Alternative Energy Vehicle
Introduction:
My team and I were tasked with the objective of creating an energy saving vehicle prototype that could be used by Hyundai. The vehicle needed to travel as close to 5 meters as possible, without going too far or stopping too soon. We opted for a unique design, using water instead of more common things like rubber bands or springs. We took inspiration from a water mill, and incorporated elements of it into our design. We began by using wood for the base and legs. Then, we used a wooden dowel for our axle, running it through both legs. We also ran the dowel through a wheel that was placed equidistantly between both legs. Next we added flaps to the perimeter of the wheel, so that the water could have an easier time pushing the wheel. This also would maximize the amount of energy captured from the water. Lastly we built a wooden car, however we quickly realized it was too heavy and we were forced to come up with something else. We ended up using Legos, as they were much lighter and easier to configure to our liking. We connected the car to our wheel using a string, and when the wheel turned, the car would be pulled. We poured water manually from directly above the wheel. After running a few more tests, we noticed that the dowel had too little of a circumference and was forcing us to need much more energy to move the car 5 meters. We added another square next to the wheel, which had a much larger perimeter than the dowel, and could therefore allow the car to get pushed 5 meters with much less water. We also found a flaw in our flaps, which we improved by replacing them with small cups. This allows the machine to capture more energy, and therefore increasing its efficiency. The last and final change we made was adding a funnel to the top of the mill. This helped because we can now have consistent pouring into a specified area, which will minimize the amount of wasted water/energy. After our first test, it nearly took our vehicle 5 minutes to get to 5 meters. However after numerous tests and modifications, we were able to take it down to just 20 seconds. That is 15 times more efficient than our original design.
Content:
Gravitational Potential Energy:
-Gravitational Potential Energy is basically the energy something has when it is high up and could fall down. The water that was poured down onto the mill had gravitational potential energy right before it was poured. The water was our main energy source, and we used the mass of the water remaining to calculate changes in the distance compared to the water left.
Kinetic Energy:
-There were two different kinetic energies in our process. One is when the water is falling, and the other is the car when it gets pulled. We found the kinetic energy (KE) of the water using the velocity of the water falling and the mass of water used to pull the car each meter. For the car, we just used the mass (0.218kg) and the velocity of the car when moving. The mass of the car is considered consistent as it always stayed the same, however the velocity is considered changing as it wasn't one single value the entire time.
Thermal Energy:
-Thermal energy wasn't a key factor to our vehicle, and the process didn't rely on any thermal energy. However, there were still very small amounts of thermal energy throughout the process, so it wasn't non-existent. Another way to look at it was when our process ended, the the vast majority of energy left was thermal energy. This is because there was almost no potential or kinetic energy left.
Distance Vs. Time:
-In our presentation, you can view our Distance vs. Time graph as well as our data table. It shows the relationship between different distances and times, which can allow us to see patterns or make observations about our process. One example is seeing when and where our machine was most efficient.
Velocity Vs. Time:
-In our presentation, you can view our Velocity vs. Time graph as well as our data table. It shows the relationship between different velocities at different times. This can allow us to notice when the vehicle had the greatest and lowest velocities. These values will stick out, as they be shown on the graph as upward and downward spikes.
Reflection
During the entirety of this project, I learned a lot about engineering, physics, and myself. I learned which skills I am good at, and which I lack. One skill I feel I could improve on is communication. I think I could've communicated better with my team, as I sometimes felt lost and could see that some others were too. I could've taken action and assigned roles to people who didn't know what to do, which is something I was good at in previous projects but lacked in this one. Another thing I believe I could improve on is collaboration. Even though I believe I did a good job, there is definitely room for improvement. Sometimes I would get distracted, or it felt like one person was doing everything and there was no need to help. Many times I realized this and got to work or asked what I could help with, however I should've offered some of my own ideas as well. However with my weaknesses also come my strengths. I feel that I was great at being a conscientious learner this project. Everytime something didn't work, I thought about why it didn't and what we could do to make it better. The same thing with when we modified something. When it improved, I asked myself why it worked and the science behind it. I was organized and planned ahead, while also working pretty efficiently. The second skill I believe I did well was critical thinking. Our project took quite long, and it came down to the last minute. My entire team was forced to think critically on how to solve major issues in our design. With a combined effort, we were able to come up with a few ideas that worked. Overall I believe that this project taught me a lot of things, and I hope to continue to learn and grow with each one.