The final test was done with the same design as the previous tests.
The first final test that Group I ran didn’t go as planned. The AEV made it through the first gate smoothly, picked up the cargo, waited, and then left the loading zone with ease. Once the AEV obtained the cargo, the issues arose. The AEV would’ve overshot the next gate, but it was stopped short to assure that the run could be completed. The AEV proceeded through the gate, but again for unknown reasons had to be touched again at the starting zone so that it didn’t recoil out of the zone. The reasons for these errors are unknown, but it was assumed to be something due to the battery or motors. The final brake didn’t stop the AEV completely, but prior to that it had never failed to stop the AEV. This test was done in room 224, which was the room that Group I had the most trouble with consistency in. The AEV used a total of 227 joules of energy and took approximately 53 seconds. This data was a little worse than expected as it pushed the group over the budget.
When Group I finished for that day, they intended to fix these issues for the last day of testing. To the surprise of the group, the AEV had issues on the final run in room 308. The errors that presented themselves in room 308 had never happened before and came to the surprise of the group. The AEV made it smoothly through the first gate and proceeded perfectly to the cargo and stopped. The AEV left the loading zone and proceeded up the ramp, but the brake never kicked in, which was another unknown error, so the AEV had to be stopped using one of the groups’ touches. After it was moved into the gate sensor, the group assumed the run would proceed smoothly as it has never failed to stop in the starting zone with that code in room 308. Again, to the surprise of the group the AEV fell short of the starting zone. The fact that the AEV ran smoothly prior to that final test and then failed to finish the performance test was again due to random chance. This test used 228 joules of energy and took approximately 51 seconds. This small change in energy and time between runs doesn’t have much effect on the overall budget, which means both runs had similar results. The timings that are present in the below graph, figure 9, are inaccurate, the correct times were taken using a stopwatch during the runs.