 | | Re: Onwards to rtlToronto18...
|
|
(...) Basically pretty much sums it up--I had such a blast with pint size marble sorting, I wanted to apply that to block stacking to see if I could. So for me, I have no problem with 2events--one in big arena with big 'bots, and one in little arena (...) (20 years ago, 25-Oct-04, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: Onwards to rtlToronto18...
|
|
(...) :) Dave K (20 years ago, 25-Oct-04, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: Onwards to rtlToronto18...
|
|
(...) Ya, but do to a lack of a "main" event, David's side event seems to be getting moved up to being the main event. Derek (20 years ago, 25-Oct-04, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: Onwards to rtlToronto18...
|
|
I thought that was just going to be a side event at another contest. Now it sounds like block stacking will be the major event. The small size would make sense in a 4x4 playfield, but, not in the 8x8. (20 years ago, 25-Oct-04, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: Onwards to rtlToronto18...
|
|
(...) Ahhhh yes, but did "samll" refer to the blocks, or the block stackers???? ;) ROSCO (20 years ago, 25-Oct-04, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: Onwards to rtlToronto18...
|
|
(...) When David said. I going to run a contest. It will be about building small block stackers. Anyone want to play? Derek (20 years ago, 25-Oct-04, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: Onwards to rtlToronto18...
|
|
(...) I'm sure we all could think of ways to accomplish this, but, I have no idea why we'd want to. Since when has this contest been about being small? (...) Thats great, build a small robot. I on the other hand want to simply build a robot. I have (...) (20 years ago, 25-Oct-04, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: Onwards to rtlToronto18...
|
|
(...) If you can't think of a way to get a 8" tall robot to build a tower taller then 8" the limiting factor is your imagination, not the rules. (...) The concept of the contest is size. It's not a rule, its the reason for the contest. So far there (...) (20 years ago, 25-Oct-04, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: Onwards to rtlToronto18...
|
|
I just manually created a stack of blocks greater than 8 inches tall. If I wanted to build a mechanism to deploy that stack, the rules would get in the way. So before we even get started, an arbritary limit would have limited a possible solution. We (...) (20 years ago, 25-Oct-04, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | My tribute to my first Technic Set
|
|
(URL) was having an unusual wave of nostalgia the other day and put together the first auto chassis--956. Having completed this, I found myself thinking about the first Technic set I received when I was a kid--set 854. So I put that one together as (...) (20 years ago, 25-Oct-04, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Onwards to rtlToronto18...
|
|
(...) Here are my thought ins no apparent order and to answer many questions and ideas already posted in this thread... I am the first to talk about building monstrous robots. As that pic that Calum posted, I can build 'em big. Big is easy. Big (...) (20 years ago, 25-Oct-04, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: Onwards to rtlToronto18...
|
|
(...) I think that's a pretty good way of putting it. The other thing we need to talk about is the worth of a tower. Do we use the Fibonacci-based sequence for tower height? How many blocks of each colour? Calum (20 years ago, 24-Oct-04, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: Onwards to rtlToronto18...
|
|
(...) I hope Dave will chime up in a minute, because he was also a big proponent of 8" cubed. I can see both points: Like Bruce, I love stuff like this: (URL) featured in the Greg Hyland AFOLs book) (...) But at the same time, I think the 8" cubed (...) (20 years ago, 24-Oct-04, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: Onwards to rtlToronto18...
|
|
We don't need no stink'n limits. Maybe if we were going 4x4, but we're not. And, can anyone recall a time that a robot was too big or had too many processors. Limits (without an obvious purpose) ar exactly that...limiting. (20 years ago, 24-Oct-04, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: Onwards to rtlToronto18...
|
|
(...) Part of the point of this contest is to build under restricted size conditions. (...) I agree with this. (...) Not sure what I would prefer. The 4x4 field makes more sense with the smaller robot size. Derek (20 years ago, 24-Oct-04, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: Onwards to rtlToronto18...
|
|
(...) I'm all in for this contest. (...) I thing the 8" cube limit puts a reasonable limit on this. Can't fit too many RCXs in a 8" cube and still be able to manipulate blocks. (...) I think adds a little too much complexity. (...) I'm not a fan of (...) (20 years ago, 24-Oct-04, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: Onwards to rtlToronto18...
|
|
I like the block stacking idea. I don’t know why we would want a limit on size. All of the robots that have impressed me over time have been on the larger size. I’m not that interested in cutesy little robots. RCXs...I thought we decided that long (...) (20 years ago, 24-Oct-04, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Onwards to rtlToronto18...
|
|
Well, yesterday, strangely enough, was a lot of fun: A simple contest, with a lot of entries (ten!), most of which worked. And I even entered a working robot that actually was somewhat successful. Congratulations to Greg Hyland and Rob Antonishen, (...) (20 years ago, 24-Oct-04, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: [rtlToronto] rtlToronto 17 This Saturday
|
|
(...) I started building tonight too. But I'm finished. I just need to program, and I can't see THAT being that hard :) Calum PS-See y'all there kids! (20 years ago, 23-Oct-04, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: [rtlToronto] rtlToronto 17 This Saturday
|
|
(...) Oh wait! Office Space just started on CTV--I'm probably good for the next two hours... Dave K (20 years ago, 23-Oct-04, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
