Cycling and bicycle racing discussion forums.   View New Forum Topics
Today's Forum Topics

Set as homepage


Go Back   Cycling Forums > Tech Corner > Power Training
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Welcome to CyclingForums.com

You are currently viewing our website as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions. You will have to register before you can post to this thread.

By joining our free online community you will have access to post new topics, communicate privately with other cyclingforums.com members (PM), respond to polls, upload photos and access other special features like product reviews and classifieds.


Using analyticcycling

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 16-01.-2006, 03:46 AM   #1
whoawhoa
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,019
Default Using analyticcycling

When using the power given speed page on ac,

1. Is there a good way to estimate cda? Say a formular for fa and a common cd?

2. If I am trying to get an idea of short duration power by doing a, say, one minute effort up a steep hill, should I start the hill at a speed similar to what I will hold during the effort to minimize acceleration/deceleration?
whoawhoa is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 16-01.-2006, 02:13 PM   #2
frenchyge
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Kansas City, USA
Posts: 3,689
Default Re: Using analyticcycling

Quote:
Originally Posted by whoawhoa
1. Is there a good way to estimate cda? Say a formular for fa and a common cd?

I'd say frontal area would be easier to determine directly, then solve for Cd. You can measure frontal area with a digital camera or videocamera setup. As long as there's something in the frame like a yardstick to establish the scaling. Solve for Cd using a coastdown measurement or power at a steady speed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by whoawhoa
2. If I am trying to get an idea of short duration power by doing a, say, one minute effort up a steep hill, should I start the hill at a speed similar to what I will hold during the effort to minimize acceleration/deceleration?

Definitely want to hold speed constant. Speed changes will throw off your AC.com calculations significantly.
frenchyge is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 16-01.-2006, 02:31 PM   #3
RapDaddyo
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 4,115
Default Re: Using analyticcycling

Quote:
Originally Posted by whoawhoa
If I am trying to get an idea of short duration power by doing a, say, one minute effort up a steep hill, should I start the hill at a speed similar to what I will hold during the effort to minimize acceleration/deceleration?
Speed on a known grade upgrade is probably the best way to estimate power without a power meter, at any duration. But, if the grade varies, even by 1%-2%, be careful about using the average grade because the average grade will understate the "effective" grade for measurement purposes. Think of a rolling, close-loop course. The average grade is zero, but the higher power required by the upgrades is not offset by the lower power required by the downgrades, at least on a physiological basis. Look at the weighting algorithm in NP. And, unfortunately, the highway engineers never got the message that you need a constant grade upgrade for testing purposes. So, this was never a design goal. You minimize the problem the shorter the duration, but be careful in choosing your test road.
RapDaddyo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 18-01.-2006, 06:01 AM   #4
rmur17
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 970
Default Re: Using analyticcycling

Quote:
Originally Posted by whoawhoa
When using the power given speed page on ac,

1. Is there a good way to estimate cda? Say a formular for fa and a common cd?

2. If I am trying to get an idea of short duration power by doing a, say, one minute effort up a steep hill, should I start the hill at a speed similar to what I will hold during the effort to minimize acceleration/deceleration?
(1) FA formula's yes but for n=1 I don't think they're of much use. CdA is of course what matters. For an aero position that could be 0.2-0.3 or even higher if you're a large bloke. For a tops/hoods climbing position something around 0.4 is in the ballpark or some 40% higher. I'm around .275 fully 'aero' (like a barn door!) and ~0.40 on the tops (at a lard-like 85 kg mind you)

(2) Yep. Constant speed to make the static ACC formula's work ( or zero delta KE across the interval). If you go long enough however the impact of delta.KE approaches zero

(3) Time to ante up (or have your parents do so) for a real PM. You can find quite decent, lightly used PT Pro's around for maybe 2/3rds of retail. I have two units and find them great ('cept in heavy rain). Folks often buy toys and carelessly discard them

rmur
rmur17 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 18-01.-2006, 06:52 AM   #5
whoawhoa
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,019
Default Re: Using analyticcycling

Quote:
Originally Posted by rmur17
(1) FA formula's yes but for n=1 I don't think they're of much use. CdA is of course what matters. For an aero position that could be 0.2-0.3 or even higher if you're a large bloke. For a tops/hoods climbing position something around 0.4 is in the ballpark or some 40% higher. I'm around .275 fully 'aero' (like a barn door!) and ~0.40 on the tops (at a lard-like 85 kg mind you)

I guess all formulas work beter for a population then an individual.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rmur17
(3) Time to ante up (or have your parents do so) for a real PM. You can find quite decent, lightly used PT Pro's around for maybe 2/3rds of retail. I have two units and find them great ('cept in heavy rain). Folks often buy toys and carelessly discard them

rmur

Already saving. Just have to win a few races this spring! Is there any reason to go with the pro over the standard?
whoawhoa is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 18-01.-2006, 07:27 AM   #6
frenchyge
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Kansas City, USA
Posts: 3,689
Default Re: Using analyticcycling

Quote:
Originally Posted by whoawhoa
Is there any reason to go with the pro over the standard?

Pretty sure there's a thread specifically about that. Greater memory and better interval display come to mind off the top of my head.
frenchyge is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 19-01.-2006, 06:35 AM   #7
rmur17
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 970
Default Re: Using analyticcycling

Quote:
Originally Posted by frenchyge
Pretty sure there's a thread specifically about that. Greater memory and better interval display come to mind off the top of my head.
I like yellow ... and memory capacity and better interval functionality. I think the SRM is best of course but the prices just ain't coming down on those puppies. The SRM interval function: (1) Turn it ON (2) Do your interval (3) Turn it OFF (4) have your interval Stats flashed in your face ... seems perfect to me. But for an extra $1.5-2.0k ???

rmur
rmur17 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 19-01.-2006, 06:37 AM   #8
whoawhoa
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,019
Default Re: Using analyticcycling

Quote:
Originally Posted by rmur17
I like yellow ... and memory capacity and better interval functionality. I think the SRM is best of course but the prices just ain't coming down on those puppies. The SRM interval function: (1) Turn it ON (2) Do your interval (3) Turn it OFF (4) have your interval Stats flashed in your face ... seems perfect to me. But for an extra $1.5-2.0k ???

rmur

What about the smoothing feature? Does power jump around too much without it? I don't think that was mentioned in the other thread, but I just skimmed it.
whoawhoa is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 19-01.-2006, 10:40 PM   #9
rmur17
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 970
Default Re: Using analyticcycling

Quote:
Originally Posted by whoawhoa
What about the smoothing feature? Does power jump around too much without it? I don't think that was mentioned in the other thread, but I just skimmed it.

http://www.midweekclub.com/powerFAQ.htm#Q8

This link says it better than I can I'd forgotten many of the small differences between the two.

rmur
rmur17 is offline  
Reply With Quote

Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



All times are GMT +10. The time now is 02:21 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin Copyright © 2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2001 - 2006 cyclingforums.com

Links to websites we like:
Pezcyclingnews | Cyclingnews.com | Wine Zone | iinet