Where are the entries from the "Cream of the Crop" schools?

[Lyn Labahn UW-Madison]

Does anyone know why schools like MIT, CalTech, Berkeley, Stanford, Harvey Mudd etc., which are usually considered to have some of the top notch engineering programs aren't major players in the competition? Perhaps vehicle projects are considered to "blue collar" grease monkey type of work, and research is more their forte?

2002/2003 Team Leader
Best overall average finish of the new millenium http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[Courtney Waters]

They came up early in the school year to chat with us about FSAE and get an idea of how we do stuff. Last I heard they were going to have a car at the comp this year. From what I gathered from talking with them, the faculty did not support the student projects in that it was a waste of time compared to research. Or maybe it's not "cutting edge" enough like solar cars http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_redface.gif

I think what it comes down to is student projects COST money, but research MAKES money for the university. UC Davis is in a similar situation, but we haven't been totally squashed out of existence (yet).

Courtney Waters
UCD Formula SAE

[Charlie]

I think those schools are in a tough situation. They have a reputation to uphold, they can't have a couple 'learning years' like other schools. I'm sure the people in charge need to see a completed car, or some serious proof that the school will be very competitive before they'll give the go ahead. Along with a more difficult course load, that makes it tough on students trying to get a team started there.

It can be done, look what RIT did thier first year. I seen signs of FSAE work at MIT, it would not suprise me to see MIT or another one of those schools burst into FSAE one year and take us all by suprise with a great car.

-Charlie Ping
Auburn University FSAE 1999-present

[Michael Jones]

Many so-called cream of the crop schools get to that point by being rather measured and conservative in their approach.

Even here (which is pretty liberal by Ivy League standards) there are some faculty who question the educational value of the FSAE program. Until they can show me some evidence that "problem sets until you implode from self-loathing masochism" is superior pedagogical practice, I choose to ignore them...and occasionally smash their windshields in with a big silver trophy when no one's looking.

Nice .sig, Lyn...enjoy it while it's still true. :-)

---
Cornell Racing
http://fsae.mae.cornell.edu

[Lyn Labahn UW-Madison]

I think you all have very good points, and I am very much looking forward to seeing what Berkeley can do this year. Another thing that makes Formula SAE really interesting is so much of your success can depend upon experience, not just classroom knowledge. I do hope to see a well refined car come from one of those schools to compete with us savages at the state schools and elsewhere.

As for my sig Mike, just take comfort in the fact that a clever sig isn't needed for those teams whose school name is enough to strike fear in the hearts of its competitors http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

2002/2003 Team Leader
Best overall average finish of the new millenium http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[Bam Bam]

I heard they were protesting cause dupont wouldn't supply them with nomex sweater vests.

Seriously though, it would be pretty tough to convince some professor who's pullin in six figures and has never done anything outside the theorhetical confines of acadamia that to be a good engineer you're gunna have to pick up a wrench.

It would make it far more rewarding to go smash his windshield with a big silver trophy after flunking out of his class though.....

[Michael Jones]

...nice. Faculty support is important, and Al George does a great job massaging the egos of even the most cantakerous old farts here. The backroom politics of academe are so petty, largely because the stakes are so small - having a good advocate is immeasureably helpful.

---
Cornell Racing
http://fsae.mae.cornell.edu

[Dick Golembiewski]

Most of the comments here are correct. The SAE projects are constantly questioned at many universities - even those which have been involved for many, many years.

When I was a professor and faculty advisor, I had a sign on my door which said that "in academia the politics are so unusually viscious because the stakes are so low."

- Dick Golembiewski

[MikeWaggoner at UW]

Another reason is prestige. A lot of these schools value their academic reputations tremendously. If their 'brilliant students' that are obviously far superior and smarter than stupid kids at state schools (i.e. me) and lower rank private schools, lose to those same dumb kids, it makes people question their superiority.

Other thing I've noticed is that academically obsessed kids often don't do well on projects.

Western Washington University FSAE
dot.etec.wwu.edu/fsae

[Michael Jones]

quote:

Other thing I've noticed is that academically obsessed kids often don't do well on projects.


***

We've had a couple of notable exceptions on both sides of this (excellent team members with 4.0's, poor team members barely holding on) but I think you're right.

To get a 4.0, you do have to have some talent - but you also have to approach education in a very instrumental and utilitiarian fashion. Follow the program to the letter, make a career jumping through hoops, take a few risks as possible, and eliminate things from your life that divert from these goals.

While playing by the rules is a useful life skill, it really shouldn't be the only one you walk out with. If you want to be rewarded for conformity to strictly prescribed rules, go to jail.

I'm a career 3.5 or so, a fine balance between taking risks and being rewarded for the effort (if perhaps not always the sucesss of it) and getting raked over the coals for trying.

My lowest grade here at Cornell is from a course on qualitative research methods - the basis of both my master's and PhD theses and I would argue one of my core areas of expertise. I got on the wrong side of a couple of intellectual holy wars and after being scolded for doing it "all wrong", bailed on a 15 person group presentation to go to 2000 competition and do real research.

Whatever.

---
Cornell Racing
http://fsae.mae.cornell.edu

[EliseS2]

I swear MIT used to come on fairly consitent basis. They made a completly different car every year. They took it as a pure learning experience evey year. Rather than refine a basic concept year after year they took a new idea every year.

[Dick Golembiewski]

In the years 1978-89, we were one of the powerhouse schools in the Midwest Mini-Baja competition. MSOE was a practical engineering school, which prided itself on academic excellence AND a faculty which had been in industry and could pass along both theoretical and practical skills. As such, the SAE projects were a natural for us.

The time period involved included my days as an undergraduate, as well as my first incarnation as a faculty advisor (after a spell in industry). In twelve years, we had three firsts, three seconds, two thirds, and didn't compete two years. That leaves only two years where we did not have a podium finish.

I can assure you that we played up the fact that we had beaten larger, more prestigeous schools to the hilt! It helped in recruiting students and reinforced our reputation as a practical engineering school. That indirectly helped the school raise funds for operations. It pays to be a winner! (something I said in a little piece I wrote a couple of years ago re: the intangible side of managing these projects)

At many institutions, these projects generally compete with those which directly bring in funding, i.e. funded research. As such, there is a natural conflict. A number of successful faculty advisors were able to combine their research interests with these projects, but those are few and far between.

The enormous expansion SAE student design competitions experienced during the 1980's and early 1990's were helped (at least in the U.S.) by the engineering design requirements of the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET). While those requirements were a bit excessive, and have been subsequently relaxed a bit, they nonetheless forced undergraduate programs to include engineering design and capstone design projects - something the SAE competitions were already known for.

We loved the reputation we developed by our finishing record. It gave our institution a real shot in the arm. I'm fond of saying that in those days we were too dumb to know that we weren't supposed to beat all of those other schools - so we just did it! <grin>

In addition to competing for resources which bring in research dollars, the other battle to be won is one of prestige. It takes an institution which believes in undergraduate education, and the preparation of its students for careers in industry. Many faculty members have come directly from graduate programs without having spent any time in industry. Prestige and research dollars are what they have been told to base their careers upon. Even in those institutions which have had reputations for undergratuate education which serves industry, unwarrented inferiority complexes can arise as the faculty and administrators envy the prestige of other institutions, and move theirs toward those models.

No answers, folks. This has been going on since the beginning of these competitions.

- Dick

[ben]

That's very interesting about the design project accreditation requirements.

The I Mech E (our professional body and FStudent 'organisers') has moved their accreditation requirements quite far towards business and management.

This, in my view, partly explains the relatively poor standard of UK teams on avergae compared to the Australians for example.

Christ - I have more accountancy lectures than mechanical design lectures, something has to be wrong there.

The elitist academic college argument is also present over hear, and illustrated perfectly by the failure of Imperial College to produce a competitive car. They've produced countless aerodynamicist tech directors in F1 but are clearly a little spanner-phobic.

Ben

[David Money]

"Many faculty members have come directly from graduate programs without having spent any time in industry." VERY true indeed. It was extremely frustrating to go through their classes having worked in industry for years and look at things from their point of view (read theory).

"Seriously though, it would be pretty tough to convince some professor who's pullin in six figures and has never done anything outside the theorhetical confines of acadamia that to be a good engineer you're gunna have to pick up a wrench." Again, very true.

Some of the prof's at out university had a HUGE problem with what we were trying to do as a FSAE team. So much so that they eliminated all after-hours access to the shop in February last year after telling us that we couldn't work over the holidays because we weren't "officially enrolled in a class because we were not sitting behind a desk at that moment". As a result, we had to move out to a sponsors warehouse filled with rats and a leaky roof taking all of the stuff we purchased with our private account with us. They loved our actions so much that they threatned to have us all arrested for theft!!! (stealing our own items...hmmmm)

I personally had a discussion with our dean about how students graduating without design AND manufacturing experience, they are missing the true engineering experience, the redesign...

To date, they continue to roll out students with virtually NO design experience. Yeah, they have a senior design project, but you don't have to make anything. It is all theory with ABSOLUTELY NO regards paid towards manufacturability, reliability, cost, or marketability (everything FSAE embodies). On a side note, my employer has subsuquently decided NOT to hire from my former university anymore. They are tired of seeing theoretical engineers that don't even know what a BOM is coming in their doors looking for a job.

I have found that there are 2 types of professors, those that have worked in industry for a long time; and those that walked into a teaching position right from graduate school. I think that the vast majority of the full time professors are the latter unfortunately and that too is what is at the "cream of the crop" schools almost by default.

FSAE is such a great program. It's such a damn shame that the majority of the faculty don't see it that way and find it far easier to say "no" than to look st it for what it give not only the students but also the university. DAMMIT I should have gone to UTA!! Oh well..

Enough rambling.

David Money

Alum from the only university to date to host a FSAE competition that didn't have a vehicle entered in it.

[Michael Jones]

The ABET requirements are particularly interesting to me as a student of the practice of engineering...There's a lot to be said for this kind of knowledge, although I would agree with Ben that the core of any curriculum still has to be technical, not managerial, in nature, unless you're indeed speicializing in industrial engineering, systems engineering or operations research.

And the only way to really get your feet wet on this is to do it - theoretical senior design projects and contrived and simulated real life examples in problem set questions don't cut it.

As David suggests, I think there will be a strong backlash against 100% theory schools, who'll find that their graduates are of little use outside of academe.

Unfortunately, this form of academe can be a closed system impervious to outside input or forces of change, so it's surprisingly easy to perpetuate the practice. The publish-or-perish thrust of many departments and the very real power gained from getting research grants complicates this as well. Teaching, alas, is subservient to these goals, especially in one's early career when obtaining tenure is critically imoprtant to one's long-term longevity.

Another benefit of having someone of Al George's experience at the helm - he's beyond these issues in many respects given his seniority, his approach to mentorship and commitment to organizational learning and development is exemplary, and his poiltical capital in the department is both substantial and judiciously exercised.

All interesting issues, though, and I'm glad that schools are specializing in applied projects are becoming increasingly succesful in obtaining and placing qualified students. Waterloo comes to mind on that - many of their programs are quite innovative and their tight integration of co-operative education tends to ground the practice in real life. Shows in the quality of their students and their car, as well as in other disciplines such as computer science...

---
Cornell Racing
http://fsae.mae.cornell.edu

[jack]

just thought i would add my two cents:
i have a friend who is in the engineering program at Harvey Mudd. He almost went to my school (Western)instead for scholarship reasons. Had he gone to Western, im sure he would have joined FSAE with me, and its too bad he didn't--he is a smart guy http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif anyway, after he had been going to Mudd for a while, i asked him why they don't have an FSAE team with all of the engineering geniuses walking around. his answer was "dude, i spend like 12 hours on one math problem, nobody around here has time for that (FSAE)" seemed like a good answer to me. It is a shame they dont have a team though, i bet they would have quite a car.

JACK
www.etec.wwu.edu (http://www.etec.wwu.edu)

[Marc Jaxa-Rozen]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>his answer was "dude, i spend like 12 hours on one math problem, nobody around here has time for that (FSAE)" seemed like a good answer to me.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm pretty glad many schools here have the opposite attitude...I would think that most engineering employers today value the managerial and project development skills associated with FSAE much more than a hardcore math background?

[jack]

you would think, but im pretty sure my buddy would certainly get a job over me because he went to Mudd and i went to a state school. unfortunatley, i think that is what is untimatley important to employers (even though i dont really think its that fair either).

[Michael Jones]

Alas, it's true - good people at less recognized schools have difficulty getting noticed, and complete morons from Cornell will get jobs. Given the chance, I for one will never hire someone from Cornell simply because they were here. That tells me bubkes - I know my fair share of bright people here, but there are also more than enough incredibly stupid folk. They all get out of here with the same piece of paper in the end - I want to know what they did to get it.

My take on this is similar to that for companies that filter on GPA alone. So your 3.15 misses the 3.2 cut, or your degree isn't the right shade of red. If that's their selection criteria in a nutshell, the job and the company sucks eggs, and you're better off elsewhere.

---
Cornell Racing
http://fsae.mae.cornell.edu

[Kelsey]

Hey everyone, glad to see my team isn't the only one having troubles with the department accepting the FSAE competition as an excellent engineering experience. We have only been in this competition for 5 years now, and every year our BIGGEST down fall is lack of money (due to department and coincidently industry rejection as a worthy investment) and support from the department.

This year is the first in our teams history that we have started to get the department and faculty to realize the potential of this program; unfortunately we had to sell this project from the manufacturing / mechatronics engineering perspective. I think the best way to get support is find their weak spot and play it hard!!!

Regarding Jack and Michael, GPA means dick to industry!!! I currently have a 1 year internship position with Alstom Power in Switzerland designing turbine blades. This company hired my buddy and I for a position normally taken by 3.8-4.0 students from German and Swiss Tech Eng schools; we got the job because we were on the FSAE team. The only companies that want eggheads are those that are solely research driven. I think if you look around in industry, experience plays a much larger factor in who gets the job versus how mcuh time one can spend on a math problem!!

See you all in Detroit.

Oh if you care to know, my GPA is ~3.4!!!

[Michael Jones]

...in many companies still makes a difference. Given a choice between a 3.4 with and without FSAE experience, I agree - there's no contest. But given a 3.8 without and a 3.0 with, all too often the stack of resumes for posted positions is filtered by the simplest of dimensions, GPA certainly being one of them.

Those with sub-3.0s here actually get quite decent jobs, but it's all through networking...of course, that's where you get the decent jobs anyway.

---
Cornell Racing
http://fsae.mae.cornell.edu

[Kelsey]

I agree entirely with you Michael, GPA does make a big difference when it comes to finding a job if you do NOT have experience; but thats where the FSAE team, I find personally, helps to further your marketability and hide the theoretical short comings that your GPA may demonstrate. Either way, those of us in the FSAE program can feel somewhat assured that we will get decent jobs.

[Nick Gidwani]

Hey all. I am the captain of the recently formed MIT team.

We are currently hard at work on our car for this year's competition. Just so you know, Cornell and RIT should not be worried (at least not this year). We'll be lucky to have a moving car at competition. Our team has about 10-12 members, all of which have several extra-curricular activities and ridiculously tough courseloads. No faculty member (including our advisor) has even seen our vehicle in the last 2 months, and if I asked them to they would probably laugh at me.

We knew it would be very tough to start a team at MIT, and it has proved to be much moreso than I could've possibly imagined. I don't think anyone has to worry about us for a few years at least- long after I am gone- and it is a very real possibility that MIT's tough courseload and research focus mean that we can never be a force in this competition.

Anyhow, we look forward to meeting everyone at competition and getting lots of feedback on everything we will have done wrong on our car- and also partying it up with you guys.

See you all there!
Nick Gidwani

[Garbo]

There's a fine line we all need to walk. We've had the same blend of top students who need help to open AutoCAD and ones who fail out every other year but stand out as the stars of the team.

MUN is a very professional (vs. practical) engineering program and I have been told more than once that 'That car thing is useless.' and that I should quit.

It's what you make of it. The bookworms focus on trying to keep their grades up, to the exclusion of all else. Out of the guys I've worked with, the ones I would hire in a second are the ones that go for 'A beer and a think.', come back and get an extra 5 horse out of the 4-banger, the guys who go out clubbing, only to have the bouncers find a 1/2" wrench in their back pocket (both scenarios did happen last year.), not the ones who don't do a tap for 3 months of the year while 'studying for exams'.

What it takes is dedication (bordering on fanaticism) to learning, rather than dedication to academia.

Matthew Garvin
Memorial University

"I never let school get in the way of my education." - Mark Twain

[Michael Jones]

Wow, there are studious bookwormish types at MUN? I thought everyone in Newfoundland engaged in their best intellectual efforts over beer.

I'd agree though - those are precisely the types I need around me as well. Actually, Cornell is weird on that since 75% of everyone's underage and they card everyone as if you're trying to purchase uranium.

I did my undergrad degree at Queen's. We ran five pubs on campus. Engineering classes were never scheduled for Friday afternoon since everyone would be at Ritual.

Whatever the initials of your school, getting a running first-year car entered and finishing all events is an admirable goal. Good luck to the MIT folk on that, and all others trying to do the same. It's much easier to get one of these things rolling with 15+ years of organizational history to build off of.

---
Cornell Racing
http://fsae.mae.cornell.edu

[Richard Lewis]

Personally I'd love to see more team like MIT taking part! In the end, it can only help to dispell the thinking that the only valuable engineering is research. (which seems to be the thought paramount in our faculty)

Out of the ~50 mechanical engineers in my class, there are less than a half dozen I'd ever hire for my business... And those are involved in FSAE or similar projects.

We've had interesting scenarios with the two department heads we've had over the last year. The first, a Ph D. in mechanical engineering asked us if our slightly rusted steel frame was made out of aluminum after inspecting it. The second, another PhD. in CAD/CAM walked into our machine shop and while standing next to our lathes, asked "I heard we have two lathes in here, where are they?". I'm not sure that this is something to aspire to, even though most of the engineering world (at least at university's) would consider both these men to be excellent engineers.

-------------------------
UVIC Formula SAE Team
http://members.shaw.ca/drax77/Formula%20UVic%20Sig.jpg
http://uvic.fsae.ca

[Garbo]

Well, all really groundbreaking work is completed over beer (no engine tuning gets done without). Also, most team meetings conclude at the Breezeway (student bar). Last year, a large part of our funding came from holding huge, often epic, parties.

This is generally frowned upon by the faculty, however. Our faculty is incredibly academic. All the profs insist on explaining mathematical concepts with... more math, not anything practical. We fight for funding and even dyno time (which we can't get becuase they have an ancient 'Turbo Swift' in permanent residence on the waterbrake). In general, our team gets along better with the lab technicians than the profs... some of the techs are mad keen on the project and often give up lunch hours and evenings to help us out.

We get a couple grand from the faculty yearly but until we get real support (ie. belief that tuning a race engine is a better use of the area's only dyno than running the same half hour test 50000 times for second year labs) we will have problems. I think that most teams are in the same boat, even when they have silverware to back their effort up (and smash windshields with).

I wanna go driving!!!

[Michael Jones]

We've had a few interesting projects fueled by libations, but given that lots of the team is underage and any US college town is quasi-fascist in their application of liquor laws, we don't have nearly the amount of inspiration as we could use at times. Certainly nothing like the MUN pub, and our equivalent to George Street redefines lame.

We're blessed with decent faculty support - the dean dropped by during recruiting and heaped effusive praise on us. A few outliers here and there that run interference, but not many.

And as far as I can tell, they know the difference between steel and aluminum, lathes and mills. Hell, I do, and I'll have a PhD in a field wholly unrelated to engineering by the end of this.

---
Cornell Racing
http://fsae.mae.cornell.edu

[Richard Lewis]

You do, I do, they do... but that might be part of what makes cornell such a well renowned school. http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif My point is that it's scary what knowledge can pass by some of these academic types.

-------------------------
UVIC Formula SAE Team
http://members.shaw.ca/drax77/Formula%20UVic%20Sig.jpg
http://uvic.fsae.ca

[Marc Jaxa-Rozen]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>The first, a Ph D. in mechanical engineering asked us if our slightly rusted steel frame was made out of aluminum after inspecting it. The second, another PhD. in CAD/CAM walked into our machine shop and while standing next to our lathes, asked "I heard we have two lathes in here, where are they?"<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yikes http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

We pretty much have the opposite situation here, very competent types for our fabrication needs but little theoretical resources. Our current faculty advisor doesn't even hold an engineering degree (not that it matters much IMHO).

BTW, a teacher once advised our Baja team to add a solid lead front bulkhead to fix their chronic understeer http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

[Gareth]

Here at UW we seem to have plenty of eggheaded students and faculty that don't know the first thing about the "real world". Luckily, we also have a good share of practical folk too. The school provides good support, though just as with every team, we're always asking for more. I'm just waiting for the day we get asked to stop working in the halls outside our room – that'll turn into a battle royale (we desperately need the space). I think the big difference is between pre and post-grad. Our school teams are more-or-less run entirely by undergrads with some support from old team members in grad studies. There is a focus on practical knowledge in undergrad and research in postgrad. This is exemplified by the mandatory co-op program for undergrad engineering students. I, in fact, am currently on a co-op term where I'm doing a fantastic job of slacking off and posting to this forum. Of course I also spend every night after work at the school...(where are my priorities?)

There's a strange team dynamic that's not always the most productive. Many designs are the result of a 4th year projects, so some are good and others are not. I think the greatest penalty we pay is in time - the less "handy"� you are, the worse your scheduling is. Every year we see smart people who create good designs having trouble getting the job done. It's not that they're not capable of it, they just didn't realize how long each step takes. Of course there's plenty of the usual Waterloo dogma wrt over-complicating problems with over-elaborate solutions (how many UW engineers does it take to screw in a lightbulb?). The upside is that unless they're well implemented, they don't make it on the car. The really hard part is finding practical elec or comp eng's to work on cool new electronic systems. There's been lots of talk of custom ECU's and traction control, but it's yet to materialize...though it may be in the works. http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

...and yes Garbo, I haven't forgotten my NF roots - we still go out and get pissed after working for too long on the car. I just hate it when the car closes before the job is done. Lets hear it for finishing carbon layups at 5:30am. La-de-freaking-da.

[Michael Jones]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Every year we see smart people who create good designs having trouble getting the job done. It's not that they're not capable of it, they just didn't realize how long each step takes. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

...one of the hidden benefits of getting the people who design things to make it their own damn self. Tends to simplify design - perhaps not in the first iteration, but certainly by the second.

---
Cornell Racing
http://fsae.mae.cornell.edu

[phonyMcRingRing]

We've had a similar problem here at MUN with elec/comp students in the past. We've had a couple of term 8 projects result in things for our car but no custom ECU yet. I'd like to do it, but it may take a couple of years to get done, since it's likely only going to be me working on it. Finding another sparky to work on this project with me would be difficult, given that the ones that'd be interested probably couldn't handle both school and the car. (Too bad the coop office probably wouldn't accept working for the raceteam as a work term)

Mmmmmmm... 52 slices of american cheese. - Homer