 | | Re: Dropping your RCX on the floor...
|
|
Having had to dismantle an RCX at one stage, I would point out that the battery connectors are not solidly attached to the main circuit board inside the RCX. (I have noted a lot of Lego electrics are built along those lines - relying on mechanical (...) (25 years ago, 6-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: NQC versus Lego RCX Code Speed
|
|
(...) With regards to your comment about sensor watchers, yes they are slow. If I remember correctly, they are implemented by a task that loops forever polling the sensors and starting other tasks whenever an event of the proper type occurs. Tasks (...) (25 years ago, 6-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Is Extreme Creatures Good?
|
|
(...) If you can find <set:6979> on clearance at TRU for $30, it's arguably a better deal, since it also has a Micromotor. It's not Technic, but my feeling is that the parts in it have more potential for making "pretty" bots. Ran (25 years ago, 6-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics, lugnet.technic, lugnet.market.shopping)
|
| |
| | Re: Cheap pyroelectric sensor
|
|
Ah hah! That's where they come from! I had seen the $40 ones mentioned in this news group a while back and then found Walmart selling complete motion detector systems for $8. So I bought a couple and pulled the sensors out. So they only cost $4! (...) (25 years ago, 6-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Cheap pyroelectric sensor
|
|
Hi all, Somebody pointed out to me a REALLY inexpensive pyroelectric sensor, to be found here: (URL) specs are here: (URL) he was asking if the sensor can be used with my interface circuit, to be found here: (URL) answer is no, at least not without (...) (25 years ago, 6-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: A neat idea for touch sensors
|
|
(...) make that four, one more than the number of sensors (...) It's on Michael Gasperi's site ((URL) Schumm has figured out how to orient the wires to allow two or more Touch sensors to be hooked in series to create the AND function. Here is his (...) (25 years ago, 6-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | RE: NQC versus Lego RCX Code Speed
|
|
(...) (URL) Is a note I posted a while back on pbForth speed. It really is very fast - not as quick as legOS, but fast enough for what we're doing. In fact, NQC and native firmware is fast enough - we just don't have enough variables.... As a point (...) (25 years ago, 6-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Vision command and Mac
|
|
I've seen no discussions of drivers either, if any finds out anything...please post. Thanks, Doug (...) Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at (URL) (25 years ago, 6-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: NQC versus Lego RCX Code Speed
|
|
(...) This is correct. (...) Hehe :) Yes, this is correct. LegOS is also faster for some other reasons- it samples the sensors at a much faster rate than the standard firmware, so legOS programs can react much more quickly than standard bytecode (...) (25 years ago, 6-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | RE: NQC versus Lego RCX Code Speed
|
|
Thanks very much, everyone, for the detailed answers. I suspect that, due to the huge performance gain I seem to get using NQC (in one observable area: touch sensor response time using two touch sensors on two separate ports), that the RCX Code (...) (25 years ago, 6-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics)
|
