EPQ Ideas for Engineering: 30+ Artefacts and Investigations

By Michael Thompson · Education Specialist; 10 years teaching the IB at Bromsgrove School · Published 24 October 2026 · Updated 25 October 2026

EPQ ideas for engineering are among the most searched by UK sixth-formers, and for good reason: engineering lends itself to both investigation and artefact routes in a way few other subjects do. A well-chosen question or brief can demonstrate exactly the kind of independent thinking that university admissions tutors want to see. The challenge is picking something focused enough to complete in 120 guided learning hours, specific enough to produce real analysis, and genuinely connected to the degree or career you have in mind - without simply rehearsing what you already cover in your A-levels. This guide gives you more than thirty starting points, three worked examples of weak topics turned into strong questions, and practical advice on feasibility, ethics, and using the finished project in your application.

Key Takeaways

In This Article

  1. What makes a strong engineering EPQ question
  2. Artefact and investigation routes for engineering EPQ ideas
  3. Three worked examples: from weak topic to focused EPQ question
  4. 30+ engineering EPQ ideas by area
  5. Feasibility, ethics and sources for engineering projects
  6. Using your engineering EPQ in a university application
  7. What to do next

1. What makes a strong engineering EPQ question

Finding good epq ideas for engineering is straightforward. Turning one into a title your centre will approve, that you can actually complete in 120 hours, and that genuinely shows independent thinking: that is the harder part.

The OCR Extended Project H857 specification is direct on one point: project titles must be approved by centres before work begins. The AQA EPQ specification requires students to draft a title and aims for formal approval by the centre.

What the OCR 2024 moderators actually observed separates useful advice from guesswork. According to the OCR Summer 2024 moderators' report for H857, candidates who scored well:

Candidates who scored lower tended to select a generic topic, research broadly and shallowly, omit in-text citations or submit lists of hyperlinks instead of formatted references, and write evaluations that were descriptive rather than analytical. The report also notes that projects were sometimes too limited or too large in scope for 120 guided learning hours, and that at least some aims should relate to the steps needed to achieve the planned outcome.

The practical implication for engineering students is a useful filter. Ask: could a single A-level lesson answer this question? If yes, the scope is too narrow. Could a PhD thesis only scratch the surface? If yes, the scope is too wide. A question about whether a particular structural design approach outperforms another under specific load conditions sits in the right range. A question titled "What is concrete?" does not.

Question stems matter more than most students expect. Formulations such as "To what extent...", "How far does...", and "Should..." tend to force analytical comparison from the outset, because they require a position backed by evidence. A "What is..." stem invites description, which leaves little room for the analysis and evaluation the assessment objectives reward.

One counter-intuitive point worth knowing: the project does not need to preview your degree. An electrical engineering applicant who writes a dissertation on the ethics of autonomous weapons systems, or builds and tests a working circuit as an artefact, is demonstrating the research skills and independent thinking that some courses value, without simply repeating content from their future first-year lectures. The project should connect to the field you are heading into, but it should go somewhere the syllabus does not.

2. Artefact and investigation routes for engineering EPQ ideas

Engineering sits unusually well with the EPQ because the subject genuinely suits both output types: you can build, code or test something physical or digital, or you can write a research-based investigation into a technical question. Neither route is easier than the other; the choice should follow the question.

The key board rules on evidence are worth knowing before you settle on a route. Per the AQA EPQ specification, all project products must include a written report. If your product is solely a research-based written report, it should be approximately 5,000 words. If you produce an artefact, the accompanying written report must be a minimum of 1,000 words, and you may include photographs of each stage of development. Large artefacts do not need to be physically submitted: photographs or other media are sufficient.

The OCR H857 specification lists a report, a dissertation (approximately 5,000 words), an artefact, and a performance or event among the outcomes a project can have. The minimum word count for the extended piece of written work that accompanies a project is 1,000 words.

One non-obvious trade-off: an artefact that sounds simple to build often demands more supervisor time than a written investigation, because safety, cost and access to tools or equipment must all be resolved before your title is approved. Settle those questions early.

Throughout either route, you will maintain one of the boards' evidence logs: AQA's Production Log and Assessment Record, OCR's Project Progression Record, or WJEC's Candidate Production Record and Candidate Assessment Record. These run alongside the project from start to finish, so treat them as live documents, not an end-of-project task.

3. Three worked examples: from weak topic to focused EPQ question

The three examples below were written for this guide. They are not real student work and not exam-board exemplars. Each follows four narrowing moves: what the project is actually about, who or where it applies, what it is compared against, and what the analytical angle is. The OCR EPQ Moderators' Report (Summer 2024) notes that candidates who did less well tended to "select a generic topic" and "research broadly and shallowly" - the four-move method is a direct remedy for both.

Example 1: Mechanical and structural topic

Before: "Bridges"

After: "To what extent does a cable-stayed design offer a better strength-to-material-cost ratio than a suspension bridge for spans between 200 m and 500 m?"

MoveApplied
WhatStructural efficiency
Who/whereSpans of 200-500 m
Compared with whatCable-stayed vs. suspension
Analytical angleStrength-to-material-cost ratio

Evidence to gather: peer-reviewed structural engineering journals, published load-test data for named bridges, and potentially an email exchange with a civil engineering department.

Example 2: Energy and sustainability topic

Before: "Renewable energy"

After: "How feasible is a community-scale anaerobic digestion plant as a replacement for grid electricity in a rural UK village of 300 households, compared with a solar photovoltaic array of equivalent capital cost?"

MoveApplied
WhatFeasibility of anaerobic digestion
Who/whereRural UK village, 300 households
Compared with whatSolar PV at equivalent capital cost
Analytical angleFeasibility and trade-offs

Evidence to gather: government energy statistics, published lifecycle-cost analyses, and a site visit or interview with a UK biogas operator.

Example 3: Software, robotics or aerospace topic

Before: "Drones"

After: "To what extent can a low-cost open-source autopilot system match the obstacle-avoidance accuracy of a proprietary commercial system in a structured indoor environment?"

MoveApplied
WhatObstacle-avoidance accuracy
Who/whereStructured indoor test environment
Compared with whatOpen-source vs. proprietary autopilot
Analytical anglePerformance parity at lower cost

Evidence to gather: the open-source project's published documentation, academic papers on UAV control systems, and logged flight-test data from a self-built prototype - a strong candidate for the artefact route, provided the build and any test flights are agreed with your supervisor first.

A counter-intuitive point worth noting: sharpening a question this far sometimes reveals the project is actually two questions. If the comparison in move three starts pulling in a second full investigation, narrow again before the title goes to your centre for approval.

4. 30+ engineering EPQ ideas by area

All ideas below are written for this guide. Each is phrased as a question or brief rather than a raw topic, so your centre has something concrete to approve. Your supervisor will need to sign off the final title before work begins.

1. Mechanical and structural design

Research this needs: Technical papers from institutions such as the Institution of Mechanical Engineers (IMechE), structural engineering journals, and published load-testing data. If you can arrange a visit to a university structures lab or an email exchange with a practising structural engineer, that contact can add genuine primary insight rather than just filling space.

2. Electronics, robotics and control

Research this needs: Datasheets, IEEE publications, and robotics conference proceedings. An email exchange with a university robotics researcher or a lab visit could strengthen evaluation of your own build's performance against published benchmarks.

3. Software, data and AI

Research this needs: Publicly available datasets (for example from the UK government's open data portal), computer science journals, and policy papers. Surveys are unlikely to add much here; an interview with a software engineer or academic working in AI ethics would be more useful.

4. Energy, sustainability and the environment

Research this needs: Reports from the Committee on Climate Change, the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero, engineering feasibility studies, and peer-reviewed energy journals. A visit to a renewable energy site or an interview with an energy engineer can ground an artefact project in real operational data.

5. Civil engineering, transport and architecture

Research this needs: RIBA publications, Transport Research Laboratory reports, local authority monitoring data, and architectural journals. EPQ ideas for architecture benefit particularly from site visits and, where possible, interviews with practising architects or planners, because observed built examples can anchor an argument in ways that secondary sources alone cannot.

6. Materials and manufacturing

Research this needs: Materials science journals, data from the Materials Processing Institute, and manufacturer technical datasheets. If your school has a tensile testing rig or access to a university materials lab, that is one of the stronger cases for genuinely purposeful primary data collection.

7. Biomedical and chemical engineering

Research this needs: Royal Society of Chemistry publications, the Institution of Chemical Engineers (IChemE) journal, and published process engineering case studies. EPQ ideas for chemical engineering sit well in the investigation route, where you can frame a hypothesis and work through published reaction data systematically. Any practical chemistry or test-rig building must be agreed with your supervisor and carried out under school laboratory supervision. An email exchange with a university chemical engineer is worth attempting early, as response times vary.

8. Aerospace and automotive

Research this needs: Reports from the Civil Aviation Authority, published aerospace engineering journals, and manufacturer technical documentation. Broad topics such as the history of jet engines or the viability of supersonic passenger flight are well worn, so the sharpest questions in this area tend to focus on a specific constraint (cost, infrastructure, materials) rather than the technology in general.

5. Feasibility, ethics and sources for engineering projects

Before settling on a method, check that you can actually reach the sources and data your question needs.

Sources open to sixth-form students include:

What a sixth-form student typically cannot do without institutional backing: research involving patients, clients or children; experiments requiring professional laboratory equipment or chemical handling licences; and data collection in environments where you have no legal right of access.

When to talk to your supervisor before committing to a method: before any primary research, whenever cost or tool access is uncertain, and whenever the scope of your question changes.

On referencing, the OCR 2024 moderators' report is direct: source evaluations must address both usefulness and credibility/reliability, formatted in-text citations and a bibliography are required, and hyperlinks or URLs alone are not acceptable because they cannot be followed once a page is printed.

Primary research is not compulsory. When it works, it often involves interviews, email exchanges with engineers or visits to relevant sites. Where it proves ineffective, you can still demonstrate the attempt by analysing why it did not work. On surveys specifically, the same OCR report found that many candidates submitted surveys that lacked purpose and contributed little to project outcomes. Only include a survey if it meaningfully adds to your findings.

6. Using your engineering EPQ in a university application

The OCR H857 specification prints statements from several universities on why the EPQ is worth doing. The University of Manchester states that students 'can refer to the Extended Project in their UCAS personal statement and at interview to demonstrate some of the qualities that universities are looking for'. The University of Cambridge states: 'We welcome the Extended Project and would encourage applicants to undertake one as it will help to develop independent study and research skills valuable for higher education.'

On offers, the WJEC EPQ student guide 2021 says: 'Increasingly, universities are including the EPQ in their UCAS offers. Very often an A/A* grade in the EPQ will lead to a lower A Level grade requirement.' That is WJEC's observation, not a guarantee. Whether any reduction applies to a specific engineering or architecture course depends entirely on that course's own entry requirements. Check the individual course page and, if nothing is stated there, contact the admissions team directly.

The practical advantage of an engineering-focused EPQ is that it gives you specific material to discuss. A built artefact, a tested prototype, or a clearly argued analytical conclusion is far easier to talk about in a personal statement or at interview than a general claim about interest in the subject. You can describe the design decision you changed halfway through, the test that failed and what you did about it, or the source that shifted your argument. Generic topics rarely produce that kind of specific detail.

7. What to do next

The project title cannot be approved until you have one. That sounds obvious, but the practical bottleneck for most students is that they never write a draft question down. A vague interest in robotics or sustainable materials stays vague until it is a sentence on a page.

This week, write down three engineering topics that genuinely interest you. Take the broadest of the three and run it through the four moves from this guide: what, who, where, compared with what. You should end up with a draft question or artefact brief specific enough to have a scope problem (too narrow or too wide) rather than no scope at all. That is the version to take to your supervisor.

Book that conversation before any research begins. Both the OCR specification and AQA's requirements require the centre to approve the title before work starts. Get that sign-off confirmed in writing.

FAQ

What makes a good EPQ question for engineering students?

A good engineering EPQ question is focused enough to be answerable within 120 guided learning hours, linked to a specific context or comparison, and analytical rather than purely descriptive - the OCR 2024 moderators' report found that candidates who did well 'refined a research question (or, for an artefact or event, a brief) which was targeted and focused' rather than selecting a generic topic.

Can I do an artefact for my engineering EPQ?

Yes - under AQA, an artefact product must include a written report of at least 1,000 words and may include photographs of each development stage; OCR also permits artefact projects, making the build-and-test route a natural fit for engineering.

Do I need to do primary research for an engineering EPQ?

Primary research is not compulsory; the OCR 2024 moderators' report notes it is 'encouraged' but that surveys often added little - interviews, email exchanges with experts, and visits to appropriate locations are the formats most likely to strengthen an engineering project.

How do I reference sources in my engineering EPQ?

OCR moderators flagged lists of hyperlinks or URLs as significant deficiencies; every source must appear as a formatted in-text citation and in a bibliography, and source evaluations must address both the usefulness and the credibility and reliability of each source.

Will my engineering EPQ help with my university application?

The University of Manchester and the University of Cambridge both have statements printed in the OCR specification welcoming the EPQ as evidence of independent study skills; the WJEC student guide also notes that an A or A* can lead to a lower A-level grade requirement, though students should check individual course pages.

Who approves my engineering EPQ title?

Your centre approves the title - the OCR specification states 'project titles must be approved by centres' and AQA requires students to 'draft a title and aims for formal approval by the centre' before the project begins.

References