Lego E-formula competition idea

[Zerobricks]

I was watching some of the E-races on youtube ad thought to myself, why not have competitions like that too. Just like the trial trucks, but with the focus on being speed and handling.

Here are the basic rules I'd propose

• use either 2XL, 3L or 4M motors for drive, no RC motors allowed
• use any Lego battery box, the Li-Po is lighter, but has lower voltage, while the new AA battery boxes have no current limit
• use of Sbrick is allowed since it only controls the model
• the model can use a third function like a gearbox, or even a spring-powered boost mechanis, as long as it does not power the car directly
• use of pre-2005 bricks is not allowed to keep things modern and fair

 

What do you guys think? Anyone wanna try it?

Few more ideas:

• size limit - all cars should be approximately at the same size
• paneling - cars should be properly covered with panels, bare chassis is not allowed

Edited May 30, 2017 by Zero (Zblj)

[syclone]

Would be a very interesting competition , I'm not sure to understand the fifth rule , what would be considered pre-2005? only studless or there are certain pieces that won't be allowed ?

The panelling idea is great , that would make people think also of light-weight body designs to increase perfomance .

[BrickbyBrickTechnic]

It's a little rough, but it's a great Idea!

[Aventador2004]

I think the motor idea is good, though there should be a max ratio for each motor, 

XL:  2.143:1, 312 rpm, 6.77 ncm.

L: 1.191:1, 324, 5.44 ncm.

M:1.191:1, 327, 3.05 ncm.

If you put each ratio into sariel's gear calculator they have approximately the same rpm, around 320 rpm.

1. Weight limit needed, proportional for each motor type: L: heaviest, XL: medium, M: lightest.

2. Size restriction, what about 1:10?

3. Class points, each motor.

[mocbuild101]

I like the idea, but I don't like the restrictions on what motors you can use and the use of SBricks - it seems strange to put restrictions on how you can use parts if it's meant to be a competition. 

I like @Aventador2004's idea for dividing models into different classes by what type of motors they use for drive.  

My ideas:

• only 100% Lego - no SBricks, 3rd party tires, or RC components.
• size limit - maximum and minimum L, W & H (to be decided)
• weight  limit - maximum and minimum weight (to be decided)

[Zerobricks]

33 minutes ago, mocbuild101 said:

I like the idea, but I don't like the restrictions on what motors you can use and the use of SBricks - it seems strange to put restrictions on how you can use parts if it's meant to be a competition. 

I like @Aventador2004's idea for dividing models into different classes by what type of motors they use for drive.  

My ideas:

• only 100% Lego - no SBricks, 3rd party tires, or RC components.
• size limit - maximum and minimum L, W & H (to be decided)
• weight  limit - maximum and minimum weight (to be decided)

Reason for type of motors and quantity is so anyone can join without having to spend massive amounts on money on expensive stuff like RC units and motors. Also having restrictions encourages innovation, how to make the racers as light and efficient as possible.

[aminnich]

I would be very interested in this, I have never made a trial truck, but this sounds fun. 

I am curious my some people are against using sbricks? They do the exact same thing as the LEGO receivers. I would be against using any other 3rd party parts for this contest, it could get very out of hand. 

[Zerobricks]

Have a look at this for inspiration:

 

[dr_spock]

Wouldn't Sbrick have a power delivery advantage over Power Functions receivers?

 

[offroadcreations]

1 minute ago, dr_spock said:

Wouldn't Sbrick have a power delivery advantage over Power Functions receivers?

 

Yes, the SBrick motor driver is much better than a receiver.

2 hours ago, Zero (Zblj) said:

use either 2XL, 3L or 4M motors for drive, no RC motors allowed

I don't think this should be a rule, but a maximum limit. There are probably many people (like me) that don't have 2 XL-motors or 4 M-motors. Use max. 2 XL or max. 4 L, but you don't have to.  

[PKW]

2 hours ago, Zero (Zblj) said:

while the new AA battery boxes have no current limit

i love the idea of the race and a sort of fast like competition like the indoor car race or the lego technic rally, what about allowing cabled cars with 3rd part wires?

also, how can i recognize if a battery pack is "new" or not without stressing it?

 

 

 

[allanp]

Nice idea, though I would like to see it totally pure, meaning absolutely no 3rd party elements (including s-bricks and tires) allowed. Also, no altering of motors, and no buggy motors/RC units. Maybe there could be 2 classes, so one class with all the rules (another rule could be that it has to look like a formula E car), and another class where anything goes. Only rules are that it must be 80% by weight Lego, and the motor must be Lego and unaltered. maybe a formula P (purist) class and a formula 3 (3rd party allowed) class. I think in this way, most people can feel accommodated without feeling like others have an unfair advantage. So for example:

Formula P

Must be 100% unaltered Lego, no s-bricks, 3rd part tires, buggy motors or RC units allowed (S bricks are about as expensive as a buggy motor, so if cost is the reason for not allowing buggy motors then S-bricks should also be excluded, I like s-bricks and will likely get one, but this is just for consistency and fairness), must look like a formula 1/E car, must be roughly between 1:8 and 1:10 scale.

Formula 3

Must be 80% or more by weight Lego, must use unaltered Lego motors

 

[Leonardo da Bricki]

I agree with @allanp that there should be a purist category, as well as an "anything goes" category. These could then be further divided into classes by motors, as has been suggested.

I think this is a great idea, I'd love to participate.

[Epic Technic]

Really cool idea, I like the idea of not using buggy motors. I'm imagining some sort of a Lego Technic rally. I think we should limit it to 2 XL, 3L, or 4M motors and no sbrick or buwizz due to the power delivery advantages(but we could have a second class for these). I was wondering on how the cars will be judged and how they will compete...

[syclone]

@PKW The newer battery boxes have bright green LED instead of lime LED when turned on , also the LED is transparent if the bb is off. (the assembled box is the new one)

Edited May 28, 2017 by LXF

[Marxpek]

Great idea, my cup of tea, speed records lovely! and a challenge to do it without RC-gear for once.

But how would we measure speed? i have a small and accurate gps device that weights 40 grams, but i suppose i am one of the few here, so how can we test speed?

5 hours ago, Zero (Zblj) said:

while the new AA battery boxes have no current limit

Is this true? I'm pretty sure they still have the thermistor to keep things safe, just one with a higher setting, no idea how much higher though.

5 hours ago, Zero (Zblj) said:

use either 2XL, 3L or 4M motors for drive, no RC motors allowed

I do not like this as a rule,i agreed with the no RC-parts but, anyone should either be free to choose whatever setup they like, or everyone should just the use exact same motor setup, i for example do have 2 Xl motors, but not 3x L-motor, but the L motor setup would have an advantage since it needs less gears to reach the same speeds and gear are resistance.

Also would a servo be mandatory? 

Same story with the s-brick, the s-brick can handle much higher current then a normal receiver and they give no problems with sunlicght so i think s-brick should be excluded, since it's not Lego and a advantage to the ones that can use it.

The "Paneling" idea is good but a bit subjective, when is a car a car? and why would i be obligated to use panels for that? i think that rule should state: It must resemble any type of car: aka, have a hood, doors, front window, roof (unless its a convertible...) stuff like that.

Great idea, loving it, needs a bit of work but i will surely be participating! 

Edited May 28, 2017 by Marxpek

[ChocolateEinstein]

I think this idea has a ton of potential.
I agree with allanp, where there is

• Purist class (Formula P)
  • Possible motor configuation locking?
• 3rd party class (Formula 3)
  • Buggy motor class (Formula B3)

where all classes require the use of stock lego motors.

I think this would satisfy pretty much everyone. I would possibly add RWD / FWD / AWD categories, but the advantages and disadvantages of those may speak for themselves without needing classes.

Marxpek makes a good point about bodywork. I'm not sure how I would make rules for that myself.

The other thing we could do is have a designated course, where a set track shape and size are drawn up, and you can recreate the track for testing wherever you are, within reason.

Edited May 28, 2017 by ChocolateEinstein

[syclone]

2 hours ago, Marxpek said:

Is this true? I'm pretty sure they still have the thermistor to keep things safe, just one with a higher setting, no idea how much higher though.

Yes , I can confirm that it is set much higher , I haven't experienced any problems at all with 1'6V Ni-Zn batteries and buggy motor.

2 hours ago, Marxpek said:

The "Paneling" idea is good but a bit subjective, when is a car a car? and why would i be obligated to use panels for that? i think that rule should state: It must resemble any type of car: aka, have a hood, doors, front window, roof (unless its a convertible...) stuff like that.

Obviously it's Formula E , so it's open wheel , low ground vehicles , like F1. So your statement has no sense if you look at Formula E cars because they share the same panelling characteristics and you won't see someone racing a chassis without a bodywork. And in any case , irl cars have bodywork for aerodynamic reasons, search up any racing car examples, they always have panels to make the design sleek and make as less air resistance as possible.

Edited May 28, 2017 by LXF

[Marxpek]

41 minutes ago, LXF said:

Obviously it's Formula E

 i do not see where this contest would be restricted to formula E type designs, i don't think that was stated, it was merely posted for inspiration it seemed to me, i read into this contest as: make a car that goes fast and looks good, by whatever means.

I am for one not interested in mimicking a race car nor do i have the parts and will/can not participate if it has to be that kind of design, and i do not want to be restricted by a pre-set design.

and what i tried to say about the paneling was: the rules should not state there has to be some kind of paneling, but it should be more along the lines of: it should look like a complete car and for that i picked a few (bad) examples ;)

[Aventador2004]

29 minutes ago, LXF said:

Yes , I can confirm that it is set much higher , I haven't experienced any problems at all with 1'6V Ni-Zn batteries and buggy motor.

Obviously it's Formula E , so it's open wheel , low ground vehicles , like F1. So your statement has no sense if you look at Formula E cars because they share the same panelling characteristics and you won't see someone racing a chassis without a bodywork. And in any case , irl cars have bodywork for aerodynamic reasons, search up any racing car examples, they always have panels to make the design sleek and make as less air resistance as possible.

Completely true, they are to be slippery, and have little drag, from downforce. The teams try to balance that using the bodywork in different ways.

@allanp's idea is good, with the fact that motors need less gearing, so they are faster. I think the motor should be a 1.25:1 geared l motor for power exclusively for it. But the motor idea I suggested earlier may still work. The purist category is a good idea for those who own ir receivers (there are people including me) or certain motors. I think a lot of ideas suggested make a lot of sense to me, but this is not a contest yet, so keep the ideas coming.

3 hours ago, Marxpek said:

1)But how would we measure speed? i have a small and accurate gps device that weights 40 grams, but i suppose i am one of the few here, so how can we test speed?

2)I do not like this as a rule, i agreed with the no RC-parts but, anyone should either be free to choose whatever setup they like, or everyone should just the use exact same motor setup, i for example do have 2 Xl motors, but not 3x L-motor, but the L motor setup would have an advantage since it needs less gears to reach the same speeds and gear are resistance.

3)Also would a servo be mandatory? 

4)Same story with the s-brick, the s-brick can handle much higher current then a normal receiver and they give no problems with sunlicght so i think s-brick should be excluded, since it's not Lego and a advantage to the ones that can use it.

5)The "Paneling" idea is good but a bit subjective, when is a car a car? and why would i be obligated to use panels for that? i think that rule should state: It must resemble any type of car: aka, have a hood, doors, front window, roof (unless its a convertible...) stuff like that.

1. Hmm, not sure. Maybe by a gearing X weight calculation?

2. I agree, but that should be just the max, not what it has to be, and what about the battery life problem, Kai the there will be a battery life rule, because motors use different power inputs.

3. I don't think so, unless you don't want to use a return to center system.

4. agreed

5. A car is a vehicle with four wheels, a steering wheel, pedals, a engine, and a body.

And @Zero (Zblj) don't forget these are only ideas, so they can change by the host of the contest, and should be set in stone.

 

[Void_S]

It's a great idea Zero   Really, it's a kind of crawlers and trial trucks plague here (in a good meaning) that provided and keeps providing a lot of amazing and smart solutions like custom portal hubs, drivetrain optimization tricks and chassis reinforcement to get as much as possible torque. Another challenge will change the priority to speed and handling, so I can't wait for new and tasty inventions that could be added into the golden list of the best ideas.  

Talking about the points 1-5, I'd share my opinion:

1. I think that it could be a track with a pre-defined length and a stopwatch that counts time (1/4 mile in X seconds ). + Plus one more idea: can we add a drag race trial as well?
2. However you may gear-up a couple of XL-motors and it may be lighter than 3-4 L-motors...
3. Return to center steering is a must thing, I suppose. It's not a truck trial anymore and speed is a new priority.
4. RC units and Buggy motors may have about the same price as s-Brick, but provides much more power so must be restricted or moved into a separate class with very strong restrictions. Meanwhile s-Brick is questionable, I think, since the IR unit could be just useless starting a some range.
5. Formula-E format looks very promising, whereas we may go further and add some other classes like 24h Le Man and NASCAR, for example. They are also well-known and all cars has the same shape and parameters.

[mocbuild101]

13 hours ago, Zero (Zblj) said:

Reason for type of motors and quantity is so anyone can join without having to spend massive amounts on money on expensive stuff like RC units and motors. Also having restrictions encourages innovation, how to make the racers as light and efficient as possible.

Well yes, but I think it would be better if they were separated into a different class.

For example:

1. Power Functions only
2. RC unit with Buggy motors
3. SBrick with any motors

Also, a better rule would be a maximum of 2 drive motors (of any type) - which applies to all classes.

10 hours ago, Marxpek said:

1. But how would we measure speed? i have a small and accurate gps device that weights 40 grams, but i suppose i am one of the few here, so how can we test speed?
2. Also would a servo be mandatory? 
3. Same story with the s-brick, the s-brick can handle much higher current then a normal receiver and they give no problems with sunlight so i think s-brick should be excluded, since it's not Lego and a advantage to the ones that can use it.

1. timing over a set distance
2. possibly for (my exampled) classes 1 & 3
3. agreed, but it's better in a separate class

[Marxpek]

2 minutes ago, mocbuild101 said:

timing over a set distance

Yes that is the obvious way, but how to do this? in speed measurements, 0.1 seconds off, or a 10cm longer track can give quite big differences, unless we do a 1km track or something.

 1 thing i thought of are sports fields, i have a artificial grass hockey field near me, that has set distances between lines, but artificial grass isn't really smooth, a indoor gym would be perfect, but i wouldn't know one where they would let me race a car. it will be a challenge to measure this accurate with everyone on separate locations without gps.

[mocbuild101]

5 hours ago, Marxpek said:

Yes that is the obvious way, but how to do this?

Time how many seconds it takes to go over a long distance, with either a video camera or stopwatch, and use this formula to work out how fast it is going in kph:

S = (1/(T/D))*3.6

• S - speed in kph
• T - time in seconds
• D - distance in meters

Edited May 29, 2017 by mocbuild101

[Marxpek]

@mocbuild101Hihi  you do not have to show me the formulas. That is just basic math anyone here should be able to do. My point was: how can we do this accurately? Cause what you mention just is not accurate.

I tried to measure speed like that, unless you have a high speed camera  (i do not) the result will vary a lot. Like i mentioned before. 0.1second is alot when going around 20kmh (doubt we will reach that but...) and what would prevent someone to make the track 10cm shorter? We wont notice on video. Measuring speed accurately just isnt that easy im affraid...thats why i bought the gps device (one big drawback.. doesnt work indoors..)