Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Another kind of Robo-Magellan contest ?

Expand Messages
  • Dan
    Hi, Has anyone ever looked at the Mini-Grand Challenge contest held at Penn State ? This is in my part of the country so I was always looking for some more
    Message 1 of 16 , Nov 22, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi,

      Has anyone ever looked at the Mini-Grand Challenge contest held at Penn
      State ? This is in my part of the country so I was always looking for
      some more robot clubs nearby us. Their contest is kinda similar to the
      Robo-Magellan, but they actually require the robot to follow a walkway
      during the first leg of the course. There is more vision processing
      involved and they make use of webcam attached to the mainboard to
      process the image. They also require the robot to carry a gallon of
      water as a payload. I wondered if there was discussion between the two
      robot clubs about combining the contests in some way. Our club is
      planning to build one per the SRS rules and attend a contest that will
      be hosted by ChiBots in Chicago in the spring next year.
      Here's the Link
      http://www.ecsel.psu.edu/~avanzato/robots/contests/outdoor/contest05.htm

      =Dan

      --
      .~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.
      [My Corner of Cyberspace http://ragooman.home.comcast.net/ ]
      [Pittsburgh Robotics Society Got Robot? http://www.pghrobotics.org/ ]
      [Pittsburgh Vintage Comp.Society http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pghvintagecomp/ ]
      .~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.



      --
      No virus found in this outgoing message.
      Checked by AVG Free Edition.
      Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.13.5/177 - Release Date: 11/21/2005
    • Doug Kelley
      We never worked with Penn State when developing the Magellan rules although it s obvious the Grand Challenge was the inspiration for both. I suspect Penn State
      Message 2 of 16 , Nov 23, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        We never worked with Penn State when developing the Magellan rules
        although it's obvious the Grand Challenge was the inspiration for both.
        I suspect Penn State also reviewed our rules while writing theirs as
        there are statements like:

        "There is no requirement for a wireless, emergency stop feature
        (primarily because the robots are low speed)."

        Their contest is a little different and perhaps we should run it as well
        as Magellan next year. We've been looking for a second outdoor contest
        anyway. It's unfortunate, though, that Penn State went with a 6' x 6' x
        6' 75-pound robot size instead of the (smaller) Magellan size. That
        makes it a little more difficult to have a robot that can do both
        contests well.

        Doug

        Dan wrote:

        >Hi,
        >
        >Has anyone ever looked at the Mini-Grand Challenge contest held at Penn
        >State ? This is in my part of the country so I was always looking for
        >some more robot clubs nearby us. Their contest is kinda similar to the
        >Robo-Magellan, but they actually require the robot to follow a walkway
        >during the first leg of the course. There is more vision processing
        >involved and they make use of webcam attached to the mainboard to
        >process the image. They also require the robot to carry a gallon of
        >water as a payload. I wondered if there was discussion between the two
        >robot clubs about combining the contests in some way. Our club is
        >planning to build one per the SRS rules and attend a contest that will
        >be hosted by ChiBots in Chicago in the spring next year.
        >Here's the Link
        >http://www.ecsel.psu.edu/~avanzato/robots/contests/outdoor/contest05.htm
        >
        >=Dan
        >
        >
        >
      • Brian Dean
        ... Back when the RoboMagellan rules were being discussed, I personally thought (and expressed) that the 50lb weight limit for RoboMagellan was arbitrary and
        Message 3 of 16 , Nov 23, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          On Wed, Nov 23, 2005 at 10:21:16AM -0800, Doug Kelley wrote:

          > anyway. It's unfortunate, though, that Penn State went with a 6' x
          > 6' x 6' 75-pound robot size instead of the (smaller) Magellan size.
          > That makes it a little more difficult to have a robot that can do
          > both contests well.

          Back when the RoboMagellan rules were being discussed, I personally
          thought (and expressed) that the 50lb weight limit for RoboMagellan
          was arbitrary and should be lifted. Note that the Penn State rules
          don't even go so far as to even specify an exact weight limit, only
          that the robot must be able to "be physically lifted and carried by
          two, average-sized humans". Clearly the intent there is that if the
          robot become stuck or disabled, they just don't want it to be so big
          that a couple of people can't move it off the course and out of the
          way.

          No offense to the RoboMagellan rules, but I think the Penn State rules
          make more sense in this respect.

          -Brian
          --
          Brian Dean
          http://www.bdmicro.com/
        • Pete Miles
          Yup, There is always someone that want a bigger sized robot for a particular contest and yells and screams about changing the rules. Too bad they caved in.
          Message 4 of 16 , Nov 23, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            Yup,

            There is always someone that want a bigger sized robot for a particular contest and yells and screams about changing the
            rules. Too bad they caved in. We definately have shown that a 50 pound robot is more than enough to do this contest.

            Pete

            ----- Original Message -----
            From: "Doug Kelley" <yahoo@...>
            To: <SeattleRobotics@yahoogroups.com>
            Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2005 10:21 AM
            Subject: Re: [SeattleRobotics] Another kind of Robo-Magellan contest ?


            > We never worked with Penn State when developing the Magellan rules
            > although it's obvious the Grand Challenge was the inspiration for both.
            > I suspect Penn State also reviewed our rules while writing theirs as
            > there are statements like:
            >
            > "There is no requirement for a wireless, emergency stop feature
            > (primarily because the robots are low speed)."
            >
            > Their contest is a little different and perhaps we should run it as well
            > as Magellan next year. We've been looking for a second outdoor contest
            > anyway. It's unfortunate, though, that Penn State went with a 6' x 6' x
            > 6' 75-pound robot size instead of the (smaller) Magellan size. That
            > makes it a little more difficult to have a robot that can do both
            > contests well.
            >
            > Doug
            >
            > Dan wrote:
            >
            > >Hi,
            > >
            > >Has anyone ever looked at the Mini-Grand Challenge contest held at Penn
            > >State ? This is in my part of the country so I was always looking for
            > >some more robot clubs nearby us. Their contest is kinda similar to the
            > >Robo-Magellan, but they actually require the robot to follow a walkway
            > >during the first leg of the course. There is more vision processing
            > >involved and they make use of webcam attached to the mainboard to
            > >process the image. They also require the robot to carry a gallon of
            > >water as a payload. I wondered if there was discussion between the two
            > >robot clubs about combining the contests in some way. Our club is
            > >planning to build one per the SRS rules and attend a contest that will
            > >be hosted by ChiBots in Chicago in the spring next year.
            > >Here's the Link
            > >http://www.ecsel.psu.edu/~avanzato/robots/contests/outdoor/contest05.htm
            > >
            > >=Dan
            > >
            > >
            > >
            >
            >
            >
            > Visit the SRS Website at http://www.seattlerobotics.org
            > Yahoo! Groups Links
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
          • Doug Kelley
            Both rules are reasonable. Penn State opted to limit speed and we opted to limit weight. Both rules are intended to ensure a safe contest. Doug
            Message 5 of 16 , Nov 23, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              Both rules are reasonable. Penn State opted to limit speed and we opted
              to limit weight. Both rules are intended to ensure a safe contest.

              Doug

              Pete Miles wrote:

              >Yup,
              >
              >There is always someone that want a bigger sized robot for a particular contest and yells and screams about changing the
              >rules. Too bad they caved in. We definately have shown that a 50 pound robot is more than enough to do this contest.
              >
              >Pete
              >
              >----- Original Message -----
              >From: "Doug Kelley" <yahoo@...>
              >To: <SeattleRobotics@yahoogroups.com>
              >Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2005 10:21 AM
              >Subject: Re: [SeattleRobotics] Another kind of Robo-Magellan contest ?
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >>We never worked with Penn State when developing the Magellan rules
              >>although it's obvious the Grand Challenge was the inspiration for both.
              >>I suspect Penn State also reviewed our rules while writing theirs as
              >>there are statements like:
              >>
              >>"There is no requirement for a wireless, emergency stop feature
              >>(primarily because the robots are low speed)."
              >>
              >>Their contest is a little different and perhaps we should run it as well
              >>as Magellan next year. We've been looking for a second outdoor contest
              >>anyway. It's unfortunate, though, that Penn State went with a 6' x 6' x
              >>6' 75-pound robot size instead of the (smaller) Magellan size. That
              >>makes it a little more difficult to have a robot that can do both
              >>contests well.
              >>
              >>Doug
              >>
              >>Dan wrote:
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >>>Hi,
              >>>
              >>>Has anyone ever looked at the Mini-Grand Challenge contest held at Penn
              >>>State ? This is in my part of the country so I was always looking for
              >>>some more robot clubs nearby us. Their contest is kinda similar to the
              >>>Robo-Magellan, but they actually require the robot to follow a walkway
              >>>during the first leg of the course. There is more vision processing
              >>>involved and they make use of webcam attached to the mainboard to
              >>>process the image. They also require the robot to carry a gallon of
              >>>water as a payload. I wondered if there was discussion between the two
              >>>robot clubs about combining the contests in some way. Our club is
              >>>planning to build one per the SRS rules and attend a contest that will
              >>>be hosted by ChiBots in Chicago in the spring next year.
              >>>Here's the Link
              >>>http://www.ecsel.psu.edu/~avanzato/robots/contests/outdoor/contest05.htm
              >>>
              >>>=Dan
              >>>
              >>>
            • Dan
              Hi, I see alot of GPS modules that are available from some places, such as , Sparkfun.com. But I m not sure about the what to lookout for yet in getting a GPS
              Message 6 of 16 , Nov 27, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                Hi,

                I see alot of GPS modules that are available from some places, such as ,
                Sparkfun.com. But I'm not sure about the what to lookout for yet in
                getting a GPS module. I don't have the reserves to experiment with
                several different kinds to find out which one would best suit my needs.
                Any tips you might have that might explain about what to check first
                before buying would be helpful.

                thanks,
                =Dan

                .~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.
                [My Corner of Cyberspace http://ragooman.home.comcast.net/ ]
                [Pittsburgh Robotics Society Got Robot? http://www.pghrobotics.org/ ]
                [Pittsburgh Vintage Comp.Society http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pghvintagecomp/ ]
                .~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.



                Doug Kelley wrote:

                >Both rules are reasonable. Penn State opted to limit speed and we opted
                >to limit weight. Both rules are intended to ensure a safe contest.
                >
                >Doug
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >


                --
                No virus found in this outgoing message.
                Checked by AVG Free Edition.
                Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.13.7/180 - Release Date: 11/23/2005
              • tbrenke@verizon.net
                I am using one that does not require the decoding of a stream of data. when I want the information I get it, and not over a serial port. I2C
                Message 7 of 16 , Nov 27, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  I am using one that does not require the decoding of a stream of data.
                  when I want the information I get it, and not over a serial port.
                  I2C
                  http://www.totalrobots.com/access_files/gps.htm

                  as an added bonus, if you are using a slower micro that struggles with
                  serial data and decoding before a buffer overrun, this will cure that also.

                  I do not know how accurate it is, but then again, if I can get with in
                  30' of a set gps location, the camera will locate the target.

                  Tony Brenke


                  Dan wrote:

                  >Hi,
                  >
                  >I see alot of GPS modules that are available from some places, such as ,
                  >Sparkfun.com. But I'm not sure about the what to lookout for yet in
                  >getting a GPS module. I don't have the reserves to experiment with
                  >several different kinds to find out which one would best suit my needs.
                  >Any tips you might have that might explain about what to check first
                  >before buying would be helpful.
                  >
                  >thanks,
                  >=Dan
                  >
                  >.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.
                  >[My Corner of Cyberspace http://ragooman.home.comcast.net/ ]
                  >[Pittsburgh Robotics Society Got Robot? http://www.pghrobotics.org/ ]
                  >[Pittsburgh Vintage Comp.Society http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pghvintagecomp/ ]
                  >.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >Doug Kelley wrote:
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >>Both rules are reasonable. Penn State opted to limit speed and we opted
                  >>to limit weight. Both rules are intended to ensure a safe contest.
                  >>
                  >>Doug
                  >>
                  >>
                  >>
                  >>
                  >>
                  >>
                  >>
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                • Randy M. Dumse
                  ... Okay, not that I have that much experience, but from scattered research, here s some thoughts. Basically, any working GPS is ok and better than no GPS.
                  Message 8 of 16 , Nov 27, 2005
                  • 0 Attachment
                    > But I'm not sure about the what to
                    > lookout for yet in getting a GPS module.

                    Okay, not that I have that much experience, but from scattered
                    research, here's some thoughts.

                    Basically, any working GPS is "ok" and better than no GPS. If
                    you want higher accuracy (better than 5 meters) you will want
                    either: two receivers with differential (DGPS) capabilities (old
                    method), or one with wide area augmentation system (WAAS)
                    correction capabilities based on satellite and ground station
                    correction signals, which should take you to less than 3 meters
                    (actually up to 5x better on average so really its often about a
                    meter).

                    Beyond that, Some things to look for are the number of
                    satellites the GPS can track, how fast it starts from a warm and
                    a cold start, current usage, interface language. Also look for
                    tachometer inputs and direction inputs, which can improve
                    position by taking vehicle provided information into account.
                    Another issue is external antennas. No matter how good a deal
                    you think you're getting, or how small a unit you think you're
                    getting, look into the antenna and the mounting cable. These can
                    easily dwarf the size of the unit, and be a 1/3 or more of your
                    total cost.

                    Most of the cheaper GPS modules have older chipsets. They track
                    12 or 16 satellites. (New units claim 20 to 32 satellites.) They
                    will give 5M basic position information. You might find this
                    site interesting: http://users.erols.com/dlwilson/gps.html

                    State of the Art, afaik, is the SiRF Star III with WAAS and
                    ENGOS (European WAAS-like system) with a Bluetooth interface,
                    and 15+ hour battery operation. (BT338, I just bought one, but
                    it hasn't arrived yet. ~$150)

                    From a eBay seller's site: "With its rapid time-to-first-fix and
                    high sensitivity, the SiRFstarIII architecture is designed to
                    meet the rigorous demands of wireless and handheld LBS
                    applications, and provides superior location performance, both
                    indoors and out, for 2G, 2.5G, 3G asynchronous networks. The
                    SiRFstarIII architecture packs a performance punch, achieving
                    time-to-first-fix of one second for aided starts in outdoor GSM
                    environments and acquiring signals down to -159 dBm. This makes
                    real-time navigation practical, including in many indoor
                    environments, through urban canyons, and under dense foliage.
                    Unlike the lengthy sequential search process of traditional GPS
                    architectures, the SiRFstarIII architecture, with the equivalent
                    of more than 200,000 correlators, enables fast and deep GPS
                    signal search capabilities, resulting in significant improvement
                    over today's architectures that contain a few hundred to a few
                    thousand correlators.The SiRFstarIII family is comprised of the
                    GRF3w RF IC, the GSP3f digital section, and the GSW3 software
                    that is API compatible with GSW2 and SiRFLoc." It tracks 20
                    satellites. You can get a SiRF Star III USB adapter for PC's for
                    about half that price, I've seen go as low as $60 on eBay.

                    Get ready to write some real-time communication-interfacing
                    program to accept the data dumped from the GPS. Some (almost all
                    I think) can be set to only give information when requested, but
                    the derault is more often than not the NMEA-0183 4800 or 9600
                    baud dump that spits about 3 to 5 lines of information every
                    second.

                    Randy
                    www.newmicros.com
                  • LJGeib@aol.com
                    ... I think the most important thing is to get a GPS that gives you the data you want without your having to do a lot of work. I m a personal fan of using a
                    Message 9 of 16 , Nov 27, 2005
                    • 0 Attachment
                      > But I'm not sure about the what to
                      > lookout for yet in getting a GPS module.




                      I think the most important thing is to get a GPS that gives you the data you
                      want without your having to do a lot of work.

                      I'm a personal fan of using a GPS that does routes and can navigate to a
                      waypoint. It saves the hassle of doing double precision math, especially if you
                      are trying to do it on a microcontroller.

                      Usually, that means a handheld device intended for hiking and backpacking,
                      but it could be a device that is intended for use with an autopilot. The former
                      will have at least the NMEA GPRMB sentence as an output, the latter will
                      output GPAPA,GPAPB,GPBOD,GPBWC,GPBWR,GPBWW, GPRTE, or other sentences that
                      transmit bearing and distance to waypoint info.

                      With any of these sentences, you enter waypoint data and the GPS will do the
                      navigating for you. Some sentences, Like the GPRMB, will cycle through a
                      list of waypoints to follow an entire route, and tell you when you are near or
                      passing a waypoint.

                      a final thing to consider is whether the GPS unit will allow uploads for
                      data stream customization or waypoint entry. The RoboMagellan lawgivers keep
                      threatening to require the latter in the future.

                      Mine is a GPS with an older chipset. The new SIRF compatible chipsets are
                      the way to go for the future, allowing faster data streaming, faster and more
                      reliable data acqusition.greater accuracy, and use of european satellites,
                      The price is coming down fast, too, below what I paid for my unit.
                      I don't yet have any experience with one of these, so I can't help you in
                      determining what the SIRF data streams to look for are in these units.



                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • Doug Kelley
                      We re close to publishing next years rules for Robo-Magellan but the only significant change will likely be optional, mandatory intermediate waypoints. Yes,
                      Message 10 of 16 , Nov 27, 2005
                      • 0 Attachment
                        We're close to publishing next years' rules for Robo-Magellan but the
                        only significant change will likely be optional, mandatory intermediate
                        waypoints. Yes, I'd like to eliminate the "walking of the course" prior
                        to the contest but haven't been able to convince the rest of the team
                        that it's a good idea! Maybe if the Google Earth coordinates are
                        precise enough at Robothon 2006 to still allow dead reckoning...

                        Doug

                        >
                        >a final thing to consider is whether the GPS unit will allow uploads for
                        >data stream customization or waypoint entry. The RoboMagellan lawgivers keep
                        >threatening to require the latter in the future.
                        >
                        >
                      • tbrenke@verizon.net
                        I would like to see the elimination of walking the course. sence it has been completed at least by some, it would add the elament of the unknown back to the
                        Message 11 of 16 , Nov 27, 2005
                        • 0 Attachment
                          I would like to see the elimination of walking the course.
                          sence it has been completed at least by some, it would add the elament
                          of the unknown back to the contest.
                          Tony Brenke


                          Doug Kelley wrote:

                          >We're close to publishing next years' rules for Robo-Magellan but the
                          >only significant change will likely be optional, mandatory intermediate
                          >waypoints. Yes, I'd like to eliminate the "walking of the course" prior
                          >to the contest but haven't been able to convince the rest of the team
                          >that it's a good idea! Maybe if the Google Earth coordinates are
                          >precise enough at Robothon 2006 to still allow dead reckoning...
                          >
                          >Doug
                          >
                        • Jon Hylands
                          ... So, are they optional, or are they mandatory? Later, Jon ... Jon Hylands Jon@huv.com http://www.huv.com/jon Project: Micro Seeker (Micro
                          Message 12 of 16 , Nov 27, 2005
                          • 0 Attachment
                            On Sun, 27 Nov 2005 16:21:33 -0800, Doug Kelley <yahoo@...> wrote:

                            > optional, mandatory intermediate
                            > waypoints.

                            So, are they optional, or are they mandatory?

                            Later,
                            Jon

                            --------------------------------------------------------------
                            Jon Hylands Jon@... http://www.huv.com/jon

                            Project: Micro Seeker (Micro Autonomous Underwater Vehicle)
                            http://www.huv.com
                          • Cathy Saxton
                            Optional for the course designer, mandatory for the competitors. Basically, the rule change is that a course designer can designate that a specific cone is
                            Message 13 of 16 , Nov 27, 2005
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Optional for the course designer, mandatory for the competitors.

                              Basically, the rule change is that a course designer can designate
                              that a specific cone is mandatory. For example, this would be useful
                              in cases where there may not be enough room for a long course -- it
                              could be done as a "there and back" kind of thing.

                              Cathy

                              On 11/27/05, Jon Hylands <jon@...> wrote:
                              > On Sun, 27 Nov 2005 16:21:33 -0800, Doug Kelley <yahoo@...> wrote:
                              >
                              > > optional, mandatory intermediate
                              > > waypoints.
                              >
                              > So, are they optional, or are they mandatory?
                              >
                              > Later,
                              > Jon
                              >
                              > --------------------------------------------------------------
                              > Jon Hylands Jon@... http://www.huv.com/jon
                              >
                              > Project: Micro Seeker (Micro Autonomous Underwater Vehicle)
                              > http://www.huv.com
                              >
                              >
                              > Visit the SRS Website at http://www.seattlerobotics.org
                              > Yahoo! Groups Links
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                            • Dan
                              Hi, Thanks for all the tips and info on GPS. This is will help alot to get us moving to build our robot too for this contest. If you don t mind I Like to add
                              Message 14 of 16 , Nov 28, 2005
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Hi,

                                Thanks for all the tips and info on GPS. This is will help alot to get
                                us moving to build our robot too for this contest. If you don't mind I
                                Like to add your comments to our 'How To' webpage on GPS. thanks again

                                =Dan

                                .~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.
                                [My Corner of Cyberspace http://ragooman.home.comcast.net/ ]
                                [Pittsburgh Robotics Society Got Robot? http://www.pghrobotics.org/ ]
                                [Pittsburgh Vintage Comp.Society http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pghvintagecomp/ ]
                                .~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.



                                Cathy Saxton wrote:

                                >Optional for the course designer, mandatory for the competitors.
                                >
                                >Basically, the rule change is that a course designer can designate
                                >that a specific cone is mandatory. For example, this would be useful
                                >in cases where there may not be enough room for a long course -- it
                                >could be done as a "there and back" kind of thing.
                                >
                                >Cathy
                                >
                                >On 11/27/05, Jon Hylands <jon@...> wrote:
                                >
                                >
                                >>On Sun, 27 Nov 2005 16:21:33 -0800, Doug Kelley <yahoo@...> wrote:
                                >>
                                >>
                                >>
                                >>>optional, mandatory intermediate
                                >>>waypoints.
                                >>>
                                >>>
                                >>So, are they optional, or are they mandatory?
                                >>
                                >>Later,
                                >>Jon
                                >>
                                >>--------------------------------------------------------------
                                >> Jon Hylands Jon@... http://www.huv.com/jon
                                >>
                                >> Project: Micro Seeker (Micro Autonomous Underwater Vehicle)
                                >> http://www.huv.com
                                >>
                                >>
                                >>Visit the SRS Website at http://www.seattlerobotics.org
                                >>Yahoo! Groups Links
                                >>
                                >>
                                >>
                                >>
                                >>
                                >>
                                >>
                                >>
                                >>
                                >
                                >
                                >Visit the SRS Website at http://www.seattlerobotics.org
                                >Yahoo! Groups Links
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >


                                --
                                No virus found in this outgoing message.
                                Checked by AVG Free Edition.
                                Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.13.7/180 - Release Date: 11/23/2005
                              • jim35848
                                ... elament ... I think walking the course should continue to be allowed for at least a few more events. The last course was indeed completed but it was a
                                Message 15 of 16 , Nov 28, 2005
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  --- In SeattleRobotics@yahoogroups.com, "tbrenke@v..." <tbrenke@v...>
                                  wrote:
                                  >
                                  > I would like to see the elimination of walking the course.
                                  > sence it has been completed at least by some, it would add the
                                  elament
                                  > of the unknown back to the contest.
                                  > Tony Brenke
                                  >

                                  I think walking the course should continue to be allowed for at least
                                  a few more events. The last course was indeed completed but it was a
                                  relatively simple course with a minimum of obstructions. It was not
                                  clear to me that any of this year's robots could have finished last
                                  year's course with the benches, trees, garbage cans, etc. I think the
                                  next level of robot sophistication should focus on smarter robots that
                                  can avoid things in their path.
                                • yahoo
                                  The contest organizer has the *option* to make one or more bonus waypoints *mandatory*. Doug ... From: Jon Hylands Reply-To:
                                  Message 16 of 16 , Nov 28, 2005
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    The contest organizer has the *option* to make one or more bonus waypoints *mandatory*.

                                    Doug

                                    ---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
                                    From: Jon Hylands <jon@...>
                                    Reply-To: SeattleRobotics@yahoogroups.com
                                    Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 00:11:32 -0500

                                    >On Sun, 27 Nov 2005 16:21:33 -0800, Doug Kelley <yahoo@...> wrote:
                                    >
                                    >> optional, mandatory intermediate
                                    >> waypoints.
                                    >
                                    >So, are they optional, or are they mandatory?
                                    >
                                    >Later,
                                    >Jon
                                    >
                                    >--------------------------------------------------------------
                                    > Jon Hylands Jon@... http://www.huv.com/jon
                                    >
                                    > Project: Micro Seeker (Micro Autonomous Underwater Vehicle)
                                    > http://www.huv.com
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >Visit the SRS Website at http://www.seattlerobotics.org
                                    >Yahoo! Groups Links
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.