Optimizing Robot Design: Heuristics for Efficient Performance

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the design of robots for specific tasks within a simulation framework, focusing on optimizing performance through the estimation of power requirements and losses. Participants explore various aspects of robot design, including task breakdown, motor sizing, and the impact of different operational conditions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant outlines a systematic approach to estimating the watt-hours required for various robotic tasks, emphasizing the importance of identifying losses in the system.
  • Another participant suggests that designing from scratch and accounting for losses may be preferable to relying on rules of thumb.
  • A participant clarifies that the simulation will involve a large number of robots (200-1000) and that power estimates should be within a factor of 2, avoiding significant errors.
  • Concerns are raised about the lack of consideration for acceleration in the initial design, which is crucial for motor sizing.
  • A proposal is made to create a spreadsheet of sub-jobs with associated costs to facilitate robot design by combining various tasks.
  • Another participant highlights the importance of considering the mass moment of inertia of the robot's components to achieve precise control and execution.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the best approach to robot design, with some advocating for rules of thumb while others prefer a more detailed, customized design process. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the optimal methodology for estimating power needs and accounting for losses.

Contextual Notes

Participants note various factors that could influence power requirements, such as different surfaces for locomotion and the nature of specific tasks, but these considerations remain open for further exploration.

Erik Bethke
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Hello all,

I am designing a lay-person-facing simulation that includes robots performing a broad array of tasks.

I do not want to create magical can-do-anything robots that collapse all work to be performed to a simple abstraction.

Rather, I would like to have relatively dedicated and optimized robots for particular jobs:
Drilling
Digging
Hauling
Smelting
3D printing [of material M, of size x, y, z and speed s]
etc...

I have a background in aerospace engineering and so I can comfortably calculate the theoretical watt-hours to accomplish any of these tasks. What I do not have a lot of experience with is estimating the losses in a robotic system.

My general plan of attack is the following:
1) Identify the job that the robot is expected to perform
2) Break that job down into smaller sub-jobs (e.g. run the manipulator arm for time t, move mass m distance d, etc)
3) Try to identify losses - e.g. wheels in soft sand, atmospheric drag
4) Sum all of these smaller jobs and identifiable losses
5) Have a standard CPU, display & communications black box and make it equivalent to the electronics in a Tesla
6) Now I have some sort of estimate of the total watt-hours to perform the job & controls
7) Then multiply by 2? 3? By 1.25? What is the rule of thumb here?

What am I forgetting to think about?

Are there better rules of thumb rather than a crude blanket across all jobs?

There must be different rules of thumb for sub-tasks such as:
1) locomotion on hard surfaces vs soft surfaces
2) gripping tasks
3) digging & drilling
4) 3d printing
etc...

Another way to look at it perhaps is that when folks go about designing a robot to do a task, how do they size the motors and batteries on paper?

Cheers and thank you,
-Erik
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Instead of thumb rule it is better to design from the scratch and add for the losses
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Oh, I should have added, I am not designing one or two robots.

But will be on the order of 200-1000 specific robots.

It is a software simulation to help solve a larger goal. The errors on the robots power needs if they are within a factor of 2 or so would be fine. I do not want to be off by an order of magnitude.
 
Erik Bethke said:
Another way to look at it perhaps is that when folks go about designing a robot to do a task, how do they size the motors and batteries on paper?
Erik Bethke said:
What am I forgetting to think about?
I don't see acceleration numbers of your loads taken into consideration in your post so far. That is part of sizing the motors (both from a power perspective and speed perspective). It takes a lot more power to do things fast compared to slowly...
 
Last edited:
Acceleration! Thank you - that is a big one.

What do you think about building essentially a spreadsheet of sub-jobs each with their own costing. Then to create a robot I composite the sub tasks...

Crudely:
1) Haul mass for a distance of d meters on level, hard surface, in time t
2) Haul mass for a distance of d meters on inclined, soft sand in time t
3) Grind a mass of substance with a hardness of h, in time t
...
...
?

Robot XYZ does 10x of 1, 3x of 2, and 1x of 3...
 
you have to take into consideration the mass moment of inertia of the links and the servo gear motor rotor inertia ,which rotates the corresponding links
to get fine tuned systems , otherwise the commands and executions will be differ greatly
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
6K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
Replies
7
Views
5K