DARwIn-OP robot is open source

Posted on Monday, August 1st, 2011 in kit biz, open source, robotics by the machinegeek

This robot kicking the beer can around in this video is known as DARwin-OP. This the result of an Open Platform Humanoid Project sponsored by the National Science Foundation (NSF) in the United States and developed by RoMeLa at Virginia Tech with collaboration with University of Pennsylvania, Purdue University and Robotis Co., based on the award winning DARwIn series humanoid robots in development since 2004.

DARwIn-OP (Dynamic Anthropomorphic Robot with Intelligence – Open Platform) is an affordable, miniature-humanoid-robot platform with advance computational power, sophisticated sensors, high payload capacity, and dynamic motion ability to enable many exciting research, education, and outreach activities.

DARwIn-OP is a true open platform where users are encouraged to modify it in both hardware and software, and various software implementations are possible (C++, Python, LabVIEW, MATLAB, etc.) The open source hardware is not only user serviceable thanks to its modular design, but also can be fabricated by the user. Publicly open CAD files for all of its parts, and instructions manuals for fabrication and assembly are available on-line for free.

We found the DARwIn-OP listing for $12,000 as a special order from Trosson Robotics. For that price, we’d expect him to retrieve the beer and open it, not just kick the car around. It would have been a particularly interesting AI learning experiment had DARwIn picked the can up and opened it after kicking it around the floor…

Via Robots Dreams.

This entry was posted on Monday, August 1st, 2011 at 5:04 pm and is filed under kit biz, open source, robotics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

2 Responses to “DARwIn-OP robot is open source”

  1. rsdio says:

    I often laugh at the way creators of some system describe their own project. You have to have a very creative definition of “affordable” to use that term in reference to a $12,000 product.

    I’ve also seen student designs which claimed to be efficient designs oriented towards low cost, but I quickly found a couple of bad design choices. One was using a premium-priced 32-channel mux chip which costs significantly more than a pair of 16-channel mux chips (way more than the placement cost could possibly be). Considering that the inputs were spread all across the board on that design, two 16-channel chips would have even shortened the length of the traces. But, hey, when you’re describing your own project design to your professor, I guess you can write the most glowing review that you want.

Leave a Reply to George

Click here to cancel reply.

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.

Recent Comments

  • Crawford: Dog pants,
  • Iain NoSpam: A very random comment from a very random commenter.
  • Kurt: Darkness falls across the land The midnight hour is close at hand
  • Jack: I hope everyone at Dangerous Prototypes wins a share of the MegaMillions jackpot tonight.
  • Edward Mallon: While I loved the Nokia 5110 LCD's readability in full sun, the pressure sensitivity was a real problem for the underwater units. So I started...