Slashdot Mirror
Build Your Own Segway
bugbear writes "Robot hacker Trevor Blackwell explains how to build your own
Segway-style balancing scooter. He says it's not that hard
(but he already knows how to build walking robots)."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
That said, just look under the heading "Limits":
There is another paragraph below that with even more info. Reading the first 3 paragraphs does not count as reading the article, you know.
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
Kamen never said cities would be designed around the Segway, that was Jeff Bezos, of Amazon.
Please get your facts straight.
The funny thing about the lil problem with the Segway having these problems when having a low charge in the battery is little different then an airplane when it is low on fuel. In both cases, the amount of time the controller has to come in to a safe 'landing' is short and will get shorter with any changes.
The difference is that when an airplane runs out of gas it tends to crash from a much higher altitude, a person falling off a Segway is getting off much easier then a pilot with a dry tank.
As I seem to be in an airplane bashing mood, I shall continue... another reason airplanes should be bannered (or at least recalled), in addition to their unfortunate behavior of crashing when they run out of gas... is the fact that they too can hurt people. Did you know that the first airplane passenger on one of the earliest Wright planes died in what was the first airplane crash?
New technology reveals new problems about it's self and other areas, and those that willingly use any form of technology (new or old) accept the risks as to what might happen.
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
It's obviously not true. A bicycle is kept from tilting sideways by momentum, but it doesn't flip over because it is touching the ground in front or in back, far away from the center of gravity.
The amount of torque you would need to get the center of gravity on the other side of one of the wheels is huge, since there is a small angle between the center of gravity, the center of the wheels, and the direction you're going.
On the Segway, there is a 90 degree angle between those vectors, and you would need no force to 'unbalance' the segway. The reason the segway stays up is because the software controls the wheels and continually moves the center of gravity so that it stays balanced.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
No, it's not just you - good minds think alike :) -- I had the exact same idea. I bet that there is an expired patent for it someplace too.
A simple wheel in the back indeed would get rid of the gyros. It is a simple solution which would probably be better/more reliable than the gyros too.
But it lacks the "gee whiz" factor that tech-heads like. Indeed, it might even be boring.
Kamen would have had a much more difficult time marketing such a product too. Which begs the question -- Is it the purpose of the gyros to balance a person? Or are they there to provide a marketing angle???
Think also of all the fancy microcontrollers you wouldn't need. All you would need is batteries, motors, and simple control electronics. It would also be inherently more stable (regardless of what the Segway marketing people would say). I am very sure that if the batteries would go dead that you wouldn't be tossed off the scooter.
I bet that all those companies looking at the segway (post office) would go for a cheaper solution at the drop of a hat. This scooter could be sold for hundreds versus the Segway's thousands.
It really makes you wonder.
Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
The difference is that when an airplane runs out of gas it tends to crash from a much higher altitude, a person falling off a Segway is getting off much easier then a pilot with a dry tank.
Airplanes can glide. A small plane can use a flat, straight highway as a landing strip in a pinch. An airplane pilot at a good height without any running motors has (compared to someone on a suddenly-toppling Segway) plenty of time to figure out how to recover from their situation.
I'll grant, however, that given the choice, I'd probably rather be on the Segway.
Kamen never said cities would be designed around the Segway, that was Jeff Bezos, of Amazon.
Please get your facts straight.
You got to love this. Here, DaHat tells me that Bezos made that claim. In the comment directly above, autopr0n claims it was Steve Jobs. Tell you what, guys, since this archived article from the New York Times credits that statement to Kamen, I'm gonna go with them. DaHat, since you are the one who is making a big stink about getting "facts straight", how about if you do a little looking around on behalf of all three of us and figure out what the answer is?
Actually, I really don't give a flying fuck whether those words came out of Kamen's mouth or not. Honestly, who really cares? Directly or indirectly, Kaman is responsible for the great hype surrounding this toy. You guys took one little thing out of my post and tried to use it to discredit everything else I said.
GMD
watch this
Who's Camen? It was Steve Jobs who thought cities would be designed (not redesigned) for this thing.
Okay, okay. I guess I got Kamen's name wrong. Sorry. As for who made that statement, refer to my response to DaHat below. You all seem to enjoy nitpicking my comments to death, however, I'm the only one providing a reference link to the statement in question. Maybe you two can come up with references backing up your claims, I don't know. I don't think you and DaHat have the right to treat me like this. It's not like I'm saying something blatantly false.
GMD
watch this
No, it means that you and I through our taxes will pay for them (if you pay US taxes anyway...) Seriously, if people really thought about every government expenditure as spending their own money, we would be much better off.
And I don't understand the negative attitude toward the iBot.
The argument for the iBot is pretty simple and it's not at all about "looking neat". The iBot is about accessibility. Given a choice between home retrofits and the many many physical obsticles all over the average city and buildings the iBot is a good alternative that overcomes a significant number of those problems.
Neither the iBot or the Segway will be something that the ADA will "force" upon people. I don't really like the tone of that. The ADA is about helping people who have disabilities gain access to the same places that people without disabilities can get into i.e. the Post Office, and the grocery store.
But insurance companies may look and see that it's much cheaper to get someone an iBot over a the cost of a home remodel costs that will popup for accessibility aids.
Look at it from the perspective of someone who's wheelchair bound. A normal motorized wheelchair can't go up a curb much less a set of steps. Likewise it can't be used to raise a person to get items off the top shelf in a supermarket. Nor can a motorized wheelchair help a person stand to be able to give a loved one a hug or greet someone at eye level. Then there's going for trips over uneven ground (walking with a friend in a park).
he mentions the thought of moving the control column to the side. why not have one on each side? probably a more comfortable position, allows your arms to help more in handling shock to the spine from bumps, and it definitely gives you more freedom to compensate for any sudden stoppage which might throw you forward.
Maybe what we really need to do is stop pining for innovative gadgets...they generally suck anyway.
"You know why you do not see me styling wit my homies? Because I have no homies!!" -Mojo Jojo