Check This Out! Terry, from one of my spin classes e-mailed me this(e-mail and link below):
CLICK HERE for the Video
"I wrote, narrated and produced the items, with material from a cross-country trip that was staggered throughout last year. What the CCS wanted was a series of short videos, each one dealing with a particular cancer, researcher and someone who's benefitted from that research area. They're all approximately 3 minutes in length, so there's not a lot of complicated detail. Rather, they're meant to be a stimulus for discussion and questions. They're also meant to help focus fundraising, i.e., if there's a potential donor who's interested in, for example, ovarian cancer, they can play that segment on a laptop or drop it into a PowerPoint presentation for a specific reference that won't eat up a lot of time.
It was my final project in my contract with the CCS and now that I'm on the hunt for work, it's rather handy to have something like this easily available on the 'net as a work reference. It was also a fascinating trip across the country. We've all heard various conspiracy theories over the years of how there's really a cure for cancer out there that's being held back. First of all, there are more than 200 types and what has worked to either cure or control one type does nothing for other types. Secondly, on this trip, I met a lot of researchers who are incredibly committed (check out Dr. Mark Nachtigal in the ovarian cancer segment) who had strong personal reasons for trying to find cures. These people have no interest in holding back progress. Also, I met a lot of wonderful people who are helping in their own way (i.e., the four sisters involved as volunteers in the clinical trials segment). Without sounding mushy, this process made me very proud to be a Canadian.
As to exercise, the one you'll want to check out is "Life After Cancer: Making Exercise the New Normal". You might also want to check out "Scoring Goals For Cancer Control" which tells the story of Toronto Maple Leaf Jason Blake. As your girlfriend deals with children, she might be interested in "Retinoblastoma: A Family's Story"
Cheers,
Terry
Showing posts with label Articles. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Articles. Show all posts
22.1.09
21.1.09
Break it Down Baby! Who's doing what, and when...
Just thought you would all find this pretty interesting....
7.1.09
11.4.08
12.3.08
22.2.08
The Green Machine...
My first bike! It was way too big for me; an awesome machine I inherited from my sister! I called it the "Green Machine". My parents used to cringe every time I'd tear out of the drive way to join my friends. My Dad used to exclaim to my mother, "he's gonna kill himself on that thing Lorraine, it's way too big," The chain ring and cog set the gearing pretty low. I could zoom past my friends, wind whistling in my ears. I was on fire! Fit to be tied!
Unfortunately the day finally came when I was racing a few buddies and lost control, I fell forward off the seat and on to the down tube crushing my manhood. Straddling the down tube, at breakneck speed, I careened into a tree on the edge of my parents property. The kids raced over to see if I was ok. They found me on the ground in tears crying over and over again, "oh my peanuts!" As you can see from this picture the bike was well fitted for optimum destruction.
31.1.08
Aerodynamics - Wheel Tests
Hey,
I came across an interesting article online about wheel aerodynamics. I have included part of the article and a link to the actual article below.
"The windtunnel gives some useful insights into the test wheels' aerodynamic performance. Drag measured in the wind tunnel is a reasonable indicator of the wake generated behind the wheel.
The drag is an essential value. It is meaured by strain gauges bonded onto the inverted fork that holds the tested wheel. These gauges translate the fork deformation, caused by the aerodynamic resistance of the wheel, into electrical resistance which can be measured.
Some other data are also captured by this setup including lateral forces and rotating momentum. However, we won't analyse them as they don't impact drag.
The protocol:
The front wheel is fixed on the inverted fork and spins in the air passing through the wind tunnel at a known speed.
The fan blades, generating the air flow, create pressure against the wheels. This pressure is recorded by several strain gauges and interpreted by software.
The wind angle is between 0° and 35°, which represents every condition met on the road. However, angles over 15° (wind+rider speed) are rarely encountered on the road and the drag at different incident angles is weighted according to a Gauss Curve to represent the average drag.
The weighted average force is then translated into watts absorbed at 50km/h. Which finally gives us a meaningful metric!
The rear wheels are not tested since they enter in the wake of the frame and the legs of the rider.
The Results(Click Here):
Interpretations:
Obviously, faster wheels tend to have deep rims and a low spoke count. Note that the wheels with Zipp rims are particularly efficient thanks to the curved rim shape (Zipp says Hybri-Toroidal rim) that forces the air flow to slide on the rim instead of stalling. This generates a low drag and you saves a few watts at high speed...
The aero thin and bladed spokes' advantage is easily understandable on the drawing on the left: their wake (drag) is very low compared to standard wider spokes.
Xentis TT, HED, Sonic, Mavic Cosmic, Lightweight 16 spokes, Shimano 50mm, Campagnolo Bora, etc, have very good aerodynamics properties, although their rim is a simple triangle, or is slightly curved, as in the case of the Mavic CCU.
If the air flow stalls quickly, which is particularly the case with flat rims, drag is important, meaning a high power loss at high speed. The Mavic Ksyrium or R-SYS are pretty bad on this point. Mixing flat rims and wide spokes, they behave as parachutes at high speeds. However, it is hard to criticize them since those aren't wheels designed with aerodynamics in mind. This is the case too for the Campagnolo Hyperon, the Vento, the Eurus, the Mavic Aksium, etc.
Please note two special cases.
First, the Shimano 7850 C24 TU has a 28mm front rim. Laced up with only 16 aero spokes, their aerodynamic performance is pretty good for a wheelset that didn't seem, at a first look, to be designed for aerodynamics.
Second, despite their 24 front spokes, the Speedcomposites do quite well. Here too, the mid deep rim (26mm) yields a low drag. The 20 spokes version should perform better too.
For our custom handmade Corima/Tune 20 DT Aerolite spokes wheel, drag is also quite low- a little better than the Fulcrum Racing Speed. It would be interesting to test it with only 16 spokes like most "factory" wheels.
Conclusion:
Leaving inertia, bearing resistance and lateral stiffness aside for a moment, deep rims bring definite advantages over shallower alternatives. They are particularly efficient on flat stages and downhills, where speeds are highest.
For Time-trial, or flat races, deep rims with a low spoke count are the best option. Actually, for standard road use, this is the best solution. Indeed, the front wheels have perfectly balanced and wide bracing angles, meaning a high lateral stiffness. Reducing the spoke count of the front wheel is not really a problem at all!
I came across an interesting article online about wheel aerodynamics. I have included part of the article and a link to the actual article below.
"The windtunnel gives some useful insights into the test wheels' aerodynamic performance. Drag measured in the wind tunnel is a reasonable indicator of the wake generated behind the wheel.
The drag is an essential value. It is meaured by strain gauges bonded onto the inverted fork that holds the tested wheel. These gauges translate the fork deformation, caused by the aerodynamic resistance of the wheel, into electrical resistance which can be measured.
Some other data are also captured by this setup including lateral forces and rotating momentum. However, we won't analyse them as they don't impact drag.
The protocol:
The front wheel is fixed on the inverted fork and spins in the air passing through the wind tunnel at a known speed.
The fan blades, generating the air flow, create pressure against the wheels. This pressure is recorded by several strain gauges and interpreted by software.
The wind angle is between 0° and 35°, which represents every condition met on the road. However, angles over 15° (wind+rider speed) are rarely encountered on the road and the drag at different incident angles is weighted according to a Gauss Curve to represent the average drag.
The weighted average force is then translated into watts absorbed at 50km/h. Which finally gives us a meaningful metric!
The rear wheels are not tested since they enter in the wake of the frame and the legs of the rider.
The Results(Click Here):
Interpretations:
Obviously, faster wheels tend to have deep rims and a low spoke count. Note that the wheels with Zipp rims are particularly efficient thanks to the curved rim shape (Zipp says Hybri-Toroidal rim) that forces the air flow to slide on the rim instead of stalling. This generates a low drag and you saves a few watts at high speed...
The aero thin and bladed spokes' advantage is easily understandable on the drawing on the left: their wake (drag) is very low compared to standard wider spokes.
Xentis TT, HED, Sonic, Mavic Cosmic, Lightweight 16 spokes, Shimano 50mm, Campagnolo Bora, etc, have very good aerodynamics properties, although their rim is a simple triangle, or is slightly curved, as in the case of the Mavic CCU.
If the air flow stalls quickly, which is particularly the case with flat rims, drag is important, meaning a high power loss at high speed. The Mavic Ksyrium or R-SYS are pretty bad on this point. Mixing flat rims and wide spokes, they behave as parachutes at high speeds. However, it is hard to criticize them since those aren't wheels designed with aerodynamics in mind. This is the case too for the Campagnolo Hyperon, the Vento, the Eurus, the Mavic Aksium, etc.
Please note two special cases.
First, the Shimano 7850 C24 TU has a 28mm front rim. Laced up with only 16 aero spokes, their aerodynamic performance is pretty good for a wheelset that didn't seem, at a first look, to be designed for aerodynamics.
Second, despite their 24 front spokes, the Speedcomposites do quite well. Here too, the mid deep rim (26mm) yields a low drag. The 20 spokes version should perform better too.
For our custom handmade Corima/Tune 20 DT Aerolite spokes wheel, drag is also quite low- a little better than the Fulcrum Racing Speed. It would be interesting to test it with only 16 spokes like most "factory" wheels.
Conclusion:
Leaving inertia, bearing resistance and lateral stiffness aside for a moment, deep rims bring definite advantages over shallower alternatives. They are particularly efficient on flat stages and downhills, where speeds are highest.
For Time-trial, or flat races, deep rims with a low spoke count are the best option. Actually, for standard road use, this is the best solution. Indeed, the front wheels have perfectly balanced and wide bracing angles, meaning a high lateral stiffness. Reducing the spoke count of the front wheel is not really a problem at all!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
