Design Comp 2011

[TommyK]

Have there been any changes to design comp this year?

I was browsing some of the older topics, trying to jog my memory on things like why Pika A got a 2:27 in '10, why Fringe and Pika had re-rolls in '09 (watching Fringe men's finals heats from '04 and '09 always hurts) and I stumbled on this old post:

My idea for improving design: hold it friday afternoon, after prelims. The judges would all be invited to watch the prelims. This, more than anything else would improve the odds of having a rational outcome of the contest

Its a pretty cool concept, kind of like "parc ferme" from Formula 1.
Just roll them into the Gym when they come off the drop line.

If you include freeroll times with a weighted scoring penalty for every second behind the leader ... then on-course performance can have some sort of balanced affect on the design score. This could replace the old "must finish in top-third" requirement and the judges get to evaluate the buggy in "race condition".

[jixson]

I thought the point of design comp was to be judged purely on the mechanical features of the buggy without any bias towards speed. Of course there's the argument that a well designed buggy should probably go faster, but what if it doesn't because of a poor shove, bad wheels, etc.? As a mechanic, I feel there should be some part of the whole buggy experience that is purely in my hands without the human element of pushers screwing it up. I don't want someone's bad pushing to ruin my chances of my buggy winning a design award that should be based solely on the efforts of me and my fellow mechanics.

[Mackin]

I completely agree Josh.

Unfortunately there is already the "day 2" rule.

[lchomas]

There is no way to evaluate the mechanical performance of the buggy without rolling it (or doing something similar) Design ends up being a beauty contest and thus, a waste of time. Perhaps we need a "fastest 5 free roll times" or some type of actual mechanical testing during the design judging that would make it a relevant assessment of a buggy.

[jixson]

Since when is Design Competition a mechanical performance test? Isn't that part of what the race is for?

To quote the Sweepstakes website: "The Design Competition, which takes place during Carnival, is an assessment of the engineering design of the buggies competing in the Sweepstakes races. More than an engineering competition, though, the Design Competition is an opportunity for competing organizations to show off the buggies to the campus community, and for spectators and visitors to get a chance to see the buggies more up-close than when they are on the course in the preliminary heats the following day."

The judges should only be looking at the quality of construction and ingenuity of the design. Teams should be rewarded for innovation, but of course said innovation has to be effective, which is why I more or less agree that the buggy needs to get to second day. A buggy that's a carbon copy of a previous buggy should not win design comp no matter how fast it is.

[Carl Nott]

Stupid day 2 rule, foiling my plans for dominating design comp with my pushbar-less buggy.

[lchomas]

I don't see how you evaluate the mechanical design of a buggy accurately by just looking at it. Something that looks "innovative" or "aerodynamic" may not actually make a faster human powered vehicle. Perhaps Design just needs to revert to the pure beauty contest it once was when the DU Fish buggy won.

[Carsen Kline]

Since when is Design Competition a mechanical performance test? Isn't that part of what the race is for?

Despite our efforts with Brooklyn to be safe, innovative, and high-tech (500% more carbon than Spirit!), one design comp judge said to us, and I quote, "It IS a race."

That judge was a Fringe alum, too. He slammed us on the score sheets.

[Carl Nott]

Despite our efforts with Brooklyn to be safe, innovative, and high-tech (500% more carbon than Spirit!), one design comp judge said to us, and I quote, "It IS a race."

That judge was a Fringe alum, too. He slammed us on the score sheets.

Well, you know, at least you didn't use Kevlar. THAT would have been a REALLY bad idea.

[jberanek]

I have some insight into the history of the "day 2" rule. We used to call it the "Pioneers Rule." It was instituted the year after the Pioneers won the design competition in 1988 with our first buggy, Pinnacle. We were not fast on the course in our debut year for a plethora of reasons. But we built a very forward looking buggy that took a lot of risks, especially as a new organization, and were reward for it based on the engineering, design, build and beauty of the buggy. This buggy was full pre-preg kevlar/nomex monocoque construction, running the pneumatics that almost everyone used after we debuted them (we gave the pneumatics to Spirit that they used to set the '88 course record).

I think most organizations thought we were hacks building a bondo buggy and won design because of a "good paint job," but at the time only we and the judges allowed to look inside knew the difference.

I think that is what design should be about, rewarding organizations for innovative engineering, design, craftsmanship. That is what will push the needle in buggy (especially in the cookie cutter era we are in). Making Design Competition relevant requires selecting judges that can see this in the buggies and trusting their decisions. (And I'm not making any judgments about any past or current judges, I've had no involvement in it).

JB