View Single Post
  #51  
Old November 23rd 19, 11:30 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 824
Default Creeping brake pad drag

On Saturday, November 23, 2019 at 6:37:21 PM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 11/23/2019 5:15 AM, wrote:
On Saturday, November 23, 2019 at 6:49:45 AM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Friday, November 22, 2019 at 5:34:55 PM UTC-5, wrote:

In general, I prefer to stay away from bicycle technologies that require
such explanations. Those include hydraulic discs. (Ten paragraph lines
of possible solutions?) Ditto for electronic shifting ("First press and
hold the button to enter the programming mode... or connect to your
computer interface using the appropriate software...") Ditto for STI,
which usually gets summarized as "You can't fix it. Just throw it away
and buy another one."

I know I'm archaic. But I like simple mechanical devices that get
diagnosed by sight and fixed with things like allen wrenches.

And I never liked working on plumbing.


--
- Frank Krygowski

If I am going to talk like this will you shoot me please because that is the moment you give up to learn and experiencing something new. I'm a mechanical engineer that started with a simple drawing board and those awful ink pens and no PC's. Then we got 2D cad, then 3D cad and then 3D cad with integrated simulation and calculation modules and databases. It got complicated everytime but is was nevertheless progress.

Requiring computers is different from being able to use computers.

I was and still am quite skilled as a paper draftsman. When it became available,
I learned and used 2-d computer drafting. I learned 3-d solid modeling.. (Hell,
the last piece of furniture I built was designed using 3-d solid modeling.) I
learned and used Finite Element Analysis. I can do that sort of stuff.

But I don't want equipment on my bike that requires interfacing to a computer to
adjust or fix. To me, that's the opposite of "appropriate technology." I have
done plumbing and can still do plumbing, but I don't like it and I don't want
plumbing on my bike. And so on. I think bikes should be simple. YMMV.

- Frank Krygowski


What makes you believe that electronic shifting needs interfacing to computer to adjust or fix?


Well, the first clue I got was in forums such as these, where some
people posted questions about how to use the computer interface for
adjusting some feature or another. Then I came across online
instructions (and maybe videos?) telling or showing how to do it.

I'll admit, I don't know how necessary those procedures really are. I
could learn that only by installing the system, and I don't have a
reason to do that.

That is not true and it is one of your misconceptions that hold you back from looking at it with an open mind. You just push a button instead of turning on a adjusting barrel. What is the difference? For most people this is more intuitive. In my kind of work a mechatronic approach leads in most cases to the best design/solution for a problem, so a combination of mechanics, electronics and software. In my opinion shifting on a bicycle is an example of a problem that will benifit from a mechatronic approach. The weak point of the current pure mechanical solution are the cables and the complicated mechanical components in the shifter in the environment were they are used. Shifting by wire solves the issue of the cables and make the internals of the shifter immensely simple. The electronics are simple for today standards and the same apply for the firmware. In the beginning you have to have vision and see the potential of such a system: a low maintenance, reliable, easy to setup and simpler system.


Your definition of "simple" is much different than mine. On one hand, we
have a lever with a cylindrical surface on which a cable is wrapped. The
cable passes through a housing, then pulls on (effectively) a lever
built into the derailleur. A spring makes it return. Everything is
visible and easy to understand, easy to diagnose, and can be fixed with
hand tools that fit in one's pocket.

OTOH, we have a battery, wires, an electric actuator of some kind with
who-knows-what inside it (do you know?), push buttons and unknown
circuits of microelectronic components and probably hundreds of lines of
code. In my view, putting immense complexity into a sealed black box
does not make a system "simple."

One day, I'm sure, Shimano will introduce "thought shifting" triggered
by some bio-electronic technology. I'm sure it will have fans who will
say "I can't believe I used to have to move my fingers to shift." I'm
sure you will be one of those fans; and I'm sure I won't.

--
- Frank Krygowski


There is another attempt to ridicule things Frank. Lets do the same. If you are scared by simple hardware and software that poll 4 simple switches and when it detects that a switch is actuated it sends a predetermined amount of pulses and a direction signal to the right stepper motor maybe you should consider a bike with a wheel you can flip to get the other gear like in the very old days. Why risk a failure of a cable or a complex mechanical device such as a derailleur with multiple pivots and a springs that can fail. Then of course you only have two gears and you have to stop and get off the bike first but hey you are not racing so it shouldn't matter. Your toaster, oven and dishwasher is more complicated than Di2.


Lou
Ads
 

Home - Home - Home - Home - Home