1. Final Presentation

2.  The Team  Competition Overview  Design Constraints & Improvements  System Testing  Timeline  Bill of Materials

3. Jackson Knott Electrical Engineer Hardware Packaging Navigation Brian Lampkin Electrical Engineer PCB Design Vision Ian Turnipseed Electrical Engineer Hardware Packaging Vision Matt Williams Electrical Engineer Hardware Packaging Website John Morrison Electrical Engineer Hardware Packaging Navigation Matt Watts Electrical Engineer PCB Design Navigation Dr. Robert Reese Advisor

4.  The Team  Competition Overview  Design Constraints & Improvements  System Testing  Timeline  Bill of Materials

5. 1) Starting Zone 2) Loading Zone 3) Sea Delivery Zone 4) Rail Delivery Zone 5) Air Delivery Zone

6.  Qualifying Round  Drive One Foot Forward  Preliminary Rounds  Three 5 Minute Runs  Score will be Sum of the Three Runs  Top 8 Teams Advance  Final Rounds  Single-Elimination Bracket  Seeding based on Preliminary Standings

7.  Four Available Practice Courses

8.  Rail Cargo (Six Blocks)  50 Points: Correct Size  100 Points: Correct Color  Sea Cargo (Six Blocks)  50 Points: Correct Size  100 Points: Correct Color  Air Cargo (Two Blocks)  350 Points: Correct Size  100 Points: Correct Color  Deductions  20 Points: Wrong Zone

9.  The Team  Competition Overview  Design Constraints & Improvements  System Testing  Timeline  Bill of Materials

10. TypeName ManufacturabilityModular Design SustainabilityBattery Life

11.  Modular Design  PCB  Layout  Population  Chassis  Layout Optimization

12.  PCB Layout and Population  PIC24 Breakout Board  Headers/Locking Connectors

13.  Chassis Layout Optimization Battery Compartment Molex Battery Connection

14.  Chassis Layout Optimization  Battery Terminal Strip

15.  Chassis Layout Optimization  Cable Tray for Routing

16.  Chassis Layout Optimization  Wheels  Grippers

17.  Maximum Battery Life  Average Current draw for the system is 2.3 A  Battery Rating is 4400 mAh  Therefore, Overall Battery life is about 2 hours.

18.  Through testing, we found that the battery performance dropped after 20-30 minutes of use.  To obtain the highest possible performance throughout the SECON Hardware Competition, the battery packs were charged following each run.

19. NameDescription Multiple Block Carrier The robot must carry the maximum allowed number of blocks. NavigationThe robot must navigate the course autonomously. DetectionThe robot must detect color and size of blocks and spaces. SpeedThe robot must travel at a speed of 0.4 feet/second. SizeThe robot must be no larger in size than 12”x12”x16” [1]

20.  Two Claws  Two Servo Motors for Each Gripper  Arm Upright/Arm Lowered  Claw Opened/Claw Closed  Same Side Alignment for Each Gripper

21. Arm Upright Period High = 1400 µ s Arm Lowered Period High = 2350 µ s

22. Gripper Opened Period High = 1800 µs Gripper Closed Period High = 600 µ s

23.  Autonomous  Infrared Distance Sensing  Encoders

24.  Infrared Distance Sensor Testing

25.  Encountered Issue

26.  Design Improvement  Extra IR Sensors Added for Precise Navigation

27.  Mini-ITX and Camera  Camera Ignores White and Black  Detect Size and Color of Blocks/Zones  Serial Communication with PIC24

28. Size: 2 RGB: 231,123,99

29. Brown and Green Filters

30. Sliders to control detection zones

31.  Design Improvement  Camera Mount  Locking  5 Degrees of Freedom  Light Source  Illuminates Blocks/Zones  Servo-Deployed Hood  Blocks Ambient Light

32.  Minimum Speed of 0.4 feet/sec.  At 12 Volts, motors perform at 150 RPM  Wheel Diameter (d) = 90 mm.  Circumference (c) = πd = 282.6  Distance per Minute = c*RPM = 42,390 mm/min.  Distance per Second = 706.5 mm/sec. = 2.32 ft/sec.

33.  Drive Motor Testing  For a Speed of 0.4 ft/sec, motors must run at 17.2% Required for Task CompletionFast Speed (40% Duty Cycle)

34.  Robot must fit within a 12”x12”x16” Volume 12” 16”

35.  The Team  Competition Overview  Design Constraints & Improvements  System Testing  Timeline  Bill of Materials

36.  Integration of all Subsystems  Ensure that the Robot can do the following:  Avoid Walls  Detect a Block  Pick Up/Set Down a Block  Match a Block with Correct Loading Zone

37.  Calibration for Competition Courses

38.  Preparing for Preliminary Run

39.  Vision System Preparation

40.  Round Beginning

41.  Approaching the Drop Zone with Blocks

42.  Preparing for Delivery

43.  The Delivery

44. 1) Western Carolina University – 4950 Points 2) University of Alabama – 1700 Points 3) University of Evansville (IN) – 1440 Points 4) Mississippi State University – 1150 Points 5) FAMU/FSU – 840 Points 6) UNC-Asheville – 800 Points 7) North Carolina A&T – 710 Points 8) Tennessee Tech University – 650 Points

45. T5) Mississippi State

46.  The Team  Competition Overview  Design Constraints & Improvements  System Testing  Timeline  Bill of Materials

47. JanuaryFebruaryMarchApril PCB Population System Testing Packaging Debugging & Optimization Competition

48.  The Team  Competition Overview  Design Constraints & Improvements  System Testing  Timeline  Bill of Materials

51. ItemCost Computer~$270 14.8V/4400mAh Battery~$80 (2) 67:1 Metal Gearmotors w/ Encoders & Wheels~$75 (6) Servo-Motors (Arm, Claw, Hood)~$180 (5) Infrared Distance Sensors~$75 (4) Robotic Claws~$40 (2) Front Wheel Casters~$10 Camera w/ Telescoping Rod~$70 Lights~$5 Fan Cables~$30 Printed Circuit Board w/ Fabrication~$200 Course Construction~$150 Miscellaneous Hardware Materials~$50

52.  Unit Subtotal: ~$1235  Spares & Other Necessities: ~$365  Final Project Cost: ~$1600

53. [1] IEEE SoutheastCon 2013 Hardware Competition. Final Version. 11 Sep. 2012. http://ewh.ieee.org/reg/3/southeastcon2013/documents/Final_SECON _2013_Hardware_Rules.pdf http://ewh.ieee.org/reg/3/southeastcon2013/documents/Final_SECON _2013_Hardware_Rules.pdf

54. Questions