Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: Ask us anything about Aero Camp [JTolandTRI] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I think height is only a real setback if it's matched with weight, which you don't seem to have in excess. I'm a very "cylindery" person myself, at 6'2" and 140lbs - I'm guessing similar build but slightly downscaled. I'm not the fastest, which is why I try to be efficient. From comparing other top age-groupers' power data, that didn't stop me from clocking one of the best watts-per-speed ratios at the half-distance at the Israman. I clocked 3:04 over 90km and 1950m of elevation, averaging 206AVG, 212NP - quite a few behind me clocked in slower times with more watts, and one guy who pulled off a 2:58 did that averaging 245W and god knows how high is NP was - and he's 30cm shorter than I am, with a proper (Lightweight!) disc wheel.

Haven't done field-testing - though I'm itching to - but I'm quite confident the following setup will test very fast:



ZONE3 - We Last Longer
Last edited by: tessartype: Jan 27, 14 1:02
Quote Reply
Re: Ask us anything about Aero Camp [BikeTechReview] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
BikeTechReview wrote:
Watt Matters wrote:
<snip>


Best of luck in your business ventures.

Thanks, but in reality it's just fun to make people faster and perform better, as well as interact with some very smart people, and quality athletes - the motivation for this stuff is way beyond just "a business venture". Already have several world and national records helped achieved, qualification for national squads / worlds selection, as well as many many riders attaining PBs after years of performance stagnation. And they all find it quite motivating and fun to do such testing, which is a big factor in this sport.
Quote Reply
Re: Ask us anything about Aero Camp [tessartype] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Damn.....6'2'' and 140lb. I thought I was skinny at 6'2'' and 165lb. :D

It is tough to get aero AND MAKE POWER at our height. My output on the tt bike suffers as I get lower even with 5mm shorter cranks. I would love to work with an aero geek around here (Philly) to get me into a good position. I'm taking some advice from this thread and going longer to get my upper arms on more of an angle rather than perpendicular to the ground. Now if it would only get above 20 and stop snowing around here so I can get out and test the position :(
Quote Reply
Re: Ask us anything about Aero Camp [BikeTechReview] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
BikeTechReview wrote:
IJ wrote:
I think I send you tunnel data before trying to attach a probe to a bike to measure dynamic pressure and found way to much rider interaction in every acceptable position. so I disagree that measuring q would be the better idea. I think field testing works and has been showen to give usable results.


I haven't seen your data. Please share it in this thread. I'm sure there are folks smarter than I reading who might be able to provide some insight. If you are basing your perspective on data acquired in a wind tunnel where blockage might be a factor, that is something to consider. I agree that field testing can work, as long as one understands the limitations of their tool/methodology. That could be a serious piece of work to undertake for a given individual who shows up on field-test day.

Hi Kraig,

I think that IJ is talking about the upstream effect that has the rider on the distribution of speed and, consequently, bike-air relative speed and yaw. In field testing yaw is affected to some extent by the rider, something that doesn't happen in WT tunnels. This extract is taken from the latest SC white paper:

"This specific sensor was built to custom Trek specifications and remains the most advanced yaw sensor in the world. In addition, we used our wind tunnel mannequin to create a proprietary set of calibration functions which accounts for the influence of bike + rider on the airflow. This Trek calibration has proven critical for extreme accuracy"

It would be interesting to know what kind error reduction was achieved thanks to the calibration. Carl?

http://cds-0.blogspot.com
Quote Reply
Re: Ask us anything about Aero Camp [cyclenutnz] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Very interesting. Thanks for sharing.
Quote Reply
Re: Ask us anything about Aero Camp [tessartype] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Your numbers are almost identical to HIM bike I did in September. Had to go back and check to make sure they were not the same! Slightly lower time and slightly less elevation change, but overall very close. An additional 40 watts doesn't sound too crazy for a 6 minute improvement on a hilly course. Is he the same weight?

Your head/helmet position combo looks very close to Jon Moen, 3rd picture and labeled in the ST Aero Camp photo gallery. I believe there was nothing that really edged the Javelin. He may chime in here, but I believe he also posted some results further up the thread.
Quote Reply
Re: Ask us anything about Aero Camp [Epic-o] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Epic-o wrote:
<snip>


I've written a bit about interaction effects:


Having some sort of visibility on relative wind speed is helpful when doing field testing. Flying blind could lead to spurious/difficult to explain data sets I would imagine.

=================
Kraig Willett
http://www.biketechreview.com - check out our reduced report pricing
=================
Quote Reply
Re: Ask us anything about Aero Camp [Watt Matters] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Watt Matters wrote:
BikeTechReview wrote:
Watt Matters wrote:
<snip>


Best of luck in your business ventures.


Thanks, but in reality it's just fun to make people faster and perform better <snip>

What are your rates?

=================
Kraig Willett
http://www.biketechreview.com - check out our reduced report pricing
=================
Quote Reply
Re: Ask us anything about Aero Camp [owtbac86] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
what changes were made between the Vorttice and P-09?
Quote Reply
Re: Ask us anything about Aero Camp [BikeTechReview] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
From a customer perspective, I think it would be a nice deliverable to have video of all my runs along with synched real-time data. Perhaps video from 5 IP cameras strategically placed on the track along with a data screen - all simultaneously displayed in a 6-way split screen. Networked weather stations around the track would be nice as well. These small investments (maybe <$2k) would help test directors as well I would imagine.

What are some other ideas that might improve the experience?

=================
Kraig Willett
http://www.biketechreview.com - check out our reduced report pricing
=================
Quote Reply
Re: Ask us anything about Aero Camp [Epic-o] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Must...resist...giving...too...much...away...

Not a huge deal in the velodrome. Outdoors: without a calibration function your avg yaw could easily be off by 25%.

Carl Matson
Quote Reply
Re: Ask us anything about Aero Camp [Carl] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Here is some example data from my test runs.




We tested 20 different probe positions and most of them with all four athlete positions. We originaly wanted to derive a calibration function as well, but since we want the measurement for help in bike fitting we didnt like that the measured dynamic pressure itself was position dependent we now measure air density once per pedal revolution and adjust accordingly.

@Kraig: I am not at all saying that the guy didnt do his homework, I just think you can only get so far without the help of windtunnels/track testing and a guy who has scientific experience in that field. I agree his gains are above average but not impossible.

@WattsMatter: Sounds pretty cool what you are doing. Sounds you worked with a few track athletes. Where are you based?
In Reply To:
Quote Reply
Re: Ask us anything about Aero Camp [warrior_80] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
warrior_80 wrote:
what changes were made between the Vorttice and P-09?

probably best answered by one of the LG folks if they're on here, but the p09 overall has a smaller frontal profile than the vorttice.

The p09 fits noticeably tighter and took a few rides to get used to, as it flattened my ears.

Visor attachment on p09 is a better arrangement than on vorttice, in my opinion.

Let me know if you want some side by side photos of the two lids - I can take those when I get home tonight.

Team Kiwami
Instagram
Quote Reply
Re: Ask us anything about Aero Camp [nealhe] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
You really need to update that website soon with better pictures ect.
Especially that cell phone pic of the stash aero storage.
I already own one of your products (skewers, love them) and I would probably own two more of your products if they were better presented.


nealhe wrote:
Hello Ex-cyclist and All,

Ex-cyclist wrote: "The only time the Air Attack MIGHT be faster is if you are riding so head down you can't see."

I might be worth noting that there is a way to keep your head down and be comfortable and be able to see.

http://www.view-speed.com

Use View-Speed Cyclops glasses and see your speed increase about 1 mph.



Cheers,

Neal

+1 mph Faster
Quote Reply
Re: Ask us anything about Aero Camp [IJ] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
IJ wrote:
We tested 20 different probe positions and most of them with all four athlete positions. We originaly wanted to derive a calibration function as well, but since we want the measurement for help in bike fitting we didnt like that the measured dynamic pressure itself was position dependent we now measure air density once per pedal revolution and adjust accordingly.


Why are you measuring dynamic pressure? To ensure inter-run repeatability? To calculate exact CdA values? To derive yaw and be able to do yaw sweeps with field tests?

I don't really see how an adjustment of air density can solve blockage effects. Adjusting density you just get a more accurate value of the relative velocities seen by the sensor

http://cds-0.blogspot.com
Last edited by: Epic-o: Jan 27, 14 9:55
Quote Reply
Re: Ask us anything about Aero Camp [scofflaw] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Educated? Those are your words, not mine. I said "guess".

Jim commented that bc I was not going to be doing anything longer than 40K, there were some differences in the position. My head is pretty buried in my shoulders which are relatively wide, as are my hips. I did not test pad width as an old shoulder injury dictates a lot for me there but given my conformation, I would think that a wider position would shield my lower body and that might be why I got the nutty results on the BTA bottle. I suspect that somewhere in there is the reason that my helmet results seemed slightly out of sync with the others.

As to the Aeon, I ran it as my baseline bc I wanted to cover helmets for road/crit, as well as TT. My first several runs were position and BTA, all with the Aeon, which took me to .2449. The LG Rocket (also my helmet) tested at .2566. The Evade was .2648. The Wingspan .2403 and the P09 .2267. In my mind, that all makes sense, except the Aeon (which had far more runs than any other helmet so I am inclined to believe it's results). All the TT helmets tested faster than the aero road and they tested basically oldest=slowest to newest=fastest. IOW, technology works. Now that Aeon, just kind of blows my mind and I will certainly not be replacing it with any other aero road. It was after the fact that I looked it up on Giro's site and discovered that it was listed with the aero helmets as well as the road helmets.

If it matters, I tested with my team skinsuit (not very fast or tight), my P4 with standard brakes and a brezza bar w/s-bends (and stinky old bar tape- gasp!), training wheels. I was the only one testing on training wheels to get a final result of .2267 so it's not like ANY of those helmets actually sucked.

________________________________________________

Coach Brain: Accelerate 3 ; Incoherent Ramblings
Quote Reply
Re: Ask us anything about Aero Camp [ridenfish39] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ridenfish39 wrote:
Damn.....6'2'' and 140lb. I thought I was skinny at 6'2'' and 165lb. :D

It is tough to get aero AND MAKE POWER at our height. My output on the tt bike suffers as I get lower even with 5mm shorter cranks. I would love to work with an aero geek around here (Philly) to get me into a good position. I'm taking some advice from this thread and going longer to get my upper arms on more of an angle rather than perpendicular to the ground. Now if it would only get above 20 and stop snowing around here so I can get out and test the position :(

At our height, narrow is the best bet, and if you can manage, stretch yourself forward. I've never had troubles with the aero position, but I did ride quite conservative until 4 months ago. Went from 175mm to 170mm (not a big change), went another 5mm forwards (saddle-nose now ~2cm ahead of the BB, I guess I'm riding effective 89-90deg) and dropped around 4cm. Found it more comfortable with the weight now more firmly on my arms, which made the bike more stable. My FTP in aero is within error of what I measured on the bullhorns.

ZONE3 - We Last Longer
Quote Reply
Re: Ask us anything about Aero Camp [tessartype] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
tessartype wrote:
ridenfish39 wrote:
Damn.....6'2'' and 140lb. I thought I was skinny at 6'2'' and 165lb. :D

It is tough to get aero AND MAKE POWER at our height. My output on the tt bike suffers as I get lower even with 5mm shorter cranks. I would love to work with an aero geek around here (Philly) to get me into a good position. I'm taking some advice from this thread and going longer to get my upper arms on more of an angle rather than perpendicular to the ground. Now if it would only get above 20 and stop snowing around here so I can get out and test the position :(


At our height, narrow is the best bet, and if you can manage, stretch yourself forward. I've never had troubles with the aero position, but I did ride quite conservative until 4 months ago. Went from 175mm to 170mm (not a big change), went another 5mm forwards (saddle-nose now ~2cm ahead of the BB, I guess I'm riding effective 89-90deg) and dropped around 4cm. Found it more comfortable with the weight now more firmly on my arms, which made the bike more stable. My FTP in aero is within error of what I measured on the bullhorns.

Thanks for the advice, I'll definitely experiment with going as long as I can til my power suffers.

I'm not a tri guy, just a time trial racer these days. If I could make my ftp in a stretched out low position I'd be dangerous :D
Quote Reply
Re: Ask us anything about Aero Camp [Epic-o] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
We wanted to measure dynamic pressure to calculate cda more accurately. Now we are not using a prandtl probe anymore and assume ground speed as air speed and calculate dynamic pressure from ground speed and air density
Quote Reply
Re: Ask us anything about Aero Camp [JTolandTRI] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
JTolandTRI wrote:
Your numbers are almost identical to HIM bike I did in September. Had to go back and check to make sure they were not the same! Slightly lower time and slightly less elevation change, but overall very close. An additional 40 watts doesn't sound too crazy for a 6 minute improvement on a hilly course. Is he the same weight?

Your head/helmet position combo looks very close to Jon Moen, 3rd picture and labeled in the ST Aero Camp photo gallery. I believe there was nothing that really edged the Javelin. He may chime in here, but I believe he also posted some results further up the thread.

Nearly twice the elevation (1950m is approx. 6400ft), but on the other hand, you won ;) I paced myself carefully on the major climb and the headwind, which means lower 20min Max, IF and VI values (considering your IF and TSS, maybe it's time to update the threshold?). Recalculating it, the 40W difference does make sense. He weights slightly more but rides fancier equipment, so I'd estimate equal overall weight. He used 19% more power which, squared and multiplied by the 180min ride time, should theoretically result in ~6 minutes of time saved if my math is correct. Again, though, we were outliers, and he rides a size 51 P3 to my size 60 B2.

I bought the Javelin on a whim - it was the coolest-looking option at the expo that day and felt comfy. I learned to "wear it", so to speak, over the following season, shortening my neck and "turtleing" it. Only recent position changes allowed me to achieve a flush line over my back, at which point I think it'll be hard to improve upon.

ZONE3 - We Last Longer
Quote Reply
Re: Ask us anything about Aero Camp [brynjulf] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Hello brynjulf and All,

Thanks for the kind remarks.

...... And point well taken about the website ..... I agree that it could use more time and effort when available.

We have a couple of more patents and prototypes in the mill and when those are finished and tested (should be soon) we will transition to invest more time in the sales mode ..... or maybe just train more ..... :)

We are a very small shop and rely primarily on word of mouth sales at present ..... which are steady but in small volume .... and surprisingly we have orders coming from all over the world.

And since Kraig Willett has posted a bit here ......... I should mention that he ran our San Diego LSWT test you see in the photo.

Kraig is 'most excellent' at detailed aero test protocol procedures and can be reached at Bike Tech Review.

Cheers,

Neal

+1 mph Faster
Quote Reply
Re: Ask us anything about Aero Camp [JTolandTRI] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Interesting question and certainly one that is on my mind. I did run across the problem that my baseline from run 3 and run 8 were significantly different. This put some limitations on the data I have, but I can still compare 2-3 runs either side of both baselines, which covers pretty much everything.

Sorry to quote you from the middle of the thread, but this seems super important. If you only did two baseline runs and there was a significant difference, that does *not* mean that you can use one for the data points taken near it, and the other for the ones taken near it. The difference could be due to any number of random factors rather than drift. Two points doesn't tell you much of anything really. I'd want to see around 10.

I would argue that it may be smart for a triathlete with no experience on the track, etc. to do more than just a starting baseline, maybe baseline as frequently as every 2-3 runs if you are trying to isolate small changes like hydration.

Not only the baseline, but *every* data point needs to be repeated a few times... mixed up, random, and even blind if possible.

I suspect a lot of conclusions are drawn from insufficient data.



Quote Reply
Re: Ask us anything about Aero Camp [rruff] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Ron, that is a good point in an ideal world, but as we all know, tunnel/velo testing costs money and time is limited. I understand your perspective on this and excellent point for field testing. unfortunately that means an 8 hr tunnel or velo day might only check 4 item or position changes. Might be better to give better insight on how you would propose to minimize cost/time to test ratios.
Quote Reply
Re: Ask us anything about Aero Camp [AndyF] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
2-3% is a significant change, for sure. Your point is well taken -- it would be hard to find any subtle deltas in that kind of noise.

Just speculating, but I can change my position a pretty huge amount without changing anything on my bike. I probably have 10cm or more of vertical movement just by changing how I hold my shoulders, and that doesn't even consider how I hold my neck and head. Add in smaller differences for how the helmet is fit to the head, sitting position, back arching, arm position, hand position, etc. It can be a lot unless you are very focused on keeping a particular position... *and* in tune with your body so you notice when it changes.

Quote Reply
Re: Ask us anything about Aero Camp [jeffp] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Might be better to give better insight on how you would propose to minimize cost/time to test ratios.

Any way you do it, it's either lots of time or lots of money... or both. It isn't easy.

I hate to be a dissenting voice, but people seem to be giving too much weight to single runs when there is significant variation. If you are getting scatter of +- 2% and helmet A tests 1% lower than helmet B, you haven't really learned anything. If you switch back and forth and get 5 data points for each helmet, and A *averages* 1% lower than B, then at least you can say that A is *probably* better.

In field testing outdoors you have to deal with wind variability, so you already know you need multiple runs for 1 data point. IME 10+. That means comparing configuration A to B... if it is something that isn't that easy to switch, do 5 out-back runs with A, switch to B and do 5 outback runs, and repeat. It's a long day and I have a bunch of data to deal with, and I have to analyze it to see what the drift and scatter and differences are to see if I learned anything... and I've just looked at two configurations!

When you test in the velodrome or wind tunnel the wind is at least stable and that increases your precision *and* reduces the repeats necessary... but you still have other factors, with positional variations being the largest and hardest to control. You can definitely save time *and* get better data than you can outside... but not if you take just one measurement and call it good.

Quote Reply

Prev Next