2004 FSAE- Worst Pontiac Event Ever?

[RagingGrandpa]

A general feeling of confusion surrounded 2004 FSAE in my mind. Skidpad starts at 8am Friday? 8:50. Endurance run order based on Autocross? Nope. Design semifinalists announced at 5:30pm Thursday? Nope. Brake workers seemed to think Lehigh with their solid axle locked the left rear but not the right rear. One of them complained a team's car was pitching under braking and almost held that team! Practice track so small teams hit bales and break suspensions. Watched a team in Design Prelim's have to explain what tire scrub meant to a judge. Running from imaginary tornados wasting half and hour of dry running time before rain came, then having workers tell teams that a decision to run will be made by 4pm, then restarting the AutoX event at 6:45pm. Explicitly describing in the AutoX drivers meeting that there is a line for first drivers and second drivers, the first driver line getting priority, and then the courseworkers letting multiple teams get second drivers run, pushing other schools back in the first driver line far enough they can't run before the rain.

I just removed a general sense that the right hand never knew what the left hand was doing at 2004 FSAE. I know our team is planning on sending letters of concern to the FSAE Consortium officials, and we are trying to get as many other teams as we can to do the same.

FSAE Competition isn't the reason we all bust our asses all year- the experience itself is worth the work, but it would be nice if the event were run as professionally as many of our teams.

[andrewd]

yea it would be nice if it was run professionally, and to an extent it certainly is, i wasnt over there in detroit, but in australia there are similar problems

needless to say its definately NOT a tiny event, and trying to get the job done right is a big task, and all the volunteers and everything that needs to be done is a credit

its not like you can blame the tornado on the officials now is it http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

[Ehsan]

The brake test officials always seem to be the least organized and on top of their game. The single non-locking wheel on a solid axle brought back memories of our own experience last year at the brake test.

We had done a number of unsuccessful runs when our car failed to launch one time. We pulled it off the brake test track and found out it was a halfshaft that had slid out of the tripod. For some reason, the idiot judge at the brake test decided that this was a safey hazard and pulled our inspection sticker on the spot. He made us waste more time by going back to the inspection tent where the judge there gave us a funny look when we described why the sticker had been pulled.

How can a dislodged halfshaft be dangerous? What might happen? Oh yeah, the car might lose power and stop moving. Very dangerous.... It seemed to us like he was just using his power as a judge because he didn't like the fact that we kept bothering him to run repeated brake tests. He was a jerk to say the least

And no, the halfshaft could not have worked its way out and hit a car behind us. It was not sliding out far enough.

[Angry Joe]

Although Lehigh's overall performance can not be blamed on the organizers, I have MANY issues with what I heard went on there.

The general attitude at competition seems to be to treat us either as criminals or bratty children. I've seen and heard this attitude in tech inspection, brake testing, design judging and don't get me started on the endurance.

On that last subject, I speak not from personal experience (we deserved to flunk the endurance) but I can only say for some teams, my heart goes out to you.

Maybe we should inspect the organizer's personal cars for trace fluid leaks and see how well they do.

There's a lot more I want to say but I gotta get back to work, I'll have to rant later.

[mtg]

At least they made a real autocross and endurance track this year. If everything else sucked, I'd still be happy about having real courses to drive on. The previous courses were retarded- this year they showed that you can have a fast, fun, safe course where there aren't many cones hit or spins.

The track finally was consistent with what the cars are supposed to be designed for- the weekend autocrosser.

[Angry Joe]

We wouldn't know - we never ran it and missing the autocross is what I am most pissed about. Since the car was designed to take advantage of the tight autocross, it would have been nice to get some data on how it behaved if this course was different.

Oh well, they only have a year to wait, then another year to evaluate the results...

[-]

I will agree to the utter confusion that went on at this year's compeition. This was my third time around coming to Pontiac and this was the worst by far. However I am willing to realize that those problems are most likely because the event was in an entirely new part of the parking lot and the organizers didn't have a feel for how teams would like or dislike them.

Each and everyone who had a problem with the compeition should write Kathleen McDonald a respectfull email as to how the compeition could be done better in the future.

[Jim400]

It's very interesting to hear what your all saying over the pond, i'm in the Uk and was racing at last years Uk compertion and did'nt really have a big complaint about the british event. It amazes me what you guys are saying happens over there, test tracks that are so small they cause accidnets, thats crazy!!! That was one of the things that got me at last years Uk event, you have so many teams that finish there cars that week or a few days before and instead of having a proper test track you have a stupid figure of eight, where you can put any loads into anything.

Intersting what you say about the SCCA tho, ours was run by the 750 Motor Club which is the UK equivilant, they run race track series for the under funded racer. I think they did a great job.I did think it was funny that they measured the track length wrong for the Endurance, Cheers to Toronto for pointing that out!!!

And to add insalt to injurry, our car last year after the driver change in the endurance had a throttle that was stuck wide open with our master of a driver driving on the brake and clutch, it did this for about 5 -6 laps with no bother, then a lap before it was pulled in it started to boil the water and was spraying water out of the top of the water bottles like chalmers did before it cault fire. they decided that was enought.

So i'd be intersted to hear what the teams that regually race in the UK and raced at this years US event thought??

Also thing to all the marshalls i talked to were really good, seamed thay were they becasue they loved cars!!!

Maybe more of you Americans should come over next year and see how it's all done!!! ( i do realise our comp is half the size of yours)

[vinHonda]

My view:

They shouldn't have let teams run their second drivers in Autocross when they specifically said they would run all the first drivers.

Charlie from Auburn told me, they ran their first driver, and were ready to run their second driver and just wanted to be sure that they'd be first in line for the 2nd driver. Instead, the marshall signalled for them to send out their second driver...... bullocks.

My only other beef is the layout of cones. I spent the first 2 laps very cautious because I felt the cone layout was pretty scarce. The track was SUPER bumpy and much more high speed compared to traditional FSAE tracks.....where were the slaloms in the enduro??

I noticed that many teams shortened their wheelbases this year and went to what I call the "Tokyo Denki sized" era of FSAE cars......real small, real short wheelbases. But the teams made this decision only to negotiate the tight tracks that included slaloms of tradition.

The track we ran was REALLY fast....guys at Rolla and UTA loved it I bet! ....where I went into 2 turns watch'n MSU lift inside wheels!

I also got a black flag for apparently ignoring a blue flag. My beef about this is: I had been out for 3 laps. During each of the first 2 laps, I got blue flagged and pulled into the passee lane. WHY then would I decide to ignore a 3rd blue flag??? I really didn't see it, and the 1 minute penalty hurt us. The course marshall told me "you should be looking for flags"........ shouldn't I be focusing on racing?? I watched every single course worker from that point on and noticed that 80% of them didn't even have flags in their pocession!

Those were my only beefs. Other then that, it was quite fun! I enjoyed seeing the quality and organization of other teams step up.

Now off to Formula Student!

Cheers,

Vinh

[Dominic Venieri]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by fsae_alum:
Second, have SCCA come on board and run the event. If there's one thing that SCCA is, it's that their notoriously fair to everybody involved (teams that is). That's an interesting concept...having a company that is in the business of running racing events run....a racing event (as opposed to a bunch of big 3 engineers). Unfortunately, it sounds as if the event is getting way to big for the same old organizers to control logistically. It's no longer the competition it was 10 years ago. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The SCCA is part of the FSAE Consortium, they set up the autoX and endurance tracks, and supply most of the courseworkers! Howard Duncan, the SCCA Solo chair comes to Pontiac every year.

[KJeepin]

Yeah, I know at MSU, our car was better suited for smaller, tighter tracks. However, we tested it in a wide range of conditions, and never once noticed the tires coming off the ground like that. Throughout all the extensive testing given to it, the issue never arose.

Obviously we can't blame what happened entirely on the track. It was just an unfortunate situation considering we were getting pretty good lap times, and got pulled from the race with about 2 laps to go.

Regardless, the teams that ranked high deserve their rankings. No event is going to end flawlessly, so let's get ready for next year.

[altendky]

overall, i think the location tends to be what screws everything up. the result of the location is the weather. tornados and thunder storms just do not lend themselves to racing. still, i would like to think that there are some better judges out there that would like to be involved in the program. i don't mean to be rude since our judge was very happy to spend well over an hour talking with us on saturday after our endurance run, but i would like to think that every judge there (at least those who focus on suspension) would have a reasonable understanding of the what and why of ackerman (and more just as importantly, anti-ackerman) steering geometry. there's something wrong if students need to explain things like tire scrub and ackerman to the judges. hopefully next year we can better present ourselves for design and be lucky enough to have judges that already understand the underlying principles on which we engineered our car.

[Angry Joe]

Rant #1 (I feel more coming...)

Judges wanting to know why having "less weight" is better. Give me a frigging break.

Last year they obviously had counted our car out as a design contender before we even showed up - for christ's sake there wasn't a question that I didn't answer, but that didn't matter as the judges looked about as interested as me dozing in an electrical engineering lecture.

This year it was the opposite. One year of excellent design work sunk because of lack of sleep, which prevented them from feeding the judges the buzzwords they wanted to hear.

And the autocross, with all due respect FUCK ANYBODY THAT ORGANIZED THAT SHITTY EVENT

First they let teams run on dry tires. After it rained, no one was able to run on dry tires even though the course dried out! Since they already threw fairness out the window, who cares? Since Hoosier decided to close early and bluntly refused to mount our wets (how much money did we spend on their tires? At least $1500). The final insult was that after the team took the wheels apart and mounted rain tires manually, they closed the fucking course ahead of schedule!

I have tried to be fair in the past but FSAE '04 gets a big thumbs down from Angry Joe.

[B.K.]

Angry Joe, you oughta take that down a notch.

No doubt there's room for improvement, but these people do their best to organize an event that is the highlight of all of our college careers, people who put in extra time because they love it. The judges and stewards and track marshalls are almost all volunteers.

Cussing them out like that reflects poorly on you, and worse, on your team. Don't sign with your team name if you're gonna step that far out of line.

[Kevin Hall]

Let me begin.......

Granted things could always go better, I must say, I was choked on many occassions....

1.) First pass through tech, the judge didn't like my Rubbermaid catch can that I had oven tested to 250?F without troubles. No big deal, go to Walmart and get a new one. Go to GM for the tour, and see the Cadillac CTS....with that same Rubbermaid catch can, held on by one zip tie. BOO JUDGE with big moustache!!

2.) After fixing that, a new judge proceeded to ask why we had changed that, yet didn't have a safety wire on a bolt that has never been safety wired EVER, and has passes tech 3 times before. Drilling through the head on a 1/2" Grade 8 bolt sucks, and held us off from making brake and noise Thursday.

3.) First pass through brakes, one judge claimed that the right rear didn't lock, but the rest did, the other claimed that the left rear didn't lock and the rest did. My video seems to show that they all did. Engine stumbled and stalled while lining up again, and pushed us to the back of the line. Hello tornado, bye bye autocross.

4.) What d'ya know, passed brakes with flying colors at 7:00 Saturday....on sopping wet conditions! Why make me wait!

5.) BOO STEVENS from New Jersey. Pay attention in the drivers meeting. 6 laps to go, and I'm hot on their tail. See a flag coming up near the straight at the North end. BLUE! BLUE! BLUE!....nope, yellow. Apparently yellow means stop. I almost ran into that purple 727lb monster, stalled, and couldn't start for some reason. I wanted to kick the driver in the head. Yellow=slow!

Overall, I wrote a three page document for my team-mates to try smooth out the rough edges. I can't blame all of the bad luck on the folks who ran the competition, but some of it was BS.

Not everyone can be first through tech, which means that perhaps the event is simply getting too big for the staff. How long should the line be for autocross....or for tech? Why should a car be allowed to run the practice track with an inside wheel lifting and end up rolling? A lot of sketchy stuff went right by, and at the same time, a lot of nicely built stuff, ALA UTA, didn't get a full go of it because they dribbled a bit of oil from their diff. My diff had 2 to 3 ounces of oil in it for the events, and worked great. If it had dripped, WHO CARES? Someone could have been very easily killed by the rolling car, or by the cars that hit the bales on the practice track, and nearly hit the other cars and people in the braking line.

I loved being there, and had an absolute blast, but I must say things could definitely have improved. The lack of communication left all of us wondering, and many of us disappointed. Angry Joe, I know you guys were right behind me in the line for endurance, and had a wild car. Keep up the good work. As I heard way too many times..."that's racing"

[Dick Golembiewski]

I had to think a bit before commenting on the posts here - at least regarding the design event. (I haven't been asked to get involved in a performance event decision since rain hit the 1993 competition.) Some of the comments are understandable if a team is disappointed. However one or two of the posts would not make me favorably disposed to hire the person(s) making them if I was in a position to do so. Lots of folks read things here, including some of your potential employers, so keep that in mind.

As most here know, I've been involved in SAE student activities for over a quarter century. I was a student, safety official, competition organizer, instigator, member and chair of the committee which oversees these competitions. I've also been a faculty advisor - in a couple of different incarnations. Save for 2003, I've been a FSAE design judge since 1999.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>i don't mean to be rude since our judge was very happy to spend well over an hour talking with us on saturday after our endurance run, but i would like to think that every judge there (at least those who focus on suspension) would have a reasonable understanding of the what and why of ackerman (and more just as importantly, anti-ackerman) steering geometry. there's something wrong if students need to explain things like tire scrub and ackerman to the judges. hopefully next year we can better present ourselves for design and be lucky enough to have judges that already understand the underlying principles on which we engineered our car. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't know who you spoke with, but all of the motorsports judges specializing in suspension and chassis (and for the most part, we're the ones wandering around all weekend - even into the wee hours of the night) understand those underlying principals. In fact, this competition is one of the few chances some of us get to sit together and discuss such things. Your message wasn't clear, but it sounds to me like the judge you spoke with disagreed with your design decision re: your Ackerman setting.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Judges wanting to know why having "less weight" is better. Give me a frigging break.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Why is "less weight" better Joe? <grin>

Perhaps they were trying to elicit from you why you did what you did, and what compromises you had to make to get the weight down.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Last year they obviously had counted our car out as a design contender before we even showed up <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If your car was good, it got a fair shot. Guess what? Only 10-20 cars make the design semi-finals each year. Perhaps other cars were better?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> One year of excellent design work sunk because of lack of sleep, which prevented them from feeding the judges the buzzwords they wanted to hear. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

YOUR job is to show up with your car and team prepared to give us your best shot. It is not the design judges fault that you didn't get any sleep. You couldn't designate at least one person to answer questions and have that person well rested? We say this year after year. It is also not just a question of "feeding the design judges the buzzwords they wanted to hear". We quiz you on basic knowledge of vehicle dynamics, mechanical design, etc. We do that because we've had teams show up with cars which are similar to previous years' without any knowledge of why they did what they did. We are coming down harder each year on teams which don't exhibit such understanding.

- Dick

[J Mac]

My main argument with the design judging was that we spent 15 minutes discussing the theory of suspension and nothing about our car. And when we get the sheet back from the judges, there were no comments on what we could of improved on. All it said was neat...clean... and something else. Almost never was a question directed towards any of the design of our actual car which is crazy. I know they are trying to get an idea of our knowledge of the subject, but isn't our car at least partially representative of that? All in all, I was the most dissapointed with the judges lack of feedback, which is key to improving design.

[Dick Golembiewski]

J Mac

You didn't indicate what school you were from.

How to provide feedback is one of the things we struggle with every year. I don't know who was handing out forms, but suspect that it was Jay.

In that first round, we have a 30 minute time slot. In that time period, we have to quiz you. We're also looking at the car as we go along. (I often tell the student group that we're not being rude, but rather that we're just trying to get as much done as we can in the allotted time frame.) The time frame usually means that we have 20 minutes to meet with you, and then allow 5 minutes for any additional questions, etc. We have to allow 5 minutes to make the transition from one car to another, and in that 5 minutes, we have to come up with a score, make some notes, etc. That isn't a lot of time.

If you read Carroll's "Everything You Wanted to Know About Design Judging, but Waited Too Long to Ask", you'll find the following re: the judges not noticing some bit you're proud of:

"It is your responsibility to bring them to the judges' attention."

As well as:

"The teams' opportunities do not end with design judging. For the length of the contest, design judges are wandering the paddock ready and willing to discuss the details of each and every car. This is a priceless learning opportunity that far too many teams fail to take advantage of. The judges will probably not come to you. We are easy to spot. Stop us and ask us to look at your car – we will all enjoy the experience."

I did something re: design judging on the old GT list-serve years ago. Carroll wrote this up a year or so later. It's all still valid, and I am amazed at how many haven't read it - even though it, and the list of terms we expect you to have an understanding of, are all on the SAE website.

- Dick

[Angry Joe]

First, let me clarify that I am an alumni and could not make it to the competition. I work near Lehigh and as such got to see the car come together so I still talk like I'm on the team...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>

Why is "less weight" better Joe? <grin>

Perhaps they were trying to elicit from you why you did what you did, and what compromises you had to make to get the weight down.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

F=ma, F=mv^2/r. Less mass to move around means the car can change direction or speed more quickly given the same inputs. Less unsprung weight means less mass for the suspension to control, less rotational resistance to acceleration and braking. That's elementary physics.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
If your car was good, it got a fair shot. Guess what? Only 10-20 cars make the design semi-finals each year. Perhaps other cars were better?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have no problem with other cars being better. But the judges didn't even seem to try. They did not grill me. There were very few questions that we could not answer to their satisfaction. There was not a single point where we did not demonstrate a clear understanding of the design of the vehicle. If they were truely trying to test us, why did they not challenge the ideas they did not agree with? The concepts we lacked? The compromises we made? It especially irks me because they did poorly this year because they apparently did not demonstrate an understanding of design concepts. Yet my personal experience was the exact opposite.

I am not saying our car should have won design. I am saying they did not seem to care enough to find out if it deserved a chance.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
__YOUR__ job is to show up with your car and team prepared to give us your best shot. It is not the design judges fault that you didn't get any sleep. You couldn't designate at least one person to answer questions and have that person well rested? We say this year after year. It is also not just a question of "feeding the design judges the buzzwords they wanted to hear". We quiz you on basic knowledge of vehicle dynamics, mechanical design, etc. We do that because we've had teams show up with cars which are similar to previous years' without any knowledge of why they did what they did. We are coming down harder each year on teams which don't exhibit such understanding.

- Dick <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Okay, I was starting to get out of control with that comment. However I think it is possible to demonstrate that a design is not copied without getting into such intense nitpicking. If the design is understood, they should be able to explain the compromises in suspension geometry they made for 10" wheels. They shouldn't have to explain why less weight is better.

Sorry for the harshness. I have given them the benefit of the dount for years. But I can't ignore the number of incidents, design related or otherwise in which teams (far more than just ours) were treated with a complete lack of courtesy and respect. If the attitude is so condescending during brake testing, I begin to wonder what goes on in design...

[Dick Golembiewski]

It's hard for me to respond to the last comment, other than to say that the folks I deal with in design are all aware of the thousands of hours which go into these things. In fact, I designed and built cars myself as a student - twice. Nothing has changed in the 25 years since that time.

I've also been involved (as a faculty advisor) in a competition in which the top two places were decided by an event which was improperly run and for which protests were ignored.

I'm out of the performance event loop, and as such don't know what happened. If I did know, I would be sending recommendations for change to the FSAE rules committee and the consortium and not posting them here. (That's protocol for me.)

I do understand that everyone wants to be in the design semi-finals, but the reality is that not everyone can.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Is FSAE becoming a competition for the elite? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This has been debated on and off for the 25 years I've been involved - across all of the student design competitions. The top schools are there for a reason. They are "elite" for a reason. It is within every school's power to get there. Each has advantages, as well as challenges. You'll find that some of the "elite" schools have some of the same problems you do - they've overcome them. Occasionally we find something out of place and have to point it out. (I am in the process of doing that. No, it won't be posted here - see my earlier comments.)

On the other hand, if you have constructive suggestions for improvement, you have a protocol for submitting them through Kathleen. Write up those suggestions and submit them.

- Dick

[andrewd]

wow look at all those angry posts http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

[Angry Joe]

I admit I was out of line. The design judging was probably the area I have the fewest complaints about - however I stand by what I said (except maybe the buzzwords sentence)

I will not edit what I said about the autocross.

[Michael Jones]

Not knowing precisely how design works, I can only offer my suspicions, which are as follows.

1) If you're answering basic questions at any stage, you're probably not in the best position. Dick's comments re: bringing the car's innovative features to the design judge's attention were echoed by Jay O'Connell quoting Carroll Smith during final design review. Part of this is controlling the nature of the conversation by insisting the judges pay attention to what you want them to notice versus, say, getting them to check if you know that F=ma.

2) The judges certainly did notice Lehigh's car, since it was the only one other than the finalists to be noted during final design review. Being radically different, however, is not enough.

3) Indeed, F=ma, but this does not necessarily mean reducing m is the only design criterion. I suspect as Dick suggests that judges are interested in the compromises one necessarily has to make in order to design a complete racecar. Weight reduction is important, but so is reliability, power, dynamic performance, innovation, ergonomics, aesthetics, and perhaps most important, an overall systems philosophy that is consistent and balances these and other factors.

I gathered from Lehigh's group that mass reduction was weighted considerably higher than other factors in many instances. Given that this is a unique approach, it has to be sold more, not less, and it's relatively easy for people to point out limitations of the design outcome that result from such focused attention on weight reduction, barring other considerations (e.g., ensuring by design that no driver over 5'7" could drive the car legally...)

4) I suspect that if Lehigh continues the effort and makes some necessary compromises regarding weight reduction and other necessary factors, a lot of things will fall into place. Innovation of this magnitude is appreciated I think, but it's also ridiculously hard to pull off in a year. There's no way in hell we could come up with a 300lb. car in the course of a night that would meet our other goals, nor would we try. Even less difficult systems innovations (e.g., electronic wastegate) took a couple of years to get to prime time. I'm sure with time and thought, Lehigh can field a 350lb. car that's more robust overall and could be a real contender in both static and dynamic events. I hope you guys give that a shot - I loved the car and it was a real shame it didn't get a chance to run out there. Jay O'Connell absolutely would love to see a new version of it return - I talked to him briefly Saturday and he was very impressed with the effort.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> The top schools are there for a reason. They are "elite" for a reason. It is within every school's power to get there. Each has advantages, as well as challenges. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Agreed on all fronts. Our biggest advantage is that we know how what it takes to win the competition, since we've done so a few times now, and are insanely well organized towards the realization of that goal.

I strongly suspected we wouldn't and Wollongong would last year based on our own team dynamics and what I heard from talking to Fergus here for the same reason - we got off track, and they were really on the ball.

Didn't want to jinx ourselves this year before, but I figured we had a great deal of promise this year, and we delivered on that promise. Simple as that.

That noted, none of this is immutable - I think more and more teams either know or are rapidly figuring out how to do it, and I suspect that future competitions will be considerably tight with more and more schools with an odds on chance at winning overall.

I suspect as well that we'll again forget how to do it, but I wouldn't hold your breath on that next year - we're only losing about 40% of the team and regaining a few old team members due to MEng. and returning from years off...On paper at least, it should be a strong group - my only concern is that there's a number of former leaders in that group and could create issues in leadership as people figure out their roles and responsibilities. Of course, I'm making notes on this as I head out the door so that they can hopefully take care of this potential issue before it becomes an actual problem.

On the rest of the competition, I agree that it was a bit chaotic - right from early staging, you knew something was amiss. Claiming paddocks was confusing as all hell, the new track was way too fast, the staging of all the noisy events right next to the road and across the street from houses made no sense, and yes, the autocross timing issues were kind of random. Growing pains in the new location, most of it.

And the freaking weather of course. You'd think after four competitions I'd at least be able to claim one 4-day period without getting waterlogged at one point or another. Nope.

At least it was warm this time.

[SeanZasada]

Dick,

In a previous thread, you had offered to provide some feedback on the design reports. My team had a hectic schedule on Friday and Saturday (like everyone else scrambling to cope with the weather) and we don't know if any design judges came by to offer feedback on our team's design event showing, or on our design report.

Is there any chance to still get feedback on either subject?

Thanks,
Car #101

[Dr Katz]

Is it like this every year?

Yes, we put in a shitload of time into our car as well. Guess what? We didn't win. Just because you might expect something to happen doesn't necessarily mean it will. What we just went to was a competition, not fantasyland.

Things happen. The teams that are best prepared for everything have the best chance of winning. For example, If Lehigh had another set of wheels that they could have their rain tires mounted on, perhaps they wouldnt need hoosier.

Also, the rollover was not the fault of the technical inspection people. Based on their protocol, we passed. So it is the protocol which will probably end up changing in next year's rules. Sorry guys

[fsae_alum]

Dr. Katz, I fully agree with you. This year, and every year, there is only one winner and approximately 130 people who didn't win. I too agree that if you're not ready, then you shouldn't be there. IMO, if you haven't tested your car into the ground and it's not spot on 100% perfect within the rules, then don't be upset when the judges unload 2 rounds on you and then continue to reload. I think that most people see that too. However, I think the thorn in the sides of most people is "lack of organization" and "lack of fairness" that some are seeing and being subjected to.

By the way, I don't want anybody to construe my opinions as those of any university that hails from the San Antonio area. Being that I am alumni, I am speaking solely for myself and on behalf of nobody else.

[Stephen Soroosh]

Dick,
I would also like some feedback on the pre-design report. You emphasized how important it was several months ago and now that you have read ours and others it would be nice to hear what we did right and what we did wrong. Also, Jay didn't have any design sheets to give to our team after the design competition. He reviewed our car with us on Saturday but we weren't given any written feedback from the design competition. Who should we contact to try to get those sheets?

Also...on another note...for all those that seemed dissapointed by their design results I want to remind you that the design event is only 10% of the whole competition. I remember in 2000 I think it was when the design judges litterally laughed Texas A&M out of the design tent only to have Texas A&M come back and spank everyone in all the dynamic events and win the whole thing. So...the best way to get back at the judges for not noticing or giving your design due attention is to show them on the track that you have the best desig. We were dissapointed with our design score but we just didn't do a very good job presenting our car. Granted...we don't have $1000 to spend on glitzy poster boards but we could do a better job presenting our vehicle and that is what we attribute our design score to.

Finally...another question for Dick...why is 500lbs so critical in the design tent? Sure, its usually better to reduce weight but perhaps not on these cars. When we did skid pad testing, the more weight we added the faster the car went around the skid pad. It seems that the tires we have in this competition (since they never really get to operating temperature) can use all the added normal force they can get. And when your talking about changing your power to weight ratio from 8.75lbs/1hp with a 525lb car to 7.9lbs/1hp with a 475lb car assuming 60hp, your looking at a very small gain for a large incrase in the normal force on the tires and generally a large increase in the robustness of the vehicle. Frictionaly force is equal to Mu*Normal Force. Since Mu is fixed based on the tire then the only way to get better tire forces is to increase the normal force. Sure, you can do this with weight transfer but that is only transient. Anyway, I'm just curious why its such a big deal to be under 500lb if being over has a few advantages of its own.

[Angry Joe]

My issue is not with the performance of the car, nor is it that I think we should have placed well (I did not expect to). The issue is the treatment of teams by the organizers and the general "tough shit" attitude that occurs repeatedly.

When you have one chance to prove yourself, what went on at competition becomes absolutely infuriating.

[Bert15]

"Okay....how come every SCCA race I've ever been to has NEVER been as screwed up as any of the FSAE events I've either attended or read about? I know that the local Detroit region SCCA works at the comp, but I guess my question is, should they be running all the dynamic events too?

You're asking an awful lot to expect anyone - even SCCA - to run the LARGEST single class racing event IN THE WORLD flawlessly when weather becomes a factor. Were the top 10 finishers the best 10 cars in Pontiac? Maybe, maybe not. Were the best 3-4 teams reflected in the top 10? ABSOLUTLEY!

This is about LEARNING, not just winning. What I am learning is there are some people from Lehigh and elsewhere based on the comments I'm reading that I wouldn't hire if they paid ME.

Support the event, make constructive criticisms, and prepare for next year. Life is never fair. This event is special and it's no coincidence that some teams do well almost every year. Go FSAE!

[Dick Golembiewski]

Sean and Stephen,

I'd be happy to.

Give me your email addresses and I'll pass something along.

Give me up to a few days.

- Dick

[Dick Golembiewski]

Stephen,

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Finally...another question for Dick...why is 500lbs so critical in the design tent? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Years ago, when I chaired the SAE Student design Competitions committee (I don't recall if I had broken things out into individual subcommittees for each type of competition yet.), Carroll came to me with the idea of having a maximum weight as a way to sift through the cars. I concur. The is no reason why a team can't get the car under 500#.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> I remember in 2000 I think it was when the design judges litterally laughed Texas A&M out of the design tent only to have Texas A&M come back and spank everyone in all the dynamic events and win the whole thing. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not quite. A&M was NOT "laughed out of the design tent". As I recall (and I can check the results to confirm) they were in the top tier of cars which didn't make the finals - only under the handful that did, and better than the vast majority of cars at the competition.

Also, they didn't "spank everyone in all the dynamic events". What they did do was to run well in all of them. All of "the usual suspects" suffered silly failures in the endurance event, while A&M finished. There's a lesson there.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> So...the best way to get back at the judges for not noticing or giving your design due attention is to show them on the track that you have the best design. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The last time I looked, we were all human. We just happen to have a bunch of motorsports experience. (In my case, also a lot of SAE student design competitions experience as well.) I usually tell students something similar - although not in the context of "getting back" at the design judges!

It's always nice when schools which do well in design also do well in the dynamic events. Occasionally we get complaints about why someone didn't advance further in the design judging, and it's always nice when the school which did performs better. It happens a lot, which should tell you something.


- Dick

[mtg]

Dick,
I would also appreciate some feedback for the University of Missouri - Rolla.
I was looking for you and Pat Clarke, but didn't see either in Pontiac.

mtg7aa @ umr.edu

Thanks,
Matt Giaraffa

[Mike Shaw]

My complaints:

Rant #1
---------
allow the suspension guys and/or drivers to walk the autox and enduro courses at least 12 hours in advance of the race so we can see what kind of course to set our car up for.

for the 5 weeks we have been running 7/8" ground clearance based on our home track and the past competition. this year's track was much bumpier, resulting in bottoming out on the autox 2nd run and losing traction. our best driver spun out, costing a 40 sec run in the autox and the top time and a top start in enduro.

we increased our ground clearance by 5/16", which was perfect for enduro.

Rant #2
--------
if a team hits 4 cones after their autox run, and fails to turn in the truth until after the eduro event, you should still deduct those points to accurately show how a team did in autox and in the final score.

i wont names, we should be 3rd in autox and should have gotten 4 free hoosier tires, and we should be only 20 points behind cornell for 2nd place.

Rant #3
--------
the weather, which SAE cant control. i thought they handled the events smoothly, and i'm glad they let the top heat run 2nd for endurance.

MOVE FSAE BACK TO TEXAS LIKE IT USED TO BE. what's teh weather like right now?

SUNNY, DRY, and 90 deg with not a cloud in the sky...

I LOVE TEXAS, GOOD TO BE BACK HOME IN SAN ANTONE http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Overall Feelings
----------------
2004 FSAE was a success, and i enjoyed every minute of it.

[Bert15]

Matt - Will be interested to see judge's comments. UMR had a beautiful car that scored pretty well across the board. Glad to see you guys back near the top again! Congrats on a strong showing & good luck next event.

Bert 15

[SeanZasada]

Thank you Dick

Myself and the rest of my team look forward to hearing from you.

my email is SZasada@shaw.ca
Car #101

[Michael Jones]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> if a team hits 4 cones after their autox run, and fails to turn in the truth until after the eduro event, you should still deduct those points to accurately show how a team did in autox and in the final score.

i wont names, we should be 3rd in autox and should have gotten 4 free hoosier tires, and we should be only 20 points behind cornell for 2nd place.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I won't name names either, but I will note that the team in question actually complained against itself during the protest window early Saturday. And resubmitted said protest Sunday when the first was misplaced. The team in question was quite adamant that they didn't want points awarded by virtue of random screwup.

The team's request for self-penalization was denied due to lack of evidence - the competition records matched the posted scores in the end.

Why this was is anyone's guess. That's racing, I suppose.

[RiNaZ]

Ive been to FSAE competition for the past 3 years now (only as an observer) and i must say that the event is getting bigger and bigger every year.

Not only do you have hundreds of competitors there, you also have hundreds of spectators and observers just like me.

And i have to say, it's not an easy job making everybody happy. So ... a big applause for the judges and volunteers at FSAE this year. I know things could be better but ... you guys deserve a pat in the back.

[altendky]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Dick Golembiewski:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>i don't mean to be rude since our judge was very happy to spend well over an hour talking with us on saturday after our endurance run, but i would like to think that every judge there (at least those who focus on suspension) would have a reasonable understanding of the what and why of ackerman (and more just as importantly, anti-ackerman) steering geometry. there's something wrong if students need to explain things like tire scrub and ackerman to the judges. hopefully next year we can better present ourselves for design and be lucky enough to have judges that already understand the underlying principles on which we engineered our car. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't know who you spoke with, but all of the motorsports judges specializing in suspension and chassis (and for the most part, we're the ones wandering around all weekend - even into the wee hours of the night) understand those underlying principals. In fact, this competition is one of the few chances some of us get to sit together and discuss such things. Your message wasn't clear, but it sounds to me like the judge you spoke with disagreed with your design decision re: your Ackerman setting.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

the judge said that he had heard of anti-ackerman steering, but did not 'get it' (can't remember the exact word, but i believe that is representative). also, when i quoted our work in mitchell suspension software regarding various geometry numbers (bump steer, etc.), he commented on computers having bugs and simply wanted those values measured. just to make it clear, i realize that it is our responsibility to bring proof of our design (both analytical and physical) to competition. on the other hand, this is 2004 and programs such as racing by the numbers (which has some bugs, but has been in development since 1985 i believe) are invaluable to design and should be trusted to some degree.

btw, to answer the question re: why is less weight good... a tire's coefficient of friction decreases with increasing load. the net force may go up, but overall the lateral force becomes less 'efficient' per down-load. thus, a lighter car will have a higher lateral force capability to weight ratio for all other variables equal. of course, during acceleration you not only can put down more force per weight, but simply need less power for the same acceleration. this decreasing tire efficiency is the reason that weight transfer (due to cg height) is bad during cornering and braking since all tires are used to apply the forces.

one last note, it sounds as if we can get commentary on our design reports. i would very much appreciate some commentary for the following report:

Oregon State University
Car #054

altendok @ onid.orst.edu


thanks to Dick for not only taking interest in our discussion, but continuing to converse with us.

[Michael Jones]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> btw, to answer the question re: why is less weight good... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not saying it isn't of course - just that there's a tradeoff between weight and everything else you have to worry about. There is certainly a question of balancing mass reduction with reliability, ergonomics, powertrain necessities, suspension and vehicle dynamics requirements, aesthetics, etc.

What that balance is is the question, and if you come up with something radically outside the bounds of the expected, great, but expect to defend it big time and prove it works as good or better in the end.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Thanks to Dick for not only taking interest in our discussion, but continuing to converse with us. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ditto, and I apologize for not getting a chance to catch up with you personally when I was around. Did see you there, then ran over to talk to U of Alberta re: cost report stuff, and by the time I got back, you had moved on. And I assume you'd had tried the night before, since I heard someone vaguely resembling a design judge was trying to track me down.

Thanks much for the feedback all the same - hopefully I'll have more free time next year as a visiting alumni. http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[Dick Golembiewski]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Thanks to Dick for not only taking interest in our discussion, but continuing to converse with us. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Remember folks, that I've been involved with these things for over 25 years now. I've seen/heard more than this! I understand disappointment - been there myself. Cooler heads usually prevail.

There are things I can't comment on here, but where I can I will continue to do so, in the spirit of helping folks go through things I did 'lo those many years ago!

- Dick

[Charlie]

I agree, SAE screwed us all again this year. *EDIT: sarcasm*

The practice area was so small it was impossible to miss the hay bales. Proof of that is that every single car that visited the practice area crashed except for one. And then the workers didn't push it into the hay bales like they should have, to be fair to the others.

Hoosier refused to mount tires of teams that they didn't like, in an effort to destroy thier efforts. We were lucky enough that they mounted ours, but 28 other teams were forced to go home.

SAE stopped the autocross event for weather purposes with smug smiles, as they all knew they were doing it just to sway the results. Imagine thier suprise when it actually did pour and the wind turned over tents. It was a good co-incidence on thier part.

http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Lets face it, THE SAE PEOPLE ARE NOT TRYING TO SCREW ANYONE, they make mistakes but to attack the event like this in my opinion is a terrible thing to do.

Think for just a minute, that a driver has control of a car that crashes into hay bales? (We did it in 2002). Or that Hoosier cannot mount 8" tires and guarantee they won't mess up your wheels? I know that if they bent your wheels there'd be bitching galore again.

[Angry Joe]

1) Hoosier mounter the tires in about 10 minutes the next day without any problem. Goodyear tried to mount them to their credit, but could not. Hoosier simply refused to do so.

2) Is it that hard to close the autocross when it was scheduled to do so? Or declare the course 'dry' when it is DRY? These are not unreasonable requests.

For the last time: Our team's performance was 90% its own fault. I am not saying the organizers took the car and heartlessly booted it from first place to 104th.

I feel that decisions were made (or not made) that defy any logic that I can come up with. When we complain we get the attitude "you're lucky you have a competition at all, you spoiled brat"

[ben]

I think we got 87th I believe. Kind of crap seeing as we made design semi (12th) and got 25th in cost. Just didn't do it on the track.

Our engine decided to destroy an injector, two rectifiers and two 4/2 pnuematic valves. We were chasing our tails from there and never recovered. Motivation ain't going to be an issue for July.

I can't really comment on the event as a whole because everyone on the team was new to FSAE. Some things were better than FStudent but some weren't. Better official announcements during the storm would have been good though.

Overall we had a great time and I'd like to hijack the thread for a few thankyous;

Oliver Kho and Cal Poly Pomona for the extinguishers, CO2, and projector for presentation. We wouldn't have had a hope without them.

Geoff and Adam from Binghampton for the free beer - hope you guys get a team together for '05.

Oxford Brookes for an entertaining evening in Big Bucks, we have some good pics :-)

Dartmouth for saying Hi! Let me now what you're doing for FStudent.

Ben

[Ben Beacock]

A few -ves

1) Design Judging.
We had 8 design judges asking questions. in response we had one for ergonomics, one for the intake/exhaust, another to cover brakes. That left me with suspension, drivetrain, chassis, engine controller. I think we'll be better prepared next time, since I won't be doing all the designing again. But we still don't have that many people to cover all the judges.

2) Paddock layout.
We showed up mid-afternoon on wednesday and were almost the farthest away from everything. It must have been a full km to the skidpad event. They also needed an entrance near the brake test, since we had to go way out of the way to get there. I'll admit we lifted the fence to get out once, and it probably saved 15mins of pushing.

If someone starts a Best Pontiac Event Ever post, i'd probably have a few for that too.

[Bert15]

"I agree, SAE screwed us all again this year"

Kind of an odd coment from a third place finisher? I can see from the posts that the maturity level of college guys varies quite a bit. Most are impressive, but I'm really surprised at Charlie and Auburn's potshots, given their good results. By the way Charlie - I think I saw about 8-10 cars actually use the practice track -yes it was small, but where is the practice track at Indy?

I loved the comment about the "Best Pontiac event ever" thread! I know it's human nature, but you'll never see that one. The weather screwed SAE - let's tell it like it is. Those teams that got their cars done early and tested, then came to Pontiac prepared to win generally did well.

It's a shame that the world - and in particular the U.S. has become a place in which people who do not do their best immediately look for someone else to blame. I applaud each of the teams for getting there and learning. I also applaud SAE, the SCCA, and all of the volunteers for doing their best - they learned too. They had terrible conditions and a lot of cars to deal with - cut them some slack, will you?

If you want to kill a good thing, just keep crying about the little stuff in a public forum like this one.

[Brent Howard]

Bert,

Might want to read all of Charlies post..

[alfordda]

Bert, take another look at Charlie's post. I think you and he are on the same page here.

Everyone really needs to quit complaining. There are a lot of people out here reading these forums, and it looks poorly upon yourself as well as your team to act this way. Let's face it there are sponsors and potential employers reading this stuff. If you noticed a problem with the event, why not write a respectful letter to SAE, with suggestions on how to fix the problem.

Dan

[RagingGrandpa]

I am a firm believer that FSAE Competition results are NOT the reason I and many others like me spend thousands of hours each year working on this project. I do not expect things to work out perfectly. In 2003, our team got hurt by weather badly in acceleration, and many people were very angry after that. But then endurance came along and we broke a part. OUR FAULT. No finger pointing necessary.

In 2004 however, we had a solid vehicle that ran flawlessly on the track, and did well in Design. Procedural improvements, even with the bad weather, WOULD have made a significant difference in our finish, as well as for many other teams. While competition does not define my personal experience with FSAE, I feel it would be irresponsible to not raise legitimate concerns about the way the event is conducted. I do not expect SAE to be able to control the weather, but they also should continue to strive to make it as level of a playing field possible. Establishing transparent event policies and procedures and strictly adhereing to them is not an unreasonable request, and is an area where improvement is warranted. Things happened other than rain at 2004 that need to be brought up as legitimate concerns that CAN be practically addressed.

While I recognise the needs of some of the people here to vent their frustration, the point of this thread was to voice legitimate concerns that affect more than the finishing position of just your team. I have great respect for the people at SAE who put on this event -it's a huge job!- and I sincerely hope they will be able to look past the profanity and ranting in this thread and think about how the event can better meet everyone's needs.

[RiNaZ]

Nicely put http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[Sam Zimmerman]

Quit whining, nut up, and learn from your mistakes.

If you didn't run in the dry, you should have been in line earlier. We all knew rain was coming.

If you didn't get your tires mounted, it was your decision not to come to the competition with both sets mounted.

If you didn't impress your particular judge, ask him why. I only got 2 or 3 questions from the power train judges that I spoke with. This gave me even more time to point out all the analysis and unique features with our design. We didn't make it into the semi's because we weren't quite there, in the judge's opinions.

The bottom line is that everybody at the competition is there by choice. The judges, course workers, tech inspectors, etc. are there, for the most part, because they want to contribute to what I consider the best collegiate design competition around. If you want to bitch and moan rather than suggesting improvements, don't show up next year. I am sure that these people are giving up their time for the students who choose to appreciate it and learn from it.

BTW, thanks to all event organizers, volunteers, and participants. What a great event.

[karter11]

As a CURRENT Lehigh FSAE team member, and one who attended competition this year, I would like to clarify a few things.

First, we as a team are not anrgy with what happened or at sae officials. If anything we are both dissapointed at some things, but overall very excited at what we saw out of our car. Our limited running during competition showed us that our car is indeed quick, in fact very quick, and next year we can only be quicker and MUCH more reliable. So competition showed us some very promising things.

As for dissapointments, judges telling us that one rear wheel locked and the other didn't, making us wait till the next morning to try braking again, in which an overlook by us allowed the car to bottom out and shear a rod end, ultimately making us miss both accelerationa dn skidpad. This was no ones fault but LEHIGH'S. As for autocross, we as a team did not have the funding to have 2 sets of wheels, especially since this was the first time we ran 10 inch wheels EVER. so the fact that both hoosier and goodyear left early is not very representative of their companies. another thing, after we spent quite a while mounting our rain tires BY HAND, we finished at 6:45. Autocross was supposed to end at 7, instead it was ended at 6:30 despite our pleas to let us run.

But overall, lehigh doesn't have a bad taste in our mouths, we walked away from competition very happy, and excited about completing next years car which we hope will make a MUCH better showing. Don't let one ALUMNI of lehigh represent the entire lehigh fsae team, because untill now, none of us have even spoken about the event.

I know I, among others on the team, had an absolute blast at competition, and was overly excited just to be there. GO FSAE, and good luck to everyone in the upcoming year!

[Michael Jones]

I'm still bummed that Lehigh's car didn't go - like WWU's V8 in 2001, it's one of those things that any decent competitor want to see go, just to see what would happen.

I'm still not wholly convinced it's the right overall strategy, but an iteration of it certainly could be. Jay O'Connell's convinced of it at least...it's worth a shot. I hope Lehigh works on it and comes back to surprise us all.

And by "surprise us all" I mean everyone save us. http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[Bert15]

Good post Karter. May Dad's a Lehigh guy (from Waaaaay back), so I'm hoping you guys come back strong in '05!

[Stephen Soroosh]

Dick,

Thanks for the corrections, 2000 was a long time ago and I stand corrected but I also stand by my point...you must do well in the dynamic events. All else aside we are building racecars that must go fast. If it goes fast then it will win awards.

Also, I would be very appreciative of any feedback on pre-design reports. My email address is NOSPAM_ssoroosh98@ou.edu. I'm with the University of Oklahoma and our vehicle number was #79.

All in all, over the past 6 years of SAE I have learned things in SAE that I couldn't have learned anywhere else and I'm very thankful for the opportunity. One change that we will be making for next years team is to take advantage of OU's world renound meteorology program and actually bring a satellite uplink to OU's Doppler radar and a meteorology grad student to predict the weather more accurately so we can get in line early or late depending on what the sky is going to do.

Dick, thanks for your years of service to SAE and perhaps some day I'll be up there with you reading design reports and judging vehicles. Everyone else...if you haven't started on your 2005 vehicle then you're already behind...quite your complaining and get back to the grind stone over the summer while you have time. Learn from your mistakes, don't repeat them and come back next year faster and smarter.

~Stephen Soroosh
University of Oklahoma
President 2003-2004

[Mike Shaw]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Ben Beacock:
A few -ves

2) Paddock layout.
We showed up mid-afternoon on wednesday and were almost the farthest away from everything. It must have been a full km to the skidpad event. They also needed an entrance near the brake test, since we had to go way out of the way to get there. I'll admit we lifted the fence to get out once, and it probably saved 15mins of pushing.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

We were much further, trust me http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Personally, i enjoyed being further out and having lots of space. We weren't crammed in a 20'X40' square, we could play football, we had close parking spots to our trailer. The only negatives: pushing our car long distances and feeling like the "Motor Trike" outsiders. A few people still ventured over to hang out with us. Thanks, y'all!

Rant #4
---------
Design Semi-finals lasted till 12:30 am! since we had to set up the car for Autox (which takes ~3 hours), we got little sleep that night.

Yall need to start / finish semi-finals earlier. One of our drivers was presenting in semi's, meaning he got little sleep. Sleepy drivers = unalert drivers = bad drivers.

[kleetuz]

This was my first time attending the FSAE Competition and I was amazed at how much help is recieved from individuals who are just enthusiastic about the event. I thank all the scca members for their help and participation, but I was very unimpressed by some in their attention to what was going on during events. Our driver hit a cone on the first skidpad lap and the two course workers were looking across the parking lot, when she came around again it was in the middle of the course and it got lodged in our a-arm, she slowed down to stop and was instructed to finish her run with the cone jammed in the a-arm.

I also hated the practice paddock, it was ridiculous, it could at least have been square, it was almost no help at all. And, why not have two areas? perhaps two braking areas? I mean really they are not that big and I saw a lot of people just standing around doing nothing.

I can't even believe the surface the courses were run on, there were huge holes and cracks everywhere, the only thing that made up for it was the course and the fact that the lot provides excellent grip, though I did like the fact that it wasn't just a level surface, but the potholes sucked.

My suggestion, make a lot specifically for the FSAE competition, its the same thing every year right? Have paddock spaces lined up, a standard place for noise, braking, practice, skidpad, acceleration events and a large enough space with good pavement to make autocross and endurance courses...

I also would suggest setting up a My-Chron beacon at the start/finish of the courses since there seemed to be a good number of teams using the My-Chron instrumentation.

Yes there are many many things that can be fixed at it would start by running the event more organized and meeting the scheduled times for events. Overall though I had a great time meeting all the other schools and looking at all the different designs there are out there. Its an awesome experience.

[Mad Ruska]

Was this the worst FSAE event in Detroit ever? I can´t confirm, because this was my first one in Detroit. And i think you can´t compare with UK or Australia, manage 50 cars or 20 cars is different to 140 cars. But what we learned in UK the last years:

Be prepaired for everything!

I really enjoy this event!
Nice to see the last car i worked on Car #114 from Stralsund so good running.9th in Skidpad and 9th fastest time in Enduro before (WIth a 582 lbs car) they gave us 6 x Offcourse, what we can´t understand, because our video shows no offcourse @all. But our run was very tricky '8 lost a wheel and other cars spining around. So in the whole trouble the Marshalls also could make mistakes, like us students during design and building the cars. It is sad that we lose over 50 points by these, but our happienes is bigger because we finish in the TOP 20!

Hope to see a lot of you in Uk this year,and

KEEP ON RUNNING!

And thanks again to the people of SVSU for suporting us. Was nice to meet you!

Frank

[Mike Shaw]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by kleetuz:
This was my first time attending the FSAE Competition and I was amazed at how much help is recieved from individuals who are just enthusiastic about the event. I thank all the scca members for their help and participation, but I was very unimpressed by some in their attention to what was going on during events. Our driver hit a cone on the first skidpad lap and the two course workers were looking across the parking lot, when she came around again it was in the middle of the course and it got lodged in our a-arm, she slowed down to stop and was instructed to finish her run with the cone jammed in the a-arm.

I also hated the practice paddock, it was ridiculous, it could at least have been square, it was almost no help at all. And, why not have two areas? perhaps two braking areas? I mean really they are not that big and I saw a lot of people just standing around doing nothing.

I can't even believe the surface the courses were run on, there were huge holes and cracks everywhere, the only thing that made up for it was the course and the fact that the lot provides excellent grip, though I did like the fact that it wasn't just a level surface, but the potholes sucked.

My suggestion, make a lot specifically for the FSAE competition, its the same thing every year right? Have paddock spaces lined up, a standard place for noise, braking, practice, skidpad, acceleration events and a large enough space with good pavement to make autocross and endurance courses...

I also would suggest setting up a My-Chron beacon at the start/finish of the courses since there seemed to be a good number of teams using the My-Chron instrumentation.

Yes there are many many things that can be fixed at it would start by running the event more organized and meeting the scheduled times for events. Overall though I had a great time meeting all the other schools and looking at all the different designs there are out there. Its an awesome experience. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

fellow RX-7 FC S4 TII owner? good to see. you on any rotary forums? i'm on nopistons.com, screen name RX7Aggie

[JPaolicchi]

Autocross Event Organization

Hi all, I was the SAE autocross event captian for this FSAE 2004. I am certianly willing to discuss with anyone how the event was run and what improvements can be made.

Firstly, I would like to respond to some comments.

Regarding the 6:30 end to the autocross event. Please note that the schedule states that the event ends a 5:00. We extended this time by 1.5 hours as a special case because of the rain. It would take a long time to explain, but it was difficult to make this happen and was a personal sacrifice by many volinteers. I have heard two students comment that the event was supposed to continue to 7:00. I am curious to know were this information came from. Because we had never run the autocoss in the rain, we had no idea how long it would take. I did not give an ending time during the 4:30 driver's meeting.

Regarding the wet/dry status of the track: I was on the track at 6:30 and I considered changing the status from wet to damp. However, I saw two or three areas on the track with streams of water. Further, if we would have changed the track condition, all of the teams would have gotten out of line to change their tires. Since we were on borrowed time, this would have been a disaster. The volinteers would have mutinied on me.

Also, the Pontiac Silverdome demanded SAE close down the autocross event because of the storm. The SCCA and SAE had no say in the matter. So don't blame us! The SCCA and I wanted to keep running.

I regret to say that (5) teams were allowed to run 2nd drivers in the dry. This was a mistake due to miscommunication between myself and the volinteers.

In general, the ever increasing size of the competition and the new location caused difficulties for us this year. I believe it was the first "wet" autocross. I know we can do better next time. The one big problem I can see is that it was very difficult to communicate to everyone during the rain period and when the event was running. I don't know how to fix this. During the event, I believed that all of available cars were at dynamic area.

Regards,
Joe

[Denny Trimble]

Joe,
It was a difficult situation to be in, and as somebody who's run a few autocrosses myself, I feel your pain http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Thanks for all the effort you put into the event!

-Denny Trimble

[Sam Zimmerman]

Joe,

Thank you for your work and for the willingness to discuss potential improvements. Hopefully everybody has an understanding that it takes a Herculean effort by all the event organizers and volunteers just to pull this event off. To expect the event to run without any hiccups, especially with Mother Nature weighing in, would be ridiculous.

As an area of improvement: The autocross course workers do not seem to be as aggressive with the red flags as they should be. Last year, I missed one red flag because the course worker was so far from the course. This year our team ended up rather close to a spinout before being red flagged. There must be a way to instantly communicate to the course workers when a car is stopped ahead and I would rather the autocross course workers are a little too quick with the red flag then to be a little to slow. They can always give a team another re-run.

Once again, thank you for everything you and your course workers do. It is a shame that your post had to be somewhat defensive in nature due to the offensive tone of a few.

[Charlie]

Joe-

The event had problems. They were well discuused here and by yourself. Take solice in the fact that out of all the hundreds of students in attendance, you only got chastised by someone who was not even THERE!

Thanks for a great effort, the circumstances were tough and we owe our team's existance to the volunteers for sure.

[Bert15]

To the suggestion that there should be a special FSAE track with a perfect surface... and I don't intend for my answer to sound smarta##... if you walk almost any racetrack in the world you'd find cracks and lumps and bumps. Part of the challenge is designing a car that can win in real-world situations.

If a smooth surface were the hallmark of all famous tracks LeMans, Darlington (US) and Sebring (yikes!) would never run them. If you master these tracks, though - you da man!

...That and the fact that it would cost about $50,000 to build even a large parking lot!

I would agree that the practice track this year was too small. Not that you should actually NEED a practice track, but if FSAE is going to have one make it decent size.

[Dick Golembiewski]

There was a rather famous incident some years (15-20) back at either Long Beach or Detroit, when F1 ran there. All of the teams were complaining about a particular bump in the track. The Late Ken Tyrell cut off the discussion by saying:

"So there's a bump! Surely of all the people in the world, we should be able to deal with it!"

- Dick

[RagingGrandpa]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JPaolicchi:
Hi all, I was the SAE autocross event captian for this FSAE 2004...
Regards,
Joe <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Thanks for giving us the insider's perspective, I really appreciate you taking the competitors seriously.

[B.K.]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bert15:
I would agree that the practice track this year was too small. Not that you should actually NEED a practice track, but if FSAE is going to have one make it decent size. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If you don't need a practice track, you are doing one or more of the following:

1) Running the same suspension setup for every event, which sounds sub optimal to me (but I wasn't a suspension guy...).

2) Making suspension changes blindly at a track you've never driven the car on, based on data from the asphalt back at school, without checking how the car feels, which sounds silly to me.

3) Driving a car that is always perfectly set up, never needs to be adjusted, and cannot be improved, which sounds unlikely to me.

4) Running your events without "shaking-in" the car, listening for rattles, making sure it feels right, checking leaks before the endurance, etc.

Even a small practice track where you can run some circles is invaluable.

Watch the top teams and their use of the practice area and I think you'll agree there's nothing embarassing about "needing" the practice track.

[mtg]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JPaolicchi:
Autocross Event Organization

Hi all, I was the SAE autocross event captian for this FSAE 2004. I am certianly willing to discuss with anyone how the event was run and what improvements can be made.


In general, the ever increasing size of the competition and the new location caused difficulties for us this year. I believe it was the first "wet" autocross. I know we can do better next time. The one big problem I can see is that it was very difficult to communicate to everyone during the rain period and when the event was running. I don't know how to fix this. During the event, I believed that all of available cars were at dynamic area.

Regards,
Joe <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Joe,
I was pleasantly surprised to see the autocross course this year- it resembled an actual SCCA course with quite a few places where good strategy could pay off nicely.
Good job on the course! It was fast, fun, safe, and not many cones were hit.

[RagingGrandpa]

2005 Update-

Others will have opinions too I'm sure, but I had no complaints with the way the event was run this year. Thanks to everyone that helped make this happen!

Great weather for dynamic events never hurts, clearly, made for a great last blast at the Silverdome site, which should be rubble by this time next year. Hopefully 2006 goes as smoothly!

-RG