Design Modifications: At first, we were trying to make a gate system with all pneumatics, but because the whole class was trying to do that as well, it was extremely difficult to find enough parts for everyone. We discovered that we could get the same linear motion job done with motors, so we switched our whole project to this. An exception to the pneumatic requirement was made for our group because of this learning process we went through.
Final Design:
Reflection: We accomplished in making a machine that works decently. Our model went through multiple prototypes. First we tried to use pneumatics and focused most of our energies on this but there were not enough parts so we switched out the pneumatics for motors. We found that motors could do the same motion the pneumatics did just as efficiently and were easier to program. For the most part, our machine worked quite well and achieved the main objective of sorting the marbles. However, the color sensor we used was very sensitive and seemed to vary its readings from day to day. Before each use we had to test our values and adjust accordingly. Only after this could we sort our marbles. However, the design worked quite well after the adjustments. Our other dilemma was getting it below 2 minutes. The machine we designed sorted 15 marbles in approximately 2 minutes and 25 seconds. We were given an exception for this, however. This is because motors work much slower than pneumatics. Regarding our programming, we made a main program with a singular subprogram imbedded in it, as shown above. It was a challenge to program because neither of us had ever made such an intricate program before but we received help from both David Cuban and Austin VonPohle and were able to make a working program. Overall, we believe that we succeeded in making a working program with a efficient machine.
Hi Sarah,
ReplyDeleteYou and Britanny did an excellent job of being flexible with your solution in the face of the "on the ground" reality of building the project (resources getting used up by the class). That said, you could share more detail on this design/build experience.
I would have liked to have seen an image of your final solution in your write up. You do reference an image from another post (not quite the same name for the post that you reference). My analogy is that you wouldn't enjoy watching a movie just to have the finale reference the preview you had previously seen?
You and Brittany worked well developing a software solution for your machine. Your images help to tell that story but you could include a few words to help put them into context. I'm assuming the first image is the "Pushers" subprogram that's nested in the second image?
Consider posting your images in a different sequence. The subprogram might make more sense to post after the main program. More significantly, your sketches start with 3 and 4 first and then go to 1 and 2. This isn't the end of the world on its own but in combination with a few other issues (vague references to other posts for example), it doesn't help to create the air of coherent presentation.
How could you improve the formating of your Reflection write up? Keep in mind that we're aiming to be effecient and effective with our communication.
If you're interested in improving your grade, make sure that you address each section as required:
Brainstorming Ideas
Decision Matrix
Final Design Solution
Design Modificatons
Final Design
Reflection
This is a link to the assignment where these are fully broken out if that's helpful (available on assignments page as well):
http://creativeproblemsolvers.blogspot.com/2011/03/machine-control-capstone-project.html