WaterBotics
Teaching Science and Engineering
Concepts Using LEGO® Underwater
Robots
Jason Sayres, Adam Scribner
The Center for Innovation in Engineering and Science Education
Stevens Institute of Technology
What is WaterBotics?
• LEGOTM MINDSTORMS robotics in underwater
environment
• Approximately 20-hour curriculum aimed at
middle and high school classes as well as
summer camps and after-school activities
• Primarily funded by NSF Innovative
Technology Experiences for Students and
Teachers (ITEST) Program
– Award #0929674: Build IT Underwater Robotics
Scale-Up for STEM Learning and Workforce
Development (BISU)
Partners
•
Stevens Institute of Technology
– Center for Innovation in Engineering and Science Education (CIESE)
– Development of curriculum
– Primary training and support
•
League for Innovation in the Community College
– Selection and support of community college partners to target formal educational
environments (i.e. schools)
– Year one selection: Sinclair Community College
•
National Girls Collaborative Project (NGCP)
– Selection and support of informal education programs, especially those aiming to engage
girls
– Year one selection: Texas Girls Collaborative Project
•
International Technology and Engineering Education Association (ITEEA)
– Development and dissemination of a hybrid professional development program built around
WaterBotics curriculum
Why Underwater Robotics?
• Presents unique, complex design
challenges (e.g., buoyancy, control in 3-D)
• Exposure to concepts like propulsion, drag,
buoyancy and stability, gearing, torque,
speed, and thrust
• Awareness of careers that involve the
types of skills developed in the project
Why LEGOs?
•
•
•
•
Familiarity (in some cases)
Ease of use and durability
Variety of pieces
Rapid prototyping, testing, redesign
– “Tweak friendly”
• Fewer components required to create startup kit
Project Challenge
Using LEGO and related components,
create an underwater ROV (remotely
operated vehicle) that will be able to
pick up weighted wiffle balls and
deposit them in a bin.
Task 1 – Straight Line Challenge
• Use a single motor to build a
vehicle that can travel the
diameter of the pool on the
surface as quickly as possible.
• Optimize gearing to achieve
best propeller speed.
Task 2 – Figure Eight Challenge
• Use a second motor to enable
steering.
• Maneuver on surface to
complete a slalom course
around two buoys in shortest
time.
Task 3 – Vertical Challenge
• Use a third motor and other
materials to control the vehicle's
buoyancy in order to descend
and rise vertically in water.
• Maneuver through the same
slalom course as in the
previous challenge, except this
time underwater.
Task 4 – Final Challenge
• Produce a vehicle which can
retrieve the greatest number of
objects from the bottom of the
pool within a specified period.
• Objects must be deposited in
bins at various depths in the
water to score points.
• A fourth motor may be used to
come up with some way to grab
and release the balls.
The NXT and Programming
Key Concepts, Skills
Buoyancy
Stability
Newton’s Laws
Propulsion
Gear Ratios
Inertia
Forces
Torque
Volume
Density
Programming
Troubleshooting
Iterative Design
Team Building
Research: Study 1
Professional Development Fidelity
• Is the program delivered with equal fidelity in different
environments?
• If not, what are the differences between trainers and also
between formal and informal teachers/staff and what
accounts for them?
• If the curriculum is altered, what is altered and why?
• Are there critical components of either the PD or the
curriculum without which the intended outcomes cannot
be achieved?
Research: Study 2
Student Impact
• Is the curriculum as effective in a wider range of settings
as in the setting in which it was originally tested?
• Are student outcomes similar regardless of the teaching
environment (formal vs. informal)?
• If they differ, what are the differences and what accounts
for them?
Research: Study 3
Scale-Up and Sustainability
• To what extent does/did each hub partner implement the
Build IT model?
• What is the correlation between the levels of success of
hub partners in meeting the project’s overarching goal
and their fidelity to the BISU model?
• What adaptations, adoptions, partnerships, and/or
collaborations resulted from implementation of the
project?
Research: Study 3
Scale-Up and Sustainability (cont.)
• To what extent did hub sites become self-sustaining by
their fourth year in the project?
• How and to what extent did hubs develop a local funding
base?
• What capacity-building activities occurred to enable
project sustainability?
• To what extent did hub sites scale up or expand the
Build IT program?
Training Model
Current Hub Sites
Formal Sites
•Ohio – Sinclair Community College
•Illinois – Triton College
Informal Sites
•Texas – Texas Girls Collaborative Project
•Washington – Pacific Northwest Girls Collaborative Project
•Kentucky – Kentucky Girls STEM Collaborative
Hub Site Activities
• Summer camp for students
• Training institute for local educators
Educator Support
• Hub site staff
– Visits to schools
– Email and phone availability
– Optional follow-up professional development
• Website
– Course management
– Interactive FAQs
– Curriculum updates
• Optional Webcasts
Training at ITEEA
New, Hybrid Training Model
• Previous trainings took up to two weeks
• Hybrid consists of:
• One intense, face-to-face session
• 4 online sessions
• Support in the form of extra materials, a discussion
area, and live webcasts
• Debuted on Wednesday this week
• Another session next year
Challenges
• Pool setup and finding alternatives
• Ensuring that educators will be able to handle technical
issues
• Fitting the project into a class
• Finding an optimal room configuration
• Costs of materials
• Ensuring sustainability
For More Information
•
Website: http://waterbotics.org
 Upcoming Training Sessions: http://waterbotics.org/training
•
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/WaterBotics/162559767125257
•
YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/waterbotics
•
Email: Jason.Sayres@stevens.edu, Adam.Scribner@stevens.edu