We’ve had some very cool multi-legged walkers showing up in our forums and blog in the past few months, including Kåre Halvorsen’s Phoenix and Matt Denton’s B.F.Hexapod, and we’ve been really impressed by the varying capabilities and gait calculation methods they’ve used.  Taking it to the next level, the builders have decided that they’re not content with just making their robots walk about and wave their legs around any more.  In February, Phoenix learned a new trick:

Then Denton gave it a shot with his B.F.Hexapod, showing off some impressive drawing skills:

If you want to see more info, or to drill these guys for more information on their projects, hit up the forums.  Kåre’s thread; Matt’s thread.

Robodevelopment 2007 Talk by Matt Trossen, “Creating a Roadmap for the Merging World of Robotics and Computers”

Robotics and computers are merging, there is no doubt about it, but questions remain- Why is it taking so long? Where do the standards belong? What tools are in the marketplace which assist integration? What are the necessary steps to take?

One thing is clear, we need a roadmap to help guide us through this winding road of merging worlds. Join us as we dig deep into this discussion of integrating modern computers into our robotics platforms.

We have uploaded the whole talk to youtube for those that couldn’t make it to the event. The talk is broken up into 10 parts so people can jump to the sections they most care about or watch the whole thing. You can find the speech here on the Trossen Robotics System homepage. The TRS is an industry proposal for a standard Robotics Object Model which will solve many of the issues plaguing the industry today.

"Standards, Hardware, & Architecture for Next Generation Robotics: Drawing a Roadmap for the Merging Worlds of Robotics and Computers"

If you're planning to attend the RoboDevelopment Conference in San Jose, CA (Oct. 25-26), don't miss your chance to see futurist, visionary, and robovangelist Matt Trossen speak about the rapidly-changing world of robotics!  The field of robotics is ripe and ready to move away from its esoteric roots, but how are we roboticists going to help bring robotics into the mainstream, for the betterment of mankind?  Matt will be speaking at 2 p.m. on Friday, Oct. 26.

Follow this link for a complete schedule of RoboDevelopment speakers.

From the RoboDevelopment website:

Matt Trossen CEO, Trossen Robotics The advent of low-cost modular hardware built around ever-shrinking computers is ushering in a new era of innovation and advancement for robotics. Join Matt Trossen for a discussion about revolutionary new tools available in the marketplace that are changing the landscape of robotics development. Understand how migration from proprietary systems toward modular solutions, high-level languages and standards is driving a new wave of unprecedented growth in our industry. The future of robotics has arrived and is waiting on your doorstep. Don't get left behind! Matt Trossen is founder and CEO of Trossen Robotics, an online hardware store for robotics developers. Trossen Robotics serves the hobby, educational, and research robotic market places. Matt is also active in the community promoting advancements through establishing development partnerships between companies, driving standards, and advising in areas of product development, distribution, and market development.

Critical articles are good for an industry because they make people think. The Register has an article called, “Why do robot experts build such lousy robots?” which focuses on the fact that most of what is coming out today isn’t useful in the consumer marketplace. I have to agree with a lot of the sentiments in the article. I myself tire of all the big claims that come out of research labs about how this or that technology will change the world. The real case is that the gap between a labratory concept and commercial product viability is greater than the one between Paris Hilton’s ears. And that’s not a small gap.

The criticism that today’s roboticists need to focus harder on real world applications is a fair one. For new technologies to survive and find revenue support they need to prove their viability at improving our lives. Self parking cars that only work half assed are not particularly useful integrations of robotics into our lives. Such “innovations” are gimmicks at best. We know how to park our damn cars. We’ve been doing it for 100 years. What next, a robot that helps me scoot my chair in? The Roomba was a great application of robotics to the consumer market space, hence it’s tremendous success. People want to see this kind of integration repeated.

I’m okay with being harsh on roboticists (including myself) because we all need consistent reminders that the market place is harshly Darwinian. Just because WE may be able to imagine wonderful uses for the technologies we play with in the lab, doesn’t mean they have any real world viability in the current market place today. That’s a problem. Research dollars only take you so far. Eventually you have to create something people can use. Tough love is a good thing. It helps keep us focused on the task at hand, and that is building useful technologies.
Big thanks to Cris Kilner for pointing us to the article in his blog dotnetrobot

Spark Fun Electronics is now carrying a rather interesting sensor:

It’s actually two sensors in one: a gyroscope and an accelerometer! From SparkFun, “This small PCB board incorporates the new IDG300 dual-axis gyroscope and Analog Devices triple axis accelerometer in a tight footprint.”

Personally, I think helps open new doors to a higher level of thinking for students, hobbyists, educators and researches. Dave thinks there’s no point on having any more than three degrees of freedom because you can determine angular velocity from the X, Y, and Z coordinates from calculations. Although he has a point, I have to argue that it is a lot more convenient to an end user to have all six right out of the box without having to perform additional calculations outside of the sensor to retrieve the other three. What do you think?

The Automatic Shower Cleaner by SC Johnson isn’t a robot by our standards, but it’s close and we like it nonetheless. It might fit the definition of a robot by the dictionary definition, you be the judge:

ro·bot (rÅ?’bÅ?t’) n.

1. A mechanical device that sometimes resembles a human and is capable of performing a variety of often complex human tasks on command or by being programmed in advance.
2. A machine or device that operates automatically or by remote control.
3. A person who works mechanically without original thought, especially one who responds automatically to the commands of others.

Here at TR we tend to define a robot as a machine which alters or determines it’s behavior based upon sensory input. For instance, if an automatic shower cleaner could sense when to spray the shower on it’s own or how much to spray the shower through sensors then it would be a robot undeniably.

A sensing machine doesn’t need to resemble a human or even do a human task to be a robot by our terms. The task can be simple or very complex. The important part is that it in some way makes decisions based upon input of some format. This is where we draw our line. It can be argued then that even your refrigerator or heating & air conditioning are robotic devices. These are machines that alter their behavior based upon sensory feedback. They are replacing tasks of human work such as tending to the fireplace or opening and closing windows to regulate the temperature in the home. Would you considers these to be robots? What about a washing machine for clothes or dishes? Those machines replace a repetative human task. Intelligent washing machines which have sensors inside analyses how the cleaning is going and alter their cycles accordingly. Wouldn’t this fit the definition of a robot?

However, if you asked anyone these days to name a home robot you aren’t going to get “my dishwasher” or “my refrigerator” as an answer. You can lay good money on the bet that you will hear instead the funny little word, Roomba.

When people think of robots they tend to think of moving machines. Or more specifically, machines that move on their own without a human guiding them. The Roomba, being a mobile robotic vacuum cleaner fits most everyone’s idea of a robot. The robot can sense dirty spots on the floor, find it’s own way back to it’s charging dock, sense walls, furniture, and even drop offs like stair cases. This endearing robot has been so successful that it is now a household name. Some entrepreneurial kids have started a company selling animal covers for the Roomba. As for real family pet’s? Some pets seem to be taking the addition of the latest family member in stride while others are having issues over sharing their domain.

This robot has caused such a stir that even SNL has created a parody product called the Woomba inspired by the famous vacuum. (Warning: Somewhat adult material) EDIT: Apparently, this robot caused such a stir that it was removed from YouTube (o.g. URL http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vxO-FZNG0ao).

It is interesting to note how simple the first break out home robot was. For decades we all had visions of fancy human like helpers and what did reality show up with? A humble vacuum a few inches tall the size of a dinner plate. It makes sense though doesn’t it? Technology in the marketplace rarely makes huge leaps so it’s logical that robots would show up being quite simple in the beginning. A machine that bounces around sucking up debris requires relatively low sensing capabilities and thus is a feasible robot to manufacture and sell in the marketplace. Anything requiring vision or voice recognition is still well into the future. Robots have to tackle non-complex routine chores first before moving on to harder tasks like fetching us a drink. Irobot delivered a solid smack to the back of the heads of everyone who was dreaming up fancy servant robots. This was one of those marketplace moments when a collective “Duh!” reverberated around the world as it became painfully obvious that a humble robotic vacuum was the first step.

No doubt thousands of companies around the globe are scrambling to try and discover what “the next Roomba” is. The next logical step would seem to be the Lawnmower robot, however those have actually been around for a long time and have never quite taken off. Must have something to do with people’s nervousness about unsupervised whirling metal blades.

What is your definition of a robot? What do you think the “next Roomba” will be? Leave your opinion in our comments section or the forums.