Professional Documents
Culture Documents
This Wikibook tries to cover all the key areas of robotics as a hobby.
When possible examples from industrial robots will be addressed too.
You'll notice very few "exact" values in these texts. Instead, vague terms
like "small", "heavy" and "light" will be used. This is because most of the
time you'll have a lot of freedom in picking these values, and all robot
projects are unique in available materials.
Contents
[hide]
• 1 An Introduction to Robotics
• 2 Design Basics
• 3 Physical Construction
• 4 Components
• 5 Computer Control
• 6 Sensors
• 7 Navigation
• 8 Exotic Robots
• 9 Resources
• 10 Contributors
[edit] An Introduction to Robotics
A device with autonomy does its thing "on its own" without a human
directly guiding it moment-by-moment.
What is a "robot" in this book? There isn't one exact definition, but there
are 2 examples that capture most of what we see as a "robot".
What isn't considered a "robot" in this book? Pretty much everything you
see on RobotWars; those are remote-controlled vehicles without any form
of autonomy. These devices use the same technologies decribed in this
book, but aren't really in the scope of it.
In short: If it has autonomy it's a robot (in this book). If it's remote
controlled, it isn't.
2. Physical Design
3. Design software
5. Electronic Components
6. Mechanical Components
7. Building materials
8. Basic Programming
1. The Platform
2. Construction Techniques
3. Resourcefulness
[edit] Components
This section could be used to discuss components used in robotics or the
making of robots.
1. Power Sources
2. Actuation Devices
1. Motors
3. Air muscle
4. Linear Electromagnetic
5. Piezoelectric Actuators
6. Pneumatics/Hydraulics
3. Grippers
4. Audio
5. Video
This section could be used to discuss the things involved with controlling
robots via computers.
1. Control Architectures
1. Reactive Systems
2. Sense-Plan-Act
3. Brooks' Subsumption Architecture ( w:Subsumption
architecture )
4. Hybrid Systems
2. The Interface
1. Computers
3. Microcontrollers
4. Remote Control
5. Networks
[edit] Sensors
Sensors that a robot uses generally fall into three different categories:
Sensors aren't perfect. When you use a sensor on your robot there will be
a lot of times where the sensors acts funny. It could miss an obstacle, or
see one where none is. Key to successfuly using sensors is knowing how
they function and what they really measure.
[edit] Navigation
1. Navigation
1. Localization
2. Collision Avoidance
3. Exploration
4. Mapping
5. Trajectory Planning
2. BEAM
3. Cooperating Robots
1. LEGO Robots
[edit] Resources
Microbotics
Mechatronics
• Electronics
• Embedded Systems
• Theoretical Mechanics
[edit] Contributors
• T.R. Darr - responsible for the (almost) complete reformat. If I
knew anything about robotics, then I'd have contributed to the
content as well.
Robot
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Robotics)
Jump to: navigation, search
Editing of this article by unregistered or newly registered users is
currently disabled.
Such users may discuss changes, request unprotection, log in, or create an
account.
Contents [hide]
1 Definition
2 Contemporary uses
3 History
4 Current developments
5 Dangers and fears
6 Literature
7 Robotics
8 Robots and Human-Machine interfaces
9 Competitions
10 See also
10.1 Classes
10.2 Research areas
10.3 Additional topics
11 References
12 External links
Definition
The word robot is used to refer to a wide range of machines, the common
feature of which is that they are all capable of movement and can be used
to perform physical tasks. Robots take on many different forms, ranging
from humanoid, which mimic the human form and way of moving, to
industrial, whose appearance is dictated by the function they are to
perform. Robots can be grouped generally as mobile robots (eg.
autonomous vehicles), manipulator robots (eg. industrial robots) and self
reconfigurable robots, which can conform themselves to the task at hand.
The word "robot" is also used in a general sense to mean any machine
that mimics the actions of a human (biomimicry), in the physical sense or
in the mental sense. It comes from the Slavic word robota, labour or work
(also used in a sense of a serf). The word robot first appeared in Czech
writer Karel Čapek's science fiction play R.U.R. (Rossum's Universal
Robots) in 1921, and according to Čapek, was coined by the author's
brother, painter Josef Čapek. The word was brought into popular Western
use by famous science fiction writer Isaac Asimov.
Contemporary uses
Main articles: Industrial robot and Domestic robot
Often this is referred to as the "Three D's: Dull, Dirty and Dangerous"
work. Hundreds of bomb disposal robots such as the iRobot Packbot and
the Foster-Miller TALON are being used in Iraq and Afghanistan by the
U.S. military to defuse roadside bombs, or improvised explosive devices
(IEDs) in an activity known as Explosive Ordinance Disposal (EOD).
Automated Guided Vehicles (AGVs) are movable robots that are used in
large facilities such as warehouses hospitals and container ports, for the
movement of goods, or even for safety and security patrols. Such vehicles
follow wires, markers or laser-guidance to navigate around the location
and can be programmed to move between places to deliver goods or
patrol a certain area. Top manufacturers include Egemin, Transbotics,
FMC and Jervis B Webb makes AGV "brains" used in freely moving
autonomous vehicles that do not require fixed paths as earlier AGVs have
done.
One robot being used in the United States is the Tug robot by Aethon Inc,
an automated delivery system for hospitals. This robot travels around
hospitals to deliver medical supplies, medication, food trays, or just about
anything to nursing stations. Once it is finished it goes back to its
charging station and waits for its next task.
Domestic robots are now available that perform simple tasks such as
vacuum cleaning and grass cutting. By the end of 2004 over 1,000,000
vacuum cleaner units had been sold [2]. Examples of these domestic
robots are the Scooba and Roomba robots from iRobot Corporation,
Friendly Robotics' Robomower, Electrolux's Automower, and Samsung.
The word robot was introduced by Czech writer Karel Čapek in his play
R.U.R. (Rossum's Universal Robots) which was written in 1920 (See also
Robots in literature for details of the play). However, the verb robotovat,
meaning "to work" or "to slave", and the noun robota (meaning corvée)
used in the Czech and Slovak languages, has been used since the early
10th century. It was suggested that the word robot had been coined by
Karel Čapek's brother, painter and writer Josef Čapek.
Current developments
Robotic manipulators can be very precise, but only when a task can be
fully described.The development of a robot with a natural human or
animal gait is incredibly difficult and requires a large amount of
computational power [7]. Now that background technologies of behavior,
navigation and path planning have been solved using basic wheeled
robots, roboticists are moving on to develop walking robots (eg. SIGMO,
QRIO, ASIMO & Hubo). One approach to walk control is Passive
dynamics, where the robot's geometry is such that it will almost walk
without active control.
Initial work has focused on multi-legged robots (eg. Aibo), such as
hexapods [8], as they are statically stable and so are easier to work with,
whereas a bipedal robot must be able to balance. The balancing problem
is taken to an extreme by the Robotic unicycle. A problem with the
development of robots with natural gaits is that human and animal bodies
utilize a very large number of muscles in movement and replicating all of
those mechanically is very difficult and expensive. This field of robot
research has become known as Biomorphic robotics.
Progress is being made in the field of feedback and tactile sensors which
allow a robot to sense their actions and adjust their behavior accordingly.
This is vital to enable robots to perform complex physical tasks that
require some active control in response to the situation.
Frankenstein (1818), sometimes called the first science fiction novel, has
become synonymous with the theme of a robot or monster advancing
beyond its creator. Probably the best known author to work in this area is
Isaac Asimov who has placed robots and their interaction with society at
the center of many of his works. Of particular interest are Asimov's Three
Laws of Robotics. Asimov also coined the term "Robotics" as the science
or study of the technology associated with robots.
Literature
Main article: Robots in literature
See also: List of fictional robots and androids
Robots have frequently appeared as characters in works of literature and
the first use of the word "robot" in literature can be found in Karel
Capek's play R.U.R. (Rossum's Universal Robots), written in 1920. Isaac
Asimov has written many volumes of science fiction focusing on robots
in numerous forms and guises [12]. Asimov contributed greatly to
reducing the Frankenstein complex, which dominated early works of
fiction involving robots. His three laws of robotics have become
particularly well known for codifying a simple set of behaviors for robots
to remain at the service of their human creators.
Numerous words for different types of robots are now used in literature.
Robot has come to mean mechanical humans, while android is a generic
term for artificial humans. Cyborg or "bionic man" is used for a human
form that is a mixture of organic and mechanical parts. Organic artificial
humans have also been referred to as "constructs" (or "biological
constructs").
Robotics
According to the Wiktionary, robotics is the science and technology of
robots, their design, manufacture, and application. Robotics requires a
working knowledge of electronics, mechanics, and software and a person
working in the field has become known as a roboticist. The word robotics
was first used in print by Isaac Asimov, in his science fiction short story
"Runaround" (1941).
Although the appearance and capabilities of robots vary vastly, all robots
share the features of a mechanical, movable structure under some form of
control. The structure of a robot is usually mostly mechanical and can be
called a kinematic chain (its functionality being akin to the skeleton of a
body). The chain is formed of links (its bones), actuators (its muscles)
and joints which can allow one or more degrees of freedom. Most
contemporary robots use open serial chains in which each link connects
the one before to the one after it. These robots are called serial robots and
often resemble the human arm. Some robots, such as the Stewart
platform, use closed parallel kinematic chains. Other structures, such as
those that mimic the mechanical structure of humans, various animals and
insects, are comparatively rare. However, the development and use of
such structures in robots is an active area of research (e.g. biomechanics).
Robots used as manipulators have an end effector mounted on the last
link. This end effector can be anything from a welding device to a
mechanical hand used to manipulate the environment.
Any task involves the motion of the robot. The study of motion can be
divided into kinematics and dynamics. Direct kinematics refers to the
calculation of end effector position, orientation, velocity and acceleration
when the corresponding joint values are known. Inverse kinematics refers
to the opposite case in which required joint values are calculated for
given end effector values, as done in path planning. Some special aspects
of kinematics include handling of redundancy (different possibilities of
performing the same movement), collision avoidance and singularity
avoidance. Once all relevant positions, velocities and accelerations have
been calculated using kinematics, methods from the field of dynamics are
used to study the effect of forces upon these movements. Direct dynamics
refers to the calculation of accelerations in the robot once the applied
forces are known. Direct dynamics is used in computer simulations of the
robot. Inverse dynamics refers to the calculation of the actuator forces
necessary to create a prescribed end effector acceleration. This
information can be used to improve the control algorithms of a robot.
Competitions
See also: Robot competition, FIRST, FIRST Lego League, and FIRST
Vex™ Challenge
Most recently, Duke University announcd plans to host the Duke Annual
Robo-Climb Competition (DARC) aimed to challenge students to create
innovative wall-climbing robots that can autonomously ascend vertical
surfaces. For more information visit DARC's Website
A competition that has existed for several years is the DARPA Grand
Challenge, pitting driverless cars against each other in an obstacle course
across the desert.
Robot software
What is DROS?
DROS stands for Dave's Robotic Operating System and it is basic
software modules needed for robotics. At the moment, the framework
consists mainly of support functions for modular programming and
modules for mobile robots. However, in the future the scope should
expand and, of course, contributions are most welcome.
DROS is open source and is distributed under the GNU Public License.
This license was chosen because we want to advance the progress of
robotics research and would like people all to contribute to the science of
robotics by releasing their code.
Category:Robots
Subcategories
S
F • [Error!
C
• [Error! Hyperlink Hyperlink
• [Error! Hyperlink
reference not valid.] reference not
reference not
Fictional robots valid.] Robotics
valid.] Chess
M stubs
automatons
• [Error! Hyperlink T
• [Error! Hyperlink
reference not valid.] • [Error!
reference not
Military robots Hyperlink
valid.] Robotics
R reference not
companies
valid.] Toy Robots
D • [Error! Hyperlink
reference not valid.] U
• [Error! Hyperlink
Robot Wars competitors • [Error!
reference not
• [Error! Hyperlink Hyperlink
valid.] Domestic
reference not valid.] reference not
robots
Robotic submarines valid.] Unmanned
vehicles
Pages in category "Robots"
• Robot
• Robot
dog
• Kim
Jong-
Hwan
• Hybrot
• AIBO
• ActivM
edia
Robotic
s
• Actroid
• Adept
Technol
ogy
• Aerobot
• Albert
Hubo
• Albert
One
• Alice
mobile
robot
• Analog
robot
• Android
Pivot joint
/wiki/Image:Gelenke_Zeichnung01.jpg /wiki/Image:Gelenke_Z
eichnung01.jpg
1: Ball and socket joint; 2: Condyloid joint (Ellipsoid); 3: Saddle joint; 4 Hinge
joint; 5: Pivot joint;
Latin articulatio trochoidea
Gray's subject #70 285
Dorlands/Elsevier a_64/12161674
Pivot joint (trochoid joint, rotary joint): Where the movement is
limited to rotation, the joint is formed by a pivot-like process turning
within a ring, or a ring on a pivot, the ring being formed partly of bone,
partly of ligament.
In the proximal radioulnar articulation, the ring is formed by the radial
notch of the ulna and the annular ligament; here, the head of the radius
(bone) rotates within the ring.
In the articulation of the odontoid process of the axis with the atlas the
ring is formed in front by the anterior arch, and behind by the transverse
ligament of the atlas; here, the ring rotates around the odontoid process.
Solder pad locations are provided for a remote on/off switch which
allows the Sidewinder to be switched on or off while the main battery
wires are connected. This can either be a physical switch or electronic
switch allowing for easy integration of the Sidewinder as an intelligent
subsystem in a complex vehicle under the control of a master computer.
Additional solder pads allow direct connection to the 12V supply of the
Sidewinder. This may be used when the battery voltage is lower than 14V
by directly supplying 12V to the Sidewinder bypassing the internal
regulator. Only a stable filtered 12V supply should be used here. Other
uses of the 12V supply are for a power indicator light or to switch on a
control solenoid. Current from this output is limited to 100mA.
Both of these solder pads are spaced to allow the installation of a standard
3.5mm screw terminal block at these locations.
High current motor and battery connections are provided by large wire
pads with holes sized to allow #8 (~4mm) bolts. Thus up to 8 AWG wires
may be soldered to the pads or ring terminals may be used or a
combination of both.
Mirror Mode is a special mode where both output channels are locked
together. This allows the Sidewinder to control a single large motor with
twice the capacity of each individual output. Two smaller motors that are
slaved together may also be controlled by one of the mirror modes. Also,
motors with four leads can make use of mirror mode to connect each
brush lead to a solder pad on the Sidewinder. On-board mixing is
supported in Mix Mirror mode by using a "Y" cabled to split the R/C
input signals to two Sidewinders. Thus an external mixer will not be
needed if running two Sidewinders in Mix Mirror Mode. Standard Mirror
mode may be used with two Sidewinders with independent inputs and
only requires a single input cable. These modes allow great flexibility in
handling a variety of load sizes and configurations.
Welcome
About us
Certifications
Directions
Quality Policy
Representatives
Support
Vibra-Metrics
195 Clarksville Road
Princeton Jct, NJ 08550
USA
Phn: +1 609.716.4130
Fax: +1 609.716.0706
sales@vibrametrics.com
Welcome to Vibra-Metrics
Vibra-Metrics designs and manufactures vibration sensing products
including world class accelerometers (vibration sensors), accelerometer
power supplies, accelerometer switch boxes, online Condition Based
Management Systems, and accelerometer accessories.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Optional mounting brackets may be ordered that slide into slots in the
sides of the case . They may be permanently attached to the case via #4
sheet metal screws or they may be left loose to allow the Sidewinder to
be removed from its mounting if needed. Solid mounting of the
Sidewinder to the vehicle frame is not recommended for high shock or
vibration applications. The recommended mounting method is to enclose
the Sidewinder in foam rubber on all sides and secure that to the vehicle
frame as needed. Since the Sidewinder does not normally need cooling
air flow this works well to protect it from shock and vibration.
Sidewinder with optional mounting brackets installed.
/wiki/Image:Canada_arm.jpg /wiki/Image:Canada_ar
m.jpg
/wiki/Image:Canada_arm.jpg/wiki/Image:Canada_arm.jpgView of the
Canadarm during a Space Shuttle mission.
The Shuttle Remote Manipulator System (SRMS) or Canadarm
(Canadarm 1) on the Space Shuttle, is a mechanical arm that maneuvers a
payload from the payload bay of the space shuttle orbiter to its
deployment position and then releases it. It can also grapple a free-flying
payload, maneuver it to the payload bay of the orbiter and berth it in the
orbiter. It was first used on the second Space Shuttle mission STS-2,
launched November 13, 1981. Since the destruction of Space Shuttle
Columbia during STS-107, NASA has outfitted the SRMS with the
Orbiter Boom Sensor System - a boom containing instruments to inspect
the exterior of the shuttle for damage to the thermal protection system. It
is expected the SRMS will play this role in all future shuttle missions.
Contents
[hide]
• 1 Specifications
• 2 Capabilities
• 3 Development
• 4 Usage
• 5 See also
• 6 External links
[edit] Specifications
The SRMS arm is 15 metres (50 ft 3 in) long and 38 centimetres (15
inches) in diameter and has six degrees of freedom. It weighs 410 kg (905
pounds), and the total system weighs 450 kg (994 lb). The SRMS has six
joints that correspond roughly to the joints of the human arm, with
shoulder yaw and pitch joints; an elbow pitch joint; and wrist pitch, yaw,
and roll joints. The end effector is the unit at the end of the wrist that
actually grabs, or grapples, the payload. The two lightweight boom
segments are called the upper and lower arms. The upper boom connects
the shoulder and elbow joints, and the lower boom connects the elbow
and wrist joints. The SRMS arm attaches to the orbiter payload bay
longeron at the shoulder manipulator positioning mechanism. Power and
data connections are located at the shoulder MPM.
[edit] Capabilities
/wiki/Image:STS-115_Truss_Handoff.jpg
/wiki/Image:STS-115_Truss_Handoff.jpg
/wiki/Image:STS-115_Truss_Handoff.jpg/wiki/Image:STS-
115_Truss_Handoff.jpgThe SRMS on Atlantis hands the P3/P4 Truss
segment to the Canadarm2 on the International Space Station during
STS-115.
The SRMS is capable of deploying or retrieving payloads weighing up to
29 metric tonnes (65,000 pounds) in space, though the arm motors are
unable to move the arm's own weight when on the ground. The SRMS
can also retrieve, repair and deploy satellites; provide a mobile extension
ladder for extravehicular activity crew members for work stations or foot
restraints; and be used as an inspection aid to allow the flight crew
members to view the orbiter's or payload's surfaces through a television
camera on the SRMS.
The basic SRMS configuration consists of a manipulator arm; an SRMS
display and control panel, including rotational and translational hand
controllers at the orbiter aft flight deck flight crew station; and a
manipulator controller interface unit that interfaces with the orbiter
computer. Most of the time the arm operators see what they are doing by
looking at the Advanced Space Vision System screen next to the
controllers.
One flight crew member operates the SRMS from the aft flight deck
control station, and a second flight crew member usually assists with
television camera operations. This allows the SRMS operator to view
SRMS operations through the aft flight deck payload and overhead
windows and through the closed-circuit television monitors at the aft
flight deck station.
[edit] Development
/wiki/Image:STS-116_Payload_%28NASA_S116-E-05364%29.jpg
/wiki/Image:STS-116_Payload_%28NASA_S116-E-
05364%29.jpg
/wiki/Image:STS-116_Payload_%28NASA_S116-E-
05364%29.jpg/wiki/Image:STS-116_Payload_%28NASA_S116-E-
05364%29.jpgThe SRMS in action on the Space Shuttle Discovery
during STS-116.
Since its first usage during STS-2 in 1981 on Columbia, the SRMS has
been used on over 50 shuttle missions. It was first flown on Challenger
during STS-7 in 1983. Then in 1985 it was first used aboard Discovery
during STS-51-C. The SRMS onboard Challenger was lost during the
Challenger disaster in 1986. It was used on Atlantis first during STS-27,
and on Endeavour during STS-49 (her first flight).
Since the installation of the Canadarm2 on the International Space
Station, the two arms have been used to hand over segments of the station
for assembly from the SRMS to the Canadarm2; the use of both elements
in tandem has earned the nickname of 'Canadian Handshake' in the
media.
Following the Columbia disaster, the SRMS has been used on every
space shuttle flight to inspect the heat shield for damage that may have
been caused during launch. It is likely that the arm will be a part of all
future shuttle missions.
Control theory
[hide]
• 1 An example
• 2 History
• 3 Classical control theory: the closed-loop controller
• 4 Stability
• 5 Controllability and observability
• 6 Control specifications
• 6.1 Model identification and robustness
• 6.1.1 System identification
• 6.1.2 Analysis
• 6.1.3 Constraints
• 7 Main control strategies
• 7.1 PID controllers
• 7.2 Direct pole placement
• 7.3 Optimal control
• 7.4 Adaptive control
• 7.5 Non-linear control systems
• 8 Further reading
• 9 See also
[edit] An example
[edit] History
/wiki/Image:Simple_feedback_control_loop.png /wiki
/Image:Simple_feedback_control_loop.png
If we assume the controller C and the plant P are linear and time-
invariant (i.e.: elements of their transfer function C(s) and P(s) do not
depend on time), the systems above can be analysed using the Laplace
transform on the variables. This gives the following relations:
Solving for Y(s) in terms of R(s) gives:
The term is referred to as the transfer function of
the system. The numerator is the forward gain from r to y, and the
denominator is one plus the loop gain of the feedback loop. If
[edit] Stability
Stability (in control theory) often means that for any bounded input over
any amount of time, the output will also be bounded. This is known as
BIBO stability (see also Lyapunov stability). If a system is BIBO stable
then the output cannot "blow up" (i.e., become infinite) if the input
remains finite. Mathematically, this means that for a causal linear
continuous-time system to be stable all of the poles of its transfer
function must
• lie in the closed left half of the complex plane if the Laplace
transform is used (i.e. its real part is less than or equal to zero)
OR
• lie on or inside the unit circle if the Z-transform is used (i.e. its
modulus is less than or equal to one)
In the two cases, if respectively the pole has a real part strictly smaller
than zero or a modulus strictly smaller than one, it is asymptotically
stable: the variables of an asymptotically stable control system always
decrease from their initial value and do not show permanent oscillations,
which are instead present if a pole has a real part exactly equal to zero (or
a modulus equal to one). If a simply stable system response neither
decays nor grows over time, and has no oscillations, it is marginally
stable: in this case it has non-repeated poles along the vertical axis (i.e.
their real and complex component is zero). Oscillations are present when
poles with real part equal to zero have an imaginary part not equal to
zero.
Differences between the two cases are not a contradiction. The Laplace
transform is in Cartesian coordinates and the Z-transform is in circular
coordinates, and it can be shown that
• the negative-real part in the Laplace domain can map onto the
interior of the unit circle
• the positive-real part in the Laplace domain can map onto the
exterior of the unit circle
If the system in question has an impulse response of
x[n] = 0.5nu[n]
which has a pole in z = 0.5 (zero imaginary part). This system is BIBO
(asymptotically) stable since the pole is inside the unit circle.
However, if the impulse response was
x[n] = 1.5nu[n]
Several different control strategies have been devised in the past years.
These vary from extremely general ones (PID controller), to others
devoted to very particular classes of systems (especially robotics or
aircraft cruise control).
[edit] Analysis
[edit] Constraints
Every control system must guarantee first the stability of the closed-loop
behaviour. For linear systems, this can be obtained by directly placing the
poles. Non-linear control systems use specific theories (normally based
on Aleksandr Lyapunov's Theory) to ensure stability without regard to the
inner dynamics of the system. The possibility to fulfill different
specifications varies from the model considered and the control strategy
chosen. Here a summary list of the main control techniques is shown:
Artificial intelligence
/ r
wi t
ki/I i
ma f
ge: i
Por c
tal. i
svg a
l
i
n
t
e
l
l
/wi i
ki/I g
ma e
n
c
e
ge:
Por P
tal. o
svg r
t
a
l
/wiki/Image:HONDA_ASIMO.jpg /wiki/Image:HON
DA_ASIMO.jpg
/wiki/Image:HONDA_ASIMO.jpg/wiki/Image:HONDA_ASIMO.jpgHo
nda's humanoid robot "AI" redirects here. For other uses of "AI" and
"Artificial Intelligence", see AI (disambiguation).
Artificial intelligence (AI) can be defined as intelligence exhibited by an
artificial (non-natural, manufactured) entity. AI is studied in overlapping
fields of computer science, psychology and engineering, dealing with
intelligent behavior, learning and adaptation in machines, generally
assumed to be computers.
Research in AI is concerned with producing machines to automate tasks
requiring intelligent behavior. Examples include control, planning and
scheduling, the ability to answer diagnostic and consumer questions,
handwriting, speech, and facial recognition. As such, the study of AI has
also become an engineering discipline, focused on providing solutions to
real life problems, software applications, traditional strategy games like
computer chess and other video games.
For topics relating specifically to full human-like intelligence, see Strong
AI.
Contents
[hide]
• 1 Schools of thought
• 2 History
• 2.1 1950s
• 2.2 1960s-1970s
• 2.3 1980s
• 2.4 1990s & Turn of the Century
• 3 Challenge & Prize
• 4 AI in Philosophy
• 5 AI in business
• 6 AI in fiction
• 7 See also
• 8 Applications
• 9 References
• 10 External links
[edit] History
[edit] 1950s
The 1950s were a period of active efforts in AI. In 1950, Alan Turing
introduced the "Turing test" as a way of operationalizing a test of
intelligent behavior. The first working AI programs were written in 1951
to run on the Ferranti Mark I machine of the University of Manchester: a
draughts-playing program written by Christopher Strachey and a chess-
playing program written by Dietrich Prinz. John McCarthy coined the
term "artificial intelligence" at the first conference devoted to the subject,
in 1956. He also invented the Lisp programming language. Joseph
Weizenbaum built ELIZA, a chatterbot implementing Rogerian
psychotherapy. The birthdate of AI is generally considered to be July
1956 at the Dartmouth Conference, where many of these people met and
exchanged ideas.
At the same time, John von Neumann, who had been hired by the RAND
Corporation, developed the game theory, which would prove invaluable
in the progress of AI research.[citation needed]
[edit] 1960s-1970s
During the 1960s and 1970s, Joel Moses demonstrated the power of
symbolic reasoning for integration problems in the Macsyma program,
the first successful knowledge-based program in mathematics. Leonard
Uhr and Charles Vossler published "A Pattern Recognition Program That
Generates, Evaluates, and Adjusts Its Own Operators" in 1963, which
described one of the first machine learning programs that could
adaptively acquire and modify features and thereby overcome the
limitations of simple perceptrons of Rosenblatt. Marvin Minsky and
Seymour Papert published Perceptrons, which demonstrated the limits of
simple neural nets. Alain Colmerauer developed the Prolog computer
language. Ted Shortliffe demonstrated the power of rule-based systems
for knowledge representation and inference in medical diagnosis and
therapy in what is sometimes called the first expert system. Hans
Moravec developed the first computer-controlled vehicle to
autonomously negotiate cluttered obstacle courses.
[edit] 1980s
The DARPA Grand Challenge is a race for a $2 million prize where cars
drive themselves across several hundred miles of challenging desert
terrain without any communication with humans, using GPS, computers
and a sophisticated array of sensors. In 2005 the winning vehicles
completed all 132 miles of the course in just under 7 hours. There will be
no prize money awarded to the winners of the 2007 race due to a re-
allocation of DARPA funds through a bill signed by George W. Bush in
which Congress switched the authority from DARPA to its boss, the
Director of Defense Engineering and Research. [1]
In the post-dot com boom era, some search engine websites have sprung
using a simple form of AI to provide answers to questions entered by the
visitor. Questions such as "What is the tallest building?" Can be entered
into the search engine's input form and a list of answers will be returned.
[edit] AI in Philosophy
/wiki/Image:Portal.svg
Mind and
Brain
Portal
/wiki/Image
:Portal.svg
[edit] AI in business
/wiki/Image:Eod_technician_ireland.jpg /wiki/Image:
Eod_technician_ireland.jpg
/wiki/Image:Eod_technician_ireland.jpg/wiki/Image:Eod_technician_irel
and.jpgThe Longest Walk. A British Army ATO approaches a suspect
device in Northern Ireland.
Contents
[hide]
• 1 History
• 1.1 World War I and the interwar period
• 1.2 World War II
• 1.3 EOD in low intensity conflicts
• 2 Fields of operations
• 2.1 EOD
• 2.2 PSBT
• 2.3 UXO
• 3 Techniques
• 3.1 EOD Equipment
• 4 What Else Do EOD Operators Do?
• 5 EOD badges
• 5.1 British Army
• 5.2 American
• 5.3 Israeli
• 6 See also
• 7 Notes and references
• 8 Further reading
• 9 External links
[edit] History
Bomb Disposal became a formalised field during World War I. The swift
mass production of munitions led to many manufacturing defects, and a
large proportion of shells fired by both sides were found to be "duds". [1]
These were hazardous to attacker and defender alike. In response, the
British dedicated a section of Royal Engineers to handle the growing
problem.
In 1918, the Germans developed a delayed-action fuze that would later
develop into more sophisticated weaponry during the 1930s, as Nazi
Germany began its secret course of arms development. These tests led to
the development of UXBs (unexploded bombs), pioneered by Herbert
Ruehlemann of Rheinmetall, and first employed during the Spanish Civil
War of 1936-37. Such delayed-action bombs provoked terror because of
the uncertainty of time. The Germans saw that unexploded bombs caused
far more chaos and disruption than bombs that exploded immediately.
This caused them to increase their use of delayed-action bombs later in
World War II. The Germans were also the first to develop and use
proximity sensitive fuzing on air dropped bombs. Allied UXO specialists,
unaware that movement on or around the fuze caused detonation, took a
number of casualties. They believed these fuzes were set at varying time
increments in order to cause unpredictable destruction. Allies began
calling these proximity devices Variable Time or VT fuzes.[citation
needed] This label is still used on many proximity fuzes today.
British Royal Engineers would soon face munitions designed to kill
civilians and ultimately, themselves. Initially there were no specialised
tools, training, or core knowledge available, and as Technicians learned
how to safely neutralize one variant of munition, the enemy would add or
change parts to make neutralization efforts more hazardous. This trend of
cat-and-mouse extends even to the present day, and the techniques used to
defuse munitions are held to high standards of secrecy.
[edit] World War II
Modern EOD Technicians across the world can trace their heritage to the
Battle of Britain, when the United Kingdom stood alone against Nazi
Germany. In addition to conventional air raids, unexploded bombs
(UXBs) also took their toll on population and morale, paralyzing vital
services and communications. These delayed-action explosives provoked
terror and uncertainty, with complex fuzes equipped with anti-tampering
devices. Royal Engineers responded on the ground by devising methods
to inert and remove deadly bombs and anti-personnel mines. These were
the first Explosive Ordnance Disposal Technicians.
The United States War Department felt the RE Bomb Disposal experience
could be a valuable asset, based on reports from U.S. Army, Navy, and
Marine Corps observers at Melksham Royal Air Force Base at Wiltshire,
England in 1940. The next year, the Office of Civilian Defense (OCD)
and War Department both sponsored a Bomb Disposal program, which
gradually fell under military governance due to security and technical
reasons. OCD personnel continued to train in UXB reconnaissance
throughout the war. After Pearl Harbor, the British Royal Engineers sent
instructors to Aberdeen Proving Ground, where the U.S. Army would
inaugurate a formal Bomb Disposal school under the Ordnance Corps.
Lt. Col. Geoffrey Yates (RE) and his British colleagues also helped
establish the USN Mine Disposal School at the Naval Gun Factory,
Washington, DC. Not to be outdone, the US Navy, under the command of
Lieutenant Commander Draper L. Kauffman (who would go on to found
the Underwater Demolition Teams -- better known as UDTs or the U.S.
Navy Frogmen), created the USN Bomb Disposal School at University
Campus, Washington, D.C. U.S. Ordnance and British Royal Engineers
would forge a partnership that worked quite effectively in war -- a
friendship persisting to this day.
1942 was a banner year for the fledgling EOD program. U.S. Army Lt.
Col. Thomas Kane, who began in 1940 as a Bomb Disposal Instructor in
the School of Civilian Defense, traveled with eight other troops to the UK
for initial EOD training. Kane took over the US Army Bomb Disposal
School at Aberdeen Proving Ground. Three members of Kane's training
mission later served as Bomb Disposal squad commanders in the
battlefield: Ronald L. Felton (12th Bomb Disposal Squad Separate) in
Italy, Joseph C. Pilcher (17th Bomb Disposal Squad Separate) in France
and Germany, and Richard Metress (209th Bomb Disposal Squad
Separate) in the Philippines Islands. Captain Metress and most of his
squad were killed in 1945 while dismantling a Japanese IED.
Graduates of the Aberdeen School formed the first Army Bomb Disposal
companies, starting with the 231st Ordnance Bomb Disposal Company.
The now-familiar shoulder emblem for Army EOD Technicians, a red
bomb on an oval, black background was approved for them to wear.
Following initial deployments in North Africa and Sicily, U.S. Army
commanders registered their disapproval of these cumbersome units. In
1943, companies were phased out, to be replaced by mobile seven-man
squads in the field. In 1944, Col. Thomas Kane oversaw all European
Theater Bomb Disposal operations, starting with reconnaissance training
for the U.S. forces engaging the Germans on D-Day. Unfortunately, the
Pacific Theater lacked a similar administration.
Late in 1942, the first US Navy EOD casualty was recorded. Ensign
Howard, USNR, was performing a render-safe procedure against a
German moored mine when it detonated. Only a few months later, the
first two Army EOD fatalities occurred during the Aleutian Islands
campaign. While conducting EOD operations on Attu Island, LT Rodger
& T/SGT Rapp (Commander and NCOIC of 5th Ordnance Bomb
Disposal Squad) were fatally injured by unexploded ordnance.
/wiki/Image:US_Navy_explosive_ordnance_disposal_%28EOD%29_div
ers.jpg /wiki/Image:US_Navy_explosive_ordnance_di
sposal_%28EOD%29_divers.jpg
/wiki/Image:US_Navy_explosive_ordnance_disposal_%28EOD%29_div
ers.jpg/wiki/Image:US_Navy_explosive_ordnance_disposal_%28EOD%
29_divers.jpgUS Navy explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) divers.
Overall, about forty Americans were killed outright performing the
specialized services of bomb and mine disposal in World War II. Scores
more were maimed or injured during combat operations requiring
ordnance support. At Schwammanuel Dam in Germany, two Bomb
Disposal squads acting as a "T Force" were exposed to enemy mortar and
small arms fire. Captain Marshall Crow (18th Squad) took serious
wounds, even as his party drove German defenders from their positions.'
Ironically, the only major ordnance attack against the continental U.S.
would be handled by the 555th Parachute Infantry Battalion, who dealt
with the Japanese Fu-Go balloon bomb menace in 1945. The all-black
555th "Smokejumpers" were trained by ordnance personnel to defuse
these incendiary bombs before they could kill civilians or start forest
fires.
Following the war, U.S. Bomb Disposal Technicians continued to clear
Nazi and Japanese stockpiles, remove UXO from battlefields, while
training host nation (HN) troops to do these tasks. This established a
tradition for U.S. EOD services to operate during peace as well as war.
Colonel Kane remained in contact with EOD until his retirement in 1955.
He urged reforms in the Bomb Disposal organization and training policy.
Wartime errors were rectified in 1947 when Army personnel started
attending a new school at Indian Head, MD, under U.S. Navy direction.
This course was named the Explosive Ordnance Disposal Course,
governing training in all basic types of ammunition and projectiles.
1947 also saw the Army Air Corps separate and become the US Air
Force, gaining their own EOD branch. That same year, the forerunner of
the EOD Technology Center, the USN Bureau of Naval Weapons,
charged with research, development, test, and evaluation of EOD tools,
tactics and procedures was born. 1949 marked the official end of an era,
as Army and Navy Bomb Disposal squads were reclassified into
Explosive Ordnance Disposal units.
In 1953, reflecting the trend in name changing, the EOD School formally
became the Naval School, Explosive Ordnance Disposal
(NAVSCOLEOD). Two years later, the Army Bomb Disposal School
would close, making Indian Head the sole Joint Service EOD School in
the US. That is, until 1985, when work began on the current EOD School
at Eglin AF Base, Florida.
The current, most recognizable distinctive item of wear by EOD
Technicians, affectionately referred to as the ‘crab’, began uniform wear
as the Basic EOD Qualification Badge in 1957. The Master Badge would
not appear until 1969. (See picture on the right)
On 31 March 2004, the U.S. Army EOD Headquarters at Fort Gillem,
Georgia dedicated its new building to Col. Thomas J. Kane (1900-65).
Whether Kane Hall remains after the Bush Administration's recent base
closure announcement remains to be seen.
[edit] EOD in low intensity conflicts
/wiki/Image:Andrews-sap1.jpg /wiki/Image:Andrews-
sap1.jpg
/wiki/Image:Andrews-sap1.jpg/wiki/Image:Andrews-sap1.jpgIDF
American Andros EOD robot
The eruption of low intensity conflicts and terror waves at the beginning
of the 21st century caused further development in the techniques and
methods of Bomb Disposal. EOD Operators and Technicians had to adapt
to rapidly evolving methods of constructing improvised explosive devices
ranging from shrapnel-filled explosive belts to 100-kg IED charges. Since
improvised explosives are generally unreliable and very unstable they
pose great risk to the public and especially to the EOD Operator, trying to
render them safe. Therefore, new methods like greater reliance on remote
techniques, such as advanced remotely operated vehicles such as EOD
robots or armored bulldozers evolved. The US Army and the Israeli
Defence Forces both have remote-control EOD vehicles and EOD
bulldozers (the D7 MCAP and the armored D9R respectively). Other
developments include using Advanced Electronic Countermeasures to
prevent a device from being detonated remotely.
The British Armed Forces have become experts in IED disposal after
many years of dealing with bombs 'planted' by the IRA. These came in
many different forms, particularly car bombs rigged to detonate via a
variety of manners. As such the first personnel sent into Iraq in 2003
were, amongst others, British Bomb Disposal experts of 11 EOD
Regiment RLC.
During the al-Aksa Intifada, Israeli EOD forces have disarmed and
detonated thousands of explosive charges, lab bombs and explosive
ammunition (such as rockets). Two Israeli EOD teams gained high
reputation for leading the efforts in that area: the Army's Israeli
Engineering Corps' Sayeret Yaalom and the Israeli Border Guard Gaza-
area EOD team.
In Iraq, the coalition forces have to face many IEDs (improvised
explosive devices) on travel routes. Such charges can easily destroy light
vehicles such as the HMMWV but large one can even destroy main battle
tank such as the M1A1 Abrams. Side charges caused many casualties and
are major threat in Iraq along the car bombs and suicide bombers. These
are the main challenge of the EOD forces today.
[edit] Fields of operations
[edit] EOD
/wiki/Image:Mil_EOD.jpg /wiki/Image:Mil_EOD.jpg
/wiki/Image:Mil_EOD.jpg/wiki/Image:Mil_EOD.jpgEOD Operator
removes a piece of unexploded ordnance.
In the United Kingdom, EOD Operators are primarily known as
Ammunition Technicians. In addition to manufactured munitions,
Ammunition Technicians also deal with improvised explosive devices
(IEDs). They are experts in chemical, biological, incendiary, radiological
("dirty bombs"), and nuclear weapons. They provide support to VIPs,
help civilian authorities with bomb problems, teach soldiers about bomb
safety, and a variety of other tasks. Sometimes, people confuse engineers
or sappers with Ammunition Technicians. While engineers and sappers
do, on occasion, deal with explosive devices, their roles are limited
normally to improving the mobility of troops. They are not Ammunition
Technicians.
All prospective Ammunition Technicians attend a grueling course of
instruction at The Army School of Ammunition and the Felix Centre, UK.
The timeframe for a Ammunition Technician to complete all necessary
courses prior to finally be placed on a EOD team is around 36 months.
Ammunition Technicians, having completed their training will be posted
to a variety of units involved in IEDD, EOD or plain conventional
ammunition duties. Until recent times the most prestigous EOD unit in
the world was 321 EOD, that has now been surpassed by 11 EOD
Regiment, who not only provides mainland IEDD duties, but also
provides detachments for Op TELIC Iraq and Afghanistan
[edit] PSBT
/wiki/Image:PSBT_guy.jpg /wiki/Image:PSBT_guy.jp
g
/wiki/Image:PSBT_guy.jpg/wiki/Image:PSBT_guy.jpgUS Public Safety
Bomb Tech inspects a suspicious package.
US EOD covers both on and off base calls in the US unless there is a
local PSBT or "Public Safety Bomb Technician". Also called a
"Hazardous Devices Technician", PSBTs are usually members of a Police
department, although there are teams formed by fire departments or
emergency management agencies.
To be certified, PSBTs must attend the FBI's Hazardous Devices School
at Redstone Arsenal, Alabama which is modeled on the International
IEDD Training school at The Army School of Ammunition, known as the
Felix Centre. This school helps them to become experts in the detection,
diagnosis and disposal of hazardous devices. They are further trained to
collect evidence in hazardous devices, and present expert witness
testimony in court on bombing cases.
[edit] UXO
In the quest to build the best, safest munition systems possible, and then
train troops to safely utilize them, many acres of government land are
currently restricted for bombing ranges. As time goes along, it becomes
the best interest of the government to turn these lands back over to the
public for reutilization. Before this can occur, specialists in unexploded
ordnance (UXO) must be brought in to clear the lands of ordnance and
explosive waste. These civilians, usually retired military EOD
Technicians, use specialized tools for subsurface examination of the
lands. When munitions are found, they safely neutralize them and remove
them from the site.
While most UXO Technicians are former military, there are schools in the
US where civilians can attend to become certified as a Tech I.
[edit] Techniques
/wiki/Image:Anti_bomb_robot.jpg /wiki/Image:Anti_
bomb_robot.jpg
/wiki/Image:Anti_bomb_robot.jpg/wiki/Image:Anti_bomb_robot.jpgBom
b disposal robot.
/wiki/Image:Remotely_controlled_bomb_disposal_tool.JPG
/wiki/Image:Remotely_controlled_bomb_disposal_to
ol.JPG
/wiki/Image:Remotely_controlled_bomb_disposal_tool.JPG/wiki/Image:
Remotely_controlled_bomb_disposal_tool.JPGWheelbarrow remotely
controlled bomb disposal tool.
Generally EOD render safe procedures (RSP) are a type of tradecraft
protected from public dissemination in order to limit access and
knowledge, depriving the enemy of specific technical procedures used to
render safe ordnance or an improvised device.
Many techniques exist for the neutralisation of a bomb or munition.
Selection of a technique depends on several variables. The greatest
variable is the proximity of the munition or device to people or critical
facilities. Explosives in remote localities are handled very differently
from those in densely-population areas, for example.
Contrary to Hollywood lore, the role of the EOD Operator is to
accomplish their task as remotely as possible. Actually laying hands on a
bomb is only done in an extremely life-threatening situation, where the
hazards to people and critical structures can't be lessened.
Ammunition Technicians have many tools for remote operations, one of
which is the RCV, or remotely controlled vehicle, also know as the
"wheelbarrow". Outfitted with cameras, microphones, and sensors for
chemical, biological, or nuclear agents, the Wheelbarrow can help the
Technician get an excellent idea of what the munition or device is. Many
of these robots even have hand-like manipulators in case a door needs to
be opened, or a munition or bomb requires handling or moving.
The first ever wheelbarrow was invented by Lieutenant-Colonel 'Peter'
Miller [2] in 1972 and used by Ammunition Technicians in the battle
against Provisional IRA IED's.
Also of great use are items that allow Ammunition technicians to
remotely diagnose the innards of a munition or IED. These include
devices similar to the X-ray used by medical personnel, and high-
performance sensors that can detect and help interpret sounds, odors, or
even images from within the munition or bomb.
Once the technicians determine what the munition or device is, and what
state it is in, they will formulate a procedure to disarm it. This may
include things as simple as replacing safety features, or as difficult as
using high-powered explosive-actuated devices to shear, jam, bind, or
remove parts of the item's firing train.
Preferably, this will be accomplished remotely, but there are still
circumstances when a robot won't do, and a technician must put themself
at risk by personally going near the bomb. The Technician will don a
specialized suit, using flame and fragmentation-resistant material similar
to bulletproof vests. Some suits have advanced features such as internal
cooling, amplified hearing, and communications back to the control area.
This suit is designed to increase the odds of survival for the Technician
should the munition or IED function while they are near it.
Rarely, the specifics of a munition or bomb will allow the Technician to
first remove it from the area. In these cases, a containment vessel is used.
Some are shaped like small water tanks, others like large spheres. Using
remote methods, the Technician places the item in the container and
retires to a uninhabited area to complete the neutralization. Because of
the instability and complexity of modern bombs, this is rarely done.
After the munition or bomb has been rendered safe, the Technicians will
assist in the removal of the remaining parts so the area can be returned to
normal.
All of this, called a mission or evolution, can take a great deal of time.
Because of the construction of devices, a waiting period must be taken to
ensure that whatever render-safe method was used worked as intended.
While time is usually not on the EOD Operator's side, rushing usually
ends in disaster.
/wiki/Image:EOD.JPG /wiki/Image:EOD.JPG
The EOD Badge.
/wiki/Image:EOD.gif /wiki/Image:EOD.gif
The EOD Badge.
/wiki/Image:Sikat-yaalom01.png /wiki/Image:Sikat-
yaalom01.png
/wiki/Image:Sikat-yaalom01.png/wiki/Image:Sikat-yaalom01.pngSayeret
Yaalom pin.
[edit] British Army
[edit] American
[edit] Israeli
Behavior
/wiki/Image:Table_of_Geography_and_Hydrography%2C_Cyclopaedia
%2C_Volume_1.jpg /wiki/Image:Table_of_Geograph
y_and_Hydrography%2C_Cyclopaedia%2C_Volume_1.jpg
/wiki/Image:Table_of_Geography_and_Hydrography%2C_Cyclopaedia
%2C_Volume_1.jpg/wiki/Image:Table_of_Geography_and_Hydrography
%2C_Cyclopaedia%2C_Volume_1.jpgTable of geography, hydrography,
and navigation, from the 1728 Cyclopaedia.
Contents
[hide]
• 1 Modern methods
• 1.1 Passage planning
• 2 Celestial navigation
• 2.1 Timekeeping requirement
• 3 History
• 4 Austronesian Navigation
• 4.1 Polynesian navigation
• 5 "Point system" measure of direction
• 6 See also
• 7 Sources
• 8 External links
[edit] History
/wiki/Image:Compass_thumbnail.jpg/wiki/Image:Compass_thumbnail.jp
gCompass with rose in center
Another early invention was the compass rose, a cross or painted panel of
wood oriented with the pole star or diptych. This was placed in front of
the helmsman.
Latitude was determined with a "cross staff" an instrument vaguely
similar to a carpenter's angle with graduated marks on it. Most sailors
could use this instrument to take sun sights, but master navigators knew
that sightings of Polaris were far more accurate, because they were not
subject to time-keeping errors involved in finding noon.
Time-keeping was by precision hourglasses, filled and tested to ¼ of an
hour, turned by the helmsman, or a young boy brought for that purpose.
The most important instrument was a navigators' diary, later called a
rutter. These were often crucial trade secrets, because they enabled travel
to lucrative ports.
The above instruments were a powerful technology, and appear to have
been the technique used by ancient Cretan bronze-age trading empire.
Using these techniques, masters successfully sailed from the eastern
Mediterranean to the south coast of the British Isles.
Some time later, around 300, the magnetic compass was invented in
China. This let masters continue sailing a course when the weather
limited visibility of the sky.
/wiki/Image:Astrolab.JPG /wiki/Image:Astrolab.JPG
/wiki/Image:Astrolab.JPG/wiki/Image:Astrolab.JPGAstrolabe
Around 400, metallurgy allowed construction of astrolabes graduated in
degrees, which replaced the wooden latitude instruments for night use.
Diptychs remained in use during the day, until shadowing astrolabes were
constructed.
After Isaac Newton published the Principia, navigation was transformed.
Starting in 1670, the entire world was measured using essentially modern
latitude instruments and the best available clocks.
In 1730 the sextant was invented and navigators rapidly replaced their
astrolabes. A sextant uses mirrors to measure the altitude of celestial
objects with regard to the horizon. Thus, its "pointer" is as long as the
horizon is far away. This eliminates the "cosine" error of an astrolabe's
short pointer. Modern sextants measure to 0.2 minutes of arc, an error that
translates to a distance of about 0.2 nautical miles (400 m).
At first, the best available "clocks" were the moons of Jupiter, and the
calculated transits of selected stars by the moon. These methods were too
complex to be used by any but skilled astronomers, but they sufficed to
map most of the world. A number of scientific journals during this period
were started especially to chronicle geography.
Later, mechanical chronometers enabled navigation at sea and in the air
using relatively unskilled procedures.
In the late 19th century Nikola Tesla invented radio and direction-finding
was quickly adapted to navigation. Up until 1960 it was commonplace for
ships and aircraft to use radio direction-finding on commercial stations in
order to locate islands and cities within the last several miles of error.
Around 1960, LORAN was developed. This used time-of-flight of radio
waves from antennas at known locations. It revolutionized navigation by
permitting semiautomated equipment to locate geographic positions to
less than a half mile (800 m). An analogous system for aircraft, VHF
omnidirectional range and DME, was developed around the same time.
At about the same, TRANSIT, the first satellite-based navigation system
was developed. It was the first electronic navigation system to provide
global coverage.
Other radionavigation systems include:
• Decca
• Omega, a longwave system developed by the United States Navy
• Alpha, a longwave system developed by the Soviet Union
In 1974, the first GPS satellite was launched. The GPS system now
permits accurate geographic location with an error of only a few metres,
and precision timing to less than a microsecond. GLONASS is a
positioning system launched by the Soviet Union. It relies on a slightly
different geodesic model of the Earth. Galileo is a competing system, that
will be placed into service by the European Union.
Later developments included the placing of lighthouses and buoys close
to shore to act as marine signposts identifying ambiguous features,
highlighting hazards and pointing to safe channels for ships approaching
some part of a coast after a long sea voyage. The invention of the radio
lead to radio beacons and radio direction finders providing accurate land-
based fixes even hundreds of miles from shore. These were made
obsolete by satellite navigation systems.
In the pre-modern history of human migration and discovery of new lands
by navigating the oceans, a few peoples have excelled as sea-faring
explorers. Prominent examples are the Phoenicians, the Ancient Greeks,
the Persians, Arabians, the Norse and the Austronesian peoples including
the Malays and especially the Polynesians and the Micronesians of the
Pacific Ocean. With the advent of the airplane, the art of aerial
navigation, an offshoot of sea navigation, was developed to account for
additional effects such as coriolis effect and motion of the observer not
experienced by slow-moving ships.
/wiki/I
mage:I
nformat
ion_ico
n.svg
The Austronesians were some of the early people that crossed vast open
seas and settled farflung islands in search of new land to settle. The
Austronesian expansion around 2500 BC and onwards is widely
considered by some contemporary scholars to be one of the great
movements of population in history. [citation needed]
Robot (camera)
[edit] History