F – Emily Laudo, Sarabeth Hewa, Nick Besancon, Bradley Moyer | Progress Report 2 |
Instructor – Richard Busick, GTA – Sheng Zhu | 19 – Mar – 2019 |
Report of Progress
Situation
Team F did Advanced R & D Testing for the Battery of the AEV and it’s Reflectance Sensors. The LI -PO (Lithium Polymer) battery is the power source of the AEV, so it is important to understand its potential to affect AEV performance.
The Battery test gave further insight into relationships between battery voltage and travel distance. In the case that a battery is underperforming, it would be important to replace the battery so that the AEV can run effectively and efficiently. 2 different batteries were run through the same code of “goFor(s)”. Times of 2 seconds, 4 seconds, and 6 seconds were used. A Total Energy VS. Distance Graph was made for each battery, for each run. The graphs were then compared side by side to see which battery performed better, and if they were both within acceptable ranges of each other, the batteries were kept. However, it was noted which battery performed better by seeing which battery travelled farther on the same amount of energy. Graphs for these battery tests can be found in appendices B.1-B.6.
Reflectance Sensor Testing was used to analyze how well the sensors worked, and examine the efficiency of the AEV. These sensors are an extremely important component of the since they allow for a certain distance to be travelled by the AEV. In order to test how well they worked, The AEV was run on the same track with different mark counts inputted into the code “goToAbsolutePosition”. Wheel rotations were converted into mark counts, and mark counts were converted into distances measured by inches. With the calculated distance of how much the mark counts should yield, it was then cross compared to the actual distance travelled by the AEV when the code was run on it. The actual distance travelled was measured by MATLAB, and a graph in B.7. was made to show these distances. Here are the conversions below:
8 marks= 1 rotation
3.9 inches per 8 marks
or
0.4875 inches/ 1 mark
50 marks= 24.735 inches
100 marks= 48.75 inches
125 marks=60.9375 inches
150 marks=73.125 inches
If the mark count distance calculation was not too far off the actual distance travelled by the AEV, the Reflectance Sensors were deemed functioning and acceptable. The primary purpose of this test was to become comfortable with the sensors and determine if any modification was needed to improve their functioning.
Results and Analysis
The first test the team performed was testing battery 1 for the distance travelled (m) vs. total energy (J) while using the goFor(2) command. As seen in Appendix A.1, the AEV travelled a total distance of roughly 0.8296 meters once the battery reached its peak energy output. The second test performed was testing battery 2 for the distance travelled (m) vs. total energy (J) while using the goFor(2) command. As seen in Appendix A.2, the AEV travelled a total distance of roughly 0.7925 meters once the battery reached its peak energy output. From this, the group determined that battery 1 performed better for this test in comparison to battery 2 because it travelled a greater distance.
The third test the team performed was testing battery 1 for the distance travelled (m) vs. total energy (J) while using the goFor(4) command. As seen in Appendix A.3, the AEV travelled a total distance of 1.94405 meters once the battery reached its peak energy output. The fourth test the team performed was testing battery 2 for the distance travelled (m) vs. total energy (J) while using the goFor(4) command. As seen in Appendix A.4, the AEV travelled a total distance of 2.167 meters once the battery reached its peak energy output. From this, the group determined that battery 2 performed better for this test in comparison to battery 1 because it travelled a greater distance.
The fifth test the team performed was testing battery 1 for the distance travelled (m) vs. total energy (J) while using the goFor(6) command. As seen in Appendix A.5, the AEV travelled a total distance of 3.8881 meters once the battery reached its peak energy output. The sixth test the team performed was testing battery 2 for the distance travelled (m) vs. total energy (J) while using the goFor(6) command. As seen in Appendix A.6, the AEV travelled a total distance of 4.2596 meters once the battery reached its peak energy output. From this, the group determined that battery 2 performed better for this test in comparison to batter 1 because it travelled a greater distance.
The final test the team performed was testing the reflectance sensors by using the goToAbsolutePosition(n) command for positions of 50, 100, 150, and 200 marks. As seen in Appendix A.7, distance increases with mark count and as mark count increases, the distance becomes more linear, leading to less error. When graphically analyzed, the 400 mark count was the most linear.
Takeaways
These results apply to the overall project by determining what would be best when setting up for the Performance Tests. For example, when the results came in that battery 2 is better when a further distance needs to be reached, Nick decided that we should use this battery for Performance Test 1 because after the AEV stopped for 7 seconds, it still needed the power to go past the second sensor. For the reflectance sensor test, the 400 mark count provided the most linear distance, so there was less error. This affects the team’s upcoming work by determining around what mark count should be used when running our tests. In Performance Test 1, the team used a mark count of 280 to reach the first sensor. The use of a servo sensor along with a lower mark count, such as 280, created little to no drift. This made the AEV successfully pass the test. In conclusion, these results helped the team determine that battery 2 is more efficient and a larger mark count provides less error.
Future Work
Situation
Upcoming tasks the group will need to complete will be performance tests 1 and 2. Performance test 1 guidelines state that the AEV must travel to the stop sign station, stop at the stop sign station for 7 seconds, then travel through the now raised stop sign. The group will be adding a servo motor onto the arm of the AEV so the servo can serve as a reliable braking mechanism by using its arm to stop the wheel, which will make this task easier. The team will then do conversions to determine the amount of marks needed for the AEV to stop at the appropriate place, and change as needed depending on AEV performance. Performance test 2 guidelines state that the AEV must do the same process as performance test 1, but must pick up a load at the end of the track, stop for 7 seconds, proceed back to the stop sign gate, wait for 7 seconds, proceed through the gate, then drop off the load. The team will go through the same process as performance test 1, by using conversion to determine the amount of marks needed for the AEV to stop at the appropriate place, and change as needed depending on AEV performance.
Upcoming Goals
The Team will be further looking into any possible different codes or materials that can be used to improve the efficiency of the AEV. For example, the team is currently looking into, and implementing the rotate servo tool. This tool will allow the team to instantaneously stop the motion of the AEV, ensuring that the AEV will stop when told. This also improves the efficiency of the AEV, as using the rotate servo command will prevent coasting and further energy usage after the AEV has run its course. This modification on the AEV was used in Performance Test 1.
The Team is also looking forward to Performance Test 2. From Performance Test 1, the team has gained insight into the functionality of the AEV. The Rotate Servo will still be implemented for the upcoming performance test, and marks will be converted into actual distance needed to travel. The team will devise a plan that efficiently can pick up an object at the end of the track, and bring it back safely. Acceleration Power of the motors will be further looked into, as to allow for a safe and low impact pick-up of the object.
Upcoming Schedule
Task Teammates Date Time Needed
Group Meeting: Everyone 3/21/19 2 Hours
Performance Test 2: Everyone 3/25/19 1 Hour
Meeting Notes: Emily 3/27/19 30 Minutes
CDR Draft: Everyone 3/27/19 1 Hour
Committee Meeting 2: Everyone 3/28/19 30 Minutes
Schedule Update: Nick 3/31/19 30 Minutes
Appendices
Appendix A: Graphs
A.1: Testing ‘goFor(2)’ for the First Battery
A.2: Testing ‘goFor(2)’ for the Second Battery
A.3: Testing ‘goFor(4)’ for the First Battery
A.4: Testing ‘goFor(4)’ for the Second Battery
A.5: Testing ‘goFor(6)’ for the First Battery
A.6: Testing ‘goFor(6)’ for the Second Battery
A.7: Reflectance Sensor Tests Showing Distances Traveled at Four Different Mark Counts
Appendix B: Codes
B.1: Testing “goFor(2)” for First Battery
motorSpeed(4,20);
goFor(2);
brake(4);
B.2: Testing “goFor(4)” for First Battery
motorSpeed(4,20);
goFor(4);
brake(4);
B.3: Testing “goFor(6)” for First Battery
motorSpeed(4,20);
goFor(6);
brake(4);
B.4: Testing “goFor(2)” for Second Battery
motorSpeed(4,20);
goFor(2);
brake(4);
B.5: Testing “goFor(4)” for Second Battery
motorSpeed(4,20);
goFor(4);
brake(4);
B.6: Testing “goFor(6)” for Second Battery
motorSpeed(4,20);
goFor(6);
brake(4);
B.7: Testing 50 marks using “goToAbsolutePosition(50)” for reflectance sensors
motorSpeed(4,20);
goToAbsolutePosition(50);
brake(4);
B.8: Testing 100 marks using “goToAbsolutePosition(100)” for reflectance sensors
motorSpeed(4,20);
goToAbsolutePosition(100);
brake(4);
B.9: Testing 150 marks using “goToAbsolutePosition(150)” for reflectance sensors
motorSpeed(4,20);
goToAbsolutePosition(150);
brake(4);
B.10: Testing 200 marks using “goToAbsolutePosition(200)” for reflectance sensors
motorSpeed(4,20);
goToAbsolutePosition(200);
brake(4);
Appendix C: Team Meetings
C.1: Meeting 1
Date: 14 – Feb – 2019
Time: 3:55 PM (Face-to-Face) Members Present: Emily Laudo, Sarabeth Hewa, Bradley Moyer, Nick Besancon Location: Hitchcock 224 Topics Discussed: Presentation of Grant Proposal and Progress Report Submission ****Decisions made are initialed in parenthesis (i.e. Bradley made decision: (BM)**** _______________________________________________________ Objective: Today’s main focus was on meeting as a team to present to the class the part for our Grant Proposal. _______________________________________________________ To Do/Action Items:
_______________________________________________________ Decisions:
_______________________________________________________ Reflections:
_______________________________________________________ Upcoming Tasks:
|
C.2: Meeting 2
Date: 21 – Feb – 2019
Time: 3:55 PM (Face-To-Face) Members Present: Emily Laudo, Sarabeth Hewa, Bradley Moyer, Nick Besancon Location: Hitchcock 224 Topics Discussed: Committee Meetings and Advanced R&D ****Decisions made are initialed in parenthesis (i.e. Bradley made decision: (BM)**** _______________________________________________________ Objective: Today’s main focus was on meeting as a team to break into our committees and beginning the Advanced R&D lab. _______________________________________________________ To Do/Action Items:
_______________________________________________________ Decisions:
_______________________________________________________ Reflections:
_______________________________________________________ Upcoming Tasks:
|
C.3: Meeting 3
Date: 28 – Feb – 2019
Time: 3:55 PM (Face-to-Face) Members Present: Emily Laudo, Sarabeth Hewa, Bradley Moyer, Nick Besancon Location: Hitchcock 224 Topics Discussed: Work on aR&D ****Decisions made are initialed in parenthesis (i.e. Bradley made decision: (BM)**** _______________________________________________________ Objective: Today’s main focus was on meeting as a team to work on our team’s assigned tasks for the Advanced R&D lab. _______________________________________________________ To Do/Action Items:
_______________________________________________________ Decisions:
_______________________________________________________ Reflections:
_______________________________________________________ Upcoming Tasks:
|
C.4: Meeting 4
Date: 4 – Mar – 2019
Time: 3:00 PM (Face-to-Face) Members Present: Emily Laudo, Sarabeth Hewa, Bradley Moyer, Nick Besancon Location: Hitchcock 308 Topics Discussed: Finish the Reflectance Sensor tests for aR&D ****Decisions made are initialed in parenthesis (i.e. Bradley made decision: (BM)**** _______________________________________________________ Objective: Today’s main focus was on meeting as a team to work on our team’s assigned tasks for the Advanced R&D lab. _______________________________________________________ To Do/Action Items:
_______________________________________________________ Decisions:
_______________________________________________________ Reflections:
_______________________________________________________ Upcoming Tasks:
|
C.5: Meeting 5
Date: 6 – Mar – 2019
Time: 3:00 PM (Face-to-Face) Members Present: Emily Laudo, Sarabeth Hewa, Bradley Moyer, Nick Besancon Location: Hitchcock 308 Topics Discussed: Finalize the Reflectance Sensor tests for aR&D ****Decisions made are initialed in parenthesis (i.e. Bradley made decision: (BM)**** _______________________________________________________ Objective: Today’s main focus was on meeting as a team to finalize the last few data collection tests for the reflectance sensors. _______________________________________________________ To Do/Action Items:
_______________________________________________________ Decisions:
_______________________________________________________ Reflections:
_______________________________________________________ Upcoming Tasks:
|
C.6: Meeting 6
Date: 7 – Mar – 2019
Time: 3:55 PM (Face-to-Face) Members Present: Emily Laudo, Sarabeth Hewa, Bradley Moyer, Nick Besancon Location: Hitchcock 224 Topics Discussed: Data Collection Formatting and Preparation for Performance Test 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 format the graphs of the data collected for the aR&D tests and build our AEV. _______________________________________________________ To Do/Action Items:
_______________________________________________________ Decisions:
_______________________________________________________ Reflections:
_______________________________________________________ Upcoming Tasks:
|
C.7: Meeting 7
Date: 18 – Mar – 2019
Time: 3:00 PM (Face-to-Face) Members Present: Emily Laudo, Sarabeth Hewa, Bradley Moyer, Nick Besancon Location: Hitchcock 308 Topics Discussed: Preparing for Performance Test 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 prepare for Performance Test 1 and make sure our final code works to complete the tasks. _______________________________________________________ To Do/Action Items:
_______________________________________________________ Decisions:
_______________________________________________________ Reflections:
_______________________________________________________ Upcoming Tasks:
|