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

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

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 of 22 , May 2, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      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 2 of 22 , May 2, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        > 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 3 of 22 , May 2, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          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 4 of 22 , May 3, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            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 5 of 22 , May 3, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              > 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 6 of 22 , May 3, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                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 7 of 22 , May 3, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  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 8 of 22 , May 4, 2005
                  • 0 Attachment
                    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 9 of 22 , May 4, 2005
                    • 0 Attachment
                      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 10 of 22 , May 4, 2005
                      • 0 Attachment
                        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 11 of 22 , May 4, 2005
                        • 0 Attachment
                          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 12 of 22 , May 4, 2005
                          • 0 Attachment
                            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 13 of 22 , May 4, 2005
                            • 0 Attachment
                              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 14 of 22 , May 5, 2005
                              • 0 Attachment
                                > 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 15 of 22 , May 5, 2005
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  --- 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 16 of 22 , May 5, 2005
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    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 17 of 22 , May 9, 2005
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      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 18 of 22 , May 9, 2005
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        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.