|
 | | Rotation sensor help (some progress)
|
| Again about my problems with legOS and the rotation sensor. First of all I checked the four values returned by both my two rotation sensor. They are different from the ones inside direct-sensor.c but anyway inside the specified range legOS: (...) (25 years ago, 16-Apr-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
| |
|  
range
(score: 1.886)
|
|
| | Re: Rotation sensors?
|
| Yep, others have reported having these problems. Here's a fix I came up with, but has also only been tested on my system. There have been reports that the existing code works for some, and not for others, so you may need to customize this. just (...) (25 years ago, 20-Jul-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
| |
|
range
(score: 1.885)
|
|
| | FindWorld & ClearWorld Spybot NQC API additions
|
| Another addition to spy.nqh : #define REL_GT 0 #define REL_LT 1 #define REL_EQ 2 #define REL_NE 3 __nolist void FindWorld(int &v, const int relsrc, const int crit, const int& thresh) { asm { 0xd5, &v : 0x3000001, 0x2a + relsrc, crit, &thresh : (...) (21 years ago, 21-Oct-03, to lugnet.robotics.spybotics, lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
| |
|
range
(score: 1.885)
|
|
| | Re: Rotation sensor bug found
|
| Lou, thank you for your reply. (...) This should work. (...) This seems wrong to me because sets all the STATE_n_VALUE to k-RANGE_SIZE. For now I modified ds_rotation_handler() in this way (two occurrences): // if ( IN_RANGE ( STATE_0_VALUE ) ) { // (...) (25 years ago, 18-Apr-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
| |
|
range
(score: 1.884)
|
|
| | Solved?? rotation sensor problem.
|
| I tried solutions posted on this newsgroup to fix the rotation sensor problem.But It didn't work stable enough. I tracked the sensor input and realized the sensor sometimes picked up transient signal between two states. To solve this problem, I (...) (25 years ago, 10-Sep-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
| |
|
range
(score: 1.884)
|
|
| | Re: Rotation sensor bug found (maybe!)
|
| (...) You've got a point here. What if we hardwire STATE_0_VALUE to the following? #define STATE_0_VALUE (ds_unscale(1023U)-RANGE_SIZE) Or, for a more general approach: #define MIN(a,b) (a<b?a:b) #define MAX(a,b) (a>b?a:b) #define STATE_VALUE(k) ( \ (...) (25 years ago, 17-Apr-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
| |
|
range
(score: 1.884)
|
|
| | Re: Syntax for reserving variables in NQC?
|
| (...) How about: #pragma reserve 1 3 5-8 9 with range explicitly specified by "-". Then those that want to specify a range can do so and those who want to specify a list can do so. Of course this assumes that you don't allow arithmetic in the pragma (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jun-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
| |
|
range
(score: 1.883)
|
|
| |
|
range
(score: 1.883)
|
|
| | Rotation sensor bug found (maybe!)
|
| I think I might have found a bug in the ds_rotation_handler (direct-sensor.c). The problem arises when the STATE_0_VALUE is checked using the IN_RANGE macro. As STATE_0_VALUE is 1023U<<6, which is about the max value for an unsigned, adding to it (...) (25 years ago, 17-Apr-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
| |
|
range
(score: 1.883)
|
|
| |
|
range
(score: 1.883)
|
|
| | Re: Lightsensor
|
| (...) Keep in mind a "dynamics range" of 10 units is just fine, if the variation is normally only a couple units. In other words, you can reliably determine when you are seeing a light or dark surface. Making sure that the sensor is close (5 mm or (...) (21 years ago, 4-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
| |
|
range
(score: 1.883)
|
|
| | Re: Motor Speed value interpretation?
|
| (...) As far as I can tell, the speed value really affects power output. This indirectly affects speed, but not in a very happy way. You end up with a wide range of values that give you nearly the same speed, then a very short range that decreases (...) (24 years ago, 23-Jan-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
| |
|
range
(score: 1.883)
|
|
| | Re: Syntax for reserving variables in NQC?
|
| (...) Handling a range should't be too tough - perhaps like this #pragma start [count] where count is assumed to be 1 if not present // reserve location 1 #pragma 1 // reserve locations 5,6 and 7 #pragma 5 3 --- The alternative would be #pragma (...) (24 years ago, 28-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
| |
|
range
(score: 1.883)
|
|
| | Re: Rotation sensor bug found
|
| (...) It wouldn't, though. First it gets the maximum of the given value or RANGE_SIZE. That is done to prevent a similar overflow at the low end, even though, with current values, that won't happen. Then, that value is compared against the safe (...) (25 years ago, 19-Apr-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
| |
|
range
(score: 1.882)
|
|
| | Radio Shack CDS cells in parallel
|
| When I first checked out the Radio Shack CDS cell five packs, the cells were all alike, about 1/4 inch and flat on two sides. But when I went back, I found some packs that had different cells. They had three of the usual small ones and a 1/2 inch (...) (25 years ago, 8-Feb-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
| |
|
range
(score: 1.882)
|
|
| | Re: light sensor problem?
|
| (...) Let me think about how to uncouple this from sys_time, so the code can get higher resolutions. (...) Yes, but even if all active sensors are turned of we are running with a lot of CPU power due to the high sampling speed. If you lower the (...) (24 years ago, 24-Jul-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
| |
|
range
(score: 1.882)
|
|
| | Re: Black
|
| Mike W. Burger <mike@hawaii.edu> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag: Fp0ys8.CB0@lugnet.com... (...) The colors we see lie in the range 400 to 700 nanometers. The response of the Lego sensors are completely different to our "sensors". This is why some of the (...) (25 years ago, 28-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
| |
|
range
(score: 1.882)
|
|
| | Re: more on the rotation sensor
|
| (...) of (...) not (...) value) (...) all (...) These (...) of (...) or (...) are (...) the (...) range (...) the (...) strength (...) to (...) I think I have an idea what is going on. Consider the sensor rotating forwards. If typical readings for (...) (25 years ago, 29-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
| |
|
range
(score: 1.882)
|
|
| |
|
range
(score: 1.882)
|
|
| | Re: Memory, Motors and Odd Things
|
| (...) Hi Steve, Are you using BrickOS 0.2.6.10? In earlier versions, it was possible for malloc() to return pointers to RAM in the range [F010,FB7F], which was shared with the motor port controller. Writing to this memory adversely affected the (...) (21 years ago, 11-Dec-03, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos, FTX)
| |
|
range
(score: 1.882)
|
