First year cars

[Moke]

Okay a bit of a rant but I've been reading the topics on this forum and I'm not feeling the positive energy from the north or south.

Now I might not be an expert but where in the rules does it say that a first year car must be junk pile that never runs? A good car can be built and designed in 9 months; I've seen a good example. It might not be flashy but it works and sets you up for future years. It takes a lot of hours and a good grasp of the basics.

To all you first year team I say channel your chi and aim high. What say ye?

[Moke]

Okay a bit of a rant but I've been reading the topics on this forum and I'm not feeling the positive energy from the north or south.

Now I might not be an expert but where in the rules does it say that a first year car must be junk pile that never runs? A good car can be built and designed in 9 months; I've seen a good example. It might not be flashy but it works and sets you up for future years. It takes a lot of hours and a good grasp of the basics.

To all you first year team I say channel your chi and aim high. What say ye?

[Ashley Denmead]

good post Moke http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

i'm with you, i reckon u just need a good bunch of switched on people and the world is your oyster!

speaking of oysters.....did u ever produce that video? would love a copy!

cheers

ash

[Dan G]

There's no reason a first year team can't build a good, or even great car. FYT's shouldn't shortcut or make sacrifices just because it's their first year.

That being said, its probably a good idea to avoid a turbo system, electronic traction control, or the use of a flux capacitor. FYT's efforts are probably best used toward succesful completion of their design, and then a healthy month or three of testing/repairs/improvements.

[CMURacing - Prometheus]

does that include (since i just finished our design report) Carnegie Mellon's "innovative cone and ring throttle?" in place of a flux capacitor?

[Dan Nauts]

I would highly recommend as primary concerns of first year teams to set up the structure of the team, develop a team culture, create a design heirarchy with respect to vehicle systems and setting up a standard design process with the goal of getting well thought out designs with technical merit analyzed, manufactured, tested, installed, and tested again.

[Dan G]

You ready for micro yet Mike?

I'm bringing a few more trucks and some new guys this year.

See you in April.

[Eddie Martin]

Moke,

I agree completely. The reason why most people are giving this advice is the fact that we see so many first year teams under prepared for the competition. They aim for cars with 4wd, 4ws, turbo etc. and fall flat on their face or just run out of time and drive the car for the first time in the brake test. You need to keep it reasonably simple and get it done very early, that doesn't mean it has to be a junk pile.

Not to be arrogant but in 2001, at uow-racing's first comp, we were 232 kg won the autocross, came second in design and finished second overall only 7 points behind the winners RIT. It can be done. There is nothing stopping any team finishing in the top 10 or getting in the design finals, its up to the team to make it happen.

Another thing people forget is even if you finish the enduro you may have a time too slow to record any points. Car speed comes with experience, that's another reason to get driving super early.

[David H.]

Hey guys,

I'm President of VCU's FormulaSAE team and we're trying to start up an FSAE project for the 2006 competition. I've heard about many teams trying to fabricate a car outside of their limits and as a president, I am dedicated to keeping our car simple and feasible. So if our team pulls through in the next year, I'll be seeing you guys in Pontiac!

[Moke]

I agree with most replies in parts. Look at our car for example. It weighed 260kg, had nothing too special, a common motor and setup. We used a lot of off the shelf parts, which we knew worked and we tested every part of the car before we decided to use it. It became a build and then design process, but we made a very nice 1st year car (well we think so).

To the new teams I say a basic running car is still a running car. You'll need to make comprises. And nothing replaces hard work and I don't mean a few all nighters but 2
months of 120 hour weeks.

On the Moke Tv DVD, we need more computer power, editing is a killer.

[EgyptianMagician]

Aim to win Rookie of the Year ... plain and simple. If it means sitting a year out, then by all means do so.

My 4.34$

[kwancho]

Heck yea.
Goal #1: FFS, make a car that runs. My vetoes as team leader: no turbo, no full aero, no awd, none of that. A basic car will already be 50132012730217 times faster and more fun than any of our street cars.
Goal #2: Build a car that finishes enduro. I don't care how fast it goes, I don't care how much we score, I want to finish.
Goal #3: Don't suck in static competitions. Period.
Goal #4: Get at least a month of driving time.
Goal #5: Go from zero money, zero space, zero anything, to that in 12 months.
Goal #6: Build a SWEET car for 2007.
Sound good?

[IsheeM]

Alex,
Best of luck to you on your goals. At least you have developed these goals. Unfortunately, as a first year FSAE team (did Mini-Baja in the past) we have had to establish a lot of infrastructure at MSU. Between doing this, getting money, and working around all the bureaucratic BS, that alone took us almost two years. So the best of luck to you if you plan on doing all that and building a car in 12 months. Also regarding your #1, those are just completely out of the question (as you have established) but your car will need to be much simpler than that.

I will be more than happy to give any advice on setting any of this up.

Good luck,

[kwancho]

Yeah, I know it's ambitious, but don't be surprised if we have a painted gokart out there next year. Thanks for the offer, I'll ask on the forum if I have questions.

[gug]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Dan Nauts:
I would highly recommend as primary concerns of first year teams to set up the structure of the team, develop a team culture, create a design heirarchy with respect to vehicle systems and setting up a standard design process with the goal of getting well thought out designs with technical merit analyzed, manufactured, tested, installed, and tested again. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


and you should make it a priority concern to initiate a comittee investigating the effectiveness of buzzwords and mission statements on a culture of excellence.


sorry Dan, ive just sat through 4 weeks of lectures by people who talk like that (but, unlike you, with no useful advice) in a management subject that i had actually already passed (with a credit!). it was so boring and un-memorable the first time round that i didnt recognise it the second time round.

anyway, Auckland were awesome! i hope no1 is directing the flak at them. we had a great race against them out on the endurance track, it was awesome to watch.

i dont think anyone actually means to be talking down to first year teams. i can see how some posts might be interpreted as "dont do what we do, your too young", but i dont think that is the message they are trying to give.

having an already built car on hand is a massive resource. being able to see what works and what doesnt can save you weeks in designing stuff. take a mechanical linkage for shifting, if i was coming at it with no experience and no previous car to work off, i would wonder if the joints need bearings, what sort of ratio gives good feedback and travel, how strong the linkage should be, what it should be made out of, etc. etc. i would probably go build a test rig to figure it all out. but having the previous car there means that i can answer all these questions in minutes.

i think this is why so often teams with experience advise first year teams to keep it simple. and also you really do sympathise when a team can not get their car finished in time for the competition, it would be a horrible feeling.

[Urvina]

Wait Wait Wait..

whats wrong with a first year team turbocharging an engine? how else or you goin to get the power out of it that you need? UAA has just declared its first FSAE team and we plan on starting the car in june/july for the 06 year. We are keeping it simple and at the same time being a little creative. Not crazy,creative.

and would a CVT be too much for a first year team?

Erin Urvina
06 Team Leader
University of Alaska Anchorage

[Patrick W. Crane]

My team thinks i'm nuts, but we should have a ice racing comp in alaska.

Maybe i am nuts, but i think it'd be pretty damn fun...

CVT's don't give you the fun of shifting. i'd hate having one on my car...

good luck anyway though!

[adrial]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Erin:
Wait Wait Wait..

whats wrong with a first year team turbocharging an engine? how else or you goin to get the power out of it that you need? UAA has just declared its first FSAE team and we plan on starting the car in june/july for the 06 year. We are keeping it simple and at the same time being a little creative. Not crazy,creative.

and would a CVT be too much for a first year team?

Erin Urvina
06 Team Leader
University of Alaska Anchorage </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You can get enough power out of the engine without the turbo... There are plenty of top teams that do not run a turbo. A turbo is really more for mid-range punch than top end power on these cars because of the restrictor.

I would say a CVT is too much for a first year team, but go nuts. The standard sportbike motorcycle engine is much easier to execute, but you already know what is easier.

[threehondas]

We just built a really complex car and I kinda wish we had kept it simple.

TOO MUCH WORK AND NOT ENOUGH FUN!If we HAD kept it simple we'd be driving right now.

It seems like our cars come out of the shop as first year cars... There are few returning members around to make sure the same mistakes dont happen again so all our cars seem plagued. Ie CV joint (last years endurance 2004). Even though the previous manager (2003) knew that the design wasn't up to snuff.

Build *whatever* you want as long as everyone on the team feels the same way about the design and make sure they (and the faculty) would be alright with the *consequences* when a complex design doesn't work out. It seems like our team/faculty loves to gamble with trick ideas. I cant stand it.

KISS will get you a most of the way in FSAE but not quite all the way. But most of the way is good enough to have a lot of fun - and who knows - tell the judges, with frankness and honesty, why you did what did and if your car hauls butt, you just might take it.

Bruce

[Z]

Can a first year team win FSAE outright?

EASILY! But there has to be the right attitude, and some good thinking done early. I would argue that a big disadvantage of many established teams, and the reason that they are perennial losers (ie. never first), is that they are locked into the status quo of building "the standard FSAE car", but with a bit less time/money/resources than other teams.


Does a FYT need to create the right "team management structure" to be successful?

NO! I reckon a few uneducated but enthusiastic farmboys could put a winning car together in 3 months. Enthusiasm, practical nous, and a spark of magic, is probably better than a structured Systems Engineering approach. However, from the School's point of view, the structured approach is less likely to produce a really embarassing car if one year the team consists of a bunch of lazy dimwits.


So what does it take for a FYT to win outright?

Here are some suggestions:

1. You have to make it to the start.
This means completing entry forms and assorted paperwork on time, building a legal car, getting the finished car to and through scrutineering, etc., etc...

2. You have to make it to the finish.
A car that doesn't finish Endurance won't win. This means building a reliable car. There are many ways to do "reliable", but KISS and lots of testing are probably the best here.

3. You have to build a fast car.
What makes an FSAE car "fast"? Here are some performance parameters, in no particular order. ONLY TWO OF THESE ARE REALLY IMPORTANT. The rest are going to waste your time/money, and stuff your chances of achieving points 1 & 2 above.

Highest-power, lowest-weight, highest-top-speed, fantastic-brakes, low-aero-drag, high-cornering-G's, slick-shifting-sequential-gearbox, all-wheel-drive-grip, rifle-bullet-acceleration, easy-driveability, grippiest-tyres, really-comfortable-seat, featherbed-ride-suspension, demolition-derby-toughness, electro-hydraulic-differential, minimum-turn-radius-manoeuvrability, miserly-fuel-economy, maximum-aero-downforce.


Z

PS. Erin, I don't see any problems with turbo's or CVT's for a first year team - they're common on most farms. But are they what you need?

[Igor]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Can a first year team win FSAE outright?
EASILY! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You're a funny guy, will you be doing stand-up-comedy at the Detroit competition? We all like a good laugh. Maybe you could bring some uneducated farm boys with you to give a design seminar.

Igor

[clausen]

We'll it's not quite the same, but our team from last year were all new to the competition, and had almost zero input from the team before, so beside having a car to drive a bit (while we could keep it going) we were for all intents and purposes a first year team. I was totally confident we could win up until the last month when we were getting very little testing done. We did end up winning design and getting 2nd in skidpan.

I think it's totally do-able for a first year team to be competitive. You just need to get your shit together a bit better than we did http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[IsheeM]

Paul,
From your arguement, it does seem as though you guys were nearly a first year team. However, there are some big differences between your team last year and a true first year team. A true first year team may have to convince the school of the project's benefits, establish access to machining equipment, establish some type of team structure, figure out how to begin to recruit members and money, get the software and hardware necessary to design and test this stuff, etc. This is what I believe a lot of people forget about when discussing first year teams. The above mentioned items in themselves is quite a large amount of work. I dont think there is anyway a true first year team could compete of overall wins or even design wins. That is just speaking from my prespective though.

[Denny Trimble]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Z:
Can a first year team win FSAE outright?

EASILY! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

A few second-year teams have won outright. Wollongong placed 28th in the US in 2002, then won in 2003. Texas A&M placed 14th in '99 and won in 2000.

There's a lot to learn, and a lot of infrastructure to build, in a team's first year. It's not impossible for a first year team to win, but you're going a bit far to say it's easy.

[Urvina]

so how about...maybe...fifth?

we want to put our state on the map. even though its the biggest state in the country, we go unnoticed way too much. so im thinkin we want to be in the top five. possible?

hell yeah

[MikeWaggoner at UW]

If a first year team wants to be successful, they'll need to know how to answer questions, and what level the design boards etc. should be at, and generally what to expect. I bet some teams would let a stranger ride along...

[Z]

Erin,

The post office often advertise that their goal is "to deliver 90% of all mail within 24 hours". So, if they've delivered the 90% at 10am, do they put the other 10% on a shelf to age for a week or so? That's their stated goal.

If you've found a loophole in the rules that, according to your simulations, allows you to build a car 10% faster than any previous FSAE car (from their listed times), do you throw that design in the bin?

If you want to come first, then that's what you should aim for. In fact, aiming for 20% faster will give you some leeway...

Z

[James Waltman]

Erin,
They already put your state on the map – down there by Hawaii.
http://www.ndaonline.org/chapters/united%20states%20map.gif

I bet your team has plenty of CVT knowledge to pull one off. Just make sure you weigh the tradeoffs. A turbo is not beyond a first year team. I suggest that you get the car running without one first though. Then when you have spare time you can add the turbo.
Aim high.

Have you worked out a way to get to Detroit next month?

[Z]

(...continuation of "EASILY" post)

How does a first year team determine what is most important for a fast FSAE car?

Here is one possible way to find out.

Do a lap time simulation of different types of cars on typical FSAE Autocross and Endurance tracks. You can download a simulator (somewhere?) or just DIY. Initially, only a very simple simulation is required. Later you can add more detail.

Start with a simplified track map that consists of constant radius corners connected by short straights. The track has no width so all cars follow the same line. Driving style is "classic", ie. straight-line acceleration and braking, and constant speed cornering. This makes the maths very simple. Later you can add track and car width, adopt a "blended cornering" driving style, and manually drive the car like a video game.


Initially, the car is simplified to a "mathematical point" with the following attributes:

Mass (100kg - 500?kg) - This is car + driver mass. Yes, start at 100kg to find out if low weight really is important.

Power (10kw - 70kw) - Effects high speed acceleration and top speed.

Coefficient-of-Friction (Cf-max = 0.1 - 2.0) - Maximum possible tyre grip effects horizontal accelerations.

Aero-Drag (Cx.A = 0.1m^2 - 2.0m^2) - Effects acceleration, braking, and top speed.

Aero-Downforce (Cz.A = 0 - 10m^2) - Effects horizontal accelerations.

It is useful to display the track map on the screen and have multiple different coloured dots representing different cars racing each other around the track. This makes it obvious where on track some cars have an advantage, and by how much. Choosing a high and low number for each of the above parameters gives 32 cars to test, for a start.


The above should make obvious which of the parameters are most important. But it still doesn't give much detail of the car. The next step is to split Cf into three.

Cf-Acceleration - Less than Cf-max for cars with 2WD.

Cf-Braking - About equal to Cf-max, unless you've got really bad brakes.

Cf-Cornering - Less than Cf-max to account for a badly set-up or difficult to drive car.

More screen testing, and now you should have a good idea what makes a car fast IN FSAE CONDITIONS. Perhaps more importantly, you should also know where NOT to spend time and money.


Of course, the better established teams will have done this, in much more detail, every year that they've been in the competition.

So, any hints as to the results, guys? (Denny, anyone else...?)


Z

[Kevin Hayward]

Z,

I know I end up putting hints to results of sims in responses to forum questions. As I would guess others are doing on this forum.

We as a team end up putting even bigger hints into how we build our cars ... and what we look for. We started out building a car that was similar spec to a 'standard' fsae car. We have made changes over the years. So if you want to know what results our sims and testing are giving us then have a look at the direction of change in our cars.

Unfortunately I think that most teams probably have their 'future development' projects fairly well under wraps. I know that we do. It is those projects that really indicate where we are going with the whole deal.

But if I was to say one thing don't overestimate the importance of weight savings. Yes car-to-car with equivalent systems it is still pretty much number 1. However there are quite a few examples where a few hundred grams added can find more vehicle speed than the performance lost due to weight gain. I mention this because if there is a common theme amongst these forums that losing weight wherever and whenever possible is the solution to all the performance issues. It just isn't true ... well at least it isn't the whole truth.

...

What the first year teams do not have is the data from previous cars to make informed decisions. To make situations worse for the newcomers is that this problem gets worse as the years pass by. Decisions get better and better as data accumulates and is analysed. Furthermore if simulations shouldn't be trusted too much until they have been benchmarked against vehicle testing.

Cheers,

Kev

[Urvina]

James-

We are holding a huge, three day car wash next week specifically to raise money to send two or three people down next month.

Y'all should bring your cars...

But when we get there, what would we be doing? As guests, would we have to pay? Do we get be on the tracks at all or is our access really limited?

If anyone is willing to show us around that would be awesome!

Erin Urvina
University of Alaska Anchorage

[Denny Trimble]

You don't have to pay anything to spectate. You'll have free access to the paddock, and to the viewing areas for the driving events. You could also listen in on the static events as well (highly recommended). You won't get much audio on your camcorder unless you have a really good mic, though.

[MikeWaggoner at UW]

Bring a digital camera and a laptop. People always go and take tons of pictures, but don't keep good track of them. Download often to your laptop, and label your pictures. It's so annoying when people tell me about a cool picture they took at comp, and I ask them where it is, and they say in the Brad's pictures folder, and then I have to sort through drunken party photos, and a bunch of general car pics with no content, to finally find the picture I want, titled "MCV-1107-MHP.JPG"... Baugh.

If you don't label a pic, you may just see the rear quarter of a car, and forget you were trying to copy the linkage system that cheats weight transfer effects.

[B.K.]

Yeah, Erin, going to the competition is an absolute must for at least two or three people from your team if you want to perform respectably next year. You won't belive the jump it gives you, both in understanding of the competition and in excitement about building one of these racecars. If you are serious about getting a solid team going, don't even consider skipping this year's competition.

You will have access to everything. Take all the pictures you can. Get videos to excite your fellow team members and to help with recruiting. Denny's point about listening to every judging discussion you can is an important one. Plus you can (and should) ask questions. Even those Cornell punks will help get you pointed in the right direction.