Subject:
|
Re: How many people signed up for the NXT Developer's Program?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Wed, 18 Jan 2006 21:24:53 GMT
|
Original-From:
|
Mr S <SZINN_THE1@nomorespamYAHOO.COM>
|
Viewed:
|
6185 times
|
| |
|
|
John,
The reason I asked is that to get a Lego robot that is
moving enough to even use GPS (read moving more than 5
yards, and outside no less) it will take a special
build. Your *average* differential drive/steer robot
with castor is not likely to do well on grass etc.
I've followed the information about RoboMagellan
closely, as well as other contests of similar design.
I'm trying to imagine a Lego robot that is competing
in the same arena as R/C monster truck based robots...
I hoped you had some secret inside,
have-to-kill-you-if-I-told-you information on building
such a beasty of a robot with Lego.
--- John Brost <john.brost@gmail.com> wrote:
> In lugnet.robotics, Mr S <szinn_the1@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> > --- John Brost <john.brost@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > The first thing I thougth of when I heard of the
> > > NXT's bluetooth capability was
> > > getting it to recieve GPS data from my bluetooth • GPS
> > > receiver. Obvious NeXT
> > > step... a GPS guided LEGO rover.
> >
> > John,
> > Seeing that GPS accuracy is on the order of • several
> > yards (optimistically speaking) what LEGO robot • wouuld
> > you build that could make good use of GPS, and how
> > would it use GPS?
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > S
>
> I have a great deal of experience with GPS. The
> accuracy you mention is indeed
> correct (the GPS I'm looking at right now is specd
> at 5 meters horizontal
> accuracy). However, when you look at
> second-by-second accuracy, it is much
> better. A great deal of the error in many GPS
> receivers is caused by drift,
> which is how much the reported position of a
> stationary object moves over time,
> usually over the course of several hours. When
> mobile, the drift isn't so much
> of a problem, unless you are trying to drive in the
> same circle for hours on
> end. The GPS unit I'm specifically thinking about
> using is one of the better
> ones for this sort of thing, and given a clear view
> of the sky, I think it would
> do okay. I've been impressed with its performance
> so far in other applications.
> I could even do a running average on the reported
> coordinates to clean up any
> errors. Your concerns are indeed valid, but my
> experience and intuition tell me
> it can be done.
>
> Obviously I'm not going to have something that is
> highly accurate, but I am
> pretty confident that I could get something to
> follow a course within 3 feet or
> so.
>
> As for a good use for such a robot, well I never
> said I had a good use for it,
> besides the fact that I think it would be cool to
> do! :) After all, why do
> people climb Mt. Everest? Because it is there.
>
> Maybe navigating autonomously to pre-programmed
> points, sort of like outdoor
> line following without the line. If I got really
> ambitious, I did find this
> event called Robo-Magellen, which appears to be an
> autonomous outdoor robot
> competition similar to a mini-DARPA Grand Challenge.
>
> http://www.robothon.org/robothon/challenge.php
>
> Could be interesting, but it would need more than
> just a GPS for guidance, maybe
> the NXT's ultrasonic detector for obstacle
> avoidance.
>
> John
>
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
77 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
|
|
|
|
