executive summary: design of a spring-loaded car kit to

Executive Summary: Design of a Spring-Loaded Car Kit to

Promote Interest in STEM Careers for Middle School Students Jared Franz, Clayton Hagenbuch, Alex Thomason, and Daniel Williams Team 1.3, ME 340 and ME 297, Mechanical Engineering Department, Penn State University Introduction

In the United States, there is an emerging gap between interest in and availability of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) related jobs. More jobs need to be filled than there are qualified individuals to fill them. A negative stigma exists against STEM due to the level of difficulty and the high involvement of math and physics. According to a study by Junior Achievement in 2017, interest in a STEM career declined an average of 12% for teenagers [1]. To address this problem, the Penn State Department of Mechanical Engineering asked our team to design a STEM outreach kit to spark interest in students between grades six and ten. These students would develop an interest in STEM fields and pursue this interest through high school and into college.

Students will be able to design and build a spring-loaded car utilizing our team’s STEM kit. The original concept for the kit came from Team 2 in Section 6 of Professor Simpson’s Design Methodology class [2]. However, our design deviated from the original idea because it now involves a 3D printed toy vehicle launched from a torsional spring. Initially, a mousetrap was proposed to launch the car, but our team decided that a torsional spring was a safer and easier concept for students to comprehend. Our kit demonstrates potential energy, kinetic energy, and momentum concepts. Several 3D printed variations of the body and wheels of the car are included. Each component of the car changes the total weight, shape, or size of the design. Teams are challenged to make the best car with the provided variations, which encourages competition and enthusiasm. To challenge more advanced students, cost analysis is incorporated as a second level of difficulty. This difficulty option contributes to higher level thinking and decision making. Our team pursued this concept because we believed it had the highest chance for success.

This executive summary presents the process for choosing the final design of our spring-loaded car. The first section describes our target specifications and our concept generation, screening, and selection. Then, the construction, testing, and peer feedback of our alpha and beta prototypes is discussed. Appendix A provides the bill of materials for the outreach kit. Following, Appendix B illustrates the instruction manual for constructing the car.

ME 340 and ME 297 1 Spring 2019

Concluding this executive summary is the lesson plan in Appendix C and the background on the design team in Appendix D. Design Concept

This section presents our design concept for a STEM outreach kit that features an integrative design and assembly to excite sixth through tenth grade students about engineering. Our value proposition is that this kit should challenge students to develop STEM concepts such as design, problem solving, and teamwork. While selecting our final design, our team had to make assumptions. Since the outreach kit is meant for middle school students, our team assumed that the students had little to no experience with STEM principles. To improve familiarity with the subject, students will build and test a model car. Another assumption we made was that groups of four people will work on the project together. Being in groups will teach students how to work together as a team to solve a problem.

Along with the assumptions our team made, we also had limitations to overcome. One limitation included the time it takes to complete the STEM activity. Since the kit will be used in schools, the activity should be able to be completed in a standard class period of one hour. One class period is an ideal timeframe to learn STEM principles and have fun while doing it. Also, the size of the outreach kit was an important limitation. Teachers need to be able to easily transport the kits to different classrooms, so the maximum size of the box should be three cubic feet. Another limitation was that our kit should not cost more than $50. Lastly, based on project requirements, our team needed to machine at least one part using a 3D printer.

The following subsections present how our team selected our design concept. Presented first are the customer needs and target specifications. The concluding subsection addresses our team’s concept generation, screening, and selection process. Customer Needs and Target Specifications

In this subsection, the customer needs and target specifications for our STEM kit will be analyzed. Some customer needs were targeted more highly than others. The most important customer need was that the kit needed to be STEM related. Teaching STEM principles is the purpose for creating the outreach kit. Another customer need that we focused on was for the kit to be transportable. Teachers carry these kits around with them, so the kit needed to be a manageable size. We also wanted our kit to be entertaining and engaging for the students. If it was not fun to use, kids would lose interest and become unenthusiastic about learning, which would deter them from the STEM field. Furthermore, it was critical that the kit provided a hands-on experience. Students who use STEM kits have a deeper understanding of the engineering concepts involved after they physically engage in the learning experience. Because we targeted students in a variety of grades, our kit includes the option to have multiple difficulty


levels. Since students do not all have equivalent background knowledge, every student should be challenged based on the skills they already possess. Displayed in Table 1 is the complete matrix of our customer needs and specifications. Table 1. Customer needs and accompanying metrics and specifications for our STEM kit.

Concept Generation, Screening, and Selection

Brainstorming many concepts was important for creating a STEM kit that would interest students in engineering. At the concept generation stage of the project, all ideas were taken into consideration. Our group first started thinking of possible designs using the 6-3-5 method of brainstorming. The 6-3-5 method was beneficial to concept generation by producing ideas that were a little unorthodox. Lastly, we used the negative brainstorming method. We thought of possible complications with the project and how not to solve the problem. Although some concepts were crazy, we were able to dull down some ideas to include within our kit. One of our most developed ideas was a car kit. In this kit design, there were several different 3D printed components for each part of the car, such as the wheels, body, frame, and motor mechanism. Each component had a different price, and students would have to build a car with a certain budget of fake money. The goal was to build a car within the budget that would roll the farthest distance. Other ideas included a biological kit, a catapult, an interactive movie and construction kit, a windmill, a mirror puzzle, and a tensile testing machine.


Once we finished the concept generation for our project, we created eight concepts that needed to be screened. The selection criteria that were essential for this screening came from our list of customer needs that we felt were the best describers of the needed product. Included in the criteria were the following: transportability, engaging, durable, STEM related, cost-effective, competitive, teamwork, hands-on, and levels of difficulty. To have a baseline to relate all our concepts, we used a reference product “Snap Circuits” [3]. We felt this product was a great representation of the STEM kits already on the market. Also, the reference product contained STEM principles and entertaining elements for students that our team wanted to improve. Once the concepts were ranked against one another, we decided which ideas our team wanted to continue with. Some concepts included the car kit, biological kit, and the boat kit. To select the concept that moved forward, 0th prototypes were created to get a better understanding of how each concept worked.

Following the concept screening, the concepts that passed needed to be tested. Prototypes were created to test the biological kit, the car kit, and the boat kit. To create a new version of the catapult, we thought it would be engaging for kids to create an arm-like catapult from 3D printed bones. Competition would be involved by launching a ball as far as possible compared to the other teams. The next concept we continued with was the car kit. Children would use the 3D printed parts available to create different combinations of cars to race against one another down a ramp. Finally, we created a prototype for the boat kit. Much like the car kit, children could combine the 3D printed parts given to them and race them against the other teams. In Figure 1, you can see the different prototypes that we created for these concepts. Once we completed construction and gathered feedback from others, we realized that the ideas we had in mind were not as good as we hoped. Because the concepts were not well developed, our team came together as a group and decided to change the ideas.

Figure 1. 0th prototypes for screened concepts: biological kit (left), car kit (center), and boat kit (right). Although constructed from paper and other miscellaneous materials, the prototypes gave us insight into how exactly they would work. After completing these prototypes, additional concepts were generated that were more effective than the previous ones. By combining the car and boat kits, we allowed students to


create a floating boat and car combination. Teams would then compete against each other in their class. The floating car would roll off the ramp into water, and the students would blow on the sail to cross the finish line first. During the construction of the prototypes, the final concept we created was a combination of the car kit with a paper plane attached to it. The car would roll down a ramp and suddenly stop, which launches the plane. This kit would allow students to create different variations of car designs like our original car kit idea. Additionally, students would design a paper airplane that attaches to the top of their car models. A competition would be conducted against one another to see how far the paper airplanes went.

After a session of concept development and creating 0th prototypes, our team decided to go forward with the car and plane kit. The 0th prototypes impacted our decisions by seeing how well each concept worked. Overall, the car and plane kit had the most appeal and application for students of the age group.

However, our design concept did not move onto to the next phase. Our team had to choose a concept from one that passed through the gate. We selected the concept from Team 2 in Section 6 because it was most similar to our idea [2]. Instead of the car having a plane attached, the concept only exhibited a torsional spring mechanism. Because of the simplicity, the torsional spring idea proved to be an easier car to build and also learn from. In Figure 2, the design concept is shown.

Figure 2. 0th prototype of the spring-loaded car [2]. The torsional spring would be attached to the axles to propel the car forward. Alpha Prototype

This section contains the development, production, and feedback for the alpha prototype. The first subsection provides how the alpha prototype was constructed. Following, the next subsection shows the feedback provided by other teams during laboratory activities. Construction of Alpha Prototype


The goal of our alpha prototype was to test the main attributes of the spring-loaded car. To build the car, our team 3D printed one vehicle frame, two axles, three car body components, and four wheels. We also needed one foot of Velcro strips, one medium-sized rubber band, and two small zip ties. On the left in Figure 3, a constructed car without the body components attached can be seen. To keep cost low and to provide an easier assembly process for students, a single rubber band was used for the spring mechanism to propel the car. However, the rubber band did not launch the car far enough distances. Our team decided to implement a translational spring instead, as seen on the right in Figure 3. The translational spring helped with distance, but was inconsistent with direction. Using Velcro contributed to simplify the assembly process, but looked unprofessional because the car body components did not fit flush with the vehicle frame. In addition, the axles did not work as efficiently as expected due to the axle slipping in the wheel slot. This slippage resulted in a loss of kinetic energy of the car.

Figure 3. Alpha prototypes of the spring-loaded car: rubber band system (left) and translational spring (right). The body components are removed to see the torsional spring mechanism. The translational spring is attached to the rear piece. Peer Feedback on Alpha Prototype

From peer feedback, our team was able to identify areas of improvement for the beta prototype. One suggestion included the way that the chassis components were attached. The alpha prototype utilized Velcro, but the pieces did not connect flush with each other. Knowing this problem, our beta prototype incorporated magnets for connecting the parts. Our classmates and engineering ambassadors enjoyed the idea that students could design their own car using different styles of components provided in the kit. Because we had trouble with the wheels, we received recommendations on how to improve them. The wheel diameter had to be larger to allow the car to travel farther. Also, the wheels needed more traction, so attaching rubber bands around each wheel would add more friction.

From constructing the alpha prototype, our team learned that both the single rubber band system and the translational spring mechanism were not as effective as our team expected. For this reason, we decided to add a torsional spring to the rubber band design. Another observation was that the medium-sized rubber band provided too much torque, which caused the front end to


lift off the ground and travel in inconsistent directions. To solve this problem, a larger rubber band was implemented to get the car up to speed at a slower rate and to travel farther distances.

Beta Prototype

This section contains the development, production, and feedback for the beta prototype. The first subsection discusses the design choices for the beta prototype. Testing of the beta prototype against target specifications is examined next. Concluding this section is the recommended improvements for our design. Construction of Beta Prototype

From the feedback we received on our alpha prototype, many suggestions were included in the beta prototype. For the design portion, the car requires a combination of four wheels and three chassis components. The chassis of the car incorporates a front, a middle, and a back component. To emphasize creativity, there are two different wheel sizes and three different designs for each part of the chassis. Parts vary in shape, size, and weight, which will have an effect on the performance of the car. The students can build and test their car before they finalize their designs for the competition at the end of the session. An example of a final design is shown in Figure 4. Instructions to build the car can be found in Appendix B.

The kit also includes one vehicle frame, two axles, one small spring rod, forty-four small cylindrical magnets built into the components, one torsional spring, large rubber bands, small rubber bands, and small zip ties. Appendix A presents an in-depth cost analysis of the bill of materials for the kit. Several design improvements were added to ensure better performance quality of the kit. We found that the alpha prototype had a significant amount of slippage between the axle and wheel. To fix this problem, we made the connection between the axles and the wheels have a square shape instead of a circular shape. In the alpha prototype, the car would turn in different directions when moving, so we shortened the length of the axles to limit translational shifting. We also supplied the kit with more rubber bands, so students can place them around the wheels for better traction. To make the car travel farther, we used the peer feedback we received and increased the wheel size. The body of the alpha prototype only consisted of unfinished printed components, so we finished designing the three different body designs for the beta prototype. Magnets were incorporated into the body and frame instead of Velcro because the magnets make for a better aesthetic appearance and a snap fit. Using magnets did increase the cost of the kit, but it simplifies the building process. The beta prototype now includes a torsional spring mechanism instead of a translational spring. This mechanism allows the car to go straighter, longer, and faster. Therefore, testing and feedback from the alpha prototype significantly improved the performance and appearance of the final beta prototype.


Figure 4. Beta prototype of the spring-loaded car. This prototype exhibits a rubber band attached to a torsional spring to propel the car. Testing of Beta Prototype

After testing the beta prototype, our team compared the prototype to our specification requirements. The spring-loaded car exhibits many STEM principles including momentum, energy conservation, and kinematics. Appendix C describes these STEM principles in a lesson plan for teachers to educate their students. Since teachers need to carry the kit with them to different classrooms, the packaging needed to be a manageable size. We limited the box of the STEM kit to be one cubic foot, which met our target specification. According to feedback that our team received on the beta prototype, other teams thought that it was engaging for them to build and compete against others. This feedback helped us determine that we satisfied the engaging and exciting customer needs. Because our kit allows for over one hundred different car combinations, our kit is hands-on. The groups who evaluated our kit enjoyed making different combinations of the car. For this reason, students are able to use this kit numerous times without getting bored of the designs. The complete beta prototype testing results compared to the design specifications is shown in Table 2. Green represents the metric meeting our goal, while red represents our team failing to meet the goal. One category that we did not meet was the production time. Since most of our parts were 3D printed, the production time for this printing took longer than our maximum of six hours.

Table 2. Our spring-loaded car STEM kit compared to our range of metrics.


Recommended Improvements for Beta Prototype

Our team was satisfied with how our final beta prototype turned out. However, some improvements can still be made to the model. Adding a total of three rubber bands to each wheel will reduce the possibility of the rubber bands shifting on the wheel during use and provide more traction to the ground. In addition, we want to vary the weights in the different chassis components. The variation of weights would affect the momentum, velocity, and distance of the car and add another design component for students. Finally, the transitions between the car body components can be improved. As of now, the components have height gaps when the car designs are mixed. The car should have a smooth look after attaching different chassis pieces. Conclusion

This report has presented how our STEM kit will be a valuable and informative kit for students in grades six through ten. Our kit allows students to experience many STEM principles and promote their interest in STEM related careers. Aerodynamics, potential energy, momentum, and friction mechanics is incorporated in the kit. Along with applying engineering principles, competition is included for students to enjoy learning. A study by Purdue University showed that 8th graders who built a hands-on water purification system had a deeper understanding of the concepts than students who had lecture-based lessons [4]. Giving students the ability to construct their own car and make modifications allows them to get creative and learn about why they should choose certain pieces over others. Students learn better through demonstration than they do from lectures.

In the future, students and teachers will be able to purchase expansion kits to go along with the main kit. We plan to create expansion kits of different car designs and kits that teach students how to 3D print their own designs if they have access to 3D printers.


Appendix A: Bill of Materials for STEM Outreach Kit

Within this appendix, the bill of materials and overall cost of our kit will be shown to ensure that we will make money with the selling price of $29.99. Table A-1 shows our entire bill of materials including our 3D print costs, ordered parts in bulk, and assembly costs. The 3D printed costs are all based on a one kilogram roll of PLA filament costing $20.00. We decided not to include the time it takes to print the models because with our kit consisting of mostly 3D printed parts, we would purchase our own 3D printers for mass production. As you can see from Table A-1, the 3D printed materials are about two-thirds of our total cost. In the future, we would like to work on minimizing this material in order to reduce our costs.

The parts within the kit that are not 3D printed cost just under $5.00 per kit. This includes forty-four magnets to place within all chassis parts, which are $0.06 per magnet when bought in bulk. Another part of this kit are the rubber bands that the students use with the torsional spring and for the wheels. The larger rubber bands for the spring mechanism cost $0.08 when bought in bulk, while the smaller sized rubber bands cost four-tenths of a cent.

Assembly costs are the final expense to take into consideration. Super glue was used for assembly to attach the magnets to the components of the chassis. With the bulk cost of one container of super glue and the assumption that roughly one twentieth of a bottle is needed for each kit, the super glue will cost $0.35 to assemble each kit. The only assembly required is gluing the magnets into the chassis components of the car kits. This assembly will approximately take fifteen minutes. Assuming the wage of an employee is about $13.00 per hour, the cost will be $3.26 per kit. Overall, our STEM kit will cost us $17.76 to produce. With the selling price of $29.99, we will be profiting $12.23 per kit.


Table A-1: Bill of materials of the production of a single kit


Appendix B: Instructions for STEM Outreach Kit

This appendix instructs the user on how to build the spring-loaded car. The STEM kit

includes two different wheel sizes and three different designs for the front, the middle, and the back of the car.

1. Place the torsional spring on the base of the car. Set the torsional spring with the rubberband end on top and the free end pointing toward the base. Slide the rod through the hole on the base and through the center of the spring. Figure B-1 shows the spring being attached to the rod.

Figure B-1: Attach torsional spring to base component.

2. Insert axles into the base component of the car. As seen in Figure B-2, push each axle rod

into their respective bearings leaving equal length on both sides of the component.


Figure B-2: Push axle through bearings.

3. Connect desired wheels to the axles. Insert the open side of the wheel into the axle until it

provides a tight fit, as illustrated in Figure B-3. Repeat this step with all four ends of the axles. *Note: Not all wheels need to be the same size.

Figure B-3: Attach wheels to axles.


4. Design the body of the car. As seen in Figure B-4, attach the 3D printed body parts to the base using the built-in magnets.

Figure B-4: Connect the chassis components to the base.

5. Measure how far the car goes to compete with other teams. The team with the car that

rolls the farthest wins.

6. Measure the speed of the car to compete with other teams. Measure a certain distance that each of the cars will travel and measure the amount of time it will take for the cars to travel that distance. Then, calculate the speed of the car using the formula provided in Appendix C. The team with the fastest car wins.


Appendix C: Lesson Plan for STEM Outreach Kit This appendix describes the physical principles behind the spring-loaded car STEM kit.

Teachers using our kit in classrooms will be able to use this appendix to educate their students on the physics of the car.

The first engineering principle demonstrated is energy conversion. The compressed translational spring is loaded with potential energy, which is converted into kinetic energy when released. A well-constructed car will have minimal energy losses. The potential energy of the spring is related to the spring constant and the displacement.

Once the teams build their cars and race against each other, they can assess what they could change to improve their car. To construct the most efficient car, users of the kit must optimize mass, body design, and wheel size. It is important for students to realize that a heavier car will be harder to accelerate and have a lower velocity. Lighter cars will be easier to accelerate from the force of the spring and move faster. This occurrence happens because of the energy conversion from potential to kinetic. A challenge is finding a balance of how much mass to give the car to yield the highest momentum possible. Bulkier body designs create more air drag, which will limit the speed and distance traveled by the car. Students should also understand that wheel size will have an effect on performance. A large wheel size will yield a farther distance traveled by the car because of the ratio of wheel diameter to the axle diameter. For the same reason, smaller wheel sizes will yield shorter distances, but have faster speeds. In the following text, equations explain the physics behind the engineering principles.

The first engineering principle which will be used in this STEM kit will involve potential energy. Potential energy of the car is stored in the spring and will be converted into kinetic energy in order to launch the car. Potential energy (U) is calculated with the following equation:

U = ½ * k * x^2 (1) where k is the spring constant, which is unique for each spring [lbf/ft], and x is displacement of the end of the spring [in].

The second engineering principle will be the elastic force of the spring. This force propels the car and is the driving force, which converts the potential energy into kinetic energy. The translational spring force (Fs) is found with the following equation:

Fs = k * x (2) where k is the spring constant [lbf/ft], and x is the displacement of the end of the spring [in].


In addition to a translational spring, torsional springs provide an elastic force by converting the potential energy from twisting the spring into kinetic energy. This rotational elastic force from the spring (Fs) can be found with the following equation:

Fs = k * θ (2) where k is the spring constant [lbf/ft], and θ is the angular displacement of the torsional spring [deg].

Another engineering principle is rotational kinematics seen through the relationship between the wheel and the car. Different wheel sizes allow for different motions of the car. To determine distance (x), use the following equation:

x = θ * r (3) where θ is the angle the wheel turns [deg] and r is the radius [in] of the wheel. Students will be able to discover that a larger wheel will travel further than a smaller wheel given that they rotate with the same number of degrees.

In addition to the wheels, the velocity of the wheels on the car (v) can be determined by the equation:

v = 𝜔 * r (4) where 𝜔 is the angular velocity of the wheel [deg/s], and r is the radius [in] of the wheel. Students will be able to determine that larger wheels have a larger displacement than smaller wheels, given the same amount of rotation. However, smaller wheels induce higher speeds. Both parameters have to be accessed to optimize and improve students’ car designs.

Finally, momentum of the car (p) can be determined by the equation: p = m * v (5)

where v is the velocity [in/s] of the car, and m is the mass [lbm] of the car. Momentum is the determining factor for how far the car will travel. If a car has too much weight, it will not travel as far and vice versa with a lighter car. However, a lighter car will have more speed than a heavier car, given the spring force behind the car is the same. Students will have to test different configurations between weight and speed in order to obtain the optimal distance traveled for their design.


Appendix D: Background on the Design Team

Each member of our team is pursuing an education in mechanical engineering, and some have backgrounds in biomedical engineering and entrepreneurship. This team was created through the class of Mechanical Engineering Design Methodology and is tasked with the project of creating a STEM kit for sixth through tenth graders to increase children’s interest in STEM careers. Our team has plenty of educational diversity to draw from to create a stimulating STEM kit for children to have an engaging learning experience. In Figure D-1, a picture of our design team is shown.

Figure D-1: Our design team for the STEM kit. Shown from left to right are: Clayton Hagenbuch, Jared Franz, Danny Williams, and Alex Thomason.

Jared Franz is a junior at Penn State pursuing a major of mechanical engineering and a minor in entrepreneurship and innovation. During this past summer, he interned at Schlumberger in Houston, Texas and from this experience, he designed and tested his own project. Regarding 3D printing for this project, Jared has an abundance of knowledge by assuming the role of President this past fall in the Penn State club, Digi Digits. Digi Digits is an interdisciplinary club dedicated to improving, designing, and 3D printing prosthetic-like training devices for children who have hand/arm malformations or disabilities. In addition to 3D printing, he also has a lot of knowledge in 3D design work. Over the past couple years, Jared has been the head designer of a start-up company who is committed to constructing augmented reality glasses. Overall, Jared has a plethora of knowledge with 3D printing and design work to assist this team with future challenges that may arise.


Alex Thomason is a senior at Penn State majoring in biomedical and mechanical engineering with a minor in engineering mechanics. Throughout his undergraduate education, he has been a research assistant in both a biomaterials laboratory and an artificial heart and cardiovascular fluid dynamics lab. In these labs, he worked on projects involving the creation of artificial vascular scaffolds and the testing of flow properties of an artificial heart pump. Over this past summer, Alex interned for an artificial heart company, where he assisted engineers with artificial heart development, built flow loops for testing biological flow, and gained more experience with Solidworks design. Alex also has experience with finite element analysis and multiphysics simulations, which will prove to be useful when designing the STEM kit that will excite students to learn more about engineering. On the side, Alex is a Division One gymnast who travels around the country with his team to compete against other schools. Being part of a team has helped Alex further develop his leadership, communication, and collaborative skills. Overall, Alex has a diversity of engineering knowledge and a creative imagination to contribute to the team.

Clayton Hagenbuch is currently a junior studying mechanical engineering at Penn State University. During his senior year in high school, he was involved in a program that allowed him to shadow and learn from different types of engineers at Kennametal, a leader in metal cutting manufacturing, at their global headquarters in Latrobe, Pa. There, he was assigned to work in groups along with Kennametal’s engineers to develop a prototype that would go through all the stages of the phase-gate process, which is essential in successfully launching a new product. Clayton also spent the past two summers interning at Fareva, a manufacturing pharmaceutical company in Richmond, Va. Working with AutoCAD software, he created and updated designs for ongoing projects. Near the end of his internships, he was able to lead a team to implement his own design for two relocation projects within the plant. Daniel Williams is a senior studying mechanical engineering at Penn State University. Before attending college, he was accepted to the ASM Materials camp at Lehigh University which allowed him to further his interest and gain some experience in the engineering field prior to being immersed in college. During college, Daniel has completed one co-op with Globus Medical, one internship with John Deere, and is currently interning at Guided Wave in State College. While at Globus Medical, Daniel was able to utilize CAD software to design and develop instrumentation for spine surgeries while speaking to surgeons for improvements and ideas as well as being able to test prototypes in cadaver labs daily. While at John Deere, he was able to develop an electrical system involving mechanical components which allowed for testing of current and future technologies. And currently at Guided Wave, Daniel is assisting in developing mechanical components which allow for the detection of flaws and defects in a variety of mechanical systems which undergo large amounts of stress and fatigues.


References

1. Kim, S. (2018). New Research Shows Declining Interest in STEM. [online] Govtech.com. Available: http://www.govtech.com/education/k-12/New-Research-Shows-Declining- Interest-in-STEM.html.

2. Tyler Bower, Gordon “Max” Hulak, Brennan Ingalls, and Nicholas “Nick” Pasquini, “Proposed Concept for a STEM Outreach Kit to Encourage Middle School Students to Pursue STEM Fields,” proposal in ME 340 (University Park, PA: Mechanical Engineering Department, Pennsylvania State University, March 2019).

3. S. C. Jr., "Home Science Tools," Elenco, 2004. [Online]. Available: https://www.homescien ce tools.com/product/snap-circuits-jr-100-electronics-kit/.

4. K. Ash, "Education Week," 30 January 2009. [Online]. Available: https://blogs.edweek.org /edweek/DigitalEducation/2009/01/engaging_students_in_stem.html


executive summary: design of a spring-loaded car kit to

Documents