41–50 of 75 posts
Edit: I am curious about what tech would be needed to bring this up to near par with a human arm.
The motion, form-factor and the range of movements is certainly good, but looking at some of the other videos[1] shows the arm really is the neat, tiny protuberance of much larger stack of technology. The pumps and everything else appear massive and bulky. Biological muscles are self-contained, not tethered. This is no doubt an impressive demonstration of integration, but unless all those pumps are inside the arm, th…
The motion, form-factor and the range of movements is certainly good, but looking at some of the other videos[1] shows the arm really is the neat, tiny protuberance of much larger stack of technology. The pumps and everything else appear massive and bulky. Biological muscles are self-contained, not tethered. This is no doubt an impressive demonstration of integration, but unless all those pumps are inside the arm, th…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pneumatic_artificial_muscles
Hydraulic, rather than pneumatic, operation has also been attempted.
Fun stuff, but nowhere close to being practical in any way for real world robotics. And, no, it isn't a matter of iterating and optimization. These kinds of actuators will never be anywhere close to the energy efficiency and technical simplicity necessary to build something like a full function humanoid with hundreds of actuators that can run without a small power plant connected to it via an umbilical cord and everyone in the room wearing hearing protection.
That said, it is great to see people experimenting and learning. Nothing wrong with that. Great video.
Well, this technology dates back to the 1950's. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pneumatic_artificial_muscles Hydraulic, rather than pneumatic, operation has also been attempted. Fun stuff, but nowhere close to being practical in any way for real world robotics. And, no, it isn't a matter of iterating and optimization. These kinds of actuators will never be anywhere close to the energy efficiency and technical simplicit…
You provide valuable information but I just hate how you succumb to easy thinking, an appeal to tradition [2]: "well it hadn't been done then so it can't possibly be done now." It's a form of anachronistic gatekeeping. It doesn't belong in the age we currently reside in.
We have totally different computational abilities today, powerful beyond reason. Our hardware is smaller and better performing. We can perform digital simulations billions of times before we even execute one physical experiment.
I've seen the same attitude with age-old mathematics problems and it makes even less sense in that domain. The ability to perform computational experiments that our predecessors couldn't, changes the viability of almost every unsolved problem.
Boston Dynamics would have never created Atlas or Spot if they clung to common tropes about robots. And now, due to battery technology, the once tethered robots are dexterously mobile. [2]
[1] https://www.fool.com/investing/2020/10/05/how-much-cheaper-a...
The motion, form-factor and the range of movements is certainly good, but looking at some of the other videos[1] shows the arm really is the neat, tiny protuberance of much larger stack of technology. The pumps and everything else appear massive and bulky. Biological muscles are self-contained, not tethered. This is no doubt an impressive demonstration of integration, but unless all those pumps are inside the arm, th…
The motion, form-factor and the range of movements is certainly good, but looking at some of the other videos[1] shows the arm really is the neat, tiny protuberance of much larger stack of technology. The pumps and everything else appear massive and bulky. Biological muscles are self-contained, not tethered. This is no doubt an impressive demonstration of integration, but unless all those pumps are inside the arm, th…
These things always start off large and gradually get smaller (and often miniaturization is where the really interesting optimizations come), apparently this apparatus can already fit roughly within a human-sized body... which isn't a bad start.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pneumatic_artificial_muscles
This has been tossed around as a theoretical for a long time, and it looks fantastic. Hopefully we can optimize this and move towards full biological integration. Amputees shouldn't have to deal with clumsy prosthetics. Edit: I am curious about what tech would be needed to bring this up to near par with a human arm.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>The ideal consumption necessary to raise this 7 kg dumbbell by 1 meter in 1 second is 7 watts. You sure? A HP is 75 Kg raised by 1 meter in 1 second (and is roughhy 750 W): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horsepower Raising 1/10th of the weight by same distance in the same time should be 1/10th of that i.e. 70-75 W.
energy = force times distance force = 7kg times 10N/kg = 70N (roughly) So yes, more like 70W
(I still doubt that the robotic arm can be almost twice as efficient as a human arm, however, so probably the 20% is not accurate or there is some other factor involved) .
[1] which I have no idea if correct even roughly