home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!opl.com!hri.com!spool.mu.edu!yale.edu!yale!mintaka.lcs.mit.edu!ai-lab!aztec!bleck
- From: bleck@aztec.ai.mit.edu (Olaf Bleck)
- Newsgroups: comp.robotics
- Subject: Re: Crazy about legs
- Message-ID: <1k6si7INNkcc@life.ai.mit.edu>
- Date: 27 Jan 93 20:50:15 GMT
- References: <1993Jan27.043305.7387@sbcs.sunysb.edu> <1993Jan27.140858.29306@news.media.mit.edu>
- Sender: bleck@aztec (Olaf Bleck)
- Reply-To: bleck@ai.mit.edu
- Organization: MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory
- Lines: 37
- NNTP-Posting-Host: aztec.ai.mit.edu
-
- In article <1993Jan27.140858.29306@news.media.mit.edu>, fredm@media.mit.edu (Fred G Martin) writes:
- |> In article <1993Jan27.043305.7387@sbcs.sunysb.edu> shane@cs.sunysb.edu
- |> (Shane Bouslough) writes:
- |>
- |> >I've been thinking a lot about legs recently (don't we all? :-).
- |> >If you're going to do a nice leg, say Brooksian, it seems like
- |> >you'd need about one miniboard per. If you use 6 legs on your
- |> >beastie, that's quite a few miniboards. Is that a good way to go?
- |> >Or is something a bit more powerful a better idea?
- |>
- |> In fact, this is just about what is done with Rod Brooks' robots:
- |> there is a dedicated CPU per leg. But, they use very small DIP CPU's
- |> (maybe a 24-pin model), and surface mount motor controllers, so the
- |> leg processor board is pretty small. Also, it's kind of shaped like a
- |> leg, long and skinny.
-
-
- Actually, each leg on Attila and Hannibal has a dedicted 8751 on it that runs
- three pwm servo loops, does sensor i/o, and communicates with the master
- 68000. The only reason we really use this system is to save wiring. With
- 20odd sensors per leg, plus motors and power lines, we'd have needed
- something like 40 wires per leg to do everything. With the local micros, we
- just have six (motor power/gnd, digital power/gnd, two wire serial
- communications, the Signetics I2C in fact). The 8751 boards have tiny FET
- drivers for the motors--there are two boards piggy-backed, about 1.5 x 2
- inches in size.
-
-
- Were we to do it again, we'd definitely go with the Motorola parts--6811/16's
- nand 683xx's, using the SCI bus. The 6811's have much more flexibility, and
- the communications bus is much faster. Right now every bit is being used in
- the I2C bus, and the 8751's are running a full load continuously (plus they
- need a bunch of peripheral stuff for all the i/o).
-
- 6811 boards can be made pretty small too, at least as small as the 8751
- boards we have (using surface mount parts). Anita Flynn's "Squirt" robot has
- a 6811 board on it that is just barely larger than the 6811.
-