Subject:
|
Re: RCX 2.0 -- ideas.
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Thu, 31 Dec 1998 15:05:22 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
4024 times
|
| |
|
|
Laurentino Martins wrote:
>
> At 14:15 31-12-1998 Thursday , you wrote:
> > Here are some things I would like to see changed for RCX 2. (if there
> > is even one)
> >
> > 1. More connections. At least 4 outputs and 4 inputs. The way it is
> > right now, a robot that drives around can't really do much else, given
> > that there is only one output to spare for a light or a motor. Another
> > inut would also be nice, but not as badly needed as the output.
>
> I don't think they are willing to change the main processor (and all the software involved) just to accomplish this...
unless there are another versions of the H8 that have more
inputs/outputs (?)
I didn't know it was processor limited. Maybe they can do some sort of
multiplexing. (At least for inputs) That way they could get 2 or more
in the space of one. But you do see the need for more outputs right? I
would LOVE 'em. :)
> > 2. Smaller size. The RCX 1.0 is HUGE!. A small robot with RCX 1.0 is
> > just impossible, the thing is so dang big. I would like to see the next
> > version half as thick and with a top 2/3 the size. This would allow for
> > some really neat, small robots.
>
> RCX is HUGE? You should see a CyberMaster unit... that's HUGE!
Hehe, I have never seen that one.
> > 3. Lighter. Right now the main thing weighing it down i think are the
> > batteries. Why doesn't LEGO get a custom lithium ion type battery, the
> > laptop kind, for RCX 2.0. That could make it REAL small. And it would
> > last longer between charges.
>
> You also should weight a CyberMaster unit. That's HEAVY!
> The two internal motors are the main reason for such size and weight.
>
> > As a first version, the RCX is pretty dang awesome, but I think there is
> > room to improve. Any comments?
>
> Something between a CyberMaster and a RCX would be ideal.
> The radio link from the CyberMaster and the memory and software from the RCX.
> Also, the two internal motors from the CyberMaster should be made external. That way we would have 2 external hi-torque
motors with rotation sensors integrated AND without the need for
connecting them to the inputs!
> Yes, the CyberMaster motors only have two connections.
>
> By the way, how can they drive a motor and receive feedback from it 50 times per rotation using only two wires ??? (have
I seen this wrong?)
That sounds too good to be true :)
I heard they couldn't have the radio link in the RCX becuase of FCC
regulations. I agree that radio is MUCH better than this line-of-sight
IR.
-PV
------------------------------------------------------------
Purple Viking (Jakob Nebeker) ____________________________
email: jakob@writeme.com | the sentence below is false
ICQ : 6245080 | the sentence above is true
------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: RCX 2.0 -- ideas.
|
| (...) I don't think they are willing to change the main processor (and all the software involved) just to accomplish this... unless there are another versions of the H8 that have more inputs/outputs (?) (...) RCX is HUGE? You should see a (...) (28 years ago, 31-Dec-98, to lugnet.robotics)
|
46 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
