Published, reliable recent research on aerodynamics and or training with power metrics as key focal

[Chris M]

I have not seen any recent articles on either topic and that leads me
to believe that whatever data that has been created / discovered has
been proprietary and or focused only on small groups or single athletes
as applied to them and kept unpublished for competitive reasons.

Am I wrong? Have I missed any good articles on these topics in the past
3 to 5 years?

Somewhat related, I really expected the most recent changes to the UCI
rules for bike construction and weight would have brought a lot more
cool functions to bikes as lighter frames, components (including
wheels) would have caused huge incentives to continue bringing out
super light products with power meters and other integrated features
(pre-wired frames with everything you can imagine, maybe even a water
bladder with straw drinking system in the frame) etc.

The closest thing to clever I have seen is Trek adding weight
attachment points near the bottom of the BB so that any ballast added
is low as possible (which in some cases might be a performance benefit
but not when we are talking - + 100 grams).

I think only CSC has persistently tried to exploit the lowe weights of
modern frames by using the aerodynamically superior frame instead of
the lighter frame that would have required ballast to add the saved
weight back (the aero' frame is just light enough to build a DA / ZIPP
bike right at the minimum weight in medium sizes and some lighter sizes
they can also add the SRM power meter instead of ballast). Nobody else
seems to recognize the potential for this.


Am I wrong here?

 

[Ron Ruff]

Chris M wrote:
> I have not seen any recent articles on either topic and that leads me
> to believe that whatever data that has been created / discovered has
> been proprietary and or focused only on small groups or single athletes
> as applied to them and kept unpublished for competitive reasons.

The people paying for wind tunnel testing generally would not benefit
from giving the info away. Tour Magazine (germany) does regular aero
testing of equipment, but I'm not aware of them testing riders for
position.

The articles and forum here are good places to find info on that:
http://biketechreview.com/

 

[Jim Martin]

You might want to read:
Modeling sprint cycling using field-derived parameters and forward
integration. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 38(3):592-7 2006. Martin, J.C., A.S
Gardner, M. Barras, and D.T. Martin

Any university library should have MSSE.

Cheers,

Jim

 

[Jim Martin]

Here is the abstract:

Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2006 Mar;38(3):592-7. Modeling sprint cycling
using field-derived parameters and forward integration.

* Martin JC,
* Gardner AS,
* Barras M,
* Martin DT.

The University of Utah, Department of Exercise and Sport Science,
Salt Lake City, UT, USA.

We previously reported that a mathematical model could accurately
predict steady-state road-cycling power when all the model parameters
were known. Application of that model to competitive cycling has been
limited by the need to obtain accurate parameter values, the
non-steady-state nature of many cycling events, and because the validity
of the model at maximal power has not been established. PURPOSE: We
determined whether modeling parameters could be accurately determined
during field trials and whether the model could accurately predict
cycling speed during maximal acceleration using forward integration.
METHODS: First, we quantified aerodynamic drag area of six cyclists
using both wind tunnel and field trials allowing for these two
techniques to be compared. Next, we determined the aerodynamic drag area
of three world-class sprint cyclists using the field-test protocol.
Track cyclists also performed maximal standing-start time trials, during
which we recorded power and speed. Finally, we used forward integration
to predict cycling speed from power-time data recorded during the
maximal trials allowing us to compare predicted speed with measured
speed. RESULTS: Field-based values of aerodynamic drag area (0.258 +/-
0.006 m) did not differ (P = 0.53) from those measured in a wind tunnel
(0.261 +/- 0.006 m2). Forward integration modeling accurately predicted
cycling speed (y = x, r2 = 0.989) over the duration of the
standing-start sprints. CONCLUSIONS: Field-derived values for
aerodynamic drag area can be equivalent to values derived from wind
tunnel testing, and these values can be used to accurately predict speed
even during maximal-power acceleration by world-class sprint cyclists.
This model could be useful for assessing aerodynamic issues and for
predicting how subtle changes in riding position, mass, or power output
will influence cycling speed.

 

[Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman]

Chris M wrote:
> I have not seen any recent articles on either topic and that leads me
> to believe that whatever data that has been created / discovered has
> been proprietary and or focused only on small groups or single athletes
> as applied to them and kept unpublished for competitive reasons....

Here is an upright bicycle rider with improved aerodynamics:
<http://tinyurl.com/esc23>.

--
Tom Sherman - Behind the Cheddar Curtain