wireless communication.
Dgswaner
Posts: 795
my project is a PINK "base station" with a wireless link to multiple bots (one for now). I want bidirectional communication. I'm creating a web interface for sending commands to the bot and receiving sensor data. I've looked at the RF modules parallax sells but I'm wondering if Blue tooth isn't a better option or if there is a completely different solution. Blue tooth is more expensive but add more options than what an RF link can provide. RF is cheaper and less features usually means more stability. I am a little Leary of Blue tooth I have had some trouble with some some booth devices not wanting to connect. so when I'm in outer Mongolia trying to control a bot I don't want to deal with wireless connection issues. if anyone has some experience I'd appreciate it.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
A complex design is the sign of an inferior designer. - Jamie Hyneman, Myth Buster
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
A complex design is the sign of an inferior designer. - Jamie Hyneman, Myth Buster
Comments
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
·
Steve
"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."
Changed it to say what I actually ment. 300ft. not meters. I'm still leaning toward RF tho.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
A complex design is the sign of an inferior designer. - Jamie Hyneman, Myth Buster
Post Edited (Dgswaner) : 7/14/2007 1:43:19 AM GMT
A: Bluetooth is designed for very low power use, and the transmission range will only be 10m, about 30ft. High-powered Bluetooth devices will enable ranges up to 100m (300ft). Considering the design philosophy behind Bluetooth, even the 10m range is adequate for the purposes Bluetooth is intended for. Later versions of the Bluetooth spec may allow longer ranges.·
Your milage may vary
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
- Stephen