Subject:
|
Re: Rotational Sensor & Gearing Down
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Wed, 24 Jan 2001 06:08:48 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
811 times
|
| |
|
|
Mark Haye wrote:
> In my experience, rotational sensors are accurate to within +/-5%. 100% accurate sensors would
> be great, but 95% accurate sensors are still very useful. You can compensate for the inaccuracy
> in various ways, e.g. in the software. IMHO, this is no reason to be disappointed or not to use them.
> YMMV (literally).
How do you compensate in software?
Dean
--
Coin-Op's For Sale!: http://www.akasa.bc.ca/tfm/coin-op.html
Dean's Lego Workshop: http://www.akasa.bc.ca/tfm/lego_wr.html
Vancouver Lego Club: http://www.akasa.bc.ca/vlc
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Rotational Sensor & Gearing Down
|
| "Dean Husby" <nntp@akasa.bc.ca> wrote in message news:3A6E7170.F38BA6...a.bc.ca... (...) accurate sensors would (...) compensate for the inaccuracy (...) disappointed or not to use them. (...) Exactly... you can't. Unless you use another sensor, (...) (23 years ago, 24-Jan-01, to lugnet.robotics)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Rotational Sensor & Gearing Down
|
| In my experience, rotational sensors are accurate to within +/-5%. 100% accurate sensors would be great, but 95% accurate sensors are still very useful. You can compensate for the inaccuracy in various ways, e.g. in the software. IMHO, this is no (...) (23 years ago, 24-Jan-01, to lugnet.robotics)
|
19 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
