Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Low Cost Ground Robot Chassis That Can Traverse Challenging Obstacles

Posted by timothy on from the how-does-it-fare-against-angry-toddlers? dept.

Hallie Siegel writes In order for a robot to be useful in our world, it must be able to traverse unpredictable obstacles, including stairs. But currently available robot chassis tend to be either too small or extremely expensive, and most platform kits cannot leave a controlled environment – a huge problem for makers who want to get outside the lab or workshop. This has been an extremely hard problem for roboticists to solve, but the Ground Drone Project wants to change all that with its low-cost ground robot chassis. Check out this innovative design. (Currently, the project is raising money through Kickstarter; if it succeeds, "the instructions and bill of materials will be available for all.")

14 of 38 comments (clear)

  1. We've been selling these since 2010 by spiritplumber · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Android based ground robots that can do stairs? Go to http://www.robots-everywhere.c... and ask us about the Renegade chassis. The working drawings are on thingiverse, too.

    --
    Liberty - Security - Laziness - Pick any two.
    1. Re:We've been selling these since 2010 by LifesABeach · · Score: 1

      What has my attention was all the Milling and CNC required for the prototype. I guess 3D Printing was beyond the scope of the Design Team? I thought, "2 segments, not 3. And how heavy is this thing? I've got wood floors, and watching their prototype move accross my floor would be a challenge."

    2. Re:We've been selling these since 2010 by Immerman · · Score: 1

      Milled parts will typically be far stronger than a 3D printed version of the same basic material (or cast for that matter). Not to mention much cheaper to produce. Moreover, lots of the cost-optimizing design decisions you make for milling-based manufacture will tend to be far more compatible with mass-production techniques - should you have loftier long-term ambitions for your design.

      For now 3D printing only seems to have two real advantages: versatility (especially important if you only have the space/budget for a few manufacturing tools), and the ability to create geometry that is essentially impossible with any other manufacturing process.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    3. Re:We've been selling these since 2010 by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

      For now 3D printing only seems to have two real advantages: versatility (especially important if you only have the space/budget for a few manufacturing tools), and the ability to create geometry that is essentially impossible with any other manufacturing process.

      not true at all! a huge advantage is the price of making a one-off part. $1K for a mold you are only going to use once is very prohibitive.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    4. Re:We've been selling these since 2010 by LifesABeach · · Score: 1

      I take it that Pricesion Machinsts are dirt cheap. But I do thank you on one news item. CNC and Milling machines have become dirt cheap also? Where? I would be very interested in looking into that.

    5. Re:We've been selling these since 2010 by delt0r · · Score: 1

      You don't need CNC and learning machining is not that hard. You don't make a mold for a one off part either. I got a mill and lathe setup for only 2k. Consider that high end 3d printers are more expensive than that its not bad. These days CNC and high end 3d printers are similar in price. As for cheap 3d printers. Well they are crap. We had one at a maker space, and you basically end up "machining" it afterwards anyway, its weak, inaccurate with an awful finish and the plastic is not exactly cheap.

      --
      If information wants to be free, why does my internet connection cost so much?
    6. Re:We've been selling these since 2010 by Immerman · · Score: 1

      I'd say that makes it *very* versatile, wouldn't you? Suppose that might merit it's own point though.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
  2. If it was really tough... by demon+driver · · Score: 1

    ..., than perhaps it could be truly labeled ground-breaking?

  3. Impressive, but.... by DiamondGeezer · · Score: 2

    ...what happens if you put the robot upside-down, or on its side? It looks to me like the robot is fine so long as it doesn't tip over. It's like a tank, but able to be flexible by not carrying a fixed payload.

    Nice hobby object, but I can't see the point.

    --
    Tubby or not tubby. Fat is the question
    1. Re:Impressive, but.... by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      From what i saw, it doesn't appear that it would tip over easily unless you placed something tall on it to chang its center of gravity substantially.

      The point seems to be to pass the design on and make parts availible to those without the machining tools or skills neccesary to get a scalable, proven design operational. There ate itherkits similar availible but i think their niche here is the ability to keep teaction in rough enviroments and not be thrawted by a stick on the ground or curb or whatever.

  4. They're called legs by tomxor · · Score: 1

    Although the general prediction is that future robots will not look like humans because other forms are easier to create... If the robot needs to not have debilitated dalek-like transport then legs are so far the most versatile way a being can move itself around and scale things if you include arms. I'm interested in simpler alternatives but caterpillar tracks are no comparison.

    1. Re:They're called legs by PPH · · Score: 1

      And they are going to need them if we expect them to drive cars for us. Three legs, in fact. Because my car is a stick shift.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    2. Re:They're called legs by Immerman · · Score: 1

      With modern cars increasingly be drive-by-wire, with no actual mechanical linkages between the cockpit and control systems,why not just install an "R2-D2 control port"? Then your robot chauffeur can be nothing more than a sensor-box you mount on the dashboard with an interface cable coming out of it. Cheaper, far more compact, and it bypasses any potential problems with the mechanical input devices, not to mention the immense lag introduced by having mechanical inertia in the communication pipeline.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
  5. Re:Targeted Individuals - Government and Military by LifesABeach · · Score: 1

    Really? Yawn.