The Aim

The aim of this task was to solve a problem related to real-life examples. Earthquakes have been the cause of lost belongings, home destruction and death. We were required to solve this issue by creating a small scale structure that is earthquake resistant using the success criteria.

Success Criteria

The success criteria of the build is written below:

• The build must be quick and easy to assemble
• It must reach the minimum height of 60 cm
• The base cant be any bigger than 30 cm x 30 cm
• The structure must remain standing after an earthquake, as simulated by shaking a table for 10 seconds
• It must be constructed from the materials supplied by the teacher
• It has to cost less than $60 to build, given the material costs listed below:
• spaghetti ($1 per 10 cm)
• Blu Tack or plasticine ($1 per gram)
• scissors or retractable craft knife
• ruler

The Engineering Process

The engineering process is a method engineers use to solve problems. This is as followed:

Define – Engineers have to define the problem at hand so they know what exactly must be solved

Brainstorm – Engineers will think of potential ideas that can be used to solve the problem they are faced with

Research – They will research methods of executing ideas to see if it’s plausible

Design – A prototype will be constructed (not built, but sketched) to understand what will be created

Create – The prototype will then be built following the design constructed previously

Test & Evaluate – Said build will then be tested to see the effectiveness and note any flaws in the build

Improve – Any flaws found previously will then be attempted to solve

Share – After refining the build it will then be shown as the final design

In this project, we followed this plan accordingly and designed a solution to the problem we were faced with, to construct a small-scale model of an earthquake-resistant building. We defined the problem, brainstormed ideas from our knowledge, and researched what engineers do to make buildings resistant to earthquakes, to gain knowledge and be able to think of new and improved ideas. We then designed a model using these ideas we thought of and constructed the prototype with spaghetti and blue-tac. After testing and noting flaws in the build, we re-designed the model to fix these issues and repeated the process until a successful design was created. We could then make a portfolio presentation to show our final design and the functionality.

The Group

My group contained Jet Noonan, Fraser Kearney and I, with roles distributed based on our strengths. Jet was the building planner, drawing and designing building plans using the information gathered by the speaker/researcher. Fraser’s role was the speaker/researcher, with the job of researching real-life situations and solutions relating to our project, and talking to people including the teacher to learn more and additionally making sure the ePortfolio of each member is completed. Lastly, I was tasked with the project manager, and my role was to keep the group underway and on track to complete the entire project by the due date, as well as check in on group members.

Research

A rough sketch of our first model

After doing the research, we brainstormed ideas for our first model. We thought that cross-braces would be good to have in our model, along with triangles. We thought of using a pendulum, a weight suspended freely so that it can sway side to side against the shaking of the earthquake to minimize the force, but realised it would become too costly and out of budget. We also found that muscles were used in bridges, and might be able to be used for a building. We also found that pyramids were a good choice, as shown by their use many years ago by ancient Egyptians. These were the main things that we found, as other things could not be implemented or weren’t needed, such as materials, lighter roofs, and foundations below the ground. After the research was completed, we began designing our first model.

Our First Model

The first model was designed as a pyramid building. We chose this shape due to its strong structure, large base, small top and natural support. We included muscles into the building, lines of spaghetti angled in a way that it can support a lot of weight so that we could make a strong, flexible shape that is cost-efficient. We began building our design, but we rapidly ran into a problem. we couldn’t build the design, because a muscle needs to be built by connecting onto the outside case of the pyramid, but the outside case can’t be built without the muscle as it would collapse in on itself. So we needed to build the muscle onto something that needed the muscle to be built. It would be impossible to do both at the same time, so there was no way of actually building our intended design.

A sketch of our first model

The Adjustments Made

Some adjustments were needed and we struggled to find a solution at first as we didn’t have anything from the previous experiment to work with, as we never got to see what the design’s strong points were. We thought that we could scrap the muscle idea, as that hardly worked. we still wanted to use a pyramid design in the building, so we thought to change the shape but also use a pyramid. We looked around the room to try and gather ideas, and an idea sparked.

A blueprint for our second model. Jet made the design with more detail to improve accuracy.

Our Second Model

We thought of using rectangular sides for the first part. Although it is a bit bland it was a start. Rectangles with cross braces were proving to work with other groups still building their first designs, so we thought to use that idea for ourselves. We put together a rough design for our second model. We stacked two rectangular prisms on top of each other, supporting them with cross braces, then putting a small pyramid on top with a short piece of spaghetti to reach the required height minimum.

Our second model constructed

And we started building again. Because of our experience, we found that the second model was much easier to build, and this time the building stood on its own. We then started testing, and the model survived the sliding test with minimal damage. Then we tried the banging test with our friend Senuka. With this test, It broke within 3 seconds. Yes, Senuka hit it very hard but the build was really weak so it wasn’t entirely his fault.

The model’s test

Why it failed

My group suggested simply and more blue-tac and spaghetti to the weak points in the build. But after analysing the video and identifying the point of failure, Jet convinced us that it would be impractical and flawed to take that outcome. He then went into detail on why the build broke, which was because of cross braces transmitting the energy into the lower part of the build, and since there were two segments, too much force was being passed through the mid-point, which was the weakest point of the building.

Our Final Model

This was our final design. We used the pyramid idea again but modified it slightly. We decided to make a square-based pyramid, with a base much wider, and cross braces on the sides. It was separated into three different parts, the base, the top half of the pyramid, and the spaghetti on top. The base would be constructed starting at 16cmx16cm, slowly going inwards to reach 21cm up. Cross braces connect from each corner to add support. Another layer on top of that is added to complete the full pyramid. After light testing we saw that the sides of this layer were quite weak, so we added extra spaghetti we had leftover to strengthen the sides of the build. The top part is just a simple 20cm piece of spaghetti on top to reach the height minimum. This was the best design we’ve had so far, as shown through the final testing. It was a relief to see that our building remained strong after the proper simulation.

Sliding test

Banging test

Reflection

I think that this project was beneficial as it strengthened my skills like; communication, problem-solving, creativity, collaboration and time management. It was important that we were put in groups for this project as it required us to expand our thinking and learn to work with different people. My group was able to construct a build following the engineering process successfully. Our pyramid building made with a muscle at the start failed, so we changed the shape of the building to a taller, rectangular design. This failed as well, so we tried a pyramid design again, reinforcing it and allowing for the highest chance of success in our final build. Our first failed to stand on its own, our second could withstand sideways shaking, but failed to the slamming and was destroyed, but our third and final design was able to withstand all of the types with ease, taking minimal damage.

I think the engineering process is hardly flawed while I believe that steps 2 and 3 should be swapped due to the fact that you can have a better idea for brainstorms if you had done research prior, as then you would know what ideas would be more plausible and more effective given the resources, time and criteria. This change would have allowed for improved designs and as a result, less time wasted and fewer flaws in general.

I believe that my team was able to work together well, even though there were times at which ideas weren’t explained very clearly and a group member would get confused or behind, we still worked pretty well. Each group member stuck to their strengths and roles, Jet as the building planner, Fraser as the researcher/speaker and I as the project manager. Our strengths were put to good use in these roles. Jet is creative and a good problem solver, Fraser is an effective researcher and had prior knowledge, and I get the work done on time. Jet was tasked with making the building designs and using the information given by Fraser, the researcher/speaker. Fraser was responsible for gathering ideas for our builds such as the muscle, which in turn helped Jet out. And I was in charge of ensuring that work was on track to completion on time. I also set due dates for everyone to have their tasks finished by so that we could have time to change anything if need be. This allowed us to make effective designs and be motivated to complete them by our set due date, for maximum efficiency. I believe we solved a lot of problems together using our expertise. The others had a lot of communication with each other which meant for effective collaboration but that meant I was missing important details due to a lack of communication. But I also felt that I was being a bit harsh on them as I was rushing them to get me the information I needed for the task while they were midway through theirs.

All in all, this was an extremely helpful experience. It had an overall positive impact on us as we can work collaboratively in the future much better since our improved communication and teamwork. This task allowed me to strengthen friendships with Jet and Fraser and learn about their strengths and personalities. It also came with good general knowledge that can be applied in future engineering.