Ocean Engineering 203 (2020) 107206

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Ocean Engineering
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/oceaneng

Review

Modeling of the in-pipe inspection robot: A comprehensive review

Mohd Zamzuri Ab Rashid a, b, *, Mohd Fitri Mohd Yakub a, **,
Sheikh Ahmad Zaki bin Shaikh Salim a, ***, Normaisharah Mamat a,
Sharifah Munawwarah Syed Mohd Putra a, Shairatul Akma Roslan a
a
iKohza Wind Engineering for (Urban, Artificial, Man-Made) Environment Laboratory, Level 10, Malaysia-Japan International Institute of Technology (MJIIT),
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Jalan Sultan Yahya Petra, 54100, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
b
Faculty of Electrical Engineering (FKE), Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka (UTeM), Hang Tuah Jaya, 76100, Durian Tunggal, Melaka, Malaysia

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The in-pipe inspection robotic system is crucial in examining the inside of a pipe without compromising its
In-pipe inspection structural safety. The in-pipe inspection robotic system is a promising alternative to conventional methods of x-
Robot ray inspection and visual inspection. Despite the ongoing investigation, the effectiveness of the in-pipe inspection
Kinematic
robotic system, particularly regarding the mathematical modeling of the system design, still needs to be
Dynamic
improved. The in-pipe inspection robot which is normally equipped with a camera or non-destructive testing
Modeling
Review (NDT) equipment moves inside the pipeline to conduct a pipe integrity assessment. The main problem during an
inspection is the restricted maneuverability of the robot due to geometric changes in the pipe. This can be
overcome by designing a proper mathematical model to develop an effective inspection robotic system. There-
fore, this paper provides a systematic review of different modeling types of the in-pipe inspection robotic sys-
tems, including the assessment of the kinematic and dynamic mathematical models for the system. This review
paper covers in-pipe inspection robotic systems with several driving mechanisms such as fluid-driven, wheeled
mobile drive (WMD), screw or helical drive, legged and biomimetic drives.

1. Introduction attached to a robot to detect internal defects of the pipe. Fig. 1 exhibits
the components of an MFL in-pipe inspection robot that was created by
Varieties of the in-pipe inspection robots have been developed over Jin et al. (2004).
the past decades to examine built-up deposits, waxes or any cracks Utilization of the in-pipe inspection robot has led to new challenges
throughout a pipeline (Tur and Garthwaite, 2010; Chattopadhyay et al., regarding robot functionality. This includes the propelling mechanism
2018). The in-pipe inspection robotic system can be operated in oil and of the robot which can be either self-propelled or assisted by a medium
gas pipelines, water pipelines, sewerage system or any piping systems and the degree of adaptability with variations in the pipe diameter.
that require specific inspection. Research on the in-pipe inspection has Consequently, new solutions in regard to the in-pipe inspection robotic
been intensified over the years. For instance, Leary et al. (2004) focused systems are constantly sought after. A large number of research studies
on the unpiggable pipeline by integrating a highly agile robotic platform involve conducting experiments of the in-pipe inspection robot such as
and an NDT sensor. Deng et al. (2004) examined the method of attaching those performed by Sanemori and Okada (1985), Niewels and Jorden
an NDT system which was an X-ray real-time imaging inspection tech- (1994), Hirose (1999), Qian et al. (2000), Roh et al. (2009).
nique (RTIIT) on their robotic platform to locate and inspect welding Despite considerable effort to conduct in-pipe inspection through
conditions in the pipeline. Jin et al. (2004), Yuan et al. (2009), and real-time experiments or on-site studies, weaknesses of these methods
Karkoub et al. (2017) used a magnetic flux leakage (MFL) sensor can still be detected. Several in-pipe inspection robots in the previous

* Corresponding author. iKohza Wind Engineering for (Urban, Artificial, Man-Made) Environment Laboratory, Level 10, Malaysia-Japan International Institute of
Technology (MJIIT), Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Jalan Sultan Yahya Petra, 54100, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
** Corresponding author.
*** Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: zamzuri@utem.edu.my (M.Z. Ab Rashid), mfitri.kl@utm.my (M.F. Mohd Yakub), sheikh.kl@utm.my (S.A. Zaki bin Shaikh Salim),
normysarahmn@gmail.com (N. Mamat), shmunawwarah13@gmail.com (S.M. Syed Mohd Putra), shairatulroslan@gmail.com (S.A. Roslan).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2020.107206
Received 20 February 2019; Received in revised form 31 January 2020; Accepted 2 March 2020
Available online 16 March 2020
0029-8018/© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M.Z. Ab Rashid et al. Ocean Engineering 203 (2020) 107206

Fig. 1. MFL inspection robotic system (Jin et al., 2004).

research had difficulties maneuvering inside a pipe with different di- published by Liu and Kleiner (2013). They categorized the water pipe
ameters, curves or bends, and T joints. The robots were regularly found inspection according to various methods including visual testing, elec-
stuck during the operation as reported by O’Donoghue (2003), Fung tromagnetic, acoustic, ultrasound, radiographic and thermography.
et al. (2006), Ferreira Lino et al. (2006), and Terenzi (2012). Hence, it is There are various research studies related to the designs of the in-
crucial to have a proper mathematical model to improve the maneu- pipe inspection robotic system and experimental work on hollow
verability of the robot and to analyze its movement before the system pipes. However, the review on the modeling of the in-pipe inspection
can be developed and tested in real-time. robotic system is inadequate. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to
According to Yan et al. (2018), Jiang et al. (2014), Nayak and provide an extensive review of the current approaches in the modeling
Pradhan (2014) Liang, L et al. (2013), the weaknesses of the in-pipe of the in-pipe inspection robotic system technology. To the best of the
inspection robotic system can be overcome by improving the system authors’ knowledge, there is no comprehensive literature about the
design, steerability inside the pipe, adaptability to various pipe sizes and subject as yet.
shapes, flexibility of the body, stability and motion efficiency. Fig. 2 This paper is organized as follows. The section following this intro-
illustrates the system designed by An and Moghaddam (2015) using duction is devoted to the classification of the pipe inspection robotic
software applications, Solidworks and Visual Nastran. The system was system. Special emphasis is placed on the classification of the outer-pipe
simulated to move inside the pipes of 100–200 mm in diameter and robots and the in-pipe robots and their locomotions. The modeling of the
elbows of 150–200 mm in diameter. It is argued that with the focus on in-pipe robotic systems are arranged as follows; the robot-driven by
the system design, the improved robotic system can ensure pipes with fluid, the wheel mobile drive (WMD) type robot, the screw-drive or
complex geometries can be thoroughly inspected (Yan et al., 2018; Qi helical drive type robot, the legged and biomimetic insect type robot
et al., 2018). Other than that, the improved system design can also such as snake, inchworm and caterpillar type robots. The conclusion
reduce the risk of potential hazards especially regarding underground section concludes the review by emphasizing the limitation of each
gas and sewerage pipelines in the event of a system breakdown or failure model and research gaps that can be further explored. This review
(Khan, 2017; Nagase et al., 2018; Minder, 2018). consolidates and organizes these topics in a manner that will allow for
A review on the previous in-pipe inspection robotic systems was done more optimized in-pipe inspection robotics system to be developed later.
by several groups of researchers such as (Ismail et al., 2012; Roslin et al., Understanding the following topics in detail allows for the optimal and
2012). Ismail et al. (2012) assessed several in-pipe inspection robot robust controllers to be discussed in the future.
designs from 1994 to 2010. The system that was created by Duan et al.
(2012) moved inside a pipe and was autonomously powered by lithium 2. Classification of the pipe inspection robot
batteries and mobile gear arms. Fig. 3 shows an example of the crawler
system designed and developed by Nagase et al. (2018). The pipe inspection robotic systems can be roughly classified into
Roslin et al. (2012) reviewed several papers related to the hybrid outer-pipe and in-pipe inspection robotic systems. The outer-pipe in-
locomotion of the in-pipe robotic system that was published from 1994 spection robotic system is desired in the industry due to its ability to
to 2012. The hybrid inspection robot is the assimilation of two or more perform the outer pipe inspection without interrupting plant operations.
locomotions, for instance, a wheeled robot combined with screw-type This inspection robot clamps to the outer wall and is able to move along
locomotion to create a wheel wall-press screw drive type inspection the pipe, overcoming bends and junctions autonomously or semi-
robot. However, their review only covered the design of the hybrid autonomously (Mirats Tur and Garthwaite, 2010). Conversely, the
locomotion robot but there was no review on modeling and controller outer-pipe inspection robotic system cannot inspect the inner pipe wall
designs. Shukla and Karki (2016) published a review on the applications rigorously as opposed to the in-pipe robotic system.
of the inspection robotic system in the on-shore oil and gas industry. The outer-pipe inspection robots have been discussed in several
They categorized the designs of the in-pipe inspection robotic system research studies (Park et al., 2002; Fukuda et al., 1987; Chatzakos et al.,
according to shapes and sizes, steering mechanisms, propelling mecha- 2006; Nagaya et al., 2012; Han et al., 2013; Singh and Ananthasuresh,
nisms, detection technology, and control mechanisms. 2013; Imajo et al., 2015). The movement of the outer-pipe inspection
Shao et al. (2015) classified and tabulated the performance criteria of robotic system is governed by two gripper arms, sliding joints on the
several in-pipe inspection robots. They analyzed eight papers to solve body and sensors to detect obstacles (Fukuda et al., 1987). Fig. 4 exhibits
the problems of variable pipe diameters, vertical layouts, complicated the outer-pipe inspection robot clamping to the pipe during an inspec-
inner geometries, and mini pipe issues. Furthermore, a review of in- tion and its movement is remotely controlled (Han et al., 2013).
spection technologies involving the conditions of the water pipeline was In contrast, the in-pipe inspection robotic system inspects the inner

2
M.Z. Ab Rashid et al. Ocean Engineering 203 (2020) 107206

Fig. 2. In-pipe inspection robot and its components (An and Moghaddam, 2015).

Fig. 3. Diagrams of the proposed cylindrical elastic tracked-crawler mechanism (a) Isometric View, (b) Side View, (c) Prototype (Nagase et al., 2018).

Fig. 4. A remote-controlled outer-pipe climbing inspection robotic system (Han et al., 2013).

pipeline. This enables an in-depth overview of internal corrosion of the (WMD) robot, screw-drive or helical-drive robot, legged robot, and
pipe, sludge built-up and any problems related to the pipe. Furthermore, biomimetic robot actuated robot. Examples of the biomimetic robots
the use of the in-pipe inspection robotic system is beneficial when the include those inspired by snake, inchworm, and caterpillar. Fig. 5 shows
pipes are buried underground (Ghavamian et al., 2018). Nevertheless, the elements of classification for this system (Mills et al., 2017).
there are still challenges in system development and inspection partic-
ularly when pipe layouts are unspecified. The ability to specify pipe 3. Modeling of fluid-driven in-pipe inspection robotic system
layouts will allow the in-pipe inspection robotic system to adapt and
reconfigure in completing the inspection process more efficiently. The fluid-driven in-pipe inspection robotic system is driven by the
The in-pipe inspection robots can be classified into a few categories compressed conveyance fluid. The difference in fluid pressures at the
including pipe inspection gauge (PIG) robot, wheeled mobile drive back and the front of the robot propels it forward. The velocity of the

3
M.Z. Ab Rashid et al. Ocean Engineering 203 (2020) 107206

Fig. 5. Elements of the in-pipe inspection robotic system (Mills et al., 2017).

propelled robot can be adjusted using flexible sealing elements and dynamic modeling of the PIG. For these modeling techniques, the ideal
support on the robot’s body (Karl Dawson, 2011). The fluid-driven gas and single-phase flow properties were applied. Other assumptions
in-pipe robotic system requires a proper tracking method to avoid the included a uniform pipe diameter, induced friction from the pipe wall,
system from being stalled inside the pipe. Since the fluid-driven robotic and the quasi-steady heat in the flow. They argued that the suitable
system is considered as an untethered system, an external monitoring velocity for the PIG to move in the pipeline without posing any risk is
system should be attached to the pipe for the signaling purpose in from 1 to 5 ms 1 for the stream liquid and from 2 to 7 ms 1 for the
identifying the robot’s movement inside the pipe during an inspection. stream gas. The movement of the PIG inside the pipe is driven by the
In a study by Nguyen and Kim (2001), a pipeline inspection gauge pressure differences between the downstream and upstream flows. The
(PIG) was modeled in a horizontal line. Their research analyzed the gas dynamic model of the PIG for the curved pipe was created in three
velocity, the position of PIG and its velocity in the pipe. The PIG was sections, namely Section 1 where the PIG entered the curve, Section 2
driven by an unsteady flow of gas with the assumption that the gas is in where the PIG was in the middle of the curve, and Section 3 where the
an ideal state and in a single phase. In order to analyze the PIG’s PIG comes out of the curve. The head and tail of the PIG are connected
movement, the authors used the method of characteristics (MOC) to via the length L, and the masses of its head and tail are indicated by m1
solve nonlinear equations for which the initial and boundary conditions and m2, respectively. The assumptions stated previously were used
were set in a rectangular grid. The initial conditions of the upstream and because most of the information for in-pipe inspection or pigging
downstream flows were then solved using the Range-Kutta method. The pipeline is acquired from experiments. Fig. 7 shows the PIG flows inside
pressure was found from the flow rate at the pipe’s inlet and outlet while the bend pipe while Fig. 8 shows the PIG in three sections namely Sec-
the flow velocity was found from the pressure boundary condition. This tion I which is at the entrance of the pipe, Section II which is at the
research focused on the interpolation and Range-Kutta methods to solve middle of the elbow pipe and Section III which is at the exit of the pipe
the dynamic behavior of the PIG as it moved in a straight line. Fig. 6 (Nguyen et al., 2001).
illustrates the boundary condition of the PIG inside the grid (Nguyen and The general derivation of the equation used by Nguyen et al. (2001)
Kim, 2001). is represented as Equation (1). However, there were no stability and
In another study, Nguyen et al. (2001) modeled the fluid-driven PIG controllability analyses conducted in this research.
in the 90� curved pipeline. They divided the system modeling into two
categories namely, the flow equation modeling of gas in the pipe and

Fig. 6. Schematic for calculation of boundary values of the PIG (Nguyen and Kim, 2001).

4
M.Z. Ab Rashid et al. Ocean Engineering 203 (2020) 107206

TB ¼ FB rd (3)

where.

Id ¼ equivalent inertia moment of the turbine and shaft,

ω_ ¼ angular acceleration,
Dd ¼ damping coefficient for the turbine and shaft,
rd ¼ radius of the shaft, and
ω ¼ angular velocity.

Equation (4) is a simplified form of the torque on the downstream

movement of the PIG. Tdown
n
is the result of mathematical manipulation
from Equation (2) and Equation (3). The torque and force balance
equations for the upstream condition are similar to those of the down-
stream condition (Hu and Appleton, 2005).

Fig. 7. Utility of the PIG inside a bend pipe (Nguyen et al., 2001).
m
Tdown ¼ λmdown ω þ Idown
m
ω_ (4)

where.
� � � � � �
d ∂K ∂K ∂P
(1)
Tdown ¼ a1 v2f Dm :vf a3 v2f Þ
þ ¼F m l
dt ∂α� ∂α ∂α 2π ðfm

λm
down ¼ a2 vf þ Am
1
where:
Idown
m
¼ Am
2
K ¼ Kinetic Energy Am ¼ Dd rd2 þ Dm :4lπ
2
1
P ¼ Potential Energy
Am ¼ Id þ Mm :4lπ
2
2
In the study by Hu and Appleton (2005), a mathematical model for a1 ¼ βrp ρCR α1
the bidirectional pipeline inspection gauge (PIG) using the Newtonian a2 ¼ βrp 2 ρCR α2
method was derived and verified using an experimental study. Two tests a3 ¼ α 3 ρC R
were carried out by moving the PIG downstream and upstream as shown Dm ¼ damping coefficient for the pig moving in the fluid
in Fig. 9(a) for the bidirectional PIG and in Fig. 9(b) for a simple PIG fm ¼ friction force of the pig at the pipe wall
prototype. Two forces of the fluid are FT which is the force that drives Mm ¼ mass of the PIG
the turbine to rotate and FF which is the push force in the axial direction. l ¼ pitch of the screw
If the propulsion force exerted on the nut at the PIG is higher than the vf ¼ fluid flow velocity
total resistance force which is the summation of frictional force and drag
β ¼ constant; coefficient related to turbine’ s shape
force, the nut will move and accelerate (Hu and Appleton, 2005). Then,
rp ¼ avaerage turbine’ s radius
the generated torque will decrease because of the speed of the turbine
increases. Dynamic equations for the system are shown as Equations (2)– ρ ¼ fluid’ s density
(4). Equations (2) and (3) show a balanced equation for the torque α1 ; α2 ; α3 ¼ constant; coefficient related to turbine’ s shape
acting on the turbine. TF is the torque generated by the fluid force, TB is
the reaction of the torque generated by the nut and FB is the reaction The speed of the PIG pushed by the gas inside the pipeline can be
force generated by the nut or PIG as it moves downstream. controlled using a butterfly bypass valve located on the PIG’s body. The
valve controls the opening and closing of the hole in order to regulate
TF ¼ Id :ω_ þ Dd rd2 ω þ TB (2) pressures at the body (Deng et al., 2011). Furthermore, a mathematical

Fig. 8. Diagrams of the PIG in three sections inside an elbow pipe (Nguyen et al., 2001).

5
M.Z. Ab Rashid et al. Ocean Engineering 203 (2020) 107206

Fig. 9. (a) Diagram of the bidirectional PIG (Hu and Appleton, 2005), (b) Prototype’s structure of the self-driven PIG in fluid (Hu et al., 2005).

model of the PIG’s speed regulation using a throttle valve was also method as Nguyen et al. (2001) particularly to show two-dimensional
created by this group of researchers. (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) derivations were used. They also
In addition, Wei et al. (2012) modeled an extremely low frequency used Newton’s second law along with the force in tangential and normal
(ELF) electromagnetic fields in pipelines to locate the position of the directions. Fig. 10 shows a diagram of the modeling using the Newtonian
in-pipe inspection robot. The electromagnetic transmitter and receiver method by Mirshamsi and Rafeeyan (2015). By using the Newtonian
were designed, and a mathematical model which is a linear equation
with six unknown numbers and three algorithms were formulated.
According to Archila and Becker (2013), a few considerations should
be made before a robot can be launched inside a pipeline. These con-
siderations include the pipeline properties, fluid properties, operation
pressure, and physical limitations of the robot. The difference finite
method is adopted to simulate the behavior of the robot with fluid inside
the pipeline.
Modeling of the fluid-driven in-pipe robot was extensively studied by
L Liang et al. (2013) where an inner and outer spiral mobile robot was
propelled by a higher pressure at the back of the robot. Computational
fluid dynamics (CFD) was used to calculate the flow field of the liquid
inside the pipe. The robot’s axial force increases when the pressure and
concentrated liquid with high velocity pushes the outer shell of the
robot. The authors also emphasized that the relationship between the
axial force is relative to the liquid density, viscosity, and eccentricity.
The axial force is directly proportional to the density, viscosity, and
eccentricity of the fluid and it is inversely proportional to the diameter
of the pipe.
A study conducted by L. Liang et al. (2013) was then supported by
Liang et al. (2014), who modeled a dynamic model of microrobot driven
by a turbulent fluid. A similar CFD method was adopted to solve the
environmental and operating parameters. Furthermore, an orthogonal
optimization experiment was used to acquire the optimal inner spiral
structural parameter of the robot.
In a paper written by Mirshamsi and Rafeeyan (2015), a similar Fig. 10. Pipeline inspection gauge (PIG) model in two-dimensional plane
(Mirshamsi and Rafeeyan, 2015).

6
M.Z. Ab Rashid et al. Ocean Engineering 203 (2020) 107206

method, the 2D and 3D derivations of the PIG movement in the normal the gravitational force using vertical components, dG. Fig. 11 shows the
and tangential directions can be illustrated. Equations (5) and (6) show bidirectional PIG in a pipeline established by Zhu et al. (2015). Based on
the Newtonian equation for the PIG’s movement while Equations (7)–(9) the findings of this research, no significant model can be formulated
show the velocity of the system, tangential acceleration as well as the because the system is only related to the force acting on the boundary of
normal acceleration. the pipe. They only focused on the contact force due to the pressure
exerted on the PIG, material properties for the disc, the effect of the disc
N mg cos θ ¼ man (5)
to the contact force, among others. Most of the numerical simulations
where. were carried out using ANSYS software. Table 1 shows the summary of
the in-pipe inspection robotic systems driven by fluid.
N ¼ force in normal direction.
m ¼ mass of the robot. 4. Modeling of the wheel mobile drive (WMD) in-pipe inspection
g ¼ gravitational acceleration. robotic system
θ ¼ angle of the tangent to the centerline curve of the pipelinewith
respect to the x-axis The wheeled mobile drive (WMD) in-pipe inspection robotic system
an ¼ normal acceleration. mainly consists of two parts, a driving module and a mechanism to press
the wheels to the pipe wall in order to generate propulsion force (Mirats
F1 F2 mg sin θ _ μ ¼ mat
sgnðxÞF (6) Tur and Garthwaite, 2010). The wheels can be on a horizontal plane and
pressed to the pipe wall by adjusting the robot’s wheel arm (Okada and
where. Kanade, 1987; Y. Zhang and Yan, 2007). However, the mobile robot
tends to slip as it maneuvers inside the pipe due to the insufficient grip
F1 ¼ force acting at the back of PIG. on the wall. According to Y. Zhang and Yan (2007), this limitation can
F2 ¼ force opposes movement of PIG. be overcome by using an in-pipe robot with wheels based on a multi-axis
Fμ ¼ frictional force. differential mechanism. Finite element analysis (FEA) was carried out by
at ¼ tangential acceleration. Hong and Yang (2011) to analyze the model based on a three-adaptive
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi symmetrical-axis in-pipe inspection robot. An analysis is required to
Velocity ​ for ​ the ​ system; Vpig ¼ s_ ¼ ð1 þ f ’ðxÞ2 x_ (7) ensure high maneuverability of the robot in geometrically complex
structures such as the pipe elbows, either in a simulation or real-time
where. study. The variable parameter for the adaptive system can be solved
using a parallelogram and nut slider which utilizes two differential axles
s ¼ measures along the pig’s path and one following axle. Pradhan et al. (2017) used an FEA software
program, ANSYS to find the driving torque required for the motor of the
Normal acceleration, robot to overcome drag due to fluid viscosity and speed. In other
2
Vpig research studies L Liang et al. (2013); Liang et al. (2015), the robot
f }ðxÞ
an ¼ ¼ qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi x_2 (8) movement was analyzed using a computational fluid dynamics (CFD)
software program, FLUENT. The robot that was studied has four spiral
R
ð1 þ f ’ðxÞ2
tails and can be rotated clockwise or counterclockwise.
where: In a study by Kwon et al. (2011) which employed both simulation
and experimental work, an inspection robot driven by a wheel chain
R ¼ radius of curvature of the path connected to a mechanical linkage clutch was initially modeled using a
kinematic method. There were two cases studied by Kwon et al. (2011)
Tangential acceleration, in assessing the model as shown in Fig. 12 (a), Fig. 12(b) and fig12 (c).
The model assessment was based on the movement of the in-pipe robotic
d2 s f }ðxÞf ’ðxÞ
system inside the straight pipeline and the bend section of the pipe. The
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
at ¼ ¼ qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi x_2 þ x€2 ð1 þ f ’ðxÞ2 (9)
linear and angular velocity of the system during a rotational movement
dt2
ð1 þ f ’ðxÞ2
in a straight line are represented by Equation (10) and Equation (11),
In other research studies Zhu et al. (2015), the contact between the respectively, while those of the rotational movement inside a bend
disc in the system with the pipe wall can be expressed as an infinitesimal section is represented by Equation (12) and Equation (13).
piece in the radial component, dF. Then, dF can be expressed in terms of
Case 1. Linear velocity for rotational motion inside a straight pipeline

v’c ¼ cos θ vc (10)

where:

vc ¼ linear velocity at the center of the robot.

θ ¼ steering angle.
C¼ center of the robot.

The steering angle for straight-line movement should be positive.

The rotational velocity of the robot along the z-axis
2π vl sin θ
ωz ¼ ¼ (11)
t r

where:

Fig. 11. Bidirectional PIG in the pipeline with force components (Zhu l ¼ moving distance of the robot along the z-axis.
et al., 2015).

7
M.Z. Ab Rashid et al. Ocean Engineering 203 (2020) 107206

Table 1
Summary of the research studies on the modeling of fluid-driven in-pipe inspection robotic system.
Authors System Method of modeling Important Findings

Nguyen and Kim Foam-like PIG (i) Method of Characteristics (MOC) Method of Characteristics (MOC) is used to solve nonlinear equations,
(2001) PIG in a straight line (ii) Range Kutta method where the initial and boundary conditions are set in a rectangular grid. The
Range Kutta method is used to estimate the initial and final boundary
values and interpolation.
Hu and Appleton Bidirectional PIG (i) Newtonian method Force drives the turbine to rotate, and pushes the system in an axial
(2005) (ii) Experimental verification direction. Propulsion force on the nut is larger than the total resistance
force, FT which is a total of frictional force, Ff and the drag force and Fd.
The propulsion force causes the nut on the system to move and accelerate.
J. Deng et al. Speed Regulation pass (i) Pressure loss & regulation to control speed (ii) Modeling pressure loss and pressure regulation Butterfly valve to control
(2011) PIG Butterfly bypass valve (iii) Throttle valve the speed of PIG driven by fluid.
Wei et al. (2012) PIG localization using (i) Linearized model A mathematical model for ELF in linear equation and six unknown
ELF numbers
Archila and Launching considerations (i) Difference finite method Launching considerations - pipeline properties, fluid properties, operation
Becker (2013) pressure, and physical limitations.
Liang et al. (2013) Spiral in-pipe robot Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) An axial force on the robot increases when the pressure and concentrated
liquid with high velocity pushes the outer shell of the robot. The axial
force ∝ increases density, viscosity, and eccentricity of fluid. Axial force is
inversely proportional to the diameter of the pipe.
Liang et al. (2014) Internal thread (i) Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) Solves the environment and operating parameters and optimizes the
microrobot (ii) Orthogonal optimizationExperiment parameters acquired from the experimental test
Mirshamsi and PIG in a 2D plane Newtonian method 2D and 3D derivations and the use of Newton’s second law along with the
Rafeeyan tangential and normal directions
(2015)
Zhu et al. (2015) Bidirectional PIG Infinitesimal modeling Contact between the disc in the system and the pipe wall expressed as an
ANSYS simulation infinitesimal piece in the radial components. System related to the force
acting to the boundary of the pipe.
Nguyen et al. Foam-like PIG moves in (i) Modeling flow equation for gas in the pipe Divides the motion of the PIG inside the curved section into three
(2001) the 90� curve pipeline (ii) Dynamic modeling of PIG segments: the entrance of the curve, middle section of the curve, and the
end of the curve. Suitable velocity for the PIG to move in the pipeline
without posing any risk. 1.5 ms 1 is in stream liquid and 2.7 ms 1 is in
stream gas.

2π r ¼ pipeline circumference. The research by Sibai et al. (2012) suggested that several equations
are required in calculating a suitable robotic platform and components
before an actual prototype can be constructed. After conducting rigorous
Case 2. Linear velocity for turning movement inside a straight pipeline
calculations, a robotic platform having a total mass of 7.5 kg was
when θo1 ¼ θo2
developed. The platform is equipped with three motors, each of which
v’c ¼ cos θ vc (12) drives two wheels. Interestingly, it has the ability to move inside a pipe
with a diameter of between 12 and 16 inches. Unfortunately, however,
Angular velocity for turning movement inside a straight pipeline. there is no information about the movement modeling and controller
vl shown in their work.
ωx ¼ (13)
Lr Another study by Damic et al. (2014) modeled the dynamics of a
multibody system using the object-oriented technique. This technique
Even though the in-pipe inspection robotic system discussed by uses a bond graph and two-way interprocess communication (IPC) pipe
Kwon et al. (2011) can move inside both the straight and bend section of where the information from the targeted place will be returned to the
the pipe, the system does not grip to the pipe wall. A system proposed by system as a 3D image. The information will then be processed before the
S. Jiang et al. (2009) and S. Y. Jiang et al. (2008) has an elastic legged next instruction is given by the system to proceed with the execution of
wheel which acts as an adaptable mechanism to maintain traction on the the next algorithm.
pipe wall. The adaptable mechanism consists of wheels on the three Martínez-García et al. (2014) employed a non-linear algebraic so-
slider-crank mechanisms located at 120� apart in the circumferential lution to control the robot’s trajectory planning. To support the author’s
direction, the pre-tightened spring, parallelogram mechanisms and observation, a half-cell electrochemical which uses the Nernst equation
timing belt mechanisms. Fig. 13 (a) shows the configuration of the as an algorithm for automatic searching and problem detecting in
system and the components of the tri-axial differential mechanism. pipelines was utilized. The Nernst algorithm estimates the distance be-
Fig. 13(b) displays the drive wheels located at 120� which presses on the tween the mobile robotic system and targeted pipeline flaws based on
pipe wall using a slider crank with pre-tightened springs. Their research theoretical-empirical nonlinear regression. Then, the gradient-based
was supported by Kim et al. (2013) that used the multi-axial differential field from the volumetric derivatives is used to control the motion of
gear mechanism, wall press mechanism and a motor to drive the system. the wheeled robot. The algebraic calculation determines the non-linear
The modeling of the system was focused on the angular velocity for each trajectory by controlling the speed of the wheeled mobile robot to the
gear based on the principle of superposition and linear velocity for every targeted flaws. Since the robot poses a non-holonomic kinematic
wheel. The system is driven by a microcontroller and has no state space constraint, it can then be integrated into the general potential equation.
model for controller manipulation (Kim et al., 2013). The Nernst equation of the system is shown in Equation (14). The for-
The research studies of Hong and Yang (2011) and Shi and Tang ward kinematic equation is represented as Equation (15) while the body
(2012) used a 3D modeling method in examining the behaviour of an diagram for the system is shown in Fig. 14.
in-pipe robot with a tri-axial differential mechanism using an equation Nernst equation for the system.
of momentum transfer. The authors stated that without this tri-axial κT
� �
aax
gearing system, the locomotion interference would exist on the trac- Et ¼ E0 þ þþ ln (14)
et F ared
tion device.

8
M.Z. Ab Rashid et al. Ocean Engineering 203 (2020) 107206

Fig. 12. Flat pipeline inspection robot with two-wheeled chains (a) 3D model (b) Actual prototype (Kwon et al., 2011). (c) Detailed structure, coordinate system,
joint variables, and parameters of the wheel mechanism (Kwon et al., 2011).

where: where:

Et ¼ electrode potential at instantaneous value. vðtÞ ¼ instantaneous robot’s speed.

E0 ¼ standard potential. ωðtÞ ¼ robot’s yaw rate.
κ ¼ gas constant. xR ðtÞ ¼ point coordinate x.
T ¼ environment temperature in Kelvin degrees. yR ðtÞ ¼ point coordinate y.
dt ðϕ1 ðtÞÞ ¼ tire 1 angular velocity.
d
et þþ ¼ instantaneous number of electrons transferred in the reaction
formula. d
dt ðϕ2 ðtÞÞ ¼ tire 2 angular velocity.
F ¼ Faraday constant. d
dt ðϕ3 ðtÞÞ ¼ tire 3 angular velocity.
aox , ared ¼ activity of the oxidized and reduced species. d
¼ tire 4 angular velocity.
dt ðϕ4 ðtÞÞ

Forward kinematic equation. The findings in a research study by Zhang and Wang (2016)
0 1 0
d2
1 explained the suitability of the mathematical model from a mechanical
design with either a straight pipe or an elbow pipe. The mathematical
d fϕ1 ðtÞg C
fvðtÞg 2
B dt
model discussed in their study also utilized the Newtonian method. The
B dt C B
B C C
1BB d2
C
analysis was accomplished and the equation includes a few criteria such
B d
B C 0
k1 k1 k1 k1 k2
C
fϕ2 ðtÞg C
C
B fωðtÞg C B
as: (i) Sliding and overturning in a straight pipe movement and, (ii) Swivel
2
(15)
B dt C B k 2 k2 k 2
C B dt
B C
B C¼B C C
motion and stability analysis in an elbow movement. The force and moment
Bd C @ k3 k3 k3 k3 k4 A:B Bd 2
C
C
B fxR ðtÞg C B 2 fϕ3 ðtÞg C
B C
of the system’s movement in straight and elbow pipes are defined with
k4 k4 k4
B C
B dt C B dt C
respect to the 3D axis labeled x (lengthwise direction of the pipe), y
B C
@d A B
@ d2
C
fyR ðtÞg
A
dt dt2
fϕ4 ðtÞg (span wise direction of the pipe), and z (vertical direction). Motion
stability in different pipe diameters was experimentally tested, and the

9
M.Z. Ab Rashid et al. Ocean Engineering 203 (2020) 107206

Fig. 13. (a) Components of the tri-axial differential mechanism for the in-pipe inspection robotic system (Jiang et al., 2008), Drive wheels of the in-pipe inspection
robotic system located at 120� pressing the pipe wall with a slider crank mechanism (Jiang et al., 2008).

The coordinate system for the robot in the elbow and straight motion are
shown in Equation (16) and Equation (17), respectively. Moreover,
Fig. 16 shows the world coordinate system which is set as the center of
the elbow curvature.
2 3
ðR þ 0:5D cos φÞcos λ
rðλ; φÞ ¼ 4 ðR þ 0:5D cos φÞsin λ 5 (16)
0:5D sin λ

where:

r ¼ coordinates of any point in the elbow.

λ ¼ angle of the radius of the curvature.
φ ¼ posture angle of the robot.
R ¼ radius of curvature.
D ¼ diameter of the pipe.

In straight motion, coordinate for the system is:

Fig. 14. Body diagram of the system (Martínez-García et al., 2014).
D2
ðx RÞ2 þ z2 ¼ (17)
results from the experiment were linked to the mathematical model 4
developed. Fig. 15 shows the robot with a sliding mechanism to adapt to Another finding showed that an unknown layout and information
the diameter of the pipe and track wheel. This system is introduced to about an in-pipe inspection robotic system could be deciphered using a
create grip and reduce slip hazards as the robot moves inside the pipe. reconstructed image obtained from the projection of laser rays to the

10
M.Z. Ab Rashid et al. Ocean Engineering 203 (2020) 107206

Fig. 15. Diagram of a robot with a radial adjusting mechanism (Zhang and Wang, 2016).

wall of the pipe. The image acquired from the laser projection could be addition, the vibration of the electromechanical device at a higher speed
solved using a scheme called the active stereo Omni-direction vision was also investigated.
sensor (ASODVS) (Tang et al., 2017). Further research about traction and interference that troubled the in-
In addition, Zhang et al. (2017) used the kinematic modeling method pipe inspection robotic system was further elaborated by Zheng et al.
to analyze the location and direction of the robot in a pipe elbow. In (2018a,b). The robot which consisted of four components namely dif-
order to derive the kinematic model, a displacement of the center of the ferential mechanism, travel drive mechanism, pre-tightening mecha-
driving wheel is linked to the steering angle, and this is formulated as a nism, and auxiliary support mechanism, was connected via a modular
function of the derivatives of displacement between the driving wheels platform. Zheng et al. (2018a,b) proposed a solution to this problem by
and steering angle. They attempted to prove the kinematic model of the ensuring that the system is able to go through irregular pipes with
system by comparing the theoretical equation with the simulation that changing diameters.
was conducted. A tracked type in-pipe inspection robot with an adjustable drive
The results obtained from the kinematic modeling and mechanical system was proposed by Ciszewski et al. (2014) to be used for pipe in-
analysis supported the findings of Luo et al. (2017) that used different spection and hole drilling operation on flat and curved surfaces. The
pipe diameters by changing the speed and driving force of the piston robot is equipped with a vision system located on the top of its body and
located inside the robot. Furthermore, research by Gravalos et al. (2017) able to operate inside pipes and ducts with a diameter range from 210
solved the problem of underground soil water monitoring. In their study, mm to 235 mm. Fig. 17 (a) shows the two-dimensional (2D) top view of
a wheeled mobile robot which was modeled to move around bend sec- the system and Fig. 17(b) shows the side view. The dynamic model of the
tions was employed. Two articulated movable platform robots were robot in 3D is shown in Fig. 17(c). The system is modeled using the
attached to a soil moisture sensor. An extension rod was used to inspect kinematics and dynamics methods. The kinematic model is obtained by
the turning radius of the wheeled mobile robot inside the curved pipe. In finding the velocity of centre of the robot, C combined with slips, s.

Fig. 16. World coordinate system set as the curvature center of an elbow pipe (Zhang and Wang, 2016).

11
M.Z. Ab Rashid et al. Ocean Engineering 203 (2020) 107206

Fig. 17. (a) Two-dimensional (2D) top view of the in-pipe robotic system for pipe and duct inspection (Ciszewski et al., 2014). (b) Side view of the in-pipe robotic system
for pipe and duct inspection (Ciszewski et al., 2014). (c) Three-dimensional (3D) view of a track in-pipe robot’s dynamic model (Ciszewski et al., 2014).

Equation (18) shows the linear and angular velocity of the robotic sys- r ¼ radius of track drive sprockets.
tem (Ciszewski et al., 2014). s1 and s2 ¼ slips of sprockets 1 and 2.
G ¼ gravitational force.
rα_1 ð1
s1 Þ þ rα_2 ð1 s2 Þ
x_c ¼ sin β α_1 and α_2 ¼ angular velocity for sprockets 1 and 2 respectively.
H ¼ distance between tracks.
2
rα_1 ð1 s1 Þ þ rα_2 ð1 s2 Þ
y_c ¼ cos β cos γ γ ¼ angle of inclination.
2
rα_1 ð1 s1 Þ þ rα_2 ð1 s2 Þ
z_c ¼ sin γ The track system is modeled dynamically by considering the kinetic
energy of the robot’s frame, kinetic energy of the right track and kinetic
2
rα_2 ð1 s2 Þ rα_1 ð1 s1 Þ
β_ ¼ (18) energy of left track (Ciszewski et al., 2014). Equation (19) shows the
total kinetic energy which is the total of three robot’s components while
H

where: Equation (20) shows the kinetic energy of the robot’s frame. Inverse and
forward dynamic problems are solved using Maggi’s formalism as shown

12
M.Z. Ab Rashid et al. Ocean Engineering 203 (2020) 107206

Fig. 17. (continued).

in Equation (21) (Malvezzi et al., 2018), (Orsino, 2016). β_ ¼ angular velocity of the robot’s frame at instantaneous center
Total kinetic energy, rotation O.
E ¼ ER þ EM1 þ EM2 (19)
Maggi’s formalism.
The kinetic energy of the robot’s frame. " !#
n
X d ∂E ∂E
ER ¼ ER1 þ ER2 Cij ¼ Θi
j
dt ∂q_j ∂qj
1 � 1 2
ER ¼ mR x_c 2 þ y_c 2 þ z_c 2 þ IR β_ (20) s
2 2
X
q_j ¼ Cij e_i þ Gj
where:
i
s
(21)
X
Aij ∂qj ¼ 0
EM1 ¼ kinetic energy of track module 1. i

EM2 ¼ kinetic energy of track module 2.

where:
mR ¼ mass of the robot frame.
IR ¼ mass moment of inertia for the robot frame.

Table 2
Summary of the research studies on the modeling of wheeled in-pipe inspection robotic system.
Authors System Method of modeling Important Findings

Hong and Yang (2011) Multi-axis differential Finite element analysis Variable parameter for the adaptive system is solved using parallelogram and nut
mechanism slider.
Kwon et al. (2011) Wheel chain driven mobile Kinematic model Wheel chain is connected by a mechanical linkage clutch.
robot
Shi and Tang (2012) Tri-axial differential mechanism Equation of momentum transfer Without this tri-axial gearing system, locomotion interference will exist in the
traction device.
Sibai et al. (2012) 3 sets of 2 wheels with 3 motor- Calculation for platform No actual movement modeling and controller were shown by the author.
driven platforms construction
Damic et al. (2014) Multibody system Object-oriented technique Uses bond graph and a two-way inter process communication (IPC) pipe.
Martínez-García et al. Non-holonomic wheel mobile (i) Non-linear algebraic solution Estimate the distance between the mobile robot system and pipeline flaws under
(2014) robot (ii) Nernst algorithm inspection based on the theoretical-empirical nonlinear regression.
L. Zhang and Wang Straight, elbow pipe inspection Experimental study Mathematical model from the mechanical design.
(2016) robot. Analysis of motion stability.
Sarvestani et al. (2016) 2DOF outer pipe robot Lagrange equation Adjustable traction force and active diameter adaptability
Tang et al. (2017) Mobile robot ASODVS Image reconstruction by projecting laser to the wall of the pipe.
Z. Zhang et al. (2017) Mobile in-pipe robot in elbow Kinematic modeling Analyze location and direction of the robot in the pipe elbow.
Driving wheels are related to steering angle as a function of derivatives of
displacement.
Luo et al. (2017) Adaptable pipe diameter mobile Changing speed and driving force of the piston located on the robot.
robot
Gravalos et al. (2017) Articulated movable based System moving at curve section Solve the problem of underground soil water monitoring using a wheeled mobile
platform robot robot.
Zheng et al. (2018) Four mechanisms connected Traction force and interference for an in-pipe robot.
with modular platform

13
M.Z. Ab Rashid et al. Ocean Engineering 203 (2020) 107206

Cij ¼ coefficient of matrix C where matrix C is the orthogonal com- supported by Liu. et al. (2014) who investigated both active and passive
plement of matrix A, A ¼ [Aij]. helical drive in-pipe robotic systems. The problem related to the passive
n ¼ number of parameters in generalized coordinates. helical drive robot was caused by low traction and lower mechanical
qj ¼ generalized coordinates (j ¼ 1 …. ,n) force transmission. They modeled their system using kinematics and
e_i ¼ ½α_ 1 α_ 2 � mechanics modeling for designing a control system. They found that the
Gj ¼ ½ 0 0 0 0 0 �T active helical drive in-pipe robot has better traction compared to the
passive helical drive.
Table 2 summarizes the previous studies regarding the wheeled type Further research on the screw drive type in-pipe inspection robotic
of the in-pipe inspection robotic system. system focusing on spring stiffness was conducted by Kakogawa and Ma
(2012). The kinematic analysis of the screw drive mechanism is needed
5. Modeling of screw drive and helical drive type in-pipe due to the inability of one-degree-of-freedom in-pipe robots to pass
inspection robotic system through curved pipe sections. Based on the analysis, they concluded that
there is a relationship between spring stiffness, length of the robot,
The screw drive type in-pipe inspection robot is composed of a few torque of the motor and static friction on the inner pipe wall. In addition,
components i.e. rotator, elastic arms to support the body, motor and they found an optimal spring stiffness for the robot to move along the
wheels to drive the system. The wheels are inclined at a certain angle to curved section of the pipe and climb up a vertical pipe.
ensure the robot moves like a screw inside the pipe (P. Li et al., 2016). In addition, Li et al. (2014) established an energy optimization
Fig. 18 shows the concept of the screw drive type in-pipe inspection technique to the screw drive in-pipe robot equipped with an inclined
robotic system moving in helical motion. The robot’s motions both angle adjustable roller. Based on this research, energy can be optimized
translational and rotational as represented by Equation (22) to Equation by conducting dynamic and model analysis. A similar study was con-
(24). ducted by Liu and Li, (2015) where special well tracks were used in the
oil and gas exploration. However, the development of the wells needs to
v ¼ ωout γ (22) consider the risk of casualties, especially to transport tools and equip-
ment downhole. To overcome this, a system with higher tractive forces
where: was designed and modeled. The geometric calculation and mechanical
analysis were used to identify suitable parameters for the helical drive
v ¼ translational speed of the in-pipe robot. in-pipe robotic system.
ωout ¼ rotational speed of the in-pipe robot. The involvement of a robot in spraying the inner pipe wall was
γ ¼ coefficient to relate translational and rotational speed. elaborated by Chen et al. (2015). The platform was modeled using a
γ ¼ ðrw þ LÞtan α (23) geometric method while the manipulator was modeled based on Dena-
vitt Hartenberg (DH). The initial position of the robot was determined
L ¼ 0:5D rw (24) using a laser tracker. Then, the robot was aligned with the pipe while the
coincidence of the spray gun with the axis of the pipeline was calculated
where: using an inverse method. Tian and Zhang (2016) further elaborated on
the mechanics of a robot in conducting an inner pipe spray. Among the
rw ¼ radius of the wheels. plausible explanation for this finding is that the stability and contact of
D ¼ inner diameter of the pipe. the robot movement relative to the inner pipe can be expressed as a
α ¼ incline angle of the wheels. matrix and differential-algebraic equations.
To support the research findings of Liu et al. (2014a,b,c) and Li et al.
Qingyou et al. (2013) modeled a modular helical motion based on (2015), Zheng et al. (2018a,b) used three-dimensional modeling to
conic springs. Analysis of the traction was carried out for three types of model a spiral or screw drive motion of an in-pipe inspection robot. The
motions which depended on the load (i.e. small, medium or heavy) that robot was employed to overcome motion interference when the pipe
the robot needed to carry. The robot utilizes the synchronized motion for robot passing through an elbow. Hence, the system was designed and
a small load but it performs inchworm and rigid motions for medium modeled with adaptable pipe changes. The in-pipe inspection robotic
and heavy loads, respectively. system was modeled as a system with three components: a driving
In order to support the research conducted by Qingyou et al. (2013), mechanism, a holding mechanism, and an elastic mechanism. The re-
Chen et al. (2014) asserted that unstable traction of the helical drive searchers created a formula for maximum size and length of the robot as
robot could be settled by adding a timing belt to synchronize wheel it moved inside a straight pipe and elbow. The motion of the system was
rotations which would otherwise be prompted independently. This is explained as a linear motion with velocity, v as the product of the

Fig. 18. Conceptual diagram of a screw-drive in-pipe inspection robotic system with the driving mechanism of helical motion (Li et al., 2016).

14
M.Z. Ab Rashid et al. Ocean Engineering 203 (2020) 107206

Fig. 19. Geometric doagram of a robot’s wheel around the corner (J Zheng et al., 2018a,b).

wheel’s angular velocity and radius of the wheel and the instantaneous where:
radius R is a combination of the curvature for three wheels. rp is the
radius of the wall and the equation of the instantaneous radius is given vi ¼ wheel speed.
in Equation (25) to Equation (27). Fig. 19 shows the geometric rela- ωi ¼ wheel angle speed.
tionship between the instantaneous radius of the curvature for the ro- rw ¼ radius of the driving wheel.
bot’s wheel.
Linear velocity is given by: Instantaneous radius is:
vi ¼ ωi rw (25) R1 þ R2 þ R3 ¼ 3R (26)

Table 3
Summary of previous research on the modeling of screw-drive and helical-drive in-pipe inspection robotic system.
Authors System Method of modeling Important Findings

Enner et al. (2013) Snake robot Model joint estimation Movement in a straight line with the pipe center.
S. Jatsun et al. 6 links snake robot The mathematical model for varying Locomotion for robot’s movement in the pipe with varying diameters.
(2014) pipe diameters’ robots
Douadi et al. Snake robot Modeling 4R active joint and 1R To solve non-holonomic kinematic constraints. Higher DOF can reduce singularities.
(2014) passive joint.
Hopkins and Gupta Snake robot Lagrangian dynamics Lagrangian to solve n modules angles of the robot.
(2014) DH parametrization DH representation to visualize movement.
Qi et al. (2017) Hyper-redundant snake (i) Hyperbolic function (ii) Hyperbolic function to move the robot in helical motion and overcome branch of
robot Continuous curve model pipe.
Continuous curve model to solve the joint angle of a snaking robot.
Qingyou et al. Modular helical conic Modeling based on conic springs Synchronize motion for small load, inchworm and rigid motion for medium and
(2013) springs robot heavy load
Q. Liu, Li et al. Active and passive helical Kinematics and mechanics modeling To solve the problem of low traction force on passive wheels using active wheels.
(2014) drive robot.
Kakogawa and Ma Screw drive robot Kinematic modeling. Spring stiffness, length of the robot, a torque of the motor and static friction on the
(2012) Optimal analysis for spring stiffness. inner pipe wall are related to each other.
T. Li et al. (2014) Screw drive robot with Energy optimization using dynamic Energy can be optimized by conducting dynamic and model analyses.
incline rollers model analysis.
Y. Li et al. (2015) Special track well robot for Geometric calculation & mechanical The system with higher tractive forces to solve the problem of transporting tools to
oil & gas exploration analysis. downhole.
Chen et al. (2015) Inner pipe spray robot (i) Geometric method. (ii) D-H for The initial position of the robot is determined using a laser tracker.
manipulator. (iii) Inverse method. Robot model aligned with the pipe while coincidence of spray gun with the axis of
the pipeline.
Tian and Zhang Inner pipe spray robot Matrix and differential algebraic Stability and movement contact between the robot’s body and the inner pipe is
(2016) equations. converted to the matrix and differential-algebraic equations.
Zheng et al. (2018) Screw drive robot with 3D modeling The system is modeled with three components: the driving mechanism, a holding
adaptable pipe changes mechanism, and an elastic mechanism
Osman and Screw drive robot with Kinematic and dynamic modeling Actuator to drive the system is an electric motor with planetary gearbox where the
Kova�ci�c (2017) adaptive legs generated torque will be transmitted to legs and wheels
Tourajizadeh et al. Screw drive robot (i) Dynamic modeling & (i) The dynamic model of the screw drive robot is derived and linearized to the
(2018) linearize model (ii) Kinematics & operating point before Linear Quadratic Controller (LQR) can be applied. Verify
Kinetics modeling using simulations in MATLAB and ADAM software.
Q. Liu, Chen et al. Helical drive robot with Modeling traction The timing belt synchronizes the wheel rotation as it rotates independently which
(2014) timing belt causes low traction.

15
M.Z. Ab Rashid et al. Ocean Engineering 203 (2020) 107206

where R1, R2, R3 are instantaneous radius of curvature with respect to 6. Modeling of legged type in-pipe inspection robotic system
the center of the wheel.
8 � 9 The legged robot for in-pipe inspection has many degrees of freedom,
enabling a wide range of motion. Nevertheless, the robot will utilize
R1 ¼ R rp � rw sin φ
(27)
< =
o
R ¼R rp rw �sinðφ þ 120 Þ
: 2 o ; more actuators and a complex control system to control its motion
R3 ¼ R rp rw sinðφ þ 240 Þ
compared to a normal wheeled robot (Bekhit et al., 2015).
where: In the study by Neubauer (1994), a legged type in-pipe inspection
robotic system mimicked the motion of a spider to climb vertical pipes
rp ¼ radius of elbow wall. for inner inspection. The legs were pushed against the pipe wall during
the climbing, and five shapes of the pipes were used to test the climbing
rw ¼ radius of driving wheel
motion. There were two control layers to accomplish the motion, re-
φ ¼ angle between the arm for drive wheel 1 and t-t.
flexive control layer and reactive control layer, but they were not based
on any mathematical models for further reference.
However, the system in Zheng et al. (2018a,b) was only tested up to
A system called Moritz which was designed by Zagler and Pfeiffer
the simulation level and not experimentally verified even though a robot
(2003) had two joints for bending and another two joints for rotation.
could pass through the elbow without any interference. The robot was
The legs of the system were mounted on the front and rear body of the
seen adaptable to various diameters, and it was able to pass through the
robot. The rotation joints were used to separate the legs into two pairs
obstacle.
and enable the robot to rotate around the longitudinal axis during its
In another research study, Osman and Kova�ci�c (2017) investigated
motion. Gait pattern, sensor, crawler controller and coordination were
the screw drive type in-pipe robotic system with adaptive legs. This
explained but without any mathematical modeling (Zagler and Pfeiffer,
study described the mathematical modeling of the robot in terms of
2003).
kinematic and dynamic screw drive principles. The system consisted of
The in-pipe robotic system moving in the crawling motion was
two sections namely the driving section which comprised ‘three legs’,
modeled using the intelligent algorithm by Qiao and Shang (2012) in
and the driven section which comprised ‘two ankles’. The actuator that
order to overcome the problem of maneuvering inside the elbow and
drove the system was an electric motor with a planetary gearbox. The
U-shaped pipes. Also, an algorithm was used to determine radial vari-
torque generated was then transmitted to the legs and wheels of the
ation in the pipe and the length of the elastic rear and front leg defor-
robot. The leg and wheel components were considered the driven sec-
mation using a MATLAB program. Han et al. (2013) modeled two
tion and these components need to be pressed to the pipe wall at all
module collaboration robots for climbing and crawling inside six inches
times.
of a vertical pipeline. The two modules were connected by an arm that
A systematic study by Zheng et al. (2018a,b) which was supported by
was remotely controlled to make them flexible for climbing and moving
Tourajizadeh et al. (2018) solved the problem and limitation related to
on the pipe’s surface.
the screw drive type in-pipe inspection robot that moved in a constant
Next, Jatsun and Malchikov (2014) illustrated several designs of the
pitch rate. A dynamic model of the screw drive type robot was derived
multi-link in-pipe inspection mobile robots that are capable of moving in
and linearized around the operating point before Linear Quadratic
a very tight space in the pipeline. The robot’s dynamic and motion
Controller (LQR) was applied to the robot system. The kinematics and
control were mathematically modeled. The numerical simulations and
kinetics of the system were also derived. In order to move forward, the
experimental tests showed that the robot demonstrated worm-like
steering angle was used to handle pitch rate movement and avoid ob-
properties.
stacles. Although this study was based on simulations using MATLAB
In addition to the work done by Han et al., (2013); Jatsun and
and ADAMS software, the findings are essential to potential investiga-
Malchikov (2014) on the crawling robot, a five-degrees-of-freedom
tion on the in-pipe inspection robot.
(5DOF) crawling robot with double claws was kinematically modeled
Based on the studies reviewed in this section, a summary regarding
using the Denavit-Hartenberg (DH) (You et al., 2015). The method was
the screw drive and helical drive type in-pipe inspection robotic systems
used to overcome the problems related to a multi-pipeline environment.
is provided in Table 3.
Three types of crawling motions which are crawling trajectory inside a
straight pipe, crawling between pipes, and crawling between rows of
pipes and joints. The motion was based on the joint interpolation

Table 4
Summary of the previous research on the modeling of legged in-pipe inspection robotic system.
Authors System Method of modeling Important Findings

Bekhit et al. (2015) Multi-degree of freedom Review the papers on legged The system has high degrees of freedom and can perform a variety of
type robot motions. It utilizes more actuators thereby increasing its weight.
Neubauer (1994)) Legged type in-pipe robot for climbing nil Legs pushed against the pipe wall. Reflexive and reactive control layers for
climbing motion.
Zagler and Pfeiffer Moritz Two joints for bending and two Rotation joints separate legs into two pairs and the robot rotates around the
(2003) joints for rotation longitudinal axis.
The system has sensor, crawling controller and coordinated motion.
Qiao and Shang Crawling type Intelligent algorithm Algorithm to solve the elbow and U-shaped pipe’s maneuver. Also, it is used
(2012) to estimate the pipe’s radius variation.
Han et al. (2013) Two module collaboration robots Climbing and crawling six Two modules are connected by an arm and controlled remotely.
inches vertical pipeline
Jatsun and Multilink in-pipe inspection robots Moves inside tight space Modeling on dynamic and motion control.
Malchikov (2014) Numerical and experimental tests.
You et al. (2015) Five degrees of freedom (5DOF) crawling Denavit-Hartenberg (DH) To overcome the problem of a multi-pipeline.
robot with double claws Joint interpolation Analysis of three motion types; (i) crawling trajectory inside a straight pipe,
(ii) crawling between pipes.
(iii) crawling between rows of pipes and joints.

16
M.Z. Ab Rashid et al. Ocean Engineering 203 (2020) 107206

between the trajectories. However, the applicability of the findings parameters was also studied..
might be limited due to the simulation mode of the study. In addition, a study by Douadi et al. (2014) highlighted the modeling
The information related to the legged in-pipe inspection robotic of a snake robot on a planar surface. The system consists of four active
system is summarized in Table 4. revolute joints and a passive revolute joint to solve a non-holonomic
kinematic constraint in the wheeled mobile robot. Singularities related
7. Modeling of biomimetic in-pipe inspection robotic system: to the robot can be solved by applying a higher number of DOF and
snake type robot, inchworm type robot, caterpillar type robot actuation input placed on the snake robot.
Moreover, Hopkins and Gupta (2014) modeled the snake in-pipe
The biomimetic mechanism is a semi-autonomous or autonomous robotic system using Lagrangian dynamics for several joint modules
system that has the ability to operate in a complex environment. The indicated by n number of modules. The equation of motion based on D-H
biomimetic mechanism can be designed and planned to be adaptable in parameters on each module was acquired to visualize the pattern of
unpredictable changes and perform multi-functional tasks. Thus, by motion for the snake robot. One joint module was used to move the robot
using this biomimetic concept, an in-pipe inspection robotic system such in the yaw motion while another was used to produce movements in the
as snake type robot, inchworm type robot and caterpillar type robot can pitch direction. The module movement was based on the sum of linear
dramatically improve in-pipe inspection. expansions from the parallel mechanisms. Fig. 20 and Fig. 21 feature
Enner et al. (2013) modeled a snake robot that was able to move parallel mechanisms as mentioned in Hopkins and Gupta (2014) while
inside a straight pipe specifically by estimating the joint angles of the the equations of the vector and coordinate system for the snake robot are
snake robot. The robot’s body moves along the center of the pipeline to shown as Equation (28), Equation (29) and Equation (30).Vector loop
estimate its diameter. Similarly, in the case of the snake in-pipe robotic equation:
system modeling, Jatsun et al. (2014) designed and addressed the
OA ¼ OB þ BA (28)
locomotion of the six-linked mobile robot. A mathematical model of the
robot’s movement in various modes especially the pipes with various

Fig. 20. Snake-inspired robot joint and friction anchor modules (Hopkins and Gupta, 2014).

Fig. 21. Parallel mechanism kinematics (Hopkins and Gupta, 2014).

17
M.Z. Ab Rashid et al. Ocean Engineering 203 (2020) 107206

Fixed coordinate frame for the system in x and y: curve. The movement is established by changing the parameter of the
hyperbolic function. Based on the formula of a continuous curve model,
xA ¼ a1 cθ1 b1 cðθ1 þ ψ 1 Þ
the curvature and torsion curves are used to derive the joint angle of the
yA ¼ a1 sθ1 b1 sðθ1 þ ψ 1 Þ (29) snake robot.
The inchworm and caterpillar in-pipe robotic systems share similar
where:
movement principles. According to Wang et al. (2009), the gait move-
ments for inchworm and caterpillar are relatively similar except that the
a1 ¼ length between point C and E
caterpillar robot has longer joint modules. Fig. 22 shows the caterpillar
c ¼ cosine.
kinematics and its gait while Fig. 23 shows the inchworm kinematics
θ1 ¼ angle x-axis at point O to pivot input link.
model. The caterpillar kinematics robot moves in the ‘open chain–closed
b1 ¼ link’s length between points A and B.
chain–open chain’ state while the kinematics for the inchworm is in an
ψ 1 ¼ passive joint angle
‘open-chain’ state.
Besides that, a worm robot which was also named a flexible
Vector loop equation for expanding mechanism:
squirming robot was suggested by Zhang et al. (2013). The authors
OA ¼ OE þ EC þ CF þ FA (30) studied the structure of the guide head and brake wheels inside the
pipeline. Apart from that, traction control was analyzed using the me-
The results from the research by Qi et al. (2017) were in correlation chanics of the robot inside the pipeline. The motion stability of the
with those from the study by Enner et al. (2013). However, this study flexible shaft is based on the instability theory where the flexible shaft of
focused on the helical motion of a hyper-redundant in-pipe robot to the system is unstable when the robot moves inside straight and curved
overcome a pipe branch. The model of the system was accomplished by pipelines.
using a hyperbolic function to make a snake robot move in the wave Furthermore, L. Liu et al. (2014a,b,c) modeled an in-pipe robotic

Fig. 22. Caterpillar kinematics and gait movement (Wang et al., 2009).

Fig. 23. Kinematics model and gait of an inchworm (Wang et al., 2009).

18
M.Z. Ab Rashid et al. Ocean Engineering 203 (2020) 107206

system of microrobot type with an eccentric wheel for in-pipe inspec- drive model when they were on the horizontal, vertical, and bend pipes
tion. The robot movement is based on the resonant principle, and a with a diameter of 53 mm. Furthermore, a single drive inchworm
micro-engine is used to excite the eccentric wheel. The authors solved pneumatic based model could move horizontally with an average speed
the problem of the angular acceleration by making the wheel flexible at of 100 mm/s and at the speed of 40 mm/s when climbing a vertical pipe
the contact point with the pipeline. Several tests were then carried out to with an almost 90� angle.
assess the performance of the system using different diameters and Yamamoto et al. (2018) supported their previous research, Yama-
different ramp angles. moto et al. (2015) on the pneumatic mechanism with high-speed loco-
To support the prior research by Liu et al. (2014a,b,c), worm-like motion. It was found that the forward motion was generated from a
locomotion using electromagnetic waves was proposed by Sattarov combination of the holding forces (produced by an expansion of
and Almaev (2017) to overcome the limitations faced by the current mechanism to the pipe wall) and the impellent forces. On the other
in-pipe robot system to climb an inclined pipe. The researchers modeled, hand, Adams et al. (2018) conducted a water utility pipe inspection
analyzed and simulated two elastic segments connected like a ring that using a soft inflatable actuator. The behavior of the inflatable actuator
was formed by two coupled electromagnetic actuators. The actuator mimicked the motion of an inchworm robot and its mathematical model
moves in the longitudinal and transverse motions to overcome friction. was computed to observe its motion inside the space provided. The data
Liu et al. (2014a,b,c) used the optimization technique to plan a he- on the forces and displacement were acquired through an experimental
lical drive motion to be used by an inchworm in-pipe robot. The robot study.
moves by extending and retracting the conic spring in a sinusoidal ve- The creation of a flexible robot to move inside a pipe was initially
locity pattern. The pattern of movement can be optimized by applying a proposed by Fei et al. (2014) in a study of the marine in-pipe robotic
genetic algorithm (GA) to the system’s movement. system based on a metamorphic mechanism. The flexible marine in-pipe
In a study conducted by Fortuni�c et al. (2017), the problem con- robot was modeled using ADAMS software and its kinematics was also
cerning the robot’s motion in a small and confined space was solved analyzed. The system was able to pass through various pipe diameters
using a bristle-based motion. The modeling of the bristle-based motion and obstacles with the addition of a spring.
of the robot was verified using the simulation and experimental studies. In addition, Wu et al. (2015) derived mathematical modeling of an
The result showed that this small and simple microrobot could move in-pipe swimming robot. By comparing with the previous crawling robot
with high speed in translational and rotational motions. which normally had difficulty maneuvering in a limited and narrow
According to Yamamoto et al. (2018), the current inchworm loco- pipe, the in-pipe swimming robot can, however, move freely and easily
motion faces difficulties when moving inside narrow pipelines. Thus, inside the pipe. The previous findings on the parameters of the robot
they proposed a pneumatic hollow shaft with a longer stroke to ensure explained that the pipe size and robot geometry play a vital role in the
that the system can roll like an inchworm at a higher speed. Two models mathematical model developed. Kim et al. (2015) also faced a similar
were assessed in terms of their movement patterns by comparing single problem to model a flexible in-pipe robot that can be used to mine
and double drive patterns. Based on the comparison, it was discovered manganese nodules. The non-linearity and correlation between the
that the single drive model performed better compared to the double vessel, a vertical lifting pipe, a lifting pump, an intermediate buffer

Table 5
Summary of the research studies on the modeling of biomimetic in-pipe inspection robotic system: snake type, inchworm type and caterpillar type.
Authors System Method of modeling Important Findings

Q. Liu, Chen et al. Helical drive inchworm robot Genetic algorithm (GA) optimization Movement using extending and retracting conic spring and in sinusoidal.
(2014)
Wang et al. (2009) Inchworm & caterpillar Kinematics model Gait movement for the inchworm and caterpillar is relatively similar, but
in terms of joint modules, the caterpillar robot has longer modules.
Y. Zhang et al. (2013) Flexible squirming worm robot (i) Traction control modeling (ii) Motion Flexible shaft for the system is considered unstable when it moves inside
stability analysis of flexible shaft the straight and curved pipelines.
Liu et al. (2014a,b,c) Microrobot with eccentric Modeling based on resonant principle The solution to angular acceleration by making the wheel flexible at the
wheel contact point on the pipeline.
Qiao and Shang Crawler in-pipe robot Intelligent algorithm modeling Deduce the radial variation in the pipe and the length of the elastic rear
(2012) and front legs’ deformation.
Han et al. (2013) Crawling robot Collaborative modeling Two modules are connected by an arm and remotely controlled for
climbing in a pipe.
S. F. Jatsun and Multilink mobile robot Dynamic & motion-controlled modeling Worm-like robots can move inside very tight spaces.
Malchikov (2014)
You et al. (2015) Crawling robot with double Kinematics modeling using DH The motion is categorized based on pipe locations:: straight pipe,
claws between pipes, and between joints.
Sattarov and Almaev Elastic electromagnetic Modeling an electromagnetic actuator Motion in the longitudinal and transverse directions applied to overcome
(2017) segment inchworm robot frictional forces.
Fortuni�c et al. (2017) Microrobot Modeling of bristle motion Microrobot moves with high speed in the translational and rotational
motions.
Yamamoto et al. Inchworm locomotion robot Modeling for single drive & double drive A pneumatic hollow shaft with longer stroke moves like an inchworm but
(2018) motion pattern. has a faster motion.
Yamamoto et al. Inchworm locomotion robot Force analysis of high-speed locomotion Pneumatic mechanism with high-speed locomotion.
(2015) modeling
Adams et al. (2018) Water utility pipe robot-soft (i) Modeling based on inchworm motion Modeling is computed to observe its motion inside space.
actuator (ii) Experimental model validation
Fei et al. (2014) Flexible marine in-pipe robot (i) ADAMS modeling A system is able to pass through variable pipe diameters and obstacles by
(ii) Kinematics modeling adding a spring to it.
Wu et al. (2015) In-pipe swimming robot Mathematical modeling Solve the problem of crawling robots in confined spaces.
Kim et al. (2015) Flexible pipe-mining robot Separable equation of motion The equation of motion is separated into two subsystems.
Kwon and Yi (2012) Caterpillar robot based on (i)Motion algorithm for spring (ii)Kinematic Cooperative and reconfigurable system using two interconnected
springs analysis springs.
X. Li et al. (2012) Not mentioned Hierarchical integer linear programming Irregular findings using certain spots on a three-dimensional (3D) region.
optimization

19
M.Z. Ab Rashid et al. Ocean Engineering 203 (2020) 107206

station, a flexible pipe, and a self-propelled mining robot are all (c) Screw drive and helical type in-pipe robotic systems are consid-
contributed to dynamics analysis. It required a considerably longer time ered effective for maneuvering inside the pipes. Most of the
to be created and needed higher specifications of a computer system. research studies reviewed that are related to the screw drive and
Thus, to solve this issue, Kim et al. (2015) proposed that the equation of helical in-pipe robots can be divided into three categories: (i)
motion should be separated into two subsystems known as the vessel snake and hyper-redundant robotic manipulator, (ii) modular robot
lifting pipe and the flexible pipe-mining robot subsystem. connected with either the helical springs or helical drive using a timing
Kwon and Yi (2012) designed and exploited a motion algorithm for belt, and (iii) screw drive in-pipe system. For the snake and hyper-
the caterpillar in-pipe robot with a loaded spring to expand and grip the redundant in-pipe robotic system, the Lagrangian and Denavitt-
pipe wall. The kinematic analysis was applied to the 4-bar mechanisms Hartenberg (DH) approaches are used to visualize the motion.
at the wheels. Also, a new motion planning for a reconfigurable system Besides that, a hyperbolic function is used as a trajectory of the
was applied using two connected springs between the two robot’s system to enable its movement in a helical motion. For the helical
modules. The consistency between these two modules was analyzed in system that is connected with springs, the criteria emphasized by
order to optimize the motion at any complex junctions. most researchers are the spring models and stiffness. Moreover,
In another study, in solving the problem of the complex junction and the analyses involving kinematics, dynamics, and geometry are
mapping of 3D in-pipe inspection, an algorithm named as the Hierar- carried out to explain the behavior of the screw drive type in-pipe
chical Integer Linear Programming Optimization technique is used. This robotic system.
algorithm is capable of covering the 3D region by checking certain spots (d) For the caterpillar and inchworm in-pipe robotic systems, previ-
in the pipe to identify any irregularities or unwanted materials. Simu- ous research focused on the gait and locomotion of the system
lations and experiments using the prototype robot were carried out to and less attention has been given to developing models that can
observe the performance of the algorithm (X. Li et al., 2012). be tested with robust controllers. Besides, the caterpillar and
The review of the biomimetic in-pipe inspection robotic system is inchworm in-type robotic system can only be used for small pipes
summarized in Table 5. and not robust enough for large and different pipe diameters. In
addition, another issue for the system is that the caterpillar and
8. Conclusion inchworm in-pipe robotic systems can only work in limited pipe
lengths, and they are not suitable for industrial pipelines.
The review on the modeling of in-pipe inspection robotic system is (e) Based on the previous points, the screw drive type and wheeled
provided in this paper. The literature survey includes the description of in-pipe robotic systems are eminent to be used in conducting in-
modeling of the fluid-driven robot, wheeled robot, screw-drive type pipe inspection. However, most of the robotic systems studied
robot, and inchworm-like robot. The main contribution of this paper is only cater to certain areas, like the fact that the modeling of a
the highlight of mathematical modeling in the implementation of the in- straight motion is not combined with the modeling of motion
pipe inspection robotic system from previous studies that had been inside the bend section. Another research gap is the ability of the
done. Thus, in order to fulfill the current gap, a comprehensive review in-pipe robotic system to switch movements from inside a straight
elucidates the mathematical models proposed by some researchers to pipe to a bend pipe. There is also no correlation between the
solve the problems of in-pipe inspection robots. mathematical models on an adaptive mechanism for the in-pipe
Based on the review, it can be concluded that: straight and curve motions. Thus, these gaps are potential
topics of investigation on improving the in-pipe inspection ro-
(a) The in-pipe robot moved by fluid or gas pressures can be modeled botic system further.
to move through and inspect a straight and curved pipe. Primary
studies have shown that the system is assumed to move inside the
ideal gas and the gas flows in a single phase inside the pipe. In Declaration of competing interests
order to model the system that maneuvers inside bend pipes,
three equations models are used to ensure the stability and The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
controllability of the robotic system. Furthermore, this technique interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
is also not suitable to be used with certain controllers that require the work reported in this paper.
several switching during a motion. Most of the techniques used to
model the fluid-driven system are based on the Newtonian Acknowledgments
method and the verification that uses different techniques is
considerably scarce. Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and Authors want to appreciate iKohza Wind Engineering for (Urban,
Finite Element Analysis (FEA) that are utilized in certain research Artificial, Man-made) Environment Laboratory, Malaysia-Japan Inter-
such as Pradhan et al. (2017); X. Tian et al. (2013) only focused national Institute of Technology (MJIIT), Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
on analysing the underflow behavior of the system, and these under grant number PY/2019/00426 for the sponsoring the research
techniques are not suitable to identify an accurate model of the and Center for Robotics and Industrial Automation (CeRIA), FKE, UTeM
system. for providing the facility to conduct the research.
(b) Research for the in-pipe robotic system that employs a wheel
mobile platform commonly uses Newtonian and kinematic References
modeling techniques to show the equation of motion. The system
normally uses a wheel to drive the system, and several studies Adams, W., Sridar, S., Thalman, C.M., Copenhaver, B., Elsaad, H., Polygerinos, P., 2018.
Water Pipe Robot Utilizing Soft Inflatable Actuators. Institute of Electrical and
indicate that the trackwheel powered by the geared motor is Electronics Engineers Inc., pp. 321–326
superior to a normal wheeled drive. Some research uses adaptive An, Saeed, Moghaddam, MajiJerb M, 2015. On the in-pipe inspection robots traversing
mechanisms like a sliding mechanism to expand and retract in through elbows. Int. J. Robot. Theory. App. 4, 19–27.
Archila, J.F., Becker, M., 2013. Study of robots to pipelines, mathematical models and
order to adapt to a variety of size changes of a pipe. These
simulation. In: Proceedings - 2013 IEEE Latin American Robotics Symposium. LARS,
mechanisms use either two adaptive mechanisms or adaptive pp. 18–23, 2013.
mechanism with three linkages located at 120� apart. However, Bekhit, A., Dehghani, A., Richardson, R., 2015. Kinematic analysis and locomotion
based on the review, there are no concrete findings of the general strategy of a pipe inspection robot concept for operation in active pipelines. Int. J.
Mech. Eng. Mechatron. 1.
transfer function from the mathematical model that can be Chattopadhyay, P., Ghoshal, S., Majumder, A., Dikshit, H., 2018. Locomotion methods of
identified in order to be applied with the controller technique. pipe climbing robots: a review. J. Eng. Sci. Technol. Rev. 11 (4), 154–165.

20
M.Z. Ab Rashid et al. Ocean Engineering 203 (2020) 107206

Chatzakos, P., Markopoulos, Y.P., Hrissagis, K., Khalid, A., 2006. On the development of Karl Dawson, 2011. MULTI-DIAMETER PIGGING – FACTORS AFFECTING the DESIGN
a modular external-pipe crawling omni-directional mobile robot. Ind. Robot 33, and SELECTION of PIGGING TOOLS for MULTI-DIAMETER PIPELINES by Karl
291–297. Dawson. Pipeline Engineering, Catterick Bridge, Richmond, UK. Pipeline Eng.
Chen, Y., Ji, X., Tang, W., 2015. Pipeline spraying robot: structure and pose adjustment. Khan, M.S., 2017. An approach for crack detection in sewer pipes using acoustic signals.
J. Beijing Univ. Aeronaut. Astronaut. 41, 209–215. Beijing Hangkong Hangtian In: GHTC 2017 - IEEE Global Humanitarian Technology Conference, Proceedings,
Daxue Xuebao. vol.2017, pp. 1–6.
Chen, Y., Liu, Q., Ren, T., 2014. A simple and novel helical drive in-pipe robot. Robotica Kim, H.M., Suh, J.S., Choi, Y.S., Trong, T.D., Moon, H., Koo, J., Ryew, S., Choi, H.R.,
89. 2013. An In-pipe robot with multi-axial differential gear mechanism. In: IEEE
Ciszewski, M., Buratowski, T., Giergiel, M., Teper, W., Uhl, T., Zwierzy� nski, A.J., 2014. International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, pp. 252–257.
Design of a versatile inspection mobile robot with drilling module for space Kim, S.-S., Yun, H.-S., Lee, C.-H., Kim, H.-W., Hong, S., 2015. Efficient Analysis of a Deep-
applications. In: 2014 ASE BIGDATA/SOCIALCOM/CYBERSECURITY Conf. 3–8. Seabed Integrated Mining System Using a Subsystem Synthesis Method. American
Damic, V., Cohodar, M., Damic, D., 2014. Multibody systems dynamical modeling and Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME).
visualization based on IPC technique. Soc. Model. Simulat. Int. 133–138. Kwon, Y.S., Lee, B., Whang, I.C., Kim, W.K., Yi, B.J., 2011. A flat pipeline inspection
Deng, J., Shen, H., Xue, C., Liu, S., Wang, X., 2011. Design and development of screw- robot with two wheel chains. In: Proceedings - IEEE International Conference on
drive in-pipe robot. Appl. Mech. Mater. 43, 1–4, 2011. Robotics and Automation.
Deng, Z., Xu, F., Zhang, X., Chen, H., 2004. Key techniques of the X-ray inspection real- Kwon, Y.-S., Yi, B.-J., 2012. Design and motion planning of a two-module collaborative
time imaging pipeline robot. High Technol. Lett. 10, 54–56. indoor pipeline inspection robot. IEEE Trans. Robot. 28, 681–696.
Douadi, L., Spinello, D., Gueaieb, W., Sarfraz, H., 2014. Planar kinematics analysis of a Leary, W., Torbin, R., Vradis, G., 2004. Robotic pipeline inspection system. In:
snake-like robot. Robotica 32, 659–675. Proceedings - Natural Gas Technologies II: Ingenuity and Innovation.
Duan, Y., Han, Z., Li, G., Tian, H., 2012. Research on key technologies of the cableless Li, P., Ma, S., Lyu, C., Jiang, X., Liu, Y., 2016. Energy-efficient control of a screw-drive
pipeline robot. In: Advanced Materials Research, vols. 591–593, pp. 1221–1224, pipe robot with consideration of actuator’s characteristics. Robot. Biomimetics 3.
2012. Li, T., Ma, S., Li, B., Wang, M., Wang, Y., 2014. Control strategies of energy optimization
Enner, F., Rollinson, D., Choset, H., 2013. Motion estimation of snake robots in straight for an in-pipe robot with inclining-angle-adjustable screw rollers. Journal Mech.
pipes. In: Proceedings - IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Eng. 50, 8–16. Jixie Gongcheng Xuebao.
(2013), pp. 5168–5173. Li, X., Yu, W., Lin, X., Iyengar, S.S., 2012. On optimizing autonomous pipeline
Fei, L.B., Wei, Y.P., Cui, F., 2014. The mechanical design and simulation of marine in- inspection. IEEE Trans. Robot. 28, 223–233.
pipe robot based on metamorphic mechanism. Appl. Mech. Mater. 457 (458), Li, Y., Liu, Q., Li, W., 2015. Development of a novel oil and gas in-pipe robot. Int. J.
433–438. Mechatron. Manuf. Syst. 8, 102–115.
Ferreira Lino, A.C., Flor^encio Filho, D., Borja Pereira, F., Silv�erio Da Silva, J., Dias Liang, L., Hu, G.-Y., Zhu, Z.-M., Tang, Y., Chen, B., Xu, Y., 2013. Dynamics modeling and
Amado, U., 2006. In search of the lost pig. Pipeline Gas J. 233 (8). numerical simulation of inner and outer spiral in-pipe robots. J. Syst. Simul. 25,
Fortuni�c, E.P., Becker, F., Zimmermann, K., Cuellar, F., 2017. Bristle-bots in Swarm 2546–2551. Xi Tong Fang Zhen Xue Bao.
Robotics -Approaches on Agent Development and Locomotion. Institute of Electrical Liang, L., Hu, G., Tang, Y., Chen, B., Chen, S., 2015. Operational numerical simulation of
and Electronics Engineers Inc., pp. 1424–1429 a four-spiral in-pipe robot. Simulation 91(3), 207–216.
Fukuda, T., Hosokai, H., Otsuka, M., 1987. Autonomous pipeline inspection and Liang, L., Peng, H., Chen, B., Tang, Y., Chen, S., Xu, Y., 2014. Performance analysis and
maintenance robot with inch worm mobile mechanism. In: Proceedings. 1987 IEEE parameter optimization of an inner spiral in-pipe robot. Robotica 72.
International Conference on Robotics and Automation, pp. 539–544. Liang, L., Zhu, Z., Hu, G., Tang, Y., Chen, B., Xu, Y., 2013. Performance analysis and
Fung, G., Backhaus, W.P., McDaniel, S., Erdogmus, M., 2006. To pig or not to pig: the structural parameter optimization of inner and outer spiral in-pipe robots. China
Marlin experience with stuck pig. In: Offshore Technology Conference 2006: New Mech. Eng. 24, 2710–2716. Zhongguo Jixie Gongcheng.
Depths, 3. New Horizons, pp. 2009–2015. New Horizons. Liu, L., Li, J., Li, W., Qin, J., 2014a. Design and experiment of a micro in-pipe robot based
Ghavamian, A., Mustapha, F., Baharudin, B.T.H.T., Yidris, N., 2018. Detection, on the resonance. J. Harbin Eng. Univ. 35, 1002–1007. Harbin Gongcheng Daxue
localisation and assessment of defects in pipes using guided wave techniques: a Xuebao.
review. Sensors 18 (12), 2018. Liu, Q., Chen, Y., Ren, T., Wei, Y., 2014b. Optimized inchworm motion planning for a
Gravalos, I., Loutridis, S., Gialamas, T., Kateris, D., Xyradakis, P., Tsiropoulos, Z., 2017. novel in-pipe robot. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part C J. Mech. Eng. Sci. 228, 1248–1258.
Dynamic behaviour of an in-pipe sensor-based platform for soil water monitoring. Liu, Q., Li, Y., Ren, T., Chen, Y., 2014c. An active helical drive in-pipe robot. Jiqiren/
Comput. Electron. Agric. 134, 11–18. Robot 36, 711–718.
Han, S.C., An, J., Moon, H., 2013. A remotely controlled out-pipe climbing robot. In: Liu, Z., Kleiner, Y., 2013. State of the art review of inspection technologies for condition
2013 10th International Conference on Ubiquitous Robots and Ambient Intelligence. assessment of water pipes. Meas. J. Int. Meas. Confed. 46, 1–15.
URAI, p. 126, 2013. Luo, J., Zhang, D., Wei, Z., Liu, S., 2017. Analysis on kinematics and mechanics
Hirose, S., H. Ohno, T. Mitsui and K. Suyama, 1999. Design of in-pipe inspection vehicles characteristics of a new type of pipeline robot. J. Shenyang Jianzhu Univ. (Natural
for /spl phi/25, /spl phi/50, /spl phi/150 pipes. Proceedings 1999 IEEE Sci). 33, 337–346. Shenyang Jianzhu Daxue Xuebao (Ziran Kexue Ban).
International Conference on Robotics and Automation 3, 2309–2314. Malvezzi, F., Orsino, R.M.M., Coelho, T.A.H., 2018. Lagrange’s, Maggi’s and Kane’s
Hong, Z., Yang, W., 2011. Development of an adaptive vehicle for in-pipe inspection equations applied to the dynamic modelling of serial manipulator. Lect. Notes Mech.
task. In: ICPTT 2011: Sustainable Solutions for Water, Sewer, Gas, and Oil Pipelines - Eng. Part F6 291–304.
Proceedings of the International Conference on Pipelines and Trenchless Technology Martínez-García, E.A., Torres C� ordoba, R., Martínez-Villafa~
ne, A., Floriano Gabald�
on, L.,
2011. 2014. Directional fields algebraic non-linear solution equations for mobile robot
Hopkins, J.K., Gupta, S.K., 2014. Design and modeling of a new drive system and planning. Appl. Math. Model. 38, 5298–5314.
exaggerated rectilinear-gait for a snake-inspired robot. J. Mech. Robot. 6, Mills, G.H., Jackson, A.E., Richardson, R.C., 2017. Advances in the inspection of
21001–21008. unpiggable pipelines. Robotics 6 (4).
Hu, Z., Appleton, E., 2005. Dynamic characteristics of a novel self-drive pipeline pig. Minder, J., 2018. Robotic ILI of Robotic in-line inspection of unpiggable buried pipelines.
IEEE Trans. Robot. 21, 781–789. In: Pipeline Pigging and Integrity Management Conference, PPIM 2018 - Papers.
Imajo, N., Takada, Y., Kashinoki, M., 2015. Development and evaluation of compact Clarion Technical Conferences.
robot imitating a hermit crab for inspecting the outer surface of pipes. J. Robot. Mirats Tur, J.M., Garthwaite, W., 2010. Robotic devices for water main in-pipe
2015. inspection: a survey. J. Field Robot. 27, 491–508.
Ismail, I.N., Anuar, A., Sahari, K.S.M., Baharuddin, M.Z., Fairuz, M., Jalal, A., Saad, J.M., Mirshamsi, M., Rafeeyan, M., 2015. Dynamic analysis of pig through two and three
2012. Development of in-pipe inspection robot: a review. In: 2012 IEEE Conf. dimensional gas pipeline. J. Appl. Fluid Mech. 8, 43–54.
Sustain. Util. Dev. Eng. Technol. STUDENT 2012 - Conf. Bookl, pp. 310–315. Nagase, J.-Y., Fukunaga, F., Ishida, K., Saga, N., 2018. Steering system of cylindrical
Jatsun, S., Loktionova, O., Malchikov, A., 2014. Six-link in-pipe crawling robot. In: elastic crawler robot. IEEJ J. Ind. Appl. 7(5), 441–442.
Mechanisms and Machine Science, pp. 341–348. Nagaya, K., Yoshino, T., Katayama, M., Murakami, I., Ando, Y., 2012. Wireless piping
Jatsun, S.F., Malchikov, A.V., 2014. Mobile Worm-like Robots for Pipe Inspection, inspection vehicle using magnetic adsorption force. IEEE/ASME Trans.
Handbook of Research on Advancements in Robotics and Mechatronics. Mechatronics. 17 (3), 472–479.
Jiang, S., Jiang, X., Zhang, X., Lid, J., 2009. Design and research on the mechanical Nayak, A., Pradhan, S.K., 2014. Design of a new in-pipe inspection robot. In: Procedia
adaptive in-pipe robot drive unit. Appl. Mech. Mater. 965–970. Engineering.
Jiang, S.Y., Jiang, X., Lu, J., Li, J., Lv, X., 2008. Research on a tri-axial differential-drive Nguyen, T.T., Kim, D.K., Rho, Y.W., Kim, S.B., 2001. Dynamic Modeling and its Analysis
in-pipe robot. Lect. Notes Comput. Sci. (including Subser. Lect. Notes Artif. Intell. for PIG Flow through Curved Section in Natural Gas Pipeline. Institute of Electrical
Lect. Notes Bioinformatics) 5314 LNAI 1031–1040. and Electronics Engineers Inc., pp. 492–497
Jiang, T., Luo, Z.R., Shang, J.Z., 2014. A spiral actuated Micro In-Pipe Robot for pipes Neubauer, W., 1994. A spider-like robot that climbs vertically in ducts or pipes. In:
diameter 15mm. In: Advanced Materials Research, vol.871, pp. 315–322, 2014. Proceedings of IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems
Jin, Tao, Que, P., Too, Z., 2004. Development of magnetic flux leakage pipe inspection (IROS’94), 2, pp. 1178–1185.
robot using hall sensors. In: Proceedings of the 2004 International Symposium on Nguyen, T.T., Kim, S.B., 2001. Modeling and simulation for pig flow control in natural
Micro-NanoMechatronics and Human Science, MHS2004; the Fourth Symposium gas pipeline, 15, 1165–1173.
“Micro-NanoMechatronics for and Information-Based Society” the 21st Century. Niewels, J., Jorden, W., 1994. Systematical Development of an Autonomous HPF Driven
Kakogawa, A., Ma, S., 2012. Stiffness design of springs for a screw drive in-pipe robot to and Controlled Inspection Robot. Publ by Int Soc of Offshore and Polar Engineerns
pass through curved pipes and vertical straight pipes. Adv. Robot. 26, 253–276. (ISOPE), Golden, CO, United States, pp. 324–329.
Karkoub, M., Gharib, M., Ghorbel, F.H., Ben Moallem, I., 2017. Design and fabrication of O’Donoghue, A., 2003. Why pigs get stuck, and how to avoid it. Pipes Pipelines Int. 48
a novel autonomous pipeline scanning robot. In: ASME International Mechanical (2), 5–16, 2003.
Engineering Congress and Exposition, Proceedings (IMECE).

21
M.Z. Ab Rashid et al. Ocean Engineering 203 (2020) 107206

Okada, T., Kanade, T., 1987. A three-wheeled self-adjusting vehicle in a pipe, FERRET-1. Tian, X., Liu, Y., Lin, R., Cai, B., Liu, Z., Zhang, R., 2013. Finite element analysis based
Int. J. Robot Res. 6, 60–75. design of mobile robot for removing plug oil well. J. Comput. 8, 1504–1511.
Orsino, R.M.M., 2016. A Contribution on Modeling Methodologies for Multibody Tian, Y., Zhang, Q., 2016. Design and Stability Analysis of the No Power and Self-
Systems. PHD Thesis. Escola Polit�ecnica, University of S~ ao Paulo, Sao Paolo. Propelled Spraying Robot Used in the Pipe Wall. Institute of Electrical and
Osman, K., Kova�ci�c, Z., 2017. Development of structure and behavioral model for screw Electronics Engineers Inc., pp. 6–9
driving in-pipe inspection robot based on adaptive mechanism on legs. In: Tourajizadeh, H., Rezaei, M., Sedigh, A.H., 2018. Optimal control of screw in-pipe
Proceedings of the 8th ECCOMAS Thematic Conference on MULTIBODY DYNAMICS inspection robot with controllable pitch rate. J. Intell. Robot. Syst. Theory Appl. 90,
2017. MBD, pp. 617–626, 2017. 269–286.
Park, S., Jeong, H.D., Lim, Z.S., 2002. Development of mobile robot systems for Tur, J.M.M., Garthwaite, W., 2010. Robotic devices for water main in-pipe inspection: a
automatic diagnosis of boiler tubes in fossil power plants and large size pipelines. In: survey. J. Field Robot. 27 (4), 491–508.
IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems. Wang, W., Wang, K., Zhang, H., 2009. Crawling gait realization of the mini-modular
Pradhan, S.K., Nayak, A., Mohan, S., 2017. Prediction of torque variations in a pipe climbing caterpillar robot. Prog. Nat. Sci. 19, 1821–1829.
inspection robot through computational fluid dynamics. In: ACM International Wei, M.-S., Tong, M.-M., Zi, B., Xia, J., Lu, Y., 2012. Adaptive localization method based
Conference Proceeding Series, pp. 95–100. on wireless magnet sensors for pipeline robots. Optics Precis. Eng. 20, 772–781.
Qi, W., Kamegawa, T., Gofuku, A., 2018. Helical wave propagation motion for a snake Guangxue Jingmi Gongcheng.
robot on a vertical pipe containing a branch. Artif. Life Robot. 23 (4), 515–522, Wu, Y., Chatzigeorgiou, D., Youcef-Toumi, K., Zribi, M., 2015. Modeling and Parameter
2018. Estimation for In-Pipe Swimming Robots. Institute of Electrical and Electronics
Qi, W., Kamegawa, T., Gofuku, A., 2017. Proposal of Helical Wave Propagate Motion for Engineers Inc., pp. 2007–2013
a Snake Robot to across a Branch on a Pipe. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Yamamoto, T., Konyo, M., Tadakuma, K., Tadokoro, S., 2018. High-speed sliding-
Engineers Inc., pp. 821–826 inchworm motion mechanism with expansion-type pneumatic hollow-shaft actuators
Qian, J., Zhang, Y., Cheng, W., Shen, L., Su, J., Yang, J., Li, J., 2000. Development of for in-pipe inspections. Mechatronics 56, 101–114.
Robotic Inspection System for Small Pipelines. American Society of Mechanical Yamamoto, T., Konyo, M., Tadokoro, S., 2015. A high-speed locomotion mechanism
Engineers (ASME), pp. 861–865. using pneumatic hollow-shaft actuators for in-pipe robots. In: IEEE International
Qiao, J.W., Shang, J.Z., 2012. Research on pipeline elbow passing for in-pipe robot. Proc. Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, pp. 4724–4730.
Inst. Mech. Eng. Part C J. Mech. Eng. Sci. 226, 1382–1394. Yan, H.W., Peng, F.X., Wang, Y., Yuan, F., Li, Y.J., Ma, J.Q., 2018. Analysis of the motion
Qingyou, L., Tao, R., Chen, Y., 2013. Characteristic analysis of a novel in-pipe driving mechanism of actively spirally driven pipe robot. In: Proceedings of 2018 3rd Asia-
robot. Mechatronics 23, 419–428. Pacific Conference on Intelligent Robot Systems, ACIRS 2018. Institute of Electrical
Roh, S.-G., Kim, D.W., Lee, J.-S., Moon, H., Choi, H.R., 2009. In-pipe robot based on and Electronics Engineers Inc., pp. 40–44
selective drive mechanism. Int. J. Contr. Autom. Syst. 7, 105–112. You, P., Wu, Z., Xie, T., You, F., Wang, W., Zhong, L., Xiao, X., 2015. Crawling Motion
Roslin, N.S., Anuar, A., Jalal, M.F.A., Sahari, K.S.M., 2012. A review: hybrid locomotion Planning of Robots in the Multi-Rows Pipeline Structured Environment, Lecture
of in-pipe inspection robot. Procedia Eng 41, 1456–1462. Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial
Sanemori, T., Okada, T., 1985. Vehicles in pipe for monitoring inside of pipe, MOGRER. Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics).
In: PROC. 15TH INT. SYMP. Ind. Robot. (TOKYO, JAPAN SEP. 11-13, 1985) 1, Yuan, J., Wu, X., Kang, Y., Huang, C., 2009. Development of an inspection robot for long-
Tokyo. distance transmission pipeline on-site overhaul. Ind. Robot 36, 546–550.
Sarvestani, A.A., Eghtesad, M., Fazlollahi, F., Goshtasbi, A., Mokhtari, K., 2016. Dynamic Zagler, A., Pfeiffer, F., 2003. “MORITZ” a pipe crawler for tube junctions. Proc. - IEEE Int.
modeling of an out-pipe inspection robot and experimental validation of the Conf. Robot. Autom. 3, 2954–2959.
proposed model using image processing technique. Iran. J. Sci. Technol. - Trans. Zhang, L., Wang, X., 2016. Stable motion analysis and verification of a radial adjustable
Mech. Eng. 40, 77–85. pipeline robot. In: 2016 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics.
Sattarov, R.R., Almaev, M.A., 2017. Electromagnetic Worm-like Locomotion System for ROBIO, pp. 1023–1028, 2016.
In-Pipe Robots: Design and Vibration-Driven Motion Analysis. Institute of Electrical Zhang, Y., Feng, W., Nian, S., Sun, H., 2013. Traction force and flexible shaft stability
and Electronics Engineers Inc., pp. 1–6 analysis of flexible squirming pipe robot. Jiqiren/Robot 35, 477–483.
Shao, L., Wang, Y., Guo, B., Chen, X., 2015. A review over state of the art of in-pipe robot. Zhang, Y., Yan, G., 2007. In-pipe inspection robot with active pipe-diameter adaptability
In: 2015 IEEE Int. Conf. Mechatronics Autom. ICMA 2015, pp. 2180–2185. and automatic tractive force adjusting. Mech. Mach. Theor. 42, 1618–1631.
Shi, Y.-J., Tang, D.-W., 2012. Adaptive control characteristics of pipeline inspection Zhang, Z., Meng, G., Sun, P., 2017. Kinematic Modeling and Simulation of Wheeled Pipe
traction device. J. China Univ. Pet. (Edition Nat. Sci). 36, 158–162. Zhongguo Robot in Elbow at Planar Motion Stage. Institute of Electrical and Electronics
Shiyou Daxue Xuebao (Ziran Kexue Ban). Engineers Inc., pp. 227–233
Shukla, A., Karki, H., 2016. Application of robotics in onshore oil and gas industry-A Zheng, J., Liu, M., Dou, Y.-H., Zhu, L.-T., 2018a. Structure Design of Spiral Driven
review Part i. Robot. Autonom. Syst. 75, 490–507. Adaptive Pipeline Robot under Complex Conditions. Institute of Electrical and
Sibai, F.N., Sayegh, A., Al-Taie, I., 2012. Design and construction of an in-pipe robot for Electronics Engineers Inc., pp. 1838–1841
inspection and maintenance. In: 2012 International Conference on Computer Zheng, J., Liu, M., Jiang, H.-L., Dou, Y.-H., 2018b. Design of a self-adaptive pipe robot
Systems and Industrial Informatics, ICCSII 2012. based on multi - Axis differential system. In: Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE 2nd
Singh, P., Ananthasuresh, G.K., 2013. A compact and compliant external pipe-crawling Information Technology, Networking, Electronic and Automation Control
robot. IEEE Trans. Robot. 29 (1), 251–260. Conference, ITNEC 2017, pp. 1461–1471.
Tang, Y., Wu, T., Yuan, G., Lu, S., Yang, Z., 2017. 3D Omni-directional vision sensor for Zhu, X., Zhang, S., Li, X., Wang, D., Yu, D., 2015. Numerical simulation of contact force
morphology defects detection in pipelines. Chinese J. Sci. Instrum. 38, 726–733. Yi on bi-directional pig in gas pipeline: at the early stage of pigging. J. Nat. Gas Sci.
Qi Yi Biao Xue Bao. Eng. 23, 127–138.
Terenzi, A., 2012. Study improves estimation of damage from stuck pigs, hydrates. Oil
Gas J. 110 (7), 110–117.

22