micromachines

Article
Design, Analysis and Experiments of Hexapod Robot with
Six-Link Legs for High Dynamic Locomotion
Jiawang Ma, Guanlin Qiu, Weichen Guo, Peitong Li and Gan Ma *

Sino-German College of Intelligent Manufacturing, Shenzhen Technology University, Shenzhen 518118, China
* Correspondence: [email protected]

Abstract: An important feature of a legged robot is its dynamic motion performance. Traditional
methods often improve the dynamic motion performance by reducing the moment of inertia of
robot legs or by adopting quasi-direct drive actuators. This paper proposes a method to enhance
the dynamic performance of a legged robot by transmission mechanism. Specifically, we present a
unique six-link leg mechanism that can implement a large output motion using a small drive motion.
This unique feature can enhance the robots’ dynamic motion capability. Experiments with a hexapod
robot verified the effectiveness of the mechanism. The experimental results showed that, when the
steering gear of the robot rotates 1◦ , the toe can lift 7 mm (5% of body height), and the maximum
running speed of the robot can reach 390 mm/s (130% of the moveable body length per second).

Keywords: hexapod robot; six-link mechanism; high dynamic capability

1. Introduction
Citation: Ma, J.; Qiu, G.; Guo, W.; Legged robots have better flexibility and mobility than wheeled or tracked vehicles in
Li, P.; Ma, G. Design, Analysis and uneven terrain such as uplands, forests, and stairways. Research shows that most existing
Experiments of Hexapod Robot with quadruped robots have high maneuverability, highly dynamic, and agile locomotion [1–9],
Six-Link Legs for High Dynamic while hexapod robots have high stability to traverse unstructured terrain [10,11]. To
Locomotion. Micromachines 2022, 13, improve the dynamic motion capability of a hexapod robot, it is desirable to improve its
1404. https://doi.org/10.3390/ transmission mechanism [12,13].
mi13091404 As the main component of a multi-legged robot, the leg mechanism plays the role of
Academic Editors: Zhangguo Yu and
achieving motion, weight-bearing, and balancing. Therefore, the study of leg mechanisms is
Marco Ceccarelli
one of the core parts in research on multi-legged robots. Compared with quadruped robots,
hexapod robots have higher terrain adaptability but lose some speed. In some flat terrains
Received: 12 July 2022 where stability is not required, an important index affecting the efficiency of a hexapod
Accepted: 24 August 2022 robot is its dynamic motion capability. For hexapod robots, the traditional methods to
Published: 26 August 2022
improve the dynamic motion capability of the legs are divided into the following: the
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral cable-driven method [14–17] and the one quasi-direct drive actuator method [18]. The
with regard to jurisdictional claims in special structure of the cable-driven gives it a low inertia. The advantages of the cable-
published maps and institutional affil- driven method are the simple structure, low cost, and low noise. However, the basis of the
iations. cable-driven method is friction, so this method has low drive efficiency and unstable drive.
In addition, this method has low life and low payload. The one quasi-direct drive actuator
method uses a high torque density motor with a low-speed ratio reducer, coupled with a
low inertia leg design. The advantages include its compactness, the ability to achieve high
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors. bandwidth force control, and good shock resistance. However, quasi-direct drive actuators
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
tend to be expensive.
This article is an open access article
Therefore, we propose a six-link leg mechanism that can significantly improve the dy-
distributed under the terms and
namic motion of a hexapod robot by relying only on mechanical structures. This mechanism
conditions of the Creative Commons
has the following characteristics:
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 1. This mechanism can realize a transformation from small input motion to large
4.0/). output motion.

Micromachines 2022, 13, 1404. https://doi.org/10.3390/mi13091404 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/micromachines

Micromachines 2022, 13, 1404 2 of 20

2. Comparing the two methods mentioned above, the method using this mechanism has
stable transmission, low wear, large payload, and low cost.
3. This method has the advantages of easy processing, reliable working member, and
easy lubrication.
The hexapod robot proposed in this paper uses this leg mechanism to ensure high
dynamic performance of the hexapod robot by carrying inexpensive servos in each leg only,
which greatly reduces the production cost.
In motion planning, conventional hexapod robots usually use tripod [19–23],
quadripod [24], pentapod gaits (Fluctuating gait) [25–27], or hexapod gait [28,29] for walk-
ing. Quadruped gait means that the robot always has four legs in a supported phase during
motion. Pentapod gait, also called fluctuating gait, is a gait in which the robot has only one
leg swinging at all times during its motion. These gaits satisfy the hydrostatic conditions
and have strong terrain adaptability. However, when the hexapod robot walks on the
ground with low stability requirements, it may lose a lot of speed. Therefore, based on the
stability and speed considerations of the robot, this paper introduces a tripod gait and a
bipod gait to apply different motion scenarios, just like the gait transition rules proposed
by Yasushi Habu et al. [30]. The research in [31] developed a general method to learn from
the morphology the appropriate coupling weights between sensory feedback and the limb
phase oscillators to form an adaptive locomotion controller. In general terms, this controller
can switch the robot’s motion gait according to different environmental conditions (in this
article, it focuses on tripod and trotting gait). Additionally, the reliability of the general
method proposed in [30] was verified by experiments on quadruped and hexapod robots.
From this, it can be seen that the two gaits use a six-link mechanism, which can significantly
improve the motion speed of the hexapod robot. The tripod gait and bipod gait are not only
applicable to hexapod robots but also to quadruped robots. However, we generally refer to
“bipod gait” as trotting gait in quadrupedal robots, and bipod gait in hexapod robots.
The main contributions of this paper are as follows:
1. We proposed a six-link leg mechanism and applied it to a hexapod robot that can
significantly improve the dynamic locomotion of the hexapod robot. We completed
the kinematic modeling of this mechanism.
2. We completed the single-legged foot-end trajectory planning of this hexapod robot
based on the kinematic model. We introduced bipod gait into the gait planning
of the hexapod robot, which enabled the leg mechanism to be more effective, and
significantly improved the dynamic locomotion capability of the hexapod robot.
3. We completed the motion simulation of a single leg and verified the high dynamic
motion capability of this mechanism. We completed the physical prototype experi-
ments to verify the feasibility of bipod gait with this mechanism to achieve highly
dynamic walking of a hexapod robot.
This paper is organized as follows. Section 1 is an introduction. Section 2 presents an
overview of the system. Section 3 presents an analysis of the robot motion, including the
solution to the forward and inverse kinematics of the leg mechanism, single-leg trajectory
planning, and gait planning. Section 4 presents the simulation and experiments of the robot.
Section 5 is the conclusion.

2. System Overview
2.1. Selection of Leg Mechanism
In this design, we adopted a six-link leg mechanism, which has the following advan-
tages. First, the link structure has a significant bearing capacity, which can better support
the robot’s body and keep the whole robot stable. Second, by simply changing the length of
each element in the moving components, we can obtain different movement rules. There-
fore, by designing the size and the whole structure of the connecting link, we can obtain leg
movement rules similar to that of a robot. In addition, the light weight of the connecting
rod also accelerates the movement speed of the robot. In a word, the linkage mechanism is
 Two bus-steering gears are fixed on the Z-shaped steering gear bracket to control the
horizontal and vertical movements of the legs. The steering gear for controlling horizontal
movement is connected with the upper and lower plates of the machine body through the
steering gear plate, and the steering gear for controlling vertical movement is connected
to the original parts of the leg linkage mechanisms through a group of parallelogram link-
Micromachines 2022, 13, 1404 3 of 20
age mechanisms. Through the transmission of the leg six-bar linkage mechanism, the
movement of the prime mover can be converted into the lifting movement of the foot end
and then combined with the horizontal movement of the leg, thus achieving a leg-step-
suitable
ping for the leg mechanism of a bionic robot. The movement diagram of the introduced
action.
leg mechanism is shown in Figure 1a.

(a) (b)
Figure 1. 1.
Figure (a)(a)
The skeleton
The ofof
skeleton the legleg
the mechanism. (b)(b)
mechanism. The legleg
The mechanism diagram.
mechanism diagram.

This six-link mechanism can be regarded as a combination of two four-link mecha-

nisms (1-2-3-4 and 1-4-5-6) with the same fixed frame. In Figure 1a, 1 is the fixed frame,
and 2, the link, is the prime mover. Through the transmission of the connecting links 3,
the rotation of the prime mover can be converted into the regular swing of link 4. The
regular swing of link 4 can be converted into the lifting and lowering movement of link 6
by the transmission of the connecting rod 5. After calculation, the degree of freedom of the
mechanism is 1, that is, the rotation angle of the prime mover and the foot end correspond
with each other. This one-to-one correspondence is convenient for later debugging.
Figure 1b is a diagram of the leg mechanism. The leg mechanism includes a base
numbered 2, a driving part numbered 1 arranged on the base, a connecting rod structure
numbered 3 connected with the driving part, and a robot leg numbered 4 connected with
the connecting rod structure.
Two bus-steering gears are fixed on the Z-shaped steering gear bracket to control the
horizontal and vertical movements of the legs. The steering gear for controlling horizontal
movement is connected with the upper and lower plates of the machine body through the
steering gear plate, and the steering gear for controlling vertical movement is connected
to the original parts of the leg linkage mechanisms through a group of parallelogram
linkage mechanisms. Through the transmission of the leg six-bar linkage mechanism,
the movement of the prime mover can be converted into the lifting movement of the
foot end and then combined with the horizontal movement of the leg, thus achieving a
leg-stepping action.
The main features of this mechanism are as follows:
1. The specially designed linkage mechanism makes the leg move up and down within
a wider range and the foot end easier to lift. In other words, when the steering gear
rotates at the same angle, the foot end can move up a larger distance to enhance its
ability to climb over obstacles in high-speed motion.
2. The lighter weight of the linkage mechanism solves the problem of large joint mass.
3. The centralized placement of steering gear lowers the leg’s moment of inertia and
enhances its agility, providing the foundation for the high dynamic movement of the
whole robot.
4. This design is more convenient for wiring, which can better protect the steering gear
to cope with more harsh environment.
5. The U-shaped opening can reduce the mass and increase the working space, as the
prime mover is frame-shaped, the connecting rod 34 is provided with a U-shaped
 3. The centralized placement of steering gear lowers the leg’s moment of inertia and
enhances its agility, providing the foundation for the high dynamic movement of the
whole robot.
4. This design is more convenient for wiring, which can better protect the steering gear
Micromachines 2022, 13, 1404 to cope with more harsh environment. 4 of 20
5. The U-shaped opening can reduce the mass and increase the working space, as the
prime mover is frame-shaped, the connecting rod 34 is provided with a U-shaped
opening facing the connecting rod 36, and the obtuse end of the connecting rod 36 is
opening facing the connecting rod 36, and the obtuse end of the connecting rod 36 is
located in the U-shaped opening.
located in the U-shaped opening.
6. Two degrees of freedom can reduce the difficulty of control.
6. Two degrees of freedom can reduce the difficulty of control.
Figure 2 is a diagram of the leg mechanism in two limit positions.
Figure 2 is a diagram of the leg mechanism in two limit positions.

(a) (b)
Figure
Figure2.2.(a)(a)AAdiagram
diagramofofthe
theleg
leg mechanism
mechanism moving to
to the
the lowest
lowestposition
positionand
and(b)
(b)a adiagram
diagramofof
the
the leg mechanism moving to the highest
leg mechanism moving to the highest position.position.

2.2.Selection
2.2. SelectionofofBody
BodyBase
Baseand
andOverall
OverallMechanical
MechanicalStructure
Structure
InInthe
theabove
aboveleglegmechanism,
mechanism,the thejoint
jointbetween
betweenthetheleg
legmechanism
mechanismand andthe
thebody
bodybasebase
isisrelatively
relativelybloated
bloated due
due toto the
the centralized
centralizedplacement
placementofofthe thesteering
steeringgear, and
gear, thethe
and legslegs
may
may interfere with each other during the movement. To give each leg more room to moveso
interfere with each other during the movement. To give each leg more room to move
soasasnot
notto tointerfere
interferewith
with each
each other,
other, wewe adopted
adopted aa design
designwith
withan anupper
upperplate
plateand
anda alower
lower
plate for the robot’s body base and sandwich the legs between
plate for the robot’s body base and sandwich the legs between the two plates. This the two plates. This not only
not
Micromachines 2022, 13, 1404 5 of 21
solves the above problems but also makes the robot lighter and easier
only solves the above problems but also makes the robot lighter and easier to disassemble. to disassemble.
The3D
The 3Dmodel
modelofofthe
thehexapod
hexapodrobotrobotisisshown
shownininFigure
Figure3.3.

Figure 3. Three-dimenasional model of the robot.

Figure 3. Three-dimenasional model of the robot.
3. The Theoretical Analysis of The Robot Movement
3. The Theoretical Analysis of The Robot Movement
This section builds the kinematics analysis model of the robot leg, which lays the
This section
foundation for builds the kinematics
the trajectory planninganalysis model
of the foot of the
end. We robot leg, the
analyzed which lays the
planned foot
foundation
trajectory and the foot trajectory to suit the characteristics of robot motion. Last, wetra-
for the trajectory planning of the foot end. We analyzed the planned foot built
jectory and the foot trajectory to suit the characteristics of robot motion. Last, we built the
dynamic model of the robot’s leg swing process to identify the real force in the robot’s
movement process.

3.1. Kinematics Analysis

Micromachines 2022, 13, 1404 5 of 20

the dynamic model of the robot’s leg swing process to identify the real force in the robot’s
movement process.
Micromachines 2022, 13, 1404 3.1. Kinematics Analysis 7 of 21

Figure 4 shows a local coordinate system with point O as the origin for analysis.

Figure 4.
Figure Schematic diagram
4. Schematic diagram of
of kinematics
kinematics analysis.
analysis.

When
3.2. Foot the position
Trajectory Planning of the prime mover is known, according to the geometric relation-
ship of the mechanism, the coordinate position of the foot end F depends on the length of
each Here,
rod andthethe
requirement
position ofof the the foot mover.
prime end trajectory is as follows.
The lengths of OA, AB, BC, BD, CD, OE, OC,
1. and
ED, The DF
trajectory
are l1 , l2of, l3the
, l4 ,foot
l5 , l6should be b,
, s, a, and a continuous
respectively,and andsmooth
the angleclosed curve,
between with
the no
prime
sudden change in speed and acceleration.
mover and the positive direction of Y-axis is θ. To facilitate the solution, AC and OC are
2. There as
connected is no impact∆between
auxiliary AOC. Let the∠leg
OCA movement
= ϕ1 , ∠ ACB and the
= ϕground, that is, the speed and
2 , ∠COY = α1 . Since O and C
acceleration
are fixed when
points, the landing expressions
coordinate and leaving of theAground
and C can arebe
0. written directly.
3. Try to avoid unnecessary exercise. 
The legs in the supporting phase x A =the
 bear
 l1 sin θ weight and the robot’s extra load,
body’s
y A = l1 cos θ

generating body movement through relative movement. The trajectory projection formed (1)
by the leg in the supporting phase contacting  xC = s the
 sin α1
ground is mostly a simple straight line.
yC = s cos α1

Swing is the continuous movement process of feet from the ground up to the ground
down, which
From thedetermines
formula of the the step
distancelength and height
between of the in
two points whole robotcoordinate
the plane and has ansystem,
essen-
tial influence on the robot’s motion performance. Typical robot foot trajectory curves in-
clude rectangular curve, elliptic curve, parabola, modified cycloid, heart-shaped line,
q
l = ( x A − x C )2 + ( y A − y C )2 (2)
combined line segment, etc. AC [32–34]. The functional forms of cycloid and elliptic curves
are elementary,
∠OCA is alwaysand their an acute derivatives
angle when are continuous
the prime mover and smooth
swingsand have
in the rangeno of
mutation
motion.
The value of θ is positive when A is on the right side of Y-axis and negative when A is
[35]. The starting angle and landing angle of the swing phase are right angles, there is no
on
horizontal velocity component, and it is not easy
the left side of Y-axis. In ∆ AOC, it can be obtained by the sine theorem: to slip. Therefore, there is no sudden
change in speed during walking, which can ensure that the robot walks stably without
impact. The expressions for correcting cycloid l sin
and(θ elliptic
+ α1 ) curves are as follows.
ϕ1 = arcsin 1 (3)
Modified cycloid expression: l AC

In ∆ ABC, it can be obtained bythe cosine

L theorem:
 x= ( − sin  )
 2 l 2 + l 2 − l 2

ϕ2 = arccos AC 3 2 (12)
(4)
 y = H (1 −2lcos
AC 3 )
l

 2
θ1 = ϕ2 − ϕ1 can be obtained from Figure 4. In ∆ OBC, it can be obtained by the
Elliptic
cosine curve expression:
theorem: q
|OB| = s2 + l32 − 2sl3 cos θ1 (5)
 L L
 x = cos  +
2 2
 (13)
y = H H
sin  +
 2 2
Micromachines 2022, 13, 1404 6 of 20

Points O, B, and D are collinear; therefore, we have the following:

q
|OD | = l4 + s2 + l32 − 2sl3 cos θ1 (6)

After this, OD is referred to as l8 .

In ∆ OCD, ∠OCD = θ 1 +α2 , ∠ODC = α3 , ∠COD = π − θ 1 − α2 − α3 ; therefore, we
obtain the following:
π π
∠ DOX = ∠COD − ∠COX = π − θ1 − α2 − α3 − ( − α1 ) = − θ1 + α1 − α2 − α3 (7)
2 2
After this, ∠ DOX is referred to as θ2 .
The coordinates of point D can be obtained from Figure 4.

x D = l8 cos θ2
(8)
y D = l8 sin θ2

For point E, it moves in a circle around point O, and the distance between it and point
D is a, so we can obtain the equations about the coordinates of point E.

x2E + y2E = l62


(9)
( x E − x D )2 + ( y E − y D )2 = a2

Since E, D, and F are collinear, assuming a = λb, the coordinate expression of the
foot-end F point can be obtained by the formula of fixed ratio point coordinates.
(
(1+ λ ) x D − x E
xF = λ
(1+ λ ) y D − y E (10)
yF = λ

As shown in Figure 4, λ = a/b, so the coordinate expression of the foot end F point is
as follows: (
( a+b) x D −bx E
xF = a
( a+b)y D −by E (11)
yF = a

3.2. Foot Trajectory Planning

Here, the requirement of the foot end trajectory is as follows.
1. The trajectory of the foot should be a continuous and smooth closed curve, with no
sudden change in speed and acceleration.
2. There is no impact between the leg movement and the ground, that is, the speed and
acceleration when landing and leaving the ground are 0.
3. Try to avoid unnecessary exercise.
The legs in the supporting phase bear the body’s weight and the robot’s extra load,
generating body movement through relative movement. The trajectory projection formed
by the leg in the supporting phase contacting the ground is mostly a simple straight line.
Swing is the continuous movement process of feet from the ground up to the ground
down, which determines the step length and height of the whole robot and has an essential
influence on the robot’s motion performance. Typical robot foot trajectory curves include
rectangular curve, elliptic curve, parabola, modified cycloid, heart-shaped line, combined
line segment, etc. [32–34]. The functional forms of cycloid and elliptic curves are elementary,
and their derivatives are continuous and smooth and have no mutation [35]. The starting
angle and landing angle of the swing phase are right angles, there is no horizontal velocity
component, and it is not easy to slip. Therefore, there is no sudden change in speed during
walking, which can ensure that the robot walks stably without impact. The expressions for
correcting cycloid and elliptic curves are as follows.
 Micromachines 2022, 13, 1404 7 of 20

Micromachines 2022, 13, 1404 Modified cycloid expression: 8 of 21

L

x= 2π ( ϕ − sin ϕ ) (12)
H
y= 2 (1 − cos ϕ )
Figure 5 shows the trajectory comparison between the elliptic curve and modified
Elliptic
cycloid, curve expression:
in which the step length L = 100 mm and the step height H = 40 mm. As can be
seen from the figure, both curves  areL continuous and smooth, with no abrupt change
x = 2 cos ϕ + L2
Furthermore, with the same step ylength and step height, (13)
the trajectory of the modified
= H2 sin ϕ + H2
cycloid is shorter than that of the elliptic curve, which reduces unnecessary motion and
where
consumesL, H,less
and energy.
ϕ are step length, step
Therefore, height,
this paperandusespolar
theangle, respectively.
modified cycloid to plan the foot-end
Figure
trajectory. 5 shows the trajectory comparison between the elliptic curve and modified
cycloid, which the step length L
It can also be found that, in the whole trajectory period, =the
in = 100 mm and the step height H 40 mm. As can
modified be
cycloid and
seen from the figure, both curves are continuous and smooth, with no abrupt change. Fur-
ellipse have sharp points at the junction with the straight line (point A and point B), which
thermore, with the same step length and step height, the trajectory of the modified cycloid
means
is shorterthat
thanthere is the
that of a sudden change
elliptic curve, at the
which transition
reduces between
unnecessary the swing
motion phase and the
and consumes
support phase, which will significantly affect the stability of robot motion.
less energy. Therefore, this paper uses the modified cycloid to plan the foot-end trajectory.

Figure
Figure 5.5.Correction
Correction ofof cycloid
cycloid andand elliptic
elliptic curves.
curves.

ItIt can also be found

is necessary that, in
to make a the wholetransition
smooth trajectory between
period, the themodified
supportingcycloid and
and swinging
ellipse have sharp points at the junction with the straight line (point A and
phases to make the foot end track continuous and smooth. In this paper, the method of point B), which
means that there is a sudden change at the transition between the swing phase and the
quintic polynomial interpolation is used to smooth the transition of the foot-end trajectory
support phase, which will significantly affect the stability of robot motion.
composed of the modified
It is necessary to make acycloid
smoothand straight
transition lines. Because
between of the and
the supporting symmetry
swinging of the tra-
jectory,
phases tothe proper
make transition
the foot end track function can and
continuous be written
smooth.by In the
this left transition
paper, the methodfunction.
of The
specific planning method is as follows.
quintic polynomial interpolation is used to smooth the transition of the foot-end trajectory
•composed of the R
The length modified cycloid
is subtracted and the
from straight lines.
left end Because
of the swing ofphase
the symmetry of the
and the left end of the
trajectory, the proper transition function can be written by the left transition
support phase to construct the retraction transition curve. As shown in Figure function. The 6, the
specific planning method is as ̂follows.
̂ ̂ ̂
trajectory consists of BC, CD, DE, EB.
• The length R is subtracted from the left end of the swing phase and the left end of the
support phase to construct the retraction transition curve. As shown in Figure 6, the
ˆ CD,
trajectory consists of BC, ˆ DE,
ˆ EB.ˆ

Figure 6. Optimized foot trajectory.

• Let the coordinates of point B and point C be B(φ0 , x0 , y0 ) and C(φ1 , x1 , y1 ), and their
 quintic polynomial interpolation is used to smooth the transition of the foot-end trajectory
composed of the modified cycloid and straight lines. Because of the symmetry of the tra-
jectory, the proper transition function can be written by the left transition function. The
specific planning method is as follows.
• The length R is subtracted from the left end of the swing phase and the left end of the
Micromachines 2022, 13, 1404
support phase to construct the retraction transition curve. As shown in Figure 86,ofthe
20
̂ , CD
trajectory consists of BC ̂ , DE
̂ , EB
̂.

Figure 6.
Figure 6. Optimized
Optimized foot
foot trajectory.
trajectory.

•• Let the coordinates of

Let pointBBand
ofpoint pointC C
andpoint B(Bφ(0ϕ, x0 ,0 ,xy00,)yand
bebe ) and C(φC1 ,( xϕ11,, yx11), and y1 ), their
and
.0 . .
.. .. ..

̇
as B(φ0 ,as ̈
x0̇ ,By0̇ ϕ),0 ,Bx(φ ̇
velocities
their and accelerations
velocities and accelerations can be can
expressed
be expressed 0 , 0y, 0x0̈ ,, y
B0̈ ),ϕ0C, (φ
x01, ,yx01̇ ,,
. . ̈.
.. .. ..

y ̇ ), and C (φ ,
C1 ϕ1 , x1 , y1 1andx ̈ , y ̈ ). Then, from the coordinates of points B and
1 C1 ϕ1 , x1 , y1 . Then, from the coordinates of points B and C, the C, the expression of
the trajectory
expression cantrajectory
of the be writtencan as be
a quintic
writtenpolynomial
as a quinticfunction.
polynomial function.
From BB to
From to C:
C:
T
a6 ϕ5 ϕ4 ϕ3 ϕ2 ϕ
 
x ( ϕ ) = a1 a2 a3 a4 a5 1 (14)
T
b6 ϕ5 ϕ4 ϕ3 ϕ2 ϕ
 
y( ϕ) = b1 b2 b3 b4 b5 1 (15)
The value range of ϕ in Equations (14) and (15) is 0 ≤ ϕ ≤ Φ.
From C to D:
L

x ( ϕ) = 2π (2ϕ − sin 2ϕ)
H (Φ ≤ ϕ ≤ π − Φ) (16)
y( ϕ) = 2 (1 − cos 2ϕ)

From D to E:
h iT
x ( ϕ ) = L − [ a1 · · · a6 ] ( π − ϕ )5 ( π − ϕ )4 · · · 1 (π − Φ ≤ ϕ ≤ π ) (17)

h iT
y( ϕ) = [b1 · · · b6 ] (π − ϕ)5 ( π − ϕ )4 · · · 1 (π − Φ ≤ ϕ ≤ π ) (18)

• The expressions of velocity and acceleration can be obtained by taking the first deriva-
tive and the second derivative of the expression of BC, respectively:

. T
a5 ϕ4 ϕ3 ϕ2 (0 ≤ ϕ ≤ Φ )
 
x ( ϕ) = 5a1 4a2 3a3 2a4 ϕ 1 (19)

. T
b5 ϕ4 ϕ3 ϕ2 (0 ≤ ϕ ≤ Φ )
 
y( ϕ) = 5b1 4b2 3b3 2b4 ϕ 1 (20)

.. T
2a4 ϕ3 ϕ2 (0 ≤ ϕ ≤ Φ )
 
x ( ϕ) = 20a1 12a2 6a3 ϕ 1 (21)

.. T
2b4 ϕ3 ϕ2 (0 ≤ ϕ ≤ Φ )
 
y( ϕ) = 20b1 12b2 6b3 ϕ 1 (22)
Similarly, the expressions of velocity and acceleration can be obtained by taking the
first derivative and the second derivative of the expression of CD segment, respectively:
 .
x ( ϕ) = πL (1 − cos 2ϕ)
 .


y( ϕ) = H sin 2ϕ
.. (Φ ≤ ϕ ≤ π − Φ) (23)
 x ( ϕ) = 2L
π sin 2ϕ
 ..

y( ϕ) = 2H cos 2ϕ
Micromachines 2022, 13, 1404 9 of 20

The phase of point C is π/9, and the coordinates of point B are (0, 25/9, 0), from which
. .. . .. .
the coordinates of B, B, C and C can be written. Substituting the coordinates of B, C, B,
.. . ..
B, C and C into (14), (15), and (19)–(22), the coefficients of the quintic polynomial can be
obtained simultaneously as follows.
   
a1 a2 a3 −3220.72 2806.31 −627.61
= (24)
a4 a5 a6 0 0 2.78
   
b1 b2 b3 6359.48 −5726.21 1443.96
= (25)
b4 b5 b6 0 0 0
It should be noted that the foot trajectory planning method [36] introduced in this
paper is aimed at motion in a two-dimensional plane. Because of the characteristics of
the linkage mechanism, the foot of the robot introduced in this paper moves in three-
dimensional space, so the foot trajectory planning described in this paper is the foot
trajectory projection planning. In addition, since the installation position of the robot leg on
the body base is determined in this paper, if the robot needs to walk in a straight line when
moving forward or backward, the step length of each group of legs will be different, but as
long as the method introduced in this paper is followed, the changed trajectory parameters
can be obtained.

3.3. Leg Dynamics Analysis

In this paper, the ground reference system is used to establish the coordinate system,
as shown in Figure 7. Take the generalized joint variable q = [θ1 , θ 2 , θ 3 , θ 4 , θ 5 , θ 6 , θ 7 , θ 8 ] T .
The center point of each rod is located in the geometric center of the rod. The corresponding
generalized driving force F can be obtained by using the Lagrange equation:

d ∂EK ∂E ∂E
F= ( . )− K + P (26)
dt ∂qi ∂qi ∂qi

Micromachines 2022, 13, 1404 where EK is the total kinetic energy of the system, EP is the total potential energy 11
ofofthe
21
system, and qi is the generalized coordinate.

Figure 7. Leg dynamics analysis model.

ThePlanning
3.4. Gait leg vector the robot is PH , the acceleration vector of gravity is g, the center
andofAnalysis
vector of each link is Pi , the mass of each component is mi , the velocity vector of the center
For the hexapod robot described in this paper, the movement gait is a typical crawl-
of mass is vi , the angular velocity vector is ωi , and the inertia tensor is Ii . Then, the total
ing principle of hexapod insects. In order to clearly describe the movement law of legs,
kinetic energy of the whole system is the sum of the kinetic energy of each connecting rod.
the schematic diagram and timing diagram are now used to describe the step sequence of
the hexapod robot. As shown in Figure 8, the six legs of a hexapod robot are divided into
two groups: defined and numbered. The left front foot, right middle foot, and left rear
foot (L1, R2, and L3) of the hexapod robot are a group, and the right front foot, left middle
foot, and right rear foot (R1, L2, and R3) are a group. The three legs of each group can
form a stable triangular structure, so it is called a tripod gait.
Micromachines 2022, 13, 1404 10 of 20

After homogenizing each connecting rod, calculating the centroid coordinates, and taking
the derivative, the following formula can be obtained:

1
EK = (m vT v + ωiT Ii ωi ) (27)
2 i i i
Through simultaneous (26) and (27), the joint torque can be obtained:
.. .
τ = D(q)q + H(q, q) + G(q) (28)
..

where D(q) is the inertial matrix of the robot legs, H q, q is the Coriolis force vector, and
G(q) is the gravity vector.
Figure 7. LegIfdynamics analysis
the gait cycle of the model.
robot is T, the energy consumed by the robot in one gait cycle
can be expressed as follows:
Z T
3.4. Gait Planning and Analysis E=
.
τ qdt (29)
For the hexapod robot described in this0 paper, the movement gait is a typical crawl-
ing principle
3.4. Gaitof hexapod
Planning insects. In order to clearly describe the movement law of legs
and Analysis
the schematicFordiagram
the hexapodand timing
robot diagram
described in this are now
paper, the used to describe
movement the step
gait is a typical sequence of
crawling
principle of hexapod insects. In order to clearly describe the movement
the hexapod robot. As shown in Figure 8, the six legs of a hexapod robot are divided law of legs, the into
schematic diagram and timing diagram are now used to describe the step sequence of the
two groups: defined and numbered. The left front foot, right middle foot, and left rear
hexapod robot. As shown in Figure 8, the six legs of a hexapod robot are divided into two
foot (L1,groups:
R2, and L3) of
defined the
and hexapod
numbered. Therobot are foot,
left front a group, and the
right middle right
foot, andfront foot,
left rear footleft
(L1, middle
foot, and
R2,right
and L3)rear foot
of the (R1, robot
hexapod L2, andare aR3) areand
group, a group.
the rightThe
frontthree legs
foot, left of each
middle group can
foot, and
form a stable triangular
right rear structure,
foot (R1, L2, and R3) aresoa itgroup.
is called a tripod
The three legs ofgait.
each group can form a stable
triangular structure, so it is called a tripod gait.

Figure 8. Gait analysis model.

Figure 8. Gait analysis model.
The basic movements of the hexapod robot can be achieved by the different alternations
of the
The basic two groups of legs.
movements of When the hexapod
the hexapod robot
robot moves
can forward, R1,
be achieved byR3,
theand L2 movealterna-
different
towards the head and are in the supporting phase, while L1, L3, and R2 move towards the
tions of the two groups of legs. When the hexapod robot moves forward, R1, R3, and L2
tail and are in the swinging phase. Then, the two groups of legs alternately take the above
move towards
actions to the headthe
complete and are inrobot’s
hexapod the supporting
advance. The phase, while
timing chart L1,advance
of the L3, and R2 move to-
is shown
wards the tail and
in Figure 9. are in the swinging phase. Then, the two groups of legs alternately take
the above actions to complete the hexapod robot’s advance. The timing chart of the ad-
vance is shown in Figure 9.
Micromachines 2022, 13, 1404
Micromachines 2022, 13, 1404 11 of 20

Figure 9. Sequence diagram of tripod gait.

Similarly, when the hexapod robot retreats, it only needs to change the rota
rection and to run the logic for each leg. For a hexapod robot, the rotation direction
Figure 9.9.Sequence
Figure diagram of tripod gait. gait.
group ofSequencelegs is slightlydiagram of tripod
different when it turns left and right on a fixed axis. For e
when it turnswhen
Similarly, left on theahexapod
fixed axis, robotR1, L2, and
retreats, R3 rotate
it only needs counterclockwise
to change the rotation in the sup
Similarly,
direction and to when
run the the
logic hexapod
for each leg.robot
For a
phase and L1, R2, and L3 rotate clockwise in the swinging phase, and thenretreats,
hexapod it
robot, only the needs
rotation to change
direction ofthe
therota
two
rection
each groupand to run the
of
of legs alternately legs is
takelogic
slightly for each
different
the above leg. For
when
actions. it turns
Thea hexapod
left and
same is true robot,
right
forthe
on a rotation
fixed
turning axis. direction
For
right on a fix
example,
group when
legs itisturns left on a fixed axis, R1, it
L2, and R3 rotate counterclockwise inaxis.
the For ex
Inofnature,
supporting phase and
slightly
multi-legged different
L1, R2, and L3insects
when haveturns
rotate clockwise a in left
typical and
the swinging
rightgait,
tripod on abut
phase, and
fixed studies
then the have
when
that,
two
it
when
groups
turns left
of there
on a fixed
is no adhesive
legs alternately
axis, R1, L2,
structure
take the above
and
actions.
R3
onThe rotate
thesame counterclockwise
legsis oftrueinsects,
for turning theright
bipod in the sup
on gait si
phase and L1,
avertebrates
fixed axis. R2, and better
performs L3 rotate than clockwise
the tripod ingait
the swinging
in terms ofphase, movement and then speed the[37].
two
of legs
gait In alternately
nature,
refers tomulti-legged
dividing take the above
insects
the ofactions.
legs have a ahexapod
typical The samegait,
tripod
robot is true
into but for turning
studies
three rightfirst
have shown
groups (the on agro
fix
that, when there is no adhesive structure on the legs of insects, the bipod gait similar to
and In R3,nature,
the second multi-legged
group is insectsL2 and have R2, and a typical
the third
vertebrates performs better than the tripod gait in terms of movement speed [37]. Bipedal
tripodgroup gait, butand
is R1 studiesL3) andhavee
that, whenthe
thatrefers
only therelegsisof no adhesive structure landon the legs of insects, the bipod gait sim
gait to dividing thethe legssame group
of a hexapod robot simultaneously
into three groups (the every time
first group isthe
L1 hexapo
vertebrates
lands.
and Assecond
R3, the performs
only two grouplegs better
is L2of and than
the the
R2,hexapod tripod
and the third robot gait
group in
land terms
is R1 onand of movement
theL3)ground
and ensuringat thespeed
thatsame[37].
tim
gait
only
pared refers
thewith to
legs ofthe dividing
thetripod
same group the legs
gait,land of a hexapod
thesimultaneously
bipod gait has robot
every
no time into
static three groups
thestability
hexapod but (the
robotislands. first
a dynamic grou
As
and only
R3, twothe legs of the group
second hexapod is robot
L2 landR2,
and on theand ground
the at thegroup
third same time,
is R1 compared
and L3) and
anced gait. With a high frequency of alternating movements of each group ofel
with
that the
only tripod
the gait,
legs of the bipod gait has no static stability but is a dynamically balanced
bipod
gait. With gait equips
a high frequencythethe same group
hexapod
of alternatingrobot land high
with
movements
simultaneously
of eachdynamicgroup of
every time
movement
legs, the bipod
the hexapo
capability.
gait
lands.
equipsWhen Ashexapod
the only
the two robot
robotlegsmoves
withofhigh
the hexapod
indynamic
a bipodmovement robot
gait, L2land and on
R2 the
capability. ground
(group 2), andat theR1 same
and L3 tim(g
pared When with the the
robot tripod
moves gait,
in a the
bipod bipod
gait, gait
move towards the head of the robot in a swinging phase, and L1 and R3 (group
L2 and has
R2 no
(group static
2), stability
and R1 and but
L3 is
(groupa dynamica
3)
anced
move
towards gait.
towards theWith
the
tailhead a ahigh
in thefrequency
ofsupporting
robot in aphase; of alternating
swinging then,phase,
each and movements
L1 andof
group R3legs of moves
(group each group
1) move in turn ofacl
towardsgait
bipod the tail in a supporting
equips the hexapodphase;robot
then, each
with group
high ofdynamic
legs moves in turn according
movement to
capability.
to this logic. The timing chart of advance is shown in Figure 10.
this logic. The timing chart of advance is shown in Figure 10.
When the robot moves in a bipod gait, L2 and R2 (group 2), and R1 and L3 (g
move towards the head of the robot in a swinging phase, and L1 and R3 (group 1
towards the tail in a supporting phase; then, each group of legs moves in turn ac
to this logic. The timing chart of advance is shown in Figure 10.

Figure 10. Sequence diagram of bipod gait.

Figure 10. Sequence diagram of bipod gait.
3.5. Analysis of Gait Stability of Hexapod Robot
3.5. This
Analysis
sectionofprovides
Gait Stability of Hexapod
an analysis Robot
of the tripod gait as the static gait and an analysis of
the bipod gait as the dynamic gait.
This section provides an analysis of the tripod gait as the static gait and an
In this
Figure paper, thediagram
10. Sequence projection
of of gait. of gravity on the XOY plane is used to
the center
bipod
of the bipod
determine gaitthe
whether as robot
the dynamic
meets the gait.
static conditions. In the tripod gait, at most three
legs are Ininthis paper, thephase.
the supporting projection of the
As shown center
in Figure 11,of gravity
when on the
the robot XOY
moves plane is use
forward,
3.5. Analysis of Gait Stability of Hexapod Robot
ittermine
is assumedwhether
that L1,the
L3, robot
and R2meets thesupporting
are in the static conditions.
phase andIn theR1,
that tripod
R3, andgait, at most th
L2 are
in theThis section
swinging phase provides
at a an
certain analysis
moment. Atof the
this tripod
time, the
are in the supporting phase. As shown in Figure 11, when the robot moves gait as
endpoints the
S1, static
S2, andgait
S3 ofandforw
an a
thethe
of three legs ingait
bipod the supporting phase will form a triangle. When the projection point P of
assumed that L1,asL3,theanddynamic
R2 are ingait.
the supporting phase and that R1, R3, and L2 a
In thisphase
swinging paper, at the projection
a certain moment.of the Atcenter of gravity
this time, on the XOY
the endpoints S1, S2,plane
and S3is use
of t
termine
legs in the supporting phase will form a triangle. When the projection point Pth
whether the robot meets the static conditions. In the tripod gait, at most o
are in the supporting phase. As shown in Figure 11, when the
bot’s center of gravity M on XOY plane is located in the triangle area, the static ga robot moves forwa
assumed
ity condition that is
L1,satisfied.
L3, and R2 are in the supporting phase and that R1, R3, and L2 ar
 Micromachines 2022, 13, 1404 12 of 20
Micromachines 2022, 13, 1404

Micromachines 2022, 13, 1404

the robot’s center of gravity M on XOY plane is located in the triangle area, the static gait
stability condition is satisfied.

Figure 11. Geometric analysis of static gait stability.

11.Geometric
Figure 11.
Figure Geometricanalysis of static
analysis ofgait stability.
static gait stability.
The mathematical relationship after converting the stability conditions corr
Thethe
ing to mathematical relationship
robot stability after converting
is △S1S2S3 , and the the
sumstability conditions
of thetheareas ofcorresponding
theconditions
three triangles
to theThe
robotmathematical relationship
stability is 4S1S2S3 , and the sumafter
of theconverting
areas of the threestability
triangles divided by corre
by
ing point
pointtoP the
P is equal
robot
is equal to 4
to
stability△ is △
S1S2S3 . The specific geometric
, and theanalysis
sum ofisthe analysis
areas is shown
of the12. in Figure
three triangles
S1S2S3 . The specific
S1S2S3geometric shown in Figure
by point P is equal to △S1S2S3 . The specific geometric analysis is shown in Figure 1

Figure Analysis
Figure12.12. of mathematical
Analysis relationship
of mathematical for static gait
relationship forstability.
static gait stability.
Figure
The12. Analysis of
coordinates of mathematical
S1, S2, S3, and relationship
point P of thefor static
robot cangait stability.
be known by moving in
The
the XOY coordinates
plane, of S1, S2,
and the coordinates areS3,set and
as S1(x point P of the robot can be known by mo
1 ,y1 ), S2(x2 ,y2 ), S3(x3 ,y3 ), and P (x P ,y P ),
the XOY
The plane,
respectively, so thatand
coordinates the
of coordinates
the areas of the
S1, S2,four are set
S3,triangles
and can
pointasbe S1(x , y1 ),robot
P obtained.
of1 the S2(x2can
, y2 ),be S3(x 3 , y3 ),by
known and P
mo
respectively,
the XOY plane, soand
thatthe
thecoordinates
areas of  theare
four triangles
set as S1(x  can
  , y ),be
 obtained.
S2(x , y), S3(x3 , y3 ), and P
 1  x1 y1 1  11 1x1 y1 2 12

  ×  x2 y2 1   ×  x3 y3 1  
respectively, so that the areas  of  the four triangles
 x p y p 1 
  2 can  be obtained.
y1(30)1 
2 
S4S1S2P S4S1S3P 
x 1  y1 x p1 y p 1 x1
 
=
 
 
 1 ×  x3 y3 x
S4S2S3P S4S1S2S3    x 2 1   1 
y 2 1     x 1 y 1 1  
1  


y 1 x y 1
 
2   1 ×
12  2 12  2x y 2 1  13 13
x p 1

 2y p 1  x3 y3 121
  x2 y 2 1  x3 y 3 1  
S Sexpression  the

S for p
2 robot’s p
2 is aspfollows:
p
 = 
The mathematical 1S 2 P S1S 3keeping
P static gait stable
S

x y 1 x y 1
3  +S4S1S3P
 SS12SSS423PPS1S2S3S =S1SS423SPS1S2P p p p p
= x y 1 x y 1
   + S (31)

S S 2S 3 P S S1S 2S 3   1  x y 1
2 4 S2S3P
2 1 1
1 

If (31) is satisfied, the center of gravity of the robot23falls in S1S2S3
23 the area of 4
x y
12 and
1
12 the 
stability condition is satisfied. In the tripod gait,  12the full-tube
x y
12 will change 
 x 3 yplane
support triangle
1 1 
with the cycle, but the projection point P of therobot’s  2 3
p 3p
center of gravity 2 on the 2XOY 23

will always be located in the support triangle, so the robot
stable The
 x p
y
in
p
1
the tripod
state.mathematical expression for keeping the robot’s static gait stable is as fo
gait isxalways
3
y 3
in a1

In order to make the hexapod robot perform better in high-speed movement, this
paperThe mathematical
adopts a dynamic gaitexpression
that S for
is bipodal.=However,
keeping
S
S1S 2S 3
+the
theSbipod +S
robot’s
gait
S1S 2 P
static
is more gait stable is
complicated
S1S 3 P S 2S 3 P
as fo

S S1S 2of
If (31) is satisfied, the center = S S1S 2of
S 3 gravity
+ S S1S 3 P +falls
P the robot
S Sin P area of △S1S2S3
2S 3the

stability condition
If (31) is satisfied.
is satisfied, In the
the center tripod of
of gravity gait,
thethe full-tube
robot falls insupport
the areatriangle will
of △S1S2S3
with thecondition
stability cycle, but isthe projection
satisfied. point
In the P of gait,
tripod the robot’s centersupport
the full-tube of gravity on thewill
triangle XO
 Simultaneously using Equations (32) and (33), the coordinates of ZMP point can be
obtained:

 n n

  mi ( zi + g )xA −  mi xi z A
Micromachines 2022, 13, 1404
 xZMP = i =1 i =1 13 of 20


n

 i = 1
mi ( zi + g )
than the tripod gait, and thestability analysis is relatively complicated. The ZMP theory is (34)
n n
used to analyze the stabilityof robot bipod dynamic gait [38].
In dynamic motion, the R1 and L3 m (
legs are
i
z + g ) y −
iin the supporting
A  mphase
yz
i i A and the other four

 yZMP
legs are in the swinging phase; = i =1
the dynamic i =1
motion stability of the robot can be analyzed.
n

As shown in Figure 13, the coordinate
 ( F
relationship
 i
z = 1
of ZMP can be obtained from Figure 13a.
mi ( zi + g )
Z A
FX= x A − x ZMP
FZ zA (32)
FY = y A −y ZMP

(a) (b)
Figure
Figure13.
13. The stabilityanalysis
The stability analysis of robot
of robot bipod
bipod gait. gait. (a)schematic
(a) The The schematic
diagramdiagram of ZMP
of ZMP point point loca-
location.
tion. (b) stability
(b) The The stability analysis
analysis model model
of bipodofgait.
bipod gait.

In Formula (32), FX , FY , and FZ are the components of the resultant force of the robot
in X, Y, and Z directions, respectively. x A , y A , and z A are the respective coordinates of the
center of gravity of the robot in X, Y, and Z directions. x ZMP and y ZMP are the respective
coordinates of ZMP in the X and Y directions.
According to mechanics, the resultant force of the robot in motion is the resultant force
of inertia force and gravity, so the following expression can be obtained:
   .. 
FX n xi
..
F =  FY  = ∑ mi  yi  (33)
..
FZ i =1 zi + g
.. .. ..
In Formula (33), mi is the weight of each component; xi , yi and zi are the acceleration
rates of each component in the X, Y, and Z directions. The acceleration of gravity is g.
Simultaneously using Equations (32) and (33), the coordinates of ZMP point can
be obtained: n n
.. ..

 ∑ mi ( zi + g ) x A − ∑ mi x i z A
i =1 i =1



 x ZMP = n ..
∑ mi ( zi + g )


i =1
n .. n .. (34)

 ∑ mi ( zi + g ) y A − ∑ mi yi z A
y = i =1 i =1


 ZMP n ..

∑ mi ( zi + g )

i =1

In order to make the robot move dynamically without tipping over, ZMP should fall
on the line connecting the foot ends of the two supporting legs. In this case, the stable
condition of the robot’s dynamic motion is that ZMP should fall on the connecting line
between R1 and L3, and Equation (35) should be satisfied:

(y3 − y4 ) x ZMP + ( x4 − x3 )y ZMP + ( x3 y4 − x4 y3 ) = 0 (35)

 the robot to move from steady-state to dumping. If the robot can adjust its posture during
this time, it can avoid dumping. Therefore, when the movement gait is determined, the
subsequent posture sequence of each posture of the robot can be estimated, so as to calcu-
late the time T1 required for the robot to move from a stable state to an unbalanced state.
Micromachines 2022, 13, 1404 If the response time T of the robot to adjust its posture is shorter than T1, the robot
14 can
of 20
complete the stable adjustment and realize the dynamic stability.

4. Simulation
When theand Experimental
robot moves withAnalysis
a bipod gait, it is difficult for the center of gravity of
4.1.
the One-Leg
robot to Simulation
fall onto theAnalysis
connecting line between the two supporting legs, so the method
of judging the stability
In this section, condition by
the SolidWorks zero moment
Motion plug-in waspoint willtofail.
used It takes
simulate anda certain
analyzetimethe
for the robot to move from steady-state to dumping. If the robot
motion characteristics of the robot. The input analog were data points of the servo can adjust its turning
posture
duringcalculated
angle this time, from
it canthe
avoid dumping.
inverse Therefore,
kinematics, withwhen the movementtype
the interpolation gait Akima
is determined,
spline
curve. The single-leg simulation results are presented in Figure 14. The maximumsolifting
the subsequent posture sequence of each posture of the robot can be estimated, as to
calculate
speed thefoot
of the timeendT1 could
required for86
reach the robot(Figure
mm/s to move from
14b), a stable
while state to anlifting
the maximum unbalanced
accel-
the response time T
eration of the foot end could reach 413 mm/s (Figure 14c). This result verified the robot
state. If of the robot to adjust
2 its posture is shorter than T 1 , the high
can complete
dynamic motionthecapability
stable adjustment and realize Figure
of this mechanism. the dynamic
14b, c stability.
also show that there was no
sudden change in both velocity and acceleration of the foot end during the motion. This
4. Simulation and Experimental Analysis
result verified the correctness of the foot-end trajectory planning method described in Sec-
4.1. One-Leg Simulation Analysis
tion 3. Table 1 shows the material information table for each component. Figure 15 shows
In this section,
the trajectory the end
of the foot SolidWorks Motion plug-in was used to simulate and analyze
in this simulation.
the motion characteristics of the robot. The input analog were data points of the servo
turning
Table angle calculated
1. Material informationfrom thecomponent.
of each inverse kinematics, with the interpolation type Akima
spline curve. The single-leg simulation results are presented in Figure 14. The maximum
Component
lifting speed ofName
the foot endMaterial Young’s
could reach 86 mm/s Modulus
(Figure (GPa)thePoisson’s
14b), while maximumRatio
lifting
Drive shaft
acceleration C45E4reach 413 mm/s2 (Figure
of the foot end could 210 14c). This result 0.31
verified the
highThe crank motion capability
dynamic AlMg1SiCu 68.9 14b, c also show
of this mechanism. Figure 0.33
that there
wasU-shaped
no sudden barchange inAlZnMgCu1.5
both velocity and acceleration 71
of the foot end during0.33
the motion.
This result
Other verified the
artifacts correctness ofResin
Photosensitive the foot-end trajectory
15 planning method described
0.23
in Section 3. Table 1 shows the material information table for each component. Figure 15
shows the trajectory of the foot end in this simulation.

58
Foot-end displacement [mm]

48

38

29

19
0.00 0.40 0.80 1.20 1.60 2.00 2.40 2.80 3.20 3.60 4.00
Micromachines 2022, 13, 1404 t [s]
16 of 21

(a)

86
Foot-end velocity [mm/s]

43

29

-43

-86
0.00 0.40 0.80 1.20 1.60 2.00 2.40 2.80 3.20 3.60 4.00
t [s]

(b)
Figure
413
14. Cont.
oot-end acceleration [mm/s^2]

256

-56
 Foot-e
Foot-end velocity [
-43
29

-86
0.00 0.40 0.80 1.20 1.60 2.00 2.40 2.80 3.20 3.60 4.00
Micromachines 2022, 13, 1404 -43 t [s] 15 of 20

(b)
-86
413 0.00 0.40 0.80 1.20 1.60 2.00 2.40 2.80 3.20 3.60 4.00
t [s ]

Foot-end acceleration [mm/s^2]

256
(b)
9
413

-56
Foot-end acceleration [mm/s^2]

256
-213
0.00 0.40 0.80 1.20 1.60 2.00 2.40 2.80 3.20 3.60 4.00
t [s]
9

(c)
-56
Figure
Figure 14.
14. The result of
The result of the
thesimulation
simulationexperiment
experimentforfora single
a single leg.
leg. (a)(a)
TheThe displacement
displacement graph
graph of
of the
the foot end on the Y−axis. (b) The velocity graph of the foot end on the Y−axis. (c) The acceleration
foot end on the Y-axis. (b) The velocity graph of the foot end on the Y-axis. (c) The acceleration graph
graph of the foot end on the Y−axis.
foot end on the Y-axis.
of the-213
0.00 0.40 0.80 1.20 1.60 2.00 2.40 2.80 3.20 3.60 4.00
t [s ]
Table 1. Material information of each component.

Component Name Material (c) Young’s Modulus (GPa) Poisson’s Ratio

Drive shaft C45E4 210 0.31
Figure The
14. crank
The result of theAlMg1SiCu
simulation experiment for
68.9 a single leg. (a) The
0.33 displacement g
the foot end on
U-shaped barthe Y−axis.AlZnMgCu1.5
(b) The velocity graph of the
71 foot end on the Y−axis.
0.33 (c) The acce
Other artifacts Photosensitive
graph of the foot end on the Y−axis. Resin 15 0.23

Figure 15. Foot simulation trajectory.

4.2. Physical Prototype Experiments

In the field experiment, the robot was equipped with a nine-axis IMU for acceleration
measurement, and the rotation speed of the servo was tuned to 0.2 r/s (the maximum
speed of servo operation). The single-leg trajectory planning scheme presented in Section
3 was introduced into the robot, and the robot moved forward for 20 s on flat ground in
the laboratory with the tripod gait and the bipod gait. Figure 16 is the experimental envi-
ronment of the robot.

Figure 15. Foot simulation trajectory.

Figure 15. Foot simulation trajectory.
4.2. Physical Prototype Experiments
4.2. Physical Prototype
In the field Experiments
experiment, the robot was equipped with a nine-axis IMU for acceleration
measurement, and the rotation speed of the servo was tuned to 0.2 r/s (the maximum
In the field experiment, the robot was equipped with a nine-axis IMU for accel
speed of servo operation). The single-leg trajectory planning scheme presented in Section 3
measurement, andthe
was introduced into the rotation
robot, and thespeed of the forward
robot moved servo was tuned
for 20 to ground
s on flat 0.2 r/sin(the ma
speed of servowith
the laboratory operation).
the tripodThe
gait single-leg trajectory
and the bipod planning
gait. Figure scheme
16 is the presented in
experimental
3environment of the robot.
was introduced into the robot, and the robot moved forward for 20 s on flat gro
the laboratory with the tripod gait and the bipod gait. Figure 16 is the experiment
ronment of the robot.
 Micromachines 2022, 13, 1404 17 of 21

Micromachines 2022, 13, 1404

Micromachines 2022, 13, 1404 16 of 20

Figure 16. Robot experiment scene.

As shown in Figure 11, the forward direction of the robot was the positive direction
of the X-axis. First, the robot moved forward with a tripod gait. Figure 17a is an image of
the acceleration of the robot moving along the X-axis changing with time. The acceleration
of the robot showed a periodic trend of first increasing, then decreasing, and then increas-
Figure
Figure
ing. The 16. Robot
16. Robot
reason for experiment
experiment scene. scene.
this is that the robot’s action switching in the tripod gait involved the
acceleration
As shown in Figure 11, the forward and
and deceleration processes, thus, of
direction thethe
ideal uniform
robot was the linear motion
positive did not
direction of
appear. As The shown
absolute in Figure
value of 11,
the the forward
acceleration of direction
the robot of
in the
the X-axis. First, the robot moved forward with a tripod gait. Figure 17a is an image the robot
X-axis was
direction the positive d
could
of the
reach
of the 4.1X-axis
acceleration mm/s 2, which indicates that the robot had high dynamic motion capability.
of .the
First,
robotthe robotalong
moving moved forward
the X-axis withwith
changing a tripod
time. Thegait. Figure 17a
acceleration of is an i
Figure 17b is an image of the acceleration of the robot moving
the acceleration of the robot moving along the X-axis changing with time. The acce
the robot showed a periodic trend of first increasing, then decreasing, along
and the
then X-axis with
increasing.
bipod
The gait. When
reason forshowedtheisrobot
this that moved forward
the robot’s with
action a bipod gait, thetripod
frequency of changethein
of the robot
acceleration and speed
a periodic
was higher,
trend
and the
ofswitching
absolute peak
in the
first increasing,
value
then
of
gait involved
decreasing,
acceleration reached
and then
acceleration and deceleration processes, and thus, the ideal uniform linear motion did not
ing.
7.8 mm/s
appear.
The The
reason
2, which
absoluteputforthe
this
robot
value
is that the robot’s
in aacceleration
of the state of dynamicaction switching
equilibrium
of the robot and in
in the X-axis
the tripod
improved
directionits
gait invo
dy-
could
acceleration
namic motion and deceleration
capability.
2 processes, and thus, the
reach 4.1 mm/s , which indicates that the robot had high dynamic motion capability. ideal uniform linear motion
appear. The absolute value of the acceleration of the robot in the X-axis directio
reach 4.1 mm/s2, which indicates that the robot had high dynamic motion capabil
Figure 17b is an image of the acceleration of the robot moving along the X-a
bipod gait. When the robot moved forward with a bipod gait, the frequency of ch
acceleration and speed was higher, and the absolute peak value of acceleration
7.8 mm/s2, which put the robot in a state of dynamic equilibrium and improved
namic motion capability.

(a)

(a)
(b)
The experimental
Figure 17. The
Figure experimental result
result of
of the physical
physical prototype.
prototype. (a)
(a) The
The acceleration
acceleration variation
variation on
on the
the
X−axis
X-axis as the robot advanced with a tripod
tripod gait,
gait, (b)
(b) The
The acceleration
acceleration variation
variationon
onthe
theX−axis
X-axis as
as the
the
robot advanced with a bipod gait.
robot advanced with a bipod gait.

Figure 17b is an image of the acceleration of the robot moving along the X-axis with
bipod gait. When the robot moved forward with a bipod gait, the frequency of change in
acceleration and speed was higher, and the absolute peak value of acceleration reached
 gaits, we integrated the acceleration images of Figure 17a, b once to derive the velocity
images of both, and the results are shown in Figure 18. Comparing Figure 18a,b, it could
be seen that the robot moves forward with a tripod gait with lower frequency and lower
amplitude, and the velocity varies slightly around the average value, which also proves
Micromachines 2022, 13, 1404
the superior stability of the tripod gait. 17 of 20
The advantage of the bipod gait is the dynamic stability and higher speed: On the
one hand, the high frequency of speed changes reflects the dynamic stability of the robot.
On the other hand, from Figure 18b, it could be found that the robot reached a peak ve-
7.8 mm/s2 , which put the robot in a state of dynamic equilibrium and improved its dynamic
locity of 390 mm/s (130% of the moveable body length per second) and an average velocity
motion capability.
of 174 mm/s (58% of the moveable body length per second) during 20 s of movement,
To further observe the motion performance of the robot moving forward with two
which is 49.5% higher than the peak velocity and 34.5% higher than the average velocity
gaits, we integrated the acceleration images of Figure 17a, b once to derive the velocity
of the tripod gait. However, the robot’s motion speed fluctuated considerably above and
images of both, and the results are shown in Figure 18. Comparing Figure 18a,b, it could
below the average value, so we could see that the robot’s speed improved when it moved
be seen that the robot moves forward with a tripod gait with lower frequency and lower
with a bipod gait, but its motion stability was not satisfactory. Another set of data should
amplitude, and the velocity varies slightly around the average value, which also proves the
be used to measure the stability of the robot’s motion when walking with different gaits.
superior stability of the tripod gait.

(a)

(b)
Figure
Figure 18.
18. The
Theexperimental
experimental result
result of
of the
the physical
physical prototype.
prototype. (a)
(a) The
The velocity
velocity variation
variation on
on the
the X-axis
X-axis
as the robot advanced with a tripod gait. (b) The velocity variation on the X-axis as the robot
as the robot advanced with a tripod gait. (b) The velocity variation on the X-axis as the robot advanced ad-
vanced with a bipod
with a bipod gait. gait.

Ideally, the motion

The advantage of theofbipod
the robot
gait isonthethe horizontal
dynamic plane
stability andshould
higherbe in a On
speed: horizontal
the one
stable
hand, the high frequency of speed changes reflects the dynamic stability of the robot. the
state; that is, the displacement in the Z-axis direction is zero, but this was not On
case in practice.
the other The acceleration
hand, from Figure 18b, in the Z-axis
it could direction
be found can robot
that the be integrated
reached twice
a peaktovelocity
obtain
the displacement
of 390 mm/s (130% of the robot
of the on the Z-axis,
moveable which represents
body length per second) the motion
and turbulence
an average of the
velocity of
robot along(58%
174 mm/s the Z-axis.
of the First, the robot
moveable bodymoved
lengthforward withduring
per second) a tripod 20gait.
s of The displacement
movement, which
of the robot
is 49.5% higheron than
the Z-axis in the
the peak actualand
velocity movement process
34.5% higher thanis the
shown in Figure
average 19a.ofThe
velocity the
absolute value
tripod gait. of the maximum
However, the robot’sforward
motiondisplacement of the
speed fluctuated robot on theabove
considerably Z-axisand
is 3.5 mm
below
(equivalent
the averageto 2.5%so
value, of we
body height),
could the absolute
see that value
the robot’s of maximum
speed improved when reverse displacement
it moved with a
is 8.5 mm
bipod gait,(equivalent
but its motionto 6.1% of body
stability was height), and the Another
not satisfactory. absolute setvalue of average
of data shouldvalue
be usedis
to measure
3.7 the stability
mm (equivalent of theof
to 6.1% robot’s
bodymotion
height).when
The walking
reason forwith different
this gaits.
situation is that the
Ideally, the motion of the robot on the horizontal plane should be in a horizontal stable
state; that is, the displacement in the Z-axis direction is zero, but this was not the case
in practice. The acceleration in the Z-axis direction can be integrated twice to obtain the
displacement of the robot on the Z-axis, which represents the motion turbulence of the
robot along the Z-axis. First, the robot moved forward with a tripod gait. The displacement
of the robot on the Z-axis in the actual movement process is shown in Figure 19a. The
absolute value of the maximum forward displacement of the robot on the Z-axis is 3.5 mm
(equivalent to 2.5% of body height), the absolute value of maximum reverse displacement
 the lifting and lowering movement conversion of the legs, which led to the fact that the
robot’s center of gravity was not always at the same horizontal height. Consequently, the
robot bumped up and down slightly along the Z-axis. Finally, the degree of motion tur-
bulence in the Z-axis direction of the robot is reflected by variance:
Micromachines 2022, 13, 1404
σ 2
=
 (Z − Z )
1
2

= 12.21
18 of 20
(36)
1
n−1
is 8.5Figure 19b is the displacement
mm (equivalent to 6.1% of bodychange on the
height), andZ-axis when the
the absolute robotofadvanced
value with
average value
the bipod
is 3.7 mm gait. From the
(equivalent to image,
6.1% ofitbody
can be seen that
height). Thethe maximum
reason displacement
for this situation is and
that the
the
average
movement displacement
conversionofofthe
therobot
robot on
in the Z-axis were
the forward both larger.
movement withThis is because
a tripod the ro-
gait involved
bot’s motion
the lifting changed
and loweringfrequently
movement in the bipod gait,
conversion of which enabled
the legs, whichitled
to achieve a dynamic
to the fact that the
balance. Its variance
robot’s center is as follows:
of gravity was not always at the same horizontal height. Consequently,
the robot bumped up and down slightly along the Z-axis. Finally, the degree of motion
turbulence in the Z-axis direction of ( 
Z − Z ) 2
2 the robot is reflected
σ2 = 2 by variance:
= 47.61 (37)
n−1 2
∑ ( Z − Z1 )
σ12 = = 12.21 (36)
n−1
Displacement[mm]

(a)
Displacement[mm]

(b)
Figure
Figure 19.
19. Plot of the
Plot of the actual
actualand
andaverage
averagedisplacements
displacementsofof
thethe robot
robot in the
in the Z−axis
Z-axis direction
direction for dif-
for different
ferent gaits. (a) The displacement variation on the Z−axis when the robot advances with a tripod
gaits. (a) The displacement variation on the Z-axis when the robot advances with a tripod gait. (b)
gait. (b) The displacement variation on the Z−axis when the robot advances with a bipod gait.
The displacement variation on the Z-axis when the robot advances with a bipod gait.

By comparison,
Figure 19b is theitdisplacement
can be seen that the on
change robot’s degree
the Z-axis of bumpiness
when on the Z-axis
the robot advanced withwas
the
far lower
bipod gait.and thatthe
From itsimage,
performance
it can bewas
seenmore
that stable when walking
the maximum in the tripod
displacement and thegait than
average
in the bipod gait.
displacement of theHowever, regardless
robot on the of the
Z-axis were bothbipod gait
larger. or istripod
This gait
because thebeing used,
robot’s the
motion
robot
changed frequently in the bipod gait, which enabled it to achieve a dynamic balance.the
did not show excellent stable movement, and there was also a big fluctuation in Its
stable tripod
variance is asgait. This is because the parts of the leg mechanism were mostly 3D-printed,
follows:
and the overall stiffness of the leg was 2
2 ∑ (low.
Z − ZConsequently,
2)
there was a big vertical and
σ =
horizontal vibration in the robot 2movement. = 47.61 (37)
n−1
By comparison, it can be seen that the robot’s degree of bumpiness on the Z-axis was
far lower and that its performance was more stable when walking in the tripod gait than in
the bipod gait. However, regardless of the bipod gait or tripod gait being used, the robot
did not show excellent stable movement, and there was also a big fluctuation in the stable
tripod gait. This is because the parts of the leg mechanism were mostly 3D-printed, and the
overall stiffness of the leg was low. Consequently, there was a big vertical and horizontal
vibration in the robot movement.
Micromachines 2022, 13, 1404 19 of 20

5. Conclusions
In this paper, we introduced a design method and implemented a hexapod robot;
the contribution of this paper are as follows. First, a six-link mechanism was designed.
This mechanism can realize the transformation from small driving motion to large output
motion, thus enhancing the dynamic motion capability of a legged robot. Second, the
robot single-leg trajectory planning and a planning method for tripod and bipod gait are
proposed and verified for feasibility. The tripod gait ensures the stability of the robot
running on an unstructured terrain, while the bipod gait ensures the high speed of the
robot on a flat terrain. Simulations and experiments verified that our method can improve
the dynamic motion capability of the hexapod robot.
Future work will enhance the hexapod robots’ sensing ability and establish a dynamic
gait transition method for hexapod robots on various unstructured terrains.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, J.M., G.Q. and W.G.; funding acquisition, G.M., investi-
gation, P.L., project administration, G.Q., methodology, J.M.; validation, J.M., G.Q., W.G. and P.L.;
resources, G.M.; formal analysis, J.M.; data curation, G.Q.; writing—original draft preparation, J.M.;
writing—review and editing, G.Q., G.M. and W.G.; visualization, G.Q.; supervision, G.M. All authors
have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by Natural Science Foundation of Top Talent of SZTU, grant
no. 20211061010012.
Acknowledgments: We thank Qitian Liao and Rongxiang Zeng for their extensive help in providing
market research information and deployment of related functions for this project.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Shi, Q.; Gao, J.; Wang, S.; Quan, X.; Jia, G.; Huang, Q.; Fukuda, T. Development of a Small-Sized Quadruped Robotic Rat Capable
of Multimodal Motions. IEEE Trans. Robot. 2022, 1–17. [CrossRef]
2. Wang, L.; Meng, F.; Kang, R.; Sato, R.; Chen, X.; Yu, Z.; Ming, A.; Huang, Q. Design and Implementation of Symmetric Legged
Robot for Highly Dynamic Jumping and Impact Mitigation. Sensors 2021, 21, 6885. [CrossRef]
3. Niquille, S.C. Regarding the pain of spotmini: Or what a robot’s struggle to learn reveals about the built environment. Archit. Des.
2019, 89, 84–91. [CrossRef]
4. Xu, R.W.; Hsieh, K.C.; Chan, U.H.; Cheang, H.U.; Shi, W.K.; Hon, C.T. Analytical Review on Developing Progress of the
Quadruped Robot Industry and Gaits Research. In Proceedings of the 2022 8th International Conference on Automation, Robotics
and Applications (ICARA), Prague, Czech Republic, 18–20 February 2022. [CrossRef]
5. Kuehn, D.; Schilling, M.; Stark, T.; Zenzes, M.; Kirchner, F. System Design and Testing of the Hominid Robot Charlie. J. Field Robot.
2016, 34, 666–703. [CrossRef]
6. Katz, B.; Di Carlo, J.; Kim, S. Mini Cheetah: A Platform for Pushing the Limits of Dynamic Quadruped Control. In Proceedings of
the International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Montreal, QC, Canada, 20–24 May 2019. [CrossRef]
7. Jeon, S.H.; Kim, S.; Kim, D. Real-time Optimal Landing Control of the MIT Mini Cheetah. arXiv 2021, arXiv:2110.02799. [CrossRef]
8. Arena, P.; Di Pietro, F.; Noce, A.L.; Taffara, S.; Patane, L. Assessment of navigation capabilities of Mini Cheetah robot for
monitoring of landslide terrains. In Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE 6th International Forum on Research and Technology for Society
and Industry (RTSI), Naples, Italy, 6–9 September 2021; pp. 540–545. [CrossRef]
9. Kau, N.; Schultz, A.; Ferrante, N.; Slade, P. Stanford doggo: An open-source, quasi-direct-drive quadruped. In Proceedings of the
2019 International conference on robotics and automation (ICRA), Montreal, QC, Canada, 20–24 May 2019.
10. Zhao, Y.; Chai, X.; Gao, F.; Qi, C. Obstacle avoidance and motion planning scheme for a hexapod robot Octopus-III. Robot. Auton.
Syst. 2018, 103, 199–212. [CrossRef]
11. Elfes, A.; Steindl, R.; Talbot, F.; Kendoul, F.; Sikka, P.; Lowe, T.; Kottege, N.; Bjelonic, M.; Dungavell, R.; Bandyopadhyay, T.; et al.
The Multilegged Autonomous eXplorer (MAX). In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and
Automation (ICRA), Singapore, 29 May–3 June 2017; pp. 1050–1057.
12. Saranli, U.; Buehler, M.; Koditschek, D.E. RHex: A Simple and Highly Mobile Hexapod Robot. Int. J. Robot. Res. 2001, 20, 616–631.
[CrossRef]
13. Travers, M.; Ansari, A.; Choset, H. A dynamical systems approach to obstacle navigation for a series-elastic hexapod robot.
In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE 55th Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), Las Vegas, NV, USA, 12–14 December 2016;
pp. 5152–5157. [CrossRef]
14. Mishra, A. Design, Simulation, Fabrication and Planning of Bio-Inspired Quadruped Robot. Master’s Thesis, Cornell University,
Ithaca, NY, USA, 2014. [CrossRef]
Micromachines 2022, 13, 1404 20 of 20

15. Wang, C.; Zhu, X.; Liu, B.; Hu, X. The Design and Simulation Analysis of Humanoid Robot Lower Limbs Driven by Rope. Mach.
Des. Manuf. 2020, 2020, 261–264. [CrossRef]
16. Spröwitz, A.T.; Ajallooeian, M.; Tuleu, A.; Ijspeert, A.J.; Sprowitz, A.T. Kinematic primitives for walking and trotting gaits of a
quadruped robot with compliant legs. Front. Comput. Neurosci. 2014, 8, 27. [CrossRef]
17. Hutter, M.; Gehring, C.; Bloesch, M.; Hoepflinger, M.A.; Remy, C.D.; Siegwart, R. StarlETH: A compliant quadrupedal robot for
fast, efficient, and versatile locomotion. Adapt. Mob. Robot. 2012, 2012, 483–490. [CrossRef]
18. Wang, L.; Meng, L.; Kang, R.; Liu, B.; Gu, S.; Zhang, Z.; Meng, F.; Ming, A. Design and Dynamic Locomotion Control of
Quadruped Robot with Perception-Less Terrain Adaptation. Cyborg Bionic Syst. 2022, 2022, 9816495. [CrossRef]
19. Barrio, R.; Lozano, Á.; Martínez, M.A.; Rodríguez, M.; Serrano, S. Routes to tripod gait movement in hexapods. Neurocomputing
2021, 461, 679–695. [CrossRef]
20. Chun, C.; Biswas, T.; Bhandawat, V. Drosophila uses a tripod gait across all walking speeds, and the geometry of the tripod is
important for speed control. Elife 2021, 10, e65878. [CrossRef]
21. Liu, Y.; Fan, X.; Ding, L.; Wang, J.; Liu, T.; Gao, H. Fault-tolerant tripod gait planning and verification of a hexapod robot. Appl.
Sci. 2020, 10, 2959. [CrossRef]
22. Grzelczyk, D.; Stanczyk, B.; Awrejcewicz, J. Kinematics, dynamics and power consumption analysis of the hexapod robot during
walking with tripod gait. Int. J. Struct. Stab. Dyn. 2017, 17, 1740010. [CrossRef]
23. Mohammed, B. Planning tripod gait of an hexapod robot. In Proceedings of the 2017 14th International Multi-Conference on
Systems, Signals & Devices (SSD), Marrakech, Morocco, 28–31 March 2017; pp. 163–168.
24. Cai, Z.; Gao, Y.; Wei, W.; Gao, T.; Xie, Z. Model design and gait planning of hexapod climbing robot. J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 2021,
1754, 012157.
25. Deng, C.; Wang, S.; Chen, Z.; Wang, J.; Ma, L.; Li, J. CPG-Inspired Gait Generation and Transition Control for Six Wheel-legged
Robot. In Proceedings of the 2021 China Automation Congress (CAC), Beijing, China, 22–24 October 2021; pp. 2310–2315.
26. Čížek, P.; Faigl, J. On locomotion control using position feedback only in traversing rough terrains with hexapod crawling robot.
IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2018, 428, 012065. [CrossRef]
27. Yoo, S.Y. A Study of Walking Stability of Seabed Walking Robot in Forward Incident Currents[M]//RITA 2018; Springer: Singapore, 2020;
pp. 249–255.
28. Zheng, Y.; Xu, K.; Tian, Y.; Ding, X. Different manipulation mode analysis of a radial symmetrical hexapod robot with leg—Arm
integration. Front. Mech. Eng. 2022, 17, 1–20. [CrossRef]
29. Camacho-Arreguin, J.I.; Wang, M.; Russo, M.; Dong, X.; Axinte, D. Novel Reconfigurable Walking Machine Tool Enables
Symmetric and Nonsymmetric Walking Configurations. IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatron. 2022. [CrossRef]
30. Habu, Y.; Yamada, Y.; Fukui, S.; Fukuoka, Y. A Simple Rule for Quadrupedal Gait Transition Proposed by a Simulated Muscle-
driven Quadruped Model with Two-level CPGs. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and
Biomimetics (ROBIO), Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 12–15 December 2018; pp. 2075–2081. [CrossRef]
31. Dujany, M.; Hauser, S.; Mutlu, M.; van der Sar, M.; Arreguit, J.; Kano, T.; Ishiguro, A.; Ijspeer, A. Emergent adaptive gait generation
through Hebbian sensor-motor maps by morphological probing. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE/RSJ International Conference
on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), Las Vegas, NV, USA, 24 October 2020–24 January 2021; pp. 7866–7873.
32. Yin, P.; Wang, P.; Li, M.; Sun, L. A novel control strategy for quadruped robot walking over irregular terrain. In Proceedings of
the 2011 IEEE 5th International Conference on Robotics, Automation and Mechatronics (RAM), Qingdao, China, 17–19 September
2011; pp. 184–189. [CrossRef]
33. Li, M.; Zhang, X.; Zhang, J.; Zhang, M. Given trajectory oriented multi-legged coordinated control of hexapod robot. J. Huazhong
Univ. Sci. Technol. (Nat. Sci. Ed.) 2015, 43, 32–37. [CrossRef]
34. Wang, L. Strategy of Foot Trajectory Generation for Hydraulic Quadruped Robots Gait Planning. Chin. J. Mech. Eng. 2013, 49,
39–44. [CrossRef]
35. Xi, L. Gait Planning and Walking Stability Research of Quadruped Bionic Robot. Master’s Thesis, Graduate School of National
University of Defense Technology, Changsha, China, 2013.
36. Dai, Z.; Liu, W.; Xu, J.; Li, L. Research on Robot Foot Trajectory Planning Based on High-order Polynomials. Comput. Meas. Control
2021, 29, 159–164.
37. Ramdya, P.; Thandiackal, R.; Cherney, R.; Asselborn, T.; Benton, R.; Ijspeert, A.J.; Floreano, D. Climbing favours the tripod gait
over alternative faster insect gaits. Nat. Commun. 2017, 8, 14494. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
38. Erbatur, K.; Okazaki, A.; Obiya, K.; Takahashi, T.; Kawamura, A. A study on the zero moment point measurement for biped
walking robots. In Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Advanced Motion Control. Proceedings (Cat. No.02TH8623),
Maribor, Slovenia, 3–5 July 2002. [CrossRef]