Racecar Engineering Formula Student Article

[ss_collins]

no that was munich - lovely car.

Graz was the red bull supported bewinged carbon thing

[GolddustMini]

ah i didnt see that one, anyone got any pictures? i vaguely remember seeing a car with red bull sponsorship but cant remember, i was a bit rushed all weekend chasing problems!

[Rutherford]

Originally Posted by GolddustMini

i was a bit rushed all weekend chasing problems!

Ain't that the truth!, what a weekend though.

[ss_collins]

I would be suprised if you could build some of the cars there for 12K

[Rutherford]

Originally Posted by ss_collins

I would be suprised if you could build some of the cars there for 12K

The idea is it's a mass production thing, but you have to cost for the prototype... Which makes no sense to me...

Prototype for a road car costing 20K might cost a 20Mill...

I didn't understand the costing's aim, but I did enjoy the challenge of designing to a strict budget, that was a worth while expereince for sure.

[ss_collins]

I have to say I really like UCLANS approach - they are handicapping themselves but for the right reasons...

[Lukin]

If the performance of the car was only worth 20% I don't think as many people would turn up.

[Boro]

Originally Posted by Lukin

If the performance of the car was only worth 20% I don't think as many people would turn up.

I doubt the industry looks heavily onto the results of the dynamic events. It's just a bonus for us to drive the cars IMO.

The teams with the advanced "innovation" and implementation of modern day technology usually gets the design awards at the end of the day.

Somehow I think companies favour graduates from those schools more so than those who wins the whole thing outright by performing better than the rest in the dynamic portion.

[Lukin]

Originally Posted by Boro

I doubt the industry looks heavily onto the results of the dynamic events. It's just a bonus for us to drive the cars IMO.

The teams with the advanced "innovation" and implementation of modern day technology usually gets the design awards at the end of the day.

Somehow I think companies favour graduates from those schools more so than those who wins the whole thing outright by performing better than the rest in the dynamic portion.

I was meaning the students. For us it was a motorsport venture and the cars and the possibility of driving got us into it. For the organisers, it's an engineering competition. The two must be equally judged in my opinion.

[avsfan733]

Heres my viewpoint, which I may say with total bias is quite valid. I actually picked my college based on the FSAE program. Before i even started looking (aka during winter break of my sophmore year of high school) i sat down and read the rule book. Having been racing karts for a fair number of years and having followed racing as long as i can remember, I thought it was an important first step. I made a point of touring the SAE progrmas at different schools and found some very interesting things.

First of all, everyone cheats...badly. The price competition is a joke. I watched admired the sidepods of teams that had two layers of carbon and topped with one of realy light fiberglass price the pods as three layer fiberglass. I visited schools with chain guards made of titanium instead of mild steel...the list goes on. I found these thigns as a high school sophmore, i don't understand why judges can't.

design. There are two schools of thought. 1) design the new buggati veyron of formula cars. everyone knows what i mean, perfect in every manner until it hits asphalt. Bluetooth shifting? come on wireless telemetry is sketchy enough. not only would no one run that because of the possibility of dropping a shift signal once in a whle but i doubt any sanctioning body would allow it because of possible interference. 2) design the car everyone else already has. highlight a few fancy features in design and have a car that might possibly do well in dynamic events. Now im all for design innovation but why spend the tiem money and effort on a carbon monocoque that is only slightly better in dynamics, is so much mroe difficult to work with and really only earns you points in the design competition. I think things like paddle shifters and proper telemetry should be deriguer on these cars but some teams (not naming names) choose to basically build the same car everyyear on a different frame and just crank out lackluster top 15's.

My ideas: I like the idea of a three year design cycle. however i don't know the feasablity of it. I also don't know the feasability of the original concept. BEing an autocrosser, i see few cars come on trailers and even fewer open wheel vehicles. I think they students would learn a lot more by being handed basica components and a rule book. Build Modify race tune etc. Many students tasked with design work on these teams are not wuite there yet in terms of practicality. I personally applaud the UNCLA team for going down a path i think formula SAE should be taken. Racing is more than pitching and idea with a prototype. Im sure i could build a lighter car a better car a more technologically advanced car, but why? sure my school could spend 60g on a tub that we spent a year designing but wether i design a tub in 9 months everyear, or one verery few years, i don't see the difference in what im learning.

[ss_collins]

I note with interest that there is a dynamic event at Silverstone coming up...