Upgrade to Pro — share decks privately, control downloads, hide ads and more …

ENGR 2050 Line Follower

ENGR 2050 Line Follower

Michael Han, Raymond Jacobson

Raymond Jacobson

February 14, 2014
Tweet

More Decks by Raymond Jacobson

Other Decks in Education

Transcript

  1. Design with Customer Purpose •  Who are our customers? IED

     &  PROFESSORS   •  Legal voltage and power •  Legal width •  Legal height •  Legal length •  Move faster than 1in/ sec •  Be able to follow lines from Basic, Intermediate, and Advanced courses quickly CLASSMATES   •  Safe •  Look good   •  Functions •  Represents our section at the final competition •  Is fast OURSELVES   •  Large learning outcome •  Challenge ourselves •  Develop good hardware & software co-practices •  Earns a great grade •  Gets us interested in line following algorithms •  Reliability •  Reproducible for future teams/well documented  
  2. Translating Needs into Specifications Customer Statement à Interpreted Need à

    Specification à Metric “I want to be able to do it again or have someone else make it”   The interpreted needs for this statement were:! •  detailed instructions! •  ease of finding low-cost parts! ! For each of these needs, there was also an associated specification:! •  documentation written about project progress, measured by the thoroughness of the report and engineering log! •  use of commonly found, cost efficient items; household products, measured by the number of these items!
  3. Project Organization Project Name Status Owner Start End 20-Jan-14 21-Jan-14

    22-Jan-14 23-Jan-14 24-Jan-14 25-Jan-14 26-Jan-14 27-Jan-14 28-Jan-14 29-Jan-14 30-Jan-14 31-Jan-14 1-Feb-14 2-Feb-14 3-Feb-14 4-Feb-14 5-Feb-14 6-Feb-14 7-Feb-14 8-Feb-14 9-Feb-14 10-Feb-14 11-Feb-14 12-Feb-14 Prepara&on  and  Research   100% - 1/21/14   1/26/14   Determine Chassis Wheel Layout 100% RJ + MH 1/21/14 1/21/14 Decide on possible algorithms 100% RJ + MH 1/21/14 1/22/14 Research phototransistors 100% RJ 1/21/14 1/21/14 Part  Acquisi&on   100% - 1/21/14   1/26/14   Chassis 100% MH 1/21/14 1/21/14 Phototransitors 100% MH 1/21/14 1/21/14 Infrared LEDs 100% MH 1/21/14 1/21/14 Mounting material 100% RJ 1/21/14 1/26/14 Arduino kit 100% RJ 1/21/14 1/22/14 Print out tracks 100% MH 1/21/14 1/26/14 H-Bridge Electrical Component 100% RJ 1/26/14 1/29/14 Build  Process   100% - 1/22/14   2/2/14   Assemble Chassis 100% MH + RJ 1/22/14 1/22/14 Test Light Sensor Configurations 100% MH + RJ 1/25/14 1/26/14 Mount Light Sensors 100% MH + RJ 1/25/14 1/26/14 Write Algorithm onto Arduino 100% MH + RJ 1/26/14 2/2/14 Tes&ng   100% - 2/2/14   2/9/14   Test on sample course 1, change code 100% MH 2/2/14 2/2/14 Test on sample course 2, change code 100% MH 2/4/14 2/4/14 Test on both courses, reiterate code 100% RJ 2/4/14 2/9/14 Report  Wri&ng   100% - 1/26/14   2/12/14   Introduction & Methods 100% RJ 1/26/14 2/12/14 Design Process & Analysis 100% MH + RJ 1/26/14 2/12/14 Conclusion 100% MH 2/10/14 2/12/14 Presenta&on  Prepar&on   100% - 2/9/14   2/12/14   Slides 100% MH + RJ 2/9/14 2/9/14 Presentaiton Materials 100% MH 2/9/14 2/9/14 Improvements   100% - 2/10/14   2/12/14   LED-driven interface to continue debug 0% RJ 2/10/14 2/12/14
  4. Concept Generation •  Used concept selection tables complimented by a

    concept selection matrix Selec5on  Criteria   Combina5on  1   Combina5on  2   (Reference)   Combina5on  3   Ease  of  use   +   0   -­‐   Ease  of   debugging   -­‐   0   +   Repeatability   +   0   0   Durability   0   0   0   Ease  of   Fabrica5on   -­‐   0   0   Portability   +   0   0   Expandability   -­‐   0   +   Cost   +   0   -­‐   SUM  +   4   0   2   SUM  0   1   8   4   SUM  -­‐   3   0   2   Net  Score   1   0   0   Rank   2   3   1   Con5nue?   Combine   No   Yes   Combination 1
  5. Hardware Design Decisions •  Revision A –  Gearbox design, gear

    ratio, caster wheel height –  H-Bridge motor driver –  Front wheel drive –  Close positioning of sensors –  Single battery –  Two phototransistors •  Revision B –  Two additional phototransistors •  Revision C –  Rear wheel drive –  Additional battery to drive motors to cut down interference –  Front breadboard •  Revision D –  Increased spacing of sensors Initial research & design •  Arduino and digital components over analog components
  6. Software Design Decisions •  To deal with faulty and inconsistent

    parts: we aimed toward developing robust and reliable software – Per-run calibration – Thresholding – Pseudo-binary line-identification and response system – Proportional and derivative control – Iterative testing to determine proper gain values
  7. Testing Format •  Microtesting during development •  Testing on practice

    course A •  Testing on practice course B •  Repeated cycle testing •  Creative track testing (using electrical tape on paper) 0   0.02   0.04   0.06   0.08   0.1   0.12   0.14   0.16   0.18   0.2   0   2   4   6   8   10   12   14   16   Rate  (D/s)   Test  #   Rate  of  Line  Follower  vs.  Test  #   0   0.5   1   1.5   2   2.5   3   3.5   4   4.5   0   2   4   6   8   10   12   14   16   Number  of  Resets   Test  #   Number  of  Resets  vs.  Test  #  
  8. Conclusions •  Our project involved thorough –  Concept generation – 

    Iterative design –  Rigorous testing –  Review However, there is always room for improvement and we believe that with some software adjustments, we should be able to perform even better at the final competition  
  9. Lessons Learned •  Developing a line following device that is

    capable of following new tracks, reliable, and precise is difficult using low-budget components •  Never trust parts, always unit test and functional test before assembly and complete integration •  Begin early. If we had not, we wouldn’t have had time to deal with many issues we ran into