Subject:
|
RE: 180° IR Eyeball
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Thu, 7 Oct 1999 20:56:52 GMT
|
Original-From:
|
Steve Hassenplug <SteveH@mailcode.com>
|
Viewed:
|
609 times
|
| |
|
|
I believe there is a problem with the theory used in the article.
He talks about using the Radio Shack emitter/detectors to do some 180 deg
Detection. He's talking about using multiple emitters and detectors as
proximity detectors. (much like using the RCX/Light sensor for proximity
detection) He's also suggesting connecting them (I forget the actual term)
in sort of a ladder array, so that a sensor on one side will return a high
value, while a sensor on the other side will return a low value (using
resistors).
The problem is that the sensors already return a range of values, so there
would be no way to actually tell the location.
For example: if you set it up so the detector would return a high value on
the right side, and a low value on the left side, you would not be able to
tell if something was very close to the right side, or far away from the
left side. You could only tell there was something... somewhere. (I may
have messed up the high/low-close/far values, but it doesn't really matter)
This type of system would work if the signal was digital (like a touch
sensor, being on or off) but it is not useful with an analog signal.
It does, however, provide me with some other ideas. It's always nice to
hear the type of things people come up with.
</steve>
-----Original Message-----
From: Andy Gombos [mailto:gombos@ne.infi.net]
Sent: Thursday, October 07, 1999 01:07 PM
To: 'Lego Mailing List'
Subject: Re: 180° IR Eyeball
> hmm.. Did you mean http://www.robotbuilders.com ?
Yeah. That is what it copied as, and I didn't bother to check it.
|
|
1 Message in This Thread:
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
