Tag Archives: Neil Gershenfeld

Morphing airplane wing

Long a science fiction trope, ‘morphing’, in this case, an airplane wing, is closer to reality with this work from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). From a Nov. 3, 2016 MIT news release (also on EurekAlert),

When the Wright brothers accomplished their first powered flight more than a century ago, they controlled the motion of their Flyer 1 aircraft using wires and pulleys that bent and twisted the wood-and-canvas wings. This system was quite different than the separate, hinged flaps and ailerons that have performed those functions on most aircraft ever since. But now, thanks to some high-tech wizardry developed by engineers at MIT and NASA, some aircraft may be returning to their roots, with a new kind of bendable, “morphing” wing.

The new wing architecture, which could greatly simplify the manufacturing process and reduce fuel consumption by improving the wing’s aerodynamics, as well as improving its agility, is based on a system of tiny, lightweight subunits that could be assembled by a team of small specialized robots, and ultimately could be used to build the entire airframe. The wing would be covered by a “skin” made of overlapping pieces that might resemble scales or feathers.

The new concept is described in the journal Soft Robotics, in a paper by Neil Gershenfeld, director of MIT’s Center for Bits and Atoms (CBA); Benjamin Jenett, a CBA graduate student; Kenneth Cheung PhD ’12, a CBA alumnus and NASA research scientist; and four others.

Researchers have been trying for many years to achieve a reliable way of deforming wings as a substitute for the conventional, separate, moving surfaces, but all those efforts “have had little practical impact,” Gershenfeld says. The biggest problem was that most of these attempts relied on deforming the wing through the use of mechanical control structures within the wing, but these structures tended to be so heavy that they canceled out any efficiency advantages produced by the smoother aerodynamic surfaces. They also added complexity and reliability issues.

By contrast, Gershenfeld says, “We make the whole wing the mechanism. It’s not something we put into the wing.” In the team’s new approach, the whole shape of the wing can be changed, and twisted uniformly along its length, by activating two small motors that apply a twisting pressure to each wingtip.

Like building with blocks

The basic principle behind the new concept is the use of an array of tiny, lightweight structural pieces, which Gershenfeld calls “digital materials,” that can be assembled into a virtually infinite variety of shapes, much like assembling a structure from Lego blocks. The assembly, performed by hand for this initial experiment, could be done by simple miniature robots that would crawl along or inside the structure as it took shape. The team has already developed prototypes of such robots.

The individual pieces are strong and stiff, but the exact choice of the dimensions and materials used for the pieces, and the geometry of how they are assembled, allow for a precise tuning of the flexibility of the final shape. For the initial test structure, the goal was to allow the wing to twist in a precise way that would substitute for the motion of separate structural pieces (such as the small ailerons at the trailing edges of conventional wings), while providing a single, smooth aerodynamic surface.

Building up a large and complex structure from an array of small, identical building blocks, which have an exceptional combination of strength, light weight, and flexibility, greatly simplifies the manufacturing process, Gershenfeld explains. While the construction of light composite wings for today’s aircraft requires large, specialized equipment for layering and hardening the material, the new modular structures could be rapidly manufactured in mass quantities and then assembled robotically in place.

Gershenfeld and his team have been pursuing this approach to building complex structures for years, with many potential applications for robotic devices of various kinds. For example, this method could lead to robotic arms and legs whose shapes could bend continuously along their entire length, rather than just having a fixed number of joints.

This research, says Cheung, “presents a general strategy for increasing the performance of highly compliant — that is, ‘soft’ — robots and mechanisms,” by replacing conventional flexible materials with new cellular materials “that are much lower weight, more tunable, and can be made to dissipate energy at much lower rates” while having equivalent stiffness.

Saving fuel, cutting emissions

While exploring possible applications of this nascent technology, Gershenfeld and his team consulted with NASA engineers and others seeking ways to improve the efficiency of aircraft manufacturing and flight. They learned that “the idea that you could continuously deform a wing shape to do pure lift and roll has been a holy grail in the field, for both efficiency and agility,” he says. Given the importance of fuel costs in both the economics of the airline industry and that sector’s contribution to greenhouse gas emissions, even small improvements in fuel efficiency could have a significant impact.

Wind-tunnel tests of this structure showed that it at least matches the aerodynamic properties of a conventional wing, at about one-tenth the weight.

The “skin” of the wing also enhances the structure’s performance. It’s made from overlapping strips of flexible material, layered somewhat like feathers or fish scales, allowing for the pieces to move across each other as the wing flexes, while still providing a smooth outer surface.

The modular structure also provides greater ease of both assembly and disassembly: One of this system’s big advantages, in principle, Gershenfeld says, is that when it’s no longer needed, the whole structure can be taken apart into its component parts, which can then be reassembled into something completely different. Similarly, repairs could be made by simply replacing an area of damaged subunits.

“An inspection robot could just find where the broken part is and replace it, and keep the aircraft 100 percent healthy at all times,” says Jenett.

Following up on the successful wind tunnel tests, the team is now extending the work to tests of a flyable unpiloted aircraft, and initial tests have shown great promise, Jenett says. “The first tests were done by a certified test pilot, and he found it so responsive that he decided to do some aerobatics.”

Some of the first uses of the technology may be to make small, robotic aircraft — “super-efficient long-range drones,” Gershenfeld says, that could be used in developing countries as a way of delivering medicines to remote areas.

Here’s a link to and a citation for the paper,

Digital Morphing Wing: Active Wing Shaping Concept Using Composite Lattice-Based Cellular Structures by Benjamin Jenett, Sam Calisch, Daniel Cellucci, Nick Cramer, Neil Gershenfeld, Sean Swei, and Kenneth C. Cheung. Soft Robotics. October 2016, ahead of print. doi:10.1089/soro.2016.0032. Published online: Oct. 26, 2016

This paper is open access.

O’Reilly Media’s Solid Conference in San Francisco, California from May 21-22, 2014

Given that O’Reilly Media is best known  (by me, anyway) for its publishing/writing conferences, the notice about their Solid Conference abut the ‘internet of things’, etc. was unexpected’. From the O’Reilly Media Feb. 26, 2014 news release,

The “punctuated equilibrium” theory asserts that rapid bursts of change upend the leisurely pace of species stasis, creating events that result in new species and leave few fossils behind.

Technology has reached the cusp of such an event. Call it the Internet of Things, the Age of Intelligent Devices, the Industrial Internet, the Programmable World, a neologism of your own choosing—it amounts to the same thing—the intersection of software, the Internet, big data, and physical objects. Ultimately, our entire environment will be connected and intelligent.

To mark this seachange moment, O’Reilly Media introduces Solid Conference, scheduled for May 21-22 at Fort Mason in San Francisco.

“As big data moves from the Web into the physical world, it’s more important than ever that people who deal with software and people who deal with hardware and machinery understand each other,” says Jon Bruner, who chairs Solid with MIT Media Lab’s Joi Ito. “Solid is about creating an interdisciplinary mix of the sort that everyone—designers, engineers, investors, researchers, entrepreneurs—will need to tap in the coming year.”

Chairs Ito and Bruner have drafted a stellar lineup of innovators, funders, and visionaries for the conference, including:

  • Astro Teller, Captain of Moonshots at Google[x]
  • Rodney Brooks, CTO and Chairman of Rethink Robotics
  • Tim O’Reilly, Founder and CEO of O’Reilly Media
  • Andra Keay, Managing Director at Silicon Valley Robotics
  • Carl Bass, CEO of Autodesk, Inc.
  • Moe Tanabian, Director of Mobile Technology at Samsung Mobile
  • Aurora Thornhill, Head of the Project Specialist Team at Kickstarter
  • Ayah Bdeir, Founder and CEO of littleBits
  • Matthew Gardiner, Artist and Senior Lead Researcher at Ars Electronica Futurelab
  • Neil Gershenfeld, Director of the MIT Center for Bits and Atoms
  • Brian Gerkey, CEO of Open Source Robotics Foundation
  • Renee DiResta, Principal at OATV
  • Timothy Prestero, Founder and CEO of Design that Matters
  • Janos Veres, Manager of the Printed Electronics Team at PARC

Solid is more show than tell. “This isn’t about sitting in a conference room and getting your brain freeze-dried by PowerPoint presentations,” Bruner says. “You’ll see demonstrations of real networked products and participate in intensive colloquies with those leading us into this new era. People who come to Solid won’t just be attending a conference. They’ll be walking through a portal to a new world.”

Early registration discounts apply until March 20.

As expected, this is not a cheap conference; an early bird all access pass for the two-day conference is $1095.00 USD.

Here’s my recounting of the March 12, 2014 ‘Solid’ web presentation by Tim O’Reilly & Jim Stogdill.

11:01 am O’Reilly: Longstanding interest in ‘maker’ movement since early 2000’s .

11:03 am O’Reilly: everything is connected ‘internet of things’, big data, robotics, maker movement, etc.

11:05 Stogdill: not sure name Solid is bit enough to describe this upcoming conference

11:05 Stogdill: says hardware is malleable (?) … more accessible, i.e., parts are easier to access and it’s easier to customize

11:08 O’Reilly: moves to subject of design … massive dislocation due to computers, e.g. graphic design … we need process designers (?) .. collisions between specialties

11:09 O’Reilly: collective intelligence and man/machine symbiosis important ideas for our age

11:11 O’Reilly: how do we change the interaction with a thermostat … remove need for human input

11:14 Stodgill: business models not taking advantage of open source options

11:15 O’Reilly: different options for future such as Google/Apple/… Internet of things (proprietary model) or a freely interoperable system of things

11:17 Stodgill: shifting to robotics … integrate virtual/digital/macro worlds in their work and thinking

11:18 O’Reilly: our notion of robots is of autonomous (intelligent) devices but we are surrounded by robots, e.g., washing machine that aren’t autonomous

11:20 Stogdill: shifting to manufacturing … talking about frictionless manufacturing  … new relationship for Silicon Valley and China

11:23 O’Reilly: it doesn’t have to be China  .. all the relationships are changing

11:24 O’Reilly: replacing matter with mathematics

11:25 O’Reilly: how you remake an industry, e.g., Square which started as a hardware company which turns a phone into a point-of-sale system

11:29 Stogdill: change topic to surveillance and privacy .. digital thermostats recently put in Stogdill’s home  .. he had them taken them offline while he was on vacation as he didn’t want the info. on the internet while he was gone (?)

11:32 O’Reilly: not good to be afraid of the future .. Stogdill agrees

11:33 O’Reilly: solid is already big in agriculture .. sensors, robotics, etc.

11:42 O’Reilly: answer to my question (Will UK PM David Cameron’s latest ‘internet of things’ funding announcement have an impact on gov’t funding in US?) .. there’s already lots of government funding here [in US] e.g. Google purchases of DARPA-funded companies … didn’t see much impact other than it’s good when governments invest … [see March 10, 2014 article by Jessica Bland for the Guardian about Cameron’s announcement]

11:45 off my Twitter feed, a tweet that seems synchronous in a Carl Jung kind of way:

claireoconnell @claireoconnell

High-tech maker space TechShop planned for Ireland at DCU Innovation Campus #TechShopsiliconrepublic.com/innovation/ite…via @siliconrepublic et moi

11:46 O’Reilly: sees big ‘Solid’ innovation in industrial space rather than consumer space

11:48 Stogdill: love the idea of generativity, i.e., innovation from unexpected quarters

11:49 Question: What is the stuff that matters

11:49 Stogdill: health care

11:50 O’Reilly: yes, health care and the environment .. e.g., keeping track of elderly parent and talks about mother-in-law, many years ago, having a stroke and laying on floor for days because family was not in town

11:51: question: How do we manage hacking?

11:52: O’Reilly: you have to be considering security but thoughtfully … not trying to anticipate everything that can go wrong and creating rules to avoid the problem .. but putting some thought into what might go wrong and responding appropriately when something does happen …

11:54 Stogdill: there’s an asymmetry problem when things go digital .. e.g. if you want to throw a rock throw his [Stogdill’s] windows you have to be there physically … digitally, anyone from anywhere has access

11:55 Question: What do we need to know to get started (paraphrase)

11:55 O’Reilly: there are some great programmes at university but right now you can get at least as much by playing around

11:57 Question: Are you optimistic?

11:57 O’Reilly: Yes, I am optimistic… and we do have possibilities both positive and negative … most concerned about anti-science movement … worse case scenario: anti-science and anti-technology backlash hits just when water, climate change, and other issues become pressing …

11:59 Stogdill: James Watt thought they were building a steam engine but they also created modernism and many other isms

12 pm O’Reilly: Lots to be optimistic about and lots to care about

I don’t know if they’ll be making this video available but you can try looking here.

ETA March 17, 2014: You can find the video for the O’Reilly/Stogdill on the Solid YouTube playlist or you can go directly to the video here.