Subject:
|
Re: Philo's remote and spy rover
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Mon, 29 Jan 2007 19:49:59 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3724 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.robotics, Philippe Hurbain wrote:
> One problem I foresee is that the fov of the US-sensor
> itself is relatively wide, so I don't know if this could
> provide much more obstacle direction information.
As a first cut, I was thinking of using the position information to determine if
the detected target was most likely to the left or the right of the direction of
travel. Just to determine the "best" direction to turn to avoid the target. It
wouldn't always work, but without that information you just have to guess, so
any approximation that works better than 50% is an improvement :-).
> > ...mounting the camera on a third motor to allow
> > up/downn pans?
>
> Not yet.
It's something I wish I could put on LNE, but not having a fourth motor, I'm
just going to have to tilt the whole chassis. If you didn't want to put a third
channel on your remote, you could always build a second remote to let a second
person control the camera independant of the driver (yeah, I know, overkill: but
I'm thinking in terms of remote-controled motion-compensated videocameras here).
> I didn't test the timings.
I'll have to do it then as well - and yes, I'm still using the original beta
unit as the remote as well (hey, it's a perfet use for the old beta motors...
and surprisingly, I've yet to have a single issue with BT on it with the new
units).
--
Brian Davis
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Philo's remote and spy rover
|
| (...) Oh - really??? ;o) (...) That's something I considered, but not tried. One problem I foresee is that the fov of the US-sensor itself is relatively wide, so I don't know if this could provide much more obstacle direction information. (...) Not (...) (18 years ago, 29-Jan-07, to lugnet.robotics)
|
3 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
