1. Thank you for visiting HeavyEquipmentForums.com! Our objective is to provide industry professionals a place to gather to exchange questions, answers and ideas. We welcome you to register using the "Register" icon at the top of the page. We'd appreciate any help you can offer in spreading the word of our new site. The more members that join, the bigger resource for all to enjoy. Thank you!
  2. ALL NEW MEMBERS READ THIS FIRST!! Thank you for joining Heavy Equipment Forums! If you are new to forums we communicate with "Threads", please search our threads to see if your topic may have already been answered and if not then click "Post New Thread" in the appropriate forum. This will allow all of our members to see your question and give you the best chance to be answered. After you've made a number of posts you will graduate to Full Member status where you'll see a few more privileges. Following these guidelines will help make this the best resource for heavy equipment on the net. Thanks for joining us and I hope you enjoy your stay!!

Autonomous Dozers

Discussion in 'Dozers' started by John C., Jul 31, 2017.

  1. John C.

    John C. Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Messages:
    8,117
    Occupation:
    Machinery & Equipment Appraiser
    Location:
    Northwest
    mikebramel likes this.
  2. Hobbytime

    Hobbytime Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2016
    Messages:
    714
    Location:
    usa
    this will be the future in almost any industry that has to deal with repetitive work in a local environment..just look how much automation in factories, and soon fast food and movie theaters, lowes and home depot have self check out lines..anything to cut down on human involvement is the future will go forward at a fast pace to save money..no sick time, no personal injuries, no vacations, no personal conflict with co workers..the list is endless,,there will be a learning curve and some goof ups along the way, but when the kinks are worked out many jobs world wide will be lost...
     
    balls2go likes this.
  3. DMiller

    DMiller Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2010
    Messages:
    8,656
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Hermann, Missouri
    I was around the years gone by when they tried this in the US as the early GPS controls came on(early 90's). Had a contract customer with machines that worked the rice fields SE MO, they tried driverless back then but failed as miserably as I suspect these will. Humans can spot hazards as to soft spots, crumbling rock and hear the noises that alert a alert operator that the machine is throwing up. Not all faults will code up as we all know, hard mechanical issues left unexamined quickly become finals reduced to grindings or running gear destroyed faster than can re-install. There is a place for a operator, there are places heartless unthinking autonomy fails to meet the mark.

    Goes back to cannot fix stupid, neither can a blind or fully deaf operator avoid the same problems. RC trains, RC highway trucks I can see but with caveats. For offroad there are a quandary of unassociable pitfalls that cannot be machine addressed.
     
    balls2go likes this.
  4. crane operator

    crane operator Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2009
    Messages:
    4,680
    Location:
    sw missouri
    I recently read a article on cranes, and the idea was to outfit the cranes with camera's, sensors, etc, and the "operator" isn't even on the site, run remotely. The last part of the article then stated that they could even have just one operator, running multiple cranes at multiple sites, all by remote. Of course written by a engineer, where it all looks great on paper.......
     
    balls2go likes this.
  5. DMiller

    DMiller Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2010
    Messages:
    8,656
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Hermann, Missouri
    The nuke I worked at was written in by engineers to only need 100 people to run it. At last count over 750 worked there with an additional 1-2000 for refuels.
     
  6. Buckethead

    Buckethead Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2007
    Messages:
    1,038
    Occupation:
    Operator
    Location:
    Porkchop City
    How does a remote operator inspect all those cranes, if he's not even there?
     
  7. crane operator

    crane operator Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2009
    Messages:
    4,680
    Location:
    sw missouri
    The machine's are perfectly engineered, why would you need to inspect them, you're just being silly now, what could go wrong? :rolleyes:
     
    mikebramel likes this.
  8. catman13

    catman13 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2011
    Messages:
    316
    Occupation:
    refrigeration engineer/excavation contractor
    Location:
    oregon usa
    hows does he know when things are not right for the lift? some camera or bad sensor says is it fine and now you have fatality's because it went bad , not on my watch
     
    Buckethead likes this.
  9. Scrub Puller

    Scrub Puller Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    Messages:
    3,481
    Location:
    Gladstone Queensland Australia
  10. DMiller

    DMiller Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2010
    Messages:
    8,656
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Hermann, Missouri
    Exactly the main issue, dependency on the written instructions and inability to fully visualize the site would be bad. I do not care for autonomy, too many conditional statements get made they cannot overcome just deal through. Machines need inspected, lubed, warmed up for use, cracks do appear, stresses do take their toll and unless the machine is educated as to how these develop and how to inspect are useless as taking a dweeb off the street and setting them in the cabs.
     
  11. Hobbytime

    Hobbytime Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2016
    Messages:
    714
    Location:
    usa
    then just for argument sake, there should be no crane accidents when humans operate them..but there are many accidents from humans and most of the time its human error that causes it..the crane operator takes a risk in wind or weight or is distracted on his cell phone or something else that a computer wont have..where a sensor would shut down the crane if any of those factors were present...automatics has its place and will be the future in more areas...but the companies figure the money saved from paying salaries and possibly avoiding human error are worth the risk for the payback..unfortunately technology is here to stay..
     
  12. John C.

    John C. Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Messages:
    8,117
    Occupation:
    Machinery & Equipment Appraiser
    Location:
    Northwest
    In today's world can a sensor be bad and the machine computer not know about it.

    How many cranes have tipped over because of a failure in the LMI? How often does an operator inspect the frame of any crane for cracks? How many mines large enough to utilize a D11T will have soft spots where they can get stuck?

    How can you compare what a piece of heavy equipment does in relation to an autonomous car or truck driving down the road in terms of safety?
     
    mikebramel likes this.
  13. Hobbytime

    Hobbytime Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2016
    Messages:
    714
    Location:
    usa
    All true, but that doesnt matter to the bean counters that run the corporations, when they show the money saved to perceived risk, they will take it..when there is a catastrophic failure they will reevaluate and go from there...perfect example is telsa cars.. they had a failure with death and they are still being sold and will continue to push driver less cars... the argument can go both ways..im not pushing automation, but its coming and its the future, it wont get rid of all operators, but in a controlled environment like a mine that digs the same day after day...it will be the first areas to go driver less...look at all the factories that are automated..years ago everyone said it wouldnt happen..guess what it did..this is just the next phase..it wont happen overnite..
     
  14. John C.

    John C. Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Messages:
    8,117
    Occupation:
    Machinery & Equipment Appraiser
    Location:
    Northwest
    Hobbytime, I'm agreeing with you.

    Right now there are driverless farm tractors tending fields in Kansas and Nebraska with a nerd on a computer screen overseeing multiple machine operations.
     
    Hobbytime likes this.
  15. DMiller

    DMiller Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2010
    Messages:
    8,656
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Hermann, Missouri
    As to those automated assembly lines, a friend works for Fiat Chrysler, he drives and stays at Belvedere Il for weeks on end then comes home as can. They attempted to automate the lines for body weld assembly, was fine until the first glitch, destroyed three days production run of body shells, welds in wrong spots, failure to adequately fuse, these made it thru to paint where they started falling apart in the paint vats. They had five personnel trying to do QA on these as the machines churned them out, failed to catch them then had to shut down for two weeks to determine Which robotic welder had sneezed out of fifty of them.

    Machine in question had a tight bearing on a rotation joint, would slip and set erratic position indications, then slip back and run as normal. Machine had no idea it was FUBAR.

    Line is still automated but there are now seventeen techs walking the floor and fifteen QA associates looking over the bodies. Oddly in that there were only 30 personnel on the floor swinging spot welders and four QA prior to automation.
     
    Tarhe Driver and balls2go like this.
  16. Birken Vogt

    Birken Vogt Charter Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    3,146
    Location:
    Grass Valley, Ca
    They can probably spit out more units per hour though. That is what automation is all about, being able to produce more with less people or alternately the same people can produce more than ever before.

    In an ideal world, this means everybody has more of x for cheaper than was possible before.

    Although getting from where we are now to there can be painful for certain people who are not up to the task of moving from spot welding into a QA position, for instance.

    Just like always, the individual has to be able to be nimble to move to where the work exists, and not count on somebody else giving him a "job".
     
    StanRUS likes this.
  17. DMiller

    DMiller Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2010
    Messages:
    8,656
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Hermann, Missouri
    Got a point.
     
  18. Hobbytime

    Hobbytime Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2016
    Messages:
    714
    Location:
    usa
    one of the biggest complaints from machine operators I noticed here was getting beat up on a machine over time,,that leads to sick time, or workers comp claims, physical injury and if you cant work disability..now if you could eliminate all that and the expense that goes along with it, add on all the no shows and down time on equipment, coffee breaks, cigarette breaks and so on..a computer will give you 12 solid hours of nonstop work..if it wasnt worth it the companies would not pursue automation... im sure there are plenty of down side items with automation...it sux for the person whose job is replaced by a computer or robot and cant get retrained to another job..but its much easier to control a computer than a human..and lets not forget rough handling of the machinery, you know the old beat the heII out of it because it aint mine...a computer wont do that either.. all this tech is not for the benefit of the worker, its for the benefit of the owner or whoever the bottom line is good for,,and they call this progress....:(
     
    balls2go likes this.
  19. lantraxco

    lantraxco Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2009
    Messages:
    6,684
    Location:
    Elsewhen
    Sensors fail all the time without throwing a code, as long as it's within normal range limits, it can be anywhere in that range, so you can have up to 100% error and the computer will accept it as gospel. How about an anemometer with a bad bearing that only reads five or six mph when the wind is actually blowing forty? Redundancy can lead to redundant errors. Nothing is foolproof, the universe keeps breeding smarter fools.
     
    Buckethead, balls2go and DMiller like this.
  20. DMiller

    DMiller Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2010
    Messages:
    8,656
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Hermann, Missouri
    So agree so agree.