The Fabric Reinforced Controlled Motion Robot (FRCMR) underwent two types of testing, performance and durability.
Performance testing evaluated FRCMR's ability to complete the tasks it was designed to do.
Durability testing evaluated how well the robot maintained its functionality when subjected to adverse conditions.
The speed test assessed how quickly the robot moved over flat ground. Each square on the grid beneath the robot had a side length of 0.5 inches. The test also determined how efficiently the robot moved. This was done by determining what percentage of expansion was converted into forward movement.
Step efficiency was calculated using the equation distance traveled per step / (Inflated length-uninflated length)
Crawling Motion:
Inchworm Motion:
The maneuverability test assessed robot agility. Robot driving performance was evaluated.
Observations: During testing the robot reliably turned in the desired direction; however, the degrees of rotation varied from 15 to 90 degrees per cycle.
The climbing test assessed the robot's ability to climb on top of and over obstacles. Two types of obstacles were tested.
Climbing an 1.5 inch step
Climbing over a 3” by 3” plank of wood
Observations: The robot's climbing performance appeared to be adversely effected by the weight of the air tubes on either end.
The incline test assessed the robot’s ability to move forward up an incline.
Average Speed: 15 inches per minute.
Two distinct compression tests were performed. The compression tests assessed the robot's ability to remain functional after being significantly compressed. Each test evaluated the robot with compression in both the inflated and uninflated states.
Test 1: The robot was compressed by 145 pounds of weight.
Observations: The robot remained functional after compression.
Test 2: The robot was run over by a minivan a total of 8 times, 6 times in the uninflated state, and 2 times in the inflated state.
Observations: Following the uninflated portion of the test, the bladders remained functional, robot retained the ability to move forward.
During the final inflated compression, the robot failed because a bladder was pulled through a zip tie used to keep the end of the robot closed.
After all 8 compressions, all 6 bladder sections were still intact but displayed obvious damage. Additionally, the feet were dirty and bent. Following reassembly, the robot was capable of moving forward with diminished step efficiency and form.
The cutting test evaluates how well the fabric sleeve protects the robot from cuts with a knife. This is to simulate the robot driving over or up against sharp objects.
Observations: The sleeve was slightly damaged; however, none of the strokes cut all the way through the fabric.
The puncture test evaluates how well the fabric sleeve protects the robot from pointed objects.
Observations: The fabric sleeve did not offer significant protection against the knife. Time to repair the robot was about 3 minutes.
The purpose of the Over Inflation Test was to determine the internal pressure required for the bladders to pop. This accessed the pressure tolerance of the robot. Standard operating pressure is 4 psi.
Observations: The robot could not be popped because air would leak out where the tubes were inserted into the bladder. The highest internal pressure maintained was 13.8 psi.