Project image Not named Not named Not named Not named Not named Not named Not named Not named Not named Not named Not named Not named Not named Not named Not named Not named Not named Not named Not named Not named Not named Not named Not named Not named Not named Not named Not named Not named Not named Not named Not named Not named Not named Not named Not named Not named Not named Not named Not named Not named Not named

Urban Explorer encourages kids (ages 6-8) to learn about renewable energy and city planning by freely building, combining and discovering.

Motivation

The energy transition and climate change are the central challenges of our time. To shape a sustainable future, it is crucial to get the next generation excited about the topics of renewable energy and sustainable urban planning. However, these concepts are often very abstract and difficult for elementary school-aged children to understand.

Our motivation is to translate these complex issues into a tangible, playful, and positive experience. Children learn best when they can try things out for themselves, build, and directly see the results of their actions. The principle of “learning by doing” is at the heart of our approach. Instead of passively consuming knowledge, children become active designers of their own little world. They experience firsthand how wind and sun become energy that brings their self-built city to life. In this way, we create an emotional and positive connection to the technologies that will shape our future.

Goals

The primary goal of the game is to provide children with an intuitive, foundational understanding of renewable energy and to awaken their curiosity about technical and ecological concepts.

Imparting Foundational Knowledge

  • Children understand the operating principle of wind power (wind moves the turbine → generates electricity).
  • Children understand the operating principle of solar energy (the sun shines on the solar panel → generates electricity).
  • Children learn the simple concept of an electrical circuit: an energy source (wind turbine/solar panel) supplies a consumer (a house).

Promoting Logical Thinking

  • Children playfully recognize cause-and-effect relationships (“If the wind turbine spins, the house lights up”).
  • They learn to solve simple problems (“Why isn’t my house lighting up? Maybe it needs more energy or isn’t connected correctly?”).

Skill Development

  • Fine Motor Skills: Assembling the components on the board trains hand-eye coordination and dexterity.
  • Creativity & Imagination: By freely building and designing their own city, there are no rigid rules, which fosters creativity.
  • Systems Thinking: Children begin to understand that their city is a small system in which everything is interconnected.

We want to cultivate a positive and natural relationship with sustainable technologies in children. They should experience renewable energy not as a complicated necessity, but as an exciting and creative opportunity to shape our world. The game is intended to encourage them to remain curious and to see themselves as capable shapers of the future.

Research

The study investigated what children aged 7 to 11 know about the origin of electricity—specifically, whether they know that electricity is generated and how it reaches household appliances. The goal was to survey these preconceptions before renewable energy topics were introduced in class.

Methodology

Participants: 115 children (7–11 years old) from four different schools. Procedure: Children were asked to draw where the electricity in their classroom light comes from. Additionally, four children per class were interviewed. Evaluation involved categorizing the drawings (e.g., depicted power source, cable connections, etc.) and qualitative interviews.

Results

  1. Understanding of Electricity Source Only about 74% of children showed a power source in their drawing. Many didn’t specify a clear origin, even though they knew the term “electricity.” Power sources named/drawn included: Power plants: 38% Factories: 24% Wind/Water/Solar energy: under 13% each Storms/Lightning: 8% Fuels like coal: hardly mentioned

  2. Understanding of Electricity Transmission Only 51% depicted a connection between the source and the light (e.g., cables, pylons). Younger children tended to associate electricity more with visible phenomena (e.g., “electric fences”) than with technical systems.

  3. Age Effects Older children (from around 9 years old) more often had a structured understanding (e.g., mentioning power plants, connection via cables, etc.). Nevertheless, even older children often lacked an understanding of energy sources (e.g., fossil fuels, energy conversion).

  4. Gender Differences Boys more frequently showed a power source (84%) and connections (62%) than girls (64% and 39% respectively). Possible reasons: more experience with technology, culturally influenced interests (cf. “tinkering” hypothesis).

Typical Children’s Ideas Electricity comes from “the ceiling,” “the sky,” “a machine.” Energy was sometimes described as invisible, sometimes as visibly active (e.g., “lightning,” “fire sparks”). Some children had imaginative ideas about electricity generation (e.g., sunlight + magic potion).

Didactic Implications Before teaching about renewable energies, basic knowledge about electricity generation must be established. Children need: A clear picture of the origin and transmission of electricity. An understanding that fuels or other energy sources are necessary. Context-sensitive questioning (e.g., why electricity costs money) might provide better access to children’s preconceptions.

Conclusion Many children only experience electricity in their daily lives (lights, appliances) and don’t grasp it as a technical concept. A large proportion of children don’t understand that electricity is generated through energy conversion. However, such a fundamental understanding is a prerequisite for making informed decisions later on, for example, regarding sustainable energy consumption.

Qualter. 2016. A source of power: Young children’s understanding of where electricity comes from, in: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/epdf/10.1080/0263514950130207?needAccess=true (10/07/2025)

The paper “Young children’s ideas of energy compared with the scientific energy concept” by Franziska Detken (2023) investigates how children aged 6 to 8 (first and second grade in Switzerland) think about the concept of energy—before they receive formal science instruction on it. Study Aim The study aims to discover: What ideas children associate with the term “energy.” How these children’s ideas relate to the scientific concept of energy (forms, transfer, transformation, conservation, dissipation). Which contexts (e.g., people, technology, movement) dominate their ideas. Methodology Participants: 24 children (6–8 years old) from Zurich who were familiar with the term “energy.” Method: Children were asked to draw or write something they associate with “energy” and were subsequently interviewed about it. The evaluation was conducted using qualitative content analysis based on a category system aligned with the scientific energy concept. Key Results

  1. Ideas of Energy Sources and Forms Children frequently link energy with: People and their activities (e.g., doing sports) Electrical devices (e.g., flashlights, cables, batteries) Vehicles (cars, bicycles) Hardly mentioned: sun, wind, potential energy, temperature—typical concepts in physics.
  2. Ideas about the “Nature” of Energy Energy is seen as: A causal force (“Energy helps me run”) Substance-like (“The battery has energy inside”) A characteristic of a state (“When I’m tired, I have less energy”)
  3. Ideas about the Behavior of Energy Transfer: Energy “comes from outside” (e.g., from the battery, through food). Transformation: Rarely described. Some children mention conversion like “fuel turns into car energy.” Conservation / Dissipation: Mostly, it was assumed that energy is “used up” or “gone” after it’s been utilized—no awareness of conservation.
  4. Dominant Contexts Three contexts dominated children’s ideas: People & Body Electrical Devices Vehicles Two-thirds of the children mentioned more than one of these contexts. Didactic Implications Children already possess differentiated ideas about energy, mostly shaped by everyday experiences. While these ideas aren’t always compatible with the scientific concept, they offer starting points (“steppingstones”) for teaching. In primary school, energy should initially be taught in a context-related and illustrative way (e.g., “Why do people need energy?”). Conclusion Children develop intuitive, context-bound models of energy even before formal schooling. These can be systematically identified and used to develop age-appropriate educational offerings. The developed category system provides a tool for further research and diagnostics.

Detken, 2023, in: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0263514950130207 (10/07/2025, 23:07)

According to the article “A source of power: Young children’s understanding of where electricity comes from” by Anne Qualter, children have a very vague understanding of where electricity comes from and how it reaches our daily lives. Many associate electricity with visible phenomena like lightning or electric fences; concrete knowledge about power plants, electricity grids, or renewable energies is rare and often inaccurate. Conversations with our target group in kindergarten also confirmed this: even frequently seen objects like wind turbines are rarely linked to electricity generation. These findings, along with our own market analysis, motivated us to develop a game that breaks new ground in both content and design. Currently, there’s no product offering that combines a classic building game with a clear separation of cause and effect (e.g., sun → solar → light) while simultaneously providing high design quality.

Concept

Our design concept is based on a child-friendly, gender-neutral formal language. It aims to appeal equally to technical understanding and design interest, because technology isn’t just “for boys.” The forms are based on simple, rounded basic shapes that appear soft and inviting. To make the design more playful and engaging, we consciously integrate unexpected design elements. This creates a varied, imagination-stimulating formal language that clearly distinguishes itself from purely functional building block designs. For design differentiation and to also appeal to adults and especially parents—we’ve drawn inspiration from postmodern architecture. Its mix of clear lines, playful shapes, and surprising details offers diverse approaches for developing individual building components. The children’s finished constructions remain diverse in form and expression, yet still blend together into a harmonious overall picture. The choice of materials also perfectly aligns with our vision: our toy will be made from recyclable plastic, extending the theme of renewable energies to the very materials we use, creating a sustainable product idea

The game underwent several iterations during its development, particularly to meet the technical requirements. A key focus was on refining the plug connections—such as the precise fit of male and female elements—and fine-tuning the 3D printing settings. Small tolerances and sometimes unreliable reproducibility necessitated repeated adjustments. Structural elements, like the base and lid parts, were also revised multiple times to ensure stability, playability and assembly of parts. This intensive engagement with form, technology, and materials provided us with valuable experience in working with PLA, transparent PLA, MDF, and their respective properties during the printing and assembly processes.

Working with spray paints required a meticulous process that began with applying primer and filler. Each step was accompanied by a sanding process: both before the initial coating and between individual layers. This iterative approach, where we repeatedly prepared, coated, and sanded, provided us with valuable insights into how to optimally prepare surfaces.

During this, we learned the importance of thoroughly preparing parts for painting. We also gained a better understanding of how much effort and time are necessary for truly high-quality results. This knowledge will significantly help us achieve the desired quality more efficiently in future projects.

The technical drawings serve as the foundation for constructing the modules and allow for extracting rough dimensions and understanding the proportions between individual components. They provide a structured overview of the form, plug connections, and spatial relationships of the game components, and are essential for the further development and reproducibility of the system.

Technical Conception and Development

The technical development of the game faced the central challenge of creating a flexible and interactive user experience. Children needed the freedom to place any game piece in any position on the board. Simultaneously, the system had to recognize which piece was placed where and react accordingly, for example, by supplying power to the houses to light up their LEDs.

Evaluated Solution Approaches

Final Solution: System Architecture with Shift Registers Initially, various technologies were evaluated. An approach using NFC chips was quickly discarded. While it would have allowed for good component detection, the necessary power transmission to all 64 slots for the LEDs would have been complicated and expensive.

Another approach was the construction of a simple resistor matrix, where each row is powered sequentially and read out via the columns. In initial tests, this approach proved to be unreliable. Erroneous readings and “ghosting” occurred, where the Arduino detected incorrect components in the wrong positions due to unclear or fluctuating measurements. This led to unstable system behavior and made precise control impossible.

To achieve the necessary stability and precision, a more robust solution was developed using shift registers as the central control element. This method solves the problems of the simple matrix by expanding the Arduino’s inputs and outputs and processing signals clearly and reliably.

The technical architecture is based on three pillars: physical construction, component detection, and control of the lights and motors.

1. Physical Construction and Contact The system’s foundation is a baseplate with an 8x8 matrix of slots. To allow each component to be placed freely while receiving power and data, each of the 64 slots has three contacts:

  • Positive Terminal (+): Provides the operating voltage for the LEDs in the houses.
  • Negative Terminal (-/GND): Serves as the common ground.
  • Data Line: Used to identify the plugged-in component.

Physical contact is ensured by spring-loaded pogo pins in the baseplate. The game pieces (houses, windmills, etc.) are equipped on the underside with copper rings for the power supply and a central copper rivet for the data line. This design guarantees a reliable electrical connection, even when the children do not place the components perfectly straight.

2. Component Detection via Resistor Matrix The core question—which component is where?—is solved through a clever combination of resistors and matrix scanning.

  • Unique Identification through Resistors: Each game piece (house, windmill, solar panel, etc.) has a built-in resistor with a specific value. When a component is placed on the board, this resistor creates a voltage divider on the data line of that slot.
  • Matrix Scanning: The main Arduino scans the matrix to read these voltage levels:
    • Row Selection via Shift Register: To avoid using 8 individual Arduino pins for the 8 rows, a shift register (OUT_DATA, OUT_SHIFT, OUT_STORE) is used. The Arduino uses it to activate only one row of the matrix at a time.
    • Column Reading: While a row is active, the Arduino reads the voltage levels of all 8 columns in that row using its 8 analog inputs (const int spalten[] = {A0, A1, …}).
    • Identification: The measured analog value (a value between 0 and 1023) is unique for each type of component. The code compares this messwert (measured value) with predefined threshold values (HAUS, WINDRAD, SOLARPANEL, etc.).
    • Creating a Digital Map: Based on the detection, a digital “map” of the game board is stored in the two-dimensional array ledPattern[8][8]. A 1 represents a house, a 2 represents a windmill, and so on.
  1. Game Logic and Actuator Control As soon as the Arduino knows where which components are located (ledPattern), the actual game logic can be executed.
    • Distributing Energy: The code checks for the presence of energy sources (solar panels, windmills) and the corresponding weather conditions (sun symbol, wind symbol).
    • Powering Houses: The printMatrixValuesCircle() function simulates power distribution. It searches for houses (ledPattern[z][s] == 1) in an expanding radius around a power source (e.g., a windmill). The found houses that are to be powered are marked in the ausgabePattern[8][8] array.
    • Output via Shift Register: To light up the LEDs in the houses, the ausgabePattern is sent to a chain of additional shift registers (controlled by PIN_DATA1, PIN_DATA3, etc.). These then specifically switch the power supply for the LEDs at the corresponding positions on or off. Here, too, the use of shift registers saves a huge number of Arduino pins and allows for the control of all 64 LEDs.
    • Special Case: Windmill: The windmills have their own, additional Arduino. It is exclusively responsible for controlling the motor, in order to offload this task from the main Arduino.

Result

The project’s outcome is a functional demonstrator of an interactive learning game that playfully conveys key aspects of renewable energy and urban planning. The game consists of a modular play surface with a grid of approximately 6x6 contact points, plus an additional connection for weather symbols or energy sources. A total of five different weather symbols such as sun, wind, or rain: are available and can be integrated into the system as triggering elements. For designing the city, there are about 40 stackable house floors in the conception that can be freely combined. Additionally, there are optional elements for greening, temporary energy storage, and thematically expandable components. The architectural components are diverse, combinable, and allow for free, creative building. The underlying game mechanic is based on a simple cause-and-effect logic: energy sources like wind power or solar cells feed electricity into the system, which is then transmitted to the houses via contact plates. In the current version, six houses are powered by wind and two by solar energy. As soon as enough energy is stored, unneeded energy sources are automatically deactivated: for example, the wind turbine switches off when demand is met. This simple yet functional logic forms a central element of the learning experience. Thus, the game strikes a balance between creative building, technical understanding, and playful knowledge transfer while also providing a flexible foundation for future expansions.

Evaluation

During the evaluation, we successfully created a largely functional demonstrator model. Despite challenges with scalability, we managed to implement several functional units and effectively represent the core game mechanics. In terms of craftsmanship and visual execution, we had to prioritize quantity over perfect surface finishing. Due to time constraints, it wasn’t possible to meticulously fill or perform multiple sanding passes on all components. Consequently, some elements show visible 3D printing traces and their surface quality isn’t yet final. At the same time, the high number of modules produced allowed for a realistic, versatile user test with multiple children simultaneously. The abundance of components made it easier for participants to realize their own city ideas, experiment with various energy connections, and intuitively explore the game mechanics. This enabled us to gather valuable feedback on comprehensibility, play motivation, and design—a crucial step for the further development of the concept.

User tests The tests with a kindergarten group showed consistently positive feedback on the game and its components. The children displayed great interest in free building, and the game was not perceived or categorized as gender-specific. The open-ended design was well received, even if individual design elements were interpreted differently than originally intended. For instance, all terraces were referred to as “pools” by the children, and a house with staggered floors was understood as a “staircase.” However, this childlike reinterpretation didn’t detract from the overall visual concept; rather, it highlighted the creative potential and the importance of an open formal language. For further development, it can still be concluded that some more complex house structures could be simplified. A key positive outcome was that the children built completely freely and autonomously—often with creative rule-breaking. For example, one child placed the wind turbine on the roof of a house, which isn’t technically logical but clearly fostered the joy of play and the desire for discovery. This very freedom significantly contributed to motivation and playful exploration, even if it sometimes overshadowed the actual learning objective for younger children (under 6 years old). The building blocks, in their chosen size (80 × 60 × 80 mm), proved to be very well suited for children’s hands. No motor difficulties were observed. The test also provided insights for targeted improvements: for example, the color distinction between an energy source and an energy power plant should be made clearer to enhance understanding. A visual feedback e.g., through weather/energy simbols: could also help make the connection between components like solar cells, storage, or wind turbines more intuitive. Long-term, there’s also the possibility of expanding the game system: with additional components, tasks, or explanatory mechanisms, the thematic depth could be increased and specifically extended to older children of primary school age. We’ll incorporate these valuable insights into the further development of the game