Subject:
|
Re: Train control (was Re: Small Park)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.org.us.indylug
|
Date:
|
Fri, 2 Aug 2002 14:30:50 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
987 times
|
| |
|
|
Steve Martin wrote:
> In lugnet.org.us.indylug, Brian B. Alano writes:
[snip]
> > I've got a micro-motor point switcher working. Stole and improved
> > someone else's idea. I'll post it and give formal credit later. Next is
> > the automated level crossing.
> >
> > I own I think 8 working micro-motors, which is enough for one level
> > crossing and 6 points. Anyone want to donate more to the effort? Of
> > course, I only have 2 RCX, so I can only control 6 motors independently.
>
>
> Can you come up with a reasonable way to convert the design to use the
> standard motor (from the znap sets)? I've got about 20 of those bought for
> just that purpose. Can you post some pictures or a ldraw file?
>
> Also, this is one case where I would really like to use pieces from my
> collection to built the point switchers. That way I can keep the layout
> fully functional when we aren't all together. Thoughts?
I can understand that. Maybe Sunday I'll get a chance to put in a geared
motor and take some pix. I'll take some pictures of the micromotor-based
switch, too, FWIW. The only Technic pieces in the micromotor design:
1 micromotor
1 micromotor pulley
1 clutch wheel/a.k.a 6-holed pulley
1 4L axle
2 full bushings
1 red belt
1 sm. rubber band
1 1 x 2 technic brick.
For the geared motor version, you'll probably need
1 half bushing instead of 1 micromotor pulley, and a belt longer than
the red one. Otherwise the same.
[snip]
> > I haven't thought much about WHY we need to control the points. "Because
> > we can is my first inkling." Given that, what is the best way to
> > demonstrate THAT we can? 1. Let spectators control the points? ;-) 2.
> > Switch the points randomly, with the contraints that we don't derail
> > trains or let them collide? 3. Do what trains are for: load and unload
> > cargo. 4. Shunt cars. 5. Give demonstrations.
[snip]
>
> Yep. I can tell you right now that number 1 is probably out.
Had to include it for the sake of completeness :-P
[snip]
>
> I'm not so interested in detecting the trains yet. That in my mind would be
> some type of second phase. I guess you need it for option 2 above. Sounds
> cool, but very ambitious. I'm guessing we need some more group goal setting
> for the layout to make sure we are all aiming for the same target.
Sounds like #5 then. Very do-able. Greatly simplifies the software.
I now have a spare Palm IIIex with a minor display problem (right-most 3
or 4 columns of pixels are blank). In theory this can be programmed to
control RCX, probably with a max range (infrared) of 1 or 2 meters in
trade show conditions. While this is a much more constrained programming
environment than a PC, it would be great fun to play with. Also, I have
zippo Palm programming experience.
Just did some research. There doesn't seem to be an API out there
directly supporting Palm to RCX infrared communication. Robotic Mover
does it (http://www.ellams.f9.co.uk/palm15.htm), and there are Palm
infrared APIs. If you want a custom Palm interface, I'll have to do more
research.
-Brian
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Train control (was Re: Small Park)
|
| (...) Can you come up with a reasonable way to convert the design to use the standard motor (from the znap sets)? I've got about 20 of those bought for just that purpose. Can you post some pictures or a ldraw file? Also, this is one case where I (...) (22 years ago, 1-Aug-02, to lugnet.org.us.indylug)
|
5 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
