To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.robotics.vcOpen lugnet.robotics.vc in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Robotics / Vision Command / 105
104  |  106
Subject: 
Re: VC vs Studio cam question
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.robotics.vc
Date: 
Mon, 26 Feb 2001 15:50:52 GMT
Viewed: 
4691 times
  
Those who built moving applications with the VC cam know that
the very stiff cable complicates the design and limits practical usage.
My opinion is that the LEGO added this heavy cable in order to
avoid interference with elmag noise produced by running motors.
If you look at the VC package box or manual, you will see
a cam with the classic (grey and thin) cable. It makes me think
that the problem with the interference might be discovered
later and was solved by adding that shielded heavy cable. But this is just
my hypothesis.

In several posts people were stating that the Vision Command and Studio
cameras were same except of the cable design.
I wonder if anybody has tried to use the Studio cam with motorised models and
what was the experience. If there were no problems observed, the Studio cam
would seem to be a better choice for advanced robotics projects.

Thanks for replies.

Jan

In lugnet.robotics.vc, Michael Gasperi writes:

Bob Fay <rfay@we.mediaone.net> wrote in message
news:G7y9qC.A2z@lugnet.com...
I know the cable is 16 feet on the Vision Command. What is the cable • length
on Studio?

I'd say it was 16 feet also.  However, the Studio camera's cable is not as
heavy or stiff at the VC one.  I'd think it would be better for pulling
behind a robot.  The VC cable is a lot more high tech looking.



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: VC vs Studio cam question
 
Jan Nouza <jan.nouza@vslib.cz> wrote in message news:G9DG0s.HwI@lugnet.com... (...) and (...) cam (...) I haven't seen any noise effects from the Studios camera when close to motors. Personally I think they used the fancy clear shielded cable just (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.robotics.vc)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: VC / studio question
 
Bob Fay <rfay@we.mediaone.net> wrote in message news:G7y9qC.A2z@lugnet.com... (...) length (...) I'd say it was 16 feet also. However, the Studio camera's cable is not as heavy or stiff at the VC one. I'd think it would be better for pulling behind (...) (23 years ago, 30-Jan-01, to lugnet.robotics.vc)

7 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
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR