Just to make a point.

[RollingCamel]

Would someone please point the obvious that ABS is not allowed for the competition and if you want to implement it for the sake of learning then do but be sure to turn it off for the competition?

"Not necessarily so. I am sure that an application to the Rules Committee would be judged favourably as long as the primary 4 wheel braking system is a manual system and cannot be affected in any way by the ESC." - Pat Clarke

The new team leader is insisting that it is ok for dynamic tests other than the brake test. So could someone prove me wrong or right to end this debate before wasting more time on ABS. Even so as a 1st year team they don't need to complicate things up for themselves.

[RollingCamel]

Would someone please point the obvious that ABS is not allowed for the competition and if you want to implement it for the sake of learning then do but be sure to turn it off for the competition?

"Not necessarily so. I am sure that an application to the Rules Committee would be judged favourably as long as the primary 4 wheel braking system is a manual system and cannot be affected in any way by the ESC." - Pat Clarke

The new team leader is insisting that it is ok for dynamic tests other than the brake test. So could someone prove me wrong or right to end this debate before wasting more time on ABS. Even so as a 1st year team they don't need to complicate things up for themselves.

[JasperC]

Braunschweig have been running an ABS system for a few years now. They do have to turn it off for the brake test to demonstrate that they are indeed capable of locking all 4 wheels, but they run it in the other dynamic events.

However I don't know if there are any other restrictions on the implementation of ABS in FSAE. I guess you should ask the rules committee.

I do agree with you that it is a bad idea to spend your precious time on developing ABS, as a new team there are more efficient ways of improving your performance at the competition...

With best regards,

Jasper Coosemans
DUT Racing Team 2008-2010
Delft University of Technology

[thewoundedsoldier]

You're only way of proving a point is to use the opinions of this forum's members as your crutch?

ABS has been used by dozens of teams and is perfectly legal. The wheels must lock during the brake test only to show that the suspension can transmit those peak forces back to the frame without major structural failure.

If you guys are serious about ABS, you should go into formula electric and use to compliment traction vectoring! That'd be sooo cooL!

[RollingCamel]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by thewoundedsoldier:
You're only way of proving a point is to use the opinions of this forum's members as your crutch? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Leaving such matter without verification for quite sometime wouldn't help. If I'm wrong then I'm glad that I am, someone had to ask sooner or later.

They barely have anytime and they have just started reading auto-fundamentals, while planning to join FSG 2011. So with barely 5 months to go with no experience, knowledge, equipment and funds they'll have to be really focused and keep it simple. Would I use forum members to knock some sense into them?...yes I would, for their own good.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">If you guys are serious about ABS, you should go into formula electric and use to compliment traction vectoring! That'd be sooo cooL! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
There was some calls for it, however it really depends on technology level available in the country and fund. Importing rodends was a pain so imagine accumulators and more.

[exFSAE]

Well.. one way to gain experience is through F'ups.

[RollingCamel]

Indeed, but whenever you design a program, for instance, you start with a functional one then improve and refine it. Any set back will leave you with a functional unit at least. The car wasn't finished last year and they really need a working one this year.
As a research matter it would be great if they develop it on the side line until it can be reliably implemented. Until then the resources should be concentrated to get the car functional which alone is quite enough to get them really busy 24/7 for the next months.

[Adambomb]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RollingCamel:
Indeed, but whenever you design a program, for instance, you start with a functional one then improve and refine it. Any set back will leave you with a functional unit at least. The car wasn't finished last year and they really need a working one this year.
As a research matter it would be great if they develop it on the side line until it can be reliably implemented. Until then the resources should be concentrated to get the car functional which alone is quite enough to get them really busy 24/7 for the next months. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

+1

Sounds like even if they don't do ABS they're still screwed. From the sounds of it they probably won't even get to that stage where the car is "running" but nowhere near competition ready. If they don't spend a good deal of time in that stage, they probably still won't realize how far off they are. IMHO flailing around with ABS at this point won't even provide a learning experience, as their failure won't even be spectacular. Even after working on 8 FSAE cars I still get surprised at how long it takes getting all the "little things" sorted out.

[Adambomb]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RollingCamel:
As a research matter it would be great if they develop it on the side line until it can be reliably implemented. Until then the resources should be concentrated to get the car functional which alone is quite enough to get them really busy 24/7 for the next months. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I also agree with this methodology. It sure beats deciding for sure you're going to implement a crazy idea this year, then having it end up being completely non-functional. New ideas need time to develop, and shouldn't be counted on as a primary solution until they've got some testing time.