 | | Re: IR collision avoidance —Adam
|
| | | Riachard, Could you please explain to me how the IR emitter angled at 45 degrees is able to pick up its beem. I'm unsure of the IR emmission dynamics. Wouldn't an IR angled perpidicular to the wall being travelled along suffice as the only sensor? (...) (28 years ago, 2-Mar-97, to lugnet.robotics.handyboard)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: IR collision avoidance —Richard Vannoy
|
| | | | (...) Someone could probably give some very good reasons why 45 degrees is a good choice. For me it was common sense and experiment. Less than 45 degrees from ahead and the angle the IR is hitting the wall is too "shallow" and I don't get a return. (...) (28 years ago, 5-Mar-97, to lugnet.robotics.handyboard)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: IR collision avoidance —MAR ERICSON
|
| | | | Some IR Leds have graphs from the manufacturer showing angular characteristics. I've seen some nice ones in linear and polar plots of angle vs. intensity. See if you can get the specs of the LEDs you order. This may help you with your configuration. (...) (28 years ago, 9-Mar-97, to lugnet.robotics.handyboard)
|
| | | | |
