Our design solution for the JPL Invention Challenge was a success. Across 23 trials, the device achieved an average of 168.2 points in an average time of 32.2 seconds. As the max possible score is 190 points, 168.2 points is a sufficiently good score. Likewise, as the task needs to be completed in 60 seconds or less, 32.2 seconds is a sufficiently good time. As shown by the trial data, 15 out of 23 trials achieved a perfect score (190 points), and 5 of these perfect scores were achieved in under 30 seconds (half the allotted time). Since the device accomplished what it was set out to do, it is sufficient to say that the prototype’s design was effective. Although we only scored 160 points in the actual competition which earned us fourth place, we got the fastest time of 24.71 seconds out of everyone competing. Further, we were able to achieve these high scores because of our hammer design, which achieved high accuracy in a short amount of time by directly striking the ball towards the wickets. The build quality of our hammer design also helped us, as our machine never had any structural failures, and shaking was minimal. In fact, most of the lost points were due to inaccurate aiming during the trials. This shows that none of the materials used failed, and thus there were no problems with the materials used for the prototype. We also did 30+ practice trials in class before the competition, ensuring that we were well prepared to fire the balls accurately and speedily during the actual competition. Finally, our group was responsible with all of the assignments, as we completed all of the components on time and earned high grades by regularly asking for feedback from Ms. Snyder and Mr. Eckhart.
We could have made moderate improvements to our design. Due to the device being more heavy than optimal, the turning speed is reduced which makes us slower when trying to fire the balls into the wickets. In addition, the stabilizers in between the two wooden boards at the base aren’t level, reducing their efficacy and slightly reducing accuracy. This is reflected in slightly slower times and slightly lower point averages. Ultimately, the device’s weight and reduced speed wasn’t a huge issue, as the device still managed nearly perfect scores. In terms of our group dynamic, we sometimes procrastinated on completing the components. We only started working on components 3, 4, & 5 just days before the deadline, which limited how much feedback we could receive from the teachers and also caused a lot of stress when completing these components. When working in groups in the future, I would like to create an organized schedule that details everyone's role in achieving our goals. This will help us stay on schedule, prevent stress near deadlines, and ensure that everyone in the group contributes their fair share.
For the year long capstone project, I would advise myself to stay organized with my work, making a detailed schedule that describes everything I have to do for each day. I would advise myself to work closely with my teammates because sometimes I take the "one-man army" approach and try to do everything by myself. By working more with my teammates, I hope to further develop my collaborative and communication skills, which will be vital in my future career as an engineer.
