2012 FSAE-A

[Tonks]

Well, we are a 6 days out of Formula SAE - Australasia.

I thought I would get a thread started for updates on team progress, then comp progress as it comes around.

Anyone doing a twitter update this year?


Madeleine Tonkin
University of Adelaide, Australia

[Rex Chan]

The official (Kirby's ex-unofficial) Twitter is at https://twitter.com/FSAEA12. There will be someone updating it (not me, a professional from UniGames), as well as Geoff Pearson (who just got an htc smartphone).

[Owen Thomas]

Good luck to all of you!

I am consistently impressed with the quality of Australian/NZ cars, despite the fact that you must build and race upside-down http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif.

[Moke]

I don't know which response to go with:

Nah we're upside down too so the cars seem the right way up.

or

Upside down relative to what? Some archaic notion of what is the top of the world.

I'd just like to wish the volunteers all the best of luck and don't take any shit from anyone especially the Auckland guys.

[Chapo]

Rex, are you plugging phone brands now to fundraise for the comp?

"Check out the new XYZ, Rex likes this!" http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

[Rex Chan]

I wish. I always go with the more info is better/more useful...

[Boffin]

So day 1 out the way.
No one is through tech yet. Monash, ECU, Melbourne, university Sydney, waikato, Auckland, Sophia and rmit all attempted (plus one more I think).
RMIT looks to be the one with the least amount of fixes to make.
Big crack down on forward facing exhaust outlets. None will pass due to concerns about fumes approaching drivers

Was a good day for me being on the other side of the tech inspection fence today. Tomorrow should be even more fun with being powertrain design judge.

Also, I'm being told the track is a lot more open this year. A lot of happy faces about that. Expectation is that mid level teams/drivers will be more competitive.
I will endeavour to walk it tomorrow.

[Rex Chan]

http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/31388089.jpg

[PatClarke]

Rex,

It's the CAMS scrutineer who has determined that forward facing exhausts are verboten.
The FSAE point of view was put by many, but no relaxation from the man from CAMS....and they are the insurer, so have the last say!

Pat

[Bemo]

Are there any pictures from this years Oz comp somewhere available?

It's still so long until the European season will start again... http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

[Rex Chan]

I'm running the FSAE-A fb page, so am putting my own pics and sharing all the pics posted by teams.

http://www.facebook.com/FSAEAustralasia

[acedeuce802]

Will there be a live feed of the dynamic events this year? I think I remember there being one last year at FSAE-A.

[Elecia - Media @FSAE-A]

Hey guys

Elecia here! I'm updating the FSAE-A facebook and twitter pages this weekend. I've also created a blog... Here's some links:

https://www.facebook.com/FSAEAustralasia
https://twitter.com/FSAEA12
http://2012formulasaea.wordpress.com/

If anyone wants to contribute content - I'm in the admin tent, come and find me!

Cheers
Elecia

[M. Nader]

is the 4.8s skidpad time by Monash really a world record?

[Mumpitz]

So i gotta ask... What the hell is going on with UWAs chassis/suspension design?
https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc7/c0.0.800.382.44365361803/p843x403/484379_10151187091878445_214229793_n.jpg
The car looks a little not complete from the facebook pics I've seen but it has me curious. Is it a kart/stressed undertray chassis withe a body sprung above it? All the "control arms" look very fixed to the undertray as a whole with the "W" leaf springs attaching it to the tub.

[RacingManiac]

So where do those dampers attach to?
http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/703520_254843311311958_1980532219_o.jpg

Also, the +/-25mm of travel...if there are that much movement between the "driver/engine" cradle to the undertray, that counts?

[Simon_R]

It's very cool concept

[mech5496]

At least one team who does the "rolling aero" concept as I like to call it. Maybe will be more than one in the next comps... Wonder what Z has to say about it! http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

[Z]

Originally posted by mech5496:
Wonder what Z has to say about it!
Z is wondering what has happened? UWA are nowhere in results! Not quite finished on time??? http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

I guess you are all busy now, but can anyone from UWA give a quick update?

Z

(PS. Harry, I made some comments on UWA's beam-undertray on the "Suspension Design" thread.)

[mech5496]

As I was just informed by Rex:

"UWA not going to run, scrutineers worried about suspension loads through undertray. because, does that make it a chassis?"

IMO there is no point for DQ, shame that such a radical (for FSAE) concept is not allowed to run and shame that creative and different ideas from UWA (wheelpods, beam/undertray) are not allowed....

EDIT: Official announcement from UWAM website:
http://motorsport.mech.uwa.edu...run-dynamically.html (http://motorsport.mech.uwa.edu.au/news/news-article/id/30/fsae-a-results-and-decision-to-not-run-dynamically.html)

[PatClarke]

Harry,don't go jumping to conclusions.

The UWA car is not running because it is not complete.

The eligibility issue is something else. The Design Judges and Tech Inspectors referred the question to the local rules tribunal. Because of the contentious nature of the request and the fact it could have international ramifications, it has been decided to refer the matter to the FSAE Rules Committee in the US. No doubt a judgement will be forthcoming some time soon.

So, the UWA car has not been excluded or DQ'd, it is simply not ready to run!

Pat

[mech5496]

Pat I'm sorry, but that was the exact wording from Rex. As you know it is pretty easy to get wrong what really happens in the heat of the comp. I was just informed by UWAM's facebook page that the car was not complete. Still, a shame that it does not run, i would love to see it against more "traditional" cars! Once again sorry for the inconvenience and best of luck to all teams!

[NickFavazzo]

Once comp is over, I'll be typing up a bit of a report on our suspension for all those interested, too busy now enjoying comp from a very different perspective, Z essentially has covered some of it in another thread (suspension design thread on page 8 I think).

In the meantime I am curious to know how people define suspension travel, be it in warp ,single wheel bump, heave, pitch or in roll. Or how would you (yourself/team) define a "chassis"
Specifically of discussion is rule B6.1.1.

I would like to clear up, that our car is not ready, we will be discussing it more at a later date when we can organise a bit of a debrief but I just want to confirm that the reason we are not running is not because of the judges or scrutineers or for any reason external to the team.

Goodluck everyone in enduro tomorrow lets all finish with good results and in one piece!

[Tim.Wright]

The definition of suspension travel is not so straight forward. To me, "chassis" is any part rigidly connected to the regulated parts of the main structure like the roll hoops or side impact bars.

[RacingManiac]

Originally posted by Tim.Wright:
The definition of suspension travel is not so straight forward. To me, "chassis" is any part rigidly connected to the regulated parts of the main structure like the roll hoops or side impact bars.

IMO as long as the wheels have provision to move (up and down I guess), relative to that structure that could count as "suspension"?

[MCoach]

T6.1 Suspension
T6.1.1 The car must be equipped with a fully operational suspension system with shock absorbers, front and
rear, with usable wheel travel of at least 50.8 mm (2 inches), 25.4 mm (1 inch) jounce and 25.4 mm (1
inch) rebound, with driver seated. The judges reserve the right to disqualify cars which do not
represent a serious attempt at an operational suspension system or which demonstrate handling
inappropriate for an autocross circuit.


From the rulebook. It defines bump and jounce but it doesn't mention of chassis or single wheel or axle. However, it is listed under "General Chassis Rules".

I'm having trouble finding what defines the chassis though...

[RacingManiac]

Also note that it requires shock absorbers. Which this does have shock absorbers...

[Moke]

Whether it does or does not meet the rules or the intent of the rules and whether this may or may not have hindered their tech inspection is kinda moot as it shouldn't be a problem.

This is the second year in a row that UWA has shown up with a controversial design feature, one would think that they had learnt from last year to ask the FSAE Rules Committee before hand rather than assume it will be ok. This structural undertray concept would have been decided at the start of the year, an email should have been sent and an answer gotten. Why invest a year in something that could be turned away at the last minute? I'm sure many teams have come up with designs that were pushing the rules and I'm sure most would have asked the question of if they will be allowed, I know we did a couple of times, some were ok and others were turned down.

So before we all start blasting the Tech Inspectors and FSAE Rules Committee for denying innovation and creativity (and threatening law suits again), let us remember that the rules exist to keep the comp safe and fair. If a team wants to push their limits then it is the teams responsibility to make sure they will allowed before hand.

Edit, sorry forgot to add: If UWA did ask and got an ok, well then that's another story.

[Fred G]

and the winner is...

[Moke]

Monash
Edith Cowan
Wollongong

[Fred G]

Congrats Monash! Well done on completing the second enduro and making it count!

Well done to all the other unis.

[Z]

"Full event wrap and team reviews will be posted on Monday (Aussie time) http://2012formulasaea.wordpress.com/"

It's lunchtime Monday, no update yet, and the newspaper is boring ... Please, soon... http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Z

[mech5496]

+1 to Z. Regarding the UWAM car (copying from FSAE-A facebook page): "The legality issue has been sent to the International Rules Committee to address. No doubt we will have a ruling soon."

Hope they will not ban similar designs and that a clarification will be published SOON!

[NickFavazzo]

In hindsight it is easy to say yeah we should have just checked with the RC first, We should have learnt our lesson by now, in our defence though the design isn't out there and we (being the group we present our concept to) believed the concept to be well within the rules, just because it is not the normal wishbone and 4 springs it comes under criticism by those who don't understand the system (it is just a dual beam axle, with 4 springs 1front 1 rear and 2(or 1) roll spring), when people understood the system they were much more receptive to the idea. Regardless, we should have sought clarification and just played the game.

A little off topic, does anyone know where I can find the FISA/FIA ruling on the T88 i.e. the official document. I am struggling to find the document.

[Bemo]

Having worked as a scrutineer in three events in the past, I'd like to add a few words regarding the discussion about tech inspection here.
Teams always tend to critisize that tech inspection takes too long, but on the other hand you make it very difficult for the scrutineers to do a quick tech inspection when showing up with very unusual designs which arent't clarified before the competition.
If you're not a suspension guy it might be very hard to understand how such a system works. You can't expect a scrutineer to understand it within a couple of minutes and decide wether it is safe or not.
If you send a detailed description of your design before competition to the rules committee so all questions can be clarified without time pressure and it is possible for the rules committee to request further documentation or design changes without ruining the competition for the team.
Don't think it is an easy decision to ban a car from the dynamic events. But sometimes I had the feeling that teams think if they ask if there design is ok, it might be forbidden, but if they just show up with it, they could get away with it (don't get me wrong, I'm not talking of this particular incident here, this is a general statement).

From what I've seen in the pictures it is definitely a very interesting concept you guys have realized here and it is really too sad, you didn't make it to the dynamics. Are you planning to go to another competition with that car? I'd really love to see it in real.

[mech5496]

Uhm, yes you should check it with the RC...we do so even for minor things we might have a hint that don't go exactly with the stream. I agree with you though that there is NO REASON for DQ, as everything is within the rulebook (or at least NOT PROHIBITED by it). Curious on what the scrutineers were concerned about (if they were), and how did they measure your suspension travel (common sense says ground-to-chassis)

[Bemo]

The suspension travel rule is quite clear in this case in my opinion. You still have a main structure with the driver compartment. It must be possible that this unit can move +/- 25mm up and down measured from ground. It might be very difficult to measure this at this car, but that's a different story, and to by honest - wheel travel can't be measured precisly during tech inspection anyway.

[Z]

Aw, come on FSAE-A... It's nearly midnight and still no update... http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Was it the afterparty? Did someone eat all the pigeons??? http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Z

[Boffin]

I want to clarify the situation here, as people are reading into things to much.

This was my first year being an official, having been a Tech Inspector and a Design Judge over the course of the weekend.

I first saw UWA's car on the Monday, while reading their design report. It took me a few read troughs in order to partially understand it. From what was presented I had doubts about the legality of the car, but it was an interesting concept.

I just happened to be in the Tech Inspection tent after design on Friday(I think) when UWA presented their car for tech.
It was missing (from what I could spot), the drive train, exhaust mufflers, shifter mechanism, and the shocks at each corner were only connected at one end with the other in free space. IT WAS DENIED TECH INSPECTION ON THESE GROUNDS, that it was not an attempt to present a complete car. I believe before this point in time UWA conceded that the car was not going to be complete enough to run in this event.

Over the course of the weekend, I over herd Pat Clarke discussing the design, and the how they have sort clarification from the rules committee about the design whether the design is legal FOR FUTURE YEARS.

Come Sunday afternoon I spotted Claude Rouelle in the UWA tent, and was able to squeeze into listening in on the conversation with him, Nick and Pete about the design, the way it worked, and the reasoning for it.
After this I have a greater understanding/appreciation of the design (as does Claude) as what they discussed was not in the design report.
From this I have no doubt that the car will pass Tech Inspection without a problem, as basically the under-tray is the beam axle (where is the ruling what a beam axle must look like) with the front and rear beam axles having next to no roll coupling, and the space frame is the chassis (where the regulated frame members are and where the driver is located).
It is such a shame that the car was not completed, as from what I could take from overhearing, it is a very promising concept due to what it accomplishes dynamically.

Bemo - The word is they are going to try and complete the car for FSAE-A West (Demo comp in WA) and run it in that.

[Kirby]

Hi All,

Just landed in Sydney after 5+ days of FSAE-A.

I will post a full update about my experience tonight.

I believe the blog will be updated today.


Thanks all for a great competition, it was one of the best run FSAE-A events I can recall.

Cheers

[JWard]

Hey all,

we've seen very few pictures of the uwam car, it would be awesome to see some detailed shots, I can't believe for a second that anyone with a camera didn't do so!!

[Rex Chan]

Have you checked the FSAE-A fb page?

http://www.facebook.com/FSAEAustralasia

[JWard]

Originally posted by Rex Chan:
Have you checked the FSAE-A fb page?

http://www.facebook.com/FSAEAustralasia

awesome. RE: UWAM car...

is the front spring the same setup as the rear, mounted to some point on the chassis?

[Pete Marsh]

is the front spring the same setup as the rear, mounted to some point on the chassis?

Yep, except it is mounted so the roll centre is floating with the chassis at the front.

Pete

[Z]

Geoff, Elecia, or anyone at FSAE-A...,

Any idea when the final results will be posted???

(I have heard there are protests being decided. Possibly some big place changes???)

Z

[NickFavazzo]

Protests and big place changes? Did I miss something?

[Rex Chan]

might be talking about usyd, who reckoned they got their fuel score incorrectly measured.

[Z]

Rex,

From the Facebook page during 2nd Enduro:

"Sydney just posted an impressive lap of 48.4."

"Two laps remaining for Sydney, who are now hitting 47s for lap times."

"Sydney next to finish enduro."

Then an Endurance/Economy score = 152.6 (=14th place)?

And overall 11th place???

[Full Rumour Mode = On]
(I heard their measured fuel usage was greater than the volume of their fuel tank!)

Z

[Big Bird]

Hi all,

We have been in discussions with USyd regarding their fuel score, and they are presently preparing their case for submission to us. Unfortunately we can't offer much more info than that at this stage - but we will announce results as soon as the issue is resolved.

Cheers,

[NickFavazzo]

In 2009 we used more than our tank capacity of fuel in the enduro run, was a bit confusing when we heard how much we used... Turns out the volume of the filler tube and everything else was used too! Need to have a properly tuned engine!

[tgman]

Anything more on when the results will come out?

The final results spreadsheet last comp (2011) was a great design tool and I would love get into a new batch of data during the holidays.

Cheers

Tim

UNSW Redback racing

[Jon Oneill]

Originally posted by tgman:
Anything more on when the results will come out?

The final results spreadsheet last comp (2011) was a great design tool and I would love get into a new batch of data during the holidays.

Cheers

Tim

UNSW Redback racing


Any more on this? Results from 2012?

[dprmb]

surely we aren't still waiting for a result???

[ausracing]

The results are up on the rankings website
http://mazur-events.de/fs-world/?cl=1

Just hover over the city to find out the uni.

Not sure where the times are, I will try and find some.

Ryan Ockerby
Monash Motorsport

[Luke Phersson]

The last few years Natsoft has been doing the timing for the events, it also keeps all the results on its website - which I think you can actually access live.

http://racing.natsoft.com.au/results/

Click "Circuit Racing" and show results from 2012 and you should be able to select the Formula SAE comp.