|
|
 | | ARM Assembly Language Programming on NXT?
|
| Hi, I just stumbled on this newsgroup/website while searching for kits for teaching Assembly Language programming to undergraduate students in Comp. Science in an interesting (interactive) manner. I'm primarily interested in the ARM instruction set. (...) (17 years ago, 8-Oct-07, to lugnet.robotics.nxt.nxthacking)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) So it sounds like a single loop should be no problem under most situations, since I'm not sure I've heard of anyone running three motors on a single train (there's the same issue with how much amperage a power regulator can push). (...) It (...) (17 years ago, 8-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego, lugnet.robotics.nxt)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) Stalled, the train motor pulls 950 mA, while the stall current of the NXT motor is a whopping 2 Amps. So a single NXT motor output should easily handle a twin-engine train loaded to the point where it stalls the engine(s)... there's the matter (...) (17 years ago, 7-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego, lugnet.robotics.nxt)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) Fair enough, but clearly the idea has sparked some interest, so I'm sure I'll see it get put into use at some point. (...) The ports may be able to pour out power, as you say, but I'd say it's equally well established that large trains with (...) (17 years ago, 7-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego, lugnet.robotics.nxt)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) As Ross mentioned, I was focused more on the "future" of trains, and if it's going to be done in LEGO, it looks like it will be done without conductive track. (...) Absolutely, but you could do better. Run a single loop off a single output, (...) (17 years ago, 6-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego, lugnet.robotics.nxt)
| | | | | Power Functions presentation
|
| I have updated my website with a presentation of the new Power Functions system, including: # Overview of Power Functions range # Description of working # Comparison with older 9V mini-motors # LDraw and LeoCAD part files (URL) motors comparison (...) (17 years ago, 6-Oct-07, to lugnet.announce, lugnet.technic, lugnet.robotics, lugnet.trains) !!
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) I believe the options being discussed were in relation to the use of non-metal track, which is all that will be produced by LEGO in the foreseeable future. ROSCO (17 years ago, 6-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego, lugnet.robotics.nxt)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) Oh, for shame, Brian. Letting me think up an option that you passed right over (and a really cool one at that). With the legacy converter cables, you could power the _track_ with an NXT. Hook the track up as if it was a motor, using the (...) (17 years ago, 6-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego, lugnet.robotics.nxt)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) Not exactly, that I know of, *yet*... The biggest problem in running a train would be hiding the NXT - I saw only one good solution to hiding the RCX in a boxcar, and the NXT is bigger, as are the motors. You could use an old motor (or even a (...) (17 years ago, 6-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego, lugnet.robotics.nxt)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| In lugnet.lego, Scott Wardlaw wrote: <snip> (...) <snip> Has anyone adapted two NXT units to drive a train yet? One NXT as a controller talks bluetooth to the other NXT that drives the train. The NXT that drives the train could be either attached to (...) (17 years ago, 5-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego, lugnet.robotics.nxt)
|
|
