This version is not peer-reviewed.
Submitted:
15 October 2024
Posted:
16 October 2024
You are already at the latest version
UI | User Interface |
RPI | Raspberry Pi |
SSH | Secure Shell Protocol |
VNC | Virtual Network Computing |
GUI | Graphical user interface |
HVLP | High Volume Low Pressure |
PLA | Plastic Liquefying Agent |
VESC | Vedder Electronic Speed Controller |
FPS | Frames per second |
Product | Operation / Specifications | Pros | Cons |
TinyPreMarker [7] |
The desired marking is drawn on a tablet. Localization using GNSS receiver. Completely autonomous. |
High Marking speed of 7 km/h. The relatively lightweight of 18 kg. Autonomous. |
Small can size of 750ml. No previous line recognition. |
LineLazer V 3900 [21] |
Manually controlled precision painting machinery. |
Many use cases. Precision. Easy to adjust and use. |
Manual. Huge size. |
TinyLineMarker Pro [10] |
Set on a soccer field, autonomously paint the field markings. Weigh 35 kg. |
Autonomous. Reliable: 1-2 cm precision. Battery life for a full day. Paint capacity of 10L. Marking speed of 1m/s. |
Narrow use case ( for soccer fields only ). |
Kontur 600 [16] |
A massive machine with a working station to control the machine. Weigh 4300 kg with an engine of 61 hp. |
Three types of paint, reflective glass spray. Huge paint capacity of 600 kg of paint and 170 kg of glass beads. |
Manual. Huge size. |
Shmelok HP Structure [18] |
Manual trolly with basic operation. Weigh 100 kg. |
Relatively low cost. | Manual. Paint prepared on the spot. Pushed manually. |
TinyPreMarker Sport [8] |
Set on a soccer field, autonomously paint the field markings. Weigh 25 kg. |
Lightweight. Easy to operate. Autonomous. Reliable: 1-2 cm precision. Battery life for a full day. |
Smaller capacity compared to [10] with 5L. Slower marking speed compared to [10] (0.7 m/s). |
Risk | Probability | Mitigation Plan | Occurrence |
Materials Delay | Mid | Purchase from other vendors (Higher cost), Or Fabrication (Time consuming) |
Yes, valves, RPI accessories, 3D printer, and RPI camera had a delay issue. At the same time, the ordered batteries were not delivered completely. |
The debugging phase will take more time | High | Ask for guidance, or consult experienced people Plan for more debugging time |
Yes, many issues were installing the Raspian OS and debugging, along with debugging issues in communication. Also, multiple tests failures elongated debugging and troubleshooting. |
Risks that were not considered | Occurrence |
Materials reliability issues | Multiple acquired parts had a reliability issue, such as the motors from the local market. |
Ordered parts specifications | Multiple parts were designed and ordered to meet certain specifications; however, the delivered parts had an error, such as dimension error on the frame. |
Components | Cost | Tools | Cost | Failed components | Cost |
Frame | 972 | 3D printer | 3767 | Failed motor | 210 |
Cardboard | 140 | 3D printer Filaments | 506 | Failed Valves | 398 |
Motors | 350 | Multimeter | 30 | Failed SD card | 73 |
Castor Wheel | 22 | Battery Chargers | 50 | ||
Arduino Mega | 158 | Soldering station | 573 | ||
Raspberry Pi 4 | 549 | Fastening tools + Tap | 192 | ||
Raspberry Pi Camera | 79 | ||||
Raspberry Pi Accessories | 410 | ||||
VESC | 1107 | ||||
Servo motor | 93 | ||||
Relay (on Arduino electronics kit) | 472 | ||||
Air compressor | 250 | ||||
Paint sprayer | 126 | ||||
Batteries | 1020 | ||||
Switches | 209 | ||||
Connectors | 543 | ||||
Cooling fan | 20 | ||||
Monitor | 470 | ||||
HDMI capture | 69 | ||||
7014 | 5118 | 681 | |||
12813 SAR |
Task | Time spent |
Design | There are 197 fully designed drawings using SolidWorks, with a minimum of 30 min per drawing. Moreover, approximating the average of drawing to be 2 hours, the total time spent designing would be approximately 400 hours. |
Local market search | The local searching was conducted in both Jeddah and Riyadh. The search was for different components at the time. Moreover, there were ten times in which the search was done through an entire day. Hence, the time would be approximated as 60 hours. |
Machining | Machining was done at the beginning on the aluminum frame, and it took around two days. Therefore, approximately 12 hours. |
Soldering | Soldering was done two times, the first was at the beginning, and the second was after the failure of the motor. The first took much more time due to practicing, whereas the second time took around 6 hours. Therefore, the total approximated time is 24 hours. |
Printing | Based on the log files of the 3D printer, the total time of printing is 158.9 hours. |
Assembly | Assembling was done multiple times, approximately five times. However, the majority took around half a day, whereas the final assembly took three full days. Therefore, the approximated time is 40 hours. |
Programming | Programming was the most consuming out of all the tasks, especially since the SD card has failed at a late stage which made me repeat all the setup of the RPI and programing. However, the approximated time spent programming and troubleshooting daily from week 13 to week 19 was half an hour daily, totaling 21 hours. Nevertheless, from week 19 to week 23, the programming intensified and troubleshooting to approximately 3 hours daily, totaling 105 hours. Therefore, the approximated time spent is 126 hours. |
Testing & debugging | Testing has started since Week 13 with the motors and painting. First, the motors were tested using VESC, then Arduino, and finally RPI. Each test was conducted approximately three times, and each time took around half an hour, totaling approximately 5 hours. Additionally, painting testing took approximately the same time. At the same time, the prototype testing and debugging took two whole weeks. Therefore, the estimated time spent is approximately 122 hours. |
Total | ~940 hours ( ~39 days) |
Chassis |
|
Drive Unit |
|
Paint Unit |
|
Sensors |
|
Control Unit |
|
Power |
|
Performance & UI. |
|
Availability in JED | Assembling difficulty | Quality | Price | Total | |
Aluminum Extruded Profile | +2 | +2 | +2 | -1 | +5 |
Carbon Fiber Tubes | -2 | -1 | +2 | -2 | -3 |
Sheet Metal Fabrication | +2 | -2 | -1 | +2 | +1 |
Availability in JED | Energy consumption | Weight | Price | Total | |
Air compressor + Paint gun | +2 | +2 | +2 | +1 | +7 |
Paint pump | -2 | -2 | -2 | -2 | -8 |
Airless paint gun | -2 | -2 | -2 | -2 | -8 |
. | Assembling difficulty | Control difficulty | Maneuverability | Price | Total |
Steerable front wheels and motorized rear wheels (Ackermann steering drive) | -1 | -2 | +2 | -1 | 0 |
Front castor wheel and Motorized rear wheels (Differential drive) | +2 | +2 | +1 | +1 | +6 |
Motor\Test | Using VESC tool | Using Arduino serial | Using Raspberry Pi serial to Arduino |
Right | OK | OK | Failure ( Burnt the motor with the VESC ) |
Left | OK | OK | OK |
Right ( New ) | OK | OK | OK |
Sprayer\Test | Water – No valve | Water – air valve | Paint – air valve |
Siphon HVLP | OK | OK | Low paint volume |
Gravity feed HVLP (small) | OK | OK | OK |
Gravity feed HVLP (large) | OK | OK | Failure ( Valve exploded ) |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 MDPI (Basel, Switzerland) unless otherwise stated