pic: Game hint

[Akash Rastogi]

For the chip is FIRST sending out backups to teams or just one? :confused:

I would say just 1 per team because they are donated by Vishay and it may be a loss to the company. However, you could ask him or www.divsys.com to be sure.

[Mark McLeod]

Tried out ours tonight, but it doesn't appear to be working as expected.
It seems to learn about four different remotes (found one it didn't acknowledge at all and another it objected to via the error LED), but after going through the learning sequence it won't respond to any of them in any way.

BTW
One of the traces from the unmarked white connector appears to go to the learn button.

[Eugene Fang]

[cdm-description=photo]29399[/cdm-description]


3 days early what? was an 'official clue' supposed to come out today?

[Larry Lewis]

Tried out ours tonight, but it doesn't appear to be working as expected.
It seems to learn about four different remotes (found one it didn't acknowledge at all and another it objected to via the error LED), but after going through the learning sequence it won't respond to any of them in any way.

BTW
One of the traces from the unmarked white connector appears to go to the learn button.
It might be rejecting the programming if the remotes are working on frequencies other than 38kHz. I would try some other remotes or verify that the ones you are working with operate on the correct frequency.

[EricH]

3 days early what? was an 'official clue' supposed to come out today?It was supposed to be delivered today, apparently. Joe got it Saturday.

[billbo911]

BTW
One of the traces from the unmarked white connector appears to go to the learn button.

Thanks Mark. That supports the theory that it will be programmed at the regionals to work with the field. In the mean time, we use any remote we want. We will use our remote to test our bots to see if they will do what we design them to do with respect to the, thus far, unrevealed game.

Once we all see the game, I think this little puzzle will all make perfect sense.

[Turtlecoach]

This has been an impressive thread with all the speculation as to how this IR board will be used. Here is my two cents. Think about what FIRST has always done...they want the teams to develop solutions to problems. NASA eventually wants to put up bases on the Moon & Mars. You need robots working together to make that happen. I bet that the KOP will contain an IR transmitter that will mount on the robot along with this receiver. Robots on the field are going to have to work together to accomplish a task such as a coordinated lift. Four outputs - UP, DOWN, FORWARD, BACK come to mind. The instructions for setting up with a TV remote are so you can test the bot before competition. The white plug would be for regional programming when you bring the robot up for inspection so everyone has the same "learned" program. The LED's on the board would be for diagnostics when checking the bot out during the build and confirming the programming at the regionals. Most likely wrong, but its a thought.

[keen101]

Umm.... I'm not exactly sure which wires do what. which leads do you have to strip back and apply power?

From the manual I think it's "saying" Brown and Red are + Posotive, and Orange, Yellow are - Negative



Bonus question: Does anyone have any ideas as to hook this up to our robot as a sensor for "pre-testing"? TTL port?

or just apply power, and then wire 5 - 8 to spare PWM cables. To the white wires?

[keen101]

Never mind. I couldn't resist. :D

OK, so I found an old 2pin sensor (female) cable end, and connected it to the two lower right hand pins. The one labeled "2"(RED?), and the one nest to it which I am assuming is 4 (Yellow?)


Anyway it worked. I was able to program code 1 with a button on my cheap DVD remote.

As for the Sensor part.... I will assume you connect them to old PWM cables. However I could be wrong, so I'll wait to hear otherwise.

[Bill Moore]

Tried out ours tonight, but it doesn't appear to be working as expected.
It seems to learn about four different remotes (found one it didn't acknowledge at all and another it objected to via the error LED), but after going through the learning sequence it won't respond to any of them in any way.

BTW
One of the traces from the unmarked white connector appears to go to the learn button.

Mark,

With the speculation about RoboLaser Tag, could the response be to shut down for a period after receiving a signal? Is your sensor still unresponsive?

Have any other teams found results they are willing to share?

[Bill Moore]

This has been an impressive thread with all the speculation as to how this IR board will be used. Here is my two cents. Think about what FIRST has always done...they want the teams to develop solutions to problems. NASA eventually wants to put up bases on the Moon & Mars. You need robots working together to make that happen. I bet that the KOP will contain an IR transmitter that will mount on the robot along with this receiver. Robots on the field are going to have to work together to accomplish a task such as a coordinated lift. Four outputs - UP, DOWN, FORWARD, BACK come to mind. The instructions for setting up with a TV remote are so you can test the bot before competition. The white plug would be for regional programming when you bring the robot up for inspection so everyone has the same "learned" program. The LED's on the board would be for diagnostics when checking the bot out during the build and confirming the programming at the regionals. Most likely wrong, but its a thought.
Earlier this fall, as FIRST was releasing information, I was surprised at the number of times they addressed "collaboration". Taking your NASA idea to a more present engineering achievement, consider the International Space Station. This is an Engineering task that must be coordinated between teams of engineers very distant from each other, yet the separate components must match up in space, or their efforts will be wasted.

BIG WHAT IF . . .

What if FIRST provided a docking ring and collar system in the KOP, and teams had to build both a drive system and an actuator assembly that could be separated by using this docking system.

Then at competitions, teams would not only play together, but would have to use the drive from one team with the actuator from another. You could have 2 robots vs 2 robots matches and increase each alliance to 4 teams (8 teams per match). Teams would only play with half their robot, and they could mix and match among the alliance to get the best fit of robots.

It would be very difficult, but by encouraging collaboration, it would mimic a current engineering task.

[Tottanka]

Earlier this fall, as FIRST was releasing information, I was surprised at the number of times they addressed "collaboration". Taking your NASA idea to a more present engineering achievement, consider the International Space Station. This is an Engineering task that must be coordinated between teams of engineers very distant from each other, yet the separate components must match up in space, or their efforts will be wasted.

BIG WHAT IF . . .

What if FIRST provided a docking ring and collar system in the KOP, and teams had to build both a drive system and an actuator assembly that could be separated by using this docking system.

Then at competitions, teams would not only play together, but would have to use the drive from one team with the actuator from another. You could have 2 robots vs 2 robots matches and increase each alliance to 4 teams (8 teams per match). Teams would only play with half their robot, and they could mix and match among the alliance to get the best fit of robots.

It would be very difficult, but by encouraging collaboration, it would mimic a current engineering task.

I dont think that first will like the idea of some teams using other teams drive systems/operational systems.
It might just take the whole game out of the driver-skills.

[Turtlecoach]

I'm thinking more along the lines of one bot synching operations with another. Here is the scenerio - Two aliance bots approach object to move together, 1st bot would be in Master mode, 2nd bot would be in Slave mode. Both bots go to pick up / move object and Master bot sends a sync signal to Slave bot via IR so both lift mechanisms operate simultaneously. This way you can get coordinated lifts, provided of course that the lift mechanisms operate at the same rate. In a similar manner both bots could be synched to move at the same time or operate two seperate field targets at the same instant to open gates, doors, etc... This would be slick and make the collaboration hints valid. Remember what FIRST was trying to teach in 2007. What will your opponent / alliance member build and how can you accomodate / defend against it.

[JaneYoung]

It might just take the whole game out of the driver-skills.

Looking at it a little differently, cup 1/2 full - it could present different challenges and opportunities to the drive teams and to the build. The excitement of the '07 game was the collaborations of the robots and of the drive teams working together.

[jerry w]

i am not impressed.!
you have all missed the most obvious clues with this board. you keep trying to fasten it to the robot.

clues
1. the power available from a robot controller is +7.2 and +5 volts.
the power for a field component is usually a 12 volt battery.
this board runs on 5 volts but requires between 7 and 15 volts!!

2. the ribbion cable is not configured anywhere like a digital connection on the controller.

3. the learning of a remote allows the newton field to use differrent codes from the curie field.
if each team had to learn an alliance partner code it would take too much time between matches.

4. there are 4 outputs from the board. there are 4 corners on the field. 2 red remotes and 2 blue remotes would allow teams to trigger 4 release mecanisms.

we have cmu-cam to collect data. now we will have IR remotes on the robot to send data to the field.!!
please put this board on the field where it belongs.

jerry w

[Pavan Dave]

OOOH!!!!

Maybe my dream of a more field oriented positioning system is coming true!!!

Maybe, on the field, there are IR emitters all over the place, each giving off a different code. You can use the IR receiver to pick up these codes, and tell where your robot is.

YES

Jacob

This is actually very possible IMO. I am actually planning on creating this type of thing, similar to STANGPS except different technology different sensors etc and cheaper and possibly redistributing it as a white paper. Hopefully FIRST is doing this for us but I believe that if real development in this "Field Mapping" type project is to occur than it will be team led since FIRST wants US to develop that type of stuff.

[billbo911]

i am not impressed.!
you have all missed the most obvious clues with this board. you keep trying to fasten it to the robot.

clues
1. the power available from a robot controller is +7.2 and +5 volts.
the power for a field component is usually a 12 volt battery.
this board runs on 5 volts but requires between 7 and 15 volts!!


So I guess the 12vdc battery on the robots is just there for counter balance?



2. the ribbon cable is not configured anywhere like a digital connection on the controller.

If you noticed by looking at the picture of the board, the connector on one end of the cable connects to the board at the matching plug. The other end of the cable is not terminated, allowing us to come up with our own connections designs to the RC.



3. the learning of a remote allows the newton field to use different codes from the curie field.
if each team had to learn an alliance partner code it would take too much time between matches.

4. there are 4 outputs from the board. there are 4 corners on the field. 2 red remotes and 2 blue remotes would allow teams to trigger 4 release mechanisms.

we have cmu-cam to collect data. now we will have IR remotes on the robot to send data to the field.!!
please put this board on the field where it belongs.

jerry w


The rest of these speculations are distinctly possible.
I really would love to see more ideas on this thread about this boards possible uses, as long as they make sense based on what we know already.

[T3_1565]

So I guess the 12vdc battery on the robots is just there for counter balance?


Uhhh the 12vdc battery connects to the RC board, which converts any digital output to 5vdc. I don't think the camera would run very well with 12vdc running through it!! ;)

EDIT: Although this is the case I still think it will go on the bot.... but I also can see it being a field element... although I'm leaning more to it going on the bot

[billbo911]

Uhhh the 12vdc battery connects to the RC board, which converts any digital output to 5vdc. I don't think the camera would run very well with 12vdc running through it!! ;)


Well, the battery connects to a breaker, then to a distribution block and then to the RC. The distribution block make 12 vdc available to various devices: Victors, Relays, RC, Gear Tooth Sensors, IR Receiver Boards....

My point is, this device can quite easily be used on the robot, as well as being part of the field.

[Tom Bottiglieri]

I am very interested in the white jack labeled 'J2'. I've mapped where the pins go.


J2 PIC Description
1 4 RA5/MCLR/VPP
2 14 VDD
3 5 VSS
4 13 RB7/PGD/T1OSI
5 12 RB6/PGC/T1OSO/T1CKI
6 X X

Points of interest:
A) None of the possible i/o lines go to any header on the black jack. So we can assume that any IO coming from these has nothing to do with what the spec sheet we were given says.
B)Pins 2 and 3 are power.
C)Pin 1 could be input or a programming power.
D)The other used can be i/o, in circuit debugging, or programming.

I've never seen a chip flashed with such a gigantic connector (Usually there are just small contact pads, no?), and I do not think there would be need for debugging on a finished board.
So if I am correct in assuming that this jack is not meant for programing the chip, the white jack must be there to talk to something else, and will give off different signals than what the spec says so far.

Maybe we will see some kind of daughter board? Maybe this will hook up onto a field element?

[billbo911]

I am very interested in the white jack labeled 'J2'. I've mapped where the pins go.


J2 PIC Description
1 4 RA5/MCLR/VPP
2 14 VDD
3 5 VSS
4 13 RB7/PGD/T1OSI
5 12 RB6/PGC/T1OSO/T1CKI
6 X X


Now that is what I'm looking for. Thanks Tom!!!:)

[T3_1565]

My point is, this device can quite easily be used on the robot, as well as being part of the field.


Oh that's fine, I agree it can go ethier way. I hope someone can find a way to connect it to thier bot sometime soon! (Although I can see why people won't because we don't want to damage the hint lol)

[AdamHeard]

So I guess the 12vdc battery on the robots is just there for counter balance?

If you noticed by looking at the picture of the board, the connector on one end of the cable connects to the board at the matching plug. The other end of the cable is not terminated, allowing us to come up with our own connections designs to the RC.

The rest of these speculations are distinctly possible.
I really would love to see more ideas on this thread about this boards possible uses, as long as they make sense based on what we know already.

I'm no electronics expert, but I think running this off of the 12V battery will all the crazy loads on it would be bad (but then again.... the RC is off the 12V...). Is this true?

Other than that fact which I don't quite understand, I think he is pretty dead on with his clues.... I'd agree with him more than any other guess so far.

[Daniel_LaFleur]

OK. I'll speculate as to what I believe this will be used for. :p

Many of us are assuming that there will be an autonomous mode because there has been an autonomous mode for the last few years. This year, I believe that instead of an autonomous mode there will be a timeframe (say 45 of the 135 seconds in a match) in which the drivers line of sight to the robot will be blocked (some sort of removable/droppable screen) and that the driver will only be able to navigate via a IR sensor grid, with 1 emitter in each corner of the field.

Since the viewing angle is only 60 degrees (+/- 30 degrees) there would be no overlap, and since the signal strength is proportional to how 'on axis' you are it would be fairly easy to navigate to a spot on the field.

Thoughts?


.

[Nuttyman54]

Since the viewing angle is only 60 degrees (+/- 30 degrees) there would be no overlap, and since the signal strength is proportional to how 'on axis' you are it would be fairly easy to navigate to a spot on the field.

Thoughts?


.

I thought of this too, but I'm pretty sure that the signal strength they're referring to is the input signal, not the output. I'm not an electrical guy, but from reading the document I gathered that the board only gives a digital output: either "I see my code" (+5v High) or "I don't see my code" (0v Low)

From the information that the RC would be getting (assuming this goes on the robot), there is no way to use the incoming signal strength to navigate.


Even if the board were giving out analog data corresponding to the signal strength, you'd have to have additional data from other sources to tell you whether your signal corresponded to the + or the - side of the angle off center.

I do believe the board will be used for navigation, but not in the sense that you are describing. (Though I very much wish it was)

[Daniel_LaFleur]

Since I don't have access to the board, I cannot test it, but my assumption (yeah I know) was that out0-3 were analog outputs.



Name Pin # Signal Description
+VIN 1, 2 Positive power supply voltage input. Voltage should be in the range 7-15 volts
DC. Your power supply will have to be independent, for example, a 6 x AA
battery pack, 9V battery, 12V battery, bench top supply, or other.
GND 3, 4 Negative power supply voltage input
OUT2 5 Output signal associated with third trained button
OUT1 6 Output signal associated with second trained button
OUT3 7 Output signal associated with fourth trained button
OUT0 8 Output signal associated with first trained button
NC 9, 10 Unused


And if we were allowed to use an array of these sensors you could quickly position where and what orientation you were on the playing field.

[billbo911]

but my assumption (yeah I know) was that out0-3 were analog outputs.

Sorry Bro,
According to the documentation available from FIRST:
"Each output provides a 100 mSec high (5V) pulse when its command is recognized."

No analog here, just one discrete output per input. Either High or Low.

Don't worry, I don't take the "me" part of your assumption personal.:rolleyes:

[coolbotz]

Pin description on J2 is a classic PIC -ICSP programming port.

[Daniel_LaFleur]

Sorry Bro,
According to the documentation available from FIRST:
"Each output provides a 100 mSec high (5V) pulse when its command is recognized."

No analog here, just one discrete output per input. Either High or Low.

Don't worry, I don't take the "me" part of your assumption personal.:rolleyes:

Digital ... darn. And here I was hoping for a navagation aide.
Ah, well :rolleyes: .

Thats what I get for assuming :p

[Richard McClellan]

I'm no electronics expert, but I think running this off of the 12V battery will all the crazy loads on it would be bad (but then again.... the RC is off the 12V...). Is this true?

It would still probably be okay with crazy loads as long as the voltage stays between the required 7.5V and 15V, which it should unless you run your main battery really really low (which is bad for the battery anyways).

[njamietech]

Personally I don't think it will be part of the robot.

However I do like some of the Ideas that have been presented. Should make for an interesting year.

16 days 18 hours and 28 minutes till kickoff.:D

[jerry w]

So I guess the 12vdc battery on the robots is just there for counter balance?


actually our team did use the battery that way one year.

come on Mr. Bill.
you have seen some of the things first has done in the past. maybe they forgot that the 3 pin connector for a digital input has +5 volts on one of the pins. so, why connect to and draw power from the breaker panel to operate this board?

did they need a 5 volt regulator on the board and on the robot controller?

i think you are looking at only half of the system here. for IR communication, the robot will have a transmitter. the IR reciever is the half that is placed on the field. we can use any old handheld remote for now. but we will have something else in the kit of parts.

jerry w

[Elgin Clock]

we can use any old handheld remote for now. but we will have something else in the kit of parts.

Like this? http://www.woot.com/Blog/BlogEntry.aspx?BlogEntryId=3584

.99 cents + 5 dollar shipping from there when it was available.
I'm sure FIRST could have convinced Woot to sell them a ton of them for even cheaper. :p
(btw, I love the time on the timestamp in that summary about it.) :D

[billbo911]

actually our team did use the battery that way one year.

Come on Mr. Bill.
You have seen some of the things first has done in the past. Maybe they forgot that the 3 pin connector for a digital input has +5 volts on one of the pins. So, why connect to and draw power from the breaker panel to operate this board?

Did they need a 5 volt regulator on the board and on the robot controller?

I think you are looking at only half of the system here. for IR communication, the robot will have a transmitter. the IR receiver is the half that is placed on the field. we can use any old handheld remote for now. but we will have something else in the kit of parts.

jerry w


We've been known to use a battery that way as well. Why waste that much weight and compensate for it elsewhere?

I really doubt FIRST would "forget" +5vdc is there. But, then again, the GTS from the 2005 KOP required +12vdc. as well, and it had to come from the battery. Besides, here are some quotes from the Users Guide: "Assuming a 12VDC supply," and "Voltage should be in the range 7-15 volts
DC. Your power supply will have to be independent, for example, a 6 x AA
battery pack, 9V battery, 12V battery....."
So, if the robot will have the transmitter, then why manufacture one receiver board, at a minimum, per team and also spend the money and manpower on shipping?

As for a transmitter being in the KOP, I definitely agree, that is a possibility!

I guess all this back and forth is fine for now. We both will know for sure come Kick Off.:)

[Rich Kressly]

So, I was thinking. Could it be possible even though all rational people might say this game will never happen ... Does IR work underwater? Or more importantly, through an air-water interface? ... sigh ... I was going to sleep over the holidays, now I'm wrapped up in the mayhem too ... :eek:

[Daniel_LaFleur]

So, I was thinking. Could it be possible even though all rational people might say this game will never happen ... Does IR work underwater? Or more importantly, through an air-water interface? ... sigh ... I was going to sleep over the holidays, now I'm wrapped up in the mayhem too ... :eek:

Light does pass through the air water barrier but it bends as it does so.

[lukevanoort]

I know pretty much for certain we'll get some IR emitters in the kit. Anyone ever stalled a Fisher-Price? ;) (sorry, couldn't resist)

[Richard Wallace]

Light does pass through the air water barrier but it bends as it does so.Water's refractive index is about 4/3. Light originating on the water side will be partially reflected (back into the water) and partially refracted (into the air) at angles given by Snell's Law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snell%27s_law). Light originating in the water and incident on the surface at an angle greater than about 49 degrees will be totally reflected back into the water.

So some underwater positions will permit better transmission of IR than others.

[Daniel_LaFleur]

Water's refractive index is about 4/3. Light originating on the water side will be partially reflected (back into the water) and partially refracted (into the air) at angles given by Snell's Law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snell%27s_law). Light originating in the water and incident on the surface at an angle greater than about 49 degrees will be totally reflected back into the water.

So some underwater positions will permit better transmission of IR than others.

I wasn't going to get into the math of it because it's highly unlikely that we'll need to transmit (or recieve) through the air/water barrier.

Also, you will most likely be able to transmit at greater angles because the surface of water will (most likely) never be a perfect plane.

Snell's law could come into play though if you tried to protect your sensor with polycarbonate ... which also makes me wonder if polycarbonate is opaque to IR ... Hmmmmm

[mizitchell]

Polycarbonate isn't opaque to IR
I think...

[vivek16]

Polycarbonate isn't opaque to IR
I think...

I can just see robots with polycarbonate "banners" like we had on our robot last year with nylon cloth.

-vivek

[Mark McLeod]

With the speculation about RoboLaser Tag, could the response be to shut down for a period after receiving a signal? Is your sensor still unresponsive?


We've tried both before and after cycling the power on the IR board, but get no response whatsoever after the learning sequence ends normally. We tested with more than a dozen different remote manufacturers, including universal remotes.

I'm pretty sure our board is defective, but don't have a way to definitively test or prove it one way or another. We need a board from another local team, to prove the remotes work. The board's learning sequence indicates it likes some remotes, doesn't like others, and was unresponsive only to one old remote (not surprising).

[ZachKahn]

IR = International Relations? Think about it.

I definitely think the wire is the hint and the sensor is a normal component. The wires are too small to be soldered. The connector wires are a rainbow. Let's follow that rainbow to the pot of gold!!!

*note* A rainbow is in an arc... could this mean a trajectory of a flying object or a round game piece.

[Ryan O]

What about having one "control" bot that sends a signal to the other alliance bots, like something to program them or tell them about a certain element on the field?

Even if we haven't got the transmitter yet, remember that last year's hint was only a very small PART of the scoring system...

By the way, we are a team in Southern NH, and we got it today. I don't know about the e-mail, but as far as I can tell it's legit.

[Kaushal.K]

IR = International Relations? Think about it.

I definitely think the wire is the hint and the sensor is a normal component. The wires are too small to be soldered. The connector wires are a rainbow. Let's follow that rainbow to the pot of gold!!!

*note* A rainbow is in an arc... could this mean a trajectory of a flying object or a round game piece.


Well we could be firing something across the "pond".. (pond being the Atlantic Ocean.. one alliance being the "American" side.. the other alliance being the "European" side...) with the possibility of a water (or IR) "obstacle" in the middle/in certain areas... would provide a serious set of risks though (using the water) but oh well..

[artdutra04]

IR = International Relations? Think about it.

I definitely think the wire is the hint and the sensor is a normal component. The wires are too small to be soldered. The connector wires are a rainbow. Let's follow that rainbow to the pot of gold!!!

*note* A rainbow is in an arc... could this mean a trajectory of a flying object or a round game piece.Or they just used rainbow ribbon cable to make it easier for people when it comes time to crimp pins onto the wire to connect it to the robot controller/whatever output it may go to. On small 20- or 22-gauge wire like that, it's a lot easier to use color coding than to attempt to label individual wires.

[T3_1565]

but FIRST is sneaky like that to make you think "hey this wire is a symbol, and then go wait no it isn't" and then BAM it is!

[keen101]

Just thought I'd let everyone know that after having the board for 1 day... It broke today. :eek:



But It's ok, seems that the 5v voltage regulator died. I replaced it, and now it works fine again. :D

So, if anyone's boards die... check the 5v regulator.

[sishu7]

Has anyone in the Pacific Northwest received this "gift?" No one from the teams I have spoken to has, and our team certainly has not.

[Anamn3sis]

My team got it this morning, I'll post hi-res photos for everyone tomorrow when I get a chance to look at it again, and thanks for all the info in this thread :)

[AndyB]

We got our chip today and were playing with it. We found it had around a 50' range for us. But with a lens, the range can be extended to well across the length of the playing field. If they will be using the the board as-is, then I don't foresee a target past midfield if a driver/human player were to be using a remote to somehow effect the game.

[Aren_Hill]

AndyB, was that 50ft range with or without the lense. And how did you have that lense setup/what type of lense

[AndyB]

AndyB, was that 50ft range with or without the lense. And how did you have that lense setup/what type of lense

Didn't use a lense... Didn't try a lense. Just saying...

[GaryVoshol]

So, I was thinking. Could it be possible even though all rational people might say this game will never happen ... Does IR work underwater? Or more importantly, through an air-water interface? ... sigh ... I was going to sleep over the holidays, now I'm wrapped up in the mayhem too ... :eek:

Light does pass through the air water barrier but it bends as it does so.

Bananas bend ...





.
(whatever that dot means)

[Daniel_LaFleur]

We got our chip today and were playing with it. We found it had around a 50' range for us. But with a lens, the range can be extended to well across the length of the playing field. If they will be using the the board as-is, then I don't foresee a target past midfield if a driver/human player were to be using a remote to somehow effect the game.

The problem with using a lens is that it has a focal length. The further away from that length you are (both closer or farther) the more defocused you get. Any single lens that gives you IR visability across the field will be out of focus up close (and may not be detectable). A zoom lens coupled with an PID circuit could allow you to focus at any length.

[Alan Anderson]

The problem with using a lens is that it has a focal length. The further away from that length you are (both closer or farther) the more defocused you get. Any single lens that gives you IR visability across the field will be out of focus up close (and may not be detectable). A zoom lens coupled with an PID circuit could allow you to focus at any length.

This isn't a camera. Being "in focus" is irrelevant. What an extra lens can provide here is a combination of directivity and light-collecting power. For this application, non-imaging optics are fine. It's the size of the lens that matters most, and the focal length is (to a point) unimportant.

[team1203 4life]

Without further ado:

Part
330 (Joe Ross) 1999 Hermosa Beach, CA
846 (SU 39) 2002 San Jose, CA
701 (Doug G) 2001 Fairfield, CA
237 (Elgin Clock) 1999 Watertown, CT
34 (Ed Sparks) 1997 Huntsville, AL
766 (razor95kds) 2002 Atherton, CA

Blast only
1018 (Stu Bloom) 2003 Indianapolis, IN
? 2264 (vivek16) 2007 Plymouth, MN
2370 (fimmel) ? (TBA lists 0 as rookie year...) Rutland, VT
418 (JaneYoung) 2000 Austin, TX
1923 (Libby K) 2006 Plainsboro, NJ
217 (GeeForce) 1999 Sterling Heights, MI
1025 (GaryVoshol) ? (TBA lists 0 as rookie year) Ferndale, MI
340 or 424...not sure (rees2001) 340 and 424: 2000 Churchville, NY
190 (Nuttyman54) 1992 Worcester, MA
781 (d.courtney) 2002 Kincardine, ON (Canada)
1565 (T3_1565) 2005 Cambridge, ON (Canada)
68 (JBotAlan) 1998 Pontiac, MI

Wow...that was a lot of work...

No high-number teams have received their part yet--no team # > 1000. Other than that I see little correlation. Analyze away. I'm done with that.


At the top of the page, there is a link labeled "Chief Delphi"--it's at the beginning of "Chief Delphi > ChiefDelphi.com website > Extra Discussion..." Click it and pick the correct forum. Then, click the New Thread button at the top, and post away.

JBot

Team 1203 got our email and part

[Elgin Clock]

.
(whatever that dot means)

Typically it's used to end sentences while writing.
Atypically, it's used to amuse certain NASA employees & screw with your head.

Note that a " . " is also called a period, and thus could be a clue as to the return of a game with periods in it such as 2006.

But then again... maybe not. :p

[Daniel_LaFleur]

This isn't a camera. Being "in focus" is irrelevant. What an extra lens can provide here is a combination of directivity and light-collecting power. For this application, non-imaging optics are fine. It's the size of the lens that matters most, and the focal length is (to a point) unimportant.

Being perfectly 'in focus' is not important, you are correct. But being out of focus will lessen the energy recieved by the sensor, and as such will make it less sensitive (requireing more light to trigger). In addition, adding a lens will shorten it's field of vision.

[Beth Sweet]

Ok folks, I have it on very good authority how this game piece is going to be used. Please pay close attention to the directions, otherwise, yours will not work properly:

1: You're going to need 2 blank sheets of white paper and a pencil. A pen will not do.
2: You need to be in a location where you will not be interrupted. You will have very limited time once you start.
3: Sit down at a large table, you will need to spread out
4: Take your game piece sent to you in the mail. Place the piece front side up on the table, and drape the first piece of paper over it like a tablecloth
5: Making sure that the paper stays in place, take your pencil and holding it horizontally, rub it across the paper back and forth from one side of the board to the other until you get a full scale drawing
6: Turn the board piece upside down and do the same with the other piece of paper
7: Now this step is very important. Take your 2 sheets of paper and 2 pieces of tape, and hang the papers on your door or on your cubicle. You now have artwork to remind you of all of the fun you had anticipating the 2008 game.

Enjoy the water game! :D

PS. What did you think you were going to get from the non-techy!?

[Gamer930]

Ok folks, I have it on very good authority how this game piece is going to be used. Please pay close attention to the directions, otherwise, yours will not work properly:

1: You're going to need 2 blank sheets of white paper and a pencil. A pen will not do.
2: You need to be in a location where you will not be interrupted. You will have very limited time once you start.
3: Sit down at a large table, you will need to spread out
4: Take your game piece sent to you in the mail. Place the piece front side up on the table, and drape the first piece of paper over it like a tablecloth
5: Making sure that the paper stays in place, take your pencil and holding it horizontally, rub it across the paper back and forth from one side of the board to the other until you get a full scale drawing
6: Turn the board piece upside down and do the same with the other piece of paper
7: Now this step is very important. Take your 2 sheets of paper and 2 pieces of tape, and hang the papers on your door or on your cubicle. You now have artwork to remind you of all of the fun you had anticipating the 2008 game.

Enjoy the water game! :D

PS. What did you think you were going to get from the non-techy!?

Printing the picture and hanging it up:
1. Easier
2. More exact replica
3. Adds more color to your desk (If you print it in color)
4. Faster, allows more time to stare at the final product

[Alan Anderson]

Being perfectly 'in focus' is not important, you are correct. But being out of focus will lessen the energy recieved by the sensor, and as such will make it less sensitive (requireing more light to trigger).

You're still talking about this as an imaging application, but that's not the case. The sensor is essentially unfocused to begin with. A suitably sized lens can only increase the energy it receives, and will thus make it more sensitive.

You're correct to a point, in that being "out of focus" will result in less light on the sensor than if it were "in focus". But if a converging lens is positioned so that the optically receptive part of the sensor casing is at its focal point, it will still put more light on the sensor than if there were no lens at all.

[keen101]

Can't soldering on a second IR module in parallel increase the range?

[T3_1565]

Our team finally got it up and running today, I during the test have come to a good conclusion

Each Team WILL NOT have a remote for anysort of transmitting!

During our test we found out that pressing the button that has been "learned" to the board and pressing another button from a different controllor (doesn't matter what button) interfers with the signal and you get no response from the board

Therefore that only thing I see this being used for is if the field transmits date to the bots!

[Elgin Clock]

Our team finally got it up and running today, I during the test have come to a good conclusion
Each Team WILL NOT have a remote for anysort of transmitting!
During our test we found out that pressing the button that has been "learned" to the board and pressing another button from a different controllor (doesn't matter what button) interfers with the signal and you get no response from the board
Therefore that only thing I see this being used for is if the field transmits date to the bots!

Hold on just a second!
If I follow what you are saying correctly, and relate it to an IR sensor on a TV & a VCR in the same room is that once you program board 1 (TV) with Remote 1 and then use Remote 2 next to it for something else (VCR, board 2, whatever the case) that you render the board 1 (and Remote 1) completely inoperable with each other?

That (if you don't have a faulty board) does not sound good.

Basically what I'm understanding is that when you program it with Remote 1, then pushing anything on Remote number 2 makes all remotes useles???

This doesn't make sense to me. :confused: Please tell me I misunderstood you. :confused:

I have a theory if this is indeed what you meant. But I'll hold off on that while you answer this one.

[Donut]

Our team finally got it up and running today, I during the test have come to a good conclusion

Each Team WILL NOT have a remote for anysort of transmitting!

During our test we found out that pressing the button that has been "learned" to the board and pressing another button from a different controllor (doesn't matter what button) interfers with the signal and you get no response from the board

Therefore that only thing I see this being used for is if the field transmits date to the bots!

This sounds pretty reasonable. The IR receiver simply learns the pattern of pulses coming from a remote when the button is pressed. If two remotes are pressed simultaneously, the receiver will detect both IR patterns at the same time, and to it will see a "merged" pattern that contains both signals.

To use this receiver effectively, the emitters have to be situated in such a way that only one is visible in its field of view at any time. So if remotes are actually used on field, they'd have to be roughly 90 degrees apart, meaning only 4 human players. This also fights the transmitters onboard robots theory, as two robots could be transmitting to the same receiver and it would detect neither.

More backing to help the transmitters on field theory?

[Kevin Sevcik]

Hold on just a second!
If I follow what you are saying correctly, and relate it to an IR sensor on a TV & a VCR in the same room is that once you program board 1 (TV) with Remote 1 and then use Remote 2 next to it for something else (VCR, board 2, whatever the case) that you render the board 1 (and Remote 1) completely inoperable with each other?

That (if you don't have a faulty board) does not sound good.

Basically what I'm understnading is that when you program it with Remote 1, then pushing anything on Remote number 2 makes all remotes useles???

This doesn't make sense to me. :confused: Please tell me I misunderstood you. :confused:

I have a theory if this is indeed what you meant. But I'll hold off on that while you answer this one.
Elgin,

I believe what he's saying is that if you program it with Remote 1 and you're only pressing buttons on Remote 1, then it works as advertised. If, however, you start mashing/holding buttons on Remote 2 and then try previously working buttons on Remote 1, then it doesn't work. If you then stop mashing buttons on Remote 2, buttons on Remote 1 will work again as advertised.

This only makes sense as all the sensor is looking for is a specifically modulated pulse train from the remote in the IR spectrum. If another remote is sending out a pulse train on the same IR wavelength, you'll end up with the two pulse trains superimposed on one another, which is bound to stymie the controller attempting to decode it.

This should have occurred to me earlier, but it's definitely one more argument against having several uncontrolled, uncoordinated transmitters moving about on the field. If you need a specific IR pulse to operate something on the field but another team is maliciously/accidentally/coincidentally transmitting at the same, then the two transmitters will jam each other at the receiver and nothing will happen.

Of course this opens up the possibility of someone in the stands with a suped-up TV remote jamming any or all robot recievers on the field....

[Elgin Clock]

Elgin,

I believe what he's saying is that if you program it with Remote 1 and you're only pressing buttons on Remote 1, then it works as advertised. If, however, you start mashing/holding buttons on Remote 2 and then try previously working buttons on Remote 1, then it doesn't work. If you then stop mashing buttons on Remote 2, buttons on Remote 1 will work again as advertised.

This only makes sense as all the sensor is looking for is a specifically modulated pulse train from the remote in the IR spectrum. If another remote is sending out a pulse train on the same IR wavelength, you'll end up with the two pulse trains superimposed on one another, which is bound to stymie the controller attempting to decode it.

This should have occurred to me earlier, but it's definitely one more argument against having several uncontrolled, uncoordinated transmitters moving about on the field. If you need a specific IR pulse to operate something on the field but another team is maliciously/accidentally/coincidentally transmitting at the same, then the two transmitters will jam each other at the receiver and nothing will happen.

Of course this opens up the possibility of someone in the stands with a suped-up TV remote jamming any or all robot recievers on the field....

Ok, that makes sense. If you have a scrambled pattern then it can't decode it. Sounds logical.
The only way I can see the thing being used on a robot now is if the intended purpose for this is to act as an E-Stop for all robots? Would that be a conceivable idea?

And the "the possibility of someone in the stands with a suped-up TV remote jamming any or all robot recievers on the field" was on the top of my thoughts when I saw we were using IR detectors in some way (with things available on the market such as remotes that can interact with all kinds of IR devices like the ninja remote (http://www.ninjaremote.com/), or the Tv Be gone (http://www.tvbgone.com/cfe_tvbg_main.php) type thing)

This would work perfect in my whole Remote E-Stop theory, but of course... then there is the flip side of the illegal crowd controlled device as well, which I'm sure no one in FIRST would even try in the spirit of things. :ahh:

Another good point was brought up a while ago, about flash cameras interfering with the IR sensors as well as was the case a few years back in the FLL world. This doesn't seem like it would be a rule that would go over too big in a FIRST competition if they were to ban flash based cameras at competitions. :(

Speaking of IR devices on the market, did anyone catch the latest device from the company that makes "The Clapper"?
It's a remote control device as well as a clapper. lol
http://www.jeiusa.com/clapperplus.html

Just something else to ponder the timing of in the whole conspiracy aspect of the thread. :p


To use this receiver effectively, the emitters have to be situated in such a way that only one is visible in its field of view at any time. So if remotes are actually used on field, they'd have to be roughly 90 degrees apart, meaning only 4 human players. This also fights the transmitters onboard robots theory, as two robots could be transmitting to the same receiver and it would detect neither.

More backing to help the transmitters on field theory?

IR receivers from what I have gathered are "line of sight" controllers, so if they told us to put our robot a certain place on a field to interact with a human player with a remote (kind of the way 2005 used the loading zones with the Tetras) then I think it could be conceivable in that case. Also, I would expect some sort of wall to be built near that area so it couldn't be interfered with in that case as well maybe? idk. If we go up to Kickoff and see that the Field has extra walls on the outside of it, I'm going to be more likely to be able to see that being a real possibility. It won't help by that point, because it will only be <1 hour before the game is revealed but whatever. lol

I think after all of this guessing, I'm still on the fence as to whether it's for on the robot, or a field element now. Arghhhhhhh!!! :eek: :p

[AndrewN]

There's no reason why the four commands couldn't be used in combination:
cmd1, cmd2, pause, cmd1, cmd2 ...

giving 16 possible combinations, or 64 etc.

Might be game pieces telling the robot what state they are in.

"Busy", "Ready", "You Scored", "Go Away", "Red Team goal", "Blue Team goal ", "Penalty for using", "Extra Points Now!".... endless possibilities.

I wonder how many games we could come up with that are not the one for FRC 2008.

Possibilities increase if the robots can also send commands.
Remember - it's all idle speculation - we just don't have enough info. :rolleyes:

As for the interference - mount the receiver in a box and make it look down a tube, it'll become very sensitive to direction and less able to be interfered by another transmitter.

[chinckley]

Team 1254 received our part.:) :eek: :confused:

[T3_1565]

Hold on just a second!
If I follow what you are saying correctly, and relate it to an IR sensor on a TV & a VCR in the same room is that once you program board 1 (TV) with Remote 1 and then use Remote 2 next to it for something else (VCR, board 2, whatever the case) that you render the board 1 (and Remote 1) completely inoperable with each other?

That (if you don't have a faulty board) does not sound good.

Basically what I'm understanding is that when you program it with Remote 1, then pushing anything on Remote number 2 makes all remotes useles???

This doesn't make sense to me. :confused: Please tell me I misunderstood you. :confused:

I have a theory if this is indeed what you meant. But I'll hold off on that while you answer this one.

That is exactly what I meant! I brought out two remotes to test the theory people had on each human player having a remote, so I programmed remote 1 with 4 buttons to use, and remote 2 with no buttons.

So pushing and holding remote 1 makes light 1 blink, and pushing any other button (including other programmed/unprogrammed buttons on remote 1) makes the board completely and totally useless.

With that being said I think the only possible thing this can be used for is for stationary towers on the field to emit signals to the robot (assuming FIRST can arrange said signals to not interfer with one another).

I will test a couple more things and get back to you all!

[njamietech]

Just a question:

What would be the purpose of the playing pieces sending out signals like "I'm worth one point"?

Wouldn't this be useless during human operated mode? wouldn't we need a display to let us know what signal the pieces are emitting during Human mode?

Just seems like FIRST would not go to that much trouble to equip their game pieces with that tech when it would only be useful for 10 seconds.

Correct me if I am wrong.

[www.divsys.com]

Wow...I am enjoying all the guessed scenarios for the "real" use of this board. Talk about a serious WWW brainstorming session. Keep it up ladies and gentlemen...restlessness breeds ingenuity. ;)


BMW

[JB987]

It is great to see so many teams off and running with creative speculation and so busy trying to familiarize themselves with the IR "hint"...those fortunate enough to have received one. Team 987 anxiously awaits their delivery. Here's our concern...should it turn out that this part is an important component of the game, isn't there an issue of fairness regarding some teams having almost a week headstart working with the part while the rest of us sit here empty handed??? Seems to be inconsistant with standard FIRST policy so does this mean this might just be another red herring?... in which case this has been much ado about nothing? If this component is important, any ideas how we and other teams still waiting can get ahold of our IR board?

[T3_1565]

Just a question:

What would be the purpose of the playing pieces sending out signals like "I'm worth one point"?

Wouldn't this be useless during human operated mode? wouldn't we need a display to let us know what signal the pieces are emitting during Human mode?

Just seems like FIRST would not go to that much trouble to equip their game pieces with that tech when it would only be useful for 10 seconds.

Correct me if I am wrong.

Chances of using it on the pieces are slim to none. Look at pervious years. Do you really think they will have thousands of game pieces equip with IR??

I doubt it personally. I mean they could, but look how many pieces get trashed in one year, all at $5+ to have produced (thats how much the board cost, so I'm assuming a transmittor cost that much as well). It seems unlikely.

[T3_1565]

It is great to see so many teams off and running with creative speculation and so busy trying to familiarize themselves with the IR "hint"...those fortunate enough to have received one. Team 987 anxiously awaits their delivery. Here's our concern...should it turn out that this part is an important component of the game, isn't there an issue of fairness regarding some teams having almost a week headstart working with the part while the rest of us sit here empty handed??? Seems to be inconsistant with standard FIRST policy so does this mean this might just be another red herring?... in which case this has been much ado about nothing? If this component is important, any ideas how we and other teams still waiting can get ahold of our IR board?

I doubt it will be all that useful to say the truth, I'm pretty sure you can manage through this game without it, it just might help (like the camera)

[njamietech]

Chances of using it on the pieces are slim to none. Look at pervious years. Do you really think they will have thousands of game pieces equip with IR??

I doubt it personally. I mean they could, but look how many pieces get trashed in one year, all at $5+ to have produced (thats how much the board cost, so I'm assuming a transmittor cost that much as well). It seems unlikely.

That's what I was thinking too...

Now what if the field was sending out those types of signals...

Wouldn't we still need a display?

Wouldn't it still be useless outside of autonomous?

[T3_1565]

That's what I was thinking too...

Now what if the field was sending out those types of signals...

Wouldn't we still need a display?

Wouldn't it still be useless outside of autonomous?

Well you can set up the lights of the OI board to give signals

And yes I think it will only be useful in Auto

[Elgin Clock]

It is great to see so many teams off and running with creative speculation and so busy trying to familiarize themselves with the IR "hint"...those fortunate enough to have received one. Team 987 anxiously awaits their delivery. Here's our concern...should it turn out that this part is an important component of the game, isn't there an issue of fairness regarding some teams having almost a week headstart working with the part while the rest of us sit here empty handed??? Seems to be inconsistant with standard FIRST policy so does this mean this might just be another red herring?... in which case this has been much ado about nothing? If this component is important, any ideas how we and other teams still waiting can get ahold of our IR board?

Joe, I addressed some of those concerns you raised in this thread (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showpost.php?p=661999&postcount=14).
By being here on CD and reading the posts, you are already helping yourselves. :)
Good Luck in 2008!

[Turtlecoach]

That's what I was thinking too...

Now what if the field was sending out those types of signals...

Wouldn't we still need a display?

Wouldn't it still be useless outside of autonomous?


How about this scenario... We have game pieces of some sort that will go into a goal. When we get to the goal, the goal is sending a signal out to tell our robots which of 4 (?) bins to drop it into. Depending on how well our robots respond will determine the point count. THis would make the game semi-autonomous even in the non-autonomous portion of the game. More things to think about

[T3_1565]

this is a neat idea!

But as I said in previous posts I can't see the game revolving around this IR board. Much like Rack N' Roll didn't revolve around the spider foot :p

I see the being useful but not nessacary!

And through testing, my biggest concern with this piece is interference. If the transmitters can move, they can interfer with one another, your bin idea could work but, they would have to be stationary, and not pointing at one another lol.

[ydnar90]

Problems I can see:

If the sensor is on the robot:
field has transmitter
-can't have IR reflective material for the walls (multiple interfering signals)
-fairly expensive if its on game pieces that get destroyed
player has transmitter
-players transmitting at the same time interfere with each other
-2 teams with the same signal for different things can mess with each other

If the sensor is on the field:
Robot has transmitter
-need to be fairly accurate with the transmitter
-2 robots transmitting at the same time = nothing happens (interfere)
player has transmitter
-isn't there an easier way than IR, like just 4 buttons?

If the sensor is at the player station:
field has transmitter
-why use IR for this?
robot has transmitter
-robot can transmit data through the radio, why use IR?

[Ryan O]

Problem: I get which cables do what, but we only have one cable for each output, and dig ins are pwms, aka 3 cables. How do you wire it to connect?

thanks for any help

[Phalanx]

Well I have a thought for the moment and I wonder the significance or potential impact to the actual usability of this device.

Most event venues that I have attended use tungsten/halogen lighting. With all that IR being thrown out on to the field from the lighting it will make using IR as a requirement for this year game quite the challenge to over come.

What is a halogen bulb?
Halogen is a type of incandescent lamp. It has a tungsten filament just like a regular incandescent that you may use in your home, however the bulb is filled with halogen gas. An incandescent lamp produces light by heating a tungsten filament.

How much heat or infrared radiation is emitted by halogen light bulbs?
Because incandescent and halogen bulbs create light through heat, about 90% of the energy they emit is in the form of heat also called infrared radiation.

Any other intriguing thoughts on this aspect?

[Mark McLeod]

Problem: I get which cables do what, but we only have one cable for each output, and dig ins are pwms, aka 3 cables. How do you wire it to connect?

For the cmd0,1,2,3 signal wires turn the pwm connector sideways and push it onto three side-by-side signal pins leaving the ground and power pins unconnected.
One signal pin will be the odd man out of a standard three wire cable, so you can either use two cables or you can spring for your own female connectors and a 4-pin connector housing.

[Turtlecoach]

IR remotes work in buildings and arenas with Halogen lighting. One aspect is the sensitivity angle. Think of what happens when you are too far to the left or right of your TV when you go to change channels... nothing happens until you get in front of it. Other thing to remember is the signal is modulated on a 38kHz(?) carrier. Lights won't put that frequency out. So, the receiver is looking forward and not up and is modulated so the lighting shouldn't be an issue.

[Turtlecoach]

Problems I can see:

If the sensor is on the robot:
field has transmitter
-can't have IR reflective material for the walls (multiple interfering signals)
-fairly expensive if its on game pieces that get destroyed
player has transmitter
-players transmitting at the same time interfere with each other
-2 teams with the same signal for different things can mess with each other

If the sensor is on the field:
Robot has transmitter
-need to be fairly accurate with the transmitter
-2 robots transmitting at the same time = nothing happens (interfere)
player has transmitter
-isn't there an easier way than IR, like just 4 buttons?

If the sensor is at the player station:
field has transmitter
-why use IR for this?
robot has transmitter
-robot can transmit data through the radio, why use IR?

This is what happens when you have too much time on your hands and you get hints like this. Here is what I've come up with...sorry about the length.

If: IR receiver is a Field Piece:

1) Robots will have emitters.
2) Robots will be activating something on the field (up to 4 events or 16 if matrixed)
a. FIRST will have to define what each output will do in game instructions.
b. Robot will need to be close-coupled (think right next to each other) with Field element to prevent other robots from interfering with task
c. Robots might be toggling goals on & off or changing goal colors (red or blue alliance). 1st robot turns goal on, 2nd robot scores ball, block, ring, etc… Goal then shuts down. This would require coordination between alliance members to enable, score and shut down goals. Only requires on/off output from IR receiver.
d. Goals may have combination locks on them that need to be decoded to open goal for scoring. Four bits is 16 combinations.
3) Why would FIRST bother with instructions on how to program a Field Element and send a bunch of them out to teams? If it is a field element, they will do the programming of the receiver not the teams

If: IR receiver is Robot Element:

1) Field will be controlling robot(s) in some way.
a. If Field is working with only one robot at a time in one area, robot will have to be close coupled with Field element to prevent instructions going to wrong robot. .
b. If Field is working globally, (simultaneous instructions to all), emitters will need to cover all areas of field completely. This would, and is done more easily and securely with RF.
c. Field may be enabling or disabling some function in robots at different times in match. Again more easily done with RF.
d. IR receiver might be “listening” to the goal to determine where a scoring element (ball, block, hoop, etc…) needs to be deposited. Individual goals might have four bins, the IR transmitter at the gate would instruct the robot which of the four bins the element needs to be dropped into. How well the robot fulfills the instruction will determine how many points you score.
2) Robots will be interfacing with each other.
a. Robots will have emitters.
b. FIRST would need to define what each output will do in game instructions to insure compatibility issues, otherwise you would need to put the outputs in a matrix to route the individual outputs to the desired function
c. IR receiver module will be reprogrammed at regionals to make them all compatible with other robots or field emitters. Need to overwrite the TV remote programming.
d. Programming instructions for tv remote controls is to check operation on the robot before regionals.

Conclusions – Educated guesses

1) Robots will more then likely have IR emitters. If the receiver is a Field Element then the robots would need to have emitters. If the robots are going to need to collaborate with each other via IR, they will also need to have emitters. If the Field is going to control the robots via IR, then and only then will the robots not need emitters. And since it would be much easier to control all robots via RF instead of IR, I don’t think that is the case. Therefore, I believe that the robots will all have IR emitters.
2) If FIRST is putting out formal instructions on how to program the IR receiver with your TV remote, this part is going to wind up on the robot. If it is a field device, again why would they go through the effort to write these instructions?
3) Robots will be working together to perform a task
4) Robots will be interfacing with the Field in some way more closely then ever in the past



Then again……………..It’s most likely something else
:eek:

[T3_1565]

If the Field is going to control the robots via IR, then and only then will the robots not need emitters. And since it would be much easier to control all robots via RF instead of IR, I don’t think that is the case.

I disagree with this.

The field does not need to "control" the robot at all, but "inform" the robot about something (ie. the colour of the goal, what piece this goal accepts, etc..) which is not so easily done through RF.

I believe this seems more like what will happen because the IR signals are jammed very easily (try programming a remote to your board, push a programmed button, and then push a button on a different control from about 10 feet away). This means that if the emitters move around the field, things will be jammed all the time.

It seems more logically (to me anyways) that the emitters will be fixed, so they cannot jam on another and each robot will have to have their IR board programmed to the signals (much like callobrating the camera last year to see that particular light in that building), so more than one robot can interact with the signal at the same time.

Just MHO :D:D

[ydnar90]

If the signals are fixed, as you suggest, there will be interference until you are fairly close unless you have something like a tube around the sensor to limit where it gets input from. +/- 40 degrees is quite a range for a signal to be received from, especially with the ability of materials to bounce a signal back into the field. The big problem with IR as a whole is anyone in the stands with a 38khz remote can mess with any robots that are facing toward the stands. I do agree that if emitters are on the field they will be fixed, but that limits it to probably 4 sensors unless there are walls on the field to stop stray IR.

[T3_1565]

If the signals are fixed, as you suggest, there will be interference until you are fairly close unless you have something like a tube around the sensor to limit where it gets input from. +/- 40 degrees is quite a range for a signal to be received from, especially with the ability of materials to bounce a signal back into the field. The big problem with IR as a whole is anyone in the stands with a 38khz remote can mess with any robots that are facing toward the stands. I do agree that if emitters are on the field they will be fixed, but that limits it to probably 4 sensors unless there are walls on the field to stop stray IR.


well how many inputs can you have on the board??? 4!

and as for interference, you don't get a good signal to the recieves after about 20 feet max. and really how far are you going to be from the goal to want to know what it is saying, chances are you'll have to be up close

Material bounce may be a problem though.... lol...

And as long as the IR doesn't control the robot but just gives it signals, and FIRST takes into account outside interference, I'm still seeing fixed field emitters as the way to go!

[Donut]

Since we're concerned about potential interference, I'd like to ask teams who used IR back in 2004... were there problems of the two IR emitters in 2004 reflecting off of objects and interfering with each other? Or if you used another IR sensor (such as the Sharp range finders), did the IR emitters on field interfere with their operation?

If there weren't problems then, I don't see any reason to think there will be this year. Our team took the line following approach that year seeing as I did autonomous and was just beginning programming back then, so we didn't see how the IR was out on the field.

[Turtlecoach]

I disagree with this.

The field does not need to "control" the robot at all, but "inform" the robot about something (ie. the colour of the goal, what piece this goal accepts, etc..) which is not so easily done through RF.

I believe this seems more like what will happen because the IR signals are jammed very easily (try programming a remote to your board, push a programmed button, and then push a button on a different control from about 10 feet away). This means that if the emitters move around the field, things will be jammed all the time.

It seems more logically (to me anyways) that the emitters will be fixed, so they cannot jam on another and each robot will have to have their IR board programmed to the signals (much like callobrating the camera last year to see that particular light in that building), so more than one robot can interact with the signal at the same time.

Just MHO :D:D

I agree with your statement that the field will 'inform' rather then 'control'. I also think we all need to step back away from the jigsaw puzzle piece and try to get a little perspective to see where we are all heading, and figure out what the big picture really is.

Look back over the last few years and see where FRC has been. 2003 - Stack attack, 2004 - Raising the bar, 2005 - Triple Play, 2006 - Aim high & 2007 Rack & Roll. NASA is very involved with FIRST not just because they are great guys and want to see us have a good time. They have definite engineering goals in mind and need answers to problems. How many students attended Atlanta last year? 10K from 23 countries. If I had an engineering company and needed a brainstorming group, ten thousand @ $0 / hr is quite a deal. These hints are to get the brainstorming sessions started so when the season officially starts with the announcement, everyone is already cranked up. I know I am:D

Where are we going...Mars, in the short term. The games from 2003,2004 & 2005 are constuction exercises (think foundations & building members), 2006 & 2007 were sample collection and storage. 2006 had us picking up uniform samples off the field and delivering them to recepticles with predefined ramps. 2007 had us picking up not so uniform samples and placing them on a multi-tier rack. Don't forget the undefined ramps either. All of these are baby steps to figure out how to get autonomous robots to go out on undefined terain, pickup samples and bring them back to return vehicles. Spirit & Opportunity need to sit and wait for commands from mission control to move the next few feet. NASA wants things to move faster.

Where is the game going this year? The next baby step. I wouldn't be supprised if the game name this year is, "Load um Up". I think that the game will be some sort of collection of samples based with a twist. Samples will be different sizes and will need to go into Field defined bins. Emitters will be in a short tube, as others have mentioned, for selectivity and immunity to outside interference, mounted next to the bins. Robot rolls up, receives info or knowledge from goal as to where the sample needs to be deposited, and acts accordingly. Points for depositing samples, extra points for putting it where the goal tells you, bonus points if you can do it autonomously.

Again...most likely wrong, but people do things for reasons, and companies and goverment agencies even more so. If you look at where you have come from you can often tell where you are going. Never forget the big picture.:D :D

[tajmorton]

Has anyone managed to download the firmware off the PIC yet? We tried to build a programmer for it (http://www.techfreakz.org/oldstuff/picb.html), but couldn't find any software that worked with the PIC that's on the board. Anyone have any recommendations of software programmers that work with easy to build HW programmers for the PIC16LF87-I/SO.

- Taj

[ydnar90]

But where do the opposing robots fit in to this interpretation of past games? Also, the place where you put the "samples" in rack n roll was not in an exact position, there was quite a range of positions that the spider legs could be in and a fairly close fit for the tubes on the rack. Its an interesting interpretation, only time will tell how accurate any of these speculations are.

[Doug G]

Ok it's taken me like 5 days to catch up with this post, whew... Here's my thoughts...

1. It's not going on the Field. If it were on the field what are 1500 teams going to use to interface with it on their practice fields? It would still require another controller and such to hook up to this board so it could actually do something like release an object or control a servo. Perhaps they will give us another circuit setup in the KOP, but I think that is a stretch.

2. It will be a part that can go on the robot that will give your robot more information about the field. I like the ideas folks have mentioned about each corner having an emitter.

3. Perhaps this a clue that we'll finally have an autonomous period at the end of a game. If each corner is emitting a unique IR signal, then robot could determine which way to go home for a bonus score or something.

4. It will be as optional to use as the camera has been the last few years. While as cool as this is, there will be many teams at a lost on how to efficiently interface this in their robot or game strategy.

[Bill Moore]

Problems I can see:

If the sensor is on the robot:
field has transmitter
-can't have IR reflective material for the walls (multiple interfering signals)
-fairly expensive if its on game pieces that get destroyed
player has transmitter
-players transmitting at the same time interfere with each other
-2 teams with the same signal for different things can mess with each other

If the sensor is on the field:
Robot has transmitter
-need to be fairly accurate with the transmitter
-2 robots transmitting at the same time = nothing happens (interfere)
player has transmitter
-isn't there an easier way than IR, like just 4 buttons?

If the sensor is at the player station:
field has transmitter
-why use IR for this?
robot has transmitter
-robot can transmit data through the radio, why use IR?

If there is an end game autonomous, is it possible that both the transmitter and receiver are on the robot? The robot then would change programs during autonomous as they encounter objects on the field that block their path toward the cold cathode.

[Anamn3sis]

For anyone who hasn't received their board yet, here is a Hi-Res gallery if you want to inspect it: http://www.flickr.com/photos/9051550@N06/sets/72157603516542645/

[Mr_I]

Forgive me for not having read 40 pages of comments yet, but I just got the IR receiver today (drat snow days!)

Could it be that alliance robots will have the ability do communicate with each other?

[Daniel_LaFleur]

Forgive me for not having read 40 pages of comments yet, but I just got the IR receiver today (drat snow days!)

Could it be that alliance robots will have the ability do communicate with each other?

While it is possible, I doubt thats what they will be used for. Each reciever can only interpret 4 IR signals and they are easily jammed. This makes for very limited and dodgy communications.

If they are on the robot (my belief) then most likely there will be 4 phases to the game and the field will emit the IR signals defining what phase it is in.

[emusteve]

So here's a new thought...
FIRST sends us a sensor with a hunk of pretty rainbow ribbon cable. Does this mean we can go back to sane wiring practices like using ribbon cable to wire our sensors, rather than being restricted to using big hunky 24awg or larger stuff? After all, they've been giving us 30awg PWM splitters all these years.

Steve

[GeoffP]

Maybe a complex version of laser tag with a capture the flag objective? a win/loose game would be unlikely though because penalty points would have to be assessed real time.

[BanksKid]

are therre ant threads longer thin this one?

[T3_1565]

are therre ant threads longer thin this one?

lol probably this one has only been open for a week or so (6 days actually) so I bet ones are out there that are longer. (now getting this many posts this fast, it probably takes the cake :D)

As for laser tag, I think it would be cool, but Interference is still a huge problem and how would you play laser capture the flag???

[Mark McLeod]

are therre ant threads longer thin this one?

The longest threads are in the Games/Trivia sub-forum.
Word association is at 9,247 posts

[jerry w]

Ok folks, I have it on very good authority how this game piece is going to be used. Please pay close attention to the directions, otherwise, yours will not work properly:

1: You're going to need 2 blank sheets of white paper and a pencil. A pen will not do.
2: You need to be in a location where you will not be interrupted. You will have very limited time once you start.
3: Sit down at a large table, you will need to spread out
4: Take your game piece sent to you in the mail. Place the piece front side up on the table, and drape the first piece of paper over it like a tablecloth
5: Making sure that the paper stays in place, take your pencil and holding it horizontally, rub it across the paper back and forth from one side of the board to the other until you get a full scale drawing
6: Turn the board piece upside down and do the same with the other piece of paper
7: Now this step is very important. Take your 2 sheets of paper and 2 pieces of tape, and hang the papers on your door or on your cubicle. You now have artwork to remind you of all of the fun you had anticipating the 2008 game.

Enjoy the water game! :D

PS. What did you think you were going to get from the non-techy!?

now this is one of the best posts so far! it focuses on what we have in hand instead of wishing that the board would do fantastic things.

i have already posted 4 clues.
anyone who is serious about solving this puzzle needs to examine the board.
CLUE# 5
the programmers might best like this clue. on the robot controller the digital inputs are the most used connections for feedback devices. we often come close to using all these inputs. so why would first design a board with 4 ouputs?
only a single remote can be detected at any time. thus only a single output line will pulse. this provides 4 pieces of information. it takes only 2 bits to hold 4 different values. the board should have 2 signal lines if the robot controller is to use this IR detector.

therefore, this will not be on the robot. we should try to determine what field-device could be activated by the 100 ms pulse from this board. there must be 4 gates, or 4 containers, or 4 of something.

jerry w

[IndySam]

The longest threads are in the Games/Trivia sub-forum.
Word association is at 9,247 posts

On my poker forum we have a thread with 258,904 posts, so far.

[Daniel_LaFleur]

now this is one of the best posts so far! it focuses on what we have in hand instead of wishing that the board would do fantastic things.

i have already posted 4 clues.
anyone who is serious about solving this puzzle needs to examine the board.
CLUE# 5
the programmers might best like this clue. on the robot controller the digital inputs are the most used connections for feedback devices. we often come close to using all these inputs. so why would first design a board with 4 ouputs?
only a single remote can be detected at any time. thus only a single output line will pulse. this provides 4 pieces of information. it takes only 2 bits to hold 4 different values. the board should have 2 signal lines if the robot controller is to use this IR detector.

therefore, this will not be on the robot. we should try to determine what field-device could be activated by the 100 ms pulse from this board. there must be 4 gates, or 4 containers, or 4 of something.

jerry w

I do believe you are missing something here.

While it is true that the reciever board we got can only read 1 signal at a time, and that there 4 different types of signals that can be read, there are 5 possible conditions coming out of the reciever.

And they are: Out0=on,Out1=on,Out2=on,Out3=on, and no signal recieved. Therefore 2 bits will not cover all of the possible outputs from the board.

[coolbotz]

now this is one of the best posts so far! it focuses on what we have in hand instead of wishing that the board would do fantastic things.

i have already posted 4 clues.
anyone who is serious about solving this puzzle needs to examine the board.
CLUE# 5
the programmers might best like this clue. on the robot controller the digital inputs are the most used connections for feedback devices. we often come close to using all these inputs. so why would first design a board with 4 ouputs?
only a single remote can be detected at any time. thus only a single output line will pulse. this provides 4 pieces of information. it takes only 2 bits to hold 4 different values. the board should have 2 signal lines if the robot controller is to use this IR detector.

therefore, this will not be on the robot. we should try to determine what field-device could be activated by the 100 ms pulse from this board. there must be 4 gates, or 4 containers, or 4 of something.

jerry w

Yeah its much more likely that we have 4 spare outputs. Right?.
You assume that we're using the same FRC controller. If the robot were the IR transmitter there would still need to be an IR encoding board or each team will need to write code to encode the IR signals.

[Syncopation]

As per new email from FIRST:
42.349905

-71.076072

342.242026What does it mean?

EDIT: The first thing I thought of was a set of lat/longitude coordinates. Using the first two, + being north on the first and - being west on the second, I get Copley Square in Boston, right in front of the John Hancock Tower.

However, probably just some settings for the IR sensor... but who knows?

[Nuttyman54]

342.24 as an elevation measurement....
342.24 inches = 28.52 feet
342.24 cm = 11.23 feet

the elevation of Boston is ~19 feet above sea level, so either one of those is plausible for the ground level of Copley Square

EDIT: Copley Sq is about 16 feet above sea level, so it's not the ground elevation. HOWEVER, if you look at the satelite view in Google Maps, it appears to be pointing DIRECTLY at a statue or post of some sort. This could be the elevation of the top of the statue, a plaque on the statue....anyone want to go take a look? (I would, but I'm in California at the present time)

EDIT #2: Statue appears to be of John Singleton Copley, the square's namesake. Famous for his paintings, parents were traders. Theres more on his wiki page. Hint could also just as easily involve the physical statue attributes, or his name (Singletons anyone?)

EDIT#3: Copley Square is the official finish line for the Boston Marathon (Credit to Ruth of 1735 for this one)

[T3_1565]

wow.... are you guys all physic... that was exactly the same things said in the email blast thread lmao

[Nuttyman54]

Discussion about the second hint has moved here
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=60297

[Mr. Freeman]

d. IR receiver might be “listening” to the goal to determine where a scoring element (ball, block, hoop, etc…) needs to be deposited. Individual goals might have four bins, the IR transmitter at the gate would instruct the robot which of the four bins the element needs to be dropped into. How well the robot fulfills the instruction will determine how many points you score.

I think this is most likely.
I believe this will follow two rules, kind of like the camera has in the past.
1. I highly doubt that this board is going to be mission-critical.
2. It'll be nice if you have it, but some teams will not have the ability to make it work. Therefore, any advantages gained from having it must not be so large as to guarantee a win.

I'm thinking something like what turtlecoach described above.
Example 1: there are four identical bins, each with a transmitter on them that you have to deposit balls into. One or two of the four bins has the transmitter active. Depositing balls into the one or two transmitter-active bins scores you 5 points/ball. Depositing balls into any other bin scores you 2 points/ball. Specific point values notwithstanding.

Example 2: 4 identical bins, each with a transmitter. Each bin is numbered, the numbers remain identical throughout every match. (I.E. bin #1 will always be the bin closest to the blue alliance station)
They all start transmitting the same, coded signal. This signal will identify a particular bin. Depositing balls into the indicated bin will result in more points than depositing balls into any other bin.

Sorry if I repeated anything that's already been said. I didn't read all 41 pages before posting, just the first and last few.

[jerry w]

I do believe you are missing something here.

While it is true that the reciever board we got can only read 1 signal at a time, and that there 4 different types of signals that can be read, there are 5 possible conditions coming out of the reciever.

And they are: Out0=on,Out1=on,Out2=on,Out3=on, and no signal recieved. Therefore 2 bits will not cover all of the possible outputs from the board.

oops
i knew this was a weak clue but forgot why. it doesnt invalidate the conclusion. however, having 3 digital inputs is not much better than 4.

jerry w

[caraddicted101]

This might have been pointed out earlier in the thread, but i thought i would say it myself...2004 game - there was a LED receiver that was used in auto. mode. I want to say that this is a re-try of that? but with a more sophisticated device?

[lucasmaker#2247]

Even taking so many theories, it can not be "Breaking the head" before the kick off, it is healthy, but many people are giving shot in the dark, as well as in other years. The only concept that we have are of new technologies, and this is good, but on the game can not know virtually nothing
...
...

...
...

Will be Triangles and not Cases, or Cubes, or Boxes, or Squares....
Will be Triangles

[jerry w]

please
it has been 24 hours.
has no one in that area got a gps unit?
google is not accurate within about 50 feet.
i would like to know what is on the ground at the suspected coordinates.

please, will someone go make the measurement?:ahh: :ahh: :ahh:

jerry w

OOPS

[DonRotolo]

Because incandescent and halogen bulbs create light through heat, about 90% of the energy they emit is in the form of heat also called infrared radiation.
It is important to distinguish between long IR and short IR. One is what we feel as heat, the other is what IR LEDs emit. Determining which is which is an exercise left to the student.
Does this mean we can go back to sane wiring practices like using ribbon cable to wire our sensors, rather than being restricted to using big hunky 24awg or larger stuff? After all, they've been giving us 30awg PWM splitters all these years.
...or you can buy 24 AWG ribbon cable, eh? For Example (http://www.electronicsurplus.com/commerce/catalog/product.jsp?product_id=65860&czuid=1198365190144)
it has been 24 hours.
i would like to know what is on the ground at the suspected coordinates.
please, will someone go make the measurement?:ahh: :ahh: :ahh:

Me too.
Anyone??

Don

[njamietech]

keep in mind that a GPS device can be off by 50 feet as well, depending on the signal quality.

[DonRotolo]

True, although since the Feds switched off selective availability it's a bit better.

Nevertheless, there are ways to get really good accuracy, for example (http://www.novatel.com/Documents/Bulletins/apn029.pdf). I have used this to locate my radio antenna tower to within a few feet.

74 01'W 41 01'N is about 32 feet NE of the tower, if anyone cares.

Don

[billbo911]

Another thought came to me today, and it wouldn't surprise me that others have thought of this as well.(If this has already been suggested/posted, please ignore mine.) :o
Could the fact that we were given GPS coordinates as a clue, mean that we will be receiving GPS coordinates, for positioning purposes, on the field? If so, the third coordinate would most likely be a height value. (Look at what is being used in Surveying and Construction these days. )

Just food for thought.

[Daniel_LaFleur]

Another thought came to me today, and it wouldn't surprise me that others have thought of this as well.(If this has already been suggested/posted, please ignore mine.) :o
Could the fact that we were given GPS coordinates as a clue, mean that we will be receiving GPS coordinates, for positioning purposes, on the field? If so, the third coordinate would most likely be a height value. (Look at what is being used in Surveying and Construction these days. )

Just food for thought.

Civilian GPS coordinants are only good to about 10 feet and GPS signals are notorious for dropping out in some structures (like a steel building) and in high EM areas.

[billbo911]

Civilian GPS coordinants are only good to about 10 feet and GPS signals are notorious for dropping out in some structures (like a steel building) and in high EM areas.
For civilian GPS, you are correct. In fact, when I backpack, my GPS is sufficient. If I know where I am within 3 meters, I'm really happy!

But remember, I said to consider what is used in surveying and construction. Think in the 1cm for X,Y and 1-3cm for Z accuracy range.
Good enough for robots???

[Daniel_LaFleur]

For civilian GPS, you are correct. In fact, when I backpack, my GPS is sufficient. If I know where I am within 3 meters, I'm really happy!

But remember, I said to consider what is used in surveying and construction. Thing in the 1 - 3cm accuracy range.
Good enough for robots???

Surveying and construction are done out doors and therefore will have cleaner signals.

To get to the 1-3cm accuracy from a non-military GPS you'd need 4-5 signals from different GPS satalites and time to syncronize them (hours). In addition, reflections cause havoc in such systems, nevermind the EM field around the robot.

[billbo911]

Surveying and construction are done out doors and therefore will have cleaner signals.

To get to the 1-3cm accuracy from a non-military GPS you'd need 4-5 signals from different GPS satalites and time to syncronize them (hours). In addition, reflections cause havoc in such systems, nevermind the EM field around the robot.

All I can say is, check this out. (http://uc.gpsworld.com/gpsuc/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=308333)

[DonRotolo]

To get to the 1-3cm accuracy from a non-military GPS you'd need 4-5 signals from different GPS satalites and time to syncronize them (hours).
Aside from the Pseudolites mentioned above, look up Differential GPS - makes it trivial to get cm accuracy within seconds.