The doped bike exists (video of pro version)!

[Dear Wiggo]

I have to ask - wouldn't the motor and battery in the bike thing only work for a flattish (eg classics) or flattish then MTF course? Due to conservation of energy?

ie. Due to inefficient battery design and motors using that stored power, any gain you make when the battery+motor is in use, is lost on the mountains you climb prior to its use that force you to expend energy carrying the additional weight up the climb.

In the bunch hiding is fine, as are smaller hills like in a classic, where the primary loss of energy is due to wind resistance. But over a couple of cols, that weight is going to make a big difference when your primary energy drain is gravity.

I am in the middle of enough tech stuff for work so won't even try to do the math, but the Nicholas Roche interview with Kimmage where he says he skipped carbs in the middle of a fricken GT to avoid adding weight for a key stage makes me think using a motor + battery in any real GT stage would be a handicap.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

NO such thing as a free ride.

Or.

The rider does a bike change just before needing to use the power source. That is another option.

We should track bike changes leading to performance increases.

 

[D-Queued]

Re: Re:

There is a very easy kill for this one: Put IR cameras on the motards...... see who has glowing tubes or BB. Target and check. End of. In fact I bet you could extract the data from existing TV footage. The CCDs sample into the near IR as well (shoot your old TV remote at a camera and see). You would have to do some tricky signal processing to extract the data and the frequencies will be at variance with the black body radiation levels (not near IR) but WTH it is broad spectrum: There would be some relative data in the tail there and It could be scoped and justified with the appropriate mathematics and without recourse to fuzzy statistical methods associated with blood vector doping. So it would be deterministic.

..........Is that the sound of running lawyers I hear?

This.

Alternately, place your hand on the frame. Burns cinch it. Or, look for smoke and watch out for the fire.

...

The tech involved here is really not that much different from a cordless electric drill, which is to say, quite accessible and not requiring any fundamentally new developments. First, define the requirements of what you need: Add 50-75 Watts for 15 minutes? That would definitely be enough to help Cancellara ride away from everyone on the cobbles and let someone keep up or ride away on the tricky part of a climb.

That's very modest and only needs a 20 Wh battery. That's 2 x 26650 LiMn02 cells which you could hide *anywhere* in the frame. Disclosure: I started my career at a Li-Ion battery manufacturer (http://www.molicel.com/ca/)

You'd need some electronics to create a motor driver, but that's really nothing too big or difficult. You could even add a small microprocessor and a wireless control system without any hassle.

The motor would have to be custom, but I'm fairly confident that you could easily build a stepper motor with gearing into a bottom bracket. This is actually the part that would require the most engineering, but certainly nothing exotic is required. At a cadence of 90 rpm, even the torque requirements are quite low (10 rad/s and 50 Watts means 5 N.m of torque).

A small team of engineers could have a decent system in less than a year on a *very* modest budget.

John Swanson

Didn't someone die from a Moli cell early in the company's history?

You know, new product integration or new application... lots of heat... confined space...

I dunno. Just thought I would ask.

Disclosure, some of us are also familiar with batteries and other electrochemical devices along with DC motors.

Dave.

 

[ScienceIsCool]

Oof. No death, but a Japanese businessman got a minor burn. First generation of cells (i.e., Moli Energy) had a lithium anode which would eventually short out due to lithium dendrites. I came on board right at the time that Jeff Dahn, Jan Reimers, Ulrich von Sacken et al figured out that an intercalating carbon anode would be much safer

 

[Archibald]

Re: Re:

I agree.
I think Fab's alleged use looks more obvious. Maybe if teams or riders are using motors then they will be more clever in the way they are used.

Boonen learned from Canc's error - do not use during actual attack

A small team of engineers could have a decent system in less than a year on a *very* modest budget.

then comes keeping their mouths shut

 

[Chipist]

DW, been working with VHDL, FPGAs and ASICs for over 20 years. Currently working on the power supply controller for a large helicopter for the US navy. We do not need to worry about saving a few percent of efficiency as we have 3*75kW ac generators. Still I think this hidden bike motor drive is still possible, whether any team would be stupid/desperate enough is a different matter.

 

[Benotti69]

Re:

DW, been working with VHDL, FPGAs and ASICs for over 20 years. Currently working on the power supply controller for a large helicopter for the US navy. We do not need to worry about saving a few percent of efficiency as we have 3*75kW ac generators. Still I think this hidden bike motor drive is still possible, whether any team would be stupid/desperate enough is a different matter.

They are all stupid and desperate enough. They have showed that time and time again.

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

DW, been working with VHDL, FPGAs and ASICs for over 20 years. Currently working on the power supply controller for a large helicopter for the US navy. We do not need to worry about saving a few percent of efficiency as we have 3*75kW ac generators. Still I think this hidden bike motor drive is still possible, whether any team would be stupid/desperate enough is a different matter.

They are all stupid and desperate enough. They have showed that time and time again.

exactly.
in the Ryder thread back then some raised the argument that it [motorized bikes] probably isn't happening, because the peloton would not allow it to happen.

Not even Cookson is that naive:
“Our information is this is a very real possibility”
http://cyclingtips.com.au/2015/03/cooks ... ssibility/

The argument that it's technologically not possible also strikes me as naive, anno 2015.
From the CIRC report:
“The Commission was told of varying efforts to cheat the technical rules, including using motors in frames,” “This particular issue was taken seriously, especially by top riders, and was not dismissed as being isolated.”
That's rather unambiguous.

 

[sniper]

it's also good to remind that accusations of motorization go as far back as Boardman (who warned the UCI it might be happening, somewhere around 2000, i think), and Cassani also warned the UCI that it's happening (in 2011?), i think (but not sure) in response to the rumors surrounding Cancellara.

The funny thing is, all those warnings/rumors didn't seem to impress anybody. The peloton remained completely silent on the issue (well, until the CIRC report) inspite of those warnings/rumors, suggesting some sort of omerta.
When Ryder's spinning wheel got in the headlights, Alex Rasmussen came in his defense with a short youtube clip.
That clip was such bogus, it almost seemed as if Rasmussen was intentionally trying to throw sand in the eyes of the doubters. I call omerta.

 

[hrotha]

The thing with motorized bikes is that a good look at your bike will always find the motor, which means if your bike is picked for a test you're screwed. Doping is much better in that regard, because if you're smart you won't race or be available for tests at all while you're glowing, which means you can't be caught unless you screw up.

Not to mention the element of plausible deniability doping provides but motors don't: good luck convincing anyone that the rider put the motor in their bike by themselves and that the mechanics and the team didn't know anything.

For these reasons, I just don't see it taking off.

 

[sniper]

Re:

The thing with motorized bikes is that a good look at your bike will always find the motor, which means if your bike is picked for a test you're screwed. Doping is much better in that regard, because if you're smart you won't race or be available for tests at all while you're glowing, which means you can't be caught unless you screw up.

Not to mention the element of plausible deniability doping provides but motors don't: good luck convincing anyone that the rider put the motor in their bike by themselves and that the mechanics and the team didn't know anything.

For these reasons, I just don't see it taking off.

but why you think UCI would ever want to catch and expose anybody with a motor. That should be pretty bad for business. First Lance. Now motors.
There are no WADA guidelines for UCI to follow here, so in the event that they find a motor, they can do with that finding whatever they want, tell the guy nicely not to do it again, ask for a bribe, anything.
I do think they want to deter. Hence the details (well, 'details') in the CIRC report, and the subsequent testing of bikes at some races.

Also:
- didn't they announce the bike testing 20 km before the finish line at some race recently? Why would they do that if they were out to catch cheats.
- didn't they fire some guy in relation to bike testing? (i seem to recall neineinei posting something)

 

[hrotha]

You don't even need the UCI to get involved. What if someone steals your bikes and the whole thing is revealed?

 

[sniper]

of course there are risks.
what if you fall and your rear wheel starts spinning as if it were motorized, in front of a camera.

 

[sniper]

compare it to not testing positive.
we don't know exactly how they do it, but that they do it.
and i think if you have a motorized bike, it's not a whole set of motorized bikes, but one or two, and you're not gonna let anybody other than those in the know close to those one or two bikes.
iow, the stealing scenario sounds like a small risk, one i'd be willing to take considering the benefits.

 

[D-Queued]

Re: Re:

DW, been working with VHDL, FPGAs and ASICs for over 20 years. Currently working on the power supply controller for a large helicopter for the US navy. We do not need to worry about saving a few percent of efficiency as we have 3*75kW ac generators. Still I think this hidden bike motor drive is still possible, whether any team would be stupid/desperate enough is a different matter.

They are all stupid and desperate enough. They have showed that time and time again.

exactly.
in the Ryder thread back then some raised the argument that it [motorized bikes] probably isn't happening, because the peloton would not allow it to happen.

Not even Cookson is that naive:
“Our information is this is a very real possibility”
http://cyclingtips.com.au/2015/03/cooks ... ssibility/

The argument that it's technologically not possible also strikes me as naive, anno 2015.
From the CIRC report:
“The Commission was told of varying efforts to cheat the technical rules, including using motors in frames,” “This particular issue was taken seriously, especially by top riders, and was not dismissed as being isolated.”
That's rather unambiguous.

Ok, call me naive.

As an aside, haven't you been expressing concern over CIRC's lack of rigor?

Somebody told them that they (that someone) thought it might be possible? Did anyone provide any technical proof, studies, or well-founded explanations of how this could be done? Or, did we just have a couple of guys who said a couple of things and CIRC wrote it down in their report.

At least with doping we have doctors, sophisticated tests, testing laboratories, a CODE, studies on the performance enhancing attributes, testimony and admissions, police cases, co-opted health facilities, blood bags, syringes, etc.

Then again, I've never seen a unicorn but somebody told me that they exist.

Now, can a bicycle be motorized? Yes. Go buy an e-bike kit and retrofit your stallion.

But, think about the practicality of hiding that hardware inside the bike frame. The engineers of those things must be naive.

System Specs:

Watts (Nominal/Peak): 500-1000w (EBK 22amp controller)
Top Speed: 28 MPH @48v in 26" wheel (Approx.)
Range: 12-26 Miles
Charge Time: 3hrs (0-100%)
Weight: 21lbs (9.5kgs)
Performance: High
Efficiency: High
Stealth Factor: High

Damn thing's top speed is only 45 kph, though, so don't expect to win any TdF stages. Well, ok, it will barely make it 40 km anyways.

48V worth of Li batteries and it will only run for 40k? Sheesh. What does he know about power? Couldn't he use a lower voltage? My RC car doesn't need 48 volts. Neither does my HR monitor. The guy should switch to coin batteries so that this stuff is compatible with my Garmin sensors, and then the battery pack wouldn't have to be so big.

And, that range seems a bit limited. According to this guy, trying to increase the range "...and the battery packs become a bit impractical (imagine a smart car with a 100 gallon gas tank)." But, what does he know? Heck he only designs and sells the things.

Impractical?

We are talking about the Tour de France here, dammit! You call that impractical? Dopers win the thing all the time. That's not impractical.

Surely there are smarter engineers who could make it work for a 200k mountain stage, right?

So let's look at that engineering challenge by starting with a look at what you get with the e-bike kit:

Every E-BikeKit conversion kit comes with all of the parts you'll need for your conversion.

1 x USA hand-built wheel w/ disc-brake compatible hub motor
1 x 36/48V compatible 22amp 12FET brushless motor controller
1 x LCD dashboard with on/off, battery indicator & 5-level top speed control
2 x Throttles (1 Thumb & 1 Split-Twist)
2 x E-Brake handles (left & right)
1 x Motor cable
1 x Accessory cable
1 x Battery wire harness (kits w/o batteries only)
1 x 7-Speed Shimano Freewheel (rears only)
1 x Owner's manual w/ installation guide
***Zip Ties, c-washers & torque arms in every kit!

**System includes battery carrying rear rack.

That's way too much stuff. We should probably just go through the list in some sort of disciplined and structured fashion. Ok, let's throw out every second item. That is pretty disciplined and consistent. That will get rid of half the stuff right there.

Now all you have to do is get the UCI to legalize disc brakes, adapt your Di2 for seven speed, get the custom built wheel option and put wheel covers over them to make it look like you have a disc, and then ditch the rear rack and somehow squeeze all those 14 lb worth of batteries inside the frame. Oh, I guess we need the UCI to make disc wheels legal for RR's, too.

But for your TdF racehorse, you are going to need a bit more zip and a bit more distance, and it is going to have to be a LOT smaller even if we have already tossed half of the stuff.

So, who is kidding us when they think someone can re-engineer the thing for up to an order of magnitude improvement in lifetime while reducing the size and weight by almost two orders of magnitude? And, if they can somehow actually do all of that, do it while not increasing the heat to dangerous levels or beyond (spontaneous disassembly)?

Oh, sure, you could add weightless, spaceless radiators and cooling systems to manage the heat load, right?

Good luck.

Looks like CIRC took the bait. Anyone else?

Dave.

 

[ray j willings]

I just wonder. Hub is power driven, small battery. Electronic shifters/cables/buttons camouflaging. Might not be so easy to detect.

 

[D-Queued]

Re:

I just wonder. Hub is power driven, small battery. Electronic shifters/cables/buttons camouflaging. Might not be so easy to detect.

Everything you need to know is in the post I provided just before yours.

Coin batteries, wheel covers, half the hardware, ten times the performance, heatless and weightless.

Simple.

Dave.

 

[ray j willings]

Re: Re:

I just wonder. Hub is power driven, small battery. Electronic shifters/cables/buttons camouflaging. Might not be so easy to detect.

Everything you need to know is in the post I provided just before yours.

Coin batteries, wheel covers, half the hardware, ten times the performance, heatless and weightless.

Simple.

Dave.

Thanks Dave ,nice post.

 

[Nicko.]

Re:

The thing with motorized bikes is that a good look at your bike will always find the motor, which means if your bike is picked for a test you're screwed. Doping is much better in that regard, because if you're smart you won't race or be available for tests at all while you're glowing, which means you can't be caught unless you screw up.

Not to mention the element of plausible deniability doping provides but motors don't: good luck convincing anyone that the rider put the motor in their bike by themselves and that the mechanics and the team didn't know anything.

For these reasons, I just don't see it taking off.

This statement is not waterproof.
The few public pictures available all show 'officials' (i.e. not motorsport engineering dudes) looking down the seat tube, maybe even using a flashlight. If you look down that hole you won't find anything...
There are reports of frames being x-rayed. Well, what if no electric-motor-parts-looking items are in the frame?

I would perhaps mould two insanely strong magnets in the front fork, just below the brake pads...
And put coils, litium batteries, radio-operated control electronics inside the front rim.

Who would think of x-raying the front rim?
Or break it open?

 

[MarkvW]

Re: Re:

The thing with motorized bikes is that a good look at your bike will always find the motor, which means if your bike is picked for a test you're screwed. Doping is much better in that regard, because if you're smart you won't race or be available for tests at all while you're glowing, which means you can't be caught unless you screw up.

Not to mention the element of plausible deniability doping provides but motors don't: good luck convincing anyone that the rider put the motor in their bike by themselves and that the mechanics and the team didn't know anything.

For these reasons, I just don't see it taking off.

but why you think UCI would ever want to catch and expose anybody with a motor. That should be pretty bad for business. First Lance. Now motors.
There are no WADA guidelines for UCI to follow here, so in the event that they find a motor, they can do with that finding whatever they want, tell the guy nicely not to do it again, ask for a bribe, anything.
I do think they want to deter. Hence the details (well, 'details') in the CIRC report, and the subsequent testing of bikes at some races.

Also:
- didn't they announce the bike testing 20 km before the finish line at some race recently? Why would they do that if they were out to catch cheats.
- didn't they fire some guy in relation to bike testing? (i seem to recall neineinei posting something)

Teams happily tolerate doping on other teams. Doping is also behind closed doors, so one team isn't likely going to catch another team in the act.

I think omerta would yield if one team discovered another team with an electric bike.

Doping creates a relatively even playing field in the sense that if one team is doping, then the other teams can respond by doping as well, and each team can select the riders who best respond to dope-therapy. Doping responsibility can also be off-loaded onto individual riders so that they take the hit from doping and the team gets off scot-free.

Electric biking creates a very uneven playing field because of the great expense needed to develop, deploy, and maintain an electric bike program in secrecy. The poorer teams would be forced to snitch on the electric bikers, or they'd be driven out of the sport. Further, if a rider was caught with an electric bike, the UCI would seemingly have to take aggressive action against the whole team, because otherwise clever teams would just put disposable domestiques on the electric bike and have the stars draft behind.

 

[sniper]

reply to @D-Queued

you shouldn't compare this to electric bikes. electric bikes are for people who don't want to pedal.
when i think about motorized bikes, i'm thinking about a small dynamo-like device (which you charge by pedalling) connected to the axis of your rear wheel. It doesn't drive the wheel, but helps an already driving wheel drive a bit better/harder/longer.
You'd charge it by pedalling, certainly not by means of external batteries. In any case, if you're on a bike, pedalling hard, i don't see why you'd need heavy external batteries to charge a hypothetical motor.

even if the motor gives you only a tiny bit of speed extra, we're talking about the difference between finishing first or second.

and what do i know about how they do it anyway.
how does my voice end up on the other side of the world when i give you a phonecall? really no idea. but it happens.

 

[D-Queued]

Re:

reply to @D-Queued

you shouldn't compare this to electric bikes. electric bikes are for people who don't want to pedal.
when i think about motorized bikes, i'm thinking about a small dynamo-like device (which you charge by pedalling) connected to the axis of your rear wheel. It doesn't drive the wheel, but helps an already driving wheel drive a bit better/harder/longer.
You'd charge it by pedalling, certainly not by means of external batteries. In any case, if you're on a bike, pedalling hard, i don't see why you'd need heavy external batteries to charge a hypothetical motor.

even if the motor gives you only a tiny bit of speed extra, we're talking about the difference between finishing first or second.

and what do i know about how they do it anyway.
how does my voice end up on the other side of the world when i give you a phonecall? really no idea. but it happens.

Hi Sniper,

It takes a lot of hardware to make your phonecall.

The e-bike kit does arguably provide only a tiny bit of extra speed if we are talking about TdF level cyclists.

And, it takes a lot of hardware to achieve that.

It does not have a regen capability. Neither from regenerative braking nor from pedaling. Which is a good thing. If it helps a little when powering the bicycle, it would suck a lot of power from pedalling to recharge it.

Think of it this way, the battery re-charge you get from pedaling would always be require more energy than the power you would get back from the stored energy. (unless you live in a frictionless vacuum where the laws of thermodynamics did not apply)

Do TdF cyclists have extra power in their legs that they are not using that could re-power the batteries instead?

If they do, why don't they just pedal harder?

And, if you just pedal harder you don't need to carry any extra weight at all!

Dave.

 

[arthurvandelay]

I can't wait for some mechanical engineering student to take this up as a graduate thesis. A terrific opportunity to show off ones ingenuity using off the shelf parts for the most part, with some clever new software thrown in. Put it in a bike for the bits before the finale, and a rider could use it to save energy before the finish. A quick bike change for a "mechanical" and Voila! Hey they got away with white lunchbags and "finish bottles" for years, why not a boosted bike for the mid-part of a difficult stage. It would be easy enough to hide or toss that bike to a waiting staff member before the finish.

 

[Nicko.]

Re: Re:

Ok, call me naive.

As an aside, haven't you been expressing concern over CIRC's lack of rigor?

Somebody told them that they (that someone) thought it might be possible? Did anyone provide any technical proof, studies, or well-founded explanations of how this could be done? Or, did we just have a couple of guys who said a couple of things and CIRC wrote it down in their report.

At least with doping we have doctors, sophisticated tests, testing laboratories, a CODE, studies on the performance enhancing attributes, testimony and admissions, police cases, co-opted health facilities, blood bags, syringes, etc.

Then again, I've never seen a unicorn but somebody told me that they exist.

Now, can a bicycle be motorized? Yes. Go buy an e-bike kit and retrofit your stallion.

But, think about the practicality of hiding that hardware inside the bike frame. The engineers of those things must be naive.

System Specs:

Watts (Nominal/Peak): 500-1000w (EBK 22amp controller)
Top Speed: 28 MPH @48v in 26" wheel (Approx.)
Range: 12-26 Miles
Charge Time: 3hrs (0-100%)
Weight: 21lbs (9.5kgs)
Performance: High
Efficiency: High
Stealth Factor: High

...

We are talking about the Tour de France here, dammit! You call that impractical? Dopers win the thing all the time. That's not rrying rear rack.

That's way too much stuff. We should probably just go through the list in some sort of disciplined and structured fashion. Ok, let's throw out every second item. That is pretty disciplined and consistent. That will get rid of half the stuff right there.
...

So, who is kidding us when they think someone can re-engineer the thing for up to an order of magnitude improvement in lifetime while reducing the size and weight by almost two orders of magnitude? And, if they can somehow actually do all of that, do it while not increasing the heat to dangerous levels or beyond (spontaneous disassembly)?

Oh, sure, you could add weightless, spaceless radiators and cooling systems to manage the heat load, right?

Good luck.

Looks like CIRC took the bait. Anyone else?

Dave.

You have disqualified yourself regarding insightful input with this post...

Innovative engineering is required for high profile cheating!
Not repacking commuter hardware...

 

[D-Queued]

Re: Re:

...
You have disqualified yourself regarding insightful input with this post...

Innovative engineering is required for high profile cheating!
Not repacking commuter hardware...

Gosh, I'm sorry.

So quick to criticize a fellow poster and such profound insight, and only 75 posts.

You being the rocket scientist that you are, why don't you take out a napkin, doodle on it, and submit it to the forum then?

Clearly anyone who has already done anything at all to power a bicycle doesn't have the faintest idea of how to solve the problem, nor could they qualify for anything in the realm of innovation.

Of course, you would probably be completely amazed to find out that the US Patent Office regards the e-bike as the definitive reference point when reviewing patent applications for electric bicycles.

Go ahead, do the patent search and prove me wrong.

Or, would doing that kind of thing disqualify you from providing opinions here?

Dave.