Exciting engineering challenges with great prizes

Show off your skills and solve real design problems

Redesign the Structural Support of the Metropolis Metro Underframe

Medium

The goal of this challenge is to obtain an optimal design for the structural support located at the underframe of the Metropolis Metro.

This challenge will focus on a line of Alstom trains called the Metropolis Metro.

The structural support is a piece located at the bottom of the vehicle. The mounted support is made in s275 carbon steel, in UPN beams reinforced with welded plates.

It has a mass of 282 kg and costs $1,800. Currently there are two identical structural supports withstanding one static converter and one battery box each one.
The static converter has a mass of 1600 kg and the battery box 418 kg.

The structural support is under the underframe crossbeams, transversal pieces which are the interface between the train and the bogies. And the solebars are the longitudinal and external profile which belong to the underframe. Both the underframe crossbeams and the solebars are made in 6005A Aluminium.

Often admissible maximum weight is risen when designing a Metropolis, so it is quite relevant to decrease every pieza’s weight as much as possible. We would like to explore the possibilities of different materials and configurations.

Each Metropolis car body houses two pieces of the ones to be redesigned. This is a piece that is included in several times in the production of a complete train. In this sense, the repercussion of optimizing the commented piece is really relevant.

Challenge Specifications:

The challenge is to redesign this structural support, while respecting it's real-world application, and considering the available volume: 915mm (height) x 2130mm (width) x 2790mm (depth), with the goal of optimizing its manufacture in terms of price and time. Ease of assembly and mass reduction are desirable considerations when designing for this challenge. It must also withstand a static converter and a battery box.

For additional information and specifications, Click here and download/open the .zip file.

Requirements

  • JUDGING CRITERIA:
    1) Mass reduction: reducing volume or composing it with different materials
    2) Ease of assembly: reducing the number of fixings for example
    3) Total cost

  • SUBMISSION FILE FORMATS:
    - STEP of design space(s)
    - Rendering(s)
    - Final design STL
    - Stress analysis
    - Mass reduction and load case diagram

  • TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS:
    - Accomplishing standard EN12663
    - Accomplishing EN61373
    - Accomplishing Alstom Standard ENG-STD-003
    - Accomplishing EN 45545-2 (R7 HL2 requirement)
    - Not to go out of the restricted volume (see images attached: "volume 1" & "volume 2").

Rules

  • ENTERING THE COMPETITION
    The Challenge is open to everyone except employees and families of GrabCAD and the Sponsor. Multiple entries are welcome. Team entries are welcome.
    By entering the Challenge you:
    1. Accept the official GrabCAD Challenges Terms & Conditions.
    2. Agree to be bound by the decisions of the judges (Jury).
    3. Warrant that you are eligible to participate.
    4. Warrant that the submission is your original work.
    5. Warrant, to the best of your knowledge, your work is not, and has not been in production or otherwise previously published or exhibited.
    6. Warrant neither the work nor its use infringes the intellectual property rights (whether a patent, utility model, functional design right, aesthetic design right, trademark, copyright or any other intellectual property right) of any other person.
    7. Warrant participation shall not constitute employment, assignment or offer of employment or assignment.
    8. Are not entitled to any compensation or reimbursement for any costs.
    9. Agree the Sponsor and GrabCAD have the right to promote all entries.
    If you think an entry may infringe on existing copyrighted materials, please email challenges@grabcad.com.

  • SUBMITTING AN ENTRY
    Only entries uploaded to GrabCAD through the "Submit entry" button on this Challenge page will be considered an entry. Only public entries are eligible. We encourage teams to use GrabCAD Workbench for developing their entries. Entries are automatically given the tag "alstomunderframe" when uploading to GrabCAD. Please do not edit or delete this tag. Only entries with valid tag will participate in the Challenge.

  • AWARDING THE WINNERS
    The sum of the Awards is the total gross amount of the reward. The awarded participant is solely liable for the payment of all taxes, duties and other similar measures if imposed on the reward pursuant to the legislation of the country of his/her residence, domicile, citizenship, workplace, or any other criterion of similar nature. Only 1 award per person. Prizes may not be transferred or exchanged. All winners will be contacted by the GrabCAD staff to get their contact information and any other information needed to get the prize to them. Payment of cash awards is made through PayPal. All team awards will be transferred to the member who entered the Challenge.

  • We will release the finalists before the announcement of the winners to give the Community an opportunity to share their favorites in the comments, discuss concerns, and allow time for any testing or analysis by the Jury. The Jury will take the feedback into consideration when picking the winners.

  • Winning designs will be chosen based on the Rules and Requirements.

  • This Challenge ends on March 26th, 2018 (17:00 EST.) Finalists will be announced April 12th, 2018 Winners will be announced April 19th, 2018.

Prizes

$12,000 in prizes for top 3 places!

1st Place

$6,000

2nd Place

$4,000

3rd Place

$2,000

About the jury?

GrabCAD, Stratasys, and Alstom

About Alstom

As a promoter of sustainable mobility, Alstom develops and markets systems, equipment and services for the transport sector.

Alstom offers a complete range of solutions (from high-speed trains to metros, tramways and e-buses), passenger solutions, customised services (maintenance, modernisation), infrastructure, signalling and digital mobility solutions: Alstom is a world leader in integrated transport systems.

The company recorded sales of €7.3 billion and booked €10.0 billion of orders in the 2016/17 fiscal year. Headquartered in France, Alstom is present in over 60 countries and employs 32,800 people.

Alstom's ambition is to be the preferred partner of its customers for their transport solutions in all geographic locations and all market segments.

With a customer-focused organisation across the globe, Alstom offers a complete range of solutions and constantly innovates to create value for its customers.

The company strives for operational and environmental excellence and bases its success on a diverse and entrepreneurial team across the globe.

99 comments

  • Winston Jennings

    Winston Jennings 4 months ago

    On it!

    Winston Jennings has uploaded 270 CAD models & has left 809 comments.
  • manish shah

    manish shah 4 months ago

    Nice challenge!!!!

    manish shah has uploaded 27 CAD models & has left 56 comments.
  • Michael Blöser

    Michael Blöser 4 months ago

    Very nice challenge

    Michael Blöser has uploaded 0 CAD models & has left 1 comments.
  • Gochat

    Gochat 4 months ago

    Hi, it seems like in photos and in drawing there is two different type of structural supports. In drawing is UPN beams, but in photo it looks like it is made of pipe, and placement is different - in drawing it structural supports placed horizontal, but in photos profile is turned 90 deg.

    Gochat has uploaded 43 CAD models & has left 28 comments.
  • Ananth Narayan

    Ananth Narayan 4 months ago

    Where to start and where to end. Can anybody help me regarding this challenge. I don't have sufficient knowledge to start these kind of problems/ designs.

    Ananth Narayan has uploaded 24 CAD models & has left 40 comments.
  • Ramachandran Seetharaman

    Ramachandran Seetharaman 4 months ago

    Great challenge. Will provide you with the optimum design soon.

    Ramachandran Seetharaman has uploaded 8 CAD models & has left 3 comments.
  • souihi sami

    souihi sami 4 months ago

    1) In the drawing there is UPN beams, but in photo it looks like it is made of pipe.
    2) placement in drawing is placed horizontal, but in photos profile is turned 90 deg.
    ????

    souihi sami has uploaded 7 CAD models & has left 4 comments.
  • Christian Oekermann

    Christian Oekermann 4 months ago

    Could you please provide more information where:
    - AED000025010
    - AED000025020
    - AED000250538
    are use in the assembly?

    A 3D Model (.stp-file) of the assembly (battery-boy, cvs, structural support) would be very helpful. Thanks!

    Christian Oekermann has uploaded 1 CAD models & has left 4 comments.
  • Christian Oekermann

    Christian Oekermann 4 months ago

    Ok, I got the position. It's #13,#14, an #15 in AED0001667408.

    But still, a 3D Model of the assembly, especially the structural support would be nice :)

    Christian Oekermann has uploaded 1 CAD models & has left 4 comments.
  • John Harald Schjelderup

    John Harald Schjelderup 4 months ago

    Just some friendly subjective advice to designers regarding GrabCAD design challenges. Due to the fact that entries are not in a "sealed envelope" It is wise to wait with uploading one's entry untill the deadline date approaches. My reasoning for this advice is that an early submission / original design is not heavily weighted; in the end the "Client" is looking for the best overall design. Just my two cents worth, good luck!

    John Harald Schjelderup has uploaded 2 CAD models & has left 15 comments.
  • Stanislav Petrek

    Stanislav Petrek 4 months ago

    Hello, few questions:
    Is possible to move with each box inside sketched volume or they have to maintain position according drawing AED0000248601? Should we redesign pos. 13,14,15 on drawing AE00001667113/AED0001667408 only? Other parts on drawing have to remain without change?

    Stanislav Petrek has uploaded 15 CAD models & has left 34 comments.
  • Don B

    Don B 4 months ago

    wow....

    Don B has uploaded 18 CAD models & has left 76 comments.
  • manish shah

    manish shah 4 months ago

    @ John Harald Schjelderup - i totally agree with you.

    manish shah has uploaded 27 CAD models & has left 56 comments.
  • Tarik C

    Tarik C 4 months ago

    Hello.
    Is it possible to specify the mains constraints imposed by EN 12663 & EN 61373?
    I don't want to buy the norms...
    Is it possible to have the drawings AE0000 166 7072 & 7074. It is to respect the volume occupied by cables and others accessories on the frame, if it's important!
    Does the bolt attachment of the converter with AE00000198347 (rep. 11) must stay the same?
    Best regards.

    Tarik C has uploaded 10 CAD models & has left 48 comments.
  • Konstantin Metodiev

    Konstantin Metodiev 4 months ago

    What is wrong with the current design? Is the weight a sole problem? Thanks.

    Konstantin Metodiev has uploaded 43 CAD models & has left 26 comments.
  • James Goddings

    James Goddings 4 months ago

    Two Things:

    1. What are the dynamic forces on the structure? A solution can be designed for the static loads, but as this is mounted on a train surely it will be accelerated/decelerated at some point. 2 tonnes creates a lot of inertia.

    A summary of the maximum dynamic forces to design for may be of some help, or even maximum acceleration/deceleration values of the train and an idea of vertical displacement likely when running due to bumps.

    2. Dou you expect competitors to buy the standards? The only one you have provided is concerning harmful substances. Investing $500 on the off chance I might win $6000 is quite a gamble. I think i prefer my chances on betting it on a horse race.

    Again providing a summary of the main constraints may be a good compromise as Tarik C pointed out

    James Goddings has uploaded 1 CAD models & has left 1 comments.
  • Tarik C

    Tarik C 4 months ago

    Hello.
    To Konstantin: i think, mayby i'm wrong, the converters (each region have his proper electric requirment 50/60hz, 1500V or 3000V...?) must stay in place but the batteries are subject to maintnance. So, mayby, an easier way to take out the battery pack should be appreciated.
    To James: yes the safety factor and the normal/critical accelerations values must be knew. Also, i think that the current system is IAW those requirments. So, if you do better, i think that's should be ok.
    I'm stil perplex on the question about the "good practices" used in the railway domain: in aeronautics, you have to avoid the use of ball joint due to the embrittlement of the thread at the attement base. For this challenge i'm worry about the "good practices" for the welding and the use of the threads & bolts for the undercarriage equipment.
    I hope I don't shoot myself in the foot talking about all this!
    Bye

    Tarik C has uploaded 10 CAD models & has left 48 comments.
  • Marcin Kret

    Marcin Kret 4 months ago

    Hello.
    To James (and others):
    When you look at the description of these standards, you will see that they define the strength, impact and vibration requirements for railway vehicles.
    Those 3 Standards cost in Poland ca. 440PLN so it's 130$. That is still not a little.

    Marcin Kret has uploaded 1 CAD models & has left 2 comments.
  • Shreyas G

    Shreyas G 4 months ago

    what is the entry fee for the competition???

    Shreyas G has uploaded 0 CAD models & has left 2 comments.
  • Vlad Syrkin

    Vlad Syrkin 4 months ago

    EN12663 ((Introductory part in Bulgarian, main text in English) https://www.dropbox.com/s/eb01hvdklg7n9ls/EN12663.pdf?dl=0

    Vlad Syrkin has uploaded 114 CAD models & has left 114 comments.
  • Tarik C

    Tarik C 4 months ago

    Many thanks Vlad!
    The scope paragraphe desrcibe exactly what i suspected!

    Tarik C has uploaded 10 CAD models & has left 48 comments.
  • Jeff Murray

    Jeff Murray 4 months ago

    Can any one open the 3dxml file?
    I get an error - Is this an assembly layout?

    Jeff Murray has uploaded 1 CAD models & has left 2 comments.
  • Peroulis

    Peroulis 4 months ago

    Thank you Vlad!

    Peroulis has uploaded 6 CAD models & has left 19 comments.
  • Vlad Syrkin

    Vlad Syrkin 4 months ago

    Three things confuse me in this contest:
    1. The customer actually hides the load on the design (reference
    to multiple-page standards, some of which are irrelevant).
    2. The customer is unhappy with the cost of rolled beams.
    I understand, weight can be made less. But cheaper than standard rolled steel, unlikely.
    3. The volume of the contest is not defined, what can be changed and what is not.
    For example, can you fix the structure directly to the longitudinal beams of the wagon?
    Dear colleagues and jury. Who can comment on the situation.

    Vlad Syrkin has uploaded 114 CAD models & has left 114 comments.
  • Allar Õunsaar

    Allar Õunsaar 4 months ago

    3dxml file can be opened with "3D XML player" https://www.3ds.com/products-services/3d-xml/download. Or with CATIA

    Allar Õunsaar has uploaded 7 CAD models & has left 6 comments.
  • Jeff Murray

    Jeff Murray 3 months ago

    Thanks Allar!

    Jeff Murray has uploaded 1 CAD models & has left 2 comments.
  • Shreyas G

    Shreyas G 3 months ago

    Are we provided with certificate of participation??

    Shreyas G has uploaded 0 CAD models & has left 2 comments.
  • Flaviano Crespi

    Flaviano Crespi 3 months ago

    A question about the fixing holes of the main components:
    Why the fixing holes of the battery box are not aligned with those of the static converter? In this way a twist is created respect to the neutral axis of the beam, could we not align them to avoid this?
    Thanks for an answer.

    Flaviano Crespi has uploaded 286 CAD models & has left 1383 comments.
  • Nathaniel Andresmooi

    Nathaniel Andresmooi 3 months ago

    ENG-STD-003 is included with the documents. Most of the other standards and engineering documents don't appear to be included. Can we get relevant excerpts from the limiting documents added? Force body diagrams. Accelerations. Allowable deformation etc. Most participants cannot be expected to purchase copies of the standards being referenced.

    Nathaniel Andresmooi has uploaded 5 CAD models & has left 244 comments.
  • Beatriz Luquero

    Beatriz Luquero 3 months ago

    @Gochat Hi, I am part of Alstom's team. Here you are the answer to your question. Do not hesitate to contact if you need any additional information. That’s right. Supporting structures in the pictures belong to other equipment’s assembly. However, what it is intended to be shown is the joint of the structure of the box so that it is related. Please, find attached new images with the right profile assembled and in stock. It is convenient to delete the previous ones to avoid confusions.

    Beatriz Luquero has uploaded 0 CAD models & has left 16 comments.
  • Beatriz Luquero

    Beatriz Luquero 3 months ago

    @souihi sami Hi, I am part of Alstom's team. Here you are the answer to your question. Do not hesitate to contact if you need any additional information. We think your questions are answered in my previous comment as it is related to @Gochat 's question

    Beatriz Luquero has uploaded 0 CAD models & has left 16 comments.
  • Beatriz Luquero

    Beatriz Luquero 3 months ago

    To the question raised regarding if there is any limitation to the manufacturing process used in making the support structures. The answer is no, just to consider that standards must be respected.

    Beatriz Luquero has uploaded 0 CAD models & has left 16 comments.
  • Beatriz Luquero

    Beatriz Luquero 3 months ago

    @Christian Oekermann Hi, I am part of Alstom's team. Here you are the answer to your question. Do not hesitate to contact if you need any additional information. Please watch out a new image we have added ("1") and also 2D documentation to complete what is related to the issue you raise. Also regarding the 3D model: additional file 3dxml "AE00001423463"

    Beatriz Luquero has uploaded 0 CAD models & has left 16 comments.
  • Beatriz Luquero

    Beatriz Luquero 3 months ago

    @Christian Oekermann Hi, I am part of Alstom's team. Here you are the answer to your question. Do not hesitate to contact if you need any additional information. To watch 3dxml AE00001423463 attached initially, also Model_A.stp (recently attached).

    Beatriz Luquero has uploaded 0 CAD models & has left 16 comments.
  • Beatriz Luquero

    Beatriz Luquero 3 months ago

    Also another clarification. All the supports are structural. What it is intended to optimize is what can be watched within 3dxml, except the equipment. Just the support structure itself and NOT the rest of equipment. The pdf shows a part called Conv. Bracket - is this the mounted support or the structural support, or neither, or both? All the supports are structural. There are some brackets that look like stirrups that support items 2,3 and 11,12 in the Static converter assembly dwg - can these be modified, or do they have to remain unchanged? Pieces # 2, 3, 11, and 12 can be modified. Stirrups can NOT be modified as they are standard elements. The photos of the undercarriage of the train are confusing as they are different than what you show in the pdf's and the cad parts. To consider also my first comment: Supporting structures in the pictures belong to other equipment’s assembly. However, what it is intended to be shown is the joint of the structure of the box so that it is related. Please, find attached new images with the right profile assembled and in stock. It is convenient to delete the previous ones to avoid confusions.

    Beatriz Luquero has uploaded 0 CAD models & has left 16 comments.
  • Beatriz Luquero

    Beatriz Luquero 3 months ago

    To be clarified:
    -Is possible to move with each box inside sketched volume or they have to maintain position according drawing AED0000248601?
    No, they can not be moved. Equipment must respect that position as the box ’s estructure is calculated with that mass distribution, besides these equipment coexist under the frame with other equipment and their associated volume.
    -Should we redesign pos. 13,14,15 on drawing AE00001667113/AED0001667408 only?
    Not only those but also 2,3, 11 and 12. Just to consider that it is not only redesigning as some freedom to add/delete pieces is admitted.
    -Other parts on drawing have to remain without change?
    Yes, the rest of the equipment must remain as it is currently.

    Beatriz Luquero has uploaded 0 CAD models & has left 16 comments.
  • Beatriz Luquero

    Beatriz Luquero 3 months ago

    We will keep on working on your questions in order them to be answered as soon as possible.
    Hope you are enjoying the challenge and expecting to watch all your contributions!

    Beatriz Luquero has uploaded 0 CAD models & has left 16 comments.
  • Yashaswi Sharma

    Yashaswi Sharma 3 months ago

    Someone please provide the standards, please.

    Yashaswi Sharma has uploaded 0 CAD models & has left 6 comments.
  • Azamat Sayapov

    Azamat Sayapov 3 months ago

    Battery box brackets mounting positions are on different hight. (position 12,13,15 on battery_box.pdf drawing). Can we align the height of these fixings in order to mount battery box directly to the beams?

    Azamat Sayapov has uploaded 3 CAD models & has left 6 comments.
  • Nathaniel Andresmooi

    Nathaniel Andresmooi 3 months ago

    @Yashaswi Sharma
    Vlad Syrkin 8 days ago
    EN12663 ((Introductory part in Bulgarian, main text in English) https://www.dropbox.com/s/eb01hvdklg7n9ls/EN12663.pdf?dl=0
    ENG-STD-003 is included with the documents

    EN61373 and EN 45545-2 (R7 HL2 requirement) were not supplied and probably shouldn't be used in judging.

    Nathaniel Andresmooi has uploaded 5 CAD models & has left 244 comments.
  • Nathaniel Andresmooi

    Nathaniel Andresmooi 3 months ago

    All we really need is some peak load diagrams taken from the documents. Cyclic loading should be substantially less than peak load. Especially if we are given a factor of safety in addition to the peak load. Say a factor of safety of 2.5? Then the cross section etc can be reduced if 2.5 is too high.

    Nathaniel Andresmooi has uploaded 5 CAD models & has left 244 comments.
  • Jarle Fevang

    Jarle Fevang 3 months ago

    What safety factor applies here?

    Jarle Fevang has uploaded 2 CAD models & has left 5 comments.
  • Jarle Fevang

    Jarle Fevang 3 months ago

    The standard EN12663 speaks of yield stength, ultimate failure and instability
    May you please simplify this and provide what value applies ?

    - in my opinion, participants should not waste too much time of stress-analysis and standards as we do not have enough information and knowledge for a final analysis.
    Our main task is to find good design solutions that probably meet the requirements, as I see it

    Best regards
    Jarle Fevang

    Jarle Fevang has uploaded 2 CAD models & has left 5 comments.
  • Nathaniel Andresmooi

    Nathaniel Andresmooi 3 months ago

    The task as presented is to create a new beam that reduces weight. The difficulty is we don't know the minimum strengths required in the beam in addition to any factor of safety. These minimums I'm sure are outlined in the standards that we may or may not have access to. We do have some weights and some dimensions. What we need is a criteria for failure. Typically if the part is designed to resist a failure in impact this would be at the peak load. Could we get a peak expected load in each axis? This would be enough to do stress/deformation calcs.

    Nathaniel Andresmooi has uploaded 5 CAD models & has left 244 comments.
  • Hans Kristian Bruun

    Hans Kristian Bruun 3 months ago

    Should the product be designed according to Catagory P-I or P-II. (EN 12663-1:2010 section 5.2.3) ?
    You would get much better results by just telling the design loads. Reading and understanding the technical requirements takes up a lot of precious time that could have been used on a great design.

    Hans Kristian Bruun has uploaded 3 CAD models & has left 7 comments.
  • Jonathan

    Jonathan 3 months ago

    standards docs are pretty thick, would take a while to gleam anything from them....anyway we could just have a few specs/parameters to work with for FEA? It obviously has to hold 2000+ KG approx. 20,000N (batt box and static box). Any idea on % margin of safety to add? Thanks.

    Jonathan has uploaded 199 CAD models & has left 2140 comments.
  • Jarle Fevang

    Jarle Fevang 3 months ago

    I may be mistaken, but it seems to me that there still is a lot of confusion of which part we are allowed to change and which not to. In some entries everthing is changed, while in others entries only the 5 cross-beams are modified.

    In what I have understood, we are NOT allowed to modify the stir-ups, the battery-case, nor the static converter-case. Am I right or not?

    Jarle Fevang has uploaded 2 CAD models & has left 5 comments.
  • Beatriz Luquero

    Beatriz Luquero 3 months ago

    @Azamat Sayapov Hi, I am part of Alstom's team. Here you are the answer to your question. Do not hesitate to contact if you need any additional information. Can we align the height of these fixings in order to mount battery box directly to the beams?No. The connections on the equipment must be maintained.

    Beatriz Luquero has uploaded 0 CAD models & has left 16 comments.
  • Beatriz Luquero

    Beatriz Luquero 3 months ago

    @ Jarle Fevang Hi, I am part of Alstom's team. Here you are the answer to your question. Do not hesitate to contact if you need any additional information. The safety factor that applies here is 1.15 (See EN 12663-1)

    Beatriz Luquero has uploaded 0 CAD models & has left 16 comments.
  • Beatriz Luquero

    Beatriz Luquero 3 months ago

    @ Jarle Fevang Hi, I am part of Alstom's team. Here you are the answer to your question. Do not hesitate to contact if you need any additional information. We will include an additional xls file where you can find some more detail. Also we recommend you to go deeper into EN12663-1.

    Beatriz Luquero has uploaded 0 CAD models & has left 16 comments.
  • Beatriz Luquero

    Beatriz Luquero 3 months ago

    @Hans Kristian Bruun Hi, I am part of Alstom's team. Here you are the answer to your question. Do not hesitate to contact if you need any additional information. Should the product be designed according to Catagory P-I or P-II. (EN 12663-1:2010 section 5.2.3) ? P-III. If you read the standard  Category P-III  underground. Also we will include an additional xls file where you can find some more detail.

    Beatriz Luquero has uploaded 0 CAD models & has left 16 comments.
  • Beatriz Luquero

    Beatriz Luquero 3 months ago

    @Tarik C Hi, I am part of Alstom's team. Here you are the answer to your question. Do not hesitate to contact if you need any additional information. We are not allowed to distribute the norms. Also we will include an additional xls file where you can find some more detail. Regarding the drawings, you will also find attached 2 additional pdf (AED0001667316_--A_AE00001667072, AED0001667326_--A_AE00001667074). Does the bolt attachment of the converter with AE00000198347 (rep. 11) must stay the same? Yes. The intention is not to change the equipement.

    Beatriz Luquero has uploaded 0 CAD models & has left 16 comments.
  • Beatriz Luquero

    Beatriz Luquero 3 months ago

    @Konstantin Metodiev Hi, I am part of Alstom's team. Here you are the answer to your question. Do not hesitate to contact if you need any additional information.What is wrong with the current design? Is the weight a sole problem? The proposal is not launched to solve a problema but to obtain improvements in a pieze which is very often integrated within the Metropolis, so its optimization would be a notable issue.

    Beatriz Luquero has uploaded 0 CAD models & has left 16 comments.
  • Beatriz Luquero

    Beatriz Luquero 3 months ago

    @James Goddings Hi, I am part of Alstom's team. Here you are the answer to your question. Do not hesitate to contact if you need any additional information. Within the norm of static calculation and fatigue EN12663-1 concretely in point 6.5.2 Proof load cases for equipment attachments (that the design must comply), load cases are included with accelerations due to the inertia which You refers ., longitudinal accelerations, (braking and starting), transverse and vertical accelerations.
    A summary of the maximum dynamic forces to design for may be of some help, or even maximum acceleration/deceleration values of the train and an idea of vertical displacement likely when running due to bumps. See EN 12663-1  6.5.2 Proof load cases for equipment attachment.
    Also we have uploaded an Excel file with the load cases detailed in EN12663.

    Beatriz Luquero has uploaded 0 CAD models & has left 16 comments.
  • Azamat Sayapov

    Azamat Sayapov 3 months ago

    @Beatriz Luquero
    What about fatigue calculations for S275JR ? Can you provide the edurance limit for it?

    Azamat Sayapov has uploaded 3 CAD models & has left 6 comments.
  • Marco Boer

    Marco Boer 3 months ago

    @Beatriz Luquero, last week I made quite some hours and it cost me almost a divorce , I submitted my design, everything oke.. I thought.. Now I read that the stirrups can't be changed. I wondered how this is going to be included in the evaluation of the designs?

    Marco Boer has uploaded 3 CAD models & has left 13 comments.
  • Tom Mai

    Tom Mai 3 months ago

    I really like following this challenge and this discussion,-) I once worked on a 2 year project at a well-known competitor company at a similar "challenge". "Load drives design" - which is not soo eazy - LOL. Well, in the rail business pretty much everything is very detail written down in federal regulations and standards, still every company has his own "secret" stress loads for multiple life time situations. In such a case a stress guy could sit 2 weeks or so, until he could confirm the design. So in our case, after 6 month of design the stress guy came - "…loads changed…" - and a lot of the design was waste… So, Good Luck to Everybody^^

    Tom Mai has uploaded 0 CAD models & has left 28 comments.
  • Matt Firmani

    Matt Firmani 3 months ago

    Hey everyone! Just a heads-up that Beatriz included some diagrams for clarification in the "added 3.zip" file. These were to help answer some previous questions that were asked.

    We're coming down to the last weekend! Everyone make sure to get your submissions in on time!

    Matt Firmani has uploaded 3 CAD models & has left 21 comments.
  • Mariusz Jablonski

    Mariusz Jablonski 3 months ago

    @Beatriz Luquero
    Thanks for your all answers!
    I have another one about submission file formats. In requirements we have points:

    - STEP of design space(s)
    - Final design STL

    It means that we should send all design parts in two formats: STEP and STL?
    I am looking forward to hearing from you.

    Mariusz Jablonski has uploaded 8 CAD models & has left 20 comments.
  • Flaviano Crespi

    Flaviano Crespi 3 months ago

    I have a request to be made to the managers of the challenge:
    I agree that the calculation rules have been strictly specified since the beginning of the challenge, but as reported by many participants the purchase of the rules would be too burdensome. You have therefore published three days ago an Excel table which shows the calculation conditions. As far as I understand, almost all of the works do not show the very heavy calculation condition according to the X axis, but are limited to the Y axis condition. So most of the models are unsuitable.
    At this point, to obtain valid results, it would be advantageous for the purposes of the challenge to grant an extra time to update the projects.

    Flaviano Crespi has uploaded 286 CAD models & has left 1383 comments.
  • Yashaswi Sharma

    Yashaswi Sharma 3 months ago

    Hey GrabCAD and the contest managers, considering all the new information that has recently been added, could you please extend the submission deadline so that we can make better use of that information in our designs. Thank you.

    Yashaswi Sharma has uploaded 0 CAD models & has left 6 comments.
  • wasif

    wasif 3 months ago

    I think the main point is design a new beam that is make a stable structural system is it right

    wasif has uploaded 165 CAD models & has left 299 comments.
  • John Bell

    John Bell 3 months ago

    Cannot submit entry. The rules state: This Challenge ends on March 26th, 2018 (17:00 EST.) Finalists will be announced April 12th, 2018 Winners will be announced April 19th, 2018. It is now 19:32 BST (GMT+1) = 13:32 EST and I cannot submit an entry - WHATS GOING ON?

    John Bell has uploaded 0 CAD models & has left 1 comments.
  • Carlos Fuentes

    Carlos Fuentes 3 months ago

    I know, I stayed up last night to make sure I was able to submit on time. One minute I see the time was at 4 hours, refresh the page and I only have 30 minutes left!!

    Carlos Fuentes has uploaded 17 CAD models & has left 26 comments.
  • Pandiyarajan Rajaguru

    Pandiyarajan Rajaguru 2 months ago

    When the finalist will be announced??

    Pandiyarajan Rajaguru has uploaded 3 CAD models & has left 1 comments.
  • Matt Firmani

    Matt Firmani 2 months ago

    Hey everyone! I'm Matt from GrabCAD, and I wanted to let everyone know that the Alstom judges have chosen ten finalists, and they've now been added to the Challenge page for you all to see. Congratulations to those whose designs were chosen!

    Next we'll be taking an in-depth look at all of the technical specifications and how each entrant performed in those areas. Which one is your favorite? Did we leave anything amazing off the list? See something we should know about?

    Matt Firmani has uploaded 3 CAD models & has left 21 comments.
  • Tarik C

    Tarik C 2 months ago

    I'm just a little peeved because I spent hours (not me but the computer) to simulate all cases in accordance with the standard and find solutions to what was lacking.
    Well, that makes me think of a Blondie song ...

    Tarik C has uploaded 10 CAD models & has left 48 comments.
  • Hein Miessner

    Hein Miessner 2 months ago

    Congrats to the finalists. Some really good solutions in the top 10 but then also must be said some shocking choices by the judges. Don't know what they were thinking making some of those choices. But guess thats their choice, but not the first time being dissapointed in the results of one of these challenges..The outcomes of these things sometimes makes no sense.

    Hein Miessner has uploaded 29 CAD models & has left 65 comments.
  • Arif Hariyadi

    Arif Hariyadi 2 months ago

    Congratulations... see you all on the 2nd ALSTOM DESIGN CHALLENGE which hopefully will have more clear load case at the beginning of the challenge.

    Arif Hariyadi has uploaded 0 CAD models & has left 1 comments.
  • Mariusz Jablonski

    Mariusz Jablonski 2 months ago

    Congratulations to all finalists.

    @Matt Firmani
    I have one comment to this challenge. When I'm looking at 10 selected works I can't agree that all of them fulfil judging criteria. For the record:
    1) Total cost.
    2) Flexibility of being able to create variants with minimum cost (...)
    3) Total weight.
    It looks like the judging criteria has to be completely different I think.
    This is only my subjective opinion.

    Once again, big congrats!

    Mariusz Jablonski has uploaded 8 CAD models & has left 20 comments.
  • Mario Inglés

    Mario Inglés 2 months ago

    Congrats to all of the 10 finalists. For sure good ideas.
    Good to see representation of Obuu between them. Miguel Cordero did a really easy-to-assembly job and thanks to his wide experience on reducing costs on designings for our aeronautics and railway clients, he did a truly cost-competitive job.

    Congrats also for the jury! To analyze 141 different projects has to be hard job and a quite difficult decision...

    Mario Inglés has uploaded 0 CAD models & has left 3 comments.
  • ANOUAR BARODI

    ANOUAR BARODI 2 months ago

    Congratulations to all finalists !!!

    ANOUAR BARODI has uploaded 83 CAD models & has left 1521 comments.
  • Tarik C

    Tarik C 2 months ago

    I do not know if it's because in the images of the simulations we saw things that could seem worrying that my solution was not retain. So, I added 3 images of the documentations used which justify some choices made concerning the converter mounting (see last update of first project).
    Also, the cost mentionned is an estimation to make a single set for prototype (depend of the qualifications/usual job of the subcontractor for the welds). I'have some references for small series costs but not for the moment in the metallic construction domain. So it could cost significatelly less if greater quantities are produced (also for painting & laser cutting) and when the settings will be arrested.
    Another think is, the profil manufacturer i used (SSAB) have standard delivery program (where i chose the more appropriate profile), can also make special profil on demand (other closed section as well open sections). In this case, the costs of implementation will increase but it can be profitable regarding the quantities considered. Also tools for transforming sheet by roling cost less than tools for hot rolled laminated products....
    Also, I will ask you to reconsider the solution that I have submitted to you carefully. thanks in advance.

    Tarik C has uploaded 10 CAD models & has left 48 comments.
  • Marco Boer

    Marco Boer 2 months ago

    Congratulations to all winners!

    Maybe I am a bad looser, but I am very disappointed by the jury. I see designs that can't be manufactured, don't have a stress analysis or not a complete one, no assumptions in the stress report.. All loads are equally devided, which will not be in reality deu to friction defferencesm where it is not clear which loads are applied to the structure, boundery conditions of the stress analysis are completely wrong, pipes are used for bending as well as flat plates, plates that can't be bend (manufactured), fixture plates that will fale. A lot of small radius wich will effect the fatigue life.

    The HAT design seems plausible, but going from a UNP to a bend plate is not really innovative.. I also have my doubts whether this design can be manufactured seen the small length of the outer flanges..

    The "Alstom Underframe Support Structure" misses boundery conditions constraints and contacts in the report. The stress in the beams seem not realistic to me. Also using the beams in this position seems to be weird for me, turning them 90 degree will make it much more strong for bending..

    The Through Beam makes no sense at all..

    The "Alstom Bracket" design can't be manufactured... Loads are not clear, boundery conditions are not clear, constraints are not clear...

    The "Underframe challenge v1.0" no stress report... Not clear, loads only applied in one direction, constrains not clear... etc.

    "Redesign the Structural Support - AD04 - by Adriano Barissa" design can't be manufactured because of the shape of the holes in the bends, no structural report, constrains are wrong.

    "Alstom Metropolis Underframe" seems to be maybe plausible but no clear analysis I also have my doubts about the mounting brackets... But going from a UNP to an hollow section is not really innovative to me.

    The "Progetto 1" design is flexible, but that also means that the battery boxes can move from left to right... I think there will be also excessive wear because of vibration. Pipe is used for compression or torsion not bending. Hollow section would be better here. The stresses seen in the report are not realistic.

    The "Support_01" design seems extremely flexible (and not strong enough in longtitudinal direction of the metro), pipes used for bending, brackets seem not strong enough, no stress report.. etc...

    This challange was a waste of my time.

    Marco Boer has uploaded 3 CAD models & has left 13 comments.
  • Marco Boer

    Marco Boer 2 months ago

    excuse me, one rectification: "Redesign the Structural Support - AD04 - by Adriano Barissa" CAN be manufactured...

    Marco Boer has uploaded 3 CAD models & has left 13 comments.
  • Ивайло

    Ивайло 2 months ago

    Congratulations selected!

    I am also puzzled by the selection of the jury. Without checking the decisions of colleagues, maybe more than half will not be strong enough to load 3g + own weight. As noted by colleague Marco Boer, several do not have stress analysis. Maybe the best solution would give

    Static Converter and battery box rotated 90° version

    although it goes out of the condition in the condition.
    I do not regret participating in this challenge because I have spent several evenings of my spare time, but probably others have spent much more time and probably have reason to be angry about the choice
    Maybe I did not correctly understand the condition of the challenge, but the selection of the jury is definitely strange.
    Аs if they chose the beauty of the pictures

    Ивайло has uploaded 5 CAD models & has left 7 comments.
  • Davide Lambertini

    Davide Lambertini 2 months ago

    An immense waste of time.
    At least half of the solutions would never hold up to a 3G stress along the x axis, some solutions are not even achievable except at exorbitant costs.
    The cost should not be reduced?
    Some solutions do not even have FEM analysis, have you selected them randomly?
    The accelerations should not be immediately posted together with the loads?
    Was the rendering time lost?
    A truly rough Challenge.

    Davide Lambertini has uploaded 57 CAD models & has left 4177 comments.
  • Marco Boer

    Marco Boer 2 months ago

    I will take a walk in Barcelona.. :-)

    Marco Boer has uploaded 3 CAD models & has left 13 comments.
  • Jacek Zieliński

    Jacek Zieliński 2 months ago

    I was supposed to write nothing, but when I read my friends' posts, I decided to take part in this discussion, although it is difficult to call this discussion if the statements are on one side only. I have already written somewhere that since Ben Ewing left GrabCad, most of the challenges are carried out in accordance with the principle: do whatever you like and we choose whatever we want, no matter what we write in the specification ;-)
    I am still able to understand people from GrabCAD because they do not need to be familiar with the challenges, so people from challenging companies do not.
    I would be ashamed in their place - reading the specification and watching the selection, it looks as if it was chosen by someone who does not have the slightest idea about the subject. I understand that there is maybe one or three of them who captivated the judges, but it would be nice to have some decency to choose these 10 finalists honestly! Anyway, in my opinion, when reviewing these 141 entries, if someone is experienced and sticks to the specification - one hour it's enough to verify them.
    I am not left with anything else to congratulate the only one who won the challenge: Alstom! Congratulations and remember: Your choice also testifies to you.
    P.S. Nobody will comment on it anyway, so this is another waste of time.

    Jacek Zieliński has uploaded 42 CAD models & has left 141 comments.
  • Marco Boer

    Marco Boer 2 months ago

    Jacek Zieliński, for me, your design was really interesting and a true competitor..

    Marco Boer has uploaded 3 CAD models & has left 13 comments.
  • Tarik C

    Tarik C 2 months ago

    I must admit that my main motivation for participating in these competitions is pecuniary. Also, if the chances of ganging are governed by such rules (or the lack of them!), It is better to play the lottery!

    Tarik C has uploaded 10 CAD models & has left 48 comments.
  • Adriano Ordoz Barissa

    Adriano Ordoz Barissa 2 months ago

    I agree that GrabCad changed a lot after the departure of "Ben Ewing".
    I also agree with everything they are saying, but I have been challenging here for some time and this always happens.
    I believe that the champion has already been selected by the team, and certainly must be a job that meets their expectations, hence the others placed they always choose ideas based on creativity, thinking outside the box, those works with a radical differential and also extremely simple. After all, the main idea of these challenges is to find the solution to the problem described and also to be able to put together a considerable number of new ideas.
    I always participate, dedicating the best of myself, trying to collaborate with the challenge and the team. I apologize if I insult anyone with my entries.
      I think that the more entries, the more opportunities we give everyone, the company that will have more ideas and also the participants, who during the period can through our entries, create something better.

    Adriano Ordoz Barissa has uploaded 86 CAD models & has left 403 comments.
  • Tarik C

    Tarik C 2 months ago

    Personally I do not feel offended by your entries.
    Also, I do not think I have highlighted myself by the denigration of the work of another but I think, however, that the originality is paying only if it integrates the data of the real world . Do not we say that hell is in the details? Simple ideas are good, but then what is the usefulness of digital simulation tools? It is also without counting on the good practices which are of use and which one their reasons for being.
    Anyway, after that, I do not care anymore.

    Tarik C has uploaded 10 CAD models & has left 48 comments.
  • Flaviano Crespi

    Flaviano Crespi 2 months ago

    Even I am not surprised by the result of the challenge, because it has already happened many times in Grabcad challenges and other equally quoted sites. More initial specifications are precise and categorical, more the person who follows the blog is just consistent with the rules, and more the judges contradict the premises.
    It is clear that the judges have neither time nor the desire to perform the control calculations, but they judge on impromptu impressions, because their collaborators then calmly will extract the best from the mine of 140 free projects.
    These are the delights of crowdsourcing :)
    or ooppps a mischievous hypothesis: it will not be a manifestation of the famous Peter principle?

    Flaviano Crespi has uploaded 286 CAD models & has left 1383 comments.
  • Tarik C

    Tarik C 2 months ago

    "Keep these complicated books, the accouting books will do the trick. Do not be proud, spiritual, or even comfortable, you might seem arrogant. Reduce your passions, they are scary. Above all, no "good idea", the shredder is full. That piercing look that worries, dilate it, and relax your lips - you have to think soft and show it, talk about your self by reducing it to little: we must be able to fit you. The times have changed. There has been no capture of the Bastille, nothing like the Reichstag fire, and Aurora has not fired yet. However, the assault was indeed launched and successful: the mediocre took power. "

    Taken from "La Médiocratie" by Alain Deneault.

    This is not meant to hurt people in particular, it's just a criticism of the system ...

    Tarik C has uploaded 10 CAD models & has left 48 comments.
  • juan_camanei

    juan_camanei 2 months ago

    Just to be clear, I don´t even know if my models are suitable with the load restrictions because I got a little mess and confused with all the standards, which I guess, I´m not the only one. I even didn´t noticed that someone was so nice to put a link with one of the standards in the comments section. So back to my models; I´m not mad that any of my models wasn´t selected as a finalist. Nevertheless I have something to say about this challenge inspired from all the participants that posted their discomfort with the judges decisions.

    juan_camanei has uploaded 2 CAD models & has left 9 comments.
  • juan_camanei

    juan_camanei 2 months ago

    I have to congratulate Alstom for such a nice challenge, and I think they should keep their price money. Well, not really. It´s ok to give it to the winning designers. I just feel bad about Alstom spending money that they should invest in their employees. I don´t think they made this challenge just 4 fun or just to see how many people could they make angry with their results. Just think about this: they are paying at least $12,000 to make the work they can´t, or just don´t want to do. That´s why they listed all the standards we had to comply with; instead of giving us concrete information about loads and all that. They maybe doesn´t have enough people and the people they have doesn´t know how to work with each other. For example: how is it possible that Beatriz Luquero tells us: (quote) “Equipment must respect that position as the box ’s estructure is calculated with that mass distribution, besides these equipment coexist under the frame with other equipment and their associated volume.” I don´t even need to download the files of all of the models (finalists) to see that if you align the holes of the CVS and the battery case in the same plane it is impossible to achieve without moving one or another. Maybe Fco. Javier Saucedo (whom I think may be the real judge in this challenge, or at least seems to have been “evaluating” the designs) doesn´t care what Beatriz Luquero wrote. Maybe I´m wrong and the Judges doesn´t work well together. I don´t even have to say anything about FEA. It´s easier for Alstom to ask for the analysis and believe everything is correct, than to take the corresponding time to prove all the designs. Well, who needs FEA when the design and/or presentation look cool and innovative? Like I said, don´t be mad at Alstom because you don´t like the finalists. Remember, we have to be supportive and apprehensive to those who need us the most. Don´t you realize they are desperate? If not, how can anyone explain why did Alstom shared all their info about the CVS and their battery box? If I´m able to see every single screw and part from these 2 components it´s either because they don´t have anyone in charge of DMU, or they just don´t care. I thought Siemens and Alstom were joining forces to compete against China´s CRRC. I don´t think that Siemens would like to know that Alstom likes to give away their R&D just for free. Or even worse; imagine if someone that participated in this challenge was so angry about the jury´s decision that decided to tip China Railway Rolling Stock (CRRC) and tell them where to find the models of their CVS and battery box, but please! Don´t tell them to use Catia v5 to see the files, because it wouldn´t be fair for the people and Investors of Alstom, that just because a designer who spend so many time wasted in a challenge where the jury didn´t have the respect for all the participants and at least take the time to check, proof, analyze, and make sure every single criteria was fulfill before selecting any finalist; that this challenge could affect so many people. That´s why I think Alstom should invest their money in themselves instead of trying to save some money by calling a challenge where they want all their work done by someone else. I think Spain, (or been more local) Cataluña has so many people prepared and with the knowledge required to be working for a company like Alstom, but instead of investing in the people, they want everything almost for free. Sometimes they have to learn: (like they say in spanish) ”lo barato sale caro”.

    juan_camanei has uploaded 2 CAD models & has left 9 comments.
  • juan_camanei

    juan_camanei 2 months ago

    What I would recommend to anyone who is not pleased with the jury´s decision, is just to delete your models. Maybe it can happen that the models Alstom choose as winners doesn´t work that well in real life, so they have to start to look for other solutions, and who knows? Maybe it´s the model from someone who wasn´t even selected as a finalist. Here comes the funny part: like it is shown in the poorly selecting process, they (Alstom) may not even downloaded all the models, and if this is the case, at least you could be pleased that no one is using your work for free. On the other hand it would be a way to show Grabcad that you don´t agree with the system where the jury doesn´t even comply with their own requirements. If I´m not wrong, I remember when the challenge was closed there were over 160 entries. It would be interesting to see how many entries are left at the end of this challenge.

    juan_camanei has uploaded 2 CAD models & has left 9 comments.
  • Tarik C

    Tarik C 2 months ago

    I quite agree with your comments, especially on the fact that they should engage people locally (and have a policy that fits in the time that is the only guarantor of a know-how for the company => age structure).
    I am, however, a little less in agreement with the solutions considered because what is done is done and I do not think it would be useful or constructive (except for the nerves!).
    On the other hand, if we can agree to the principle of crowdsouring, I think it is necessary to put in place binding rules for judges, on pain of the system committing suicide; I think about an evaluation grid that is as exhaustive as possible in order to objectify the choices made and the contractual obligation, as warrantie, that the juging must comply with them.
    If that is not done, personally, I will no longer participate in competitions to provide services to commercial companies.

    Tarik C has uploaded 10 CAD models & has left 48 comments.
  • Jacek Zieliński

    Jacek Zieliński 2 months ago

    What's funny, Alstom yesterday asked the finalists for FEA analysis and cost estimation who did not have it ;-). See the comments under the finalists projects.

    Jacek Zieliński has uploaded 42 CAD models & has left 141 comments.
  • Davide Lambertini

    Davide Lambertini 2 months ago

    I am afraid that none of the solutions you choose will end up being mounted under an ALSTOM train, for obvious structural shortcomings
    In case I was wrong I would like to see a picture ..............

    Davide Lambertini has uploaded 57 CAD models & has left 4177 comments.
  • Matt Firmani

    Matt Firmani 2 months ago

    Hey everyone!

    If you haven't met me yet, I'm the new Community Manager here at GrabCAD, and I wanted to reach out and announce that the winners of this challenge have been chosen by our judges at Alstom, and posted under the "Results" tab on this page. Please take a look, and let us know what you think!

    We've been reading through some of your recent comments, and wanted to express our sympathies towards those who do not agree with the finalist choices our judges made. We understand that it's frustrating to have your hard work be overlooked, and I wanted to let each and every one of you know that we appreciate the efforts you put into these Challenges, and that this doesn't go unnoticed by us.

    We will take your feedback into account for future challenges, but for now, let's please thank our Alstom judges for their hard work combing through these 140 models, and let's please congratulate our finalists and winners! They worked hard to get here too, and they deserve every bit of recognition they have received.

    Finally, @juan_camanei, please do not encourage members to remove their entries if they do not win. Not only is that unsportsman-like, but encourages members to violate our Challenge Terms & Conditions, which you can find a link to under "Rules" above. Please show a little grace and congratulate the winners, ok?

    If you have any questions, you can reach me at problem-solvers@grabcad.com. Have a lovely day!

    Matt Firmani has uploaded 3 CAD models & has left 21 comments.
  • Miguel Cordero

    Miguel Cordero 2 months ago

    Hola a todos!

    Ahora que el concurso ha terminado, quiero agradecer el apoyo a toda la comunidad de GrabCAD por haber hecho de ésta una experiencia inolvidable, también a todos los concursantes, a los que felicito por su excelente trabajo, y en especial a los finalistas. No creo haya sido fácil para los jueces elegir entre tanto talento.

    Por último, quiero dar la enhorabuena a GrabCAD por la oportunidad y a ALSTOM por confiar en nosotros y por su riguroso trabajo en la selección.

    Un saludo y muchas gracias a todos!
    ________________________

    Hello everyone!

    Now that the contest is over, I want to thank the entire GrabCAD community for making this an unforgettable experience, also to all the contestants, whom I congratulate for their excellent work, and especially the finalists. I do not think it was easy for the judges to choose between so much talent.

    Finally, I would like to congratulate GrabCAD for the opportunity and ALSTOM for trusting us and for their rigorous work in the selection.

    Greetings and many thanks to all!

    Miguel Cordero has uploaded 2 CAD models & has left 13 comments.
  • Marco Boer

    Marco Boer 2 months ago

    Congratulations to all winners of this challange! They deserve more respect than they are getting now...

    As stated before, I do not agree with all selections, but this is part of the game.

    I wish all of you the best and hope for an alike challange to compete in.

    * quite funny that the 3 winners are one I did not comment, and the other two I commented as plausible.. ;-)

    Marco Boer has uploaded 3 CAD models & has left 13 comments.
  • juan_camanei

    juan_camanei 2 months ago

    Hi Matt Firmani.
    It seems you haven´t get it. When you say (quote): “Please show a little grace and congratulate the winners, ok?” Are you talking just to me and saying me what to do? Or is it for everyone? Because it sounds a little personal (same paragraph). For me it sounds like if you want to make me look like a bad looser, (Isn´t perception part of the cognitive psychology?) and I don´t take it very well; specially from the new Community Manager. So in this case I would expect an apology from you, even if it was only from the misunderstanding. Second, I never said, or ask the members “to remove their entries IF THEY DO NOT WIN” like you are stating. It was more “to anyone who is not pleased with the jury´s decision”.
    Like I said, you haven´t get it. It was never about the entries from other participants, the quality of their work, or the fact I wasn´t selected as finalist (I´ve already commented about this). In fact, I´m happy to see that Miguel Cordero won. At least the price is going locally (Spain); and no, I´m not Spaniard, neither I live in Spain. I just sympathize with the idea of “local development”; but that´s just a personal view. This doesn´t have to reflect those from Sponsor, GrabCad, or anyone from the community. For me, a more unsportsman-like conduct is when the candidates aren´t subjected to the same guidelines. (I´ve already commented about that when I talked about Beatriz Luquero´s involvement)

    juan_camanei has uploaded 2 CAD models & has left 9 comments.
  • juan_camanei

    juan_camanei 2 months ago

    Now, back to your direct comment where you stated that it “encourages members to violate our Challenge Terms & Conditions” could you be so nice to tell me exactly where does “deleting the models” violates the Challenge Terms & Conditions? I tried to look for it, but I wasn´t able to find. What I did find was under heading 1. GENERAL INFORMATION
    “Entries are automatically given a tag when uploading to GrabCAD. Please do not edit or delete this tag. Only entries with valid tag will participate in the Challenge.”
    Well, If this makes you feel better 
    I would like to encourage all the participants of the challenge “Redesign the Structural Support of the Metropolis Metro Underframe” NOT to edit or delete the automatically given tag when uploading to GrabCad, please.
    Let me be clear. Under heading 4. WARRANTIES states as following: “Entrant agrees that the Sponsor and/or GrabCAD have the right to promote all entries”. Under heading 6. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: “By submitting an Entry, Entrant grants to the Sponsors and GrabCAD the right to review the Entry, to describe the Entry in connection with any innovations created in connection with a Challenge and to have GrabCAD, the Sponsors and their designees review the Entry.”; and under heading 11. ASSIGNMENT: “Entrant may not transfer or assign this Agreement or any rights or obligations hereunder without the express written consent of the Parties.”
    Well, when someone deletes their models, this doesn´t means they are revoking any rights the Sponsors and/or GrabCad have. We all know (or should) that when we submit an entry in any challenge; (in Plain English) all our work doesn´t belongs to us anymore. It belongs to the Sponsors and/or GrabCad.
    Now there´s a question: If this work doesn´t belongs to us anymore, are we obligated to keep it in our profile? First of all, at least the Sponsor has (or should have) downloaded the data from every Entry in order to evaluate it. Ok, they are not obligated to keep it. So let’s suppose that for some reason either the Sponsor or GrabCad wants to review an Entry. It´s their right, and I don´t see how could we possibly take away this right. If you tell me that when someone deletes “their” models, they are doing so; there´s an easy solution: just ask for the models. I am not encouraging anyone to violate your Challenge Terms & Conditions like you stated.

    juan_camanei has uploaded 2 CAD models & has left 9 comments.
  • juan_camanei

    juan_camanei 2 months ago

    I could go on with so many technicalities, but that´s not the point. I know your opinions (Matt Firmani) doesn´t reflect those from GrabCad, the Sponsors, or Stratasys, Inc.; but Don´t worry. I realized you don´t like to see all kind of opinions. I just try to bring some solutions to the table. These are just options; no one is forced to follow them, neither they´re made to encourage members to do something negative. In the case of “delete your models” it had 2 reasons: first, to relieve some stress and tension (or like Taric C calls: for the nerves), because believe it or not; I care about what other participants express because sometimes we can share feelings like joy or frustration from other contestants, and I hope that if someone follows the recommendation from this anarchist unsportsman-like person (aka me); that he or she doesn´t has any problem, and that it had make them feel better. And the second was like I stated: “to show Grabcad that you don´t agree with the system”. I believe that if we don´t like something, but if we stay quiet, changes are not just going to happen. At least we have to show somehow that we don’t agree. I hope there´s more people who are willing to raise their voice even if they´re humiliated.
    By the way, if you say that you (I guess GrabCad too) will take our feedback into account for future challenges
    Could you tell us please what does your feedback is? I mean: which are the opinions or concerns (from the community) that you´ll take into account for future changes. I´m not asking why, when, or how are you planning to change. I just want you to list all the things you noticed from our feedback, just to give us chance as a community to check if all our concerns, opinions, and/or discomforts were listed

    juan_camanei has uploaded 2 CAD models & has left 9 comments.
  • juan_camanei

    juan_camanei 2 months ago

    Just to make this post not so long, I thought this could be a solution for you Matt Firmani:
    According to the Challenge Terms & Conditions, under heading 6. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS
    “GrabCAD shall have the right to remove any content from the website in their sole discretion at any time and for any reason, including, but not limited to, any online comment or posting related to a Challenge.”
    (Yeah, I indeed read the rules). I hope that by listing this option you don´t feel encouraged to do it, because I would feel someone is taking away my right of free speech. Just remember: you, as representative of GrabCad, wouldn´t leave a good impression. Maybe that´s why many people say GrabCad was better before Ben Ewing left.
    If you have any questions, you can reach me in this comment section. Have a lovely day!

    juan_camanei has uploaded 2 CAD models & has left 9 comments.
  • Beatriz Luquero

    Beatriz Luquero 2 months ago

    Dear participants within the Alstom Challenge “Redesign the Structural Support of the Metropolis Metro Underframe” published on GrabCad platform:

    From Alstom we want to thank you all for your participation and also the interest, effort and time that each one of you dedicated to the development of different proposals. All of them have a high quality and show your technical level and dedication invested to generate them.

    We can guarantee that the different teams within Alstom involved in the design, industrialization and assembly of this type of piece have dedicated all needed resources to analyze deeply every proposal, assessing not only the originality and functionality, but also the ease of fabrication and assembly, as well as the aspects to be considered in the design of every component of railway’s rolling stock.

    To be part of this platform and your collaboration have been a great experience. We especially appreciate the suggestions for improvement that you have proposed during the challenge for future ones that we will be launching progressively.

    Thank you very much to you all and see you at the next challenge!!!

    Beatriz Luquero has uploaded 0 CAD models & has left 16 comments.
  • Please log in to add comments.

    Log in
We have updated our terms in order to better protect your hard work and keep our challenges running smoothly! To submit your challenge entry, please read and accept the new Challenge Terms and Conditions.

Save Cancel