Go to Post Honestly, no one at a FIRST competition is gonna judge you. Chances are, there are least 20 people dorkier than you. - JohnnyB [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > Technical > Electrical
CD-Media   CD-Spy  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
Closed Thread
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 26-10-2013, 20:23
Daryl Vogel Daryl Vogel is offline
Registered User
FRC #2122
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Boise
Posts: 358
Daryl Vogel is an unknown quantity at this point
Optical sensors getting tricked

In the last competition we had a number of IR and other optical sensors on our robot. Due to the halogen lights however, we kept getting a true when it shouldn't have detected anything. Are there any sensors that you guys use that aren't affected by them or how do you get around that.
  #2   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 26-10-2013, 20:43
Mark McLeod's Avatar
Mark McLeod Mark McLeod is offline
Just Itinerant
AKA: Hey dad...Father...MARK
FRC #0358 (Robotic Eagles)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Rookie Year: 2002
Location: Hauppauge, Long Island, NY
Posts: 8,904
Mark McLeod has a reputation beyond reputeMark McLeod has a reputation beyond reputeMark McLeod has a reputation beyond reputeMark McLeod has a reputation beyond reputeMark McLeod has a reputation beyond reputeMark McLeod has a reputation beyond reputeMark McLeod has a reputation beyond reputeMark McLeod has a reputation beyond reputeMark McLeod has a reputation beyond reputeMark McLeod has a reputation beyond reputeMark McLeod has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Optical sensors getting tricked

We usually use shading cones or recess the receiving sensor deeper into an enclosing project box to limit the amount of ambient light striking it.
__________________
"Rationality is our distinguishing characteristic - it's what sets us apart from the beasts." - Aristotle
  #3   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 27-10-2013, 17:02
yash101 yash101 is offline
Curiosity | I have too much of it!
AKA: null
no team
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Rookie Year: 2012
Location: devnull
Posts: 1,191
yash101 is an unknown quantity at this point
Lightbulb Re: Optical sensors getting tricked

I do not have any ideas on how to shield against light, except to create an enclosure around the sensor. However, you could use some different technology, like hall-effect or mechanical
  #4   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 27-10-2013, 23:45
philso philso is offline
Mentor
FRC #2587
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Rookie Year: 2011
Location: Houston, Tx
Posts: 940
philso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Optical sensors getting tricked

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daryl Vogel View Post
In the last competition we had a number of IR and other optical sensors on our robot. Due to the halogen lights however, we kept getting a true when it shouldn't have detected anything. Are there any sensors that you guys use that aren't affected by them or how do you get around that.
People here will be better able to help you if you describe what you are trying to do with the sensors.
  #5   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 28-10-2013, 00:16
MrForbes's Avatar
MrForbes MrForbes is offline
Registered User
AKA: Jim
FRC #1726 (N.E.R.D.S.)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Sierra Vista AZ
Posts: 6,033
MrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Optical sensors getting tricked

we got around it by designing our robot so it doesn't need any sensors other than the compressor pressure switch. It's amazing what you can do with mechanical design, to eliminate the need for software
  #6   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 28-10-2013, 00:57
yash101 yash101 is offline
Curiosity | I have too much of it!
AKA: null
no team
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Rookie Year: 2012
Location: devnull
Posts: 1,191
yash101 is an unknown quantity at this point
Smile Re: Optical sensors getting tricked

Closed-loop programming is good enough for most cases. However, when you are building a robot that will be in a different scenario at most times, you cannot rely on closed-loop. Open-loop seems like it would be slower, but it would be trustworthy. Would you rather shoot 100 frisbees into the goal at a 60% accuracy, or would you shoot 60 frisbees and make all 60 into the goal? The latter would be more impressive because that is a 100% accuracy compared to a 60% accuracy of the first one. Also, these numbers above are sarcastic. It would be more of a 7-9 or 8-9 ratio of made goals.
  #7   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 28-10-2013, 02:10
MichaelBick MichaelBick is offline
Registered User
FRC #1836 (MilkenKnights)
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Rookie Year: 2010
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 734
MichaelBick has a brilliant futureMichaelBick has a brilliant futureMichaelBick has a brilliant futureMichaelBick has a brilliant futureMichaelBick has a brilliant futureMichaelBick has a brilliant futureMichaelBick has a brilliant futureMichaelBick has a brilliant futureMichaelBick has a brilliant futureMichaelBick has a brilliant futureMichaelBick has a brilliant future
Re: Optical sensors getting tricked

Quote:
Originally Posted by yash101 View Post
Closed-loop programming is good enough for most cases. However, when you are building a robot that will be in a different scenario at most times, you cannot rely on closed-loop. Open-loop seems like it would be slower, but it would be trustworthy. Would you rather shoot 100 frisbees into the goal at a 60% accuracy, or would you shoot 60 frisbees and make all 60 into the goal? The latter would be more impressive because that is a 100% accuracy compared to a 60% accuracy of the first one. Also, these numbers above are sarcastic. It would be more of a 7-9 or 8-9 ratio of made goals.
I don't see how open loop would be slower. It actually should be much faster than closed loop. In response to the OP we used banner sensors that could be tuned based on light.
__________________
Team 1836 - The Milken Knights
2013 LA Regional Champions with 1717 and 973
2012 LA Regional Finalists with 294 and 973
To follow Team 1836 on Facebook, go to http://www.facebook.com/MilkenKnights
To go to our website, go to http://milkenknights.com/index.html
  #8   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 28-10-2013, 07:46
Gdeaver Gdeaver is offline
Registered User
FRC #1640
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: West Chester, Pa.
Posts: 1,370
Gdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Optical sensors getting tricked

We had a similar problem in 2012 with sharp IR sensors from Pololu electronics.
http://www.pololu.com/catalog/product/1134
They are inexpensive and worked very well at first to control the indexing of the balls in our pick up. Between the 1st and 2nd competition we change the robot covering for a couple of reasons. That's when we started getting false positives. At that point for many reasons we could not go back to a robot covering that shielded the sensors. The human operator ended up being the controller. A tough lesson. So in the future we would use them again but design shielding in to the robot.
  #9   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 28-10-2013, 09:58
Alan Anderson's Avatar
Alan Anderson Alan Anderson is offline
Software Architect
FRC #0045 (TechnoKats)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Rookie Year: 2004
Location: Kokomo, Indiana
Posts: 9,113
Alan Anderson has a reputation beyond reputeAlan Anderson has a reputation beyond reputeAlan Anderson has a reputation beyond reputeAlan Anderson has a reputation beyond reputeAlan Anderson has a reputation beyond reputeAlan Anderson has a reputation beyond reputeAlan Anderson has a reputation beyond reputeAlan Anderson has a reputation beyond reputeAlan Anderson has a reputation beyond reputeAlan Anderson has a reputation beyond reputeAlan Anderson has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Optical sensors getting tricked

Quote:
Originally Posted by yash101 View Post
Closed-loop programming is good enough for most cases. However, when you are building a robot that will be in a different scenario at most times, you cannot rely on closed-loop. Open-loop seems like it would be slower, but it would be trustworthy.
Can you explain why you say this? It's pretty much the opposite of my experience.
  #10   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 28-10-2013, 10:21
yash101 yash101 is offline
Curiosity | I have too much of it!
AKA: null
no team
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Rookie Year: 2012
Location: devnull
Posts: 1,191
yash101 is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Optical sensors getting tricked

The robot will not be in the same place very often. It needs to adapt by itself to it's surroundings. Also, yes, open-loop can be faster, or it can be slower depending on how you tackle it. In the case that I was thinking about, it would take time to read sensors and joysticks, process that information and then move the robot. That would basically have very little impact, unless you are doing complex processing (like vision). So, you are right. The impact of speed would be very little.
  #11   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 28-10-2013, 11:37
Alan Anderson's Avatar
Alan Anderson Alan Anderson is offline
Software Architect
FRC #0045 (TechnoKats)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Rookie Year: 2004
Location: Kokomo, Indiana
Posts: 9,113
Alan Anderson has a reputation beyond reputeAlan Anderson has a reputation beyond reputeAlan Anderson has a reputation beyond reputeAlan Anderson has a reputation beyond reputeAlan Anderson has a reputation beyond reputeAlan Anderson has a reputation beyond reputeAlan Anderson has a reputation beyond reputeAlan Anderson has a reputation beyond reputeAlan Anderson has a reputation beyond reputeAlan Anderson has a reputation beyond reputeAlan Anderson has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Optical sensors getting tricked

Quote:
Originally Posted by yash101 View Post
The robot will not be in the same place very often. It needs to adapt by itself to it's surroundings.
I still don't understand your previous post. You seem to be saying that closed-loop control is not capable of dealing with dynamic situations, and that open-loop programming is necessary in such cases. Again, that is completely opposite to my experience. Please tell us what you mean by open-loop and closed-loop in this context.
  #12   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 28-10-2013, 12:07
Joe Ross's Avatar Unsung FIRST Hero
Joe Ross Joe Ross is offline
Registered User
FRC #0330 (Beachbots)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Rookie Year: 1997
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 8,599
Joe Ross has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Ross has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Ross has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Ross has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Ross has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Ross has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Ross has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Ross has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Ross has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Ross has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Ross has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Optical sensors getting tricked

Quote:
Originally Posted by yash101 View Post
Closed-loop programming is good enough for most cases. However, when you are building a robot that will be in a different scenario at most times, you cannot rely on closed-loop. Open-loop seems like it would be slower, but it would be trustworthy. Would you rather shoot 100 frisbees into the goal at a 60% accuracy, or would you shoot 60 frisbees and make all 60 into the goal? The latter would be more impressive because that is a 100% accuracy compared to a 60% accuracy of the first one. Also, these numbers above are sarcastic. It would be more of a 7-9 or 8-9 ratio of made goals.
I'm confused. A few weeks ago, you said:

Quote:
Originally Posted by yash101 View Post
Our team wants to start PID, because we properly designed our robot last year, but didn't use sensors. If we did use sensors, we would have probably won the championships.
You seem to be contradicting yourself.
  #13   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 28-10-2013, 13:12
MichaelBick MichaelBick is offline
Registered User
FRC #1836 (MilkenKnights)
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Rookie Year: 2010
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 734
MichaelBick has a brilliant futureMichaelBick has a brilliant futureMichaelBick has a brilliant futureMichaelBick has a brilliant futureMichaelBick has a brilliant futureMichaelBick has a brilliant futureMichaelBick has a brilliant futureMichaelBick has a brilliant futureMichaelBick has a brilliant futureMichaelBick has a brilliant futureMichaelBick has a brilliant future
Re: Optical sensors getting tricked

Microcontrollers can respond to input much faster than a human could. The lag in reading input is barely noticed compared to the time taken off repetitive tasks. For example closed loop code on a shooter could reduce down time between shots and increase reliability. This makes the action of shooting much faster.

Also, open loop relies on human feedback or constants. Humans make mistakes and constants aren't as accurate as battery voltage decreases. Closed loop properly programmed will always be better than open loop code.
__________________
Team 1836 - The Milken Knights
2013 LA Regional Champions with 1717 and 973
2012 LA Regional Finalists with 294 and 973
To follow Team 1836 on Facebook, go to http://www.facebook.com/MilkenKnights
To go to our website, go to http://milkenknights.com/index.html
  #14   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 28-10-2013, 15:06
magnets's Avatar
magnets magnets is offline
Registered User
no team
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Rookie Year: 2012
Location: United States
Posts: 748
magnets has a reputation beyond reputemagnets has a reputation beyond reputemagnets has a reputation beyond reputemagnets has a reputation beyond reputemagnets has a reputation beyond reputemagnets has a reputation beyond reputemagnets has a reputation beyond reputemagnets has a reputation beyond reputemagnets has a reputation beyond reputemagnets has a reputation beyond reputemagnets has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Optical sensors getting tricked

To address the open/closed loop control issue-
The confusion probably comes from the fact that the poster isn't too familiar with implementations of closed loop control in FRC. It's really hard to make blanket statements about one method being faster than another, or one being more reliable than another unless you have spend a significant amount of time working with both.
I do agree that a well-written closed loop control (PID, bang-bang, take-back-half...) is much superior to an open loop version, but in some cases, a team with little programming resources may not need to have PID control on their arm, but instead have two end of travel limits.
My recommendation to the poster is to spend time in the offseason experimenting with different control methods before commenting on their effectiveness.

As for the optical sensors, our team uses the banner IR sensors. We've used them on our drive wheels, our shooter wheels, and to detect the bump in 2012. We've found that with high speed control, we'd sometimes see that the speed reported would get cut in half when we went to competition, due to false positives. We fixed this by making sure that when we did high speed sensing, the black and white parts of the shaft that the sensor looked at were equal lengths. This makes it harder for the sensor to skip over one of them and report the incorrect speed. We also turned down the sensitivity as far as it would go without loosing the signal.
  #15   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 28-10-2013, 20:46
yash101 yash101 is offline
Curiosity | I have too much of it!
AKA: null
no team
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Rookie Year: 2012
Location: devnull
Posts: 1,191
yash101 is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Optical sensors getting tricked

PID is quite required, to my opinion. Last year (2013), our robot did well, but the shooter wasn't consistent because we didn't have a way to measure the shooter speed. We would just place the shooters at 100% power and shoot from the same place. Programming a consistent robot closed loop can be hard because you need to calculate the motor speed using the hundreds of variables, mostly:
-battery voltage
-motor life
-controller life
-load on motors
-bearing stress
-multitudes of other variables
Yes, you could use vision so that the robot can determine whether the disk went into the goal. However, that would be hard because there is a small slot of time where the disk would show the greatest proof of position and landing. Encoders can be a life-changer when you want to want to have a very accurate robot while remaining simple.
Closed Thread


Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 19:19.

The Chief Delphi Forums are sponsored by Innovation First International, Inc.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi