Delft car unveiled: short movie

[Peter]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by El Joe:
READ THE RULES!

3.5.1.4 Drive Train Shields and Guards </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Don't worry, the scatter shield will be on it before competition starts... (Reading rules is something we are quite good at actually )

Peter
Delft

[Chris Boyden]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">You (and Matt) say that my solution (a direct-to-wheel coilover with no rocker) "would probably end up heavier". How so? I would take your existing coilover, attach the bottom 1/4 of your pushrod as an extension of the damper shaft, and throw away the upper 3/4 of the pushrod, the rocker, and the rocker mounting bracket. Surely this is losing weight? Furthermore, I would attach the coilover to the chassis just above the upper-wishbone rear chassis mount, which is already a "strong point" and probably part of your dashboard bulkhead (or front-roll-hoop?). Moving this coilover chassis mount closer to the centre of the car makes for a shorter stressed chassis, so less weight again (do similar at rear). Also this angle of coilover is more aligned with the worst case forces on the front wheels (ie. from wheelprint to CG), so it reduces the loads on the lower wishbone, so again less weight. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Z,

We've heard volumes about what you would do?
Blah, blah blah...I think that you offer some good insight and ideas. But, What have you actually done? How have your projects performed?
Care to put your money where your mouth is? Are you actually gonna build an FSAE car?

Chris

[Storbeck]

Hey Z,I guess we agree somewhat. I considered using a shock extension similiar to what you described, but was concerned about puting the buckling load on the shock, so we did this.

Motion ratio almost exactly .5, and very linear.

I hope this image thing worked out.

http://photobucket.com/albums/v191/doc1320/FSAE/?action...current=100_2735.jpg

[Z]

Chris,

Am I "actually gonna build an FSAE car"? No. I explained this before, I am not eligible - I left school probably before you were born . I could probably sign up for some kind of teaching role at my old university and get involved in FSAE that way, but I'm too busy building other stuff (well, when I'm not in front of this screen!). When I finish this house and another shed, and some other stuff, I'll get back into off-roading...

Anyway, I have ulterior motives for my postings here. I have become bored with a lot of modern motorsport, especially circuit racing, and I want to see something interesting/exiting! Where are the Colin Chapmans and Jim Halls, and all their radical cars? They are certainly not to be found in mainstream road racing (there is some interesting stuff off-road). There is some mild innovation in FSAE, such as CVT's, but even these have been around for ages (unfortunately, the boneheaded organizers of most current formula (eg. FIA) have banned them!). Trying yet another variation of a pushrod and rocker, even if it is in carbonfibre, is NOT innovation - it is just following fashion.

Worldwide, there are probably ten thousand bright, well-educated, young students involved in FSAE. Because of the necessary turnover, in five years time there will be another ten thousand. Surely some of these students can come up with something really new or exiting? I'm thinking of something that so dominates the opposition that the organizers will have to ban it (like many of CC's or JH's creations). Would this be a bad thing for the builders of these cars? No! Forcing a rule change is undoubtedly the best compliment you can get! And since you are out of the competition in a few years anyway, the more restrictive rules don't matter.

To finish this rant, I realise that a few of you have taken offense to some of my criticisms/comments. Get used to it guys, it is going to get much worse when you get a "real" job . My intention is NOT to be a nagging, critical, pain-in-the-arse. Instead, I am trying to provide a supportive voice to those who want to build a slightly "different" car, in the hope that they can get an edge on all those "standard car" teams out there.


Storbeck,

Yep, good solution (IMHO). Simpler, stiffer, less friction, etc., etc., than a pushrod/rocker. Nice graphics too!

Did you have any trouble getting it past the "design review committee" (aka the "fashion police")?

Z

[Charlie]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Z:
My intention is NOT to be a nagging, critical, pain-in-the-arse. Instead, I am trying to provide a supportive voice to those who want to build a slightly "different" car, in the hope that they can get an edge on all those "standard car" teams out there. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Z, after reading quite a few of your posts and being quite annoyed with you more than a few times, may I offer some advice.

I think you have good points and, at least to some extent, the direction you are trying to lead anyone that will listen is a good one.

But damn, the way you do it is awful. Your comments come in threads where people are trying to introduce thier car, put photos up, show off thier hard work. People have a hard enough time taking criticism from design judges, mentors, people they are face to face with, and (usually) have at least some respect for. They are much less likely to be receptive to someone they've never met, know nothing about, and has nothing good to say.

As closely knit as the FSAE community seems to be, you don't just offend that particular team, but most everyone else too!

Of course people get criticism from your boss, parents, etc. But either they respect those people or they at least respect the fact they have to try and listen. If you are faceless and nameless, you better be tactful if you want to sway opinions.

I don't suggest you say nothing. If you see something that 90% of FSAE teams do, and you think it makes no sense, start a new post. make an arguement. People will listen and this is a great place for discussion when there isn't percieved ill will.

[Z]

Charlie,

Sure, I'm not tactful, but then again I'm not trying to be. I'm not trying to sell anything here. Since most readers of these posts are adult engineers (and not little children, or menopausal women undergoing stress counselling), I really don't think they should get too upset when their designs or pet ideas are questioned in a rational (and frankly, rather boring) manner. Like I said, it gets a lot tougher when you move into the real world.

Most of my "criticisms" have actually been in the form of questions along the lines of "I can't see a reason for that part. Please explain how the extra weight/complexity/cost of that part improves the car's performance?". Apparently Socrates' philosophical style was to walk the streets of Athens asking people various questions about their beliefs. Then, after Socrates asked some deeper questions, the person would often contradict themselves, and thus find out for themselves that their original opinion was wrong. This is a legitimate and well respected method for getting at "the truth" of a matter (it is called the Socratic method). Of course, when Socrates was about 70 the government of the day decided that he was guilty of shit-stirring or some such crime (actually "impiety and corrupting the youth"), and sentenced him to death. Given your above post, Charlie, I wonder if our modern society has progressed?

Getting back to pushrods and rockers. I've asked "Why?" in two threads now, and I still haven't heard any compelling reasons for using them. Since, as you say, ~90% of the cars are using them, and there is at least some doubt as to their benefit, then shouldn't there be more discussion of their merits, or otherwise (of a boring, technical, and unemotional nature)? You suggest that I have "nothing good to say". Well, I pointed out many advantages of NOT using rockers, and I suggested a possible alternative. I also said that I think Storbeck's design is a good approach. So what helpful comments do you have about the pros and cons of rockers?

I would also note that while there is no end of praise for complicated versions of the "standard car", both from the students and the design judges, there is still very little praise for simple and effective solutions (like no rockers). I am trying to provide some support for those solutions.

Z

[Kevin Hayward]

Z,

You have misunderstood Socrates in comparing yourself to him.

It was his style to ask questions ... not give answers. One of his claims to fame was to claim his own ignorance.

The Socratic method of teaching entails the teacher first approaching with apparent ignorance (humility). Once the student has admitted his own ignorance the questions would then turn to finding out the truth of the matter. The summary of the answers would lead to true knowledge of the subject and the conclusion that the student did indeed posess the knowledge required.

The response at large of the forum viewers appears to match the response Athens gave Socrates, in that you are similar. However we are yet to see you admit ignorance, feigned or otherwise.

So while I admire the questioning to keep the great men of Athens (the forums) honest, the act of supplanting yourself as the source of wisdom is much less appealing. Especially when the people of the forums have no way to assess the validity of your wisdom by viewing the end results of your work. (Beyond the small amount of converstaion on these forums.)

Still it makes for interesting reading.

Kev

p.s. By the way this is not an attack at you, but at the analogy ... especially after a well thought out reply to the other post.

[Z]

Kevin,

No, I am not comparing myself with Socrates. I am just trying to use (some of) his method.

And yes, I am very ignorant on a lot of matters (apparently, tact is one of them ). But to use the full Socratic method (of lots of questions and answers) in this forum would take a very long time, and probably not get a result. So I have posted a few of the ideas that I have some inkling about (its faster, and I think more helpful).

Should people believe me? No way! I don't even trust myself! You've got to work it out for yourselves, guys.

Z

[Chris Boyden]

Z,

Yea, we've all got stuff to do. I'm working on a house....etc....A 240Z also awaits a nice resto-mod in the garage. Hmmmm...LS1?

So, you've managed to avoid my question? What have you actually built to completion and competed with? Here....I'll start. I'm not bragging, because things can always be improved, but I, as with many other FSAE'ers, have designed engine packages, electronics, wiring systems, intake, exhaust. Each design was better than the previous and I ended up learning more than I ever would have thought.

http://www.unm.edu/~fsae (shameless plug)

Delft has this beautiful composite featherweight car that I'm sure they put enourmous amounts of effort into. But, where is your stuff? I would like to see some photos or videos of your stuff. I would like to be able to say..."what the hell did you do that for?, why didn't mount the engine much lower, it totally messed up your CG."

" Like I said, it gets a lot tougher when you move into the real world." In the real world, money talks and bullshit walks. So, show us the money! All of my experiences have benefitted me greatly in the "real world". System integration, teamwork, engineering anaylsis, etc, etc. Even if we are following "fashion", at least we did our homework, did the anaylsis, worked out the problems, built the stuff, tested it, drove it, broke it, and learned from it.

[rjwoods77]

Z,

Keep being a bastard. Its more fun that way.

Chris,

That is what I am doing after i get out of school. Ls1 240z. Love those cars.