Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: Swiss Side Aero Pod [BryanD] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The new Cervelo T5 that the GB team were using last week at the world championships had these sensors integrated into the headtube. Maybe something that will appear on the next generation of TT/Tri superbikes
Quote Reply
Re: Swiss Side Aero Pod [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
A couple questions:

Wasn’t it mentioned previously that a device such as this should be on the frame, so the data better reflects yaw? (As opposed to any part of the steering mechanism)

Edit: not on the frame, but attached and extending out to clean air.

Would a secondary sensor, off the seat....say extending to the end of the rear tire (measuring pressure? Wind speed? Some variation of clean vs dirty air? Yaw? Whatever?) be of any value?

Anyways layman’s questions but I am curious to what the experts think.

Cheers,
Maurice
Last edited by: mauricemaher: Mar 5, 18 17:22
Quote Reply
Re: Swiss Side Aero Pod [mauricemaher] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
mauricemaher wrote:
A couple questions:

Wasn’t it mentioned previously that a device such as this should be on the frame, so the data better reflects yaw? (As opposed to any part of the steering mechanism)

Edit: not on the frame, but attached and extending out to clean air.

Would a secondary sensor, off the seat....say extending to the end of the rear tire (measuring pressure? Wind speed? Some variation of clean vs dirty air? Yaw? Whatever?) be of any value?

Anyways layman’s questions but I am curious to what the experts think.

Cheers,
Maurice

I can say with confidence that a sensor behind the bike would be of zero value. One solution for mounting an "Aero Stick" that comes to mind is a bracket that attaches to the mounting points for a bento box.
Quote Reply
Re: Swiss Side Aero Pod [GreenPlease] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
GreenPlease wrote:
Tom A. wrote:


Everything you guys are talking about here is part of the Aerolab.tech "secret sauce", if you read the patent application Coggan linked to on that thread.

"Less than ideal" sensor placement can apparently be calibrated out...with the large caveat, of course, that anything which later ends up changing the pressure gradient in and around that location significantly (for example, with a sensor mounted under the bars like the Swiss Side pic, and then looking at "high hands" vs. level hand positions) may cause you to have to do that calibration procedure over again.


Right and that's a real concern IMO. The mantis position, when it works, seems to really work so it's something everyone should try IMO. Also, hydration options that sit in front of the head tube, such as the the Torhans and Profile Design systems, would also affect the pressure gradient.

Regardless, it's always fun to have new toys to play with.

Well the simplest solution would be to include a skewer mount that moves the sensor away from the areas where interference would be an issue. I would like to take credit for the idea, but Dr. Coggan used that in his original Coggan challenge (i.e., a sphere of known diameter on an old spoke attached to the end of the front skewer). You wouldn't use it for a mass start event, but for an accurate CdA measurements, it seems like a great option.
Quote Reply
Re: Swiss Side Aero Pod [grumpier.mike] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Re: the Compton challenge, it's simpler to do a delta mass test.
Quote Reply
Re: Swiss Side Aero Pod [grumpier.mike] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
grumpier.mike wrote:
I would like to take credit for the idea, but Dr. Coggan used that in his original Coggan challenge (i.e., a sphere of known diameter on an old spoke attached to the end of the front skewer). You wouldn't use it for a mass start event, but for an accurate CdA measurements, it seems like a great option.

I don't think so. It's too far from the area of interest. If there is wind, the airspeed at the sensor would be substantially different than at rider/bike height.
Quote Reply
Re: Swiss Side Aero Pod [mauricemaher] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
You mean like this? https://instagram.com/p/BfOg51zlmJ3/ it was fortunate that all the bikes we were testing back then (2015) had top tube bosses.

Steering angle isn’t that large and it’s cyclic about zero, so the simplicity of attaching to the front end is attractive. Most of the interest is in front end stuff like hand position and front wheel/tyre.

Developing aero, fit and other fun stuff at Red is Faster
Quote Reply
Re: Swiss Side Aero Pod [mauricemaher] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
mauricemaher wrote:
A couple questions:

Wasn’t it mentioned previously that a device such as this should be on the frame, so the data better reflects yaw? (As opposed to any part of the steering mechanism)

Edit: not on the frame, but attached and extending out to clean air.

Maybe...maybe not...depends on what you're interested in looking at in particular.

For example, the front wheel "sees" the yaws as reflected by a sensor mounted on the steering mechanism, so if you want to know what yaw angles a front wheel experiences, then that's a better location.

However, if you're interested in what yaw angles the overall system "sees"...then a frame mounted sensor might be more appropriate.

That said, my gut feel is that the "steering" effects on the yaw angle measurements my be a bit overblown (yeah...I said it ;-) and that averaged over a long enough interval, the answers will basically be the same. That would be a fun thing to explore with a dual sensor setup, with one located on the steering mechanism and the other on the frame. I'm pretty sure some of the bike and wheel manufacturers have done this already.

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply

Prev Next