 | | robotic rovers —Ian Warfield
|
| | | Hello all, I'm trying to construct a rover to make its way around a household environment and avoid obstacles reliably. I'm experimenting with several chassis designs to find one to my liking. (Okay, so I build one design, try it for five minutes, (...) (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | |
| | | | | RE: robotic rovers —Rich Thompson
|
| | | | | I have been real happy using the KISS (keep it simple sir) principle of design. (URL) is the only robot I have built that I have not un-built since it is very simple and the programming makes it a good wanderer. I tend to hook up new parts to this (...) (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: robotic rovers —Ian Warfield
|
| | | | | | I'm pretty much inclined to go with KISS too; it's less complicated, with fewer parts to worry about and less that can go wrong. Plus you can always expand on it and modify it easily. Bot 5 looks like a good design, especially if it has stood the (...) (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | RE: robotic rovers —Rich Thompson
|
| | | | | | A/B steering is the simplest possible (and least accurate) steering mechanism. One motor controls each wheel. Similar to the very first robot you build with the Mindstorms CD. No fancy gearing or other machinations. Usually the robot has trouble (...) (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: robotic rovers —Ian Warfield
|
| | | | | | I have another LDraw(n) rover that I posted in the (URL) group. Only problem is that it's kind of top-heavy, and the motors don't gear down much. Still, it's another design to compare. Incidentally, has anyone tried to combine a rotation sensor and (...) (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: robotic rovers —David Chen
|
| | | | | | (...) Have you tried combining the inputs of the two output motors into a differential? If the inputs are counter-rotating, the net differential body rotation will tell you which side is moving faster, ie: Motor A ------> Differential <--(Reversed (...) (25 years ago, 26-Aug-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: robotic rovers —Ian Warfield
|
| | | | | | (...) Yeah... the LDrawn design I came up with is at (URL) I'm very happy with because with two differentials it allows me to track both linear and rotational motion. (25 years ago, 27-Aug-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: robotic rovers —Alex Wetmore
|
| | | | | (...) (URL) is a design that worked well for me (and I still have it together if you want better pictures). I've had it running for up to an hour around my living room without getting caught on anything. alex -- Did you check the web site first?: (...) (25 years ago, 23-Aug-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: robotic rovers —Ian Warfield
|
| | | | | | (...) I'm getting a good deal of inspiration from everybody's links - thanks guys! Alex - great designs. You have a good selection of differential apparatuses (apparati? :) ) on your page. How fast do your rovers go? I've tried several designs of my (...) (25 years ago, 23-Aug-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: robotic rovers —Ian Warfield
|
| | | | | | | I've finished the LDraw of my fourth and most current rover; it can be found at (URL) for anyone who'd like to see. Comments? Suggestions? Flame mail? ;) (25 years ago, 23-Aug-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: robotic rovers —Alex Wetmore
|
| | | | | | (...) The best versions of them don't have too much gearing in between the motor and drivetrain (motor drives the differential through only one gear) so they are pretty efficient. They won't be as fast or powerful as an A/B motor design however, (...) (25 years ago, 24-Aug-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: robotic rovers —Jack Perdue
|
| | | | (...) FWIW, here's what I came up with given a couple of weeks: (URL) are some aspects I was happy with (e.g., easy removal of the RCX, transmission range of upward pointing RCX, durability of frame) and others I wasn't (e.g., I didn't have a second (...) (25 years ago, 23-Aug-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: robotic rovers —Ian Warfield
|
| | | | (...) One word: wow! Jack, you certainly came up with a substantial amount of information, especially considering that you only had a short time for your project! You have a lot of good theory on your site that I'll have to study, especially your (...) (25 years ago, 23-Aug-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: robotic rovers —Jack Perdue
|
| | | | (...) Sure. I had mine detect overhead objects since that is the way the RCX was pointing. (...) I found I had a longer range with the RCX pointing up instead of away from the IR tower. In theory, the ping routine will turn the RCX towards the IR (...) (25 years ago, 25-Aug-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: robotic rovers —Ian Warfield
|
| | | | (...) Perhaps you could compromise - mount the RCX facing forward for proximity detection and point the IR transmitter downward - say, suspend it from a ceiling fan ;). I'm still going nuts over that ping routine you came up with - a stroke of (...) (25 years ago, 27-Aug-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | |
