[HN Gopher] CARA - High precision robot dog using rope
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       CARA - High precision robot dog using rope
        
       https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8s9TjRz01fo
        
       Author : hakonjdjohnsen
       Score  : 279 points
       Date   : 2025-07-23 17:38 UTC (5 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.aaedmusa.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.aaedmusa.com)
        
       | hakonjdjohnsen wrote:
       | See also the youtube video about the project:
       | https://youtu.be/8s9TjRz01fo
        
         | PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
         | The linked page has that video embedded.
        
       | btbuildem wrote:
       | I've watched and re-watched Aaed's videos on the capstan drive,
       | it's great stuff. High speed, high torque, compliance,
       | effectively no backlash. It's fascinating to watch a legit
       | engineering mind at work.
        
         | DeepSeaTortoise wrote:
         | He's easily one of my favorite content creators. Ofc, there are
         | much better engineers, domain experts or more entertaining
         | people on youtube, but he strikes a very enjoyable balance.
         | 
         | I wanted to start writing a list of other tech related, pop-sci
         | and industrial-design Youtubers I kinda enjoy, but noticed just
         | how many channels I'm subscribed to... If there's any interest,
         | I'll drop it, just tell me. Meanwhile I have some filtering and
         | sorting to do.
        
         | Lerc wrote:
         | I recently found his videos also. It's one of those things that
         | gets my mind bubbling with ideas for things I want to make,
         | never enough time to do them all though (and this breadboard
         | beside me is asking for attention)
         | 
         | It does make me wonder about the algorithm, Quite a lot of
         | things I find on Youtube turn up on HN a week or two later. I'm
         | not sure if this is an indicator of the effectiveness or
         | failure of the algorithm. It is definitely succeeding in
         | finding videos popular with some people and showing it to more
         | who might share that interest. The question is, are the things
         | I (and consequently many others of similar interests) see the
         | best of all there is, or a subset of the excellent videos out
         | there that happen to get noticed.
         | 
         | I sometimes find channels that are years old with a goldmine of
         | good information. That suggests that there is more good stuff
         | out there than what I see. Were they just unlucky that I didn't
         | see them before? Am I lucky to be seeing them now? It also
         | might be that it is not luck but the algorithm has arbitrarily
         | decided that the video has some special factor that requires
         | promotion or that I have passed some arbitrary threshold of
         | perceived character development that makes me supposedly now
         | interested in such things.
        
         | adolph wrote:
         | I haven't watched the one about the dog, but the one with the
         | initial explication of capstan drives [0] was excellent. I've
         | been dreaming about it for the last year, especially since
         | about the same time another person started working with the da
         | Vinci robot actuators which use cables to generate find motion.
         | 
         | 0. High Precision Speed Reducer Using Rope:
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwIBTbumd1Q
         | 
         | 1. Building a DIY Surgical Robot
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d_8rHKrwr-Q
        
       | oc1 wrote:
       | Ai, robots, where are we heading? Not far until ai + robot will
       | replace humans
        
         | A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 wrote:
         | I don't think it is fair to downvote this comment. It is a
         | genuine concern and should be addressed. Amusingly, given that
         | the thought has entered mass consciousness by means of question
         | on 'whether all this is a simulation', matrix ( the animated
         | series ) explored this question a little and it is interesting
         | in how the timeline aligns with what the movie presented.
        
           | asoneth wrote:
           | > It is a genuine concern and should be addressed.
           | 
           | No disagreement, but does the comment meaningfully contribute
           | to the discussion about this particular project?
        
           | falcor84 wrote:
           | That's an interesting reference, but do our timelines really
           | align with what was presented in (ani)matrix? Their timelines
           | are quite murky, but it seems that in their universe things
           | only started getting problematic between humans and AIs
           | around 2090 and The First Machine War started in 2139 [0].
           | With how fast things are progressing, it's not clear to me
           | that we have so much time.
           | 
           | [0] https://screenrant.com/matrix-timeline-year-future-when-
           | sett...
        
           | zuminator wrote:
           | It's absolutely a legitimate concern but since this robot
           | project has no chance of replacing humanity, it seems like a
           | derail in terms of the subject matter of the video. It's as
           | if someone posted a link to an incremental advancement in
           | graphene aluminum-ion battery tech and a person chimed in
           | with a general lament about heavy metal battery toxic waste
           | disposal.
        
         | nawgz wrote:
         | Definitely.
         | 
         | It's intellectually exciting.
         | 
         | On the flip side, capitalistic / private / special interests
         | both controlling the progress and having the most ability to
         | utilize it to further centralize power and wealth is deeply
         | concerning. We can already see more controversial figures
         | involved in AI using it to spread their personal viewpoints.
         | 
         | It feels really easy to see how our jobs/labor and therefore
         | our capital and therefore our value in the modern system are
         | being directly attacked by these capabilities and deeply
         | concerning to imagine how further centralization of power could
         | be good for the masses.
        
       | A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 wrote:
       | There is a weird mixture of hope and dread in me as I watch this.
       | I am ridiculously excited over a person like me being able to
       | mess around with something that, until recently, was gated
       | behind, well, a lot of hard problems to overcome ( I am only now
       | slowly getting through old Peter Scott's robotics to get some
       | perspective ). By comparison, it should be so much easier to
       | explore aspects of robotics that may go beyond strict math and
       | engineering.
        
         | bmau5 wrote:
         | Why dread?
        
       | fusionadvocate wrote:
       | Why spend so much effort to achieve an "exact" gear ratio? Having
       | more zeros does not equal to being more "precise".
       | 
       | Also, I wonder how resistant this mechanism is to wear and
       | fatigue.
        
         | skeeter2020 wrote:
         | >> Having more zeros does not equal to being more "precise"
         | 
         | Isn't having more decimal places the exact definition of
         | precision (vs accuracy)?
        
           | munchler wrote:
           | The point is that those decimal places don't have to be
           | zeros. 7.893 is just as precise as 8.001.
        
             | a3w wrote:
             | Yet for some reason unknown to me, people get annoyed when
             | you tell them ,,let us meet at 13:37. that is no more
             | accurate than let us meet at 14:00 hours"
        
         | sabareesh wrote:
         | That was confusing part of this video . May be there are some
         | limitation on the tools he uses to tune
        
           | dvt wrote:
           | I don't think the _number_ of the gear ratio really matters,
           | what matters is that you know what it actually _is_ (since
           | every IK calc depends on said ratio); 8:1 is probably
           | arbitrary and /or looks nice & might simplify some stuff.
        
             | eichin wrote:
             | It might be a lot easier to _check_ the ratio  "by hand"
             | (by counting rotations etc) if it's numerically simple.
             | (IIRC in some earlier videos he noticed that the pulley
             | size ratio wasn't producing the expected movement ratio,
             | _because_ they were built as an obvious 8:1 or 10:1 or
             | something, and didn 't match - which led to him figuring
             | out the subtleties of the design - I can easily imagine
             | wanting to preserve that aspect just for debugging, at that
             | point, even if you _now_ have correct math.)
        
         | michaelt wrote:
         | Well, it probably wasn't _that_ much effort. When you 're 3D
         | printing you're going to end up printing everything 2-3 times
         | _anyway_ , so why not dial in the ratio while you're at it?
         | 
         | And you can't really declare your design is "high precision"
         | and present yourself as someone others should take transmission
         | design advice from if you aimed for a gear ratio of 8 and
         | achieved "somewhere around 7.9 to 8.2"
        
           | LeifCarrotson wrote:
           | It probably doesn't matter so much whether it's 7.913 or
           | 8.186, but it would be important to know the exact value for
           | kinematics. One way to do that is to build an object very
           | accurately, the other is to build inaccurately and then
           | measure the result after the fact.
           | 
           | It's also interesting because competing actuators with
           | strain-wave, cycloidal, or planetary gearboxes will state
           | _exactly_ what the ratio is. The actual gear teeth may not be
           | spaced out perfectly around the circumference, but the number
           | of teeth is an integer with an infinite number of zeros.
        
             | tonyarkles wrote:
             | Yeah, I think one of the nice things about making it a
             | "clean" number (either an integer or a rational with a
             | small integer denominator) is that you can easily validate
             | it without needing high-precision measurement equipment:
             | put a mark on both gears (maybe even embedded in the 3D
             | print), line up the marks, rotate the large gear 1 full
             | rotation, and count the number of rotations the smaller
             | gear makes. Check to see if the marks line up perfectly
             | after those rotations.
        
         | throwawayffffas wrote:
         | I think it's about kinematics, the more precise your gears the
         | better the model fits the real world.
         | 
         | That's why pro crews don't use gears and ropes. At high
         | impulses deformations and elasticity throw the kinematics off
         | what's actually happening. Modeling the deformations and the
         | elasticity is a computational no no. Instead what you see is
         | the motors right on the joints.
         | 
         | At least that was the case last time I had a look at robotics.
        
           | PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
           | more than 30 years ago I was writing code for a "robotic"
           | device that used motors, directly on the joints.
           | 
           | the motors were so sloppy the company wasted a ton of money
           | [0] having me write heuristics to tackle the errors they
           | accumulated over several hours.
           | 
           | one of his whole points is that by using dyneema (rope),
           | there's almost no elasticity at all in the capstans.
           | 
           | [0] relative to the cost of better motors
        
           | michaelt wrote:
           | _> That 's why pro crews don't use gears and ropes. [...]
           | Instead what you see is the motors right on the joints._
           | 
           | The answer here, as with so many things in robotics, is: It
           | Depends.
           | 
           | UR10e robot arm that can lift a 4kg object with a reach of 1m
           | and has sub-1mm repeatability? Strain wave gears in the base
           | and shoulder joints, 100:1 ratio.
           | 
           | MIT Mini Cheetah robot dog that can do backflips? 6:1
           | planetary gearbox.
           | 
           | Shadow Hand with 20 degrees of freedom? Tendon driven, with
           | the 20 motors in the forearm to keep the fingers slim.
           | 
           | Little dinky Huggingface SO-101? Servo motors, integrating
           | 1:345 gearing with a series of 6 tiny brass gears.
           | 
           | Mid-price CNC milling machine, if you call that a robot?
           | Really long ballscrews, driven by stepper motors.
        
             | Joel_Mckay wrote:
             | In general, for some platforms each gear mechanism adds
             | backlash precision loss, lower energy efficiency, and might
             | not be back driven.
             | 
             | >Mid-price CNC milling machine
             | 
             | A ball-screw is mostly decorative on small machines... =3
        
       | AIorNot wrote:
       | Amazing presentation! - somebody hire this kid asap
       | 
       | https://www.aaedmusa.com/
        
         | abraae wrote:
         | I'm going to tell my 12 year old that when he leaves education
         | he wants something like this on his personal web site:
         | 
         | "CARA (Capstans Are Really Awesome) is my latest quadrupedal
         | robot, following ZEUS, ARES, and TOPS. Built over the course of
         | a year, CARA is easily my most dynamic and well-designed
         | quadruped yet."
        
         | andrewstuart wrote:
         | He might be perfectly happy doing projects and YouTube.
        
           | dvt wrote:
           | Likely makes more money, too!
        
             | geerlingguy wrote:
             | For many, no; taking on lots of sponsorships, you can make
             | a good amount of money (especially the ones where you agree
             | to do X posts across Y social media accounts for Z period
             | of time, essentially being fully sponsored across a large
             | swath of life).
             | 
             | But for a lot of tech/engineering channels, it'd be
             | immensely difficult to make the same salary as you could
             | working at a FAANG or the like. (I'm making about half what
             | I made when I had a W-2, but it's enough).
        
               | sitkack wrote:
               | You just need to start selling supplements, anti-aging
               | creams and time shares.
        
               | abtinf wrote:
               | Do fun projects of your choosing vs the grind of
               | corporate life.
               | 
               | The former has a rather large non-pecuniary component of
               | total compensation.
        
             | busymom0 wrote:
             | His current Patreon has 57 paid members. Unless he has
             | another revenue stream, I think he'd need more paid
             | members.
        
         | abtinf wrote:
         | That would be a terrible path for someone with this extreme
         | level of _demonstrated_ talent, motivation, and follow-through.
         | 
         | Much better for someone to fund a startup run by him.
        
       | TheBozzCL wrote:
       | Thanks for sharing this! What a treat of a video. It's a fun
       | project, and it's presented very well. This guy has a talent for
       | communication - the video was super clear and well explained. I
       | really admire that ability and I want to get better at it.
        
       | mikewarot wrote:
       | It's amazing what he's done in terms of the robotics, and the
       | presentation of it to the viewer. I'm amazed at the quality of
       | cinematography on the internet these days.
       | 
       | The implications of the tools we now make available for use in
       | our own personal workshops are still being discovered, and will
       | be for some time.
        
       | csours wrote:
       | Professor of Upstairs Neighboring.
       | https://youtu.be/8s9TjRz01fo?t=1128
        
       | micromacrofoot wrote:
       | I'm so excited for a smaller open source version of this, I'd
       | love to make one. What a great project.
        
       | andrewstuart wrote:
       | He's got the magic combination of tech skill plus ability to make
       | and edit entertaining videos.
        
       | heap_perms wrote:
       | Fascinating! I want to get into this type of stuff. But I have no
       | idea where to start, I just have just a CS degree and 3 years
       | experience as a developer.
        
         | taneq wrote:
         | Arduinos and hobby servos. No, neither of them are "industrial
         | grade" and yeah, you'll reach their limits pretty quickly, but
         | building a physical thing that does stuff is (in my experience)
         | a huge motivator.
         | 
         | Or if you're already all over the basics, figure out what kind
         | of stuff you want to build and then try and build it. :)
        
           | Paddywack wrote:
           | Can you recommend where to find beginners projects that "do
           | stuff".
        
             | Retr0id wrote:
             | Just like the article, there's a huge amount of hobbyist-
             | accessible projects on youtube, you can click around the
             | recommended videos.
        
             | sitkack wrote:
             | Grab a servo and start playing with it.
        
         | adolph wrote:
         | I recommend a Brachiograph build. It will introduce you to some
         | fundamentals of PWM and inverse kinematics. It is well
         | documented but not cookie-cutter. Using a Raspberry Pi will
         | give you more direct access to running the servos than the
         | microcontroller experience. All the parts are infinitely
         | reusable afterward if you don't want to keep it around.
         | 
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4Jh1daCl60
         | 
         | https://www.brachiograph.art/
         | 
         | https://github.com/evildmp/BrachioGraph                 Sample
         | Supply List for $80 budget:       Pi Zero with header $20:
         | https://www.adafruit.com/product/6008       Power supply $9:
         | https://www.adafruit.com/product/1995       SD Card $10:
         | https://www.adafruit.com/product/1294       Three hobby servos
         | $18: https://www.adafruit.com/product/169       Breadboard
         | wires $5: https://www.adafruit.com/product/153       Breadboard
         | $5: https://www.adafruit.com/product/64        Glue, popsicle
         | sticks, pen and paper $10
        
       | ZeWaka wrote:
       | Just saw this at Open Sauce last weekend! Super cool project,
       | looking at all the gearing was fascinating.
        
       | s_dev wrote:
       | Cara is the Irish word for 'friend'. Not sure if thats what was
       | intended or is just a coincidence.
        
       | srameshc wrote:
       | I remember a post previously related to him here on HN but I am
       | surprised at how I forgot about him and how cool he is to build
       | all these incredible stuff and also teaches in his videos. I am
       | subscribing so that I never miss anything from him again.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-07-23 23:00 UTC)