Motor doping thread

Page 174 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
We all know that Sky is up to no good. Look at all the evidence against them on Wiggins. All the fair minded people that is, with a good dose of common sense as well. I don't feel the need to produce or explain any proof. Sky's budget is huge and can easily pay an expert engineer to invent the latest form of technological doping that beats a very basic waste of time UCI form of testing. And that's if the UCI hasn't been in on it.

Just as Sam is sure they're not doing it, myself and plenty of others are sure they are or in the least have done it in the past and no one is being persuaded into changing their thoughts on it are they.

May the debating continue.
 
Re: Re:

ScienceIsCool said:
samhocking said:
The claim is the wheel hits the ground with enough force that a non-motorized rim would not still be spinnning. By setting up a bike the same as Ryders, we couldn't get the wheel to stop spinning with 50kg strapped to the frame. The points of levers, 140mm -17 stem, a ton of saddle drop, Garmin Vectors and Mavic QR prevents it. The wheel/bike just bounces and wheel carries on spinning.
If you couldn't get the wheel to touch the ground, how did you get the bike to spin? And with 50 extra kilos, are you saying the bike did spin eventually and it looked like Ryder's incident? Or Rasmussen's? Or something altogether different?

John Swanson
As I explained, when the weight is removed or you unclip the balance of the bike on the slop with the bike at the angle Ryders was at, the wheel then makes contact as it acts like a pivot/seesaw in balance

Read the following article. If an electrical engineer from Ball Aerospace has doubts a rim motor is even possible beyond theory, I'll go with that as it seems to back up my thoughts on the little Varjas showed as work in progress perhaps? I'll wait for the 10 to 50w motor the total volume of a sugar cube weighing 800g in a Mavic or Shimano rear hub lol!

https://cyclingtips.com/2016/02/electromagnetic-wheel-motors-possible-in-theory-but-unlikely-in-practice/

Thinsg that make sense to my basic understanding of a switched reluctance motor or whatever you want to call it is:

the frequency of the applied current would have to be unfailingly precise, so as not to turn the desired speed-boosting motor into a resistance-adding generator.
In an electric motor, the direction of the electric current is at right angles to the direction of motion. If your current is going in the same direction as you supposedly want to travel, you’re going to struggle, to say the least.
In order to keep the weight low and have it work reasonably well, you’d need thin strips of magnetics around the rim
As an engineer, you’d then want a tight clearance between the seatstays/chainstays and the rim for maximum efficiency.
The real question is how much are the magnetics and induction motor elements going to weigh? I bet it’s all possible to keep the total system weight under 2kg (4.4 lbs), but at what cost? To keep the weight down, you’d need some very hard-to-manufacture magnetics. They’d need to be small, thin, and lightweight, yet generate strong magnetic fields. You’d then have to get them in the wheels. Basically I’d say yes, it’s theoretically possible, but I’ll put this in the ‘I’ll believe it when I see it’ category.”
 
Jul 5, 2009
2,440
3
0
I agree. It is far more likely that Ryder was using a hub motor. If you look at the Mavic Cosmic freehub circa 2014, there's a lot of over-engineering and you could easily replace the axle and freehub to fit in a motor. http://www.slowtwitch.com/Tech/Mavic_hub_How-To_4006.html

First, you'd replace the axle, and if you're crafty you'd go with tungsten to get the desired stiffness at a much smaller diameter. Costly though. Get rid of the big nylon bushing, reduce the size of the pawls (and go from two pawls to four or more), push the outboard bearing further outwards, change the cap and locknut a bit. Voila! You've got a substantial space to put your 40 Watt stepper motor.

Electronics and battery go inside the frame. Connections are done at the non-driveside dropout (custom dropouts with ring or pin contacts and an integrated axle/locknut contacts). The four wires run along the axle and to the windings.

There's your basic design. Nothing exotic and you can even use a standard Mavic wheel from just about anything in their series because they standardized the design.. Just replace the axle and freehub. A mechanic could do that in only a few minutes, even after the iPad and x-ray. As someone said, you could even leverage the Di2 system and remove the battery!

PS - anybody who wants to finance this, I'd be happy to build them one.

John Swanson
 
Re: Re:

samhocking said:
ScienceIsCool said:
samhocking said:
The claim is the wheel hits the ground with enough force that a non-motorized rim would not still be spinnning. By setting up a bike the same as Ryders, we couldn't get the wheel to stop spinning with 50kg strapped to the frame. The points of levers, 140mm -17 stem, a ton of saddle drop, Garmin Vectors and Mavic QR prevents it. The wheel/bike just bounces and wheel carries on spinning.
If you couldn't get the wheel to touch the ground, how did you get the bike to spin? And with 50 extra kilos, are you saying the bike did spin eventually and it looked like Ryder's incident? Or Rasmussen's? Or something altogether different?

John Swanson
As I explained, when the weight is removed or you unclip the balance of the bike on the slop with the bike at the angle Ryders was at, the wheel then makes contact as it acts like a pivot/seesaw in balance

Read the following article. If an electrical engineer from Ball Aerospace has doubts a rim motor is even possible beyond theory, I'll go with that as it seems to back up my thoughts on the little Varjas showed as work in progress perhaps? I'll wait for the 10 to 50w motor the total volume of a sugar cube weighing 800g in a Mavic or Shimano rear hub lol!

https://cyclingtips.com/2016/02/electromagnetic-wheel-motors-possible-in-theory-but-unlikely-in-practice/

Thinsg that make sense to my basic understanding of a switched reluctance motor or whatever you want to call it is:

the frequency of the applied current would have to be unfailingly precise, so as not to turn the desired speed-boosting motor into a resistance-adding generator.
In an electric motor, the direction of the electric current is at right angles to the direction of motion. If your current is going in the same direction as you supposedly want to travel, you’re going to struggle, to say the least.
In order to keep the weight low and have it work reasonably well, you’d need thin strips of magnetics around the rim
As an engineer, you’d then want a tight clearance between the seatstays/chainstays and the rim for maximum efficiency.
The real question is how much are the magnetics and induction motor elements going to weigh? I bet it’s all possible to keep the total system weight under 2kg (4.4 lbs), but at what cost? To keep the weight down, you’d need some very hard-to-manufacture magnetics. They’d need to be small, thin, and lightweight, yet generate strong magnetic fields. You’d then have to get them in the wheels. Basically I’d say yes, it’s theoretically possible, but I’ll put this in the ‘I’ll believe it when I see it’ category.”
Wait! Hasn't somebody just posted upthread an example from a bike show of a working rim motor? While I appreciate the practical problems of hiding one, isn't the technical question of feasibility now answered?
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Magnetic wheels or not, just have a look at the Copenhagen wheel to get a basic, rudimentary sense of what is possible inside a discwheel. Thats consumer level. Go figure what's possible with a Sky budget.

This is an interesting vid, too.
https://youtu.be/IymLqEPUkvw
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
In relation to magnetic wheels see this post:
viewtopic.php?p=1861332#p1861332

Varjas of course also claims they exist and has shown us a wheel he claims was designed to fit magnets in the rim.
Looked real enough to me and I have no idea why or how Varjas would be making all that stuff up or why he would go to such length as to fake that wheel.

That said, I was told that magnetic wheels, while certainly possible, would not be the most ideal form of motor doping a road bike. There are much more efficient options.

On the other hand, if serious bike testing really happens under lappartient note that plastic magnets might be a way to circumvent scanners.
All fwiw.
 
Re:

sniper said:
In relation to magnetic wheels see this post:
viewtopic.php?p=1861332#p1861332

Varjas of course also claims they exist and has shown us a wheel he claims was designed to fit magnets in the rim.
Looked real enough to me and I have no idea why or how Varjas would be making all that stuff up or why he would go to such length as to fake that wheel.

That said, I was told that magnetic wheels, while certainly possible, would not be the most ideal form of motor doping a road bike. There are much more efficient options.

On the other hand, if serious bike testing really happens under lappartient note that plastic magnets might be a way to circumvent scanners.
All fwiw.
If he really knew what he was talking about, and could make it, he would be making million$ selling it instead of making local access TV videos talking about it.
 
Re: Re:

MarkvW said:
samhocking said:
ScienceIsCool said:
samhocking said:
The claim is the wheel hits the ground with enough force that a non-motorized rim would not still be spinnning. By setting up a bike the same as Ryders, we couldn't get the wheel to stop spinning with 50kg strapped to the frame. The points of levers, 140mm -17 stem, a ton of saddle drop, Garmin Vectors and Mavic QR prevents it. The wheel/bike just bounces and wheel carries on spinning.
If you couldn't get the wheel to touch the ground, how did you get the bike to spin? And with 50 extra kilos, are you saying the bike did spin eventually and it looked like Ryder's incident? Or Rasmussen's? Or something altogether different?

John Swanson
As I explained, when the weight is removed or you unclip the balance of the bike on the slop with the bike at the angle Ryders was at, the wheel then makes contact as it acts like a pivot/seesaw in balance

Read the following article. If an electrical engineer from Ball Aerospace has doubts a rim motor is even possible beyond theory, I'll go with that as it seems to back up my thoughts on the little Varjas showed as work in progress perhaps? I'll wait for the 10 to 50w motor the total volume of a sugar cube weighing 800g in a Mavic or Shimano rear hub lol!

https://cyclingtips.com/2016/02/electromagnetic-wheel-motors-possible-in-theory-but-unlikely-in-practice/

Thinsg that make sense to my basic understanding of a switched reluctance motor or whatever you want to call it is:

the frequency of the applied current would have to be unfailingly precise, so as not to turn the desired speed-boosting motor into a resistance-adding generator.
In an electric motor, the direction of the electric current is at right angles to the direction of motion. If your current is going in the same direction as you supposedly want to travel, you’re going to struggle, to say the least.
In order to keep the weight low and have it work reasonably well, you’d need thin strips of magnetics around the rim
As an engineer, you’d then want a tight clearance between the seatstays/chainstays and the rim for maximum efficiency.
The real question is how much are the magnetics and induction motor elements going to weigh? I bet it’s all possible to keep the total system weight under 2kg (4.4 lbs), but at what cost? To keep the weight down, you’d need some very hard-to-manufacture magnetics. They’d need to be small, thin, and lightweight, yet generate strong magnetic fields. You’d then have to get them in the wheels. Basically I’d say yes, it’s theoretically possible, but I’ll put this in the ‘I’ll believe it when I see it’ category.”
Wait! Hasn't somebody just posted upthread an example from a bike show of a working rim motor? While I appreciate the practical problems of hiding one, isn't the technical question of feasibility now answered?
Not really no. If you look at the example upthread you'll see that, to get it to work, you have to enclose the rim for a significant portion of its circumference for it to work, with extremely tight clearances between the coil and the magnets. The feasibility of making a rim motor of some sort has never really been a question, the question is how do you make a rim motor that works within a current road bike frame where there is no where near as much rim coverage and much bigger clearances. Even triathlon bikes like the Andean and P5x don't cover the wheel like that (I think they're not allowed to). That's before you get to the weight issue.
 
Re: Re:

King Boonen said:
MarkvW said:
samhocking said:
ScienceIsCool said:
samhocking said:
The claim is the wheel hits the ground with enough force that a non-motorized rim would not still be spinnning. By setting up a bike the same as Ryders, we couldn't get the wheel to stop spinning with 50kg strapped to the frame. The points of levers, 140mm -17 stem, a ton of saddle drop, Garmin Vectors and Mavic QR prevents it. The wheel/bike just bounces and wheel carries on spinning.
If you couldn't get the wheel to touch the ground, how did you get the bike to spin? And with 50 extra kilos, are you saying the bike did spin eventually and it looked like Ryder's incident? Or Rasmussen's? Or something altogether different?

John Swanson
As I explained, when the weight is removed or you unclip the balance of the bike on the slop with the bike at the angle Ryders was at, the wheel then makes contact as it acts like a pivot/seesaw in balance

Read the following article. If an electrical engineer from Ball Aerospace has doubts a rim motor is even possible beyond theory, I'll go with that as it seems to back up my thoughts on the little Varjas showed as work in progress perhaps? I'll wait for the 10 to 50w motor the total volume of a sugar cube weighing 800g in a Mavic or Shimano rear hub lol!

https://cyclingtips.com/2016/02/electromagnetic-wheel-motors-possible-in-theory-but-unlikely-in-practice/

Thinsg that make sense to my basic understanding of a switched reluctance motor or whatever you want to call it is:

the frequency of the applied current would have to be unfailingly precise, so as not to turn the desired speed-boosting motor into a resistance-adding generator.
In an electric motor, the direction of the electric current is at right angles to the direction of motion. If your current is going in the same direction as you supposedly want to travel, you’re going to struggle, to say the least.
In order to keep the weight low and have it work reasonably well, you’d need thin strips of magnetics around the rim
As an engineer, you’d then want a tight clearance between the seatstays/chainstays and the rim for maximum efficiency.
The real question is how much are the magnetics and induction motor elements going to weigh? I bet it’s all possible to keep the total system weight under 2kg (4.4 lbs), but at what cost? To keep the weight down, you’d need some very hard-to-manufacture magnetics. They’d need to be small, thin, and lightweight, yet generate strong magnetic fields. You’d then have to get them in the wheels. Basically I’d say yes, it’s theoretically possible, but I’ll put this in the ‘I’ll believe it when I see it’ category.”
Wait! Hasn't somebody just posted upthread an example from a bike show of a working rim motor? While I appreciate the practical problems of hiding one, isn't the technical question of feasibility now answered?
Not really no. If you look at the example upthread you'll see that, to get it to work, you have to enclose the rim for a significant portion of its circumference for it to work, with extremely tight clearances between the coil and the magnets. The feasibility of making a rim motor of some sort has never really been a question, the question is how do you make a rim motor that works within a current road bike frame where there is no where near as much rim coverage and much bigger clearances. Even triathlon bikes like the Andean and P5x don't cover the wheel like that (I think they're not allowed to). That's before you get to the weight issue.
Thanks. That makes sense. That Varjas character appears very sketchy.
 
Re: Re:

sniper said:
Getting back to this:


Somebody on youtube made a compilation:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m1HPOiYY-yo

Not sure if it contains all the examples listed above, but it's rather compelling all the same.

What is more, in the movie The Program there is a scene on the Sestriere in 1999 where the mechanic leans out of the car and appears to click/trigger something under Lance's saddle (and then sets the rear derailleur). After that the camera zooms in on Lance's face and you see him smile rather theatrically. It just looks there like Frears is hinting at something. It's a very odd detail to add to the movie. The scene doesn't seem to have any other cinematographic/story-telling value.
There is another exemple here, at 15:35
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRYEz8KqYZE
Except the TT is over when it happens and he clearly doesn't even touch his saddle this time.
Maybe he is faking having an habit so nobody notice. One time he activates a secret hidden motor and one other time he just scratches his @ss. It would be absolute genuis.

More seriously, now that we saw this hand thing I will try to pay attention and report when I see one.
 
Re: Re:

absolutely_not said:
sniper said:
Getting back to this:


Somebody on youtube made a compilation:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m1HPOiYY-yo

Not sure if it contains all the examples listed above, but it's rather compelling all the same.

What is more, in the movie The Program there is a scene on the Sestriere in 1999 where the mechanic leans out of the car and appears to click/trigger something under Lance's saddle (and then sets the rear derailleur). After that the camera zooms in on Lance's face and you see him smile rather theatrically. It just looks there like Frears is hinting at something. It's a very odd detail to add to the movie. The scene doesn't seem to have any other cinematographic/story-telling value.
There is another exemple here, at 15:35
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRYEz8KqYZE
Except the TT is over when it happens and he clearly doesn't even touch his saddle this time.
Maybe he is faking having an habit so nobody notice. One time he activates a secret hidden motor and one other time he just scratches his ***. It would be absolute genuis.

More seriously, now that we saw this hand thing I will try to pay attention and report when I see one.
Why would they put the control there? Makes no sense to me. All that's happened with Lance and this never came out? I haven't seen a shred of even remotely suspicious evidence for motor doping in this era.
 
Of course, I was kiding Red_Flanders.
A few pages back in this topic,(and also on twitter) a compilation of Armstrong reaching to his @ss or saddle was brought as an "evidence" that he was maybe activating a motors there. There was discussions about the validity of this video since 1/ it is weird but 2/ it doesn't really show anything and in one of the 4 occurrence we can see he is never touching his saddle.
This video of him doing the same thing after the race and from an angle where we can see he only grab his short shows IMO that this gesture is probably just a twitch

I also agree on the absence of evidence from that era. Only Varjas supports that. And, as it was said many times before, he is a very odd character that a lot of people (I include journalists) don't trust
Some people trust him to be fair, but no one was abble to confirm what he says. Even Varjas can't proove most of what he says
 
Re:

absolutely_not said:
Of course, I was kiding Red_Flanders.
A few pages back in this topic,(and also on twitter) a compilation of Armstrong reaching to his *** or saddle was brought as an "evidence" that he was maybe activating a motors there. There was discussions about the validity of this video since 1/ it is weird but 2/ it doesn't really show anything and in one of the 4 occurrence we can see he is never touching his saddle.
This video of him doing the same thing after the race and from an angle where we can see he only grab his short shows IMO that this gesture is probably just a twitch

I also agree on the absence of evidence from that era. Only Varjas supports that. And, as it was said many times before, he is a very odd character that a lot of people (I include journalists) don't trust
Some people trust him to be fair, but no one was abble to confirm what he says. Even Varjas can't proove most of what he says
What does Varjas say to support it? I've only ever seen where he put a current motor in an old bike, which is evidence of exactly nothing. I may have missed it to be sure.

Sorry, didn't get that you were kidding but more aimed at the preceding commentary anyway. Thx for clarifying!
 
Phil Gaimon on Motor Doping:
"When you watch the footage, his accelerations don't look natural at all, like he's having trouble staying on the top of the pedals. That *** probably did have a motor," Gaimon wrote in the book.
"I do think it happened that year a couple times, but as soon as somebody noticed and it became a story nobody did it again. I think it's an absolute clickbait, red herring - even up to the new UCI president [David Lappartient] who is acting like it's a big issue that he is going to get to the bottom of. Anyone on the inside knows it's a joke."
"I wish they had found a more interesting angle, but the reality is it's clickbait. I do think motor doping happened for a minute with one guy, and everyone else keeps bringing it up."
 
Jul 5, 2009
2,440
3
0
Since I'm also a data scientist, I saw a semi-obvious solution to the obviousness of ,motor doping. You know, where the bike practically accelerates out from under the rider. You could set up a deep learning environment and keep feeding it power meter files from different riders and races. At the end you'd have a set of algorithms that would let the motor control itself. You wouldn't turn it on and off, you'd let the motor decide when to turn on and by how much based on a set of inputs. You'd get the maximum benefit, and it would look all natural.

John Swanson
 
Re:

silvergrenade said:
Phil Gaimon on Motor Doping:
"When you watch the footage, his accelerations don't look natural at all, like he's having trouble staying on the top of the pedals. That **** probably did have a motor," Gaimon wrote in the book.
"I do think it happened that year a couple times, but as soon as somebody noticed and it became a story nobody did it again. I think it's an absolute clickbait, red herring - even up to the new UCI president [David Lappartient] who is acting like it's a big issue that he is going to get to the bottom of. Anyone on the inside knows it's a joke."
"I wish they had found a more interesting angle, but the reality is it's clickbait. I do think motor doping happened for a minute with one guy, and everyone else keeps bringing it up."
And who the hell is Phil Gaimon?!!! Anyone on the inside knows that he's a joke, as a rider, and as a person!
 
Re: Re:

Blanco said:
silvergrenade said:
Phil Gaimon on Motor Doping:
"When you watch the footage, his accelerations don't look natural at all, like he's having trouble staying on the top of the pedals. That **** probably did have a motor," Gaimon wrote in the book.
"I do think it happened that year a couple times, but as soon as somebody noticed and it became a story nobody did it again. I think it's an absolute clickbait, red herring - even up to the new UCI president [David Lappartient] who is acting like it's a big issue that he is going to get to the bottom of. Anyone on the inside knows it's a joke."
"I wish they had found a more interesting angle, but the reality is it's clickbait. I do think motor doping happened for a minute with one guy, and everyone else keeps bringing it up."
And who the hell is Phil Gaimon?!!! Anyone on the inside knows that he's a joke, as a rider, and as a person!
That's a fairly serious accusation, I think you're going to have to back that up.
 
Jul 19, 2009
949
0
0
Re: Re:

Blanco said:
And who the hell is Phil Gaimon?!!! Anyone on the inside knows that he's a joke, as a rider, and as a person!
For sure he has a book to sell, if being a pro is a joke, what are we?
For the moment, Luigi is tranquilo... really?
 
Re: Re:

King Boonen said:
Blanco said:
silvergrenade said:
Phil Gaimon on Motor Doping:
"When you watch the footage, his accelerations don't look natural at all, like he's having trouble staying on the top of the pedals. That **** probably did have a motor," Gaimon wrote in the book.
"I do think it happened that year a couple times, but as soon as somebody noticed and it became a story nobody did it again. I think it's an absolute clickbait, red herring - even up to the new UCI president [David Lappartient] who is acting like it's a big issue that he is going to get to the bottom of. Anyone on the inside knows it's a joke."
"I wish they had found a more interesting angle, but the reality is it's clickbait. I do think motor doping happened for a minute with one guy, and everyone else keeps bringing it up."
And who the hell is Phil Gaimon?!!! Anyone on the inside knows that he's a joke, as a rider, and as a person!
That's a fairly serious accusation, I think you're going to have to back that up.
To back what up? That he's a joke of a person? Is this not clear enough after his numerous posts where he's accusing people left and right about doping and motor doping, while his best buddy is caught not once, but twice, at that same doping, but somehow that's different from this cases where the guilt wasn't even confirmed! Freaking clown!
 
Re: Re:

Blanco said:
King Boonen said:
Blanco said:
silvergrenade said:
Phil Gaimon on Motor Doping:
"When you watch the footage, his accelerations don't look natural at all, like he's having trouble staying on the top of the pedals. That **** probably did have a motor," Gaimon wrote in the book.
"I do think it happened that year a couple times, but as soon as somebody noticed and it became a story nobody did it again. I think it's an absolute clickbait, red herring - even up to the new UCI president [David Lappartient] who is acting like it's a big issue that he is going to get to the bottom of. Anyone on the inside knows it's a joke."
"I wish they had found a more interesting angle, but the reality is it's clickbait. I do think motor doping happened for a minute with one guy, and everyone else keeps bringing it up."
And who the hell is Phil Gaimon?!!! Anyone on the inside knows that he's a joke, as a rider, and as a person!
That's a fairly serious accusation, I think you're going to have to back that up.
To back what up? That he's a joke of a person? Is this not clear enough after his numerous posts where he's accusing people left and right about doping and motor doping, while his best buddy is caught not once, but twice, at that same doping, but somehow that's different from this cases where the guilt wasn't even confirmed! Freaking clown!
It’s highlighted in bold so I think it’s pretty obvious. Everyone else managed to do it.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS