For the "pedaling technique doesn't matter crowd"

[coapman]

They must not have such a vivid imagination as you Noel.

A vivid imagination is of no use if you cannot convert your ideas into reality.

 

[FrankDay]

I have modified this chart to reflect this pedaling patterned offset 25º from the earlier one. I think this is closer to reality.

 

[CoachFergie]

You think? Outstanding

 

[coapman]

I have modified this chart to reflect this pedaling patterned offset 25º from the earlier one. I think this is closer to reality.

The sinusoidal curved pattern results from the increase and decrease in the tangential effect of the force that is being applied together with the dead spot sectors in the pedaling strokes. The almost perfect technique can only be found by extending the peak torque area and this can only be done by learning how to apply a fully tangential maximal force for as long as possible even through the dead spot sectors. In that graph your torque at 1 o'c appears to exaggerated. Is what you are attempting to show here the pedaling pattern of a masher who is using the ideal unweighting technique.

 

[FrankDay]

The sinusoidal curved pattern results from the increase and decrease in the tangential effect of the force that is being applied together with the dead spot sectors in the pedaling strokes. The almost perfect technique can only be found by extending the peak torque area and this can only be done by learning how to apply a fully tangential maximal force for as long as possible even through the dead spot sectors. In that graph your torque at 1 o'c appears to exaggerated. Is what you are attempting to show here the pedaling pattern of a masher who is using the ideal unweighting technique.

Phooey. The reason there is a sinusoidal pattern has nothing to do with muscles and how we apply force. This pattern is explained by one thing and one thing only. GRAVITY!!! It is gravity (and the fact that our legs are quite massive) that accounts for this general pattern. If we were to do these measurements on the spacestation they would look quite differently (if we could keep the rider on the seat). Mashing, circles, whatever you call what you think you do, they all have this same basic pattern with the only difference being small differences in how much they unweight (mashers unweight less) and how much they do at the "dead spots" (mashers do less). You can "extend the peak torque area" all you want and all you are going to do is make the sinusoidal pattern look a little flatter.

And, a "perfect" sinsusoidal pattern looks the same regardless of how hard the rider pushes. The same % of their power output (less than half) will come from between 45º and 135º). It looks exaggerated because of the scaling of the graph. Make the graph wider and it will look less severe. It is the same thing as those little "course profiles" you see for a bike race, a 3% climb looks like the side of a cliff because 100 miles gets compressed into 3 inches.

 

[JayKosta]

I think the updated graph is a near approximation of what a 'high efficiency' pedal stroke would look like.

But, I'm not going to get hung-up on a good pedal stroke being a "perfect" sinsusoidal pattern.
My guess is that our leg muscles do not have the physiology to work in that "perfect" sinsusoidal pattern.
Our legs work very well for walking and running (strong down and backward force); the muscles for the remainder of the motion have developed mainly just to move the foot into position for the next down & back effort.

Jay Kosta
Endwell NY USA

 

[FrankDay]

I think the updated graph is a near approximation of what a 'high efficiency' pedal stroke would look like.

But, I'm not going to get hung-up on a good pedal stroke being a "perfect" sinsusoidal pattern.
My guess is that our leg muscles do not have the physiology to work in that "perfect" sinsusoidal pattern.

Jay Kosta
Endwell NY USA

I disagree that our leg muscles do not have the physiology to work in the "perfect" sinusoidal pattern. A clock pendulum works in a perfect sinusoidal pattern, which closely resembles what the legs do when walking. A perfect sinusoidal pattern simply comes from repetitive timing of impulses in a gravitational field. Now, it is not possible for a human to do anything perfectly. But, it is also not possible for a human to instantaneously apply muscle force or remove that force so force application patterns have to occur "gradually" whatever pattern is applied. When we add in the affects of gravity it just seems to me that this is probably the pattern that people should aspire to. And, getting close may be possible. This pattern, if viewed on a spinscan and combining the two legs together would result in a spinscan number of 100. Now, 100 on the spinscan does not mean one is riding using this pattern but it could. When I ride on the computrainer I am frequently seeing spinscan numbers around 95. I look forward, when I get a pair of these cranks, to see if it is because I am close to a "perfect" sinusoidal pattern.

Our legs work very well for walking and running (strong down and backward force); the muscles for the remainder of the motion have developed mainly just to move the foot into position for the next down & back effort.

Yes, but "moving the foot into position for the next down and back effort involves lifting the foot. And, the best runners lift the foot higher than lesser runners. It is not like asking the cyclist to lift the foot is asking them to do something alien. One difference between cycling and running/walking is the potential energy we put into the leg lifting the foot can be retrieved on the downward part of the stroke, which is reflected in an increased pedal force than what is seen from the muscles alone. That energy is lost when running/walking which is one reason cycling should be (and is) more energy efficient than running/walking.

 

[JeffreyPerry]

Wow

So, I occasionally pop in this thread to see whats new. I have to ask, why do you two dislike each other so bad? Are you brothers?

 

[coapman]

If we were to do these measurements on the spacestation they would look quite differently (if we could keep the rider on the seat).

Give me an example of how they would look.

 

[FrankDay]

Give me an example of how they would look.

It will look pretty much the same except the pushing peak will be a lot lower and the pulling trough will be much higher. It might even come close to resembling a straight line at the average torque level.

 

[coapman]

Phooey. The reason there is a sinusoidal pattern has nothing to do with muscles and how we apply force. This pattern is explained by one thing and one thing only. GRAVITY!!! It is gravity (and the fact that our legs are quite massive) that accounts for this general pattern. If we were to do these measurements on the spacestation they would look quite differently (if we could keep the rider on the seat). Mashing, circles, whatever you call what you think you do, they all have this same basic pattern with the only difference being small differences in how much they unweight (mashers unweight less) and how much they do at the "dead spots" (mashers do less). You can "extend the peak torque area" all you want and all you are going to do is make the sinusoidal pattern look a little flatter.

The weight of the leg does not change between 1-5 o'c, so how do you explain the difference in torque readings at 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 o'c. My semi circular technique graph should appear as a sharp rise in torque from minimal or nil at 11 o'c to max torque at 12 o'c and a straight line of continuous max torque from 12 to after 3 o'c, That's far removed from a sinusoidal graph.

 

[FrankDay]

The weight of the leg does not change between 1-5 o'c, so how do you explain the difference in torque readings at 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 o'c. My semi circular technique graph should appear as a sharp rise in torque from minimal or nil at 11 o'c to max torque at 12 o'c and a straight line of continuous max torque from 12 to after 3 o'c, That's far removed from a sinusoidal graph.

Huh? Do you understand anything about torque and forces? Torque is a vector calculated from two other vectors. The direction of gravity is always down. The direction of the crank is always changing. When the crank is at 12 oclock the gravity component to the torque will be zero. At 3 (and 9) oclock it is maximum because it is the force X distance X sin of the angle that determines the torque from this component.

Anyhow, I look forward to seeing your force vectors once you have accumulated them to see if they are what you think they are. I think you will be surprised at how little they vary from what I describe and from this sinusoidal pattern. I hope they are really different as this should make for an interesting discussion. We will see.

 

[coapman]

Huh? Do you understand anything about torque and forces? Torque is a vector calculated from two other vectors. The direction of gravity is always down. The direction of the crank is always changing. When the crank is at 12 oclock the gravity component to the torque will be zero. At 3 (and 9) oclock it is maximum because it is the force X distance X sin of the angle that determines the torque from this component.

Anyhow, I look forward to seeing your force vectors once you have accumulated them to see if they are what you think they are. I think you will be surprised at how little they vary from what I describe and from this sinusoidal pattern. I hope they are really different as this should make for an interesting discussion. We will see.

So your bike is powered solely by the weight of your leg while mine is powered by the effective force I apply to the crank. That explains your 40% power increase by pulling up.

 

[FrankDay]

I want everyone to know that I am developing a new way to describe "optimum" pedaling technique that doesn't involve the term "pedaling in circles". This new way of thinking has come about as I have analyzed what little data I do have in trying to write an article on how to use these new right/left independent power meter systems that will soon be upon us. I will soon have pre-production power measuring crank arms again along with the software that will allow me to gather the data I need to better illustrate my thoughts. Once I have these cranks again it shouldn't take me long. Stand by, this thread still has legs.

 

[CoachFergie]

By developing do you mean creating a testable hypothesis rather than your usual trick of making a wild arsed claim?

Measuring power, L/R and force vectors has been well tested in the lab. Most of this testing has provided ample evidence of the wild aresedness of all your claims.

 

[FrankDay]

By developing do you mean creating a testable hypothesis rather than your usual trick of making a wild arsed claim?

Measuring power, L/R and force vectors has been well tested in the lab. Most of this testing has provided ample evidence of the wild aresedness of all your claims.

Fergie, do you understand the meaning of the word discussion? Anyhow, I believe I have come up with a different and better way of thinking about this stuff, especially in view of the fact that the ability to measure these forces will soon be available to anyone who wants it. Just how are people supposed to use this information that has never been available to them before? I believe my way of thinking about this will be more useful than what has been done before but I need to gather some additional data that will help me to present my ideas cogently, to facilitate informed discussion.

Now, hopefully, when I do so, you will join this discussion in good faith but my guess is most who are still following this thread are not holding their breath hoping that might happen.

 

[coapman]

I want everyone to know that I am developing a new way to describe "optimum" pedaling technique that doesn't involve the term "pedaling in circles".

You have first got to explain what your idea of the "optimum" technique is,(ie), it it is ideal technique to be used in what situation. If you rule out pedaling in circles ( having to concentrate on the crank throughout its 360 degree revolution) where does that leave your POWERCRANKS.

 

[CoachFergie]

Wouldn't even bother with a new description when the research on pedalling has answered most of the pertinent questions.

Just another sad attempt to re-frame the debate to perpetuate his wild arsed claims.

 

[coapman]

Wouldn't even bother with a new description when the research on pedalling has answered most of the pertinent questions.

Such as ??

 

[FrankDay]

Wouldn't even bother with a new description when the research on pedalling has answered most of the pertinent questions.

Just another sad attempt to re-frame the debate to perpetuate his wild arsed claims.

LOL. My 40% claim looks like chump change to what my analysis is saying is possible. I now understand where the 40% is coming from and, I understand what is really possible to those who want to work for it. Anyhow, I need a little more data to make my case clear and convincing, as if anything presented on the internet could ever be clear and convincing.

I look forward to hearing your (Fergie) thoughts in view of what you have already said. Let me predict. I can't prove anything so you will just close your eyes and ears until I (or someone) can. That about summarizes your position on about everything I guess.

 

[CoachFergie]

A 40% improvement in performance is only coming out your mouth as none of the very suitable studies on the subject has seen any improvement.

All talk no show!

 

[coapman]

I now understand where the 40% is coming from and, I understand what is really possible to those who want to work for it.

Where is it coming from, it can't be from across the top, bottom or from pulling up and there is only so much one can apply in their downstroke, so please explain, your customers and those who did your powercrank studies are entitled to know where they went astray.

 

[FrankDay]

Where is it coming from, it can't be from across the top, bottom or from pulling up and there is only so much one can apply in their downstroke, so please explain, your customers and those who did your powercrank studies are entitled to know where they went astray.

You know, you really ought to wait until you see what I have to say. I really think you will like my analysis, as I think it supports a lot of what you have been saying.

 

[coapman]

You know, you really ought to wait until you see what I have to say. I really think you will like my analysis, as I think it supports a lot of what you have been saying.

You keep forgetting, it's direct muscle action not analysis that powers the cranks. What muscles will be used and where for this extra 40%, have you already used these muscles for testing purposes.

 

[rickshaw]

hmmmmmmmmm

What about pedaling on Mars, you know, with the gravity being so much less? Not to mention the lack of O2. That could change things too. If they build a station on mars these issues muct be addressed.