3D Coating Self-Assembly for Modular Robotic Scaffolds

Abstract

This paper addresses the self-reconfiguration problem in large-scale modular robots for the purpose of shape formation for object representation. It aims to show that this process can be accelerated without compromising on the visual aspect of the final object, by creating an internal skeleton of the shape using the previously introduced sandboxing and scaffolding techniques, and then coating this skeleton with a layer of modules for higher visual fidelity.We discuss the challenges of the coating problem, introduce a basic method for constructing the coating of a scaffold layer by layer, and show that even with a straightforward algorithm, our scaffolding and coating combo uses much fewer modules than dense shapes and offers attractive reconfiguration times. Finally, we show that it could be a strong alternative to the construction of dense shapes using traditional selfreconfiguration algorithms.

Achievements and future directions in self‐reconfigurable modular robotic systems

“…The method maintains the time complexity of O ($$\sqrt[3]{N}$$) (Thalamy, Piranda, Lassabe, et al, 2020). The scaffolding technique is shown in detail in Figure 21 (Thalamy, Piranda, & Bourgeois, 2020). We can see the distinction between the outer closure modules and the insider tree branch structured modules.…”

Impact of the Size of Modules on Target Acquisition and Pursuit for Future Modular Shape-changing Physical User Interfaces

“…DynaBlock [91] PolyBot [100] CONRO [16] Stochastic 3D [98] M-TRAN [52] ATRON [68] SuperBot [84] Miche [30] Robot Pebbles [29] Blinky Blocks [49] Molecube [56] lineFORM [65] M− Blocks [80] BitDrones [31] Cubimorph [82] GridDrones [13] SMORES [46] Sambot [92] Catom [94] For instance here, a slider could become larger [19]. Right (b): The simulated robotic movement of small, interchangeable modules currently developed that could allow such changes in shape [73].…”

“…Modules are small building block elements, which can rearrange or be rearranged to form the UI. Such modules can be robotic, i.e., microelectromechanical modules embedding computational capabilities (e.g., Catoms [94], MBlocks [80]). We do not consider in this paper modular approaches that do not allow for 3D reconfiguration (e.g., Lumen [76], InFORM [26]) or non-selfactuated ones (e.g., GaussBricks [58]).…”

“…However, Dynablocks are not selfactuated, preventing the system to actuate their 3D display unless they lie on the dedicated table. Major technological advances are done in the autonomous robotics community, where the currently most advanced robotic modules being assembled are the 3.6mm Catoms [94] (Figure 2). Figure 2 shows that it is not possible yet to prototype high-resolution modular shape-changing UIs to conduct user studies.…”

Centralised Connectivity-Preserving Transformations for Programmable Matter: A Minimal Seed Approach

“…Another interesting implementation is Millimotein [6], a system where programmable matter folds itself into arbitrary 3D shapes. The CATOMS system [7,8] is a further implementation which constructs 3D shapes by first creating a "scaffolding structure" as a basis for construction. It is expected that applications in further domains such as molecular computers and self-repairing machines may become apparent in the long-term.…”