For this lab period, we worked on designing two different AEV designs with the goal of determining which design, if any, would be a good design to continue further testing.
Figure 1: “Airplane Design”
The figure above was the first design the team came up with for the performance testing. This design was created in hopes that the AEV would be lighter than previous designs, and also that the weight distribution would be even. While the design was lighter, it did not have good weight distribution. Regardless of what the team tried, the design would not balance evenly on two wheels on the track, which means it would not move. This meant the group could not get any data from this design because it could not make a run. It was determined that this design would need to be scraped, and the group would need to proceed to the next design.
Figure 2: The Vertical Design
The figure above was the second design the group came up with for the performance test. This design was made for similar reasons as the first one, to shed weight and increase better weight distribution. Both were achieved in the testing. The AEV was able to make consistent runs on the track, not perfect runs, but significantly closer to a perfect run than the first design.
Table 1: Arduino Code and Energy Consumption
| Phase | Arduino Code | Time (seconds) | Total Energy (Joules) |
| 1 | reverse(1);
motorSpeed(4,30); goFor(6.1); |
6.1 | 7.0 * 6.1 = 42.7 |
| 2 | celerate(4,30,0,2);
brake(4); |
2 | ½ * (8.1-6.1) * 7 = 7 |
| 3 | goFor(6.5); | 6.5 | 0 |
| 4 | motorSpeed(4,30);
goFor(6.5); |
6.5 | (21.1-14.6) * 11.8 = 76.7 |
| 5 | brake(4);
goFor(9); |
9 | 0 |
| 6 | reverse(4);
motorSpeed(4,45); goFor(7.25); |
7.25 | (37.35-30.1) * 11.8 = 85.55 |
| 7 | celerate(4,45,0,2); | 2 | ½ * (39.35-37.35) * 11.8 = 11.8 |
| 8 | brake(4);
goFor(8); |
8 | 0 |
| 9 | motorSpeed(4,45);
goFor(8); |
8 | (55.35-47.35) * 11.67 = 93.36 |
| 10 | brake(4); | ~4 | 0 |
Total Energy: 317.11 Joules
This was the data collected from the second design of the AEV. A table like this for the first design was not possible because it never completed a run on the track. Since the group collected this data, further testing will be compared to the energy used in this design.
Figure 3: Graph of the Energy used by Design Two
The figure above is the graph of the data from Table 1 above.
The group determined to continue using the vertical design in further testing because it proved to be the most effective and efficient of all of the designs created to this point in the lab testing.
Code Used for Successful Run of Design Two
reverse(1); //Reverse motor number 1.
motorSpeed(4,30); //Power all motors to 30% speed.
goFor(6.1); //Maintain 30% speed for 6.1 seconds.
celerate(4,30,0,2); //Decelerate all motors from 30% speed to 0% speed in 2 seconds.
brake(4); //Brake all motors
goFor(8); //Coninue to brake for 8 seconds.
motorSpeed(4,30); //Power all motors at 30% speed.
goFor(6.5); //Maintain 30% speed for 6.5 seconds.
brake(4); //Brake all motors.
goFor(9); //Coninue to brake for 9 seconds.
reverse(4); //Reverse all motors.
motorSpeed(4,45); //Power all motors to 45% speed.
goFor(7.25); //Maintain 45% speed for 7.25 seconds.
celerate(4,45,0,2); //Decelerate all motors from 45% speed to 0% speed in 2 seconds.
brake(4); //Brake all motors.
goFor(8); //Coninue to brake for 8 seconds.
motorSpeed(4,45); //Power all motors to 45% speed.
goFor(8); //Maintain 45% speed for 8 seconds.
brake(4); //Brake all motors.
Project Schedule
Meeting 14
Date: 26-March-2017
Time: 2:00-3:30 PM
Location: Hitchcock Hall, Room 324
Members Present: Omar Mahboob, Xander Riggio, Matthew Spishakoff, Eric Fogle
Method: Face to Face
Meeting Objectives: Work on PDR
Roles for Meeting 14:
O Eric: Executive Summary, Conclusion, and Vertical Design SolidWorks Model
o Omar: Results and Disucssion
o Xander: Experimental Methodology and Appendicies
o Matthew: Introduction, Appedndicies, and Horizontal Design SolidWorks Model
| No. | Task | Start | End | Due | Eric | Omar | Xander | Matt | % Complete |
| 1 | Project Portfolio | 1/19 | 4/19 | 4/20 | x | x | x | x | 70% |
| 2 | Finish AEV design | 1/19 | 4/12 | 4/13 | x | x | x | x | 80% |
| 3 | Complete AEV code | 1/19 | 4/12 | 4/13 | x | x | x | x | 50% |
| 4 | PDR Report | 3/21 | 3/26 | 3/27 | x | x | x | x | 100% |
| 5 | Progress Report 10 | 3/31 | 4/2 | 4/3 | x | x | x | x | 0% |
| 6 | CDR Presentation Draft | 4/1 | 4/5 | 4/6 | x | x | x | x | 0% |
| 7 | Progress Report 11 | 4/7 | 4/9 | 4/10 | x | x | x | x | 0% |
| 8 | Extra Credit Video | 4/8 | 4/12 | 4/13 | x | x | x | x | 0% |
| 9 | CDR Report | 4/11 | 4/19 | 4/20 | x | x | x | x | 0% |
| 10 | CDR Presentation | 4/14 | 4/19 | 4/20 | x | x | x | x | 0% |