spacejunk,
You missed the relay coil field suppression diode to prevent frying the driver transistor when the current stops flowing in the relay and it opens. Figure $0.05 for the 1N4001 didoe.
Just a thought.
Regards,
TCIII
… and he forgot the board to assemble the parts on, and the connector for the battery and load connections, and the servo lead to get connected to the ssc-32, and the shipping/gas to get all the parts from the store to his house, and lastly he forgot to factor in the $3/hr rate he charges his time out at to make a comparable superjunk switch for < $20 when he’s done.
LOL … that’s funny stuff.
You’re joking right… lol
It would be cheaper and easier to use because it only need a high or low signal. All the parts are commanly avalible.
Why would anybody consider making/assembling their own “comparable superjunk” robots when nice complete factory built ones can be purchased? 
The add for the picoswitch should be “no more retro-fitting spacejunk” 
Zoomkat if I get the intent of your post, your reply is taking the example out of context and then to an extreme degree. At the simple level, for an experienced hobbyist the knowledge and parts to do this are typically readily at hand, and there is always the do it yourself satisfaction level. For a relative newcomer to hobby robotics and general electronics, which the orriginal poster would appear to be based on the nature of his question(s), the over simplified babble of a replacement circuit for a pico switch coupled with a shot at Jim about loosing a $20 sale (of which he probably makes all of $2 to $3) just begged for a reality injection. If the person has to actually figure out what the heck he was told to do in the first place, travel to a radio shack to maybe find the parts required, figure out how to wire it up and solder it together, and then find the error (like a missing recirc. diode on the relay coil) that keeps eating transistors… $20 for a plug and play almost no brainer solution gets real cheap real fast. Even if you place no value on your time if you have to go out and source all the parts from zero you would still be real close to $20 real cost. This is a lot like the guy some months ago who was complaining about the power switch cable being a rip-off, he just didn’t have a clue about the real cost of making something real. Do it yourself is great fun and every once in a while it can be a cheaper solution than some canned product IF you happen to have everything you need sitting right at hand. Most of the time though, in my opinion, you pay for the experience… which is all fine and good and fun so long as you don’t delude yourself into thinking you are saving a buck in some way.
I think insinuating a “relative newcomer to hobby robotics and general electronics” can only handle a “plug and play almost no brainer solution” is a little bit off base. People learn by doing simple projects like the one described. As the person said he wanted to be able to turn on/off three different lighting effects, $60 to do the job is a little bit expensive in my mind. A little learning DIY could save most of that cost.
$60 if he wanted to turn each one on/off independantly, $20 to control all three at once, did he specify which?? 
The below discussion is very similar and apparently ended with DIY success.
First of all, thanks to everyone for the comments and discussion.
Being a newcomer to building robotics myself, I am learning, and I appreciate the time taken to offer insight to my question.
From this discussion, I understand what a pico switch can do and how to make my own from the different parts which better enables me to plan out exactly how I will go about setting up three different lighting effects (independent of each other - so yes, I’d turn them on or off separately.) I now feel I have a better grasp on the whole idea from listening (reading) your responses. Just goes to show that a little research goes a long way…as Einstein once said…“If we knew what we were doing, it would not be called research.”
Just so you know, although I am new to all this, I do have both motivation and interest to learn so the more knowledge shared, the better. I’m working on my PhD right now in Environmental Science and not too long ago had the chance to work aboard a ship on the Pacific for 18 days with Jason 2, the underwater robotic submersible out of Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. (Jason2 is a tethered ROV with 2 robotic arms and a drill sled for coring samples from the bottom of the ocean 1.5 miles deep.) It was that experience which made me want to get into learning and building my own terrestrial rover and robotic arm…then later after learning the basics, maybe I’ll try to build an small ROV for ocean research. Would Lynxmotion ever offer an ROV kit for water use? There’s a college competition every year with the Office of Naval Research to build a better ROV…and I am sure many would be interested.
Anyways, I figured with my first robot build, I’d attempt something simple…with lighting effects. Once I know how to do that, then later I can progress to more sensors and things that may actually be more useful for an exploratory or scientific robot.
So thanks for all the input. And for those wondering…I decided to go with two pico switches right now…then maybe attempt to make a third “superjunk” to be able to compare results.
We don’t have any plans to make under water robots.
First off I did not insinuate any such thing and you have managed to sidestep the point. Hmmm. My POINT is a relative newcomer to electronics who places any significant value on his time isn’t going to build a pico switch for $20 by the time they have it working. If the point in the exercise is to learn more about electronics and build your way to a solution then great, the value you get for your time spent may be worth the effort. I would be inclined to agree with you however that about the time someone is going to buy 3 or 4 of the pico switches the cost vs. learning curve to replace them with custom electronics is definately going to lead most hobbyists to the do-it-yourself route. Oh, and re: your link, I would not exactly place Chunga at the top of the noob list at the point he was asking for ideas in that thread.
Anyway, oceansci, underwater ROV would be pretty cool project. I seem to remember we had a discussion about this awhile back so if you are interested you might want to search. seems like there was a link or two referenced as well in the thread. do you have a link to the competition you reference? I would be interested to see if there are any non-tethered underwater ROVs that can send video back, or more specifically how they manage to do that. Heh. Also, building an arm that is sealed up enough to work under water without shorting out must be pretty interesting as well.
You mean this discussion : lynxmotion.net/phpbb/viewtop … =submarine
http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m51/Italian_guy299/MSCoastguard2.jpg
This is one of many of my backburner projects I’ve never gotten around to doing
ha, yeah that is pretty cool too. sort of like a glass bottomed r/c boat. 
hmmm… what if a submersible was tethered to a floating platform which was itself wireless. you could put all the power stuff in the floating platform so the submersible part would be just motors and instruments. you could use a fish finder to keep track of the submersible position beneath the platform, and use thrusters to keep the platform positioned above the submersible.
Im hoping to get started on it in a few years
hmmmm, where does all my time go? 
Well…my first step is to learn about the basics of building and programing a robotic arm on a roving platform. As far as the underwater ROV stuff, I do have some interesting observations from aboard ship of Jason2 and ABE.
First, Jason2 is ROV (remotely operated vehicle) that is tethered to the ship. One thing I noticed is that the electronics compartments are one of two kinds…titanium pressure vessels for the sensitive electronics or special oil filled boxes for the pressure tolerant electronics and wire junctions. (not sure what kind of oil). Also, Jason 2 must be tethered since it is unmanned being a mile and a half below the surface of the water and radio waves do not propagate well through water. On board ship is the Control Van which houses all the sophisticated electronics, controls, and scientists and engineers that operate Jason. For more info on this, check out this links. whoi.edu/page.do?pid=8423 which has the specifications for Jason2.
Now, a different sort of platform is ABE which stands for Autonomous Benthic Explorer, and is an AUV (autonomous underwater vehicle). This is more of your independent robot that you send out and forget about until it is done with the mission. For example, ABE maps out the ocean floor. A ship drops it off at whatever location it wants mapped out, say a site of hydrothermal activity, and ABE descends to the sea floor and maps out the whole area with SONAR. The ship is free to go off to another location while ABE works. (visions05.washington.edu/documents/VISION/abetopo.jpg). ABE also can sense a plume from an underwater volcano or a change in water chemistry (the picture link above shows ABE sensing a change in water chemistry as it passes over a plume) and then goes back and surveys that area with better resolution for further exploration. One the mission is complete, ABE surfaces and sends out a signal to the ship which tells it where it is and then the ship comes and picks it up and downloads the information stored during its mission. More on ABE is here whoi.edu/page.do?pid=8458
Additionally, there are newer AUVs like the sea glider and the deep glider from the University of Washington that are so energy efficient, they can stay underwater for up to 1 year gathering information and when they surface, they just transmit their data via satellite or receive new instructions that way so they don’t really even need a ship except to launch or change the batteries. In this way, they are almost fully autonomous. Plus, they can go to depths of 9000 feet (deepglider) which is a 266.5 atmospheres so they can take a lot of pressure.
thedaily.washington.edu/article/2007/3/30/divingDeepBelowTheSurface
Anyways, some asked for links to these competitions. Here they are.
The first is sponsored primarily by the US Navy. This competition has both ROVs and AUVs as entries.
AUVSI & ONR’s International AUV Competition
auvsi.org/competitions/water.cfm
and a pdf describing the competition is here…
auvsi.org/competitions/NEST.pdf
Also, from this site, I would encourage looking at the competitors list for more information on their robot builds because each team is required to submit a journal paper (which are provided at this link auvsi.org/competitions/2007/07Competitors.cfm) that describes the designs in great detail for each of the ROVs or AUVs…so you can see what universities like Duke or Cornell or the US Naval Academy used in building their ROV or AUV.
The second group of competitions is mainly for ROVs (not AUVs) marinetech.org/rov_competition/ and is sponsored by several scientific ocean research groups from NOAA to the Marine Institute. Here, you get to use your ROV to collect samples and to deploy equipment like sonar or seismometers. That link contains all the necessary info from how to apply to design specifications to tasks one must complete that simulate real world scientific research with ROVs. Also, there are several competitions across the country listed on this page that one can participate in before going to the National and then International competitions also linked from this page.
So with that, thanks again for all the insight. I hope you enjoy the links and maybe are inspired to build that AUV or ROV.
Okay guys. Just red the whole thread and I think my head would explode. Does any have a complete guide for this? a pdf perhaps? thank you guys.
What exactly are you not understanding? Ask specific questions, and we can give specific answers.