Subject:
|
Re: Robolab, byte codes and assembler
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics.rcx.robolab
|
Date:
|
Wed, 26 Nov 2003 20:03:11 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
9164 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.robotics.rcx.robolab, Don Stauffer wrote:
| |
Or, is there another “competition-legal” way to get
more reliability from the rotation sensor?
|
Don’t run it too quickly or too slowly.
http://www.sjbaker.org/steve/lego/rotation_sensor.html
Um, that’s all I know, besides using BrickOS which has code to make it more
accurate. You mentioned that already. Actually, now that I think about it,
BrickOS might be able to run assembly language functions since it’s C++ anyway.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Robolab, byte codes and assembler
|
| (...) Two problems: 1. From what I've read about the problem, the speed I ran it at was right in the "sweet spot". 2. BrickOS would not qualify for the competition. I wonder if (hope?) the recent unavailability of rotation sensors at Pitsco is (...) (21 years ago, 26-Nov-03, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.robolab, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Robolab, byte codes and assembler
|
| Having investigated rotations sensors thoroughly, I conclude they have some serious design flaws. Most notably, some samples taken during voltage transitions can be impossible to differentiate from samples at entirely different rotational positions. (...) (21 years ago, 26-Nov-03, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.robolab)
|
24 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
