Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Researchers Create First Flying Wireless Robotic Insect (newatlas.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the first-of-its-kind dept.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from New Atlas: You might remember RoboBee, an insect-sized robot that flies by flapping its wings. Unfortunately, though, it has to be hard-wired to a power source. Well, one of RoboBee's creators has now helped develop RoboFly, which flies without a tether. Slightly heavier than a toothpick, RoboFly was designed by a team at the University of Washington -- one member of that team, assistant professor Sawyer Fuller, was also part of the Harvard University team that first created RoboBee. That flying robot receives its power via a wire attached to an external power source, as an onboard battery would simply be too heavy to allow the tiny craft to fly. Instead of a wire or a battery, RoboFly is powered by a laser. That laser shines on a photovoltaic cell, which is mounted on top of the robot. On its own, that cell converts the laser light to just seven volts of electricity, so a built-in circuit boosts that to the 240 volts needed to flap the wings. That circuit also contains a microcontroller, which tells the robot when and how to flap its wings -- on RoboBee, that sort of "thinking" is handled via a tether-linked external controller. The robot can be seen in action here.

64 comments

  1. Yes, but can they make them... by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

    Yes, but can they make robotic insects that fly around, suck your blood, and give you diseases?

    Until they do, we're at great risk of not being able to fill the Mosquito's ecological niche should it go extinct.

    --
    "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    1. Re:Yes, but can they make them... by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      Yes, but can they make robotic insects that fly around, suck your blood, and give you diseases?

      Robo-Skeeter!!!!

      :O

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    2. Re: Yes, but can they make them... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that is Dr. Robo-Skeeter, MD, MCSE, Esqire to us all.

    3. Re:Yes, but can they make them... by hey! · · Score: 2

      Actually, my thought was "why not a cyborg fly?" Implant circuits in an actual fly that would control its movements. They've already done computer controlled cockroaches.

      Powering this thing by laser isn't really that different than powering it with a wire. Biological flies are efficient enough for sustained autonomous flight, and come in even tinier packages.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  2. Flying? by argStyopa · · Score: 2

    Er...look, I want to credit the development team for making some tremendous strides in miniaturization but - that's not flying.

    Fluttering wings hard enough to momentarily leave the ground is impressive, yes. But don't spoil it by trying to call it flying.

    --
    -Styopa
    1. Re:Flying? by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      The thing you are forgetting is that technology always progresses, so even though it can only "fly" for .25sec today, next week it will be .50sec, and by the end of the year 10sec, etc until it will fly for hours. This is similar to how the first computers had only a few bytes of memory, but now my wristwatch has a couple of gigabytes. Technological progress is inevitable.

    2. Re:Flying? by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      The thing you are forgetting is that technology always progresses, so even though it can only "fly" for .25sec today, next week it will be .50sec, and by the end of the year 10sec, etc until it will fly for hours. This is similar to how the first computers had only a few bytes of memory, but now my wristwatch has a couple of gigabytes. Technological progress is inevitable.

      In ten years time, we might be able to literally put a fly on the wall inside the Kremlin.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    3. Re: Flying? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Right? Is this a joke? I just saw the video and fail to see why it is worthy of publishing. I'm sure they are on their way to success but it is way too early to be rolling out the "Mission Accomplished" banner.

    4. Re:Flying? by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      Or invade another planet:

      FAST, CHEAP AND OUT OF CONTROL: A ROBOT INVASION OF THE SOLAR SYSTEM

      https://people.csail.mit.edu/b...

      That was written in 1989. I am sure it is going to happen any time now though. After all these guys went to MIT and we all know how smart those people are.

    5. Re:Flying? by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      There is tremendous spying benefit from the technology. Also it could be a deadly tool. Having it inject people with a poison or a virus then fly off. Would make it difficult to track.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    6. Re: Flying? by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      Publish or perish. Academia has been pushing these breathless hype press releases for quite a while now. It beats getting a real job and you might get some taxpayer funded DARPA grants out of it.

    7. Re: Flying? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Call me when it can evade getting whacked by a rolled up newspaper,

    8. Re:Flying? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it's called jumping.....

    9. Re:Flying? by radarskiy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Fluttering wings hard enough to momentarily leave the ground is impressive, yes. But don't spoil it by trying to call it flying."

      Fluttering wings hard enough to leave the ground is the actual definition of flying.

    10. Re:Flying? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Precisely. Just like how "imitation of intelligent behavior" is the actual definition of AI. Not "alive, and capable of doing anything and everything a person can do."

    11. Re:Flying? by Teun · · Score: 2

      Indeed, their miniaturisation is at the front.
      But the TU Delft's MAVLab (http://mavlab.tudelft.nl) has autonomous flapping wing vehicles.
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      --
      "The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
    12. Re:Flying? by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      Call me a cynic, but I wouldn't say technological progress is necessarily inevitable. Probable yes, but nothing is guaranteed. A couple of counter-examples is modern "alchemy", (well...changing one element into another), highly impractical on any sort of mass scale; and power generated by fusion; especially cold fusion. So far, useful applications of those technologies have been elusive despite decades of research. I suspect attempting interstellar travel in any acceptable time frame is going to be pretty hairy too.

      As far as that robot goes, chances of improvement are much higher, but having to keep a laser focused on that wobbly photocell seems hardly practical. At best it's only good for line-of-sight. There's got to be a better way, preferably something that provides true power autonomy, but maybe something that can convert RF in the meantime.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    13. Re:Flying? by Ryanrule · · Score: 1

      Your parents should be ashamed. Possibly fined. Maybe improsnomed.

    14. Re: Flying? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tell the Wright brothers that

    15. Re:Flying? by argStyopa · · Score: 1

      Right:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      at 1:00 - that's flying?

      No, it isn't.

      --
      -Styopa
  3. FBI by ickleberry · · Score: 1

    The FBI/NSA has had these since the 80s

  4. This is definitely not a first by MobyDisk · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Not to poo-poo their work, but this is definitely not a first. A quick google search reveals several:
          https://gizmodo.com/its-almost...
          https://spectrum.ieee.org/auto...
          https://www.ted.com/talks/a_ro...

    I also remember a DARPA project to create a flying insect with a camera, that was powered entirely by ambient wi-fi. It would fly a bit, then spend hours charging, then fly a bit more.

    1. Re:This is definitely not a first by hey! · · Score: 1

      The second link is to work by the same group.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    2. Re:This is definitely not a first by mrclevesque · · Score: 1

      Impressive, especially the first link.

    3. Re:This is definitely not a first by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Not to disparage anyone's work, these are all cool projects. Regarding your contenders:

      The Festo eMotionButterflies fly, are wireless (battery powered), but have 50 cm wingspan (roughly twice that of the largest bio-butterfly). Insect-inspired, but a bit of a stretch to call it an "insect".

      The Harvard hawkmoth is in the size range of bio-moths, but requires a launcher. That makes it more "falling with style" than "flying". It is also battery powered.

      The Festo SmartBird) is a robotic bird, not insect.

      RoboFly itself needs to do more than what is shown in the video for me to call it "flying". It could then clearly claim First Wirelessly-Powered Flying Robotic Insect. I think it will get there.

    4. Re:This is definitely not a first by radarskiy · · Score: 1

      The first example has neither onboard controller or onboard sensors, so it is not a prior example of the category
      The second example uses a wired power supply, so it is not a prior example of the category
      The third example uses a bird style flight which is aerodynamically distinct from insect styles of flight, so it is not a prior example of the category.

    5. Re:This is definitely not a first by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The CIA had an RC with a microphone that mimicked a dragonfly... in 1971. Sure, it sucked and couldn't handle even small amounts of wind, but keep in mind that was almost fifty years ago.

    6. Re:This is definitely not a first by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

      Thanks for doing that research. I hastily put those links in without really reading them. You are totally right about the smartbird. So perhaps this is the world's smallest untethered robotic insect, and it definitely deserves accolades for breaking new ground.

  5. Dick Chopp made a robot to find lumps on your nads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did you know that there is a urologist in Austin TX named Dick Chopp?!! Isn’t that cray cray?!!

  6. You're gay. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're gay.

    1. Re: You're gay. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not that there's anything wrong with that.

    2. Re: You're gay. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You annoying faggots need to get a room next to Trump Junior at Leavenworth.

    3. Re: You're gay. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have a very bad bug eating you. Fight it off.

  7. Been done before... by EzFlier · · Score: 0

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

  8. Cutie by Finiz1983 · · Score: 1

    It is so cute! Can it do anything else except for taking off and landing? As far as I'm concerned the idea is to eventually create a robot that would detect methane leaks? I wonder if in some 50 years parents will use such robots to check if their kids do not search for what is the best essay services website in their rooms haha https://alltopreviews.com/

    1. Re: Cutie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The idea is to eventually be able to spy on people and land on their picnic foods undetected.

    2. Re:Cutie by PPH · · Score: 2

      a robot that would detect methane leaks

      Robots following my ass around. Do Not Want.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
  9. Why not? by sjbe · · Score: 1

    Fluttering wings hard enough to momentarily leave the ground is impressive, yes. But don't spoil it by trying to call it flying.

    The first flight of the Wright Flyer was 852 feet. Not exactly an intercontinental flight and they had almost no steering control. First flights are always short. Stop being such a cynic.

  10. 1970s by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    What makes this one from the 1970s not qualify for "first"?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_Museum#/media/File:DragonflyInsectothopter.jpg

  11. Volts? Just volts? How about POWER? by bobbied · · Score: 2

    Sorry but the electronic engineer in me wonders how much POWER this arrangement creates and that requires we know the current... Knowing how many volts is like knowing how tall a building is you need to put a weight on top of, but not how heavy the weight is.

    Then the whole, we convert it to 240 volts to flap the wings, part is amusing too. How is this technical detail relevant to the coolness of what you accomplished? It's not hard to push 7V to 240V as there are off the shelf devices that do this with quite high power efficiencies... But there I go again with that power thing..

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  12. Re:Volts? Just volts? How about POWER? by 110010001000 · · Score: 0

    240V is much more impressive than 7V. They did miss the opportunity to mention how the AI in the microcontroller tells the robot when to flap its wings though.

  13. Progress, but . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Until it has enough power and longevity to fly into a room and take pictures or transmit real-time audio, the government's not going to be interested in buyin. . . er, I mean "shutting down" the project.

  14. Holy shit! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seven Volts of Electricity. SEVEN VOLTS!

    That's a shitload of electricity, I tell ya.

    Yep, bobbied. Totally agree.

    By simply regurgitating mainline press releases, Slashdot is neglecting one of its duties, which would be to *lower*, not to raise general dumbness level.

    Please, Slashdot. Pretty please? We're supposed to be geeks.

  15. Re:Volts? Just volts? How about POWER? by bobbied · · Score: 1

    LOL.. I'm not that impressed with 240 V. It's easy to convert from 7 V DC to 240V DC if the power levels are under a watt or so. Cheap off the shelf hardware does that all day long. Now if you are converting a Kilowatt from 7V to 240V, that's a bit more of a neat trick.

    https://www.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Advanced-Energy/025PXS9-FL15?qs=BZBei1rCqCDMA25%252bfmkeyQ%3d%3d

    And that's just a quick search...

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  16. Watch out for the assassin bugs by Chrisq · · Score: 2

    Combine one of these with the ability to squirt a few drops of nerve agent.....

    1. Re:Watch out for the assassin bugs by mujadaddy · · Score: 2

      Deployed at altitude via cruise missile in packs of 500...

      --
      Populus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur...
      "Force shits upon Reason's back." - Poor Richard's Almanac
  17. Black Mirror predicted that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hated_in_the_Nation

  18. Re:Volts? Just volts? How about POWER? by nospam007 · · Score: 1

    "240V is much more impressive than 7V. "

    Both of them are idiot values to fly a fucking toothpick.

  19. Researchers weren't first; ... by CaptainDork · · Score: 2

    ... evolution did this long ago.

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
  20. Re:Volts? Just volts? How about POWER? by PPH · · Score: 1

    I scanned the article quickly and did not see (too lazy) what sort of motors/actuators and mechanical linkages they used. That will be a large factor in determining the efficiency of PV power to thrust.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  21. As seen on Lexx by go-nix.ca · · Score: 1

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

  22. Re:Volts? Just volts? How about POWER? by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

    Then the whole, we convert it to 240 volts to flap the wings, part is amusing too. How is this technical detail relevant to the coolness of what you accomplished? It's not hard to push 7V to 240V as there are off the shelf devices that do this with quite high power efficiencies... But there I go again with that power thing..

    But 240 is way more than 7!

    --
    Wanna buy a shirt?
    https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
  23. Innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe they can put the solar cell on tiny wheels and have the bug drag the wagon around. That to me, would be cool. Maybe even make a train out of a bunch of them. NO BATTERIES!!

  24. Not Remotely New by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

    DARPA invented better over a decade ago.

  25. In a couple more years and people can play the by mark_reh · · Score: 1

    #deathto game and be hated in the nation.

  26. Nope, already existed 10+ years ago by ayesnymous · · Score: 1

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/...