Results for Weight Testing
The predicted result for weight test was that the bridge would weigh less than 85 grams. The results from the test were that the bridge weighed 47.81 grams, which is much less than 85 grams. The precision for this test was +/- 0.01 grams, which is too precise for what the requirement needed considering that the weight requirement was a whole number. The precision was based on the values given for the digital scale. To ensure that the weight was as accurate as possible, the bridge was roughly centered on the digital scale in order to prevent any offsets from poor positioning. The results of this test are valid because since the bridge would ultimately have a light weight that's set in grams, a proper digital scale would have been needed to be able to read its proper weight. One viewpoint can say that the results are relevant to the project, as it did meet the requirement of being less than 85 grams. However, because there is a large difference between the weight of the bridge and the maximum parameter it can be said that there could have been more additions and changes to the bridge to help it in other areas.
Results for Vehicle Traversal
The predicted result for vehicle traversal was that the vehicle would be able to travel across the road deck without issues. The actual result was that there was one minor issue when the vehicle hit the hole in the center of the road deck, causing it to flip over. Still, it was able to cross from one end of the bridge to another. While there isn't any numerical values in this test, to keep this test precise the vehicle had to be be placed at the edge of one end of the bridge, and had to cross to the other end by meeting (or going over) the other edge. Accuracy would be a bit more tricky as the vehicle is being pulled by a string and would be faced by whatever it meets as it crosses the road deck. This test is valid in that the vehicle wasn't directly guided across the bridge to overcome potential problems, it was pulled by a string and thus would face whatever issues that would arise from the bridge, which the center hole of the road deck was the cause of it flipping over. These results are relevant in that the vehicle was able to traverse the full length of the road deck from end to end.
Results for Vertical Articulation
Predictions for vertical articulation of the road deck was that it would be able to raised 280 mm above its original position. The result of this test was that while over 50% of the bridge was above 280 mm, the road deck began to roll as it approached 280 mm. The precision for this test was +/- 1 mm, using a metric ruler. Prior to testing, a cut piece of sticky notes was placed so that the topmost edge of it was at 280 mm. This test can be considered accurate in that most of the bridge was over the 280 mm mark, however it would have been better if the entire bridge was over that mark in the case that the road deck did not roll. This test is likely not valid in that the intention was probably for the road deck to be attached to the bridge, and that it would have been raised alongside the bridge and meet the 280 mm requirement from that. It would also mean that the test isn't relevant in that the road deck alone was raised and not alongside the bridge, since this method wouldn't be practical.
Results for Bridge Raising
The predictions for the test regarding bridge raising are that it would be able to keep the bridge raised for 10 seconds with the addition of 10 grams to the lifting component, and a sheet of paper will slide between the abutment and the raised bridge. The results from this test are that the bridge was able to stay raised for over 10 seconds, and a sheet of paper was able to slide between the abutment and the raised bridge. Also, the time it for the bridge to be raised was about 14.53 seconds. The precision for this test was +/- 0.01 seconds, using a stopwatch from a phone. However, the test's accuracy is mixed in that while the time it took for the bridge to raise was accurate, the part of the test for keeping the bridge raised wasn't accurate in that it was done from mental counting of seconds. Post-testing from checking the video recordings reveal that it did stay raised for a bit over 10 seconds, if one was to account from the moment that the bridge was raised to its maximum and when the sheet was beginning to slide between the abutment and the bridge. This test is likely not valid in that the raising of the bridge required direct handling from the user, as by itself the articulation system wouldn't be able to raise the bridge. However, for what this test was testing for, it probably is relevant in that it was able to keep the bridge raised for the required time with the addition of 10 grams, and that the sheet can slide between the abutment and the bridge.
Results for Load Testing
The prediction that was made for this test was that the bridge would not be able to take a 20 kg load. The actual result was that the bridge collapsed at a load of 6.71 kg. The precision of this test varied in that two different scales were used, and they both were read in lbf. The initial weight of the bucket with attachments were 0.81 lbf which was taken on a digital scale with a precision of +/- 0.01, and the final weight of the bucket filled with water was 14 lbf with a weight scale with a precision of +/- 1 lbf. Then through conversion factors was the final weight in kilograms achieved. The results can be considered accurate for the results that were obtained, despite not achieving the required minimum load. This test can be considered valid in that the load was applied directly to the center of the bridge through the road deck, and that the bridge was taking the full load since it was suspended in the air. However, the test isn't relevant in that test isn't made for what the bridge would have been able to take.