Representation of the project: Provide a summary of the project (maximum 100 words)

In this project, we were challenged with building a structure with specific requirements that needed to be met by only using uncooked pasta and blu-tac. The purpose of this assignment was to evolve our understanding and thinking of earthquakes and be able to design large buildings and structures that withstand the force and seismic activity of earthquakes in the future. When an earthquake hits, it can leave many buildings destroyed and many lives lost. Therefore, we have been researching ways to build structures more efficiently on a lower scale to prevent this.

Overview of the engineering process: Provide a brief overview of the engineering process. What changes would you make to the process that would improve the outcomes for your group in future? (maximum 200 words)

The engineering process and the different steps in the process assisted my group and me as we gained an understanding and researched other ideas and structures and, therefore, gained information on how to build our structure. Firstly, we defined what the project asked us and then explored different ways to build an earthquake-proof building. When we managed to create the design and tested it, the initial design did not stand up at all, and we had to go back to the drawing stage and ensure that this new design did not fail. We realised and identified the problem of the first design and managed to work around the problem and make our new prototype much simpler and more stable. We would then test our new design and be far more successful. We then evaluated, shared and collaborated on our design with other groups to see each other’s designs. If we had to make specific changes to the process, it would probably be to add another create and test before the evaluation. We managed to do this, making our second prototype much more successful as we could identify and fix the issues and problems.

Collaboration: Provide a brief summary of the investigation components that each of your group members was responsible for. Comment on how the strengths of each group member contributed to the engineering challenge. (100 words)

Each group member contributed differently, as we were all assigned different roles. Tejas was the spokesperson because Tejas is very assertive and knows what questions to ask, so we completely understood the project. Jacob was the equipment manager. His strengths were that he could keep track of our expenses and what equipment we needed to enhance our model further. Finally, I did most of the research, made the designs, and assisted in building the model because I was the Project Manager. This role was tailored to my strengths as I am strong at designing and have access to developing platforms.

Photos and Videos from our Project