The same could be said of theoretical work: here, we tightened up an inequality.
This is also research, not all of it is experimental!
I note MIT (like many universities) has a department of Electrical Engineering and Computer "Science".
Allowing engineering opens up the workable space by quite a bit.
My brother and I, for example, did an experiment where we tested pH of various water bodies around us. The hypothesis was based off of local drainage patterns.
Not a new question... Still scientific.
Science means applying the scientific method.
"I hypothesize that method X is the best way to construct a robot that does Y and I've tested methods A, B, and C to validate that claim"
That's science.
Just building something can actually be a pursuit of non science..this is why many engineers have not invented here syndrome. They think they're thinking scientifically, but they don't. Thus, instead of checking their assumptions, they run with them.
Freshman year: effect of light wavelength on basil plant growth. I shined a black light, a regular light bulb, and a very bright IR light at some basil plants. I probably could have made it better by doing colored lights with controlled lux levels. Didn't win anything and the judges were unimpressed.
Sophomore year: effect of water pH on electrolysis gas production. Varied the pH on some water and put it in an electrolysis apparatus. I actually got 3rd place in the highschool chemistry group surprisingly. It wasn't a very rigorous project but I guess no one else did anything terribly interesting. Not enough to go onto regional or state level (not sure what came next). Even my parents were surprised.