9 ms·

I wonder if you could use downhill sections to regenerate the high pressure inside of the tube. I love this idea. You're hired.

BobaFloutist 2y ago
Wait now I'm imagining purely mechanical regenerative braking. Like the bike has no ability to generate its own power, but it has a spring (or compressed air or compressed liquid) inside the frame that contributes to turning the gearshaft but gets rewound/compressed while braking. Is this possible? Would it be against the rules as written?
- daemonologist 2y ago
  The UCI rules are... extensive; it's definitely disallowed [1]. Even if not, there's a rule along the lines of "any technical innovation must be pre-approved," and I am pretty confident it would not be. [1] Probably by article 1.3.010: "The bicycle shall be propelled solely, through a chainset, by the legs (inferior muscular chain) moving in a circular movement, without electric or other assistance." - https://www.uci.org/regulations/3MyLDDrwJCJJ0BGGOFzOat https://www.uci.org/regulations/3MyLDDrwJCJJ0BGGOFzOat
  - Aerroon 2y ago
    Therefore you put the motor inside the leg muscles
  - AnthonyMouse 2y ago
    > Probably by article 1.3.010: "The bicycle shall be propelled solely, through a chainset, by the legs (inferior muscular chain) moving in a circular movement, without electric or other assistance." Well that just says you need to build your regenerative braking system into the chainset. Use of stored energy is obviously allowed or else you couldn't make use of gravity when on a hill. > Even if not, there's a rule along the lines of "any technical innovation must be pre-approved," What innovation? Mechanical energy storage is ancient technology.
    - eru 2y ago
      >> Even if not, there's a rule along the lines of "any technical innovation must be pre-approved," > What innovation? Mechanical energy storage is ancient technology. The actual unwritten rule is not so much against inventions, as against having any fun. Recumbent bikes are also forbidden.
      - masklinn 2y ago
        > The actual unwritten rule is not so much against inventions, as against having any fun. The rules, written or not, are about trying to adjudicate a competition of people, if you want a no holds bared technology based competition nothing precludes creating a different one (or participating in one, there’s no dearth of alleycat races and other odd events like the singlespeed world championship).
        eru 2y ago
        I'm not against rules. What irks me a bit is that they are supposed to be about bikes, but in reality they are only about bikes that look exactly like the ones they have in mind. Eg (if I remember right) they also specify a minimum wheel radius, because at some point people started doing well with those, and the people in charge didn't like that. And they might as well be right: they have an entertainment business to run. They don't care about finding the best or anything like that.
        angus-prune 2y ago
        I disagree that the sport is about bikes. I think the sport is about cyclists. The olympics is particular is built around human athletic competition not technical competition. How do you find the best cyclist if the quality of the bikes is wildly different? In any experiment, you have to control for the factors other than the ones you're looking to test. I don't think its fair to say that they don't care about finding the best, they're just trying to find the best of a different category than you're interested in. As GP said. There is also space for different competitions about technology (in motorsport, formula 1 has both a driver championship and a constructor championship which is about the technology).
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]

BobaFloutist 2y ago

Wait now I'm imagining purely mechanical regenerative braking. Like the bike has no ability to generate its own power, but it has a spring (or compressed air or compressed liquid) inside the frame that contributes to turning the gearshaft but gets rewound/compressed while braking. Is this possible? Would it be against the rules as written?

daemonologist 2y ago
The UCI rules are... extensive; it's definitely disallowed [1]. Even if not, there's a rule along the lines of "any technical innovation must be pre-approved," and I am pretty confident it would not be. [1] Probably by article 1.3.010: "The bicycle shall be propelled solely, through a chainset, by the legs (inferior muscular chain) moving in a circular movement, without electric or other assistance." - https://www.uci.org/regulations/3MyLDDrwJCJJ0BGGOFzOat https://www.uci.org/regulations/3MyLDDrwJCJJ0BGGOFzOat
- Aerroon 2y ago
  Therefore you put the motor inside the leg muscles
- AnthonyMouse 2y ago
  > Probably by article 1.3.010: "The bicycle shall be propelled solely, through a chainset, by the legs (inferior muscular chain) moving in a circular movement, without electric or other assistance." Well that just says you need to build your regenerative braking system into the chainset. Use of stored energy is obviously allowed or else you couldn't make use of gravity when on a hill. > Even if not, there's a rule along the lines of "any technical innovation must be pre-approved," What innovation? Mechanical energy storage is ancient technology.
  - eru 2y ago
    >> Even if not, there's a rule along the lines of "any technical innovation must be pre-approved," > What innovation? Mechanical energy storage is ancient technology. The actual unwritten rule is not so much against inventions, as against having any fun. Recumbent bikes are also forbidden.
    - masklinn 2y ago
      > The actual unwritten rule is not so much against inventions, as against having any fun. The rules, written or not, are about trying to adjudicate a competition of people, if you want a no holds bared technology based competition nothing precludes creating a different one (or participating in one, there’s no dearth of alleycat races and other odd events like the singlespeed world championship).
      - eru 2y ago
        I'm not against rules. What irks me a bit is that they are supposed to be about bikes, but in reality they are only about bikes that look exactly like the ones they have in mind. Eg (if I remember right) they also specify a minimum wheel radius, because at some point people started doing well with those, and the people in charge didn't like that. And they might as well be right: they have an entertainment business to run. They don't care about finding the best or anything like that.
        angus-prune 2y ago
        I disagree that the sport is about bikes. I think the sport is about cyclists. The olympics is particular is built around human athletic competition not technical competition. How do you find the best cyclist if the quality of the bikes is wildly different? In any experiment, you have to control for the factors other than the ones you're looking to test. I don't think its fair to say that they don't care about finding the best, they're just trying to find the best of a different category than you're interested in. As GP said. There is also space for different competitions about technology (in motorsport, formula 1 has both a driver championship and a constructor championship which is about the technology).
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]