How do yousee things?

What is one of the main criteria that is used in selecting a car?  I know that there are many, but probably one of the top ones is the appearance of the car.  A type of car may become popular and viewed as safe and efficient all based on the fact that it looks nice, all the while one does not have any information regarding the safety and efficiencyof that car.  How we perceive things is very important.

The paper that I read for this post dealt with this idea.  There is a growing emphasis on the environment and how we can be more eco-friendly and automakers are some of the main groups that are being targeted for this movement.  The paper talks about a method that was created to help automakers  in the design of thier cars.  It stated that just by seeing the silhouette of a car, one will perceive whether or not it is environmentally friendly.

A survey was created that contained images of car silhouettes, as shown in the following picture,



Figure 1



They picked 7 points on the silhouette and changed them to give the car a different look.

Figure 2

 The ratings were based on how people percieved the car as environmently friendly and if the shape was inspired by nature. 

I have decided not to disclose the results for this study because I would be interested to see what your perception of these silhouettes are.  Refer to Figure 1 and comment on the top two silhouettes you think meet the criteria.

Sustainable Design

Mechanical Engineering is a vast field of study, however I am focusing more on design and mechatronics (yes I used Wikipedia).  The Journal of Mechanical Design is were I got my article for the blog entry.  The September issue that I got the article from was dedicated to sustainable design.   There has been such an awareness to the environment and how waste can be reduced over the past several years.  In mechanical systems there are numerous ways that energy is lost, so as an engineer it would be wise to reduce that lost or even redirect it to another system. 

The issue that got the article from dealt with these issues.  The title of the article is "A Device for Harvesting Energy From Rotational Vibrations".  I found it to be an interesting article.  It was very technical with many equations and figures.

As I metioned, there are many ways that energy can be lost in mechanical systems, but specifically in dealing with components that rotate like gears and cams.  There is energy lost through the vibrations of these components.  The article states that through the use of electromagnetic induction the potential energy of the vibrations can be harvested.

The approach that the authors took in their research was to first develop an analytical model of the harvester and present that first.  Second, they designed the prototype based on their theories and test details for each element.  Finally, they tested the prototype and compared the data they obtained to the models they developed.  The outputs were not very large, but enough to possibly energize other components in surrounding systems.

I have tried to be clear and concise in presenting this article.  Any feedback would be appreciated so that it could help me with the ones to follow.

 

Genre??? Take 2

So much has transpired since I made my last post.  After much thought and conversations with others, I felt it best to amend my last post.  I did not explain myself thoroughly.  I was trying to make a  quick post so that I could make a check mark next to that task on my list of things to do. 

I understand the reason that Miller "jumped around throwing out different names and quotes".  She was making comparisons and pointing out ideas that she agreed and diagreed with.  I feel as though my statement was too blunt and not well explained.  It was not fair of me to through that statement out and not explain myself as to why I was feeling confused by that.

I try to make posts that are positive and thought provoking since we all experience so much negative junk from day-to-day.  My intensions were not to be negative on the post, however after reading it later on, I feel the overall tone was not what I felt it should be.

It was a tough essay to read and packed with so much information.  I must say that after reading it a second time, I was starting to understand it more.  I am sure that the discussion in class would have brought out some interesting points.

Genre???

I don't know about anyone else but I am having trouble with the Miller selection that was assigned for Tuesday.  I consider myself to be fairly intelligent, but am having a hard time understanding this piece. 

She does alot of comparisons of how other authors define genre and I think that is where the main difficulty comes.  She jumps around throwing out different names and quotes.  I just find that confusing.

I am going to give it one more try before class tomorrow to gain some understanding of the material so that I can contribute to the in-class discussion.

Just curious to hear what others think of this piece.