 | | Re: off topic "The simpsons"
|
|
(...) Yah, you're rigth on that, the simpson are good at laghfing at every one ;-) Martin (...) (23 years ago, 18-Feb-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, lugnet.loc.ca.on.tor)
|
| |
| | Re: off topic "The simpsons"
|
|
(...) They do that to pretty much everyone, Americans included. (...) They obviously didn't spend any time in Hamilton or Windsor. ;) Toronto does, however, have the friendliest heroin addicts on Earth! (They give excellent directions to visitors.) (...) (23 years ago, 18-Feb-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, lugnet.loc.ca.on.tor)
|
| |
| | Re: off topic "The simpsons"
|
|
"Martin Legault" <mlegault@nortelnetworks.com> wrote in message news:GrpG68.6sF@lugnet.com... (...) well (...) Wouldn't it have been hilarious if they went on the Metro/STM and they heard the fantasy tone (_-' noise) and then Marge would smile and (...) (23 years ago, 18-Feb-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, lugnet.loc.ca.on.tor)
|
| |
| | Re: off topic "The simpsons"
|
|
(...) Stupid Global!!! Jude (23 years ago, 18-Feb-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, lugnet.loc.ca.on.tor)
|
| |
| | Re: off topic "The simpsons"
|
|
(...) Well after all they did went to Toronto, but as usual they depict us as, well ... but after all they reconize that Canada and Toronto in particular is a lot cleaner that some US city. Martin (23 years ago, 18-Feb-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, lugnet.loc.ca.on.tor)
|
| |
| | Re: off topic "The simpsons"
|
|
"Martin Legault" <mlegault@nortelnetworks.com> wrote in message news:GrpFsu.5rC@lugnet.com... (...) not (...) go (...) No, it's okay - looks like you were right, but they blasted this as like a little subplot in the last SIX MINUTES of the show????? (...) (23 years ago, 18-Feb-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, lugnet.loc.ca.on.tor)
|
| |
| | Re: off topic "The simpsons"
|
|
(...) Look like I was mislead, or there is 2 version 1 US and 1 canadian, I hope not I heard on the TV last week when I was in Iowa that they where supposed to go in Toronto or it sounded like that, I wasn't directly on front of the TV, sorry to (...) (23 years ago, 18-Feb-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, lugnet.loc.ca.on.tor)
|
| |
| | Re: off topic "The simpsons"
|
|
"Richard Noeckel" <Shroud_of_kung_fu@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:GrpDFt.n36@lugnet.com... (...) and (...) Are you guys sure this is the Canada episode? I'm showing them having just left a fair...? With very expensive looking bumper cars?? (...) (23 years ago, 18-Feb-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, lugnet.loc.ca.on.tor)
|
| |
| | Re: some stuff... robot accuracy
|
|
"Chris Magno" <cmagno@rogers.com> wrote in message news:3C704CF8.B1B0E7...ers.com... (...) Yeah, if you're into the whole "vanishing block" routine. Dork :) Iain (23 years ago, 18-Feb-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: some stuff... robot accuracy
|
|
1110 1010 1110 0000 humm, Ka-on, thank you for this pattern. here are a few that i use to test: 1111 1100 1000 1000 i called this on the stealth bomber. It forced a lot of diagonals for testing. As well, this is simple but a good test of distance (...) (23 years ago, 18-Feb-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: off topic "The simpsons"
|
|
(...) Thanx!!! =) --==Richard==-- (23 years ago, 18-Feb-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, lugnet.loc.ca.on.tor)
|
| |
| | off topic "The simpsons"
|
|
new episode tonigth, they are supposed to visit Toronto. At 8:00 on Fox and Global. Martin (23 years ago, 17-Feb-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: some stuff... robot accuracy
|
|
(...) I also have some problems with accuracy, but I am gona igonore it since there is little I can do without a complete redesign. The thing has enough momentum to push the whole 48x48 board around, there is little I can do in software. And don't (...) (23 years ago, 17-Feb-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | check you wires
|
|
I'm not sure why I never noticed this before BUT i just discovered that one of my wires had a nic in it. just enuff to throw my sensor reading off by a percent. I've known about the erratic readings and i coded them out early on. I just changed the (...) (23 years ago, 17-Feb-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: some stuff... robot accuracy
|
|
If it makes you feel any better, I've been struggling with the same thing myself. My ability to get the XY accuracy down to the top of a tooth IS slowing it down and worse, (like Calum said) it causes a vibration in the EOAT. I don’t have a time (...) (23 years ago, 17-Feb-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: some stuff... robot accuracy
|
|
(...) this is what I thought. argh. Chris Pretend this says something funny (23 years ago, 17-Feb-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: some stuff... robot accuracy
|
|
(...) you have a anti-X time and it is BAD...... i can hear it in your voice. -- Chris Pretend this says something funny (23 years ago, 17-Feb-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: some stuff... robot accuracy
|
|
(...) There isn't an answer--if your accuracy isn't tight, it won't ever be repeatable unless you fix it somewhere else downstream of the system (ie, a positioner chute like Derek's original idea for example) The block that is off its position is (...) (23 years ago, 17-Feb-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: some stuff... robot accuracy
|
|
(...) I agree whole-heartedly with Iain, SLOW that thing down….If ever there was a time for worm to 40t this is it! Bruce (23 years ago, 17-Feb-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: some stuff... robot accuracy
|
|
"Chris Magno" <cmagno@rogers.com> wrote in message news:3C6FF5CB.ED778E...ers.com... (...) Yes...? (...) This is why we should not have been posting our times. Argh. Try your best to make it fast. You should decide for yourself how much shaving is (...) (23 years ago, 17-Feb-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
