9 ms·

Walking Truck

134 points by colinmegill 7y ago

retSava 7y ago
> It alternatively bore the name of "CAM", an acronym for "cybernetic anthropomorphous machine" now that's a seriously cool name! The pic makes me think of Strandbeests and derivatives: https://www.strandbeest.com/ https://www.strandbeest.com/
- Hitton 7y ago
  It's the opposite of cool name. Anthropomorphous means resembling human being, this was nothing like human, it was quadruped.
  - Insanity 7y ago
    That just makes it an incorrect name but not necessarily not a cool one. The Death Star isn't a star but the name is cool.
  - PhasmaFelis 7y ago
    It had four limbs that were directly controlled by a human's four limbs. That's a lot more anthropomorphic than any other existing vehicle.
ckastner 7y ago
> The stepping of the robot was controlled by a human operator through foot and hand movements coupled to hydraulic valves. > The walking truck was one of the first technological hardware design applications to incorporate force feed-back to give the operator a feel of what was happening. This might sound primitive in today's autonomy-driven mindset, but in contrast to autonomous robots, this is a technology that could be delivered today (or was already delivered in 1965, according to the article). So if infantry really does need hardware to move stuff from A to B, the 1965 approach -- primitive as it is -- might be the simplest solution.
- icebraining 7y ago
  I'm sure that approach is simpler, but from what I can tell, the (semi?) autonomous technology can also be delivered today: https://www.bostondynamics.com/ls3 https://www.bostondynamics.com/ls3
  - Jaruzel 7y ago
    However, wouldn't the hydraulic + operator version be a) cheaper to develop and b) less complex to build and maintain (useful when deployed) ? I think there is a good case for KISS here.
    - masklinn 7y ago
      KISS is slapping an engine and threads or 4~6 all-terrain wheels on a box.
      - JasonFruit 7y ago
        You've made the same comment twice and I only just now managed to figure out that you meant treads, not threads. I thought you maybe meant some kind of box that could be screwed through the soil...
        masklinn 7y ago
        > You've made the same comment twice and I only just now managed to figure out that you meant treads, not threads. Oh… oops.
        cr0sh 7y ago
        Well... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Screw-propelled_vehicle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Screw-propelled_vehicle
  - ckastner 7y ago
    I thought of that example, too, but thought that it had been cancelled as unsuccessful. Turns out it was cancelled for mainly other reasons. Quoting [1]: "By late 2015, the Marines had put the LS3 into storage because of limitations with the robot including loud noise, challenges in repairing it if it breaks, and how to integrate it into a traditional Marine patrol" [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legged_Squad_Support_System https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legged_Squad_Support_System
PinkMilkshake 7y ago
That thing looks amazing! A similar concept was these walking harvesters https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2pJwDZXasKU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2pJwDZXasKU
- Animats 7y ago
  That was an interesting idea. Deere acquired them, and built a prototype.[1] But Ponsse's approach[2] was more practical. The dual chassis articulated 8-wheel system is unusual but very effective. A big problem with those heavy legged machines is very low road speed. The Ponsse machine is much faster when you aren't in difficult terrain, so you can get it to the job under its own power. Deere copied that and now makes those, too. [1] https://agmetalminer.com/mmwp/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/walking_harvester_large.jpeg https://agmetalminer.com/mmwp/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/wal... [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PE1f1GydafQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PE1f1GydafQ
  - dyyni 7y ago
    One of the advantages of a legged machine is its smaller footprint on the often very vulnerable (at least in boreal forests) forest floor. Wheels and tracks tear and dig into the soil and cause a lot of damage that can take years to heal.
  - DoctorOetker 7y ago
    The Ponsse machine: it would be cool if they could recover the gravitational potential energy of the tree for the cutting operations, say by storing the energy in a flywheel
alex_young 7y ago
Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMGCFLEYakM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMGCFLEYakM The thing looks a little top heavy to me. I wonder if there are airbags :) Also - external hydraulics seems like quite a limitation.
- beardog 7y ago
  Between the old footage (minus the basic color), music, and narration this feels like it could be a scene from the twilight zone or a doctor who episode
bwaine 7y ago
Interesting, perhaps the inspiration behind the walking battle machines[0] in my favourite table top board game "Scythe"[1]. Interesting to see a real life Mech! [0] - http://www.heavymetal.com/news/these-amazing-paintings-raised-1-8-million-for-a-board-game/ http://www.heavymetal.com/news/these-amazing-paintings-raise... [1] - https://stonemaiergames.com/games/scythe/ https://stonemaiergames.com/games/scythe/
t0astbread 7y ago
It had force feedback. Did it have any sort of protection in the case of rapid movement of tge legs?
- cr0sh 7y ago
  I personally don't know if it did - I've never seen any information on operator safety of this machine, though I have read a lot about it and Ralph Mosher over the years. He's also the guy behind the GE Hardiman exoskeleton: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hardiman https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hardiman ...which was another system much like this truck. For that one - and I don't know how true it was - it was said that it could get into a feedback loop that could cause injuries to the user, but it wasn't clear if that was for the entire "suit" or for the mounted arm test assembly (they had built a single arm up to the shoulder and mounted it on a stand to test it separately from the "suit"). GE was heavily into this field of what they called "man amplifiers" - several of the later ones spearheaded by Mosher: http://cyberneticzoo.com/man-amplifiers/1953-g-e-o-man-manipulator-american/ http://cyberneticzoo.com/man-amplifiers/1953-g-e-o-man-manip... http://cyberneticzoo.com/man-amplifiers/1958-9-ge-handyman-ralph-mosher-american/ http://cyberneticzoo.com/man-amplifiers/1958-9-ge-handyman-r... http://cyberneticzoo.com/walking-machines/1962-64-ge-pedipulator-ralph-mosher-american/ http://cyberneticzoo.com/walking-machines/1962-64-ge-pedipul... http://cyberneticzoo.com/man-amplifiers/1965-g-e-lifting-boom-edwin-e-ziegler-ralph-mosher-american/ http://cyberneticzoo.com/man-amplifiers/1965-g-e-lifting-boo... http://cyberneticzoo.com/teleoperators/1969-g-e-man-mate-industrial-manipulators-ralph-mosher-american/ http://cyberneticzoo.com/teleoperators/1969-g-e-man-mate-ind... This was also the same time period as Hughes Aircraft's MOBOT systems - which were meant as remote manipulators for working in nuclear research, underwater repaid, and similar harsh environments: http://cyberneticzoo.com/teleoperators/1959-mobot-1-hughes-aircraft-american/ http://cyberneticzoo.com/teleoperators/1959-mobot-1-hughes-a... http://cyberneticzoo.com/teleoperators/1962-underwater-mobot-hughes-aircraft-american/ http://cyberneticzoo.com/teleoperators/1962-underwater-mobot... http://cyberneticzoo.com/teleoperators/1963c-mobot-hughes-aircraft-american/ http://cyberneticzoo.com/teleoperators/1963c-mobot-hughes-ai... http://cyberneticzoo.com/teleoperators/1964-%e2%80%93-mobot-mark-ii-%e2%80%93-hughes-aircraft-american/ http://cyberneticzoo.com/teleoperators/1964-%e2%80%93-mobot-... What we now know as "ROVs" (and UAVs, UGVs, and other names) all stem from a lot of this research back then (and earlier). Hughes' system was actually kind of innovative; there is a paper you can dig up (in fact, I think it's linked on one of the above articles) that detail how these systems were controlled: They needed to control a lot of various servo and other actuators, but they couldn't use a long cable with tons of wires - they needed the cable to be flexible and not weigh a ton (which is still an issue today). But they didn't have the modern electronics we have today to accomplish it. What they ended up doing was using a synchronized motor-switching system that had two rotary switches driven by synchronous motors on both ends. There was a mechanism in place to keep them "in sync" so that the switch connected on one end would be the same as on the other end. The controller at the transmitter would thus be connected to the proper motor or actuator at the other end, many times a second, and the umbilical only needed a few wires (plus wires for power - which IIRC was AC and served as part of the sync system - plus wires for video feeds). In a way, it was an early form of electro-mechanical multiplexing. It quickly gave way to more electronic methods (likely things more closely resembling serial PPM, used in hobby radio control systems - once reliable transistors became common; while such a thing could have been done with vacuum tubes, it wouldn't have been reliable on such machines and environments) - but reading that paper was an interesting insight on how to do things differently! In fact, it's similar in scope to how Westinghouse did something similar for telemetry monitoring and control back in the 1920s and 30s - and showcased in their "robot" Electro - by using sounds and tuning forks, in a similar was to electrical coherer systems - they could control relays remotely using tones sent down telephone lines. Why Hughes didn't use a similar approach is a mystery - could have been patent reasons, or reliability issues or something of that nature. It's a fascinating period of history in robotics, control theory, computation, and more in my opinion (also at this time, you have a large interest going on in artificial intelligence - such as it was in those years - and deep behind the scenes, there was certain interest in so-called "artificial neurons" - hardware implementations of the McCulloch-Pitts neuron model. At one time, around 1956 IIRC, RCA even made a "frog's retina" model using similar models - when you look at it and how it was wired and works - it really looks like a CNN made of hardware for image recognition...
booleandilemma 7y ago
They look vulnerable to snowspeeders.
- HenryKissinger 7y ago
  That armor's too strong for blasters.
rishabhd 7y ago
Metal Gear? : )
shireboy 7y ago
Discontinued when they realized the enemy could just fly around it’s feet with a tripwire. ;) Inspiration for the AT-AT?
timonoko 7y ago
Why are these walking machines always so slow? I think Neal Stephenson described a skateboard with hundreds of tiny feet, moving faster than wheels on any surface. I want to see that.
- krapp 7y ago
  Progress takes time, and ambulatory motion is a finicky, delicate nightmare that only seems simple in humans and animals thanks to millions of years of evolution. CAM was created in the 1960s[0], but BigDog[1] and other recent Boston Dynamics quadrupeds that aren't designed for human passengers are much faster[2], but still awkward. Also remember these are expensive prototypes designed to test things other than speed. Making them faster only guarantees that they break themselves harder when they run into a wall or trip over a cliff or something. [0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMGCFLEYakM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMGCFLEYakM [1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1czBcnX1Ww https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1czBcnX1Ww [2]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3OKZ_n8QW4w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3OKZ_n8QW4w >I think Neal Stephenson described a skateboard with hundreds of tiny feet, moving faster than wheels on any surface. I want to see that. I am neither Neal Stephenson nor a physicist but I'm pretty sure the friction caused by the increased surface contact of "hundreds of tiny feet" versus wheels would still make the wheels faster and more efficient. Geckos and things can stick to vertical surfaces and move quickly because they're lightweight. Anything capable of sticking to an arbitrary surface and supporting human weight is going to be slow. And if moving downhill, wheels don't really need to do work - gravity does the work. Something with "hundreds of tiny feet" either has to slide or "walk."
  - timonoko 7y ago
    I disagree. Centipedes and other many-legged critters can move very fast. Every leg is just a tiny lightweight thing with its own balanced dynamics, just a part of a wheel basically. First thing that came to my mind is a plastic brush with flexible back. If you move a rollers along the back the bristles extend downwards and move backwards in a walking motion, just like a sea urchin does. Scale that and you have a walking machine moving amazingly fast. Tiny bristles yield and conform to any surface.
globuous 7y ago
The reminds me of this video [1] where the guy builds these out of wood and paper and powers them with wind. Increadible. [1] https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LewVEF2B_pM https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LewVEF2B_pM
dmix 7y ago
I’ve always wondered how much money consultants made off the “cybernetics” buzzword in the 60s and 70s.
- PhasmaFelis 7y ago
  Was it a buzzword at the time? Stuff like this is actually closer to the original definition--very roughly, a system that uses continuous feedback loops to keep itself in a stable, functioning state--than to the way we use the word now.
jonah 7y ago
There was a walking logging machine developed by Finnish company Plustech Oy in the mid-nineties and later bought by John Deere who tried to commercialize it but it didn't meet much success. "[It] was designed with sensitive or by other means harder to reach terrain with minimum impact on the environment in mind." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2pJwDZXasKU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2pJwDZXasKU http://www.theoldrobots.com/Walking-Robot2.html http://www.theoldrobots.com/Walking-Robot2.html http://www.unusuallocomotion.com/pages/museums/museum-of-lusto-in-finland-forest-machinery.html http://www.unusuallocomotion.com/pages/museums/museum-of-lus... (Near the bottom)
- cr0sh 7y ago
  The was also the OSU Adaptive Suspension Vehicle: http://cyberneticzoo.com/walking-machines/1984-osu-asv-adaptive-suspension-vehicle-mcghee-american/ http://cyberneticzoo.com/walking-machines/1984-osu-asv-adapt... https://library.osu.edu/documents/university-archives/subject_files/Adaptive%20Suspension%20Vehicle.pdf https://library.osu.edu/documents/university-archives/subjec...
bischofs 7y ago
Is this better than a Driving Truck?

134 points by colinmegill 7y ago

> It alternatively bore the name of "CAM", an acronym for "cybernetic anthropomorphous machine" now that's a seriously cool name! The pic makes me think of Strandbeests and derivatives: https://www.strandbeest.com/ https://www.strandbeest.com/

Hitton 7y ago
It's the opposite of cool name. Anthropomorphous means resembling human being, this was nothing like human, it was quadruped.
- Insanity 7y ago
  That just makes it an incorrect name but not necessarily not a cool one. The Death Star isn't a star but the name is cool.
- PhasmaFelis 7y ago
  It had four limbs that were directly controlled by a human's four limbs. That's a lot more anthropomorphic than any other existing vehicle.

ckastner 7y ago

> The stepping of the robot was controlled by a human operator through foot and hand movements coupled to hydraulic valves. > The walking truck was one of the first technological hardware design applications to incorporate force feed-back to give the operator a feel of what was happening. This might sound primitive in today's autonomy-driven mindset, but in contrast to autonomous robots, this is a technology that could be delivered today (or was already delivered in 1965, according to the article). So if infantry really does need hardware to move stuff from A to B, the 1965 approach -- primitive as it is -- might be the simplest solution.

icebraining 7y ago
I'm sure that approach is simpler, but from what I can tell, the (semi?) autonomous technology can also be delivered today: https://www.bostondynamics.com/ls3 https://www.bostondynamics.com/ls3
- Jaruzel 7y ago
  However, wouldn't the hydraulic + operator version be a) cheaper to develop and b) less complex to build and maintain (useful when deployed) ? I think there is a good case for KISS here.
  - masklinn 7y ago
    KISS is slapping an engine and threads or 4~6 all-terrain wheels on a box.
    - JasonFruit 7y ago
      You've made the same comment twice and I only just now managed to figure out that you meant treads, not threads. I thought you maybe meant some kind of box that could be screwed through the soil...
      - masklinn 7y ago
        > You've made the same comment twice and I only just now managed to figure out that you meant treads, not threads. Oh… oops.
      - cr0sh 7y ago
        Well... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Screw-propelled_vehicle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Screw-propelled_vehicle
- ckastner 7y ago
  I thought of that example, too, but thought that it had been cancelled as unsuccessful. Turns out it was cancelled for mainly other reasons. Quoting [1]: "By late 2015, the Marines had put the LS3 into storage because of limitations with the robot including loud noise, challenges in repairing it if it breaks, and how to integrate it into a traditional Marine patrol" [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legged_Squad_Support_System https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legged_Squad_Support_System

PinkMilkshake 7y ago

That thing looks amazing! A similar concept was these walking harvesters https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2pJwDZXasKU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2pJwDZXasKU

Animats 7y ago
That was an interesting idea. Deere acquired them, and built a prototype.[1] But Ponsse's approach[2] was more practical. The dual chassis articulated 8-wheel system is unusual but very effective. A big problem with those heavy legged machines is very low road speed. The Ponsse machine is much faster when you aren't in difficult terrain, so you can get it to the job under its own power. Deere copied that and now makes those, too. [1] https://agmetalminer.com/mmwp/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/walking_harvester_large.jpeg https://agmetalminer.com/mmwp/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/wal... [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PE1f1GydafQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PE1f1GydafQ
- dyyni 7y ago
  One of the advantages of a legged machine is its smaller footprint on the often very vulnerable (at least in boreal forests) forest floor. Wheels and tracks tear and dig into the soil and cause a lot of damage that can take years to heal.
- DoctorOetker 7y ago
  The Ponsse machine: it would be cool if they could recover the gravitational potential energy of the tree for the cutting operations, say by storing the energy in a flywheel

alex_young 7y ago

Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMGCFLEYakM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMGCFLEYakM The thing looks a little top heavy to me. I wonder if there are airbags :) Also - external hydraulics seems like quite a limitation.

beardog 7y ago
Between the old footage (minus the basic color), music, and narration this feels like it could be a scene from the twilight zone or a doctor who episode

bwaine 7y ago

Interesting, perhaps the inspiration behind the walking battle machines[0] in my favourite table top board game "Scythe"[1]. Interesting to see a real life Mech! [0] - http://www.heavymetal.com/news/these-amazing-paintings-raised-1-8-million-for-a-board-game/ http://www.heavymetal.com/news/these-amazing-paintings-raise... [1] - https://stonemaiergames.com/games/scythe/ https://stonemaiergames.com/games/scythe/

t0astbread 7y ago

It had force feedback. Did it have any sort of protection in the case of rapid movement of tge legs?

cr0sh 7y ago
I personally don't know if it did - I've never seen any information on operator safety of this machine, though I have read a lot about it and Ralph Mosher over the years. He's also the guy behind the GE Hardiman exoskeleton: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hardiman https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hardiman ...which was another system much like this truck. For that one - and I don't know how true it was - it was said that it could get into a feedback loop that could cause injuries to the user, but it wasn't clear if that was for the entire "suit" or for the mounted arm test assembly (they had built a single arm up to the shoulder and mounted it on a stand to test it separately from the "suit"). GE was heavily into this field of what they called "man amplifiers" - several of the later ones spearheaded by Mosher: http://cyberneticzoo.com/man-amplifiers/1953-g-e-o-man-manipulator-american/ http://cyberneticzoo.com/man-amplifiers/1953-g-e-o-man-manip... http://cyberneticzoo.com/man-amplifiers/1958-9-ge-handyman-ralph-mosher-american/ http://cyberneticzoo.com/man-amplifiers/1958-9-ge-handyman-r... http://cyberneticzoo.com/walking-machines/1962-64-ge-pedipulator-ralph-mosher-american/ http://cyberneticzoo.com/walking-machines/1962-64-ge-pedipul... http://cyberneticzoo.com/man-amplifiers/1965-g-e-lifting-boom-edwin-e-ziegler-ralph-mosher-american/ http://cyberneticzoo.com/man-amplifiers/1965-g-e-lifting-boo... http://cyberneticzoo.com/teleoperators/1969-g-e-man-mate-industrial-manipulators-ralph-mosher-american/ http://cyberneticzoo.com/teleoperators/1969-g-e-man-mate-ind... This was also the same time period as Hughes Aircraft's MOBOT systems - which were meant as remote manipulators for working in nuclear research, underwater repaid, and similar harsh environments: http://cyberneticzoo.com/teleoperators/1959-mobot-1-hughes-aircraft-american/ http://cyberneticzoo.com/teleoperators/1959-mobot-1-hughes-a... http://cyberneticzoo.com/teleoperators/1962-underwater-mobot-hughes-aircraft-american/ http://cyberneticzoo.com/teleoperators/1962-underwater-mobot... http://cyberneticzoo.com/teleoperators/1963c-mobot-hughes-aircraft-american/ http://cyberneticzoo.com/teleoperators/1963c-mobot-hughes-ai... http://cyberneticzoo.com/teleoperators/1964-%e2%80%93-mobot-mark-ii-%e2%80%93-hughes-aircraft-american/ http://cyberneticzoo.com/teleoperators/1964-%e2%80%93-mobot-... What we now know as "ROVs" (and UAVs, UGVs, and other names) all stem from a lot of this research back then (and earlier). Hughes' system was actually kind of innovative; there is a paper you can dig up (in fact, I think it's linked on one of the above articles) that detail how these systems were controlled: They needed to control a lot of various servo and other actuators, but they couldn't use a long cable with tons of wires - they needed the cable to be flexible and not weigh a ton (which is still an issue today). But they didn't have the modern electronics we have today to accomplish it. What they ended up doing was using a synchronized motor-switching system that had two rotary switches driven by synchronous motors on both ends. There was a mechanism in place to keep them "in sync" so that the switch connected on one end would be the same as on the other end. The controller at the transmitter would thus be connected to the proper motor or actuator at the other end, many times a second, and the umbilical only needed a few wires (plus wires for power - which IIRC was AC and served as part of the sync system - plus wires for video feeds). In a way, it was an early form of electro-mechanical multiplexing. It quickly gave way to more electronic methods (likely things more closely resembling serial PPM, used in hobby radio control systems - once reliable transistors became common; while such a thing could have been done with vacuum tubes, it wouldn't have been reliable on such machines and environments) - but reading that paper was an interesting insight on how to do things differently! In fact, it's similar in scope to how Westinghouse did something similar for telemetry monitoring and control back in the 1920s and 30s - and showcased in their "robot" Electro - by using sounds and tuning forks, in a similar was to electrical coherer systems - they could control relays remotely using tones sent down telephone lines. Why Hughes didn't use a similar approach is a mystery - could have been patent reasons, or reliability issues or something of that nature. It's a fascinating period of history in robotics, control theory, computation, and more in my opinion (also at this time, you have a large interest going on in artificial intelligence - such as it was in those years - and deep behind the scenes, there was certain interest in so-called "artificial neurons" - hardware implementations of the McCulloch-Pitts neuron model. At one time, around 1956 IIRC, RCA even made a "frog's retina" model using similar models - when you look at it and how it was wired and works - it really looks like a CNN made of hardware for image recognition...

booleandilemma 7y ago

They look vulnerable to snowspeeders.

HenryKissinger 7y ago
That armor's too strong for blasters.

rishabhd 7y ago

Metal Gear? : )

shireboy 7y ago

Discontinued when they realized the enemy could just fly around it’s feet with a tripwire. ;) Inspiration for the AT-AT?

timonoko 7y ago

Why are these walking machines always so slow? I think Neal Stephenson described a skateboard with hundreds of tiny feet, moving faster than wheels on any surface. I want to see that.

krapp 7y ago
Progress takes time, and ambulatory motion is a finicky, delicate nightmare that only seems simple in humans and animals thanks to millions of years of evolution. CAM was created in the 1960s[0], but BigDog[1] and other recent Boston Dynamics quadrupeds that aren't designed for human passengers are much faster[2], but still awkward. Also remember these are expensive prototypes designed to test things other than speed. Making them faster only guarantees that they break themselves harder when they run into a wall or trip over a cliff or something. [0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMGCFLEYakM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMGCFLEYakM [1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1czBcnX1Ww https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1czBcnX1Ww [2]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3OKZ_n8QW4w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3OKZ_n8QW4w >I think Neal Stephenson described a skateboard with hundreds of tiny feet, moving faster than wheels on any surface. I want to see that. I am neither Neal Stephenson nor a physicist but I'm pretty sure the friction caused by the increased surface contact of "hundreds of tiny feet" versus wheels would still make the wheels faster and more efficient. Geckos and things can stick to vertical surfaces and move quickly because they're lightweight. Anything capable of sticking to an arbitrary surface and supporting human weight is going to be slow. And if moving downhill, wheels don't really need to do work - gravity does the work. Something with "hundreds of tiny feet" either has to slide or "walk."
- timonoko 7y ago
  I disagree. Centipedes and other many-legged critters can move very fast. Every leg is just a tiny lightweight thing with its own balanced dynamics, just a part of a wheel basically. First thing that came to my mind is a plastic brush with flexible back. If you move a rollers along the back the bristles extend downwards and move backwards in a walking motion, just like a sea urchin does. Scale that and you have a walking machine moving amazingly fast. Tiny bristles yield and conform to any surface.

globuous 7y ago

The reminds me of this video [1] where the guy builds these out of wood and paper and powers them with wind. Increadible. [1] https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LewVEF2B_pM https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LewVEF2B_pM

dmix 7y ago

I’ve always wondered how much money consultants made off the “cybernetics” buzzword in the 60s and 70s.

PhasmaFelis 7y ago
Was it a buzzword at the time? Stuff like this is actually closer to the original definition--very roughly, a system that uses continuous feedback loops to keep itself in a stable, functioning state--than to the way we use the word now.

jonah 7y ago

There was a walking logging machine developed by Finnish company Plustech Oy in the mid-nineties and later bought by John Deere who tried to commercialize it but it didn't meet much success. "[It] was designed with sensitive or by other means harder to reach terrain with minimum impact on the environment in mind." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2pJwDZXasKU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2pJwDZXasKU http://www.theoldrobots.com/Walking-Robot2.html http://www.theoldrobots.com/Walking-Robot2.html http://www.unusuallocomotion.com/pages/museums/museum-of-lusto-in-finland-forest-machinery.html http://www.unusuallocomotion.com/pages/museums/museum-of-lus... (Near the bottom)

cr0sh 7y ago
The was also the OSU Adaptive Suspension Vehicle: http://cyberneticzoo.com/walking-machines/1984-osu-asv-adaptive-suspension-vehicle-mcghee-american/ http://cyberneticzoo.com/walking-machines/1984-osu-asv-adapt... https://library.osu.edu/documents/university-archives/subject_files/Adaptive%20Suspension%20Vehicle.pdf https://library.osu.edu/documents/university-archives/subjec...

bischofs 7y ago

Is this better than a Driving Truck?