Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE

International Conference on Mechatronics and Automation

August 9 - 12, Changchun, China

A Biologically Inspired Miniature Biped Climbing Robot

Chuanwu Cai, Haifei Zhu, Li Jiang, Yisheng Guan*, Xianmin Zhang and Hong Zhang O
Biomimetic and Intelligent Robotics Lab (BIRL)
School of Mechanical and Automotive Engineering
South China University of Technology
Guangzhou, Guangdong, China, 510640
{ysguan, zhangxm} @scut.edu.cn
Abstract- Inspired by the motion patterns of inchworms, a
miniature biped climbing robot is developed with modularization
method for some tedious and dangerous high-rise tasks. This
inchworm-like mini-robot consists of several modules including 1typed joint modules, T-typed joint modules, and gripper modules,
which are all driven by small RC servo motors. In this paper, the
development of the robot prototype with biomimetic and modular
methods is presented, and two feasible gaits of the mini-robot
are proposed for climbing poles, trees and trusses. The climbing
ability of such biped robot is verified through simple experiments.
It is shown that the locomotion function of some biped climbing
animals such as inchworms can be easily implemented by simple
mechatronic systems.
I. INTRODUCTION

High-rise work are often carried out in many fields such as

industries, agriculture, forestry and architecture. Typical highaltitude tasks in agriculture and forestry include picking fruits,
trimming or cutting branches; those on poles or in trusses
include setting up and maintaining high-voltage wires on high
towers, inspecting, painting or coating structure of metal-based
TV and communication towers, airports, bridges and other
huge truss architectures (for example, the main gymnasium
of Beijing Olympic Game 2008, "The Bird Nest"), changing
street lamps on poles, assembling and disassembling frames
for building construction. It is significant and urgent to develop
climbing robots to release human being from those tedious and
dangerous tasks.
A few robotic systems have recently been developed to
climb tree trunks. A prototype called WOODY-l has been
made by Waseda University [10], [14]. The system consists
of two ring-shaped parts (for embracing trunks) connected by
two guides and driven by ball screws. A pruning robot has also
been built [9], inspired by timber-jacks for assistance to human climbing. Based on Stewart-Gough's platform, climbing
parallel robots (CPRs) have been developed to climb tubular
or metallic structures [1]. They consists of two rings that are
joined by six linear actuators through universal and spherical
joints at each end. A project called RiSE (Robots in Scansorial
Environments) is being undertaken by serval universities in
USA [2], [13]. With six legs and one tail, the prototype can
climb trees and walls like a cockroach.
* Corresponding author. The work in this paper is supported in part by
the Boshidian Fundation of the Ministry of Education (No. x2jqC7080300).
o Also with the Department of Computing Science, University of Alberta,
Edmonton, AB, Canada, T6G 2Hl, zhang@cs.ualberta.ca.

978-1-4244-2693-5/09/$25.00 2009 IEEE

2653

Robotic technique is also being investigated for truss and

construction work [4]. The systems that have been or being
developed include UT-PCR [3], which can climb poles, and
HyDRAS-Ascent, a hyper-redundant robot able to climb poles
by wrapping them tightly like a snake. A similar system is
reported in [15]. The robotic system Shady3D capable of
climbing along truss links with rectangular sections has been
recently built in MIT [19]. A spider-like robotic prototype
named ASTERISK has been designed by Osaka University to
climb ladders [5]. Though robots capable of climbing trusses
have risen great interest recently, their earliest inspiration and
first potential application may be traced back to space robot
developed many years ago [17].
Though the aforementioned systems are able to climb one
kind of object (trees, poles or trusses), their locomotion ability
is to be improved in the following two aspects: 1) the ability to
climb multiple objects including trees, poles and trusses, and
2) the capability of transmitting between different objects to
climb (for instance, from tree trunk to branches, from one truss
link to another). Moreover, manipulating function is necessary
to be imposed to these system so that they can perform highrise tasks. The function of manipulation has been imposed to
some quadruped walking robots [12], but not yet to climbing
robots.
Aiming at potential applications of robots in agriculture,
forestry and building construction, we are developing novel
robots with both manipulation and climbing functions. The
design of our climbing robots is inspired by observation of
climbing locomotion of animals such as inchworms, chimpanzees/monkeys, and slothes, which can be regarded as
biped climbing. Designed using modularization method, the
climbing robots are built with a few joint modules for the
main body and a couple of grippers at the two ends.
In this paper, a miniature biped climbing robot driven by RC
servo motors is presented. The development of the prototype
with biomimetic and modular methods is first introduced,
the kinematic issue for climbing tasks is discussed, and two
climbing gaits are proposed. The locomotion of such biped
climbing robot is primarily verified through experiments. It
is shown that the motion function of some biped climbing
animals such as inchworms can be easily implemented by
simple mechatronic systems. A prototype of conventional size
and driven by DC servo motors is also being developed [6].

Systems

Biological

Mechatronic

Head/Tail

A set of small feet

Grippers or suckers

Main body

Soft body with many DoFs

A few rotary joints

Functions

Climbing

Climbing & Manipulating

TABLE I
COMPARISO N BETWEE N BIOLOGICAL AND MECHATRO NIC SYSTEMS

B. Modularization Method

Fig. I.

Modularization method has been widely used in development of robotic systems, especially with snake-like robots [7],
[11], caterpillar robots [16] and reconfigurable robots [8], [18],
[20]. Modularization is considered to be a good methodology
with the following benefits :

An inchworm and its mechanical model

II.

DESIGN METHODS

We design the climbing robots with biomimetic method and

modularized method, rather than with the traditional design
method . The system built in this way may mimic animal
locomotion functionality, and its configuration can be changed
flexibly and conveniently if needed.

A. Biomimetics Method
Biomimetics is a rich source for developing new robotic
systems . Many biologically inspired robots have been spawn
in the past decades, among which are snake-like robots ,
robotic fishes, four-legged robots, spider-like or cockroachlike (six-legged) robots, humanoid (biped) robots, and minirobots mimicking flying insects. These robots are imposed
with locomotion functions of animals, with high mobility of
creeping, crawling, swimming, walking, or flying.
To develop robots for climbing trees, poles, and trusses ,
we observe the climbing patterns of some animals like inchworms . At the head and tail ends of an inchworm are two
arrays of small and short feet that can stick or suck to the
objects to support the whole body of the inchworm (see
Fig.1). It is difficult to implement such tiny foot arrays in
a miniature mechatronic system . Fortunately, the function of
the foot arrays may be realized in a practical system with a
gripper, a sucker or a set of smaller suckers. Since suckers are
only suitable for smooth surfaces and need extra equipments
(vacuum generators), grippers are good choice for a robot
to climb trees, poles and trusses. Moreover, grippers may
impose grasp/manipulation ability to the robot in addition
to climbing function. The soft body in the middle of an
inchworm, equivalent to a number of joints in series with small
rotation range, enables the head or tail to a target position in
an appropriate orientation for the climbing (along a straight
line or transmit between different branches). In a practical
mechatronic system, this part may be implemented with a few
rotary joints connected in serial mode.
The mechanical model of an inchworm is shown in Fig.1,
and a basic comparison between its biological and mechatronic
systems is listed in Table I.
2654

Versatility: By connecting a few identical or similar modules in various configurations, new robotic systems can
be built quickly, or new functionalities can be enabled.
Thus they are able to fit different tasks or environments.
Reconfigurability: The configuration (mechanical structure) of a modular robot may be modified from one type
to another by changing the connection or combination of
modules automatically or manually;
Scalability: The degrees of freedom (DoFs) of a robot
can be increased or decreased by simply adding joint
modules to or removing joint modules from the system ;
Low-costs: The modules are usually identical and may be
mass produced. The costs of design, manufacture, assembly and maintenance of systems consisting of modules
are much less than those of conventional systems with
the same function;
Fault-tolerance and Self-repair: If a module is detected
to be malfunctioned, it may be detached automatically by
the system and other normal modules are re-connected
so that the system can continue work . A joint may be
replaced by another one in trivial actions of disconnection
and connection of them.
With modularization design, a system is composed of a
number of identical or different modules, which are independent and complete units and can be easily connected or
disconnected with one another. Modularization is especially
beneficial to development of a new system whose configuration is not finally determined and to be changed for different
needs. We adopt this method in the development of our
climbing robot, since the degrees of freedom or kinematic
chain (configuration of joint arrangement) of the robot may
be changed in the test of the system.
As can be seen from the kinematic model of the robot shown
in Fig.1(b), three basic types of modules may be built, one for
the grippers (suckers are not suitable for climbing trees, poles
and trusses, and hence not used here), and two for the joints,
which are called T-type and l-type. The revolute axis of the Ttyped joint is perpendicular to the link axes; and the rotational
axis of the l-typed joint is collinear with the link axes.

III. KIN EMATIC ANALYSIS

In the development of a robot, it is a basic issue to determine
the DoFs and kinematic chain. For a biped climbing robot,
the following two points are desired: 1) the robot has less but
sufficient DoFs for its specific tasks ; 2) the two ends of the
robot is symmetric for simplicity and convenience of control.
In climbing procedure, while the robot is supported by one
fixed gripper, it moves another end (with another gripper) to a
target position in appropriate orientation, which is similar to a
manipulator. It is well-known that at least six DoFs are needed
for arbitrary configuration (position and orientation) of an endeffector in the workspace. However, less DoFs are sufficient
for some specific tasks, as with a welding robot having only
five DoFs . For a biped robot to climb trees, poles and trusses
constructed by cylindrical links, the kinematic chain G 1 < L, T 1- To - T 2 - h - G 2 is a good choice, where G 1 and G 2 are
gripper modules, It and h are I-typed joint modules, To, T 1
and T 2 are T-typed joint modules. This kinematic chain has
only five DoFs and is symmetric with two same ends. A robot
with this kinematic chain may transmit between two cylindric
objects to climb, as described by the following proposition.

= [ex e y ez ]T , from (2) and (3), the joint angles

, (}s can be solved for as

= arctan(py /px) , or (}l = (}l + Jr;

= aretan{ - sz/ (cl e x + sl ey)}, or (}234 = (}234 + Jr;
2) - I}, or (}3 = - (}3;
(}3 = arccos{(>.2 + p2)/(2l
(}2 = arctan{((c3 + 1)>' - S3P) /((C3 + l)p + S3>')} ;
(}4 = (}234 - (}2 - (}3 ;
(}s = arc sin( - Sl ex + cl ey), or (}s = (}s + zr,
(}234

where the axes of T-typed joints T 1 , To and T 2 are

parallel, and perpendicular to those of I-type joints.

where

To prove the proposition, it is sufficient to show that, for

a transmittance state, the inverse kinematics of the robot
has feasible solutions. Refer to Fig. 2, the configuration of
coordinate frame XsYsZs with respect to frame XoYoZ o can
be obtained by forward kinematics with D-H parameters as
(2)

is the transformation matrix for

is the configuration of the end-

= si n (}i , Ci = COS(}i,
= sin((}l + (}2 + (}3) , C234 = COS((}l + (}2 + (}3),
>. = pz + C234 l', P = CI Px + SlPy - S234l' ,
Px = x o + kex , Py = Yo + key, pz = Zo + k e. ,
Si

S234

For a feasible target configuration, if the solved (}l rv (}s are

within the corresponding joint limits, the swinging gripper of
the robot may reach the desired position and orientation, and
so the robot may transmit between these two cylindric links.
IV. DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROTOTYPE

O ii
0 0

P]
1

'

(3)

where P is the position vector of the gripping center, fi is the

unit vector perpendicular to the plane II in which the two
fingers move relatively.
To grasp a cylindric link (with circular section) for climbing,
two conditions must be satisfied: 1) the gripper can reach to
the desired position , 2) the gripper plane II is perpendicular
to the cylindric object. Let e = [ex ey ezV be the known
direction vector of the cylindric link to climb, then the target
position of the gripper can be defined as

P- = [Px,Py,Pz]T

Let ii =

(it , (h ,...

The kinematic model of a climbing robot

(}l

Proposition: A biped climbing robot with the following kinematic chain is able to transmit between
two cylindrical objects in arbitrary orientations.

where A i (i = 1,2, ' " , 5)

two adjacent frames, and T
gripper,
fi
T = [ 0

Fig. 2.

= [x o+ kex, yo+ key, zo+ ke z] T ,

(4)

where Po = [x o, Yo , ZO ]T is a known point on the centerline

of the link to be grasped, k is a scale.
2655

A. The Mechanical System

As stated before, our climbing robots are composed of a
number of modules. Three types of modules are designed,
namely the T-typed joint module, the I-typed joint module
and the gripper module, denoted by T , I and G, respectively.
The rotational axis of the T-typed module is perpendicular to
joint link and that of the I-typed module is collinear with the
link axis. In the miniature prototype , all modules are driven by
RC servo motors, MG946R with torque of 14 x 10- 3 Nm. The
frames of modules are made of stainless sheets. The structure
of the three modules are shown in Fig.3, and the specification
(sizes and weights) of them is listed in Table II.
The modules can be connected with one another in serial
modes using screw bolts. Many combinations are possible, for
example, T-T, T-I, T-G, I-I and I-G are possible connecting

1-4

(a) T-typed joint

1- 5

(c) Gripper

(b) I-typed joint

Fig. 3. Three modules (T-I ,T-4: Fixed brackets; T-2 : Rotational bracket; T-3:
Rotating plate of RC servo; T-5: RC servo motor; I-I : Fixed bracket; 1-2:
Assisting plate; 1-3: Rotational bracket; 1-4: Rotating plate of RC servo motor;
1-5. RC servo motor; G-I : RC servo motor; G-2, G-3: Fixed brackets; G-4:
Passive block; G-5: Rotational bracket; G-6: Rotating link of the RC motor)
Fig. 5.
I -typed module

The CAD model of a mini-robot with six OoFs

T-typt'd module

(b) I-T connection

(a) I-I connection

Fig. 6.

(c) T-T Parallel connection

Fig. 4.

(d) T-T Vertical connection

The possible connection between two joint modules

modes. Four feasible modes of connection between two joint

modules are shown in FigA.
Module type

T-typed Joint

Size (LxWxH, mm)

62x51x23

Mass (g)

90
TABLE II
SP ECIFI CATIO N OF TH E MODU LES

Fig.5 shows the CAD model of a min-robot with six DoFs

consisting of two gripper modules, two I-typed joint modules,
and four T-typed joint modules with rotational axes parallel.
The four T-typed joints are actually redundant, but they can
increase the dexterity of the robot.
B. The Control System

The control system is designed under the consideration

of low-cost, good man-machine interface and convenience of
2656

The architecture of the control system

extension. The control system uses two 8-bit microprocessors.

Fig.6 reveals the architecture of the controller. As shown in the
figure, the control system is in a parent-children architecture.
The controlling program can be downloaded into the controller
from the PC through ISP (In-System Programming) . While the
slave controller is responsible for sending the PWM signals to
the RC servos and receiving the motion commands, the host
controller is intent on displaying the state of the robot (such
as the gait number, the velocity, and so on.) and receiving
the orders from the operator and they can intercommunicate
through the serial port protocol. The working state will thus
be displayed in real-time . When being off-line, the motion
modes of the robot can be changed through the keyboard
easily. Furthermore, the control system is extending when
more modules are assembled .
Before the robot climbs, the motion data of every joint
are calculated based on the kinematics model of the robot.
As shown in the preceding section, a 5-DoF robot with the
kinmetic chain of (I) has specific solutions of the joint angles.
But for the model in Fig.5 with redundant T-typed joints, there
are infinite number of joint angles for these T-typed joints. The
selection of joint angle may be based on symmetry of these
joints. For climbing straight links, much simpler robot may
be constructed with less modules, and its joint angles may
be obtained trivially for the control , as will be seen in the
following experiment.

12
TI

h
"-

Tz

GI

'"
TI

II
"-

GI

TI

GI

II

TI

GJ

To (

TZ

'"
[Z

T[

t____ 3_~~

To

IZ

GZ

Tz

lz

GZ

TZ

'"
'"

Iz

G[

Ir

TI

'"'"

GZ

TI

'"'"
Ir

GI

To )

Gz

Tz

(a)

Gz

To )

'"
TO

'"'"

(b)

(e)

(d)

'"
I;"
(a)

Fig. 7.

. _. _. _. _. _ . _ ._. _. _. _.

Gz

(e)

(b)

(d)

Inchworm mode
Fig. 8.

Turning-over mode

V. CLIMB ING GA ITS

The biped climbing robot works as follows. When one

gripper grasps firmly a link to support the robot (this end is
fixed as the robot base), the other end of the robot moves to
a target position and the associated swinging gripper grasps
firmly at the target position. The former gripper is then
released and moves to a new position. The two grippers
interchange their roles in turn, and thus the robot move along
a pole, in a truss or in a tree.
According to its kinematic structure , the robot may climb
in two modes. For simplicity, we here consider only the case
that the robot climbs a vertical pole where the robot moves
in a free space (no obstacle around the robot to be avoided).
Without loss of generali ty, supposing at the beginning both
grippers grasp the link to support the robot, we propose two
climbing gaits as follows.
A. Inchworm Mode

This gait mimics the motion of an inchworm, as illustrated

in Fig.7. The robot acts in the following steps.
1) Releasing one gripper (say, G 2 ) and supported only by
the other one (denoted as Gd which firmly grasps the
pole, the robot rotates its three T-typed join ts to move the
released gripper (G 2 ) along the pole to a target position
(refer to Fig.7(a) and (b));
2) The gripper G 2 is closed to firmly grasp the pole, and
gripper G} is released (see Fig.7(c));
3) Supported only by the newly fixed gripper G 2 , the robot
rotates its three T-typed joints so that G} moves towards
a new target position on the pole (see Fig.7(d));
4) Gripper G} firmly grasps the pole so that it can support
the robot;
5) Repeats the above steps, thus the robot climbs along the
pole.
In this gait, the I-typed join ts may not do any rotation when
it climbs a straight pole, and the roles (grasping and swinging)
of the two grippers change in turn, but the orders (the front
and the rear) are kept unchanged. The maximum step length of
this gait is Smax = 2l (1- cos "''2 a x ), where l is the link length
2657

between two adjacent T-typed joints, Cl:m a x is the maximum

joi nt angle in the positive or negative direction.
B. Turning -Over Mode

The inchworm gait proposed above is effective for climbing

motion, it is not so efficient with the maximum step length
Sma x less than 2l. With the structure similar to (I), the robot
can realize climbi ng in other mode besides the preceding
inchworm gait. The procedure of this gait is shown in Fig.8,
and stated as follows.
I) Releasing one gripper (denoted as G 2 ) and supported
only by the other one (denoted as G 1) whieh firmly
grasps the pole, the robot rotates its T-typed joints so
that the released gripper moves away from the pole
(Fig.8(b));
2) The robot continues to rotate T-typed joints. As a result,
the whole robot turns over (about the T-typed joint near
the fixed gripper G }, see Fig.8(b) and (c));
3) The robot continues to rotate Ttyped joints to move the
swinging gripper G 2 to the target position for grasping
(Fig.8(d));
4) The gripper G 2 closes to grasp the pole, thus the robot
is supported by both grippers .
5) Repeats the above steps.
In this gait, the T-typed joints playa great role in realization
of climbing function, and the l-typed joints may not do any
rotation if the robot climbs a straight pole. The roles (grasping
and swinging) and orders (the front and the rear) of the two
grippers change in turn. Obviously, this gait is more efficient
than the former one as it is able to produee a step length more
than two times the displacement of inchworm gait.
A restrictio n with RC servo motor driving lies in rotation
limits. The rotatio n range of a RC motor is usually less than
180 0 With this restriction, it is hard for the robot to climb in
other gait such as turning-around mode, in which the robot is
to turn about the axis of the I-typed joint adjacent to the fixed
gripper by rotating this l-typed join t.

have primarily verified the feasibility of the biped climbing

mini-robot design.
We are improving the grippers with high stiffness and
robustness so that the robot can realize more complex climbing
function such as transmission between two links and can fulfill
manipulating tasks. We are also implementing remote control
via wireless joystick. In the near future, autonomous and
intelligent climbing functionality will be imposed to the robot
based on visual sensing gained by two mini-cameras mounted
respectively onto the grippers at the two ends of the robot.
REFERENCES

Fig. 9.

Snapshots of a climbing experiment with the biped mini-robot

VI. EXPERIMENTS
To primarily verify the climbing function of the biped minirobot, we have carried out some simple experiments. A PVC
pipe with diameter of 40 millimeters is employed as the pole
to climb. To climb this straight pole, a simple prototype with
three T-typed joint modules and two gripper module is set
up. It is very important that there are sufficiently big friction
between the grippers and the pole for the robot to grasp the
pole firmly to support itself. Pieces of rubber are fastened to
the V-shaped surfaces of the gripper finger to increase the
necessary friction. Fig.9 shows some snapshots of the robot in
climbing motion.
It is found that the stiffness and robustness of the grippers
play a critical role in successful climbing. With the current
grippers, it is difficult for the robot to perform straight climbing with high speed and to perform more complex climbing
tasks such as transmitting between two links.
VII. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK
For potential applications in new fields including agriculture, forestry and building construction, robots capable of
climbing trees, poles and trussed are needed to perform highrise tasks. We are developing novel robots with both climbing
and manipulating functions. In this paper, a miniature prototype has been presented to kinematically verify this kind of
new and novel robots, inspired by the observation of climbing
patterns of inchworms.
By modularization method, three basic kinds of modules
have been designed, which are T-typed joint module, I-typed
joint module and gripper module, all driven by RC servo
motors. With these modules, a biped climbing robot may be
built easily in appropriate configuration. The basic kinematics
of the robot has been analyzed for climbing requirement, and
two climbing gaits have been proposed . Simple experiments
2658

[I] R. Aracil, R.1. Saltam, and O. Reinoso. A climbing parallel robot. IEEE
Robotics and Automation Magazine, 2006(3):16-22, 2006.
[2] K. Autumn, M. Buehler, and M. Cutkosky, et al. Robotics in scansorial
environments. In Proc. of SPlE, pages 291-302, 2005.
[3] A. Baghani, et al. Kinematics modeling of a wheel-based pole climbing
robot (ut-pcr). In Proc. IEEE Int. Con! on Robotics and Automation,
pages 2111-2116, 2005.
[4] B. Chu, D. Kim, and D. Hong. Robotic automation technologies in
construction: A review. International Journal of Precision Engineering
and Manufacturing, 9(3):85-91, 2008.
[5] S. Fujii, K. Inoue, and T. Takubo, et al. Ladder climbing control for
limb mechanism robot asterisk. In Proc. IEEE Int. Con! on Robotics
and Automation, pages 3052-3057 , 2008.
[6] Y. Guan, L. Jiang, X. Zhang, and J. Qiu. l-dof robotic joint modules
and their applications. In IEEE Int. Con! on Robotics and Biomimetics,
pages 1905-1910,2008.
[7] S. Hirose. Biologically inspired robots (snake-like locomotor and
manipulator. Oxford University Press, 1993.
[8] A. Kamimura and S. Murata, et al. Self-reconfigurable modular robot experiments on reconfiguration and locomotion. In Proc. IEEE/RSJ Int.
Con! on Intelligent Robots and Systems, pages 606-612, 2001.
[9] H. Kawasaki and S. Murakami, et al. Novel climbing method of
pruning robot. In Proc. SICE Annual Conference 2008 (an International
Conference on Instrumentation, Control ad Information Technology),
pages 160-163,2008.
[10] Y. Kushihashi and Y. Koji, et al. Development of tree-climbing and
pruning robot woody-I - simplication of control using adjust function of
grasping power (in japanese) . In Proc. of JSME Conference on Robotics
and Mechatronics , pages IAI - E08, 2006.
[II] S. Ma. Analysis of creeping locomotion of a snake-like robot. Advanced
Robotics, 15(2):205C 224, 2001.
[12] T. Ornata, K. Tsukagoshi, and O. Mori , Whole quadruped manipulation.
In Proc. IEEE Int. Con! on Robotics and Automation, pages 2028-2033,
2002.
[13] M. Spenko, G. Haynes, and J. Saunders, et al. Biologically inspired
climbing with a hexapedal robot. Journal of Field Robotics, 24(45):223-242, 2008.
[14] Y. Suga, et al. Development of tree-climbing and pruning robot woodyI - actuator arrangement on the end of arms for revolving motion (in
japanese). In Proc. of SI2006, pages 1267-1268,2006.
[15] H. Sun, L. Liu, and P. Ma. On the tree-climbing static mechanism of a
snake robot climbing trees. Robot (in Chinese), 30(2):112-116, 2008.
[16] W. Wang, H. Zhang, and J. Zhang, et al. Analysis of the kinematics of
module climbing caterpillar robots. In Proc. IEEE/ASME Int. Con! on
Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics , pages 84-89, 2008.
[17] Y. Xu, H. Brown, S. Aoki, and T. Kanade. Mobility and manipulation
of a light-weight space robot. Journal of Robotics and Autonomous
Systems, 13:1-12, 1994.
[18] M. Yim, D. Duffand, and K. Roufas. Polybot: A modular reconfigurable
robot. In Proc. IEEE Int. Con! on Robotics and Automation , pages 514520,2000.
[19] Y. Yoon and D. Rus. Shady3d: A robot that climbs 3d trusses. In Proc.
IEEE Int. Con! on Robotics and Automation , pages 4071-4076, 2007.
[20] E. Yoshida, et al. Get back in shape! a hardware prototype selfreconfigurable modular microrobot that uses shape memory alloy. IEEE
Robotics and Automation Magazine, 9(4):54-60, 2002.