top of page

Testing and Results

Positioning Tests

Figure 1:
Testing Preset Function

Figure 2:
General Test of Movements

Figure 3:
Testing High Level Requirement for Hardware/Receiver

Figure 4:
Testing High Level Requirement for Software/Transmitter

Testing of High Level Requirements

The testing of the positioning, maneuvering, and range capabilities proved to be very successful. The RCMS was able to move from one specified spot to another in order to place the microphone as a marked location. This was done within a small tolerance of 3 inches from the marked location on the ground and 1 inch from the marked location on the instrument. The results show that the RCMS can be fairly precise in positioning the microphone anywhere within the range of the arm's height dimensions. 

Table 1:
Testing High Level Requirement for Hardware/Reciever

Table 2:
Testing High Level Requirement for Software/Transmitter

Testing of Mid Level Requirements

The testing of the RCMS electromechanical abilities of lifting the required weight, battery life, and height proved to be successful. The required weight of 680g was exceeded by also lifting a larger microphone that weighed 860g. The height was within an inch of the required height of 4ft from the floor. This was measured to be 3ft and 11in. The battery life was tested to last up to 24 hours and 39 minutes which well exceeded our required battery life of 6 hours. The final testing of this section was of the preset functionality which can be seen in Table 3. The software was able to store the current positions of the arm and recall them up to 6 different times. This proved to be very successful and worked as intended.

Table 3:
Testing Preset Functionality (Mid Level Requirement)

Testing of Low Level Requirements

These tests consisted of the low level requirements of cable management and the GUI position dispaly acurracy. The cable management was able to successfully keep the cable out of the way of the wheels while in movement. The GUI position display was successful in showing the angles of the arm sections after testing simple angles to show there was sufficient accuracy. These angles proved to be consistent with the angles displayed on the GUI. Table 4 shows the several trials of testing the GUI position accuracy.   

Table 4:
Position Display Testing (Low Level Requirement)

bottom of page