FrankDay wrote:Ah yes. That was exactly the point of Len Brownlie when we were discussing this issue at the wind-tunnel in explaining our findings at the time. This is what led me to ask the 'Q' question because, if one looks at those studies then one would naturally come to the conclusion that at some point, the cylinders would stop affecting each other and the drag would have to drop.
You need to re-read those studies (assuming, of course, that you ever read them at all). The flow around paired cylinders is quite complex, depending upon their orientation with respect to each other, such that you can't automatically assume that increasing the distance between them will reduce drag. Moreover, since the bicycle is located between the legs, the *possibility* exists for interactions with it as well (although as the data I posted demonstrate, this does not seem to occur).
(Hmmm...I just remembered that Cervelo has also assessed the effects of reduced
pedal stance width on aerodynamic drag, and commissioned Jim Martin to determine the effect on power. While I have not seen the data, clearly they were expecting/pursuing a reduction
in drag, not an increase as you have hypothesized.)
FrankDay wrote:Which is why you shouldn't be participating in these threads devoted to some of these anecdotes. Further, if your understanding of the science can't explain all of the observations being made then you shouldn't be here pretending that your understanding is complete and coming here criticizing those of us trying to discuss some of these more "off the wall" things.
Au contraire. If people like me didn't participate in threads you start, the world would be left completely misinformed.
(BTW, you'll note that I never claimed to be able to predict the aerodynamic behavior of a complex object such as a cyclist on a bicycle...only reported what others have repeatedly observed.)