Re: Last points

[Tim Vanderhoek <vanderh@ecf.utoronto.ca>]

On Sat, Jan 08, 2000 at 03:11:51PM -0500, Joyce Poon wrote:
> 
> As for the distance (this was something that I wanted to talk to you about
> too), I think it is indeed possible to get a sense of the distance of the
> enemy using A/D converter after a few stages of filter/amplification.
> There is no need to use sonar or radio to accomplish this task. Again, I

Yes, the Subject: heading of the message was a slip that betrayed what
I had been thinking about only minutes before.


> structural details.  To increase the sensitivity of the touch sensors
> (which will be microswitches), we can hook each switch to a lever arm and

There is no need to make them particularly sensitive.  I don't
expect you should have any problem with a simple mechanical switch.  :)

Remember the comp has feedback on wheel speed, so if we hit an
obstacle too softly to trigger a touch sensor, the comp will still
manager to figure-it-out and will apply more power to the motors until
some touch sensors do go off (or, alternatively, decide that there is
a sensor malfunction of some sort).

_RESOLUTION_ is the most important thing.  Ie. There should be a large
number of touch sensors so we can determine the angle at which we
strike an obstacle accuratlely.

      RESOLUTION

        not

     SENSITIVITY


> 	We might want the latter setup for our robot.  We haven't thought
> much about the bumper before.  Having the more sensitive touch sensors
> will affect the structure of our robot.  Any thoughts on the bumper
> structure?

I don't believe there is any particular challenge in building this
part of the robot.  I leave it confidentally in Cindy's capable hands.  :-)


> Lastly, I just wanted to know what will be happening since there are no
> TAs.  Malone hasn't said anything yet, right?

AFAIK, no.


-- 
Signature withheld by request of author.