APPENDIX B-1

FSAE STRUCTURAL EQUIVALENCY FORM

This form must be completed and submitted by all teams no later than the date specified in the
Action Deadlines on specific event website. The FSAE Technical Committee will review all
submissions which deviate from the FSAE rules and reply with a decision about the requested
deviation. All requests will have a confirmation of receipt sent to the team. Structural Equivalency
Forms (SEF) and supporting calculations must be submitted electronically in Adobe Acrobat Format
(*.pdf). The submissions must be named as follows: schoolname_sef.pdf using the complete school
name. Please submit to the person indicated in the Action Deadlines for each event.
University Name UNIVERSIDAD DE ORIENTE
Car Number(s) & Event(s) # 24 FORMULA SAE CALIFORNIA
Team Contact Simn Nuez E-mail Address fsaeudo@gmail.com
Faculty Advisor Flix Payares E-mail Address fpayares@gmail.com
Is proof of equivalency for your design required for any of the rules?
___Yes. Rule(s) deviated (indicate which below) __ No. Chassis did not deviate from baseline
requirements
Deviation
Requested

No
Deviations

Rule
No.
3.10
3.10.6
3.11
3.12
3.13
3.14
3.18
3.18.4
3.19.4
3.19.5
3.20.3
3.20.6
3.24
3.25
3.26
5.2.2
5.4.4

Rule Description

Design Description

Main Roll Hoop Material

Main Roll Hoop Attach. to Monocoque
Front Roll Hoop Material
Main Roll Hoop Bracing
Front Roll Hoop Bracing
Monocoque Bracing Attachment
Front Bulkhead
Monocoque Front Bulkhead
Front Bulkhead Support
Monocoque Front Bulkhead Support
Impact Attenuator Attachment
Impact Attenuator Anti-Intrusion Plate
Tube Frames Side Impact Structure
Composite Monocoque Side Impact
Metal Monocoque Side Impact
Monocoque Safety Harness Attach.
Shoulder Harness Bar

26.7 mm x 2.77mm Round

26.7 mm x 2.77mm Round

26.4 mm x 2 mm Round
26.4 mm x 2 mm Round

26.4 mm x 2 mm Round

Attachment Checklist (make sure all are included in your report)

Receipt, letter of donation or proof for non-steel materials (composite, honeycomb, resin, etc).
Properties for all non-steel materials
Holes drilled in any regulated tubing require a deviation, include area and moment of inertia
ATTACH PROOF OF EQUIVALENCY
Please see "Structural Equivalency Guide" on SAE website for more information about the proof of
equivalency.
TECHNICAL COMMITTEE DECISION/COMMENTS
______________________________________________________________________________
Approved by__________________________________________ Date_____________
NOTE: THIS FORM AND THE APPROVED COPY OF THE SUBMISSION MUST BE PRESENTED
AT TECHNICAL INSPECTION AT EVERY FORMULA SAE EVENT ENTERED

2008 SAE International. All Rights Reserved. Printed in USA.

2009 Formula SAE Rules

2009 STRUCTURAL EQUIVALENCY

STRUCTURAL EQUIVALENCY FOR MAIN ROLL HOOP AND FRONT
ROLL HOOP MATERIAL

Figure N 1. Circular Cross Section of the Main Roll Hoop and Front Roll Hoop

The properties of the selected material are:

1020 STEEL
Property
Elasticity Modulus
Poisson Coefficient
Shearing Modulus
Density
Ultimate Strength
Yield Strength
Thermal Conductivity

CAR NUMBER

24

Value
200 x 109
0,29
7,7 x 1010
7900
379 x 106
207 x 106
47

Units
N/m2
NA
N/m2
Kg/m3
N/m2
N/m2
W/(M,K)

2009 STRUCTURAL EQUIVALENCY

According to rule 3.3.3.1 the tubing size required is:
OD 1.0 inch (25.4 mm) x 0.095 inch (2.4 mm)
or OD 25.0 mm x 2.5 mm metric
Material: minimum 0,1% carbon.
For 1020 steel we have a Modulus of Elasticity
E = 200 GPa
- Calculating its Area Moment of Inertia
I
I

I xx

I yy

64

OD 4

0.0254

64
11.591 10

ID 4

0.0206

m4
Figure N 2. Rules cross section for Main Hoop

The Buckling Modulus is:

EI

200 109 Pa 11.591 10 9 m 4

EI

2318.397 Nm2

- The tubing geometry selected for our design is:

Round Tube
OD 26.7 mm x 2 mm metric
Calculating its Area Moment of Inertia
I
I

I xx

I yy

64

0.0267

64
14.37 10

OD 4

ID 4

0.02096

m4

The Buckling Modulus is:

EI

200 10 9 Pa 14.37 10 9 m 4

EI

2874.064 Nm2

Its proved now that our design achieves the restriction of the rule 3.3.3.1 by
having a greater Moment of Inertia and exceeds Buckling Modulus.

CAR NUMBER

24

2009 STRUCTURAL EQUIVALENCY

Comparison of the cross section (Bending Moment Analysis)
- For the rules circular cross section
A1
A1

OD

0.0254

4
A1

ID

0.0206

1.734 x10 4 m 2

- For the new circular cross section

A2
A2

4
A2

OD

0.0267

ID

0.02096

2.148x10 4 m 2

Therefore, we can conclude that

A2 > A1
Let compare now the normal stress due bending moment in both cross sections:
- For the rules circular cross section
Assuming we are working in extreme conditions for the ultimate stress that maximum
bending moment would be:
u

M max

Ic

c
379 x10 Pa 11.591x10 9 m 2
0.0127 m
6

M max

M max

345.904 Nm

- For the new circular cross section

Now if we calculate the maximum normal stress produced by this bending moment in
our new cross section

M max
I

345.904 Nm 0.0134 m
u

14.37 x10 9 m 4
u

322.555 x10 6 Pa

This way we prove that in a maximum condition for the cross section of the rule 3.3.3.1
our selected cross section wont reach the maximum stress.

CAR NUMBER

24

2009 STRUCTURAL EQUIVALENCY

STRUCTURAL EQUIVALENCY FOR FRONT BULKHEAD, SIDE IMPACT
STRUCTURE AND FRONT BULKHEAD SUPPORT.
This report pretends to explain the reasons who lead our team to fill the structural
equivalency for the Front Bulk Head and the Side Impact Structure according to the
2009 FSAE rules (Show in fig. N 3)
Due to the several changes performed in our new chassis design, and considering the
note 2 of rule 3.3.1 that goes:
For a specific application, tubing of the specified outside diameter but with greater
wall thickness, OR of the specified wall thickness and a greater outside diameter
to those listed above, IS NOT a rules deviation requiring approval.
We have decided not to show any stress, buckling and/or simulation to prove out that
this new selected tube cross section is according to the SAE 2009 rules due to the higher
outer diameter and wall thickness of our circular cross section in comparison of the
tubing specified in the rules. All this considering that the new cross section chosen for
the team is the one you see in the next picture.

Front bulkhead cross

section
OD= 26.4 mm t= 2 mm

Side Impact & Front

Bulkhead Support cross
section
OD= 26.4 mm t= 2 mm

Figure N 3. Isometric view of 2009 Prototype.

Considering the new cross section of the Front Bulkhead Supports, we do not perform
any impact simulation in order to prove this frame geometry is safe enough due to
exceed cross section selected in our design.

CAR NUMBER

24