Running Files MSD16: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
== Line Referee: TURTLE vs Omnibot == | == Line Referee: TURTLE vs Omnibot == | ||
The first idea was to use a TURTLE robot as a line referee while two Omnibots would be playing on the field. However, the communication with the TURTLE seems to be a difficult task which is not yet achieved. Also, there are only two Omnibots currently present to test with and we are not the only team who want to use them. Now a choice needs to be made whether it would be better to switch the role of the different robots: two TURTLEs as players and one Omnibot as a line referee. To make a decision about this, this risk analysis is made. | The first idea was to use a TURTLE robot as a line referee while two Omnibots would be playing on the field. However, the communication with the TURTLE seems to be a difficult task which is not yet achieved. Also, there are only two Omnibots currently present to test with and we are not the only team who want to use them. Now a choice needs to be made whether it would be better to switch the role of the different robots: two TURTLEs as players and one Omnibot as a line referee. The switching should be possible due to our implementation of the System Architecture. To make a decision about this, this risk analysis is made. | ||
=== Choice 1: TURTLE as line-referee and Omnibots as players === | === Choice 1: TURTLE as line-referee and Omnibots as players === | ||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
* the TURTLEs already possess algorithms to detect a ball and players | * the TURTLEs already possess algorithms to detect a ball and players | ||
* the TURTLEs already are able to locate themselves | * the TURTLEs already are able to locate themselves | ||
* TURTLE has a large field of view | |||
cons: | cons: | ||
| Line 18: | Line 19: | ||
* if the comm is working, we should still adapt the code to use our set-points | * if the comm is working, we should still adapt the code to use our set-points | ||
* in order to use comm we need at least one laptop with Ubuntu and run everything on there or link it to the base laptop | * in order to use comm we need at least one laptop with Ubuntu and run everything on there or link it to the base laptop | ||
* the TURTLEs are quite big, maybe | * the TURTLEs are quite big, maybe too big to drive next to the field | ||
| Line 25: | Line 26: | ||
pros: | pros: | ||
* comm with Omnibot is already working (arrows to control the bots) | * comm with Omnibot is already working (arrows to control the bots) | ||
* | * we only need one Omnibot to test with | ||
* we don't necessarily need to equip the Omnibots with any protective gear | |||
* TURTLEs are already programmed and designed as players | |||
cons: | |||
* still not able to receive data from the Omnibot (but also not with TURTLE) | |||
* we need to develop localization for the Omnibots, possibly there is some software to do this based on LED strips | |||
* Kalman filtering: identification of model and implementation on the bod. | |||
* implement ball and object detection on the Omnibot. (but approach is already made) | |||
* field of view is probably limited | |||
Revision as of 11:04, 7 March 2017
Internal Navigation
Risk Analysis
Line Referee: TURTLE vs Omnibot
The first idea was to use a TURTLE robot as a line referee while two Omnibots would be playing on the field. However, the communication with the TURTLE seems to be a difficult task which is not yet achieved. Also, there are only two Omnibots currently present to test with and we are not the only team who want to use them. Now a choice needs to be made whether it would be better to switch the role of the different robots: two TURTLEs as players and one Omnibot as a line referee. The switching should be possible due to our implementation of the System Architecture. To make a decision about this, this risk analysis is made.
Choice 1: TURTLE as line-referee and Omnibots as players
pros:
- this was the first idea for the project
- the TURTLEs already possess algorithms to detect a ball and players
- the TURTLEs already are able to locate themselves
- TURTLE has a large field of view
cons:
- the communication with the TURTLEs is still not working
- if the comm is working, we should still adapt the code to use our set-points
- in order to use comm we need at least one laptop with Ubuntu and run everything on there or link it to the base laptop
- the TURTLEs are quite big, maybe too big to drive next to the field
Choice 1: TURTLE as player and Omnibots as line-referee
pros:
- comm with Omnibot is already working (arrows to control the bots)
- we only need one Omnibot to test with
- we don't necessarily need to equip the Omnibots with any protective gear
- TURTLEs are already programmed and designed as players
cons:
- still not able to receive data from the Omnibot (but also not with TURTLE)
- we need to develop localization for the Omnibots, possibly there is some software to do this based on LED strips
- Kalman filtering: identification of model and implementation on the bod.
- implement ball and object detection on the Omnibot. (but approach is already made)
- field of view is probably limited