Sharing the Product:

Our product is an elastic-band ornithopter that resembles a peacock. When being used, it converts elastic potential energy to kinetic energy. Specifically, when the user rotates the propeller on it, connected rubber band is twisted and therefore stores potential energy in it. This energy transforms into kinetic energy when the user lets go of the handle, as the rubber band will start to unwind and power the wings attached to it to flap.

Design process:

The process of creating this product was first set off with inspirations that I found on YouTube—rubber band powered flying butterfly and other DIY flying machines. I was fascinated by the mechanism that brought the paper butterfly to life—enabling it to fly. Hence, I was determined to create something similar. The research process eventually introduced me to the ornithopter flying machine invented by Leonardo da Vinci. Seeing how this could demonstrate a conversion of elastic potential energy to kinetic energy—also deeply attracted by the intelligence of the design—I settled down with the idea. Then, I began envisioning how it will look for our project; subsequently, identifying the purpose and the targeted audience. Me and partner agreed upon the overall outline that this device will be created to entertain children predominately in the age range of 6-12, and it should be able to flap its wings in imitation of birds.

Hoping to add our own creativity and originality into the design, I searched up different types of birds that I could shape the outer appearance of the product into and drew sketches on iPad. At last, we arrived at the concept of making the ornithopter resemble the appearance of a peacock—having considered that it is one of the world’s most exquisite bird, whose vibrant colors may help attract the young users.

Following, came the developing and planning stage, where we formulated the success criteria for the project and a plan for the arrangement of time. Then, with the help of the tutorial video online, we were quickly able to determine the procedures, building techniques, and materials we need for the construction process, listed in the previous blogs.

However, we did not entirely follow the video, making multiple changes to the materials used—to make it more environmentally friendly—and certain steps that we thought could be simplified or accommodated to the tools and skills we have. For example, instead of using thin wires, we used similarly thin strings, combined with the use of superglue, to fasten the piece together, which aligned with our sustainable goal and made it easier for us to do. In the following lessons, we constructed the product in the sequence of building the fundamental wooden structure; assembling the components that creates the mechanism; finally, decorating the product with the colorful wing and tail.

Learnings:

The most important lesson I learned is that, during an engineering process, patience could sometimes be the most influential factors that determines your success. When I reflected on the moments of failure and success, I was able to notice a pattern. Whenever we tried to rush through some steps or skip over some measurements, we were almost destined to fail, but when we slowed down and carefully worked through the formulated plan, things become a lot easier. For example, the first time when we were creating the propeller, we paid little attention to the key details, which led us to failure. In the second time, we followed each step and measurement precisely, and the product turned out much more successful. Another key learning would be effective time management and organization. At first, we both worked on the same parts together, which caused us to make extremely slow progresses. After realizing this problem, we divided the task into smaller parts among ourselves to work more individually. This increased our work efficiency significantly.

Assessing against the rubric & success criteria:

I did look through many precedents and used them to develop our own design. However, I think I only mainly focused on looking at the ones that are highly related/similar to my design idea (rubber band flying machine) but not including a diversity of ideas from different sources, to explore the different mechanisms and energy that I could’ve used besides elastic potential energy. Yet, the overall documenting and the developing of the concepts were detailed and specific. I also thoroughly reflected through the feedbacks to identify areas for improvement (written in previous blogs).

Lastly, looking at our success criteria, I think we achieved nearly two of the three. The prototype did not break during all the trials, and it is able to move successfully. However, the weaknesses are that sometimes only one of the wings flap and ever was the prototype actually able to fly due to the low frequency of the flapping movements and, possibly, overweighting.

Explain how and why your toy/device meets the design specifications.

It meets the design specifications because it successfully demonstrated the energy conversion that this project aimed to explore. The out appearance of our design was also commented by many of our peers as creative and interesting, meaning that it is highly likely for it to also appeals to the interests of the younger children, who are our targeted audience. Apart from that, the partially hand-powering part of this device also contributes to its entertaining purpose. Additionally, the product has minimal effects on the environment compared to the toys that are commonly made from plastic today, as most of the materials are all from biodegradable and renewable resources.

Other reflections: What are you most proud of? What was most challenging?

I was proud that me and my partner, who both have little independent engineering experiences, were able to complete the construction of the product within the given dates and resource, and actually make this relatively complicated mechanism/design work, despite the fact that it cannot fly. I was also proud of how we were both willing to challenge ourselves to create this difficult design and our perseverance against the setbacks. There were a few times during the construction stage when we felt hopeless in making our product work, but we never gave up on improving the prototype. Furthermore, the most challenging part was making the mechanism work because it needs multiple components of the design to be successful, ranging from the propeller to the attachment of the wings. These small details required close attention, as well as an abundant of time and patience. It was also challenging for us to work with the pliers, which is a tool that neither of us is familiar with. Fortunately, we were able to receive some helpful tips from the staffs at the design center.

Reflect on your prototype. What were some strengths? What needs refinement?

The overall appearance of our prototype came out fairly like the blueprints—how we envisioned it in the planning stage. The peacock wings and tail indeed added more color to the design, making it more appealing and interesting to the user. Another strength would be our success on the construction of the main wooden structure of the design. Our decision on choosing the 3mm thick plywood pieces instead of the other two options (1.5mm and 5mm) was correct and successful as they were strong enough to hold together without breaking—for the whole time—and still as light-weighted as we were hoping it to be. Additionally, the prototype was also able to successfully demonstrate conversion of elastic potential energy to kinetic energy through the flapping movements of the wings, following the twisting and unwinding of the rubber band. However, the propeller and the connecting of the wings still needs refinement as it is sometimes difficult rotate with the small handle and sometimes only one side of the wing flaps. We also had to rip a bit of the wing to enable it to move freely, which affected its appearance.

Feedback from Peers:

Positive Feedback–

• “I like how your design looks like a peacock. I think it is really colorful and attracts young people.”
• “I think the design is really creative.”
• “The envision is great and the idea is pretty solid.”
• “I like how you guys used duct tape to wrap around the pointy end of the stick.”

Constructive feedback & possible changes–

• One of the feedback items was that the combination of the glue and strings that were used to connect the bended wire with the wood piece, which created a big lump, did not look aesthetically pleasing. Therefore, in order to align with the purpose of our product—which partly is to bring entertainment to the user—and the interests of the targeted audience—the children—who are likely to be more attracted by beautiful things, we will change the strings to thinner threads and apply less glue, while making sure that the parts are still tightly fastened together. The thinner thread will not only look cleaner but could also be a better alternative for assembling the pieces together, as it is easier to wrap around stick tightly and be fixed in place with glue.
• We were also encouraged to try to find ways to enable both wings to be able to move simultaneously. First, we were suggested to reconsider the materials that we use and think about whether some of the components of the product were too heavily, which could’ve put an excessive amount of burden on the wings, causing it to either not move at all or move at a low frequency. In response to this suggestion, I think we could use a thinner type of paper that we found in the supply office to replace the normal A4 paper that we used for the wings. This could make the wings lighter while abiding to the sustainable goal of our product by eliminating the plastic options. Apart from that, we were also given the recommendation to reshape the curves of the propeller so that both sticks attached to either side of the wing could move at the same time. We plan on bending one of the straight sections of the propeller, where the side of the wing that doesn’t move is attached to, sideways, to creating a V-shape from the front perspective. This could possibly ensure that the stick is not just turning in the same place with the wire, when the rubber band unwinds, but is actually rotating in a full circular path like the stick connected to other side of the wing. The rotating movement should allow that side of the wing to move up and down like the other one.

Photos of our current prototype:

Explain how you used design thinking practices to arrive at this iteration of your toy/device.

I arrived at the final idea for my toy (ornithopter) by thoroughly considering about the different aspects of the design that will make it successful. First, I thought about the things that I must keep in the original design of the ornithopter, and things that I could make more creative. To ensure that a conversion of elastic potential energy to kinetic energy can be clearly shown from my product, I decided that I must not change the core mechanism that makes this possible: using rubber band to power the movements of the wings. However, I decided that I could change its appearance to make it look more unique, by painting and cutting its plain-colored wings and tail to have the features of a peacock. Then, I began considering about the requirements that will take for the product to function successfully and have little impact on the environment. This led me to shrinking the length of the peacock’s tail, so that this outer design would not be putting too much weight on the wings—minimizing its impact on the functioning of the toy. Apart from that, I carefully thought through the materials that will be used to construct the product, aiming to reduce environmental impacts and avoid over-weighting (so that the ornithopter could fly further and longer). With that in mind, I changed the iron wire used to fasten parts together to strings, which is lighter and more biodegradable. I substituted the plastic used for making the wings to paper and decided to use the 3mm thick plywood instead of the 5mm one, both for roughly the same reasons—environmentally friendly and lightweight.

Important Measurements of the Ornithopter:

Total wingspan: 30 cm

Total length: 20 cm

Materials list:

• Thin paper (length: at least 30cm)
• 3mm think plywood board cut into:

5 cm long wood stick x 2

10cm long wood stick x1

13 cm long wood stick x1

4cm long wood stick x2

• 9mm small plastic pipe x2 (or use paper to make them)
• Paper clip x5
• Thin strings
• Plastic straw x2
• 1 cm small plastic pipe (could use paper as alternative)
• Beads x2
• Cotton swab stick x2
• Rubber band x2

Tools:

• Superglue
• Hot glue gun (alternative for superglue)
• Wood driller
• Ruler
• Pliers
• Scissors

Building Techniques

• Drilling–this technique will be needed when making holes on the wood pieces, with drillers, to assemble small parts of the product together during construction.
• Gluing–this technique will be used throughout the entire construction process since most of the materials (plywood, plastic straw, paper, etc.) can be put together by applying hot glue/superglue on their surfaces.
• Binding–this technique is used for fastening paper clips and wood pieces together with strings. (It is hard to glue these materials together)
• Laser-cutting—we’ll design the shape of the wood pieces on Affinity Designer and then cut them out with the laser cutting machines, for later use. This technique is suitable for cutting the wood boards as it is both precise and efficient.

Develop a detailed plan for creating the preferred design, including success criteria.

1. Check needed materials and aim to complete the construction of wood frames of the prototype in 3^rd
2. Complete the construction of the rest of the prototype in 4^th
3. In lesson 5, finish up the decoration of the prototype and test it against the success criteria written below (record the timing and measurements of the trials). Politely ask one teacher and one other student to try out the prototype and give feedbacks for improvement. Make revisions to the prototype based on the feedbacks and own observations—producing the final product.

Success criteria

-The ornithopter should be able to fly for at least 7 seconds

-The ornithopter should be able to flap its wings successfully

-The quality of the ornithopter should be able to hold up to 10 trials without breaking down

What is the purpose of your device/toy, how does it function, and who is your user?
The toy that we are going to make is an elastic band ornithopter. It is designed to have the function of mimicking the flying motion of a bird by flapping its wings. The mechanism behind this is that it has a rotating propeller attached to the wings and to an elastic band that is connected its body. By rotating the handle on the propeller, the user will be able to twist the elastic band to store elastic potential energy. Then, when the user releases the handle and send the ornithopter into the air, the stored potential energy will instantly convert to kinetic energy, powering the twisted elastic band to unwind. This rotating movement will cause the attached wings to flap up and down, thus, allowing the ornithopter to fly in the air.
This toy will be targeting children predominantly in the age range of 6-12. Children in this age range are more likely to be interested in this kind of more advanced flying toy, meanwhile being mature enough to avoid getting hurt or easily breaking it.

What is the environmental impact of your product and is it durable and safe?
Our product is mostly environmentally friendly because it does not produce any pollutants or emissions harmful to the air. Additionally, apart from the wires, the main materials (rubber band, paper and wood) that will be used to build the product are all made from biodegradable and renewable resources, such as trees and saps of rubber tree. Additionally, since it’ll be a very light-weighted flying toy that does not have a sharp propeller like that of a helicopter, it is considerably safe and is unlikely to be capable of causing harms to its users. However, because the materials are mostly soft and fragile, and the components of the ornithopter will also be cut into thin pieces to reduce the mass, the product can be less durable.

What precedents inspired you? What did you take away from them & how did it inform your choices?
I was inspired by DIY flying butterflies and bird-shaped ornithopters that I found on YouTube. Both of these products share a similar mechanism—twisting rubber bands to store elastic potential energy that can later convert kinetic energy to power the flying motion. This became the central idea that I am applying to my product. Furthermore, by looking at the materials that they use to make the flying motion successful, which is to use thin pieces, I also made the choice to use light-weighted materials, such as papers, instead of cardboards.

How are you making your product original and/ or using creativity?
We’ll be changing the shape of the ornithopter into that of a peacock (mainly using the colors blue and green), so that it could have a cuter and more colorful look. We believe that this creative appearance is likely to appeal to the preferences of young children.