Subject:
|
Re: Mindstorms 3.0 Wish List
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Wed, 5 Nov 2003 15:32:24 GMT
|
Original-From:
|
Steve Baker <sjbaker1@airmail.SPAMLESSnet>
|
Viewed:
|
2206 times
|
| |
|
|
Chris Phillips wrote:
> Reading this thread, I am struck by one thought: who would actually pay for a
> souped-up RCX with intelligent sensors and BlueTooth in every sensor?
I agree - it's basically a good idea - but it's probably too expensive.
> I could see BlueTooth in every RCX, but it would be overkill for talking with sensors.
Using bluetooth for communications between RCX's - or between RCX and PC - is a bit
of a non-starter, the range of bluetooth is intentionally rather short. An 802.11
interface would make more sense for that.
> Besides, could you imagine your typical hacker trying to build a custom sensor
> if they had to imitate all of this functionality just to hook it up to the RCX?
What would be ideal would be for Lego to recognise that people do this and to
make a little breadboard with a handful of TTL inputs and outputs and whatever
standard interface their own sensors have.
> I think it would be better for them to stick with hard-wired sensors, but to
> scale down the RCX and make it smaller+cheaper so that you could afford to
> combine several RCXes in a single robot. This would give us the I/O expansion
> capability that we (sometimes) desire.
A bus architecture is what's most desperately needed. So instead of each sensor/motor
needing it's own dedicated port on the RCX, they should be 'daisy-chained'. This
allows the RCX to be MUCH smaller because in place of those six 2x2 stud connectors,
you can have just one bus connector. Also, you could take the LCD panel off and
make that a separate module on the bus - so small/simple models wouldn't have to
have it. Then, the interface to the PC could be a pluggable module - so you could
connect it to the RCX when downloading the program - and either unplug it when the robot
is operating autonomously - or leave it plugged in if the robot needs to talk back to
base during operation.
All of those things would shrink the RCX drastically...and drop the price to just a
few dollars. I'd hope it could fit into a single 2x4 brick...with power supplied from
an external battery pack.
Done right, you could have multiple RCX's on one bus.
I'd also like to see ROM chips in small bricks with a bus connection. This would
allow Lego to build kits with an RCX in them - but with a preprogrammed 'behavior'
chip. So you could have something as fancy as the back-hoe model with all kinds
of clever built-in tricks for people who don't want to mess with software. However,
the RCX chip would still be a standard one - so enthusiasts could use it in other
ways in other models by just tossing out it's ROM 'behaviour' brick.
> Even the concept of adding a Compact Flash slot seems misguided. Adding an
> empty CF slot would probably cost as much or more than simply adding a couple
> megs of memory right into the RCX, which is what you really want anyway.
Yes - although if you had a bus-based system, you could make a compact-flash slot
'module' if there was a good reason for doing that.
> I do like very much Paul Kleniewski's axle electrical connector replacement for
> the 2x2 electrical brick. It is much more compact (allowing for a smaller RCX)
> and has the advantage of allowing a wire to be passed through a Technic pinhole.
> Of course, I would hope that they would also create an adaptor brick to convert
> one type of connector to the other so the old stuff would work with the new.
Yes - that's a good idea. For a bus-based system, we'd probably want at least
three and preferably four wires - which would imply the need for a connector that
would mechanically only allow you to plug it in one way round.
---------------------------- Steve Baker -------------------------
HomeEmail: <sjbaker1@airmail.net> WorkEmail: <sjbaker@link.com>
HomePage : http://www.sjbaker.org
Projects : http://plib.sf.net http://tuxaqfh.sf.net
http://tuxkart.sf.net http://prettypoly.sf.net
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
GCS d-- s:+ a+ C++++$ UL+++$ P--- L++++$ E--- W+++ N o+ K? w--- !O M-
V-- PS++ PE- Y-- PGP-- t+ 5 X R+++ tv b++ DI++ D G+ e++ h--(-) r+++ y++++
-----END GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Mindstorms 3.0 Wish List
|
| (...) Reading this thread, I am struck by one thought: who would actually pay for a souped-up RCX with intelligent sensors and BlueTooth in every sensor? I could see BlueTooth in every RCX, but it would be overkill for talking with sensors. A (...) (21 years ago, 5-Nov-03, to lugnet.robotics)
|
44 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
