1. JULIA RODRIGUEZ PHOENIX GRAVES TEAMWORK: THE COLLABORATION OF MULTIPLE PEOPLE IN A PROCESS 1.EFFORT 2.HARD WORK 3.PERSISTENCE 4.DEDICATION MOTTO: “A FOR EFFORT” GUIDELINES: EQUAL WORK SHARE, EFFORT, AND PARTICIPATION Unsure (Usually Not Sure under real evaluation)

2. PAPER AIRPLANE PROJECT FLIGHT TIME PAPER AIRPLANE DISTANCE PAPER AIRPLANE

3. DESIGN PROCESS: UNDERSTAND PURPOSE: TO TEST VARIATIONS OF PAPER AIRPLANES TO SEE WHICH WOULD HAVE THE GREATEST HANG TIME, AND LONGEST FLIGHT DISTANCE. MAKE A PROTOTYPE, THEN SCALE IT UP TO SEE IF IT WOULD WORK AT THE LARGER SCALE. PURPOSE: TO TEST VARIATIONS OF PAPER AIRPLANES TO SEE WHICH WOULD HAVE THE GREATEST HANG TIME, AND LONGEST FLIGHT DISTANCE. MAKE A PROTOTYPE, THEN SCALE IT UP TO SEE IF IT WOULD WORK AT THE LARGER SCALE. REQUIREMENT: REQUIREMENT: 2 PAPER AIRPLANES, 1 FOR HANG TIME, 1 FOR FLIGHT DISTANCE 2 PAPER AIRPLANES, 1 FOR HANG TIME, 1 FOR FLIGHT DISTANCE 2 MORE PAPER PLANES OF THE PROTOTYPE, LARGER SCALE 2 MORE PAPER PLANES OF THE PROTOTYPE, LARGER SCALE TABLES FOR RECORDING DATA TABLES FOR RECORDING DATA MATERIALS PROTOTYPE: 1 SHEET OF 8/11IN PAPER, CLEAR TAPE MATERIALS PROTOTYPE: 1 SHEET OF 8/11IN PAPER, CLEAR TAPE MATERIALS LARGER SCALE: 16 SHEETS OF 8/11IN PAPER TAPED IN GROUPS OF 4, LAYERED, MASKING TAPE, PAPER CLIPS, SCISSORS MATERIALS LARGER SCALE: 16 SHEETS OF 8/11IN PAPER TAPED IN GROUPS OF 4, LAYERED, MASKING TAPE, PAPER CLIPS, SCISSORS

4. DESIGN PROCESS: EXPLORE POSSIBILITIES: MULTIPLE PROTOTYPES TO TEST A VARIATION OF MODELS AND THEN SEE WHAT ASPECTS OF THE PAPER PLANES MADE THEM SUCCESSFUL AND WHICH ONES DID NOT. POSSIBILITIES: MULTIPLE PROTOTYPES TO TEST A VARIATION OF MODELS AND THEN SEE WHAT ASPECTS OF THE PAPER PLANES MADE THEM SUCCESSFUL AND WHICH ONES DID NOT. QUESTIONS ASKED: QUESTIONS ASKED: WOULD A HEAVIER OR LIGHTER MASS BE MORE BENEFICIAL IN BOTH TIME AND DISTANCE? WOULD A HEAVIER OR LIGHTER MASS BE MORE BENEFICIAL IN BOTH TIME AND DISTANCE? WOULD A GREATER AREA OF PAPER BE MORE BENEFICIAL? (MORE AREA ON THE WING) WOULD A GREATER AREA OF PAPER BE MORE BENEFICIAL? (MORE AREA ON THE WING) WHAT SHAPES WOULD BE THE MOST BENEFICIAL? WHAT SHAPES WOULD BE THE MOST BENEFICIAL? WHEN CHANGED TO THE LARGER SCALE, WHICH WOULD WORK AND WHICH ONE WOULD NOT? WHEN CHANGED TO THE LARGER SCALE, WHICH WOULD WORK AND WHICH ONE WOULD NOT? RESEARCH: WE SEARCHED THE INTERNET TO FIND DIFFERENT TYPES OF PROTOTYPES THEN WE TESTED EACH ONE TO SEE WHICH ONE HAD POTENTIAL. WE ALSO WATCHED VIDEOS OF THE PLANS AND HOW TO MAKE THEM SUCCESSFULLY. THEN WE KEPT ON SEARCHING UNTIL WE FOUND A DESIGN THAT SUCCEEDED THE OTHERS. WE THEN DECIDED TO USE THIS ONE. RESEARCH: WE SEARCHED THE INTERNET TO FIND DIFFERENT TYPES OF PROTOTYPES THEN WE TESTED EACH ONE TO SEE WHICH ONE HAD POTENTIAL. WE ALSO WATCHED VIDEOS OF THE PLANS AND HOW TO MAKE THEM SUCCESSFULLY. THEN WE KEPT ON SEARCHING UNTIL WE FOUND A DESIGN THAT SUCCEEDED THE OTHERS. WE THEN DECIDED TO USE THIS ONE.

5. DESIGN PROCESS: DEFINE CONCEPTS CONCEPTS HANG TIME: THE THROW NEEDED TO BE MORE LIKE A GLIDING MOTION, AS FOR THE PLANE TO HAVE A LONGER FLIGHT IT NEEDED TO GLIDE MORE RATHER THAN BE THRUST. MORE AREA OF WINGS ON THE PLANE HELPED IT STAY AFLOAT, MORE RESISTANCE AGAINST THE AIR WHEN THE WINGS WERE WIDER AND FLAT. THE WEIGHT NEEDED TO BE MOSTLY EQUAL WITH A GREATER AMOUNT OF WEIGHT ON THE NOSE TO MOVE FORWARD. FOR THE PLANE TO GLIDE IT NEEDED TO HAVE LESS WIND RESISTANCE. HANG TIME: THE THROW NEEDED TO BE MORE LIKE A GLIDING MOTION, AS FOR THE PLANE TO HAVE A LONGER FLIGHT IT NEEDED TO GLIDE MORE RATHER THAN BE THRUST. MORE AREA OF WINGS ON THE PLANE HELPED IT STAY AFLOAT, MORE RESISTANCE AGAINST THE AIR WHEN THE WINGS WERE WIDER AND FLAT. THE WEIGHT NEEDED TO BE MOSTLY EQUAL WITH A GREATER AMOUNT OF WEIGHT ON THE NOSE TO MOVE FORWARD. FOR THE PLANE TO GLIDE IT NEEDED TO HAVE LESS WIND RESISTANCE. FLIGHT DISTANCE: HARDER THROWS WERE REQUIRED TO GET OPTIMAL DISTANCE, HEAVIER PLANES WERE EASIER TO THROW AND THEREFORE MORE SUCCESSFUL IN DISTANCE. THINNER PLANES HAD LESS AIR RESISTANCE AND COULD THEREFORE CUT THROUGH THE AIR AT A HIGHER SPEED, HIGHER SPEED PER TIME RESULTS IN A GREATER AMOUNT OF DISTANCE. FLIGHT DISTANCE: HARDER THROWS WERE REQUIRED TO GET OPTIMAL DISTANCE, HEAVIER PLANES WERE EASIER TO THROW AND THEREFORE MORE SUCCESSFUL IN DISTANCE. THINNER PLANES HAD LESS AIR RESISTANCE AND COULD THEREFORE CUT THROUGH THE AIR AT A HIGHER SPEED, HIGHER SPEED PER TIME RESULTS IN A GREATER AMOUNT OF DISTANCE. SOLUTIONS SOLUTIONS HANG TIME: EXCESS WEIGHT WAS CUT FROM THE NOSE FOR THE LARGER SCALE MODEL TO WORK. MASKING TAPE WAS USED TO TAPE DOWN EXCESS PAPER. GENTLE THROW. HANG TIME: EXCESS WEIGHT WAS CUT FROM THE NOSE FOR THE LARGER SCALE MODEL TO WORK. MASKING TAPE WAS USED TO TAPE DOWN EXCESS PAPER. GENTLE THROW. FLIGHT DISTANCE: TAPE WAS ALSO USED FOR LESS WIND RESISTANCE, AND PAPER CLIPS WERE ADDED TO THE TAIL OF THE PLANE TO ADD WEIGHT. FORCEFUL THROW. FLIGHT DISTANCE: TAPE WAS ALSO USED FOR LESS WIND RESISTANCE, AND PAPER CLIPS WERE ADDED TO THE TAIL OF THE PLANE TO ADD WEIGHT. FORCEFUL THROW.

6. DESIGN PROCESS: IDEATE SKETCHES/DRAWINGS (MORE SO BUNCHES OF PROTOTYPES) SKETCHES/DRAWINGS (MORE SO BUNCHES OF PROTOTYPES) WE DISREGARDED THE FAILURES AND WORKED ON THE ONES WHICH COULD WORK OR DID WE DISREGARDED THE FAILURES AND WORKED ON THE ONES WHICH COULD WORK OR DID WE FOUND THESE PROTOTYPES THROUGH INTERNET SEARCHES USUALLY, KEY WORDS: LONGEST FLYING PAPER AIRPLANE, LONGEST DISTANCE, ETC. WE FOUND THESE PROTOTYPES THROUGH INTERNET SEARCHES USUALLY, KEY WORDS: LONGEST FLYING PAPER AIRPLANE, LONGEST DISTANCE, ETC. USE OF MATERIALS USE OF MATERIALS PAPER, TAPE, SCISSORS, PAPER CLIPS, STAPLES, CLEAR TAPE, MASKING TAPE PAPER, TAPE, SCISSORS, PAPER CLIPS, STAPLES, CLEAR TAPE, MASKING TAPE

7. DESIGN PROCESS: PROTOTYPE INITIAL DESIGNS INITIAL DESIGNS Hang Time Flight Distance

8. DESIGN PROCESS: REFINE DESIGN ISSUES THAT NEEDED TO BE RESOLVED: DESIGN ISSUES THAT NEEDED TO BE RESOLVED: HANG TIME PLANE: THE FRONT END NEEDED TO BE CUT OFF BECAUSE OF THE UNNECESSARY WEIGHT (NOSE DIVED WITH TOO MUCH WEIGHT) HANG TIME PLANE: THE FRONT END NEEDED TO BE CUT OFF BECAUSE OF THE UNNECESSARY WEIGHT (NOSE DIVED WITH TOO MUCH WEIGHT) HANG TIME PLANE: HANG TIME PLANE: FLIGHT DISTANCE PLANE: 8 PAPER CLIPS WERE ADDED TO INCREASE SPEED AND WEIGHT SO THAT WHEN THROWN THE PLANE WENT FURTHER. ONLY USED 2 LAYERS (8 SHEETS OF 8/11IN) PAPER BECAUSE THE DESIGN WOULD NOT FOLD PROPERLY WHEN THERE WERE 4 LAYERS. FLIGHT DISTANCE PLANE: 8 PAPER CLIPS WERE ADDED TO INCREASE SPEED AND WEIGHT SO THAT WHEN THROWN THE PLANE WENT FURTHER. ONLY USED 2 LAYERS (8 SHEETS OF 8/11IN) PAPER BECAUSE THE DESIGN WOULD NOT FOLD PROPERLY WHEN THERE WERE 4 LAYERS. Flight Distance Prototype Trial 1Trial 2Trial 3 Time1.8s1.5s2.1s Distance43ft40ft47ft Hang Time Prototype Trial 1Trial 2Trial 3 Time2.5s3.1s2.7s

9. DESIGN PROCESS: SOLUTION Airplane TrialsTrial 1Trial 2Trial 3 Flight Time1.5s2.6s1.8s Airplane TrialsTrial 1Trial 2Trial 3 Flight Distance40ft54ft30ft Flight Time2.5s2.05s1.85s Distance Plane Instructions on how to build plane: Time in Air Plane Conclusion: In the end, we figured that the small scale designs worked better than the larger scale, this was possibly caused by the greater amount of weight or human error in the design.

10. VIDEO HANG TIME PROTOTYPE LARGE SCALE MODEL FLIGHT DISTANCE PROTOTYPE LARGE SCALE MODEL