I'm just, JUST starting to look at robotics (have a few parts at home, have a few things on order).
So I have started looking at the current state of the art in hobby robots to see what can be reasonably achieved.
I compared the motion of Open Sourced (often EZ-Robot controlled) InMoov which takes dozens or hundreds of man-hours to build with the motion of "Female Figure" (which is a NSFW museum piece of an 'exotic dancer', viewer discretion when googling).
The former moves like a hobby robot and will set you back thousands of dollars, the latter is an "animatronics" piece that has eerily human-like arm/hand/finger movements design to play with the uncanny valley.
Usual animatronics perform a limited set of motions (think Disney's "It's a Small World" ride) over and over, but the arms on this piece seem to have a full range of motion for shoulders, arms, hands and fingers.
I can't imagine these animatronic arms being as complex or costly as an InMoov shoulder/arm/hand build. The build certainly doesn't look as complex from the close up shots on youtube.
From the perspective of making movements life-like, this does not seem to have an equal.
Is anyone in the hobby robot community using the same construction approach this animatronic has? Can anyone explain that animatronic build?
Upgrade to ARC Pro
Your robot can be more than a simple automated machine with the power of ARC Pro!
Ezrobots can run a series of animatronic movements, if you like / but that's not why we created it. Ezrobot has behaviors and triggers for interactive and autonomous robotics.
No one here would be interested in the pole dancing nsfw animatronic disaster that you're speaking of - it's a disgrace to robotics.
I'm interested in how they achieved (hardware/build-wise) the natural arm/hand/finger motion.
I'm sure ultimately the system can be controlled via EZ B but I'm also pretty sure the construction approach differs from the usual one in hobby robotics.
If you can stomach it, please watch the video again (I'd suggest the slightly less disturbing "The Artist's Studio - MOCAtv" video to minimize creepiness, still NSFW due to the gyrating lingerie clad mannequin). Pay close attention to the motion of arms/hands, I was just interested in knowing how they achieved the fluidity and full range of motion that is apparent there.
Sorry about the nightmares that will surely follow. *eek*
There is a video on that contraption that credits Spectral Motion. I'm just hoping to find some info on the approach to the build, seems very interesting.
Did you have a part in bringing us giant boxing robots?
BTW, I'm sure this build is WAY beyond my skills, but the realistic results can't be denied. Would like to read more about how they tackle the build.
I won't link from here, please google "The Artist's Studio - MOCAtv", should come up at the top of the results.
As far as what I'm asking, as I've said "I'm interested in how they achieved (hardware/build-wise) the natural arm/hand/finger motion." Don't know how to make that any more clear.
Again, sorry for the nightmares.
I assume present company excluded?
Just google animatronic schematics and I'm sure you'll find plans or how-to's...I'm quite sure the one you're referring to are all cable controlled with servos. Usually that achieves fluid motion, although no power or less power than gears...it's more for motion/looks and less function. I doubt it that stripper bot can grip anything...keep that dirty mind out of the gutter...
My train of thought:
A 1:3 scale biped or Jonnie 5 type bot would look great with those fluid motions (which I know some here associate with "toy" Japanese robots).
I think some lifelike movement could make some robots "better" at that scale versus giving them the ability to have a working hand/gripper. It's not like most robots of similar size are carrying six packs of beer back to the user.
Then again, I haven't built or designed any yet. I'll keep reading.
@Richard, don't say I didn't warn you.