 | | Re: IR scanner
|
| (...) I may be underestimating the capabilities of current Lego sensors, but I believe that the time difference of (light across 1 foot) and (light across 10 feet) would be too small to register without some seriously fast processing. [ BTOE (...) (25 years ago, 30-Nov-99, to lugnet.robotics)
| | | | | Re: IR scanner
|
| Why don't you just get a Pentium III at 900MHz to run a sensor?! If it is not fast enough, then you could still have one brick that could beat the snot out of most of the computers that are running them!!! (+ extra RAM, not firmware - real programs (...) (25 years ago, 30-Nov-99, to lugnet.robotics)
| | | | | Re: IR scanner
|
| In reply to: (...) believe (...) A couple of quick points here: Your value of 96,720,000 ft/s, while accurate and sounds extreme should be considered in it's proper context. For the light to travel 1 foot, the object must be 6 inches away (6in there (...) (25 years ago, 1-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics)
| | | | | Re: IR scanner
|
| Your numbers aren't quite correct. The speed of light is 982,080,000 fps or 0.000,000,001,018 seconds per foot. That yields a value of 0.002036 microseconds for a "radar foot"; 12 inches out, 12 inches back. You are NOT going to measure distance (...) (25 years ago, 1-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics)
| | | | | Re: IR scanner
|
| =>From: "Matthias Jetleb" <jetleb@netcom.ca> =>... =>A couple of quick points here: Your value of 96,720,000 ft/s, while =>accurate and sounds extreme should be considered in it's proper context. [My summary: the timescale involved in measuring the (...) (25 years ago, 1-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics)
| | | | | Re: IR scanner
|
| That STILL is NOT the correct value for the speed of light! It is 186,000 * 5280 = 982,080,000,000 feet per second (approximately). To get 96,720,000 you must have multiplied 186,000 * 520. - Nick - (...) (25 years ago, 1-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics)
| | | | | Re: IR scanner
|
| (...) Um. Your frequencies are out somewhere... There is a factor of ten 'slip' in the figures being used here. In fact your oscillator needs to be at ten times this frequency for a 1ft/Hz measurement. (the figure in the first line should be (...) (25 years ago, 1-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics)
| | | | | Re: IR scanner
|
| (...) That's my fault - I missed the button on the calculator, and so the fps value in my original post was off. (25 years ago, 1-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics)
| |
