WPBD vs. Knex

To begin with, both systems for the bridge design are effective in their purpose, which is to get an idea of the different aspects that should apply into analysis when trying to design a bridge; especially one that satisfies the given guidelines and evolves under certain priorities.  However, yes both approaches are effective, but each in different ways assigning each other advantages and disadvantages for the creation of this model.

For example with the WPBD program each student is given a great amount of information about their own design that the student might not even have thought of him/herself when they were trying to come up with that design.  This could include factors such as size, material, overall cost, durability and reliability.

On the other hand, with Knex, the student gains an understanding for designing bridges, but through a more physical/experimental approach that might even facilitate the concept and illuminate the student on the several aspects to have in mind as well while they create their model of a bridge.  In this case, it will most probably involve the angles and their resistance depending on the shape and geometrical characteristics of a given design.  It seems as though in engineering, being able to see, and use our senses as we create a model is key to understanding the science behind it, and this could apply to all levels of difficulty to a given design or creation.

-  Ana M. Franco