 | | Re: "Servo" Driver for NQC
|
|
"Matthias Jetleb" <Jetleb@Netcom.ca> wrote in message news:3c5763f6.195969...net.com... (...) Ooooooooo, someone else is actually NOT doing a gantry? ;) (...) The mass is at a minumum, but due to the size fo the robot to get the required work (...) (24 years ago, 30-Jan-02, to lugnet.robotics, lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: "Servo" Driver for NQC
|
|
"Steve Baker" <lego-robotics@crynwr.com> wrote in message news:3C56F4B7.FC698E...ail.net... (...) Then why doesn't it work? :-/ At lower power settings, all it seems to do is sit there and humm, not wanting to go. It really dosen't work that well in (...) (24 years ago, 30-Jan-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: IP on Mindstorms
|
|
(...) It's still on /. It's worth mentioning that this isn't the first stack. The Inferno Styx-in-a-Brick has been around a year or so. (URL) -- ___...___ Day by day the Penguins are making me lose my mind. Bumper Sticker The Armadillo Group (...) (24 years ago, 30-Jan-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Control the RCX from AppleScript
|
|
Sorry for the quick updates, but Robot Controller 1.4b2 is now available! This adds the ability to control several motors simultaneously in AppleScript. I have also posted an example AppleScript Studio project which uses Robot Controller to drive a (...) (24 years ago, 30-Jan-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: Running Vision Command on XP
|
|
Great work, Ted. Do you think a similar hack could make Lego Studios run under XP? Anyway, this workaround just underlines the poor, poor support from Lego. The VC/Studios support sites does not even mention XP! Wake up, Lego! A company thats says (...) (24 years ago, 30-Jan-02, to lugnet.robotics.vc)
|
| |
| | Re: "Servo" Driver for NQC
|
|
The ON/OFF bang-bang control you are trying has some problems that proportional control does not. While it is true that if the update rate is high enough, or the controlled plant damped enough, that switching a drive ON and OFF can simulate (...) (24 years ago, 30-Jan-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Incorrect result
|
|
(...) Yes, this is what happens when one is used to just making everything long and not considering overflows. Even worse was that I was doing the math on the computer's calculator, but not looking at the intermediate result, just typing in the (...) (24 years ago, 30-Jan-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: BricxCC release 3.3.3.4
|
|
hi Guido, I just a very little time also the comming week, but my first impression is very good !! Thanks very much. And you said you weren't a fast programmer ;-) (...) It sound great indeed. (...) I couldn't get it to work, but maybe I did (...) (24 years ago, 30-Jan-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: Incorrect result
|
|
(...) 256 * 128 = 32768, one higher as the biggest positive integer value. The cast to long would help, but your cast is too late. I have not tested, but I think rc += ( (long)b->magnitude * (long)TA_costable[...] ) >> 7; will help. Try output in (...) (24 years ago, 30-Jan-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | RE: Incorrect result
|
|
<snipped code> (...) Robert, this is a classic problem with ranges of singed numbers in C rx = (long)(a->magnitude * TA_costable[a->direction]) >> 7; I don't have an RCX in frot of me, but I think you need to cast a->magnitude to long before the (...) (24 years ago, 30-Jan-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
