Summary of the First Trimester

Throughout the course, I learned several new concepts. Although I knew much from AP physics, I didn't know a lot of things. For example, the testing process that goes into making safe cars in accordance with physics. I learned about string instruments as well, from how they are built to the science behind it. I knew about amplitude, vibration and resonance, but I didn't know how volume affects the resonance of an instrument. This was the first time using tools such as the band saw, jigsaw, belt sander, and drill press. It was certainly pretty cool to learn how to use them.

One of the biggest things I learned was how to apply the design process to creating new products. From planning to testing, I had never used a specific method to make good designs. It's cool to think that we're using the same thing that high-level engineers at large companies use to make their products as well. I could also see how important it was to truly understand science to make a useful technology.

In the future, I plan to pursue engineering. Certainly the knowledge about tools will come in handy at some point in my life; more importantly, this served as an introductory experience to how I will solve problems in the future. That pretty cool to think about -- I could certainly see myself having a job in this type of process. Knowing that you're creating technology is definitely a cool thing.

Definitely one of the coolest things of the future will be the technology -- what will seem magic to us then?

Choose a Project: Musical Instrument

Project overview: For our next project, we had choices. We could either make a robotic arm that would pick up small objects, a musical instrument that could play a scale, or a bridge and seismograph. We could even make our own project if we desired. George and I decided to create a musical instrument, an imitation of a cello.

Technological Concepts: Our cello is an example of a chordophone, an instrument that produces sound through one or more vibrating strings, where vibration is the oscillation of  a string at the point the vibration was initiated at. We had to consider the materials (thin wood) and the volume in order to create a chamber that would resonate -- vibrate with the strings' vibrations -- and project and mature the sound. When the string vibrates, a larger amplitude (harder pluck) is a louder sound; the tension in the string determines the frequency -- how many times per second (Hertz) -- it vibrates at, which in turn directly correlates with pitch.

Learning Goals: At this point, research and planning took a greater role in the design process. As is the nature of musical instruments, bridges, and robotic arms, it is essential to plan out meticulously how you are going to build the structure. During the implementation, a greater independence in the creation of different parts was required, in order to finish the project in time. Often people were required to be doing entirely different things, and then would come back to assemble the parts.

Instrument Description: We created a slightly small cello, which was 26 inches in height, 20 inches in width, and five inches deep. Thing wood was used for the main body, with a thin board supported by a thick board was required for the fingerboard. Small blocks of wood were used to act as a bridge and to raise the strings above the fingerboard. Wooden pegs were implemented at the end of the fingerboard, with nails holding the end of the string to the body. Long four inches pieces of wood were put along the sides in the body to give strength, and a wooden dowel rod was placed underneath the bridge to support it when the strings were tightened.

Positive Feedback:  We were quite proud of creating an instrument that in many ways mimics real cellos. The fingerboard was stiff throughout the entirety of the wood, and small touches like the structural supports and the wooden dowel rod underneath the bridge really made a solid design. When played, the cello had a surprisingly good amount of resonance due to its volume, unlike many homemade stringed instruments.

Redesign Paragraph: The two main things that come to mind are the height of the side pieces and the wooden pegs. The wooden pegs simply could not hold tension, so we had to try and use toothpicks to hold them in place. Also, the height of the side pieces didn't match for some reason. Even though we measured the heights meticulously, we should have made the heights uniform; it just looks a little unprofessional because of it.

Technological Resources: George and I created the cello once again, still with Dr. Sartori's advice on supports, pegs, glue, and whatever else we needed. Electricity powered the jigsaw, belt sander, band saw, and glue guns that we used to create the instrument. It took two and a half weeks to construct the project, in 60 minute class work periods. We used or knowledge of string instruments and woodworking together to make the cello. Lastly, the resources we used were nails, wood boards and dowel rods, nails, Elmer's glue, and hot glue.

Biggest Challenge: Our biggest challenge is the peg box, as we chose to use wooden pegs. They simply can't hold tension and slip in the holes, and tape didn't work and we couldn't glue them. The string also cuts into the wood at its point of contact. As of writing this, we are going to attempt to use toothpicks to hold the pegs in place; we think it work, but it takes a lot more work than we expected it to.

What we learned: We discovered that independence in constructing a project is essential to be efficient. We wouldn't have finished otherwise. Also, we learned that using ideas from other successful instruments was very helpful. With the wooden dowel rods underneath the bridge (inspired by real instruments) and other elements like the bridge and pegs, real instruments really inspired our design. I think collaboration and inspiration of ideas is a good thing; it fosters innovation, competition, and a better standard of life for people.

Through a piano, one can create incredible and magical sounds.

The Nearly Unsuccessful Mousetrap Project

Project Overview: For a few weeks, we were given the task of creating a small wooden vehicle that would be propelled by the energy in a mousetrap. We could bring in our own wheels and materials to create unique, more effective designs. We had to select which size dowel rods to use, what size wheels, what diameter axles to use, among other things to design a vehicle that would travel the furthest.

Technological Concepts: At its most basic level, this project was about discovering the most efficient way to transfer the potential energy in a mousetrap into the kinetic energy of the vehicle, while minimizing energy lost to friction. Potential energy is "stored" energy, while kinetic energy is the energy of motion. Friction is two imperfect substances that rub against each other, dispersing energy in the form of heat. We also had to consider the diameter of the wheels (larger wheels take more energy to rotate) and the diameter of the axles, which would determine the wheel-to-axle ratio. Higher wheel-to-axle ratios were harder to rotate.

From the front

Learning Goals: We continued to apply the design process to decide which materials to use, and what size of materials to make the most effective design. However, a main focus of this project was learning how to use tools to speed up construction and improve products. We had to consider what the best tools were and learn the basics of safety for a variety of tools. A greater role of testing was emphasized in this project; often designs would not work very well at first or not at all, and all projects had to test to maximize the distance the vehicle would travel

Mousetrap Design: Our design utilized a single, thin piece of wood with holes bored through it for lightness. Small squares of wood were attached with holes drilled through for axles; records were implemented for the rear wheels with small plastic ones for the front. We attempted to minimize weight while still retaining a high wheel-to-axle ratio.

Positive feedback: Our design managed to go 32 feet, which we were satisfied with. Although it moved slowly, it moved very steadily. We were proud of this fact, considering our design did not even move initially; our testing phase was very effective. We also succeeded in minimizing weight throughout the vehicle.

 Redesign: The main thing we would have changed was the axle system. We found out that wood axles in wood frames created a large amount of friction. If done again, we would have used plastic for both, and then our design would have traveled far further. Furthermore, we could have lowered weight even further in the front wheels, which could have been thinner.

Technological Resources: We used three tools/machines: the belt sander, drill press, and mousetrap. Electrical energy was used to power the two tools. We used records and plastic for wheels, as well as wood for the axles and chassis. George and I created the vehicle, along with the guidance of Dr. Sartori, in the time of nearly three weeks from start to finish. We had to utilize new information on energy and friction, as well as safety precautions to construct the design.

Biggest Challenge: Beyond a doubt, our greatest challenge was fine tuning the length of the dowel rod to supply enough force to even move the vehicle, while still maximizing distance. At first (and for the next six tests) our design moved only five feet and sometimes not at all. To overcome this, we had to continually shorten the length of the dowel rod, and cut out part of the middle of the chassis to minimize weight. It took a long time before we were satisfied with the movement of the vehicle.

What we learned: We discovered how to use several tools to make more polished designs. We also had to apply concepts of energy perhaps even more so than in the previous project; if the science was flawed or ignored, the design would do poorly. We saw this many times from the other designs in the class, as many didn't even considered friction at all. Also, we learned that foresight is important -- once we had our friction generating wood axle implemented, we had no time to fix it.

The Model T extracted potential energy from gasoline, a magical proposition at the time