Thanks for capturing all of Kettering's highs on Saturday, Randy! I'll be emailing you shortly.
Printable View
Thanks for capturing all of Kettering's highs on Saturday, Randy! I'll be emailing you shortly.
I think that (at least in FSG) the judges are looking at the procedure you have used to make your engineering decision more compared to the final design (of course you don't want to make basic design mistakes). What I mean is the method you have used is important, and how you have used your tools and datas to make the decisions. In my experience the winning team is operating as a group of engineers and not as a group of hobby people in a garage.Quote:
Originally posted by Tinomik:
A car's design should also be judged if it meets the basic requirements of the competition.
...
What if i show up with a car designed for non-FSAE but real world tracks, because i decide that that is my market?
So if the "market" is a FSAE-Track autocross, i assume doing well in dynamics somewhat proves one's design. Or at least portrays how it meets some requirements. Cause if I bring just data to prove my design, it might as well be wrong data, that were hand picked.
...
But a good design should include not only manufacturability, but the fact that a student machines/makes it. No? Am i wrong?
...
Maybe it is a good practice to machine yourself in the workshop, but for me I go to engineering university to learn engineering and not to become a mechanic in a workshop... I don't think the Airbus engineers are building the CFK wings themself just to prove to that it is easy to make?
I do, but (!), in my opinion, GFR always had one of the most sophisticated analysis I've ever seen. I watched their presentation at the FSG Workshop in the fall of 2011 and visited there shop in Germany in the spring of 2012 and what I saw was really nice. A lot of data, a lot of analysis. But still the "failed" in Design in FSA and FSG. According to their team they got scored down because the car was simply "the same" as in 2011 and the judges in Europe didn't like this. Maybe the US-judges look above this point but if you come to an European competition with a "nearly" 2nd year car, you won't score high in design.Quote:
Originally posted by jpusb:
Maybe between FSG 2012 and FSAE MIS 2013 some teams have worked harder than others on the data gathering, testing, and so on and maybe that is what the MIS design finals show.
I think you get my point.
But maybe GFR will prove my theory wrong and score high again in design.
Yes, Tobias, I know that FSAE is always awesome but after four years of watching the competition, I think at least I will see the best one so far http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
One thing to note, the process for Design changed this year. They essentially adopted the FSG model, with a preliminary round on static day and a final round at the end of first day dynamic. The previous model had three rounds, with finals after endurance. So this year the judges made their decisions after autocross but before endurance.Quote:
Originally posted by Kevin Hayward:
Quite a special design result. In the last 20 years only three teams have managed to win design in Michigan and not finish endurance:
1999: Leeds with what was a landmark car with what was at the time unique composite construction
2000: RIT with the first really well built minimalist car
2013: GFR with a development of their current concept
GFR has taken out the last 4 years in the design tent, clearly showing they have a mastery of the event. The 2013 comp was well and truly decided in the design tent with the top 5 placings within the score margin awarded between design finalists.
Kev
Stuttgart's position in Design impacted their overall position only because they ran the entire endurance in the wet. Had they run in the dry like Akron, Tallin, Laval and Cornell, their margin would have been much larger. My congratulations to them for an excellent performance.
ETS also had an outstanding performance in endurance given they ran mostly in the wet. My condolences to Auburn, who easily would have been top 6 or so if not for the UMich-oil-on-track delay and the weather.
Hey is it possible if I made a thread where everyone could link their pictures. Would be nice to have a collaberation of pictures from the whole event since there wasn't a big photo taken during the event.
To see all the cars.
Bob,
Thanks for some clarification for those that weren't there, especially for the change in the order of the design event. There have been teams that have done well in design that have done poorly in endurance before, on the basis of a distinct knowledge gap between them and other teams. Every design judge I have spoken to about GFR has spoken highly of the team's process and knowledge, many stating they are leagues ahead of most teams.
Sorry to hear that your team wasn't able to finish. GFR has owned the comp for the past three years, with some truly impressive engineering and speed.
It would be great if we could hear a bit more about the event from the people that were there. The coverage over the normal channels (streaming, this forum, twitter, fstotal etc) has been pretty lacking and we have FSAE fans around the world eager to know the inside stories of the successes and failures of the comp.
Kev
I am pretty curious as to what happened to GFR, they didn't start the endurance at all. For that matter, RIT also suffered some kind of issue and didn't start enduro also. A group of us were talking to the RIT guys in their pit probably 1.5-2 hr before their starting slot and they don't seem to be panicking about any fault, though they did seem to be trying to start their car.
GFR posted their AutoX winning lap on their FB page, and that was something else....
I'm dying here! Anyone have more info on the final scores?
Seriously, comon guys someone must have a picture of the second and third page!
Quote:
Originally posted by Dash:
I'm dying here! Anyone have more info on the final scores?
How much oil was really spilled on that track!? http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif There's more oil sorbent than tarmac visible in Missouri S&T's video...
Bob, the design actually changed last year, but it's a good point.