Engineering Fundamentals 151

Fall Semester 2008 Final

Project

“Ode to Phil”

By: Jeremy Brooksbank

Price Collins

Essa Sharif

Alex Zadell

December 3, 2008

Page I

EF 151 Final Project

Abstract Paragraph:

Hello there, we are team “Ode to Phil.” Our humble team of hard workers includes Alex

Zadell, Essa Sharif, Price Collins, and Jeremy Brooksbank. We are here to solidify the living

legacy that is Phillip Fulmer. Although solid enough in stature (i.e. “Donuts are GOOD!”), Phil’s

popularity has begun to diminish over the last few years. This is a shame because he completely

turned the University of Tennessee’s football team around, making it into the national

powerhouse it is today (today=before this year). However, now that Phil has left the building to

be replaced with young, non-Tennessean blood, we feel it necessary to do an engineering project

in his memory to make everyone remember the glory years under Coach Fulmer. Our project is

to engineer a “roller coaster” on a limited budget and try to achieve both minimal size and

maximal time requirements. We designed and built our contraption utilizing the skills and

information we learned in Engineering Fundamentals 151 (Aka. The best class ever!)

Introduction:

The objective of our roller coaster project was to sum up all aspects of our EF 151

physics course. We were required to construct a “roller coaster” (very loose definition) within a

0.5 meter * 0.5 meter * 0.5 meter box. To make matters more difficult, we were limited to a

maximum amount of forty dollars for purchasing necessary materials, as well as having to

attempt to reach a ride time of around fifteen seconds. We also created a power point

Page II

presentation along with a written report to supplement our coaster. We included a variety of

calculations at numerous points along the progression of the roller coaster that coincide with our

design. It should be marked that we had a great time (both socially and educationally) while

doing this project.

Design Process:

Our team first tried to think of a design that would be the epitome of a fun and exciting

roller coaster. We conceptually thought of a roller coaster that would have many different

components such as a loop and the use of a small car. Our initial design had a gumball start out

at a steep incline and go over a small piece of carpet to increase frictional force and reduce the

velocity of the gumball. The ball would then go up a small hill and fall into a funnel. Next, the

ball would drop onto a car launcher that shoots a small car through a loop. The problem with this

original concept was that we forgot to incorporate the size restraints and had a much larger

contraption than specified in the project. So, we had to discard our original plan and rethink the

concept of a “roller coaster” once more. Our team started this thought process by measuring the

project dimensions (0.5 m*0.5 m *0.5 m) to see what volume we had to work with. Naturally, we

cut a cardboard box and taped it together with the specified dimensions. We then used three

plastic tracks to roll the gumball down. The tubes were placed on a slight decline to slowly move

the ball down the box from side to side. The differing tracks were placed underneath one another

so that after the ball rolled down one slope it would hit the side of the box and fall down to the

next slope. We secured the tracks with duct tape and added a small plastic scrap to change the

Page III

direction of the gumball. After reaching the bottom of the third ramp, the gumball falls into a

“bucket” which is attached to a piece of string. The thought behind the bucket was to add more

time to our coaster and increase the excitement level of our design. The bucket was constructed

out of a piece of plastic piping which was cut in a cylindrical fashion with the bottom being a

piece of cardboard. When the gumball fell into the bucket, it caused the bucket to fall down

pulling the string down with it. The string was fed through the top of the box and placed to

balance a marble in front of more plastic tubing. So, when the gumball would fall in the bucket,

it would pull the string away from the marble starting it down a separate track from the top of the

box. The other track was made to resemble a spiraling loop that went all the way around the box.

We used wooden supports to hold up the heavy tubing. After going around the spiral, the ball hit

a cardboard sheet to stop its motion and then fell onto more plastic tracks that went back inside

our box.

Device:

Our roller coaster fit into the allotted 0.5 meter sided cube. We had the most trouble with

trying to get our coaster to last the entire fifteen seconds. Consequently, we had to make many

adjustments throughout the building process to slow the roller coaster. To slow down the

gumball and marble, we increased the frictional forces acting on them throughout the ride. On

two segments of our plastic track, we put speed bumps made from placing duct tape over small

'' 22112211 vmvmvmvm +=+2

2

1mvmgh =

mvimpulse ∆=maWT −=dFW •=

=Θ−

r

y1sin

222 bac +=

Equations used in calculations

nails. We also added extra tape on the

marble would not roll down it too fast. Another way we increased the time of the ride is by

varying the steepness of the track.

the velocity of the ball, thus maximizing the time.

by a whopping 5.5 seconds!

Our device works the way it does because of planning and consideration. However, it is

obvious that we did not plan carefully enough beca

around 65 percent of the time. We made several building errors in a few spots along the track

that caused our coaster to not be as reliable as it could have been.

On many occasions, though, our device worked

fifteen second timing goal. Our problem was repeatability. When we made modifications to

increase the time of the ride we compromised the structural integrity of the coaster. With more

time we could have solved our st

every time.

Figure:

nails. We also added extra tape on the circular track that surrounded our ride to ensure that the

marble would not roll down it too fast. Another way we increased the time of the ride is by

varying the steepness of the track. We used a very small angle for the track so it would minimize

ocity of the ball, thus maximizing the time. These adjustments increased our overall time

Our device works the way it does because of planning and consideration. However, it is

obvious that we did not plan carefully enough because our coaster only worked successfully

around 65 percent of the time. We made several building errors in a few spots along the track

that caused our coaster to not be as reliable as it could have been.

On many occasions, though, our device worked smoothly and in close proximity to the

fifteen second timing goal. Our problem was repeatability. When we made modifications to

increase the time of the ride we compromised the structural integrity of the coaster. With more

time we could have solved our structure problems and ensured that our roller

Page IV

circular track that surrounded our ride to ensure that the

marble would not roll down it too fast. Another way we increased the time of the ride is by

We used a very small angle for the track so it would minimize

These adjustments increased our overall time

Our device works the way it does because of planning and consideration. However, it is

use our coaster only worked successfully

around 65 percent of the time. We made several building errors in a few spots along the track

smoothly and in close proximity to the

fifteen second timing goal. Our problem was repeatability. When we made modifications to

increase the time of the ride we compromised the structural integrity of the coaster. With more

ructure problems and ensured that our roller coaster would work

Page V

Results:

Calculations and equations used are in the appendices section.

Conclusions:

Our project was successful, but only part of the time. When it worked, it worked very

well. The main problem we had with the project was that we never got it to work 100% of the

time. We had a lot of little trouble areas that we just were not able to fix completely. If we had

done things differently, we would have made sure that our project worked every time that it

performed. If we had more time, we would have been able to achieve this feat. One of the major

things we learned through this project is that theoretical and actual analyses are two very

different things. Also, we learned that if you are going to use a lot of duct tape make sure that

you press it down all the way or your ball will get caught and stop.

References

We purchased the majority of materials necessary for the project at Lowes and Toys R

Us. The plastic tracks were bought at Toys R Us while the duct tape and plastic tubing were

purchased at Lowes, Home Improvement. We also incorporated a cardboard box which was

already in our possession. In order to assist with the design process, we utilized the Engineering

Fundamentals 151 website (ef.engr.utk.edu) for pictures of past designs. This helped us to boost

our creativity and ensured that we designed met the size requirements. We also taped pictures to

our coaster that we found on the Internet using Google images search engine.

Appendices