Re:What became of the personal robot, and comments on desig
Eric Hunting
amazing. I've seen some pictures of it being deployed from a stowage
position and it's impressive how compact it can be. It's only problem
as a near-term robot platform is its noise. Because it uses pneumatics
for its leg actuators, it apparently needed some kind of fuel engine
for its compressor system for sake of power-to-weight and it makes a
very loud constant buzzing noise like a large model airplane. So
wheels still have a bit of an advantage in that. I suspect, though,
that may be a near-term solvable issue as more microturbines become
available. I'm wondering whether it can stand in place without its
compressor being on continuously or if, when it needs to shut down, it
has to lay down like a camel.
On the tool-carrier robot concept, in TMP2 there are a couple of robot
concepts that also relate to this idea. A couple of the sections I
recently added were the OSbot and VersaBot, and somewhat earlier there
was a series of microgravity robots in the Asgard section. VersaBot is
a rough attempt at envisioning an evolutionary modular multipurpose
robotics platform. It's basically a Rhoomba-like cylindrical hardware
platform intended to be structured as stackable modules; motive system
on bottom, functional modules, sensory modules, and processor systems
above, sometimes with a turntable and rotary circuit connector between
the modules so they can move independently. I imagined it starting out
in roles like the Rhoomba and like those office messenger robots,
doing simple janitorial tasks, then evolving for different more
advanced jobs as people developed different functional modules
independently. Though most of the automation would be traditional
structurally-integrated systems, tool and parts carrying would be a
key role to assist maintenance work on the marine arcologies of the
Aquarius phase, which would evolve into automated maintenance based on
hot-swapping of larger service components. (makes more sense to swap a
system module whole and work on it in a more controlled environment
than trying to have robots finagle with their more delicate internals
in the field) There would even be RUV varients based on syntactic foam
modules in a simple capsule or torpedo shape and small thrusters. The
most advanced form I imagined would be crudely anthropomorphic;
basically a Segway with light duty arms and camera/sensor head and
tool and carrying compartments around the base. VersaBot would
originate as the OSbot Project -a hobbyist robotics platform under the
Open Source Everything Project that would serve basically a catch-all
for robotics in that early stage but seek to realize some
standardization in form factors toward the VersaBot.
In the Asgard section, which deals with orbital settlement, there are
a variety of robots that build on the InchWorm arm platform I
mentioned earlier, Remotes, and Carrier Pallets. In space the tool
carrier robot becomes even more significant a role because of the
complications of working in microgravity and so all these robot forms
would assume this role in some way. Remotes are basically the future
of devices like NASA's ball-shaped Personal Satellite Assistant (http://psa.arc.nasa.gov/
) These function primarily as self-mobile cameras and communications
devices alternately local user and remotely operated. They would start
out much like the PSA, evolve to small flat devices akin to a PAD/PDA
that one would carry in a pocket or plug into wall sockets much of the
time, and station-keeping video displays and tool pallets. Their most
advanced form would be what I call a 'Leota'; a spherical self-mobile
display intended to employ virtual transparency and augmented reality
for digital personalities. This is a role that would start much
earlier with Concierge robots based on the VersaBot platform which,
instead of the usual approach of making creepy latex-skinned androids,
would employ back-to-back or cylindrical man-height video displays on
which to project virtual characters. The Leota does the same thing in
a microgravity environment. The name comes from -believe it or not-
Disney's Haunted Mansion where the fortune teller Madame Leota appears
as a ghostly head in a crystal ball. (one of my favorite Disneyworld
attractions. I always found it relaxing. It was dark, had air
conditioning, and reminded me of home in New Jersey...)
Carrier Pallets would be simple robots that use the same propulsion
technology of Remotes for the purpose of assisting in the handling of
bulky large mass objects and cargo in the potentially large volumes of
EvoHab orbital habitats. (EvoHab is the ultimate evolution of the
TransHab concept -adaptive built-up hull structures that can grow and
change incrementally to be potentially kilometers in diameter using
heliostat and fiber optic based virtual transparency that enclose an
'urban tree' of light retrofit buildings, hydroponic garden trellises
of semi-permeable ceramic tubing, and support systems on a branching
core truss structure) Carrier Pallets are aluminum or polyethylene tie-
down panels with nitrogen thruster modules in their corners, handle
bars on their edges, and control, sensors, and gas tanks in their
hollow volume that basically work like a hand-truck in microgravity,
resisting reactive motion in one mode to aid people loading things on
them then actively maintaining orientation and limiting velocity as
one moves them around. This makes them especially useful as tool
carriers and platforms for other machines and they would have variants
for both interior and exterior activity. In their more advanced forms
they would become increasingly autonomous in function, serving as a
mobility platform for other robots. In time they will become a basis
of personal transportation systems such as the RocShaw (rocket rick-
shaw), which is like a chaise lounge you strap into and pilot like a
vehicle, and the Pallet Truck, which is a Carrier Pallet large enough
to have multiple seats, a roll-cage, and/or a box-like container of
strap-down pallet panels or netting. Most transportation and robot
mobility in microgravity would be tracked and built into the truss and
space frame structures of a habitat or based on powered variations of
the 'zip line'. But these things would fill in the remaining mobility
gaps, particularly during construction activity.
Just some naive futurist musings...
Eric Hunting
erich...@gmail.com
> == 3 of 4 ==
> Date: Wed, Dec 24 2008 6:04 pm
> From: "Paul D. Fernhout"
>
>
> Eric Hunting wrote:
>> Though automata as a form of art, puppetry, parlor entertainment, or
>> stage magic may actually go back as far as Roman times, the general
>> concept of the robot emerged in western culture at a time ...
>
> Eric-
>
> I'm always impressed with your command of the history of technology
> and
> related analysis. I agree with you about the anthropomorphic and
> entertainment issues. Thank you for sharing that.
>
> I surprisingly liked the Newton video (never seen it before)
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qdXkJVQUfM
> and can see that they were still ahead of their time, because even
> without a
> manipulator, it was essentially a security watch dog (but with
> personal
> computer functions like education thrown in). Everything they hyped
> there
> could really be done now in a solid way as far as I can tell. There
> is also
> a big market for home and office security devices now, for good or
> bad. I
> see several other security robot designs these days -- this is my
> favorite
> based on looking just the right amount of scary and walking:
> "Banryu Guard Dragon Home Robot"
> http://www.technovelgy.com/ct/Science-Fiction-News.asp?NewsNum=952
> A cheap current item with similar functionality in many ways (but
> not as
> intimidating :-):
> "Erector Spykee Robot"
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7j0TCvfnOpA
>
> Now, personally, I was more interested in the 1980s in robots with a
> manipulator (the Silent Running Drones have always been my ideal),
> and I
> never would have bought something like the Newton. But now I can see
> the
> potential appeal of a mobile sensing platform which does not much
> else.
> Although, following your theme, it probably is cheaper and easier
> just to
> put web cams and smoke detectors everywhere in a small house. But,
> it is
> still nice to have multiple approaches to a situation, so it could
> provide a
> nice mobile backup sensing system. And combine that with the right
> personality entertainment software, and maybe we will yet see a
> Newton-like
> robot. :-)
>
> On the mobile tool platform you mention, you may not believe this,
> but I
> thought of something related about ten years ago, but not quite at
> the level
> of detail you did. I might have been inspired by this Star Trek
> episode with
> robots called "exocomps":
> http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Exocomp
> "The exocomp consisted of a micro replicator, a boridium power
> converter and
> axionic chip network. This axionic network gave the exocomp formidable
> computational power. The micro replicator not only created tools
> which the
> exocomp could use to solve problems but also created new circuit
> pathways in
> the exocomps memory when it performed new tasks. This mechanism gave
> the
> exocomp the ability to learn. The more tasks it had to perform, the
> more
> pathways were formed in its memory. Problems to be solved could be
> entered
> through a command-pad, after which the exocomp decided what kind of
> tool it
> had to use and then replicated that tool."
>
> Anyway, my thoughts had been about a robot that could follow me
> around the
> house and, like R2D2 holding Luke's lightsaber in one movie, this
> "toolbot"
> would carry all my hand tools somehow, and I could ask for a tool
> (by voice)
> and it would hand the right one to me. Then when I was done with a
> tool, I
> could hand it back and it would store it away. And if it could do
> that, then
> why not have it store common parts, like nuts and bolts and wire? As I
> reflect on that, that idea was a predecessor to the general idea of an
> internet of packets of things but on a small scale.
>
> I totally agree that we have not yet tapped the full potential for
> specialized devices around the home. But, I can also wonder what the
> overall
> effect of more and more devices are as they begin to interact -- for
> example, getting a robot to clean the dog hair out of our Roombas. :-)
> Or, as another example, I'd use one of several juicers more often if
> I had a
> robot that cleaned them easily and without the worry of cutting my
> fingers
> by accident on the blades. A self-cleaning food processor or self-
> cleaning
> juicer is a different variation on that, or a self-cleaning Roomba
> -- that
> would go more with the single appliance model, but somehow I feel a
> separate
> device might work better for each one.
>
> On your concept, have you seen this?
> "Robotic mule"
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3W8dm5JxFc
> About thirty seconds in, someone even kicks it and it stands
> upright. When I
> hung around the CMU Robotics Institute in the 1980s, I met people in
> Marc
> Raibert's lab in passing (great people), and I believe that is an
> extension
> of his lab's work.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Raibert
> My wife, a keen study of animal behavior, immediately suggested that
> it
> looked like two people carrying a litter. Related:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BigDog
>
> So, these kind of things are getting more and more doable.
>
> The open manufacturing relevance? Well, maybe, like you suggest, such
> devices in partnership with people, may make it easier to make all
> sorts of
> structures in outdoor locations more quickly.
>
> Actually, on this theme, a major time cost in using machine tools is
> positioning clamps to hold materials worked on. Even back in the
> 1980s I
> know there was work to automate that. So, devices that hold things
> easily
> will also lead to breakthroughs in lowered cost and greater
> flexibility in
> producing things is small batches (or single items) in a machine shop.
>
> Or to try to take your idea one step further (maybe you've thought
> of that
> already) by putting flexible material holders (and you mention related
> things) on the "Big Dog", that might lead to one person being able
> to do
> more carpentry quicker. Another thing to add is laser measuring
> tools and
> maybe ever a smart but "safe" circular saw,
> http://dethroner.com/2007/07/26/how-a-safe-circular-saw-works/
> and before you know it, you have a truly all terrain mobile
> carpentry buddy.
> Maybe it has a display screen for plans or checklists. Give it a
> mild and
> humble "good mule" personality, and carpenters might love it. And
> since many
> carpenters need to bring in a generator anyway to a work site,
> that's a cost
> savings right there to make the economics of the device a little
> better,
> since usually these outdoors robots use big generators.
>
> Bryan's absolutely right in his suggestion it another followup that
> redesigning the dishwashing task in a cafeteria would save a lot of
> time and
> effort. I've seen lines like that with belts for ten or twenty years
> -- why
> has this not happened? Even with perhaps a dedicated dishwashing
> machine for
> each item?
>
> Anyway, to address this systematically, we would need to make a
> detailed
> list of activities people really do around the home (even tiny
> things) or on
> the job site, and think in detail about how each little thing might be
> automated alone, redesigned to be unneeded, be automated as part of a
> package, or be just made really fun to do, so doing it is a non-issue.
> From:
> http://www.whywork.org/rethinking/whywork/abolition.html
> "What I really want to see is work turned into play."
>
> So, with that last point, we may even see a convergence of the utility
> aspect of automation and their entertainment aspects. :-)
>
> Maybe someone would want their helping robots to act like the three
> stooges,
> for fun. :-)
> "Number 5 and the Three Stooges"
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kC1LSSL-d50
> In that video, anyone can see what a difference personality can make
> in a
> robot. :-)
>
> --Paul Fernhout
Paul D. Fernhout
robots, each somewhat specialized. Interesting about the limits of the "big
dog". I'm sure they will be fixable. I previously linked to the walking
robot called Flame -- perhaps two of those might be quieter?
If you haven't read it, I'd recommend James P. Hogan's "Two Faces of
Tomorrow" for the examples of robots under central AI controls doing stuff
in a space habitat. He has one great example early on where people are
challenged to stop a machine from working and the robots keep fixing it.
http://www.amazon.com/Two-Faces-Tomorrow-James-Hogan/dp/0671878484
http://www.amazon.com/Two-Faces-Tomorrow-James-Hogan/dp/1593075634
http://jamesphogan.com/books/book.php?titleID=28
The section in Google books, not sure if it will show for others:
(A google search on "drone party piece hogan" (not in quotes though):
http://books.google.com/books?id=4HL0JYW0fTsC&pg=PT105&lpg=PT105&dq=drone+party+piece+hogan&source=bl&ots=KPEH8hiKDR&sig=YYi08AV2F8eIJY02NRBJhH_QKjQ&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result
You might want to go back three or so pages in the book though.
--Paul Fernhout