| |
In lugnet.org.us.laflrc, Geoffrey Hyde wrote:
> I wonder if we'll ever see some kind of rubber plug-in outer surface
> for these treads?
I would like to hope so. Those mounting holes would seem perfect to secure
rubber cleats to, especially with the ridges on the hard plastic tread
underneath. That one piece woulkd change them from semi-decorative to fully
robotic functional (not that they aren't functional now).
> Ideally it would be like a car tire's tread pattern
> whereby the tread presses harder given more weight.
Tire treads are there to handle things like wet or dirty roads, not to just
increase friction when pressed down harder (there's some good basic physics
reasons friction doesn't work that way... it turns out those reasons are wriong,
but it seems the concoulsions hold :-).
> If you wanted to, you could provide a suitable (LDRAW or MLCAD)
> file format for downloading... [etc.]
Despite some very very good reasons to kump into LDRAW or similar with both
feet, I've never taken the plunge. First, I've had no luck getting them working
on my Mac (OSX), and second, if I have the time I usually want to play with real
bricks, not the virtual ones. *Someday* I'll be forced to do it.
> Maybe the front arms could be made somewhat longer in length?
Not while I'm limited to the "stock length" rubber treads. I could get them
about 3 units longer by offsetting the "front" of the arm tread from the center
of the shoulder joint, but at a minimum cost of making the whole chassis at
least 4 beams wider, and probably a lot weaker or at least a lot heavier.
> > driving the model takes two hands...
>
> perhaps rework the control unit you're using...
The problem is the robot has three degrees of freedom: left tread, right tread,
and flipper arm position. So I need to work at least three controls on the
remote. I'm planning on partially automating the flipper arms (so they can be
use din "full manual" mode, or handled by single button presses or voice
command). But for full control, you really need full constant control of three
control surfaces, and that's tough to do with just one hand.
> btw, can you include some shots and explanations of that?
The hardware for my BT remote is pretty much laid out in my Brickshelf folder:
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=203384
The software, as well as a short "how to" document, Steve Hassenplug was kind
enough to host on his website (down near the bottom, although take a look at the
rest too - Steve has popped some nice content up there):
http://www.teamhassenplug.org/NXT/
> give them the ability to slide forwards and
> backwards (extend and retract) along their
> own length.
Yes, dynamicly changing the tread length would be great, and doable in a couple
of ways. For instance, here's something similar:
http://www.astolfo.com/bots/dynatrax.asp
There's also the "shape shifting tank" design:
http://news.lugnet.com/technic/?n=9672
The problem comes in at the number of motors. With three motors, I can really
only have three full degrees of freedom (OK, yes, I could use splitters if I
wanted, but then it could only move forward or something similar... not really
in the spirit of a high-mobility system) unless I want to go with 3rd party
multiplexers. And honestly, i'll probably try that once HiTechnic comes out with
something. But at least initally, I wanted this acessible to anybody with "just
LEGO", so three motors was the limit.
--
Brian Davis
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
43 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
