 | | RE: time sampling under the rcx standard OS
|
|
Here are some comments on how to improve your code for real-time performance. 1. Move the "SetUserDisplay" out of the loop and put it just before the loop. 2. I think the "OnFwd" macro is actually two instructions: "Fwd" and then "On". Replace this (...) (19 years ago, 17-Sep-05, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: time sampling under the rcx standard OS
|
|
(...) From what I've seen, the standard firmware takes about 3ms per command, and the same program will run on BrickOS about 100 times faster. I usually set up my BrickOS programs so they use the internal timer, and only update the motor setting (...) (19 years ago, 17-Sep-05, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: time sampling under the rcx standard OS
|
|
(...) Francois, I think you should be able to get much faster sampling. I can easily get 10-20 Hz, and others have claimed to get down to 3 ms. Whether it can be done at a constant rate, I'm not sure, and think it probably depends on what else is in (...) (19 years ago, 17-Sep-05, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | time sampling under the rcx standard OS
|
|
Hi list, I'm trying to implement a position regulation (using a motor and a rotation sensor), using for instance a PID (Proportional-Integr...erivative) regulation. I tried to code it in NQC, using the standard OS, but it seems that the RCX loops at (...) (19 years ago, 17-Sep-05, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | time control : BrickOS versus the RCX standard OS ?
|
|
Hi list, I'm trying to implement a position regulation (using a motor and a rotation sensor), using for instance a PID (Proportional-Integr...erivative) regulation. I tried to code it in NQC, using the standard OS, but it seems that the RCX standard (...) (19 years ago, 17-Sep-05, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | IR-based proximity measurement
|
|
I'm changing the subject line in the middle of the thread. Wonder what the server will do with that... I tried out Brian's "Max-picking" ping method, as well as a few other things. Here's a summary of what I found: 1) If the active sensor readings (...) (19 years ago, 16-Sep-05, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: direct manipulation of bits in RCX registers using NQC
|
|
(...) Correct. A NQC command (say, "Wait(10);") is converted to one or more "bytecodes" (in this case, one bytecode, namely a string of 4 bytes (0x43 0x02 0x0a 0x00), the first of which is a command (0x43) while the following three are information (...) (19 years ago, 16-Sep-05, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: direct manipulation of bits in RCX registers using NQC
|
|
Hey, Thanks for all the helpful responses, everyone. Brian: (...) I guess that "firmware" must be the code that tells RCX how to interpret user instructions (NQC, C, IC, opcodes, or whatever), and convert them to binary machine-specific code. Right? (...) (19 years ago, 16-Sep-05, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: RCX to RCX NQC
|
|
(...) And that explains why I was having so much trouble with my custom Tcl based uploader in high speed mode. I fixed it a while ago by adding a slight bit of extra time between messages, but never got to the root of the problem. Thanks Dick! (...) (19 years ago, 15-Sep-05, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | RCX to RCX NQC
|
|
One last email on this topic. There's new opcodes in the Swan firmware to support many data bytes in a single "mailbox" message. The standard firmware supports "mailbox" messages with a single byte parm. I found this very restrictive in building RCX (...) (19 years ago, 15-Sep-05, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | RE: RCX to RCX NQC
|
|
There's another little problem that you may need to program around. There's a bug in the ROM firmware that could end up requiring a 30-millisecond delay between when a RCX sends out a message and when you should start sending the first character of (...) (19 years ago, 15-Sep-05, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | RE: RCX to RCX NQC
|
|
The message "toggle" bit was a good concept that has very limited value in practical use. I guess the intent was to prevent unexpected behavior when a PC program attempts retransmission after a message failure. Suppose the failure condition was that (...) (19 years ago, 15-Sep-05, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | Re: RCX to RCX NQC
|
|
(...) I'm pretty sure, both the remote, and the send message commands only have one op-code, and are done differently from the rest. Steve (19 years ago, 14-Sep-05, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | Re: RCX to RCX NQC
|
|
(...) Ahh, now I understand why it is called a "toggle bit" - I somehow misinterpreted this to mean a new command had the toggle bit set (to 1), and if the sending unit doesn't recieve a reply it should re-transmit the command with the toggle bit (...) (19 years ago, 14-Sep-05, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | Re: 1.0 brick not responding
|
|
(...) Powerbook 5300 with MacNQC: After about 4 seconds "No response or bad response from RCX. Make sure the RCX's receiver is facing the IR device and the RCX is turned on." Palm 130 with PBrick Demo: play sound 1, play sound 2, and play sound 3 (...) (19 years ago, 14-Sep-05, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | Re: 1.0 brick not responding
|
|
(...) Generally, that means the IR tower is working. It's possible the tower has become broken, while it sat in a closet, but that's not very likely. So, knowing things worked before, you may be forgetting something. Make sure the memory is cleared. (...) (19 years ago, 13-Sep-05, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | Re: 1.0 brick not responding
|
|
(...) Yes, it flashes. (...) Yes it did work, but it's been in storage for a couple of years. (...) At this point, just download firmware. Once I get the communication issues resolved, I'll do programming. (...) (19 years ago, 13-Sep-05, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | Re: direct manipulation of bits in RCX registers using NQC
|
|
(...) I agree with Steve that the code samples you posted are probably BrickOS. Now to acheive what you want, it might be a waste of power, but you could always blank off the light itself with a peice of black card or thin black packing plastic. If (...) (19 years ago, 13-Sep-05, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: direct manipulation of bits in RCX registers using NQC
|
|
(...) Matt, There are a few ways you can program your RCX. The main choice is if you use the standard firmware, or not. The firmware is pretty much like Windows Operating System. If you use NQC & the standard firmware, you don't need to worry about (...) (19 years ago, 13-Sep-05, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: direct manipulation of bits in RCX registers using NQC
|
|
(...) inside the RCX *directly*, not running programs layered on top of the standard firmware. And if you want to use NQC, you have to work within the limits of the standard firmware (OK, ignoring Dick Swan's firmware, which I've still not been able (...) (19 years ago, 13-Sep-05, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
