The system, the blurb states, was designed for use in 'space' applications, that increases it's unsuitability for 'earth' use.
1. Not one-man portable: the diameter of the device is extremely large also how would you grip it; 2. It can be quickly rendered partially inoperative with heavy paint; 3. It can be rendered completely inoperative by jamming it's WiFi radio/communications systems - which also divulges it's operating range on manual. These days model/toy robots/aircraft use 11-13 channels and effectively block their (and your) use. A $10 GPS (L1 and L2) jammer would do this, too; 4. Since it is light, that implies an adversary could lift one end, stand it on the other end, and the device would stop; 5. At 10 km/h the speed is low; 6. The security is poor - screw fasteners aren't the answer; 7. IR radiation is very easy to detect and jam; 8. It's travel over water is slow, and it's travel on ice covered snow is likely nil; 9. The cameras CANNOT give a horizontal 360 degree field of vision - which means there are dead spots around the circumference of the machine where an attack could be made; 10. You claim sensors for: radioactivity, gas, humidity, flame, heat and smoke detection, biological material, explosives, narcotics. Of these five or six require access externally to work - which breaks the 'hermetically sealed' qualification; 11. According to patent 20110060492 (unchallenged) you use a drive belt for main motion and another belt for pendulum motion. These are weak points - and used in other US patents issued prior to yours; 12. It isn't suitable for many security environments, and in many jurisdictions these environments include guns. My guess is three or four rounds, max, would make it a dead Groundbot.
Q1. How does a 'hermetically sealed' entity detect gas? Q2. What is the distance (metres) between the operator and the device using manual control? Q3. How is charging achieved? Your patent filing shows a standalone charger.
It is not my intention to pee on your parade but I have just completed testing a spherical 'robot' for a customer and all the tests I imposed are very fresh in my mind. (I was their test sub-contractor.)
The final version of their robot had no pendulum, employed direct drive (250W motor), achieved over 7 knots in water, over 17 km/h on paved road, could jump over obstacles 24 cm in height and can turn in a circle with less than a radius of the length of the robot. It, too, uses the transverse support system.
The whole thing is run by multiple PicAXE, to be replaced with PIC, microprocessors. The communication uses three mediums one of which can be used for downloading software updates.
I realise this post will not live long, but that's OK, Google will have it. If you want further (free) input, do a search for Fung.Pee@ and messages will reach me.
