Accuracy and Reliability
AEV was able to complete Performance Tests 1 and 2 with full marks. Was able to complete the Final Performance Test with full marks on it’s first two attempts. Able to score a 39/40 when completing the alternate assignment.
Energy and Time Efficient
Due to the fact that our AEV can transport two loads of cargo in one run, it uses almost half the total energy and time of other AEVs when transporting two loads of cargo. Total energy usage and time was the the lowest in the class.
| Team | Run 1 (J) | Run 2 (J) | Run 3 (J) | Total Energy (J) |
| A | 229.555 | 193.500 | 197.500 | 391.000 |
| B | 133.153 | 129.169 | 123.367 | 252.536 |
| C | 243.151 | 237.440 | 234.230 | 471.670 |
| D | 307.160 | 311.660 | 306.880 | 614.040 |
| E | 322.507 | 500.000 | 278.456 | 600.963 |
| F | 228.670 | 226.065 | 217.682 | 443.747 |
| G | 146.170 | 500.000 | 163.930 | 310.100 |
| H | 217.098 | 228.500 | 218.812 | 435.910 |
| I | 229.452 | 227.823 | 256.500 | 457.275 |
| J | 198.554 | 0.000 | 240.830 | 240.830 |
| K | 211.578 | 262.287 | 230.984 | 442.562 |
| L | 137.850 | 130.050 | 134.856 | 264.906 |
| M | 152.590 | 217.152 | 196.355 | 348.945 |
| N | 204.370 | 212.515 | 212.485 | 416.855 |
| O | 176.270 | 182.120 | 182.536 | 358.390 |
| P | 205.431 | 207.738 | 201.603 | 407.034 |
| Q | 154.970 | 155.682 | 155.355 | 310.325 |
| R | 161.200 | 157.670 | 165.811 | 318.870 |
| Team | 1 (sec) | 2 (sec) | 3 (sec) | Total Time (sec) |
| A | 51.90 | 49.80 | 50.20 | 100.00 |
| B | 54.48 | 53.82 | 54.12 | 107.94 |
| C | 57.30 | 58.98 | 58.50 | 115.80 |
| D | 54.24 | 52.20 | 52.80 | 105.00 |
| E | 62.82 | 120.00 | 56.28 | 119.10 |
| F | 51.96 | 52.08 | 51.96 | 103.92 |
| G | 50.40 | 120.00 | 51.30 | 101.70 |
| H | 55.92 | 55.62 | 54.60 | 110.22 |
| I | 57.90 | 57.78 | 65.10 | 115.68 |
| J | 53.16 | 0.00 | 55.02 | 55.02 |
| K | 49.22 | 58.22 | 55.20 | 104.42 |
| L | 45.90 | 46.20 | 46.20 | 92.10 |
| M | 53.64 | 63.84 | 58.68 | 112.32 |
| N | 52.32 | 53.70 | 53.38 | 105.70 |
| O | 59.32 | 57.78 | 57.24 | 115.02 |
| P | 54.42 | 54.84 | 53.52 | 107.94 |
| Q | 50.10 | 50.76 | 52.20 | 100.86 |
| R | 59.64 | 57.54 | 57.00 | 114.54 |
Cost Efficient
Total cost of the AEV turned out to be the lowest in the class. Group was able to make an AEV that was not only the most energy and time efficient, but also was very inexpensive to operate
| Team | TOT COST | ||||
| A | $554,990 | ||||
| B | $553,076 | ||||
| C | $593,108 | ||||
| D | $625,501 | ||||
| E | $663,263 | ||||
| F | $568,646 | ||||
| G | $581,013 | ||||
| H | $585,143 | ||||
| I | $655,503 | ||||
| J | $503,169 | ||||
| K | $603,784 | ||||
| L | $550,528 | ||||
| M | $605,163 | ||||
| N | $595,222 | ||||
| O | $548,216 | ||||
| P | $551,167 | ||||
| Q | $554,490 | ||||
| R | $596,168 |
Communication
Division J received high marks on all Progress Reports and CDRs meaning they were very effective with sharing their findings. This would be ideal when communicating with a client about the project.
(Click to see Performance Test 1)