+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 13 1 2 3 11 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 122

Thread: Formula SAE Australasia 2007 Competition: - Updates, Pictures, Stories, and More.

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Booyah! First Post.

    Can't wait to see the action again this year!

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Edith Cowan Racing, Joondalup, Western Australia
    Posts
    195
    Wow, what a flame-fest!

    UWA's Kinetic system was originally designed for 4wd-ing applications, but was applied to the SAE car by UWA. Making this system work to such an effective degree is a credit to the team. Unless your team can build a faster car than UWA's, you have no grounds to discredit it.

    I am really looking forward to next year! It's a shame I couldn't be there. Hope some of you got to meet Edward and Pete from our team at some stage throughout the weekend.
    Kind Regards,

    Chris Lane
    Design Team Leader - ECR 2008
    http://engineering.ecu.edu.au/ecr
    ------------------------------------------------------
    "Race Tape is like 'The Force'. It has a dark side, a light side, and it holds the Unive

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Rochester NY
    Posts
    1,061
    Chris,

    Check your PM's

  4. #4
    there is a sewerage plant in Werribee and it was extremely hot that weekend.
    Monash FSAE (2005-2009)
    www.monashmotorsport.com

  5. #5
    Hi all,
    I probably will post some pictures, but it will not be for a few days. I think I am commentating tomorrow, so I may not be able to get my usual on track action shots....we'll see.

    Been tied up in Design Finals all evening. The finalists in Design were UWA, RMIT, Wollongong and Tokyo Denki...In other words, the 'usual suspects'.
    5 teams took a 10 point penalty for failure to accept Percy, the 95% percentile mannekin. This possibly kept one or two teams from the finals. In any case the Design Judges agreed there were only four deserving finalists. Obviously, I know the result, but this is not where the results are announced. Just lets say, I expect some robust debate tomorrow.

    I agree with Big Bird about the quantity, quality and readiness of teams and the willingness for some teams to simply throw in the towel and abandon ship.

    Random thoughts.
    UWA, some systems not ready, so their effort, though fast, is somewhat jury rigged.
    RMIT, struggled with brake issues and then a sensor problem, limiting speed on track,
    Swinburne, some deserved penalties in Design, won Presentation. On the track, having the current Australian Formula Ford Champion in the driver lineup is helping them.
    FH Munich. Too heavy in Design (5th or 6th)fastest in accel, crucified in cost (probably for the truth!)
    Auckland. No go yet as they have cam or crank sensor problems.
    Tokyo Denki. Tuning issues and hard starting. Looks like far too rich down low and far too lean up high.
    ADFA. After a heroic effort re-engineering the diff to a spool (and being amazed by the positive result) ate their epicyclic gear train, probably as a result of previous failures.
    Deakin. Design penalties.
    Wollongong. Seemed to run okay, lots of power but a worrying smoke trail from the exhaust.
    Can't remember any more right now.
    Goodnight
    Pat
    The trick is ... There is no trick!

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Rochester NY
    Posts
    1,061
    I was wondering if any of the AUS teams light be able to help me verify Erik Zapletals fax number in NSW. I looked on the AUS White Pages and it lists three numbers of which each wouldnt take a fax I was trying to send him. I have his home number. Any chance one of you can give him a shout for me to verify his fax number?

  7. #7
    Fair point Charger. I suppose if all team members are willing and your sponsors are happy for you to use their machines then go for it. I know I certainly would!

    But still, I think that if two teams have equal knowledge of CNC machining and one actually got the opportunity to get some hands on experience it would be unfair to reward them just for that. It might simply be unfeasible for the other team to gain that experience.

    Anyway, I'm sure most readers want to see more about the comp rather than our opinions on the cost event

  8. #8
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Pete Marsh:
    How about The Germans accel winning run, you could see that was a winner right there. Is it true they weigh 260kg?
    </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Thanks. I can't give you the official number for the Australian Event yet but in FS Germany we were weighed at 245kg. We like to call that natural traction control. For a giggle our first ever car weighed in at 330kg and scored a 3.86 in the German 06 Event taking 2nd place.
    But don't mind our victory in accel. I think I'm going to bury my self now because if you did that to us without proper testing and an unfinished car, I think we have a looooooong way to go before we can keep up with guys like you.

    Congratulations!
    Cheers,

    Josef Duschl
    www.munichmotorsport.de Alumni
    2007&2008 DAQ & Steering Wheel
    Solving the problems, you wouldn't have without computers.

  9. #9
    Hi again,
    The comment edited was on the forum for just minutes. I was hopping mad at being misquoted and having words put in my mouth. Two separate Swinburne members confronted me with "You said the only reason we performed was because Tim Blanchard was driving" I never stated that!! And I loathe when people put words in my mouth.
    I edited and withdrew some of the ripe language when I realised the poster wasn't a current team member.

    As for why teams did poorly in Design despite having supposedly a 'Good Design'.
    In the preliminary competition where I was only involved on the periphery, a team may not score well if they cannot successfully defend their design. The judges don't want to know WHAT you have done, they can see that. They want to know WHY you did it and what other options you canvassed. Statements like 'It worked last year so we did it again' don't cut it!

    Incidentally, I do not disagree that the Deakin and Auckland cars were well designed cars. But that's only half the battle in Design. If you think the Design Judges might be getting a bit tougher, especially with cars that do not meet both the letter of the rules as well as the intent of the rules, then you might well be right! There was a significant faction in the Judging group that wanted to DQ cars that didn't fit Percy. Beware next year!

    The decision by the judges this year to put only 4 teams in the finals left everyone else stranded somewhere below 100 points. When a 10 point Percy penalty is applied, then it hurts doubly bad. A car can never reach the Design Finals if it does not comply with the rules!

    It is not the job of the Judges to smile and pat you on the back and say what a wonderful job you have done. It is their job to probe your defense of your design decisions. You may not like it, but thats how it is in real life (only worse!)

    Anyway, I have spoken enough on this thread. I might get labelled a 'Keyboard Warrior' ..Oops, too late!

    Pat
    The trick is ... There is no trick!

  10. #10
    what's with the flies?!
    RiNaZ

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 13 1 2 3 11 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts