Subject:
|
Re: RCX Programming Questions and Sensor Ideas
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Sat, 28 Aug 1999 20:15:46 GMT
|
Original-From:
|
Laurentino Martins <lau@!ihatespam!mail.telepac.pt>
|
Viewed:
|
858 times
|
| |
|
|
I think it would be more interesting to synthesise human voice, that is to make the RCX speak! :-]
At 09:32 27-08-1999 Friday , abieler wrote:
> I hope someone reads this reply to a reply to a very OLD message.
> I've been lurking for almost a month and, during a search, I found
> a thread I can expand.
>
> In lugnet.robotics, lego-robotics@crynwr.com (Peter Hesketh) writes:
> > In article <255199E650C3D11194BF00805FA785365101AB@cs03mail.BestBuy.com>
> > , Cwikla, Brian <Brian.Cwikla@BestBuy.com> writes
>
> [snip]
>
> > > A voice recognition module. The module has, say, 8 memory banks where there
> > > can be 3 or 4 seconds of 8-bit audio. Then, the on board voice recognition
> > > processors analyze the sound, match it to the proper bank and then send a
> > > number value to the RCX input port that it is attached to. I know this
> > > sounds really far fetched and probably really expensive, but I thought it
> > > would be cool to verbally tell my RCX to turn right etc...
> >
> > Voice recognition is much more difficult than comparing digitised sound
> > with an 8-bit audio file. Just try recording and comparing the binary
> > of 2 wav files of the word "Left"
>
> It is more difficult than this to recognize speech, but it can be done.
>
> And, in a 14-pin Plastic DIP!
>
> I have an old (early 90's ??) chip from RadioShack that contains a
> fully functional 5 word (go, back, stop, turn left and right turn)
> or 2 word (on/off, up/down etc.) selectable voice recognition system.
>
> Does anyone know if this or a similar product is still in production?
>
> The way this chip works is:
>
> 1. It filters the speech until it is a sqare wave with a changing
> pulse width and frequency, but a constant amplitude.
>
> For each of the recognizable words, this wave will be *very*
> similar between any two speakers, also *totally* unrecognizable
> as speech by a human.
>
> 2. It uses this wave as a sort of "audio barcode." A barcode (or magstripe)
> uses the *ratios* between pulses, instead of their frequency, because
> the card can get swept through the reader quickly or slowly.
>
> Since people all speak at different pitches, the frequencies will
> be different. To compare, again, with a barcode, a person with a
> high pitched voice would "swipe" quickly, whereby eg. Barry White
> would swipe slow.
>
> 3. Just like a barcode reader, the chip then determines whether a word
> was said, if it was valid and which one it was.
>
> 4. To interface with the controlled circuit, it lowers one of 5 lines,
> plus an 'enable' signal, for each word.
>
> The way it outputs which command was spoken will be a major obstacle
> to using it with the RCX/CyberMaster.
>
> I'm not sure about how the inputs on these work, but, maybe a resistor
> ladder where each word has it's own unique resistance.
>
> Also, I think my chip requires a 'dual rail' (eg. +5v and -5v) power supply.
>
> Perhaps there is a better chip on the market that will be more compatible.
>
> -------------
> Amos Bieler
> Turn my address umop episdn to shake out the spamcake.
>
> > > Why not a sensor that relates to a remote beacon. The remote beacon is a
> > > battery operated, stand alone unit that emits a IR pulse/signal every x
> > > amount of time. The sensor connects to the RCX has four detectors on it all
> > > facing in opposite directions. The sensor receives the pulse and the two
> > > detectors that receive the strongest signal (from the direction the beacon
> > > is) derive some number that is sent to the RCX. Multiple beacons would have
> > > different 'carrier' signals so that the program can determine from what
> > > beacon the signal came. I think the reason I thought this one up is for a
> > > very specific device I was building and am not sure how useful this would be
> > > in a general sense. However, I can't imagine this being a
> > > complicated/expensive device to build.
> >
> > IR has problems with obstacles in a room. A much better method is
> > ultrasonic beacons as they transmit round corners and under chairs. You
> > would not use 4 directional sensors, but measure the time delay for a
> > distance measurement.
> >
> > --
> > Regards - Peter Hesketh, Mynyddbach, Mon.
> > Forty reasons why a dog is better than a woman: number 6
> > "Dogs don't expect you to call when you are running late."
> --
> Did you check the web site first?: http://www.crynwr.com/lego-robotics
Laurentino Martins
[ mailto:lau@mail.telepac.pt ]
[ http://www.terravista.pt/Enseada/2808/ ]
--
Did you check the web site first?: http://www.crynwr.com/lego-robotics
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: RCX Programming Questions and Sensor Ideas
|
| (...) Maybe AS interesting.. I also have a TI Speak 'N' Math that I would like to rip the guts out of, too. Has anyone hacked a Speak 'N' Whatever before? Is it worth it? Amos Turn my address umop episdn to shake out the spamcake. (...) (25 years ago, 29-Aug-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: RCX Programming Questions and Sensor Ideas
|
| In article <255199E650C3D11194B...stBuy.com> , Cwikla, Brian <Brian.Cwikla@BestBuy.com> writes (...) An example. Say you want to prevent two tasks from fighting over motor 1. Just insert an instruction in each task before operating the motor to (...) (26 years ago, 10-Nov-98, to lugnet.robotics)
|
17 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
|
|
|
|
Active threads in Robotics
|
|
|
|
|
|
