| |
> news-gateway@lugnet.com wrote on 01/07/2005 04:11:02 PM:
>
> > > Should extra width be reserved around the in basket to
> > > allow space for some sort of container to fit over the
> > > basket with room for, say, tipping?
> >
> > At this point no - for one thing, the upstream module dumping
> > needs only have
> > an output 6 studs wide or so to make sure it all goes into the
> > downstream input
> > hopper. The only place I see a strong need for such "extra space" is if • one
> > robot tries dumping a standard crate into another standard crate (and in • the
> > Type I standard, we're avoiding the whole issue).
>
> This was my *exact* reason for asking: tipping containers. If the tip
> left to right (from their space to the next module's space), there is no
> need for extra width: you steal it from your own space.. But if they tip
> from front to back (or some other sort of, say, flat rotation of a square
> shape), there is.
In our test, when people dump, they usually dump onto a ramp in their own module,
that drains onto the next module. Like on John's back hoe:
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=1049775
As you can see, it hangs over it's neighbor a bit.
Of course, if you ass-u-me anything about the neighboring modules you could run into
problems.
But, again with the flexibility of arranging modules, we'll be able to work around
most problems.
Steve
|
|
| |
Steve Hassenplug writes:
> As you can see, it hangs over it's neighbor a bit.
>
> Of course, if you ass-u-me anything about the neighboring modules
> you could run into problems.
You can assume anything that's in the specification! Speaking of
which, you should probably add a requirement that the top of the input
bin must always be unobstructed. That is, the output part of a module
gets to do anything it wants with the space over the input part of the
next module.
--
--My blog is at angry-economist.russnelson.com | Freedom means allowing
Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | people to do things the
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-323-1241 cell | majority thinks are
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 212-202-2318 VOIP | stupid, e.g. take drugs.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.robotics, Russell Nelson <nelson@crynwr.com> wrote:
> Speaking of which, you should probably add a
> requirement that the top of the input bin must
> always be unobstructed. That is, the output
> part of a module gets to do anything it wants
> with the space over the input part of the
> next module.
Instead of that, just make sure that your module delivers through the "side"
of the downstream module's territory. In other words, using a chute (even a very
short one) is a pretty easy solution. And that way the standard isn't further
complicated. At least one practical reason for this is for a Type II
(crate-passing) standard, allocating the space above your neighbor's input crate
zone might really limit the solutions.
--
Brian Davis
|
|
| |
Brian Davis writes:
> Instead of that, just make sure that your module delivers through
> the "side" of the downstream module's territory.
Then the spec should say that the ball should go through a vertical
plane, and specify the size of the opening.
--
--My blog is at angry-economist.russnelson.com | Freedom means allowing
Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | people to do things the
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-323-1241 cell | majority thinks are
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 212-202-2318 VOIP | stupid, e.g. take drugs.
|
|
|
