Influence of Test Conditions on Comfort Ranking of Road Bicycle Wheels

Conference paper
Part of the Conference Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Mechanics Series book series (CPSEMS)

Abstract

In the past few years, the dynamic comfort of bicycles has become a hot topic in the cycling industry. To improve comfort, a wide variety of dynamic tests is used to characterize and compare bikes. Because these tests usually involve a cyclist, and since the tires have a non-linear effect on the system, test protocols are expected to have an impact on the dynamic characteristics and bicycle ranking. With the objective of establishing good practices when comparing wheel comfort, this paper presents the influence of several test parameters on the vibrations induced to the cyclist at the hands and buttocks. The influence of two excitation surfaces on bicycle dynamics is studied: a flat excitation surface and an irregular surface that locally deforms the tire. The type of excitation, such as white noise, impacts and typical road excitation, are also investigated. Results with regard to the effect of the cyclist’s mass are also presented. The conclusion of this study shows that even if those parameters have a significant influence on the vibration levels transmitted to the cyclist, they do not affect the transmissibility ranking of two wheelsets. It should be noted however that the changes observed in the cyclist’s posture and position on the bicycle can affect wheelset ranking. Great care is therefore advised in controlling the cyclist’s posture and attitude on the bicycle during the tests.

Keywords

Bicycle dynamic comfort Bicycle wheel Vibrations transmission Vibration measurement Excitation techniques 

References

  1. 1.
    ISO 5349–1 (2001)Mechanical vibration – measurement and evaluation of human exposure to hand-transmitted vibration – Part 1: general requirementsGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    ISO 2631–1 (1997) Mechanical vibration and shock – evaluation of human exposure to whole-body vibration – Part 1: general requirementsGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hunt L, Garcia I (2012) Implementation of a vibration absorber for composite hockey goalie sticks. Procedia Eng 34(0):349–354Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Russell DA (2006) Bending modes, damping, and the sensation of sting in baseball bats. The Eng. Sport 6:11–16Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Roberts JR, Jones R, Mansfield NJ (2005) Evaluation of vibrotactile sensations in the ‘feel’ of a golf shot. J Sound Vib 285(1–2):303–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Champoux Y, Richard S, Drouet J (2007) Bicycle structural dynamics. Sound Vibr 41(7):16–24Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wojtowicki J, Champoux Y, Thibault J (2001) Modal properties of road bikes Vs. ride comfort. Proceedings of IMAC-XIX, 1:648–652Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lépine J, Champoux Y, Drouet JM (2012) Technique to measure the dynamic behavior of road bike wheels. Topics Modal Anal II 6:465–470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Petrone N, Giubilato F (2011) Comparative analysis of wheels vibration transmissibility after full bicycle laboratory tests. Proceedings of AIAS 40°Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Olieman M, Marin-Perianu R, Marin-Perianu M (2012) Measurement of dynamic comfort in cycling using wireless acceleration sensors. Procedia Eng 34(0):568–573Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Giubilato F, Petrone N (2012) A method for evaluating the vibrational response of racing bicycles wheels under road roughness excitation. Procedia Eng 34(0):409–414Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zinn L (2012) Getting the most from your post. Velo News 41:88–94Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fretz C, Nick L, Zinn L (2011) Tech and training: endurance bike test. Velo News 40:84Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Drouet J, Champoux Y (2012) Development of a three-load component instrumented stem for road cycling. Procedia Eng 34(0):502–507Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lépine J, Champoux Y, Drouet J (2011) Excitation techniques for testing bike vibration transmission in the laboratory. Proceedings of IMAC-XXIX, 6:35Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Montgomery DC (2009) Design and analysis of experiments. Wiley, HobokenGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc. 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Julien Lépine
    • 1
  • Yvan Champoux
    • 1
  • Jean-Marc Drouet
    • 1
  1. 1.VélUS Research Group, Department of Mechanical EngineeringUniversité de SherbrookeSherbrookeCanada

Personalised recommendations