Question: iTulip Engineering Division

[don]

Is the human shape of this NASA robot more PR or actual engineering efficiency?

[c1ue]

Re: Question: iTulip Engineering Division

From a hardware perspective - there is very little benefit to the human shape.

From a software perspective, though, it is extremely challenging to train a non-human analogue robot into doing tasks otherwise performed by humans. How would you adaptively train a cuttlefish-shaped robot? In many ways a cuttlefish is far more adaptable towards space and also has dexterity.

However, keep in mind what NASA is looking for is a highly flexible robot as an adjunct to an extra astronaut. Due to lift costs, even a multimillion dollar robot may actually be more cost effective since life support overhead is not necessary and astronauts require millions of dollars in training anyway.

From a manufacturing perspective - I very much doubt that the extremely high cost of a highly versatile robot is worthwhile for replacing specific automotive assembly tasks even discounting against retirement and health care benefits. The robots already in use are good examples of what is practical.

[flintlock]

Re: Question: iTulip Engineering Division

More engineering masturbation with your tax dollars.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/space/201004...tralianoutback

[RebbePete]

Re: Question: iTulip Engineering Division

The benefit of the human form is that it can use human tools and can fit in spaces designed for human beings. Very important for working alongside astronauts.

A bigger question is how autonomous this demo really was. When the camera zooms out to show the engineer at the console, it looks like the engineer might be "driving" the robot.

The weight lifting capability, combined with its agility, in such a small package, is very impressive. Industrial robots can be much stronger, but the hyraulics are located separately, and add quite a bit of size and weight to them.

It's a step forward, but I wouldn't call it a "giant leap" yet.

- Pete