The goal of lab 9 was to construct two sets of code that would result in a varying performance of the AEV. The difference between the codes was minimal yet, would result in a very different performance while on the test track. Unfortunately, due to difficulties with code 1, code 2 was not able to be tested in the allotted time. Regardless, observations could be inferred from past data that would support the teams decision to move forward in the lab with code 1. Code 1 primarily ran on a motor speed of approximately 30 as much as possible on the track, having to run a slightly longer distance. This is different from code 2, which uses a higher motor speed of 38 over a shorter distance to move. Based on wind tunnel data, the motor speed of 30 would result in the most efficient means of travel. Accordingly, the two codes were different in structure where code one only used “goToAbsolutePosition” functions while code 2 used a combination of “goFor” and “goTo AbsolutePosition” functions. It was found that the structure of code 2 often resulted in errors.
Although power data was not able to be observed for the second code because of lack of time, the group decided to move forward with code 1 because of the inferred results. They also decided to test code 2 in the future if time was available. The following figures are results from code 1.
