It looks an awful lot loke a cheese grater, I hope it doesn't do that to you when you crash.
If you take a look at the high res (1200x1680) version of the frame close-up, it seems that everything is pretty smooth. But it isn't aerodynamic, and it looks like it would hold a ton of mud. I suppose if this were ever used in a frame, it'd be covered with some thin layer of mylar or something. But really, how much of an improvement can there be? Hardtail MTB frames are already in the 3lb range. Not much room for weight savings.
As I see it, the huge advantage the IsoTruss has over other methods of frame construction is that anyone can see you have one from a great distance. Also, it probably whistles at speed. I want mine now.
I've seen this posted before, at least links to the isotruss bike pictures. I have to question the claim that it is more aerodynamic. Surely one single pipe has to be more aerodynamic than that trusswork? It seems that something like that would cause a lot of airflow disturbances no?
Granted, I don't know much about anything..
Mike
"Leonard Migliore" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Brigham Young University has just knocked all the cool frames out of the water. Why go to titanium or carbon when you can have an IsoTruss?
As I see it, the huge advantage the IsoTruss has over other methods of frame construction is that anyone can see you have one from a great distance. Also, it probably whistles at speed. I want mine now.
I've seen this posted before, at least links to the isotruss bike pictures. I have to question the claim that it is more aerodynamic. Surely one single pipe has to be more aerodynamic than that trusswork? It seems that something like that would cause a lot of airflow disturbances no?
I agree. If aerodynamic was the goal they'd have stuck with one tube and made the cross-section teardrop shaped. Although at MTB speeds it's likely irrelevant.
As I see it, the huge advantage the IsoTruss has over other methods of frame construction is that anyone can see you have one from a great distance. Also, it probably whistles at speed. I want mine now.
It looks an awful lot loke a cheese grater, I hope it doesn't do that to you when you crash.
-- Roy Owen
Keep the leather side up, and the rubber side down.
As I see it, the huge advantage the IsoTruss has over other methods of frame construction is that anyone can see you have one from a great distance. Also, it probably whistles at speed. I want mine now.
My admiration to the students and faculty. Anyone going to school in Utah who finds a research subject that involves serious mountain biking is thinking with all lobes engaged.
I've seen this posted before, at least links to the isotruss bike pictures. I have to question the claim that it is more aerodynamic. Surely one single pipe has to be more aerodynamic than that trusswork? It seems that something like that would cause a lot of airflow disturbances no?
I agree. If aerodynamic was the goal they'd have stuck with one tube and made the cross-section teardrop shaped. Although at MTB speeds it's likely irrelevant.
Plus, cleaning this thing would be a pain.
In the high-res closeup, it appears that the down tube is covered in clear plastic. That's probably to keep it from gathering dirt, but consider that the resulting surface is bumpy. If that creates the turbulence/boundary layer effect like the dimples on a golf ball, it could be more aerodynamic than round tubes.
My admiration to the students and faculty. Anyone going to school in Utah who finds a research subject that involves serious mountain biking is thinking with all lobes engaged.
I'd say they have a great future in marketing if nothing else ("less breakable and more aerodynamic??? I doubt it). Still a very cool project. I can't imagine what one would look like after a few months in Arizona though (rocks would have to be really, really hard on all those spindly little protrusions).
My admiration to the students and faculty. Anyone going to school in Utah who finds a research subject that involves serious mountain biking is thinking with all lobes engaged.
Quoted message said:
I'd say they have a great future in marketing if nothing else ("less breakable and more aerodynamic??? I doubt it). Still a very cool project. I can't imagine what one would look like after a few months in Arizona though (rocks would have to be really, really hard on all those spindly little protrusions).
Mark, I wouldn't doubt that the frame is alot stronger than conventional frames. Truss structures tend to be incredibly strong for their weight because most forces that the structure can be subjected to can be redirected into compression and tension. Heck, a basic bicycle frame is built on the same idea; the only difference being that its two triangles limit the redirection of forces mostly into the vertical realm.
The aerodynamics is difficult to assess just from the appearance of the frame; as someone pointed out a golf ball is alot more aerodynamic than a perfect sphere would be.
I'd say they have a great future in marketing if nothing else ("less breakable and more aerodynamic??? I doubt it). Still a very cool project. I can't imagine what one would look like after a few months in Arizona though (rocks would have to be really, really hard on all those spindly little protrusions).
Mark, I wouldn't doubt that the frame is alot stronger than conventional frames. Truss structures tend to be incredibly strong for their weight because most forces that the structure can be subjected to can be redirected into compression and tension. Heck, a basic bicycle frame is built on the same idea; the only difference being that its two triangles limit the redirection of forces mostly into the vertical realm.
They're not really changing that much in the way of stress on the frame. It might help to think of a regular tube as a structure with an infinite number of interconnected trusses (and that would actually be pretty much correct at a molecular level I suppose).
Quoted message said:
The aerodynamics is difficult to assess just from the appearance of the frame; as someone pointed out a golf ball is alot more aerodynamic than a perfect sphere would be.
That's only because of the cavitation that's created by the wicked spin that's put on the ball. I don't believe there'd be much difference in the terminal velocity of a golf ball-size and weight identical smooth ball dropped from an airplane.
I'm trying to picture the air flow over/through those funky tubes - only one word comes to mind... turbulence. Lots o' turbulence. I know aerodynamics is sometimes voodoo science, but I find it hard to believe I could make a tube and fabric airplane go faster by taking the fabric off...
I've seen this posted before, at least links to the isotruss bike pictures. I have to question the claim that it is more aerodynamic. Surely one single pipe has to be more aerodynamic than that trusswork? It seems that something like that would cause a lot of airflow disturbances no?
Presumably you'd cover it with a film of some sort (clear, obviously, so everyone could see your unusual and expensive frame).
