Robohub.org
 

The importance of interfaces

by
24 November 2008



share this:

Take the USB port as an example. It’s ubiquitous; practically everything either has one or plugs into one.

 

Similarly, if you want to build a multi-vendor market for almost anything, one of the best things you can do is to find the natural divisions of responsibility and insert standard interfaces into the boundaries between them.

 

One example, in the context of cultibotics, would be the connections between robotic arms and tool units that attach to them. What physical form should the connections take? How much force should the mechanical connection be able to withstand or apply? What services should the unit be able to expect from the arm? What signals should each understand or send to the other, or pass through to the CPU? Would the arm supply water, or should any unit making use of it have a hose connected to it in addition to its connection to the arm?

 

Detailed answers to these questions would fill a thick book, which is what it typically takes to specify a standard. Moreover, chances that any standards organization which undertook to fill in the details would decide that there would need to be several such standards, to accommodate scales ranging from very small to very large.

 

But given a set of well-defined standards, you’d be able to buy a robotic arm from company A and a tool unit complying to the same standard from company B, and have good reason for confidence that you could just plug them together and have it work seamlessly.

 

Until now there hasn’t been much need for standardization in agriculture. The prime examples of what there has been would be power takeoff, hitches, and hydraulic connectors, all of which have been standardized by the ISO, which makes it the most likely candidate for tackling standards for robotics in agriculture.

 

Of course the ISO isn’t going to get involved until there’s at least the beginnings of a market and more activity than sparse experimentation, so it behooves those who do get involved early to cooperate with each other to develop ad hoc standards which are in the public domain, royalty-free, or available for low-cost-per-unit licensing, suitable to the bootstrap nature of the field. These ad hoc standards can later serve as the starting point for formal standards.

 

Reposted from Cultibotics.



tags: , , , , ,


John Payne





Related posts :



World Robotics 2023 report: Asia ahead of Europe and the Americas

The new World Robotics report recorded 553,052 industrial robot installations in factories around the world – a growth rate of 5% in 2022, year-on-year. By region, 73% of all newly deployed robots were installed in Asia, 15% in Europe and 10% in the Americas.

#IROS2023: A glimpse into the next generation of robotics

The 2023 EEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS 2023) kicks off today at the Huntington Place in Detroit, Michigan.
01 October 2023, by

Robot Talk Episode 55 – Sara Adela Abad Guaman

In the first episode of the new season, Claire chatted to Dr. Sara Adela Abad Guaman from University College London about adaptable robots inspired by nature.
30 September 2023, by

A short guide to Multidisciplinary Research

How and Why would I consider colliding two opposite disciplines in my research.
27 September 2023, by

Robo-Insight #5

In this fifth edition, we are excited to feature robot progress in human-robot interaction, agile movement, enhanced training methods, soft robotics, brain surgery, medical navigation, and ecological research. 
25 September 2023, by

Soft robotic tool provides new ‘eyes’ in endovascular surgery

The magnetic device can help visualise and navigate complex and narrow spaces.





©2021 - ROBOTS Association


 












©2021 - ROBOTS Association