February 15, 1999 Late Vehicle Registration. Submit your registration form,
statement of compliance, and payment to :
The deadline for registration has past. All teams registering
now must pay an additional $250.00 late fee! No exceptions!
March 1, 1999 Safety Structure Equivalency Form. Please submit to Creative
Consulting Services. You can either mail or fax the form and any supporting data to:
April 1, 1999 Cost Report.
April 20, 1999 Pre-event Design Reviews. Mail*, fax or email* to:
Must reach sae by 4/20/99.
*Mail and email are preferred.
Teams that do not submit a pre-event design review will not
compete in the design event, and will receive zero points for design!
Teams that submit a review,but are deemed to be
unsatisfactory, will also not compete in the design event, but will receive between 5 and
20 pts. for their efforts.
Car numbers 1-10 are reserved for the top finishers of last
years competition. Requests for car numbers will be filled on a "first come,
first serve basis." Please send a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd
choice for car numbers. No car numbers will be reserved until the registration form and
payment have been received by SAE, so hurry and get your checks in the mail today!
| 00 |
University of Iowa |
| 3 |
University of Akron |
| 5 |
Rochester Inst. Technology |
| 7 |
University of Waterloo |
| 9 |
Ohio State University |
| 11 |
University of Washington |
| 12 |
Texas A&M University |
| 13 |
Georgia Institute of Tech. |
| 14 |
University of Florida |
| 15 |
Iowa State University |
| 17 |
Polytechnic Univ. of Puerto Rico |
| 19 |
University of Missouri, Rolla |
| 20 |
Queens University |
| 21 |
University of Utah |
| 22 |
University of Louisville |
| 23 |
Penn State University |
| 25 |
California State Univ., Northridge |
| 27 |
Cornell University |
| 29 |
Lehigh University |
| 31 |
Monroe County Comm. College |
| 33 |
University of Pittsburgh |
| 34 |
Clemson University |
| 43 |
Univ. of Minnesota, Twin Cities |
| 45 |
SUNY Stony Brook |
| 52 |
Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst. |
| 54 |
Univ. of Missouri, Columbia |
| 56 |
Purdue University |
| 61 |
Brown University |
| 63 |
University of Cincinnati |
| 70 |
Univ. of Michigan, Ann Arbor |
| 75 |
Florida Inst. of Technology |
| 76 |
Bradley University |
| 77 |
University of Kansas |
| 88 |
Milwaukee School of Engrg. |
| 97 |
University of Toronto |
| 99 |
University of Texas, Arlington |
| 100 |
University of Colorado, Boulder |
| 102 |
Michigan State University |
| 111 |
Auburn University |
| 113 |
Michigan Tech. University |
| 201 |
Kettering University |
| 247 |
University of Toledo |
| 418 |
Universite du Quebec, Chicoutimi |
| 500 |
Univ. of Puerto Rico, Mayaguez |
| 747 |
University of Calgary |
| 911 |
West Virginia University |
|
Carnegie Mellon University |
|
University of Hartford |
|
Union College |
|
United States Air Force Academy |
|
Virginia Tech |
|
University of Western Ontario |
Teams that submit a review, but are deemed to be unsatisfactory,
will also not compete in the design event, but will receive between 5 and 20 pts. for
their efforts.
Design Judge Team
..From the desk of Carroll Smith
Since the SAE student Race Cars are just that racing cars
in addition to engineers from DaimlerChrysler, Ford, and General Motors we include
a number of engineers actively working in professional racing. Our goal is for each of the
design judging teams to include engineers from both industry and racing that have current
valid experience in chassis/suspension and engine/powertrain. These judges basically work
independently.
This year, for the first time, the design competition will start
with the submission of design briefs. Those teams that do not submit a design brief will
not be judged for design. Teams will be pre-assigned to judging lines so that each judging
team will see a representative cross section of cars.
The procedure begins with a five minute presentation by the team.
This presentation should be concise, however it should include the following:
- design goals
- philosophy behind the project
- organization of the team
- type and extent of research involved
- manufacturing and testing/development procedures and the amount of testing, both static
and dynamic that has been done.
This is a tall order for a five minute presentation. We would have
no objection to separate efforts for chassis/suspension and engine/powertrain. Story
boards, notebooks etc. are a definite plus. A brief written description of the project
could be left with the judges. Again, this year, we are requiring color photos of the car.
Thirty minutes is an inadequate period of time to evaluate the
design of a car. Therefor, it is essential that knowledgeable members of the team
accompany the judges as they inspect the car. Questions should be answered completely but
concisely. If the team feels that the judges have overlooked some important feature of the
car, it should be brought to their attention.
When the judges have completed their inspection of each car, they
huddle, compare notes and assign numerical scores to the car. At the end of the day, each
team normalizes their scores, assigns numerical placing to the cars that passed through
their lines and selects some number of cars to advance to the semi finals. One or more
roving judges, who do not take part in the initial scoring, make certain that no deserving
cars are left out of the semi finals. At this point normalized scores are assigned to each
of the cars that are not selected as semi finalists.
A reduced number of judges evaluate the semi finalists and select
the final five or six cars. At this point, the level of the competition is so high that we
inevitably wind up taking points away for less than optimum features rather than awarding
points for excellence. Again normalized scores are assigned to the cars not selected as
finalists.
The proof of the validity of the design lies in performance. For
this reason final design judging takes place after the dynamic competition, usually on
Sunday morning, before the awards banquet. Because driving skill, preparation and luck are
involved in performance, we evaluate how well the car works, rather than how well it
scores in the dynamic events.
There are a lot of ways to skin a cat, and vehicle dynamics is not
an exact science. We the judges do not have to agree with the design features or even the
design philosophy of the cars. What is essential, is that the teams have valid engineering
reasons for their design decisions and be prepared to defend them.
We see the same less than optimum features each year (although,
thankfully, not usually form the same teams). They include:
- Inadequately supported steering rack and pinion assemblies
- Inadequate suspension member stiffness as opposed to strength
- Poor load paths for suspension members particularly push rods
- Suspension pivots in single shear
- Inadequate upper torso support from the seating system
- Poor pedal placement, particularly with respect to the relative heights of the brake and
throttle pedals on three pedal cars.
- Overly heavy cars. Year after year otherwise excellent cars do not make the semi finals
simply because they are too heavy. There is no reason for one of these cars to weigh more
than 500 pounds.
Total belief in the validity of finite element analysis, FEA, should
always be backed up with some form of physical testing. Theoretical knowledge and the
ability to calculate stresses are absolute necessities in the engineering world. So is a
"feel" for the rightness of structures and mechanisms. The theory is very well
taught in our universities, however the feel seldom is, neither is it inborn. It can only
be learned by actually making and developing complex devices like student race
cars.
The annual SAE Collegiate Design Competitions ensure that several
hundred young engineers will enter industry having been part of a team that has
conceptualized, designed, constructed and developed a racing car, a load bearing aircraft
or a walking machine. These people will have necessarily learned how to work as a member
of a team; that, in order to be successful, any team requires a strong leader; that time
and money constraints are immutable; that practicality takes precedence over elegance (and
even purity) or design and that the interfaces between the operator and the machine are
critical to the success of the project. This experience and the knowledge gained through
it will serve both the graduates and the industry well.
Hotel Accommodations
We have blocked rooms at the following local hotels to aid your team
in getting accommodations. Reservations are on a first come first serve basis, so call
early to ensure that you can get rooms at the hotel of your choice. Important: Tell the
reservations clerk that you are with Formula SAE® and rooms have been blocked for your
use. The cut-off date for each hotel is April 28, 1999.
All reservations must be guaranteed for late arrival by a first
nights room deposit or guaranteed to a major credit card.
Reminder: Most of the hotels will waive the state tax if your team provides a copy
of the schools tax exemption certificate. Some hotels have more stringent
requirements than others, so be sure to ask the reservations clerk exactly what you will
need to take advantage of this tax savings.
Amerisuites Hotel 20 rooms blocked
1545 N Opdyke Road
Auburn Hills, MI 48326
Reservation Number: 248/475-9393
Room Rate: $99.00 + tax
Courtyard Marriott 30 rooms blocked
1296 Opdyke Road
Auburn Hills, MI 48326
Reservation Number: 248/373-4100
Room Rate: $69.00 + tax
Fairfield Inn 40 rooms blocked
1294 Opdyke Road
Auburn Hills, MI 48326
Reservation Number: 248/373-2228
Room Rate: $68.50 + tax
Auburn Hills Hilton Suites 40 rooms blocked
2300 Featherstone Road
Auburn Hills MI 48326
Reservation Number: 248/334-2222
Room Rate: $135.00 + tax
Hampton Inn 40 rooms blocked
1461 Opdyke Rd
Auburn Hills, MI 48326
Reservation Number: 248/370-0044
Room Rate: $84.00 + tax
Holiday Inn Select 50 rooms blocked
1500 Opdyke Road
Auburn, Hills MI 48326
Reservation Number: 248/373-4550
Room Rate: $89.00 + tax
Wingate Inn 50 rooms blocked - opened 1998
2200 Featherstone Rd
Auburn Hills, MI 48326
Reservation Number: 248/334-3324
Room Rate: $95.00 + tax
The above hotels are within a one-mile radius of the Pontiac
Silverdome. If you have any questions or concerns, please call Stacey Bush at 724/772-8533
or email
Steves Corner
...from the desk of Steve Sayovitz
Welcome to the first installment of my column. The staff at SAE
Educational Relations has asked me to write for the newsletter. I intend to cover a
variety of aspects of Formula SAE®, but first, a little about myself.
Many of you may recognize me as the Design Event photographer. I
have been documenting all of the cars for the organizers since 1996. Before that, I
attended every Formula SAE® event since 1987.
My involvement began my freshman year at Georgia Tech. After reading
an article in the school newspaper about a new project on campus to build a racecar, I
joined. That was the rookie year for Georgia Tech. After working on body and composites
projects for several years, I designed and built the chassis for the car that placed 2nd
in 1990 and was team manager for my last two years. My last year as a competitor was 1991,
the first year that an auto company instead of a school hosted the event.
The Formula SAE® of today is quite different from the event of
1987. What has changed between then and now? The quality of the competing cars has
improved dramatically, of course, but the biggest change is the amount of recognition by
the automotive industry.
Formula SAE® is a fantastic introduction to the engineering field.
Even if a competitor is never again involved with building or selling cars, the experience
gained from the project is invaluable. I am employed as a consulting engineer for the
electric utility industry to develop predictive maintenance programs. I still draw heavily
on my experience with Formula SAE®.
This column will be a means of communication to everyone involved
with Formula SAE®. I will be writing about visits to the competing schools, involvement
of teams outside of the May event, and anything else appropriate. I welcome your feedback
and suggestions.
Send your feedback or suggestions to Steve via email:
* Buying rates are quoted in foreign currency unit per U.S. dollar unless denoted by an
"+". Rates denoted by a "+" are quoted in U.S. dollar per foreign
currency unit. The noon buying rates in New York for cable transfers payable in foreign
currencies are certified by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York for customs purposes, as
required by Section 522 of the amended Tariff Act of 1930. The information is based on
data collected by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York from a sample of market
participants and is intended only for informational purposes. The data were obtained from
sources believed to be reliable but this bank does not guarantee their accuracy,
completeness or correctness.
The introduction of the new European currency, the euro, on January
1, 1999 will result in two changes to the posting of certified rates by the Federal
Reserve Bank of New York:
1) Effective January 4, 1999, the FRBNY will commence posting a dollar-euro exchange
rate;
2) After a brief courtesy period concluding January 15, 1999, the FRBNY will cease posting
dollar rates against the currencies of the eleven countries participating in monetary
union (i.e. the Austrian schilling, Belgium franc, Finnish markka, French franc, German
mark, Irish punt, Italian lira, Luxembourg franc, Dutch guilder, Portuguese escudo, and
Spanish peseta).