Servo2008 06

V
o
l
.

6

N
o
.

6
S
E
R
V
O
M
A
G
A
Z
I
N
E
L
O
K
I
R
O
B
O
E
X
O
T
I
C
A
S
O
N
A
R

S
Y
S
T
E
M
K
U
K
A

A
I
R

H
O
C
K
E
Y
J
U
N
U
N
.
O
R
G

M
A
R
K

I
I
I
J
u
n
e

2
0
0
8
Cover.qxd 4/29/2008 10:23 PM Page 1
Let your geek shine.
Meet Leah Buechley, developer of LilyPada
sew-able microcontrollerand fellow geek. Leah
used SparkFun products and services while she
developed her LilyPad prototype.
The tools are out there, from LEDs to conductive
thread, tutorials to affordable PCB fabrication,
and of course Leahs LilyPad. Find the resources
you need to let your geek shine too.
2008 SparkFun Electronics, Inc. All rights reserved.
Sharing Ingenuity
S P A R K F U N. C OM
Full Page.qxd 3/5/2008 4:10 PM Page 2
Features
22 BUILD REPORT
Building Out of the Box:
The Story of Herald
26 MANUFACTURING
Milling: Part 2
32 PARTS IS PARTS
Attaching Foam Wheels to
Manufactured Hubs
Events
28 Results and Upcoming Competitions
29 EVENT REPORT: Saskatoon Combat
Robotics Club Kilobots XII
Robot Profile
31 Solaris
Columns
08
Robytes by Jeff Eckert
Stimulating Robot Tidbits
11
GeerHead by David Geer
Kuka Robot Plays Air Hockey
14
Ask Mr. Roboto by Dennis Clark
Your Problems Solved Here
62
Robotics Resources
by Gordon McComb
What You Need to Know About
Radio Control Servo Motors
70
Appetizer
by David Calkins
What the Heck is a Robot, Anyway?
72
Appetizer
by Andrew Horsman, age 13
My Experience as a Young FIRSTer
and Robot Hobbyist
77
Then and Now by Tom Carroll
Books on Experimental Robotics
PAGE 11
4 SERVO 06.2008
This Month In
THE COMBAT ZONE ...
TOC Jun08.qxd 4/30/2008 2:29 PM Page 4
06.2008
VOL. 6 NO. 6
SERVO 06.2008 5
34 RoboExotica
by Simone Davalos
RoboExotica celebrates the finer
things in life with robots that make
cocktails, provide bar conversation,
light cigarettes, and deliver snacks.
38 Designing and Building a
Robot From Scratch
by Brian Benson
In this last installment, robot
construction is completed.
42 Building a Sonar System
by Fred Eady
Ultrasonic ranging is a great way to
add eyes to your bot. Discover this
of f-the-shelf solution.
50 Loki Crosses the Pond
Part 1
by Alan Marconett
Build this unique biped that has an
unusual center of gravity that makes
for some outrageous postures.
58 BasicBoard Robotics
by William Smith
OEM module robotic platform.
SERVO Magazine (ISSN 1546-0592/CDN Pub Agree#40702530) is published
monthly for $24.95 per year by T & L Publications, Inc., 430 Princeland Court, Corona,
CA 92879. PERIODICALS POSTAGE PAID AT CORONA, CA AND AT ADDITION-
AL ENTRY MAILING OFFICES. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to SERVO
Magazine, P.O. Box 15277, North Hollywood, CA 91615 or Station
A, P.O. Box 54, Windsor ON N9A 6J5; cpcreturns@servomagazine.com
06 Mind/Iron
18 Events Calendar
20 New Products
56 Robotics Showcase
67 SERVO Webstore
76 Robo-Links
81 Advertisers Index
PAGE 42
PAGE 58
Features & Projects
Departments
TOC Jun08.qxd 4/30/2008 2:30 PM Page 5
Published Monthly By
T & L Publications, Inc.
430 Princeland Court
Corona, CA 92879-1300
(951) 371-8497
FAX (951) 371-3052
Webstore Only 1-800-783-4624
www.servomagazine.com
Subscriptions
Toll Free 1-877-525-2539
Outside US 1-818-487-4545
P.O. Box 15277
North Hollywood, CA 91615
PUBLISHER
Larry Lemieux
publisher@servomagazine.com
ASSOCIATE PUBLISHER/
VP OF SALES/MARKETING
Robin Lemieux
display@servomagazine.com
EDITOR
Bryan Bergeron
techedit-servo@yahoo.com
CONTRIBUTING EDITORS
Jeff Eckert Tom Carroll
Gordon McComb David Geer
Dennis Clark R. Steven Rainwater
Fred Eady Kevin Berry
Brian Benson Simone Davalos
Alan Marconett David Calkins
James Baker Kurtis Wanner
William Smith
CIRCULATION DIRECTOR
Tracy Kerley
subscribe@servomagazine.com
MARKETING COORDINATOR
WEBSTORE
Brian Kirkpatrick
sales@servomagazine.com
WEB CONTENT
Michael Kaudze
website@servomagazine.com
PRODUCTION/GRAPHICS
Shannon Lemieux
Joe Keungmanivong
ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT
Debbie Stauffacher
Copyright 2008 by
T & L Publications, Inc.
All Rights Reserved
All advertising is subject to publishers approval.
We are not responsible for mistakes, misprints,
or typographical errors. SERVO Magazine
assumes no responsibility for the availability or
condition of advertised items or for the honesty
of the advertiser. The publisher makes no claims
for the legality of any item advertised in SERVO.
This is the sole responsibility of the advertiser.
Advertisers and their agencies agree to
indemnify and protect the publisher from any
and all claims, action, or expense arising from
advertising placed in SERVO. Please send all
editorial correspondence, UPS, overnight mail,
and artwork to: 430 Princeland Court,
Corona, CA 92879.
A Push for FIRST
An impossible deadline, a box of
stuff, a steep learning curve, and a
public competition the stuff
engineers are made of awaits high
school teams world-over in the annual
FIRST Robotics Competition. The
high-profile, adrenaline-charged FIRST
(For Inspiration and Recognition
of Science and Technology) is the
nonprofit organization designed to
inspire youth to become science and
technology leaders (www.usfirst.
com). By all accounts, FIRST is working,
with over 37,000 high school students
involved last year.
The challenges facing the teams in
2009 will be significantly different from
those facing teams in previous years,
thanks to an infusion of capital,
technical mentoring, and advanced
hardware and software technology
from generous vendors and
institutions. At the center of the push
is National Instruments, joined by
Analog Devices, Boston Engineering,
ChipX, Dove Electronics, Freescale, MSI,
Texas Instruments, TTI, Westak, Wind
River, Worcester Polytechnic Institute,
and Xilinx.
FIRST teams opening the box of
stuff for the 2009 competition will
find a new, high-end controller and
a matching, ruggedized aluminum
frame from National Instruments
(www.ni.com). The controller is a
National Instruments CompactRIO,
a ruggedized, reconfigurable
programmable automation
controller, shown in Figure 1. As Ray
Almgren, VP of Product Marketing
and Academic Relations, described
the controller to me, its about the
size of a box of Velveeta cheese.
At nearly four pounds, the controller
isnt a replacement for that PIC or
BASIC Stamp in your carpet rover. Its
intended to be used on a 100+ pound
competition robot that destined to
occasionally crash into other robots
in the event.
Theres a lot of power packed into
the modular, expandable controller,
including a 32-bit, 400 MHz Freescale
MPC5200, programmable FPGA-based
I/O, 802.11 wireless Ethernet, the
Wind River VxWorks real-time
operating system, and hot-swappable
I/O modules. Each I/O module is
connected directly to the FPGA,
providing low-level customization of
timing and I/O signal processing. In
addition, the FPGA is connected to the
embedded real-time processor via a
high-speed PCI bus. You can review
the full specifications at www.ni.com/
compactrio.
Programming a FPGA can be a
daunting task for seasoned engineers,
much less high school students with
only a few weeks to master the
technology. Fortunately, the FPGA and
MC5200 can be programmed in the NI
LabVIEW graphical programming
language, as well as ANSI C. If youve
worked with the LEGO Mindstorm NXT,
then youre familiar with the icon-based
LabVIEW programming language. The
Mind / Iron
by Bryan Bergeron, Editor
Mind/Iron Continued
6 SERVO 06.2008
FIGURE 1. Eight-bay
CompactRIO Controller.
Mind-Iron Jun08.qxd 4/30/2008 7:53 AM Page 6
language is largely responsible for the success of the NXT
in the non-engineering market. My only complaint with
the language which Ive used for years is that it really
demands a lot of screen real estate. A 20 LCD screen can
display only so many icons without scrolling or collapsing
some. As a testament to the capabilities of the hardware
and software, Virginia Tech used the LabVIEW-programmed
CompactRIO for a third-place showing in the DARPA Urban
Challenge (www.me.vt.edu/
urbanchallenge). Virginia Techs
2005 Ford Hybrid Escape won
$500,000 for autonomously
navigating the 60 mile urban course,
behind Carnegie Mellon University
and second-place finisher Stanford
University.
What this means is that students
in the FIRST competition will no
longer be limited to a clumsy,
hopeless showing in the autonomous
component of the competition. Armed with the new software
and hardware, theyll be able to use sophisticated, real-time
image processing. Furthermore, because teams can use the
high-level, graphical LabVIEW programming environment,
they should be able to achieve more in less time. Again,
referencing the Virginia Tech experience, the team was able
to come in only seven minutes behind Stanford Universitys
entry in the DARPA Challenge, even though there were no
programmers on the Virginia Tech team.
So, whats the cost for this new push? The CompactRIO
controller is a standard product available from National
Instruments for about $1,500 retail. However, because of the
generosity of National Instruments and the suppliers of
components for the CompactRIO, the cost for teams will be
significantly less. Still too steep for your high school? If so,
FIRST competitors will also have a
new platform based on the LEGO
Mindstorm NXT and a ruggedized
metal platform.
The technological push behind
FIRST will likely have repercussions
beyond the mentors and students
involved in the competition. With
thousands of students developing
LabVIEW routines and sensor
assemblies, Darwinian selection will
identify what works and what
doesnt. Whether this move by the industry is equivalent to
the introduction of the Macintosh in a PC-dominated market
remains to be seen. However, Id say the chances are
good that youll be seeing numerous how-to articles in SERVO
on how to best take advantage of this next generation of
hardware and software platform available to the robotics
community. SV
HE8EJIFH;<;H>?J;9)0'
The results of an informal poll taken recently at the First
Annual World Domination Symposium are now in. Robots
prefer Hitec servos 3:1 over other servo brands. They know the wide
selection of Hitec analog and digital servos provide them with the power and depend-
ability needed to eventually take over the World. Make your robot happy, use Hitec servos.
12115 Paine Street | Poway | California | 92064 | 858-748-6948 | www.hitecrcd.com
>_j[Y
Ej^[h8hWdZ
.EW2OBOT3ERVOS
HSR-5980SG
Speed: 0.14 sec
Torque: 417 oz/in
Steel Gears
HSR-5498SG
Speed: 0.19 sec
Torque: 187 oz/in
Steel Gears
HSR-5990TG
Speed: 0.14 sec
Torque: 417 oz/in
Titanium
ALL SPECFCATONS AT 7.4 VOLTS
SERVO 06.2008 7
FIGURE 2. Controller
on chassis.
Mind-Iron Jun08.qxd 4/30/2008 7:54 AM Page 7
8 SERVO 06.2008
Prof Envisions Bot Threat
Prof. Noel Sharkey is not exactly
a silent, plodding evil genius, toiling
away somewhere in an obscure lab.
In fact, the rather colorful guy
appears regularly on TV (about 300
appearances so far) and radio, and
in a range of publications. But he is
also among other things a
Professor of AI and Robotics at the
University of Sheffield (www.shef
field.ac.uk) and has an impressive
string of academic abbreviations after
his name. It is therefore worth noting
that, in a keynote address to the
Royal United Services Institute (RUSI),
he recently opined that terrorists
may soon get a clue and replace
suicide bombers with robots. The
threat is largely a by-product of
military research in the field,
occurring not only in the USA but in
Canada, South Korea, South Africa,
Singapore, Israel, China, Russia, and
India, as well.
According to Sharkey, With the
current prices of robot construction
falling dramatically and the availability
of ready-made components for the
amateur market, it wouldnt require a
lot of skill to make autonomous robot
weapons. He further pointed out
that a small GPS-guided drone can be
built for approx. $500. It seems
clear, he continued, that there is an
urgent need for the international
community to assess the risks of
these new weapons now rather than
after they have crept their way into
common use. Not a bad idea when
you think about it.
Batplane Program Begins
It doesnt actually exist yet, and
the accompanying illustration is an
artists rendition, but the US Army
has awarded the University of
Michigan College of Engineering
(www.engin.umich.edu) $10
million to develop the
microelectronics for a new,
compact robotic spy plane.
The grant can be extended by
another five years and $12.5
million at the Armys option.
U-M will develop sensors,
communication tools, and
batteries for this micro-aerial
vehicle, dubbed the bat. The
concept includes tiny cameras
for stereo vision, a micro-
phone array that can home in
on sounds from different
directions, and detectors
for nuclear radiation and
poisonous gases. Low-power
radar and a sensitive navigation
system will help the bat find its way
at night, and it will be able to
scavenge energy from solar,
wind, vibration and other sources
(presumably excluding insects) to
recharge its lithium battery. Collected
data will be radioed back to the
home base, making it particularly
useful for short-term surveillance in
support of advancing soldiers.
U-M also gets this months
Bloated, Labyrinthine Acronyms for
Hype (BLAH) award. The program
goes by the name of Center for
Objective Microelectronics and
Biomimetic Advanced Technology
(yes, COM-BAT).
Remote Remote Control
Its still under development, but
Toshiba (www.toshiba.co.jp)
researchers have provided a sneak
preview of ApriPoko, which is
basically a remote remote control for
TVs, stereos, and other electronic
systems. According to various reports,
ApriPoko sits and listens for infrared
signals emitted by standard remotes.
When one is detected, he inquires,
What did you just do? You
might answer, turned on the TV,
changed to the adult channel, or
Noel Sharkey presenting the Bright Sparks
TV series for BBC in N. Ireland.
Engineers envision a six-inch robotic
spy plane modeled after a bat.
Photo courtesy of Eric Maslowski,
University of Michigan 3D Lab.
Toshibas ApriPoko bot.
Photo courtesy of Toshiba Corp.
by Jeff Eckert
Robytes.qxd 4/29/2008 7:50 AM Page 8
TASERed the dog. He then stores
that information, remembers the
proper signal, and stands ready
to repeat the operation on your
command. He simply waves his little
transmitter arm at the proper device
and engages it. ApriPoko is also said
to possess a camera with which he
can identify particular users. Details
are scarce, but he stands about 11
in (27 cm) tall and weighs 5 lbs
(2.3 kg). Perfect for couch potatoes
everywhere.
Laser-Activated Fetchbot
In 2005, Georgia Tech and
Emory University got together to
create the Health Systems Institute
(www.hsi.gatech.edu), within which
lives the Center for Healthcare
Robotics. Center Director Charlie
Kemp and other researchers recently
demonstrated El-e (pronounced
Ellie), a one-armed contraption that
in addition to having obvious
appeal to Barkalounger jockeys
everywhere may turn out to be a
great thing for people with severe
mobility problems. It is designed to
help users with everyday tasks such
as fetching towels, pill bottles,
telephones, etc. Most interesting is
El-es user interface system. Rather
than grappling with a complex control
system based on speech recognition or
body language, the bot is controlled
using a green laser pointer. You simply
illuminate the desired object, and the
robot uses a stereo pan/tilt camera to
analyze the situation, pick up the
object, and deliver it to a nearby
human or, if you prefer, place it on a
nearby table. The team is now working
to expand El-es capabilities to include
operating light switches and opening
and closing doors.
Stickybot Features Advanced
Adhesive
Its actually been around since
April 2005, but Stickybot a product
of the Stanford University Robotics
in Scansorial Environments (RiSE)
project continues to be improved
and refined. Several interesting videos
have been made available for
download at bdml.stanford.edu/
RiSE/Downloads, and a related
technical paper (as of this writing)
was slated for presentation at the
recent IEEE International
Conference on Robotics
and Automation (ICRA).
Inspired by geckos, the
creepy crawler is operated
by 12 servo motors and
driven by a PIC controller
with force sensors. The
novel feature is its feet,
which cling to smooth sur-
faces such as glass, acrylic,
granite, and ceramic tile
using a special directional
dry adhesive. Unlike normal
sticky things (e.g., tape),
it requires a very small
preload to adhere, and
you detach it by reducing
the load. Planned
enhancements include
adding a degree of freedom at the
ankles, allowing the rear feet to
rotate for better orientation, and the
addition of an active tail.
UAVs over Antarctica
In March, the British Antarctic
Survey (BAS, www.antarctica.ac.uk)
announced completion of the first ever
series of autonomous UAV flights over
Antarctica. In collaboration with the
Technical University of Braunschweig
(Germany), four of the aircraft
completed a total of 20 flights,
including four over the Weddell Sea.
It gets down to about
-50C (-58F) along the coast, which
is definitely cold enough to freeze
your braunschweiger. Apparently, the
sea freezes and turns white during
the winter, reflects heat, and at least
to some extent helps cool the planet.
To provide a better understanding of
how that works, the UAVs were fitted
with instruments to record the heat
exchange between sea ice and the
lower atmosphere.
The flights lasted for about 40
min, covered 45 km, and collected
100 measurements per second. Each
bird has a wingspan of 2 m, weighs
6 kg, and is powered by a lithium-ion
polymer battery pack. Takeoff and
Robyt es
Researcher Charlie Kemp accepts a towel
from El-e. Photo courtesy of HSI.
Stickybot uses directional adhesive
to cling to smooth surfaces. Photo
courtesy of Biomimetics Dexterous
Manipulation Laboratory.
SERVO 06.2008 9
landing are under radio control, but
the rest of the flight is autonomous.
Major hurdles included figuring out
how to keep the batteries operating
in the extremely cold temperatures
and how to operate the little joystick
while wearing thick mittens. BAS
scientists see this as a great way to
study remote areas that cannot be
reached efficiently by ships or
manned aircraft. According to a
representative, UAVs allow scientists
to reach the parts others cannot
reach the future of much
atmospheric research will be robotic.
Robot-Generated Manifestos
According to World Robotics
(www.worldrobotics.org), 951,000
industrial robots were at work as of
2007, but relatively few of us common
folks get a chance to see and interact
with them in an up-close and personal
way. This annoys Germanys Robotlab
(www.robotlab.de) tech artists, so
their manifesto is to create creative,
experimental exhibitions in public places.
In this way, the bots appearance,
movements, and sounds can be
interpreted individually by the viewer
and evoke ideas which may lay in the
field of practical purposes, as well as
formulate a Utopian image of a future
culture with man and machine.
Toward that end, Robotlab recently
programmed a Kuka unit to write
its own manifestos, which consist
of eight autonomously generated
statements followed by a serial number/
signature. Because the machine draws
words at random out of an internal
information pool and drops them into
a sentence structure, they make even
less sense than Robotlabs aforemen-
tioned expression of purpose. The
statements are written in German,
but a few loose translations are: The
apparatus becomes the composition,
which makes a shift. The sublimation
is subjective. From the chip comes
out data flow, pouring into the
collage. Sauerkraut drips into
Immanuel Kants lederhosen, making
him sterile. Okay, I made up the last
one myself, but its pretty good. SV
Robyt es
10 SERVO 06.2008
A Kuka industrial robot takes a
whack at generating philosophy.
Photo courtesy of Robotlab.
UAV ready to begin an Antarctic mission.
Photo courtesy of British Antarctic Survey.
E
nabling an industrial robot in
this case, the KUKA KR3 to
play air hockey solves some of
the same problems faced when trying
to make it pick up moving parts. The
robot has to identify the moving puck
and direct its arm to meet it where it
is before it moves again.
The project team used an
industrial KUKA KR3 six-axis articulated
robot, which they inverted above one
side of an air hockey table, according
to Dr. Adam Stienecker, assistant
professor, Technological Studies, Ohio
Northern University. The robot can
move up to 3 kilograms at a time
while maintaining its maximum speed
of movement.
Puck Striker
The robot moves its arm at
speeds up to two meters per second.
This is still not fast enough to
compete with a human opponent,
who strikes the puck at a faster
rate. In order for the robot to strike
the puck with equal speed, the
team engineered a mechanical
puck striker and added that to the
robotic arm.
The team designed the puck
striker in CATIA V5, an advanced 3D
CAD modeling program. Then, they
printed (formed) the striker in a rapid
prototype 3D printer. This kind of
printer forms the actual part out of
ABS plastic. To do this, it melts narrow
strings of the plastic and layers them
one at a time, similar to how a 2D
printer puts ink on paper, according
to Dr. Stienecker. The machine adds
layer after layer to the part
using the printer until the
part is formed.
The striker moves four
spring-loaded disc quarters
out in all four directions
by striking them with a
cam. The cam attaches
to a motor powered
shaft. According to Dr.
Stienecker, the cam
(protrusion) sticks out
from the shaft and hits a
mating piece on each disc
quarter, pushing it outward
as the shaft rotates. A
spring return brings each
disc quarter quickly back
to its original position so
that the cam can strike it
again. The cam pushes
each disc quarter out
about three to five times
per second.
The diameter of the
striker is 100 mm, like
the striker in the human
opponents hand. This is to
ensure that the robot gains
no special advantage.
Air Hockey Table
Side Rails, Puck
Return System
Medium Density Fiberboard (MDF)
Contact the author at geercom@alltel.net by David Geer
Kuka Robot Plays Air Hockey
Students from the Department of Technological Studies at Ohio Northern University
found a fun, creative way to solve an industrial robotics problem: How can a robot pick
parts from a bin if the parts are in motion? Answer: The same way it can play air hockey.
Air hockey robot with Kuka robot, table, and
system, built by the Department of Technological
Studies at Ohio Northern University.
SERVO 06.2008 11
Geerhead.qxd 4/29/2008 8:01 AM Page 11
12 SERVO 06.2008
GEERHEAD
forms the side rails of the air hockey
table. Because the MDF walls were
deflecting the puck on impact, the
trajectory of the puck moving away
from the walls was different than the
teams algorithm had accounted for.
The new trajectory affected the pucks
speed and angle of deflection off the
walls. This had a negative affect on
their algorithm.
According to Dr. Stienecker,
because the algorithm assumes
that the angle of incidence equals
the angle of deflection (that
the puck hitting the wall at a
45-degree angle will bounce off at a
45-degree angle as well, for example),
and because the MDF walls moved
when struck by the puck, the puck
would bounce off the walls at a
different angle than the algorithm
could predict.
To resolve the issue, the
Department of Technological Studies
team fabricated aluminum sides for
the air hockey
table. The
aluminum does not deflect the puck
in a way that is out of synch with
the teams equations and algorithm.
This is similar to the difference
between bouncing a basketball on
cement and bouncing it on a
trampoline. If I were to bounce-pass
a basketball to you on cement, it is
pretty easy for me to judge were I
should aim to bounce, but on a
trampoline it would be anybodys
guess as to where it would bounce,
says Dr. Stienecker.
According to Dr. Stienecker, the
robot employs an automatic puck
return system so that if the human
player scores, the system delivers the
Close-up of air hockey robot.
Full view of air hockey robot, table, computer, and system.
The Department of
Technological Studies at
Ohio Northern University
built this air hockey puck
return system. The ONU team
created the return system to
relieve the human opponent
of manual retrieval of the
puck after a score. The
return system uses a chute
and conveyor to bring the
puck back to the robots
human competitor.
The puck enters the
score pocket, slides down
the chute, triggers a
photo-electric sensor, and
falls onto the conveyor, says
Dr. Adam W. Stienecker, PhD,
assistant professor,
Department of Technological
Studies, Ohio Northern
University. After the puck
triggers the sensor, the
conveyor activates long
enough for the puck to travel
and fall into the container at
the opposite end. Then, the
system flashes the lights at
the top of the frame, alerting
the human player that they
have scored against the
robot.
The container is
located beneath the human
opponents score pocket
and is easily retrievable,
says Dr. Stienecker.
puck to them again. The system senses
when the puck has been delivered
to the robots goal and returns it
beneath the table to a receptacle in
front of the person. When the human
opponent does score, the system
lights up indicating their success.
Programming
A human competitor keeps the
puck moving during play to provide
motion similar to what the robot
might experience when picking a part
in motion in an industrial setting. The
robot uses a machine vision system to
see the puck and original program-
ming created by the team in the
Department of Technological Studies
to strike the puck repeatedly (to play
air hockey).
The air hockey robot vision
system uses a Point Grey Flea2 model
camera. The camera attaches to the
robots frame. The firewire camera
is a one-third inch, color CCD. The
camera (with the help of the VisionPro
Quickbuild software application)
snaps 30 images of the entire
table view every second. The
camera transmits each image to a
computer. The computer
uses a non-linear
equation to remove
image distortions so the
current position of the
puck can be clearly
distinguished in the
image. The VisionPro machine
vision software then distinguishes
the puck and transfers its x,y
coordinates to another algorithm
on the computer.
Still on the computer, a VB
.NET program keeps track of
previous and current x,y values.
This helps the program to
determine the trajectory of the
puck. This program uses those
values to determine where the
robot should move in order to
strike the puck. The algorithm
sends this new value a point
on the table near the puck to
the robot controller. The robot
controller completes some
additional math to decide how
the robot should move to get to
that point on the table. SV
Department of Technology,
Ohio Northern University
www.onu.edu/a+s/techno/
KUKA Air Hockey Robot
on YouTube
www.youtube.com/watch?v=
AidLoq9eW8M
KUKA, makers of the robot used
in the air hockey experiment
www.kuka.com/usa/en
Rapid prototype 3D printer
www.dimensionprinting.com
RESOURCES
A close-up of part of the air hockey
puck return system.
Another view of the air hockey robot and table.
The Point Grey camera
(the Flea2 model) used in the
air hockey robot experiment.
GEERHEAD
SERVO 06.2008 13
This is the puck striker. The
puck striker attaches to the end
of the robot arm in order to
increase the speed at which the
robot strikes the puck. The image
shows the striker without the
motor, the cam, the springs, and
three of its disc quarters. The
image also shows the base and
one disc quarter.
The motor would appear
in the large hole on top of the
striker. The shaft would turn
and its cam would strike the
half-circle protrusion on top of
the disc quarter (shown). This
would push the disc quarter
out for a split second until a
spring would bring it back in
again, according to Dr. Adam
W. Stienecker, PhD, assistant
professor, Department of
Technological Studies, Ohio
Northern University.
14 SERVO 06.2008
Q
. I use PICBASIC PRO to write my robot programs.
Until now, Ive just used the serial I/O commands
that will use any I/O pin. I want to use interrupts in
my programs and this will interfere with the bit-banged
serial I/O commands. I have not managed to make this
work yet. How is it done?
Ed Rupp, CO
A
. No doubt you have found the obvious solution to
use the hardware UART, but when using it you
discovered that it spit garbage out the USART port.
This is because PBP defaults all commands and timing to an
assumed 4 MHz oscillator. We usually want our controllers
to run as fast as possible, so 4 MHz isnt likely our first
choice for a clock speed. The example program that Ive
included here shows all the obvious settings that show how
to use the USART (HSERIN, HSEROUT), and it shows a
couple that arent so obvious. You will need to read the PIC
datasheet to know that at higher clock speeds, you need to
use a different BRG (Baud Rate Generator) divider setting.
Here is the basic (pardon the pun) source code to use
the hardware USART just like the bit-banged ports in PBP:
*******************************************************
* Name : PBPUSART.PBP *
* Author : Dennis Clark for Mr. Roboto column *
* June 2008 *
* Notice : Copyright (c) 2008 [Dennis Clark *
* TTT Enterprises] *
* : Feel free to use this any way you want to*
* Notes : Faster clocks require different bits*
* set in TXSTA *
* : register. 2400 is the max baud rate *
* at 4MHz. *
*******************************************************
INCLUDE M16F6xx.INC
DEFINE HSER_BAUD 9600 For > 4MHz use these settings
DEFINE HSER_RCSTA 90H
DEFINE HSER_TXSTA 24H
DEFINE OSC 10
DEFINE HSER_BAUD 2400 For 4MHz, just use this
setting instead
char var byte
Hserout [HSEROUT working!, 13, 10] cr/lf
While 1 = 1
Hserin 10000, timeout, [char] Get a character
Hserout [char] Send it back
if char = 13 then add LF to the CR
HSEROUT [10]
endif
timeout: well keep resetting to here
when waiting
wend
End
The important
part that you may
not have found yet
is the HSER_TXSTA
setting. This DEFINE
points to a Special
Function Register in
the USART block TXSTA. The value given here (in hex) tells
the BRG to use the high speed setting. This is NOT done in
the default PBP USART setup because PBP assumes that the
clock rate is 4 MHz unless told otherwise. Dont forget to
set the correct PIC device type before you download the
code (see Figure 1)!
Q
. I have several QRB-1134 IR reflection sensors that
I want to use but I dont know what resistor values
to use for the LED side or the sensor side. How can
you tell how to set the current or how to read the value
back from the light sensor side?
George T., via email
A
. If you are using QRB-1134s, then I assume you want
to use them as line sensors since they are kind-of
bulky. I love these sensors because they are easy to
mount and are very forgiving in their use (see Figure 2). To
Tap into the sum of all human knowledge and get your questions answered here!
From software algorithms to material selection, Mr. Roboto strives to meet you
where you are and what more would you expect from a complex service droid?
by
Dennis Clark
Our resident expert on all things
robotic is merely an email away.
roboto@servomagazine.com
Figure 1. Choose the correct PIC device!
N
E
W
MrRoboto.qxd 4/29/2008 8:12 AM Page 14

know how to bias these
sensors, you need to read the
datasheet. For the newcomer
to the art of datasheet reading,
this can be a daunting prospect
because datasheets might just
as well be written in Klingon for
all the difficulty it can be to
wrestle useful information
from them. Fortunately for us,
the Fairchild Semiconductor
datasheet is very straight-
forward in telling us what we need to know.
The first graph to look at is the one that tells us
where the device is the most sensitive. Figure 3 gives this
chart. It shows us that 150 mils is optimal (0.15 inches).
The chart gives this data for a 20 mA I
F
(the current
through the LED) and V
CE
(voltage used on the sensor) of
5V, which suits us, so well use those values. This chart has
normalized collector current as the Y axis what is
that? This is a fancy way of saying that if we call the
maximum current 1, then every other point on the curve is
a percentage of that value. Well need another chart to tell
us what the typical current would be through the sensor to
set our bias resistor.
Now, how much current should we allow through the
sensor? As usual, that depends. We want to avoid the
maximum values and pick something that is typical or
recommended. We wont get any direct answers from the
tables here. All we have to work with are maximum values
for certain chosen settings. However, in the Electrical/
Optical Characteristics table of the datasheet, we find the
information shown in Figure 4.
This information shows us that if we put 40 mA
through the LED and had no resistor limiting current,
and used 5V to power the device that we should get a
maximum of 0.60 mA (600 microamps) current through the
device. Further, it tells us that the saturation voltage from
the collector to the Emitter would be 0.4V. This means that
whatever we use as a dropping resistor would have about
5V 0.4V = 4.6V across
it. Thats a pretty good
logical 1. I like to
connect the bias resistor
from Vcc (5V to the
collector of a transistor)
so that when the sensor
is fully on, I read a logic
0 and when it is off, I
read a logic 1. A voltage
of 0.4V will read a logic
0 very nicely on our
microcontrollers so no
ADC (Analog-to-Digital)
reading is needed; we
can just use a digital
input line. Were only
going to be driving the IR
LED at 20 mA, so lets estimate that our fully on current
would be a minimum of 100 A (half of that seen at 40
mA of LED current). Since I like to use worst case, lets use
100 A as the current for that worst case. If we were to be
fully turned on with all of these settings, what resistor value
would give us 100 A if the sensor transistor was dropping
0.4V across it? The answer is:
(5V 0.4V)/100 A = 46000, or 46K ohms
That isnt a very common value, so lets choose 47K
ohms from our junk box.
Weve decided that we want an LED current of 20 mA.
How do we choose the resistor value for that current?
Again, we look at a chart. In this case, we will use the
Electrical/Optical Characteristics table again, but the
section shown in Figure 5. This shows us that at 20 mA,
our LED will drop a maximum of 1.7V across it. So, our
resistor value needs to be:
(5V 1.7V)/20 mA = 165 ohms
We have now used the charts and tables from a
datasheet to decide upon reasonable and predictable values
SERVO 06.2008 15
Figure 3. How close should we be?
(Used with permission from Fairchild Semiconductor.)
Figure 2. QRB-1134
reflection sensor.
Figure 5. IR LED current information. (Used with permission from Fairchild Semiconductor.)
Figure 4. Excerpted table information for sensor current.
(Used with permission from Fairchild Semiconductor.)
for our IR reflection sensors. But do they work? Did we
read the tables right? The best way to find out is to go to
the lab bench and hook up some meters to our circuit and
check it out. Table 1 shows the results of my tests of this
sensor with our chosen values. My sensor was about 0.15
above the surface and I used a 5V source.
The first entry in the table is our calculated and
estimated values we got from reading the graphs and
charts. We see that we do get what we expect and it will
work great. CMOS inputs (our microcontrollers) want to see
a logic zero be less than about 1.3V and a logic one to be
more than about 3.7V. Our values fit that bill just fine. But,
I like to experiment since the charts and tables really only
give worst case values or values under very controlled
circumstances. So, I tried a few different values for both
resistors. You can see that the first four value pairs would
all work just fine; the optimal ones are the 470/47K and
the 1K/47K since their logic high values are quite high.
Numbers 5 and 6 do not reliably meet CMOS logic high
levels so they should be avoided. Number 7 would seem to
be a good choice too. What we are seeing here is that if
we have too much current (numbers 1 and 2), then too
much IR is seen by the sensor on the black surface and we
dont shut off quite enough and our logic high suffers. On
the other hand too, if we limit the current too much in the
IR sensor then its affected more by the reflected IR beam
and we cant pull up as far when we are over the dark
areas. So, to make ourselves less susceptible to ambient
light (all those lamps and camera lights), we want a
reasonable current through the sensor. I like to save battery
power, so I would pick either
number 3 or number 4 for my
line sensors. While were on
the topic of IR sensors, lets
talk about wheel encoders. I
have not traditionally used
them since I usually like my
robots to blunder about until
they reach their objective, but
recently Ive been getting
into the Trinity Fire Fighting
competition fun and have
found that I want a bit tighter
control over where my robot is.
But how to make those nifty wheel encoders? If you dont
want to buy a set and want to DIY (Do It Yourself) like me,
you go looking. A friend sent me a postscript file that he
had to generate pairs of encoder graphics and I went out
looking and found the original author of the code before
(as the author put it) it had escaped into the wild. Here is
the URL for the original encoder wheel generator: http://
epl.meei.harvard.edu/Engineering/encoderdisk.html
given with kind permission from the author, I. J.
Stefanov-Wagner of Eaton-Peabody Laboratory.
Figure 6 shows the output of the postscript file. If you
are using a Windows PC, then youll want to have both
Ghostscript and Ghostview to create the output, then send
it to your local printer. If you are using a Macintosh with
OSX, then you can look at the file by just using Preview and
print out the PDF file it generates.
The link given explains how to modify the postscript file
to change the various characteristics of the encoder disk
output. It is simplicity itself and will allow any kind of
encoder wheel that you could find useful. I have a
derivative encoderdisk.ps that prints out two encoder
wheels of the same dimensions. While you cant make as
big of an encoder wheel with this file, it makes an identical
pair which can be useful. It is used in the same way but
has another option to print out a center hub of variable
diameter, as well. Rather than print it in the magazine
(which would make a tedious and error prone job of
re-typing it), you can get this file from the SERVO website
at www.servomagazine.com it is called encoderdisk.ps.
If you are going to do basic odometry using ticks from your
drive wheel encoders, then the single bar disks will do
you already know which direction the wheels are turning!
If you wish to implement a PID loop, then you will need the
second kind of disk, which is called a quadrature encoding.
If you use two sensors and detect the timing of the
detection for the inner vs. the outer bars, you can tell
which direction the wheel is turning. When using
quadrature encoding, make sure that your two sensors
are in a direct line with each other along a line through the
center of the hub. Figure 7 shows wheels I made with an
encoder disk created from this nifty program.
You can use the QRB-1134 reflection sensor to read
this disk or try for something smaller. I have a handful of
Omron EE-SY124 reflection sensors that are very tiny, about
16 SERVO 06.2008
Resistors Light Dark
1 165/47K 0.12V 4.1V
2 330/47K 0.13V 4.1V
3 470/47K 0.16V 4.4V
4 1K/47K 0.21V 4.8V
5 470/100K 0.13V 3.7V
6 330/100K 0.12V 3.0V
7 1K/100K 0.16V 4.5V
Table 1. Resistors vs. readings. Figure 6. Encoderdisk.ps output example.
Figure 7. Wheels with encoder disks attached.
5 mm square, more or less.
These need biasing in a similar
manner as the QRB-1134
devices. The datasheet for the
EE-SY124 is a great deal more
difficult to understand but
many of the stated values and
test criteria were very similar,
so I tried our 470 ohm LED
resistor and 47K sensor resistor.
I keep a supply of SMT (surface-mount) parts on hand
which looked perfect for this quick lash-up project. This
configuration works quite well. Unlike the QRB-1134, the
EE-SY124 documentation suggests putting the bias resistor
on the emitter side of the sensor so that you get a logic
high when you have high reflection (light). My tests showed
that my dark logic low was 0.43V and my light logic
high was 4.77V. This sensor, however, was much more
sensitive to the distance from the surface that it is sensing.
It appeared to work well at about 1 mm distance and the
logic high voltage fell off very sharply as you got closer to
or further away from its sweet spot. Figure 8 shows what
my quick build encoder sensor looks like. I plan on attaching
these to my hacked hobby servos using R/C servo tape.
That stuff is very thin and VERY strong when used like this.
In case you were wondering, the schematics for the circuits
that I used in researching this question are shown in Figure 9.
Conclusion
I may have answered the question with more
information that what was expected. However, sometimes
you get caught up in the thrill of discovery, or perhaps
the overwhelming urge to be clever just cant be stopped.
There was information that I discovered during my
experiments that I felt would be useful to everyone.
Finding that postscript encoder wheel program was worth
the time all by itself! Have fun and may you always know
where your robot is.
If you have any questions of your own, please go
ahead and send us an email to roboto@servomagazine.
com. SV
SERVO 06.2008 17
Figure 9. Schematics for the two sensors.
Figure 8. Wheel encoder
sensor board.
Know of any robot competitions Ive missed? Is your
local school or robot group planning a contest? Send an
email to steve@ncc.com and tell me about it. Be sure to
include the date and location of your contest. If you have a
website with contest info, send along the URL as well, so we
can tell everyone else about it.
For last-minute updates and changes, you can always
find the most recent version of the Robot Competition FAQ
at Robots.net: http://robots.net/rcfaq.html
R. Steven Rainwater
J J u un ne e
1-6 CIG Car Racing Competition
Hong Kong Convention and Exhibition Centre,
Hong Kong
Autonomous robot cars compete against each
other in this racing event.
www.wcci2008.org
5-8 ION Autonomous Lawnmower Competition
Beavercreek, OH
The cutting edge (sorry couldnt resist) of
autonomous lawn care robotics. There are events
for basic and advanced autonomous mowing.
The basic event is a rectangular yard with a
single non-moving obstacle. The advanced event
is an L-shaped yard with multiple moving and
non-moving obstacles, as well as a bordering
fence.
www.automow.com
13-15 RoboGames
Ft. Mason Festival Pavilion, San Francisco, CA
The Guinness Book of World Records says this is
the largest open robot competition in the world.
Wired Magazine says its one of the 10 best
North American Geek Fests. Expect to see over
70 robot events of all kinds. If you have a robot,
theres probably an event for it at RoboGames.
www.robogames.net
21-22 International Autonomous Robot Contest
Del Mar Fairgrounds, Del Mar, CA
Includes three events for autonomous robots
including the Urban Challenge, in which robots
must find their way through a maze; the Gold
Rush Challenge, in which robots cross a desert
filled with rocks and cacti; and a technical
presentation, where contestants explain the
robot's hardware and software.
www.iaroc.org
21 KCRS Robot Exhibition and Competition
Above the Harvey House Cafe, Kansas City, MO
This years Kansas City Robotics Society
competition includes Sumo, Mini-Sumo, and
indoor Solar Rollers events, as well as their
trademark Dinnerware Demolition event.
www.kansascityrobotics.org
26-28 MATE ROV Competition
Scripps Institution of Oceanography, San Diego, CA
Underwater robot contest for high school and
university students.
www.marinetech.org/rov_competition
28 UK National Micromouse Competition
Technology Innovations Center,
Birmingham, United Kingdom
Micromouse robots compete for the coveted
Brass Cheese award.
www.tic.ac.uk/micromouse
J J u ul l y y
7-11 Africa Championship Robotics Competition
Pretoria, South Africa
Students from various countries and continents
will compete in several robot challenge
events.
www.nydt.org/home.asp?pid=963
8-11 Botball National Tournament
Norman, OK
Educational robot contest for middle and high
school students designed to use science,
technology, engineering, and math to solve
real world problems.
www.botball.org
Send updates, new listings, corrections, complaints, and suggestions to: steve@ncc.com or FAX 972-404-0269
18 SERVO 06.2008
Events.qxd 4/29/2008 6:48 PM Page 18
13-17 AAAI Mobile Robot Competition
Chicago, IL
This years competition will take the form of
exhibits that demonstrate either robot creativity
or mobility and manipulation. Expect to see
robots that dance, paint, play musical instruments,
and much more.
www.aaai.org/Conferences/conferences.
php
14-18 KNEX K*bot World Championships
Las Vegas, NV
This competition includes events for two-wheel
drive autonomous K*bots, four-wheel drive
autonomous K*bots, and the remote control
Cyber K*bot Division.
www.livingjungle.com
22-25 FIRA Robot World Cup
Shinan Software Park, Qingdao, China
This competition has events for every kind of
robot soccer imaginable, ranging from the
humanoid robot league down to the tiny Khepera
robot league.
www.fira.net
29 AUVS International Underwater Robotics
Competition
Space and Naval Warfare System Center,
San Diego, CA
In this competition, autonomous underwater
robots built by university students must complete
an underwater course. This event runs through
August 3rd.
www.auvsi.org/competitions/water.cfm
Send updates, new listings, corrections, complaints, and suggestions to: steve@ncc.com or FAX 972-404-0269
SERVO 06.2008 19
Events.qxd 4/29/2008 6:51 PM Page 19
USB Four Relay Controller
U
se your PC to
control just
about anything with
the USB Four Relay
Controller, from
Endurance Robotics.
This is a device
which allows a user
to control larger
voltage devices via
a PC. Each relay can
be independently controlled and is capable of switching
DC voltages up to 100 VDC at 5A and AC voltages up to
120 VAC at 10A. The Four Relay Controller is perfect for
controlling small electronic devices and appliances.
The Controller features a USB to serial port interface
and can be easily controlled and manipulated via free
development software on most platforms. The open
sample control software and API make it easy to get up
and running quickly with the Controller.
The Four Relay Controller is Windows Vista
compatible. Sample software, examples, videos, and
API documentation can all be found at the Endurance
Robotics website listed below.
For further information, please contact:
The MACH64 Programmable
Logic Starter Kit
W
hats a CPLD?
CPLDs are chips
that are internally
constructed of an
array or matrix of
programmable logic
units or blocks.
Each cell can
perform various
logic functions. The
power of CPLDs is
that with a software
based tool you can
write code that is
compiled into a
hardware description
that is then
downloaded and
Flashed into the
CPLD, changing its
behavior to your
exact specifications.
By mastering this technology, you can develop your own
chips that run at blazing speeds, as well as design very
complex systems that would be impossible with discrete
TTL chips.
CPLDs are a great starting point for those interested
in programmable logic technology and allow you to
seamlessly move into their bigger brothers Field
Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGAs) when youre ready.
The MACH64 from Nurve Networks kit is two kits in one:
A complete Lattice ispMACH 4064 series development
kit with a built-in programmer which supports external
targets, as well.
The MACH64 is a powerful educational kit that
teaches CPLD technology and programming from the
ground up applicable to any CPLD.
The MACH64 kit comes complete with everything
you need to learn, experiment, design, and program with
CPLDs. The included 250+ page manual starts off with
the technology of CPLDs and then eases you into the
ABEL Language used to program CPLDs. The numerous
challenging hands-on projects include: basic logic gates,
counters, state machines, ALU design, audio generation,
NTSC, and VGA video generation, plus more.
Everything you need to build all the labs is included
in the kit along with extra parts for your own creations
(resistors, capacitors, LEDs, transistors, diodes). You can
design your own chips.
Package includes:
MACH64 Development Board.
Built-in Programmer.
250+ Page Hard Copy User Manual.
9V @ 300 mA, 2.1 mm, DC Wall Adapter.
DB25 Parallel Port Programming Cable.
External CPLD Programming Cable.
New Products
CONTROLLERS & PROCESSORS
N
N
E
E
W
W
P
P
R
R
O
O
D
D
U
U
C
C
T
T
S
S
20 SERVO 06.2008
Website: www.endurance-rc.com
Endurance
Robotics
JUN08NewProd.qxd 4/30/2008 11:50 AM Page 20
A/V Cable.
Solderless Breadboard.
40 Hook-up Wires (20 long, 20 short).
Over 75 Passive Components.
1.0 MHz, 3.58 MHz, 25.175 MHz oscillators.
Windows CD-ROM w/Software and Tools.
Over 20 Step-by-Step Tutorials.
System requirements: Windows PC with parallel
port; NTSC TV monitor for NTSC labs; VGA monitor for
VGA labs.
The Dual-POB
T
he Dual-POB from
POB Technology is
a new double-sided
controller to build a
robot. A second connec-
tors board can be used
separately. The Dual-POB
is programmable with
the POB graphical
development software RISBEE for starters, or in C with the
AVR Studio and GNU compiler for advanced users. Build
new amazing robots or enhance existing robots with a
single controller which manages all what you need.
HOKUYO Laser Range-Finder
for Robotics
T
he UBG-05LN available from Active
Robots is a programmable laser
distance measuring and obstacle
detection scanner.
Features include:
Laser obstacle detection scanner
High resolution 0.36
Response time less than 210 msec
180 scanning area
Range 100 to 5,000 mm
Power consumption 24 VDC @150 mA
RS-232 interface
Size: 60 x 60 x 75 mm
Weight: 185 g (260 g with cable)
Applications include:
Automated guided vehicles
Robotics
Security
Automation
Pololu Ball Casters
P
ololu introduces its
new line of unique
ball casters designed
specifically to serve as
third contact points
for small, differential-
drive robots. The ball
casters are available
with either a metal or
plastic ball and come
in a variety of sizes,
with heights ranging
from 0.4 to 1.1.
Each caster kit includes
two spacers (1/8
and 1/16 thick) for
fine-tuning the height
for various applications.
The black ABS
caster housings are
engineered to minimize
friction with the
ball, and the larger
casters come with dowel-pin rollers to further reduce
friction. The range of available sizes allows customization
of robots for low profiles or increased obstacle
clearance.
The Pololu ball casters start at $2.99 and are
available at www.pololu.com/catalog/category/45.
SENSORS
WHEELS
Website: http://pob-technology.com
POB Technology
Website: www.active-robots.co.uk
Active Robots
6000 S. Eastern Ave. Suite 12-D
Las Vegas, NV 89119
Tel: 8777POLOLU or 7022626648
Fax: 7022626894
Email: www@pololu.com
Website: www.pololu.com
Pololu
Corporation
Website: www.nurve.net
Nurve
Networks, LLC
SERVO 06.2008 21
JUN08NewProd.qxd 4/30/2008 11:51 AM Page 21
Featured This Month:
Features
22 BUILD REPORT:
The Story of Herald
by Brian Benson
26 MANUFACTURING:
Milling Part 2 by James Baker
32 PARTS IS PARTS:
Attaching Foam Wheels to
Manufactured Hubs
by Kevin Berry
Events
28 Mar/Apr 2008 Results and
Jun/Jul 2008 Upcoming
Events
29 EVENT REPORT:
Saskatoon Combat Robotics
Club Kilobots XII
by Kurtis Wanner
ROBOT PROFILE Top
Ranked Robot This Month:
31 Solaris by Kevin Berry
22 SERVO 06.2008
A
s the sport of robotic combat
moves into its 14th year, we
can look back and see the pro-
gression of the robots. It all started
out with a remote control vacuum
cleaner that was upgraded with a
chainsaw. From there, we saw La
Machine, the first wedge robot;
Blendo, the first full body spinner
built by none other then Jamie
Hyneman of Mythbusters fame;
and a multitude of other firsts. We
have seen floating robots, robotic
snakes that rolled/slithered across
the arena, and giant six-legged
creations like Mechadon. Robotic
combat has attracted people of
seemingly infinite creativity, many
of whom who are at the top of their
field. However, as the sport has
progressed there has been a clear
transition towards a greater focus
on power and effectiveness rather
than creativity and uniqueness.
The Clone Wars
Cheaper and higher quality
technology along with simple
Darwinism have led to an
increase in uber-spinners and
wedges. The number of bots
with hammers, lifters, clampers,
and personalities in general has
dropped exceedingly low in
response to the high-powered
spinners. The huge amounts of
energy the current spinners are
able to dish out require more
armor than ever expected.
Todays 30 pound robots have
the power to cut through 1/4
titanium. Considering how
1/4 aluminum used to be
adequate in 220 pound robots,
you can see how the game has
changed. Builders cannot afford
to rebuild their robots from
scratch every competition, so
they try to build robots that they
wont need to. This, however, has
led to what many call the clone
wars. A number of select
designs have been identified as
being extremely effective and
easy to build. These designs are
by Brian Benson
The Story of Herald
BUILD REP RT
CombatZone.qxd 4/29/2008 5:38 PM Page 22
SERVO 06.2008 23
being used so often now that it
is hard to tell the difference
between them.
The Sportsman Class
The Northeast Robot Club
(NERC) realized that this progression
towards spinners and wedges was
driving the creativity out of the
competition. They watched many
builders get burnt out from the
sport because they no longer had
the time, energy, or money to
rebuild after every competition. To
counter these issues, the NERC
created the 30 pound Sportsman
class. The basic idea behind this
new class is that no wedges are
allowed and no spinners over 400
RPM, but an active weapon is
required. The goal of the Sportsman
class is to allow other designs to be
effective again, and prevent complete
destruction of robots in a match.
The first few competitions
proved to be effective in its goals.
A resurgence of hammers,
flippers, actuated spikes, and even
saw blades for wheels were seen.
However, even with these designs,
builders were stuck building in
the box. The robots were gaining
personality, but builders werent
trying things that hadnt been
done before. It was really fun to
see designs that hadnt been done
in 10 years, but the true potential
of the Sportsman class had yet to
be seen.
Throw it Out the
Window
The elimination of wedges and
uber-spinners now allowed builders
to throw everything out the window
they had previously known and try
something new. I noticed that for
the upcoming event there was a
lack of entrants in the Sportsman
class, so I decided to build one. The
question was what would I build,
and how would I make it unique
and effective? Thus far, the most
dominate design in the class
included flippers. This was for a
very simple reason: Everyone was
accustomed to building low to the
ground boxes, perfect prey for a
good flipper. To counter this, I
reasoned that if a robot was higher
up in the air than the flipper arm
could reach, then it would be
rendered completely ineffective.
With this basic idea in mind, I set
about designing a new robot to
take advantage of this weakness.
The Birth of Herald
To begin, I named the new
project Herald. First, I had to decide
how I would make Herald tall. The
most obvious method of raising the
height of a robot is to use very
large wheels. However, I found this
impractical given my budget,
weight, and time constraints. So,
looking for alternate ideas I thought
of the 60 pound robot, Archetype,
built by Team Delta in 2002. It
featured four legs, each of which
contained a motor at the end with a
wheel. I then took this concept and
morphed it; instead of making the
legs out of a stiff material such as
aluminum, I decided to use UHMW
a type of polyethylene. For this
application, it was perfect because it
would give the robot a completely
independent suspension that would
be impossible to damage in the
Sportsman class.
One issue with this design was
that with the center of gravity so
high, it might be prone to falling
over. To counter this,
I designed each leg
so that its height
could manually be
adjusted, meaning
my total height
could be adjusted.
With that part
decided upon, I now
needed a simple,
easy, and fun
weapon. I decided
on a hammer. Then,
I realized that
because the body of
the robot was so high up, I could do
something that had never been
done before a hammer that
swung 360 degrees. This meant I
would have to add one interesting
feature to the design. Herald would
have to consist of two frame pods
connected by a hollow, stationary
shaft to allow wires to run from one
pod to the other. The hammer
would then swing around the shaft.
I was now ready to create a
list of parts to build the robot out
of. I decided to use four drill motor
gearboxes and hobby motors for
the drive. For my weapon motor,
I determined that an EV Warrior
motor would be adequate, which
is a discontinued surplus motor. In
the electrical system, I decided to
use a 14.4 volt Nicad battery that I
already had, along with an IFI Victor
883 speed controller to manage
the hammer and an RS80D dual
channel speed controller for the
drive train. I decided to use the
software package Solidworks to
design the robot. The CAD model
can be seen in Figure 1.
The Build Process
There were a few specific
design problems that I had to
address to ensure the robot would
be a success. The first was that
hammer mechanisms are subject to
almost instantaneous stops. Some
builders have had problems with
attaching sprockets to the motor
shaft so that they dont shear off.
FIGURE 1. Before any
construction began,
Herald was designed
on the computer
using Solidworks.
24 SERVO 06.2008
To solve this problem, I designed an
adjustable slip clutch that would go
on the driven sprocket. By using a
steel hub, a friction plate, and three
screws with split lock washers I was
able to build a clutch with minimal
weight and space that captured
the sprocket between the hub and
friction plate. This can be seen in
Figure 2. A secondary stage gear
reduction then brought my maxi-
mum hammer speed down to 400
RPM as required by the rules.
The next step was to create the
mounts for the stationary shaft.
Rather than spend a lot of time
milling a shaft mount, I
decided to use two-piece
steel shaft collars welded to
steel plates as shown in
Figure 3. Next, I drilled and
tapped the holes in the large
steel gear so it could mount
to the hammer arm. I also
drilled four lightening holes,
all of which can be seen in
Figure 4.
I next made the base
plates and built the four leg
assemblies with the help of
some fellow students at
Worcester Polytechnic
Institute. Figure 5 shows
the pile of parts slowly
growing and the robot
beginning to take shape.
A fellow teammate
shows how the robot will
basically look in Figure 6.
After much help and
additional work, I added
UHMW side armor for
the top frame along with
Lexan braces on the legs
to stiffen them. I mounted all of the
components except the hammer
arm and did a quick test drive to
see how the design works. Figure 7
shows Herald nearly complete!
At this point in the build
process, I spent about a week
testing different configurations in
terms of heights of the legs. I was
running into the expected problem
that the center of gravity was too
high, so the robot was tipsy front
to back. To counter this, I added a
rear wheelie bar and two spars on
the front two legs to prevent the
robot from doing face plants.
With the robot now stable, I
concentrated on the weapon
system. We completed the design
for the hammer arm, spending a
little extra time making sure it had a
unique look. To do this, we used a
CNC milling machine and cut it out
of 3/8 7075 aluminum. A hammer
head with replaceable tips was then
FIGURE 2. A custom slip clutch was built
consisting of a hub and friction plate that
squeezed a sprocket using three screws
and split lock washers.
FIGURE 4. A large 40 tooth, 12 pitch steel
gear was chosen to bolt onto the hammer
arm. Here it is shown after the lightening
holes and mounting holes are complete.
FIGURE 5. Heralds pile of parts
begins to come together.
FIGURE 6. Teammate
Ciaran demonstrates
how the frame pods
fit together.
FIGURE 3. A custom
shaft mount is created by
welding a two-piece shaft
collar to a steel plate.
made that could attach to the
hammer arm. All of this progress is
shown in Figure 8.
With the hammer complete and
drive system working reliably, it was
now time to make the top armor
with the small amount of weight
remaining. I decided to use 1/16
Lexan as the top armor for each
pod. I also added some thin Lexan
armor to help protect the drive
motors at the end of each leg
assembly. With these additions, the
robot was complete.
Top Secret
Herald started out as just a fun
project designed to be cheap and
fun to watch. However, in the
process of building it, I came to
realize the true potential of the
Sportsman class. Not only did it
offer the chance to fight and not be
completely destroyed, it allowed
builders to try things that would
never have been practical previously.
I realized that I could use Herald as
a way to promote the Sportsman
class and its potential. To do this, I
started a build report in the robotic
online discussion forums (http://
forums.delphiforums.com/CJRC/
start). In the build report, I posted
some hints about the design
along with a few photos such as
Figure 5, but I didnt reveal what it
actually was. I thought that if I
created a level of interest and built
up anticipation for finding out what
Herald was, I could increase its
impact when it first competed.
With the mystery of What is
Herald? created and a finished
robot, I set off to compete at
NERCs Motorama 2008.
I decided that I had spent the
last few months hyping up Herald
online, so I didnt want to give
the design away in an uneventful
fashion. Instead, I kept it a secret
until the very last second. So, at the
event I kept it under a blanket to
keep anyone from seeing it. For my
first match, a friend who was in on
the secret took the initiative to play
the theme music from 2001: A
Space Odyssey as I entered the box
with the covered robot. I lifted the
blanket so it was timed perfectly
with the music, and after three
months of secrecy, Herald was
unveiled. Figure 9 shows Herald
right after the unveiling, ready to
pummel the opponents!
Conclusion
Herald started out
as just a fun project
and slowly morphed
into an attempt to
build out of the box
and try to excite other
builders to do the same
thing. Herald had four
fights at Motorama
2008, two of which it
won. At the end of the
competition, the
builders were asked to vote on a
number of awards in different
categories: best driver, most
aggressive, best engineered, and
coolest robot. By popular vote,
Herald was lucky enough to win
coolest robot. This was an honor
because this award often went to
rare robots such as walkers and
other types whose builders didnt
just think outside the box, but
didnt even realize there was a box.
The competition was fierce this
year with over three robots trying
concepts that had never been done
before. In many ways, the other
robots beat Herald in their creative
design concepts. I hope to see a
greater number of out of the box
bots at Motorama 2009, because
Herald is only a small step in what I
feel is the right direction for the
Sportsman class.
For more information on myself
or my robots, please visit www.
Benson-Labs.com. SV
SERVO 06.2008 25
FIGURE 7. All of the parts are mounted
and Herald is ready for a test drive.
FIGURE 8. The
hammer is added
along with a
wheelie bar and
front spars.
FIGURE 9. Herald sits in
the arena ready to fight
in its first match!
26 SERVO 06.2008
W
hen writing an article about
the techniques of milling, it is
tempting to fill the page with tables
and graphs showing cutting speeds,
feed rates, and helix angles, but
these things are easily available
already. There are some great books
and helpful articles on the Internet,
which a quick search will uncover in
no time at all. Writing the same
things again may be helpful, but I
want to add something to the many
options you already have. I want to
write about techniques for the robot
builder specifically.
Preparation
I will assume you have bought a
milling machine. Did it come with
tooling? If so, it is a very good idea
to read as much as you can about
this tooling. Do you have a set of
slot drills or end mills? Do you know
the difference? Research is essential
before you even think about
starting. You do not want to dull
your brand new set of specially
coated cutters on mild steel, when a
quick bit of reading would tell you
that some coatings are for use on
non-ferrous metals only. Im barely
touching the surface of this subject,
but to give you a comprehensive
guide to the design and use of
cutters alone would fill several of
these magazines. There are books
on the subject, and they generally
cost less than breaking a couple of
slot drills, so buy as many as you like
they are a great investment. Read
all the literature that comes with
your milling machine, be aware
what every component does, and
how to change them. Play with your
various clamps, vice, and other
attachments to get familiar with
their limit of travel and reach. Make
sure you have left plenty of room
around the mill for outsized parts to
overhang the bed, and for easy
swarf and debris removal. Have your
various accessories neatly stored
close to the machine, and keep the
heavy parts like a vice or indexing
head at bed level, so you dont have
to bend over or reach up to change
them. These are simple, common
sense tips that might save you time,
trouble, or an injury.
Identification
When working in industry, you
generally will know what material
you are working with because it
was ordered specifically. In most
cases, robot builders will know this
when buying new materials. But if
using material from the junkyard or
off cuts from your local workshop, it
becomes a bit of an unknown.
Looking up the speed and feed
rates for aluminium should give you
a large number of possible values.
Soft commercial aluminium is very
different from the strong aircraft
grades, but how does the average
builder know the difference? Do
you need to identify the exact alloy
to work out the feed rates, speeds,
and cutters to use?
Having built most of my robots
from recycled (i.e., scrap) material, I
can tell you in no uncertain terms
that identifying the exact alloy
of your salvaged aluminium billet
or titanium sheet is not easy.
Sometimes you get lucky and
MANUFACTURING:
Milling Part 2
A Robot Builders Guide
by James Baker
Basic shapes can be
cut from billets.
A frame can be cut from
a solid with a slot drill.
Material can be
thinned or
removed with
an end mill.
SERVO 06.2008 27
everything you need is printed on
the piece, but other times it is near
impossible. In this case where the
material is an unknown there is
a very simple set of skills you can
learn to be able to identify what
youve got.
Use the Force
When you start out with your
milling, practice on materials you
can identify. Use known grades and
alloys, and look up the exact speeds
and feed rates. Turn the feed
handles by hand. There will usually
be an auto-feed on most milling
machines, but dont use it. By
getting used to the feel of milling
the material at the correct settings,
you will get to know how much
force you need to apply to turn the
handles. You will feel how the
vibration builds when things are not
correct, and you can see and hear
the results. The chips coming off the
material change, and the cutting
becomes noisy or squeals. You are
sensing the forces involved in
cutting the material through the
handles, the vibrations in the floor,
and your eyes and ears. It sounds a
little strange, but it is useful
to know. Trying to feed too
fast or too slowly generates
symptoms that tell you things
are not right, so look out
for them, and adjust your
settings accordingly.
The main reason I
suggest doing this is because
the robot builder will not
always have the certificates
for the material they are
using, so knowing a material is cut-
ting efficiently by feel is important,
as the consequences of getting it
wrong are reduced tool life, excess
noise and vibration, and possible
tool failure. Incorrect settings can
also damage the material you are
machining, with the cutters flexing
or chattering, or pulling out of line.
Patience
The secret to learning effective
milling techniques is patience. The
more you prepare, the more you
read, the more you practice, the
better you will get. Maybe it is a
robot builder specific problem, but
the ever-closing deadline of the
next event, added to the ambition
and enthusiasm common to all in
this hobby, tend to make you turn
that handle a little faster, or set
the cutter a little deeper. Resist
the temptation! Things cut at a
given speed, and it doesnt matter
that you have four more ramming
spikes and team t-shirts to make
before you go to bed. Your tooling
will punish you if you try to rush.
Similarly, if you are making a part
that requires precision (such as a
gearbox casing), spend that little bit
of extra time dialing everything in,
setting your zero position, and take
all the measurements from that zero
in the same direction to eliminate
errors from the backlash and slack
in the feed mechanisms. Double-
check cutter widths and check your
math when subtracting this from
your measurements. Stop regularly
to measure the depths of a cut, to
ensure the tool is not pulling out of
Precision hole pitching
for spinning components.
Deep pockets
reduce weight.
Pockets can
be made to
precise depths.
Two-dimensional milling can
create three-dimensional parts.
A bigger machine helps when
working with tough material.
28 SERVO 06.2008
EVENTS
Results and Upcoming Events
Results Mar 10
Apr 14, 2008
R
oaming
Robots held
the Easter Robot
Rumble 2008 in
Colchester,
England on 3/22-23/2008. Sixty-one
robots attended with their humans.
They also held Oldham Out Of
Control on April 5th in
Oldham, with 33 bots.
T
he Saskatoon
Combat Robotics
Club held Kilobots XII on 3/29/2008
in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan,
Canada. Twenty-two bots were
registered.
T
he Central
Illinois
Robotics Club
the holder. The books give you the
theory, but you must always be
thinking of the obvious when using
your milling machine.
Improvise
Being a robot builder, you are
most likely quite creative, but do not
be afraid to try new things with
your milling machine. It is true that
these machines can be dangerous
(always wear eye protection!),
incorrectly held parts can fly out of
the clamps or move and shatter
cutters, but if you are careful, you
can create three-dimensional parts
from the two axis on your mill.
Using a rotary table or indexing
attachment, you can
create curves and cooling
fins. You can add wire
brushed surface effects,
mirror finishes, engraved
symbols, patterns and
even words! You can
pitch holes at angles, add
textures, create eccentric
pulleys, or limited arc
gears. Many people buy
milling machines to assist
their hobby, only to find
that using the milling
machine is a hobby in itself.
Top Tips
1) Read as much about the theory
of milling as you can.
2) Practice milling by hand; develop
the feel for it.
3) Dont be afraid to experiment
with new techniques, but be careful.
Everything else you need to
know about cutter types, speeds,
and the theory of milling is in the
many great books on sale on the
Internet or even at your local
technical college or school. Why
not pay them a visit and see if they
have a short evening course in
machining? Our hobby allows us to
use these tools in so many creative
ways, the better your understanding
of the basics, the more impressive
your creations will be. SV
Thick titanium
is far easier at
correct cutting
speeds.
Removing 35 lbs
from a 40 lb billet
takes quite a bit
of time.
With some creative solutions and a bit of
patience, unusual shapes can be machined.
A 30 lb robot milled from a single billet of
aircraft aluminium.
held the Central Illinois Bot Brawl
2008 on 3/29/2008 in Peoria, IL.
Twenty bots were registered.
R
obots Live held Memorabilia on
3/29-30/2008 in Birmingham,
England.
Upcoming Events for
June-July 2008
C
omBots will present RoboGames
2008 on 6/12-15/2008 in San
Francisco, CA. At press time, almost
100 combat bots were registered.
Go to www.robogames.net for
more information.
D
. W. Robots
will present
Pennsylvania Bot
Blast 2008 in Bloomsburg, PA on
7/12/2008. Seventeen bots were
registered at press time. Go to www.
dwrobots.com/tournament.html
for more information.
W
ar-Bots Xtreme will present
WBX-V Taking the Fifth
on 7/26/2008 in Saskatoon,
Saskatchewan, Canada. Twenty-nine
bots were registered at press time.
Go to www.warbotsxtreme.com
for more information.
T
he North East Robotics Club will
present House of Benson
Barnyard Brawl in Winchendon, MA,
on 7/26/2008. Thirty-seven bots
were registered at press time. Go
to www.nerc.us for more
information.
R
oaming Robots will present
Guildford 2008 in Guildford,
England on 6/15/2008; and UK
Champs 08/RAF Fairford in
Gloucestershire, England on 7/12-13/
2008. Go to www.roamingrobots.
co.uk for more information. SV
by Kurtis Wanner
Saskatoon Combat Robotics Club (SCRC) Kilobots XII
EVENT REP RT
I
nstead of writing the usual event
report, I have decided to give you
a glimpse into the minds of the
builders while competing. I asked
everyone to write fight reports for
their robots and have chosen to
present from each drivers point
of view the path of Metroid
through the antweight (1 lb) field of
robots. (See Figure 1.)
Builder Dennis Beck,
of Team DBM,
Describes Metroid
Metroid is a new bot to me. It
is of the drum spinner design, that
has been proven to work well in
other antweight robots. I chose to
add some features that I have never
seen before on other antweight
drum spinners. I added titanium
wheel guards, an adjustable height
rear wedge, and a large neodymium
magnet to help keep the robot
stuck to the steel arena floor.
Metroid vs. Kitbot:
1st Place Champion of
Previous Two Events
Dennis: Metroids first ever match
was against Team Fingertechs
Kitbot. The angle of Kitbots lifting
wedge/plow was steep enough that
Metroids weapon teeth
would not be able to catch
on the leading edge of
the wedge. Luckily, the
sharpened steel weapon
teeth on Metroids
spinning drum were able
to get enough bite into
Kitbots titanium wedge,
flipping him over. Kitbot
would be inverted for the
remainder of the match. Metroid
got in a few more good hits on
Kitbot before the endcap retaining
nut came unthreaded from
Metroids drum, causing the drum to
come out of alignment, eventually
jamming against the frame. The
inverted Kitbot and Metroid chased
each other around the arena for
the remainder of the fight. Judges
decision was in favor of Metroid ...
a great start!
FIGURE 1. Metroid.
SERVO 06.2008 29
Kurtis Wanner, Team Fingertech:
Kitbot got smashed in the rumble
of the last event, and has been
rebuilt with a single lifting arm
instead of the four-bar lifter of
previous events. It is much less
effective and I couldnt get a good
lift on Metroid at all. Instead, the
lifting plow rose straight into his
drum and Kitbot was flipped over.
Im a little rusty on driving inverted,
and having magnets only on the
bottom of the bot didnt help in the
pushing category. I drove in front of
the pushouts trying to entice him to
take a run at me, but Dennis must
have figured it out because he
always kept a good distance from it.
Ill admit that Kitbot is boring upside
down, and Metroids decision win
was well deserved.
Metroid vs. Short
Circuit: A Four-Event
Veteran Horizontal
Spinner
Ethan McKibben, Team ACME:
(See Figure 2.) We both spin up
and head for the middle. I chase
Metroid as he tries to get behind
me, and we hit weapon to weapon!
Short Circuit is now upside down
but can still drive. Unfortunately, the
blade is too high to hit Metroid. He
attacks and hits our main weapon
gear sending pieces flying, but our
blade doesnt stop! There are only
about 10 teeth left out of the
60-tooth gear and it still works!
SC eventually gets flipped over the
wall and the match ends.
Dennis: Team ACMEs Short Circuit
really had me worried. SCs weapon
is a large horizontal spinning bar
capable of much damage. I attempt
to use Metroids speed to get
behind or beside SC to hit one of
their exposed wheels, but I cannot
accurately steer away from SCs
weapon. After just a few seconds,
the two robots hit weapon to
weapon. Somehow Metroid remains
almost stationary while SC flies
backwards, landing upside-down on
the opposite side of the arena. I line
up a good hit into the side of SC,
breaking its weapon gearbox.
Metroid gets in a few more hits and
finally flips SC over the wall.
Another win for Metroid!
Metroid vs. Mighty
Mouse: A Fast, Hard
Hitting Wedge/Rammer
Dennis: (See Figure 3.) The fight
starts with the two bots driving
directly into each other. To my
dismay, Metroid drives right up
MMs wedge instead of catching
on it. Then WHAM! Metroid catches
on the wedge, throwing himself
backwards against the outer arena
wall and bouncing back in onto
the floor. Luckily, Metroid has
landed back in the arena right side
up. MM is on the attack, driving
straight at Metroid again. This time,
Metroid catches the leading edge
of MMs wedge, bending the
wedge pretty badly and throwing
MM backwards across the arena,
landing on his wheels. This happens
about three more times, with MM
doing a back flip and landing on
his wheels every single time!
Eventually, MM gets thrown right
out of the arena!
Team Humbot: Fight report not
available.
Metroid vs. Firefly
(finals): New Drum
Bot With a Thresher
Tooth Design
Dennis: (See Figure 4.) Both
weapons spin up instantly and we
hit weapon to weapon. Im
disappointed that Metroid was
getting slightly bounced into the air
instead of Firefly. As it turns out,
Fireflys weapon teeth were catching
on my side rails. Metroid finally
gets a hit in on the side of Firefly,
flipping him over. A weapon-to-
weapon hit sends Firefly flipping
through the air, and another quick
hit sends him over the wall. Metroid
wins the antweight finals!
Kurtis Wanner, Team Fingertech:
I had to skimp on the voltage
of Firefly, but so far the slower
spinning drum has still caught and
flipped every opponent. Not so with
Metroid, as his drum is spinning
much faster. Fireflys teeth have
better reach, so I knock him back
a couple times, but then his teeth
catch and flip Firefly upside down.
With now counter-rotating drums,
the next weapon-to-weapon hit
throws Firefly high into the air, and
another hit as soon as it lands
sends Firefly over the wall. Im
happy with Fireflys performance,
but I will make sure it can beat
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 3 FIGURE 4
30 SERVO 06.2008
S
olaris has competed in Rocky
Mountain Robot Showdown 03,
Steel Conflict 2, Motorama 2003,
Robot Assault 2003, Rocky
Mountain Robot Showdown 04,
Robolympics 2004, Pound of Pain 8,
2004 RFL Nationals, Motorama
2005, Rocky Mountain Robot
Showdown 05, Motorama 2006,
and Motorama 2007. Details are:
Configuration: Four wheeled
drumbot.
Frame: 3/8 2024 aluminum;
1/4 magnesium alloy.
Drive: Two heavily modified
Handiwork gearboxes; Long Can
speed 400 motors.
Wheels: Custom alumimum
hubs and polyurethane tread. Can
also use turned down 3 Colson
wheels.
Drive ESC: Two Banebot 12-45s.
Drive batteries: 3100 mAh Li-Poly
(20C discharge rate).
Weapon: 4 lb. aluminum 4 OD
drum with 5 S7 blades and teeth.
Weapon power: Uses same
battery as drive.
Weapon motor: Plettenberg HP
220/30/A2 six pole brushless
inrunner motor.
Weapon ESC: Castle Creations
Phoenix 45 amp brushless
controller.
Armor: 0.125 titanium,
Metroid next event!
Congratulations to Dennis
for Metroids 1st place finish. His
method of starting with an
established base design and seeing
ways to improve upon it has certainly
succeeded. He can be sure that
other builders will be designing to
upset Metroid at Warbots Xtreme in
July. Check out www.kilobots.com
and our Delphi Forum (http://
forums.delphiforums.com/saska
tooncrc) to see these and other
bots. SV
ROBOT PR FILE
by Kevin Berry
TOP RANKED ROBOT THIS MONTH
Weight
Class
Bot Win/Loss
Weight
Class
Bot Win/Loss
150 grams VD 26/7 150 grams Micro Drive 7/1
1 pound Dark Pounder 44/5 1 pound Dark Pounder 23/3
1 kg Roadbug 27/10 1 kg Roadbug 11/4
3 pounds 3pd 48/21 3 pounds Limblifter 12/1
6 pounds G.I.R. 17/2 6 pounds G.I.R. 11/2
12
pounds
Solaris 42/12
12 pounds Surgical Strike 17/7
15 pounds Humdinger 26/4 15 pounds Humdinger 26/4
30 pounds
Totally
Offensive
43/13 30 pounds Billy Bob 12/4
30 (sport) Bounty Hunter 9/1 30 (sport) Bounty Hunter 9/1
60 pounds
Wedge of
Doom
43/5 60 pounds K2 8/2
120 pounds Devil's Plunger 53/15 120 pounds Touro 10/0
220 pounds Sewer Snake 41/10 220 pounds Sewer Snake 9/3
340 pounds SHOVELHEAD 39/15 340 pounds Ziggy 3/0
390 pounds MidEvil 28/9 390 pounds MidEvil 3/0
Top Ranked Combat Bots
Rankings as of April 12, 2008
History Score is calculated by
perfomance at all events known to
BotRank
Current Ranking is calculated by
performance at all known events,
using data from the last 18 months
History Score Ranking
Solaris Currently Ranked #2
Historical Ranking: #1
Weight Class: 12 lb Hobbyweight
Team: Cosmos
Builder: Pete Covert
Location: Boulder, CO
BotRank Data Total Fights Wins Losses
Lifetime History 54 42 12
Current Record 6 6 0
Events 12
SERVO 06.2008 31
0.06 carbon fiber.
Future: Will compete next at
Motorama 2009.
Design philosophy: No
compromise in materials or
components. Big weapon, but
make sure its drivable and reliable.
Builders Bragging Bits:
Motor model and brand has never
been revealed until now.
Six pole motor gives more low-end
torque, no cogging.
Over 60 custom parts total.
All custom parts fabricated in
my garage, except for waterjetted
titanium.
First 12 pound bot to use Li-Poly
Batteries.
First 12 pound bot to use brushless
motor.
Highest ranked 12 pounder of all
time. SV
Photos and information are courtesy of
Pete Covert. All fight statistics are
courtesy of BotRank (www.botrank.
com) as of April 12, 2008. Event
attendance data is courtesy of BotRank
and The Builders Database (www.build
ersdb.com) as of April 12, 2008.
O
ne of the classic forum posts
by newbie insect builders is
How do I attach the wheels to
the motors? They typically are sent
to one of a few hub makers, but
then come to a screeching halt
trying to figure out how to put the
pieces together. Over the past
five years with lots of help from
other builders a pretty solid
technique has emerged for doing
this. Illustrated here is a double
wheel stack for beetle
weights, but the same
mechanics work for single stacks
and ant weights. Figure 1 shows the
Pile O Parts: a classic Escap 33:1
gearmotor, Lynxmotion hub, Dave
Brown Lite Flight 2 wheels, and
some McMaster-Carr fasteners.
The first step is to gently (or
not) pry apart the press-fitted plastic
hub on the Lite Flites.
Remove the male half of
the hub, leave the female
half intact. Then build a
jig, which is nothing more
than a large nail driven
through a piece of wood,
and slide the hub and
both wheels onto the nail,
hub on top. Then drill
1/16 pilot holes through
two of the threaded hub
holes and both wheels.
Removing everything from
the jig, run a 1/8 bit
through the plastic hubs
(often by hand).
The hubs take an odd
sized screw a 5-40
thread which Ive never
found in a local hardware
by Kevin Berry
PARTS IS PARTS:
Attaching F am Wheels
to Manufactured Hubs
FIGURE 1
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 3
32 SERVO 06.2008
store. Since the ones
provided are usually
too short, I have
accumulated boxes
of these from
McMaster-Carr in
various lengths by
doing this build on
1.5, 2, and 2.5
wheels in singles and
doubles. Figure 2
shows the stack
ready to assemble. In
Figure 3, the hub
screws and two washers are
tightened to the point of deforming
the plastic hub. The foam and
plastic acts as loc-tite and Ive
never had them come loose.
Figure 4 shows one more
important change. A mantra of
combat builders is: Set Screws
Suck. The miniscule allen head set
screw in the Lynxmotion hubs MUST
be replaced with a beefy cap head
that can be cranked hard enough to
dimple the gearbox
shaft. After losing
several fights
through slipping wheels, I came up
with this method to ensure no more
set screw related failures.
Finally, Figure 5 shows the
whole assembly, along with a
crudely manufactured bracket to
hold the motor in place, and
support the shaft at the gearbox
output. SV
FIGURE 4
FIGURE 5
PHOTO 1.
Mounted to
an L-shaped
bracket, the
motor and
gearbox
directly drive
the foam
wheel.
From $25
From $25
Use our low-cost
solder paste stencils
to quickly assemble
your surface-mount
designs.
Solder Paste Stencils
programming
connector
20 MHz clock
power LED
(green)
trimmer pot
(on ADC7)
dual H-bridge voltage
regulator
ATmega48/168
microcontroller
red user LED
(on PD1)
Baby Orangutan B-48 and B-168
starting at $24.95
Robot Controllers
S
e
n
s
o
r
s
3
-
A
x
s
i
A
c
c
e
l
r
o
m
e
t
e
r
e
$
1
9
.
9
5
R
Q
T
R
e
f
l
e
c
t
a
n
c
e
S
e
n
s
o
r

$
3
.
4
9
T

R
e
f
l
e
c
t
a
n
c
e

S
e
n
s
o
r

A
r
a
y

$
1
4
.
9
5
Q
R
r

TReX Jr
Dual Motor
Cont r ol l e r :
Instantly switches
between radio control
(RC) or analog voltage and
asynchronous serial (RS-232
or TTL), plus a multitude of
additional features. $59.95
o
t
r
M
o
C
o
n
t
o
l
e
s
r
l
r
Find out more at www.pololu.com or by calling 1-877-7-POLOLU.
Custom Laser Cutting
Cut your own custom
chassis, front panels, and more!
o

l
e
!
G
r
e
a
t

f
r
i
n
-
s
e
n
s
i
n
g
SERVO 06.2008 33
N
ow in its ninth season, RoboExoticas goal is to explore
the philosophical implications of man-machine inter-
action through interactive robotics projects, symposia
featuring notable speakers from all over the world, and lots
and lots and lots of alcohol. RoboExotica is brought to life
by the Vienna Bureau of Philosophy and Austrian art groups
Shifz and monochrom, whose tireless dedication to this
festival and other projects such as Ars Electronica expand
the frontiers of the study of technological philosophy.
RoboExotica celebrates the finer things in life with
robots that make cocktails, provide bar conversation, light
cigarettes, and deliver snacks. The symposium backs up the
show every year with thought-provoking discussions and
idea exchanges in a semi-academic setting. This years
speakers included science fiction writer and Boingboing.net
contributor Cory Doctorow, MetroBloggings Sean Bonner,
monochrom artist-in-residence David Fine, and Chaos
Computer Club programmer Jens Ohlig.
Participants from around the world brought their
machines to vie for the top awards, which go to the robots
that best fulfill the stringent and exacting standards of the
judging categories: Serving, Mixing, Conversation, Fire and
Smoke, and Special Achievements. Other sub-categories this
year included Persistence, Environmental, Most Welcome
Off-Topic entry, and Best Swiss Entry, more on that later.
The Freiraum machine gallery space at the
Museumsquartier in Vienna was crowded with old
favorites and some promising up-and-comers. David
Calkins, founder of RoboGames, showed up for his third
RoboExotica with Chapek, the snarky arm-swinging
bartender bot with glowing red eyes. Chapek razzed
the crowd and made vodka or gin martinis, as well as
inappropriate comments to young women. Chapek
ended up taking home the Cocktail Robot Award for the
Conversation category at the Annual Cocktail Robot
Awards, which took place the last night of the festival.
Robert Martin brought back RoboMoji, a popular
machine and four-year veteran of the contest. RoboMoji
makes mojitos with a chain-drive conveyor belt, mechan-
ically actuated lime squeezer and mint muddler, and
automatic shot pourers. The drinks are tasty, but take
a bit of patience while the machine does its thing.
Robomojis parts are handmade out of aluminum for
an industrial effect with a sugar-coated ending.
Watching the process is fascinating when its running
flawlessly, and even more fascinating when the
machine breaks down and the creators swarm over it
The machines have been packed up, the floor is still sticky, and the participants are
probably still hung over, which means that RoboExotica 2007 the International
Festival for Cocktail Robotics in Vienna, Austria has come to a close for another year.
RoboExotica
RoboExotica
34 SERVO 06.2008
by Simone Davalos
David Calkins' barbot Chapek.
Chapek makes three kinds of
martinis and dishes out smart aleck
comments with his beverages.
Monochrom's entry into the
festivities they were awarded
a Lime for general disservice to
the public.
Davalos.qxd 4/29/2008 6:28 PM Page 34
to find the problem. (Rule one of robotics, especially cocktail
robotics: robots break.) For this reason, RoboMoji was
awarded Honorable mention in the category of Patience.
Chris Veigls Mind Reading martini maker the winner
of the Mixing category collected EEG scans of the drinkers
brain to determine how strong a drink the drinker is to
receive. The more relaxed alpha waves the machine can
detect, the stronger the drink. Since everyone there had
previously been relaxed by other offerings, great amounts
of gin and vodka flowed from the generous mind reader.
A new touch this year was the inclusion of students from
FH Joanneum University Information Design course. The course
is taught by monochroms Johannes Grenzfurthner, and by
the looks of it hes leading them in the right direction, design-
wise. One specimen, The BF Ice Cube Gun, fired lethal
rocks into drinks. It worked by having the shooter carefully
place a glass in the receptacle under the target, and if the aim
was right, the shooter got a cocktail. If the aim was wrong, the
ice cubes usually ended up embedded in the wall, smashed
against the floor, or buried in the soft flesh of innocent
bystanders. If the aim was dead on, the machine would
give ice and drip an alcoholic beverage into the waiting cup.
The Rabbits Revenge another student creation
earned Honorary Mention for the cutest and most simple
user interface. The work consisted of a giant papier mach
rabbit, with one single switch on its furry chest. One side
said Good and one side said Evil. The most popular
setting throughout the exhibition was, of course, Evil,
seeing as Good lacked that key, free liquid ingredient in
which most exhibition attendees were interested.
Many contributors to the exhibition also came from
places far outside Austria. Michail A. Crest of Gryasnaya
Galereya from St. Petersburg, Russia, brought Explanator, a
complicated steampunk-style combination of tubes, wires,
artful lighting, and a brain. Not just a processor, an actual
pink, squishy organ. Were not sure whose it was, but it
added a certain aesthetic dimension to Explanator a slimy
one. In addition to the hardware, Explanator also included a
good old-fashioned experimental performance art piece.
There were body stockings, cute women in rabbit costumes,
and lab coats. During the piece, the artists fired up compo-
nents of the machine to smoke some very fine tobacco
through a water pipe filled with absinthe. A good time was
had by all on stage. The Explanator team was rewarded for
their efforts with the prize for the Serving category.
Christopher T. Palmer, a kinetic artist from San
Francisco, CA, brought the
only machine that did not
directly involve alcohol
Blow Your Fortune. The
piece works similarly to a
Breathalyzer test, only instead
of a DUI it gives a personally
tailored fortune from a smiling
wire head, which is also courteous enough to hold drinks
while the fortune is being told. Chris Palmer took home the
Other Achievements award.
The winner of the Best Swiss Entry category (a last
minute addition to the 2007 Annual Cocktail Robot Awards)
was Roman Maeder, with The Holy Milk and Wodcow, a
tactilely-interesting wooden bovine that dispensed milk and
vodka from large rubber nipples mounted on the underside.
The rubber udders were extremely popular with young nubile
women and the camera-toting young men following them.
monochroms own Franz Ablinger brought the newest
version of his drink-injection bot, Gesundheit VI. The
previous five incarnations of Gesundheit had not been up
to expectations. However, Mr. Ablinger won an award in
the category of Persistence, having brought Gesundheits
1-5 to every edition of Roboexotica since 2001. Gesundheit
VI still had a ways to go. A pair of hospital-grade automatic
syringe pumps dispensed carefully measured vodka, juice,
and vermouth according to which button the drinker
pushed on the machine. A glass moved along a conveyor
belt underneath the dispenser syringes, and an ingenious
LEGO-based contraption pushed the beverage into the
waiting hands of the recipient. A nominal fee of two Euros
activated the machine; we can only surmise that this was
for the continued refinement of next years drinkbot.
The Environmental award went to Quebecois builder
Jacques Gallant. The Perpetual Popper used only corn and
sunlight to make sustainable bar snacks, and was also charming
to look at; 2007 was Mr. Gallants first year at RoboExotica,
and though his machine did not function perfectly (or at all)
he is determined to come back next year with a better model.
Aktionsgruppe LN2.0 subverted the dominant paradigm
by protesting the coming robot revolution. Members in
masks and gloves paraded through the exhibit space armed
with liquid-nitrogen-cooled, mandarin orange flavored alcohol
treats for the masses. Their message was simple: Drinks are
for humans, and robots will never understand the social
ramifications of true bar culture. The Aktionsgruppe was
awarded Best Off-Topic Entry as a good example of why and
when humans are still needed in the cocktail environment.*
Honorable mentions were given out at the ACRAS as
well, for those machines that were interesting but still needed
a bit more refinement than the winners. Along with the
aforementioned Rabbits Revenge and RoboMoji, mentions
were given out to Tom Heikes RoboFriend 2 in the category
SERVO 06.2008 35
RoboMoji the amazing robotic
Mojito maker. It's chain driven,
ice-empowered, and mashes and
muddles to perfection.
A college production of Hamlet, put on entirely
by anarchist robots, who later revolted against
their mainframe teacher to discuss what life was
like for robots. In German.
of Visionary System; to Misha A. Crest and Explanator for
Most Versatile; and to FH Joanneums student-built Urinator
for Most Realistic Depiction Of A Robot Penis (no, you dont
want to know).
The panel of officials also drew attention to what they
referred to as meager achievement: those entries that
stood out among the other entries not for any good points
they might have had, but for the lameness of the entry. The
recipients were awarded limes. David Fines installation The
Prisoners Dilemma was given the comment Installation is
a construction site. Bre Pettis R.R. Shot Bot was unfinished,
the BF Ice Cube Gun was upbraided for vodka theft and
militaristic behavior, and FH Joanneums Urinator had an
unappetizing delivery. Johannes Grezfurthners Kalkohol:
The Producer was cited with the note Causing floods is
not an achievement. And finally, Adrian Dabrowskis
Bic-O-Mat was awarded a lime for not showing up.
RoboExotica 2007 was not without its other mishaps.
The winner of the Fire and Smoke category El Espanol
Borracho offered up a stunning display when the
flamethrower got stuck in the on position and lit both its
creator and the floor on fire. Luckily, there were no injuries,
as bystanders were laughing too hard to douse the flames
effectually.
When it was repaired, ESB made excellent Spanish Coffees.
With a press of ESBs Big Red Button, Kahlua and a sweet-
ened coffee mixture were poured into a rocks glass, and a
small shot of the Austrian liqueur Stroh 80 was floated over
the top. Many would-be drinkers were warned away from
grabbing their drink prematurely, as the final touch is a
three second burst of butane/propane flame to add flavor.
Johannes Grenzfurtners piece, Kalcohol: The Provider
also experienced a slight malfunction when 40 liters of
Screwdriver (vodka and orange juice) ended up on the floor
and in the face of an unlucky (lucky?) participant. The
motorized cement mixer serving as part of the piece
accidentally dumped its load in an incident that was
reminiscent of aromatic, alcoholic waterboarding. Some
witnesses went for paper towels, others just got on hands
and knees and started licking. Disaster was averted when
the flow was stopped just before it reached the electrical
panels in the floor.
The Symposium took place during the day and was
thoughtfully attended by many participants, despite the
debauchery that tended to occur each evening. The talks
added an interesting philosophical aspect to RoboExotica,
as the presentations were not necessarily about robotics,
but dealt with human and technological interaction in general.
Jens Ohlig, Chaos Computer Club member and monochrom
correspondent, gave a talk that discussed using Markov
chains to write literature so human beings wouldnt have
to. (For example, wouldnt it be better if this article were
written by a robot? We think so.) The Markov property is a
mathematical concept that loosely says that for a given
changing system, the next state of the system depends on
the present state of the system, but not on the previous
states. This was applied to code and made for a great talk.
Cory Doctorow gave a fine talk on the subject of how
singularity and science fiction in general are a better tool
for understanding the present than they are as an actual
predictive tool, as well as why the coming era of uploading
human minds into the ether is a compelling idea. On the
same consciousness theme, monochrom artist-in-residence
David Fine declared that for his talk, he was as much an
expert on consciousness, being a conscious, sentient human
being, as anyone else in the forum full on conscious human
beings. Therefore, his talk was an unstructured discussion
on the nature of consciousness, consciousness and
technology, consciousness and art, and other matters which
make the weak-hearted want to be unconscious.
Other talks included MAKE magazines Bre Pettis speak-
ing on The Apocalyptic Utopia, Metroblogging.coms Sean
Bonner discussing the inmate taking over the asylum (that
is, citizen journalism and the World Wide Web), and
Alexander Edelhofer presenting in German about the effects
of geographical environment and industrial landscapes,
using the band Joy Division as a theoretical example. To
hear audio of each talk (some in German, some in English),
please visit www.roboexotica.org/en/audio.htm.
RoboExotica also featured a Film Brunch where
participants congregated on Sunday to drown their
hangovers in strong coffee and cult science fiction. The
powers that-be screened the classic mini-dystopian film
Demon Seed, about a researchers wife imprisoned in her
robotic house and forced to bear the machines child.
RoboExotica 2007 was successful for the organizers,
the participants, and especially the audience, which was
excited to participate in such a singular event. The
amount of international press was impressive, and
teamwork was the order of the day for everything from
conference organization to coffee making. Anticipation
is building for the 10th anniversary of RoboExotica in
November 2008 and if its anything like this year, well be
buying our tickets and getting a helmet sooner rather
than later. SV
* From www.shifz.com/2007/11/acra-90-winners_25.html.
36 SERVO 06.2008
The Cocktail Jackpot
spin the wheel, win a prize
works every time.
RoboFriends were fetching drinks
according to RFID tags on their tray
tops. They were mostly successful.
http://RoboGames.Net
June 12-15th, 2008
San Francisco, CA
Events:
Compete at RoboGames 2008!
Last year, over 1000 builders from around the world brought over 800
robots to San Francisco, in the 4th annual international event. This year,
we expect even more robots and engineers to compete. Be one! With 80
different events, theres a competition for everyone - combat, androids,
sumo, soccer, Lego, art, micromouse, BEAM, or Tetsujin! More than half
the events are autonomous. Even if you just come to watch, youll be
overwhelmed with the diversity.
Last year, RoboGames hosted teams with over 800 robots from Argentina,
Australia, Austria, Brazil, Canada, China, Colombia, Czech Republic,
Denmark, Germany, India, Indonesia, Iran, Japan, Korea, Mexico, Nether-
lands, Peru, Singapore, Slovenia, Sweden, Taiwan, UK, and the USA.
Be a RoboGames Sponsor!
RoboGames is the worlds largest open robot competition - letting people
of any age, gender, nationality, or affiliation compete. Sponsoring Robo-
Games not only helps more people to compete, but also gets your
company unrivaled press coverage and visibility. The event has been
covered by CNN, ESPN, Fox, CBS, ABC, NBC (live), EBS Korea, NHK
Japan, BBC, and countless print and web companies. Your logo can be
everywhere the cameras turn!
Rent a Booth!
Booth spaces are at the front of the venue, ensuring lots of traffic. With
3000-5000 people each day, youre company will get amazing traffic!
-SERVO Magazine
38 SERVO 06.2008
Frame Construction
I started by manufacturing the frame because it is arguably
the most important part of the robot. Using our CAD model
as a reference (shown in Figure 1), I determined how much
material was needed. I ordered 36 feet of 3 x .5 2024
aluminum bar stock, so that I would have enough material for
two frames (plus a little extra). My first step was to spray
down all of the metal with layout fluid so that I could mark
where everything needed to be cut. Using calipers, a ruler,
and a scribe I marked each cut. I then used a handheld
Sawzall to cut the bar stock to appropriately oversized
lengths. Next, I used the mill to cut everything to its exact
length. With that done, I was able to then lay out the
frame as shown in Figure 2.
The next step was to drill the holes that would allow me
I
n this series of articles, we
have worked our way through
the complete design phase
of building a robot. Starting
with I want to build a robot, we
developed a goal and created
a set of design specifications.
We next brainstormed and
used decision matrices to
decide on a combat robot with
a horizontal bar spinner as
the weapon, much like an
upside-down lawn mower.
Next, we chose a frame type
and the components along with
determining the ideal layout.
We completed the design of
the robot and learned some
tools and techniques that can
be useful when building a
robot. With all of this done, we
can now build the robot! In the
next few sections, I have
outlined the actual building
process of the robot.
Part 4
FIGURE 1. The robots completed design is
shown in a CAD rendering.
FIGURE 2. All of the aluminum is cut to size
and ready to be drilled and tapped.
FIGURE 3. One of the frame rails
has the through holes drilled
and countersunk for the screws
that hold the frame together.
b y B r i a n B e n s o n
Designing and Building a
ROBOTfrom
SCRATCH
Benson4.qxd 4/29/2008 7:38 AM Page 38
to screw the frame together. Drilling the holes that went
through the face of each rail was easy. For this, I simply used
the mill and a combination countersink/drill bit to drill the holes.
However, for the tapped holes that went into the end of each
rail, I wasnt able to mount the rails on the mill to drill them.
To solve this, I used specialized right angle clamps and a hand
drill. Clamping the two rails together at a right angle (as shown
in Figure 4), I used the rail with the through holes in it as a
template for the holes that would go into the end of the other
rail. This worked well because it meant the holes would line up,
since it was the equivalent of drilling them at the same time.
After drilling the holes, I tapped them as shown in Figure 5.
Now that the frame had been cut to size and the holes
drilled, I could pocket the frame rails. Pocketing involves
using the mill to remove material so that it retains much
of its strength but reduces weight. In our CAD model, I
preplanned all of the pocketing so that the robot would be
underweight. Using a scribe and a ruler, I marked where all
the pockets would be and then used the mill to cut them
out. Figure 6 shows some frame rails partially pocketed.
Continuing this process for every frame rail, I quickly found
myself with a completed frame, shown in Figure 7.
The next step after completing the frame was to make
the base plate. To do this in the quickest and easiest way, I
used the method talked about in the previous article. I bought
some .063 thick Lexan and cut it to the appropriate size. I
then clamped it to the frame, and used a hand drill to drill
through the Lexan, using the pre-existing holes in the frame
as a guide. Figure 8 shows the completed frame with the Lexan
attached to the bottom. Next, I used the Lexan template to
create the 1/8 7075 aluminum base plate. This worked
very well and resulted
in every hole lining up as expected.
The finished frame and base plate
are shown in Figure 9.
Overall Assembly
The next step after finishing the construction of the
frame was to start assembling the robot. To do this, I
began by installing the weapon motors and gearbox. I then
installed the bearing blocks for the weapon shaft assembly
and placed the drive motors in place to verify they would fit
as expected. All of this can be seen in Figure 10. Happy
with the fit of everything, I now cut the holes for the
wheels to pass through on the base plate and drilled the
mounting holes for everything that would attach to it. To
cut and drill these holes, I again used my Lexan template to
ensure everything would line up. I reattached the frame to
the base plate and mounted all of the components. I put
together the weapon assembly which included two custom
designed aluminum pulleys. With this assembled, I began
the wiring of the robot. All of this progress can be seen in
Figure 11. I also cut out the top armor out of 3/16 Lexan
and drilled those holes in it using the same template
method, except the template was the final product.
Wiring
The next step was to finish wiring the robot. I used
both 12 and 10 gauge wire, depending on the system. For
the weapon system, I used 10 gauge wire because of the
SERVO 06.2008 39
FIGURE 4. In order to accurately drill the
tapped holes at the end of each rail, the
mating frame rail is used as a template and
a right angle clamp is used to hold it
together while it is drilled.
FIGURE 5. The holes in the end of the rail are
tapped using a bottoming spiral flute tap.
FIGURE 7. The completed frame is
assembled for the first time.
FIGURE 8. Thin Lexan is used to create a
base plate template.
FIGURE 9. The completed base plate is
attached to the frame for the first time.
FIGURE 6. The nearly
finished frame
rails are partially
pocketed for
weight reduction.
high current draw the weapon would have. However, my
drive required much less current so I used 12 gauge wire
for it. Every connection was crimped and soldered for
maximum strength and conductivity. I used Anderson
power poles at each major connection point because of
their high current carrying capacity and ease of use. After
mounting all of the components and wiring the robot, it
was finished! The completed robot dubbed Papercut
can be seen in Figure 12.
Testing and Analysis
Part of building a robot is analyzing how well it meets
its goals and design specifications. After comparing the
completed robot against the design specifications from
the first article of this series, I would say that we were
successful in meeting all of our requirements. To refresh
your memory, those requirements were:
Combat robot for fighting in national competitions
Middleweight weight class (120 pound maximum weight)
Four-wheel drive
Inboard wheels
Tank steering
Minimum drivetrain speed of 6 mph
Minimum 1/4 ground clearance
Five minute run time
As small a size as possible in all
dimensions
Importance of subsystems
40% weapon
15% armor
20% drive train
25% reliability
Comply to all of the Robot Fighting Leagues and BotsIQ rules
Papercut met all of these requirements, and even with
its high powered weapon system weighed in at 117 pounds
3 lbs underweight. After testing, I found that Papercut
could be improved in one area. The wheel configuration
was very long and narrow; this led to the robot having a
hard time turning unless it was already moving. To alleviate
this problem, in future designs I need to ensure the robots
wheel base is at a minimum as wide as it is long.
In Conclusion
In this four part series of articles, we have covered a lot
of material! We have discussed every part of building a custom
robot from scratch. Starting with a simple idea, we developed
and quantified that idea. Next, we came up with a number
of different options and analytically compared them,
choosing the best one. We decided upon a frame type and
components, along with the best way to lay them out. Taking
all of this information, we designed the robot using CAD.
Next, we discussed a number of tools and techniques that are
useful when building a robot. Using this new construction
knowledge, we applied it towards
building a robot using the CAD as the
instructions. We successfully built the
robot and analyzed how well it
matched the design specifications
along with identifying its weaknesses.
I hope you enjoyed this series of
articles and that the information
presented will be useful in your future
robotic projects! For more information
on myself or my robots, or if you have
any questions, please visit
www.robotic-hobbies.com. SV
40 SERVO 06.2008
FIGURE 10. The weapon assembly is installed in
the frame and the drive motors are test fitted.
FIGURE 12. Papercut is completed and
is ready to do battle!
FIGURE 11. All of the components are
mounted and wiring has begun.
SERVO 06.2008 41
I
f you scan the pages of SERVO carefully, youll come
across a company called MaxBotix. They produce a line
of ultrasonic ranging devices that take the hassle out of
implementing a viable ultrasonic ranging application. Each
of MaxBotixs LV-MaxSonar rangefinders has a differing
beam pattern that results in a unique detection pattern.
This allows you the ultrasonic ranging system designer
to pick an LV-MaxSonar that is right for your application.
Ultrasonic rangefinders with wide beam widths
are better suited for eye applications. An eye application
may need to detect obstacles, avoid collisions, or sense
the presence of a humanoid. Wide beams also are very
good at detecting small objects due to their higher
sensitivity.
MaxBotix offers LV-MaxSonar ultrasonic rangefinders
that produce a narrow beam. These narrow beam
rangefinders are good for ranging and room mapping. A
narrow beam LV-MaxSonar rangefinder will do a better job
at operating in cluttered and high noise environments as
its beam is a bit less sensitive in the center. However, you
can use a narrow beam ultrasonic rangefinder to do the
work of a wide beam ultrasonic rangefinder if thats what is
right for your application.
The LV-MaxSonar ultrasonic rangefinder line is
composed of five models. As you can see in Figure 1, the
EZ0 is the wide beam ultrasonic rangefinder model and is
the most sensitive. The EZ1 emits a narrower beam than
the EZ0, which makes it more suitable for sensing humans.
The MaxBotix LV-MaxSonar-EZ2 produces a beam that is
even narrower than the EZ1. The beam width narrows
progressively from
Building a Sonar System
42 SERVO 06.2008
by Fred Eady
Detection pattern
to a 1/8 inch
diameter dowel.
EZ0 EZ1 EZ2 EZ3 EZ4
5V
3.3V
Detection pattern
to a 1/4 inch
diameter dowel.
Detection pattern
to a 1 inch
diameter dowel.
Detection pattern
to a 3 1/4 inch
diameter dowel.
V+ supply voltage,
(Distances overlaid on a 1 foot grid.)
LV-MaxSonar
-EZ
beam patterns
Ive always wanted to do an
ultrasonic ranging project. So,
guess what well be talking about
and building up this month?
Ultrasonic ranging is a great way
to add eyes to your mechanical
animal. Ill bet you didnt realize
that there is an off-the-shelf
ultrasonic ranging product out
there that allows you to tune
those electromechanical eyes
to your robots environment.
FIGURE 1. This illustration makes it easy to comprehend
the differing detection patterns of the line of MaxBotix
LV-MaxSonar ultrasonic sensors. The really cool thing is that
all of the LV-MaxSonar sensors have the same ranging data
interface. This set of lobe shots demonstrates the ranging of
various diameter dowels on a one foot grid.
PHOTO 1. The LV-
MaxSonar-EZ0 you see
here is a combination
of the MaxBotix
MaxSonar-UT ultrasonic
transducer and the
proprietary circuitry
you see in Schematic 1.
Another reason for not
getting too deep with
the inner workings of
the EZ0 is that there
is no technical
information available
from MaxBotix for the
ultrasonic transducer.
Eady.qxd 4/30/2008 10:41 AM Page 42
the LV-MaxSonar-EZ0 through to the LV-MaxSonar-EZ4.
Im anxious to begin our MaxBotix sonar project.
However, before we can run the range, we have to learn
how to ride.
The MaxBotix LV-MaxSonar
Ultrasonic Rangefinder
I seriously considered removing the MaxSonar-UT
ultrasonic rangefinder from the EZ0 you see in Photo 1
so that you could see its circuitry. Rather than taking a
chance on ruining my only one, I decided to show you
what the circuitry looks like schematically. Take a look at
Schematic 1. The EZ0 is under the control of a PIC16F676.
Since we dont really know what the PIC is doing
programmatically, we can only take a guess as to what
the supporting circuitry is doing. If you take a look at the
MaxBotix forum, youll see that some students have
attempted to simulate the circuit you see in Schematic 1.
Thats nice. However, MaxBotix wants to keep their secret
formula for ultrasonic sensing under wraps. I respect that
SERVO 06.2008 43

75K
100K
VCC
100K
.1uF
VCC
VCC
1K
PIC16F676
1
2
3
4
6
7 8
9
10
11
12
13
14
5
VDD
RA5
RA4
RA3
RC4
RC3 RC2
RC1
RC0
RA2
RA1
RA0
VSS
RC5
S-TXR
100K
.1uF
100K
BAV99DW
1
2 5
6
3 4
D1A
D2C D4C
D1C
D3C D3A
VCC
TX
PW
.1uF
+
-
LM324
3
2
1
4
1
1
.01uF
AN
VCC
1uF
+
-
LM324 12
13
14
100K
100K 100K
100K
.01uF
100K
680pF
10K
680pF
RX
+
-
LM324
10
9
8
BW
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
2.7K
4.7K
680pF
+
-
LM324
5
6
7
SCHEMATIC 1. This is presented for your viewing pleasure. Its
real purpose is to provide some advanced insight as to how
the ultrasonic transducer is supported and nothing more.
PHOTO 2. It doesnt get
any better than this.
Each LV-MaxSonar-EZ0
I/O pin is clearly
marked. The black dot
is a color code that
identifies this unit as an
LV-MaxSonar-EZ0. The
LV-MaxSonar-EZ4 has a
yellow dot. Im always
interested in looking at
printed circuit board
land patterns as you
never know what you
may find. Can you find
other messages in
this image?
Eady.qxd 4/29/2008 8:11 PM Page 43
and thats all well say about the circuit shown in Schematic
1. After all, were only interested in putting the EZ0 to work.
All of the ultrasonic engineering has been done for us
by the MaxBotix engineers. All we really have to do to bring
the EZ0 online is to apply some power and follow some
very simple operational rules. The LV-MaxSonar series of
ultrasonic rangefinders can be powered by voltages as low
as 2.5 volts and as high as 5.5 volts. This power rail range
allows the LV-MaxSonar ultrasonic rangefinder family to
work with 3.3 volt systems, which are gaining popularity
due to their lower power consumption characteristics.
These ultrasonic rangefinders draw approximately 3.0
ma of current when powered by a 5.0 volt power source.
When powered by 3.0 volts, the rangefinders draw only
2.0 ma of current. That kind of current consumption allows
the LV-MaxSonar ultrasonic rangefinders to easily operate in
battery powered mobile systems.
As you can see in Schematic 1, the EZ0 (and all of
the other LV-MaxSonar ultrasonic rangefinders) interfaces
to the outside world with five I/O lines and two power
connections. A physical look at the EZ0 interface can
be seen in Photo 2. Lets walk through each line of the
I/O interface.
Pin 1 is labeled BW. This pin is used when multiple
ultrasonic rangefinders need to be triggered. If triggering
multiple rangefinders is not part of your application, you
must tie the BW pin low or leave it open. Otherwise,
holding the BW pin logically high will force the EZ0s TX pin
to produce a pulse instead of serial data. The pulse is used
to trigger other ultrasonic rangefinders in the rangefinder
network. An initial seed pulse to the RX pin of the first
LV-MaxSonar ultrasonic rangefinder in the chain is all thats
needed to fire off the rest of the ultrasonic rangefinders
behind it in the chain.
PW marks pin 2 of the I/O interface. When the EZ0 is
ranging, the PW pin will emit a pulse that is relative to the
distance to the target object. The ranging pulse is defined
as 147 s per inch.
If measuring pulse widths is not something your host
microcontroller will do easily, you can opt to receive your
ranging information from the EZ0s AN pin. However, your
microcontroller will need to have an on-chip analog-to-
digital (A-to-D) converter subsystem to capture the AN
pins output. As youve probably deduced, the AN I/O pin
provides an analog voltage that is relative to the distance
to the target object. The distance is calculated as Vcc/512
volts per inch. Doing the math, we can count on 9.7656
mV per inch from the AN pin. The Vcc/512 ratio works
will with 10-bit A-to-D converters.
When the 10-bit A-to-D reference voltage is set to
+5.12 volts, each A-to-D step (not including zero) is 4.8828
mV, which happens to be half of the EZ0s volts-per-inch
figure of 9.7656 mV. If we put my HP-15C to work on the
3.3 volt A-to-D figures, we come up with 6.4453 mV per
inch. The 3.3 volt ratio is not as pretty as the 5.12 volt
ratio, but if thats what you have to run, you run it and
work with the hand youre dealt. The LV-MaxSonar-EZ0 will
supply precise A-to-D voltages. Your microcontroller must
be able to handle the 3.3 volt A-to-D information accurately.
The AN output voltages are buffered and represent the
most recent ranging data.
You already have a clue as to the operation of the
LV-MaxSonar-EZ0s RX pin. Recall that a pulse applied
to the RX pin of a chained ultrasonic rangefinder will
trigger a ranging operation. The RX pin is pulled logically
high. In single ultrasonic rangefinder designs, ranging
operations will be continuous if the RX pin is left open.
The RX pin can also be held logically high if your host
microcontroller needs to control the ranging process.
Otherwise, if the EZ0s ultrasonic rangefinder RX pin is
pulled logically low, ranging will cease. A low-to-high
logical pulse with a duration of 20 s or greater will trigger
a ranging operation.
The EZ0 TX pin is very interesting. As long as the
LV-MaxSonar-EZ0s BW pin is open or held low, the TX pin
spouts asynchronous serial data in RS-232 format. Recall
that when the BW pin is forced to a logical high, the TX pin
will revert to sending pulses instead of RS-232 ranging data.
Although the TX pin issues data in RS-232 format at zero-to-
Vcc levels, you can hang the EZ0s TX pin on your laptops
serial port interface. The signal levels at the TX pin are logic
levels and dont adhere to true positive and negative RS-232
voltage levels. So, to be politically correct, youll need an
RS-232 converter circuit or IC to interface the EZ0s TX
signal to a true RS-232 port. You can take your chances
with a direct interface between a PC serial port and the TX
pin as long as you never connect the serial ports TX pin to
the LV-MaxSonar-EZ0 I/O interface. As long as youre
pushing properly polarized data into the PCs RX pin,
theres a chance the serial interface will actually interpret
the zero-to-Vcc logic transitions as if they were RS-232
signals. My Lenovo laptop has no problems with the
LV-MaxSonar-EZ0 serial interface.
Once youve decided how to connect the EZ0s TX pin,
your firmware should expect to see an ASCII R with three
ASCII character digits following. The three ASCII digits will
be your ranging data in inches. The maximum value of the
ranging data will be 255 inches. A carriage return character
(ASCII 13 or 0x0D) denotes the end of the ranging data
stream. Speeds and feeds for the TX I/O pins serial data
are standard: 9600 bps, eight data bits, no parity, and one
stop bit.
All of the methods of obtaining ranging data from
the EZ0 can be used simultaneously. All we need to do is
provide the necessary microcontroller interface to capture
the ranging data from our desired ranging data portal.
However, before we can start writing our I/O interface
code, we need to understand the LV-MaxSonar-EZ0s timing
and power-up specifications.
LV-MaxSonar Timing
The LV-MaxSonar-EZ0 needs 250 ms of idle time
following power-up. After the 250 ms have passed, the EZ0
44 SERVO 06.2008
Eady.qxd 4/29/2008 8:12 PM Page 44
is ready to process input on its
RX pin. Recall that if the RX pin
is left open or forced logically
high, the ranging process will
begin and continue until the RX
pin is pulled logically low. With
that, lets run a scenario with
the RX pin open at power-up
plus 250 ms.
With the RX pin open or
forced logically high following
the setup time, the first ranging operation will be a 49 ms
calibration cycle. The next ranging operation will be the first
ranging operation that will report ranging data to the I/O
interface. Thus, the very first ranging data will appear at
the EZ0s data portal 98 ms past the 250 ms power-up
setup period. All subsequent ranging operations will
consume 49 ms each. What this all means is that the
LV-MaxSonar-EZ0 can perform a ranging operation every
49 ms. If your application requires control of the ranging
process, the EZ0 will scan the RX line at the end of every
ranging cycle. This allows you to force the RX I/O pin
logically low and take control of the scheduling of the
subsequent ranging cycles.
Each ranging cycle is initiated by a logical high level at
the RX I/O pin. Thirteen 42 kHz waves are transmitted at
the beginning of a ranging cycle. After the 13 waves have
been sent, the PW I/O pin is pulled to a logically high
level. The PW pin will go logically low when a target object
is detected. As you would expect, the maximum length
of a PW pulse is 37.5 ms, or the equivalent of just over
255 inches. The maximum ranging distance of the
LV-MaxSonar-EZ0 is 254 inches.
The 37.5 ms pulse width will occur when no target
objects are detected. Assuming we didnt detect a target
object, we still have 11.5 ms of time left in the ranging
cycle; 6.8 ms of the remaining ranging cycle time is used
to adjust the analog voltage that will appear on the AN
pin to the correct level. We still have 4.7 ms left. At this
point, the EZ0 has presented its pulse width ranging data
and its analog ranging data to the I/O interface. The
RS-232 ranging data is all thats left to present. The
serial ranging data is sent during the final 4.7 ms of the
ranging cycle.
To guarantee successful ranging operations, all we have
to do is make sure that there are no targets closer than
seven inches to the ultrasonic rangefinder during its
calibration time. Also, the EZ0 is not an outdoor cat. So,
we must be sure to keep it out of harms way as far as
weather goes. We now have enough information to begin
writing some interface code. Im going to write the EZ0
driver in C using HI-TECH PICC-18 and Ill target the
PIC18F2620. Before we start writing code and assembling
hardware, we can use my CleverScope to check out the
LV-MaxSonar-EZ0s pulse ranging data mechanism.
Ranging with a CleverScope
Lets use our human eyes to interpret the EZ0 ranging
pulse I captured in Screenshot 1. The pulse width as
measured by the CleverScope extents is 9562.3 s. A bit
of simple math will yield the distance from my coffee
tabletop to the ceiling:
9562.3 s/147 s per inch = 65.0496 inches
This is an easy way to receive instant gratification from
a ultrasonic rangefinder. However, to make the ranging
information work for us, we must employ the resources of
a microcontroller. My rangefinder support hardware is
visually obtainable in Schematic 2. As you can see, Ive tied
the LV-MaxSonar ultrasonic rangefinders PW output pin to
the PIC18F2620s CCP1 capture pin.
Ranging with a PIC18F2620
We need to electronically measure the pulse width
presented to the PIC18F2620s CCP1 capture input. The
algorithm is simple and so is the code. We must set up the
PIC18F2620 capture engine to trigger an interrupt on the
rising edge of the PW ranging signal. Meanwhile, TIMER1 is
running free with a period of 1 s. Thus, a count is supplied
to the CCP1 holding registers every microsecond. The
1 s TIMER1 period is a direct result of us running the
PIC18F2620 system clock at 4 MHz. I programmatically
SERVO 06.2008 45
SCREENSHOT 1. This is a look at
a LV-MaxSonar-EZ0 ranging pulse
that is emitted from the ultrasonic
rangefinders PW pin. This pulse
happens to be 9562.3 S wide.
With 147 S representing one
inch, this pulse equates to
65.0496 inches to the target,
which happens to be the coffee
tabletop to ceiling distance.
Eady.qxd 4/29/2008 8:12 PM Page 45
overrode the 20 MHz crystal you see in Schematic 2
with the PIC18F2620s internal oscillator.
When the rising edge of the PW ranging signal triggers
an interrupt, we immediately read the value of the CCP1
holding registers and preserve that value in the pulsestart
variable. The next step we perform is to configure the CCP1
input to trigger on a falling edge. Meanwhile, the TIMER1
clock is still counting. When the falling edge occurs,
another interrupt is generated and we preserve the
contents of the CCP1 holding registers in the pulseend
variable.
The pulse width is the difference in the value of the
pulseend variable and the pulsestart variable. Since the
pulsewidth value is in microseconds, we can easily
determine the target distance in inches by dividing the
pulsewidth value by 147. Heres a look at the PW pulse
capture interrupt handler code:
void interrupt MEASURE(void)
{
if(CCP1IE && CCP1IF)
{
//interrupt caused by rising edge of PW
if(flags.rising_edge)
{
//save start count
pulsestart = make16(CCPR1H,CCPR1L);
CCP1CON = 0b00000100;
//capture falling edge
flags.rising_edge = 0;
//setup for falling edge
}
else
//interrupt caused by falling edge of PW
{
//save end count
pulseend = make16(CCPR1H,CCPR1L);

AN
PIC VOLTAGE SELECT JUMPER
C6
.1uF
PW
OPTIONAL
390
VCC
VCC
JP2
R2 1K
+
C5
220uF
ICSP CONNECTOR
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
VCC
+3.3V
+
C3
220uF
R1
390
RX
C8
.1uF
5.0V
+5.0V
C7
.1uF
U2
PIC18F2620/PIC18LF2620
2
3
4
5
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
10
9
1
6
7
8
19
20
RA0
RA1
RA2
RA3
RB0
RB1
RB2
RB3
RB4
RB5
RB6/PGD
RB7/PGD
RC0
RC1/CCP2
RC2/CCP1
RC3
RC4
RC5
RC6/TX
RC7/RX
OSC2/RA6
OSC1/RA7
MCLR
RA4/T0CKI
RA5
GND
GND
VDD
VR1 LM2940
IN
G
N
D
OUT
C11 20pF
LV-Max Sonar-EZ0
1 3 4 5 2 6 7
B
W
A
N
R
X
T
X
P
W
V
C
C
G
N
D
Q1
BC846B
3
1
2
VCC
Y1 20 MHz
+
C2
220uF
R4 1K
5.0V
+5.0V
OPTIONAL
ACTIVITY LED
J1
+6VDC to +9VDC
BW
VR2 LM3940
IN
G
N
D
OUT
C12 20pF
VCC
R5
10K
3.3V
LED1
R1
100
R3
10K
RX
C4
.1uF
C9
.1uF
C1
.1uF
46 SERVO 06.2008
SCHEMATIC 2. As you have come to expect, theres no rocket science
in my PIC design. All of the advanced hardware and firmware resides
within the confines of the LV-MaxSonar-EZ0 ultrasonic rangefinder.
Eady.qxd 4/29/2008 8:13 PM Page 46
CCP1CON = 0b00000101;
//capture rising edge
flags.rising_edge = 1;
//setup for rising edge
flags.captured = 1;
//signal captured pulse
}
CCP1IF = 0; //clear the CCP1 interrupt flag
}
}
The interrupt handler is steered by the flags.rising_edge
flag, which is a logical one for capturing the rising edge of
the PW ranging pulse and a logical zero for capturing the
falling edge of the PW ranging pulse. The flags.captured bit
signals the main body code that a valid set of pulse width
values has been captured. Heres how the flag bits were
realized in code:
typedef struct {
charrising_edge:1;
charcaptured:1;
} FFlags;
FFlags flags;
I created a structure of type FFlags, which consists
of two bits, rising_edge, and captured. The instantiated
structure flags are based on the structure FFlags. FFlags is
reusable. For instance, I could instantiate a structure of bits
called pwbits in this way:
FFlags pwbits;
The bits contained within the structure pwbits are
referenced in the following manner:
pwbits.rising_edge = 1;
pwbits.captured = 0;
Although the bits rising_edge and captured are
common to both structures, they are separate entities and
can be used together in the same body of code. Defining flag
bits this way is just a fancy (and easier) way of doing this:
char flags;
#define rising_edge 0x01 //rising_edge bit
#define captured 0x02 //captured bit
//rising_edge = 0
#define clr_rising_edge flags &= ~rising_edge
//rising_edge = 1
#define set_rising_edge flags |= rising_edge
//captured = 0
#define clr_captured flags &= ~captured
//captured = 1
#define set_captured flags |= captured
Lets take a look at the main body code that summons
the services of the capture interrupt handler we call
MEASURE. Recall that the ultrasonic rangefinder needs
250 ms of time to get its act together after power-up.
Also recall that the rangefinders first ranging cycle is a
calibration run. So, to make sure the EZ0 ultrasonic range
finder is ready for work, we allow it to run free for a while:
//*******************************************************
//* MAIN SERVICE LOOP
//*******************************************************
void main(void)
{
init();
//allow TIME to calibrate
RX = 1;
for(temp16=0;temp16<0xFF;++temp16) {
NOP();
}
RX = 0;
After were sure the LV-MaxSonar rangefinder is ready
to go, we turn our attention to the PIC18F2620 and set up
the PICs capture subsystem:
CCP1CON = 0b00000101; //capture rising edge
CCP1IE = 1; //enable capture interrupt
CCP1IF = 0; //clear capture interrupt flag
reset_TIMER1(); //initialize TIMER1 and start it
We are now ready to let the main loop take control:
do{
enable_GLOBALint; //enable interrupts
RX = 1; //kick off a ranging cycle
do{
NOP(); //wait for ranging to complete
} while(!flags.captured);
SERVO 06.2008 47
PHOTO 3. Nothing fancy here except the LV-MaxSonar-
EZ0 ultrasonic rangefinder. From left to right we have a
dual-rail +3.3/+5.0 volt regulated power supply, the
PIC18F2620, and the EZ0 ultrasonic rangefinder.
Eady.qxd 4/29/2008 8:13 PM Page 47
disable_GLOBALint; //disable
//interrupts
RX = 0; //cease ranging
//compute pulsewidth and distance
//in inches
pulsewidth = pulseend - pulsestart;
// in ms
distance = pulsewidth / 147;
//147us = 1
flags.captured = 1; //do it all
//again
reset_TIMER1();
} while(1);
The result of running the PW code
through a ranging cycle is captured in
Screenshot 2. Enough said.
Ranging with an Analog-
to-Digital Converter
I put my Meterman DM73B multimeter
leads across the +5 volt power supply of
the rangefinder support hardware you see
in Photo 3. My +5 volt power supply is
actually producing +4.97 VDC. Using the
AN portal scaling factor (Vcc/512) and my
actual power supply voltage (4.97 volts)
yields a conversion factor of 9.707 mV per
inch. With an A-to-D reference voltage
equal to the power supply voltage, the
PIC18F2620s A-to-D step voltage works
out to 4.858 mV per step.
To get the ranging information from
the EZ0s AN output pin into the
PIC18F2620, I attached it to the
PIC18F2620s RA0 analog input. To obtain
the target distance, I sprinkled in a bit of
A-to-D code onto our PW code:
do{
GODONE = 1; //trigger an AD
//conversion
while(GODONE); //wait for the
//conversion to
//end
} while(!flags.captured);
Rather than just spin around doing
SCREENSHOT 2. The proof is in the
pudding. The distance value matches our
CleverScope observation.
SCREENSHOT 4. It doesnt get much easier
than this. All I had to do was add a transistor
and some PIC18F2620 EUSART code to get
this result.
48 SERVO 06.2008
SCREENSHOT 3. The analogdistance value is actually the number of 4.858 mV
steps measured by the PIC18F2620s analog-to-digital converter subsystem.
To get the distance, we must multiply the number of steps and the voltage per
step values and divide the product by the AN scaling factor.
Eady.qxd 4/29/2008 8:14 PM Page 48
nothing while waiting for the pulse width distance
figure to be computed, I replaced the NOP (No Operation)
instruction with an A-to-D conversion trigger. A ranging
cycle with the new A-to-D code resulted in the
analogdistance value you see in Screenshot 3. To
convert the analogdistance voltage value to inches, we
do the following:
1) Convert the analogdistance raw value to volts: 0x80 *
4.858 mV = 0.6218 volts.
2) Convert volts to inches: 0.6218
volts/9.707 mV = 64.062 inches.
If we consider the PW distance
golden, the A-to-D distance value is
well within tolerances, considering Im
feeding the PIC18F2620s A-to-D
converter with a piece of wirewrap
wire hung out in the wind. Lets see
what the TX output has to say.
Automatic Ranging with
the TX Output
Transistor Q1 in Schematic 2 is
acting as an inverter. If we are to
make any sense of the TX ASCII
output, we must invert the TX serial
data before presenting it to the
PIC18F2620 RX input. The
PIC18F2620 doesnt have a native
method of inverting the data that is
coming into its EUSART. So, Q1 acting
as a logic inverter is a necessary
hardware addition. From the looks
of Screenshot 4, it appears 64
inches is the consensus distance
determination.
Home on the Range
Ive had a great time experiment-
ing with my set of LV-MaxSonar ultrasonic rangefinders.
Ill post all of the PIC18F2620 LV-MaxSonar ultrasonic
rangefinder driver code we talked about plus the
PIC18F2620 RS-232 driver code on the SERVO
website (www.servomagazine.com) so that you
can have just as much fun with your LV-MaxSonar
ultrasonic rangefinder as I had with mine. See you
next time! SV
SERVO 06.2008 49
Tormach PCNC 1100 Features:
Q Table size 34" x 9.5"
Q R8 Spindle 1.5 hp variable speed to 4500 RPM
Q Computer controlled spindle speed and direction
Q Precision ground ballscrews
Q Digitizing and tool sensing support
Q 4th axis and high speed spindle options
3 Axis Mill
$6800
plus shipping
When youre serious about hardware, you need serious tools.
Whether milling 0.020 traces on prototype PCBs or cutting
steel battle armor, this CNC mill can do it all. Weighing in at more
than 1100 lbs, the PCNC can deliver the hardware end of your
combined hardware & software projects.
Precision CNC
Machining
Mill includes Control, CAD and CAM
software. Optional stand, coolant system,
computer and accessories are extra.
Product information and online ordering at www.tormach.com

MaxBotix www.maxbotix.com
LV-MaxSonar Ultrasonic
Rangefinders
HI-TECH Software
www.htsoft.com
HI-TECH PICC-18 C Compiler
Microchip www.microchip.com
PIC18F2620
Resources
Fred Eady can be reached via email at fred@edtp.com.
Eady.qxd 4/29/2008 8:14 PM Page 49
I
found Davids pictures of Loki with exaggerated postures
quite amusing! Although I was already deeply involved
in another robotic project a hexapod I named Shelob
(the giant spider from Lord of the Rings) I was taken
by the antics of Loki walking and posturing. I had to
build one!
I began to entertain the idea of designing and building
my own Loki. Davids Loki has what looks like aluminum
legs and feet. I couldnt figure out a simple way to solder or
weld the leg and feet parts together. I later found out that
the original Lokis legs were made of painted aircraft-type
plywood. Since I prefer working with metal, I hit upon the
idea of making the parts out of PCB (printed circuit board)
material. Double-sided PCB stock is fairly easy to cut, and
easy to soft-solder together with a simple soldering iron. I
was hooked on another bot project!
Design
After a few hours on a CAD package, I had designed a
body, the legs, and the feet parts to be CNC milled out of
PCB material. I got the rough dimensions from eyeballing
Davids pictures. My body would be a little wider, due to
the PIC QwikFlash controller board I planned on using.
This additional width would lead to my initial failure, as
youll read.
Loki walks by lifting one foot up and over the other.
Many biped robots accomplish walking by shifting the
body weight to keep the CG (center of gravity) within the
landed foot. Not so with Loki, whose feet are quite big,
with toes extending towards each other, passing the CG
of the bot, and actually overlapping. So, Loki is able to lift
up a foot and hold it up as long as desired. This can lead
to some outrageous postures, and is exactly what drew
me to Loki!
Remember I mentioned that my first attempt was a
I first became interested in bipeds when I ran across a
Robotics website by David Buckley in the U.K. One of
Davids bots was called Loki. I thought I recognized the
name. Loki is the Norse god of trickery, mischief, and
change; and a major character in Norse mythology. Then I
remembered, in the TV series Star Gate SG-1, Loki is an Asgard!
Loki Crosses the
Pond Part 1
50 SERVO 06.2008
by Alan Marconett
Cutting Loki deck parts on CNC'd Sherline Mill. A paper template
guides the clamp setup and verifies proper tool path.
Cutting Loki deck parts on CNC'd Sherline Mill.
Marconett.qxd 4/30/2008 6:54 AM Page 50
failure? I neglected to have the feet overlap so
that the CG of the bot was always over a foot.
I had made the body wider, but not the feet longer. After a
few tests, I determined a good length for the feet and
made another pair. I may still use the first pair of feet by
making a narrower body with a smaller controller board.
The DonTronics DT106 board holds some promise, or I may
just design a new dedicated board from scratch.
Mechanical Construction
Depending on your resources, you can build the body
parts of Loki in several ways. As mentioned, I drew the
parts in CAD, and milled them out with my CNCd Sherline
mill. Not everyone has CNC of course, so the usual
procedure is to lay out the parts with a blue dye and a
scriber, and then cut them out. Drill all the holes first. PCB
stock is easy to cut; a bandsaw makes simple work of the
exterior contours. Dremel has a new scroll saw Id love to
have. Of course, a hand tool would also work. Mind the
notches! Although exact location is not critical, they
should be similarly located on matching parts. None of the
dimensions are critical, and the decorative holes can be left
out at the builders discretion. I like all the curves and
holes, especially in the body and upper decks. The
curves could be left out, which would also simplify
making the parts. For the large holes in the body,
youll want to drill holes near the corners, and then
saw between them to remove the material. Finish up
with a small jewelers file, and they should be good.
Nibblers are also useful for this job. Make two sets
of LokiFootPartsV2 and LokiSonarPlate, and one
LokiBody2. Youll also need one LokiIRbracket of
one sort or another.
An alternate way to lay the parts out is to print
out full scale templates on a laser-jet printer, then cut
them out and Scotch-tape them onto the PCB stock
(follow the templates to cut out the stock). One could
even lay out a PCB, etch it, and then cut out the
parts. I dont know if it would be any more useful for
the home PCB maker, or if a PCB house would accept
the job and route them out for you. Just a thought.
Loki Gets Legs
To put the legs together, trial-fit the pieces, then clean
them up with fine sandpaper and de-grease. Assemble a
foot, heat the copper foil up using the tip of the iron in
contact with both pieces of the joint, and quickly tin. Tack
solder the joint in a place or two. Keep testing the foot for
a good flat stance on a flat surface as you tin and tack
solder the remainder of the joints. Then go back and
form good small fillets between the pieces. No harm in
practicing on some scrap first!
Notice that the two brackets the knee servos bolt into
are made of aluminum. I would have used aluminum for all
the pieces, but I cant solder aluminum! A simple bend of
these pieces in a bench brake makes quick work of these
parts. The aluminum may be a little harder to work with. In
light of this, I also have drawings of this bracket for making
them from PCB stock.
Youll also note that the bracket holding the two IR
sensors is made of aluminum angle. You can buy angle, or
SERVO 06.2008 51
Loki and Shelob on display at Yuri's Night,
Moffett Field, CA, April 12, 2008.
Loki back.
Loki front.
Upside-down view of Loki showing battery and plastic hold-down.
Loki Crosses the Pond Part 1
bend it up from aluminum plate. Cut a thin notch to allow
the angle to be bent back to match the drawing. Here
again, I felt aluminum was the best material for the job,
however, it too can be made up from PCB stock. Take your
pick; there are PCB-style drawings for it, as well.
Mounting Servos
Now is a good time to electrically center each of the
servos, and then attach the servo horns square to the
servos. This can be done by the controller board, or a servo
driver accessory available for this purpose. Position the
servos to 1,500 s. The screws used can be the self-tapping
screws supplied with the usual servo horns, or 2-56 screws
in case you have machined servo horns.
To give Loki his legs, well start by bolting the pair of
shoulder servos into the body as per the graphics. Next,
bolt the L-brackets onto the installed shoulder servo horns.
This order is required as the knee servos block access to the
screws of the shoulder
servo horns.
Bolting on the knee
servos is next. Its a little
cramped up near the
shoulder servo horn,
but youll find that a
miniature ignition
wrench will help here.
Some users might want
to use the nylon snap
rivet fasteners available
for R/C servos. They
work well in blind areas
such as these.
The feet can now
be bolted up to the servo horns of the knee servos. With
the spine shafts of the servo only allowing rough squaring
of the servo horns, alignment wont be perfect. Later
well determine and enter servo offsets into the controller
to correct for this. Actually, we dont quite square the
shoulder servo, anyway. Loki has a little problem with his
feet, as youve probably noticed. They are too long! In
order for them to both lay flat on the floor, well actually
stagger them a little, to keep Loki from tripping over his
own feet!
The controller board will be mounted by means of four
1/2 spacers. An additional set of four spacers mounts the
two sensor decks on top of the controller board. The IR
bracket shares the two screws used to mount the controller
board, and is mounted below the body. Youll need four
long 4-40 screws (upper) and four short 4-40 screws (lower)
for this task.
Two identical sensor decks are to be made. Solder the
rectangular plates to these boards as before. Small gussets
(corner braces) can be added if desired,
but they haven't proven necessary. Youll
bolt the Bluetooth transceiver to one
(add a lock washer from a toggle switch)
and the ultrasonic rangefinder to the
other. The rangefinder is mounted on a
pair of 5/8 long 4-40 screws, and two
3/8 spacers. Also mounted below the
controller board is the battery. I secured
my battery with a thin (0.025) sheet of
flexible PCB stock I had on hand. You
could also just use rubber bands!
Controller Board
I should say a little about the
controller board I used. Most any
controller board and processor can
probably be used on a bot this size. I had
on hand several bare QwikFlash boards
purchased from the PICbook website
52 SERVO 06.2008
3
.
7
6
0
5
3.7000
0.1210
6.4791
0.1720
0.2500 0.8000
1
.
6
3
7
5
4.9000
5
.
2
7
8
9
Noki Body 1.1
Another upside-down view of Loki.
Drawing to make Loki's body. Make from
1/16 PCB stock.
Katie, Loki's admirer (Nemesis?) looks on.
(www.picbook.com). This website supports the
book Embedded Design with the PIC18F452
Microcontroller written by John Peatman.
If you like programming in Basic, consider
either a Basic Atom or a Basic Atom Pro board from
Lynxmotion. Youll also want a Bot Board II to put
them on. These modules are well supported, and are
an excellent place to start ones studies in computers
for robots.
The main cutout in the body is sized to allow mounting
of the QwikFlash controller board. Use of a different
controller board will necessitate changing the mounting holes
and possibly the cutout. Or, a trick that Ive used, simply cut
and drill a 4 x 4 piece of PCB stock to match the holes in
the body, and then make an appropriately sized cutout
along with mounting holes for the new controller. I did this
in Shelobs lower deck to mount an SSC-32 board.
Electrical
The electrical system on Loki is simple. It consists of a
battery, switch, battery connector, and wiring. The free ends
of this wiring are to be terminated in the power connector.
The red +V wire goes to the center connector; the black -V
wire goes to the shell. This connector allows easy disconnect
from the controller board. The battery connector can be
disconnected to allow connection of the battery charger.
I initially ran my Loki with a battery pack lying on my
desk. Having the weight of the battery pack off-loaded
SERVO 06.2008 53
0
.
5
0
0
0
0.5000
1.1250
0
.
6
5
6
2
0.0935
0.3150
0.1720
0.6560
0
.
1
6
8
9
0.5500
0.3500
0
.
5
0
0
0
0.6560
0.3656
0
.
3
0
6
2
1
.
9
3
7
5
0
.
1
5
6
3
1
.
2
1
8
7
0.8000
1
.
6
3
7
5
2
.
2
8
1
2
0
.
1
5
0
0
2.5334
0.0625
0.2500 0.3000 0.3000
0.2500
0.3000
0.4000
0.3937
4.4033
4.1495
1.3125
0
.
8
0
1
5
0
.
7
0
0
0
1.3750
0.0935
0.3150
0.4000
1
.
7
5
0
0
1.3750
1.2500
0
.
6
8
4
4
0
.
8
8
0
7
4.8878
2
.
3
7
5
0
0.0625
V2 Foot
gusset, make 2
Foot
(One Leg)
0.0400
0.6725
0
.
2
9
5
0
0
.
1
0
0
9
0.1000
0.1210
0.1280
0.2500
0
.
5
7
4
8
1.5018
1
.
0
2
6
5
1.7035
3.7000
1
.
1
2
5
7
4.4375
2
.3
1
1
0
1
6
.
2
4
3
4
SonarPlate
0
.2
1
4
0
3.7752
0
.
1
7
4
1
0
.
5
0
0
0
2
.2
5
0
0
2
.2
5
0
0
1
.4
5
6
7
1
.4
5
6
7
2
.0
9
6
1
1
7
.
1
0
9
0
0
.
5
0
0
0
0.1160
IR Sensor Bar
AuminumAngle
0.0935
0.3150
0.6560
0
.
3
0
6
2
1
.
9
3
7
5
0
.
1
5
6
3
3
.
0
0
0
0
0.8000
1
.
6
3
7
5 3
.
5
6
2
5
0.1720
0.3656
0.3937
1/16 bend allowance
Loki Leg (.0625 Aluminum)
Drawing to make one
leg/foot (need two sets)
from 1/16 PCB stock,
including upper leg.
Drawing to make
sonar sensor plates
from PCB stock.
Drawing to make IR sensor bracket from aluminum angle.
Drawing to make (need two) upper legs from 1/16"
aluminum plate.
allowed me to use some old Futaba S3004 R/C servos I
had laying around until I could determine what size servos
I needed.
NOTE: Hitec HS-475HB servos or better are needed to move
Loki with the batteries on board. The Futaba S3004 servos
were NOT able to move Loki properly with the batteries
on-board. Specifications for the servos are:
Hitec HS-645MG: 107 oz-in at 4.8V, 133 oz-in at
6.0V
Hitec HS-475HB: 61 oz-in at 4.8V, 76 oz-in at 6.0V
Futaba S3004: 44 oz-in at 4.8V, 56 oz-in at 6.0V
Sensors
Loki presently has three sensors. Two IR
distance sensors (also called proximity sensors or
rangefinders) and an ultrasonic sensor. The sensors
allow Loki to avoid obstacles. I started out with the
Devantech ultrasonic sensor, but then realized Id
need two sensors to determine which way to turn.
As a result, I added the two Sharp GP2D12 IR
sensors that I had on hand.
The ultrasonic sensor gives good range
information from practically touching (a little over
1) out to several feet, although we only use it out
to something less then 3. Mounting this sensor
on a small R/C servo would allow it to rotate and
collect better data. This sensor is read by the I
2
C
peripheral on the controller board in a similar
fashion to reading I
2
C EEPROMS.
The IR sensors are a little smaller and cheaper
than the ultrasonic sensor. The max range is about
30. They are inaccurate (way!) at distances less
than about 4. These sensors output a DC voltage
between 0.45V and 2.45V and are to be read by
two A/D channels of the controller board. Either a
look-up table or a scaling algorithm must be used
to scale the voltages read. A good white paper is
mentioned in the references.
Servos
WARNING! Servos can rapidly jump when first turned
on! Positioning the feet as mentioned will minimize any
undesired jerking motion of the feet upon application of
servo power. KEEP YOUR FINGERS CLEAR of Lokis feet
when starting up!
I recommend connecting and testing one servo at a
54 SERVO 06.2008
0
.
5
0
0
0
0.4622
2.0961
0.4622 1.4567
2.0961
1
.
0
0
0
0
4.5000
1.4567
0.1160
IR Sensor Bar
Auminum Plate
2.5000
0
.
1
7
4
1
0
.
5
0
0
0
2
.2
5
0
0
1.4567
0
.
5
0
0
0
1
7
.
1
0
9
0
0.1160
3.7752
2
.2
5
0
0
0
.2
1
4
0
2
.0
9
6
1
PCB Stock
Make 2
IR Sensor Bar
Drawing to make IR
sensor bracket from
aluminum plate.
Drawing to make IR
sensor bracket from
PCB stock.
Old pair of Loki legs. Side view of old legs on initial
Loki. NOTE: Feet too short!
A pair of Loki upper legs bent up from
aluminum plate.
time. Driving servos into their mechanical stops can damage
them. Proceed cautiously. Also be aware that if the battery
discharges too far, erratic servo operation can occur. Turn
off the power immediately!
Power up either Lokis controller with ONLY servo #0
connected, or a servo driver (Servo Driver Pro). These servo
drivers are reportedly (I don't have one yet) useful in aligning
servos during construction of a robot just what we need!
Turn on the servo power, being careful to hold up Loki
by the body, and WATCH your fingers!
Servo Calibration
As mentioned earlier, with the servo horns only allowing
rough squaring, we will record and save a calibration value
for each centered servo position. This calibration will be
dependent upon the controller board and software used.
The intent is to be able to send a 1,500 s (null) position
request to all servos and have Loki move to the left foot
forward posture. This is the starting position, and all
of the canned move sequences should both start and
stop here.
NOTE: Futaba 3004 servos rotate the opposite direction to
Hitec HS-475HB servos! Be sure you account for this if you
change between the servo brands.
Part 2
Part 2 of this article will discuss the QwikFlash board I
used and the software developed to run Loki.
Lokis Future
A better location for the IR and ultrasonic sensors
could be investigated. Maybe rotating sensors! Ive been
contemplating adding some foot sensors, as well. These
would be great for keeping Loki from walking off the table!
A battery test function would be quite useful. A low
dropout voltage regulator to supply the controller board
would probably allow Loki to run on just a 6V battery pack.
One would have to
check to see what
current the IR and
sonar sensors
would need,
however. A custom
control board
for Loki is also
envisioned. SV
SERVO 06.2008 55
A set of PCB parts for two Loki legs/feet (no upper legs).
Davids original
Loki with wooden
body/legs. Foot
up in the air.
PIC BOOK URL: www.picbook.com
Schematic of QwikFlash board:
www.picbook.com/bookinfo/QwikFlash.pdf
Assembly instructions for QwikFlash board:
www.picbook.com/bookinfo/CA1.pdf
David Buckley website: http://davidbuckley.net/DB/Loki.htm
QwikFlash board:
www.microdesignsinc.com/qwikflash/index.htm#QwikFlash_
Development
Microchip data sheets, ICD 2, MPLAB: www.microchip.com
Board Parts, PCB stock, PIC: www.digikey.com
Hi-Tech PICC-18 compiler: www.htsoft.com
Servos, IR sensors, battery: www.lynxmotion.com
Ultrasonic Rangefinder:
www.superdroidrobots.com/shop/item.asp?itemid=344&
catid=35
Sparkfun Bluetooth:
www.sparkfun.com/commerce/categories.php?cPath=16_115
SchmartBoard jumpers:
www.schmartboard.com/index.asp?page=products_
accessories
DT106 Development board:
www.dontronics-shop.com/search.php?mode=search
Aluminum stock: www.onlinemetals.com
Book available on Amazon.com:
www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0130462136
Embedded Design with the PIC18F452 Microcontroller
Prentice Hall, 2003
ISBN: 0-13-046213-6
T2 Terminal program:
www.mpfreezone.com/downloads/downloads.html
Docklight Terminal program: www.docklight.de
References
Medonis
Engineering
www.medonis.com
Android Robot Head Kit
Maxwell
Lifesize - stands 19 high!
5 servos move head, eyes, jaw
8 channel servo controller
Windows control software

Great for Halloween displays!
Human Robot Interaction!
$350.00
56 SERVO 06.2008
Microsoft Releases
Preview of New Version
of its Robotics Platform
Software development platform aims
to continue making programming
robots easier and more affordable
for hobbyists and professionals alike.
A
t the recent RoboBusiness
Conference and Exposition in
Pittsburgh, PA, Microsoft released the
first community technology preview
(CTP) of Microsoft Robotics Developer
Studio 2008, the new version of its
robotics programming platform.
Microsoft Robotics Developer Studio
2008 contains improvements in its
runtime performance, distributed
computational capabilities, and tools.
Scheduled for release later this
year, the first preview of the product is
now available for evaluation and testing
by developers, customers, and partners.
2008 is a Windows-based environment
that can be used by academic,
hobbyist, and commercial developers
for the creation of a variety of robotic
programs and testing scenarios.
We launched Microsoft Robotics
Studio in 2006 in response to the
robotics communitys request for a
mature platform and toolset that would
provide for stability and portability,
allowing more people to participate and
contribute, said Tandy Trower, general
manager of the Microsoft Robotics
Group. Microsoft Robotics Developer
Studio 2008 demonstrates Microsofts
continued commitment to help catalyze
the emerging new markets for robotics
by delivering even better performance
and enhanced tools. Microsoft
Robotics Developer Studio 2008
includes the following new elements:
Increased runtime performance.
Performance improvements of 150
percent to 300 percent in message
throughput between services within a
node and between DSS nodes. Services
now load 200 percent faster.
Improved distributed computational
capabilities. Support for distributed
language integrated queries (LINQ),
which reduce network utilization and
simplify service authoring. LINQ support
enables advanced filtering and inline
processing of sensor data at the source.
Improvements to tools. The ability to
visually define computational domains
within the Microsoft Visual Programming
Language (VPL) tool, providing for easier
accessibility to managing distributed
execution. The Visual Simulation
Environment (VSE) tool adds the ability
to record and play back simulations,
which allows for easier sharing of
running simulation experiences. In
addition, VSE adds a new floorplan
editor to simplify the definition of
complicated structures and interiors.
The latest version of the software
bears a new name to better reflect
its objective to support software
development for robots and to
better align with Microsofts other
development tools.
Previous versions of the software
gained widespread support throughout
the robotics industry, with more than
200,000 copies downloaded and more
than 50 companies pledging their
support by joining the Microsoft
Robotics Supporting Partner Program.
Aldebaran Robotics has joined the
Partner Program. Microsoft is working
with Aldebaran to bring services and
simulation capabilities for their Nao
robot to the Microsoft robotics platform.
Developers can take advantage of the
detailed simulation to validate motion
sequences, or test image recognition
algorithms. Aldebarans Nao robot is
designed to be an affordably priced,
humanoid robot with first-class
mechanical, electronic, and cognitive
features and up to 25 degrees of
freedom.
A persistent challenge for the
robotics industry up till now has been
the limited choice within development
platforms that would allow developers
to easily create robotic applications,
said Bruno Maisonnier, president and
founder of Aldebaran Robotics.
2008 will contribute greatly to expand
the robotics industry and encourage
more developers to design new robot
applications. We are pleased to support
these efforts.
Microsoft Robotics Studio and
2008 are available as a free download
for use in noncommercial applications.
Licensing details for commercial robot
developers are available at
www.microsoft.com/robotics.
B
lo
B
low
O
u
t
w
O
u
t
S
p
e
c
ia
l
S
p
e
c
ia
l
$
9
.9
5
!
$
9
.9
5
!
WWW.SERVOMAGAZINE.COM
Showcase Jun08.qxd 4/30/2008 1:17 PM Page 56
The Escape
Robot`s built-in
microprocessor
enables it to
'think on its own.
(KSR4) $29.95
20 second voice recorder/playback
module. The electret microphone is on the
board. One button records, the other button is
momentarily pressed to replay the message.
(pre-assembled) (A96010) $6.60
5mm White
water clear
LED 3.5V
10,000 mcd
(AB287)
$0.56
The Velleman Personal Scope
is not a graphical multimeter
but a complete portable
oscilloscope at the size and
cost oI a good multimeter.
(HPS10)
The robot Irog moves Iorward
when it detects sound and
repeats: start (move Iorward) -~
stop -~ leIt turn -~ stop -~ right
turn -~ stop. (KSR2) $19.95
S
o
l
d
e
r
i
n
g

r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
Thousands
m
ore item
s on
our w
eb site!
$146.
Ask for our FREE 96 page catalog
VISIT OUR ONLINE STORE AT
www.allelectronics.com
WALL TRANSFORMERS, ALARMS,
FUSES, CABLE TIES, RELAYS, OPTO
ELECTRONICS, KNOBS, VIDEO
ACCESSORIES, SIRENS, SOLDER
ACCESSORIES, MOTORS, DIODES,
HEAT SINKS, CAPACITORS, CHOKES,
TOOLS, FASTENERS, TERMINAL
STRIPS, CRIMP CONNECTORS,
L.E.D.S., DISPLAYS, FANS, BREAD-
BOARDS, RESISTORS, SOLAR CELLS,
BUZZERS, BATTERIES, MAGNETS,
CAMERAS, DC-DC CONVERTERS,
HEADPHONES, LAMPS, PANEL
METERS, SWITCHES, SPEAKERS,
PELTIER DEVICES, and much more....
ORDER TOLL FREE
1 - 8 0 0 - 8 2 6 - 5 4 3 2
THOUSANDS OF ELECTRONIC
PA RT S A N D S U P P L I E S
Robotics Showcase Robotics Showcase
SERVO 06.2008 57
Showcase Jun08.qxd 4/30/2008 2:45 PM Page 57
W
hat caught my eye the first time I went there
was the Mark III Chassis Kit. For $10, I got all the
metal parts to build a mini-Sumo robot as shown
in Figure 1. All I needed to add were the servos, wheels,
and electronics which they also sell at this site.
I wanted to use my own electronics and I had some
servo motors already, so all I needed to purchase were the
wheels. I bought the injection molded wheels for $6/pair
that use a simple rubber band as a tire. These are common
and found in many robotic kits. The servos I had were already
reworked for continuous rotation so that made it easier.
Taking apart a servo to modify them for this type of
operation isnt difficult but depending on how much time you
want to invest, it may be worth buying pre-modified servos.
I wanted to make this a quick and easy to build robotic
platform, so if I didnt have some already I would just buy it.
Assembly
The instructions for assembling the Mark III can be
found at the Junun.org site or directly through the link
www.junun.org/MarkIII/Manual/index.jsp. The manual
explains very well how to assemble the chassis and servos
with very crisp and clear pictures. They cover their own
electronics but Ill cover my design in a few paragraphs. The
chassis design is so simple but so effective, I think this is
one of the greatest beginner robotic kits you can purchase.
The only issue I ran into is some of my servos are taller
than others. When you place them back-to-back on their
side as this design requires, the mounting may need shims
to reach the servo mounts. I had a couple of Parallax servos
that were too tall, but my GWS servos fit fine. You may
want to purchase your servos from GWS just for this reason
alone. They also have a lengthy list of sensors and other
robotic accessories, but surfing around for that stuff or
Im always looking at robotic bases and there isnt a better source than SERVO
Magazine. Ive also run across many just by surfing around on the Internet. One
of my favorite sites to visit is the Junun.org site developed for the Portland Area
Robotics Society. Ive never gone to any of their competitions or been part of their
club, but I still like the parts offered at this site.
58 SERVO 06.2008
FIGURE 1. Junun.org
Mark III Chassis Kit.
FIGURE 2. Basic Atom OEM board.
OEM Module Robotic Platform
by William Smith
BasicBoardRobo.qxd 4/30/2008 2:24 PM Page 58
building your own may be a lot more fun. It is for me.
Electronics
This is the area I enjoy the most and I wanted to use
some of the boards we sell at BeginnerElectronics.com,
but also make this article something for more than just our
customers. I wanted to make this into a robot platform that
worked with various electronic control boards. I originally
planned to use one of our Ultimate OEM boards originally
designed by Chuck Hellebuyck of elproducts.com since it
has a common input/output (I/O) pin-out that matches many
similar OEM-style boards. The original Basic Atom OEM
board and the Parallax BASIC Stamp OEM boards share
the same 20-pin header layout. The Ultimate OEM takes that
further by bringing the extra I/O out to the main header to
offer more direct I/O. Each of these OEM modules has their
own options for programming. The Basic Atom OEM module
shown in Figure 2 is the one I chose to use in this project
and is programmable using the BasicMicro.com Basic
compiler that you can download for free from their website.
The Atom OEM software uses the same Basic
language type commands as the Stamp but offers faster
operation and more memory for program and variables.
The Atom has analog-to-digital (A/D) ports built in that
are brought out to the AX0,1,2 and 4 holes at the top of
the board. If I wanted something beyond BASIC, I could
have used the Ultimate OEM module which can be
configured as an Atom or used with a bootloader PIC so it
can be programmed with PICBASIC PRO, a C Compiler or
even assembly language. The Ultimate OEM also has an
in-circuit programming port at the top so you can program
it directly from a PIC programmer. This allows you to use a
blank PIC rather than a bootloader chip. If you are partial to
the BASIC Stamp, then a BS2 OEM will work fine with this
project, as well. The point is they all share the same first 20
pins at their main I/O headers which allows them to share a
common connection footprint.
Docking Station
We modified a custom board design originally
developed at elproducts.com to make a base for the OEM
modules to plug into. Because all the OEM modules share
the same first 20 pins, making a common OEM docking
board that will work with any of them is easy. The board
layout is shown in Figures 3, 4, and 5. The board was created
with ExpressPCB free layout software and you can download
this file from the BeginnerElectronics.com website.
The docking station is designed for robotics as it has
separate power inputs for servos and module power. Each
power input also has its own on/off switch so you can
switch off the servo power but still have power applied to
your OEM module. This allows you to program the OEM
module without the possibility of having the servos driving
the robot off your bench. When you are ready to put your
robot on the floor to test it, then you can flip the servo
switch to on to let the servos run.
The OEM docking station also has all the module I/O
pins brought out to three pin connectors, including the
extra pins that the Ultimate OEM has. The three pin
headers have one pin connected to an I/O while the other
two are power and ground. The central power bus line is
actually split into two lines with each connected to a
different power switch. The pins that are within the
silkscreen that says servo are the pins that have power
controlled by the servo power switch. The rest are
controlled by the other power switch. This is how you can
shut off the servos and keep power to the electronics.
Many sensors have three pin connectors similar to a
SERVO 06.2008 59
FIGURE 3. Silkscreen layer.
FIGURE 4. Bottom layer.
FIGURE 5. Top layer.
FIGURE 6. Finished
OEM docking station.
servo connector so you
can easily connect
sensors to the docking
station. The completed
OEM docking station is
shown in Figure 6. One
of the sensors that easily
plugs into the docking
station is the Lynxmotion single line detector that I added
to my setup to eventually create a simple line follower.
These are really great sensors but have to be bent a little to
fit the Mark III chassis. They easily plug into the three pin
connections of the docking station. Figure 7 shows the
sensor by itself.
I didnt finish the line follower code in time for this article
but you can find plenty examples of this in SERVO. I mainly
just wanted to demonstrate how easy it was to put all this
together and end up with an effective, low-cost robot from
off-the-shelf parts and a little creativity of your own.
Software
I wanted to at least test my final creation by writing a
simple program to drive the servos. This is a quick program
to make the robot go forward for a short distance, then pause
for a half second, then move the robot backward and delay
for a half second again. The program will loop through this
over and over again. This is a simple program (shown next)
that demonstrates the Basic Atom servo command.
serv1 con p10 Make nickname for servo1
connection
serv2 con p11 Make nickname for servo2
connection
x var byte Create a counting variable for
the servo loops
main:
Forward:
For x = 1 to 20 Send the servo control pulse
20 times
servo serv1, 1200, 1 Drive the right servo forward
servo serv2, -1200, 1 Drive the left servo forward
Next do it again
Pause 500 Delay 500 milliseconds
Backward:
For x = 1 to 20 Send the servo control pulse
20 times
servo serv1, -1200, 1 Drive the right servo in
reverse
servo serv2, 1200, 1 Drive the left servo in
reverse
Next do it again
Pause 500 Delay 500 milliseconds
Goto Main Go back to the top and drive
it again.
Conclusion
If you wonder what the final robot looks like, check
out Figure 8. Its nothing exciting but its simple to build
without a lot of expense. We do have a few of the older
docking station boards, so maybe Ill make a kit out it for
anybody that wants a one-stop source for this same kit.
As I mentioned, I ran out of time to get the line sensors
working before sending this to SERVO, so Ill consider that plus
maybe wheel sensors for a future article. The off-the-shelf
chassis from Junun.org works well and saves you a lot of
cutting and bending of metal, plus its smooth finish prevents
any sharp edges. Adding the docking station definitely simplifies
connecting an OEM module of your choice. If you want to
modify the design or just build it the way we have it, remember
the docking station board files are avail-
able from expresspcb.com. You can use
their low-cost $59 option if you dont
need silkscreen or solder mask. SV
60 SERVO 06.2008
FIGURE 8.
Final robot
assembly.
FIGURE 7. Single
line detector.
Metal Fabrication
Quality parts within 24 hours!!
Materials from 0.001 to 6.000 in
thickness.
Parts from practically any material.
Finishes such as powder coat, paint,
plating, anodizing, silk screen, and
more!
Every job is an extension of IIT. We
meet and exceed the quality and
service expectations of our clients on a
consistent basis. Contact sales at
(208) 665-2166 or visit
today! www.iitmetalfab.com
Complete Fabrication Center
Integrated Ideas & Technologies, Inc.
Precision Laser, Waterjet, Plasma, Machining,
Micro-Machining, Forming, and Welding
Capabilities
3896 N. Schreiber Way Coeur dAlene, ID 83815-8362 USA
Ph (208) 665-2166 Fax (208) 665-5906 www.iitmetalfab.com
*
*
*
*
Quick
Affordable
Precise
No Minimums
62 SERVO 06.2008
S
ince the early 1990s, servos for radio
controlled airplanes and cars have
been a preferred method of motorizing
a robot. Many of the benefits of servo
motors are obvious: Theyre small,
relatively inexpensive, and for the most
part easy to use with most any robotic
control system. Radio control (R/C)
servos combine a DC motor, gearing,
and control electronics in one compact
package. Plus, most servos are
engineered for convenient mounting.
Just a couple of screws and the motor
is tightly secured to your bot.
Some of the benefits are less
obvious, but just as important. Though
the typical R/C servo is designed for
imitated rotation to control a
steering mechanism on a model car or
a wing flap on a model airplane
with some basic hardware hacking, its
possible to convert most servos to
rotate continuously. In this fashion, the
same small, inexpensive, and easy
motor solution can be used for moving
your robot creation across the floor.
Servos are also common finds,
both locally and through mail order.
Many areas of the country have at
least one neighborhood hobby store
that caters to the radio control
enthusiast. So if you find your latest
robot needs one more motor, theres
a fair chance you can pick one up
some late Saturday afternoon. And in
those areas where a good hobby
store is hard to find, or when youre
needing something special, you can
always turn to mail order, and the
literally hundreds of online retail stores
that carry all types and sizes of R/C
servos. In this installment of Robotics
Resources, well take a closer look at
R/C servos. We last looked at them in
July 2005, and given the importance
these motors have in building the
typical desktop robot, were due for
another look.
What Makes Up a
Radio Control Servo
The vast majority of servo motors
for model radio control applications
follow the same design principles. In
fact, theres even some standardization
in both electrical interfacing and
sizing that allows you to freely
interchange one servo for another.
More about that later.
The R/C servo consists of a DC
motor, a series of gears to reduce the
speed of the motor, a control board,
and a potentiometer. The motor and
potentiometer are connected to the
control board, all three of which form
a closed feedback loop. Both control
board and motor are powered by a
constant DC voltage, usually between
4.8 and 6 volts. (A few servo brands
can tolerate voltages of up to 7.2, but
this is dependent on the make and
model, and may cause excessive heat
build-up in the motor housing which
can lead to a shortened life-span.)
To operate the motor, a digital
signal is sent by some outboard
electronics to the control board. In the
typical R/C application, the outboard
electronics is a radio control receiver.
The receiver picks up signals from its
nearby transmitter, which is being
humanly operated. For the typical
robot, the outboard electronics can
also be an R/C receiver or, more often,
a microcontroller that is programmed
to provide the same kind of control
signal provided by the receiver.
The control signal used by R/C
servos is nearly universal in concept.
Specifically, the servo responds to a
signal made up of short pulses;
the pulses vary from about one
millisecond (one thousandth of a
second, or ms) to about 2 ms. These
pulses are sent approximately 50
times each second. The exact length
of the pulse in fractions of a
millisecond determines the position
of the servo. With a 1 ms duration,
the servo is commanded to turn all
the way in one direction. At 2 ms, the
servo is commanded to turn all the way
in the other direction. Logically, at 1.5
milliseconds, the servo is commanded
to turn to its center or neutral
position. Most any in-between angle is
accommodated by using pulse values
between 1 and 2 ms.
Many people refer to this control
signal as pulse width modulation, but
perhaps a more accurate term is pulse
duration modulation, as the servo
responds to the specific duration of
the pulse, rather than the ratio of on
and off times, as is the case with
pulse width modulation. Regardless of
what you call it, the signal is relatively
simple to reproduce. Most popular
microcontrollers used with robotics
such as the Parallax BASIC Stamp,
Netmedia BasicX, OOPic, and others
have built-in commands that make
What You Need to Know
About Radio Control Servo Motors
Tune in each month for a heads-up on
where to get all of your robotics
resources for the best prices!
RoboResources.qxd 4/29/2008 8:31 AM Page 62
servo programming even easier.
Critical to the operation of the servo
is the number of times each second the
pulse repeats. In the typical servo,
the motor is activated with each
pulse. That means if the pulses are
too infrequent, the motor may not
receive adequate power and the servo
may not work properly. Most servos
are designed to expect a pulse
repetition rate of about 50 times
per second, though they will function
adequately down to 30 or 40 pulses
per second.
Conversely, if you apply too many
pulses, the servo may behave erratically,
or it may even overheat and become
damaged. If you have a spare servo for
testing, you can experiment with the
upper pulse rate for that make and
model by slowly increasing the pulse
rate from 50 to about 80 or even 90.
You may notice that as the pulse rate
increases, the output torque (mechani-
cal power) of the servo increases. At
some upper point, as you increase the
pulse rate, the servo may jitter or fail
to move at all. And most likely, you
will feel the motor casing getting
hotter, due to the increased current
consumption. This is why you want to
do this experiment with a spare servo,
but it is quite possible for you to per-
manently damage it. Do this test only
if you can afford a burned out servo!
More About Servo
Control
The power that is delivered to the
servos motor is proportional to the
difference between where the output
shaft is and where its supposed to
be. This means that if the servo has
only a few degrees to move to its new
location, the motor is therefore driven
at a fairly low speed. This ensures that
the motor doesnt overshoot its
intended position.
Conversely, if the servo must move
a distance to its new location, the control
electronics drive it at full speed in order
to get it there as fast as possible.
As the output of the servo approaches
its desired new position, the motor
slows down. What may seem like a
complicated process actually happens
in a very short period of time. The
average servo can rotate a full 60
degrees in a quarter to half a second.
The 1-2 ms range is the standard
specification for the typical R/C servo,
and all are guaranteed to operate within
this range. The extent of motion of
the servos output shaft depends on
the model, but its usually in the
90-100 degree range. Most servos will
accept pulses above and below the
1-2 ms range, and will provide
additional degrees of movement. The
actual minimum and maximum pulse
width varies between servo brands, and
sometimes even between different
models by the same manufacturer.
With careful adjustment of the
pulse widths, you can often achieve
end-to-end movement of 150-160
degrees. But this extra comes with a
caution: You must exercise care that
you do not force the servo to operate
past the natural stop points that are
built into the mechanism. These stop
points typically one or more nubs on
the output gear are designed to
prevent damage to the feedback
potentiometer. Operating the servo so
that it hits against the stop may damage
the gears, the potentiometer, or other
components. Therefore, if you are
experimenting with finding the absolute
minimum and maximum pulse widths
for your favorite brand and model of
servo, you must do so with extreme
care, and understand it may result in
damage to the servo under test.
The shape and electrical contacts of
the connectors used to attach the servo
to a receiver vary between manufacturers,
though only marginally so. While your
robot probably wont use a radio receiver,
you may still want to match up the
servo with properly mated connectors
on your controller board or computer.
There are three primary connector
types found on R/C servos: J or
Futaba style; A or Airtronics style;
and S or Hitec/JR style. Servos made
by the principle servo manufacturers
Futaba, Airtronics, Hitec, and JR
employ the connector style popularized
by that manufacturer. In addition, servos
made by competing manufacturers
are usually available in a variety of
connector styles, and connector
adapters are available. Almost always
the wiring of the servo is as follows:
Signal +V Ground
A white or yellow wire is often
used to denote Signal, while a brown
or black wire is typically used to
denote Ground. It is very important
that you do not switch the +V and
Ground wires, or the servo will likely
be quickly damaged. When in doubt,
check the specifications of the servo
with the manufacturer.
Modifying a Servo for
Continuous Rotation
The vast majority of R/C servos are
designed for limited motion an arc of
about 90-120 degrees, depending on
the upper and lower limits of the control
pulses provided to the servo. However,
many brands and models of R/C servos
can be modified to allow them to rotate
continuously, making them function
like a regular DC motor. The modifica-
tion retains the control electronics, so
the servo is operated using the same
pulses as a non-modified servo.
Simply, to move the motor in one
direction, you apply a series of 1 ms
pulses; to reverse the motor, you apply
a series of 2 ms pulses. To stop the
motor, you apply 1.5 ms pulses
or better yet remove the pulses
altogether. This has the same effect as
stopping the rotation of the motor.
(Note that this technique works
with the typical analog servo, which
uses analog control electronics. Servos
that use fully-digital control electronics
may contain additional features that
inhibit the motor from stopping if the
control pulses are removed. However,
as digital servos are considerably more
expensive than analog servos, they
are less likely to be selected for
modification for continuous rotation.
The vast bulk of servos modified for
continuous rotation are the analog
type, so this issue seldom comes up.)
Quite a bit as been written on
modifying servos for continuous rotation.
This is a subject discussed numerous
times in previous issues of SERVO and
Nuts & Volts, and youll find plenty
of details online. Though the exact
procedures may differ from one servo
SERVO 06.2008 63
64 SERVO 06.2008
make to another, the basics are about
the same:
1) Open the servo by removing its
case screws. Youll need a miniature
Philips-head screw driver.
2) Carefully remove the output gear,
and file or cut off its stop. This is
easier with plastic gears, but you must
be careful that when you cut off the
stop, you dont break the gear. Its
usually better to file the stop down.
3) Examine the bottom of the output
gear, which is engaged with the
servos potentiometer. Youll find two
general designs: a molded-in slot that
slips around the shaft of the poten-
tiometer; or a small piece of plastic
that engages the potentiometer with
the output gear. The plastic piece is
easier to work with, as you can just
slip it off. If the gear uses a molded-in
slot, youll have to drill it out.
4) With the servo still open, apply 1.5
ms pulses to the servo, and manually
adjust the potentiometer so that the
motor stops.
5) Reassemble.
Bear in mind that the average
servo is not engineered for lots and
lots of continual use. The mechanics
of the servo are likely to wear out
after perhaps as little as 25 hours
(thats elapsed time), depending on
the amount of load on the servos.
Models with metal gears and/or brass
bushings or ball bearings will last
longer. Also consider that the control
electronics of a servo are made for
intermittent duty. Servos used to power
a robot across the floor may be used
minutes or even hours at a time, and
tend to be under additional mechanical
stress because of the weight of the
robot. Though not exactly common, it
is possible to burn out the control
circuitry in the servo by overdriving it.
Standard size servos are not
particularly strong when compared to
many other DC motors with gear-heads.
Dont expect a servo to move a five or
10 pound robot. If your robot is heavy,
consider using either larger, higher output
servos (such as 1/4-scale or sail winch)
or DC motors with built-in gear heads.
Finally, keep in mind that
modifying a servo voids its warranty.
Youll want to test the servo before
you modify it to ensure that it works.
Before moving on ... if youre not
interested in modifying a servo yourself,
you can buy them pre-modified from
a couple of sources. One is Parallax,
who offers an already modified
version of its standard servo. This modi-
fied servo is the same as is used on the
companys popular BOE-Bot robot.
Also, my own small mail order outfit,
Budget Robotics, routinely offers the
GWS S35 continuous rotation servo.
Servos of Dif ferent
Sizes and Types
As noted above, R/C servos follow
some standards, including size. By
using (more or less) the same sizes,
servos are interchangeable within a
model airplane or car. Exceptions
exist, of course, but for the most part,
youll find R/C servos in the following
size categories:
Standard, which measure about 1-1/2
by 3/4 by 1-3/8 (case dimensions).
Most use a flange mounting with four
holes spaced within a rectangle of
approximately 1-7/8 by 3/8.
Quarter-scale (or large-scale) servos
are about twice the size of standard
servos, and are significantly more power-
ful. Quarter-scale servos are designed
to be used in large model airplanes,
but they also make perfect power
motors for a robot. Typical size for a
quarter-scale servo is 2 by 1-1/8 by
2-3/8. Most larger scale servos can
be modified for continuous rotation,
but it may require extra effort due to
the increased size of the components.
Mini/micro servos are about half the
size (and smaller!) of standard servos,
and are designed to be used in tight
spaces in a model airplane or car. They
arent as strong as standard servos,
however. A typical size for a mini servo
is 1-1/8 by 5/8 by 1. Typical for a
micro servo is 7/8 by 3/8 by 5/8. Most
micro and mini servos are not easily
adapted to continuous rotation, unless
you have good mechanical skills.
A relative newcomer on the servo
scene is the specialty robotics motor,
designed for the special requirements
of desktop rolling and walking bots.
Most of the large servo manufacturers
offer at least one or two such servos,
which typically offer higher torque and
other features that make them ideal
for robotics use. Some of these servos
such as the Hitec HSR-8498HB
are provided in their own unique form
factor. They are not sized along the
same lines the standard servos
mentioned above are. For these special-
purpose robotics servos, be prepared
for a little bit of sticker shock.
A special mention is also due to
the Dynamixel servos provided with the
Robotis robot construction sets see
robotis.comfor more information. These
unique servos like several robotics-
specific models from other companies
offer high torque, internal feedback,
and serial communication. The Dynamixel
servos also support software
changeable operation from angular to
continuous rotation, and back again.
Understanding
Servo Specs
Manufacturers list several
specifications that are unique to R/C
servo motors. One is transit time,
which is the approximate time it takes
for the servo to rotate the shaft X
degrees usually specified as 60
degrees. Small servos turn at about a
quarter of a second per 60 degrees,
while larger servos tend to be a bit
slower. The faster the transit time, the
faster acting the servo will be.
If youve modified the servo for
continuous rotation, you can calculate
equivalent RPM by multiplying the 60
degree transit time by six (to get full
360 degree rotation), then dividing
the result into 60. For example, if a
servo motor has a 60 degree transit
time of 0.20 seconds, thats one
revolution in 1.2 seconds (0.2 * 6
= 1.2), or 50 RPM (60 / 1.2 = 50).
RoboResources.qxd 4/29/2008 2:40 PM Page 64
Most servos will also specify
output torque, usually at either 4.8
volts (standard for model airplanes),
or both 4.8 and 6 volts. The higher
the torque, the more powerful the
motor. Some manufacturers specify
torque in ounce-inches (oz-in) while
others use the metric measurement;
typically gram force centimeter or
Newton centimeter. You can use one
of the many free online conversion
calculators (do a search on Google to
find them; one is convert-me.com)
so you can compare apples to apples
or in this case, ounces to ounces.
For whatever reasons, few
manufacturers specify current
consumption of their wares. If youre
interested in these specifications,
youre best off making them yourself.
The servo will have a different current
consumption depending on whether
its idling (holding still without a load),
under load, or in transit. All servos will
consume the most current when their
output shaft is held stationary, and
the motor is commanded to move to
the opposite extreme.
Sources
Servo Manufacturers
Check here for datasheets and
specifications of popular servo brands.
For the most part, these companies
do not sell directly to the public.
Airtronics
www.airtronics.net
Futaba
www.futaba-rc.com
GWS
www.gws.com.tw
Hitec USA
www.hitecrcd.com
Online Servo Retailers
These listings include online sources
for servos. Many also sell mounts,
wheels, and other servo accessories
useful in assembling complete robots.
Balsa Products
www.balsapr.com
Reseller of the low-cost Grand
Wing servos, including the powerful
(but slow) BP148T, rated at 100 oz-in.
Budget Robotics
www.budgetrobotics.com
Small selection of GWS brand
servos, both standard and modified.
Modified servos include the S35,
which comes from the factory ready
for continuous rotation.
Central Hobbies
www.centralhobbies.com
Carries JR, Hitec, and Futaba
SERVO 06.2008 65
The Jameco Robot Store offers a selection of standard and specialty servos.
Pololus servo inventory includes a variety of GWS brand servos.
RoboResources.qxd 4/29/2008 2:39 PM Page 65
radios, servos, and accessories.
CrustCrawler
www.crustcrawler.com
Among their own products,
CrustCrawler also carries the Robotis
Dynamixel networkable robotic servo.
Hobby Engineering
www.hobbyengineering.com
Offers a selection of servos,
including Parallax standard and
continuous rotation.
Hobby People
www.hobbypeople.net
Sells a selection of Hitec and
Futaba servos, plus their own in-house
Cirrus servo brand.
Images Co.
www.imagesco.com
Reseller of Hitec servos, including
already modified Hitec and Parallax
servos.
Lynxmotion
www.lynxmotion.com
Hitec servos, custom-made
mounts, and wheels.
Parallax
www.parallax.com
In addition to manufacturing the
popular BASIC Stamp microcontroller,
Parallax offers a number of robotics
components, including custom wheels
for servos.
Pololu
www.pololu.com
Wide variety of GWS servos, plus
Parallax and other specialty servo brands.
Robotshop.ca
www.robotshop.ca
Canadian online retailer of
robotics parts and kits; included in
their lineup is a full selection of Hitec,
Futaba, and GWS brand servos.
Robot Store
www.robotstore.com
Servos, mounts, wheels.
Servo City
www.servocity.com
Reseller of Hitec and Futaba
servos, plus manufacturer of custom
servo horns, mounts, external
gearboxes, and other accessories.
Trossen Robotics
www.trossenrobotics.com
Resellers of the Dynamixel
serial-controlled robotics servos, as
well as standard hobby servos from
Hitec and Parallax.
Tower Hobbies
www.towerhobbies.com
Slightly higher prices than some
others, but good selection and
customer service. SV
66 SERVO 06.2008
Gordon McComb can be reached
via email at robots@robotoid.com
CONTACT THE AUTHOR
Order 24 hours a day, 7 days a week
www.Jameco.com
Or call 800-831-4242 anytime
Exclusively at Jameco
The Lowest Prices
Guaranteed!
3 Levels of Choice
3 Levels of Savings
Save 3% to 5%
Looking to save on
thousands of Name Brand
components? Jameco
offers these popular
products for 3% to 5%
below market price, and
we guarantee it!
Save 15%-25%
Save more when a
specific manufacturer is
not required. Major Brand
semis are sourced
from 5-6 specific major
manufacturers, plus we
also offer Jameco Brand
and Generic passives for
even greater savings.
Save 30% or more!
Looking for killer deals?
Jameco buyers often find
Factory Overruns from
some of the industrys
biggest names. That
means savings of 30%
and more to you!
Other Jameco Advantages:
We offer over 300 Major Manufacturers
99%of catalog products ship the same day.
Lowest prices guaranteed, or we pay 10%.
SEMICONDUCTORS PASSIVES INTERCONNECTS ELECTROMECHANICAL POWER
Robot Builders Cookbook
by Owen Bishop
This is a book for
first-time robot
builders, advanced
builders wanting to
know more about
programming robots,
and students in
further and higher
education tackling
microcontroller-
based practical
work. They will all find this book a unique
and exciting source of projects, ideas, and
techniques to be combined into a wide
range of fascinating robots. $29.95
FIRST Robots: Rack 'N' Roll
Behind the Design
by Vince Wilczynski / Stephanie
Slezycki
The second annual
book highlighting the
creativity and process
behind 30 winning
robot designs from
the 18th annual
international FIRST
Robotics Competition.
The FIRST organization,
founded by Dean
Kamen (inventor of the Segway), promotes
education in the sciences, technology, and
engineering in collaboration with sponsors
including Motorola, Xerox, NASA, Delphi,
General Motors, and other companies
invested in science education. $39.95
Build Your Own
Humanoid Robots
by Karl Williams
GREAT 'DROIDS, INDEED!
This unique guide to
sophisticated robotics
projects brings
humanoid robot
construction home to
the hobbyist. Written
by a well-known figure
in the robotics
community,
Build Your Own
Humanoid Robots provides step-by-step
directions for six exciting projects, each
costing less than $300. Together, they form
the essential ingredients for making your
own humanoid robot. $24.95*
Mechanisms and Mechanical
Devices Sourcebook
by Neil Sclater / Nicholas Chironis
The fourth edition
of this invention-
inspiring engineering
resource covers the
past, present, and
future of mechanisms
and mechanical
devices. Youll find
drawings and
descriptions of more
than 2,000 compo-
nents that have
proven themselves over time and can
be incorporated into the very latest
mechanical, electromechanical, and mecha-
tronic products and systems. Overviews of
robotics, rapid prototyping, MEMS, and
nanotechnology, along with tutorial chapters
on the basics of mechanisms and motion
control, will bring you up-to-speed quickly
on these cutting-edge topics. $89.95
We accept VISA, MC, AMEX, and DISCOVER
Prices do not include shipping and
may be subject to change.
The SERVO Webstore
Attention Subscribers ask about your discount on prices marked with an *
N N
E E
W
!
W
!
Forbidden LEGO
by Ulrik Pilegaard / Mike Dooley
Build the Models
Your Parents
Warned You
Against.
Forbidden LEGO
introduces you to
the type of free-
style building that
LEGOs master
builders do for fun
in the back room. Using LEGO bricks in com-
bination with common household materials
(from rubber bands and glue to plastic
spoons and ping-pong balls) along with
some very unorthodox building techniques,
youll learn to create working models that
LEGO would never endorse. $24.95
SERVO 06.2008 67
SERVO Magazine
Bundles
Published by T & L Publications, Inc.
$57
per bundle
Save $10
off the
normal
price!!
Now you can get one years worth of all
your favorite articles from SERVO Magazine
in a convenient bundle of print copies.
Available for years 04, 05, 06, and 07.
Robotics Demystified
by Edwin Wise
YOU DON'T NEED ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
TO LEARN ROBOTICS!
Now anyone with an
interest in robotics can
gain a deeper under-
standing without for-
mal training, unlimited
time, or a genius IQ. In
Robotics Demystified,
expert robot builder
and author Edwin Wise
provides an effective and totally painless
way to learn about the technologies used
to build robots! $19.95
WebstoreJune08.qxd 4/30/2008 12:01 PM Page 67
Get your very own limited-edition SERVO Magazine T-shirt. Shirts come
in sizes S, M, L, and are available in either black or white.
All shirts are 100% preshrunk cotton. Please check availability on our website.
SERVO
Magazine
T-Shirts
For men and women
B
lo
B
low
O
u
t
w
O
u
t
S
p
e
c
ia
l
S
p
e
c
ia
l
$
9
.9
5
!
$
9
.9
5
!
From HomoSapien to RoboSapien Before R2D2 there was R1D1
Take This Stuff and Hack It!
by Dave Prochnow
Transform common household items into
really cool stuff. You
don't need to be an
electronics genius to get
started turning everyday
items into high-performing
wonders. With how-to
guru Dave Prochnow's
step-by-step directions
and fully illustrated plans,
even beginners can hack their way to a high-
tech home, cooler toys, and less yard work.
Certain to fire your imagination and start you
plotting new, original, and even more creative
wonders you can make from ordinary house-
hold items, Take This Stuff and Hack It! is the
perfect gift for your inner inventor. $27.95
Oil prices getting
to you, too?!
Stay home,
read a book.
The online stor The online store @ e @
www www.ser .ser v vomagazine omagazine.com .com
Robot Builders Bonanza
Third Edition
by Gordon McComb / Myke Predko
Everybodys favorite
amateur robotics book
is bolder and better
than ever and now
features the fields
grand master Myke
Predko as the new
author! Author duo
McComb and Predko
bring their expertise
to this fully-illustrated robotics bible to
enhance the already incomparable content
on how to build and have a universe of
fun with robots. $27.95
To order call 1-800-783-4624
Robot Builders Sourcebook
by Gordon McComb
Fascinated by the
world of robotics but
dont know how to
tap into the incredible
amount of informa-
tion available on the
subject? Clueless as
to locating specific
information on robot-
ics? Want the names,
addresses, phone
numbers, and websites of companies that
can supply the exact part, plan, kit, building
material, programming language, operating
system, computer system, or publication
youve been searching for? Turn to Robot
Builders Sourcebook a unique clearing-
house of information that will open 2,500+
new doors and spark almost as many new
ideas. $24.95
68 SERVO 06.2008
The Amateur Scientist 3.0
The Complete Collection
by Bright Science, LLC
There are 1,000
projects on this CD, not
to mention the
additional technical
info and bonus
features. It
doesnt matter if youre
a complete novice
looking to do their first
science fair project or a
super tech-head gadget
freak; there are enough projects on the
single CD-ROM to keep you and 50 of your
friends busy for a lifetime! $26.99
CNC Robotics
by Geoff Williams
CNC Robotics gives you
step-by-step, illustrated
directions for designing,
constructing, and testing
a fully functional CNC
robot that saves you 80
percent of the price of an
off-the-shelf bot and
that can be customized
to suit your purposes exactly, because you
designed it. Written by an accomplished
workshop bot designer/builder, this book
gives you everything you need. $34.95
BACK ROOM SPECIALS
PROJECTS
Recently named as one of the Best Inventions of 2006 by Time Magazine, the H-racer is now
the best selling fuel cell product in the world. The H-racer is a micro-version of what engineers
and scientists have been dreaming about for real cars: combining hydrogen with oxygen to
generate a DC current to power an electric motor. Unlike a gas-powered car engine, the only
byproducts of this electrochemical process are electricity, heat, and pure water. With the
H-racer, you can witness the power of new energy technology in the palm of your hand.
Horizon has created this unique, patented miniature fuel-cell car and hydrogen refueling station.
All you need to do is add water. Only $115.00 plus S/H
The Day the Earth
Stood Still
An alien (Klaatu) with his
mighty robot (Gort) land
their spacecraft on Cold
War-era Earth just after
the end of World War II.
They bring an important
message to the planet
that Klaatu wishes to tell
to representatives of all
nations. Directed by: Robert Wise
Actors: Michael Rennie, Patricia Neal
Run Time: 92 minutes $14.95
Forbidden Planet:
50th Anniversary Edition
A starship crew goes to
investigate the silence of a
planets colony only to
find two survivors and a
deadly secret that one of
them has. Dr. Morbius and
his daughter Altaira have
somehow survived a
hideous monster which
roams the planet.
Directed by: Fred M. Wilcox
Run Time: 98 minutes $26.95
Blade Runner
(The Directors Cut) (1982)
In a cyberpunk vision of
the future, man has devel-
oped the technology to
create replicants, human
clones used to serve in the
colonies outside Earth but
with fixed lifespans. In Los
Angeles, 2019, Deckard is a
Blade Runner, a cop who
specializes in terminating replicants.
Directed by: Ridley Scott
Rated: R Violence $19.95
CLASSIC SCIENCE FICTION DVDS!
With this kit, you now can see and
feel the future of energy generation
in your own hands!
Linux Robotics
by D. Jay Newman
If you want your robot
to have more brains than
microcontrollers can
deliver if you want
a truly intelligent,
high-capability robot
everything you need
is right here. Linux
Robotics gives you step-
by-step directions for
Zeppo, a super-smart, single-board-
powered robot that can be built by any
hobbyist. You also get complete instructions
for incorporating Linux single boards into
your own unique robotic designs. No
programming experience is required. This
book includes access to all the
downloadable programs you need.
$34.95 Sale Price $ 29.95
Or order online www.servomagazine.com
SERVO 06.2008 69
Building Robots with LEGO
Mindstorms NXT
by Mario Ferrari, Guilio Ferrari
The Ultimate Tool for
MINDSTORMS
Maniacs, the new
MINDSTORMS kit has
been updated to
include a
programming brick,
USB cable, RJ11-like
cables, motors, and
sensors. This book
updates the robotics
information to be
compatible with the new set and to show
how sound, sight, touch, and distance issues
are now dealt with. $39.95
Sale Price 35.95 Phone orders only.
123 Robotics Experiments
for the Evil Genius
by Myke Predko
If you enjoy tinkering in
your workshop and
have a fascination for
robotics, youll have
hours of fun working
through the 123
experiments found in
this innovative project
book. More than just
an enjoyable way to
spend time, these excit-
ing experiments also provide a solid
grounding in robotics, electronics, and
programming. Each experiment builds on the
skills acquired in those before it so you
develop a hands-on, nuts-and-bolts
understanding of robotics. Sale $22.95
The SERVO BUDDY
PCB
An inexpensive circuit you
can build to control a servo
without a microcontroller!
For more information,
please check out your
May 2008 issue
or go to our website @
Subscribers Price $17.95
Non-Subscribers Price $20.95
PCB includes article reprint.
H Racer video clips can be found in the on-line store product descriptions!!
In the play, they were not
electro-mechanical humans. They
were very much flesh and blood,
manufactured in fleshy parts and later
assembled. This very much follows the
golum and Frankenstein mythos. And
it is clearly the basis for follow-ups like
Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep
/ Blade Runner, BattleStar Galactica,
and to an extent, zombie mythos. Ah,
but language is ever so fluid, and the
original intended Corpus Novum in
the above tales has since been
replaced by clone in modern usage.
Yet we grandfather robot in on the
above stories. Yet under Capeks
original definition, none of us can call
our creation a robot.
And now, we have so very many
different opinions on what a robot is.
Ask 10 roboticists for a definition, and
youll get 15 answers.
It must move across the floor, some
will say.
It must have some grabbing device.
It must have artificial intelligence,
others will say.
It must react to its environment or
have sensors.
It must do the job of a man.
It must run without human
intervention.
It must obey the three laws.
It must have an x-y-z table with a
reprogrammable multipurpose
manipulator. etc., etc.
Now, if I use any one of the
definitions above (far removed from
Capeks), I can come up with
something that fits the definition, but
clearly is not a robot. For example, car
welding bots are bolted to the floor.
They have no lateral motion. Yet they
are robots. But if I remote control
such an arm, some would say its not
a robot. At what point does a car
with cruise control become a robot
when it can follow lines? When it
can take you to work? Why doesnt
cruise control count as a robotic
attachment? cause GMs marketing
department chose not to call it that
back in the 70s?
It must have a sensor and react
to an environment well, every
wall-thermostat has just that. And its
reprogrammable. Analog? Sure, but it
fits the definition. Everyone likes to
call the Mars rover a robot, yet people
at JPL drive it. Hell of a lag time on
those signals, but bundling packets of
driving-coordinate data doesnt make
it autonomous. Many who call the
rovers robots sneer at combat
robots, yet they are fundamentally the
same in operation as the Mars rovers.
A Roomba is called a robot, but really,
its mostly just touch sensors doing
obstacle avoidance how much
intelligence is that? And why isnt a
dishwasher a robot if a Roomba is?
It has moving parts inside and its
reprogrammable, but no wheels,
you say. Just like those car-welding
robots without wheels that you do
call a robot.
If I put a WiFi controller on a
RoboNova, 99.9% of people will say,
thats a robot! Mostly because its in
human form. Yet a lowly R/C car with
the same transmitter gets no such
respect. Even when those R/C cars
have sonar with ROV override.
And lets look at Asimov/Kubrics
HAL from 2001. No arms, no body.
But he gets the tag. Those damnable
bodyless web-crawlers qualify, but
hexapods dont? Millions of lines of
code with not one motor, and both
HAL and Googles web-crawler lucks
out for the title. C-3PO got into
CMUs Robot Hall of Fame. Im sure
actor Tony Daniels the man in the
3PO suit was quite proud of being
called a robot (although if the robot
tag was to be given to a Star Wars
actor, it clearly belonged to Hayden
Christensen).
For those few whove actually
read Asimovs short stories (dont lie),
in one story, The Evitable Conflict,
the robot has no body. Just a
machine. Some giant, pre-Internet
fantasy super-computer. Very clearly
defined in the book as a robot. So,
to Asimov at least, a body was not
necessary to gain the title he used
the term for both moving platforms,
What the Heck is a
Robot, Anyway?
by David Calkins
In 1921, Karl Capek wrote the play Rossums Universal Robots, thus coining the term Robot.
(Okay, technically it was his brother Josef who amended Karls original term from either the
Latin labori, or the Czech trudnik, but we wont quibble. It was still Karls play.)
70 SERVO 06.2008
Appetizer-Horsman.qxd 4/30/2008 1:01 PM Page 70
as well as large-scale computers.
Which makes all those damned spam
bots grabbing email address of web
pages robots by some peoples
definition.
Eliza is often cited as a robot
but her AI is so limited that she
could not even gain an entrance
exam into the Chinese box, much
less pass it. Do we give AIs an IQ test
to see when they qualify for robot
citizenship? Does a touch sensor
make you a robot? A CMU cam?
Does your microcontroller have to be
above a certain processing speed to
get you into the club? How many I/O
pins do you need to get an invite?
If I put a R/C PWM controller on
to two servos or ESC controlled
motors, and it moves by my joystick
motions, many would call it a remote
control car (or ROV if theyre being
generous). But everyone calls
bomb-disposal bots or PackBots
robots, even though theyre clearly
the same basic R/C vehicles.
Add a speech recognition chip
shifting from moving the joystick to
the left to make the bot go left, to
speaking the phrase go left and
now those same people will call it a
robot. This is not autonomy. Does
it really have any intelligence? Sure
it has a sensor that listens for
key words, but thats not much
difference from a PWM signal being
received from a receiver. A 500 Hz
voice signal = robot; but a 75 MHz
PWM signal doesnt?
Full autonomy lets return to
the lowly household thermostat.
It has sensors, it reacts to its
environment, it has moving parts,
and it even has electric and
mechanical circuits. It controls
hardware in your home with heating
elements and blowers. But do we call
it a robot? No. If we hadnt had
them until four years ago, I have
no doubt that Helen would be
marketing them as Robot
Fireplaces.
I think that we, as robot
builders, have fallen into the trap
that Supreme Court Justice Potter
Stewart did in 1964 when he tried to
explain what is obscene, by saying,
I shall not today attempt further
to define the kinds of material I
understand to be embraced ... [b]ut I
know it when I see it. I think that
this is where we as robot builders are
clearly headed, which is a shame.
Ive seen quite a bit of snobbery
within all aspects of the field. Many
Aibo programmers claim they are
the great roboticists because of the
software they develop for the
platform, and yet, many of those
same programmers cannot replace a
servo should it blow on the Aibo
this is akin to a NASCAR driver
claiming to be a great mechanic,
even though hes never looked under
the hood of his race car. Some fire-
fighting bot builders sneer at combat
builders, because the ComBot
builders make ROVs (yet most of
those same people would call the
Woods Holes UAV Alvin a robot.
Is this an anti-wheel thing?). Combat
builders who design and build their
own electronic speed controllers
and drive-trains think of themselves
as bot builders, but they sneer at
anyone whos only assembled an
off-the-shelf kit. Sumo robots come
in both autonomous and R/C classes.
Is one class of sumo a robot while
the other is not?
So, whos right and whos
wrong? Where does the definition
lie? Well, like in programming robots,
I dont think it lies in a Boolean Is
robot! vs. Is not robot! Do we
stop calling a paraplegic a man
because he cannot move? Is a blind,
deaf woman no longer a person
because shes lost her sensors?
No boys and girls, a robot isnt
some narrow classification. I prefer to
think of robots like Americans. You
dont have to be tall or short, white
or Asian, smart or dumb, strong or
week, ambulatory or bed-ridden to
be an American. And to be a robot,
you merely need to have either some
artificial intelligence (which is a
whole nother rant: does an SPST
touch sensor really count as AI?),
some electro-mechanical body (do
wind up all-wood automatons like
the duck count? Id say so.). Body
and Mind. They are separable in
humans and they should be equally
so in robots. There will always be a
few people who get snobby about
whats what, even to the point of
University vs. Garage Builders
classifying as to whos in and whos
out. But in the end, the line isnt a
line, its a long gradient of gray,
slowly shifting from white to black,
but heavily in the gray zone.
I think that we as a group need
to move beyond exclusionary feelings
(youre robot isnt a real robot and
mine is), and start with inclusionary
definitions. An analogy is that
engineering students in my University
sneer down at the Business school
who, in turn, snub their noses at the
creative arts guys, who dont like to
run with the kinesthetic majors
who, in turn, dont like the geeks in
engineering. But really, theyre all just
people. Theyre all students. They
have more in common than not.
And many bot builders (certainly
not all) seem to be moving down
that path of separatism. Cant we all
get along?
Robotics is a booming field for
all of us. It is not a science. It is a
nexus point of other sciences:
Mechanical Engineering, Computer
Engineering, Electrical Engineering,
Computer Science, Kinesthetics,
Chemical Engineering, and Art to
name a few of the disciplines
involved. In order for there to be
great robots, we all need to work
with each other, rather than locking
ourselves in little rooms one door
down from the guys who have
already solved the electrical problem
that youre working on, while theyre
working to solve the mechanical one
you finished weeks ago.
Im thrilled at the prospect of
A123 batteries hitting the street.
Those guys are roboticists in my
book theyre making our bots
more efficient with shorter recycle
and longer amp-hours. And batteries
are to robots what hearts are to
humans. We cant have people
without hearts. The art guys make
robots who are more emotionally
available to the humans who will use
them if you dont connect with the
robot on an emotional level, will you
really use it? Kinesthesiologists help
me learn how to make my androids
walk better. Look at what Bob Full
at Berkeley has done to advance
legged motion and hes trained as
SERVO 06.2008 71
a biologist. But he obviously qualifies
for the title roboticist.
While Im not going to call a
thermostat a robot anytime soon, I
am going to continue to look at the
field of robotics in terms of what cool
things we can make together, and
ignore the gangsta hand-sign that
Tony Pratkanis throws the way of the
ComBot arena. After all, someday his
fire-fighting robot might need a more
robust shell and ESC. And guess
whos got those?
Would a robot by any other name
smell as metallic?
So lets try to ignore what has
become a much-misused term and
focus on cool things we can make
together. (Im sorry, but I do draw the
line at EL-wire lined shirts being called
robot shirts.)
Try augmenting your primary
discipline with a secondary, and try
working with other guys. One of the
best teams I know of Bob Allen and
Ted Larson come from opposite
ends of the field: hardware and
software. They fight like an old
married couple, but the sum of their
parts is clearly greater than the whole.
And theyre better roboticists for it.
So, I hope that more people will
start looking at other robots outside
their normal comfort zone/specialty,
and realize that theyll be able to be
a much better builder by studying
cross-field. Michelangelo Buonarroti
became a better sculpture because of
his studies in oil painting. I bet you
could learn something by doing
the same type of cross-pollination
within robotics (like shifting from
microcontroller programming to
welding 6061).
Of course, RoboGames is the best
place to do that, but Id never stoop
so low as to put in a cheap plug like
that, would I? SV
72 SERVO 06.2008
As a frequent reader of SERVO Magazine and a kid who
loves to write, I thought what better thing to do than to
write an article for SERVO Magazine! Now, here I am
a 13-year-old writing an article on the best
experience of my life the experience of
robotics in FIRST.
by Andrew Horsman
My Experience as a
Young FIRSTer
and Robot Hobbyist
I
ll start with the organization called FIRST
(www.usfirst.org) which stands for For Inspiration
and Recognition of Science and Technology. FIRST
shows the world of robotics to kids and teens of all ages. It
also gives adults a chance to be involved as a mentor or
coach. FIRST is a non-profit organization and was founded
by Dean Kamen (inventor of the Segway)! My experience
with robots all started way back, when I got a LEGO
Robotics Invention System. Having loved that, I moved on
to microcontrollers, the Vex Platform, and now FIRST.
Last year, I helped my dad who was mentoring a FIRST
Robotics Competition team. But it was an hour or so drive
to that school, so we couldnt go there much. So, what
better way to experience FIRST than to start my own team!
In the summer, I joined up with the Vex Forum (www.vex
forum.com) and Chief Delphi (www.chiefdelphi.com) and
absorbed the impact of FIRST on teens and adults on the
forums. They absolutely loved it; not a single person on that
forum did not have FIRST impact their lives. Now anyway,
since the regular FIRST robotics Competition is way too
expensive and I would need access to power tools, adult
supervision, and other team members to help me build a
huge robot, I decided to go the smaller route.
The FIRST Tech Challenge uses the Vex Robotics
platform and is affordable to teams. Although, not quite
affordable just to myself. I needed a sponsor. I have a
contact within NetMedia (www.netmedia.com), so I
asked him about sponsorship. They gladly sponsored my
team for the FIRST Tech Challenge. I immeditaly
registered, and my FIRST 2007-08 season began!
When my Vex kit finally came in the mail, it
was building time, right away, without hesitation.
I already had many designs in my head for this
years game entitled Quad Quandary, in which
alliances of two robots each must score points with
rings and hexagonal goals around the field. My
first design was a three wheeled scooter robot
which could grab rings and easily score them on
the high goal. Well, with limited parts, this
proved difficult. Eventually, wanting to follow the
K.I.S.S. principle (Keep It Simple, Stupid), I tried a
different design.
Another five designs, all with a powerful
drivetrain, but they each were ruined by my huge,
complex arms. With only so many parts, it was
hard to build an arm, let alone be able to pick up
plastic rings with just the small grip of metal
attached to the servo motors. So, after much
thought and now designing with the consideration of the
amount of parts I have, I went to Plan B. No arm. How
can I score points with no arm!? Well luckily, the Game
Design Committee gave teams like mine the luxury of a
side goal. This side goal is flat on the ground with one
point given per ring score.
There was also the option to push the hexagonal
goals into your sectors for another seven points, which
luckily scored a lot in the actual game. Another advantage
to my new design would be torque! I planned to have
enough torque to be able to push whatever robot or
obstacle stood in my path. Also, I wanted to be able to
push those goals (which turned out to be simple!). This
last strategy took a few design iterations. The first was
another attempt at a high torque scooter bot that
had omni-directional capability. My original attempt
at this failed and so did my second one which actually
came very close to success, but when it came to
programming autonomous mode (key part to the
game!), it didnt make the cut.
My last gloriful design was relatively simple and yet
extremely powerful. It was a simple 6WD robot with a
plow and sensors scattered over it. The 6WD gave it so
much torque it could even push the two-time champion
robot built by Simbotics (see Figure 1). The plow was
really effective at getting rings and hexagon goals into
their locations quickly and not stopping because some
robot tried to get me!
Before I talk about the competition and what
happened on that amazing day, I want to go more
in-depth about actually building the robot with the Vex
Robotics platform (www.vexlabs.com). Building with Vex
allows you to be creative, and build robust and powerful
bots without using all those expensive shop tools like
band saws and power sanders. The only tools I used
with building Vex were two Allen keys (or hex keys, hex
wrenches, whatever you like to call them) and a small
wrench. All of which came with the kit.
SERVO 06.2008 73
FIGURE 1
FIGURE 2. Between matches, all the teams have to fix their
robots from the brutality of competition. In this photo,
Team 468 is fixing their robot.
FIGURE 3. My robot going in to push a goal into my
alliance section for seven points.
The standard Vex kit comes with all sorts of metal,
gussets, screws, nuts, and electronics. It has a powerful
microcontroller with two PICs built in and a total of 16 I/O
ports, six interrupts, and eight motor ports. The kit
comes with four motors: three continous rotation and
one precision servo. The sensors provided in the kit were a
couple of limit switches and bumper sensors, but I got my
hands on some ultrasonic sensors and some optical
encoders. Everything was easy to program, espicially with
easyC made by Intelitek.
I registered for the Ontario Championship Tournament
which was announced to take place at Woburn C.I. It was
an absolutely great event. All the events Ive gone to that
are hosted by FIRST are amazing and always fun. The great
part too is that theyre always open and free to the public.
Almost like we were jinxed, we played our first match
against Simbotics, the two-time champion as mentioned
above. We lost ... but not harshly, at least not counting the
score. We were defending against Simbotics and we had
kept them away from the goals and thought we had won.
Unfortunately, as my robot and Simbotics robot were
head-to-head, rings already in their arm, their alliance
partner came up and pushed my bot out of the way.
Simbotics raised their deadly arm and put about six rings
on the high goal. Those points put them in winning
position with about two seconds left. They won.
It was still morning though, and there were three more
matches to go until the elimination rounds. Being ranked in
the 30s, we did not give up hope. We ended up winning
the next three matches putting us in 7th place. Before the
elimination rounds, there were still a few more matches to
finish up. At the end of the qualification round, my team
74 SERVO 06.2008
FIGURE 4. An advantage to being small, my robot can drive
under the crossbar pushing the opposition away from scoring
those deadly five rings.
FIGURE 5. Another team in the pit area,
fixing and tweaking their robot.
FIGURE 6. Me (left) Team Role: Captain, Mechanical, and
Programmer; Derek (middle) Team Role: Coach and Mentor;
Ben (right) Team Role: Part Time Driver.
FIGURE 7. On the practice field, this robot is using a
conveyor belt method of picking up the rings, which
works very well and can easily score points.
(Mini Robotics) was sitting in 11th place. It was now time
to choose alliances for the elimination rounds.
Now, as the team captain standing beside the stage
with 49 other captains everyone was in high school
while I was in 8th grade I had a strong chance of
getting onto an alliance. Well, I was thinking I would be
picked by another alliance captain but it got better.
They called all seven alliance captain teams and then they
called me up to the stage as the eighth alliance captain.
Again, just an 8th grader, team captain, in front of an
eager audience with all the other alliance captains. I
picked teams 104 and 106 to be my partners.
Now in the finals, the eighth alliance plays against the
first alliance, seventh against second, etc. So, I was up
against Simbotics again and their alliance. Unfortunately, I
didnt stand a chance against their amazing robot. That is
the one problem with something like this. They have a
team from a school, they have tons of Vex parts, and also
years of experience. Put this team against a one-man, low
amount of parts team and you get destruction. They won
both their matches against my alliance. All of our robots
were great ... theirs were just better.
Oh well, we had a great time anyway! I learned so
much from the build season, and the competition was
awesome! At the end, there was the awards ceremony.
Everyone from every team crowds into the auditorium to
await the announcement of the winners for the Inspire
award, the Innovate award, the Amaze award, and the
tons of awards FIRST gives out to not just the top
ranked teams, but to the little teams; the rookie teams,
even teams who got last place.
I won the Amaze Award just my brother, my dad,
and I on one team where my brother drove. As the
name states, the Amaze award is given to a team who
does something amazing. Not just a great robot, but
something outstanding that not just every team can do.
For our team, it was the fact that we did build an
amazing robot with limited parts. It was also that I
was the youngest at that tournament that even an
8th grader can start a team and show FIRST spirit, and
also me writing that technical manual on the BasicX
microcontroller may have helped.
So, was this worth it? I spent hours on the forums,
absorbing and researching information, tinkering with
robots at my desk until 2 AM; got back, neck, and wrist
pain repairing and building the robot, and most crucial,
the time spent organizing all of this. Yes, this was
worth it! Put a kid on a FIRST team and they will
develop and learn creativity, leadership, engineering,
technology, web development, CAD, and all sorts of
stuff about robotics. Just ask anybody on the Chief
Delphi forum. Possibly even more important, I had a
huge amount of fun and it was definitely the best
experience of my life.
For pictures of the Ontario Tournament at Woburn
C.I. in Toronto, visit http://theroboticsuniverse.com
which is also my website, so if you want to know more
about me and my projects, go there. I also encourage
you to check out my sponsor NetMedia (www.net
media.com) as they make microcontrollers, cameras,
and web servers (perfect for robot hobbyists!). They were
an excellent and caring sponsor and I thank them so
much! Im now moving on to writing a book on Mini
Robotics and am making more robots with Vex and just
whatever I can get my hands on, so check my website
frequently for updates. SV
Andrew Horsman is a 13-year-old student in 8th grade attending Brant
Hills Public School. He has a FIRST Tech Challenge team named Mini
Robotics and has been a robot hobbyist for years. He is currently writing a
book on Mini Robotics with the BasicX microcontroller and hopes to be
finished and published by the end of 2008. Watch for upcoming articles
in SERVO on his Mini Robotics.
P
erform proportional speed, direction, and steering with
only two Radio/Control channels for vehicles using two
separate brush-type electric motors mounted right and left
with our mixing RDFR dual speed control. Used in many
successful competitive robots. Single joystick operation: up
goes straight ahead, down is reverse. Pure right or left twirls
vehicle as motors turn opposite directions. In between stick
positions completely proportional. Plugs in like a servo to
your Futaba, JR, Hitec, or similar radio. Compatible with gyro
steering stabilization. Various volt and amp sizes available.
The RDFR47E 55V 75A per motor unit pictured above.
www.vantec.com
STEER WINNING ROBOTS
WITHOUT SERVOS!
Order at
(888) 929-5055
SERVO 06.2008 75
If you want to learn more about FIRST or better yet,
become a team member, mentor, coach, volunteer, or
even sponsor, check out the links below. There are also
links to forums and Vex stuff. Thanks for reading!
FIRST www.usfirst.org
Vex www.vexlabs.com
Chief Delphi www.chiefdelphi.com
Vex Forum www.vexforum.com
FIRST Canada www.firstroboticscanada.org
My Website www.theroboticsuniverse.com
FIRST Objective www.firstobjective.org
Resources
Electronic Parts & Supplies
Since 1967
www.c-stamp.com
L
O
W

C
O
S
T
!
CONTROLLERS & ROBOT KITS SENSORS DISPLAYS
Free
Expert
Technical
Support
1 (800) 985-AWIT
E
a
s
y

t
o

C
o
n
n
e
c
t
L
O
W

C
O
S
T
!
LOW COST
Professional SW Dev. Tools
For the finest in robots,
parts, and services, go to
and click on Robo-Links.

76 SERVO 06.2008
ShopBot Announces
CNC Open House
O
n June 14, 2008 from 9 am-5 pm,
ShopBot Tools, Inc, a leading manufac-
turer of affordable CNC tools and systems,
will host an Open House for any and all
woodworkers, sign-makers, or hobbyists who
are interested in how CNC technology can
improve what theyre doing.
Our years of success at our regional
Camp ShopBots, and our annual Jamboree
motivated us to just open our doors and
invite people in to see our company in
action, said Ted Hall, founder and
president of ShopBot. It will be a great
opportunity for us to meet with potential
CNC users, let them get to know us, and to
answer their questions about how our tools
and systems can make them more creative
in their business or hobbies.
A key attraction in this years Open
House will be the ShopBot Buddy a
newly released CNC system that features
a standard 24x32 or 32x48 table for
easy use in any size workshop. The smaller
PRS (Personal Robotic System) CNCs
incorporate many of the same features as
ShopBots full-size systems, yet weigh less
than 600 lbs and occupy less than 16 sq.
ft. of floor space. The PRSalpha BT32
provides the speed and accuracy
necessary for precise cutting and milling
applications, and detailed 3D carving,
while the PRSstandard BT32 offers an
affordable opportunity for the hobbyist
and serious do-it-yourselfer to incorporate
the advantages of CNC into their projects.
For more information on the ShopBot
Open House, visit www.shopbottools.
com or contact Bill Powell at bill.p@shop
bottools.com.
RobolinsJUN08.qxd 4/30/2008 1:33 PM Page 76
G
ood reference books on any
particular subject are vital for
anyone who really wants to know
more about the topic, and robotics
is no exception. The Internet can give
you access to a lot of great
information, but a good set of books
on robotics is necessary to delve far
into this exciting field. Id like to
discuss a history, of sorts, of some of
the books that made the greatest
impression on me for the past 30
years or so. As you can imagine, my
choices for a great series of books on
robotics might not be what youd
choose. Ill also deviate a bit into
some of the technology that made a
particular book such a success. Some
of the books Ill mention are quite
outdated but all still contain real gems
of information that will help us all in
our robot building. Im going to
concentrate on experimental robotics,
though Joe Engelbergers 1980 classic
Robotics in Practice about
industrial robotics, should be on the
bookshelves of any serious robotics
engineer and/or experimenter.
Build Your Own
Working Robot
Back in the 70s, there were very
few books on robotics outside some
of the more scholarly tomes for
industrial applications, or particular
specialties within the small, but
growing field. While browsing a
technical bookstore near my home in
1976, I happened across a book
entitled Build Your Own Working
Robot by David L. Heiserman,
published by TAB Books. All I could
think of was, wow, somebody has
finally written a hobbyist level book on
the subject of robotics! I had built
some crude robots before then, but a
robot with true, logic control sounded
great. Prior to this, my idea of logic
for one of my robots was a series of
interconnected relays, hardwired into
something that managed to work only
part of the time. I bought the book
on the spot and read through it cover
to cover.
David called his robot Buster and
attempted to make it into a class of
robots that a lot of people would
refer to. I personally never knew
anyone who used that name for their
robot, preferring to call their own
creation whatever they desired. His
robot design was buildable and it
worked, and it could be modified
to the builders own desires. He
introduced a lot of people to hobby
robotics and compelled many
experimenters myself included to
delve into digital electronics. I had
previously read a book entitled Basic
Basic by Hayden Books and wired up
a few experiments in conjunction with
a PDP-11 computer at work, but knew
I could never use one in a robot. The
popular 7400 series of ICs coupled
with 555/556s connected to relays
started to make robots possible.
Davids robot was based on a
childs riding car and used two
motors: one to drive a rear wheel and
the other to steer the Ackerman-type
wheels. (Typical car steering
two front wheels steered.)
In the early 70s, microprocessors
had far less computing power than
todays microcontrollers that are
so popular with todays robot
experimenters. Intels 4004 of 1971
considered the first microprocessor
was rapidly followed by their 8008
and then the 8080 in 1974 the chip
that gave Bill Gates his start. (Would
you believe that the 8080 processor
chip alone cost $395 in 1973?)
Motorolas 6800, Zilogs Z80, and
MOS Technologys 6502 came next
and powered many a robot in those
years and early 80s. But Heisermans
book allowed builders to make a
seemingly-intelligent machine with
just a handful of logic ICs.
If you could ignore the poor
quality photographs and the
continual references to Buster this
and Buster that, the book was a real
jewel for a robot hobbyist. Davids
robot used a 556 dual timer circuit
driving NAND gates which, in turn,
drove the ever popular 2N3055
power transistor to produce three
different drive speeds: a slow of 75%;
a medium of 90%; and a high speed
of 100% duty cycle PWM signal. His
blunder interface gave the robot a
way of hitting an obstacle and turning
away to go another direction. He
later added a hunger alarm to tell the
operator when the robot needed
charging, data links, line tracking,
and a nesting instinct. It was a
great book back in 1976 when you
could do wonders with TTL logic and
op-amp ICs.
a
n
d
BOOKS ON
EXPERIMENTAL ROBOTICS
b y T o m C a r r o l l
SERVO 06.2008 77
Then&Now.qxd 4/30/2008 7:42 AM Page 77
78 SERVO 06.2008
How to
Build a
Computer-
Controlled
Robot
A popular elec-
tronics conference
and exposition
Wescon used
to have a yearly
show in California,
rotating from southern to northern
California. When it was in the Los
Angeles or Anaheim convention
centers, I really enjoyed going to them
and attending a few of the better
conference presentations. However, it
was the trade show part that I liked
best as I could easily pick up enough
free samples of switches, heat sinks,
ICs, and mechanical items to last
through a years worth of robot
experimenting. It was at one of the
shows in 1978 that I stopped at the
Hayden Book Company booth and
was given a copy of How to Build a
Computer-Controlled Robot, by Tod
Loofbourrow (see Figure 1). In the
past, I had received books on antenna
design and control systems subjects
more in line with what I actually did
at Rockwell at the time, but, when I
saw this book, I just had to have it. In
my office, I have an eight-foot high
bookcase that is now filled with books
on robotics and related subjects, many
from the golden age of the 70s and
80s, and this book is one of my best
from those years. I had tinkered with
robots for many years but had never
added a real computer to one of my
creations. Filled with clear photos and
schematics, Tods book is a good read
and a definite keeper.
His robot featured the KIM-1
single-board computer made by MOS
Technology. It was based on a 6502
microprocessor, considered by many
to be the most popular experimental
robot microprocessor for years (see
Figure 2). He built the robot down in
his parents basement. It was
designed on a triangular base and
used a car battery as the power
source and two surplus motorized
wheels that were originally designed
for a kids riding toy car. I later used
these same six volt motorized wheels
for one of my larger robots a great
choice for robot power. At a computer
conference where he was showing off
his creation, he met an editor from
Hayden who signed him to a contract
to write about his robot. Tod wrote
the book as a teenager, formed his
own company, Foundation
Technologies with money from the
books royalties, and is now CEO and
founder of Authoria, a business talent
management company.
Stepping aside from Tods robot a
bit, these single board computers got
a lot of people started in intelligent
robotics. The KIM-1 was produced as
a development board for engineers
who MOS Technology hoped would
then buy many thousands of their
6502 chips to use in various products.
This microprocessor was an off-shoot
of their 6501 that they developed as
a replacement for Motorolas 6800,
with only a pin layout as the
difference. Needless to say, Motorola
wasnt too pleased with this copy and
sued MOS Technology. Engineers
loved the $245 development board
and the word quickly
spread to hobbyists,
such as Tod. Screaming
along at 1.0 MHz, the
KIM-1 had a kilobyte of
RAM, a six digit LED
display, a hexadecimal
keypad, operated on the
machine code HEX, and
had 30 I/O lines. You
could use an external
cassette recorder for
storage and hook it up
to a teletype for data
I/O. I remember that warm feeling
that I had as my surplus teletype
chattered away with real output from
my KIM-1.
Rockwell, who second-sourced the
6502, produced their own version of
the KIM-1 called the AIM-65. It had
a full keyboard, a 20 character
alphanumeric display, and a small cash
register-like paper tape printer. Since
we could get the AIM-65 at a great
discount, a bunch of us at Rockwell
also bought a well-made aluminum
case that had a built-in power supply.
I believe I paid $40 more to expand
my memory from 1 kilobyte to a full 4
KB. (Wow!) I also bought a Microsoft
Basic interpreter chip that allowed
me to stumble through some real
programming. Synertek released their
own version of the 6502 development
board that Ill mention later. Tod had
picked a winner for his Mike robot,
a name he derived from microtron.
I wonder what pre-teen Tod would
have been able to build had he grown
up with the computing power of
todays processors, servos, and sensors.
TABs Robot Books
I was always getting book club
offers in the mail and sometime in
1979 or thereabouts, I received an
offer from TAB Books to join their
book club and receive a set of four
books on robotics. I already had
Heisermans first book that was one
of the set, but I couldnt resist joining
to get the other three books. We
had already formed the Southern
California Robotics Society now
called the Robotics Society of
Southern California and most of the
members also ordered the sets.
The Complete Handbook of
Robotics by Edward L. Stafford, Jr.,
was another book in the TAB set. It
was quite interesting back then and
still has relevance today as it went
beyond hobbyist level robotics to look
at the entire field. How to Build Your
Own Robot Pet by Frank DeCosta,
was the third book in the set and was
less a book on how to build a robot
dog than a reference on circuitry and
technology that one could use in
robot development. Published in 1979
FIGURE 1.
Tods book.
FIGURE 2. KIM-1.
by TAB, How to Build Your Own Self-
Programming Robot, by David L.
Heiserman, was the final book in this
series. Heisermans newest robot
centered on the Intel 8085 micro-
processor and featured three levels of
robots called Rodney Alpha, Beta,
and Gamma, and featured wire-
wrapped circuit boards. (Remember
those?) The 8085 was used in quite a
few experimental robots in the early
80s and even a few kits and ready-
builts. As with his earlier Buster
monikers, these levels were never
adopted by anyone, but the book was
a great reference for advanced robotics
construction of the day. Ive seen
these books on sale at used book
stores and I highly recommend that
you latch on to one or all of them as
references, or just interesting reading.
One book that I was particularly
fond of was Android Design, by
Martin Bradley Weinstein, published
by Hayden in 1981. It had so much
unique information beyond just the
typical robot built on a car or toy,
such as a TV camera built from a
dynamic RAM chip and a tri-wheel
robot design based on the Land
Master from the film Damnation
Alley. There was even a design of a
robot finger made from a bicycle
chain. I loaned this book to a friend
years ago and he obviously liked
it better than I did and knew that
Id forget who I had loaned it to.
Oh well. Two other classic robot
experimenters books of the early 80s
were published by Howard Sams
Company and written by Mark J.
Robillard. Remember the Sams Photo
Facts that you just had to get when
you bought something electronic so
you could later troubleshoot it?
Microprocessor Based Robotics
written in 1983 was also a goldmine
of great information on everything
from Intels 8748 microprocessor (it
had an EPROM on board the chip)
(Figure 3) to Polaroids electrostatic
sonar system to voice recognition.
Video systems, hacking the Big Trak,
arms, and other mechanisms were
also covered. His next book in 1984,
Advanced Robot Systems, not only
covered the Heath Hero 1 robot,
but rover robotics and manipulator
systems. I recommend that you locate
and buy both of these for information
that is quite useful even today.
Mobile Robots
Inspiration to
Implementation
Taking a leap forward to newer
titles, Mobile Robots Inspiration to
Implementation by Joseph Jones and
Anita Flynn published in 1993, is
another must for your bookshelf.
Though there was a lawsuit on just
who were the actual authors for the
second edition, either of the editions
are indispensible for any serious
robotics experimenter. Not surprising
to any of us, the authors and the
robots they describe all came from
MITs Artificial Intelligence Lab under
the auspices of Rodney Brooks. This is
one book that allows the reader to
start with a basic robot design, such
as the TuteBot (for tutorial robot) and
work up to a more sophisticated robot
such as the Rug Warrior. The TuteBot
was based on the LEGO block
system with the intelligence built with
analog parts available at your local
RadioShack. The latter design is more
heavily dependent on software design
and uses more sensors and actuators
to exhibit many more behaviors.
The two versions of the Rug
Warrior use the ever-popular Motorola
68HC11 microcontroller. The robot
was constructed with a clear acrylic
case and the book clearly references
all of the parts used. So many were
built using this book as a reference
that a true class of robot was born
the Rug Warrior. As the name implies,
its area of operation was on the floor,
and the many available sensors gave
the many versions quite a sophisticated
capability. The schematics are
clear, the software programs in
the appendix run well with little
debugging, and this book has been
the key text for many high school and
college robotics courses.
Sensors for Mobile
Robots
A robot can contain the most
powerful microprocessor, a terabyte
of RAM, and hard drive capacity, plus
millions of lines of great code, but, if
it has no sensors to tell it what is
happening on the outside world, well,
its just a computer. Bart Everetts
1995 book of over 500 pages,
Sensors for Mobile Robots is a must
have book for any serious robot
experimenter. Having built some quite
sophisticated robots as a kid in high
school, he ended up in some of the
best places for anyone who loves to
build robots: several of the US Navys
best robotics labs. Those of us who
started in robotics many years ago
may have built one or two crude
creations as a kid, but Bart started
with a human-sized creation, then
delved into crawling robots, including
a hydraulic-controlled robot arm on
a mobile base. After his Naval
Postgraduate School, an admiral
recognized Barts talent and created a
FIGURE 4. Robart I. Photo courtesy
of the Space and Naval Warfare
Systems Center, San Diego.
FIGURE 3. Intel C8748.
SERVO 06.2008 79
robotics program office within the
Naval Sea Systems Command so he
could concentrate on mobile robots.
His book covers many robots that he
has designed, from Walter, Crawlers I
and II, Modbot to MDARS, but his
Robarts are his most famous.
Bart Everetts Robart
Series of Robots
During the 1980-82 time period,
Bart designed and built Robart I as
his thesis project at the Naval
Postgraduate School in Monterey, CA.
Figure 4 shows how Bart laid out all
of the components and sub-systems in
an aluminum framework of angle
extrusions, screwed and bolted not
welded. This is the easiest way for an
experimenter to construct a
large robot and modify it at a
later time. This robot used a
Synertek SYM-1 single board
computer (Figure 5). Though
not as popular as the KIM-1,
the SYM-1 6502 development
board was used in many
experimental robots of the
early 80s. Robart I was
designed to patrol a home
using a layered hierarchy of
behavior modes and could
announce specific alerts and internal
situations through a National
Semiconductor Digitalker DT1050
speech synthesized chip set. It could
search out its charging station when
the batteries were low and the sensor
suite could detect motion by optical or
ultrasonic methods, plus many other
phenomena through many other
sensor types. Robart I laid the way for
many other types of sentry/security
robots to follow.
Robart II was designed, built, and
modified over a period from 1982 to
1992. The robot was started in his
basement workshop in Virginia. Bart
was transferred to the Naval Ocean
Systems Center (later called the Space
and Naval Warfare Systems Center) in
1986 and continued his work on this
second in the series of robots (Figure
6). Despite being constructed from
hobbyist-grade components, as he
states, it lasted 20 years in operation,
and was continually powered up for
four of those years. It was in continual
communication with an external
IBM-AT computer.
Robart III was the final in the
series and, as you can see in Figure 7,
it is anthropomorphic of sorts, with a
revolving head and one arm that
appears to be a Gatling gun but, in
reality, is a pneumatic gun that shoots
harmless darts or rubber bullets.
Using the popular A-BEC motorized
wheelchair wheels, it has a series of
PIR sensors around its neck, an
expensive industrial SICK scanner in
the front of its base, and a nicely
molded shell. Barts great book not
only covers the development of
these three robots but outlines the
geometry and physics behind many
of the popular sensors still used today
in robotics applications.
Build Your Own
Robot!
I would be remiss to not include a
great book by Karl Lunt entitled Build
Your Own Robot. Published in 2000,
Karls book is a compilation of over
50 of his very popular articles from
SERVOs sister publication, Nuts &
Volts. At 575 pages each filled with
gems of knowledge for the robot
experimenter this is also one book
to have on your bookshelf. His
Amateur Robotics column in Nuts &
Volts from 1992 until 1998 produced
almost 70 articles. Many readers kept
asking for a collection of his articles
and this book is the result. Karl is sec-
ond to none in software development
for robots, but youll also find all
sorts of information on driver and
control systems, and interfacing
microcontrollers, especially the
Motorola 68hc11. Karl has built
robots from all sorts of bases,
including one from a plastic tackle
box. As a good friend of mine and a
fellow member of the Seattle Robotics
Society, Karl has always been quick
to help anyone learn about and build
robots. This book will be quite
FIGURE 7. Robart III. Photo courtesy
FIGURE 6. Robart II. Photo courtesy
FIGURE 5. SYM-1.
80 SERVO 06.2008
valuable to anyone from a beginner to
an advanced robot builder.
Thats a Wrap
I have only highlighted a few of
the many, many great books on robot-
ics available to the experimenter. Most
have been published eight to 30 or
more years ago. We are blessed with
hundreds of great titles today, many
of which youll find listed in SERVOs
Webstore book section. I wont
mention the title of the book that
Pete Miles and I wrote a few years
back, but I will recommend the Robot
Builders Sourcebook, by Gordon
McComb as another must have, along
with Gordons Robot Builders
Bonanza. Outside of mentioning these
two, I suggest you look within the
pages of this magazine, talk with
friends, and search the Internet for
the titles that interest you the most.
There are so many specialized robot
books available today that cover
contest robots, RoboMagellan robots,
LEGO, Vex, FIRST, and combat robots
that you need to make the determina-
tion first just what will fill you needs.
If you cannot find what you need and
you are a good writer, I suggest that
you write one of your own. All of us
who build experimental robots need
all the information we can get our
hands on. Good luck! SV
Tom Carroll can be reached via email
at TWCarroll@aol.com
CONTACT THE AUTHOR
SERVO 06.2008 81
Active Innovations ...................................57
All Electronics Corp. ..........................57, 76
AP Circuits/e-pcb.com ............................19
AUVSI ........................................................61
AWIT ..........................................................76
Boca Bearings .....................................19, 76
Budget Robotics ......................................81
CipherLinx Technologies .........................76
CrustCrawler ...............................................3
Electronics123 ..........................................57
Hitec ............................................................7
Integrated Ideas & Tech. ...................60, 76
Jameco ......................................................66
Lorax Works ........................................57, 76
Lynxmotion, Inc. .......................................82
Maxbotix ...................................................76
Medonis Engineering ..............................56
Net Media .................................................83
Parallax, Inc. ...............................Back Cover
PCB Fab Express .......................................76
PCB Pool ..............................................10, 76
Pololu Robotics & Electronics ..........33, 76
RoboBrothers, Inc. ...................................57
RoboGames ..............................................37
Robot Craft ...............................................76
Robotis Co. Ltd. ........................................17
RobotShop, Inc. .................................41, 76
Schmartboard...........................................57
Shooting Star Technology..................49, 76
Solarbotics/HVW.....................................40
Sparkfun Electronics ..................................2
SuperBright LEDs .....................................76
Technological Arts ...................................76
Tormach ..............................................49, 76
Vantec .......................................................75
Advertiser Index
Looking for a GIFT or maybe just something special for yourself?
Check out our website and take a look at
all our other robotic items for sale!
Then&Now.qxd 4/30/2008 12:13 PM Page 81
backcvr.qxd 4/29/2008 3:44 PM Page 84

Servo2008 06

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Servo2008 06

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

V

MrRoboto.qxd 4/29/2008 8:12 AM Page 14

You might also like