To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.roboticsOpen lugnet.robotics in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Robotics / 6502
6501  |  6503
Subject: 
Re: robotic rovers
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.robotics
Date: 
Mon, 23 Aug 1999 21:25:37 GMT
Viewed: 
713 times
  
In lugnet.robotics, Jack Perdue writes:
FWIW, here's what I came up with given a couple of weeks:

http://www.cs.tamu.edu/people/jkp2866/cpsc643/explorerbot.html

There 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 differential
to build Leo's adder/subtractor).  The report provides more details.

HIH,

jack
j-perdue@tamu.edu

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 GPS "ping" routine.

Something I thought of when reading your report: do you suppose that, in
addition to providing out-of-range notification for the PC and indicating that
the datalog is ready for upload, the ping routine could provide a source for
the proximity sensor reflection data?  In my experience I haven't had to mount
the RCX pointing straight up (it can still receive messages even facing away
from the tower), so hopefully I can use the RCX IR in conjunction with the
light sensor.

-- Ian



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: robotic rovers
 
(...) 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)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: robotic rovers
 
(...) 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)

15 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
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR