 | | Re: Even better, RIS 1.5, $99.99 —Steve Baker
|
| | | (...) 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 —Jonathan Spitz
|
| | | | 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 —Steve Baker
|
| | | | | (...) 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 —Mike Payson
|
| | | | 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)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Even better, RIS 1.5, $99.99 —Steve Baker
|
| | | | (...) 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)
|
| | | | |
