| |
In lugnet.technic, Mark Tarrabain wrote:
> Okay, Kevin... you talked me into trying this inverted logic thingamy.
>
> (I'm just too competitive for my own good...)
>
> How's this?
Geat job Mark! I started out with a 14 piston, seven switch full adder, and by
piggybacking off each others ideas, you've gotten us down to 2 pistons and a
handfull of switches. Absolutely amazing! Unless I come up with some
revolutionary idea, you win.
Now that we've reduced the computing to such inexpensive levels, I'm back to
making pneumatic state machines to make advanced pneumatic bipeds.
While on a work trip to Boston, I figured out a second way to make synchronized
pneumatic logic. The new one does not need a clocking scheme, so it is really
asynchronous, but using your AND gate mechanism, I can synchronize multiple
pistons before the state machine changes to the next state. I've been trying
for several years to come up with this new methodology. Previous to this my
state machines were simple variations of the two piston/two switch pneumatic
motor circuit.
So I'm back to working on my biped that has two degrees of freedom at the hips,
two at the knees, and two at the ankles. It used to take 16 pistons to
coordinate (not including the alternating pressure mechanism needed to keep them
all coordinated). Using my new design methodology I can discard the 6 timing
generation pistons, and just use the *muscle* pistons to control all the timing.
I've tested the new design methodology on a few example circuits and it works
well. I've got the paper design for the 10 piston beast, and will be working
toward a real model over the next week. The design is very aggressive, so I'm
not sure it will walk, even when the pneumatics work correctly.
It has been a lot of fun having someone else exploring the world of pneumatic
circuitry! Thanks for all your contributions!
If you have an algorithm for using the switches the way you do without running
into accidental release problems, I'd be very interested in how you do it. I'm
planning on presenting my new state machine design methodology technique at
BrickFest. The power point presentation will be uploaded to BrickShelf also.
Kevin
<snip>
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: A better full adder!
|
| (...) Not sure if there's an algorithm, per se... but here's how I do it. Conceptually, I think of the backwards switch arrangement as an XOR gate. Input (from the output valves) will only be accepted from either the top or bottom valve. In general, (...) (21 years ago, 1-Jul-03, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.robotics)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: A better full adder!
|
| Okay, Kevin... you talked me into trying this inverted logic thingamy. (I'm just too competitive for my own good...) How's this? (URL) A and NOT A, B and NOT B, and Carry in as inputs and produces A+B+C, NOT A+B+C, and Carry Out as outputs. I saw no (...) (21 years ago, 28-Jun-03, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.robotics)
|
27 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
Active threads in Robotics
|
|
|
|
|
|
