Subject:
|
Re: The latest rage in pneumatic computing
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.technic, lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Sun, 22 Jun 2003 14:17:40 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1768 times
|
| |
|
|
Kevin L. Clague wrote:
> Arrow heads showing which direction you expect the air to flow (not including
> release) would be helpful also. I've tried to figure it out, but I've not had a
> lot of luck.
Okay... I've added arrowheads to each line showing air flow direction.
The switches are set up so that the center port is the conventional
inlet, and the top and bottom ports the outlets. I say conventional,
because I don't always use it that way in this diagram, (but wait, I
know what you might be thinking -- it should work anyways because of how
it this particular system is designed).
The URL is the same: http://www.members.shaw.ca/markt1964/fulladder.jpg
The way it works is as follows:
The pistons connected to the 7 black switches cause the air to be
directed to exactly *ONE* of the exit valves off of the black switches
connected to Cin. These outputs are then combined, using gray switches
like a form of "OR" gate, and directing them either to the SUM output or
the CARRY output, depending on which combination of pistons was
specified. I made very, very, very sure that the gray switches were
positioned in the schematic so that on whichever side of the switch that
air *MIGHT* be flowing, the switch would always be ready to direct air
between that port and the center. This was doable because of the black
switches, it was already certain that air would only be coming out of
exactly one valve of the rightmost black switches anyways. This also
made it possible to use the gray switches in the diagram like an OR
gate, being confident that I would never be ventilating air through the
switch's inaccessible exhaust port. The hardest part about designing
it was that a major design goal was to balance the switches across the
input pistons as closely as possible, so I had to carefully trace
through each of the 8 possible piston positions to see if there were
ways that I could combine multiple potential airflow valves into one
without causing unintended exhaust (this is probably the primary reason
for the diagram's obfuscation, and I can only apologize for that, but it
was the only way I saw it being doable with as few parts).
I realize that this may not be the greatest explanation of how it works,
but hopefully between this and the arrows that I've added to the
diagram, you can figure it out. If you have any questions, let me know.
>> Mark
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: The latest rage in pneumatic computing
|
| (...) I was concerned about your use of switches that is backwards from normal. I transitioned through all the possible values and it never lost system pressure. Great job! Now I have to study the design so I understand how you did it. There's are a (...) (21 years ago, 23-Jun-03, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.robotics)
|
Message is in Reply To:
9 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
|
|
|
|
Active threads in Robotics
|
|
|
|
|
|
