Subject:
|
Re: Another update for WIRRL
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Tue, 22 Oct 2002 15:24:14 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
748 times
|
| |
|
|
Instead of worrying about the half duplex communication,
wouldn't it just be easier to have tranceiver at two different frequencies?
If I am missing something, go ahead and say so. I know very, very little
about electronics.
Timothy
In lugnet.robotics, "Rob Limbaugh" <RLimbaugh@greenfieldgroup.com> writes:
> I just noticed at least one glaring error with the new schematic...
>
> Say, for argument, an RCX sends "1001", which, in IR, would be "0110". =
> The IR detector of WIRRL would do nothing for the first bit ("0"), but =
> the next bit ("1") should be sent over the RFTX, and, according to the =
> current logic/schematic, it is. However, I never disabled the line =
> between the RFRX and the Oscillator, so the RFRX will receive the =
> transmission from the RFTX (because all are same frequency). This would =
> make IR =3D 1 and RF =3D 1. According to the truth tables, priority =
> will be given to RFRX data and the third bit of IR ("1") would never be =
> sent.
>
> Apparently, while creating the truth tables, I gave consideration to =
> this... I just never included it in the schematic.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rob Limbaugh=20
> Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2002 2:45 AM
> To: lego-robotics@crynwr.com
> Subject: Another update for WIRRL
>
>
> To those interested,
>
> I've made a new schematic (WIRRL Rev. 2a) using a better TX/RX pair =
> (Linx LC
> Series) and I think I've found a possible better solution for handling =
> flow
> of data. This new diagram eliminates three transistors and replaces the
> 4001 Quad-NOR with a 74HC00A Quad-NAND.
>
> Out of nowhere, it dawned on me that I should use a truth table to =
> figure
> out how to move the data. I've included the truth table information and
> logic diagram at the bottom of the page.
>
> Same link as before: http://www.abs-robotics.com/projects/wirrl.htm
>
> Maybe I'll have time this weekend to actually build it...
>
> - Rob
>
> PS - Just as before, I don't claim this circuit works... I haven't built =
> it,
> so I don't know. I'm still learning.
>
>
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | RE: Another update for WIRRL
|
| I just noticed at least one glaring error with the new schematic... Say, for argument, an RCX sends "1001", which, in IR, would be "0110". The IR detector of WIRRL would do nothing for the first bit ("0"), but the next bit ("1") should be sent over (...) (22 years ago, 22-Oct-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
5 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
