Subject:
|
Re: rtlToronto15 January issues
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto
|
Date:
|
Mon, 25 Aug 2003 16:21:10 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
502 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> I *think* that's Iain's way of saying "the different path requirement is not
> really a good idea" but I'm not sure. :-)
Forgot the smiley. :)
> I'm still wondering about the joint question... didn't most of the bots at BF
> have rigid guidewheels that would be incompatible with branching in the piping?
> If so, that makes this contest a lot different (which is a good thing one would
> assume).
I think the joints are going to be very hard. The only thing I could think of
doing, was have the robot somehow open on one side... and have all the drive
wheels rotatable so that you could either a) drive your robot forward, or b)
rotate axially about the pope to align your robot with the split in the T.
But it's all so very complex...
Iain
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: rtlToronto15 January issues
|
| (...) That's why the rest of the world just sits back and *watches*, while the genius Lego builders (& programmers!) of RTL Toronto come up with amazing solutions to problems the rest of us would be scared to even attempt... Me? I'll stick to (...) (21 years ago, 25-Aug-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: rtlToronto15 January issues
|
| (...) I *think* that's Iain's way of saying "the different path requirement is not really a good idea" but I'm not sure. :-) I'm still wondering about the joint question... didn't most of the bots at BF have rigid guidewheels that would be (...) (21 years ago, 25-Aug-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
30 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
