Intake Jam Reliability Analyzer
Count what actually happened over a run of attempts and find out which version is better, and whether you have enough trials to say so.
Inputs
One row per version you tested. The four outcome columns should add up to the attempts, and the tool says so if they do not.
Results
Best version
—
Its success rate
—%
95% confidence range
—%
Beats the runner-up?
—
Attempts recorded
—
Most common failure overall
—
Version by version
| Version | n | Success | 95% range | Jams | Doubles | Bounce | Worst failure |
|---|
Keep testing
Each version's success rate with the range your attempts really support. Slide to see what the same rates would look like after more attempts: the dots stay put and the ranges close in. Two versions are only told apart once their ranges stop overlapping, which is why a version that looks better after ten attempts often is not. This assumes each version keeps the rate you have measured so far.
How this is calculated
A success rate on its own is close to meaningless. Twenty-one out of thirty is 70%, but run the same intake again and you might get 24, or 18. The question is not what happened, it is what the rate would settle at if you kept going.
Why the range matters more than the rate
The 95% range is a Wilson score interval, which asks what true success rates could plausibly have produced the result you saw. Its width is set almost entirely by how many attempts you ran.
The practical consequence is blunt. Two versions whose ranges overlap have not been told apart. Version B looking better than version A on twenty trials each is usually noise, and rebuilding around that difference is rebuilding around nothing. Run more trials, or accept that you cannot yet tell.
The interval also handles the case a simpler formula gets wrong. Ten successes out of ten does not mean a perfect intake; it means the true rate is probably somewhere above 70%, which is a very different claim.
With your numbers
Separate the failures
Lumping every failure together hides the fix, because the three modes pull in opposite directions:
- Jams usually mean too much compression, or a gap narrower than the object.
- Double feeds usually mean too little compression, or no feature to separate objects.
- Bounce-outs usually mean too much speed at the mouth, or nothing to trap the object once it is in.
Note that the first two have opposite remedies. An intake with both is being asked to handle objects that vary more than the mechanism tolerates, and tightening the compression will trade one failure for the other rather than removing either.
Running the test honestly
Vary one thing at a time, keep everything else identical, and use the same objects in the same condition. Alternate between versions instead of doing all of A then all of B, so a drifting battery or a warming motor does not land entirely on one of them.
Sources & assumptions
No VEX data is used. The statistics are applied to counts you record, so nothing here goes stale between seasons.
The interval is a 95% Wilson score interval. It assumes attempts are independent and identically conditioned, which is only true if you kept the test consistent. It cannot detect a version that works on a fresh battery and fails on a flat one.
Save this run, and compare
Keeps what is on screen so you can change something and see both sides of the change. Saved in this browser only, never uploaded.
Make a notebook page
Turns this calculation into a dated engineering notebook page: the setup, data, results, figures, working and sources, numbered and cited. You add the goal, the decision and the reflection in your own words, plus photos and sketches. Print it, paste it into Google Docs, or download a Word file or slides.
Where this goes next
Explore further on the full mapWhere the answers on this page can be used, and which tools could have given you the numbers it asks for.
Comes after
Intake DesignerYou are here
Intake Jam Reliability Analyzer
a number carries across the next question it raises