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 / 8477
8476  |  8478
Subject: 
Re: RCX --> miniBoard(was: lack of interest in basic stamp and basicx)
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.robotics
Date: 
Tue, 23 Nov 1999 21:30:30 GMT
Original-From: 
RMEMORY@ZINC.spamlessCOM
Viewed: 
560 times
  
You all may think that I'm nuts, but I've kinda had a pipe dream for a while
about putting a basic 32 bit CPU in the RCX enclosure. Something like a
Motorola 68k or ColdFire. Lots and lots of tools out there for 32 bit micros!
Heck, if money were no issue, a person could even put a Java VM on it. But
I'm getting carried away...

My biggest problem has always been that I have only a basic knowledge of how
to build even simple circuits. Software is definitely my specialty. Building
a CPU board looks fun, but something that has a learning curve to it. Such a
small board would most likely have multiple layers, maybe even parts on both
sides of the board. A soldering iron doesn't help much there.

So an even bigger problem is once I get a successful design on a breadboard
with schematics and all, where can I go to find a company or person who can
actually build a pc board for fairly cheap??  I could be wrong, but building
a CPU board that will fit into the Lego enclosure looks like it could get
quite expensive. And that's if I could even find a place that would be
willing to build just 1 or 2 boards at any price. I like the RCX and all, but
I don't think my marriage can afford to fund such a major cost to simply be
able to build a powerful 32 bit Lego robot :-) Reality is such a pain to deal
with! :-)

The HC11 is a really neat idea as well. And most likely the most practical.

Stefano Franchi wrote:


My personal interest in replacing my RCX by a handyboard in a lego
compatible enclosure is driven by the knowledge that I can easily
program the HC11 in assembly language and download the code into
the chip by well documented functions in the CPU. And straightforward
68 family assembly language is so simple compared with the arcane
pbForth which is touted as the "assembler" for the RCX.

Is anyone here thinking about going the opposite way, i.e replacing
the RCX with  a Mini Board? I am contemplating such a switch for
essentially two reasons: cost and size. For the price of a Rcx you
can buy two mini board kits, and they are about half the size. That'd
make multi robot applications (well, games...) easier and cheaper.
Has anyone done that already?




Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: RCX --> miniBoard(was: lack of interest in basic stamp and basicx)
 
Getting pretty far off-topic, methinks, but... =>From: rmemory@zinc.com =>... =>You all may think that I'm nuts, but I've kinda had a pipe dream for a while =>about putting a basic 32 bit CPU in the RCX enclosure. Something like a =>Motorola 68k or (...) (25 years ago, 24-Nov-99, to lugnet.robotics)

Message is in Reply To:
  RCX --> miniBoard(was: lack of interest in basic stamp and basicx)
 
(...) Is anyone here thinking about going the opposite way, i.e replacing the RCX with a Mini Board? I am contemplating such a switch for essentially two reasons: cost and size. For the price of a Rcx you can buy two mini board kits, and they are (...) (25 years ago, 23-Nov-99, to lugnet.robotics)

5 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