Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

OmniTread: A serpentine robot

Posted by samzenpus on from the crawl-anywhere dept.

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."

6 of 150 comments (clear)

  1. 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 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.
  2. 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.

  3. 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.

  4. 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.