Mobile robot controller

Group 2

Group 2 - Robot controller project - TDT4240 Software Architecture

Group 2

Leif Hamang Bru Lisa W. Eriksen Kay Are Ulvestad Gunnar René Øie

Group 2 - Robot controller project - TDT4240 Software Architecture

Introduction

Project problemWhat we should doThe quality attribute in focus was availability

Group 2 - Robot controller project - TDT4240 Software Architecture

Lookout Captain Navigator Pilot

Perception subsystem

UsesUses Uses Uses

Uses

Blackboard

Blackboard architectural pattern

Group 2 - Robot controller project - TDT4240 Software Architecture

Attributes realised in architecture

AvailabilityRedundant blackboardsVotingPossibility for redundant crewmembers

Group 2 - Robot controller project - TDT4240 Software Architecture

We have learned

We should have learned more about the robot before setting our goals, and taken a simpler approach.

Got some more documentation practice.

The ATAM process should be used with larger teams.

Using software architecture may be hard if the system is small and highly interconnected.

Group 2 - Robot controller project - TDT4240 Software Architecture

Findings/achievements

ATAM works as a structured way to give feedback. Feedback was valuable, to improve explanation of architectural choices.

Quality requirements are sacrificed to achieve functionality

We were able to make all the modules needed to solve the problem, but didn’t finish putting them together. Why: Discrete movement problem.

Demonstration

Strategy:1. Build internal map2. Map-matching3. Cover map4. Move all balls