Getting the feel for robotics

Citation

Loughlin, C. (2000), "Getting the feel for robotics", Industrial Robot, Vol. 27 No. 5. https://doi.org/10.1108/ir.2000.04927eaa.001

Getting the feel for robotics

Getting the feel for robotics

While manufacturing industry is now well aware of at least some of the potential applications for robotics, the same cannot be said of the utility industries that supply our homes, offices and factories with water, gas and electricity.

It is generally considered to be a "good thing" to get robots doing all the dirty, dull and dangerous jobs so that people do not have to. However these three "Ds" are frequently associated with a fourth "D", in view of the difficult nature of the task. So, while people no longer have to manhandle spot welding equipment around a car or spray on underseal, we still routinely have situations where people are put in danger due to lack of a viable (or, more frequently, commercial) alternative.

If you want to see an example of a job that is guaranteed to make your hair curl, look no further than Plate 1 of our contribution from Yoshinaga Maruyama, of the Kyushu Electric Power Co. (p. 358). It is to the great credit of companies like Kyushu that they are pioneering research and development work in these areas while other companies and countries sit back and await developments.

At the 31st ISR held recently in Montreal, Canada (pp. 366-9) it was evident that teleoperation and the associated technologies of augmented reality, force feedback and manipulator control are now well established as valid areas of research. This is all excellent news and I was impressed by the progress that is being made. You can now really see and feel what your robot is doing and this will be crucial to the succesful application of robotics to many utility industry tasks.

Industrial contributions were in short supply. This is a great shame and I hope that future ISRs reverse this trend towards a completely academic conference. The ISR used to be the ISIR (International Symposium on Industrial Robotics) and, while I can understand "Industrial" being dropped in deference to the many service applications that are now coming to the fore, it would be a great loss if the conference fails to attract participation from the very companies that will be required to turn the research ideas into commercial reality.

Robotic technology has a great deal to offer the utility industries but it is the work being done in our universities, such as the pipe inspection robot from Durham, UK (pp. 370-77), rather than by the industrial robot manufacturers that will be required.

Clive Loughlin