[Dprglist] Sample Retrieval vacuum cleaner

[Doug Paradis]

Ron,
Weighing the objects in an interesting take on the problem. Just shows
folks will rise to the challenge. The rules are set for November, unless I
made a typo or grammar error. So weighing is a viable option. Of course,
you still have to find the objects to weigh them, and you you might have to
weigh several decoy objects to find the true objects, but the same is true
for a vision solution.

I encourage people to use their creative thinking, that is what the
competitions are for. However you are not helping me bait John into running
this November... <grin>. I also want to see bat_bot.

Regards,
Doug P.

On Sat, Jan 19, 2019 at 12:16 PM <deltagraph at aol.com> wrote:

> Doug / All,
>
> "I challenge you to outline an alternate method that is actually superior
> to vision in performance for this task."
>
> I can think of a inexpensive "1D" sensor that can do a better job than
> your camera classifying your objects excluding different "paint jobs" and
> it does not require a super computer. You might have to strain a bit to
> think what it is or go to a lot of trouble to put objects in with the same
> mass, but different colors...
>
> Ron Grant
> TwoDollarLoadCellsForYou.com
>
> PS might want to add that to the exclusion list to _force_ me to abandon
> my creative thinking and conform to the  vision camp! Ha!  I overheard
> someone say that they were hoping John Swindle would build his bat bot to
> solve this problem. John might argue that you are evolving anti-sonar
> strategy, like the perhaps the Hawkmoth with its anti-sonar "feathers" that
> might just force bats to re-activate old genes or re-evolve genes for eyes.
>
> Interesting high frequency sound is used to measure / image eyes and all
> their internal bits, for cataract surgery -- like 10 MHz, would be
> interesting to learn about benefits of high frequency sound to better image
> objects / textures...
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Doug Paradis via DPRGlist <dprglist at lists.dprg.org>
> To: John Swindle <swindle at compuserve.com>
> Cc: DPRG <dprglist at lists.dprg.org>
> Sent: Sat, Jan 19, 2019 11:11 am
> Subject: Re: [Dprglist] Sample Retrieval vacuum cleaner
>
> John,
>     Yes, a shop vac might have a role in a robot retrieving samples, but
> there many much simpler ways to collect the objects. The one group that I
> think has substantial experience in collecting items, is Iron Reign. They
> have built many robots for various FIRST competitions which use a spinning
> mechanism with a zip tie broom that sweeps items into a hopper. As i stated
> in our previous message exchange, the rules do not require that the
> specific objects be retrieved one at a time or be placed on the floor of
> the home base (only in the home base).
>
>    Also, the rules do not require the hunted objects to be in sight of the
> home base, only that they be in the search area. There may be obstacles
> between the home base and the object's location. So in my opinion truly
> searching for the objects would be a better strategy, opposed to trying to
> a  "collect them all and let god sort them out" method. We will see what
> the contestants dream up in November.
>
>    BTW, with the current state of technology available to hobbyists, I
> think that vision is not only cheaper, but better. I challenge you to
> outline an alternate method that is actually superior to vision in
> performance for this task.
>
>   I hope to see you compete. Start thinking about the contest and go for
> it.
>
> Regards,
> Doug P.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 11:00 PM John Swindle via DPRGlist <
> dprglist at lists.dprg.org> wrote:
>
> Doug, et al,
>
> Good to see my emails to the list are no longer bounced. My comments about
> self-driving cars got me on the evil list for a while. (I would still
> rather be face-planted and rear-ended constantly than have any measurable
> chance that my car's software would kill me.)
>
> A solution to Sample Retrieval was voiced at the January meeting: a
> leafblower, but since there are no arena walls, that would not work. But a
> shop vac would. Seems that a statically-guided shop vac would win the
> contest.
>
> As usual, I am missing the point.
>
> Thank you for reminding me that vision processing is chosen not because it
> is good but because it is cheap. I'd forgotten that. Indeed, in my classes,
> I emphasize that the choice of processor, memory, and expansion bus has
> less to do with performance: It has most to do with what is cheap.
>
> I have a Kirby, but Hoover is better known for cleaning up. Seems like a
> solution to the contest. No height limit given.
>
> Best to you, a very patient person,
>
> John Swindle
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> DPRGlist mailing list
> DPRGlist at lists.dprg.org
> http://lists.dprg.org/listinfo.cgi/dprglist-dprg.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> DPRGlist mailing list
> DPRGlist at lists.dprg.org
> http://lists.dprg.org/listinfo.cgi/dprglist-dprg.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.dprg.org/pipermail/dprglist-dprg.org/attachments/20190119/01b63418/attachment.html>