Subject:
|
Re: Custom Sensor poll (Re: Mindstorms on Slashdot)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Fri, 2 Dec 2005 20:34:13 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1443 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.robotics, Chris Magno wrote:
> FWIW, Rob, has shown us the "trick" to stack lego lamps
> on a sensor to offer varied resistance to separate sensors.
> This is a great example of how the Lego community as a whole
> has gained by not allowing custom parts.
I'm not sure about that. Rob's trick is great - I've used it myself, and
probably will again (I tend toward the end of "purist", although I confess some
of this may not be high moral standards, but laziness). But I would say that
solution is due to Rob's innovation, coupled with a challenge. And those
challenges don't go away if you allow custom sensors. For instance, pulling from
rtlToronto again, when C$ was won by Steve, there were cries of "well, you
couldn't do it with a single RIS kit"... whereupon Steve went and did it (at
least electronics-wise) with Stick.
Another example is I keep entering "purist" robots into sumo events that
allow custom sensors - that's partly because I'd like to find ways to "defeat" a
sumobot using an US sensor like Steve's Knife, while remaining in "purist" mode.
The result was I learned much more about IR detection and ranging than I
otherswise would have to try to achive that result. Here, custom sensors
actually encouraged a "pure LEGO" solution, not discouraged it. As another
example, I recently went up against "sheet metal" robots, and not only limited
myself to LEGO but built a sumobot that was (a) RCXless and (b) needed to be
manually wound before each sumo bout. I didn't decide to do this because the
rules forced it - quite to the contrary. I did it because I thought it would be
a unique challenge.
You can always restrict the parts list (electronic or otherwise) to produce a
new challenge. I think the question is when would the average "LEGO purist"
consider custom sensors to be acceptable. *Personally*, I would say two factors
would be required:
1) It must look, feel, and work in a way nearly indistinguishable from a LEGO
product. That means no exposed wires, metal, solder, etc, and furthermore that
it mates seemlessly onto LEGO bricks/beams. That's mostly a function of
casework, and the fact that I like the "look" of LEGO. "Works" like LEGO is
another factor - if the sensor is "plug and go", great, but I don't want to have
to "work" (as in exert a lot of non-LEGO effort) to get it functioning (this is
perhaps one of the reasons I've not migrated to BrickOS; again, that or
laziness).
2) It should be commonly availible. Any time I want a LEGO light sensor, I
can order one (assuming I have the $$$). The hurdle for someone to utilize or
extend a creation is raised if they are using a hard-to-find part or sensor. I
admit this is more of a continuum - after all cybermaster sensors are certainly
LEGO, but I could get an input multiplexer from several source faster and
cheaper.
> Do we risk never finding out because it
> would be easier to use a Sharp IR distance
> range sensor?
Maybe, but I honestly doubt it - there will always be folks trying to do
something in a new or different way. Look at Legway. Yep, custom sensors...
which then inspired a bunch of others to see how close to "all LEGO" they could
get. Steve basing the design on IRPD's didn't limit the way people thought of
doing it, quite the opposite.
> Well, again, IMO, I think the finished product of the third party
> supplier would have to have the look and feel of a OEM Lego product.
>
> It would not be enough to have a protoboard, or "bare wire" project as
> an "authorized" sensor. To me, the idea of a LEGO blessing would be to
> extend the sensor product line to a niche market (us), filled by small
> companys who do quality, not quantity production.
>
> Like the pens, and watches, if the third party item was actually
> sold/carried by LEGO, I think that would also go a long way towards
> purists acceptance.
>
> Clear as mud?
Actually, I think you said what I just did, but you did it cleaner, using
fewer parts. sigh...
One last thing to consider: a lot of events or challenges can (& are) done
both ways. For instance you can have a "pure LEGO" event side-by-side with a
"LEGO + custom sensors" event, and some of us have entered LEGO in "sheet metal"
events. Even more restrictive than a "pure LEGO" event is the "single RIS kit"
format that also has a lot going for it (even playing field for the maximum
number of potential participants). Just because most of us own more than a
single RIS kit, doesn't mean we don't enter and really enjoy "RIS only" events.
--
Brian Davis
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Custom Sensor poll (Re: Mindstorms on Slashdot)
|
| (...) Yes, this is a quirky little requirement. Common "LEGO Only" rules allow sensors that stopped being produced several years ago, and were only sold in England. Or gears that haven't been produced for over 20 years. But they don't allow brand (...) (19 years ago, 2-Dec-05, to lugnet.robotics)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Custom Sensor poll (Re: Mindstorms on Slashdot)
|
| Steve Hassenplug wrote: > >> The counter argument to all that, is those rare lego parts, or country >> specific ones that are not easily obtained. Hypothetically, what is the >> difference between me (being in Canada) getting cybermaster touch >> (...) (19 years ago, 2-Dec-05, to lugnet.robotics)
|
12 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
|
|
|
|
