While riding to the Post Office

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

Quoted message said:

You think alot don't you?

All Good Things,
Maggie....Thinks only when necessary.

Yes I do think a lot, but in my opinion if more people did more thinking the
world would be a better place!
Ken

Ken said:

While I was on a leisurely ride to the post office this morning I was
thinking about the efficiency of the bicycle as compared to other forms of
transportation for 1 person. It seems to me that it is far more efficient
than say walking, running, horse back, horse drawn carriage or motor
vehicle. I can ride for hours, well at least a couple of hours, at a
relatively low speed and cover more distance than even the fastest power
walker in the neighborhood. And then I got to thinking about just how
efficient it really is? As in how much mechanical advantage is there in
riding a bicycle, I googled it and could not find any charts, diagrams or
programs that one could use to calculate this. Does anyone know a formula to
compute the mechanical advantage of the gearing of bicycle given the number
of teeth on the front chainring and the number of teeth on the rear cog?

Take the number of teeth on the rear, divide by the number of teeth on
the front, that gives you a number, if the front has 44 teeth and the
rear 11 teeth, then the number would be 4. Multiply that by the
circumfrence of the rear wheel, if the rear wheel is 700mm in diameter
(outside tire diameter), that would be 2198mm, multiply that by the
number you calculated above (for example 4), gives you 8792mm or 8.8m,
for most people one walking stride is ~1 - 1.5m, so divide 8792mm by 100
0 to get 8.792 divide this by 1.25 (average stride) gives 7.0336 which
leaves us with an advantage of 7:1 for biking over walking.

Individual bikes are different, so you need to count the teeth to do the
calculation, also you should measure your stride, best is to find a
known distance, say the length of a public tennis court, 23.77m or 78',
count the number of strides, and divide by the distance, to get the
length of a stride. Don't count on the tire size, get a measuring tape,
roll out about 10' or 3m and starting with the valve stem at the bottom,
roll the wheel along the tape, until the value stem is in the same
place, and check the tape.

I would agree for a single person, a bike is probably the most efficient
way to go, and for two people a tandem is even better, as long as the
weight is less then two seperate bikes, unless the gearing is higher....

W

Ken said:

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

Quoted message said:

You think alot don't you?

All Good Things,
Maggie....Thinks only when necessary.

Yes I do think a lot, but in my opinion if more people did more

thinking the

Quoted message said:

world would be a better place!
Ken

I think we would have more headaches!!!

Live, laugh, love and play. Throw some thinking in there when
necessary.

That's my motto.

And it took me a damn long time to get to this point.
Now I follow my heart and say what I feel.

All good things,
Maggie - Could never accept logic.

"Ken" wrote: (clip) Does anyone know a formula to compute the mechanical
advantage of the gearing of bicycle given the numberof teeth on the front
chainring and the number of teeth on the rear cog?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Mechanical advantage is a term used in physics and engineering to specify
the force multiplication of thinbgs like levers, gears and pulleys. On a
bicycle, it is simply the ratio of rear cog to chainring, which is generally
less than one.

However, I really think you are trying to explore a different question: how
much additional travel does one gain by riding a bicycle, as compared to
walking or running. The answer does not lie just in the gear ratio--it
depends on a number of factors, such as tires, wind, gradient, nature of
surface, etc, and I doubt whether a general answer can be had.

I would also be fascinated to know whether there are studies along these
lines.

The Wogster said:

Ken said:

While I was on a leisurely ride to the post office this morning I

was

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

thinking about the efficiency of the bicycle as compared to other

forms of

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

transportation for 1 person. It seems to me that it is far more

efficient

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

than say walking, running, horse back, horse drawn carriage or

motor

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

vehicle. I can ride for hours, well at least a couple of hours, at

a

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

relatively low speed and cover more distance than even the fastest

power

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

walker in the neighborhood. And then I got to thinking about just

how

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

efficient it really is? As in how much mechanical advantage is

there in

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

riding a bicycle, I googled it and could not find any charts,

diagrams or

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

programs that one could use to calculate this. Does anyone know a

formula to

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

compute the mechanical advantage of the gearing of bicycle given

the number

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

of teeth on the front chainring and the number of teeth on the rear

cog?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Take the number of teeth on the rear, divide by the number of teeth

on

Quoted message said:

the front, that gives you a number, if the front has 44 teeth and the

Quoted message said:

rear 11 teeth, then the number would be 4. Multiply that by the
circumfrence of the rear wheel, if the rear wheel is 700mm in

diameter

Quoted message said:

(outside tire diameter), that would be 2198mm, multiply that by the
number you calculated above (for example 4), gives you 8792mm or

8.8m,

Quoted message said:

for most people one walking stride is ~1 - 1.5m, so divide 8792mm by

100

Quoted message said:

0 to get 8.792 divide this by 1.25 (average stride) gives 7.0336

which

Quoted message said:

leaves us with an advantage of 7:1 for biking over walking.

Individual bikes are different, so you need to count the teeth to do

the

Quoted message said:

calculation, also you should measure your stride, best is to find a
known distance, say the length of a public tennis court, 23.77m or

78',

Quoted message said:

count the number of strides, and divide by the distance, to get the
length of a stride. Don't count on the tire size, get a measuring

tape,

Quoted message said:

roll out about 10' or 3m and starting with the valve stem at the

bottom,

Quoted message said:

roll the wheel along the tape, until the value stem is in the same
place, and check the tape.

I would agree for a single person, a bike is probably the most

efficient

Quoted message said:

way to go, and for two people a tandem is even better, as long as the

Quoted message said:

weight is less then two seperate bikes, unless the gearing is

higher....

Quoted message said:

W

This kind of stuff is the cause of all the worlds problems. Do people
really care about this stuff? It's hard for me to even believe. This
is too much thinking. It may even cause brain damage. You should
preface these posts with MAY BE HAZERDOUS TO YOUR HEALTH.
All good things,
Maggie

Maggie said:

The Wogster said:

Ken said:

While I was on a leisurely ride to the post office this morning I

was

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

thinking about the efficiency of the bicycle as compared to other

forms of

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

transportation for 1 person. It seems to me that it is far more

efficient

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

than say walking, running, horse back, horse drawn carriage or

motor

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

vehicle. I can ride for hours, well at least a couple of hours, at

a

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

relatively low speed and cover more distance than even the fastest

power

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

walker in the neighborhood. And then I got to thinking about just

how

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

efficient it really is? As in how much mechanical advantage is

there in

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

riding a bicycle, I googled it and could not find any charts,

diagrams or

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

programs that one could use to calculate this. Does anyone know a

formula to

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

compute the mechanical advantage of the gearing of bicycle given

the number

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

of teeth on the front chainring and the number of teeth on the rear

cog?

Quoted message said:

Take the number of teeth on the rear, divide by the number of teeth

on

Quoted message said:

the front, that gives you a number, if the front has 44 teeth and the

Quoted message said:

rear 11 teeth, then the number would be 4. Multiply that by the
circumfrence of the rear wheel, if the rear wheel is 700mm in

diameter

Quoted message said:

(outside tire diameter), that would be 2198mm, multiply that by the
number you calculated above (for example 4), gives you 8792mm or

8.8m,

Quoted message said:

for most people one walking stride is ~1 - 1.5m, so divide 8792mm by

100

Quoted message said:

0 to get 8.792 divide this by 1.25 (average stride) gives 7.0336

which

Quoted message said:

leaves us with an advantage of 7:1 for biking over walking.

Individual bikes are different, so you need to count the teeth to do

the

Quoted message said:

calculation, also you should measure your stride, best is to find a
known distance, say the length of a public tennis court, 23.77m or

78',

Quoted message said:

count the number of strides, and divide by the distance, to get the
length of a stride. Don't count on the tire size, get a measuring

tape,

Quoted message said:

roll out about 10' or 3m and starting with the valve stem at the

bottom,

Quoted message said:

roll the wheel along the tape, until the value stem is in the same
place, and check the tape.

I would agree for a single person, a bike is probably the most

efficient

Quoted message said:

way to go, and for two people a tandem is even better, as long as the

Quoted message said:

weight is less then two seperate bikes, unless the gearing is

higher....

Quoted message said:

W

Ahhhhh, Maggie

Quoted message said:

This kind of stuff is the cause of all the worlds problems. Do people
really care about this stuff? It's hard for me to even believe. This
is too much thinking. It may even cause brain damage. You should
preface these posts with MAY BE HAZERDOUS TO YOUR HEALTH.

Really they need to put that warning on televisions..... The worst
invention ever was the television. People don't do things anymore, they
DRIVE to work, do as little as possible, then DRIVE home, just sit in a
hypnotic trance in front of "the box", feeding their faces, with the
latest chemical [censored] seen in the commercials, because real cooking would
reduce the amount of "box" time. That's why the average person, in
North America today is fat and stupid. Want to do the whole family a
big favour, call the cable company and cancel it, the one or two
stations that come in kinda fuzzy will discourage TV use.

When people at work start talking about the latest show on the box, tell
them where you have gone on your bike lately, when you get a couple of
hours ride time in per day, it's amazing where you can go.....

Efficiency of transportation comes to the forefront when local transit
has again jacked up the fees, and Gasoline is twice the price it was a
couple of years ago......

W

Tue, 5 Apr 2005 10:18:48 -0400, <[email hidden]>,

Ken said:

While I was on a leisurely ride to the post office this morning I was
thinking about the efficiency of the bicycle as compared to other forms of
transportation for 1 person. It seems to me that it is far more efficient
than say walking, running, horse back, horse drawn carriage or motor
vehicle. I can ride for hours, well at least a couple of hours, at a
relatively low speed and cover more distance than even the fastest power
walker in the neighborhood. And then I got to thinking about just how
efficient it really is?

See if your library has a copy of "Bicycling Science". It will answer
your questions and probably inspire even more.

http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/default.asp?tid=10063&ttype=2
--
zk

Ken said:

While I was on a leisurely ride to the post office this morning I was
thinking about the efficiency of the bicycle as compared to other

forms of

Quoted message said:

transportation for 1 person. It seems to me that it is far more

efficient

Quoted message said:

than say walking, running, horse back, horse drawn carriage or motor
vehicle. I can ride for hours, well at least a couple of hours, at a
relatively low speed and cover more distance than even the fastest

power

Quoted message said:

walker in the neighborhood. And then I got to thinking about just how
efficient it really is?

Try looking for Popular Science, circa 1972, when the bike shops sold
little signs for your seat rails that read I GET 1000 MILES TO THE
HAMBURGER.

Seriously, someone converted other modes to BTUs and figured out that
cycling is off the charts.

Quoted message said:

As in how much mechanical advantage is there in
riding a bicycle, I googled it and could not find any charts,

diagrams or

Quoted message said:

programs that one could use to calculate this. Does anyone know a

formula to

Quoted message said:

compute the mechanical advantage of the gearing of bicycle given the

number

Quoted message said:

of teeth on the front chainring and the number of teeth on the rear

cog?

Most efficient form of transportation, and that's before you factor in
the number of parking places needed per auto (one at each destination)
and highway wear 'n' tear.

HTH

--Karen M.
enjoys thinking

Ken said:

And then I got to thinking about just how efficient it really is?

Quoted message said:

From Wikipedia on 'bicycle', there is a reference to:

http://www.jhu.edu/~gazette/1999/aug3099/30pedal.html

The authors ignored losses due to sound, friction between tires/ground,
air viscosity, .. etc., probably because these are bike- and/or
environment-specific factors. Would be interesting if they do a
similar efficiency study on Tiagra, 105, Ultegra, and DuraAce
components.

On Tue, 5 Apr 2005 10:18:48 -0400, "Ken"
<[email hidden]> wrote in message
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

While I was on a leisurely ride to the post office this morning I was
thinking about the efficiency of the bicycle as compared to other forms of
transportation for 1 person. It seems to me that it is far more efficient
than say walking, running, horse back, horse drawn carriage or motor
vehicle.

I thought it was an open secret that the bicycle is the most efficient
form of transport on the planet?

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

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

Quoted message said:

This kind of stuff is the cause of all the worlds problems. Do people
really care about this stuff? It's hard for me to even believe. This
is too much thinking. It may even cause brain damage. You should
preface these posts with MAY BE HAZERDOUS TO YOUR HEALTH.
All good things,
Maggie

LOL! No, what really causes the world's probelms is politics... religion...
inequalities... poverty... lack of education... disease...

But discussions about bikes? Never.

Well, not unless some left-wing-commie-pinko-European doesn't admit that LA
is god ;-)

Cheers, helen s

Ken said:

I got to thinking about just how
efficient [a bicycle] really is?

This is posted in my office:

"Man on a bicycle can go three or four times faster than a pedestrian,
but uses five times less energy in the process. He carries one gram of
his weight over a kilometer of flat road at an expense of only 0.15
calories. The bicycle is the perfect transducer to match man's
metabolic energy to the impedence of locomotion. Equipped with this
tool, man outstrips the efficiency of not only all machines, but all
animals as well." - Ivan Illich, _Energy and Equity_

- Frank Krygowski

The Wogster said:

Really they need to put that warning on televisions..... The worst
invention ever was the television.

Television isn't bad, just most of the content. I think TV can in fact
be very educational (Nova, TDC, etc..).

Quoted message said:

Want to do the whole family a
big favour, call the cable company and cancel it, the one or two
stations that come in kinda fuzzy will discourage TV use.

I think most people in the US can actually get ABC, CBS, NBC, UPN, and
Fox for free. We do.

Rich

Just zis Guy said:

I thought it was an open secret that the bicycle is the most efficient
form of transport on the planet?

Perhaps the most efficient form of PRACTICAL transport. I think
sailplanes beat bikes otherwise.

Rich said:

Perhaps the most efficient form of PRACTICAL transport. I think
sailplanes beat bikes otherwise.

You want practical -- how about sailing ships? Efficient freight carriers
for non-perishable goods. Energy input is only required for cooking the
crew's food.

Mike

Tue, 05 Apr 2005 21:05:19 +0100,
<[email hidden]>, "Just zis Guy, you

know? said:

On Tue, 5 Apr 2005 10:18:48 -0400, "Ken"
<[email hidden]> wrote in message
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

While I was on a leisurely ride to the post office this morning I was
thinking about the efficiency of the bicycle as compared to other forms of
transportation for 1 person. It seems to me that it is far more efficient
than say walking, running, horse back, horse drawn carriage or motor
vehicle.

I thought it was an open secret that the bicycle is the most efficient
form of transport on the planet?

Guy

"Man, unaided by any tool, gets around quite efficiently. He carries
one gram of his weight over a kilometre in ten minutes by expending
0.75 calories. Man on his feet is thermodynamically more efficient
than any motorised vehicle and most animals. For his weight, he
performs more work in locomotion than rats or oxen, less than horses
or sturgeon. At this rate of efficiency man settled the world and made
its history. At this rate peasant societies spend less than 5 per cent
and nomads less than 8 per cent of their respective social time
budgets outside the home or the encampment. Man on a bicycle can go
three or four times faster than the pedestrian, but uses five times
less energy in the process. He carries one gram of his weight over a
kilometre of flat road at an expense of only 0.15 calories. The
bicycle is the perfect transducer to match man's metabolic energy to
the impedance of locomotion. Equipped with this tool, man outstrips
the efficiency of not only all machines but all other animals as
well."

- Ivan Illich
--
zk

On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 14:20:37 -0600, Rich <[email hidden]>

wrote in message : said:

Quoted message said:

I thought it was an open secret that the bicycle is the most efficient
form of transport on the planet?

Quoted message said:

Perhaps the most efficient form of PRACTICAL transport. I think
sailplanes beat bikes otherwise.

OK, provided you have a convenient cliff to launch them from.
Otherwise the tow will have to be taken into account...

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

The Wogster said:

Ahhhhh, Maggie

Yes my darling? ;-)

The Wogster said:

Maggie said:

The Wogster wrote:

That's why the average person, in North America today is fat and

stupid. > W

Who you calling average??? Huh??? I may be fat and stupid, but I sure
ain't average baby cakes. :-)
Maggie