 | | Re: The Great Ball Contraption —Steve Hassenplug
|
| | | (...) 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: (URL) you can see, it hangs over it's neighbor a bit. Of course, if you ass-u-me anything about the (...) (19 years ago, 8-Jan-05, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: The Great Ball Contraption —Russell Nelson
|
| | | | 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 (...) (19 years ago, 9-Jan-05, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: The Great Ball Contraption —Brian Davis
|
| | | | (...) 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 (...) (19 years ago, 10-Jan-05, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: The Great Ball Contraption —Russell Nelson
|
| | | | 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 (...) (19 years ago, 10-Jan-05, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | |
