802.11 tank control

[adt22-at-drexel.edu]

Jon,
 I am pretty sure I will be using the parallel port.  I haven't come up with a good 
system for all tank control with 8 bits from the parallel port.  

 Basically what I am thinking of is 4 bits (16 states) used for the drive motors.  4 
bits for everything else.  So far "everything else" will be the turret, but I'd like 
to be able to add a lot more gadgets in later.  This system is pretty sloppy I am 
sure I can partition the bits better.  I think I can even use another 4 bits on the 
parallel port for 12 total.

 Ultimately the circuits will connect to the input of some relays that will turn the 
motors on.  I'll probably be implementing the tri-pact speed control 
http://www.rctankcombat.com/articles/speed-control/
I'd like to be able to add at least another forward speed.

 I started to slouch off on the programming aspect of it.  I abandoned it for tank 
research for a while.  I'm starting to realize how little I have planned.  I think 
I'll have to actually do some parallel port programming before I settle on a plan.  
Right now one of my main questions is: if, inside an infinite loop, I poll for user 
input and write a byte to the parallel port will the logic be "jumpy".  Meaning if I 
am pushing the "forward" button will the program write 0001 (forward code) to the 
port for 5-10ms then sit there (at 0000) for 5-10ms then in the next iteration of 
the loop write 0001 again.  Or does the last value written stay on the parallel port 
until something new is written?

 What are you planning to use to send/receive information?  A couple of ideas I had 
were:
 http server/browser
 raw IP datagrams
 udp/rpc

 I'd like to try my hand at implementing some sort of low level communication over 
ethernet in c by throwing and catching IP datagrams.
 On the other hand a web server could do some pretty neat things if its fast enough.

-Amir

----- Original Message -----
From: Jonathan Butler <jon.butler-at-atdesk.com>
Date: Tuesday, February 17, 2004 8:14 pm
Subject: Re: [Fwd: subscribing to RC Tank Combat]

> On Tue, 2004-02-17 at 19:38, adt22-at-drexel.edu wrote:
> > thanks for the links, I'm gonna check the boards out.  I had 
> looked into it a while ago but dismissed it because of cost.  It 
> definitely seems like the right way to go in terms of size and 
> power consumption.
> > So far for the wireless connectivity I've been planning on doing 
> point to point as opposed to using a router - the disadvantage is 
> that it caps you off at around 3 connections usually, but you 
> don't need a router in the field.  
> > 
> > -Amir
> > 
> 
> Yeah, the only reason I picked the router variant was so I could 
> get the built-in 4 port
> switch as a dedicated test network at home and in the field.  The 
> price was sure right, it
> ran $73 with shipping, and I also will get a $20 rebate so for the 
> net $53 I dont have to
> mess with my normal home switch/wiring and setup.  This gives 
> 802.11 b, g, plus their proprietary
> 108Mb speed (fingers crossed).  I want to try using the 
> switch/router in the car + my Mac
> OS X laptop as the controlling machine.
> 
> I was interested in how you'll be controlling the motors.  I have 
> some ideas, but have not
> settled on any particular solution.
> 
> Jon
> 
> 
>