Subject:
|
Re: SSClagorpion
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.technic
|
Date:
|
Thu, 15 Apr 2004 18:51:00 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
8486 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.technic, Kevin L. Clague wrote:
> <snip>
> > But...... if I use as little piston expansion/contract as I can to flip the
> > switch, I end up with the shortest time for piston expansion/contraction. Cut
> > the piston throw in half, and double your walk rate.
> >
> > I'll start on new designs using this concept. Because I'm building something
> > that wants to tear itself apart, I'm going to use studded beams for extra
> > strength.
Yes, I'd rather see a solid, strong, slow robot over a fast robot that succeeds
in tearing itself apart. :)
> Ignoring the pressure issue, a simple reduction of 30% of throw, decreases time
> by 30%, so the increase in step rate is less than doubled.
That's the throw of the switches, right? Not the throw of the cylinders on the
legs. So the legs will "move" at the same speed, but the time between the start
of one move, and the start of another move could be less.
In any case, yes, it does sound good.
I've been playing around with the Spybot & it's controller. I can make the
Spybot follow the remote, and I can process remote commands, which allows me to
"control" the Spybot, using it's nice little remote control.
I just had another idea. In the movie RoboCop, there was a big mech-looking
robot, which ended up going out of control. When we first saw that robot, they
powered it up, and the whole thing raised up a bit, and came to life.
That would be another cool trick for SSClagorion to do. Actually, I think by
letting all the pressure out of the system, it may sit down on the ground.
Then, when it's repressurized, it will "power-up". Is that right?
Steve
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: SSClagorpion
|
| (...) Well Steve, it might and it might not. Given 18 bits of state (two bits/pistons per leg plus two extra), we could have a total of 256K possible combinations of leg positions. We only want about about 10 of them. If we start out the pistons in (...) (21 years ago, 16-Apr-04, to lugnet.technic)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: SSClagorpion
|
| In lugnet.technic, Kevin L. Clague wrote: <snip> (...) So using #1 axle connectors as the linkage, we get a reduced piston expansion, down to 86% of maximum. Using technic axle joiner perpendicular, we can reduce the range to 70% of maximum. I can't (...) (21 years ago, 15-Apr-04, to lugnet.technic)
|
300 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- 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
|
|
|
|
