 | | Electrical Data Link between 2 RCXs —Bernd Frassek
|
| | | It's me again with the subject "electrical datalink between 2 RCXs" (I posted some articles a couple of weeks ago). This subject may seem trivial but in fact it is not. Dealing with it, I discovered some "unpleasanties" in the general execution of (...) (23 years ago, 26-Mar-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Electrical Data Link between 2 RCXs —Rainer Balzerowski
|
| | | | | Hi Bernd, When you need it really fast, you sholud use legOS instead of NQC. A program written with NQC uses the LEGO firmware, which is a ByteCode Interpreter. This pogram is interpreted Byte after Byte from firmaware. The firmware executes the (...) (23 years ago, 26-Mar-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Electrical Data Link between 2 RCXs —John Barnes
|
| | | | | I am not positive about this, but some of the jitter may be due to the mode in which the motor outputs work. They are PWM at 125 Hz, so I am wondering if, when the byte code to change an output setting is executed, the new state setting is placed (...) (23 years ago, 26-Mar-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Electrical Data Link between 2 RCXs —Dean Hystad
|
| | | | | Thanks for the info on the electric datalink. It's a clever idea that I never would have thought of myself. It seems to me that you could cut down on your transmission time if you changed the shape of your pulse train. The pauses between bits don't (...) (23 years ago, 26-Mar-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Electrical Data Link between 2 RCXs —Bernd Frassek
|
| | | | | | | Hi Dean, thanks for your interesting idea for a reduction of transmission time. I will deal with that as soon as possible. Your questions: (...) Version 2.0 (...) No. Do you think that is faster? (...) No, just the transmission program. (...) Good (...) (23 years ago, 28-Mar-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Electrical Data Link between 2 RCXs —Bernd Frassek
|
| | | | | | (...) Hi Dean, meanwhile I followed your suggestions and implemented a scheme that uses a pulse scheme like this: ______ ______ ______ __ ______ ______ ___...___ Start Bit3 Bit2 Bit1 Bit0 A bit value of 1 results in a long pulse, a bit value of 0 in (...) (23 years ago, 3-Apr-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Electrical Data Link between 2 RCXs —Dean Hystad
|
| | | | | | (...) My guess is that SENSOR_1 in your receiving RCX is getting a 1 when your program starts. I imagine that OFF is the default state for OUT_B in your transmitter RCX, and that the receiver is seeing this before OUT_B is switched to FLOAT. This is (...) (23 years ago, 3-Apr-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Electrical Data Link between 2 RCXs —Bernd Frassek
|
| | | | | | It's me again with some improvements for an "Electrical Data Link between 2 RCX". In the current version I changed the default condition of the link to "high" (in the transmitter: OFF(OUT_B)) so that the receiver has a 1 at its sensor input. So, you (...) (23 years ago, 17-Apr-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | RE: Electrical Data Link between 2 RCXs —Marco Correia
|
| | | | Hi Bernd :) I see we're working in the same subject here :) *great* If you care to browse lugnet.robotics old thread "VLL *input* for RCX/CyberMaster (in NQC) ?" or the newer one, starting with "CM-RCX" (the subject had some variations) Your (...) (23 years ago, 27-Mar-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc, lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Electrical Data Link between 2 RCXs —Bernd Frassek
|
| | | | Hi Marco, it is always interesting how many other people in the world do have the same problems or are dealing with the same subject. Sometimes I had the feeling that I dealt with "exotic" problems but then I realized that other "Mindstormers" had (...) (23 years ago, 28-Mar-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc, lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | RE: Electrical Data Link between 2 RCXs —Marco Correia
|
| | | | (...) Hi :) (...) Heheh, my feelings exactly before "bumping" into LUGnet community almost a year and a half ago ;) Ok, now, about the way I use Timer() and will try to use FastTimer() or counter loop if proven more effective. I have no need to get (...) (23 years ago, 28-Mar-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc, lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | |
