
Scrapino – Self-sustainable robot from e-scrap using renewable energy [pdf] - watchdogtimer
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405896318328593/pdf?md5=ac7fae174710da0a5035026f88e0559b&pid=1-s2.0-S2405896318328593-main.pdf
======
TeMPOraL
How is this a paper?

TL;DR:

\- Industrial robots are important and also expensive.

\- Wouldn't it be cool if they were made from e-scrap? We suggest attaching a
solar panel for extra joy!

\- <Bunch of buzzwords around learning and community and end-of-life
management.>

\- Look at those toy robots made from scrap! (And look, there's also a Dalek
that can poop!)

\- Let's do what every hobbyist in every hackerspace has been doing daily for
near a decade now: take an Arduino, a bunch of random leftover components, and
make a "robot" with servos and ultrasound range finders.

\- Conclusion: (industrial) robots are important and expensive, but our
(Arduino kitbashing) robot shows the way for building them in a more
responsible fashion. It also shows how a bottom-up approach to e-scrap could
work.

Add spelling & formatting errors to the mix. Flagged for extremely low SNR.

~~~
bArray
Agreed. This method of sustainable robots is generally not very good en mass.
It's good for a hackaday post, but try making 100 of these. Before this is a
possibility, we need robots that are able to self-model and hence understand
the relationship between sensors and actuators correctly.

Even 3D printing a robot on the same 3D printer, with the same calibrated
parts from manufacturers, with the same software - _still_ requires
calibration. The more complicated the robot, the more the errors accumulate.

As for the quality of the paper - I completely blame the journal (who are
ultimately responsible for the actions of the reviewers) as this should have
been caught earlier. I can understand authors rushing to produce a paper not
in their own language, but the profit machine journals need to take more
responsibility for what they publish.

