[Coco] COCO Robot update.

[camillus Blockx]

google for astable oscilator . two transister two capacitor and a couple of
resistors. easy to build.
just blinking like railroad lights.

On Sun, Apr 8, 2012 at 12:45 PM, <haywire666 at aol.com> wrote:

> Thanks for the thoughts guys. My thoughts were that If some animated
> things (Like blinking eyes) could be taken away from the main processor
> (The coco) and operate independently when the
> robot was turned on that would be fine. I have a small led eq bar that
> operates on its own, going up and down with the voice. I don't even know
> how to do that with a micro controller or with the coco.
>
>
> The led eyes will be done with this little off the shelf component I
> found. It comes with a circuit to vary the blink rate and the leds, it
> costs 14$ including shipping. To me, its not worth trying to reinvent the
> wheel if there is something off the shelf I can just mount. Of course, this
> may not look right to me, we'll see when it gets here. If it dosn't look
> right I want to use the relay on the coco.
>
>
> Besides the color computer as the main "brain" The robot WILL have a
> couple of micro controllers, as I have two basic stamp homework boards here
> someone gave me. I also have an arduino board I bought but never used. I
> believe distributed processing is the best thing for robots. In a robot,
> there is virtually unlimited amounts of sensors and things. I built a pc
> based mobile robot some time ago, but I found it nearly impossible to get
> enough i/o lines to handle all the additions, sensors, flashing lights, and
> doo dads I would keep adding. Besides this, its difficult to manage one cpu
> doing everything.
>
>
> if some sensors could be managed by the microcontroller and just report
> things to the main cpu, I think the robot would be much smarter and more
> hmmm... capable?
> Also,If I use micro controllers along with the color computer, I can also
> do things the coco can't do (or would take too much cpu time) like speech
> recognition.
>
>
> Like I said, when I make more progress I'll post some pictures. Right now
> the head is not attached, the mobile base still needs work and the frame is
> done, but still mounthing stuff.
>
>
> Still,my frankencoco robot is slowly taking shape. Thanks for everyone's
> help!
>
> Steven
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Frank Pittel <fwp at deepthought.com>
> To: CoCoList for Color Computer Enthusiasts <coco at maltedmedia.com>
> Sent: Sun, Apr 8, 2012 10:43 am
> Subject: Re: [Coco] COCO Robot update.
>
>
>
> Once upon a time the cost (in term of complexity, time, etc) was high
> enough that it was important to keep the count down. This was back in
> the day when the "support" chips cost more then the processor. Having
> a microcontroller that eliminates the address decoding and manipulations
> with the control lines/buss and chips that go along with that was made it
> fast and cheap to have multiple micros.
>
> My introduction with microcontrollers started with the 68hc11 and while an
> improvement in the microprocessors but clearly a long way from current
> offerings.
> By removing all or most support hardware the price has gotten to the point
> of it
> being faster, easier and cheaper to use multiple smaller micros instead of
> trying
> to get all of the software into one!
>
> The Other Frank
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 08, 2012 at 12:00:44AM -0700, Steve Bjork wrote:
> > I find it interesting that the idea of using distributed processing
> > was against the grain.  After all, modern object-oriented
> > programming is distributed processing of a program.  Be it hardware
> > or software, I find that breaking down the job into small and easy
> > to manage tasks makes for easy to design and build systems.  (and a
> > lot less errors in the final product.)
> >
> > All of may Z-80 and 6809 games used object-oriented programming.
> > Since the name "object-oriented" had NOT yet to be coined, I called
> > it D.C.B for Data Control Block coding.  But this style of coding
> > was the natural direction programmers were taking the art.
> >
> > In my Halloween display that I do every year, the whole system is
> > based on simple modules that preform their task independently.
> > There are signal lines that tell some props to fire while keeping
> > other props quiet.  (just like the singals you send to a code
> > object.)  One of the key signal is the "QUIET" line that keeps other
> > props from firing when a prop has pulls it low to do its show.  When
> > the line returns to the high state, another prop can grab it to do
> > its show.  To keep props from colliding,  each device has a priority
> > number start with 1 to 10.  (It waits that number of seconds before
> > trying to grabbing the control line.)
> >
> > The great benefit to this system is no Master Control Program to
> > waste time on.  (Or take over the world of TRON)
> >
> > On a picaxe side-note, the new 18m2+ chip can run 8 tasks at the
> > same time.  The older 18m2 could only run 4 tasks at once.  All in
> > BASIC to boot!
> >
> > Steve
> >
> >
> >
> > On 4/7/2012 10:25 PM, Frank Pittel wrote:
> > >Steve,
> > >
> > >My understanding was that the robot control was to be built "in parts"
> > >and that the OP was looking for a way to "blink" leds at random rates.
> > >While that can be done with "discrete" electronics I've come to the
> conclusion
> > >that these types of things are better done with microcontrollers (not
> microprocessors),
> > >pics, etc. Let's face it $3 for an 8pin DIP microcontroller is going to
> be
> able
> > >to do a lot more then $3 in 555 timers, resistors, caps, etc!
> > >
> > >While the larger PICs are capable of doing a lot on there own they are
> by
> definition
> > >intended to work under the control of a more capable processor. When I
> first
> started
> > >working with them a year or so ago that fact went against the grain for
> me. I
> kept trying
> > >to do everything with a single controller. Then it dawned on me that I'm
> better off using
> > >2,3 chips of lower capability under the control of something more
> powerful
> then trying to
> > >do it all from one very powerful chip.
> > >
> > >Currently I'm working with the parallax "propeller" (an 8 "core"
> controller)
> and their discontinued
> > >"SX" pics. Both can be programmed in Basic as well as assembly. The
> propeller
> can also be programmed
> > >in forth and C!! As soon as I'm done with my current project I'm going
> to
> look into the picax. I think
> > >it can be used for a number projects I have in mind. Unfortunately none
> involve the coco. :-(
> > >
> > >The Other Frank
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Coco mailing list
> > Coco at maltedmedia.com
> > http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>
> --
> Coco mailing list
> Coco at maltedmedia.com
> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>
>
>
> --
> Coco mailing list
> Coco at maltedmedia.com
> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>