Subject:
|
Re: Robot classification
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics.handyboard
|
Date:
|
Wed, 2 Apr 1997 00:33:05 GMT
|
Original-From:
|
Chuck McManis <cmcmanis@{NoSpam}freegate.net>
|
Reply-To:
|
CMCMANIS@FREEGATE.spamcakeNET
|
Viewed:
|
1623 times
|
| |
|
|
Katt,
Good question, and I liked Tom's response. If I may I'll add
my two cents.
From Tom's list:
> You got software engineering (art?) for the code to make it work.
Definitely and its not the kind of software they teach these days.
When's the last time a program crash in your CS-101 class put a
hole in the drywall of your dorm room?
> You got mechanical engineering to make it move about.
Also a big component, but not only movement but linkage. How the
various parts attach to each other.
> You got electrical electrical engineering to get the software
> talking to the hardware.
And to get the hardware talking to the mechanics. Too many EE students
these days think "high power" electronics means 100 mA through an LED.
I recently corresponded with a guy who thought his calculations were
wrong because his transistor was dissipating 20 watts. He'd never seen
a number that big until he starting playing with robots.
> You got materials engineering making it stay together (what do you
> mean keep it away from stairs!)
Again, this is on the mark but the materials engineering choices are
often involved with 'how much does this weigh and how much force can
it take.'
> Did I miss any?
I think structural engineering plays a part. Certainly SEs combine
information on materials and purpose to create adequate structures.
I've learned a lot about the rigidity of Lexan(tm) especially in the
presence of very warm transistors.
Just plain physics is also a big part of robotics. You've got to
understand momentum, torgue, Newton's laws and the laws of thermo-
dynamics.
That's why robotics are fun, no matter how good you might think you
are, there is always something to learn and challenge you.
--Chuck
--
cmcmanis@netcom.com http://www.professionals.com/~cmcmanis
All opinions in the non-included text above are the sole opinions of
the author.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Robot classification
|
| Katt97> What sort of engineering would robots, as a whole, be put in? Katt97> Or would robotics be considered a blend of different kinds of Katt97> engineering? -Kat Yup, blend. You got software engineering (art?) for the code to make it work. You (...) (27 years ago, 1-Apr-97, to lugnet.robotics.handyboard)
|
3 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
