 | | | | | |
If everything goes fine I'll be getting a RIS 2.0 it will be
my 1st LEGO MINDSTORMS set. I have an idea but may is not possible to
do specially a newbie like me won't be able to do it but I whould like
to know if is possible to do a remote control plane?
May be no if what about a car?
Does there robots work only if the pc is on or can they work with out
using the pc once they are built?
What baterries I need for this RIS 2.0 set?
Thanks for answers
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
> If everything goes fine I'll be getting a RIS 2.0 it will be
> my 1st LEGO MINDSTORMS set. I have an idea but may is not possible to
> do specially a newbie like me won't be able to do it but I whould like
> to know if is possible to do a remote control plane?
Very unlikely.
Some guy tried controlling a kite to make it work like a hangglider, you can
check that here, its cool
http://jpbrown.i8.com/gliderpilot.html
I tried making an airship/Zepplin using helium balloons to create the lift,
and having fans to steer the thing around, but I didnt have much success as
it just seemed to spin around at random
> May be no if what about a car?
Should not be _too_ hard. One of the expansion kits contains a remote
control you could use, and it could even be possible to get your PC with a
joystick controlling it (lot of work with alternative firmware such as
BrickOS)
> Does there robots work only if the pc is on or can they work with out
> using the pc once they are built?
Both. If you use BrickOS (and maybe others I am not familiar with) you can
have programs downloaded to the robot, so it obeys a program all by itself,
or you can send instructions to it constantly by the PC, or a mixture of
both.
One problem you will find, building these style of things, is that the IR
communication used is not very reliable, and the range is only a few meters.
>
> What baterries I need for this RIS 2.0 set?
six 1.5v AA
> Thanks for answers
no problem :) have fun :)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Do I have to buy the batteries seperatedly?
How long can they last?
Want can the robots do since they are so basic not like r2d2, c3po...?
I whould like to read some ideas for this RIS 2.0 set specially.
In lugnet.robotics, "Niall McCaffrey" <niall.mccaffrey@uds.se> writes:
> > If everything goes fine I'll be getting a RIS 2.0 it will be
> > my 1st LEGO MINDSTORMS set. I have an idea but may is not possible to
> > do specially a newbie like me won't be able to do it but I whould like
> > to know if is possible to do a remote control plane?
>
> Very unlikely.
> Some guy tried controlling a kite to make it work like a hangglider, you can
> check that here, its cool
> http://jpbrown.i8.com/gliderpilot.html
>
> I tried making an airship/Zepplin using helium balloons to create the lift,
> and having fans to steer the thing around, but I didnt have much success as
> it just seemed to spin around at random
>
> > May be no if what about a car?
>
> Should not be _too_ hard. One of the expansion kits contains a remote
> control you could use, and it could even be possible to get your PC with a
> joystick controlling it (lot of work with alternative firmware such as
> BrickOS)
>
> > Does there robots work only if the pc is on or can they work with out
> > using the pc once they are built?
>
> Both. If you use BrickOS (and maybe others I am not familiar with) you can
> have programs downloaded to the robot, so it obeys a program all by itself,
> or you can send instructions to it constantly by the PC, or a mixture of
> both.
>
> One problem you will find, building these style of things, is that the IR
> communication used is not very reliable, and the range is only a few meters.
>
> >
> > What baterries I need for this RIS 2.0 set?
>
>
> six 1.5v AA
>
> > Thanks for answers
>
> no problem :) have fun :)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Eduardo Vazquez Harte wrote:
> Do I have to buy the batteries seperatedly?
Yes.
> How long can they last?
Depends a lot on how much work your robot is doing. If it's just
running the computer with no motors or sensors turned on - then
probably 12 hours.
If you are running lots of motors and sensors then it's more like
3 hours...but it depends a lot on how much load you put on the
system.
Most serious users spend the extra to get rechargable batteries.
I use NiHM batteries. They cost quite a bit - but it's worth it.
I find that even with intensive use, my batteries last a long time
because I'll build the robot, program it, try it for about a minute
then turn it off while I think how to fix whatever it was I did wrong.
Since that happens a lot, one set of batteries lasts me for WEEKS
because I only run the robot for a few minutes in every hour or two
of 'play'.
If you are concerned about this, buy one set of regular AA's and
see whether you run them flat too quickly. If so - you'd be well
advised to buy a set of NiMH's - but you may find that ordinary
batteries suit you OK.
> Want can the robots do since they are so basic not like r2d2, c3po...?
R2D2's functionality is probably mechanically possible in Lego - but
he's far more intelligent than something powered by the RCX's simple
computer could ever be.
Making a robot that walked or talked as well as C3PO would also be
impossible I think.
But the beauty of Lego is that it's amazingly flexible. You program
the robot yourself - so it could be as simple as making the robot
follow a black line on a white sheet of paper - to some of the amazing
creations you see on this mailing list and on Lego's web site.
I've built a computer game, robot arms, cranes, vehicles of MANY kinds
that move in interesting ways, musical instruments, robots that play
'tag', robots that ran a relay race - passing a baton between them, a
robot that could navigate to my refrigerator, open the door and bring
me a can of soda.
Other people have made amazing things like: Robots that walk, a clock,
a photocopier (!), a robot that balances on two wheels, a robotic
bartender, a 'Coke Machine' that accepted coins or read paper money
and dispensed cans of Soda, a typewriter, a milling machine, a
'factory' that assembled tiny Lego cars automatically. Lego
railroads with the tracks switched and trains driven using
several RCX computers, a CD auto-changer. A robot dog (like the
'Aibo' robot). Robots that can climb a rope, climb up a vertical
sheet of glass(!), swing along the rungs of a ladder, stack
soda cans, play Soccer, ski on snow, solve a maze, play chess
(including moving the chess pieces), play tic-tac-toe, fight
in robotic Sumo contests...
...so many clever things built by so many clever people.
The things that people create don't compare to the robots you
see in movies - but that's because those are generally not real
robots and they are far beyond the best technology that exists
in the world today.
Lego can't compete with works of fiction.
However, there aren't many things that 'real' robots can do that
you can't do *somehow* in Lego.
> I whould like to read some ideas for this RIS 2.0 set specially.
The RIS 1.0, 1.5 and 2.0 sets are virtually identical - so most
Mindstorms ideas will be OK for RIS 2.0. However, some of us
AFOL's (Adult Fans Of Lego) are fanatics and have dozens of sets
and millions of parts...I have four Mindstorms sets and 20 Lego
motors with LOTS of other Lego besides. So it's inevitable that
there will be some things people have come up with that you won't
be able to build.
There are MANY books out on the subject - I recommend:
Building Robots with Lego Mindstorms by
Mario and Giulio Ferrari
Published by Syngress.
...but I only own a few of the many books out there.
There are HUNDREDS of web sites out there showing Lego Mindstorms
robots - and the Lego site itself has lots of ideas and building
instructions.
There are many Lego competitions held around the world - some of
them can be entered 'remotely' without having to actually travel
to the competition venue - some have websites where you can find
out the details of the problems set for the robots to solve - and
the results of the competition after it's over.
Then there are lots of Lego mailing lists (like this one) with
hundreds of friendly people who will be only too happy to suggest
things for you to try and help you out when you get stuck.
---------------------------- Steve Baker -------------------------
HomeEmail: <sjbaker1@airmail.net> WorkEmail: <sjbaker@link.com>
HomePage : http://web2.airmail.net/sjbaker1
Projects : http://plib.sf.net http://tuxaqfh.sf.net
http://tuxkart.sf.net http://prettypoly.sf.net
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
> If everything goes fine I'll be getting a RIS 2.0 it will be
> my 1st LEGO MINDSTORMS set. I have an idea but may is not possible to
> do specially a newbie like me won't be able to do it but I whould like
> to know if is possible to do a remote control plane?
I have built not a plane but a helicopter that does fly (sort of) which is
remotely controlled. Here are some recent photos:
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=258416
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=258417
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=258418
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=258419
As you can see from the pictures, the helicopter does not fly free. It is
attached to a cantilevered arm that uses the RCX as the counter weight.
Without the rotor turning, the arm is balanced so that the helicopter does
have some weight. With the rotor turning, enough lift is produced to lift
the helicopter. By changing the pitch of the helicopter (a motor is located
near the base) the helicopter can be made to move forward and reverse.
A second RCX is used as the controller. In the version in the photos I used
rotation sensors in the controller that sent IR messages to the helicopter
to control the pitch motor and the rotor power. There is also a small
micro-motor on the helicopter that raises and lowers a hook which is
controlled by a button on the controller.
Since these photos were taken I have redesigned the controller to use light
sensors pointing to gray scale disks instead of rotation sensors. This has
allowed me to use levers instead of wheels on the controller. The
controller now has one lever that simulates the collective (rotor power) and
one lever for the cyclic (pitch).
> May be no if what about a car?
With a second RCX to build a controller, this would be doable. IR messages
could be assigned to different steering angles and power/direction settings
for the drive. Like my new helicopter controller, a light sensor could be
aimed at a gray scale on a disk to get the desired steering angle input.
Similarly, a gray scale on the car could verify that the current steering
angle matches the steering input. Of course, if the car uses differential
drive you don't need any of this and you can just use buttons on the
controller or even just the Lego remote.
Gus Jansson
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Gustav Jansson wrote:
> > If everything goes fine I'll be getting a RIS 2.0 it will be
> > my 1st LEGO MINDSTORMS set. I have an idea but may is not possible to
> > do specially a newbie like me won't be able to do it but I whould like
> > to know if is possible to do a remote control plane?
>
>
> I have built not a plane but a helicopter that does fly (sort of) which is
> remotely controlled. Here are some recent photos:
>
> http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=258416
> http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=258417
> http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=258418
> http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=258419
Very cool - but definitely cheating!
> > May be no if what about a car?
>
> With a second RCX to build a controller, this would be doable.
A Lego remote controller would be cheaper than a second RCX.
---------------------------- Steve Baker -------------------------
HomeEmail: <sjbaker1@airmail.net> WorkEmail: <sjbaker@link.com>
HomePage : http://web2.airmail.net/sjbaker1
Projects : http://plib.sf.net http://tuxaqfh.sf.net
http://tuxkart.sf.net http://prettypoly.sf.net
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Gustav Jansson wrote:
> I have built not a plane but a helicopter that does fly (sort of)
> which is remotely controlled. Here are some recent photos:
>
> http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=258416
> http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=258417
> http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=258418
> http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=258419
Do you have any close-up photo's of the stationary helicopter?
My son has been trying to reproduce this - but without much success.
His best effort lifts off very weakly and has to be balanced so
accurately that it can't pick up any loads.
---------------------------- Steve Baker -------------------------
HomeEmail: <sjbaker1@airmail.net> WorkEmail: <sjbaker@link.com>
HomePage : http://web2.airmail.net/sjbaker1
Projects : http://plib.sf.net http://tuxaqfh.sf.net
http://tuxkart.sf.net http://prettypoly.sf.net
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Hi Steve and everyone else,
I'm working on a Lugnet page with more information on my helicopter but in
the mean time, here are the photos:
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=28783
As you can see, I use a low-torque, hi-rpm motor with a non-lego rotor. The
rotor, by the way, came from a cheap helicopter pull-toy.
Let me know if you have more questions about how it works, either I will
answer them directly or I will include them in my eventual lugnet page.
Gus
In lugnet.robotics, Steve Baker <sjbaker1@airmail.net> writes:
>
> Do you have any close-up photo's of the stationary helicopter?
> My son has been trying to reproduce this - but without much success.
> His best effort lifts off very weakly and has to be balanced so
> accurately that it can't pick up any loads.
>
> ---------------------------- Steve Baker -------------------------
> HomeEmail: <sjbaker1@airmail.net> WorkEmail: <sjbaker@link.com>
> HomePage : http://web2.airmail.net/sjbaker1
> Projects : http://plib.sf.net http://tuxaqfh.sf.net
> http://tuxkart.sf.net http://prettypoly.sf.net
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Gustav Jansson wrote:
> I'm working on a Lugnet page with more information on my helicopter but in
> the mean time, here are the photos:
>
> http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=28783
Ah - *many* thanks!
THe thing we couldn't understand was how you'd managed to make the
helicopter fly forwards and backwards. We'd assumed you had
some amazingly clever cyclic pitch adjustment in the rotor head
(which looks complicated enough to maybe do something like that
in the original photos). Now I realise that you are simply rotating
the support beam - we'd thought of that as a measure of last resort
but were hoping to find that you'd done something much cleverer.
> As you can see, I use a low-torque, hi-rpm motor with a non-lego rotor. The
> rotor, by the way, came from a cheap helicopter pull-toy.
My son has managed to make one (along similar lines to yours) that
uses only Lego parts. The motor is a standard geared Mindstorms motor
(we don't own one of the older style motors) with a 40t gear on the
motor and an 8t on the rotor shaft. The blades are the blue
translucent "insect wings" from the RDS set. We experimented with
two, three and four rotor designs and with different gear ratios -
but the more blades it has, the slower it spins because of the
increased load on the motor. In the end, it doesn't seem to matter
much - you get the same amount of lift with two faster spinning blades
as with three or four slower blades - so we settled on two to keep
things light and to simplify the rotor head. The 40:8 gearing is
also optimal.
The extra weight (compared to your non-lego solution) is something we
can deal with using appropriate counter-balance weights - but we are
rather tight on load carrying - if the helicopter is balanced
correctly so it'll take off *and* come back down again, there isn't
enough thrust left to lift much of a load. We can fix that by making
it 'neutrally' balanced - and throw the rotor into reverse to go down
but that's an ugly solution.
One 'feature' of using the insect wing rotors is that their pitch
angle is adjustable - we've been thinking about whether we could
build a swash-plate and drive the collective pitch of the rotors
instead of (or as well as) the RPM of the motor. Controlling the
cyclic pitch would also be cool - but I don't see how to do that
easily.
The counter-balance arrangements are similar to yours and the RCX is
driven with a Lego remote instead of a second RCX.
> Let me know if you have more questions about how it works, either I will
> answer them directly or I will include them in my eventual lugnet page.
What you have there explains a lot. Thanks!
---------------------------- Steve Baker -------------------------
HomeEmail: <sjbaker1@airmail.net> WorkEmail: <sjbaker@link.com>
HomePage : http://web2.airmail.net/sjbaker1
Projects : http://plib.sf.net http://tuxaqfh.sf.net
http://tuxkart.sf.net http://prettypoly.sf.net
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.robotics, Steve Baker <sjbaker1@airmail.net> writes:
>
> Ah - *many* thanks!
You are welcome.
> My son has managed to make one (along similar lines to yours) that
> uses only Lego parts. The motor is a standard geared Mindstorms motor
> (we don't own one of the older style motors) with a 40t gear on the
> motor and an 8t on the rotor shaft. The blades are the blue
> translucent "insect wings" from the RDS set. We experimented with
> two, three and four rotor designs and with different gear ratios -
> but the more blades it has, the slower it spins because of the
> increased load on the motor. In the end, it doesn't seem to matter
> much - you get the same amount of lift with two faster spinning blades
> as with three or four slower blades - so we settled on two to keep
> things light and to simplify the rotor head. The 40:8 gearing is
> also optimal.
I did a fair amount of experimenting on the rotor blades. I also tried the
RDS insect wings (though I only had two) and I did have limited success. I
couldn't think up a way of mounting them that will keep them at a fixed
pitch and in the proper position. With my high rpm motor, if the blades
were not perfectly adjusted, it would shake horribly and produce very little
lift. If I managed to get the blades perfectly positioned they worked okay,
though not as well as the pull-toy rotor. I also tried fixed blades made
out of large 6x16 plates that worked about as well as the RDS insect wings.
I also tried blades made out of soft foam sheets. These had the advantage
that kids could touch the blades without getting hurt though again, the lift
was not very good.
>
> The extra weight (compared to your non-lego solution) is something we
> can deal with using appropriate counter-balance weights - but we are
> rather tight on load carrying - if the helicopter is balanced
> correctly so it'll take off *and* come back down again, there isn't
> enough thrust left to lift much of a load. We can fix that by making
> it 'neutrally' balanced - and throw the rotor into reverse to go down
> but that's an ugly solution.
That is no good, the helicopter should drop if the rotor power is too low.
You should also be able to control the robot position while hovering. If
you hover under no power, you can't move the robot by adjusting the pitch.
> The counter-balance arrangements are similar to yours and the RCX is
> driven with a Lego remote instead of a second RCX.
I started out using the Lego remote but the second RCX controller is much
more satisfying. One of the pictures
http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/GJansson/Helicopter/controller3.jpg
shows the controller partially disassembled. To detect the position of the
levers, I use gray-scales that I printed onto label paper and stuck onto
Lego disks (like the disk brakes that came with some of car models). This
works very well and gives me more then a 100 step resolution on 90 degrees
of movement.
Gus
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Thought I would let you guys know that a MindStormer by name of
SeriousDamage claims to have built a helecopter that really can fly. He's
uploaded it to the MindStorms site:
http://mindstorms.lego.com/eng/inventions/invention.asp?id={A4558A7F-E39D-4419-B862-8ED68F26BC9B}&slotN=3
and he sent me some pictures I'm hosting for him at my site for two weeks.
(after that I'm taking them down)
http://www11.brinkster.com/buachaille/sd/
Just FYI, maybe some food for thought. :-)
~Mike
http://www.lmsm.info
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In general, I don't know how to use the list of inventions
on mindstorms.lego.com. All I get is the idea that yeah
someone did this and that. No discussions on the issues:
how it was done, problems solved, etc, no details. I guess
for that you have this list, books, and your own experiments.
For example, does the helicopter built by SeriousDamage track
its own environment, or does it just crash into walls? How
many times can the motor sustain that kind of drops before it
breaks, or does he only fly it over carpits no more than two or
three feet above ground? etc.
-kam
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Thorn" <buachaille@lmsm.info>
To: <lego-robotics@crynwr.com>
Sent: Saturday, November 23, 2002 7:59 AM
Subject: Re: Helicopter was Re: Newbie has an idea
Thought I would let you guys know that a MindStormer by name of
claims to have built a helecopter that really can fly. He's
uploaded it to the MindStorms site:
http://mindstorms.lego.com/eng/inventions/invention.asp?id={A4558A7F-E39D-4419-B862-8ED68F26BC9B}&slotN=3
and he sent me some pictures I'm hosting for him at my site for two weeks.
(after that I'm taking them down)
http://www11.brinkster.com/buachaille/sd/
Just FYI, maybe some food for thought. :-)
~Mike
http://www.lmsm.info
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
At 01:54 PM 11/23/02, you wrote:
> Do any pictures exist that show construction?
Unfortunately, no. What you see is all there is.
~Mike
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mike Thorn" <buachaille@lmsm.info>
> To: <lego-robotics@crynwr.com>
> Sent: Saturday, November 23, 2002 10:59 AM
> Subject: Re: Helicopter was Re: Newbie has an idea
>
>
> > Thought I would let you guys know that a MindStormer by name of
> > SeriousDamage claims to have built a helecopter that really can fly. He's
> > uploaded it to the MindStorms site:
> >
> >
> http://mindstorms.lego.com/eng/inventions/invention.asp?id={A4558A7F-E39D-44
> 19-B862-8ED68F26BC9B}&slotN=3
> >
> > and he sent me some pictures I'm hosting for him at my site for two weeks.
> > (after that I'm taking them down)
> >
> > http://www11.brinkster.com/buachaille/sd/
> >
> > Just FYI, maybe some food for thought. :-)
> >
> > ~Mike
> > http://www.lmsm.info
> >
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Eduardo Vazquez Harte wrote:
> If everything goes fine I'll be getting a RIS 2.0 it will be
> my 1st LEGO MINDSTORMS set. I have an idea but may is not possible to
> do specially a newbie like me won't be able to do it but I whould like
> to know if is possible to do a remote control plane?
Power-to-weight ratio's are far too poor.
Electric-powered aircraft have to be built with very careful
attention to battery and motor technology with the lightest possible
designs.
Lego is HEAVY - so no aircraft.
> May be no if what about a car?
Yes - that's fairly easy. Get the Lego remote controller and you
can build a remote controlled car very easily. Depending on your
computer skills, you could probably make a PC-controlled car and
drive it from your PC's mouse or something.
> Does there robots work only if the pc is on or can they work with out
> using the pc once they are built?
Lego robots (once programmed from the PC) are completely autonomous.
They don't need the PC anytime after you've downloaded the program
from the PC into the RCX computer.
If you *WANT* to have communications with the PC, you can.
> What baterries I need for this RIS 2.0 set?
Six AA's in the RCX computer. The IR Tower that connects to the PC
is powered from the USB port.
If you have the older RIS 1.0 or 1.5 sets, you need a 9 volt battery
in the IR tower because on the older sets they connect into the PC's
serial port..
---------------------------- Steve Baker -------------------------
HomeEmail: <sjbaker1@airmail.net> WorkEmail: <sjbaker@link.com>
HomePage : http://web2.airmail.net/sjbaker1
Projects : http://plib.sf.net http://tuxaqfh.sf.net
http://tuxkart.sf.net http://prettypoly.sf.net
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
One idea that I always wanted to persue was autonomus car racing, nascar
style.
I thought of setting up a small oval on a 4x8 sheet of plywood and marking
the entrance to the corners in one shade, inside boundries(3' from the wall)
in a second shade and the outside boundries in a third. the rcx could use
dual light sensors to avoid walls know when to turn and AI to determine
cornering speed and acceleration. I figured the best way to classify the
vehicles would be by vehicle footprint and the number of motors ( a stock
class for three motors tied to the rcx, and "unlimited" class for those
using auxlirary power packs)
it would be an excellent balance between programming and mechanical design.
The AI could try different cornering radious for different laps. with three
or more "cars" on the track it could be quite excitingto watch, better than
sumo or line following.
What do you think?
Jeff Wood
"Eduardo Vazquez Harte" <eduvazhar@terra.es> wrote in message
news:H5vxCE.GqG@lugnet.com...
> If everything goes fine I'll be getting a RIS 2.0 it will be
> my 1st LEGO MINDSTORMS set. I have an idea but may is not possible to
> do specially a newbie like me won't be able to do it but I whould like
> to know if is possible to do a remote control plane?
>
> May be no if what about a car?
>
> Does there robots work only if the pc is on or can they work with out
> using the pc once they are built?
>
> What baterries I need for this RIS 2.0 set?
>
> Thanks for answers
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Now that's a well cool idea! We could set up 'formulas' based on the parts
usable by the cars and the programming allowed, something like
Formula 3 - standard RIS kit only, regular/NQC RCX code
Formula 2 - standard RIS kit only, any (BrickOS, QC, LeJOS) code
Formula P - programming challenge - standard car, any code
Formula B - building challenge, standard program, any car
Formula 1 - Anything goes (no homebrew mega-motors though!)
I agree that it would not only be just as exciting as sumo, but it's a
generally better challenge as the constraints are more suited to the
capabilities of the Mindstorms set.
"Jeff Wood" <jeffwood@ptd.net> wrote in message
news:H5zL8G.I57@lugnet.com...
> One idea that I always wanted to persue was autonomus car racing, nascar
> style.
>
> I thought of setting up a small oval on a 4x8 sheet of plywood and marking
> the entrance to the corners in one shade, inside boundries(3' from the • wall)
> in a second shade and the outside boundries in a third. the rcx could use
> dual light sensors to avoid walls know when to turn and AI to determine
> cornering speed and acceleration. I figured the best way to classify the
> vehicles would be by vehicle footprint and the number of motors ( a stock
> class for three motors tied to the rcx, and "unlimited" class for those
> using auxlirary power packs)
>
> it would be an excellent balance between programming and mechanical • design.
> The AI could try different cornering radious for different laps. with • three
> or more "cars" on the track it could be quite excitingto watch, better • than
> sumo or line following.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Jeff Wood
>
>
> "Eduardo Vazquez Harte" <eduvazhar@terra.es> wrote in message
> news:H5vxCE.GqG@lugnet.com...
> > If everything goes fine I'll be getting a RIS 2.0 it will be
> > my 1st LEGO MINDSTORMS set. I have an idea but may is not possible to
> > do specially a newbie like me won't be able to do it but I whould like
> > to know if is possible to do a remote control plane?
> >
> > May be no if what about a car?
> >
> > Does there robots work only if the pc is on or can they work with out
> > using the pc once they are built?
> >
> > What baterries I need for this RIS 2.0 set?
> >
> > Thanks for answers
>
>
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Jeff Wood wrote:
> One idea that I always wanted to persue was autonomus car racing, nascar
> style.
> What do you think?
If this is a race (as opposed to a set of solo time trials) then I
think you need some way for cars to avoid each other.
Maybe requiring each car to have a 'tail light' at a specified height
so that a forward facing light sensor could detect if you are about
to rear-end the car in front?
---------------------------- Steve Baker -------------------------
HomeEmail: <sjbaker1@airmail.net> WorkEmail: <sjbaker@link.com>
HomePage : http://web2.airmail.net/sjbaker1
Projects : http://plib.sf.net http://tuxaqfh.sf.net
http://tuxkart.sf.net http://prettypoly.sf.net
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.robotics, Steve Baker <sjbaker1@airmail.net> writes:
> Jeff Wood wrote:
>
> If this is a race (as opposed to a set of solo time trials) then I
> think you need some way for cars to avoid each other.
>
> Maybe requiring each car to have a 'tail light' at a specified height
> so that a forward facing light sensor could detect if you are about
> to rear-end the car in front?
Good idea! I was thinking more in terms of bumpers but taillights and
forward pointing light sensors is much better. That would allow a robot
coming from behind to setup a pass without hitting the robot in front.
Perhaps the sensor input used for the forward pointing light sensor can be
multiplexed with a bumper in case, for some reason, the robot coming from
behind misses the tail light. The rules should also specify penalties for
robots that cause accidents such as rear-ending another robot.
Gus
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
maybe it would be better if u could cause accidents
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gustav Jansson" <GJansson@aol.com>
To: <lego-robotics@crynwr.com>
Sent: Saturday, November 23, 2002 11:36 AM
Subject: Re: Newbie has an idea - Nascar style racing?
> In lugnet.robotics, Steve Baker <sjbaker1@airmail.net> writes:
> > Jeff Wood wrote:
> >
> > If this is a race (as opposed to a set of solo time trials) then I
> > think you need some way for cars to avoid each other.
> >
> > Maybe requiring each car to have a 'tail light' at a specified height
> > so that a forward facing light sensor could detect if you are about
> > to rear-end the car in front?
>
> Good idea! I was thinking more in terms of bumpers but taillights and
> forward pointing light sensors is much better. That would allow a robot
> coming from behind to setup a pass without hitting the robot in front.
> Perhaps the sensor input used for the forward pointing light sensor can be
> multiplexed with a bumper in case, for some reason, the robot coming from
> behind misses the tail light. The rules should also specify penalties for
> robots that cause accidents such as rear-ending another robot.
>
> Gus
>
| | | | | | |
