Slashdot Log In
New BigDog Robot Video
Posted by
kdawson
on Wed Mar 19, 2008 02:01 AM
from the now-to-work-on-the-muffler dept.
from the now-to-work-on-the-muffler dept.
John860 writes "The US company Boston Dynamics has released an amazing new video of its quadruped robot BigDog. The highlight of the video (at 1:24) shows how the robot starts slipping on ice, almost falls several times, but finally regains its balance and continues walking. The video also shows the robot's ability to cope with different types of terrains, climb and descend steep slopes, and jump. Two years ago, the older version of BigDog was already able to climb slopes, keep its balance after a strong kick, and walk on rough terrain like stones, mud, and snow. The new version weighs 235 lbs and can carry a payload of up to 340 lbs, a factor of 4 better than its predecessor."
Related Stories
[+]
Robotic 'Pack Mule' with Impressive Reflexes 268 comments
moon_monkey writes "New Scientist has a story about a nimble, four-legged robot that can recover its balance even after being given a hefty kick." From the article: "The project is sponsored by the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), who want the robotic pack mule to assist soldiers in terrain too tough for vehicles. Ground-based soldiers often need to carry 40 kilograms of equipment. Raibert says the latest version of BigDog can handle slopes of 35 - a steeper gradient than one in two. The hydraulics are driven by a two-stroke single-cylinder petrol engine, and it can carry over 40 kg, about 30% of its bodyweight. The robot can follow a simple path on its own, or can be remotely controlled."
[+]
The Best Robots of 2008 57 comments
An anonymous reader writes "Robot innovation continued its relentless advances during 2008. SingularityHub has a showcase of the best robot videos of the past year. These robot videos are really amazing, and they show just how far we have come in the field of robotics in recent years."
The videos include toy robots, robot musicians (which we've discussed in the past), modular robots that work together to move around, robots doing synchronized martial arts, the BigDog robot that can walk on almost any type of terrain, and robot soccer. We've also recently talked about a couple of robots that will bring you beer.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
sorry (Score:5, Funny)
The walking motion is much like a goat. A goat, see?
Re:sorry (Score:4, Funny)
Goat.mechs?
Parent
Somewhere deep in the caves of Tora Bora (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah, but it was delivered by this weird mechanical goat thing that buzzed like a swarm of bees in a poppy field.
Hmm. I believe my RealGoat delivery has arrived! Allahu Ackbar!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
My favourite part was where some scientist enthused that "you can fi
Re:Somewhere deep in the caves of Tora Bora (Score:4, Funny)
When it gets real they sent the the dogs out, but because the dogs was trained with russian equipment, they prefer to lay below the russian tanks and not the germans.
Parent
Kick (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think anyone was calling FAKE and claiming that it was CGI, so yes... it is real. More seriously though, I think they are saying dog just because of the conotations it brings, its movements don't seem very dog like to me, they match that of some other four-legged mammals more closely I think.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
If you took two dogs and strapped them together, facing each other, with their forelimbs in the air and only their rear limbs on the ground... and made them telepathic... they might move a bit like that!
I find the part where it slips on the ice particularly impressive - although BigDog seemed to come perilously close to a broken limb in the incident! I think most human
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
if you took two dogs and strapped them together, facing each other, with their forelimbs in the air and only their rear limbs on the ground... and made them telepathic... they might move a bit like that!
The first time I saw this Boston Robotics thing (the earlier version), I had no context for the video clip, nothing to tell me it was a robot. So it reeaally creeped me out big time. And the loud engine actually made it even more scary. I thought maybe it was some sick, brutal, military experiment in commanding a real, but mutilated animal, a hybrid dog-machine, like those experiments being done with rats. Has anyone else here seen No Telling [imdb.com]? I suspect that if I hadn't seen that movie I might not have bee
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I kept thinking about those mutant Headcrab things from Half-Life
Re:Kick (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Kick (Score:5, Funny)
The civillian versions will be all plush and lovable (though huge) until some glitch reenables the combat subroutine. Lone cop and beautiful female computer scientist will then need to fight their way to the Mans' Best Friend central computer to press the reset button. One of the dogs will stay loyal and help them, the rest (with glowing red eyes, to tell the slower audience members that they are Evil) will terrorise the population.
Joe Dante will direct "Mans' Best Friend" (working title "Pastiche 3") of course, from a novel by Steven King. The cast will all be scientologists and there will be a few references to engrams and so on in the script, or maybe just adlibbed in. The movie will start with Eisenhower's speech about the Military Industrial complex and then cut to something ironic, like a weapons factory stripping the weapons off a giant robot dog endoskeleton, wrapping it in plush fur and loading it into a box labelled "Mans' Best Friend".
Parent
Creepy (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Creepy (Score:5, Interesting)
They may have to think about toning this aspect down for war time scenarios - I can well imagine soldiers going to 'old yella's' assistance when he comes under fire!
Parent
Re:Creepy (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Creepy (Score:5, Informative)
Yes, it's called the "Uncanny Valley [wikipedia.org]".
Parent
Uncanny Valley... (Score:3, Interesting)
Let's just hope they don't mount Kismet's head on this thing.
Simply Amazing. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Simply Amazing. (Score:4, Insightful)
Add a turret, a video camera, and a remote control -- presto, a soldier that can march 24/7 across the desert, across the ice, through tear gas clouds, through radioactive fallout, and arrive somewhere all fresh and ready to shoot people, or drop bombs.
They're not going to "make toy versions", at least not any time soon. Why try to make a $100-1000 toy, and compete on the free market, when you can keep everything secret and sell them to the military for orders of magnitude more?
I'm an American, and these things scare me. Robert E. Lee once said "It is well that war is so terrible, or we should get too fond of it". Our government is making it significantly less terrible (for its own soldiers) all the time, and they also seem to be growing rather fond of it. When you can run a robotic war (in the air and on the ground) by remote control, what's to stop you from attacking everybody you don't like?
I predict we'll have robot infantry on the ground inside of 5 years, and within 2 years of that, they'll be back here patrolling American soil. And no, it's not a partisan issue, either: even Obama, the democratic frontrunner, wants to *increase* military spending, even though America's military budget is already larger than the military budgets of every other country in the world, combined.
Parent
Re:Simply Amazing. (Score:4, Insightful)
And this could be likely achieved with other conventional robotic conveyance mechanisms. If you just need to deliver a mobile land-mine, adaptation of simple RC cars could probably serve. As for dropping bombs and shooting people - there are plenty of airborne weapons that would be difficult to surpass in terms of "efficiency". Cheaper and simpler will win.
About the only military use I can see for this might be urban alley crawls, where terrain could be difficult, cramped, and dangerous, and possibly IED detection/detonation. I agree with parent about this being mostly a pack mule.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Simply Amazing. (Score:5, Insightful)
If a robot is cheaper than a dead/wounded soldier the robot might be a better option.
Also consider that robots need no training and (almost?) no supplies when they are in storage.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Simply Amazing. (Score:5, Funny)
Sounds like maybe we should call PETA on you, since it sounds like you know exactly how an animal reacts when it gets violently kicked
Parent
Re:Simply Amazing. (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Other than an autonomic anti-tank cannon or 100KG of explosives?
No tactical need for anti-tank or self-detonating (Score:3, Insightful)
* Best Dubya line ever. http://www.snopes.com/rumors/bush.asp [snopes.com]
Re:No tactical need for anti-tank or self-detonati (Score:2)
Say, the enemy has tunnels a'la Vietcong, or underground bunkers or such. You need to send a scout. Who will it be?
And it wouldn't be good if the robot gets captured, so a good self-destruction mechanism is in order.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I frankly don't see the actual use in war, besides transporting things,
Um, that "besides" you're brushing off so easily is a pretty big one. Today, a common load carried by (US) infantry soldiers weighs around 45 kg. That's a LOT to be lugging around, and it's increasing due to new equipment being added (plus its batteries) and more stringent requirements on e.g. body armor.
If you can offload half that onto a mechanical dog, the effectiveness of your unit would increase dramatically.
War is mostly a logistical operation with some fighting going on at the fringes. Anything that
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
One small step for a dog (Score:5, Funny)
True Test (Score:3, Interesting)
This is bigger than you think (Score:4, Interesting)
Cool, yes. Useful? (Score:4, Interesting)
Since it needs to be able to exert pretty big forces very quickly, I doubt they're going to lower the power requirements, so I highly doubt they're going to be able to use a quieter power source like batteries or fuel cells. Nothing beats the power-to-weight ratio of internal combusion.
Me, I'd go with a real live mule instead for all applications you'd use this in. Same payload capacity, not much bigger, totally silent, self-refuelling, costs $hundreds rather than $hojillions.
Re:Cool, yes. Useful? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
I guess you've never heard of mules being stubborn...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Me, I'd go with a real live mule instead for all applications you'd use this in. Same payload capacity, not much bigger, totally silent, self-refuelling, costs $hundreds rather than $hojillions.
Self-refueling? That rather depends on the terrain you're on. Totally silent? Until it brays (or whatever mules do) at exactly the wrong moment and ruins your ambush.
Livestock needs to be taken care of every day, is much more maintenance-intensive than anything mechanical. It also can't be stowed in a container for easy long-range transport.
Baby Steps (Score:2)
A decade or two from now with improvements in batteries allowing for stronger and faster motors along with an increased number of quicker processors and you'll have something that will truly resemble natural animal movement. It wasn't that long ago that the pinnacle of robotic movement was stiff and insect like.
More like "Big Fly" (Score:2)
Creepy. But obviously highly sophisticated (or they found a simple rule and implemented it well).
Those newfangled measure units ... (Score:2)
Career regrets (Score:3, Insightful)
How it works - some technical details (Score:5, Informative)
This is very nice work. It's good to see Raibert doing robotic locomotion again, and finally, with a big enough budget.
Back in the 1980s and early 1990s, Raibert headed the MIT Leg Lab, which produced the first legged robots with real balance control. Raibert started with one-legged hopping machines, to force the balance issue. His big insight was that balance is more important than gait. In 1992, he left MIT and did a startup, Boston Dynamics, and went off into simulation. Most of the simulations weren't dynamic, just kinematic. Now he's back to robotics, and dynamics, again.
I've worked on control of robot running on rough terrain [youtube.com]. So I understand the problems. Watching the Big Dog video, I have a reasonably good idea of how it works. This is quite impressive. DARPA got its $40 million worth.
First, it has slip control, like automotive ABS, for its feet. The first insight on the hard cases for locomotion is that balance is more important than gait. The second is that slip control is more important than balance. The key to slip control is keeping the transverse forces at foot-ground contact below the point where the feet break loose. ("Inside the static friction cone", for those familiar with the terminology.) Watch it move on ice. The feet do not slip at all unless there's real trouble, as when someone kicks the thing. The transverse forces are being held below the break-loose point. Given the load on the foot, the actuator forces (hydraulic cylinders on Big Dog) must be coordinated to keep the transverse force below the ground coefficient of friction times the longitudinal load. Finding the ground coefficient of friction can be either trial and error (if it slips, reduce the value) or they may have actual slip sensing in the foot, like humans and animals. Humans, incidentally, tend to maintain a contact force about 20% above the break-loose point, as a safety margin.
Big Dog's reaction to a slip is to immediately raise the foot and go for a new foot placement. That's an emergency behavior, though; it's the prevention of slip that makes it work. Watch the robot's reaction when it slips on ice, and, once you know what to look for, you'll see how it does it. The first priority is to recover traction. As soon as a foot slips, it's lifted and placed in a new position. The second priority is to recover balance. As the robot starts to roll to the right, it executes a violent twist to the right and throws out the right front foot. It needs a foot position within the traction limits to provide the roll moment needed to recover balance, and it has a good enough planner to find one. Look at that sequence and ask yourself first "where does the foot need to be to get traction", then "where does the foot need to be to recover balance". Then you'll understand how it works.
Big Dog has, finally, true gaitless locomotion. Decades of locomotion research have focused on gait, foot sequence, "central patten generators", and similar mechanisms that deal with the easy cases. Wrong answer. The right answer is to think of legs as assets that can be deployed to maintain slip and stability criteria. It's very clear that Big Dog does this; it can use its feet (and knees!) as necessary. It's not constrained to a gait pattern at all.
There's a true dynamics predictor and planner in there. This is not just a reactive robot, like Brooks' little machines. Nor is it a straightforward ZMP ("zero moment point" [wikipedia.org]) stabilization system, like Asimo. (Think of ZMP as a generalization of center of gravity to include momentum.) There's a planner with a horizon of (I think) about two foot placements ahead, and it has "what if" internal simulation capability. That's why this robot moves so well. It can predict, at least approximately, what's going to happen for its next move, and plans on that basis. That's why its movement are so smooth. Without that, you'
Reaction time (Score:3, Insightful)
I wonder why the reaction time is about the same. Does the dynamics planner take that long to figure out what to do? Are the actuators slow enough so that it can't recover in a blur of leg motion? Or is that just the minimum amount of time stabilization can physically take?
Nah.openoffice (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Roger roger!
- Jesper
Re: (Score:3, Informative)