Subject:
|
Re: 3T Board Change Suggestion
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.org.us.laflrc
|
Date:
|
Mon, 9 Jan 2006 17:14:08 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1531 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.org.us.laflrc, Brian Davis wrote:
-snip-
> Sounds inteesting. If you want to share, I'd love to learn (hardware or
> software).
On the hardware side, the biggest change is that my cube magazine now moves
side-to-side with the RCX/arm carriage assembly. The arm is still the only
thing that moves out over the playing field. This allowed me to force the cube
holder into a tighter "parking space" when the arm returned from playing a cube,
which increased the reliability of the reloading mechanism (the tolerances are
pretty tight). Does that make sense? It is a little tough to explain. I also
moved the pneumatic dropper motor control to the carriage as well. This
eliminated the need for the tubes to be able to move in both X and Y directions
and reduced tube mess. Now that I say that, I think I'm going to mount the pump
and tanks on the carriage as well. That will eliminate alot of the mess. My
cube sensor has gone from a light sensor to a pendelum-light sensor setup. I
believe it is similar in function to your cube sensing mechanism. I was very
unhappy with the reliability of my sensor before. Besides this eliminates yet
another wire traveling out over the playing field. Many other things have seen
upgrades as well. Rotation sensor mounting points & gearing, arm carriage
re-design, cube holder on the arm, end-of-turn sensor. Besides that it is
completely unchanged :)
> Does it play?
Not yet. First test of the completely re-written-from-scratch code was last
night. Went about like I expected. If I make it play white and go first, it
does drop the first cube correctly, and return home, but that is about it. I
have some sort of problem with my board scanning routine. Figuring out what is
wrong with that is the task for tonight. Hopefully it is something simple. I
put a lot more thought into organization & comments in this version of the
software than the last. I also managed to eliminate a few variables and events.
I don't yet know if it will function better or faster, but it should be easier
to troubleshoot!
John
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: 3T Board Change Suggestion
|
| (...) It sounds like the carriage has become a castle. Is there still room for a minifig guard on the fortress wall :) ? (...) I hear you. Next time if we really need color distinguishablility, we test first. (...) so... you still used the same (...) (19 years ago, 9-Jan-06, to lugnet.org.us.laflrc)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: 3T Board Change Suggestion
|
| (...) It's a good point. For one thing, for anybody who wants to use a light sensor to "look" at the cells, the bottom would have to be a standard color. And on top of that, each board would require nine 1x1 ties of the chosen color. Tough. (...) (...) (19 years ago, 9-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
|
|
|
|
