Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 329 330 [331] 332 333 ... 376
4951  Forum 2005-2010 (read only) / Frequently-Asked Questions / Re: Projections? on: April 16, 2010, 12:16:51 pm
Quote
As a neat 'addon' for this i thought of some sort of HUD for the frontal glass

If this is for car usage, you probably can't put a piece of frosted glass or film on your front window (might violate some vehicular window tinting or such law - check your local laws). Does it need to be for day and night, or night-time usage only? If night-time only, then you might be able to get away with reflection off the glass (though you will need to come up with some other method to undistort the image).

 smiley
4952  Forum 2005-2010 (read only) / Frequently-Asked Questions / Re: Projections? on: April 15, 2010, 12:29:35 pm
Quote
Also - is it possible to 'beam' such projections onto glass?

If the glass is frosted or ground (for back projection) it would. But it would need to be a fairly bright image. As Osgeld noted, I doubt that the LCD "opaque" state is as opaque as needed for such projection (this is the "black" contrast issue you see on LCD TVs, for instance). Also, I doubt you will be able to dissect a GLCD to the point of adding your own backlight.

I am not absolutely certain, but I think the way those alarm clocks work is by using bright 7-segment (or 5x7) LED displays, and then a simple magnifying lens arrangement for the projection - rather than LCDs.

 smiley
4953  Forum 2005-2010 (read only) / Frequently-Asked Questions / Re: standalone? on: April 15, 2010, 12:16:08 pm
Quote
surely you cant be disappointed in me.


I suppose I have higher expectations of people; I keep forgetting that we let AOL users join the internet...

 ;D

Quote
you dont even know me.

I know enough about you from your words. My opinion so far may change as time goes by, so please, keep talking.

 smiley

Quote
if your disappointed in the human race....your too young to carry that burdon!

Actually, I am very disappointed in the human race, on many levels. What could be achieved via cooperation rather than struggle, for instance, would dwarf everything that has so far occurred on this planet. The fact that we haven't destroyed ourselves (yet), though, does give me hope.

This, however, isn't the forum to discuss these issues, so I won't say any more on the topic (perhaps bar/sport would be a better forum).

 smiley
4954  Forum 2005-2010 (read only) / Frequently-Asked Questions / Re: standalone? on: April 15, 2010, 11:49:14 am
[edit]I really love this one[/edit]

That would definitely confuse the hell outta people if we set up estranged's system...

 smiley
4955  Forum 2005-2010 (read only) / Frequently-Asked Questions / Re: standalone? on: April 15, 2010, 11:16:59 am
Quote
anyway if you do the maths you wasted more time gettin all raged up than it did for "grumpy"_mike to reply. a tad counter-active imo.

Not rage. Disappointment.

btw - your words speak a lot; thank you for writing.
4956  Forum 2005-2010 (read only) / Frequently-Asked Questions / Re: standalone? on: April 14, 2010, 03:13:55 pm
It's not the answer I wanted, but it was the answer I expected.

I am beginning to take the tack of not responding to these easily answerable questions; I can certainly understand some questions that are difficult to answer (ie, "How do I tune my PID?", among many) or reveal so many options as to be nearly overwhelming to a newcomer.

Your question was neither. Your question could've been answered just as quickly (if not quicker) and just as accurately, had you typed it into google than into this forum.

You've done nothing more than waste a wee bit of mine and Grumpy Mike's time, due to sheer laziness and/or apathy; I am not upset or angry, but I am a little annoyed. I don't know how Mike feels, but he should feel worse than I, since I didn't answer the question, and I willfully came into this discussion with a question of my own to you.

Rather than being lazy, next time be proactive and take a stab at google; 9/10 times you will find the answer there. If you can't find it there, search the forums here. Nobody is so busy as to not be able to do that, and if they are, then electronics and the Arduino probably isn't the hobby for them, as both take time and patience for full understanding (and without understanding, especially when it comes to electronics, you can end up dead quick depending on the situation).

Perhaps you schedule your time out (hopefully not to the minute though; such planning of a life seems to me a sad way to exist); if so, then you likely have a "work on arduino" time slot - do your search then, write it down or make a memo or set up a reminder alarm for it if you have to.

Only if you are unable to find an answer, or you find so many anwers you don't know where to turn, then post the question. This is something that should be general netiquette, but for some reason isn't.

Oh well.

 smiley
4957  Forum 2005-2010 (read only) / Frequently-Asked Questions / Re: standalone? on: April 14, 2010, 11:02:28 am
decorations555:

I am curious about something; you had a question, it was answered fast, that's great, right?

But why did you ask the question in the first place? What I mean is, this particular question is asked at least once a week, if not more often, so what was it that prevented you from finding an answer?

Even if you couldn't navigate the site well (is this an issue?), you could go to google, type in "arduino standalone", and...

http://www.google.com/search?q=arduino+standalone

The first link would take you to the page Grumpy_Mike posted.

So what prevented you from doing that?

I am honestly curious and I want an answer that makes sense, because it would only help to improve the site and resources for new users. Back in the day, one had an excuse that they didn't understand a card catalog or the Dewey Decimal system - but that excuse doesn't apply anymore in the age of Google...

/I miss microfiche...(not really)...

 smiley
4958  Forum 2005-2010 (read only) / Frequently-Asked Questions / Re: Android/iProduct app interface with arduino? on: April 09, 2010, 04:07:40 pm
This seems interesting:

http://www.instructables.com/id/Android_G1_Serial_Cable/

I also read some stuff about people working to get USB OTG working; there was this for instance:

http://androidcommunity.com/motorola-droid-gets-usb-host-hack-20100210/

Wish I had the time to play with this stuff...

 smiley
4959  Forum 2005-2010 (read only) / Frequently-Asked Questions / Re: Android/iProduct app interface with arduino? on: April 09, 2010, 01:43:11 pm
Well - once you start messing with kernel rebuilding and such, you probably can do anything; like I said, I haven't been following this too closely.

One thing to keep in mind - if you "root" your phone to install your own custom kernel (or even to do such development), you have to take care of your own security updates and such (you can't get the ones that are pushed out without going back to the official kernel).

Personally, for myself, while I am pretty sure I could do such a thing (if I even had the time to do it!) - given that my first linux install was Turbo Linux 2.0 on a 486 laptop with 8 meg of RAM back in 1995 or so - I still would avoid it, considering I paid full price for my G1 from TMobile not too long ago (it was cheaper to go this route for the plan I wanted). I am wary of bricking the phone, I am also wary of losing stuff...

But if I could do it under a "user mode application" (ie, a regular app) using the regular/standard SDK/API for java, that would be more my style (once again, if I only had the time).

 smiley
4960  Forum 2005-2010 (read only) / Frequently-Asked Questions / Re: Android/iProduct app interface with arduino? on: April 09, 2010, 11:06:37 am
As far as Android phones are concerned, I know there is one guy out there who has made an application that connects (I believe) to the microphone input (via a special mini-b extended USB plug; probably something you have to custom mod yourself from a headset) to give you an "audio oscilloscope" (it doesn't work with digital signals). This is close to what you are asking, albeit only a single channel.

As far as what you are asking, this is the problem: both devices are (currently) USB slaves. I believe that in API discussions, though, there have been talks about allowing the API for Android to use the USB port as a master, but I don't know what work has gone on there (I don't follow it that closely). I think, though, that it has been an issue of the API and access, more than any device limitations of the various Android phones.

There is also the possibility of using bluetooth; I know that they recently (?) released the API for bluetooth capabilities on the Android SDK - so (in theory?) you could set up BT on the Arduino, and communicate wirelessly with it using the API.

My main interest has been the idea of creating a (likely) low-speed multi-channel digital signal analyzer (likely a single port of 6 bits) and use the Android SDK for the logging and GUI; the opening up of using BT makes it even more attractive, since you could monitor something wirelessly (say a circuit on a mobile robot). Regardless of the application, though, what is ultimately needed is some way to get a high speed serial link with the phone; once that is done, you could plug anything you wanted into the Arduino, and monitor it (with appropriate software, etc on both ends).

Lastly - there is also the idea of communicating over 802.11x (would make the Arduino end a tad expensive)...

As far as the iPhone or other smartphones are concerned, I don't know what the capabilities are there, but I would think things would be nearly the same (or perhaps more advanced; I have heard that the iPhone's SDK audio processing capabilities are far better than the Android SDK - mainly less latency, from what I have read - given the head start of the iPhone and its maturity, other interfaces might be more easily worked with)...

 smiley
4961  Forum 2005-2010 (read only) / Frequently-Asked Questions / Re: arduino and underwater Rov on: April 14, 2010, 03:22:17 pm
Parcanman:

Everything you noted is a good idea, with the exception of something you don't tend to think about (unless you're a constant tinkerer/thinker like me) until you get your ROV in the water:

The weight of the cable.

The more you add to make it robust, the more it weighs. You have to pull that weight around and/or support it with floats. If you add floats, you add drag in the water, so you need more power. Basically you are fighting this weird power vs. weight vs. drag vs. rubustness feedback cycle. For a small ROV (something mainly meant to go into a pool), you can't afford anything too heavy, too thick, or with too much drag. You also have to keep/take in mind the weight to reel in, and carry, all of that cabling (which is why you see on the big ocean-going ROVs huge engine/motor-operated cable reels). Adding floats makes everything bulkier (and more likely to tangle).

Viscious circle, unfortunately. Your idea of putting the cable into aquarium tubing is probably the best idea; I think I would use the more flexible silicone tubing rather than the PVC, though. Perhaps even get the Cat5 in silicone clad outer sheath as well. The lighter and more flexible you can make it, the better overall, at least for these smaller ROVs.

 smiley
4962  Forum 2005-2010 (read only) / Frequently-Asked Questions / Re: arduino and underwater Rov on: April 14, 2010, 12:47:31 pm
Quote
Ethernet cable isn't designed to work under water!  At the very least I'd expect severe degradation of frequency response of long runs, and if salt water I predict a very short useful life...  Choose a marine-rated cable.

I thought the outer insulation was PVC? Of course, in a chlorinated or salt water environment it won't last, and ultimately it won't last in the long run period, but I suspect (though the OP didn't give any details) that this project won't be for commercial research use but rather for fun or an ROV contest of some sort. As long as the OP makes sure to seal up the ends well, he should be fine.

Your recommendation is spot-on though if he is planning something more robust; in that case marine-rated cable and connectors are a must (just be prepared for $$$ it will cost - jeez, some of those connectors cost more than my PC! But then again, I am not dropping my PC into the ocean).

Quote
However the symmetry of the pair means that its all common-mode interference and the signal is detected by a differential amplifier which is insensitive to common-mode signals.  cat5 definitely leaks a lot of signal out, try placing an AM radio near it!

Huh - here I thought all this time that the extra wire acted as some kind of (poor?) shield, but your explanation makes more sense. That also explains why you don't want to kink/stretch a cable as you run it (for ethernet).

As I have said before, I learn something new here every day!

 smiley
4963  Forum 2005-2010 (read only) / Frequently-Asked Questions / Re: arduino and underwater Rov on: April 14, 2010, 01:17:29 am
Quote
If you use one conductor of the cat-5 connected to the antennas on either end

The reason why cat5 (and coax) consist of two conductors (or pairs) is that one conductor acts as a "shield" to prevent signals from leaking out or in. While you might be able to get away with using a single conductor for video (whether as an RF transmission or otherwise), it might bleed out and cause interference on other lines (say ones carrying data); or the signal fluctuations in those other lines could bleed into the video (making it fuzzy, or even worthless as a signal) - these fluctuation could be especially true if the lines are carrying power signals for motors and such, where the brush noise would cause snow and other stuff to bleed in. That isn't to say a shielding conductor is perfect; its only as good as its ground, and even then it may still allow leakage in both directions - but it should be much less than without using it.
4964  Forum 2005-2010 (read only) / Frequently-Asked Questions / Re: arduino and underwater Rov on: April 13, 2010, 06:51:52 pm
Quote
that junk probably could make it 70 feet on stretched out coat hangers


When I was kid, me and friend stretched about 50 feet of various cable - phone cable and speaker wire, mainly - from one side of his house to his room so he could have cable TV (we didn't have any coax). We ended up stapling and taping it up along walls, ceilings, and floors; it worked great for several months until his mom got a real installer to come out and hook him up right.

 smiley-wink
4965  Forum 2005-2010 (read only) / Frequently-Asked Questions / Re: arduino and underwater Rov on: April 13, 2010, 06:15:17 pm
Quote
that hack a day link I pointed out was doing ntsc upto around 70 feet without external amplification

Were they using impedance matching baluns, though? They sell these for security camera installations, and 70 feet seem like on the low end...?
Pages: 1 ... 329 330 [331] 332 333 ... 376