Hack Hitchin

Piwars 3.0 Day 3

February 3rd, 2017

Oooooh there is so much I want to share you you all about our newest robot…but can’t. Sorry, sworn to secrecy ūüôĀ

Don’t dismay, here is what I CAN tell you:

Over the last couple of years I’ve assisted in building several wheeled bots and prototypes (actually, counting back in my head its more that I realised).¬†These range from tiny little three omni wheeled mico-pi noon entrants all the way up to our beloved bighak. One thing that they all have in common during the building stage is we haven’t ever built a rig testing station. By that (excluding bighak due to its size and weight) they have all rested on a china mug when performing motor tests. Normally this induces a fair amount of fear in me as the vehicle spins up the dangling wheels to their full speed (not always in the same direction as each other and not always stably…) and having loose wiring precariously close to the rubber grippy tires.

World, say hello to our newest creation:

Assembled Test Bed

Laser Cutting Test Bed

 

It may not be the most photogenic, but this is a big thing! We now have a ‘safe’ way to test our prototype AND drink our cups of tea, something not previously possible.

Now, we’ve had to do this previously but as I’m in charge of the blog I’d thought it required mentioning so that future Pi designs might be tweaked. Every time we come to mount the Pi (or pi camera module) we very quickly remember that the mounting holes are M2.5. If you didn’t already know, M2.5 bolts are not generally available from hardware stores as they are tiny. The smallest I’ve seen is M3, of which I now have a small stock with nylock nuts to pair with. Just to be clear, I’m not saying they are impossible to come by, far from it. A quick google will probably show loads of places to buy them online. What I’m trying to get across (and probably failing) is that not many DIY projects use them and so I don’t tend to hold a stock of them at home. This has previously led us to do something drastic:

Drilling out a Pi Zero mount hole

What you can see here is me finger turning a 3mm drill bit through an existing 2mm mounting hole. I’m using my fingers and not a drill mainly because the drill is cordless and not charged as I had forgotten I’d needed to do this ūüôĀ

Before I get any grief, please don’t try this at home. I’m a responsible adult who will take responsibility if I break my own Pi. I don’t want to be responsible for anyone else who copies me.

 

Wii Classic Controller

Onto the “new” toy,¬†ah the wonders of the second hand market! Last year we used a Wii controller with it’s nunchuk to drive our robot wirelessly. This year we wanted to improve on this as we were basically holding two separate controllers yet only really using one hand/thumb to drive thing. I’ve been researching PS3 controllers and have done a fair few tests with positive results when interfacing with a Pi and Python. Whilst the PS3 controller is ergonomic I don’t like how the thing pairs with the bluetooth adapter. It isn’t a simple button press and requires knowledge of the ‘dark side’ to get it to work. This means if the PS3 controller broke or ran out of juice mid contest we’d be frantically typing on a laptop to try and pair a backup. So, back to the Wii controller it is because this easily pairs each time the robot boots by pressing 2 buttons on the controller. this means we can have many spares and no-one needs divine knowledge as to which one is currently paired.

Whilst I was passing by a favorite second hand shop in town, they happened to have a Wii classic remote going cheap. I knew the Wii had plastic remote holders in the shape of guns and steering wheels and that they had balance boards and the like, but I wasn’t aware that these were made…probably shows just how much use my Wii actually got ūüôĀ

I bought the controller and hurriedly ran home like Charley from the chocolate factory to see if I had purchased something useful or whether I’d wasted my money. I was in luck, the CWIID python module supported it (mind, this took a fair bit of googling and github searching to find the exact text state to request from the module and each button ID to test for).

If you have very good eyes you might be able to see a load of text on the screen behind the controller above. Each one of those is a test for a button state and a print line to report a button pressed.

So, at this point we have a basic test rig and a basic controller input. Next up will be proper coding and hopefully testing.

Posted in Pi Wars, Raspberry Pi, Uncategorized | No Comments »

Piwars 3.0 Day 2

January 25th, 2017

Before we go any further lets agree to keep any costs between us. I wouldn’t want my family knowing exactly what I’ve spent on my hobbies instead of holidays ūüėČ
First putter test

So with that out of the way, the basic drive-train has been decided and building started so next we need to focus on some of the challenges. Golf first as it has peeked our teams interest for most comical effect. Amusingly the photo above actually shows us doing first feasibility tests on using an arm mounted putter on a cheap lightweight servo. When I say putter, I actually mean metal ring with a pencil stuck to it ūüôā

I can’t believe how many ‘unlikely to succeed’¬†ball moving suggestions we have gone through on the golf challenge. It started with¬†the simple yet effective servo mounted putter pausing slightly with a variable power solenoid kicker and ended with gas powered combustion ball launcher. Seriously, someone (probably me) actually thought it might be funny to “fire” the ball….not a good idea, not power adjustable between shots and DEFINITELY not guaranteed to keep the ball touching the ground at all times.

Still, we haven’t actually settled on the putter idea as the solenoid one keeps rearing its little head because it seems ‘simpler’ and ‘less prone to mechanical failure’. On testing the metal putter idea above it was quickly noticed that any competing solenoid idea would either have to have a reasonable mass on the moving arm or be extremely powerful to have any chance of moving the ball any distance. Then comes the adjustable power problem….so, so far the putter is winning.

noir and nanoThe first round of tests were done using an Arduino Mega the team member writing the test code to make a servo move had one to hand, but obviously we won’t have room for such luxury in our bot so the second round of testing will be done on the Arduino Nano, shown with a carefully placed Raspberry Pi NOIR camera in shot. The reason for using Arduino’s to control the servo is basically PWM timing accuracy. Obviously the Raspberry Pi will be in control of the whole system and will tell the Arduino exactly what to do at any point, but why not sub-out some of the¬†low level work to devices that are designed to do this kind of thing day in and day out. That said, the Arduino will also be used for multiple things in combination with the Pi. One such task will be analog to digital conversion as the Pi has no analog GPIO pins and a Nano is a very cheap way to incorporate this feature.

motor kitNow that¬†the drive-train design has settled down, we thought it wise to buy spares of everything. 8x motors, 8x motor controllers (ESC’s) and lots and lots of connectors and wire. Last year we went through soooooo many cheap ESC’s. Since then we have found a decent supplier, albeit from Australia, and have stocked up. Plus it made the delivery cost more efficient, well that is what I’m telling my wife.

Well, onward we go and always attempting to avoid the bunkers ūüėČ

Posted in Pi Wars, Raspberry Pi, Uncategorized | No Comments »

Piwars 3.0 Initial Preparation

January 17th, 2017

Well, after having our entrance accepted maybe we should actually get on and build something.

The Piwars challenges have evolved since the last competition. Some are similar and¬†need only tweaks to the our previous design where as other challenges are new but kind of build on previous years challenges. We’ve been thinking about this for some time (my excuse for not actually doing any work until now) but now is the time to put¬†some parts together and build a drive-able bot.

First things first, planning. Do we dismantle Tito, our old bot, or building from scratch?

Tito Robot

Previous Piwars robot called TTOS aka Tito.

Overwhelming emotions seem to be stopping us destroying our previous creations plus we intend to make our new bot smaller lighter and based on a pi zero so other than wheels and motors (which have been hammered in testing and competing) not much else is transferable.

 

 

 

 

Laser cut frame

Laser cut prototype frame/chassis.

Mark Mellors kindly designed and laser cut a frame onto which we can to attach our motors and ESCs so that we could start putting stuff together. I put together the basics of a wiring loom. Its modular (detachable connectors in key positions) so motors and/or ESCs can be swapped out in case the magical blue smoke is accidentally released ūüôā

We suffered last year from at least one damaged gear box so this year I’d love to have an easily replaceable drive system should the worst happen.

 

 

Prototype wiring loom

Prototype wiring loom

Experience from last year showed that building a robot and being able to drive it competitively are two separate things. We were a little close to the deadline last time as we were still writing….erm I mean tweaking… code on the morning of and in between challenges. So this year we are all very keen to get a drive-able prototype together everyone can practice driving and have confidence that we could actually complete a challenge or two.

Prototype progress so far:

  • Frame laser cut.
  • Motor clamps 3D printed.
  • Motors bolted to frame.
  • Motors wired with detachable connectors to ESC’s and battery.
Prototype part assembled

Prototype part assembled.

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in Pi Wars, Raspberry Pi, Uncategorized | No Comments »

Reflection on Pi wars

December 17th, 2015

What an event! We came away exhausted but with smiles on our faces and three prizes! Here’s how we did in each event:
Skittles – 1st

The skittles challenge was one of the only ones where our innovations really paid off, our attachment worked just as we’d hoped and we got spares on every round. We even managed to get a strike on¬†our practice go! We only had one minor issue- there was a slight issue with one of the rotor motors that meant it didn’t always spin up properly but we managed to overcome this on the day by¬†repeatedly spinning up and slowing down until both rotors were spinning properly. The laser pointer worked great for lining up, knocking the pins down to get the spares was really satisfying, we¬†had so much ball speed we not only knocked the spare pin over, we smashed it into the backboard! (back board added just because of our attachment : – ) We also had a very minor issue with¬†maneuvering. We knew we would be very front heavy, but the front tyres compressed so much that the attachment hit ground, adding friction and reducing the grip the rear tyres had. Luckily Mike¬†had time to make some nice little ptfe skids and put lead ballast in the ‘booster’ battery holder. This meant we could actually maneuver, but it was still slightly challenging to line up sometimes.

score: 8,2  9,1   9,1

 

Speed challenge – 1st


The time spent choosing the motors/voltage/wheel sizes really paid off here, and we got times within 0.1second of what we predicted! Unfortunately we didn’t get the sensor feedback working in time¬†but luckily it wasn’t actually required. Four grippy wheels, tuning the motor speeds to be equal and aiming straight was all that was needed to avoid the sides. We really should have done more¬†tuning beforehand, as we hit the sides on the first few runs whilst dialing the motor speeds in but after that it went straight as an arrow. When we did hit the sides, we just lightly glanced off¬†or continued relatively straight whilst sliding along the sides, so the front bearing guide worked as hoped. Starting at the back of the starting box also allowed us to get some speed up before¬†entering the timed section, saving about 0.1s (fairly significant when your overall time is 1.5s :-). The motors didn’t seem to mind being significantly overvolted for that short period, so we¬†might actually be able to go to an even higher voltage next time, if we can find some suitable motor controllers.

times: 1.618s, 1.54s, 1.526s

 

Proximity – 3rd


This event was a total fluke for us! We didn’t manage to get the code for our secret (blog post to follow), super accurate sensor finished in time so we were just using a regular IR sensor as many¬†others were. In the hour of testing we got on the day, we were getting +/- 5-10mm of noise in the stop positions, so we settled on a fairly conservative target of 13mm. When we got on the course,¬†the judges commented that many robots using IR had really suffered, so we were then even more nervous. On our first run we got 4.5mm! That was a great, lucky start but we were worried, was that just¬†random luck or was the wall colour or reflectivity causing the robot to stop late? If we got 4.5mm+/-5mm or more, we were quite likely to hit the wall on the next run! We decided to risk leaving the code as it was and lined up for another run. We got 4.5mm again! We‚Äôd never been that close or consistent in or practice runs. Maybe the wall reflectivity was actually doing us a big favour. We¬†had originally been testing with a wooden wall, then switched to paper. We had found that the paper might be more consistent but it’s always hard to tell when the results are quite variable. We¬†crossed our fingers and went for the third run: 0.5mm! What a set of results! We were more shocked then anything after the dodgy test performance. It was clearly a fluke but we were just happy we¬†had finished without incurring a fault. We weren’t sure he we’d do in the results, as we’d heard of others getting 0.5mm results and several with consistent few ~3mm scores. In the end we got¬†third.

scores: 4.5mm, 4.5mm, 0.5mm

 

Three point turn – 7th


This was another challenge where we had grand plans of clever sensors that didn’t quite pan out due to being behind with the code. Like the proximity challenge, we spent an hour on the day of the¬†competition tuning the timing in the basic code we had. We knew the floor surface would have quite a strong effect on the turn speed, so we tested on the closest surface we could find: the textured¬†tiled floor. It didn‚Äôt take too long to get the timings pretty close and our test results were surprisingly repeatable. Once we got on the actual playing surface of the challenge though, we¬†quickly found we needed to change a few parameters. On the first one we over shot and drove straight off the platform after the first turn. Luckily there’s just enough time allowed to tune your code¬†once you’ve started the challenge, so we quickly ran back, got the laptop and guessed some new numbers. On the second attempt we were much closer but again slightly went outside the playing surface¬†on the second leg and overshot the finish at the end. Again, we tuned the numbers and went for it again. It wasn’t a perfect run but we at least got back behind the starting line. Dave proved¬†himself as the master of guessing the magic timing numbers , every one of his guesses gave the spot on correction we needed for that element.

times: 16s, 16.04s, 14.5s

 

Obstacle course – 9th


We were quite hopeful of doing well in this challenge as we had speed, grip, ground clearance and a reasonable amount of driving practice under our belt. We weren’t too worried about most of the¬†obstacles as they were less severe than the wooden obstacles we’d attempted in testing; the one unknown was the turntable, it looked like it might be tricky to line up and time the entry. We’d also¬†noticed in some of the previous challenges that the gearbox that started clicking during testing now wasn’t reversing correctly, so the robot didn’t turn around the centre as it usually did. Rob¬†did a good job of compensating for the dodgy gearbox, getting through the first few obstacles with no faults. The gearbox really scuppered us with turntable though, he struggled to line up and the¬†robot didn’t accelerate straight forwards when asked to, causing us to get caught by the rotating bollards. By an unlucky design fluke, the bollards were a close fit with the gap between our wheels¬†and we got wedged. We have nearly enough grip to climb vertical walls so we initially hoped we’d be able to climb out but we then got wedged against the wall and couldn’t move. In retrospect, we¬†should have been clearer on the rules as none of us knew what the penalty was for getting rescued, so we took some time deliberating. If we’d known it was no penalty for a rescue, we would have moved the robot much more quickly and could have got a much faster time. The rest of the course was uneventful, although we were slightly disappointed with the run over the seesaw. In testing,¬†we’d found the robot was fast enough to hit small wooden blocks and fly quite a distance, so we were hoping we could hit the ramp at speed and finish the course in the air. In reality, the dodgy¬†gearbox hindered s again, and Rob couldn’t quite get it lined up as he hoped. We were still in the air over the finish line, but only because we were bouncing… Still, 1:26 with one rescue wasn’t too bad, good enough for 9th place. We shouldn’t dwell too long on the could haves and¬†might have beens, but after looking at the video for our obstacle run, if we‚Äôd rescued the robot immediately after we got stuck, we could have finished in¬†less than a minute with one rescue (no penalties), possibly putting us in first place.

time: 1:26 with one rescue

Pi Noon – second round


Our first round was over very quickly: Rob expertly maneuvered TTOS alongside Bedford Modern then turned in for the kill, popping the balloon in less then ten seconds! The second round didn’t go as well. Mark¬†volunteered to drive this one (mistake?) and we hadn’t had chance to replace the dodgy gearbox (definitely a mistake), so turning was hampered.¬†Westpark Club had the interesting idea of mounting the¬†balloon/spike on the back of their robot, pointing forwards, making it easier for them to keep the balloon out of the way. After a short period of jostling for position, with TTOS failing to get¬†around their side/back, the two robots came together. Westpark Club had lined up better and burst our balloon first. We were out.

Line following – not placed
Before the day we had made the mount for the line sensor and got some simple code written, but it was completely untested. As soon as we saw the course we knew it was pointless to distract ourselves with trying to get it working. The course was so narrow and twisty that we would really struggle to get around it. We had designed our sensor mount to work best on relatively fast line following courses, with no turns over 90 degrees and lots of space between turns, like the course was last year. Those courses favour a sensor that is well in front of the centre of mass. This tight course strongly favoured robots with the sensors very close to the centre of turning, allowing them to follow the very twisty bends and switch backs. So a no score on this one.

 

Code – 20th

Our low position in the coding probably reflects more on how little coding we’d done when we submitted it than the actual quality of the code. We’ll do better next year!

 

Aesthetics – 9th

Given we were one of the few entries that didn’t have a mass of wires sticking out, we were hoping to score higher in this challenge.

_MG_8870

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Build Quality – 9th

Like the aesthetics ‘challenge’, we were hoping to do fairly well here, as the core robot was solid and had some nice features. ¬†Maybe not actually having enough room for the wiring and connectors let us down, or maybe we didn’t ‘sell’ the design enough to the judges.

 

Blogging – 12th

Not a bad score, considering we didn’t start until pretty late in the day and some of the other blogs were excellent.

 

Overall – 3rd!

A fantastic result for our first time at the competition! With a bit more consistency and preparation, we’re hoping for higher next year

ūüôā

 

Other awards

Most featured
We knew we’d got more attachments than many of the other competitors but hadn’t considered this was an award during the run up to the event, so we were quite surprised when we were announced as the winner!

 

Posted in Pi Wars, Raspberry Pi, Uncategorized | No Comments »

Progress – the final straight?

December 2nd, 2015

 

IMG_20151201_205322

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The team’s been working hard the last couple of days. Let’s compare the progress against the job list from Sunday:

Wiring in the new body:

  • 12v power/motors: done (Mark ¬†+ Paul)
  • 5v power: done (Paul)
  • Analogue signals: half done (Mark)
  • Pwm signals: not started
  • Lcd: done (Dave)
  • Other digital I/O: not started

Obstacle course:

  • Practice driving: not done

Skittles:

  • Mount arms to the servos on the ball launcher: done (Mike)
  • All the wiring (both power and signal)*: mostly done, some routing issues (Mike)
  • Write some code that allows the wii mote to control the servos and the spinner motors*: not started

Pi Noon:

  • Design and print a wire holder*: done (Laser cut, Paul)
  • Practice driving: not done

IMG_20151201_225143

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Straight line speed test:

  • Design and print the distance sensor holder / bumper: done (Mark)
  • Design and print the second (boost) battery holder: not done
  • Turn my pseudo code into real code: not done

IMG_20151201_224522

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three point turn:

  • Finish designing the camera/line sensor mount and print it out: done (Mark)
  • Design and print the beacon: started (Mike)
  • Get the basic code working*: Dave and Rob have spent two evenings finding and fixing bugs. Getting there but still lots to do
  • Tune the timings*: not started

IMG_20151130_220847

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Line follower:

  • Finish designing the line sensor mount and print it out* done: (Mark)
  • Turn my pseudo code into real code*: not done
  • Tune it*: not done

IMG_20151201_223814

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Proximity alert

  • Turn my pseudo code into real code*: not done
  • Design and print the attachment for our probe: not done
  • Tune it:not done

* = high priority

T-4 days? Agggghhhhhhh!

Posted in Pi Wars, Raspberry Pi, Uncategorized | No Comments »

The Flinger takes shape….

November 30th, 2015

As part of night’s work the Ball Flinger has started to take shape….

Ball Flinger

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

First stage of assembly

 

Fly wheel assembly

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The flywheel assembled with kevlar anti expansion strengthening.

 

 

General view with ball pusher arms installed

Ball pusher servos and arms installed… now to wire it up and attach the speed controllers

 

Posted in Pi Wars, Raspberry Pi, Uncategorized | No Comments »

Mad dash

November 29th, 2015

Like many other teams, we’ve now appreciating how much there is left to do with only a week before the competition. On the bright side, we’re all managing to put in a bit of crucial extra time. Tonight we met at our space (I think for the first time we’ve ever hired it on a Sunday) to work on our modules:

I (Mark) was working on the wire routing, with Paul’s help:

2015-11-29 20.02.19

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(Our speed controllers don’t quite fit, so we lost time hacking at the prints to make room)

 

Dave (also with Paul’s help) was working on getting the LCD display working, so that we can easily see what menu/challenge code we’re running:

2015-11-29 20.02.49

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(Hopefully we can get a video of it working tomorrow, it’s looking really slick)

 

Rob was working on turning my terrible code into something that actually works:

2015-11-29 20.02.26

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mike was working on his solid looking ball launcher for the skittles challenge:

2015-11-29 20.01.59

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And here’s the robot as it stands now, a nice looking but empty body shell and an overly complicated RC car:

2015-11-29 22.20.15

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What’s left to do? ¬†well, by challenge:

Obstacle course:

  • We could enter this now but it’d be nice to have all the components in the new body shell. That needs a load of wiring doing
  • Practice driving

Skittles:

  • Mount arms to the servos on the ball launcher
  • All the wiring (both power and signal)*
  • Write some code that allows the wii mote to control the servos and the spinner motors*

Pi Noon:

  • Design and print a wire holder*
  • Practice driving

Straight line speed test:

  • We could also enter this now but we really want to do it autonomously
  • Design and print the distance sensor holder / bumper
  • Design and print the second (boost) battery holder
  • Turn my pseudo code into real code

Three point turn:

  • Finish designing the camera/line sensor mount and print it out
  • Design and print the beacon
  • Get the basic code working*
  • Tune the timings*

Line follower:

  • Finish designing the line sensor mount and print it out*
  • Turn my pseudo code into real code*
  • Tune it*

Proximity alert

  • Turn my pseudo code into real code*
  • Design and print the attachment for our probe
  • Tune it

* = high priority

T-6 days? Agghhhh!

Posted in Pi Wars, Raspberry Pi | No Comments »

Driving onwards

November 28th, 2015

On the previous drivetrain blog post we’d found that cordless drill motors were excessively large and powerful for a piwars robot. We continued the drivetrain search, this time looking for smaller motors that could work in a one-per-wheel (four motors total) configuration. From last time we know that we want a total power output of around 120watts, or 30watts per motor. At this point we were hoping that we could use the small ‘1000rpm’ gearmotors we’ve used on small combat robots before.

 

_MG_7522alt yellow and black colour scheme

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

They give our beetleweight (~1.5kg) combat robot great performance and it looks like other competitors are looking at them too. From previous testing we also knew they had a stall current of ~6A at 12V (72W input) so they look like they might work here. As before, we went to enter them into the drivetrain calculator , but found the 1000rpm motors weren’t listed in their motor database.So this time ¬†we put together our own numerical model (spreadsheet) of the torque, acceleration etc, allowing us to change the parameters and see what happens to the performance:¬†This is something we’ve used successfully many times before, for combat robots to dragsters:

acceleration calculator

So they’re ok but it looks like they top out very quickly. The top speed is much below the 12m/s we were aiming for. What can we do about that? The usual options are: change the gear ratio (complex for us) or use larger wheels (increasing effective gearing, is more easily acheived but increases the stress on the motors). Another solution is running the motors above their rated voltage (something thats very common in combat robots). This also increases the stress on the motors(overheating). Playing with the drivetrain calc again, we found that increasing the wheel size worked up to a point (about where the motors stopped having enough torque to wheelspin), then the overall time started to increase again:

wheel size

accleration results 1

 

 

 

 

 

 

So we can get a good improvement there but its still not quite as fast as we’d hoped for (1.2s). As expected, changing the voltage also worked but running the motors at 36V is a long way from their rated voltage.

Playing with the inputs more showed a combination of increasing the voltage and the wheel size could get us pretty close to target:

accleration results 2

 

 

 

 

 

 

24v 95mm traction limited

 

Picking the 95mm, 24V design, we can see from the graph that we have more than enough torque (we’re traction limited) for most of the time and the finish speed is pretty high at ~9m/s, much more than we’ll need for the other challenges. Since the 95mm, 12V performance still looks pretty good, we now wondered if we could run at 12V for most of the challenges, just adding the extra battery pack for the speed challenge. This would reduce weight and stress on the motors when we don’t need the extra speed. As before, we quickly mocked up a drivetrain test platform to confirm the model:

second concept

laser cut chassis

 

 

 

 

 

 

Well that looks promising ūüôā The robot is about as fast as before but it’s now much easier to fit the electronics in. Reliability seems good, apart from the occasional wheel falling off… It also has a tendency to wheelie or roll over, so we’ll have to be careful for component placement to keep the centre of gravity low or limit the peak deceleration a little. Its still a little difficult to get the robot to reliably move slowly though (like we’ll need for the proximity challenge) but now the motors are smaller, we can fit smaller wheels just for that challenge, effectively changing the gear ratio and slowing the robot down:

second concept - small wheels configuration

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So that’s the drive train sorted, better get the code started now ūüôā

 

Posted in Pi Wars, Raspberry Pi | No Comments »

Raspberry Pi Zombie

November 27th, 2015

or “How I Fell in DooDoo and Came Up Smelling of Raspberries”

OK. Picture the scene. It’s late on a Friday night, and you’ve been hacking on your Pi Wars robot all evening. It’s been productive. Between you and co-roboteer, you’ve ironed out glitches in your Remote Control code, you’ve¬†soldered up the wiring looms, and you’ve even designed and printed custom parts to mount the pi onto the baseplate you laser cut earlier. You’re robot building machines. Go you. High fives all round.

Flushed with success, you both decide to power up the pi and and take it for a spin. So, you plug in the USB cable that you wired up to¬†that adjustable 5v regulator earlier to step down the power from the lipo battery, and… uh. I’m pretty sure the activity light doesn’t normally do *that* when it’s booting. what the..? yank the power! yank the freaking power!

Welcome To Cockupsville. Population: You

facepalm

OK. wait a second. what just happened? Well, remember that 5v regulator you wired up earlier? The key word there was adjustable, Dingus. And you didn’t check it, did you? You buzzed every single other thing you soldered, but you forgot to check that the output voltage was actually, y’know, ADJUSTED to 5v. So you just sent how many volts into your Pi? 12? Excellent work. well done. Slow hand clap.

You decide to check the damage, hoping against hope that the Pi just kind of wouldn’t notice that you just rammed 12v up it’s tiny USB port and you can pretend like nothing happened. After all, no blue smoke came out, so …¬†fine, right? Fine. Probably fine.

Except, no. Adjusting the voltage regulator to 5v (triple checked – bit late now, but whatevs) and trying to boot again does nothing. Well, not exactly *nothing*, but only some flickering of the activity light and no actual booting. Saddest of sad faces.

Alas Poor Pi

yorick

So that’s that then. You’ve fried your pi. It has gone toes up. Time to give it a viking funeral.

But. BUT. A bit of Googling seems to suggest a few things:

  1. There is such a thing as a polyfuse
  2. They can heal themselves when they’ve tripped.
  3. Actually flipping *HEAL THEMSELVES*
  4. The Pi has one on the USB power input.

So you leave it an hour and, with great hope in your dumb little heart, you plug it in.

Nothing. Just a bunch more flickering. Probing across the polyfuse seems to suggest that it’s maybe a bit better, but stil a loooong way away from being useful as part of a functioning computer. sigh.

M. Night Shyamalan style plot twist

dr_frankenstein

Fast forward two weeks. You’ve nearly forgiven yourself for frying a perfectly innocent Pi. You’ve ordered a replacement and plumbed it in to your Bot, and you’re sitting at your desk idly surfing the web when you see out of the corner of your eye that poor little dead Pi, half hidden under a pile of papers. “I wonder…”, you, um, wonder.

So, you dig out a phone charger and a cable, and you plug it in. <DEITY> be praised! It’s booting. It lives! You’re like the Doctor freaking Frankenstein of consumer electronics! Except that he made a sort of patchwork quilt of chopped up people and you’ve reanimated a credit card sized computer. Same thing apart from that though. Probably.

Step aside Pi Zero, I give you Pi Zombie!

zombie_pi

So, there you have it. You too can get away with stuffing 12v into a 5v hole, if you’re very , VERY lucky. But what have we learned? Well, we’ve learned:

  • If someone gives you an adjustable voltage regulator and tells you that it’s set to 5v, don’t believe a damn word of it.
  • Stick your multimeter across EVERYTHING.
  • Raspberry Pis don’t like 12v up them, Corporal Jones.
  • Polyfuses are an actual thing. They freaking HEAL THEMSELVES, people. Insane.
  • Sometimes you can fall in the doodoo and come up smelling of Raspberries.

Posted in Pi Wars, Raspberry Pi, Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

Technical Drawings: Interface

November 26th, 2015

Since there’re multiple people all working on different elements of the hardware, we’ve found it useful to share CAD and technical drawings describing the key interfaces. For example, here’s the latest drawing should the overall layout and the key mechanical interfaces:

piwars v0.4

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Posted in Pi Wars, Raspberry Pi | No Comments »