Forum Replies Created

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • Author
  • in reply to: Water flow and rain not working very well #112126



    Thanks so much for responding. You are a gem. Your dedication to this long standing project is amazing.

    I do indeed have the correct driver installed.

    I solved the problem by scouring the forum and collecting what I call your kernels of wisdom regarding proper set up and operation of the sandbox.

    With the addition of -rer 10 110 to SARndbox’s command line I am now getting excellent rain response by holding my hand with fingers spread (very important).

    I added the configuration files that you explain in your “AR Sandbox Post Installation Instructions” which map the 1 and 2 keys for calibrating the projector and for the adding and removing water globally. It works great.

    One question I have is related the the height of the hand over the box. If my hand is held low, the software thinks my hand is the surface of the sand and maps it white which obscures the image on the sand. I am guessing that the setting of -rer 10 110 might not be quite correct. What setting should I use so that a hand held over the top won’t be color mapped as snow? Is this a result of the way I calibrated?

    I will be showing off our AR Sandbox next weekend at a Washington State Science and Engineering Fair at Bremerton High School in Bremerton Washington. This Sandbox was funded by several STEM grants to the Bremerton Historic Ships Association, aka the USS Turner Joy Naval Ship Museum.

    Thanks again for your continued support of this great educational tool.

    — greg

    in reply to: Does camera have to be at same height #111154


    OK, thanks for you response.

    Yes, I agree that ease of construction is definitely a factor in setting the height of the camera.

    I re-read the instructions a little more carefully and I think I understand why Oliver recommends that the camera be located 40″ above the sand. The Kinect camera has a 90 degree field of view and the vertical resolution is roughly proportional to the height of the camera squared. The closer the camera is to the sand the better the resolution. In particular the better the vertical resolution is as it degrades quickly as the distance to the sand increases. Because of the 90 degree field of view of the camera and its 4:3 aspect ratio, with a sandbox that is 40″ x 30″ the camera will exactly cover the area of the sand when it is at a height of 40″.

    Oliver’s original instructions were based on using the discontinued projector model MX631ST with an adjustable throw ratio of .9 to 1/08. A throw ratio of 1 would require the projector to be at 40″ from the sand to project a 40″ wide image. The current model which is the closest to the 631ST is model MW632ST with an adjustable throw ratio of .72 to .87. By adjusting the optical zoom and the throw ratio the 632ST (according to the manual that came with the projector) will project an image size of 30″ x 40″ from a height of 36″ to 43″ from the sand. The BenQ manual says “All measurements are approximate and may vary from the actual sizes.” A little experimentation is required.

    If I understand this correctly,the camera needs to be at 40″ from the sand and with the MW632ST projector it needs to be at what ever convenient height between 36″ to 43″ that will just cover the sandbox. Placing them both at 40″ might work just fine.

    in reply to: USB problems with Kinect #110886


    2nd Update:

    I found that the problem was a combination of probably the wrong usb port on the computer and the bigger problem was either not enough current from the 12V power supply or a bad cable. I tried all of the usb ports on the computer and found one that connected to the camera. Then I noticed that if I moved the cable that it would disconnect and then if I moved it again it might connect. The Kinect to usb adapter I was using had a 1 amp power supply. Some of my research into my problems revealed that some people have had problems with only 1 amp power supplies. So, I built my own adapter using a 3.5 amp 12Vdc power supply. It’s now working and there doesn’t seem to be any sensitivity to cable movement. I think the problem is solved but I’m not real sure of what solved it.

    in reply to: USB problems with Kinect #110885


    I discovered that my attempt to get the camera to work with windows was errant. I downloaded the wrong Windows SDK. I have now installed version 1.8 for a XBox 360 camera. I have also installed Webcam Zone Trigger and verified that the camera does work.

    So, the issue I am having must be with the usb controller. The computer is an Alienware X51 R2 gaming computer. It’s in a small form factor case and has only one PCIe connector for the graphics card so it’s not possible to install a separate usb controller card. I’m either going to have to find a way to use the existing usb controller or get another computer.

    Would an external USB hub work?

    Anyone out there been able to get it to work with Intel 8 series/C220 usb controllers?

    in reply to: USB problems with Kinect #110884


    I getting the error
    terminate called after throwing an instance of ‘std::runtime_error’
    what(): Kinect::Camera::Camera: Less than 0 Kinect camera devices detected

    I’m using a Kinect Model 1473
    The computer is an 3.5Ghz i3 machine with 6GB Ram running Linux Mint and all the other software required
    The usb controllers are Intel 8 series/C220
    I’ve tried all of the usb 2 and 3 ports on the computer
    I can see the Motor and Audio devices when running lsusb but do not see the Camera
    The green light on the camera is blinking slowly continuously
    To check out if the camera is working, I installed the Kinect Windows SDK on another machine with Win10 and I can see the camera on the windows machine but I also see on the device manager that as long as the camera is connected to the windows machine there is something that is connecting and disconnecting but I can’t tell what. As this happens the device manager refreshes every 5 seconds. This has me thinking that the camera is defective??

    Any thoughts?

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)