Subject:
|
Re: robotic rovers
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Fri, 27 Aug 1999 01:02:23 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
912 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.robotics, Jack Perdue writes:
> 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 tower when it
> gets out of range, so it really shouldn't matter too
> much in a small area. I was just trying to get the
> maximum range... the trade-off being that the proximity
> detector only detected overhead objects (which was neat,
> but rather useless).
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
genius. I'm planning to use my rover as a scout controlled by the main
computer which will eventually be running a full-fledged mapping program...
I'll try to implement trig and a graphical map-drawing interface using the
powerful capabilities of a host computer running Visual Basic. I was getting
a little upset since I could see no way to have the rover using its own IR for
proximity detection while still receiving messages from the PC. This task
opens up a huge realm of possibilities.
> One suggestion I have for your latest design is slapping
> some vertical reinforcement beams around your drivetrain.
> For example, next to the left wheel towards the back...
> you've got two horizontal beams seperated by two plates.
> A couple beam connector pegs and a three hole beam should
> slide right in there between the wheel and the frame (looks
> like there's a spare hole there). That will help hold
> the differential together.
You're right! It's a perfect space for reinforcement.
> Securing your motors will take a bit more thought.
Yeah, I'm a bit annoyed at that - especially since it looks like I won't be
able to use that slot piece without a bit of fancy bridgework. At least if
they fall off it won't be a big deal to put them back on.
What do you think about the frames I used to enclose the two tires? I'm
hoping to avoid any axle bending - one of the first robots I built had these
tires at the end of two long axles, and one ended up getting bent a little,
making the robot bounce... I got rid of that axle, and I hope to avoid a
repeat of that problem here.
I'll see if I can extend the tire sidebars a little big forward so I can mount
some bumpers. I hope to be able to multiplex my touch sensors with the
rotation sensors on inputs 1 and 3, but I'm not sure I'll be able to do that.
Fortunately with the ping routine I now have renewed access to a proximity
sensor!
Ian
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | 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)
|
15 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
