text:
Engineering Projects/HoverCraft/Howard Community College/Fall2011/501 Glorious

Problem Statement
There are many working models of Hovercrafts, some large and some small. However, the large ones are often piloted by a person, and the smaller ones are controlled with a remote controller. To the best of our knowledge, there are not many models that utilize an autopilot system and sensors that can avoid people yet travel down a crowded school corridor.

Team Members
Here is a list of the team members working on this project. The links to their individual project pages are also given:
 * James Morgan
 * Parlette
 * Blomme

Summary
Our team started out by making a basic design for the hover craft. We decided that we wanted the base to be a rectangular piece of Styrofoam. We wanted to have two fans blowing downward, one in the far back and one in the middle, and two fans blowing behind the hovercraft. This was so that the weight of the back two fans would not push the back of the hovercraft low to the ground since we have a fan right there blowing it up. We decided to keep the plastic wrap on the the piece of Styrofoam as our skirt. And it works very well. We cut two holes in the Styrofoam and plastic wrap where the two fans are blowing down so that the skirt can be inflated. Next, we needed to figure out a way to remotely control our hovercraft. We wanted some way to be able to remotely turn off just the left fan, turn off just the right fan, have both on, or have both off. We were given ATI remotes. These ATI remotes are meant to be used to watch TV on a computer, and we were to try to figure out how to use them to remotely control a hovercraft. After several hours of effort, we were unable to figure out how to use the remote to remotely turn on or off our fans. We tried hooking it up to an Arduino, but we couldn't get it. We also tried to just use wires straight from the receiver and put them on a bread board to make an LED light up, but that didn't work. In the end, when we finally got our remote controlled cars in, we changed our focus toward using the remote and receiver from one of the cars to turn the motors of our fans on and off. We are still in the process of hooking up the receiver to the motors on our hovercraft.

Story
There are three overall aspects to complete this project: 1. Building a working design of a Hover Craft; 2. Using a remote control system to control the Hover Craft; and 3. Developing and using an Autopilot system to allow the craft to avoid people while traveling through a crowded hallway. To build a working design of a Hover Craft, our team used prior knowledge of Hover Craft design, and also drew on the designs of previous teams. We created a design out of a Styrofoam sheet and gathered fans and turbines to propel and lift the craft. After roughly attaching these, we hooked the fans up to a power source to see if they worked. They worked quite well and provided enough lift to allow our craft to hover on a table surface.

The next step was finding a way of remotely controlling the Hover Craft. We searched the back rooms for any controllers remaining from previous projects, but unfortunately we didn't find a remote like the kind we were looking for. We did find an ATI remote, and attempted to connect the receiver to an Arduino. However, this provided some trouble, as no one in our team had much experience with Arduinos. Meanwhile, we requested some remote controlled cars, as we hoped to use the receiver and transmitter from the cars for our Hover Craft. We continued with this for another week, learning how to use an Arduino, and trying to splice the ATI Remote with the Arduino. The remote controlled cars finally arrived, but we have had no time to work with the receivers and transmitters as of yet.

Because the second step took so long to work through, and was not even completed at the end, there has been no time for working out an autopilot system. Once control is established for the Hover Craft with a remote controller, the next priority is to develop a method of autopilot control. The only lead our team has at this point is to use a Lego Mindstorm sensor of some kind and connect it to an Arduino. The next steps to take at this point are finalize control via remote controllers, and then set up an autopilot system.

Decision List
1. Decide what the base of the hover craft is going to be made out of.

2. Decide how many fans we wanted to use and how to arrange them. And if we decide on one fan in the back, what the ruder will be like.

3. Decide on what to use for the skirt.

4. Decide on what to use for our remote control device.

Material List
-rectangle of Styrofoam for our base

-the plastic that came wrapped around the piece of Styrofoam to use as our skirt.

-4 fans

-epoxy glue to glue down the fans

-wire, to attach the motors from the fans to power sources

-remote controlled car controller and receiver

Software List
- ATI remote software, found here http://support.amd.com/us/gpudownload/Pages/remotewonder2-xp.aspx

-Arduino software

Time
We spent about an hour and fifteen minutes each class working on this, and we spent an average of about one hour and a half each week outside of class individually. So over four weeks, each person should have spent about 11 hours of work on the project.

Tutorials
A Hover Craft is a common enough idea that many people probably know the basic method of constructing one. However, we've found that it's slightly more difficult to construct one than we thought. However, we will walk through our procedure so that those who wish to continue with this project may learn from us.

To start with, we planned our designs, and decided on a simple, yet capable design. We took a sheet of Styrofoam about an inch thick and left the plastic wrap it was packed in on the sheet. We then used an Exacto knife to cut two holes for the lift turbines, and attached those turbines with epoxy. We attached alligator clip wires to the turbines and hooked it up to a power source to see if the turbines worked. We set it up correctly, and the turbines provided enough lift to allow the sheet of Styrofoam to hover across the tabletop.

Then we went looking for remote controllers, but only found ATI remotes which are used to watch TV on a computer. We began taking apart the receiver box to gain access to the insides. Our goal was to find a way to splice the ATI remote receiver box to an Arduino, and use the Arduino software found on the computers to establish a connection and control the Hover Craft. After we could not get that working, we tried to see if we could just have wires from the receiver be directly attached to an LED to see if we could turn the LED on and off using the remote. But we were not able to achieve that either. So we would recommend to get a remote and receiver from a remote controlled car and use the wires from the receiver to power our fans. And set it up to be able to turn both fans individually on and off.

Next Steps
We have made good progress on this project, however there is still a lot of work that needs to be done to accomplish the initial problem statement. We were able to build our design of a Hover Craft, and have found that, when supplied with power, will hover on a surface. However, control still needs to be established in some form or another. After one is able to control the craft with a remote, an autopilot system should be set up for the craft so it can navigate without needing to be physically controlled.

This is a promising project, and one that could be a lot of fun. However, there was a lot to do in little time, and we would have liked to have gotten further with this interesting project.


text:
Engineering Projects/Car Hack/Howard Community College/Fall2011

 * /501_Autoengineers/

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
User:Chaagii 0817/enes100/flyers

Link back to Flyers

Give instructor top 3 project choice list
Typically the instructor picks teams. Students send the instructor their top 3 choices. The project choices are typically those found at Category:General_Engineering_Projects. The instructor tries to put students in the project of their choice. Put your top three choices here after they are used to assign you to this project. Create a link to the project root and to where your team will be working.

Write problem statement
How to control AR Drone from IPod Touch 4?

Assign Task1
Figure out how to download AR Drone application for IPod touch

Compare actual work done to Task1
I learned how to deal with AR Drone controller from IPod touch. In addition, I learned how to upload pictures to wikimedia and put pictures on wikiversity. Also, I learned how to shrink web pages.

Week1 Narrative
I took those pictures in Lab on 09/21/11 from my Ipod touch4. When I first tried to put someones AR Drone picture, I had problem because they wanted to actually where that pictures comes from. In order, to solve it solve that, I took pictures by my IPod touch. It was able to upload it. Later on, I figured out how to put someone else pictures.

Week1 Peer Review
I went my teammate pages but they didn't record anything; therefore, i was not able to put positive comments. I went their pages and added "saw the page" Chaagii 0817 16:19, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Assign Task2
I choose IPod Touch 4 to control AR Drone. First I went to online search about AR Drone and downloaded AR Drone free application for IPod Touch 4. Then, I got some information about it, so with teammates we started to test. For the first and the second time we had no idea why AR Drone was not connecting with WiFi. Therefore, I tried to use some information from official site. After that, I followed some instruction I unpaired AR Drone and turned off wiki. When unpair finished, I turned on Wifi and found AR Drone wifi and connected with it. Next, application was downloading some thing and said reset your wifi. For that reason, I closed that application and went my IPod Touch setting to reset my wifi. Then, I was not able to find AR Drone connection. After while, I tried to search AR Drone connection and it works pretty well.

Compare actual work done to Task2
Connecting AR.Drone from IPod Touch was easy to control it; however, connecting X-Box Kinect from PC is hard because programs is not so popular yet.

Week2 Narrative
Added some pictures of Ar Drone. Also, Uploaded video of AR Drone in youtube In HCC. We almost finished most of our X-box Kinect project. However, we need purchase Winrar or Winzip program in order to test our work, but we are looking for free program. I found program called jZip; therefore, I believe our team project will not take long time.

Week2 Peer Review
I went to my teammate discuss page and wrote positive comment. However, one of my teammate wrote nothing on his discussion page; therefore, I just wrote saw the page.

Assign Task3
For this week I am trying to control AR Drone from Computer using X-Box Kinect, so we will able to make it fly using body movement. We almost finished 80 % of project that we should use X-box Kinect. We only left to test it.

Compare actual work done to Task3
Working on X-Box Kinect takes us longer time compare to IPod Touch and Android.

Week3 Narrative
We tried to fly AR Drone on Thursday October 5, but it had problem with propeller Ar Drone propeller problem; therefore, we decided to fix that. First we took off screws because it was loose and we put it back where it should be. After that, we tested Ar Drone and propeller worked properly Propeller fixed. This is our first big problem that we solved.In addition, I am recorded video that shows how high it goes Video.

Week3 Peer Review
I went to my team mate pages and wrote positive comment. Also, put my name and date.

Assign Task4
We are planning to finish X-box Kinect project next week. However, next week we have only one meeting, so we will try our best to finish that project.

Compare actual work done to Task4
I am working on PC almost two weeks to control Ar.Drone; however, I am having problem.

Week4 Narrative
This is the video how people are using the Ar.Drone from computer Pc. The main web page that I used for my project is DroneHack I am downloaded Windows application from Windows app. After I'm downloaded the program( ARDroneUI WPF2.rar ), I had problem extracting that file, which was gave me headache. However, I am figured out how to solve that problem. Since I had everything that i need, I tried to control Ar.drone from my computer but I am still can't control it. This program required me to install Direct X, but every time when I download it. I am having viruses in my computer; therefore, I can not able to finish my project. I am thinking that maybe I need to install computer game because I believe if i download game i can able to have Direct X. I didn't have enough to finish connecting Ar.Drone to PC, but i will finish it for my next project. While I was researching information, I found information about Arduino related with Ar.Drone.However, I don't know about Arduino, so for next project maybe I can use it Arduino

Week4 Peer Review
Go to each team mates weekly summary wiki page. Read their activities and narrative. Then go the associated discussion page. Say something positive on this page. Try some constructive criticism. Add your name and 1sfoerster 13:33, 28 August 2011 (UTC) to create a time and date stamp. Create a new category if another team mate has already commented here.

Complete Project Page
Project Done

Start Next Project Week0 activities
Download games from ITunes to play on ITouch and to test them.

title: User:Chaagii 0817/enes100/flyers


text:
Wikiversity:Candidates for Custodianship/Abd (full custodian)/Response to comments of SB Johnny

Copied from the Candidacy page. My response is interspersed. Section headers supplied--Abd 16:31, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Abd well-intentioned, creative, and dedicated

 * Abd is a very well-intentioned, creative, and dedicated contributor, with plenty of time to devote and many ideas for improving Wikiversity.
 * Thanks, SBJ, but I really don't have "plenty of time." Rather, I've made Wikiversity a priority. I won't always be able to do that, which is why I very much want to expand the custodial base. I cannot sustain the level of activity that I've been handling recently. Wikiversity, long-term, cannot depend on me, personally. --Abd 16:31, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Net negative

 * However, each of these qualities are double-edged, and I feel that the negatives definitely outweigh the positives when it comes to putting him in a position of trust.
 * I'm in a position of trust, and have been for a total of over three months, in the three probationary periods. I haven't been shy, I've acted, as a probationary custodian, as I'd act as a permanent one. But SBJ does not take this opportunity to examine actual incidents where I might have betrayed that trust. Instead, he focuses on irrelevancies. Things that I have done when not a custodian, things that may continue whether I am or am not a custodian, and things that may, indeed, be very important to the future of Wikiversity, which was, when I began, under attack and in serious doldrums.

 * My work with Wikiversity structure and policy should be distinguished from my work as a custodian. As SB Johnny is aware, the latter is mostly boring. If I used tools to support my sometimes controversial views on structure and policy, I'd be creating disruption. It seems that SB Johnny fears this, but no actual example has been shown in the recent probationary period. There are several possible examples from the past periods, they mostly involve Ottava Rima, and my actions in those incidents were never deeply examined; if it were to become necessary, I'd claim that I was acting in anticipation of consensus, and under emergency conditions, where there was immediate and ongoing damage. Those actions were immediately submitted to the community, and a custodian who does this, who acts openly and transparently, cannot do serious harm, unless he or she is the only custodian left standing, in which case the matter is almost hopeless in any case. Some projects have only one administrator. That's not Wikiversity, nor will it be Wikiversity. One of my ambitions is to expand the custodial base here, and we also need 'crats willing to pay attention and respond to requests, such as at Changing username.

 * On the one hand, SB Johnny is the only 'crat who has responded to these requests recently, but on the other, he only responded when personally pinged by the users involved, whereas general policy suggests that requests be on the Changing username request page for transparency. I worked to clean up that page to make it easier for 'crats, and I'm proud of that. We need at least one more 'crat, someone willing and able to be available. Perhaps Jtneill, who has been moving his residence, will be able to return to 'crat activity.

 * The "negatives" are essentially in SB Johnny's mind, not in the record of my actions.

 * I have been in a position of trust, many times. Have I abused that? This should be the question. By the way, I'd be completely willing to continue as a "probationary custodian." I don't need "permanent" status to help out. As a probationary custodian, I'm subject to Candidates for Custodianship/Standard stop agreement, which I voluntarily accepted. This should make it safe for almost any user to be a probationary custodian. All it takes is some supervision, and if there are too many examples of supervision needed, then it's simple to stop the problem, given that agreement. But we don't need to decide that this time. If I'm not confirmed, and if there is a mentor willing to continue, then it can be decided at that time. --Abd 16:31, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Ignores objections
He has over time put forward a number of innovative ideas, but then applies them without building a consensus to do so, and has said on a few occasions that he feels the people who don't agree with his approaches simply don't understand them (and hence, apparently, the objections can be ignored because they lack a force of argument).
 * That's how wikis work. Actions speak louder than talk about actions. That is, I may try out an idea, I may suggest and try out a process, within what is allowed (which is wide, generally). However, the issue would be if I insist, if I become disruptive, if my "bold" actions cause harm, if I revert war. There is one incident where I "revert warred," and it was a very special case, and it's the only case I know where there was an appearance of "disregarding consensus."
 * This was when Moulton was blocked, but continued editing WV pages, including "outing." Off the top of my head, as I recall, I reverted, and Moulton, as IP, reverted, and this went on and on. What I was doing was begging for custodial attention (I had been desysopped by SBJ, based on a very strange CR filed by Ottava Rima). Instead, SBJ blocked me. What I was doing would have been considered completely allowed on Wikipedia. I've seen it done here, by global sysops, with IP vandalism that's repeated. In the end, SBJ was more or less forced to range block Moulton, when it became clear that stewards were about to intervene. The basis for SBJ's position that I was ignoring consensus? A couple of odd opinions on RCA. Basically, I'd disturbed SBJ's peaceful goat farming. He doesn't like that. I don't blame him for that, but ... heat, kitchen. --Abd 16:31, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

ban on Wikipedia
Similar behavior led to an eventual community ban on Wikipedia earlier this year. The opening comment of the ban discussion included "This disruption is characterized by attempts to influence project governance in ways orthogonal to accepted modes (e.g. delegable-proxy, self-reversion whilst blocked/banned, placing huge walls of text inside collapse boxes which "you don't have to read" but will be referred to nevertheless as being accepted if not read".

 * I was blocked, including talk page access, and unable to contribute to that discussion on Wikipedia. Yes, I do collapse lengthy discussions of topics, but I have never claimed that anyone has "accepted" these, read or not. I only collapse what is optional in a discussion. To claim acceptance would be preposterous! What happened there was that people imagine that I'm like them. Natural, I'm sure. The person writing that assumes that someone has accepted their arguments if they don't respond otherwise.

 * They were right that my suggestions were "orthagonal" to "accepted modes," that's actually quite accurate. "Accepted modes" exist within a one-dimensional linear and confined space, that is either "this" or "that." Delegable proxy makes possible something completely consistent with the ad hoc wiki model, but also integrating aspects of representative democracy. On Wikipedia, this was proposed as w:WP:PRX, and not by me, but by a long-term Wikipedian who had come across my ideas and who was inspired by them. The rejection was vehement, even though this was just an experiment to try out a proposed voluntary file structure, so vehement that he became imbalanced, and, yes, he had some problems. Wikipedia had a very negative impact on him, in the end. Immediately, though, he was indeffed, a draconian response, without warning, for an offense that would normally result in a 24-hour block, if that, if repeated after warning, and he didn't repeat after warning. It became obvious to me that the default oligarchy at Wikipedia felt very threatened by the proposal. The votes in the MfD assumed that it involved "proxy voting.' It did not. It changed no policy, it was just an experiment, one which some obviously wanted not to happen. I didn't insist on Wikipedia. I have now proposed delegable proxy here, have set up a simplified version, and it is being accepted by some, see Delegable proxy/Table. The problem with this is? Now if I were to start violating policy here, and claiming support from X users based on that Table, it would be offensive. SBJ might imagine that I'd do that, but I would not. Delegable proxy is just a method of estimating large-scale consensus from small-scale discussion, and no changes in policy here are being proposed. At least not yet! The goal of the Assembly and the delegable proxy aspect of that is consensus, not control by some faction.
 * And this has nothing to do with my custodianship, I'd have proposed all that, with the same results, even if SBJ's pocket veto of my probationary custodianship had not been bypassed. And that's the real issue here. SBJ is accusing me of wanting to control Wikiversity, when the truth is that he believes that he's in charge, and this has been going on for a long time, since before I came to WV. I've done little about this because what he believes is actually irrelevant, and he's entitled to his opinions. But in this comment, SBJ has raised some very serious issues, below. --Abd 16:31, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Abd user space documentation of Wikipedia self-reversion
Abd has himself documented much of this in his userspace, for example here (the main page), here (documenting his "self-reversion"), and here (where he tries to outsmart the bots... the bots were employed because the time of actual people was deemed to be wasted following him around).
 * "Tried to outsmart the bots." I'd urge people concerned about this to read my page, as cited, and there is a subpage about the filter. I was labelling all my edits to Wikipedia, in the edit summaries, with my user name, and self-reverting, "Will self-revert per ban of Abd" and "Self-revert per ban of Abd." I have a long-standing opinion, backed with some substantial evidence, that self-identified, self-reverted edits, unless the content is truly harmful (i.e., outing or serious incivility or other serious disruption) don't violate bans, just as self-reverted 3RR violations don't violate 3RR, or self-reverted incivility doesn't violated civility restrictions (unless the self-reversion is simply wikilawyering, another issue, a way of committing serious incivility and claiming an exemption). (Imagine an edit summary, "Abd is a lying Moslem pervert pedophile, well self-revert this truth per civility policy.")
 * The bots didn't prevent my editing at all, they simply prevented me from labelling the edits, which then made ban enforcement more difficult rather than less difficult. In other words, the edit filter was self-defeating, all it did was prevent the self-identification, the cooperation with the ban. I spend a few edits determining what exactly was banned. The ban caused serious collateral damage, and I attempted to undo this. And then I simply abandoned self-indentification. The edit filter did not inhibit my actual editing, and, in fact, nothing did but my increased involvement here. And the edit filter was causing collateral damage (which I documented in a subpage). It was disabled. What I do know is that my WV page was reviewed by WP admins, who, in some cases, acted to prevent continued problems caused by over-zealous enforcement. That was part of my goal, to facilitate change through making existing practice visible. It's unusual that a blocked and socking editor will cooperate like that by identifying all the edits. I didn't attack anyone on that page, and, notice, the attempt at Wikiversity to delete the page failed, see the RFD archive. And that WP activity ceased. Why? Because I became very active here. I find it ironic that some Wikipedia editors fail to understand how WV helps the other projects, but it seems that some progress is being made. I can point to a number of examples of how our welcoming attitude here has prevented disruption and socking elsewhere. We provide hope. Some seem to want to stop that, and I intend to stand firmly for it.
 * And this has nothing to do with my use of tools here, and my demonstrated trustworthiness on that. --Abd 16:31, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Experiments on Wikiversity
Abd has subjected the Wikiversity community to similar treatment:

Personal RCA

 * For one example, he at one point decided that WV:RCA would be better handled in his own userspace (there's an archive too!). He has made his belief clear that putting things in one's userspace gives one absolute authority.
 * SBJ misrepresents my position. I suggested -- and tested, with some success -- a clerked RCA, something that if done on Wikipedia, instead of the free-for-all AN/I, might make Wikipedia far more functional. At the time, RCA was routinely becoming like AN/I, a debate forum, which actually defeats the purpose. I haven't paid attention to my personal RCA page, but any user could create something like this, participation is completely voluntary, and if I'm no longer a sysop here, I might get that going again. (As a sysop, I watch RCA and requests for anything controversial should be made there. I would also watch any personal RCA page, like mine, where the user shows clerking ability, keeping it simple.) SBJ apparently doesn't understand traditions about user space. Users do not have "absolute authority" there, but user authority over their own user space is generally respected. I've used user space for mediations, successfully, on Wikipedia. ("Success" meant that users who were about to be blocked, one or both, because of their conflict, became cooperative and mutually supportive.) It's a device for allowing clerking by a volunteer clerk, the user. That personal request page violates no policy, and could be seen as a suggestion to make the regular RCA more functional, while reducing disruption. However, there has been little use of RCA for debate recently, so it became not necessary, at least at this point. However, some possible disruption just began, I'd say, with SBJ's re-opening of a discussion there which had been moved to a place of better function, thus creating an opportunity for a forked discussion. It's his privilege, but the effect could be disruptive. Let's hope that sanity prevails.
 * This is, again, an example of SBJ using what I've done, and would continue to do, as an ordinary user, not a custodian, as an argument against custodianship. This is turning into a referendum on my general approach, and maybe that's important, which is why I can thank SBJ for raising all these issues. I want people, including him, to take stands for what they believe in. --Abd 16:31, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Self-reversion here

 * He also tried (with more or less the opposite of community support) to employ his theories on self reversion and block evasions when Moulton was blocked here. Later when he himself was blocked, he continued along that path.
 * One of the most successful examples of the use of self-reversion was here on Wikiversity, arranged while I was indeed a sysop. It's documented on that self-reversion page study in my user space; SBJ points just to my section of that page, it's a general study of self-reversion as a technique for allowing nondisruptive participation by a banned user, thus moving "orthagonally" to the free/blocked thesis that traps some wiki thinking. However, all I did as a sysop in this regard was to block an account created by the cooperation of Thekohser, to allow a password-verified pointing to IP edits that were his, so they could be reviewed. SBJ doesn't remember this clearly, he was inactive at the time, and only came back during the successful RCA request that I eventually filed to resolve the issue. I attempted to suggest self-reversion to Moulton, and that failed. Moulton was not interested in cooperation, and self-reversion requires cooperation. Moulton was unblocked, not by me, but by Ottava Rima, as some kind of parting gesture, or possibly a "see how bad it will get" parting shot. I would never have unblocked Moulton, because he'd never agreed to cooperation. However, for a time, Moulton was, in fact, nondisruptive, if occasionally irritating. That changed.

 * As to "when he himself was blocked," I don't recall specifically, and it's not worth looking up, but I think I may have made some requests and self-reverted. Or I just made some of "block-evading IP edits," which I considered necessary for the protection of the community. I was trying to avoid steward intervention, but SBJ did not respond, until later, when it because obvious that stewards could and would respond. If we don't enforce WMF privacy policy here, they will, and every time that happens it damages Wikiversity's reputation. Seriously. My actions there were never reviewed, because I never considered a review to be worth the effort. I don't file Community Reviews just because I'm personally offended in some way. There has to be clear reason and value to them, my view. --Abd 16:57, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Playspace

 * Around the same time, he started pushing with no community support whatsoever) the notion of a "playspace". Again, he kept these in his userspace.
 * See Playspace. This is a device for avoiding deletion of inappropriate pages, inappropriate for mainspace, but possibly useful for the user. And perhaps useful eventually for Wikiversity. It has settled, in my usage, for such pages created by IP, otherwise I will move pages to the user space of the user who created them. It works. SBJ at one point objected to the name "Playspace." Apparently he thinks it insulting. Fine. He can create something like it under another name. But this should probably be in user space, the space of an active user, who will take responsibility for the pages not becoming magnets for disruption.
 * But "play" is not insulting to academic educators, those in the field of education itself. It's an essential part of deep learning process.
 * Again, This isn't about my use of custodial tools. Most of the Playspace work has been done when I was not a custodian. As a custodian, I'm doing deep Recent Changes patrolling, and thus see, often before others, possibly inappropriate pages. So I've been moving some of these IP-created pages to my own playspace. I'm probably going to tag most of these for slow deletion (another process I'm pioneering, see Category:Slow deletion, an idea which has had some community support when proposed. We may eventually have timed categories, with expirations named in the Category name. But one step at a time!

Canvassing for the Assembly

 * Most recently, he has been widely and relentlessly canvassing for "delegable proxies", which are to be used in the "Wikiversity Assembly" (the "rules" for the assembly are to be found in his userspace, so presumably are not intended as a collaborative thing at this time).
 * Well, not "widely," and certainly not "relentlessly. See User:Abd/Assembly invitations. The widest "canvassing" was that, the other day, I placed an invitation on the talk page of every inactive custodian (14, as shown by WV:Staff). Which brought in one who registered in the Assembly. Is that some bad thing? How? Notice that I've invited people who might not, shall we say, knee-jerk support what I do. Aside from the inactive custodians, I've invited, since August 23, 16 users, four of whom have opposed my candidacy, all invited previously to the opening of this PC nomination.
 * See User talk:Abd/Assembly invitations for an explanation of the inactive custodian invitations, and a suggestion for all Wikiversity users about the Assembly and invitations to it.
 * This is not the behavior of a user who wants to control the project, as distinct from seeking more efficient and effective ways of finding project consensus. The Assembly project has just begun and it may not at all be obvious how it will work, but that will change in coming weeks.
 * The only proposed Assembly process nominated so far is about forming a study committee to suggest Assembly process itself. The page SBJ cites is a rough draft. Just my proposal, that's why it's in my user space. The actual process will not begin until it is seconded by a user, and, yes, as a default clerk for the Assembly page, I will follow my own proposed rules. They bind nobody else. This is all designed for minimum disruption, minimum useless debate, while allowing maximum input, and while facilitating the creation of coherent reports, as distinct from what we often get when there is controversy, train-wreck pages that are very difficult to interpret.
 * Again, no use of tools involved. --Abd 17:49, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Meta activity

 * Finally, and perhaps most alarmingly, Abd has been very active on meta putting himself forward as a "representative" of Wikiversity. We've seen that issue before (with Ottava Rima), and I don't think we should go there again. (The person he was advocating for in this effort is someone in need of a psychiatrist, and I seriously doubt that any amount of "assuming good faith" on a wiki will help him, though that's been tried.)
 * The page cited by SBJ is a local page, and does not show what he claims. The "person" involved is a Wikiversity user who was in good standing here, no disruption, productive and helpful, when locked. "In need of a psychiatrist" is radically uncivil. I'd urge SBJ to retract this statement. I've only briefly touched on this, I hope that it does not become necessary to examine the situation more closely. The user involved has been very patient, to his credit; delay in this has been due to 'crat unavailability, same as the problems with WV:Changing username. No decision has been made whether or not a process should be initiated here, i.e., a CR, but the global lock at meta set a very bad precedent, as some highly experienced users -- including SBJ himself -- pointed out at the meta ban discussion. We are attempting to deal with this in the least disruptive manner possible, because history shows that discussion of this user will bring in many users with axes to grind. If it's necessary, all this will be documented. The page SBJ cited was created for usage in discussing this with 'crats, but wasn't actually pointed to. Is there a problem with that page?
 * Unfortunately, that page shows, without rubbing it in (it's not made obvious), a serious violation of WV bureaucrat confidentiality. I'm a bit surprised that SBJ would cite it here. --Abd 18:00, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Most ideas interesting but he's too certain he's right

 * Again, I think Abd means well. Most if not all of his ideas are interesting and worth considering. The problem with his approach is that he seems to become so sure of the validity and righteousness of his ideas that he just runs with them without taking an interest in getting others to come along, support, and improve them. Awarding a "badge of trust" to a person with this particular blind spot would both shed a bad light on the community that gave it to him, as well as bolster a sort of confidence that we should not be bolstering. To those new users who have found him helpful, I'm sure he can continue to be helpful without this status.

 * I think it's also important for the community to take very seriously the comments of "Salmon of Doubt" and "S Larctica" (scare quotes intended), because giving this person trusted status really will reflect badly upon the community here. It pains me to say it, but if Abd is confirmed, I would be prone to voting on closure as well, because this would (to me) make it crystal-clear that this community is both irresponsible and unsustainable. --SB_Johnny talk 22:24, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I've faced, shall we say, this problem many times, and with a number of situations, years ago, I've had the opportunity to discuss them later with people who were initially perplexed by my behavior. They've said to me, "You were right, we just didn't understand." Now, with this and twenty-five cents, at one time, I could get a ride on the subway. No longer. I propose solutions to problems that I see, and try them out. I do not insist, unless the matter is extremely clear, and, so far, where I insisted, the ultimate resolution was quite what I was advocating-by-doing. I.e., Moulton was range-blocked to prevent what I was preventing by reversion, as a relatively recent example (and as a non-custodian), earlier this year.
 * I do not believe that being a custodian confers any sort of advantage in content and policy positions, and a custodian who enforces a personal position contrary to consensus should be removed. True consensus is essential to my goals. In the example I mention from years ago, people were opposed to what I was doing, but what I was doing was independent, it did not actually require them to do or support anything. I followed my legal rights, that's all. And within months, all those people had signed up, because it became obvious that what I'd done was the way forward, possibly the only way. Yeah, it was a difficult case, because these were all my friends (and the friends of my ex-wife). I have better skills now, for sure. But I do take stands. Taking a stand does not involve "being right." I want everyone to take a stand for what they believe. Right and wrong actually have little or nothing to do with it. If we all take our stands, we can then discuss them and seek consensus.
 * Where I might differ from some others -- which doesn't make me "better," just different -- is that I'm willing to take risks, to do something if I have the right to do it, even if some people don't "approve." But I do not Revert War, except maybe with a blocked editor, reverting the removal of highly disruptive edits with privacy policy violations in them, who is insisting on his way. And that SBJ doesn't understand this, I'll say, is a bit horrifying to me. But it's his right to take a stand. And my right to comment on it. And we and the community may then discuss it, if we choose.
 * SBJ's statement about closure would be scary, if there were a snowball's chance of closure. We have a Wikiversity 'crat who would vote for closure of the project because he disagrees with a (hypothesized) permanent candidacy approval? Based on? Who obviously considers this project as-it-is -- because all of his objections are to my non-custodial actions, which are definitely not opposed by the community, they have been allowed and even supported -- "irresponsible and unsustainable," but who is not willing to lend a hand to actually resolving the problems, that's been made crystal clear.
 * My sense is that SBJ is being completely honest here. He considers Wikiversity a train wreck, and has so considered it for a long time. His net effect here, over the last year, has been to increase disruption, not to resolve problems. That's unfortunate, and I hope he'll reconsider.
 * Wikiversity is actually the best hope that Wikipedia will realize its original vision, because that original vision requires genuine consensus. The problem is that WP did not develop genuine consensus process, early enough. I've been studying voluntary organizations for about thirty years, and what I've seen seems completely understandable to me, it was intrinsic in the naive structure. Compare Wikiversity, as something like a full, complete, comprehensive, open university, with Wikpedia, as an encyclopedia. If Wikipedia is allowed to control Wikiversity, this would be like the editors of an encyclopedia trying to control what academia says about a topic. Bad Idea. Tail Wagging the Dog. The editors are properly those who edit the encyclopedia, but academia properly advises. Following advice is optional, but controlling advice is stupid. When WV is mature, consensus here will be followed there, it can practically be guaranteed, from what I've seen in successful consensus organizations. That's my long-term vision, and is why it is so important that we develop genuine consensus process here, while we are still relatively small. When we become large, as we will, when our traffic exceeds that of Wikipedia, as it may easily do, it will be too late. That's part of what happened to Wikipedia. It's like clockwork. It is not the fault of Bad Guys, as some are fond of assuming. It's just what happens, if something else isn't set up, early on. --Abd 18:35, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Friends in the foundation

 * Just an additional thought after looking at WV:RCA: we do have friends in the foundation who are trying to support us (such as SJ, a board trustee who voted above, and User:Kaldari, a foundation employee who has made his opinion clear elsewhere after a rather strange encounter with Abd). His custodianship will not likely be helpful in getting additional support. --SB_Johnny talk 23:18, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Sj is certainly welcome here. The RCA discussion he started was premature, because the problem he's pointing to can easily be resolved -- and is being resolved -- by discussion with the editor. I closed that RCA discussion because the matter was being addressed, fully, on the editor's talk page. No custodian action was being requested other than attention, and attention was provided (some had already been provided, and Sj didn't seem to recognize that), and the closed discussion invited further participation in the talk page discussions. SBJ re-opened that discussion without considering the reasons for close, which was largely to avoid a forked discussion. I'm not reverting SBJ's re-opening, that would be revert warring. I simply did what I considered best for the wiki, in closing the request as being attended to, and leaving the archived discussion on the RCA page for review ("more eyeballs." I'd closed "without prejudice," which meant that if some action were required, it could be re-opened. I predict that no action will be required, so further discussion there will just be a waste of time. Of course, I could be wrong. So? Good example of what I do. No usage of tools was involved.
 * As to Kaldari, it was indeed strange. Kaldari created some original research pages in mainspace. However, they were named with what would be appropriate as titles for journal articles. I moved one to Kaldari's user space, simply suggesting that placement in Wikiversity mainspace should be considered. How, not whether or not. Kaldari apparently got upset, moved the page back, then moved it back to his user space. Kaldari did some comments that showed an expectation I'd harass him or something. But there was really no problem, and we ultimately agreed on the solution and the result is not only two excellent articles that will become open access journal articles, but placement of these resources within existing school/topic structure. Win-win. That's what I aim for. Kaldari's initial negative response shows how some Wikipedians have come to expect administrative abuse based on personalization of disputes and prior history. They won't find it here, not as long as I have anything to say about it.
 * In fact, Kaldari kept his "journal article names," and a good precedent was established. The use of mainspace subpages for such "journal articles," and a bit of mainspace page structure improved. No usage of tools was involved.
 * I'm not adding links here unless it seems necessary.--Abd 19:07, 14 September 2011 (UTC)


text:
User:Dkromer1996/enes100/flyers

Link back to Flyers

Give instructor top 3 project choice list
Typically the instructor picks teams. Students send the instructor their top 3 choices. The project choices are typically those found at Category:General_Engineering_Projects. The instructor tries to put students in the project of their choice. Put your top three choices here after they are used to assign you to this project. Create a link to the project root and to where your team will be working.

Write problem statement
Look through the existing problem statements. Find something not yet done on the project. Create a problem statement for it. Think of a new subsystem that needs to be built for the project. The goal is something simple, possible, for zero dollars.

Assign Task1
Tasks are typically done over the weekend. They are documented during the week, presented during the week and the next weekends work is negotiated during the week. Week 0 is the week that task 1 is negotiated. Record your individual task here. Plan on working on it during the weekend between week0 and week1.

Compare actual work done to Task1
Rationalize differences

Week1 Narrative
Upload photos to wikimedia. Upload video to youtube. Convert all spreadsheets, documents, and presentations to wiki format and create wiki subpage of your page for each of them. Link to them here in a narrative that tells a story. High light the problems (engineering problems) you had and how you solved them.

Week1 Peer Review
Go to each team mates weekly summary wiki page. Read their activities and narrative. Then go the associated discussion page. Say something positive on this page. Try some constructive criticism. Add your name and 1sfoerster 13:32, 28 August 2011 (UTC) to create a time and date stamp. Create a new category if another team mate has already commented here.

Assign Task2
Record what you are planning on doing for the team during the weekend between week1 and week2 of the project here.

Compare actual work done to Task2
In this task we are not only attempting to fly the drone from a pc, but control the drone using the kinect, which will be connected the the pc. The software downloaded will enable the drone to move according to arm movement.

Week2 Narrative
http://cdn.slashgear.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/Parrot-AR.Drone_.jpg

Week2 Peer Review
Go to each team mates weekly summary wiki page. Read their activities and narrative. Then go the associated discussion page. Say something positive on this page. Try some constructive criticism. Add your name and 1sfoerster 13:32, 28 August 2011 (UTC) to create a time and date stamp. Create a new category if another team mate has already commented here.

Assign Task3

 * Everyone in our group is trying to accomplish the same thing(connection to xbox kinect) but executing it in different ways. We are installing different software, and apps, to test the drone. One member tests the ipod touch, one tests the android operating system, and i am using my PC.

Compare actual work done to Task3
This week we will fly the AR drone with the PC connected through wifi without my laptop crashing due to computer viruses. We will touch on the xbox kinect but not before we establish flight from PC.

Week3 Narrative

 * During week 3 our team faced minor problems with the drone that postponed task progress. The biggest problem we had was the drone was not flying so our diagnoses was that the brass gear on on of the motors sank too far down to exert force into the propeller gear. The brass gear was barely touching the propeller gear so i loosened the drone arm end with a mini screwdriver to push the gear up, then tightened all the screws.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=VKNAXd1CSlg

http://i.ebayimg.com/t/Parrot-AR-Drone-Esky-Belt-Upgrade-Drive-Gear-Bearings-/00/$(KGrHqR,!l!E2ER!OjccBNojZn0Gz!_35.JPG

Week3 Peer Review
Go to each team mates weekly summary wiki page. Read their activities and narrative. Then go the associated discussion page. Say something positive on this page. Try some constructive criticism. Add your name and 1sfoerster 13:33, 28 August 2011 (UTC) to create a time and date stamp. Create a new category if another team mate has already commented here.

Assign Task4
For week 4 our team will completely establish connection with the AR drone and be able to fly the drone through a wifi pc. The camera will be shown on the laptop screen.

Compare actual work done to Task4
Last week we tested how much weight the drone could lift and this week our team is trying to create and run a program to fly the drone from PC.

Week4 Narrative
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=BGKXbTjtZpo
 * This video shows an AR Drone being flown from a laptop pc

Week4 Peer Review
Go to each team mates weekly summary wiki page. Read their activities and narrative. Then go the associated discussion page. Say something positive on this page. Try some constructive criticism. Add your name and 1sfoerster 13:33, 28 August 2011 (UTC) to create a time and date stamp. Create a new category if another team mate has already commented here.

Complete Project Page
Our progression with the drone project was not as far as we would have hoped but our team still succeeded in many aspects of the project. We successfully controlled the drone using android and ipod touch operating systems and were able to lift very light objects. All members of our team are in the drone project for the next month, including a new member, so we will push the project further.

Start Next Project Week0 activities
During this week you will perform the week0 activities of the next project.

title: User:Dkromer1996/enes100/flyers


text:
User:Jamorgan3/enes100/glorious

Link back to Glorious

This is where work on my Hover Craft project exists.

Give instructor top 3 project choice list
My top three choices were 1) Model Boat, 2) Cardboard Boat, and 3) Old Flat Screens. I was placed in the HoverCraft Group because it is similar to Model Boat.

Write problem statement
Make a HoverCraft that can be controlled with a remote control, then add an autopilot and sensors so that the craft can avoid people yet travel down a crowded school corridor.

Assign Task1
My task is to make sure our team page is up to date, and, like the other team members, to look for a remote control. Tasks are typically done over the weekend. They are documented during the week, presented during the week and the next weekends work is negotiated during the week. Week 0 is the week that task 1 is negotiated. Record your individual task here. Plan on working on it during the weekend between week0 and week1.

Compare actual work done to Task1
Able to update team page, unable to find remote controller at my house. We will look for controllers online.

Week1 Narrative
The HoverCraft's body was built out of a styrofoam sheet about 1" thick. Two holes were cut to allow the turbines to blow air underneath the body and create a cushion of air below. The turbines and the directional fans for the craft have been chosen for maximum output and control. However, sensors for autopilot control need to be gathered, and there may be some available in the engineering room.

Week1 Peer Review
Go to each team mates weekly summary wiki page. Read their activities and narrative. Then go the associated discussion page. Say something positive on this page. Try some constructive criticism. Add your name and 1sfoerster 13:32, 28 August 2011 (UTC) to create a time and date stamp. Create a new category if another team mate has already commented here.

Assign Task2
Continue updating Wikiversity team and individual pages. Plan to build a more refined craft.

Compare actual work done to Task2
Came up with ideas for how to improve our design.

Week2 Narrative
The propulsion turbines were glued onto our hovercraft. We gathered Arduinos, ATI Remotes, and sensors for autopilot. Request for RC cars was placed, and the included receivers and transmitters will possibly be used to control our craft. One problem the team had was how to distribute the weight evenly on the craft. We decided that instead of placing the directional fans in the back of the craft, they will be placed on the front since the propulsion will cause the front of the craft to rise up.

Week2 Peer Review
Go to each team mates weekly summary wiki page. Read their activities and narrative. Then go the associated discussion page. Say something positive on this page. Try some constructive criticism. Add your name and 1sfoerster 13:32, 28 August 2011 (UTC) to create a time and date stamp. Create a new category if another team mate has already commented here.

Assign Task3
Research information regarding Lego Mindstorm sensors and software for autopilot function.

Compare actual work done to Task3
Researched information regarding Lego Mindstorm sensors for use in autopilot feature.

Week3 Narrative
I continued working with my teammates on figuring out a control method. We worked on taking the ATI remote receivers apart, trying to splice them with an Arduino, which we would then use to control the Hover Craft. However, the combination process is highly technical and difficult. We are still waiting on remote control cars so we can utilize the receivers and transmitters from them to control our Hover Craft.

Week3 Peer Review
Go to each team mates weekly summary wiki page. Read their activities and narrative. Then go the associated discussion page. Say something positive on this page. Try some constructive criticism. Add your name and 1sfoerster 13:33, 28 August 2011 (UTC) to create a time and date stamp. Create a new category if another team mate has already commented here.

Assign Task4
Work on team Wiki page and look around for any remote controllers.

Compare actual work done to Task4
Unfortunately, not much work was able to be done on the team page this past weekend. I was also unable to find any remote controllers at home to use.

Week4 Narrative
While I was unable to find remote controllers at home, the remote controlled cars did arrive at the end of this week, so we started taking them apart to get to the receiver and transmitter in the car and remote, respectively. It is unfortunate that we didn't have access to these cars earlier on. They would have been helpful, and our team might have been farther along if we had a better control method.

Week4 Peer Review
Go to each team mates weekly summary wiki page. Read their activities and narrative. Then go the associated discussion page. Say something positive on this page. Try some constructive criticism. Add your name and 1sfoerster 13:33, 28 August 2011 (UTC) to create a time and date stamp. Create a new category if another team mate has already commented here.

Complete Project Page
Link to team page Glorious

Start Next Project Week0 activities
I will try to work with the remote controlled cars and determine a way to utilize the receiver and transmitter for the Hover Craft.

10/10/0 ... your week 0 todo should be on the next projects page ... searching for remote cars doesn't push a project forward, lack of materials excuses lower respect ... can always find something else to do ... 1sfoerster 13:37, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

title: User:Jamorgan3/enes100/glorious


text:
Engineering Projects/Car Hack/Howard Community College/Fall2011/501 Autoengineers

Problem Statement
We would like to get a car to start and read diagnosis from the car via a mobile device like a cell phone.

Team Members

 * Fahad
 * andyn6361
 * Mderrick

Summary
For the first week, Fahad's goal was to gain familiarization on starting a car. He did so by researching how a car starts outside of class. After the first week, he was researching what OBD scanner to purchase and what application can be used to start a car.

Matt's goal was to find a suitable blue tooth receiver, purchase the receiver, and test the range of the receiver.

Andy's goal was to find the schematics of the wires inside of a 1997 Toyota Corolla, the car being used in the project. After that, he went on to determine what voltage and ampere is required to trigger a starter solenoid, the device that starts up the starter that starts up a car's engine motor.

Poster
Pictures are to the right side of the team page

Story
Car hack is all about being able to get into a car without using the original equipment and be able to access the cars computer. Doing that can enable us to start the car, or unlock the doors and much more. The car hack project is very useful to people who want to push their engineering abilities. The car hack really gets you to use your brain. Using the car's on-board computer that is used to diagnose what is occurring throughout the car, we believe that we can turn on and off the vehicle.

Decision List
1. What On-board diagnostic scanner should we buy?

2. Through what do we make a car start?

3. What wires from the vehicle do we need to start the car?

4. What receiver should we use for the maximum range?

5. Does the vehicle have any type of built in theft deterrent systems that would thwart crossing of wires or hacking the ECU?

Material List

 * 1. a car to use
 * 2.Garmin obd connector Bluetooth to iPhone.(we couldn't get this)
 * 3.relay for the ignition switch.
 * 4.tools to open a steering column of a car.
 * 5.OBD adapter wifi(ordered)

Software List
We did not get to use any software as we did not receive it in time. We were going to use a iphone app called REV to read the codes off the car. Codes such as check engine light can be checked to see what is causing the car to have the light on. We had many software to choose from such as Viper, OBD check, and REV, but none of them had the same ability to read many adapters as the REV did. REV worked with many adapter available on the market.

Time
We spent 3 hours a week in classroom discussing weekly goals and decisions. We then spent 3 hours outside of class individually. In total, 6 hours were spent every week and 24 hours were spent during the entire duration of the project. With 3 team members, the total man hours spent for the project is 72 hours.

Tutorials

 * First gather all information on the car you are trying to hack. Get the details on the cars computer, find out where the OBD is located. Find out if it starts up normally or is it a electronic start.
 * Gather all the parts you will need for this project. We gathered information about the possible software we might need for our phones to display the data of the car. We searched to find out possible OBD adapters that work with several cars.
 * Purchase the items you need. We used an iPhone app called REV which cost about $39.99, we bought a OBD adapter for $80. Links are in team members pages

Next Steps

 * Find out how the apps works
 * Get the OBD Adapter connected
 * Get the data of your car
 * start working on the Starting the Car


text:
User:Gpforty2/enes100

This is where personal work for ENES 100 at Howard Community College will be placed.

Poppit

title: User:Gpforty2/enes100


text:
User:Ayapici/enes100/cupcakes

Link to Cupcakes team page.

Give instructor top 4 project choice list
I had three 4 choices, there were

A)   3D scanning

B)   Music projects

C)   Electric cars

D)   CAD Design Solidworks

In the end I was assign to do the 3D scanning, with three more friends..

Write problem statement
The project has five stages

1) How to use the program or CAD software to build a model.

2) Then how to put that model or data on "ReplicatorG"

3) How to use the makerbot

4) How to use a laser and scan objects

5) How to scan an object with Kinect XBOX 360

Assign Task 1
I was assigned to build a basic model in solidworks, ReplicatorG or Blender and research about the makerbot...

Compare actual work done to Task1
The work I have done in task1 was sufficient for understanding how the ReplicatorG, Blender, and solidworks work. by how to build a basic model like cube, or square. I have a full understanding of how all of these software work..

Week 1 Narrative

The first choice was to use Software CAD Blender. Because, the Blender have some samples(templates) that I could use, which could save my time.After looking at the samples, I picked up a cube shaped model. my next step was to save the file as a STL file, which is a file type that ReplicatorG was unable to recognize. I have tried so much on the Blender but I could not converted into Gcode. After uploading the STL file onto ReplicatorG, I was unable to find a connection between the ReplicatorG program. I went on www.thingverse.com and chose a model there and the model already provided with STL file type. That solved my assign task. Now it is ready for the MakerBot Cupcake CNC Procedure

Week 1 Peer Review
I have commented on Ben's individual page. my comment was how great his page was, and he has done really great job..The link to the discussion page is: Week1 Peer Review I have also commented on Ahmed's individual page. My comment was to advise him to use his wikiversity very often and type in what he has done.Week1 Peer Review

Assign Task 2
After working on CAD software and knowing how to work with them now the goal is to use the Metrologic neon laser to scan an object with camera.and save it as an stl file.

Compare actual work done to Task2
I have able to set up the laser, camera, and the wine glass into the right position, than I have downloaded the 2 more programs which are Meshlab and Makerscanner.. using .Makerscanner allowed me to scan the abject, and using Meshlab allowed me to convert the file type to PFY format... This task was successful.

Week 2 Narrative
I wanted to start looking at things differently, instead of using the Kinect XBOX360, I wanted to come up with a different idea. That idea was to scan an object by using a laser, Makerscanner sofware, Meshlab software, wine glass, camera, and labtop. I borrowed the Metrologic Neon Laser form my instructor Mr Foerster.I went online www.makerbot.com. I found some information how to set up the laser and scan the object. I have downloaded the Makersanner and the Meshlab from that website.. I turn the Makescanner on and I could see my self from the camera that Allows me to scan. That was cool. After getting the programs that I need. I put the laser on my desk with the stand and turned it on. then I put the wine glass straight in front of it. I could see the laser lines are changing on the wall every time I move the laser. I made a demonstration in a dark room just to find out how it scans and find out thing that I could improve to make it better..I am using my laptop's webcam which is so difficult to get it right, because every time you want to move the camera you have to move the whole laptop. and second issue was not being very sensitive. I made a few trails and determined my problems; laptop camera,unclear background, and spinning the object gently in 360 degrees. Every time I found myself in a new problem, I was doing more research and learning new things and that makes this class fun and fascinating... my next step will be working on the same in better room with clear background, and try to spin the object gradually 360 degrees.

Week 2 Peer Review
I made a comment on Ben's page. Saying that he has worked hard, and the next step of the task is more challenging.Week2 Peer Review

Assign Task 3
After a while,I thought that if I could change the camera and the glass with a clear plastic bottle I found in ENES lab could give me a better scanning.

Compare actual work done to Task3
I bought a new portable and easy to move around camera, and I have tried scanning an object with that, but it didn't work, the result was little better than the week 2 task, I have scan my very best 3D object, even though it's still recognizable...

Week 3 Narrative

It is been little frustrating at this point. After the week 2, I was thinking that if I could buy a camera and spin it myself gently, and change the wine glass with a clear plastic bottle might work.. Changing the wine glass with a clear plastic bottle was a better idea. I set the laptop in one position and I had to install a driver for the webcam that I bought... After getting the software to run the webcam, camera was working properly.The software that I have installed was "LOGITECH WEBCAM."Then, I positioned the the object and the laser in a straight line as I have done the same thing many times so far... On my laptop, I turned the Maker Scanner, and change the camera from laptop webcam to Logitech webcam, and eventually I was able to move the camera where ever I wanted. I have measured and positioned everything right according to my calculations. (I have done scanning in school and at home, in school there was an error, but at home I did not have error.) and I start scanning by clicking the scan button on the Makerscanner. I have a waited about 4 minutes or maximum 5 minutes I stopped scanning because, It actually scan many patterns as I could see on the screen, I thought, if I put that inside the Meshlab (the software that I have downloaded week before this task)this will work, I had blue patterns of scanning on the Makerscanner. I have save my work and then I was going to open the same image with the Meshlab. I open the image file and there was something and I captured the image but it was not recognizable, I save my file, if you look bottom right, you will be able to see my capture. I have tried several times the same steps to understand how it works and what else could I do to improve and push the project.As I was spinning the camera around the object as in making a circle it was making blue patterns on the makerscanner, when I was not moving the camera nothing was happening. So I came up with this idea; if we are going to use Makerscannner and Meshlab programs to scan an Object in 3D, I must have the camera where it can spin around the object or to spin the object around the camera. When you actually turn the lights off and start scanning I could see that it scans around the laser lights, I mean it only scans the edges of the laser line or any kind of light, because the light or the laser light is so bright, it cannot make any patterns, so I have determined that using the laser and scanning an object is doable, it is just how to put things in right position with right conditions.here is the video to show how it scans *plastic gear being scanned

Week 3 Peer Review
I commented on Ben's individual 3D-Scan project page. My comment was regarding how well and great his work on his individual page every week. The link to the discussion page is: Week3 Peer Review

Assign Task 4
My goal is to analyze everything I have done and determine what could we do to puh this project further in the future..

Compare actual work done to Task4
After a long analysis, I have come up with this idea. I think we need better programs to scan the object in 3D and we need to spin either the object or the camera..

Week 4 Narrative
First week, I said to myself, I don't think I can complete this project, and I was doubting myself, but still would fight to the end. After researching and finding out a lot about 3D scanning,I was so excited and I was looking forward to find more about it.. As a team, we kind of share the project, Ben was dealing with the Makerbot and the XBOX Kinect and Andrew was taking notes and fallowing our path and helping us. my part was to try to scan an object by building a set up system to scan an object in 3D.second week, I got my materials ready: as in Metrologic Neon Laser, Wine Glass, two different software,webcam, and laptop. My first try was very luck, and I scanned my hand,although it was not recognizable but it did scan my hand. Ben was able to made the Makerbot work and has showed us how it prints the object. That was straight forward. Most difficult of all was the XBOX 360 Kinect, after connecting it to the computer with USB, It still needed some kind of software to capture the Image. As a result, I was not able to scan an 3D object manually, but still hoping that next teams could follow our steps and take it further..

Week 4 Peer Review
I commented on Andrew's individual 3D-Scan project page. My comment was regarding how he should document his work on his individual page every week because it is almost the end of our Project. The link to the discussion page is: Week1 Peer Review I also made a comment on page Ben's page saying that it was a pleasure to work with him and it was a very productive project Ben's individual 3D-Scan project page

Complete Project Page
The project is done, over all we got the makerbot working, and was able to print and an object and you can see some pictures and how we did it on Ben's individual 3D-Scan project page or just click here to see the video that Ben has recorded *MakerBot Cupcake CNC Printing. Scanning an abject with laser and a camera was not fully successful, but there were some progress though. This 3D scanning is going to be one of most popular thing in the world in the next decade, I would like to think it will be easy to just print things by then.

title: User:Ayapici/enes100/cupcakes


text:
User:Ckpress/enes100/Ballbot

Link back to team BBotz

Project choice
Ballbot

Write problem statement
My goal is to figure out how the ballbot works. Assemble the Ballbot to stand on its head and remotely rotate a basketball balanced in its wheels.

Assign Task1
I created team page and individual page and scrumaged through old ballbot project files to find any useful information i could use.

Compare actual work done to Task1
I created the team page and my own page. Went through the files on the engineering class room computers and found photos of the fully assembled ballbot, the arduino, the motors, wheels, and the wheel connectors. I also found a useful power point from older teams works.

Week1 Narrative

 * Ballbot parts
 * Here are some of the parts more can be seen on my teampage

Week1 Peer Review
Go to each team mates weekly summary wiki page. Read their activities and narrative. Then go the associated discussion page. Say something positive on this page. Try some constructive criticism. Add your name and 1sfoerster 13:32, 28 August 2011 (UTC) to create a time and date stamp. Create a new category if another team mate has already commented here.

Assign Task2
I am going to take parts of the ballbot home to get more aquainted with the ballbot and how it works/assembled.

Compare actual work done to Task2
Took parts of the ballbot (Tribot) home realized that alot of the parts were missing. Could not put the Ballbot together so i look up how the arduino works with light in comparison so the wheel motors. Also how the remote works, wanna get the ball to spin on the wheels when i press the up channel or volume button.

Week2 Narrative
Heres a picture of one of the three tribots we ordered this week to further or project.

Week2 Peer Review
Go to each team mates weekly summary wiki page. Read their activities and narrative. Then go the associated discussion page. Say something positive on this page. Try some constructive criticism. Add your name and 1sfoerster 13:32, 28 August 2011 (UTC) to create a time and date stamp. Create a new category if another team mate has already commented here.

Assign Task3
Taking remote home over the weekend gonna figure it out in relation to signals when pressing buttons. Wanna get the motors to work when pressing a button on the remote.

Compare actual work done to Task3
The remote was so dismatled and so many pieces lost that it could not work. So i figured out how get the mortors to run by connecting the wires of the smaller ballbot to the mortor wires of the bigger ballbot. Just by playing around and switching the wires and holding them together.

Week3 Narrative
Ordered the wrong Tribot (ballbot) they are mini bots. I took it apart and found that nothing was useful. Here is some pictures of the dismantled Tribot. The rest can be found on teampage

Week3 Peer Review
Go to each team mates weekly summary wiki page. Read their activities and narrative. Then go the associated discussion page. Say something positive on this page. Try some constructive criticism. Add your name and 1sfoerster 13:33, 28 August 2011 (UTC) to create a time and date stamp. Create a new category if another team mate has already commented here.

Assign Task4
I will learn more about the the motors in the wheels of the tribot.

Compare actual work done to Task4
Figure out the wheels all run on seperate motors connected to one central piece. So I need to figure out how to control them with set buttons I want when I press them using the remote. The BIG ballbot came in! I played around with it and got comfortable with it and how it works and how it reacts to certain buttons on the remote.

Week4 Narrative
Upload photos to wikimedia. Upload video to youtube. Convert all spreadsheets, documents, and presentations to wiki format and create wiki subpage of your page for each of them. Link to them here in a narrative that tells a story. High light the problems (engineering problems) you had and how you solved them.

Week4 Peer Review
Go to each team mates weekly summary wiki page. Read their activities and narrative. Then go the associated discussion page. Say something positive on this page. Try some constructive criticism. Add your name and 1sfoerster 13:33, 28 August 2011 (UTC) to create a time and date stamp. Create a new category if another team mate has already commented here.

Complete Project Page
Follow the "project done" format.

Start Next Project Week0 activities
Plan to take apart the ballbot and connect the wheels to a base for balancing the basketball.

title: User:Ckpress/enes100/Ballbot


text:
User:Baminnick/enes100/cupcakes

Link to Cupcakes team page.

Give instructor top 3 project choice list
My top three project choices were Perfume, Corn Starch, and Water Jet, in that order. The project I am currently working on is 3D Scan.

Write problem statement
Past attempts at operating the MakerBot Cupcake CNC have been succesful at printing a 3-D object. But these attempts have been unsuccesful at creating a video, using the X-BOX Kinect Camera, then using ReplicatorG to convert the file from an STL file to Gcode, and finally printing the object.

Assign Task1
The task which I planned to accomplish for week 1 was to develop a procedure, which anyone can follow in order to print an object.

Compare actual work done to Task1
The work completed in task1 was sufficient for understanding how the MakerBot Cupcake CNC works. By developing a procedure for printing an object, I have a full understanding of how the 3-D printer works.

Week1 Narrative

To begin developing the MakerBot Cupcake CNC Procedure, I needed to understand how the MakerBot Cupcake CNC operated. By observing the 3-D printing demonstration given by the engineering aid, Patrick, I was able to obtain a basic understanding of the MakerBot Cupcake CNC. As I began printing my own object, I came across several problems. The main problems I experienced were regarding understanding the CAD program, Blender, setting up the MakerBot, and a few hardware difficulties with printing a raft in the MakerBot.

Blender, the CAD program which Patrick used in his demostration, seemed unreliable when I was working with it individually. I have used CAD programs in the past, and this program seemed difficult and confusing to use. However this was not the main issue. After saving a file on Blender, I could not convert the file into Gcode or even an STL file. So my solution to this was to download an already developed STL file from the thingiverse website.

After uploading the STL file onto ReplicatorG, I was unable to find a connection between the ReplicatorG program and the MakerBot. The connection between the serial port was not found and recognized by the ReplicatorG, and without this connection I would not be able to control the MakerBot from ReplicatorG. My solution to this was to search different COM ports, and use the connection command in ReplicatorG until the connection was made.

Once the connection was made, I began printing my object using the MakerBot. However as the printing process began, the work table jerked into the corner of the MakerBot. This action prevented further printing. My solution to this problem was to recenter the motor so it was closer to the work table in the Z-axis.

After solving these main significant problems, I was able to properly print an object. And since I printed something, and documented it in my engineering notebook, I was able to regenerate a basic outline for the procedure. The gaps in the procedure were filled by printing another object shown in the pictures to the left and the right:

Week1 Peer Review
I commented on Alex's individual 3D-Scan project page. My comment was regarding how he should document his work on his individual page every week. The link to the discussion page is: Week1 Peer Review

Assign Task2
The task which I planned to accomplish for week 2 is to upload an STL file from the X-BOX Kinect Camera onto ReplicatorG.

Compare actual work done to Task2
The X-Box 360 Kinect was properly connected to a computer in the engineering room. Visual, sound, and movement of the camera were all easily controlled in a window. However, forming an STL file from the Kinect was not accomplished because a photo or video could not be taken.

Week2 Narrative
The X-Box 360 Kinect is a camera with a motion sensing input device. This device recognizes motions and audio from a person or an object. Although the Kinect is for the X-Box 360 console, the device can be used on Windows computers. The relevance of this camera to the 3D-Scan project is that the camera can be used to scan an object. The scan which the Kinect produces is more accurate and precise than the scan produced with a laser and a regular camera. Since the scanning with the Kinect is more effective, it is easier to produce an STL file from the Kinect video.

When I first began using the X-Box 360 Kinect, I came across minor issues regarding the connection between the Kinect and the computer. My first attempt at connecting Windows and the Kinect was unsuccesful because the XBox NUI Motor was not recognized. I tried several possible solutions, however none of them were succesful at completing this connection. Then looking through Windows Help I came across a soluion I did not previously consider. The solution to this connection issue was to download software from the internet which can connect the Kinect and Windows.

The next problem which occured as I was attempting to complete this task was regarding the use of the Kinect software which I downloaded from a certain website. The software still did not complete the connection, the Kinect was recognized by the computer but the visual, audio, and other functions of the Kinect were not operating. After testing all possible solutions I came up with for this problem, only one solution worked. By looking at the X-Box 360 website, I was directed to another website in which I should download this software. Once visiting this website I downloaded the new software package, and the X-Box 360 Kinect was properly connected to the computer.

The connection between the Kinect and computer using this software resulted in a single window. This operating window allowed the user to move the Kinect up and down, and see what the Kinect was visualizing. In the operating window, the user can view a regular screen and a depth evaluating screen seen from the Kinect camera. Although the connection of the Kinect was succesful, the task was not completed. This is because a video or photo using the Kinect was not taken. The photo could not have been taken because there was no command on the operating window to do so. This problem was not resolved, and it will be worked on next week.

Week2 Peer Review
I commented on Alex's individual 3D-Scan project page and Andrew's individul 3D-Scan project page. My comments wer regarding how they should document their work on their own individual pages every week. The link to the discussion pages are: Alex:Week2 Peer Review and Andrew:Week2 Peer Review

Assign Task3
The task which I planned to accomplish for week 3 is to complete the MakerBot Cupcake CNC Procedure by adding the necessary videos, photos, and screenshots onto wikiversity.

Compare actual work done to Task3
The work accomplished for Week 3 is a success. I fully completed the HCC MakerBot Cupcake CNC Procedure by adding photos, screenshots, and videos to each step.

Week3 Narrative
Some of the MakerBot Cupcake CNC Procedure photos and screenshots are shown throughout this narrative:

As you can see from the various photos, most of the different aspects of the procedure are displayed. The photos are taken equally from the four different sections of the procedure: SetUp, Downloading an STL file, Uploading the STL file onto Replicator G, and Printing. The rest of the narrative disscusses the problems I faced in completing the procedure, as explained in the following paragraphs:

The task for week three was to complete the HCC MakerBot Cupcake CNC Procedure by adding photos, screenshots, and videos which may help future HCC engineering students to learn how to use the MakerBot. The completed procedure can be viewed at this link:Procedure with Photos and Videos. To do this, I followed the procedure I developed in week 1 and documented every step of the procedure. To document the steps, I used the class camera to take videos and photos, and I used the printscreen key to take screenshots on the computer. Documenting and following the procedure lacked some difficulty, however some major problems did occur. The problems were regarding how to use the class camera, working with the MakerBot, and storing the documentation.

To document the procedure's steps, the class camera was used to take a total of three photos and four videos. However, problems occured as I was using the class camera to do this. The first issue was setting up the camera so it can view the MakerBot properly. Books and other level objects were used to bring the camera to the height of the MakerBot, however the camera was looking forward not down on the MakerBot. To solve this issue, a small thin object was used to angle the camera so it could record a video of the MakerBot printing. As the setup of the camera occured, the batteries died. This problem resulted in an immediate stop of the previous problem. To fix the battery power issue, new batteries were found by asking the engineering aid for some new ones.

The next issue was working witht the MakerBot. Although I have been able to succesfully print something before, some issues still occur as I attempted to print something this week. Following the procedure I made in week 1 was helpful because it reminded me of steps I may have forgotten. Since I was following the procedure I could also edit the procedure as well as document it. The problems that occured as I was following the procedure were regarding the MakerBot. For some reason, the MakerBot would not complete a test extrusion. Without the test extrusion, the printing of my object could not be completed. To solve this problem, I attempted the STL upload process again and heated the motor again. Then the test extrusion occured.

The last major issue as I was completing the procedure is regarding storing the documentation. I took the photos and videos in Friday's lab, so I needed to work on them further at home. To do this transportation of the files was required. I first used my email, and this worked for the camera photos and screenshots, but not the videos. The file size was too large and it was over the email size limit. I tried several solutions to solve this problem, and using a USB drive was the best solution. However, I did not have my own USB drive with me at the moment, therefore I used the class USB drive. After this problem was solved, I was able to work on the documentation at home and upload the photos on wikimedia commons and the videos onto youtube.

The MakerBot Cupcake CNC Procedure Videos are shown below:
 * Setting Up the MakerBot Cupcake CNC
 * Centering the Work Table under the MakerBot Motor
 * MakerBot Cupcake CNC Test Extrusion
 * MakerBot Cupcake CNC Printing

Week3 Peer Review
I posted a comment on both Andrew's discussion page and Alex's discussion page regarding the great improvement in the wiki postings.

Assign Task4
The task I plan to complete for week 4 is to start summing up the project by allowing future teams to work on this project from where team cupcakes left off.

Compare actual work done to Task4
Work for week 4 was completed by adding information to the team page, documenting youtube videos and pictures taken, and changing the link for the HCC MakerBot Cupcake CNC Procedure. These accomplishments will allow the next team to view and understand the information which team cupcakes and I have posted on wikiversity.

Week4 Narrative
The time spent in week 4 was spent on bringing the project to an end and allowing future teams to continue team cupcakes work. The two stages to accomplish this are documenting the work, and presenting the work to the ENES-100 class. The main problem that occurred as this task was completed was deciding on a method to communicate this information to the reader.

I decided to communicate this infromation by contributing input to the Cupcakes Team Page, adding photos and videos to the team page, and changing the link to the MakerBot Cupcake CNC Procedure so that it can viewed from the team page, not my own individual page. These documentations will help future ENES students to use the HCC MakerBot, use the X-Box 360 Kinect, and push this project forward even further.

This information was also presented in the ENES-100 class. From this presentation, discussion evolved about how the next group should use the work team cupcakes completed to push this project forward. It was decided that the MakerBot side of this project was completed, so the next step was to use the Kinect. Methods for capturing an image or video with the Kinect was discussed and solutions resulted. These solutions were stated in the next steps section of the team page.

Week4 Peer Review
I posted a comment on Alex's discussion page regarding the work completed and documented for this project.

Complete Project Page
As stated previously, the team project page was completed. Content was added to each section, filled with photos, videos, and documentation of what was completed on the 3D Scan project. This was completed as a team effort, with everyone's contributions to this project properly documented. With this project coming to an end for myself and team cupcakes, the future team should be able to start from where we left off.

Start Next Project Week0 activities
My top three project preferences were Perfume, Corn Starch, and Chaos Theory, in that order. The project I will be working on is Corn Starch.

title: User:Baminnick/enes100/cupcakes


text:
Engineering Projects/Engines/Howard Community College

Howard Community College is starting this project in the fall of 2011. The goal is to give those that program and/or game a very specific programming project.
 * /Fall2011/


text:
User:Gpforty2/enes100/3dscan

Link to Cupcakes team page.

Give instructor top 3 project choice list
Typically the instructor picks teams. Students send the instructor their top 3 choices. The project choices are typically those found at Category:General_Engineering_Projects. The instructor tries to put students in the project of their choice. Put your top three choices here after they are used to assign you to this project. Create a link to the project root and to where your team will be working.

Write problem statement
Look through the existing problem statements. Find something not yet done on the project. Create a problem statement for it. Think of a new subsystem that needs to be built for the project. The goal is something simple, possible, for zero dollars.

Assign Task1
Tasks are typically done over the weekend. They are documented during the week, presented during the week and the next weekends work is negotiated during the week. Week 0 is the week that task 1 is negotiated. Record your individual task here. Plan on working on it during the weekend between week0 and week1.

Compare actual work done to Task1
Rationalize differences

Week1 Narrative
Upload photos to wikimedia. Upload video to youtube. Convert all spreadsheets, documents, and presentations to wiki format and create wiki subpage of your page for each of them. Link to them here in a narrative that tells a story. High light the problems (engineering problems) you had and how you solved them.

Week1 Peer Review
Go to each team mates weekly summary wiki page. Read their activities and narrative. Then go the associated discussion page. Say something positive on this page. Try some constructive criticism. Add your name and 1sfoerster 13:32, 28 August 2011 (UTC) to create a time and date stamp. Create a new category if another team mate has already commented here.

Assign Task2
Record what you are planning on doing for the team during the weekend between week1 and week2 of the project here.

Compare actual work done to Task2
Rationalize differences

Week2 Narrative
Upload photos to wikimedia. Upload video to youtube. Convert all spreadsheets, documents, and presentations to wiki format and create wiki subpage of your page for each of them. Link to them here in a narrative that tells a story. High light the problems (engineering problems) you had and how you solved them.

Week2 Peer Review
Go to each team mates weekly summary wiki page. Read their activities and narrative. Then go the associated discussion page. Say something positive on this page. Try some constructive criticism. Add your name and 1sfoerster 13:32, 28 August 2011 (UTC) to create a time and date stamp. Create a new category if another team mate has already commented here.

Assign Task3
Record what you are planning on doing for the team during the weekend between week2 and week3 of the project here.

Compare actual work done to Task3
Rationalize differences

Week3 Narrative
Upload photos to wikimedia. Upload video to youtube. Convert all spreadsheets, documents, and presentations to wiki format and create wiki subpage of your page for each of them. Link to them here in a narrative that tells a story. High light the problems (engineering problems) you had and how you solved them.

Week3 Peer Review
Go to each team mates weekly summary wiki page. Read their activities and narrative. Then go the associated discussion page. Say something positive on this page. Try some constructive criticism. Add your name and 1sfoerster 13:33, 28 August 2011 (UTC) to create a time and date stamp. Create a new category if another team mate has already commented here.

Assign Task4
Record what you are planning on doing for the team during the weekend between week3 and week4 of the project here.

Compare actual work done to Task4
Rationalize differences

Week4 Narrative
Upload photos to wikimedia. Upload video to youtube. Convert all spreadsheets, documents, and presentations to wiki format and create wiki subpage of your page for each of them. Link to them here in a narrative that tells a story. High light the problems (engineering problems) you had and how you solved them.

Week4 Peer Review
Go to each team mates weekly summary wiki page. Read their activities and narrative. Then go the associated discussion page. Say something positive on this page. Try some constructive criticism. Add your name and 1sfoerster 13:33, 28 August 2011 (UTC) to create a time and date stamp. Create a new category if another team mate has already commented here.

Complete Project Page
Follow the "project done" format.

Start Next Project Week0 activities
During this week you will perform the week0 activities of the next project.

title: User:Gpforty2/enes100/3dscan


text:
Engineering Projects/Engines/Howard Community College/Fall2011

 * /501_HEMI/
 * /550_ARM/
 * /501_BigBlock/
 * /550_QSM/
 * 550_qjb-eng


text:
Engineering Projects/Engines/Howard Community College/Fall2011/501 HEMI

Problem Statement
The Stirling engine is an external combustion engine. In our project, we will find a way to make it generate enough power to move a grain of sand 1cm from it's original location.

 * Example of Stirling Engine Motor

Team Members

 * ARoberts
 * Cdiffendal
 * Joon Kim

Summary
Every kind of automobile today is run by a horse. But, this is the general term for what it really is. All cars today run off of an internal combustion engine. This means that the all processes are done within its environment. The heat that runs the pistons is made from within. A horse works in a similar way, except one. It is an external combustion engine. The main difference is, simply, that the heat is applied externally in the cycle. In our project, we have a model of a horse. We will use an open flame as our heat source. This will heat the air trapped inside the cylinder to a pressure strong enough to move the grain of sand and encourage movement.

Decision List

 * We have decided that we can only use air as the gas inside the cylinder. Also we wanted to put the engine on axles with wheels and find a way for it to propel self once a candle is added to provide the energy.
 * As of week three we decided to scrap using the store bought Engine and create our own. Each team mate is to go and build their own designed engine and compare during week four.

Material List

 * 1. Stirling Engine model

 * 2. Tool Kit

 * 3. Heat source, preferably open flame.

If building your own Engine:

 * Tin cans
 * Wire coat hangers
 * Tape
 * Glue
 * Styrofoam
 * Specific tools like pliers (slip joint and needle nose pliers are good) a razor blade to shape styrofoam and wire cutters to cut the coat hanger
 * Metal snips to cut the can or a hack saw. id snips are available they are much easier to use.
 * Aluminum foil

Software List
We didn't use any soft ware during the project, we used was the internet to do a little research and document our activities on wikiversity other than that we did this thing the old fashioned way by playing around with an already existing Stirling Engine and then going off to build our own engines.

Time
Our time frame was four weeks, due to a lack of communication and not knowing a clear direction to take our project in was a serious disruption on our time frame. None of the three of us have created a successful Stirling Engine in the time frame but we would like to continue to find a successful design to use.

Next Steps

 * Step 1- find a suitable direction to take the project in. Don't play around with unpractical ideas for your team to complete.
 * Step 2- If building a home made Stirling Engine, they can be build for practically nothing. Common items found around the house can be used to make one such as tin cans, wire coat hangers, tape, styrofoam and common tools like pliers, scissors, and glue.
 * Step 3- Make sure communication between team mates is at a maximum or else the project will fall apart and documentation will suffer, and ultimately your grade suffers.

Tutorials
We don't have any tutorials for this project other than we watched a bunch of youtube videos and mashed together a bunch of designs that we thought could work.


text:
User:Honda97/enes100/cupcakes

This is the 3-D scan cupcakes

title: User:Honda97/enes100/cupcakes