Road Cycling · Public discussion

deceptive slopes

Started by recycled-one · · Last activity · 15 posts · 248 views

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Road Cycling
Published
13 August 2006
Last activity
23 August 2006
Original author
recycled-one
Posts
15
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
248
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–15 of 15
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Does anyone else have these?

    I rode a section of highway I sometimes do as part of a 50 km out and in
    that is part on-road and part off-road. The highway part is a typical two
    lane black top with average inclines and declines to look at them. I haven't
    measured them with an altimeter but my sense is that there is no drastic
    bias in either direction. But my ride back always seems to require less
    effort.

    Ceterus paribus I would expect to be more tired coming back but these
    highway slopes seem easier on the return leg.

    Go figure.

  2. State Road 600 (Plank Road) near Farmville, VA is like this. Heading
    north out of town, the road, which appears flat to the eye, requires a
    definite uphill pull. The grade is slight, but it's there and it's
    long--several miles of it. Heading south toward town I feel like a
    wind has come up behind me to push me home. This happens on short and
    long rides, and no matter how tired or fresh I am. I have a
    road-biased hybrid (don't yell at me--I'm saving for a good road bike):
    14 mph going out, 22 mph coming back, even if I'm exhausted.

    --
    Rodney Dunning
    Assistant Professor of Physics
    Longwood University

    recycled-one said:

    Does anyone else have these?

    I rode a section of highway I sometimes do as part of a 50 km out and in
    that is part on-road and part off-road. The highway part is a typical two
    lane black top with average inclines and declines to look at them. I haven't
    measured them with an altimeter but my sense is that there is no drastic
    bias in either direction. But my ride back always seems to require less
    effort.

    Ceterus paribus I would expect to be more tired coming back but these
    highway slopes seem easier on the return leg.

    Go figure.

  3. "recycled-one" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Does anyone else have these?

    I rode a section of highway I sometimes do as part of a 50 km out and in
    that is part on-road and part off-road. The highway part is a typical two
    lane black top with average inclines and declines to look at them. I
    haven't measured them with an altimeter but my sense is that there is no
    drastic bias in either direction. But my ride back always seems to require
    less effort.

    Ceterus paribus I would expect to be more tired coming back but these
    highway slopes seem easier on the return leg.

    Go figure.

    "False Flats"
    Yeah I have a few of those too. On one the trees nearby are angled slightly,
    so that it makes it look flat, when you are really going up.
    There is a hill with the optical illusion that makes it look not very steep,
    but when you try to climb it, you find out it is a lot more steep than it
    looks.

  4. "recycled-one" <[email hidden]> wrote in
    news:[email hidden]:

    Quoted message said:

    Does anyone else have these?

    I rode a section of highway I sometimes do as part of a 50 km out and
    in
    that is part on-road and part off-road. The highway part is a typical
    two lane black top with average inclines and declines to look at them.
    I haven't measured them with an altimeter but my sense is that there
    is no drastic bias in either direction. But my ride back always seems
    to require less effort.

    Ceterus paribus I would expect to be more tired coming back but these
    highway slopes seem easier on the return leg.

    Go figure.

    Try and find out if your local government has bought into a publically
    available GIS website, and you can see the elevation lines as one of the
    layers, normally.

    You might also find some hidden roadways or "I didn't know that went
    through there" types of streets that could save a lot of angst in heavy
    traffic conditions when you can't do a highway run.

  5. "wvantwiller" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    "recycled-one" <[email hidden]> wrote in
    news:[email hidden]:

    Quoted message said:

    Does anyone else have these?

    I rode a section of highway I sometimes do as part of a 50 km out and
    in
    that is part on-road and part off-road. The highway part is a typical
    two lane black top with average inclines and declines to look at them.
    I haven't measured them with an altimeter but my sense is that there
    is no drastic bias in either direction. But my ride back always seems
    to require less effort.

    Ceterus paribus I would expect to be more tired coming back but these
    highway slopes seem easier on the return leg.

    Go figure.

    Try and find out if your local government has bought into a publically
    available GIS website, and you can see the elevation lines as one of the
    layers, normally.

    You might also find some hidden roadways or "I didn't know that went
    through there" types of streets that could save a lot of angst in heavy
    traffic conditions when you can't do a highway run.

    Oh I can do it easily enough. I wasn't even complaining about it really.
    It's just something I noticed when I ride it. I'm sure an exact measurement
    of the slopes would show that the outbound leg is a net incline.

    I have noticed other - what I call - power inclines. Hills that seem
    conducive to hard pedalling, actually accelerating uphill.

  6. Optical illusion and para-normal causes aside, is it possible the wind
    is behind you on the return (or against you on the outgoing) trip?
    Sometimes the slightest breeze, although not physically noticed can have
    the most annoying effect on "peformance"

    - -
    Comments and opinions compliments of,
    "Your Friendly Neighborhood Wheelman"

    My web Site:
    http://geocities.com/czcorner

    To E-mail me:
    ChrisZCorner "at" webtv "dot" net

  7. Chris Corner said:

    Optical illusion and para-normal causes aside, is it possible the
    wind is behind you on the return (or against you on the outgoing)
    trip? Sometimes the slightest breeze, although not physically
    noticed can have the most annoying effect on "performance"

    To appreciate wind effects graphically, see:

    http://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/wind.html

    The graphs show wind effects only, other losses being independent of
    these. Adding mechanical losses to these graphs would obscure wind
    effects.

    Jobst Brandt

  8. "Chris Z The Wheelman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Optical illusion and para-normal causes aside, is it possible the wind
    is behind you on the return (or against you on the outgoing) trip?
    Sometimes the slightest breeze, although not physically noticed can have
    the most annoying effect on "performance"

    I thought about the wind first. It could be. I never measured but I suspect
    if anything the prevailing winds would mostly come out of the west and the
    return leg is from east to west.

  9. wvantwiller said:

    Try and find out if your local government has bought into a publically
    available GIS website, and you can see the elevation lines as one of the
    layers, normally.

    No need for that. Just connect to the National Map, courtesy of the
    USGS:

    http://nmviewogc.cr.usgs.gov/viewer.htm

    -Buck

  10. Group: rec.bicycles.misc
    Date: Mon, Aug 21, 2006, 10:57pm (EDT+4)
    From: [email hidden]

    Quoted message said:

    To appreciate wind effects graphically,
    see:

    Quoted message said:

    http://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/wind.html

    Quoted message said:

    The graphs show wind effects only, other
    losses being independent of these.\
    Adding mechanical losses to these
    graphs would obscure wind effects.

    Quoted message said:

    Jobst Brandt

    Interesting article, I only glanced through it (I'll read it in greater
    detail later) but a couple of things struck me:

    1) He states that wind resistance at the wheel is greater because "parts
    are moving twice as fast". Actuality, the top half is moving at twice
    the relative velocity of the main body of the bike and rider, HOWEVER,
    the bottom half is stationary relative to the ground. Wouldn't these
    factors cancel out to some degree?

    2) Climbing uphill is more daunting because the resistance is constant,
    regardless of speed. The way I've experienced it, effort does increase
    when climbing faster, maybe not at the square of velocity like wind
    resistance, but it does take more effort.

    Actually I find climbing to be less daunting. Probably because I can
    actually see the "enemy", and there is the knowledge that in most cases
    the uphill will eventually end and in 99% of the cases be followed by a
    downhill. No such guarantees exist with headwinds. Also there is the
    demoralisng feeling that "you KNOW you should be going faster than
    this..." Therefore headwinds launch a psychological attack a wellas a
    physical one.

    But That's Just Me. :-3)

    - -
    Comments and opinions compliments of,
    "Your Friendly Neighborhood Wheelman"

    My web Site:
    http://geocities.com/czcorner

    To E-mail me:
    ChrisZCorner "at" webtv "dot" net

  11. Quoted message said:

    1) He states that wind resistance at the wheel is greater because "parts
    are moving twice as fast". Actuality, the top half is moving at twice
    the relative velocity of the main body of the bike and rider, HOWEVER,
    the bottom half is stationary relative to the ground. Wouldn't these
    factors cancel out to some degree?

    only if wind resistance is linear with velocity.
    which it isn't.
    --
    mac the naïf

  12. "Buck" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    wvantwiller said:

    Try and find out if your local government has bought into a publically
    available GIS website, and you can see the elevation lines as one of the
    layers, normally.

    No need for that. Just connect to the National Map, courtesy of the
    USGS:

    Nope. The problem lies in the first two initials.

    Quoted message said:


    http://nmviewogc.cr.usgs.gov/viewer.htm

  13. There's a section of Route 29, along the Delaware River in New Jersey,
    that rides like it's uphill in both directions! I've thought about the
    wind shifting directions between the morning leg and the afternoon
    return, but I haven't perceived any pattern. That 8½ mile stretch just
    rides like a slight incline in either direction, north or south.
    Regards, Roy Zipris

  14. Chris Z The Wheelman said:

    1) He states that wind resistance at the wheel is greater because "parts
    are moving twice as fast". Actuality, the top half is moving at twice
    the relative velocity of the main body of the bike and rider,


    Not to nit pick, but only the top and bottom POINTS are going at twice
    and zero the "over the road speed," not wheel halves.

    Quoted message said:

    2) Climbing uphill is more daunting because the resistance is constant,
    regardless of speed. The way I've experienced it, effort does increase
    when climbing faster, maybe not at the square of velocity like wind
    resistance, but it does take more effort.


    Work = Force x Distance. When climbing, the "force" is the weight of
    you and the bike. The "distance" is the vertical rise. But climbing
    faster, means you're doing the same work in less time which requires
    more POWER.

    Art Harris

  15. Buck said:
    wvantwiller said:

    Try and find out if your local government has bought into a publically
    available GIS website, and you can see the elevation lines as one of the
    layers, normally.

    No need for that. Just connect to the National Map, courtesy of the
    USGS:

    http://nmviewogc.cr.usgs.gov/viewer.htm

    -Buck

    Check out http://www.routeslip.com/. You can enter your routes using
    an interactive map, and it determines elevations automatically. I'm
    not sure what database it's using, but it appears accurate for the
    areas around Farmville, VA and Birmingham, AL, places I'm familiar
    with. You can also keep an online log of your rides. Cool site.

    --
    Rodney Dunning
    Assistant Professor of Physics
    Longwood University
    http://www.longwood.edu/staff/dunningrb/

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.