Re: [mowbot] Goals

William J. O'Reilly III (pookie nospam at
Sun, 29 Sep 1996 22:34:56 -0500

At 06:48 AM 9/29/96, you wrote:
>Byron A Jeff wrote:
>> 2) Instead of design by comittee, it's probably more productive to do
>> design by friendly competition.
>Wayne Talbot wrote:
>>I will be building my own design no matter what the group goals are
>>but I hope to be able to contribute to the group work and learn from
>>it as well.
>This is also the way that I feel about it. We each work to validate our
>own Ideas and concepts. The concepts are debated to refine them, designs
>are concieved and prototypes built. The results are excanged so that we
>may choose the ones that best meet our own particular needs. The results
>of this colaboration will be more of a knowledge base of MowBot Know how
>than a single do it this way design.
> Ron
I concur with Ron. Judging from the ideas out already, there is a diverse
base of interest, knowledge, and motivation.

How about dividing (casually) along a basic principle? I would like to see
a solar power, small, smart robot--One that runs all day, hides during rain
or dark, knows its boundaries, and stays away from the dog. But before we
design, say, the gear down on the wheels, lets debate a power supply. Start
from the top. If we decide on solar, then a small group of hell bent people
on thinking petrol is better can evolve a parellel design--and due to
independent thinking, help others in the process. Alternatively, if we
decide on AC, then there is a completely different design goal than from
solar--or 2 cycle engine for that matter.

I vote for dicussion on power supply. My design proposal calls for 1 medium
sized star in close proximity to the lawn to be mowed and a 1.0 m^2 solar
panel coule provide a constant voltage at a reasonable current. Reason:
The grass grows over a period of days, no hours. Let the mowbot take its
time, be efficient, and work continuous...not in 1 hour spurts as I imagine
a 2 cycle piston engine would.


William O'Reilly
pookie nospam at