Unified Fab Lab Bot

16 views
Skip to first unread message

lowki

unread,
Feb 10, 2010, 6:54:26 AM2/10/10
to RepLab Discussion List
I'm thinking the fab lab can actually be unified,
by simply using two robot arms,
with a camera and perhaps microphone.
there can be a turn table on the side with tools.

We can also give it legs so it could use external facilities,
and reach things that might be out of arms length.

We can eventually create a robot that can build a civilization
from scratch,
using just features of it's own body,
and materials from the environment.

Can add a stomach kiln into this robot,
for breaking down (digesting) rocks,
perhaps with vaccuum seal heat insulation,
and a gut that sifts through the materials garnered.

The process of transfering from a large set of tools,
to just one robot, may take some design,
so is best done incrementally.

Robot arms can already weld, drill, punch, paint, and catch baseballs.

If someone really likes the x,y,z table design we can use that to,
just have different tools.

here's a tenative list I made

cutting tool(s) (different blades, or chain saws, or lazers)
grinding tool(s) (smooth or rough rocks)
drilling tool(s) (drill bits, power drills of varying torque or
precision can be different robot wrists)

robot wrist can be high precision motor embedded in high torque
motor, the high precision holder can lock onto hand holder for high
torque applications.

painting tools(s) (ink jet(s) hose's with spray nozzles, paint brush)
joining tool(s) (glue, solder, braze, weld)

robot arm for using main tools,
and second robot arm for holding or turning items.

tools can be on robot arm turnable table on side.

camera(s) for computer to see it's work,
maybe audio as well,
to verify system health,
acoustically identifying or verifying progress through process.
and aids in sensing unseen processes.


thought's anyone?
suggestions for inclusion to the tools list,
or any related info,
appreciated.

tranquil aware desire choice love express intuit channel

Lowki

Sam Putman

unread,
Feb 12, 2010, 3:58:49 PM2/12/10
to openmanu...@googlegroups.com, RepLab Discussion List
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 9:00 AM, Thomas Fledrich <thfle...@gmx.de> wrote:
> On Friday 12 February 2010 06:11:22 pm Leo Dearden wrote:
>> And, IMHO, the rate of return on effort will be much higher for Cubespawn
>> than for robot arms, for the forseeable future.
>
> That's why I will focus on robot arms. A lot of people seem to be working on
> Cubespawn-like stuff already and a robot would be a next logical step to
> assemble the products made by the microfabs to something bigger and more
> complex. But there is still a lot of work to do before that becomes
> effective, so I agree with you. Question is what timespan the "foreseeable
> future" will encompass, I hope it will be rather short.
>

Robotic arms are definitely one way to do it, and any work that
improves the open hardware robotics space is work well done.

That said, the logical extension from a Cubespawn type system, where
assembly is concerned, is something very much like RoboCrane:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robocrane

There are solid safety and efficiency reasons to go with a design of
this nature. A robotic arm is even more flexible, but exceedingly
dangerous and non-trivial to control.

-Sam

Andrii Zvorygin

unread,
Feb 13, 2010, 1:31:04 AM2/13/10
to rep...@googlegroups.com

agreed, there's an extra joint.

> but exceedingly
> dangerous

? humans have arms.
do you meant exceedingly full of potential?

> and non-trivial to control.
>
> -Sam
>

well having more joints would certainly imply there are more things to
think about.
but we can also do virtual projection,
as in put little markers on our clothing,
have camera read the markers,
then have robot arm move in similar manner.

an action can be given a name,
and several can be used in a series for a program.

incrementally we can get there.

there's already a chef bots that make for fully automatic ramen soup
places in japan.
as well as robot chefs taught through combinations of observational
learning, pattern matching and reinforcement.

agreed that with more diversity comes more complexity, but also more potential.

Tranquil Aware Desire Free Anchor

Elspru

Samuel Rose

unread,
Feb 13, 2010, 10:18:31 AM2/13/10
to rep...@googlegroups.com, openmanu...@googlegroups.com
This is largely a "toy":

http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:387

Yet, there are likely some modular components that could be scaled up,
re-designed, etc. In other words, it is worth looking at for learning
(and could be useful for smaller stuff)

The circuits/electronics are definitely re-usable in a larger and more
re-inforced arm. Such an arm could also look at using pnuematics
and/or hydraulics too.

On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 3:58 PM, Sam Putman <atman...@gmail.com> wrote:

--
--
Sam Rose
Forward Foundation
Social Synergy
Tel:+1(517) 639-1552
Cel: +1-(517)-974-6451
skype: samuelrose
email: samue...@gmail.com
http://socialsynergyweb.com
http://forwardfound.org
http://socialsynergyweb.org/culturing
http://flowsbook.panarchy.com/
http://socialmediaclassroom.com
http://localfoodsystems.org
http://notanemployee.net
http://communitywiki.org
http://wikieducator.org

"The universe is not required to be in perfect harmony with human
ambition." - Carl Sagan

Leo Dearden

unread,
Feb 16, 2010, 7:54:21 AM2/16/10
to rep...@googlegroups.com
On 13 February 2010 07:31, Andrii Zvorygin <andr...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 3:58 PM, Sam Putman <atman...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ...something very much like RoboCrane:

>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robocrane
>
> There are solid safety and efficiency reasons to go with a design of
> this nature.
> A robotic arm is even more flexible,

agreed, there's an extra joint.

What Sam meant is that robotic arms are more flexible in use than RoboCranes. They can be put to more uses.
 
> but exceedingly
> dangerous

? humans have arms.
do you meant exceedingly full of potential?

Humans do have arms, but they have a number of very effective safety interlocks that robotic arms usually lack. 

A robotic arm that could assemble, for example, a car, is plenty strong enough to tear a person in half, moves fast and unpredictably enough that it's almost impossible to dodge, and has a huge working volume. It also typically lacks the sight, sound, or touch to know if it's about to elbow you head off, or even if it just has. If you're in a workshop within reach of your robotic assistant you would be literally betting your life on the complete system, including the control software.

I have a CNC router, and that is VERY simple in comparison. I have had software, electronic, and electromechanical faults that have all lead to broken tools and parts. If it was a robotic arm, that could have been a broken me.
 
> and non-trivial to control.

IMHO, while the kinematics are much harder than a cartesian bot, they are not at all hard compared to a number of other parts of the proposed system, especially the computer vision, safety interlocks, and command/instruction/control interface. :-)

I can believe in an assembly robot that has a work area to itself and can construct known designs from known objects, and is safe by virtue of the humans staying the hell out of the way while it has power. I will be impressed if we see it in a generally usable open source form the next three years. I think it's totally doable and it will be beneficial to have it done. Please, impress me. :-)

For the more ambitious ideas being discussed, FWIW I'm gently skeptical. I think they need technologies that either don't currently exist or which are not available within our community at the moment. Success is of course possible, but ISTM that it will take unpredictable breakthroughs. By all means, impress the hell out of me. :-)t 

Cheers,

Leo

Andrii Zvorygin

unread,
Feb 19, 2010, 2:02:06 AM2/19/10
to rep...@googlegroups.com
On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 7:54 AM, Leo Dearden <leo.d...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On 13 February 2010 07:31, Andrii Zvorygin <andr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 3:58 PM, Sam Putman <atman...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > ...something very much like RoboCrane:
>> >
>> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robocrane
>> >
>> > There are solid safety and efficiency reasons to go with a design of
>> > this nature.
>> > A robotic arm is even more flexible,
>>
>> agreed, there's an extra joint.
>
> What Sam meant is that robotic arms are more flexible in use than
> RoboCranes. They can be put to more uses.
>
>>
>> > but exceedingly
>> > dangerous
>>
>> ? humans have arms.
>> do you meant exceedingly full of potential?
>
> Humans do have arms, but they have a number of very effective safety
> interlocks that robotic arms usually lack.
> A robotic arm that could assemble, for example, a car, is plenty strong
> enough to tear a person in half, moves fast and unpredictably enough that
> it's almost impossible to dodge, and has a huge working volume. It also
> typically lacks the sight, sound, or touch to know if it's about to elbow
> you head off, or even if it just has. If you're in a workshop within reach
> of your robotic assistant you would be literally betting your life on the
> complete system, including the control software.

with a camera that can filter the repetitive motions of the robot
(with perhaps a uniqueness filter),
could sense "new elements" or "out of place motions/objects) such as
people, or factory anomalies,
alert factory overseers or stop processes near anomaly.

in a factory setting stoping one machine might mean stopping "all machines",
but with software that is "fault tolerant" can move the line a bit
slower and get the next arms to assemble that part.

Assuming we use just the two robot arms,
and have head mounter camera's,
it can be programmed to stop in case of "excess unknown variables"
such as new (unexpected) objects in it's vision.

> I have a CNC router, and that is VERY simple in comparison. I have had
> software, electronic, and electromechanical faults that have all lead to
> broken tools and parts.

with focus we can have longer lasting products.

> If it was a robotic arm, that could have been a
> broken me.

every person likes to have their personal space,
frequently this is arms length,
some people need more space when working.

for instance a person chops wood a safe distance and orientation away
from campfire social group.


the laboratory,
due to high temperatures,
high voltages,
and powerful equipment,
and who knows what else.

are best kept in a safe place,
preferably detached, shielded and reinforced.

probably with safety measures corresponding to lab's scope of potential hazards.


>
>>
>> > and non-trivial to control.
>
> IMHO, while the kinematics are much harder than a cartesian bot, they are
> not at all hard compared to a number of other parts of the proposed system,
> especially the computer vision, safety interlocks, and
> command/instruction/control interface. :-)

if by "hard" you mean difficult,
that is a personal preference.

Personally AGI, software, programming are my areas of expertise.

Difficult are things we're not yet able to do to the level of our satisfaction.
This includes things we haven't done before.

I can mind-see the algorithms required for these software processes.
I've already started working towards the goal and am creating Huspol
(Human speakable programming language),
to increase software development speed by allowing more people
(speaking human languages) to use it.

I'm also integrating it with robot operating systems,
a low layer of it is a general machine assembly language.
I'm currently at address translation compiler development stage.

> I can believe in an assembly robot that has a work area to itself and can
> construct known designs from known objects, and is safe by virtue of the
> humans staying the hell out of the way while it has power.

Any workplace manipulating physical matter can be hazardous to physical matter.


I'm sure you take many safety precautions,
with ample obeservations with your nose, eyes, ears and touch,
and maintain safety protocols including safety apparel and procedure rituals.

These are all modular components,
which can be integrated into a unified fab lab bot.

I was thinking it can be a multi stage assembler.
small parts can be made with a 3d printer,

the robot with arms assembling macro components that may require
maneuverability as leverage.

the bot's abilities are also beneficial in that it can repair the fab
lab and construct new ones.
as well as leave to bring back supplies.

the 3d printer might be able to "print" these bots, and so be like the
"queen ant" or "mother bot".
also good for at least some of these "children" to be able to seed
another fab lab somewhere.


> I will be
> impressed if we see it in a generally usable open source form the next three
> years.

I'd give it 10, 15, 20 years to reach that level.

> I think it's totally doable and it will be beneficial to have it
> done. Please, impress me. :-)
> For the more ambitious ideas being discussed, FWIW I'm gently skeptical. I
> think they need technologies that either don't currently exist or which are
> not available within our community at the moment. Success is of course
> possible, but ISTM that it will take unpredictable breakthroughs. By all
> means, impress the hell out of me. :-)t
> Cheers,
> Leo
>

Perhaps you've already been impressed.
:-).

# To affect strongly, often favorably: wrote down whatever impressed
me during the journey; was impressed by the child's sincerity. See
synonyms at affect1.
# To produce or attempt to produce a vivid impression or image of: a
scene that impressed itself on her memory; impresses the value of
money on their children.

Classifying it as realistic enough for the near future.
Agreeing with the notion you'd like it to manifest.
I agree.

This can certainly be quite beneficial.
Together we with you can manifest this mental notion.

Many of the components are already available.

Having this "unified vision" or long term goal can be used for roadmap creation.
Identifying required components for goal situation,
distinguishing developed, developing and undeveloped components.

So those that fresh members that join the movement can contribute to
the long term roadmap.

It may benefit from management software,

working on a holographic architecture,
also applicable to companies/tribes.
based on social psychology,
structures of atoms, cells, bodies, tribes.
here's a page with some link to my relevant blog posts
http://lokiworld.org/wordpress/?page_id=736


Meanwhile a Rep Lab road map with dependencies is highly suggested.
Perhaps there is one and I've not found it.

a hypothetical starting point for roadmap tree:

--

end-goal: self reproducing laboratory

sections:

material, assembly, programming,

material:
resource acquisition, refinement, mixing, casting

assembly keywords:

scale: nanometer, micrometer, milimeter, meter, kilometer

type: weaving, printing, binding

programming sections:

sensing, acting, analyzing,

---

Also could have more specific rep labs.

perhaps with strains of rep labs that are designed to reproduce
themselves in different environments,
like on land, underground, on water, submerged, and so on.

By Elspru, from the Heart and Choice Chakras

John Griessen

unread,
Feb 19, 2010, 11:47:20 AM2/19/10
to rep...@googlegroups.com
Andrii Zvorygin wrote:
> Personally AGI, software, programming are my areas of expertise.
>
> Difficult are things we're not yet able to do to the level of our satisfaction.
> This includes things we haven't done before.
>
> I can mind-see the algorithms required for these software processes.
> I've already started working towards the goal and am creating Huspol
> (Human speakable programming language),
> to increase software development speed by allowing more people
> (speaking human languages) to use it.
>
> I'm also integrating it with robot operating systems,
> a low layer of it is a general machine assembly language.
> I'm currently at address translation compiler development stage.

This is very beneficial work -- thanks for doing it.

> Perhaps you've already been impressed.
> :-).

Yes.
.
.
.

> Having this "unified vision" or long term goal can be used for roadmap creation.
> Identifying required components for goal situation,
> distinguishing developed, developing and undeveloped components.
>
> So those that fresh members that join the movement can contribute to
> the long term roadmap.
>
> It may benefit from management software,
>

Yes.

> working on a holographic architecture,
> also applicable to companies/tribes.
> based on social psychology,
> structures of atoms, cells, bodies, tribes.
> here's a page with some link to my relevant blog posts
> http://lokiworld.org/wordpress/?page_id=736

I like this idea of a software tool for managing people
in a non-profit who are far apart. http://lokiworld.org/wordpress/?p=634

Have you used the P2 theme of wordpress? It is supposed to be able to
have attachments easily done, so it can be a repository of info groups of people
are using to get tasks done.

I'm wanting to try Wordpress P2 out. Any one else using it?

John Griessen

Andrii Zvorygin

unread,
Feb 20, 2010, 2:53:15 AM2/20/10
to rep...@googlegroups.com, openmanu...@googlegroups.com

I can't see the theme anyways.
all my web browsing has a uniform light green on gray "theme" or color
setting i chose in browser.

I'd use a text browser if it supported flash and other media.

it's about the content,
the text.

>
> I'm wanting to try Wordpress P2 out.  Any one else using it?
>
> John Griessen
>


I'm going through a "transition",
having become disenchanted by the virtual world,
I'm becoming more interested in the physical world.

Elspru (Elder Spruce).

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages