Subject:
|
Re: Lego controller
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Tue, 31 May 2005 19:02:24 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
955 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 (...) (19 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 (...) (19 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
|
|
|
|
