• Fractal robot web site moving

    From love2campandhike@gmail.com@21:1/5 to Joe on Wed Feb 12 13:44:05 2020
    On Saturday, March 23, 2002 at 8:17:00 PM UTC-6, Joe wrote:
    Gerry Schneider <gerry.s@sympatico.ca> wrote in message news:3C9D41B7.543AB41B@sympatico.ca...
    Joe wrote:

    Alan Kilian <kilian@raceme.UUCP> wrote in message news:lMMm8.1211$K13.380155@typhoon.mn.ipsvc.net...


    You said "Each application can generate billions
    in revenue and I hold the USA patent."

    When I search the US Patent office's database
    for "Joe" AND "Michael" in the inventor field, I
    get lots and lots of hits, but I can't find any
    fractal robots.

    Could you please post the patent numbers?

    Well Alan, if you are referring to my USA pat no. then it
    is No. 6, 157, 872.

    I'd share it with any decent person that wants to get
    this technology off the ground.

    Share what? The patent refers to a hopelessly complicated structural technique that will always produce a device 100 times bulkier and 100
    times less robust than any specifically-built product. Your abstract blithely describes methods that require hundreds or thousands of
    different surface sliding operations without once mentioning the effects
    of dust, grit, water and other contaminants on the reliability of the operation. There are lots of other reliability-reducing operations, such
    as the connector mating and un-mating inherent in such a design, that
    would be apparent to any reasonable person. Imagine a hammer whose
    striking face contains a couple of processors, some electric motors and actuators, communications and control cable, a power supply, etc. What a ridiculously complicated approach to a specific task.! Now scale this up
    to a Moon or Martian crawler, a submarine or an airplane. The designs
    for these struggle with specific problems, but have nicely solved the
    basic structure, thank you very much. Your approach would still be
    trying to get the thing put together in the presence of surface ice, expansion or contraction of mating surfaces due to tremendous heat or
    cold, high-pressure water penetration of seals, etc. while the
    specifically built machine is off doing its work. Compare a rolling
    wheel using an electric motor, a gear train and a sealed bearing to a machine that loops around by coupling and un-coupling elements at the
    rate of millions of operations per mile. Hmm... wonder which one's going
    to break down first? Fault tolerance doesn't do much good when you run
    out of spares a few million miles from home. The whole concept is ridiculous except under the most narrow applications. You'll also have noticed that the applications being done by others and that you claim
    are "yours" couple elements at a much higher level. They don't build I-beams by making the "I" out of little cubes, or wheels by rolling
    little cubes up in a circle.


    Gerry, the patent document is just abstraction. Seeing beyond it requires visiting web site http://www.fractal-robots.com
    In abstract the patent document specifies a few designs
    for cubes and the patent claims are over common elements between designs. Thus variants will use most if not all common features.

    Its a misunderstanding to say cubes roll up into a circle to make a wheel
    or anything else.
    The simplest alternative is to tool the cubes.
    A large cube can be fitted with an electric wheel for instance.
    Four of these wheels can be shuffled out to the edges of a machine
    to transform the machine into a drivable vehicle.
    Then you can travel the mile on the martian surface
    without coupling or uncoupling any elements. If you have a break down
    and carry a spare wheel unit, then you can shuffle the cubes around to
    change the wheel without calling for help.
    If you come across a steep vertical, then
    you can change shape, climb the vertical, and then convert back
    into a wheeled vehicle. The design doesn't struggle with new
    challenges of terrain because it is not a fixed geometry vehicle.
    All cubes can carry tools inside such as antenna, batteries,
    solar panels, drilling equipment etc. and deploy them
    as and when needed in different configurations.
    For example in drilling, you put away the wheels and change
    shape to have sturdy legs whilst drilling. If you carried steel
    tubes and girders then articulate those
    steel tubes and girders and join them together to make a base
    for the drilling machine.
    As for dust and dirt or hostile environments, do what
    CD-ROM do every minute of every day - use flaps that keep out dust. Alternatively, the machines can shuffle plate elements on
    themselves to keep themselves safe in a dust storm.

    The possibilities are endless depending on how many tools
    have been fitted along with software to deploy it - which
    is where all the hard work comes in. Its made easier
    in that cubes can be mostly empty inside and since different
    sizes of cubes are present in a fractal machine, any existing
    tool will have a size of cube that could take it. So it
    just becomes a customization operation to fit tool into cube
    and then pull out interface wires to the connectors
    so that the tools can be software controlled.

    To make wheel unit for example requires a wheel, washing machine motor
    a gear box and electronic control circuits.
    Once built, 3 more copies can be made. Then it can
    be attached together into a wheeled vehicle.
    Simple as Lego, but letting
    the computer do the shuffling of the bricks.


    Oh yes, the good old days.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)