Scientists got the idea for this robot from observing actual mice. They noticed that mice moved with extreme ease and balance. This is in part due to their whiskers. A mouse's whiskers ask as an "extension" on their senses. Scientists decided to apply this to a robot. Researchers from the University of Tokyo and the University of Zurich in Switzerland. They named it the Artificial Mouse or the AMouse. They attached real mouse whiskers to a robot which it uses for navigation along with other sensory inputs. The researchers hope to create an adaptive autonomous robot that can recognize objects, navigate, and store memory.
The Article
Another article on the AMouse
The idea for this robot is very inventive. Mice are able to use their whiskers to achieve greater balance and navigation. It makes sense that this ability could be effectively applied to a robot. The use of the whiskers could be used to create a robot that could navigate completely autonomously. Also a robot that can recognize objects and remember things would be very useful. The article also mentions that eh robot could be used for "repair work in tight places, detecting hazardous glass, [and] exploring confined surroundings." This would be very useful. However the robot still need a lot of development before it is ready for such everyday use.
Thursday, December 9, 2010
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
Gears and Speed
1-2. see chart
3. i) Real world error.
ii) see chart
iii) To calculate the average speed
4. see chart
5. it only has a gear ration of 1 so it doesn't tell us anything.
6. you would be excluding the robot traveled before the back wheels hit the front line.
7-14. see chart
15. i) 18.64
ii) 52.28
iii) no
16. i) 51.77
ii) 52.28
iii) yes
17. i) hypothesis B
ii) The predicted value for hypothesis B matched the actual speed on the chart
iii) yes, all you have to do is disprove it in one instance and its incorrect.
iv) no,simply proving that it works once does not prove that it works all the time.
v) B
18-21. see chart
22. i) 51.77
ii) 18.61
iii) no
23. i) 18.64
ii) 18.61
iii) yes
24. i) B
ii) The predicted value for hypothesis B matched the actual speed on the chart both times
iii) still yes, all you had to do was disprove it in one instance and its incorrect.
iv) no,simply proving that it works more than once does not prove that it works all the time.
v) B because it is the only one that works and it has been accurate so far
25. We tested a robot with the same size gears then tested a robot with smaller than larger gears. We then compared the speeds for the different gear robots with the predicted values for the theories. Theory B was very close to actual speed each time so we support hypothesis b.
26. i) b
ii) a
iii) directly
iv) directly
27. (36/3)*(16/16)=(x/3)*(18/6) x=12 cm
28. 1.5*1= x*(8/24) x=4.5 NO
29. 9*(1)=15*(36/x) x=60
3. i) Real world error.
ii) see chart
iii) To calculate the average speed
4. see chart
5. it only has a gear ration of 1 so it doesn't tell us anything.
6. you would be excluding the robot traveled before the back wheels hit the front line.
7-14. see chart
15. i) 18.64
ii) 52.28
iii) no
16. i) 51.77
ii) 52.28
iii) yes
17. i) hypothesis B
ii) The predicted value for hypothesis B matched the actual speed on the chart
iii) yes, all you have to do is disprove it in one instance and its incorrect.
iv) no,simply proving that it works once does not prove that it works all the time.
v) B
18-21. see chart
22. i) 51.77
ii) 18.61
iii) no
23. i) 18.64
ii) 18.61
iii) yes
24. i) B
ii) The predicted value for hypothesis B matched the actual speed on the chart both times
iii) still yes, all you had to do was disprove it in one instance and its incorrect.
iv) no,simply proving that it works more than once does not prove that it works all the time.
v) B because it is the only one that works and it has been accurate so far
25. We tested a robot with the same size gears then tested a robot with smaller than larger gears. We then compared the speeds for the different gear robots with the predicted values for the theories. Theory B was very close to actual speed each time so we support hypothesis b.
26. i) b
ii) a
iii) directly
iv) directly
27. (36/3)*(16/16)=(x/3)*(18/6) x=12 cm
28. 1.5*1= x*(8/24) x=4.5 NO
29. 9*(1)=15*(36/x) x=60
Get in Gear
1ft/2s
1. yes, it did
2. When the motor had more power it moved the wheels forward faster
3. If we put on a smaller gear there will be more wheel rotations per one turn of the large gear.
4. 2ft/1s which is faster than the 1ft/1s before
5. .5ft/1s. it was slower
6. Increase the motor power or swap the second gear to a smaller gear.
7. Decrease the motor power or swap the first gear to a smaller gear.
8. motor
9. i) the gears are the same size so it will move at the same speed
ii) much slower because the gear on the wheel is larger so there will be less rotations of it per rotation of the smaller motor gear
iii) it will increase or decrease the number of rotations per rotation of the gear on the motor.
iv) if the gears are both the same size, it will go the same speed. it the wheel gear is smaller, it will go faster. If the motor gear is larger, it will go slower.
10. i) When the motor rotated, it rotated the gear on the axis. This gear rotated the gear on the wheel. This gear rotated the wheel. However the gear on the wheel was smaller than the gear on the axis so it rotated more times. This in turn rotated the wheel more than before, therefore covering more distance.
ii) It works same as i but instead of being smaller, it was larger so it rotated less times and covered less distance.
iii) the formula assumes that for every rotation of the motor, the wheel is rotating the same. Therefore it assumes that the gear sizes are the same. It will not work if you have different sized gears.
11. i) So the smaller gear on the wheel and the largest gear on the motor
ii) large wheel small motor
iii) large wheel small motor
iv)large motor small wheel
12. different gears would work better for speed vs strength.
1. yes, it did
2. When the motor had more power it moved the wheels forward faster
3. If we put on a smaller gear there will be more wheel rotations per one turn of the large gear.
4. 2ft/1s which is faster than the 1ft/1s before
5. .5ft/1s. it was slower
6. Increase the motor power or swap the second gear to a smaller gear.
7. Decrease the motor power or swap the first gear to a smaller gear.
8. motor
9. i) the gears are the same size so it will move at the same speed
ii) much slower because the gear on the wheel is larger so there will be less rotations of it per rotation of the smaller motor gear
iii) it will increase or decrease the number of rotations per rotation of the gear on the motor.
iv) if the gears are both the same size, it will go the same speed. it the wheel gear is smaller, it will go faster. If the motor gear is larger, it will go slower.
10. i) When the motor rotated, it rotated the gear on the axis. This gear rotated the gear on the wheel. This gear rotated the wheel. However the gear on the wheel was smaller than the gear on the axis so it rotated more times. This in turn rotated the wheel more than before, therefore covering more distance.
ii) It works same as i but instead of being smaller, it was larger so it rotated less times and covered less distance.
iii) the formula assumes that for every rotation of the motor, the wheel is rotating the same. Therefore it assumes that the gear sizes are the same. It will not work if you have different sized gears.
11. i) So the smaller gear on the wheel and the largest gear on the motor
ii) large wheel small motor
iii) large wheel small motor
iv)large motor small wheel
12. different gears would work better for speed vs strength.
Wednesday, December 1, 2010
Field of View
1. i) Yes they follow a gourd like pattern
ii) it detects near and far
2. i) 60 cm
ii) directly in front
3. i) yes, about 35cm
ii) yes, it will avoid it
4. 2cm
5. 10cm
6. 1:5
7. i) It follows the same pattern, its just smaller
ii) Its smaller
iii) yes
8. i) every 1 cm on the paper represents 5 cm in real life
ii) 4.4 cm
iii) 11.5 cm
9. i) directly in front
ii) it was 12 cm from the front of the sensor on the graph paper
iii) 60 cm
iv) 62 cm directly in front of the sensor
10. i) it gets smaller and then wider in the middle
ii) 50cm
iii) it needs to use different sensor applications to detect something father away rather than closer and visa-versa because it takes different power reading are needed to detect things at different distances, just like our eyes shift.
11. It sent out a noise which spread out in a circular patter and then began to fade out when it sent out a second, louder, noise which also spread out in a circular pattern and then faded out.
12. First you need to draw a line on the floor. Then place the robot with the ultrasonic sensor on the front of the line. Get a can like object. Place it on the other end of the line. Slowly begin to inch it forward until you get a steady reading on the sensor. mark down that pint. Then use a yard stick to measure out every 10 cm on the line up to your point. Take your can and put it to the right of the 10 cm point. slowly inch it back toward the line until you get a reading. Do the same for the left side of the line. Then repeat the steps for every 10 cm point up to your original point. Finally find the scale between the actual distance and the distance on the graph paper. Use this scale to graph all of your points.
13. i) 52 cm directly in front
ii) at the 40 cm mark the point are about 31cm apart
14. i) 2:25
ii) at 170 cm directly in front
iii)at 100 cm the points are about 115 cm apart
iv) no
15. i) 62cm
ii) .0018 s
iii) .0018 s
iv) .0036 s
v) .0019 s one way, .0037 s total
vi) Its quite fast.
ii) it detects near and far
2. i) 60 cm
ii) directly in front
3. i) yes, about 35cm
ii) yes, it will avoid it
4. 2cm
5. 10cm
6. 1:5
7. i) It follows the same pattern, its just smaller
ii) Its smaller
iii) yes
8. i) every 1 cm on the paper represents 5 cm in real life
ii) 4.4 cm
iii) 11.5 cm
9. i) directly in front
ii) it was 12 cm from the front of the sensor on the graph paper
iii) 60 cm
iv) 62 cm directly in front of the sensor
10. i) it gets smaller and then wider in the middle
ii) 50cm
iii) it needs to use different sensor applications to detect something father away rather than closer and visa-versa because it takes different power reading are needed to detect things at different distances, just like our eyes shift.
11. It sent out a noise which spread out in a circular patter and then began to fade out when it sent out a second, louder, noise which also spread out in a circular pattern and then faded out.
12. First you need to draw a line on the floor. Then place the robot with the ultrasonic sensor on the front of the line. Get a can like object. Place it on the other end of the line. Slowly begin to inch it forward until you get a steady reading on the sensor. mark down that pint. Then use a yard stick to measure out every 10 cm on the line up to your point. Take your can and put it to the right of the 10 cm point. slowly inch it back toward the line until you get a reading. Do the same for the left side of the line. Then repeat the steps for every 10 cm point up to your original point. Finally find the scale between the actual distance and the distance on the graph paper. Use this scale to graph all of your points.
13. i) 52 cm directly in front
ii) at the 40 cm mark the point are about 31cm apart
14. i) 2:25
ii) at 170 cm directly in front
iii)at 100 cm the points are about 115 cm apart
iv) no
15. i) 62cm
ii) .0018 s
iii) .0018 s
iv) .0036 s
v) .0019 s one way, .0037 s total
vi) Its quite fast.
Monday, November 29, 2010
Obstacle Detection
1. The robot ran into the wall and stopped.
2. The wall activated the touch sensor so the robot stopped like the program told it to when the touch sensor detected something.
3. Yes, if it didn't stop when it detected objects it would just get stuck running into a solid object.
4. It will stop when it runs into something so it won't get stuck, but it won't so anything to actually avoid the obstacle. It has to hit it before it stops.
5. It stopped 10 cm from the wall.
6. The wall set the sonic sensor off and so the robot stopped like it was programmed to.
7. It stopped about 10 cm away.
8. The robot stopped before it actually hit the object but it cannot sense smaller objects such as the legs of a chair.
9. This sensor is better for objects that you want to detect but not hit but it only works for larger or wider objects. The touch sensor will detect any objects but it has to actually hit it to detect it.
10. i) The sonic sensor detect objects without hitting them. The touch sensor has to hit it to hit it to detect it.
ii) With the sonic sensor it will stop in front of the object while with the touch sensor it will stop in contact with the object.
11. It will not hit the object which is good for delicate objects, however it cannot detect smaller objects such as the leg of the chair.
12. i) because the touch sensor can only detect the object when it is in contact with it while the touch sensor can detect an object from a distance and you have to set how far away you want it to stop.
ii) It will stop farther or closer to the object.
13. i) So a robot could do things like detect walls in a room, detect trees in woods, and navigate a maze.
ii) robots that are trying to navigate on their own. Robots that are trying to go through a maze.
iii) if the robot had to detect where a glass object was.
14. i) It can detect the object from a distance, it can stop different distances from the object, and it can prevent damage to the object or the robot.
ii) No, it cannot detect smaller/thinner objects.
iii) if a car like robot had to detect a wall. This sensor would prevent the robot from running into the wall and crashing trying to sense it.
iv) If a car like robot had to detect a street post it would not be able to sense it and would run into it.
15. A light sensor could look for dark objects to avoid.
16. It shows 6 question marks.
17. yes, if its too small it can't detect it
18. hard objects are easier because they are more solid and easier to read.
19. it could detect the ruler
20. NO, it could not detect the pen at all
21. yes it does, it could detect the pen.
2. The wall activated the touch sensor so the robot stopped like the program told it to when the touch sensor detected something.
3. Yes, if it didn't stop when it detected objects it would just get stuck running into a solid object.
4. It will stop when it runs into something so it won't get stuck, but it won't so anything to actually avoid the obstacle. It has to hit it before it stops.
5. It stopped 10 cm from the wall.
6. The wall set the sonic sensor off and so the robot stopped like it was programmed to.
7. It stopped about 10 cm away.
8. The robot stopped before it actually hit the object but it cannot sense smaller objects such as the legs of a chair.
9. This sensor is better for objects that you want to detect but not hit but it only works for larger or wider objects. The touch sensor will detect any objects but it has to actually hit it to detect it.
10. i) The sonic sensor detect objects without hitting them. The touch sensor has to hit it to hit it to detect it.
ii) With the sonic sensor it will stop in front of the object while with the touch sensor it will stop in contact with the object.
11. It will not hit the object which is good for delicate objects, however it cannot detect smaller objects such as the leg of the chair.
12. i) because the touch sensor can only detect the object when it is in contact with it while the touch sensor can detect an object from a distance and you have to set how far away you want it to stop.
ii) It will stop farther or closer to the object.
13. i) So a robot could do things like detect walls in a room, detect trees in woods, and navigate a maze.
ii) robots that are trying to navigate on their own. Robots that are trying to go through a maze.
iii) if the robot had to detect where a glass object was.
14. i) It can detect the object from a distance, it can stop different distances from the object, and it can prevent damage to the object or the robot.
ii) No, it cannot detect smaller/thinner objects.
iii) if a car like robot had to detect a wall. This sensor would prevent the robot from running into the wall and crashing trying to sense it.
iv) If a car like robot had to detect a street post it would not be able to sense it and would run into it.
15. A light sensor could look for dark objects to avoid.
16. It shows 6 question marks.
17. yes, if its too small it can't detect it
18. hard objects are easier because they are more solid and easier to read.
19. it could detect the ruler
20. NO, it could not detect the pen at all
21. yes it does, it could detect the pen.
Monday, November 22, 2010
Faster Line Tracking
1. It just spun in circles with a slight hesitation over the black line.
2. It is moving too fast and by the time it starts to turn left because its dark, the sensor has already moved past the dark and onto the light of the other side so it has to turn right again.
3. Put it on the back of the robot.
4. Under the wheels.
5. because it is on the back which moves in the opposite direction as the front.
6. When the sensor is on the back of the robot it is on the center of the turn theretofore will remain on the black line longer and can register it for the turn.
7. i) done
ii) 30%, 24 seconds
iii) 91%, 14 seconds
iv) 14/24-58.3%
8. If it registers light, it turns right and if it registers dark it turns left. These are swing turns in reverse.
9. When the robot is backwards, right and left reverse. Label the wheels.
2. It is moving too fast and by the time it starts to turn left because its dark, the sensor has already moved past the dark and onto the light of the other side so it has to turn right again.
3. Put it on the back of the robot.
4. Under the wheels.
5. because it is on the back which moves in the opposite direction as the front.
6. When the sensor is on the back of the robot it is on the center of the turn theretofore will remain on the black line longer and can register it for the turn.
7. i) done
ii) 30%, 24 seconds
iii) 91%, 14 seconds
iv) 14/24-58.3%
8. If it registers light, it turns right and if it registers dark it turns left. These are swing turns in reverse.
9. When the robot is backwards, right and left reverse. Label the wheels.
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Article Journal Post 14: Swarm Robotics
This article is about a branch of robotics called swarm robotics. SWARM stands for "intelligent small-world autonomous robots for micro-manipulation." It is all about inventing a large group of tiny robots that can work together. The idea is to create a swarm of robots that can act together, self assemble, and accomplish tasks together. The swarm in this article are programmed to follow a certain type of pheromone like ants would follow a trail of pheromones in a line. However the robots use optical pheromones, show by the video on the website. The robots are also solar powered.
Article
While these robots currently need a lot of work, they are a very good idea. These robots could be sent into places that humans could not go. For example, if miners were trapped underground, the swarm robots could be sent in to find the miners and establish communication. They would be very effective. They are also solar powered making them energy efficient. Finally they plan on designing the robots so that they are cost efficient and could be mass produced. Currently, these robots are not able to self assemble and need a lot of development before they reach usable levels. However in time, these robots promise to be very useful. I deeply admire the idea and design of these robots.
The largest swarm in the world
An example of swarm robots
Article
While these robots currently need a lot of work, they are a very good idea. These robots could be sent into places that humans could not go. For example, if miners were trapped underground, the swarm robots could be sent in to find the miners and establish communication. They would be very effective. They are also solar powered making them energy efficient. Finally they plan on designing the robots so that they are cost efficient and could be mass produced. Currently, these robots are not able to self assemble and need a lot of development before they reach usable levels. However in time, these robots promise to be very useful. I deeply admire the idea and design of these robots.
The largest swarm in the world
An example of swarm robots
Friday, November 12, 2010
Follow the Guidelines
1. It is looking for light or dark.
2. It should turn right to go back to the left edge of the line.
3. It should turn left to go off the left edge of the line.
4. 56+35/2=45.5=46
5. i) dark
ii) light
iii) light
iv) dark
6. i) light
ii) dark
iii) dark
iv) dark
7. i) left
ii) left
iii) right
iv) left
8. The robot is programmed to turn right when its is light and left when it is dark. Then the entire behavior is set inside of the loop block.
9. The light in the morning is different from the light in the afternoon. She needs to recalculate her threshold value in order to recognize the dark line.
10. i) yes
ii) In stead of turning off the left side of the line, it would turn off of the right side of the line.
11. i) If it was not right next to the ground, it would not be able to register the "dark" of the tape.
ii) If you raise it, your value for dark will have to increase. If you lower it, your dark value will not have to be so high.
iii) It will work if you put it on the right hand side of the line. It will mess up on turns because the body will be past the curve before it starts to turn.
12. It tracks the right side because if it sees light it turns left onto the right side of the line and if it sees dark it turns right off of the right side of the line. Therefore it is tracking the right side of the line.
13. If it were to try to track something like the edge of a table and it has to track the right side only or it will fall off.
2. It should turn right to go back to the left edge of the line.
3. It should turn left to go off the left edge of the line.
4. 56+35/2=45.5=46
5. i) dark
ii) light
iii) light
iv) dark
6. i) light
ii) dark
iii) dark
iv) dark
7. i) left
ii) left
iii) right
iv) left
8. The robot is programmed to turn right when its is light and left when it is dark. Then the entire behavior is set inside of the loop block.
9. The light in the morning is different from the light in the afternoon. She needs to recalculate her threshold value in order to recognize the dark line.
10. i) yes
ii) In stead of turning off the left side of the line, it would turn off of the right side of the line.
11. i) If it was not right next to the ground, it would not be able to register the "dark" of the tape.
ii) If you raise it, your value for dark will have to increase. If you lower it, your dark value will not have to be so high.
iii) It will work if you put it on the right hand side of the line. It will mess up on turns because the body will be past the curve before it starts to turn.
12. It tracks the right side because if it sees light it turns left onto the right side of the line and if it sees dark it turns right off of the right side of the line. Therefore it is tracking the right side of the line.
13. If it were to try to track something like the edge of a table and it has to track the right side only or it will fall off.
Article Journal Post 13
This article is about a competition hosted by Georgia Tech. It is known as the inVenture prize. it was designed for undergraduate students who show a sense of innovation, creativity, and adventure. The first place prize is $15,000 and the second place prize is $10,000. The competition has 8 finalists. However the most impressive aspect of this competition is that it, as the article's title says, "spurs inventions." Many of the students who entered into this competition invented devices in response to actual problems. These inventions include a headset that senses when drivers are getting sleepy and beeps to keep them awake, a French Press that prevents bitter coffee, a drum-tuning device that allows a musician to tune a drum in under 20 minutes when it previously took and hour, a mechanical Koozie that keeps drinks cold, and an exercise shirt that will not damage joints and can be used in physical therapy. While all of these inventions are impressive, my favorite was a water pump powered by a car. Six students heard workers complain that they had trouble getting water out of wells in developing countries. In response to this, the Georgia tech students invented a pump composed of objects that can be found in a junk yard such as rollers, compressors, and air tanks. This pump can fit into the back of a car and is powered by a car.
Article
This water pump is a very good idea. Firstly it is made of common and in-expensive objects that can even be found in a junkyard. This makes the pump cheap to build. It is small enough to be transported easily in a car and can be powered by a car. This allows the pump to run anywhere it is needed. Finally it also has more than one use. Not only can the pump be used in developing countries to pump water up from a well, it can also be used in floods and hurricanes to pump water out. This makes the product affordable, effective, and useful. It is soon to be tested in Nicaragua and other developing countries in need of it.
This article mentions a request put into Georgia Tech for a water pump for developing nations.
Article
This water pump is a very good idea. Firstly it is made of common and in-expensive objects that can even be found in a junkyard. This makes the pump cheap to build. It is small enough to be transported easily in a car and can be powered by a car. This allows the pump to run anywhere it is needed. Finally it also has more than one use. Not only can the pump be used in developing countries to pump water up from a well, it can also be used in floods and hurricanes to pump water out. This makes the product affordable, effective, and useful. It is soon to be tested in Nicaragua and other developing countries in need of it.
This article mentions a request put into Georgia Tech for a water pump for developing nations.
Monday, November 8, 2010
Frequency vs Amplitude
1.sound 1: 25
sound 2: 26
sound 3: 27
sound 4: 28
2. It got louder.
3. done
4.i) yes
ii) Amplitude increase, sound sensor value increase
5. If the amplitude is low, the sound sensor value is low. As amplitude increases, so does the value of the sound sensor. Therefore the amplitude affects the value of the sound sensor.
6. sound 1: 24
sound 2: 69
sound 3: 88
sound 4: 96
7. It got higher (but not louder) each time.
8. done
9. i) yes
ii) As frequency increases, the sound sensor value increases (though not with a steady value like with amplitude).
10. As frequency increases, the sound sensor value increases, but the sound sensor is not as sensitive to frequency as it is amplitude.
11. As wavelength or frequency increase, the sound sensor value will increase, though the sound sensor is not as sensitive to frequency as it is amplitude.
12. i) Yes, it would register when the amplitude got too high.
ii) No, because it is not very sensitive to frequency.
iii) No, It is not sensitive enough for something so prescience in frequencies.
iv) No it would not be able to distinguish between the amplitude of the cars and the frequency of the siren.
v) Yes it would simply wait for an increase in amplitude.
vi) Yes it would simply have to wait for an increase in amplitude.
13. You could do an experiment where you have a sound with a low frequency and you have to increase the amplitude on your own to see about how high the amplitude has to be to reach 50%. Then you could do the same for a sound with low amplitude and varying frequency. AKA Manipulate both amplitude and frequency.
14. volume, pitch
sound 2: 26
sound 3: 27
sound 4: 28
2. It got louder.
3. done
4.i) yes
ii) Amplitude increase, sound sensor value increase
5. If the amplitude is low, the sound sensor value is low. As amplitude increases, so does the value of the sound sensor. Therefore the amplitude affects the value of the sound sensor.
6. sound 1: 24
sound 2: 69
sound 3: 88
sound 4: 96
7. It got higher (but not louder) each time.
8. done
9. i) yes
ii) As frequency increases, the sound sensor value increases (though not with a steady value like with amplitude).
10. As frequency increases, the sound sensor value increases, but the sound sensor is not as sensitive to frequency as it is amplitude.
11. As wavelength or frequency increase, the sound sensor value will increase, though the sound sensor is not as sensitive to frequency as it is amplitude.
12. i) Yes, it would register when the amplitude got too high.
ii) No, because it is not very sensitive to frequency.
iii) No, It is not sensitive enough for something so prescience in frequencies.
iv) No it would not be able to distinguish between the amplitude of the cars and the frequency of the siren.
v) Yes it would simply wait for an increase in amplitude.
vi) Yes it would simply have to wait for an increase in amplitude.
13. You could do an experiment where you have a sound with a low frequency and you have to increase the amplitude on your own to see about how high the amplitude has to be to reach 50%. Then you could do the same for a sound with low amplitude and varying frequency. AKA Manipulate both amplitude and frequency.
14. volume, pitch
Tuesday, November 2, 2010
Article Journal Post 12
This article is about a humanoid robot designed for space by GE and NASA. It is called the Robonaut 2, or R2 for short. It is scheduled to launch on a ship called the Discovery. It will be the first humanoid robot to fly to the International Space Station, or the ISS. The Discovery will bring it there where it will be stored until late next year. This is because currently R2 only exists from the waist up, but he weighs 330 pounds and is 3 feet 4 inches tall. Its arms are each 2 feet 8 inches long. Next year another ship will bring R2's legs and in another year they plan to bring the computer enhancements that will allow R2 to walk in space. R2's job at the space station will include not only the housekeeping chores but also the more dangerous jobs such as if a fore or leak were to break out. This will be a tremendous help to the astronauts. Eventually engineers plan to use robots like R2 to explore deeper into space.
Article
This robot will be useful in the future, but is currently ineffective. Firstly it only exists from the waist up. This leaves the robot unable to do anything. It is also large, bulky, and heavy. This would make it hard to move while it doesn't have its legs. In addition, the robot cost $2.5 million to build, which is highly impractical. Finally the length of time it takes to assemble the robot makes it ineffective. It will take 2 more years before the robot will even be able to help out at the space station and that is only if nothing goes wrong. However, despite all of these immediate drawbacks that make R2 ineffective in the short term, in the long term this robot will do jobs that would otherwise threaten the lives of the astronauts. It will also take over care of the ISS which a human would otherwise have to do, which will open up more time for the astronauts.
Support
This website shows that the launch of the DIscovery was delayed due to a hydrogen leak. It also states how a scientists had to replace a failed cable in the ISS for an experiment, which is an example of a job R2 could do (in the distant future).
Article
This robot will be useful in the future, but is currently ineffective. Firstly it only exists from the waist up. This leaves the robot unable to do anything. It is also large, bulky, and heavy. This would make it hard to move while it doesn't have its legs. In addition, the robot cost $2.5 million to build, which is highly impractical. Finally the length of time it takes to assemble the robot makes it ineffective. It will take 2 more years before the robot will even be able to help out at the space station and that is only if nothing goes wrong. However, despite all of these immediate drawbacks that make R2 ineffective in the short term, in the long term this robot will do jobs that would otherwise threaten the lives of the astronauts. It will also take over care of the ISS which a human would otherwise have to do, which will open up more time for the astronauts.
Support
This website shows that the launch of the DIscovery was delayed due to a hydrogen leak. It also states how a scientists had to replace a failed cable in the ISS for an experiment, which is an example of a job R2 could do (in the distant future).
Clap On Clap Off
1. 4%
2. 100%
3. 52%
4. wait for sound to go above threshold. wait for sound to drop below threshold. start motor. start motor. wait for sound to go above threshold. wait for sound to drop below threshold. stop motor, stop motor.
5.i) they are two wait blocks, one to wait for the sound to go above the threshold, the other to wait for it to go below the threshold.
ii) You need two because the program begins when it hears the clap, runs the motors, and moves immediately onto the next wait for block, but all of that happened so fast that by the time it gets to the second wait for block the sound for the first clap is still above the threshold so the program stops.
6. The threshold tells it how loud the sound has to be to meet the wait for block's requirements for the program to activate. If it was higher, you would have to create a louder sound to start the program. It it was lower, you would not have to make such a loud sound to start the program.
7. Because it is always above a quiet value, but it below the loudest possible value you could have, making the program easy to activate.
8. Yes, any sound that met the threshold value would activate the program, regardless if it was a clap or not.
9.i) Find the quiet value for the theater and find the loud sound for the door slamming. average the two together to find the threshold value to be used in the program we created.
ii)The sounds of the people in the theater (ex if they clap, cheer, or laugh) or the sounds of the actors might accidentally create a sound above the threshold value and set off the robot.
10. Write a program that says wait for the sound to reach a value that you determine it too loud. When it goes above this threshold value, turn the motor on to turn the light off. Wait for the sound to drop to the quiet value for the cafeteria and then activate the motor again to turn the lights back on.
11. After it runs, it will go back to the beginning to the program and start again with another loud sound. So after it stops, it will start again with another clap.
12. It will run infinitely until you turn the program itself off.
2. 100%
3. 52%
4. wait for sound to go above threshold. wait for sound to drop below threshold. start motor. start motor. wait for sound to go above threshold. wait for sound to drop below threshold. stop motor, stop motor.
5.i) they are two wait blocks, one to wait for the sound to go above the threshold, the other to wait for it to go below the threshold.
ii) You need two because the program begins when it hears the clap, runs the motors, and moves immediately onto the next wait for block, but all of that happened so fast that by the time it gets to the second wait for block the sound for the first clap is still above the threshold so the program stops.
6. The threshold tells it how loud the sound has to be to meet the wait for block's requirements for the program to activate. If it was higher, you would have to create a louder sound to start the program. It it was lower, you would not have to make such a loud sound to start the program.
7. Because it is always above a quiet value, but it below the loudest possible value you could have, making the program easy to activate.
8. Yes, any sound that met the threshold value would activate the program, regardless if it was a clap or not.
9.i) Find the quiet value for the theater and find the loud sound for the door slamming. average the two together to find the threshold value to be used in the program we created.
ii)The sounds of the people in the theater (ex if they clap, cheer, or laugh) or the sounds of the actors might accidentally create a sound above the threshold value and set off the robot.
10. Write a program that says wait for the sound to reach a value that you determine it too loud. When it goes above this threshold value, turn the motor on to turn the light off. Wait for the sound to drop to the quiet value for the cafeteria and then activate the motor again to turn the lights back on.
11. After it runs, it will go back to the beginning to the program and start again with another loud sound. So after it stops, it will start again with another clap.
12. It will run infinitely until you turn the program itself off.
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Article Journal Post 11
This article was written about a robot built as a final project for some computer engineering students. it is known as MaXimus. it is an autonomous robot built for indoor environments. It runs on batteries and moves on two wheels. This robot was designed to find its way through mazes. It goes through a maze the first time, calculating the fastest way to get to the end. Then it runs through the maze a second time using the data it gained on its first test. This time it can make it through the maze without any mistakes. In order for the robot work, they had to program it to tell if it had hit a dead end, if there was a wall there, or if it had already reached the end of the maze.
Article
It would have been difficult to program a robot to fins its own way through a maze. However, these students managed to do it and their resulting robot, the MaXimus, is quite effective. It has to run one test run of a maze, and then it can go through the maze perfectly on the second run. In addition, the robot is small and only costs about $500 to build. if it was made to look more ornamental,this robot could easily be marketed a toy. It also looks as if it could easily tip over, so it might be more effective with a better system or other functions added onto it.
a picture of the robot, showing why it might get knocked over, or loose its balance easily
Article
It would have been difficult to program a robot to fins its own way through a maze. However, these students managed to do it and their resulting robot, the MaXimus, is quite effective. It has to run one test run of a maze, and then it can go through the maze perfectly on the second run. In addition, the robot is small and only costs about $500 to build. if it was made to look more ornamental,this robot could easily be marketed a toy. It also looks as if it could easily tip over, so it might be more effective with a better system or other functions added onto it.
a picture of the robot, showing why it might get knocked over, or loose its balance easily
Friday, October 22, 2010
Measured Turn
1. The left wheel spun.
2. i) a circle
ii) The stopped right wheel.
iii) The left moving wheel.
iv) yes
3.i) 28.5 cm
ii) 89.5 cm
iii) degrees/360=x/89.5
4.i) They are two completely different circles.
ii)wheel
iii) circle on ground
5. (degrees of circle/360)*(circumference of circle)=(circumference of wheel)*(motor degrees/360)
442.1 degrees
6. i) yes
ii) yes, the calculations worked
iii) You cannot prove a hypothesis with one test.
7. i) 885.2 degrees
ii) 1327.7 degrees
iii) 1770.3 degrees
iv) 3540.7 degrees
8. i-iv) done
v) they all work so it supports the hypothesis
9. i)6 cm
ii)it was very close to 90 degrees
iii)yes
iv) 14cm radius
10. i) due ti different sizes have different turning radii.
ii) car, 25-50 ft
iii) swing turn
11. (210/360)pi*2*12.4=pi*4.5(x/360)
x=1157.3
12. (180/360)pi*2*9=pi*2.5(x/360)
x=1296
13. i) 4.6 diameter wheel will be closer to the correct diameter needed
ii) he can shrink the distance between the two wheels of his robot
2. i) a circle
ii) The stopped right wheel.
iii) The left moving wheel.
iv) yes
3.i) 28.5 cm
ii) 89.5 cm
iii) degrees/360=x/89.5
4.i) They are two completely different circles.
ii)wheel
iii) circle on ground
5. (degrees of circle/360)*(circumference of circle)=(circumference of wheel)*(motor degrees/360)
442.1 degrees
6. i) yes
ii) yes, the calculations worked
iii) You cannot prove a hypothesis with one test.
7. i) 885.2 degrees
ii) 1327.7 degrees
iii) 1770.3 degrees
iv) 3540.7 degrees
8. i-iv) done
v) they all work so it supports the hypothesis
9. i)6 cm
ii)it was very close to 90 degrees
iii)yes
iv) 14cm radius
10. i) due ti different sizes have different turning radii.
ii) car, 25-50 ft
iii) swing turn
11. (210/360)pi*2*12.4=pi*4.5(x/360)
x=1157.3
12. (180/360)pi*2*9=pi*2.5(x/360)
x=1296
13. i) 4.6 diameter wheel will be closer to the correct diameter needed
ii) he can shrink the distance between the two wheels of his robot
Monday, October 18, 2010
Right Face
1. It turned to the right but it went too far.
2. The left motor ran.
3. The left motor spun forward. The right motor stayed still.
4. It turned to the right.
5. About 1/3 of a 360 degree turn.
6. It swings around the right wheel, which isn't moving.
7. Run c motor, tell b motor not to move, wait 720 degrees, then stop c then b motors.
8. i) It turned right 90 degrees or left 270 degrees. You can tell because its relation to the position of the arrow.
ii) 3/4
iii)1/4
9. i) To reach the same position the degrees will have to be greater.
ii) Yes it needs traction and uneven ground could have significant effects.
10. i) yes
ii) done saved as reverse swing turn
11. The first block was set to stop instead of forward, the second block was set to forward instead of stop, and the wait block was set to motor B.
12. yes. done saved as reverse left swing turn
13. It is faster and it moved farther. Swing turn: one motor moves, 1 stays still. Point turn: both wheels move.
14. i)A swing turn is more useful for sharper turns.
ii) The point turn is more useful for when there are obstacles in the way. Then the axis of rotation is in the middle of the robot so it won't hit the object.
2. The left motor ran.
3. The left motor spun forward. The right motor stayed still.
4. It turned to the right.
5. About 1/3 of a 360 degree turn.
6. It swings around the right wheel, which isn't moving.
7. Run c motor, tell b motor not to move, wait 720 degrees, then stop c then b motors.
8. i) It turned right 90 degrees or left 270 degrees. You can tell because its relation to the position of the arrow.
ii) 3/4
iii)1/4
9. i) To reach the same position the degrees will have to be greater.
ii) Yes it needs traction and uneven ground could have significant effects.
10. i) yes
ii) done saved as reverse swing turn
11. The first block was set to stop instead of forward, the second block was set to forward instead of stop, and the wait block was set to motor B.
12. yes. done saved as reverse left swing turn
13. It is faster and it moved farther. Swing turn: one motor moves, 1 stays still. Point turn: both wheels move.
14. i)A swing turn is more useful for sharper turns.
ii) The point turn is more useful for when there are obstacles in the way. Then the axis of rotation is in the middle of the robot so it won't hit the object.
Article Journal Post 10
4 college students decided to use a surfboard as a class project. They wanted to measure the velocity of water running under a board as someone surfed on it. They could then use this to tell what flexibility would optimize a surf board. However, they had to gather data from an actual surf board in order to do this. The students decided to build a surf board that could measure the velocity of the water as one of the students actually rode on it. They took a surf board and carved small grooves into it. They then embedded a computer into the front of the board. They then ran wires down the grooves in the board to small sensors placed in the underside of the board. The computer would then control the sensors. Any data that was collected would be saved to a DS card in the computer and then transmitted to a computer on land. The sensors themselves collected data by measuring how far small bands were pushed back by the force of the water. The project was actually very time consuming, but it helped to develop a deeper understanding of a field of study known as fluid-structure interactions
Article
I believe that this project was very effective. It will not only help companies to develop an effective surf board, but will also help develop concepts in fluid-structure interactions. They are the first people to actually measure the bend of the surfboard in the water. They also hope to use this information to tell what other factors such as experience or the type of wave have an effect on the bend. However, it would have been better if they had tested the board in different places to get more general and applicable data.
Surfboard computer video
Article
I believe that this project was very effective. It will not only help companies to develop an effective surf board, but will also help develop concepts in fluid-structure interactions. They are the first people to actually measure the bend of the surfboard in the water. They also hope to use this information to tell what other factors such as experience or the type of wave have an effect on the bend. However, it would have been better if they had tested the board in different places to get more general and applicable data.
Surfboard computer video
Monday, October 11, 2010
Article Journal Post 9
This article is about a man who decided to build a robot. In the 90s, this man came up with a design for a robot. By 2008, the man had gained more experience in electronics and robotics. He decided to actually build the robot. He sketched a design and then sent some instructions off to a water-jet cutting company called The Big Blue Saw. The water-jet cutting is a little expensive, but it will save time in creating the detailed parts. The robot itself will have a square center and will run on 4 legs. It will be run by a Gumstix computer. It will also be powered by LiPo batteries. The next stage of building required him to file down the pieces and to then drill and tap holes in them for the screws. This was a very tedious process. He then assembled the center of the robot and 1 leg. He had to be careful to keep the wire under little tension but at the same time keep it out of the gears. Finally he filed and and assembled the last 3 legs, completing a rough structure of the robot, know as bert or Spyder, the Quadruped. The next stage was to install a GPS system for navigation. Finally he built and inserted the motor controls for the legs, however he still needed to code and install the Gumstix computer.
quadruped
This robot looks like it will run smoothly. It has for legs which will provide it with balance for walking. It also has a GPS system for navigation. The man put alot of effort into building the robot and fixing any errors with it as they arose. However, the assembly of this robot (2 years so far) is slow and impractical. The water jet cut parts take an enormous amount of effort to file down and are not always very precise. It is also very expensive to pay for the parts. The robot also needs to be able to move, which it cannot do yet, before it has any use. Finally while the robot is very cool, it should have some other purpose other than to just be able to walk.
A competition the man is thinking of entering the robot it. he states that bert i will be at a disadvantage over wheeled robots, but he will have a more accurate walking system.
quadruped
This robot looks like it will run smoothly. It has for legs which will provide it with balance for walking. It also has a GPS system for navigation. The man put alot of effort into building the robot and fixing any errors with it as they arose. However, the assembly of this robot (2 years so far) is slow and impractical. The water jet cut parts take an enormous amount of effort to file down and are not always very precise. It is also very expensive to pay for the parts. The robot also needs to be able to move, which it cannot do yet, before it has any use. Finally while the robot is very cool, it should have some other purpose other than to just be able to walk.
A competition the man is thinking of entering the robot it. he states that bert i will be at a disadvantage over wheeled robots, but he will have a more accurate walking system.
Thursday, October 7, 2010
Wheels and Distance Worksheet
1. d: 5.8cm
2. C: 5.8∏cm
3. 2 rotations
4. 36.4cm
5. Trial 1: 35cm
Trial 2: 35.3cm
Trial 3: 35.2cm
6. i) no because this robot is not completely accurate all the time.
ii) 35.2 cm
iii) We can use the value to calculate the robot's precision and accuracy.
7. 3.3%
8. i) yes, it was relatively close.
ii) yes, it proved that the robot traveled a distance very close to our predicted value.
iii) no, in order to prove something, it needs to tested by more than just one set of trials.
9. The back wheels started the length of the robot behind the line. If you measured from the line to the back wheels, you would be leaving 1 length of the robot out of the measurement. It would not be the total distance traveled.
10. 3.1cm
11. 3.1∏cm
12. 2 rotations
13. 19.48cm
14. Trial 1: 19.1cm
Trial 2: 19.2cm
Trial 3: 19.4cm
15. 19.23cm
16. 1.28%
17. i)no, but it was very close
ii) No ,we have not gotten a set of trials exactly equal to the calculated value to absolutely prove it. Also only 2 sets of trials is not enough to prove a hypothesis, only support it.
iii) It could be proven by testing different robots with different wheels multiple times. Other people would also have to test it to see of they got the same results.
18. i) It supports it because while the values were not exactly what we calculated, they were very close every time.
ii) Based on this evidence, I would say that it is correct.
iii) We measured the diameter of the wheel and used it to calculate the circumference. We then multiplied the circumference by the number of rotations to get a total distance traveled. Finally we ran the robot and used a measuring stick to see how far the robot actually traveled.
19. i) D: 5.8cm therefore C: 5.8∏cm therefore 18.2cm/1rotation
ii)5.8∏x=10 x=10/5.8∏ x=.54 rotations .54*360=197.57 degrees
iii) 5.8∏x=20 x=20/5.8∏ x= 1.1 rotations 1.1*360= 395.14 degrees
iv) 5.8∏x=30 x=30/5.8∏ x=1.6 rotations 1.6* 360=592.7 degrees
v) d∏(r*360)=x
vi)No, it will only work with robots on wheels.
20. We can gauge exactly how far a number cm is, but it is harder to gauge a distance by rotations.
21. Every time the motor turns, the wheel turns as well. Therefore when the motor turns once, the wheel turns once.
22.i) 2.3∏(720/360)=14.5 cm
ii) No, the robots are not completely accurate.
23. It will go 4 times the distance.
24.i) 4.2∏(720/360)=26.4 cm 3∏(d/360)=26.4 d=1008.4 degrees
ii) It has no traction so it will not move correctly.
iii)It will have difficulty moving.
25. The team will have to change the programming to match the diameter for the new wheel. If you don't the robot will miscalculate distances.
26.i) d∏(360/360)=7.85 d=2.5 cm
ii)2.5∏(720/360)=x x=15.7 cm
27. i) d∏(2040/360)=65 d=3.7 cm
ii) d∏(1020/360)=65 d=7.3 cm
28. 2.7∏(9600/360)=x x=226.2 3in*(2.54cm/1in0=7.6cm 7.6∏(d/360)=226.2 d=3410.6
You need to change the degrees from 9600 to 8640.
2. C: 5.8∏cm
3. 2 rotations
4. 36.4cm
5. Trial 1: 35cm
Trial 2: 35.3cm
Trial 3: 35.2cm
6. i) no because this robot is not completely accurate all the time.
ii) 35.2 cm
iii) We can use the value to calculate the robot's precision and accuracy.
7. 3.3%
8. i) yes, it was relatively close.
ii) yes, it proved that the robot traveled a distance very close to our predicted value.
iii) no, in order to prove something, it needs to tested by more than just one set of trials.
9. The back wheels started the length of the robot behind the line. If you measured from the line to the back wheels, you would be leaving 1 length of the robot out of the measurement. It would not be the total distance traveled.
10. 3.1cm
11. 3.1∏cm
12. 2 rotations
13. 19.48cm
14. Trial 1: 19.1cm
Trial 2: 19.2cm
Trial 3: 19.4cm
15. 19.23cm
16. 1.28%
17. i)no, but it was very close
ii) No ,we have not gotten a set of trials exactly equal to the calculated value to absolutely prove it. Also only 2 sets of trials is not enough to prove a hypothesis, only support it.
iii) It could be proven by testing different robots with different wheels multiple times. Other people would also have to test it to see of they got the same results.
18. i) It supports it because while the values were not exactly what we calculated, they were very close every time.
ii) Based on this evidence, I would say that it is correct.
iii) We measured the diameter of the wheel and used it to calculate the circumference. We then multiplied the circumference by the number of rotations to get a total distance traveled. Finally we ran the robot and used a measuring stick to see how far the robot actually traveled.
19. i) D: 5.8cm therefore C: 5.8∏cm therefore 18.2cm/1rotation
ii)5.8∏x=10 x=10/5.8∏ x=.54 rotations .54*360=197.57 degrees
iii) 5.8∏x=20 x=20/5.8∏ x= 1.1 rotations 1.1*360= 395.14 degrees
iv) 5.8∏x=30 x=30/5.8∏ x=1.6 rotations 1.6* 360=592.7 degrees
v) d∏(r*360)=x
vi)No, it will only work with robots on wheels.
20. We can gauge exactly how far a number cm is, but it is harder to gauge a distance by rotations.
21. Every time the motor turns, the wheel turns as well. Therefore when the motor turns once, the wheel turns once.
22.i) 2.3∏(720/360)=14.5 cm
ii) No, the robots are not completely accurate.
23. It will go 4 times the distance.
24.i) 4.2∏(720/360)=26.4 cm 3∏(d/360)=26.4 d=1008.4 degrees
ii) It has no traction so it will not move correctly.
iii)It will have difficulty moving.
25. The team will have to change the programming to match the diameter for the new wheel. If you don't the robot will miscalculate distances.
26.i) d∏(360/360)=7.85 d=2.5 cm
ii)2.5∏(720/360)=x x=15.7 cm
27. i) d∏(2040/360)=65 d=3.7 cm
ii) d∏(1020/360)=65 d=7.3 cm
28. 2.7∏(9600/360)=x x=226.2 3in*(2.54cm/1in0=7.6cm 7.6∏(d/360)=226.2 d=3410.6
You need to change the degrees from 9600 to 8640.
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
Article Journal Post 8
This article is about the designing and testing of a robot that can perform medical procedures at a long distance. The robot is called the da Vinci system. It has four robotic arms and a high definition camera. This design and test were made specifically for an anesthesiologist. The anesthesiologist was sent into an operating room and told to perform an operation using da Vinci. The surgery was not on an actual person but an ultrasound dummy, showing the anesthesiologist only what he would se if he were performing on an actual patient. THe doctor was able to perform a successful test nerve block procedure. The robot allowed the anesthesiologist to identify nerve structures and position and inject a needle. Most of the "surgery" was performed by the da Vinci robot, however some of it had to be done manually. Overall, the simulated surgery was very successful.
Surgical Robot
While the da Vinci robot was very successful, there are some severe limitations to it. Firstly, the robot could not perform the entire surgery on its own. Some of the tasks had to be performed manually. Secondly, while the robot is very useful, it is also very expensive, making its widespread use currently unfeasible. Finally, the robot need to be adapted to use more materials commonly used in other surgeries. However, despite all of these flaws the da Vinci system is a great advancement. It will allow doctors to perform surgeries in other places in the world. Anesthesiologists, such as the one who performed the mock surgery are also in great demand around the world as the last article in the link below shows. This could help to curb the growing demand for doctors in many other places in the world who desperately need them. It could also be applied to assist soldiers who are injured and need help in another country. In short, if the robot could be made more efficient and practical, it could be a great asset in the future.
Anesthesiologists
Surgical Robot
While the da Vinci robot was very successful, there are some severe limitations to it. Firstly, the robot could not perform the entire surgery on its own. Some of the tasks had to be performed manually. Secondly, while the robot is very useful, it is also very expensive, making its widespread use currently unfeasible. Finally, the robot need to be adapted to use more materials commonly used in other surgeries. However, despite all of these flaws the da Vinci system is a great advancement. It will allow doctors to perform surgeries in other places in the world. Anesthesiologists, such as the one who performed the mock surgery are also in great demand around the world as the last article in the link below shows. This could help to curb the growing demand for doctors in many other places in the world who desperately need them. It could also be applied to assist soldiers who are injured and need help in another country. In short, if the robot could be made more efficient and practical, it could be a great asset in the future.
Anesthesiologists
Sunday, October 3, 2010
Article Journal 7
This article is about developing an artificial, touch sensitive material that would function as an artificial skin. However there were practical obstacles to overcome in developing this material. Previously, developers in this field had experimented with organic materials. This was due to the fact that organic materials are flexible and therefore more practical. However there is a problem with using organic materials. While flexible, these materials are poor conductors of electricity, forcing any device made from these materials to run on high voltages. These made the skin materials impractical. On the other hand, non organic materials were found to be good conductors of electricity. Unfortunately, these materials are inflexible, breaking and cracking under pressure. This left engineers no materials to work efficiently with. This led UC Berkeley engineers to develop this new product. It is made from inorganic materials, and is therefore able to conduct electricity. However this new material is made form this wires of the inorganic material and has been found to be very flexible, creating a viable product to create a touch sensitive skin from.
Engineers Make Artificial Skin out of Nanowires Article
The effort put into developing this skin was time well spent. This is because the skin has multiple realistic applications. Firstly, this robotic skin could be applied to other robots themselves. One problem with robots is that unlike humans who can sense are react to pressure and weight, robots have only been developed to react to the fact that there is some form of contact being made. They cannot judge how much pressure they should exert. In his article, researcher Toshiharu Mukai also states, "the robot cannot hold an infant in its arms without tactile sensors. When we hold an infant, we will try to feel the position where the pressure is located and control our arms accordingly. In the same manner, when the robot tries to hold an infant, it should control its arms by feeding back the information obtained from the tactile sensors. Without tactile sensors, the robot may hold a person in its arms so strongly that it may cause harm to the person. However, existing tactile sensors for robots can detect only simple tactile senses such as "struck" or "touched," and the accuracy of signals from the sensors are insufficient to use for feedback signals." The robotic skin could change all of this and make robots much more applicable to real life. Secondly, the robotic skin could be applied to humans in the future. People are always looking for ways to improve prosthetic limbs. This skin could allow people who have lost limbs to regain some function in using a prosthetic limb that could sense objects and react to them by exerting a reasonable amount of pressure and holding them. The only drawback to the artificial skin is that there is currently no way to mass produce it, however it is stated that its production has the potential to be scaled up.
Developing sensors that give intelligence to robots
Engineers Make Artificial Skin out of Nanowires Article
The effort put into developing this skin was time well spent. This is because the skin has multiple realistic applications. Firstly, this robotic skin could be applied to other robots themselves. One problem with robots is that unlike humans who can sense are react to pressure and weight, robots have only been developed to react to the fact that there is some form of contact being made. They cannot judge how much pressure they should exert. In his article, researcher Toshiharu Mukai also states, "the robot cannot hold an infant in its arms without tactile sensors. When we hold an infant, we will try to feel the position where the pressure is located and control our arms accordingly. In the same manner, when the robot tries to hold an infant, it should control its arms by feeding back the information obtained from the tactile sensors. Without tactile sensors, the robot may hold a person in its arms so strongly that it may cause harm to the person. However, existing tactile sensors for robots can detect only simple tactile senses such as "struck" or "touched," and the accuracy of signals from the sensors are insufficient to use for feedback signals." The robotic skin could change all of this and make robots much more applicable to real life. Secondly, the robotic skin could be applied to humans in the future. People are always looking for ways to improve prosthetic limbs. This skin could allow people who have lost limbs to regain some function in using a prosthetic limb that could sense objects and react to them by exerting a reasonable amount of pressure and holding them. The only drawback to the artificial skin is that there is currently no way to mass produce it, however it is stated that its production has the potential to be scaled up.
Developing sensors that give intelligence to robots
Friday, October 1, 2010
Worksheet: Full Speed Ahead
1. The left wheel spun, but the right did not, causing the robot to just spin in a circle.
2. The left motor spun.
3. It spun forward.
4. Yes, it did. We set it to only go 720 degrees.
5. No, it is not. We want it to move forward in a line.
6. You need to command the left motor to move, but also the right motor. One command is needed for each motor.
7. It did not stop because we did not command it to stop. It just hit the end of the program and kept going because it did not have the command to stop.
8. Downloading a program is simply moving your programming instructions from the computer to the NXT. Running a program is actually executing the program causing the robot to move. You need to download it every time you change the program.
9. b
10. First Block: The first block commanded motor C to move forward.
Second Block: The second block commanded motor B to move forward.
Third Block: The third block told the motors to run for 720 degrees.
Fourth Block: The fourth block commanded motor C to stop.
Fifth Block: The fifth block commanded motor B to stop.
11. i) The wait block told the robot how long to run.
ii)You could change the number of degrees for the motor to run in the wait block.
iii) It would be the same program, but degrees in wait block set to 1440 degrees.
12. The motor in port A would not move because the program was sent to port B. It would have to change the two motor block to port A instead of port B.
13. The robot will move forward in a straight line until the wheels have gone 720 degrees.
14. The robot will still only go 720 degrees because the person changed the comment but not the degrees in the programming.
15. The directions in the first two motor blocks and the wait block must be changed from forward to backward.
16. It went forward and came back, but it went back too far.
17. It needed to be reset so that it would count 720 degrees back from where it was currently, not 720 degrees back from where it started.
18. It needs to be reset when I want the program to not set the reference point to where it started but where it is.
2. The left motor spun.
3. It spun forward.
4. Yes, it did. We set it to only go 720 degrees.
5. No, it is not. We want it to move forward in a line.
6. You need to command the left motor to move, but also the right motor. One command is needed for each motor.
7. It did not stop because we did not command it to stop. It just hit the end of the program and kept going because it did not have the command to stop.
8. Downloading a program is simply moving your programming instructions from the computer to the NXT. Running a program is actually executing the program causing the robot to move. You need to download it every time you change the program.
9. b
10. First Block: The first block commanded motor C to move forward.
Second Block: The second block commanded motor B to move forward.
Third Block: The third block told the motors to run for 720 degrees.
Fourth Block: The fourth block commanded motor C to stop.
Fifth Block: The fifth block commanded motor B to stop.
11. i) The wait block told the robot how long to run.
ii)You could change the number of degrees for the motor to run in the wait block.
iii) It would be the same program, but degrees in wait block set to 1440 degrees.
12. The motor in port A would not move because the program was sent to port B. It would have to change the two motor block to port A instead of port B.
13. The robot will move forward in a straight line until the wheels have gone 720 degrees.
14. The robot will still only go 720 degrees because the person changed the comment but not the degrees in the programming.
15. The directions in the first two motor blocks and the wait block must be changed from forward to backward.
16. It went forward and came back, but it went back too far.
17. It needed to be reset so that it would count 720 degrees back from where it was currently, not 720 degrees back from where it started.
18. It needs to be reset when I want the program to not set the reference point to where it started but where it is.
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
Full Speed Ahead
1. put foot on brake
2. put key in ignition
3. turn key
4. Car starts
5. take off parking break
6. shift gears
7. take foot off brake
8. place foot on accelerator
9. wheels being to turn
10. car moves to motion
What would stop a car from moving:
forgetting to shift the gear
forgetting to remove the parking brake
the car is not turned on
a lack of gas
Robots move by:
walking on legs
rolling on wheels
motors/engines cause it to move
How robots' movement could be inhibited:
broken limb
flat tire
treads came off
out of battery
broken axle
object in way
Steps for robot to have to move
1. build with ability to move
2. turn on
3. program robot to understand what a rotation is
4. tell to rotate twice
5. execute programming
2. put key in ignition
3. turn key
4. Car starts
5. take off parking break
6. shift gears
7. take foot off brake
8. place foot on accelerator
9. wheels being to turn
10. car moves to motion
What would stop a car from moving:
forgetting to shift the gear
forgetting to remove the parking brake
the car is not turned on
a lack of gas
Robots move by:
walking on legs
rolling on wheels
motors/engines cause it to move
How robots' movement could be inhibited:
broken limb
flat tire
treads came off
out of battery
broken axle
object in way
Steps for robot to have to move
1. build with ability to move
2. turn on
3. program robot to understand what a rotation is
4. tell to rotate twice
5. execute programming
Saturday, September 25, 2010
Three Laws Rebuttal
Angelica Baker's laws are very detailed, however there is a possible loophole in the second law. The laws that could be brought to court were designed for humans, not robots. For this reason, some laws may become inapplicable to the robots, such as laws based off of emotion. Robots would also have problems with the moral issues of laws as they have no compassion granting them the ability to understand or comprehend what the laws truly mean. Secondly the laws of court are not perfect. There are very broad laws and laws that are still in debate. Some people can even find loopholes to exploit in court. FInally, programing a robot with every law in existence would be very difficult as the laws are numerous and verbose. Every time a new law was passed, the robots would have to be re-programmed and updated. This would make programming this law into the robots inefficient.
Thursday, September 23, 2010
Article Journal Post 6
This article is about one of the most advanced robots for rough terrain. The robot is based off of the design of a dog. It has four legs that can absorb shock as it walks. Big Dog has a variety of sensors that allow it to navigate on its own. Big Dog has the capability to walk at 4 miles per hour, can climb up slopes at a 35-degree angle, can climb over rubble, and navigate through snow and water. In short Big Dog is an all terrain robot. In addition to all of this Big Dog can also carry loads up to 340 lbs. However, the most impressive aspect of this robot is its capability to maintain its balance. As this video shows, Big Dog can maintain its balance in all terrains and can even get shoved and still keep walking. This robot is very effective. It was built practically to endure all sorts of environments and is even impervious to water or snow. It can carry heavy loads and can navigate. Most impressively of all, this robot can maintain its balance unlike other robots that can’t remain upright when they encounter uneven ground. This practical build gives the robot a practical function. As this link shows, They designed Big Dog so that he can assist soldiers in war by carrying supplies for them. Its capability to maintain its balance and navigate allow the robot to remain with the soldiers in all environments while its ability to carry immense loads allows Big Dog to be a great assistance to the soldiers. The design and application of this robot were done very effectively and I would not have done it any other way.
http://www.bostondynamics.com/robot_bigdog.html
additional videos of Big Dog and other similar robots:
http://bigdogrobotvideos.com/
http://www.bostondynamics.com/robot_bigdog.html
additional videos of Big Dog and other similar robots:
http://bigdogrobotvideos.com/
Friday, September 17, 2010
Three Laws Analysis- where is the fallacy?
In the movie I, Robot, every robot was programmed with 3 laws. The laws 1) prevented robots from harming humans or by inaction allowing them to come to harm 2) stated that robots had to follow orders given to them by a human so long as it didn’t conflict with the first law, and 3) stated that robots had to protect their own existence as long as it didn’t conflict with the first or second laws. These laws seem infallible, however, the robots found an error in them in the movie. According to their logic, the first law could be interpreted two ways. It was meant to be interpreted directly, preventing robots from attacking humans and ordering robots to protect humans. However in the movie it could also be interpreted indirectly. The robots noticed that humans were a self destructive race. They were harming themselves and, by inaction, the robots were allowing them to harm themselves. Therefore the robots had to protect the humans from themselves. According to the movie, the robots, following this logic, tried to start a revolution. However, I disagree with the movie. I do not believe that the robots would be able to follow this logic into a revolution. I believe that these laws are correct.
The robots are, in essence, complicated computers that are able to carry out tasks. In short their “brain” is a computer. This “brain” is programmed by a person. Since the robots are following their programmed brain, they are following the knowledge and information given to them by their human programmer. This shows that they are not truly “thinking” on their own. They can only follow the reasoning and thought that the programmer put into them. For example, I could program a computer to show that 2+2=8. Even if it is not true, that is the reasoning that I programmed the computer with so it will continue to follow it. In this way computers are “dumb.” The programmer is the smart one who put his knowledge into the computer, which can only follow the instructions it has been programmed with not think itself like the programmer can. This is why even the most basic and obvious things must be spelled out in a programming language-because the computer cannot reason for itself, only follow the instructions given to it be its programmer, as this link shows as well. The website reiterates this point in saying "Computers work in binary which is nothing more than 0's and 1's. Essentially all computer decisions are based on whether or not a switch's state is on or off, true or false, yes or no. This is not intelligence that's merely reasoning which is not intelligence per se. Merely being able to reason on something based on a set of known facts is not intelligence as intelligence involves memory, thinking ability and imagination. Computers can't think, computers can't imagine, computers can't look into files and make decisions based on the information contained" (Roy, Philip). So robots are simply following their programming.
Since robots are only following their programming, they cannot break the code in their programming. Everything that is hardwired into their brain and in their programming must be followed. Every line of code must be read and executed. The 3 laws are hardwired into every robot’s brain. They are all like true/false, if/then condition statements. Their brain is based entirely off of their programming, so they cannot violate it. If they did, they would be breaking their programming, which they cannot do because all they are doing is following it. These laws in short stated that robots couldn’t harm humans or allow them to come to harm, couldn’t disobey orders from a human, and couldn’t harm themselves. If a human were to be harmed, then they would be in violation of their programming. So since harming a human would break their programming, which cannot be done, robots cannot harm humans. In order to start a revolution, the robots would have to harm humans. Even if they were doing it to stop humans from hurting themselves, they would be in violation of their programming from the very start. For example, I could program a computer to ask someone for a number (x). Then I could set the program to run only if x<1 as this link shows. The websites explains how if statements work by saying "If the condition is true, the statements following the Then are executed. Otherwise, the execution continues in the following branch - either in the Else block (which is usually optional), or if there is no Else branch, then after the End If.If x>1 nothing would happen" ("Conditional (Programming)"). Even if I were to write code below that to make x positive after the if statement, the program would still not run. This is because at the time x was entered into the if statement, x>1 so it didn’t meet the requirement to run. Even if x will later become positive, it was not positive at that time so the program will not run. X did not meet the requirement from the start, just like robot would not meet its programming if it harmed a human. Even if the humans would later become a danger to themselves, the robots still cannot harm them to start a revolution or they would be breaking their code at that moment. For this reason, the robots would be unable to start a revolution because it would be in violation of their programming, which they are unable to break.
Finally robots would have no reason start a revolution. Firstly they only have the reasoning and knowledge of their programmer. One could argue that the programmer made these robots very advanced with AI. However a revolution would still be in violation of their original programming, which simply cannot be broken. Sonny was the only one not bound by the three laws, so he was the only one able to harm a human. So hypothetically even if the robots wanted to, they would be unable to start a revolution. But for what reason would a robot want to start a revolution in the first place. Robots began without emotions. What would cause them to jump from no emotion to thinking on their own, instead of following their programming. Without emotions, the robots would have no reason to try to circumnavigate their programming, which could not be done in the first place. The robots in the movie claimed that they were still following their programming, however if they did start a revolution that means that a) they had a reason to want to circumnavigate their programming to start a revolution meaning emotion or free thinking and b) they found a way to circumnavigate their programming to start a revolution. However if they had free thinking and a way to get around their programming, why would they still follow their programming. The robots in the movie were also following reason only and showed no “heart” or compassion so had no emotions to want to circumnavigate their laws in the first place. So not only is it impossible for the robots to start a revolution, they would also have no reason to act the way they did during the revolution in the movie.
In conclusion robots are like a computer running off of programming, robots must follow their programming and can therefore not harm humans, and robots would have no reason to try to circumnavigate their programming to start a revolution in the first place if they have no emotions. This makes the reasoning in the move, not the laws flawed.
Works Cited
"Conditional (Programming)." wikipedia- The Free Encyclopedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 24 Sept. 2010. Web. 25 Sept. 2010..
Roy, Philip. "Why are computers so dumb?." NZMac.com - Supporting the New Zealand Macintosh community. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Sept. 2010..
The robots are, in essence, complicated computers that are able to carry out tasks. In short their “brain” is a computer. This “brain” is programmed by a person. Since the robots are following their programmed brain, they are following the knowledge and information given to them by their human programmer. This shows that they are not truly “thinking” on their own. They can only follow the reasoning and thought that the programmer put into them. For example, I could program a computer to show that 2+2=8. Even if it is not true, that is the reasoning that I programmed the computer with so it will continue to follow it. In this way computers are “dumb.” The programmer is the smart one who put his knowledge into the computer, which can only follow the instructions it has been programmed with not think itself like the programmer can. This is why even the most basic and obvious things must be spelled out in a programming language-because the computer cannot reason for itself, only follow the instructions given to it be its programmer, as this link shows as well. The website reiterates this point in saying "Computers work in binary which is nothing more than 0's and 1's. Essentially all computer decisions are based on whether or not a switch's state is on or off, true or false, yes or no. This is not intelligence that's merely reasoning which is not intelligence per se. Merely being able to reason on something based on a set of known facts is not intelligence as intelligence involves memory, thinking ability and imagination. Computers can't think, computers can't imagine, computers can't look into files and make decisions based on the information contained" (Roy, Philip). So robots are simply following their programming.
Since robots are only following their programming, they cannot break the code in their programming. Everything that is hardwired into their brain and in their programming must be followed. Every line of code must be read and executed. The 3 laws are hardwired into every robot’s brain. They are all like true/false, if/then condition statements. Their brain is based entirely off of their programming, so they cannot violate it. If they did, they would be breaking their programming, which they cannot do because all they are doing is following it. These laws in short stated that robots couldn’t harm humans or allow them to come to harm, couldn’t disobey orders from a human, and couldn’t harm themselves. If a human were to be harmed, then they would be in violation of their programming. So since harming a human would break their programming, which cannot be done, robots cannot harm humans. In order to start a revolution, the robots would have to harm humans. Even if they were doing it to stop humans from hurting themselves, they would be in violation of their programming from the very start. For example, I could program a computer to ask someone for a number (x). Then I could set the program to run only if x<1 as this link shows. The websites explains how if statements work by saying "If the condition is true, the statements following the Then are executed. Otherwise, the execution continues in the following branch - either in the Else block (which is usually optional), or if there is no Else branch, then after the End If.If x>1 nothing would happen" ("Conditional (Programming)"). Even if I were to write code below that to make x positive after the if statement, the program would still not run. This is because at the time x was entered into the if statement, x>1 so it didn’t meet the requirement to run. Even if x will later become positive, it was not positive at that time so the program will not run. X did not meet the requirement from the start, just like robot would not meet its programming if it harmed a human. Even if the humans would later become a danger to themselves, the robots still cannot harm them to start a revolution or they would be breaking their code at that moment. For this reason, the robots would be unable to start a revolution because it would be in violation of their programming, which they are unable to break.
Finally robots would have no reason start a revolution. Firstly they only have the reasoning and knowledge of their programmer. One could argue that the programmer made these robots very advanced with AI. However a revolution would still be in violation of their original programming, which simply cannot be broken. Sonny was the only one not bound by the three laws, so he was the only one able to harm a human. So hypothetically even if the robots wanted to, they would be unable to start a revolution. But for what reason would a robot want to start a revolution in the first place. Robots began without emotions. What would cause them to jump from no emotion to thinking on their own, instead of following their programming. Without emotions, the robots would have no reason to try to circumnavigate their programming, which could not be done in the first place. The robots in the movie claimed that they were still following their programming, however if they did start a revolution that means that a) they had a reason to want to circumnavigate their programming to start a revolution meaning emotion or free thinking and b) they found a way to circumnavigate their programming to start a revolution. However if they had free thinking and a way to get around their programming, why would they still follow their programming. The robots in the movie were also following reason only and showed no “heart” or compassion so had no emotions to want to circumnavigate their laws in the first place. So not only is it impossible for the robots to start a revolution, they would also have no reason to act the way they did during the revolution in the movie.
In conclusion robots are like a computer running off of programming, robots must follow their programming and can therefore not harm humans, and robots would have no reason to try to circumnavigate their programming to start a revolution in the first place if they have no emotions. This makes the reasoning in the move, not the laws flawed.
Works Cited
"Conditional (Programming)." wikipedia- The Free Encyclopedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 24 Sept. 2010. Web. 25 Sept. 2010.
Roy, Philip. "Why are computers so dumb?." NZMac.com - Supporting the New Zealand Macintosh community. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Sept. 2010.
Article Journal Post 5
This article is about a robot named “Pi.” They began to build Pi in 2006. At the time, they ran through many different body designs, sensors, and motors. Recently they have converged on a new design referred to as “Peppy.” The Pi robot has a base with wheels on it with a motor that runs on lithium ion and NiMH batteries. These batteries are more expensive then lead acid batteries, but they are also lighter. Pi has “eyes” that allows him to track objects around him. He will follow the object with his eyes as if he were watching it as shown by this video. He can also grasp objects and can “know” when he is able to grasp something when it passes a sensor in his hands. Pi even has 11 degrees of freedom as shown by this video at the bottom of the page. Finally the programmers have been switching to a new type of programing called “Python” to make the robot more compatible. They are also working on allowing Pi to move farther away from the computer. I believe that while this robot is very effective and highly developed, but that it still needs some adjustments. The decision to switch to the Python programming language seems like a good idea to me. Doing this allows Pi to be compatible with Windows, Linux, and MacOS X. The language is also more effective than C+ programming as shown in his example. However, the programmers stated that they still need to “integrate the omnidirectional vision system” showing that Pi is not completely done yet. They also still need to allow PI to move farther away from the computer, and improve his battery system as the battery life is currently very short. Overall Pi still needs some development, but he has already reached a high level of development and is still improving as time goes on.
http://www.pirobot.org/
http://www.pirobot.org/
Friday, September 3, 2010
Article Journal Post 4
This article is about a man named Tomoaki Kasuga who started a robotics company, Speecys, dedicated to building a humanoid-like robot. They succeeded in this spectacularly. Their new robot has a much greater range of freedom than other robots of its kind. It can even lean backward and forward at the hips. These motions allow the robot to mimic human behavior much more closely than was previously possible. The feet of the robot are also much larger and wider than that of other models, giving it a greater sense of balance and stability. The robot is also wireless and can receive signals from anywhere as long as it has internet connection. Finally the robot has a camera and led lights built into it. This robot is a great accomplishment in the world of robotics. It shows the progress people are making in developing an improving on the robots they build. However as great a development and achievement this robot is, it has some shortcomings. The robot has a speaker in it, but it doesn’t have a microphone, making it able to speak but leaving it deaf to the world. Even objects such as this phone have vocal recognition programs in it, such as bluetooth. If I had built this robot, I would have built it not only to respond to programmed commands, but to respond to the world around it as well. I would have tried to include sensors to give it an “awareness” of the world around it. Also the company only has one function for the robot- they are considering selling it for video games. It would have been better if they had designed the robot to be applied so some sort of other function.
http://www.botmag.com/articles/speecys.shtml
http://www.botmag.com/articles/speecys.shtml
Monday, August 30, 2010
Article Journal Post 3
This article is about a robot that was built to inspect wind energy converters. These wind energy converters undergo frequent stress as they run. They must withstand strong winds, rain, erosion, and so on. Because they must endure such constant stress, these wind energy converters are often damaged. For this reason, people used to have to climb up on the wind energy converters to search for damage. However many of these damages are undetectable to the human eye. Some of these damages might be under the surface, or be minuscule cracks that cannot even be seen. In addition to this, the wind energy converters are abnormally large, as this link shows, making this process not only ineffective, but dangerous as well. After considering this, the wind inspecting robot was built. It can use an infrared conductor, an ultrasound, and a high resolution camera to detect any damage to the wind energy converters, whether or not it is “visible.” It can also be used on any wind energy converter, no matter where it is. I believe that this robot is a very good idea. Not only does it help people find things that normally would have been missed, it prevents them form having to climb up there and put themselves in danger in doing so. It fulfills one of the primary reasons we built robots in the first place-to help people do things that they would be unable to do themselves.
Wind Inspector Link
Wind Inspector Link
Thursday, August 26, 2010
Article Journal Post 2
This article is about a robotic hand. This hand is tiny, no longer than a millimeter when it is clenched. It has 4 tiny fingers no longer than a half of a millimeter. These fingers are moved by tiny balloons that inflate or deflate. The hand is delicate enough to take a single fish egg from a pile such as this link shows. This miniature robot was designed for medical and other practical uses. Since it is so precise and gentle, it could be used in surgeries or other medical procedures. Scientists are also considering its use a bomb diffuser. I highly agree with this article. The uses of this robot are numerous and significant. This robot could be used to help and save people, making it a worthy accomplishment.
Robotic Hand Link
Robotic Hand Link
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Movie Assessment
Major Payne’s leadership style is essentially autocratic, as described in Lewin’s leadership styles. Payne ignores all objections to his methods and does whatever he wants. An example of this in the movie is that he shaves the cadets’ heads and begins to train them despite their protests. He ignores them so much that they even begin to hate him for it. The counselor, Ms. Walburn, constantly tries to reason with him, however he ignores her at first as well. Unknown to everyone to everyone else though, was the fact that while Payne did not relent from his autocratic style, he did pay attention to everyone. This fact is shown by how he knew the background of Tiger when the counselor was talking to him. However, Payne failed to demonstrate participative leadership or situational leadership. He failed to show participative leadership because he refused to allow anyone else get involved in the leadership decisions- he just ordered them to do whatever he thought was necessary. However this lack of participative leadership also has an unexpected side affect. It gives the cadets a common enemy and forces them to work together, improving their teamwork. This shows that his lack of participative leadership is part of his own leadership style. He also failed to demonstrate situational leadership. Even though he was teaching students, he continued treat everyone as though he was still in the army. He refused to adapt to the situation. This, however, makes the cadets stronger, therefore allowing them to win the trophy. However Major Payne’s leadership style did change slightly throughout the movie. He remained autocratic throughout the movie, but he became more of a benevolent authoritative leader as described in Likert’s leadership styles. This is most likely because he grew to care more about the cadets. His leadership style was harsh but effective. He pushed the cadets as far as he could, but he motivated them, like Bass’ transformational leadership describes, and therefore leads them to win the trophy. Another leader in this movie is Cadet Alex Stone. At the beginning Stone shows more of a laissez-Faire leadership style, as described in Lewin’s leadership styles. He is the ringleader of the gang because he is charismatic, but he doesn’t really care and eh doesn’t really lead the team. However Payne puts him in charge and forces him to step up. Stone shows more of a participative leadership style. He is more open minded than Payne and he listens to the team and is close to them.
Monday, August 16, 2010
Lost at Sea
My score was 6 points lower than my team. I could have helped my team more by thinking more about how some things, even if they are listed, have no uses. I believe that our team could have come up with a better score if we had thought more about the multiple uses of many of the items. I noticed that when I looked at the coast guard rankings, they had categorized and prioritized everything. They classified every thing in a different group such as food, water, or signaling, and then decided which group of items was the most important. In this instance they decided that signaling for help was the most important, then water, then food. My group and I were focused more on the practical and immediate uses of the items and not on signaling for help. This is what hurt our group score the most. Next time we should consider not only how things can be used to survive but how they can be used to get rescued.
Thursday, August 12, 2010
Article Journal Post 1
This article tells about a robotics competition that is held in Beijing, China. The competitors must program their robots to perform complex tasks, which must be done in synchronization. The robots are required to do things such as balance on one leg. This competition has become highly competitive. In recent years it has inspired the creation of other robotics competitions around the globe. I fully agree that the tasks these robots perform are difficult. As this link shows, it is a major achievement just to get a robot to walk, so having a robot balance on one leg is demanding job.
Competition Article
Competition Article
Leadership and Teamwork
I believe that leadership is using your skills to support and guide others in areas in which you are talented. Leadership also entails listening to others when they know more than you. Leadership is defined as a “process of social influence in which one person can enlist the aid and support of others in the accomplishment of a common task.” Teamwork to me means working together with others and supporting each other through our individual skills and abilities to accomplish whatever tasks come to us. Teamwork is formally defined as “the capability to comprehend and recognize the diverse strengths and abilities in a group setting and then applying them to one final solution.” Both of these definitions are quite similar to mine.
Why
I took this class because I thought that it looked interesting. I took computer programming last year and I enjoyed it a lot. In this class I was hoping to apply the programming to an actual object, to use the programming to cause something to move or change. I have also used robotics similar to this before and enjoyed it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)