Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Aerodynamic Testing 3.0
Quote | Reply
The next level for wind-tunnel aerodynamic testing may be, NO wind tunnel!

Canadian Start-Up AeroLab has been working on some ground-breaking technology that would eliminate the need to go to the wind tunnel to test gear, positions and other details.

More here in a recent review by Ray Maker - https://www.dcrainmaker.com/...dynamic-sensors.html


Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog
Quote Reply
Re: Aerodynamic Testing 3.0 [Fleck] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
& they (aeroLAB) are looking for beta test riders .. https://www.aerolab.tech/consumers

___/\___/\___/\___ the surfboard of the Kurpfalz is the road bike .. oSo >> Older, and faster ..
Quote Reply
Re: Aerodynamic Testing 3.0 [sausskross] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I am the main engineer/scientist/cyclist/triathlete/techjunkie behind the sensor (Chris Morton, if you want to look me up). Happy to discuss it and answer as many questions as possible. I also would love to hear advice/feedback on what would be your ideal product to use on a daily basis.
- For those that are experienced with GoldenCheetah, at the end of a ride would you like the 'aerolab' feature to be done automatically via an app? Keep in mind, the automatic computation would include a graphical representation of the data, and enable adjustments to be made so you are no relinquishing control.
- Would you see value in building an avatar which provided CdA information for different positions/equipment/environmental conditions?

Chris Morton, PhD
Assistant Professor, Mechanical Engineering
co-Founder and inventor of AeroLab Tech
For updates see Instagram
Quote Reply
Re: Aerodynamic Testing 3.0 [AeroTech] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
AeroTech wrote:
I am the main engineer/scientist/cyclist/triathlete/techjunkie behind the sensor (Chris Morton, if you want to look me up). Happy to discuss it and answer as many questions as possible. I also would love to hear advice/feedback on what would be your ideal product to use on a daily basis.
- For those that are experienced with GoldenCheetah, at the end of a ride would you like the 'aerolab' feature to be done automatically via an app? Keep in mind, the automatic computation would include a graphical representation of the data, and enable adjustments to be made so you are no relinquishing control.
- Would you see value in building an avatar which provided CdA information for different positions/equipment/environmental conditions?

It'd be nice if you could set it to automatically aerolab the ride, so long as it was optional. It'd definitely help for the people who aren't familiar with GC/Aerolab.

As for the avatar, incorporating a "baseline" setup the rider could refer back to (and, if they were really trying to keep things as accurate as possible, test again at the beginning of each new session) might be nice. I know I have a notebook full of dates/temp/wind/test protocol/etc that is a bit of a chore to update on site. (I always forget something if I wait until later) So the ability to "store" some gear you know you'd be using over and over (bike/helmet/suit/etc) would make things a lot quicker.

Would hope for a more "user friendly/easy mode/quick recap" App, (would be especially nice for traveling testers/races so they don't need a laptop/pc to pour over data) but still the ability to upload it in GC and have full control.

My Blog - http://leegoocrap.blogspot.com
Quote Reply
Re: Aerodynamic Testing 3.0 [AeroTech] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Hi Chris, is there any chance to be considered for a beta test rider living in the Kurpfalz (Germany), the region riding on two wheels was invented 200 years before, than I'd apply .. a S5, P2M, N2C, GC and 900h/y is on my plus side .. I'm not racing any more on my minus ..

___/\___/\___/\___ the surfboard of the Kurpfalz is the road bike .. oSo >> Older, and faster ..
Quote Reply
Re: Aerodynamic Testing 3.0 [sausskross] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
sausskross wrote:
Hi Chris, is there any chance to be considered for a beta test rider living in the Kurpfalz (Germany), the region riding on two wheels was invented 200 years before, than I'd apply .. a S5, P2M, N2C, GC and 900h/y is on my plus side .. I'm not racing any more on my minus ..

Absolutely. For me I want data - loads of it, in a variety of environments. If you are quite tech savvy with experience in GoldenCheetah and other platforms, even better.
Beta riders will roll out in phases. Will keep you up to date on when we expect this to happen this year.

Chris Morton, PhD
Assistant Professor, Mechanical Engineering
co-Founder and inventor of AeroLab Tech
For updates see Instagram
Quote Reply
Re: Aerodynamic Testing 3.0 [AeroTech] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I applied & will prepare my self with some stretching to get the head down (ore what ever helps) .. spring will come ..

Cheers,
#anno

___/\___/\___/\___ the surfboard of the Kurpfalz is the road bike .. oSo >> Older, and faster ..
Quote Reply
Re: Aerodynamic Testing 3.0 [sausskross] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I wouldn't mind a beta as well count me in.
Quote Reply
Re: Aerodynamic Testing 3.0 [mooremikey1] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
mooremikey1 wrote:
I wouldn't mind a beta as well count me in.

You are in! Just complete the survey/application form from our website (link is at the bottom): https://www.aerolab.tech/consumers

Chris Morton, PhD
Assistant Professor, Mechanical Engineering
co-Founder and inventor of AeroLab Tech
For updates see Instagram
Quote Reply
Re: Aerodynamic Testing 3.0 [Morelock] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Morelock wrote:
AeroTech wrote:
I am the main engineer/scientist/cyclist/triathlete/techjunkie behind the sensor (Chris Morton, if you want to look me up). Happy to discuss it and answer as many questions as possible. I also would love to hear advice/feedback on what would be your ideal product to use on a daily basis.
- For those that are experienced with GoldenCheetah, at the end of a ride would you like the 'aerolab' feature to be done automatically via an app? Keep in mind, the automatic computation would include a graphical representation of the data, and enable adjustments to be made so you are no relinquishing control.
- Would you see value in building an avatar which provided CdA information for different positions/equipment/environmental conditions?


It'd be nice if you could set it to automatically aerolab the ride, so long as it was optional. It'd definitely help for the people who aren't familiar with GC/Aerolab.

As for the avatar, incorporating a "baseline" setup the rider could refer back to (and, if they were really trying to keep things as accurate as possible, test again at the beginning of each new session) might be nice. I know I have a notebook full of dates/temp/wind/test protocol/etc that is a bit of a chore to update on site. (I always forget something if I wait until later) So the ability to "store" some gear you know you'd be using over and over (bike/helmet/suit/etc) would make things a lot quicker.

Would hope for a more "user friendly/easy mode/quick recap" App, (would be especially nice for traveling testers/races so they don't need a laptop/pc to pour over data) but still the ability to upload it in GC and have full control.

This would certainly be optional (using the aerolab type analysis post-ride). Some rides will not prove to be worth completing any analysis for CdA (e.g., rides with substantial use of brakes, or drafting when you really want an unassisted CdA value). Indeed, the key is to bring in current GC experts as well as new consumers - people who aren't familiar with GC. Those unfamiliar with GC would benefit substantially from the automated analysis.
For the avatar, indeed, data collected on a baseline setup (you will have freedom to name your setups, e.g., "aero01") would be good to have for comparison. The intent for the avatar is to integrate this into a race course emulator - ideally enabling the software to make equipment suggestions for the rider to have his/her optimal performance for a known course and anticipated environmental conditions.

Chris Morton, PhD
Assistant Professor, Mechanical Engineering
co-Founder and inventor of AeroLab Tech
For updates see Instagram
Quote Reply
Re: Aerodynamic Testing 3.0 [AeroTech] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Are you not concerned about stagnation effects with the probe so close to the bike?
Quote Reply
Re: Aerodynamic Testing 3.0 [Andrew Coggan] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Andrew Coggan wrote:
Are you not concerned about stagnation effects with the probe so close to the bike?

Absolutely. Very concerned! It was the main focus of our patent filing. A major portion is on the calibration and use of a pitot tube based sensor in proximity to a deformable body. Would love to discuss this in detail (actually its killing me that I can't!).

Chris Morton, PhD
Assistant Professor, Mechanical Engineering
co-Founder and inventor of AeroLab Tech
For updates see Instagram
Quote Reply
Re: Aerodynamic Testing 3.0 [AeroTech] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Why kind of mounting solutions are you planning on having? I signed up for beta testing and hoping for a way to mount it to my speed concept.

get comfortable being uncomfortable
Quote Reply
Re: Aerodynamic Testing 3.0 [stevej] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
stevej wrote:
Why kind of mounting solutions are you planning on having? I signed up for beta testing and hoping for a way to mount it to my speed concept.

We run Go-Pro style mounting kits on the current prototypes, and had some past prototypes with garmin quarter-turn mounts. We will ensure that mounting options allow for different TT setups and road bikes. This is actually an area of interest for feedback through the beta testing.

Chris Morton, PhD
Assistant Professor, Mechanical Engineering
co-Founder and inventor of AeroLab Tech
For updates see Instagram
Quote Reply
Re: Aerodynamic Testing 3.0 [AeroTech] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I do a lot of field testing -- pretty much every week -- and I'd love to be in as well. I can get you tons of data. I filled out the form.

As for what I'd like to see on the tech side, I'd rather *not* use Golden Cheetah aerolab. GC aerolab is clunky for doing multiple tests and also for tests involving two separate runs that you want to splice together (one each direction on the same road). It's hard to remove chunks you don't want (the turnaround), and you have to manually do each run. If you do 5 runs you have to manually do it 5 times, and if the 5 runs are out and backs with a turnaround you have to chop out the turnaround 5 times! I'd rather a piece of software that displayed every lap in your fit file and computed CdA for each lap, and then allowed you to combine laps as you please. If that doesn't make sense I can try to explain better. That would be really slick.
Quote Reply
Re: Aerodynamic Testing 3.0 [AeroTech] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I applied after reading DC's post. Think I tick all the boxes... Forgot to add I am a GoldenCheetah user and would absolutely love to see this integrated in the software! PM me for more details if you feel like it.

Sr. Salitre
Quote Reply
Re: Aerodynamic Testing 3.0 [AeroTech] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
A collection of avatars would be great. I race some local time trials where I don't pull out the top of the line gear or it is so hilly a road bike is a better option. At others it is "weapons grade" aero. This would also allow a tester to set a default total weight for each setup.

An option for doing Crr testing, using end points with known elevations, would also be a cool feature. I tried writing my own code for simultaniously solving for the CdA and Crr values and that was a disaster.

This looks like a totally cool product and I would love to help with the beta testing. Best of luck.
Last edited by: grumpier.mike: Feb 7, 18 5:14
Quote Reply
Re: Aerodynamic Testing 3.0 [lanierb] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
lanierb wrote:
I do a lot of field testing -- pretty much every week -- and I'd love to be in as well. I can get you tons of data. I filled out the form.

As for what I'd like to see on the tech side, I'd rather *not* use Golden Cheetah aerolab. GC aerolab is clunky for doing multiple tests and also for tests involving two separate runs that you want to splice together (one each direction on the same road). It's hard to remove chunks you don't want (the turnaround), and you have to manually do each run. If you do 5 runs you have to manually do it 5 times, and if the 5 runs are out and backs with a turnaround you have to chop out the turnaround 5 times! I'd rather a piece of software that displayed every lap in your fit file and computed CdA for each lap, and then allowed you to combine laps as you please. If that doesn't make sense I can try to explain better. That would be really slick.

This is an interesting thought that I haven't perfected yet - I currently have the sensor picking up when you are braking (aggressively), as well as when you are cornering/turning around (not so difficult with GPS tracking + accelerometer, though feathering or momentarily touching the brakes can be tricky to 'sense'). This enables the real-time CdA to remain stable under these conditions since it simply checks and discards or ignores the data under those conditions. The time-stamps surrounding a corner or turn-around are tracked and saved during the ride. With some fancy math, this could be used to do as you said, remove chunks you don't want.

Chris Morton, PhD
Assistant Professor, Mechanical Engineering
co-Founder and inventor of AeroLab Tech
For updates see Instagram
Quote Reply
Re: Aerodynamic Testing 3.0 [AeroTech] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
AeroTech wrote:
Andrew Coggan wrote:
Are you not concerned about stagnation effects with the probe so close to the bike?

Absolutely. Very concerned! It was the main focus of our patent filing. A major portion is on the calibration and use of a pitot tube based sensor in proximity to a deformable body. Would love to discuss this in detail (actually its killing me that I can't!).

This one?

https://www.google.com/...WO2017197524A1?cl=en

Based on what is written, it appears that a correction is applied based on the assumed impact of the trailing object on the local flow field around the sensor?

Wouldn't it just have been simpler to locate the sensor far enough forward to avoid any such issues in the first place?
Quote Reply
Re: Aerodynamic Testing 3.0 [Andrew Coggan] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Andrew Coggan wrote:
Wouldn't it just have been simpler to locate the sensor far enough forward to avoid any such issues in the first place?

engineers will never get that one past marketing...

Eric Reid
AeroFit | Instagram Portfolio Coaching and Bike Fitting
Chapel Hill, NC
Aerodynamic Optimized Bike Fitting, Retul Pre-Purchase Bike Fitting, USAT Level 1 Triathlon Coaching, Nutrition
Ask me: Scody Optimized Speed Suits | CeramicSpeed Oversized Pulley Systems | HUUB Skinsuits and Wetsuits | Ventum Bicycles and Frames
Quote Reply
Re: Aerodynamic Testing 3.0 [Andrew Coggan] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Andrew Coggan wrote:
AeroTech wrote:
Andrew Coggan wrote:
Are you not concerned about stagnation effects with the probe so close to the bike?


Absolutely. Very concerned! It was the main focus of our patent filing. A major portion is on the calibration and use of a pitot tube based sensor in proximity to a deformable body. Would love to discuss this in detail (actually its killing me that I can't!).


This one?

https://www.google.com/...WO2017197524A1?cl=en

Based on what is written, it appears that a correction is applied based on the assumed impact of the trailing object on the local flow field around the sensor?

Wouldn't it just have been simpler to locate the sensor far enough forward to avoid any such issues in the first place?

Wow, I didn't even know it was google searchable... eek. The 'assumed' impact of the trailing object on the local flow field around the sensor is modeled well as an irrotational component, particularly since you are well upstream of separation. We have experimental data backing this up - almost to the point where 'assumed' could be replaced with '-', though strictly speaking we cannot say it is perfect (coming from an academic).

Now, to your other question, why not locate the sensor far enough forward? Sure, you can do that. Far enough forward for one rider may not be far enough forward for another due to differences in the rider body position and rider size (his/her effects on the pressure field). You are also placing a restriction on the volume of space in front of the rider where the sensor can be mounted. In our case, there are fewer restrictions on the location where the sensor can be mounted. We believe this enables significantly more flexibility for a user.

Chris Morton, PhD
Assistant Professor, Mechanical Engineering
co-Founder and inventor of AeroLab Tech
For updates see Instagram
Quote Reply
Re: Aerodynamic Testing 3.0 [AeroTech] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
AeroTech wrote:
mooremikey1 wrote:
I wouldn't mind a beta as well count me in.


You are in! Just complete the survey/application form from our website (link is at the bottom): https://www.aerolab.tech/consumers

Hi Chris,

I'm also very interested in helping you guys Beta test this, filled out the form.

With regards to your earlier questions of how/where to display the data post-ride, an app is great (vs GC on a desktop) so that you can get faster results in the field of what works and doesn't, allowing for faster iteration. Ideally if the main cycling computer collecting all the data can use the "lap" separation to enable the CdA calculation for the specific sections where a given item/aspect was trialed, that would probably be easiest/fastest.

The concept of an "avatar" or toolkit of sorts that can derived from numerous rides that test various aspects is very interesting, although not sure how best to be implemented. A drop-down choice of avatar component "tags" for each ride, so that as you A/B test you can assign a CdA benefit value for said tag? I don't have enough expertise in this field to say whether even if proceeding down that route the accumulated data would be correct, or if there is some amount of interference between various components that would affect their overall benefit or not.
Quote Reply
Re: Aerodynamic Testing 3.0 [ericMPro] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
engineers will never get that one past marketing...

Marketing wins the day again! :)


Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog
Quote Reply
Re: Aerodynamic Testing 3.0 [lanierb] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
lanierb wrote:
I do a lot of field testing -- pretty much every week -- and I'd love to be in as well. I can get you tons of data. I filled out the form.

As for what I'd like to see on the tech side, I'd rather *not* use Golden Cheetah aerolab. GC aerolab is clunky for doing multiple tests and also for tests involving two separate runs that you want to splice together (one each direction on the same road). It's hard to remove chunks you don't want (the turnaround), and you have to manually do each run. If you do 5 runs you have to manually do it 5 times, and if the 5 runs are out and backs with a turnaround you have to chop out the turnaround 5 times! I'd rather a piece of software that displayed every lap in your fit file and computed CdA for each lap, and then allowed you to combine laps as you please. If that doesn't make sense I can try to explain better. That would be really slick.

If you use a "U-shaped" course, or "half-pipe" profile, you shouldn't need to brake at the turnarounds (since the uphill slows you to a crawl), so no removal necessary. Here's what that type of run ends up looking like (this is my own personal spreadsheet I put together before Aerolab was available...basically the same thing):



Of course, re-looking at your description above...I'm unclear how you're using Aerolab in the first place for the type of testing you describe, since it's intended to evaluate multiple continuous "laps"...

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: Aerodynamic Testing 3.0 [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Tom A. wrote:
lanierb wrote:
I do a lot of field testing -- pretty much every week -- and I'd love to be in as well. I can get you tons of data. I filled out the form.

As for what I'd like to see on the tech side, I'd rather *not* use Golden Cheetah aerolab. GC aerolab is clunky for doing multiple tests and also for tests involving two separate runs that you want to splice together (one each direction on the same road). It's hard to remove chunks you don't want (the turnaround), and you have to manually do each run. If you do 5 runs you have to manually do it 5 times, and if the 5 runs are out and backs with a turnaround you have to chop out the turnaround 5 times! I'd rather a piece of software that displayed every lap in your fit file and computed CdA for each lap, and then allowed you to combine laps as you please. If that doesn't make sense I can try to explain better. That would be really slick.


If you use a "U-shaped" course, or "half-pipe" profile, you shouldn't need to brake at the turnarounds (since the uphill slows you to a crawl), so no removal necessary. Here's what that type of run ends up looking like (this is my own personal spreadsheet I put together before Aerolab was available...basically the same thing):



Of course, re-looking at your description above...I'm unclear how you're using Aerolab in the first place for the type of testing you describe, since it's intended to evaluate multiple continuous "laps"...
Hi Tom- Yeah the thing is not everyone has a good half pipe course. When you don't, out and back courses with a turn around work great if you can remove the turn around. What I do right now is I hit the lap button for each direction of the out and back test, then remove the turnaround lap -- so laps 1 and 3 are the ones I want and then lap 2 has braking and the turnaround and gets removed. I wrote my own java code that reads in the fit file and then does this automatically for you because I got tired of doing it in GC/Aerolab. Actually the code does even more than that because I can have it automatically control for temperature variation and stuff like that across laps, and it can combine many runs or do them separately or whatever. Since I do a lot of testing it really helps, and I can get the answers quickly in the field if I want.
Quote Reply

Prev Next