Motor doping thread

Page 40 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re: Re:

sniper said:
The Carrot said:
http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest-news/this-electromagnetic-hidden-motor-bike-can-go-100kph-211660#disqus_thread

Here's an electromagnetic wheel system. The frame's been designed around it though.
hardly surprising, but nice to see that the Gazzetta article wasn't a hoax.
Hawkwood, Jyl, gbj123, opinions please. :cool:
Dude, what have you been smoking? This is a top line band who produce a bike that looks nothing like any bike currently in use in the peloton, it weighs 11 kilogram and makes jyl correct on just about anything he stated on possibilities and problems with this kind of motorization.

Did you miss this part of the article?

We asked Leschik what he thought of the previous electromagnetic wheel doping claims, to which he responded “I saw the piece in the news paper with the sketches of the wheels that were €200,000 claiming to give 50-60 watts. It suggested that you just replace the wheel with nothing needed on your existing bike. It’s not possible. It wouldn’t work.
He says it is NOT possible if you don't adjust the geometry of the frame, it is basically not possible in practice. I adore your tenacity but your point would be so much stringer if don't flog every dead horse in sight. :rolleyes:
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Re: Re:

GJB123 said:
...
This is a toppling band who produce a bike that looks nothing like any bike currently in use in the peloton
maybe that's because they haven't been asked to produce a bike that looks anything like any bike currently in use in the peloton.
jeez...
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Re: Re:

GJB123 said:
...
He says it is NOT possible if you don't adjust the geometry of the frame, it is basically not possible in practice. I adore your tenacity but your point would be so much stringer if don't flog every dead horse in sight. :rolleyes:
you haven't come close to grasping my point, even though it's quite an elementary point:

sniper's point: "various forms of motordoping exist and we, outsiders, are unlikely to know all of them"

in this thread with some basic googling with been able to come up with five, six systems that you, jyl and others didn't know existed.
imagine what a crew of top specialists with big budgets and shitloads of time could come up with.


hesjedal may not have motordoped, but the argument that he couldn't be motordoping because we are not familiar with the technique is bullocks.
 
Jul 5, 2009
2,440
3
0
<shrug> 50-60 Watts is an order of magnitude less than the 500 Watt system that Lightweight is toying with - and I doubt Lightweight are the go-to experts in motor design. So the 50 Watt system would need roughly an order of magnitude less surface area between stator and rotor. Possibly less if it uses a very high voltage driver. It's the difference between 100 cm^2 of overlap (wheels/frame) and 5 cm^2, or roughly 2 x 2 cm. Sounds doable to me, especially if you invest in a year or two of research by some motor designers to get things dialed in. From there it's ka-ching!! I think the Ferrari model was a couple hundred thousand per year plus a percentage of earnings. If I didn't have any morals, I'd be all over this and retire wealthy.

John Swanson
 
Jul 5, 2009
2,440
3
0
Re:

MarkvW said:
Are we arguing about the possibility of a wheel that goes around and around all by itself? A perpetual motion machine?
We're arguing about the application of electromotive force to wheel and bicycle design.

John Swanson
 
Re: Re:

sniper said:
GJB123 said:
...
This is a toppling band who produce a bike that looks nothing like any bike currently in use in the peloton
maybe that's because they haven't been asked to produce a bike that looks anything like any bike currently in use in the peloton.
jeez...
Have you even bothered to read what jyl tried to explain? The coils need to be really close to the rim in order to work. Is that the case in current bikes?

It is typical that for you to take away from the article the detail that is in principle possible to construct a working rim motor (something nobody denied) but not take away the overall conclusion that what Gazetta claimed is NOT possible and highly, highly unlikely. So far you haven't been able to link to any article where an expert stated it could be possible and very likely on a normal looking bike without too much issues. None!
 
Re:

ScienceIsCool said:
<shrug> 50-60 Watts is an order of magnitude less than the 500 Watt system that Lightweight is toying with - and I doubt Lightweight are the go-to experts in motor design. So the 50 Watt system would need roughly an order of magnitude less surface area between stator and rotor. Possibly less if it uses a very high voltage driver. It's the difference between 100 cm^2 of overlap (wheels/frame) and 5 cm^2, or roughly 2 x 2 cm. Sounds doable to me, especially if you invest in a year or two of research by some motor designers to get things dialed in. From there it's ka-ching!! I think the Ferrari model was a couple hundred thousand per year plus a percentage of earnings. If I didn't have any morals, I'd be all over this and retire wealthy.

John Swanson
Why would you doubt that? Do you have any realistic evidence that they didn't go to some real experts themselves. Besides you would still require the copies to really, really close to the rim, soothing that is not the case on any road going bike currently available or in use in the peloton. In other words it would stand out like a soar thumb.
 
Jul 5, 2009
2,440
3
0
Let me put it this way: I know first hand of one cycling specific and one green tech venture capitalist that together have an enormous amount of capital that they are willing to invest in cycling technology. In no way would these two ever do anything unethical. Let's be clear on that. I'm only using them as an example. There are literally tens to hundreds of millions of Euros/Dollars in capital available to those with interesting bicycle technology that might return a very good yield. Do you honestly think that this isn't being worked on? Are you *sure* that some clever, well-fundeed engineers couldn't come up with something? Are you *sure* that Lightweight has the most money to spend on this?

John Swanson
 

jyl

Jan 2, 2016
142
0
0
Sniper, an electromagnetic rim drive that looks just like a regular pro race bike would not produce an "order of magnitude" less power than the claimed 500 watts of this design. It would be a lot, lot less.

The e-bike you showed has about 90 degrees angular coverage of the rim by the electromagnets. A standard road bike's chainstay has maybe 5 degrees angular coverage of the rim. So that is a factor of 5/90 = 0.055 less power. This e-bike's electromagnets are placed about 3 mm from the rim (just eyeballing). A regular bike's chain stay is, at best, say 15 mm from the rim. 3^2 / 15^2 = a factor of 0.040 less power. 0.055 x 0.040 = 0.0022.

0.0022 x 500 watt = 1 watt.

Plus all those magnets in the rim will light up the UCI's magnetometer app. Heck, the mechanics would find their wrenches sticking to the rim.
 

jyl

Jan 2, 2016
142
0
0
Re:

ScienceIsCool said:
Let me put it this way: I know first hand of one cycling specific and one green tech venture capitalist that together have an enormous amount of capital that they are willing to invest in cycling technology. In no way would these two ever do anything unethical. Let's be clear on that. I'm only using them as an example. There are literally tens to hundreds of millions of Euros/Dollars in capital available to those with interesting bicycle technology that might return a very good yield. Do you honestly think that this isn't being worked on? Are you *sure* that some clever, well-fundeed engineers couldn't come up with something? Are you *sure* that Lightweight has the most money to spend on this?

John Swanson
How much profit has been made by Vivax, Typhoon, and all the makers of motor doping systems?. I'd be surprised if collectively they've made more than a million dollars profit in the entire history of the "industry". Where do you see the "very good yield" on investing "hundreds of millions"?

Heck, for $30MM/yr you can run Team Sky and win all the Tours you want. And you get to advertise your success openly.
 
Jul 5, 2009
2,440
3
0
Re: Re:

jyl said:
ScienceIsCool said:
Let me put it this way: I know first hand of one cycling specific and one green tech venture capitalist that together have an enormous amount of capital that they are willing to invest in cycling technology. In no way would these two ever do anything unethical. Let's be clear on that. I'm only using them as an example. There are literally tens to hundreds of millions of Euros/Dollars in capital available to those with interesting bicycle technology that might return a very good yield. Do you honestly think that this isn't being worked on? Are you *sure* that some clever, well-fundeed engineers couldn't come up with something? Are you *sure* that Lightweight has the most money to spend on this?

John Swanson
How much profit has been made by Vivax, Typhoon, and all the makers of motor doping systems?. I'd be surprised if collectively they've made more than a million dollars profit in the entire history of the "industry". Where do you see the "very good yield" on investing "hundreds of millions"?

Heck, for $30MM/yr you can run Team Sky and win all the Tours you want. And you get to advertise your success openly.
If you abandon ethics, consider the ferrari model. Up front cash plus a percentage of earnings every year. One big fish nets you 2+ million per year for exclusive rights to the best stuff and 2 dozen others get last year's tech for ~$250,000 per year. You're closing in on ten million per year. Plus, this has the benefit of "trickle-down" technology that could be watered down and put into consumer items for an extra million or so per year.

John Swanson
 
Jul 5, 2009
2,440
3
0
Re: Re:

jyl said:
ScienceIsCool said:
Let me put it this way: I know first hand of one cycling specific and one green tech venture capitalist that together have an enormous amount of capital that they are willing to invest in cycling technology. In no way would these two ever do anything unethical. Let's be clear on that. I'm only using them as an example. There are literally tens to hundreds of millions of Euros/Dollars in capital available to those with interesting bicycle technology that might return a very good yield. Do you honestly think that this isn't being worked on? Are you *sure* that some clever, well-fundeed engineers couldn't come up with something? Are you *sure* that Lightweight has the most money to spend on this?

John Swanson
How much profit has been made by Vivax, Typhoon, and all the makers of motor doping systems?. I'd be surprised if collectively they've made more than a million dollars profit in the entire history of the "industry". Where do you see the "very good yield" on investing "hundreds of millions"?

Heck, for $30MM/yr you can run Team Sky and win all the Tours you want. And you get to advertise your success openly.
BTW, this is a bit like saying nobody could/would capitalize EPO because Joe Papp only made a couple grand per year...
 
Re:

ScienceIsCool said:
Let me put it this way: I know first hand of one cycling specific and one green tech venture capitalist that together have an enormous amount of capital that they are willing to invest in cycling technology. In no way would these two ever do anything unethical. Let's be clear on that. I'm only using them as an example. There are literally tens to hundreds of millions of Euros/Dollars in capital available to those with interesting bicycle technology that might return a very good yield. Do you honestly think that this isn't being worked on? Are you *sure* that some clever, well-fundeed engineers couldn't come up with something? Are you *sure* that Lightweight has the most money to spend on this?

John Swanson
So the Gazzetta idea is an engineering problem, rather than a theoretical one?
 
Jul 5, 2009
2,440
3
0
Re: Re:

MarkvW said:
ScienceIsCool said:
Let me put it this way: I know first hand of one cycling specific and one green tech venture capitalist that together have an enormous amount of capital that they are willing to invest in cycling technology. In no way would these two ever do anything unethical. Let's be clear on that. I'm only using them as an example. There are literally tens to hundreds of millions of Euros/Dollars in capital available to those with interesting bicycle technology that might return a very good yield. Do you honestly think that this isn't being worked on? Are you *sure* that some clever, well-fundeed engineers couldn't come up with something? Are you *sure* that Lightweight has the most money to spend on this?

John Swanson
So the Gazzetta idea is an engineering problem, rather than a theoretical one?
I honestly don't know. I have my personal opinions though. I'm somewhere on the Dunning-Kruger curve and self-aware enough to admit that I can't make a conclusive statement. However, maybe I can give personal experience as a guide to how I feel. Years back I joined a team in my company to work on a "skunkworks" project. We wanted to make an inkjet printer that could achieve 600 dpi full colour but was a full web press (more than a meter across) printing at 10 m/s. That is, every nozzle putting out 500,000 drops per second, six hundred per inch, roughly fifty inches across. That's 45 billion picoliter drops per second precisely placed within microns.

Sounds insane, right? With a small team of less than a dozen and an even smaller budget we had proof of concept and successful demonstrations in a handful of years. Mostly due to the lead physicist who might be the smartest person I've ever met - and I've met Ted Maiman, the inventor of the laser (he showed off the world's first laser for us too. Had the ruby crystal in a shoe box!!).

Do not under-estimate a small, motivated team of smart people. A F*cking motor sounds dead simple to me. </Dunning-Kruger>

John Swanson
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
great coupla posts from JS.

As Einstein's gravitation waves go to show: great discoveries are typically preceded by great imagination.
 
Jul 19, 2009
949
0
0
Re:

jyl said:
Sniper, an electromagnetic rim drive that looks just like a regular pro race bike would not produce an "order of magnitude" less power than the claimed 500 watts of this design. It would be a lot, lot less.

The e-bike you showed has about 90 degrees angular coverage of the rim by the electromagnets. A standard road bike's chainstay has maybe 5 degrees angular coverage of the rim. So that is a factor of 5/90 = 0.055 less power. This e-bike's electromagnets are placed about 3 mm from the rim (just eyeballing). A regular bike's chain stay is, at best, say 15 mm from the rim. 3^2 / 15^2 = a factor of 0.040 less power. 0.055 x 0.040 = 0.0022.

0.0022 x 500 watt = 1 watt.

Plus all those magnets in the rim will light up the UCI's magnetometer app. Heck, the mechanics would find their wrenches sticking to the rim.
When there is no checking for electric bike, everything were possible, isn't it.

According the picture of the 500W e-bike, the stator electromagnet were on less than 90°, around 75°. On a race bike like the one of the precedent picture, electro-magnet can be installed in 2 parts, first of 7-10° + 5°
apparently.
So the corrected factor could reach 20% = 15/75 !

I have a problem with the formule applied to the gap. What kind of results we would get if the gap were 0 between stator and rotor?
 

jyl

Jan 2, 2016
142
0
0
Re: Re:

poupou said:
jyl said:
Sniper, an electromagnetic rim drive that looks just like a regular pro race bike would not produce an "order of magnitude" less power than the claimed 500 watts of this design. It would be a lot, lot less.

The e-bike you showed has about 90 degrees angular coverage of the rim by the electromagnets. A standard road bike's chainstay has maybe 5 degrees angular coverage of the rim. So that is a factor of 5/90 = 0.055 less power. This e-bike's electromagnets are placed about 3 mm from the rim (just eyeballing). A regular bike's chain stay is, at best, say 15 mm from the rim. 3^2 / 15^2 = a factor of 0.040 less power. 0.055 x 0.040 = 0.0022.

0.0022 x 500 watt = 1 watt.

Plus all those magnets in the rim will light up the UCI's magnetometer app. Heck, the mechanics would find their wrenches sticking to the rim.
When there is no checking for electric bike, everything were possible, isn't it.

According the picture of the 500W e-bike, the stator electromagnet were on less than 90°, around 75°. On a race bike like the one of the precedent picture, electro-magnet can be installed in 2 parts, first of 7-10° + 5°
apparently.
So the corrected factor could reach 20% = 15/75 !

I have a problem with the formule applied to the gap. What kind of results we would get if the gap were 0 between stator and rotor?
There is not enough volume in the seat stays of a typical race bike, that you see in today's peloton, to fit much of anything. You have to work with the chain stays, which are pretty big. But still doesn't get you enough angular coverage. If we start seeing pros ride on bikes with big fat seat stays, like 2" side and 1" thick, thenb we can start including the seat stay in the concept.

Magnetic attraction force is inverse to the square of the distance. In motors, that's called the air gap. So in the e-bike shown, the denominator is 3 mm ^ 2. If the chain stay is 15 mm from the rim in a real pro bike, the denominator is 15 mm ^ 2. Hence 9/225.

In the article, note the e-bike guy even mentions how critical air gap is. He says if he could run his coils 1 mm from the rim, he could double the power.

You asked if the air gap were zero? The motor wouldn't run, of course: too much friction. In practice, rotor-stator air gaps are very small, less than 1 mm for small electrical motors and even really big industrial motors for stationary equipment, developing hundreds of horsepower, have air gaps in the several mm range.
 

jyl

Jan 2, 2016
142
0
0
The argument that "no one is checking for motor doping, so the motors don't actually have to be undetectable" makes no sense.

If you actually think that are no bike checks (the tablets are dummies, xray machines not plugged in, everyone just pretends to remove bottom brackets, all the motor checks are just a big sham) then there is no reason to develop a rim drive or a hub drive.

Just use the existing crank drives with motor in the seat post, they are proven, inexpensive, and work well with plenty of power and no mythical skunk works with "hundreds of millions of dollars" of cutting edge R&D needed.
 

jyl

Jan 2, 2016
142
0
0
Re: Re:

ScienceIsCool said:
jyl said:
ScienceIsCool said:
Let me put it this way: I know first hand of one cycling specific and one green tech venture capitalist that together have an enormous amount of capital that they are willing to invest in cycling technology. In no way would these two ever do anything unethical. Let's be clear on that. I'm only using them as an example. There are literally tens to hundreds of millions of Euros/Dollars in capital available to those with interesting bicycle technology that might return a very good yield. Do you honestly think that this isn't being worked on? Are you *sure* that some clever, well-fundeed engineers couldn't come up with something? Are you *sure* that Lightweight has the most money to spend on this?

John Swanson
How much profit has been made by Vivax, Typhoon, and all the makers of motor doping systems?. I'd be surprised if collectively they've made more than a million dollars profit in the entire history of the "industry". Where do you see the "very good yield" on investing "hundreds of millions"?

Heck, for $30MM/yr you can run Team Sky and win all the Tours you want. And you get to advertise your success openly.
If you abandon ethics, consider the ferrari model. Up front cash plus a percentage of earnings every year. One big fish nets you 2+ million per year for exclusive rights to the best stuff and 2 dozen others get last year's tech for ~$250,000 per year. You're closing in on ten million per year. Plus, this has the benefit of "trickle-down" technology that could be watered down and put into consumer items for an extra million or so per year.

John Swanson
$11MM annual revenue, maybe $5MM annual operating profit (there is cost of goods and opex) and say $3MM after tax income. From a business that might exist only for a few years, until the sport learns of your product and figures out how to detect it, which can be done easily enough with a magnetometer and/or metal detector. For this you think a VC will invest "hundreds of millions"? That's like a 3% ROI (3/100) at best. They would be the dumbest VCs in the world.
 
Jan 30, 2016
1,048
0
4,480
Femke disappeared from Zolder after her race. The press was told that she left inmediately because she was disappointed. Saturday late afternoon the UCI anounced the incident. At this time Femke's FB page had been taken down allready.

I'm surprised to see that she has put it back online. It's a great source of info and would be surprised if she keeps the fotos on there for long.

She actually raced three races on a row on bike nr 3 this season, so it may have been motorized at some point.

The white bicycle is a special paint job with several UEC logos on it. She got this one from a sponsor after winning the european championship. She does not race it.

You can see her riding bike nr 1 in december 2014 so she has been getting away with it for a long time.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=753708958037903&set=t.100002095749193&type=3&theater


Non drive side comparisson of the frames:
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10202294590886362&set=t.100002095749193&type=3&theater
http://forum.cx-sport.de/picture.php?albumid=118&pictureid=789
No need to cut open the downtube if you can just stick the battery on the outside of the tube.
 
Dec 7, 2010
8,771
3
0
Re: Re:

sniper said:
ebandit said:
............what is the likelihood of detecting a hidden motor......just by tapping the frame?

Mark L
between IOC and UCI, who's gonna do the bike testing at the Olympics?

cheaters better watch out!

:rolleyes:
If the Olympics were going to be held in say London then there is a great chance they would find nothing. But since it is going to be in Rio there is an great chance they will find nothing. ..... :D
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY