I was wondering why Mowbot traffic crawled to a standstill.
I just subscribed to the new mailing list and pereused the Web site. I also
scanned through the previous messages. Lots of activity.
Anyway some commentary on what I read:
- Taking time to design is a good thing. If we rush we'll end up spending
a lot more time later backtracking...
- I like to moritorium on CPUs. Probably need to simply define some
generic specification for what the CPU board must do and let folks pick
the CPU and development environment they're comfortable with. I'm
a PIC guy personally.
- I tested my gas trimmer with the "Weed Terminator" on it with grass. The
WT uses 3 6 in. nylon blades instead of string. So no worries about feeding.
Anyway I was pleased with the results, as long as the blade and housing
didn't hit the ground, it cut grass quite well. I have no idea about the
power consumption for a such a beast.
- Total autonomy is a difficult goal to achieve. I could live with both
setting up boundry markers and having to do some setup for recharging. Ideally
the Mowbot (a term that I didn't think up incidentally even though a early
post attributed it to me...) could cycle several sets of batteries so that
it can continue to mow while some sets of batteries are charged. Think along
the lines of a bowling alley where the last set of batteries deposited are
the last ones to be cycled. So the bot could always have a fresh set available.
This potentially could give up to 24 hr. mowing...
Again I would not mind having to prepare an area for mowing considering that
area will be mowed by the bot forever. I think IR marker beakons as an
interesting path for that...
Honestly I'd be willing to give up some autonomy to save several hundred
hours of design and code work to program the mowbot to consider every
possible contingency. Hell I'd even consider the tether if a somewhat
reliable way of stringing it could be thunk up...
Love the conversation. Keep it up.
I'll be around now...
BAJ