Antifreeze on the Survival Rate and Growth of Algae



 
PURPOSE

The purpose of this experiment was to determine the effect of water pollution (antifreeze) on the survival rate and growth of algae.

I became interested in this idea when my old fish tank became coated with algae. I was going to use bleach and soap on it, but my mom said that if I put too much in and didn’t wash it out well enough then it would kill my fish. So I wondered if certain types of pollution that people dumped into the sea or oil that came from ships would affect the growth and survival rate of algae.  

The information gained from this experiment could help beneficial algae grow more efficiently and keep workers from polluting the water. Also it would help scientist know if oil or other pollutants would affect the growth and survival rate of algae. 

HYPOTHESIS

My first hypothesis was that as the antifreeze had more time in contact with the algae, the less the dissolved oxygen level would be.

My second hypothesis was that ethylene glycol would have more effect than the other pollutants and would decrease the dissolved oxygen level most.

I based my second hypothesis on information that I got from a 2005 science project, “Effect of Antifreeze Type and Concentration on Soybean Growth.” The conclusions stated that ethylene glycol affected the growth of soybeans more than propylene glycol.

EXPERIMENT DESIGN

The constants in this study were:

•      Type of dissolved oxygen meter

•      Water type

•      Amount of water

•      Type of container

•      Type of pollutant

•      Species of algae

The manipulated variable was the antifreeze concentration.  

The responding variable was how much of the algae survived.

To measure the responding variable, I used a dissolved oxygen meter.

MATERIALS

QUANTITY 
ITEM DESCRIPTION
4 quarts
Water
24
Eggs
5  , 2 liter
Plastic containers
2-liter
Algae
12
Small jars
2 quarts
Antifreeze concentrations
1
Dissolved oxygen meter

PROCEDURES

1)    Obtain all supplies and algae

2)    Create Pollutant Mixtures in Decreasing Concentrations

A)    Pour 8 ml of pollutant into a graduated cylinder and add 12 ml of distilled water.  Mix well.  This yields 20 ml of polluted water.  Pour exactly 10 ml of this into a disposable cup.  One half of the pollutant (4 ml) is in this cup and the other half (4 ml) is still in the graduated cylinder.   Mark this cup “4 ml”.

B)    Add an additional 10 ml of distilled water to the graduated cylinder (still containing 4 ml of pollutant) to make 20 ml total.  Mix well.  Pour exactly 10 ml of this “half strength” pollutant into a second disposable cup and label “2 ml” because that is how much of the original pollutant is still in this water.

C)    Add an additional 10 ml of distilled water to the graduated cylinder (now containing 2 ml of pollutant) to make 20 ml total.  Mix well.  Pour exactly 10 ml of this “quarter strength” pollutant into a third disposable cup and label “1 ml” because that is how much of the original pollutant is left.

D)    Repeat this process again.  Add an additional 10 ml of distilled water to the graduated cylinder (now containing 1 ml of pollutant) to make 20 ml total.  Mix well.  Pour exactly 10 ml of this into a fourth disposable cup and label “0.5 ml”.

E)    Add an additional 10 ml of distilled water to the graduated cylinder (now containing 0.5 ml of pollutant) to make 20 ml total.  Mix well.  Pour exactly 10 ml of this into a fourth disposable cup and label “0.25 ml”

F)    Add an additional 10 ml of distilled water to the graduated cylinder (now containing 0.25 ml of pollutant) to make 20 ml total.  Mix well.  Pour exactly 10 ml of this into a fourth disposable cup and label “0.125 ml”

3)    Add Algae to Pollutant Mixtures

A)    Go back and add exactly 40 ml of algae/water to each of the 10 ml samples of polluted water in each of the disposable cups.  Here is the math:

i)    40 ml algae + 10 ml polluted water = 50 ml total (including 4 ml of pure pollutant).  So 4 parts pollutant in 50 parts liquid = 4/50 = 8% 

ii)    40 ml algae + 10 ml polluted water = 50 ml total (including 2 ml of pure pollutant).  So 2 parts pollutant in 50 parts liquid = 2/50 = 4% 

iii)    40 ml algae + 10 ml polluted water = 50 ml total (including 1 ml of pure pollutant).  So 1 part pollutant in 50 parts liquid = 1/50 = 2% 

iv)    0.5 part pollutant in 50 parts liquid = 0.5/50 = 1% 

v)    0.25 part pollutant in 50 parts liquid = 0.25/50 = 0.5% 

vi)    0.125 part pollutant in 50 parts liquid = 0.125/50 = 0.25% 

B)    Control Group - Algae with NO Pollutant

i)    Create control groups with absolutely no pollutant.  Use 40 ml algae + 10 ml distilled water to keep the amount of algae in control samples equal to algae in treatment samples. 

4)    Start Observations

5)    This is “TIME ZERO.” Do first dissolved oxygen reading for each group.

6)    Repeat step 5 with other concentrations

RESULTS

The original purpose of this experiment was to determine the effect of water pollution on the survival rate and growth of algae.

The results of the experiment were the algae reacted most to the ethylene by dropping dissolved oxygen.

CONCLUSION

My first hypothesis was that as the antifreeze had more time in contact with the algae, the less the dissolved oxygen level would be. The results indicate that this hypothesis should be accepted, because the amount of dissolved oxygen generally decreased across time.

My second hypothesis was that ethylene glycol would have more effect than the other pollutants and would decrease the dissolved oxygen level most.  The results indicate that this hypothesis should also be accepted, because the amount of dissolved oxygen generally was lowest for ethylene glycol.

After thinking about the results of this experiment, I wonder if I used a stronger pollutant like gasoline or oil would affect the algae in a different way? Also if I used higher concentrations with my antifreeze, if that would have brought the results down more?

If I were to conduct this project again   I would of used oil or a stronger pollutant, I would have put in higher concentrations, bought a lot more algae so I could use maybe two or three types of pollutant.

Researched by ----- Natalie F

Read More

Error Correction Routines on the Efficiency of a Robot





PURPOSE

The purpose of this experiment was to determine the most efficient software instruction set for a light-sensing robot to follow a visual path.

 I became interested in this idea because when I’m older I would like to have a job with technology involved. So I thought that discovering a system that could affect manufacturers across the state would be a great first step toward my future.

 The information gained from this experiment could allow manufacturers to have a better, more useful robot. If a robot has a malfunction it will most likely stop working, but if I can design a program that will allow a robot to handle malfunctions on its own, it could use my programming and handle itself. 
  
HYPOTHESIS

My first hypothesis was that specific programmed instructions could be varied to obtain a maximum speed and accuracy for the robot. 

My second hypothesis was that specific programmed instructions optimized for one task would also give the maximum speed and accuracy on a second similar but different task. 

I based my hypothesis on information about robots that explained the importance of the programmed instructions. 

 
EXPERIMENT DESIGN

The constants in this study were:

•    Robot components

•    Stopwatch 

•    Design of robot

•    Use of light sensor

•    Basic program controlling robot 

•    Use of course 1 and 2 

The manipulated variable was the error correction factors in the software instruction set.

The responding variable was the time it took for the robot to follow the intended route.

To measure the responding variable, I used a stopwatch for each trial to know how long it took for the robot to complete its task.   

MATERIALS

QUANTITY
ITEM DESCRIPTION
1
Stopwatch
1
Computer
1
“Mind Storms For School” Lego set
1
ROBOLAB 2.4.5 software for Windows
18"X24"
Tag board
1
Black Construction Paper
1
Scissors
1
Protractor

   
    
PROCEDURES

The following instructions assume two things.  First the experimenter must be very well acquainted with using Lego’s, especially how gears work to power a small vehicle forward, backward, and in turns.  Second, the software that controls the robot is “RoboLab 2.5.4.b” for a Windows PC.  The experimenter must spend many hours becoming familiar with the basics of using this program.  Since there is no true instruction manual for the software, one must go through a series of “Training Missions” to learn the basics for programming the robot.  There are an enormous number of possible commands and programming options, and the training missions do not adequately lead you through more than 25%.  So the next step is hours of trial and error effort to get to a point where a “formal experiment” can even be attempted.

1)    Build basic robot using Lego “Mind storms for Schools” kit

a)    Create compact vehicle powered with two electric motors each attached via direct     gearing to its own drive wheel on an independent axle.  There must be one more point of support, a tiny low-friction skid plate, to keep the vehicle upright and level.

b)    Attach the RCX 1.0 computer module to the vehicle to act as its “brain”.  Attach output A to the left motor and output C to the right motor. (Note these motors work in  opposition.)

2)    Create a basic program to make the robot do each of the following

          a)    Go straight forward for several seconds

b)    Go straight backward for several seconds 

c)    Rotate clockwise

d)    Rotate counter-clockwise.


3)    Test vehicle and improve design and program as needed

a)    Upload program to RCX using the USB controlled infra-red transmitter

b)    Press “RUN” button on RCX to activate program
c)    Observe and evaluate robot’s actions
4)    Add light sensor to front of robot and connect to RCX input 

5)    Create a second basic program to make the robot do each of the following: 

a)    Read the input from the light sensor and display the lightness value
b)    Stop or alter motion depending on a change in the light sensor reading
6)    Create test course with black line on white paper

a)    Create test course on white construction paper (18 X 24 inches).  Draw basic course in pencil.  Be sure to have a long straight-away, several “S” curves and several 90° zigzags.
b)    Use black construction paper that is 3/4 inch wide to make continuous course following pencil line.
c)    Glue down all of the pieces to your course.
d)    Label one direction as Course 1 and the other as Course
e)    Place test course on a flat and level surface and tape down.
7)    Create the test program using components from the basic programs above.  It must have the following elements:

a)    Activate both motors to move the robot forward in a straight line while constantly monitoring light sensor

b)    If light sensor value is 43 or less (still tracking the black line) loop back to the beginning of the program and continue going forward

c)    If light sensor value is 43 or greater (off-course, now on white instead of black), begin the first error correction routine:

i)    Stop motors

ii)    Add 3 to the temporary memory

iii)    Rotate left and slightly back up using the following method (which will later be varied)

iv)    Make left motor (A) reverse with a power setting of 5

v)    Make the right motor (C) go slightly forward with a power setting of 3

vi)    Do this for the exact amount of time indicated by the temporary memory (the first time it will be 3/100 second)
vii)    Stop all motors

d)    If light sensor value is 43 or less (back on the black line) loop back to the beginning of the program and start going forward

e)    If light sensor value is 43 or greater (still off-course, rotating left didn’t work), begin the second error correction routine:

i)    Add 3 more to the temporary memory

ii)    Rotate right and slightly back up using the same power settings as in 6.c.iv-v above (only in opposite directions)

iii)    Do this for the exact amount of time indicated by the temporary memory (the first time it will be 6/100 second) Note: the result of adding more time to the temporary memory causes the robot to rotate back to the beginning direction and continue on the same rotation to the opposite side.

iv)    Stop all motors

f)    If light sensor value is 43 or less (back on the black line) loop back to the beginning of the program and start going forward

g)    If light sensor value is 43 or greater (still off-course, rotating right didn’t work either), try the first error correction routine again, only with a longer duration (which means a wider swing). Go back to 6.c.ii.

8)    Upload program to RCX using the USB controlled infra-red transmitter

9)    Conduct your first set of trials

a)    Reset stopwatch. 

b)    Place robot on Course 1 start point.

c)    Start stopwatch at the same time you press the “RUN” button on robot.

d)    If something goes wrong while you are conducting a trial or robot gets stuck on a part of your course for longer than thirty seconds, define the trial as an “error.”

e)    Stop both the watch and the robot when it ends the course.

f)    Record time on data collection sheet.

g)    Repeat steps 9 (a-f) for 10 trials.

10)    Repeat step 9 using Course 2 (opposite direction)

11)    Change motor power setting variables

a)    Now change the program variables that control the motors:

i.  First error correction routine should now make left motor 

(A) reverse with a power setting of 6 and make the right motor 

(C) go slightly forward with a power setting of 2.

ii.     Second error correction routine should now make left motor (A) go slightly forward with a power setting of 2 and make the right motor (C) reverse with a power setting of 6.

12) Conduct second set of trials

a)  Repeat steps 8-10 at the current settings.
13) Change motor power setting variables as in step 10 except use the values of  7 and 1

14) Conduct next set of trials as in step 11

15) Change correction routine duration variables

a)    Repeat steps 7-13 except change temporary memory increment value to 5.  First trial should start with motor power settings of 5 and 3 as in first trials.  Note: the result of increasing the amount of time added to the temporary memory causes the robot to rotate back and forth through larger swings. 

b)    Repeat step 14.a. except change value to 7.

16) Analyze results. 

RESULTS
The original purpose of this experiment was to determine the most efficient software instruction set for a light-sensing robot to follow a visual path.

 The results of the experiment were that motor power settings of 6 and 2 had the best times overall.  The error correction duration of 7 also provided the best times overall.

Another observation was that I could have predicted the outcome of any settings without so many trials. Five trials would have been more than enough. Also, the robot doesn’t run both courses equally, the robot scored a few seconds better on the second course.  

CONCLUSION

My first hypothesis was that specific programmed instructions could be varied to obtain a maximum speed and accuracy for the robot. 

The results indicate that my first hypothesis should be accepted, because the combination of power settings of 6,2 with an error correction duration increase of 7 gave the fastest times in both directions.

My second hypothesis was that, specific programmed instructions optimized for one task would also give the maximum speed and accuracy on a second similar but different task. 

The results indicate that my second hypothesis should also be accepted, because the same settings worked best on both tasks. I am uncomfortable with this statement because when the settings are slightly off the errors that result are much different for the two tasks. I think more research is needed on this hypothesis.

After thinking about the results of this experiment, I wonder how much changing the body style would affect performance.  The distance of the light sensor in front of the axle would probably make a difference. Having two light sensors would also be a good thing to test. Most animals have two eyes so it is possible that it could be better for a robot as well.  

If I were to conduct this project again I would have completed more trials and tested smaller variations of duration. Testing on longer and more difficult courses would be worth while.  A more complex programming system could also result in less jerky movement of the robot and faster times. I would have tried to build a better body style. In addition I would have done something to stop the tires from slipping on the wheel rims.


Researched by  ----- Taylor Dale V


Read More

Oil Absorbency of Polypropylene Pads vs Natural Products




PURPOSE

The purpose of this experiment was to compare the oil absorbency of natural items with that of polypropylene pads, the most common consumer product used for this purpose.

I became interested in this idea when my math teacher told our class about the Exxon Valdez oil spill that occurred in 1989 in Prince William Sound, Alaska. When I did more research on the Valdez, I found that they were able to remove the oil, with talc, a powder made from talcum. I also found that many animals were harmed from the oil so I decided to find out if any natural sources could absorb more oil than consumer products.

 The information gained from this experiment could be useful to the consumer’s who need to clean oil from driveways, parking lots etc. It could also be helpful to store owners. It would be very useful to wildlife as well! 

HYPOTHESIS

My hypothesis was that polypropylene absorbent pads would absorb at least 10% more oil than hay would.

My second hypothesis was that polypropylene pads would absorb at least 10% more oil than sheep wool would.

I based my hypothesis on a 2002 science project by Arianne Judy. In her results it states her hypothesis, that natural products absorb equal or more oil than consumer, should be rejected.


EXPERIMENT DESIGN

The constants in this study were:

•    Type of oil (40 weight motor oil)

•    Container size and type

•    The amount of natural product used

•     The amount of oil “spilled” to collect

•    The temperature of the oil.

•    The temperature of the room.

•    Size and weight of mesh bags.


The manipulated variable was the type of product used to absorb oil; in this case it was hay, sheep wool, llama wool, and polypropylene pads.

The responding variable was the mass of oil absorbed. 

Using the triple beam balance I measured the amount of oil absorbed by taking the beginning mass of the material and subtracting that from the ending mass (the mass of the material plus oil). This was the mass of the oil absorbed.


MATERIALS
QUANTITY
ITEM DESCRIPTION
75g
Washed Sheep Wool
75g
Hay
75g
Water/oil Tray
1
Water/oil Tray
5
Polypropylene Pads (consumer products)
1800 ml
Tap Water
36
Mesh Bags
1
Triple Beam Balance
1 quart (.946ml)
40 Weight Motor Oil














  
PROCEDURES

1. Create Mesh Pouches

a)    Cut out 36 pieces of mesh fabric that are 12x20 cm.

b)    Fold them in half so they are 12x10cm.

c)    Sew along the two sides that were 20 cm. but are now folded on top of each other.  This will form 36 open pockets that are 12x10 cm. 

d)    Place 4.5g. of an absorbent inside the pouch using a triple beam balance to make sure the mass is 4.5g.

 •    Fill 12 mesh bags with polypropylene, 12 with hay, and 12 with fleece. 

e)     Sew the tops shut.

2. Begin Experiment #1-Without Water.

a)    Place 500-ml. motor oil in the tray DO NOT PUT WATER IN.

b)    Place each absorbent in pouch into the tray of oil. 

c)    Leave in oil for 20 minutes. Flip the pouches over every ten minutes. 

          d)    Remove from tray.

e)     Let the pouches drip for 24 hours. 

f)     Place a paper plate on the scale and record it’s weight. 

g)    Next, place one pouch on the plate and weigh it. Record the mass. Next, subtract the mass of the plate from the mass of the pouch and the plate, so you only have the weight of the pouch.

h)     Subtract 4.5g from the weight of the pouch minus the plate. The remaining weight is the mass of oil absorbed. Record the mass of oil that was absorbed in experiment number one. 

i)    Repeat steps f-h with each oil soaked pouch.

3. Begin Experiment #2-Water Only

a) Repeat Experiment number two with WATER ONLY (No oil) Use new absorbent pouches.

4. Begin Experiment #3(with oil and water).

a) Repeat experiment number one but float 500ml. oil in 1000ml. H2O.

RESULTS

The original purpose of this experiment was to compare the oil absorbency of natural items with that of polypropylene pads, the most common consumer product used for this purpose.

The results:

•    For oil only sheep wool absorbed the most oil (85g). 

•    For water only on average hay absorbed the most water (85g). Polypropylene absorbed the least amount (0.375g). 

•    For water and oil polypropylene absorbed the most (100.175g), followed by sheep wool (90.9g) and hay (14.3g).

CONCLUSION

My hypothesis was that polypropylene absorbent pads would absorb at least 10% more oil than hay would.

The results indicate that this hypothesis should be accepted because the polypropylene pads absorbed about seven times as much as hay did, far more than the 10% required.

My second hypothesis was that polypropylene pads would absorb at least 10% more oil than sheep fleece would.

The results are inconclusive for this hypothesis.  When absorbing oil only (no water), sheep wool absorbed more than polypropylene. When absorbing oil floating on water, the polypropylene did absorb 10% more than the wool did. I rejected this hypothesis but realized that more experimentation should be done.

After thinking about the results of this experiment, I wonder if the kind/weight of the oil would affect the amount that is absorbed. My oil was refined, but how would crude oil affect the results?

If I were to conduct this project again I would test more types of materials, and do many more trials with each material. I did have a couple of strange outliers and doing more trials would help dilute the effect of unusual weights in the final average.


Researched by  ------ Tensie P

Read More
Home About-us Privacy Policy Contact-us
Copyright © 2017 www.sciencefairprojects.in | All Rights Reserved. Design By Templateclue