2.7 Conclusion & Future Work

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 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 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: 

One of the main takeaways from this project is that as you design a mechanism it requires a lot of iterating. You may have a vision of what something looks like however, when you go to implement it you realize that it won't work the way you intended it to so you have to adapt and think of a new solution. This can be a time-consuming process but when it finally works as desired it comes with a satisfying feeling of accomplishment. Another lesson we learned was the importance of analysis. If we hadn't calculated the necessary link lengths or the RPM/PWM necessary for the distance we wanted to travel we would've had to do the project through trial and error; which would have been a very time-consuming process. 

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. We would also like to add a potentiometer to have the user adjust the PWM signal themselves so they can shoot anywhere on the court rather than four set distances. 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 and Dr. Symmank for teaching us about the mechanisms that helped create our robot and furthering our knowledge of robotics.