Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Stanford Built a Humanoid Submarine Robot To Explore a 17th-Century Shipwreck (ieee.org)

Posted by BeauHD on from the how-it's-made dept.

schwit1 quotes a report from IEEE Spectrum: Back in April, Stanford University professor Oussama Khatib led a team of researchers on an underwater archaeological expedition, 30 kilometers off the southern coast of France, to La Lune, King Louis XIV's sunken 17th-century flagship. Rather than dive to the site of the wreck 100 meters below the surface, which is a very bad idea for almost everyone, Khatib's team brought along a custom-made humanoid submarine robot called Ocean One. In this month's issue of IEEE Robotics and Automation Magazine, the Stanford researchers describe in detail how they designed and built the robot, a hybrid between a humanoid and an underwater remotely operated vehicle (ROV), and also how they managed to send it down to the resting place of La Lune, where it used its three-fingered hands to retrieve a vase. Most ocean-ready ROVs are boxy little submarines that might have an arm on them if you're lucky, but they're not really designed for the kind of fine manipulation that underwater archaeology demands. You could send down a human diver instead, but once you get past about 40 meters, things start to get both complicated and dangerous. Ocean One's humanoid design means that it's easy and intuitive for a human to remotely perform delicate archeological tasks through a telepresence interface.

schwit1 notes: "Ocean One is the best name they could come up with?"

11 of 47 comments (clear)

  1. As Steve Jobs would say... by OpenSourced · · Score: 3, Informative

    Ocean One is the best name they could come up with?

    That's the kind of names that happens when you concentrate on the product, and not on the marketing of it.

    --
    Rome taught me patience and assiduous application to detail. Virtues which temper the boldness of great, general views.
  2. Re:Why always going for hominoid? by OpenSourced · · Score: 2

    It is explained. The reason was to facilitate the remote controlling by some kind of VR setup. If you turn your head, you expect something similar to happen to your robotic avatar. If you raise your arm, it's better if the distance between your "eyes" and your "shoulder", and the relationship of lengths of your "arms", is human-like. So you end up with a human-like structure. If you want to protect your sensors with a hull, a head-like cover is as good as any other.

    On the other side, there are many other alternatives open to you, and it's clear that they went for the hominoid look, but that's also very human :-)

    --
    Rome taught me patience and assiduous application to detail. Virtues which temper the boldness of great, general views.
  3. Next Slashdot poll by RuffMasterD · · Score: 2

    Clearly they are far too busy with trivial scientific details to bother with stuff that matters. Slashdot poll to the rescue: "What should Stanford call their new Humanoid Diving Robot?". I propose "Oussama bin Divn".

    --
    Human Rights, Article 12: Freedom from Interference with Privacy, Family, Home and Correspondence
    1. Re:Next Slashdot poll by Snard · · Score: 3, Funny

      I predict the top vote getter in the poll will be Botty McBotFace.

      --
      - Mike
  4. Re:Why always going for hominoid? by bruce_the_loon · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I got the technical reasoning for the arm design and the stereo cameras, but the head feels unnecessarily restrictive to me. It precludes the added utility of independently steerable cameras or adjusting the distance between cameras to get an exaggerated binocular vision which can be useful for certain retrieval and manipulation operations.

    I guess I always tend to think that humanoid robots are trying to do something the more difficult way than one that is built more along the functional requirements. Like using a three axis arm instead of a more flexible segmented snake that could reach into impossibly twisty gaps.

    --
    Trying to become famous by taking photos. Visit my homepage please.
  5. dangerous past 40 meters? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    > You could send down a human diver instead, but once you get past about 40 meters, things start to get both complicated and dangerous.

    Well for a scuba diver on oxygen, yes, but 100 meters would not be much of a problem for a diver using trimix. This statement is not quite true.

    1. Re: dangerous past 40 meters? by drewsup · · Score: 2

      Screw underwater salvage, this looks like a pretty good satellite repair bot, replace thrusters with gas jets, and operate from the ISS or xb37 with dedicated link.

    2. Re:dangerous past 40 meters? by demonlapin · · Score: 2

      Yeah, agreed. Recreational divers shouldn't be messing around at that depth, but technical divers do it all the time. Just have to have decompression facilities available.

  6. Re: Why always going for hominoid? by bsDaemon · · Score: 2

    Well, it seems to me it is designed to functional specs, where the PRD phase probably said something like "it should work like a person, but without risk of death" and then they went about figuring how to build that. Humans don't have snaky arms with additional articulation points, so how would someone in a VR motion capture suit control that?

  7. They brought back more than a vase by Grand+Facade · · Score: 2

    The kind of money that it took for the expedition and the robot, they didn't bring back just a vase.

    They are just saying that while hiding the real loot behind their back.

    --
    Rick B.
  8. A better name by not_surt · · Score: 2

    "Ocean 11" has a much nicer ring to it.