This meeting, our team continued to brainstorm possible ideas, and began to formulate a more concrete approach to prototypes. One of the first ideas we came up with was the water wheel ideas, thanks to Matthew's extensive experience as a hydraulic engineer. At first, the team was confused about how the spinning of the water wheel would generate energy, and how we would harness this energy. However, as Matthew pointed out, we were not at the stage of transporting the water yet- we were simply using the waterfall to produce kinetic energy in the form of a shaft rotating with the water wheel's progress. Below is a diagram of a basic water wheel, in all its simple pure beauty.
As Anisha pointed out, one advantage of this design is that it would be easy to adjust the power volume, by simpling increasing or decreasing the size and bucket width of the water wheel itself. However, Matthew orignially disliked the idea, because he was discouraged by its lack of creativity and its bland prospects as an innovative technique. Ashwin was also reluctant to give the idea his complete approval, citing the improbable nature of the water wheel's application on a full scale setting. However, the team did realize that this was only a brainstorming session, and that all ideas, no matter how ridiculous or how much they encouraged rule-breaking, especially that annoyingly meddlesome rule against the utilization of live animals, was worthy of consideration. However, this train of thought spurred heavy debate about the specifics of the rule against live animals, as Ashwin touched off this touchy subject by suggesting the use of dead animals, which Cassie objected to on moral and ethical grounds, and Anisha objected to on the grounds of an unpleasant odor. Matthew tactfully remained ambivalent about the issue, noting the relative merits of casual rule-bending within plausible interpretation, but also considering the stench of rotting animals.
No comments:
Post a Comment