|
|
 | | Re: Shaft Encoders
|
| One of the advantages of using a shaft encoder is: For you to get the same "resolution" as a shaft encoder with a potentiometer, you must have a very precise pot. Some optical encoders can have 500 "ticks". But... a normal encoder does not tell (...) (28 years ago, 2-Apr-97, to lugnet.robotics.handyboard)
| | | | | Re: Robot classification
|
| Katt, Good question, and I liked Tom's response. If I may I'll add my two cents. From Tom's list: (...) Definitely and its not the kind of software they teach these days. When's the last time a program crash in your CS-101 class put a hole in the (...) (28 years ago, 2-Apr-97, to lugnet.robotics.handyboard)
| | | | | Shaft Encoders
|
| Does anyone see a problem with using the pot thats built in a RC servo as its shaft encoder. I have modified it so that it makes contact once every revolution. Would this mechanical contact create any "bounce" that would interfere with the enoding (...) (28 years ago, 2-Apr-97, to lugnet.robotics.handyboard)
| | | | | Re: Robot classification
|
| (...) Kat, That question is one that a LOT of schools are asking right now. At the present time (in my opinion) it is a blend of different kinds of engineering, which is very much determined by the type of project that your doing. For example, (...) (28 years ago, 1-Apr-97, to lugnet.robotics.handyboard)
| | | | | Re: Robot classification
|
| Katt97> What sort of engineering would robots, as a whole, be put in? Katt97> Or would robotics be considered a blend of different kinds of Katt97> engineering? -Kat Yup, blend. You got software engineering (art?) for the code to make it work. You (...) (28 years ago, 1-Apr-97, to lugnet.robotics.handyboard)
|
|
