Subject:
|
Re: CM-RCX comm
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Wed, 31 Jan 2001 04:30:06 GMT
|
Original-From:
|
Steve Baker <SJBAKER1@AIRMAIL.spamlessNET>
|
Reply-To:
|
sjbaker1@airmail.netSTOPSPAMMERS
|
Viewed:
|
721 times
|
| |
|
|
"Marco C." wrote:
>
> 2) My first tests with the two pBricks (CyberMaster and RCX) prove that
> it's possible to communicate using a (ten times) slower version of VLL
> protocol (I call it SlowVLL for short). *It works*, and it transmits data
> very accuratly (I'd thought it would suffer some variations in timmings but
> no, the Wait() value on the OUTPUT pBrick is exactly the measured Timer()
> value on the INPUT pBrick.
Wooaahhh! That can't be true. Both machines are running some kind of
(hopefully) crystal oscillator to generate the clock that drives the
Timer() and Wait() commands. No two cystal oscillators generate the
*exact* same timing - so your two clock could easily differ by one
part per million or so. Hence, once in a while, you'll find that
you either miss a bit or drop a bit. That may be quite rarely or
quite frequently depending on the quality of the oscillators that
Lego used for the RCX.
You may be able to tolerate that - but you *do* need to be aware that
the error rate won't ever be zero.
--
Steve Baker HomeEmail: <sjbaker1@airmail.net>
WorkEmail: <sjbaker@link.com>
HomePage : http://web2.airmail.net/sjbaker1
Projects : http://plib.sourceforge.net
http://tuxaqfh.sourceforge.net
http://tuxkart.sourceforge.net
http://prettypoly.sourceforge.net
http://freeglut.sourceforge.net
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: CM-RCX comm
|
| Status Report: 1) Ok, just got my RIS 1.0 set (AT LAST! ;) 2) My first tests with the two pBricks (CyberMaster and RCX) prove that it's possible to communicate using a (ten times) slower version of VLL protocol (I call it SlowVLL for short). *It (...) (23 years ago, 30-Jan-01, to lugnet.robotics)
|
20 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
