| F – Emily Laudo, Sarabeth Hewa, Nick Besancon, Bradley Moyer | Progress Report 1 |
| Instructor – Richard Busick, GTA – Sheng Zhu | 06 – Feb – 2019 |
Report of Progress
Situation
To ensure that the AEV ran to its full extent, correctly and efficiently, Team F ran through a series of different codes to test this. In the first lab, Team F wrote out a basic code incorporating many of the different commands to make sure the electric motors followed what was written. The electric motors performed to standards.
During lab 2, the reflectance sensors were tested and worked properly. To test this, the “goToPosition” code was used, where the wheels would only rotate a certain amount of times and then stop.
In lab 3, accelerating, decelerating, and reversing commands were primarily used to gather data to later construct graphs. It was found here that the left electric motor was lagging when the brake command was executed, so instead of using brake(4) which halts all motors, brake(1) and brake(2) were implemented to see if that would change anything. It did not, and the left motor still lagged. A new command in this lab, motorSpeed was used to change accelerations of the motors. Please refer to Appendix B for the exact code used.
Results and Analysis
The first lab resulted in the AEV running code effectively and showed the team that the arduino could upload code and run the motors properly. The second lab did not work perfectly at first. The code for lab two used the reflectance sensors to measure when the AEV had moved the wheels 40 rotations and then stop using brake(4). The sensors did not work initially and the motors would not stop when the 40 rotations occured. The wheels were handspun over 80 times the opposite direction to test the other direction but the motors would not stop.
The connection between the reflectance sensors and the arduino were then analyzed and it was noticed that the wires were not in the correct orientation. Once the wires were fixed the reflectance sensors worked perfectly and stopped the AEV after 40 rotations. In the third lab acceleration, deceleration, direction change and brake were all used to test the capabilities of the AEV. The results of the lab gave us a lot of data showing what the AEV could do. One issue that was noticed was that the left motor had a delay in using the brake(4) command. The delay of 3 seconds could not be fixed when commands brake(1) and brake(2) were used separately. The issue remains unsolved.
Takeaways
After evaluating the team’s final AEV Design, it was found that having wings at an angle of 135 degrees will create more force towards the center of the AEV, which in turn allows the AEV to go faster. It was also decided that different materials will be tested for their durability and efficiency, more on this can be found in the “Upcoming Goals” section found below. In general, the team aims to produce a bracket that holds these wings, and has already made a grant proposal for this part to be put into action.
It was also found that the reflectance sensors should be tested regularly to make sure that they are working properly and effectively. The team should troubleshoot by rearranging the wires if it appears that they are not working to the best of their ability.
For programming, the only real concern that was raised was the brake command. The brake command does not halt all the motors at once, but instead coasts to a stop. This makes the stopping location unable to be precisely determined, and the team will work on researching commands that may combat this issue.
Future Work
The next tasks to be completed include designing and producing the correctly dimensioned and properly budgeted team AEV, running the AEV on the track, and giving an oral presentation about the manufacturing, price, and efficiency of the AEV. These tasks are crucial to complete because without the final AEV design, the project will not be finished. Having proper dimensions and a design under budget are essential to making the design run effectively, while influencing consumers to support our design. These tasks will be completed by Team F through several meetings and more specifically the design itself will be created and dimensioned using SolidWorks.
Upcoming Goals
In future labs, Team F is planning on modifying the arms of the AEV by testing different angles at which the wings will be positioned on the side of the rectangular base. The original plan was to use an angle of 135 degrees, but angles of 125 and 145 will also be tested. If the AEV runs more efficiently and cuts through air better at the lower or higher angle, more testing will be pursued in that direction. For example, if the 135 degree angle proves more efficient, angles such as 115, 110, and 105 will continue to be tested.
Team F is also planning on researching more into the kind of material to be used. Team members will compare materials that have a bumpy surface, a smooth surface, and a cloth-like surface. Each will be tested under the same conditions against the wind, and the material with the least resistance will be used for the AEV.
Upcoming Schedule
Task Teammates Date Time Needed
Group Meeting: Everyone 2/18/19 2 Hours
Analyzing Lab 5 results: Sarabeth, Bradley 2/16/19 1 Hour
Meeting Notes: Emily 2/18/19 30 Minutes
Website Update: Everyone 2/20/19 30 Minutes
Schedule Update: Nick 2/22/19 30 Minutes
Lab 6: Everyone 2/21/19 2 Hours
Programming Basics
Using the code that was found in the Preliminary R&D Manual, Team F ran code test-runs on the arduino nano. The electric motors ran as expected, breaking, reversing, and accelerating when expected to, however there was some resistance shown when starting up the motors to run. In Exercise 3, when the motors were coded to accelerate up to 25% in 3 seconds, the left motor took longer to start up. It was also seen during this lab that when the brake command was applied, it took the left motor an upwards of 2 seconds to come to a complete halt after the right motor already had. The brake command does show some fault. This code can be found in Appendix B.3.
Applying the brake causes the AEV to stop over time and not immediately, additional distance is covered, and some degree of energy is wasted. This occurrence also could have been due to a faulty motor, but the brake command definitely does impact the efficiency of the AEV.
The prominent error observed with the programming the Arduino was found in lab 3, when an incorrect command was used to run all motors at 25%, and then 20%. Please refer to appendix B3 for the exact code. The coder had not used the command motorSpeed, so the AEV still ran, but not through the correct code. After motorSpeed was uploaded, the correct code and performance of the AEV was observed.
The team did need more guidance on some of the proper commands for coding, as seen in the error above. However, they reached out for help, and consulted a teaching assistant which resolved their problem.
Please refer to Appendix B for further information on the code used, the exact code used, and comments within the code that instruct the Arduino.
Reflectance Sensors
The reflectance sensors measure how far the AEV has traveled on the rail by analyzing how many times the wheels rotate. This is used to find the relative position of the AEV. The code in the AEV uses the position of the AEV to determine when to speed up, brake, or change direction. The reflectance sensors need to be functioning properly for the AEV to work effectively.
During lab 3, it was found that the reflectance sensors were not working properly and the code could not be executed effectively because of it. After analyzing the AEV it was concluded that the two wires connecting the reflectance sensors to the AEV were attached backwards. Once this was fixed the code was executed properly. The team did need guidance with this problem, as they tried to troubleshoot it by themselves but could not determine what was wrong with the sensors.
Once a GTA came over, the team realized that they had the wires mixed up, and were able to resolve the problem and complete the lab. It was also discovered that applying the brake causes the AEV to stop over time and not immediately, additional distance is covered, and some degree of energy is wasted.
Creative Design Thinking
Team F, during Lab 3, brainstormed what design would be the most efficient in terms of energy, cost, and sustainability. The Concept Scoring header contains more information around the process of deciding the most optimal design. Team members aimed to have the most aerodynamic design. This includes shooting for parts that are compact, lightweight, and pierce the air.
Bradley’s Sketch
Bradley’s design features one main change from the original AEV design. Bradley tilted the wings of the aircraft to an angle of 45 degrees above the horizontal. After doing research, Bradley found that this increases the stability of the craft and a larger portion of the force generated by the propellers would be directed towards the center of the AEV. In order to tilt the wings though, a custom part of two 135 degree circle brackets would have to be made, preferably via 3D printing.
These brackets would connect the wings to the main body of the AEV as well. Bradley was going to use a light plastic because it would ensure that the weight could be as light as possible. Please refer to Appendix A1 to view the sketch.
Emily’s Sketch
Emily’s entire AEV shape differs from the original design. She based the shape of her AEV on the shape of airplane because after research, she wanted the most aerodynamic shape possible. There are sections specifically for the battery, motors, and the Arduino to make the AEV run. Emily was going to use steel for a sleek and smooth operating AEV. Please refer to Appendix A.2 to view the sketch.
Sarabeth’s Sketch
Sarabeth’s design is a very simple alteration to the AEV used in class demonstrations. She only changed the shapes of the arms protruding from the rectangular base. However, her design is not very compact and quite lengthy. Her cost was about $150,000, making this a very expensive AEV to design. The arms protruding from the base have a good aerodynamic design, being able to slice through air.
Sarabeth was planning on using marble to make her design since it is very resilient against erosion. Please refer to Appendix A.3 to view the sketch.
Nick’s Sketch
Nick’s design was very lightweight and air resistant. It contains a small vertical platform to attach the Arduino, battery, and the motors. It is very efficient at using space effectively but this could result in the design being unstable. The total design would cost around $135,000 which is not expensive.
Nick was planning on using plastic to make his because it is lightweight. Please refer to Appendix A.4 to view the sketch.
Group’s Final Design
The groups Final AEV design encompasses the basic characteristics of the AEV used in class with only two modifications. Instead of using a T-Shape base, the team will use a 3” x 15” rectangular base. The team will also use 2 arms angled at 135 degrees off the side of the base, with propellers attached to the sides of them. Lightweight, smooth plastic will be used to create this design. The reasoning behind why the team chose this design was because this design was the most aerodynamic with the position of the wings, and also the most cost efficient.
The Scale is a 1:1 scale of the orthographic sketch on the right. The approximate weight is 167g and the approximate cost is $185,000. Please refer to Appendix A.5.
Data Analysis Tool
The graph located in Appendix D.2 shows how much Power (in watts) that the AEV outputted over a certain distance (measured in meters). The graph in Appendix D.3 shows how much Power (in watts) that the AEV outputted over a certain time (measured in seconds). It can be seen that in the two graphs, the power output increased and reached its max halfway through, and then decreased. The maximum power output was reached at approximately 0.6 meters and 6.22 seconds.
The code implemented for these graphs used the reflectance sensors for the testing process. The command “goToPosition” was used in this lab (Lab 3) which limits the number of times the wheels may rotate before the AEV applies the brakes to the system and stops moving.
The Graph located in Appendix D.4 shows a plot of Energy (J) vs. Distance (meters), while Appendix D.5 shows a plot of Energy (J) vs. Time (s). Both of these graphs show a trend that as Distance and Time increased, the total Energy of the system also increased, modeling a direct relationship with each other. The code implemented was the same code used for the graphs above. Lab 3 used acceleration commands, goToPosition commands, and the brake command after the wheels rotated an objective amount of times.
Reflectance sensors were very important for creating these graphs; seeing that if the reflectance sensors did not work, a graph for distance would appear as a straight non-changing line, unlike the one seen above. It can also be seen that the AEV ran until approximately 40 J of energy was produced. Data as shown in Appendix D.6, was used to calculate the total energy graphs. This was taken directly from the sensor data analysis tool in MATLAB. The first two graphs were made directly in MATLAB with the corresponding code runner and analyzer.
The AEV ran smoothly with the scenario code. It was mostly balanced with a slight lean to the left on the track. It slowly stopped and then reversed once the motor was ready to stop running the code.
Concept Screening and Scoring
The designs of each individual AEV were compared and contrasted to the original design by using screening and scoring matrices. The screening matrix pieces together how close or far the individual designs are to the sample AEV (see Appendix D.7). In Appendix D.8, it shows the scoring matrix. This ranks how well/similar the individual designs compare to the sample AEV. The comparison of the following were used in the matrices:
Shape: The overall similarity of each general shape in comparison to the sample AEV.
Wings: The overall similarity of the wing shape in comparison to the sample AEV.
Battery Placement: How similar the battery placement is between our designs and the sample AEV.
Propeller Placement: How similar the propellers/motors are in reference to their placement and shape.
Emily’s design obtained a streamline that minimizes air resistance to make it more efficient, however, it is potentially too bulky. Bradley’s design is more stable due to its shape, but we may go over budget and not have enough parts to build. Nick’s design is lightweight and streamline so it also minimizes air resistance, but it could be unstable. Sarabeth’s design was also streamline, but like Bradley’s we may not have the parts to build it. The two AEV designs were are taking into the design process are the designs made by Nick and Bradley. These two designs passed both the concept screening and scoring matrices, therefore they share similar designs to the sample AEV.
Both designs will run smoothly and more efficiently than Emily and Sarabeth’s. The final design will model the basic AEV used in lab, but incorporate Bradley’s arms that act like wings, positioned at a 135 degree angle from the rectangular base.
Appendices
Appendix A: Design Sketches
Appendix B: Code
Appendix C: Team Meetings
Appendix D: Graphs and Matrices
Appendix A: Design Sketches
A.1: Bradley Individual Sketch
A.2 Emily Individual Sketch
A.3: Sarabeth Individual Sketch
A.4: Nick Individual Sketch
A.5: Team Sketch
Appendix B: Code
B.1: Exercise One Code
celerate(1,0,15,2.5);
//Run motor one at a constant speed (15% power) for 1 second.
goFor(1);
//Brake motor one.
brake(1);
//Accelerate motor two from start to 27% power in 4 seconds.
celerate(2,0,27,4);
//Run motor two at a constant speed (27% power) for 2.7 seconds
goFor(2.7);
//Decelerate motor two to 15% power in 1 second.
celerate(2,27,15,1);
//Brake motor two.
brake(2);
//Reverse the direction of only motor 2.
reverse(2);
//Accelerate all motors from start to 31% power in 2 seconds.
celerate(4,0,31,2);
//Brake all motors for 1 second
brake(4);
//Reverse motor one
reverse(1);
//Accelerate motor one from start to 19% power over 2 seconds
celerate(1,0,19,2);
//Run all motors at a constant speed of 35% power for 1 second
goFor(1);
//Brake motor two but keep motor one running at a constant speed (35% power) for 3 seconds.
brake(2);
//Brake all motors for 1 second.
brake(4);
goFor(1);
//16. Run both motors at a constant speed (19% power) for 2 seconds
goF1or(2);
//17.Decelerate both motors to 0% power in 3 seconds
celerate(4,19,0,3);
//18.Brake all motors
brake(4);
//19.Save Program as (Save As: ) PrgmBasics
B.2: Exercise 2 Code
//run motors at 25% for 2 seconds
motorSpeed(4,25);
goFor(2);
//run motors at 20% and go to absolute position of 12 feet
motorSpeed(4,20);
goToAbsolutePosition(12);
//reverse all motors
reverse(4);
//brake all motors
brake(4);
//Save the program as ExternalSensorsOutside
B.3: Exercise 3 Code
celerate(4,0,25,3);
//Run all motors at a constant speed 25% for 1 second
goFor(1);
//Run all motors at 20% power for 2 seconds
motorSpeed(4,20);
goFor(2);
//reverse all motors
reverse(4);
//Run all motors at 25% for 2 seconds
motorSpeed(4,25);
goFor(2);
// Brake all motors
brake(4);
//Save as CSS1
Appendix C: Team Meeting Notes
C.1: Meeting 1
Date: 10 – Jan – 2019
Time: 3:55 PM (Face-to-Face)
Members Present: Emily Laudo, Sarabeth Hewa, Bradley Moyer, Nick Besancon
Location: Hitchcock 224
Topics Discussed: Lab 1 Beginning Website and Equipment Setup
****Decisions made are initialed in parenthesis
(i.e. Bradley made decision: (BM)****
_______________________________________________________
Objective: Today’s main focus was on meeting as a team to discuss how to construct and assemble the equipment, start the AEV u.osu.edu website for our company, and begin the code for Scenario One.
_______________________________________________________
To Do/Action Items:
- U.OSU.EDU (SH)
- Assembly (SH, EL, BM, NB)
- Write Code For Scenario One (SH, EL, BM, NB)
- Record Team Meeting Notes (EL)
_______________________________________________________
Decisions:
- Decided on which codes and connections to use/make when putting together the motor (SH, EL, BM, NB)
_______________________________________________________
Reflections:
- Decided that a group document of the code was the most proficient way to keep the code organized and share it amongst each other
_______________________________________________________
Upcoming Tasks:
- Begin Website Update 1 (SH, EL, BM, NB)
- Start programming with sensors (SH, EL, BM, NB)
- Begin planning (SH, EL, BM, NB)
C.2: Meeting 2
Date: 14 – Jan – 2019
Time: 3:00 PM (Face-to-Face)
Members Present: Emily Laudo, Sarabeth Hewa, Bradley Moyer, Nick Besancon
Location: Hitchcock 308
Topics Discussed: SolidWorks Applications
****Decisions made are initialed in parenthesis
(i.e. Bradley made decision: (BM)****
_______________________________________________________
Objective: Today’s main focus was on meeting as a team to discuss and review the logistics of the platform SolidWorks. Team members became familiar with how to navigate this platform.
_______________________________________________________
To Do/Action Items:
- Update Meeting Minutes (SH, EL, BM, NB)
- Website 1 Update (SH, EL, BM, NB)
- Record Team Meeting Notes (SH, BM, NB)
_______________________________________________________
Decisions:
- Decided to meet tomorrow out of class to finish updating the website and read over goals for the AEV project.
_______________________________________________________
Reflections:
- Found that the most efficient way to schedule team meetings was through GroupMe, a platform that is compatible with all phone types.
_______________________________________________________
Upcoming Tasks:
- Continue to work on Website 1 Update (SH, EL, BM, NB)
- Become Familiar with SolidWorks (SH, EL, BM, NB)
C.3: Meeting 3
Date: 15 – Jan – 2019
Time: 12:30 PM (Face-to-Face)
Members Present: Sarabeth Hewa, Bradley Moyer, Nick Besancon
Location: 18th Avenue Library
Topics Discussed: Website Update 1
****Decisions made are initialed in parenthesis
(i.e. Bradley made decision: (BM)****
_______________________________________________________
Objective: Today’s main focus was on meeting as a team to discuss
and revise the Website Update 1 due January 17th.
_______________________________________________________
To Do/Action Items:
- Set up drop-down menus (SH, BM, NB)
- Set up the Company Landing page (SH, BM, NB)
- Set up division (team) pages within the Company page (SH, BM, NB)
- Create Team pages with Student Information (SH, BM, NB)
- Division Pages should show approach to MCR (SH, BM, NB)
_______________________________________________________
Decisions:
- The team created the drop down menus, and decided which theme would be best for the website. Student Information was uploaded accompanying pictures of each members. (SH, BM, NB)
_______________________________________________________
Reflections:
- It was found that it is most efficient to break apart into groups to complete a task, and not have everyone working on the same idea at once.
_______________________________________________________
Upcoming Tasks:
- Check with a Supervisor tomorrow that all of the To-Do items were completed correctly and fully. (SH)
C.4: Meeting 4
Date: 17 – Jan – 2019
Time: 3:55 PM (Face-to-Face)
Members Present: Emily Laudo, Sarabeth Hewa, Bradley Moyer, Nick Besancon
Location: Hitchcock 224
Topics Discussed: Assembly of The AEV Car
****Decisions made are initialed in parenthesis
(i.e. Bradley made decision: (BM)****
_______________________________________________________
Objective: Today’s main focus was on meeting as a team to assemble the components of the kit and make sure the kit is fully equipped by going over the provided checklist.
_______________________________________________________
To Do/Action Items:
- Record Team Meeting Notes (EL)
- Go over kit checklist (BM & NB)
- Assemble kit (SH, BM, NB, EL)
- Begin progress report #1 (EL)
- Upload content of meeting notes to website (EL)
_______________________________________________________
Decisions:
- The team divided tasks and decided which pieces go where during the assembly of the kit, while going over the kit checklist and running the code created during Lab 1. (SH, BM, NB, EL)
- Decided to take a group selfie every lab. (SH)
_______________________________________________________
Reflections:
- Found that dividing up tasks made the group work more efficiently.
_______________________________________________________
Upcoming Tasks:
- Brainstorms AEV designs (SH, BM, NB, EL)
C.5: Meeting 5
Date: 31 – Jan – 2019
Time: 3:55 PM (Face-to-Face)
Members Present: Emily Laudo, Sarabeth Hewa, Bradley Moyer, Nick Besancon
Location: Hitchcock 224
Topics Discussed: Running Code For Data Analysis
****Decisions made are initialed in parenthesis
(i.e. Bradley made decision: (BM)****
_______________________________________________________
Objective: Today’s main focus was on meeting as a team to run the reflectance sensor test and the programmed code, while brainstorming and discussing ideas for a sample AEV design. Will also extract data using the program.
_______________________________________________________
To Do/Action Items:
- Assemble the sample AEV (BM & NB)
- Run the data extraction program to collect Arduino data (SH, BM, NB, EL)
- Run testing of reflectance sensors (BM, NB, SH)
- Finish and catch up on progress report questions (SH, BM, NB, EL)
- Finish and upload sections and pictures to website for the first 3 exercises (EL)
_______________________________________________________
Decisions:
- Create a code for the data analysis (SH)
- Downloaded data analysis tools onto computer (SH)
- Found that the reflectance sensors don’t work (NB, EL, SH, BM)
_______________________________________________________
Reflections:
- This project is slightly stressful, so we must work together as a team to ensure that everyone understands what is going on.
_______________________________________________________
Upcoming Tasks:
- Complete individual AEV design (SH, BM, NB, EL)
- Finish Website Update 2 (SH, BM, NB, EL)
C.6: Meeting 6
Date: 2 – Feb – 2019
Time: 10:45 AM (Face-to-Face)
Members Present: Emily Laudo & Bradley Moyer
Location: Hitchcock 316
Topics Discussed: Application 8 and Website Update 2
****Decisions made are initialed in parenthesis
(i.e. Bradley made decision: (BM)****
_______________________________________________________
Objective: Today’s main focus was on meeting as a team to design the base for the chess piece in Application 8 and finish Website Update 2.
_______________________________________________________
To Do/Action Items:
- Assemble a base for our team to use for Application 8 (BM)
- Get up to date on progress report questions and deliverables for each lab for website (BM & EL)
- Create an evolution of design section (EL)
- Update (and comment) various codes used (BM & EL)
- Update (and comment) various designs examined (BM & EL)
- Update research that supports your AEV decisions (BM & EL)
_______________________________________________________
Decisions:
- Decided to finish Website Update 2 with the rest of the group during the week (BM & EL)
_______________________________________________________
Reflections:
- Working on a weekend on most of the work was beneficial to getting caught up and remember what is due and when.
_______________________________________________________
Upcoming Tasks:
- Start designing AEV design (SH, BM, NB, EL)
- Creative design thinking (SH, BM, NB, EL)
- Concept screening and scoring (SH, BM, NB, EL)
C.7: Meeting 7
Date: 6 – Feb – 2019
Time: 3:55 PM (Face-to-Face)
Members Present: Emily Laudo, Sarabeth Hewa, Bradley Moyer, Nick Besancon
Location: Hitchcock 224
Topics Discussed: Creative Design Thinking and Concept Screening & Scoring to Produce the team AEV Design
****Decisions made are initialed in parenthesis
(i.e. Bradley made decision: (BM)****
_________________________________________________
Objective: Today’s main focus was on meeting as a team to discuss our individual AEV designs and combine our ideas into one final team AEV and perform a concept screening & scoring matrix for all of the AEV design concepts discussed.
_________________________________________________
To Do/Action Items:
- Create a concept sketch in orthographic view for the team AEV (SH, BM, NB, EL)
- Discuss individual AEV designs and brainstorm a team design (SH, BM, NB, EL)
- Produce a concept screening & scoring matrix for all design concepts created (SH, BM, NB, EL)
_________________________________________________
Decisions:
- Flipped wires to get sensors to work (NB)
- Redo our sensor test and data collection (SH, BM, NB, EL)
_________________________________________________
Reflections:
- We realized that some of our data collected is not viable due to error from previous labs.
_________________________________________________
Upcoming Tasks:
- Build the team AEV based off of the design chosen from the concept screening & scoring (SH, BM, NB, EL)
- Finish Progress Report 1 and upload to website
- Prepare for Grant Proposal
Appendix D: Graphs and Matrices
D.1: Upcoming Schedule
Upcoming Schedule
Task Teammates Date Time Needed
Group Meeting: Everyone 2/18/19 2 Hours
Analysing Lab 5 results: Sarabeth, Bradley 2/16/19 1 Hour
Meeting Notes: Emily 2/18/19 30 Minutes
Website Update: Everyone 2/20/19 30 Minutes
Schedule Update: Nick 2/22/19 30 Minutes
Lab 6: Everyone 2/21/19 2 Hours
D.2: Power v. Distance
D.3: Power v. Time
D.4: Energy v. Distance
D.5: Energy v. Time
D.6: Raw Data for Power v. Distance, Power v. Time, Energy v. Distance, Energy v. Time
D.7: Screening Matrix
D.8: Scoring Matrix
