Vehicle Design
| Vehicle Design | |
|---|---|
| Description | Teams write a proposal as if they were going to create a Mousetrap or Gravity Vehicle and then answer questions from the Event Supervisors about their proposal. |
| Event Information | |
| Participants | Up to 2 |
| Approx. Time | 5 minutes |
Vehicle Design is an event created in Virginia for the 2021 season during the Coronavirus outbreak as an alternative to that season's vehicle events, Mousetrap Vehicle (Division B) and Gravity Vehicle (Division C). Instead of constructing a Mousetrap or Gravity Vehicle, teams write a proposal as if they were going to create such a device, and then they participate in a short virtual Q&A session with the Event Supervisor about their proposal. This was deemed a safe alternative to Mousetrap and Gravity Vehicle, since it allows teammates to collaborate remotely. Although Vehicle Design was used as a substitute for technology events, it places the focus on communication over fabrication, which lends it a similarity to many inquiry events.
Vehicle Design was on the 2021 event slate for all Virginia regional and state tournaments as well as the BEARSO Invitational, the Science Olympiad at Penn State Invitational, and the Lake Braddock Invitational. The event has not been run at any tournaments since 2021, largely due to the sizable time commitment required for Event Supervisors to score every team's proposal in advance of a tournament.
The Event
Each team writes a proposal to build a Mousetrap (Division B) or Gravity (Division C) Vehicle, including the Ramp for the latter, and submits it as a single PDF file in advance of each competition. Details for how and when to submit the file must be released well ahead of each competition.
The proposal may be no longer than 6 pages in Division B and 8 pages in Division C, excluding the budget section, which has no page limit. If the proposal, excluding the budget section, is too long, Event Supervisors stop reading at the page limit. The proposal must include enough information (i.e. device dimensions) for the Event Supervisors to determine that the proposed device would not incur a construction violation according to the Mousetrap or Gravity Vehicle rules. Teams do not need to construct or test any physical prototypes, since research involving physical devices or video of physical devices is not scored.
Event Supervisors review a team’s proposal before that team’s competition time. During the competition, Event Supervisors conduct a 5 minute Q&A with the team about their proposal over video conferencing software. The Q&A session is a chance for Event Supervisors to get a deeper understanding of the team's proposal and design process, not to give feedback about the proposal.
Sample Q&A Questions
- If you were also to consider this factor in your analysis, how would that change your thinking?
- What were your goals in designing your vehicle?
- If the construction parameters were different in this way, how would that affect your design?
- How would you decide in what way to adjust your device for a particular target distance?
Scoring
The highest event score wins. The proposal is scaled to be worth 75% of the overall score, and the Q&A is scaled to be worth the remaining 25%. Teams must participate in a Q&A to receive a score for their proposal. Tournaments are encouraged to have at least two Event Supervisors scoring the proposals and Q&As to minimize the subjective nature of the event. Ties will be broken first by the highest proposal score and second by predetermined scoring rubric sections.
Proposal Scoring Rubric
- [1 point] Identifying information: school/team name, team number, student names, title
- [10 points] Evaluation of the problem: scoring incentives and constraints in Mousetrap or Gravity Vehicle rules, implicit constraints (i.e. cost, build time), mathematical analysis where appropriate
- [8 points] Background research (Div C only): explores important scientific concepts underlying a Gravity Vehicle, information supports the rest of the proposal
- [20 points] Design specification: all information needed to build the device, description of how it is run within the competition setting, verification that all construction parameters are met
- [23 points] Design rationale: analysis that supports all significant aspects of chosen design, evaluation of trade-offs, mathematical analysis where appropriate, uses ideas presented in previous sections
- [8 points] Plan for testing and calibration: explanation of what data/observations are needed, procedure to acquire data/observations, how data/observations will be used
- [3 points] References (Div C only): included where appropriate, consistent style throughout document, appropriate style chosen
- [8 points] Budget: complete itemized list of parts and materials, includes testing equipment, line items have a clear or explained purpose, reasonable estimates and precise costs used where appropriate
- [5 points] Figures: included where appropriate, easily decipherable, properly labeled, complement the text of the proposal
- [5 points] Format: aids in understanding of content, consistent throughout document, appropriate format chosen, reasonable margin and font sizes, reasonable font choice or legible handwriting
- [9 points] Scientific writing style (Div C only): adequate detail, succinct explanations, no unnecessary information, neutral and impersonal perspective, declarative and expository tone
Q&A Scoring Rubric
- [5 points] Ability to offer clarification on the proposal
- [5 points] Justification of answers
- [5 points] Understanding of Mousetrap or Gravity Vehicle rules
- [5 points] Understanding of design principles
- [5 points] Good scientific communication (Div C only)
Penalties
Proposals submitted late and/or in an improper format will have their proposal score multiplied by 0.9.
If the proposed device would incur a construction violation according to the Mousetrap or Gravity Vehicle rules, or the proposal excludes the information necessary to make that determination, the overall score will be multiplied by 0.7.
Students may receive advice and feedback on their proposal, but all uncited words and images must be their own. Even though Division B is not scored on references, any unoriginal content must still be cited. If the Event Supervisor has strong cause to believe a team is in violation of this, the team may be subject to disqualification for plagiarism.
Awards
VASO
The event was run in both divisions at the 2021 Virginia State Tournament as well as every Virginia regional tournament in 2021.
| Rank | Division B State Medalists | Division C State Medalists |
|---|---|---|
| 1st | Cooper Middle School | Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology |
| 2nd | Stone Hill Middle School | George C. Marshall High School |
| 3rd | Longfellow Middle School | Langley High School |
| 4th | River Bend Middle School | Potomac Falls High School |
| 5th | Colvin Run Elementary School | McLean High School |
| 6th | Lake Braddock Secondary School | Fairfax High School |
BEARSO
The event was run under the name Gravity Vehicle Design at the BEARSO Invitational only in Division C on October 10, 2020.
| Rank | Medalists |
|---|---|
| 1st | West Windsor-Plainsboro High School North 1 |
| 2nd | Seven Lakes High School Orange |
| 3rd | Mason High School White |
| 4th | Martin Luther King High School Blue |
| 5th | Fairfax High School |
| 6th | Martin Luther King High School Red |
| 7th | Orange County School of the Arts |
| 8th | Castro Valley High School Diamond |
| 9th | Temple City High School |
| 10th | Solon High School C |
SOAPS
The event was run at the first Science Olympiad at Penn State Invitational on February 6, 2021.
| Rank | Medalists |
|---|---|
| 1st | West Windsor-Plainsboro High School North East South West |
| 2nd | New Trier High School Grey |
| 3rd | Mason High School White |
| 4th | Adlai E. Stevenson High School Green |
| 5th | Mason High School Black |
| 6th | Lower Merion High School A |
| 7th | Portola High School A |
| 8th | Mason High School Green |
LBSO
The event was run at the second Lake Braddock Invitational on December 12, 2020.
| Rank | Medalists |
|---|---|
| 1st | Cooper Middle School Pepper |
| 2nd | Longfellow Middle School Astra |
| 3rd | Sierra Vista Middle School |
| 4th | BASIS Independent McLean Fire |
| 5th | J. Michael Lunsford Middle School Barada |
| 6th | Kennedy Middle School Pearl |