Subject:
|
Re: Max-picking LIDAR
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Thu, 4 Mar 2004 14:55:12 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1040 times
|
| |
|
|
John Barnes wrote:
> I have a question which may help others duplicate your
> work - did you expressly ensure the RCX IR "range" setting
> was set to "long"?
Yes. Here's a more complete test program, that comes close to duplicating my
original performance. Just download, & attach a forward-facing light sensor to
IN_2:
#define eye SENSOR_2
int reflect;
task main()
{
SetSensor(eye, SENSOR_LIGHT);
start lidar;
SetUserDisplay(reflect,0);
while(true)
{
switch(reflect/10)
{
case 1:
PlayTone(440,1);
break;
case 2:
PlayTone(880,1);
break;
case 3:
PlayTone(1760,1);
break;
}
Wait(1);
}
}
task lidar()
{
int x1,x2,x3,x4,ambient;
SetTxPower(TX_POWER_HI);
while(true)
{
ambient = eye;
SendMessage(255);
Wait(2);
x1 = eye;
x2 = eye;
x3 = eye;
x4 = eye;
if (x2>x1) x1=x2;
if (x3>x1) x1=x3;
if (x4>x1) x1=x4;
reflect = x1 - ambient;
}
}
> As a matter of interest, what effect does continuous message
> transmission have on battery life?
I've yet to test that... for that matter, I ought to use Recorder to measure
the difference in sensitivity to IR for RCX 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0 versions. Recorder
is fun to play with: you can watch a LEGO lightbulb "turn on" as the brightness
ramps up & down.
> Also, did you know you can format up your own messages under
> RCX2 firmware?
No, I did not! How do you do that? Not only might that reduce power
consumption & decrease cycle time, but...
> ...a couple of FFs (or 00s - whichever causes continuous
> transmission of bits)...
...would make it much easier to ensure a maximum reading! Where can I find
documentation on this? For that matter, does anyone know where I could get the
most up-to-date NQC guide? Since the web page moved, the guides seem to have
vanished (& I've only got the 2.3 guide).
> As an observation, two Sumo bots doing this kind of detection
> would cause some interesting results wouldn't they :)
I got lucky - nobody else tried it, *this* time. But that's another reason I
came up with this routine. By taking a clean "ambient" reading, I can at least
detect IR interference (if the "ambient" reading is greater than the maximum
reflection reading, somebody else is emitting IR and making artificially bright
"ambient" readings). So while I can't yet completely counter jamming
(intentional or otherwise), I can deduce that it's occuring with this method.
--
Brian Davis
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Max-picking LIDAR
|
| In lugnet.robotics, Brian Davis wrote: <SNIP> (...) <SNIP> Brian, thanks for posting this...I can't wait to try it out :) As for formatting your own messages in RCX 2.0 you can look at our (LRGoAA) communication protocol functions put together by (...) (21 years ago, 4-Mar-04, to lugnet.robotics)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Max-picking LIDAR
|
| (...) .. major snippage ... Nice work! Although I like building custom sensors, I also really enjoy the ingenuity of people working with what's available. I have a question which may help others duplicate your work - did you expressly ensure the RCX (...) (21 years ago, 4-Mar-04, to lugnet.robotics)
|
4 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
|
|
|
|
