# Design and Performance of L-CaPaMan2
## 5 Testing Results  
Before making tests, the workability of the system and its components has been checked. When the system is static, the IMU sensor measures not only its own accelerations, but also the gravitational component, so when it is placed in the horizontal position, the acquired acceleration data in m/s\({}^{2}\) must be (0.0; 0.0; \(-\)9.806), where the last component represents the standard acceleration of gravity. The raw acceleration data conversion from the sensor is executed by the formula (1) from [27]:  
\[\text{a}=(\text{a}_{\text{raw}}/32768.0)*\text{getAccRange}*\text{g}, \tag{1}\]  
where a\({}_{\text{raw}}\) = (0... 32768) is a value, acquired from sensor to Arduino board, and getAccRange = 2 is predefined by the user maximal acceleration in \(g\) = 9.806 mm/s\({}^{2}\) standard acceleration of gravity. The results from IMU sensor shows that during a first test calibration in static horizontal position, the acceleration components data as (0.0; 0.0; \(-\)80.0) mm/s\({}^{2}\) are different from expected ones. For that reason, it is needed to calibrate the sensor. To calibrate the sensor, it has been placed and statically fixed in the different positions, while acquiring the data. The acquired values of the accelerations must be zeros, except one of the components, which must be equal to 9.806 or \(-\)9.806 depending on the orientation. After zeroing the two components, the values of the third component have been taken 10 times, and the average has been calculated. Therefore, to equalise the measurements of the acceleration \(a\) to the standard acceleration of gravity, they must be multiplied by the coefficient k, which can be calculated such that k = 9.806/a. By taking the experiments, the coefficients for x, y, and z components have been calculated. For given sensor BMII60, the coefficients are equal to 0.121965, 0.11744, and 0.12251, respectively. The coefficients may vary from the different examples of the sensors and accuracy of orthogonality to the ground while calibrating the sensor. The acquired results for modes 1 and 3 in terms of acceleration of H are represented in Figure 9(a),b, respectively. The acquired components of acceleration from the IMU sensor \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Parameter**} & **Material** & **Diameter of** & **Extruder** & **Layer Height** & **First Layer** & **Shell** \\  & **Type** & **Filament** & **Temperature** & **Height** & **Thickness** \\ \hline Value & PLA & 1.75 mm & 210 \({}^{\circ}\)C & 0.15 mm & 0.25 mm & 0.8 mm \\ \hline
**Parameter** & **Base Print Speed** & **Travel Speed** & **Extrude Speed** & **Fill Pattern** & **Fill Density** \\ \hline Value & 60 mm/s & 80 mm/s & 30 mm/s & Hexagon & 50\% \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: Parameters of 3D printing for prototype construction. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**Name** & **Quantity (pcs.)** & **Price (f/pc.)** & **Total Price (f)** \\ \hline Arduino Mega & 2 & 17.5 & 35.0 \\ DC battery & 1 & 5.53 & 15.99 \\ IMU BMII60 & 2 & 8.5 & 17.0 \\ Current sensor & 1 & 5.1 & 5.1 \\ Servomotor MG996R & 3 & 9.99 & 29.97 \\ Total & & & 103.06 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 5: The price of the components. are represented with gravitation affect. For comparison of the results with the dynamic simulation model, each acquired value has been compared to the arithmetic average for all the results and the difference has been calculated. The maximal value of the component has been found from the data from IMU sensors and has been represented in Table 6.  
Before acquiring the results, the presented model was tested near 100 times, installed, and reinstalled; components were tested together and separately. The characteristics of stiffness and tolerances for printed components were worse than for manufactured parts. Moreover, during the design and assembly process, the task was not set to make the most accurate and precise model.