While autonomous robots have been the subject of some projects in the past, this particular project takes a swing at building a robot that can teach children about controls and robotics.
The idea is to mimic a space mission on the dark side of the moon, where radio contact is nearly impossible. The students learn to program and debug embedded devices and sensors, even before some of them have learned the alphabet!
The material for the challenge allows the microcontroller to be programmed in a simple Arduino program (Blink) as well as lower level languages like C++ or Java. The main hardware consists of an Arduino Uno R3-based rover controlled over WiFi by an ESP8266. The sensor data from the robot is gathered from an ultrasound distance sensor an a camera, as well as a SIM7000E GSM+GPS. Commands are polled from a server, sent via a web page and REST interface.
The rover responds to commands for directions, takes pictures, and scans its distance remotely. Some custom libraries are written for the serial communication and camera to account for spotty communication. The latest challenge expansion is a probe that pays attention to battery life and power consumption, challenging students to account for power usage during the robot’s lifetime.
Since the project’s conception, the rovers have already been used in schools, and we’re excited to see a new approach for younger students to learn controls and programming.
Since when is JAVA a lower language?
Might simply be a comma missing.
I.e. “as well as lower level languages like C++, or Java.”
That one look like a rover at my first Maker Faire that tried to tag me. It scooted back a mumbled “Sorry!”.
Article is unclear about how this is zero RC. In fact, it suggests there *is* RC.
The idea is that the server simulate an Earthbound base station which has only intermittent, non-real time communication with the rover.
Oh please, the “dark side” of the moon is brutally blasted by the sun fully half the time!
It’s not pedantic to call it “the far side.” So can’t we keep injecting a little correctness into popular discourse? Even if (especially if) the program being discussed gets it wrong?
From my reading of the project logs, it is only the Dark Side with reference to communications.
Are we going to have another lengthy comment thread about “the Dark side of the Moon”?
Beatings will continue until morale improves.
Why is the bot called robber?
Check the contents of your wallet after buying the parts to build one…
Can somebody elucidate on the tracks used in the picture? – What is the ‘triangle’ shape good for? If the motor was on the upper ‘point’ of the triangle, i’d get the use, namely having a high clearance between the tracks. But with this design, the motors are on one of the lower ‘points’ of this triangle making the clearance only a few mm, and also bringing the motors near the (possibly wet) ground.
Is this about making it look less like a tank and more like a cuddly movie robot? Are these treads some set length, and you simply have to put the spare lenght somewhere if you build a short robot? Is there some mechanical advantage? Is there some advantage on not having a horizontal upper tread mud-/water-/sand-wise?
Maybe it’s for tension?
It’s in the project logs. The whole idea is to simulate the communications lag of have a rover on another planet. All commands and return data have to go via the server so there is no direct link, and the lag is variable.
“There’s no dark side of the moon really. Matter of fact, it’s all dark.”