Mandatory data collection beginning 1-1-2014

[sccadsr31]

Data collection beginning 1-1-2014: please remember this came out in the December Fastrack and is going to be enforced beginning with the Sebring race in January. While this needs to be approved by the BoD i see no reason it will not be approved.

Change 9.1.1.G. FORMULA 1000 (FB) PREPARATION RULES

Formula 1000 is a restricted class. Therefore, all allowable modifications,
changes, or additions are as stated herein. There are no exceptions. IF IN
DOUBT, DON’T. Homologation is required for all cars. All FB cars competing in Majors Races must have a 3x4 inch magnetic mounting surface (i.e. steel plate) for an SCCA provided GPS-based data acquisition box measuring 3x4x1.5 inches. The mounting surface is to be approximately oriented either horizontally or vertically either parallel or perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the car and must be accessible from the exterior of the car with the driver on board. It should have a view of the sky, and not be located under carbon fiber or metallic bodywork. The purpose of this requirement is to allow the random placement of data boxes on cars on pre-grid by SCCA assigned personal and the collection of the box when the car exits the race track.

[KenT]

Hmmm. Some of these cockpits can get a little tight, especially with head surrounds to provide a view of the sky. I know of my car that little area had switches and bias adjusters tucked underneath bodywork.

Of course you can always mount a section of steel on one of the front endplates and see if an SCCA rep feels its worth slapping on their data acq out in the wind like that.

[jaltaman]

Thanks for the heads-up.

But really?

Slapping a GPS on a street car is no big deal as they have lots of metal surfaces, but on an FB??? I guess we'll have to add a metal plate somewhere on the outside of the car (that will look like crap).

Wait, I know where there's enough metal - on the muffler!

All this time I have been looking for a reason to stick a 3"x4" metal plate on the outside of my car......NOT!

Can't say I am a fan of this one.

[David Ferguson]

That's why they are asking for your help. I think there is a market for a small fiberglass (not carbon) bubble that allows this to easily be mounted to formula cars or sports racers).

Since the goal is to mount an AiM solo, you might want to consider the AiM solo mounting plate. Here it is on our webstore:

http://store.veracitydata.com/item/s...unting-bracket

[Will Velkoff]

What is the purpose of this?

[Charles Livingston]

What is the purpose of this (i.e., what data will SCCA collect and why)? If it is to collect data on the engines I can maybe understand, but I don't want anyone save for a few select individuals viewing my learning process. I would call most data a trade secret.

Charles

[jaltaman]

Interesting. So why not just download the data from my AIM MXL? And for those who don't have an AIM they can use the solos.

Or is that too easy?

[David Ferguson]

The purpose is purely competition adjustments. Now that we have restrictors, the CRB needs good data on engine/vehicle performance.

I'm sure the data will be made anonymous with respect to the driver, but they do need to capture chassis/engine info to go with a particular data set.

They tried to do this at the 2013 Runoffs, but failed make it work. Folks that had data, didn't want to share other data their data set continued (i.e. suspension data), so they ended up with nothing.

[RobLav]

No compliance with this on my car.

[Tigaman]

They tried to do this at the 2013 Runoffs, but failed make it work. Folks that had data, didn't want to share other data their data set continued (i.e. suspension data), so they ended up with nothing.

Using the Solo allows for GPS data, longitudinal and lateral accleration forces and if you know the weight, you can make comparative studies between cars.

I think drivers are mistaken that any "proprietary" information could or would be gleaned from Solos that don't have TPS, steering sensor, brake pressure or suspension data logged.

It's a great, non-invasive thing to, in about 60 seconds, overlay a selection of cars sampled and pick out cars that may need a little more "scrutiny." Other series do this, namely World Challenge and some NASA classes. In FIA series, they do it all the time...

Relax.

[JRMarchand]

how is rpm data collected, only if rpm is of any use to the data collectors.


i have a funny one, talk to Devins about prototyping a "kicker" for the solo unit, as long as "it", "the kicker" does not obscure view of the sky.

Peter said it right, Relax.

[Tigaman]

how is rpm data collected, only if rpm is of any use to the data collectors.

RPM is not capable of being collected on a Solo.

[Dee]

you guys are in for real problems!! maybe the white house is behind this!!!!!!!

[JRMarchand]

how about the Solo3 for collecting RPM data, oh wait we are not talking of GoPro lol, only one Solo, one Solo , got it ok ok maybe hook up GoPro to helmet and maybe see the rpms and rest of the data, like predictive laps and what the laps could've been. just joking relax.

[Wren]

The purpose is purely competition adjustments. Now that we have restrictors, the CRB needs good data on engine/vehicle performance.

I'm sure the data will be made anonymous with respect to the driver, but they do need to capture chassis/engine info to go with a particular data set.

They tried to do this at the 2013 Runoffs, but failed make it work. Folks that had data, didn't want to share other data their data set continued (i.e. suspension data), so they ended up with nothing.

I don't think restrictors are a done deal. I suspect that this is to further research whether or not to use them. Seems pretty pointless compared to using a dyno, but whatever.

They don't need to know what chassis it goes along with. I cannot imagine they are considering competition adjustments based on chassis manufacture.

I think drivers are mistaken that any "proprietary" information could or would be gleaned from Solos that don't have TPS, steering sensor, brake pressure or suspension data logged.

It's a great, non-invasive thing to, in about 60 seconds, overlay a selection of cars sampled and pick out cars that may need a little more "scrutiny." Other series do this, namely World Challenge and some NASA classes. In FIA series, they do it all the time...

Relax.

Even top speed is proprietary. FB competitors are pretty sensitive to things like this now. They are not going to start picking out individual cars for increased scrutiny. That would be the opposite of what FB is about.

I am not sure what they hope to accomplish with this.

[stonebridge20]

I am not sure what they hope to accomplish with this.

Wealth distribution. It fixes everything!

[BRONCO]

Will placement of these devices be totally random? Or; Will they only be put on front running cars only? Personally, I don't understand why FB cars need to have them. You all have come up with a spec. cars are within them. I can more understand data collection for P2 as they are trying to achieve some parity within that class. Nuff said.
Tony

[BWC54]

you guys are in for real problems!! maybe the white house is behind this!!!!!!!

If you like your engine package, you can keep your engine package.

[romoman]

Even top speed is proprietary. FB competitors are pretty sensitive to things like this now. They are not going to start picking out individual cars for increased scrutiny. That would be the opposite of what FB is about.

I am not sure what they hope to accomplish with this.

Until someone sits with a radar gun and gets trap speeds. Might even have a stop watch and sector times. Oh My!

People are going to make a much bigger deal out of this than it really is.

[Maciej]

If you like your engine package, you can keep your engine package.

I just erupted in laughter from this, thank you...

[KenT]

Just put it on the left from end plate. It will take care of itself. Life sometimes works things out.

[DanW]

If you like your engine package, you can keep your engine package.

Wealth distribution. It fixes everything!

Its all part of the new NSA Grand Plan.

From your NSA - The only Federal Agency that really listens to YOU!

[glenn cooper]

..............

I don't think restrictors are a done deal. I suspect that this is to further research whether or not to use them. Seems pretty pointless compared to using a dyno, but whatever.

They don't need to know what chassis it goes along with. I cannot imagine they are considering competition adjustments based on chassis manufacture.



Even top speed is proprietary.

How so? The top speeds from RO's were listed on the SCCA website, possibly from My Laps(?). They've been doing that for quite some time, no?

FB competitors are pretty sensitive to things like this now. They are not going to start picking out individual cars for increased scrutiny. That would be the opposite of what FB is about.

I am not sure what they hope to accomplish with this.

[Mike Devins]

with the aero packages being so much different on these cars top speed and acceleration will be very different with the same motor in different cars. How this data can be useful is a mystery to me. I agree with Wren - Dyno data if it is about HP.

[Jnovak]

I am on the FB and the SR2 (P2) ad hoc committees and the first I heard of this, for use in FB, was when it was announced. I can understand the value of this in helping with parity in P2 but I see no need for this in FB.

That said I think that this is a big nothing to worry about.

[JerryH]

This will be useless data....and not enough data points on which to make any decision if it were.

It may be useful in P2 or any class where you are dealing with cars that are way different from one another.....and trying to equalize the chassis.....but not for FB.

But, I will make a place for it.....don't see any problem with that.

Jerry Hodges

with the aero packages being so much different on these cars top speed and acceleration will be very different with the same motor in different cars. How this data can be useful is a mystery to me. I agree with Wren - Dyno data if it is about HP.

[Wren]

How so? The top speeds from RO's were listed on the SCCA website, possibly from My Laps(?). They've been doing that for quite some time, no?

It gives people a target to shoot for. Top speed is the single most common question from other competitors.

Yes, the runoffs publishes data and it has bothered me more and more after the actions of some others. But it is just one track and there is nothing that can be done about it.

With that said, given the makeup of the CRB, I don't expect confidentiality to be a problem.

I am interested in what they could possibly hope to accomplish with this data.

[stonebridge20]

This is nothing new in SCCA. If I remember correctly, GTL was the first to get the "little black box" back in 2006 or something like that. I'm relatively sure that the black boxes have been in use in many classes since.

[mousecatcher]

and how do they use the data?

[stonebridge20]

and how do they use the data?

Parity or the never ending quest for it at least.

[ghickman]

Parity or the never ending quest for it at least.

More like never ending quest to kill a perfectly good class. The SCCA is out of touch with their members and reality.

[John LaRue]

The rule was implemented so that IF the CRB decides to gather data there will not be a problem in mounting the boxes. This was a significant issue in attempting to gather data at the '13 Runoffs. It won't be an issue moving forward.

At present the performance of the various engines is being discussed at the AdHoc level and nothing has been forwarded to the FSRAC or CRB for consideration. If and when something comes across the table it will be given due consideration. I assure you there has been much effort (time and money) put forth by members of the AdHoc in trying to pave a road for growth and prosperity for this class.

Consider also that the data might have nothing to do with the parity of specific cars or performance of specific engines, but might be used to get a better understanding of the actual performance potential of the FB cars in general. Further, there are amply qualified people on the CRB to consider the data gathered and who are certainly cognizant of the limitations thereof.

Regards,

John LaRue

[Randy Cook]

Has anyone actually had one of these data boxes magnetically attached to their car?
I'm concerned that with only a magnet holding it (yes I know there are great magnets) it will become a projectile in a collision. Or, with vibration and normal loads it will come free with serious consequences.

Note that there isn't any specification on the thickness of the required 3"x4" plate and so the magnetic attraction could be minimal with a plate oh say, 0.032" or less thick.

Also, if adding this plate will cause a dimension to be out of compliance with regulations is the plate exempt? If for instance, the plate is attached to the outside face of a rear wing fence does it become part of the aerodynamic device who's width is restricted?

Who can answer these questions?

Randy

[LJennings]

Consider also that the data might have nothing to do with the parity of specific cars or performance of specific engines, but might be used to get a better understanding of the actual performance potential of the FB cars in general. Further, there are amply qualified people on the CRB to consider the data gathered and who are certainly cognizant of the limitations thereof.

Regards,

John LaRue

Could this be the start of introducing carbon tubs?

Just curious.

[Phil Creighton]

"More like never ending quest to kill a perfectly good class. The SCCA is out of touch with their members and reality."

Gary
I'm really going to call BS on this one. As the outgoing Director for Area 12 and having been involved with FB since day one (actually before day one with Gloria) this is not being driven by some SCCA entity to kill a good class. Your fellow competitors have discussed parity in this class since day one on engines and, believe it or not, some actually write letters on the subject to the CRB and Adhoc committee. No-one wants a DSR like engine arms race to detract from the class - it was never supposed to be about the engines when the class was proposed and all the manufacturers were pretty even with small steps each year.
The magnetic area applies to many classes not just FB and is a tool that takes non-invasive data for comparison. How many times have I read that the SCCA officials don't know........
I don't know why you had to make the above comment at all - you have a pretty good ad-hoc committee working on your behalf. If you have a real comment to make then make it to Jay Novak or one of the other members rather than belittle them on this forum.
Phil Creighton
Almost ex Director Area 12

[Wren]

More like never ending quest to kill a perfectly good class. The SCCA is out of touch with their members and reality.

That's a little strong since you don't even know what they are going to use the data for or what their motivation is.

edit - Phil got in more of what needed to be said

Could this be the start of introducing carbon tubs?

Just curious.

What John said has provided some insight into what they are trying to do and I think that you can be pretty sure that is absolutely not where they are going. I doubt that is on anyone's radar for FB.

[KevinFirlein]

why are people actually thinking about attaching this damn box to the outside of their cars ? A proper cars has hundreds of hours of work done to make the body just the way you want it then you are gonna plunk this damn boxes to it while your competitors might not have to. I don't care how crowded the cockpit is I'd be putting it in the car. If I had to cut a hole in the seat between my legs to drop it in that's what I would do. It has to go in on the grid but you don't have to fish it out till you get out of the car in impound. Sit in your car and get creative. Putting it on the outside is just foolish.

[ghickman]

That's a little strong since you don't even know what they are going to use the data for or what their motivation is.

edit - Phil got in more of what needed to be said

If this is the case why not just come right out and tell us up front what it will be used for.

[RobLav]

1. The ad hoc committee is NOT AT ALL working on my behalf. They are completely working AGAINST my behalf.
2. IMO, the ad hoc committee has a solution in search of a problem.
3. All the FB owners I've recently talked to are against the restrictors.
4. My perspective is that the DSR-like engine arms race concerns come from a few vocal non-FB owners.
5. A simpler solution is to limit the engines to the big 4 Japanese bikes with a two or three year lag between engine year and installation in an FB.
6. I own my car and all the associated property rights that go with it. This includes data. If SCCA wants my data, they will have to ask my permission rather than demand it. I'll gladly sell my data for free entries! If the data is demanded, then I will not comply by either not running Majors, or running in another class, or not run at all. Rather harshly put, but I'm quite defensive when it comes to property rights!

[Wren]

If this is the case why not just come right out and tell us up front what it will be used for.

I don't know. Why not pick up the phone and call the CRB member who posted this instead of insulting people? Dave is a good guy, he can probably answer your question.