Go to Post First is more than a competition it is a family. - amos229 [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > Old Forum Archives > 1999
CD-Media   CD-Spy  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #16   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 23-06-2002, 23:01
archiver archiver is offline
Forum Archival System
#0047 (ChiefDelphi)
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Pontiac, MI
Posts: 21,214
archiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond repute
Dumpster diving...

Posted by Joe Johnson, Engineer on team #47, Chief Delphi, from Pontiac Central High School and Delphi Automotive Systems.

Posted on 5/17/99 7:34 PM MST


In Reply to: 99 Controllers? posted by Dodd Stacy on 5/17/99 7:25 AM MST:



Great idea!

If they are destined for the scrap heap, I propose we all start a fund to pay for professional dumpster divers to keep an eye on the trash outback of 200 Bedford Street, Manchester, NH ;-)

Joe J.


__________________
This message was archived from an earlier forum system. Some information may have been left out. Start new discussion in the current forums, and refer back to these threads when necessary.
  #17   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 23-06-2002, 23:01
archiver archiver is offline
Forum Archival System
#0047 (ChiefDelphi)
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Pontiac, MI
Posts: 21,214
archiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond repute
add a custom curcuit area

Posted by Joe Johnson, Engineer on team #47, Chief Delphi, from Pontiac Central High School and Delphi Automotive Systems.

Posted on 5/20/99 5:25 PM MST


In Reply to: Serious Controller Ideas posted by Joe Johnson on 5/15/99 7:02 PM MST:



I have suggested this before, but it was a while ago so I will repeat myself.

FIRST should include a proto area and an approved set of components (e.g. any inductor
__________________
This message was archived from an earlier forum system. Some information may have been left out. Start new discussion in the current forums, and refer back to these threads when necessary.
  #18   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 23-06-2002, 23:01
archiver archiver is offline
Forum Archival System
#0047 (ChiefDelphi)
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Pontiac, MI
Posts: 21,214
archiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond repute
Re: add a custom circuit area

Posted by Thomas A. Frank, Engineer on team #121, The Islanders/Rhode Warrior, from Middletown (RI) High School and Naval Undersea Warfare Center.

Posted on 5/23/99 11:02 AM MST


In Reply to: add a custom curcuit area posted by Joe Johnson on 5/20/99 5:25 PM MST:



Another great idea, Joe!

But there might have to be just a few more rules...like only DIP package IC's allowed, or
some such restriction, to keep people from buying things at the die level and making up
something really serious in the available space.

I know we'd try it! (assuming the microelectronics lab would volunteer it's time...)

Tom Frank





__________________
This message was archived from an earlier forum system. Some information may have been left out. Start new discussion in the current forums, and refer back to these threads when necessary.
  #19   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 23-06-2002, 23:01
archiver archiver is offline
Forum Archival System
#0047 (ChiefDelphi)
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Pontiac, MI
Posts: 21,214
archiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond repute
learn mode for joystick inputs

Posted by Joe Johnson, Engineer on team #47, Chief Delphi, from Pontiac Central High School and Delphi Automotive Systems.

Posted on 5/20/99 5:42 PM MST


In Reply to: Serious Controller Ideas posted by Joe Johnson on 5/15/99 7:02 PM MST:



This year we put in a 'learn' mode in our RX code that allowed us to train the controller to adjust the joystick's nuetral and max and min outputs (The raw data was scaled so that an untouched joystick always read 128, a full forward joystick always read 254, a full back joystick always read 0, etc.).

It wasn't terribly complicated, but on the current controller, it took up resources that were already pretty scarce.

What do folks think of a set of switches on the TX box (perhaps recessed in holes and only pressable with a small screwdriver) that would allow the TX box to learn these values for a each joystick and then do the conversion prior to sending the data?

While it IS exciting to adjust those joystick trims as 1000's watch from the stands, I think I could manage to live a fulfilled life without doing it again ;-)

Any thoughts?

Joe J.


__________________
This message was archived from an earlier forum system. Some information may have been left out. Start new discussion in the current forums, and refer back to these threads when necessary.
  #20   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 23-06-2002, 23:01
archiver archiver is offline
Forum Archival System
#0047 (ChiefDelphi)
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Pontiac, MI
Posts: 21,214
archiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond repute
Ain't it great... ;)

Posted by Tom Vanderslice, Student on team #275, ORHS/AST/Hitachi, from Academy of Science and Technology and Hitachi.

Posted on 5/20/99 6:29 PM MST


In Reply to: learn mode for joystick inputs posted by Joe Johnson on 5/20/99 5:42 PM MST:



Ain't it great to watch that light come on and your robot jump all over the place...great feeling...


Tom
__________________
This message was archived from an earlier forum system. Some information may have been left out. Start new discussion in the current forums, and refer back to these threads when necessary.
  #21   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 23-06-2002, 23:01
archiver archiver is offline
Forum Archival System
#0047 (ChiefDelphi)
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Pontiac, MI
Posts: 21,214
archiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond repute
PID Control Module

Posted by Joe Johnson, Engineer on team #47, Chief Delphi, from Pontiac Central High School and Delphi Automotive Systems.

Posted on 5/20/99 6:58 PM MST


In Reply to: Serious Controller Ideas posted by Joe Johnson on 5/15/99 7:02 PM MST:



Regardless of what controller changes are made, I propose that FIRST publish a generic PID control mudule (PID = Proportional Integral Derivative).

The current controller is not powerful enough (in my opinion) or fast enough to implement a robust PID control routine.

I propose that the module would have do all the hard work and allow the users (like us) to set the gains for the propotional, integral and derivative feedback loops.

There are well know methods for determining the gains for PID control (I will pull together a PID controller primer if someone will develop the code).

If teams have well behaved feedback routines available, I think that many robot arms would be MUCH better behaved.

Am I the only one out here who can't stand to see these herky-jerky robot arms out there?

Give me robust feedback.

Joe J.


__________________
This message was archived from an earlier forum system. Some information may have been left out. Start new discussion in the current forums, and refer back to these threads when necessary.
  #22   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 23-06-2002, 23:01
archiver archiver is offline
Forum Archival System
#0047 (ChiefDelphi)
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Pontiac, MI
Posts: 21,214
archiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond repute
more analog inputs on RX side

Posted by Joe Johnson, Engineer on team #47, Chief Delphi, from Pontiac Central High School and Delphi Automotive Systems.

Posted on 5/20/99 7:05 PM MST


In Reply to: Serious Controller Ideas posted by Joe Johnson on 5/15/99 7:02 PM MST:



More feedback inputs on the RX side would be good too.

I think that more teams would have used the Yaw Rate Sensor if there were more analog inputs available (assuming also that the microprocessor is powerful enough to handle more inputs of course)

If it were up to me, I would have feedback on almost every motor on our robot.

16 or 32 analog inputs should be enough to keep us for a few years.

Joe J.


__________________
This message was archived from an earlier forum system. Some information may have been left out. Start new discussion in the current forums, and refer back to these threads when necessary.
  #23   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 23-06-2002, 23:01
archiver archiver is offline
Forum Archival System
#0047 (ChiefDelphi)
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Pontiac, MI
Posts: 21,214
archiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Serious Controller Ideas

Posted by Mike, Student on team #175, Buzz, from Enrico Fermi High School and UTC - Hamilton Standard Space Systems.

Posted on 5/21/99 4:20 PM MST


In Reply to: Serious Controller Ideas posted by Joe Johnson on 5/15/99 7:02 PM MST:



I would definitely like to have processing power on
both the receiver and the transmitter side. This will coincide
with the other great idea of RF Ethernet because we will now
have an up-link from the robot. This will help drivers 'see'
things from the robot's perspective.

I would like to propose an idea from a technical design
aspect. I think there should be two computers on the receiver
side. The first would be the one we're all talking about: more
memory, lightning fast processor. This computer would be
responsible for the RF Ethernet, all inputs, and the processing
of data. This computer would send it's output to a modified version
of the current receiver, and then out to the motors. This setup
would save FIRST some cash (which gets us a better system) but
would also allow us to use something that we have come accustomed
to. Anybody have any suggestions or comments?



__________________
This message was archived from an earlier forum system. Some information may have been left out. Start new discussion in the current forums, and refer back to these threads when necessary.
  #24   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 23-06-2002, 23:01
archiver archiver is offline
Forum Archival System
#0047 (ChiefDelphi)
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Pontiac, MI
Posts: 21,214
archiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond repute
counter point

Posted by Joe Johnson, Engineer on team #47, Chief Delphi, from Pontiac Central High School and Delphi Automotive Systems.

Posted on 5/21/99 6:16 PM MST


In Reply to: Re: Serious Controller Ideas posted by Mike on 5/21/99 4:20 PM MST:



I think that two user programmable CPU's on the RX side sounds okay, but I object to keeping the current RX box as one of them.

The basic loop time is too slow to be useful in many situations.

As long as we are going to bite the bullet and go to a new controller, I say do it right, don't compromise performance to get one or two more years out of the current (very good, but definitely improvable) controllers.

As to saving money, I don't think that much would really be saved. Remember that we are on a 40% growth curve. This means that over 100 new controllers are required even if we change nothing!

Just my two cents.

Joe J.


__________________
This message was archived from an earlier forum system. Some information may have been left out. Start new discussion in the current forums, and refer back to these threads when necessary.
  #25   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 23-06-2002, 23:01
archiver archiver is offline
Forum Archival System
#0047 (ChiefDelphi)
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Pontiac, MI
Posts: 21,214
archiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Serious Controller Ideas

Posted by Rick Berube, Engineer on team #121, Rhode Warriors, from Middletown H.S..

Posted on 5/22/99 10:56 PM MST


In Reply to: Serious Controller Ideas posted by Joe Johnson on 5/15/99 7:02 PM MST:




Joe,

I like the modular approach and the isolation of the power electronics from the processor. Consider the Motorola 683xx series of controllers for the task of receiver controller. I think it has more than enough 'bang-for-the-buck'. More specifically, check out the 68PM302 and 68EN302/MC68160 pair. They provide ethernet/PCMCIA support? How about high-level language, operating system and BDM debugging support?
The 683xx series is 68K based and is surrounded by all sorts of peripheral goodies like interrupts, A/Ds and high speed timers, etc. Regardless of the micro selected, if you mount it on a mezzanine card, and add your 'black-box' design for relays and switches, you have the makings of an upgradable controller box. Good for many years to come. You'll need more receiver horsepower to utilize the LAN idea anyway.

Ok. NOW FOR A REALITY CHECK. with a more powerful contoller and functional system comes a price. And I'm not talking about monetary value either! We must ensure no one gets left in the dust trying to make use of this wonderful new controller. We (read the FIRST software community) need to get together and establish a development 'environment'.
The beauty of the Basic Stamp was its easy of use and readily available support. Will the formation of a 'GNU-like' consortium be needed, or will it this all fall upon FIRST shoulders? how steep will the learning curve be to program this new controller? remember you only have a few weeks to master the beast and get it to jump thru hoops.

To simplify the task of programming the beast with all these new features, we'll need consider (amoung others):
1)publishing a library of software accesible to all (and complete with source code)
2)writting a FIRST executive (a mircokernel by any other name). We need to ensure user programs cannot execute outside the saftey boundries established by FIRST (I'm to old to chace runaway robots. the concept of priveledged(FIRST)/user(your team)tasks works well here.
3)writting a new default program is needed to provide basic functionality, and a place to start for more advanced programs. if my team doesn't have a programmer, this is my only recourse.
4)let's not forget the need for a new transmitter and some PC software (if we're going to use this new system to its fullest potential we'll need the tools to do it). teams will need a place to start to make use of all these new features.
5)oh yeah. I almost forgot. Last but not least, we need a ton of documentation (luckily something we all love to do We'll have to develop an Application Programmers Interface document so everyone knows what is available and how to used it. How many man hours do you think something like would take?

Don't get me wrong, I too would like more controller features at my disposal. But be careful what you ask for, you may just get it.
There is a great deal of work here. A significant hardware & software undertaking for sure. It would surly be a challenge to come up with a design which adds all this functionaly while minimizing the complexity which normally accompanies such systems.

I bet Eric is having trouble trying to estimate how all this will impact his customer support hours (not!).


__________________
This message was archived from an earlier forum system. Some information may have been left out. Start new discussion in the current forums, and refer back to these threads when necessary.
  #26   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 23-06-2002, 23:01
archiver archiver is offline
Forum Archival System
#0047 (ChiefDelphi)
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Pontiac, MI
Posts: 21,214
archiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond repute
Maybe a Partial Solution to the Learning Curve

Posted by Tom Vanderslice, Student on team #275, ORHS/AST/Hitachi, from Academy of Science and Technology and Hitachi.

Posted on 5/22/99 11:48 PM MST


In Reply to: Re: Serious Controller Ideas posted by Rick Berube on 5/22/99 10:56 PM MST:



Maybe if they sent the new control system a little early (say before x-mas)
it would give everyone a chance to 'get to know' the new controller...
write some simple programs and hook up an old robot or some old motors
or little motors you just have lying around (ok...we all know we do)...
This would be fairly simple and would allow the 'learning curve' to be not
so steep by giving us a few weeks...maybe a month if they sent them early
enough...

Just a thought...

Tom
Team 275
__________________
This message was archived from an earlier forum system. Some information may have been left out. Start new discussion in the current forums, and refer back to these threads when necessary.
  #27   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 23-06-2002, 23:01
archiver archiver is offline
Forum Archival System
#0047 (ChiefDelphi)
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Pontiac, MI
Posts: 21,214
archiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Maybe a Partial Solution to the Learning Curve

Posted by Rick Berube, Engineer on team #121, Rhode Warriors, from Middletown H.S..

Posted on 5/23/99 10:16 AM MST


In Reply to: Maybe a Partial Solution to the Learning Curve posted by Tom Vanderslice on 5/22/99 11:48 PM MST:



: Maybe if they sent the new control system a little early (say before x-mas)
: it would give everyone a chance to 'get to know' the new controller...

Certain an idea worth entertaining regardless of what the new controller looks like. Although I haven't been to a kick-off mtg yet in NH, I believe the manufactures of the animation software provide a seminar to those who wish to attend. This same type of thing for the controller would certain help the un-initiated to get over the learning curve. However, realize this is just a start. Aside from the controller hardware and software, there would also be the potential learning curve of real-time multi-tasking, operating system/kernel, development tools, etc.
Engineering will always be about tradeoffs. This new controller is no different. How fast does the micro have to be? what programming language will you make available for teams to program in? what type of development environment should be established? I'm not saying we can't strike a balance. I guess the point I'm trying to make, is that while all these suggestions are valid, there must be some thought put into the final product and the level of expertise required to program it (have mercy on the rookie teams).

Again, I'm not saying this can't be done with a well published API. Maybe it's done by starting with a well documented micro and OS, with networking and multi-tasking support built-in. Typically your talking about using the C programming language here however not Basic. But if the software is layer properly, and you can minimize the shear number learning curves to overcome, it becomes more feasible.


__________________
This message was archived from an earlier forum system. Some information may have been left out. Start new discussion in the current forums, and refer back to these threads when necessary.
  #28   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 23-06-2002, 23:01
archiver archiver is offline
Forum Archival System
#0047 (ChiefDelphi)
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Pontiac, MI
Posts: 21,214
archiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond repute
Nearly off the shelf...

Posted by Joe Johnson.

Engineer on team #47, Chief Delphi, from Pontiac Central High School and Delphi Automotive Systems.

Posted on 5/24/99 6:55 PM MST


In Reply to: Re: Maybe a Partial Solution to the Learning Curve posted by Rick Berube on 5/23/99 10:16 AM MST:



To my mind, your comments are exactly why FIRST should go with a nearly off the shelf system.

3 years back, I tried to roll my own robot controller using a 68332 based New Micros Inc single board computer. It almost killed me...

The machine had TONS of CPU speed, what I needed was a standard library of useful functions. Before I gave up, I had the onboard TPU (Time Processing Unit) performing the PWM function in an automonous mode, much like the Serial Servo Controller (SSC) does now only much quicker to access (a single write to memory rather than a serial stream to the SSC). In the future, such partial solutions can be made available to all.

I think that it is possible for FIRST to use an off the shelf or nearly off the shelf single board CPU.

But, there will be problems to deal with:

1) Control of high current loads

This can be dealt with in a number of ways already discussed.

2) Watch dog curcuitry to cut off power in case of a lost radio signal or the end of a match

It is pretty standard to have watchdog curcuitry onboard single board computers, if first used a radio with the checksum and security stuff incorporated inside its internal CPU then it could also provide the watchdog signal(s) to the watchdog curcuit. I suppose that a bit of care would have to be taken to see to it that clever EE-types don't disable the watchdog (you have to watch those highly paid sneaky electrical folks ;-) but I think that this would not be too much of a problem. If it were we would have already seen some cheating because the current system is far from invulnerable (A snip here a cut trace there and your robot could continue to run regardless of what FIRST did to the TX signal). It is no more or less an honor system than whether or not a team's BOM actually matched the robot.

3) High learning curve.

For my money, the best way to beat this is for FIRST to decide to use an off the shelf controller NOW or ASAP and then tell the world where to get it.

I would like nothing more than to teach a CPU class or a C class or a digital curcuitry class next fall to the students on my team.

Winning animations are already being designed and built for next year. Why can't the winning control program already begin?

Also, I think that if we choose an off the shelf system, then we can all go to existing user groups for help. There are a lot of very clever people online, many of them give advice and consulting free if asked. This could be no different.

In addition to this, an off the shelf controller has existing documentation and support for its product. Once again, this puts us ahead of the game.

As to the difficulties of C, I agree, that C is a language for consenting adults, but with enough examples and a fall back default code, we can all get through this. After all, we don't tell teams that heat treatment of steel is tricky business best left to folks who know what they are doing. No, we allow heat treatment or not as teams see fit. This C thing could be just like that. Many teams may choose to use the default code with only minor changes. Others may be implementing Kalman filters and State Space control schemes -- let us all seek our own depth.

I think that the GNU model mentioned in a prior message is not far from how the FIRST online community would support a new commercially available computer. If we (ChiefDelphi.com) put up a forum on code issues, don't you think that we could all climb that learning curve faster than you can say, 'Realtime Multitasking C'?

4) Others I have not thought of...


I think that we can do this. I think that we SHOULD do this. Now is the time to do this.

Who will join me in finding an appropriate commercial solution? I think that if we find a good solution we can sell it to Eric and the gang back in NH.

Joe J.


__________________
This message was archived from an earlier forum system. Some information may have been left out. Start new discussion in the current forums, and refer back to these threads when necessary.
  #29   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 23-06-2002, 23:01
archiver archiver is offline
Forum Archival System
#0047 (ChiefDelphi)
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Pontiac, MI
Posts: 21,214
archiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond repute
No emulators required!

Posted by Rick Berube.

Engineer on team #121, Rhode Warriors, from Middletown H.S..

Posted on 5/25/99 10:06 PM MST


In Reply to: Nearly off the shelf... posted by Joe Johnson on 5/24/99 6:55 PM MST:



Ok. Let's see if I can address these issues one at time. I have nothing against C. It's probably the best embedded high level language for mid to lower-level micros going. And its only one step away from C++. It has been around for ages (at least in computer years and is well supported by just about every development environment I can think of.

As far as the 'off-the-shelf' bullet is concerned, I heard a rumor that FIRST is having someone develop the controller for them. So perhaps you will get your wish for a COTS controller that can be purchsed. Regardless, we are talking about the need for some type of integrated development environment (IDE). I can see something like a Motorola micro which supports background debug mode (BDM). This is a great way to go. Its functional, register level access and cost effective (read CHEAP!). Mike isn't the only one on a budget. No emulators, or JTAG debuggers need apply, thank you.

I'll argue however, that if FIRST were to provided a system complex enough to require a battery of development tools, you'll see more complaints regarding this issue than those attacking the lack of power in the earlier models. I think a 'high-level, wiz-bang' system means embedding a microkernel/OS. This means someone must write one or purchase one. Last time I looked, vxWorks and Windows CE both came with a pretty good IDEs, but neither is cheap. Is someone going to strike a deal with Jerry or Bill? Are they on-board for this project?

Whatever the IDE provided, if the controller goes the route of a generic micro, one where the entire application programmer's interface (API) were a custom design, its has to be an open system. One with plenty of documentation. One where FIRST teams could contribute in a GNU-like fashion. But it has to have some straight forward tools to leverage or it'll never make it as a commercial product. There's a reason companies like Wind River and Microsoft are doing so well. Software at this level is hard to write and make bullet proof in short order. I think starting from scratch with a custom IDE and API would kill this project dead. I just don't think there's enough time to do it well unless you leverage off an existing COTS software, or 'Simplify' the design of teh controller itself.


__________________
This message was archived from an earlier forum system. Some information may have been left out. Start new discussion in the current forums, and refer back to these threads when necessary.
 


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 Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
serious problem found - robot controller resets when jarred! KenWittlief Electrical 23 19-03-2003 13:30
Visibility of Robot Controller and Reset Button Tracy Rules/Strategy 1 17-02-2003 07:36
How do you connect the speed controller fans? Iain Electrical 7 31-01-2003 07:05
Problems with rookie ideas?!? Tton General Forum 7 08-01-2003 22:10
Robot Types (post your ideas here) Rick Rules/Strategy 30 10-02-2002 12:09


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 00:45.

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