Subject:
|
RE: LEGO Purism
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Fri, 9 Aug 2002 05:15:01 GMT
|
Original-From:
|
Rob Limbaugh <RLIMBAUGH@GREENFIELDGROUP.COMnomorespam>
|
Viewed:
|
792 times
|
| |
|
|
Here here!
Another great thing about LEGO is the engineering of the pieces allow one to
test possible designs for other types of robots. In my case, I don't have the
resources to spend $$$ on machining metal only to find out my first 3 ideas
didn't work. LEGO gives me a simple way to try out a concept and see if it
works. If it does, I can figure out a (better) way to make it out of simple,
cheap materials from Home Depot using relatively inexpensive tools to shape
things.
-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce Boyes [mailto:bboyes@systronix.com]
Sent: Friday, August 09, 2002 1:06 AM
To: lego-robotics@crynwr.com
Subject: Re: LEGO Purism
At 03:40 PM 8/8/2002 -0400, The Gaff wrote:
> > Why is everything Lego makes "pure"?
>
> Because my chosen hobby is *LEGO* robotics, a distinct subset of robotics as
> a whole. I am fully aware of the advantages of "opening my mind" to using
> non-LEGO elements; I just don't want to. I understand that you feel
> differently, but that doesn't make me wrong.
I don't have any quarrel with setting limits for the scope of some hobby.
When I was a kid I made a whole raft of 'useful' household articles from
nothing but glue, popsicle sticks and dried pasta in various shapes. Most
were spray painted gold and probably survive in my parents' attic.
I've paddled the Grand Canyon for 18 days rather than blasting through 4X
faster with a motor. I was there to savor the experience, not to race. I
don't own a power boat but do own several oar and paddle powered
craft. OK, I'm done with the folksy analogies.
My perspective is using the Legos as a way to quickly build robots and
structures not as a hobby but as a teaching tool at the university level. I
don't want to build what I can buy (and here's the qualifier) if it will do
the job. All the Lego mechanical bits are wonderful. The RCX is great for
kids (it's intended audience) but inadequate for a senior level computer
technology course.
A lot of very smart people have managed to extend the usefulness of the RCX
by grafting on more reasonable programming languages. They've done an
astounding job. But at its core, RCX is still an 8 bit micro with very
limited resources. What if you could erase those limits? We intend to.
> using - and there always would be. Serious robotics is a very, very
> expensive hobby.
Not being a serious roboticist I wouldn't know. I do, however have over
$2000 worth of Lego and Knex bits in my office closet... plus assorted add
ons like sonar sensors, heavy duty motors, etc.
> Because I cannot afford it. If I was going to play with non-LEGO robotics,
> there would be accelerometers, gyros, laser ranging, high-speed RF
> communication, stereoscopic image processing, shape memory alloys, stepper
> motors, servos, solenoids... to say nothing of all the tools I'd need to
> machine parts and make them work nicely together. LEGO is plenty expensive
> enough on its own.
For my purposes sonar rangers, RF, etc and other sensors are required or at
least desired. My interest is in education, so students are allowed to add
whatever they want, hack up bricks, etc. I know, I know, the Society for
Prevention of Modification of Legos will be contacting me shortly...
Call me a heretic but I see Legos as part of the universe of raw materials
available to solve a problem. I intend to apply them where they excel and
add other parts where they don't. And replace the RCX completely.
I also believe a true robot is autonomous, so running vision processing on
a PC is cheating. It's like the man behind the curtain in the Wizard of Oz.
It grates on me that the remote control devices on TV (battle bots, etc)
are called "robots", if they are, then so is my VCR... So a more powerful
CPU for the brain is essential if we are ever to build capable true robots.
The technology now exists to combine a current technology, open, powerful,
standardized language (Java) with a very small, very powerful controller
(native execution Java hardware) such as on our JStamp module. I think this
opens doors which have been closed up to this point. With a bit of luck
we'll be able to demonstrate a lot more of this in the near future.
Bruce Boyes
|
|
1 Message in This Thread:
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
