Slashdot Mirror


Still More on the DARPA Grand Challenge

The SF Chronicle has an in-depth story on the DARPA Grand Challenge, with emphasis on the several teams from the San Francisco area. The three teams covered are using a pickup truck, a six-wheeled all-terrain vehicle, and a self-balancing motorcycle...

5 of 168 comments (clear)

  1. rover by bran6don · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I wonder how much do NASA and DARPA collaborate. Much of the technology used to create the mars rovers seems like they would be useful for this challenge.

    From the article: "The biggest hurdle has been making vehicles see obstacles and react to them"

    The mars rovers use a pair of cameras to build a 3d model when it decides its path. Put this system into a 4x4, give it a small cluster for computation, and it should work well enough to make it across the desert, I would think.

    1. Re:rover by timeOday · · Score: 5, Interesting
      The rovers are cutting edge aerospace, but I haven't seen anything to make me think they're on the forefront of computer vision. The obstacle avoidance done on the rover was first done on earth many years ago. It's not just the NASA hardware that's (necessarily) conservative; the surface of MARS isn't a race so apparently it's better to drive the rovers conservatively and mostly manually, which is what they do.

      The rovers aren't even autonomous in real time. They stop, take pictures, plan the next few feet, execute blindly, then stop and open their eyes again to start the next episode. That's not what DARPA is looking for. And the system only looks ahead by a few feet. You might think it's just a matter of adding more computing horsepower, but handling all the disorienting motion from looking while moving is a whole different problem.

      The DARPA contest will hopefully be won by somebody pushing the field forward, not by recycling a technology time-tested enough to go on a rover.

  2. any robotics experts? by bluesepsilon · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I just read an article in Scientific American about this. I'm not into robotics myself, but I'm curious: how much of the difficulty is due to the time it takes to process the input data (from cameras, lasers, etc.)? how much is from the necessary ruggedness of the components? how much difficulty comes from lack of funding for and access to top-of-the-line components? I'm also curious to see what DARPA plans to do with the winning vehicle, if there is a winner. Will they pay for, and then take, any vehicle that is innovative (for example, the motorcycle that can stand on its own)?. Kudos to DARPA for their clever method of conducting research--instead of tying funds up in someone's brainchild, they are allowing a lot of different ideas to proliferate.

    --
    War does not determine who is right, war determines who is left.
  3. In other news by BigBadBri · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Trains are dangerous, because the human body is not designed to go over 30 mph.

    Automobiles should be restricted to 4 mph, and preceded by a man carrying a red flag (an presumably singing the Internationale for good measure).

    Machines such as the Spinning Jenny will destroy our way of life.

    I salute you, Ned Ludd, for your foresight and insight into the human condition.

    --
    oh brave new world, that has such people in it!
  4. Behind The Scene of Our GC Team by TravisTHose · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I was the lead engineer of the Grand Challenge team 'R Junk Works'. Our paper was submitted and approved by DARPA for the Grand Challenge. They then put us in the 'Partially Acceptable' category just after approval. This was no big deal for us as we already had our prototype vehicle built and were testing it in October of 2003 before we submitted our Technical Paper. Their 'Site Visit' seemed like just another hoop to jump through before being in the race. There are only three people on our team, and we all have worked in one form or another for the 'Lockheed Martin Skunk Works', so our little group we called the spin offs - or the 'R Junk Works'. We are also located in Palmdale California. In retrospect, perhaps it was our team name that gave DARPA hesitation. Heaven forbid that only three guys in a garage in Palmdale with a name like ours win their Grand Challenge! Anyway, the four DARPA site visitors/inspectors arrived at my garage on the 5th of December to inspect our progress. They road around in our test vehicle that had: Integrated DGPS, LN200INU and V4L2 Vision systems running under LINUX Fedora Core 1.0 all installed and functional in my personal 1998 Toyota Tacoma pickup truck. They let it slip that this was a 'first for them' to be riding around in one of the contestants vehicles. They road around in the drivers seat around the desert next to my house here in Palmdale along a pre programmed course that took them down dirt desert roads and washes here in the Mojave Desert - only a few mile away from where they are going to have the actual race. Members of this inspection team jump in front of our vehicle as it was traversing the pre programmed course and watched how it avoided them by driving around them and continuing down the course. They watched with amazement as our vehicle raced along in excess of 35 mph across the rutty Mojave Desert roads. Almost everything worked perfectly for the demo except our main vision system camera had been damaged the day before and we were using our backup camera that was having intermittent problems, but did not take away from the totality of the demo. It was probably one of the best demos I have ever given in my entire professional life. If I could summarize their attitude of the demonstration, it would be that they were amazed, enthused and excited over our participation in the Grand Challenge. They also let it somewhat slip that we were the farthest along team that they had seen as yet! I tend to think that the inspection team was 'On our side' as possible contestants. After the demo, we assumed that it was inevitable that we would be selected for one of the remaining six contestant slots left. This was far from the case. They called us on December 17th (my birthday) and told us that we were not selected to participate. One of the inspection team members said: 'After a much heated discussion amongst the DARPA Program Director and our inspection team, I have been told to tell you that you were not selected to participate in the Grand Challenge.' The transparent reason they gave us was that our team did not, as yet, have an actual 'race vehicle'. A very trivial problem for us when it comes right down to it. This was by their very own undoing, as once our vehicle sponsors got wind that we were not in the 'Totally Acceptable' list; they backed out and were waiting for our team to be on that list before donating our actual race vehicle. We even supplied statements of sponsorship from that sponsor = they obviously did not read them = OR = perhaps there was another incentive. After talking to a guy called 'Dan' who is the editor of a national magazine and good friend of mine, he also went to the 'Kick Off' for the Grand Challenge that DARPA had in LA last year. He was able to 'Liquor Up' one of the DARPA legal reps, and SHE intimated that the reason they were holding the Grand Challenge was to put the fear of god into their current contractor and show that they could go else ware for technical projects. She also said that it had already achieved this goal and that even if the