PDA

View Full Version : CP/M help needed for Hubot robot



rebeltaz
May 9th, 2010, 11:21 PM
I just got a Hubotics Hubot robot (http://www.robotsandcomputers.com/robots/hubot.htm) that runs the CP/M 2.2 operating system. I am still looking for the control software for this robot, but when I find it, I am going to need some documentation on programming it. Does anyone know where I can find such as this?

paul
May 10th, 2010, 04:17 AM
I haven't heard that name in a long time. I interviewed at Hubotics in Carlsbad, CA in 1983 for a mechanical engineering job. I initially had no idea what products they made but when they showed me their "domestic robot" I couldn't believe they were serious. They called me a few weeks later to see if I would come in for some casual drafting work but I turned it down, despite being unemployed.

One of the items they talked about during my interview was adding arms. You can see the boss where it was supposed to go - it looks like they never completed the design.

VintageComputerman
May 10th, 2010, 06:07 AM
Only 110 lbs, lol. Very lug-able. I bet that one is worth over $1,500.00 at least.

Dwight Elvey
May 10th, 2010, 06:24 AM
I just got a Hubotics Hubot robot (http://www.robotsandcomputers.com/robots/hubot.htm) that runs the CP/M 2.2 operating system. I am still looking for the control software for this robot, but when I find it, I am going to need some documentation on programming it. Does anyone know where I can find such as this?

Hi
Do You have disk for it? If so, often an ascii search will reveal something.
If not, get Forth running on it and then start poking at some of the I/O
addresses.
Dwight

ziloo
May 10th, 2010, 11:29 AM
Hi
Do You have disk for it? If so, often an ascii search will reveal something.
If not, get Forth running on it and then start poking at some of the I/O
addresses.
Dwight

You know Dwight....one of these days you have to take the time and
write a nice "Diagnosis Methods for Small Computers" manual!!!
You usually have very interesting but brief remarks about fault finding in
computers. If I were not aware of how much you knew, I would not
ask!!

Anyways, would you please explain more about the use of Forth...

Thank you

ziloo

barythrin
May 10th, 2010, 02:21 PM
Extremely cool! Are you a member of any local robotics groups? I'd be surprised if not but certainly I'm sure you'd find some help there or a robotics forum from interested parties. (Though here is a good start also since it's a fairly standard computer processor and OS). Either way very cool find!

rebeltaz
May 11th, 2010, 09:20 PM
I appreciate all the replies...

paul: They were serious, but apparently a little over estimated the demand.

Dwight: I agree with ziloo... please... elaborate.

barythrin: I live out in the country in the deep South so needless to say there aren't many (or any that I am aware of) robotics clubs around here. Besides that, aside from these forums, I am more of a loner so I doubt I would associate with any anyway. I did find a robotic guy that is helping me find the disk and with the hardware aspects. But I knew if anyone could help with the CP/M portion, it would be you guys.

Dr_Acula
May 12th, 2010, 05:12 AM
What a fantastic robot! I guess a schematic is out of the question? I did a quick search but all I found was a few other links looking for schematics.

I'm sitting here surrounded by CP/M 2.2. The disk is probably going to be the issue - what sort of disk drive, and what CP/M parameters were used for the disk drive. Here's hoping you can find some software. Anything really, just so you can get an A> prompt.

rebeltaz
May 12th, 2010, 10:45 PM
What a fantastic robot! I guess a schematic is out of the question? I did a quick search but all I found was a few other links looking for schematics.

I'm sitting here surrounded by CP/M 2.2. The disk is probably going to be the issue - what sort of disk drive, and what CP/M parameters were used for the disk drive. Here's hoping you can find some software. Anything really, just so you can get an A> prompt.

Yeah... I've been looking for technical information on this thing for quite a while. There's a guy (Robert Doerr) who does repairs on these and the only thing he is going by are block diagrams and basic reversed-engineered schematics he's done himself.

From what he tells me, the drive was a standard 360k Shugart SA455 5.25" floppy. As for the parameters, I have no clue.

Dwight Elvey
May 13th, 2010, 08:52 AM
[QUOTE=rebeltaz;139952]I appreciate all the replies...


Dwight: I agree with ziloo... please... elaborate.

Hi
Without a boot disk, you'll need to do a little more work. Bootstrapping such a machine,
to CP/M, is a little difficult but can be done. Analyzing the ROMs on board will give
one a starting place. Once you can do a first load from disk and write back to disk,
one can install CP/M without too much difficulty. I realize it seems like a massive
project but I've done it on a machine with nothing more than schematics. You most
likely have enough code in the ROMs to get the disk going. I didn't even have that.
As for using Forth. I put some notes together with my thoughts:
Why Forth?
1. Most small Forths are actually small
enough that, within a couple weeks, one can
fully understand how they work. Could you
say that about your C compiler?
2. Small Forths like EFORTH only need 32
code words to be implemented on any particular
machine ( Already done for 8080/8085/Z80 ).
3. Forth can run on the target machine with
minimum resources. Most can run on an 8080
machine with about 6-7K for the Forth engine
and about 1K of additional RAM.
4. Tethered Forth can run with as few as a
100 bytes or so.
5. Forth is both interactive and compiling,
at the same time. Test code can be quickly
entered and run. Incremental write, test
and debug is very fast at getting to
working code.
6. Forth is modular with no boiler plate need,
like most other modular languages.
7. Forth uses a simple input interpreter that
doesn't have any ambiguity in what is typed
in. ( What you see is what you get )
8. Forth enables one to quickly write/modify
the language itself to become the problem
set ( there is no distinction between the
Forth interpreter/compiler and the code you
just wrote, unless you want it to ).
9. Execution is left to right, top
to bottom. This makes debugging easier.
10. It is like having a monitor on steroids.
Why Not Forth?
1. No type checking!
2. RPN is not to familiar to most!
3. You maintain stacks or you crash!
4. You don't get it!