Searching \ for '[EE] Robot jellyfish' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/index.htm?key=robot+jellyfish
Search entire site for: 'Robot jellyfish'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[EE] Robot jellyfish'
2011\01\01@230822 by V G

picon face
blog.makezine.com/archive/2008/11/more_robot_jellyfish.html

I REALLY love this thing. I want to make one, or at least draw out the
designs for one. How difficult do you guys think this would be? At the bare
minimum, I would like to have designed the propulsion and maneuvering
system

2011\01\01@232800 by V G

picon face
On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 11:08 PM, V G <spam_OUTx.solarwind.xTakeThisOuTspamgmail.com> wrote:

> http://blog.makezine.com/archive/2008/11/more_robot_jellyfish.html
>
> I REALLY love this thing. I want to make one, or at least draw out the
> designs for one. How difficult do you guys think this would be? At the bare
> minimum, I would like to have designed the propulsion and maneuvering
> system.
>

The whole thing that impresses me is the motion of the tentacles. I wonder
how they do it. I mean, I can see part of the mechanics from the video, but
I really want to come up with something like that

2011\01\02@005657 by PICdude

flavicon
face
Fascinating, and I'd love to have my high-schoolers (  http://www.veisystems.com/nose/ ) get involved in designing/building  this for/with you, but we're scrambling to finish up two projects  right now.  Perhaps after?

The design seems fairly simple but very ingenious.  AFAICT, each  tentacle is made up of two slats, joined by some "ribs" between them  (or more like rungs on a ladder).  By pushing/pulling the center of  each tentacle, with the top part hinged to the main body, the  tentacles curve.  The rungs are probably set to define exactly how  they curve.  Then the body has the up/down mechanism with pivoting  arms to push all tentacles at once.

I know Festo from robotics (they make pneumatic actuators/cylinders),  so perhaps the up-down movement is controlled by some pneumatic slide.    It would probably be better for waterproofing, rather than some  electrical-motor type system.

Cheers,
-Neil.



Quoting V G <.....x.solarwind.xKILLspamspam@spam@gmail.com>:

{Quote hidden}

>

2011\01\02@014959 by V G

picon face
On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 12:56 AM, PICdude <.....picdude3KILLspamspam.....narwani.org> wrote:

{Quote hidden}

Yeah, I forgot to mention, it's called Aquajelly by Festo.

PDF:
http://www.festo.com/rep/en-us_us/assets/Corporate_img/Festo_AquaJelly_en.pdf

Info: http://www.festo.com/ext/en/5889_6297.htm

Site: http://www.festo.com/cms/en-ca_ca/5889_6037.htm#id_6037

They mention something about "Fin Ray" tentacles. Wonder what that's all
about...

And I'd love to take part in collaborative work

2011\01\02@025011 by N. T.

picon face
V G wrote:
> Yeah, I forgot to mention, it's called Aquajelly by Festo.
>

Can you find similar projects by Camozzi?


>
> And I'd love to take part in collaborative work.

Yeah, I would too,  with Camozzi, if they didn't mind it of course :-)

Thanks

2011\01\02@032442 by V G

picon face
On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 2:50 AM, N. T. <EraseMEntypesemispam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTgmail.com> wrote:

> Can you find similar projects by Camozzi?
>

I'm not familiar with that company. Sorry.


>  Yeah, I would too,  with Camozzi, if they didn't mind it of course :-)
>

Why do you say that

2011\01\02@050830 by N. T.

picon face
V G wrote:
>>  Yeah, I would too,  with Camozzi, if they didn't mind it of course :-)
>
> Why do you say that?

Why did I say what? Why could they mind it? None of the specific
reasons on my side, just in case they have some :-)

Seriously, perhaps I am not getting your humor, I took your post as a
joke, sorry.

2011\01\02@082539 by alan.b.pearce

face picon face
> Fascinating, and I'd love to have my high-schoolers (
> http://www.veisystems.com/nose/ ) get involved in designing/building
> this for/with you, but we're scrambling to finish up two projects
> right now.  Perhaps after?
>
> The design seems fairly simple but very ingenious.  AFAICT, each
> tentacle is made up of two slats, joined by some "ribs" between them
> (or more like rungs on a ladder).  By pushing/pulling the center of
> each tentacle, with the top part hinged to the main body, the
> tentacles curve.  The rungs are probably set to define exactly how
> they curve.  Then the body has the up/down mechanism with pivoting
> arms to push all tentacles at once.
>
> I know Festo from robotics (they make pneumatic actuators/cylinders),
> so perhaps the up-down movement is controlled by some pneumatic slide.
>   It would probably be better for waterproofing, rather than some
> electrical-motor type system.

Imagine having a transparent one beside your front door on Halloween, and have it start up and lit with LEDs when the door bell rings ...

The air one seems to have some form of rotary motion converted to push pull by a crank to move the 'floaty' arms. I think the drive is a drive shaft down the arm that holds the crank assembly, as it also appears to do a right angle change in the rotary motion at that point.

I couldn't really work out what the pump motion in the centre of the body of the water ones was pumping from where to where. It seemed it was jetting out the bottom to provide upwards motion, but I couldn't be sure of that as it also seemed to pump out the top. But then I couldn't work out where the inlet to the pump was.
-- Scanned by iCritical.

2011\01\02@124714 by PICdude

flavicon
face
Wow, I'm now significantly confused.  I found Camozzi, but not clear  on why they would be better than Festo (in general).  What is it  specifically about Camozzi that prompted you to bring them up?   Something they do better?  Connections?  Or...???




Quoting "N. T." <ntypesemispamspam_OUTgmail.com>:

{Quote hidden}

>

2011\01\02@145101 by N. T.

picon face
PICdude wrote:
> Wow, I'm now significantly confused.  I found Camozzi, but not clear
> on why they would be better than Festo (in general).  What is it
> specifically about Camozzi that prompted you to bring them up?
> Something they do better?  Connections?  Or...???

Some personal preferences (location and maybe connections).

2011\01\02@161228 by PICdude

flavicon
face
Quoting @spam@alan.b.pearceKILLspamspamstfc.ac.uk:

> Imagine having a transparent one beside your front door on  
> Halloween, and have it start up and lit with LEDs when the door bell  
>  rings ...
> ...

Speaking of which, did you ever see this...  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jr8stcBBN_s

Cheers,
-Neil.

2011\01\03@024800 by V G

picon face
>From the video, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSTJVnf5nyA, it seems that
the motion (velocity) of the linear actuator is sinusoidal in nature (think
piston, (like that within an internal combustion engine), being driven by a
crankshaft).

So, the drivetrain could be composed of a motor attached to a crankshaft
which drives the two "pistons" (on the top and bottom) up and down.

This is sort of what I mean: http://www.animatedengines.com/stirling.shtml

The "pistons" are then attached to the tentacles by rigid rods.

How does this sound

2011\01\03@050140 by N. T.

picon face
V G wrote:
> So, the drivetrain could be composed of a motor attached to a crankshaft
> which drives the two "pistons" (on the top and bottom) up and down.
>
> This is sort of what I mean: http://www.animatedengines.com/stirling.shtml
>
> The "pistons" are then attached to the tentacles by rigid rods.
>
> How does this sound?

Sounds like you need quite a garage to keep that kind of a car.
Sorry for the off-topic, just could not resist it. :-

2011\01\03@141052 by V G

picon face
On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 5:01 AM, N. T. <KILLspamntypesemiKILLspamspamgmail.com> wrote:

> Sounds like you need quite a garage to keep that kind of a car.
> Sorry for the off-topic, just could not resist it. :-)


I don't get the joke.

But seriously though, how does it sound

2011\01\03@145526 by N. T.

picon face
V G wrote:
>
> But seriously though, how does it sound?
> --

Looks cool

2011\01\04@120229 by RussellMc

face picon face
                  BCC: Ken & Graham want to look at animations. Rod may

> This is sort of what I mean: http://www.animatedengines.com/stirling.shtml

> The "pistons" are then attached to the tentacles by rigid rods.
> How does this sound?

Floo-fa-floo-fa-floo-fa- ... ?

Seriously though, forget the Jellyfish, become entranced with the
Stirling Engine instead.
It's a lifelong obsession just waiting to happen.
Believe me ... :-).

Nice animation.
User-variable frame rate is an excellent idea.

Become instroduced to its stable mates.

One of these will run on the heat from a cup of coffee.
Or an ice cube.
Or both.

     http://www.animatedengines.com/ltdstirling.shtml

Note what the change of colour and size of the gas particles is
telling you - albeit not quite correctly in all cases.

Ross is/was a relatively modern-day patent attorney who caught the bug

       http://www.animatedengines.com/ross.shtml

One can almost feel a Jellyfish comin on ...

            http://www.animatedengines.com/vstirling.shtml

Stay away from the dark side

        http://www.animatedengines.com/coomber.shtml

Somebody else patented the crankshaft, leading to things like this (seriously)

          http://www.animatedengines.com/crankless.shtml

Air Hoggs ...
(I've never seen one)

           http://www.animatedengines.com/co2.shtml

....



             Russel

2011\01\04@130453 by Olin Lathrop

face picon face
RussellMc wrote:
> Somebody else patented the crankshaft, leading to things like this
> (seriously)
>
>            http://www.animatedengines.com/crankless.shtml

I gave up waiting for the animation to load, so didn't look at it.  However,
there are other reasons for not using a crankshaft.  One clever idea is the
Sanderson engine.  The nature of the mechanism allows a truly continuously
variable displacement piston engine.

This can be used as a long distance continuously variable transmission if
pumping some reasonably incompressible fluid.  This is actually being looked
at currently to get the power from a horizontal axis wind turbine to a
stationary spot on the ground below where the generator is placed.  Not only
does this have obvious advantages for maintainence, but allows for keeping
the generator spinning at a fixed frequency while keeping the blades at the
optimum speed to extract the most power from the wind.  In the end the only
variable is the power output of the generator.

I don't know whether this is a better tradeoff than what is currently being
done, but it does solve some problems in a elegant way, while of course
adding others.  I do know it is seriously being looked into by people who
specialize in such things.


********************************************************************
Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products
(978) 742-9014.  Gold level PIC consultants since 2000

2011\01\04@135543 by Mark E. Skeels

flavicon
face
[

One clever idea is the
Sanderson engine.

]

Olin, are  you talking about this thing?

http://www.sandersonengine.com/


Mark Skeels
Engineer
Competition Electronics, Inc.
TEL: 815-874-8001
FAX: 815-874-8181
http://www.competitionelectronics.com

2011\01\04@140403 by Olin Lathrop

face picon face
Mark E. Skeels wrote:
> Olin, are  you talking about this thing?
>
> http://www.sandersonengine.com/

Yes.  The animation on that page doesn't show the variable displacement
capability, but this basic design can do that.  It is done by varying how
far off center the the rocker assembly gets rotated.  The bigger the radius,
the greater the rocker motion, and the greater the displacement.


********************************************************************
Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products
(978) 742-9014.  Gold level PIC consultants since 2000

2011\01\04@142357 by KPL

picon face
>> http://www.sandersonengine.com/
>
> Yes.  The animation on that page doesn't show the variable displacement
> capability, but this basic design can do that.  It is done by varying how
> far off center the the rocker assembly gets rotated.  The bigger the radius,
> the greater the rocker motion, and the greater the displacement.

It seems to me that this design, compared to conventional crankshaft,
requires much more sophisticated joints, because all movements are
kind of "3D", not like in crankshaft. Most probably it's possible to
make spherical joints up to high standards with today's technology,
but it will be much more difficult and expensive anyway. I am not sure
those will have same life expectancy too.


-- KPL

2011\01\04@154240 by Peter

picon face

KPL <kpl.listes <at> gmail.com> writes:

>
> >> http://www.sandersonengine.com/
> >
> > Yes.  The animation on that page doesn't show the variable displacement
> > capability, but this basic design can do that.  It is done by varying how
> > far off center the the rocker assembly gets rotated.  The bigger the radius,
> > the greater the rocker motion, and the greater the displacement.
>
> It seems to me that this design, compared to conventional crankshaft,
> requires much more sophisticated joints, because all movements are
> kind of "3D", not like in crankshaft. Most probably it's possible to
> make spherical joints up to high standards with today's technology,
> but it will be much more difficult and expensive anyway. I am not sure
> those will have same life expectancy too.

http://www.cimec.ro/Muzee/mteh/sonic.jpg

This is a 'sonicity' based motor, cca. 1919 by Henry Coanda (Romania). It
converts a single pulsating pressure source (at the left) into rotary motion in
the case of the pictured functional exhibit which can be seen in a museum in
Bucharest today. The coils are ... coils, they delay the power pulses to create
3 phase drive. The tubing uses low pressure hydraulic fluid filling. Other
versions exist where the amplitude of the stroke can be adjusted dynamically.
Technically it has about 4 moving parts (the 4 pistons, one in the pulsating
source).

-- Peter

2011\01\04@154507 by Peter

picon face
The previous posting should have said Gogu Constantinescu, not Henri Coanda

-- Peter

2011\01\04@163932 by Herbert Graf

picon face
On Tue, 2011-01-04 at 13:05 -0500, Olin Lathrop wrote:
> RussellMc wrote:
> > Somebody else patented the crankshaft, leading to things like this
> > (seriously)
> >
> >            http://www.animatedengines.com/crankless.shtml
>
> I gave up waiting for the animation to load, so didn't look at it.  
Then you need either a faster computer, a faster browser, a faster
internet connection, or more patience. It took about 2 seconds to load
on my machine.

Pretty neat looking IMHO.

TTYL

2011\01\04@213802 by V G

picon face
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 4:39 PM, Herbert Graf <RemoveMEhkgrafTakeThisOuTspamgmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 2011-01-04 at 13:05 -0500, Olin Lathrop wrote:
> > RussellMc wrote:
> > > Somebody else patented the crankshaft, leading to things like this
> > > (seriously)
> > >
> > >            http://www.animatedengines.com/crankless.shtml
> >
> > I gave up waiting for the animation to load, so didn't look at it.
>
> Then you need either a faster computer, a faster browser, a faster
> internet connection, or more patience. It took about 2 seconds to load
> on my machine.
>
> Pretty neat looking IMHO.
>

Less than a second here, but we're all seriously off topic.

I'm interested in ideas on how to get the pulsing motion in the jellyfish

2011\01\04@220057 by RussellMc

face picon face
> > Somebody else patented the crankshaft, leading to things like this
> > (seriously)

> >            http://www.animatedengines.com/crankless.shtml

> I gave up waiting for the animation to load, so didn't look at it.

Summat aglae in your system and/or the path thereto.
Loading time from NZ using ADSL at under 5 Mbps download was perhaps 1 second.
(Maybe it had just been slashdotted :-) ).

{Quote hidden}

Sounds good.

The current (pun noticed in passing) area being looked at is direct
alternator drive with suitable electronics to provide the voltage and
frequency conversion. Until now gearboxes have been almost universally
used but it sees likely that direct drive will increasingly replace
them. AIR this produces a heavier head so is easier  for smaller
systems and places a current upper limit on where DD is liable to be
practical BUT I'd doubt vthere will be many gearbox based systems in
say 20 years time.


        Russell

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2011 , 2012 only
- Today
- New search...