Subject:
|
Re: thoughts on gbc module reliability
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Fri, 7 Jul 2006 10:06:22 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
6886 times
|
| |
|
|
Steve Hassenplug wrote:
> By design, all the balls go in one end of the GBC, and come out the
> other. For the "throughput zones" to work, there must be a way to
> get some balls from the middle of the GBC, around the slower modules,
> and to the end.
What about a 'splitter' with two outputs (nominally 0.5 bps/output) and a
'joiner' for combining the two streams later on?
--
Anders Isaksson, Sweden
BlockCAD: http://web.telia.com/~u16122508/proglego.htm
Gallery: http://web.telia.com/~u16122508/gallery/index.htm
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: thoughts on gbc module reliability
|
| (...) That works, but it's not as simple as it sounds. Keep in mind with all the below, it *can* be made to work: I'm not nearly as negative as I seem below :-). First, you need a splitter and combiner that... (a) work At Least as well as a "normal" (...) (19 years ago, 7-Jul-06, to lugnet.robotics)
| | | Re: thoughts on gbc module reliability
|
| (...) Another thing we might try is to implement this splitter at the junction of the throughput zones to catch any ball overflow from the leaky bucket module. Then this shunted ball flow could be loaded onto several train cars and haulled around (...) (19 years ago, 7-Jul-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: thoughts on gbc module reliability
|
| (...) I don't think it's a question of being offensive. It's simply a question of how it would work. The "Leaky Bucket" analogy only works if all modules can handle the same average throughput over an extended period of time. Otherwise, the "bucket" (...) (19 years ago, 6-Jul-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
43 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
|
|
|
|
