Codes Used So Far
Scenario 1 – Lab 1 – Programming Basics
This code was used to test out basic learned code and how it worked when downloaded and executed by the Arduino on the motors.
ExternalSensorsOutside – Lab 2 – External Sensors
This code was used to test the external sensors so that they were working correctly and logging marks. For this, the wheel with reflective surface was spun for the mark distance of the goToAbsolutePosition function, which was approximately 12 feet.
CSS1 – Lab 4 – Design Analysis Tool
This code was used to run on the AEV to collect data for the design analysis tool to process and graph. Those graphs allow us to see energy used vs. time and energy used vs. distance.
PropTest1/PropTest2 – Lab 5/6 – Propeller Configuration Testing
This code was used to compare the different propeller configurations for advanced R&D in labs 5 and 6. PropTest1 was used for the single pusher AEV and the double pusher AEV.
PropTest2 was used for the puller AEV design and both pull-push AEV designs.
Performance Test 1
Used to get the AEV up to the gate, stop, wait for 7 seconds, and continue through.
Performance Test 2
Used to get the AEV up to the gate, stop, wait for 7 seconds, continue through, slowly attach to caboose, and move it out of loading zone.
Final Performance Test
Used to get the AEV up to the gate, stop, wait for 7 seconds, continue through, slowly attach to caboose, transport it to the gate, stop, wait for 7 seconds, and deliver it safely to the starting zone.
Designs Brought Forth So Far
“Design I” – Austin Hill
For this design, the thinking was that the craft would be more streamlined and be able to run both motors in either a pull-push configuration or have one motor on for either direction. This design would also keep costs down due to the small amount of materials needed as well as keep energy use down due to less weight being moved.
“The Skyline Cruiser” – Marshall Price
The design below is a very simple design. It provides stability to the AEV as well as practicality. The motors are on both sides of the back of the vehicle connected to slanted wings. This will allow them to move in unison and be programmed together. A potential downside, is that it will potentially be costly.
“Design III” – Jurian Misawayee
For this design, I was thinking about how most airplanes have the thrust coming from the middle of the fuselage and off the center of the fuselage. All components of the AEV are on the body and the two motors are supported by an arm extending out both sides with the dihedral angle pointed downwards.
AEV Design – Laiwei Wei
For this design a long rectangular section holds the battery and Arduino vertically. The motors are perpendicular to this rectangular piece, allowing for close thrust and streamline design.
Design V – Combination Build
For this design, aspects of everyone’s builds are taken into account. Streamlined but with ‘wing’ engines, compact for less weight and cost, it will more than likely be a contender for Advanced R&D.
Design V-2 – Combination Build #2
This design keeps the same aspects as Design V but uses the other AEV arm instead.
Propeller Configuration Research and Designs
Below are the 5 different propeller configurations the team used to research power, distance, and time variations between the designs.
With the advanced R&D done between these 5 designs, some patterns did appear. The engines seemed to favor pushing the AEV opposed to pulling it energy-wise, and having dual push motors offered slightly better results than push-pull variations. We decided to stick with the two push motor design in accordance to our component performances, which is shown in the servo testing below and in Design V-2 above.
Servo Functionality Research and Design
The other advanced R&D topic the team focused on was servo functionality, successfully implementing an airbrake onto the AEV design to test. Other ideas suggested were using the servo to move an arm onto the wheels/rail to slow it down or attach a motor to said airbrake portion to have a fully rotating motor.
Performance Test Iterations
Prototype 1 – initial design, did not run on track as intended so needed modified.
Prototype 2 – adapted design, used for Performance Test 1 (needed to reverse counters and adjust balance).
Prototype 3 – adaptation of Prototype 2 in that it is able to connect to caboose. Connection arm not sturdy, changed in final.
Final Prototype – used for Final Performance Test with stronger caboose connection.
