Extended Abstract

Section ~~~
Group Name: ~~~~~~~~~~~
Team Member Names:
1. ~~~~~~~~~~~~
2. Lynch, Christopher
3. ~~~~~~~~~~~~
4. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
5. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Objective
The objective of this project is to create a ground based craft capable of traversing a flat,
paved surface for as far as possible while carrying a set amount of weights. The craft will be
judged on distance traveled, weight of the cargo carried, weight of the craft, and adherence to the
project guidelines. The constraints are that we cannot use any form of electricity or any electrical
components to power the craft. No compressed gases, chemical reactions, or initial force
imparted at launch are allowed, and all mechanisms and materials must remain on the craft for
the entire duration. The total cost of materials must remain under $80 and the dimensions cannot
exceed 2 x 2 x 3 tall.
Project Options
Option 1: Slow Tension Release Model
The first option relies on mechanics very similar to an enlarged mouse trap. A standard
rectangular shaped frame will be constructed out of PVC, the frame being slightly stilted
from the wheels to make room for a gear system and the undercarriage where the cargo is
stored. Secured on the front of the frame will be a mildly flexible metal arm able to be
bent back towards the rear. Attached to the back end of the arm will be a cord running
through the rear wheel gear systems. After pulling the arm back, effectively setting the
mouse trap mechanism, releasing the catch will immediately result in the arm moving
back to its resting position with much force. The cord attached will pull through the
gears, spinning the axle and creating enough rotational motion to propel the craft forward
for a distance.
Option 2: Hydropower Model
This option uses a large reservoir of water affixed on top of the craft and water pressure
to spin a turbine that outputs torque on to the wheel axle. Again, the PVC frame would be
a basic rectangular shape, maintaining space for the cargo directly on top of the frame,
and above which would be a lofted main water reservoir. Inside the reservoir but above
the water level rests a weight with a watertight seal around the edges. Its purpose is to
maintain pressure on the water to maximize the water pressure output. A valve at the
bottom of the reservoir would lead into a single tube to the undercarriage where the
turbine system is secured. The turbine system consists a watertight container with a free
spinning water wheel in the middle that outputs to the rear wheel axle. The tube system
continues into a final container in the base where the used water is collected and stored.
The hypothesis exists that between the weight pressurizing the water flow and the

bottlenecked tube system, there will be enough force on the water wheel to output
sustained torque onto the rear wheel axle.
Option 3: Elastic Propulsion Model
The last option uses a series of elastic medical tubing to provide the torque needed to
power the rear wheel axle. The same basic frame would be used, but this time using a
plywood base. The purpose of this is to be capable of housing the wheel and tubing
mounts on the underside of the carriage and to support the cargo weight on top. The
propulsion for this model comes from multiple lengths of the elastic tubing stretching
from an anchor near the front of the craft to the rear where it is wound around the back
wheel axle. When released, the elasticity would provide the torque necessary to turn the
axle as the tubes gradually unwind. The rear wheels would be of a larger kind to
accommodate the power output and provide stability. They would also extend outwards
from the craft to allow for better directional control and smaller sized front wheels. The
front wheels would be small, fixed direction rollers affixed directly onto the frame. The
rear axle would be connected to the bottom of the frame by two fixed arms that contain a
system to allow for smooth rotation.
Option Comparison
The first model relies on a continuous instance of force coming from the bent beam. Its possible
that not enough force would be acting on the gear system, resulting in a complete stand still. In
addition, engineering a system for the craft to maintain velocity after the tension system
completes would be complicated and might even result in less efficiency. The Hydropower
model relies on storing a lot of additional water weight on board and complicated, watertight
engineering that would likely run over budget. Despite potentially providing the best
performance, given the constraints we opted to move on to the next option. Option 3 was agreed
upon to potentially provide the most stable and predictable performance out of the three options,
while easily maintaining adherence to the constraints and budgetary concerns.
Conclusions
After thorough discussion and comparison between ideas with the group, we elected to proceed
with Option 3 as it seemed that it would provide the best results and stay under budget. Option 1
lacked the performance of the other two despite being under budget and having a relatively
simple concept behind it; there also was the danger of possible breaks in the tension arm
resulting in injury. The second option was agreed to have the possible best performance and
creativity behind it, but was hindered by complicated construction methods and expense. Option
3 seemed to be a good balance between ease of construction, budget concerns, and performance
factor; thus it was decided to proceed with this selection.
Time Line
10/27/2014
10/29/2014
10/30/2014
11/21/2014

Initial Group Meeting; introductions made, group brainstorming, rough ideas

formed
Second Group Meeting; project ideas finalized, abstract worked on
Extended Abstract finalized and submitted
Final Competition