|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dashboard communication ports
Does anybody know what ports the cRio talks to to communicate with the dashboard?
|
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Dashboard communication ports
the default dashboard packet is UDP on 1165
|
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Dashboard communication ports
You are referring to the DS -> Dashboard traffic, right?
-Joe |
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Dashboard communication ports
yes
|
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Dashboard communication ports
With respect to communications in the other direction, Update #5 (25-Jan-2011) states that UDP 1130 is being available for “Dashboard-to-Robot” Communications which is highly suggestive that we are now allowed to communicate to the Robot from our own dashboard and overrides Rule 75 where the Driver Station is the only tool allowed to collate driver/operator inputs and send them to the robot.
This is a big change opening many opportunities for enhanced leveraging of the PC facilities (screen, keyboard, touch screen, ANY USB device, etc) at the console. Does anyone disagree with this interpretation that we ARE now allowed to directly send data from our dashboard to the Robot ? |
|
#6
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Dashboard communication ports
The question needs to be asked directly in Q&A before we start deciding for ourselves what rule takes precedence over what other rules.
"During competition are we allowed to control the robot from Dashboard controls rather than purely Driver Station controls?" |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Dashboard communication ports
I posted this question on the Q&A two nights ago and have not heard a response yet
|
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Dashboard communication ports
Quote:
But yes, you can communicate however you want as long as all teleop goes through the driver station. I'd suggest, however, to not reverse-engineer the current protocol and just make your own (like I did). |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Dashboard communication ports
Quote:
|
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Dashboard communication ports
Quote:
Regardless, this rule has nothing to do with the driver station. I myself am rather confused as to why they insist on all human-driven input going through their software, as it would already be possible under the rules to modify the cRIO to negate any "safety" benefits from this. And I noticed the computer-driven control exception myself. I moved image processing to my driver station as I wished to write my own, and I believe someone else was going to do much the same thing so they could use OpenCV, something more featured than the NIVision on the cRIO. Remember the Dashboard and the Driver Station are completely separate. The Dashboard NEVER sends back information, while the Driver Station is the one to initiate everything as far as rounds/teleop/autonomous goes, therefore the interpretation of "all human input must go through the Driver Station" is by far the most valid interpretation. Last edited by sjspry : 29-01-2011 at 15:47. |
|
#11
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Dashboard communication ports
Most of your post seems based on a faulty memory of what the rules say. Please read the description of what ports are available in section 2.2.8 (as amended in Team Update #5).
|
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Dashboard communication ports
Quote:
Quote:
![]() |
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Dashboard communication ports
Greetings,
We are moving forward with our "Dashboard to Robot” communications approach which appears to be legal (our current interpretation) with update #5 where UDP port 1130 is available for “Dashboard-to-Robot control data”. The update #5 statement that these ports “are open on the playing field, so a team can use them as they wish” is fairly unambiguous although we recognize the <R75> inconsistency where it is stated that the DriverStation is the only tool allowed to collate driver/operator data to the robot. While we are moving forward with our Dashboard plans to allow user interaction with the robot, we’ll continue to monitor the FIRST site for any further clarification on this subject and will graciously remove this capability should our interpretation later be shown to be incorrect. I’m attaching a C++ example function where we have successfully received UDP packets from our dashboard. John |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|