|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Bicycle Stopping Distances
On Nov 2, 10:44*am, "Paul B. Anders" wrote:
Plug in 50 mph. Anyone who has done any high-speed descending who believes a bike can stop from 50 mph in under 100 feet is smoking weed. It's laughable. Go descend Carson or Monitor passes in the Sierra's, where you can hit 50 mph easily, and do a full-on panic stop and see if you can do this. It's funny, I have ridden those passes, and 50 mph descents are also common on many of my local roads. I honestly have no idea how I might hope to stop under such conditions, although I suspect it would not be that quickly. I DO know that I never want to be faced with finding out nor am I likely to go out and do any significant experimenting toward that end. DR |
Ads |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Bicycle Stopping Distances
On Nov 2, 10:44*am, "Paul B. Anders" wrote:
On Nov 1, 10:09*am, Anton Berlin wrote: In a head to head test and in normal conditions a bike should be able to stop faster than a car. But that includes that the rider has both hands on the bars (and brakes) which is hard to do when you're flipping someone off. At 50 kmh http://www.exploratorium.edu/cycling/brakes2.html Bike stops in 10 meters http://www.forensicdynamics.com/stopdistcalc Car stops in 14 meters. I hate proving Kunich wrong (again) at the expense of proving Magilla right. But Kunich may be right on an empirical basis. *It make take several hundred meters to slow his fat ass to a stop. Besides this is all theory as we know Kunich has never gone 30 mph on a bike. Plug in 50 mph. Anyone who has done any high-speed descending who believes a bike can stop from 50 mph in under 100 feet is smoking weed. It's laughable. Go descend Carson or Monitor passes in the Sierra's, where you can hit 50 mph easily, and do a full-on panic stop and see if you can do this. Brad Listen up monkeys, The calculator is wrong because they did not consider that a bike's braking ability is limited by going over the bars. The calculator, for 30 mph = 13.4 m/s, returns a stopping distance of 10.4 meters. This translates to a deceleration of 8.6 m/s^2, from distance = 0.5 * (initial velocity)^2/ acceleration. This is suspiciously close to 1 g = 9.8 m/s^2 times the "adhesion coefficient" of 0.85 that the calculator suggests. So I think they assumed that a bike can brake at slightly less than 1 g, slightly less because it's limited by tire adhesion. However, everyone who thinks about this says that a bike can't do that because of the high center of mass. Most people agree that just from geometry (height of the center of mass relative to how far forward the front wheel contact patch), a bike is limited to at most 0.6 g deceleration, or 5.9 m/s^2. If you use 0.6 g to calculate the stopping distance from 30 mph, it's 15.2 meters. And that is assuming absolutely perfect conditions and flat ground, not down hill, which makes the endo problem worse. So no, a bike cannot stop faster than a car. Ben |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Bicycle Stopping Distances
On Nov 2, 4:30*pm, "
wrote: {snip of confusing facts and numbers that "smart" people use to confuse the "stupid" people, and, yes, I'm talking about "you"} So no, a bike cannot stop faster than a car. It's not about the bike. It's about the guy _on_ the bike...unless it's a really nice bike. If it's a hot girl on a bike, then it's a toss up, or a tossed salad if she's feeling frisky. R |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Bicycle Stopping Distances
bjw wrote:
The calculator is wrong because they did not consider that a bike's braking ability is limited by going over the bars. ....snip... However, everyone who thinks about this says that a bike can't do that because of the high center of mass. Most people agree that just from geometry (height of the center of mass relative to how far forward the front wheel contact patch), a bike is limited to at most 0.6 g deceleration, or 5.9 m/s^2. A naive dynamics question: isn't it possible to modulate the front and rear brakes to offset the high-center-of-gravity problem? Without really thinking about it, that's what it feels like you do instinctively when trying to stop really quickly. And of course you also push your weight back as much as you can. So no, a bike cannot stop faster than a car. Somebody should do this test and post it on youtube. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Bicycle Stopping Distances
On Nov 2, 4:45*pm, "marco" wrote:
bjw wrote: The calculator is wrong because they did not consider that a bike's braking ability is limited by going over the bars. ...snip... However, everyone who thinks about this says that a bike can't do that because of the high center of mass. Most people agree that just from geometry (height of the center of mass relative to how far forward the front wheel contact patch), a bike is limited to at most 0.6 g deceleration, or 5.9 m/s^2. A naive dynamics question: isn't it possible to modulate the front and rear brakes to offset the high-center-of-gravity problem? Without really thinking about it, that's what it feels like you do instinctively when trying to stop really quickly. And of course you also push your weight back as much as you can. And those things have a negative impact on reaction time. So no, a bike cannot stop faster than a car. Somebody should do this test and post it on youtube. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Bicycle Stopping Distances
On Nov 2, 4:45*pm, "marco" wrote:
Somebody should do this test and post it on youtube. Sorry, I hit send too quickly. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbroNClq7l4 That guy was still moving?! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DvWJsxI8Vz4 And, if you're not humor impaired... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zeYdTjNrBg R |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Bicycle Stopping Distances
On Nov 2, 2:30*pm, "
wrote: On Nov 2, 10:44*am, "Paul B. Anders" wrote: On Nov 1, 10:09*am, Anton Berlin wrote: In a head to head test and in normal conditions a bike should be able to stop faster than a car. But that includes that the rider has both hands on the bars (and brakes) which is hard to do when you're flipping someone off. At 50 kmh http://www.exploratorium.edu/cycling/brakes2.html Bike stops in 10 meters http://www.forensicdynamics.com/stopdistcalc Car stops in 14 meters. I hate proving Kunich wrong (again) at the expense of proving Magilla right. But Kunich may be right on an empirical basis. *It make take several hundred meters to slow his fat ass to a stop. Besides this is all theory as we know Kunich has never gone 30 mph on a bike. Plug in 50 mph. Anyone who has done any high-speed descending who believes a bike can stop from 50 mph in under 100 feet is smoking weed. It's laughable. Go descend Carson or Monitor passes in the Sierra's, where you can hit 50 mph easily, and do a full-on panic stop and see if you can do this. Brad Listen up monkeys, The calculator is wrong because they did not consider that a bike's braking ability is limited by going over the bars. The calculator, for 30 mph = 13.4 m/s, returns a stopping distance of 10.4 meters. *This translates to a deceleration of 8.6 m/s^2, from distance = 0.5 * (initial velocity)^2/ acceleration. This is suspiciously close to 1 g = 9.8 m/s^2 times the "adhesion coefficient" of 0.85 that the calculator suggests. *So I think they assumed that a bike can brake at slightly less than 1 g, slightly less because it's limited by tire adhesion. However, everyone who thinks about this says that a bike can't do that because of the high center of mass. Most people agree that just from geometry (height of the center of mass relative to how far forward the front wheel contact patch), a bike is limited to at most 0.6 g deceleration, or 5.9 m/s^2. If you use 0.6 g to calculate the stopping distance from 30 mph, it's 15.2 meters. *And that is assuming absolutely perfect conditions and flat ground, not down hill, which makes the endo problem worse. So no, a bike cannot stop faster than a car. It's even worse than you cite. I used to coach riders in our club on effective use of their brakes. Note that these weren't elites, they were your typical club racers, probably like the guys who got brake- checked. Many barely used their front brakes at all, due to fear of doing an endo. We did drills in parking lots where we trained people how to use their front brakes effectively by progressively braking down from higher and higher speeds, and applying more front brake bias. It took a LOT of passes before people could begin to properly shift their weight, brake hard, and unweight their rear wheels at all. Add in the inherent limitation of the high CG on bicycle braking performance, and your average rider can't begin to stop anywhere near as quickly as a car where the driver has fully engaged the ABS. And it's one thing to be fully prepared for a corner, shift your weight back, and apply full braking, vs. having some hair-trigger lunatic ER doc whip his car in front of you and slam on his brakes without warning. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Bicycle Stopping Distances
On Nov 2, 2:45*pm, "marco" wrote:
bjw wrote: The calculator is wrong because they did not consider that a bike's braking ability is limited by going over the bars. ...snip... However, everyone who thinks about this says that a bike can't do that because of the high center of mass. Most people agree that just from geometry (height of the center of mass relative to how far forward the front wheel contact patch), a bike is limited to at most 0.6 g deceleration, or 5.9 m/s^2. A naive dynamics question: isn't it possible to modulate the front and rear brakes to offset the high-center-of-gravity problem? Without really thinking about it, that's what it feels like you do instinctively when trying to stop really quickly. And of course you also push your weight back as much as you can. So no, a bike cannot stop faster than a car. Somebody should do this test and post it on youtube. No, you can't get extra braking power from the rear brake. Braking transfers weight forward, as we all have felt; another way of thinking about it is that the deceleration of your center of mass generates a torque which wants to pivot the bike forward around the front contact patch, and the force of gravity pulling you down is what counteracts that torque. The limit of about 0.6 g is when the bike is just about to start pivoting about the front contact patch by lifting the rear wheel. At that point, it doesn't matter what you do with the rear brake because there's almost no weight on the rear wheel, so no friction. If you grab it hard you may skid the rear wheel. When trying to stop quickly, I grab both brakes, but I think the rear is psychological. If your brakes are weak or squishy or the road is wet, grabbing both may help. I don't like braking real hard on the rear because it skids - if you hit a wet patch or a bit of sand on the road, very easy to skid and lose it. As Anders said, newbies never get this right. It's tough to brake hard enough on the front to endo, unless you are MTB'ing and drop the front wheel into a rut or hole. BTW, the 0.6 g number isn't magical, it's just based on the angle from your center of mass to the front contact patch. If the center of mass is around your belly button, then (on my bike) the height off the ground is about 1.2 m and the horizontal distance to the contact patch is about 0.75 m. The geometry of the opposing torques from deceleration and gravity means that the bike starts to endo when the deceleration is more than (0.75/1.2) ~ 0.63 g. All fairly approximate. Ben |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Bicycle Stopping Distances
On Nov 2, 4:21*pm, "
wrote: On Nov 2, 2:45*pm, "marco" wrote: bjw wrote: The calculator is wrong because they did not consider that a bike's braking ability is limited by going over the bars. ...snip... However, everyone who thinks about this says that a bike can't do that because of the high center of mass. Most people agree that just from geometry (height of the center of mass relative to how far forward the front wheel contact patch), a bike is limited to at most 0.6 g deceleration, or 5.9 m/s^2. A naive dynamics question: isn't it possible to modulate the front and rear brakes to offset the high-center-of-gravity problem? Without really thinking about it, that's what it feels like you do instinctively when trying to stop really quickly. And of course you also push your weight back as much as you can. So no, a bike cannot stop faster than a car. Somebody should do this test and post it on youtube. No, you can't get extra braking power from the rear brake. Braking transfers weight forward, as we all have felt; another way of thinking about it is that the deceleration of your center of mass generates a torque which wants to pivot the bike forward around the front contact patch, and the force of gravity pulling you down is what counteracts that torque. The limit of about 0.6 g is when the bike is just about to start pivoting about the front contact patch by lifting the rear wheel. *At that point, it doesn't matter what you do with the rear brake because there's almost no weight on the rear wheel, so no friction. *If you grab it hard you may skid the rear wheel. When trying to stop quickly, I grab both brakes, but I think the rear is psychological. *If your brakes are weak or squishy or the road is wet, grabbing both may help. I don't like braking real hard on the rear because it skids - if you hit a wet patch or a bit of sand on the road, very easy to skid and lose it. *As Anders said, newbies never get this right. *It's tough to brake hard enough on the front to endo, unless you are MTB'ing and drop the front wheel into a rut or hole. BTW, the 0.6 g number isn't magical, it's just based on the angle from your center of mass to the front contact patch. *If the center of mass is around your belly button, then (on my bike) the height off the ground is about 1.2 m and the horizontal distance to the contact patch is about 0.75 m. *The geometry of the opposing torques from deceleration and gravity means that the bike starts to endo when the deceleration is more than (0.75/1.2) ~ 0.63 g. *All fairly approximate. Ben- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I always use both brakes when stopping hard, modulating the rear to avoid lock-up. Why? Because 99% of the braking I'm doing isn't threshold braking at the max. You get shorter stopping distances with more control by using both brakes. Also, most front brakes become pretty tough to modulate when you're near the limit, so if I can shift even 10% of the load to the rear brake and tire, it makes it easier to control. This video is pretty dry, but it gets the points across about using your front and rear brakes effectively: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TeJ1JH2ah00 Brad anders |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Bicycle Stopping Distances
In article
, Anton Berlin wrote: On Nov 1, 6:50Â*pm, "Tom Kunich" wrote: "Ryan Cousineau" wrote in message ]... In article , Anton Berlin wrote: In a head to head test and in normal conditions a bike should be able to stop faster than a car. But that includes that the rider has both hands on the bars (and brakes) which is hard to do when you're flipping someone off. At 50 kmh http://www.exploratorium.edu/cycling/brakes2.html Bike stops in 10 meters http://www.forensicdynamics.com/stopdistcalc Car stops in 14 meters. I hate proving Kunich wrong (again) at the expense of proving Magilla right. But Kunich may be right on an empirical basis. Â*It make take several hundred meters to slow his fat ass to a stop. Besides this is all theory as we know Kunich has never gone 30 mph on a bike. The missing factor is essentially reaction time, which probably explains how Dr. Evil managed to whomp two riders with his trunk. Here's a claim that reaction times vary around 0.7-1.5 s for drivers in braking situations. That suggests that if the Doctor swerved and braked fast enough, the riders would not have had time to react before hitting the car. He's effectively got about a 1-second head start on braking, and at 50 km/h, that's about 14 meters. In other words, the car could be at zero km/h before the riders got to their brakes, and the rest depends on how closely in front of them he cut. Considering he seems to have been trying to injure them, I'm going to guess really close, like 5m. I figure that scenario as being 14 metres of stopping distance but about 24 metres of rt+ideal stopping. In other words, physics says those cyclists were gonna hit the car no matter how good their brakes, as long as their reaction times were within human norms. Gerbils or monkeys may have better reaction times than humans, though. As usual, those who fail to think do the most talking. The brakes on a modern car will stop the car at a rate of about one gee. Race cars commonly brake well above one gee. Moreover, car tires, which cover a large portion of the road and put more square inches of rubber on the road per lb. of load, are less susceptible to road conditions, gravel etc. on the road and other traction problems. Because of the high center of gravity a bicycle has, the braking force you can apply while sitting normally on the saddle is about 1/2 gee. Got that? HALF the braking force of a car. You can increase your braking force to perhaps .85 gees by sliding backwards and putting your stomach on the saddle. This unfortunately greatly decreases your control of the bicycle while increasing your ability to brake by lowering your center of gravity. Note that normally the time to slide back like that would take more time/distance than the slightly improved braking would justify. The reaction time for both the driver and the rider are the same and so can be ignored when discussing stopping distances at equal speeds.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Gee, where the **** did you get the idea G was gee? Geesus ****ing christ you're an idiot. I always write `g' or `g_n', because the official nomenclature is `g' with a a subscript `n'; and the value is 9.806Â*65 m /s^2 exactly. -- Michael Press |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
unicycling distances | ntappin | Unicycling | 0 | July 2nd 06 01:01 PM |
Bike Stopping distances? | Werehatrack | Techniques | 10 | September 23rd 05 11:10 PM |
Bike Stopping distances? | [email protected] | Techniques | 13 | September 23rd 05 04:51 PM |
Bike Stopping distances? | Phil, Squid-in-Training | Techniques | 3 | September 21st 05 09:48 PM |
Bike Stopping distances? | Dan | Techniques | 0 | September 20th 05 03:18 AM |