FE Team Challenge - discussion - Page 15 - Fuelly Forums

Android Users - Coming Soon! - Migrating from aCar 4.8 to 5.0

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 04-06-2007, 04:42 AM   #141
Registered Member
 
zpiloto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,225
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by rh77 View Post
In order to calculate the weighted adjustments, I believe I'll need a total of the number of miles driven for each driver.

Quote:
Can't you get this from the gaslogs. The offical results are from fill data only

As I look at it on paper, perhaps the percentage of miles driven can be applied to the MPG to make an "Adjusted MPG" figure to make the final calculation. Would that be sufficient to weight the amount of miles contributed per driver to increase/decrease the final number proportionately?

Quote:
:Sorry could you give an example
RH77
Love the avatar
__________________

zpiloto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2007, 07:28 AM   #142
Registered Member
 
MetroMPG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,223
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by zpiloto View Post
Metro just noticed you filled on the 03-21 so your good for the 28 day cycle. Although it's probably not as good as what your SG tank average is.
That was the fill I used to set my "starting" FE figures.
__________________

MetroMPG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2007, 05:00 PM   #143
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,978
Country: United States
What a Mess!

I started playing around with the numbers to get a weighted average. Having crunched the numbers left/right, up/down -- I came to a conclusion...

Assuming a competitor does 75% of the driving on the team, that particular FE was weighted as such. This created one "Mell of a Hess".

Basically, those who drove less, were essentially punished by the averages. On the same token, there wasn't a way to shift the weight off of the hi-milers on an inversely-weighted system without penalizing them too.

It ended up being:

"Those who were more efficient by driving less were losing a contest in efficiency"

On a long trip, I got to thinkin'
  • There will probably be drivers that use less than 3 gallons/month
  • What is the spirit of the competition?
  • How can this be resolved so it's still fun, challenging, and competitive?
  • FE should stand for "Fuel Efficiency" instead of "Fuel Economy"

The "Framers" can probably help more on this, but the spirit of the competition seems to be: to increase one's "FE" from a 90-day baseline number, have some fun, learn about increasing FE on personal level, and take part in a competition.

How about this -- if you don't drive 3-gallons in one-month, for statistical purposes, you have to forfeit that month's entry, but the team wouldn't necessarily be penalized (instead of getting the average of 5 participants, it could go down to 4). Then, as time passes and you reach the 3-gallon fill-up mark, then that month your FE gets to be included. Seem reasonable?

This way no one is penalized for being efficient.

Feedback anyone? Beuhler?

Speaking of the 80's:

Quote:
Originally Posted by zpiloto
Love the avatar
I think it's an actual Police car from Eastern Europe. As a result, I got that "Der Kommisar" song stuck in my head

Don't Turn Around, Uh-oh -- Der Kommisar's in town, Uh-OH
__________________
rh77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2007, 06:16 PM   #144
Registered Member
 
zpiloto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,225
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by rh77 View Post
I started playing around with the numbers to get a weighted average. Having crunched the numbers left/right, up/down -- I came to a conclusion...

Assuming a competitor does 75% of the driving on the team, that particular FE was weighted as such. This created one "Mell of a Hess".

Basically, those who drove less, were essentially punished by the averages. On the same token, there wasn't a way to shift the weight off of the hi-milers on an inversely-weighted system without penalizing them too.

It ended up being:

"Those who were more efficient by driving less were losing a contest in efficiency"

On a long trip, I got to thinkin'
  • There will probably be drivers that use less than 3 gallons/month
  • What is the spirit of the competition?
  • How can this be resolved so it's still fun, challenging, and competitive?
  • FE should stand for "Fuel Efficiency" instead of "Fuel Economy"

The "Framers" can probably help more on this, but the spirit of the competition seems to be: to increase one's "FE" from a 90-day baseline number, have some fun, learn about increasing FE on personal level, and take part in a competition.

How about this -- if you don't drive 3-gallons in one-month, for statistical purposes, you have to forfeit that month's entry, but the team wouldn't necessarily be penalized (instead of getting the average of 5 participants, it could go down to 4). Then, as time passes and you reach the 3-gallon fill-up mark, then that month your FE gets to be included. Seem reasonable?

This way no one is penalized for being efficient.

Feedback anyone? Beuhler?

Speaking of the 80's:



I think it's an actual Police car from Eastern Europe. As a result, I got that "Der Kommisar" song stuck in my head

Don't Turn Around, Uh-oh -- Der Kommisar's in town, Uh-OH
That was my intent. I want to have fun and not make this so complicated that the engineers at NASA and a super computer in a 32 degree room would be needed to calculate the results. It would be nice for team members to be able to look at results and see how they came about.

Actually that's a pretty good idea. Let me add why don't we just take the best 4 out of 5 for the 28 days. That way if someone is testing, they have had bad luck FE wise, or whatever reason they won't hurt the team. There is still a 3 gallon min for fills. But that will give some flexibility. Surely there won't be 2 on a team that can't make the 3 gallon min in 28 days. ( and don't call me shirley).
zpiloto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2007, 08:53 PM   #145
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,978
Country: United States
Do we have Clearance, Clerence?

Quote:
Originally Posted by zpiloto View Post
That was my intent. I want to have fun and not make this so complicated that the engineers at NASA and a super computer in a 32 degree room would be needed to calculate the results. It would be nice for team members to be able to look at results and see how they came about.

Actually that's a pretty good idea. Let me add why don't we just take the best 4 out of 5 for the 28 days. That way if someone is testing, they have had bad luck FE wise, or whatever reason they won't hurt the team. There is still a 3 gallon min for fills. But that will give some flexibility. Surely there won't be 2 on a team that can't make the 3 gallon min in 28 days. ( and don't call me shirley).
Roger, Roger. To go with the "Airplane" movie theme, it's ironic that's where most of my thinking on this was done today -- at 33,000-feet in a Northwest DC-9. So, do you like movies about Gladiators?

That movie still remains one of my movie favorites -- very quotable.

Anyways, the best 4 out of 5 sounds reasonable across the board. Hypermiling's a whole different kind of driving, altogether.

Hypermiling's a whole different kind of driving.
__________________
rh77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2007, 08:56 PM   #146
FE nut
 
diamondlarry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,020
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by rh77 View Post

Hypermiling's a whole different kind of driving.
Hypermiling's a whole different kind of driving. I won't even call you Shirley.
__________________
Horsepower is how hard you hit the wall, torque is how much of the wall you take with you.

2007 Prius,



Team Slow Burn
diamondlarry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2007, 06:48 AM   #147
Registered Member
 
zpiloto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,225
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by rh77 View Post
Roger, Roger. To go with the "Airplane" movie theme, it's ironic that's where most of my thinking on this was done today -- at 33,000-feet in a Northwest DC-9. So, do you like movies about Gladiators?

That movie still remains one of my movie favorites -- very quotable.

Anyways, the best 4 out of 5 sounds reasonable across the board. Hypermiling's a whole different kind of driving, altogether.

Hypermiling's a whole different kind of driving.
Rick you can probably relate to this also but my favorite scene in that movie is when Robert Stack moves through the terminal wiping out all the cults members that are bothering him.

but back to reality.

If we really wanted to put pressure on the teams we could throw out the high and low and average the remaining 3 drivers. Thoughts?
zpiloto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2007, 08:02 AM   #148
Registered Member
 
MetroMPG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,223
Country: United States
Nah, don't throw out the "high". Then the high achievers have nothing to strive for. Whereas throwing out just the low puts pressure on everyone to not be that guy Plus complexity is creeping in again...

It goes without saying that I like the idea that the 3-gal monthly minimum / penalty is removed (along with that person's stats that month - until he does a 3-gal min fill.)
MetroMPG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2007, 08:06 AM   #149
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,978
Country: United States
Need Competitor Feedback

Quote:
Originally Posted by zpiloto View Post
Rick you can probably relate to this also but my favorite scene in that movie is when Robert Stack moves through the terminal wiping out all the cults members that are bothering him.

but back to reality.

If we really wanted to put pressure on the teams we could throw out the high and low and average the remaining 3 drivers. Thoughts?
I'm going to have to watch that at some point this weekend

Re: the contest. Dropping the top and bottom would round-out the average even further to remove the "outliers" in the calcutation, but would that take too much away from team concept?

We haven't heard much from the competitors on their feelings about re-alignment, so hows about a poll?
__________________
rh77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2007, 08:31 AM   #150
Registered Member
 
zpiloto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,225
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by rh77 View Post
I'm going to have to watch that at some point this weekend
Funny you should mention that I just finished watching it on The Comedy channel
__________________

zpiloto is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
google+ integration? xchrislee Fuelly Web Support and Community News 3 07-15-2011 02:55 AM
FFI GasSavers_MPGmaker Introduce Yourself - New member Welcome 39 05-30-2006 04:31 PM
Another fuel additive mtbiker278 General Fuel Topics 10 04-19-2006 06:10 AM
State of the Union address touches on "oil addiction." Matt Timion General Discussion (Off-Topic) 31 02-06-2006 04:38 PM
Where to get parts? What parts do we need? Matt Timion Electric and Solar powered 11 09-19-2005 09:37 PM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:36 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.