CPG CONTROL OF A TENSEGRITY MORPHING

STRUCTURE FOR BIOMIMETIC APPLICATIONS

T. K. BLISS, H. BART-SMITH, and T. IWASAKI
University of Virginia, Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering

Abstract
The manta ray, Manta birostris, is an amazing creature, propelling itself through the water with the
elegant and complex flapping of its wings. This animal is of interest for morphing structures applications,
achieving outstanding efficiency and speed even with the enormous span of over five meters. This project
aims at integrating biomimetic control systems with morphing structures to harness what years of evolution
have created. Synthetic central pattern generators (CPG), the fundamental neural control mechanisms for
rhythmic motion in animals, are applied to actuation control of morphing tensegrity structures. Current
results illustrate successful integration of biomimetic control and structures to achieve efficient underwater
propulsion.
1 Introduction 2.1 Design and Synthesis of a CPG

The design of a CPG begins with laying a frame-

The ultimate goal of this research is to success-
fully integrate a neural network control system in
a biomimetic morphing structure to achieve under-
water propulsion. As shown in Figure 1, the con-
trol system used to achieve forward motion through
oscillation of the limbs or wings is complex with
many integrated systems and feedback loops. In or-
der to achieve the goal, the problem has been bro-
ken down. First, a CPG is synthesized, where con-
trol over the signal phase, amplitude, and frequency
are paramount. Second, governing equations for the
analysis of tensegrity structures are derived. Lastly,
the CPG controls and morphing structures analyses
are integrated to create a biologically inspired mor-
phing system, capable of underwater propulsion.
2 Central Pattern Generators
Neural networks offer a robust solution to achieve
a high level of autonomy in the control of robotic
systems. Key characteristics that make artificial
neural networks a prime candidate for control of
an underwater vehicle are efficiency and adaptabil-
ity. Using a feedback system, it is envisioned that
synthetic CPGs could “provide a new paradigm for
nonlinear control theory and applications where the
control objective is to achieve robust and adaptable
oscillations.”1
work for the modeling of an individual neuron. Next,
a system of neurons are grouped together to form a
neural network. This network is designed such that
each neuron excites or inhibits the others. To form
a CPG, the weight by which neurons are intercon-
nected must satisfy certain conditions in order to
collectively produce an oscillatory system. The fol-
lowing sections will outline this procedure, as illus-
trated by Iwasaki.1
2.1.1 Modeling of a Neuron
In the creation of a CPG, the activity of a single
neuron is analyzed as a dynamical mapping from an
input u to an output ν with equations (1) 1 . The
nonlinearity ϕ captures the threshold and satura-
tion characteristics of a neuron, meaning the neuron
requires a certain level of input to activate and exces-
sive input is damped at saturation. F(s) is a transfer
function that captures the band-pass characteristics
of neurons.2
ν = ϕ(q) q = F (s)u
τs (1)
ϕ(q) = tanh(q) F(s) = (1+τ s)2
2.1.2 Model of a Neural Network
To create a neural network, we simply connect
a system of neurons together where the output of
each neuron contributes to the input of all others.
As seen in equations (2), the input to the ith neuron

1
 Figure 1: Complete neural control architecture for rhythmic motion
is the sum of all j neurons, weighted by µij . These
equations can also be written in vector form (3).
Pn
νi = ϕ(qi ) qi = F (s)ui ui = j=1 µij νj
(2)
ν = ϕI(q) q = F (s)M ν M (i, j) = µij (3)
The problem now becomes finding the value for each
µij , commonly grouped as connectivity matrix M.
As can be seen, the problem is nonlinear, so the
method of harmonic balance is used to linearize the
problem.
2.1.3 Method of Harmonic Balance
As shown by Iwasaki1 , the neuron system can be
linearized to allow for an analytical solution of M.
The harmonic balance strategy assumes a periodic
solution for each qi with frequency ω, amplitude αi ,
and phase φi : qi (t) = αi sin(ωt + φi ). This approxi-
mation for q allows us to describe the nonlinearity ϕ.
First, we expand ϕ(q) as a Fourier series, but keep
only the first term because the transfer function F(s)
acts as a band-pass filter, attenuating the bias and
higher frequency terms. We can then describe the
output from the nonlinearity as a gain relating the
amplitude of q and the amplitude of the first term
in the Fourier series of ϕ(q).
∞ gin, with their eigenvectors located in the null space
X
y1
κ(x) = x ϕ(xsin(t)) = yk sin(kt) (4)
k=1
Bliss, T. K.
The assumptions made in this approach are valid
because a periodic, oscillatory solution is the goal of
synthesizing a CPG.
2.1.4 Solving for the Connectivity Matrix
With the problem linearized, the focus turns to
solving for the appropriate connections between the
outputs and inputs of each neural element. First, we
reduce the dynamic equations to
(M K − λI)q = 0
λ = 1/F (s) (5)
K = diag(κ(α1 ), ..., κ(αn )).
We therefore know that det(M K −λI) = 0. By ana-
lyzing the eigenvalues of these equations, we see that
stability will be guaranteed if <(λ) < 2. However,
we want an unstable, bounded, oscillation. For this
reason, we will set two of the eigenvalues of M K,
λ and its complex conjugate λ̄, on the 2 + jb line,
b ∈ R. These two eigenvalues and their eigenvectors
will include the information pertaining to the desired
phase, amplitude and frequency of each neuron. The
remaining n−2 eigenvalues will be located at the ori-
of M K. Solving for M , where each neuron’s output
feeds into the input of every other neuron, including
2
itself (self feedback), ties will have higher performance due to their low

weight and high actuation capabilities.
R= c s ci =αi cos(φi )
2 $ 3.1 Linear Algebra of Tensegrities
si = αi sin(φi ) Ω = (6)
−$ 2
$ = ω − 1/ω M = RΩR† K −1 To study tensegrity structures, a linear algebraic
approach is used3 , describing the structure as a sys-
where † represents the Moore-Penrose Inverse1 . tem of nodes and elements connecting those nodes.
This solution for M can now be used in numer- To begin, a nodal vector pi locates each node, νi ,
ically synthesizing a CPG using Matlab’s Simulink in Cartesian space and all nodes are compiled into
package. For example, Figure 2 shows the controlled vector p,
growth of rhythmic neuron activity in a six neuron  
system with a 60 degree phase offset between each pix
neuron oscillating at 1 Hz. This neuron activity can pi = piy  ∈ R3
now be used to control a structure, dictating desired piz (7)
actuator location or actuator force output.
pT = pT pT ... pT
 
1 2 n .
Let E represent the set of elements, where element
ei connects the j th and k th nodes: ei = {[νj , νk ], zi }.
The set E is comprised of sets Es and Eb , string
elements and bar elements respectively. The zi is an
element identifier such that
(
1, ei ∈ Es ;
zi =
−1, ei ∈ Eb . (8)
 T
z = z1 z2 ... zn
A sparse connectivity matrix m is now con-
structed, and describes which nodes are connected
by which elements. Letting each row represent an
element, and each column a node, the matrix is filled
with 0, 1, and -1’s. A -1 means the element “leaves”
Figure 2: Synthesized CPG (three of six neurons the node, a 1 means the element “enters” the node,
plotted) and a 0 means the node is not associated with the
element. For example, if element 3 connects nodes 5
and 9, the third row of m would contain a -1 in the
fifth column, a 1 in the ninth column, and 0 else-
3 Tensegrity Analysis
where. As a further example, the matrix shown in
(9) is a suitable sparse connectivity matrix for figure
With the synthesis of a CPG complete, the focus
3.
switches to studying the structures the CPG will
control. We have chosen to investigate tensegrity
 
−1 1 0 0
structures, which are both statically and kinemati- −1 0 0 1
cally indeterminate. Simply stated, tensegrities are
 
 0 −1 1 0
systems of bars held in compression by cables in ten- m=   (9)
0 0 −1 1
sion. This state of self-stress, necessary for static

−1 0 1 0
equilibrium, makes the structure statically indeter- 0 −1 0 1
minate. These structures are also geometrically non-
This m matrix is expanded to the full connectivity
linear in that the position of the nodes are a func-
matrix M using the Kronecker product, M = m⊗I3 ,
tion of element lengths, which are again a function
where I3 is a 3x3 identity matrix. There is a corre-
of nodal position. Kinematic indeterminacy stems
sponding connectivity matrix CT = −ẑM, where
from the fact that elastic properties of the elements
keep the nodal positions from being described by x̃ = blockdiag{x1 , , x2 , ..., xn } ∈ Rmn×n , xi ∈ Rm
element lengths alone. These structures may seem x̂ = x̃ ⊗ I3 ∈ R3n×3n ,
overly complicated, but it is believed that tensegri- (10)

Bliss, T. K. 3
 Figure 4, which describe a polyhedral cone, Figure
5, containing all possible configurations of the struc-
ture for the prescribed nodal location3, 4, 5 .

Figure 3: A simple two dimensional tensegrity struc-

ture

defines the ˜· and ˆ· operators on a given vector x ∈

Rn .
An element vector gi associated with element ei is
defined as gi = pj −pk . A vector of element vectors,
g, can be calculated as g = Mp.

3.2 Nodal Forces and Equilibrium

Using the definitions above, equations summing

Figure 4: 3 Cell, Type 1 Tensegrity, and its 3 Pre-
the force on each node can be derived. Assuming all
stress Modes
bar and string elements are linear elastic, and the
dynamics of the elements are negligible, i.e. strain
rates are low enough that damping is negligible, the
force density within the ith member can be calcu- 4 Integration of Stuctures and Controls
lated as
With the necessary tools for tensegrity analysis
( established, we now look to combining the structures
yi ai and controls. Our goal here is to use the CPG to
zi li (p)l (li (p) − loi ),
λi (p, lo ) = o
i
actuate a tensegrity structure. To keep the problem
0, if ei ∈ Es and li (p) 6 loi (11)
simple, we will actuate the structure illustrated in
li (p) = kpj − pk k = kgi k ,
Figure 4. We predict that oscillating the actuation of
the top and bottom strings will allow us to propagate
where yi , ai , and loi are the ith element’s Young’s
a wave left to right over the beam, mimicking the
modulus, cross-sectional area, and manufactured
motion fish employ for efficient propulsion.
length. The forces on all nodes can finally be calcu-
lated as a vector
4.1 Actuation of Strings
f = Cλ̂(p)Mp = Cg̃(p)λ(p). (12)
Using the results from the prestress mode analysis,
It is important to note here that the force on each the structure will be actuated by changing the man-
node is nonlinear in nodal location p. ufacturing length lo of the top and bottom strings
In a static analysis, we require that the sum of of each mode. The initial nodal positions, po , are
all the forces on each node be identically 0 in the shown in Figure 4, and the initial prestress has been
absence of external loads. With this information, selected as a uniform superposition of each elemen-
we can prescribe the desired nodal location and look tary mode. To actuate the structure, a new man-
for the nullspace of Cg̃. This resulting vector space ufacturing length vector is prescribed such that all
can be reduced to the extremal modes of prestress, unactuated elements retain their original manufac-

Bliss, T. K. 4

Figure 5: Visual representation of the polyhedral
cone of prestress
turing lengths, and all actuated members are given
their respective desired manufacturing length. To
picture this, imagine pulling on selected strings of
a marionette while keeping others at their original
lengths. A nonlinear solver is then used to find the
new location of the nodal points.
4.2 Quasitatic Analysis
We perform a quasistatic analysis of a CPG con-
trolled tensegrity structure to approximate a dy-
namic study of the moving tensegrity. We contract
each of the top and bottom strings of Figure 4, as
described above, according the the energy level of
their associated neuron from a six neuron CPG at a
discrete time step. With the actuation lengths deter-
mined, the nonlinear solver converges to a suitable
nodal configuration. The next time step is then con-
sidered, changing the actuation lengths and the non-
linear solver searches for a new set of nodal points.
The dynamics of the moving tensegrity are simpli-
fied by solving static equilibrium at each time step
in this approach. However, this simplification ig-
nores the inertia of the moving system, but these
effects are assumed negligible due to the low oscil-
lation rates we are considering (≈1 Hz) and the low
mass of the physical system.
5 Results and Conclusions
Using the nodal sets obtained from the quasistatic
analysis, we can plot the shape of the two dimen-
sional tensegrity beam over time. Compiling these
images one after another provides visual evidence
that the CPG is capable of controlling a tensegrity
Bliss, T. K.
structure to produce the mechanics necessary for os-
cillatory propulsion. The beam slowly ramps up into
the bounded oscillations depicted in Figure 2. This
controlled growth in movement is what is often ob-
served in nature, as an animal accelerates up to an
optimal forward velocity. At steady state, the beam
oscillates as predicted, mimicking the motion of an
undulating fish tail.
5.1 Future Work
The methods employed in this study shed light on
the powerful capabilities of a CPG controlled mor-
phing structure. Referencing Figure 1, we started
with a CPG, created actuation, and observed the
actuations effect on the body. We assumed that the
body’s motion rectified with environment to created
forward propulsion. Also, we ignored the environ-
ment’s impact on the body, and also the body’s feed-
back to the CPG. Future work involves looking into
each of the separate parts and pulling them together
into one, robust, autonomous system capable of ef-
ficiently propelling a submersible biomimetic robot.
Acknowledgments
Thomas K. Bliss, Hilary Bart-Smith, and Tet-
suya Iwasaki gratefully acknowledge the support
of the Virginia Space Grant Consortium, National
Science Foundation through Awards #0348448 and
#0237708, and the David and Lucille Packard Foun-
dation through the Packard Fellowship for Science
and Engineering.
References
1
T. Iwasaki, Analysis and synthesis of central pat-
tern generators via multivariable harmonic bal-
ance, in: 2006 American Control Conference,
ACC, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 2006.
2
K. Matsuoka, Sustained oscillations generated by
mutually inhibiting neurons with adaptation, Bi-
ological Cybernetics 52 (1985) 367–376.
3
M. Masic, R. E. Skelton, Selection of prestress for
optimal dynamic/control performance of tenseg-
rity structures, International Journal of Solids and
Structures 43 (2005) 2110–2125.
4
J. Gagneur, S. Klamt, Computation of elementary
modes: a unifying framework and the new binary
approach, BMC Bioinformatics 5 (1) (2004) 175.
5
M. L. Balinski, An algorithm for finding all ver-
tices of convex polyhedral sets 9 (1) (1961) 72–88.
5