View Single Post
Old 05-13-14 | 04:35 PM
  #30  
FBinNY
Senior Member
Titanium Club Membership
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 39,897
Likes: 3,868
From: New Rochelle, NY

Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter

Originally Posted by Carbonfiberboy
.....Nothing to do with the rearward force from bumps because for every rearward force there's a forward force from the other side of a random bump. Rough roller test show that resistance decreases with increasing pressure just the same as it does on smooth rollers. It's the upward movement of the bike that uses energy, so to get an increase in resistance there has to be enough upward movement to counteract the inherent lower resistance of higher pressure. .
I bolded the main part of your error. There's no return of energy lost to the rear vector of the force needed to raise the bike over the bump because the bicycle is moving too fast and "ski jumps" off the other end of the bump and free falls back to earth.

You are right that the energy lost on bumpy roads relates to what's needed to raise the bike, but it's not the vertical movement that's an issue, it's the rear vector of that lifting force generated at the point of contact.
__________________
FB
Chain-L site

An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.

Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.

“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN

WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
FBinNY is offline  
Reply