D-Queued said:
You can bring a horse to water... but you can't make em drink.
Indeed, I don't know if you even read my post. You certainly have not interacted with it. I'm not going to take this conversation any further with you.
You can bring a horse to water... but you can't make em drink.
Indeed, I don't know if you even read my post. You certainly have not interacted with it. I'm not going to take this conversation any further with you.
Glenn_Wilson said:
Although they may gain an advantage by activating the motor with the hypothetical cell that's small and powerful enough they will have to lug that extra mass around them on the stage before a climb.
I'd love a device like this myself as an old fart and part time rider - simply to take to the alpe and power me all the way up while I do my best pirata/Froome/contador impressions of climbing whilst other cyclists I drop on the bike and also their jaws lol. I think the lead shielding required to block the gammas for my preferred power plant may make it a slightly unwieldy bike to handle though!
- May 27, 2010
- 6,333
- 3
- 17,485
GoodTimes said:
Ok, so take your toys and go home then. You want me to cry or something?
But, you are right, you can't make me drink the koolaid.
And, I do have a novel personal policy to never respond to a post without reading it. Quaint these days, maybe, but I suffer through regardless.
Dave.
Gavandope said:Although they may gain an advantage by activating the motor with the hypothetical cell that's small and powerful enough they will have to lug that extra mass around them on the stage before a climb.
I'd love a device like this myself as an old fart and part time rider - simply to take to the alpe and power me all the way up while I do my best pirata/Froome/contador impressions of climbing whilst other cyclists I drop on the bike and also their jaws lol. I think the lead shielding required to block the gammas for my preferred power plant may make it a slightly unwieldy bike to handle though!
Gavandope, Please read my posts from earlier in this thread. ~ pg 65. I showed that a 25W motor operating for 1 hr would constitute a winning advantage in pro cyclists. I concluded that a battery to power this would be ~ 90g. Since then, more complete and wider information about lithium ion batteries has come to light. I would revise the estimate to be more like ~ 250g (more conservative) or 125 g (more optimistic). This is based on the same technology and chemistry that is commercially available and on the marketplace, today. Links have been provided by myself, as well as three others (including Dave
) which corroborates this specific energy. In my mind, the question of feasibility is not whether a motor, or battery is possible (it is). The question is as to how detectable it would be, and whether the UCI would likely uncover it.
Not sure what is debatable about the above, but I would invite you or anybody else (Dave?
can't help myself....) to explain where your disagreement is.GoodTimes said:Gavandope, Please read my posts from earlier in this thread. ~ pg 65. I showed that a 25W motor operating for 1 hr would constitute a winning advantage in pro cyclists. I concluded that a battery to power this would be ~ 90g. Since then, more complete and wider information about lithium ion batteries has come to light. I would revise the estimate to be more like ~ 250g (more conservative) or 125 g (more optimistic). This is based on the same technology and chemistry that is commercially available and on the marketplace, today. Links have been provided by myself, as well as three others (including Dave
In my mind, the question of feasibility is not whether a motor, or battery is possible (it is). The question is as to how detectable it would be, and whether the UCI would likely uncover it.
Not sure what is debatable about the above, but I would invite you or anybody else (Dave?
I will take the time to read all this later but I can't see my thoughts on this being swayed one bit.
I have only discussed the motor and battery part and with the current battery technology I don't think the cells are light enough to pass UCI scrutineers handling a typical carbon frame, never mind providing the right power output for the motor itself.
To achieve those kind of results you would also need a control interface for the motor, split voltages to provide 5/3.3v DC power for the controller interface hosted on its PCB from the cell which is yet more difficult spaghetti to hide from the UCI. Then there's the interface controls to hide..
All of which to an experienced scrutineer who knows what the weight distribution of a carbon frame should be would raise enough suspicions for further testing. One x-ray and the whole game would be up, unless you line it with lead which will add an insane amount of mass and show up as blank areas on the scan prompting them instantly to get the angle grinder out!
Gavandope said:
The subject matter deals only with the energy requirements for a useful system, and the resulting battery weight.
I admit that the speculation about how to hide such a contraption is just that, speculation. Hence why I suggest that this remain the area of contention in the above post.
For the record, my position remains that I would be very surprised if motor-cheating occurs regularly (if ever) in WT races. I have no personal interest in "proving" that motors can (or are) be installed in pro bikes.
Earlier this thread, I posed the question as to whether there is a gap between technology available to cheat, and inspections imposed to catch it. I havent got enough information about what UCI actually checks with any regularity to be able to con conclude either way. It sounds like it is a definite possibility though.
GoodTimes said:
The electrical power requirements for the control interface, the motor with its on off clutch with associated relays and rider controls will all have to be taken into account along with the total mass. Else it's like comparing a complete iPad to solely its display and battery parts!
One for the future I think but not at this moment in time..
As far as a gap in technology like there is such as the chasm between the riders who can master their passport levels with ease and the drug testers I don't think there is one. Any scrutineers who are used to handling one brand/type of carbon frame should easily notice a different weight distribution with a doped powered one, and the power of an x-Ray or other scanners will expose the electronics in an instant never mind them simply cutting the frame apart. Incredibly easy compared to a rider nano doping with their own blood and newer types of EPO I'd say!
- Aug 3, 2009
- 3,217
- 1
- 13,485
D-Queued said:
No, I think he's been more than accommodating and been happy to bring his toys (and make a pretty darned good effort to explain them to the less-scientifically or mathematically inclined).
All he asked was for those who are being dismissive of his hypothesis, which he has attempted to support at most opportunities with science and math, be similarly supportive of their criticisms.
"I am more than happy to provide plenty of references via inbox", and "I could probably cite more than one commercial effort that has failed or re-directed", don't quite measure up.
Is he completely full of it? Quite possibly, but he's more than willing to throw it out there for any and all to review, critique, respond to, or dismiss. Out in the open, not via a private in-box conversation.
And again, the Wikipedia dig is completely uncalled for. Plenty of real work has gone into the vast majority of his posts and I think he's bringing real contribution to the dialog.
You and I have been on here for more years than we both probably care to admit, and we've more often than not been on the same side of most arguments, but I'm gonna say that accusing a guy of "taking his toys and going home" after more than a few well-worded, and supported posts is a bit off base.
Gavandope said:
regarding weight distribution, IMO you'd have to be pretty good to notice a few hundred grams where it's not expected by feel alone.
I don't know how frequently they XRAY. The certainly do not frequently cut the frame apart. They could, if they suspected something. But... I dont think they would do this just on a whim.
The question I suppose should be framed in a slightly different way. It's not as to whether the technology exists to catch the cheater. It's whether or not this technology is employed sufficiently to deter cheating.
Do you know how frequently they X=Ray a winner's bicycle? Is it a once a year type thing? Once ever? Every race?
GoodTimes said:
I thought I remembered seeing pictures of bikes being x-rayed, but when I quickly searched I could only find the following information about x-ray scanners (similar to airport scanners - that oughta be effective!
) or of cameras inserted into frames.http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-to-start-bike-scanning
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-checked-for-motors-in-bikes-at-cyclo-cross-worlds
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/bikes-to-be-scanned-after-tour-de-france-stages
I note that the UCI said that if caught, the rider would be expelled from the race. Just the rider? Just from that race? Gosh, that'll show 'em.
GoodTimes said:
Not so sure - say you had two of the same make and model of frames it would be very easy to notice - it's centre of gravity/balance would no doubt be very different and only weighs 6kg.
On a similar tangent - I work with a lot of Apple products for decades and own 3 iPad 2's here, 1 wifi only the other two wifi+ cellular. To entertain my kids I can tell the difference between the two types of chassis blindfolded by holding them and gauging their weight distribution and feel. We're talking tiny amounts of mass there, a plastic cut out and an extra 3G modem inside the only difference. With something far, far bigger like a frame I would imagine they would suspect immediately if they handle frames a lot as I expect a uci scrutineer would do.
MacRoadie said:
Definitely some scrutiny...
Lol - so much for a 6kg minimum weight test. Though having read Gaimons brilliant book on holiday I recognise that Gila won't have quite the best scrutinisers the UCI could possibly provide
- Aug 3, 2009
- 3,217
- 1
- 13,485
Gavandope said:Lol - so much for a 6kg minimum weight test. Though having read Gaimons brilliant book on holiday I recognise that Gila won't have quite the best scrutinisers the UCI could possibly provide
True, but a good laugh nonetheless.
On second thought, while only a UCI 2.2 race, it IS the US so what race would USAC be holding the "A Team" back for?
MacRoadie said:
Oh, I agree that that's perfectly technically possible, IMO it's just much, much less likely. I think that it's far easier to build in a motor that drives the cranks. That's what we've seen from Vivax and the other website RaceRadio posted (even though they don't actually show any product, which makes me wonder if it isn't just a hoax?).
One of my EE friends said he figured you could make a motor that would output 40W for 10 minutes that was about the size of 2 cigarettes if you had enough money. And, you could do without switches by building in an inclinometer so it would automatically turn on above a certain grade, which I thought was pretty amusing.
- May 27, 2010
- 6,333
- 3
- 17,485
MacRoadie said:
Hi MacRoadie,
Fair enough.
Perhaps I am coming from an 'already knowing' attitude.
And, I will admit that is a problem. For me, at least.
My inclination is that if someone were to pitch this technology (not the application, just the technology) in a business plan they would be laughed out of the room.
IMHO, it would be a chase down the rabbit hole to start discussing torque, rpm, brushless dc, operating voltages, duty cycles, intermittent versus continuous, Voltage/Current discharge curves, etc.
Here are a couple of truisms:
1. Higher voltage is better than lower voltage, especially for electro-mechanical purposes. Higher voltage requires more/bigger batteries. Higher voltage also allows for SMALLER components on a weight/output basis.
2. Semiconductors can operate at low voltages. Batteries for cell phones are powering semiconductor devices, not electro-mechanical devices.
Here is a useful chart:
This represents the batteries only.
Please note that whether evaluated on a power or energy density basis, lithium batteries run around 100 w/kg for a one hour duty cycle. This agrees with what GoodTimes has noted above.
It is critical, however, to respect that scaling is non-linear. In other words, you cannot expect to get a 1 watt system for 10 grams. This is particularly true on the electromechanical (i.e. motor) side.
When GoodTimes makes "conclusions" with no background in the field, and no true understanding of the complexities involved, I suppose it strikes a chord.
"I concluded that a battery to power this would be ~ 90g. Since then, more complete and wider information about lithium ion batteries has come to light. I would revise the estimate to be more like ~ 250g (more conservative) or 125 g (more optimistic). This is based on the same technology and chemistry that is commercially available and on the marketplace, today. ..."
Here is a quote from Daimler's R&D Director that I recall very well: "This is the first electrochemical device we have ever tested that actually met its performance spec." In other words, electrochemistry is the home of modern day snake oil.
If GoodTimes were to invest about four to five more years of research into this area (i.e. after Malcom Gladwell's Outliers 10,000 hour rule of thumb), then I would likely be a lot less dismissive.
In fact, if GoodTimes could truly demonstrate this device I could probably point him towards some VC money and set him on a path to becoming the next billionaire.
Dave.
- Aug 3, 2009
- 3,217
- 1
- 13,485
fishtacos said:
I don't disagree on any of that.
One point I do think some on here are missing (although it's been made pretty clear a few times by now): we're not talking about a motor and battery sized to provide the torque necessary to move the bike from a dead stop (as in what you'd require from an electric car). We're just talking about additional bursts of power once well underway.
We're also not talking about 200 watts of additional power for extended periods of time. Think of it more as the amount of power you might receive from a push from a team mate, albeit for 10 or 20 minutes. Even 20 or 30 watts of additional power during a critical point in the race would offer significant advantage.
None of which makes it any more or any less likely, but once you move past the ridiculousness of the "Wow, I wish I had a motor that could power me up the Tourmalet 5 times too" arguments and focus on the practicality and possibility of more "marginal improvements", the task of developing a means of mechanical assistance seems less fantastic.
fishtacos said:I thought I remembered seeing pictures of bikes being x-rayed, but when I quickly searched I could only find the following information about x-ray scanners (similar to airport scanners - that oughta be effective!
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-to-start-bike-scanning
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-checked-for-motors-in-bikes-at-cyclo-cross-worlds
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/bikes-to-be-scanned-after-tour-de-france-stages
I note that the UCI said that if caught, the rider would be expelled from the race. Just the rider? Just from that race? Gosh, that'll show 'em.
The old style airport scanners use x-Ray and the body scanners which have been thankfully banned over here in Europe now use a scattering microwave beam. I take a pat down and a grope in my crutch every time and will only go through the metal detector!
MacRoadie said:Even when you're there just to pick someone up?
lol - thanks to the Islamist loonies with their gas bottle jeep bomb attempt at Glasgow airport even picking up people is a PITA here now though not quite that much
- Aug 3, 2009
- 3,217
- 1
- 13,485
D-Queued said:
Sure there's always going to be a higher initial demand when a motor is first energized, but isn't inrush current reduced by reducing the load on the motor at startup? Motor's in compressors are notorious for high initial demands, thus the need for startup capacitors.
What happens if there's actually a "negative" load, I.E. the rotor is already moving by means of the rider's input?
Also, maybe "bursts" is a bit too flowery. Maybe "incremental increases in power" would be better.
- Aug 24, 2011
- 4,349
- 0
- 13,480
Real life anecdote:
I ride with my daughter is a tag along type arrangement. She is not quite 3 years old, so who know how much power she can deliver. When she decides to pedal rather than sit back, I do feel a slight difference in effort in my legs.
I really don't know how to gear, drive or what loss mechanically an extra 20-40W from a motor requires. I am pretty sure from that experience it would make a difference if triggered at the right moment.
That could be a key climb for a GC guy, or a day in the medium mountains for a breakaway rider going for a stage win.
I don't think its happening now. But its certainly something that needs to be thought about better by the powers that be.
I ride with my daughter is a tag along type arrangement. She is not quite 3 years old, so who know how much power she can deliver. When she decides to pedal rather than sit back, I do feel a slight difference in effort in my legs.
I really don't know how to gear, drive or what loss mechanically an extra 20-40W from a motor requires. I am pretty sure from that experience it would make a difference if triggered at the right moment.
That could be a key climb for a GC guy, or a day in the medium mountains for a breakaway rider going for a stage win.
I don't think its happening now. But its certainly something that needs to be thought about better by the powers that be.
TRENDING THREADS
-
World Championship 2025: Men’s RR, September 28- Started by Berniece
- Replies: 2K
-
Il Lombardia 2025, monument, October 11- Started by Krzysztof_O
- Replies: 792
-
European Championship 2025: Men’s RR, October 5- Started by Berniece
- Replies: 854
-
Teams & Riders The Remco Evenepoel is the next Eddy Merckx thread- Started by DNP-Old
- Replies: 35K
-
Teams & Riders Tadej Pogačar discussion thread- Started by Lequack
- Replies: 40K
-
World Championship 2025: Men’s ITT, September 21- Started by Berniece
- Replies: 942
-
Teams & Riders The Great Big Cycling Transfers, Extensions, and Rumours Thread- Started by RedheadDane
- Replies: 13K
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram