• =?UTF-8?B?UkU6IFJlOiBTdXNwZW5zaW9uIGxvc3Nlcw==?=

    From =?UTF-8?B?Y3ljbGludG9t?=@21:1/5 to All on Fri Jun 20 20:23:19 2025
    On Fri Jan 3 20:27:04 2025 Jeff Liebermann wrote:
    On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 10:06:08 -0600, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:

    I take from that, you think the actual impact/height
    change/velocity change etc from various irregular surfaces
    can be quantified for any given random gravel (or road)
    experience and used to compare efficiency for other iterations.

    This is close, but not quite what you're asking.

    "Energy Harvesting from Bicycle Vibrations by Means of Tuned
    Piezoelectric Generators"
    <https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9292/9/9/1377> <https://mdpi-res.com/d_attachment/electronics/electronics-09-01377/article_deploy/electronics-09-01377-v2.pdf?version=1598515211>

    On PDF page 14, it proclaims:

    "8. Prediction of Generated Power
    The electrical power harvested by a piezo-harvester is very low (in
    the order of a few mW), so highly-efficient power management units
    (PMU) have to be used for energy conversion. The output voltage of the piezo-harvester is a random signal with a main harmonic component at
    the resonance vibration frequency of the cantilever. On the other
    hand, electronic loads (such as a battery for energy storage and/or a portable device which can be mounted on a bicycle) are typically fed
    by DC voltage; therefore, interface electronic circuits between the piezo-harvester and the load are made up by a rectifier (for AC to DC
    voltage conversion), an electrolytic capacitor for voltage leveling
    and energy storage, and DC-DC converter for impedance matching with
    the electronic load resistance."

    Page 17 has a table of generated power at various speeds.

    Of course it's possible to optimize the bicycle design, material
    (tire) selection, road surface profile, etc to produce the most power
    output. Presumably, the generated electric power will be used to
    power an electric and mechanical doping system. The problem is that
    when you're starting with milliwatts, it's a long way to go before
    sufficient power can be harvested to make a difference in a race or on
    a ride.




    What do you think you're saying? There is essentually no pezo power from a bike with 32 mm tires at the correct pressure. Bike riders are being told that they should ride 40 mm tires. You don't ride bicycles so you have no first hand knowledge of
    anything so stop acting as if you do.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Roger Merriman@21:1/5 to cyclintom on Fri Jun 20 20:43:18 2025
    cyclintom <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Fri Jan 3 20:27:04 2025 Jeff Liebermann wrote:
    On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 10:06:08 -0600, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:

    I take from that, you think the actual impact/height
    change/velocity change etc from various irregular surfaces
    can be quantified for any given random gravel (or road)
    experience and used to compare efficiency for other iterations.

    This is close, but not quite what you're asking.

    "Energy Harvesting from Bicycle Vibrations by Means of Tuned
    Piezoelectric Generators"
    <https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9292/9/9/1377>
    <https://mdpi-res.com/d_attachment/electronics/electronics-09-01377/article_deploy/electronics-09-01377-v2.pdf?version98515211>

    On PDF page 14, it proclaims:

    "8. Prediction of Generated Power
    The electrical power harvested by a piezo-harvester is very low (in
    the order of a few mW), so highly-efficient power management units
    (PMU) have to be used for energy conversion. The output voltage of the
    piezo-harvester is a random signal with a main harmonic component at
    the resonance vibration frequency of the cantilever. On the other
    hand, electronic loads (such as a battery for energy storage and/or a
    portable device which can be mounted on a bicycle) are typically fed
    by DC voltage; therefore, interface electronic circuits between the
    piezo-harvester and the load are made up by a rectifier (for AC to DC
    voltage conversion), an electrolytic capacitor for voltage leveling
    and energy storage, and DC-DC converter for impedance matching with
    the electronic load resistance."

    Page 17 has a table of generated power at various speeds.

    Of course it's possible to optimize the bicycle design, material
    (tire) selection, road surface profile, etc to produce the most power
    output. Presumably, the generated electric power will be used to
    power an electric and mechanical doping system. The problem is that
    when you're starting with milliwatts, it's a long way to go before
    sufficient power can be harvested to make a difference in a race or on
    a ride.




    What do you think you're saying? There is essentually no pezo power from
    a bike with 32 mm tires at the correct pressure. Bike riders are being
    told that they should ride 40 mm tires. You don't ride bicycles so you
    have no first hand knowledge of anything so stop acting as if you do.



    Who is saying they should ride 40mm tyres?

    I’ve seen some reviews of 40mm road tyres which broadly comes down to comfortable but almost certainly slower than 28/32 though non racers may
    well make that choice.

    Not seen anyone claiming 40mm tyres should be ridden quite apart from
    anything else relatively few road bikes will fit 40mm.

    Roger Merriman

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jeff Liebermann@21:1/5 to All on Fri Jun 20 18:31:39 2025
    On Fri, 20 Jun 2025 20:23:19 GMT, cyclintom <[email protected]>
    wrote:

    On Fri Jan 3 20:27:04 2025 Jeff Liebermann wrote:
    On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 10:06:08 -0600, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:

    I take from that, you think the actual impact/height
    change/velocity change etc from various irregular surfaces
    can be quantified for any given random gravel (or road)
    experience and used to compare efficiency for other iterations.

    This is close, but not quite what you're asking.

    "Energy Harvesting from Bicycle Vibrations by Means of Tuned
    Piezoelectric Generators"
    <https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9292/9/9/1377>
    <https://mdpi-res.com/d_attachment/electronics/electronics-09-01377/article_deploy/electronics-09-01377-v2.pdf?version=1598515211>

    On PDF page 14, it proclaims:

    "8. Prediction of Generated Power
    The electrical power harvested by a piezo-harvester is very low (in
    the order of a few mW), so highly-efficient power management units
    (PMU) have to be used for energy conversion. The output voltage of the
    piezo-harvester is a random signal with a main harmonic component at
    the resonance vibration frequency of the cantilever. On the other
    hand, electronic loads (such as a battery for energy storage and/or a
    portable device which can be mounted on a bicycle) are typically fed
    by DC voltage; therefore, interface electronic circuits between the
    piezo-harvester and the load are made up by a rectifier (for AC to DC
    voltage conversion), an electrolytic capacitor for voltage leveling
    and energy storage, and DC-DC converter for impedance matching with
    the electronic load resistance."

    Page 17 has a table of generated power at various speeds.

    Of course it's possible to optimize the bicycle design, material
    (tire) selection, road surface profile, etc to produce the most power
    output. Presumably, the generated electric power will be used to
    power an electric and mechanical doping system. The problem is that
    when you're starting with milliwatts, it's a long way to go before
    sufficient power can be harvested to make a difference in a race or on
    a ride.

    What do you think you're saying?

    I was responding to Andrews comments on using energy harvesting
    technology to generate electrical power. You were responding to my
    comments from 6 months ago. Are you lacking in suitable topics to
    demonstrate your ineptitude, are you just resurrecting old discussions
    because you can't seem to find suitable replies to current topics, or
    are you having difficulties operating your NewsHosting.com news
    reader?

    There is essentually no pezo power from a bike with 32 mm tires
    at the correct pressure. Bike riders are being told that they
    should ride 40 mm tires.

    What is the "pezo" power? Do you mean power generated by piezo
    electric methods? Who is telling riders to ride 40 mm tires? It's
    certainly not me? So why are you complaining about something I
    obviously didn't say?

    You don't ride bicycles so you have no first hand knowledge of
    anything so stop acting as if you do.

    I see. Not riding a bicycle somehow makes me ignorant on how energy
    harvesting functions on a bicycle (or any vehicle). <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_harvesting> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_harvesting#Energy_from_smart_roads_and_piezoelectricity>
    Did you have classes in college on engineering mechanics, statics,
    dynamics, materials, motors, generators, thermodynamics, fluidics,
    physics and such? Oh, I forgot that you are self taught and know all
    those topics because you "read out" all their books on "non-fiction"
    topics from 3 public and 1 military libraries in an amazingly short
    period of time.

    06/07/2022 <https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/QNPNSofg064/m/Xaamy15iBQAJ>
    "I would warrant that I've read more than 20 times more books than you
    have. I read out three public libraries, the military library and all
    of the books I used to gain the knowledge to become an engineer."

    That sounds very much like you are in favor of "book learning" since
    you obviously would not have been able to obtain "hands on" experience
    with real products on the technologies I mentioned. Are you perhaps
    claiming that your can "book learn" complex engineering topics, while
    everyone has to learn from "hands on" experience? That doesn't quite
    work.

    --
    Jeff Liebermann [email protected]
    PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
    Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
    Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Roger Merriman@21:1/5 to Frank Krygowski on Sat Jun 21 07:59:18 2025
    Frank Krygowski <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 6/20/2025 4:43 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:

    Who is saying they should ride 40mm tyres?

    I’ve seen some reviews of 40mm road tyres which broadly comes down to
    comfortable but almost certainly slower than 28/32 though non racers may
    well make that choice.

    Not seen anyone claiming 40mm tyres should be ridden quite apart from
    anything else relatively few road bikes will fit 40mm.

    These days I think the main proponent of such wide tires is Jan Heine, publisher of Bicycle Quarterly. IIRC he rides something like 40mm very frequently even on smooth-ish pavement. But his articles seem to
    describe his typical routes as having lots of gravel.


    Even with the caveat that he’s not really mainstream, he sells sub 40mm
    tyres 30mm/33 or so?

    Don’t recall him being quite so literal, my way or nothing, all advice and indeed reviews seem to be it depends particularly at the 40mm end!

    Roger Merriman

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Roger Merriman@21:1/5 to Frank Krygowski on Sat Jun 21 16:48:50 2025
    Frank Krygowski <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 6/21/2025 3:59 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:
    Frank Krygowski <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 6/20/2025 4:43 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:

    Who is saying they should ride 40mm tyres?

    I’ve seen some reviews of 40mm road tyres which broadly comes down to >>>> comfortable but almost certainly slower than 28/32 though non racers may >>>> well make that choice.

    Not seen anyone claiming 40mm tyres should be ridden quite apart from
    anything else relatively few road bikes will fit 40mm.

    These days I think the main proponent of such wide tires is Jan Heine,
    publisher of Bicycle Quarterly. IIRC he rides something like 40mm very
    frequently even on smooth-ish pavement. But his articles seem to
    describe his typical routes as having lots of gravel.


    Even with the caveat that he’s not really mainstream, he sells sub 40mm
    tyres 30mm/33 or so?

    Don’t recall him being quite so literal, my way or nothing, all advice and >> indeed reviews seem to be it depends particularly at the 40mm end!

    Right, he's not commanding we all ride 40mm tires. What salesman would
    do that? But he spends a good amount of his text output praising ever
    wider tires, even for normal pavement.

    Looks like he sells one 28mm tire in 700c, and his road tires go up to
    55mm.

    <https://www.renehersecycles.com/product-category/components/tires/700c/>


    Indeed it’s been one of the takeaways about my gravel bike has been big
    plump tyres roll nice on road as well, and give a much more planted ride,
    ie less skittish.

    Let alone is everyone setup for speed 1st and only? Mine certainly isn’t!

    Roger Merriman

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From =?UTF-8?B?Y3ljbGludG9t?=@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jun 22 20:02:02 2025
    On Fri Jun 20 20:43:18 2025 Roger Merriman wrote:

    Who is saying they should ride 40mm tyres?

    I?ve seen some reviews of 40mm road tyres which broadly comes down to comfortable but almost certainly slower than 28/32 though non racers may
    well make that choice.

    Not seen anyone claiming 40mm tyres should be ridden quite apart from anything else relatively few road bikes will fit 40mm.




    I most certainly have not tried this since none of my bikes would mount tires that wide but CyclingNews does recommend it.

    https://www.cyclingnews.com/features/lab-tested-40mm-road-tyres-are-faster-for-nearly-everyone-and-heres-why/

    Now I surely was surprised at the increase in average speed using 32 mm tires (using very slow Gatorskins Hardshells) and also a very noticeable increase in comfort and another advantage is that they roll right over pavement cracks of quite a large size.
    You don't have to swerve to try and cross at a closer to right angle.

    But if you look at the rolling resistance site:

    Most of the lowest rolling resistance tests are on 25 mm tires.

    The rolling resistance tests need to be greatly changed since it does not have "bumps" of the same size as those on open roads.

    I had a gravel bike with 38 mm tires and I road with the group on a 37 mile ride with 3700 feet of climbing. Now these were gravel tires which were semi-knobbies. But I had no trouble keeping up with the fast group. (well except for a couple of 17 year
    old twins.)

    The new bikes such as the Time Sylon has room to fit really fat tires.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Roger Merriman@21:1/5 to cyclintom on Sun Jun 22 20:25:20 2025
    cyclintom <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Fri Jun 20 20:43:18 2025 Roger Merriman wrote:

    Who is saying they should ride 40mm tyres?

    I?ve seen some reviews of 40mm road tyres which broadly comes down to
    comfortable but almost certainly slower than 28/32 though non racers may
    well make that choice.

    Not seen anyone claiming 40mm tyres should be ridden quite apart from
    anything else relatively few road bikes will fit 40mm.




    I most certainly have not tried this since none of my bikes would mount
    tires that wide but CyclingNews does recommend it.

    https://www.cyclingnews.com/features/lab-tested-40mm-road-tyres-are-faster-for-nearly-everyone-and-heres-why/

    They are again using the silverstone rig, ie cobbled and non cobbled drum,
    and noted that on smooth tarmac rolling resistance was negligible, but
    wider was less aerodynamic which is kinda obvious, and the conclusion is
    that road bikes probably should be aiming at the 30/40mm space for ride feel/handling reasons than speed.

    Ie the article doesn’t say what you think it does if one looks beyond the headline which is designed to hook one in.

    Now I surely was surprised at the increase in average speed using 32 mm
    tires (using very slow Gatorskins Hardshells) and also a very noticeable increase in comfort and another advantage is that they roll right over pavement cracks of quite a large size. You don't have to swerve to try
    and cross at a closer to right angle.

    But if you look at the rolling resistance site:

    Most of the lowest rolling resistance tests are on 25 mm tires.

    The rolling resistance tests need to be greatly changed since it does not have "bumps" of the same size as those on open roads.

    I had a gravel bike with 38 mm tires and I road with the group on a 37
    mile ride with 3700 feet of climbing. Now these were gravel tires which
    were semi-knobbies. But I had no trouble keeping up with the fast group. (well except for a couple of 17 year old twins.)

    The new bikes such as the Time Sylon has room to fit really fat tires.



    Roger Merriman

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From =?UTF-8?B?Y3ljbGludG9t?=@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jun 22 22:13:08 2025
    On Fri Jun 20 18:31:39 2025 Jeff Liebermann wrote:
    On Fri, 20 Jun 2025 20:23:19 GMT, cyclintom <[email protected]>
    wrote:

    On Fri Jan 3 20:27:04 2025 Jeff Liebermann wrote:
    On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 10:06:08 -0600, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:

    I take from that, you think the actual impact/height
    change/velocity change etc from various irregular surfaces
    can be quantified for any given random gravel (or road)
    experience and used to compare efficiency for other iterations.

    This is close, but not quite what you're asking.

    "Energy Harvesting from Bicycle Vibrations by Means of Tuned
    Piezoelectric Generators"
    <https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9292/9/9/1377>
    <https://mdpi-res.com/d_attachment/electronics/electronics-09-01377/article_deploy/electronics-09-01377-v2.pdf?version=1598515211>

    On PDF page 14, it proclaims:

    "8. Prediction of Generated Power
    The electrical power harvested by a piezo-harvester is very low (in
    the order of a few mW), so highly-efficient power management units
    (PMU) have to be used for energy conversion. The output voltage of the
    piezo-harvester is a random signal with a main harmonic component at
    the resonance vibration frequency of the cantilever. On the other
    hand, electronic loads (such as a battery for energy storage and/or a
    portable device which can be mounted on a bicycle) are typically fed
    by DC voltage; therefore, interface electronic circuits between the
    piezo-harvester and the load are made up by a rectifier (for AC to DC
    voltage conversion), an electrolytic capacitor for voltage leveling
    and energy storage, and DC-DC converter for impedance matching with
    the electronic load resistance."

    Page 17 has a table of generated power at various speeds.

    Of course it's possible to optimize the bicycle design, material
    (tire) selection, road surface profile, etc to produce the most power
    output. Presumably, the generated electric power will be used to
    power an electric and mechanical doping system. The problem is that
    when you're starting with milliwatts, it's a long way to go before
    sufficient power can be harvested to make a difference in a race or on
    a ride.

    What do you think you're saying?

    I was responding to Andrews comments on using energy harvesting
    technology to generate electrical power. You were responding to my
    comments from 6 months ago. Are you lacking in suitable topics to demonstrate your ineptitude, are you just resurrecting old discussions because you can't seem to find suitable replies to current topics, or
    are you having difficulties operating your NewsHosting.com news
    reader?

    There is essentually no pezo power from a bike with 32 mm tires
    at the correct pressure. Bike riders are being told that they
    should ride 40 mm tires.

    What is the "pezo" power? Do you mean power generated by piezo
    electric methods? Who is telling riders to ride 40 mm tires? It's
    certainly not me? So why are you complaining about something I
    obviously didn't say?

    You don't ride bicycles so you have no first hand knowledge of
    anything so stop acting as if you do.

    I see. Not riding a bicycle somehow makes me ignorant on how energy harvesting functions on a bicycle (or any vehicle). <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_harvesting> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_harvesting#Energy_from_smart_roads_and_piezoelectricity>
    Did you have classes in college on engineering mechanics, statics,
    dynamics, materials, motors, generators, thermodynamics, fluidics,
    physics and such? Oh, I forgot that you are self taught and know all
    those topics because you "read out" all their books on "non-fiction"
    topics from 3 public and 1 military libraries in an amazingly short
    period of time.

    06/07/2022 <https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/QNPNSofg064/m/Xaamy15iBQAJ> "I would warrant that I've read more than 20 times more books than you
    have. I read out three public libraries, the military library and all
    of the books I used to gain the knowledge to become an engineer."

    That sounds very much like you are in favor of "book learning" since
    you obviously would not have been able to obtain "hands on" experience
    with real products on the technologies I mentioned. Are you perhaps
    claiming that your can "book learn" complex engineering topics, while everyone has to learn from "hands on" experience? That doesn't quite
    work.




    You act characteristically stupid. Suddenly after you mention Piezoelectric methods in your posting you don't know what references to Piezo is. Are you a circus clown?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)