Thursday, April 30, 2009

integral basket. air horn dreams.


http://www.treehugger.com/files/2009/04/the-bike-porter.php

D: looks nice. Isn't.
Ever dangle groceries from yer handlebars?
Good way to crash.
All that weight,high up on the bars will affect steering.

I have considered 'bumpers' on a bike.
Extend the frame to cover the wheels.
Less crumpled tires.
Would also provide a mount point for such things.
Integral.

Something I have considered as a product is The Boom.
I found my handlebars lacked enough space to mount all my doo-dahs.
Plus detaching them - or leaving them - was a pain to deal with potential theft.
The Boom clamps onto the steering tube. It extends over the front wheel.
Obviously, lacking ranged or remote controls, stuff like a bell and horn must remain
mounted on the handlebars.

Aside: my Zound air horn broke in no time. It won't refill.
They need a threaded and robust adapter for refills.

http://209.150.104.225/HalloweenTech/pnupro_PropaneAirTank.html
D: rig this up to a motorbike air horn, or even big-rig or train!
<:
Don't use it in residential areas at night.
Or on folks with weak hearts.

But for the idiotic U students that wander around with their I-pods in their ears, it's just the ticket. And the look on their face is PRICELESS.

http://www.twistedthrottle.com/trade/productview/2137/

D: Tetz's 12V power assist could work.
I think you'd hafta use a capacitor to keep the charge strong enough for a few seconds.
I had considered that for the 'start at green light on angle on 'bent bike' issue anyway.
Check out the battery-sized supercapacitors on market!
<:

Saturday, March 28, 2009

good gear hubs never cheaper

http://www.diyelectriccar.com/forums/showthread.php/sale-new-nuvinci-cvt-bicycle-hubs-25619.html?s=d766ec1a1c0b353705bfac53baf0222c&

I am selling 5 brand new (in sealed boxes) NuVinci Hubs 32 hole hubs for $275 each including Priority Mail Shipping with Insurance.

A friend asked me to help him sell these NuVinci Hubs, that he purchased wholesale, for a small production run of Ebikes that drive through the gears. He really likes the hubs for manual use. For his ebikes he decided he wanted something that shifted up in regular increments because he could manage his watt usage better (both motor and pedaling are through the rear hub).

He paid $300 apiece for them. He said to sell them for $275 each ("lets get rid of them") including priority mail shipping with insurance.

D: I have seen some on sale for about that.

Watch out for the 'controller not included' prices though!

Imotion9:

http://www.amazon.com/i-Motion-9-Speed-Internal-Bicycle-135mm/dp/B0013HM7QY

D: IM9 should be lighter, more efficient.
NV more cool, 'n sooo easy to automate gear changing. Up. Down.

A 350% range is practical for most commuters.
Don't try offroad, severe hills or loads, or racing though.

Schlumph Hyperdrive or Mountaindrive is an option.
Not cheap.
http://www.kinetics.org.uk/html/mountain_drive.shtml

Bicycle Forest has one on a teardrop trike.
http://www.kinetics.org.uk/html/hub_picker.shtml

D: might be best to pay upfront.
Although one can also retrofit with a Schlumph later.
The range WITH the Rohloff would be insane.
Watch the gear inches and torque ratio stuff though.

Using a mountain drive (2.5:1 reduction) with a Rohloff will void the warrenty on the Rohloff hub. As the input is too low

Sure, a maintained new bike is more efficient.
But hubs are no fuss, no muss!

I've had quite a few bikes rust out.

Easy to seal all away with sealed hubs.

Wednesday, March 11, 2009

rail road riding bike


http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/06/railrider-travel-in-style.php

http://www.railriders.net/index1.html

D: I had a daydream somewhat like this.
Rails in town had been cordoned off for bicycle use.
Bikes had clamps on the wheels that let them stay upright on rails.
For roads, they arced over in bridges.

I saw suspended walkways in Detroit. I imagine that is mostly viewed as a nice place to mug folks.


Still, something covered against the weather would be nice.

Needless to say, I imagined recumbents.
But I got to thinking.
If one partitions off the left/right side, and forced air at stations one way or the other, then at say 30kph wind folks are getting a 'power assist'.
Simpler than tricking out every bike with a power assist.

A full fairing on a recumbent is less an issue with a wheel clamp to keep it upright.
No chance of accidents blocking the way.

Close your eyes. Imagine cycle tubes elevated above traffic.
Getting to work by going 30kph non stop.
(Optional turnoffs as per trains).
All those little human powered bikes flitting about.
Nice, huh?

Friday, February 27, 2009

transforming bikes


http://i.gizmodo.com/5161263/rebirth-of-the-big-wheel-matias-contis-transformable-spin-vehicle

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCxSUg12RLc

D: a trike with built-in baby carriage. The baby is up front to cushion any impacts you have with cars, LOL.

D: I saw a vid last year of an upright bike that could transform into a semi-'bent.

I wonder if that inspired me to consider a variable seat height. The height of the seat means it must be on its own boom.

Also, I am pondering a dual-mode front and mid-steerer.
This would require re-arranging some pins in the frame.
It would reuse the steering grips for either under or over seat steering.

Regarding the variable height seat on a recumbent - this was my way of
1) having a low drag fast bike but
2) a good visibility option for commuting in traffic.
I will never use a lowrider in traffic!
Even the short wheelbase recumbent 'highrider' seemed very low.
That is part of why I settled on a Cruzbike.

The highracers would be brutal on the pot-holes around here.
Our winter freeze-thaw cycle wreaks havoc on roads.
http://www.bicycleman.com/recumbents/bacchetta/bacchetta_aero_ti.htm

Aside- regarding my Mark I bike design contest offering, with the suspension built into the seat...
For intense cycling, one wants the suspension between wheel and frame.
Otherwise, the bike loses contact with the ground and doesn't hug the riding surface.
However, given the frame simplicity that results, I am willing to accept the trade-off.
Plus also recall that light wheels make for a light feeling bike frame.
It is less punitive for acceleration - imparting all that centrifugal force.
It gets wasted in braking as heat anyway.

Sunday, February 15, 2009

mechanical and electronic gear shifters, hydraulic drive, bottom bracket dynamo


http://i.gizmodo.com/5153773/electronic-bicycle-gear-shifting-promises-aerodynamics-and-complications

The good and the bad and the prohibitively expensive.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/14/sports/cycling/14gears.html?_r=2&pagewanted=2&ref=technology

Two earlier attempts at electronic gear changing by a French company, Mavic, often malfunctioned in rain. Another company, Campagnolo, has delayed bringing its version to market because of the economic downturn.

D: only 4000 bux (!!!) and reliant on a battery...

There was a nifty earlier attempt by Browning. The gear changing method is something else.

http://www2.bsn.de/Cycling/articles/browning.html (pic)

The critical feature that differentiates the Browning from standard derailleur systems is the continuous gear/chain engagement during shifting, there is no skipping or grinding even under the heaviest loads. The transmission will shift under any combination of speed, cadence and pedaling force. Shifts are smooth, fast and nearly silent. The chain stays fully in contact with the gear teeth during either up or down shifts. In contrast, even with the best standard derailleurs, on upshifts, the chain loses contact with the smaller sprocket before it is fully engaged on the large sprocket which often leads to grinding or skipping under heavy loads.

Another unique feature of the Browning transmission is that it is ideally suited for complete electric operation including computer controlled automatic shifting. This eliminates derailleur cables and cable adjustment.

D: I had pondered the idea of computer control after studying the efficiency analysis of the Rohloff gear hub.
http://www.ihpva.org/HParchive/PDF/hp52-2001.pdf
Love these guys!
As you can see, the Rohloff's efficiency varies by 4%, depending on the gear.
That is because the number of internal gears engaged varies.
I think between 1 and 4 at a time.
Obviously direct drive is always preferable.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rohloff_Speedhub

D: yet another lament by me. I asked about the I-motion 9 internal gears.
Not like I couldn't crack one open to find out.
I got the third degree and then no answer to my question anyway.

OK - back to the Rohloff. A computer would be able to accommodate the gear efficiency versus optimal cadence equation. For example, let us a say that a certain cyclist spins at 80rpm best. In a good gear - one with fewer internal gears engaged - maybe we want him/her/it/them (sigh) to expand the cadence range by say 5 or 10 rpm prior to gear shifting.
Conversely, in an inefficient gear, we might wish to reduce the spread of cadence in that gear by a like amount. This is just the sort of equation a computer could do easily and well.

Frankly, the simpler solution is to use a NuVinci hub with a continuous variable gear. Then it's a simple matter of up and down.

A quick aside on drive efficiency.
1) a non gear-hub is likely ideally a bit more efficient. Dust, grit, rust et al makes me think is only true in theory.
2) a severe chain wrap around a small sprocket is inefficient
3) a taught chain is a must
4) oddly, lube seemed to serve no purpose here.

Another aside- a hydraulic drive was designed but never seemed to reach the market.
It would have the potential to allow dual-drive on a bike.
Pretty terrific for snow and up hills/gravel on a front wheel drive 'bent.
http://www.newadventure.ca/welcome/technology.php
Their site doesn't even seem to up any more.

Yet another unrelated aside. Shimano has the patent on a bottom bracket internal dynamo generator. I think this is to suppress it, so they can promote their wheel hub dynamos.

http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/7059989/claims.html

D: I like the idea of all the expensive components embedded within the frame itself.
This way, the wheels are 'naked'. They can be stolen but won't be worth much.
Or they can be used for other options.

Since my partial fairing closing-clamshell design (and the later pure-design 'lobster') covers the frame when closed and locked shut, the frame ought to be pretty safe.
Embedding some police anti-theft devices like RFIDs could also help.
With carbon composites hiding some RFIDs during construction is a snap.
There would be no way to remove them without causing catastrophic failure in the frame.



Sunday, January 25, 2009

bus bike rack dictates basic geometry for commuter




http://www.toronto.ca/ttc/bike_racks.htm

D: Waterloo has a similar rack.
That was not something I considered when I settled on a front-boom SWB Cruzbike.
The triangular boom prevents the swing arm from rising.
With care, I might be able to put the bike on backwards, if I leave the (old front ) rear tire bare.

I had considered whether a SWB non-boom bike could have the pedal tube on a pivot mount. It could swing up and out of the way.
Alternatively, enough clearance and careful tube geometry could help.

Has anybody successfully mounted their SWB 'bent bike on a bus bike rack?

It certainly precludes a LWB or even MWB.

Lament: with a DVD and more care in the parts/instructions list, a Cruzbike would be very simple to build at home, as opposed to highly challenging like it is.
They could expand their customer base with a training DVD that costs one dollar...

A few more asides on Cruzbike construction:
1) bike shops don't use the same terms from threaded/threadless front fork bits
Simply including this bit, since all the cheap Y-frames will need it anyway would be nice.
2) NO bike shops in town sold the tool I needed to open the bottom bracket
3) you need TWO sets of Allen hex wrenches.
4) psychologically, I just had to drill more holes to mount the seat. No good reason.

Update: my bud Ryan found a talented cheap welder. My pal Fern is a whiz with stainless but is not as close.
We're gonna use scrap to make the first clunky version of my 'bike contest' SWB.
See an earlier entry- it is the one inspired by the GreenMachine.

Monday, November 3, 2008

my shot at bike design contest.

http://bicycledesign.blogspot.com/2008/10/commuter-bike-for-masses-design.html

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/11/bicycle-design-competition.php

D: the bike must be
1) easy
2) comfy
3) efficient
4) fun.

D: this reminds me of the old mechanic joke. You can have 2 out of 3 of the following. Cheap, fast, good. You can have good and cheap but not fast. And so on....

1) easy. I assume this means easy to operate for the end-user. No fancy controls. No complex technical aspects
2) comfy. Ergonomics. Feels good.
3) efficient. This one is trickier. This sounds like 'light' to me, with good gearing.
4) fun. I imagine 123 would make it fun. Not dealing with technical stuff is also fun.

Well, the above bike is just a 26" wheel DIY version of the Greenmachine I want to build.
The Gm is great - and about 5000 bux, with no support in North America.

I thought about dual suspension and whatnot. But that makes it heavier, more expensive, less efficient and complicated.
I wanted to make the frame very light.
Well just by isolating the rider, who weighs say 150 or so pounds from a bike that weights 20-30? pounds, on makes it both light (efficient) and fun (particularly with the seat).
I thought two parallel parallelogram thudbuster setups with a few inches of wiggle room by the frame on each side would suffice. Elastomer is adequate for non-winter cycling.
This does mean the seat must be free-floating. I.e. it is not leaning on the rear wheel assembly.

The square tube frame just makes my life easier. No concern that the seat can fall sideways!
A few holes or indents and the seat mounted on a sliding mount and the thing can adjust for rider height.
Of course (see the Optima Condor) below 5' 10" or so, 26" wheels become problematic.
There are 24 and 20" wheels about.

The chain is completely enclosed. No grease on yer work clothes. Pretty quiet.

The NuVinci drive is cheaper though heavier than an I-motion 9.
I suppose efficient favours the IM9, but I disliked the technical support.
The NVd is also easier in that it is a variable drive lacking discrete gears.

The SWB recumbent layout is amenable to a partial fairing and a motor assist if desired.
A backpack mount is a must! I'd like a Y-shaped shoulder mount on the back of the seat.
I don't like the idea of strapping a backpack to the luggage rack area. I always worry about those straps getting caught in the tires.

I could ride a 'bent the first weekend I tried it, so there is not much learning curve.
(Unlike a front-boom style - I still don't trust myself in traffic! ).

Well that is what I think a commuter bike should look like.
Other than the seat-suspension, the whole thing should be pretty simple to make.