
Why Dyson's robot vacuum took 16 years, and why it's headed to Japan first - guiambros
http://www.engadget.com/2014/09/04/why-dysons-robot-vacuum-took-16-years-and-why-its-headed-to-j/
======
ChuckMcM
I appreciate the extra detail here. Having built small robotics platforms for
more than a couple of decades I completely agree with much of what Dyson is
saying, things really have changed tremendously in the last 5 years. Between
$0.75 32 bit MCUs with 64K of flash and 8K of ram, to $3.00 6DOF IMU chips, to
$5 HD video cameras, the ability to put high resolution sensors, better
compute, and getting more watts per _gram_ than ever before, it is a great
time to take another look at what mobile robotics can and cannot do.

I should have known, robots have always been held back by the weight of power
and compute.

~~~
Schwolop
Interestingly enough, for robotic vacuums _low_ weight is also a problem: the
better your suction, the worse your ability to drive!

The tank-tread wheels on Dyson's model are meant to help mitigate against
this, but I gather from (now ex-) insiders that this is still a buggy sticking
point (ha!) that needs to be solved before release.

~~~
tonylemesmer
ex-dyson robotic engineer here.

Correct - low weight means you have less force to apply to the wheels and
hence achieve grip. The design of the aperture where the air goes into the
vaccum (the soleplate) has to be optimised between flicking the carpet fibres
in the right fashion to achieve good dirt pickup and not impeding sliding
across the carpet too much.

The design of the tyres is critical. If there is any slip in the tyres you
have a problem. Even though the attitude and trajectory of the robot is
governed by the information coming from the camera it does also rely on
feedback from the wheel speed sensors. If you have slip on one side and not
the other then you will tend to spin around and not drive in a straight line.
Adding more power to the slipping wheel merely exacerbates the problem.

You'll notice the treads on the tank tracks are chunky. This is to give
maximum grip on thicker pile carpets, however this kind of carpet tend to be
"squishy" and allow the wheels to float somewhat on the carpet surface no
matter what design of tyre. So this is probably where they are having
problems. Also you'll notice the wheels are not rigidly mounted to the robot
chassis, they have suspension. But unlike car suspension the bottom of the
robot does take some of the weight and it touches the floor. If you have more
mass in the robot it gives you more latitude to distribute it between the
wheels and the soleplate.

Its a careful balancing act and all of these variables have to be tuned based
on the amount of suction your vacuum motor is providing.

~~~
dominotw
Hello. Sorry about the offtopic question. How does one become a robotic
engineer. What was you career path/education?

~~~
tonylemesmer
I studied Manufacturing engineering and got a bachelors degree. This is very
similar to ordinary Mechanical Engineering. I happened to be working on
laundry products leading up to my time on the Dyson Robot. Its just a diverse
enough company that they also operate in robotics. I now work for a medical
devices company still working on motors.

My personal interests have been influenced by my father and elder brother who
are both electronics engineers and I developed a keen interest in electronics
and software from as far back as I remember and which I still have to this
day. The ability for a mechanical engineer to fully understand the
implications of the integration of mechanical systems, electronics and how
they are prototyped and manufactured is key.

For instance when developing the wheels we were able to achieve minimal size
by integrating the motors directly onto the PCB inside the gearbox and the PCB
was an integeral part of the gearbox housing. This came about because all
members of that part of the team understood each others domains to an
extremely high degree.

~~~
dominotw
Thank you for your detailed answer.

------
yitchelle
The title is almost click baiting. I was hoping to read an in-depth article
for the 16years of effort in design the vacuum. Information on how the
engineers solve massive problems that would have take many years to do.

From the general sense of the article, 16 years was the elapse time from their
first version to their release version.

However, probably the right level of detail from engadget...

~~~
stigi
I was expecting a good argument on why it's launched in JA prior to US, UK or
EU. Just the fact that Japan is a big adaptor for robotics doesn't make it.
Roomba and others have established solid markets for that kind of product
outside of Japan already. I hope Dyson can match the demand and will start
selling the 360 eye globally soon.

~~~
toyg
I think the real motivation for a Japan-only launch is that, if things don't
work out, they can quietly kill it without experiencing a costly PR fiasco in
Western markets. Which is a bit weak for such a "revolutionary" products.

------
pw
This was a disappointingly light read. I was hoping for lots of fascinating
technical details and a heartening, Apple-esque story of biding one's time
with a product (along with an analysis of what technical advancements make
_now_ the right time for the Dyson robot vacuum). And there was exactly one
paragraph about why it's launching in Japan first.

~~~
ianstallings
I actually have a hosts rule for techcrunch articles that helps me avoid this
frustration:

 _/ etc/hosts:_

0.0.0.0 techcrunch.com

~~~
djrogers
except the linked article is on engadget...

~~~
ianstallings
Well you could
extrapolate.........................................................................

It's all shit anyway, garbage.

------
buro9
Is the solution to a small robot vacuum really to increase the power of the
motor above the competition?

On hard wood flooring I've never found rotary brushes to be better than side
sweeps (what most of the competition uses).

And on carpet where rotary brushes do perform better, I can't help but think
that instead of upping the suction power you could approach the problem from a
different perspective... such as using a low vibration to shake the dirt and
dust free of the carpet so that it's easier to pick up the material with less
suction power.

I really like Dyson products, but it very much feels like they have a hammer
(high powered suction in lower watt motors) and so every problem looks like a
nail.

Some of their innovations over the past 5 years haven't impressed me...

Their hand dryers do a worse job than the classic World Dryer and look uglier
over time and seem to be less performant over time (smaller clogged filters
perhaps!?).

Their "fanless" fan of course has a fan, and whilst it shifts a good chunk of
air at first it also suffers from degrading performance as the hidden fan gets
clogged with dust over a season. And yet, the classic desk fan performs
consistently well all the time.

And the problem with releasing highly-hyped products that turn out to be only
average, is that it's hard to believe the hype in future.

Whereas I used to look at a Dyson as being incredibly functional innovation, I
now look upon them as gimmicky innovation using their single core-trick.

And of course, they will successfully market and patent all of this (of which
even the linked article is a part of that puzzle), such that people start to
believe this is the best solution (not proven at all), and that Dyson will
claim that no-one else can provide the best because of the patents (partly
true, but who said this was the best?).

Years of buying and using Dyson products has left me greatly cynical. Their
upright hoovers are still the business though.

~~~
Throwaway823
Dyson definitely does a great job at marketing, and giving their products a
premium price and expectations.

I was at the store one day, and saw vacuum cleaners. Now, I have no interest
in a vacuum at the moment, but they had a Dyson Ball, and I've seen countless
videos of it, and had to take a look to see this high-end vacuum. I was
disappointed from the first second, it just looked like a bunch of cheap
plastic parts, and similar to something I'd find from a yard sale ten years
ago. Photo below of my expectation from all the marketing, and a photo someone
took of the actual vacuum.

[http://i.imgur.com/bs1ygfM.jpg](http://i.imgur.com/bs1ygfM.jpg)

I played around with it for a bit, and it just felt cheap, in every way
possible. I was expecting the best vacuum in the world, and I was holding
something that was entirely different. Now, I don't own one, it might work
great for vacuuming, but it had no sense of luxury in person.

Another example, is the handheld vacuum, I'd see commercials on television,
and then I saw one in the wild at a friends house. Comparison below is using
slightly different models, but just look at the materials. In the promo image,
it looks like glass and metal, and then in reality, it's some cheap stamped
plastic that you'd expect from a bottom of the barrel vacuum.

[http://i.imgur.com/RZ8sFxq.jpg](http://i.imgur.com/RZ8sFxq.jpg)

As for the hand dryers, I find they work well and fast. It's a creative idea,
and I think they're a success. I imagine they're more difficult to clean
though, and get dirty with all the water dripping on them.

~~~
asuffield
It appears that you are placing a very high value on how shiny things are and
their presentation. In that case Dyson is probably not for you; they are
fundamentally an industrial engineering organisation.

I own that model of vacuum you have photographed, and it's just.... good.
Lightweight, easy to push around tight corners, and sucks up everything in my
flat in under 10 minutes without ever having to fight it. It makes it very
clear that ever other model I've ever used was not very well-designed.

It is not the kind of status symbol that you appear to be seeking. Kirby makes
those and I think you'd be a lot happier with their products.

~~~
Throwaway823
I don't care about a status symbol. I'm not in the vacuum market right now and
already own a miele.

Based on all the hype Dyson tries to generate, their product renders,
commercials, sales lingo, etc, I expected this to be the iPhone of vacuums,
where it was priced high, because it functions well, and has a great build
quality.

Instead, it just looked overpriced, and the quality appeared no better than
the vacuums a third of the price. I was disappointed, that's all, it looks
like they spent their budget on marketing and the quality of the product came
second.

~~~
gbhn
Agree with the GP -- I own this vacuum and it works great. If you're more in
the market for a chrome-and-platinum vacuum and don't care as much about the
performance, you're probably headed the right direction with what you have.

What may be worth understanding, though, is that there are people who are
equally willing to pay money for good vacuums, but whose judgment of "good
vacuum" runs much more to "suction power and functional ability" rather than
"build quality."

The idea that there is not a single axis of quality, and that different
products can optimize for different axes, is not a new one, but it's one that
many tech people in a post-Steve-Jobs era seem to have a hard time
remembering.

~~~
Throwaway823
_If you 're more in the market for a chrome-and-platinum vacuum and don't care
as much about the performance_

Is no one listening here? I said I care about performance, and build quality.
Why can't I ask for both? Perhaps the Dyson performs well. I said I don't have
experience with it, but the quality looks cheap. When a product advertises
itself as being premium and top of the line, and asks for a high price, I
expect both of the above.

Likewise, when I spend money on a phone or laptop, I expect it to feel solid.
Don't sell me a $1,500 laptop that's built like a $300 Dell Inspiron.

~~~
rtb
People are listening, but they disagree with you. The build quality is good as
well as the performance. It is made of plastic because that is tough and soft
(see previous comments about banging into things). You seem to be saying it
should be made of metal and glass because plastic is "cheap", but that would
be a worse vacuum.

~~~
asuffield
More than anything else, plastic is light for comparable strength. This is
important for something that you're going to be pushing around a lot.

I had a Miele cylinder before this one. The experience of using it was that I
_dragged_ it around the flat and needed both hands to manage it. This Dyson
model, I _point_ at things, with one hand. It seems to be a combination of low
weight, and the ease of pivoting on the ball that means it's rolling
everywhere, but the difference is huge.

------
christop
It does look very impressive and I'm sure it picks up more dust and dirt than
the Roomba, but my Roomba neatly fits under every piece of furniture I have.

The extra height of the Dyson means it wont make it under our sofa, the TV
stand, into the gap between the kitchen floor and the cupboards (well, perhaps
Roomba doesn't fit there either, but the side brush does), under the chest of
drawers in the bedroom etc etc..

I'll have to wait for the next iteration (and hope I'm rich by then).

------
abcd_f
> _Why Dyson 's robot vacuum took 16 years_

Because that's how Dyson marketing department spins it.

~~~
Eiriksmal
This is a valid point. What better way to convince people that your product is
superior to the competition? "Why are we so late to the robot-vacuum game?
Great question. You see, we spent _16 years_ perfecting our robot, whereas our
competitors rushed something to launch to capitalize on a trend."

------
ekianjo
I find these round robots completely useless in Japan, because in most
apartments, they are unable to move around because there's just too much stuff
at ground level. There's a reason why normal vacuum cleaner ends are not
shaped like landmine detectors, and unless you seriously address that point in
your design, these robots will remain completely unadapted to most households.

~~~
poglet
This things are so popular right now in Japan. After going to the shops and
seeing a demo of them, I'm also wondering how they work in a Japanese style
apartment (most of which are tiny).

My friend got one (forgot the brand) because she didn't have time to clean.

~~~
Cthulhu_
TBH vacuuming the floor is just a small part of cleaning - hiring a cleaner is
probably a better solution then. Cheaper in the short run, too.

~~~
kisielk
Yeah, but it's one I found I often neglected in the past. I ended up buying a
Roomba since it was on sale and it's worked out quite well. It's not perfect
at vacuuming but on average the floor is a lot cleaner when I can run the
Roomba every couple of days while I go out for lunch versus me getting around
to vacuuming every few weeks.

------
lingben
if you're interested in the product you'll get about 1000 times more
information via their website than this article

[https://www.dyson360eye.com/](https://www.dyson360eye.com/)

~~~
sparkman55
Yikes, what did they do to the page's "scroll" function?

Do people actually find that usable? It definitely made me think the page was
broken at first... The slideshow seems like a 'play' (right-arrow) much more
than a 'scroll' (down-arrow).

Is this a metaphor for Dyson vacuums in general? (Technically-clever, shiny,
but not necessarily the most effective)

~~~
arjie
It worked very well on my laptop. Moving between slides felt very natural.
Going back, I see that scrolling 'back' (up) didn't work as well. Interesting.
I would never have noticed if your comment didn't make me check.

Why did you think it was broken? It said 'scroll to begin' on my screen so I
suppose I knew I was expecting something when I scrolled.

~~~
sparkman55
When I flick my fingers up, I expect a smooth vertical movement of the view
pane, exposing new content at the bottom. I can scroll fast and far if I want
to scan for interesting content, and scroll backwards if I might have missed
something. Every other web page does this, except this one. It subverts the
conventional affordance of the scroll wheel / two-finger scroll.

The recent NYTimes article about ISIS in the Tigris and Euphrates rivers (
[http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/07/03/world/middleea...](http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/07/03/world/middleeast/syria-
iraq-isis-rogue-state-along-two-rivers.html) ) is a much better treatment of
the scroll.

If I'm going to be subjected to lengthy animations between slides, I generally
expect arrows left-and-right to click on.

The whole 'scroll to begin' language on an otherwise beautiful page is a
usability smell. See
[http://www.harmoni.ca/blog/affordances](http://www.harmoni.ca/blog/affordances)

------
jamessb
There's more discussion about the 360 eye in this (15 hours older) thread:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8267622](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8267622)

------
riffraff
there's one thing I don't understand about this robot, as well as the roomba:
how does it clean corners?

~~~
tonylemesmer
It doesn't.

The idea of the cleaner is that it reduces the overall level of dirt in your
house. Its a "maintenance" cleaner as it can just continuously clean.
Therefore the buildup of dirt in the corners will be less as there is less
dirt around generally. However you will still need a secondary vacuum to do
the corners, cobwebs, stairs etc.

Its aimed at people with plenty of cash, who might not blink at having one per
floor of their house.

~~~
hessenwolf
Our Roomba does a good job on the corners. It has a rotating brush that sticks
out.

We thought we'd need a second vacuum cleaner, but we really haven't.

------
Magicstatic
I'm still impressed by the fact that Dyson made a fan with no...fans.

~~~
facepalm
They didn't. The fan is integrated in the base. Actually the fan example is
exactly what makes me look at any Dyson announcements with a lot of
skepticism.

~~~
Stulander
That and "digital motors".

