 | | Bump switches and "aggression"
|
|
To my thinking there are two approaches to this, really two levels of difficulty, - Make it deterministic, in that if a switch is bumped invert your current trajectory axis, if going forward then reverse, if going R then go L. - Make it more (...) (22 years ago, 3-Dec-03, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | RE: Bump switches and "aggression"
|
|
(...) <SNIP> (...) I think that your example indirectly shows that there are two things to be aware of. Survival is one. Obstacle detection/avoidance is the other. In thinking about it, I can see where there is a fine line between the two. Consider (...) (22 years ago, 3-Dec-03, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: an idea, can someone tell me if this is possible/been done before/etc?
|
|
(...) So the pneumatic switch acts as a pneumatic touch sensor and stops the leg from extending fully. I'll keep that in mind. (...) I understand. Thanks for the explanation. (...) Kevin (22 years ago, 3-Dec-03, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Bump switches and "aggression"
|
|
(...) Oh I wish I had some of those touch sensors! One person from rtlToronto has a set and there is much envy from me to him. Right now I'm using lamp bricks, which isn't that great, really, but does work :) Thanks for the heads-up! Dave K (...) (22 years ago, 3-Dec-03, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Bump switches and "aggression"
|
|
(...) go (...) 'bumper'. (...) my (...) me, (...) alternative. (...) There is one solution for staying 100% Lego and putting 4 sensors on the same RCX input. Therefor you should be able to sense which direction you were getting bumped. Lego made (...) (22 years ago, 3-Dec-03, to lugnet.robotics)
|
