USF1 -- F1's All-American Challenger

[The FOZ]

Then again, with that small a group it becomes more manageable.

It does look VERY much like Solidworks. I have no real experience with Catia so I can't tell if it could be that. Any hints from those more familiar? Earlier pics also might provide some clues as the picture of the cockpit before looked like it wasn't from Solidworks.

Honestly...it looks to me like 3D CAD Drawings...I see nothing there that conclusively links it to SW...I do believe you could achieve that exact same model using any number of 3D CAD software out there.

[Mystery Steve]

Then again, with that small a group it becomes more manageable.

It does look VERY much like Solidworks. I have no real experience with Catia so I can't tell if it could be that. Any hints from those more familiar? Earlier pics also might provide some clues as the picture of the cockpit before looked like it wasn't from Solidworks.

Honestly...it looks to me like 3D CAD Drawings...I see nothing there that conclusively links it to SW...I do believe you could achieve that exact same model using any number of 3D CAD software out there.

Those construction lines for the front suspension do look very SWish. I actually thought the same thing when I first saw them.

The only CAD that I've used as a group is SolidEdge when I was still doing FSAE, so I don't have any experience with CAD in a "large company" setting, but what exactly would make a CAD package more user-friendly for a large group? As far as I understand, a lot of "larger" companies use SolidWorks, too. I mean, Scaled Composites used it to go into space IIRC... I would think the important thing is just having some standardized way of organizing and labeling parts, and just have someone in charge of overseeing the process. I'd be curious to be corrected, though.

[FW17]

Can some one send one of these into the USF1 factory.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FBxmck16 ... r_embedded#[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=feVoX26W ... r_embedded[/youtube]

[Richard]

what exactly would make a CAD package more user-friendly for a large group?

With models having hundreds of interlinked components and parameters, then a small change at one end could have knock on effects down the whole length of the car. Also, imagine trying to run some aero analysis while the suspension guys are playing with their configuration.

Some software trips up when confronted with many users operating on one model, other software takes it its stride.

[WhiteBlue]

Not that they will ever hold a candle to the grandees, but for giving it a try, good resource benchmarking indeed. If they can be within 107% of pole-time with this level of technology, corporations might just start to wonder if ten times the staff is worth it?

I think that 107% will be achievable with the current regs for those who take the financial hurdles. Just the first four fly away races can easily cost you 6 mil $. If your rookie drivers smash up a pair of chassis you can be in serious trouble with the PTB unless your factory is capable of churning out parts like a well oiled machine.

The new USF1 approach will be fascinating to experience in practise. Perhaps they will get engineering feedback from all that publishing and some good tips may be in the sea of rubbish that will be coming their way.

[djos]

Im kinda rooting for USF1, y'know under-dog status etc .... but, I really hope they hire 1 decent rookie (not the Mexican who no-one has ever heard of) and an experienced reasonably current F1 driver.

heck, even Scott speed would be a better choice that Hoseb Lopez!

[xpensive]

Oh come on dj, everybody knows that people in your part of the world consider this effort "AUSF1", just admit it?

[djos]

Oh come on dj, everybody knows that people in your part of the world consider this effort "AUSF1", just admit it?

Lol, if only Peter would come to his sense and hire Ryan Briscoe! (fmr Toyota test driver) Then it could be AUSF1

[xpensive]

Why don't you give Scott Dixon an asylum-visa while you're at it and ask Sam Michael over?
Alan Jones can perhaps be physio-therapist or something?

[Fil]

Can some one send one of these into the USF1 factory.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FBxmck16 ... r_embedded#[/youtube]

err, that IS the USF1 factory..

at 55sec you can see the schematics for their toaster design.

[The FOZ]

Those construction lines for the front suspension do look very SWish. I actually thought the same thing when I first saw them.

The only CAD that I've used as a group is SolidEdge when I was still doing FSAE, so I don't have any experience with CAD in a "large company" setting, but what exactly would make a CAD package more user-friendly for a large group? As far as I understand, a lot of "larger" companies use SolidWorks, too. I mean, Scaled Composites used it to go into space IIRC... I would think the important thing is just having some standardized way of organizing and labeling parts, and just have someone in charge of overseeing the process. I'd be curious to be corrected, though.

That linetype was probably inveted decades before SW...Remember, before drafting happened on computers, it happened on the drafting board, and there were many different linetypes (and lineweights) used then, too. Then, AutoCAD and the like integrated linetypes into it's functionality, and when SW came along, it used that particular one for construction lines.

SW multi-user operates like this: Assemblies and parts within them each have read only and read/write attributes. First person to open an assembly gains read/write control over all parts and assemblies housed inside of it. To yield write permission of a part, they should make it read only on their side in both the first assembly level it's located in, AND for the individual part. Then, the person who wishes to write to that file must separately make that file and that assembly read/write so that the changes they make are actually save-able.

IIRC, there's no prompting system on screen saying "user XYZ requests read/write access to this file/assembly"...which is all well and good if you're sitting a few feet from the person you're working with, but what if there's ten people in a room? Or if you work in separate rooms?

*This is based on my SW2008 experience. I now use a mix of 2007 and 2010, and haven't bothered looking into 2010's capabilities enough to comment on it, and we don't use it at my work.

[ringo]

Sorry ringo, but I can only see dark-blue coils, not yellow torsion bars, but that's ok when I love retro like the
solidpiece-machined 6000-Alu birdcage holding the rockers, beautiful thing that!

here is a closer look, i think i see the blue coil. but i still can make out the grey link. The yellow is something else.



I don't see why they would use a coil spring over the torsional spring though. The coil takes up a lot of volume.

Hello........first time posting here but I have followed the forum for sometime.
My take on the blue piece is that it is one end of the power steering unit which is generally mounted in that area. Last years Brawn had it mounted low and in line with the lower A arm, BMW was the opposite and had it high and in line with the upper A arm. USF1 has, at least in this drawing, chosen to mount it and the steering arms in line with the upper A arm. Best example I can find is the Renault although the view is somewhat cluttered by the frame used to support the car. In all the black on the nose there is a goldish oval the width of the car that holds the steering.

Yeah, i can see the steering rack in light blue and silver on the USF1 car. What Xpensive was talking about is the blue thing behind that.
Coil overs can be beneficial for simpler ride height adjustment. That could be one of their "innovations", but i am still skeptical about it interms of weight and the footprint.
I figure Americans are always faithful to older, "beefier" technologies like 2valve push-rod engines, carbs, and solid axles. As long as it works fine they use it.


Git r done!!

I am interested in how the rear suspension looks after seeing the front.

[Richard]

I figure Americans are always faithful to older, "beefier" technologies like 2valve push-rod engines, carbs, and solid axles. As long as it works fine they use it.

Such as bright copper kettles, warm woollen mittens, and brown paper packages tied up with strings?

[Jersey Tom]

We use CATIA at work, and that certainly is not CATIA. I'm almost convinced its SW. Really surprises me.

Solidworks does not handle large assemblies particularly well, nor does it do complicated surfaces particularly well.



From the little red icon and the interface layout..

[xpensive]

I figure Americans are always faithful to older, "beefier" technologies like 2valve push-rod engines, carbs, and solid axles. As long as it works fine they use it.

Such as bright copper kettles, warm woollen mittens, and brown paper packages tied up with strings?

I think it has a little more to do with what I said upstreams;

Why? Well, as a decision-making engineer, at the end of the day you tend to stick to what you know, just like parts machined from solid 6000-Alu rather than Ti-investment castings, where the benefit is rather limited but the cost is not.
I always wondered what Anderson wanted with those CNC's, but when you're trying to build an F1 car with a staff of 40-some, you have to work with methods and means you have xperience from.