The Ohio State University: College of Engineering

Lab 11 – Performance Test 4

Final Testing

 

In lab 11, Performance Test 4, the team aimed to run their chosen AEV design with their chosen code on the overhead track successfully. If the AEV ran correctly, the MCR scenario would be completed correctly and all requirements would be fulfilled. PT4 provided guidelines for the AEV final testing evaluation. Important guidelines to mention include that the team got two runs to attempt to complete the scenario and also that the score would consist of two separate scores, one for the energy to mass ratio and the other for the AEV’s ability to complete the scenario successfully. The scoring would be done by either the instructor, the GTA, or a UTA. Lab 11 was the final lab in which the team would work hands on with the Arduino software and AEV controller.

 

Before Performance Test 4, the final testing, the team was confident that their vehicle would run correctly. The team utilized both test runs allowed in PT4. The first and second runs ran exactly as desired. The AEV stopped properly before the gate on the way to and from the cargo. The AEV also stopped before and connected to the cargo. Lastly, the AEV stopped correctly at the drop-off area. However, during the first run, the team failed to collect the EEPROM data to find the energy used during the run. Therefore, the team had to ensure that in their second run, all went smoothly. The team succeeded in collecting the data for the second run, and found that their AEV’s total energy used was 194.629 Joules. When that amount was adjusted to account for the distance traveled on the inside track compared to the outside track, the total energy became 231.6 Joules.  Compared to the average total energy of each team’s AEV in the class, the team’s had a 11.8% difference as the average total energy was 262.2 Joules. To understand the mass to energy ratio of their AEV, the mass was measured as well, which was 240.2 grams.  Additionally, a graph representing the power versus time for the run was created using the Design Analysis Tool. The graph is shown below: 

 

Final Run Power vs. Time Graph

 

The second run ran for a total of 62.03 seconds which meet the under 150 seconds requirements. Regarding the score given which was calculated according to the AEV’s ability to complete its run successfully fulfilling all MCR requirements and its overall mass to energy ratio, the team scored a 51.85. The average score was a 46.29. The team scored 10.7% higher than the average score.  Overall, all conditions of the MCR were met by the team in PT4.

 

Important takeaways were drawn from Performance Test 4, including that:

  1. Time management will make completing tasks simpler.
  2. Improving upon error can be done by drawing from previous experience regarding the team forgetting to collect the EEPROM data on the first run.
  3. Confidence in your vehicle and code should be developed because testing for the final run occurs.

 

A video of the AEV’s final run is shown below:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXT8pM8Kco4