 | | Re: Even better, RIS 1.5, $99.99
|
|
(...) In the end, the decision comes down to: * Do you need a USB tower or an RS232 serial port tower? If you need a USB tower then you've got to go with the RIS 2.0, if you need the serial port tower, you need an RIS 1.5 or an RIS 1.0. If you have (...) (22 years ago, 6-Jun-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Even better, RIS 1.5, $99.99
|
|
(...) You can program each RCX independantly. You need to turn one off or put it out the way of the IR tower while you are downloading the program to the other of course!) That much is pretty obvious - but where the fun comes is when you get the two (...) (22 years ago, 6-Jun-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | RE: Even better, RIS 1.5, $99.99
|
|
With the compatibility issues not totally known, plus the cost of upgrading to 2.0 software, you might look at buying the 2.0 RIS on eBay or somewhere for not much more. I've seen sealed new sets go as low as $120 (usually around $140), and I (...) (22 years ago, 7-Jun-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Even better, RIS 1.5, $99.99
|
|
In the end, it all comes down to the power connector on the original 1.0 RCX. If you don't mind buying batteries while you're trying to debug your code, then the version you buy doesn't matter. (And with the 2.0 firmware on the web, the contents of (...) (22 years ago, 7-Jun-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Even better, RIS 1.5, $99.99
|
|
(...) This brings up another question I have. Since I will now have two RCX's can someone give me a short summary of how to use them? Can both be used from the Mindstorms software, or is something better required (since I've only had 2.0 a week, I (...) (22 years ago, 7-Jun-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Even better, RIS 1.5, $99.99
|
|
Take a look at my version of Mibo and play the GIF or AVI and you will see two RCXs operating 6 motors and 5 sensors communicating with each other with messages to synchronize the actions of the model. Two RCXs are twice the fun. -- Bob Fay THE SHOP (...) (22 years ago, 7-Jun-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Even better, RIS 1.5, $99.99
|
|
(...) That's actually what my 1xRCX + 4xScout system uses. Another way to think of it is "Don't talk until the person before you has finished speaking". If each machine has a number, you can send that number embedded in the message somewhere. The (...) (22 years ago, 8-Jun-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Even better, RIS 1.5, $99.99
|
|
(...) What makes this REALLY difficult is that the communications medium is error prone - it's all too easy for two robots to get out of IR contact with each other when they are moving around. That makes all the usual protocols very difficult. In (...) (22 years ago, 9-Jun-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Even better, RIS 1.5, $99.99
|
|
(...) Probably regulatory. Lego want to market this in many countries - and probably don't want to redesign and re-certify it in every market. The 27MHz band is widely used for toys - but you get a lot of radio interference from toys, CB radio's and (...) (22 years ago, 9-Jun-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Even better, RIS 1.5, $99.99
|
|
There's one way for solving the problem with multiple IR communications at the same time. The method used for old computer networks is called a "token" wich is passed from PC to PC giving each one a chance to "speak". This could also be used for (...) (22 years ago, 9-Jun-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Even better, RIS 1.5, $99.99
|
|
I have thought about those methods as well, the only problem is when you don't work with the RCX's for just one robot. When you want to try a little bit with AI and interactions between different robots you can't have a master that requests, unless (...) (22 years ago, 9-Jun-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Even better, RIS 1.5, $99.99
|
|
I've been wondering if anybody has any ideas why they chose to go with IR as opposed to RF? The substantial limitations of IR make it highly impracticle for robotics. The only two reasons I can see would be cost or power limitations. I can't imagine (...) (22 years ago, 10-Jun-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
