Design process lab 02
Lab 02: External Sensors & System Analysis 1
For Lab 2 – The team members installed the external sensor on the AEV model. This is to count marks on track and set how far the model will move. The reflectance sensor was then tested to ensure that it is well-functioned. To appropriately set the orientation of the sensors, the sensor connections had been reversed. After the members typed in the coding for inside track, the program was uploaded and compiled. The group should be familiarized in troubleshooting errors if any. One of Group H members then worked on collecting the Wind Tunnel data. This wind tunnel testing is important to determine what type of propellers and what power work the most efficient, in designing the AEV model for the project.
Results & Analysis
The AEV didn’t really balance on the rail while it’s moving. This is due to the random design that the
members had for this test. The AEV stopped after few seconds it passed the gate. The team members recognized this flaws as acceptable because the group had increased the power used beforehand (the AEV wasn’t been able to move by the power given from the coding). The design and other external factors might also be the reasons for this AEV behaviour.
For Type EP-3030 propeller configuration, pusher has higher propulsion efficiency compared to the puller. Pusher’s advance ratio is 0.706 and pullers are 0.69. Both have its highest propulsion efficiency at 15% of Arduino power setting. In contrast, for Type EP-2510 propeller configuration, pusher has lower propulsion efficiency compared to the puller. Pusher’s advance ratio is 1.381 and pullers are 0.762. Both have its highest propulsion efficiency at 15% of Arduino power setting. It can be perceived that the propulsion efficiency of the EP-2510 propellers with puller configuration is
the highest among the propellers. This propeller got an advance ratio of 0.762 and calibrated thrust of 6.74g. It can be understood that this type of propellers is the most efficient propeller for its propulsion as it wastes energy the least. Nevertheless, this propeller might require a much greater power setting to even move the AEV compared to the EP-3030. This had brought to some consideration in deciding the power setting for the final project. The team would choose the propeller with the highest propulsion efficiency and can move the AEV. The sample AEV was not able to move with 25% power during the trial.
In conclusion, the team decided to use the EP-3030 Pusher propeller configuration with the power of
40%. The team could move the sample AEV at this power setting. With this setting, the propulsion efficiency is 11.37% which is the highest compared to EP-3030 puller and Ep-2510 pusher. Even though the efficiency of EP 2510 puller is a little higher, 16.27%, this propeller might require a higher power setting.
