Conclusions Recommendations MSD19
The project was not completed to the expected state because of the coronavirus outbreak. We were able to get most of the subsystems working, but we had to stop before everything was fully integrated and tested. As experienced with previous groups, the drone hardware proved to be temperamental, and fire-fighting small technicalities related to this took up large chunks of the time. There were also unavoidable project bottlenecks resulting from setting up the drone that meant that many things could not be worked on in parallel. For the future, it is advised to invest in more Crazy Flie hardware as this will allow more scope for working in parallel, and it is often the case that things break on the drone because it often crashes. Purchasing the replacement equipment during the project can significantly impact the project plan, and it is our experience that replacement parts will indeed most likely be needed.
Initial steps on the computer vision aspects of the project have been undertaken, and the ball position relative to the pitch has been determined. More effort should be focused on the computer vision to realize the main aim of autonomously refereeing the game of football, as it will mean that many of the issues relating to drone hardware and controls would most likely be unnecessary anyway. In retrospect, a more precise scope is also needed. While the suggested strategy of a flying drone is fine for a robot game inside a drone cage, for an outdoor game between humans, a more powerful drone would be required to overcome adverse weather conditions. It would not be safe to have this drone near the players or the crowd. Notwithstanding safety, it would also distract the players. This would heavily restrict options for drone movement. For the indoor pitch at TU/e specifically, the football pitch is small enough that a single static camera from a mobile phone can pick up most of the events on the field with little latency. It is estimated that a combination of at least 4 cameras would provide full coverage, certainly good enough for an external referee to base a decision on for the vast majority of cases. People tend to carry mobile phones around with them anyway, so the improved cost efficiency is also a moot point.