Subject:
|
Re: Tasks vs. program slots
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc
|
Date:
|
Mon, 20 Sep 1999 22:01:13 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2423 times
|
| |
|
|
In article <FID8F8.Jqy@lugnet.com>, "Dennis Clark" <dlc@verinet.com> wrote:
> What I am wondering is if the IR remote uses the same byte/inverse byte
> format as the RCX message scheme...
Yes, it appears to use the same packet level formatting. It does use a
new bytecode (0xd2) that isn't seen elsewhere. This bytecode needs two
bytes of data to follow. These three bytes of "payload" are encoded the
usual way with a three byte header for packet sync, then each payload byte
followed by its complement, and lastly a checksum and complement.
I appears to stream out these packets continuously as long as the
button(s) are held down. These packets are unconfirmed - no response back
from the RCX.
Note that the remote uses this special bytecode even when activating a
function (such as sending RCX message 1) that has an alternate bytecode.
Dave
--
reply to: dbaum at enteract dot com
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Tasks vs. program slots
|
| (...) Dave, It is basically just exactly what you describe. It usually takes about 200us or so to "see" the incoming 38KHz signal, common I suppose for an integrator to react to the signal getting through the band-pass filter, then a Schmidt trigger (...) (25 years ago, 20-Sep-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
14 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
