3D Useful Object Description

3D Useful Object Main Event:

Event Description:

Teams of 2-4 students will design, prototype and print a useful object with the MakerBot 3D printers.

Designing and Creating your Project:

The process of creating your project should take on the following steps:

  • Brainstorm a need that could be met with a 3D printed object.
  • Use a 3D program such as SketchupMake to create a model of your object.
  • Print your object on a 3D printer.
  • Test your object, make adjustments, and reprint if necessary.
  • Bring and present your object to the judges at the Tournament.

Technical Requirements:

  • Objects must be completely student created. No downloading or “remixing” someone else’s work.
  • The object may be printed in pieces and then assembled with glue but NO other materials may be used.
  • The object must be school appropriate.

3D Useful Object Design Document:

Define the Problem:
In this section students will state a problem/need people have, and then ask 3-4 questions that will help them find a solution to that problem/need. Students should thoughtfully answer the 3 questions below.

  • What is the problem:(Example) People want to watch Netflix on their phones, but get tired of holding their phones for an hour at a time
  • Who has the problem: (Example) Any person with a cellphone who watches shows on their phone.
  • How will you know your solution solved your problem: (Example) I will know my solution solved the problem when people can see their phones easily without having to hold their phones in their hands.

Prepare:

  • In this section, students will create a brainstorm of their initial ideas. The brainstorm may be a list, a web link, or any other representation of ideas.
  • They will choose one idea and sketch it with labels. Photograph the sketch and upload it onto the document.

Include in the Document:

1. Explanation of sketch (sample below):

Students will write one paragraph explaining their sketch:

  • The image sketch should include labels of all parts.
  • What are the parts?
  • How does the item work?
  • How big/ small is it?

Initial Sketch of my _____________________:
Sample image sketch:


Credit: Joe Smith

2. Design Specifications (sample below): 

Students will Include:

  • 3D Model of item from Sketchup
  • 3D model should include dimensions for all features: Width, Depth, & Height
Front View: Side View: Rear View: Picture of the actual printed item:

Width:8cm
Depth:4cm
Height:14cm

 

3. Testing (Sample below):

Physical Testing:

  • Students will test their item to see if it works. They will take a photo of their item in use.
  • Students will describe what modifications they made to the item for reprint.

Test 1:

Picture of item in use 

List Modifications Made
Modifications Made: In the first model of the design, we encountered a problem in construction. Based on the model that we had designed, the box would not close properly. As shown on the left, the sizes did not add up. The edges of the boxes did not meet, which set back the design process. We had to overcome this by adjusting the boxes so that the hinge had different positions. Instead of placing the hinge pieces every 20mm, we had to account for the fact that stacking the pieces would result in the box being taller on one side, and shorter on the other. With the new technique, the sides of the box matched and could actually close.  The photo shows the newly designed box on the left that correctly fits with the previous box created. When matched, the box on the left is compatible with its partner while the right box is not.

In the first model of the design, we encountered a problem in construction. Based on the model that we had designed, the box would not close properly. As shown on the left, the sizes did not add up. The edges of the boxes did not meet, which set back the design process. We had to overcome this by adjusting the boxes so that the hinge had different positions. Instead of placing the hinge pieces every 20mm, we had to account for the fact that stacking the pieces would result in the box being taller on one side, and shorter on the other. With the new technique, the sides of the box matched and could actually close.

The photo shows the newly designed box on the left that correctly fits with the previous box created. When matched, the box on the left is compatible with its partner while the right box is not.

Test 2:

Picture of item in use 

List Modifications Made

With the second test, the goal was to have the clip hold the cord of the earbud. Unfortunately, when moved to the printer the clips were too small. The cord of the earbud that we were using, according to both Apple and our own measurements, the cord diameter is 2mm. Knowing that, the clip would definitely have to be small, and the printers were not able to accurately print it. Strength is a big deal for the clips, and having just a single thread of filament would not fulfill the job required. This was an issue because if the clip was scaled up than the cord would likely be too slim and slip through the opening, something we did not want to happen. We had to adjust for this by increasing the size of the clips so that the printer could print it. The result was that the clip could successfully complete the task of locking down the cord while still being printable, a balance that took a lot of thought and multiple different versions of clips.

Test 3:

Picture of item in use 

List Modifications Made

With the next version of the design, an issue encountered was the height that the clips should be mounted at. The issue was that the earbud pieces are solid and cannot be manipulated, so the clips have to be low enough for the pieces to rest. After making this adjustment, the heads of the earbuds could fit into the box, and the overall design worked very well.
The first photo shows the newly designed box that has enough room to mount the earbuds, while the second shows the previous version which only had about 2.0cm of room, half of what was needed.

Improvement/Conclusion:

This section will be a one (1) paragraph conclusion. Students will evaluate how well their design worked, reflect on what went well, and parts that could be improved. They will also suggest ways to improve the device in the future.

***End of Sample Design Document***

 

The Design Document must be uploaded to the TOT App Submission Portal no later than 10:00 pm March 6, 2020.

View the 30-point rubric below for a scoring breakdown for the Live Challenge.

3D Useful Object Live Event Scoring:

The live event will entail a team presentation of the product to the judges.  Judges will not only judge the product, but also respond with constructive criticisms.  Team will have to respond to criticisms with their design and engineering expertise.

The Live event will be judged by the following four components:

  • Usefulness: 5 points
  • Design & Complexity: 10 points
  • Aesthetics: 5 points
  • Team Presentation & Response: 10 points

Getting Help:

Visit the 3D Useful Object Documents Page to see a sample Design Document and Event support files.

Contact Anthony Sombat at Anthony.sombat@fresnounified.org or Robert Donat at Robert.Donat@fresnounified.org if you have any further questions or suggestions regarding this future competition event.


3D Useful Object Reward Points:


Scoring Breakdown Description / Formula Max Points
Online Design Document 70
Live Event Live Challenge 30
Design Document Scoring Rubric
Category Exemplary Proficient Partially Proficient Incomplete

Students define the problem they are solving by answering the questions .

Students clearly define the problem they are solving and answer all three questions with detailed responses.

Students mostly define the problem they are solving and answer the questions at a basic level.

Students attempt to explain the problem they are solving and answer only 1 or 2 questions clearly or with details.

Students do not identify the problem they are solving, and do not answer the questions clearly.

Brainstorm: students create a brainstorm using a graphical organizer that lists 5 or more possible solutions to the problem.

Brainstorm is in a graphical organizer and has at least 5 unique ideas to solve the problem.

Brainstorm is present and has at least 3 unique ideas to solve the problem.

Brainstorm is present, but has two or fewer unique ideas to solve the problem.

There is no brainstorm or list of ideas to solve the problem.

Sketch: the sketch clearly shows multiple views of the object, and all parts are labeled.

There are two or more lifelike sketches showing different views of the object, and all parts are labeled.

There are two or more clear sketches showing at least 2 views of the object, and some parts are labeled.

There is a somewhat clear sketch showing a view of the object, and parts might or might not  be labeled.

The sketch is really unclear as to what it is, or there is no sketch.

The measurements of the product are clearly listed with multiple screenshots and pictures of the 3D object.

All measurements are listed and there are 3 or more screenshots.

All measurements are listed and there are 2 screenshots.

Some measurements are listed, and there are less than 2 screenshots.

Most of the measurements are missing, and there are no screenshots or pictures. .

Specific modifications were described as a result of physical testing, including pictures of the product.  .

3 or more modifications were very clearly described after the physical testing.

2 modifications were clearly described after the physical testing.

Only 1 modification was somewhat described after the physical testing.

There were no modifications described after the physical testing.

Students evaluate the efficiency and efficacy of their design. They discuss what went well, and what they will improve in the future.

Students critically evaluate their 3D design. They point out good and bad qualities and detail 2 or more improvements they would make in the future.

Students are not critical of their design, but they do detail improvements they would make in the future.

The conclusion is a weak summary of what was done and is lacking detail.

There is no conclusion in the design document. .
Live Challenge Scoring Rubric
Category Exemplary Proficient Partially Proficient Incomplete

The functional and popularity of object use in populations.

The usefulness of the object has far reaching positive consequences to the world.

The usefulness of the object will have a mass appeal to populations.

The usefulness of product is established, but may be limited to a small population.

The use of product is nonexistent or extremely limited to a few individuals.

The design works.

The product achieves not only the extent of the objective established, but has potential to evolve into other uses and products.

The design product works to most extents of the objective stated by presenter.

The design product works to a limited extent.

The product does not work as it set out to in the description.

The sophistication of a well-designed product.

The product is thoroughly efficient and designed.

The design exhibit shows complexity of thought, but not well executed.

The design shows some integrity and potential.

The design is poor and lacks integrity.

The beauty of the product.

The design aesthetics of product is both attractive and functional.

The product is attractive and has some design details.

The product is functional, but lacks design flair.

The design is messy and/or non-functional.

Team oral presentation of product.

Team prepared an exceptional and thorough pitch of their product.

Team prepared a solid presentation about their product.

Team presented basic details about their product.

Team had very little to say about their product.

Oral response to constructive criticisms .

Team expertly demonstrates several design solutions to respond to product criticisms.

Team provides a decent design solution to constructive criticism.

Team responds weakly with design solutions to constructive criticisms of product.

Team was unable to respond to constructive criticisms of product.