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

net/publication/284285242

Design of a teleoperated wall climbing robot for oil tank inspection

Article · July 2015

DOI: 10.1109/MED.2015.7158759

CITATIONS READS
25 21,571

1 author:

Andres San-Millan
University of Aberdeen
31 PUBLICATIONS 288 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Andres San-Millan on 22 February 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

23rd Mediterranean Conference on Control and Automation (MED)
June 16-19, 2015. Torremolinos, Spain
Design of a teleoperated wall climbing robot for oil tank inspection
Andres San-Millan1
Abstract— This paper presents a climbing robot with wheeled
locomotion which uses permanent magnets as adhesion mech-
anism. The robot designed is intended for the inspection of
various types of ferromagnetic structures, such as ship hulls,
wind turbine towers, bridges, and fuel tanks, in order to
detect surface faults or cracks caused by, for example aging or
atmospheric corrosion. The proposed robotic system consists
of a cordless teleoperated mobile platform which can move
on vertical ferromagnetic walls. The robot can be equipped
with the various testing probes and cameras that are necessary
for different inspection tasks. First, different prototypes of
magnetic wall climbing robots are analyzed in order to establish
the current state-of-the-art, and to provide the background
required to analyse the main advantages and drawbacks of
the prototypes presented. The design of the proposed robotic
system is then explained, and details are provided of the new
approach for the design of the permanent magnetic adhesion
mechanism. Finally the mechanical and electrical construction,
the control architecture implemented, and the human-machine
interface for its control and teleoperation are presented too.
Index Terms— Wall climbing robot, Magnetic adhesion mech-
anism, Inspection systems, Teleoperation
I. INTRODUCTION
Robotic climbing systems have, in recent years, attracted
increasing attention. Robots with the ability to adhere to and
move on vertical surfaces are useful devices that can be
applied in several areas: reliable nondestructive evaluation
and diagnosis in hazardous environments [1]; the welding,
short-blasting, and painting of metallic structures [2]; and the
cleaning and maintenance of high-rise buildings [3], among
others. These robotic platforms are usually adopted in places
in which the workspace is particularly hazardous for human
operators, or in which direct access by human operators is
very expensive, requiring scaffolding or special structures.
The utilization of robotic systems allows such tasks to be
automated, thus increasing operation efficiency and reducing
the overall cost of the operation by eliminating the need
for scaffolding, and by reducing non-productive work. The
safety of human operators is also increased, since these
robotic systems allow the supervision of the work from a
safe distance.
Various adhesion and locomotion principles have been
applied to the construction of different robotic climbers
which can be classified as: 1) vacuum suckers [3], 2) negative
pressure [4], 3) propellers [5], 4 grasping grippers [6], and
5) magnetic adhesion
*This paper was sponsored by the Spanish FPU12/00984 Program
(Ministerio de Educacion, Cultura y Deporte).
1 A. San-Millan is with the Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha, Ciudad
Real 13071, Spain (e-mail: andres.sanmillan@uclm.es)
978-1-4799-9935-4/15/$31.00 ©2015 IEEE
This last type of robots has numerous industrial appli-
cations owing to the great number of man-made ferromag-
netic structures which require constant maintenance (bridges,
spherical gas tanks, oil reservoirs, and ship hulls). The
offshore oil industry has great potential as regards the use
of magnetic climbers in a wide range of structured and
unstructured environments (since the routine checks carried
out on storage tanks in search of leaks or corrosion require
a considerable amount of manpower and capital). This has
motivated the appearance of several examples of robotic
wall climbers based on magnetic adhesion, among which we
can find examples based on: 1) magnetic tracks [7], [8], 2)
magnetic compliant mechanisms [9], and 3) magnetic wheels
[9], [10], [11], [12], [13].
A wall-climbing device must meet a number of contra-
dictory requirements: it has to be light in order to minimize
the risk of damaging or deforming the working environment
(usually thin plates of metal), but it must also have a large
payload carrying ability in order to carry the equipment
needed. It must, however, additionally be able to provide the
optimal adhesion force in order to guarantee fast movements
without slipping. As the previous examples show, in most
cases the magnetic adhesion is based on permanent magnets
(usually neodymium magnets). The adoption of permanent
magnets, rather than electromagnets, makes the robot more
reliable and safer, since as the magnets do not depend on
external sources of power, they do not undergo a loss of
adhesion in the case of power failure. However, the high
density of the permanent magnets (7-8 g/cm3 ) makes it
difficult for them to meet the light weight requirement.
In this article a new design of a wall-climbing robotic sys-
tem based on permanent magnets is presented. The proposed
robot has been designed in order to minimize its overall
weigh while maximizing the adhesion force of the robot to
the wall.The proposed system can perform tasks such as the
nondestructive monitoring of ferromagnetic walls equipped
with a camera in order to transmit images of the surface of
the wall. The navigation of the robot is cordless, depending
only on the onboard battery and the orders sent by an on-
ground human operator. This paper is organized as follows:
Section II explains the mechanical design of the robot and
analyzes the magnetic adhesion system. Section III shows
the architecture of the inspection system and the human-
machine interface developed for robot teleoperation. Some
experimental results are carried out in Section IV, and finally
some conclusions are drawn in Section V.
274
 II. MECHANICAL DESIGN
The aim of this work is to build a climbing robot that is
capable of carrying a wireless camera to any desired point of
the surface of a ferromagnetic structure, such as an oil tank.
It is important to note that this requirement determines the
workspace of the robotics system. In the case under study
(an oil tank), it is considered that the wall of the tank is
sufficiently thick to guarantee that the magnetic flux will
not saturate at any point. It is also considered that the seams
between the plates of which the wall is composed have small
bumps, produced by the weld beads which can be up to 5mm
high.
Both characteristics of the workspace, along with the
general requirements stated in the Introduction, determine
the mechanical design of the robot. Since the prototype is
designed to carry out inspection tasks, it is desirable for
the robot to be able to perform fast and precise motions,
without losing tractive force during its movements, in order
to reach any desired point of the structure analyzed, even if
the surface is covered by dust, or the inspection is carried
out under adverse weather conditions. The first requirement
that the mechanical design must guarantee is therefore the
absence of slippage during the motion of the robot.
Since Skid steer configurations rely on track or wheel
slippage for steering, they were discarded as a design option
(as was any other configuration that would be unable to
provide only one instantaneous center of rotation (ICR)). The
solution adopted to design the kinematic configuration was
the differential steering approach, which is composed of two
drive wheels and a passive tail equipped with a neodymium
magnet which stabilizes the system on the wall, as in [10].
The main goal of the design methodology is to construct
a robot that is as cheap and small as possible. A pair of 12V
Guoling brushed motors were utilized in the fabrication of
the robot owing to their small size and high power density.
These motors are commercially available with a range of
interchangeable gearboxes integrated into the design of the
motor. The combination of motor+gearbox utilized in the
prototype provides a maximum torque and speed of 6.4
Kgcm and 35 rpm.
It is important to note that the mechanical dimensions of
the motors determine the minimal separation between the
wheels and therefore the size of the mechanical structure on
which the motors are placed.
A. Magnetic adhesion mechanism
Once the kinematic configuration had been chosen, it was
necessary to design the magnetic adhesion mechanism. It is
important to note that the magnetic adhesion mechanism has
to be able to provide a strong adhesion force to the wall in
order to avoid any loss of tractive force The most commonly
adopted solution is the utilization of any kind of magnetic
wheels which can be divided into two categories, as shown
in Fig 1:
a) Conformal wheels, on which the magnets are radially
oriented toward the central axis of the wheel [10],
Rubber Tire Spacer
Flux Plate Magnet
(a) (b)
Fig. 1. Magnetic wheels commonly utilized in robot climbers. a) Conformal
wheel, b) Flux-plate wheel
Wheels
Motors
Mechanical structure
Magnets
(a) (b)
Fig. 2. Mechanical design of the magnetic adhesion mechanism. (a) Overall
view (b) Axial view
b) Flux-plate wheels, on which the magnets are oriented
parallel to the central axis of the wheel [13], [12], [11].
It is important to mention that the orientation of the
magnets on the wheel determines not only the adhesion force
produced, but also its relationship with regards to the distance
between the magnets and the magnetic surface. This has been
analyzed in [7], which points out that if the gap between the
magnets and the wall is very small, the optimal configuration
is achieved by orienting the magnets as in the case of the
flux-plate wheel, but when the gap is increased, then the
orientation of the conformal wheel is better.
However, the utilization of traditional magnetic wheels
is far from being an optimal solution, and has two main
shortcomings:
1) Only a small portion of the magnets is sufficiently close
to the surface to provide an effective adhesion force,
while the remaining portion of the magnets is so far
from the surface that it cannot contribute to the total
adhesion force. However, these magnets increase the
overall weight of the robot and, since they are far from
the surface, they provide a torque that tends to separate
the robot from the surface;
2) Permanent magnets are part of the wheel, which limits
the volume of the magnet. Any attempt to increase the
adhesion force would therefore lead to an increase in

275

(a)
(c)
Fig. 3. Arrangement of Magnets. a) Halbach array. b) Alternating polarity. c) Same polarity oriented along the largest dimension. d) Same polarity
oriented along the smallest dimension
the thickness or in the diameter of the wheel, which
would result in an increase in the total weight of the
robot.
Two different approaches with which to improve the
effectiveness of the adhesion mechanism can be considered:
1) moving the magnets away from the wheel, so that the
volume and the shape of the magnet will not be limited
by the size of the wheel;
2) optimizing the layout of the magnets in order to increase
the magnetic force of adhesion.
These two approaches were utilized in the design of the
proposed prototype. On the one hand, the designed robot
does not have magnetic wheels, the motors and the wheels
are mounted on a 145mm long, rectangular aluminium pro-
file, and the magnets are placed inside the aluminium profile
as can be seen in Fig. 2.
The whole structure has been designed so that the lower
face of the aluminium profile is situated 7mm over the
contact point between the wheels and the surface of the wall,
in order to guarantee that the robot will never scratch the
surface of the wall. It is important to note that, as stated
previously, the weld beads of the surface can be up to 5mm
in height (2mm are utilized as safety clearance, and in order
to compensate any small deformation of the tires).
On the other hand, different arrangements of magnets were
analyzed in order to increase the magnetic force of adhesion.
The magnets utilized on the robot are commercially avail-
able neodymium cubes of 10x10x10mm with a strength of
N52 (signifying a nominal energy product of 52 MGOe).
The optimal configuration of polarities was found by using
FEMM software to conduct different finite element analyses
276
1.355 : >1.426
1.284 : 1.355
1.212 : 1.284
1.141 : 1.212
1.070 : 1.141
0.9985 : 1.070
0.9273 : 0.9985
0.8560 : 0.9273
0.7847 : 0.8560
(b) 0.7134 : 0.7847
0.6421 : 0.7134
0.5708 : 0.6421
0.4995 : 0.5708
0.4282 : 0.4995
0.3569 : 0.4282
0.2857 : 0.3569
0.2144 : 0.2857
0.1431 : 0.2144
0.07179: 0.1431
<0.0005 : 0.07179
(d) Density Plot: |B|, Tesla
(FEA) in order to compute the magnetic field produced by
each arrangement of magnets. The configurations analyzed
were: a) the Halbach array [14], b) alternating polarity,
c) same polarity oriented along the largest dimension of
the arrangement, and d) the same polarity oriented along
the smallest dimension of the arrangement. The different
configurations, and the flux density graphs obtained are
compared in Fig. 3, (the arrows of each magnet point to
the magnetic north pole).
In addition to the flux density graphs shown in Fig. 3,
the relationship between the magnetic force and the distance
from the magnets was also obtained. In order to carry out
this analysis, an infinite iron plate with a width of 3mm
was added below the magnets. The force applied to the plate
was computed for the distances between the magnets and the
plate, in the range [0.1,15]mm . The results of this analysis
are shown in Fig. 4
As can be seen in Fig. 4, for small distances between the
magnets and the plate, the best arrangement corresponds to
the magnets oriented with alternating polarities. However, the
magnetic force of this arrangement depends greatly on the
distance. It is also possible to see that, when all the magnets
have the same polarity, the dependence between the force and
the distance is very small, although the total force applied is
also small.
As previously mentioned, since the distance between the
magnets and the wall on the prototype is 7mm, and the
maximum height of the weld beads is up to 5mm, the range
of operation of the magnets is therefore [2,7]mm. It will
be noted in Fig. 4 that the configuration which produces
a greater force of attraction in the range of interest is the
 Wheels
Motors
Mechanical structure
Battery
Control Electronics
Sensors

(a) (b)
Fig. 5. a) Real prototype of the robot b)Schematic CAD representation of the components of the robot

Halbach array arrangement robot is 700g, of which only 140g appertain to the magnets
30
Single magnet normal to the surface
Single magnet perpendicular to the surface utilized, which represents only 20% of the total weight of
25 Alternating poles the robot.
It is also important to note that the number of magnets
Force of attraction (N)

Range of operation
20
15
10
5
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Distance from the surface (mm)
Fig. 4. Magnetic force vs. distance between magnets and plate
Halbach array. What is more, and is shown in Fig. 3, the
Halbach array augments the magnetic field on one side of
the array while cancelling the field to near zero on the
other side. This characteristic is an important advantage since
the magnetic field produced by the adhesion mechanism is
partially confined, which prevents any interference with the
magnetic field generated by the DC motors of the robot.
These characteristics have led to the wide use of the Hal-
bach array in portable Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR)
[15], in maglev vibration isolation units (MVIU) [16], and
in brushless DC Motors for spacecraft applications [17].
However, its utilization in robotic climbers has not been
widely studied to date.
The utilization of a Halbach array of small magnets placed
outside the wheels allows the reduction of the total weight
of the robot without any loss of adhesion force. This allows
accurate motions to be achieved without any loss of tractive
force or slippage, and the size of the actuators utilized to be
decreased. It is important to note that the total weight of the
that can be utilized on the robot with the current design
is determined by the separation between wheels. Bearing in
mind that we wish to keep the design as compact as possible
(and therefore the wheels as close as possible) only 2 rows
of 10 magnets can be placed inside the aluminium profile
utilized to mount the motors.
B. Stabilization tail
15 Despite the fact that the differential steering approach
allows the system to turn on the spot, it has one important
disadvantage when it is applied to robotic climbers: the
torque produced by the wheels can rotate the whole body
of the robot rather than moving the wheels, leading to a loss
of adhesion to the surface and thus causing the robot to fall.
This problem can be solved by using a passive tail to com-
pensate the torque produced by the wheels. This structure has
already been analysed in [18], and it has been successfully
employed (equipped with a small magnet) on other robotic
climbers [10]. In the proposed prototype, the passive tail is
not only utilized to stabilize the motion of the robot, but
it has also been designed to carry the batteries, the control
electronics, and the sensors of the robot. This design makes
the robot more compact and allows the height of the robot
to be reduced. It is important to note that the magnet used
on the tip of the tail has to be designed, on the one hand,
in order to minimize the friction force between the tail and
the wall, and on the other, in order to guarantee that the tail
will not detach from the wall.
The whole structure of the robot is depicted in Fig. 5,
which also shows that the passive tail has been employed to
carry all the electronic components except the motors (which
are mounted in the magnetic adhesion unit). The same figure
additionally depicts the real prototype compared with a pen

277
 Battery

Motors

Sensors WIRELESS
ATMEGA 328
CAMERA Robotic
Climber

Bluetooth 2.4 GHz

Ground
ANDROID Station
LCD SCREEN
DEVICE

HUMAN OPERATOR

Fig. 6. Overview of the architecture of the whole inspection system

in order to give an approximate idea of the scale of the robot.

The dimensions of the final prototype are 22x21x10 cm.

III. ARCHITECTURE OF THE SYSTEM

The popularity of smartphones has risen drastically in
recent years, and since most Android devices are equipped
with Bluetooth, the usage of this wireless communication
in order to control the robot implies a reduction in not only Fig. 7. Graphical user interface
manufacturing costs (removing the need for a specific remote
control), but also the training time needed by a human opera-
application and control the the robot owing to its compu-
tor to learn to control the system. The proposed prototype can
tational power and ease of programming. It is important to
be teleoperated using any commercially available Android
note that, since the Arduino open-source platform is based
device equipped with Bluetooth.
on the ATmega family, the future addition of new sensors to
Although the prototype is currently equipped only with
the robot and their configuration is greatly simplified.
an accelerometer, and a wireless analog camera, the robot
The client application receives the commands from the
is designed so that it can be equipped with a variety of
server application, and it is responsible for controlling the
different application sensors for the inspection of oil tanks.
motors, the data gathering, and checking the battery level.
The control interface is therefore programmed, in such a
After any received command has been executed, the client
way that after the necessary Bluetooth connection handshake
application sends back the readings from the sensors to the
between the robot and the Android device, a bidirectional
server application. It is important to note that the client
communication is established between them, which makes it
application is designed in such a way that if the connection
possible to not only send commands to move the robot, but
is interrupted, the robot will stop until the arrival of new
also receive all the data produced by any sensor connected
commands, which avoids any uncontrolled operation of the
to the microcontroller of the robot.
robot.
The inspection prototype developed is based on a
client/server architecture. As Fig. 6 shows, the client appli- B. Server application
cation runs on the on-board microcontroller of the robot, The server application, meanwhile, runs on an Android
and the server application runs on an Android device. The device and is responsible for the communications between
on-ground control unit is additionally equipped with an LCD the robot and the mobile device. It also provides a graphical
monitor and a 2.4GHz receiver in order to display the images user interface (GUI), which allows the robot to be controlled
obtained by the camera on the robot. and the sensors measurements to be read. The GUI is shown
in Fig. 7. The video transmitted by the robot is not displayed
A. Client application by the GUI, but by an on-ground LCD monitor connected
The robot has a limited number of sensors in order to to a 2.4GHz receiver.
minimize weight and complexity. The Atmel ATmega328p The server application handles the bidirectional commu-
microcontroller was chosen in order to execute the client nication between the Android device and the robot. On the

278
 TABLE I
P HYSICAL SPECIFICATIONS OF THE CLIMBING ROBOT

Dimensions (l x w x h): 22 cm x 21 cm x 10 cm
Weight: 700 g
Velocity: 10cm/s
Actuation: 2 x 12 V
DC gear motors
Battery: 11,1 V - 1300 mAh
lithium polymer battery
Wheels: 65mm Rubber wheel
(without magnets)
Magnets: 2x10 neodymium magnets
(10x10x10)mm
Weight ratio 140g / 700g (20%)
magnets/total
Sensors: 2.4GHz Wireless video camera,
accelerometer
Control: Any Android device
equipped with Bluetooth

wheels, the weight of the robot can also be reduced without

Fig. 8. Climbing robot resting on a metallic wall in the lab at the UCLM
any loss of adhesion force.
The proposed prototype has been tested under laboratory
conditions, proving its ability to move in any direction over
one hand it sends the movement commands provided by the
a ferromagnetic surface, and that it is able to climb up walls
user, and on the other it displays any message sent by the
even in the presence of welding lines without losing adhesion
robot (sensor readings) to the user. The GUI was designed
force or getting stuck. The camera based inspection system
by considering that the principal objective was simplicity,
has been illustrated.
and in order to provide the user with an intuitive means of
controlling the robot and reducing the learning time to the R EFERENCES
minimum. [1] Zhengyao Yi, Yongju Gong, Zuwen Wang, and Xingru Wang. Devel-
opment of a wall climbing robot for ship rust removal. In Mechatronics
IV. PROTOTYPE AND EXPERIMENTS and Automation, 2009. ICMA 2009. International Conference on,
pages 4610–4615, Aug 2009.
An autonomous wireless self-contained prototype of a [2] Minghui Wu, Xiaofei Gao, Z. Fu, Yanzheng Zhao, and Shanben Chen.
magnetic robotic climber has been successfully designed, The mechanism design of a wheeled climbing welding robot with
built and tested. In order to evaluate the design concepts, passing obstacles capability. In Tzyh-Jong Tarn, Shan-Ben Chen,
and Gu Fang, editors, Robotic Welding, Intelligence and Automation,
the robot was teleoperated on a metallic testing wall, which volume 88 of Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering, pages 401–409.
reproduces the conditions of the actual working space, such Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2011.
as the existence of welding beads up to 5mm high. The [3] H.X. Zhang, W. Wang, J.W. Zhang, and G.H. Zong. Real-time
control realization of a new pneumatic climbing robot. In Industrial
robot was successfully displaced on the wall, without loss Electronics and Applications, 2008. ICIEA 2008. 3rd IEEE Conference
of adhesion or tractive force, in trajectories that were both on, pages 691–696, June 2008.
perpendicular and parallel to gravity. Its ability to move over [4] Ke Wang, Rong Liu, and Yuan Qu. Development of a double-
cavity climbing robot for on-site inspection of glass-curtain-walls.
the welding beads without getting stuck was also tested. In Information and Automation (ICIA), 2013 IEEE International
Video files showing the operation of the robot have been Conference on, pages 1183–1188, Aug 2013.
documented. Fig. 8 shows the climbing robot resting on a [5] Kunchan Seo, Sunme Cho, Taegyun Kim, Hwa Soo Kim, and Jongwon
Kim. Design and stability analysis of a novel wall-climbing robotic
metallic wall in our laboratory. The general specifications of platform (rope ride). Mechanism and Machine Theory, 70(0):189 –
the robot are listed in Table I. 208, 2013.
[6] Rui Chen, Rong Liu, Jifan Chen, and Jin Zhang. A gecko inspired
V. CONCLUSIONS wall-climbing robot based on electrostatic adhesion mechanism. In
Robotics and Biomimetics (ROBIO), 2013 IEEE International Confer-
This paper presents a new design of an autonomous ence on, pages 396–401, Dec 2013.
magnetic climber robot for the inspection of ferromagnetic [7] Weimin Shen, J. Gu, and Yanjun Shen. Proposed wall climbing
robot with permanent magnetic tracks for inspecting oil tanks. In
structures such as oil tanks. The proposed design is focused Mechatronics and Automation, 2005 IEEE International Conference,
on the magnetic adhesion mechanism and, it has been proven volume 4, pages 2072–2077 Vol. 4, July 2005.
that a working prototype can be built without the utilization [8] L.P. Kalra, Weimin Shen, and J. Gu. A wall climbing robotic system
for non destructive inspection of above ground tanks. In Electrical
of magnetic wheels. The analysis presented demonstrates and Computer Engineering, 2006. CCECE ’06. Canadian Conference
that the Halbach array can be utilized to generate high on, pages 402–405, May 2006.
magnetic forces by using a small amount of magnets, thus [9] J. Berengueres, K. Tadakuma, T. Kamoi, and R. Kratz. Compliant
distributed magnetic adhesion device for wall climbing. In Robotics
reducing the total weight of the robot. It has additionally and Automation, 2007 IEEE International Conference on, pages 1256–
been demonstrated that if the magnets are placed outside the 1261, April 2007.

279
 [10] M. Eich and T. Vogele. Design and control of a lightweight magnetic
climbing robot for vessel inspection. In Control Automation (MED),
2011 19th Mediterranean Conference on, pages 1200–1205, June
2011.
[11] Seung-Chul Han, Jinho Kim, and Hwa-Cho Yi. A novel design
of permanent magnet wheel with induction pin for mobile robot.
International Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing,
10(4):143–146, 2009.
[12] Wolfgang Fischer, Fabien Tache, and Roland Siegwart. Magnetic wall
climbing robot for thin surfaces with specific obstacles. In Christian
Laugier and Roland Siegwart, editors, Field and Service Robotics,
volume 42 of Springer Tracts in Advanced Robotics, pages 551–561.
Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2008.
[13] R. Fernandez, E. Gonzalez, V. Feliu, and A.G. Rodriguez. A wall
climbing robot for tank inspection. an autonomous prototype. In
IECON 2010 - 36th Annual Conference on IEEE Industrial Electronics
Society, pages 1424–1429, Nov 2010.
[14] J.C. Mallinson. One-sided fluxes – a magnetic curiosity? Magnetics,
IEEE Transactions on, 9(4):678–682, Dec 1973.
[15] Yiyuan Cheng, Ling Xia, Wei He, Minhua Zhu, and Feng Liu.
Improved halbach magnets by particle swarm optimization for mobile
nuclear magnetic resonance systems. In Natural Computation (ICNC),
2013 Ninth International Conference on, pages 798–802, July 2013.
[16] Yiheng Zhou, Baoquan Kou, Liqiang Wang, and Feng Xing. Modeling
and analysis of a maglev vibration isolation unit using rectangle
halbach permanent magnet array. In Electrical Machines and Systems
(ICEMS), 2014 17th International Conference on, pages 1711–1714,
Oct 2014.
[17] R.P. Praveen, M.H. Ravichandran, V.T.S. Achari, V.P.J. Raj, G. Madhu,
and G.R. Bindu. A novel slotless halbach-array permanent-magnet
brushless dc motor for spacecraft applications. Industrial Electronics,
IEEE Transactions on, 59(9):3553–3560, Sept 2012.
[18] P. Sandin. Robot Mechanisms and Mechanical Devices Illustrated.
McGraw Hill professional. McGraw-Hill Education, 2003.

280

View publication stats