Re: Aero sensors for dummies thread [marcag] [ In reply to ]

Sep 29, 21 9:25

Post #426 of 909 (5369 views)

I've attached the JSON file (just an extract of 3 test runs as file too big). The downhill test laps are easy to identify (zero power and cadence).

I can't see any setting in Notio GC for the rolling CdA time window (only a smoothing factor which is set to 1).

I was using a road bike and did 4 different positions - quite extreme aero on one of them but none of them I would expect to be showing as 0.201 CdA (probably at best 0.25).
I wanted to test this way for a few reasons; primarily so that I could eliminate variation with acceleration from my pedal stroke, I could also keep the bike much steadier reducing any swaying and steering straighter, I could also hold a nice fixed body position, and I didn't get tired!

Thanks for taking a look at this marcag

Re: Aero sensors for dummies thread [burnthesheep] [ In reply to ]

Sep 29, 21 10:54

Post #427 of 909 (5352 views)

For Notio I've found that the best practice is to do 5min A/B runs on an athletics track and then edit out the first and last 15 seconds in GC as well as zero out the virtual elevation. Definitely gives you better or worse.

E

Eric Reid AeroFit | Instagram Portfolio
Aerodynamic Retul Bike Fitting

“You are experiencing the criminal coverup of a foreign backed fascist hostile takeover of a mafia shakedown of an authoritarian religious slow motion coup. Persuade people to vote for Democracy.”

Re: Aero sensors for dummies thread [Jfitchew] [ In reply to ]

Sep 29, 21 11:23

Post #428 of 909 (5342 views)

Jfitchew wrote:

I've attached the JSON file (just an extract of 3 test runs as file too big). The downhill test laps are easy to identify (zero power and cadence).

I can't see any setting in Notio GC for the rolling CdA time window (only a smoothing factor which is set to 1).

I was using a road bike and did 4 different positions - quite extreme aero on one of them but none of them I would expect to be showing as 0.201 CdA (probably at best 0.25).
I wanted to test this way for a few reasons; primarily so that I could eliminate variation with acceleration from my pedal stroke, I could also keep the bike much steadier reducing any swaying and steering straighter, I could also hold a nice fixed body position, and I didn't get tired!

Thanks for taking a look at this marcag

I didn't have much time to look in detail, but I suspect your "Calibration Factor" is way, way off and grossly inflating the power to overcome air and making your CDA at high speed, too low. Just looking at the wind pattern I corrected it, and CDAs become much more in line. Did you calibrate ? That looks like more of a default value for TT position than a road bike. Maybe you calibrated on a TT bike ?

I looked about both your "climbs" and "downhills". I am not sure what kind of PM you are using, but you have your efficiency set at 1.0. Unless it's a powertap this is too high. It is inflating your CDA numbers on your climbs.

Correct these two and your lap numbers make a lot more sense.

I see the downs at 0.380, 0.356, 0.398 and this is with very coarse tuning. I am sure with more time it could be made much better. Your "rolling" CDA is also much better. Not perfect but better.

So no use in spending a ton of time on it, you need to be properly calibrated.

I pulled the air density from the Notio data. The idea was to look it in the Chung chart (which is the brainChild of RChung, implemented by AndyF). You can see your turn around in the VE chart and they correspond to the IMU data in the Notio.

Re: Aero sensors for dummies thread [ericMPro] [ In reply to ]

Sep 29, 21 11:26

Post #429 of 909 (5340 views)

Can people post a few screenshots of both the CdA plot in GC and maybe of from the app, however useless or useful that is?

So far, I'm still not following how to use this. With old VE, I knew I was holding a position for a piece of road. Then get the CdA to get the elevation profiles to match, I've got a CdA.

But these plots on both GC and the Notio app for me the CdA is always moving all over. Even after it has had plenty of time to "smooth" out. I would expect if the road isn't doing stupid stuff, the CdA should only really bounce around a tiny bit. Not on an order of magnitude up/down of 0.050.

It's almost like the CdA changes follow the terrain changes.

I feel I am missing something here in GC to deal with that. But even the app has the same thing going on.

When I get to my Mac tonight with GC I'll take some screenshots and then post it up here what I'm seeing.

Re: Aero sensors for dummies thread [rruff] [ In reply to ]

Sep 29, 21 13:06

Post #430 of 909 (5323 views)

rruff wrote:

There are both random and systemic components to wind measurement and position. As I mentioned only the random parts (which are not small) are helped by repeats.

Sorry I only check ST once in a while. The problem with wind is actually a bit more complex than that. It enters into the VE statistical estimator nonlinearly, so even if it were completely independent over time and averaged out quickly, the estimator would still be biased because of Jensen's inequality. So you can't completely average out the wind to get no bias. Measuring it helps, but again any measurement error in the wind is going to enter nonlinearly and still cause some problems. That said, if you test when the wind is light and do a course (say, out and back) where the distance average wind is zero then the bias isn't too bad.

Re: Aero sensors for dummies thread [marcag] [ In reply to ]

Sep 29, 21 16:06

Post #431 of 909 (5306 views)

Sorry marcag I should have been clear and said that I was only testing on the downhill not uphill. After the downhill I would have been applying the brakes, turning and going back up the hill in a very different relaxed body position, then braking at the top before repeating the downhill test run.

That is also why I set the drivetrain efficiency to 1.0 because I’m not using it! I’m just rolling down not pedalling (perhaps there should be some factor for the freehub friction).

As for the calibration factor I’m using a value which was discerned on previous testing. I have different values for different body positions but the file I attached is for the same body position on all 3 test runs. I did play around with changing this but the overall pattern of CdA decreasing then increasing was the same. I also varied the CRR but this still did not change that same pattern of change with the CdA.

I would be very disappointed if the average CdA came out as high as you calculated for the aero position I was holding (very low back and head posture with arms tucked in). I think it would be circa 0.25

So perhaps we are still just looking at an issue with the rolling CdA average window being too big for the length of my test run?

Re: Aero sensors for dummies thread [Jfitchew] [ In reply to ]

Sep 29, 21 22:35

Post #432 of 909 (5290 views)

If you reverse the direction of the test and start out uphill instead of downhill, do you see the same pattern where the estimated CdA changes markedly in the first 30 seconds?

Re: Aero sensors for dummies thread [lanierb] [ In reply to ]

Sep 29, 21 22:40

Post #433 of 909 (5287 views)

lanierb wrote:

rruff wrote:

There are both random and systemic components to wind measurement and position. As I mentioned only the random parts (which are not small) are helped by repeats.

Sorry I only check ST once in a while. The problem with wind is actually a bit more complex than that. It enters into the VE statistical estimator nonlinearly, so even if it were completely independent over time and averaged out quickly, the estimator would still be biased because of Jensen's inequality. So you can't completely average out the wind to get no bias. Measuring it helps, but again any measurement error in the wind is going to enter nonlinearly and still cause some problems. That said, if you test when the wind is light and do a course (say, out and back) where the distance average wind is zero then the bias isn't too bad.

xkcd: Average Familiarity

Last edited by: RChung: Sep 30, 21 6:14

Re: Aero sensors for dummies thread [Jfitchew] [ In reply to ]

Sep 30, 21 5:41

Post #434 of 909 (5262 views)

Jfitchew wrote:

Sorry marcag I should have been clear and said that I was only testing on the downhill not uphill. After the downhill I would have been applying the brakes, turning and going back up the hill in a very different relaxed body position, then braking at the top before repeating the downhill test run.

That is also why I set the drivetrain efficiency to 1.0 because I’m not using it! I’m just rolling down not pedalling (perhaps there should be some factor for the freehub friction).

As for the calibration factor I’m using a value which was discerned on previous testing. I have different values for different body positions but the file I attached is for the same body position on all 3 test runs. I did play around with changing this but the overall pattern of CdA decreasing then increasing was the same. I also varied the CRR but this still did not change that same pattern of change with the CdA.

I would be very disappointed if the average CdA came out as high as you calculated for the aero position I was holding (very low back and head posture with arms tucked in). I think it would be circa 0.25

So perhaps we are still just looking at an issue with the rolling CdA average window being too big for the length of my test run?

Knowing a little more does help. Thank you. I looked at it a bit more.

I do like looking at the up as well as the down, looking for symmetry in the altitude. I can see the turn arounds and the braking, cut them out, and yes a more relaxed position. You can see all of this in the data.

However when looking at VE up, it does not make sense without a proper ETA. All the power is going to climbing. I understand that it makes no difference on the way down since you are applying 0 watts. But I look at the VE vs Alt curve on the way up and down, and then the mirrored down curve compared to the up. This allows to figure out where errors are.

I'm a little sceptical of your calibration factor.

Even with your calibration factor I don't see the very low .2x CDA. I do see a slight bump up in CDA when you hit the bottom of the hill and it levels off. IMO this is a slight error in the altitude, you can see it in the VE, you would see it by mirroring the lap. But the lap CDA should be OK.

Yes, your laps are a little short. If you are in the exact same position, there is too much variability between the runs. If they were longer you would see less of this. The VE and lap CDA shows about about 0.29 to 0.31. Some sensors do better than others at altitude.

As for the .25 on a road bike descending, that is aggressive IMO. I attached a picture of a .29ish rider I tested multiple times in all kind of scenarios. In case you are interested he's the guy that finished third at worlds. And that's what the roads look like in the Canary Islands :-)

Last edited by: marcag: Sep 30, 21 5:43

Re: Aero sensors for dummies thread [marcag] [ In reply to ]

Oct 1, 21 8:16

Post #435 of 909 (5218 views)

Loop didn't work last night. Despite best Strava sleuthing, it had appreciable elevation change per lap. I wasn't too concerned with this but it caused me not to be able to reliably hold speed or power in a way that wouldn't likely screw up the CdA calcs. Introducing error or variability in calc. Meaning, I had to ease off way too much a few times near the bottom of the loop.

Despite this environmental test setup issue, I went ahead to get some data to play with this more.

A few comments about the GC Notio aspect of things:

1. I thought I was going nuts, but I swear I created two identical intervals in GC for the same data set and the POS spit out wildly different averages for CdA. Identical time range for the interval. Off on average by 0.005. Yeah, that's not confidence inducing at all. Not pleased with that discovery.

2. The average shown in GC for intervals often doesn't make sense versus the displayed data curve. The data line or curve may vary +/-0.005 high to low, fine. But the average will be equal or higher than the highest value on the data line there. Like, what? I dug into this a bit looking in Excel instead and didn't see any weird spikes. So not sure what the error is in GC. I got more reliable averages for an interval by using the CSV file export, converting to excel, adding charts, and going that way. In Excel I basically found the spot I had started getting a speed reading, and added 30sec worth of delay to the average since that's what the Notio has setup. Then sub'd 30sec off the ending time just to be sure.

Comments on the Notio from this test set:

1. The air density given was 1.15 to 1.155 for the run. The local weather station literally up the road, which I trust more, came out to 1.166 for the same period. A 10% difference. This caused the "actual" CdA to be "off" in my opinion. Not a huge deal so long as it's consistent.......but I'd have hoped it would be a bit closer than that. If the weather man swore to you it's going to be 80 tomorrow and was off 10%, 88 isn't a huge deal but 88 is a lot less comfy than 80. Right? Same here. It's just enough off to not be pleased.

2. I keep getting CdA's that given the terrain, power, and speeds are many points too high. I plug the data into Aeroweenie calculator or my own Excel one for a whole run average and even ignoring not putting in elevation to those calcs get a lower CdA. By about 0.015. Using the same air density, power, weight, CRR. For my 10mi run same data in Aeroweenie gives me a 0.233. But the Notio and GC data gave me more like a 0.245. I trust that the 0.233 is a lot closer to reality, and even would be higher than reality given the route had terrain to slow you. Whereas the calc is for pan flat.

So far, not super pleased. I understand the value Rchung above posts about preferring to suffer on the laptop in comfort of home instead of lots of runs.........but so far the data isn't very reassuring sitting on my couch.

I've attached the JSONs for all last night. The 10mi run is bigger than zip file even for 250kb max.

Re: Aero sensors for dummies thread [burnthesheep] [ In reply to ]

Oct 1, 21 8:36

Post #436 of 909 (5213 views)

burnthesheep wrote:

Loop didn't work last night. Despite best Strava sleuthing, it had appreciable elevation change per lap. I wasn't too concerned with this but it caused me not to be able to reliably hold speed or power in a way that wouldn't likely screw up the CdA calcs. Introducing error or variability in calc. Meaning, I had to ease off way too much a few times near the bottom of the loop.

Despite this environmental test setup issue, I went ahead to get some data to play with this more.

A few comments about the GC Notio aspect of things:

1. I thought I was going nuts, but I swear I created two identical intervals in GC for the same data set and the POS spit out wildly different averages for CdA. Identical time range for the interval. Off on average by 0.005. Yeah, that's not confidence inducing at all. Not pleased with that discovery.

2. The average shown in GC for intervals often doesn't make sense versus the displayed data curve. The data line or curve may vary +/-0.005 high to low, fine. But the average will be equal or higher than the highest value on the data line there. Like, what? I dug into this a bit looking in Excel instead and didn't see any weird spikes. So not sure what the error is in GC. I got more reliable averages for an interval by using the CSV file export, converting to excel, adding charts, and going that way. In Excel I basically found the spot I had started getting a speed reading, and added 30sec worth of delay to the average since that's what the Notio has setup. Then sub'd 30sec off the ending time just to be sure.

Comments on the Notio from this test set:

1. The air density given was 1.15 to 1.155 for the run. The local weather station literally up the road, which I trust more, came out to 1.166 for the same period. A 10% difference. This caused the "actual" CdA to be "off" in my opinion. Not a huge deal so long as it's consistent.......but I'd have hoped it would be a bit closer than that. If the weather man swore to you it's going to be 80 tomorrow and was off 10%, 88 isn't a huge deal but 88 is a lot less comfy than 80. Right? Same here. It's just enough off to not be pleased.

2. I keep getting CdA's that given the terrain, power, and speeds are many points too high. I plug the data into Aeroweenie calculator or my own Excel one for a whole run average and even ignoring not putting in elevation to those calcs get a lower CdA. By about 0.015. Using the same air density, power, weight, CRR. For my 10mi run same data in Aeroweenie gives me a 0.233. But the Notio and GC data gave me more like a 0.245. I trust that the 0.233 is a lot closer to reality, and even would be higher than reality given the route had terrain to slow you. Whereas the calc is for pan flat.

So far, not super pleased. I understand the value Rchung above posts about preferring to suffer on the laptop in comfort of home instead of lots of runs.........but so far the data isn't very reassuring sitting on my couch.

I've attached the JSONs for all last night. The 10mi run is bigger than zip file even for 250kb max.

So a couple of things

a) I've seen some of the warts of several of these products and their benefits. I've tested a few ( more than 2:-) ). Some are better than others. Some require more tweaking to get good numbers, some are more subject to user error. Best to get to the bottom of it before throwing in the towel....None of them are perfect (yet) but some of they give (or will give) data that is useful. I really wish DCR would do a review of the state of the nation
b) Don't worry about the air density. It doesn't use air density in it's calculation. It uses air pressure therefore doesn't need density. Now, wind may be off because it has to go from pressure to speed, but that won't impact your CDA.
c) If you believe your CDA is too high, one problem may be the calibration. Remember if it's ready low air speed, it will give a high CDA. Look at it in VE chart. What does the wind pattern look like ? Strongers tail winds than head winds ?
d) .005 is not that big an error. It's big but not crazy. Some will claim they get .001, there are people in the tunnel that get nowhere near .001. I have seen pros get .005 at Specialized tunnel. I think DD said he sees a .003 at the tunnel (by memory).
e) remember that in the running averages in the chart. If the average is higher than the highest, check if there isn't some very low numbers in the seconds preceding the lap start. If your laps are more than 60 seconds see if the average is higher than the highest after 60s. Maybe they have a bug.
d) coming back to A, you can analyze the underlying data of these devices and figure out if they have a hope of calculating a correct CDA. I don't mean this for the Notio, I mean it for one specific product, but the class of products. In the best case you press a button and get a CDA. In the worst case you have better data to calculate a better CDA on your own.

Last edited by: marcag: Oct 1, 21 8:57

Re: Aero sensors for dummies thread [burnthesheep] [ In reply to ]

Oct 1, 21 9:05

Post #437 of 909 (5194 views)

just a note that RChung has brought up many times related to barometric pressure, station pressure is typically reported as corrected to sea level and if you are not at sea level then it will differ from your notio which is reading local pressure. Not sure that is the reason but just a note re station pressure.

Re: Aero sensors for dummies thread [marcag] [ In reply to ]

Oct 1, 21 9:11

Post #438 of 909 (5192 views)

marcag wrote:

burnthesheep wrote:

Loop didn't work last night. Despite best Strava sleuthing, it had appreciable elevation change per lap. I wasn't too concerned with this but it caused me not to be able to reliably hold speed or power in a way that wouldn't likely screw up the CdA calcs. Introducing error or variability in calc. Meaning, I had to ease off way too much a few times near the bottom of the loop.

Despite this environmental test setup issue, I went ahead to get some data to play with this more.

A few comments about the GC Notio aspect of things:

1. I thought I was going nuts, but I swear I created two identical intervals in GC for the same data set and the POS spit out wildly different averages for CdA. Identical time range for the interval. Off on average by 0.005. Yeah, that's not confidence inducing at all. Not pleased with that discovery.

2. The average shown in GC for intervals often doesn't make sense versus the displayed data curve. The data line or curve may vary +/-0.005 high to low, fine. But the average will be equal or higher than the highest value on the data line there. Like, what? I dug into this a bit looking in Excel instead and didn't see any weird spikes. So not sure what the error is in GC. I got more reliable averages for an interval by using the CSV file export, converting to excel, adding charts, and going that way. In Excel I basically found the spot I had started getting a speed reading, and added 30sec worth of delay to the average since that's what the Notio has setup. Then sub'd 30sec off the ending time just to be sure.

Comments on the Notio from this test set:

1. The air density given was 1.15 to 1.155 for the run. The local weather station literally up the road, which I trust more, came out to 1.166 for the same period. A 10% difference. This caused the "actual" CdA to be "off" in my opinion. Not a huge deal so long as it's consistent.......but I'd have hoped it would be a bit closer than that. If the weather man swore to you it's going to be 80 tomorrow and was off 10%, 88 isn't a huge deal but 88 is a lot less comfy than 80. Right? Same here. It's just enough off to not be pleased.

2. I keep getting CdA's that given the terrain, power, and speeds are many points too high. I plug the data into Aeroweenie calculator or my own Excel one for a whole run average and even ignoring not putting in elevation to those calcs get a lower CdA. By about 0.015. Using the same air density, power, weight, CRR. For my 10mi run same data in Aeroweenie gives me a 0.233. But the Notio and GC data gave me more like a 0.245. I trust that the 0.233 is a lot closer to reality, and even would be higher than reality given the route had terrain to slow you. Whereas the calc is for pan flat.

So far, not super pleased. I understand the value Rchung above posts about preferring to suffer on the laptop in comfort of home instead of lots of runs.........but so far the data isn't very reassuring sitting on my couch.

I've attached the JSONs for all last night. The 10mi run is bigger than zip file even for 250kb max.

So a couple of things

a) I've seen some of the warts of several of these products and their benefits. I've tested a few ( more than 2:-) ). Some are better than others. Some require more tweaking to get good numbers, some are more subject to user error. Best to get to the bottom of it before throwing in the towel....None of them are perfect (yet) but some of they give (or will give) data that is useful. I really wish DCR would do a review of the state of the nation
b) Don't worry about the air density. It doesn't use air density in it's calculation. It uses air pressure therefore doesn't need density. Now, wind may be off because it has to go from pressure to speed, but that won't impact your CDA.
c) If you believe your CDA is too high, one problem may be the calibration. Remember if it's ready low air speed, it will give a high CDA. Look at it in VE chart. What does the wind pattern look like ? Strongers tail winds than head winds ?
d) .005 is not that big an error. It's big but not crazy. Some will claim they get .001, there are people in the tunnel that get nowhere near .001. I have seen pros get .005 at Specialized tunnel. I think DD said he sees a .003 at the tunnel (by memory).
e) remember that in the running averages in the chart. If the average is higher than the highest, check if there isn't some very low numbers in the seconds preceding the lap start. If your laps are more than 60 seconds see if the average is higher than the highest after 60s. Maybe they have a bug.
d) coming back to A, you can analyze the underlying data of these devices and figure out if they have a hope of calculating a correct CDA. I don't mean this for the Notio, I mean it for one specific product, but the class of products. In the best case you press a button and get a CDA. In the worst case you have better data to calculate a better CDA on your own.

Thanks! Given the density thing doesn't matter, that helps some with my complaints. Also having a clearer expectation of "resolution" helps as well.

Knowing the .005 thing, then that helps me with protocol a bit more in terms of figuring out some things.

I had just done a calibration recently. The high CdA was for both my tiny loop runs and also my big 10mi workout run.

I wonder if it isn't happy with sensor placement. I put it somewhere out front away from the cockpit so I could do hand/extension stuff and not worry about the sensor re-cals.

I guess I need to nail down the protocol so I can trust which average I'm using to say "better/worse".

One good thing is I'm pretty much leaving it on the bike and using it much more often now to get used to it. Maybe there'll be some "aha" moments along the way.

Re: Aero sensors for dummies thread [burnthesheep] [ In reply to ]

Oct 1, 21 11:55

Post #439 of 909 (5169 views)

burnthesheep wrote:

I had just done a calibration recently.

You can check calibration post ride, (or at least you used to be able to last time I used one).
A consistent calib factor will increase confidence in your numbers.

Re: Aero sensors for dummies thread [marcag] [ In reply to ]

Oct 1, 21 12:22

Post #440 of 909 (5162 views)

marcag wrote:

b) Don't worry about the air density. It doesn't use air density in it's calculation. It uses air pressure therefore doesn't need density. Now, wind may be off because it has to go from pressure to speed, but that won't impact your CDA.

Really? Am I wrong, I thought it needs at least air pressure and air temperature in order to calculate air density or is it all in this calibration factor?

Last edited by: BergHugi: Oct 1, 21 12:24

Re: Aero sensors for dummies thread [BergHugi] [ In reply to ]

Oct 1, 21 13:20

Post #441 of 909 (5155 views)

BergHugi wrote:

marcag wrote:

b) Don't worry about the air density. It doesn't use air density in it's calculation. It uses air pressure therefore doesn't need density. Now, wind may be off because it has to go from pressure to speed, but that won't impact your CDA.

Really? Am I wrong, I thought it needs at least air pressure and air temperature in order to calculate air density or is it all in this calibration factor?

You don't need air density to calculate cda if you have the differential pressure of the pitot. Lots of examples of this in the drone world.

You do need air density to calculate airSpeed and from airSpeed, wind. So if your calibration process requires airSpeed ow wind, then yes you will need air density for the calibration process, but only the calibration process.

This is one advantage of using a pitot. Air density varies.
You need barometric pressure, temp and humidity to compute air density.

Now you can use airSpeed for other creative things but it's not required to compute CDA.

Re: Aero sensors for dummies thread [marcag] [ In reply to ]

Oct 2, 21 17:56

Post #442 of 909 (5114 views)

It's been a good thing to decide to start running the sensor on all my training rides. Learning more. More data. Get in training or fun and learn something.

I had the parts laying around to try out how folks like Ganna and others work the 10cm 15deg rule by having the pads just so much closer toward the end of the extensions. Let's be clear, I do not own some $2000 cockpit setup. I have some alloy angle Aerocoach ext and wing pads and some random assortment of pad blocks and extension tilts from Fouriers. I had a good feeling about it just looking at it after setting it up.

I live in a hilly part of town and there's one good stretch of a 1.5 to 2.0mi of area I can rip a little.

It just felt quick. KOMs and PRs on less power without wind help. I need to run a more formal set of data runs later, but so far....I'm downright giddy. While I realize skinsuits and other kit can affect details of the system, this was my "slowest" set of wheels and other stuff to wear for a TT ride. But the CdA beat my prior full skinsuit/helmet getup by a whole 0.025.

The deal with that kind of cockpit cheating the 10cm/15deg you'd assume it to be garbage for comfort or holding your head or whatever. Nah, felt fine. It was actually easier to get really hunkered down, hips rotated, settled into where I wanted to be. I feel it has to deal with the angle in the elbows and such. But I bet the gains were from it facilitating better interaction cockpit to head and also narrower on the arms also.

On a "budget" set of parts it's similar looking to that modern "weird" short distance from pads to extension tips look.

Now....time to shake the money maker for a flatter 10mi try.

Re: Aero sensors for dummies thread [marcag] [ In reply to ]

Oct 3, 21 12:58

Post #443 of 909 (5081 views)

Thank you, I learned something.

Re: Aero sensors for dummies thread [grumpier.mike] [ In reply to ]

Oct 18, 21 11:29

Post #444 of 909 (4936 views)

Marc on Endurance Innovation podcast:

https://endurance-innovation-podcast.simplecast.com/episodes/marc-graveline-redux-_1ZtttkG

Re: Aero sensors for dummies thread [RChung] [ In reply to ]

Oct 18, 21 12:10

Post #445 of 909 (4921 views)

RChung wrote:

Marc on Endurance Innovation podcast:

https://endurance-innovation-podcast.simplecast.com/episodes/marc-graveline-redux-_1ZtttkG

Was a really good listen. It was informative without going so deep that my eyes ever glazed over :D

My Blog - http://leegoocrap.blogspot.com

Re: Aero sensors for dummies thread [Morelock] [ In reply to ]

Oct 18, 21 12:20

Post #446 of 909 (4917 views)

Morelock wrote:

RChung wrote:

Marc on Endurance Innovation podcast:

https://endurance-innovation-podcast.simplecast.com/...eline-redux-_1ZtttkG

Was a really good listen. It was informative without going so deep that my eyes ever glazed over :D

Thanks to both of you.

Hopefully it can generate some debate/discussion.

Rumor on the street is the endurance innovation guys have a big aero fish on the hook for the near future.

Re: Aero sensors for dummies thread [marcag] [ In reply to ]

Oct 20, 21 6:58

Post #447 of 909 (4862 views)

I've been a cheap ass too long trying to use this Notio with just the app. I don't have a good place to put my phone. The phone I feel isn't the best setup. I would slip it under my suit. Last night I started a training ride and slipped in my suit and must have messed up something doing so as it didn't record.

So, instead of being cheap I just paid for a refurb Garmin 530. I'll just keep that as my TT bike GPS always and set it up with the Notio. Making laps and other stuff just infinitely easier on me. Not doing it for seeing live CdA, doing it just to make data capture, laps, etc... just that much easier.

Re: Aero sensors for dummies thread [burnthesheep] [ In reply to ]

Oct 20, 21 7:07

Post #448 of 909 (4859 views)

I have never really used the app. It was in Beta the last time I used a Notio.

A 530 is great, a 130 would have done the trick. Just posting that if someone else is in the same situation.

The only thing I don't like about the 130 is the inability to auto-lap on anything shorter than 5km, and no strava segments

Re: Aero sensors for dummies thread [marcag] [ In reply to ]

Nov 10, 21 10:49

Post #449 of 909 (4734 views)

Submitted ticket to ask, I couldn't find it in the literature I downloaded. Thought maybe someone here would have an answer faster. If you forget your wheel speed sensor and go by GPS, how do you tell the Notio to use that instead?

Today I thought I had it but forgot the sensor on the wheel and didn't notice. It kept reading zero CdA because of no speed reading. But I thought it could do both, even though the sensor is highly preferred?

It wasn't important runs, just learning to use the Garmin with it now instead of the app.

I'll try to remember speed sensor next ride, but just wanted to clarify this part.

Re: Aero sensors for dummies thread [burnthesheep] [ In reply to ]

Nov 10, 21 12:43

Post #450 of 909 (4711 views)

burnthesheep wrote:

Submitted ticket to ask, I couldn't find it in the literature I downloaded. Thought maybe someone here would have an answer faster. If you forget your wheel speed sensor and go by GPS, how do you tell the Notio to use that instead?

Today I thought I had it but forgot the sensor on the wheel and didn't notice. It kept reading zero CdA because of no speed reading. But I thought it could do both, even though the sensor is highly preferred?

It wasn't important runs, just learning to use the Garmin with it now instead of the app.

I'll try to remember speed sensor next ride, but just wanted to clarify this part.

I haven't used one in such a long time I don't know if that functionality is still there. If it were an important ride, the underlying data could be messed with to get results but probably more work that necessary.

Some products would do a fusion of GPS and sensor data, so maybe they have a way to do something similar. Let us know what support says.

Our Partners

transition-DOT-area-AT-slowtwitch-DOT-com

Advertise with us

©1999-2024 Slowtwitch, Inc., and Slowtwitch.com
Reproduction of material from any Slowtwitch.com page
without written permission is strictly prohibited.