The End

The semester is coming to an end and so is this blog. Over the course of the last few months I’ve posted on many different examples of how robotics is being used or will be used in society. Some have been interesting, others funny and admittedly a few have been a little boring. However, whether you are a loyal reader or simply stopped by every once in a while to get your robot fix I hope that this blog has helped to show you the many different ways that robotics can be used.

If you’re interested in learning about what robots are doing you should check out Automation, which is a blog on IEEE spectrum that discusses some of the latest in robotics and automation technology.

State of the Blog Address (self evaluation #3)

Dancing engineers and their robots

A while back I had a post about Robocup which is primarily a tournament for robot soccer teams. However, I have just recently found out that there is also a dance challenge as one of the categories in the junior Robocup competition. The idea is for a team of kids to build a group of dancing robots and then create a performance which includes both themselves and the robots.

The video shows some short clips of some of the finalists in the 2010 competition.

Robot Assisted Surgery

Using robots to perform minimally invasive surgery has become more common in the last few years. This article from MSNBS talks about several hospitals in Memphis which together perform about 1000 robot assisted surgeries each year. The costs and benefits of using the robot for surgery depend on the type of surgery but in most cases the patent has a faster recovery time, less pain and a shorter stay in the hospital.  The monetary cost, as compared to conventional methods, varies with the type of surgery and is sometimes less expensive and other times more. A downside to using the robot is for many surgeries the procedure takes longer than when using conventional methods. There are some exceptions though like the example discussed in the article where the conventional method would have required cutting open the jaw in order the access the throat. Using the robot not only allowed for a faster procedure but it also eliminated the future problems some patients have with speaking or swallowing as a result of the jaw has been cut open.

The diagram below shows the da Vinci Surgical System which is a popular example of a robot surgical system.

Another issue with this method is the steep learning curve associated with operating the robot. The surgeon uses hand controls to operate the robot and a camera for feedback. The robot itself has three or four arms each with a tool on the end. The controls are such that the robot is basically following the movements of the surgeon (it’s not really making any decisions on its own) but remove any shakiness from the motion. This also creates the possibility of slowing down the motion if necessary to increase precision.

Although this technology is already doing a lot to help surgeons, like most robots it still has room for improvement. Currently it’s only practical for some surgeries and the availability is limited but someday robots may be common place in operating rooms.

Keepon

Keepon is a robot designed for use by therapists to help children with social developmental disorders such as Autism. It is designed to interact with children by maintain eye contact and providing affirmative visual cues such as nodding or dancing. The simple design presents a friendly non-threatening face which helps make the child feel more comfortable.

Compared too many robots these days Keepon is pretty simple. It uses 4 motors located in the base to move and has a microphone in the nose and a camera in each eye. It can automatically follow people gaze and dance to a beat or be controlled remotely by a therapist for more complex interaction.

In case you’re wondering a commercial version of Keepon is going to be available soon at http://wowstuff.co.uk./

NASA’s Six Legged Robot

Athlete is a six wheeled/legged robot being developed by NASA for use on the Moon or Mars. This robot has the ability to move quickly across smooth terrain by rolling or move over rough terrain by walking. It is still sable even if one of the limbs is not on the ground which gives it the ability to operate tools designed to fit in a special attachment on each limb. Athlete is just a prototype in the testing phase but NASA hopes it will be ready for a mission by 2015.

A second generation Athlete prototype was built in 2009 and has the ability to split into two independent 3 limb vehicles. This is a feature which makes loading and unload cargo more simple.

The video is of the original athlete prototype.

The Final Frontier

Space exploration relies heavily on robotics. At this point anything further away than the moon is strictly the domain of the robots and even when that changes the robots will still be a crucial component to the success of manned space exploration.

The Mars Science Laboratory, scheduled to launch in the fall of this year, is a neat example of what robotics can do. The primary goal of this mission is to assess the habitability of the planet. The following video is a cool animation done by NASA that shows the landing procedure along with some of the capabilities of the robot.

I realize this is an extremely brief look at robotics in space but I hope to be able to go more in depth for future posts.

Video Post

YouTube Videos used in this post

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iRW7TDUpMqo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8G59zTXVHHU&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPTd8XDZOEk&NR=1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e82e-3MDkF8

RoboCup

RoboCup is a soccer tournament played by fully autonomous robots. There are several different categories including a humanoid category and tournaments are played in multiple countries all around the world each year. The Robocup first began in the 1990s to help promote research in the field of robotics.

The following video shows some clips from a game between robots in the kid size humanoid category.

This next video is robots in the midsize category (non-humanoid). This one is a little long but you really only need to watch the first few minutes to get the idea.

A more specific long range goal of the project is described on the RoboCup website. It is to have a team of humanoid robots that can defeat the winner of the most recent world cup. As you can see from the videos, technology has a long ways to go before that’s going to happen.

Phantom Traffic Jams

Here’s an interesting phenomenon that robotic cars could help prevent.

You’ve probably all experienced something like this before while driving. Basically you’re driving along on a crowded highway when suddenly traffic slows way down for just a minute or two and then speeds back up again. The video doesn’t go into much detail about how these things form but the basic reason is that most vehicles can slow down faster than they can speed up so if a car slows down just a little then several cars behind it need to slow down before the first car can speed up again. This builds up until cars are momentarily coming to nearly a complete stop and you end up with a mini traffic jam moving backwards along the road.

Robot Platoons

SARTRE- Safe Road Trains for the Environment

SARTRE is a project currently under way in Europe with the goal of developing a system where autonomous vehicles could follow a lead car with a professional driver. The technology itself already exists and works pretty well but the goal of the project is to make the system usable on public roads.

The idea is that there would be a lead vehicle with a professional driver and a string of autonomous vehicles behind which are designed to follow the lead vehicle. The vehicles in the line would be able to wirelessly communicate with each other and have a variety of sensors to maintain the proper distance from the vehicle in front. This formation is referred to in the project as a platoon. If a driver outside of the platoon wanted to join they would simply push a button and relinquish control of their vehicle at which point the car would take over and automatically fall into line. Likewise if a driver needed to exit they would simply press a button, the car would leave the line and the driver would take back control of the vehicle.

This video gives a bit more detailed explanation of the project and demonstrates the technology

There are some significant advantages to this system such as improved gas mileage and the chance for drivers to take a break from driving. However, there are still many social, legal and logistical issues that need to be addressed before something like this would be feasible for public roads.

Inspired by Nature

Sometimes the best way to figure out how to make a robot do something is to find an animal that can do it and then build a robot that imitates it. Here are some examples of robots that do just that.

Stickybot is a robot designed to imitate a gecko. It can climb smooth vertical surfaces and is being developed at Stanford University

Currently Stickybot is limited to operating in a very controlled environment but eventually it will be able to climb a much wider range of surfaces.

Snakebot is a robot similar in design to a snake which allows it to travel in places that would be too small for people are other machines. It is being developed at Carnegie Mellon University.

Snakebot works pretty well already but one important drawback is it currently requires a tether to operate which limits its usefulness.

The following is one of several examples of a robotic fish. This one is being developed at Essex University.

Robotic fish could be effectively used for underwater exploration in places or situations that would be too dangerous for people.

State of the Blog Address (self evaluation #2)

Disclaimer: The following has almost nothing to do with robotics. Proceed at your own risk.

How Safe Does It Need to Be?

In the last two posts I have looked at examples of autonomous vehicles that can be used on public roads. The two examples I have discussed are the DARPA Urban Challenge and Google’s autonomous vehicles. Both of these involve fully autonomous vehicles either driving in a simulated environment or with human supervision on public roads. Although the technology needs to be perfected it still raises some interesting questions.

One of the biggest that comes to mind is how good is good enough? How reliable and safe will these vehicles need to be before they are allowed to be used without close supervision? The most logical answer is when robots are better drivers then people but that may not be good enough. I would see this more as the minimum requirement where the real answer depends on the public’s perception of the technology. Even if on average it’s safer than human controlled cars if people don’t see it as safer then it can’t be used.

Another possibility which could help with this issue is that the technology being slowly implemented using semi-autonomous vehicles. In other words, the car and the driver would be working together. Examples of this can already be seen today with features such as automatic parking and lane drift warning systems. Even cruise control and automatic transmission could be considered examples. This would provide time for people to get used to the idea of automated vehicles being on the road. However, even with a gradual transition there is still the jump from the driver being ultimately responsible to the car being fully autonomous and a driver no longer needed.

Or perhaps we will never be willing to give up control.

It's Not as Easy as it Looks

My previous post discussed Google’s autonomous robotic cars which it has been testing on the roads in California. One thing this post did not highlight is how difficult it is to build an autonomous vehicle. This example might give you a little bit better idea of both the difficulty and how few people/organizations are capable of rising to the challenge.

In 2004 DARPA hosted the first of a series of competitions for fully autonomous vehicles known as the Grand Challenge. This first competition was a 150 mile race through the Mojave Desert with a winner’s purse of $1 million. Of the 21 teams which entered only 7 were able to make it through the preliminary test which consisted of a 1 mile obstacle course that each entrant had to navigate successfully to be allowed to compete. In the final race not a single vehicle was able to complete the 150 mile course and the furthest any team got was 7.4 miles. All the vehicles either ran off the road or suffered mechanical failure.

Not to be deterred, DARPA tried again the next year. The race was similar to the previous one but used a different 132 mile course, which followed a dirt road and contained numerous sharp turns, several tunnels and a mountain pass. This time, 23 out of the initial 43 teams made it through the preliminary test and were allowed to race. In the race, 5 vehicles successfully completed the course but only 4 were within the 10 hour time limit.

The third race, commonly referred to as the Urban Challenge, was held in 2007 and used a 60 mile course through a simulated urban driving environment. The course included intersections, stop signs, multilane roads, parking lots and other challenges commonly encounter in an urban driving environment. The vehicles were required to obey all California traffic laws and complete a number of different challenges along the way. Of the 11 vehicles allowed in the final race 6 were able to complete all of the challenges and finish the race.

The following video gives some more information about Urban Challenge. The highlights from the race start 3min 20sec into the video.

If you want more information about these races, Wikipedia is a good place to start.

2004

2005

2007

Robot Chauffeur

A few months ago Google disclosed that it has outfitted six Priuses and an Audi TT to run autonomously and has been testing them on the roads in California. This article from the New York Times provides some good information about this project.

The cars have covered over 1,000 miles on public roads while operating completely autonomously and an additional 140,000 miles with only limited human control. They navigate using a series of GPS waypoints. Additionally, a system of sensors and cameras are used throughout each car to find surrounding vehicles, stay within the lane lines and detect things such as stop signs, traffic signals and cross walks. The technology is still not perfect so during the tests the cars had a human sitting behind the wheel monitoring the situation and ready to take over if anything went wrong.

Eliminating the need for a driver could help to make driving safer since most automobile accidents are caused at least in part by human error. A computer doesn’t get tired or distracted (like in this video) and because of the multiple sensors it would literally have eyes in the back of its head.

One interesting point that the article makes is the current legal code assumes that cars are being controlled by a human driver so the eventual introduction of autonomous vehicles would probably require the addition of a whole new set of traffic laws. The most optimistic estimates say autonomous vehicles won’t be available on the market for another eight to ten years so it will be awhile before this is a serious concern.

Watson's Victory

In case you haven’t heard, over the course of the last few days there has been a series of Jeopardy episodes featuring Watson, an IBM computer, facing off against two of Jeopardy’s greatest players, Brad Rutter and Ken Jennings. Although on the first night it looked like the game would be close, in the end Watson was the clear winner.

There are news stories about this all over the internet (MSNBC) so I want to look, instead, at some of the questions that arise from this event. In particular, was it a fair fight and what does this mean for robotics?

Was it fair?

Looking at the comments on some of the news stories out there I have noticed many people are crying foul. The biggest complaint I have seen is that Watson receives the question electronically as a text file which some claim gives him extra time to process the question and find an answer. The alternative would be for Watson to have some sort of visual device to read the question off the screen. Personally, I don’t think it would have made much difference. The questions are all displayed in the same general area using the same size, color and font. Under these circumstances it would have been easy (easy relative to the difficulty of building Watson) for the engineers at IBM to build a vision system that could quickly and accurately read the text. However, this project was focused on a computer understanding human language and not vision.

A second issue that has come up is how Watson buzzes in. According to an article at Wired, Watson uses a mechanical button pusher along with the same button as the other players. The article doesn’t mention the speed of the button pusher but since it’s mechanical I doubt it’s significantly faster than a human finger.

The third issue I have come across is that some claim the questions were of the type that favor a computer, meaning they did not include as many puns are other intricate features of language that would be very difficult for a computer to interpret. I can’t speak for this claim since I have no idea how the questions were selected and do not watch the show often enough to know if the questions used were typical of Jeopardy.

How does this effect Robotics?

In my opinion this is the more interesting and more important of the two questions I’ve posed. However, a complete answer is way beyond the scope of this blog, or my knowledge for that matter, but I do have a few thoughts.

An important aspect of robotics is the interaction between robots and people. Typically we communicate with robots through some sort of control mechanism which could be anything from a mouse to a lever or dial. When speech is used, it usually involves relatively simple commands like “pick up the ball” or “call Katie.” These methods work but if we could communicate with computers the same way we communicate with each other then we could use computers, and thus robots, far more effectively. One application suggested by IBM is having a computer analyze a patent’s description of symptoms to help the doctor make a diagnosis.

Let me know what you think. Was the game fair? Is Watson a breakthrough in computing technology or is it just a PR stunt by IBM? What are some other applications for this technology?

Need a Hand?

Have you ever looked at your hands and been amazed at how complex they are? In fact, the human hand has 27 bones, 24 degrees of freedom and 1300 nerve endings per square inch. It doesn’t take much to realize that trying to build a functional hand would be extremely difficult, yet people are trying to do it anyway. Why? Well, there are many different applications for robots with hands but the simple answer is this; we want robots to help us and to do that they need to be able to do what we do. Since much of what we do involves using our hands, it would be helpful for robots to have hands.

This article from wired.com gives some information on a number of different robot hands.

Research on robot hands has been going on for about 50 years and there are many examples of different robot hands using all kinds of different actuators (what makes it move), sensors, control systems and building materials. The first working robot hand was developed in 1960 by General Electric’s Ralph Mosher and had two fingers and 5 joints. However, it did not have any sensing capabilities.

A good example of a more modern hand is the Shadow Dexterous Air Muscle hand (#12 in the article). This hand has 24 degrees of freedom which is the same as a human hand. It uses 40 “Air Muscles” which require compressed air and electrical current to operate. The hand uses pressure sensors with a twelve bit resolution from 0-4 bars, which make it sensitive enough it to detect a quarter lying on the floor.

 

If you want more information the check our these pages: Spec Sheet and Shadow's website.

These examples barely scratch the surface of information about robot hand technology so hopefully I’ll have more posts on this topic in the future.

State of the Blog Address (self evaluation)

Please disregard the following, as it is part of the requirements for the class.

The 6 posts I have made so far mostly consist of information about robotics. Many of these posts have been regarding aids for the disabled with the two best being about the prosthetic arms and the robotic wheel chair. Both of these provide interesting information that should be easily understood by most people. However, the wording on both is a little dry and I plan to try and make future posts more engaging.

I have left comments on Trashy Energy in the Toilet Energy post. Also, there is a comment in Straining the Grid on the initial post about solar energy.

For the future of this blog I plan to continue my theme about robotics for the disabled but I will also branch out to a few other interesting applications for robots.

Robotic Wheelchair

This video is about a wheelchair developed at MIT that can navigate through a building on its own.

As mentioned in the video navigation and mapping algorithms have been around for a long time but what impressed me is how the wheelchair could learn the layout of the building from a guided tour in a similar way to how a person would. This not only makes the voice commands possible but also makes it easier to deploy the robot in a new environment.

There are, of course, still limitations to this flexibility such as the need for a number of preset Wi-Fi hotspots which the wheelchair uses in conjunction with a laser range scanner for navigation. These are necessary since it’s extremely difficult for a mobile robot to keep track of its own position as it moves.

There are many other examples of robotics being used in wheelchairs. If you’re interested, do a search on YouTube and see them in action.

Q&A

1.      What is the purpose of this blog?

This blog is intended to provide information about how the field of robotics can have a positive impact on people’s lives. Along with applications of robotics I would also like it to provide some easy to understand technical information about current and near future robotics.

2.      Who is the imagined audience(s) of this blog?

I imagine the audience to be college students, and random people who are bored at work and trying to kill time.

3.      Have my posts matched up with my purpose/audience?  What/who might I be overlooking in defining my purpose/audience this way?

Up to this point I think the blog has done a decent job of reaching the intended audience but I’m probably overlooking the people who actually work in the area of robotics. I think they would find this blog a little too general to be interesting.

4.      What can I do to encourage more reader participation with my blog?

Either ask more questions or write more interesting and thought provoking posts. Currently robotics does not involve too many controversial topics but there are many different issues that could arise at technology continues to progress.

5.      How can I expand my audience in this class?  Outside of this class?

I could use a wider variety of posts that would include information about more advanced technical information.

6.      How would I characterize the tone of my blog?

Serious but informal (most of the time).

7.      What do I hope to get out of writing this blog?

I would say a good grade but that answer is not allowed so I’m going to go with a chance to practice my communication skills and learn a little bit more about robotics in the process.

8.      What would I like others to get out of it?

I would like people to have a better understanding of how robotics is starting to work its way into society and the benefits that can come of this.

9.      What are the strengths of my blog/my blogging?

Links to a variety of different types of information sources such as videos, news reports and technical papers.

10.  What are the weaknesses?

Some parts are a little boring.

11.  Have I used a deficit model in my writing, or something else?  How would I know?

Definitely the deficit model, since its just information.

12. How have I characterized (implicitly or explicitly) science, engineering, and/or technology in my blog?

I think the general characterization in the blog is that science and technology can be helpful for most people.

Science Communication and Robotics

Investigating Science Communication in the Information Age discuses how communicating science to the public has traditionally been done and how it has began to change. Section 3.1 discusses how the media has been involved in science communication and concludes that it is the primary conveyer of scientific information to the public. Dr. Hansen also concludes that most science in the media revolves around nuclear, environmental or medical issues. This makes sense, since all three of these topics are the center of debate over public policy that could have a significant impact on most people’s lives. Thus, they are topics which people want to hear about.

After reading this section I began to wonder where robotics fits into the issue of science in the media. Robotics can play a role in nuclear, environmental and medical issues but it is not usually the item actually being discussed by most media outlets. There are, of course, a few examples here and there but for the most part it is not a very common topic. This is probably because the field of robotics is still in its infancy and not as much has been done to make it news worthy. However, robotics has the potential to have a significant impact on society in the future and as that happens will probably become more prominent in the media.

In the News

There was a report done by NBC about a telecommunication robot being used to help a sick student attend school remotely (here's the link). The technology itself isn't incredibly new or exciting but the application of it is pretty neat.

There was also a story done recently by Colorado Channel 9 News about high school students who designed a couple of devices to help the disabled (link, I think this is the same report referenced by Jen in her comment on the previous post). The ingenuity and creativity of the students is impressive.

The video below demonstrates some of the research done with prosthetic arms. It is a few years old and may not represent the absolute latest in prosthetics but it does provide a good example of what robotics technology can do in this area.

In the video the prosthetic arms are being controlled by the nervous system but this doesn’t allow for any feedback from the arm. The only way the user can know how the arm is positioned or if it is touching anything is to look at it. This limitation makes grasping small or delicate objects difficult.

One solution to this problem is using what is sometimes referred to as a haptic device mounted somewhere on the patents body and connected to the prosthetic. This device would take input from sensors on the prosthetic and translate that into something the user could feel. For example, if the device was mounted on the patent’s back then it would apply pressure to a point on their back in proportion to pressure applied to a pressure sensor on the prosthetic. The idea is that now the person using the prosthetic arm can grasp something delicate, like a paper cup, without crushing it.

The next step up from this is to make it so instead of feeling the pressure on some other part of their body they actually feel it on their missing hand. The surgery the subjects in the video underwent to restore some of the severed nerves allowed for them to feel sensations of touch in the missing hand. So, in theory, all you have to do is place a haptic device on the person’s chest and line it up with the appropriate nerve endings. In reality, it isn’t that easy.

The paper On the Design of Miniature Haptic Devices for Upper Extremity Prosthetics (this paper is from the IEEE website and the full text may not be available to people without a subscription) goes into more detail and documents some of the work being done in this area. It discusses the development of three haptic devices that can provide touch, pressure, vibration, shear force and temperature to an amputee who has had targeted nerve reinnervation surgery.

This is just one of many different aspects of robotic prosthetics and hopefully I’ll be able to discuss some others in future posts.

Welcome

Robotics is an area which has a significant amount of potential to change the way we live and work. Even today robots play an important role by performing tasks which would be dangerous or monotonous for humans. In this blog I would like to explore some of the ways that robotics is currently being used to help people, what work is being done and obstacles that need to be overcome.

Starting out, I'm going to focus on how robotics could help people directly. This would include things like advanced prosthetics, robot assisted surgery and robots used in daily life. The application of robotics on this level is for the most part very new and limited. One of the few and probably most well known examples is the Roomba, which is a robotic vacuum cleaner.