Cornerstone of Engineering I & II

Fall 2023 MWH

Mimicry Mashup

SUBMITTED BY:

KSG’s KGB (Krazy Good Biomimicry) | MWH-3

PREPARED BY:
Elle Arcand
Emilie Cocke
Caleb Hagner
Matthew Szela

Report Submitted: December 12, 2023

 ABSTRACT

In order to develop a museum exhibit to teach 4th and 5th grade students about biomimicry, Team 3
considers design constraints, design objectives, client goals, and stakeholder needs in order to provide an
engaging, interactive, and technically satisfactory product. Through its compliance with the size
requirements and provided travel bag dimensions, it accomplishes the objectives of easy transport and
assembly. By making inclusive design a priority through the incorporation of the principles of EDGE and
Universal Design, Team 3 makes the exhibit accessible to more students and enhances the exhibit’s reach.
Measured and observed data from user interactions shows that the exhibit, “Mimicry Mashup,” is an
effective education tool, and this data satisfies the design requirements. The exhibit performs well at the
NU and Beachmont Expos, with everything working, despite no inclusion of bilingual text. In order to
evaluate the success of the exhibit, Team 3 uses feedback from faculty, peer, and students in addition to
qualitative analysis of user created biomimicry drawings from the exhibit.

i
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT......................................................................................................................... I
TABLE OF CONTENTS................................................................................................ ii

LIST OF TABLES ..........................................................................................................VIII

LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................VIII
ELLE ARCAND ..................................................................................................................1
Introduction ..........................................................................................................1

1.1.1 Problem statement .............................................................................................. 1

1.1.2 Stakeholders ....................................................................................................... 1

1.1.3 Pertinent topics in engineering: sustainability ................................................... 1

1.1.4 Scope .................................................................................................................. 2

Background ..........................................................................................................3

1.2.1 Research ............................................................................................................. 3

1.2.2 Ethics.................................................................................................................. 3

1.2.3 Universal Design & EDGE ................................................................................ 4

Methodology ........................................................................................................5

1.3.1 Milestone 1......................................................................................................... 5

1.3.2 Milestone 2......................................................................................................... 5

1.3.3 Milestone 3......................................................................................................... 6

1.3.4 Milestone 4......................................................................................................... 7

1.3.5 Milestone 5......................................................................................................... 8

1.3.6 Milestone 6......................................................................................................... 9

1.3.7 Individual Contributions .................................................................................. 11

EMILIE COCKE ...............................................................................................................12

ii
 Introduction ........................................................................................................12

Background ........................................................................................................15

Methodology ......................................................................................................17

1.6.1 Defining the problem .................................................................................... 17

1.6.2 Generating Solutions..................................................................................... 18

1.6.3 Deciding on the best solution........................................................................ 19

1.6.4 Implementation ............................................................................................. 20

1.6.5 Evaluation ..................................................................................................... 22

1.6.6 Individual Contributions ............................................................................... 23

CALEB HAGNER .............................................................................................................25

Introduction ........................................................................................................25

1.7.1 Problem Statement ........................................................................................ 25

1.7.2 Stakeholders .................................................................................................. 25

1.7.3 Pertinent Topics in Engineering.................................................................... 26

1.7.4 Scope ............................................................................................................. 26

Background ........................................................................................................27

1.8.1 Research ........................................................................................................ 27

1.8.2 Ethics............................................................................................................. 27

1.8.3 Universal Design........................................................................................... 27

Methodology ......................................................................................................28

1.9.1 Defining the problem .................................................................................... 28

1.9.2 Generating Solutions..................................................................................... 29

1.9.3 Deciding on the best solution........................................................................ 30

iii
 1.9.4 Implementation ............................................................................................. 30

1.9.5 Evaluation ..................................................................................................... 33

1.9.6 Individual Contributions ............................................................................... 34

MATTHEW SZELA..........................................................................................................35
Introduction ........................................................................................................35

1.10.1 Problem Statement ......................................................................................... 35

1.10.2 Stakeholders ................................................................................................... 35

1.10.3 Biomimicry/bionics........................................................................................ 36

1.10.4 Scope .............................................................................................................. 36

Background ........................................................................................................37

1.11.1 Research ......................................................................................................... 37

1.11.2 Ethics.............................................................................................................. 38

1.11.3 Universal Design ............................................................................................ 38

1.12 Methodology ..................................................................................................... 39

1.12.1 Defining the problem ..................................................................................... 39

1.12.2 Generating solutions ...................................................................................... 39

1.12.3 Deciding course of action .............................................................................. 40

1.12.4 CAD drawings and exhibit overview ............................................................. 41

1.12.5 Construction of mock-up ............................................................................... 42

1.12.6 Proof of concepts ........................................................................................... 42

1.12.7 Final design .................................................................................................... 42

1.12.8 Evaluation of design ...................................................................................... 44

1.12.9 Individual contributions ................................................................................. 44

iv
KSG’S KGB ......................................................................................................................46
Final Design .......................................................................................................46

Results ................................................................................................................49

1.13.1 Measurements ................................................................................................ 49

1.13.2 Evaluation Results ......................................................................................... 49

1.13.3 Peer Feedback ................................................................................................ 49

ELLE ARCAND ................................................................................................................51

Discussion/Analysis ...........................................................................................51

Conclusion .........................................................................................................53

Recommendations ..............................................................................................54

Lessons Learned.................................................................................................55

1.17.1 Contributions ............................................................................................ 55

1.17.2 Resources .................................................................................................. 55

1.17.3 Reflections on Learning ............................................................................ 55

1.17.4 Reflections on Working in a Team ........................................................... 55

EMILIE COCKE ...............................................................................................................57

Discussion ..........................................................................................................57

Conclusion .........................................................................................................59

Recommendations ..............................................................................................60

Lessons Learned.................................................................................................61

1.21.1 Contributions ............................................................................................ 61

1.21.2 Resources .................................................................................................. 62

1.21.3 Reflections on learning ............................................................................. 62

v
 1.21.4 Reflections on Working in a Team ........................................................... 62

CALEB HAGNER .............................................................................................................64

Discussion ..........................................................................................................64

Conclusion .........................................................................................................66

1.23.1 Conclusions and Restatement of Results .................................................. 66

1.23.2 Concluding Remarks................................................................................. 66

Recommendations ..............................................................................................67

Lessons Learned.................................................................................................68

1.25.1 Contributions ............................................................................................ 68

1.25.2 Resources .................................................................................................. 68

1.25.3 Reflections on learning ............................................................................. 68

1.25.4 Reflections on Working in a Team ........................................................... 69

MATT SZELA ...................................................................................................................70

Discussion ..........................................................................................................70

Conclusion .........................................................................................................72

Recommendations ..............................................................................................73

Lessons Learned.................................................................................................74

1.29.1 Contributions ............................................................................................ 74

1.29.2 Resources .................................................................................................. 75

1.29.3 Reflections on learning ............................................................................. 76

1.29.4 Reflections on Working in a Team ........................................................... 76

REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................78
AUTHOR BIOGRAPHIES ...............................................................................................81
APPENDICES ...................................................................................................................83

vi
Appendix A – Team Contract ........................................................................................83

Appendix B - Decision Analysis....................................................................................95

Appendix C – Final Solidworks/AutoCAD Drawings...................................................96

Appendix D – Product Testing Results........................................................................101

Appendix E – Code Used in Project ............................................................................113

Appendix F – Wire Diagrams for SparkFun Boards ...................................................146

Appendix G – Photo Log .............................................................................................147

Section 1: Progress Photos by Milestone ................................................................ 147

Section 2: Exhibit Slides: ........................................................................................ 170

Appendix H – Final Gantt Chart ..................................................................................208

Appendix I – Final Budget...........................................................................................209

Appendix J – Project Hours Log..................................................................................210

vii
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Rating system totals and respective percentages. ..............................................101

Table 2. Number of individuals that approached, started and finished our game with

respective precents. ..................................................................................................101

Table 3. Peer Feedback from Milestone 5 .......................................................................104

Table 4. Peer feedback from Northeastern exposition. ....................................................105

Table 5. Faculty Feedback from the Expo .......................................................................105

Table 6. Evaluation Table, updated, from Milestone 5....................................................108

Table 7. Drawing Summary Data ....................................................................................108

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Program & Collect exhibit at the Museum of Science where users program a

robot to collect gems. ...................................................................................................3

Figure 2. Problem Duncker Diagram ...................................................................................5

Figure 3. User empathy map. ...............................................................................................5

Figure 4. Summary of main points from brainstorming session..........................................6

Figure 5. Emilie's design used in the KDTA. ......................................................................6

Figure 6. SolidWorks generated CAD of our original cardboard mockup. .........................6

Figure 7. Fully assembled cardboard mockup. ....................................................................7

Figure 8. Flowchart of the function of our exhibit...............................................................7

Figure 9. Wooden structure of exhibit with buttons, button covers and some LEDs. .........8

Figure 10. Wire diagram of an Arduino proof of concept that we employed to test the

main function of our exhibit. .......................................................................................8

viii
Figure 11. Matt's 3D printed stamp handle. .........................................................................8

Figure 12. The soldered breadboard and wires inside of our exhibit...................................9

Figure 13. One of the final slides used for our exhibit. .....................................................10

Figure 14. Poster for the expositions. ................................................................................10

Figure 15. A student's response to the pangolin prompt at the Beachmont exposition. ....10

Figure 16. Final setup of our display for the expositions. .................................................11

Figure 17. One of my two ideas from the 4-3-2 session. ...................................................11

Figure 18. My individual proposal for our exhibit used in the KDTA. .............................11

Figure 19. Biomimicry slide example. ...............................................................................14

Figure 20. Bloom’s Taxonomy Pyramid ...........................................................................14

Figure 21. Trash Lab Exhibit [16] .....................................................................................16

Figure 22. Museum Administration (Client) Empathy Map ..............................................17

Figure 23. Beachmont Students (User) Empathy Map ......................................................17

Figure 24. Problem Formulation: Duncker Diagram .........................................................18

Figure 25. Biomimicry Brainstorming...............................................................................18

Figure 26. Cocke 4-2-3 Sketch ..........................................................................................19

Figure 27. Cocke 4-2-3 Sketch ..........................................................................................19

Figure 28. Kepner-Tregoe Decision Analysis ...................................................................19

Figure 29. Exhibit Design Chosen from Kepner-Tregoe Decision Analysis.....................20

Figure 30. Initial AutoCAD Drawing ................................................................................20

Figure 31. Revised SolidWorks Drawing ..........................................................................20

Figure 32. Biomimicry Examples Excel Spreadsheet........................................................21

Figure 33. Exhibit Code Flowchart....................................................................................21

ix
Figure 34. Trifold Design ..................................................................................................22

Figure 35. Adobe Illustrator Wrap Design ........................................................................22

Figure 36. Bloom's Taxonomy [17] ...................................................................................26

Figure 37. User Empathy Map ...........................................................................................28

Figure 38. Client Empathy Map.........................................................................................28

Figure 39. Duncker Diagram .............................................................................................29

Figure 40. Brainstorming Results ......................................................................................29

Figure 41. Individual Concept Sketch ...............................................................................30

Figure 42. Rank-Order Chart and KTDA ..........................................................................30

Figure 43. Initial AutoCAD drawing .................................................................................30

Figure 44. Excel Matrix of Biomimicry Examples ............................................................31

Figure 45. Revised SOLIDWORKS Drawing ...................................................................31

Figure 46. Wiring ...............................................................................................................32

Figure 47. Exhibit Wrapping Design in Illustrator ............................................................32

Figure 48. Trifold Design ..................................................................................................33

Figure 49. Decorated Lock ................................................................................................33

Figure 50. Colorful display of BatiKids [23] .....................................................................37

Figure 51. Example of free design choice in BatiKids exhibit [23] ..................................37

Figure 52. Dunker Diagram for problem statement ...........................................................39

Figure 53. Matt’s sketch for the 4-2-3 activity ..................................................................40

Figure 54. Rank-Order Chart and K-T Analysis ................................................................40

Figure 55. Best design sketch determined by the KTDA ..................................................41

Figure 56. Revised SOLIDWORKS Drawing ...................................................................41

x
Figure 57. Cardboard mock-up of exhibit..........................................................................42

Figure 58. Assembled Wooden Frame...............................................................................42

Figure 59. Wired buttons beneath the exhibit ....................................................................43

Figure 60. Example Canva slide ........................................................................................43

Figure 61. Final design and trifold.....................................................................................43

Figure 62. Matt's final exhibit design ................................................................................45

Figure 63. Fully Decorated Exhibit ...................................................................................47

Figure 64. Trifold Design ..................................................................................................47

Figure 65. Exhibit in transport bag ....................................................................................49

Figure 66. Example information slide ...............................................................................74

Figure 67. Example question slide .....................................................................................74

Figure 68. Example correct answer slide ...........................................................................74

Figure 69. Example incorrect answer slide ........................................................................74

Figure 70. Painted 3D printed button covers .....................................................................75

Figure 71. Picture of trifold design ....................................................................................75

xi
ELLE ARCAND
INTRODUCTION
1.1.1 PROBLEM STATEMENT
Elementary students often do not engage with biomimicry–
the use of natural elements to inspire the creation of more
sustainable devices–in their classrooms. These students
need to be engaged to learn and should feel accomplished
when they do so. We must design an exhibit that teaches
students about biomimicry by letting them explore existing
technologies before creating their own designs. The exhibit
must also be unique, colorful and accessible to students of
different genders, races, and identities. It must be
constructed within 8 weeks, cost under $100, incorporate
two SparkFun elements, be less than 28" x 36" as well as
meet ease of transportation and assembly requirements.
Specifically, the exhibit had to fit in a 27.6" by 13.8" by
16.5" bag and be assembled and disassembled in 30
minutes. Additionally, the exhibit had to be safe for users
and observers and be resilient against constant user
interactions. Also, at least one 3D printed, CNC milled, or
laser cut part had to be included in the design. Moreover,
all “behind the scenes” elements–such as microcontrollers
and wires–had to be hid. Lastly, the exhibit needed to
collect user data automatically.
1.1.2 STAKEHOLDERS
The stakeholders in the project were people within the
sphere of influence of our final product. Firstly, our
primary stakeholders were our target users, which were the
STEAM club members at Beachmont Veterans Memorial
School. These students ranged from ages 9-12 years old
and were mainly in 4-5th grade; Also, they came from a
variety of ethnic backgrounds. Additionally, our clients
1
included the Museum of Science and our professor,
Kathryn Schulte-Grahame, for they hired us to make this
exhibit for a pop-up museum benefiting the students.
Furthermore, secondary beneficiaries were future
Cornerstone students, for they will use our report as
inspiration or as a guide for their projects.
1.1.3 PERTINENT TOPICS IN ENGINEERING:
SUSTAINABILITY
In recent years, the earth has experienced extremely
abnormal climate-related events. For instance, in 2022, the
global surface temperature was the sixth highest since
documentation began in 1880 [1]. Additionally, during this
year, massive wildfires ravaged through western North
America, while hurricanes like Agatha, Fiona and Ian set
records for massive destruction in Mexico, Canada, Cuba
and Florida. Moreover, heavy rainfall and floods caused
catastrophic damage in Pakistan, China and the western
Pacific, while Antarctica experienced it its fourth-smallest
annual maximum and smallest annual minimum ice extents
on record . These abnormal occurrences are linked to the
release of greenhouse gases–carbon dioxide, methane,
nitrous oxide, and fluorinated gases–into the atmosphere
from human activities, including the burning of coal, oil
and gas; deforestation; the use of nitrogen-containing
fertilizers; increases in livestock farming; and the
utilization of fluorinated gases in devices like aerosols and
air conditioners [2].
To address this crisis, many organizations and individuals
are emphasizing the importance of sustainability, which
the United Nations Brundtland Commission has defined as
“meeting the needs of the present without compromising
the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”
[3]. In order to reverse the effects of climate change, evaluations plans, the final code and other useful
present and future generations must create and employ references are included in the appendices.
sustainable products and processes. However, many
elementary school students–who are the future of this
world–are not sufficiently taught about sustainability in
their school curricula. For this reason, Professor Kathryn
Schulte Grahame and the Museum of Science
commissioned Northeastern GE 1501/1502 students to
create exhibits that taught them about sustainability topics.

For our project, my team elected to design an exhibit about

biomimicry, which is the emulation of nature in designs to
make them safer, more efficient and thus more sustainable
[4]. Biomimicry is effective because natural elements have
experienced centuries of natural selection and adaptations,
and as a result of being tested and/or redesigned a
multitude of times, nature’s technology is often superior to
that of humans. Therefore, this topic is vital because it is a
method to combat climate change. Examples of
biomimicry include using the way that maple seed leaves
capture wind to inspire the creation of more efficient wind
turbines and emulating the way that butterfly wings create
color via light reflecting off of their nanostructures in place
of toxic dyes [5].

1.1.4 SCOPE
This report mainly describes the steps of the Engineering
Design Process (EDP) used to create our exhibit–Mimicry
Mashup. These steps include problem definition, solution
generation, course of action decision, solution
implementation and solution evaluation during Milestones
1-6. Additionally, recommendations for future work or
redesign opportunities are detailed. Additionally, we
recount individual contributions to the project and the
lessons that we have learned while completing this
endeavor. Finally, ideation techniques, CAD drawings,

2
 BACKGROUND Furthermore, we used current museum exhibits as
inspiration. At the beginning of the EDP, we visited the
1.2.1 RESEARCH Museum of Science, where we learned about the process
of conceiving the ideas for exhibits and how to implement
To complete our project, my group conducted
these ideas. Also, we had the opportunity to interact with
comprehensive research on examples of biomimicry. We
many of the museum’s displays ourselves. Exhibits that we
researched devices that addressed water, energy, medical
found especially appealing to children were those in the
and materials related problems that emulated aspects of
Engineering Design Workshop, for they presented users
mammals, insects, plants and mollusks. Some of the
with problems and tasked them with designing solutions
examples that we ultimately chose to include in our final
[9]. Ultimately, the exhibits in this area of the museum
exhibit were the use of whale flippers to inspire the
inspired the drawing station of our final design, which will
creation of wind turbines with less drag, painless needles
be described in later sections.
that emulate the way mosquitoes suck blood and solar
panels that collect more energy from the sun by following
its movement like sunflowers. Moreover, other examples
included glue that mimics the proteins that mollusks use to
stick to rocks, filters that remove salt and contaminants
from water in a similar manner to mangroves and wet suits
that emulate the skin of beavers.

Additionally, I researched successful aspects of current

exhibits. For instance, to effectively emphasize
relationships between objects, images or text, they should
be place proximally and segregated from other content, Figure 1. Program & Collect exhibit at the Museum of
such as by placing a border around them [6]. Likewise, in Science where users program a robot to collect gems.
terms of exhibit arrangement, smaller items should be
1.2.2 ETHICS
placed toward the front of the display, and a contrast in
As engineers, we understand that our values are reflected
color should be created between items in the background
in the products that we create. Thus, while designing our
and foreground. Also, in terms of text, the use of complex,
exhibit, we utilized Value Sensitive Design (VSD)–having
colloquial language and words in all caps should be
values in mind while creating a product–throughout the
avoided, and sans serif text should be employed to
EDP. For example, we hoped to instill a sense of pride in
accommodate people with reading disabilities [7].
our users by making them feel rewarded–via the lights,
Moreover, I discovered a research study from Liaoning
sounds and dramatic unlocking of our 3D printed lock–
Science and Technology Museum claiming that children
when they answered three questions correctly and thus
were more attracted to hands-on digital exhibits than their
demonstrated that they had learned something from our
hands-off digital counterparts [8].
exhibit. Also, although we were not formally affiliated
with the National Society of Professional Engineers

3
(NSPE), we adhered to their fundamental canons. We
acted as faithful agents of our employers–Professor
Kathryn Schulte Grahame and the Museum of Science–and
conducted ourselves honorably and responsibly, especially
during the Northeastern and Beachmont expositions.

1.2.3 UNIVERSAL DESIGN & EDGE

Universal Design is creating products for all people
regardless of their race, gender, disabilities, etc. We
employed this concept along with Exhibit Designs for
Girls’ Engagement (EDGE) principles–which focuses on
accessibility for girls–over the course of the EDP. For
instance, we made half of the voice recordings for the
technology summaries female and the other half of them
male. Furthermore, half of the male voice recordings were
of someone of color, while the other half were of a person
with European descent. Moreover, we made our exhibit
long enough so that three or more people could view it and
gave it a whimsical aesthetic, for according to EDGE, girls
are more inclined to interact with exhibits that
accommodate multiple people and are playful [10]. By
using these principles, we tried to make our exhibit appeal
to elementary school students of all backgrounds, and
therefore not make it feel exclusive to certain groups. For
these reasons, Universal Design and EDGE were essential
to our design process.

4
 METHODOLOGY

1.3.1 MILESTONE 1
Primarily, we started the project by completing the first
step in the Engineering Design Process–problem
definition. We identified the objectives of this project–
creating an accessible, highly-interactional exhibit that
would allow us to convey a sustainability topic to
students–by creating a Duncker Diagram (Figure 2). Then,
we acknowledged the constraints of this endeavor: it must Figure 3. User empathy map.
be completed within 8 weeks, cost under $100, be easily
With these aspects of our problem defined, we composed
transported and assembled and did not exceed 36" wide by
the first draft of our problem statement, which notably did
28" deep. Next, we created an empathy map for our users,
not include our specific sustainability topic. We then
the Beachmont STEAM club students, to better
proceeded to the solution generation phase of the EDP. At
comprehend their wants and needs (Figure 3).
the beginning of this phase, we conducted extensive
research on possible sustainability topics and aspects of
successful museum exhibits. These possible sustainability
topics were sea level rise, fast food sustainability,
biodiversity and sustainable textiles. The results of
research regarding effective aspects of current exhibits and
sustainability are detailed in the preceding and following
Background sections.

1.3.2 MILESTONE 2
Next, during Milestone 2, we continued the solution
generation phase of the EDP. We added three more topics–
biodegradable design, sustainable feedstocks and
biomimicry–to our list of possible sustainability topics.
After weighing the pros and cons of each topic, we decided
to move forward with biomimicry as our main theme,
which we ultimately kept for the duration of the project.
Figure 2. Problem Duncker Diagram
Once we had selected this topic, we utilized two ideation
techniques to generate possible designs for the function of
our exhibit. Firstly, we completed a brainstorming session
to produce general ideas about possible features. Some of

5
these ideas included making it a matching game and 3D
printing models of biomimicry technology; a complete list
can be seen in Figure 4.

Figure 5. Emilie's design used in the KDTA.

1.3.3 MILESTONE 3
With our course of action decided, we proceeded to the
Figure 4. Summary of main points from brainstorming next phase of the EDP–solution implementation. For this
session. milestone, we created a cardboard mock-up of Emilie’s

With these ideas and our stimulated creativity, we design with a few modifications. The photos of the CAD

completed a 4-3-2 session, where each group member for our mockup and the mockup itself are displayed in

created two sketches of concepts for the exhibit and Figures 6 and 7 respectively.

commented on each other’s designs. Then, to decide a final

course of action, each member created one final proposal
for the designs which we ranked with a Kepner-Tregoe
Decision Analysis (KDTA) (Appendix B). By completing
this analysis, we chose to implement Design 4–which was
Emilie’s design–because it had the highest ratings for
uniqueness, aesthetics and ways to measure its
entertainment. The main concept of this design was that
students would push on nature-themed 3D-printed buttons
and would read corresponding summaries of devices
created with biomimicry. Once the students were done
learning about current technologies, they would be
prompted to draw their own, and these drawing would be
Figure 6. SolidWorks generated CAD of our original
displayed so that other students may view their work. Also,
cardboard mockup.
the exhibit would have a strong nature aesthetic and would
feature many LEDs (Figure 5).

6

Figure 7. Fully assembled cardboard mockup.
While some group members constructed the mockup,
others worked on the flowchart for the function of the
exhibit (Figure 8). In short, users would select a problem
category–water, energy, medical or materials–from the top
row of buttons and a nature category–mammals, insects,
plants or mollusks–from the bottom row of buttons. Then,
a summary about a device that solves a problem related to
the selected category by mimicking a natural element from
the nature category would appear on the screen. Once they
had read the passage, the users would answer a question
based on the narrative, and different LEDs would turn on
depending on if the answer was correct or incorrect.
Lastly, when the users had answered three questions
correctly, they would unlock our drawing station, where
they would be asked to draw a biomimetic solution to a
problem of their choosing. This final aspect of the exhibit
was aimed to assess higher levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy–
like analyze, evaluate and create.
7
Figure 8. Flowchart of the function of our exhibit.
Moreover, we created an initial Bill of Materials (BOM)
for our exhibit based on the mockup and flowchart.
Specifically, we decided to create the main structure of our
exhibit with plywood and cover it with printed paper.
Additionally, we elected to 3D print button covers and use
my laptop as our main screen. Our final BOM is shown in
Appendix I.
1.3.4 MILESTONE 4
Following the townhall meeting in Milestone 3, we
decreased the size of our exhibit and created the final CAD
drawing of the structure, which can be viewed in Appendix
C. Additionally, this CAD drawing was used to laser cut
the structure, which was then assembled with wood glue
and screws. Also, the buttons and some of the LEDs were
placed in their respective holes. Moreover, we made CAD
drawings of our button covers and 3D printed them
(Appendix C and Figure 9).
 aesthetics, uniqueness, cultural accessibility and ability to
meet physical constraints.

Figure 9. Wooden structure of exhibit with buttons, button
covers and some LEDs.
Furthermore, during this milestone, we created several
proof-of-concept videos. Primarily, we used SparkFun
components to demonstrate that when certain buttons were
pushed, messages could be printed on the serial monitor,
which proved that we could use buttons to display certain
passages and have the users answer related questions
(Figure 10). Additionally, we showed that a counter could
be used to record the number of times that a button is
pressed, which served as the basis for our rating system.
Finally, we demonstrated that an image could be displayed
on a screen with MATLAB and that an LED could turn on
when a button was pushed.
1.3.5 MILESTONE 5
To prepare for the in-class feedback session, we used
Adobe AI to generate graphics for the illustrations on our
exhibit. Next, we printed the panels on a CAMD plotter,
laminated them and adhered them with hot glue to the
wooden structure. Some of the panels were smaller than
the actual dimensions of the structure, so we painted the
gaps with green paint that was the same color as the main
background of the panels to save time and money.
Additionally, all of the button toppers were covered with
layers of mod podge and standard paint. Lastly, each
member of the group created SolidWorks sketches of a
stamp handle that would be used to put a stamp in the
passport books of students that attended that Beachmont
exposition. The design had to print within 180 minutes,
have a 4" height by 2" diameter or less and contain
multiple features to create a complex design that fit our
theme–biomimicry. After performing a KDTA to assess
our individual designs, we decided to proceed with Matt’s
design, which is show in Figure 11. Also, a logo for the
stamper–which featured a half of a real sunflower and half
of a solar sunflower–was designed with AutoCAD and
laser cut on rubber. This logo and the stamp handle CAD
can be seen in Appendix C.

Figure 10. Wire diagram of an Arduino proof of concept

that we employed to test the main function of our exhibit.

Once we had completed these videos, we drafted an

evaluation plan for our project. The main portions of our
exhibit that we intended to evaluate were students’
engagement and sense of accomplishment as well as how
Figure 11. Matt's 3D printed stamp handle.
effectively it taught them about biomimicry and its
8
In terms of electronics, extra wires were soldered to those
already connected to the buttons. Additionally, mainly of
the ground wires were coming loose from an unsoldered
breadboard during tests. Therefore, we created a soldered
breadboard for these wires (Figure 12). Also, we
connected input wires for the buttons and output wires for
the LEDs to their respective digital pins on an Arduino
Mega 2560 board. The locations of these pins are shown in
the final wire diagram in Appendix F.
Figure 12. The soldered breadboard and wires inside of our
exhibit.
Finally, the main functionalities of the MATLAB code
were completed. This entailed programming the Mega
board so that when certain button combinations were
pressed, a specific summary of a device would pop up on
the laptop screen in a figure. Also, the questions and
answers were programmed to pop up in the figure in a
similar manner, and the LEDs were programmed to flash
on the main board when a question was answered correctly
or during the unlocking of the drawing station. The final
code can be viewed in Appendix E. The slides for the
summaries, questions, answers and other messages in the
exhibit were created with Canva. At the end of this
milestone, we evaluated our current exhibit by having
classmates and Professor Schulte-Grahame’s children test
9
it and give us advice on improvements for the final
expositions. This peer feedback may be viewed in Table 3
in Appendix D.
1.3.6 MILESTONE 6
With the feedback from the in-class feedback session, we
made several changes to the exhibit that made it operate
more smoothly and be more entertaining. Primarily, in
terms of the code, we edited it so that once a question had
been attempted, the user would not be able to revisit it so
that he/she could get a “free” correct answer. This change
improved our ability to judge the teaching efficacy of our
exhibit, for it disabled users from winning without truly
attempting to learn about biomimicry. Additionally, we
added sound effects that were played when certain buttons
were pushed and when questions were answered correctly
or incorrectly. Similarly, after observing the exhibits of
other teams, we decided to add AI generated voice
recordings of the main summaries of the devices; these
were produced with a free program called FreeTTS.
Also, we updated our slides so that the summaries were
more concise and that the text was larger. Likewise, we
changed the background of the slides to make them better
fit the aesthetic for the main portion of the exhibit.
Additionally, we fixed errors in the text, such as cases
where one option that was intended to be correct was
marked incorrect. An example of one of the final slides is
displayed in Figure 13. Finally, in terms of aesthetics, we
finished painting the drawing station the same green as the
main structure of the exhibit and made a cover for the
screen out of carboard and paper. Also, I made minor edits
to the AutoCAD logo so that it could be laser cut properly.
 Also, using general research about biomimetic devices, we
drafted four prompts for our drawing station. The prompts
provided information on a natural element–like geckos and
sycamore seed leaves–and asked students to use facts
about these elements to create their own device that
addresses a problem of their choosing. A sample of one of
these prompts is displayed in Figure 15 and the remaining
drawings are shown in Appendix D.

Figure 13. One of the final slides used for our exhibit.

Furthermore, to make the unlocking of our drawing station

more dramatic–so that the students would feel more
rewarded when they completed the game, we added more
LEDs to the drawing station and 3D printed a lock that
would physically unlock via a servo. This lock was
covered with printed paper and tape to make it appear like
a real lock. Finally, to display an active count of correct
answers during the game, I added a function to the code
that made an extra LED turn on each time a question was
answered correctly (Appendix E).

Once we had completed the main function of the exhibit,

we created a poster board to surround it that displayed
game instructions and general information about
biomimicry. This poster was printed using the CAMD
plotter and glued onto a trifold (Figure 14).
Figure 14. Poster for the expositions.
10
Figure 15. A student's response to the pangolin prompt at
the Beachmont exposition.
Ultimately, on December 1, 2023, we presented our exhibit
during expositions at the Northeastern Curry Student
Center and the Beachmont Veterans Memorial School.
Over the course of these events, we acquired data via our
rating buttons at the end of the game, the drawings
produced by our users and by counting the number of
individuals that started and finished our exhibit upon
approaching it (which was only measured at Beachmont).
The results of this data and its analysis are provided in
successive Results and Discussion/Analysis sections. The
final setup of our display, which included our posterboard,
exhibit and stamper, for the expositions is shown in Figure
16.
 Figure 18. My individual proposal for our exhibit used in
Figure 16. Final setup of our display for the expositions. the KDTA.

1.3.7 INDIVIDUAL CONTRIBUTIONS Next, as the project manager for Milestone 3, I took the
lead with constructing the cardboard mockup, and
Firstly, during Milestone 1, I significantly contributed to
assigning tasks to other group members based on their
the group’s research about successful exhibits, for I
strengths; I also served as the point person for questions.
conducted a thorough search for reputable articles and
Then, during Milestone 4, I worked on the proof of
explored the Museum of Science following the information
concept for the integration of Arduino into MATLAB.
session. Secondly, in Milestone 2, I ensured that all voices
Moreover, over the course of Milestones 5 and 6, I
were heard during the brainstorming session. Additionally,
programmed and debugged the main script and LED
I produced the two drawings during the 4-3-2 session, one
function for the exhibit in MATLAB. The details of this
of which is displayed in Figure 17. Also, following this
code are described in previous sections, and the code itself
session, I helped identify the best aspects of each drawing
is listed in Appendix E. Also, photo evidence of my
and ways that we could combine these strengths for our
programming and debugging efforts is shown in the photo
final individual proposals for the KDTA (Figure 18).
log (Appendix G). Additionally, during these milestones, I
created and revised the stamper logo (Appendix C).

Finally, over the course of the entire EDP, I oversaw the

Gantt chart and made sure all group members logged their
hours. Similarly, I was one of the main contributors to the
project notebook and ensured that all the topics that we
needed to cover for each milestone and mentor meeting
was included in it. Also, I helped put the final touches on
the team’s memos

Figure 17. One of my two ideas from the 4-3-2 session.

11
EMILIE COCKE

INTRODUCTION 16.5” during transportation. It should also include at least

two SparkFun elements, some 3D printing, and some laser
1.4.1 PROBLEM STATEMENT
cutting.

Group 3 in Kathryn Schulte Grahame’s Cornerstone of

Finally, users should have a way to provide feedback on
Engineering class was tasked with building an interactive
our museum exhibit so that we would be able to improve
learning experience focused on sustainability for a
the design. This could be done with a short feedback form,
traveling science museum. Museums can often be
a star rating system, or a simple “thumbs up” and “thumbs
expensive and only in large cities, therefore making them
down” button system, which is how we chose to
inaccessible to families of a lower socioeconomic status.
incorporate user feedback.
This easily transportable and cheap museum should give
underprivileged children access to a unique learning Using this analysis and a Duncker Diagram, we were able
experience. to formulate the following problem statement: Elementary
school students must learn about sustainability to be well-
This exhibit must also teach students about a topic
informed inhabitants of the earth. Science museum
pertaining to sustainability. Building a greener world is
exhibits can be inaccessible, ineffective at conveying
probably the biggest problem scientists, engineers, and
complex scientific ideas, and unattractive to students.
humanity are facing, and educating children about
These students need to be engaged to learn and should feel
sustainability starting at a young age can help combat this
accomplished when they do so. We must design an exhibit
crisis.
that teaches the students about biomimicry via
gamification and other interactive elements, has a unique
Additionally, this museum exhibit should be completed in
style, uses engaging colors and decorations, and is
8 weeks with $100 or less and should be made with EDGE
accessible to students of all genders, races, and identities.
and Universal Design incorporated in. The time constraint
It will need to be completed within 8 weeks, cost under
and budget ensure that these exhibits stay cheap and
$100, and be designed so that it can be easily and safely
simple. EDGE design prioritizes the learning patterns of
transported and assembled. We would also like to make
young girls and ensures that women feel included and
the exhibit using sustainable materials and processes as
interested in the learning experience. Universal Design
much as we can.
ensures that children of all identities, backgrounds, and
abilities will be able to learn from the exhibit as well as
1.4.2 STAKEHOLDERS
reach the buttons and interactive elements.

Analyzing the stakeholders of this project is important to

To standardize the exhibit and keep it portable, the exhibit
its execution because it allows us to pinpoint the wants and
should also be able to sit on a 36” wide by 28” deep
needs of the client and the user. We used an Empathy Map
tabletop and be able to fit in a bag that is 27.6” by 13.8” by
to help us with this process.
12
The client has hired us to build an exhibit for a traveling
museum that has an emphasis on interactive learning
experiences and focus on sustainability as a learning
outcome. With a cheap, transportable museum, they hope
to give underprivileged students a chance to attend a
museum who wouldn’t necessarily have access to that type
of education. They want kids to have equal opportunity
when it comes to science learning, and they want to help
generate young interest in STEM to help grow the fields
and the engineers of tomorrow.
To generate this interest, the clients want the museum to be
interactive and themed in a way that appeals to children so
that students can stay engaged. Teachers and learning
experts talk a lot about the lack of engagement and interest
in classrooms nowadays, so it is important that we help
switch up the boring routine and learning framework for
the students with some unique, hands-on learning. The
client wants to teach the kids about sustainability because
it is one of the most essential topics scientists are tackling.
If students can learn about ways to love their planet, it
could help stop the rise of global warming.
The users are the fourth and fifth grade STEAM Club
Beachmont Elementary School students. They are
interested in science and want to seek out more STEM
experiences, but many may not have the means to attend
learning experiences like museums. These kids are in
school every day and sometimes find the teaching methods
boring and ineffective. They have also grown up hearing
about global warming and the environmental crisis
happening in our world today, but may not know what they
can do personally, or how they should feel about it. They
may feel like the crisis is out of their control or not their
responsibility to worry about or act on.
13
1.4.3 PERTINENT TOPICS IN
ENGINEERING
Our exhibit directly relates to biomimicry, or bionics,
which is an engineering strategy where we take inspiration
from nature to solve problems [4]. Life is very
interconnected and there are clues all around us in other
species for how to solve human problems. By simply
observing the life around us that has survived for billions
of years, we can mimic those strategies and engineer new
solutions for humans.
To teach the Beachmont students about biomimicry, we
made slides that they could explore and answer questions
about. Each slide contained an example of biomimicry,
such as how sunflowers follow the movement of the sun
with their faces, which scientists mimicked to engineer
solar panels that were more efficient [11]. Another
example is how scientists were inspired by the mosquitoes
ability to painlessly retrieve blood to create a small needle
that makes delivering vaccines and other minor medical
procedures easier [11]. One final example, out of many
that we showed the kids, described how mangroves have a
filtration system to get fresh water from their roots [12].
Scientists were able to take some of these techniques to
improve desalination and contaminant removal process.
We believed that this would be a favorable sustainability
topic to teach because of its connection to nature and to
engineering. We used cartoons to personify the nature
when we presented the biomimicry examples with the
hope that this would help kids better empathize with the
world around them. Biomimicry is also a direct
engineering technique, which by teaching them about it,
we hoped would generate interest in engineering and help
the kids appreciate the natural talent and biodiversity of the
world, and therefore make more sustainable decisions in 1.4.4 SCOPE
the future.
This report describes the entire engineering design process
for our exhibit, Mimicry Mashup. We explain in detail
each step of this 8-week process: defining the problem,
generating solutions, deciding on a course of action,
implementing our solution, and evaluating our solution.
Each individual in Group 3 justifies their contributions and
personally explains the engineering design process.
Additionally, this report includes recommendations for
future exhibits, CAD drawings, ideation techniques,
MATLAB/Arduino code, and all evaluation plans.
Figure 19. Biomimicry slide example.
In our project, we also incorporated Bloom’s Taxonomy
and the Engineering Design Process. Bloom’s Taxonomy
is a hierarchical system that helps frame and categorize
learning objectives based on complexity. It includes three
learning domains, cognitive, affective, and psychomotor.
This relates to our exhibit because our exhibit uses many
of its levels to teach the students about biomimicry. The
students start off at the exhibit at the lowest level of
learning on the pyramid, remembering, by reading a short
passage and then answer a question about it. They then
finish the exhibit by applying, or even creating when they
come up with their own engineering designs at the drawing
station.

Figure 20. Bloom’s Taxonomy Pyramid

14
 BACKGROUND an internal interpretation of internal stimuli (vibration in
our eardrums), making it inherently more pervasive and
1.5.1 RESEARCH
therefore a stronger tool than visual stimuli to capture
attention in museum exhibits [6], [15]. Exhibits using
Before generating solutions, each member of Group 3
sound that corresponds to certain elements of the
conducted individual research on successful museum
experience leave a positive impact on the user, improve
exhibits (as well as biomimicry examples, which were
user attention, and lengthen user dwell times [15]. Not
described in 1.4.3. I started by analyzing how sight and
only is sound attention-grabbing, but it also helps a user
sound play into a student’s interactive learning experience:
learn. Sounds help individuals absorb information by

There are many existing solutions aimed at teachers for associating new material with a larger system of

holding elementary students' attention in the classroom that conceptual understanding [6].

can inform the design of our museum exhibit. For

From there, I found a case study on a successful museum
example, according to Maria Oliveira, an educational
exhibit that was aimed at kids and focused on
design expert, “[s]tudies have shown that color affects a
sustainability, similar to our assignment: A current
student's attention span and perception of time. Visual
successful children’s museum exhibit focused on
stimulation actually rewires the brain, making stronger
sustainability is Trash Lab, from Madison Children’s
connections while fostering visual thinking, problem
Museum in Wisconsin [16]. One indicator of success are
solving and creativity” [13]. She also mentions that
all the awards this exhibit has received, such as the
painting the teaching wall in a classroom a brighter color
American Alliance of Museums Sustainability Excellence
and the non-teaching walls a more neutral color can help
Award, International Solid Waste Association’s 1st place
focus students’ attention on the material while not
Communications Award, and Associated Recyclers of
overwhelming a student’s visual processing center [13].
Wisconsin’s Outstanding Achievement in Education
The neutral walls give the eye a break and reduce glare
Award [16]. This exhibit teaches children about how
from large overhead lights [13]. This design can be
landfills are useful and why humans have created so much
mirrored in a museum exhibit by adding a combination of
trash and invites their creativity by allowing them to think
neutral and colorful elements.
about what we can do to reduce waste [16]. The exhibit

Sound has also been found to be an important element of employs bright colors that catch the user’s attention and

museum exhibits. In the past, museums have been connect to the topic of turning waste into something

considered places of silence and contemplation; many positive or useful, like art. Words are used sparingly and

considered that it was only with silence that museumgoers headings are large and decorative.

could truly enjoy exhibits [14]. However, sounds actually

enhance museum exhibits [14]. Designing a museum
exhibit that lacks sound also does not consider that our
users do not have the literacy of adults, who may be able to
fully learn from an exhibit with just text [14]. While vision
is an internal interpretation of an external stimuli, sound is

15

Figure 21. Trash Lab Exhibit [16]
In addition to this research, my group and I visited the
Boston Museum of Science, where we were able to
interact with prototypes of interactive exhibits aimed at
children. From there, we gained inspiration from the
button-to-information type of exhibit that we saw, where
users pressed a button and then received information,
which we incorporated into our final design. We also
encountered an AI drawing exhibit, in which users were
presented with different options to choose from to generate
a fun, final image. This partly inspired our drawing station.
1.5.2 ETHICS
When engineering anything, no matter the scale, we should
keep in mind our ethical code. To make the exhibit as
accessible as possible, we incorporated value sensitive
design, which prioritizes the needs and values of our users.
As outlined earlier 1.4.2, our users are elementary school
students who may not typically have access to science
museums. To satisfy this problem, we found it ethical to
make the exhibit as transportable as possible. To make the
exhibit as engaging as possible for these students, we made
sure to use bright colors, cartoon-like characters, simple
syntax, noises related to educational content, interactive
buttons, and flashing lights.
16
We can also consider common normative ethical theories
when creating this exhibit. Though the design is relatively
small scale, we are still making an impact on and teaching
young children. By teaching them about sustainability
through biomimicry, which may help kids better appreciate
the biodiversity and uniqueness of species around the
world, we are helping them to become better people that
may make more sustainable choices, which aligns with
virtue ethics. Teaching the kids sustainability may also
lead them to make decisions that produce a smaller carbon
footprint, which aligns with consequentialism.
1.5.3 UNIVERSAL DESIGN
By incorporating Universal Design, Group 3 ensures that
kids of all backgrounds, races, genders, and cultures can
appreciate and feel included by our exhibit. One large part
of this is how we choose to present information through
characters. We chose to use cartoon plants and animals to
share information about biomimicry so that not one student
would feel left out or misrepresented.
Additionally, we included sound in our exhibit to reinforce
avenues by which students were receiving information. To
keep this inclusive as well, half of the biomimicry
examples were read in a man’s voice, and half were read in
a woman’s voice. We had planned to include a Spanish
option in our exhibit as well to make the exhibit even more
universal but ran out of time.
 METHODOLOGY

1.6.1 DEFINING THE PROBLEM

To begin this project, we started by analyzing the interests
of our stakeholders and users by making Empathy Maps
for each party. As seen in Figure 22, the client is focused
on bringing STEM education through a unique, interactive
learning experience to elementary students who otherwise
may not have access to museums. They need us to create a
transportable exhibit prototype themed in sustainability
that allows users to give feedback.
Figure 22. Museum Administration (Client) Empathy Map

Diving into the user Empathy Map shown in Figure 23, we

found that the Beachmont fourth and fifth graders in
STEAM club have an interest in science and engineering
but may be bored with their current classes or classroom
environment. It is also likely that they hear about the
environmental crisis often, as well as the importance that
future generations have in solving it, but they may not
know how they can help. This encouraged us to frame our
sustainability education in a positive light, rather than a
pessimistic one that might have them scared for the future.
While we considered four sustainability topics (one Figure 23. Beachmont Students (User) Empathy Map
generated per group member) initially in Milestone 1, we
found that biomimicry would teach the students about The User Empathy Map’s insights on student boredom
sustainability (in the context of biodiversity) in the most inspired a lot of our research on what makes a good
positive manner, so we decided to designate it as our museum exhibit for kids. We visited the Boston Museum
sustainability theme. of Science and performed individual background research
to collect information. From this, we learned that our
exhibit should have bright colors that invite elementary
students, but don’t overwhelm them. It should also include
some noise elements that help link visual learning/reading
to another one of their senses in order to strengthen it. One
final integral element of a successful museum exhibit for
kids that we should include, is that our project should give
the students choice and agency to their learning, but not
too much free reign.

17
With this new insight, we created a Duncker Diagram
(Figure 24) as a prerequisite to finalizing a problem
statement. While the diagram considered the alternative
option of making it okay for kids to not learn much on
sustainability because they would still have fun and we
would still help foster their interest in science, we decided
to prioritize their learning and create an exhibit where they
could play a game about sustainability to learn.
Figure 24. Problem Formulation: Duncker Diagram
The Empathy Maps, Duncker Diagram, and specific design
requirements (including Universal Design and EDGE) all
led us to our final problem statement: Elementary students
often do not engage with biomimicry–the use of natural
elements to inspire the creation of more sustainable
devices–in their classrooms. These students need to be
engaged to learn and should feel accomplished when they
do so. We must design an exhibit that teaches the students
about biomimicry by letting them explore existing
technologies before creating their own designs. The exhibit
must also be unique, colorful, and accessible to students of
different genders, races, and identities. It must be
18
constructed within 8 weeks, cost under $100, incorporate
two SparkFun elements, be less than 28” x 36” as well as
meet ease of transportation and assembly requirements.
1.6.2 GENERATING SOLUTIONS
Once we had defined the problem, the next step in the
Engineering Design Process was to generate specific
exhibit ideas that would frame our final design. We started
this process by coming together as a group and simply
shouting out ideas, which resulted in the brainstorming
sheet shown in Figure 25 and yielded 5 exhibit ideas.
Figure 25. Biomimicry Brainstorming
From there, we implemented the 4-2-3 Sketch Method,
which involved each of the four group members sketching
out two exhibit designs. Each design was then passed
around to the other three group members for feedback.
Once feedback was received, each group member sketched
out a more finalized version of one of their exhibit ideas,
with changes from the feedback. My personal initial
sketches for the 4-2-3 Method are shown below in Figures
26 and 27.
Figure 26. Cocke 4-2-3 Sketch
Figure 27. Cocke 4-2-3 Sketch
These two idea generation techniques allowed us to
brainstorm together as well as individually, and in a way
where individual ideas could receive feedback. This
ensured that the needs of each group member could be
met. Both those who worked better in a team and needed
more group support were satisfied, and those who worked
better individually and needed less support were also
satisfied.
1.6.3 DECIDING ON THE BEST SOLUTION
Our main method for deciding on the best exhibit design
sketch, and therefore the best solution to the task defined
19
by our problem statement, was a Kepner-Tregoe Decision
Analysis, as illustrated in Figure 28. We came up with the
“musts” for our exhibit relatively easily from our problem
statement and specific design requirements from the client.
Luckily, each finalized sketch from the group met these
“musts,” so we could move on to our “wants.”
Figure 28. Kepner-Tregoe Decision Analysis
We wanted our exhibit to first be sustainable itself,
because we knew we had to practice what we preached
about sustainability to the kids. It was also important to
include a means of measuring how fun the exhibit was for
the kids to help measure our success on the project.
Additionally, we wanted the exhibit to be aesthetically
pleasing and have a game-like aspect to attract students to
our project and have them feel engaged. Finally, we
wanted our museum exhibit to be easy to build and
transport, to reduce our own hassle, and for it to be unique,
to create a one-of-a-kind learning experience for the
students.
Next, we weighed each “want” from 1-10 on its
importance. “Aesthetically pleasing,” “way to measure
how fun the exhibit is,” and “game-like aspect” were the
highest weighted “wants,” with scores of 8. We ranked
these highest because they pertained to student
engagement, which is the most important element because
our exhibit is useless in teaching if kids don’t want to
approach it, and feedback oriented, which is also one of
the most important elements because it directly gives us a 1.6.4 IMPLEMENTATION
way to measure how successful we were in fulfilling a
To implement our final solution, we started by sketching
solution to the problem. The second most important
our exhibit dimensions out on AutoCAD, as shown in
“want” was that the exhibit should be “easy to build and
Figure 30. We then built a cardboard mock-up of the
transport,” which we rated at a 6. We only had 8 weeks to
exhibit to present at Town Hall. The biggest piece of
complete this project, and our prototype was specifically
feedback that we received from our peers and instructors
for a travelling museum, so we knew these aspects were
was to cut down on size so that the elementary school
important. Finally, “uniqueness” was rated at an
students would be able to reach the buttons and have the
importance of 5 and “exhibit itself be sustainable” was
screen at their eye level. So, we moved to SolidWorks to
rated at a 4. While uniqueness and the exhibit itself being
revise our exhibit dimensions and add more detail to our
sustainable were important elements to our design, if they
design, as illustrated in Figure 31. The 3D aspect of
were not included, it would not hinder our success.
SolidWorks helped us with visualization.

After rating the sketch from each group member on a scale

of 1 to 5 in each “want” category, we multiplied the score
of the designs in each category with their category-specific
weighting, and then found the sum of the products for each
design. We chose the sketch with the highest final score
(132) to move forward with, as shown in Figure 29. The
KTDA had about an 11% difference between the first and
second final scores, so our scaling did not have to be
adjusted. However, while we liked the design that received
the highest score, we decided on also including elements
from all designs.
Figure 30. Initial AutoCAD Drawing

Figure 29. Exhibit Design Chosen from Kepner-Tregoe

Decision Analysis
Figure 31. Revised SolidWorks Drawing
20
At the same time, we conducted research on examples of
biomimicry in categories that would intersect. Choosing
examples with intersecting categories would allow our
buttons to have more than one example linked to them,
which would minimize the number of buttons we had to
use while maximizing the number of examples our exhibit
could include. We highlighted the examples that included
one of four technology categories (Water, Energy,
Materials, and Medical) and one of four nature categories
(Mammal, Mollusk, Insect, and Plant) to identify the
sixteen examples that we would put in the project, as seen
below in Figure 32.
Figure 32. Biomimicry Examples Excel Spreadsheet
Once we had finalized the design with the mock-up, we
started to develop our proofs of concept with SparkFun
and MATLAB and started to build the base of our exhibit
with plywood. These proofs of concepts consisted of a
flowchart of our code (Figure 33), wire diagrams, and
function videos of how our quiz game would work with
only four buttons, as opposed to the eleven we planned on
21
including. It also included proof of our understanding of
how MATLAB can communicate with an Arduino, which
we demonstrated by a program that brought an image to a
laptop screen if a button was pressed. Finally, it showed
proof of our feedback system, which would give users the
choice between the “thumbs up” button or the “thumbs
down” button and then record their answer. The wood
frame of the exhibit was built by first laser cutting each
face, and then assembling the project with glue. Clamps
were put on the finger joints for support and a hinge and
door handle were added.
Figure 33. Exhibit Code Flowchart
As the code and hardware continued to develop, we drew
button covers in AutoCAD and SolidWorks and then 3D
printed them. This included the category buttons, the home
button, the true and false buttons, and the thumbs up and
thumbs down buttons. Once they were printed, when
painted a layer of Mod Podge on them as a base to prevent
paint chipping (which we learned the hard way) and then
added 3-4 layers of acrylic paint to enhance the aesthetics
of the exhibit.
We then moved on to wiring and soldering our project. We was painted dark green to match. After being painted,
used a solderable breadboard as the base grounding plate button covers were hot glued to their corresponding
for most of our electrical components and soldered wires buttons.
to the buttons and lights in our exhibit. We plugged the
power and signal wires directly into our Arduino Mega
Board and then used electrical tape to secure them. As we
finished up integral wiring components, we realized that
we had enough time to add a servo that would enhance the
unlocking of the drawing station by removing the top of a
3D printed lock. The exhibit wire diagram can be found in
Appendix F.

Next, we developed informational slides on Canva that

would display our biomimicry examples with playful
cartoon characters that would appeal to the students. We
also included transition slides that would appear if only
Figure 34. Trifold Design
one category button was pressed (before they pressed the
second one and received information on the example),
slides with quiz questions, slides giving a user feedback on
if their answer to a question was right or wrong, and a
home slide. In total, there were 75 slides, and all can be
found in Appendix G. These slides were displayed at the
appropriate times as directed by the MATLAB code
(which can all be found in Appendix E) depending on
which buttons a user pressed.

Finally, we added finishing touches to our aesthetics by

designing our tri-fold board (Figure 34) that would reside
behind the exhibit and the vinyl wrap design that would
cover our wooden base. The board design was created
using Adobe Illustrator, and the wrapping was created
using Adobe Illustrator AI. The wrapping included an
aesthetically pleasing globe and forest that went with our Figure 35. Adobe Illustrator Wrap Design
theme of biomimicry (Figure 35) and was cut into 8.5” x
1.6.5 EVALUATION
11” sheets and laminated. We then cut out spaces for
buttons to poke through and hot glued it to the wooden During the Engineering Design Process, we received

surface. Any part of the exhibit not covered with the wrap feedback from mentor meetings and Town Halls. Initially,
our main feedback pertained to our sustainability topic and
22
the size of our exhibit. Our peers and instructors liked our
initial topic of fast food but thought that it would present
sustainability in too negative of a tone, so we decided to go
with biomimicry for our theme. They also thought our
mock-up was way too big, and that we should take the
focus off of gamifying our exhibit. In the beginning, we
were very set about making our museum exhibit some sort
of game, because we wanted the kids to be interested.
However, we received feedback that while games are fun,
they can often be less educational, which is why we
switched to a quiz-reward system.
Our main source of feedback came from our “thumbs up”
and “thumbs down” buttons on the front of our exhibit. We
felt as though this was an efficient way of receiving
feedback because it was simple and although many groups
included some sort of feedback form as a part of their
project, we decided that our main users, the Beachmont
Elementary students, would not have the attention span
required to fill out a form.
As outlined in Milestone 5, we had a very detailed plan of
evaluation and goals set. Our goals that define our success
for this exhibit are as follows:
• Have at least 80% of the students that start the
exhibit actually finish it
• Have at least 60% of the students who complete
the exhibit rate it a “thumbs up”
• Have at least 60% of the drawings effectively
demonstrate biomimicry principles
• Have buttons corresponding to categories of
nature and technology so that users can explore
biomimicry examples
• Have at least one unique feature of our exhibit
that differentiates ours from others and others of
years past
23
• Have at least 7 different colors represented in the
exhibit
• Have at least two EDGE design principles
included
• Have our exhibit be less than 28’ by 36’ as well
as meet ease of transportation and assembly
requirements
We displayed our final museum exhibit at two expos: one
at Northeastern University and another at Beachmont
Elementary School. 93.75% of all users reported that they
had learned something (68.75% of the data coming from
NU and 31.25% of the data coming from Beachmont). The
expo at Northeastern invited students and faculty to
evaluate our projects. The expo at Beachmont Elementary
was for the STEAM Club students, accompanied by their
families, to evaluate our exhibits. Here, 22 students/groups
of students approached the exhibit; 90.9% started the quiz
game and 81.8% finished it.
We evaluated drawings on a scale from zero to two. A zero
meant that a student did not pay much attention to the
prompt and drew something very literal or just a doodle. A
one meant that a student thought about the example in
terms of technology and applied it in a very simple or
baseline way. A two corresponded to a unique, descriptive,
and/or innovative application of the prompt. The average
drawing score from these ratings was 1.3 and 68.75% of
drawings were rated as 1 or higher. The shows that most
students had a grasp of what biomimicry was and were
able to apply it. All drawings can be found in Appendix D.
1.6.6 INDIVIDUAL CONTRIBUTIONS
Throughout the project, I maintained an active role and
took on my fair share of tasks. To start, I was the Project
Manager for Milestone 1. This involved creating and
delivering a presentation which synthesized individual
research from each group member as well as the general
ideas that each member came up with pertaining to
sustainability topic and general exhibit gameplay. My
specific idea for the exhibit was centered around fast food
and would help educate students on the environmental
impact of fast food by having them create their own fast-
food chain through our exhibit. This idea was inspired by
one of my service-learning visits to Beachmont, where I
noticed an enthusiasm and interest for fast food in the
group I was leading. However, we ultimately decided
against that sustainability topic because we wanted to
avoid creating a negative museum experience or a negative
connotation with fast food, as we kept in mind that fast
food is a very accessible option for low-income families.
My role as a service-learning lead mentor played a large
part in how I influenced our exhibit. In going to
Beachmont every other week, I really got to know the
group of girls that I lead activities for. One of them seemed
to have a passion for drawing, which reminded me of the
“art” part of STEAM Club. This ultimately inspired the
drawing station for our exhibit, which was able to play to
kids’ creative side. This, combined with individual
24
research, brainstorming, and sketching, lead to my design
being selected by the KTDA.
Moving on to the prototype, I helped build the cardboard
mock-up as well as the initial AutoCAD and SolidWorks
drawings. I continued this CAD momentum by drawing
each of the button covers and then 3D printing them. Some
of the more complicated designs, such as the whale and the
butterfly, I had to draw in AutoCAD first so I could trace
picture references, and then import them into SolidWorks.
For each cover, I had to raise different elements of the
drawing to different heights so the design could be
recognizable when it was 3D printed. After printing each
cover out in EXP, I helped paint them. I started with a
layer of Mod Podge to reduce peeling and then added
acrylic paint.
Finally, I created the project video and alongside Matt,
helped create the informational slides on Canva. I had a lot
of fun making the video. I added tons of funny photos and
songs while going through our implementation of the
Engineering Design Process throughout this project.
CALEB HAGNER
INTRODUCTION
1.7.1 PROBLEM STATEMENT
Science museum exhibits can be inaccessible, ineffective
at conveying complex scientific ideas, and unattractive to
students. These students need to be engaged to learn and
should feel accomplished when they do so. Design a
design museum exhibit that teaches elementary students
about the use of biomimicry in modern-day technology.
The exhibit must contain interactive elements as well as a
unique style. This exhibit should meet the physical design
requirements and incorporate an inclusive design. It will
need to be completed within eight weeks, cost under $100,
and be designed so that it can be easily and safely
transported and assembled.
Engaging students can be done through a variety of
techniques. These include interactive elements that are
defined as being able to be manipulated by students
(buttons, levers, dials, etc.), the use of color and whimsical
or child-friendly designs, the inclusion of characters in a
variety of genders, having students draw or write to create
something of their own, and using a combination of visual
and auditory stimulation through sound effects and
voiceovers along with textual information.
A unique style means having an aesthetic and functional
feel that is different from other exhibits.
The physical design requirements of this exhibit were that
it must, when fully set up, sit in a 36” wide by 28” deep
tabletop; it must include educational text about the text,
including labels where necessary; have a total cost of less
25
than $100; and fit within the provided transport container.
This transport container was a roughly 14” x 16” x 28”
rectangular sturdy plastic bag.
An inclusive design means incorporating elements of both
EDGE and Universal Design into the exhibit. EDGE
Design focuses on the design choices that must be made so
that exhibits are inclusive to students of all genders, with a
focus on including women and gender minorities.
Universal Design is a framework for designing products
that are accessible by those of varying ability levels and
cultural backgrounds. Each framework has its own set of
design guidelines that are laid out fully at their respective
websites [10], [17].
Easily and safely transported assembled means that four or
less people can fully set up the exhibit in thirty minutes or
less, and that the exhibit can be transported comfortably by
public transport by one or two people.
1.7.2 STAKEHOLDERS
The main stakeholders for this project are the 4th and 5th
grade users of the exhibit, their parents/guardians and
teachers, the museum staff clients, and our manager,
Professor Kathryn Schulte-Grahame. The 4th and 5th
graders come from Beachmont Veterans Memorial School
in Beachmont, MA and are an ethnically diverse group.
They are our key stakeholder since our project is designed
to be directly used by them and to teach them about
biomimicry. Their parents/guardians and teachers are
secondary stakeholders because they may attend the
exhibit with the students, learn something from the exhibit
either directly or through their child (for the parents and
guardians), and have the potential to help reinforce the 1.7.3.2 Bloom’s Taxonomy
students’ learning at home and in the classroom.
Bloom’s Taxonomy is a commonly used
framework for education that categorizes learning
Meanwhile, our client is a stakeholder since they have
along a continuum from simple and concrete to
commissioned us to create these museum exhibits for a
complex and abstract, as seen below [18]. In our
pop-up museum at Beachmont Veterans Memorial School.
project, Bloom’s Taxonomy is relevant to the
They are who we are designing this exhibit to be presented
progression between the stages of the exhibit,
by and their reputation could be affected by the quality of
from the remembering of facts in the quiz game to
the product we produce. Similarly, although we were not
application and creation of the topic in the
commissioned to create these by our manager, her
drawing station.
reputation and credibility can be affected for better or
worse by the quality of our final product.

1.7.3 PERTINENT TOPICS IN ENGINEERING

1.7.3.1 Biomimicry / Bionics

Biomimicry, or bionics, is the practice of learning

from and mimicking natural strategies in order to
design technologies to solve human challenges
Figure 36. Bloom's Taxonomy [17]
[4]. It can include physical structures like the
knobs on a whale’s flipper of the shape of a 1.7.4 SCOPE
sycamore seedpod, chemical structures like the This technical report spans the entire engineering design
polar and nonpolar structures of a Namib beetle’s process for this project. It describes the background
shell or the adhesive secreted by mussels, and research and problem definition we undertook; the solution
even microbial structures found in a variety of ideas we generated and our decision on which to
microorganisms [11], [12]. It matches the implement; our prototyping and revised design; our final
thematic requirement of sustainability for this design, including electronics, software, and aesthetic
project in that is often used to make sustainable interactive features; and an evaluation of our product. It
solutions that are more environmentally friendly takes a fairly granular lens to this process and includes
or integrated into natural processes. We believed ample information about each step of the design cycle.
it would be a good topic to educate students about
because the natural elements of plants and
animals can provide fun graphics and characters
can engage students, and it is usually not taught to
students until high school or college – none of us
had even heard of it before our freshman year
classes.

26
 BACKGROUND I then looked at an industry artifact, a museum exhibit
called “Project Vaccine” from the Boston Museum of
1.8.1 RESEARCH Science (MoS). I was trying to see what features were
present in an existing exhibit from very effective exhibit
The most prominent question in my mind when I started
designers (the team at the MoS). Similar to what I found in
this research was “What are elements of an engaging and
the literature, this exhibit had features that drove emotional
informative exhibit?” After all, no matter which topic our
connection, were interactive, contained multiple
group ultimately decides, our definition of success will
complementing elements, were tied to reality/current
likely include some kind of criteria around the exhibit
events, and were immersive [23].
engaging students and having a measurable impact on their
knowledge. Searching in Web of Science led me first to a
1.8.2 ETHICS
very interesting journal article that discussed a “content-
oriented model for science exhibit engineering” [19]. In Ethical thinking showed up primarily in two places during

this article, the author talked about how a museum exhibit the creation of this exhibit: sourcing materials and using

can be essentially broken down into tasks, techniques, and value sensitive design. First, we recognized for us to be

technology through praxeology. She elucidated how the teaching children about sustainability, it would be ethically

praxeology of a scientist’s discovery of a scientific concept wrong to not try to make the project itself more

can be used to inspire a praxeology of learning for a sustainable. We did this by reusing, borrowing, and

museum exhibit, and then applied this transposition to repurposing material before buying anything new; this had

suggestions of redesign for a specific scientific exhibit that the pleasant side effect of our budget being only $35.

fell short in educating students [19].

Value Sensitive Design is a topic closely intertwined with
ethics and essentially just means designing with respect to
While interesting, this article was mostly conceptual, so I
certain additional values. For us, this meant prioritizing the
searched again, and this time found a paper discussed how
values students place on having exhibits that are accessible
“free choice” exhibits (exhibits without structured lecture
to them and don’t have higher representation of people
by a guide that relied on independent learning and
who aren’t them. To accomplish this, we used plants and
manipulation of exhibit features) can be frustrating to
animals as the characters to avoid excluding anyone by
students and ineffective at imparting knowledge [20]. This
using specific character designs. We also used 50/50 male
led me to wonder what features could make exhibits more
and female voice overs. We also used the principles of
engaging and more effective at teaching. One group of
Universal Design, detailed below, in our exhibit. We also
researchers found that immersion, emotional involvement,
designed with respect to the client values of making these
interactive experiences, connections to reality, decoration,
exhibit accessible to different populations.
and multiple complementing elements were conducive to
an engaging exhibit [21]. Another group of researchers
1.8.3 UNIVERSAL DESIGN
found that exhibits that related to familiar objects and
exhibits that promoted social interaction and allowed Universal Design refers to the mindset of designing
multiple people to be at one exhibit [22]. products to be accessible to people regardless of ability
level, cultural background, or other identities. This can
27
mean having an inclusive (or non-exclusive) array of
characters in the exhibit, not having a cultural bias around
theming, incorporating different languages, and catering
those with different ability levels. Our exhibit showcased
most of this design elements.

As mentioned above, we had a non-exclusive array of

characters, all organisms rather than people, and used a
good mix of voiceovers. Our theming was straightforward,
relying on common categories of organisms rather than
specific ones, and on technology categories that should be Figure 37. User Empathy Map
familiar to those of any culture. We had the goal of adding
a Spanish option to the exhibit but didn’t have enough time
to complete it. Our exhibit was also designed of a size to
be wheelchair accessible and had the same information
duplicated in audio and speech for those with sensory
impairments.

METHODOLOGY

1.9.1 DEFINING THE PROBLEM

We began the design process for our exhibit by rigorously
defining the problem. The first step here was to create two
empathy maps, one for the client and one for the user, to
better inform our design. As can be seen in Figure 37 and
Figure 38 below, the empathy maps helped us realize that
we needed to make positive solutions rather than the
problem the central focus of our exhibit and that we
needed to make sure the exhibit was accessible to different
students.
Figure 38. Client Empathy Map
We also conducted research on both scholarly sources and
industry artifacts to see what elements were essential to
drive learning in children through museum exhibits. Each
member read and evaluated several sources. We then
synthesized our research and compiled key takeaways for
our exhibit, including specific elements that can make
exhibits engaging for children such as: some level of
choice, but not too much; color; and auditory as well as
visual stimulation.

Having done this, we moved forward by creating a

Duncker diagram to evaluate possible methods of solving
the problem of sustainability education for students. As
can be seen below in Figure 39, our Duncker diagram

28
ultimately resulted in us moving forward with creating an completed within eight weeks, cost under $100, and be
exhibit that used game elements to teach students about designed so that it can be easily and safely transported and
sustainability. assembled.

1.9.2 GENERATING SOLUTIONS

Once we had a comprehensive and agreed-upon problem
statement, we could move on to generating solutions. This
process began with a group brainstorming session. Here,
we sat around a table and threw ideas out as they came up,
making sure to use the “Yes, and…” technique to build on
each other’s ideas and not shut anything down. Figure 40
shows the result of our brainstorming: a large list of ideas
ripe for refinement.

Figure 39. Duncker Diagram

All of this, combined with revisiting our client’s objectives
and constraints, led us to reformulate an updated problem
statement that we updated over the course of the exhibit Figure 40. Brainstorming Results

into its final form, as follows. Science museum exhibits Refining took the form of a second idea generation

can be inaccessible, ineffective at conveying complex method, the 4-2-3 sketch method. Here, each of the four
scientific ideas, and unattractive to students. These group members created two concept sketches of an exhibit.

students need to be engaged to learn and should feel We then all exchanged papers and each of the eight

accomplished when they do so. Design a design museum sketches received feedback comments from the other three

exhibit that teaches elementary students about the use of members who had not drawn them. This group feedback

biomimicry in modern-day technology. The exhibit must was the impetus for revisions that we each incorporated

contain interactive elements as well as a unique style. This into our individual exhibit concept sketches that we

exhibit should meet the physical design requirements and decided between. My concept sketch is visible in Figure

incorporate an inclusive design. It will need to be 41.

29
 Figure 42. Rank-Order Chart and KTDA

1.9.4 IMPLEMENTATION
Figure 41. Individual Concept Sketch We began the implementation stage by creating initial

1.9.3 DECIDING ON THE BEST SOLUTION AutoCAD drawings of our selected exhibit design. These
drawings were used to create a scale cardboard prototype
To determine which of our four individual concepts we
(see Figure 43) of our design that we used to gather
wanted to move forward with, we used a Kepner-Tregoe
feedback from our colleagues and manager. The biggest
Decision Analysis to guide our decision process. We
feedback we got was about size – it needed to be scaled
worked with our mentor to create a list of needs and wants
down dramatically. We also needed to bring the buttons
for the exhibit. Most of our needs came directly from client
further down to the bottom for accessibility.
objectives and constraints, while the wants were mostly
design objectives determined by the team to be beneficial
to project function and impact.

As can be seen in Figure 42, the decision analysis matrix

led us to choose to move forward with Design 4, which
performed significantly (10%) better than the other three
designs with respect to the sum of our weighted criteria.
However, we decided that there were specific elements of
the other three designs that we could include in an
implementation of the fourth design that would only add to Figure 43. Initial AutoCAD drawing
its function. Enumerated, these were a screen on a separate At the same time, we identified which specific biomimicry
back panel, lights that changed with student activity examples we wanted to move forward with by doing some
(answering questions), and 3D printed button covers for research and creating a matrix in Excel to figure out which
the category buttons. eight categories could actually work. We ended up using
Mammal, Mollusk, Insect, and Plant as our natural
categories and Water, Energy, Materials, and Medical as
30
our technology categories. Reference Figure 44 for this
matrix.
Figure 44. Excel Matrix of Biomimicry Examples
Following the town hall, we moved forward by refining
our design, making it significantly smaller, changing the
button placement, and detailing the support structure for
the laptop. At this point, switching to SOLIDWORKS
made more sense for ease of visualization of how the
different pieces fit together as well as for ease of
manufacturing. We created a revised CAD drawing that
can be found in Figure 45.
31
Figure 45. Revised SOLIDWORKS Drawing
We used these revised drawings to begin fabrication of the
final exhibit, laser cutting the wooden frame and
assembling it with glue and clamps on the finger joints,
creating the support structure, and adding hardware
including a hinge and a door handle. This next stage of
implementation also included using SparkFun and
MATLAB to develop our proofs of concept. These proofs
of concept were for a simplified version of our exploration
and quiz section using four buttons instead of eleven, the
automated feedback system for our exhibit, and a very
basic application of using MATLAB to have pressing a
button bring an image up on a laptop screen.
During this time, we designed the button covers for the
exhibit. These were animals, plants, or large symbols that
were designed to be attached to the arcade buttons and
make it more fun and interactive for kids. We 3D printed
these buttons and later painted them by layering Mod
Podge (to prevent peeling) and acrylic paint.
We then garnered more feedback from our colleagues and
manager before moving on to the electronics
implementation of the final exhibit. This involved three
different elements: the game screen, the MATLAB code
that ran the entire exhibit logic, and the soldering and
wiring of the hardware.
We soldered wires to the lights and buttons used in the
exhibit and then used a solderable breadboard to create
what was mainly a grounding plate for the many electrical
components. The signal and power wires were plugged
directly into the Arduino Mega Board and secured with
electrical tape there. Primarily 20-gauge single strand wire
and 22-gauge multi strand wire were used for the wiring.
Towards the end of project development, we used
additional time to add more electrical components: a servo
for the lock mechanism detailed later in this section and
two more lights. A wire diagram and the actual wiring of
the final exhibit can be seen in Appendix F and Figure 46,
respectively.
Figure 46. Wiring
The game screen development was done using Canva. We
created several characters, different organisms wearing
hard hats, to give the exhibit a sense of whimsy and more
appeal for kids. A total of seventy-five slides were created
32
for the game screen. All game slides can be found in
Appendix F. These slides did evolve over the course of
project based on feedback, primarily only with regard to
color scheme and font size for theming and accessibility.
These screens were displayed at various points based on
combinations of user input and game state by the
MATLAB logic that ran the exhibit. This code used a
MATLAB library to talk to the Arduino / Spark Fun
electrical components in the exhibit. It read in user input
from the buttons and changed the display states of the
lights and lock using many nested loops and if-elseif-else
statements. All of the MATLAB code for this exhibit can
be referenced in Appendix E.
The final part of the implementation was the physical
aesthetics, including the trifold. We used a color plotter to
print an Adobe Illustrator AI generated wrapping with a
globe and forest backgrounds for part of the exhibit, as can
be seen in Figure 47. This wrapping was cut into 8.5” x
11” sheets, laminated, and then hot glued to the wooden
surface with cutouts to accommodate the buttons and
LEDs of the exhibit. Button labels were separately printed,
laminated, and hot glued on top of the original wrapping.
The other part of the exhibit was painted dark green to
match the wrapping color tones.
Figure 47. Exhibit Wrapping Design in Illustrator
The trifold was also designed in Illustrator and featured all
of the characters coped over from the Canva Designs and
color tones copied over from the exhibit wrapping.
Informationally, it provided a definition of biomimicry, a
reiteration of the game instructions, and a description of
how biomimicry is used in the engineering design process
to generate ideas. The trifold design is shown in Figure 48.
Figure 48. Trifold Design
As mentioned in the description of the wiring, we ended up
added an additional component later in the project, a lock
mechanism that used a servo to raise a lock hook out of a
box to give the appearance of the second section of the
exhibit “unlocking” for students. The lock was designed in
SOLIDWORKS (reference Appendix A for the drawing),
3D printed, and then decorated using a combination of
printed paper wrapping and electrical tape (see Figure 49).
33
Figure 49. Decorated Lock
1.9.5 EVALUATION
Evaluation of this project began with our mentor meeting
and town hall during Milestone 5. During these two
meetings, we received feedback on our design from our
mentor, peers, TAs, and professor. This helped us revise
our design ahead of the final expo.
Our main evaluation consisted of an evaluation plan of
eleven criteria. These criteria dealt with physical attributes
of the project, educational and engagement outcomes with
students, and inclusion of specific design elements.
Ultimately, we achieved ten of these eleven criteria, all
except for having Spanish as a language option for the
game. We were unable to complete these criteria due to
time constraints. The full evaluation plan can be referenced
in Appendix D, Table 6.
We collected evaluation data as necessary at the Expo.
This was done using an automated feedback system on the
exhibit (thumbs up and down buttons), forms for peer and
faculty reviewers, qualitative analysis of user-produced
drawings, and observed user engagement. Details of this
data can be referenced in Appendix D.
1.9.6 INDIVIDUAL CONTRIBUTIONS
I had an active role throughout this project. During idea
generation, I contributed to the brainstorming session,
created two concept sketches, and revised one of them into
a final individual sketch. I also played a large role in
writing the team memos, framing the structure of the
memo body and appendices. Similarly, I led efforts for
some group sections of the final technical report.

During project implementation, I had perhaps my largest

impact on the team by spearheading physical technical
implementation. I created all of the final project CAD for
the frame and mechanisms, not including the button covers
that Emilie worked on, and turned this CAD into physical
reality with the EXP laser cutter, wood glue, and limited
hardware (screws, bolts, a handle, and a hinge). Following
this, I did all of the soldering and wiring for the exhibit,
including soldering wires to the grounding breadboard and
adding soldered connector cables where needed.

Towards the end of the project, I worked a lot on the

aesthetics. The drawing frame and button frame paint was
done by me, while Matt and I worked together to design a
paper wrapping in Illustrator, plot it in CAMD under
Ruggles, laminate it in FYELIC, and hot glue it to the
exhibit. I also touched up button cover paint as needed
before returning them to Emilie for final coats and
detailing.

34
MATTHEW SZELA
INTRODUCTION
1.10.1 PROBLEM STATEMENT
Science museum exhibits can be inaccessible, ineffective
at conveying complex scientific ideas, and unattractive to
students. These students need to be engaged to learn and
should feel accomplished when they do so. Design a
museum exhibit that teaches elementary students about the
use of biomimicry in modern-day technology. The exhibit
must contain interactive elements as well as a unique style.
This exhibit should meet the physical requirements and
incorporate an inclusive design. It will need to be
completed within eight weeks, cost under $100, and be
constructed so that it can be easily and safely transported
and assembled.
To measure student engagement and accomplishment,
feedback needs to be collected at the end of the exhibit.
This can be done though a survey or a simple “thumbs up”
or “thumbs down” button. Also, we can collect data for
engagement by monitoring student interactions with the
exhibit during our presentation of the prototype. For
example, we can monitor how many students use the
exhibit until the activity is completed and how many
students walk away during mid-use.
To make the exhibit interactive, we must have two
different ways for the user to place input into the exhibit.
For example, an interactive element would include turning
a dial or clicking a button. Additionally, the user could
have the ability to engage their own creativity by including
activities such as writing and drawing. Also, some form of
user output must be included in this exhibit, whether it be
through the output of light or sound.
35
In terms of physical design requirements, the exhibit must
be able to sit on a 36” wide by 28” deep tabletop, so its
size must not exceed these dimensions. During
transportation, the exhibit must be able to fit in a bag that
is 27.6” by 13.8” by 16.5.” In the bag, the exhibit is
allowed to be disassembled. Additionally, the exhibit must
incorporate two different SparkFun components into the
design. Furthermore, at least one 3D printed, CNC milled,
or laser cut part must be used in construction of the
exhibit.
Regarding the topic of inclusive design, the exhibit must
incorporate aspects of EDGE and Universal Design. The
idea of EDGE design is to include elements in the exhibit
that will attract the attention of young women, making
exhibits more gender inclusive. Universal design involves
constructing an exhibit that can be used by people of all
backgrounds and abilities.
For transportation, the exhibit should be able to be carried
from Northeastern to any venue without sustaining
damage. Additionally, its setup and assembly should take
no longer than thirty minutes. It should be small enough
where it can be transported by two individuals or less.
1.10.2 STAKEHOLDERS
The client for this project is a company that is starting a
new traveling museum. These exhibits must be easy to
transport to students out of the region that normally would
not have the opportunity to go to a museum. The client
requires that design journals are kept throughout the entire
process, as well as a technical report to analyze the
performance of each exhibit.
In terms of the user, the client’s primary audience is
elementary-aged students. The client wants the users to be
able to have an interactive learning experience with the
exhibit and give them the feeling and excitement of
attending an actual science museum. Therefore, while
meeting the client’s constraints, our design must appeal to
elementary-aged children.
A secondary stakeholder in the design of the exhibit would
be the parents of the elementary-aged users. During
construction of the exhibit, we must keep in mind certain
designs that would appeal to parents. Adults in this
situation have the power of preventing their children from
using the exhibit as well as submitting complaints to the
company. Therefore, we must avoid sensitive topics and be
as inclusive as possible when designing this exhibit.
A secondary beneficiary of this exhibit would be the
faculty of an elementary school. The traveling museum
might inspire a student’s interest in science, which would
lead to higher student engagement in class. This would
overall benefit a teacher that is having trouble engaging
their students.
1.10.3 BIOMIMICRY/BIONICS
pyramid that ranks six different levels of learning [18].
This measurement tool is used by teachers in the classroom
to determine how well students have learned a certain
topic. Ranked from lowest to highest, the levels of learning
go as follows: remembering, understanding, applying,
analyzing evaluating, and creating. In our exhibit, we have
set the goal of having students create their own designs to
demonstrate the highest level of learning.
1.10.4 SCOPE
The purpose of this report is to cover all aspects of the
engineering design cycle, beginning with defining the
problem and ending with evaluating our solution. To better
understand the problem, background research will be
provided as well as our brainstormed solutions. All
documentation of our final design will be provided, such
as the CAD designs, proof of concepts, Canva slides, and
code for the exhibit. Documentation of the physical
construction of the prototype will also be included. Finally,
to determine the success of our exhibit, we created an
evaluation plan that was carried out at both of our
expositions, one at Northeastern and the other at the
Beachmont school. We received feedback from a diverse
background of people, ranging from adults to students.

Biomimicry is the process of creating technology based on

something from nature, typically a plant or an animal. For
example, the spirals on a nautilus shell have inspired the
creation of pipes and exhaust fans that are able to transport
material faster and self-clean any debris. Bionics is the
process of using nature to create solutions in the
engineering design process. Simply put, bionics is another
word for biomimicry, except bionics refers specifically to
the engineering design process.

Additionally, the exhibit that we created is based on the

idea of Bloom’s Taxonomy. Bloom’s Taxonomy is a
36
 BACKGROUND children have free choice, they feel as if they are given free
reign over their learning. Additionally, exhibits that let
1.11.1 RESEARCH students choose what topics they want to explore will
allow them to follow their previous interests. In the
To create an exhibit that teaches students about a
BatiKids exhibit, users are supposed to design a shirt and
sustainability topic, we must first understand how students
are given numerous choices throughout the process. Figure
learn best. First, for an exhibit to be engaging, students
51 is an image of the BatiKids exhibit that represents a
must be motivated to learn. To discover what motivates
design stage in the game. In the design stage, users are
students, I analyzed a case study on a museum exhibit
given free choice of what colors they want the shirt design
called BatiKids. The idea of this exhibit was to teach
to be.
students about Indonesian culture in a fun, game-like
manner [24].

When it comes to learning through a museum exhibit,

games have a strong motivational effect on children.
However, even though children are motivated to learn
through playing games, this method still has its limitations.
For example, it is difficult for children to learn concrete,
factual knowledge through a game. Despite this, the
incorporation of games into exhibits can promote
children’s creative abilities, and is especially important for
education of culture and art. Figure 50. Colorful display of BatiKids [24]

Knowing that games have a significant role in children’s

education, how can we create these games to maximize
their impact? From the case study, it was determined that
character design is directly correlated with child
engagement. To attract children’s attention with
characters, they must be colorful, full of expression, and
have a unique design. However, the addition of color
should not just be included with characters. Studies have
proven that children appear more engaged and responsive
Figure 51. Example of free design choice in
when working in an environment that is filled with color. BatiKids exhibit [24]
Figure 50 is an image of the BatiKids exhibits in-use that
displays a wide variety of color.
Additionally, in my research, I found that socialization and
Finally, it is found that students learn best when they are
interaction with others promotes learning in a museum
presented with multiple choices within a game. When exhibit. To promote socialization, exhibits are beginning to

37
incorporate “mixed reality,” which is a combination of
both physical and virtual elements. The incorporation of
physical elements allows for a hands-on, interactive
experience that families and classmates can work together
on [25].
However, simply conducting research on successful
aspects of museum exhibits was not enough to cover the
scope of our problem. To make our exhibit a success, we
also had to find relevant examples of biomimicry we could
present to our users. In the end, we found the most
biomimicry examples for the following aspects of nature:
mollusks, mammals, plants, and insects. By keeping the
categories broad, we were able to present a wide variety of
different examples. When applying these aspects of nature
to technology, we found the most examples for the
following categories: electricity, medical, water, and
materials. Each category of nature had one biomimicry
example for all four technology categories, leaving our
group with sixteen examples in total.
1.11.2 ETHICS
When considering the topic of ethics, we can first
determine if our exhibit uses an ethical design based on the
normative theories. However, applying these theories
would not make sense for our project because it is too
small-scale. Despite this, we can still incorporate ethics
into this project using Value-Sensitive Design.
The goal of Value-Sensitive Design is to identify the needs
and values of our users. Based on our problem statement,
we can see that our users typically do not have access to
museums. Therefore, we should make our exhibits as
concise as possible to reduce confusion among the
students. Additionally, based on research, we can see that
students value free choice, color, and engaging characters.
38
On top of analyzing the needs of our users, we must also
examine the needs of our client. For this project, the client
wants us to create a traveling exhibit for underprivileged
children. Therefore, we should construct the exhibit under
the constraint that it can be easily transported.
Additionally, the client wants to inspire kids in the field of
science, so we should make the exhibits as engaging as
possible.
1.11.3 UNIVERSAL DESIGN
According to the Universal Design Project, Universal
Design is “design that’s usable by all people, to the
greatest extent possible, without the need for adaptation or
specialized interest” [17]. This means that everyone should
be able to use our exhibit, no matter their abilities or
background.
It's important that our project incorporates Universal
Design because there is an increasing trend of diversity in
America [26]. This data implies that there is a polyglot of
languages in America and there is an increasing number of
students from different backgrounds. To accommodate this
increasing amount of diversity, we need to make sure all
students feel represented and included in the exhibit.
One way that students can feel represented and included is
by including characters of different races and ethnicities.
We could include non-human characters in the design
instead, which would eliminate the issue of race.
Furthermore, the exhibit should not display cultural bias
toward one culture over another. For example, unless it is
part of the theme, the exhibit should not contain colors or
graphics that are associated with only one culture.
Furthermore, including different languages in the exhibit
could potentially boost learning and comprehension of
non-native speakers.
Finally, we must consider students that have disabilities. Based on the needs of the client and user, we determined
For example, some students might be wheelchair-bound, that this solution was best.
so we should make sure the interactive portions of the
exhibit are in reach for them. Also, for students with
hearing loss, we should incorporate text or closed captions
for all potential audios.

1.12 METHODOLOGY

1.12.1 DEFINING THE PROBLEM

While the problem statement was laid out earlier in the

report, it’s important to acknowledge how we reached that
statement in the first place. To first analyze the client’s and
users’ needs, we created two separate empathy maps.
Based on these empathy maps, we saw that the client
sought to bring STEM Education to kids that do not have
Figure 52. Dunker Diagram for problem statement
access to museums and making learning fun and
interactive for users. For the users, we saw that their goals
were to have fun while learning about science and receive
Using this solution, we redefined our problem statement
praise for their knowledge and accomplishments.
based on the constraints and requirements. The problem

To further define our problem, we created a Dunker statement can be found in section 1.10.1 of the report.

Diagram based on the users’ and client’s needs (Figure

52). First, we started the diagram by defining the problem
1.12.2 GENERATING SOLUTIONS
with a blanket statement: develop, design, and create an
To generate potential solutions for our design, we first
educational exhibit that promotes awareness about the
participated in ideation activities as a group. The two
important of sustainability by teaching the topic in an
activities that we used were brainstorming and a 4-2-3
interactive approach to a targeted audience. Even though
sketch method.
we had this blanket statement at first, we did not know
exactly how we wanted to create the exhibit.
For the brainstorming method, we sat down as a group and
wrote down as many ideas possible. For this activity, we
In the end, we decided that the best possible solution was
did not include any visual sketches. The information that
to “create an exhibit where students can play a game about
we wrote down included potential aesthetics for our
sustainability to learn.” This solution is circled on the
exhibit, how we wanted our exhibit to work, and what
Dunker Diagram. At the end of the Dunker Diagram
shape we wanted our exhibit to be.
(bottom row of the figure), we had four possible solutions.

39
Then, using what we came up with by brainstorming, our
group participated in a 4-2-3 activity. In this activity, each
group member made two potential sketches of a museum
exhibit design. One of the sketches that I made is included
in Figure 53. Each sketch contained labels and a basic
description of how the exhibit would work. Once when we
were done creating sketches, each group member left
comments on everyone else’s sketches regarding things
that they could improve upon.
Figure 53. Matt’s sketch for the 4-2-3 activity
Using our feedback from the 4-2-3 method, each group
member created one final sketch of what they wanted the
exhibit to look like and how they wanted it to function.
Then, we analyzed each of these final drawings and
determined which one would be the best solution.
1.12.3 DECIDING COURSE OF ACTION
To determine which solution was the best, we analyzed all
the sketches in a Kepner-Tregoe Decision Analysis table
(Figure 54. Rank-Order Chart and K-T Analysis).
However, to use a K-T table, we first had to create a rank
order of our wants. For this, we simply made a list of our
wants and ranked them each on a scale of one to ten, with
40
ten being the most important. Some of our most notable
wants include that the exhibit is aesthetically pleasing, the
exhibit has game-like aspects, and the there is a way to
measure how fun the exhibit is. Then, we determined the
“musts” of our project that we could include in the K-T
table. These requirements were mainly taken from the
problem statement. The Rank order and K-T analysis are
shown in Figure 54.
Figure 54. Rank-Order Chart and K-T Analysis
Based on the results of the K-T analysis, we determined
that Emilie’s design was ranked the highest (Figure 55).
However, we did not end up using this design in its
entirety. One limitation of the K-T diagram is that it only
provides engineering with one concrete solution. However,
we believe that there were notable aspects to each design
that we wanted to include. Our group wanted the design to
be representative of everyone’s ideas.
 Figure 55. Best design sketch determined by the
KTDA
1.12.4 CAD DRAWINGS AND EXHIBIT OVERVIEW
The first step of implementing our solution was to create
CAD drawings of our final museum exhibit idea. First, we
created an AutoCAD drawing to help determine what the
exact dimensions of the exhibit. After this, the group
created a SolidWorks drawing so we could have a 3D
representation of the exhibit (Figure 56).
41
Figure 56. Revised SOLIDWORKS Drawing
On the diagram, there is one main panel with a screen on
top, facing the user. On the main panel (diagonal board),
there are two rows of four buttons each. The tope row
represents a technology category, and the bottom row
represents a nature category. When users interact with the
exhibit, they will click one button from both the nature row
and the technology row. The nature category will feature
both plants and animals. The technology category will
feature different fields of science, such as medicine and
sustainable materials. After clicking one button from each
category, the exhibit will present information on how the
chosen element of nature was used to create a technology
in the given field of science.
The user will then be presented with a short true or false
question. The goal of the exhibit is to have users continue
to explore biomimicry topics until they answer three
questions correctly. After they answer three questions
correctly, they will unlock the second area of the exhibit,
called the drawing space. To use the drawing space, users
will take paper out of a drawer that contains a fact of
nature. Using this fact about nature, the user will have to
draw their own technology, essentially creating their own
example of biomimicry. We wanted to include this portion
of the exhibit because it reflects the highest level on
Bloom’s Taxonomy, which is creating your own designs.
1.12.5 CONSTRUCTION OF MOCK-UP
Using our CAD drawings, we then created a cardboard
mock-up of the exhibit to present to the class. While the
cardboard mock-up had no actual function, it was still
useful because it allowed us to see the physical dimensions
of our exhibit (Figure 57). From the mock-up, we learned
that our design was too big. Although it met the physical
constraints of the project, it was not accommodating to the
size of our users. For example, some of the buttons were
too difficult to reach. Nonetheless, we used our mistakes
from the cardboard mock-up to fix our final design.
Figure 57. Cardboard mock-up of exhibit
1.12.6 PROOF OF CONCEPTS
Before we could construct our final design, we first needed
to make sure that what we wanted to code was in our scope
of abilities. To do this, we created three SparkFun proof of
concepts. The first proof of concept had a purpose of
presenting different information based on what buttons
were clicked. Additionally, this proof of concept
demonstrated that it was possible to successfully answer a
42
true/false question by clicking a button. Every time a
question was answered correctly, an LED would light up
on the proof of concept.
The second proof of concept was created to show that
MATLAB and Arduino could successfully integrate with
each other. For this proof of concept, an image on
MATLAB was displayed after a button was clicked.
The final proof of concept demonstrated that our feedback
system would function properly. For the feedback portion
of our exhibit, we wanted to include a “thumbs up” and
“thumbs down” button somewhere on the design. As users
pressed the buttons, a counter would simply record how
many times each button was pressed.
1.12.7 FINAL DESIGN
To start creating our final design, we first laser cut the
pieces of wood that would serve as the frame of our
exhibit. Then, our group designed 3D printed button
covers that would represent all the possible nature and
technology categories. An assembled wooden frame of the
drawing is shown in Figure 58.
Figure 58. Assembled Wooden Frame
After the wooden frame was made, we then worked on
wiring all the buttons properly (Figure 59). Once the wires
were completed, we could then work on the development
of our code, which is shown later in this report. The code
follows the same exhibit function outline presented earlier
in this section. To wire all the buttons, we used a soldered
breadboard and a mega Arduino board. One difficulty that
we had was that the wires kept coming undone. The
kids (Figure 60). Seventy-five Canva slides were created to
accommodate the sixteen possible combinations and
questions that the user could pick from. These Canva
slides featured animal and plant characters wearing
hardhats. Each Canva slide had a speech bubble as if the
character was speaking to the user.
Finally, we created a trifold to put behind our exhibit. The

excessive amounts of buttons and wires sometimes caused trifold explained what biomimicry was and how it related

the museum exhibit to break apart. to the engineering design process. It also contained
expanded directions for our exhibit. The final design and
trifold are displayed in Figure 61.

Figure 60. Example Canva slide

Figure 59. Wired buttons beneath the exhibit

Once the code and frame were complete, we then moved

onto the last portion of the exhibit: museum aesthetics. For
this portion, we created giant designs on Adobe Illustrator
that would cover the sides of our exhibit. We used a
laminator to add an extra layer of protection to the designs.
Additionally, we painted the drawing space area dark
green to match the exhibit theme. The button covers were
painted as well.

In addition to all the actual exhibit aesthetics, we created

engaging slides on Canva to present information to the
Figure 61. Final design and trifold
43
1.12.8 EVALUATION OF DESIGN
Our prototype was tested at two different expositions:
Northeastern and the Beachmont school. At Northeastern,
our main audience was students and adults while at
Beachmont, our main audience was elementary-aged
students. To evaluate the success of our design, our group
used various methods. One notable aspect of our
evaluation is that it does not include a Google Form for
feedback. We believed that a Google Form would be too
lengthy and difficult for the kids to fill out.
As instructed, the first thing that our group did in terms of
evaluation was create an evaluation plan. This plan lined
out all our targets, how we would measure them, and what
the target measurement would be for success. In this
context, a target is simply a goal that we would like the
exhibit to reach. Some of our targets could be measured
before the expositions, such as the uniqueness of the
design, if it met the physical constraints, and if the design
incorporated Bloom’s Taxonomy elements.
However, some of our targets could not be measured until
the day of the exposition. For example, we wanted to count
how many users started and finished the exhibit without
walking away. Also, we wanted to have a certain
percentage of “thumbs up” versus “thumbs down” scores
as well.
Overall, we had eleven different targets that would
determine the success of the exhibit. After the expositions,
we determined that ten out of these eleven targets were
met. The only target that was not met was creating Spanish
text for the exhibit. We determined that this would be too
difficult to fit in the time limit of the project. Ultimately,
we can say that this exhibit was successful due to it
achieving almost all our goals.
44
List of our targets:
• Over 80% of students that start the exhibit finish
it
• 60% of students rate the exhibit with a thumbs up
• 60% of drawings effectively demonstrate
biomimicry principles as evaluated by the team
• Bloom’s Taxonomy elements
• Presents the users with free choice
• Contains at least one unique feature
• Seven different colors represented in the exhibit
• Incorporates two aspects of EDGE design
• Meets physical project constraints
• English and Spanish text
1.12.9 INDIVIDUAL CONTRIBUTIONS
At the beginning of this project, I conducted individual
research about what elements our exhibit should include. I
created an annotated bibliography that summarized the
sources that I had found. Additionally, I researched
possible themes for our exhibit and sustainability topics
were currently trending. When it came down to creating a
problem statement, I created empathy maps for both the
client and the user as well as a Dunker Diagram.
Using this research, I participated in ideation activities
with my team. First, we brainstormed possible ideas as a
group. Then we each created two sketches using the 4-2-3
method. One of my sketches from the 4-2-3 can be seen in
an earlier section of this report. After this, I created my
own individual final design for the exhibit on AutoCAD
(Figure 62. Matt's final exhibit design).
 times, but in the end, we were able to achieve what we
were hoping for.

As a team member, I was able to fill all my general

responsibilities. For example, I was present at every team
meeting when we worked on the memos as well as all the
mentor meetings. I tried my best to work with efficiency
while maintaining respect for all my teammates.
Figure 62. Matt's final exhibit design

Once we decided on an exhibit theme and design, I was in

charge of creating the flowchart for our exhibit’s coding
logic. This flowchart served as the backbone for our
exhibit code. Using this flowchart, I was also responsible
for creating the SparkFun proof of concepts for our group.
The SparkFun proof of concepts were downsized from our
actual exhibit, but they still provided insight on how the
code would work.

During the construction of the exhibit, I was responsible

for creating the Canva slides with information for each
possible combination of user input. In the end, there were
over seventy-five slides that were created for this project.
Each slide had its own character and graphics that went
along with it.

After completing the Canva slides, I helped work on

exhibit graphics and aesthetics. For example, I helped
paint some of the 3D printed button covers for the exhibit,
which took several attempts because the paint kept
chipping off. Also, I helped design, print, and laminate the
graphics on our exhibit. Additionally, I created a design for
the trifold and worked with another group member to write
the information on it. I created buttons labels for each of
the buttons and laminated everything accordingly.

Finally, I helped write some of the prompts for the drawing

space on the exhibits. These prompts were revised a few

45
KSG’S KGB

FINAL DESIGN here, the Arduino Mega Board can be easily connected to
the laptop, which runs all of the MATLAB code and serves
The final design of the museum exhibit is constructed of
as a display screen for the slides.
laser cut 1/8” birch plywood joined together with finger
joints and wood glue. It consists of two separate wooden
The drawing frame has a top tray, as previously
frames: a 30-degree sloped button board (“button frame”)
mentioned, that holds colored pencils and pens for drawing
atop a trapezoid-sided box and a rectangular box with a
with. The vertical front plate has a door integrated into
small tray atop it (“drawing frame”). Neither of these
with a hinge and handle, and a label reading “Open for
frames have a bottom. The button frame is 16” wide x 17”
Paper.” Accordingly, there is a stack of papers with
deep x 8” high (16 ±1” with the laptop inserted) and the
drawing prompts inside of this door. The drawing frame
drawing frame is 12.5” wide x 17” deep x 3” high (not
also has two holes drilled into the top plate so that a 10mm
including the lock). Reference Appendix C for detailed
RGB LED can pass through from the bottom, as well as an
dimensions of the overall exhibit assembly and the lock.
FDM lock constructed of a box, a servo, and a hook
shaped piece (reference Appendix C).
The button frame has fourteen holes cut in the slanted top
plate, two holes cut in the vertical front plate, and slots cut
The servo and both 10mm RGB LEDs are connected to the
in the back and right side (reference Appendix C). Eight of
breadboard and Mega board underneath the button frame.
the fourteen holes on the slanted top plate and the two
The servo has the ability to raise the hook shape and give
holes on the vertical front plate are cut to size 24mm
the illusion of the lock “unlocking” when commanded to
arcade buttons at a tight fit. Three more of the fourteen
turn from 0 to 120 degrees. The button frame and lock are
holes on the slanted top plate are cut to size 30mm arcade
both wrapped in color printed paper with natural tone
buttons at a tight fit, and the remaining three of these
designs – the button frame has tree designs on the sides
fourteen holes are cut so that a 10mm LED cannot pass
and front and a stylized globe on the slanted top plate,
through, but its cathode and anode can. Each of these
while the lock has a stylized keyhole on the front and
fourteen holes has its corresponding electrical component
mottled gray on the sides and top – while the drawing
(button or LED) inserted into it. These components are
frame is painted dark green (Figure 63).
then wired into a solderable breadboard, which is primarily
for grounding, with the LEDs having 330 W resistors
soldered into the wires between the anodes and ground,
and an Arduino Mega board, as shown in Appendix F. The
slot in the side is cut to allow wires for two 10mm RGB
LEDs to pass into the drawing frame. The slot in the back
is cut to allow a laptop to slide under the slanted top plate
(reference Appendix C). There is a supporting substructure
under this slanted top plate on which the laptop rests. From

46

Figure 63. Fully Decorated Exhibit
Each of the thirteen buttons in the exhibit has a painted
FDM button cover corresponding to its function: a true
button, a false button, a home button, four natural category
buttons (whale, butterfly, lotus flower, and mussel), four
technology category buttons (water drop, lightning bolts,
amorphous material, and medical cross), thumbs up button,
and thumbs down button (visible in Figure 45, above).
Only the thumbs up and down buttons were located on the
vertical front plate of the button frame, while the other are
located on the slanted top plate of the button frame. The
eleven buttons located on this slanted top frame all have
printed labels next to them.
Behind the drawing and button frame was a 36” wide by
48” tall trifold with printed information in English (Figure
64). This information included a definition of biomimicry,
a discussion of its use in the engineering design process,
and directions for the game. The trifold also had a number
of animal and plant characters wearing hard hats that
matched the characters from the display screen. The color
tones of the trifold matched those of the wrapping of the
button frame and the paint of the drawing frame.
47
Figure 64. Trifold Design
During a typical user interaction, a user approaches the
exhibit to see the directions slide for the game shown on
the display screen (reference Appendix G, section 2, photo
1). The user is then able to press a nature category button
and a technology category button in any order, displaying
information about the first button pressed and then about
the biomimicry technology existing at the intersection of
that natural category and technology category. Each time a
category button is pressed, a user can hear a related sound
effect, and when the biomimicry technology is shown,
there is an accompanying voiceover reading the same
information. For example, a user who pressed the Mammal
button would first hear a mammal noise and see
information about mammals (reference Appendix G,
section 2, photo 66). Then, if they pressed the Energy
button, they would hear an energy sound and be shown
information about wind turbines inspired by whales (the
corresponding biomimicry technology) (reference
Appendix G, section 2, photo 2) that is also read aloud.
The user is able to use the home button to return to the
main screen during this time and select new categories.
The user is also able to press the True button once on a
biomimicry technology slide to move on to a true or false
question slide about the technology, which is also read
aloud (reference Appendix G, section 2, photo 3). The user
is then able to answer the question using the True or False
buttons. A correct answer results in the correct answer
screen (reference Appendix G, section 2, photo 4) being
shown, a ding sound effect being played, and the three
LEDs on the slanted top plate flashing. After they flash,
one stays on. A second correct answer turns the second
LED on, and a third correct answer turns the third LED on.
Meanwhile, an incorrect answer results in the incorrect
answer screen (reference Appendix G, section 2, photo 5)
being shown, a buzzer sound being played, and no LEDs
flashing or turning on (it should be noted that an incorrect
answer does not turn any currently on LEDs off). Once the
user answers three questions correctly, the LEDs on the
drawing section begin flashing and the servo rotates to
“unlock” the lock (as previously mentioned). The user is
then prompted to use the thumbs up and down buttons to
rate their learning from the exhibit and to move on to the
drawing section by opening the door, taking a prompt
paper, and using it to draw a design. If the user happens to
go through all 16 questions without getting three or more
answers correct, then the game resets to the beginning.

Reference Appendix I for a tabulated list of all physical

components included in the physical design, Appendix E
or all of the MATLAB code running the final exhibit,
Appendix C for the full isometric and standard 3-view
SOLIDWORKS drawing of the final exhibit assembly, and
Appendix G, section 2 for all of the 75 slides that can be
shown on the display depending on user choices.

48
 RESULTS
1.13.1 MEASUREMENTS
The final dimensions of the exhibit were 28.5” by 17” by
16 ±1”, where the height fluctuated depending on the angle
of the laptop screen. By disconnecting the drawing section
from main portion of the exhibit and stacking the sections
in the bag, the entirety of the exhibit, excluding the trifold,
was able to fit in the transportation bag, as shown in
Figure 65. Additionally, the exhibit was fully constructed
within 6 weeks and cost $35.00 (Appendix I). Also, at both
expositions, the display was assembled and disassembled
in 5 to 10 minutes.
Figure 65. Exhibit in transport bag
1.13.2 EVALUATION RESULTS
According to our rating system, 93.75% of users reported
that they had learned something from our exhibit during
both expositions. 68.75% of this data was acquired from
Northeastern users, where 31.25% is from Beachmont
students. Only 80% of the Beachmont students claimed
that they had learned something. Additionally, during the
Beachmont exposition, 22 people approached the exhibit
49
(Table 1, Appendix D). Of these individuals, 90.9% started
the game, and 81.8% finished the game (Table 2,
Appendix D). It should be noted that many of the students
engaged with our exhibit in a group, and thus, the number
of individuals that finished the game, eighteen, was not the
same as the number of learning experience ratings
collected by the automated feedback system in the exhibit,
ten.
We qualitatively assessed the learning represented in user
drawings using a scale between 0 and 2, where 0
represents something that was drawn that didn’t relate to
the prompt at all and demonstrated no application of the
higher levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy (creating), i.e., a
doodle, 1 represented a fairly simple application of the
natural feature described in the prompt, and 2 represented
a novel or unique application of the natural feature
described in the prompt. The average drawing score from
these ratings was 1.3, with a standard deviation of 0.73 and
a median rating of 1.5, and 68.75% of drawings rated as 1
or higher, showing that most users had a good grasp on
how to apply biomimicry in at least a simple way by the
end of the exhibit. All drawings and the full analysis table
can be found in Table 7, Appendix D.
1.13.3 PEER FEEDBACK
We collected peer and user feedback through several
different fillable forms. The first was a peer feedback form
completed slightly before the final projects were ready but
at a time when the overall objective and sense of the
exhibit was evident. As can be seen in Table 3 in
Appendix D, the exhibit was generally well liked, with the
main concerns being a lack of auditory stimulation and
issues with font size on the slides. We addressed both of
these issues prior to the final exhibit showing at
Northeastern and Beachmont expositions.
During the Northeastern exposition, there were two
feedback forms, one for peers and one for faculty. Most of
the seven people who gave feedback liked the exhibit,
rating us an average 5 out of 5 on the faculty side and 4.75
out of 5 on the peer side. They commented that the exhibit
was educational, mostly engaging, well fabricated, and
used appropriate dynamic elements. A detailed review of
this feedback can be found in Tables 4 and 5 in Appendix
D.

50
ELLE ARCAND

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS the same time. Likewise, we included female voices in our

audio recordings for the technology summaries, and the
Firstly, we met the constraints and objectives of the
overall aesthetic of our exhibit was playful–for we
project. We completed construction of our exhibit within 8
employed lots of bright colors and whimsical nature
weeks under $100, for we finished building our main
characters with hard hats. On the other hand, we were not
display in 6 weeks with $35. Also, it incorporated two or
able meet our culture accessibility objective of having
more SparkFun elements–LEDs, buttons and a servo–and
Spanish text options for our exhibit due to time constraints.
was 28.5" by 17" by 16 ±1" (depending on the angle of the
Nevertheless, we exceeded our student engagement
screen), which fit in the 28" by 36" area on the table.
objective of having at least 80% of students who start the
Similarly, the exhibit fit within the 27.6" by 13.8" by 16.5"
exhibit finish it by 10%. Additionally, we aimed to have
flexible bag, as demonstrated in Figure 65, and it was
60% of students who participated in the rating system
assembled and disassembled in 5 to 10 minutes, which was
indicate that they had learned something. Of the 32 people
well under the 30-minute maximum. Additionally, our
that participated in the system in both expositions, 93.75%
exhibit contained a multitude of 3D printed parts–the lock
of people voted that they had learned something about
and button covers–and laser cut pieces–all of the sides of
biomimicry. It should be noted that of the 10 Beachmont
the wooden structure, so we significantly surpassed the
students that participated in the voting, 8–and thus 80%–
requirement of one or more 3D printed, CNC milled, or
indicated that they had learned something, which met our
laser cut parts. Also, besides minor flaking of the paint on
goal.
our button covers, the exhibit withstood repeated use, and
it was safe, concealed “behind the scenes” electronic
Finally, from our drawing station results, it was clear that
components and collected data automatically via our rating
our students somewhat displayed an ability to employ
system.
higher levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy, for the mean of the
drawing scores was 1.3, with a standard deviation of 0.73
In terms of our evaluation plan, our exhibit met and
and a median of 1.5. Moreover, we received relatively
exceeded many of our goals. For instance, in terms of
positive feedback from peers during the in-class feedback
color, we aimed to have 7 different colors incorporated in
session, and the majority of the concerns raised–such as
our exhibit and we surpassed this amount with +7.
clarifying directions and adding sounds–were addressed in
Moreover, in terms of uniqueness, we had several
Milestone 6 (Appendix D). Similarly, we received positive
distinctive features of our exhibit compared to other
feedback from faculty and peers at the Northeastern
exhibits at the expositions, which met our goal of having at
exposition. We received 18.2 out of a possible 20 points
least one unique feature. For example, we were the only
for a variety of categories, like ease of use, aesthetic
group that had a drawing element and a motorized lock.
appeal and enjoyability, from our peers, while we received
Also, our exhibit incorporated multiple EDGE principles–
28 out of 30 possible points for these same categories from
exceeding our goal of 2. For instance, we made it long
faculty (Tables 4 and 5 Appendix D),
enough so that multiple individuals could interact with it at

51
Overall, these results indicated that our exhibit taught users
about biomimicry while still being entertaining.
Additionally, our wide variety of colors, whimsical designs
and sounds made our exhibit appealing. However, I
believe that the paint on the buttons was a bit messy, and
the ill-fitting covers on the main portion of the exhibit and
the lock looked unprofessional. Nevertheless, our project
was effectively designed for a traveling museum, for it fit
within its required table space and the transportation bag
and was easily assembled.

52
 CONCLUSION issues with paint adhering to PLA of the button covers. We
attempted to remedy this issue by applying a layer of mod
In the end, our exhibit had a positive performance. It met
podge prior to adding the paint. However, some of the
all of the physical requirements established in our problem
paint still flaked from the button covers with repeated use.
statement and by our clients–Professor Kathryn Schulte-
Grahame and the Museum of Science. The exhibit met
size, cost, transportation and assembly requirements.
Similarly, it exceeded technical requirements, such as
incorporating at least two SparkFun components and one
or more 3D printed, CNC milled, or laser cut parts.
Moreover, it satisfied all of our evaluation objectives–such
as those for color, uniqueness and teaching effectiveness–
except that for cultural accessibility.

Also, independent of the specific requirements and

objectives, the project met my personal standards.
Considering that our group was a mixture of
bioengineering/biochemistry, chemical engineering and
environmental engineering majors, I am proud of the final
project that we presented. It effectively taught users about
biomimicry in an entertaining way, for it featured LEDs,
sounds and a moving part. Additionally, it was
aesthetically pleasing since it had many colorful images
and adorable graphics.

Throughout the EDP, we encountered several challenges.

Primarily, we had several issues with our buttons not
working, and due to the large mass of wires in the back, it
was often hard to identify the wires associated with the
button in question and thus fix the issue. Specifically,
many of our troubles with buttons were attributed to wires
breaking loose from the buttons themselves as a result of
the laptop being inserted inside the slot or movements
during transportation. Also, some of the wires would break
loose from the microcontroller or plastic, solderless
connections. Additionally, we experienced difficulties with
printing the panels for our main exhibit, for these panels
were ultimately smaller than intended. Finally, we had

53
 of a laptop so that the information can be more easily
viewed. Additionally, I would incorporate more complex
RECOMMENDATIONS and pertinent sounds for each category into the exhibit, for

If given the opportunity to restart this project, I would have I used low quality audio files for this project because they

done several things differently. Primarily, I would have were free and thus did not add to the budget. However, for

more thoroughly checked the soldered connections a professional exhibit, it would be worthwhile to invest in

between the main body of the buttons and the wires during quality audio files. Also, voice recordings should be added

the initial milestones. More importantly, I would have to the code to narrate the questions as well as the answers

utilized shorter wires and possibly placed tape with labels to make the exhibit more engaging. Finally, I would have

on them of which buttons they belonged to. This action employed more lights on the drawing station to make the

would have significantly reduced the time and effort that unlocking of this aspect of the exhibit more dramatic and

we employed trying to debug buttons that were not therefore further enhance students’ sense of

functioning. Moreover, I would have glued the servo and accomplishment.

the lock to the drawing station, for it began to malfunction

Before undertaking a similar endeavor, I would
late in the Beachmont exposition as a result of the parts
recommend gaining familiarity with basic woodworking
becoming loose from the tape that secured them.
techniques. Inevitably, all groups built their main

Additionally, if given more time, I would have reprinted structures with wood, and woodworking skills were not

the panels for the main portion of our exhibit so that they taught in GE 1501/1502. Thus, it was expected that

would have fit the wooden structure properly. Likewise, I someone in the group possessed these skills or was willing

would have covered the button toppers with laminated to learn them. Additionally, I would advise having at least

paper or stickers instead of paint. In doing so, the buttons one person in the group gain familiarity with a graphic

would have looked cleaner, and the designs would not design application like Canva. Similarly to woodworking,

have flaked off. On a similar note, I would have created a graphic design was not touched upon in class, and thus, it

more durable and professional looking cover for my was expected that someone learn how to create effective

computer screen–like a laser cut piece of wood with graphics on her/his own if she/he lacked these skills.

laminated paper–than the carboard covered in paper that I

created last minute. Moreover, I would have liked to better
distinguish which buttons were associated with each
category. This could have been accomplished by creating
“nature” and “technology” labels next to the respective
rows as well as putting a rectangular outline around the
buttons in each category.

Furthermore, for commercial implementation, I would

recommend using a larger monitor for the screen than that

54
 LESSONS LEARNED hours to this project, and although many of them were
spent efficiently, there were a few instances in which I
1.17.1 CONTRIBUTIONS spent more time than would have been necessary if I had
employed more forethought. For example, if I had looked
Between Milestones 5 and 7, my major contribution to the
to see if MATLAB had a “find and replace” feature earlier,
project was creating the entire MATLAB code. This code
it would have saved me time fixing repetitive sections of
was the basis for the entire exhibit, for it showed the
code. Also, we would have reduced debugging time if we
images containing our information, played sound effects
had used shorter wires and had organized them at the
and audio recordings of technology summaries and
beginning of the project. Thus, I will try to employ more
controlled the LEDs and servo. Also, I was heavily
forethought in the future before starting a similar
involved with debugging button failures as result of
endeavor.
writing and being in possession of the code (Appendix E).
Additionally, I created the logo for our stamper on
1.17.3 REFLECTIONS ON LEARNING
AutoCAD (Appendix C) and updated documentation, such
as the project notebook and Gantt chart (Appendix H). Primarily, over the course of constructing the exhibit, I
Finally, I attended both expositions, where I helped set up deepened my comprehension of MATLAB. I had never
and disassemble the exhibit as well as answer questions. thought that I would be capable of writing a 1700+ line of
code program from scratch. Also, I am proud of the fact
1.17.2 RESOURCES that I was able to learn how to integrate Arduino into
MATLAB quickly and that I learned several tricks for this
In the end, my team did meet the budget requirement of
integration–like never deleting the Arduino variable
under $100, for our final budget was $35. I did not
between trials by sectioning the code. These skills will
personally spend any money on the project, for I had paid
benefit me in my bioengineering career, for I will use
for other objects and services earlier in the semester. For
MATLAB in future courses, like Bioengineering
example, I paid for the wood for the AutoCAD 3 project
Measurement, Experimentation and Statistics (BMES) as
and for an Uber for my team to the Museum of Science for
well as its accompanying lab. Also, I improved upon my
research. Over the course of this project, I learned the
SolidWorks skills while creating my individual stamp
importance of reusing past parts, if possible, to reduce
handle and my AutoCAD skills while designing my team’s
costs. If we had purchased the buttons, LEDs and
stamper. Furthermore, I advanced my knowledge of
posterboard instead of reusing them from past projects, our
circuits, and with this experience, I now feel comfortable
project would have still been under budget, but we would
completing my own electrical projects. Finally, I enhanced
not have met this requirement with such flying colors
my debugging skills, for I had to learn how to identify the
(Appendix I). Moreover, in doing this, we could
root of electrical malfunctions, like inoperative buttons and
immediately begin working on our project because we did
LEDs.
not have to waste time waiting for parts to arrive via mail
or walking to a store to purchase them.
1.17.4 REFLECTIONS ON WORKING IN A TEAM
In addition to learning about cost management, I also This project changed my team working skills by
learned about time management. Ultimately, I devoted 102 emphasizing the importance of communication. Many
55
tasks were dependent on the work of multiple people, so
we constantly needed to interact with one another. For
example, Matt made the slides for the exhibit. Thus, I was
consistently checking in with him because I needed the
slides to input into the code. In the future, I will try to
maintain this constant communication with my teammates
because it allowed us to efficiently finish this project.
Also, this communication allowed our team to quickly
resolve conflicts, for when issues arose, we immediately
had honest conversations that decreased tensions.
Additionally, while completing this project, I developed
my listening skills. In the past, I have usually taken the
sole lead of projects and therefore been the person to give
advice and not receive it. During this project, I have
learned to accept my weaknesses and become more willing
to ask for help from others, which has allowed me to
develop the skills that I lacked. Ultimately, I believe that
this courage to acknowledge and address my shortcomings
will make me a more well-rounded teammate in future
groups.
have changed our meeting time from Tuesday night earlier.
During the pasta bridge project, we were able to finish
tasks last minute. However, this was not a successful
strategy for project 2, for many parts of the milestone
required a several-day span to properly complete. If we
had made the switch from Tuesday night to Sunday
afternoon earlier, we would have been less stressed about
Milestone 1. Additionally, if this project were restarted, I
would have prioritized having a Spanish text and audio
option. At the Beachmont exposition, it was very apparent
that Spanish was one the primary languages of the
students, so we would have better met our accessibility
goals if we had incorporated it into our exhibit.

Nevertheless, when I was at the helm of the team, I was an

effective leader. I allocated tasks to my team members
based on their preferences and strengths and helped
resolve any disputes. Moreover, I ensured that all voices
were heard during brainstorming solutions and further
aided this process by suggesting how we could merge
multiple ideas. One aspect of my leadership style that I can
improve upon is my composure. When the group was
running out of time during meetings late at night, my
teammates would sometimes note that I appeared stressed,
which did not aid the completion of our objectives. Thus, I
will make a greater effort to remain composed during
stressful moments in the future.

Finally, if given the opportunity to go back to the

beginning of the semester and restart this project, I would
56
EMILIE COCKE

DISCUSSION read out to the user and when some buttons were pressed, a
related sound would play).
When considering the design requirements set forth by the
client as well as the goals we set in our evaluation plan, we
Additionally, we were able to include a few unique
can consider our exhibit mainly successful. For starters, it
features that differentiated our exhibit from others. While
easily fit into the size requirements of 28” by 36” and was
the quiz structure of our exhibit was not uncommon, our
able to comfortably fit on the table provided for us at the
drawing station was one of a kind. It allowed students to
Northeastern expo as well as the Beachmont expo. It was
apply their new knowledge of biomimicry in a creative
also able to fit inside the bag provided to us. The exhibit
way, therefore taking the exhibit to a higher level of
and trifold could both be transported by one person,
Bloom’s Taxonomy.
though it was a little tight, especially on public
transportation. Additionally, we created the exhibit in 8 We displayed our final museum exhibit at two expos: one
weeks as required. at Northeastern University and another at Beachmont
Elementary School. 93.75% of all users reported that they
We excelled in the budget category, as we were given
had learned something (68.75% of the data coming from
$100 to create our exhibit but only used $35. We were able
NU and 31.25% of the data coming from Beachmont). The
to achieve this by reusing many materials such as wires,
expo at Northeastern invited students and faculty to
buttons, and even the trifold that groups from previous
evaluate our projects. The expo at Beachmont Elementary
Cornerstone of Engineering had already purchased. We
was for the STEAM Club students, accompanied by their
also made sure to only buy things that were necessary and
families, to evaluate our exhibits. Here, 22 students/groups
to recycle and preserve as much as we could so that groups
of students approached the exhibit; 90.9% started the quiz
in the future can do the same. Not only did this process
game and 81.8% finished it.
save us money, but it also made our exhibit sustainable
itself. We evaluated drawings on a scale from zero to two. A zero
meant that a student did not pay much attention to the
We were also able to include elements of Universal Design
prompt and drew something very literal or just a doodle. A
and EDGE. We achieved Universal Design through the
one meant that a student thought about the example in
dimensions of our exhibit and the font that we used
terms of technology and applied it in a very simple or
throughout our informational slides, which made it
baseline way. A two corresponded to a unique, descriptive,
accessible to people of all abilities. We achieved EDGE
and/or innovative application of the prompt. The average
principles by including familiar object, playful and
drawing score from these ratings was 1.3 and 68.75% of
whimsical design, open-endedness, multiple stations, and
drawings were rated as 1 or higher. The shows that most
the ability for visitors to preview exhibit engagement
students had a grasp of what biomimicry was and were
before engaging themselves. We were also able to include
able to apply it. All drawings can be found in Appendix D.
over 7 colors and a sound element (informational text was

57
Overall, our goal of 60% of people giving our exhibit a
“thumbs up” was exceeded, with 80% instead. We had
hoped that 60% of students would learn something, and
from the drawing feedback, it was clear that 68.75% were
able to demonstrate their learning. Finally, peer and user
feedback on forms was generally positive.

I believe that the only goal we didn’t get the chance to

achieve was the incorporation of Spanish into our exhibit
as a second language. This would have made our exhibit
much more accessible and would have made it completely
unique from any other exhibit at the expos. However, we
simply ran out of time to incorporate it and prioritized the
function of the exhibit.

58
 CONCLUSION been one extra coding cook in the kitchen. Dividing the
tasks for this project so rigidly also made it harder to
After 8 weeks of hard work, we completed all design
understand how certain parts of the project worked or
constraints and most objectives as outlined in the problem
could be improved.
statement. The final exhibit was functional, transportable,
and effectively taught Beachmont Elementary students and
Regarding my specific responsibilities, my biggest
Northeastern students and faculty about biomimicry and
challenge was definitely with SolidWorks. Drawing each
was even completed with only $35 used out of the $100
button cover on the software and taking the time to make
budget we were allotted.
sure that arcs were smooth and that elements were
symmetrical was time consuming and frustrating. I also
Feedback from the NU expo and the Beachmont expo was
had trouble with extruding each drawing, because different
overwhelmingly positive and exceeded our satisfaction and
parts of the drawing had to be different heights, so that the
learning goals. Students were able to demonstrate their
design would show up in real life once it was 3D printed.
learning with the quiz questions as well as the drawing
This meant that I needed to split the drawing on these
station. Our theme and aesthetics engaged kids and
button covers sometimes into four or five layers of
attracted them to the exhibit. Our use of lights, colors,
different heights, which was also time consuming and
cartoon characters, sounds, and drawing were all effective
required a detail-oriented eye. It was also challenging to
in making the exhibit fun. The buttons and structure of our
paint the button covers because they required a steady
project made it interactive and a unique learning
hand, Mod Podge, and multiple layers of paint.
experience. We fell short when it came to incorporating
multiple languages, but we were able to incorporate EDGE
and Universal Design elements to help with inclusion.

Throughout this project, we significantly divided up tasks,

which I believe made the project easier to accomplish, but
overall hindered my learning. This divide-and-conquer
strategy came in handy because it helped develop my
SolidWorks skills and forced me to learn how to 3D print,
but it did not allow me to develop my coding or Arduino
skills.

I came into this project knowing that I wasn’t very good at

and didn’t really enjoy SparkFun, so I was able to give that
responsibility to another group member. However, I do
enjoy MATLAB and C++, and am even pursuing a
computer science minor. I wish that I could’ve engaged in
the coding at least a little bit, though it would’ve made the
project more difficult to complete because there would’ve

59
 RECOMMENDATIONS Spanish, that group’s experience would’ve most likely
been significantly better.
Early on in the project, I think that it would have been
better if we had more effectively communicated our ideas,
Finally, a major part of our constructive criticism was that
schedules, and tasks. This would’ve saved time and
it was unclear which buttons corresponded to a nature
prevented a few small disagreements, especially during the
category and which corresponded to a technology
cardboard mock-up stage. I think that spending more time
category, even among the adults who engaged with our
with the group socially would have improved this. Now
exhibit. I recommend that we should have added labels not
that we have reached the end of the project, I can definitely
only to each individual button, but to the groups of buttons
say that our bond as a team and as friends has grown. If we
to make that distinction clearer. Many exhibits at the
had made more of an effort to form those bonds earlier,
Museum of Science were very clearly labeled, and I don’t
earlier milestones would have been much easier to
think we took advantage of seeing that museum enough.
complete.
There were a lot of good tips and examples of a good
exhibit that we didn’t pay enough attention to.
Regarding my specific contributions to the team, I
recommend that in the future, button covers, or any
relatively flat 3D printed elements, should be covered with
a laminated wrap like the wrap that we used for covering
the wood surfaces of the project. This would have saved
money from buying paint, the time it took to paint all those
layers, and it would have looked cleaner in general. Even
with the Mod Podge, we still had issues with paint
chipping or looking uneven.

Finally, I think incorporating another language into our

exhibit would’ve been very beneficial and widened our
audience significantly. It would’ve also made the exhibit
inherently more autonomous. I can remember a group of
boys who approached our exhibit at the Beachmont expo.
They seemed very interested and even stayed to play for a
while, but they spoke to each other in Spanish, and the boy
who seemed to be the leader of the group, and who was
also the one mainly engaging with the exhibit, seemed to
have his friends translating for him. I also had to step in
several times to explain gameplay and lead him into
question answers. The group eventually left because they
kept getting questions wrong. Had we incorporated

60
 LESSONS LEARNED avoid creating a negative museum experience or a negative
connotation with fast food, as we kept in mind that fast
1.21.1 CONTRIBUTIONS food is a very accessible option for low-income families.

Throughout the project, I maintained an active role and

My role as a service-learning lead mentor played a large
took on my fair share of tasks. To start, I was the Project
part in how I influenced our exhibit. In going to
Manager for Milestone 1. This involved creating and
Beachmont every other week, I really got to know the
delivering a presentation which synthesized individual
group of girls that I lead activities for. One of them seemed
research from each group member as well as the general
to have a passion for drawing, which reminded me of the
ideas that each member came up with pertaining to
“art” part of STEAM Club. This ultimately inspired the
sustainability topic and general exhibit gameplay. My
drawing station for our exhibit, which was able to play to
specific idea for the exhibit was centered around fast food
kids’ creative side. This, combined with individual
and would help educate students on the environmental
research, brainstorming, and sketching, lead to my design
impact of fast food by having them create their own fast-
being selected by the KTDA.
food chain through our exhibit. This idea was inspired by
one of my service-learning visits to Beachmont, where I Moving on to the prototype, I helped build the cardboard
noticed an enthusiasm and interest for fast food in the mock-up as well as the initial AutoCAD and SolidWorks
group I was leading. However, we ultimately decided
drawings. I continued this CAD momentum by drawing
against that sustainability topic because we wanted to
each of the button covers and then 3D printing them. Some
avoid creating a negative museum experience or a negative
of the more complicated designs, such as the whale and the
connotation with fast food, as we kept in mind that fast
butterfly, I had to draw in AutoCAD first so I could trace
food is a very accessible option for low-income families. picture references, and then import them into SolidWorks.
For each cover, I had to raise different elements of the
Throughout the project, I maintained an active role and
drawing to different heights so the design could be
took on my fair share of tasks. To start, I was the Project
recognizable when it was 3D printed. After printing each
Manager for Milestone 1. This involved creating and
cover out in EXP, I helped paint them. I started with a
delivering a presentation which synthesized individual
layer of Mod Podge to reduce peeling and then added
research from each group member as well as the general
acrylic paint.
ideas that each member came up with pertaining to
sustainability topic and general exhibit gameplay. My
Finally, I created the project video and alongside Matt,
specific idea for the exhibit was centered around fast food helped create the informational slides on Canva. I had a lot
and would help educate students on the environmental
of fun making the video. I added tons of funny photos and
impact of fast food by having them create their own fast- songs while going through our implementation of the
food chain through our exhibit. This idea was inspired by Engineering Design Process throughout this project.
one of my service-learning visits to Beachmont, where I
noticed an enthusiasm and interest in the group I was
leading for fast food. However, we ultimately decided
against that sustainability topic because we wanted to

61
1.21.2 RESOURCES completed my SolidWorks assignment early in the week
but felt occupied with the project to the point where I
Our group came way under budget by spending only $35
waited until the night before to finish my SparkFun and
out of our allotted $100. While I didn’t personally spend
C++ assignments. By the last week, I had allocated enough
any money, I made half of the slides and acquired the
time for myself to seek help from FYELIC if I needed it
skills required to 3D print the button covers. I donated
and still turn in my assignments with days to spare.
SparkFun components from my kit as they were needed
and singlehandedly made the project’s demo video. I
In the future, I would find a way to allocate responsibilities
devoted about 90 hours to this project.
to myself in a better way. While I did do a significant
amount of work, I didn’t have the absolute highest number
This experience taught me a lot about resource
of hours in the group. I would have liked to help more, but
management. It really taught me about the importance of
it was hard to find extra tasks that needed to be completed
recycling and how it can not only save you money, but
without stepping on someone else’s task.
also the time that you would’ve spent searching for
resources. It can also make the project itself sustainable, as
1.21.4 REFLECTIONS ON WORKING IN A TEAM
reusing is a valuable way to reduce waste. Additionally, I
have seen my peers, instructors, and previous projects as In high school, I was always the person to do more work

immense resources to our exhibit. You can learn a lot than they had to, check in on other members to make sure

simply from consulting archives or asking one of your that their parts were being completed, and proofread every

friends about a problem you’ve been encountering. part of the project, even parts that weren’t mine. Now that
I’m at university, everyone is working just as hard as I am.
1.21.3 REFLECTIONS ON LEARNING Everyone was that kid in high school. This change allowed
me to change my perspective when it came to group work.
Overall, I learned a lot from this project. I think my main
It was nice to feel supported in the way that everyone cares
takeaway will be the technical skills that I have gained. I
how the project turns out and everyone wants to produce
feel very comfortable with AutoCAD and SolidWorks
something that they’re proud of. Everyone wants to work
now; I’m not sure how useful they will be in the chemical
hard, and I can trust my teammates to produce strong
engineering field, but I’m glad I learned them. If anything,
work. I think I still need to work on getting used to
learning new software like this taught me how to problem
working with that kind of team.
solve. I also think it’s cool that I know how to 3D print
now; I’ve always wanted to learn!
I would describe my leadership style as very inclusive. I
always want to make sure that everyone feels heard and
I also feel like I learned a lot about time management and
that everyone has a say on decisions made by the group. I
my responsibility in a group. This class is a lot of work.
am easily managed as long as I feel like the tasks and
It’s 8 credits and requires a lot of time and brain space
responsibilities being expected of me are reasonable. I
towards the end of the semester when we were juggling
always speak my mind, but I always have a reason for it
three software assignments a week with getting 90% of our
and am open to compromise. As a Project Manager, I
project done. The first “hell week,” as it was described to
treated people with respect and asked for lots of input on
me, I did not manage my time very well. I promptly
62
my presentation. I was resourceful and asked my team
questions that would help me get a better understanding of
our research and ideas for the exhibit.
I believe that my biggest asset to the team was my ability
to calm people down. When my team members and I got
stressed, I felt as though I was able to zoom out and realize
that it was all going to be okay. I asked specific questions
to my teammates about what was frustrating them and how
I could support them. I feel like even just talking out their
frustrations helped ease tension. As a team, when we
encountered adversity, I believe that we overcame it by
63
staying transparent with communication, dividing and
conquering in order to favor individual work, and even
using humor.
If I could go back to the beginning of this project, I would
have prioritized adding Spanish into the exhibit. Seeing
that group of boys interested but struggling to understand
the project made me really wish that we had added a
second language. I would also have liked to take on a more
diverse set of responsibilities that would’ve maximized my
learning.
CALEB HAGNER

DISCUSSION exhibit accomplished this easily, being unique in its sheer

number of buttons to collect user input, its use of a servo
In comparing our final design and results to the design
for visual effect in the lock, and having users draw from
requirements, objectives, and evaluation criteria, it is
prompts as a key part of the exhibit.
evident that our exhibit was broadly successful but not
without its issues. First, our exhibit was well under the
From an inclusivity standpoint, we met our objective of
budget requirements for the project, constructed at a cost
incorporating at least two EDGE design principles into our
of only $35.00 through efficient reuse and repurposing of
exhibit. The artwork style of our decorations, from the soft
previous teams’ materials, effective use of manufacturing
feel and tones of our graphics to the addition of big eyes
facilities on campus, and careful purchasing of only what
and bright yellow hard hats on top of plants and animals to
was absolutely necessary.
create characters, had a whimsical feel. Using natural
elements as the characters had the added benefit of not
The next easiest of the results to analyze were the physical
having a male-dominated character pool as all characters
requirements: our final exhibit was inarguably 36” wide x
were visually genderless while giving students a familiar
Y” deep x 48” high, including the trifold, which fit within
object to focus on throughout the exhibit. The exhibit had
the 36” wide x 28” deep table space set forth as a design
multiple stations – drawing and quiz game – such that two
constraint. Additionally, our exhibit fit within the provided
students could use it at once but was not as open and easily
project bag during transport and thus could be easily
observable as we would have liked to have to encourage
transported by two people, one holding the bag and one
inclusivity. The game was open-ended in that users could
holding the trifold. One person could carry both, but it was
explore the technology examples in whatever order they
inconvenient, especially on public transport.
desired and ended the exhibit by creating their own design.

From a design evaluation standpoint, we had to achieve Thus, we had a strong case of incorporating four EDGE

interactivity and engagement, create inclusivity, and design principles, which was more than our goal of two.

incorporate multiple colors and unique features. Again,

Ultimately, we did fall short in some regards. Our design
starting with the simplest criteria, our exhibit incorporated
was somewhat overly complex, with not every student
approximately 14 colors, more than our objective of 7
understanding which buttons were technologies and which
different colors. From a unique feature standpoint, our
were nature categories – although it was delineated clearly
64
in these instructions on the trifold, this clarity was not
equally incorporated onto the main information source, the
screen. We were unable to incorporate a second language
option of Spanish to the exhibit due to time constraints and
thus the exhibit was only accessible to English speakers.
Finally, we got somewhat overambitious with our wiring
and had continual struggles with soldered pieces snapping
and requiring resoldering, including one ten minutes
before the NU Expo began.

Lastly, our user experience data suggests that the exhibit

was well received and informative. More than 80% of
students who approached the exhibit completed all sections
of it, which was greater than our goal of 80%. 80% of the
students rated the exhibit with a thumbs up as being a
learning experience, which exceeded our goal of 60%
thumbs up ratings. Finally, 68.75% of the drawings
demonstrated effective biomimicry application as
determined by our qualitative review, overshooting our
goal of 60%. All comments and ratings from peer and
faculty also pointed to our exhibit being a success as being
educational, enjoyable, and engaging. Full evaluation data
and our completed evaluation table from Milestone 5 can
be found in Appendix D.

65
 CONCLUSION expertise. For example, I spearheaded the physical
technical elements of our exhibit – wood frame
1.23.1 CONCLUSIONS AND RESTATEMENT OF construction and wiring/soldering – but was able to gain

RESULTS insight into programming logic from sitting next to Elle

and serving as moral support and a sounding board for
To summarize the discussion and analysis of results, this
debugging. I was also able to learn more about
exhibit successfully achieved all design requirements and
programming from helping Team 2 with some of their
constraints, and most of the design objectives, set out in
logic.
the team’s problem statement. It provided students with an
interactive and engaging learning experience about Throughout the course of this project, we found that
biomimicry that seemed to translate into tangible communication was the most important part of teamwork.
knowledge gains. Not only that, but it was able to While this may seem pretty obvious, it pays off to keep
accomplish this while coming in well under budget and everyone on the team posted about any and all design
was completed with time to spare, such that additional
decisions and completed work in order to avoid
features were added to the initial design – and then also
duplication of effort. We struggled with communication a
completed. few times towards the beginning of the project but refined
our approach and I felt as though we were all in sync with
The exhibit was successful in providing physical each other in a way that magnified all of our efforts by the
accessibility through its incorporation of Universal Design end of the project.
techniques and textual representations of all auditory
information. While the goal of bilingual materials was Finally, keeping a clear eye on objectives from beginning
never realized, our design incorporated multiple EDGE and end and using that to guide weekly and daily task
design requirements and seemed to be enjoyable and breakdown may have helped us achieve our goal of the
informative to users across a spectrum of ages, genders, Spanish slides and just made our work more purposeful
and cultural backgrounds. overall. Linking overarching goals with granular tasks can
be hard to do but we likely could have used our Gantt chart
1.23.2 CONCLUDING REMARKS better or started evaluation planning earlier to streamline
Over the course of this project, we often divided labor to a this process.
great extent, with each member taking lead on a specific
element of the exhibit. While this allowed us to complete
everything we had initially designed with some additional
features – except for Spanish slides and trifold information
– it often felt as if it detracted from our individual learning.
That said, just from our regular team meetings and
interactions with other teams, it felt like we had the
opportunity to learn about some of the other elements of
making these exhibits beyond our own narrow area of

66
 RECOMMENDATIONS decision design with all team members and make sure that
everyone knows, even if you think they already do. It is
To begin with, some of our problem definition and
better to overcommunicate than to under communicate.
objective setting from the beginning could have been
better informed. Although time constraints on the day of
the Museum of Science field trip prevented us from
staying longer and exploring exhibits, doing so could have
better informed our research and development of
educational interactive components. It could have also
given us a better idea of what inclusivity in design looked
like in an industry standard implementation, which may
have better guided us towards implementing inclusivity in
our own exhibit: incorporation of two EDGE design
features was a rather arbitrary choice, and a bilingual
option never ended up a high enough priority for us to
complete it. Had we been able to, it would have made the
exhibit more accessible and potentially even more
appealing to the students at Beachmont.

Technically, doing better research into RGB LED wiring

would have prevented us from burning out two of the
bulbs and saved us a couple of hours of rewiring,
resoldering, and troubleshooting the bulbs – all of which
resulted from our misunderstanding of the mono cathode
LEDs as mono anode LEDs. Additionally, using a
laminated wrap on the button covers rather than 3D
printing them would have saved us money and effort while
providing a neater aesthetic than the flaking paint. We
should have better tested painting the FDM printed parts
with acrylic paint, and it would have been very useful to
have had more experience with the laminator and/or vinyl
cutter prior to starting the project.

In terms of team dynamic, we had a very successful

dynamic for the most part, but communication could have
been improved in the beginning stages of the project and
resulted in saved hours and emotional energy from
frustration. It is important to always communicate any

67
 LESSONS LEARNED
1.25.1 CONTRIBUTIONS
Throughout the whole of this project, I took charge of
writing the memos, often writing most of it before sending
it to the rest of the team to gather feedback and flesh out
the appendices. Similarly, I spearheaded writing for the
group sections on the technical report and served as the
final quality control / copy editor. I also was the main
person maintaining the bill of materials, which made
sense, since I spearheaded the physical technical aspects of
the project beginning with Milestone 4 and ramping up for
Milestones 5 through 6.
Specifically, I created the final SOLIDWORKS CAD files,
designed and created the laptop support substructure,
designed and implemented the lock, wired and soldered
(and often resoldered) all of the final exhibit, laser cut all
of the wood for the frames, led the gluing and joining
process with assistance from other team members as
needed, and attached the hinges and handle.
Beginning towards the end of Milestone 5 and throughout
Milestone 6, I also took a lead with the physical aesthetics,
designing the paper wrap for the button frame and the lock.
After Matt laminated the paper, I then attached it to the
exhibit with hot glue. Matt took charge of adding the
labels, however. I also painted the drawing frame and, with
Matt in equal share, designed and printed the trifold.
Finally, I revised Matt and Elle’s original prompts into the
final versions we used during the Expo, broke down the
evaluation planning into more specific points together with
Matt in equal share, served as Project Manager for
Milestone 4, and manufactured the vinyl flower petal
topper for our stamp handle.
68
1.25.2 RESOURCES
I felt that we used our resources very effectively
throughout this project. Our group spent on $35.00 on this
project by repurposing materials from previous teams,
taking advantage of free materials from FYELIC and EXP,
and making specific design choices many times based on
what we had rather than what we wanted. Personally, I
paid for the plywood and acrylic paint that were our only
purchases – although cost sharing is easier in the days of
Venmo and Zelle – and was responsible for selecting and
sourcing many of our reused and free materials. I devoted
111.5 hours to this project. All of this has helped me
understand how results can be achieved even when
working from limited resources and starting with an
attitude of “What do we already have?” rather than “What
do we need?” Going forward, this will influence my
perspective on resource management by trying to
repurpose materials whenever possible (a rather good thing
for someone whose major is devoted to dealing with waste
in sustainable ways).
1.25.3 REFLECTIONS ON LEARNING
Some skills that I had some experience with but greatly
increased or refreshed during this project are soldering,
SOLIDWORKS, 3D printing, and laser cutting. I gained
certification with the 3D printer, laser cutter, and soldering
setup at EXP Makerspace due to my work on this project
and reduced my solder time dramatically (almost 50%
depending on the position of the targeted section).
Additionally, I learned new skills in designing with
Illustrator and printing the results on a plotter, in using
CirKit to create custom wire diagrams, and in technical
writing. All of these skills will be useful in my future
career and life in general going forwards. Of all of these, I
am most proud of learning how to use Illustrator.
1.25.4 REFLECTIONS ON WORKING IN A TEAM leadership style is laid back but no nonsense: once I knew I
could trust everyone, I was happy to delegate objectives
My biggest growth in teamwork during this project was
rather than tasks and let people decide how they wanted to
learning to trust other people and delegate effectively. In
get it done, as long as they got it done on time.
high school, it was often easier to just do large sections of
the group project myself because people couldn’t be relied
As a team, we overcame adversity well throughout this
on to complete their work either on time or to satisfactory
project. This was because everyone was good at respectful
standards.
disagreement and compromise and willing to put in time
and energy into getting things done right. Consistent
This project was completely different in that there was so
technical and spelling issues with wiring, slides, and code
much work to be done that one person could not do it all
plagued us towards the end, but all four of us were able to
and with a lot of things (button covers, Canva slides,
come together, put our heads down, and get it done
MATLAB code) I had practically no input and had to trust
successfully. Over the course of the project, whenever we
that my teammates would get it done. I was pleasantly
disagreed about the direction of the project, we were able
surprised every week when everything got done either as
to have respectful conversations where everyone could
good as or better than I could have done it. I learned that
share their input, and everyone agreed on a new direction
each of us had strengths and that we could play to them to
to go in that combined the best parts of competing ideas.
be most efficient and effective in completing project work.
While I still have some control freak tendencies (especially
My biggest asset to this project was my technical
with memos) and don’t always delegate like I should, I
background with woodworking and wiring. I was able to
have improved in these areas a lot since the beginning of
take on my assigned project “system” – the physical
the semester.
technical elements – successfully and efficiently because I
already had that skillset. With that said, I do think that had
My ability to be managed is very high, I would say, as
we had more time, it would have been nice to have
long as I am given some room to make decisions and have
everyone involved with all the systems more to maximize
flexibility. I’m a good follower and can work hard towards
individual learning – I’m not sure anyone but Elle got a
an objective that I’m given, but I don’t like being told
whole lot of coding knowledge from this project, for
exactly what to do and prefer having the freedom to
example.
accomplish tasks in the way that I would like, as long as I
comply with the directive.
Additionally, adding Spanish translations would have been
nice to do. That said, I don’t have any regrets for this
On the other side, as a manager, I like to be in close
project. I think we did a good job with it within time and
communication with the team but not breathing down their
material constraints, and I am proud of our final exhibit.
necks – because I know that I hate that feeling. My

69
MATT SZELA

DISCUSSION this category since it is very subjective. However, we

believe that the drawing station of our exhibit is a unique
Overall, I believe that the design can be considered
element. No other exhibits involved the use of drawing
successful, because it met most of the requirements set out
with pencil and paper.
in the problem statement and evaluation plan.

To determine whether our exhibit was aesthetically

The first requirement of our problem statement and our
pleasing, one of the elements that we looked at was color.
evaluation plan was that we wanted the students to be
We aimed to have seven different colors on the exhibit,
engaged. To measure engagement, we decided that 80% of
and our exhibit had a dozen. Additionally, although it was
students must start and finish the exhibit. Based on our
not lined out in the evaluation plan, all our graphics were
data from Beachmont, eighteen students started and
created using Adobe Illustrator to ensure that our graphics
finished the exhibit, while only two did not. This means
were crisp and clean.
that 90% of students completed the exhibit in its entirety.
To measure users’ sense of accomplishment, we decided
In terms of physical requirements, our exhibit was less
that we wanted to see over 60% of ratings be “thumbs up.”
than 28” by 36”, which was the goal set out in the
At Beachmont, we received eight “thumbs up” and two
evaluation plan. Additionally, it could fit in the transport
“thumbs down,” setting this percentage at 80%, which
bag and could be transported by two people. However,
meets the threshold.
there was still one limitation in this category. The goal was
to transport the exhibit without sustaining any damage.
Another requirement set out by our problem statement is
However, at the Beachmont exposition, one of the buttons
that we wanted the exhibit to teach students about
stopped working due to damage to the exhibit.
biomimicry. To measure this, we wanted 60% of the
Additionally, the laptop holder on the exhibit broke in
drawings to demonstrate biomimicry principles. While we
transit. Despite this, the performance of the museum
didn’t get that many drawings in total (due to students
exhibit was not impacted as we were able to fix it.
working together on them), we were still able to meet this
threshold. Each team member rated the drawings on a
However, one aspect of our evaluation plan that our team
scale of 1 to 2 based on how well they related to
disagreed on was the incorporation of EDGE design. Our
biomimicry. Contrary to my teammates, I gave the
goal was to include at least two aspects of EDGE design.
drawings generous ratings because I believed that almost
Some members of my team believed that the following
all of them were accurate representations of biomimicry.
EDGE design requirements were met: playful and
whimsical design, multiple stations, open-ended, and
In our problem statement, we determined that we wanted
visitors can watch and preview. First, I do not believe that
our exhibit to be both unique and aesthetically pleasing. To
our design was playful. While it was aesthetically pleasing
measure the uniqueness of our exhibit, we determined that
because of the neatness of our design, the colors were
we wanted our exhibit to have at least one unique element.
mostly dark and dim. Additionally, our cutouts for
It was difficult to create a quantitative measurement for
70
characters were too small, so the exhibit cannot be
considered “whimsical.” Furthermore, I do not believe that
the exhibit was sizeable enough for people to come over
and watch. The exhibit was smaller compared to others,
and it was difficult to see the screen over someone else’s
shoulder. However, I still believe that the exhibit met the
requirements of being open-ended and containing multiple
stations. The exhibit met some aspects of EDGE design,
but it overall could have been better by incorporating more
aspects.

In terms of Universal Design, the only requirement that we

did not meet was providing the user with an English and
Spanish option. This requirement was not met because we
simply did not have enough time. However, the exhibit
was able to work for students of all physical abilities. It
was low enough to the ground where someone of any
height could reach it. Additionally, it contained audio that
read the text for you in case students have trouble reading.

Ultimately, our design can be considered successful. We

met most requirements set forth in our problem statement
and evaluation plan.

71
 CONCLUSION no clearly female character displayed for young girls to
see. However, one accomplishment toward EDGE design
After evaluating this exhibit, it can be clearly seen that our
was the inclusion of both male and female AI voices.
design met most of the requirements laid out in the
problem statement. The first requirement that this design
Ultimately, the exhibit met most requirements set out in
met was the physical constraints of the project. The
the problem statement. Anything that was not met was due
prototype fit within the required dimensions and could be
to lack of time.
easily transported by two people without sustaining
damage. Additionally, the project was completed under the
budget of $100.

In terms of student engagement, most of our ratings on the

exhibit were “thumbs up.” Also, almost all our users
completed the exhibit in its entirety and did not stop
halfway through.

Furthermore, the design met all the electronics/interactive

design elements. We successfully incorporated two
elements of SparkFun, buttons and lights, and our exhibit
contained multiple 3D printed and laser cut elements.
Additionally, the exhibit contained several interactive
elements for the user, including button-pressing, drawing,
and audio outputs.

However, there was one portion of our problem statement

that our design came short of, and that was creating an
inclusive design. For example, we failed to make our
exhibit in multiple languages. This occurred because it was
simply outside of our scope of time. Therefore, for future
projects, the amount of time you must complete everything
should be considered when writing the problem statement.

Additionally, in my opinion, we failed to incorporate

enough elements of EDGE design. First off, our exhibit
was all green and blue, which are typically more
“masculine” colors. Moreover, our exhibit did not display
any female characters. All of our characters were plants
and animals and did not have a gender, but there was still

72
 RECOMMENDATIONS than we intended, and more people used Spanish as their
primary means of communication than we thought. Had
Whenever you are constructing something, it is best to
we known this beforehand, we would’ve found time to
know how the materials you are working with interact with
create text in Spanish. Therefore, it is important to know
one another. For example, our graphics on the exhibit were
your audience and their needs.
coated with lamination paper. When trying to glue these
graphics to the side of the exhibit, we first used mod
My final recommendation is to label everything clearly
podge. However, the lamination material did not respond
and have straightforward directions for everything.
well to this. Therefore, instead, we had to use hot glue
Sometimes, when working on a project, we become biased.
because it melted the laminated materials and held
We develop a profound understanding of the material and
everything together much stronger.
what we are working on, so we begin to assume that other
people do as well. On our exhibit, we neglected to label
Another instance of this occurred with painting our 3D
some of our buttons because we thought that it was
button covers. We tried to paint our covers with acrylic
straightforward what they represented. However, almost
paint, but it required multiple coats and the paint kept
all our users had an issue with knowing which buttons to
chipping off. Had we known this beforehand, we could
press. Therefore, even if something appears obvious, you
have covered the buttons in vinyl or even used a marker to
need to add definitions or labels to it because there will
color them in.
likely be someone that does not understand.

Based on these two examples, my recommendation is to

Overall, for a final exhibit design, Spanish text should be
have a backup plan for everything in case something does
included to aid bilingual users with understanding the
not work out. For the button covers, we did not have
material. Additionally, labels should be added to every
another plan, so we wasted hours trying to paint these
button on the exhibit to avoid confusion. The directions for
buttons to perfection. In a work setting, this lost time will
the exhibit should be more concise so the users have an
equate to lost money, so it is important to seek alternatives
easier time understanding them.
when something fails.

Another recommendation is to know your audience. One

of the goals we had for the exhibit was to create text in
English and Spanish. In the end, we didn’t have enough
time to create text in Spanish, but we figured that this
wouldn’t be that big of a deal. We believed that only a
handful of our users would be able to speak Spanish, and
of these kids, we assumed they would all be able to
understand English well. However, at the exposition, we
had a group of four children come up to our exhibit, all
speaking in Spanish to each other throughout the duration
of the exhibit. Clearly, there were more Spanish speakers

73
 LESSONS LEARNED

1.29.1 CONTRIBUTIONS
During the construction of our final design, I spent a great
deal of time creating the Canva slides that would present
educational information. In total, there were 75 Canva
slides for this project. As discussed previously in this
report (see 1.12.1 Methodology), the users could pick
Figure 68. Example correct answer slide
between 16 different examples of biomimicry to learn
about. Each example had one slide for information (Figure
66), one question slide (Figure 67), a slide explaining why
an answer was correct (Figure 68), and a slide explaining
why an answer was incorrect (Figure 69).

Figure 69. Example incorrect answer slide

When first creating the slides, my teammate and I wanted

to focus on getting the information down before we started

Figure 66. Example information slide
working on graphics. For milestone 5, the slides contained
a simple textbox and a sold colored background. However,
for milestone 6, I decided to recreate the aesthetics of the
Canva slides so they would look more appealing to our
users. For example, I reworked what images were shown
on each slide, and I chose different characters to be
featured on each of the slides as well. Initially, our text
was not big enough for our users to read, so I oversaw
editing this as well.

In addition to creating the Canva slides, I also helped

Figure 67. Example question slide
create the aesthetics of the exhibit. For example, I worked
with a teammate to design and print the paper covers that
would go over the laser cut wood of the exhibit. I
laminated all the pieces in FYELIC and helped attach

74
them. Additionally, I printed out labels for each of the
buttons on the exhibit.
Furthermore, to help with aesthetics I took part in painting
the 3D printed button covers. This task took multiple
attempts because the paint did not stick to the 3D print
material very well and it required multiple coats. The 3D
printed button covers with labels are shown in Figure 70.
Figure 70. Painted 3D printed button covers
For milestone 6 and for the exposition that week, I assisted
my team with creating the trifold. The trifold contains
information on the definition of biomimicry, how it applies
to the engineering design process, and the directions for
the exhibit. I added all the plan/animal characters to the
trifold as well to help appeal to our users (Figure 71).
Figure 71. Picture of trifold design
75
In terms of collaborative contributions, I attended every
team meeting and every mentor meeting that we had. I
assisted my teammates with writing the memos for each
milestone and offering my input when necessary.
1.29.2 RESOURCES
Regarding our budget, my group only spent $35.00
(Appendix I). This was well under the required amount of
$100. The only two items that the group had to purchase
were acrylic paint and plywood. Most of the materials used
were either borrowed from previous projects or borrowed
from FYELIC. Personally, I did not need to acquire
anything for this project since most of the items that were
used were already property of the school.
In terms of time spent on this project, I devoted 81.5 hours
of work (Appendix J). A significant portion of my work
was spent on aesthetics, creating the Canva slides, and
working on the team memos. Almost half of my hours
were spent on milestone 5 and milestone 6 alone, where
the actual construction of the museum exhibit took place.
In terms of resource management, this project has taught
me that recycling old materials and taking advantage of
what is offered can save a significant amount of time and
money. Out of the entire class, we were one of only groups
to borrow buttons used from previous projects, while
everyone else purchased their own. Although the buttons
weren’t that big and visually appealing, we were still able
to make them our own by putting 3D printed covers on
them. Even though a product or a solution might not be
exactly what we are looking for, it might be worth using it
if it can save money. Another issue that our team avoided
was having to wait for our online orders to ship. Several
teams were delayed by this, but borrowing items helped
our team avoid this problem.
1.29.3 REFLECTIONS ON LEARNING
At the beginning of this course, I had almost no knowledge
of code and had had no experience with any of the
software that we used in class. Even though the start of the
semester was challenging, the workload became easier as
time went on and I gradually watched my skills improve.
The first thing that I learned with this project was how to
create graphics on Canva. Before this project, I had no
experience with this software. However, I still put in most
of the work for creating the slides for the project. At first, I
created an entire slideshow with my teammates, but
compared to other groups, our graphics did not stand out.
Realizing this, I decided to redesign our entire slideshow
from scratch to improve our graphics. Having the
opportunity to create the Canva slides gave my creative
abilities the chance to improve. I’m proud of this new
ability because I will be able to create graphic design in the
future more efficiently.
Another skill that I learned from this project was how to
properly conduct research. Before coming to college, I had
never written a formal research paper, so I was unaware of
how to properly cite sources. However, I was able to
quickly adapt to this new form of writing. I believe that
this skill will serve me well in my career because I’m
certain that I will have to conduct a significant amount of
research. I am proud of this ability because it proved to me
that I am capable of learning new things quickly.
While creating the proof of concepts, I was able to
improve my abilities with Arduino Code. Although we had
gone over how to use SparkFun in class, working on the
proof of concepts significantly improved my abilities. I am
proud of having learned this skill because SparkFun was a
challenge for our entire class, and I proved to myself that I
was able to persevere.
76
The final skill that I learned was how to 3D print.
Although it didn’t take long to learn, I believe that this
skill will be important for my career. If I have to design
something on SolidWorks in the future and print it, I will
know the logistics of how it works. For example, I learned
that when printing large objects, the 3D printer often prints
scaffolding around the object that you will have to snap
off. Also, I learned that 3D printers have a hard time with
printing small details, which will be useful to know when
designing things for the future.
1.29.4 REFLECTIONS ON WORKING IN A TEAM
Before this semester, I had never worked as a team in a
long-term project before. While the first few milestones of
this project proved challenging, I was able to quickly adapt
to my teammate’s working styles. After completing this
project, realized that the biggest challenge that I had
working as a team was meeting everyone’s expectations.
In high school students generally didn’t care about group
work and did not put care or effort into their assignments.
However, each member of my team for this project was the
Valedictorian of their high school class. Therefore, we all
came into this class with high expectations from ourselves
and others. Even though there were disagreements at
times, I put my best foot forward when working on our
project to meet the high expectations set by my group
members.
One way that my teamworking skills have improved this
semester was through efficiency. During high school, I
spent a lot of time off tasks while working on group
projects. However, for this project, we only had one week
to complete each milestone, so there was not ever time to
spare. Generally, our group members were extremely busy,
and we struggled to find time to meet. This meant that at
our group meetings, we had to stay on task with what little
time we had. Therefore, at these meetings, I learned how to
work with more efficiency. I learned how to delegate tasks,
make quick and informed decisions, and clear my
environment of distractions.
Another way that my team working skills have improved
was through keeping an open mind to others. This project
was nothing like I have ever done before, so it was
challenging to come up with ideas and have an opinion on
certain topics sometimes. Therefore, whenever my
teammates gave input, I always considered it carefully and
respectfully. In high school, the projects we completed
were less open-ended and didn’t leave room for much
discussion or creativity. However, due to the high volume
of divergent thinking in this project, I learned how to give
more value to my teammates’ opinions.
In terms of my leadership style, I believe that I am very
observant. I do not believe that one team member should
take charge of the team for the entire project. While
working in a group, I prefer to analyze everyone’s
strengths and move forward from there. For example, if we
are completing a task that is outside my area of expertise, I
will step back and allow someone else with more
experience to take charge. When someone gives clear
directions that are straightforward that the team agrees
upon, I have no problem following orders. However, if we
complete a task that I believe I could provide insight on, I
will step up and take charge to lead my team. I believe that
leadership is a fluid term. I don’t think it is possible for
someone to be a leader 100% of the time, because
everyone has their own weaknesses and must ask for help
from others. It’s important to acknowledge that some
people can perform certain tasks and delegate better than
others, and therefore would be better leaders in their
respective area of expertise.
Overall, our biggest struggle on the team was deciding
when to make changes to something that had already been
completed. During this project, there were numerous times
where our intentions were not reflected in the design, and
we had to make changes. For example, we had issues with
the cardboard mock-up and its shape. Certain team
members believed that the design should be recreated,
while others did not. In the end, we created a system. If
someone believed something should be changed, then they
would oversee making the change while someone else
completed a different task. The people that did not want to
make changes would not have to, and they would just work
on different tasks to make the workload equitable.
If I could go back to the beginning of the semester, one
thing I would do is use my time wisely. I didn’t really
understand how important time was in this class until
midway through the second project. Our group meetings
were always on Tuesday, while often left a time crunch
before the milestone was due. Overall, I would have used
time more efficiently to reduce stress on myself and my
group members.

77
 REFERENCES

[1] M. J. Menne, C. N. Williams, B. E. Gleason, J. J. Rennie, and J. H. Lawrimore,

“The Global Historical Climatology Network Monthly Temperature Dataset,
Version 4,” J. Clim., vol. 31, no. 24, pp. 9835–9854, 2018, doi:
https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-18-0094.1.

[2] “Causes of climate change - European Commission.” Accessed: Dec. 11, 2023.
[Online]. Available: https://climate.ec.europa.eu/climate-change/causes-climate-
change_en

[3] U. Nations, “Sustainability,” United Nations. Accessed: Dec. 11, 2023. [Online].
Available: https://www.un.org/en/academic-impact/sustainability

[4] “What Is Biomimicry?,” Biomimicry Institute. Accessed: Dec. 11, 2023. [Online].
Available: https://biomimicry.org/what-is-biomimicry/

[5] “Nature-inspired Solutions from the Biomimicry Institute,” Biomimicry Institute.

Accessed: Dec. 11, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://biomimicry.org/solutions/

[6] B. D. Jee and F. K. Anggoro, “Designing Exhibits to Support Relational Learning in

a Science Museum,” Front. Psychol., vol. 12, 2021, [Online]. Available:
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.636030

[7] “Smithsonian Guidelines for Accessible Exhibition Design | WBDG - Whole

Building Design Guide.” Accessed: Dec. 11, 2023. [Online]. Available:
https://wbdg.org/ffc/si/smithsonian-criteria/accessible-exhibition-design

[8] Q. Li, “Effects of different types of digital exhibits on children’s experiences in

science museums,” Des. J., vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 126–135, Jan. 2022, doi:
10.1080/14606925.2021.2015162.

[9] “Engineering Design Workshop, Powered by MathWorks | Museum of Science,

Boston.” Accessed: Dec. 11, 2023. [Online]. Available:
https://www.mos.org/explore/exhibits/explore/exhibits/engineering-design-
workshop

[10] “EDGE: Exhibit Designs for Girls’ Engagement | Exploratorium.” Accessed: Dec.
11, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.exploratorium.edu/education/research-
evaluation/edge

[11] EcoCation, “20 Outstanding Examples of Biomimicry (Updated 2024),” EcoCation.

Accessed: Dec. 11, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://ecocation.org/examples-of-
biomimicry/
78
[12] B. D. Editors, “Biomimicry - Definition and Examples of Biomimetics,” Biology
Dictionary. Accessed: Dec. 11, 2023. [Online]. Available:
https://biologydictionary.net/biomimicry/

[13] “Exploring the Impact of Color on Classrooms: Color Experts Perspective  ”
Accessed: Dec. 11, 2023. [Online]. Available:
https://communities.ppg.com/news/Exploring-the-Impact-of-Color-on-Classrooms-
A-Q-A

[14] N. Bubaris, “Sound in museums – museums in sound,” Mus. Manag. Curatorship,

vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 391–402, Aug. 2014, doi: 10.1080/09647775.2014.934049.

[15] J. E. Beliveau, “Audio Elements: Understanding Current Uses of Sound in Museum

Exhibits,” Thesis, 2015. Accessed: Dec. 11, 2023. [Online]. Available:
https://digital.lib.washington.edu:443/researchworks/handle/1773/33415

[16] M. C. Museum, “Madison Children’s Museum,” Madison Children’s Museum.

Accessed: Dec. 11, 2023. [Online]. Available: http://madisonchildrensmuseum.org

[17] “What is Universal Design?,” The UD Project. Accessed: Dec. 11, 2023. [Online].
Available: https://universaldesign.org/definition

[18] “Bloom’s Taxonomy,” Vanderbilt University. Accessed: Dec. 11, 2023. [Online].
Available: https://cft.vanderbilt.edu/guides-sub-pages/blooms-taxonomy/

[19] M. F. Achiam, “A Content-oriented Model for Science Exhibit Engineering,” Int. J.

Sci. Educ. Part B, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 214–232, Nov. 2013, doi:
10.1080/21548455.2012.698445.

[20] Y. Bamberger and T. Tal, “Learning in a personal context: Levels of choice in a free
choice learning environment in science and natural history museums,” Sci. Educ.,
vol. 91, no. 1, pp. 75–95, Jan. 2007, doi: 10.1002/sce.20174.

[21] Xin Xin et al., “Exploring Interaction Qualities from Teenagers’ Studying Behavior
for Learning Feature in Museum Exhibit,” in 3rd International Conference on
Human Interaction and Emerging Technologies: Future Applications (IHIET 2020),
27-29 Aug. 2020, in Human Interaction, Emerging Technologies and Future
Applications III. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Human
Interaction and Emerging Technologies: Future Applications (IHIET 2020).
Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing (AISC 1253). Cham, Switzerland:
Springer International Publishing, 2021, pp. 91–6. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-55307-
4_14.

[22] N. Shaby, O. B.-Z. Assaraf, and T. Tal, “The Particular Aspects of Science Museum
Exhibits That Encourage Students’ Engagement,” J. Sci. Educ. Technol., vol. 26, no.
3, pp. 253–268, Jun. 2017, doi: 10.1007/s10956-016-9676-7.
79
[23] “Project Vaccine: Our Best Defense | Museum of Science, Boston.” Accessed: Oct.
17, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.mos.org/exhibits/exhibits/project-
vaccine-exhibit

[24] H. Rante, H. Schelhowe, and M. Lund, “A Preliminary Design of BatiKids: A

Game-Based Learning to Support Children Learning the Process of Producing
Traditional Batik in Museum Context,” Int. J. Inf. Educ. Technol., vol. 6, pp. 580–
583, Jan. 2016, doi: 10.7763/IJIET.2016.V6.755.

[25] R. S. Vishkaie, T. Seyed, C. T. Emmons, and D. vom Lehn, “Understanding mixed

reality interactions in a children’s museum exhibition,” Educ. Media Int., vol. 59,
pp. 1–23, 2022.

[26] U. C. Bureau, “The Chance That Two People Chosen at Random Are of Different
Race or Ethnicity Groups Has Increased Since 2010,” Census.gov. Accessed: Dec.
11, 2023. [Online]. Available:
https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2021/08/2020-united-states-population-
more-racially-ethnically-diverse-than-2010.html

80
AUTHOR BIOGRAPHIES
Elle Arcand was born in
Warwick, Rhode Island
in 2004. She graduated
from La Salle Academy
in Providence as
Valedictorian in 2022,
receiving awards for
excellence in math,
science, English, and
religion. She is currently pursuing a B.S. in
Bioengineering and Biochemistry from
Northeastern University as a part of its
Honors Program.
During high school, she played multiple
sports–lacrosse and field hockey, and
ultimately was recognized as the female
student-scholar athlete of her graduating
class. Additionally, she was fundamental in
the evolution of a library guide about various
types of poverty for her institution.
Moreover, she was a tour guide, student
council representative and a member of
calculus league. She also received a First
Grant at the Rhode Island Science and
Engineering Fair for creating a mail detector
and participated in an internship with
Johnson Controls, where she helped
engineers design a remote coupling cycle
tester.
At Northeastern, she is a member of the club
field hockey team, an events coordinator for
the Honors Alumni Mentoring Network, a
member of the Executive Leadership Team
for Relay for Life and pen-pal for the Tele-
Health Initiative. She is also a member of
Professor Vasiliki Lykourinou’s mPIRE lab
where she is studying the role of
metallopeptides in Alzheimer’s Disease.
81
Emilie A. Cocke was
born in Portland, OR
in 2005. Growing up
she found a passion for
science, math, and
dance. She graduated
in 2023 from St.
Mary’s Academy, a
Catholic, private, all-
girls high school
located in Portland. Today she is pursuing a
B.S. in chemical engineering and a minor in
computer science from Northeastern
University in Boston, MA.
She spent her high school years immersing
herself in extracurriculars that aligned with
her passions. She was a mentor, mentor
captain, and then director for TIES
(Teaching, Integrating, Exploring, Science) a
mentorship program that pairs fifth grade
students with high school students and hosts
science events. She was a member of a
student-run non-profit, an avid volunteer for
several organizations, and an ambassador for
her school. She also performed research at
Portland State University for Dr. Theresa
McCormick’s startup company by testing the
rates of the photooxidation of 1,4-
Dimethynaphthalane in several different
solvents. This informed the design of a new
portable oxygen device. Finally, she
graduated as a student body officer, the
Valedictorian of her high school class, with
an Achievement of Excellence in Computer
Science, and several honors.
Ms. Cocke is involved in the American
Institute of Chemical Engineers and NU
Dance Company at Northeastern University.
 Matthew N. Szela was
born in Worcester,
Massachusetts, in 2004.
He lived in Oxford,
Massachusetts his entire
life and graduated from
Oxford High School in
2023. He is currently
pursuing a B.S. in Chemical Engineering as
well as a minor in Spanish at Northeastern
University in Boston, MA.
During high school, Matt participated in
student council, which was responsible for a
lot of volunteering around the community.
He served on a regional student council board
for Central MA where he organized
conferences for dozens of schools twice a
year. Additionally, he participated in track
and field as well as cross country each year.
With a school size of only 350 students, he
describes Oxford as a tight-knit community.
He graduated Valedictorian of his class with
a passion for learning. He hopes to live in
Oxford for the rest of his life because he
believes that his town is truly a diamond in
the rough.
82
Caleb G. Hagner was born
in Manchester, NH in 2004.
He graduated from
Goffstown High School in
2022 as Valedictorian of his
class, was an AmeriCorps
member and was selected
for the Presidential Gold Award and
Congressional Bronze Medal in 2023, and is
currently pursuing a B.S. in Chemical and
Environmental Engineering at Northeastern
University in Boston, MA.
He is a lab assistant for two research projects
under the mentorship of Professor Annalisa
Onnis-Hayden, one focusing on PFOA
phytoremediation and the other on anaerobic
digestion.
Mr. Hagner is a standing member of the
American Society of Civil Engineers, New
England Water and Environment
Association, and American Institute of
Chemical Engineers. He is also an active
member of Engineers Without Borders, the
Alliance of Civically Engaged Student, and
Solar Decathlon at Northeastern University.
APPENDICES

APPENDIX A – TEAM CONTRACT

Cornerstone Team 3 (MWH) Team Contract (D-2)

Elle Arcand, Emilie Cocke, Caleb Hagner, Matthew Szela | September 11, 2023
Contact Information

Name Email Phone Number

Elle Arcand arcand.e@northeastern.edu (401) 234-3380
Caleb Hagner hagner.c@northeastern.edu (603) 487-0432
Matt Szela szela.m@northeastern.edu (774) 272-2826
Emilie Cocke cocke.em@northeastern.edu (503)-539-0696
Table 1. Team Contact Information

Respect

Work will be considered late when a group member comes to a meeting without having completed
their defined responsibilities. To ensure that submissions are organized, work should be turned in to the
project manager 36 hours before an assignment will be due on Canvas. Being punctual to a meeting will
mean arriving at the meeting location ± five minutes of the designated start time. The project manager will
assume a leadership position for the meeting, including assigning work for the milestone and having
members report on progress. If someone violates group expectations for respect, the violation will be
acknowledged in front of the group so that the violator can take responsibility for their actions and plan to
change their behavior. If respect violations become egregious or repetitive, the situation will be elevated to
the mentor, TA, or professor.

Commitment

All group members are expected to be available between 9 a.m. and 9 p.m. on weekdays,
excluding times which they have marked busy on the group’s Outlook calendar. The team will plan to
regularly meet on Tuesdays from 8:15-9:15 PM and Fridays from 5:30 PM to 6:30 PM. However,
exceptions may be made if other group members are given sufficient prior notice–at least 3 days–of the
need to change the meeting time for a particular week. Outside of meetings and class, group members are
expected to answer questions from other members within 24 hours of the question being sent or prior to the
next class or group meeting, whichever is earlier.
The expectation of quality is that members are giving their best effort and doing what they can
within their ability. This definition of quality also includes members asking for help if they feel unsure
about their work or need assistance—help could from another group member, professor, mentor, TA or
FYELIC red vest. Either way, group members should have the amount of work completed that they agreed
to complete at the last meeting. The project manager for each milestone will be primarily responsible for
measuring the quality of completed work. If it is felt that a group member is consistently submitting low-

83
quality work, the group will talk about how to avoid this issue going forward. In the event that this behavior
persists after a group meeting, the situation will be elevated to the mentor, TA, or professor.

Transparency

In the decision-making process, the team will first begin by having brainstorming sessions during
which members may suggest any ideas, and each idea will be valued and built on with the “Yes, and”
method. Following the brainstorm, all ideas will be considered as group ideas and no longer any
individual’s idea. The group will then decide which idea to proceed with by discussing the benefits and
drawbacks of each idea. During this process, combining or compromising more than one idea will be
performed as necessary until all group members feel satisfied with the decision.
All information related to the project will be disseminated through official channels (email, text,
Microsoft Teams). If there happens to be an informal meeting between two or more members when at least
one member is not there, the members meeting informally should share what they discussed with the rest of
the team as soon as possible. If a member does feel excluded, it is their responsibility to express their
concern with the rest of the group. For such a problem to be fixed, it must be voiced in the first place. Once
a group member shares such a problem, the entire team will be responsible for discussing how the issue can
be addressed moving forward to create a more inclusive environment.

Communication

The group will use text messaging as their primary method of communication. If a member of the
group is running late, feeling sick, or is unable to complete their responsibilities, that member should let the
rest of the group know as soon as possible so plans may be adjusted. To ensure everyone’s voice is heard,
group members should practice active listening and kind communication during meetings. When conflict
arises, group members should work to find a fair compromise that respects both points of view. If a
disagreement escalates, the group will talk to the professor about their concerns. At the end of the last
meeting of the week, the project manager will facilitate a group reflection where members share a high
point and low point of the week.

Justice

Equitable contribution will be defined as group members spending a similar amount of time,
energy, and effort each week. The group recognizes that each members brings a unique skill set to the team
and may be stronger in some areas but weaker in others. This is expected to be taken into account during
the assignment of work each week. The group also recognizes that individual bandwidth can vary from
week to week due to life (getting sick, family business, etc.). They will also take this into account when
dividing work.
The group will work to avoid conflict by being transparent, having open communication, and
assuming good intent. However, the group recognizes that conflict will likely occur at some point and that
it is more important to effectively work through conflict than to try to avoid it completely and not be
prepared to handle it. As such, group members are expected to express issues early so that they can be
addressed before they contribute to larger issues. If a member has an issue, they should address it at the
lowest level—if it only involves one other member, try to work it out with that member before escalating to
the group. If any conflict ever escalates to where the group believes they need additional support to
navigate conflict resolution, they will escalate to the mentor, TA, or professor.

84
 If someone stops contributing, the other group members will prioritize completing work for a
milestone deadline before circling back with the non-contributor to address their behavior. They will then
work to create a plan of action with the non-contributor to try to prevent the same behavior in the future. If
this becomes a pattern of behavior or resolution within the group fails to fix the issue, the situation will be
elevated to the mentor, TA, or professor.

Team Goals

• Team wide goals

o Within the semester and by the appropriate deadline, create a final project that we feel
proud of, that at least seven out of ten child testers rate positively, and that earns an A.
Since we are all going into engineering disciplines, learning how to use engineering
design principles effectively now is important to our future success.
o Whenever conflict arises, handle the issue as soon as possible and within 48 hours.
Handling conflict appropriately will make our work better and prepare us to work as
members of teams throughout college and in engineering firms.
o Have out of class work equitably divided among the team by the end of the day on which
the work is first assigned. Being able to manage projects and tasks is a skill that is
essential for life and especially for engineers.
o Once a week for the rest of the semester, complete a reflection or team bonding exercise
for at least ten minutes at one of the twice weekly meetings. This will cultivate a sense of
belonging and team pride and ultimately improve the work that we complete as a team.
• Individual goals: Caleb
o Be fully engaged with the kids at both service-learning times with the STEAM club and
volunteer for a third service-learning time if possible. After each service learning, take
time to think about how the kids approached the activity for the day and how that can
inform design. Learning how to design for an audience that is different from myself is
important for engineers.
o Take at least five to ten minutes before writing any code for any MATLAB and C++
assignment to methodically plan and write pseudocode to inform the code. I tend to like
to hit the ground running, but making a good plan will help with the development of
more complex programs and systems, whether they are software-based or not.
• Individual goals: Emilie
o Arrive on time to every meeting this semester. Being punctual will help foster a sense of
fidelity to the group and make me more invested.
o By the end of the semester, feel comfortable performing all of the actions laid out in the
Basics of AutoCAD and Basics of SOLIDWORKS textbook sections on TopHat.
Knowing how to use engineering graphics software is important to being a good designer.
• Individual goals: Matt
o By the end of the semester, feel comfortable performing all of the actions laid out in the
Programming for Engineering textbook on TopHat. Also, earn a passing grade on all ML
and CP assignments. With little background in programming, it’s important to learn more
about it.
o Throughout the semester, complete all work assigned for team projects on time and know
when to ask for help or offload work. Learning how to manage work as a part of a team is
important for my future.
• Individual goals: Elle

85
 o By the end of the semester, a solid understanding of graphics and/or programming
languages pertinent to my major, such as MATLAB and SOLIDWORKS. A solid
understanding is defined as feeling comfortable performing the basic functions identified
in the relevant textbook section on TopHat. This will help me succeed in my major.
o Prior to the day of each presentation for Cornerstone, rehearse it at least three times and
get good grades on the presentation assignment(s). Being able to present effectively is a
good skill for an engineer.

Team Roles

Milestone Project Manager

Milestone 1 (P2-M1) Emilie Cocke
Milestone 2 (P2-M2) Matthew Szela
Milestone 3 (P2-M3) Elle Arcand
Milestone 4 (P2-M4) Caleb Hagner
Milestone 5 (P2-M5) Emilie Cocke
Table 2. Milestone Project Manager Assignments*
*The rubric in the PDF for D-2 states 4 milestones but there appear to be 5 milestones for project 2 per the
syllabus. Regardless of the exact number of milestones, the order of project manager will rotate through
the team per the table above.
.

Team Calendar

• Note: No events were added to the calendar on weekends as the team expressed a general
preference to only meet during the week and leave weekends for recharge.
• Note: Milestone due dates show up as small purple boxes without visible text due to the number of
availability events in the calendar.

86
Figure 1. Calendar Week of 9/10-9/16

Figure 2. Calendar Week of 9/17-9/23

87
Figure 3. Calendar Week of 9/24-9/30

Figure 4. Calendar Week of 10/1-10/7

88
Figure 5. Week of 10/8-10/14

Figure 6. Week of 10/15-10/21

89
Figure 7. Week of 10/22-10/28

Figure 8. Week of 10/29-11/4

90
Figure 9. Week of 11/5-11/11

Figure 10. Week of 11/12-11/18

91
Figure 11. Week of 11/19-11/25

Figure 12. Week of 11/26-12/2

92
Figure 13. Week of 12/3-12/9

Figure 14. Week of 12/10-12/16

Signatures

93
Emilie Cocke

Matthew Szela

Caleb Hagner

Elle Arcand

94
APPENDIX B - DECISION ANALYSIS
Musts Design 1 Design 2 Design 3 Design 4
Educational about biomimicry GO GO GO GO
Cannot spend more than $100 GO GO GO GO
Can be transported easily GO GO GO GO
Design constraints GO GO GO GO
Handle regulation interaction by students GO GO GO GO
Must contain one 3D printed or laser cut part GO GO GO GO
Must include two interactive elements for the user GO GO GO GO
Must include two components from Sparkfun GO GO GO GO
Wants Weights Score Weighted Score Weighted Score Weighted Score Weighted
Exhibit itself be sustainable 4 2 8 3 12 1 4 3 12
Aesthetically pleasing 8 4 32 4 32 2 16 5 40
Way to measure how fun the exhibit is 8 3.5 28 1 8 1 8 5 40
Uniqueness 5 3.5 17.5 3 15 2 10 4 20
Easy to build and transport 6 2.5 15 3 18 4 24 2 12
Game like aspect 8 2 16 4 32 5 40 3 8
Total Score 116.5 117 102 132

The wants and needs for the KTDA were determined in collaboration with our mentor during a mentor
meeting. The needs were primarily guided by client constraints and objectives, while the wants were team
objectives or features that research suggested would help the exhibit educate students effectively. The
highest ranked ones were ones that the team felt were most importance to performance, followed by the
moderately and low ranked wants. The highest performing design in the KTDA was Design 4, which had
more than a 10% margin over the next highest exhibit (132 – 117 = 15 and 15 / 132 > 10%). However, we
decided that we wanted to integrate key elements from Designs 1 through 3 that would enhance the
function of Design 4 in simple ways: LEDs that responded to user interaction, a separate back panel for the
laptop screen, and 3D printed button covers.

95
APPENDIX C – FINAL SOLIDWORKS/AUTOCAD DRAWINGS
C-1 SOLIDWORKS Final Assembly

96
C-2 SOLIDWORKS Stamp Handle Assembly

97
C-3 AutoCAD Stamper Design

98