 | | Re: thoughts on gbc module reliability
|
|
[Others have addressed most of this, so I'm just putting in my 2 cents and not a bunch of "me too"s] (...) Ok, but that one I do have to add a "me too" :-). (...) Over any long-term average. This could be 1 ball every second, or a batch of four (...) (18 years ago, 29-Jun-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: thoughts on gbc module reliability
|
|
(...) This brings me to a question: is there any restriction on bringing last year's modules to this year's Brickfest? On one hand it seems like that could make it even bigger (!) but on the other hand we want some new stuff, right? Thoughts, (...) (18 years ago, 29-Jun-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: thoughts on gbc module reliability
|
|
(...) If you have a module, then bring it - old or new. I'm not sure how many new ones I'll have, especially as one of mine is now a virtual GBC antique, having been one of the very first modules ever made to the standard. And the others that will (...) (18 years ago, 29-Jun-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: thoughts on gbc module reliability
|
|
I wonder whether some cause of instability for seemingly well tested modules when they are put into a real GBC is that the specification doesn't specify the speed, or the angle of entry of balls into your input hopper. If your upstream 'test' module (...) (18 years ago, 30-Jun-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: thoughts on gbc module reliability
|
|
(...) Roger that on the spouse kicking out part. We already had our annual Brickfest argument! She says I run and hide in my Lego room for endless hours. She's wrong: I walk there! I have one more tidbit: please email me at (...) (18 years ago, 6-Jul-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
