Alt-BEAM Archive
Message #09198
To: beam@sgiblab.sgi.com
From: Blumojo13@aol.com
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 19:57:37 EST
Subject: [alt-beam] Re: New Beam Page
In a message dated 1/9/2000 5:59:57 AM Pacific Standard Time,
sparkyg@seark.net writes:
> http://www3.telus.net/rfws/beam/sparky/index.html
all it says is Host Unreachable
blumojo13
9199 Fri, 14 Jan 2000 21:14:45 EST [alt-beam] Re: D1 beam@sgiblab.sgi.com JVernonM@aol.com In a message dated 1/14/00 6:52:29 PM Eastern Standard Time,
Bumper314@aol.com writes:
> ok...im looking at Wilfs solution here to the D1...and i feel stupid.I cant
> see where to hook up the LED. it will run if I put in on the output + and
-
> listed but i thought he said it clicked over when the voltage of the solar
> cell was 1/3 the voltage in the cap. Am i wrong here?
>
You may have your solar cell inputs wrong. I did the same thing and got a
SIMD1 that comes on in light and snaps off in the dark. Make sure that your
negative side of the circuit is hooked up straight to the cell and cap and
inverter (this is where I screwed up, because most of these BEAM circuits
switch on the negative side and have positive hooked straight). The positive
side of the cell is hooked straight to the diode and the input of the
inverter. The positive side of the diode (the side with the line) goes to the
positive side of the cap and over to the inverter positive connection. The
output of the inverter goes to the positive connection of your load (Pummer,
Bicore, etc). If you want it to run like all other BEAM circuits, run the
inverter output to another inverter input. The output of the second inverter
will then be hooked to the negative rail of your load and positive is hooked
up straight to cell and cap as usual. Hope this helps.
See ya,
Jim
http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Exhibit/8281/beamart.html
ICQ# 55657870
9200 Fri, 14 Jan 2000 13:43:30 -0500 [alt-beam] Re: SV: BEAM LEGO was microcore experimentation kit beam@sgiblab.sgi.com "Peter A. Low" If my memory serves me correctly, LEGO provided funding to the MIT lab that
produced the technologies for Mindstorms. In this situation, the lab was
acting as a research and development arm of LEGO.
IANAL, but I don't think that saying "LEGO" in the list is a big deal,
although the company would likely take issues to someone selling a product
called "BEAM LEGO". It just happens to be easier to type "LEGO" than to
type "a modular system composed of reconfigurable, interlocking, vertically
stacked elements."
At 04:54 PM 1/14/00 +0100, you wrote:
>I am curious, have you guys had trouble with LEGO being b*tchy in the past?
>Living in Denmark - where LEGO was invented - I wouldn't hesitate just
>dialing them up asking a coupla questions. After all, the mindstorm kit was
>developed in cooperation with MIT, so one should think that they were
>interested in further development. At the University of Aalborg, Denmark
>where I am a student, the engineering departments are rapidly shifting to
>LEGO in favor of making stuff up themselves, since it is a very flexible,
>powerful and rapid prototyping tool.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Thomas, Denmark.
>
> > 8< snip> What about BEAM LEGO?
> >
> > Well, you gotta know that I approve of such a thing, as all my walkers are
> > built from LEGOs!
> >
> > Herr Tilden does bring up a good point. Although the LEGO Mindstorms came
> > from just such an idea. Gotta avoid the legal caca that would ensue.
> >
> > Since the single Nv circuit can be built on a very small board,
> > it sould be
> > relativly easy to make a large number of these boards for a
> > reasonable price
> > and sell them. I'll work us some stuff on pricing and such.
> >
> > Richard
> >
> >
Home