Conclusion:
With our final design, we were able to accomplish most of our initial goals at the outset of this project. We produced a fully automated, user-friendly, and most importantly, accurate and consistent shooting mechanism. With a simple 4-bar mechanism driven by a motor and careful assembly, we were able to recreate an almost perfect shooting motion that makes shots at a consistent rate. The mechanism was also able to shoot from different distances proving that the shot motion is not one-dimensional but replicable with adjusted power. Moreover, we were able to prove that a 4-bar linkage mechanism would be able to produce a consistent motion when it is assembled correctly. By eliminating as much play as possible between our joints, we could reduce a majority of the variance in the shot that would normally make it inaccurate.
Lessons Learned:
Future Work:
Although we accomplished a great deal with our final design, there are still some areas of it that we could improve upon. For example, in future models, we hope to include a reloading mechanism that would bring the ball back to the launcher after it is made into the basket. This feature would improve user experience as it eliminates the need to move the ball from the basket back to the launcher. Another change we would make is to add another degree of freedom to our mechanism so that the launcher can shoot from different angles instead of just straight in front of the basket. In future designs, it would also be beneficial to incorporate a scoreboard that would track the number of shots made. This feature would mainly help the user and improve their experience using our device. Additionally, adding a digital display that shows the shot distance that the launcher is currently on. In our final design, the shot cycle button, when pressed, sets the distance for which the launcher will be shooting. There is no digital display showing what setting the launcher is on and adding an indicator would help the user by not forcing them to guess what distance the ball will be shot. Another area that we would further explore in the future, is evaluating why our theoretical RPM values are lower than our actual RPM values for the motor that launches the ball. A hypothesis that we have about why this is happening is that as the motor builds up to the appropriate RPM value, the initial input is higher than shown in calculations.
Acknowledgements:
We'd like to thank Connor Hennig for his guidance throughout the project. He offered very useful insight and advice on how to get the output we desire from our robot.