Anna Konda, the Robotic Firefighter 94
Roland Piquepaille writes "In fact, Anna Konda is a robotic fire hose moving like a snake. This robot, which has been developed in Norway by SINTEF, is 3 m long and weighs 70 kg. The snake contains 20 water hydraulic motors that move the robotic joints. And the energy needed to power these motors comes from water pressurized to 100 bars and already available inside the fire hose. This gives enough energy to this water-powered robot to climb up stairs, to lift a car up off the ground or even break through a wall. Very clever design! The designers think that this robot could not only replace humans to fight fires when it's too dangerous for them, but could also be used for subsea operations or explosion prevention. An additional overview contains more details and pictures of this snake robot."
Re:FP (Score:4, Funny)
Re:FP (Score:1)
Re:In other news... (Score:2)
Re:Hmph. (Score:4, Funny)
I was going to run out and buy one to, ah, um, improve my tennis game.
Solomon
Reminds me of... (Score:2)
Cue... (Score:1)
on planes, perhaps? (Score:2)
Re:on planes, perhaps? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Cue... (Score:1)
Re:Cue... (Score:1)
Commercial announcement: "You've seen giant snake movies before, but this time they're not just cold blooded! They're Cold *Scene Flash* As *Scene Flash* Steel!" *Shocking Scene Flash!* SCREAM!!! "This Saturday at 9... Only on Sci-Fi."
Interesting research (Score:1, Redundant)
Re:Interesting research (Score:2)
Re:Interesting research (Score:2)
In ours, sadly. This thing is a nice concept, but TFA says it needs 100bar water. The normal pressures for firefighting are around 8-20bar, so it'd take specialised pumping equipment and hoses for it to work.
That's not a showstopper of course, but it'd probably be cheaper just to build a conventional electric robot like Quinetiq's [qinetiq.com] Talon based firefighting bot, which can pull conventional 63mm fire hoses.
*cough* (Score:2)
Robotic Snakes on a Plane! (Score:2, Funny)
We could fight forest fires better
Re:Robotic Snakes on a Plane! (Score:2)
Or even one hooked with a drainage tube with a slight suction-device, no more restroom breaks!
The possibilities... endless...
All I wonder is; will the electronics be able to withstand the temperatures of a fire?
Translation of Norwegian Dagbladet.no article (Score:4, Informative)
The Worlds Most Sophisticated Firehose
(Dagbladet.no): Tenk deg en situasjon hvor du er innestengt som følge av brann, snøras eller jordskjelv, og det er for farlig for hjelpemannskapet å gå inn og redde deg. Det er da Snakefighteren Anna Konda kommer glidende inn, på skrå sidelengs som en ørkenslange.
(Dagbladet.no): Imagine a situation where you're trapped due to a fire, snow avalaunch or earthquake, and it's too dangerous for the rescue crew to enter to save you. That's when the Snakefighter Anna Konda comes gliding in, sideways like a desert snake.
Hun er verdens sterkeste og mest avanserte brannslange, ifølge SINTEF-forskerne Pål Liljebäck og Øyvind Stavdal som har utviklet henne.
She's the world's strongest and most advanced firehose, according to SINTEF researchers Pål Liljebäck and Øyvind Stavdal, who developed her.
En Anakonda av metall, smidig, sterk og smart, inspirert av naturen selv. Hun kommer hun seg frem gjennom alt slags terreng, og har sanser som en vanlig slange ikke har.
An Anaconda of metal, agile, strong and smart, inspired by nature itself. She moves through all kinds of terrain, and has senses that a regular snake lacks.
Hun kan heve hodet og sprute vann, slå gjennom vegger med en slagkraft på 700 kg i tyngdefeltet, løfte vekk objekter for å frigjøre fastklemte dyr eller mennesker og bringe gassmasker. Ved hjelp av infrarødt kamera, ultralyd og sensorer skal hun kunne finne kropper og kartlegge et område.
She can lift her head and spray water, break down walls with a gravity of 700 kg, lift away objects to free trapped animals or people, and bring gas masks. With an infrared camera, ultrasound and sensors, she'll be able to find bodies and map an area.
- Snakefighteren representerer en ny æra i brannslukning, sier Pål Liljebäck ved SINTEFs avdeling for anvendt kybernetikk til Dagbladet.no.
- The Snakefighter represents a new era in fire extinguishing, says Pål Liljebäck at SINTEF's department for applied cybernetics to Dagbladet.no.
Han presiserer at slangen er et verktøy, ikke en erstatning for brannfolk, for hun er ikke skapt for å dra med seg objekter.
He notes that the snake is a tool, not a replacement for fire crews, since she wasn't created for towing objects.
Vannhydraulikk
Anna Konda drives av vannhydraulikk, som er nærmest et ikke-eksisterende fagfelt i dag, ifølge de to forskerne. Det vil si at det er vannkraft som driver musklene til den tre meter lange, 16 cm i diameter tjukke og 70 kilo tunge slangen. På et brannåsted kan hun tilkobles en brannslange. Er det snakk om en sammenrast bygning, kan hun ha en innebygget dieselmotor og ha med eget vann. Hun beveger seg med en hastighet på 20 - 30 cm i sekundet, men målet er en fart på en meter i sekundet.
Anna Konda is powered by water hydraulics, a virtually non-existing field today, according to the two scientists. This means that water power is powering the "muscles" of the 3 meter long, 16 cm in diameter thick and 70 kg heavy snake. In a fire location she can be connected to a firehose. In the case of a collapsed building, she can carry her own diesel engine and her own water. She moves with a speed of 20 - 30 cm per second, but the goal is a speed of 1 meter per second.
Slangen skal dels fjernstyres, dels ta egne avgjørelser. Hun bruker så kompliserte bevegelser at hun selv må greie føle seg frem i terrenget og beregne hvordan hun skal ta seg frem. Men en operatør skal kunne gi overordnede instrukser.
The snake will partly be remote controlled, partly make her own decisions. She uses such complex movements that she has to feel herself through the terrain and calc
Movement (Score:5, Interesting)
Great stuff. It not entirely new though.
This is my fave out there at the mo. Snake link (click the images for vids) [snakerobots.com]
Re:sssss (Score:3, Interesting)
Try no
Re:sssss (Score:5, Insightful)
Hate to burst your bubble, but this Internet of ours is primarily a textual medium. As far as extrinsic [umkc.edu] ethos [dcccd.edu] goes, your literacy skills are all you've got. We have literally no other way to judge you as a rhetor.
You're welcome to protest that such things shouldn't be important. But they are. Sorry.
define primary for me? (Score:2)
do you mean internet, or WWW? (one is a subset of the other)
in terms of data volume, I doubt the majority of the bits are for plain old ascii..
I bet reading all text on the internet RIGHT NOW would take less time than studying EVERY picture available or watch EVERY video available.
I personally think of it as more along the lines of a communications medium.
Re:define primary for me? (Score:1)
Your point is taken; to be clear, I should have said 'web' rather than 'Internet'. That shows you I've been hanging around my students too long.
I disagree with your other assertion, however. I suspect that reading all of the text on the Internet would take much longer than similarly consuming the binary content, even if you were to factor in how much more quickly we can read.
Project Gutenberg [gutenberg.org] alone contains 18,000 books. If we assume that each book contains just the equivalent of 150 "pages", that's
Re:define primary for me? (Score:2)
High-definition video is similarly large, at least 14MB/second
Textual data, even at very high rates of speed, is only going to average maybe 5kb/s IF you include side channels like font, size, weight, italics, etc
For most people, assimilating plain ascii at rates greater than 5kb/min would be very hard.
Re:sssss (Score:2)
Well I hate to pop yours, but I actually access the text content of the web via a screen reader, so, text is not the primary medium for all users. Nor is it the only medium for most. But this is not my point. My point is that a wise reader (IMO) assesses the value of comment not on the style of its writing, nor on the accuracy of its execution as a piece of prose, but rather on the merit of its content when regarded concep
Re:sssss (Score:1)
Clearly Einstein was worthy of our attention regardless of how poor his grammar may have been. Yet
Re:sssss (Score:2)
to quote Teach "We have literally no other way to judge you as a rhetor."
This is not true. Is it? (read back for context of quote)
You seem to co
Re:sssss (Score:1)
The quality of a person's ideas provides a way to judge him as a thinker. The presentation of those ideas - structure, grammar, spelling - is
Re:sssss (Score:2)
"The presentation of those ideas - structure, grammar, spelling - is the only way to judge the person as a rhetor. I am defining a rhetor as an eloquent communicator."
In which case you've been arguing a tautology all this time. Mechanicaly and determanistically regurgitating logical and linguistic vocabulary. Which goes little way to solving anything. But I refute this, as a rhetor of nonsense, is of no merit as a rhetor, in my mind.
"A poorly written opinion must overcome two obstacles in
Re:sssss (Score:1)
I meant no offense towards you, and I apologize for implying that you should simply overcome your dyslexia. I didn't mean to communicate that, but I can see now how it sounded that way. It seems to me that you have done very well with communicating clearly in our discussion, so I wasn't directing that comment at you personally.
I enjoy language. I enjoy thinking about it, dissecting it, and attempting to use it well. I see that many people today don't care for language, and can be
Re:sssss (Score:2)
porn star name (Score:1, Funny)
Roland the Plogger again - here's the real link (Score:5, Informative)
Here's the real link to the research. [sintef.no] As usual, Roland the Plogger is posting a story from a blog, maximizing ad revenue, and the actual reference has been lost. One would think that Slashdot's "editors" would be wise to this by now, but they still don't get it.
It;s only a prototype; the water stream that comes out is more like a garden hose than a fire hose.
Re:Roland the Plogger again - here's the real link (Score:2)
Of course they get it! (Score:1, Interesting)
It amazes me that guys like you can't see the obvious: why else would every single submission by 'Roland' get plastered on Slashdot? Why else the earlier submission of the same article (from the original sources, no less) by other submitters is always ignored?
'Roland' is just an extension of Slashdot's marketing machine. How can you imagine otherwise?
Re:Of course they get it! (Score:2, Interesting)
The question
What you talkin' bout, Animats? (Score:1)
Roland's comments are not quite as well received. (Score:1)
Perhaps Slashdot's editors like his, um, "writing style" better than the rest of us.
Anyone up to writing a Firefox plugin to filter the Piquepaillespam out of Slashdot?every story he submits
more like a squirt gun... (Score:2)
One of those really powerful supersoaker squirt guns, but a squirt gun nonetheless.
The segements don't appear to have enough space inside to pass a decent-sized hose, nor room for a valve to control that much water and as is pointed out in another thread, the force of the water leaving a decent size hose would move this thing out of position anyway.
It seemed like a good idea. Now I'm not so sure it's practical.
100 bars?! (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:100 bars?! (Score:3, Informative)
Also, remember that this is a Euro invention. Think it's gonna have a smoothbore? A TFT?
Nope... it'll be HPF with a 1". Europeans have been begging for a way to bring back HPF for almost a decade... and this might just be a viable way to do it. Expensive as hell, but viable.
Re:100 bars?! (Score:1)
I'm sure you know what you are talking about, but for the clairification of others I will explain. Fire engines pump an enormous volume of water (gpm or gallons per minute), but at relatively low pressure (around 100 psi IIRC). However, that doesn't make this useless. Your average pressure washer works the opposite way, enormous pressure but low gpm. A fire company could buy a unit capable of several thousand psi for around $1,000 at any hardware store. As another poster pointed out, this kind of syste
And Then Again, Maybe Not (Score:5, Informative)
There is also the other problem: We typically charge our lines to the point where the nozzle-man's feet just leave the ground, then we ease back so they are just barely on the ground. This maximizes our flow into the area we are fighting. With a two-person nozzle team that means we have in the neighborhood of 600-700 lbs of ballast to offset the reaction force at the tip (the force of the water exiting the nozzle that is pushing back on it, which would result in the hose flying all over the place otherwise). (The 600-700 lbs is the weight of two firefighters, their bunker gear, air packs, etc.). The robot only weights 70kg, so it won't have nearly the control of the tip, which means that you can't push nearly the water.
I could see this as a good application when trying to work in a warehouse or supermarket, where the distance from the door is large. However, the device is going to need assistance to move a great distance since the line has to be charged in order for it to function, but if the line is charged it becomes much harder to move the line. That combination seems to defeat the purpose - of keeping firefighters out of harm's way.
Personally I'm in favor of our current option "b" - trench cut the roof (long cut perpendicular to the path of the fire, in an area we know is good), then drown the cut with water from a ladder pipe, which causes a water curtain - the good part of the building is saved by the water curtain, which means we can fight the remainder from a position of strength.
Re:And Then Again, Maybe Yes (Score:2, Informative)
Re:And Then Again, Maybe Not (Score:3, Informative)
what about a a self stiffening hose? (Score:2)
Re:And Then Again, Maybe Not (Score:2, Interesting)
Actually, it's going to have to continously spray water just to move, since having a water return line would be a little silly. I'm really curious if the motors are attached in series or parallel - i.e. does e
Re:And Then Again, Maybe Not (Score:4, Interesting)
Presently, there's two popular tip-types - the TFT (taskforce tip) which has an adjustable "spray" pattern, and the smoothbore, which is actually not a tip at all. It's just a pipe.
Arguments over which is better have raged on, forever. In either case, though, the goal is to get gallonage onto the heat source. The theory of water as an extinguising agent is fairly simple - we want to stop the chemical reaction by eliminating Heat from the equation. Water is ideal - to raise 1 gram of water 1 degree celcius, it takes 1 calorie. Great! I've got a fire producing 2000 calories of heat per second. That's gonna take a lot of water to mitigate.
But, there's a trick - we don't want water. We want STEAM. Water needs 1 calorie for that 1 degree, all the way up to 99 degrees. But... to get from 99 to 100 takes... wait for it... 1400 calories. That is a LOT of heat.
Water doesn't put fires out. Water converting to steam does. That ONE degree shift is what fights the fire. Any water that ends up on the floor is a waste of time.
The TFT theory is based on surface area; a bunch of droplets will have more exposed surface area than a cylinder ("straight stream") of water, hence will evaporate faster / have a higher conversion rate.
The smoothbore argument is based on penetration; with a solid ("straight") stream, you know the water is impacting the hot surface pretty hard with some depth of penetration. Since that water will be trapped, its only way "out" is to convert. It has the added advantage of being able to blow holes through things that are in the way... walls, furniture, whatever. Smoothbores are obviously popular with urban companies, like FDNY for example.
The tight-spray actually isn't that relevent to distance; it's all about NOT screwing up the thermal strata in the room. A smoothbore is ideal for a cooker, since there is almost no drag and (therefore) no venturi effect. A TFT, with all of its droplets, has a lot more cross section - but these droplets create a big venturi as they travel through space. The resulting turbulance can suck the hot stuff above into the cool stuff where we are. That's the argument in the US, anyway. The Europeans see it a completely different way... but their building construction is completely different, also.
Re:And Then Again, Maybe Not (Score:2, Informative)
Actually, that's too much. The heat of vaporization of water is 539 cal/g at 100 degrees C.
But, of course, the concept is dead on -- to remove a LOT of heat, turn water to steam.
Re:And Then Again, Maybe Not (Score:3, Informative)
1. Surface area via HPF. High Pressure Fog systems were all the rage a few decades ago, and also in the 1800s (wait long enough, everything comes around again, eh?). The conversion rates are dangerous if the application rate is not properly managed. Likewise, application is dangerous b
Thanks (Score:3, Insightful)
Its nice to hear from people who actually know their stuff. I can't think of any other forum where that can happen.
Re:Thanks (Score:2)
Why not? It's possible in almost any forum. I didn't realize that "most forums" banned people with knowledge from posting.
Re:Thanks (Score:2)
I think that's where some of the draw of
It ain't perfect, but it works most of the time. And sometimes you learn
Re:And Then Again, Maybe Not (Score:2)
Re:And Then Again, Maybe Not (Score:4, Informative)
There's just a couple of caveats, however -
1. Typical hose lengths on an engine (in the US, at least) are 150', 200', and 400', made up of either 50' or 100' segments. There's no way in hell the entire length of hose will contain a "snake" exoskel as someone had suggested... meaning you'd probably have several snakes separated by "normal" hose lengths. This stuff needs to fit on the truck, somewhere... and a mere human needs to deploy it WITHOUT a Genie-lift.
2. The unit only operates when the line is charged. As Mikey said, that means the entire length of the line is rigid; typical fire streams run at +60 psi (plus additional for friction loss and altitude) for a smoothbore, or up to 160 for a "taskforce" (fog) style tip. Such pressures are not condusive to bending. Combined with having a coupling every 50' along the length of the hose, which invariably get snagged on every corner or edge they find... the idea of this device pulling the hose behind it has some serious challenges.
3. Speaking of bending, it'd be interesting to see how this device would be stored on the truck. A flat-load is probably out of the question... and space on a truck is typically at a premium. I assume the "snake" would retain it's circular cross-section, compared with a typical hose which squashes flat.
4. Somewhere, there was mention of a camera at the head of the unit. Since your typical CCD is useless in a smoke condition... your starting price for vision is $13k for a bolometer, and that's just the sensor. By the time you've added everything else needed for vision, including the "Motorola Floating Decimal Point", remote-vision will probably top $25k, easily. (And yes, I'm pulling numbers out of my butt. However, your typical bolometer-based TIC will run about $16k-$23k for a hand-held unit, and those are mass-produced. Remove the production volume, separate the sensor from the display by 200', realize that "wireless" is not an option, invent a cabling system that'll withstand 1000+ deg...) I don't see anyone who could afford to run this thing via remote vision.
5. I *WILL* disagree with Mikey on the Noz-Reaction argument. He's right, but sadly he lives in TFT-land:
5a. Water weighs 8lbs per gallon; whatever your reaction force is, you need merely have adequate water-weight in the hose on the ground, behind you. (Yes, that description was awful). I weigh 130lbs soaking wet, and can solo a deuce and a half at 170psi with a TFT. Don't ask me to move it while it's flowing water, but once in position... I can solo it without any effort, and maintain control over a 30 degree arc. The trick is to have the line continue *straight* behind you for a few meters, such that the hose jacket takes the compression from the reaction force; meanwhile, residuals keep the jacket from kinking, and mass & ground friction prevent the hose from sliding backwards. It's not appropriate in many places (e.g. if a tight corner is involved), but it's effective in others. Barn fires and corridors, for example
5b. Pressure isn't volume, especially with a Thinker nob. Most thinkers intend 120lbs (or whatever) at the tip, and they clamp anything above that. Remind your guys that the typical Taskforce Tip has Thinker built into it, so the excess pressure is NOT increasing the GPM; you crank it up, the Thinker chokes it down at the bale. Most TFTs don't have a visible control for this device, but many Master devices do. Take a look at the deck gun on your engine - it probably has an adjustable GPM collar. So long as you meet the minimum pressure for the tip, it doesn't matter what pressure you dump into it - if you set the collar at 900 gpm, you'll GET 900 gpm. It won't matter if you're at 130psi or 250psi... you'll get 900gpm. Most TFTs contain this device (it's a selling point), but it's f
Snakes on a... (Score:1, Funny)
Her greatest nemesis? (Score:2, Funny)
Evil Applications (Score:2, Funny)
Red Dwarf reference (Score:4, Funny)
Want pictures? (Score:5, Informative)
Due to the complete lack of pictures in the source article, here's some for your appetite...
Anna Konda in action [sintef.com] (JPEG, 844x453)
Close-up of a segment [dagbladet.no] (JPEG, 280x210)
Alternate uses. (Score:1, Offtopic)
Would any ladies in the Slashdot community care to comment on other applications of this robotic snake?
Re:Alternate uses. (Score:2)
Re:Alternate uses. (Score:1)
Husband replacement?
Ann Coulter? (Score:1, Flamebait)
Other snake 'bots (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.snakerobots.com/ [snakerobots.com]
http://arctangent.8k.com/snake/snakemain.htm [8k.com]
Afraid (Score:3, Funny)
Anime Reference (Score:1)
But... (Score:3, Funny)
Kool-aid (Score:1)