Where is the data of the test??

---

STRAVA INSTAGRAM

Did you ride on the highway, or is there something I am missing? I am always on the lookout for aero test locations...

The test data is in the table below - is it not visible??

I rode on C-31:

Out: from Castelldefels towards the Airport (to Filipinas), then a small loop on the Taxi loop,
then Home: back to Filipinas and on C-31 to Castelldefels (as far as you can go on C-31, before it become Autopista)

Do you see the map I posted in the original post?

T

I can't see any data. Looks like the picture didn't upload correctly.

Sorry about that. I tried to upload again to the original post, and uploading data and map below here also. Works now??

Yes, looks great. Thanks!

Thanks to you mate

I would be be careful to draw conclusions that a bottle is slower for you. You went faster for every try, if you would have done another one with bottle it might have been faster again.

Something changed throughout your test, maybe wind and temperature changed enough to make a difference!

---

https://acprestation.se/

For a 5.2km test at aprox 43km/h (less than 8 minutes...), the accuracy of the measure I guess is not good enough to extract any conclusions. Usually the aero benefits for a 180km TT are around 3 to 5 minutes. So for your test I guess you would see a difference in between 3 to 6 seconds. I don't know the equipment used to measure the distance and the time, but if GPS and your eye-hand neuromotor coordination were to be used, the test I would say is not good. But it is a good start...

---

STRAVA INSTAGRAM

Fair points! I would say the total test track is 10.4 km and close to 18-19 min in total, out and home. I find it hard to see how adding much more distance to the test will change the outcome avg velocity. It really is hard to find any segments with undisturbed possibilities of staying in aero, and steady-state watts for much longer amounts of time.
I saw the Sanders Aero testing, and the course they use is much shorter, I believe

The data is taken from a Garmin 540 unit and intervals are started and stopped going under walking bridges.

Thanks for chiming in!

Can anybody suggest "how much real estate is enough" to get more significance in this kind of testing?

Or comment why the 8-9 mins multiple testing is insufficient?

TIA

Hi Mulen,


I think there might be some issues with the protocol
* The C-31 has traffic at speeds around 100km/h, and even though you're riding in the shoulder it's not very wide thus it can potentially interfere with the results
* You might want to try A/B/B/A runs instead of A/B/A/B
* Furthermore, you have to brake to make the turn at both ends so you can't easily use the virtual elevation method in goldencheetah (as far as i know)

If you could find a shorter circuit that you can ride "indefinitely" without braking (all right turns or roundabout maybe?) doing several laps with no traffic, I think it'd be better

Gracias elquike! A few comments to your notes:

1). Testing was done early saturday, so not really any traffic and cars tend to pass in the left lane. Either way, if the cars interfere, its both WITH and WITHOUT the bottle. So not really giving any difference in results.

2) The Runs are A/B then B/A.
As in:
Course Out: CDF (the surf shop) to Rotunda Filipinas exit
Course Home: Airport (actually starting the lap at El Row or the firecracker factory) then back to CDF (a bit further than the old Riviera)
See the map! ;)

3) As per pt. 2 - there are no turns on the course out and home. Dead straight.

4) Yes a round course would be optimal, but not even on Montmelo you can be 100% in Aero all the way round, at least not at 255w avg

Thanks again

actually as has been pointed out in the virtual elevation thread, the braking can be used for confirmation and can be cut out of the data, the bigger problem for virtual elevation is traffic and thus variable wind impact. If a person wants to do this sort of minor CdA type evaluation it is best in a sheltered area with an elevation change, and little or very consistent light wind. Read the article done by Dr. R Chung who is often on this forum and who invented the virtual elevation methods or the Chung method. or this article by Josh at Silca: https://silca.cc/...ng-with-robert-chung. If you search R Chung you should find an outline Dr. Chung wrote on the method.

The protocol used is flawed on numerous levels and there are people far more expert than I who can point them out.

but for info on virtual elevation go to this thread look up Platypus Thread: Aero Virtual Elevation Testing Protocol: https://forum.slowtwitch.com/...g=r%20chung#p3536905