Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [SeattleRobotics] Robo-Megellan Woas.....and Questions

Expand Messages
  • Jim McBride
    ... Really? I thought the whole point of the 4X4X4 rule was to keep broad sweeping arms and such from touching the cones. I seem to recall it being said that
    Message 1 of 22 , May 2, 2005
      At 06:52 PM 5/2/2005 -0700, you wrote:
      >In any
      >case, it's the robot that must remain within a 4' x 4' x 4' cube
      >throughout the run. If a 3.5' high robot hovers 1 foot off the ground
      >(so the top is 4.5' high) it's still allowed.

      Really? I thought the whole point of the 4X4X4 rule was to keep broad
      sweeping arms and such from "touching" the cones. I seem to recall it being
      said that the robot had to be able to remain in the given space, but the
      space effectively moved with the robot with so a robot could not grow in
      size after the start. It seems to me, no matter how high a robot goes, it
      is still within its cube of size restriction. Of course I don't make the
      rules.


      JIMc
      x22661
      National Ignition Facility
    • Doug Kelley
      You are correct and maybe I misunderstood your question. A robot must stay in a 4 x 4 x 4 cube regardless of whether it s on the ground or hovering 10 in
      Message 2 of 22 , May 2, 2005
        You are correct and maybe I misunderstood your question. A robot must
        stay in a 4' x 4' x 4' cube regardless of whether it's on the ground or
        hovering 10' in the air. The air between the robot and the ground does
        not have to be included in the height dimension although an arm
        extending below the robot would. Does that make sense?

        Doug

        Jim McBride wrote:

        >At 06:52 PM 5/2/2005 -0700, you wrote:
        >
        >
        >>In any
        >>case, it's the robot that must remain within a 4' x 4' x 4' cube
        >>throughout the run. If a 3.5' high robot hovers 1 foot off the ground
        >>(so the top is 4.5' high) it's still allowed.
        >>
        >>
        >
        >Really? I thought the whole point of the 4X4X4 rule was to keep broad
        >sweeping arms and such from "touching" the cones. I seem to recall it being
        >said that the robot had to be able to remain in the given space, but the
        >space effectively moved with the robot with so a robot could not grow in
        >size after the start. It seems to me, no matter how high a robot goes, it
        >is still within its cube of size restriction. Of course I don't make the
        >rules.
        >
        >
        >JIMc
        >x22661
        >National Ignition Facility
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >Visit the SRS Website at http://www.seattlerobotics.org
        >Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >.
        >
        >
        >
      • Dave Hylands
        ... Ummm. You seem to be agreeing with Doug? You both said that a robot that s 3.5 high doesn t violate the rules if it s 1 foot off the ground. -- Dave
        Message 3 of 22 , May 2, 2005
          > Really? I thought the whole point of the 4X4X4 rule was to keep broad
          > sweeping arms and such from "touching" the cones. I seem to recall it being
          > said that the robot had to be able to remain in the given space, but the
          > space effectively moved with the robot with so a robot could not grow in
          > size after the start. It seems to me, no matter how high a robot goes, it
          > is still within its cube of size restriction. Of course I don't make the
          > rules.

          Ummm. You seem to be agreeing with Doug?

          You both said that a robot that's 3.5' high doesn't violate the rules
          if it's 1 foot off the ground.

          --
          Dave Hylands
          Vancouver, BC, Canada
          http://www.DaveHylands.com/
        • Jim McBride
          Yes I agree with Doug, And then some. :-) Of course when this whole thing started out it was a Mini Darpa model. And as some of you well know, the Darpa
          Message 4 of 22 , May 2, 2005
            Yes I agree with Doug, And then some. :-)

            Of course when this whole thing started out it was a "Mini Darpa" model.
            And as some of you well know, the Darpa challenge is strictly a ground
            vehicle challenge "The entry must be a ground vehicle that is propelled and
            steered principally by traction with the ground. The type of ground contact
            devices (such as tires, treads, and legs) is not restricted." There are
            even restrictions on tethered airborne sensors.
            Perhaps the whole point is mute. Or soon will be with a little rule
            massaging. As someone pointed out, there are other contest for airborne
            navigation.
            I am glad someone finally touched the cone!!!


            At 07:20 PM 5/2/2005 -0700, you wrote:
            > > Really? I thought the whole point of the 4X4X4 rule was to keep broad
            > > sweeping arms and such from "touching" the cones. I seem to recall it being
            > > said that the robot had to be able to remain in the given space, but the
            > > space effectively moved with the robot with so a robot could not grow in
            > > size after the start. It seems to me, no matter how high a robot goes, it
            > > is still within its cube of size restriction. Of course I don't make the
            > > rules.
            >
            >Ummm. You seem to be agreeing with Doug?
            >
            >You both said that a robot that's 3.5' high doesn't violate the rules
            >if it's 1 foot off the ground.
            >
            >--
            >Dave Hylands
            >Vancouver, BC, Canada
            >http://www.DaveHylands.com/
            >
            >
            >Visit the SRS Website at http://www.seattlerobotics.org
            >Yahoo! Groups Links
            >
            >
            >
            >

            JIMc
            x22661
            National Ignition Facility



            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Jay Prince
            I still wonder why safety responsibility is only a requirement of the competitors--- at PDXBOT there were spectators standing within a couple feet of the
            Message 5 of 22 , May 3, 2005
              I still wonder why safety responsibility is only a requirement of the
              competitors--- at PDXBOT there were spectators standing within a
              couple feet of the robots while the robot came towards them... just
              standing there. On multiple occasions.

              When MRToo went into an area created by the U shape of a buildign to
              go after a bonus cone, the spectactors crowded in and blocked off all
              avenues of exit, effectively preventing the robot from having the
              possibility of completing the course-- unless it decided to just
              ignore the objects blocking its path and go anyway.

              Now that this is a race-- someone has touched a cone, and we can
              assume that in later competitions people will be as succesful-- speed
              is more important than it was in the past.

              Without effective crowd control, holding builders responsible for the
              "Safety" of the robot is problematic. (And it wasn't natural
              obstacles-- people sitting on park benches that are the problem-- its
              people followign the robot, and getting in front of it, etc, blocking
              off its likely course.)

              I propose a rope that crosses the course and keeps the spectators well
              away from the robots.

              On 5/2/05, Jim McBride <mcbride7@...> wrote:
              > Yes I agree with Doug, And then some. :-)
              >
              > Of course when this whole thing started out it was a "Mini Darpa" model.
              > And as some of you well know, the Darpa challenge is strictly a ground
              > vehicle challenge "The entry must be a ground vehicle that is propelled and
              > steered principally by traction with the ground. The type of ground contact
              > devices (such as tires, treads, and legs) is not restricted." There are
              > even restrictions on tethered airborne sensors.
              > Perhaps the whole point is mute. Or soon will be with a little rule
              > massaging. As someone pointed out, there are other contest for airborne
              > navigation.
              > I am glad someone finally touched the cone!!!
              >
              >
              > At 07:20 PM 5/2/2005 -0700, you wrote:
              > > > Really? I thought the whole point of the 4X4X4 rule was to keep broad
              > > > sweeping arms and such from "touching" the cones. I seem to recall it being
              > > > said that the robot had to be able to remain in the given space, but the
              > > > space effectively moved with the robot with so a robot could not grow in
              > > > size after the start. It seems to me, no matter how high a robot goes, it
              > > > is still within its cube of size restriction. Of course I don't make the
              > > > rules.
              > >
              > >Ummm. You seem to be agreeing with Doug?
              > >
              > >You both said that a robot that's 3.5' high doesn't violate the rules
              > >if it's 1 foot off the ground.
              > >
              > >--
              > >Dave Hylands
              > >Vancouver, BC, Canada
              > >http://www.DaveHylands.com/
              > >
              > >
              > >Visit the SRS Website at http://www.seattlerobotics.org
              > >Yahoo! Groups Links
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              >
              > JIMc
              > x22661
              > National Ignition Facility
              >
              > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              >
              >
              > Visit the SRS Website at http://www.seattlerobotics.org
              > Yahoo! Groups Links
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
            • Dave Hylands
              ... I think that people will tend to crowd closer to a slow moving robot since they don t feel threatened. This should evolve into a foot race, and the
              Message 6 of 22 , May 3, 2005
                > Now that this is a race-- someone has touched a cone, and we can
                > assume that in later competitions people will be as succesful-- speed
                > is more important than it was in the past.

                I think that people will tend to crowd closer to a slow moving robot
                since they don't feel threatened.

                This should evolve into a foot race, and the challenge should be
                keeping up with the robot! :) That will tend to keep the spectators at
                bay....

                --
                Dave Hylands
                Vancouver, BC, Canada
                http://www.DaveHylands.com/
              • Jay Prince
                What ultimately worked at PDXBOT was a couple robots having trouble getting off the finish line, plus some downtime between the races.... when there wasn t a
                Message 7 of 22 , May 3, 2005
                  What ultimately worked at PDXBOT was a couple robots having trouble
                  getting off the finish line, plus some downtime between the races....
                  when there wasn't a robot running, the spectators drifted off rather
                  quickly.

                  So, maybe I should design a robot that can complete the course in 5
                  minutes, and that sits and waits for 15 minutes 2-feet in front of the
                  starting line before continuing.... course then it will take off and
                  crash into someones knees.

                  Maybe robots should just have bumpers and not sonar.... go until you
                  hit something, then back up. The panic button is there in case the
                  robot actually menaces an innocent bystander (as opposed to a
                  spectator.)


                  On 5/3/05, Dave Hylands <dhylands@...> wrote:
                  > > Now that this is a race-- someone has touched a cone, and we can
                  > > assume that in later competitions people will be as succesful-- speed
                  > > is more important than it was in the past.
                  >
                  > I think that people will tend to crowd closer to a slow moving robot
                  > since they don't feel threatened.
                  >
                  > This should evolve into a foot race, and the challenge should be
                  > keeping up with the robot! :) That will tend to keep the spectators at
                  > bay....
                  >
                  > --
                  > Dave Hylands
                  > Vancouver, BC, Canada
                  > http://www.DaveHylands.com/
                  >
                  > Visit the SRS Website at http://www.seattlerobotics.org
                  > Yahoo! Groups Links
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                • LJGeib@aol.com
                  You may be overstating the safety and crowd issues 1) MRToo is slow as molasses and doesn; t have a mean streak Though it weighs 44 pounds, I can easily stop
                  Message 8 of 22 , May 3, 2005
                    You may be overstating the safety and crowd issues

                    1) MRToo is slow as molasses and doesn;'t have a mean streak Though it
                    weighs 44 pounds, I can easily stop it by standing in front of it. My next door
                    neighbor Molly, who is six, can stop it too.

                    2)There is a big-ass pause button on it that will stop the robot, and if you
                    choose, the robot switches are in easy reach. At the speeds it runs, there
                    is no danger of it getting away from you.

                    3) the sonar wouldn't let it approach anything closer than about 5 feet
                    without the camera on, so it couldn't hit anything.

                    4)The enthusiasm of the crowd was a bit of a problem perhaps for the first
                    run, but after that, the crowds spread out a bit more. I don't think any
                    competitor can claim that the crowd ruined a run. Maybe our entry, which in the
                    condition it was in had no hope of winning, was good just to get people over the
                    adrenaline rush of the first run.

                    5)The crowd helped that run more than they hindered it. The folks lining
                    the walk formed a perfect sonar corridor for the robot. I just wish they had
                    lined the whole course!. We stopped the robt when it went into a building
                    entrance. Maybe we should have kept going, who knows if it would have extricated
                    itself.As it was, the crowd helped MRToo get to within the 5 foot sonar limit
                    of the "hard" cone.
                    If I could have figured out how to turn the camera on, MRToo would have hit
                    it.

                    6) after the first run, the crowd learned to stay behind the robot, even the
                    kids. I have several shots of Brandon surrounded by a gaggle of kids
                    following the robot like it was the Pied Piper. As you will see when the pictures
                    get posted, there was virtually no interference from spectators when the robot
                    was cone searching. By that time, they all "got" it.

                    About all I would suggest as a change is perhaps that we arrange the start
                    so the crowd has a bit more room to congregate behind the robot. They'll be
                    perfectly happy from that vantage point. I don't think we anticipated that large
                    a crowd, but that was a good thing, not a bad one. each time these contests
                    are run, the anxiety concerning the "damage' the robots have potential to
                    inflict goes down.

                    Larry

                    In a message dated 5/3/05 1:33:44 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
                    jayprince@... writes:

                    Without effective crowd control, holding builders responsible for the
                    "Safety" of the robot is problematic. (And it wasn't natural
                    obstacles-- people sitting on park benches that are the problem-- its
                    people followign the robot, and getting in front of it, etc, blocking
                    off its likely course.)

                    I propose a rope that crosses the course and keeps the spectators well
                    away from the robots.






                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • Jay Prince
                    Oh, I don t think the crowd was in any danger... I just think its unreasonable to expect MrToo to have been able to distinguish between spectators and a wall
                    Message 9 of 22 , May 4, 2005
                      Oh, I don't think the crowd was in any danger... I just think its
                      unreasonable to expect MrToo to have been able to distinguish between
                      spectators and a wall blocking off exit from the area. If he had been
                      ready / able to head out to another cone, his path was effectively
                      blocked off.

                      Doing it in a public place allows the robots to navigate a real
                      environment with random people in it, but at the same time, it ensures
                      that it will attract many spectators who have no idea what's going on
                      other than there being a robot, and wanting to crowd around it...
                      making for an unnatural environemnt for the robot.

                      Scouts speed kept him out of the crowd, and the kids running around
                      all day didn't seem to be a problem- they tended to listen to
                      instruction, and even when they were in front of a robot, they didn't
                      stay there long.

                      I still like the sit-for-a-few-minutes-and-do-nothing strategy. Call
                      it "getting a good GPS" fix.

                      On 5/3/05, LJGeib@... <LJGeib@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > You may be overstating the safety and crowd issues
                      >
                      > 1) MRToo is slow as molasses and doesn;'t have a mean streak Though it
                      > weighs 44 pounds, I can easily stop it by standing in front of it. My next door
                      > neighbor Molly, who is six, can stop it too.
                      >
                      > 2)There is a big-ass pause button on it that will stop the robot, and if you
                      > choose, the robot switches are in easy reach. At the speeds it runs, there
                      > is no danger of it getting away from you.
                      >
                      > 3) the sonar wouldn't let it approach anything closer than about 5 feet
                      > without the camera on, so it couldn't hit anything.
                      >
                      > 4)The enthusiasm of the crowd was a bit of a problem perhaps for the first
                      > run, but after that, the crowds spread out a bit more. I don't think any
                      > competitor can claim that the crowd ruined a run. Maybe our entry, which in the
                      > condition it was in had no hope of winning, was good just to get people over the
                      > adrenaline rush of the first run.
                      >
                      > 5)The crowd helped that run more than they hindered it. The folks lining
                      > the walk formed a perfect sonar corridor for the robot. I just wish they had
                      > lined the whole course!. We stopped the robt when it went into a building
                      > entrance. Maybe we should have kept going, who knows if it would have extricated
                      > itself.As it was, the crowd helped MRToo get to within the 5 foot sonar limit
                      > of the "hard" cone.
                      > If I could have figured out how to turn the camera on, MRToo would have hit
                      > it.
                      >
                      > 6) after the first run, the crowd learned to stay behind the robot, even the
                      > kids. I have several shots of Brandon surrounded by a gaggle of kids
                      > following the robot like it was the Pied Piper. As you will see when the pictures
                      > get posted, there was virtually no interference from spectators when the robot
                      > was cone searching. By that time, they all "got" it.
                      >
                      > About all I would suggest as a change is perhaps that we arrange the start
                      > so the crowd has a bit more room to congregate behind the robot. They'll be
                      > perfectly happy from that vantage point. I don't think we anticipated that large
                      > a crowd, but that was a good thing, not a bad one. each time these contests
                      > are run, the anxiety concerning the "damage' the robots have potential to
                      > inflict goes down.
                      >
                      > Larry
                      >
                      > In a message dated 5/3/05 1:33:44 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
                      > jayprince@... writes:
                      >
                      > Without effective crowd control, holding builders responsible for the
                      > "Safety" of the robot is problematic. (And it wasn't natural
                      > obstacles-- people sitting on park benches that are the problem-- its
                      > people followign the robot, and getting in front of it, etc, blocking
                      > off its likely course.)
                      >
                      > I propose a rope that crosses the course and keeps the spectators well
                      > away from the robots.
                      >
                      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      >
                      > Visit the SRS Website at http://www.seattlerobotics.org
                      > Yahoo! Groups Links
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                    • Susan M
                      If I were trying to navigate my way somewhere and found all exits blocked, wouldn t I say, Excusez-moi , or Pardon , or try to backup the way I came in,
                      Message 10 of 22 , May 4, 2005
                        If I were trying to navigate my way somewhere and found all exits
                        blocked, wouldn't I say, "Excusez-moi", or "Pardon", or try to backup
                        the way I came in, beeping a horn, or holler "Clear the way, please!"?
                        Or yell, "Fire!"?

                        Just a thought.
                        Susan
                      • Alan King
                        ... Off hand I thought it was way understated. ... Irrelevant since the question isn t can I stop it easily if I try but can it possibly harm someone if it
                        Message 11 of 22 , May 4, 2005
                          LJGeib@... wrote:
                          >
                          > You may be overstating the safety and crowd issues
                          >

                          Off hand I thought it was way understated.


                          > 1) MRToo is slow as molasses and doesn;'t have a mean streak Though it
                          > weighs 44 pounds, I can easily stop it by standing in front of it. My next door
                          > neighbor Molly, who is six, can stop it too.

                          Irrelevant since the question isn't 'can I stop it easily if I try' but 'can
                          it possibly harm someone if it hits them wrong'. At 44 lbs and even just moving
                          1 mph or less the answer is of course.

                          >
                          > 2)There is a big-ass pause button on it that will stop the robot, and if you
                          > choose, the robot switches are in easy reach. At the speeds it runs, there
                          > is no danger of it getting away from you.
                          >
                          > 3) the sonar wouldn't let it approach anything closer than about 5 feet
                          > without the camera on, so it couldn't hit anything.

                          Both of these are easily tossed, it isn't intended operation that usually
                          causes problems. No one else could be expected to know to hit the off button no
                          matter how obvious, and things can always operate in unintended ways.

                          >
                          > a crowd, but that was a good thing, not a bad one. each time these contests
                          > are run, the anxiety concerning the "damage' the robots have potential to
                          > inflict goes down.
                          >

                          Does having a few dog shows with no problems lessen your liability if a dog
                          bites someone on the next? Knowing someone who had a $12,000 suit won against a
                          dog owner for medical bills from a single bite might make you think twice.
                          Minor bite on the hand but just happened to hit a nerve and require
                          microsurgery. While rare, would you want to pay that money? The owner swore up
                          and down they weren't liable, but a judge let them know otherwise.


                          No safety thinking at all lessens liability somewhat for the organizers by
                          claiming ignorance, and it splits. Proper safety steps for both contestant and
                          organizers lessens liability a lot. "We know there are safety concerns,
                          contestants have to put in a kill switch" along with "we're not responsible at
                          all for safety on our side" is sort of nuts. Juries routinely find that the
                          first part means you obviously knew there were potential safety issues, and the
                          second part won't legally protect you since you didn't get the signature of
                          everyone in the general public to prove that they agreed to your terms.
                          Requiring kill switches without taking any steps on the organizers side pretty
                          much guarantees they will be found more liable not less if something does go wrong.

                          I'm not a lawyer but I do know a little bit, and I'd say it's extremely
                          unlikely you can even make yourself not liable for something that happens around
                          the general public. If something does go wrong and you had any part in it
                          expect to be a party in the suit, and that a jury will probably find you at
                          least partially liable. Even if you're not involved but live within 10 miles
                          expect to get sued these days.

                          I've been around many liability lawsuits from friends with small businesses,
                          and haven't ever seen anyone even remotely connected to something bad happening
                          be found not at least partly liable, no matter what was said or agreed to up
                          front. You just have to really really hope nothing ever goes even slightly
                          wrong, or research it and take every possible step to make sure you are properly
                          protected under the law. Everything in between is extremely bad news if
                          something happens.

                          Best way to look too is search local cases and find the rare ones where
                          someone was involved but still found not liable. The steps they took that
                          caused a jury to decide they had taken every legally required and all other
                          possible precautions are a very good place to start.

                          Didn't intend for this to get so long, but having been around a lot of
                          similar situations you simply can't take it too seriously before something
                          happens, everyone I know in similar circumstances kicked themselves over and
                          over for not doing so themselves. Even relatively small things end up costing a
                          lot of money and time and headaches.
                        • Alan King
                          ... Please and pardon? Just run them down. And remember, handicapped people are more points but nurses are more fun! (You ll have to have seen the abysmal
                          Message 12 of 22 , May 4, 2005
                            Susan M wrote:

                            > If I were trying to navigate my way somewhere and found all exits
                            > blocked, wouldn't I say, "Excusez-moi", or "Pardon", or try to backup
                            > the way I came in, beeping a horn, or holler "Clear the way, please!"?
                            > Or yell, "Fire!"?
                            >

                            Please and pardon? Just run them down. And remember, handicapped people are
                            more points but nurses are more fun! (You'll have to have seen the abysmal
                            movie Deathrace 2000 for the reference..)

                            Some sharp pointy horns, that might keep the crowd out from in front of the
                            robot.
                          • LJGeib@aol.com
                            You convinced me- Molly s not standing in front of the robot any more, and I m building a muzzle for the robot . Larry In a message dated 5/4/05 8:42:32 PM
                            Message 13 of 22 , May 4, 2005
                              You convinced me- Molly's not standing in front of the robot any more, and
                              I'm building a muzzle for the robot .

                              Larry


                              In a message dated 5/4/05 8:42:32 PM Pacific Daylight Time, alan@...
                              writes:

                              LJGeib@... wrote:
                              >
                              > You may be overstating the safety and crowd issues
                              >

                              Off hand I thought it was way understated.


                              > 1) MRToo is slow as molasses and doesn;'t have a mean streak Though it
                              > weighs 44 pounds, I can easily stop it by standing in front of it. My next
                              door
                              > neighbor Molly, who is six, can stop it too.

                              Irrelevant since the question isn't 'can I stop it easily if I try' but 'can
                              it possibly harm someone if it hits them wrong'. At 44 lbs and even just
                              moving
                              1 mph or less the answer is of course.

                              >
                              > 2)There is a big-ass pause button on it that will stop the robot, and if
                              you
                              > choose, the robot switches are in easy reach. At the speeds it runs, there

                              > is no danger of it getting away from you.
                              >
                              > 3) the sonar wouldn't let it approach anything closer than about 5 feet
                              > without the camera on, so it couldn't hit anything.

                              Both of these are easily tossed, it isn't intended operation that usually
                              causes problems. No one else could be expected to know to hit the off
                              button no
                              matter how obvious, and things can always operate in unintended ways.

                              >
                              > a crowd, but that was a good thing, not a bad one. each time these
                              contests
                              > are run, the anxiety concerning the "damage' the robots have potential
                              to
                              > inflict goes down.
                              >

                              Does having a few dog shows with no problems lessen your liability if a dog
                              bites someone on the next? Knowing someone who had a $12,000 suit won
                              against a
                              dog owner for medical bills from a single bite might make you think twice.
                              Minor bite on the hand but just happened to hit a nerve and require
                              microsurgery. While rare, would you want to pay that money? The owner
                              swore up
                              and down they weren't liable, but a judge let them know otherwise.


                              No safety thinking at all lessens liability somewhat for the organizers by
                              claiming ignorance, and it splits. Proper safety steps for both contestant
                              and
                              organizers lessens liability a lot. "We know there are safety concerns,
                              contestants have to put in a kill switch" along with "we're not responsible
                              at
                              all for safety on our side" is sort of nuts. Juries routinely find that the
                              first part means you obviously knew there were potential safety issues, and
                              the
                              second part won't legally protect you since you didn't get the signature of
                              everyone in the general public to prove that they agreed to your terms.
                              Requiring kill switches without taking any steps on the organizers side
                              pretty
                              much guarantees they will be found more liable not less if something does go
                              wrong.

                              I'm not a lawyer but I do know a little bit, and I'd say it's extremely
                              unlikely you can even make yourself not liable for something that happens
                              around
                              the general public. If something does go wrong and you had any part in it
                              expect to be a party in the suit, and that a jury will probably find you at
                              least partially liable. Even if you're not involved but live within 10
                              miles
                              expect to get sued these days.

                              I've been around many liability lawsuits from friends with small businesses,
                              and haven't ever seen anyone even remotely connected to something bad
                              happening
                              be found not at least partly liable, no matter what was said or agreed to up
                              front. You just have to really really hope nothing ever goes even slightly
                              wrong, or research it and take every possible step to make sure you are
                              properly
                              protected under the law. Everything in between is extremely bad news if
                              something happens.

                              Best way to look too is search local cases and find the rare ones where
                              someone was involved but still found not liable. The steps they took that
                              caused a jury to decide they had taken every legally required and all other
                              possible precautions are a very good place to start.

                              Didn't intend for this to get so long, but having been around a lot of
                              similar situations you simply can't take it too seriously before something
                              happens, everyone I know in similar circumstances kicked themselves over and
                              over for not doing so themselves. Even relatively small things end up
                              costing a
                              lot of money and time and headaches.






                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                            • LJGeib@aol.com
                              Well, I DID have to keep asking folks to stay out of the 5 foot sonar range-- Larry In a message dated 5/4/05 11:31:53 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
                              Message 14 of 22 , May 4, 2005
                                Well, I DID have to keep asking folks to stay out of the 5 foot sonar range--

                                Larry



                                In a message dated 5/4/05 11:31:53 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
                                jayprince@... writes:

                                Oh, I don't think the crowd was in any danger... I just think its
                                unreasonable to expect MrToo to have been able to distinguish between
                                spectators and a wall blocking off exit from the area. If he had been
                                ready / able to head out to another cone, his path was effectively
                                blocked off.

                                Doing it in a public place allows the robots to navigate a real
                                environment with random people in it, but at the same time, it ensures
                                that it will attract many spectators who have no idea what's going on
                                other than there being a robot, and wanting to crowd around it...
                                making for an unnatural environemnt for the robot.

                                Scouts speed kept him out of the crowd, and the kids running around
                                all day didn't seem to be a problem- they tended to listen to
                                instruction, and even when they were in front of a robot, they didn't
                                stay there long.







                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                              • Jeff Sampson
                                ... How about a Super Soaker squirt gun type attachment? If the robot has any doubt about the difference between a wall and people, let er rip... And make
                                Message 15 of 22 , May 5, 2005
                                  > Date: Wed, 04 May 2005 23:43:15 -0400
                                  > From: Alan King
                                  > Subject: Re: Robo-Megellan Woas.....and Questions
                                  >
                                  > Susan M wrote:
                                  >>If I were trying to navigate my way somewhere and found all exits
                                  >>blocked, wouldn't I say, "Excusez-moi", or "Pardon", or try to backup
                                  >>the way I came in, beeping a horn, or holler "Clear the way, please!"?
                                  >>Or yell, "Fire!"?
                                  >
                                  > Please and pardon? Just run them down. And remember, handicapped people are
                                  > more points but nurses are more fun! (You'll have to have seen the abysmal
                                  > movie Deathrace 2000 for the reference..)
                                  >
                                  > Some sharp pointy horns, that might keep the crowd out from in front of the
                                  > robot.

                                  How about a "Super Soaker" squirt gun type attachment? If the robot has
                                  any doubt about the difference between a wall and people, let 'er rip...
                                  And make sure you fill it with ice water. :-)

                                  Has anybody tried using a PIR (Passive Infrared) sensor to distinquish
                                  people? I just bought a couple from eBay but I haven't played with them.

                                  --
                                  Jeff Sampson
                                  http://tcrobots.org/members/jsamp.htm
                                • beausbabcock
                                  ... please! ? ... handicapped people are ... the abysmal ... front of the ... rip... ... them. ... You could take out the flash mechanism from a disposable
                                  Message 16 of 22 , May 5, 2005
                                    --- In SeattleRobotics@yahoogroups.com, Jeff Sampson <jsampson@p...>
                                    wrote:
                                    > > Date: Wed, 04 May 2005 23:43:15 -0400
                                    > > From: Alan King
                                    > > Subject: Re: Robo-Megellan Woas.....and Questions
                                    > >
                                    > > Susan M wrote:
                                    > >>If I were trying to navigate my way somewhere and found all exits
                                    > >>blocked, wouldn't I say, "Excusez-moi", or "Pardon", or try to backup
                                    > >>the way I came in, beeping a horn, or holler "Clear the way,
                                    please!"?
                                    > >>Or yell, "Fire!"?
                                    > >
                                    > > Please and pardon? Just run them down. And remember,
                                    handicapped people are
                                    > > more points but nurses are more fun! (You'll have to have seen
                                    the abysmal
                                    > > movie Deathrace 2000 for the reference..)
                                    > >
                                    > > Some sharp pointy horns, that might keep the crowd out from in
                                    front of the
                                    > > robot.
                                    >
                                    > How about a "Super Soaker" squirt gun type attachment? If the robot has
                                    > any doubt about the difference between a wall and people, let 'er
                                    rip...
                                    > And make sure you fill it with ice water. :-)
                                    >
                                    > Has anybody tried using a PIR (Passive Infrared) sensor to distinquish
                                    > people? I just bought a couple from eBay but I haven't played with
                                    them.
                                    >
                                    > --
                                    > Jeff Sampson
                                    > http://tcrobots.org/members/jsamp.htm

                                    You could take out the flash mechanism from a disposable camera and
                                    modify it so that is give a mild shock, that would help distinguish
                                    between people and inanimate objects.
                                    Otherwise, maybe a hard to trigger push bumper that will apply enough
                                    pressure to either alert a person to move or shove a light object out
                                    of the way before triggering "solid". Not hard enough so that it will
                                    damage your baseboard in your house however...
                                  • tbrenke@verizon.net
                                    I have used the PIR sensor. the field in frount needs to be moving. this means that you eather pan the sensor across something OR put a chopper window infrount
                                    Message 17 of 22 , May 5, 2005
                                      I have used the PIR sensor.

                                      the field in frount needs to be moving.
                                      this means that you eather pan the sensor across something OR put a
                                      chopper window infrount of it.

                                      on my PIR this was the affect.
                                      a steady 2.5V output on stationary state.
                                      pan across a heat source and you see a dip in voltage then a rise from
                                      the 2.5 steady state.
                                      using a servo I recorded the position at the lowest dip and at the highest.
                                      subtract the two and you have the direction that the heat source is
                                      located at.

                                      using a chopper this would not be needed.


                                      Jeff Sampson wrote:

                                      >>Date: Wed, 04 May 2005 23:43:15 -0400
                                      >>From: Alan King
                                      >>Subject: Re: Robo-Megellan Woas.....and Questions
                                      >>
                                      >>Susan M wrote:
                                      >>
                                      >>
                                      >>>If I were trying to navigate my way somewhere and found all exits
                                      >>>blocked, wouldn't I say, "Excusez-moi", or "Pardon", or try to backup
                                      >>>the way I came in, beeping a horn, or holler "Clear the way, please!"?
                                      >>>Or yell, "Fire!"?
                                      >>>
                                      >>>
                                      >> Please and pardon? Just run them down. And remember, handicapped people are
                                      >>more points but nurses are more fun! (You'll have to have seen the abysmal
                                      >>movie Deathrace 2000 for the reference..)
                                      >>
                                      >> Some sharp pointy horns, that might keep the crowd out from in front of the
                                      >>robot.
                                      >>
                                      >>
                                      >
                                      >How about a "Super Soaker" squirt gun type attachment? If the robot has
                                      >any doubt about the difference between a wall and people, let 'er rip...
                                      >And make sure you fill it with ice water. :-)
                                      >
                                      >Has anybody tried using a PIR (Passive Infrared) sensor to distinquish
                                      >people? I just bought a couple from eBay but I haven't played with them.
                                      >
                                      >
                                      >
                                    • Jay Prince
                                      These solutions are all too complicated... a spinning lawnmower blade on the top of the robot and a demonstrated propensity to lurch forward unexpectedly will
                                      Message 18 of 22 , May 9, 2005
                                        These solutions are all too complicated... a spinning lawnmower blade
                                        on the top of the robot and a demonstrated propensity to lurch forward
                                        unexpectedly will keep the crowd out of its way. Also, a tape player
                                        with a loop saying "Danger, do not come within 20 feet of this robot.
                                        Approach at your own risk!" will take care of any liability concerns.

                                        On 5/5/05, tbrenke@... <tbrenke@...> wrote:
                                        > I have used the PIR sensor.
                                        >
                                        > the field in frount needs to be moving.
                                        > this means that you eather pan the sensor across something OR put a
                                        > chopper window infrount of it.
                                        >
                                        > on my PIR this was the affect.
                                        > a steady 2.5V output on stationary state.
                                        > pan across a heat source and you see a dip in voltage then a rise from
                                        > the 2.5 steady state.
                                        > using a servo I recorded the position at the lowest dip and at the highest.
                                        > subtract the two and you have the direction that the heat source is
                                        > located at.
                                        >
                                        > using a chopper this would not be needed.
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > Jeff Sampson wrote:
                                        >
                                        > >>Date: Wed, 04 May 2005 23:43:15 -0400
                                        > >>From: Alan King
                                        > >>Subject: Re: Robo-Megellan Woas.....and Questions
                                        > >>
                                        > >>Susan M wrote:
                                        > >>
                                        > >>
                                        > >>>If I were trying to navigate my way somewhere and found all exits
                                        > >>>blocked, wouldn't I say, "Excusez-moi", or "Pardon", or try to backup
                                        > >>>the way I came in, beeping a horn, or holler "Clear the way, please!"?
                                        > >>>Or yell, "Fire!"?
                                        > >>>
                                        > >>>
                                        > >> Please and pardon? Just run them down. And remember, handicapped people are
                                        > >>more points but nurses are more fun! (You'll have to have seen the abysmal
                                        > >>movie Deathrace 2000 for the reference..)
                                        > >>
                                        > >> Some sharp pointy horns, that might keep the crowd out from in front of the
                                        > >>robot.
                                        > >>
                                        > >>
                                        > >
                                        > >How about a "Super Soaker" squirt gun type attachment? If the robot has
                                        > >any doubt about the difference between a wall and people, let 'er rip...
                                        > >And make sure you fill it with ice water. :-)
                                        > >
                                        > >Has anybody tried using a PIR (Passive Infrared) sensor to distinquish
                                        > >people? I just bought a couple from eBay but I haven't played with them.
                                        > >
                                        > >
                                        > >
                                        >
                                        > Visit the SRS Website at http://www.seattlerobotics.org
                                        > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                      • Larry Barello
                                        Ok, I like it: a loop playing Warning! Warning! Danger Will Robinson! And a wildly gyrating arm with a sharp implement at the end. ... From: Jay Prince These
                                        Message 19 of 22 , May 9, 2005
                                          Ok, I like it: a loop playing

                                          "Warning! Warning! Danger Will Robinson!"

                                          And a wildly gyrating arm with a sharp implement at the end.


                                          -----Original Message-----
                                          From: Jay Prince

                                          These solutions are all too complicated... a spinning lawnmower blade
                                          on the top of the robot and a demonstrated propensity to lurch forward
                                          unexpectedly will keep the crowd out of its way. Also, a tape player
                                          with a loop saying "Danger, do not come within 20 feet of this robot.
                                          Approach at your own risk!" will take care of any liability concerns.
                                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.