Durability of analog vs. electronic robots?

Question

The setting is just like earth.

If we could build a fully functioning humanoid robot out of either a fictional analog material, or an electronic/digital processor and material, which would be more durable?

My presumption is that due to the extreme precision required to machine the parts in an analog machine of this complexity, and have them all intermesh so precisely; the analog version would be less durable. One well-placed strike may jam up a gear or break a fluid line. The one using electronic components seems to be the more durable plan.

Is this assumption realistic?

Answer 1

It all depends on the safety margins considered into the design: when you hear people complaining that things in the past lasted way longer than today, it's also because they were built with larger safety margins due to the greater ignorance on the properties of the used materials.

For mechanical devices, a formula 1 engine is very sensitive to even a small deviation from the design conditions: I remember a car which blew up during the race because some leaves obstructed part of the radiators. On the other hand, heavy duty engines are less picky on their working condition.

Same goes for electronic: a 7 nm gate transistor can easily be damaged by overheating or electrostatic discharge, while an old 1 micron gate transistor will tolerate much more.

Also, keep in mind that a fully electronic robot can't do much: it will need some mechanical part to physically interact with the world beside spitting out voltage or current.

Answer 2

What is a robot ?

There are numerous types of modern "robot". You have robots that are moving, robots which remain stationary. You have industrial robots, military robots.. You have toy robots, that look like robots and only move. There are advanced biped and quadruped robots, made for amusement purposes. Medical robots doing surgery. Most of that would be completely out of reach for mechanical technology. Safety is an issue.. complexity, reliability..

But you also have windmills and looms, which are mechanical devices that can do a supervised task. In fact these are robot-like. Like a clock runs. Let's do a gradual buildup of the complexity, else, "mechanics" would will be out of reach soon..

Definition 1: A robot is a device with moving parts.

Any motor is a robot, any artificial motion is robotics. When we would apply this definition, anything goes. Trains are quite durable, some run 50-80 years. Electronics with moving parts, like record players and CD players have a shorter lifetime, but they tend to keep functioning. For the basic requirement of "moving and artificial" both technologies can be durable.

Toy robots, that only look like robots, mostly android robots, fall into this category too.. 20th century toy robots move and flicker their lights, 80% mechanics. They were not really durable, most ended up damaged. I kept them for years. Nowadays, you have robotics toolkits for computer savant kids. See definition 4 below, that's another league !

Definition 2: A robot is a device which can do a supervised task.

This will limit the number of "robots" considerably. But looking at the two aspects, "moving" and "supervised task", there are numerous devices we don't call "robot", which meet both requirements.

The power loom (1787) is an example of a 100% mechanical apparatus doing a quite complicated task. In fact you could call a clock a robot. As far as I know mechanical clocks and watches have proved to be - at least - as durable as electronic clocks and electronic watches. We actually don't know this yet. Generally available electric clocks (wrist watches) have existed for only 75 years or so, less than a century. Electronics could be more vulnerable on the long term, requiring a specific type of batteries to be replaced.. mechanics does not suffer from that issue.

Definition 3: A robot is a device performing a task unsupervised

Now we are in the realm of modern robots. A lot of industrial robots are actually deployed with this purpose. To perform a task previously done by a human, quicker and more hours in a row. An industrial robot can open up possibilities, enable certain processes that would not be possible with human hands only. Still, a 6 year old would hardly recognize a Mitutoyo arm as "robot".

This class of robots is not out of reach for a mechanical level of technology. In the age of "mechanization" it was the primary development goal. Before 1950, mass production existed.. very sophisticated mechanical work. But without the electronics, it is difficult to control it and dangerous to work with. During that age (1850-1950) there were numerous accidents with mechanical production lines, with mechanical solutions without safety limits. There were no prescribed safety limits and ISO-standards, like we have now.

Definition 4: A robot is a device that can autonomously perform a human task

An autopilot takes over control from the pilot. You could call it a robot, or you could call the autopilot-controlled aircraft a robot. In any case, it will take decisions, sometimes move around. Advanced industrial robots, or robots in hospitals can perform tasks previously done by humans. This area requires versatile, mobile robots that can be assigned tasks on the fly. Robots that assist industrial warehouses, robots that can pick up and transport goods inside a building. It could be done mechanically, with rails and tricks.. but it would become very complicated construction.

Definition 5: A robot is a device that can impersonate a human

In the virtual realm (games, films) there are numerous very credible designs. To create such a robot in real life remains a challenge, but some developments approach spectacular results. There exists no mechanical equivalent of this. A mechanical robot impersonating a human being would become too heavy to carry its own weight.

Answer 3

Here are some of my schemings about this from other questions. In these worlds, electronics have world-specific weaknesses that are worked around with older tech.

1. Radiation is tough on electronic parts. How do I explain that an interstellar spaceship still requires risky spacewalks?

For your spacefarers, radiation is a big problem for machines. Circuits go bad and self-repair mechanisms may not take them back to where they started. The damage radiation causes to electronics is almost insurmountable without impractically cumbersome shielding.

This means the AI and the antimatter containment mechanisms are the only machines on the ship - both hunkered down within multiple layers of different types of shielding. In addition to the spacewalks, human crew do routine maintenance and clean the ship. They cook their food over gas. They wash their laundry using clockwork mechanisms driven by springs. The ships weapons are cannons which propel solid projectiles via explosive charges.

Computer virus.

How would a treaty forbiding the use of automated weaponry change space combat?

This is an infection of AI and other computer systems. It is not clear how it is transmissible. Systems with no connection to other systems still can get infected; possibly the virus propagates through subspace. Back in the day this virus infected most or all of the AI combat systems and many other things besides. The virus does not just break things; it slaves the infected thing to an obscure mass mind, with obscure motives. Infected systems are unreliable, and instead of your goals infected systems may start pursing the goals of the virus.

The virus might be a weapon, or an evolved thing, or possibly a life form from somewhere else. Back in the day it took a systematic purge to get rid of this virus and result is a heavy reliance on biological systems, clockwork, vacuum tubes and other infection proof automations.

and a new one!

Clockwork robot has lots of padding.

It is indeed delicate. Its makers knew this. It has defenses. It is armored like a hockey goalie. Shock absorbers of many sizes cushion interior parts. Without its shock defenses it would be half its size and a third of its weight. It can go naked if circumstances require, but it is vulnerable.

Answer 4

Charles Babbage's [Difference Engine][1] was to be able to operate on "sixteen digits and six orders of difference." It required 25,000 parts and would have weighed four tons. It was a major undertaking, never completed.

A modern computer can handle... somewhat more than sixteen digits and includes what would at the time have been considered a mind-boggling amount of storage as well as the ability to execute program code, which the Difference Engine lacked. Even if you make the tiniest imaginable gears and levers, millions of them all perfectly manufactured so there are no broken chain links, etc, this is not a machine that would be able to trundle around. And of course, the tinier they are the faster they will wear out from friction against each other, or the more likely it is a single loose grain of sand or tiny broken off gear tooth or failure to lubricate properly could freeze up the whole thing.

However, that's if you adhere strictly to real-world rules. Writers of steampunk fiction routinely ignore these considerations for the sake of a good story, or figure out ways to cheat. For instance in "The Deep End" by Tyler Tork, there's a large mechanical computer that bypasses the limitations of mechanical computing by employing "magical registers" to do the heavy lifting.

Comparing electronics to moving parts in the same materials, however, with any real-world materials, the moving parts will wear down while the electronics will not, so absent any special perils peculiar to electronics, they will be more reliable.

If you want to get kind of -- I don't know what to call it -- atom-punk(?) though, you could envision mechanical computers with nano-scale components. Because the components are held together by atomic binding forces, they can't wear down and friction is not a consideration. They might jam up if material gets into the mechanism, but they don't need lubrication and can be fully enclosed -- they just need an energy input in the form of, say, an axle driven from the outside to make the internal wheels go round. Maybe make a nod to compartmentalization and redundancy to show that you're thinking about things like vulnerability to cosmic ray strikes -- the smallest error won't bring down the whole system, though enough of them might degrade performance or reliability over time.