Motor Configuration Tests
Our team designed and tested 3 different motor configurations in order to find the most efficient placement for the motors of the AEV. We tested all the designs with the same code and used the Design Analysis Tool to graph the Power vs Distance of each run.
Design 1
This motor configuration served as our baseline design as the motors are configured plainly on the base of the AEV. This design does not require any extensions to support the motor so it is very cost effective. The design also sticks to our team’s goal of creating a lightweight and compact AEV.
This is the resulting Power vs Distance graph for the regular configuration’s run. The AEV was able to travel slightly over 1.67m while using a steady amount of power.
Design 2
Our second design aimed to spread out the motors by attaching wings to the back of the AEV. The cost of the AEV in this design is higher than Design 1 due to the adding of the wings. The back of the AEV was very heavy and the support arm had trouble supporting the weight.
This is the resulting Power vs Distance graph for the winged AEV design. The power utilized over the run is steady, but the AEV was only able to travel around 0.56m. This is around a third of the distance traveled by the baseline design.
Design 3
Our third and final design’s goal was to see what would happen if the motors were raised off the base but not spread out like in Design 2. This design would cost more than the baseline because of the additional rectangles required to support the motors. Although the amount of weight on the back of the AEV was similar to Design 2, the support arm was able to stably hold the AEV. A large downside to this design is that the propellers are close to hitting each other and the track, which may cause problems if the AEV were to sway.
The Power vs Distance graph for the raised motor design produces results almost in the middle of Design 1 and Design 2. The AEV was able to travel around 1.1m.
Design Comparison
The above graph compares Power vs Distance graphs of all three motor designs. The winged configuration performed very poorly due to most of the weight being distributed in the back of the AEV. Although the raised motor configuration performed fairly well, due to the safety concerns it will not be considered when moving forward. The baseline motor configuration performed the best. The baseline design was compact, lightweight, stable, safe and cost effective. Our team has determined that all these factors contribute to the regular configuration as being the best design and will be used moving forward.
Battery Tests
Our team designed 4 different sets of test code that were utilized to determine the most efficient motor settings to use in regard to power consumption. After each run a graph was created of the Voltage vs Distance.
Run 1
Code:
celerate(4,0,35,3);
motorSpeed(4,35);
goFor(3);
reverse(4);
motorSpeed(4,35);
goFor(2);
brake(4);
- Minimal power was used, resulting in the greatest average voltage
- Slight drop in voltage before reversing motors
- Slight decrease in voltage after motors reverse
Run 2
Code:
celerate(4,0,45,3);
motorSpeed(4,45);
goFor(2.5);
brake(4);
- Highest motor-power was used, resulting in lowest average voltage
- Returns to original voltage as AEV begins to coast
- Slight decrease in initial voltage from Run 1
Run 3
Code:
celerate(4,0,40,3);
motorSpeed(4,40);
goFor(2.5);
brake(4);
- Maintained a higher voltage than Run 2 due to decreased power
- Returns to original voltage as AEV begins to coast
- Slight decrease in initial voltage from Run 2
- Voltage spikes when battery is no longer being used.
Run 4
Code:
celerate(4,0,40,3);
motorSpeed(4,40);
goFor(2.5);
reverse(4);
motorSpeed(4,30);
goFor(3);
brake(4);
- Longest distance motors were powered
- AEV begins acceleration at approximately 8.225 V
- Slight drop in voltage before reversing motors
- Slight decrease in initial voltage from Run 3
- The motors were run at 45% power in both directions
Battery Test Conclusions
- Run 4 was the most efficient where the power from Run 3 was combined with the code from Run 1
- Lower motor power results in higher average voltage
- Letting the AEV coast lets the battery regain voltage, allowing for a more efficient run
- Temporary drop in voltage as motors switch directions
- Total charge of battery will decrease as runs continue, which results in decreased overall voltage