Shop OBEX P1 Docs P2 Docs Learn Events
Landing on the moon with a Propeller and Fuzzy Logic - Page 2 — Parallax Forums

Landing on the moon with a Propeller and Fuzzy Logic

2»

Comments

  • Mike HuseltonMike Huselton Posts: 746
    edited 2009-06-09 06:58
    AC not DC. Check your EM theory,

    ▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
    JMH
  • mctriviamctrivia Posts: 3,772
    edited 2009-06-09 07:04
    of course only ac power can be transmitted over air waves. still i am guessing a diode will take to much power out of the week signal to charge a cap by using intena through diode to cap. So how do you charge a cap from the signals present in your house?

    ▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
    propmod_us and propmod_1x1 are now in stock. Only $30. PCB available for $5

    Need to upload large images or movies for use in the forum. you can do so at uploader.propmodule.com for free.
  • Paul_HPaul_H Posts: 85
    edited 2009-06-09 14:51
    @McTrivia - We can you up to 32km if you weight less than 6 pounds... (http://www.hapb.net/HAPB4.htm) ("we" = earl, I'm just ballast!)
    <--- And have you seen my hat? The Ansari Xprize launch was great fun. It was too bad they didn't get several team's methods working. I love contest-driven engineering. Is anyone here going in up spaceshiptwo?

    Unfortunately its expensive in every sense of the word to fight gravity.

    Paul
    www.hubner.net
  • CounterRotatingPropsCounterRotatingProps Posts: 1,132
    edited 2009-06-09 17:28
    Paul,

    pretty inspiring stuff you are doing ... hope you win the Microsoft contest !

    - Howard

    (Who once put a cricket in a match box tied to a 6' weather balloon [noparse]:)[/noparse]

    ▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
    No matter how much you push the envelope, it'll still be stationery.
  • mctriviamctrivia Posts: 3,772
    edited 2009-06-09 17:30
    Unfortunetly since gravitational pull is so strong even 30km up we would need to either generate a constant thrust of 26.5 N to keep a 2.7kg rocket up or accelerate to 32000km/h and acheive orbit. I don't think either can be done that light.

    ▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
    propmod_us and propmod_1x1 are now in stock. Only $30. PCB available for $5

    Need to upload large images or movies for use in the forum. you can do so at uploader.propmodule.com for free.
  • heaterheater Posts: 3,370
    edited 2009-06-09 17:37
    What's up with you guys? Everyone knows that propellers do not work in space. No amount of fuzzy logic is going to help[noparse]:)[/noparse]

    ▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
    For me, the past is not over yet.
  • SRLMSRLM Posts: 5,045
    edited 2009-06-09 17:55
    heater said...
    What's up with you guys? Everyone knows that propellers do not work in space. No amount of fuzzy logic is going to help[noparse]:)[/noparse]

    My initial reaction wasn't quite angry, but indignant maybe. Why can't Propellers work in space?!? The circuit probably, oh, wait, a propeller needs air, oh,... dang...

    [noparse]:)[/noparse]
  • OwenSOwenS Posts: 173
    edited 2009-06-09 18:58
    My understanding [noparse][[/noparse]from the experience of AMSAT] is that unshielded logic [noparse][[/noparse]TTL, RAM and ROM], circa ~1985, has a lifespan of about 5 years in low Earth orbit. That is inside the shielding that is provided by the Earth's magnetic field. It dies much quicker when not inside, since it is unshielded.

    Modern logic uses much smaller processes and is much more susceptible. Your props aren't gonna last long in the harsh environment of space without some very good shielding. This is one reason why space bourne applications tend to use older processors (Bigger processes) which are radiation hardened.

    (The other reason is that all processor bugs are well known)
  • HollyMinkowskiHollyMinkowski Posts: 1,398
    edited 2009-06-11 08:59
    @James Michael Huselton

    Ran across this on Ray Kurzweil's site today....seems that Nokia is using the same method to keep cell phone batteries topped up.

    Wireless Power Harvesting for Cell Phones

    Nokia hopes to create a device that could harvest enough power to keep a cell phone topped up.
    http://www.technologyreview.com/communications/22764/
  • RvnPhnxRvnPhnx Posts: 36
    edited 2009-06-11 11:02
    @OwenS
    Thank you for bringing that up. I was thinking the same thing. Every time somebody makes fun of the computing resources of the Poineer and Voyager craft they unfortunately show their lack of grasp of the details. From my studies of chip design (not that I'll ever get a job doing it mind you--Chip, Ken, & Co. are quite lucky to be able to afford it) I can say that it would be prohibitively expensive to RAD-harden the propeller design given the volume of the runs and the target market.
    Besides, most extra-terrestrial computing (say on Mars) is done using platforms running things like QNX and VXWorks. It cuts down on the types of problems noted earlier in the Don Eyles article which was linked to--as the OS is quite mature and stable (with adequate resource management), and all critical sections have been made nearly (if not completely) deterministic in nature. The FAA once upon a time required similar things of all flight computers used in civilian aircraft (basically mandating stack-based--1 address--processors).
    So yes, a prop-based system could land on the moon using fuzzy logic--but it might not survive the radiation long enough to make it there. If if does, don't expect it to last horribly long beyond that--it just isn't designed for that kind of hostile environment.

    ▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
    --RvnPhnx
  • WNedWNed Posts: 157
    edited 2009-06-11 14:35
    Space exploration is really cool and all, but it's just too damned expensive to be done as a "hobby". How about we go in the other direction and design an oceanographic explorer? Let's face it, it's WAY cheaper to drop something than it is to throw it... Also, no radiation to deal with... only megatons of crushing weight, and propellers have been working in the ocean for over a century now!

    Ned

    ▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
    "They may have computers, and other weapons of mass destruction." - Janet Reno

    Post Edited (WNed) : 6/11/2009 2:48:13 PM GMT
  • CounterRotatingPropsCounterRotatingProps Posts: 1,132
    edited 2009-06-11 16:50
    > and propellers have been working in the ocean for over a century now!

    Radiation-hardended = NO

    Salt-water corrosion resistant = ?

    :-P

    - H

    ▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
    Got Electrons?
  • mctriviamctrivia Posts: 3,772
    edited 2009-06-11 16:58
    If we made it more like a plane so it would move forward during change of depth you could have it completely sealed and move entirely by changing its balist.

    ▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
    propmod_us and propmod_1x1 are now in stock. Only $30. PCB available for $5

    Need to upload large images or movies for use in the forum. you can do so at uploader.propmodule.com for free.
  • mctriviamctrivia Posts: 3,772
    edited 2009-06-11 16:58
    If we made it more like a plane so it would move forward during change of depth you could have it completely sealed and move entirely by changing its balist.

    ▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
    propmod_us and propmod_1x1 are now in stock. Only $30. PCB available for $5

    Need to upload large images or movies for use in the forum. you can do so at uploader.propmodule.com for free.
  • WNedWNed Posts: 157
    edited 2009-06-11 19:13
    Hey McT, interesting idea. One of the nifty things about being in water is that you can glide downward, but also up, if you have positive buoyancy.

    CounterRotatingProps - Damn! You got me... oh, wait... McTrivia has all kinds of experience with epoxy "potted" Props! smilewinkgrin.gif

    Should I apologize for hijacking the thread? I sort of took it to be a "theoretical discussion" thread rather than specifically about a moon shot. Is that OK?

    Ned

    ▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
    "They may have computers, and other weapons of mass destruction." - Janet Reno

    Post Edited (WNed) : 6/11/2009 7:24:48 PM GMT
  • mctriviamctrivia Posts: 3,772
    edited 2009-06-11 19:18
    You have not hijacked if it is fuzy logic related .

    One benefit of the propulsion system I mentioned is it would usd almost no power. Need a piston inside that takes in or pushes out a volume of water. Would be slow though.

    ▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
    propmod_us and propmod_1x1 are now in stock. Only $30. PCB available for $5

    Need to upload large images or movies for use in the forum. you can do so at uploader.propmodule.com for free.
  • WNedWNed Posts: 157
    edited 2009-06-11 19:24
    Are you in any particular rush to get somewhere.
    "Speed is the enemy of the scientific observer." Jacques Cousteau.

    Ned

    ▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
    "They may have computers, and other weapons of mass destruction." - Janet Reno
  • mctriviamctrivia Posts: 3,772
    edited 2009-06-11 19:27
    Nope not really just mentioning it would not go fast.

    ▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
    propmod_us and propmod_1x1 are now in stock. Only $30. PCB available for $5

    Need to upload large images or movies for use in the forum. you can do so at uploader.propmodule.com for free.
  • WNedWNed Posts: 157
    edited 2009-06-11 19:43
    If we used a "constant glide" propulsion mode, it could spend periods of time at the surface to recharge batteries from a solar array, and take GPS readings. That device would be great for long range missions.
    What about a "crawler", though? Something that could spend a month documenting the environment around volcanic vents? It could have a turbine on an arm that it could swing out over a vent to recharge...

    Ned

    ▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
    "They may have computers, and other weapons of mass destruction." - Janet Reno
  • Paul_HPaul_H Posts: 85
    edited 2009-06-11 19:51
    Solar powered? That's so 20th century... Why use a segmented container and let tidal action bend the sections with respect to each other to generate the power? So it would really be gravity powered - Lunar Gravity Powered at that!! - though we all orbit the sun , so really solar gravity powered!!! - And we can just call that "solar power" for short.

    Solar power is so 21st century wink.gif


    Paul
  • mctriviamctrivia Posts: 3,772
    edited 2009-06-11 19:52
    that would be a good recharging source also. For power supply the new 3kF caps from maxwell would make an ideal storage cell. small light weight and easy to charge.

    ▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
    propmod_us and propmod_1x1 are now in stock. Only $30. PCB available for $5

    Need to upload large images or movies for use in the forum. you can do so at uploader.propmodule.com for free.
  • WNedWNed Posts: 157
    edited 2009-06-11 20:03
    Paul_H - LOL!

    McT - As nifty and terrifying as a 3kF cap. may be (wired to a door handle?), light weight will not really be a concern. Instead, the rather large "air pocket" a capacitor represents will present its own problems. Every 33 feet of water represents an increased pressure of one atmosphere (roughly 14.7 psi). So that's about 89 psi at just 200 feet. What do you suppose the crushing depth of a large capacitor would be? Lead/acid batteries aren't just great ballast, they don't crush.

    Ned

    ▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
    "They may have computers, and other weapons of mass destruction." - Janet Reno

    Post Edited (WNed) : 6/11/2009 8:16:44 PM GMT
  • CounterRotatingPropsCounterRotatingProps Posts: 1,132
    edited 2009-06-11 20:43
    Paul's got the *best* idea, I think.

    Being on the coast of Florida, every walk on the beach makes me think of tidal forces --- from just those forces, we could generate all the solar->lunar->water power you'd ever need.

    The simplest and coolest idea, imho, is a buoy with a long shaft and basically a big fishing bobber around the shaft. The bottom of the shaft is attached directly or by cable to the ocean floor. The bobber goes up and down with the waves - it generates variable low-frequency A.C.

    Surfs up!
    - Howard

    ▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
    Got Electrons?
Sign In or Register to comment.