Automaton iconAutomaton

Robot Builder Profile: Aiko

The Humanoid

Le Trung has been working on his impressive homemade humanoid for several years now, called Aiko, breaking his bank account to follow his dream. Check out his video for a demonstration and his blog post on the early work of his project for more info/videos.

What makes his project especially amazing is that his work is on level with both corporations and universities working towards the same goal, yet he does this on his own.

Follow the below link to read on . . .

The Brains

More recently he has been working on Aiko's software, which sports object recognition, voice recognition, face recognition, as well as many other features.

aiko_brains.jpg

image: projectaiko.com

The Muscle Controlled Robot Hand

His robot hand creation is the latest of his work. Sensors attached to his arm measure muscle activity to control the servo actuated robot hand. For a homemade project, this hand has impressive precision control. More info and pics of his robot hand.

project_aiko_fries.JPG

image: projectaiko.com

image: projectaiko.com

Curvilinear Camera Detector could Revolutionize Robot Vision

flexible_camera.jpg

Image: Optics.org

With the potential to revolutionize robot vision, National Science Foundation (NSF) funded US researchers from the University of Illinois have developed a silicon camera detector with a hemispherically shaped surface.

Made using the same silicon technology as modern day detectors, they can be 'stretched' into shapes matching eyes found in biology, such as insects, or even the human eye. This is highly beneficial as it greatly improves the field of view, as well as other benefits reported by the researchers.

The technology involves using traditional rigid silicon wafers, 'dicing' them into individual pixels, then laying them onto a stretchable membrane with interconnecting wires for transmitting data. The researchers say that because the technology is based on established materials and manufacturing processes, improving the current 256-pixel sensor resolution would not be difficult.

More information can be found on BBC, AZoNano.com, and Optics.org.

iRobot to sell police 'bots won in xBot lawsuit

Negotiator1.jpg

Photos: iRobot

If you'll recall, late last year iRobot accused a small company called Robotic FX, founded by a former iRobot employee, of stealing IP to create a competitor robot, the Negotiator, which looked suspiciously like an iRobot PackBot. The two machines were the subject of a disputed US $286 million Army contract and, later, a lawsuit.

In the end, iRobot prevailed. It won both the contract (called the xBot program) and the lawsuit (sort of: the two sides settled and Robotic FX was dissolved). Now iRobot is enjoying the fruits of its victory.

Negotiator2.jpg

Turns out the company is taking the Negotiator developed by the ill-fated Robotic FX and making it their own. The idea is to have a PackBot-like robot that is stripped down and cheaper for use by police departments and security firms. Wired's blog has the details:

Like Ahed did in his early days, iRobot will be marketing the Negotiator to police forces and other public safety departments around the country. One of the only major changes is where the things will be built: in India, instead of on the assembly lines of Ahed's still-unnamed defense contractor partner.

The new Negotiator will also be much cheaper than the early edition: $20,000 a pop, "about the cost of a squad car," notes iRobot executive Joe Dyer. It's also less than a quarter the price that Ahed (or iRobot) was going to give the military for its xBots. ... The xBots were supposed to handle bombs, with a mechanical arm. The new, joystick-driven Negotiator comes equipped with just a video camera -- so it'll be a cop's unmanned scout, and not much more.

The formal press release, which makes no mention of the previous dispute, is here.

Thanks, Rex!

Robots podcast discusses robotics blogs, media coverage, more

robotspodcastlogo.jpg

The Robots podcast, a great show with news and interviews created by a group (which includes Automaton's own Markus Waibel) from the Laboratory of Intelligent Systems at EPFL, in Switzerland, has a new episode.

The guests are Steven Rainwater, a founding editor of the popular robots.net, and Mikell Taylor, one of the world's most prolific robotics bloggers ;) -- and, yes, an Automaton contributor!

Although Mikell doesn't mention her prom date 'bot, she talks about how her robot geekness came about and also about blogging and her job as an AUV engineer at Bluefin Robotics.

Listen to the show here [MP3], and check out future episodes at robotspodcast.com.

Video: NYC Soldering Championship

Since many robot makers are fond of a soldering iron, I thought I'd post this video here.

Produced by Spectrum's Josh Romero and Monica Heger. Some details:

IEEE Spectrum stopped by Ignite NYC, where Bre Pettis and the NYC Resistor hacker collective hosted a contest to see who had the fastest soldering iron in the city. The contestants all raced to build a TV-B-Gone kit, and the first to turn off the TV won.


"It is never 'not my job'." Professor Michael Gennert on Robotics Engineering at WPI

Worcester Polytechnic Institute in Worcester, Mass is a small science and engineering university more in the company of flexible, innovative institutions like Harvey Mudd College and Olin College than the tech behemoths MIT or CalTech. Focusing on interdisciplinary and practical education, last fall they kicked off the country's first undergraduate robotics engineering program. I recently had the pleasure of speaking with Professor Michael Gennert, the current director of the Robotics Engineering Department. Prof. Gennert was kind enough to answer many of the questions I've had about the major since I learned about it last year. Read on for the interview -- and high school students, take note! An application to WPI may be in your future!

wpi_logo.gif

How is this curriculum different from the more traditional engineering majors like mechanical, electrical, or aero/astro? What specifically will make robotics engineers better suited to their careers than with a different background?

Robotics Engineering is similar to Aero/Astro in that it covers a wide range of topics and is an integrative, systems discipline. It is no coincidence that our core curriculum consists of Introduction to Robotics followed by Unified Robotics 1-4, similar in philosophy to the MIT Aero and Astro Unified Engineering 1-4 sequence. I want us to graduate engineers who are comfortable machining parts, wiring a board, or writing code, as well as conducting rigorous modeling, analysis, and design.

Each of our robotics courses includes elements of CS, ECE, and ME. The courses are team-taught by faculty from these departments. Consequently, students see that there are no boundaries in engineering. We don't just talk about it; we practice it. What matters is what do you need to solve the problem. It is never "not my job". In this sense, Robotics Engineering is good old-fashioned engineering, not overly compartmentalized like so many fields are today.

Let me add that we did manage to include a one course requirement in Entrepreneurship. Although it is a small part of the program, we believe that it will be immensely valuable to graduates' understanding of the business contexts within which they will have to operate. Interestingly, although this was the hardest part of the curriculum to win approval from the faculty, industry is very excited about it.

Why was the major introduced? What led to it? Was it feedback from industry, from academia, from prospective students?

We saw that robotics was going to become an area of increasing importance. The rapidly decreasing cost of robotics components - computers, memory, communications, sensors - creates a lot of "push" on the supply side. Couple that with the "pull" on the demand side - increasing national needs for manufacturing, defense, health, consumer products, elder care, and entertainment - and we get an industry that is on the verge of exploding. But no one field provides a broad enough background for robotics. One has to know a bit of everything and be willing and able to learn whatever you need that you don't know yet. Clearly the intellectual basis for robotics lies in Computer Science, Electrical and Computer Engineering, and Mechanical Engineering. We are very fortunate to have extremely solid programs in all three at WPI, in fact, one might call them our flagship departments. WPI has a tradition of close interaction among departments and minimal barriers to collaboration. So members of each department just got together and figured out what a robotics program would look like. We quickly realized that robotics - we ended up calling our program Robotics Engineering (RBE) - was a perfect fit for WPI and our project-based curriculum. Also, the opportunity to be leaders with the nation's first robotics undergraduate degree was pretty attractive.

The path to Robotics Engineering was paved by the launch two years earlier of our Interactive Media and Game Development program. IMGD combines Computer Science and Humanities & Arts, two very different departments. So we had already figured out how to assemble multi-disciplinary majors. IMGD went from conceptualization to final approval in about 14 months; Robotics Engineering, a more difficult major to assemble, took only 10.

The response from industry, academia, and students has been overwhelming. Industry craves excellent talent and is very eager to get in on the ground floor of this program. Everyone I asked to join the RBE Advisory Board has accepted. My colleagues at other universities sometimes wonder how we did it and how we did it so fast. The simple answer is that it took a lot of hard work and constant communication - and still does! - aided by the fact that most WPI faculty members actually know and like each other. Many alumni wish that we had a robotics major when they attended. Student response has been great. Our business plan for the program identified 20-25 students each year as the break-even point. We counted 80 RBE majors last year, our very first year and enrollment so far this year is way ahead of last year's.

Carnegie Mellon University of course was a pioneer in offering a robotics engineering graduate degree. Did they influence the way the WPI major was developed? Were you influenced by any other academic programs, organizations, or corporations in framing the coursework requirements?

We looked at the CMU graduate curriculum, Georgia Tech's Threads model, and others. CMU has a very impressive graduate robotics program, but its goals are different from ours. We are aiming to give the best undergraduate engineering education possible. Schools that have robotics minors, concentrations, and similar programs will not be able to give students as rich an experience in robotics as we will, although there are many fine engineering programs that include robotics.

We were influenced by accreditation and designed the program to be accreditable. The national engineering accreditation body, ABET, has criteria for accrediting engineering programs, including specific criteria for each engineering field. Of course, they do not have criteria (yet!) for Robotics Engineering, so we have tried to make the program accreditable under General Engineering. We can go up for accreditation after we've graduated our first student; with four senior RBE majors (they changed majors last year) that should happen this Spring.

Speaking of graduate degrees, I'm looking at grad school some time soon (as are, I'm sure, many of us who were too late for a robotics undergrad degree and are now intensely jealous). Any plans for WPI to offer a graduate program in robotics?

We are planning M.S. and Ph.D. programs right now. We plan to finalize the M.S. program this fall. Although we have only one year of experience with the robotics B.S. degree, we would like the cohort of RBE sophomores to be able to stay for our 5-year B.S. / M.S program. We are looking at several tracks for the M.S. degree: a thesis-based track that is especially appropriate for continuing on for the Ph.D., and non-thesis tracks for B.S. / M.S. students and working professionals. But the non-thesis tracks will still have significant design experiences - Robotics Engineering is definitely not a purely theoretical program at WPI, no matter what level degree. One nice thing about the M.S. is that we can fill in the subjects that did not fit into the 4-year degree, while adding Systems Engineering and other advanced topics. After that, the Ph.D. curriculum almost writes itself.

Looking at entry-level openings in industry, they're still hiring EEs, MEs, and software engineers, not robotics engineers. Do you anticipate any challenges for these students meeting industry expectations while not having the subject-specific depth of their peers? Will industry have to change their expectations to accommodate these students?

We certainly will have to educate employers about this major. Companies such as iRobot, Foster-Miller, BAE, Brooks Automation, and others, are very supportive from the top down and are likely to target robotics majors. When we see that a company is advertising for CS, ECE, and ME majors on campus, we can ask if they want to include RBE majors. RBE majors might not have quite as much depth as others, but they should make up for that with their breadth of knowledge, Where else can you find a fresh graduate who can talk intelligently about Object-Oriented Design, Fourier Transforms, Nyquist criteria, Reynolds numbers and Young's modulus?

While our graduates will be well-suited for the growing robotics industry, they will also be highly qualified to work in fields that are not traditionally thought of as robotic. For example, the principles and technologies involved in detecting incoming projectiles, assessing their threat levels, and deploying countermeasures follow the same sense-compute-actuate paradigm as robotics.

What high school preparation do you recommend for students interested in robotics engineering that may be different from other engineering tracks?

Honestly, it is the same as any other engineering discipline. The most important thing is a passion for the subject and that is perhaps the one thing we cannot teach. Other than that, I look for students who have strong math skills, can think analytically and creatively, and are highly literate and communicate well. Come here with that, and we'll teach the rest. Of course, being well-read and knowing a lot of math and science helps, too.

Thanks, Prof. Gennert! And be sure to check out WPI's Robotics Engineering homepage for more information.

French company Aldebaran sends "Nao" humanoid robot into production

nao.jpg

I've had my eye on Aldebaran Robotics, a company based in Paris, France, for a while (and not just because of my love for pain au chocolat). In addition to raising € 5M in venture capital earlier this year, Aldebaran has spent the last three years developing an affordable autonomous humanoid robot called Nao.

Nao speaks, emotes, and moves. It runs on Linux and it's powered by a rechargeable battery -- nothing particularly revolutionary there. It sounds like the real novelty will be in the software interaction and mobility (it has 25 degrees of freedom). Initially it's pitched as a research and development platform for the next generation of applications, but eventually they want Nao to be a household robot to assist with tasks. (At only 23 inches tall, though I suspect these capabilities will be relatively limited.)

From Aldebaran's website:

"Eventually, with many improved behaviors, it will become an autonomous family companion. Finally, with more sophisticated functions, it will adopt a new role, assisting with daily tasks (monitoring, etc.)

Featured with an intuitive programming interface, the entire family will be able to enjoy the robot experience. Yet, full of new technologies, our robot will also satisfy the demanding techno-addict's expectations."

What interests me the most is the idea that the plan is for Nao to always be user-programmable, even ultimately by the average consumer end-user. Given the problems most people I know have resetting VCR clocks and setting automatic functions on air conditioners, I'm a little skeptical that consumers will want something they have to "train" with any sort of programming interface, rather than just buying a specialized end-product with the necessary behaviors already built in. However, I can't argue with how beneficial it could be to have even a basic understanding of programming in a graphical "block" environment be so commonplace. As with most recent technology, though, I anticipate it'll be the kids doing this while the parents look on in wonder.

This puts Aldebaran in competition with Willow Garage's PR-2 robot; they're also designing it as a university development platform to encourage research into next gen applications. PR-2 doesn't seem to be nearly as close to production as Nao, but with greater size and dexterity it may have more potential for a broad range of household tasks.

Aldebaran is planning general public release at the end of 2008. The press release on their website doesn't indicate pricing, but this blog suggests it'll go for € 10k initially with a target price of € 4k when they can ramp up production.

Via Slashdot

Scoop: Robot dragonfly is smaller than real insect, transmits camera images

DelFly-Micro-Robot.jpg

Researchers at the Technical University Delft will present the smallest flying flapping robot carrying a camera today. With a wing span of just 10 centimeters and weighing in at a mere 3.07 grams, the remote controlled dragonfly is half the size of Borneo's Tetracanthagyna plagiata dragon flies.

The video below shows the DelFly Micro's first test flight indoors. The smaller picture in the bottom right corner shows video data transmitted from the robot in-flight to a ground station. Using image recognition software developed by the DelFly team, objects can then be recognized automatically. This may allow the robot be operated from - or by - a computer.

Guido de Croon, developer of the vision-based control system of the DelFly, already has applications in mind. When a university building burnt-out recently he thought of his team's MAVs: "Since there was some risk of collapse, people could not enter it, and we proposed to attempt to fly into it with the DelFly or a quad-rotor." With the new DelFly Micro still in development, a quad-rotor was deployed to survey the site, but was found too large to enter the building. "Unfortunately, we did not succeed in getting in," De Croon explains, "However, we did gain some experience in what problems one can encounter in such a situation."

Thanks Guido!

Atsuo Takanishi's 41-DOF robot toots its own flute

Atsuo-Takanishi-flutist-robot.jpg

Photo: Takanishi Lab

Toyota's Partner plays the violin and trumpet, and Honda's Asimo has even conducted the Detroit Symphony.

Atsuo Takanishi wants to build an entire humanoid robot orchestra. Takanishi, a professor of mechanical engineering at Waseda University, in Tokyo, started with a flutist.

From John Boyd's "This Robot Toots Its Own Flute" story in Spectrum:

Getting the robot to produce a melody turned out to be a monumental task. First, the researchers worked with professional players to create a performance index of what constitutes the best flute sounds. They translated these sounds into mathematical formulations, to which the robot refers. The researchers then programmed the robotâ''s organs to create a sound. Once a sound was produced, they used the parameters controlling the organs that produced the sound as a base and then adjusted those parameters repeatedly until the sound improved and eventually approximated a target sound in the performance index.

â''We had to teach it everything,â'' says Takanishi. â''The different positions of the lips and fingers, the strength of the air pressure, everything. There are any number of parameters [making it] almost impossible to engineer.â'¿ It was a very slow process.â''

The result? See for yourself -- here's a video of the bot in action: http://spectrum.ieee.org/ns/video/flutebot.mp4

Crabfu's Putter Bot

Another creation of robot maker and animator Crabfu. I'm a big fan of this guy! His robots are not only simple and beautiful -- they have a lot of "personality" as well.

Description from his site:

PutterBot uses 2 standard size servos for the tracks, each with the potentiometer popped out, and servo taped to the top of the servo. This is an easy way to make the servos continuous, and you can adjust the trim with the potentiometer or with the radio. The tank chassis is a kit from Tamiya, and directly driven from the servo horns. The tread mesh is not perfect, but it works ok. One micro servo is used for the putter, and another one used for the head, and mounted in the back of the Putter Bot, driven through wire linkage. The reason using a linkage system, instead of directly mounting the head/light to the servo, is to lower the head for a better center of gravity... and it just looks cuter with the head down low. Radio mixing is used, so that the right stick controls the tank movements, and the left controls the putter and head.

Most Commented Posts

Automaton

IEEE Spectrum's award-winning robotics blog, featuring news, articles, and videos on robots, humanoids, automation, artificial intelligence, and more.
Contact us:  e.guizzo@ieee.org

Editor
Erico Guizzo
New York, N.Y.
Senior Writer
Evan Ackerman
Berkeley, Calif.
 
Contributor
Jason Falconer
Canada
Contributor
Angelica Lim
Tokyo, Japan
 

Newsletter Sign Up

Sign up for the Automaton newsletter and get biweekly updates about robotics, automation, and AI, all delivered directly to your inbox.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Load More
IEEE Spectrum logo Continue to site ➔
ADVERTISEMENT