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!

Double the magnets ...

Old 01-17-06, 01:11 AM
  #1  
willtsmith_nwi
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,398
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Double the magnets ...

Has anyone tried using two magnets instead of one on their cyclocomputer. I'm curious if this would give more accurate readings at lower speeds (you would just have the circumference to keep things right).
willtsmith_nwi is offline  
Old 01-17-06, 01:14 AM
  #2  
bennyk
Senior Member
 
bennyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 477
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
wouldn't this mean that your measurement of the wheel's circumference would have to be more accurate?

edited to say, yes it would make the low-speed readings more precise, but it could throw off all of the readings.
bennyk is offline  
Old 01-17-06, 01:17 AM
  #3  
SteveFox
Tour de World
 
SteveFox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Hinton, AB, canada
Posts: 185

Bikes: Trek 520, Giant Iguana disc

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
are you saying 2 magnets at opposite ends of the wheel, or right next to eachother? if they are opposite sides, they would give you twice the speed reading as the magnet is passing past the sensor twice in one revolution of the wheel, making everything X2. if you spin your magnet across the sensor back and forth it does the same thing, gives a really high speed...i got 97 km/h by doing that with my hand.

Steve
SteveFox is offline  
Old 01-17-06, 02:41 AM
  #4  
DannoXYZ 
Senior Member
 
DannoXYZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Saratoga, CA
Posts: 11,739
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 102 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Two separate magnets wouldn't make a difference. If the field is too weak with one, you'll end up with two weak pulses per revolution. What you can do, is to stack two magnets on top of each other oriented such that their fields are reinforced. In which case, yes, you'll have a stronger signal.

What's the problem anyway?
DannoXYZ is offline  
Old 01-17-06, 04:39 AM
  #5  
CommuterRun
Conservative Hippie
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Wakulla Co. FL
Posts: 4,271
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
One magnet using the diameter of the wheel.
Two magnets, 180 out, using half the diameter of the wheel.

I don't think it would make any difference for practical purposes.

Of course you could always try it and see.

Last edited by CommuterRun; 01-17-06 at 04:44 AM.
CommuterRun is offline  
Old 01-17-06, 05:15 AM
  #6  
Retro Grouch 
Senior Member
 
Retro Grouch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: St Peters, Missouri
Posts: 29,244

Bikes: Catrike 559 I own some others but they don't get ridden very much.

Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1135 Post(s)
Liked 17 Times in 13 Posts
Don't tell but putting two magnets on your wheel will make you go twice as fast. It's the only way that I can keep up with the guys that I ride with.
Retro Grouch is offline  
Old 01-17-06, 06:22 AM
  #7  
2manybikes
Dog is my co-pilot
 
2manybikes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 17,525

Bikes: 2 many

Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 986 Post(s)
Liked 10 Times in 9 Posts
Originally Posted by Retro Grouch
Don't tell but putting two magnets on your wheel will make you go twice as fast. It's the only way that I can keep up with the guys that I ride with.
Then I'm going for three !!
2manybikes is offline  
Old 01-17-06, 07:23 AM
  #8  
EventServices
Announcer
 
EventServices's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Detroit's North Side.
Posts: 5,084

Bikes: Many

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
How accurate do you NEED it to be???

I'd say this would be an excellent practical joke to play on other riders.
EventServices is offline  
Old 01-17-06, 07:25 AM
  #9  
2manybikes
Dog is my co-pilot
 
2manybikes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 17,525

Bikes: 2 many

Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 986 Post(s)
Liked 10 Times in 9 Posts
Originally Posted by EventServices
How accurate do you NEED it to be???

I'd say this would be an excellent practical joke to play on other riders.

It certainly was !
2manybikes is offline  
Old 01-17-06, 09:20 AM
  #10  
SteveFox
Tour de World
 
SteveFox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Hinton, AB, canada
Posts: 185

Bikes: Trek 520, Giant Iguana disc

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
aww, i wish people ride thier bikes here...id do that to someone. dang

steve
SteveFox is offline  
Old 01-17-06, 09:42 AM
  #11  
ghettocruiser
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 4,063
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Getting two spoke locations on exactly opposite sides of the centre of the hub would be required, and I'm not sure you can find them with a conventional 32H 3-cross. Otherwise your speed will appear to oscillate within a single revolution of the wheel.

File this under "dumb things I tried at university". Nowadays it's all about the GPS anyways...
ghettocruiser is offline  
Old 01-17-06, 11:11 AM
  #12  
EventServices
Announcer
 
EventServices's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Detroit's North Side.
Posts: 5,084

Bikes: Many

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
But if you attach TWO gps units to your friend's front wheel ....

...now you've got a practical joke!
EventServices is offline  
Old 01-17-06, 11:16 AM
  #13  
Retro Grouch 
Senior Member
 
Retro Grouch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: St Peters, Missouri
Posts: 29,244

Bikes: Catrike 559 I own some others but they don't get ridden very much.

Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1135 Post(s)
Liked 17 Times in 13 Posts
Originally Posted by 2manybikes
Then I'm going for three !!
I thought about that but then I'd get ahead of them, wouldn't I?
Retro Grouch is offline  
Old 01-17-06, 11:21 AM
  #14  
JT52
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Highlands Ranch, Colordao
Posts: 137

Bikes: '84 Peugeot PSV-10, '00 Schwinn Moab 2, '01 Airborne Valkyrie, '04 Surly Cross-Check

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Just think how fast you could go by putting magnets on all 32 spokes! Of course, I might have to remove the playing cards...
JT52 is offline  
Old 01-17-06, 01:15 PM
  #15  
cyccommute 
Mad bike riding scientist
 
cyccommute's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 21,271

Bikes: Some silver ones, a red one, an orange one and a few titanium ones

Mentioned: 91 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2404 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 78 Times in 55 Posts
Originally Posted by CommuterRun
One magnet using the diameter of the wheel.
Two magnets, 180 out, using half the diameter of the wheel.

I don't think it would make any difference for practical purposes.

Of course you could always try it and see.
I placed second magnet on my daughters bike by accident. As we were riding along, she stated that we were going really fast. My computer said we were doing about 12 mph. Her's said we were doing around 20 mph. It took a while but I found the second magnet. Now I'm going to put one on my buddies bike without his knowledge and listen to him brag about how fast he is. I wish I had a way of putting one that would cut the speed in half. I could have lots of fun with this
__________________
Stuart Black
Pokin' around the Poconos A cold ride around Lake Erie
Dinosaurs in Colorado A mountain bike guide to the Purgatory Canyon dinosaur trackway
Solo Without Pie. The search for pie in the Midwest.
Picking the Scablands. Washington and Oregon, 2005. Pie and spiders on the Columbia River!
Days of Wineless Roads. Bed and Breakfasting along the KATY
Twisting Down the Alley. Misadventures in tornado alley.
An Good Ol' Fashion Appalachian Butt Whoopin'.
cyccommute is offline  
Old 01-17-06, 01:43 PM
  #16  
Rev.Chuck
The Red Lantern
 
Rev.Chuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Raleigh NC
Posts: 5,965
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
They don't even need to be 180 off. The computer would recieve two signals per revolution regardless of position.
__________________
Are you a registered member? Why not? click here to register. Its free, and only takes 27 seconds!
Help out the forums, abide by our community guidelines.

I am in the woods and I have gone crazy.
Rev.Chuck is offline  
Old 01-17-06, 01:48 PM
  #17  
TheRCF
Da Big Kahuna
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Oahu, Hawaii
Posts: 814
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Nah, the magnets add weight and wind resistance - just change the computer calibration to a really high number!
TheRCF is offline  
Old 01-17-06, 01:53 PM
  #18  
TheRCF
Da Big Kahuna
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Oahu, Hawaii
Posts: 814
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I'm not exactly sure if the OP had the same thing in mind as I have wondered about or not, but here is my question:

I have noticed that the actual speed tends to jump certain numbers. For example, mine might show 16.9 and even if I try to just barely speed up, it will then go to 17.2 - same problem if I slow back down.

I'm not sure it can't or never has shown the inbetween speeds, but it sure doesn't do it much if it does at all.

I figure it has to do with how the computer software works in relating seconds to rpm (rounding things off basically).

So I wondered if I put a second magnet across from the first and cut my calibration number in half, would that cause me to get more accurate numbers? Sure, it isn't a big deal, but certainly more accuracy is better than less.
TheRCF is offline  
Old 01-17-06, 02:30 PM
  #19  
ghettocruiser
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 4,063
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
If the magnets were not 180 off, the distance travelled would be measured correctly. But the current speed function times the difference between magnet passes. Hence the speed jumps up and down.
ghettocruiser is offline  
Old 01-17-06, 02:37 PM
  #20  
willtsmith_nwi
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,398
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by TheRCF
I'm not exactly sure if the OP had the same thing in mind as I have wondered about or not, but here is my question:

I have noticed that the actual speed tends to jump certain numbers. For example, mine might show 16.9 and even if I try to just barely speed up, it will then go to 17.2 - same problem if I slow back down.

I'm not sure it can't or never has shown the inbetween speeds, but it sure doesn't do it much if it does at all.

I figure it has to do with how the computer software works in relating seconds to rpm (rounding things off basically).

So I wondered if I put a second magnet across from the first and cut my calibration number in half, would that cause me to get more accurate numbers? Sure, it isn't a big deal, but certainly more accuracy is better than less.
Yeah, this is kinda the point. With a large wheel the computer has to do a LOT of guessing (is he slowing down or speeding up?). This is more amplified at lower speeds. In the end the odometer will be the same. But two magnets might make the computer a bit more responsive.

Three magnets would probably be optimal, but I don't think the computers take numbers that low for circumference.
willtsmith_nwi is offline  
Old 01-17-06, 02:41 PM
  #21  
willtsmith_nwi
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,398
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by ghettocruiser
If the magnets were not 180 off, the distance travelled would be measured correctly. But the current speed function times the difference between magnet passes. Hence the speed jumps up and down.
It already does, that's the point.
willtsmith_nwi is offline  
Old 01-17-06, 02:59 PM
  #22  
BlazingPedals
Senior Member
 
BlazingPedals's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Middle of da Mitten
Posts: 10,894

Bikes: Trek 7500, RANS V-Rex, Optima Baron, Velokraft NoCom, M-5 Carbon Highracer, homebuilt recumbent

Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 882 Post(s)
Liked 12 Times in 10 Posts
I think multiple magnets would make the readings more stable, but might result in a loss of accuracy. Here's how: if the circumference measurement is an odd number and you add a second magnet, you can't set the computer for half - it'll have to be half minus 0.5 or half plus 0.5. You could be off by 1 for each wheel revolution!

OTOH, one integer difference is only going to introduce something like a 0.5% error or less. Make it up by not wobbling as much when you pedal or cutting your corners differently.
BlazingPedals is offline  
Old 01-17-06, 04:31 PM
  #23  
webist
Huachuca Rider
 
webist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 4,275

Bikes: Fuji CCR1, Specialized Roubaix

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
This thread raises an interesting point regarding computer accuracy which until now I hadn't really given much thought to. Saturday, I was certain that I had completed a 30-mile ride. My computer registered only 29.97 miles however. I think I'll get another magnet!
__________________
Just Peddlin' Around
webist is offline  
Old 01-17-06, 04:44 PM
  #24  
jur
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 7,406
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 313 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 1 Post
From a computer calculation perspective, having 2 magnets and entering 1/2 the wheel circumference could yield faster speed updates and smaller quantization steps, depending on the circumference resolution, for low speed.
jur is offline  
Old 01-17-06, 04:49 PM
  #25  
free_pizza
later
 
free_pizza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,471
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by jur
From a computer calculation perspective, having 2 magnets and entering 1/2 the wheel circumference could yield faster speed updates and smaller quantization steps, depending on the circumference resolution, for low speed.
that would work perfectly provided that the magnets were placed at exactly the right points.
free_pizza is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.