🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <9934@pt.cs.cmu.edu> gerry@cive.ri.cmu.edu (Gerry Roston) writes:
>In his post, Chuck states that we have a hard time teaching 
>robots to do things we do easily.  This is true.  However,
>those things which we do well were DESIGNED such that we can
>do them well.  The same applies to robots.  A succesfull design
>for a space station, etc, will be one which will allow robots
>to assemble/repair it.

Fair enough, care to postulate some new designs that are easier for
robots. Like, what about fastener technology? Currently robots 
can weld ok (when the robot base is fixed, we also have to assume 
a robot in a floating frame of reference) Bolts? Screws? 
New Adhesives ? Brazing supplies?

Let's suppose we have a construction model as follows :
	Booster A lifts into LEO a "bundle" of building materials.
	These materials are to be unpacked and assembled by a robot
	in orbit. The job of the robot is to locate, match orbits
	with the bundle. Then unpack it and assemble the final
	component. It must retain and eventually dispose of any
	packing material. (Tossing it over its shoulder may be
	viable if this put it into a decaying orbit, plus the
	robot may wish to use the reaction mass of the packing
	material to boost its orbit slightly)

As a good leveraging experiment analyze the engineering hurdles to
having a robot that can approach a "bundle" of materials and assemble
it. Can you design it such that it would fit in a shuttle bay? In one
of the experimenter pods (The "fly away" specials?) Anyway, can
we propose such a paper design?

--
--Chuck McManis						    Sun Microsystems
uucp: {anywhere}!sun!cmcmanis   BIX: <none>   Internet: cmcmanis@Eng.Sun.COM
These opinions are my own and no one elses, but you knew that didn't you.
"I tell you this parrot is bleeding deceased!"