Q&A: Hacker, Roboticist, and Website Host

Dean “Dino” Segovis is a self-taught hardware hacker and maker from Pinehurst, NC. In 2011, he developed the Hack A Week website, where he challenges himself to create and post weekly DIY projects. Dino and I recently talked about some of his favorite projects and products. —Nan Price, Associate Editor

 

NAN: You have been posting a weekly project on your website, Hack A Week, for almost three years. Why did you decide to create the website?

Dean "Dino" Segovis at his workbench

Dean “Dino” Segovis at his workbench

DINO: One day on the Hack A Day website I saw a post that caught my attention. It was seeking a person to fill a potential position as a weekly project builder and video blogger. It was offering a salary of $35,000 a year, which was pretty slim considering you had to live in Santa Monica, CA. I thought, “I could do that, but not for $35,000 a year.”

That day I decided I was going to challenge myself to come up with a project and video each week and see if I could do it for at least one year. I came up with a simple domain name, www.hackaweek.com, bought it, and put up a website within 24 h.

My first project was a 555 timer-based project that I posted on April 1, 2011, on my YouTube channel, “Hack A Week TV.” I made it through the first year and just kept going. I currently have more than 3.2 million video views and more than 19,000 subscribers from all over the world.

NAN: Hack A Week features quite a few robotics projects. How are the robots built? Do you have a favorite?

rumblebot head

Dino’s very first toy robot hack was the Rumble robot. The robot featured an Arduino that sent PWM to the on-board H-bridge in the toy to control the motors for tank steering. A single PING))) sensor helped with navigation.

Rumble robot

The Rumble robot

DINO: I usually use an Arduino as the robot’s controller and Roomba gear motors for locomotion. I have built a few others based on existing wheeled motorized toys and I’ve made a few with the Parallax Propeller chip.

My “go-to” sensor is usually the Parallax PING))) ultrasonic sensor. It’s easy to connect and work with and the code is straightforward. I also use bump sensors, which are just simple contact switches, because they mimic the way some insects navigate.

Nature is a great designer and much can be learned from observing it. I like to keep my engineering simple because it’s robust and easy to repair. The more you complicate a design, the more it can do. But it also becomes more likely that something will fail. Failure is not a bad thing if it leads to a better design that overcomes the failure. Good design is a balance of these things. This is why I leave my failures and mistakes in my videos to show how I arrive at the end result through some trial and error.

My favorite robot would be “Photon: The Video and Photo Robot” that I built for the 2013 North Carolina Maker Faire. It’s my masterpiece robot…so far.

NAN: Tell us a little more about Photon. Did you encounter any challenges while developing the robot?

Photon awaits with cameras rolling, ready to go forth and record images.

Photon awaits with cameras rolling, ready to go forth and record images.

DINO: The idea for Photon first came to me in February 2013. I had been playing with the Emic 2 text-to-speech module from Parallax and I thought it would be fun to use it to give a robot speech capability. From there the idea grew to include cameras that would record and stream to the Internet what the robot saw and then give the robot the ability to navigate through the crowd at Maker Faire.

I got a late start on the project and ended up burning the midnight oil to get it finished in time. One of the bigger challenges was in designing a motorized base that would reliably move Photon across a cement floor.

The problem was in dealing with elevation changes on the floor covering. What if Photon encountered a rug or an extension cord?

I wanted to drive it with two gear motors salvaged from a Roomba 4000 vacuum robot to enable tank-style steering. A large round base with a caster at the front and rear worked well, but it would only enable a small change in surface elevation. I ended up using that design and made sure that it stayed away from anything that might get it in trouble.

The next challenge was giving Photon some sensors so it could navigate and stay away from obstacles. I used one PING))) sensor mounted on its head and turned the entire torso into a four-zone bump sensor, as was a ring around the base. The ring pushed on a series of 42 momentary contact switches connected together in four zones. All these sensors were connected to an Arduino running some simple code that turned Photon away from obstacles it encountered. Power was supplied by a motorcycle battery mounted on the base inside the torso.

The head held two video cameras, two smartphones in camera mode, and one GoPro camera. One video camera and the GoPro were recording in HD; the other video camera was recording in time-lapse mode. The two smartphones streamed live video, one via 4G to a Ustream channel and the other via Wi-Fi. The Ustream worked great, but the Wi-Fi failed due to interference.

Photon’s voice came from the Emic 2 connected to another Arduino sending it lines of text to speak. The audio was amplified by a small 0.5-W LM386 amplifier driving a 4” speaker. An array of blue LEDs mounted on the head illuminated with the brightness modulated by the audio signal when Photon spoke. The speech was just a lot of lines of text running in a timed loop.

Photon’s brain includes two Arduinos and an LM386 0.5-W audio amplifier with a sound-to-voltage circuit added to drive the mouth LED array. Photon’s voice comes from a Parallax Emic 2 text-to-speech module.

Photon’s brain includes two Arduinos and an LM386 0.5-W audio amplifier with a sound-to-voltage circuit added to drive the mouth LED array. Photon’s voice comes from a Parallax Emic 2 text-to-speech module.

Connecting all of these things together was very challenging. Each component needed a regulated power supply, which I built using LM317T voltage regulators. The entire current draw with motors running was about 1.5 A. The battery lasted about 1.5 h before needing a recharge. I had an extra battery so I could just swap them out during the quick charge cycle and keep downtime to a minimum.

I finished the robot around 11:00 PM the night before the event. It was a hit! The videos Photon recorded are fascinating to watch. The look of wonder on people’s faces, the kids jumping up to see themselves in the monitors, the smiles, and the interaction are all very interesting.

NAN: Many of your Hack A Week projects include Parallax products. Why Parallax?

DINO: Parallax is a great electronics company that caters to the DIY hobbyist. It has a large knowledge base on its website as well as a great forum with lots of people willing to help and share their projects.

About a year ago Parallax approached me with an offer to supply me with a product in exchange for featuring it in my video projects on Hack A Week. Since I already used and liked the product, it was a perfect offer. I’ll be posting more Parallax-based projects throughout the year and showcasing a few of them on the ELEV-8 quadcopter as a test platform.

NAN: Let’s change topics. You built an Electronic Fuel Injector Tester, which is featured on HomemadeTools.net. Can you explain how the 555 timer chips are used in the tester?

DINO: 555 timers are great! They can be used in so many projects in so many ways. They’re easy to understand and use and require only a minimum of external components to operate and configure.

The 555 can run in two basic modes: monostable and astable.

Dino keeps this fuel injector tester in his tool box at work. He’s a European auto technician by day.

Dino keeps this fuel injector tester in his tool box at work. He’s a European auto technician by day.

An astable circuit produces a square wave. This is a digital waveform with sharp transitions between low (0 V) and high (+ V). The durations of the low and high states may be different. The circuit is called astable because it is not stable in any state: the output is continually changing between “low” and “high.”

A monostable circuit produces a single output pulse when triggered. It is called a monostable because it is stable in just one state: “output low.” The “output high” state is temporary.

The injector tester, which is a monostable circuit, is triggered by pressing the momentary contact switch. The single-output pulse turns on an astable circuit that outputs a square-wave pulse train that is routed to an N-channel MOSFET. The MOSFET turns on and off and outputs 12 V to the injector. A flyback diode protects the MOSFET from the electrical pulse that comes from the injector coil when the power is turned off and the field collapses. It’s a simple circuit that can drive any injector up to 5 A.

This is a homebrew PCB for Dino's fuel injector tester. Two 555s drive a MOSFET that switches the injector.

This is a homebrew PCB for Dino’s fuel injector tester. Two 555s drive a MOSFET that switches the injector.

NAN: You’ve been “DIYing” for quite some time. How and when did your interest begin?

DINO: It all started in 1973 when I was 13 years old. I used to watch a TV show on PBS called ZOOM, which was produced by WGBH in Boston. Each week they had a DIY project they called a “Zoom-Do,” and one week the project was a crystal radio. I ordered the Zoom-Do instruction card and set out to build one. I got everything put together but it didn’t work! I checked and rechecked everything, but it just wouldn’t work.

I later realized why. The instructions said to use a “cat’s whisker,” which I later found out was a thin piece of wire. I used a real cat’s whisker clipped from my cat! Anyway, that project sparked something inside me (pun intended). I was hooked! I started going house to house asking people if they had any broken or unwanted radios and or TVs I could have so I could learn about electronics and I got tons of free stuff to mess with.

My mom and dad were pretty cool about letting me experiment with it all. I was taking apart TV sets, radios, and tape recorders in my room and actually fixing a few of them. I was in love with electronics. I had an intuition for understanding it. I eventually found some ham radio guys who were great mentors and I learned a lot of good basic electronics from them.

NAN: Is there a particular electronics engineer, programmer, or designer who has inspired the work you do today?

DINO: Forrest Mims was a great inspiration in my early 20s. I got a big boost from his “Engineer’s Notebooks.” The simple way he explained things and his use of graph paper to draw circuit designs really made learning about electronics easy and fun. I still use graph paper to draw my schematics during the design phase and for planning when building a prototype on perf board. I’m not interested in any of the software schematic programs because most of my projects are simple and easy to draw. I like my pencil-and-paper approach.

NAN: What was the last electronics-design related product you purchased and what type of project did you use it with?

DINO: An Arduino Uno. I used two of these in the Photon robot.

NAN: What new technologies excite you and why?

DINO: Organic light-emitting diodes (OLEDs). They’ll totally change the way we manufacture and use digital displays.

I envision a day when you can go buy your big-screen TV that you’ll bring home in a cardboard tube, unroll it, and place it on the wall. The processor and power supply will reside on the floor, out of the way, and a single cable will go to the panel. The power consumption will be a fraction of today’s LCD or plasma displays and they’ll be featherweight by comparison. They’ll be used to display advertising on curved surfaces anywhere you like. Cell phone displays will be curved and flexible.

How about a panoramic set of virtual reality goggles or a curved display in a flight simulator? Once the technology gets out of the “early adopter” phase, prices will come down and you’ll own that huge TV for a fraction of what you pay now. One day we might even go to a movie and view it on a super-huge OLED panorama screen.

NAN: Final question. If you had a full year and a good budget to work on any design project you wanted, what would you build?

DINO: There’s a project I’ve wanted to build for some time now: A flight simulator based on the one used in Google Earth. I would use a PC to run the simulator and build a full-on seat-inside enclosure with all the controls you would have in a jet airplane. There are a lot of keyboard shortcuts for a Google flight simulator that could be triggered by switches connected to various controls (e.g., rudder pedals, flaps, landing gear, trim tabs, throttle, etc.). I would use the Arduino Leonardo as the controller for the peripheral switches because it can emulate a USB keyboard. Just program it, plug it into a USB port along with a joystick, build a multi-panel display (or use that OLED display I dream of), and go fly!

Google Earth’s flight simulator also lets you fly over the surface of Mars! Not only would this be fun to build and fly, it would also be a great educational tool. It’s definitely on the Hack A Week project list!

Editor’s Note: This article also appears in the Circuit Cellar’s upcoming March issue, which focuses on robotics. The March issue will soon be available for membership download or single-issue purchase.

 

High-Tech Halloween

Still contemplating Halloween ideas? Do you have a costume yet? Is your house trick-or-treat ready? Perhaps some of these high-tech costumes and decorations will help get you in the spirit.

Recent Circuit Cellar interviewee Jeremy Blum designed a creative and high-tech costume that includes 12 individually addressable LEDs, an Adafruit microcontroller, and 3-D printing.

Skull_Side_Full_IMG_0067

Custom animatronic skull

RavenSide2Armature_IMG_0015

Animatronic talking raven

Looking for Halloween decoration inspiration? Peter Montgomery designed some programmable servo animation controllers built around a Freescale Semiconductor 68HC11 microcontroller and a Parallax SX28 configurable controller.

Peter’s Windows-based plastic skull is animated with RC servos controlled via a custom system. It moves at 24 or 30 frames per second over a custom RS-485 network.
This animatronic talking raven features a machined aluminum armature and moves via RC servos. The servos are controlled by a custom system using Windows and embedded controllers.

Peter’s Halloween projects were originally featured in “Servo Animation Controller” (Circuit Cellar 188, 2006). He displays the Halloween projects every year.

Feeling inspired? Share your tech-based Halloween projects with us.

New Product: Parallax Debuts Three New Products

Parallax, which designs and manufactures microcontroller development tools and small single-board computers, recently introduced three new products, the Single Relay Board, the SCP1000 Pressure Sensor Module, and the Propeller Mini.

You can use the Single Relay Board to turn lights, fans, and other devices on or off while keeping them isolated from your microcontroller. The Single Relay Board’s on-board relay enables you to control high-power devices (up to 10 A). The relay’s control is provided via a 1 x 3 header that works well with servomotor cables and conveniently connects to many development boards.

The SCP1000 Pressure Sensor Module is an absolute pressure sensor capable of detecting atmospheric pressure from 30 to 120 kPa. The sensor also provides temperature data. A single multiplication operation using constants obtains pressure data in kilopascals or temperature in degrees Celsius. The pressure data is internally calibrated and temperature compensated. The SCP1000 features four measurement modes in addition to Standby and Power Down mode. A SPI bus handles the sensor’s communication and provides additional control lines (e.g., interrupt line and trigger input).

The Propeller Mini can embed a multi-core microcontroller system in small-sized projects where a full-sized development board is impractical. With its small size and component count, the Propeller enables you to have a complete prototyping system or project while maintaining a small footprint.

The Propeller features many options. For breadboarding, you can solder the included header onto the board. To keep your project’s control system small, you could solder your project’s wire leads directly to the board’s through holes. You can also solder sockets onto the Propeller Mini, enabling it to plug into a prototyping board containing your sensors and other components.

The Single Relay Board costs $9.99. The SCP1000 Pressure Sensor Module and the Propeller Mini cost $24.99.

Parallax, Inc.

www.parallax.com

Client Profile: Parallax, Inc.

Parallax P8X32A Propeller chips

Parallax, Inc.
599 Menlo Drive
Rocklin, CA 95765

www.parallaxsemiconductor.com
www.parallax.com

Contact: Emily Kurze
ekurze@parallax.com

Embedded Products/Services: Parallax P8X32A Propeller chip (Part #P8X32A-Q44), Propeller family. The P8X32A Propeller chip is Parallax’s 8-core, 32-bit, 80-MHz microcontroller. P8X32A Quickstart (Part #40000), Quickstart family. The P8X32A Quickstart board, featuring the Propeller chip, is everything you need to begin designing Propeller-based applications.

Product Information: The P8X32A Propeller chip is a modern, easy-to-use and a powerful multicore microcontroller that has the flexibility to propel your design to the next tier of performance and reliability. With eight independent cores at your disposal, developers can easily instantiate any number of custom soft-peripherals from Parallax’s Object Exchange library to enable the chip to fill nearly any role. From generating graphics for a control system’s VGA display to managing fly-by-wire avionics equipment, the 80-MHz Propeller chip makes short work of embedded applications that require real-time execution.

Parallax Propeller QuickStart Board #40000

Autonomous Mobile Robot (Part 1): Overview & Hardware

Welcome to “Robot Boot Camp.” In this two-part article series, I’ll explain what you can do with a basic mobile machine, a few sensors, and behavioral programming techniques. Behavioral programming provides distinct advantages over other programming techniques. It is independent of any environmental model, and it is more robust in the face of sensor error, and the behaviors can be stacked and run concurrently.

My objectives for my recent robot design were fairly modest. I wanted to build a robot that could cruise on its own, avoid obstacles, escape from inadvertent collisions, and track a light source. I knew that if I could meet such objective other more complex behaviors would be possible (e.g., self-docking on low power). There certainly many commercial robots on the market that could have met my requirements. But I decided that my best bet would be to roll my own. I wanted to keep things simple, and I wanted to fully understand the sensors and controls for behavioral autonomous operation. The TOMBOT is the fruit of that labor (see Photo 1a). A colleague came up with the name TOMBOT in honor of its inventor, and the name kind of stuck.

Photo 1a—The complete TOMBOT design. b—The graphics display is nice feature.

In this series of articles, I’ll present lessons learned and describe the hardware/software design process. The series will detail TOMBOT-style robot hardware and assembly, as well as behavior programming techniques using C code. By the end of the series, I’ll have covered a complete behavior programming library and API, which will be available for experimentation.

DESIGN BASICS

The TOMBOT robot is certainly minimal, no frills: two continuous-rotation, variable-speed control servos; two IR (850 nm) analog distance measurement sensors (4- to 30-cm range); two CdS photoconductive cells with good lux response in visible spectrum; and, finally, a front bumper (switch-activated) for collision detection. The platform is simple: servos and sensors on the left and right side of two level platforms. The bottom platform houses bumper, batteries, and servos. The top platform houses sensors and microcontroller electronics. The back part of the bottom platform uses a central skid for balance between the two servos (see Photo 1).

Given my background as a Microchip Developer and Academic Partner, I used a Microchip Technology PIC32 microcontroller, a PICkit 3 programmer/debugger, and a free Microchip IDE and 32-bit complier for TOMBOT. (Refer to the TOMBOT components list at the end of this article.)

It was a real thrill to design and build a minimal capability robot that can—with stacking programming behaviors—emulate some “intelligence.” TOMBOT is still a work in progress, but I recently had the privilege of demoing it to a first grade class in El Segundo, CA, as part of a Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) initiative. The results were very rewarding, but more on that later.

BEHAVIORAL PROGRAMMING

A control system for a completely autonomous mobile robot must perform many complex information-processing tasks in real time, even for simple applications. The traditional method to building control systems for such robots is to separate the problem into a series of sequential functional components. An alternative approach is to use behavioral programming. The technique was introduced by Rodney Brooks out of the MIT Robotics Lab, and it has been very successful in the implementation of a lot of commercial robots, such as the popular Roomba vacuuming. It was even adopted for space applications like NASA’s Mars Rover and military seekers.

Programming a robot according to behavior-based principles makes the program inherently parallel, enabling the robot to attend simultaneously to all hazards it may encounter as well as any serendipitous opportunities that may arise. Each behavior functions independently through sensor registration, perception, and action. In the end, all behavior requests are prioritized and arbitrated before action is taken. By stacking the appropriate behaviors, using arbitrated software techniques, the robot appears to show (broadly speaking) “increasing intelligence.” The TOMBOT modestly achieves this objective using selective compile configurations to emulate a series of robot behaviors (i.e., Cruise, Home, Escape, Avoid, and Low Power). Figure 1 is a simple model illustration of a behavior program.

Figure 1: Behavior program

Joseph Jones’s Robot Programming: A Practical Guide to Behavior-Based Robotics (TAB Electronics, 2003) is a great reference book that helped guide me in this effort. It turns out that Jones was part of the design team for the Roomba product.

Debugging a mobile platform that is executing a series of concurrent behaviors can be daunting task. So, to make things easier, I implemented a complete remote control using a wireless link between the robot and a PC. With this link, I can enable or disable autonomous behavior, retrieve the robot sensor status and mode of operations, and curtail and avoid potential robot hazard. In addition to this, I implemented some additional operator feedback using a small graphics display, LEDs, and a simple sound buzzer. Note the TOMBOT’s power-up display in Photo 1b. We take Robot Boot Camp very seriously.

Minimalist System

As you can see in the robot’s block diagram (see Figure 2), the TOMBOT is very much a minimalist system with just enough components to demonstrate autonomous behaviors: Cruise, Escape, Avoid, and Home. All these behaviors require the use of left and right servos for autonomous maneuverability.

Figure 2: The TOMBOT system

The Cruise behavior just keeps the robot in motion in lieu of any stimulus. The Escape behavior uses the bumper to sense a collision and then 180° spin with reverse. The Avoid behavior makes use of continuous forward-looking IR sensors to veer left or right upon approaching a close obstacle. The Home behavior utilizes the front optical photocells to provide robot self-guidance to a strong light highly directional source. It all should add up to some very distinct “intelligent” operation. Figure 3 depicts the basic sensor and electronic layout.

Figure 3: Basic sensor and electronic layout

TOMBOT Assembly

The TOMBOT uses the low-cost robot platform (ArBot Chassis) and wheel set (X-Wheel assembly) from Budget Robotics (see Figure 4).

Figure 4: The platform and wheel set

A picture is worth a thousand words. Photo 2 shows two views of the TOMBOT prototype.

Photo 2a: The TOMBOT’s Sharp IR sensors, photo assembly, and more. b: The battery pack, right servo, and more.

Photo 2a shows dual Sharp IR sensors. Just below them is the photocell assembly. It is a custom board with dual CdS GL5528 photoconductive cells and 2.2-kΩ current-limiting resistors. Below this is a bumper assembly consisting of two SPDT Snap-action switches with lever (All Electronics Corp. CAT# SMS-196, left and right) fixed to a custom pre-fab plastic front bumper. Also shown is the solderless breakout board and left servo. Photo 2b shows the rechargeable battery pack that resides on the lower base platform and associated power switch. The electronics stack is visible. Here the XBee/Buzzer and graphics card modules residing on the 32-bit Experimenter. The Experimenter is plugged into a custom carrier board that allows for an interconnection to the solderless breakout to the rest of the system. Finally, note that the right servo is highlighted. The total TOMBOT package is not ideal; but remember, I’m talking about a prototype, and this particular configuration has held up nicely in several field demos.

I used Parallax (Futaba) continuous-rotation servos. They use a three-wire connector (+5 V, GND, and Control).

Figure 5 depicts a second-generation bumper assembly.  The same snap-action switches with extended levers are bent and fashioned to interconnect a bumper assembly as shown.

Figure 5: Second-generation bumper assembly

TOMBOT Electronics

A 32-bit Micro Experimenter is used as the CPU. This board is based the high-end Microchip Technology PIC32MX695F512H 64-pin TQFP with 128-KB RAM, 512-KB flash memory, and an 80-MHz clock. I did not want to skimp on this component during the prototype phase. In addition the 32-bit Experimenter supports a 102 × 64 monographic card with green/red backlight controls and LEDs. Since a full graphics library was already bundled with this Experimenter graphics card, it also represented good risk reduction during prototyping phase. Details for both cards are available on the Kiba website.

The Experimenter supports six basic board-level connections to outside world using JP1, JP2, JP3, JP4, BOT, and TOP headers.  A custom carrier board interfaces to the Experimenter via these connections and provides power and signal connection to the sensors and servos. The custom carrier accepts battery voltage and regulates it to +5 VDC. This +5 V is then further regulated by the Experimenter to its native +3.3-VDC operation. The solderless breadboard supports a resistor network to sense a +9-V battery voltage for a +3.3-V PIC processor. The breadboard also contains an LM324 quad op-amp to provide a buffer between +3.3-V logic of the processor and the required +5-V operation of the servo. Figure 6 is a detailed schematic diagram of the electronics.

Figure 6: The design’s circuitry

A custom card for the XBee radio carrier and buzzer was built that plugs into the Experimenter’s TOP and BOT connections. Photo 3 shows the modules and the carrier board. The robot uses a rechargeable 1,600-mAH battery system (typical of mid-range wireless toys) that provides hours of uninterrupted operation.

Photo 3: The modules and the carrier board

PIC32 On-Chip Peripherals

The major PIC32 peripheral connection for the Experimenter to rest of the system is shown. The TOMBOT uses PWM for servo, UART for XBee, SPI and digital for LCD, analog input channels for all the sensors, and digital for the buzzer and bumper detect. The key peripheral connection for the Experimenter to rest of the system is shown in Figure 7.

Figure 7: Peripheral usage

The PIC32 pinouts and their associated Experimenter connections are detailed in Figure 8.

Figure 8: PIC32 peripheral pinouts and EXP32 connectors

The TOMBOT Motion Basics and the PIC32 Output Compare Peripheral

Let’s review the basics for TOMBOT motor control. The servos use the Parallax (Futaba) Continuous Rotation Servos. With two-wheel control, the robot motion is controlled as per Table 1.

Table 1: Robot motion

The servos are controlled by using a 20-ms (500-Hz) pulse PWM pattern where the PWM pulse can from 1.0 ms to 2.0 ms. The effects on the servos for the different PWM are shown in Figure 9.

Figure 9: Servo PWM control

The PIC32 microcontroller (used in the Experimenter) has five Output Compare modules (OCX, where X =1 , 2, 3, 4, 5). We use two of these peripherals, specifically OC3, OC4 to generate the PWM to control the servo speed and direction. The OCX module can use either 16 Timer2 (TMR2) or 16 Timer3 (TMR3) or combined as 32-bit Timer23 as a time base and for period (PR) setting for the output pulse waveform. In our case, we are using Timer23 as a PR set to 20 ms (500 Hz). The OCXRS and OCXR registers are loaded with a 16-bit value to control width of the pulse generated during the output period. This value is compared against the Timer during each period cycle. The OCX output starts high and then when a match occurs OCX logic will generate a low on output. This will be repeated on a cycle-by-cycle basis (see Figure 10).

Figure 10: PWM generation

Next Comes Software

We set the research goals and objectives for our autonomous robot. We covered the hardware associated with this robot and in the next installment we will describe the software and operation.

Tom Kibalo holds a BSEE from City College of New York and an MSEE from the University of Maryland. He as 39 years of engineering experience with a number of companies in the Washington, DC area. Tom is an adjunct EE facility member for local community college, and he is president of Kibacorp, a Microchip Design Partner.