Great stuff - at least for bike geeks. I'm curious about aero testing for mountain bikes. It's obviously a significant advantage even on dirt but the mountain bike community is resistant to considering aerodynamics as a major factor in performance. Currently semi accurate dependable data is minimal regarding air drag for mountain bikes.
Very enjoyable, as always. I'm (of course) a fan of virtual elevation but mostly that's because as an academic, I live in a perpetual state of penury. That said, a main advantage of wind tunnels isn't just speed: it's that there are people there who not only can measure your drag, but they can make suggestions about what to do next. I've had to learn that all by myself. As another comment, in the run-up to the 2012 Olympics, we put early aerosticks on all the riders of a pursuit team and watched how their drag changed on the track. This was an interesting optimization problem because not all the riders were the same size (or had the same CP or W') so if you put the biggest rider behind the smallest, that rider wouldn't've gotten much recovery. So we could make suggestions about ordering of the riders.
Hey Guys, thanks for the content. Question I would love to here Josh elaborate on more. What are the energy saving effects of balancing a bike wheel? It’s pretty easy to feel the vibration when spinning the bike wheel and holding the bike off the ground but translating that to an energy lost seems pretty complex. Hysteresis of the whole bike that may deform slightly from the addition Al force on the wheel axle. So yea what would the wattage benefit be from balancing a set of wheels that are about 8 grams or so off? Thanks!
We used to sell a balancing kit that was very polarizing to the market, people either thought it totally stupid or totally necessary. Any savings will be less than 1W as that's the resolution we have for measurement and in repeated testing the balanced wheel seems more efficient but never more than the margin of uncertainty of the test equipment.
Would love to hear if there is opportunity for gravel wheels that work aerodynamically with 42-47mm gravel tires. Or is it just too wide and we should give up?
I would add mtb wheels. I'm not sure how rim design for gravel and mtb rims is going to evolve over the next 5-10 years. I'd guess that a limited deep section rim for wider tires (40-65mm) and rims is going to be the upcoming trend. For a combination of aero, mud shedding, compliance, durability and weight is going to work it's way out. It will be interesting to see what rim designs which will be shown to be the highest performing compromise.
My understanding of the tire/rim aerodynamics is that a key element in optimising it is the tire and rim width transition ideally want to be similar size and smooth. With high volume tires on Gravel and MTB the tires are just too wide relative to the rim, and the air just doesn’t re attach or stay attached as it passes over it. Add to that the knobs on the tyres creating more turbulence. So you can run deep section rims that have little impact in improving aerodynamic. And deep section Reims have weight penalty plus impact ride dynamics so with little aero improvements low profile rims save weight and have better ride dynamics with little or no aero penalty.
@@bradleybabel4814 rims can be wider. Exactly how wide mtb rims will be in 10 years is hard to predict. It appears that for the most part mtb rims are about as wide as they're going to get. Still there a number of aero tricks that are worth trying such as smoothing the transition from the tire to the rim with a little silicone caulking or aero frame tubes. Or positioning changes that could be offered by things such as inner bar-ends along with aero testing helmets.
Great stuff - at least for bike geeks. I'm curious about aero testing for mountain bikes. It's obviously a significant advantage even on dirt but the mountain bike community is resistant to considering aerodynamics as a major factor in performance. Currently semi accurate dependable data is minimal regarding air drag for mountain bikes.
Great episode. Thank you for sharing all this knowledge
Very enjoyable, as always. I'm (of course) a fan of virtual elevation but mostly that's because as an academic, I live in a perpetual state of penury. That said, a main advantage of wind tunnels isn't just speed: it's that there are people there who not only can measure your drag, but they can make suggestions about what to do next. I've had to learn that all by myself.
As another comment, in the run-up to the 2012 Olympics, we put early aerosticks on all the riders of a pursuit team and watched how their drag changed on the track. This was an interesting optimization problem because not all the riders were the same size (or had the same CP or W') so if you put the biggest rider behind the smallest, that rider wouldn't've gotten much recovery. So we could make suggestions about ordering of the riders.
I use track cranks, in that market there are plenty of narrow cranks and the chainline is better too
A buddy and I still have some Dura-Ace AX stuff. I think I may have a set of adapters for std pedals. Those were the days... 👍🏼
Never thought I'll see Dean Pelton on a cycling podcast.
Hey Guys, thanks for the content.
Question I would love to here Josh elaborate on more. What are the energy saving effects of balancing a bike wheel? It’s pretty easy to feel the vibration when spinning the bike wheel and holding the bike off the ground but translating that to an energy lost seems pretty complex. Hysteresis of the whole bike that may deform slightly from the addition Al force on the wheel axle. So yea what would the wattage benefit be from balancing a set of wheels that are about 8 grams or so off? Thanks!
We used to sell a balancing kit that was very polarizing to the market, people either thought it totally stupid or totally necessary. Any savings will be less than 1W as that's the resolution we have for measurement and in repeated testing the balanced wheel seems more efficient but never more than the margin of uncertainty of the test equipment.
Would love to hear if there is opportunity for gravel wheels that work aerodynamically with 42-47mm gravel tires. Or is it just too wide and we should give up?
I would add mtb wheels. I'm not sure how rim design for gravel and mtb rims is going to evolve over the next 5-10 years. I'd guess that a limited deep section rim for wider tires (40-65mm) and rims is going to be the upcoming trend. For a combination of aero, mud shedding, compliance, durability and weight is going to work it's way out. It will be interesting to see what rim designs which will be shown to be the highest performing compromise.
My understanding of the tire/rim aerodynamics is that a key element in optimising it is the tire and rim width transition ideally want to be similar size and smooth. With high volume tires on Gravel and MTB the tires are just too wide relative to the rim, and the air just doesn’t re attach or stay attached as it passes over it. Add to that the knobs on the tyres creating more turbulence. So you can run deep section rims that have little impact in improving aerodynamic. And deep section Reims have weight penalty plus impact ride dynamics so with little aero improvements low profile rims save weight and have better ride dynamics with little or no aero penalty.
@@bradleybabel4814 rims can be wider. Exactly how wide mtb rims will be in 10 years is hard to predict. It appears that for the most part mtb rims are about as wide as they're going to get. Still there a number of aero tricks that are worth trying such as smoothing the transition from the tire to the rim with a little silicone caulking or aero frame tubes. Or positioning changes that could be offered by things such as inner bar-ends along with aero testing helmets.
GREAT video
Probably over the head of many who get bored easily
See also "Saturday Night Live"........EXTREME CLOSE-UP...........hahahaha.....thanks guys.
Never been so bored, this could be really good, but edit this please