Post has attachment
Myself, Katie and Sophie decided to create 'bridges' to stop the water spilling over the sides, and used tape to minimise the water lost in any gaps. To slow down the flow of water as it entered the path, we blocked off the plug hole with a cork, which we drilled a small hole into to make sure the water didn't flow down the path too quickly.
PhotoPhotoPhotoPhoto
2016-05-06
4 Photos - View album

Post has attachment
Myself, katie and sophie began using the straight piping. We put one cup of sediment half way down the piping and then poured 1 cup of water down the pipe. We timed how long it took for the water to reach the container at the bottom to see which sediment worked better as a dam. We then did the same test with the slanted piping and 2 cups of sediment.
PhotoPhotoPhotoPhotoPhoto
2016-05-06
6 Photos - View album

Post has attachment
Our group took the initial step to fill the area with water to determine how much water we began with, and how much we were losing. In order to do so, we measured how much water was released in four pumps of water- this was 850ml. It was calculated that when we had reached the 'fill' point, water was at a total of 20.4L. We then drained the water, collecting all water that was wasted - this totalled 13.2L. As a group we worked together to amend the areas of the channels that were causing wasted water. This involved the use of waterproof materials such as plastic, cork and foam sheets. After we had made our amendments, we filled the basin again and released the water. We found that we had dramatically reduced the water that had previously been wasted.

This would be a good investigation for children to carry out as it allows them to communicate with each other. It requires children to make discussions in order to decide on what needs to be amended and altered to see an effective outcome. Children are then also able to self-evaluate and critique where their experiment required improvements, and what aspects went well.
PhotoPhotoPhotoPhotoPhoto
2016-05-05
9 Photos - View album

Post has attachment
Kelly, Paige and myself began with investigation using the straight guttering provided in order to test which 'river' sediment was the most obstructive. We measured this by timing how long it took for a beaker of water to flow through the gutting and reach the end. We made discussions as a group, for example, how to create a flow of water that wouldn't be biased depending on how the water was poured - this resulted in a beaker of water becoming the 'release' system for our flow. We then repeated this with the guttering that was bent, therefore not creating a straight flow of water. The results we found are in the below image...
PhotoPhotoPhotoPhotoPhoto
2016-05-05
5 Photos - View album

Post has attachment
Our created K'Nex model. It took a large amount of time to put together the different pieces to create the K'Nex model, and myself and Daisy were able to test the model using cups of water. However, we didn't have enough time to measure how much energy was being produced.
Photo

Post has attachment
Erin, Carly, Josh and myself all started with the straight guttering to see if we could find a way to stop to water going though. We started by putting dry sand in the guttering and we found that because it was dry it absorbed the water really well. However we conintued to put more and more water down until it eventually made a path for itself though the sand.
We then moved onto zig-zag guttering and tried to block the waters path with a combination of sand and pebbles. This worked a lot better than just sand as the two components worked together to fill the gaps to stop the water!
Our second mission was to stop the wooden beams from wearing when water was run down them. In order to stop the leaks we used plasticine and felt to guide the water smoothly down the wooden beams. We then tested the water at different paces, we found that the best way to get the most water down is to pour the water into a funnel slowly. This saves the most water at the end of the woodwork.
PhotoPhotoPhotoPhotoPhoto
5/3/16
7 Photos - View album

Post has attachment
In our group - Antonia S, Josh M, Danny L - we created a 'river' to see how different materials affect the 'river flow'. We found that building sand was the quickest and that the gravel slowed down the river flow. Our full results table can be seen below.
Video
PhotoPhoto
03/05/2016
3 Photos - View album

Post has attachment
When investigating ways to stop leakages in the water reservoir, we all split up into groups to work on separate areas and come up with possible solutions. This allowed us to use a variety of materials and methods and observe which were most effective. This would be a great activity to do with children as it involved a lot of investigation and measuring which would give children a chance to share ideas and work as a team to implement them.

Next, we moved onto testing different materials and how they affected the amount and flow of the water down a straight pipe. We then carried out the same investigation with a pipe with bends in it and was surprised by some of the results when compared with the first set of results. This could provide opportunities for further investigation.
PhotoPhotoPhoto
2016-05-03
3 Photos - View album

Post has attachment
Harsimrat, Keely, lauren, ciara, Kayleigh and I created an artificial river and tested the water flow in a straight and bended course. The water passed through both rocks and fine sand however the more dense sand held the water back. This simulates how a river course and bed are formed.
PhotoPhotoPhoto
2016-05-03
3 Photos - View album

Post has attachment
Here are our groups findings - Antonia S, Josh M and Danny L. We found that building sand was the quickest and that the gravel slowed done the river flow the most.
Photo
Wait while more posts are being loaded