A Foundation to Build:

Applying Engineering Principles to Lego Robotics

Stephanie Spoony Witherspoon

Alexander Hamilton Middle School

Use this material with extreme caution! While in the throes of a Team Challenge
event, you may excite, motivate and engage your students into a frenzy of
SERIOUS FUN.
~ Lego educational division

INTRODUCTION
My degree is in Agriculture Science concentrating on animal science with a specialist degree
in Agriculture education from California Polytechnic State University in San Luis Obispo,
California. At this point you might be scratching your head with confusion as to why I am writing
a curriculum unit for applying engineering principals to Lego robotics. Yeah, I do that too
sometimes. It was a series of unfortunate events that led me to this new subject area and a very
fortunate future. I went from cows and plows to wires and pliers and could not be happier with
the way things have turned out. My unfortunate events (not to bore you with the details) included
but were not limited to three major ankle surgeries following a very ungraceful moment on a
school farm in Manteca, California, in a turkey house.
I found myself back home in Houston, Texas, looking for a position teaching middle school
science, not a far stretch from Agriculture Science. I landed a job at Alexander Hamilton Middle
School teaching science, and found a school to call home for the past four years. Hamilton is
located in the Historic Heights in Houston with a student ethnicity of 15% African American,
73% Hispanic and 12% White. Our students have an attendance rating of 95% with 82%
economically disadvantaged students and a drop out rate of .2%. We earned an accountability
rating of academically acceptable with the help of 82% of our students passing the reading TAKS
test and 92% passing the writing section. Hamilton is more than the percentages that I just
mentioned: it is an old building, which just celebrated its 85th anniversary, busting at the seams
with new ideas. In this environment teachers are allowed to be individuals, and I have pushed
this liberty to its breaking point and have created a new custom-made position.
One day while talking to a fellow teacher at Hamilton who dabbled in Lego robotics, I
discovered that our school had a couple of Lego robotics kits and that at the moment they were
not being used. I borrowed a couple and began playing with robots on the side after school with a
handful of students, and we began to have some serious fun. That year I chaperoned a small
group of students to the TCEA (Texas Computer Educators Association) robotics contest for the
other teacher who left our school at the end of that year. I had a blast at the contest, but what
amazed me was how hard these students worked at perfecting their robots; they never gave up! I
noticed that even while they were frustrated with the difficulty of the task, they never wanted to
quit, and they never stopped having fun. At that moment I was hooked and I knew this was what
I wanted to teach full time. I fell in love with the subject and realized that I had stumbled upon an
outstanding opportunity to excite students about learning.

Stephanie Witherspoon 99
 I continued using Lego robots in my science classroom and taught an after school program.
Finally, I was given an opportunity to teach Lego robotics as an elective one period a year. Lego
robotics is a hands-on way to teach problem solving, teamwork, time management, programming,
computer skills, physics, and engineering. Now four years later I have been given the
opportunity to create a new full-time position to teach this subject to 150 students.
I am always looking for ways to expand my program and to increase student learning in my
classroom. When this course changed from an after school program taken mostly for fun to an
elective course in which we meet regularly, one challenge that I encountered was the need for
evaluating student performance. While I want to have a program that makes learning fun, I also
want to have a program where students develop usable and marketable skills for their life.
Therefore, I decided to participate in the 2005 HTI program to see what new ideas I could
develop for my class.
In the Lego robotics course I have made a concentrated effort to tie real world applications to
the structure of the class by having similar expectations that any engineer would have in a major
company, including daily activity reports and adherence to timelines. This year I have also
introduced my students to the proper names of the Lego pieces, and I am requiring them to use
these names. Instead of students calling the Lego the small round thing that you put on the
ribbed black piece, I ask the students to say, I need a full bushing to put on the #3 axel. Many
of the proper names of Lego pieces are common structural material and member names. Two
examples of Lego pieces are shown in Figure 1. Figure 1A shows examples of full and half
bushings, while Figure 1B shows examples of axels, and Figure 1C shows examples of beams.

Figure 1A Figure 1B Figure 1C

If you look at buildings and cars, you will see that some of the key building components are
beams, axels, and bushings, and they look very similar to and are used in the same way in the real
world as we use them in robotics.
I have noted a remarkable improvement in my students performance this year in class with
the change in structure. There has been a decrease in frustration levels with the improved
communication that I directly tie to the use of these proper names of the Lego pieces. I can only
imagine how much more improvement and growth my students, and I will experience with the
further introduction of engineering terms which are introduced in activity two of lesson one. A
conversation with a student just the other day went something like this. Miss, my robot will not
go straight when I have programmed it to go forward on both motors at the same power. I have
checked and my robot looks like it is built correctly. In the past, I would say something like,
Make sure your robot is square, and if it is maybe you should try to change the power on one of
your motors to compensate for your design. Looking at the same situation next year, I imagine
my end of the conversation to go more along these lines, I notice that you have a gripper arm
cantilevered off the front right support beam of your robot. Have you considered the impact of
the force on the right side of your robot? Maybe you could add some webbing to join the gripper
to the left support beam as well, thereby distributing your load more evenly on you robot. Just
imagine the day that I can say that sentence and see full registration of understanding on my
students face and receive a reply along these lines, Yes, that is a good idea. I will go and discuss
your solution with my team and let you know what we decide to try. Meanwhile my dean just

100 Houston Teachers Institute

stopped by for a visit and asked for a translation of our conversation. I directed him to the word
wall for a little engineering vocabulary crash course.
The addition of structural engineering principals to this course will help the students
understand the why behind unsuccessful attempts to build functional robots and sub-
assemblies. Much of mankinds development in history, art, science, and economy is intimately
intertwined with the fact that some things break while others bend. While I do not expect my
students to become mechanical engineers, I do hope that they will begin to understand that they
have control over the quality of their robots, and they can learn to predict if a robot design will be
successful because they will have the knowledge of what design qualities make a robot sound in
structure. I hope that with the addition of structural engineering concepts, I will see an increase
in successful robot design and a decrease in the production of robots that literally fall apart on
their way to the challenge table where they are tested. Figure 2 is an example of a very stable and
well-constructed robot; this is the Demobot from the Botball contest.

Figure 2

The material from this structural engineering unit will be included in the first six weeks of my
Lego robotics class, which is when we cover the Basics of Robotics. We also discuss the
various Lego pieces and basic structures like the tank robot from the Lego instruction books and
off the robotics educator CD which is a structurally sound robot that we use before students start
designing and building robots of their own. The material would then be readdressed throughout
the school year as needed and appropriated to the topic or challenge that we are covering. Figure
3 shows an example of the first robot that we build in Lego robotics. It is from the Carnegie
Mellon Lego Educator CDs.

Figure 3

UNIT BACKGROUND
This unit will last for six to twelve 90-minute class periods depending on how you adapt it to
fit your needs. When I started looking at how to add the information from the seminars to my
curriculum, I knew exactly what it would look like. It would look like my existing course with an

Stephanie Witherspoon 101

emphasis on understanding how structures can be put together to last and with the addition of the
vocabulary terms which will give my students the tools that they need to communicate their ideas
to each other and to me.
After adding the proper names of the Lego pieces to my class in the past year and seeing what
a difference such a simple change can make, I am excited to add the terms in lesson one to my
course. While it is a large number of terms, I think it is vital to introduce them all early on during
the first few weeks of school so that we can use them and master them during the course of the
school year. During the past year I found that creating a word wall with pictures of the Lego
pieces and their proper names was a big help. With adding such a large amount of information to
my course, I will continue the practice of having a word wall that will now include all the Lego
pieces and the structural engineering terms.
One thing I learned this year is how truly important it is that I lead by example. When I did
not know the name to a piece during class, I stopped teaching and went to the word wall to find
the proper name, and then once I knew the name, I would continue teaching. It did not take long
for my students to catch on and to realize that I was serious, and they knew not using proper Lego
names would not be accepted. I know I can achieve the same success this year with these terms if
I strive to use them correctly and work them into our daily discussions as often as possible.
In lesson two the instruction will move from an introduction of the terms to learning what
they mean when you are building a structure. Students will be challenged to build structures to
specification, and then that structure will be tested to see if it is stable and to see if it can support
a predetermined weight. Students will be encouraged to practice using the new terms when we
are discussing the class activities. After testing the structure, they will be asked to present to the
class an evaluation of their structures performance making sure that they use proper terminology.
After having the opportunity to build their own structures, students will build structures using
Lego set # 9618 Bridges, Towers, and Other Structures. By using these kits students will have an
opportunity to build and test proven structures and will be able to compare what they built on
their own to the structures they built following the kits instructions. During a teacher-led class
discussion, we will work together to discover which traits the most successful structures have in
common. This is going to be a critical step in building a strong foundation for the year. If
students are able to see what makes a structure sound, then they will be able to build robots that
do not fall apart on the way to a challenge.
In the final lesson students will first build a tankbot following the instructions from the
Carnegie Melon software programs, and then they will be given an introduction to Robolab and
how to build a simple program. Once they have built this robot and programmed it, they will be
instructed to take the tankbot apart and to build an original robot that can accomplish the same
simple program. If this unit is successful, students should be able to build a solid and stable robot
that can accomplish this task and then they will be asked to present to the class their robot and
describe what attributes made their robot a success. Of course they will be required to use the
terms from this unit when appropriate.
LESSON PLANS
Lesson One: Introduction to structural engineering terms
Subject: Robotics
Grade Level: 6-8
Objective
In this lesson students will be introduced to the many structural engineering terms and will have
an understanding of why we want to learn and understand these terms.

102 Houston Teachers Institute

Time Allotment: Two to three 90 minutes class periods
Activity One
A short class discussion of why we need to learn about structural engineering in order to build
better robots. Students will be asked questions and we will fill out the first two sections of a
KWL (Know, Want to Know, Learned) chart.
Activity Two
Students will be given a handout with the following terms and definitions, and we will popcorn
read the terms, and I will show examples of each term when possible.
Terms
1. Arch A curved structure that primarily transmits forces through compression reaction.
2. Balance Equilibrium in movement.
3. Beam A structural member that supports loads through bending action.
4. Bend To cause something to change its shape into a curve, by physical force.
5. Bridge A construction or natural feature that spans a divide.
6. Buttress A support on the outside of a wall that helps to stabilize a vault or roof.
7. Cantilever A projecting beam or member supported only on one end.
8. Column A vertical post divided into a base, a shaft, and a capital at the top.
9. Compression The stress resulting from a pushing force on a member, which tends to
shorten it (the opposite of tension)
10. Compression strength The maximum compressive force a material can support.
11. Construction A structure that is put together out of separate pieces of often disparate
(unlike) materials.
12. Core A central and often foundational part usually distinct from the enveloping part by a
difference in nature.
13. Cost The amount or equivalent paid or charged for something.
14. Dead load The weight of a structure itself, including the weight of fixtures or equipment
permanently attached to it.
15. Deflection A translational deformation.
16. Deform To alter the shape by stress.
17. Elasticity The property of recovering original shape and dimensions upon removal of a
deforming force.
18. Engineering The profession of applying scientific principals to the design and
construction of buildings and structures.
19. Failure A state of inability to perform a normal function.
20. Fatigue The phenomenon leading to fracture under repeated or fluctuating stresses.
21. Flexible Yielding to influence.
22. Footprint Plane or space occupied by a piece of equipment.
23. Form Shape or visible structure of a thing or person.
24. Force Strength or energy brought to bear.
25. Foundation The lowest and supporting part of a member or a wall, including the base
course.
26. Frame The structural elements that make up the skeleton of a building or other
constructed object.
27. Function The purpose of something; what something does.
28. Hinge A jointed or flexible device that allows the pivoting of a structural member.
29. Girder A large beam of steel, iron, reinforced concrete, or timber used to support
concentrated loads at isolated points along its length.
30. Infrastructure An underlying base or foundation.

Stephanie Witherspoon 103

31. Joint The point where two components of a structure join, but are still able to rotate.
32. Load A burden; a weight to be carried.
33. Live load The moving load on a structure, including the weight of people, cars, buildings,
and equipment, but not including wind load.
34. Materia l Matter that may be shaped or manipulated, particularly in making something.
35. Pillar An upright structure of stone, brick, or metal that holds up part of a building or
other structure.
36. Rigidity The degree of flexibility.
37. Shaft A long thin object.
38. Shear The sliding of one layer of material relative to another layer.
39. Span Distance between the supports of a bridge or arch.
40. Stability Ability of a system to maintain control when subjected to severe outside
disturbances.
41. Strain Deformation produced on a body by an outside force.
42. Strength The quality of being strong.
43. Stress Deforming force per unit area to which a body is subjected.
44. Structure Name for any complex construction.
45. Stiffness Rigidity.
46. Suspension The act of suspending or the state of being suspended.
47. Tensile strength Breaking strength of a material when subjected to a tensile (stretching)
force.
48. Tension Action of stretching.
49. Test A session in which a product or piece of equipment is placed under everyday and/or
extreme conditions and is examined for its durability, etc.
50. Tie Attach or fasten.
51. Torque Force that causes twist in a member.
52. Tower A structure, usually taller that it is wide.
53. Truss Structure composed of axial loaded members that intersect at different joints.
54. Web A connecting element between ribs.
Activity Three
At the beginning of the activity students will each draw a term and its definition from a container.
Students will then be instructed to use the Lego pieces located in their area to construct a visual
representation of their term. After approximately 15 minutes each student will present their
model to the class and describe how it represents the term. Students will be encouraged to ask
questions and offer other ways to represent each term.
Activity Four
I will put all the terms up on the word wall and we will use the wall together to answer questions
and to help in our class discussions.
Activity Five
Students will fill out the last section of the KWL chart during a teacher led class discussion.
Lesson Two: Building a foundation
Subject: Robotics
Grade Level: 6-8
Objectives
In this lesson students will be given an opportunity to apply the terms to the structures they build.

104 Houston Teachers Institute

Time Allotment: Two to four 90-minute class periods
Activity One
In this activity students will work in small groups, and each group will be given an identical set of
Lego building blocks (how many and what types of Lego building blocks depends on availability
and teacher preference). Students will be given the challenge to build a tower out of Lego
building blocks in which they should try to build the tallest freestanding tower possible. This
tower will need to hold a container for a mass or have a place to hook a mass with a hanger.
Whichever type of mass you decide to use, it is important that the students see the mass before
beginning so that their design takes it into consideration. Once students towers are complete,
each group should be given the mass to see if their tower can support it. After each group has
completed their towers they should compare all the towers during a gallery walk in which each
group should collect the following data: tower height, footprint size, widest section, narrowest
section, type of core and if it held the mass. After the gallery walk students will discuss each of
the towers strong and weak points and try to come to a conclusion as to which towers are the
most structurally sound and why.
Activity Two
In this activity students working in groups of 5-7 will be challenged to build the structures from
Lego set # 9618 Bridges, Towers, and Other Structures. After students build each structure, we
will come together as a class to discuss what attributes the structure has that make it stable, and if
they have ideas to improve the structure and time allows, they can be allowed to try their
improvements.
Activity Three
We will look at pictures of bridges and structures, and together we will practice identifying their
structural elements. You can use any books and web pages about bridges and structures for this
lesson. I have included a few suggestions in the bibliography.
Lesson Three: Testing the foundation
Subject: Robotics
Grade Level: 6-8
Objectives
In this lesson students will get to put what they have learned to the test, and we will see if they
have learned enough about structural engineering to be able to build a solid and stable robot that
can accomplish a predetermined task and to be able to use the proper terms to describe the
outcome.
Time Allotment: Two to six 90-minute class periods.
Activity One
Students will be divided into groups of 5-7 and assigned a Lego robotics team challenge set.
After a brief introduction of the kit and an explanation of class procedures for using and storing
these materials, students will be asked to follow the instructions on the Carnegie Melon robotics
educator CD-Rom for how to build a tankbot. Once the robots are built we will have a brief class
discussion about the structure of the tankbot and what elements make it stable.
Activity Two
Students will be given an introduction to Robolab and then will be challenged to program their
robot to move forward and then to navigate around an obstacle, a small orange caution cone.

Stephanie Witherspoon 105

Activity Three
Students will be asked to take their tankbot apart, and then once their kits are back in order, they
will be asked to build an original robot. Before beginning construction, students will be required
to draw a sketch of their plan for their robot and label this sketch with their design elements.
Students will need to show their designs to me and will only be allowed to proceed with my
approval. Once their design is approved, students will be allowed to build their original design
and then to test it by attempting the challenge in the previous activity. After accomplishing the
challenge, each group will be asked to write a brief account of this activity and will be asked to
share this with the rest of the class. This account should include a description of the robot, a
critique of how their robot performed, and a justification of their design, which may include ways
that given time they could improve it.

ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bridges, Towers and Other Structures set #9618. Bilund, DK.: Lego Dacta.
This is the kit used in lesson two to build the bridges and structures.
Carnegie Mellon Robotics Academy Robotics Educator. Windows or Macintosh Version Computer software. Robo
matter incorporated, 2004. CD-Rom.
A complete robotic classroom on a CD-Rom, this is a great CD to help guide new and experienced robotics
teachers and coaches through teaching robotics. It includes investigations, curriculum, assessment rubrics,
multimedia material and other robotics resources.
Carnegie Mellon Robotics Academy Robotics Explorer. Windows or Macintosh. Computer software. Robo matter
incorporated, 2003. CD-Rom.
This CD-Rom contains robotic challenges ranging in difficulty, a Robolab tutorial for further help in
programming, and additional multimedia material to aid in teaching Lego robotics.
Cowan, Henry J., et al. A Guide to the Worlds Greatest Buildings: Masterpieces of Architecture and Engineering.
San Francisco: Fog City P, 2000.
This is one of the books you could use in lesson two.
Dietsch, Deborah K. Architecture for Dummies. New York: Wiley Publishing, Inc., 2002.
This book is a great resource for vocabulary terms and definitions along with simple explanations of these terms
for students.
Dupr, Judith. Bridges: A History of the Worlds Most Famous and Important Spans. New York: Black Dog &
Leventhal P Inc., 1997.
This book contains a nice glossary of terms and can be used for lesson two.
Eberhart, Mark E. Why Things Break: Understanding the World by the Way It Comes Apart. New York: Harmony
Books, 2003.
This book is neat read that will be fun to share excerpts with students. It shows a real human side to physics and
chemistry and is where I learned there is a difference between knowing why things break and knowing when
things will break.
EngNet. 1998-2005. <http://www.engnetglobal.com>.
This is one site I used to define the engineering terms.
Fact-Archive.com. July 6, 2005. <http://www.fact-archive.com>.
This is one site I used to define the engineering terms.
Lego Mindstorms for Schools Team Challenge Set Manual. Bilund, DK.: The Lego Group, 1999.
A printed resource of teacher notes and copy masters for use with the team challenge set.
Petroski, Henery. To Engineer Is Human:The Role of Failure in Successful Design. New York: St. Martins P, 1982.
Robolab programming Software for the Lego RCX. PC Version 2.5.4B. Computer software. Lego systems A/S, 2004.
CD-Rom.
Robolab is a robotics software that is good for an introduction to robotics this program uses icons which are linked
together with wires to program the Lego robots. This program while much more simple follows the structure and
rules of a higher level programming software like Interactive C or C++.

106 Houston Teachers Institute

Team Challenge Set # 9790. Bilund, DK.: Lego Dacta
This is the Lego kit that we use to build most of our robots.
Wilkinson, Philip. Super Structures: How Things Work from the Inside Out. New York: DK Publishing Inc., 1996.
This is a cool book for use in lesson two; it has really neat cross section pictures of structures so you can really see
how they are built.

Stephanie Witherspoon 107