Subject:
|
Re: rotation sensor question
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Fri, 28 May 1999 20:27:27 GMT
|
Original-From:
|
Luis Villa <liv@dukeNOMORESPAM.edu>
|
Viewed:
|
1174 times
|
| |
|
|
I had already planned on something similar. I think (at the moment) that
the additional weight will not be too subtantial, and a certain amount of
friction will be beneficial, as the reaction time of the system will not
be spectacularly fast, or incredibly accurate. I'll certainly keep you
all posted.
-Luis
On Fri, 28 May 1999, Kekoa Proudfoot wrote:
>
> As for using them for a balancing problem, Luis will probably want to gear
> up the axle at the pivot point to get a more-accurate measurement than the
> 1/16th rotation that the rotation sensor provides. This might add some
> friction on its own, and will probably multiply the friction at the
> rotation sensor by the gear ratio. Not that big a deal, it just means he
> might have to beef up the size of the pole, and therefore the size of the
> whole system (except the rotation sensor and associated gears).
>
> -Kekoa
> --
> Did you check the web site first?: http://www.crynwr.com/lego-robotics
>
>
#######################################################################
God was my co-pilot,
but we crashed in the mountains
and I had to eat him.
-bumper sticker
#######################################################################
--
Did you check the web site first?: http://www.crynwr.com/lego-robotics
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: rotation sensor question
|
| (...) As for using them for a balancing problem, Luis will probably want to gear up the axle at the pivot point to get a more-accurate measurement than the 1/16th rotation that the rotation sensor provides. This might add some friction on its own, (...) (25 years ago, 28-May-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
4 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
Active threads in Robotics
|
|
|
|
|
|
