# Remotely Controlled Robot Swarms: A Structural Analysis and Model for Structural Optimization
## 3 Results
### The Analysis of Human and Insect Swarm Patterns as a Reference for Robots' Swarm Structures
#### 3.1.2 Results of Simulations  
A few trajectory scenarios were tested. Those that had the greatest effect on the robots structure are listed below:  
Action 1: The required path was straight in front of the leader. A random obstacle was placed on the road. For the first simulation, the swarm was set to one column; for subsequent simulations there were two, three, and four columns, respectively. Results: The path in the simulation was similar to what was expected, but the array was spread out and the line was disturbed (see Figure 11). Effects: A controller for the distance between the robots was introduced. To maintain the dynamics of the swarm, the robots needed a power reserve. As the lineup of the rows was not important, this result was acceptable. Action 2: In the second simulation, an obstacle appeared on one side, but the leader moved in a straight line. Results: The swarm avoided the obstacle as one. Effects: A problem appeared in the first row, which was programmed to have the leader at its centre. This was resolved by adding a function for maintaining the distance from followers and the centrality of the leader's position. Action 3: The array structures passed between two walls, which forced them to compress. Results: Fortunately, the movement of the robots from the side to the centre took time, so the central columns moved forward to the side, and some free space appeared for the robots in the side columns. The reconfiguration of the swarm took place by introducing the robots from the side columns between the robots of the central columns, as presented in Figure 12. After the robots passed the obstacles, the distance between the columns grew. Effect: The algorithm forced the robots to stay close to the central columns when obstacles were detected. The swarm will move in order if the algorithm controlling the distance between the predecessor and follower is flexible and based on information about the swarm reconfiguration. Action 4: The leader turned and one column of robots followed it. The test was performed for one and three columns. Results: If the robot did not have a predecessor tracking system, it followed its precursor via the shortest route, changing the trajectory of the swarm, as presented in Figure 13.  
Figure 11: The array of robots passes over the obstacles. Figure 12: The results of the simulation for scenario 3. Additionally, if the robots were not equipped with a tracking system to maintain distance, the followers took the shortest path. If an obstacle entered the line of contact, the robot needed to avoid the obstacle by moving in a different direction and, after passing the obstacle, searching for its predecessor. Effect: The predecessor's tracking system needs, track memory, and a global navigation system. Action 5: The leader was controlled by the operator to pass between obstacles on a rectangular path. Followers/slaves were to follow it and avoid the obstacle. Results: The operator estimated the turning point in order for the whole swarm to pass the obstacle. The followers tried to follow the robots in front of their column. Due to the non-ideal tracking system algorithms, the robots tried to keep their distance from their predecessor and followers, so they tried to proceed between them. The result was a change in the array's shape. The area occupied by the robots changed and the robots did not follow the paths of their predecessors. The operator needed to estimate how to control the leader in order to enable the slave robots to follow it and avoid the obstacle. The results are presented in Figure 14, where the sequences of the swarm positions are marked with numbers. Effects: The operator needed to control the swarm by commanding the leader and observing the whole swarm. The identification of the leader, the first row, and the column members was needed to maintain the array. To allow the followers to avoid the obstacles, additional obstacle detectors were needed. As a result, each robot should be identified and should have an ID marker.