wow look at all those angry posts

I admit I was out of line. The design judging was probably the area I have the fewest complaints about - however I stand by what I said (except maybe the buzzwords sentence)

I will not edit what I said about the autocross.

Not knowing precisely how design works, I can only offer my suspicions, which are as follows.

1) If you're answering basic questions at any stage, you're probably not in the best position. Dick's comments re: bringing the car's innovative features to the design judge's attention were echoed by Jay O'Connell quoting Carroll Smith during final design review. Part of this is controlling the nature of the conversation by insisting the judges pay attention to what you want them to notice versus, say, getting them to check if you know that F=ma.

2) The judges certainly did notice Lehigh's car, since it was the only one other than the finalists to be noted during final design review. Being radically different, however, is not enough.

3) Indeed, F=ma, but this does not necessarily mean reducing m is the only design criterion. I suspect as Dick suggests that judges are interested in the compromises one necessarily has to make in order to design a complete racecar. Weight reduction is important, but so is reliability, power, dynamic performance, innovation, ergonomics, aesthetics, and perhaps most important, an overall systems philosophy that is consistent and balances these and other factors.

I gathered from Lehigh's group that mass reduction was weighted considerably higher than other factors in many instances. Given that this is a unique approach, it has to be sold more, not less, and it's relatively easy for people to point out limitations of the design outcome that result from such focused attention on weight reduction, barring other considerations (e.g., ensuring by design that no driver over 5'7" could drive the car legally...)

4) I suspect that if Lehigh continues the effort and makes some necessary compromises regarding weight reduction and other necessary factors, a lot of things will fall into place. Innovation of this magnitude is appreciated I think, but it's also ridiculously hard to pull off in a year. There's no way in hell we could come up with a 300lb. car in the course of a night that would meet our other goals, nor would we try. Even less difficult systems innovations (e.g., electronic wastegate) took a couple of years to get to prime time. I'm sure with time and thought, Lehigh can field a 350lb. car that's more robust overall and could be a real contender in both static and dynamic events. I hope you guys give that a shot - I loved the car and it was a real shame it didn't get a chance to run out there. Jay O'Connell absolutely would love to see a new version of it return - I talked to him briefly Saturday and he was very impressed with the effort.

quote:

---

The top schools are there for a reason. They are "elite" for a reason. It is within every school's power to get there. Each has advantages, as well as challenges.

---

Agreed on all fronts. Our biggest advantage is that we know how what it takes to win the competition, since we've done so a few times now, and are insanely well organized towards the realization of that goal.

I strongly suspected we wouldn't and Wollongong would last year based on our own team dynamics and what I heard from talking to Fergus here for the same reason - we got off track, and they were really on the ball.

Didn't want to jinx ourselves this year before, but I figured we had a great deal of promise this year, and we delivered on that promise. Simple as that.

That noted, none of this is immutable - I think more and more teams either know or are rapidly figuring out how to do it, and I suspect that future competitions will be considerably tight with more and more schools with an odds on chance at winning overall.

I suspect as well that we'll again forget how to do it, but I wouldn't hold your breath on that next year - we're only losing about 40% of the team and regaining a few old team members due to MEng. and returning from years off...On paper at least, it should be a strong group - my only concern is that there's a number of former leaders in that group and could create issues in leadership as people figure out their roles and responsibilities. Of course, I'm making notes on this as I head out the door so that they can hopefully take care of this potential issue before it becomes an actual problem.

On the rest of the competition, I agree that it was a bit chaotic - right from early staging, you knew something was amiss. Claiming paddocks was confusing as all hell, the new track was way too fast, the staging of all the noisy events right next to the road and across the street from houses made no sense, and yes, the autocross timing issues were kind of random. Growing pains in the new location, most of it.

And the freaking weather of course. You'd think after four competitions I'd at least be able to claim one 4-day period without getting waterlogged at one point or another. Nope.

At least it was warm this time.

Dick,

In a previous thread, you had offered to provide some feedback on the design reports. My team had a hectic schedule on Friday and Saturday (like everyone else scrambling to cope with the weather) and we don't know if any design judges came by to offer feedback on our team's design event showing, or on our design report.

Is there any chance to still get feedback on either subject?

Thanks,
Car #101

Is it like this every year?

Yes, we put in a shitload of time into our car as well. Guess what? We didn't win. Just because you might expect something to happen doesn't necessarily mean it will. What we just went to was a competition, not fantasyland.

Things happen. The teams that are best prepared for everything have the best chance of winning. For example, If Lehigh had another set of wheels that they could have their rain tires mounted on, perhaps they wouldnt need hoosier.

Also, the rollover was not the fault of the technical inspection people. Based on their protocol, we passed. So it is the protocol which will probably end up changing in next year's rules. Sorry guys

Dr. Katz, I fully agree with you. This year, and every year, there is only one winner and approximately 130 people who didn't win. I too agree that if you're not ready, then you shouldn't be there. IMO, if you haven't tested your car into the ground and it's not spot on 100% perfect within the rules, then don't be upset when the judges unload 2 rounds on you and then continue to reload. I think that most people see that too. However, I think the thorn in the sides of most people is "lack of organization" and "lack of fairness" that some are seeing and being subjected to.

By the way, I don't want anybody to construe my opinions as those of any university that hails from the San Antonio area. Being that I am alumni, I am speaking solely for myself and on behalf of nobody else.

Dick,
I would also like some feedback on the pre-design report. You emphasized how important it was several months ago and now that you have read ours and others it would be nice to hear what we did right and what we did wrong. Also, Jay didn't have any design sheets to give to our team after the design competition. He reviewed our car with us on Saturday but we weren't given any written feedback from the design competition. Who should we contact to try to get those sheets?

Also...on another note...for all those that seemed dissapointed by their design results I want to remind you that the design event is only 10% of the whole competition. I remember in 2000 I think it was when the design judges litterally laughed Texas A&M out of the design tent only to have Texas A&M come back and spank everyone in all the dynamic events and win the whole thing. So...the best way to get back at the judges for not noticing or giving your design due attention is to show them on the track that you have the best desig. We were dissapointed with our design score but we just didn't do a very good job presenting our car. Granted...we don't have $1000 to spend on glitzy poster boards but we could do a better job presenting our vehicle and that is what we attribute our design score to.

Finally...another question for Dick...why is 500lbs so critical in the design tent? Sure, its usually better to reduce weight but perhaps not on these cars. When we did skid pad testing, the more weight we added the faster the car went around the skid pad. It seems that the tires we have in this competition (since they never really get to operating temperature) can use all the added normal force they can get. And when your talking about changing your power to weight ratio from 8.75lbs/1hp with a 525lb car to 7.9lbs/1hp with a 475lb car assuming 60hp, your looking at a very small gain for a large incrase in the normal force on the tires and generally a large increase in the robustness of the vehicle. Frictionaly force is equal to Mu*Normal Force. Since Mu is fixed based on the tire then the only way to get better tire forces is to increase the normal force. Sure, you can do this with weight transfer but that is only transient. Anyway, I'm just curious why its such a big deal to be under 500lb if being over has a few advantages of its own.

My issue is not with the performance of the car, nor is it that I think we should have placed well (I did not expect to). The issue is the treatment of teams by the organizers and the general "tough shit" attitude that occurs repeatedly.

When you have one chance to prove yourself, what went on at competition becomes absolutely infuriating.

"Okay....how come every SCCA race I've ever been to has NEVER been as screwed up as any of the FSAE events I've either attended or read about? I know that the local Detroit region SCCA works at the comp, but I guess my question is, should they be running all the dynamic events too?

You're asking an awful lot to expect anyone - even SCCA - to run the LARGEST single class racing event IN THE WORLD flawlessly when weather becomes a factor. Were the top 10 finishers the best 10 cars in Pontiac? Maybe, maybe not. Were the best 3-4 teams reflected in the top 10? ABSOLUTLEY!

This is about LEARNING, not just winning. What I am learning is there are some people from Lehigh and elsewhere based on the comments I'm reading that I wouldn't hire if they paid ME.

Support the event, make constructive criticisms, and prepare for next year. Life is never fair. This event is special and it's no coincidence that some teams do well almost every year. Go FSAE!

Sean and Stephen,

I'd be happy to.

Give me your email addresses and I'll pass something along.

Give me up to a few days.

- Dick

Stephen,

quote:

---

Finally...another question for Dick...why is 500lbs so critical in the design tent?

---

Years ago, when I chaired the SAE Student design Competitions committee (I don't recall if I had broken things out into individual subcommittees for each type of competition yet.), Carroll came to me with the idea of having a maximum weight as a way to sift through the cars. I concur. The is no reason why a team can't get the car under 500#.

quote:

---

I remember in 2000 I think it was when the design judges litterally laughed Texas A&M out of the design tent only to have Texas A&M come back and spank everyone in all the dynamic events and win the whole thing.

---

Not quite. A&M was NOT "laughed out of the design tent". As I recall (and I can check the results to confirm) they were in the top tier of cars which didn't make the finals - only under the handful that did, and better than the vast majority of cars at the competition.

Also, they didn't "spank everyone in all the dynamic events". What they did do was to run well in all of them. All of "the usual suspects" suffered silly failures in the endurance event, while A&M finished. There's a lesson there.

quote:

---

So...the best way to get back at the judges for not noticing or giving your design due attention is to show them on the track that you have the best design.

---

The last time I looked, we were all human. We just happen to have a bunch of motorsports experience. (In my case, also a lot of SAE student design competitions experience as well.) I usually tell students something similar - although not in the context of "getting back" at the design judges!

It's always nice when schools which do well in design also do well in the dynamic events. Occasionally we get complaints about why someone didn't advance further in the design judging, and it's always nice when the school which did performs better. It happens a lot, which should tell you something.


- Dick

Dick,
I would also appreciate some feedback for the University of Missouri - Rolla.
I was looking for you and Pat Clarke, but didn't see either in Pontiac.

mtg7aa @ umr.edu

Thanks,
Matt Giaraffa

My complaints:

Rant #1
---------
allow the suspension guys and/or drivers to walk the autox and enduro courses at least 12 hours in advance of the race so we can see what kind of course to set our car up for.

for the 5 weeks we have been running 7/8" ground clearance based on our home track and the past competition. this year's track was much bumpier, resulting in bottoming out on the autox 2nd run and losing traction. our best driver spun out, costing a 40 sec run in the autox and the top time and a top start in enduro.

we increased our ground clearance by 5/16", which was perfect for enduro.

Rant #2
--------
if a team hits 4 cones after their autox run, and fails to turn in the truth until after the eduro event, you should still deduct those points to accurately show how a team did in autox and in the final score.

i wont names, we should be 3rd in autox and should have gotten 4 free hoosier tires, and we should be only 20 points behind cornell for 2nd place.

Rant #3
--------
the weather, which SAE cant control. i thought they handled the events smoothly, and i'm glad they let the top heat run 2nd for endurance.

MOVE FSAE BACK TO TEXAS LIKE IT USED TO BE. what's teh weather like right now?

SUNNY, DRY, and 90 deg with not a cloud in the sky...

I LOVE TEXAS, GOOD TO BE BACK HOME IN SAN ANTONE

Overall Feelings
----------------
2004 FSAE was a success, and i enjoyed every minute of it.

Matt - Will be interested to see judge's comments. UMR had a beautiful car that scored pretty well across the board. Glad to see you guys back near the top again! Congrats on a strong showing & good luck next event.

Bert 15

Thank you Dick

Myself and the rest of my team look forward to hearing from you.

my email is SZasada@shaw.ca
Car #101

quote:

---

if a team hits 4 cones after their autox run, and fails to turn in the truth until after the eduro event, you should still deduct those points to accurately show how a team did in autox and in the final score.

i wont names, we should be 3rd in autox and should have gotten 4 free hoosier tires, and we should be only 20 points behind cornell for 2nd place.

---

I won't name names either, but I will note that the team in question actually complained against itself during the protest window early Saturday. And resubmitted said protest Sunday when the first was misplaced. The team in question was quite adamant that they didn't want points awarded by virtue of random screwup.

The team's request for self-penalization was denied due to lack of evidence - the competition records matched the posted scores in the end.

Why this was is anyone's guess. That's racing, I suppose.

Ive been to FSAE competition for the past 3 years now (only as an observer) and i must say that the event is getting bigger and bigger every year.

Not only do you have hundreds of competitors there, you also have hundreds of spectators and observers just like me.

And i have to say, it's not an easy job making everybody happy. So ... a big applause for the judges and volunteers at FSAE this year. I know things could be better but ... you guys deserve a pat in the back.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dick Golembiewski:

quote:

---

i don't mean to be rude since our judge was very happy to spend well over an hour talking with us on saturday after our endurance run, but i would like to think that every judge there (at least those who focus on suspension) would have a reasonable understanding of the what and why of ackerman (and more just as importantly, anti-ackerman) steering geometry. there's something wrong if students need to explain things like tire scrub and ackerman to the judges. hopefully next year we can better present ourselves for design and be lucky enough to have judges that already understand the underlying principles on which we engineered our car.

---

I don't know who you spoke with, but all of the motorsports judges specializing in suspension and chassis (and for the most part, we're the ones wandering around all weekend - even into the wee hours of the night) understand those underlying principals. In fact, this competition is one of the few chances some of us get to sit together and discuss such things. Your message wasn't clear, but it sounds to me like the judge you spoke with disagreed with your design decision re: your Ackerman setting.

---

the judge said that he had heard of anti-ackerman steering, but did not 'get it' (can't remember the exact word, but i believe that is representative). also, when i quoted our work in mitchell suspension software regarding various geometry numbers (bump steer, etc.), he commented on computers having bugs and simply wanted those values measured. just to make it clear, i realize that it is our responsibility to bring proof of our design (both analytical and physical) to competition. on the other hand, this is 2004 and programs such as racing by the numbers (which has some bugs, but has been in development since 1985 i believe) are invaluable to design and should be trusted to some degree.

btw, to answer the question re: why is less weight good... a tire's coefficient of friction decreases with increasing load. the net force may go up, but overall the lateral force becomes less 'efficient' per down-load. thus, a lighter car will have a higher lateral force capability to weight ratio for all other variables equal. of course, during acceleration you not only can put down more force per weight, but simply need less power for the same acceleration. this decreasing tire efficiency is the reason that weight transfer (due to cg height) is bad during cornering and braking since all tires are used to apply the forces.

one last note, it sounds as if we can get commentary on our design reports. i would very much appreciate some commentary for the following report:

Oregon State University
Car #054

altendok @ onid.orst.edu


thanks to Dick for not only taking interest in our discussion, but continuing to converse with us.

quote:

---

btw, to answer the question re: why is less weight good...

---

Not saying it isn't of course - just that there's a tradeoff between weight and everything else you have to worry about. There is certainly a question of balancing mass reduction with reliability, ergonomics, powertrain necessities, suspension and vehicle dynamics requirements, aesthetics, etc.

What that balance is is the question, and if you come up with something radically outside the bounds of the expected, great, but expect to defend it big time and prove it works as good or better in the end.

quote:

---

Thanks to Dick for not only taking interest in our discussion, but continuing to converse with us.

---

Ditto, and I apologize for not getting a chance to catch up with you personally when I was around. Did see you there, then ran over to talk to U of Alberta re: cost report stuff, and by the time I got back, you had moved on. And I assume you'd had tried the night before, since I heard someone vaguely resembling a design judge was trying to track me down.

Thanks much for the feedback all the same - hopefully I'll have more free time next year as a visiting alumni.

quote:

---

Thanks to Dick for not only taking interest in our discussion, but continuing to converse with us.

---

Remember folks, that I've been involved with these things for over 25 years now. I've seen/heard more than this! I understand disappointment - been there myself. Cooler heads usually prevail.

There are things I can't comment on here, but where I can I will continue to do so, in the spirit of helping folks go through things I did 'lo those many years ago!

- Dick