The 2010 MVDP: Feat. the "Filipino Car" or Philippine Brand Vehicles

[ghosthunter]

*prowler2009

I saw your other uploaded youtube video:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mvExDvvR_cU&feature=related"]YouTube- The HOY! Pinoy Mini Car Space Frame rustproofing[/ame]

In the video you displayed the bare chassis without the engine & body.

I noticed all the squared joints. I also noticed the chassis looks like it has too much material in many places which are redundant. Fine for prototype but not good for "finished" unit, especially the squared joints without any diagonals/triangles will be weak & requires more material just for stiffening purposes. This is much like the Micro-Car 1 done in DLSU years ago by a designed & assembled by a different engineering team.

In this video, the basic drive system is more clear. Did you include a chain tensioner on the chain drive from the "axel" to the rear wheels? Vertical movement of the rear suspension (leaf spring) will result in chain slack which may result in the chain jumping off the sprockets. This also happened in DLSU's Micro Car 1 (although this had trailing arm type rear suspension to avoid/minimize chain slack during it's suspension travel arc).

[prowler2009]

*prowler2009

I saw your other uploaded youtube video:

YouTube- The HOY! Pinoy Mini Car Space Frame rustproofing

In the video you displayed the bare chassis without the engine & body.

I noticed all the squared joints. I also noticed the chassis looks like it has too much material in many places which are redundant. Fine for prototype but not good for "finished" unit, especially the squared joints without any diagonals/triangles will be weak & requires more material just for stiffening purposes. This is much like the Micro-Car 1 done in DLSU years ago by a designed & assembled by a different engineering team.

In this video, the basic drive system is more clear. Did you include a chain tensioner on the chain drive from the "axel" to the rear wheels? Vertical movement of the rear suspension (leaf spring) will result in chain slack which may result in the chain jumping off the sprockets. This also happened in DLSU's Micro Car 1 (although this had trailing arm type rear suspension to avoid/minimize chain slack during it's suspension travel arc).

That "bare chassis" WAS a prototype chassis ver 0.5. Definitely not for finished units. Everything you see in today's prototype ver1.5 are "dry fitted" to see what works or not. It's built as weak as possible so it CAN BREAK NOW, then i can fix it now so i can consolidate all the fixes into a "new" chassis version.

The square joints are meant to be reference points for squaring everything that follows. They are "educated" guesses which road testing will prove good or bad. I am not good with 2D drawings, i need 3D joints that i can "feel" and move around an inch at a time.

If you have worked on airplanes, you would really be amazed to see how they "fit" all that stuff "in there" and still fly.

Until i can fit "all that stuff" where i want to, the HOY! is not gonna fly.

[ghosthunter]

That "bare chassis" WAS a prototype chassis ver 0.5. Definitely not for finished units. Everything you see in today's prototype ver1.5 are "dry fitted" to see what works or not. It's built as weak as possible so it CAN BREAK NOW, then i can fix it now so i can consolidate all the fixes into a "new" chassis version.

Years ago, I used scaled models to prototype the car through the first few variations. I also made some guesses on the strengths on certain sections but later verified via computer modeling.

The square joints are meant to be reference points for squaring everything that follows. They are "educated" guesses which road testing will prove good or bad. I am not good with 2D drawings, i need 3D joints that i can "feel" and move around an inch at a time.

As mentioned above, I used scaled models to take the guess work out of the final prototype. Aside from that, I also made & used basic 2D drawings for referencing between the scaled models & full scale car.

I can see the chassis you made isn't optimized, even on your model ver1.5. You could have taken advantage of a better unified body/chassis design to cut down on cost and weight while increasing overall strength and vehicle rigidity.

It might also have a side benefit of increasing safety as well by creating a single body unit instead of the distinct chassis & body design you are currently using.

A good example of this are the Nascar race cars. These are built using a light but strong spaceframe body where all other components are bolted to.

Anyway, have you considered using different sized steel tubings for different sections of the chassis (example: 2x4 inch rectangle steel tubings for the chassis' main backbone)? This can help making it more stronger with minimal welds, boxing and reinforcements.

If you have worked on airplanes, you would really be amazed to see how they "fit" all that stuff "in there" and still fly.

Not only airplanes,... even the humble modern family car or a modern condo or hotel in Japan or other first world countries.

You can be amazed in the quantity of stuff (like meters of wiring) you can find stuffed into the hidden corners of a modern car.

Until i can fit "all that stuff" where i want to, the HOY! is not gonna fly.

Well, that is why we have computer modeling so you don't need to cut metal until you have everything figured out.

Anyway, I assume you don't have an engineering background so you are doing it full scale from the get-go?

[prowler2009]

Years ago, I used scaled models to prototype the car through the first few variations. I also made some guesses on the strengths on certain sections but later verified via computer modeling.





As mentioned above, I used scaled models to take the guess work out of the final prototype. Aside from that, I also made & used basic 2D drawings for referencing between the scaled models & full scale car.

I can see the chassis you made isn't optimized, even on your model ver1.5. You could have taken advantage of a better unified body/chassis design to cut down on cost and weight while increasing overall strength and vehicle rigidity.

It might also have a side benefit of increasing safety as well by creating a single body unit instead of the distinct chassis & body design you are currently using.

A good example of this are the Nascar race cars. These are built using a light but strong spaceframe body where all other components are bolted to.

Anyway, have you considered using different sized steel tubings for different sections of the chassis (example: 2x4 inch rectangle steel tubings for the chassis' main backbone)? This can help making it more stronger with minimal welds, boxing and reinforcements.




Not only airplanes,... even the humble modern family car or a modern condo or hotel in Japan or other first world countries.

You can be amazed in the quantity of stuff (like meters of wiring) you can find stuffed into the hidden corners of a modern car.





Well, that is why we have computer modeling so you don't need to cut metal until you have everything figured out.

Anyway, I assume you don't have an engineering background so you are doing it full scale from the get-go?

You are correct, i have no engineering background that's why i'm doing this full scale from the get go. How much scaling does it need to make something 50"wide by 76"long by 62" high work?

If you are as meticulous and educated as you seem to be, then you need to convince other intellectuals to join you in making your vision of this mythical "Filipino Car" or "Philippine Brand Vehicles" a reality, as quickly and efficiently as possible. It is time to replace the trikes and jeepneys, that's where your business should be.

Btw, do you have anything in 3D outside of a computer i can maybe look look at?, learn from?

[ghosthunter]

You are correct, i have no engineering background that's why i'm doing this full scale from the get go. How much scaling does it need to make something 50"wide by 76"long by 62" high work?

My suggestion would be 1/5 or 1/6 scale would be a good balance of small size for easy handling but big enough to have good detail.

You can even go smaller for more basic modeling like chassis & component layout.

Also, working with metric than with english would make it more accurate (well, it would depend on the fabricators too) on the critical cuts & welds.

If you are as meticulous and educated as you seem to be, then you need to convince other intellectuals to join you in making your vision of this mythical "Filipino Car" or "Philippine Brand Vehicles" a reality, as quickly and efficiently as possible. It is time to replace the trikes and jeepneys, that's where your business should be.

Unfortunately you are singing to the wrong person. The "Filipino" car is not my vision. Although I am educated as a mechanical engineer, I am a practical person and a businessman. I don't see myself as a Filipino patriot.

If you want to find more people of the same "vision" as you, you might want to look up the tsikot members with the handle "Romski123" and "Architect". They are some of the people behind the infamous PHUV (among other things).

As for me, I don't see the same things eye-to-eye (so to say) with this group so I prefer not to join them in their projects. If you checked the other discussion threads, I have played the "evil guy" more than a few times.

Btw, do you have anything in 3D outside of a computer i can maybe look look at?, learn from?

I would suggest some basic engineering drafting lessons and even art lessons for making balsa wood models (or even with simpler materials like styro, paper, illustration board, etc).

My choice materials were: bbq sticks (of a certain quality), popsicle sticks (quality), styro, index cards, illustration board and white glue. I used to make scaled models of pretty much all the projects I was involved in like whole or partial compotents of production line automation robots, the micro-car projects, etc. The only ones that I didn't have a scale model made were the animatronic dinosaurs made for Star City.

Drafting skills will be handy in drawing up plans in different views of your designs.

Art skills would be used when making scaled models.

[niky]

Despite being the "evil guy", ghosthunter has a solid engineering background and his advice is good. It's nice to see you're taking his criticism in a constructive manner.

Romski123 is already connected to MDJuan and the E-Jeep... so he has a lot on his plate, but if you can present a proposal that makes sense, he might be interested. But you'll have to come up with something more production-ready first. Since he's an industry man, he can tell you what will and will not work for mass or even small scale line production and what can be sourced easily.

Architect still hangs around. He's much like you... a non-manufacturer who dreams big. But he has a technical and computer background. I've talked to him recently, and their project seems to be getting close to fruitition. Just haven't been able to go see him for a while.

You can try using the Private Message function to get a hold of them. I don't know if they'll answer... romski isn't always around, and architect only drops by every few weeks.

If you need online resources, there are numerous websites showing homegrown kitcar builds (you may want to check out those where the builder is making a three or four-wheeled bicycle, because this is the scale of the project you are doing... except they will be using lighter suspension parts.

One interesting site is autospeed.com, as there are many do-it-yourself tips for the home builder and mechanic... including a few tips on cheap but practical scale modelling and suspension geometry design. ;)

[architect]

*GH,

Just a point of clarification. I was not involved with the PhUV project of MVPMAP since I am not even a member of the association. While their initial efforts weren't successful, at least it triggered a sense of awareness among several groups.

As for being the "evil guy", I wouldn't describe you as such. Rather, you are more of a devil's advocate who often likes to articulate counterpoints - sometimes logical, sometimes not - though that really depends on one's perspective and information regarding the issue concerned. And just because you happen to be on the other side doesn't automatically make you the opposition. As niky pointed out, you do end up contributing in your own way, and perhaps, more than you may realize.

*niky - As we have discussed in the past, what I would like to implement is the logistics we (one of our family biz) developed and implemented in assembling/manufacturing computers in the US for clients using both OTS and proprietary components back in the late 80s/early 90s. The deconstructed modular assembly process allowed us to be extremely scalable and configurable that we can easily accommodate orders in the low hundreds up to 5,000 units at a time and reconfigure lines with very minimal downtime.

Such an approach would allow us to start small and quickly scale up if necessary. In addition the proposed decentralized structure (for the car) would allow us to maintain very minimal overhead even as we scale up. So actually I am thinking (or dreaming) small - very small. But scalable.

[donbuggy]

I noticed all the squared joints. I also noticed the chassis looks like it has too much material in many places which are redundant. Fine for prototype but not good for "finished" unit, especially the squared joints without any diagonals/triangles will be weak & requires more material just for stiffening purposes.

Spaceframe?

Architect still hangs around.... I've talked to him recently, and their project seems to be getting close to fruitition.

Any spy photos or concept artwork of this project? Kahit na teaser?

[architect]

Donbuggy,

I believe you have access to the other site. If not, just contact OyiL. I am sure he will give you access.

[ghosthunter]

Spaceframe?
http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s...spaceframe.jpg

Something like that BUT instead of making a flat-ish chassis, it would be better to incorporate the passenger area into the spaceframe design. This would result in a more rigid structure with the same (or even less) amount of structural material.

Also potentially incorporating techniques like "stressed skin" design in certain places would also help in lightening the structure even more while retaining structural strength.

And a benefit of incorporating the passenger area into the spaceframe design would be to increase the level of safety for the passengers in case of accidents. Example: the roof (part of the spaceframe) would be strong enough to hold the weight of the vehicle instead of collapsing on itself in case if the vehicle rolls over. In cases of a collision, the vehicle's spaceframe body would help better protect the occupants inside instead of simply buckling & crumpling on the slightest of vehicular accidents if the body was simply formed out of shaped & welded sheet metal.