|
|
|
'Just' creating a straight replica doesn't show outstanding engineering skill, IMHO: while it would be a good technical excercise, it wouldn't demonstrate your problem solving skills to their best effect, since they were mostly solved on the original. This. I don't honestly think your tutor would go for building a replica; the aim of the FYP is to show the ability to design and engineer solutions, not to build a car. It's not supposed to be hard - it's supposed to be worthwhile. "Non-trivial" is how my project handbook put it. And I think it would be a huge project. Unbelievably so. Bear in mind it takes a Formula Student team of, what, 10-14 people? basically 3 years to build their car, and the amount of work you're talking about isn't far off building a car from scratch. I've just finished my BSc in Motorsport Technology at Hertfordshire and I could barely believe the amount of work involved in the project. The Formula Student guys were working on improving a car that's been built for a year already; a mate spent the year (which is only 9 months long; remember that because you won't do half as much work over the summer as you think) designing a light cluster. That's the sort of scale of project you're looking at. Maybe designing a rear suspension set up, or a transfer box, would be a goer. I wouldn't even expect to commit anything to metal by the end of the year. Or from your back-up plan, designing the turbo- or supercharger set-up for the Daf is possible. And don't underestimate how much other work you'll have. I did, and I think I've only just scraped these exams. We'll see in August... It's a huuuuuuge project. I'd really consider what bit of it really interests you and how you can make a project of it, with the possibility of proper research and testing.
|
|
Last Edit: Jun 2, 2010 1:21:23 GMT by Rich606
1989 Peugeot 205. You know, the one that was parked in a ditch on the campsite at RRG'17... the glass is always full. but the ratio of air to water may vary.
|
|
|
|
|
Wow, this is such a crazy idea!
First off, before you even talk about the feasibility of the project, are you even allowed to do work on your own car as a uni project? I would think that ownership would be a major issue, especially with a group project. At my uni, any and all student work belongs to the university, so you have to leave it behind when you graduate. This obviously makes sense with the Formula Student (FSAE) car, as the university generally uses it as a promotional tool afterwards at car shows and such, as well as using it to help teach the next batch of students, so that they can learn from mistakes made or successes in the previous project. In my mind, if you used your own car for this, then at the very least your 3 co-contributors would have equal shares in all of the modified parts, or at the worst the university would own the car outright. Seriously, it's not fair to have 3 other students putting in a year's free labour (and their share of the uni's materials) into your car. Even if the uni will allow you to keep the car, you would have to buy out their shares of whatever you can agree that the finished car is worth.
Then, after that, it's obvious that this project is too large. I don't know about your uni, but here we have a team of perhaps 3-4 people working on the rear suspension of the FSAE car, and another team working on the drivetrain, and still another team working on the monocoque or tube frame, depending on which way they choose to go. You are proposing to do all of these things at the same time with only a single team of 4 people, and I just don't see how that could be done. It may be physically possible to build it in that time with 4 people, but you wouldn't have any time to do other subjects, write the reports on the project, do any testing or fine tuning, etc. Also, this may not be an issue at your uni, but here most projects rely on funds raised from industry sponsorship, so you have to approach companies with your project proposal beforehand to try and get them to sponsor you. I can't see many companies who would sponsor such a project, as even the most enthusiastic Triumph owner is unlikely to shell out the cash needed to build a 4wd replica of an obscure competition special.
Lastly, think of it this way: other than the retro/coolness factor, what sound engineering reason is there for a Triumph to be 4wd? The problem which you are actually trying to solve, if you take one step back, is "How can we make this Triumph faster off-road?" By instantly jumping to a 4wd system, you are skipping a very important step of the engineering design phase. If your goal is off-road speed, you would need to investigate some other possible solutions such as increased engine power and tyre size/tread pattern, then prove that 4wd is the best and most viable/cost effective solution.
If you take this design question back a step further and get rid of the pre-conceived notion of using a Triumph, then the question is, "What is the fastest way we can get across this off-road track?" This line of inquiry could then lead you to perhaps build a tube-frame buggy or something similar, which might be more easily done within the time frame of your project. If you wanted to keep the Triumph theme going, then you could perhaps rear-mount a Triumph FWD engine/box to power it, although once again you're going to find it hard to justify the use of the Triumph lump on engineering grounds, when any old FWD motor/box assembly out of a modern hatchback will be more powerful and reliable, and more compact. If you want to give the project a green flavour, as many current student projects have been doing, then maybe go for a diesel engine out of a Daihatsu Charade and then run it on biofuels. All of a sudden your project will seem a lot more respectable to the kind of industry types who you will shortly be asking for a job. The biodiesel buggy, in this example, has green credentials, and is a vehicle you obviously built yourself from the ground up, rather than looking like an old Triumph. You could perhaps suggest that it might have military applications for economical use on light duties. You could perhaps do a comparative study on how your lightweight diesel buggy could replace a 90" Land Rover for on-base transport or something, and then show how much fuel this would save.
At the end of the day, your final-year project will go on your resume as a major component of your degree, and you have to think about what sort of jobs it will qualify you for. If there are no experimental off-road Triumph workshops currently hiring in your area, perhaps it's best to look for another project.
P.S. I build Beetles for a hobby and would love to design a decent Beetle turbo kit for my project, but I know that I'm far better off keeping uni projects and my hobby separate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Excuse me if I'm missing the point, but isn't the 3rd year of MEng a pure design-related activity? As I recall we designed everything for our 3rd Year project (for Formula Student), with the idea being to base your final year project on an aspect of the build if you so wished. If it is just a design project, then surely it doesn't matter how difficult it is to implement the design on the actual car?
Think you've had some fantastic feedback from everyone so far, Paul, so sapologies in advance if I'm a bit off the mark!
|
|
"Mechanical Power Subduing Animal Speed" (Robert Trevithick, 1808)
'72 BMW 2000 Touring '99 TT 180 (mrs) '72 BMW 2500
|
|
|
|
|
First off, before you even talk about the feasibility of the project, are you even allowed to do work on your own car as a uni project? I would think that ownership would be a major issue, especially with a group project. At my uni, any and all student work belongs to the university, so you have to leave it behind when you graduate. Same at my uni
|
|
1989 Peugeot 205. You know, the one that was parked in a ditch on the campsite at RRG'17... the glass is always full. but the ratio of air to water may vary.
|
|
|
|
|
If you end up kicking this idea, PLEASE do a modern take on the "Cross Rotary Valve" system on a modern bottom end. Materials tech has hampered them in the past - and it should tick all of the right boxes for your tutors.
And do it on a bottom end that will take 10000 rpm - as valve inertia would be a thing of the past.
|
|
'83 GTM Coupe. 4A-GE Powered '00 GTM Libra Auto. Ick. '71 Detomaso Pantera. Current Resto '89 GMC Safari Tow/Kip bus '05 SAAB 9-3 Daily '71 Siva Moonbug. Not even contemplating resto yet.
|
|
|
|
|
Erm, I might have a new old stock TC manifold is all I can say!
Not sure if it is though, but if you know what you're looking at, pm your email and I'll forward a couple of pics.
Work in Stratford too so not far away, and I don't want a lot for it.
|
|
|
|
stefan
Posted a lot
If it isn't broken fix it till it is
Posts: 1,598
|
|
|
Doing the daf as a back up plan is just as hard if not harder. the engine was a ford BDA for a start, sideways trans with no reduction gears bmw 2002 turbo dis front and rear, ne trans cradle new front and rear up rights and a new rear suspension just to start with, then you need to find a 55 coupe to chop up and not many of them are left.
Landrover have spent millions developing transfer boxes and they are still curse word, I have to say from you posts you seem to know very little about 4x4 systems and it sounds like you would be giving your car to the uni at the end of it.
|
|
POWER IS EVERYTHING WITHOUT CONTROL
1985 Honda jazz 1997 Saab 93 convertible 2010 transit 280
|
|
|
|
|
I'll just repeat , as others have said already , the car will require a BIVA test at the finish IF it is required to make it roadworthy .
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I hope that by following the original car specifications that an IVA wont be a problem. I do think though that the end product will end up Q plated It doesn't matter that you are copying a previously built car ,you are still modifying one car to resemble another. It is your CURRENT cars identity that will be called into question and the answer is that it was not designed 4wd and you will have modified the monococque = BIVA
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The transfer box is the biggest problem which to get around the viscous coupling idea seems a likely one. Just use a shortened freelander propshaft. Although saying that the freelander has numerous problems with the system so this may be a non starter. For my degree the final year is build project and this coming year we have a pure design project maybe thats the way to go with this idea. TC manifold would be nice though as it would make it faster {evil look}
|
|
|
|
mike
Part of things
Posts: 54
|
|
|
I agree with rich606 in choosing one aspect of the build and concentrating on that is the best solution. The transfer box would be a good start, if you designed it in a CAD package then did all related calculations with all the design aspects taken into consideration, would prove to be a really good project. If this was completed before the end of the year you could expand on the project and do all the programming and test simulations in the CAD program so if it were to be manufactured someone could just use your design and instructions and make it. You will be under massive time constraints with all the other work that is piled on you even working in a group (trust me I have done it) and the expectations that your tutors have. As already said the project doesn't have to be hard just be worthwhile and be interesting, building a replica to me doesn't fit into interesting but re engineering a part or designing a part form scratch is. My whole dissertation project was based around trying to prove a theory, that alone took me almost 7 months.
Thanks
Mike
|
|
|
|