View source for Category talk:Vehicle Dynamics

My suggestion is:

• Theory
• Simulation
• Suspension Geometry (maybe here or in suspension...)
• Control Systems
• Tuning
• Tyres
• Testing and Validation

I think this is a good proposal. Testing and validation is going to be weird its own whole thing though - I "think" categories can be both child and parent categories so perhaps making testing and validation both a child of VD as well as a child of Vehicle would make sense? Simulation and tuning are also those categories that can go either way.

MediaWiki isn't smart enough to distinguish a child category under VD called "simulation" as a different category as a category under "powertrain" also called simulation. I wonder how we can split these up?

I'm not concerned about the specific details of how the categories are organized as much I am concerned about articles actually being tagged with categories which make sense so perhaps I'm just going into the weeds here.

If you allow me to give some input. I think that the Vehicle Dynamics subcategory should be focused on Simulation and Control Systems.

Tires and suspension should be their own category. They are not necessarily connected to Vehicle Dynamics. I think that the interesting topics to approach first for Vehicle Dynamics Category would be control systems and Simulation.

Thats a great point. The VD article itself (under the VD category) could have theory on it and fundamentals, and then it can point to the simulation and control systems sections.

Perhaps moving tires under suspension then?

I understand about the suspension geometry being in the suspension category but I don't agree with the tyres being also under suspension.

I think it is either under VD or a category of itself. Suspension team members don't usually need to have that much knowledge about tyres. It is more a VD thing and is used for basically every subcategory of VD (simulation, control, suspension geometry...).

My team had the same problem in our wiki. We ended up calling every subcategory following this pattern: "VD - Simulation", "PT - Simulation", "VD - Theory"... Either this or we make the subcategory simulation both for PT and VD at the same time.

As for suspension I think the "Suspension Geometry" could be a subcategory of VD and Suspension at the same time if it is allowed to.

I would add history, examples, rules, and even maybe trends. It'd be cool to see how the competition as shifted over the years, and maybe give an insight to why the cars look like they do.

I think these are good topics for the actual articles versus categories. Students would learn a lot from history of the competition and how the designs have evolved for each subsystem.

I agree. It would be interesting but I don't think it should be under the VD category

Additionally, what would be more important is to start adding content. And as we grow the pages we will start to have a clear idea of how each section should be.

Yeah, for now lets focus on generating articles and we can continue to find a way to organize them.

I'd argue that suspension should only contain mechanical design topics, and that all tire modeling, kinematics, spring/arb/damper tuning etc should be contained under the vehicle dynamics category. I'd also say that the same should apply to much of the aerodynamics mass vs drag vs downforce, the powertrain power vs mass vs efficiency trade-offs & the differential selection and tuning.