 | | Re: Variations on the "ADDER SUBTRACTOR" ("differtrans" ?)
|
|
I like the name "differtrans", personally. :) But that's just my opinion. With so many variations on a theme coming about, I have to wonder if anyone's come up with the "best" implementation -- minimal volume and using no unusual pieces (such as the (...) (26 years ago, 28-Jan-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Variations on the "ADDER SUBTRACTOR" ("differtrans" ?)
|
|
I have mixed feelings about this device. I find it fascinating, for reasons I have yet to come to grips with. It has many weaknesses, the most significant being that only one motor provides propulsion, the other is only used for turning. When using (...) (26 years ago, 28-Jan-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Variations on the "ADDER SUBTRACTOR" ("differtrans" ?)
|
|
In article <36AFD272.E2ED9872@lynx.bc.ca>, Mark Tarrabain <markt@lynx.bc.ca> writes (...) The differential goes back to the origins of the motor car at least. The use as an adder/subtractor goes back to WW2 or earlier: there was a marvellous (...) (26 years ago, 28-Jan-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Variations on the "ADDER SUBTRACTOR" ("differtrans" ?)
|
|
(...) Which design did you use? If you try some of the more efficient designs it works quite well. On my webpage (just updated, (URL) I added pictures of my most recent robot. It runs the large wheels at a 1:3 ratio from the motors. The motors can (...) (26 years ago, 28-Jan-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
