Subject:
|
Re: motorized points - beating a dead horse
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Thu, 30 Nov 2000 23:12:48 GMT
|
Original-From:
|
J Austin David <austin@{stopspammers}havoc.gtf.org>
|
Reply-To:
|
austin@gtf.orgSPAMCAKE
|
Viewed:
|
845 times
|
| |
|
|
I didn't take pictures, but I did it w/ some gearing and clever
placement of a touch-sensor. The key part was that the touch
sensor (though light or rotation would work) would sense when
the switch was vertical; I then used the motor like a big
reciprocator, it was geared to just push the switch back and forth.
It was programmed using a scout, and it would wait on the sensor;
so if I hit one touch sensor, the motor would start -- it would
switch the track, then when the switch traveled back to vertical,
the switch-sensor would engage and stop the motor.
As for strength ... the whole mechanism was encased in a "house",
and was pretty huge, relative to minifig.
> Hi All,
> Currently I am attempting to build an automated hump yard. The main problem
> I'm tackling is the RCX controlled motorized points. I've spent 7 hours over
> the last two days trying to build a motorized switch track that will run
> forever with out ripping itself off the base plates and be very *forgiving*
> at the edges of both states, turn or straight. What I mean by forgiving is
> that the motor doesn't burn up or the gears do not get stripped off.
>
> I like really simple and elegant solutions. For instance I would like to be
> CPU switched with no feedback, again forgiving at the edges of both states
> such that the motor can spin for 1.5 secs and not reap havoc. Hanging
> elaborate clutch systems with differentials and angle sensors would not be
> my first choice. Of course beggers can't be choosers.
>
> Yes I have tried a bunch of slip gear configurations and the 2.5N/cm doesn't
> seem to over come the internal detent.
>
> Yes I looked at several designs on the web, I could have missed something.
>
> After at least 10 iterations I am still staring at a desktop full
> of disassembled bricks.
>
> Any ideas? Help?
> SteveB
> PNLTC
---
J Austin David austindavid.com austin@gtf.org
IMAGINE that, shortly after his defeat by the tortoise, the hare had
demanded a re-run on selected parts of the course. The tortoise
protested, and the umpire, coincidentally another tortoise, backed
him. The hare appealed to a court, coincidentally composed of seven
hares, who let him rerun those bits. Now, groundsmen on one of the
sections of the course are saying they cannot arrange a re-match
after all, the tortoises on the local council are threatening to
reject anything that might give the race to the hare, and both sides
have hired the best alligators money can buy.
--The Economist, 25 Nov 00: "Whatever will they think of next?"
|
|
1 Message in This Thread:
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
