It began as "build it with what's on hand" robot. And in the end, despite various purchases the bot still looks the part and therefor IS TrashBot. This is my first bot. My first experiment with Arduino beyond blinking lights.
There's some source code and a brief description at the second URL. It's a basic obstacle avoidance routine. After some discussion here on the forum I rewrote this to avoid using the delay function. The improved code uses enumerated states for steering commands.
I am surprised this didn't generate any conversation at all. I am new at all of this but I thought this freshman effort would at least provide a helpful dialog.
Is there something I'm missing? Is this really that bad?
Good point in both instances. It is a bit disingenuous calling it a trashbot now. Though that is the way it began, I guess I have to think about the project differently now.
In fact I started with the four rechargable nine volts I had here. Then went through a dozen other possibilities including the 12 volt gel cells they use in emergency lighting. In the end the pack of ten nines I ended with fit the bill best. The bot will run well for twenty hours with that pack. Not bad given how low the weight factor is with those batteries.
Maybe I should have posted "if I spent all of this money why does my bot look like trash?" ROTFLOL!!!
It is a strange looking bugger, but it ended up that way through a natural evolution that was very interesting and a lot of fun.
Shoot I almost forgot to answer your question. I had the wood it's quarter inch four ply. I had most the aluminum angle iron though in the end I did need one piece to finish the motor mounts. Most everything else had been home brew from surplus at one time or the other. In time this stuff was replaced by commercial or kit products like the Solarbotics H-Bridge and commercial TV transmitter pack.
I had grown accustomed to saying it was an "on hand" project when in fact that would no longer be the case.
I knew I might have to defend that weird looking bot, but my bench stuff too?
Ok, the meter on the left is there for one reason only. I am accustomed to using the swing of an analog meter to determine the relative health of larger caps, the ones I find fiddling with tube amps. Perhaps not the best method of testing them but it's what I learned in the dark ages. The analog bargraph on the next digital meter won't cut it.
The next one I think is the digital. An old friend from my days fixing copiers. It's the one I use most often. The orange seen next to it offers two distinct functions the others don't. Both things are often done while measuring voltage at the same time at other points in the circuit. That orange bugger can measure Frequency and that's about all I use it for. It also has an accurate temp prob which I thought would be interesting, but hasn't been all that useful. The frequency meter though has been very helpful.
The next meter, the yellow one isn't a multimeter at all. It's a capacitance meter and the most accurate one I've used. When working out caps for audio filters I have found it also indispensable and I often use it in combination with simultaneous voltage readings.
Wow, I guess that should take care of it. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy talking about anything, but my bench clutter?
