1

Prototype Performance Report  

San Marin High School

Tanner Spence, Andersen Teoh

Max Leonard, Wesley Fink
 

1
  

Abstract
To test the durability of pykrete in the real world, we conducted sixth differing experiments.
Pykrete itself is an ice alloy, made up of 86% water and 14% ice and the experiments will
demonstrate the scientific theory of thermodynamics. The results of the experiments will be used
to construct a prototype for modular tools with a pykrete-based tool head. The governing
questions for this experiment revolved around how pykrete would react to the climate of
temperate Marin County, how durabile pykrete would turn out to be, and what the results meant
for the project moving forward.

The six tests measured the freezing and melting times of pykrete and the effects of dropping it
from a 2+ meter height, penetrating it with a screwdriver, driving a nail through it, and impact from
a sledgehammer dropped onto it. For each of these tests, ice was used as a control due to pykrete
being an ice alloy. Materials used for the various tests include: a mold for the pyrekete, scrap
wood, a freezer, a sledgehammer, a screwdriver, a hammer, an electronic source of heat, a
stopwatch, and a ladder.

The results were reflected well on pykrete. The pykrete turned out to be much more durable than
ice, with it only experiencing mild to minimal damage. In most penetrative and impact tests, the
pykrete would fracture into few pieces and mostly maintain its form and weight. However, pykrete
took approximately 160 more minutes to freeze than ice. This provides a difficulty in the
convenience of making the tools, making them better suited for non-emergency tasks. While other
tool head materials may be more durable than pykrete, our experiments show the material is able
to hold its own and shouldn’t be ruled out of being a tool material, despite being an ice alloy.

Table of Contents
1- Title Page
2- Abstract
2, 3- Table of Contents
3, 4 ,5- Introduction
5, 6- Methods

2
7, 8, 9- Results
10, 11-Discussion
12-References
12-Appendix  

Introduction
Background​ ​on Pykrete
Pykrete was discovered in late 1942 by Lord Mountbatten. It is what's known as an ice alloy, in this
case, 14% sawdust, 86% water. This enabled it to hold its temperature better, resist impacts, and
maintain its shape. Its first demonstration of durability was a trial by fire in Lord Winston
Churchill's bathtub.. The second was when rifles were fired at it, dealing little to no damage. The plan
was to construct a 2 million ton aircraft carrier from the alloy to protect Atlantic shipping from
German u-boat attacks.. It would be the largest military vessel ever constructed. By the time the
design was finalized however, the niche had been filled by long range bombers and the project was
shelved.

In 1943, more tests were done to look at similar vessels, namely cargo ships. Pykrete remained
stronger than ice, yet lighter and cheaper than steel or concrete. Further development has led to
numerous amature boats made of the alloy, and several serious looks at using it to create structures.
One notable attempt came from the University of Vienna. A 10 meter dome was built and left alone,
lasting several weeks before the sun melted it. While our project is to build dynamic tools, it will
change how we build structures in arctic conditions.

Guiding Scientific Theories

To start off, it is important that we have a basic understanding of thermodynamics so we are able to
make pykrete in the first place. We need to understand how the water and sawdust freeze to make a
strong material. Adjacent to this we must have a grasp on how and why hammers work the way
they do and how they accomplish their job. We have acquired this knowledge by looking at the
designs and exploded sketches of various metal sledgehammers so we know what makes them so
effective and creating our own prototypes..

3
As we continue the prototyping stage, where we are using our knowledge on thermodynamics to
make a mold for the toolhead that accounts for the expansion of the ice whilst also keeping the
shape essential for the head. Now that we have working prototype models, we are moving onto
testing where we will utilize the concepts of physics specifically force, velocity, mass, and
acceleration when we test the project by destroying various objects to find the durability of the
hammerhead as well as how long it lasts.

The Experiments
The experiments listed in the Methods section below were chosen on insight they would provide us
with pykrete’s properties and how the alloy works in a real world setting.

The first test, “Making Pykrete and Freezing Time” was chosen in order to demonstrate how quickly
pykrete freezes on its own and when compared to regular ice.. Knowing the speed at which pykrete
freezes is essential to the real world viability of our tools. If it has a relatively quick freezing time,
then that bodes well for researchers who need the tools in a short period of time.

Our second test, “Percussive Impact Resistance,” the goal is to demonstrate the durability of pykrete.
by dropping a sledgehammer on it. With the alloy needing to be used as a tool head, knowing how
much damage upon impact it can withstand is critical for its overall viability.

The third test, “Penetrative Impact Resistance,” has a similar goal to the previous test, in which we
are once again testing for durability. This test is more to see how the pykrete reacts to smaller
penerations, such as that by a knife or screwdriver. This test is needed for the real world practicality
of pykrete and most importantly if it can still be used as a toolhead after penetration.

Our fourth test, “Applicable Testing Resistance,” the goal is the same as the previous test, but with the
force of the hammer and the deeper impact of the nail. Once again, this test will be used to see how
pykrete reacts to penetration in a smaller surface area.

The fifth test, “Lithobrake Resistance,” is designed to demonstrate how pykrete holds its form when
dropped from a substantial height. This is important to know for the durability of the material, and if
a pykrete tool head will be able to withstand being dropped and hold its form.

Our sixth and final test is, “Melting Rate,” which shows us how quickly pykrete melts. This is useful to
know when the tool is used in a warmer climate, to see how long its able to last before melting and
for the user to plan around this factor.

4
All experiments were tested alongside ice as a control. Ice was chosen because of the close
relationship it has to pykrete and to give a basis for how the addition of sawdust changes durability
and other factors. The control is vital for understanding pykrete’s overall usefulness and practicality..

Discovery Questions
● How will a pykrete sledgehammer compare to a traditional steel sledgehammer?
● How long would it take for pykrete to melt in the temperate climate of Marin County?
○ What do these results tell us about how pykrete would react in arctic climates?
● How will the durability of the pykrete turn out?
● Under what pressures will the pykrete hammerhead break down under?
● How long does it take the pykrete tool head to freeze?
● What do the results mean for the future of our project?
● Do any of the results call for further experimentation?

Methods
 

Techniques

● Measuring weight in grams via Scale

● Freezing times captured using a clock/stopwatch
● Penetrative impact tracked via hammering a nail into pykrete
● Using consistent measuring tools to determine physical dimensions and distances

Variables

● Pykrete sledgehammer
● Steel sledgehammer (control)
● Watermelons
● Eggs
● Table

5
 ● Apples

How kept fair:

● Comparing the tools on the same materials

● Keeping a constant environment temp
● Using the same scale for all measurements
● Same person did all of the smashing so as to ensure consistent arm strength

Steps:
1. Make pykrete (1:1 ratio sawdust to water)
2. Use some form of waterproofing to protect the mold. (Candle wax, plastic wrap,
etc)
3. Pack pykrete into mold
4. Insert attachment bolt into pykrete mold. Your pykrete mix should be thick
enough to hold it in place.
5. Close mold, and place into holder, or apply rubber bands
6. Place into freezer
7. Wait several hours (or days)
8. Remove mold from toolhead
9. Screw head onto tool rod mount

Testing Procedure (General)

1. Place testing material onto a durable surface

2. Locate either a testing tool, or control tool
3. Firmly grasp it in your hand
4. Apply tool in its intended use to testing material
a. Example: Swing sledgehammer upon testing material
5. Record results
6. Repeat with control
7. Repeat with remaining variables
 

6
Results

Steel Sledgehammer
(Control)
Variable Results Notes
Egg Half of egg shell was completely cracked
Apple Split completely in half
Watermelon Split completely in half
Table Easily broke through table top

Pykrete Sledgehammer
Variable Results
Egg Half of egg shell was completely cracked
Apple Split completely in half
Watermelon Split down the middle, but not in half
Large crack in middle, didn't break through
Table table top Tool head came off

Steel
Sledgeham
mer
(Control)
Mass of Time of Time of
Head Swing Impact Distance Acceleration Velocity Force
0.386 kg 0.25 s 1/120 s 1m 32m/s^2 8m/s 365.76N

7
Pykrete
Sledgeham
mer
Mass of Time of Time of
Head Swing Impact Distance Acceleration Velocity Force
12 lbs 0.25 s 1/120 s 1m 32m/s^2 8m/s 5184N

8
9
 Discussion
From our experimentation, Project Icebreaker can conclude pykrete tool heads are a
workable alternative to traditional materials. When it came to smashing an apple and
egg, the pykrete sledgehammer had the same effectiveness as a steel hammer, which
is to be expected. In terms of the sturdier watermelon and table, the pykrete
sledgehammer wasn’t able to do as much damage as the steel sledgehammer, but still
had a performance better than expected. This also shows that despite the smaller
amount of force the pykrete sledgehammer exerted, it's lightweight nature still allows
it to be on par with a steel sledgehammer.

A few errors occurred during the project that would need to be fixed in a second
experiment. The most noteworthy change would be a better connection between the
tool head and rod. During our table trial, the tool head flew off the rod when used with
excessive force. While the pykrete remained undamaged, the ordeal showcases how
key a sturdy connection is for these tools, and this would need to be implemented in
further testing. In the table trial, unlike the egg, apple, and watermelon trials, the same
table was used for both tools. Since the table was previously damaged by the pykrete

10
trial, the subsequent steel sledgehammer result may not be genuine. However, due the
steel sledgehammer’s previous strong performances, we have reason to believe the
result would have been the same. But, in future experimentation, this should not be
repeated. For the watermelon, apple, and egg trials, we did not measure the variables
for size and weight. While we tried to use variables that had similar qualities for each
trial, we did not take in the data to confirm this. Differences in size and weight could
affect the sledgehammers’ performances.

For future experiments, it would be keen to conduct them in climates similar to

Antarctica and space, where the tools are designed to be used. Because of limitations
in budget and the inability to travel due to the COVID-19 pandemic, our experiment was
conducted in the Mediterranean climate of Marin County, California. This likely affected
our results, as our tool head became mushy after an hour after being taken out the
freezer.

To summarize our findings, a pykrete sledgehammer has identical effectiveness to a

traditional tool when it comes to more malleable material, apples and eggs, and an
equal but slightly poorer performance with more rigid objects, watermelons and tables.
The pykrete sledgehammer exerted a significantly lesser amount of force than the
steel sledgehammer, 365.75 Newtons to 5184 Newtons.

The results show that pykrete has potential as an alternative material for tools. While
our results indicate pykrete isn’t fully there, the results suggest that modifications can
be made to the pykrete itself to reach a level of efficiency. A modification Project
Icebreaker recommends is experimentation with pykrete mixed with a gelatin, Sodium
Carboxymethyl Cellulose, and Polyacrylamide-based gel mixture. Additionally, it would
be useful to see how other pykrete tools, such as a shovel and pickaxe, would perform
when compared to their traditional counterparts. At Project Icebreaker, we encourage
our fellow engineers to continue our work in researching the validity of pykrete tools.
 

11
References
The Story of Pykrete: That Time the Navy Built a Ship Out of Ice and Sawdust

How to Make an Indestructible Snow Fort — With Pykrete

Pykecrete

Using chitin, a bioinspired material, to manufacture tools and shelters on Mars

 

Appendix
Digital Technical Poster

Project Icebreaker Final Test Results

Project Icebreaker Proposal

12