1 / 9

P9204 – 1kg Robotic Platform

P9204 – 1kg Robotic Platform. System level Design. Engineering Analysis – Concept Selection. Processor BDmicro ATmega128 unrestrictive IDE open source / open architecture This aspect ruled out the existing Freescale board that the 10kg platform uses expandable memory

rhona-berg
Download Presentation

P9204 – 1kg Robotic Platform

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. P9204 – 1kg Robotic Platform System level Design

  2. Engineering Analysis – Concept Selection • Processor • BDmicro ATmega128 • unrestrictive IDE • open source / open architecture • This aspect ruled out the existing Freescale board that the 10kg platform uses • expandable memory • This aspect ruled out the ArduinoNanosince it does not support expandable memory for future development • existing gcc • existing codebase • support for RS-232, SPI, I2C

  3. Engineering Analysis – Concept Selection • Bus • I2C • Modularity • Minimal hardware needed for implementation • This aspect ruled out CAM since each device connected to the bus requires a CAM controller • Slower than SPI but more modular • IC compatability • Only 2 signals to drive many devices • Risk! – slowest of available buses

  4. Engineering Analysis – Concept Selection • Motor • Stepper • Extremely precise • The most important point for choosing stepper over DC brushed. Crucially important for accurate dead reckoning • Superior torque per Watt • Power efficient • Risk! - System no longer uses PWM signals. Control logic will be more complex.

  5. Engineering Analysis – Concept Selection • Modularity • H-Bridge on individual Modules • Since H-bridges are variable dependant on motor type, these should not be hard-wired to the logic board • Reduces size of “box” • Single PCB Controller • Reduces wiring choas! • Smaller size • Risk! – less modular than multiple PCB boards

  6. Engineering Analysis – Concept Selection • Wireless • Crossbow • Existing codebase • Existing hardware (from 10kg platform) • Long range (30 meters) • Low power • Small size

  7. Engineering Analysis – Concept Selection • Battery • Type still not finalized since maximum current draw has not been calculated. • Ni / Li • Lead acid ruled out since it is too large • 12 V • Custom built battery module from 10kg platform will be re-used and tweaked

  8. Risk Assessment • Possible Risks • Not receiving parts on time (i.e. PCBs, Motors, µC) • Motor team unfinished with motor module at time of testing • Unable to get all code working properly with hardware • Possible Solutions • Reuse existing PCBs & motors, Order Early • Test control software with 1st Gen. RP1 • Concentrate on software that is most important to motor controller • Proof of Concept Works to test Design Concepts Early

  9. System Block Diagram Graphical User Interface(Lead: Jason Jack) Power Monitor Subsystem(Lead: Emily Phillips, NandiniVemuri) (PCB Layout: Jeffery Howe) Processing Subsystem(Lead: John Corleto, Jason Jack) µC Serial Comms Bus Controller Wireless Communication Subsystem(Lead: Ryan Schmitt) Power Distribution Subsystem(Lead: Emily Phillips, NandiniVemuri) (PCB Layout: Jeffery Howe) Motor Module Controller Subsystem(Lead: Jason Jack, Ryan Schmitt)(PCB Layout: Jeffery Howe) Motor Module(Future Mechanical Team) Bus Controller H-Bridge Motor Control Logic Encoder Feedback Logic Motor Encoder

More Related