3 ms·
Smaller platforms are actually harder to build: minimal power budget, weaker drive systems, less sensors, and fewer processing options. Not a fan of bipedal pl
by Joel_Mckay 8mo ago
Smaller platforms are actually harder to build: minimal power budget, weaker drive systems, less sensors, and fewer processing options.
Not a fan of bipedal platforms or 50kg of servos for a number of reasons.
Best regards. =3
- michaelt 8mo agoYes and no. An Aldebaran Nao can fall over with no damage because it’s only 5kg and 58cm. And you can use relatively low power motors, so nobody can lose a finger to crushing in the joints. But you miss out on the benefits of being able to operate in a human centric world - you’ll never get a Nao to climb stairs, open a door, or carry a cup of coffee.
- Joel_Mckay 8mo ago>Nao can fall over with no damage They were overpriced, hard to repair, and the university lab would lose one every few weeks. The consumer grade internal ribbon interconnect harness would usually tear eventually. Those 3kW to 5kW brush-less servos in the biped dance video are often only 12:1 planetary reduction, and are almost certainly backdrivable. As long as the platform has a safe-fall canned pose, than damage should be limited to shear pins in the worst case falls. Fun to see people pushing the design limits. =3