Search This Blog

Yesteryear

Saturday, August 30, 2014

August 30, 2014

Yesteryear
One year ago today: August 30, 2013, one smart potato.
Five years ago today: August 310, 2009, eTrade sucks.
Ten years ago today: August 30, 2004, the Queen of Mean.

MORNING
           An impromptu meeting of the club at the bakery. The argument goes that the clubhouse does not serve coffee and cinnamon buns. As usual, I will mention the topics but not necessarily the way we deal with obstacles. You gotta join the club for that. Foremost, we are slowly learning to work with aluminum by necessity. The only metal shaping tool we have is a metal-cutting blade on the jigsaw. I told how the brazed joints I made all eventually failed. Here is a likely explanation.
           Nobody told me to scuff the surfaces to be joined. My sources said a braze worked largely by capillary adhesion so in some cases I even left the can decoration in place. Golly, I must be stoopid. I pulled the four "professional" instructional videos from my history list and reviewed them. Not one mentioned the need to abrade the surfaces first. This "you're supposed to know" mentalitiy is a consistent problem in all trades.

           We also have no device to fasten rivets. I've never used one in my life. The club allocated a whopping $20 to buy a kit. Unlikely as it seemed six months ago, Nova has moved from a benchmark to a snide joke when making comparisons. Before bingo tonight, I'll have done more riveting than their entire robot section. I'm not being severe on Nova at all. I've been through university (twice) and know precisely what gives, what limitations exist. They produce an elitist attitude that they are personally educated enough to create something new by rearranging the, as it were, spare parts they find in the dumpster behind the Internet sheep-shearing factory. The one that doubled as a voting booth during the last two elections.

NOON
           [Author's note 2015-08-30: the reappearance of this glue issue exactly one year later is coincidence. Even the concept of a rubber solvent was not a follow-on, I had long since forgotten I had written that on this date (see below). The emergence of this identical issue in one year was the result of a flat tire, which is one of the more random occurrences in my life.]

           Another annoyance is the diluted quality of rubber cement. Next time you pass the display, pick up a can and feel how little heft it has compared to what you expect. It is watered down to nothing so don't waste your money. It doesn't stick to anything except rubber but don't go thinking thats a put-down to me. I'm not the only one who expects it traditional to use rubber cement wherever a flexible seal is wanted. This new glue will not hold two sheets of paper together--seriously. Try it. (I think the new substance contains a solvent to temporarily dissolve rubber to make it stick.)
           Bear in mind we have been failing at making robot frames and project boxes for several years now. We have a lot of vivid words and practical experience over which adhesives will not do the job. Ordinary school project glue (the can marked "Yes") works better than the rubber cement from AutoZone (marked "No"). For that matter if you want something that sticks better than today's rubber cement, try vinyl neodecanoate copolymer. Huh? Oops, sorry. That's the purple can on the far right. Hairspray. (It turns out hairspray also turns brittle. Robot builders don't like brittle glue.)

           We also reviewed my progress with the motors. I can get it to sputter but not turn. Since the code compiles properly, it is likely the wiring diagrams. I followed the color charts without figuring out what each wire did. I will retrace the connections by hand. But a mismatch like this is normally the result of an author making changes to one chapter and not updating the others. This shortcoming is magnified when you start dealing with web pages.

EVENING
           We also talked music, just little. Here's an item that sets off my spider sense. For years I've been bucking to get into steady Friday circuit but I don't have a duo. The big band is too big, but I advertised us as suitable for special occassions. Out of nowhere last Tuesday, a lady who I know does not like me, suddenly says please check if they have the right phone number if they want to hire my band. Maybe I shouldn't say the person does not like me. More like she knows I'm a liar always talking crazy whoppers about computers and robots and motorcycles.
           So why the sudden concern whether my band gets hired? My contact info is in the till, which she knows. What could it be but politics over there? The obvious conclusion is that somebody has made hire decision and there are some brownie points to be earned. But she's never heard the band, so that doesn't make sense. Unless the caliber of the band is not an issue. We shall see.

ADDENDUM
          Totally concerned with electronics. Here is a snap of the Ping))) sensor in action. This was child's-play, I even used pirated code. I'm after results first, ask questions later. It was so easy, in fact, I'll skip the tech parts I learned and move to the less obvious observations. You know, the parts that aren't in the textbooks. Everyone else seems to connect this thing up and start randomly waving their palm in front of the sensor. Shown here is our systematic approach.
           Naturally, we are interested in how accurate the thing is. You can see the metric ruler and target block. Metric in this case is an "inch-ruler" divided into tenths instead of sixteenths. Turns out to be quite accurate to six inches, then slightly over measures after that. Also, it seems tuned to integers, but that might be the code. That is, it will read 4 inches between 4 inches and 4.99999 inches, then leap to 5. All that can be calibrated.
           It is always wise to test the claimed parameters with what you actually get, although so far the parts I've bought seem to be fine quality. If you have the money (I don't), I would advise the serious student to invest in two of everything. Not only can you compare them to spec, but you start thinking out of the box. For example, can I simultaneous run two sensor programs on the same computer? No, it isn't obvious. Some software, like the dreaded Outlook, won't let you open a second copy.
           The minimum distance is right down to an inch, much better than listed in the specs. The sensor will pause when it encounters a moving object, or more accurately, an object moving faster than it can take a reading. There is also a pause when switching readings instantaneously. But to me, that is not a glitch, just another piece of data. It measures, predictably, only the nearest object.
           It must be tethered to a computer or similar output device to read the returns. A mobile unit must therefore contain an LCD screen, transmit wirelessly, or have an on-board recorder for later retrieval. Yes, this is obvious, but I'm thinking aloud. The sensor is right now aimed at a curtain on the far wall, and here is the confused reading as the target flutters slightly in the morning breeze. Can you spot the "stall". The true reading is 88.7 inches.
           Next step is to test the resolution. How accurate can it be made? Can two sensors give a better average? Will two sensors cause mutual interference? And how can this sensor be made more useful? The next Nova meeting is a month away, so there is no time to waste. Most of the attendees have one Arduino and one sensor, which you can tell they have never connected up. There are no such shortages over here.
           Sadly, the Windows operating system has trouble keeping more than one COM port active, another indication that their software is not intended for serious scientific discovery, rather to operate dumb terminals on the Internet.
           Complicated as this seems to many, if you are going to get into this field, do it now will things remain relatively simple. There have been, to date, no major breakthroughs or inventions with any of this gear. Our "plumb crazy" idea of a robot game using these sensors is, at this juncture, just as good as anything the bigs labs have come up with. What? Well, the robots battle it out with the "weapon" being a sound beam which they can only avoid by, say, ducking behind something.
           Don't bother stealing that idea, we were far beyond that level long ago. Did you think last day I was fascinated by the Merkava V disappearing gun carriage because I like the Middle East? Please, I have enough Klingons to deal with at Nova.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Return Home
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++