Robel: Robotics Benchmarks for Learning with Low-Cost Robots
ai.googleblog.com
Robel: Robotics Benchmarks for Learning with Low-Cost Robots
1–10 of 26 posts
Re: Robel: Robotics Benchmarks for Learning with Low-Cost Robots
#2They may be lower cost than the status quo, but $3199 to $3699 is out of my reach as a (non professional) hobbyist. I hope maybe one day though!
https://sites.google.com/view/roboicsbenchmarks/getting-star...
https://www.trossenrobotics.com/d-kitty.aspx
https://www.trossenrobotics.com/d-claw.aspx
Not quite in the realm like the $50 to $90 'Google Voice / Google Vision AI' kits
Re: Robel: Robotics Benchmarks for Learning with Low-Cost Robots
#3You can translate this short article of mine https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/azzerare-con-poco-il-debito-t... to get real, low-cost “toys” for a small mechatronics lab suited to almost any dl & rl starting level endeavor you want. (tldr: less than $1.5k would suffice in first instance)
Re: Robel: Robotics Benchmarks for Learning with Low-Cost Robots
#4They may be lower cost than the status quo, but $3199 to $3699 is out of my reach as a (non professional) hobbyist. I hope maybe one day though! https://sites.google.com/view/roboicsbenchmarks/getting-star... https://www.trossenrobotics.com/d-kitty.aspx https://www.trossenrobotics.com/d-claw.aspx Not quite in the realm like the $50 to $90 'Google Voice / Google Vision AI' kits https://aiyprojects.withgoogle.com/
The main cost is the actuators. The servos they use are the only ones out there with integrated feed back from the sensors which is required so they can calculate hardware safety. They also have, albeit pretty bad, torque control which is necessary for many approaches to controlling legged robots and manipulators.
Re: Robel: Robotics Benchmarks for Learning with Low-Cost Robots
#5They may be lower cost than the status quo, but $3199 to $3699 is out of my reach as a (non professional) hobbyist. I hope maybe one day though! https://sites.google.com/view/roboicsbenchmarks/getting-star... https://www.trossenrobotics.com/d-kitty.aspx https://www.trossenrobotics.com/d-claw.aspx Not quite in the realm like the $50 to $90 'Google Voice / Google Vision AI' kits https://aiyprojects.withgoogle.com/
The main cost is the actuators. The servos they use are the only ones out there with integrated feed back from the sensors which is required so they can calculate hardware safety. They also have, albeit pretty bad, torque control which is necessary for many approaches to controlling legged robots and manipulators.
Wouldn’t stepper motor with encoder and current sensor be cheaper?
Re: Robel: Robotics Benchmarks for Learning with Low-Cost Robots
#6Earlier quoted context omitted.
The main cost is the actuators. The servos they use are the only ones out there with integrated feed back from the sensors which is required so they can calculate hardware safety. They also have, albeit pretty bad, torque control which is necessary for many approaches to controlling legged robots and manipulators.
Wouldn’t stepper motor with encoder and current sensor be cheaper?
That wouldn't work for a robotic hand.
Re: Robel: Robotics Benchmarks for Learning with Low-Cost Robots
#7Earlier quoted context omitted.
The main cost is the actuators. The servos they use are the only ones out there with integrated feed back from the sensors which is required so they can calculate hardware safety. They also have, albeit pretty bad, torque control which is necessary for many approaches to controlling legged robots and manipulators.
Wouldn’t stepper motor with encoder and current sensor be cheaper?
I'm skeptical that a stepper motor would be able to support it's own weight and more without a gearbox. This is especially important for making serial manipulators. Also keep in mind that what they're aiming for here is repeatability so that researchers can easily compare their algorithms. That means using parts that don't vary too much and minimizing the amount of assembly researchers have to do. There are much cheaper knock off versions of these actuators, although they may not be as repeatable. At the very least they aren't as well documented.
Re: Robel: Robotics Benchmarks for Learning with Low-Cost Robots
#8They may be lower cost than the status quo, but $3199 to $3699 is out of my reach as a (non professional) hobbyist. I hope maybe one day though! https://sites.google.com/view/roboicsbenchmarks/getting-star... https://www.trossenrobotics.com/d-kitty.aspx https://www.trossenrobotics.com/d-claw.aspx Not quite in the realm like the $50 to $90 'Google Voice / Google Vision AI' kits https://aiyprojects.withgoogle.com/
You’re not the intended audience. This is meant for small research labs that are just starting up and want to enter the RL/Robotics research space and can’t afford a $400,000 PR2 or $150,000 shadow hand.
Re: Robel: Robotics Benchmarks for Learning with Low-Cost Robots
#9I'm interested in hearing from anybody who has sucessfully built a useful research robot for my experience has been everything < $1K uses crappy servos.
Re: Robel: Robotics Benchmarks for Learning with Low-Cost Robots
#10They may be lower cost than the status quo, but $3199 to $3699 is out of my reach as a (non professional) hobbyist. I hope maybe one day though! https://sites.google.com/view/roboicsbenchmarks/getting-star... https://www.trossenrobotics.com/d-kitty.aspx https://www.trossenrobotics.com/d-claw.aspx Not quite in the realm like the $50 to $90 'Google Voice / Google Vision AI' kits https://aiyprojects.withgoogle.com/
You’re not the intended audience. This is meant for small research labs that are just starting up and want to enter the RL/Robotics research space and can’t afford a $400,000 PR2 or $150,000 shadow hand.
Totally worth the money :)