 | | 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)
|
| |
| | 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: 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)
|
| |
| | Re: direct manipulation of bits in RCX registers using NQC
|
|
(...) Hi Brian, Thanks for your response. (...) I'm not sure if I get this, because of C code examples I've seen, which I'll discuss again below. (...) I've tried this already, and as you say, it works, but the sensitivity goes waay down. For a (...) (19 years ago, 13-Sep-05, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
