Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

Framebuilders Thinking about a custom frame? Lugged vs Fillet Brazed. Different Frame materials? Newvex or Pacenti Lugs? why get a custom Road, Mountain, or Track Frame? Got a question about framebuilding? Lets discuss framebuilding at it's finest.

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 09-04-12, 09:18 PM   #1
Canaboo
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Bikes:
Posts: 321
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Whippy frame energy return

I recently built a bamboo frame from slim tonkin that practically seems to pedal itself and when going through various theories and testimonials came across this.
http://www.faqs.org/patents/app/20120098233
Thoughts?
Canaboo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-12, 10:56 PM   #2
Andrew R Stewart 
Andrew R Stewart
 
Andrew R Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Rochester, NY
Bikes: Stewart S&S coupled sport tourer, Stewart Sunday light, Stewart Commuting, Stewart Touring, Co Motion Tandem, Stewart 3-Spd, Stewart Track, Fuji Finest, Raleigh Pro, Trek Cycle Cross, Mongoose tomac ATB, GT Bravado ATB, JCP Folder
Posts: 6,769
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 68 Post(s)
The patent reads to me like a another way of saying the bike plans...

Really it is interested that companies that market stiffness have to patent flexibility.

Your "discovery' is not new. BITD we sold nicer bikes on their "resilency" The thick walled low cost bikes were actually stiffer then the higher priced light weight ones. The thin walled ones rode better to any that used them. Some of us are still riding such bikes. We know that our rides are not filled with 1000 watt sprint finishes but with the feel of a nice road and how we flow along it. Andy.
Andrew R Stewart is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-12, 07:59 AM   #3
Canaboo
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Bikes:
Posts: 321
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
http://www.erbbike.com/index.html
Canaboo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-12, 09:38 AM   #4
Live Wire 
Framebuilder
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Bikes:
Posts: 531
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Ha, thats pretty funny. The URT + the slingshot, the hottest suspension designs from 1994 together in one bike!
Looks like it would be fun to try though, the old Slingshots weren't so bad.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canaboo View Post
Live Wire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-12, 11:32 AM   #5
fietsbob 
coprolite
 
fietsbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: NW,Oregon Coast
Bikes: 7
Posts: 20,390
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 643 Post(s)
VBQ went on and on about Planing.. just enough flex to add comfort,
but any flexibility comes back as springy rebound , returned to the pedaling forward.
fietsbob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-12, 09:15 PM   #6
Canaboo
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Bikes:
Posts: 321
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I do notice some very heated discussions about frame flex versus stiffness.
Interesting that many pieces of sport equipment likely fall in the same category.
Here's a quote from a badminton raquet company:

The stiff racquet structure at the top of the frame head allows the head to bend in a very controlled way and hold shuttles on the string bed for longer.
The thin frame sides then allow the frame to bend more and transfer more energy to the shuttle.
This combination allows you to smash with instant power.
Doesn't that sound just like what a person convinced that a frame with just the right amount of give might do to a pedal "smash" as well?
Canaboo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-12, 08:34 AM   #7
repechage
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Bikes:
Posts: 10,951
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 99 Post(s)
The whole "plane-ing" claim really makes me crack up.

Do bikes "plane", front he descriptions I have read, yes. But from experience and a bit of engineering and riding some early ti frames, (Speedwell and Teledyne) the window of "advantage" or perceived advantage is pretty narrow. The bike planes, but then there is an attack, and you must answer it, and you get out of phase with the spring of the frame, your inputs vary but the spring constant does not. So, you endure. Your happy, springy frame is not helping anymore. If you can always pedal in the happy harmonic of the frame, life will be just springing. Stops and terrain don't allow that.
repechage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-12, 11:27 PM   #8
Canaboo
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Bikes:
Posts: 321
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by repechage View Post
The whole "plane-ing" claim really makes me crack up.

Do bikes "plane", front he descriptions I have read, yes. But from experience and a bit of engineering and riding some early ti frames, (Speedwell and Teledyne) the window of "advantage" or perceived advantage is pretty narrow. The bike planes, but then there is an attack, and you must answer it, and you get out of phase with the spring of the frame, your inputs vary but the spring constant does not. So, you endure. Your happy, springy frame is not helping anymore. If you can always pedal in the happy harmonic of the frame, life will be just springing. Stops and terrain don't allow that.

I wouldn't call a frame a "constant" spring. The harder you hammer, the more you displace the frame but it requires more pressure to do so.
Canaboo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-12, 10:07 PM   #9
Andrew R Stewart 
Andrew R Stewart
 
Andrew R Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Rochester, NY
Bikes: Stewart S&S coupled sport tourer, Stewart Sunday light, Stewart Commuting, Stewart Touring, Co Motion Tandem, Stewart 3-Spd, Stewart Track, Fuji Finest, Raleigh Pro, Trek Cycle Cross, Mongoose tomac ATB, GT Bravado ATB, JCP Folder
Posts: 6,769
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 68 Post(s)
The question here might be is the deflection of the spring (frame) linier with the load or not. We, people, are not able to discern the difference with out measuring tools. With either a constant or variable spring, the harder you load it the more displacement will happen. How this applies to frames I'm not sure... Andy.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Canaboo View Post
I wouldn't call a frame a "constant" spring. The harder you hammer, the more you displace the frame but it requires more pressure to do
so.
Andrew R Stewart is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-12, 07:00 AM   #10
Canaboo
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Bikes:
Posts: 321
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew R Stewart View Post
The question here might be is the deflection of the spring (frame) linier with the load or not. We, people, are not able to discern the difference with out measuring tools. With either a constant or variable spring, the harder you load it the more displacement will happen. How this applies to frames I'm not sure... Andy.
The harder you push against the spring, the harder it pushes back???
One thing you learn as a kid pushing over standing dead trees so you can yell "timber!" is that a tree with just the right amount of flex left is a lot easier to get pushing itself over once you set it in motion.
Canaboo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-12, 08:01 PM   #11
Andrew R Stewart 
Andrew R Stewart
 
Andrew R Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Rochester, NY
Bikes: Stewart S&S coupled sport tourer, Stewart Sunday light, Stewart Commuting, Stewart Touring, Co Motion Tandem, Stewart 3-Spd, Stewart Track, Fuji Finest, Raleigh Pro, Trek Cycle Cross, Mongoose tomac ATB, GT Bravado ATB, JCP Folder
Posts: 6,769
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 68 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canaboo View Post
The harder you push against the spring, the harder it pushes back???

--I think that's what I said

One thing you learn as a kid pushing over standing dead trees so you can yell "timber!" is that a tree with just the right amount of flex left is a lot easier to get pushing itself over once you set it in motion.
--Not sure how this applies to frames, Andy.
Andrew R Stewart is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-12, 08:10 PM   #12
wphamilton
rugged individualist
 
wphamilton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Bikes: Nashbar Road
Posts: 10,037
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 272 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canaboo View Post
I recently built a bamboo frame from slim tonkin that practically seems to pedal itself and when going through various theories and testimonials came across this.
http://www.faqs.org/patents/app/20120098233
Thoughts?
I think the patent doesn't actually claim greater efficiency from the flexible frame, so all the related verbiage is extraneous.
wphamilton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-12, 08:59 PM   #13
Canaboo
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Bikes:
Posts: 321
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by wphamilton View Post
I think the patent doesn't actually claim greater efficiency from the flexible frame, so all the related verbiage is extraneous.
The second link does and the patent is for the owner of the energy return bike...
Canaboo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-12, 09:20 PM   #14
wphamilton
rugged individualist
 
wphamilton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Bikes: Nashbar Road
Posts: 10,037
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 272 Post(s)
canaboo you can name an invention anything you want on the patent, but the patent abstract says, "may also enhance the delivery of pedal power" and in the Background says "appears to increase energy efficiency". I look at the indefinite language - "maybe" claims are not patented.

In short, the inventor isn't trying to patent a more efficient frame. He's trying to patent a frame which yields a smoother ride. He might market it in some other fashion.
wphamilton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-12, 09:52 PM   #15
Canaboo
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Bikes:
Posts: 321
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by wphamilton View Post
canaboo you can name an invention anything you want on the patent, but the patent abstract says, "may also enhance the delivery of pedal power" and in the Background says "appears to increase energy efficiency". I look at the indefinite language - "maybe" claims are not patented.

In short, the inventor isn't trying to patent a more efficient frame. He's trying to patent a frame which yields a smoother ride. He might market it in some other fashion.
Doesn't the site for the actual bikes make those claims a bit more definitely?
Canaboo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-12, 06:05 AM   #16
Omiak
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Minneapolis
Bikes:
Posts: 313
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Man that's so weird I'm almost interested in buying one. Their over the top marketing kind makes me suspicious though.

Quote:
The mid-frame suspension improves traction, reduces vibration and noticeably improves acceleration and ratchets up your overall speed.

The ERB suspension will help you climb hills better and faster than you ever thought possible. This frame delivers more of your precious pedal energy to the ground.

ERB's Energy Return System gives you a mechanical pedaling advantage by storing and releasing energy with every pedal stroke.

With pedal power transfer that is even better than on rigid frame bikes, you will notice exceptional acceleration, a smoother ride and superior handling. Climbing hills will also be easier on the ERB.
Also there only seems to be two reviews of the thing online, one from two years ago and one from four years ago. Weird.
Omiak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-12, 06:29 AM   #17
Mark Kelly 
Senior Member
 
Mark Kelly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Willy, VIC
Bikes:
Posts: 642
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The problem with all these claims is that they're a castle built on sand: since there isn't any appreciable energy loss in an ordinary frame, reducing the energy loss does diddly squat. Same argument applies to the latest carbon LSBVC wundercycle.
Mark Kelly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-12, 06:50 AM   #18
Canaboo
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Bikes:
Posts: 321
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Kelly View Post
The problem with all these claims is that they're a castle built on sand: since there isn't any appreciable energy loss in an ordinary frame, reducing the energy loss does diddly squat. Same argument applies to the latest carbon LSBVC wundercycle.
The video of the bikes on the dynamometer looks pretty convincing.
Energy loss isn't really the point but rather the practical energy gains.
I realize that energy can't be "created" but I can see relative inefficiencies of a pedal stroke being converted to a more efficient system.
Canaboo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-12, 07:03 AM   #19
Omiak
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Minneapolis
Bikes:
Posts: 313
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'm not entirely sure what a carbon LSBVC wundercycle is, but you make a good point about the ERB. It does look interesting as a sort of semi-passive suspension though.
Omiak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-12, 07:38 AM   #20
wphamilton
rugged individualist
 
wphamilton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Bikes: Nashbar Road
Posts: 10,037
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 272 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canaboo View Post
The second link does and the patent is for the owner of the energy return bike...
The marketing text does say that the spring "returns energy", but it is unclear to me that there is any mechanism to transfer the energy to the pedal rotation or wheel rotation. That's not actually in the patent so I'm skeptical. The only way I can see an improvement for energy efficiency is if the frequency of bumps happen to coincide with a frame oscillation, lightening the wheel over subsequent bumps. But that could just as easily work against you.

Sorry, but you did ask for our thoughts.

I tend to believe that it does act as a suspension with a smoother ride, possibly improving traction over rough surfaces.
wphamilton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-12, 08:57 PM   #21
Mark Kelly 
Senior Member
 
Mark Kelly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Willy, VIC
Bikes:
Posts: 642
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
LSBVC = Laterally Stiff But Vertically Compliant.
Mark Kelly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-12, 09:09 PM   #22
Canaboo
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Bikes:
Posts: 321
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Not sure where your other reply went......
Canaboo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-12, 10:26 PM   #23
Omiak
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Minneapolis
Bikes:
Posts: 313
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Kelly View Post
LSBVC = Laterally Stiff But Vertically Compliant.
Ahh, I've never heard that one acronymized before.

Do you guys think this frame would suffer from the same negative features of other unified rear triangle suspension designs? I guess any time the suspension is pivoting along the composite rods you're going to have the pedals moving in the opposite direction as the saddle, but it seems like it would be pretty subtle on this bike.

Is engaging the rear brake going to make the suspension pivot and bounce you around?
Omiak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-12, 10:50 PM   #24
Mark Kelly 
Senior Member
 
Mark Kelly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Willy, VIC
Bikes:
Posts: 642
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canaboo View Post
Not sure where your other reply went......
I decided it wasn't worth pursuing.



Pic courtesy XKCD.

Last edited by Mark Kelly; 09-12-12 at 10:54 PM.
Mark Kelly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-12, 02:00 PM   #25
Andrew R Stewart 
Andrew R Stewart
 
Andrew R Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Rochester, NY
Bikes: Stewart S&S coupled sport tourer, Stewart Sunday light, Stewart Commuting, Stewart Touring, Co Motion Tandem, Stewart 3-Spd, Stewart Track, Fuji Finest, Raleigh Pro, Trek Cycle Cross, Mongoose tomac ATB, GT Bravado ATB, JCP Folder
Posts: 6,769
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 68 Post(s)
Mark- Well said! I usually try to use logic and physical laws a couple of times with my relies. After that I am reluctent to go for a strike three. I i had a dollar for every time someone said they have reinvented the bike I'd be rich. Like the Italian crank arms with a 90* bend in the arms. Their claims were along the lines of "the power reaches the rings before it's applied to the pedals" (or some such impossibility). Andy.
Andrew R Stewart is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:23 PM.