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


Go Back   > >

General Cycling Discussion Have a cycling related question or comment that doesn't fit in one of the other specialty forums? Drop on in and post in here! When possible, please select the forum above that most fits your post!

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 05-17-06, 05:35 PM   #1
huhenio
Barbieri Telefonico
Thread Starter
 
huhenio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Albuquerque, New Mexico
Bikes: Crappy but operational secondhand Motobecane Messenger
Posts: 3,522
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Using PowerCalc to predict performance due changes in crank arm length.

Using PowerCalc to predict performance due changes in crank arm length.

So I got a hold of a set of 175’s in really good shape for 20$. The difference in the actual cranks and my older cranks is that the new ones have the five arm configuration, so changing rings for fine tuning my gear inch development would take 15 minutes versus impossible.

These are my findings using PoweCalc

Problem: 7% hill on 74 g.i. is a bit tough –

170 = 51.14 pounds @ pedals @ 52 rpm = 08.00 mph. – 291 watts @ pedals

175 = 51.14 pounds @ pedals @ 36 rpm = 11.22 mph. - 425 watts @ pedals!

I do not get it … I will use less pressure on the pedals, yet wattage increases.


Problem: 10% hill @ 5 mph on both cases.

170 = 71.28 pounds @ pedals. 247 watts.

175 = 68.87 pounds @ pedals. 247 watts.

Is Wattage a function of pedal pressure?

In my opinion, it should be …. But PowerCalc seems to disagree.

Who knows this stuff well?
__________________
Giving Haircuts Over The Phone

Last edited by huhenio; 05-17-06 at 07:56 PM.
huhenio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-06, 06:52 PM   #2
operator
cab horn
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Toronto
Bikes: 1987 Bianchi Campione
Posts: 28,306
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Is Wattage a function of pedal pressure?
Not just.
operator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-06, 06:59 PM   #3
iamlucky13
Footballus vita est
 
iamlucky13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Portland, OR
Bikes: Trek 4500, Kona Dawg
Posts: 2,118
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Power is the force multiplied by the arm length multiplied by the rate you are spinning at. In order to get Watts, use Newtons, meters, and radians per second (2*pi/60 * RPM's). If you increase the arm length, the force, or the speed you spin the pedals, you increase the power.

You're either using different gear ratios between examples one and two or you mixed up the RPM's between them. It looks like the latter, in which case those numbers make sense according to what I stated above. I didn't bother pulling out my calculator, but they look approximately right.

Note that this assumes a constant force throughout the stroke.

I'm not familiar with the term gear-inch. Can you explain that briefly?
__________________
"The internet is a place where absolutely nothing happens. You need to take advantage of that." ~ Strong Bad
iamlucky13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-06, 08:09 PM   #4
Jerseysbest
J E R S E Y S B E S T
 
Jerseysbest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: DC
Bikes:
Posts: 1,849
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


I love this picture
Jerseysbest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-06, 08:25 PM   #5
huhenio
Barbieri Telefonico
Thread Starter
 
huhenio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Albuquerque, New Mexico
Bikes: Crappy but operational secondhand Motobecane Messenger
Posts: 3,522
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
... and that is relevant because.

By the way ... I look pretty much like that guy rather than the "nerd" you are trying to imply.

asshat
__________________
Giving Haircuts Over The Phone
huhenio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-06, 08:21 AM   #6
BlazingPedals
Senior Member
 
BlazingPedals's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Middle of da Mitten
Bikes: Trek 7500, RANS V-Rex, Optima Baron, Velokraft NoCom, M-5 Carbon Highracer, homebuilt recumbent
Posts: 8,799
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by huhenio
Using PowerCalc to predict performance due changes in crank arm length.

So I got a hold of a set of 175s in really good shape for 20$. The difference in the actual cranks and my older cranks is that the new ones have the five arm configuration, so changing rings for fine tuning my gear inch development would take 15 minutes versus impossible.

These are my findings using PoweCalc

Problem: 7% hill on 74 g.i. is a bit tough

170 = 51.14 pounds @ pedals @ 52 rpm = 08.00 mph. 291 watts @ pedals

175 = 51.14 pounds @ pedals @ 36 rpm = 11.22 mph. - 425 watts @ pedals!

I do not get it I will use less pressure on the pedals, yet wattage increases.
In example 2 (175) you are turning less rpm but going 3 mph faster! No matter what you say, the two examples are not the same size gear. Power is work over time, and going faster requires more power.
BlazingPedals is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-06, 09:03 AM   #7
Jerseysbest
J E R S E Y S B E S T
 
Jerseysbest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: DC
Bikes:
Posts: 1,849
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by huhenio
... and that is relevant because.

By the way ... I look pretty much like that guy rather than the "nerd" you are trying to imply.

asshat
relax
Jerseysbest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-06, 10:26 AM   #8
MichaelW
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: England
Bikes:
Posts: 12,920
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
In any experiment, ou have to figure out what factors to fix and what are variable.
The variables here are your crank length, what happens when you alter it.
Do you want to fix gear ratios? Not neccessarily since the same rider on different cranks would select a different ratio. See Sheldon Browns Gain Ratio measure.
The pedalling force should remain constant but the circumference of a rotation will increase with crank length so you would expect cadence to drop and gear ratio to increase a notch.

Is power output a variable: No, your body has a fixed upper limit and a set crusing level. Bike speed is the variable here.

Fix your heartrate and pedalling force. Select gear ratio and cadence to suit and measure the resultant speed. Do this on a ~5 mile time trial circuit in both directions.
MichaelW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-06, 11:20 AM   #9
huhenio
Barbieri Telefonico
Thread Starter
 
huhenio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Albuquerque, New Mexico
Bikes: Crappy but operational secondhand Motobecane Messenger
Posts: 3,522
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Oh ... the problems with powercalc were to help me understand the forces

Anyhow ... the main problem is that I like to ride in only 1 gear, either fixed or free. Pedaling uphill gets tricky after the second mile of upward slope. The main objective is to optimize the actual bike, and crank length is one of the variables so to add torque.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JerseyBest
Relax
... sorry for jumping on the gun like that. I wish I was a nerd and do all this math in my head.

Now ... will you contribute with the problem or not?
__________________
Giving Haircuts Over The Phone
huhenio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-06, 11:34 AM   #10
Eggplant Jeff
45 miles/week
 
Eggplant Jeff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Bikes: Jamis Aurora
Posts: 2,020
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
WTF happened to my post?

I had commented that in the MPH lines, you're gearing was different by about a factor of 2. I.E. 48/18 in the first case and 48/9 in the second.

Gear inches: http://www.sheldonbrown.com/gloss_g.html#gearinch

Although they're more popular than sheldon would have you believe .

The main thing crank length is going to give you is a change in the way your legs work the pedals. Mathematically it's no different than changing the gearing, but practically it is a question of how big a circle do your legs "like" to move in? Finding that will result in your body producing the optimal amount of torque applied to the crank.
__________________
Treasurer, HHCMF Club
Now living in the land of the cheesesteak.
But working at a job where I can't surf BikeForums all day any more...
Eggplant Jeff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-06, 11:44 AM   #11
BlazingPedals
Senior Member
 
BlazingPedals's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Middle of da Mitten
Bikes: Trek 7500, RANS V-Rex, Optima Baron, Velokraft NoCom, M-5 Carbon Highracer, homebuilt recumbent
Posts: 8,799
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelW
In any experiment, ou have to figure out what factors to fix and what are variable.
The variables here are your crank length, what happens when you alter it.
Do you want to fix gear ratios? Not neccessarily...
I understand about gain ratio, development, etc. The point is, as soon as you introduce a second variable, you've invalidated pointing to the first variable as the cause. Put the same rider up the same hill using the same gear, and only the crank length is changed (s in problem #2,) and you'll find the power requirement is the same for the same speed. Longer cranks have the effect of lower gears in that they break up the total work required into smaller chunks, i.e. the weight is moved a shorter distance per inch of foot travel. But the total work required is still the same because the feet have to move further under that load. I'm not arguing for or against longer cranks, I'm just saying that PowerCalc gave the results I would expect to see.
BlazingPedals is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-06, 06:36 PM   #12
huhenio
Barbieri Telefonico
Thread Starter
 
huhenio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Albuquerque, New Mexico
Bikes: Crappy but operational secondhand Motobecane Messenger
Posts: 3,522
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Anyhow.

The Powercalc prediction is the following ... revisited.

One of the hills @ 5% - Nice suffering for two miles in a 32 mile ride. Pedals go @ 58 rpm. Quads and hams are burning.

170mm crank @ 39.80 pounds of pressure at pedals = 12.87 mph. // cadence = 58 // wattage = 365.9
175mm crank @ 39.80 pounds of pressure at pedals = 14.79 mph. // cadence = 67 // wattage = 434.9

I repeat, this is the powercalc prediction.

Being the pounds of pressure at pedals the same, I would not only go 1.92 miles an hour faster but I would gain some efficiency since my cadence will be closer to 90.

With about the same percieved effort, I can produce 69 more watts.

My experience today in the 32 mile ride was the following: I even could drop some people from the B group on the uphills, keep with them in the downhills, and even take a few turns pulling the paceline.

Last time I simply could not ....

Go longer cranks!

pd: I will try them a few months, then I will decide it it would be reasonable to go up to 177's
__________________
Giving Haircuts Over The Phone

Last edited by huhenio; 05-18-06 at 07:32 PM.
huhenio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-06, 06:58 AM   #13
AnthonyG
Senior Member
 
AnthonyG's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Queanbeyan, Australia.
Bikes:
Posts: 3,676
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by iamlucky13

I'm not familiar with the term gear-inch. Can you explain that briefly?
Gear Inch is the OLD way of specifying gear ratio's and it makes sense to me because I'm OLD.

From the day's of 27" wheels its a simple calculation of front chainring (42t) divided by rear sprocket (13t) x wheel diameter (27") = 87 gear inches.

Its not realy suitable for accurate calculations but its a method suitable for considering one gear ratio in relation to another thats easy to calculate.

Regards, Anthony
AnthonyG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-06, 09:41 AM   #14
huhenio
Barbieri Telefonico
Thread Starter
 
huhenio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Albuquerque, New Mexico
Bikes: Crappy but operational secondhand Motobecane Messenger
Posts: 3,522
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
For example = bike works of New York has a chart with all the gear inch combinations.

Being the 700c x 25 wheel +- 2105 mm in circumference, we translate it in inches = 82.874 inches

Now we divide that diameter by 3.14 so we get the diameter. 26.39 inches.

Being the wheel diameter 26.4 inches, multiplied by fron/rear cog (42/15) my gear inch ratio is

Old gear ratio 26.4*(42/13) = 85.2923077 gear inches.
New gear ratio 26.4*(42/15) = 73.9 gear inches.

I was about to change it a bit, but maybe I'll do it if I change my tires first.

Handy dandy formula, eh?
__________________
Giving Haircuts Over The Phone
huhenio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-06, 12:03 PM   #15
Eggplant Jeff
45 miles/week
 
Eggplant Jeff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Bikes: Jamis Aurora
Posts: 2,020
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Woah woah woah, since when did you wimp out? What's this 74 gear inch nonsense? What happened to 85? A few dinky little hills and you collapse like a card house under a bulldozer?
__________________
Treasurer, HHCMF Club
Now living in the land of the cheesesteak.
But working at a job where I can't surf BikeForums all day any more...
Eggplant Jeff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-06, 03:04 PM   #16
huhenio
Barbieri Telefonico
Thread Starter
 
huhenio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Albuquerque, New Mexico
Bikes: Crappy but operational secondhand Motobecane Messenger
Posts: 3,522
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The 85 is nice for 15 or 20 miles, but I think that 78 would be more ideal. I need to get stronger and lighter to ride 85 for 50 or 60 miles.

Sorry Jeff, 52 miles of hills last week made me wimp out. <sobbing in disgrace>
__________________
Giving Haircuts Over The Phone
huhenio is offline   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 06:06 AM.