In this lab, the team did further testing on the final developed code, and observed the energy efficiency over multiple tests. One complication of this lab were the data results received regarding the efficiency figures. The power output ranged no less than 300 and no more than 350, which are high numbers in terms of mass to power output ratio. While team F continues to work on adding final commands to the working code, the power efficiency is proving to be a difficult challenge. This issue is being overcome with less propellor work over the same period of time. The team is changing the code to promote more “gliding” of the AEV when it breaks, which decreases the amount of power needed to quickly and shortly reverse the AEV in order to stop it. Another issue originates from inconsistent AEV performance on the track during testing. After two to three tests, the AEV begins to fall short in distance and speed, and changing the battery to satisfy energy needed to run the AEV also tends to be met with over/underestimates in absolute position lengths in the code and the overall speeds of the AEV when reversing and going straight. The team is working on obtaining data on the voltage of the battery in use, and seeing how it changes over the course of the lab period to determine the true source of the error before final testing.
In order to follow the MCR objectives while having the most efficient vehicle, the team plans to make progress with the current lab setup; Testing the code and troubleshooting based on data received through the arduino. In terms of the physical aspect of the AEV, the team has decided to maintain the current prototype as the final model. As discussed in the previous lab, the team was working on the final code independent of monitoring the energy efficiency. The overall main goal for the team was to develop a code that meets all of the criteria given for final testing. Now that a working code has been developed, the team used this lab to not only tweak the code to compensate for any small errors in timing or speed, but have also used the lab time to now improve the efficiency figures produced by the AEV. While the team is observing similar efficiency levels as past labs, finishing the final code allows them to devote more attention to decreasing the overall power output. Regardless of the ultimate outcome of the power efficiency troubleshooting, the working code will be tested next week.
The team was able to further develop a process to make quick changes to the code in order to move closer to the final test/run. Other takeaways regarding the code included being able to see relationships between the motor speeds and the power output, and how the team could potentially decrease the output and promote a higher energy efficiency. This takeaway, while beneficial to the team’s overall performance, has been difficult to implement in the physical AEV model due to energy it takes for the AEV to carry the R2 unit back to the original position. The team has also overall been able to maintain a strong system of delegation seen in the first stages of the lab, working independently while still being able to come together with our ideas and conclusions and continue to develop a cohesive AEV product.