+ Reply to Thread
Page 9 of 11 FirstFirst ... 7 8 9 10 11 LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 108

Thread: Formula Student Germany 2013

  1. #81
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,688
    Yep, this Team-Name thing is a real pain...

    The results of the recent Baltic Open are a good example.
    "Zips Racing"???
    Oh, yeah... that's "Akron", err ... I think...???

    But never fear, for Z has a solution!!!

    Use the HURRICANE NAMING system! (Or something like it.)

    So, for existing teams, the date of registration for their very first FS/FSAE event is found. Then the female name of the hurricane that was named closest to this date becomes the Official Team Name, for all time henceforth. New teams are similarly named. As a slight variation, an Official FS/FSAE World Wide List of Names (perhaps taken from a kiddies naming book (girl's names only!)) might be drawn up, and Team-Names taken chronologically from this list.

    Importantly, these names are non-negotiable! If your team happens to get the name "Edna", or "Gladys", or whatever, then you had better get used to it. You will be called Team Edna forevermore.

    There are two obvious advantages to this system.

    1. Teams are recognisable by their short, distinctive names, whenever and wherever these names are used (which should be always and everywhere, such as on the cars, team uniforms, scoreboards, results.pdfs, etc., etc...). This is, of course, the rationale for naming hurricanes this way, and has been proven to work well.

    2. It is well known that FS/FSAE is a great way to get rid of a girlfriend, or, more likely, never get one in the first place! But with this new naming convention every team member (yep, mostly male) will have at least one girl they can talk about. Their Team!!!

    Z

    (PS. Julian, Thanks... )

  2. #82
    To be honest, I'm not good with politics, so therefore the whole "naming problematic" seems a bit exaggerated for me.
    I don't understand the problematic with the "strange team names" and I also don't understand when teams seem to have problems with the thing that pops up on the scoring screen (as long as the time is purple ).

    Of course GFR is a special case (but the team doesn't have issues to use the multi-nationality as an advantage...), and I think it is good to have both universities on the car. We are also a cooperation of multiple universities and we have a small sticker of the University of Lucerne of the car. So far this was never an issue.

    Last year, I was only confused by "Rolla", I never heard about this town and certainly didn't know that Missouri S&T is located there. But once you know that, where is the problem?

    More problematic, in my opinion, is the obsession of the scrutineers about the rules when it comes to the "size" of the University and the Number. Yes, I understand the intend of the rule that it should be visible, but a few millimeters more or less.. come on... I can't remember how often we gave away one of our "3"'s for another team that had a number that was too small. That is one rule paragraph that should be killed...
    -------------------------------------------
    Alumnus
    AMZ Racing
    ETH Zürich

    2010-2011: Suspension
    2012: Aerodynamics
    2013: Technical Lead

    2014: FSA Engineering Design Judge

  3. #83
    Z, you should remember that Baltic Open allows participation with old cars and in some cases the Universities do not want their name shown in such occasions, thus the most logical choice is to show the team names. It's the best of available options.

    And your solution doesn't really achieve anything. Firstly it's presented in a humorous way but does not include any funny content. Secondly it doesn't solve the problem as recognizing teams from random names is as difficult as recognizing teams from team names.

    By the way, many of the teams in Europe are registered organizations, so using the legal name (team name) is not that far fetched.

    But to include an opinion to the discussion: My preference for naming is using the University name - although our team is recognized as Helsinki UAS, which is actually incorrect.
    "...when this baby hits 88 miles per hour... you're gonna see some serious shit" - Dr. Brown

  4. #84
    More problematic, in my opinion, is the obsession of the scrutineers about the rules when it comes to the "size" of the University and the Number. Yes, I understand the intend of the rule that it should be visible, but a few millimeters more or less.. come on... I can't remember how often we gave away one of our "3"'s for another team that had a number that was too small. That is one rule paragraph that should be killed...
    If you had ever sat in the timekeeping booth during Endurance or AutoX you would know how important it is to be able to quickly identify a car without a doubt. This is one of the most important rules for the timekeeping guys. And by the way: It is just embarrassing that teams are still not able to meet it. The same goes for the minimum radius on the nose by the way.

    Regarding "obsession": There is no tolerance specified in the rules, thus there is none. If you would allow 3mm deviation, what about 4mm? Or maybe 5mm? You know where this is leading. It just doesn't work which is why the scrutineers have to stick to the rules. Otherwise they risk to be involved in hours of discussion.

    On the other hand: As long as the most important complaints about FSG2013 are the size of the numbers on the cars and the naming schemes used to identify the teams then I can live with it.
    Regards,

    Tobias

    Formula Student Germany
    FSE Rules & Organisation
    http://twitter.com/TobiasMic
    http://TobiasMic.Blogspot.com

    Not many people know the difference between resolution and accuracy.

  5. #85
    Tobias, sure, for timekeeping it is important to identify the cars. Some cars have the name written on the top of their sidepods so that the university can only be seen from "top-view" (or if you are standing close to the car...) and not from distance. The rule simply says it has to be on the side of the car.

    What I mean with "obsession" is that a lot of cars that we "sponsored" with a car number passed scrutineering at other events (I know, the argument is not valid because the scrutineers at these events simply didn't do their job properly...).

    When it comes to the "embarrasment"-part.
    We are probably going to fail this rule in Italy this year.. it is simply not possible to put an "E633" confirm to the rules on the nose cone...
    -------------------------------------------
    Alumnus
    AMZ Racing
    ETH Zürich

    2010-2011: Suspension
    2012: Aerodynamics
    2013: Technical Lead

    2014: FSA Engineering Design Judge

  6. #86
    Quote Originally Posted by JulianH View Post
    Last year, I was only confused by "Rolla", I never heard about this town and certainly didn't know that Missouri S&T is located there. But once you know that, where is the problem?
    Up until a few years ago the school was named "Missouri Rolla." They changed to "Missouri S&T" around 2010.

    I think the biggest problem with the naming is the schools who assume they have recognized initials, or have repeat initials. Take OSU for example. Is that Oregon State, Okalahoma State or Ohio State? MSU? Michigan or Mississippi State?

  7. #87
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Stuttgart
    Posts
    494
    Quote Originally Posted by JulianH View Post
    More problematic, in my opinion, is the obsession of the scrutineers about the rules when it comes to the "size" of the University and the Number. Yes, I understand the intend of the rule that it should be visible, but a few millimeters more or less.. come on... I can't remember how often we gave away one of our "3"'s for another team that had a number that was too small. That is one rule paragraph that should be killed...
    Well, as I've been a scrutineer this year and last year I can't help replying on this one. I've been a track marshal twice at FS Austria and had to count cones and off courses for a sector while organising the other track marshals. I can tell this is quite hard. As no one knows all cars from their look, the number is all you have. Teams want that penalties are counted correctly (off course, this is their damn right). But to meet this, it must be possible to identify a car within a glimpse of an eye. This is where we are talking about the number. Anything besides writing a precise minimum size in the rules and insisting on it is bullshit. What is the rules change you are asking for? Should the rule say "The number should be quite tall so it can be read from a great distance"? Discussions would be endless. It is always best to have precise criteria. There is a size given in the rules. How hard is it? As Tobias already explained, it is plain stupidity showing up with a number which is too small (and I'm saying that although the only reason why we didn't pass mechanical scrutineering in 2010 on first try was a too small school name).
    Teams want the competition to be fair and to have clear criteria and of course no one wants wrong decisions during AutoX and Endurance. Having tall enough numbers and school names on the cars is one thing the teams have to manage to make these goals achievable...
    Rennteam Uni Stuttgart
    2008: Seat and Bodywork
    2009: Team captain

    GreenTeam Uni Stuttgart
    2010: Seat and Bodywork / Lamination whore

    Formula Student Austria
    2012: Operative Team

  8. #88
    Bemo, you are right. There should be a lower limit in Car number size, my comment wasn't too bright. But ruling the spacing of the letters, the width of the number, and so on. I don't know. But probably somebody would go so extreme that it had to be ruled once again. There are other areas to discuss which are more important. I withdraw my case.


    Coming back to FSG 2013:
    I gave the feedback that the WetPad should be rethought, maybe it is just a personal feeling, so I'd like to discuss it. My issue with the WetPad is, that it does not really show the capability of the car but simply what tire the team choose. I know that the tire choice is part of a teams desicion, but one discipline at one event per year (maybe 1 discipline out of 20...) shouldn't affect the team's choice.
    As in the last two year's it was clearly visible that 13inch cars dominate the Wetpad. Some 10inch teams even choose 13inch Goodyears (Akron, Esslingen) and placed very high. It is a great move by those, but I don't know what would happen if the AutoX/Endurance would be wet...
    I personally think that the SkidPad should show the cornering ability of the car. The probably fastest SkidPad car out there (Rennteam Stuttgart, which drove close to the World record at Silverstone) placed only 20th in the FSC (32nd overall). Maybe they didn't test it very well or had problems but still, they struggeled mainly due to the 10inch tires not because their car "itself" is bad.
    As said before, I know that the team makes the desicion, but the WetPad is not within "normal" rules, it is just an option that FSG chooses to use. What happens if FSUK next year says "ah, Acceleration will be held on a µ-split tarmac" or FS Austria introduces a AutoX that is an oval (because the rules are only a guideline...). That would change the outcome of these events.
    The question is, if it possible to go back to a "normal" SkidPad with the FSC statics on Friday. Maybe one can go to a "damp" Skidpad or use a big tent so that it is always dry or something completely different.

    Looking forward to hear some other opinions.
    Last edited by JulianH; 08-18-2013 at 04:38 PM.
    -------------------------------------------
    Alumnus
    AMZ Racing
    ETH Zürich

    2010-2011: Suspension
    2012: Aerodynamics
    2013: Technical Lead

    2014: FSA Engineering Design Judge

  9. #89
    Julian,

    Quote Originally Posted by JulianH View Post
    I personally think that the SkidPad should show the cornering ability of the car.
    I agree with you, and wetpad does exactly this; it shows the cornering ability of the car in the wet! All of us (my team included) design our cars like it will never rain, and in the last few years this happens really often (about half the competitions I have attended were ran in wet conditions). That said, we should pay more attention in our wet setup, and tire choice is a part of that. All of us noticed the advantage of 13" last year in FSG, apparently Esslingen and Akron did some back to back testing in the wet with their older cars and noticed that too; thus they decided to run their previous tires which were faster!

    The difference in radius between wet 10's and 13's is not that big, you could run 13"s without lifting the CoG too much. My question is whether you can run both 10" and 13" wets on the same competition. Did not find anything against it in the rules, so if both sets are being present during scrutineering, there should not be any problem.

  10. #90
    Harry,
    in my opinion, the WetPad does not show the performance of the car.

    Giving you an example:
    In 2012, we drove all three UK dynamic events on Saturday at least in damp conditions. Skidpad and Acceleration were wet, AutoX dried up over the day.

    We placed 1st in Accel, 2nd in AutoX and 3rd in Skidpad (with only thousands to P1 and drove in worse conditions than the 2 cars in front of us, because we couldn't run for a 2nd time.)
    The Skidpad times were not faster than the WetPad times in Germany.

    At the Wetpad in Germany, we placed basically last with the same tires. The car was working much better than in the UK.

    It is simply too much water to run "normal". Even in "normal wet" conditions, the cars behave completely different than on the wetpad.

    Next example:
    2011, we probably had the "wettest" Endurance for the e-Cars ever. Delft won that event with 10inch Intermediates (still!) but they also screwed up WetPad. Just because they used 10 inch tires and placed behind Deggendorf which drove 8 seconds slower in Endurance per 1minute laptime.


    I agree with you, that cars should also be able to run in the wet, but in my opinion, the WetPad is more "artifical very wet" than a normal track would be in the rain.


    Your last point:
    It is only allowed to use one rain tire. So if you choose to run a 13 inch rain tire on the WetPad, you have to use this tire to run in the wet, if AutoX or Endurance are wet. I don't know how the car will handle then.. Additionally there are issues with the "5kg deviation" and so on. I tried to "get" a third set of tires only for the WetPad at the FSG Workshop in the last fall but this was not granted. Because teams with less money couldn't afford it (that is a valid point!).
    -------------------------------------------
    Alumnus
    AMZ Racing
    ETH Zürich

    2010-2011: Suspension
    2012: Aerodynamics
    2013: Technical Lead

    2014: FSA Engineering Design Judge

+ Reply to Thread
Page 9 of 11 FirstFirst ... 7 8 9 10 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