Upload
others
View
1
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Autonomous People MoverPhase II - Sensory System
P15242 - MSD 1 - SYSTEM DESIGN REVIEW
The Team Member Role ProgramNathan Biviano Project Manager &
IntegrationIE
Madeleine Daigneau
Software & Communication
CE
James Danko Controls & Communication
EE
Connor Goss Software & Communication
CE
Austin Hintz Power & Electrical Design
EE
Sam Kuhr Power & Electrical Design
EE
Benjamin Tarloff Controls & Integration
ME
Agenda● Background
○ Project Background○ Team Overlap○ Scope○ Customer Requirements○ Engineering Requirements○ Risk Assessment
● System Analysis○ HOQ Relationship Diagram○ Functional Decomposition○ Engineering Analysis○ Concept Selection/System Level Proposal○ Test Plan○ Updated Schedule
Feedback Topics
● Sensor Selection● Microcontroller Selection● Sub-microcontrollers● Sensor Layout● Sensor Integration Difficulty
Project Background
The Rochester Institute of Technology wishes to re-enter the field of research in vehicle autonomy.
Autonomy is becoming more and more important as automotive standards leave fewer vehicle functions to the human user. Autonomous vehicles offer significant improvements in roadway safety and traffic flow.
The base of this project is the work started by the Autonomous People Mover Phase I team.
Team Overlap & Integration
Project Scope
Phase I● Remote Control● Manual Override
Phase III+● Full Autonomy (forward
& reverse)● Refined User Interface● Object Identification &
Avoidance● Static & Dynamic Objects
Phase II● Autonomous Forward
Drive● Static Object
Detection & Avoidance
● Closed Course● Remote and Manual
Override
Customer Requirements
Engineering Requirements
Risk Assessment
HOQ
Functional Decomposition
Autonomous Mode
Vehicle Benchmarking
LIDAR Benchmarking
Morph Chart
Morph Chart
Engineering Analysis of Sensor Placement
Engineering Analysis of Sensor Placement
Engineering Analysis of Sight
Engineering Analysis of Sight
System Overview
Concept Selection Process
Concept Selection Process
Concept Selection Process
Concept Selection
Engineering Analysis
● Will we have sufficient forward sight on the cart?o Yes
● Microcontrollers - # of Inputs? Processing?o Sub-microcontrollers
● Sensors - Amount of certain types? Orientation?● Power Consumption*
*No specifications for some sensors so competitor data was used.
Sensor Analysis
Sensor Communication Number of InputsUltrasonic Analog-Digital
Converter6
LIDAR Ethernet/USB 1RADAR CAN 3Camera USB 2.0 2GPS Serial 1Accelerometer I2C 1
Microcontroller Benchmarking
Microcontroller Benchmarking
ROS vs. PolySync
ROS with SLAM● Optimized for Robotic Systems
Integration ● Simultaneous Localization and
Mapping (SLAM)● 3D Perception● Works well with Autonomous
Navigation● Much Existing Code● Adaptable to most systems
ros.org
PolySync● Optimized for Autonomous Vehicle Image
Stitching● Algorithms for diagnostics, automatic fault
recovery and cybersecurity● Integrated Simulation● Advanced Logging and Replay● Plug and Play with massive ecosystems of
sensors, actuators, and computer hardware
harbrick.com
Test Plan
Once we have agreed upon sensors, ordered and received them:● Write test code● Test the different types of sensors under a variety of
conditions● Test different software to see which is the most versatile and
user friendly● Verify sensors are working● Test sensor code
o Translate sensor output data into a useful diagram● Revise code as needed
Schedule
Questions? Feedback?