Subject:
|
Re: NXT Newbie "Is it possible" question
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics, lugnet.technic
|
Date:
|
Thu, 26 Aug 2010 16:35:03 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
51807 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.robotics, Kevin L. Clague wrote:
> In lugnet.robotics.nxt, Brian Davis wrote:
> > In lugnet.robotics.nxt, Kevin L. Clague wrote:
>
> I like it! As they say "There's more than one way to skin a cat".
>
> I work on computer servers that have 128 CPUs per chip and 512 CPUs per pizza
> sized box, and I knew that there is no true parallelism here with the NXT :)
>
> I like your design, because it seems more accurate because it grabs the time at
> which the system sees the touch sensor pressed. One point of inaccuracy due to
> lack of parallelism.
>
> My solution has two points: one at recording the button was pressed, and the
> other in the loop deciding who got what place. For example if software just
> checked lane 4 to see if it finished, and then lane 4 finishes, then lane 3
> finishes, and software was busy checking lane 1 then 2, it could incorrectly
> report lane 3 as placing before lane 4. It all depends on how quick the loop is
> (I have no idea!)
>
> Kevin
Well, I've built a 2 sensor version of Brian's idea using parallel sequence bars
(I tried your idea Kevin, got stuck, then Brian chimed in). I just did some
testing by building a rig to press the 2 sensors "simultaneously." I was able to
get them to within 1 msec of each other. The data seemed to favor sensor 1 as
far as timing. I tried pressing the sensors in all different manners to avoid
any favoring of 1 sensor based on method. I even swapped out the cables so they
were all the same length (only going as low milliseconds, it shouldn't matter).
Overall, while not "perfect", close enough for what I am doing. I don't
anticipate many races being that close.
Maybe I'll just get 3 more NXT bricks ;)
Chris
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: NXT Newbie "Is it possible" question
|
| (...) I like it! As they say "There's more than one way to skin a cat". I work on computer servers that have 128 CPUs per chip and 512 CPUs per pizza sized box, and I knew that there is no true parallelism here with the NXT :) I like your design, (...) (16 years ago, 26-Aug-10, to lugnet.robotics, lugnet.technic)
|
9 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
|
|
|
|
