Slashdot Mirror


OmniTread: A serpentine robot

karvind writes "Physorg is running a story about OmniTread: a serpentine robot designed to traverse extremely difficult terrain, such as the rubble of a collapsed building. The 26-pound robot is developed at the University of Michigan U-M College of Engineering. It moves by rolling, log-style, or by lifting its head or tail, inchworm-like, and muscling itself forward. Link to videos. Check out there other robots as well."

150 comments

  1. Crikey! by Dancin_Santa · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Someone call Steve Irwin!

  2. BattleBots? by teh+merry+reaper · · Score: 0

    Wasn't there a serpentine robot in one of the competitions? Sounds like a fascinating idea.

    --
    6x9=42
  3. Clarification of how this works by MobyDisk · · Score: 4, Funny
    From the article:
    These treads prevent the snakebot from stalling or becoming stuck on rough terrain because, similar to a tire touching a road, t the treads propel the robot forward like a tire touching a road.
    Well, that sure made it clear!
    1. Re:Clarification of how this works by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also from the Department of Redundancy Department, "the OmniTread climbed an 18-inch curb, which is over more than twice its height".

    2. Re:Clarification of how this works by rob_squared · · Score: 1

      Trust me, after seeing the way some people drive, it'd be nice to see this kind of detail in the driver's manual.

      --
      I don't get it.
    3. Re:Clarification of how this works by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was going to post that myself. The whole paragraph doesn't make sense, actually.

      If you simplify it, it basically says:

      "The treads prevent the snakebot from stalling because they are similar to a tire touching a road. Historically, scientists haven't had much success with wheels because they constantly stall."

      So the reason it succeeds is because it uses something that usually doesn't succeed?? Huh?? Hello, editor!

    4. Re:Clarification of how this works by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The author apparently used to work for the Department of Redundancy Department.

    5. Re:Clarification of how this works by flyingsquid · · Score: 1

      Tires touching the road... shit, I knew I was doing something wrong.

  4. cool by dteichman2 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I imagine that with more development, this could lead to subways/trains without tracks. Or, perhaps "smart" cars that "know" how to handle obstacles and avoid collisions.

    --


    Silence is golden... and duct tape is silver.
    1. Re:cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The barf bag cost alone would make that idea too expensive.

    2. Re:cool by Mazem · · Score: 0

      Maybe not commercial cars, but perhaps there might be military uses for such a vehicle.

    3. Re:cool by Jeremi · · Score: 3, Funny
      Or, perhaps "smart" cars that "know" how to handle obstacles and avoid collisions.


      Great, just what I need... SUVs crawling over my house at night.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    4. Re:cool by Digital+Pizza · · Score: 1

      Perhaps I'm a little slow, but why did the parent get modded as a troll? Just curious.

      --
      We apologize for the inconvenience.
    5. Re:cool by isopossu · · Score: 1

      The passenger cars are deliberately made somehow hard to drive. While the automatic system cannot handle every possible situation, the driver has to be kept alert.

    6. Re:cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FYI, TFA mentions that there could be military uses.

    7. Re:cool by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1
      Or, perhaps "smart" cars that "know" how to handle obstacles and avoid collisions.

      Great! So now we'll get SUV who'll gladly climb over any VW bugs unfortunate enough to be in its path. The SUV will handle the situation just fine, but the VW bug will be slightly flatter than before!

    8. Re:cool by B3ryllium · · Score: 1

      That's not true. According to the commercials, the dome design will improve structural integrity and prevent worm-robot-SUV-flattenings. ;-)

  5. Serpentine Sheldon! by rob_squared · · Score: 2, Funny
    Vince Ricardo: Serpentine Shelly. Serpentine!

    From "The In-Laws," possibly the best Peter Falk movie ever, right next to "The Great Race."

    --
    I don't get it.
  6. Spheres with tentacles are better by GAATTC · · Score: 5, Interesting

    From a comment posted below the article: "Arthur C. Clarke had it right --- spheres with tentacles; _that_ is the ultimate in agility and mobility, for robotic design. Plus, such units can easily link together to form a much greater whole, if required --- they could perform nearly *any* engineering, construction, or transportation task."

    1. Re:Spheres with tentacles are better by 4_Minor_Drawbacks · · Score: 0

      Not to mention MUCH scarier.

    2. Re:Spheres with tentacles are better by teh+merry+reaper · · Score: 1, Funny

      The design challenges seem insurmountable, though, when you consider that this cutting edge robot is the equivalent of one tentacle. However, robots with tentacles would potentially be quite popular in hentai.

      --
      6x9=42
    3. Re:Spheres with tentacles are better by schwatoo · · Score: 4, Funny

      "Any sufficiently tentacled sphere is indistinguishable from the Great Cthulhu".

      --
      I have trouble with passwords among other things.
    4. Re:Spheres with tentacles are better by joetheappleguy · · Score: 1

      Don't forget that tentacles are required for most Hentai out there.

    5. Re:Spheres with tentacles are better by Have+Blue · · Score: 3, Funny

      Thanks. Now I'll never look at Koosh balls the same way again.

    6. Re:Spheres with tentacles are better by xactuary · · Score: 1

      Are you saying we now have proof that Arthur C. Clark is really Dr. Benton Quest?

      --
      Say hello to my little sig.
    7. Re:Spheres with tentacles are better by ikkonoishi · · Score: 2, Interesting

      While spheres have the lowest surface area to volume ratio, cubes are far easier to store and link.

    8. Re:Spheres with tentacles are better by bruthasj · · Score: 1

      Or a sufficiently overgrown Chia Pet.

    9. Re:Spheres with tentacles are better by Omega+Leader-(P12) · · Score: 1

      Yes, but cubes don't roll. Think or the security "balls" from The Prisoner, or if you are too young. Think of The Simpsons spoof.

    10. Re:Spheres with tentacles are better by chialea · · Score: 1

      Rhombic dodecahedrons are another good option. They're closer to spheres, but still stack densely, like cubes.

      Lea

    11. Re:Spheres with tentacles are better by B3ryllium · · Score: 1

      Star Wars Episode 1 had security balls. Instead of tentacles, though, they had portions of the sphere extend in triangular patterns to create a mounting point for stability.

      George Lucas really embellished his balls in that one.

    12. Re:Spheres with tentacles are better by rapett0 · · Score: 1

      Could this issue not be easily solved by simply placing the tentacles into a position to make the parameter of the unit square when turned off, for storage? BTW, I claim copyright/patent, etc :)

  7. I know this is off-topic but... by kernel_dan · · Score: 1

    Am I really that unobservant or is the hardware section new?

    --

    Illegal? Samir, This is America.
    1. Re:I know this is off-topic but... by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      it's Been around a while (january 2,1998 appears to be the first posting to that section)

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    2. Re:I know this is off-topic but... by EtherAlchemist · · Score: 1


      At first I thought you were kidding. Something along the lines of...

      Slashdot's Hardware Section

      I read both (and others) daily and seems like at least one thing from Gizmodo shows up on the front page here per day. Nothing wrong with that, but when I'm bored and trying to find new "news" and other interesting things, it's just a drag to see the same thing proliferated across sites.

      --
      R(k)
    3. Re:I know this is off-topic but... by Webtommy88 · · Score: 1

      Even though it's already been stated the section is not new, I have to tell you I share my sentiments. I was confused as to why the green bars started to have these circuits on them until I noticed it wasn't the normal section.

      So you're not the only one.

    4. Re:I know this is off-topic but... by kernel_dan · · Score: 1

      Aha! So I'm not crazy. It just appeared today for the first time. Google's cache from yesterday (3/22) does not include the link to hardware.slashdot.org in the left sidebar.

      --

      Illegal? Samir, This is America.
  8. A 40MB file on slashdot. by spagetti_code · · Score: 0, Redundant
    You're just trying to set a world record for /.'ing aren't you?

    Can I suggest to the editors that if you know you are linking to a video, you simply place a link to a mirror there as well.

    Having said that, the site is holding up remarkably well - I've still got 14kb/s..... uh oh 13..... 12..... damn.

    1. Re:A 40MB file on slashdot. by rob_squared · · Score: 1

      Doesn't mirrordot automatically mirror things from slashdot? Wouldn't that make some kind of infinite loop? Mirrors of mirrors of mirrors of mirrors of mirrors of mirrors of mirrors of mirrors of mirrors of mirrors of mirrors of mirrors of mirrors of mirrors of mirrors of mirrors of mirrors of mirrors of mirrors of mirrors of mirrors of mirrors of mirrors of mirrors... [no carrier]

      --
      I don't get it.
    2. Re:A 40MB file on slashdot. by dcclark · · Score: 1

      I think this was the same UMich server that got taken out by a /. story around exam time last December. It's probably close to midterm/exam time there now. I smell a conspiracy... "but the server was slashdotted! How could I look up the course materials?"

    3. Re:A 40MB file on slashdot. by ag0ny · · Score: 1

      I'm still downloading it at 95KB/s...

    4. Re:A 40MB file on slashdot. by norkakn · · Score: 1

      no, no

      that was eecs.umich.edu. eecs is probably some dual pII in a closet somewhere. It serves up static pages, mostly for internal usage.

      engin.umich.edu is a bunch of heavy iron suns. Probably right now there are more than a few instances of matlab and some simv procs running

    5. Re:A 40MB file on slashdot. by fbartho · · Score: 1

      Guys... Slashdot wouldn't taken down umich... please let me know when this supposedly happened... I'm an engineer on campus and I've seen some of the servers... I use them every day for all my homework... engin.umich.edu and the various subservers are continuously connected to my desktop with ssh for the AFS serverspace as well as for compiling/running/writing my code for my Programming classes. Around exam time someone fucked up with the news-servers... they were switching them around and brought themselves down, Another time, part of eecs went down... (some of the hosts) some runaway processes started by too many instances of a grading script trying to catch too many e-mails of a class of 150 students of whom apparently more than half had submitted the debug folder of their Visual Studio Projects in directx to the script along with their source files making a bunch of 10 meg zips that were being extracted, built, and run (or attempted to run) until they were killed by timeout.

      Finally a piece of lsa umich.edu went down lately because PeopleSoft supplied us with crappy server intensive webapplications for our class selection interface, and due to all the students attempting to simultaneously register for classes near exam times it went down...

      Both engin and umich though are extremely stable.
      200 liscences of UGNX2 are hosted on the servers.
      Uncounted licenses of matlab maple maya and a bunch of other programs are also hosted on these terminals

      Beyond the normal software available to terminal users below I have attached a list of the extra packages I can add to use... all of these are server side, with X11 forwarding on many.

      Fun random fact is that all the CAEN (Engineering Computers) reboot overnight if they're not in use, into linux, and run a distributed computing program.

      Sorry about the formatting for the lameness filter

      1. ABAQUS 2. ADAMS 3. AMPL 4. ANSOFT 5. ANSYS 6. APPLIX 7. ARC/INFO 8. ARC/VIEW 9. AUTO 10. AVS 11. Allegro Common Lisp 12. Aspen Plus 13. CERIUSHP,SGI 14. COVENTORWARE 15. CPLEX 16. CVS 17. Cadence IC 18. Cadence LDV 19. Calibre *20. DDD *21. EXPLORER HP,,SGI,Linux 22. Emacs All 23. Exmh All 24. FEMLABHP, 25. FLUENTHP, 26. Formality 27. FrameMaker *28. GAIM All*29. GNU Compilers/Utils All 30. GambitAll 31. Gnuplot 32. HP ADS 33. HP-UX 10.20/11.00 Compiler Opti HP 34. HSPICE 35. Hercules *36. Hypermesh *37. I-DEAS 38. ICCAP 39. IDL 40. IMSL 41. Insure++ 42. Island Software ,AIX 43. Jack HP,SGI 44. Java ,HP 45. Khoros,SGI,AIX 46. LCLint 47. Labview 48. Lynx 49. Lyx 50. MCNP ,Solaris,HP 51. MPI 52. Mach TA *53. Maple ,SGI,AIX,X86 54. Math All 55. MathematicaAll*56. Matlab 57. MatrixX ,Solaris,HP*58. Maya Linux 59. Mentor AMS 60. Mentor DFT 61. Mentor ICFlow 62. Modelsim ,Windows 63. NAG HP,, Linux 64. NASTRAN 65. NCAR Graphics 66. Nanosim *67. Netscape/Mozilla 68. Opnet 69. Oracle,IBM 70. PV-WAVE 71. Pathmill 72. PatranHP 73. Pico , HP 74. Pine All 75. Primepower 76. Pro/Engineer 77. Purify 78. RDesktop 79. Raphael 80. RealAudio/RealVideo 81. SYNOPSYS 82. Saber 83. Silicon Ensemble 84. Splint 85. Star-RCXT *86. StarOffice , Linux 87. Surfacer 88. TDI IBM 89. TDS 90. TeX 91. TecPlot 92. TetraMax *93. Unigraphics 94. VCS 95. Wordperfect*96. XEmacsHP, 97. XFig ,DEC*98. XMMS

      --
      Gravity Sucks
    6. Re:A 40MB file on slashdot. by geggibus · · Score: 1

      700Kb/s here.. impressing..

    7. Re:A 40MB file on slashdot. by norkakn · · Score: 1

      Um, why you responded to me instead of the parent is sort of confusing. when the London Law game got posted on slashdot, it destroyed EECS.umich.edu. I was in the 4th floor eecs opteron lab at the tme, and we were all rather pissed. (I was in 470 and needed some of the specs on the server) I don't have an eecs account, so all I actually know about it is that it is running solaris 8.

      I've been going through the archives, and I found a dupe of the story, but not the actual one (unless comments got ripped from it)

    8. Re:A 40MB file on slashdot. by Webtommy88 · · Score: 1
      PeopleSoft supplied us with crappy server intensive webapplications for our class selection interface


      By god, my school isin't the only one then, I could not for the life of me figure out why my school bought such shitty software from them. Apparently my school wasn't the only one scammed by their PR.

      Peoplesoft = worse web apps I have ever had the displeasure to use.
    9. Re:A 40MB file on slashdot. by fbartho · · Score: 1

      The sad thing is that we kindof knew that... but they had an agreement where they got to update our software at will... we had already had a working version of software but they decided the needed to update ours. With a completely new I'm only assuming barely tested version, because it completely fried for awhile, and even released private data on 2 or 3 occasions. Privacy breech due to bad code... and the funny thing is that I heard that the company just recently got sent on a move to dissolve (Adobe, or Oracle, or Novell bought them (can't remember which) and decided to cut jobs in them. ALOT, a month or two back)

      --
      Gravity Sucks
  9. I wonder by Yeshua · · Score: 2, Insightful

    How modular the design is.

    It is obviously made of 5 (reasonably) identical parts, but I wonder if you can (in theory) make a robot of this type as longs as you want just by `tacking' on a new section (of course this ignores drive train problems).

    1. Re:I wonder by loupgarou21 · · Score: 1

      it shouldn't be too hard to figure out a way to make the drive train adaptable to additional sections, look at some laser printers (ie. IBM InfoPrint 1120) you can add an additional tray to the device by just sticking it at the bottom of the stack, you don't even have to worry about plugging anything in. You would just have to be mildly creative about it.

    2. Re:I wonder by AeroIllini · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It is obviously made of 5 (reasonably) identical parts, but I wonder if you can (in theory) make a robot of this type as longs as you want just by `tacking' on a new section (of course this ignores drive train problems).

      It actually wouldn't be too hard to give each section its own motor and power supply. The connection between each section would include an umbilical capable of transmitting data, and perhaps even extra voltage if one of the power units (batteries) was not providing sufficient power. At that point, operation of the robot becomes a software issue; how do you program each pod with identical software that can all work together as a cohesive whole, in real time? If all of the individual components are identical but work flawlessly together, at almost any length, then theoretically the robot could add more sections or shed damaged ones without compromising functionality. Specialized sections could also be attached to the front and/or rear, for digging, drilling, collecting, clearing, bomb dismantling, carrying, or anything else you can think of.

      I noticed in the video that the crew was using a remote to control the robot. (I also noticed the distinct lack of any purposeful log-rolling, contrary to what the editor said--but I digress.) Ideally, of course, such remote operation would not be needed. Crews using the robots--rescue teams, bomb squads, recovery missions--should be able to just tell the robot, "hey, go explore over there. We'll be watching on the monitors, and you tell us if you find anything." The locomotion of the robot would then be completely automated, based on a set of instructions (one of a library of scripts, maybe; use the "find and bring out bomb" script, or the "search for human survivors" script), with the operator just gathering data, and perhaps taking manual control if needed.

      --
      For security, the MD5 hash of this message and sig is 09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0.
    3. Re:I wonder by Nebu · · Score: 2, Informative

      How modular the design is. It is obviously made of 5 (reasonably) identical parts, but I wonder if you can (in theory) make a robot of this type as longs as you want just by `tacking' on a new section

      If you go into the slideshow on the site, there's an image of the robot composed of 7 sections instead of 5.

    4. Re:I wonder by ytpete · · Score: 1
      I interned at Xerox PARC two summers ago and saw a snake-like robot very similar to this. The motion is different---undulating like a caterpillar instead of using treads. But otherwise strikingly similar.

      theoretically the robot could add more sections or shed damaged ones without compromising functionality
      This is how PARC's modular robots worked, which is the really cool part. The modules could be snapped apart and then reassembled into a different-shaped robot. Some models could even reconfigure themselves without intervention.

      The connection between each section would include an umbilical capable of transmitting data, and perhaps even extra voltage ...
      Some of the PARC modules did exactly that. And they had limited demos with specialized attachments instead of generic modules, also as you mentioned.

      My housemate that summer was working on the control system of these robots. The computer fed them simple script-like commands, so there was no real AI backing it up. Given that, it was impressive what these things managed to do. But of course, they were working toward taking input from each module and applying complex processing to react to it.

      As far as your suggestion about distributed processing across modules, other groups at PARC were doing work in that field too. Awesome place to intern!

    5. Re:I wonder by chialea · · Score: 1

      Hmm... two summers ago. I worked in the modular robotics lab for a few years a bit before that.

      On-board power is definitely not easy, both because it takes a lot of power to move that much robot around and because batteries make the robot heavier (and larger), which makes the problem even worse.

      I'm assuming your housemate was working on the plastic polybot modules, which were run off of an offboard processing board, or one of the cubic or rhombic models. The G2 hardware had a CAN bus and onboard processing quite a bit before that.

      About distributed processing, Mark, a visiting professor, and I developed an algorithm for distributed computation of inverse kinematics for high-dof robots like polybot, specifically for splitting across modules.

      I will certainly agree that PARC is a great place to work :)

      Lea

    6. Re:I wonder by orim · · Score: 1

      Yeah, totally!

      They showed a prototype of this in that documentary "The Core." They were able to travel to the center of the Earth and restart the core's spin, thus saving Earth!

      Eat your heart out, Jules Verne!

      --
      "If you could only see what I've seen with your eyes..." - Roy Batty
    7. Re:I wonder by ytpete · · Score: 1
      I'm assuming your housemate was working on the plastic polybot modules, which were run off of an offboard processing board
      Yeah, he was working on the G1 modules, which were controlled by a cable leading to a PC. The PC processed a simple script language and sent commands to the modules. I didn't RTFA, but it sounds like the UMich robots are a step behind here, using human "pilots."

      About distributed processing, Mark, a visiting professor, and I developed an algorithm for distributed computation of inverse kinematics for high-dof robots like polybot, specifically for splitting across modules.
      Cool, I remember the videos for that stuff. I was referring to a separate team that did work on distributed (car) traffic monitoring (and some cool ideas for military use). It unfortunately didn't look like they were working with the robot lab at all.

      I will certainly agree that PARC is a great place to work :)
      Ain't it? They had a great atmsophere there -- even in shaky financial times -- and an incredible variety of projects. It's a shame they've been cursed with such little commercial success.

  10. Ooh, snake! A snake! by FlyByPC · · Score: 5, Funny

    Badgerbadgerbadger... (C'mon -- *someone* had to say it...)

    --
    Paleotechnologist and connoisseur of pretty shiny things.
    1. Re:Ooh, snake! A snake! by dartboard · · Score: 1

      I think you meant:

      WolverwineWolverineWolverine....

    2. Re:Ooh, snake! A snake! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mushroom Mushroom

  11. Redundant (pedantic) by Kiryat+Malachi · · Score: 0, Redundant

    It is the University of Michigan College of Engineering, or the UMCOE, or engin.umich.edu. It is, under no circumstances, the University of Michigan UM College of Engineering.

    --

    ---
    Mod me down, you fucking twits. Go ahead. I dare you.
    (I read with sigs off.)
  12. It's so simple. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Their other robots are there. They're amazing.

    1. Re:It's so simple. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There there, now...

    2. Re:It's so simple. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You not speak robotspeak. There other robots. You confusing. *beep*

  13. At least we haven't slashdotted the server yet... by carpe_noctem · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...but I'm sure we will soon. Everyone should check out this rad 7min video of this thing in action. Very cool. =)

    --
    "Quoting famous computer scientists out of context is the root of all evil (or at least most of it) in programming." - K
  14. Memory Shape Alloys by TimeTraveler1884 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I have always wondered why robotics engineering has not taken more approaches using memory-shape alloys. Mondo-tronics has a product called Muscle Wire that has carbon or graphite embedded in the alloy so that it heats up when an electric current is applied. This causes the Nitinol to contract as the alloy returns to its "memory" shape.

    Really the only thing I have seen using this form of memory-shape alloys is just for hobbyist projects, nothing serious. Granted there are some problems to overcome, such as duty cycles and heat dissipation. But most of these could be solved, I have looked into them. On larger scale projects the cost could be prohibitive though.

    The value as I see memory-shape alloys over motors, is that it is almost a solid-state actuator. There really is no moving parts that can wear, other than the alloy itself. And these memory-shape alloys have a very high force/weight ratio - thus making the bulk of most robotics not a function of locomotion.

    1. Re:Memory Shape Alloys by loupgarou21 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      one problem is that Nitinol really doesn't contract that much, usually only 5-7% (if I'm remembering correctly) however one especially clever nitinol crawler was able to move something like 20% of it's total body length per step

    2. Re:Memory Shape Alloys by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm guessing cost isn't the issue as robot servos can easily run in to the thousands of dollars each. The problem is likely speed, efficiency, accuracy/repeatability, and reliability. I'm guessing the speed is a big problem since this stuff has to heat up and cool down.

    3. Re:Memory Shape Alloys by SnowZero · · Score: 1

      They are slower, and although lighter, are less power efficient than ordinary motors. So unless weight is the only concern (and battery weight is't a problem), they aren't useful for much on reasonably sized robots. And as soon as your robot gets reasonably sized and isn't on a cord, battery size and weight is *the* problem. Also IIRC nitinol yield stress isn't that great (i.e. expensive *and* breaks when your actuator gets yanked on).

      People are still working on artificial muscles though, and hopefully they'll get something that scales well eventually. It'll take a lot of work to catch up with a billion years of evolution however (or intelligent design by $DIETY, whatever).

    4. Re:Memory Shape Alloys by ink_13 · · Score: 1

      Perhaps because they're not yet strong enough to beat even a teenaged girl at arm wrestling?

    5. Re:Memory Shape Alloys by GeneJock · · Score: 1

      They have been considered. One of the big problems is that they tend to require large power sources, which with battery operated robots makes your duration nil.

      --
      "Its coming? Ha! It isn't even breathing hard."
  15. Purposes? by Lil-Bondy · · Score: 0

    Id Like to know the possible purposes of these robots, like with the example of crawling through rubble, it makes me think of a robot searching for people after an earthquake, getting to places we couldnt, anyone else get any impressions like that?

    --
    Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job. - HHGTTG
    1. Re:Purposes? by SnowZero · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's exactly the kind of thing they want to use this type of robot for. They focus on rubble and similar terrain, because if it isn't hard to traverse, you might as well use wheels. Exploring mines and caves could be useful too, but urban search and rescue is a big topic now. After a disaster, you want to rescue people as fast as possible to save them, but the earlier after a collapse, the more dangerous it is for the rescuers who risk getting trapped themselves. Robots can be sent in immediately becuase you don't care much if you lose them.

    2. Re:Purposes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Robots can be sent in immediately becuase you don't care much if you lose them.

      Yes I do, you insensitive ...!

    3. Re:Purposes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But the robot has all of its surface dedicated to movement. What is it going to do if it finds someone trapped under a pile of rubble? Keep the victim company?

    4. Re:Purposes? by Voxus · · Score: 1

      "I am sorry I cannot help you. However, perhaps if I sing a song, you will feel better?"

    5. Re:Purposes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the first problem is just finding the people that need rescuing. if there is no one down there, then there is no reason to risk a life by sending a human.

  16. ed2k link of the movie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative


    remember to remove the spaces

    ed2k://|file|OmniTread.SwRI-7min.320x240 x30.wmv|39219440|00C932FF9AD4D798E92C05D9869EE323| /

  17. serpentine movement suggestion by thomasa · · Score: 2, Insightful


    Only the treads that are touching the ground should
    move. The others moving in air are wasted motion. That does not seem efficient.

    1. Re:serpentine movement suggestion by ldm314 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It is efficient in several ways:

      - Eliminates complicated gearing

      - Every part that can come in contact with a surface has full torque

      And when you are tethered to a cable anyways, and not run on battery power, you probably don't have to worry as much about efficiency.

    2. Re:serpentine movement suggestion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      at times when moving through complicated terrain (think tunnels, between or under bolders) it needs all treads moving. You are assuming it will always be on flat ground, which it is really not designed for; there are more efficient designs for that.

      Next time try thinking before posting.

    3. Re:serpentine movement suggestion by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1

      Actually, if you read their promo litterature, you'd see that the next prototype wil have threads that can be disengaged when not in use.

    4. Re:serpentine movement suggestion by thomasa · · Score: 1

      Next time try thinking before posting.

      Perhaps you could do the same.

  18. Mouse vs Snake? by Mulletproof · · Score: 1

    "Physorg is running a story about OmniTread: a serpentine robot designed to traverse extremely difficult terrain, such as the rubble of a collapsed building."

    I thought Remote control mice were taking that job.

    --
    You need a FREE iPod Nano
    1. Re:Mouse vs Snake? by odsock · · Score: 1

      heh,all the ad links on the left there are for pest control. :)

  19. Obligatory bash.org quote by dracken · · Score: 4, Funny

    what does your robot do, sam
    it collects data about the surrounding environment, then discards it and drives into walls

    -Dracken

  20. Hurray, I'm saved by skomes · · Score: 1

    They need to send this baby over the to the disaster area that is my room. First mission: Pick up my underwear and clothes that need washing. It'll probably break down under that kind of stress though.

  21. Unsafe Ground. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Tremors" comes to mind as well.

  22. Virtually unstoppable? by Lomithrandel · · Score: 1

    Oh please, there is no robot design possible with a simple singular traction system that is virtually unstoppable. There are many many area where such a robot with a snake-like tread structure will simple be unable to get anywhere at all. I would be impressed if there was a use for anything but reconnaisance from a robot that can deal with as many situations as this one supposedly can however.

  23. Slick. Wonder if.. by bunhed · · Score: 5, Funny

    you can program it in python?

    1. Re:Slick. Wonder if.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or obfuscated C :)

    2. Re:Slick. Wonder if.. by Mr.+Hankey · · Score: 1

      A similar device was developed at NASA Ames. At least for a time part of its routines for getting around objects was written in perl, so I suppose Python wouldn't be out of the question. :)

      http://www.nasa.gov/centers/ames/news/releases/2 00 0/00images/snakebot/snakebot.html

      --
      GPL: Free as in will
  24. Missing Part! by knapper_tech · · Score: 1

    Somebody fill out a requisition for the Batterylife Activator!

    --
    "There are some people that if they don't know, you can't tell them." ~ Louis Armstrong
  25. There was, and it sucked major ass. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Quite possibly the worst design used in that competition. It looked cool, but was as useless as tits on a boar hog.

    1. Re:There was, and it sucked major ass. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In reality tits on a boar hog are not useless, they serve to indicate genes for more tits (which is what you'd like sows to have). The more tits on a boar hog the better.... but of course that's only half of the genetic mix.

  26. Re:SCO...? by XeroPurpose · · Score: 0

    -1? WTF? I thought SCO jokes were "in" this year. Oh well, back to MSFT bashing...

  27. More like a caterpillar by SnowZero · · Score: 4, Informative

    This is more like a caterpillar than a snake. It uses tracks all over its body (like many small feet), rather than a serpentine motion to propel itself. Props though, as this seems far more practical than robots that actually try to move like snakes or inchworms.

    I've sat through many talks about modular robots that are supposed to be able to do everything, yet rarely do anything well at all (I come from a lab doing what I guess you'd call "specialized monolithic" robots). I think this robot is just specialized enough to be useful (using its treads). The walking snake like robots are normally agonizingly slow, but this robot moves at a reasonable speed for the type of applications you'd need it for. Also, tracks should scale up in speed reasonably well if needed.

    1. Re:More like a caterpillar by Bonhamme+Richard · · Score: 1

      The thing about robotic snakes is that they can get anywhere a real snake can. My professor's snake-bots can climb straight up a drainpipe, tube, or crack. The caterpillar one only managed a 22 degree angle. Doesn't make "real" snakebots more useful in general, but speed isn't everything, and CMU's snake-bots can really get around...

    2. Re:More like a caterpillar by SnowZero · · Score: 1

      In that case progress is being made and that's good to hear. Perhaps I came off a bit too negative in the GP. Pure modular/reconfigurable robots strike me as fantastically difficult, especially when you start talking about onboard power; Snake robots do have a future as you point out, but they still need some work to be useful for things like urban search and rescue. But then again, what robot doesn't need more work :) At any rate my main point is that we should distinguish caterpillars-like vs snake-like, and ultimately I think they'll be used for different things.

      Though another take on it is that you could create any hybrid between pure snake and pure tracked, or even add wheels or rollers at some segments. The future will be interesting.

  28. What good is this "Robot"? by PorkNutz · · Score: 0
    So they have a neat hi-tech remote controlled car. What are the practical use for this? I mean there is no place to put manipulation devices, cargo or sensors. AND it is connected to a driver by a bunch of wires.

    Really, can this even be called a robot any more than a cheap assed wired remote control car can?

    1. Re:What good is this "Robot"? by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 3, Insightful
      AND it is connected to a driver by a bunch of wires.

      The "bunch of wires" is probably because it's still a prototype. The finished product will be radiocontrolled, obviously (or at least I hope so).

      Indeed, if you watch carefully, the "bunch of wires" would make the robot useless in real conditions: the wires would get tangled into the debris, and hold the contraption back, even though the robot by itself could cope. Many times in the video, you'll see the handlers rearranging that cable to make sure it doesn't get tangled anywhere.

  29. My first thought... by Infinityis · · Score: 1

    When I saw this, the first thing I thought was how nice a large version of this could be. It seems like it would be suitable for something like the DARPA Grand Challenge. http://www.darpagrandchallenge.com/

    1. Re:My first thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not to take anything away from this robot, but it's worlds away from being suitable for the DARPA challenge. It's not fast enough, has no sensors, obstacle avoidance or guidance system, and it's not self-contained... but other than that... hmmm.

  30. What about controls? by Statecraftsman · · Score: 4, Interesting
    That thing looks like you need more than a joystick. It'd be really great if they showed how many buttons they have on their control board. By my count the 5 segment version has 9 degrees of freedom. 1 for the front back and the other 8 for the 2 degrees of freedom for each joint.

    Also, does it know which way is up and readjust or do you have to figure that out after it rolls?

    1. Re:What about controls? by Sparr0 · · Score: 1

      Why? The movement of this is controlled with a simple two-D joystick.

  31. ... read the article, started watching the video by JMZorko · · Score: 0, Troll

    ... then the cheeseball techno (read: different than non-cheeseball techno) was just too much :-)

    Regards,

    John

    --
    Falling You - beautiful
  32. Syd Mead by Unordained · · Score: 1

    http://www.scrubbles.net/mead/mead12.html
    I came across this a few days ago, seemed vaguely related conceptually.

  33. funny html headers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    from http://www.engin.umich.edu/research/mrl/00MoRob_6. html
    <HTML>
    <!-- HTML Export Technology Patent Pending, Astound Incorporated -->
    <HEAD>
    ...
    export "technology" ?? even worse.. patent pending??? auch!

    --ikp
  34. Snakebots are very fragile! by Quantum+Jim · · Score: 5, Interesting
    My friend Jer Romeiko builds these kinds of robots for a living. You can download some cool videos of snakebot action at his employer's web site (CMU).

    Snakebots are very fragile. Many times a section would break after a few hours demostration. Jer was working on making each section more modular and easier to build. Apparently the main goal of snakebots for many research labs are for providing demostrations (read: grantbots) and giving new grad students something to do. ;-)

    --
    It is impossible to enjoy idling thoroughly unless one has plenty of work to do.
    - Jerome Klapka Jerome
    1. Re:Snakebots are very fragile! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cool videos, too bad they're fragile. Those at CMU appear to be so much faster and more "limber" than the UMCOE highlighted in the article.

    2. Re:Snakebots are very fragile! by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1
      Those at CMU appear to be so much faster

      Read the fine-print: the videos are played at twice the speed...

    3. Re:Snakebots are very fragile! by chialea · · Score: 1

      I've put together more of those segments than I can count (note that this is Mark Yim's design, from PARC, borrowed by CMU). They're using a /very/ old hardware design, using weak motors and weak parts. (The motors + the weight of the segments certainly have enough leverage to break the frames, but that's another issue.) The modular robotics group at PARC had much, much better hardware years ago, and were working on G3 when I left.

      A short overview of polybot hardware:
      http://www2.parc.com/spl/projects/modro bots/chain/ polybot/index.html

      Lea

  35. but does it run linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www-personal.engin.umich.edu/~johannb/me_ju mp1.jpg

    i have yet to have this professor.

  36. cool-Demolition Man. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Or, perhaps "smart" cars that "know" how to handle obstacles and avoid collisions."

    Lord knows the drivers certainly can't.

  37. This is reminiscent of... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    A one-time BattleBot that was run in Vegas by one of the guys at ILM. It was designed like a snake and was very capable of moving around just like one (with a nice little "rattler" to boot). While it could move around, the problem with the design is that there is little you can do with it. I'm curious as to how utilities and other devices could be attached to make this useful. I suppose small cameras and lights could be implemented, making it somewhat useful for rescue missions.

  38. Polybot by Digital+Pizza · · Score: 1

    Check out Xerox PARC's PolyBot; each segment contains its own motor and PowerPC processor. This was on Slashdot some time ago.

    --
    We apologize for the inconvenience.
    1. Re:Polybot by ytpete · · Score: 1
      See also my recent post higher up on this thread. I got to see these things in action as an intern at PARC and they're pretty cool. They don't require manual remote control like the UMichigan versions seem to. And they can be reconfigured (sometimes autonomously) into other shapes as well.

      And from the looks of the CMU site linked to above, their project is heavily based on this PARC work.

  39. "Rolling like a log" by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1
    In the whole video, this only happened twice... and each time it looked accidental. The primary means of propulsion are the tracks (movement along its length), and bellows (which allow it to lift its "head" to climb over obstacles).

  40. Don't try this at home by PetoskeyGuy · · Score: 1

    Almost everything they learned making the robot has been patented. So do the students who worked to create this robot end up paying the college to patent the research they performed? Do College's have patent contracts boilerplate on student applications now?

    1. Re:Don't try this at home by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

      Yes, they do. Even when I applied to college in 1991, there was a waiver of rights to intellectual property built into the application. Anything I created belonged to the school, regardless of whether it was for class or on my own time. They even handed out intellectual property disclosure forms in the event we had an idea.. This IP agreement was written so poorly that it even claimed IP ownership to things I created while employed off-campus.

      It is just urban legend, but I have heard that some schools make you sign over creations for some fixed period of time AFTER you graduate. I haven't seen it for myself, though.

  41. Weight distribution among segments? by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Anybody know how to explain the photo a the 4th page of the presentation? (robot having its head and middle segment resting on top "stair", while tail is hanging "in the air").

    Such position looks as if it would only be possible if "head" is substantially heavyer than "tail" (or else it would tip backwards). However, the doc states that the middle segment is the heavyest. Or does it also have the means of pumping liquid for one end segment to the other to achieve more optimal weight distribution? In any case, if such feature exist, it isn't mentioned anywhere...

    1. Re:Weight distribution among segments? by fbartho · · Score: 1

      If you look closely and count the segments you should see that the middle segment is on the edge, since that is hooked and assuming the rest of the snake is equally weighted, on its own you should be able to balance it at that point... I don't really see why thay would only work if the head were heavier than the tail...

      --
      Gravity Sucks
    2. Re:Weight distribution among segments? by ysachlandil · · Score: 1

      The center of weight is in the middle, the middle of the robot is extended a couple of inches beyond the 'stair'. So the robot should be unbalanced, right?

      But since the two 'head' segments are nearly horizontal, and the two 'tail' segments are diagonal, the 'head' segments extend their mass further away from the tilt point, and thus shift the center of gravity to the 'head' of the robot.

      HTH
      --Blerik

    3. Re:Weight distribution among segments? by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1
      [head] extend their mass further away from the tilt point [than tail]

      Oops, didn't think about this. Yes, obviously this explains it.

  42. I, for one... by david_420 · · Score: 0

    I, for one, welcome our new serpentine robot overlords.

    1. Re:I, for one... by Lil-Bondy · · Score: 0

      does anyone else see this joke as old and boring? (not to say the person who posted it is, just the joke)

      --
      Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job. - HHGTTG
    2. Re:I, for one... by david_420 · · Score: 0

      Yes, it is old and boring. I regret having posted it.

  43. Re:At least we haven't slashdotted the server yet. by Kiryat+Malachi · · Score: 1, Funny

    Hah.

    No, you probably won't. COE at Michigan has what is technically termed "phat pipe", and the main web servers are more than capable of handling your piddly little Slashdot attack.

    YOU ARE HITTING THE MAIN WEBSERVERS FOR A 40,000 STUDENT UNIVERSITY WITH 10,000 ENGINEERING STUDENTS. Slashdotting? Unlikely. It'd be like slashdotting Sun.

    --

    ---
    Mod me down, you fucking twits. Go ahead. I dare you.
    (I read with sigs off.)
  44. Cool, but... by AliasMoze · · Score: 2, Informative

    it's hard not to be a little disappointed with the state of robot technology. We've landed a man on the moon, split the atom, and decoded our genes, yet we're supposed to be impressed by a (human-controlled) robot that can crawl like a caterpillar.

    Don't get me wrong. I realize this is a step forward, but the current state of robots seems so behind others.

    1. Re:Cool, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am a robot, you insensitive clod.

    2. Re:Cool, but... by way2trivial · · Score: 1

      yea, and I'm going to tycho city on my next vacation..

      Landed on the moon, 26 freaking years ago..

      US can't even get a man into high orbit right now...

      What's behind>?

      --
      every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
  45. It's pretty simple actually by commodoresloat · · Score: 2, Funny

    It works like a tire touching a road.

  46. Re:At least we haven't slashdotted the server yet. by fbartho · · Score: 1

    Hehe, I am sleeping on the "phat pipe" its fun. :) very warm. about body temperature.

    --
    Gravity Sucks
  47. News? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I couldn't access the article now, so I can only base this on the comments and the post, but... is this realy new?
    I mean: http://www.snakerobots.com/main.htm

    or am missing out on something from TFA? =)

  48. In a further development by flyingsquid · · Score: 1

    The robotic snake offered a woman working on the project a robotic apple...

  49. Vrtually unstoppable!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and you see pictures of it crossing specially made obstacles, that just fit it's capabilitys, or a video about it crossing a railroad and some siple rocks
    and the foto's with some bricks on the ground aren't really impressive either....

  50. Important question by arhar · · Score: 2, Funny

    Does it grow longer the more dots it eats?

  51. wow! by sootman · · Score: 1

    Over 100 comments so far and I, for one, am the first to welcome our new serpentine robot overlords?

    --
    Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
  52. Snake 3D by amanox · · Score: 1

    Wow baby, real 3D snake gaming !! Now if only they could make these humanoid robots a bit faster and cheap, and we can all play Doom 3D!

  53. serpentine? by grikdog · · Score: 1

    Not sure I'd call that action serpentine. Real serpents use the classic tetrapod evolution, or else a kind of peristaltic slip and glide inside skin. The robot version looks like something that would have died suddenly during the Cambrian.

    --
    ``Tension, apprehension & dissension have begun!'' - Duffy Wyg&, in Alfred Bester's _The Demolished Man_
  54. Did the robot write the press release, too? by fnurb · · Score: 1

    These treads prevent the snakebot from stalling or becoming stuck on rough terrain because, similar to a tire touching a road, t the treads propel the robot forward like a tire touching a road. Historically, scientists haven't had much success with wheeled and tracked robots on rough terrain because they constantly stall.

    --


    Flout 'em and scout 'em,
    and scout 'em and flout 'em;
    Thought is free. - Shakespeare [The Tempest]
  55. their != there by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    there - location
    their - belongs to them

    gah! please, pretty please, try to remember this.