Performance Test 1

The team built and tested AEV Design A first. The team observed that AEV Design A had poor balance. They spent the majority of two labs trying to balance AEV Design A. After a multitude of different testing procedures, the team was unable to get the AEV to balance. The battery outweighed the Arduino and the motors so that in any configuration the AEV would lean towards the side that the battery was on. Given this fact, the team decided to decommission AEV Design A. Since the team was unable to get AEV Design A to balance, they never tested it on the actual track because of the danger it would pose of falling off and getting damaged or potentially injuring a fellow student or instructor. As a result of this, the team never collected any data from AEV Design A and did not have the data to create any table or figures for AEV Design A. The team would want to emphasize this note to the instructors as to why they did not have tables or figures for AEV Design A.

 

After the team tested AEV Design A, they moved on to building and testing AEV Design B. After testing 3-4 different Arduino and battery configurations, they were able to find a configuration that balanced the AEV. This was what the group was expecting. The purpose of the horizontal wings on AEV Design B was to create more room for positioning the Arduino and battery so that the AEV could be balanced. This was AEV Design B’s most significant benefit over AEV Design A. Balance was important for both the safety of bystanders, and the protection of the AEV. On the track, the AEV behaved as the team expected. It balanced well, and was light enough (at an estimated weight of 270 grams) to traverse safely and quickly along the track. Since the team was unable to collect data from AEV Design A, they could not discuss the difference in total energy consumed by the AEV designs.

 

Performance Test 1 impacted the team’s AEV design process by leading the team to choose AEV Design B over AEV Design A. Instead of analyzing the respective data for each AEV, and choosing which AEV to continue with based on that data, the team made the decision based on the fact that they could not get AEV Design A to balance. Given this fact, it would have been unsuitable for the team to continue to work with that design.

 

Team meeting notes

03/09/17

Houston 2nd Floor

Gabe, Eugene, Andrew, Mark

 

Objective

Complete Progress Report Lab 8. Create two designs to be tested in Lab 08. Work on sections of PDR. Update project portfolio- discuss with team.

 

Tasks Completed

  • Progress Report Lab 9- All- NA
  • Code Commenting- Andrew Coyle- Complete
  • Team Meeting Notes-Gabe Hedges -Complete
  • Updating Project Portfolio- Gabe Hedges- Incomplete
  • PDR – All – Complete

 

Tasks for Upcoming Week

  • Update Project Portfolio- Gabe
  • Plan two individual designs to be tested
  • Work on fixing AEV balance in off-time
  • Begin prepping for Final Test

 

Reflection

  • Meetings have been effective. Team is working well together.
  • Potentially research/implement time management strategies to accomplish all given tasks

Schedule

Update Portfolio – Gabe – Complete by Friday

Proofread PDR – Mark – Complete by Sunday Evening

Implement team standard for operation procedure – Eugene – Complete by Monday