 | | Re: New MOC: RoboArm I
|
|
By making a good programming you can control lots of functions with one touch sensor, wich would be complicated but it's possible. I have tried using two touch sensors to control motors, let's say you press the sensor once for motor A, twice for B, (...) (23 years ago, 10-May-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: RIS 2.0 Upgrade Kit content?
|
|
Mine contained only the software. I bought the USB tower from Lego Dacta. -- Bob Fay THE SHOP (URL) Wang" <lkwang@mail.ncku.edu.tw> wrote in message news:B901594A966879A....edu.tw... (...) (23 years ago, 10-May-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | RIS 2.0 Upgrade Kit content?
|
|
What are in the 2.0 upgrade kit? Only software, or software and hardware? It is said that it contains a USB IR transmitter. I use NQC, on a Macintosh. Thank you in advance. -- Li-Kai Wang, M.D. Dept. of Anesthesiology, National Cheng Kung University (...) (23 years ago, 10-May-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: New MOC: RoboArm I
|
|
(...) Yes - you need to thread them though some technic beams along the way. ---...--- Steve Baker ---...--- Mail : <sjbaker1@airmail.net> WorkMail: <sjbaker@link.com> URLs : (8 URLs) (23 years ago, 11-May-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: New MOC: RoboArm I
|
|
(...) Well, with three touch sensors, you can have (at best) only 8 possibilities at any instant - but with even only one touch sensor, you can input any conceivable command if you have enough time. (Imagine if you entered your commands in morse (...) (23 years ago, 11-May-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: New MOC: RoboArm I
|
|
I don't know of any other source for the flex axle. I found that they did not turn smoothly. Tend to loft. Maybe they can be contained at several points to stop the whipping action. Micromotors seem to work well in pairs, I guess they unlock each (...) (23 years ago, 10-May-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: New MOC: RoboArm I
|
|
(...) You should be able to get 3 sensors to control 3 motors like this: Sensor A not pushed = forward Sensor A pushed = reverse Sensor B pushed and not C = Motor 1 Sensor C pushed and not B = Motor 2 Sensor B and C pushed = Motor 3 -Kyle (23 years ago, 10-May-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: New MOC: RoboArm I
|
|
(...) Thats the exact problem I'm having. I would like to have 1 RCX be able to control the direction of 2 motors. So what I trying to make is a 4 button controller using 3 touch sensors. For instance, I want to have 1 RCX control the opening and (...) (23 years ago, 10-May-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: New MOC: RoboArm I
|
|
(...) Yes - I agree. I'd avoid using micromotors anyway because of their tendancy to lock up when you put any kind of strain on them. Micromotors are good for little decorative features or small one-time operations that don't need much power. So (...) (23 years ago, 10-May-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: ___cmpsi2
|
|
(...) OK, I planned to test 0.2.6; this is the right moment to do it. (...) Do you know why? (I'm just curious) (...) Thank you very much. This was really important to me. Eric (23 years ago, 9-May-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: New MOC: RoboArm I
|
|
(...) I've used a collection of four Scouts driven by IR commands from an RCX to drive a total of eleven motors. Just program the scouts to read simple 1-byte messages sent from the RCX - use the top two bits to select which Scout you are talking (...) (23 years ago, 10-May-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: New MOC: RoboArm I
|
|
I am not a big fan of Lego pneumatics either, but they are so light weight and a perfect solution in your application. The micromotors have so little power, that you would have to gear them down to get any holding power for your grippers. Then (...) (23 years ago, 9-May-02, to lugnet.robotics, lugnet.technic, lugnet.build)
|
| |
| | RE: Apparent 'time-out'
|
|
(...) Rob, Thanks for this. I think I'll be able to get to this tonight. I'll have a good look at what is going on. Cheers, Ralph (23 years ago, 9-May-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | FW: Apparent 'time-out'
|
|
(...) Have you seen the articles I recently wrote here... (URL) Cheers, Ralph (23 years ago, 9-May-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | Re: ___cmpsi2
|
|
(...) Don't know. Just made a quick download from sourceforge. Didn't install, just looked through with mc. Seems that in the mint-lib, both cmp2-files are missing. And no printf in the c library path. Regards, Michael (23 years ago, 9-May-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: Apparent 'time-out'
|
|
(...) Yes, the flashlight consistently makes the RCX go "dead". (...) No rush. PATIENT: "Doctor, it really hurts when I move my arm like this." DOCTOR: "Then don't move your arm like that." (...) I look forward to the article. I am currently working (...) (23 years ago, 9-May-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | Re: ___cmpsi2
|
|
(...) How did *that* happen?!!?!? Just curious. Somebody should point a finger, just for yuks. -Kekoa (23 years ago, 9-May-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | RE: Apparent 'time-out'
|
|
(...) OK, so if the RCX is in the "dead" state, shutting down the GUI and restarting the GUI makes no difference. And you can always clobber the RCX running pbForth by shining a light at it? I'll see what I can do on this end to reproduce the (...) (23 years ago, 9-May-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | Re: Apparent 'time-out'
|
|
Shutting down the GUI and starting it back up has no effect, pbForth continues to respond correctly. Adding words to the dictionary doesn't seem to make any difference either. Whether having just uploaded the firmware or having the RCX active for (...) (23 years ago, 9-May-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | Re: semaphores
|
|
a short example: #include <semaphore.h> // for semaphore opperations // global buffer, used to store incoming messages. // the buffer is checked by the application waiting for the message. struct inn_msg{ char *msg; sem_t lock; }; //create a (...) (23 years ago, 9-May-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
