Emanuel’s Status Report for 2/24

This Week’s Updates:

  • Mandatory Lab (4 hr.)
    • Sat and gave feedback to other team’s design presentation
    • Had to prepare and give our team presentation for our team design
  • Team Meetings (6 hr.)
    • Created a cardboard prototype 
      • Track and test levitation and stability
    • Implemented magnets with the cardboard prototype 
      • Track and test the strength of magnets
    • Adjusted CAD design metrics based on results from cardboard prototype
  • Design Research and Self-Time (2 hr.)
    • Looked into alternative ways to power the nano Arduino
      • Nano needs wireless power since it is moving on the track
    • Soldered battery with wires to the nano
      • Tested for any heating, current/voltage loss, whether the component works
    • Researched ways to decrease the amount of voltage loss when connected to the nano
      • Alternative batteries (Lithium batteries)
      • Implement a switch in between the nano and the battery (most likely solution to go with)

Schedule:

As of now, we are behind schedule. We would have liked to have our track and carrier fully printed out by now, but due to our order request being rejected, we had to create an alternative cardboard prototype for testing. Though we are behind schedule, the cardboard prototype really helped us add and finalize certain details and components for the track and carrier.

Next Week’s Schedule:

  • Fully printed out carrier and track
  • Whole H-Bridge circuitry done (at least one coil)

Emanuel’s Status Report for 2/17

This Week’s Updates:

  • Mandatory Lab (4 hr.)
    • Met with TA and Professor to discuss feedback from presentation 
    • Established a new definition for our MVP
  • Team Meetings (4 hr.)
    • Completed the design for our carrier, adding finishing touches to track
    • Made decisions to change certain components 
      • Magnetometer instead of RFID
      • Ultrasonic Sensor instead of LiDAR Sensor
      • H-Bridge instead of Digital Potentiometer
    • Worked with team members on the Design slides for presentation
  • Design Research (4 hr.)
    • Read data sheets provided with new components about any recommendations
      • Voltage and Current
      • Potential safety components, e.g. Flyback Diodes
    • Assisted in researching the new components
      • Magnetometer
      • H-Bridge Chip
      • Ultrasonic Sensor

Schedule:

As of now we are behind schedule because of the drastic changes that we had to make to our project after talking to the TA and Professor. We had to make the decisions of changing multiple components to our designs such as changing from digital potentiometer to an H-Bridge, from LiDAR to Ultrasonic Sensor, and from RFID system to Magnetometer. With such changes to our design, we had to invest a lot of time into researching these components, as well as creating new ways to smoothly insert these newer components to the ones we are deciding to continue with. We wanted to finish all the 3D printing for the track and the carrier but we were not able to since we haven’t bought any filament for the 3D printer. 

Next Week’s Updates:

  • Have a finished and 3D printed carrier and track, at least so we can get to MVP territory 
  • Buy all the components we would need in order to work on MVP
  • Have circuits ready to implement the power system

Team Status Report for 2/17

Risks:

The main risk with our project is that we aren’t able to get our Arduino integrated duty cycle for the voltage to vary the current in the speed coils. This would mainly affect the propulsion system. In the case we can’t get the magnetic propulsion system functional we would pivot to a mechanical wheel system and have some type of battery or motor for the carrier. Achieving levitation and stability with levitation as well is a risk. To mitigate this risk we have designed our carrier with elongated sides to slightly contact the track to make sure it does not fall off. 

Design Changes:

  • Lidar to Ultrasonic Sensor with Blockage system
  • Digital Potentiometer to H-Bridge with speed up coil
  • Straight-Away track for MVP 

Schedule Changes:

  • Push back when we design speed up coils
  • Push back prototype 2
  • Since we are no longer using the lidar sensor, we have freed parts of our schedule. Therefore, we have time to push back parts of our schedule

A was written by Angel Nyaga, B was written by Emanuel Abiye and C was written by Myles Mwathe.

Part A:

Given that our product involves a user interface, there is good reason to consider what safety mechanisms the product has. This product is intended to have the user have as little interaction with the circuit as possible. To get the train to move, a button, separate from the main circuit is pressed. This little interaction protects the user from the possibility of being hurt by components of the circuit. 

Additionally, magnetic fields are often associated with negative health effects. This is only true when someone is in contact with a high amounts of magnetic fields. Since our system is small, a small amount of current is required to power the system. This means a small magnetic field is produced, meaning the user is not in danger.

Lastly, we want to advise people with magnetic or conducting materials to steer clear of the product. Given that our system is dependent on magnetism, there is a high possibility a conducting or magnetic component can interfere with the system without our control. This interference could result in damage to the product and harm to anyone near the product. For this reason, we would put up a visual disclaimer to anyone approaching the product with conducting and magnetic material.

Part B:

Our project aims to target train enthusiasts and those interested in Maglev Trains and would like to learn more about them. Our product offers an interactive learning experience for both kinds of users. For enthusiasts, we wanted to make sure that our product mirrored real life Maglev Trains and their functionality, with such components being the levitation and wanted to ensure authenticity to our product that can stand out to similar products. With the overall quality gap we plan on having compared to current MagLev model train sets, we believe that we can successfully cater to such users. And with such a gap mentioned before, train enthusiasts would be fine with our proposed cost for our product. For those that primarily would want to learn more about MagLev Trains, we are allowing our product to take in user input, allowing users to experiment with how MagLev trains would respond to such inputs. With examples such as affecting the speed, or having a carrier move from one stop to the next, or manipulating the current throughout the track, we want these users to learn how the MagLev carriers react to these changes, and have these reactions be as accurate as possible to an actual MagLev train. Again, with how wide we expect the gap to be compared to current MagLev model train sets, we believe that the cost accurately represents the wide variety of experiments and knowledge the user can learn from our product, and would be fine with the proposed cost. Overall, we are hoping to have a mutual appreciation of MagLev trains from both kinds of users, and possibly allow train enthusiasts to become the kind of user that would want to learn more about MagLev trains, and allow those that want to learn more about MagLev trains become train enthusiasts themselves.

Part C:

We are mindful of the current model maglev trains on the market and their prices currently. The most functional maglev train set that allows for propulsion goes for around $450. Some simpler models cost less but don’t have propulsion systems beyond the user pushing the train along the track manually. Some maglev model trains require materials like liquid nitrogen which may be expensive and hard to obtain for the average user of our product. 

Given that our budget for the project as a whole is $600 and that most of the components of our MVP are relatively inexpensive, staying below a price of $450 should be relatively easy. Since we are pivoting our design to use ultrasonic sensors and magnetometers instead of a LiDAR system, we not only simplify the complexity of implementation but the overall cost of our project as well. The magnets we would be using for the product are also relatively inexpensive given that the load of our carrier won’t be heavy enough to justify having to use stronger, more costly magnets. We aim to make our product accessible to people who want to learn about electromagnetics and the average train hobbyist so we don’t want there to the price point of the product to be an accessibility limiter for users. When our process becomes optimized for production we should be able to cut the costs of the product even further since we wouldn’t be doing prototyping and experimentation. 





Emanuel’s Status Report for 2/10

This Week’s Updates

  • Mandatory Lab (4 hr.)
    • Attended the mandatory labs, watched peer’s presentations and provided feedback
  • Working on Presentation Slides (4 hr.)
    • Worked with teammates to complete the slides for presentations
  • Team Meetings (4 hr.)
    • Met with teammates outside of in class hours
    • Worked on components to buy
    • Worked on track design
    • Watched videos to compare different circuit designs

Schedule

I am on schedule according to our proposed schedule. I am scheduled  to be focusing heavily on the 3D Printing components first which I have been accounting for.

Next Week’s Updates

  • Getting Prototype 1 materials
    • 3D Filament
    • Wires, resistors, digital potentiometer
  • Finishing up our proposed designed track
    • Finalizing the design, using filament to start printing
  • Research alternative power circuit methods
    • Some including digital potentiometer
    • H-Bridges

 

 

 

 

Team Status Report 2/10

Team Status Report for February 10, 2024

Risks

  • Levitation not working. 
    • We have a backup system with mechanical wheels. We will test the levitation system early on to make sure it’s sufficient 
  • Things ordered don’t show up on time
    • Working in slack time into the schedule. 
  • Integration not working out. 
    • Prioritize levitation and propulsion and work with the functional components. 
  • Speed and Slow not Implemented. 
    • Try different methods to implement speed-up/slow-down, we’ll look into different tracks and circuit designs. 
  • RFID stops not functional. 
    • We’ll make sure the train does a complete loop around the track which can be triggered by the user. 

Design Changes

The LiDAR may be changed to an ultrasonic sensor or something lighter and simpler. The LiDAR may be too complicated for our needs. 

Schedule Changes

In the future, we will try to make it more clear that our tasks are parallel. 

Angel’s Status Report for 2/10

This Week

  • Weekly Team Meeting (4hr)
    • Discussed design of prototype one
    • Research alternatives for the maglev design
    • Discussed how to implement “speed-up” coils
  • Mandatory Meeting (4hr)
    • Watched proposal presentations and provided feedback
  • Proposal Preparation (4hr)
    • Collaborated with team to finalize details of our proposal
    • Discussed deliverables we wanted to meet throughout the project

Throughout this week, we spent time working on the proposal presentation and finalizing details for our first prototype. In our proposal, we honed in on our intended audience and how we would deliver the best product for this group. We decided to target our project towards train enthusiast and individuals with interests in electromagnetics. Our final product is intended to be an interactive maglev train that has model train components and utilizes key properties of electromagnetics.

We are currently on-schedule.

Next Week

In the following week, I hope to work with my teammates to finalize the design for our first prototype. We intended to order products for our first prototype including 3D filament, digital potentiometers, and magnets. Also, I hope to start designing and building the “speed-up” coils that will be used to regulate speed on the track.

Myles status report 2/10

Personal Accomplishments:

  • Presentation (4 hrs):
    • On Sunday teammates and I finalized our slides for our presentation on Monday.
  • Lab Meetings (4 hrs):
    • I gave our team’s presentation on the proposal and also took part in active engagement in listening and giving feedback to other teams’ proposals.
  • Team Meetings (4 hrs):
    • Discussed track design and how we should scale it based on model train tracks
    • Research Maglev Model Alternatives

Progress:

On-time with schedule

Next Week Deliverables:

  1. Start the 3D printing design for the carrier and track
  2. Order Prototype 1 materials
    1. 3D printing material
    2. Digipot, magnets