Solar Freaks

Hello all,

Possible rule changes for 2010's challenge will be discussed in a national committee meeting at the nationals.

If you have any ideas or suggestions, please post them here. I will bring these up, or pass them on to someone else to bring up, at the meeting.

Cheers,

miseli

Bring back the crash barriers.

Currently the only way you're likely to break your egg is by flipping off the track, in which case you're probably going to lose the race anyway. Another advantage of the crash barriers is that it allows the eggs to be inspected before any interference (such as violent catching by team members) can come into play. A few years ago there was a case of a broken egg that did not result in a forfeit because the team claimed it was broken when they picked the car up after the timing gate. As far as I can see it, if there is no guarantee of a collision then there isn't much point in having to carry an egg.

I can see where you're coming from.
As a competitor in the past, however, I really disliked the rule. Hitting a crash barrier at 25 to 30km/h just wasn't something I really wanted my cars to go through.

Here's a pic that I have from one of my cars in Melbourne in 2005 destroying the impact zone of one of the crash barriers. From memory, I don't think that they were too happy about that.



I have a new stopping procedure in mind though that I think will be likely to be taken on as a rule for next year - particularly with some of the mishaps that we had occur with some competitors stopping cars the way that they did last year in Hobart. I hope to set up a demo in Melbourne.

miseli

Hello

I reckon cars should be able to support 4kgs. This will be exciting. Schools, are just bringing the same design, chassis and only changing the body shape. I.e. Queechy HS. Recycling wheels etc and not improving and trying to seek efficiency in their casting system and overall performance. This is the same with our school - Girrawheen.

Explora as you stated in your other forum weighs around 260-270grams. This is true and wouldn't be able to support the 4kg!
However my new and improved design is slightly lighter and can support 5kg! Although I don't have plans in testing this again, unless i add extra nuts and bolts. LOL
However if the car wins the nationals, then why not test it with 4kg (two milk bottles)
I reckon the shape of the cars should be able to support one bottle laying down however should be able to support 2, 2litre milk bottles when they are positioned upright!

It will be amazing to see what schools will do. Will the cars become heavier or will schools think beyond their normal designs.

Hello all,

Just a reminder that if anyone has some ideas for rule changes for next year, please list them here. I will be documenting some over the next couple weeks to then send out to the national committee for consideration before the meeting at the nationals.

miseli

Maybe implement an increase of ballast for race wins. (the concept taken from Touring car)

This is implemented with the current layout of best of 3 rounds where if 1 team wins the first race, that team is added a ballast of say.. 40/50g for the next race (supplied by committee or your own). If it wins 2 in a row, it goes through the next round and the ballast of the 40-50g added is removed. this is repeated for each round.

For the finals race (best out of 5) if 1 team wins 2 consecutive races, that team will be forced to carry a maximum 80-100gm for that next race, and if the other team does eventually win they will be ballasted for 40-50g. Eventually if both teams are ballasted to the same amount, its back to square 1, head to head. I'd like to see an increase of the finals to a 3 lap race.

Just my 2 cents..

I like the idea of 3-lap finals, perhaps all the other races could become 2 laps.

Speaking of race distance maybe it would be interesting to add an endurance element to the AIMSCC. Along with the regular seeding's on the first day maybe each car could do an 8 lap race and then points are awarded in order of the fastest times. This endurance race could be useful in determining the 'structural integrity' of every car.

Also I'm not a big fan of the 2L milk bottle because it has slightly removed the aerodynamics element of the challenge with most teams going for a simple rod shape. Perhaps something that would allow more creative aerodynamics could be introduced in 2010?

My thoughts

That's ridiculous! Don't you guys want to set a record time! It's already hard to get the weight down on your chassis and body. But I do like the sounds of seeding adjustments. Seeding should be taken over 2 laps rather than one. This will get a better overview of the cars. However according to PWK some cars perform better in one lap than two! No race should be over 3 races more. If you have noticed, you panel gets really hot, maximizer produces so much heat and your motor will last for a shorter time. No-one would like to watch the same cars race off in 8 laps. The winning car will be determined after two laps generally.

Yes i agree 8 laps is on the ridiculous side, just a crazy idea that popped into my head. But I have always wondered how long a car could last.

Ive always wondered the same.

The killer would be fitting all the races (8lap races) into the one day, they already struggle to run on schedule as it is.

jhg wrote:That's ridiculous! Don't you guys want to set a record time! It's already hard to get the weight down on your chassis and body.

I'd take it that this is a response to my post.
I'd love to set a record time, don't get me wrong. My idea was more pointed towards the parity of the fast car vs slow car to increase closer competition. Well an idea is an idea, whether it is adopted or implemented is completely different.

Keep the suggestions coming.

It might be nice to have a bit of an endurance element to the competition, but as Tony mentioned, there wouldn't ever be the time to run it.

There is a chance that the rules next year may go back to a certain required cross-sectional area transverse to the direction of motion. They had a rule like this in 2003. What it means is that it gives teams a few more options when designing their cars.

Getting the cars to have at least 2 wheels within the body so that they are not visible when racing will also be discussed.

As the formula currently stands, cars using electronics are still advantaged even when carrying the extra weight. This applies for all sunlight levels over the one lap.
This could however be modified for next year to give those without electronics the slight advantage. Weights of the non-electronic cars may be reduced instead of added to those with electronics though.

miseli

Redlands wrote:Yes i agree 8 laps is on the ridiculous side, just a crazy idea that popped into my head. But I have always wondered how long a car could last.

We had a few BHHS cars doing laps on our track (The blue one at any event in Victoria) for close to an hour without any significant problems, and they would have gone a lot farther than 8 laps.

Hi All.

I personally like the idea of the transverse carton - increases variety of designs. Also an ontrack stopping system seems like a good idea - I know we used to use something akin to an extention of the switch that would be turned off as the car passed under a kind of bridge one of the boys held on the finish line.

I know this is unrelated to the rules, but would it also be possible to create more of an atmosphere at the event - I know that the WA event was sponsored by Nova - a radio staion, and this helped keep up an atmosphere with music inbetween races. Would it be possible to get some music/ a PA system goin for this.

Cheers
C.C

Rather than a transverse carton, just a minimum cross-sectional area is what I'm on about. It doesn't give you any restrictions on the shape like the carton does and just gives you a few more options when designing and building your car.

With regards to a stopping procedure, it could be likely that there could be one brought in for next year. Basically, it could be something as follows:

Rather than have a stopping block supplied by the committee, teams will be required to make up their own stopping procedure and will then not be allowed to touch the car after a race until it has come to a complete standstill.
Like the crash barriers a few years ago, teams will have to place their system on the track at the end of the first corner on the straight after their cars have passed by for the last time during a race.
The cars may then, once coming into contact with their teams stopping procedure, also be required to stop before a certain point further along on the straight (maybe somewhere near the underpass). The stopping procedure will not be allowed to influence the opposing car, or lane in any way.

The method in which teams choose to stop their cars will be entirely up to them. It could be a simple weighted stopping block shaped to the front of the car where a point with some strength takes the impact rather than the egg cabin, something that covers the panel, or something that turns off the car, whatever. The car will just have to stop before a certain point on the track.

If a car fails to stop, or intrudes on the other lane or car in anyway, it will be disqualified from that particular race and the win will be awarded to the other car regardless of the result in the race. Should teams fail to bring a suitable stopping procedure, the committee will provide a weighted crash barrier.

miseli

We might see teams utilising back-EMF braking again if this comes out.

I'd imagine so, yes.

Although, there might be some restrictions on the type of switch and how it must be (or not be) positioned on the cars. This will mean you can't just run it under a gate of some sort and actually have to run into something.

Personally I would like to see something done about the electronics so that cars without them have the advantage. It's getting to a point where the winner is the one with the best electronics.

Redlands wrote:Personally I would like to see something done about the electronics so that cars without them have the advantage. It's getting to a point where the winner is the one with the best electronics.

I disagree with you. You will get similar performance from all electronics units.
Perfecting your car design/setup is still the most important thing.

TonyB wrote:I disagree with you. You will get similar performance from all electronics units.

Perhaps 'best electronics' was not the right way to describe it, I think that the school has their electronics setup the best will do very well. Setting up your electronics properly to work with the car can be very difficult.