Anatomy of a Robot Part 5 ppt

Now, if you accelerate the room upward at 32 feet/second/second 1 G of gravity, when the next beam of light comes through the first hole, it won’t make it out through the second hole whi

Other cost functions beyond LMS are available LMS still requires multiplication, which can eat up computer time and resources LMS multiplies the step size by the dif-ferential error (X1  X1d) to get the iteration step size This can be approached in other ways:

■ Use just the sign of (X1  X1d), not the magnitude The sign simply indicates which way X1 is off The entire step size is then simply added or subtracted from X1 to iterate to the next value This makes the iteration step a simple addition or subtraction and avoids the multiplication This can be of particular value if we choose to use a small microcomputer that has no multiplier

■ Use the relative size of (X1  X1d) to pick the step size from a table of step sizes This can work well and also avoids multiplication It can converge faster when the cost function is large and can remain fairly quiet about the optimal solution Care must be taken when switching gears in an arbitrary manner like this Please reread the earlier “A Caution” section

Multivariable systems have other peculiarities to worry about as well Issues of sta-bility, convergence, and speed of operation all must be addressed here:

■ Stability As already discussed, if the step size is too large, the system may oscil-late about the solution point in an unacceptable manner Further, all the variables may not be able to reach an optimal solution at the same time The system may remain noisy forever, even if the inputs stop moving

■ Convergence It’s possible, in some situations, that the control system will not actually move to an acceptable solution:

■ Finding a solution Sometimes the starting position of the robot can affect whether it will move to the desired location or not The control system always has a set of points beyond which it cannot recover In the design and operation

of our robot’s control system, we must assure ourselves that the robot will not

be asked to recover from such a situation Note that we must determine what

an acceptable solution is for the robot Often, this involves some metric on the size of the cost function, but this can be done many different ways

■ Avoiding false solutions Sometimes arithmetic systems will settle into a false solution An example might be a robot looking for the highest hill, only

to find a smaller hill nearby If the control system must contend with a com-plex environment, this can happen easier than we might suspect If the situa-tion looks suspicious, consider putting some safety mechanism into the control system that will jar the robot out of a false solution if it gets stuck in one Such

66 CHAPTER TWO

a “safety” system must be very well designed to make sure it does not create a false alarm and disrupt a perfectly good solution

■ Speed of operation As with any robot control system, good performance is always expected The speed of operation is almost always one of the criteria If the step sizes are too small, it might take intolerably long to move to the proper solu-tion Choose the step size to optimize the robot’s behavior in terms of speed and accuracy Consider choosing the step size to best match the capability of the robot

to move and maneuver If the match is close, the results will be better in the form

of smoother operation

Now we need a bit of a reward for having slogged through so much “useful” math It’s time to dream a bit and talk about more esoteric matters that might not affect us today or tomorrow but are important anyway

Time

A little ways back in this book, we talked about the fact that the earth cannot be counted

on to be a stable reference point for our robot As a practical point, it truly is stable enough in every case I’ve ever seen, so I’m content not to worry about the earth But along comes Albert Einstein to throw us another curve ball (see Figure 2-31) It turns out that we cannot count on time itself to be unvarying in our calculations However, if the robot is puttering around at a slow speed and stays away from black holes, we can probably ignore the considerations that follow If the robot will be mov-ing at high speeds relative to the earth, then Einstein’s calculations come into play

In the very early 1900s, Einstein came up with the special theory of relativity, which holds that time does not always run at the same rate If two bodies are moving with respect to one another, they will experience time running at two different rates The effect does not become serious until the speeds are high But even the astronauts cir-cling the earth have to take relativisitic time into account or their orbital calculations will be off The following URLs show some of the calculations involved in the theory

It was a Polish mathematician Minkowski who provided the math that eluded Einstein

■ www.astro.ucla.edu/⬃wright/relatvty.htm

■ www.physics.syr.edu/courses/modules/LIGHTCONE/twins.html Time varies roughly as 1/sqrt (1  (v/c)2), where v is the relative velocity of the object and c is the speed of light Using this formula, plugging in an orbital speed of

CONTROL SYSTEMS 67

roughly 8,800 meters per second, and given the speed of light at roughly 300,000,000 meters per second, we get a time dialation for an orbiting spacecraft of

So, consider the Soviet cosmonaut who spent 458 days in space (the record) (for a total of 458  24  60  60
39,571,000 seconds) Ignoring all the other motions of the spacecraft other than the orbital speed, the cosmonaut’s time dialated 39,571,000  1.0000000004
39,571,000.017 seconds

Thus, after over a year in orbit, a time change of 17 milliseconds has occurred for the cosmonaut That’s not very much, but at an orbital speed of 8,800 meters per sec-ond, the cosmonaut would be off by 150 meters (8800  0.017) That’s not very far in terms of the earth’s expanse, but a big error while you’re trying to dock! Orbital plan-ners do take relativistic effects into account in planning orbits and interplanetary missions

1.0000000004

1>sqrt 11  0.000000000862

1>sqrt 11  18800>300,000,000222

68 CHAPTER TWO

FIGURE 2-31 Einstein

Well, if it’s not bad enough having to worry about just what time is, Einstein threw another monkeywrench into our collective thinking The General Theory of Relativity holds that the fabric of space itself isn’t just a series of straight perpendicular lines like some street pattern, but rather it’s curved and changing! He came up with this theory using a truly beautiful “thought experiment.” Instead of working in a lab, Einstein sat down and pictured the experiment in his head Here’s how his thinking went

Suppose we are sitting in a room in far outerspace where no gravity exists Two holes are in the wall, one to the left and another to the right A beam of light comes in one wall and out through the other It does not take long for the beam of light to cross the room at light speed Light travels one foot per a billionth of a second (see Figure 2-32) Now, if you accelerate the room upward at 32 feet/second/second (1 G of gravity), when the next beam of light comes through the first hole, it won’t make it out through the second hole (which has now moved) From our standpoint sitting the the room, the light beam curves after it enters the room and hits the wall too low (see Figure 2-33) Now suppose instead of acceleration, we put the earth immediately under the room From our standpoint sitting in the room, we could not tell the difference We still expe-rience 1 G of accelerative force under us The beam of light comes in the first hole and still bends down to hit the wall below the second hole (refer to Figure 2-33)

CONTROL SYSTEMS 69

FIGURE 2-32 Einstein’s thought-experiment: Light moves straight in the absence of gravity.

Room in Deep Space

No Gravity Light Beam

Gravity is this bending light But if we maintain that light must travel in a straight line at a constant speed, then we must conclude that gravity bends space itself The very existence of matter, which engenders gravitational force, bends our fabric of space Seems simple enough, right? Lest you worry about your warped existence, please be assured that the bending of space is quite small and can be ignored in most of our every-day existence

Around the First World War, some astronomers decided to put Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity to a test They observed some known stars during a solar eclipse Sure enough, stars emerged from behind the sun and moon earlier than they were sup-posed to The stars’ light was coming from behind the sun (where the astronomers should not have been able to see it), bending around the sun’s gravity and appearing before they were supposed to Further, the amount of the observed bending closely matched Einstein’s theoretical calculations This was a revelation in the sciences and confirmed Einstein’s major discovery It was a beautiful piece of work (see Figure 2-34)

A few years after that, scientists found three stars in a row, with the outer two appear-ing identical It turns out that the light from one star was beappear-ing bent around an inter-vening star, so both images appeared to us on Earth This was another manifestation of

gravity bending light and has been called a gravitational lens Since starlight can bend

70 CHAPTER TWO

FIGURE 2-33 Light not only bends in the presence of gravity; it actually falls.

Room Near a Star

Acceleration or Gravitational Pull

Light Beam Bends

around an intervening star in any direction (360 degrees), gravitational lenses often pro-vide an image of a star as a ring or arc of light Some nice examples of gravitational lenses can be found at www.iam.ubc.ca/⬃newbury/lenses/glgallery.html

The web page at http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/features/news/07nov97.html has reported an extreme case of this effect as “a black hole that is literally dragging space and time around itself as it rotates [in] an effect called frame dragging.”

CONTROL SYSTEMS 71

FIGURE 2-34 A gravitational lens The path of light defines straight lines, so gravity bends space.

STAR

STAR

Multiple Images Bending Light

This page intentionally left blank.

COMPUTER HARDWARE

Before getting into the nuts and bolts of choosing the computer hardware to include in the robot, let’s take a step back What are the reasons for putting a computer inside the robot? Even experienced engineers choke on this question It seems, after all, to be a natural decision Yet when we look at any one particular reason, there always seems to

be yet another underlying reason behind it At the beginning of any one phase of the robot project, it makes sense to analyze the options Often, a better solution is at hand Let’s look at a nontechnical example

You and your friend are in an open field and are confronted by a hungry lion (see Figure 3-1) The lion starts to charge and it is clear you must run What should your immediate goal be? Some say, “Outrun the lion.” Others say, “Outrun your friend.” Clearly, it can be difficult to think in stressful situations If we have time to think, a better solution can usually be found that will save us much time, effort, and pain Do not, however, get trapped in endless rounds of thinking and planning This too is a good way to get eaten by the lions

This survival scenario is a good example of how larger questions always reside above the immediate question Did the second answer above make you smile? If so, why?

73

3

Copyright 2003 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc Click Here for Terms of Use.

So why use a computer at all? The bottom line is

■ The project will cost less to complete

■ The robot will be a better one

■ The design can be finished sooner

Let’s look at where these savings accrue Every project has costs in terms of time and money:

■ Cost What types of cost exist?

■ Direct cash outlay for equipment, parts, and tools

■ Tying up scarce resources Sometimes projects consume resources that cannot be replaced but are essentially free An example would be the time of a key employee

If another project came along, the key employee would not be available

■ Development time The amount of time the development takes has various costs attached to it If the schedule for a commercial robot project slips, a company can miss a large percentage of the potential profits As soon as competitors come out with similar products, profits drop off quickly The first few months of a product’s lifetime are the most valuable If the robot is not ready on time, the opportunity cost is lost If a project schedule slips, real costs generally run up Resources and personnel can also be tied up, causing a longer development time

■ Risk of failure Managers of robot projects often expend resources early in the schedule to defuse risks As an example, consider a robot that must traverse

diffi-74 CHAPTER THREE

FIGURE 3-1 A hungry lion can be a problem.

cult terrain The designers may choose to build a couple of different drive trains and test them out before proceeding with the rest of the project If a project has few risks, the final cost is likely to be lower If the risk items become real prob-lems, schedules often slip and costs run up

The decision to use computer hardware in the robot design can decrease the cost of the project in various ways The following section illustrates a few ways to make this a reality

Leverage Existing Technology

“If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.”

Sir Isaac Newton (Figure 3-2), cited in The Oxford Dictionary of Quotations

Civilization advances on the strength of its history and knowledge Humans are unique

in that we store information outside our brains, in libaries and computers The accu-mulated work of others can be brought to bare to solve our problems In the case of com-puters, engineers have made their work available in the form of archived software and printed circuit hardware Each can be rapidly and inexpensively reproduced for our use Computer hardware is available in various forms We can purchase complete com-puters at stores, but these tend to be too bulky to fit into a robot We can purchase

COMPUTER HARDWARE 75

FIGURE 3-2 Sir Isaac Newton

printed circuit cards from distributors and place them inside the robot We can also pur-chase computer chips from distributors and build our own printed circuit cards, a diffi-cult proposition for the casual robot designer

We can purchase complete computer systems on a card, which will accept our soft-ware and provide connectors for the signal lines we need to control the robot This is often the most economical method of integrating computers into the design, unless large quantities of robots will be manufactured

The companies that sell computers have invested millions of dollars to make their tech-nology available for our use We gain time, dollars, and reliability by sharing and taking advantage of their effort Because the technology has been made so readily available to others, many third-party designs are also available for us to use, such as the following:

■ Third-party hardware Most computers have connectors on them that enable

us to use the “bus.” We’ll define the term later, but suffice it to say, a bus allows third-party companies to design hardware that will plug right in to the computer

Dozens of printed circuit boards (PCBs) and other conveniently packaged

cir-cuitry are available

■ Third-party software It’s not unlikely that other companies have written soft-ware we can use If the computer we choose is “special purpose” (to be defined later), then several companies have probably written software that takes advantage

of the special features of the computer We can purchase this software and use it

in various ways:

■ Freeware Often an author of software will make it freely available for others

to use One can search for “freeware” on the Internet, qualified by words that describe the software needed Sometimes the author will ask for attribution or have other requirements

■ Shareware Shareware is much like freeware, except the author often requests payment if the shareware is used in a robot One can search for shareware in the same manner as freeware and one should read the restrictions very carefully Make copies of the author’s requirements and save them if questions should arise later Searching for shareware takes some time, but it can be a very valu-able endeavor If nothing else, it can tell us how difficult our software effort will be If it’s easy to write and valuable, somebody else will have written it already If it’s hard, nothing remotely close will be available in shareware We can also discover shareware that comes close and, along with it, the authors who might be employed to modify it for our project

■ Licensing Large software operating systems, tools, and application software usually have licensing requirements Contact the company that sells the soft-ware directly for information

76 CHAPTER THREE