HOT: Active* forum members generally gain 5% discount at starbike.com store!
Weight Weenies
* FAQ    * Search    * Trending Topics
* Login   * Register
HOME Listings Articles FAQ Contact About




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 125 posts ] 
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Jan 31, 2012 8:02 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 5:56 am
Posts: 248
http://panasonicbikemuseum.info/archives/15 should have been included.


Top
 Profile  
 
Posted: Tue Jan 31, 2012 8:02 am 


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:50 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2011 8:08 pm
Posts: 194
djconnel wrote:
Waldo wrote:
Our stated likely ranges of yaw are based on years of actually collecting on-bike data at a range of velocities (I'm certainly not averaging 40 kph on my typical rides) and in a range of conditions, locales, etc. This led us to the bi-modal curve we now use that suggests the bulk of effective yaw angles for most cyclists will be on 10-15 degrees.


Most of the time I'm tooling around at 25 kph. I care about wind resistance on aero-optimized equipment at crunch time in races on flat roads. I don't care during "average typical" conditions, nor for that matter when the pack is cruising along in a race. So my estimate is clearly for when it actually matters.


I was going to ask about this. Would it not make more sense, as a racing product, to optimize the shape for those moments when aerodynamics is most important to a race result? Off the front, alone or in a small group, at 40-45kph?

Otherwise, it seems they would be optimized for everyday riders rather than racers, and I can't imagine you guys would have made a decision like that.

_________________
VeloNews Magazine/VeloNews.com tech
Contact always welcome - http://velonews.competitor.com/author/cfretz / cfretz at competitorgroup dot com.
Twitter: @CaleyFretz


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 31, 2012 12:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2010 8:31 pm
Posts: 986
Have any of you guys actually won a race on an aero bike?

Just wondering as I've never seen one cross the line first in an amateur road race and I get to see a lot of those.

Given that the rolling resistance of a tyre can vary more than the power gains of these framesets I do honestly wonder why these garner so much attention here when they are both non weight weenie and less enjoyable to ride.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 31, 2012 1:08 pm 
Offline
in the industry
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 10:45 pm
Posts: 330
Location: Indianapolis
There is a patent on the hybrid toroidal rim, and there is an application for the Firecrest shape. I've only had cursory dealings on the patent side of things but it's certainly interesting to see what constitutes a patent that's easily enforced, claims that are easily dismissed, things like that.

The fun thing with all the Firecrestish rim profiles out there now is that it's like what we've seen with previous rim profiles-a half millimeter here or there can make a massive difference in drag values. The difference is now we're able to see that it also makes a significant difference in vortex shedding frequency off the wheel as well as steering torque, both of which are a significant part of wheel stability. We've also provided volumes of data on this subject, some of which has been presented at the AIAA conferences over the past few years (that work was not done by us but rather the PhD at our CFD post-processor). Other data seems curiously absent, but since other companies have clever acronyms describing how they've enhanced the stability of their wheels, I'm sure they're all over it.

Dan, I think we'll have to agree to disagree here. The data I've got is not easily presented here and doesn't seem like it's going to be sufficient to overcome your assumption-based estimates so we'll leave it at that.

Caley, the point I was trying to make is that we've got data sets applicable to a variety of conditions. Lots of good data for Pro Tour-level TTs, age-grouper triathlon events, and racing at a variety of speeds and in some smaller groups. The comment about me not averaging 40 km/hr was to illustrate that we also are considering the lower end of the velocity range for racing.

So, given all that data, it must be truly difficult to "optimize" (I think we all need to use that word less, myself included) for all these different scenarios, right? Well, conveniently enough there's a fair amount of convergence in the data (gross abbreviation of analysis follows-need to get on my ride to work to see what we'll find in today's wind). Even in the case of a relatively low wind velocity (10 km/hr), your maximum effective yaw angle ranges from 21.8 degrees at 25 km/hr to 14.0 degrees at 40 km/hr. If you increase wind velocity to 15 km/hr that 14.0 degrees at 40 km/hr becomes 20.6; of course in all cases the bulk of effective yaw angles will be below this value.

It's a long and boring process describing how we arrived at our final analysis (that quote about lies, damn lies, and statistics seems appropriate), but we're confident that we're incorporating the bulk of racing conditions with our stated range of targeted yaw angles.

I think we've derailed this thread sufficiently-perhaps it would be better to start a new one if people wanted to continue this discussion.

_________________
Former Zipp test engineer


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 31, 2012 3:48 pm 
Offline
Formerly known as PezTech
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 12:37 am
Posts: 5685
Location: Phoenix Arizona
airwise wrote:
Have any of you guys actually won a race on an aero bike?

Just wondering as I've never seen one cross the line first in an amateur road race and I get to see a lot of those.

Given that the rolling resistance of a tyre can vary more than the power gains of these framesets I do honestly wonder why these garner so much attention here when they are both non weight weenie and less enjoyable to ride.



Ignoring one condition / advantage because another exists is, well, ignorant....

_________________
charles@pezcyclingnews.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 31, 2012 7:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2010 8:31 pm
Posts: 986
PezTech wrote:
airwise wrote:


Ignoring one condition / advantage because another exists is, well, ignorant....


In which case 99.99% of cyclists are ignorant Pez.

It's also fairly daft to attach huge importance to unproven advantages that may well only exist using crash test dummies in the wind tunnel.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 31, 2012 8:21 pm 
Offline
Formerly known as PezTech
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 12:37 am
Posts: 5685
Location: Phoenix Arizona
Yeah those silly wind tunnel tests are worthless. It's way better to assume that road surfaces the world over are a match for the drums that Rolling Res tests are done on and just disregard aerodynamics.

F1 & MotGP engineers, Aircraft manufacurers, if they would just pay attention to forums... :wink:


I'm not really saying RR tests are worthless, I'm just saying that just because RR test show one thing doesnt mean people should just ignore aero data...

_________________
charles@pezcyclingnews.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 31, 2012 8:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 1:57 pm
Posts: 7409
Location: San Francisco, CA
Pez: For "everyday riding" aerodynamics is hardly important. Comfort, reliability, and feel are more important. So you optimize each factor based on when that factor is important. You optimize weight for going uphill, you optimize aerodynamics for riding fast, comfort for rough roads, etc.

_________________
http://djconnel.blogspot.com/
Fuji SL/1
\


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 31, 2012 8:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 7:45 pm
Posts: 3293
Location: Natovi Landing
airwise wrote:
Have any of you guys actually won a race on an aero bike?

Just wondering as I've never seen one cross the line first in an amateur road race and I get to see a lot of those.

Given that the rolling resistance of a tyre can vary more than the power gains of these framesets I do honestly wonder why these garner so much attention here when they are both non weight weenie and less enjoyable to ride.


Very few amateurs race on aero road frames. I've seen races being won by aero Cervelos but that's about it. Why? Because it's the only aero road frame to have been around a while and sold in considerable numbers is my guess.

You'll see a huge growth in aero frames over the next few years. You'll see them get lighter, stiffer and more enjoyable to ride. You may even seen one of your races won on one :D


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 31, 2012 10:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2010 8:31 pm
Posts: 986
PezTech wrote:

I'm not really saying RR tests are worthless, I'm just saying that just because RR test show one thing doesnt mean people should just ignore aero data...


And I'm not saying ignore aero date - just put it in proper perspective. The reason we will see more is that manufacturers are selling the whole idea along with unrepeatable data and huge marketing spend - not because there is any real benefit to real cyclists.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 31, 2012 10:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 3:16 pm
Posts: 617
no body has won a race because they were on an 'aero' frame or had 'aero' wheels

and i would love to see anyone provide data proving otherwise


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 31, 2012 10:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 7:45 pm
Posts: 3293
Location: Natovi Landing
airwise wrote:
PezTech wrote:

I'm not really saying RR tests are worthless, I'm just saying that just because RR test show one thing doesnt mean people should just ignore aero data...


And I'm not saying ignore aero date - just put it in proper perspective. The reason we will see more is that manufacturers are selling the whole idea along with unrepeatable data and huge marketing spend - not because there is any real benefit to real cyclists.


A very small benefit yes, but then 100g off a frame is a pretty small benefit on an 85kg rider plus bike weight!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 8:10 pm
Posts: 46
Location: Up north
bikedoc wrote:
no body has won a race because they were on an 'aero' frame or had 'aero' wheels

and i would love to see anyone provide data proving otherwise


When talking aero advantages, would anyone think that Cav taped over his helmet at the Worlds just for the fun of it? ;)

As for data, success in cycling is a combination different factors. How do they weigh in in a racing situation is very difficult to measure. But that does not automatically mean that these individual factors do not exist or should be overlooked, especially in a sport where millimeters and milliseconds matter.

Rhetorical question: how would you measure the importance of pshychological boost in confidence by riding an aero frame as a believer of aero advantage, for example?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:37 pm 
Offline
Formerly known as PezTech
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 12:37 am
Posts: 5685
Location: Phoenix Arizona
People have won races because they were on aero frames and wheels and I would love to see anyone provide data proving otherwise.

:lol:

_________________
charles@pezcyclingnews.com


Top
 Profile  
 
Posted: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:37 pm 


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 01, 2012 1:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2010 10:20 am
Posts: 446
This photo has been posted before and it looks to me that an aero frame, a pair of aero wheels with a super rider edged this win... maybe gloveless helped in aerodynamics too? :wink:

Image

_________________
Current Bikes: Storck F0.6 6kg , Storck Aero2 7.04kg
Storck Organic Light 11.1kg , Storck F0.7IS Di2 4.8kg


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 125 posts ] 
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], kramnnim and 58 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

   Similar Topics   Author   Replies   Views   Last post 
There are no new unread posts for this topic. TOUR Magazine light frame test - January 2014 info?

in Road

villahidalgo

13

1876

Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:40 pm

DWatkinsBSB View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Aus Ride Magazine frame and wheel jig flex test????

in Road

User Name

2

809

Sun Sep 22, 2013 1:48 pm

User Name View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Aero road helmet comparison test

in Road

jaketim114

2

1529

Mon Sep 09, 2013 3:23 am

prendrefeu View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. New aero test: 12 aero frames vs 12 "unaero" light frames

[ Go to page: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ]

in Road

fa63

69

8675

Fri Feb 28, 2014 9:42 pm

DMF View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Di2 read derailleur damaged

in Road

sambaverde

7

403

Mon Jun 16, 2014 3:07 pm

Nejmann View the latest post


It is currently Fri Aug 01, 2014 5:36 pm

All times are UTC + 1 hour




Advertising   –  FAQ   –  Contact   –  Convert   –  About

© Weight Weenies 2000-2013
hosted by starbike.com


How to get rid of these ads? Just register!


Powered by phpBB