Caption:
Team troubleshooting inconsistent sensor readings while reviewing code and wiring.
Description:
The obstacle avoidance system continued to behave unpredictably and produced voltage values that did not match expected distance changes. The group modified the program by shifting how the signal was interpreted, moving from a more fluid analog style toward clearer digital boundaries that could force the robot to make decisions with less ambiguity. We redefined trigger points, reviewed pin configurations, and walked through the logic line by line. Multiple instructors were consulted to confirm that the issue was not rooted in assembly mistakes or incorrect electrical routing. Even after these interventions, the voltage floor remained near 3.85V, preventing accurate differentiation between near and far obstacles.
PLTW Step:
Test and Evaluate because we were deliberately running trials, gathering performance evidence, and diagnosing why the design was not meeting expectations.
Outcome:
We eliminated several possible causes and narrowed the failure to calibration or sensor behavior, giving us a clearer path forward.
Caption:
Team strategy meeting to protect timeline and prioritize essential deliverables.
Description:
Recognizing that continued attempts at the same fix were not producing new information, the team paused technical work and shifted into decision making. We reviewed our project agreement, upcoming benchmarks, and grading expectations. By comparing the time remaining against unfinished mechanical and integration tasks, we determined that remaining locked on one malfunction would threaten overall completion. The conversation centered on efficiency, opportunity cost, and sequencing. Rather than abandoning the sensor permanently, we chose to temporarily redirect effort toward components that would unlock future assembly.
PLTW Step:
Identify Problem and Plan because we redefined what the most urgent obstacle truly was.
Outcome:
We regained control of the schedule and ensured progress would continue this week.
Mechanical inspection reveals hinge restriction and door misalignment.
Description:
Attention moved to the dog carrier where operational flaws became obvious during handling. The hinges prevented full travel, contact between surfaces created resistance, and the door stuck when minor pressure was applied. Measurements were retaken, interference points were identified, and hardware positions were adjusted to allow smoother rotation. Reinforcement was added so the pivot would maintain alignment even after repeated use. These improvements transformed the carrier from a fragile prototype into a component capable of real deployment.
PLTW Step:
Improve / Redesign because we modified an existing build to increase reliability.
Outcome:
The carrier now functions with a wider range of motion and predictable performance.
Caption:
Installation of ultrasonic detection system and rotating scan mechanism.
Description:
With mechanical barriers reduced, we returned to obstacle avoidance using a more structured build approach. The ultrasonic sensor was mounted securely, the servo was positioned to enable directional reading, and jumper wiring was organized to prevent tangling during motion. Power distribution and communication paths were double checked before energizing the system. This phase emphasized stability, repeatability, and physical integrity so future programming would rest on dependable hardware.
PLTW Step:
Build because we translated plans into tangible structure.
Outcome:
A complete sensing assembly was ready for live code integration.
Caption:
Tno rials confirming successful object detection and rerouting.
Description:
Programming resumed with the newly stabilized hardware. Distance values were monitored, reaction thresholds were tuned, and repeated passes were conducted across the floor with different obstacle placements. Early attempts showed hesitation, but incremental adjustments improved response time and turning confidence. By the end of testing, the robot consistently identified barriers and redirected itself without manual intervention.
PLTW Step:
Test and Evaluate because performance data guided refinement.
Outcome:
Obstacle avoidance moved from uncertain concept to working capability.
Next week the main goal is preparing the dog carrier so it can be mounted onto the robot without creating safety or balance problems. Krishwa will lead the measurement process for the second level that will hold the carrier above the chassis. She will confirm spacing so the mount does not interfere with wheel rotation, battery access, or maintenance points. Nothing will be drilled until alignment is checked multiple times.
Hansika will study how the added height and weight could change the robot’s center of gravity. She will perform slow rolling tests and gentle turning trials to predict where tipping or wobbling might occur once the carrier is installed.
Julia will focus on wiring protection. Because the robot will be moving with more weight, she will secure loose cables, add support where motion could create tension, and label connections for faster repair if needed.
By the end of the week, we want to know exactly where the carrier will sit and feel confident that installation will not surprise us with new mechanical issues.
Once preparation is complete, we will permanently attach the dog carrier. Mounting holes will be drilled and the structure will be fastened securely. Testing will begin at low speed before moving into more realistic driving conditions.
Krishwa will watch for frame stress, vibration, or shifting in the mount. Hansika will compare turning performance before and after installation to see how the added load affects movement. Julia will check whether sensor readings remain stable and whether wires stay connected during motion.
If problems appear, we will stop immediately and reinforce or rebalance before continuing. Safety and control are more important than speed.
By the end of this period, the robot should be able to drive, avoid obstacles, and transport the carrier together.
When the robot can reliably carry the structure, we will begin improving quality instead of just functionality. Adjustments will be made to smooth out turns, reduce hesitation, and increase consistency between runs.
We will also design a demonstration setup that shows safe transport, successful avoidance, and easy access to the carrier. Practice runs will help us identify small weaknesses before final evaluations.
The emphasis becomes dependability. It must work again and again, not just once.
At the next review we should be able to present measured layouts, secured wiring, and stability observations.
At the following review we expect a mounted carrier and successful driving trials with it attached.
After that, we plan to show repeated, reliable performance.
The extra height may make sharp turns risky, so speeds may need adjustment.
Drilling mistakes could weaken the mount, so we will confirm positioning before committing.
Movement may stress electrical connections, which is why reinforcement and cable management are being handled early.