Your question about navigation systems pretty much falls in to the question about avoidance systems.
You can't navigate without avoiding obstacles....otherwise it's like you've come home drunk and can't find the light switch....a lot of stumbling and bumping in to things!
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔ ·
Steve http://members.rogers.com/steve.brady "Inside each and every one of us is our one, true authentic swing. Something we was born with. Something that's ours and ours alone. Something that can't be learned... something that's got to be remembered."
If you are new, you may want to try the Sharp GP2D15. It is really easy to set up and use. You are also going to want to have a "bumper" or similar device just in case you ranged detectors miss something.
Ok heres a similar list of various methods, the same disclaimer applies as with the navigational systems.
Bumper/contact switch: cheapest, provides no distance to object information (other than zero distance), can miss low objects.
IR: cheap, provides a distance measurement that is typically a threshold (ie is the bot further or nearer than X distance to objects), can be modified to provide some degree of range of distance, color of object affects what the threshold of distance is (black objects may not register at all, mirrors can make threshold infinite ie if bot's IR is perpedicular to mirror the bot will think the mirror is very close regardless of its actual distance), can miss narrow and low objects.
Ultrasonic: moderate price, provides a range measurement, isn't affected by object color, cannot accurately measure very close objects, can miss narrow objects.
Motor stall: cheap, alternate method to bumper, senses when motor stalls (motor is trying to turn but wont, such as when against a wall), detects contact with all objects which impede bot's movement, requires use of DC motors.
steve: while related, navigation is a broader subject than object avoidance, I personally think it's not unreasonable to seperate the two questions, especially when it is understood that no specific method discussed will provide all necessary information wrt to navigation. Perhaps it would have been better to split the questions into "object avoidance" and "location information" but I try to give neophytes some latitude (pun intended) since they don't always know the best way to ask thier question(s).
Post Edited (Paul Baker) : 2/13/2005 7:17:09 PM GMT
Comments
Your question about navigation systems pretty much falls in to the question about avoidance systems.
You can't navigate without avoiding obstacles....otherwise it's like you've come home drunk and can't find the light switch....a lot of stumbling and bumping in to things!
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
·
Steve
http://members.rogers.com/steve.brady
"Inside each and every one of us is our one, true authentic swing. Something we was born with. Something that's ours and ours alone. Something that can't be learned... something that's got to be remembered."
Bumper/contact switch: cheapest, provides no distance to object information (other than zero distance), can miss low objects.
IR: cheap, provides a distance measurement that is typically a threshold (ie is the bot further or nearer than X distance to objects), can be modified to provide some degree of range of distance, color of object affects what the threshold of distance is (black objects may not register at all, mirrors can make threshold infinite ie if bot's IR is perpedicular to mirror the bot will think the mirror is very close regardless of its actual distance), can miss narrow and low objects.
Ultrasonic: moderate price, provides a range measurement, isn't affected by object color, cannot accurately measure very close objects, can miss narrow objects.
Motor stall: cheap, alternate method to bumper, senses when motor stalls (motor is trying to turn but wont, such as when against a wall), detects contact with all objects which impede bot's movement, requires use of DC motors.
steve: while related, navigation is a broader subject than object avoidance, I personally think it's not unreasonable to seperate the two questions, especially when it is understood that no specific method discussed will provide all necessary information wrt to navigation. Perhaps it would have been better to split the questions into "object avoidance" and "location information" but I try to give neophytes some latitude (pun intended) since they don't always know the best way to ask thier question(s).
Post Edited (Paul Baker) : 2/13/2005 7:17:09 PM GMT
bugg
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
I think I know what I'm doing...