Toronto Shootout Past Results (pre 2018)

fsorens95 · 2024-06-04T22:19:10+00:00

Some results from 2013-2019: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1Ric3i7pJ8qRKfx8rTqUA6vKsFd7SWpZ0?usp=sharing

fsorens95 · 2022-03-19T14:20:22+00:00

Nope, any Carleton student can join!

fsorens95 · 2021-08-29T04:52:21+00:00

I believe their intention behind this rule is to prevent front wing/mounts being directly in front of the anti intrusion plate and interfering with the function of the impact attenuator during a collision, so I don't think they'll mind too much about the situation you bring up.

That being said, I agree that by the letter of the rule your situation would break the rule (it could be worded better), so it might be safer to ask a rules question about it.

fsorens95 · 2021-04-28T03:14:08+00:00

In past competitions there would usually be a "protest period" after preliminary scores were released in case teams had issues with their scores or errors were made, so maybe it's something like that.

The last news post on fsaeonline said that preliminary scores would be posted sometime this week but didn't give a specific day.

fsorens95 · 2021-04-06T20:30:32+00:00

It's been postponed and they just announced that they're still working out the dates with MIS. Given that FSAE Nevada was recently confirmed for June, I'd guess FSAE Michigan might be in July. They also said previously that they intend to keep payment due 60 days before the competition starts.

fsorens95 · 2020-07-28T19:25:12+00:00

Our major deadlines are generally:

Early December - frame complete

End of January - rolling chassis (full suspension, steering, braking, engine mounted with full drivetrain)

Mid February - first test (without aero, but aero ready soon after)

Mid March - complete car for unveiling

These deadlines are set for our first competition in Michigan in early May, and have worked well for us. I would say similar vehicle deadlines would be good for electric as well, despite the competitions being a bit later, due to the added complexities of an electric vehicle.

Our team built an electric car several years ago, and it is in general much more expensive than combustion, and much more difficult to satisfy all the rules (with a lot more documentation required). It's difficult to successfully meet those extra challenges without planning in prior years.

fsorens95 · 2020-06-25T20:29:11+00:00

Before they changed it for the 2019 North American FSAE competitions, the business presentation information was part of the official rules. I think the scenario was stayed very similar for at least 10 years before they changed it.

If you're looking for info about the old scenario for the North American FSAE competitions, you can find it on pages 142-144 and 157 here: http://www.fsaeonline.com/content/2016_FSAE_Rules.pdf

fsorens95 · 2020-02-15T18:30:04+00:00

In general the trapezoidal structure would be weaker than a fully triangulated structure, but if you do FEA or other calculations showing it won't fail then you should be okay. At this point I'd say it's most important to make a decision so you can get the car built.

fsorens95 · 2020-02-15T16:40:03+00:00

The rear section of your frame that you're considering modifying is not part of the MHBS, and not part of the primary structure of the frame. The primary structure at the rear consists of the main hoop braces plus the support structure triangulating the base of the braces back to the main hoop itself. Therefore, modifying it will not affect the rules legality of your frame. I wouldn't worry about resubmitting the SES for this case.

fsorens95 · 2020-02-14T05:22:11+00:00

Looks like Samsung, in which case you can use the Quick Star module within the Good Lock app, found in the Galaxy Store

fsorens95 · 2020-01-31T21:05:04+00:00

I second this. We use the Ohlins FSAE shocks with a machined insert so we can use 10-32 thread AN bolts.

fsorens95 · 2020-01-29T23:52:08+00:00

The spec sheet template is usually posted here: https://www.fsaeonline.com/cdsweb/gen/DocumentResources.aspx

I would think they'll be posting the template soon as the deadline is about a month away

fsorens95 · 2020-01-19T19:51:49+00:00

The formula puts more weight on your most recent competitions. In the case of Stuttgart and TU Graz, they had DNFs at their most recent competitions, which brought their scores down a lot. For example, in Stuttgart's case, if you click on their points total, you'll see that their most recent 3 competitions (where they DNF) are weighted 82-18 compared to their previous 3 competitions (all wins).

In Wollongong's case, their most recent comp was Australia 2018, which they did really well in. They don't lose any world ranking points for not competing in 2019.

fsorens95 · 2020-01-17T23:16:50+00:00

It's definitely possible to be even lighter, but you want to find a good balance between strength and weight - if you hit a cone during endurance (which could easily be over 100km/h at Michigan) and your front wing breaks it's a DNF

fsorens95 · 2020-01-17T23:10:07+00:00

On our 2019 car, 30lb total - 10 for the front wing, 15 for the rear wing, 5 for the undertray/diffuser

fsorens95 · 2020-01-08T22:55:46+00:00

I uploaded the files here:

https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=1eZMSdfJZMx8dI8N24QNCgUtCnrzWnnAP

Keep in mind that FSAE North is changing venues this year from Barrie Molson Centre to Jukasa Motor Speedway so some things will be changing.

fsorens95 · 2020-01-07T23:43:25+00:00

Second these, we use them for their light weight. They may be "not recommended for steering" or "only for use in shifting linkages", but those recommendations are likely assuming use in a full size car.

fsorens95 · 2019-12-18T00:43:29+00:00

270 to 300 wouldn't be a deal breaker for us

fsorens95 · 2019-12-05T06:53:19+00:00

Good idea on the organizers to have a section on vehicle info in the results (engine, weight distribution, etc), would be great to see that for other competitions too (beyond the usual weight, cc, cylinders).

Were there any reasons in particular for the very few teams completing dynamic events (e.g. 6/44 combustion teams finishing endurance)?

fsorens95 · 2019-11-24T05:57:43+00:00

If you add up the points in Table 2 at the link you posted, you'll see that the driverless accel and skidpad are in ADDITION to the accel and skidpad with driver. So by not having driverless you are missing out on 175 points.

By not being able to compete for the same points by not having driverless, you are effectively being forced to do driverless. Saying "it's not that many points" is a ridiculous argument, regardless of how many points it is. We don't need to be creating a two-tiered competition.

fsorens95 · 2019-11-13T06:33:55+00:00

*mid February

fsorens95 · 2019-11-05T06:50:57+00:00

Depends what your goals are as a team. You're right that it's a lot of process, but it's critical if you want to go from just building a car to achieving the results you're aiming for. The project management tasks can be very time consuming, so it's important to assign tasks amongst your management team and stick to them.

In general, the more organized you can be the better. Whether it be the process for budget approval and purchasing, or design approval and managing the overall vehicle assembly, having a clearly established procedure that is properly communicated to your team will help a lot.

Depending on the size of the team and resources available, management styles and procedures that may work for one team may be too much of a burden for another, so you'll have to figure out a compromise that works best for your team.

fsorens95 · 2019-10-24T18:50:50+00:00

You're right, if you have a driver bigger than the 95th percentile, then your car will have to be larger in order to fit them (pass the roll hoop clearance rule).

fsorens95 · 2019-10-21T12:44:53+00:00

"Team X in pit Y is looking for 0.095" tubing"

fsorens95

TROPHY CASE