GM, NASA collaborate to put Robonaut 2 in space

CHICAGO, IL. Engineers at GM and NASA chose Automate 2011 to highlight their collaborative effort to put Robonaut 2 aboard the International Space Station. Marty Linn, principal engineer for robotics at GM, and Myron Diftler, NASA Robonaut project manager, recounted how GM’s efforts to “build the world’s best vehicles,” as Linn put it, combined with NASA’s push for performance to get a humanoid robot into space in a Tuesday morning keynote address to Automate attendees and those of the collocated Promat 2011.

Linn described GM’s commercial robot strategy as focusing on long-term purchase agreements with suppliers and flawless launches of proven robotic technologies applied to high-value low-risk applications. GM, he emphasized, is pursuing a global strategy of common robot specifications and robotic technology developments, all focused on improving manufacturing flexibility and quality. “We look to the future and want to be leaders in product technology and manufacturing technology,” he said.

GM’s robotic goals might seem quite divergent from NASA’s, but Linn said that’s not the case. “Humanoid robots have broad application, he said, adding, “With electrification of vehicles we see robots and vehicles coming together,” enabling advanced safety and controls and more sensors and drives. Robots, he said, can “…enhance and complement humans in manufacturing.” He said that when asked if this approach puts people out of work, he responds, “No, absolutely not. You generate jobs with robots.” GM, he said, looks at Robonaut as a technology platform to try out new technologies.”

GM began collaborating with NASA on robotics, Linn said, in 2006, with GM interested in advancing industrial reliability and robustness, NASA pursuing advanced capability, and both interested in performance and  safety-the latter particularly when humans and humanoid robots work in close proximity. GM, he said, wants to exploit the technologies needed for providing human dexterity to robots to assist with ergonomically difficult tasks.

Linn said that the robotics work takes place in a “secret government lab” right off the tourist trail at the Johnson Space Center in Houston. Part of key to success of the project, he said, stems from a “badgeless” team of sequestered engineers committed first and foremost to the robotics project—not to GM, NASA, or contractor  Oceaneering Space Systems.

Myron Diftler of NASA concluded the keynote address by calling the GM and NASA partnership a “fantastic one” that benefitted both organizations, who were looking for technology to help people. The collaborative effort, he said, lead to advances in hand dexterity with respect to joints and tendon tension, machine vision (including autonomous and via a teleoperator interface), tactile systems involving pliant materials (enabling the robot to grasp and manipulate a wrench, for example), finger impedance control, arm control (involving torsional springs and position feedback for better signal-to-noise performance than strain gauges would provide), and safety. “One of most important things is to ensure that people are comfortable working around a 300 lb robot.”

When asked how much Robonaut 2 cost, Diftler said it’s been estimated that an exact copy would cost about $2.5 million, but he said NASA is unlikely to build the same robot twice. Nevertheless, the project has lead to some 40-odd patents that commercial firms may license to mass produce versions suitable for the industrial applications of interest to GM and other industrial companies.

For more on Robonaut, visit http://Robonaut.jsc.nasa.gov.