🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Sep2.045803.4051@news.media.mit.edu> fredm@media.mit.edu (Fred G Martin) writes:
>In article <1992Sep2.001302.3074@PacBell.COM> tlhouns@ns.pacbell.com
>(Lee Hounshell) writes:
>
>> The robotics application I'm constructing (which will probably be
>> using the miniboard) needs to control a lot of motors.  I'll only need
>> one speed, however.  I'll also need forward/backward control.  I'm
>> thinking of a modification add-on board that will permit each of the
>> miniboard's 4 motor ports to control 16!!!  motors (for a total of 64
>> motors per miniboard). I would appreciate any net
>> feedback/comments/suggestions/etc.. that anyone may have.
>
>Wow!  That's a lot of motors!  Pray tell what ever for, I am
>curious...

Since you asked..
What I'm actually building is a "new kind" of neural network that will
be distributed (massively parallel) and also use subsumption architecture
and a GA.  This network will incorporate several origonal concepts I'd
like to test along with many of the ideas expressed in the book "Wet Mind"
by Stephen Kosslyn and Oliver Koenig (great book, by the way).  Essentially,
I am attempting to build a *real* "brain." Since I need a "body" for the
brain to control, my choices were either to build one, or to simulate one.
I'd much rather build one, I think.  However, I need a body that has motion
complexity approaching that of an "ant" or perhaps a "lizard."  To do that,
I will need the robot to have several (six, at the moment) segmented legs,
a grasper, and several types of sensors.  I also need to build in a concept
of "space" or at least be able to determine the robot's position in relation
to itself (leg/antenna position, etc..)  For the motion part, I will
require a LOT of motors, hence my requirement.  I also need some pretty
sophistocated sensor abilities.. Some of the sensor stuff can be done with
the miniboard, but I expect to also use another board to augment it's
capabilities. (any suggestions for this piece would be appreciated).

Fred, thank you very much for your suggestions.
Of the two alternatives you outlined, I think I prefer the 2nd the best
(register shifting).  It offers much better use of the miniboard and is
far more space efficient.  The only thing that worries me a little is the
random motor motion that might occur during the shifting of registers.
Nevertheless, at the moment I am leaning toward this a the solution I will
implement.

Do you know of any way I might "disable" all the motors while the
registers are being shifted into place?

Also, is anyone working on (or planning on building) a monitor program
that will enable the miniboard to be networked to other miniboards?
Perhaps we could make this a net project if the interest level is high
enough.

Thanks for the help!


-Lee Hounshell
tlhouns@srv.pacbell.com
-- 
Lee Hounshell - (510) 823-2432
tlhouns@srv.pacbell.com
Alchemical Engineer and Virtual Realist