To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.roboticsOpen lugnet.robotics in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Robotics / 24032
24031  |  24033
Subject: 
Re: Lego controller
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.robotics
Date: 
Tue, 31 May 2005 19:02:24 GMT
Viewed: 
3691 times
  
On Tue, May 31, 2005 11:17 am, Martijn Boogaarts said:
> > > 2) A Better handshake between the RCX and the IRtower. To reduce in a multi
> > > environment overwritten of programs, or a switch to lock the programs
> > 
> > Do many people use the IR as a way to communicate between a PC and a moble
> > robot? Personally, I don't think I've ever used the IR tower where I couldn't
> > just use a wire, instead.  How about everyone else?  Would it be better to
> > just plug the robot into your computer?
> 
> Imagine you have multiple RCX units build in a large model then it is convenient
> to not have to leave a place open for the connector to program it. During a
> class session I found that many times the RCX programs were overwritten by
> programs from other users.

Ok, I'm not sure what you're in favor of, here.  :)

First, with the current setup, don't you have to leave the front of the RCX clear,
so the IR can flow in?

And, if the RCX used a wire, wouldn't that eliminate the possibility of programs
being overwritten in a classroom setting?

> > >  6) Remote sensor Usage (IR or Bluetooth)
> > > ...
> > >  10) Internal IP-like number (same as the imprinted) so you can direct
> > > address  that RCX ! (using IR or Bluetooth)
> 
> The advantage of Bluetooth sensors would be that they don’t need a sensor input
> on the RCX, and you can configure them in your program as you would configure a
> normal sensor, but link them to a virtual Input port. This makes the RCX small
> (not more connections are needed on top of it) and extra modules can be a
> connection for other sensors and those units then connect using Bluetooth to the
> RCX.

So, does this require any programming in the actual sensor?  And, how much would
something like that cost?  I'd think it would really raise the cost of a simple
sensor, wouldn't it?

Steve



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: Lego controller
 
(...) Reading all of this, I would imagine having a few more wired IO ports, as well as an I2C bus would go a great deal. For those who really want to go bluetooth (including myself) are there not I2C/bluetooth devices on the market? One problem I (...) (21 years ago, 31-May-05, to lugnet.robotics)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Lego controller
 
Steve (and others) Read in-between the lines for comments (...) Imagine you have multiple RCX units build in a large model then it is convenient to not have to leave a place open for the connector to program it. During a class session I found that (...) (21 years ago, 31-May-05, to lugnet.robotics, FTX)

29 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
    

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR