Newsgroups: comp.robotics
Path: brunix!sgiblab!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!rand.org!vortex.com!lauren
From: lauren@vortex.com (Lauren Weinstein)
Subject: Armatron vs. Mobile Armatron
Message-ID: <CHLoCt.tp@vortex.com>
Organization: Vortex Technology, Topanga, CA, U.S.A.
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1993 06:22:04 GMT
Lines: 33

Greetings.  For those who have never played with either of these 
devices, it might be worthwhile for me to point out the significant
(major) differences between them.

The original Armatron used a completely mechnical system (with,
I believe, only *one* motor) to control all arm motions.  The arm
itself was mounted on a stationary platform.  The all-mechnical
system made interfacing for computer control a mess.  I recall
reading an article many years ago that detailed the process--I decided
it wasn't worth it at the time and never bought the unit.

Sometime later, Radio Shack started selling the Mobile Armatron.  The most
obvious external difference was that the arm was now mounted on a moving
platform, with separate right and left drive motors, providing excellent
mobility.  An even more important difference was that control functions were
now electrical.  The unit has a remote control box (which has separate
switches for all arm controls and motion controls, so you can have
simultaneous movements) connected to the main unit by a conventional ribbon
cable.

Interfacing the Mobile Armatron would be a snap.  I bought one 
when Radio Shack was closing them out, but never actually did the
interfacing.  The current thread of messages has me thinking about
it again--but of course radio control and proper sensing devices
would be a must.  And now of course a tiny TV camera would be easy
as well--perhaps mounted at the end of the arm?  (I know, I've been
watching too much NASA Select lately...)  

Anyway, even though it's "just" a toy, it's a really nifty toy.
If anyone has any pointers or stories about actually interfacing
these things, I'd appreciate hearing about them.  Thanks.

--Lauren--
