Thesis

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/362583160
Contribution to the geometric, kinematics and dynamic modeling of bionic

continuum robots
Thesis · August 2022

DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.20459421
CITATIONS READS
0 213
1 author:
Selman Djeffal
École Nationale Polytechnique Constantine
23 PUBLICATIONS 52 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Selman Djeffal on 09 August 2022.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria
Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research
University of Larbi Ben M’hdi Oum El Bouaghi
Faculty of Sciences and Applied Sciences
Thesis
Presented to obtain a 3rd cycle DOCTORATE degree
In : Mechanical engineering
SPECIALITY : Construction
By : DJEFFAL Selman
Subject
Contribution to the geometric, kinematic and

dynamic modeling of bionic continuum robots
Publicly defended, on 15/12/2021, before a jury composed of :

M. Djouambi Abdelbaki Professor Univ-Oum El Bouaghi President
M. Mahfoudi Chawki Professor Univ-Oum El Bouaghi Supervisor
M. Amouri Ammar Professor UMC Co-supervisor
M. Berkani Oualid Professor Univ-Oum El Bouaghi Examiner
M. Barkat Belkacem Professor Univ-Batna 2 Examiner
M. Ridha Kelaiaia Professor Univ-Skikda Examiner
M. Merzouki Rochdi Professor University de Lille1, france Guest
‫ميحرلا نمحرلا هللا مسب‬
‫َّ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ْ‬

‫َقا ُل ْوا ُس ْب َحا َن َك َلا ِعل َم ل َنا ِا َّلا َما مت َنا انكَ‬
‫َّ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ْ‬ ‫ل‬‫ع‬ ‫َ‬
‫ِ‬
‫ْ َ ال ْ َ‬
‫َان َت العِلي ُم ح ِكيمُ‬
‫سورة البقرة ‪ ,‬الاية ‪13‬‬

Dedication
I dedicate this work as a testimony of my great respect and esteem to my dearest

father DJEFFAL BACHIR, and to my dearest mother FERKANI NASSIRA
for all their sacrifices, love, tenderness, support and prayers throughout my studies.
May ALLAH almigthy preserve your health and long life.
I would also like to thank KIA Motors Corporation for making such a picanto
car, robust and economist which helped me to continue my PhD without any major
broken-down in particular that I was Jobless during the preparation of my PhD. After
all, it was given to me by my dearest father as a way to continuue my journey of
research.
iii
Acknowledgement
First of all, I would like to thank the Allah almighty, all powerful, to have given
me the strength to survive, as well as the audacity and the patience to overcome all
difficulties.
The work presented in this thesis was carried out at the Larbi Ben M’hidi University,
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Science and Applied Sciences, Ain
beida, Oum el Bouaghi, under the supervision of Mr. CHAWKI MAHFOUDI,
Professor at the University Larbi Ben M’hidi of Oum el Bouaghi, which has throughout
this thesis and who made me share his brilliant intuitions. May he also be be thanked
for his availability and for the numerous encouragements that he me.
I also thank my co-director of thesis, Mr. AMMAR AMOURI, Professor at the
University of Brothers Mentouri, Constantine 1. For its availability, its follow-up of
my work and its supervision.
I express my gratitude to Mr. ABDELBAKI DJOUMBI, Professor at the
university Larbi Ben M’ hidi of Oum el Bouaghi, agreed to chair the jury of this thesis.
My thanks also go to Mr. OUALID BERKANI , Lecturer at the University
Larbi Ben M’hidi of Oum el Bouaghi, BELKACEM BARKAT, Professor at the
University of Batna 2 and RIDHA KELAIAIA, Professor at the University 20
August 1955 of Skikda, who kindly agreed to be examiners.
I express all my gratitude to Mr. ROCHDI MERZOUKI Professor at the
university of Lille 1, france, for having well to answer my questions throughout this
thesis.
It is impossible for me to forget Mr. ABDERAHMAN AISSOUI and LARBI
BENDADA teachers at the university Larbi Ben M’hidi of Oum el Bouaghi for their
invaluable help. They have always made all their possible to help me.
In order not to forget anyone, my warm thanks are addressed to all those who
helped me to realize this modest work.
iv
Abstract
This thesis elaborately studies continuum robots in particular those actuated by cables
and the continuum robot which is called Compact Bionic Handling Assistant (CBHA).
First, we have developed a new method allowing the simplification of the forward
kinematic model (FKM) of a flexible continuum robot with variable curvature (CV).
This simplification consists in establishing a relationship between the bending angles
of all units of the same section as a function of the bending angle of the first unit
belonging to the same section. The goal is to reduce the number of the robot’s degrees
of freedom .
Regarding the inverse kinematic model (IKM) of the multi-section continuum robot
is complex and this is confirmed by the lack of an analytical solution in the currently
existing research work. To figure out this problem, we have turned to meta-heuristic
methods for the resolution of IKM. In particular our contribution is based on the use
and comparison of the three optimization methods PSO, GA and ABC. These three
methods use an objective function that minimizes a desired distance between the robot
and the target using different constraints.
To give a practical aspect to our work, a design of a flexible two-section continuum
robot has been proposed with all the dimensioning calculation, namely the robot body
as well as the control mechanisms.
This thesis is conluded with the proposal of a preliminary dynamic model for the
continuum robot with variable curvature which can be used for future improvements.
The establishment of this dynamic model is based on Taylor approximations. In order
to derive the Lagrangian of the dynamic model, we used Taylor’s approximations and
then the obtained differential equation was solved by the Runge-Kutta method of
fourth order.
Overall, all the simulations were carried out through MATLAB.
‫الملخص‬
‫تركز هذه األطروحة على الروبوتات المرنة‪ ،‬وال سيما الروبوتات المرنة المتحكم فيها باألسالك‬
‫وكذلك الروبوت المسمى (‪.Continuum Bionic Handling Assitant )CBHA‬‬
‫أوالا‪ ،‬قمنا بتطوير طريقة جديدة تسمح بتبسيط النموذج الحركي المباشر (‪ )FKM‬للروبوت المرن‬
‫ذي االنحناء المتغير (‪ .)CV‬يكمن هذا التبسيط في إنشاء عالقة بين زوايا االنحناء لجميع وحدات‬
‫الروبوت و الوحدة األساسية )‪ (unity‬لكل قسم )‪ )section‬من الروبوت‪ .‬الهدف من هذا التبسيط‬
‫هو تقليل عدد درجات حرية الروبوت‪.‬‬
‫فيما يتعلق بالنموذج الحركي العكسي (‪ )IKM‬للروبوت متعدد األقسام )‪.(multi-sections‬‬
‫استخدامنا وقارنا ثالث طرق ذكية مستوحاة من الطبيعة‪ ،‬الكائنات التي تعيش في مجموعات (‪)PSO‬‬
‫‪ ،‬الخوارزمية الجينية (‪ )GA‬و مستعمرة النحل االصطناعية (‪ .)ABC‬تستخدم هذه الطرق الثالث‬
‫في تقليل المسافة المرغوبة بين الموضع النهائي للروبوت )‪ (Robot’s end tip‬والمسار المطلوب‬
‫باستخدام قيود مختلفة‪.‬‬
‫إلعطاء جانب عملي لهذا البحث‪ ،‬تم اقتراح تصميم روبوت مرن من قسمين مع كل الحسابات‬
‫الضرورية ألجزاء الروبوت من خالل (‪.(SolidWorks‬‬
‫تم انهاء هذه األطروحة باقتراح نموذج ديناميكي أولي للروبوت المتصل ذي االنحناء المتغير والذي‬
‫يمكن استخدامه للتحسينات المستقبلية‪ .‬يعتمد إنشاء هذا النموذج الديناميكي على تايلور )‪.(Taylor‬‬
‫من أجل اشتقاق الغرانج )‪ ) Lagragien‬من النموذج الديناميكي ‪ ،‬استخدمنا تايلور ومن ثم تم حل‬
‫المعادلة التفاضلية التي تم الحصول عليها بطريقة رونج‪-‬كوتا )‪ (Runge-Kutta‬من الدرجة الرابعة‪.‬‬
‫تمت محاكاة النماذج الموضوعة بواسطة ماتالب )‪ (Matlab‬للتحقق من كفاءة النماذج المقترحة في‬
‫هذه األطروحة‪.‬‬
Nomenclature
i Cable index
j Unit index
k Section index
Xk Cartesian coordinate along X with respect to the local coordinate system ℜk−1
Yk Cartesian coordinate along Y with respect to the local coordinate system ℜk−1
Zk Cartesian coordinate along Z with respect to the local coordinate system ℜk−1
Ai,j,k The point connecting the end of the cables and the mobile platform of the unit (j, k)
Bi,j,k The point connecting the the cables and the fixed platform of the cylindrical unit (j, k)
⌢
B i,j,k The point connecting the cables’end and the fixed platform of the conical unit (j, k)
t Time
k
Tk−1 Homogeneous transformation matrix (4 × 4), defining the coordinate system Rk in Rk−1
rj,k radii of discs
X Objective function
γi,k Arrangement angle of the segments in a rotating distance of 120 degrees
g Gravity
ℓ̂i,j,k Cable length i of conical unit (j, k)
ℓi,j,k Cable length i of cylindrical unit (j, k)
lj,k Length of the central axis of a unit (j, k)
di,j,k Bending radii for cables
k
Rk−1 Matrix (3 × 3) defining the orientation of the frame reference Rk in Rk−1
vh,j Linear velocity
v(t) Particle velocity p à t
Pgb (t) The best position obtained by the swarm
Pp (t) The best position that is visited by the particle
P (t) Particle position p at t
θj,k Bending angle for each unit
κk Curvature of the flexible section
c1 , c2 Acceleration coefficients, constant
Xi Source of food
xi Source de nourriture actuelle
si Current food source [-1,1]
λi A random number representing the position vector
vii
w Inertia coefficient
λ1 , λ2 Random numbers with a uniform distribution in [0,1]
pop Size of bees
Fi The tension applied to the cables of the robot
Qk Generalized forces
Uj,k The position vector of each point located on the central axis of unity
h Curvilinear abscissa
mj Disc mass
mb Backbone mass
db Diameter of the backbone
E Young’s modulus
Ib Moment of inertia of backbone
T Total kinetic energy of the robot
Tb Backbone kinetic energy
Td Kinetic energy of discs
U Total potential energy of the robot
Up Potential energy of discs
viii
Abreviations list
BHA Bionic Handling Arm

CBHA Compact Bionic Handling Arm
DDL Degree of freedom
PSO Particle swarm optimization
ABC Artificial bee colony
GA Genetic algorithm
FKM Forward kinematic model
IKM Inverse kinematic model
CC Constant curvature
VC Variable curvature
ix
Table of contents
Dedication iii
Acknowledgement iv
Nomenclature vii
Abreviations list ix
List of figures xiii
List of tables xviii
Introduction 4
1 State of the art 5

1.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.2 Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.2.1 Originality of continuum robots . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.2.2 Some types of continuum robots . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.2.3 Principle of classification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
1.3 Modeling approaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
1.3.1 Qualitative approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
1.3.2 Quantitative approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
1.3.3 Hybrid approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
1.4 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2 Forward kinematic modeling 20

2.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
2.2 General description of a cable driven continuum robot . . . . . . . . . . 21
2.2.1 Geometry of the considered robot’s profile . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Table of contents
2.2.2 Geometry of a conical unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

2.2.3 Placement of the reference frames on the central axis of the robot
(general case) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
2.3 Modeling assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
2.4 Forward kinematic Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
2.4.1 Forward kinematic model of a conical shape unit . . . . . . . . . 25
2.4.2 Forward kinematic model of a conical section . . . . . . . . . . . 31
2.4.3 Forward kinematic model of multi-section conical robot . . . . . 34
2.5 Workspace generation for a multi-section flexible continuum robot . . . 35
2.5.1 Comparison between the workspace of a continuum robot with
variable and constant curvature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
2.6 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
3 Inverse kinematic modeling 41

3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
3.2 Inverse kinematic model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
3.2.1 Inverse kinematic model of a cylindrical shape unit . . . . . . . 42
3.3 Meta-heuristics for solving the inverse kinematic model . . . . . . . . . 44
3.3.1 Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
3.3.2 The objective function and the definition of the problem . . . . 45
3.4 Analysis and simulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
3.4.1 Simulation of a flexible continuum robot with a single section . 46
3.4.2 Simulation of a two-section flexible continuum robot . . . . . . . 49
3.4.3 Simulation of a two-section flexible continuum robot (spatial case) 57
3.5 Comparison of meta-heuristic algorithms for solving the inverse kine-
matic model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
3.5.1 Artificial bee colony algorithm (ABC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
3.5.2 Genetic Algorithm (GA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
3.5.3 Results and discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
3.6 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
4 Conceptual study of the two-section continuum flexible robot 77

4.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
4.2 Study of the flexible body of the robot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
4.3 Study of the force applied on the robot during bending . . . . . . . . . 78
4.4 Proposals of the kinematic chain of the control system . . . . . . . . . 80
4.4.1 Kinematic chain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
xi
Table of contents
4.4.2 Calculation of the force acting on the rod (backbone) . . . . . . 82

4.4.3 Calculation of the forces acting on the system . . . . . . . . . . 82
4.4.4 Calculation of forces on the gearing (teeth) . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
4.4.5 Calculation of the forces acting on the worm . . . . . . . . . . . 86
4.5 Determination of the preliminary diameters of shafts and the study of
their fatigue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
4.5.1 Calculation of the preliminary diameter of the shaft . . . . . . . 88
4.5.2 Checking shafts for fatigue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
4.5.3 Application . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
4.6 Presentation of the robot parts on SolidWorks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
4.6.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
4.6.2 Conceptual study of cable-driven continuum robots . . . . . . . 99
4.6.3 Flexible backbone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
4.6.4 Actuating cables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
4.6.5 The guiding discs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
4.6.6 The electric motors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
4.7 Design of a flexible spacial robot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
4.8 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
5 Dynamic modeling 105

5.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
5.2 Dynamic modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
5.3 Dynamic model of flexible spatial continuum robot . . . . . . . . . . . 106
5.3.1 Kinetic and potential energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
5.3.2 Generalized forces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
5.3.3 The equations of motion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
5.4 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
Conclusion and future work 115
References 117
Appendix A 124
xii
List of figures
1.1 Evolution from rigid to continuum manipulators . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

1.2 Pulp tentacle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.3 Tentacle robot with flexible and incompressible rod . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.4 Prototype of the OctArm V . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1.5 JHUs snake robot (Credit:JHU/Vanderbilt University) . . . . . . . . . 8
1.6 hyper-redondant continuum robot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1.7 Columoscope continuum with the shape of a snake . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1.8 Concentric Tube Robot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
1.9 HARP snake robot (Credit: Howie Choset/CMU) . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
1.10 Gauche) Octopus-Arm, (Droite) Octopus-inspired robotic arm . . . . . 11
1.11 Robot camera . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
1.12 (Left) Insertable robotic effector platforms for single-access surgery
(2010), (Right) Miniature snake-like robots (2006) . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
1.13 The snake-continuum hybrid robots . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
1.14 (Left) Bionic Handling Arm (BHA), (Right) RobotinoXT: the bionic
Compact Bionic Handling Assistant (CBHA) " mounted on the omnidi-
rectional robot "Robotino" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
1.15 Continuum robots’ types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.1 (Left) The total robot structure with global coordinates for each section,
(Right) Placement of reference frames on the central axis for each unit . 21
2.2 (Left) Description of a unit with conical and cylindrical shape (j, k),
(Right) The variation of the cables length for the two conical and
cylindrical shapes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
2.3 Placement of reference frames on the structure of a flexible manipulator 23
2.4 Global view of the modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
2.5 Definition of the different radii of curvature of the unit (j, k) . . . . . . 27
xiii
List of figures
2.6 Unit with rmax = 25mm and rmin = 23.5mm; (Left) Bending angle
θ = 0rad ; (Center) Bending angle θ = 0.4rad; (right) Bending angle
θ = 0.5rad . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
2.7 Illustration of the distribution of the cable lengths of the first unit (1, k)
over the remaining units of the first section (k = 1) . . . . . . . . . . . 32
2.8 Bending angles as a function of a given variation in cable length for each
unit (j, k). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
2.9 The ratios of the angles and disks for a given variation of the length of
the cables of the section (k = 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
2.10 2D view of the continuum robot workspace at VC . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
2.11 3D view of the workspace of a CC and VC section . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
2.12 View in the YZ plane of the workspace of a section at CC and VC . . . 36
2.13 View 2D for the workspace for a flexible continuum robot with constant
curvature: rmax = 25mm, rmin = 25mm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
2.14 2D View of the workspace for a flexible continuum robot with variable
curvature: rmax = 25mm, rmin = 10mm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
2.15 Comparison between the workspace for a flexible continuum robot at
CC and VC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
2.16 Simulation 1 of a continuum robot with VC (three sections) . . . . . . 38
2.17 Simulation 2 of a continuum robot with VC (three sections) . . . . . . 39
3.1 3D representation of the central axis of the unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

3.3 Representation of the initial and final configuration of the first section
of the flexible continuum robot while following the desired trajectory in
its own 3D workspace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
3.4 Bending angles obtained from FKM and IKM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
3.5 The execution time to accomplish the arc-shaped path tracking . . . . 48
3.6 The accuracy of the PSO method for arc-shaped trajectory tracking . . 48
3.7 Orientation angles obtained from FKM and IKM . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
3.8 Possible solutions for each point constituting the linear trajectory . . . 50
3.9 Some configurations of the robot following the linear trajectory with
constraints: θ2 > 0 and 0 < φ1 , φ2 < 10−5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
3.10 Some configurations of the robot following the linear trajectory with
constraints: θ2 < 0 and 0 < φ1 , φ2 < 10−5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
3.11 Calculated cable length for the first section (first configuration) . . . . 51
3.12 Calculated cable length for the second section (first configuration) . . . 52
xiv
List of figures
3.13 Calculated cable length for the first section (second configuration) . . . 52
3.14 Calculated cable length for the second section (second configuration) . 53
3.15 Profile of the cable length L1 for the units of the first section (linear
trajectory) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
trajectory) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
trajectory) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
3.18 Profile of the cable length L4 for the units of the second section (linear
trajectory) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
trajectory) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
trajectory) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
3.21 Some configurations of the central axis of the robot when following the
desired circular path . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
3.22 Comparison between the generated trajectory and the desired one and
their Euclidean errors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
3.23 Profile of cable lengths for the first section while following the circular
path (first configuration) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
3.24 Profile of cable lengths for the second section while following the circular
path (first configuration) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
3.25 Bending angles for the circular path . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
3.26 Orientation angles for the circular path . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
3.27 Profile of cable lengths for the first section while following the circular
path (second configuration) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
3.28 Profile of cable lengths for the second section while following the circular
path (second configuration) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
3.29 Profile of the cables length for the units of the first section (circular path) 62
3.30 Profile of the cables length for the units of the second section (circular
path) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
3.31 Robot following the desired spiral trajectory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
3.32 Comparison between the generated spiral path and the desired one with
their Euclidean errors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
3.33 Cable length profile for the first section (spiral path) . . . . . . . . . . 64
3.34 Cable length profile for the second section (spiral path) . . . . . . . . . 65
xv
List of figures
3.35 Bending angles for the spiral path . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

3.36 Orientation angles for the spiral trajectory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
3.37 Profile of the cable length L1 for the units of the first section for the
spiral path . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
spiral path . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
spiral path . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
3.40 Profile of the cable length L4 for the units of the second section for the
spiral path . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
spiral path . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
spiral path . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
3.43 Flexible continuum robot with a single section following a circular path 72
3.44 Value of the cost function for the three meta-heuristic algorithms . . . 73
3.45 Execution time for the three meta-heuristic algorithms . . . . . . . . . 73
3.46 Value of the cost function for the three meta-heuristic algorithms (spiral
path) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
3.47 Execution time for the three meta-heuristic algorithms (spiral path) . . 74
3.48 The first bending angle obtained by the three meta-heuristic approaches
to follow the spiral trajectory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
3.49 The second bending angle obtained by the three meta-heuristic ap-
proaches to follow the spiral trajectory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
4.1 Diagram of the kinematic chain of the flexible body . . . . . . . . . . . 78

4.2 Beam slung under an axial force . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
4.3 Diagram of the drive train in front view . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
4.4 Diagram of the drive train in top view . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
4.5 The location of the control mechanism on the fixed base . . . . . . . . 81
4.6 Diagram showing the forces acting on shaft 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
4.7 Forces acting on the worm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
4.8 Diagram of the dimensions of the shaft section . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
4.9 Forces and reactions acting on the screw shaft in the vertical plane . . 91
4.10 Forces and reactions acting on the screw shaft in the horizontal plane . 92
4.11 Forces and reactions acting on the screw shaft in the vertical plane . . 96
4.12 The forces and reactions acting on the screw shaft in the horizontal plane 97
xvi
List of figures
4.13 3D representation of the robot continuum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101

4.14 SolidWorks software interface representing the robot in 4 views . . . . . 101
4.15 Robot body (Backbone and disks) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
4.16 Design of the robot base subassembly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
4.17 3D representation of the control system in 4 views (for a single cable) . 103

5.2 The oscillation of the robot for θ = π8 and φ = 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
5.3 The oscillation of the robot to θ = 0 and φ = 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
xvii
List of tables
2.1 The parameters of the two-section flexible continuum robot . . . . . . . 31

2.2 The disc radii for each section of the robot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
2.3 Variation of cable lengths for the first simulation of the three-section
continuum robot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
2.4 Variation of cable lengths for the second simulation of the three-section
continuum robot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
3.1 Cable lengths for both configurations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

3.2 The parameters used for the three optimization methods . . . . . . . . 70
4.1 Parts of the robot’s mechanism of control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82

4.2 Geometric characteristics of the gear . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
4.3 Results of the calculation of the breaking capacity . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
4.4 Results of the calculation of the allowable power following the rupture . 85
4.5 Results of the calculation of the capacity at surface pressure . . . . . . 86
4.6 Results of the calculation of the admissible power at surface pressure . 86
4.7 Application of the characteristics of the worm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
4.8 Material sensitivity coefficients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
5.1 The characteristics of a single section of the flexible continuum robot . 110
5.2 The parameters of the considered section . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
xviii
Introduction
he study of robotics has remarkably attracted researchers’ interest in recent

T decades, prompting them to design different types of robots. Safety is the
most obvious benefit of using robotics. Robots can deal with heavy machines, those
that operate at high temperatures, and sharp objects which can easily injure a human .
Robots can also perform traditional actions or repetitive tasks in industrial environments
that are dangerous to humans (e.g., destroying bombs, near nuclear reactors or handling
chemical waste). Many companies around the world are working on new technologies
for serving humans. Among these projects, robots can help disabled, elderly or sick
people as well as intervening inside the human body, which is called non-invasive
surgery. Recently, a new type of robot has emerged that is attracting more and more
interest from researchers. This new type is called biomimetic robots whose morphology
and behavior are inspired by animals.
Traditional rigid robots still dominate industry, with a very structured and well-
defined task and workspace. Outside of industry, their usefulness is very limited because
of their predetermined movements, allowing only limited manipulations. Then comes
the idea of the flexible structure which skillfully adapts to its environment, usually
operated pneumatically or by cables by eliminating the rigid links and replacing them
with a continuous structure. These robots are called continuum robots.
Continuum robots have a flexible structure, among the most representative examples
of these robots we cite the elephant trunk [1], the octopus arm [2], the snake [3], and
the kangaroo tail [4].
The capability of continuum robots in medicine, in space, in inspection and in
other applications makes this type of robots a ubiquitous topic in recent research. To
model the behavior of the structures of this type of continuum robot mentioned before,
geometrical and dynamic models are still open to researchers to be developed.
In this context, this thesis presents a modest contribution to the geometric, kinematic
and dynamic modeling of a multi-section continuum robot.
1
Various modeling approaches have been applied to continuum robots, unlike tradi-
tional rigid robots, flexible bionic robots are more difficult to model and build due to
their lack of rigidity and the large number of degrees of freedom required for geometric
models in their continuous form. Modeling approaches in which articulations are
attached to each joint are inappropriate for this type of robot. Their modeling requires
the establishment of a continuous model of the central axis of the structure. Research
on the modeling of this type of robot focuses on the calculation of the geometric
model while respecting the specificities and mechanical properties of continuum robots.
However, there is not yet a general geometrical model that can explicitly describe the
behavior of this type of robot.
• Motivation: This problem of solving the inverse kinematic model motivates

us to develop a modeling approach for a flexible continuum robot with variable
curvature.
• Thesis objectives: The main objective of this work is the modeling of the
geometric behavior of continuum robots. In order to achieve this objective,
mathematical models have been developed based on geometrical, kinematic and
dynamic approaches.
• Contribution : The results obtained during this work can be summarized as

follows: The simplification of the forward kinematic model by adapting a new
mathematical approach that allows to establish the location of each unit of a
section with respect to the base unit of the same section, which considerably
simplifies the equations of motion. The resolution of the inverse kinematic model
by meta-heuristic methods is presented as an optimization problem governed by
an objective function with constraints for different applications, namely, trajectory
tracking, while having adequate postures for the encountered environment. A
design for a two-section continuum robot is built in SolidWorks.
Finally, the proposal of a prior dynamic model for the variable curvature con-
tinuum robot. The establishment of this dynamic model is based on Taylor
approximations. In order to derive the Lagrangian of the dynamic model, Taylor
approximations are used and then the obtained differential equation is solved by
the Runge-Kutta method of fourth order.
• Organization of the manuscript: This thesis is organized into five chapters.

The Chapter 1 focuses on the state of the art of continuum robots. In the 1st
part, we present the different types of continuum robots and their uses in various
2
fields. In the 2nd part of the state of the art we present some recent studies on
kinematics and dynamics modeling. In Chapter 2, the geometrical description of
a robot with a complex structure similar to the CBHA robot was started. Then,
the forward kinematic modeling of a unit, a flexible section and then the whole
robot are established. Chapter 3 is dedicated to the inverse kinematic modeling
(IKM). The inverse kinematic model of a unit with constant curvature (CC) is
analytically presented, however the inverse geometric model of a section or of
the whole robot cannot be solved analytically which has oriented us towards the
use of some optimization algorithms for the solution of its complex equations.
A study of the design and dimensioning of a prototype of a flexible continuum
robot with two sections are carried out in the fourth chapter. The drawing of this
study is done in SolidWorks. Finally, the last chapter deals with a preliminary
dynamic study of a single section continuum robot.
• List of publications :
Djeffal, S., Amouri, A., Mahfoudi, C., "Kinematics modeling and simulation
analysis of variable curvature kinematics continuum robots," UPB Sci. Bull. Ser.
D Mech. Eng. vol. 81, pp. 28-41, 2021.
Djeffal, S., Mahfoudi, C., Ghoul, A., "Solving the Non-Linear Dynamic Equa-
tions of Motion of a Variable Curvature Continuum Robot Using Runge-Kutta
Method and MATLAB Software," Journal of Applied Nonlinear Dynamics, 2022.
(accepted)
Ghoul, A., Kara, K., Djeffal, S., Benrabah, M., Hadjili, M.L., "Artificial Neu-
ral Network for Solving the Inverse Kinematic Model of a Spatial and Planar
Variable Curvature Continuum Robot," Archive of Mechanical engineering, 2022.
(accepted)
Merrad, A., Amouri, A., Cherfia, A., Djeffal, S., "A Reliable Algorithm for Ob-
taining All-Inclusive Inverse Kinematics’ Solutions and Redundancy Resolution of
Continuum Robots", Arabian journal for science and technology, 2022. (accepted)
Djeffal, S., Mahfoudi, C., Amouri, A., "Comparison of three meta-heuristic
algorithms for solving inverse kinematics problems of variable curvature continuum
robots," 10th European Conference on Mobile Robots (ECMR). IEEE, pp. 1-6,
2021.
3
Amouri, A., Mahfoudi, C., Djeffal, S., "Kinematic and dynamic modeling and
simulation analysis of a cable-driven continuum robot," In computational methods
and experimental testing in mechanical engineering. springer, pp. 26-37, 2019.
Djeffal, S., Mahfoudi, C., Amouri, A., "A path optimization technique with
obstacle avoidance for multi-section continuum robot using teaching learning
based optmiaztion," 3rd international conference on mechanical sciences ICMS’
2021, Oum el Bouaghi, Algeria. (accepted)
Djeffal, S., Mahfoudi, C., Amouri, A., "The improvement of the orthoglide’s
proposed design through the dynamics’ implementation," 5th international con-
ference on advances in mechanical engineering december 17-19, 2019, istanbul,
Turkey.
Djeffal, S., Mahfoudi, C., Amouri, A., "Contribution to the conceptual study with
a view to including the ortho-glide robot’s equation," 3rd international conference
on electromechanical engineering ICEE 2018, August 20, 1995-Skikda, Algeria.
4
Chapter 1
State of the art
1.1 Introduction
In this chapter, we first present a definition of a continuum manipulator, then the
state of the art dealing with modeling approaches for this type of robots. This allowed
us to position our work with respect to the current literature on continuum robots. A
part of the state of the art which concerns the different types of continuum robots is
based on the work developed by Manas Milind Tonapi [5].
1.2 Definition
Continuum robots are an extension of the recently developed rigid robots. By adding
more joints to rigid robots, this changed their name to hyper-redundant robots [6]. If
we repeat the same process by adding more and more joints to the robot until the
lengths of its segments approach zero, this gives rise to the so-called continuum robot.
Fig. 1.1: Evolution from rigid to continuum manipulators [7–9]
5
State of the art
1.2.1 Originality of continuum robots

Continuum bionic robots are generally inspired by nature, especially biological species
that mimic hydrostats, for example the elephant’s trunk, and the tail of animals. These
continuous structures are very useful for these species to perform their daily tasks. If
someone looks at a continuum robot for the first time, it reminds them of a feeling of
something existing in nature, especially with muscular hydrostats.
Muscle hydrostats, commonly found in elephant trunks, mammal tongues and
octopus tentacles, are soft muscular structures that can deform, expand and twist and
provide the force needed to make a movement.
There is a fluid-filled cavity that is surrounded by muscle and connected to tissue
fibers. The hydrostatic muscle takes on a wide variety of shapes due to these fibers
opposing each other, for example, elongation and flexion are due to these muscles.More
investigations into muscle hydrostats may open the way to understanding the main
source of the complex shape changes repeatedly made by these species, for example
a twist easily made by octopus. Based on these findings, continuum robots can be
improved in terms of dexterity.
Fig. 1.2: Pulp tentacle
The deep understanding of the physical movements of octopuses and their functional
principles have given roboticists an interesting insight and a solid starting point in the
design of continuum manipulators.
6
State of the art
1.2.2 Some types of continuum robots

The cable-driven robot [5] recently developed at Clemson University, is a continuum
robot with a flexible and incompressible rod [10]. It contains sections, each section
bends as a constant curvature [11]. It has a slender backbone profile but lacks local
extension or contraction.Generally, this continuum robot consists of two flexible sections
with 4 degrees of freedom, two orientation angles. Each section consists of three main
elements: the flexible rod used as a backbone, three drive cables and disks. The spatial
movement of the manipulator is achieved by applying electrical voltages to one or two
motors at the same time in order to produce tension in the cables. The attachment
points of these cables are equidistant at 120° on all disks.
Fig. 1.3: Tentacle robot with flexible and incompressible rod [12]
The OctArm is a continuum robot developed by M. D. Grissom, I. D. Walker et

al. in the early 2000s. Several OctArms were developed, such as OctArm IV with
four sections and OctArmV with three sections. Figure 1.4 shows the OctArm V. It is
operated by the pneumatic artificial muscle. Each segment has three muscles. The
load capacity of OctArm is large compared to other continuum robots. For OctArm
IV, the vertical load capacity is 90 N and the transverse load capacity is 16 N; for
OctArm V, it is 220 N and 70 N, respectively. However, the response time is long.
7
State of the art
Fig. 1.4: Prototype of the OctArm V
A cable-driven snake robot designed by John Hopkins University (JHU) for laryngeal
surgery (see Figure 1.5) has a thin 4-mm profile [13]. The robot consists of a base disk,
an end disk, several spacer disks, and four superelastic tubes called skeleton tubes
made from an alloy (aluminum). However, it has significant complexity in degrees of
freedom (DOF) and problems with overheating that comes from the friction of the
aluminum alloy against the surface of the robot tubes.
Fig. 1.5: JHUs snake robot (Credit:JHU/Vanderbilt University)
The hyper-redundant continuum robot [14] is a 48 DDL robot, see 1.6 driven by
24 motors. It is analogous to an elephant trunk and similar to another robot with 8
DDL. A spring is used as a backbone to actuate the flexion. This gives the robot the
ability to make a variety of shapes. However, this type of robot lacks local extension
and contraction. In addition, the higher DDL requires a higher number of motors in
order to control each joint, which is not desirable for use in space applications.
8
State of the art
Fig. 1.6: hyper redondant continuum robot[14]
The snake-shaped continuum colonoscope (see figure 1.7) is composed of a series

of universal joints joined together by rivets with guides to carry spring tubes. The
drive cables are enclosed in the spring tubes and the entire body of the colonoscope
is covered with an external wire mesh. The disadvantage of this robot is the large
number of actuators (20) required for a relatively small length (60 cm) despite a clean
and relatively slim design.
Fig. 1.7: Columoscope continuum with the shape of a snake [15]
The continuum robots developed with a concentric tubular structure are made of
pre-bent tubes that slide into each other (see figure 1.8). They are commonly used in
minimally invasive surgery. Some have limited curvature due to the pre-bent nature of
the concentric tube design, but can inherently achieve local extension and contraction.
9
State of the art
Fig. 1.8: Concentric Tube Robot[16]
The highly articulated robotic probe (HARP) introduced by Carnegie Mellon

University (see figure 1.9) [17] and Massachusetts Institute Technology (MIT) [18] is a
snake robot, working on variations of the principle implemented in USGI Medical’s
ShapeLock® Patent [19]. These are essentially concentric tubes with rigid cylindrical
links (or beads of modular design in the case of MIT) connected by some type of
spherical joint (or spherical bearing surfaces by MIT). The links (or beads) are strung
by cables, three for the outer tube and one for the inner tube (or three for each of the
tandem tubes by MIT). Only the outer tube is folded via cables. The inner and outer
tubes are alternatively made rigid or flexible by pulling or releasing all their cables.
When all the cables are pulled, the friction between the links and the spherical joints
makes the concerned tube rigid
Fig. 1.9: HARP snake robot (Credit: Howie Choset/CMU)
Guglielmino E. and his group [20] have proposed structures similar to the octopus
arm; of which the first robot named Octopus-Arm (figure 1.10) is designed in 2010 .
The robot is composed of two flexible sections and has 15 active degrees of freedom.
Their actuation is realized by longitudinal and transverse pneumatic artificial muscles.
Unlike the previous robots, this robot is able to control its diametrical contraction
using the transverse muscles.
10
State of the art
Fig. 1.10: Gauche) Octopus-Arm, (Droite) Octopus-inspired robotic arm

Gauche) Octopus-Arm, (Droite) Octopus-inspired robotic arm [20]
In 2012, the team of the Guglielmino [21], have introduced another type of robot
similar to the octopus arm. The ”octopus-like robotic arm” is controlled by cables
and the diametrical contraction is controlled by an articulated mechanical structure
(SMA).
The active camera scope (figure 1.11), is the longest type of continuum-style snake
robot (8 meters) [22] to date. But its movement is only possible if its drive mechanism
faces a contact surface against which it is pushed. This is not practical from the point
of view of inspection in space, where minimal contact is desired. In addition, it lacks
local backbone extension and contraction.
Fig. 1.11: Robot camera[22]
Active cannula robots (figure 1.12 (left) [23]), (figure 1.12 (right) [24]) represent
another kind of flexible continuum robots, especially intended for surgical applications
11
State of the art
that require high dexterity in a confined environment [25, 26]. Researchers such as Nabil
Simaan, Pierre E. Dupont, and Robert J. Webster III have been frequent contributors
to this field.
Fig. 1.12: (Left) Insertable robotic effector platforms for single-access surgery (2010)
[23], (Right) Miniature snake-like robots (2006) [24].
Hybrid robots involving snake and continuum elements [27, 28] were developed
to eliminate the disadvantages of each type individually. Figure 1.13(Left) shows
the HARP design with nitinol inserted between the inner and outer probe through a
channel to provide more dexterity. Figure 1.13(Right) shows a hybrid robot that has
spherical joints with an elastic spine and cables to control flexion. However, both of
these structures rely heavily on the snake counterpart (i.e., the segmented skeleton) in
terms of mechanical design. This increases their structural complexity and decreases
their ability to maintain a slender profile.
Fig. 1.13: The snake-continuum hybrid robots[27]
The flexible bionic robots that resemble the elephant trunk (figure 1.14) were
developed by the company Festo. The flexible sections of the Bionic Handling Assistant
(BHA) robot are made of polyamide which makes it flexible. Each flexible section
consists of three tubes controlled by three electro-pneumatic actuators. The position and
orientation of each section is controlled by varying the inlet air pressure. RobotinoXT
is a cooperative mobile manipulator robot based on an omnidirectional robot called
Robotino and a small version of the BHA robot called Compact Bionic Handling
12
State of the art
Assistant (CBHA). The CBHA bionic trunk is composed of: 2 flexible sections, 1
rotating part, and 1 compliant clamp. The rotating part is composed of a flexible
vertebrate tube describing an arc of circle. These types of robots are characterized by
their hyper-redundancy with a high number of degrees of freedom.
Fig. 1.14: (Left) Bionic Handling Arm (BHA) [29], (Right) RobotinoXT: the bionic
Compact Bionic Handling Assistant (CBHA) " mounted on the omnidirectional robot
"Robotino" [30]
1.2.3 Principle of classification

Continuum manipulators can be broadly classified according to the type of skeleton
they have. Therefore, they are classified as single or multiple backbone (flexible shaft)
manipulators. Single backbone manipulators (figure 1.13) have a central structure that
supports the passage of the actuation system along the manipulator body [31]. Many
single skeleton manipulators have cables along their structure, which are equidistant by
the disks attached to the skeleton as a means of transmission. The ends of the cables
define the length of the section. Another classification of continuum manipulators is
based on the actuation that can be intrinsic, extrinsic or hybrid. According to the
classification ( figure 1.15), when the actuation system is integrated into the structure
of the continuum manipulator and the force is applied directly to the spine, it is called
intrinsic actuation system. The BHA manipulator (Figure 1.14) is a pneumatically
operated intrinsic manipulator. Extrinsic actuation is defined as actuation that applies
torque and force to the manipulator spine from outside the robot structure. Hybrid
actuation is actuation that has both intrinsic and extrinsic actuation. Typically,
the central cavity of extrinsically actuated manipulators is operated by an actively
controlled actuator. Many models of hybrid-actuated manipulators have pneumatic
actuation [32, 33], Figure 1.15 shows a diagram that encompasses the different types
of continuum robots [7].
13
State of the art
Fig. 1.15: Continuum robots’ types
1.3 Modeling approaches

Modeling continuum manipulators is widely explored in the literature using quali-
tative, quantitative, and hybrid approaches [9, 25, 32]. This work discusses different
approaches to modeling continuum manipulators. In the reference [34], the work done
concerns the modeling of multi-section continuum manipulators using shape functions.
This approach solves the singularity problem associated with previously available
models. In our case, the class of continuum manipulator used for this thesis is CBHA
(Compact Bionic Handling Assistant). The long or extended version of this manipulator
is called BHA (Bionic Handling Assistant). The state of the art concerning the modeling
developed for this class of manipulators can be classified according to two approaches
which are detailed in the following sections.
1.3.1 Qualitative approach

Continuum robot modeling is considered a hurdle for researchers due to the nonlin-
earity that appears in the equations involved in the modeling. In order to successfully
deal with the complexity of modeling continuum robots, researchers have turned to
qualitative approaches that are based on learning algorithms, explicitly, the algorithms
used are taught to capture the behavior of the robot without needing to solve the
equations involved in the modeling, in other words, the algorithms are able to avoid
14
State of the art
the modeling task. These approaches are based on input-output data derived from
experimentation or simulation and can provide accurate and fast approximations.
In the work of [35], the researchers established a learning-based approach for the
development of the direct geometric model. In fact, they proposed an experimental and
structural comparative study of commonly used learning models, namely multilayer
perceptron (MLP), radial basis functions (RBF), support vector regression (SVR),
and co-active adaptive neuro-fuzzy interference system (CANFIS). According to their
results, support vector regression provides the best accuracy and fast convergence for
(RBF), and a good trade-off between learning time and accuracy for (MLP) while
CANFIS shows similar accuracy to SVR but with a much shorter learning time.
In reference [36], the authors developed an approach that is based on multilayer
perceptron (MLP) and radial basis function (RBF) neural networks, which aims to
provide an approximate forward kinematic model (FKM) of the elephant trunk that
is named CBHA. To obtain good results, the database must be well prepared and
accurately constructed. For the inverse geometric model, the researchers used a distal
supervised learning (DSl) technique [36] which is mainly derived from the study [37],
in which the IKM is solved. Explicitly, the LDS can be summarized in two steps; the
first one is to create a database from the direct geometric model that is used to train
the robot. In the second, for a given position, the bending angles as well as the cable
lengths can be obtained. In the work of [38], the authors developed a meta-heuristic
approach to solve the inverse geometric model based on the assumptions of constant
curvature, namely particle swarm optimization (PSO). Their main idea aims to solve
the inverse geometric model by a governing objective function that illustrates the
distance between the continuum robot end effector and the prescribed trajectory. They
proved that the PSO provides remarkable accuracy as well as fast convergence. In
the same context, in this thesis, three meta-heuristic approaches are established and
developed to solve the inverse geometric model of the variable curvature continuum
robot, namely PSO, artificial bee colony (ABC) and genetic algorithm (GA).
In our research, the developed algorithms can provide the necessary bending and
orientation angles as well as the appropriate cable lengths to follow a specific trajectory.
The geometric inverse model of the BHA manipulator [39] using a qualitative approach
based on online goal babbling, the idea of this modeling is to learn the inverse model
of the BHA manipulator (3 sections), a long version of the CBHA (2 sections), which
suggests the common parameter lengths to reach the target in the workspace.
15
State of the art
1.3.2 Quantitative approach

The complexity of modeling continuum robots has not totally diverted the attention
of researchers to find analytical solutions that are based on quantitative approaches.
For the geometric model [40–47, 11, 27], in this work, researchers consider each section
of the robot bends as a circular arc.
For the modeling of CBHA, two transformations were used, the first is an indepen-
dent transformation that expresses the position of the robot end effector as a function
of the arc parameters, and the second is a specific transformation that establishes the
relationships between the arc parameters and the lengths of the tubes that can be
equated to cables. The development of the CBHA model is purely quantitative since it
is based on analytical expressions.
The equations of the direct geometric model are not easy to solve especially when
it comes to determining the IKM. Therefore, the Newton Raphson method is used to
find the solution of this problem. The Newton Raphson method is an iterative method
for finding the best approximation to the roots of a function. The functions used for
the calculation of the solution of the IKM for the CBHA, without having the FKM is
mentioned in the reference [48]. The study in [49] introduced the finite element method
(FEM) based approach to model flexible continuum manipulators under quasi-static
conditions. In the work [50], the authors present a methodology to model continuum
manipulators with variable curvature. In a first step, the direct geometric model is
deduced. This approach defines each section of the manipulator as a series of the finite
number of arcs. To include the redundancy in the IKM problem, the solution is provided
at the velocity level by using a robot Jacobian matrix which is computed analytically.
In [51], the authors used Euler spirals to model the sections of a continuum robot with
variable curvature. Euler spirals are curves whose curvature increases linearly with the
length of the arc. These Euler spirals have given an improvement in the prediction of
the shape of the shape of the robot sections during bending for a realistic case. In [52],
a new analytical approach is established to solve the continuum robot IKM based on
the constant curvature assumption.
In the same context of forward kinematic modeling, we have developed a mathe-
matical model that describes a continuum robot with variable curvature. In which, the
conical units for each section of the robot depend on the first angle that governs the
base of the first unit of the section.
Regarding the dynamic modeling, the researchers have analytically developed
models that are based on the Euler-Lagrange method [46, 53–57], the Newton-Euler
formalism [10], Hamilton’s principle [58], the virtual power principle [59, 60], and
16
State of the art
the Cosserat rod theory [61–66, 44]. These models describe the equations of motion
of a rod, and are derived from first principles under moderate assumptions such as
idealizing the rod as a slender object. In [67], the authors have solved the inverse
dynamic model using parametric curves (Pythagorean Hodograph) combined with the
euler bernouli model, which allows to establish a relation between the actuator inputs
and the ’Pythagorean Hodograph’ curves; thus the actuator inputs can be calculated.
In [68], a dynamic model for a multi-section continuum robot with variable curvature
is developed through the Cosserat rod theory by taking into account the elongation
of the central axis of the robot. The proposed model is found to have significantly
improved accuracy compared to the constant curvature model. In the same context, for
the dynamic model developed in this thesis, we used the Euler-Lagrange method for a
continuum robot with variable curvature. In which we assumed that the backbone of
the continuum robot is a series of circular arcs interconnected with each other.
1.3.3 Hybrid approach

The hybrid approach uses quantitative (geometric) and qualitative (neural network,
optimization method) approaches to solve the Compact Bionic Handling Assistant
(CBHA) IKM. The CBHA is considered to be composed of 17 vertebrae; therefore,
in this approach, each inter-vertebra is modeled as a parallel 3UPS-1UP (Universal-
Prismatic-Spherical) robot. Three kinematic series UPS joints control the position
and orientation of the upper vertebra with respect to the lower vertebra, but only the
prismatic joints are active. In CBHA, the translation of the upper vertebrae relative
to the lower vertebrae is perpendicular. In addition, torsion is not possible. For these
constraints, the UP series is used. The equations of the inverse geometric model of
parallel robots are easy to establish with some elementary geometric relations [69]. In
our work, we develop a simplified method to compute the direct geometric model as
well as the inverse geometric model using meta-heuristic methods, even particle swarm
optimization (PSO) [70], artificial bee colony (ABC), genetic algorithm (GA). The
PSO method is one of the heuristic methods that has proven its effectiveness in solving
difficult optimization problems in various fields of science and engineering [70, 71]. The
main advantage of this method is its simplicity and fast convergence [72, 73]. This
method is successfully applied to solve the IKM for a planar and spatial multi-section
continuum robot [74, 75], the GA method has a good accuracy compared to PSO.
Similarly the ABC method, is applied for the first time on flexible continuum robots,
where it is known by its considerable accuracy. The IKM has been formulated as an
optimization problem for the case of variable curvature (VC).
17
State of the art
By comparing the three approaches, it is found that the quantitative approach is

more efficient for predefined tasks, but is not suitable for real-time implementation, due
to the complexity of the analytical models describing the kinematics of the system. The
qualitative approach is accurate when the learning space covers all spatial tasks, but
in the general case it is more appropriate for simulation and real-time implementation.
The third approach is a combination of the first two approaches and combines the
advantage of quantitative in terms of generalization and qualitative in terms of real-time
implementation.
18
State of the art
1.4 Conclusion
This chapter presents a general definition of the continuum robot and its evolution
over the last years. We have also presented the different types of continuum robots
and their applications in various domains. The modeling of continuum robots has
been discussed in detail, as well as the positioning of our work with respect to existing
studies.
19
Chapter 2
Forward kinematic modeling
2.1 Introduction
The main objective of this chapter is to establish the forward kinematic model of a
flexible continuum robot with variable curvature. In the same context, emphasis is
placed on the development of new mathematical formulas that facilitate the computation
of the forward kinematic model of a flexible continuum robot with variable curvature.
The forward kinematic model of a flexible manipulator addresses the problem of
identifying the end effector position for a defined manipulator configuration. For a
rigid manipulator, this configuration is simply the set of variables associated with the
robot’s joints; unlike rigid robots, the variables that express the configuration of a
flexible manipulator change with respect to the robot’s morphology and its type of
actuation, and thus cannot be obtained in a direct way. For this reason, research on
the modeling of flexible continuum robots is interested in ways to develop exhaustive
forward kinematic models while respecting the maximum of specificities and mechanical
properties of the studied robot. The approach adapted to this task, is to assimilate the
central axis of the robot to a theoretical curve using a reference frame evolving along
the central axis of the structure, with the aim of having a continuous model of the
central axis of the robot. In this chapter, the formula developed for continuum robots
with variable curvature can be easily applied on flexible robots that have a structure
whose deformation is similar to serially-connected arcs. In the following, the geometry
of a cable-driven continuum robot with constant and variable curvature is discussed.
20
2.2 General description of a cable driven continuum

robot
Cable-driven continuum robot is one of the most commonly used types. Cable-driven
continuum robots consist of a flexible backbone with disks that are separated from
each other by the same distance, and attached to the backbone. In most of these
robots, the cable is straight or a smooth helical curve. The cables pass through holes
that are located on the disks to guide the robot and bend it to the desired position.
A lot of research has been done to come up with an appropriate geometry to better
understand the geometric modeling of flexible continuum robots. Researchers have
used several geometric models for describing the structure of continuum robots. In [42],
the authors adopted the constant curvature (CC) because it simplifies the complexity
of the continuum robot behavior. On the other hand, in [50], the authors used the
variable curvature (VC) because it mimics the real behavior of continuum robots and
which takes more specifics for modeling the continuum robot. In the same context, the
FKM of a continuum robot with VC is derived in the following sections.
2.2.1 Geometry of the considered robot’s profile

The structure of the robot under consideration has two conical shaped sections. Each
section is mounted on the base of its first conical unit, the remaining conical units are
stacked sequentially. Each section has two degrees of freedom, a bending angle (θj,k )
and an orientation angle (φj,k ). The robot is driven by three independent cables.
Fig. 2.1: (Left) The total robot structure with global coordinates for each section,
(Right) Placement of reference frames on the central axis for each unit
21
To have a simplified description of the considered continuum robot, the profile of

the whole section is assimilated to a curve formed by a concatenation of arcs connected
in series to each other, and which represent the central axis of the robot (figure 2.1).
A detailed illustration of a conical shape unit showing arc parameters and geometric
properties is discussed in the following.
2.2.2 Geometry of a conical unit

Mastering the geometry of a single conical unit paves the way for understanding the
remaining units that form the backbone of the robot. Each unit is composed of two
platforms (figure 2.2), which can be virtual as in the case of CBHA or real as in our
case.
Fig. 2.2: (Left) Description of a unit with conical and cylindrical shape (j, k), (Right)
The variation of the cables length for the two conical and cylindrical shapes
In the general case, the base of the unit is fixed and the upper part is mobile. They
are connected by three segments i (i=1,2,3).
Each segment connects the two platforms at the points Ai,j,k and Bi,j,k for the case
⌢
of a cylindrical shape unit respectively, while Ai,j,k , B i,j,k connects the fixed platform
and the mobile one which has a conical shape (conical disc), (figure 2.2).
The length of cable that connects the disks of a cylindrical unit is denoted by
ℓi,j,k and that which connects the disks of a conical unit is denoted by ℓ̂i,j,k . Each
cylindrical unit is parameterized by its orientation angle φk , its bending angle θj,k , and
its curvature κj,k .
22
2.2.3 Placement of the reference frames on the central axis of

the robot (general case)
In this section, we define the different articulations that must be attached to the general
geometry of a flexible manipulator. First, the center of the upper platform of each
section of the flexible robot is referenced by a reference frame Rk . Then, a reference
frame is fixed at the base of the first section as shown in figure 2.3.
Fig. 2.3: Placement of reference frames on the structure of a flexible manipulator
In order to be able to compute the forward kinematic model of each unit constituting
the robot, an intermediate reference frame Rj,k is assigned to the center of the platform
of each unit (j, k).
The description of a flexible section from its base to its end is as follows: the indices
of the units j increase from 1 to m, and for each intermediate platform (j, k), the
distance between the central axis and the anchor points is noted rj,k (figure 2.2 (left))
The unit (j, k), is modeled as an inextensible arc of a circle. This unit has one end
23
fixed at the origin of the reference frame Oj−1,k , the other end Oj,k is located at a
point in the reachable workspace as shown in figure 2.2.
2.3 Modeling assumptions

Before starting the modeling of the considered robot, it is necessary to point out the
different adopted assumptions, on which the mathematical development throughout
this work is based. The previously developed work on the assumptions used to model
the central axis of flexible continuum robots is based on the constant curvature [42],
which consider the deformation of the robot sections as a circular arc. Researchers
have used it because it facilitates the calculation of geometric models. However, the
constant curvature (CC) does not show a better imitation of the central axis of the
continuum robot. For this reason, recent research has opened new doors to modeling
the continuum robot centerline, which describe in detail the deformation of each robot
unit as an arc of a circle, typically called variable curvature (VC) [50].
The assumptions considered for modeling variable curvature (VC) along this thesis
can be summarized as follows:
• The flexible continuum robot is described as an open kinematic chain of n sections;
• Each section is a set of concatenations of equidistant units of conical shape;
• Each unit of conical shape is modeled as an inextensible circular arc having its
individual parameter;
• The cable lengths are homogeneously fragmented along the robot;
• Robot deformations at sections and units are done without torsion (torsion
neglected);
2.4 Forward kinematic Model

Forward kinematic Model (FKM) consists of calculating the position and orientation
of the end-effector of the flexible continuum robot as a function of the cable lengths.
The FKM for the robot considered in this work can be derived in three steps:
✓ The FKM of a single conical shaped unit.
✓ The FKM of a single section.
✓ The FKM of a multi-section flexible continuum robot.
24
2.4.1 Forward kinematic model of a conical shape unit

As shown in Figure 2.2, an elaborate description of the conical and cylindrical shape
of the flexible continuum robot is described. The FKM of a conical shape unit consists
of plotting the operational coordinates Xj,k as a function of the length of the wires
⌢
Qj,k through the arc parameters Kj,k , and which is obtained by two transformations,
the first is the specific transformation and the second is the independent one. Both
transformations will be discussed in detail in the rest of this chapter.
Fig. 2.4: Global view of the modeling
Assuming that each unit deforms in the form of a circular arc. The homogeneous
transformation can be written by the following equation [25] :
 
j−1,k j−1,k
j−1,k Rj,k Oj,k
Tj,k =   (2.1)
01×3 1
j−1,k j−1,k
With Rj,k and Oj,k are respectively the (3 × 3) matrix and the (3 × 1) vector
defining the orientation and the position of the origin of the reference frame Rj,k in the
j−1,k
reference frame Rj−1,k . Under the above assumptions, the orientation matrix Rj,k is
given by the following equation [47]:
j−1,k

Rj,k = rot Zj−1,k , φk rot Yj−1,k , θj,k rot(Zj−1,k , −φk )
c2 φk cθj,k + s2 φk
 
cφk cθj,k sφk − cφk sφk cφk sθj,k
s2 φk cθj,k + c2 φk
 
=  cφk cθj,k sφk − cφk sφk
 sφk sθj,k 
 (2.2)
−cφk sθj,k −sφk sθj,k cθj,k
With : c. = cos(.) et s. = sin(.)

And the position vector, it is defined as follows:
25

lj,k



 θ 1 − cos θj,k cos (φk )
 j,k


j−1,k l

Oj,k =  θj,k 1 − cos θj,k sin (φk ) (2.3)
 j,k
 l
 j,k sin (φk )


θj,k
2.4.1.1 Specific transformation
In order to make the length of the cables appear in the orientation matrix, a specific
transformation is established. It expresses the length of the cables ℓi,j,k , of each unit
(j, k) as a function of the arc parameters which are the orientation angle φj,k , the
bending angle θj,k [rad] and its curvature κj,k [1/mm]. First, the orientation angle
φj,k must be calculated.
As the diameter of each disk is included, we provide a general equation that allows
to determine each of them:
j
rj,k = rmax,k − rmax,k − rmin,k (2.4)
k
Where rmax,k and rmin,k are, respectively, the minimum and maximum radius of the
section k. When the orientation anglehis equalito 0, the central axis of the unit takes
T
the form of a circular arc with center dj,k , 0, 0 .
Similarly, the points Ai,j,k and Bi,j,k where the cables are attached will lie in an arc
h iT
of a circle with center di,j,k , 0, 0 . Based on these results, we can obtain the following
equation:
θj,k
lj,k [mm] = (2.5)
κj,k
This can be described by the equation eqrefeq:eq2.6 based on figure 2.5, where dj,k
is the radius of curvature of the unit (j, k) and di,j,k the radius of curvature for each
cable.
26
Fig. 2.5: Definition of the different radii of curvature of the unit (j, k)
Additionally, there is a relationship between the angle φj,k and γi,k . The angle γi,k
takes three values: −φj,k , 2π 2π
3 − φj,k , − 3 − φj,k , pour i = 1,2,3 respectively. Through
figure 2.5, the radius of curvature can be expressed as follows:



 d1,j,k = dj,k − rj,k cos γ1,k

d
 2,j,k
= dj,k − rj,k cos γ2,k (2.6)

3,j,k = dj,k − rj,k cos γ3,k
 d

If we substitute the three values of γi,k into the equation (2.6), we can obtain the
following equation: 
 ℓ1,j,k = lj,k − rj,k θj,k cos γ1,k



ℓ
 2,j,k
= lj,k − rj,k θj,k cos γ2,k (2.7)

3,j,k = lj,k − rj,k θj,k cos γ3,k
 ℓ

According to the equation (2.7), one way to get φj,k out of this equation is to subtract
member by member the first equation from the second and the first equation from the
third, we will have

 ℓ1,j,k − ℓ2,j,k = rj,k θj,k cos γ2,k − cos γ1,k
(2.8)
 ℓ1,j,k − ℓ3,j,k = rj,k θj,k cos γ3,k − cos γ1,k
27
By dividing the equations (2.8) member by member, we obtain the following equation:

2π
ℓ1,j,k − ℓ2,j,k rj,k θj,k cos 3 − φj,k − cos −φj,k
= (2.9)
ℓ1,j,k − ℓ3,j,k rj,k θj,k cos − 2π
3 − φj,k − cos −φj,k
Then, we replace γ1,k , γ2,k , γ3,k by their values, which allows to find the following
equality:

ℓ1,j,k − ℓ2,j,k cos 2π 2π
3 cos φj,k + sin 3 sin φj,k − cos −φj,k
= (2.10)
ℓ1,j,k − ℓ3,j,k cos − 2π cos φj,k + sin − 2π sin φj,k − cos −φj,k
3 3
After simplification the equation (2.10) becomes:

√
3
ℓ1,j,k − ℓ2,j,k − 21 cos φj,k + 2 sin φj,k − cos −φ j,k
= √ (2.11)
ℓ1,j,k − ℓ3,j,k − 1 cos φj,k −

3
2 2 sin φ j,k − cos −φ j,k
In the following, a detailed procedure for obtaining the arc parameters is established
by replacing the angle γi,k with its values −φj,k , 2π 2π
3 − φj,k , − 3 − φj,k , for i = 1,2,3
respectively.
• 1st simplification : √
1
3
1 √3
2 ℓ1,j,k cos φj,k − 2 ℓ1,j,k sin φ j,k −√
ℓ 1,j,k cos φ j,k + 2 ℓ1,j,k cos φ j,k + 2 ℓ2,j,k sin φj,k +
ℓ√2,j,k cos φj,k = − 12 ℓ1,j,k cos φj,k + 23 ℓ1,j,k sin φj,k − ℓ1,j,k cos φj,k + 12 ℓ3,j,k cos φj,k −

3

2 ℓ3,j,k sin φj,k + ℓ3,j,k cos φj,k
• 2sd simplification :
√ 1 √3
+ 2 ℓ2,j,k sin φj,k +ℓ2,j,k cos φj,k = 12 ℓ3,j,k cos φj,k −

−
√
3ℓ1,j,k sin φj,k + 2 ℓ2,j,k cos φj,k
3

2 ℓ3,j,k sin φj,k + ℓ3,j,k cos φj,k
• 3th simplification :
√ √ √
− 3ℓ1,j,k sin φj,k + 32 ℓ2,j,k cos φj,k + 23 ℓ2,j,k sin φj,k = 32 ℓ3,j,k cos φj,k − 23 ℓ3,j,k sin φj,k

• 4√th simplification :
3 3

2 −2ℓ1,j,k + ℓ2,j,k + ℓ3,j,k sin φj,k = 2 ℓ3,j,k − ℓ2,j,k cos φj,k
• 5th simplification
√ :
sin(φj,k ) 3(ℓ −ℓ2,j,k )
cos(φj,k )
= −2ℓ 3,j,k
( 1,j,k +ℓ2,j,k +ℓ3,j,k )
Finally, we will have the formula for the orientation angle:

 √ 
3 ℓ3,j,k − ℓ2,j,k
φj,k = tan−1   (2.12)
2ℓ1,j,k − ℓ2,j,k − ℓ3,j,k
28
Having determined the orientation angle, we now calculate the radius of curvature
using the previously mentioned equation (2.7), summing the three members:

3lj,k = ℓ1,j,k + ℓ2,j,k + ℓ3,j,k + rj,k θj,k cos γ1,k + cos γ2,k + cos γ3,k (2.13)
Through the figure 2.5, we can write
3
X
cos γi,k = 0 (2.14)
i=1
This makes it possible to write:
ℓ1,j,k + ℓ2,j,k + ℓ3,j,k

lj,k = (2.15)
3
Substituting the equation (2.5) and (2.15) into the equation (2.6), and after trigono-
metric simplifications, we get the formula for the radius of curvature

1 rj,k ℓ1,j,k + ℓ2,j,k + ℓ3,j,k
dj,k = = q (2.16)
κj,k 2 ℓ21,j,k + ℓ22,j,k + ℓ23,j,k − ℓ1,j,k ℓ2,j,k − ℓ1,j,k ℓ3,j,k − ℓ2,j,k ℓ3,j,k
The last parameter of the arc is the bending angle θj,k , which can be calculated by
substituting the equations (2.15) and (2.16) into (2.5), we then obtain: :
q
2 ℓ21,j,k + ℓ22,j,k + ℓ23,j,k − ℓ1,j,k ℓ2,j,k − ℓ1,j,k ℓ3,j,k − ℓ2,j,k ℓ3,j,k
θj,k = (2.17)
3rj,k
Finally, the arc expressions can be summarized in the equation (2.18) :

 √
3(ℓ3,j,k −ℓ2,j,k )
φj,k


 = tan−1 2ℓ1,j,k −ℓ2,j,k −ℓ3,j,k

 q

2 ℓ21,j,k +ℓ22,j,k +ℓ23,j,k −ℓ1,j,k ℓ2,j,k −ℓ1,j,k ℓ3,j,k −ℓ2,j,k ℓ3,j,k


θ = (2.18)
 j,k
 q 3rj,k
ℓ21,j,k +ℓ22,j,k +ℓ23,j,k −ℓ1,j,k ℓ2,j,k −ℓ1,j,k ℓ3,j,k −ℓ2,j,k ℓ3,j,k



 2
κj,k =


rj,k (ℓ1,j,k +ℓ2,j,k +ℓ3,j,k )
Knowing that each unit has a conical shape, the equations (2.18) must be expressed in
⌢
terms of the cable lengths ℓ i,j,k instead of ℓi,j,k . Therefore, according to the assumption
mentioned before; each conical shape unit is modeled as an inextensible arc with its
individual arc parameters and deforms at small angles, the relationship between these
two cable lengths is given by the law of cosines [50]:
29
⌢2 2
2
ℓ i,j,k = ℓi,j,k + rj−1,k − rj,k − 2ℓi,j,k rj−1,k − rj,k cos βi,j,k (2.19)
With :
!
κj,k lj,k 2

cos βi,j,k = sin cos π (k − 1) − φj,k
2 3
After solving the equation (2.19), the length of the cables ℓi,j,k can be expressed as
follows: s
⌢2 2 2
ℓi,j,k = ℓ i,j,k − rj−1,k − rj,k + rj−1,k − rj,k cos2 βi,j,k

(2.20)
+ rj−1,k − rj,k cos βi,j,k
According to equation eqrefeq:eq2.200, the length of the cable ℓi,j,k is a function
⌢
of the length of the cable ℓ i,j,k , the variation in disc diameters for each conical unit
(rj−1,k − rj,k ) and the angle βi,j,k .
To find an approximate analytical solution between the lengths of the conical unit
⌢
cable ℓ i,j,k and the configuration state κj,k , the influence of βi,j,k on the lengths of the
cylindrical unit cable according to equation (2.20) must be negligible. Since the unit
taper cannot be changed, angles βi,j,k close to π2 are required. This can be achieved by
choosing a high number of units, because the bending angle θj,k of the unit decreases
with increasing number of units per section. In this case, the equation (2.20) simplifies
to : s
⌢2 2
ℓi,j,k = ℓ i,j,k − rj−1,k − rj,k (2.21)
2.4.1.2 Independent transformation

To express the Cartesian coordinates xj,k , yj,k , zj,k , in function of the arc’s pa-
rameters

: we
substitute the equation (2.18) in (2.3), the Cartesian coordinates
xj,k , yj,k , zj,k according to the length of the cables will be expressed as follows :
 √
rj,k (ℓ1,j,k +ℓ2,j,k +ℓ3,j,k ) 2 Mj,k −1 3(ℓ3,j,k −ℓ2,j,k )


 xj,k = Mj,k sin 3rj,k cos tan 2ℓ −ℓ −ℓ
√1,j,k 2,j,k 3,j,k



rj,k (ℓ1,j,k +ℓ2,j,k +ℓ3,j,k ) M 3 (ℓ −ℓ 2,j,k )


yj,k = Mj,k sin2 3rj,k
j,k
sin tan−1 2ℓ1,j,k −ℓ
3,j,k
2,j,k −ℓ 3,j,k
(2.22)

rj,k (ℓ1,j,k +ℓ2,j,k +ℓ3,j,k )

 2Mj,k
zj,k = sin 3rj,k


2Mj,k
q
With : Mj,k = 2 ℓ21,j,k + ℓ22,j,k + ℓ23,j,k − ℓ1,j,k ℓ2,j,k − ℓ1,j,k ℓ3,j,k − ℓ2,j,k ℓ3,j,k
30
2.4.2 Forward kinematic model of a conical section

As mentioned before, a section k is a concatenation of m units. Moreover, each
section deforms without torsional effect, so we can have the forward kinematic model
of a section by the multiplication of transformation matrices, which can be expressed
by the following relation: :
m
0,k j−1,k
Tkk−1 = Tm,k
Y
= Tj,k (2.23)
j=1
j−1,k
Where Tj,k is the (4×4) matrix defining the orientation and position of the origin of
the reference frame Rj,k in the reference frame Rj−1,k .
The parameters used for the considered section of the robot continuum are indicated
in the Table 2.1.
Table 2.1: The parameters of the two-section flexible continuum robot
Section (k=1) Section (k=2) Description

mk 5 units 5 units Number of units per section
Lk 300 mm 300 mm Total length of the section
rmin,k 17.5 mm 10 mm Radial cable distance
rmax,k 25 mm 17.5 mm Radial cable distance
Table 2.2: The disc radii for each section of the robot
The radii of the discs (mm) Section 1 Section 2

r1 (The disc of base) 25 17.5
r2 23.5 16
r3 22 14.5
r4 20 13
r5 19 11.5
r6 17.5 10
We considered a section (k = 1) with variable curvature (figure 2.7) whose base

disk radius is 25mm and the upper one is 17.5mm. The length of the backbone (stem)
of the section is 300mm. Using the equation (2.4), the first unit of the section has
25mm (base disk radius) and 23.5mm (upper disk radius) as shown in the Table 2.2.
Then, the unit is given a set of bending angles (−0.5rad < θ < 0.5rad), in other words,
31
at each bending angle, the three cable lengths take a certain value (As an example,
three configurations of the bending angles of the first unit figure 2.6 are shown). Using
equation (2.21), we determined the length of the cables of a unit with variable curvature
(VC) as a function of those of a unit with constant curvature (CC) by taking into
account the taper of each unit (different diameters).
Fig. 2.6: Unit with rmax = 25mm and rmin = 23.5mm; (Left) Bending angle θ = 0rad ;
(Center) Bending angle θ = 0.4rad; (right) Bending angle θ = 0.5rad
The cable lengths obtained for the first tapered unit will be evenly distributed over
the remaining units of the first section (4 units). In other words, for a given bending
angle, the cable lengths calculated for the first unit will be equally distributed over the
units of the section. After that, for each unit the bending angle is calculated by the
equation (2.17).
Fig. 2.7: Illustration of the distribution of the cable lengths of the first unit (1, k) over
the remaining units of the first section (k = 1)
32
Fig. 2.8: Bending angles as a function of a given variation in cable length for each unit
(j, k).
From Figure 2.8, for a given variation in cable length for the first section, the
bending angle for each unit varies linearly. It is therefore clear that the bending angles
for each unit can be related to each other by a factor, which can be one of the geometric
or physical parameters of the robot.
Fig. 2.9: The ratios of the angles and disks for a given variation of the length of the
cables of the section (k = 1)
33
According to figure 2.9, it is clear that the ratios of the angles as well as the ratios
of the disks have approximately the same value, this leads to an important observation
that lies in the establishment of a relationship between the angle of each unit and the
neighboring one according to the diameters of the disks.
In other words, a constant relationship that connects the arc bending angle and
the geometric parameters of the units of the section considered. Thus, we can obtain
the following relationship:
r1,k
θj,k = θ1,k (2.24)
rj,k
As the number of units increases, the accuracy of the solutions of the equation (2.24)
also increases, i.e., when the angle βi is closer to π2 (see Figure 2.2). Therefore, using
equation (2.24), the forward kinematic model of a single section can only be expressed
by two variables θ1,k and φk . This approximation leads to a remarkable simplification
and reduction of the number of variables involved in the FKM.
An illustration of the equation (2.24) is represented by figure 2.8 and 2.9. The
constant ratios for the arc parameters and the geometric parameters are shown in
figure 2.9.
2.4.3 Forward kinematic model of multi-section conical robot

The inclusion of equation (2.24) makes the identification of the position and orien-
tation of the robot end-member relatively simpler because the different unit angles
will be expressed in terms of the bending angle of the first unit. Thus the forward
kinematic model for a multi-section continuum robot (see figure 2.1) can be easily
found by successive multiplication of the independent transformation matrices for each
section k and the transformation matrix of the static frame of reference. The resulting
matrix is given by the following equation:
 
n
Aorig Onorig 
Tnorig =  n = T0orig Tkk−1
Y
(2.25)
01×3 1 k=1
Where the matrices T0orig and Tkk−1 represent the static transformation matrix and the
independent transformation matrix of each flexible section respectively.
34
2.5 Workspace generation for a multi-section flexi-

ble continuum robot
By definition, the workspace is the set of all positions accessible by the robot’s
end device. Figure 2.10 shows the possible positions that can be reached by the first
section of the continuum robot as well as by the continuum robot with two sections
in two-dimensional representations. These points were obtained using h
the FKM,
i
by
π π
varying the first bending angle for each section in the interval θ1,k ∈ − 8 , 8 .
In figure 2.10, we present some possible positions that the end point of the continuum
robot can reach, designated by the letter A (dotted curved lines in red) as well as the
positions of the first section of the robot, designated by the letter B (dotted curved
lines in yellow). In order to understand the behavior of the robot considered in its
working space, we have fixed the first section of the robot in specific positions and
exclusively the second section of the robot is allowed to move, its possible movements
are illustrated by the letter C (curved lines in black), three curved lines in black for
each specified position.
Fig. 2.10: 2D view of the continuum robot workspace at VC
35
2.5.1 Comparison between the workspace of a continuum

robot with variable and constant curvature
In this section, we compare the workspace of a flexible continuum robot with
constant and variable curvature. Starting with the comparison of a single section of
the continuum robot, the characteristics of each section are shown on the Table h
2.1. i
The first bending angle and orientation of the section are varied in the interval 0, π5
and [−π, π] respectively.
Fig. 2.11: 3D view of the workspace of a CC and VC section
Fig. 2.12: View in the YZ plane of the workspace of a section at CC and VC
36
In Figure 2.11 and 2.12, it can be clearly seen that the variable curvature is able to
produce bending angles with increasing curvature, namely, the end point of the section
can reach much more curved positions vs. the constant curvature, which is similar to
the results obtained in [50].
In the second
h
example,
i
we vary the first bending angle for each section in the same
π π
range θj,k ∈ − 8 , 8 .
Fig. 2.13: View 2D for the workspace for a flexible continuum robot with constant
curvature: rmax = 25mm, rmin = 25mm
Fig. 2.14: 2D View of the workspace for a flexible continuum robot with variable
curvature: rmax = 25mm, rmin = 10mm
37
Figure 2.13 and 2.14 show the workspace of a CC and VC flexible continuum robot
respectively. Comparatively, the end member of a VC flexible continuum robot can
reach much more curved positions vis-a-vis a CC continuum robot as shown in Figure
2.15.
Fig. 2.15: Comparison between the workspace for a flexible continuum robot at CC
and VC
In the following we present an application for the case of a 3 section continuum

robot as shown in figure 2.16 and 2.17.
Fig. 2.16: Simulation 1 of a continuum robot with VC (three sections)
38
Table 2.3: Variation of cable lengths for the first simulation of the three-section
continuum robot
Lengths Section 1 Section 2 Section 3

L1 (mm) 190.0641 183.6008 364.9277
L2 (mm) 186.3192 189.5372 378.9891
L3 (mm) 186.3192 189.5372 378.9891
Fig. 2.17: Simulation 2 of a continuum robot with VC (three sections)
Table 2.4: Variation of cable lengths for the second simulation of the three-section
continuum robot
Lengths Section 1 Section 2 Section 3

L1 (mm) 149.5105 205.1044 389.4895
L2 (mm) 205.4542 178.4248 353.7959
L3 (mm) 205.4542 178.4248 353.7959
39
2.6 Conclusion
In this chapter, we have presented the forward kinematic modeling of a flexible
continuum robot with variable curvature. This model allows to know the working
space of the robot. The forward kinematic model of the flexible continuum robot with
variable curvature is simplified by implementing the mathematical equation relating
the bending angles of each robot unit belonging to the same section. The calculation
of the forward kinematic model for this robot starts with the unit model which is
obtained by using the homogeneous transformation matrix and is summarized in two
steps: the specific transformation which expresses the relationship between the arc
parameters and the lengths of the cables, and then the independent transformation
which expresses the desired situation (position) as a function of the arc parameters.
The forward kinematic model of the flexible section and the whole robot are obtained
by successive multiplication of the global geometric transformation matrices of the
units. We concluded this chapter with a comparison between the workspace of a flexible
continuum robot with constant and variable curvature.
40
Chapter 3
Inverse kinematic modeling
3.1 Introduction
In this chapter, a meta-heuristic approach to solving the inverse kinematic model of
the variable curvature (VC) flexible continuum robot is presented. We start the first
part of this chapter by verifying the effectiveness of the proposed approach using the
direct geometric model explicitly, by comparing the bending and orientation angles
obtained by the direct geometric model of a section and those obtained by the proposed
algorithm. Then, we apply the proposed particle swarm optimization (PSO) algorithm
to solve the inverse kinematic model of a multi-section flexible continuum robot with
specific constraints. In the rest of this chapter, two other meta-heuristic approaches,
namely the artificial bee colony (ABC) and the genetic algorithm (GA), are proposed
to solve the inverse kinematic model of continuum robots. A comparison between the
three methods in terms of accuracy and convergence has been made.
3.2 Inverse kinematic model

The inverse kinematic model for the considered robot consists in determining the
parameters of the arc corresponding to a desired posture of the robot’s terminal organ.
In order to establish this model, we start by calculating the inverse kinematic model of
a unit. However, for the computation of the inverse kinematic model of a section and
the multi-section flexible continuum robot using meta-heuristic approaches.
41
3.2.1 Inverse kinematic model of a cylindrical shape unit

The inverse kinematic model (IKM) of a flexible continuum robot starts with the
calculation of the IKM of the first unit which is considered as a circular arc. First, we
determine the parameters of the arc in the configuration space based on the operational
coordinates. The arc of each unit has:
• curvature κ
• Orientation angle φ
• Bending angle θ
For the calculation of the arc parameters, according to figure 3.1, it is obviously
clear that the orientation angle φ can be expressed as follows [76] :
y

−1
φ = tan (3.1)
x
Fig. 3.1: 3D representation of the central axis of the unit
The center of the arc lies in the plane xy; after rotation, this center must lie along
the axis x. Therefore, the radius r of the center of this arc c lies in (r, 0) with respect
to the plane xz.
42
The curvature κ can be determined by finding the distance between the origin and
′
the center of the arc formed by the continuous section. By rotating P around the
′ ′ ′ √ ′ ′
axis z , this creates P such that x = x2 + y 2 , y = 0 and z = z. From figure 3.2,
′ ′ ′
explicitly from the triangle P c x , we can write the following equation:
′ 2 ′
x −r + z 2 = r2 (3.2)
′ ′ ′
x 2 + r2 − 2x r + z 2 − r2 = 0
′ ′ ′
2x r = x 2 + z 2
′
−1 2x
κ=r = ′2 ′
z +x 2
′ ′
Substituting x and z , we get:
q
2 x2 + y 2
κ= 2 (3.3)
x + y2 + z2
The angle θ, as shown in figure 3.2, can be calculated from the curvature and the
′ ′ ′
Cartesian coordinates of P . Examining the triangle P c x we can write:
′ ′
x −r κ−1 − x
cos (π − θ) = = (3.4)
r κ−1
43
For z ≤ 0 we get :
′
 
κ−1 − x  q
θ = 2π − cos−1  = 2π − cos−1
1 − κ x2 + y 2 (3.5)
κ−1
For z > 0 we get :

′
 
κ−1 − x
q
−1   = cos−1
θ = cos 1−κ x2 + y 2 (3.6)
κ−1
3.3 Meta-heuristics for solving the inverse kine-

matic model
For any robotic system, the inverse kinematic model can be summarized as follows:
for a given posture (position and orientation), we determine the necessary actuation
variables that satisfy certain movement constraints. For the robot studied in this thesis,
the inverse kinematic model consists in calculating the cable lengths corresponding
to a desired position of the robot’s terminal organ. To achieve this goal, various
methods have been explored based on the IKM, such as the works of [77, 10, 78, 20].
But due to the nonlinearity of the inverse kinematic model and the redundancy of
this type of robots, it is usually very difficult to solve this problem directly. Even if
the set of nonlinear equations can be solved, the unique solution is not guaranteed.
Usually, these problems are solved using an algorithm that minimizes/maximizes a set
of criteria. In this context, powerful optimization methods namely PSO, ABC and GA
are implemented to choose an inverse kinematic solution among an infinite number
of configurations satisfying some additional constraints. But before applying these
algorithms to solve the inverse kinematic model, we need to determine the operational
coordinates of the robot’s end-member ( for each robot section) flexible when tracking
the trajectory. The hyper-redundancy of flexible robots and the complexity of the
equations implemented in the IKM for this type of robots can justify the use of
meta-heuristic methods.
3.3.1 Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO)

PSO is an algorithm that has been developed by Kennedy and Eberhart [13]. This
method is based on the simulation of the social behavior of a set of birds, fish and other
flocks. The starting phase of this algorithm consists of randomly generated particles
44
that aim to reach optimal solutions through iterations that are updated. At each
iteration step, four pieces of information are available for each particle: the first piece
of information is the local position vector of the best solution obtained and is denoted
by Pb (t). The second one is the position visited by the particles that have been selected
by the best experiments of all the particles, it represents the best global position and
is denoted by Pgb (t). Other information is the current position of a particle in the
given search space and which is called by a vector P (t) and its velocity given by v (t).
Therefore, the velocities and the positions of the particles continue to change at each
step until they agree according to the equation (3.7):

v (t + 1) = wv (t) + c1 λ1 (Pb (t) − P (t)) + c2 λ2 Pgb (t) − P (t)

(3.7)
P (t + 1) = P (t) + v (t + 1)

Where ω is the weight of inertia; λ1 , λ2 are two positive constants; and which are
given in a random way with uniform distribution between 0 and 1. The importance of
the parameters involved in the equation (3.7) is to provide the algorithm’s behavior
with the necessary convergence. For example, the inertia gives the rate of convergence
of the algorithm, in some difficult problems the rate must be applied in small increments
in order to keep the algorithm stable, and the coefficients c1 et c2 guide the tendency
of the swarm to converge to a local or global level for a better solution.
3.3.2 The objective function and the definition of the problem

When the point-to-point technique is involved in the tracking of a trajectory by
robots, the robot’s end device requires specific actuation variables to correctly follow
the desired desired trajectory. Furthermore, the orientation of the robot end-member
cannot be guaranteed for the considered multi-section continuum robot. Due to these
challenging conditions, a suitable objective function is proposed as an alternative
solution and which can be expressed as:
fobjective = |XD − XG | (3.8)
Where XD and XG are, respectively, the desired and generated Cartesian coordinates
of the robot continuum end-member which are given by the fourth column of the
homogeneous matrix defined in equation (2.25). robot continuum which are given by
the fourth column of the homogeneous matrix defined in equation (2.25). On the other
hand, due to the hyper-redundancy of the continuum robot, the equation (3.8) has an
45
infinite number of solutions. Therefore, to select a solution among them, additional

constraints are added to the objective function, which are discussed in the analysis
and simulations section. The main objective of this section is to find the bending and
orientation angles (i.e. The main objective of this section is to find the bending and
orientation angles (i.e., θ1,k and φk ) for each section, which will be adopted for the
robot end-member to follow the desired trajectory via the point-to-point technique.
For this purpose, at each sampling time, the optimization problem that is illustrated
by the equation (3.8), is solved to obtain the different combinations θ1,k and φk , in
which the last combination is considered as the most optimized one and that allows
the robot to follow the desired trajectory with a better performance. The particles
generated by the PSO are the variables to be optimized, which are themselves the
bending and orientation angles of the robot.
3.4 Analysis and simulation

To show the effectiveness of the solutions of the inverse kinematic model, various
simulation examples are considered for a flexible continuum robot that follows different
types of trajectories. The first example is devoted to the study of a single spatial
section, the second example concerns a flexible continuum robot with two sections
in a plane projection, while the last example is considered for the three-dimensional
case. The geometric parameters describing the multi-section continuum robot for this
simulation are presented in the tab:second. The computational process was performed
in MATLAB software using an Intel Core i5, 2.19 GHz, 8 GB RAM.
3.4.1 Simulation of a flexible continuum robot with a single

section
In this simulation, the continuum robot with five units corresponding to the first
section is described in the Table 2.1. As shown in Figure 3.3, the robot is used to follow
a trajectory on its own workspace. In this simulation example, we have considered a
configuration in space; thus, for a given Cartesian coordinate of the robot end-member
(first section), the variation of the bending and orientation angles are calculated, using
the IKM proposed by the PSO algorithm. On the other hand, in order to verify the
effectiveness of the proposed model, the corresponding bending and orientation angles
are calculated using the FKM. Figure 3.4 shows the bending and orientation angles
calculated by FKM and those obtained by the PSO method. The errors are deduced
46
for each sample, for the bending angle θ1 see figure 3.4 and for the orientation angle φ
see figure 3.7. We can see that there is a significant convergence between them, where
the maximum error is less than 0.005 rad.
Fig. 3.3: Representation of the initial and final configuration of the first section of the
flexible continuum robot while following the desired trajectory in its own 3D workspace
Fig. 3.4: Bending angles obtained from FKM and IKM
47
Fig. 3.5: The execution time to accomplish the arc-shaped path tracking
Fig. 3.6: The accuracy of the PSO method for arc-shaped trajectory tracking
Figure 3.6 shows the cost function (precision) during the tracking of the trajectory
which has the shape of an arc of a circle (the desired trajectory is shown in figure 3.3) .
48
Fig. 3.7: Orientation angles obtained from FKM and IKM
From figure 3.4 and 3.7, it is obviously clear that the bending and orientation angles
obtained from the proposed algorithm are very close to the bending and orientation
angles calculated from the direct geometrical model. According to the results obtained
in this example, the developed algorithm is validated as a powerful tool to solve the
inverse kinematic model of a flexible continuum robot with variable curvature robot.
3.4.2 Simulation of a two-section flexible continuum robot

In the second simulation, the flexible continuum robot has two sections, each section
consists of five units. We consider the case of following a linear trajectory defined
by the equation (3.9). The figure 3.8 shows some solutions of the inverse kinematic
model, it is clear that there are several possible configurations of the robot for each
given point on the desired trajectory. Due to the redundancy of the solutions and in
order to select a solution among the infinite number of possible solutions, additional
constraints will be necessary : θ2 > 0 and 0 < φ1 , φ2 < 10−5 are added to the objective
function which is defined by the equation (3.8) .
(X2 = 10 t, Y2 = 30, Z2 = 400) (3.9)
49
Fig. 3.8: Possible solutions for each point constituting the linear trajectory
Fig. 3.9: Some configurations of the robot following the linear trajectory with
constraints: θ2 > 0 and 0 < φ1 , φ2 < 10−5
50
Fig. 3.10: Some configurations of the robot following the linear trajectory with
constraints: θ2 < 0 and 0 < φ1 , φ2 < 10−5
Fig. 3.11: Calculated cable length for the first section (first configuration)
51
Fig. 3.12: Calculated cable length for the second section (first configuration)
Figures 3.11 and 3.12 show the variation in cable lengths for each section, so it
is interesting to know which of the existing configurations allows the robot to follow
the desired trajectory with the smallest possible cable length. This gives rise to a
better use of the energy generated by the robot motor. For this purpose, we used these
constraints θ2 < 0 and θ2 < 0 et 0 < φ1 , φ2 < 10−5 ( figure 3.10).
Fig. 3.13: Calculated cable length for the first section (second configuration)
52
Fig. 3.14: Calculated cable length for the second section (second configuration)
After calculating the cable lengths used for the two configurations, we find that the
configuration θ2 < 0 and 0 < φ1 , φ2 < 10−5 gives better performance in terms of energy
as shown in Table 3.1. The calculation of the cable length is strongly related to the
Table 3.1: Cable lengths for both configurations
Configurations Lmoy (section 1) (mm) Lmoy (section 2) (mm)

θ2 > 0 et 0 < φ1 , φ2 < 10−5 180.0243 178.7937
θ2 < 0 et 0 < φ1 , φ2 < 10−5 179.5833 178.3386
approximation proposed by the equation (2.24), which is clearly visible in the profile
of the cable length of each unit, as shown in Figures 3.15 -3.20. As the bending of a
section increases, the length of the cables in each unit decreases in an orderly fashion
from bottom to top.
In order to grasp this phenomenon, we can refer to the second section, where the
bending of the robot is huge, especially the last position. From these observations, we
can say that the length of the six cables converges to the last point as shown in figures
3.18 -3.20. Also, we notice that there are several configurations that allow the robot to
follow the desired trajectory, but the one that provides the smallest length of cable can
be considered the most efficient in terms of energy.
53
Fig. 3.15: Profile of the cable length L1 for the units of the first section (linear
trajectory)
trajectory)
54
trajectory)
Fig. 3.18: Profile of the cable length L4 for the units of the second section (linear
trajectory)
55
trajectory)
trajectory)
56
3.4.3 Simulation of a two-section flexible continuum robot

(spatial case)
In this example, we take a circular trajectory that is generated by the PSO algorithm
and compare it with the desired one using the same robot as the previous example.
The robot is ordered to follow a circular spatial trajectory defined by the equation
(3.10), to select a solution among the existing solutions of the inverse kinematic model,
additional constraints are defined as θ1,1 < 0, θ1,2 > 0, 0 < Y1 < 10−6 .

πt



X2 = 30 cos5

πt (3.10)
Y2 = 30 sin 5

Z = 440 + 30 sin πt


2 5
The illustration of this example is presented on figure 3.21.
Fig. 3.21: Some configurations of the central axis of the robot when following the
desired circular path
.
57
Fig. 3.22: Comparison between the generated trajectory and the desired one and their
Euclidean errors
.
As shown in figure 3.22, it is very clear that the generated trajectory is very close
to the desired one which confirms the robustness of the developed algorithm as well
as the reliability of the equations proposed in chapter 2.2. Also, the lower part of the
figure 3.22 shows the Euclidean errors between the desired trajectory and the generated
one. They are almost negligible, of the order of 10−6 mm.
By On the basis of the results obtained, we can easily calculate the lengths of the
cables as well as the bending and orientation angles for each section of the robot with
precision.
58
Fig. 3.23: Profile of cable lengths for the first section while following the circular path
(first configuration)
Fig. 3.24: Profile of cable lengths for the second section while following the circular
path (first configuration)
59
Fig. 3.25: Bending angles for the circular path
Fig. 3.26: Orientation angles for the circular path
60
Now we consider another configuration as followsθ1,1 > 0, θ1,2 > 0 and 0 < Y1 < 10−6 ,
and we calculate the length of the cables (see figure 3.27 and 3.28)
Fig. 3.27: Profile of cable lengths for the first section while following the circular path
(second configuration)
Fig. 3.28: Profile of cable lengths for the second section while following the circular
path (second configuration)
61
According to the configurations used to make the robot follow the circular path
with better performance, the second performance, the second configuration allows the
least use of the cable length.
As in the previous example, when following the circular path, the cable length of
each unit can be calculated, as shown in the figures below. Similar to the previous
example, when following the circular path, the length of the cables of each unit can be
calculated, as shown in the figures below.
Fig. 3.29: Profile of the cables length for the units of the first section (circular path)
Fig. 3.30: Profile of the cables length for the units of the second section (circular path)
In the same context, we consider a spiral trajectory defined by the equation (3.11)
with the following constraints: θ1,1 < 0, θ1,2 > 0 and 0 < Y1 < 10−6 .
The considered robot follows a trajectory with a small increment of angles in
order to confirm that the developed algorithm is able to solve the IKM whatever the
62
complexity of the given trajectory.





 X3 = 50 − 5 cos (2t)

Y3 = 50 sin (2t) (3.11)



Z = 450 − 5 sin (2t)

3
Fig. 3.31: Robot following the desired spiral trajectory
From figure 3.31, the algorithm must find remarkably small angles that can fit the
desired trajectory. In figure 3.32, we compare the generated trajectory with the desired
one.
It is confirmed that the equation developed in Chapter 2 and the algorithm estab-
lished in Chapter 3 are effective in solving the inverse kinematic model problem for a
continuum robot with variable curvature.
63
Fig. 3.32: Comparison between the generated spiral path and the desired one with
their Euclidean errors
Fig. 3.33: Cable length profile for the first section (spiral path)
64
Fig. 3.34: Cable length profile for the second section (spiral path)
Fig. 3.35: Bending angles for the spiral path
65
As shown in figure 3.33 and 3.34, the length of the cables needed for the robot to
follow the spiral path is successfully calculated as well as the bending and orientations
angles (see figure 3.35 and 3.36)
Fig. 3.36: Orientation angles for the spiral trajectory
Fig. 3.37: Profile of the cable length L1 for the units of the first section for the spiral
path
66
path
path
67
Fig. 3.40: Profile of the cable length L4 for the units of the second section for the
spiral path
spiral path
68
spiral path
3.5 Comparison of meta-heuristic algorithms for

solving the inverse kinematic model
In this section, we will compare the previously introduced PSO heuristic method
with two other heuristic approaches, namely the Artificial Bee Colony (ABC) and
the Genetic Algorithm (GA) in order to determine which is more efficient in terms of
accuracy and time consumption.
First, we present the two algorithms, ABC and GA. Then, an application of these
two methods to solve the inverse kinematic problem of flexible continuum robots is
presented. Then, we compare the results obtained with PSO. In the first example, we
consider a circular trajectory that is followed by a single section continuum robot.
The characteristics of the considered robot are defined in the autoreftab:second.
Moreover, the objective function is already defined in the previous section by the
equation (3.8). The parameters used for each algorithm are defined in the Table 3.2.
69
Table 3.2: The parameters used for the three optimization methods
PSO iterations = 200 swarm size = 50 Inertia= 0.791 C1=C2=1.2

GA iterations = 200 swarm size = 50 Elite count = 1 Cross.fraction=0.4
ABC iterations = 200 swarm size = 50 Employed bees=25 Onlooker bees=25
3.5.1 Artificial bee colony algorithm (ABC)

ABC is one of the most recent artificial intelligence algorithms. It was proposed by
Dervis Karaboga in 2005. It was mainly developed to reach the global optimum of a
continuous mathematical model, inspired by the behavior of bees when they explore
the surrounding environment to find an area rich in nectar. In this approach, artificial
agents are classified into three categories: the employed bee, the spectator bee, and
the scout bee.Employed bees focus on a food source and retain the location of that
food source in memory. The number of worker bees is equal to the number of food
sources since each worker bee is associated with only one food source.The spectator
bee receives the information of the worker bee’s food source in the hive. Then one of
the food sources is selected to collect nectar.
The scout is in charge of finding new food sources and nectar. The general process
of the ABC method and the details of each step are as follows:
• In this phase, the bees carry information about the target source and skillfully
share it with the other bees, including the direction, quality of the food. In
the employed bees phase, each employed bee finds a new food source Xi in the
neighborhood of its current source xi and compares the new one with the current
solution. The employed bee saves the best one thanks to a greedy selection
mechanism and the food source, to describe mathematically this phase, it can be
explained as follows:
Xi = xi + si (xi − λi ) (3.12)
where xi is the new position vector of the solution, si is a random number between
-1 and 1, and λi a random number representing the random order in the position
vector.
• Spectator bees: A random number of bees await the worker bees from a randomly
discovered food source. Once they arrive, the visiting bees receive information
through a particular type of dance (waggle dance). In addition, the visiting bees
use probability to choose the best solution. To capture how the visiting bees
use probability, the roulette wheel section method, which is a fitness-based value
70
section technique, can be used to find this probability of a solution Xi .
fi
Xi = pop (3.13)
P
fi
i=1
wherefi is the value of the objective function and pop is the size of the used bees.
• Scout bees: all bees are considered as scouts, and then they are converted to
employed or spectator bees during the run. If the position of the employed bees
does not change after trials, they are forced to abandon their position and convert
to scouts.
3.5.2 Genetic Algorithm (GA)

GA was first developed by Holland in 1975. It essentially mimics the stages of
natural growth and is widely used in engineering problems, especially in domains where
several possible solutions are involved. Each element of the population will be tested
through the objective function to see if the result can match the required solution.
The best solution provided by each individual among the whole population will
be taken over and integrated in the next generation. After several generations, the
population converges to a certain value, which is the best solution of the problem.
The main idea of heuristics is to explore the solution space trying to converge to
the best solution. However, it is important to avoid premature convergence of the
algorithm to an extremum, or local optimum. A local extremum is the best solution in
a restricted area, as opposed to the global extremum, which is the best solution in the
whole.
3.5.3 Results and discussion

In this section, the three meta-heuristic approaches are compared in terms of accuracy
and time consumption. Two simulation examples are considered, the first one concerns
a comparison of PSO, GA, and ABC while following a circular trajectory. For the
second example, a spiral trajectory is considered.
• the first example:
In this simulation example, the robot must follow a circular trajectory as shown
in figure 3.43 using the ABC, GA and PSO algorithms. The results obtained are
compared in terms of accuracy and the time consumed to perform the proposed
task for the three algorithms.
71
Fig. 3.43: Flexible continuum robot with a single section following a circular path
.
As can be seen in figure 3.44 and 3.45, for each approach, the time consumption as
well as the cost function are calculated based on the samples.
It is clear that the ABC approach has the lowest cost function, which gives better
accuracy, in other words; the robot with a single section accurately follows the circular
path. Comparatively, ABC outperforms PSO and GA in terms of accuracy.
72
Fig. 3.44: Value of the cost function for the three meta-heuristic algorithms
Fig. 3.45: Execution time for the three meta-heuristic algorithms
However, in figure 3.45, the ABC algorithm takes relatively long time to get good
results, especially when compared with GA and PSO.
On the other hand, PSO offers the best time consumption, which is preferable for
real-time applications, at least compared to GA and ABC.
73
• Le deuxième exemple:
In the second simulation example, additional bending angles will be used, namely
the bending angles of the second robot section with the following constraints:
θ1,1 < 0, θ1,2 > 0 and 0 < Y1 < 10−6 . In fact, the whole operation of following the
spiral path is relatively difficult compared to the previous example.
Fig. 3.46: Value of the cost function for the three meta-heuristic algorithms (spiral
path)
Fig. 3.47: Execution time for the three meta-heuristic algorithms (spiral path)
Explicitly, the algorithms must find the necessary bending angles for each section
of the robot, provided that the bending and orientation angles generated for the first
section are appropriate compared to those generated for the second section when
following the spiral path.
74
Fig. 3.48: The first bending angle obtained by the three meta-heuristic approaches to
follow the spiral trajectory
Fig. 3.49: The second bending angle obtained by the three meta-heuristic approaches
to follow the spiral trajectory
It is interesting to note that all three meta-heuristic approaches were successful in

generating the necessary bending angles that satisfy the spiral path tracking as shown
in figures 3.48 and 3.49.
75
3.6 Conclusion
This chapter discusses different meta-heuristic approaches, namely PSO, GA and
ABC to solve the inverse kinematic model of flexible continuum robots with variable
curvature. The inverse kinematic model problem is established as an objective function
describing the distance between the robot end-effector and the desired trajectory. It is
found that the PSO algorithm is more suitable when it comes to a real-time application
compared to GA and ABC. However, its accuracy is less than ABC and GA. On the
other hand, ABC proves its good accuracy towards the resolution of the continuum
robot IKM. In order to validate this comparison, various examples of simulations have
been established.
76
Chapter 4
Conceptual study of the two-section

continuum flexible robot
4.1 Introduction
A cable driven continuum robot is a particular type of robot that uses discrete cable
connections to control it. The mechanism that defines this robot consists of a fixed
platform which itself composed of:
• Motors (even pulleys, worms, wheels, overrunning clutches, springs, etc.).
• The cables wind or unwind author of a pulley in order to be able to control

precisely the position and orientation of the robot, in our case have planned to
build a robot formed by two independent and flexible concatenated sections, each
operated by three cables.
In fact, this chapter has been realized in the same context of a master thesis [79].
4.2 Study of the flexible body of the robot

The whole mechanism of the robot is represented on the figure 4.1. The robot is
composed of a flexible rod which ensures the connection between the disks and the
flexibility of the robot. The rod flexes according to the mobility of the disks which are
in turn activated by the tension of the cables.
It is to be noted that each section is actuated separately by its motor, the two
motors are located in the base of the robot.
77
Conceptual study of the two-section continuum flexible robot
Fig. 4.1: Diagram of the kinematic chain of the flexible body
4.3 Study of the force applied on the robot during

bending
The force applied on the considered continuum robot to make it bend is a real
example of the nonlinear following force, also called non-conservative force, in other
words the Beck column. The equation that governs the force applied on the flexible
rod of the robot can be expressed as follows [80]:
∂ 4y ∂ 2y q ∂ 2y
EI + P + =0 (4.1)
∂x4 ∂x2 g ∂t2
With : I : Moment of inertia of the rod, f racqg : The force applied to the rod, f racqg
The mass per unit length, y and x: Displacements, f racqg: Time.
78
Due to the complexity and demanding conditions for solving this equation, we
simply consider the case of the trailing force as a simple buckling case. Since the force
on the cables is parallel to the axis of the rod, then it exerts a compression on the last
disk which results in a buckling phenomenon on the rod. La notion de flambement
s’applique généralement à des poutres élancées qui lorsqu’elles sont soumises à un effort
normal de compression (physique), ont tendance à fléchir et se déformer dans une
direction perpendiculaire à l’axe de compression (passage d’un état de compression à
un état de flexion).
Fig. 4.2: Beam slung under an axial force
We apply the moment on the rod we will have :
M = p (y − a) (4.2)
∂ 2y
EI = Py−Pa (4.3)
∂ 2x
With: E: Young’s modulus (GPA), I: moment of inertia (mm2 ).
The general solution of the equation (4.2) is :
 s   s 
P  P 
y = A cos x + B sin x +a (4.4)
EI EI
By applying the initial conditions for x= 0, y = 0 we obtain

  s 
P 
y = a 1 − cos x (4.5)
EI
79
And for x = L, y = a we obtain :

π
P= EI (4.6)
4L2
Equation (4.6) will be used for the dimensioning of the control mechanism.
4.4 Proposals of the kinematic chain of the control

system
In this chapter, we will propose a design of the flexible robot as well as the control
mechanism represented in the form of a kinematic chain that allows us to understand
the operation of the robot parts in order to obtain the movements and displacements of
the structure (rotation, translation and deformation). After that, we will calculate the
parameters of the system construction, namely the study of resistance and endurance
under the effect of solicitations (stress and pressure), calculation of gears (breaking
stress and surface pressure).
4.4.1 Kinematic chain

The power of the motor transmits a rotational movement to the worm gear 2 which
in turn turns the gear wheel 3 that make up the gearbox assembly supported by the
base 1. The gear wheel 3 turns the transmission shaft 7 and the overrunning clutch 6,
thus transmitting the rotational movement to the pulley 5. On the latter a cable is
wound, the end of which is fixed to the last disk of the flexible section, thus enabling
the robot to be driven by the buckling of the shaft. When the motor is not working,
the flexible rod returns to its vertical position under the efforts of the torsion spring
fixing the pulley to the body of the mechanism after having accumulated a potential
energy obliges the pulley to turn in the opposite direction causing the opposite winding
of the cable without turning the shaft of the mechanism (role of the overrunning clutch
6) see (figure 4.3) and (figure 4.4)
80
Fig. 4.3: Diagram of the drive train in front view
Fig. 4.4: Diagram of the drive train in top view
Fig. 4.5: The location of the control mechanism on the fixed base
81
Table 4.1: Parts of the robot’s mechanism of control
N° Pieces Name of the part

1 Base
2 Worm gear
3 Helical toothed wheel
4 Radial contact ball bearing
5 Pulley
6 Overrunning clutch
7 Transmission shaft
4.4.2 Calculation of the force acting on the rod (backbone)

the backbone of the robot is made of Kevlar, the force applied on the rod can be
calculated by the following formula :
π 2 EI
F= (4.7)
4L2
h i
E = 34.5 [GPA] = 34.5 KN.mm2 : Young modulus of Kevlar
L = 400 [mm] : length of the rod for the first section
4
I : moment of inertia of the rod I = πd
64 (d = 12mm)
For a numerical application:
π 2 × 34.5 × 103 × 1017.87

F= = 541.540 [N ]
4 × 4002
4.4.3 Calculation of the forces acting on the system

In this section, we calculate the forces applied to the system as shown in Figure 4.6.
Fig. 4.6: Diagram showing the forces acting on shaft 2
82
F : Acting force on the cable [N]

Ft2 : Radial force [N]
Fr2 : Axial force [N]
Fa2 : Tangential force [N]
• Determining the diameter of the wheel d2 :

mr
d2 = ma2 × z2 = × z2 (4.8)
cos β
With z2 number of teeth of the wheel, β helix anglee, mr actual module in [mm].
The apparent modulus of the wheel is expressed as:
mr
ma2 = = 2.07 [mm] (4.9)
cos β
Thus
2
d2 = ◦ × 20 = 41.41 [mm] (4.10)
cos 15
The bending strength of the tooth should be checked by the following equation:
v
T
u
u
mr = 2.34 × t (4.11)
k × cos β × σp
With T = Ft2 Tangential force in [N].
2 × Mt 2 × F × Rp
F t2 = = (4.12)
d d
With Mt is the torsional momenth in [N.mm],
i
Rp = 35[mm] is the radius of the pulley.
2
The practical elasticity stress in KN.mm can be expressed as follows :
σe
σp = (4.13)
s
With σe is the elastic limit stress, s = 2.75 is the safety coefficient.
For steel 16MnCr5:
σe = 440[N N/mm2 ]
k = π ◦ = 12.13 ≈ 13
sin 15
So we will have: v
T
u
u
mr ≥ 2.34 × t = 1.57 [mm] (4.14)
k × cos β × σp
83
We take m2 = 2 according to the series 1 of RENARD.
Table 4.2: Geometric characteristics of the gear
Designations Relations
The real module mr mr mr = 2 [mm]
The apparent module ma2 ma2 ma2 = mr × cos β = 2.07 [mm]
The number of teeth z2 z2 z2 = 20 dent
◦
Angle de pression α α = 20
◦ ◦ ◦
Angle of the helix β = 15 Direction of the helix : right or left 15 ≤ β ≤ 30
Primitive d2 d2 = ma2 × z2 = 41.41 [mm]
From the top da2 da2 = d2 + 2mr = 45.41 [mm]
Diameters
From foot df 2 df 2 = d2 − 2.5mr = 36.41 [mm]
Height h h = 2.25 × mr = 4.5 [mm]
Hollow hf hf = 1.25 × mr = 2.5 [mm]
Projected ha ha = mr = 2 [mm]
Width b b ≥ πm r
sin β = 24.27 [mm]
Characteristic of the teeth
Reel step pr pr = π × mr = 6.28 [mm]
Apparent step pa pa = π × ma = 6.50 [mm]
Thickness e e = p2r = 3.14 [mm]
Interval i i = p2r = 3.14 [mm]

z1 z2
Center distance a a = m2r cos γ + cos β
z1 d1 1
Transmission ratio k12 k12 = z2 = d2 = 10
4.4.4 Calculation of forces on the gearing (teeth)

Tangential force:
2Mt
F t2 = = 915.42[N ] (4.15)
d
Axial force :
Fa2 = Ft2 × tgβ = 245.28[N ] (4.16)
radial Force :
tgα
Fr2 = Ft2 × = 344.93[N ] (4.17)
cos β
84
Table 4.3: Results of the calculation of the breaking capacity
The wheel z2 = 20, mr = 2[mm]

Materials Alloy steel Mn-Cr 65-70 hbar (300 Br)
Resistance to rupture σb lim = 22 [hbar]
d: Primitive diameter d2 = 41.41 [mm]
b: Width of the teeth b = 24.27 [mm]
2πN
v : Tangential velocities v = ω × R = 60 R = 10.47 × 20.705 = 0.216 [m/s]
kv : Velocity factor kv = 3+3√v = 3+√30.216 = 0.865
Lh : The duration of operation Lh = 24960[heures]
N :Speed of rotation N = 100 [tr/ min]
Nc : Number of cycles q = 2 Nc = 60N × Lh × q = 0.299 × 109
1/10
107
kbl : Time to Breakdown Factor kbl = Nc = 0.71
kM : Range Factor kM = 1
kA : Application factor kA = 1
Yε : Driving factor Yε = 0.25 + 0.75
εα = 0.715
zroue
Zv : Number of virtual teeth zv = 3 = 22.19
cos (β)
YF : Form factor YF =
2.71

β
Yβ : Tilt factor Yβ = 1 − εβ 120 = 0.866
Ftadm Allowable forces Ftadm = σb lim × b × mr × kbl ×k v ×kM ×KA
Yε ×YF ×Yβ = 394.05 [daN ]
Comparison Ftmax etFtadm Ftmax = 91.542 [daN ] < Ftadm = 394.05 [daN ]
Table 4.4: Results of the calculation of the allowable power following the rupture
◦
The wheel : z1 = 20 , mr = 2mm β = 15
N : rotational speed N = 100 [tr/ min]
Permissible efforts Ftadm Ftadm = 394.05 [daN ]
10−6 mr
Allowable power Pa dim Pmax < Pa dim = 1.96 × cos β N × Z × Ftadm = 0.83 [KW ]
85
Table 4.5: Results of the calculation of the capacity at surface pressure
The wheel z2 = 20, mr = 2[mm]

Materials Alloy steel Mn-Cr 65-70 hbar (300 Br)
Surface pressure σH lim = 95 [hbar]
Cr : Ratio factor Cr = z1z+z
2
2
= 0.9
2πN
v : Tangential velocities v = ω × R = 60 R = 10.47 × 20.705 = 0.216 [m/s]
kv : Speed factor kv = 3+3√v = 0.865
Lh : Duration of operation Lh = 24960[heures]
N : Rotation speeds N = 100 [tr/ min]
Nc : Number of charging cycles Nc = 60N × Lh × q = 0.299 × 109 [heures]
1/6
107
kHl : Surface pressure factor kHl = Nc = 0.57
kM : The report db22 kM = 1
kA : Application factor kA √=1
ZE : Elasticity factor ZE = 7700
k
Zβ : Contact length factor εβ = π × sin β = 1.07 Thus Zβ2 = 0.62
βb
zc : Geometric factor zc2 = sin αcos
t ×cos αt
= 2.94
γ : Load capacity factor N12 = 100 [tr/min], γ for N < 200
Ftmax and Tadm Ftmax = 91.542 [daN ] < Tadm = 143.38 [daN ]
Table 4.6: Results of the calculation of the admissible power at surface pressure
◦
The wheel : z2 = 20 , mr = 2mm β = 15
N : Rotational speed N = 100 [tr/ min]
Ftadm : Allowable forces Ftadm = 143.38 [daN ]
10−6 mr
Padm : Admissible power Pmax < Padm = 1.96 × cos β N × Z × Ftadm = 0.30 [KW ]
4.4.5 Calculation of the forces acting on the worm
Fig. 4.7: Forces acting on the worm
86
Mt : Torsional moment
Ft2 : Tangential force of the screw [N]
Ft1 = Fa2 = 245.28 [N ] (4.18)
Fr2 : Radial force of the screw [N]
Fa1 = Ft2 = 915.42 [N ] (4.19)
Fa2 : Axial force of the screw [N]
Fr1 = Fr2 = 344.93 [N ] (4.20)
Table 4.7: Application of the characteristics of the worm
Designations Relations
The real module mr mr mr = 2[mm]
mr
The apparent module ma1 ma1 ma1 = cos γ = 7.22 [mm]
The number of nets z1 z1 z1 = n = 2
Pressure angle α α = 20◦
Angle of the helix β + γ = 90◦ Helix direction: left or right γ = 75◦
from bottom df 1 df 1 = df 1 − 2.5 × mr = 10.44 [mm]
Primitives d1 d1 = dma × z1 = 15.44 [mm]
Diameters From head da1 da1 = d1 + 2 × mr = 19.44 [mm]
Height h h = 2.25 × mr = 4.5 [mm]
Hollow hf = 1.25 × mr = 2.5 [mm]
Projection ha ha = mr = 2 [mm]
Length l l ≥ 6 × ma1 = 46.36 [mm]
reel step pr pr = π × mr = 6.28 [mm]
Characteristic of the teeth apparent step p a pa = π × ma = 24.25 [mm]
thickness e e = p2r = 3.14 [mm]
range i i = p2r = 3.14 [mm]
Center distance a a = 0.5 × (d1 + d1 ) = 28.42 [mm]
w2 d1 z1 1
Transmission ratio k w1 = d2 tgβ = z2 = 10
87
4.5 Determination of the preliminary diameters of

shafts and the study of their fatigue
The element that carries the geometric rotation parts is called an axis or shaft.
Shafts are only intended to support the rotating parts. They can be either fixed in
relation to the parts they carry, or they rotate with them (the axis can then be part of
them) Whatever the case, the forces exerted on the rotating parts acting on their axis
act as bending loads.
In contrast to the axles, the shafts not only carry the rotating parts, but also
transmit the torsional moment, so that in addition to the bending forces, the shafts
are also subjected to a torsional moment along their entire length or only in part.
4.5.1 Calculation of the preliminary diameter of the shaft

To determine the diameter of the shaft, the reactions in the vertical plane as well
as in the horizontal plane are calculated and the resulting max bending moments are
calculated as follows: q
Mf res = Mv2max + MH 2 (4.21)
max
Mf res : Resulting bending moment [N.mm], Mvmax : Maximum vertical moment

[N.mm], MHmax : Maximum horizontal moment [N.mm]
By applying the 4ème theory of resistance (critère de tressas):
q
σeq = 2
σmax 2
+ 4τmax ≤ [σ]tr (4.22)
σeq : The elastic limit stress, σmax : Maximum stress
Mf res max Mf res

σmax = = πd3 (4.23)
Wf net
32
The maximum tangential stress
Mt Mt
τmax = = πd3 (4.24)
Wpnet
16
88
Mt : Torsional moment [N.mm]

Finally the diameter equation of the shaft can be written as:
v
uq
u
3
u MF2 res + Mt2
d= t × 32 (4.25)
π [σeq ]
d : shaft diameter
4.5.2 Checking shafts for fatigue

The shaft dimensions given by the preliminary calculation are checked to determine
the practical safety factors in the dangerous sections.
1
n = r 2 ≥2 (4.26)
1 1
nσ + nτ
n : globale safety coefficient

σ−1
nσ = kσ
(4.27)
βεσ σα + ψσ σm
nσ : Coefficient of safety in bending
τ−1
nτ = kτ
(4.28)
βετ τα + ψτ τm
nτ : Torsional safety coefficient

β : Surface hardening coefficient
• Remarque
→ For the axes τ = 0 what makes n = nσ
→ For the axes animated by a rotational movement the stresses being symmetrical
σm = 0, Therefore :
σ−1
n = nσ = kσ
(4.29)
β εσ σ α
When the stresses vary according to a pulsating cycle as in the case of fixed axes
Therefore:
2σ−1
n = nσ = (4.30)
σmax βkεσ + ψσ
σ
The values of σa etσm are defined as follows:
89
→ Symmetrical cycle:
For σm = 0
Mf
σa = σmax = (4.31)
Wf net
For τm = 0
Mt
τa = τmax = (4.32)
Wpnet
→ Pulsating cycle:
‘
Mf
σmax Wf net
σm = σa = = (4.33)
2 2
Mt
τmax W
τm = τa = = pnet (4.34)
2 2
The location of the key is taken into account here
πd3 bd(d − p)2

wf net = − (4.35)
32 2d
πd3 bd(d − p)2

wpnet = − (4.36)
16 2d
Fig. 4.8: Diagram of the dimensions of the shaft section
kσ kτ
ψσ , ψτ Material sensitivity coefficient And εσ , ετ Stress concentration coefficient
!
kτ kσ
= 1 + 0.6 × −1 (4.37)
ετ εσ
→ Law of bending
σ−1 = 0.43 × R (4.38)
90
Table 4.8: Material sensitivity coefficients
Steel ψσ ψτ
Mild steel 0.15 0.05
Medium carbon steel 0.20 0.10
→ Law of torsion
τ−1 = 0.58 × R (4.39)
h i
R : Fracture stress daN/mm2
4.5.3 Application
◦
→ Calculation of the shaft N 2
Fig. 4.9: Forces and reactions acting on the screw shaft in the vertical plane
• Calculation of reactions in the vertical plane:
X d2
MB = F × 75 − Fa2 × − Fr2 × 22.5 − RAv × 45 = 0 (4.40)
2
F × 75 − Fa2 × d22 − Fr2 × 22.5

RAv = = 617.24 [N ] (4.41)
45
91
X d2
MA = F × 30 − Fa2 × + Fr2 × 22.5 − RBv × 45 = 0 (4.42)
2
F × 30 − Fa2 × d22 + Fr2 × 22.5
RBv = = 420.63 [N ] (4.43)
45
Verification :
F + RBv − Fr2 − RAv = 0 (4.44)
Mv1 = F × 30 = 541.540 × 30 = 16246.2 [N.mm] (4.45)

d2
Mv2 = Fa2 × + RBV × 22.5 = 14542.92 [N.mm] (4.46)
2
Donc :
Mv1 ≥ Mv2 (4.47)
Alors :
Mvmax = Mv1 = 16246.2 [N.mm] (4.48)
• Calculation of reactions in the horizontal plane
Fig. 4.10: Forces and reactions acting on the screw shaft in the horizontal plane
MB = RAH × 45 − Ft2 × 22.5 = 0 (4.49)
Where
Ft2 × 22.5 915.42 × 22.5
RAH = = = 457.71 [N ] (4.50)
45 45
X
MA = RBH × 45 + Ft2 × 22.5 = 0 (4.51)
92
Where
Ft2 × 22.5 915.42 × 22.5
RBH = = = 457.7 [N ] (4.52)
45 45
Verification :
Ft2 − RAH − RBH = 0
915.42 − 457.71 − 457.71 = 0 (4.53)
MH1 = 0
MH2 = RAH × 22.5 = RBH × 22.5 = 10298.47 [N.mm]

(4.54)
MH2 = MHmax = 10298.74 [N.mm]
Calculation of the resulting moment
q q
Mf res1 = 2
Mv21 + MH 1
= 16246.22 + 02 = 16246.2 [N.mm] (4.55)
q q
Mf res2 = 2
Mv22 + MH 2
= 14542.692 + 10298.472 = 17819.88 [N.mm] = Mf res (4.56)
Calculate the diameter of the shaft:
u√
v v
uq
u M2 + M2
3
u fres t u
3 17819.882 + 18953.92
d= × 32 = × 32 = 11.83 [mm] (4.57)
t t
π [σeq ] π × 160
Checking the shaft for fatigue, we choose forged alloy steel.

Calculation of the endurance limit σ−1 and τ−1
The fit between the shaft and the impeller is : H
h6
7
h i
So the breaking stress R = 90 daN/mm2 et β = 1 (no hardening)
→ For bending
h i
σ−1 = 0.43 × R = 0.43 × 60 = 25.8 daN.mm2 (4.58)
→ For torsion
h i
τ−1 = 0.58 × R = 0.43 × 60 = 14.96 daN.mm2 (4.59)
The shaft is of carbon steel XC42, ψσ = 0.2 et ψτ = 0.1

With kεσσ , kεττ : Coefficient of stress concentration
kσ
= 1.8 (4.60)
kσ
93
!
kτ kτ
= 1 + 1.6 × − 1 = 1 + 0.6 × (1.8 − 1) = 1.48 (4.61)
ετ ετ
Calculation of σa and τa , solicitation of a rotational movement being of symmetrical
cycle:

πd3 bd(d − p) 2
π × 11.833 4 × 2 11.83 − 22
Wf net = − = − = 129.86 (4.62)
32 2d 32 2 × 11.83

2
πd3 bd(d − p)2 π × 11.833 4 × 2 11.83 − 2
Wf net = − = − = 292.40 (4.63)
16 2d 16 2 × 11.83
Where
σ−1 25.8
nσ = kσ
= = 1.04 (4.64)
βεσ σa + ψσ σm
1.8 × 13.722 + 0.2 × 0
τ−1 14.96
nσ = kτ
= = 1.55 (4.65)
βετ τa + ψσ τm 1.48 × 6.4825 + 0.1 × 0
So the overall safety coefficient :
1 1
n = r 2 2 = r 2 = 0.86 ≺ 2 (4.66)
1 2

1 1 1
nσ + nτ 1.04 + 1.55
Insufficient we must increase the diameter of the shaft, to d = 15mm.
πd3 bd(d − p)2 π153 4 × 2(15 − 2)2

wf net = − = − = 286.27 (4.67)
32 2d 32 2 × 15
πd3 bd(d − p)2 π153 4 × 2(15 − 2)2

wpnet = − = − = 617.61 (4.68)
16 2d 16 2 × 15
Where " #
Mf res max 117819.88 N daN

σmax = = = 62.24 2
= 6.224 (4.69)
Wf net 286.27 mm mm2
" #

σmax = = = 30.68 2
= 3.068 (4.70)
Therefore
σ−1 22.8
nσ = kσ
= = 2.30 (4.71)
βε σα 1.8 × 6.224
σ
94
τ−1 14.96
nσ = kτ
= = 3.29 (4.72)
βετ τα
1.48 × 3.068
So the overall safety coefficient.
1 1
n = r 2 2 = r 2 = 1.88 ≺ 2 (4.73)
1 2

1 1 1
nσ + nτ 2.3 + 3.29
Insufficient, we must increase the diameter of the shaft, for d = 16mm:
πd3 bd(d − p)2 π163 4 × 2(16 − 2)2

wf net = − = − = 353.12 (4.74)
32 2d 32 2 × 16
πd3 bd(d − p)2 π153 4 × 2(16 − 2)2

wpnet = − = − = 755.24 (4.75)
16 2d 16 2 × 16
Where " #

σmax = = = 50.46 2
= 5.046 (4.76)
" #
Mt 18953.9 N daN

τmax = = = 25.09 2
= 2.509 (4.77)
Wpnet 755.24 mm mm2
Therefore
σ−1 25.8
nσ = kσ
= = 2.84 (4.78)
βεσ σα
1.8 × 5.046
τ−1 14.96
nτ = kτ
= = 4.02 (4.79)
βτ τα
1.48 × 2.430
So the overall safety coefficient:
1 1
n = r 2 2 = r 2 = 2.31 ≻ 2 (4.80)
1 2

1 1 1
nσ + nτ 2.84 + 4.15
We choose the acceptable diameter d=16 mm.

◦
→ Calculating the shaft N 1
• Calculation of reactions in the vertical plane:
95
Fig. 4.11: Forces and reactions acting on the screw shaft in the vertical plane
X d1
MB = RAv × 71.08 + Fa1 × − Fr1 × 35.54 = 0 (4.81)
2
−Fa1 × d21 + Fr1 × 35.54 −915.42 × 15.44
2 + 344.93 × 35.54 = 73.04N (4.82)
RAv = =
71.08 71.08
X d1
M A = RBv × 71.08 + Fa1 × − Fr1 × 35.54 = 0 (4.83)
2
−Fa1 × d21 × Fr1 × 35.54 −915.42 × 15.55
2 + 344.93 × 35.54 = 271.88N (4.84)
RBv = =
71.08 71.08
Verification:
Fr1 − RAv − RBv = 344.93 − 73.04 − 271.88 = 0 (4.85)
Mv1 = RAv × 35.54 = 2595.84 [N.mm] (4.86)
Mv2 = RBv × 35.54 = 9662.61 [N.mm] (4.87)
Thus
Mvmax = Mv2 = 9662.61 [N.mm]
• Calculation of reactions in the horizontal plane
96
Fig. 4.12: The forces and reactions acting on the screw shaft in the horizontal plane
X
MB = RAH × 71.08 − Ft1 × 35.54 = 0 (4.88)
Ft1 × 35.54 245.28 × 35.54
RAH = = = 122.64N (4.89)
71.08 71.08
X
MA = RBH × 71.08 − Ft1 × 35.54 = 0 (4.90)
Ft1 × 35.54 245.28 × 35.54
RBH = = = 122.64N (4.91)
71.08 71.08
MH1 = MH2 = RAH × 35.54 = RBH × 35.54 = 9610.55 [N.mm] (4.92)
Then the result moment is :

q q
Mf res = 2
Mv2max + MH max = 9662.612 + 9610.552 = 13628.23 [N.mm] (4.93)
Calculate the diameter of the shaft:

v
uq
u M2 + Mt
3
u f res 2
d= t × 32 = 11.41 [mm] (4.94)
π [σeq ]
Checking the shaft for fatigue (Forged alloy steel is chosen) :
97
Calcul de la limite d’endurance : σ−1 et τ−1

The fit between the shaft and the impeller is : H
h6
7
h i
Alors la contrainte de rupture R = 90 daN/mm2
β : Coefficient of surface hardening So we can write :
h i
σ−1 = 0.63 × 0.7R = 0.7 × 90 = 63 daN/mm2 (4.95)
h i
τ−1 = 0.58 × 0.7R = 0.7 × 90 = 36.54 daN/mm2 (4.96)
The shaft is made of carbon

steel

: XC42, φσ = 0.2 and φτ = 0.1
kσ kτ kσ
εσ = 2.3 et ετ = 1 + 0.6 εσ − 1 = 1.78 : coefficient de concentration des contraintes.
Calculation of σa and τa , the solicitations of a rotational movement being of

symmetrical cycle Thus :
" #
Mf 9662.61 dan N

σa = σmax = = = 84.176 2
= 8.4176 (4.97)
πd3 bd(d − p)2 π × 11.413 4 × 2(11.41 − 2)2

Wf net = − = − = 114.79 (4.98)
32 2d 32 2 × 11.41
πd3 bd(d − p)2 π × 11.413 4 × 2(11.41 − 2)2
Wpnet = − = − = 260.624 (4.99)
16 2d 16 2 × 11.41
" #
Mt 18953.9 dan
τa = τmax = = = 7.272 (4.100)
Wpnet 260.624 mm2
σ−1 63
nσ = kσ
= = 3.25 (4.101)
βεσ + φσ σm 2.3 × 8.471 + 0.2 × 0
τ−1 36.54
nτ = kτ
= = 2.82 (4.102)
βετ τα + φσ τm
1.78 × 7.272 + 0.1 × 0
So the global safety coefficient is :
1 1
n = r 2 2 = r 2 2 = 2.12 ≻ 2 (4.103)
1 1 1 1
nσ + nτ 3.25 + 3.82
The diameter of the shaft is acceptable.
98
4.6 Presentation of the robot parts on SolidWorks

4.6.1 Introduction
From a design point of view, the imitation of the backbone as well as a reliable
structure that describes the behavior of a flexible continuum robot is a challenge. In
this thesis, a new design is proposed using SolidWorks software for a flexible continuum
robot with variable curvature that is similar to the elephant trunk.
In fact, the proposed design is similar to the work developed in [81], where the
researchers proposed a structure for the robot that consists of a backbone containing
many equidistant disks. The entire robot is guided by cables.
4.6.2 Conceptual study of cable-driven continuum robots

Most of the proposed designs are aimed at simplifying the structures of cable-operated
continuum robots [82, 81, 83, 46].
The envisaged design is composed of two sections, each section is formed by units
connected in series. Each unit has two disks that differ in diameter. Each flexible
section is controlled individually by electric motors and pulleys.
4.6.3 Flexible backbone

The backbone (rod) of the flexible continuum robot is a crucial part since it supports
the entire robot structure and represents the main source of bending during task
execution. Thus, the selection of an appropriate material that better serves the flexure
must be done properly, such as Kevlar, fiberglass [16] and NiTi [46]. In the proposed
design, Kevlar is used because of its flexibility and ease of 3D printing.
4.6.4 Actuating cables

Cables are usually made of materials that can return to their original shape after
being extended to allow the robot to return to its initial position where it started to
oscillate. An example is the Dyneema fiber which is studied in detail in [84].
In our work, the cables are not realizable in SolidWorks so we just consider a
following force on the edge of the disks.
99
4.6.5 The guiding discs

The discs in the continuum robots driven by cables, are responsible for guiding
the cables along the entire structure of the robot. They can have the same shape
(diameters) or differ in diameter, which is adopted in the design of the robot. The
disks (usually made of plastic) are used to increase the bending angle for each unit of
the robot.
4.6.6 The electric motors

In order to ensure a good functioning of this robot, an exact dimensioning of all
transmission elements (reducer, spring, pulley,) are taken into consideration.
4.7 Design of a flexible spacial robot

The proposed design describes the structure as a flexible beam that contains a set of
disks for each section.Three cables manage the movement of each section separately,
they are separated from each other by an angle of 120 degrees. They pass through the
holes of the disks, each hole is separated by 120 degrees from each other. The complete
structure of the robot is shown in figure 4.13. Each part of the robot, including
the cables, disks, flexible backbone, base, and motors with their parts, are shown in
Appendix A. The robot parts are designed to match the performance of the motors.
As shown in the figures below, different views of the robot with its different
components.
100
Fig. 4.13: 3D representation of the robot continuum
Fig. 4.14: SolidWorks software interface representing the robot in 4 views
101
Fig. 4.15: Robot body (Backbone and disks)
Fig. 4.16: Design of the robot base subassembly
102
Fig. 4.17: 3D representation of the control system in 4 views (for a single cable)
103
4.8 Conclusion
In this chapter, we proposed a design for a cable-operated continuum robot. The
proposed design has two sections, each section has a separate control motor. Each
part of the control system is designed in detail on SolidWorks. The two sub-assemblies
controlling the robot are composed of different parts generally designed to ensure
proper operation of the robot.
104
Chapter 5
Dynamic modeling
5.1 Introduction
Equations of motion for continuum robots are useful for simulating their dynamic
behavior. In this chapter, we introduce dynamic partial differential equations that
describe the kinematic energy and potential energy of a flexible continuum robot.
Current research on the modeling of continuum manipulators is moving towards the
development of accurate dynamic models by taking into account more specificities
and mechanical properties. In the same context, we present the dynamic modeling of
a cable-driven continuum robot based on the Euler-Lagrange method.The dynamic
model is developed based on the equations of motion of a section with inextensible
bending and zero torsion.
The established model is based on the variable curvature using the equation
previously developed in chapter 2 (2.24) which relates each unit to the neighboring
unit belonging to the same section, we chose the variable curvature because it describes
the dynamic behavior of the continuum robot much better than the constant curvature
especially when the robot undergoes a dynamic force. The Taylor expansion is applied
to the geometrical model in order to avoid singularities and to reduce the complexity
of the mathematical expressions.
5.2 Dynamic modeling

The dynamic model of the considered robot allows to determine the relationship
between the forces or the actuator torques and the motion of the structure. The direct
dynamic modeling consists in determining the generalized accelerations submitted by
105
Dynamic modeling
the robot as a function of the forces and/or torques, the generalized coordinates and
their first derivatives.
5.3 Dynamic model of flexible spatial continuum

robot
In this section, we present the direct dynamic model of a continuum robot with a
section (k=1) composed of 5 units using the Lagrange-Euler method.
The bending angle and the orientation angle present the generalized coordinates in
space for the following equation of motion:

d dT dT ∂U
dt ∂ θ̇j,k − ∂θj,k + ∂θj,k = Q1


(5.1)
 d dT − dT + ∂U = Q

dt ∂ φ̇k ∂φk ∂φk 2
Avec
Q1 : the first generalized force
Q2 : the second generalized force
T : the total kinetic energy of the robot
U : the total potential energy of the robot
θj,k : the bending angle for each unit (j, k)
φk : the angle of orientation
For variable curvature, each unit has its own bending angle, so we will have five
generalized coordinates. But if we use the equation (2.24), previously developed
in Chapter 2, the equation of motion will be expressed exclusively in terms of two
variablesθ1,k and φk .
5.3.1 Kinetic and potential energy

The kinematic energy of the considered robot resides in the flexible rod as well as the
disks. As mentioned before, the flexible rod is composed of a concatenation of units,
each unit has its own bending angle, so the kinetic energy of the rod is the sum of the
kinetic energy of each unit.
Each point located on the central axis of the flexible unit (j, k) is specified by the
curvilinear abscissa h which represents the length from the origin of the reference frame
Rj,k−1 to the specified point (see figure 5.1).
106
Dynamic modeling
By means of the variable curvature assumption, the position vector Uj,k of any
point distant h from the origin of the reference frame Oj,k−1 can be expressed by the
equation (5.2).
hU


 x U (h) = j,k 1 − cos θ hU cos (φk )
 j,k j,k
θ hUj,k





hUj,k



y
Uj,k = Uj,k (h) = 1 − cos θ hUj,k sin (φk ) (5.2)

 θ hUj,k



 hU

 zU (h) = j,k sin θ hU
 j,k j,k


θ hUj,k
.
hUj,k θj,k r1,k
With θ hUj,k = lj,k , θj,k = rUj,k θ1,k et Uj,k the position vector of each point
located on the central axis of each unit. The linear velocity of any point away from
the origin can be calculated by differentiation with respect to time:
hUj,k hUj,k

lj,k l



 ẋUj,k (h) = θ̇j,k θj,k sin lj,k θj,k − 2 H
θj,k
cos (φk ) − θj,k
j,k
H φ̇k



hU hUj,k

lj,k l

j,k
vh,j = ẏUj,k (h) = θ̇j,k θj,k sin lj,k θj,k H − 2
θj,k
sin (φk ) − θj,k
j,k
H φ̇k (5.3)




hUj,k hUj,k hUj,k

 lj,k
żU (h) = θ̇ cos lj,k θj,k − sin lj,k θj,k


j,k j,k θj,k 2
θj,k
107
Dynamic modeling
hUj,k

With H = 1 − cos lj,k θj,k
The kinetic energy of the flexible rod is given by :
Zj,k l
5
X1 2 2 2
Tb = mb ẋUj,k (h) + ẏUj,k (h) + żUj,k (h) (5.4)
j=1 2 0
Where mb is the mass of the rod. For more details on how to obtain the kinetic energy
using
For the kinematic energy of the disks, it can be obtained using the equation (5.5).
The weight of the disks being very small, for simplicity, we consider the same weight
for each disk. And since each unit has its own bending angle, we will have the potential
energy for each unit. Thus, the total kinematic energy of the disks can be obtained as
follows:
5
1X T
Td = vh,j mj vh,j (5.5)
2 j=1
For simplicity reasons, the kinetic energies of rotation are kinetic energies of rotation
are neglected. Thus, the total kinetic energy of a single section is given by :
T = Tb + Td (5.6)
With Tb : the total kinetic energy of the rod, and Td : the total kinetic energy of the
disks.
For potential energy, the flexible rod can be virtually divided into a series of flexible
rod fragmentation where each flexible rod has its own bending angle θj,k . As long as
the disks have low weight, we can only consider the potential energy of the rod, which
can be considered as follows:
5
EIb X
U = Up = θ2 (5.7)
2L j=1 j,k
Where Ib and E represent the moment of inertia and the young’s modulus of the rod,
respectively.
The parameters used for each equation are given in Table 5.2.
108
Dynamic modeling
5.3.2 Generalized forces

The force applied on the cables simultaneously can give rise to the spatial motion of
the robot which can be written as follows [46]:

Q1

= F1 d cos (γ1 − φ) + F2 d cos (γ2 − φ)
(5.8)
Q2

= F1 dθ sin (γ1 − φ) + F2 dθ sin (γ2 − φ)
γi takes different values, for i = 1, 2, 3, γ = 0, 2π 2π

3 , − 3 respectively.
5.3.3 The equations of motion

After the substitution of the kinetic energy as well as the potential energy of the
robot, the equation of motion contains the bending angle and the orientation angle as
well as their first and second derivatives. The equation of motion can be written in a
matrix system as follows:
θ̇2
 
     
θ̈   θ F
 = Dt  1 
Mt   + Ct 
 θ̇ φ̇  + Kt
  (5.9)
φ̈ φ F2
φ̇2
Avec:
 
M11 M12 
Mt = 
M21 M22
 
C11 C12 C13 
Ct = 
C21 C22 C23
 
K11 K12 
Kt = 
K21 K22
 
D11 D12 
Dt = 
D21 D22
For a numerical application :

We will consider a section with 5 units, the characteristics of the whole robot are shown
in the Table 5.1 and Table 5.2.
109
Dynamic modeling
Table 5.1: The characteristics of a single section of the flexible continuum robot
Section (K=1) Description

mk 5 units Number of physical units per section
Lk 800 mm Total length of the section
rmin,k 17.5 mm Radial cable distance
rmax,k 25 mm Radial cable distance
Table 5.2: The parameters of the considered section
Robot parameters Description values

L The length of the robot 0.800 m
g Gravity 9.81 m/s2
E Young module 210 GP a
Ib Moment of inertia of the backbone 1.257 10−11 m4
mb Mass of the backbone 32,6 10−3 kg
m1 The mass of disk 1 (base) 50 10−4 kg
m2 The mass of disk 2 40 10−4 kg
db Backbone diameter 4 10−3 m
The elements that make up the equation eqrefeq:eq4.9 can be expressed as follows:
9739 L2 m1 L3 mb 163 L2 θ2 m2 4 L2 θ2 m3 2000 L2 θ4 m4

M11 = + − + +
16918 154 10000 29 34657
4 3 3 2
21897 L θ m5 L θ mb L θ mb 3 4
+ − +
472109 396 21911
m5 L4 θ3 mb L3 θ4 mb L3 θ2 330513 m1 L2 θ4 61938 m3 L2 θ3
M22 = − + − +
19991 122 100 6505015 2299369
2
467 m2 L θ 2 2
m4 L θ
+ +
1058 145678
mb L3 θ5 mb L3 θ3 126 m3 L3 θ2 mb L3 θ 2.1010 m5 L2 θ5
C11 = − + − − +
839204 18769 10000 381 100000
1.1364 m4 L2 θ4 6.5829 m2 L2 θ3 200000 m1 L2 θ
+ + −
14286000 10000 12300403
110
Dynamic modeling
17862 m4 L4 θ3 mb L3 θ5 mb L3 θ3 15983 m5 L3 θ2 mb L3 θ
C13 = − − + + −
282109 364 119 28982109 115
2
138 m3 L θ 5 2
591879 m2 L θ 3 2
2807 m1 L θ
− + −
10000 5030069 4700
mb L3 θ5 mb L3 θ3 281 m5 L3 θ2 mb L3 θ 214 m2 L2 θ5
C22 = − + + +
383 30 203196 69 10000
2
670011 m1 L θ 3 2
19337 m4 L θ 2 2
1978 m3 L θ
− − +
2210041 10000 21129
C12 = C21 = C23 = 0
32573 E Ib
K11 =
10000 L
The factors of the equation (5.9) were obtained by separating each factor from its
multiplier, e.g. M11 is multiplied by θ̈ and M22 by φ̈.
In order to solve this matrix system, namely to find the bending angles as well as
the orientation angle, we will use the Runge-Kutta method on Matlab.
Understanding this system opens the way to understanding the dynamic behavior of
the robot. That is why we define the variables used in this method as follows:



 S1 (t) = θ

S2 (t) = θ̇


(5.10)




S3 (t) = φ


S4 (t) = φ̇
Using the equation (5.9), we can write:


M11 θ̈ + C11 × θ̇ 2 + C13 × φ̇2 + K11 θ = D11 F1 + D12 F2

(5.11)
M22 φ̈ + C22 × θ̇ × φ̇ = D21 F1 + D22 F2

Substituting the equation (5.10) into (5.11) we will have :
D11 F1 + D12 F2 − C11 θ̇2 − C13 φ̇2 − K11 θ

θ̈ =
M11
(5.12)
D11 F1 + D12 F2 − C11 S22 − C13 S42 − K11 S1
=
M11
111
Dynamic modeling
Et :
D21 F1 + D22 F2 − C22 θ̇φ̇
φ̈ =
M22 (5.13)
D21 F1 + D22 F2 − C22 S2 S4
=
M22
Finally, the equation (5.10) can be written as follows:




 Ṡ1 = S2


1
D11 F1 + D12 F2 − C11 S22 − C13 S42 − K11 S1

Ṡ2

= M11
(5.14)



Ṡ3 = S4


1
(D21 F1 + D22 F2 − C22 S2 S4 )

Ṡ4

= M22
π
If we provide the robot with an initial bending angle θ = 8 with zero tension on the
cables.
π
Fig. 5.2: The oscillation of the robot for θ = 8 and φ = 0
After releasing it, the robot oscillates from 22.5 to -22.55 degrees and after this
maximum level of oscillation that the robot can reach, we can observe that the oscillation
of the robot starts to decrease until it stabilizes at 18 seconds as shown in figure 5.2.
112
Dynamic modeling
For the second simulation example, we will apply a force equal to 3N on the first
cable, after releasing it, we can observe that the robot takes the equilibrium position
in 32.6° as shown in figure 5.3.
Fig. 5.3: The oscillation of the robot to θ = 0 and φ = 0
It should be noted that when implementing the Runge-kutta method for solving the
matrix system (5.9), we deliberately considered that the robot initially bends by an
angle of pi/5000, which avoids the non-convergence of the method used, and this can
be seen in Figure 5.3, namely that the robot is initially tilted by an angle of pi/5000
(0.036°) before applying the force.
113
Dynamic modeling
5.4 Conclusion
In this chapter, the direct dynamic model of a continuum (single section) robot with
variable curvature is developed by including the relationship that links the robot unit
with each other. Thus, the equation of motion can be expressed by two variables, the
bending angle and the orientation angle. The solution of the equation of motion is
performed using Runge-Kutta with Taylor expansion to avoid singularities.
114
Conclusion and future work
Overall in this work the following ideas have been addressed progressively:
✓ The development of a new mathematical formulation for the calculation of the

forward kinematic model (FKM) of continuum robots with variable curvature.
This formulation reduces the number of variables that appear in the calculation
of FKM by establishing a relationship linking the bending angle of all units of a
section of the continuum robot and the angle of the base unit belonging to the
same section.
✓ The use of optimization techniques to compute the inverse kinematic model (IGM)
of the variable curvature continuum robot namely: particle swarm optimization
(PSO), genetic algorithm (GA) and artificial bee colony (ABC). This computation
is studied as an optimization problem governed by an objective function that
defines the distance between the robot’s terminal organ and the desired trajectory
according to an imposed posture. A comparison between these three methods
is made in terms of accuracy and time consumption. It is found that the
PSO optimization technique converges quickly compared to both ABC and GA
methods. However, the ABC method provides better accuracy than PSO and
GA.
✓ The development of a dynamic model for variable curvature (CV) continuum

robots with a single section (spatial case) by including the mathematical relation-
ship that relates the bending angle of all units in a section of the robot with the
angle of the base unit belonging to the same section. Based on this relationship,
each unit has its own bending angle, which means that the total kinetic energy of
the robot is the sum of the unit energies. The potential energy of the backbone
(flexible rod) of the continuum robot is the sum of the flexible rod energies for each
unit. As long as the disks have low weight, we just calculated their kinetic energy
neglecting the potential energy. In this context, the Lagrangian is computed
and the equation of motion is approximated using the Taylor expansion to avoid
115
Conclusion and future work
numerical singularities. The solution of this equation of motion is performed

through the Runge-Kutta method (4th order).
✓ From a design point of view, a prototype of a two-section flexible continuum robot

is proposed taking into account all the necessary dimensioning and resistance
calculations for all the parts that constitute it.
The possible extensions of this current work are numerous, among the perspectives
that can be supported we cite:
✓ For the calculation of the forward kinematic model, where other specifications
can be added to the modeling phase, taking into account the possible extension
of the central axis as well as the torsion caused by some specific movement.
✓ Solve analytically the inverse kinematic model which allows fast convergence
when running a trajectory generation.
✓ For the dynamic model, the addition of frictional forces, torsional effect and
gravitational terms in the equation of motion of the robot to get closer to the
real dynamic behavior of the robot.
✓ Finite element study of the dynamic motion of the central rod .
✓ Redo the same work but for a robot driven by a pneumatic system.
116
References
[1] M. W. Hannan and I. D. Walker, “Analysis and experiments with an elephant’s

trunk robot,” Advanced Robotics, vol. 15, no. 8, pp. 847–858, 2001.
[2] W. McMahan, B. Jones, I. Walker, V. Chitrakaran, A. Seshadri, and D. Dawson,
“Robotic manipulators inspired by cephalopod limbs,” Proceedings of the Canadian
Engineering Education Association (CEEA), 2004.
[3] S. Hirose, “Biologically inspired robots,” Snake-Like Locomotors and Manipulators,
1993.
[4] J. L. C. Santiago, I. S. Godage, P. Gonthina, and I. D. Walker, “Soft robots
and kangaroo tails: modulating compliance in continuum structures through
mechanical layer jamming,” Soft Robotics, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 54–63, 2016.
[5] M. M. Tonapi, “Space-capable long and thin continuum robotic cable,” 2014.
[6] S. Hirose and M. Mori, “Biologically inspired snake-like robots,” in 2004 IEEE
International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics, pp. 1–7, IEEE, 2004.
[7] I. Singh, Curve Based Approach for Shape Reconstruction of Continuum Manipu-
lators. PhD thesis, Universite de Lille, 2018.
[8] M. Vujović, A. Rodić, and I. Stevanović, “Design of modular re-configurable robotic
system for construction and digital fabrication,” in International Conference on
Robotics in Alpe-Adria Danube Region, pp. 550–559, Springer, 2016.
[9] I. D. Walker, “Continuous backbone “continuum” robot manipulators,” Interna-
tional Scholarly Research Notices, vol. 2013, 2013.
[10] I. A. Gravagne, C. D. Rahn, and I. D. Walker, “Large deflection dynamics and
control for planar continuum robots,” IEEE/ASME transactions on mechatronics,
vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 299–307, 2003.
[11] M. W. Hannan and I. D. Walker, “Kinematics and the implementation of an
elephant’s trunk manipulator and other continuum style robots,” Journal of robotic
systems, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 45–63, 2003.
[12] J. D. Till, “On the Statics, Dynamics, and Stability of Continuum Robots: Model
Formulations and Efficient Computational Schemes,” 2019.
117
[13] A. Kapoor, N. Simaan, and R. H. Taylor, “Suturing in confined spaces: con-
strained motion control of a hybrid 8-DoF robot,” in ICAR’05. Proceedings., 12th
International Conference on Advanced Robotics, 2005., pp. 452–459, IEEE, 2005.
[14] J. Yang, P. Jason, and K. Abdel-Malek, “A hyper-redundant continuous robot,”
in Proceedings 2006 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation,
2006. ICRA 2006., pp. 1854–1859, IEEE, 2006.
[15] H. Hu, P. Wang, B. Zhao, M. Li, and L. Sun, “Design of a novel snake-like
robotic colonoscope,” in 2009 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and
Biomimetics (ROBIO), pp. 1957–1961, IEEE, 2009.
[16] R. J. Webster III, J. M. Romano, and N. J. Cowan, “Mechanics of precurved-tube
continuum robots,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 67–78,
2008.
[17] A. Degani, H. Choset, B. Zubiate, T. Ota, and M. Zenati, “Highly articulated
robotic probe for minimally invasive surgery,” in 2008 30th Annual International
Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, pp. 3273–
3276, IEEE, 2008.
[18] Y. Chen, J. H. Chang, A. S. Greenlee, K. C. Cheung, A. H. Slocum, and R. Gupta,
“Multi-turn, tension-stiffening catheter navigation system,” in 2010 IEEE Interna-
tional Conference on Robotics and Automation, pp. 5570–5575, IEEE, 2010.
[19] T. Maahs, V. Saadat, C. Rothe, and T. Le, “Disposable shapelocking system,”
2006.
[20] E. Guglielmino, N. Tsagarakis, and D. G. Caldwell, “An octopus anatomy-inspired
robotic arm,” in 2010 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots
and Systems, pp. 3091–3096, IEEE, 2010.
[21] E. Guglielmino, L. Zullo, M. Cianchetti, M. Follador, D. Branson, and D. G.
Caldwell, “The application of embodiment theory to the design and control of an
octopus-like robotic arm,” in 2012 IEEE International Conference on Robotics
and Automation, pp. 5277–5282, IEEE, 2012.
[22] K. Hatazaki, M. Konyo, K. Isaki, S. Tadokoro, and F. Takemura, “Active scope
camera for urban search and rescue,” in 2007 IEEE/RSJ International Conference
on Intelligent Robots and Systems, pp. 2596–2602, IEEE, 2007.
[23] J. Ding, K. Xu, R. Goldman, P. Allen, D. Fowler, and N. Simaan, “Design,
simulation and evaluation of kinematic alternatives for insertable robotic effectors
platforms in single port access surgery,” in 2010 IEEE International Conference
on Robotics and Automation, pp. 1053–1058, IEEE, 2010.
[24] E. Ayvali and J. P. Desai, “Towards a discretely actuated steerable cannula,” in
2012 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, pp. 1614–1619,
IEEE, 2012.
118
[25] R. J. Webster III and B. A. Jones, “Design and kinematic modeling of constant
curvature continuum robots: A review,” The International Journal of Robotics
Research, vol. 29, no. 13, pp. 1661–1683, 2010.
[26] V. C. Anderson and R. C. Horn, “Tensor arm manipulator,” 1970.
[27] Z. Li and R. Du, “Design and analysis of a bio-inspired wire-driven multi-section
flexible robot,” International Journal of Advanced Robotic Systems, vol. 10, no. 4,
p. 209, 2013.
[28] M. Mahvash and M. Zenati, “Toward a hybrid snake robot for single-port surgery,”
in 2011 Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine
and Biology Society, pp. 5372–5375, IEEE, 2011.
[29] A. G. Festo and C. KG, “Bionic handling assistant,” Info-brochure. Festo, Esslingen,
Germany, 2010.
[30] C. Escande, P. M. Pathak, R. Merzouki, and V. Coelen, “Modelling of multisection
bionic manipulator: Application to robotinoxt,” in 2011 IEEE International
Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics, pp. 92–97, IEEE, 2011.
[31] J. Burgner-Kahrs, D. C. Rucker, and H. Choset, “Continuum robots for medical
applications: A survey,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 31, no. 6, pp. 1261–
1280, 2015.
[32] G. S. Chirikjian, “Conformational modeling of continuum structures in robotics
and structural biology: A review,” Advanced Robotics, vol. 29, no. 13, pp. 817–829,
2015.
[33] J. D. Greer, T. K. Morimoto, A. M. Okamura, and E. W. Hawkes, “Series
pneumatic artificial muscles (sPAMs) and application to a soft continuum robot,”
in 2017 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA),
pp. 5503–5510, IEEE, 2017.
[34] I. S. Godage, E. Guglielmino, D. T. Branson, G. A. Medrano-Cerda, and D. G.
Caldwell, “Novel modal approach for kinematics of multisection continuum arms,”
in 2011 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems,
pp. 1093–1098, IEEE, 2011.
[35] I. M. Loutfi, A. H. B. Boutchouang, A. Melingui, O. Lakhal, F. B. Motto, and
R. Merzouki, “Learning-Based Approaches for Forward Kinematic Modeling of
Continuum Manipulators,” IFAC-PapersOnLine, vol. 53, no. 2, pp. 9899–9904,
2020.
[36] A. Melingui, O. Lakhal, B. Daachi, J. B. Mbede, and R. Merzouki, “Adaptive neural
network control of a compact bionic handling arm,” IEEE/ASME Transactions
on Mechatronics, vol. 20, no. 6, pp. 2862–2875, 2015.
[37] M. I. Jordan and D. E. Rumelhart, “Forward models: Supervised learning with a
distal teacher,” Cognitive science, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 307–354, 1992.
119
[38] A. Amouri, C. Mahfoudi, A. Zaatri, and H. Merabti, “A new approach to solve
inverse kinematics of a planar flexible continuum robot,” in AIP Conference
Proceedings, vol. 1618, pp. 643–646, American Institute of Physics, 2014.
[39] M. Rolf and J. J. Steil, “Efficient exploratory learning of inverse kinematics on
a bionic elephant trunk,” IEEE transactions on neural networks and learning
systems, vol. 25, no. 6, pp. 1147–1160, 2013.
[40] J. Merino, A. L. Threatt, I. D. Walker, and K. E. Green, “Forward kinematic model
for continuum robotic surfaces,” in 2012 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on
Intelligent Robots and Systems, pp. 3453–3460, IEEE, 2012.
[41] L. Fryziel, Modélisation et calibrage pour la commande d’un micro-robot continuum
dédié à la chirurgie mini-invasive. PhD thesis, Université Paris-Est, 2010.
[42] C. Escande, Towards modeling of a class of bionic manipulator robots. PhD thesis,
Lille 1, 2013.
[43] S. Neppalli and B. A. Jones, “Design, construction, and analysis of a continuum
robot,” in 2007 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and
Systems, pp. 1503–1507, IEEE, 2007.
[44] D. C. Rucker, B. A. Jones, and R. J. Webster III, “A geometrically exact model
for externally loaded concentric-tube continuum robots,” IEEE transactions on
robotics, vol. 26, no. 5, pp. 769–780, 2010.
[45] Y. Bailly and Y. Amirat, “Modeling and control of a hybrid continuum active
catheter for aortic aneurysm treatment,” in Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE Inter-
national Conference on Robotics and Automation, pp. 924–929, IEEE, 2005.
[46] B. He, Z. Wang, Q. Li, H. Xie, and R. Shen, “An analytic method for the
kinematics and dynamics of a multiple-backbone continuum robot,” International
Journal of Advanced Robotic Systems, vol. 10, no. 1, p. 84, 2013.
[47] B. A. Jones and I. D. Walker, “Kinematics for multisection continuum robots,”
IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 43–55, 2006.
[48] C. Escande, T. Chettibi, R. Merzouki, V. Coelen, and P. M. Pathak, “Kinematic
calibration of a multisection bionic manipulator,” IEEE/ASME transactions on
mechatronics, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 663–674, 2014.
[49] T. M. Bieze, F. Largilliere, A. Kruszewski, Z. Zhang, R. Merzouki, and C. Duriez,
“Finite element method-based kinematics and closed-loop control of soft, continuum
manipulators,” Soft robotics, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 348–364, 2018.
[50] T. Mahl, A. Hildebrandt, and O. Sawodny, “A variable curvature continuum kine-
matics for kinematic control of the bionic handling assistant,” IEEE transactions
on robotics, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 935–949, 2014.
[51] P. S. Gonthina, A. D. Kapadia, I. S. Godage, and I. D. Walker, “Modeling variable
curvature parallel continuum robots using euler curves,” in 2019 International
Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pp. 1679–1685, IEEE, 2019.
120
[52] H. Wu, J. Yu, J. Pan, and X. Pei, “A New Approach for Solving the Inverse
Kinematics of Continuum Robot Based on Piecewise Constant Curvature Model,”
2021.
[53] H. Mochiyama and T. Suzuki, “Kinematics and dynamics of a cable-like hyper-
flexible manipulator,” in 2003 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and
Automation (Cat. No. 03CH37422), vol. 3, pp. 3672–3677, IEEE, 2003.
[54] G. S. Chirikjian, “A continuum approach to hyper-redundant manipulator dynam-
ics,” in Proceedings of 1993 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent
Robots and Systems (IROS’93), vol. 2, pp. 1059–1066, IEEE, 1993.
[55] G. S. Chirikjian, “Hyper-redundant manipulator dynamics: A continuum approxi-
mation,” Advanced Robotics, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 217–243, 1994.
[56] V. Falkenhahn, T. Mahl, A. Hildebrandt, R. Neumann, and O. Sawodny, “Dy-
namic modeling of constant curvature continuum robots using the Euler-Lagrange
formalism,” in 2014 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots
and Systems, pp. 2428–2433, IEEE, 2014.
[57] A. Amouri, A. Zaatri, and C. Mahfoudi, “Dynamic modeling of a class of continuum
manipulators in fixed orientation,” Journal of Intelligent & Robotic Systems, vol. 91,
no. 3, pp. 413–424, 2018.
[58] Z. Li, Wire-driven mechanism and highly efficient propulsion in water. The Chinese
University of Hong Kong (People’s Republic of China), 2013.
[59] W. S. Rone and P. Ben-Tzvi, “Continuum robot dynamics utilizing the principle
of virtual power,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 275–287,
2013.
[60] W. S. Rone and P. Ben-Tzvi, “Mechanics modeling of multisegment rod-driven
continuum robots,” Journal of Mechanisms and Robotics, vol. 6, no. 4, 2014.
[61] D. C. Rucker and R. J. Webster III, “Statics and dynamics of continuum robots
with general tendon routing and external loading,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics,
vol. 27, no. 6, pp. 1033–1044, 2011.
[62] F. Renda, M. Giorelli, M. Calisti, M. Cianchetti, and C. Laschi, “Dynamic model of
a multibending soft robot arm driven by cables,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics,
vol. 30, no. 5, pp. 1109–1122, 2014.
[63] E. Tatlicioglu, I. D. Walker, and D. M. Dawson, “New dynamic models for planar
extensible continuum robot manipulators,” in 2007 IEEE/RSJ International
Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, pp. 1485–1490, IEEE, 2007.
[64] D. Trivedi, A. Lotfi, and C. D. Rahn, “Geometrically exact dynamic models
for soft robotic manipulators,” in 2007 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on
Intelligent Robots and Systems, pp. 1497–1502, IEEE, 2007.
[65] P. E. Dupont, J. Lock, B. Itkowitz, and E. Butler, “Design and control of concentric-
tube robots,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 209–225, 2009.
121
[66] F. Renda, M. Cianchetti, M. Giorelli, A. Arienti, and C. Laschi, “A 3D steady-state
model of a tendon-driven continuum soft manipulator inspired by the octopus
arm,” Bioinspiration & biomimetics, vol. 7, no. 2, p. 25006, 2012.
[67] S. Mbakop, G. Tagne, M.-H. Frouin, A. Melingui, and R. Merzouki, “Inverse
Dynamics Model-based Shape Control of Soft Continuum Finger Robot Using
Parametric Curve,” IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 8053–
8060, 2021.
[68] Y. Chen, B. Wu, J. Jin, and K. Xu, “A Variable Curvature Model for Multi-
Backbone Continuum Robots to Account for Inter-Segment Coupling and External
Disturbance,” IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 1590–1597,
2021.
[69] O. Lakhal, A. Melingui, and R. Merzouki, “Hybrid approach for modeling
and solving of kinematics of a compact bionic handling assistant manipulator,”
IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 1326–1335, 2015.
[70] J. Kennedy and R. Eberhart, “Particle swarm optimization,” in Proceedings of
ICNN’95-international conference on neural networks, vol. 4, pp. 1942–1948, IEEE,
1995.
[71] M. N. K. Kulkarni, M. S. Patekar, M. T. Bhoskar, M. O. Kulkarni, G. M.
Kakandikar, and V. M. Nandedkar, “Particle swarm optimization applications to
mechanical engineering-A review,” Materials Today: Proceedings, vol. 2, no. 4-5,
pp. 2631–2639, 2015.
[72] A. Lazinica, Particle swarm optimization. BoD–Books on Demand, 2009.
[73] A. Rezaee Jordehi and J. Jasni, “Parameter selection in particle swarm optimi-
sation: a survey,” Journal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence,
vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 527–542, 2013.
[74] A. Ammar, M. Chawki, Z. Abdelouahab, and M. Halim, “A New Approach to
Solve Inverse Kinematics of a Planar Flexible Continuum Robot,” in International
Conference of Computational Methods in Science and Engineering, ICCMSE, 2014.
[75] A. Amouri, C. Mahfoudi, A. Zaatri, O. Lakhal, and R. Merzouki, “A metaheuristic
approach to solve inverse kinematics of continuum manipulators,” Proceedings of
the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part I: Journal of Systems and Control
Engineering, vol. 231, no. 5, pp. 380–394, 2017.
[76] S. Neppalli, M. A. Csencsits, B. A. Jones, and I. Walker, “A geometrical approach
to inverse kinematics for continuum manipulators,” in 2008 IEEE/RSJ Inter-
national Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, pp. 3565–3570, IEEE,
2008.
[77] B. Siciliano and O. Khatib, Springer handbook of robotics. springer, 2016.
122
[78] M. D. Grissom, V. Chitrakaran, D. Dienno, M. Csencits, M. Pritts, B. Jones,
W. McMahan, D. Dawson, C. Rahn, and I. Walker, “Design and experimental
testing of the OctArm soft robot manipulator,” in Unmanned Systems Technology
VIII, vol. 6230, p. 62301F, International Society for Optics and Photonics, 2006.
[79] R. Lamraoui, M. Malla, and C. Mahfoudi, Modélisation Géométrique d’un Robot
Flexible à deux Sections Commandées par câbles, Proposition d’une Conception.
University of Larbi Ben M’hidi, Oum el Bouaghi, faculty of science and applied
sciences, Algeria, 2020.
[80] V. V. Bolotin, Nonconservative problems of the theory of elastic stability. Macmil-
lan, 1963.
[81] A. Amouri, C. Mahfoudi, and A. Zaatri, “Dynamic Modeling of a Spatial Cable-
Driven Continuum Robot Using Euler-Lagrange Method,” International Journal
of Engineering and Technology Innovation, vol. 10, no. 1, p. 60, 2019.
[82] A. Yeshmukhametov, K. Koganezawa, and Y. Yamamoto, “Design and kinematics
of cable-driven continuum robot arm with universal joint backbone,” in 2018 IEEE
International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics (ROBIO), pp. 2444–2449,
IEEE, 2018.
[83] C. Li and C. D. Rahn, “Design of continuous backbone, cable-driven robots,” J.
Mech. Des., vol. 124, no. 2, pp. 265–271, 2002.
[84] D. ASANE, A. SCHMITZ, and S. SUGANO, “Investigating the Strain Behaviour
of Dyneema under Cyclic Loads,” in The Proceedings of JSME annual Conference
on Robotics and Mechatronics (Robomec) 2020, pp. 1P2—-K05, The Japan Society
of Mechanical Engineers, 2020.
123
Appendix A
124
Pieces 3D Drawing via SolidWorks
worm screw
Worm Wheel Reducer
Shaft 2
Overrunning clutch system and

pulley
Freewheel-wheel
Pieces 3D drawing via SolidWorks
Pulley
Carter
Tray 1
Tray 2
Cover 1
Pièces 3D dessin via SolidWorks
Cover 2
Cover 3
Cover 4
Cover 5
Cushioned
Pieces 3D drawing via SolidWorks
Control mechanism
Base 1
Base 2
Disc of the first section (X5)
Disc of the second section

(X5)
Fixing part 1
Pieces 3D drawig via SolidWorks
Fixing part 2
Flexible backbone
Spring
1- Base
2- Plaque
3- body
Moteur 4- Instrument ball
bearing_68_am
5- Pan cross
head_am
View publication stats

Thesis

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Thesis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

Contribution to the geometric, kinematics and dynamic modeling of bionic

Thesis · August 2022

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Faculty of Sciences and Applied Sciences

Contribution to the geometric, kinematic and

Publicly defended, on 15/12/2021, before a jury composed of :

‫َّ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ْ‬

‫سورة البقرة ‪ ,‬الاية ‪13‬‬

I dedicate this work as a testimony of my great respect and esteem to my dearest

BHA Bionic Handling Arm

List of figures xiii

List of tables xviii

1 State of the art 5

2 Forward kinematic modeling 20

2.2.2 Geometry of a conical unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

3 Inverse kinematic modeling 41

4 Conceptual study of the two-section continuum flexible robot 77

4.4.2 Calculation of the force acting on the rod (backbone) . . . . . . 82

5 Dynamic modeling 105

Conclusion and future work 115

1.1 Evolution from rigid to continuum manipulators . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

3.1 3D representation of the central axis of the unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

3.35 Bending angles for the spiral path . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

4.1 Diagram of the kinematic chain of the flexible body . . . . . . . . . . . 78

4.13 3D representation of the robot continuum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101

5.1 3D representation of the central axis of the unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107

2.1 The parameters of the two-section flexible continuum robot . . . . . . . 31

3.1 Cable lengths for both configurations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

4.1 Parts of the robot’s mechanism of control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82

he study of robotics has remarkably attracted researchers’ interest in recent

• Motivation: This problem of solving the inverse kinematic model motivates

• Contribution : The results obtained during this work can be summarized as

• Organization of the manuscript: This thesis is organized into five chapters.

State of the art

Fig. 1.1: Evolution from rigid to continuum manipulators [7–9]

1.2.1 Originality of continuum robots

Fig. 1.2: Pulp tentacle

1.2.2 Some types of continuum robots

The OctArm is a continuum robot developed by M. D. Grissom, I. D. Walker et

Fig. 1.4: Prototype of the OctArm V

Fig. 1.5: JHUs snake robot (Credit:JHU/Vanderbilt University)

Fig. 1.6: hyper redondant continuum robot[14]

The snake-shaped continuum colonoscope (see figure 1.7) is composed of a series

Fig. 1.7: Columoscope continuum with the shape of a snake [15]

Fig. 1.8: Concentric Tube Robot[16]

The highly articulated robotic probe (HARP) introduced by Carnegie Mellon

Fig. 1.9: HARP snake robot (Credit: Howie Choset/CMU)

Fig. 1.10: Gauche) Octopus-Arm, (Droite) Octopus-inspired robotic arm

Fig. 1.11: Robot camera[22]

Fig. 1.13: The snake-continuum hybrid robots[27]

1.2.3 Principle of classification

Fig. 1.15: Continuum robots’ types

1.3 Modeling approaches

1.3.1 Qualitative approach

1.3.2 Quantitative approach

1.3.3 Hybrid approach

By comparing the three approaches, it is found that the quantitative approach is

Forward kinematic modeling

2.2 General description of a cable driven continuum

2.2.1 Geometry of the considered robot’s profile

To have a simplified description of the considered continuum robot, the profile of

2.2.2 Geometry of a conical unit