Table of Contents

1. Executive Summary ............................................................................................................. 2

2. Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 2

3. Implementation ................................................................................................................... 3

3.1 Battery ......................................................................................................................... 3

3.2 Vehicle ......................................................................................................................... 4

4. Materials ............................................................................................................................. 4

5. Techniques .......................................................................................................................... 6

5.1 Cell Construction .......................................................................................................... 6

Preparing the Container.................................................................................................... 6
Preparing the Electrodes ................................................................................................... 6
Preparation of Electrolyte Solution .................................................................................. 9
Preparing Connection ....................................................................................................... 9

5.2 VEHICLE CONSTRUCTION ............................................................................................ 9

6. Estimates or Measurements................................................................................................10

Design of Tested Cell .............................................................................................................13

Detailed Design of Vehicle .....................................................................................................14

7. Methods.............................................................................................................................14

8. Testing ...............................................................................................................................15

9. Reflection – Daniel Turkovic ...............................................................................................16

10. Reflection – Michael Italiano ...........................................................................................18

11. Reflection – Phoebe Heywood ........................................................................................20

12. Reflection – Rihab Ahmed ...............................................................................................22

13. Reflection – David Clowes ...............................................................................................24

14. Reflection – Angela Li .....................................................................................................26

15. Reflection – Amjad Alkhater ............................................................................................28

16. Reflection – Yida Hao ......................................................................................................30

17. References ......................................................................................................................31

18. Acknowledgement ..........................................................................................................31

1
 1. Executive Summary
This report documents the final outcome and reasoning of ENGG1000 2016’s Chemical
Project Team 10’s design and construction of a LEGO vehicle and energy storage device that when
combined are capable of traversing a flat and hill of 30-degree incline. This project had the intent of
introducing students to aspects of chemical engineering and industrial chemistry, in particular
relation to the areas of energy storage and electrochemistry, whilst encouraging a reflective outlook
on the engineering design process associated with the project.

As engineering is considered to be ‘the application of scientific and mathematical

principles to practical ends’, this report entails the engineering behind the project at hand, that is,
the amalgamation of scientific theory with the engineering design process, an iterative process of
creativity, intellect and constant re-evaluation. This report divulges into this application of
engineering and how an investigation of the theoretical and practical aspects of the task allowed
for design flaws to be easily identified and remedied in an optimal manner.

Ultimately, this report stresses the relevance of this electrochemical project to the real
world with an accentuation on high density energy storage and the application of engineering
design principles.

2. Introduction
Whilst the industrial revolution conjured great change for civilisation, the human race is
now facing a grave number of converging issues that if left unopposed, will tragically impact both
the biodiversity and overall quality of life our planet withholds. These issues are in direct
correspondence to the industrial revolution’s augmented climate change, detrimental impact on
ecosystems, accelerated usage of non-renewable resources such as crude oil and much more.

Thus, this amalgamates to a myriad of challenges for society and engineers seeking to
remedy this problem, specifically in relation to the sustainability of our current practices.

As problems concerning our extensive, unsustainable use of the petrochemical industry

become more obvious to society, companies are becoming more and more eager to adopt an
alternate means of energy production. The issue with the shift towards renewable sources of
energy however, lies in our current inability to store this harnessed energy adequately.
Consequently, many engineers are opting to develop batteries as a means for one day sufficiently
storing forms of renewable energy. Whilst batteries already compliment the storage of energy due
to their portable, recyclable and high energy density nature, engineers hope that with future
research, the technical barriers associated with batteries such as their weight, cost and durability
may be overcome and allow batteries to one day phase out our dependency on crude oil. There are
particularly high prospects for batteries to power transportation but with development, batteries

2
 will also possess the potential to be applied to many other aspects of society such as the powering
of household appliances and even industrial plants.

In order to encourage research and introduce engineers to this field, the chemical
engineering project entails the design and construction of a battery and LEGO vehicle, which
together, are capable of transporting an unknown load of up to 200 grams over both a flat and hill
in as quick a time as possible. Through such, the project engages with the multifaceted nature of
engineering design, accentuating the technical and practical challenges of engineering both a car
and electrochemical cell in industry, specifically, the challenges associated with achieving a unity
between high power output, endurance, manufacturability, sustainability and minimizing weight. It
is only once an industrial level unison of so is achieved that then can engineers truly phase out our
dependency on crude oil and encourage more sustainable practises such as the implementation of
electric automobiles.

3. Implementation

3.1 Battery
Our cell design incorporates the reduction of hydrogen ions in hydrochloric acid and the
oxidation of magnesium into an electrochemical cell. This cell is completed via the addition of an
inert copper electrode and aqueous sodium chloride into the electrolyte. The magnesium strip is
oxidised as by the oxidation half reaction, that is, it loses two electrons. These electrons travel
through the wire and do work on the Lego car’s motor before flowing towards the inert Copper
electrode, propelling the car through the course. The Copper electrode then gains two electrons
which reduce the H+ to convert it to Hydrogen gas. The chemical reaction is as follows:

Oxidation Mg(s)→Mg2+(aq)+2e- EO = -(-2.37) V

Reduction 2H+(aq)+2e-→H2(g) EO = (0) V
Overall Mg(s)+2H+(aq)→Mg2+(aq)+H2(g) EO = 2.37 V

The ions in solution, SO42-, H+, Na+ and Cl- help maintain a neutral electric charge on
each electrode by migrating between them. The entirety of the cell is to be stored inside a narrow,
inert, plastic, hexagonal container, with 5 cells in total connected in series to increase voltage. The
design focuses on maximizing current and voltage whilst minimizing weight, leading to a high power
to weight ratio and a fast overall time for the course. Wire leads will run from both the Magnesium
and from the Copper of the cells at the ends of the series to allow the circuit to be complete.

3
 3.2 Vehicle
The vehicle was designed with our problem statement and objectives in mind. It was
required to be as lightweight as possible while maintaining durability and the ability to securely carry
the storage device and an unspecified load. Although they increased the weight of the car, we opted
for larger wheels (diameter: 43.2 mm, width: 22 mm) to allow for better clearance, more stability and
greater traction with the track. The gear ratio was another important component and we decided
that the ability to climb the slope was more important than the initial sprint. The gear system utilises
a small, 8 tooth gear connected to the motor and then a 24-tooth gear connected to the axle. This
gives a final gear ratio of 3, meaning that less input power is required to turn the wheels but the
wheels move at a speed less than that of the driven gear, increasing our climbing ability but
hindering speed.

The car bed consists of a flat platform with raised edges to hold the battery in place. We
chose hexagonal containers for our cells as they tessellate and will conserve space within the vehicle.
There is also a contraption for securing the containers which is strong enough to hold them in place
even if the car is inverted. The front section is the designated area for holding the load and was built
to be easily adapted to fit the object given. The last notable feature is the clearance of the vehicle,
which was increased to allow the car to easily tilt for the hill and overcome the bump at the top.

4. Materials

For this design, we are using a total of 5 cells. Each cell is composed of the following materials:

● Copper sheet (5.5 cm x 7.5 cm).

● Magnesium Strip (20 cm long).
● HCl (1 M, 16 mL).
● NaCl (0.15 g).
● Filter paper (enough to isolate the copper from the magnesium - semicircle of radius 5 cm).
● Hexagonal ‘bubble’ container.

Copper acts as an inert auxiliary electrode to help aid the flow of electrons. Copper will
not react with the chloride ion as neither chloride or copper can be reduced further. They can both
only be oxidised, which cannot lead to a redox reaction. Copper will not react with the Hydrogen ion.
We can see this through the analysis of the following equations:

Oxidation Cu(s)→Cu2+(aq)+2e- EO = -0.337 V

Reduction 2H+(aq) +2e-  H2(g) EO = 0 V
Overall Cu(s)+2Na+(aq)→2Na(s)+Cu2+(aq) EO = -0.337 V

4
 Here, the overall reaction has a negative voltage so it is not a spontaneous reaction and will require
the input of energy for the reaction to proceed.

Copper will not react with the sodium ion:

Oxidation Cu(s)→Cu2+(aq)+2e- EO = -0.337 V

Reduction 2Na+(aq)+2e-→2Na(s) EO = -2.71 V
Overall Cu(s)+2Na+(aq)→2Na(s)+Cu2+(aq) EO = 2.37 V

The voltage for this reaction is highly negative and for the same reasons as above, the reaction will
not take place in our battery.

Finally, it is not oxidised over Mg as Mg possesses a higher oxidation potential.

Mg(s) → Mg2+(aq) + 2e- EO = 2.37 V

Cu(s) → Cu2+(aq) + 2e- EO = -0.337 V

We can see that the oxidation potential of Magnesium is much higher than that of the
copper, and as a result, the oxidation of Mg is favoured. For all these reasons, copper is inert in this
cell and does not contribute towards any side reactions, making it a suitable choice of material in
addition to its high electrical conductivity.

Magnesium has a high oxidation potential. This means that it will allow for a high
standard potential of the cell, which will then in turn result in a high power output for the battery,
allowing the vehicle to be propelled at a high speed. The main limitation regarding the magnesium
is that it is only supplied as a thin strip, leading to low surface area and low amounts of the metal
available to react. This limitation has been managed by coiling the magnesium, increasing total
metal amount and allowing for a larger contact area between it and the copper electrode.

Hydrochloric acid - The proton resulting from the dissociation of the acid acts as the
oxidising agent for the battery. We tested varying concentrations of the solution in an attempt to
find a balance between the attainable current and the dissolving rate of the magnesium electrode.
The results of these analyses showed that having a 1 M concentration provides sufficiently high
current and a reasonable consumption rate of the magnesium. Additionally, the chloride ion in
Hydrochloric acid is very unreactive and is also insoluble with all other materials used.

NaCl is added to the electrolyte as to increase ionic conductivity - this increases the rate
of ion flow and thus increases the current. Both Na+ and Cl- are unreactive species and soluble with
all the materials used so there should be no side reactions.

5
 Filter paper is used as a separator to prevent the two electrodes from touching and short
circuiting. It allows the electrodes to be placed close to each other in order to maximize reaction rate
and current, thus maximizing power output.

The bubble containers are made out of plastic, and hence are unreactive, with no
possibility of unwanted side reactions that could hinder performance. The bottleneck shape of the
container allows the spreading of the filter paper covered copper in order to give space for the
escape of hydrogen gas generated whilst preventing the possibility of spilling the electrolyte. In
addition, the container is narrow and small enough to minimize weight and also allow for a short
distance between electrodes to increase current, however, not so narrow and compact that the gas
release significantly hinders the performance. To aid this potential gas issue, the lid has been left off
to prevent gas build up.

5. Techniques

5.1 Cell Construction

Preparing the Container

I. 5 hexagonal bubble containers with a width of 30 mm and height of 35 mm were collected.

These small containers helped minimize the weight of the cells. One container was used for
each cell, giving a total of 5 cells. The majority of the ‘bottleneck’ was removed using a pair of
scissors. This aids in gas release, lowers the weight of the containers and reduces their overall
sizes while retaining the ‘bottleneck’ shape that helps prevent spillage.

Figure 1 Container Illustration

Preparing the Electrodes

I. 5 sheets of copper were obtained and cut such that their dimensions were 55 mm x 75 mm.
Each sheet was then cut into the “t-shape” shown in figure 2.

6
 Figure 2 Copper electrode preparation step I Illustration

II. 3 circular pieces of filter paper with a 10 cm diameter were obtained and cut in half, leaving 6
semi-circles of filter paper. Each of the 5 “t-shaped” sheets of copper were then placed on the cut
pieces of filter paper as shown in figure 3.

Figure 3 Copper electrode preparation step II Illustration

III. A section with the width of the copper ‘tab’ was cut out of each semicircle as shown in figure 4.

Figure 4 Copper electrode preparation step III Illustration

IV. The resulting filter paper was then folded around the copper in 3 steps:

i) The bottom of the filter paper was folded up onto the copper.
ii) The tops of the filter paper to either side of the copper tab were folded down over the
copper.
iii) The filter paper to either side of the copper sheet was folded back onto the copper and
previously folded paper.
iv) The result.

7
 Figure 5 Copper electrode preparation step IV Illustration

V. Each of these altered copper sheets wrapped in filter paper were then curved into a cylindrical
shape and inserted into separate bubble containers, with the side containing partially exposed
copper facing outwards, leaving the copper tab sticking out the top of the containers for easy
connection. The curvature was done in a way that caused the cylindrical shape to expand once
in the container. This minimized the negative effect of the formation of gas bubbles on the
current output of each cell.

VI. Five magnesium strips each 200 mm long were obtained. Each strip was coiled around a pen,
leaving 2 cm at the end to act as a lead. The coiled section was adjusted until it was had a
height of 30 mm and diameter of 20 mm. This was done to maximize the surface area between
magnesium and copper, increasing current and power output, and also to increase the total
mass of Magnesium in each container to prolong the endurance of the battery. The coiled
strips were then placed in each container, leaving the lead sticking out the top.

Figure 6 Magnesium electrode preparation step VI Illustration

8
 Preparation of Electrolyte Solution

I. 100 ml of HCl solution was poured into a 150 ml beaker.

II. 0.75 g of NaCl was then added to the same beaker. The electrolyte for all 5 cells was prepared
once in one beaker to reduce repetition and improve the accuracy of the concentration of NaCl
in the electrolyte.

Preparing Connection

I. The containers holding the electrodes were then setup as shown in figure 7. The cells were set
up in series with the copper electrodes attached to the magnesium electrodes using metal
alligator clips to keep them connected. Copper wires were used to connect two electrodes to
the motor, completing the circuit.
II. The prepared electrolyte solution was then added to the containers via pipettes’ until each
container was filled just below the lip (15 ml each).

Figure 7 Cell Connection Illustration

5.2 VEHICLE CONSTRUCTION

- Gear ratio
The small (8 tooth) to medium (24 tooth) ratio was chosen over the 1:1 ratio as it produces more
climbing strength, allowing the car to go over the hill, but with a slower and lower maximum
speed on the first 4 meters of non-inclined plane.

9
 Securing the Load
To secure the load, a flexible rectangular
cage was designed and placed at the
front of the car which can be easily
adjusted to fit the load by changing the
volume.

- Securing the Battery

A contraption was built at the back of
the car to secure the batteries, while the
rectangular cage at the front holding the
load is also working to provide further Figure 8 Illustration of vehicle
security, keeping the cells tightly
together.

- Clearance (getting over the hill)

The whole platform was elevated by using large wheels and using additional construction
pieces, ensuring enough ground clearance to go over the hill.

- Weight reduction
To minimize the overall weight of the car, we constructed a relative small car that is just enough
to fit both the battery cells and the load using minimal number of Lego pieces to build the
structure of it, limiting unnecessary constructions.

- Weight distribution
The weight was distributed evenly throughout the vehicle by placing the motor and battery cells
at the back with the load at the front, where the centre of mass is near the middle of the car.

- Wheel alignment
Cross bars and separators were added to the car platform and axle to ensure that the wheels
remained in line and that the car travelled straight.

6. Estimates or Measurements
In order to get a good estimate for our power output, we measured both the voltage and current
outputs of the battery connected in series. Our results are as follows:

10
Figure 9 Voltage and current drop

Figure 10 Power drop

11
 Power Assessment

Figure 11 Track Illustration

Assuming that the hill is symmetrical, length along ground = 2 m

Using right angle trigonometry gives a slant height of 2/cos(30) = 2.31 m
We need to overcome Weight/2 Newtons of force to climb the hill as F = Weight * sin (30)
Given that, Work = Force * Displacement and
Work = Power * Time
Equating these two equations gives
Power * Time = Force * Displacement or
Power = (Force * Displacement)/Time
In this case, we can let Time = 20 s (the approximated time it takes to climb the hill), Force =
mg/2, Displacement = 2.31 m, and the mass of 5 cells combined with the mass of the car and a
maximum load of 200 g = 0.525 kg.

Therefore, Power = ((0.525*9.8)/2*2.31)/20

= 0.3 watts

However, we must take into account the power loss of the motor, so the actual required average
power to move a 0.5 kg mass up a 2.3 m, 30 degree incline in 20 s will be greater than this
theoretical amount.
According to (DETERMINING ELECTRIC MOTOR LOAD AND EFFICIENCY 13-14), the general
efficiency of a motor is approximately 80%. In that case, the actual minimum power output would
be 0.375 watts.
In addition are other mechanical power losses (not motor sourced) such as power loss through
heat and sound of the vehicle.

12
Comparing this figure with the power drop curve (figure 10), we can see that the car would have
sufficient power to climb the hill for up to 140 s after the reaction has started, giving us an ample
amount of time to set up the reaction and for the car to traverse the first 4 metres.

Design of Tested Cell

Mass of each cell: 23 g
Total mass of battery: 115 g

Figure 12 Illustration of cell

13
 Detailed Design of Vehicle

Figure 13 Detailed vehicle design

We estimated through trials with our final battery that the vehicle would take 20 seconds for the
sprint, 20 seconds to climb the hill and 10 seconds to dismount the hill, giving it a total of 50
seconds to complete course. This could possibly be improved upon but is safely within the 1 minute
time limit.

7. Methods
Various aspects of our car design significantly promoted the implementation process, as
our group was able to arrive at a design that was versatile enough to carry the load provided.
However, our design for the battery slightly hindered this process, mainly due to being a wet cell
which required a stable base to prevent spilling unlike dry cells, as well as the nature of the
chemical components which comprised the cell.

Due to the simple yet versatile design of the car, we were prepared for a variety of
different possible loads. The cage was designed to be adjustable so that the load was able to be
placed in accordingly, hence the car was able to securely carry it across the track without

14
disrupting the space on the vehicle needed for the batteries which were kept securely in place
with a LEGO contraption. This promoted the implementation process by reducing the time spent
on the reconstruction of the car on the day. This was a result of working on both the vehicle and
battery concurrently throughout the semester. Working concurrently also allowed us to reduce the
development time of both the car and battery, whilst also allowing us to identify and solve any
problems early in the process. The choice to put the load in the front of the vehicle and the
batteries and motor in the back balanced the mass of the vehicle, which would prevent the vehicle
from toppling as it ascended/descended the hill, easing the implementation. The gear ratio
chosen also assisted the vehicle in climbing the hill, enabling it to execute the track. However, this
ratio resulted in our vehicle travelling at a reduced speed, which hindered our implementation.
This could be seen as a good example of DFX (Design for X), where the vehicle was designed
specifically to complete the whole track, rather than complete the first 4 metres at a higher speed
while failing to successfully climb the hill.

Like most other wet cells, our battery required the electrolyte to be pipetted into the
cells just prior to the commencement of the race. However, due to the corrosive nature of the
electrolyte of our battery, this hindered our implementation as the magnesium would have
already started to deplete, reacting with the electrolyte before the race had even begun. In
addition, the execution was impeded by the small diameter of the containers and relatively large
volume per cell, meaning it took a long time to pour the electrolyte into cells before the race. On
the other hand, the design of the battery allowed the electrodes and separator to be prepared
prior to the day, which minimized the labour time on the test day and eased the implementation.
Furthermore, in regards to the design process, several design elements were put in place to
enhance the performance of the battery. For instance, the copper placed within the containers was
curved along the walls of the containers to increase the contact area, further easing the
implementation process. The magnesium strip placed inside the cell was also curled in a helical
shape to increase the amount of magnesium in one cell and the contact area and therefore
increase the current and also the duration of the cell. This was also a good example of DFX, where
the battery was designed specifically for durability so that the vehicle could complete the 8 metre
course.

8. Testing
Overall Results
Overall, our performance was satisfactory and was similar to our estimate time. We completed the
sprint in 30.54 s and the next four metres for the hill took 23.89 s. This results in a total time of
54.43 s, close to our 50 s estimate for the entire course. However, the first 4 m was completed in a
longer time than expected whilst the hill was completed faster than expected.

15
 Performance of battery
The battery didn’t start on cue for the first run. This was due to the short circuiting of two
electrodes. By the time we had noticed this, the reaction was already in motion, leading to a lower
power output than we had hoped for. However, we ensured this same issue did not occur in the
next trial so this significant loss of power did not occur. In addition, it was difficult to pour the
electrolyte into the solution as our planned method of using tic-tac containers as the delivery
method was prohibited. Alternatively, we were required to pipette the solution into each cell
which took a long time as each pipette held only 3 mL whilst each cell required 15 mL of solution.
This again resulted in some power loss however, it was not nearly as significant as the short
circuiting issue.

Performance of car
The vehicle had a slight veer to the left and so improper alignment on the first attempt caused it
to fall off the track. The starting position of the car was changed for the second trial, allowing it to
stay on the track. Friction on the downhill caused the gears to separate and so it accelerated
rapidly down the slope without brakes. This gave us a faster time but should not have occurred
had the LEGO been connected properly. The large wheels used allowed us to roll over the bumps
on the hill with greater ease. The vehicle securely held the battery as expected, and the modified
load holder held the load very securely as well. The allocated positions for the load and battery
allowed the weight to be spread relatively evenly throughout the vehicle. This allowed for good
traction with the rear wheels which were connected to the motor.

9. Reflection – Daniel Turkovic

If I Knew Then What I Know Now

Throughout the ENGG1000 semester, I learned a lot about teamwork, electrochemistry

and ways to approach a lengthy project. The biggest tip I would give is to not reject ideas too
early. There were often times where an idea was proposed however, since I did not think that it
would work, I rejected it. Our final chemicals used in our battery were actually proposed very early
in the semester, however, due to my scepticism of the idea combined with an initial test that did
not read a stable current, I rejected the idea, only to come back to it a few weeks later.
Additionally, especially as a team leader, I learned that it is important to constantly
communicate with team members to ensure that all work is up to date and everyone understands
what is expected of them.

Plan for Procrastination

Put into the project with essentially no information given on electrochemistry or how to
build a working battery, we had initially felt very lost and unsure how to start. As a result, the pace

16
for the first couple weeks were slow. As we began to grasp the essence of the project, we started
to brainstorm with many ideas, attempting to adapt pre-existing batteries to something that was
capable of being made in our laboratory. However, this was a tedious process and many of these
ideas had failed. Despite our hard work, not much progress seemed to occur and the pace
continued to be slow. However, once we finally got a design to power the motor, we had a
platform that we could work from and thus our pace increased drastically. We were able to
perform various tests to improve the design such as examining the best electrolyte dilution, size of
electrodes and size of containers. We tested to see if the battery could power the vehicle to climb
the practice ramp, which it did. From this point, the team started to relax due to the sense of
security, and the design of the battery did not progress with much pace from this point onwards.

Overall, I was satisfied with the performance of our battery, obtaining an average mark
for the day, placing 8th out of 15. However, I feel like our approach could’ve been improved in
two main ways. Firstly, we should’ve researched into the possible battery designs more
thoroughly. This would’ve minimized the time spent with failed designs in the laboratory and we
would’ve reached the more productive stage more quickly. Secondly, we should’ve continued our
testing on our battery with the same sense of urgency rather than slowing down like we did. This
would’ve allowed us to transform our average battery to something well above average.

Design for Success

I would like to approach future projects similarly to how we approached this one. The 3
phases outlined to us provided us with a good structure to work from and paved the way in which
we worked throughout the semester. One of the key strengths of our team was being able to
actively listen and allow each member to share his or her opinion. On the other hand however, this
coincided with an initial lack input towards discussions. Although many people listened, only a few
talked. This was improved upon throughout the semester as we became more comfortable with
each other but ideally we would want a high level of input from the very start of a project. As a
team leader, I could in the future improve on this by attempting to interact with quieter members
and encouraging their input from the start. There were also many moments where we were we
were collectively unsure about a decision, and in these moments, I believe it is important for a
team leader to make be bold and decisive to allow the meeting to continue smoothly and so in
future projects I will be sure to do so. Additionally, I think it is crucial to be focused throughout
the entire project. We cannot let failed ideas to discourage us and neither should we let successes
give us a sense of over comfort. We must work at a consistent pace throughout the project for
maximum effectiveness. Finally, I should have personally been more open to ideas and not reject
anything that I may be sceptical of without proper testing and consideration.

17
Your Expectations

Diving into this project, I had expected much of the problems to be chemistry focused. I
believed that the decision of which materials would be used would be the determining factor on
the success of the battery. However, this was only a small factor. A bigger factor was how well
those chemicals were implemented into the design, or in other words, how the battery was
constructed. The underlying reason for why changing certain aspects of the design (e.g. distance
between electrodes) would affect the performance of the battery was taught along the way and so
I had learned some electrochemistry as expected. In addition, there was a lot less information
provided to us than expected. I thought the mentors and coordinators would explain directly any
uncertainties that we had, however, I found that they would only give a vague answer to most
questions. This was slightly frustrating at first but I realised that this had forced me to research
myself and made me a more proficient independent learner.
This course was intended to teach us how to problem solve under pressure, work
effectively in teams, and to conduct research and develop our communication and literacy skills.
Our final product is reflective of the amalgamation of our achievements towards these areas, and
so I believe I have sufficiently met the expectations of the course, with our design adhering to the
conditions specified in the project brief. As mentioned above, I have learned to research to solve
problems instead of simply asking an academic for the solution whilst also developing my
cooperative skills through constant communication with my team.

Your Feedback

I thoroughly enjoyed the practical, hands-on aspect of this course, teaching us not only
the theory behind an electrochemical cell, but also how to apply this in the laboratory, setting this
course apart from my others. In addition, I think the course was very well structured for most of
the semester, with two lectures per week and 1 laboratory session and 1 team meeting. However, I
felt that for the first couple of weeks, the laboratory and meeting sessions should’ve been
replaced by more lectures so that students can have a stronger intellectual base to start from
before cluelessly researching and constructing possible batteries. Instead, maybe in the later
stages there could be extra hours allocated for laboratory and meeting sessions in place of
lectures.

10. Reflection – Michael Italiano

If I Knew Then What I Know Now

Starting this course, I carried with me the burden of thinking mere chemical
combinations would be the deciding factor of the winning team – I couldn’t have been more

18
wrong. If there’s one thing that I have undoubtedly learnt through this course it is to not
underestimate the importance of design.
My group struggled with design throughout the entirety of the semester. It was not
until late in the semester that we recognised the importance of design, and began identifying and
improving the flaws of our design. Hence, when first starting this course I wish I understood the
importance of design, as well as some strategies for best designing electrochemical cells/cars.
That being said, if I had to give 10 words of advice to next year’s class, they would be: ‘Discovering
why designs failed is as significant as new designs’.

Plan for Procrastination

On reflection, my group did not procrastinate much but the pace of our efforts
definitely fluctuated throughout the semester. After a slow beginning, my team eventually came
to terms with the task, and became motivated, constantly churning out ideas as a consequence of
so. However, due to a knowledge barrier regarding electrochemical design, we forcedly had to
abandon many ideas that yielded failure in the lab and thus, the process of devising new ideas
became tedious. Nevertheless, after arriving at an idea that proved to be of great potential, our
efforts surged and we quickly submitted a preliminary patent and began experimentation with
design aspects such as concentration and casing. Our heightened efforts proved successful as our
car became one of the first to traverse the test hill. This led to an untimely false sense of security
that made the final weeks seemingly less urgent. This led to poor improvement in comparison to
the vast time we spent on the design, reflective of our dampened efforts.
Ultimately, after abandoning several ideas and becoming one of only four teams to
traverse the entirety of the course, I can say that I’m satisfied with our project outcome although I
must admit that our design and performance failed to reach its maximum potential.

Design for Success

For my next, big team engineering project I would undertake a similar approach to the
one we implemented for this project. This would involve first delegating roles to each member
and then encouraging the generation of ideas through discussion. Afterwards, each member
would undertake research on certain ideas. Through reiteration of this discussion and research,
accompanied by constant group evaluation, the most appropriate solution would be forged.
My team performed well in that from an early week in the semester, we sub-divided the
group to maximise productivity. We implemented this strategy not only for the cell/car but also
for our initial research into electrochemical cell possibilities. I do believe however, that our
conceptual evaluation and discussion was often quite poor due to the group being quiet and
unmotivated at times. This failure to establish regular discussions actually led to an overarching
team knowledge barrier that hindered our analysis of, and ability to improve designs.
As an individual, I undertook a satisfactory amount of research and contributed a fair
amount of thoughts/criticisms when generating ideas for our electrochemical cell. On reflection

19
however, I should’ve undertaken more research/analysis into the design of each possible cell, in
particular, in identifying the flaws in all the failed designs we had tested in the lab.

Your Expectations

To be franc, this course was harder than I had anticipated. Whilst I had expected to be
taught a significant amount of electrochemistry, mechanical physics, and design techniques
behind the development of batteries and cars, the course offers little to no more knowledge than
HSC chemistry did. Although this was initially aggravating and unusual, I now recognise that it was
effective in serving as a catalyst for the development of my own character in improving my self-
determination, self-reliance and abilities related to serving as an effective team member such as
my initiative, communication, and ability to research. As such, after overcoming my high schooler
attitude to ENG1000, I gave the course my all. In terms of commitment, research and
determination, I do believe I met the course’s expectations but I also believe I unfortunately fell
short in meeting the course’s expectations for brilliant design.

Your Feedback

ENG1000 is a course that reciprocates the efforts you put in. The course and projects
are undeniably engaging due to the open-ended and unique nature of each project. The course is
designed well as a first-year course through its development of ‘connections’ and friendships as
through its inherently vigorous teamwork. In my opinion, the peer review aspect of the course is
its downfall. Whilst it is admirable that the peer marking serves to develop our knowledge, and
analytical/communicative skills, the quality of peer marking needs much improvement. The only
consistency in my peers’ marking was their inconsistency. In each phase, I had a negative outlier
that dragged my mark down which was needless to say, irritating. To address this, the fairness of
peer reviews could be improved through diminishing the weighting of outliers in the calculation of
resultant marks while the quality of so could be improved through having more detailed
calibration examples that clearly identify what the exemplar responses did well and what they did
poorly.

11. Reflection – Phoebe Heywood

If I Knew Then What I Know Now

Throughout the course I learned a lot about working effectively in a team and
designating specific tasks based on individual abilities and strengths. I also discovered the
importance of having a team leader to organise and motivate the team, and the necessity of being
able to remain on task for long periods of time. I wish that at the start I knew more efficient
research techniques and how to analyse design concepts to gauge how well they would work

20
before attempting to implement them. I also would have benefitted from knowing how to be
more efficient with the available time.
The 10 words of advice that I would give to next year’s class (not that they’ll be given
them) are; don’t waste lab time, plan beforehand, and believe in yourselves. These were some of
the biggest issues that I came across and something that could have been fixed.

Plan for Procrastination

The team was initially slow to get started. Less than half of the team actually study
chemical engineering and we were a bit lost as to where to begin the project. We started having
laboratory time before we had actually thought through the design process and so ended up
wasting time. We came up with a number of battery concepts which were not feasible and either
could not be built efficiently in the lab or did not produce a substantial power output. We
eventually got our motor to spin in week 7 and submitted the initial patent that weekend. In the
following lab we built a simple LEGO car and prepared the battery and managed to conquer the
hill on our first attempt. This was a big motivator for the team and we then worked more
effectively to refine the design and create the best possible vehicle. In the following labs we split
into two groups, with one focussing on the battery and the other building the vehicle. This worked
well as it ensured that everyone was working on something and both parts were well catered for.
We ending up coming in at 8th place on test day and were one of the only 4 teams to successfully
complete the entire course. I was satisfied with this result and pleased by how well the team came
together towards the end.

Design for Success

I would approach the next engineering project in a similar way utilising the design
phases, but probably start with more in depth research and a greater understanding of the design
problem. It would be advantageous to set more time constraints on each activity to ensure they
are completed on schedule. It would also be useful to get to know the team better at the onset so
that we would feel more comfortable around one another and know individuals’ strengths and
weaknesses. My team was fairly quiet, and it was sometimes difficult to have proper discussions
and make significant decisions about the design. One thing we did do well however was dividing
tasks among team members to ensure that everything got done and each member participated. I
think I could have worked on being more accepting of new and different ideas and putting more
effort into understanding the chemistry involved.

Your Expectations

The course was more difficult than I expected, as I thought that the lectures would be
more in depth and useful to the completion of the task. I was also not expecting to be marked
based on rankings against the other teams and thought this was unfair.

21
 Throughout the semester I learnt a great deal about working in a team and the
engineering design process. My report writing and technological skills have improved a lot as has
my ability to work with people that I don’t know beforehand. I believe I have satisfactorily met the
expectations of the course, such as understanding and implementing the principles of engineering
design, and learning collaborative, technical and non-technical skills.

Your Feedback

Participating in the ENGG1000 course was thought-provoking, valuable and (mostly)

enjoyable. It was beneficial to have a hands on subject to get us out of the classroom and teach us
about teamwork, project management and the design process, and I think that the skills I have
acquired will be particularly useful in future study and work.
One of the biggest negatives of the course was the assessment process. Being
designated marks based on our peer assessment was painful, especially when the calibration
marks that we initially received for stage three were slashed. It is difficult to tell how good a task is
and the assessment criteria were not very explicit. However, it has taught me to be more critical
and put greater thought into the analysis of the thoughts and ideas of others.

12. Reflection – Rihab Ahmed

If I Knew Then What I Know Now

In terms of how you went in this course, reflect on one thing you learned and wished you
knew already when you started this course. What 10 words of advice you would give to next year’s
class to help them improve how they go.
Throughout the ENGG1000 course, I have developed an increased knowledge of
electrochemistry and teamwork, such as the significance of communication to effectively express
and understand the ideas of individual team members. Knowing the importance of this at the start
of the course would have resulted in more effective teamwork, allowing the team to formulate
suitable solutions at a faster rate.
The advice I would give to next year’s class is to manage your time with the team
properly; make the most of your lab times and team meetings as certain parts of the design
process may take longer than expected.

Plan for Procrastination

Personally, I made an effort to contribute wherever I could in the group discussions and
labs. However due to my limited knowledge in electrochemistry, physics and design in general,
many of my efforts did not influence the outcome of the design as there was often a better design
concept found later on than the one I brought forth. Also, many of my design concepts that were

22
implemented into the final design had to be altered during the testing stages as they failed to
meet our design objectives. I see this as an upside as it resulted in further innovation in our design
due to the concepts suggested by other team members and a better performance of our design
overall. The team as a whole put in a lot of effort into this project, which had ultimately led to the
success of final design.
I am overall satisfied with the team’s efforts throughout the course as our vehicle was
one of the ones to be able to complete the track, even though we didn’t receive a high mark on
the testing day. However, we did receive additional marks due to one of the other teams buying
our patent due to the elegant design and electrochemistry of our battery.

Design for Success

Our team was able to designate specific tasks to different team members in accordance
with their strengths, hence all members were able to work on different parts of the design
simultaneously. However, it took a while for things to get moving at the start of the course as
none of the team members were familiar with each other and it took a while for us to be more
comfortable with each other, hence much time was wasted as ideas were not expressed very well
initially. This, of course, changed as the course progressed and we became more familiar with each
other. Also, most of us were a bit confused in regards to where to begin with the project.
Personally, I believe that I was able to effectively communicate a variety of ideas at the
start of the course, but was unable to continue this communication throughout the course as the
team explored various concepts of electrochemistry which I was not familiar with. I would
approach my next big project with a better understanding of the project requirements beforehand
so that I have a better idea of where to begin early in the project, hence the limited time provided
will be well spent.

Your Expectations

When I initially chose the chemical engineering project for ENGG1000 after reading the
project outline, I assumed that the basic knowledge of electrochemistry I had gained from HSC
chemistry would be sufficient to meet the outcomes of the project. However, over the course I had
realised the complexity and in-depth understanding of electrochemistry required, as various
constraints had to be taken into account when designing the vehicle and battery. As a result, I
found this project to be much more challenging than initially expected. The project did meet my
expectations of developing an enhanced understanding of the engineering design process and
the different skill-sets of engineers that would be required in a team collaboration to complete a
specific task, as we were able to successfully collaborate and design a vehicle and battery that was
able to complete the course, hence meeting the expectations of the course.

23
Your Feedback

I found this engineering course satisfying in applying the skills and knowledge of
chemistry and design to solve a real-life engineering problem. The course had enabled students to
engage in critical thinking and had forced them to search for answers themselves instead of being
spoon-fed information. The course had also allowed me to build positive relationships with fellow
peers in a constructive working environment.
Although I believe that exposing students to an open-ended task with limited assistance
is a good simulation of the challenges faced by engineers in the real world, I believe that this
course can be improved if the tutors and lecturer provided better feedback and responded to our
enquiries with less ambiguity, as this slows teams down to such an extent where most won’t be
able to produce a sufficient vehicle and battery within the limited timeframe. Also, the course can
be improved by diminishing or depreciating the peer assessment in value, as many students do
not assess others fairly, which affects their overall mark. It may also be difficult for some students
to assess the submissions of other students from different faculties, as they would have no
knowledge of their project.

13. Reflection – David Clowes

If I Knew Then What I Know Now

Over the course of ENGG1000 I have gained a greater understanding of

electrochemistry, teamwork and the importance of communication. One thing I wish I had known
when starting the course is how to effectively work on a project in a team. Early in the course I was
unsure about what I could contribute to the team as I had very little experience with batteries.
Luckily, our team was full of great people and I quickly realized that sharing ideas and discussing
them with each other is an excellent way to contribute. It allowed us to pool together our
thoughts and knowledge on the task in an efficient way. My advice is “to work with your team
every step of the way” because people working together can accomplish way more than any one
person could do alone.

Plan for Procrastination

Being told you have 10 weeks to build a working battery can be pretty scary when
you’ve never built one before. During the first few weeks we were a bit slow to get started, not
really knowing where to start. The first two labs were sort of wasted as we had no clear design to
work on. The pace really started to pick up after we had brainstormed a number of ideas to test in
the lab. However, a lot of these ideas didn’t end up working and our pace fell to a crawl. Once we
had finally established the design we would be using our progress improved dramatically. We
began discussing the different ways we could improve the design and tested these ideas in the

24
lab. By week 7 our team was on track. Our team mentor had gone from warning us that we were
behind to congratulating us on our progress. In retrospect, I am very pleased with the outcome of
our design. We were one of only a few teams to finish the course which was great. Although we
were off to a slow start we still managed to produce a great battery.

Design for Success

I would approach my next team engineering project with the same approach our team
used. Each member was set tasks they according to their strengths, allowing our team to work on
multiple things at once while ensuring a high standard of work. This worked really well for our
team since everyone had differing levels of knowledge on chemistry and design. Our initial
progress was quite slow and somewhat poor which I believe was due to the team being unfamiliar
with each other as well as a lack of direction. I definitely contributed to the slow progress toward
the start of this project by being reluctant to express my opinions. This changed over time as our
team became more comfortable with each other and I became involved in as much discussion as I
could. One thing I would change in the next team project I do is get to know everyone in the first
meeting and establish goals from the start. It might take up some time we could be working on
the project but I believe it would increase productivity in the long run.

Your Expectations

The course seemed very daunting at first. Making a battery powered car seemed almost
impossible to me at the time. All the electrochemistry looked extremely complicated and made
little sense which made me hope the focus of the project would be on design techniques. I
expected the course to be really challenging and serious. Luckily, this was not completely true.
Although the course was challenging it was a great learning experience and challenged us to think
rather than causing frustration. The lecturer and mentors were really helpful and engaging
throughout the course. Over time, the electrochemistry became more interesting than challenging
and made the course a lot more enjoyable. Prior to starting the course, I had no idea what my
team would be like and thought everything would be very serious. Fortunately, I was lucky to have
a great team that were fun to work with. The course met my expectations of being challenging
and providing a deeper understanding into both the design process and electrochemistry.

Your Feedback

I thought the course was great at building both knowledge and skills in regards to
engineering design and chemistry. The course was great at simulating a real life scenario
engineers are put in all the time. Although frustrating at times, the hesitance of the mentors to
share information was great at pushing us to find out information for ourselves.

25
Suggestions:

- Giving feedback on why the professor marked the peer assessment tasks the way they did. There
were several times where I marked a peer assessment really close to how the professor had
marked it but lost so many marks just because I was a bit off.
- Making the Assessment S1a and S1b fairer. I was unable to attend the camp and thus had to do
the written task. From what I heard about the camp the S1 assessment took a lot less effort than a
2000-3000 word essay where most of the marks were for sourcing and word count rather than the
actual content.

14. Reflection – Angela Li

If I Knew Then What I Know Now

Throughout this course, I’ve gained many beneficial outcomes and learnt many valuable
skills, such as some basic knowledge towards electrochemistry, problem solving skills and most
importantly team work skills. I have learnt that a good team work requires not only good
communications but also suitable organizations, where all team members get to collaborate and
contribute their ideas and knowledge with different personal abilities that eventually lead us to a
successful final result. One thing I wished I knew already before we started this course was the
importance of time management during early stage works, where we brainstorm ideas and test
them during our once per week labs, our team started off a bit slow and wasted a few labs due to
our loose schedule and limited researches and information. The 10 words of advice I would give to
next year’s class to help them improve are: Start as early as possible and never underestimate
yourself.

Plan for Procrastination

In the beginning of this project, our team including myself started off with slow
development in researching and collating cell ideas that could be tested in the laboratory
sessions. This early stage was tedious and not as successful as our many experiments failed, it was
until past mid semester when we finally found a cell that worked and produced sufficient power,
which we submitted as our final patent. After our patent was approved, our team’s efficiency has
definitely accelerated and became on top of work, where the team was split into two groups, one
focused on optimizing our cell design and the other began to work on the construction of the
LEGO car. Throughout the next few weeks until the final testing day, our group was able to analyze
with many experimental results of some crucial components of the final design, such as the cell
arrangements, the containers to be used, the cell connections, the gear ratio to be used and the
size of the car. Overall, our team did a great job coming 8th and were one of the four groups that

26
completed the course. I am very satisfied with this result as it successfully reflected on the whole
group’s efforts throughout the semester.

Design for Success

For my next, big, team engineering project, I will approach it a bit differently, where I
would do more secondary researches, as much as possible to improve my ideas which can let me
to overcome the knowledge berries and become more creative. I would also like to change myself
from being afraid to speak up and call out my own ideas as I was initially in this project to ensure
good communications and understandings of each members in the team. Each member of our
group came from a different area of engineering and all had different personal knowledge, this
has caused a few problems as we were all not familiar with this project area (me with no chemistry
background) and each other, resulting in some awkwardness and silence during the early stages,
lacking discussions and contributions. Our group eventually overcome this through our mentor’s
encouragement and good leadership from our leader, where we began to take parts in different
aspects with great organization, so that each member is allocated with a job that they are good at
or are able to achieve to the best quality possible, this lead to the optimized design and positive
outcomes. Other than the mistake our team made during the early stages, we did a great job
completing this course as we made efficient decisions, such as my car group, where we kept the
car design flexible to consider all the situation and the unknown factors (the load). Thus, with
everyone’s contribution, I believe our team worked sufficiently and allowed everyone to develop
various skills that will definitely be beneficial to our future engineering career.

Your Expectations

In the beginning of this course, my expectation of this project was very vague, I did not
know what they expect due to my lack of understanding of not only the course outlines, but also
the lack of basic HSC or any chemistry knowledge background, therefore I have expected that I
will have trouble with the group work as I did not know how I could contribute. This expectation
was then proven wrong as the project actually consisted many different aspects, allowing me to
contribute to the team in another direction. i.e. designing the car. One other unexpected factor
was that I thought we would be carried along the way and be given hints or answers during the
lectures and from our team mentors, but I was surprised as they were limited to the extent to
which they could help us. This was definitely unexpected and pressured me and my teammates,
but, on the other hand, it helped us develop some key skills in engineering that will definitely be
beneficial to our future studies/career, such as critical thinking and problem solving, thus, leading
us to a successful finish by completing the course, which I believe is the expectations of the course
that I have met.

27
Your Feedback

This is my first team engineering project and I have gained a lot of benefits from it,
apart from all the challenges, I found this ENGG1000 course as an enjoyable learning experience.
One negative thing about this course was the peer assessment, although it aims to develop our
critical thinking and evaluation skills, I think it still consists of some unfair aspects, such as peer
assessing reflections across all the projects of this course that they had limited knowledge of
which adds to the confusion of the task, the calibration marks were then scaled down to a score
that is not in proportion to the accuracy percentage, affecting the overall mark of the student.

15. Reflection – Amjad Alkhater

If I Knew Then What I Know Now

Individual work and teamwork are two of the major aspects that are tested throughout
this course. The individual component relies on personal knowledge of concepts which include
electrochemistry and coming up with ideas that need to be tested. The teamwork component on
the other hand relies on team cooperation and structure that is built fundamentally to be able to
get past the struggles that an individual may have in an efficient matter. Furthermore, teamwork is
can be a catalyst for dormant members to be inspired by their charismatic peers to contribute to
the team. However, the team crumbles when members begin to neglect their responsibilities.
Therefore, I personally found that individual work is essential to the success of the team. Having
limited guidance from the mentors can also be detrimental when the team most needs it which is
why each member should be aiming to provide a fair amount of theory to back up their ideas.
Having said that, I still think that the team is in its strongest when the members have communal
agreement and a plan to follow. That is why my advice to next year’s class would be: “Insure
having a well-spread balance of both individual and teamwork to boost productivity.”

Plan for Procrastination

Based on my personal experience, I found that procrastination has bloomed from

frustration due to lack of progress. This lack of progress was mainly a result of being lost in the
process of building a functional chemical battery. The team started strong with a few ideas to test
which ended up being scrapped when deemed unsatisfactory. This process has repeated many
times throughout this course and coming up with a working battery got more challenging as the
course progressed. Nevertheless, once the team had an idea to pursue, I felt more motivated than
ever to go ahead and put the concept through its paces. The outcome may not have be absolute
best in the course, but after running into as many road-blocks as we did, I am reasonably satisfied.

28
Design for Success

Our Team leader managed the team by identifying what each member gravitated to
and assigned us as he found suitable which I think is a sound method to follow. However, having a
certain affinity to a part of the project does not necessarily translate to being able to overcome
difficulties pertaining to that section easily. Due to this, I would try to follow the same method, but
expand on it by having members contribute to other parts of the project when necessary.
As a member that mainly worked towards getting a battery that satisfies the
requirements, I should have put more effort in to coming up with battery ideas. I was content with
looking up different combinations in the standard cell potential table and doing some research;
one combination at a time. Instead, what I should have done was to conduct a thorough
theoretical analysis as well in order to come up with more reliable battery ideas to test.

Your Expectations

What I expected from this course in an introduction to engineering; a browse through

many of the elements that are utilized in engineering on a daily basis. What I got was all what I
expected and more. This course tests communication skills, evaluation skills, critical thinking in a
simulated setting that is set to match high level engineering projects in experience.
The course expected me to show and practice a number of skills that are used by
engineers regularly. I met the course by confusing it for a type of course that is more akin to
mathematics where concepts are simply taught and tested.
However, I thankfully managed to realize my mistake before too long and attempted to
meet the course’s expectations putting myself in the mindset of engineer to the best of my ability.

Your Feedback

This course exposes students to an open-ended engineering problem with the hope of
imbedding them with the qualities of an engineer and give them a fair preview of what is to come
which I find very admirable. In addition, it allows for development in essential skills which are
commonly used in engineering such as effective communication, critical thinking and research.
This is important for setting students up for success.
An aspect that I am particularly fond of is that this course allows for an environment
where making new friends is incredibly easy due to how the course is set up. However, I find that
the peer assessment, while useful for developing evaluation skills, can be implemented better
having a moderator to analyse the assessments and provide a general assessment of his own for
reference. I personally found peer assessment process to be a bit unreasonable due to the
inconsistent feedback that is provided.

29
 16. Reflection – Yida Hao
If I Knew Then What I Know Now

Throughout the whole course what I learned is how to contribute to the teamwork
efficiently and the point is effective communication with the other team members. As an
international student who came here just several months ago, English is the biggest block for me
to really take part in the activity. However, throughout the course, I noticed that I really need to
have some talks with the others in order to make some contribution. To be honest, if I noticed the
significance of communication at the start of the semester, I may do much better.
So the 10 words of advice I would give to the next year’s class, especially those international
students like me, is that “make friends with your teammates and don’t be shy.”

Plan for Procrastination

Though we didn’t waste our time and tried our best, due to the limitation of knowledge
in electrochemistry, we were told that we were a little bit slower than the other teams at the
beginning. We got anxious about it and tried to speed up as much as we can. However, as we paid
too much attention to speed, we got poor quality of our work and bad judgement about possible
designs. We rejected some ideas without thinking carefully. To be honest, we went back to one of
the ideas in the end and passed the test.
So we cannot be neither too fast nor too slow in the process of engineering design. We
must not waste time since there is not much time for laboratory and team meetings. If we read
comics and get start late, there will be less time for coming up with designs, getting enough
statistics from testing and improving our designs and finally we fail.
On the other hand, we had better not worry about the time too much. We are not supposed to
get the work done as fast as we can and ignore the quality of it. What we care is not how fast but
how good our design is.
I am really satisfied with our design since we passed the test successfully. However, as I
said above, I wish I made more communication with the others in order to contribute better to the
whole team so that I may get much happier about the success of our team.

Design for Success

Since it was the first time I do an engineering project, I knew little about the techniques
and skills in engineering design. Actually I even didn’t know there are some techniques I can use
before I took this course. Now I know that it is much better if I follow the design phases while I am
doing my next engineering project. A good time management is also needed for my next project.
We need to make and follow a schedule to make sure the work is finished on time. Time
management is also what our team did well this time and in addition, each activity are allocated to

30
 each member properly so that our design was done relatively successfully. However, the weakness
of our team is that several members including me did not talk enough and give sufficient
response. Instead of just listening to the others, providing responses may make our work more
effective and efficient.

Your Expectations

I found the course really interesting throughout the semester. ENGG1000 is not like the
courses I took in my country, which focus too much on theories but neglect the significance of
practice. I like the process of engineering design and the sense of achievement when we finally
made a nice LEGO car. Though the course is a little bit hard than I expected, it is encouraging and
does get students involved. I thought I relatively met the expectation of the course. Though due
to the lack of communication I made less contribution than what I expected and what I needed, at
least I learned that I have to improve my communicating skills and make progress for the next
time I do an engineering project like this.

Your Feedback

I like the way we were marked based on the competition with other 14 teams. It
encouraged me to make more efforts and I thought competition is really necessary since no one
likes to be the bottom of the 15 teams and will do make some effort. However, I thought the
project (electrochemistry) is difficult for those who has not learned chemical engineering before,
which is relatively unfair. So, in my opinion, the course could focus on design progress more in the
future to ensure everyone can make really make contributions to the team and prevent someone
who has learned chemistry from dominating.

17. References

Dym, C., Little, P. and Orwin, E. (2013). Engineering Design: A Project-Based Introduction. 4th ed.
John Wiley & Sons.

DETERMINING ELECTRIC MOTOR LOAD AND EFFICIENCY. 1st ed. U.S. Department of Energy.
Retrieved from:
<https://www1.eere.energy.gov/manufacturing/tech_assistance/pdfs/10097517.pdf>.

18. Acknowledgement

We would like to thank Francois for his consistent faith in us, and our mentor Yangson Shen for
helping us especially when we needed it most. We would also like to thank Andrew for his support
throughout each of our laboratory sessions.

31