Subject:
|
Re: RCX & RIS, a fading glory?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Thu, 30 Jan 2003 20:51:55 GMT
|
Original-From:
|
Kyle McDonald <Kyle.McDonald@Sun.COM#spamless#>
|
Viewed:
|
1345 times
|
| |
|
|
PeterBalch wrote:
>
> > If Lego designed a SMALL computer which had an external bus onto which
>
> could
>
> > be plugged ROM chips ... with different and "interesting-to-kids"
>
> programs in them
>
> > ROM-bricks with
> > flow-chart elements printed on them that could be stacked to build
>
> programs...
>
> That is an absolutely fantastic idea. Have you written anything down that
> you'd be prepared to share with all of us?
I've considered this in the past. The downside that made me look for
something else, is that if you start actually 'porgram' the creation
through the different combinations of bricks, then very quickly the
physical shape, design, and mechanical funtions of the creation
start to be dictated by this growing combination of flowchart bricks.
It also has the downside of not being able to finish a program
just because you ran out of 'If/then' bricks (as an example.)
I've started to think that a comprimise might be to keep a single
(possibly multiple as an upgrade, but for the sake of simplicity...)
computer brain that has progams downloaded like today. But this
computer would connect to a 'bus' or communications interace
(which could be a simple as the 2 wires we use today, and which
possibly could carry both power and data.)
Then you might have 'blocks' with 2 or 4 sensor inputs, blocks
with LCD screens, blocks with motor outputs (or better yet, put
the motor controller, an RPM/Rotation/Torque Sensor all inside
the motor, and make it a 'block' that connects to the bus directly.)
With this digital interface, a compass, or a sonar, or even a
camera could directly interface to the computer block, without
needint to convert it's output to 'analog' and go in through a
sensor input. Also the Batteries themselves should be able to
be plugged into this bus, and the computer should be able to
read the status from the batteries as if they were a sensor.
Ideally the batteries would be selfcontained and rechargable
(or at least a model like that would be an option.) and there
would be a battery 'docking' brick that could be built into a
base station so that the robot could (theoretically) drive up
and 'plug' itself in.
A system like this would be nearly limitless. Within reason,
as many motors or sensors as you wanted could be connected,
The sensor input terminals could be distributed out near the
sensors themselves (and reduce the number of wires) Multiple
LCD screens could be attached and used for different purposes.
A new turntable (like the current Technic one) could be made
that would have a 'bus' input on one half and output on the
other, so that sensors, motors, etc could be located on the
rotating part of the robot and rotated constantly without
needing to worry about twisting up the wires.
Electrically, Mechanically, this system sounds great all
around. It's the closest analog to the real LEGO flexible
building system that I've heard yet. The downside, (and
maybe what stopped LEGO from doing something like this) is
the programming.
It's not impossible to solve, but it is complicated enough
that prividing a kid with a en easy to use programming model
for this system would be hard. All of a sudden you really need
to track device ID's and types. Either each motor has to
have it's own address hard coded or set by the user, or there
needs to be some 'automatic' way of assigning them. Trying
to assign them automatically, and still have them work right
when the kid rewires the robot, or inserts a new sensor block
in the middle of the bus is not a trivial problem.
With assigned addresses, this really is doable though, and
maybe not that hard. Infact it's very similiar to the DCC
system used in model trains. DCC has a way of reading registers
back from the decoders I believe, so by putting a DCC decoder
right in a LEGO motor, and adding the rotation/torque/rpm
sensor, you should be able to control the motor, and read
back the sensor I would think. Same for the sensor blocks.
I'm pretty sure DCC isn't a perfect fit, but it is a good
enough analog that it's probably worth looking at as a starting
point.
-Kyle
--
_
-------------------------------ooO( )Ooo-------------------------------
Kyle J. McDonald (o o) Systems Support Engineer
Sun Microsystems Inc. |||||
Enterprise Server Products Kyle.McDonald@Sun.COM
1 Network Drive BUR03-4630 \\\// voice: (781) 442-2184
Burlington, MA 01803 (o o) fax: (781) 442-1542
-------------------------------ooO(_)Ooo-------------------------------
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: RCX & RIS, a fading glory?
|
| What about DACTA? The eductaion market must be huge. (...) motors? (...) As an aside: I have a simple and successful design for a motor interfaced to Lego - total cost is around $1. But I'm not a Lego purist ... (...) could (...) programs in them (...) (22 years ago, 30-Jan-03, to lugnet.robotics)
|
2 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
