PS. I should've included my email to be contacted directly - it is sbs447@gmail.com

Hey @Alan, WOW did not know Synthiam was doing something like this. OK that is cool! 

If I could give one piece of advice @Shlomo search to see if your idea already exists. If it does not exist request who ever you talk to, sign a patent or invention non-disclosure agreement before you discuss anything. You need freedom of movement to file a patent in future. Also a search maybe very eye opening as you would be amazed at what is already out there. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3mPMQbJs6Q

@PTP - Want to know the common theme for those failures? They didn't use ARC hahaha

In reality there are a two (main) reasons robotics companies fail:
1. Over promise and under deliver. 
2. Too much money sunk into trying to "do it all". 

The examples you provided promised the world, built massive dev teams with expertise in every aspect of the product so they could own all the IP and got lost in development, forgetting what was truly important - meeting buyer expectations. Jibo sold a ton of units in their pre-sale. That showed the demand was there and the reason they were able to raise 70+million. Once people got their hands on Jibo, they were all disappointing at the result. I would wager the majority of their funds were spent on software development. Maybe the outcome would have been very different if they integrated 3rd party tech rather than building it themselves? Maybe they wouldn't have burned through 70+million. Maybe they would have met user expectations and would still be alive today. 

The industry is evolving quickly, learning from the faults of the past is a great way to progress. These historic failures shouldn't be seen as a dead end to people and companies with great ideas today, but rather an opportunity to learn from and change the way they bring their products to market tomorrow.

...a big part of a products success is also based on timing and when it comes to market.

Shlomo, don't let the naysayers kill your dream. Just because someone else failed doesn't mean you can't make it work for you. Find the right help and learn from other's mistakes. Sounds like Alan from the partners team at Synthiam has a way to help guide you and the team shares your vision.

Don't ever let them tell you it can't be done. Just find a way to make it happen. The Altair project that our good friend Nink mentions as being troubled is not dead or even that troubled. I just chatted with Tony a couple days ago. His little robot has found a now possible life as an assist robot to people that needs a hand or companionship. Will's (fxrtst) Male and Female Alan heads are alive and kicking (well maybe not kicking. They have no legs. LOL). Both these guys have the same thing in common that are making them successes, They keep trying, didn't listen to the ones that said "can't do", found help and adapted to the market. Also like Will said; "timing is everything". My two above examples above by not be "mainstream" right now but I know if the inventor builders keep with their vision their work will soon be. 

Good luck and keep going.

@Dave Schulpius,
I like your posts they are always positive.

Code:

naysayer
/nsr/
noun
plural noun: naysayers
a person who criticizes, objects to, or opposes something.

There is a difference between providing examples and experience and criticizing someone. 

Only to clarify I'm firmly believer you should follow your dreams and ideas, I've been following my dream: Creating, integrating, solving software problems  for more than 15 years and when someones says it can't be done... I'll try my best with the available time to help and find a solution.

**** EDITED ****
The previous post content reflected my thoughts. I erased the negative part to focus only on the positive side.

Thank you all for encouragement. I'll be taking this up soon with Alan re: Partners@synthiam as Alan suggested. 
I would also like to contact those with established projects to see if we could work together but can't find anyone current via cruising this website.

Meanwhile, a question bubbled up. If I made a life-sized robot using Synthiam's servos, would the arms be capable of lifting 10 lbs? Or, what is the maximum weight that  servo can lift? (I am probably asking the wrong way because I am not conversant with the technical terms).

I'll break your question

Quote:

I am probably asking the wrong way because I am not conversant with the technical terms

The technical term is Torque https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torque the standard unit is Newtons Meters but you can use Kg/cm, In/lbs etc.
To compare torques you will need to have the same unit e.g. N/M,  kg/cm, etc.
Online converter tool:
http://www.onlineconversion.com/torque.htm 
 

Quote:

If I made a life-sized robot ... would the arms be capable ...

 Very subjective, let's imagine your robot arm length is 80 cm and has one servo only in the arm extremity. If you add more joints/servos this servo will handle all the weight. 

Quote:

If I made a life-sized robot using Synthiam's servos

EZ-Robot/Synthiam HDD servos torque are 19 Kg / cm
source:
https://www.ez-robot.com/Shop/AccessoriesDetails.aspx?prevCat=104&productNumber=1307 

Quote:

what is the maximum weight that  servo can lift?

There are other factors like the arm weight, joints placement/rotations, but to keep the exercise simple the Torque formula:


source: https://www.grc.nasa.gov/www/k-12/airplane/torque.html

Torque = Force * Length * cos(Angle) => Force = Torque / (Length * cos(Angle) )

What we know:
Torque = 19 Kg /cm (EZ-Robot Servo)
Length = 80 cm
  
Case 1: Arm resting, Angle 0 deg.
F = 19 / (80 * cos(0)) => F = 19 / (80 * 1) => F = 0.23 Kg
In theory the arm can hold 230 grams

Case 2: Arm at 90 deg =  0.785 radians
F = 19 / (80 * cos(0.785)) => F = 19 / (80 * 0.70 ) => F = 0.335 Kg
In theory the arm can hold 335 grams

Bear in mind there are other factors, but this will help you start.

ROBOT ARM CALCULATOR:
https://www.societyofrobots.com/robot_arm_calculator.shtml

Thx so much PTP. This is very kind of you to take so much time.
So what kind of motor so I need to lift/support 10 lbs or 5 kg

I don't have a mechanical engineering background, there are other design factors like gearboxes, transmissions, joint placement. 

for benchmark purposes a collaborative arm 80 cm 5 Kg payload (URM5) https://www.universal-robots.com/products/ur5-robot/ costs 35 K then you will need to add some addons, services, support etc.

maybe some other members can chime in and contribute their "bits"...

bear in mind we are DIY members, for a professional opinion take Synthiam/Alan's suggestion.

PTP, thx for reminding me. I convened a group from my community when the idea 1st hit me to make sure it was feasible - among that group was a young fellow in his last semester of mechanical engineering - haven't seen him in awhile because he was busy with exams, but now he will be a good source for a suggested solution
I will also follow up with Alan, as you correctly suggest

Still looking for someone to help build the life sized robot - 

Just want to say, thanks, great links

Awesome...this thread went off the roof since I checked it the last time!!
Great to see the engagement...and the NASA Research Chart is supercool!!!

Why dont you start to develop the system on a smaller scale, to develop the software and scale the mechanical parts later?

Just an idea...great to have you on the forum!!

Mickey666Maus: thx for your encouraging participation. Your appreciation of the NASA chart nudged me to review it which then led to the following question for PTP: how could the arm at rest (Case 1) carry less weight than the arm at a 90 deg angle (Case 2)? 
In any case, my mech engineer friend will be the one to guide me through that. As for the last question about starting development....

Haven't you guys guessed yet? The software is mostly developed! It is waiting for final tweaking according to whatever features must be built into the mechanics. As in any marriage, you've got to start living together to work out the kinks:).

Still looking for someone to help build the life sized robot -

hi shlomo ! I think that , by life sized , you mean a walking  humanoid about  1,70 meters tall.
Are you aware of the problems involved ?  You will need  many motors with very high torque and cost, large  and heavy batteries, a sophisticated control system,  including accelerometers and gyroscopes , a rigid frame to hold all this,  etc.
i'm working on a 80 cm robot and have a lot of problems. I use Hitec servos D845WP, that seem good enough for that. To make a larger one would be very difficult !

Leonardo46: very fitting ID for inventor in Italy:). thx for commenting. Doesn't need to be walking, could be on wheels, like electric wheelchair or hoverboard; allows use of their large battery type which lowers centre of gravity. 
In fact, I have begun wondering if lifting 10 lbs/5kg could be done using a hoisting wire that would be powered by the same motor that turns the wheels axle and would only engage when wheels were disengaged (type of transmission??)

To move on wheels is much easier. There are many examples of such robots around.
For the arms you might use cheap geared motors  adding position sensors for feedback, or linear actuators (Servocity makes many types, with their own control system) or rotary  servos with very high torque (I saw one with 280 kg.cm).
Leonardo is my first name.

For weight distribution of carrying large loads, Boston Dynamics has demonstrated the easiest application. The trouble with humans imagining robots is that we imagine them looking like humans. The challenge with that is humans are actually quite terrible at specific tasks, and are instead merely competent at a wide variety of tasks. For example, the worst robot lawn mower you could design is a human

Here's boston dynamic's box stacking robot... Notice the counter weight to assist with it's inverted pendulum balance.

If you want a cheap hack for high torque you can always use a hacked battery drill and booker rod instead of a rotary servo for a fraction of the price. Here is Bruton's robot legs, he originally used hacked drills for (he eventually replaced them with proper motors). Sounds like you are still in the early concept and design phase. I was surprised to hear you already have the software written.  

DJ: honored to have attracted your attn. Wonderful point about thinking out-of-the-(human)box, so to speak, for the "look". A business person doesn't care what the device looks like, only that it can perform efficiently. On the other hand, a consumer may yes care (or not) - I think jury may be still out. (Of course, I had seen the Boston video you linked but hadn't articulated the message you found.)

All the applications I envision need primarily an app that can control the robot device (of whatever appearance), as you have achieved with your EZ stuff. One of these applications doesn't need a humanoid body, but does need to exert more torque than 19 kg/cm. My business plan for only this one application predicts that, with only a 1% penetration into existing installs in the US, the net revenue stream would be $112M/yr., ongoing from just that penetration. As I have said before (and demonstrated) I do not have the knowhow or inclination to build the necessary hardware. But, I do have the software ready to go and need a partner to fill the missing pieces, ie. construct a working prototype (if need be with only temporary fixes such as Nink's suggestion of "hacked battery drill and booker rod") that can be shown to prospective buyers, get whatever feedback to tweak and off to the races.

Did you create the software in Synthiam's ARC? Because that would make sense in how quickly you created it!