I would love to. The catch is that the camera came with a custom made cable that directly hooks into it. The USB3 capability gives really low latency (<5 milliseconds if I remember right) and it has a really wide angle (70 degrees?). I also can't switch cameras without causing difficulties using my existing training data.
That said, I've only got about 2 days of proper data so far with this setup so an alternate camera could be somewhat possible. Research so far does agree that it is USB3 causing the interference. I was trying to do USB because it makes it really easy to port between platforms, but I notice that this particular camera module gives me roughly similar speeds over USB2 legacy ports. Does anyone know of a good wide angle USB camera (60+ degrees) that can deliver 224x224 with low latency (<5-10 millisecond)? Also, thank you Kevin & Pete. On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 8:14 PM Pete Soper via TriEmbed < [email protected]> wrote: > The aluminum foil should be replaced with a good USB cable that has the > "bulges" indicating RF chokes. Adding additional RF chokes to the cable on > the end closest to the camera may help further. The GPS cable should > probably get an RF choke or two too. My final suggestion is to hit the > camera with an eight pound sledge and buy a different one that has an FCC > label. > -Pete > > On 4/30/19 10:33 AM, Charles West via TriEmbed wrote: > > Hello from the North! > > I'm still working on the golf course robot. Recently I've run into a > rather odd issue. When I put everything together for my 1/8 scale RC car > platform, my GPS module refused to converge. I spent a solid 4 days > debugging it only to eventually discover that the problem appeared to be > that my USB 3 camera was putting out large amounts of RF interference of a > spectrum suitable to interfere with my GPS even when there was a metal > ground plane between the GPS and the rest of the equipment. > > Eventually, a combination of wrapping the camera in metal tape, placing > the GPS with a ground plane elevated way above the rest of the robot and > wrapping the camera's cable in aluminum foil finally got the GPS to > converge. The only problem is, the accuracy of the GPS is far worse than > in the previous version of the robot. Originally, I got within a 2-3 > meters with an occasional drift. Now it squiggles all over the place. > > Does anyone know what I should try next to get decent performance and/or > hunt down any interference for the GPS? > > Thanks, > Charlie West > > _______________________________________________ > Triangle, NC Embedded Computing mailing list > > To post message: [email protected] > List info: http://mail.triembed.org/mailman/listinfo/triembed_triembed.org > TriEmbed web site: http://TriEmbed.org > To unsubscribe, click link and send a blank message: > mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe > <[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe> > > > _______________________________________________ > Triangle, NC Embedded Computing mailing list > > To post message: [email protected] > List info: http://mail.triembed.org/mailman/listinfo/triembed_triembed.org > TriEmbed web site: http://TriEmbed.org > To unsubscribe, click link and send a blank message: mailto: > [email protected]?subject=unsubscribe > >
_______________________________________________ Triangle, NC Embedded Computing mailing list To post message: [email protected] List info: http://mail.triembed.org/mailman/listinfo/triembed_triembed.org TriEmbed web site: http://TriEmbed.org To unsubscribe, click link and send a blank message: mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe
