Subject:
|
Re: 3T Board Change Suggestion
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.org.us.laflrc
|
Date:
|
Mon, 9 Jan 2006 00:50:59 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1284 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.org.us.laflrc, Bryan Bonahoom wrote:
> > True, but... I guess my main concern is that as it stands,
> > everybodies can work (I think) with an occassional nudge or human
> > touch to "correct" a cube. And we said that would be OK, for at
> > least the first trial. I don't see a reason to make the challenge
> > easier at this point.
>
> Wait a minute...
>
> You guys are willing to accept a human "nudge" of a cube as part
> of the spec, and you call adding tiles making the challenge easier??
Nudging the cubes was part of the original discussion as I remember it, with
the idea that it would be used *if needed* for the *first cut*. Ultimately, I
think all the robots should function within the tightest spec possible, which is
why I spent so much time trying to get the error rate as low as possible given
the physical set-up; personally, I'm *not* willing to accept a nudge, which is
why I designed against it. And why I don't think loosening the physical spec is
needed.
> I guess I don't see a human nudge as an acceptable part of robot
> operation. Especially when you want to leave it for kids to run.
Absolutely. Which is another reason why I wanted to be able to clear the
board and reset without help. But I don't think everybody is aimed that way.
> As for John's response about dropping the cube slower, the answer
> is no, I can't control the drop rate.
Yes, on the day of the get-together, there were several comments about how
the RCX should really be able to contorl gravity ;-).
> Whatever...My robot works 90% of the time without nudges...which
> translates to about 1 nudge every 2 games.
And I think for a first run at this event, everybody is fairly happy with
that. I took the other apporach (i.e.- make the thing extremely error-resistant,
but not near the limits of speed). That was my decision, and the result is my
current robot is *not* in the runnning for the top slot as we have defined the
rules. I'm OK with that. Hopefully I'll move more towards the speed issue on my
next attempt (got to order some parts...).
--
Brian Davis
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: 3T Board Change Suggestion
|
| Well, I just got back from my ski trip. I read quite a few e-mail while I was gone, but I have over 200 NXT e-mails still waiting. As to the tiles in the bottom of the 3T board... (...) The first problem I see with adding tiles is that it will (...) (18 years ago, 9-Jan-06, to lugnet.org.us.laflrc)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: 3T Board Change Suggestion
|
| (...) Wait a minute... You guys are willing to accept a human "nudge" of a cube as part of the spec, and you call adding tiles making the challenge easier?? I guess I don't see a human nudge as an acceptable part fo robot operation. Especially when (...) (18 years ago, 8-Jan-06, to lugnet.org.us.laflrc)
|
16 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
|
|
|
|
