Posted on

Team Status Report for 4/25

This week, we finished a rough full system integration. We exposed some faults that needed addressing, such as gantry pitch decoupling and audio bugs. We explored adding two axes to the gantry, improved the robustness of wiring connections, and are working to tie up any other loose ends to create a robust system for public demos.

As for our unit tests, we conducted the following:

1. Bat Swing -> Servo Actuation. Actuated servo based on different measured swing speeds. Adjusted base level measured on on our own strengths, made room for it to be adjustable.

2. Bat Swing Strength. Measured the servo’s torque, the bat’s strength, and the swing power (ball distance traveled).

3. Scoring Detection. Measured detection (trigger/no trigger) for each pocket, revised pocket design. Measured correct base state changes for each scoring type with different runners on base. Created routing scheme for balls to route to bottom of board.

4. Pitch Coupling and Decoupling. Coupling was tested by dragging our magnets under our surface by hand, with the ball coupled on top, we can test how strong the connection is between the magnet and the ball. This was important as it informed how strong to size our magnet. If our magnet didn’t couple well enough, we wouldn’t be able to produce fast and variable pitch movements (like a start-stop pitch, which requires high acceleration). But we also needed the ball to be able to decouple relatively easily. We tested this with the flick of our fingers on the same setup. If we could flick the ball off the magnet coupling, we were sure that the real flipper could do the same easily. This informed an upper bound for our magnet strength, since if the magnet was too strong, we wouldn’t be able to decouple it or hit the ball cleanly.

5. Pitch Speed. This was tested by sweeping parameters of the gantry control software, FluidNC. It has a steps_per_mm and acceleration parameter, and we pushed it until we noticed motor whirring or extreme vibration. We were satisfied with the speed we were able to achieve. We were able to get up to ~250 mm/s for velocity. This was below our original target, but the eye test suggests that our original target was way higher than necessary, and that these speeds suffice.

 

To test the full system, we ran through full game cycles of pitch -> hit -> score (-> pitch). The full system testing revealed some flaws, such as the aforementioned gantry pitch decoupling and audio bugs, as well as issues such as the ball getting stuck on wires below the table. This informed us on what needed revision this week to make our game a complete, fun playing experience.

Posted on

Aiden’s Status Report for 4/25

What did I accomplish?

I built another linear axis for the pitch gantry and achieved simultaneous 2-axis movement, and hypothesized different solutions to frame it. I decided that, given the spatial constraints and minimal time left, the XY gantry was unfeasible. I instead developed and sourced components for another gantry enhancement — the retractable Z magnet. I also iterated on the gantry control with Bing to enable variable pitch speed and a button interface.

 

Am I on schedule or behind?

I’m behind schedule. I hoped we would have had more time fully integrated and testing at this point.

 

What do I hope to complete in the next week?

Everything. I hope to produce a system that is robust, skill-based, engaging, aesthetically pleasing, and, most importantly, fun.

Posted on

Aiden’s Status Report for 4/18

 

What did I accomplish?

I framed the gantry into our wooden game board, I mounted a magnet to it, I designed and cut the housing for our scoreboard, and I iterated previous pocket designs and printed them all.

 

Am I on schedule or behind?

I feel a bit behind schedule, as we haven’t gotten around to testing as much as I would’ve liked, and tomorrow is our last push for complete integration.

 

What do I hope to complete in the next week?

I hope to finish the full integration, clean up any hacked-together solutions, and improve the robustness of fabrication. After that, I will begin working on two-axis gantry movement, as it’s currently confined to 1 axis.


As you’ve designed, implemented and debugged your project, what new tools or new knowledge did you find it necessary to learn to be able to accomplish these tasks? What learning strategies did you use to acquire this new knowledge?

Given how mechanically complex my project is, I have had to spend many hours using Fusion 360, a CAD software, to model my design. Then, I have spent time 3D printing, woodworking, and machining to make my model a reality. For CAD and 3D printing, I used LLMs and YouTube tutorials to learn how to design and debug. For woodworking and machining, I consulted the experts and TechSpark routinely, from high-level overviews to assess feasibility, to double-checking specific implementation details.

Posted on

Aiden’s Status Report for 4/4

What did I accomplish?

I assembled a linear actuator (1 axis of the gantry) and designed and CAD modelled pockets which have a slot to embed our breakbeams in them. 

 

Am I on schedule or behind?

I feel on schedule with our latest Gantt chart. While I didn’t get to programming the linear actuator (gantry), I was pleased with the progress we made on the under-table routing and pocket design.

 

What do I hope to complete in the next week?

I hope to program the gantry to move in a straight line and mount a magnet to it. I also hope to print and test the pockets and finalize the design.

On the verification of my systems
I have contributed to a lot of the subsystems, and the one that I am owning, the pitch, is still awaiting its core component — the gantry. I just finished assembling the gantry and have yet to verify it.

Another core component of the pitch is the “coupling mechanism”, which includes everything in the scope of the ball and getting it to move with the gantry under the table. At first, our design included a magnet that we would linearly retract. Our first ball design was a steel puck with a plastic cover on it, as we feared the weight of a full ball would be too much for the flipper. Our main test was a drag test with the ball, where we had the ball above a piece of the surface material and dragged it with a magnet below. From our testing, we concluded that the puck experienced too much friction, and we changed to a ball once we realized that the flipper was strong enough to hit it effectively. We also tested a few different strengths of magnet and settled on one that held the ball strongly enough so that it stayed coupled while undergoing massive acceleration changes (by dragging the magnet in aggressive paths and speeds), yet not too strong so that it was difficult to decouple the ball with the flick of our fingers (replicating a flipper striking it). The balls rolled and thus didn’t suffer from friction like the pucks.

Much of my contributions have been physical thus far, namely the game board. This required little formal testing. We needed to ensure the game dimensions passed the eye test and that the board felt strong enough.

Posted on

Aiden’s Status Report for 3/28

What did I accomplish?

I fabricated the game board out of plywood and laser-cut the surface out of hardboard. I CAD modelled and 3D printed a gate-like housing for the breakbeams and a return pocket for the ball to be picked up from. I tested the friction and magnetic strength of two models of game balls, and ordered a few other sizes of balls and a pack of stronger magnets according to the testing results. I spoke with several people from TechSpark to review my designs.

 

Am I on schedule or behind?

I am currently on schedule. So long as tomorrow goes to plan, the game board fabrication should be complete.

 

What do I hope to complete in the next week?

I hope to build one axis of the gantry and program it to move in a straight path.

Early in the following week, I hope to have the magnet mounted to the gantry so that it can automatically drag the puck in a straight line.

Posted on

Team Status Report for 3/21

This week, we made significant strides in the physical fabrication and flipper-gameboard integration. Aiden revised the CAD models of the game board surface and frame, and consulted TechSpark’s woodshop lead for advice. Vivian tested the new servo and IR break beam sensors and successfully implemented a prototype game state machine with these two components. Bing continued development on the bat swing detection system.

We ran multiple hands-on tests this week that helped shape upcoming design decisions. We tested flipper-ball (hits), ball-magnet, and ball-surface (friction) interactions, and developed a full-scale surface prototype to evaluate the dimensioning of the board and pockets. We confirmed that the flipper was strong enough to hit the ball, but the ball doesn’t travel as far as we wish. We are going to try with a spherical game ball instead of the current design, which is a puck. We also concluded that the magnet was strong enough.

Looking ahead, we are focusing on pulling together a cohesive interim demo for next week, and we will likely focus on physical fabrication and integration of at least a prototype of all subsystems minus the pitch (gantry).

Posted on

Aiden’s Status Report for 3/21

What did I accomplish?

I did a lot of stuff pertaining to the physical fabrication of our game board. I revised our CAD model for both the surface and the frame of our board. The surface design mimicked an old baseball-themed arcade game that we found, and the frame design was informed by a conversation I had with Justin Harvilla, who works at TechSpark’s woodshop. I also iterated on the flipper design and 3D-printed a few other small components to ensure a clean interaction between the flipper and the game ball.

I cut out both a small piece of hardboard and a full-sized surface replica out of cardboard. The hardboard cutout served to test how much friction the game ball experienced, and the full-size cutout served as a visual aid for pocket placement and board sizing.

Am I on schedule or behind?

I am currently on schedule with revisions to reflect the delayed arrival of the gantry, yet I am concerned with the amount of work I’ll have to do next week to hit a reasonable interim demo.

What do I hope to complete in the next week?

I hope to:

1. Order and acquire my game board materials — hardboard, acrylic, and plywood.

If those come in by Wednesday:

2a. Test the flipper hitting reach with the hardboard. This will inform the final board size.

3a. Resize the surface and cut it. This may not be the final surface, but the length and width should be final so that I can:

4a. Make the frame.  This should be a one-and-done deal. No revisions.

If those don’t come in by Wednesday:

2b. Build the Gantry

3b. Program it to move in a straight path.

4b.  (Stretch) Mount the magnet to the gantry so it can automatically drag the puck in a straight line.

Posted on

Aiden’s Status Report for 3/14

What did I accomplish?

I machined three prototypes for the game puck out of steel, and tried testing magnetism with small neodymium magnets I found, but they were far too weak, so I ordered some stronger magnets. I also drilled holes in the 3D printed flipper prototypes so they can be mounted on the servo horn, and planned revisions to the flipper.  I acquired and tested a small solenoid for linear actuation for the coupling mechanism, and the speed seemed fine. Thus, I have simplified the coupling mechanism design. For our board fabrication, I researched building materials and framing styles.

Am I on schedule or behind?

I’m on schedule, but I am getting concerned that the gantry still hasn’t come in yet. I will continue to make progress elsewhere until then.

What do I hope to complete in the next week?

I plan to make a prototype game board with a cutout for the flipper servo and at least one for a scoring pocket. This can serve as a test bench for all of our subsystems except the pitch. It will be like a slice of the real deal, so it should be a good proof of concept. 

Posted on

Team Status Report for 3/7

This week, we formalized and integrated our subsystem designs to make a planned final vision, which was captured in our Design Report. Until now, a lot of our ideas had been hypothetical. This report forced us to rigorously analyze tradeoffs and defend our design with a mathematical basis. In addition, we updated our Gantt chart to adapt to logistical challenges and developed some prototypes for the flapper subsystem.

 

The following paragraphs discuss  how we are considering factors of public health, safety, and welfare, social, and economic. Part A was written by Aiden, Part B was written by Vivian, and Part C was written by Bing.

 

A. Globally, there has been a shift towards screen-based, single-player entertainment. Our solution addresses the downsides of this shift directly by making our playing experience physical and social.

Our game is intuitive and accessible. Our desire for simplicity enables an experience that anyone can quickly pick up and enjoy,  with intuitive inputs such as button presses and a bat swing. The components we use are easily accessible and affordable, and there is a plethora of open-source projects online that can be used for additional context. Our product is also designed to have a small footprint, which enables users to easily set up our board in a variety of environments, such as classrooms, arcades, community centers, and even homes.  — Aiden

 

B. Our product solution is designed to create a game experience that is accessible, familiar, and enjoyable for a broad range of users. Because games are often played in shared social settings, cultural values such as inclusivity, fairness, and ease of participation are important considerations taken into account within our design. The system is made to be playable by anyone, regardless of prior sports experience or familiarity with similar arcade games. In our game, this is illustrated through simple physical interactions, visual feedback, and straightforward scoring logic so that the product can be understood quickly without long instruction manuals. By lowering barriers to entry, the game better serves users and supports a fun community bonding experience. — Vivian

 

C. From the standpoint of environmental considerations, we of course plan to limit any unintended adverse affects that it may have on the environment. Although we have good reason to believe that the main purpose of our product would not have direct negative effects on the environment, we still take into consideration the power consumption, building materials, and longevity of the product. In terms of power consumption, the system should use the same amount of power as a typical electric appliance based on our design, which we believe is reasonable. We also plan to construct the main body of the system out of composite wood, which is highly sustainable. We understand that the electrical components of the gantry, microcontrollers, and sensors rely on materials that are obtained through environmentally destructive ways, however, the use of those components is strictly necessary and shall only remain as such. Finally, our product is designed to be played over and over again for as long as possible, and thus waste should be minimal. — Bing

 

Posted on

Aiden’s Status Report for 3/7

What did I accomplish?

I designed the coupling mechanism and began 3D printing prototypes. I also designed the flapper and 3D printed prototypes for that. I improved the game board model and sought feedback from my partners.

I pondered alternative game board materials, such as hardboard. Acrylic will be very low friction, but it is expensive and can be tough to work with. Hardboard may have low enough friction.

Am I on schedule or behind?

I think after adapting my schedule to fit my delayed gantry arrival, I am on schedule. Over Spring break, I worked on the things I sought to beforhand.

What do I hope to complete in the next week?

If my steel rod comes in, I want to make a prototype of the game puck to enable Vivian to make forward progress with the flapper system. I want to pass off the coupling mechanism work to her as well so that I can focus on the gantry, as it should be arriving soon.

I want to meet with the team to finalize a game board surface design so that we can at least have a prototype to work with in the following week.