Go to Post If your goal is to win matches... Pick the most capable candidate. If your goal is to change lives... Sometimes you pick those that need the most change. - IKE [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > FIRST > General Forum
CD-Media   CD-Spy  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 17-12-2013, 14:23
EricWilliams EricWilliams is offline
Registered User
FRC #2039 (Rockford Robotics)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: Rockford, IL
Posts: 103
EricWilliams is a glorious beacon of lightEricWilliams is a glorious beacon of lightEricWilliams is a glorious beacon of lightEricWilliams is a glorious beacon of lightEricWilliams is a glorious beacon of lightEricWilliams is a glorious beacon of light
Re: 3.6GHz 802.11y for Competitions

Quote:
Originally Posted by magnets View Post
1. 3.6GHz is a licensed channel, so first would have to pay.
2. The problems (excluding those of Einstein 2012) aren't caused by interfering signals.
3. If implemented properly, normal 802.11n should work fine, even with lots of other networks happening at the same time. Instead of making it more complicated to fix the problem, FIRST should resolve the current issue.
The fact that it's licensed is stated in the proposal. Many telecommunication technologies require an FCC license for use - the reason these bands/services are licensed is to protect the users from interfering signals. As that's the point of this proposal, I feel it's an acceptable cost.

From the FCC site (http://wireless.fcc.gov/services/ind...&id=3650_3700), it appears the filing fee would be $60 + $150/Call Sign - at worst, this is less than $2000 (somewhere between $50 and $100 per team) These events cost money - the A/V budget alone for some events would most likely be mind boggling. I think that's a reasonable price to pay to ensure that the command & control network remains isolated and secure.

Quote:
Originally Posted by magnets View Post
Overall, the 3.6GHz solution requires too much work (money, new radios...) in order for something that may not be the right solution, may make the situation worse, or could be resolved another way.
I don't agree, or at least don't find enough evidence to support that statement in your comment to summarily dismiss the idea.

As for going back to some type of custom hardware/radio: that completely undermines the biggest benefit of going away from the 900MHz radios - that teams can use standard COTS equipment for development/demo/practice/off-season events. I'm suggesting simply swapping out the bridge before you bring the robot out onto the field.
Reply With Quote
  #2   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 17-12-2013, 14:36
techhelpbb's Avatar
techhelpbb techhelpbb is offline
Registered User
FRC #0011 (MORT - Team 11)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Rookie Year: 1997
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 1,620
techhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 3.6GHz 802.11y for Competitions

Quote:
Originally Posted by EricWilliams View Post
As for going back to some type of custom hardware/radio: that completely undermines the biggest benefit of going aay from the 900MHz radios - that teams can use standard COTS equipment for development/demo/practice/off-season events. I'm suggesting simply swapping out the bridge before you bring the robot out onto the field.
When I helped propose a 2015 control system I got around this by making a module that accepted radio modules of various frequencies. FIRST could send teams ISM band modules (often unlicensed) with valid frequencies for the team's nation of origin. If you really wanted that module could do TCP/IP for home use of an AP or base band serial. After all that module had an Ethernet for field side. It could work with existing fields and FMS. The module was called the Turtle. Slow and steady wins the race and it is hardened.

If the teams wanted WiFi FIRST could let them provide hardware or restrict the hardware to choices they prefer.

Turtle did not advocate a specific frequency it would have allowed FIRST to move around.

This proposal was not accepted.

I think Asus is providing a WiFi USB radio for RoboRIO.
Upside - less involved than the D-Link AP and hopefully cheaper.
Downsides - still wraps baseband serial in TCP/IP giving up control and risks RoboRIO busy state holding up radio.

Last edited by techhelpbb : 17-12-2013 at 15:01.
Reply With Quote
Reply


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 15:23.

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