Subject:
|
Re: More Speed? Re: Mindstorms 3.0 Wish List
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Thu, 6 Nov 2003 13:20:14 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
899 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.robotics, “T. Alexander Popiel” popiel@wolfskeep.com wrote:
| |
Superficially, that seems true... but it falls apart as soon as you
start dealing with dead-reconing errors.
|
Ah hah! And the reason I don’t want to waste time and effort making my memory
map (excuse the pun) any harder to code than it has to be is because I am busy
building special sensors and other gizmos to solve the short range navigation
and location problem. That is where my interest really lies - not fighting
with limitations in the RCX.
Of course, the real answer is to build a replacement RCX too, to go along with
these new sensors. What’d you reckon, 1Mb of RAM should be enough for now :)
Yeah and a 40 MHz CPU with gobs of I/O.
JB
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: More Speed? Re: Mindstorms 3.0 Wish List
|
| (...) OK, that's definitely a good reason to keep things simple. I'm far from convinced that _any_ sensor suite (advanced or not) will completely fix the drift problem, but if the sensors themselves return absolute coordinates (or even absolute (...) (21 years ago, 10-Nov-03, to lugnet.robotics)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: More Speed? Re: Mindstorms 3.0 Wish List
|
| (...) Superficially, that seems true... but it falls apart as soon as you start dealing with dead-reconing errors. In practice, recovery from slew errors is significantly more difficult with a location grid-based mapping instead of an obstacle-based (...) (21 years ago, 5-Nov-03, to lugnet.robotics)
|
5 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
|
|
|
|
