2007 Rules & August Newsletter Up

[Derf]

2007 rules and the new August newsletter are posted on the SAE website. I haven't had a chance to dive into it in any great detail yet, but just letting you all know.

2007 Rules (http://students.sae.org/competitions/formulaseries/rules/rules.pdf)

Aug 06 Newsletter (http://www.sae.org/students/cdsnewsletter0806.pdf)

I wish everyone the best of luck for the upcoming 2007 design series.

Derf aka Fred

[Derf]

2007 rules and the new August newsletter are posted on the SAE website. I haven't had a chance to dive into it in any great detail yet, but just letting you all know.

2007 Rules (http://students.sae.org/competitions/formulaseries/rules/rules.pdf)

Aug 06 Newsletter (http://www.sae.org/students/cdsnewsletter0806.pdf)

I wish everyone the best of luck for the upcoming 2007 design series.

Derf aka Fred

[cmeissen]

Thanks

[Nitesh]

last time the rules were a lot more reader friendly with hyperlinked contents and highlighted rule changes. what happened to them this time??

[murpia]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Nitesh:
last time the rules were a lot more reader friendly with hyperlinked contents and highlighted rule changes. what happened to them this time?? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

A rule-changes document is posted on the official forum here (http://www.formulasae.org/forums/formula/dispatch.cgi/rules/docProfile/100124/d20060626183617/No/2007%20FSAE%20Rule%20Change%20Summary.doc).

Having just read it, I am interested in the changes to 3.3.5.1 (F) which has changed from:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The attachment of the main hoop braces must not compromise the function of the bracing, i.e. the attachment method and supporting structure must be capable of transmitting all loads applied to them by the bracing without failing. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

to

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> The attachment of the main hoop braces must not compromise the function of the bracing i.e. the attachment method and supporting
structure must be capable of transmitting all loads from the main hoop into the major structure of the frame without failing. The braces must either transmit this load directly to the major structure of the frame, or through a properly triangulated structure. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Given the definition of 'major structure' as

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Primary Structure – The Primary Structure is comprised of the following Frame components: 1) Main Hoop, 2) Front Hoop, 3) Roll Hoop Braces, 4) Side Impact Structure, 5) Front Bulkhead, 6) Front Bulkhead Support System and 7) all Frame Members, guides and supports that transfer load from the Driver's Restraint System into items 1 through 6.

Major Structure of the Frame – The portion of the Frame that lies within the envelope defined by the Primary Structure. The upper portion of the Main Hoop and the Main Hoop braces are not included in defining this envelope. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

this outlaws rearward angled Main hoops and the associated rearward angled bracing. Was this intentional? If not, and if as per elsewhere in the rules rearward angled Main hoops with rearward bracing are intended to be allowed, then it still poses a problem for any team which attaches rearward bracing to anything other than a complete continuation of a triangulated spaceframe (or equivalent) structure, i.e. no stressed engines etc. This also appears to make a lot of current cars illegal, including FS winners Toronto:

http://fsae.utoronto.ca/2002/fstudent06-003.jpg

and FSG winners TU Graz:

http://www.cosic.org.uk/galleryv2/main.php?g2_itemId=5141

I'm not a team member, but I suggest that if you are, you get this clarified...

Regards, Ian

[Alexandre D.]

Some team had bracings going nowhere. If some major load was to be applied on the main hoop, the structure supporting the bracings would fail. I think the intent of the rule is to ban such chassis.

I think it wasn't very clear before. Is it the attachement (bolts or weld) or the structure receiving the loads? Now it's very clear and it does make sense.

Like you said the only issues may be stressed engine.

[murpia]

So, I broke my own rules by not reading the _whole_ rulebook before commenting... and of course I get caught out!

Section 6 of the 2007 rules 'Notice of possible rule changes for 2008' discusses rule 3.3.5.1 Main Hoop Bracing as follows:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The Rules Committee is reviewing how the Main Hoop Bracing ties back into the Main Roll Hoop, including the desirability of allowing the engine or transmission to carry Roll Hoop Bracing loads. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

So, by implication, feeding the bracing loads into the engine / transmission is still OK for 2007, as long as the engine / transmission is properly triangulated to the Major Structure. I assume a composite structure would be OK also as long as Structural Equivalency is granted?

I would still recommend teams clarify their intended chassis design for 2007 with the rules committee if they are in any doubt.

Regards, Ian