Self-Reconfigurable Robot - A Platform of Evolutionary Robotics
•
6 likes•2,104 views
This keynote speech discusses self-reconfigurable modular robots. It introduces the concept of self-reconfigurable systems made of homogeneous modules that can change shape and function through self-reconfiguration. The speech describes the modular transformer (M-TRAN) robot prototype, which uses a hybrid lattice-chain design of stackable modules connected by magnetic and shape memory alloy actuators. Demonstrations of M-TRAN include wall climbing, creeping carpet motion, and rhythmic locomotion generated by a central pattern generator network optimized with a genetic algorithm.
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (20)
Similar to Self-Reconfigurable Robot - A Platform of Evolutionary Robotics
Similar to Self-Reconfigurable Robot - A Platform of Evolutionary Robotics (20)
More from elliando dias
More from elliando dias (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Self-Reconfigurable Robot - A Platform of Evolutionary Robotics
- 1. Keynote Speech Alife9 Sept. 14, 2004 Boston Self-Reconfigurable Robot - A Platform of Evolutionary Robotics Satoshi Murata Tokyo Institute of Technology / AIST murata@dis.titech.ac.jp
- 2. Outline Introduction Self-reconfigurable systems Modular transformer (M-TRAN) Demonstration of M-TRAN
- 3. Introduction
- 4. Hierarchy in biological system Homo/heterogeneous layers alternately appear in biological system (Masami Ito) Species hetero Individual homo Organ hetero Cell homo Organelle hetero Molecule homo
- 5. Heterogeneous systems Made of heterogeneous components Centralized Sequential Global interaction Design principle --- Reductionism
- 6. Homogeneous systems Made of homogeneous components Distributed Parallel Local Interaction Design principle --- Self-organization
- 7. Advantages of homogeneity Scalability Enlarge / reduce system size in operation Redundancy Fault tolerance Self-repair Flexibility Self-assembly Self-reconfiguration
- 8. Self-assembly in different scales Molecular self-assembly Small, simple, Proteins, DNA tiles, etc. a large number of elements, difficult to control Mesoscopic self-assembly Particles, bubbles, E-coli, etc. Robotic self-assembly Large, complicated, Modular robots a small number of elements, Mobile agents programmable
- 10. Self-reconfigurable systems Artifacts based on homogenous modular architecture Change their shape and function according to the environment (Self-reconfiguration) Able to assemble itself, and repair itself without external help (Self-Assembly, Self-Repair)
- 11. Homogeneous modular architecture The system made of many (mechanical) modules Each module is identical in hardware and software Each module has computational and communication capability Each module can change local connectivity
- 12. Self-assembly and self-repair Random shape Assemble target shape Detect failure Cutting off Reassemble
- 14. 2-D Self-reconfigurable hardware Metamorphic robot (G.Chirikjian, JHU,93) Micro-module (MEL, 98) 2-D Crystaline (M.Vona, D.Rus, Dartmouth Col./MIT)
- 15. Fracta (Murata, 93) Solid state module based on hexagonal lattice
- 16. Basic operations of fracta
- 18. Self-assembly problem How to change connectivity among modules to achieve target configuration ? Random You must consider • Modules are homogeneous • Parallel and distributed • Only local communication • Physical constraints Given
- 19. Example: Self-assembly of fracta Parallel algorithm based on connection types and local communication Connection types Target shape
- 20. Program code o(K,K) K(o,K,K,s) s(K,K,K,K,K,K) Local configurations Exchange connection type with neighbors
- 21. Parallel distributed algorithm for self-assembly 1. Each module evaluates distance to the nearest target configuration in the program code 2. Modules compare the evaluation through simulated diffusion 3. Module which wins among the neighbors moves to random Type transition diagram direction defines metric among connection types
- 22. Difficulties in 3-D hardware More mobility in limited space Spatial symmetry requires more degrees of freedom More power/weight Mechanical stiffness
- 23. Space filling polyhedra Rhombic Truncated Regular cube dodecahedron octahedron
- 24. Lattice based designs Design based on cube Design based on rhombic dodecahedron 3-D Crystaline (M. Vona, D.Rus，Dartmouth, MIT) Proteo （M.Yim, PARC, 2000）
- 25. Lattice based designs Design based on cube Molecule （Kotay, Rus, Dartmouth/MIT） 3-D Universal Structure (MEL, 98)
- 26. Chain based designs PolyBot: M.Yim ,Xerox PARC CONRO: W-M.Shen, P.Will, USC
- 27. Lattice or chain ? Lattice based designs Reconfiguration is easy Motion generation is hard Requires many connectors & actuators Chain based designs Reconfiguration is hard Motion generation is easy Insufficient stiffness
- 29. M-TRAN（Modular Transformer） Hybrid of lattice and chain based designs Easy self-reconfiguration and robotic motion Two actuators Communication Stackable Battery driven
- 30. M-TRAN II
- 31. M-TRAN Module
- 32. Li-Ion battery Non-linear spring Light bulb PIC Connecting plate Main CPU Power supply circuit Permanent magnet PIC Neuron chip SMA coil Acceleration sensor M-TRAN II
- 33. M-TRAN I
- 34. Magnetic connection mechanism Magnet Light bulb Distance SMAcoil Non -linear spring SMA Actuator Force (a) Attraction by magnets Force Repulsion by springs Detach (b) (c) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 a-b Temperature (ºC) Distance(mm)
- 35. New prototype M-TRAN III Hook connection mechanism • Quick • Reliable
- 36. Coping with complexity Because of physical constraints such as Maintain connectivity Avoid collision Limited torque Non-isotropic geometry of M-TRAN module makes self-reconfiguration very difficult Complexity can be relaxed by Automatic acquisition of rule set Heuristics (structured rule set) Periodical pattern in structure
- 37. Wall climbing 600 rules (no internal state) 18 rules (with internal state) Generated by software Hand-coded
- 38. Creeping carpet
- 39. Robot maker (structured rule set)
- 40. Rhythmic motion generation Central Pattern Generator (CPG) Connected neural oscillators Oscillators entrain phases mutually Feedback of physical interaction Mechanical interaction Motor control Angle feedback CPG Neural connection (CPG network)
- 41. CPG Antagonistically connected pair of nonlinear oscillators Output from other CPGs CPG y1i Extensor Neuron ue τ τ’ Σ u1i β v1i Joint angle feedback f1i Extensor m1 y1i = max(0, u1i ) – Input to Output to motor i w0 + m2 y2 i = max(0, u2 i ) Other CPGs f2i Flexor Joint angle feedback Σ u2i β v2i y2i τ τ’ ue Flexor Neuron Output from other CPGs (Taga 95, Kimura 99)
- 42. CPG network Generate stable walk pattern (limit cycle) y Inhibitory Excitatory z connection connection x CPG
- 43. CPG network tuned by GA Simulation space GA optimizes Given topology of robot Connection matrix of CPG Initial set of individuals Joint angles in initial posture Converge？ Dynamics Simulation by evaluating Yes Generation +1 Energy consumption Mutation, crossover per traveled distance Selection Download to modules
- 44. Dynamics Simulation Before GA After GA Vortex simulator (CML)
- 45. -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 1 21 41 61 81 101 121 141 161 181 201 221 241 261 281 301 321 341 361 381 401 421 441 461 481 501 521 541 561 581 601 Forward 621 641 Obtained CPG network for 4-leg walker 661 681 Symmetric connection is obtained -1 +1
- 46. Real-time morphology control Adapt morphology suitable to the environment Rapidly-Exploring Random Trees (RRTs)
- 48. Self-reconfigurable robots ~ A new kind of artifacts Amoeba Reconnection to cluster Locomotive flow of periodic cluster Individual Producing individual agents Morphing Swarm
- 49. Conclusion Self-reconfigurable systems give a platform upon which we can investigate both individual adaptation and morphological evolution concurrently in a single framework. In this sense, self-reconfigurable systems open the new possibility of artifacts beyond natural evolution.