Future Direction

The fundamental goal of this project was to gain an understanding of the tunnel bore building process and the best way to implement this project in other projects class and at the high school level. Thus, while we did not quite reach the desired outcome of the best model tunnel bore, we gained invaluable knowledge on how this project can be adapted to create unique and innovative designs. While we are unlikely to personally continue with this project as none of us are on the CU Hyperloop team, our successes and failures within this project will serve others well. 

    While we initially chose our design to be pneumatically operated, we have concluded that this method, while marginally effective, requires more investment than an electric or gas system to be truly successful. Thus, under the restraints of a budget under $500, an electric system would prove to be much more reliable, and a gas system would prove to be much faster. If a future team is not restrained by a budget such as ours, a pneumatic system could prove reliable and relatively quick; however, we would again advise against this for future teams. As well, this project proved to be an ‘awkward’ size as a 6” hole is a very niche market to buy parts for, and we would advise future teams to create a larger bore with a larger budget, a bore with a 4’ diameter maximum, or for the heads of this project to help teams source items.

In terms of component design for future teams, we have learned a great deal about what materials and designs other teams should take. Firstly, we would advise that teams opt for a metal digging utility as it proved to be the more efficient and rigid option. While we avoided this option as it was costly or too time-consuming within our timeframe, we would advise that it is the correct financial investment. While we chose a less effective option for the auger, we succeeded in selecting a material for the body. As already mentioned, we used ABS for our body, which proved to be structurally sound, inexpensive, and lighter than the metal alternatives. Because of the success of this part of our design, we can confidently say that ABS is a quality material for a bore.
    Lastly, our team would advise future teams to create a design that doesn’t depend on epoxy and moves manually. Through our testing and iterations, we found epoxy to be frustrating and challenging to work with as it required hours away from the project while we allowed it to dry. These issues are compounded by common mistakes that require additional work and less progress. Suitable alternatives would be creating a one-piece design, soldering, or using more screws and bolts to secure the design. Secondly, through our testing and use of a pneumatic movement system, we believe that future projects should opt for a mechanical movement system, especially if testing vertically. A mechanical system would allow teams to make more precise movements and a reliable way to remove dirt from the tunnel. Options for a mechanical movement system would be based around a track system, similar to how much larger tunnel bores are moved.