The pedaling technique thread

[coapman]

With independent cranks bike speed (and, hence, pedal speed) is also maintained because the weight of the other leg acts the same as the counterweight (plus you have the muscle efforts added into the mix) so pedal speed remains reasonably constant similar to the counterweighted condition.

How can the weight of the other leg act like the counterweight when both cranks and legs are working independently. What you are describing is what happens during natural two legged cycling with riders not unweighting during their upstroke.

 

[FrankDay]

How can the weight of the other leg act like the counterweight when both cranks and legs are working independently. What you are describing is what happens during natural two legged cycling with riders not unweighting during their upstroke.

It acts the same as a counterweight because it maintains bicycle speed. The rider is still forced to fully unweight with independent cranks to make the crank go around but the rider does not have to pull up with force to maintain bicycle speed as one has to do with the non-counterweighted single legged pedaling.

It is my take on things. Feel free to think differently.

 

[coapman]

It acts the same as a counterweight because it maintains bicycle speed. The rider is still forced to fully unweight with independent cranks to make the crank go around but the rider does not have to pull up with force to maintain bicycle speed as one has to do with the non-counterweighted single legged pedaling.

It is my take on things. Feel free to think differently.

No forceful pulling up is required by the non counterweighted single leg pedaller, little more than raising the leg upward is required because his cranks and pedals are balanced unlike the PC rider who has the added inconvenience of having to tow his independent crank and pedal upwards. What you are forgetting is, unlike counterweighted single leg pedalling both the PC'er and the non counterweighted single leg pedaler have the added difficulty of getting the crank and pedal from 10 past 12 o'c, whereas the counterweight pushes the pedal through this difficult sector. I believe this difficult sector is what makes this type of pedalling less efficient than counterweighted pedalling. Of course this difficulty disappears when he returns to two legged pedalling and he will have the added minimal advantage of a resistance free path for his crank/pedal.

 

[FrankDay]

No forceful pulling up is required by the non counterweighted single leg pedaller, little more than raising the leg upward is required because his cranks and pedals are balanced unlike the PC rider who has the added inconvenience of having to tow his independent crank and pedal upwards. What you are forgetting is, unlike counterweighted single leg pedalling both the PC'er and the non counterweighted single leg pedaler have the added difficulty of getting the crank and pedal from 10 past 12 o'c, whereas the counterweight pushes the pedal through this difficult sector. I believe this difficult sector is what makes this type of pedalling less efficient than counterweighted pedalling. Of course this difficulty disappears when he returns to two legged pedalling and he will have the added minimal advantage of a resistance free path for his crank/pedal.

If you say so. Since the entire purpose of single legged pedaling is to help train the rider to unweight better on the back stroke (as I understand it) I don't see that having to "tow his independent crank and pedal upwards" as the "added inconvenience" that you do but I see it as an advantage (plus the rider doesn't have to unclip and hold their non pedaling leg off to the side and become unbalanced on the bike). Having done both I have a different opinion than you. When you have tried the PowerCranks get back to me regarding your opinion as to what they do for the cyclist.

 

[coapman]

Having done both I have a different opinion than you. When you have tried the PowerCranks get back to me regarding your opinion as to what they do for the cyclist.

I can visualize exactly what they can do for a cyclist and more importantly what they can't do.

 

[FrankDay]

I can visualize exactly what they can do for a cyclist…

So thinks almost everyone until they get on them.

 

[coapman]

So thinks almost everyone until they get on them.

How do PC's train a cyclist to apply greater torque through TDC than what the non counterweighted single leg rider can apply.

 

[sciguy]

How do PC's train a cyclist to apply greater torque through TDC than what the non counterweighted single leg rider can apply.

Frank sometimes hooks his cranks up to bungee cords in order to add resistance at either TDC or BDC. The obvious problem with this approach is that when you increase resistance to one region you decrease it to the other.

Hugh

 

[JayKosta]

How do PC's train a cyclist to apply greater torque through TDC than what the non counterweighted single leg rider can apply.

----------------------------------------
My understanding is that the 'pedaling technique' which is developed via training with PC is to always have some positive rotational force on both pedals thru the entire rotation of the crank. If the rotational speed of the foot becomes less than the speed of the pedal, the PC will un-couple and give immediate feedback (via the foot feel). With a standard crank, instead of un-coupling the result would be negative rotational force on the pedal (which might not be noticed or felt).

The goal is to obtain a pedaling technique that has no instances of negative force on either pedal, and perhaps to add some positive force in the sectors where only 'un-weighting' (maintaining foot/pedal speed) would be adequate to not un-couple.
By eliminating negative forces, the 'net sum' of forces will be greater.
And additional positive force might also be developed.

note: I have not used PC's, but have attempted a well 'thought out' view of how they work.....

Jay Kosta
Endwell NY USA

 

[FrankDay]

----------------------------------------
My understanding is that the 'pedaling technique' which is developed via training with PC is to always have some positive rotational force on both pedals thru the entire rotation of the crank. If the rotational speed of the foot becomes less than the speed of the pedal, the PC will un-couple and give immediate feedback (via the foot feel). With a standard crank, instead of un-coupling the result would be negative rotational force on the pedal (which might not be noticed or felt).

The goal is to obtain a pedaling technique that has no instances of negative force on either pedal, and perhaps to add some positive force in the sectors where only 'un-weighting' (maintaining foot/pedal speed) would be adequate to not un-couple.
By eliminating negative forces, the 'net sum' of forces will be greater.
And additional positive force might also be developed.

note: I have not used PC's, but have attempted a well 'thought out' view of how they work.....

Jay Kosta
Endwell NY USA

You pretty much understand the concept. Other than eliminating the negatives in the pedaling circle the other thing they hope to do is to redirect the applied forces to be a little more tangential so as to be more efficient in generating power.

 

[FrankDay]

Frank sometimes hooks his cranks up to bungee cords in order to add resistance at either TDC or BDC. The obvious problem with this approach is that when you increase resistance to one region you decrease it to the other.

Hugh

It is called training the weaknesses. I consider coming over the top to be the weakest part of most peoples stroke. This is a form of overload training for this weakest part because it forces the rider to do more over the top than they would normally do (even with PowerCranks, which is normally more than they would do with fixed cranks as shown by several studies). The intent here would be to train the rider, over time, to apply more force naturally over the top. The size of the force over the top has been shown to be related to overall cycling efficiency. The "problem" you point out actually isn't a problem because of the one way clutch in the crank arms. There is no reduced resistance at the bottom of the stroke because the mass/momentum of the bike prevents a large acceleration of pedal speed there despite the increased force. This trick wouldn't work on coupled cranks because the combined forces would end up being a wash. It is similar to what gravity does on the downstroke. There is a large increase in downward force due to gravity on the downstroke but no significant reduction in resistance because of that added force.

 

[Tapeworm]

I'm going to just leave this here:-
http://youtu.be/djLKplpWsa0

 

[CoachFergie]

I'm going to just leave this here:-
http://youtu.be/djLKplpWsa0

Interesting. Wonder why Drapac are not using them? Henk is the DS.

 

[coapman]

It is called training the weaknesses. I consider coming over the top to be the weakest part of most peoples stroke. This is a form of overload training for this weakest part because it forces the rider to do more over the top than they would normally do (even with PowerCranks, which is normally more than they would do with fixed cranks as shown by several studies). The intent here would be to train the rider, over time, to apply more force naturally over the top. The size of the force over the top has been shown to be related to overall cycling efficiency. The "problem" you point out actually isn't a problem because of the one way clutch in the crank arms. There is no reduced resistance at the bottom of the stroke because the mass/momentum of the bike prevents a large acceleration of pedal speed there despite the increased force. This trick wouldn't work on coupled cranks because the combined forces would end up being a wash. It is similar to what gravity does on the downstroke. There is a large increase in downward force due to gravity on the downstroke but no significant reduction in resistance because of that added force.

Your problem here is caused by the fact that you believe in pedalling unconsciously. If you concentrate on your objective, you will have more than enough resistance coming from your chain. Even though the muscles you are attempting to train are capable of applying the equivalent of 3 o'c torque to the crank at TDC tomorrow morning , you will never train them to do that because you are using them in isolation. This means their power, as you apply it across the top, cannot be improved.

 

[FrankDay]

Your problem here is caused by the fact that you believe in pedalling unconsciously. If you concentrate on your objective, you will have more than enough resistance coming from your chain. Even though the muscles you are attempting to train are capable of applying the equivalent of 3 o'c torque to the crank at TDC tomorrow morning , you will never train them to do that because you are using them in isolation. This means their power, as you apply it across the top, cannot be improved.

You got me there. I do believe in pedaling unconsciously, at least most of the time. I also believe in paying attention to cars, pedestrians, pot holes, traffic lights, stop signs, the race course, how one is feeling, etc. You must be really special to be able to concentrate on all of that stuff and pedaling at the same time. I simply cannot manage it.

 

[coapman]

You got me there. I do believe in pedaling unconsciously, at least most of the time. I also believe in paying attention to cars, pedestrians, pot holes, traffic lights, stop signs, the race course, how one is feeling, etc. You must be really special to be able to concentrate on all of that stuff and pedaling at the same time. I simply cannot manage it.

Is it possible to buy counterweights for pedals, the ideal weights would be a quick release type that could be easily switched from one pedal to the other. Or are counterweights screwed into the cranks like pedals? Non counterweighted single leg pedalling cannot be used with my semi circular (11-5 o'c) technique.

 

[coapman]

Is it possible to buy counterweights for pedals, the ideal weights would be a quick release type that could be easily switched from one pedal to the other. Or are counterweights screwed into the cranks like pedals? Non counterweighted single leg pedalling cannot be used with my semi circular (11-5 o'c) technique.

Got the solution here http://forum.slowtwitch.com/gforum.cgi?post=3818005;.
This should have more to offer than bungee cords.

 

[kilibo77]

wow, a lot of knowledge that I got from here tread

 

[FrankDay]

I am now able to measure my technique (at least as it involves torque around the circle). Here is a short snippet illustrating my technique and how my two legged technique is almost identical to my one-legged technique (quite a surprise to me). Someday (soon, I hope) I will be able to do this out on a ride instead of needing to be indoors on a trainer.

http://tinypic.com/r/2569s76/8

 

[coapman]

I am now able to measure my technique (at least as it involves torque around the circle). Here is a short snippet illustrating my technique and how my two legged technique is almost identical to my one-legged technique (quite a surprise to me). Someday (soon, I hope) I will be able to do this out on a ride instead of needing to be indoors on a trainer.

http://tinypic.com/r/2569s76/8

As I said before, unlike the sinusoidal graphs these graphs are too vague for proper pedaling analysis

 

[FrankDay]

As I said before, unlike the sinusoidal graphs these graphs are too vague for proper pedaling analysis

Huh? the numbers are the numbers, they could be presented as sinusoidal graphs easily since modern computers are very powerful. Maybe they will someday allow the user to choose what they want the way Racermate does.

Edit: actually, the computers don't have to be that powerful. Racermate was offering this option back in the 90's when they were doing all this on the Nintendo system.

 

[CoachFergie]

As I said before, unlike the sinusoidal graphs these graphs are too vague for proper pedaling analysis

Reminds me of the saying that not everything that matters can be measured and not everything that can be measured matters.

40 years of real measurement and reporting in the peer review literature and no has yet shown cyclists are pedalling wrong or there is a better way of pedalling.

 

[FrankDay]

40 years of real measurement and reporting in the peer review literature and no has yet shown cyclists are pedalling wrong or there is a better way of pedalling.

Nor has it been shown that they are pedaling correctly (or, because pedaling technique varies substantially, which of those are pedaling "correctly') or that there isn't a better way of pedaling. The so-called literature in this area is pretty awful.

 

[coapman]

Reminds me of the saying that not everything that matters can be measured and not everything that can be measured matters.

40 years of real measurement and reporting in the peer review literature and no has yet shown cyclists are pedalling wrong or there is a better way of pedalling.

Cyclists are not pedalling wrong but those in TT's could improve their sustainable high gear power output by learning how to replace their pedalling dead spot sector with maximal torque. Lower back pain in cycling is another serious problem scientists failed to solve and this dead spot eliminating technique also eliminates the root cause of that torture.40 years of wasted research time on nothing more than analysis of the circular and mashing styles. I hope BB PM can produce more revealing pedalling graphs.

 

[CoachFergie]

Cyclists are not pedalling wrong but those in TT's could improve their sustainable high gear power output by learning how to replace their pedalling dead spot sector with maximal torque. Lower back pain in cycling is another serious problem scientists failed to solve and this dead spot eliminating technique also eliminates the root cause of that torture.40 years of wasted research time on nothing more than analysis of the circular and mashing styles. I hope BB PM can produce more revealing pedalling graphs.

So you keep saying but never supplying any real data to show this is the case. If your method was effective you would be able communicate it to someone like Jim Martin and he could easily test it on a validated and calibrated erg. Hiding behind the delusion that Brim Brothers will come to market is a joke. If the method produced more power any PM could show that.