Craig,

How much for say five or ten boards? Mailed inside Canada. With a 9 yr
old doing the soldering there is a high fry factor to consider:)

Thx,
Dave

> The Chloroplast is at http://members.home.net/cybug/Chloro/chloro~1.htm , and
the circuit boards are still free if you want one.
>
> Craig Maynard
> JCM Electronic Services
> 3335 Caribou Drive NW
> Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2L-0S4

Jim,

Excellent piece of work!!!

BTW: Kyle sort of copied your bubble bot. His is a simple: single motor,
with a 1381J SE to drive it. By using a micro tape player motor he was
able to use standard mounting screws, and keep the weight low enough to
have the self righting effect.

JVernonM@... wrote:
>
> Hey all,
> I just posted another finished bot. Look under Carbots/probebot1 on my site.
>
> See ya,
> Jim
> http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Exhibit/8281/beamart.html
> ICQ# 55657870

Greetings Xaphiosis;


Although I am new to BEAM, I am familiar with torque. While I was
taking engineering statics, their came a point in time where I
actually saw (rxF) in my sleep.

The formula for torque (M) is M = rxF. The x is the cross product
of the radius and force. When working in three dimensions, the right
hand rule applies.  Luckily, the cross-product reduces to a simple
multiplication when the force is at a right angle to the radius.

Lets say you have a bolt to turn. You stick a wrench on the bolt, and
then you place your hand on the wrench--say 20cm from the center of the
bolt. Next, you apply 2 Newtons of force to the wrench at a right angle
to the bolt. The torque created with this arrangement is radius times
force, or .2m times 2 Newtons, equals .4 Newton-meters.

Now, looking at the motors page in the latest Jameco rag, I see a
stepper motor which claims to produce 144 g-cm. That is, 144 gram
centimeters. This means that if I stick a tiny wrench on this motor
and put my finger on the wrench one centimeter from the center of
the shaft, the motor will exert 144 grams of force on my finger.
Now, I move my finger so that it is 3cm away from the center. The
force on my finger is F = M/r (force equals torque over radius).
Well we see that the force is 48 grams.

Instead of our little pretend wrench, lets say this is the length
of a robot leg attached to this motors' shaft and it is still
3 cm away from the center. The weight this motor, in conjunction
with this *moment arm* is capable of pushing (or lifting) 48 grams.

Think of torque along the same lines as POWER. Where power is
the product of voltage and current, torque is the product of
force and radius. You know how a 2.5V 10mA cell produces 25mWatts.
This power can be expended at 5volts and .5mA, or it can be
expended at 1volt and 2.5mA. Conservation of energy in action.

Now, to put the cross-product into its place, imagine I were trying
to turn that bolt with a wrench. Silly stooge I am, instead of applying
pressure to the wrench at a right angle to the radius, I apply force
directly toward the center of the bolt. If you can imagine this, then
it should generate a chuckle. Anybody knows I will never turn the bolt
if I pull the end of the wrench directly over the top of the bolt. Now
as I figure this out, I gradually change the direction from along the
radius to a point ninety degrees to the radius. As I increase the angle,
then the torque will also increase. The torque resulting from this
constant force (at varying angle) will be at a maximum at ninety
degrees to the radius. To the other extreme, lets say I start with
force on the wrench at ninety degrees to the radius, but then I start
moving out. The torque will decrease as my angle of pull increases
from ninty degrees to 180 degrees. At 180 degrees I will be pulling
the wrench directly away from the bolt, and the bolt will never
turn. If I were a stupid muscle-man, I may manage to shear the top
of the bolt off while trying to turn that bolt 180degrees from
the radius (pulling straight out) -- but I will never turn that bolt

Xaphiosis--I haven't the slightest idea where you are on the
educational ladder. As far as I am concerned, position is not
nearly as important as direction. On your way up the ladder,
take any physics courses that come your way--be it high school
or calc-based--suck em up! The concepts gained will serve you
well!

ok..jef




On Fri, 21 Apr 2000, Xaphiosis wrote:

> Again a silly question ... how do I more or less find out the lifting power
> of a motor
> when connected to an average efficiency propeller?
> Ideally I'd like to know how cheap I can buy a motor that can lift a bit
> more than
> just itself, as my funds are quite limited at the moment :(
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> X.
>
>


Jeffrey D. Spears
University of Michigan
College of Engineering

``Double-E, can't spell gEEk without it!''
			 -Captain Gerald M. Bloomfield II, USMC
			  (my brother)

There are 13,818 messages in the alt-beam archive.  The only spam
I've seen in it occurred because alt-beam was a copy of the main list
and the main list was hit a few times.  No one can _promise_ that
everything will be perfect here, but eGroups has served our community
pretty well for the last 1 1/4 years.

Since users can choose between having the messages sent individually
or in a daily digest or MOST IMPORTANTLY not at all via email (the
user reads the messages on the web), it is possible to greatly reduce
the risk of spam or at least its annoyance.

In any case, back to discussing robots, eh?

------------------------------------------------


--- In beam@egroups.com, "William Cox" <william@c...> wrote:
> I think this is a **bad** idea. The free eGroups service (so I've
heard)
> generates *tons* of SPAM. The Stamp list went through the whole
thing a few
> weeks ago. Fortunately they're paying for the service.
> -William
>

I'd be willing to put up this money for one year, but of course it
depends on Mark Dalton's approval:

Q. Is there a no-advertising option?
A. Yes, eGroups offers a no-ads option. For $4.95 a month (payable in
a single annual payment of $59.40), a moderator can designate that a
group be excluded from the standard eGroups email advertisements.


--- In beam@egroups.com, "William Cox" <william@c...> wrote:
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
------
> > Your high school sweetheart-where is he now?  With 4.4 million
alumni
> > already registered at Classmates.com, there's a good chance you'll
> > find her here. Visit your online high school class reunion at:
> > http://click.egroups.com/1/3139/5/_/610793/_/956361215/
> >
>
> AHHHHHH!! I can't stand this......
> -William

> Well, I don't really know much about eastern cultures, but USers works,
> USAmericans.
For a while there it looked like it might end up MSUSAmericans :)

Peace!

-- Rob

No doubt it will all make sense when we're older ‹ Calvin and Hobbes

Well, since the speed is not big, the projectile could sit in a tube (or
whatever railing) and electromagnets surrounding it, couldnt it? i mean, it
wouldnt go so fast that it'll rip through a plastic tube?!?!(in that case,
you'll have an awesoe weapon for DOD!)
----- Original Message -----
From: Jeffrey D Spears <jspears@...>
To: <beam@...>
Sent: Saturday, April 22, 2000 9:53 AM
Subject: [beam] Re: efficient launcher?


> Greetings Tan;
>
> Great question. The answer is no. Listen:
>
> In physics class we learn that in order to turn, an object must either
> exert a force in the direction opposite to the turn, or something must
> force the object toward the center. This seems counter intuitive at
> first glance. The center seeking force is called 'centripetal' force.
> This concept is often times misrepresented as 'centrifugal' force.
>
> The point is that energy will be expended by the projectile as it spins
> around the circular rail---it *wants* to go straight real bad. You can
> feel this energy when entering the expressway on a circular on-ramp.
> The tug you feel pushing you out is felt by the tires--which must
> overcome that force by friction.
>
> When I read that post, rail gun came immediatly to mind also.
>
> Hope not to dissuade you thinking on these lines though. That 'what if'
> attitude ought serve you well!
>
> ok..jef
>
> On Thu, 20 Apr 2000, Tan wrote:
>
> > I know its a bit of topic but...
> > What if you use an electromagnetic rail gun? It has been proved to work,
but
> > only its length is a problem. So could you coil it around itself? So the
> > projectile )or the grapple, in this case,) would start from the inside
of
> > the circle, work its way out while the circle gets bigger, and lastly
shoot
> > out. It'll be low velocity, so  it does not have to be big. Could it
work?
> > (Just a fantasy.) :)
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Phillip A. Ryals <phillip@...>
> > To: <beam@...>
> > Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2000 12:55 AM
> > Subject: efficient launcher?
> >
> >
> > > I had this groovy idea, but I'm not sure if it can actually be done
> > > efficiently.  Maybe someone could give me some pointers?
> > >
> > > I was thinking that it would be cool to implement a grappling hook
type
> > > system to allow a robot to get over large obstacles.  It would require
> > > some type of winch system that retracts the line, and I think this has
> > > already been done with 'window washers'.  But what about a launcher?
I
> > > really don't think there's an efficient way to do it with a solenoid
or
> > > motor...  I just don't think a beam cicuit could really launch
anything
> > > very far.  I think it would need to be a system where a gear motor
> > > wiches the hook onto a spring.  Then, you would need some sort of
quick
> > > release to get the full force of the spring.  I think a big problem
> > > might be the friction of the line used.  That might be overcome if the
> > > hook had some weight though.
> > >
> > >
> > > Is this all just wishful thinking?  It sounds like a LOT of trouble to
> > > go to, but I think the effect would be pretty cool.  Set the bot in
> > > front of a wall three times it's height, and watch the bot climb it.
> > >
> > >
> > > Any ideas?
> > >
> > >
> > > -phillip
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> Jeffrey D. Spears
> University of Michigan
> College of Engineering
>
> ``Double-E, can't spell gEEk without it!''
> -Captain Gerald M. Bloomfield II, USMC
> (my brother)
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *--- FREE VOICEMAIL FOR YOUR HOME PHONE! ---*
> With eVoice Now you can keep in touch with clients, vendors, co-workers,
> friends and family ANYTIME, ANYWHERE. Sign Up Today for your FREE!
> http://click.egroups.com/1/3426/5/_/610793/_/956368432/
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> beam-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
>

----- Original Message -----

From: BUDSCOTT@...

To: beam@...

Sent: Friday, April 21, 2000 11:16 AM

Subject: Re: PM 1

hmm...i've been trying to get a PM1 to work for the longest time! I'm trying
to use it on my beamant, could somebody give me the adress for the
chloroplast schematic?

    -Spencer

<http://www.botic.com/users/beamstop>

not a robot scientist
not a college major
not a grad student
not a professor
not a very organized person
just Spencer (isn't that impressive enough?)

"Phillip A. Ryals" wrote:
>
> My dad just gave me a huge amount of assorted semi-conductors, and I'm
> trying to figure out if any of them are useful.

> First of all, resistors.  Most of them are large (compared to 1/4 watt)
> brown or gray cylinders.

I remember those! No coloured rings, right? They have the values printed
on them. Did you see a % sign on any of them? I still have a couple of
the brown ones, and the resistance is in three digits. They are marked
1%, which is great for reducing the difference between Nv's in a loop.

> The only thing, how long can these last?  They look archaic.

They shouldn't have a shelf life (shelf death ??). If they haven't been
used all this time, they are probably still good.

> Next, transistors. Most of them aren't marked with anything but colors.

?

> ... there are a few with a lens on top.  I'm assuming this means
> they are light sensitive, but to what kind of light?  They still
> have three leads, so they don't work like ordinary phototransistors.

A while back I was trying to find information on 3-lead
phototransistors, without much luck. Then I finally stumbled across the
answer -- Schmitt phototransistors. They need a Vcc, a ground, and an
output. The light level toggles them on and off. That might be worth
checking out. Mine are IR, slavaged from old photocopier
electro-mechanical counters. Can't tell you the vintage I'm afraid. Made
by Vishay-Telefunken.

> Last, caps. There are some really wierd looking caps (I think) that
> are cased in transparent plastic.  You can see the foil inside.  One
> of them has "DIEL 950 5%" on the side.

I remember them as well, and yes, they are caps -- once again,
relatively accurate. But I can't for the life of me remember the marking
system.

Bruce

----- Original Message -----

From: Clive

To: beam@egroups.com

Sent: Friday, April 21, 2000 6:25 PM

Subject: [beam] Re: PM 1

I've been trying to build a chloroplast SE, for about an hour now, but I
can't seem to find the MC34164-x voltage regulators at any of the local
shops, are there any good alternatives? I tried the 1381s, didn't work,
didn't realy expect it to.

Clive,



------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enter to WIN one of 10 NEW Kenmore Ranges!
Only at sears.com
http://click.egroups.com/1/2677/5/_/610793/_/956359428/
------------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
beam-unsubscribe@egroups.com

Not only do you folks pet kangaroos all day long, you haven't figured
out how to make the water swirl in the right direction whilst flushing
the toilet!

Oh those Ozzies!

BTW--saw two New Years celebrations in Sydney. Ozzies *do* know how to
celebrate!

ok..jef

On Fri, 21 Apr 2000, David Perry wrote:

> its our right to call you yanks, you make us look like we're all from the
> 'outback' and that we have pet kangaroos and say g'day constantly :-)
> Besides, America includes Brazil, Canada, Mexico,......
> sigh...another useless thread
>
> David Perry - US Citizen, NZ Citizen and Australian Citizen
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "SG" <sparkyg@...>
> To: <beam@...>
> Sent: Friday, 21 April 2000 10:45
> Subject: Re: 1381's in Australia
>
>
> > At 08:31 PM 4/20/00 EDT, you wrote:
> > >
> > > Yanks....! Hey watch it Ben. Our Civil War wasn't that long ago. Many
> take
> > > that as an insult (me maybe). Americans. Not Yanks.
> >
> > *sigh*  i guess you get offended when we are referred to as "the colonies"
> >
> >
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
> http://im.yahoo.com
>


Jeffrey D. Spears
University of Michigan
College of Engineering

``Double-E, can't spell gEEk without it!''
			 -Captain Gerald M. Bloomfield II, USMC
			  (my brother)

Robot info - www.botic.com/users/robotcentral
-William

----- Original Message -----
From: Patrick Pintens <splatje@...>
To: <beam@...>
Sent: Friday, April 21, 2000 11:02 AM
Subject: BEAM-organisation in Belgium


> Hey everyone,
>
> I just joined this mail list, and I am thrilled beyond every limit. I have
> been interested in Beam robots for about a year, but have only recently
> gotten internet-access, and then I did not know where to go, but know I've
> found more than enough information to get started (finally). yes, I have
> abolutely NO experience with electronics (working on that). So if anyone
can
> get me some help, you can contact me by e-mail at Splatje@..., or
by
> Icq #69047038. thx.
>
> I would alo like to know if there are any active organizations involving
> BEAM-technology in Belgium (this is where I live, well duh)or neighbouring
> countries. If there isn't, how about starting one???
>
> regards,
> patrick
> ________________________________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
>
>

>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Your high school sweetheart-where is he now?  With 4.4 million alumni
> already registered at Classmates.com, there's a good chance you'll
> find her here. Visit your online high school class reunion at:
> http://click.egroups.com/1/3139/5/_/610793/_/956361215/
>

AHHHHHH!! I can't stand this......
-William

I think this is a **bad** idea. The free eGroups service (so I've heard)
generates *tons* of SPAM. The Stamp list went through the whole thing a few
weeks ago. Fortunately they're paying for the service.
-William

----- Original Message -----
From: John A. deVries II <zozzles@...>
To: <beam@egroups.com>
Sent: Friday, April 21, 2000 6:46 PM
Subject: Re: [beam] Uh...adress change?


> At 03:45 PM 4/21/00 , Spencer wrote:
> >I guess that the BEAM list moved to egroups, just testin the waters!
>
> This is decidedly odd.  One supposes that Mark (who appears to be the
owner
> of the new list) finally decided that maintaining the list on eGroups
would
> be substantially easier than doing it at SGI.  It is rather unfortunate
> that he hasn't taken the time to alter his welcome message -- it is quite
> anachronistic (for example, he hasn't had an account at webconn for quite
> some time now.  There are also some other odd things about the group
startup.
>
> If this change -does- work out, I'll probably close out the alt-beam
> archive.  Whee!
>
>
>
> Zoz
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Enter to WIN one of 10 NEW Kenmore Ranges!
> Only at sears.com
> http://click.egroups.com/1/2677/5/_/610793/_/956357184/
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> beam-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>

Man that is SWEET! When I grow up, I want to be just like you!

ok..jef

On Thu, 20 Apr 2000, Les Davis wrote:

> Incredible Jim, I am in awe.
>
> Les
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <JVernonM@...>
> To: <beam@...>
> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2000 1:34 PM
> Subject: One more bot
>
>
> > Hey all,
> > I just posted another finished bot. Look under Carbots/probebot1 on my
> site.
> >
> > See ya,
> > Jim
> > http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Exhibit/8281/beamart.html
> > ICQ# 55657870
> >
>
>


Jeffrey D. Spears
University of Michigan
College of Engineering

``Double-E, can't spell gEEk without it!''
			 -Captain Gerald M. Bloomfield II, USMC
			  (my brother)

Greetings Tan;

Great question. The answer is no. Listen:

In physics class we learn that in order to turn, an object must either
exert a force in the direction opposite to the turn, or something must
force the object toward the center. This seems counter intuitive at
first glance. The center seeking force is called 'centripetal' force.
This concept is often times misrepresented as 'centrifugal' force.

The point is that energy will be expended by the projectile as it spins
around the circular rail---it *wants* to go straight real bad. You can
feel this energy when entering the expressway on a circular on-ramp.
The tug you feel pushing you out is felt by the tires--which must
overcome that force by friction.

When I read that post, rail gun came immediatly to mind also.

Hope not to dissuade you thinking on these lines though. That 'what if'
attitude ought serve you well!

ok..jef

On Thu, 20 Apr 2000, Tan wrote:

> I know its a bit of topic but...
> What if you use an electromagnetic rail gun? It has been proved to work, but
> only its length is a problem. So could you coil it around itself? So the
> projectile )or the grapple, in this case,) would start from the inside of
> the circle, work its way out while the circle gets bigger, and lastly shoot
> out. It'll be low velocity, so  it does not have to be big. Could it work?
> (Just a fantasy.) :)
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Phillip A. Ryals <phillip@...>
> To: <beam@...>
> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2000 12:55 AM
> Subject: efficient launcher?
>
>
> > I had this groovy idea, but I'm not sure if it can actually be done
> > efficiently.  Maybe someone could give me some pointers?
> >
> > I was thinking that it would be cool to implement a grappling hook type
> > system to allow a robot to get over large obstacles.  It would require
> > some type of winch system that retracts the line, and I think this has
> > already been done with 'window washers'.  But what about a launcher?  I
> > really don't think there's an efficient way to do it with a solenoid or
> > motor...  I just don't think a beam cicuit could really launch anything
> > very far.  I think it would need to be a system where a gear motor
> > wiches the hook onto a spring.  Then, you would need some sort of quick
> > release to get the full force of the spring.  I think a big problem
> > might be the friction of the line used.  That might be overcome if the
> > hook had some weight though.
> >
> >
> > Is this all just wishful thinking?  It sounds like a LOT of trouble to
> > go to, but I think the effect would be pretty cool.  Set the bot in
> > front of a wall three times it's height, and watch the bot climb it.
> >
> >
> > Any ideas?
> >
> >
> > -phillip
> >
> >
>
>


Jeffrey D. Spears
University of Michigan
College of Engineering

``Double-E, can't spell gEEk without it!''
			 -Captain Gerald M. Bloomfield II, USMC
			  (my brother)

Greetings BEAMers;

Sometimes we look at equations and so on, but really can't see
what is going on. Im an EE student so this happens to me--Big Time!
Here is an experience that hammered home a simple electrical
concept for me.

I worked on a couple of ships during a ten year stint in the Coast
Guard. One day I was walking down the corridor, and all these
electricians were standing around an electrical junction panel. It
was basically a box inside the wall where wires came in from one
side and connected directly to wire on the other side. No big deal
except these were high current lines. One of the fellehs had some
contraption that looked like a camera. So I asked one of the other
joe's who was standing around what he was doing. Apparently, the
camera looking thing was actually an infrared camera, similiar to
what fire-fighters use to see where the fire is through all the
smoke. What they were doing was looking at the connections under
full load--for heat. They could see the bad connections from the
heat they generated. So, this team of folks were looking at all
the junction panels and tightening down the terminals if they
were hot.

Over a years operating time, the generator fuel savings gained
by these fellehs was probably substantial. Couple thousand
bucks maybe?

BEAM experimenters who are new at soldering should bear this in
mind. Solder is a very poor conductor of electricity. If we
solder two elements together with just a gob of solder holding
them, then we are effectivly adding a resistor (small space
heater) between these elements. Resistors cause voltage drops
which cannot be reclaimed. Make GOOD SOLID ELECTRICAL CONTACT,
and then solder to maintain that good contact. Whereas ships have
generators that can generate unlimited sources of charge--plenty
to waste--the beam designer has a very limited source of charge.
I imagine good careful electrical contact at solder joints could
provide significant performance differences to typical SE's.

Here is a simple test. If before soldering you can wiggle the
connection and then everything looks okay in terms of good
contact afterword, then go ahead and solder it. If you are
making a connection and think to yourself--man, thats pretty
flimsy--better get solder on their before it falls apart! Well
then the time taken providing better connection is probably
worth while.

Frankly, I wish gold was cheap enough to use as solder! Low
melting point, excellent conductivity, no oxidation.

ok..jef

Jeffrey D. Spears
University of Michigan
College of Engineering

``Double-E, can't spell gEEk without it!''
			 -Captain Gerald M. Bloomfield II, USMC
			  (my brother)

Greetings;

I am curious if anybody has fooled around with galvanic action between
dissimilar metals in BEAM applications.

Thinking about the subject outloud, I imagine potential difference
from galvanic reactions comes in the form of an E-field between the
two metals across the electrolyte--similar to solar cells. No doubt
the potential developed is pretty small---perhaps millivolts. However,
if the E-field acts as above, then individual *cells* in series would
sum.

For example, lets fix our design for use in saltwater. A battery
of cells could have a printed circuit board etched with little
rectangular pieces linked in an alternating series type format. One
cell would be left copper clad, the one next to it would have zinc
plating. The board will end up looking like a checkerboard. The space
between adjacent pads would have to be optimized for performance.
I do not know if it is possible to plate zinc onto copper, but lets
just assume we can. Ok, we take two of these boards and have it so
when we put the boards together with a little gap in between, each
copper pad on one board mates with a zinc pad on the other. In
operation the thing would have saltwater flowing between these two
plates.

Lets say five millivolts per cell. Then 100 cells, a ten by ten
matrix, would provide half a volt. Its funny how when fooling around
with BEAM stuff, we think of the flow of charge as opposed to
current eh? Well, imagine in the case of the above cell, current
could definitly be tought of as the amount of charges flowing past
a particular point! :-)

I think Galvin built a similiar arrangement, but instead of salt
water---he used frog guts (eeeww!) :-).

The series arrangment of the individual cells of this battery will
cause the voltages to sum. The individual batteries could be series'd
or paralleled to the BEAM designers taste.

To be sure--Im talking potato clock technology here! :-)

One downside to this arrangment is lifespan--which must be finite
as the copper and zinc pads deplete over time. In fact, imagine the
metal thicknesses could be proportioned to deplete at the same time.

I worked for the US Coast Guard for ten years up in the radio
room at various land and sea billets. Although I did not work with
them directly, was exposed to buoys, which the Coast Guard maintains
tens of thousands of. The lights on buoys are all powered by lead
acid batteries. Buoys must be maintained constantly. There are on
the spot fixes when they go out, and annual maintanance. Recharging
and replacing batteries is very expensive in materials, boats and
people. IF the Coast Guard could replace the lead acid batteries
with some sort of salt-water battery, THEN they would have. I am
willing to bet they TRIED. The reason I say all this is that the
idea outlined above probably isn't practical.

On the other hand, the same experience brought me into contact with
NOAA data gathering techniques. On the IceBreaker I worked on, there
was installed a salinity monitoring outfit. This was NOAA equipment.
It had a little launching tube mounted to one of the handrails near
the edge of the ship. The sensor was a torpedo shaped job, heavy
lead on the nose, plastic tail section--shaped like a torpedo. The
nose had a small sensor and the body had a spool of very fine
copper wire. To operate the thing, they would take a little torpedo,
hook the end of the copper wire to a terminal on some box, stick
the thing in the tube and drop it. The little torpedo would provide
signals up that one wire (and perhaps the hull of the ship) to the
box that would radio the signals to NOAA via GOES satellite.

If the reader is still awake, then perhaps this may pertain to the
subject as well.

I recall reading an article in Scientific American regarding an
autonomous ocean transfersing probe. Here is a sysnopsis of the
opertion: The thing is shaped like a long tube. Think 2 meters
long, 2 decimeters wide. This tube has control surface, rudder,
dorsals etc. When on the ocean surface, it has a density less
then water. By some sort of mechanical motion--I believe a
bladder inside the thing was deflated by some process--the
density would increase so that it was greater than water, and
the probe would sink. While sinking, the fins would control the
attitude so it would sink in the direction of desired motion.
When at some predetermined depth, the thing would once again
mechanically alter its density--inflating a bladder?--and rise
to the surface. The control surfaces would again make the thing
rise in the desired direction. After one cycle, the probe will
have progressed a given distance.

The other day at school, a senior mechanical engineering class was
displaying projects out in the hallway. A group of fellows tried
building the apparatus above. Although I doubt their project ever
got wet it sure did spark a fire in me. I walked away sad that
probably nobody would continue their work as the whole concept
intrigues the hell out of me.

So list--is this salt-water BEAM power supply idea feasable? How
did the BEAM felleh(s) who already tried this idea fare?

ok..jef



Jeffrey D. Spears
University of Michigan
College of Engineering

``Double-E, can't spell gEEk without it!''
			 -Captain Gerald M. Bloomfield II, USMC
			  (my brother)

Perhaps it will bring some inspiration.  It is a revision of
something I wrote last June.  Pray, do not take it too seriously.


      http://www.serve.com/heretics/thought.html


jab

My dad just gave me a huge amount of assorted semi-conductors, and I'm
trying to figure out if any of them are useful.  He's from 'back in the
day', and so many of them look like they belong with vacuum tubes.

First of all, resistors.  Most of them are large (compared to 1/4 watt)
brown or gray cylinders.  He gave me a TON, and many of them are correct
values for BEAM.  The only thing, how long can these last?  They look
archaic.

Next, transistors.  Most of them aren't marked with anything but colors.
Any ideas where I might find their values?  And there are a few with a lens
on top.  I'm assuming this means they are light sensitive, but to what kind
of light?  They still have three leads, so they don't work like ordinary
phototransistors.  What kind of circuits can they be used in?

Last, caps.  There are some really wierd looking caps (I think) that are
cased in transparent plastic.  You can see the foil inside.  One of them has
"DIEL 950 5%" on the side.  Those are the only markings besides one end of
the plastic case being colored black.  I'm assuming that's identifying +
or -, but I'm not sure which.


Anyone who could point me in the right direction?  There's such a large
amount of stuff, I just hate to throw it away as useless.  I wish there was
SOMEthing that I could use.



Thanks for any help,
phillip

I was referring to the Photopopper circuit at Beam-online:

http://www.beam-online.com/Robots/Circuits/circuits.html

(don't click the link to photopopper, just scroll down after circuits page
loads, it's down there a ways)

or just the circuit drawing:

http://www.beam-online.com/Robots/Circuits/images/BEAMPP.JPG

I see the misunderstanding now after seeing Chiu's circuit :)

Thanks, Ken

  >Hmmm...
  >
  >Which schematic are you looking at?  I went by the one at Chiu's site
  >(http://www.geocities.com/SouthBeach/6897/photovore.html).
  >
  >It doesn't show touch sensors, so I just made up what I thought would work.
  >No guarantees though :-)
  >
  >Ben
  >
  >----------
  >>From: Ken Hill <hardlock@...>
  >>To: beam@...
  >>Subject: Re: Photopopper answers from Ben
  >>Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2000 15:43
  >>
  >
  >> Thanks Ben!  Making much more sense now!
  >>
  >> [snip]
  >>
  >>  >> (Photopopper drawing shows the wires crossing near 1381s but not
sure if
  >>  >> they are connected at that junction).
  >>
  >> After further study, I'm thinking that junction must be connected or the
  >> PDs wouldn't have any effect on the 1381 (am I right?)
  >>
  >>  >>
  >>  >> And lastly, is the RC timer (if that's what it is?) used to keep
the motor
  >>  >> from firing for a while assuring the turn or what?
  >>
  >>  >Eh?  RC networks?  Where?  The cap on the trigger of the 1381 is there to
  >>  >allow different resistances of light sensor to have some effect...
This is
  >>  >an RC network I guess, but only if you replace the Photodiode with a LDR.
  >>  >Is this what you're talking about?  If so then yes the RC time
constant is
  >>  >affected by light, therefore the popper will be affected by light and
will
  >>  >either turn away or come towards the light.
  >>
  >> [snip]
  >>
  >> Oh...I saw the .22 cap and 680k resistor to ground on the feeler switch and
  >> thought it was an R/C timeout for the turn action of the switch like other
  >> bots I've seen have.  I'm learning :)
  >>
  >> Thanks again;  Ken
  >>

>>This is decidedly odd.

>True, when he doesn't work there anymore :)

Actually, I had figured as much, but the start of the message ("I've
added you to...") looked so much like eGroups' standard blurb that...

>Take a closer look at his "Welcome to the BEAM group"
>message, about halfway down the page.

indeed I hadn't read that part.  Foolish me!

It would be nice if someone would pay the nominal fee that would get
rid of the ads at the bottom of the messages.  Interestingly enough,
it won't make much of a difference to me with regard to
administrative stuff (i.e. "control of the list") because eGroups
works so well that it was hardly ever necessary.  More than that,
Mark has chosen a service that permits file storage, chats, a
calendar and other stuff.

All told I believe this will be a Really Good Thing.

Zoz

"John A. deVries II" wrote:
>
> This is decidedly odd.  One supposes that Mark (who appears to be
> the owner of the new list) finally decided that maintaining the
> list on eGroups would be substantially easier than doing it at SGI.

True, when he doesn't work there anymore :)

Take a closer look at his "Welcome to the BEAM group" message, about
halfway down the page.

Bruce

Bernard Nazari wrote:
>
> Wilf,
> So would your multi diode PNC work or should I use something like
> Bruce's PNC ...

I'll be the first to say it ... if you have a 4 Nv loop, use Wilf's
circuit. I do.

Mine's better suited to big loops, branching networks, etc.

Bruce

Du-Bro has just what you want,  Check the R/C (radio control) aircraft section
of your local hobby shop.  They make solid and pnuematic tires.
Aircraft parts make great 'bot parts.

jester96beam@... wrote:

> Does anyone have any good wheels they'd be willing to sell?  I need 4 good
wheels/tires kinda like the rear wheels on RC buggies.  I'm making a (mars)
rover and I need wheels. About 2 inch in diametre or larger will be great, and
they should have treads of some sort.  They don't have to be from and RC car!!
that's just an example.
>
> Anyway please e-mail me at jester96@... if you have any, and include a
picture if you can.
>
> Thanks
>
> Chris
>
> ---------------------------------------------------
> Get free personalized email at http://www.iname.com

I've been trying to build a chloroplast SE, for about an hour now, but I
can't seem to find the MC34164-x voltage regulators at any of the local
shops, are there any good alternatives? I tried the 1381s, didn't work,
didn't realy expect it to.

Clive,

At 03:45 PM 4/21/00 , Spencer wrote:
>I guess that the BEAM list moved to egroups, just testin the waters!

This is decidedly odd.  One supposes that Mark (who appears to be the owner
of the new list) finally decided that maintaining the list on eGroups would
be substantially easier than doing it at SGI.  It is rather unfortunate
that he hasn't taken the time to alter his welcome message -- it is quite
anachronistic (for example, he hasn't had an account at webconn for quite
some time now.  There are also some other odd things about the group startup.

If this change -does- work out, I'll probably close out the alt-beam
archive.  Whee!



Zoz

--

Welcome to the beam mailing list!

Please save this message for future reference.  Thank you.

If you ever want to remove yourself from this mailing list,
send the following command in email to
<beam-request@...>:

     unsubscribe

Or you can send mail to <majordomo@...> with the following
command in the body of your email message:

     unsubscribe beam

or from another account, besides Mark Dalton <mwd@...>:

     unsubscribe beam Mark Dalton <mwd@...>

If you ever need to get in contact with the owner of the list,
(if you have trouble unsubscribing, or have questions about the
list itself) send email to <owner-beam@...> .
This is the general rule for most mailing lists when you need
to contact a human.

  Here's the general information for the list you've subscribed to,
  in case you don't already have it:


Hello and Welcome to the BEAM e-mail list there are over 400 people
on this e-mail list.  This list has a mix of people from young kids
to experienced professors.  So there are wide variety of dicussions.

PLEASE Read through the FAQs listed below, almost every basic question
is answered from components to how to build a Solarroller to a walker.

Please read through this message and some of the WWW sites.  If there
is something you think should be included e-mail me at: mwd@...

To post a message to this mailing list use this address:

         beam@...

====================================================================


Sections:

    1.Idea/Concept/Purpose/Goals of the BEAM e-mail list.
    2.How to Subscribe/unsubscribe and post to the list.
    3.Lots of WWW sites on how to get started, find resources and build
      BEAM robots.
    4.Appropriate use of the list.
	 o No flames or personal attacks, keep it objective. And were to
           send complaints, don't reply to these flames on the list.
	 o Try to keep on topic of BEAM robotics, there are other lists
           devoted to traditional robotics and CPU controlled devices.
	 o How to handle non-BEAM discussions, and some pointers.
    5.Where to go with problems, concerns about the e-mail list or others
      on the list.



                 Purpose of the BEAM e-mail list

The idea/concept of this e-mail list is to provide a place to discuss and
share information about BEAM Robotics. To encourage sharing of ideas,
resources, and minds to make understanding and building easier.  Also this
is a method of letting people know of new ideas, resources, meetings, and
competitions.

Well this is a place to start.  Currently this is a very informal group,
and we will just see how it goes.

We tried to help a diverse group of people on this list.

        1.Beginners just learning to solder and about components.
        2.Others on their first and second robots.
        3.Some that have built microcores and walkers.
        4.A few that know theory but lack experience hands on experience.
        5.Advanced individuals designing their own circuits or interfacing
          CPU's to the Nervous Net.
        6.Experts that have designed, looked into the theory and looking
          into why they work the way they do. Models have a hard time taking
          into account 'total systems'.

So hopefully we can help a wide range of people, and keep everyones interest
at the same time.

====================================================================
***              WWW sites on BEAM Robotics                     ***
====================================================================

Here is a note on the general information available and a list of
some of the WWW sites organized by categories.

I do have this list setup to be archived now you can get more BEAM
information and access to the archives at:
         http://www.webconn.com/~mwd/beam.html

The FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions) is at:
         http://www2.xtdl.com/~bushbo/beam/FAQ.html
BEAM Tek.. page - more info, schematics, etc.
         http://www2.xtdl.com/~bushbo/beam/main.html
         http://sst.lanl.gov/robot/    <-- Home of BEAM.
         http://www.solarbotics.com/
         http://www.golden.net/~amiller/beam.htm
         http://www.xs4all.nl/~sbolt/e-index.html

Peoples BEAM pages:
	 http://www.webconn.com/~mwd/beam-people.html

India Games:
         http://www.webconn.com/~mwd/beam-india.html

e-mail list:
         http://www.webconn.com/~mwd/beam.html

For a beginner site.. The FAQ (actually for all levels):
         http://www2.xtdl.com/~bushbo/beam/FAQ.html
         http://www2.xtdl.com/~bushbo/beam/FAQ.html#q2
         http://www.geocities.com/ResearchTriangle/9879/homepage.htm
	 http://www.beckingham.com/

I wrote some stuff on soldering/getting started:
         http://www.webconn.com/~mwd/beam/solder.html

BEAM Web ring:
         (You can start from various sites)
         http://www.ix.net.au/~tink/beam/

Parts listings:
         http://www.webconn.com/~mwd/beam/parts.html
         http://lenti.med.umn.edu/~mwd/robot/resource.html

Course of study in BEAM robotics (part of the FAQ/BEAM Tek):
         http://www2.xtdl.com/~bushbo/beam/FAQ.html#CourseOfStudy

Building a simple solar engine:
         http://www2.xtdl.com/~bushbo/beam/oscillate.html
         http://www2.xtdl.com/~bushbo/beam/beam.gif
         http://www.geocities.com/ResearchTriangle/9879/solaroll.htm

Bibliography:
         http://www.webconn.com/~mwd/beam/beam_bib.html

Photovores:
         http://www.geocities.com/ResearchTriangle/9879/photovor.htm
         http://www.xs4all.nl/~sbolt/e-index.html

Walkers/Microcores:
         http://www.golden.net/~amiller/
         http://www2.xtdl.com/~bushbo/beam/nvnet.html
         http://www.geocities.com/ResearchTriangle/9879/microcor.htm

     Also see the Bibliography and patent:
         http://www.webconn.com/~mwd/beam/beam_bib.html
         http://www.webconn.com/~mwd/beam/mwt/patent.html

Pictures:
         http://www.solarbotics.com/
         http://www.iupui.edu/~khaupt/robots.html

BEAM Kits:
         http://www.solarbotics.com/

Events:
         http://sst.lanl.gov/robot/html/events.html
         http://sst.lanl.gov/robot/html/upcoming.html
         http://www.webconn.com/~mwd/beam-india.html
                 - India game and rules

====================================================================


   How to Subscribe/unsubscribe from the BEAM e-mail list

E-mail list/newsgroup, info

      The BEAM e-mail list archive
      The BEAM e-mail list moved to a majordomo list at SGI.

          To subscribe send e-mail to:
                        majordomo@...

          with the the following in the body of your message:
                            'subscribe beam your_email_address'

          To Unsubscribe, e-mail to:
                        majordomo@...

          with the the following in the body of your message:
                           'unsubscribe beam your_email_address'

          To change your e-mail address, send e-mail to:
                        majordomo@...

          with the the following in the body of your message:
                         'unsubscribe beam your_old_email_address'
                          'subscribe beam your_new_email_address'

          NOTE: We are going to propose a new newsgroup: sci.robotics.beam
	 - moderated

                        Appropriate use of the list

      Appropriate use of the e-mail list:
             1.No Flames, personal attacks.
               This is a G/PG rated list, and language should be kept
               non-threatening.
               We want to encourage open discussion.
               We want to help kids and adults learn in a safe and open
               enviroment.
               If you disagree with someone on the list:
               Just say so, AND state why.
               Keep discussions objective.
               If you feel offended or someone is attacking/flaming you,
               please contact: Mark Dalton: mwd@...
             2.Try to keep on the Topic of BEAM robotics.
               It is a really wide topic. It includes, but is not limited
               to, BEAM Solar Engines - one 'neuron'
               Nervous Networks - microcore, bicore, etc.
               CPU Interfaces to Nervous Networks
               Robotics Event announcements
             3.If someone e-mail a non-related topic, please move the
               discussion off-line.

               Reason: There are a ton of places to talk about CPU based
               machines, R/C machines and CPU based robots. But this is
               the only BEAM discussion list, of which I am aware.

             4.How to handle requests for non-BEAM e-mail...
               personal e-mail
               comp.robotics.misc
               Other e-mail groups/lists:

               Dallas Personal Robotics Group: http://www.dprg.org/
               Portland Area Robotics Society: http://www.rdrop.com/users/marvin/
               Twin Cities Robotics Group: http://www.webconn.com/tcrobots/
               General Robotics FAQ: http://www.frc.ri.cmu.edu:80/robotics-faq/


           Where to go with problems/concerns about this list/users

      It is a imperfect world, and people sometimes use poor judgement,
      miscommunicate or just have a bad day. And say things in a non-constuctive
      way.  What can you do about these?

      Sometimes it is hard to do this (yep, I fail sometimes also..), but here
      are some ideas.
             1.Don't take it personally.
             2.Send me a e-mail if you want me to mediate or look into
               inappropriate mail on the list.
             3.Do not post a concern to the list
             4.Send them a e-mail and state what you were offended.
               Don't copy the list.
               Let them explain what they meant or give them a chance to clear
               it up.
               keep it simple and short.

If you have comments/suggestions on making this message better
please let me know at mwd@....

Thanks!

Mark

hmm, this is interesting.. I'm wondering if you could actually get enough
force from a beam circuit though.  Seems like it would take an awful lot of
amperage to energize the coils effectively.  Then to have to energize one
after another...  Maybe I'm not completely getting it?

I still think using a spring would be the best way.  Call me old-fashioned.
:)

-phillip




-----Original Message-----
From: owner-beam@... [mailto:owner-beam@...]On
Behalf Of sebastiaan van Vliet
Sent: Friday, April 21, 2000 12:49 PM
To: beam@...
Subject: Re: efficient launcher?Magnetic acceleration?


I think magnetic acceleration is the easiest way to do this. This is just a
shaft with a number of coils around it. The first triggers, pulling the hook
in the shaft up, when the hook is at the coil, the next one triggers , etc.,
etc.

Nasa must have something about it on its site, since this is a researched
alternative for launching.

I guess that the BEAM list moved to egroups, just testin the waters!

     -Spencer

<http://www.botic.com/users/beamstop>

not a robot scientist
not a college major
not a grad student
not a professor
not a very organized person
just Spencer (isn't that impressive enough?)