Author Topic: Mechanised doping? (Read 15156 times)

rogerzilla · « **Reply #25 on:** 04 June, 2010, 03:58:11 pm »

There is enough energy in some Li-ion bike light batteries to get me to work at a reasonable speed. 20W for two hours, or 120W for 20 minutes? Developing a small enough BB motor with enough torque is the tricky bit, because the BB of a bike has as much torque through it as a V6 petrol engine; then it's geared up for the rear wheel where it becomes more manageable. That's why we have hub gears and hub motors.

Rhys W · « **Reply #26 on:** 04 June, 2010, 10:44:27 pm »

Quote from: padbeat on 04 June, 2010, 03:54:31 pm

Quote
"I sat at a meeting with the UCI last year and drew on the blackboard exactly how this might work," Boardman told the Telegraph. "I showed them some of the sophisticated boosting technology now available, mainly from F1 teams, that can get a kilowatt out of a single AAA battery."

Erm ... no, big guy, I really don't think so! 1200mAh maybe? Unless you're installing regenerative breaking too ...
1.2Ah x 1.5v=1.8Wh

I had to do the sums just to check, but yes, he's a factor of 1000 out. Back to school Chris!

Also, quite ironic, as Chris has been heavily involved with the GB team's top secret equipment development. Did he spend his time hiding AAAs in seattubes?

gonzo · « **Reply #27 on:** 06 June, 2010, 08:50:12 pm »

Quote from: padbeat on 04 June, 2010, 03:54:31 pm

Quote
"I sat at a meeting with the UCI last year and drew on the blackboard exactly how this might work," Boardman told the Telegraph. "I showed them some of the sophisticated boosting technology now available, mainly from F1 teams, that can get a kilowatt out of a single AAA battery."

Erm ... no, big guy, I really don't think so! 1200mAh maybe? Unless you're installing regenerative breaking too ...
1.2Ah x 1.5v=1.8Wh

A Watt is a joule per second. A Watt hour is a joule per second for an hour. 1.8Wh could be 1kW for 6.5 seconds.

Anyhow, I'll now be replacing my terminology:
"Wow, did you see Dave attack then? He really pressed the button."

TimO · « **Reply #28 on:** 06 June, 2010, 09:30:59 pm »

Getting one kW out of a 1.5v battery would require a fairly huge current (>600A), and the cabling and motor design would be equally huge.

Ignoring the infeasibility of that part of the design, very few chemical batteries can produce that sort of current, certainly no off the shelf battery designs.

You may be able to get a moderate boost over a longer period of time, and as others have said stuffing the frame with batteries of a very modern battery types (eg Lithium Polymer) might work, but as Roger points out, converting that into a usable torque at the bottom bracket would be challenging.

It does strike me that if this is considered a potential problem, then checking bikes for it would be trivial, if their excessive mass doesn't give them away, a quick X-Ray certainly will, this will be a complex and easily identifiable structure.

Séamas M. · « **Reply #29 on:** 06 June, 2010, 10:41:51 pm »

X-Ray? They'll all go back to steel frames!

TimO · « **Reply #30 on:** 07 June, 2010, 12:20:31 am »

It wouldn't matter, with the right equipment (which isn't terribly exotic), you could easily see through the thin steel of a bicycle tube. If you couldn't somehow, that in itself would be suspicious.

PaulF · « **Reply #31 on:** 19 June, 2010, 10:25:15 am »

Looks like they'll be screening for it in the TdeF BBC Sport - Cycling - UCI to introduce motor scanners for Tour de France

padbeat · « **Reply #32 on:** 19 June, 2010, 11:01:51 am »

Am I missing something?

Seriously, is there a massive unidentified gap in my engineering knowledge? The battery/motor tech required to make this feasable is decades ahead of the state of the art today.

Why is anybody taking this seriously?

rogerzilla · « **Reply #33 on:** 19 June, 2010, 11:08:28 am »

Quote from: padbeat on 19 June, 2010, 11:01:51 am

Am I missing something?

Seriously, is there a massive unidentified gap in my engineering knowledge? The battery/motor tech required to make this feasable is decades ahead of the state of the art today.

Why is anybody taking this seriously?

How big is the battery for a powerful bike light? There's certainly enough energy in that to make a difference over the closing km of a race. As I posted somewhere above, the main problem is buildng a small motor with enough torque to make a difference at the bottom bracket end of the transmission. Mechanically it's much easier at the hub end, but that would be spotted.

andygates · « **Reply #34 on:** 19 June, 2010, 12:41:05 pm »

Still doesn't pass my giggle test.

Palinurus · « **Reply #35 on:** 19 June, 2010, 02:17:41 pm »

About 60s in..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQi5XHi5NXs

mrcharly-YHT · « **Reply #36 on:** 19 June, 2010, 02:37:14 pm »

Bloody noisy, tho'. All you need to detect that is a pair of ears!

Palinurus · « **Reply #37 on:** 19 June, 2010, 04:32:50 pm »

It is, isn't it. Maybe a bit of serious fettling would quieten it some.

A pack of riders isn't all that noisy, mostly whirring transmission, shouts and clearing of throats. On a crit anyway- presumably even quieter out on the open road.

jayceedee · « **Reply #38 on:** 19 June, 2010, 04:42:18 pm »

Considering how quickly a team of race mechanics can strip an engine to measure for irregularities in car/motorbike racing. It would only take minutes for a bicycle that wins a stage to be impounded at the finish of a stage and stripped to check. Stupid story

Palinurus · « **Reply #39 on:** 19 June, 2010, 05:00:21 pm »

After reviewing a few YouTube videos I think it is too noisy for use in pack racing.

I wasn't quite sure how it worked, this video from the Gruber assist people explains it nicely.

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/jmPUze3WBTw&rel=1" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/v/jmPUze3WBTw&rel=1</a>

It would however be excellent for cheating in the local TT. Wait until you are a couple of miles from the start, give it a boost while no other riders or marshalls are in earshot.

andrew_s · « **Reply #40 on:** 19 June, 2010, 09:27:34 pm »

Quote from: jayceedee on 19 June, 2010, 04:42:18 pm

Considering how quickly a team of race mechanics can strip an engine to measure for irregularities in car/motorbike racing. It would only take minutes for a bicycle that wins a stage to be impounded at the finish of a stage and stripped to check. Stupid story

And how often has that happened over the last couple of years? It's easy to hide something that no one is looking for.

Rhys W · « **Reply #41 on:** 19 June, 2010, 11:15:52 pm »

OK, it's ridiculous. But why is Davide Cassani getting involved in the accusations?

Rig of Jarkness · « **Reply #42 on:** 20 June, 2010, 07:49:09 am »

Quote from: Rhys W on 19 June, 2010, 11:15:52 pm

OK, it's ridiculous. But why is Davide Cassani getting involved in the accusations?

A publicity stunt for the television channel ? Or perhaps he's getting paid by the manufacturers of said device ?

Rhys W · « **Reply #43 on:** 20 June, 2010, 03:13:26 pm »

It would make a great viral ad campaign, for sure.

Zoidburg · « **Reply #44 on:** 20 June, 2010, 06:49:35 pm »

It could be that the tech is on the brink of becoming usable.

This could be an advertising ploy, a touch of the P.T Barnums.

Maybe you could manufacture an electric motor that fits in a planetery gear that could indeed be hidden inside a hub or BB.

How big is CF BB shell?

You could bond a pretty big ally shell inside that, have ally spigots extending into the tubes which are then carbon wrapped to hide it.

Bosch the power tool manufacturer used to have a converted scooter they took around trade shows, it was powered by a 24v SDS drill running on a nicad pack and it was pretty nippy, that was 6 years ago.

Palinurus · « **Reply #45 on:** 20 June, 2010, 07:21:32 pm »

I think its feasible that the device could have been used in a race

The only technical issue I can see, once the control gear has been concealed, is that the motor (of the Gruber Assist- there isn't anything similar as far as I know) makes a fair bit of noise, noticeable when rattling over cobbles with a lot of crowd noise? no idea.

TimO · « **Reply #46 on:** 21 June, 2010, 04:59:11 pm »

I bet with some fiddling, and more carefully machined gears (ie totally custom), and good lubrication you could reduce the noise a lot. You just need two bikes, and then swap them over at an appropriate point.

As others have said, if no one was looking for it, it would be relatively easy to hide it.

The design is actually rather good, since many electric bikes have the drive on the wheel, which only really works at one speed. This arrangement uses the bikes own gearing, which is an efficient use of the existing mechanics. At around £2000 it's a bit rich for me however!

alexb · « **Reply #47 on:** 21 June, 2010, 05:06:37 pm »

Just a thought, but when it's running, fine. but when it's not running, unless there's a clutch mechanism, surely some portion of the rider's energy is going into turning the motor - where it's acting as a dynamo. surely that's a chunk of effort that should be spent racing...

TimO · « **Reply #48 on:** 21 June, 2010, 05:16:12 pm »

Which would be a reason to swap bikes at the appropriate time. Another similar reason would be the extra weight of the motor, and more significantly the batteries.

dkahn400 · « **Reply #49 on:** 21 June, 2010, 05:17:16 pm »

Quote from: alexb on 21 June, 2010, 05:06:37 pm

Just a thought, but when it's running, fine. but when it's not running, unless there's a clutch mechanism, surely some portion of the rider's energy is going into turning the motor - where it's acting as a dynamo. surely that's a chunk of effort that should be spent racing...

I think there's a freewheel mechanism built into the drive so the extra energy required to pedal with the motor off is negligible.

Author Topic: Mechanised doping? (Read 15156 times)

gonzo

jayceedee

Zoidburg