
Franka: A Robot Arm That’s Safe, Low Cost, and Can Replicate Itself - aaronyy
http://spectrum.ieee.org/robotics/industrial-robots/franka-a-robot-arm-thats-safe-low-cost-and-can-replicate-itself
======
rubidium
Everything was pretty standard until I got to the price. This robot is a nice
improvement, but there's already many good collaborative robots (i.e.
[http://preciseautomation.com/PF400.html](http://preciseautomation.com/PF400.html)).

But if they can actually hit the price point it will be game changing:

"Another factor that will make Franka stand out is cost. At the time of this
writing, the robot was available for preorder at a yet-to-be-confirmed price
of €9,900, or about $10,500. That’s a startlingly low figure for such a
capable robotic arm. For comparison, Rethink’s Sawyer sells for $29,000, and
Universal Robots’ best-selling UR5 costs even more, at $35,000."

Heck, even $15K vs the standard $30K would be a big improvement.

~~~
danvoell
Agreed this could change the game. I think there is a large network effect to
this type of product. Once people get used to it, learn how to code it, build
tutorials, start using it on projects, and tell their friends about it, they
won't want to switch. Right now Universal Robots seems to have a large share
of the existing market, but many small shops are still just getting their
first robotic arm. Will be very cool to watch.

~~~
nickparker
I agree that effect will exist, but it remains to be seen when it will kick
in.

Ie, if there are big improvements left to be made then that network effect can
be overcome a few times by each 'big leap' change. Once the market matures
though, you probably will see strong lock-in as you describe.

------
Animats
"Replicate itself" is a bit much. It's used on its own assembly line. Fanuc
has done that for two decades. Here are Fanuc robots making more Fanuc
robots.[1] Robots are pouring molten metal for casting, loading and unloading
CNC machine tools, and making many of the parts. Then robots assemble the
parts.

[1] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgzrkwXV-
bY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgzrkwXV-bY)

~~~
jimnotgym
Not quite skynet yet then

~~~
candiodari
This is an ancient video about KUKA robot production [1]. While it's not very
automated at all, some things are done with robots because no human has the
required strength or precision.

Truth is, robots have been building robots since the 60s or so, long before I
was born, and long before skynet was a fictional gleam in some author's eye.

[1]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0qM0znv70IA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0qM0znv70IA)

------
jwatte
"Clone itself" as long as you get gearboxes, actuators, bearings, bolts, and
any other part already made by other machines. "Assemble a copy of itself from
parts" would be more accurate, but of course less attention grabbing.

~~~
jpablo
I'm guessing it could 3D print/CNC quite a few of its own parts?

~~~
blacksmith_tb
Unlikely - seven axes is very flexible, but it can't lift more than 3Kg, I
suppose a very small handheld router could allow it to do some CNC, though the
precision would suffer compared to a normal CNC; by the same token, it could
hold a 3D printer's extrusion nozzle, but the accuracy would be poorer than a
dedicated printer. It sounds like they are hoping to drive their production
line entirely with their own robots, not to manufacture all the parts needed
in-house.

~~~
robbrown451
The key is to design it in a way that such precision isn't really necessary.
It probably isn't for most of it. Some things are, and for that, it puts the
part on a precision jig or whatnot, rather than relying on it's own precision.

Also, if it works the way they say it does, where it is constantly comparing
what it measures against its internal model and adjusting the model (similar
to how our own arms and brain works), again, precision (in the geometry of the
parts) isn't so necessary.

------
robbrown451
One thing it doesn't do, that would be particularly powerful, is emulate the
geometry of the human arm. If it did, and it if it was typically paired with a
mirror image arm, you would be able to very easily train it to do most tasks
that can be done by a human. Instead of "programming" it to, say, iron a
shirt, you just get someone who is good at ironing shirts to do the task over
and over while it copies them, gradually improving its abilities.

Combine that with designing it in a way that it can do a large part of making
new robot arms, and the costs should drop and the capabilities should
increase....dramatically.

~~~
Pica_soO
The very easily trained arm depends on a lot of precision of the surroundings
to repeat the process. Knifes and ingredients at the same spots.

Else you enter the World of cameras and image processing. A expensive world
still.

~~~
robbrown451
Yes I assume there are cameras, and that it isn't copying exact moves but
actually learning. I'm not suggesting it would figure out how to iron a shirt
quickly, it would take thousands upon thousands of hours of watching/copying
as someone is ironing. But hey we were worried about robots taking jobs...and
there's a job! (and they are also producing ironed shirts!)

Cameras aren't particularly expensive, the ones made for cell phones can do
fine and they are a couple bucks. The software is hard but machine learning is
improving by leaps and bounds. And software may be expensive to develop, but
it isn't expensive to make another copy of.

~~~
jayjay71
The problem isn't the hardware here, the problem is the software. Robots just
aren't smart enough to perceive the world around them yet. People are working
on it, but it's still _very much_ in the research phase at universities. You
should check out HERB at Carnegie Mellon (1), which is working on things just
like this. A fun anecdote - all the students spent forever trying to get the
robot to open a microwave (and keep in mind this is a highly controlled
environment and they knew exactly where it was). Eventually they gave up and
modified the microwave.

Robotics is really, really hard.

(1)
[https://www.personalrobotics.ri.cmu.edu/](https://www.personalrobotics.ri.cmu.edu/)

~~~
robbrown451
True. I bet if the hardware was cheap enough, the software would advance a lot
quicker.

I mean, imagine the only really useful thing one of these things can do is
make a copy of itself. And it might takes it a month running non-stop to do
it, but the parts are cheap so it only costs a few hundred bucks for a new
one. Would you want one of these things in your basement working away? I sure
would. And I'd be pretty interested in tweaking its software and training data
and whatnot to make it faster and better.

Sure it'll be a good while before it is folding laundry or picking weeds in
the garden or whatever, but I think the pace of improvement would pick up
quick once these things are available in mass.

------
siavosh
I'm curious if there's a small population of people (with the means) that buy
these robots for private/hobby use, and if so, what they do with them in their
house/workshop?

Cause honestly, I would love to play and experiment with a few of these to see
what I can automate around the house and maybe if I was inclined create a
mini-assembly line for "etsy" like products.

~~~
michaelbuckbee
I suspect that most of them compete in the Amazon picking challenge -
[http://spectrum.ieee.org/automaton/robotics/industrial-
robot...](http://spectrum.ieee.org/automaton/robotics/industrial-robots/team-
delft-wins-amazon-picking-challenge)

------
gallerdude
Man, $10K - soon we're going to hit a threshold of some sort, and automation
is going to explode.

------
bad_alloc
10500€ for 7 degrees of freedom is awesome. Usually you get small 6 axis bots
for 20k - 40k, without collision detection. Not to mention user friendly
software.

