FELICITACIONES AL EQUIPO DE LA UNIVERSIDAD SIMÓN BOLÍVAR, HACE 5 AÑOS ERA UN RETO PARTICIPAR EN MICHIGAN, Y HOY EN DÍA LA GENERACIÓN 2005 NO SOLO ESTÁ PARTICIPANDO SI NO QUE POR PRIMERA VEZ ESTÁ EN SEMI-FINALES!!!!! MUCHO ÉXITO!!!!!!!
Y UNA VEZ MÁS FELCITACIONES...
Una fiel amiradora
Pachi

Hey mates..

any updates from aceleration post it...

Thanks
Good luck to all.. and congrats for those in semifinals

I know we are overtaking this forum, but I have to take a moment to congratulate my team! we have worked for this for two years and now is a reality!!
CONGRATS F-SAE USB 2005! you guys are doing a great job!!

PD: we are waiting for updates in the dynamics events...

Congratulations to FSAE USB. You guys have worked extermely hard over the past three years and it is paying off. I hope that the dynamic events work out just as well. Great job.

Brent

Felicitaciones al Equipo FSAE USB por alcanzar las semifinales de diseño de parte del Equipo FSAE-LUZ y son un orgullo para Venezuela...
Sigan así..

Carlos Torres
Jefe de Suspension FSAE-LUZ

The design finals have been announced.
Cornell #1
Penn State #6
Waterloo #52
West Australia #70
RMIT #15

Some of the acceleration runs
West Australia 4.32
Lehigh 5.37
RMIT 4.671
Penn State 4.285
SVSU 4.135
Cornell 4.135
Texas A&M 4.049
I don't think anyone beat texas.

Hey team...
Very pruod of your work over there, seems like people aroud the world are supporting you posting messages.


Let`s playing this soccer game as pro Pieretti told us.

Waitin information about the presentation or dynamics events..

Good luck!

Roberto Schael
FSAE USB- Venezuela

Hey, just wanted to thank you guys from WWU for the updates and photos. I'm sure there's lots of alumni like me checking regularly to see how things are going.

Go Big Red!

Congratulations to F-SAE USB Team!

We, members that stayed in caracas are very proud and excited to hear all those great news from Michigan:

We are sorry that we weren't able to make it to design finals, but w are very proud to be the first South American team to reach the semifinals.

Animo Equipo. Lo estan haciendo de lo mejor, y podremos cerrar con broche de oro la competencia en el Silverdome

PD: Es rígido!!!

Saludos

Great to see USB, i.e non US, UK OZ, etc. in design semis, big ups

Chavez,
I hope any doubts about design semi selection are doused by final selections

quote:

Originally posted by Foote:
The design finals have been announced.
Cornell #1
Penn State #6
Waterloo #52
West Australia #70
RMIT #15

Some of the acceleration runs
West Australia 4.32
Lehigh 5.37
RMIT 4.671
Penn State 4.285
SVSU 4.135
Cornell 4.135
Texas A&M 4.049
I don't think anyone beat Texas A&M.

Thanks for the updates everyone. I wish someone from FSAE would officially update the main website so the former competitors around the world could keep up with the competition when they are away.

If they want FSAE to get bigger (even NCAA worth???) they need to do a little more to publicize it. A website with more info and updates would help.

Until then, these forums will work, and because of y'alls hard work, I can keep up with my beloved Aggies.

I'm am suprised our team didn't make the semi's though. I attended the conceptual & final design reviews, and the roll out, and the car is very clean, well designed, and well put together.

Our team last year made semi's, and this year's team improved on everythign we did, including getting a shock dyno and testing all our old shocks, and new ones for this year.

They also combined the rear brake rotor and sprocket (sprotor), shrunk and lightened the chassis while stiffening it, and increased HP and torque. They also change wheels to stiffer ones, resulting in less camber induced deflection.

So, even if the design judges dont recognize, the time clock will, as evidenced by our Acceleration run. We'll see how skidpad, autox, and enduro turn out.

I really dont think they should select design semi's or finals until after enduro. All the theory in the world doesn't matter if you dont have the skills & manufacturing to back up.

PS Foote: I corrected your statement about how "nobody will beat texas". We are TEXAS A&M, NOT texas university. Thanks

- Mike

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Shaw:

I really dont think they should select design semi's or finals until after enduro. All the theory in the world doesn't matter if you dont have the skills & manufacturing to back up.

- Mike

Apparently you've missed the point. The endurance/fuel economy event already has the highest weight of any of the events, which already places an emphasis on the endurance of the car. The design aspect is not meant to necessarily reflect the best performing cars, but is more to test the ability of young engineers to present/discuss their design stratagies and back them up with data - the ultimate winner being the team that has conducted the most thorough design effort.

Since this is an engineering competition it makes sense to realize that a well thought out design followed by copious amounts of test data (either saying yea or nay on the design) shows an engineer doing a good job. Having a car that finishes endurance does not necessarily point to the same thing.

Here's a quote from the rules (page 68, 2005 rules):

"The concept of the design event is to evaluate the engineering effort that went into the design of the car and how the engineering meets the intent of the market. The car that illustrates the best use of engineering to meet the design goals and the best understanding of the design by the team members will win the design event."

Red 27!

NoH

Mike,

In the pictures I've seen so far from this year's competition the Texas A&M car looks real solid. I wouldn't have been surprised to see it in Design Semis or even Finals.

I know that Cornell has walked away from the design event feeling a little stung in the past as well, including one year when we won the competition. We felt the same "if it's the fastest, then it's the best design" sentiment. One thing we realized, though, is that it's very much the responsibility of the team to sell the car to the judges. That means proving both that the design is strong and that the team understands why it's strong. Maybe the Texas A&M team did a great job of that this year, I don't know... but a Ferrari F1 car wouldn't get into FSAE design finals if the team didn't sell the design well.

And I think that in the spirit of this competition, that's the right way to run the Design event. Static events based on the results of the dynamic events wouldn't have much credibility.

But you're right about the clock. In the end, it will have the most say in selecting this year's World Champion.

Good luck to the Aggies! Looks like it could be another close year.

BK, 10-4 on the updates. Following the action live and direct from LMS. Go Big Red!

Jeff

quote:

Originally posted by me:
the ultimate winner being the team that has conducted the most thorough design effort.

What was implied but not said here was that this is all seen through the judges eyes, hence what BK is saying:

quote:

Originally posted by B.K.:
I know that Cornell has walked away from the design event feeling a little stung in the past as well, including one year when we won the competition. We felt the same "if it's the fastest, then it's the best design" sentiment. One thing we realized, though, is that it's very much the responsibility of the team to sell the car to the judges. That means proving both that the design is strong and that the team understands why it's strong. Maybe the Texas A&M team did a great job of that this year, I don't know... but a Ferrari F1 car wouldn't get into FSAE design finals if the team didn't sell the design well.

And I think that in the spirit of this competition, that's the right way to run the Design event. Static events based on the results of the dynamic events wouldn't have much credibility.

But you're right about the clock. In the end, it will have the most say in selecting this year's World Champion.

The competition is setup to favor dynamic events, and as BK already pointed out, you can win without winning final design. There is, however, a distinct difference between the static and dynamic events that should be preserved.

Balls to the wall.

NoH

It's competition...someone is always going think their getting screwed. We've all been there. Just don't take it personally. We've all spent so much time on these cars and it's hard when you aren't recognized or the car chooses to wait until competition to malfunction. All the teams deserve respect for putting in the time and laying it on the line in Detroit. Good luck to all. Wish I was still living this dream we call Formula SAE.

-Clif Oberle
Texas A&M '01-'02

P.S.- I do feel that you should have to pass tech inspection before participating in any part of the competition. There have been teams in the past that did well in design with a car that didn't run.

quote:

Originally posted by NoH:
Apparently you've missed the point. The endurance/fuel economy event already has the highest weight of any of the events, which already places an emphasis on the endurance of the car. The design aspect is not meant to necessarily reflect the best performing cars, but is more to test the ability of young engineers to present/discuss their design stratagies and back them up with data - the ultimate winner being the team that has conducted the most thorough design effort.

Since this is an engineering competition it makes sense to realize that a well thought out design followed by copious amounts of test data (either saying yea or nay on the design) shows an engineer doing a good job. Having a car that finishes endurance does not necessarily point to the same thing.

Here's a quote from the rules (page 68, 2005 rules):

"The concept of the design event is to evaluate the engineering effort that went into the design of the car and how the engineering meets the intent of the market. The car that illustrates the best use of engineering to meet the design goals and the best understanding of the design by the team members will win the design event."

Red 27!

NoH

I agree with what you are saying, and I see how judging the cars after endurance would seem redundant in scoring. But as we all know, data and testing performed at places other than the competition can be fabricated. Just because the part analyzed using FEA passed, doesn't mean the part on the car is exactly the same.

You emphasize the "testing" aspect of the design process, however some cars that are in the design semi's don't even have any real world testing on them because the car wasn't completed on time. You want a real design test? Put a car through 20 hard laps where everyone can witness the real results, and see what happens.

I think Mark Twain said it best when he said "There are lies, damned lies, and statistics." In the real engineering world, all your design efforts and theory are pointless if your design fails. You dont get points, you get lawsuits.

And I realize you point to the rules and what they state about "The concept of the design event is to evaluate the engineering effort that went into the design of the car and how the engineering meets the intent of the market."

Correct me if I'm wrong, but our market is weekend autocrossers. I dont see how designs like forced induction, exotic materials , CNC everything, etc meets the intent of the market, when such systems are complex, expensive, and difficult to fix.

I realize the cost event is supposed to iron that out, but I still question that whole process and the number of loopholes that teams use as cost-cutting measures.

At A&M, we emphasize safety, reliability, and simplicity. We make fast cars, that are light weight and easy to tune. We usually end up with the KISS philosophy, so that we have extensive amounts of time to test & tune (1-2 months). We end up with great cars that last a long time, and win. Yet we frequently get missed in the design competition, and somehow (even using your less exotic materials and parts with lower cost ie ABS plastic) we are somehow one of the higher-costing cars. Maybe were just too honest. Stupid Aggie Code of Honor...

I'm not at all against the design portion of the competition. I agree with it, and it's purpose. Our team did well last year in it; I just think the whole process and intent could use some changes.

One final point. I thought the place to "sell your car" was during the Marketing Presentation. That's the portion where you make up numbers and figures to impress people. That shouldn't happen in the design portion.

Okay, we're effectively hi-jacking this thread. It's my fault; I started it. Sorry.

Back to priorities:

Updates anyone???

well, from what I hear from down the grapevine (correct me if I'm wrong please) your Aggies walked autocross, 1st. UW took 5th in autocross.

Matthew