I'm starting to see an increase in the number of self propagating threads from commercial software vendors who are making pitches for their products in the name of better engineering. I don't agree with the notion that blindly running commercial software amounts to an engineering education. (Last I checked this was supposed to be a university level educational undertaking). Some are now reposting material presented much earlier in time,` in the name of being current, when I feel that its only to keep their products in the sunlight.
Quite frankly, some of the claims being made and the techniques being recommended or passed of as 'technology' are just plain wrong. Its clearly aimed at students unwilling or unable to get educated on the subjects presented and wanting to get ahead of the rest by taking shortcuts around a classroom, laboratory, shop and track experience.
I'm not taking about classes being offered (even for compensation), just turn the crank products offered for sale which seem to have made up their own technology in the absence of facts or experience. I'm now even seeing fudge compensators for use when the facts don't line up with the computer outputs.
I hope the judges are seeing through this because this is a student competition, not a commercial venture. Let these vendors establish their value with results in the professional world, not in the minds of students or faculty here wanting to 'compete' as quickly as possible.
Sorry for the dispute, but I'm just recollecting a project GM once contracted out to a major local university involving rollover analysis. (Of course, the GM internal Vehicle Dynamics department would be too prejudiced to ever come up with a fair conclusion). Sure enough, their ADAMS results correlated perfectly for the maneuver being studied. Just for laughs, I used THEIR vehicle model to run two other ISO open loop handling tests in ADAMS. However the disappointment in these basic findings was not amusing to anyone on our side of the aisle. "They" had used only 1/2 of the MEASURED roll and yaw inertias in order to get their astounding rollover test results. When the 'correct' values were used, the correlation was ridiculous.
I'm unanimous with myself on this. All I'm suggesting is that these vendors be moved to their own discussion area, perhaps with a solid warning about the consequences of using their products.