Slashdot Mirror


The World's Heaviest Robot

Roland Piquepaille writes "This distinction goes to a future autonomous version of the 700-tons Caterpillar mining truck. In this article, Discovery News reports that Caterpillar engineers and computer scientists from Carnegie Mellon University have teamed up to develop this autonomous truck. Japan-based Komatsu has already delivered autonomous mining trucks to its customers, but these are smaller than the Caterpillar ones. Both companies are transforming their trucks into 'robots' for three reasons. Improvements in safety, efficiency and productivity will reduce costs and increase availability."

29 of 142 comments (clear)

  1. All I Have to Say Is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    You'll be hearing from Shampoo's lawyers.

  2. Quick, tag this 'whatcouldpossiblygowrong' by MrHanky · · Score: 5, Funny

    Not that I think there's a huge chance that things will go wrong with, but think of how awesomely cool it would go wrong if it did.

    1. Re:Quick, tag this 'whatcouldpossiblygowrong' by narcberry · · Score: 2, Funny

      Of course, we're still claiming "The World's Heaviest Robot" even before the project collapses.

      --
      Modding me -1 troll doesn't make me wrong.
    2. Re:Quick, tag this 'whatcouldpossiblygowrong' by Daimanta · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "but think of how awesomely cool it would go wrong if it did."

      Yeah, I'm thinking about the truck going on a rampage killing multiple people in the vicinity. Awesome.

      --
      Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power lost.
    3. Re:Quick, tag this 'whatcouldpossiblygowrong' by negRo_slim · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yeah, I'm thinking about the truck going on a rampage killing multiple people in the vicinity. Awesome.

      These kind of machines are incredibly slow.

      --
      On the Oregon Cost born and raised, On the beach is where I spent most of my days
    4. Re:Quick, tag this 'whatcouldpossiblygowrong' by ColaMan · · Score: 5, Informative

      My old man drives a 797 at a coal mine in Central Queensland - top speed unloaded is 60km/hr.
      I don't define that as "incredibly slow", as it's a damn sight faster than you can run.

      Got a photo around here somewhere of him and his truck- he's 6ft tall, and standing next to the truck, his hard-hat is level with halfway up the hub of the front tyre.

      Top speed loaded is 40km/hr, but that is because the tyres cannot take the higher speeds - they overheat and blow. When a tyre is $35,000 and it blows, that's not good. When it's pumped to it's normal pressure of 130PSI and the truck is parked anywhere near people when it goes off, that's definitely very,very bad.

      Considering the inertia involved, they are pretty much unstoppable by cars, buildings,etc if at speed - they will mow right over the top of your average 4x4 and not even notice. A guy where he works ran over an (empty) Toyota Landcruiser troop carrier one night - swung around in a loop to dump, backed up towards the face, felt a bump "like coming up against a little ridge of dirt" (his words) , put the foot down a little, reverse to face, dump load, drive forward a little, get out of the cab for a smoke, look down in front of the truck.... what's that down near the front wheel? Oh, crap.

      But anyway, I've worked on more autonomous stuff than this.

      Sandvik (and Cat) have systems for underground mines that are pretty much fully autonomous. Sandvik and their Toro loaders can do a full circuit in auto, driving using laser rangefinders to map the walls, update their location on an internal map and basically do all the work except actually dig the bucket of ore. They do traffic control (one loader waits for another at intersections), collision avoidance, the whole shebang.

      So one guy can operate three or four loaders at once, as all he does is take control of a loader at the ore pile, dig a bucket, then set it loose to go and dump that load automatically elsewhere. Meanwhile another loader turns up and sits idle at the ore pile waiting for him to take control. It's Management's wet dream - no need for trained underground operators on $55/hr, get some 17 year old in a control room on the surface at $20/hr running 4 loaders.

      If ore wasn't so tricky to dig out (irregular sizing is the problem), they'd be full auto by now.

      --

      You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
      There is a lot of hype here.
    5. Re:Quick, tag this 'whatcouldpossiblygowrong' by TubeSteak · · Score: 2, Informative

      These kind of machines are incredibly slow.

      You obviously didn't RTFA.
      So the real question is, did you even read the wikipedia article you linked?

      FTFA: That's nearly two million pounds of metal, fuel and stone powered by a 3,550-horsepower, 24-valve engine moving at up to 42 miles per hour, with software and a robot at the wheel.

      FTFWiki:
      # Drive: 3524B Series, 24-cylinder, four-stroke diesel engine
      # Max speed: 42 mph (67 km/h)
      # Power: 3,550 hp (2,650 kW)

      I don't consider 2 million pounds moving at 42 mph "incredibly slow"

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    6. Re:Quick, tag this 'whatcouldpossiblygowrong' by simaolation · · Score: 2

      Skynet approves of this research.

    7. Re:Quick, tag this 'whatcouldpossiblygowrong' by Smauler · · Score: 4, Funny

      I don't consider 2 million pounds moving at 42 mph "incredibly slow"

      You've obviously never waited in a queue at McDonalds then...

  3. Heaviest at a mere 700T? by ozphx · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I would say the distinction would go to Australia's driverless ore trains when commissioned in 2013.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Port_Hedland,_Western_Australia.jpg

    (Yeah I know the pic is of a drivered BHP rather than Rio train... but it does give you an idea of the scale).

    The argument for driverless is that because they take the best part of a day to perform an emergency stop, the family car stalled on the crossing is going to be pulverised regardless of the skill of a human operator. The largest fragment left over from these collisions is usually a few inches in size. Fortunately they don't happen that often.

    --
    3laws: No freebies, no backsies, GTFO.
    1. Re:Heaviest at a mere 700T? by Pinckney · · Score: 2, Informative

      2.4km at 75km/h means it will take about 2 minutes to pass a crossing. At half speed, it's still only 4 minutes.

      Source for figures: im-mining.com

      Only having two engines just means it takes a long time to get up to speed.

    2. Re:Heaviest at a mere 700T? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Typical Rio Tinto Pilbara train

      Loaded weight 30 000 tonnes
      Length 2.4 km
      Top speed 75 km/h

      http://www.railwaygazette.com/news_view/article/2008/10//rio_tinto_to_go_driverless.html

    3. Re:Heaviest at a mere 700T? by Jacques+Chester · · Score: 3, Informative

      "Driverless" is a better term. Train drivers for Rio and BHP are very expensive and their rosters are very inflexible, which hampers production. It's a hangover from the union days.

      --

      Classical Liberalism: All your base are belong to you.

  4. Transformers by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 3, Funny

    Which Autobot was a dumptruck?

    1. Re:Transformers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      I believe that was a Constructicon, not an Autobot ... (specifically "Long Haul" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructicon)

    2. Re:Transformers by Nickbou · · Score: 2, Informative

      Besides the Constructicons, there is also Wreck-Gar, who is a dumptruck in the new Transformers: Animated series. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wreck-Gar

      --
      The LEGO of my childhood prepared me for the IKEA of my adulthood. ~me
  5. Why don't rockets count ? by mbone · · Score: 2, Interesting

    An unmanned spacecraft when launched is "fully autonomous" and there are a number that are bigger than 700 metric tons.

    Titan IVB - 943 tons
    Delta IV - up to 733 tons
    Saturn V (there were 3 unmanned launches) - 3000 tons

  6. He's not heavy... by eln · · Score: 4, Funny

    he's my brobot.

    Sorry.

  7. Mining in the Pilbara by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I live in Western Australia, where Rio Tinto are developing their autonomous mining equipment. My old man is employed by Rio as a radio techie and as such he has a small part to play in the development of their autonomous trucks. I'm posting anonymously as I don't want any of these remarks getting him in trouble.

    The basic model relies on a single central system coordinating all the trucks as they move about. There have been a lot of kinks to do with radio lines of sight. Mine sites where the principal ore body is ferrous tend not to be very friendly to radio transmission. The actual driving of the trucks is not hugely complicated as the routes are identical for every run and GPS systems make it easy to align a truck with the road. It's not like navigating a desert track or urban landscape.

    Rio are also working on automating their trains. Alongside BHP, Rio has one of the largest fully private rail networks in the world. The two mining giants run the largest freight trains anywhere -- several kilometres long with tens of thousands of tons of iron ore. That may change as the two mining giants are being forced to open their networks to junior mining companies -- it looks easy on paper but railway systems are extremely complicated and finely balanced systems.

    The scale of the mining efforts in the Pilbara boggle the mind. They are utterly vast. Whole mountains made of rust are being excavated, crushed and then shipped to Japan and China. The pace is frenetic. Rio and BHP can't find enough workers and that has caused costs to explode, which is part of why they are turning to automation. But really it's about throughput: an autonomous truck doesn't need lunch breaks, delays for shift change or the like. Every minute counts.

    Rio have been more forward-looking than BHP in this department, so it may not last as BHP are trying to carry out a hostile takeover at the moment.

    1. Re:Mining in the Pilbara by daBass · · Score: 2, Interesting

      With a mine 2 kilometers deep and 7 KMs wide, you may well have LOS problems with LEO satellites! In fact, even GPS is a problem and most of these system don't use GPS at all, rather relying on a series of land-based transmitters on the edge of the excavation.

    2. Re:Mining in the Pilbara by ozphx · · Score: 2, Interesting

      To put some numbers on this a small ship loading plant hits an easy 300 megatonne per annum. The cost of downtime on a line is around $500 a second.

      --
      3laws: No freebies, no backsies, GTFO.
  8. Megaweapon! by simonbp · · Score: 2, Funny

    It's Megaweapon!

    http://mst3k.wikia.com/wiki/Megaweapon

    Simon ;)

  9. Previous Slashdot Story by Leif_Bloomquist · · Score: 2, Informative

    This isn't all that new...I submitted a story to Slashdot about a fully autonomous/tele-operated underground mine back in 2001! (Disclaimer, I was one of the engineers on the project.)

    http://slashdot.org/articles/01/01/30/1552243.shtml

  10. correction by Eto_Demerzel79 · · Score: 2, Informative

    The Cat 797 mining truck actually hauls 400 tons, not 240 as stated in the article. The 240 ton truck is the 793.

  11. TerraMax by Bones3D_mac · · Score: 2, Informative

    Although the vehicle mentioned in the article is not a DARPA challenge setup, there was one competitor in the DARPA challenge that would be almost as intimidating if it went rogue:

    - TerraMax

    Although the vehicle has had it's share of buggy moments, it's has done surprising well, especially considering it's sheer size.

    --


    8==8 Bones 8==8
  12. Imagine... by CptNerd · · Score: 2, Funny

    Since no one has said it yet, "Imagine a Beowulf cluster of these"...

    --
    By the taping of my glasses, something geeky this way passes
  13. Sense of scale.... by thrill12 · · Score: 2, Informative

    ...by checking this video.
    Or this video of a smaller 793, but I sure hope that is not an autonomous kill-bot.

    --
    Slashdot: stuff for news, nerds that matter, matter for news, stuff that nerd
  14. Re:Hit or not to hit, that is the question... by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 2, Interesting
  15. 1 major problem: Robots are too accurate by Dan+B. · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The biggest problem with the driverless Komatsu's on the mine sites are the ruts they cause on the dirt mine 'roads'. When you have 18 tippers weighing 500+ ton rolling on the exact same pair of tyre treads once a minute 24x7, the ruts get gouged pretty deep, pretty quick. A human driver will do his or her best to avoid ruts as he or she drives around every small (and large!) rock pile on the road as it makes for a smoother ride, especially when all you want to do is get it from the bottom of the pit to the top as many times as directed for your 8 hour shift.

    --
    Dan. -- So what if it's spelt wrong, nobody's perfect