ENME 408 - ENMT 401 Final Year ProjectsUniversity of CanterburyTe Whare Wananga o WaitahaPrivate Bag 4800Christchurch 8020, New ZealandTelephone: +64-3-366 7001Facsimile: +64-3-364 2078

Development of a Robotic Fish forChemo-Photographic Observations in Coastal Waters

University of CanterburyProject Report

Written by

BEN FORTUNE

MARK RAYNE

BEN MITCHELL

WINSTON POH

Date: November 4, 2016

1 Executive SummaryThis is the final report on the progress of the Fisch Roboter project, sponsored by theUniversity of Canterbury’s Biological Sciences Department. The client requested an un-derwater biomimetic robot, with the likeness of a fish, that can be controlled remotely toobserve marine life and collect water samples. The proposed solution is a user-controlledrobotic fish that resembles a Kahawai, capable of collecting two water samples and oper-ates at depths up to 20 m underwater. A tether connects the robot to the user’s computerfor control, live sensor data and video streaming. This is accomplished by four main sub-systems within the robot: depth control, communications, peripheral (motor and lights)control, and a propulsion system. The final mechanical design of the robot’s body, finsand sealing mechanism have been generated and modeled with Computer Aided Designshown in Figure 1 and the final product is shown in Figure 2.

Figure 1: Exploded robotic fish CAD model.

Camera lens

Pectoral fins

Caudal fins

Waterproof ethernet connector

Figure 2: Final fish product, complete with electronics and tether.

A silicone tail was manufactured using a 3D printed mold, while the head and body ismade through additive manufacturing. The depth control system is a worm drive actuatedsyringe system. An ethernet connection has been confirmed as the only viable commu-nications option. The tail linkage system reproduces the swimming motion of a fish,actuated by a single servomotor. The final costing for this project was $4218.90.

i

Contents

1 Executive Summary i

2 Aim 1

3 Technical Details 13.1 Mechanical Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.2 Communications Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73.3 Electronics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83.4 Technical Detail Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

4 Project Management 10

5 Deliverables 11

6 Future Considerations 116.1 Communications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116.2 Electronics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126.3 Mechanical . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

7 Contribution Statement 13

References 14

Appendices 15

Appendix A Design Requirements 16

Appendix B Finance 17

Appendix C Sealing Designs 18C.1 State of the Art Sealing Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18C.2 Sealing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19C.3 Hatch Designs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21C.4 Caudal Fin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

Appendix D Actuation 24D.1 Buoyancy Control System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24D.2 Water Sampling Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24D.3 Direction Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24D.4 System Propulsion and Stability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

Appendix E Depth Control System Concept Designs 25E.1 Syringe-based Solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25E.2 Bladder-based Solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

Appendix F Depth Control System Modifications and Calculations 27F.1 Buoyancy Calculations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

Appendix G IMU Sensors 30

Appendix H Sampling Systems 31

ii

H.1 Valve Control System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

Appendix I Communications Technology 31I.1 Tether . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31I.2 Acoustics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31I.3 LED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31I.4 Radio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

Appendix J Electronics Systems 33J.1 Onboard Computer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33J.2 Quadrature Decoding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33J.3 Power Supply . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33J.4 Sensors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33J.5 Drivers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34J.6 Software . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

Appendix K Material Testing 35K.1 Tail Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35K.2 Stratasys Connex 350 Material Testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

Appendix L Silicone Tail Manufacture 39

Appendix M Ansys Analysis 43M.1 3D Printed Section . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43M.2 Silicone Section . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

Appendix N Revised Gantt Chart 45

2 Aim

The aim of this project was to produce an underwater vehicle to traverse the coastalwaters of Kaikoura at depths down to 20 m and collect up to two water samples. Itshould also cause minimal disturbance to the native marine life by taking the form of afish with similar size of the species found in the Kaikoura region. These species includethe Kahawai, Spotty, and Butterfish. This is to avoid intimidating the fish from the useof invasive propulsion systems.

3 Technical DetailsThis section outlines the technical achievements in each aspect of the project. It includesmethods used, processes chosen, reasoning’s and calculations.

3.1 Mechanical DesignThere are four main specifications which directly affected the mechanical design pro-cess:

1. The robotic fish’s body shape and characteristics were required to mimic a Kahawaior similar.

2. The maximum length of the fish’s streamline body should not exceed 400 mm.

3. The design was required such that the internal components were easily accessible.

4. The sealing mechanism must withstand pressures at a depth of 20 m, 0.3 MPa.

With these design requirements in mind, an investigation was conducted for various dif-ferent underwater remote controlled vehicles. Past designs like the UC-Ika I and II fromthe University of Canterbury and the Cornell University Underwater Vehicle Team’s de-signs were examined and used for inspiration (further can be found in Appendix C). Theoverall bio-inspired design concept was confirmed with purposeful modifications of:

• The Body and Fin shape,

• Locking Mechanism,

• Sealing,

• Fabrication Techniques: Flexible Tail Material

3.1.1 Body and Fin Shape

Key features are taken from the body shape, fin aspect ratio and overall length of therobot, such measures are taken from the Kahawai shown in Figure 3.

1

400 mm

Figure 3: Kahawai fish. Commonly found around Kaikoura and is the basis for themimetic design.

Key aspects of the fish such as the aspect ratio of the fins were mimicked. The pectoraland caudal fin designs were chosen based on the aspect ratio of the fins for a Kahawaiand an aspect ratio of 5 was chosen (as discussed in Appendix C.4). The analysis of theKahawai resulted in five body shapes and hatch designs which were evaluated using anevaluation matrix (as detailed in Appendix C.2). This resulted in a simple two piece bodystructure shown in Figure 4 which has multiple advantages:

• Small sealing surface. Easy, reliable and robust waterproofing.

• All sealing faces are perpendicular to the compression face, therefore secure.

• Provides a large access area to the internal parts.

3.1.2 Locking Mechanism

Having the body design in two separate pieces meant a locking mechanism was required tojoin the two pieces. Four methods were investigated and evaluated (outlined in AppendixC.2). These methods were a threaded screw, latched system, twist lock and a boltedflange.

The chosen locking mechanism for the robotic fish was the bolted flange method, Figure4, due to its simple but robust design and construction while providing the adequatecompressional sealing needed.

2

Front halfof the Fish

Rear half of theFish

4 mm screw

O-ring seal

Figure 4: Bolted system with recessed flange. The eight evenly spaced bolts provide adistribution of the compressive forces all around the seal.

3.1.3 Sealing

As the body is constructed using two separate parts, a seal was required. Various types ofseals and gaskets were considered. It was determined the most simple and cost effectiveoption was an o-ring. This has the benefit of not requiring a custom product to be made.As the flange which houses the o-ring was designed to use a standard, 97 mm innerdiameter, o-ring which can withstand 50 atm of pressure. This is 16 times larger than the3 atm encountered at 20 m underwater. The sealing mechanism was tested at 3 meterssuccessfully.

3.1.4 Flexible Tail Material

The main requirement for the bio-inspired robotic fish was that the tail must mimic theswimming motion of a Kahawai or similar fish. To do this, it must have a flexible tailsection to allow for this oscillatory motion. Initially the tail was designed to be constructedwith a Stratasys Connex 350 3D printer which is capable of printing flexible materials.The properties of the materials produced from the printer were unknown, as this wasnew technology, therefore research was conducted and documented in Appendix K. Theresearch highlighted that the material was not suitable for this application, as it was toodissipative with too much plasticity for the motor to overcome.

The second option was to go with a 3D printed head and use a mold with Sygine 184silicone to form the tail section. This material is far less dissipative and has far higherelasticity as discovered in the previous prototpye for the UC IKA 2. It is also cheapercompared to the material produced from the Stratasys Connex 350. A three piece moldwas constructed, using a 3D printer, to produce the silicon tail (as detailed in AppendixL).

3

3.1.5 Depth Control Systems

A depth control system was required to change the buoyancy of the fish. Two designspecifications were outlined for the depth control system,

1. The system must be contained inside the robotic fish.

2. The robotic fish must be able to control its buoyancy to swim at different depths,ranging from sea level to 20 m underwater.

Initial concept designs were investigated in Appendix E. The system chosen is an actu-ated syringe, controlling the amount of water within the robotic fish to make the robotpositively, negatively or neutrally buoyant. A worm drive with a motor is used as thesyringe actuator, Figure 5.

Motor

Ball bearingEncoder Disc

Photointerruptors

Syringe

Figure 5: Exploded view of depth control system.

A rotary encoder and pressure sensor are used to provide feedback to the control systemto maintain the desired depth. Due to the limited internal space, the buoyancy system’ssyringe has a small volume of 30 ml. This requires the fish to weigh 2.36 kg for the robotto be slightly positively buoyant when the syringe is empty, and negatively buoyant whenthe syringe is full. The calculations are documented in Appendix F.

3.1.6 Pitch and Yaw Control

The pitch and yaw of the fish are controlled by the pectoral fins. Each fin is attached to aservomotor, and can be controlled individually. The angles of the fins change the amountof drag on each side of the fish to control the yaw when the robotic fish is in motion. Theangle of the fins also contribute to the lift of the fish, changing the pitch.

3.1.7 Sampling System

The robotic fish was required to be capable of taking water samples. The proposedsolution is depicted in Figure 6. The water sampling system is comprised of three parts,the inlet and outlet pipes, water sampling tube, and miniature valves.

4

Flexible tubing tohold water sampleValves

Top inlet

Bottom inlet 30 mm

Figure 6: Sampling system configuration. The two valves default to a closed state to holda water sample and are opened to capture a sample.

Flexible pipes connect the inlet of the valves to the exterior of the fish. These inlets areat the top and bottom of the fish, to utilise the pressure difference for collecting the watersamples. The two valves open simultaneously to allow the pressure gradient to displaceair within the sample tube with the surrounding seawater. Flexible tubes were used tohold water samples, as they are space efficient and can be lined up along the walls ofthe fish tail. This method requires the water samples to be transferred to a separatecontainer once back ashore. This method has advantages of being simple, low cost, andlow on power consumption. Currently, two of these systems are issued within the roboticfish.

3.1.8 Kinematic Analysis and Motion Generation

The propulsion system is based on the UC-Ika 2 design, in particular its tail mechanism[1]. The length of the linkage system was required to be 100 mm, which is far smaller thanthe UC-Ika 2, therefore geometric and kinematic relationships were formed. A simplifiedmodel, using three main rigid links which constrained the motion of the fish, is shown inFigure 7.

φ θ

Figure 7: A simplified model of the fish motion. Using three virtual links to model thesinusoidal motion of the tail relative to the main body.

The actual kinematic relationships between the main body and the tail are determinedby a complex kinematic linkage mechanism, which was invented for the UC-Ika I and II,documented in detail in Sayyed Masoomi’s Thesis [1]. For this project only the estimate

5

length of the linkage system, maximum tail and body deflection and estimate motor torquerequirements were relevant for the design.

The oscillatory motion of the body, φ, due to the propulsion system is required to be min-imised. This is to reduce the oscillatory motion that the camera and sensory equipmentundergoes.

φbody � θtail

Minimising the oscillatory motion of the body has the benefit of being capable of mountingthe sensory equipment further from the midpoint of the body deflection.

The geometric relation of the linkage mechanism was derived from trigonometric prin-ciples, to form a general triangle and solved using closed form vector analysis. Thisproduced an equation for the motion of the tail as a function of the geometry and angulardisplacements.

θtail = f(~θ, ~α)

where ~α represents geometric quantities and ~θ is the angular displacement of the links.The kinematic relations were obtained from the time derivation of the geometric expres-sion. Using this relation, the motion of the body relevant to the motion of the tail wasdetermined.

φbody = f(θtail, θ̇tail, θ̈tail,Mf , Fhydro)

where Mf are the moments applied throughout the body, and Fhydro are the forces appliedat the tail through interaction with water. This analysis was based on first principlessuch as Newton’s second law of motion, Euler’s and closed form vector analysis. Theseprinciples were used to form four equations of motion, which allows solving this fourdegree of freedom system. The desired response for the body of the fish, given the tailmotion, is shown in Figure 8.

Figure 8: Tail and body deflection of the robotic fish design. The small deflection is theresulting body motion produced by the tail. This provides good camera stability whileallowing for a wider sweeping tail motion.

6

The linkage system was designed with the Solidworks software package. A full scale proofof concept linkage system was constructed using 3D printed technology. After verifyingthe concept performed as expected, the linkage system was constructed from aluminium(Figure 9).

Servo motor

Caudal fin connector

Kinematic links

Figure 9: Aluminium tail linkage system. The motion applied by a single motor is ampli-fied through the links to generate a much larger sinusoidal motion in the tail.

The tail was built in-house in the mechanical workshop. It involved building severalsmaller links, joined together with silver steel pins through bearings and bushes.

3.2 Communications DesignThe design specification outlines the desire for a real time data link between the shorebound user and the robotic fish. This data link is used to transfer user input, real timedata logging, and a live video feed from the robot’s point of view. The requirements forthe communications link are:

• Maximise data speed for better quality video.

• Reliable communications.

• (Ideally) wireless.

Three concept methods, further detailed and compared in Appendix I, of transferringdata were developed:

1. Tether with data cable.

2. Radio communications.

3. Ultrasonic communications.

Radio waves experience a large signal attenuation in salt water (≈ 1000 dB/m) renderingthis option unfeasible. The ultrasonic communications provides a relatively low maxi-mum data rate of 62.5 kbps which could theoretically carry a compressed video streambut at very low quality and the cost of the product is very high[10]. The final optionremaining is to use a tether connecting from the fish to the user. This does not meet thewireless requirement but developing new wireless communications technology to allow forthis was beyond the scope of this project.

The cable chosen for this project is a Category 5e cable (Cat. 5e) which is typically usedin Ethernet computer networks. This is ideal for this project as it is very cheap, easy toprocure and is easily integrated with common electronics. This type of cable is capable ofcarrying signals up to 100 Mbps over ranges up to 100 m providing excellent data ratesand because the cable is a physical connection, it provides excellent reliability. This high

7

data rate will allow for very good quality video to be sent to the user and allow them toaccurately control the robotic fish in real time.

3.3 ElectronicsThe electronic systems of the fish encompasses the processing units, power supply, sensorsand drivers. These systems need to be contained inside the fish and not rely on anyexternal inputs other than user commands. The design requirements are:

• Small size and weight.

• Can transmit a live video feed.

• Can regulate the power from an internal battery.

• Can operate all actuators and provide sensor data for control systems.

The requirement to transmit a live video feed requires a very particular processor selection.The amount of data being sent is too much for a simple microcontroller and a normalcomputer would be too large to fit in the fish. A Raspberry Pi Model 3 B, shown inFigure 10, provides the best option of having the small size and weight required whilealso having the built-in hardware to capture video, and then stream it using the H.264video codec. This also provides an easy to program computer with access to GeneralPurpose Input/Output (GPIO) pins and an Inter-Integrated Circuit (IIC or I2C) bus forcommunication with sensor and driver devices. The final selection for the electronics isshown in Table 1. A detailed explanation for these parts is in Appendix J.

Table 1: Description of electrical systems chosen to meet requirements of the robotic fish

Processing units Raspberry Pi Model 3 BATMEL ATMega 16U2 (Quadrature decoding)

Power supply 4S lithium-polymer Batteries12V, 5V, and 3.3V regulation

Sensors Pressure sensor (depth)Inertial measurement unit (orientation)Temperature (internal temperature monitoring)Voltage (battery voltage monitoring)

Drivers Pulse width modulation (LEDs, fins and tail actuation)Motor driver (buoyancy)MOSFETs (Valves)

Due to the specific size requirements of the fish, all of these systems had to be integratedinto a custom PCB. The Raspberry Pi provides a 40 pin interfacing header and thesimplest design available was to design the PCB such that it could plug directly ontothe Raspberry Pi. This gave the board dimensions of (85 × 56)mm. The componentsthat needed to be soldered onto the board were the power regulation, IMU, temperaturesensor, voltage sensor, and the drivers. The rest of the space is taken up by headers whichwere used to connect to components distributed around the fish’s body such as the LEDs,servos, motors, and pressure sensor. The final product can be seen in Figure 11.

8

85 mm 56 mm

Figure 10: Raspberry Pi Model 3 B. This runs the control software and handles the livevideo streaming from a Raspberry Pi Camera module. The custom PCB mounts onto the40 pin header and provides this board with power.

85 mm 56 mm

Figure 11: Custom PCB developed to control the robotic fish. Contains electronics forpower regulation, power supply to the Raspberry Pi, and connectors for peripherals. ThisPCB also contains a number of sensors which provide real-time data to the user.

In order to control the fish remotely, specialized software has been developed to providean intuitive program which runs on a laptop and connects to the fish via the Cat 5ecable. It then displays the live view of the fish, what the sensors are reading, and allowsthe user to control the fish using a keyboard or controller. This software was developedin C++11 and uses of a number of small third party, open source libraries to handlegraphical output, user input and digital input/output on the Raspberry Pi.

3.4 Technical Detail SummaryIntegration of the aforementioned project subsections resulted in a complex system ( Fig-ure 12). A streamlined body was produced, creating a means of mounting for the internalsystems. The main internal systems are propulsion system (Tail linkage system, Tailmotor and Caudal fin), live video feed (Camera), depth control (Depth control system),power supply (LI-Po batteries and power distribution board), water samples (Valves) andcontrols board (Peripherals board and Raspberry Pi 3).

9

Head

Pectoral finsFin servomotor

Li-Po batteries

Caudal finRaspberry Pi 3

Peripherals and powerdistribution board

Tail linkage system

Tail motor

Depth control system

ValvesCamera

Figure 12: Exploded robotic fish CAD model.

4 Project ManagementThe main project management areas were the scheduling, finances, risks and implicationsto the project.

ScheduleThere was no change in the planned milestone dates or in the final delivery date. Therehas however been some delays in a few aspects of the project that were unavoidable.These delays were:

• Mechanical: Change of plans with manufacture of fish tail, from 3D printing ma-terial to silicone molding, as well as changes to the tail linkage design. Delayswith technical errors in material tests and broken 3D printer. Estimated delay: 21operational days

• Electrical/Electronics: Broken pick and place machine delayed board population.Estimated delay: 6 operational days

• Malfunctioning 5V Buck regulator delayed integration of electronics. Estimateddelay: 7 operational days

Details can be seen in Appendix N.

FinancesTable 2, Appendix B, outlines the costs related to the project for which the final costing is$4218.90 NZD. The construction of the solid fish hull proved to be cheaper than initiallybudgeted for. The switch from a wireless communications system to a simple tether alsoproved a much cheaper alternative. However the flexible 3D printed material did not meetspecifications and the design had to be changed to use a molded silicone tail.

Risks and LimitationsThere are a number of technical risks and limitations that affect the performance of theproduct. One of theses limitations was that the final design incorporates a physical tetherwith a data cable for communication and control of the robotic fish, this cable will imparta maximum length the fish can swim from the user. The buoyancy control of the fish iscritical to its ability to move around underwater, failure of this system would result inthe robotic fish not resurfacing.

ImplicationsThe implications of some of these risks and limitations are as followed:

10

The Tether introduces the chance of entanglement on the robotic fish. A potential so-lution to this problem could be the use of advanced acoustic modems or the emergingtechnology of blue LED communication. The acoustic modems are currently very expen-sive, large, have low data rates but video compression technology could provide a solutionfor that. The LED technology is still under active research but could provide a viablecommunications channel in the near future.

The change in manufacturing method and material from 3D printing to silicon mold-ing of the robotic fish’s tail is less costly. Silicone is also lighter than the Stratasys3D printed material, which alters the density of the fish, resulting in effected buoyancycalculations.

5 DeliverablesThe main deliverables which the Robotic Fish can theoretically perform:

• Real time video feed (tested out of water)

• Stores two water samples

• Designed to be operated at a depth of 20 m (tested at 3 m)

• Battery life of 40 minutes

• Fish dimensions of 400 mm x 130 mm x 110 mm excluding fins

• A buoyancy system to hold 30 mL of water (tested at 1 m)

There are a few features that the Robotic Fish was not designed for:

• Keep its location (needs constant adjustment)

• Fast manoeuvrability (can not turn sharp radius)

• Wireless communication

6 Future ConsiderationsThere are multiple recommended considerations for each subsection of the project whichcould be further investigated.

6.1 CommunicationsThere are three options to consider for improving the communications between the fishand the user:

1. Use ultrasonic modems for wireless communication.

2. Use blue LED for wireless communication.

3. Use the tether to carry power to the fish.

For this project, the use of ultrasonic and blue LED communications was deemed toocostly and outside the scope of the project. However this might change in the near futureand as such they are viable options for research.

The development of this fish included the potential for it to be wireless and as such aninternal battery was included in its design. This added a lot of weight and used up alarge volume of the available space. If continuing with the tether option, the possibility

11

of providing power down the cable should be investigated as this will allow for a morecompact and lightweight fish design.

6.2 ElectronicsThe electronics for this system could be simplified to a small degree. A computer systemthat can handle both the live video and the handling of the quadrature interrupts shouldbe possible. Failing that a simpler system for counting the quadrature rotation could bedesigned. The PCB has test points which are located too close together, e.g. the 12V andGND points which could lead to a short. The resulting design has almost every possiblesignal connected to a header. This was to ensure any unforeseen usage of the GPIO pinswould not result in any modifications required for the board.

6.3 MechanicalThere are three main areas which could improve and simplify the design of the productwith further development.

1. Increasing the size of the body

2. Producing a circular buoyancy chamber and plunger

3. Investigate new manufacturing processes for the body

The difficulty of the project was significantly increased due to the limitations of the sizeof the body. This meant all internal units had to be as small as possible. This producesnumerous issues with manufacturing. The buoyancy system was designed to be spaceefficient, and therefore not circular. This resulted in sealing issues due to sections ofthe seal having different applied forces. If the system was circular, the applied forceswould be constant around the entire seal and provide an even sealing. The manufacturingtechniques used to produce the body and tail of the fish should be further investigated toproduce a system which can handle the required depth without large deformations.

12

7 Contribution StatementThe following people have contributed to the project in various ways:

Ben Fortune Kinematic analysisMechatronics Engineering Geometric analysis

Buoyancy control conceptsWater sampling conceptsPCB schematic designTail linkage (design and Workshop manufacturing)Initial poster design3D printingSilicon tail manufacturingMechanical integrationMaterial testing

Mark Rayne Sealing conceptsMechanical Engineering Body design concepts

CAD design and modelingFinite Element Analysis (FEA)Buoyancy control (Design and calculations)Tail linkage (design and Workshop manufacturing)3D printingSilicon tail manufacturingMechanical integrationMaterial testing

Ben Mitchell Communication conceptsComputer Engineering Single board computer analysis

Communication system schematicsPCB schematic designPCB constructionSoftware engineeringIntegration of electrical systems

Winston Poh Buoyancy control concepts (CAD modeling)Mechatronics Engineering Water sampling concepts

PCB constructionQuadrature decodingIntegration of electrical systemsFinal poster refinement

Dr. Stefanie Gutschmidt Project supervision

David Read Technical advice for the body constructionJulian Phillips Technical advice for communication systemsNils Jensen Dynamics modelling

13

References[1] S F Masoomi, An Efficient Biomimetic Swimming Robot Capable of Multiple Gaits of

Locomotion: Design, Modelling and Fabrication, PhD Thesis, University of Canter-bury, May 2014

[2] A Haunholter, Developing an autonomous swimming robot using a Fish-like propulsivesystem December 2012

[3] D Merz, Design and Manufacturing of a Novel biomimetic Fish Robot February 2013

[4] N Akrawi et al.Cornell University Autonomous Underwater Vehicle: Design and Im-plementation of the Argo AUV Journal, 2014

[5] Barrett, David. MIT Ocean Engineering Testing Tank Biomimetics Project: Robo-Tuna. Citing Internet source URL http://web. mit. edu/towtank/www/tuna/robo-tuna. html (2000).

[6] Chen, Z., Bart-Smith, H., & Tan, X. (2015). IPMC-Actuated Robotic Fish. In RobotFish (pp. 219-253). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

[7] Metal Container Latch. (n.d.). http://i01.i.aliimg.com/img/pb/681/810/393/

393810681_279.jpg

[8] NANUK. (n.d.). Plastic Latch. http://www.customcaseco.ca/nanuk/latch.jpg

[9] Plastic Latch. (n.d.). http://g03.a.alicdn.com/kf/HTB1lS.

xKVXXXXXyXpXXq6xXFXXXe/Outdoor-font-b-Waterproof-b-font-Multi-

functional-Shockproof-Airtight-font-b-Plastic-b-font-Storage.jpg

[10] EvoLogics S2C M High Speed Modem. https://www.evologics.de/en/products/acoustics/s2cm_hs.html

[11] Cuauv http://www.cuauv.org/about.php

14