In response to your question, it is cam and pawl style diff.

Mr Riley,
I have one quick question on machining. If a machined cnc part has drilled and taped holes and of course, we do these hole as part of the machining sequence. Is the material removal cost as machined, or we have to cost as a drilled hole?

Adam: Thank you for pointing out the broken link. I'm glad you found the file. The website is updated so the link works now.

U of Louisville: I will add this generally to the tables based on a representative cost for this style.

Ben: You can cost the holes as machined, I would do whatever is cheaper. Obviously if they're tapped holes you would have to include that on top of the machining cost.

Anodizing

Anodizing does not need to be included in the cost report. I am adding it to the cost tables with a cost of $0 and note to this effect (so people in the future will not wonder if they need to cost it).

This is a message from Luke a few days ago:

Hi Mr. Riley,

I noticed that in your tutorial the example process description of an A-Arm does not include steps for seting up a part onto a mill, lathe or jig. However, machining setup and changes are included in the processes cost tables. Can you please clarify what is expected.

Many Thanks,
Luke

Answer: My proposed response is that the setup labor should be included with every part. Having any other rules creates a huge gray zone where some parts will have this labor and some won't. To fix the problem of automation, however, I propose that the quantity value for this line item can be scaled to represent the number of parts produced from each fixture setup. So an upright machined out of billet aluminum would have a a quantity of 1, since one block of aluminum makes 1 part. The a-arm inserts from the example might have a quantity of 0.1 since you could chuck up a bar of steel and machine 10 of them out of a bar. This reduces the cost per part to a reasonable level. However, you would need to be able to proove this is possible. I don't want to see a 6 foot x 6 foot block of aluminum and then you say you machined every aluminum part on your car out of if it with one setup fee. You would need a picture of the mill setup or a layout drawing showing how you could fit all the welded on frame tabs out of a single sheet of steel and where you would clamp it down. If you create that layout drawing and then show that 8 tabs fit in a sheet of steel then you could claim 0.125 for the quantity of the setup fee for each tab. This seems fair and something judges can confirm in your report if you include the documentation. Quantity values of 1 would not need any documentation.

I open this up to comments from team members before making a final decision to hear compelling arguments for or against.

Bill Riley

Mr. Riley,
I just notice that our dampers on not on the list either. They are Koni 3012. The approximate cost to us last year was ~$450/piece. Should we just take that cost and the penalty or can that still be added? Thanks in advance.

Mr. Riley,

I would like some clairifaction on the purpose of the process "Attach wire, ring" in the 'Electrical-Attach Wire' category.

Is this the cost of attaching the connector to the wire, or the cost of installing the connector (and the attached wire) onto a part/terminal?

If it is for connecting the ring to a wire, would this cost replace the need for crimping?
If this cost is for installing to a terminal, does this replace assembly labor (loose fit or line-on-line)?

Your help is appreciated.
-Luke

Mr. Riley,

I noticed that there is no cost for brake fluid in the materials table. Will there be a standardized cost or are we to use the cost it takes to obtain it?

The other question I have is the excel template that is available, are we only allowed to use that or can we use one we made ourselves?

George

MrSwa: The Koni 3012 will be in the next update for the tables (probably later today).

Luke: The "attach wire, ring" can puts the ring on to a terminal block, screw, etc. Crimp puts the ring on the wire. You don't need to double book labor so the electrical labor replaces the general labor. So in this case if you crimp and use the ring attach you don't need any "1 kg, loose" etc. labor codes.

George 4: The comments under oil notes that this includes hydraulic (brake) fluid.

I would like to make an important point about the second part of your question, and I'm paraphrasing "or do we just use the cost we paid for it". The answer to that question is always no, the cost must come from the tables and if it isn't in the tables you need an AIR submitted and approved. We want everyone to use the same cost for the same material for fairness.

You may use any format/template you want. The Excel file was a suggestion.

quote:

This is a message from Luke a few days ago:

Hi Mr. Riley,

I noticed that in your tutorial the example process description of an A-Arm does not include steps for seting up a part onto a mill, lathe or jig. However, machining setup and changes are included in the processes cost tables. Can you please clarify what is expected.

Many Thanks,
Luke

Answer: My proposed response is that the setup labor should be included with every part. Having any other rules creates a huge gray zone where some parts will have this labor and some won't. To fix the problem of automation, however, I propose that the quantity value for this line item can be scaled to represent the number of parts produced from each fixture setup. So an upright machined out of billet aluminum would have a a quantity of 1, since one block of aluminum makes 1 part. The a-arm inserts from the example might have a quantity of 0.1 since you could chuck up a bar of steel and machine 10 of them out of a bar. This reduces the cost per part to a reasonable level. However, you would need to be able to proove this is possible. I don't want to see a 6 foot x 6 foot block of aluminum and then you say you machined every aluminum part on your car out of if it with one setup fee. You would need a picture of the mill setup or a layout drawing showing how you could fit all the welded on frame tabs out of a single sheet of steel and where you would clamp it down. If you create that layout drawing and then show that 8 tabs fit in a sheet of steel then you could claim 0.125 for the quantity of the setup fee for each tab. This seems fair and something judges can confirm in your report if you include the documentation. Quantity values of 1 would not need any documentation.

I open this up to comments from team members before making a final decision to hear compelling arguments for or against.

Bill Riley

This idea can now be considered rules compliant and the next process table update will include a note to this effect.

Mr Riley,
I'm writing you becaus I have two questions.

- The first is about the difference between ANY and ALL in the supplier column of the materiale table. Does one of the two term includes if the part is Student built?

The second questione is about the unit cost for carbon fiber...iN the tables the carbon fiber the cost unit is $/kg but I know that normally the carbon fiber is costed in $/meters...Wich is the right unit cost?

Thank you very much

Mr. Riley-

I have a few questions that have come up while working on my BOM.

For an air-water heat exchanger what are you looking for for volume? Core volume (height * width * depth)? Actual internal volume? Including tanks? Maybe external heat transfer area would be a bit less ambiguous?

I don't see any type of filler neck included in parts or plumbling. Should this be cost as student built or should I submit and AIR? This is an example of what I am looking at:

http://store.summitracing.com/...700+115&autoview=sku

Lastly, for processes shoud we be including the "Machining Setup, Intall and remove" process twice for each part? Once for installing/machine set-up and once for removing the finished part?

Thank you.

quote:

Mr. Riley-

I have a few questions that have come up while working on my BOM.

For an air-water heat exchanger what are you looking for for volume? Core volume (height * width * depth)? Actual internal volume? Including tanks? Maybe external heat transfer area would be a bit less ambiguous?

I don't see any type of filler neck included in parts or plumbling. Should this be cost as student built or should I submit and AIR? This is an example of what I am looking at:

http://store.summitracing.com/...700+115&autoview=sku

Lastly, for processes shoud we be including the "Machining Setup, Intall and remove" process twice for each part? Once for installing/machine set-up and once for removing the finished part?

Thank you.


Andrew Mitchell
UWashington Team 20

Andrew,

We're looking for what you call core volume, length x width x height. What we could measure at the judging tent with a tape measure.

Filler necks are cost as made.

"Machining setup, Install and Remove" includes both fixturing the part and removing after machining all as one process cost, so don't include it twice or you will be double paying for something. It also includes cleaning the parts of chips, etc which is why it might seem expensive as a labor cost.

quote:

Mr Riley,
I'm writing you beause I have two questions.

- The first is about the difference between ANY and ALL in the supplier column of the material table. Does one of the two term includes if the part is Student built?

The second question is about the unit cost for carbon fiber...iN the tables the carbon fiber the cost unit is $/kg but I know that normally the carbon fiber is costed in $/meters...Wich is the right unit cost?

Thank you very much

Claudia,

Any and all are interchangeable. I will change all the "all" to "any" so it is consistent and less confusing.

Do you have a specific example of what you are wondering about student built parts? Generally student built will be in the material description.

Carbon fiber is normally cost per square meter but that cost varies a lot depending on the specific weave and number of fibers in each ply (plus thickness of the ply). We found that to represent carbon fiber (and other composites) relatively accurately we had to do it by mass.

Don't forget the cost per mass includes resin as well as carbon so you need to cost your part by finished part mass, not by the dry fiber or mass before layup.

Mr. Riley-

I have a question that come up while working on the add items. We are a European team and we are working in Euro instead of Dollar. Last year there was a defined exchange factor in the rules, but that´s missing this year.
Should we take the exchange factor from 1st january 2009?

None of our add items are in the new table update, (Sachs dampers and ECU Motec M800).

Lorenz Ehgartner
joanneúm racing graz

Since we are all using the same cost tables, you will not need to convert Euros. Just use the dollar amount given for a particular material or process from the tables.

Have you sent in an AIR for the dampers and Motec? If not, you need to. If you did, from what I have heard, they are still in the process of updating the tables with all of the AIRs.

Hope this helps.

Brad Underwood
Virginia Tech

We also write the cost report in dollar but the finacial management in our team work in Euro.

For the AIR`s we currently use Euro because there is not defined exchange factor like it was last year. Is it ok to do that?
(Last year the dampers was in the costreport with the exchange factor from 01.01.2008, like all purchase parts in our team)

I have a second question concerning the oil cooler. In the tables you find a Air to Air cooler and a Air to Water cooler. Is it ok to use the price for a Air to Water cooler for the oil cooler too?

Best regards
Lorenz

Brake pads and heat exchangers are costed at $0.00 per mm^3. Does that mean they are free or is this a typo?

There are Controllers for active suspension and active differentials included, but there is no controller for shifting purposes.

We have a self made controller unit built for that. How should we cost it, especially as there is no posibillity do cost it as self made as all needed parts are not included in the table.

Greets!

I have posted a new material table that has almost all of the AIR's we've received since about middle of last week. Not all, but most.

Now to answer some questions:

Lenz_FH: Send us your AIR in Euro. We can convert it. If you want to convert it for us, please use whatever exchange rate you think as we will check it. Before the exchange rate mattered a lot more because no one looked at it before the competition but now we check them all before we add them to the tables.

The Sachs Damper and Motec M800 are now included. We were working on it, but the work is complete. We have received several hundred AIR's and there are three of us working on them.

Please use air-to-water for air-to-oil. When I added them it was in the general sense I and I didn't realize it might be confusing. I will modify it to be air-to-liquid.

FryGuy: Please increase the number of digits and you will see the cost is not zero. The unit size is small so the unit cost is very small and doesn't show up in the default format. Sorry for the confusion.

FH_Roland: We have developed a model for costing all integrated electronics like you're talking about. It is under internal review and should be posted this week. The basic idea is you cost a "chassis control module" which is the box the electronics sit in. Then you add the functionality you have in your electronics by adding line items from the materials table. You don't cost it by adding resistors, capacitors, etc. Once the methodology is approved after committee review I will have it in the table, and I'm planning to do it this work week to give the Virgina teams time to use it.