login
Aerodynamics
-
No new posts
|
 2009-04-28 1:37 PM |
Master  1718    Loughborough, England |  Subject: AerodynamicsHave a read of the attached file if you are interested. The article has a look at how much time different equipment can save you and it is interesting to note that the lower your power output the more important aerodynamics become (tests are done over 40km at 100, 200 and 300 watts). |
| 2009-04-28 1:37 PM in reply to: #2116047 |
Elite 4048  Gilbert, Az. | Subject: RE: Aerodynamics tridantri - 2009-04-28 11:37 AM Have a read of the attached file if you are interested. The article has a look at how much time different equipment can save you and it is interesting to note that the lower your power output the more important aerodynamics become (tests are done over 40km at 100, 200 and 300 watts). Erhm...what attached file?  |
| 2009-04-28 1:40 PM in reply to: #2116047 |
Master 1718 Loughborough, England | Subject: RE: Aerodynamics |
| 2009-04-28 1:46 PM in reply to: #2116047 |
Master 1718 Loughborough, England | Subject: RE: Aerodynamics These are the time savings for various bits of equipment at different wattages. As you can see aero wheels give you a bigger advantage at 100w (1min 13s) than at 300w (50s). Just thought I'd share this as I've come across quite a few people recently (not on BT) who have been criticising slower athletes for having state of the art equipment when actually they are getting more bang for their buck than faster athletes.
|
| 2009-04-28 1:54 PM in reply to: #2116047 |
| Pro 4054 yep, | Subject: RE: Aerodynamics Interesting everything looks to be consistent when you progress in power. |
| 2009-04-28 2:07 PM in reply to: #2116047 |
| Veteran 263 | Subject: RE: Aerodynamics I thought the general consensus was that aero savings increased in proportion to speed ie there wasn't much point in slower riders going for aero bikes. |
| 2009-04-28 2:10 PM in reply to: #2116162 |
Master 1718 Loughborough, England | Subject: RE: Aerodynamics lengthcroft - 2009-04-28 8:07 PM I thought the general consensus was that aero savings increased in proportion to speed ie there wasn't much point in slower riders going for aero bikes. Yeah people often think that. The article was basically written to address that. |
| 2009-04-28 2:12 PM in reply to: #2116162 |
Cycling Guru 15134 Fulton, MD | Subject: RE: Aerodynamics Not sure who here is "criticizing." I'm the first usually to point that aero benefits slower athletes more from a pure timing perspective. It just becomes more critical for the faster athletes as the power required to go faster when dealing with aerodynamics is exponential. Source on this by the way? Not that I'm questioning the numbers per se, but want to know who it is coming from ..... Cyclingnews did a real world test using different products (to include helmets) and got some numbers as well. |
| 2009-04-28 2:23 PM in reply to: #2116176 |
Champion 11989 Philly 'burbs | Subject: RE: Aerodynamics Daremo - 2009-04-28 3:12 PM Not sure who here is "criticizing." tridantri - 2009-04-28 2:46 PM people recently (not on BT) who have been criticising slower athletes for having state of the art equipment FYI |
| 2009-04-28 2:38 PM in reply to: #2116047 |
| Member 17 | Subject: RE: Aerodynamics It actually does have a bigger effect for faster riders when you look at the % decrease in time. Taking the aero wheel example, it is a 1.707% decrease for the slower rider and a 1.767% decrease for the faster rider. The time savings are greater for the slower rider but they are spending over 29 minutes longer on the course so it has the greatest impact on the speed of the faster rider. That said the results almost identical in this example for percentage of time decrease. |
| 2009-04-28 2:43 PM in reply to: #2116089 |
| Veteran 144 Ann Arbor, MI | Subject: RE: Aerodynamics I wonder how much time you save when you put all the aero bits together? I don't think you can just add up all the time savings, can you? Also...I wonder how much time a aero helmet would save? I read somewhere that a aero helmet might be the single best time saver... |
| 2009-04-28 2:44 PM in reply to: #2116047 |
Master 1718 Loughborough, England | Subject: RE: Aerodynamics From The Endurance Coach.com. |
| 2009-04-28 2:47 PM in reply to: #2116300 |
Master 1718 Loughborough, England | Subject: RE: Aerodynamics slowpoke77 - 2009-04-28 8:43 PM I wonder how much time you save when you put all the aero bits together? I don't think you can just add up all the time savings, can you? Also...I wonder how much time a aero helmet would save? I read somewhere that a aero helmet might be the single best time saver... No, presumably you can't just add the time savings together, although it would still give you a rough estimate I think the aero helmet is the best in terms of bang for your buck. I think there are other bits of equipment that give up bigger time savings, they are just far more expensive. Wheels??? |
| 2009-04-28 2:51 PM in reply to: #2116047 |
Cycling Guru 15134 Fulton, MD | Subject: RE: Aerodynamics Outside of the frame, the wheels are the biggest gains (known before this chart was posted based - in real world tests). Aero helmet can actually be a wash or even a loss for some. It all depends on their position and if they can maintain it. We have examples here on BT of people who were more efficient and had a lower CD in the tunnel using their normal helmet over an aero one. |
| 2009-04-28 3:07 PM in reply to: #2116047 |
Master 1890 Cypress, CA | Subject: RE: Aerodynamics I think the real lesson of that table comes from reading it horizontally, not vertically. You gain seconds with aero gear, but half an hour over 40km if you can pull 300 watts instead of 100 given the same equipment. See the quote in the OP's signature... Edited by tjh 2009-04-28 3:09 PM |
| 2009-04-28 3:16 PM in reply to: #2116282 |
Pro 5011 Twin Cities | Subject: RE: Aerodynamics Dingdingding. Math and common sense again come to the rescue :p |
| 2009-04-28 3:22 PM in reply to: #2116047 |
| 70 | Subject: RE: Aerodynamics Aerodynamics are not exponential in affect between slow riders and faster riders. The biggest gains that can be achieved (equipment wise) is an aero helmet. |
| 2009-04-28 3:24 PM in reply to: #2116047 |
| 70 | Subject: RE: Aerodynamics Yes assuming that they are in the correct position. The best position w/ a reg. helmet and the best position w/ a aero helmet. I figured I was fixin' to get dinged 4 that. So, I thought I would clarify.  |
| 2009-04-28 3:47 PM in reply to: #2116089 |
Extreme Veteran 510 Falls Church, VA | Subject: RE: Aerodynamics One way of looking at the numbers is that slower riders gain more time, but another is the faster riders gain a larger percentage
|
| 2009-04-28 3:48 PM in reply to: #2116335 |
| Veteran 144 Ann Arbor, MI | Subject: RE: Aerodynamics Daremo - 2009-04-28 3:51 PM Outside of the frame, the wheels are the biggest gains (known before this chart was posted based - in real world tests). Aero helmet can actually be a wash or even a loss for some. It all depends on their position and if they can maintain it. We have examples here on BT of people who were more efficient and had a lower CD in the tunnel using their normal helmet over an aero one. i have a aero helmet...but no wind tunnel testing. how can i know if the helmet is helping or hurting? is it just a matter of being able to keep the tail pretty flat against your back? |
| 2009-04-28 3:52 PM in reply to: #2116449 |
Extreme Veteran 510 Falls Church, VA | Subject: RE: Aerodynamics whole - 2009-04-28 3:22 PM The biggest gains that can be achieved (equipment wise) is an aero helmet. This, I believe, is a misrepresentation of studies I've read. Aerohelmets may give you the best "bang for the buck" (ie. seconds gained per dollar spent) but wheels give you the most overall gain in time, just when you divide by their cost aerowheels seconds/dollar rank lower Edited by StarGazer 2009-04-28 3:52 PM |
| 2009-04-28 3:57 PM in reply to: #2116449 |
Champion 9407 Montague Gold Mines, Nova Scotia | Subject: RE: Aerodynamics whole - 2009-04-28 5:22 PM Aerodynamics are not exponential in affect between slow riders and faster riders. The biggest gains that can be achieved (equipment wise) is an aero helmet. Could you please elaborate on your point; I'm not quite sure what you are trying to say. Shane |
| 2009-04-28 4:17 PM in reply to: #2116047 |
| 70 | Subject: RE: Aerodynamics I'm the first usually to point that aero benefits slower athletes more from a pure timing perspective. It just becomes more critical for the faster athletes as the power required to go faster when dealing with aerodynamics is exponential. that waspart of the post from Daremo. That was what I was referring 2 about the exponential factor. |
| 2009-04-28 4:53 PM in reply to: #2116089 |
| Veteran 263 | Subject: RE: Aerodynamics How do you know if a frame is 'standard', 'semi aero' or 'full aero'? Are any road bikes semi aero or full aero? I presume all tri bikes would be full aero?? |
| 2009-04-28 7:08 PM in reply to: #2116592 |
Champion 9407 Montague Gold Mines, Nova Scotia | Subject: RE: Aerodynamics whole - 2009-04-28 6:17 PM that waspart of the post from Daremo. That was what I was referring 2 about the exponential factor. Okay, however I was curious about what you meant about aerodynamics not being exponential. Shane |
|
|
|
|
View profile
Add to friends
Go to training log
Go to race log
Send a message
View album
CONNECT WITH FACEBOOK