+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 8 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 75

Thread: Rules Reduction Recommendations

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Perth, Western Australia
    Posts
    717

    Rules Reduction Recommendations

    This is following a prompt from a few people in the post about the 2015 rules. A suggestion was made to provide the rules committee with a set of shorter and simplified rules fromt his community. Doug Milliken suggested a wiki, but I propose that we put together an edited document using these forums as a place for reasoned discussion.

    Here are the guidelines that I propose:
    1. We modify the rules with the sole intent of shortening and simplifying rules documentation.
    2. We attempt to stay as close as possible to the intent of the 2015 rules.
    3. Conceptual changes to the rules are permitted only on the basis of the following:
    - The rule(s) fundamentally works against simplicity
    - Rule is currently unenforceable
    - Rule is overly subjective
    4. Any proposed rule changes or additions are made with supporting calculations, simulations or real test data where possible.

    Some limitations:
    1. We will limit any attempt to make changes to the intent of the rules. This is not an attempt to undermine the rules committee, rather a way to provide editing feedback.
    2. Try to avoid any abuse or ridicule of individuals here, event staff, or anyone associated with the rules committee. If you feel strongly about it do it somewhere else.
    3. Where possible we will try to keep to the rough order of rules and use similar sections. Conceptually there may be better ways, but for a first pass consistency with older rule-sets will likely have less impact on the teams.

    Deliverables:
    1. A revised version of the 2015 rules to be sumbitted to the rules committee for consideration. A target length for the document is 100 pages with similar text formatting to the current rules. For reference the first rules with templates (2009) was 105 pages.
    2. A document detailling which rules were altered and the justification for the changes.

    Process:
    I suggest using these forums to discuss potential areas of change. It will be difficult to gain 100% consensus on the items. To this end I believe a group of editors would be the best way of working. I believe these editors should be nominated, and supported by at least 2-3 others. I would expect a small group of maybe 4-6. They should be active members on these forums if possible.

    The process is intended to be open, and only implementing changes or ideas suggested by the community. Regular updates to the documents would be made publically available and accessable from these forums. An attempt will be made to keep these documents current and complete at all times so they may be viewed by the rules committee at every stage of development. Current rules committee members are more than welcome to add suggestions or direction to the thread.

    First stage documents are to be submitted to the Rules Committee by the end of the year to allow time to assess the suggestions prior to the release of the 2016 rules. Final documents for this process to be released by the end of 2016 in time for consideration for the next expected large change in 2017.


    There is no expectation that any of the suggestions will be adopted. This process is purely a feedback mechanism, not a way to replace the current rules.

    I will edit this front page if any guidelines are modified, or deliverables changed.

    Kev

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Perth, Western Australia
    Posts
    717
    For reference 2009 vs. 2015 page count

    Total: 105 176
    Administrative Regulations 10 19
    Techincal Regulations (total) 36 101
    General Technical Regulations 36 52
    Alternative Frame Rules - 7
    IC engine only rules - 17
    EV only rules - 25
    Static Event Regulations 24 30
    Dynamic Event Reulations 22 23

    Kev

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Perth, Western Australia
    Posts
    717
    I have put a bare document up for revision:

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/238606037/FSAE-Revised-Rules

    This is a word document with headers and footers removed, with a beginner header stating it is not an official document.

    Kev

  4. #4
    Kev, great initiative and glad someone started it. I would propose starting a shared folder on a cloud service (google drive for instance) which would allow revisions etc. I could host it on my account and make it publicly available if you wish.

    EDIT: Of course, this also means that I volunteer to be an editor.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Hayward View Post
    Penalties for Rule S4.16, S6.8, T3.22.7, T3.9.5, A5, are contradictory with A8.4.1.
    All this nonsense could be replaced with a single penalty policy for late submissions, i.e. -5 points per day for the first 10 days, then deregistration of the team.
    Last edited by mech5496; 09-04-2014 at 05:53 AM.

  5. #5
    Great thinking Kevin.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Hayward View Post
    Penalties for Rule S4.16, S6.8, T3.22.7, T3.9.5, A5, are contradictory with A8.4.1.
    Kevin, I think rule T3.22.9 is the ruling on IAs you’re thinking of regarding penalties, T3.22.7 states that the data must be uploaded in a PDF. Nevertheless that string of rules is a good talking point.

    Quote Originally Posted by mech5496 View Post
    All this nonsense could be replaced with a single penalty policy for late submissions, i.e. -5 points per day for the first 10 days, then deregistration of the team.
    I agree, this is already covered at the beginning of rule A8.4 in the existing rules.

    Using the rules suggested by Kevin above, here’s a few proposed edits.

    Analysis:
    Rule A8.4.1 states “Failure to submit the required Business Logic Case, Cost, Design or Technical documents within 10 days of the deadline will constitute an automatic withdrawal of your team”, however the wording of rule S4.16 states “Teams that do not submit a Cost Report will receive negative 100 points for the Cost & Manufacturing Analysis score”, and rule S6.8 states “If any or all of your Design Documents are received more than ten (10) days late they will be classified as “Not Submitted” and your team will not participate in the Design Event and will receive zero (0) points for design”, both rules implying that teams would still be able to compete if these documents are not submitted.

    Also, rule A8.4 under “Late Submission of Cost Report” and “Penalty for Late Submission or Non-Submission” contradicts rule A8.4.1, implying that if the documents are not submitted within 15 and 10 days of the deadline, respectively, the team may still compete.

    Further, rule A8.4 states “Documents received /uploaded after the deadline and documents that are largely incomplete will be penalized negative ten (-10) points per day, or partial day”, which is repeated in S4.16, S6.8, T.3.22.9, and T3.9.5. Rule A8.4 also states “with the following penalty caps and exclusions”; these penalty caps are again defined in S4.16, S6.8, T3.22.9, and T3.9.5.

    Proposition:
    Consolidate penalty points and non-submission rulings into rule A8.4 and A8.4.1, respectively, with removal of point penalties and non-submission rulings from each document’s section in rules such as S4.16, S6.8, T3.22.7, and T3.9.5. This action would consolidate all point penalties to one central location for quick, efficient referencing.

    For pertinent EV rulings found in A8.4, an additional sub-ruling A8.4.2 added to make rulings more concise.

    Proposed Rule Re-Write:

    (Deletions in Red, additions in Blue)

    A8.4 Late Submission Penalties
    Documents received /uploaded after the deadline and documents that are largely incomplete will be penalized negative ten (-10) points per day, or partial day, late with the following penalty caps and exclusions:
    A5 “Electrical Systems Officer and Electrical Systems Advisor Form” - The penalty for late ESO/ESA forms is capped at negative fifty (-50) points.
    T3.9.5 “Structural Equivalency Spreadsheet (SES)” or AF2 “Structural Requirements Certification Form (SRCF)” – The penalty for late SES/SRCF submission is capped at negative fifty (-50) points. However, teams are advised that SES/SRCF forms are evaluated in the order in which they are received and that late submissions will be reviewed last. Late SES/SRCF approval could delay the completion of your vehicle. We strongly recommend you submit your SES/SRCF as early as possible.
    T3.22.7 “Impact Attenuator Report Penalties” - The penalty for late Impact Attenuator Report submissions is capped at negative fifty (-50) points.
    PART IC - IC2.1 “Fuel” – There is no point penalty for late submission of a fuel type order, however once the deadline has passed your team will be allocated the basic fuel type.
    Rules S3 “Business Logic Plan” – The penalty for late submission of the BLP is capped at negative fifty (-50) points.
    Rule S4.16 “Late Submission of Cost Report” – For the first 15 days after the deadline submission penalties for late Cost Reports are capped at negative eighty (-80) points. After the first 15 days a late Cost Report is classified as “Not Submitted”. Cost Reports that are not submitted will receive negative one hundred (-100) points and may not participate in the Cost Event.
    Rule S6.8 “Penalty for Late Submission or Non-submission” – The Design Report and Design Spec Sheet collectively constitute the “Design Documents”. Late submission or failure to submit all, or any one, of the Design Documents will be penalized at the standard negative ten (-10) points per day to a maximum of negative one hundred (-100) points. If your Design Documents are received more than ten (10) days late they will be classified as “Not Submitted” and your team will not participate in the Design Event and will receive zero (0) points for design.
    EV9.1 “Electrical System Form” The penalty for late ESF submissions is capped at negative fifty (-50) points. If the ESF is received more than ten (10) days late it will be classified as “Not Submitted” and your vehicle will not be inspected and will not be permitted to compete.EV9.2 “Failures Modes and Effects Analysis” The penalty for late FMEA submissions is capped at negative fifty (-50) points. If the FMEA is received more than ten (10) days late it will be classified as “Not Submitted” and your vehicle will not be inspected and will not be permitted to compete.
    Program Submissions – Program submission requirements differ across competitions and may or may not involve penalties. Please submit program material by the published deadlines. This rule is only a summary; it does not supersede the individual event rules. Read the individual rules for complete document submission requirements. Check the competition websites for deadlines, submission addresses and other details. If you have any questions – ask us.


    A8.4.1 Failure to submit the required Business Logic Case, Cost, Design or Technical documents within
    10 days of the deadline will constitute an automatic withdrawal of your team. Your team will be
    notified after the 9th day of no submission that we have not received your documents and after 10
    days your team’s registration will be cancelled and no refund will be given. This elimination will
    take place after each round of required document deadlines.


    A8.4.2 Failure to submit the required Electrical System Form (ESF) or FMEA documents within 10 days of the deadline will result in the document being classified as “Not Submitted” and your vehicle will not be inspected and will not be permitted to compete.


    S4.16 Late Submission of Cost Report
    It is imperative that the cost judges have the Cost Reports in enough time for proper evaluation. Teams that submit reports late will be penalized 10 points per day late, with a maximum penalty of 80 points. Teams that do not submit a Cost Report will receive negative 100 points for the Cost & Manufacturing Analysis score. Penalties will be applied based on official upload date and time for electronic submission and by post mark for printed submissions.



    S6.8 Penalty for Late Submission or Non-submission
    The Design Report and Design Spec Sheet collectively constitute the “Design Documents”. Late submission or failure to submit all, or any one, of the Design Documents will be penalized at the standard negative ten (-10) points per day to a maximum of negative one hundred (-100) points. If any or all of your Design Documents are received more than ten (10) days late they will be classified as “Not Submitted” and your team will not participate in the Design Event and will receive zero (0) points for design.



    T3.22.9 Teams that submit their Impact Attenuator Data Report after the due date will be penalized 10 points per day up to a maximum of 50 points, which will be taken off the team’s Total Score.


    T3.9.5 Structural Equivalency Spreadsheet – Submission
    a. Address – SESs must be submitted to the officials at the competition you are entering at the address shown in the Appendix or indicated on the competition website.
    b. Due Date – SESs must be submitted no later than the date indicated on the competition website. Teams that submit their Structural Equivalency Spreadsheet after the due date for the competition will be penalized 10 points per day up to a maximum of 50 points, which will be taken off the team’s Total Score.
    c. Acknowledgement – North America competitions – SESs submitted for vehicles entered into competitions held in North America will be acknowledged automatically by the fsaeonline website.
    Last edited by tromoly; 09-04-2014 at 11:06 AM.

  6. #6
    Great input tromoly, thanks! I am integrating those in a working version right now which I will upload and share. I also added a further consolidation of my own. Delete all the individual wording and add this instead:
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The penalty for:
    A5 “Electrical Systems Officer and Electrical Systems Advisor Form
    T3.9.5 “Structural Equivalency Spreadsheet (SES)” or AF2 “Structural Requirements Certification Form (SRCF)”
    T3.22.7 “Impact Attenuator Report Penalties”
    Rules S3 “Business Logic Plan”
    EV9.1 “Electrical System Form”
    EV9.2 “Failures Modes and Effects Analysis”
    is capped at negative fifty (-50) points.

    NOTE: Teams are advised that SES/SRCF forms are evaluated in the order in which they are received and that late submissions will be reviewed last. Late SES/SRCF approval could delay the completion of your vehicle. We strongly recommend you submit your SES/SRCF as early as possible.

    Exceptions:
    PART IC - IC2.1 “Fuel” – There is no point penalty for late submission of a fuel type order, however once the deadline has passed your team will be allocated the basic fuel type.

    Rule S4.16 “Late Submission of Cost Report” – For the first 15 days after the deadline submission penalties for late Cost Reports are capped at negative eighty (-80) points. .

    Rule S6.8 “Penalty for Late Submission or Non-submission” – The Design Report and Design Spec Sheet collectively constitute the “Design Documents”. Late submission or failure to submit all, or any one, of the Design Documents will be penalized at the standard negative ten (-10) points per day to a maximum of negative one hundred (-100) points.

    Program Submissions – Program submission requirements differ across competitions and may or may not involve penalties. Please submit program material by the published deadlines.

    This rule is only a summary; it does not supersede the individual event rules. Read the individual rules for complete document submission requirements. Check the competition websites for
    deadlines, submission addresses and other details. If you have any questions – ask us.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    EDIT: Document uploaded as the original that Kev made, you can find both (and upload future versions) on a shared forlder here:
    https://drive.google.com/folderview?...E0&usp=sharing
    Last edited by mech5496; 09-04-2014 at 11:46 AM.

  7. #7
    On the fashion of tromolys' post:

    EV8.3.7 The IMD must be either within the accumulator or the charger must incorporate one. When charging the accumulator, the IMD must be active and must be able to shut down the charger.
    In the case that the accumulator is charged outside of the vehicle, either the charger must incorporate an active IMD or an active IMD must be within the accumulator.

  8. #8
    I have noticed in the past that Article A is unncecessarily long and complicated, so I started editing it trying to keep all the important points. You can find a working version here:

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9A...it?usp=sharing

    As noted above this is still a working version, with comments etc. Numbering is not concise because I have deleted some sections completely. Additions are highlighted in blue. Reasoning is included as comments. Formatting is not correct. I would definitely appreciate some thoughts/feedback if you are so inclined and I will try to upload a complete, concise version within the week.

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Perth, Western Australia
    Posts
    717
    Harry,

    I had similar thoughts about collecting the comp info into a table. I think we may need to make the decision with this review to not include any competition specific (i.e. UK, US, Germany rules). It is common for competitions to have supplementary regulations that pertain directly to the event being run. A lot of what is written in the trailing half of the first rules section only applies to the US.

    Given that this docuemnt is intended as recommended rule set suitable for all comps I think it would be a good idea to work this way.

    It is noticeable how difficult it is to see what has been eliminated or kept. Short of having both documents open and comparing them article for article.

    Approaching this article by article (as you have done) is probably the best way forward at this point.

    Kev

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Hayward View Post
    A lot of what is written in the trailing half of the first rules section only applies to the US.
    Totally agree here.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Hayward View Post
    It is noticeable how difficult it is to see what has been eliminated or kept.
    I think it is a good idea to maintain the specific rule numbering and add "deleted" in red right next to it. I did not, because I wated to produce a "clean" document to see how shorter it could be.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 8 1 2 3 ... 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