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 / 25628
25627  |  25629
Subject: 
Re: turtle coding kit (Re: How would we (the rest of us) communicate ideas to the MDP?)
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.robotics
Date: 
Wed, 22 Feb 2006 15:47:38 GMT
Viewed: 
2445 times
  
In lugnet.robotics, Tim Rueger wrote:

Given the choice, I'd like to see included in NXT
a software module for coding dead-reckoning
navigation for turtle-type robots, kind of like
here:

  http://www.seattlerobotics.org/encoder/200108/using_a_pid.html

But since the NXT motors have built-in encoders,
the code would be much simpler.  In fact, the inputs
to the routines would be just the diameter of the
wheels and their separation.

   The question is just how much of this is handled at what level within the NXT
firmware & software. I'd be surprised if LEGO doesn't do *something* with the
built-in encoders - after all, *they* put them there. the question is how much.
   The other point is that the Peeves code is really nice - and tuned. tuning
PID isn't all that easy, from what I've seen. In other words, I don't think an
"out of the box" solution will have nearly the abilities of Peeves in this
regard. But it's a great starting place. Hopefully, some of this will be
implimented out of the box, and the rest will be implemented by AFoLs (or non-A
FoL's - there's a lot of very sharp younger folks out there) shortly thereafter.

Credit Evan Ryker, a member of my recent FLL team,
for the sending me this excellent link.  Apologies
if it's been seen before here.)

   It has, but don't apologize - it's a great link that should be pulled up now
and again, *especially* now that encoders will come in the "base" Mindstorms
set. PID (or simpiler correction schemes) may become a lot more common. Time to
read up...

if NXT is to be an "iPod for robotics", I think
this has to be included, and be dead-on reliable.
Then FLL teams... can get on with the business of
coding actual robot behaviors instead of endlessly
tweaking one-shot navigation routines.

   I don't know - a lot of good FLL robots don't bother with complicated
dead-reckoning, but use either "point and shoot" techniques, or correct based on
landmarks. Having three encoders opens up some wonderful new options - but some
of the old "KISS" methods shouldn't be ignored either.

--
Brian Davis



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: turtle coding kit (Re: How would we (the rest of us) communicate ideas to the MDP?)
 
(...) I'd go further than that - I may be wrong here, but AFAIK professional roboticists largely consider dead reckoning to be a losing game, an amateur red-herring that you can waste all the time and money you want on and it will still never work (...) (19 years ago, 22-Feb-06, to lugnet.robotics)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: turtle coding kit (Re: How would we (the rest of us) communicate ideas to the MDP?)
 
(...) Having given this a bit more thought, the code would be almost the same. Even though the encoders are built-in, there's no guarantee that the motors themselves are matched. You would still need control loops to ensure that the motors rotate at (...) (19 years ago, 22-Feb-06, to lugnet.robotics)

18 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
    

Custom Search

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