
Boston Dynamics’ new robot stacks boxes [video] - oedmarap
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5iV_hB08Uns
======
Symmetry
For those of you who don't work in the warehouse logistics space ProMat, which
is to warehouses as CES is to home gadgets, is coming up in a couple of weeks
so expect lots of warehouse robotics companies to continue making
announcements.

The roboticization of manufacturing is mostly finished since factories work
with identical outpus SKUs every time. Warehouses tend to have to handle a lot
of different SKU but in a fairly regular way meaning that they're an
environment that's pretty much ripe for robots to be entering just now. Goods
to picker systems (like Kiva) have really taken off allowing robotic pickers
like the one sold by us a nice ecological niche to fill. There are also
companies with robotic forklifts and all sorts of other things.

I'm not entirely certain that the role these bots are performing wouldn't be
better served by a large stationary robotic arm, as some other companies are
working on now. It might very well be the best solution for unloading trucks?

~~~
ChuckMcM
On the stationary arm question it is a question of warehouse logistics.
Warehouses are cheap (essentially a simple box over a concrete pad) and they
they get reconfigured all the time. A robot that can set up where ever you
have dropped a bunch of metal shelving, and then move to a new place, keeps
your operational costs down.

~~~
iguy
Right, but how about a stationary arm mounted on the back of a pickup truck?
Or something. It does seem like a lot of the hard work here (balancing, not
running out of space to zig-zag...) isn't obviously needed for the task.

~~~
mv4
That swinging counterweight is a major hazard, and negates the idea of having
a small foot print due to 2 wheels... But then I remembered this is probably
designed to impress non-engineers, and has nothing to do with safety, or
efficiency.

~~~
notyourwork
Its only a safety hazard if people are around it right? If the warehouse is
fully automated it is only a hazard to other robots right?

~~~
trickstra
and that can probably be fixed by a software update somewhere down the road

~~~
barry-cotter
If you take a tour of a factory with industrial robots there will be black and
yellow tape on the floor or some other equivalent way of warning:

Do not step inside this perimeter or you may die.

If a 200kg robot arm gives you a love tap because you were just barely in the
perimeter you may not survive.

We’ll fix it in post is ok for film production. Move fast and break things is
ok in free to consumer services or SaaS where 0.99 uptime is great. It is not
ok with industrial automation.

------
nabla9
Two wheeled dynamically balanced warehouse robot like that is completely
unnecessary complication.

Boston Dynamics is developing amazing tech but they are demoing robots for
tasks that are better with 4 wheels. Dynamically balanced walkers inside are
niche application.

Smarter robot hands and 4-wheeled robot movers are where the markets and money
is. Boston dynamics may be moving towards that direction but they still like
to show the cools stuff they can't find markets for.

~~~
hinkley
This was my reaction too, but after I thought about it for a second it seems
only half right.

For a device leaning into shelves to grab things, being dynamically balanced
might be useful. Like a racing sailboat with a movable keel or ballast. But
you could do that with a three wheeled design.

I bet there's also a static version of this bot with three wheels, slightly
larger footprint, where the battery pack is situated over the third wheel for
leverage.

But the swinging battery pack? In theory it reduces the footprint of the bot,
but any time the bot is trying to grab a package, the battery is moving. Which
means you can't let another robot or human enter that space. So either you
have a very very complicated calculation of what areas of the warehouse are
'empty' at any moment, or your logistics program has to treat the robot like
it's its worst-case footprint at all times. At which point you might as well
make it static. Right?

~~~
wool_gather
Is this physical safety margin a substantially different problem than human-
operated machinery, though? You don't want to get too close to a live
forklift, either.

------
AareyBaba
Whenever I see these Boston Dynamics video's I have many unanswered questions
about the underlying control systems.

This one for example has an organic birdlike head motion. Is that pre-
programmed or a natural outcome of their control system dynamics. The MIT
technologyreview page says "Each one is created with carefully pre-programmed
movements and will take many, many takes to get right before it’s shared."

So is it a sequence of individual actions: align to pallet using registration
cards -> move forward with reaching distance -> detect box position -> use box
picking algorithm to pick box -> backup fixed precalculated distance -> turn
90 degrees -> move forward to destination etc. This would be a brittle
solution that has to be reprogrammed for the next task.

Or is it a more general closed loop solution: Theres a pile of boxes there.
Move it here. Use your sensors to plan a trajectory and sequence of actions to
accomplish the goal.

That's what I want to know.

~~~
mv4
I have no doubt that organic motion was deliberately designed that way to
impress their intended audience.

Yes, it makes sense to mimic nature sometimes. But when it comes to robotic
manipulators, loaders, etc - there's absolutely no reason to copy biological
systems limited by strength, speed, or joint mobility. They seem to be
deliberately going for that uncanny valley effect.

Eventually, someone is going to admit it. Until then, this is hugely
entertaining.

~~~
ranie93
I think it may very well be a natural outcome of inverse kinematics and PID
loops in a noisy (uneven floor, uneven loads, etc, etc) environment

~~~
mv4
Could you elaborate? The floors appear to be perfectly level, and load weight
isn't changing after it's been picked up - so where's all this excessive
locomotion coming from?

~~~
ranie93
I agree that the conditions in the video are very ideal as you mention.

Perturbations do exist and they add up in the PID feedback loop. For example
you can see in the video that the way each box is handled varies and that the
robot reorients itself to pick/drop boxes.

Consider a simpler 1 dimensional example:
[https://youtu.be/JpNAhKT7yY4?t=101](https://youtu.be/JpNAhKT7yY4?t=101)
(warning, loud). You can observe the system adjusting to the hits by the
person, but also when left alone it will have to adjust to accumulating
externalities like gravity. Also note the natural/biological looking swaying
motion that results.

~~~
mv4
Thank you for explaining this. Still, while this presents a very interesting
scientific problem, the engineer in me wonders why these feedback loops are
needed for an automaton navigating a 2D terrain and carrying solid objects
(unless they plan on tossing/catching boxes), why two wheels with that giant
swinging counterweight? What's next, a unicycle?

You know, sometimes you see a solution, and it's just so elegant... This isn't
elegant, or brilliant. This is an attempt to solve self-imposed, artificial
problems.

P.S. people who liked your pendulum video (I did), might also enjoy this drone
pole acrobatics video:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XxFZ-
VStApo](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XxFZ-VStApo)

------
chasing
Surprisingly birdlike in their form and movement. Interesting to ponder the
convergence of evolved and human-designed balance and bodily physics.

Also: Kept waiting for some guy to come in and try to kick it over. I thought
that was Boston Dynamics' signature move in these promo videos...

~~~
quirkot
YES! Very disappointed there was no robot kicking

~~~
SEJeff
A robot cassowary sounds more scary than a live cassowary

~~~
blacksmith_tb
Hmm, for now I'd take my chances with the robot, real cassowaries can pack
quite a punch[1].

1: [https://youtu.be/IAj0GG6tf5c](https://youtu.be/IAj0GG6tf5c)

~~~
SEJeff
Yes indeed they do!

------
antoineMoPa
This robot looks unpredictable and dangerous for any worker that would be in
the area. Other point: as a unicycle rider, I would suggest this robot to wear
a helmet.

~~~
hitpointdrew
The robot is no doubt amazing, but I do wonder why they didn't make it with 4
wheels. I am not robot designer, but I would have to think making it with 4
wheels would have been way easier.

~~~
platz
It needs to swing that counterweight around maybe?

~~~
tachyonbeam
The thing is: that counterweight looks very heavy, but the boxes being carried
look fairly light (something that a human could lift). It doesn't really seem
like there's any reason they needed to design this robot to have two wheels
and a counterweight. As others have said, the counterweight makes the robot
more unpredictable and dangerous. What happens when someone steps behind the
robot, and the robot needs to swing the counterweight back to keep its
balance? Does it hit the person with that massive weight or fall flat?

~~~
dbcurtis
I suspect that this is an exercise in learning how build a two-wheel balancer
that doesn't "hunt" around the vertical position. A normal two-wheel balancing
robot is continuously controlling to keep the robot at an unstable equilibrium
point (the "inverted pendulum" problem). The only actuators it has to do that
are the wheels, so a normal two-wheel balancer is continuously rocking back
and forth as it controls for vertical stability. The counter-weight gives a
second actuator to control for equilibrium, so that it doesn't have to use the
wheels for small corrections.

Also, recall from freshman physics that the pendulum problem is non-linear.
Most balancing robots linearize the problem around the stable point. Which
means if the robot gets far away from the equilibrium point, you either have
to switch to a different controller or live with the consequences. One of the
consequences is the robot racing off to the horizon as it tries to get the
wheels under the CG again. (Which may happen anyway whether or not you switch
controllers.)

Thus, my standard advice to all newbie robot builders: Your first robot should
have a low enough mass that a missing semicolon will not punch a hole in your
living room wall.

If this kind of thing is interesting to you, MIT 6.832 Underactuated Robotics
by Russ Tedrake is posted on YouTube going a few years back, and the Spring
2019 version is being live-streamed every Tuesday and Thursday, picking up
again next Tuesday after spring break.

------
bamboozled
It's absolutely insane to me that this thing works with suction caps and isn't
designed to actually pick up the boxes by supporting the weight from the
bottom. That would seem like such a basic requirement for any boxes with
relatively heavy payloads.

~~~
markbnj
I would think the boxes have to be spec'd to contain the suspended weight of
whatever is inside them anyway. I doubt they can depend on always being
supported from the bottom throughout the whole delivery chain.

~~~
throwaway2048
Where exactly in the process of delivery are the majority of boxes not being
supported from the bottom?

~~~
poslathian
The vast majority of human lifts that start from a belt or cramped shelf - in
sorting, loading, and last mile. Humans will sometimes rotate the box to
center the load over an edge or regrasp from the bottom - but any given box is
definitely going to experience moments with no support from the bottom.

------
harmful_stereo
I have spent far too much of my life in a warehouse doing this robot's job. A
job that according to every pundit from the "smart" to the stupid was supposed
to be gone tomorrow. Mostly I'm just disappointed in how clownish all those
futurists look.

Completely retooling the society after 70 years of postwar infrastructure is
going to take more than anyone would willingly sacrifice. You would have to
bomb everything more than a few years old flat. At no point will it be
feasible to keep leaving major investment in business and industry tied to the
promises of modernizing through bleeding edge technology. The world is so vast
and involves such a colossal distribution of existing resources. So many of
the systems here are only functioning through broad and cheap standards, like
containers, rail gauges, ship sizes.

I don't want my job. I want a machine built to put me out of it for good. I
have been saying that along with a generation of workers told robots were
coming for their jobs since the day i was hired. That was fifteen years ago.

We need a Manhattan project for the basic tools of industry. Now. There are
thousands of novel or unproven methods of doing the most basic forms of labor
our economy is based on, and we are leaving the creation of things that need
to be ISO standard across the surface of the earth in order to succeed to
entrepreneurs and startups and scholastic vanity.

The modern technological landscape across all disciplines looks terrifyingly
similar to the cambrian explosion, which produced so many things, at such a
cost of living suffering, that did not survive what came after. I'm afraid our
civilization might have run out of low-hanging fruit.

To me that is the line of demarcation between the "developed world" and
whatever precedes it. I don't think what is beyond that is peaceful. It
necessarily undermines the infrastructure the whole society is founded on.

~~~
petermcneeley
Serious question. What would you do for work if we did get a robot to do your
job?

~~~
mabbo
What would I need to work?

Look, we're rapidly approaching a point where all human needs (food, shelter,
etc) can be handled by automation. If we reach that point, why do people need
to have jobs? Why can't we turn our lives towards something better?

~~~
TaylorAlexander
I’ve researched this extensively and I’m convinced we could have done this in
the developed world starting 100 years ago, but individuals in a position of
power preferred to accumulate wealth themselves rather than distribute
earnings equitably.

So I don’t believe an automated utopia is going to happen automatically. We’ve
got to work to create corporate structures that naturally reward all of the
workers instead of a few at the top. Cooperatively run companies are one way
to do this. If the major companies of our world were cooperatives, a wide
swath of the population would gain the wealth our world is increasingly
producing.

But technology alone won’t solve the problem. We need to intentionally
structure our society in a way that makes this socialist utopia possible.
That’s what I study and I’m trying to figure it out. I’m also a robotics
engineer.

~~~
matz1
I don't understand how technology alone won’t solve the problem. If I have a
technology that can provide me my basic need (food,shelter,etc) and it cheap
enough and easy enough for me to operate myself, in a way that I can be self
sufficient without relying of other human, how is the notion of traditional
job will not change in this situation ?

~~~
TaylorAlexander
Total individual self sufficiency is not really the best solution - collective
self sufficiency is. But once we start collaborating, we fall in to structures
where all the benefit we create ends up in the bank accounts of a few people
instead of building a utopia. It takes a different structure to society, not
mere technology, to change this situation.

Moreover: liberating technology will not be developed by the capitalist
establishment because our liberation runs counter to the opportunity we
represent as tools to be exploited. This is why Silicon Valley relies on
surveillance and the big companies don’t share their key source code. They
don’t have the goal of liberating us.

~~~
matz1
Do you mean someone or some group of people is going to prevent the invention
of this technology (individual self sufficiency) ?

Invention of technology doesn't rely on capitalist establishment though, as
long as there is at least one engineer out there to work on it just for the
sake of it. For example, the invention of linux.

~~~
TaylorAlexander
No, but technology does not spontaneously occur. I am in fact a huge advocate
of the development of liberatory technology like Linux, but I emphasize that
actual people have to be working on that problem for the technology to
develop. It is not the case that it simply “will happen”. It will only happen
if we build it. The capitalists will not build it.

------
ksec
I don't think Warehouse Robotics in ambient are of anything urgent. There are
still plenty of affordable labours and tools to help with lifting. Warehouse
Robotics in Cold Storage is an entirely different scenario, no one wants to go
into the freezer even when you have full suits and helping machinery. The
constant changing of temperature from -20C ( -4F ) to 3C ( ~40F) over a long
period of time causes all sort of damage to your body. And it is increasingly
hard to find anyone willing to work in these environment even when substantial
premium are paid.

I am still baffled as to why Cold Storage today is still not fully automated.

~~~
lawlessone
>no one wants to go into the freezer

it's great if you're hungover.

------
viach
Genuine question - why 2 wheels, not good old 4? Only because these robobees
look cooler this way?

~~~
tomp
My guess is that [1] 4 wheels don't solve the fundamental problem of lifting -
counterweights (unless your 4-wheel "platform" is so wide to not easily fit /
maneuvre in the warehouse), and [2] 2 weels are _enough_ \- with modern
motors, microcontrolers and feedback algorithms, 2-wheel platforms (think
Segway) are perfectly stable.

~~~
throwaway2048
I don't think Segways are exactly a great argument for practical design.

------
stcredzero
When I see this video, I keep thinking of Terror Birds.

[https://naturalishistoria.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/terror...](https://naturalishistoria.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/terror-
bird-reconstructions.jpg?w=416&h=399)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phorusrhacidae](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phorusrhacidae)

A robot like this, able to move on 2 wheels, could be quite versatile for
combat in tight spaces. Giving it a 4 wheel bogey like on an iBot, with the
ability for the bogey to fully rotate, would also enable stair climbing.

[https://msu.edu/~luckie/segway/iBOT/iBOT.html](https://msu.edu/~luckie/segway/iBOT/iBOT.html)

The single manipulator could be mounted with a gun/bayonet, which could also
be turned around to provide a surface for a door breaching ram. The thought of
such a thing is pretty terrifying.

~~~
kkarakk
This is pretty much all i see whenever i see boston dynamics attempting to do
a cute "oh look at the robot picking up a box" video.

put an ak47 in that robot's manipulators and install some level 3 armor on the
important bits and you've basically build a automated mobile weapon of terror
and oppression

i don't remember the source but the only reason big dog was rejected by the us
military was the sound it generated + power requirements. not really a problem
if it's also firing guns at the same time and is deployed from a mobile self
driving charging base. maybe the robot charges itself from the nearest tesla
power station...

------
jonahss
The bobbing abdomens lend credence to my claim that the way to build a giant
mech robot suit is to include an autonomous tail

------
Animats
Nice. It's fast enough to be useful. It's all electric - the hydraulic systems
are gone.

Palletizing is a routine robot task.[1][2] This is just palletizing with a
mobile base. Now Boston Dynamics has to compete on price with the twenty or so
other companies that do palletizing. If this turns out to be cost effective,
Kuka will probably do it, too.

[1]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DiuFkMkReSs](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DiuFkMkReSs)
[2]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EgiUWycNFC0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EgiUWycNFC0)

------
andrewfromx
I don't think these types of robots will ever get smart as humans and que
terminator music... i think rather companies like
[https://www.neuralink.com](https://www.neuralink.com) will start doing
surgery on human brains and slowly humans will become more and more cyborgs
until at some point... yes, a human with a human brain will have all these
artifical parts and 1/2 his/her brain now a robot etc. And maybe that "person"
will lose track of which side they are on in the human vs robot war?

~~~
sametmax
Or they'll get in influenced by anybody having access to the parts software
and will subtly lose free will and never notice they did.

But of course the part makers will say they are super secure and will have a
PR making them look like as legit as google or amazon today. Because it's
convenient, people will do it, considering the warnings comming from tin foil
conspirationists.

Soon society will expect the level of productivity those parts give you, and
most public and private services will assume this interface so the people not
doing it will be more and more excluded from the regular system.

~~~
lm28469
> and will subtly lose free will and never notice they did.

Isn't that happening for decades now ?

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJ3RzGoQC4s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJ3RzGoQC4s)

> the people not doing it will be more and more excluded from the regular
> system.

Same with cars, phones, internet

------
SimonPStevens
There's something I don't understand, perhaps someone knows and can explain.

Why have the chosen to build it with only two wheels? It's clearly unstable
and has to constantly adjust it's position and counterweight to stay balanced.
Sure, it's super clever and I think it looks amazing. But surely it would have
been far cheaper and easier to build it with three of four wheels so it
naturally stable. It would have looked less cool, but I feel like that can't
be the only reason.

~~~
trendoid
I think the idea might be to have them for different kinds of works. We might
be seeing 0.1% of the work these robots (this particular design) will actually
do.

~~~
SimonPStevens
I still can't really think of any kind of work where 2 wheels and that body
shape would be any better than just having 3 wheels and more stability. It
would be just as flexible. Using wheels means it's not like it's going to be
doing anything particularly off road anyway, that's for the walking robots.

Literally the only thing I can think of is that this is a pure tech demo to
show off how clever they are that will never make it into production at all.
Which is fair enough I guess, it certainly achieves it's aim if that is the
case.

------
cdnsteve
It looks like the warehouse needs to be redesigned not just the robots inside
it. Warehouse lighting is likely unnecessary, heat can be reduced, sensors
everywhere... its now a machine environment. The floor markers, etc should all
be part of that environment. Build the environment to the automated worker and
you'll get a more effective result. I think Amazon has gone this route
already.

------
qwerty2020
I like how Boston Dynamics decided to monetize this YT video. Those robots
don't pay for themselves

------
neals
What they now need, is somebody to re-design a wherehouse around the new
capabilities of robotics.

~~~
davnicwil
You should check out Ocado - they have literally done this

[https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/business-38897417/the-ocado-
wa...](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/business-38897417/the-ocado-warehouse-
run-by-robots)

~~~
hapidjus
It looks a bit different now [https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-
hampshire-47168430](https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-hampshire-47168430)

------
novaRom
Would like something like that for masonry.I wish some more robotics and
automation for house/roads construction. Is anyone working actively in that
area? I have some interesting ideas how and what can be done to reduce total
construction costs a bit.

~~~
jpindar
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16698167](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16698167)

------
hmexx
At this point I feel like Boston Dynamics has a designer whose job is to make
their robots look cool/interesting, beyond what their function requires.

There's always something mesmorizing about them!

~~~
JKCalhoun
I had the opposite thought: that they are designing their robots strictly for
function and letting the form follow.

To be sure they are "cleaned up" but the way the counterbalance is slung
underneath, and "Wheeler"-like ("Return to Oz" reference) mobility, single arm
with some kind of suction gripper .... it screams utility.

------
ufmace
What I'd like to know about this thing - how would you program it for what to
do in a real warehouse environment? I would expect that many real warehouses
have plenty of small differences in what needs to be done day to day. It's
easy to tell a person to do something a little differently. How tough would it
be to tell this robot to do it, and to make sure that it actually does it
right?

------
mey
I wonder what the noise level will be with ten industrial vacuums on wheels
running around.

------
TheTruth1234
Looks ridiculous ... but I get it. The first computers look fairly ridiculous
now.

------
sys_64738
The issue I think of his how much maintenance will one of these robots need?
What will happen to the robot (or me) if I don't pay for any maintenance?

I bring this up as warehousing is all about reducing costs from all angles.

------
tzs
I wonder why the one stacking the boxes gently lowers each box until it is in
place before letting go, but the one putting boxes on the roller conveyor just
gets them near and then drops them on?

------
pugworthy
This reminds me of Tim Lewis' Pony kinetic sculpture...

[https://vimeo.com/60894098](https://vimeo.com/60894098)

------
JoeAltmaier
Warehouses typically have shelves four, five or six tall. Thus, forklift
operators. This thing seems limited to sorting boxes at floor level?

------
jpm_sd
Very clever, but if it has battery issues it's going to fall on its face. An
automated forklift seems a bit safer in that scenario.

------
amelius
I want to see a robot picking up LEGO bricks out of a pile, and then stacking
them up, _then_ I'm impressed.

------
jpindar
Can it get back up if it were to fall over?

------
homero
The balancing slows everything down so much. Is it really needed?

------
agumonkey
depalletozaurus rex

~~~
jacquesm
Now that _was_ funny.

------
willart4food
I have worked with people with less personality.

------
robot
the 2 wheel approach looks redundant. just use 4 wheels and all that extra
balancing is not needed.

------
sergiotapia
Moves and sounds like something from The Surge. I want to target it's head to
get some sweet new head armor.

------
cdnsteve
AI Ostritches are taking over!

------
AlexCoventry
How does that gripper work?

~~~
jonahss
I think vacuum. Like those wall-climbing robots.

------
wgx
Will be good to move human bodies after the machine uprising of 2048.

------
milemi
The way to defeat one of these guys is to put a bucket of water in front of
it, and then just relax and enjoy watching it dip its head in and out forever.

------
dang
Url changed from [https://www.technologyreview.com/the-
download/613240/watchin...](https://www.technologyreview.com/the-
download/613240/watching-boston-dynamics-new-robot-stack-boxes-is-weirdly-
mesmerizing/), which points to this.

------
Element_
Dupe:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19516378](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19516378)

------
781
THICC

------
starpilot
We need basic income now.

------
ozzyman700
I wish they had a better co-op internship program it seems they don't have one
at all.

