Hill climbing simulation on flats - possible?

The foundations for successful riding

Re: Hill climbing simulation on flats - possible?

Postby human909 » Thu Aug 05, 2010 9:17 pm

brentono wrote:
human909 wrote:
brentono wrote:So (coach troy) if I stick my static trainer (rollers) at a 45 degree (sideways), along my wall,
and ride at that angle, the position of the body will result in different muscles
working at different intensity, and I can simulate riding around the Track (Velodrome) :?: :?

No because the whole point of banking is that you should be riding at a speed where your bike is actually perpedicular to the banked surface thus it is equivalent to riding on a flat surface. Thus banking should put you body into a MORE neutral position.

So as gravity has no effect on hills. :roll:
Then Centrifugal force must have no effect also, and the banking should put my body into a MORE neutral position,
equivalent to riding on a flat surface... that's what you are saying, correct. :?
So what body position am I in, on the straights, when the surface is almost level?
Does my position, vary. :?:
(Is that you "coach troy")
Cheers,
BrentonO


What the hell are you on about? What is your question? Ideally your body position should be neutral in all cases. Banking just decreases the lateral grip required and so makes cornering easier.

Either way you comment about tipping a trainer to simulate a velodrome makes little sense.
human909
 
Posts: 4849
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:48 am

by BNA » Sat Aug 07, 2010 10:04 am

BNA
 

Re: Hill climbing simulation on flats - possible?

Postby brentono » Sat Aug 07, 2010 10:04 am

human909 wrote:The best piece of advice in the entire thread an you guys think its a joke! :roll:

Either way you comment about tipping a trainer to simulate a velodrome makes little sense.


"Simulate a velodrome makes little sense", about as much sense as the simulation, with books, of hills. :wink:

"The best piece of advice"... let us know how it goes, it's your time (wasted) 8)
Now back to normal programming (reality) :|
Cheers,
BrentonO
Lone Rider- I rode on the long, dark road... before I danced under the lights.
User avatar
brentono
 
Posts: 3674
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 12:33 pm
Location: Perth DubyaEh.

Re: Hill climbing simulation on flats - possible?

Postby human909 » Sat Aug 07, 2010 10:49 am

brentono wrote:"Simulate a velodrome makes little sense", about as much sense as the simulation, with books, of hills. :wink:


Your wrong. As has been explain books will simulate on the front will simulate a hill climb quite well. Make sure the resistance is set right and you are all good.
human909
 
Posts: 4849
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:48 am

Re: Hill climbing simulation on flats - possible?

Postby brentono » Sat Aug 07, 2010 11:20 am

human909 wrote:
brentono wrote:"Simulate a velodrome makes little sense", about as much sense as the simulation, with books, of hills. :wink:


Your wrong. As has been explain books will simulate on the front will simulate a hill climb quite well. Make sure the resistance is set right and you are all good.


Your wrong, you can't ignore Gravity, you go for it, if you wish. :roll:

The primary forces a cyclist must overcome are air resistance and gravity.
Air resistance increases exponentially with speed. In the transition from cycling on a flat road to climbing a hill,
the decreased speed reduces air resistance to the point where drafting other riders provides little benefit.
At this point, smaller cyclists, who tend to have superior power-to-weight ratios, will be able to break away from the peloton.
Climbing ability can be enhanced by minimizing weight, and also by pedaling at a consistently high cadence.
there are three primary forces to be overcome in bicycling: rolling resistance, air resistance and gravity:

W = krMs + kaAsv2 + giMs

where W is power, kr is the rolling resistance coefficient, M is the combined mass of cyclist and bicycle,
s is the bicycle speed on the road, ka is the air resistance coefficient,
A is the combined frontal area of cyclist and bicycle,
v is the bicycle speed through the air (i.e. road speed plus head wind speed),
g is the gravitational acceleration constant,
and i is the road incline
(grade; however, this is only an approximation,
as the sine of the road angle to the horizontal should technically be used).

Knock yourself out, I'm done. :wink:
(go have a "silly debate" with Christine :lol: )
Cheers,
BrentonO
Lone Rider- I rode on the long, dark road... before I danced under the lights.
User avatar
brentono
 
Posts: 3674
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 12:33 pm
Location: Perth DubyaEh.

Re: Hill climbing simulation on flats - possible?

Postby mikesbytes » Sat Aug 07, 2010 11:53 am

toolonglegs wrote:Bobbin Head Sth 4km.... 8m38secs
Brooklyn to Pie in the Sky 3.95km... 8m21secs
Akuna West 5.2km... 11m18secs
McCarrs 4.2km... 10m26secs

Obviously depends who you are :lol: ...they aren't my times btw!...McCarrs seems a bit slow thou,I can nearly get to 11m45secs.


Where's McCarrs? I'll have a crack at your 11m45secs one day

brentono wrote:So (coach troy) if I stick my static trainer (rollers) at a 45 degree (sideways), along my wall,
and ride at that angle, the position of the body will result in different muscles
working at different intensity, and I can simulate riding around the Track (Velodrome) :?: :?


LOL :D :D :D :D

I'm in agreement with most of the other posters, hit the hills. I do most of my training on indoor spin bikes, which includes hill simulations but I'm aware that the best way to be good at climbing is to go climbing
A helmet saved my life
User avatar
mikesbytes
Super Mod
Super Mod
 
Posts: 14807
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 10:42 pm
Location: Tempe, Sydney

Re: Hill climbing simulation on flats - possible?

Postby Alex Simmons/RST » Sat Aug 07, 2010 12:17 pm

There is only one sensible reason to elevate the front wheel when riding a trainer. That's when you need to reduce the weight borne by the hands/arms (which shouldn't be a lot anyway to start with) if for example you have an injury - it can help make the trainer a little more comfortable to use and put a little more weight back on the sit bones (where most weight should already be).

Does raising the rear wheel on a trainer make you a better descender? Of course not.

Honestly folks, think about this stuff a little more carefully before posting.

If you want to go faster up hills, then work on increasing your sustainable power to weight ratio. Hills are good for forcing the higher effort required to elicit such adaptations, but you can get the same adaptations on the flat - you just have to ride hard.

You'd be amazed how slack most people are when riding flat/rolling terrain - something you find out when using a power meter.
User avatar
Alex Simmons/RST
Expert
 
Posts: 3428
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 3:51 pm

Re: Hill climbing simulation on flats - possible?

Postby toolonglegs » Sat Aug 07, 2010 12:22 pm

mikesbytes wrote:
toolonglegs wrote:Bobbin Head Sth 4km.... 8m38secs
Brooklyn to Pie in the Sky 3.95km... 8m21secs
Akuna West 5.2km... 11m18secs
McCarrs 4.2km... 10m26secs

Obviously depends who you are :lol: ...they aren't my times btw!...McCarrs seems a bit slow thou,I can nearly get to 11m45secs.


Where's McCarrs? I'll have a crack at your 11m45secs one day


If I remember right then it is from the Park sign at the bottom to the KOM line by the junction down to Akuna...good luck!.
Image
User avatar
toolonglegs
 
Posts: 14380
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 7:49 pm
Location: Somewhere with padded walls and really big hills!

Re: Hill climbing simulation on flats - possible?

Postby Ross » Sun Aug 08, 2010 5:29 pm

one_damo wrote:Hi All,

Wondering if you can give some advice - I'm about to sign up for the Fitz Challenge ( http://www.ocf-fitz.com/ ) in October later this year and as I'm looking at the 160km ride, I'm more and more thinking about the late preparation I can do to help cope (a little bit at least) with the 2300m of climbing.



I would suggest you come to Canberra one weekend and ride or at the very least drive the course to see what you are in for. It's pretty tough, especially as you get past Tharwa and head up Fitz's Hill and beyond. Maybe the ~100km Tharwa Challenge might be more suited if you haven't done much hill training.

Image
Image
User avatar
Ross
 
Posts: 3749
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 7:53 pm

Re: Hill climbing simulation on flats - possible?

Postby human909 » Sun Aug 08, 2010 6:56 pm

brentono wrote:Your wrong, you can't ignore Gravity, you go for it, if you wish. :roll:

How am I ignoring gravity? Hills simply mean you need to drop gears and continue the same power rate. Unless you run out of gears then the pedaling and work rate doesn't need to change.

Your pedalling angle however DOES change, that is unavoidable no matter how many gears you have. It puts more stress on your core muscles. This is all simulated very accurately by propping up the front of a trainer.

Alex Simmons/RST wrote:There is only one sensible reason to elevate the front wheel when riding a trainer. That's when you need to reduce the weight borne by the hands/arms (which shouldn't be a lot anyway to start with) if for example you have an injury - it can help make the trainer a little more comfortable to use and put a little more weight back on the sit bones (where most weight should already be).


Simply not true. As said before do not over looking the influence on angle of pedalling on required muscles.
human909
 
Posts: 4849
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:48 am

Re: Hill climbing simulation on flats - possible?

Postby mikesbytes » Sun Aug 08, 2010 7:19 pm

How does changing the angle of the bike change the angle of pedaling on the required muscles?
A helmet saved my life
User avatar
mikesbytes
Super Mod
Super Mod
 
Posts: 14807
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 10:42 pm
Location: Tempe, Sydney

Re: Hill climbing simulation on flats - possible?

Postby human909 » Sun Aug 08, 2010 7:37 pm

mikesbytes wrote:How does changing the angle of the bike change the angle of pedaling on the required muscles?


Well on a 10degree slope the angle of pedalling with respect to the gravitional line changes by 10degrees. On steep inclines this puts along more stress on your core muscles.

If you have done much long steep hill climbing you would know this. Its very obvious on really steep hills, quite evident mountain biking spinning away in 22 chainring and 32 rear up something proper steep.

If you don't believe me google can help.
human909
 
Posts: 4849
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:48 am

Re: Hill climbing simulation on flats - possible?

Postby mikesbytes » Mon Aug 09, 2010 6:29 am

Can't say I've noticed an increase in core strength use.

Does this mean that if I lower my handlebars, I'll be using less core strength?
A helmet saved my life
User avatar
mikesbytes
Super Mod
Super Mod
 
Posts: 14807
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 10:42 pm
Location: Tempe, Sydney

Re: Hill climbing simulation on flats - possible?

Postby human909 » Mon Aug 09, 2010 7:55 am

mikesbytes wrote:Can't say I've noticed an increase in core strength use.

Does this mean that if I lower my handlebars, I'll be using less core strength?


Lowering your handle bars wont change the direction of gravity. But I'm sure it will make hill climbing even more difficult. (There is a reason why the tops of the bars a more likely to be held when climbing.)
human909
 
Posts: 4849
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:48 am

Re: Hill climbing simulation on flats - possible?

Postby mikesbytes » Mon Aug 09, 2010 9:16 am

So when I was racing yesterday I should of had my hands on the hoods and not in the drops when I was seated climbing?
A helmet saved my life
User avatar
mikesbytes
Super Mod
Super Mod
 
Posts: 14807
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 10:42 pm
Location: Tempe, Sydney

Re: Hill climbing simulation on flats - possible?

Postby human909 » Mon Aug 09, 2010 9:34 am

mikesbytes wrote:So when I was racing yesterday I should of had my hands on the hoods and not in the drops when I was seated climbing?


I didn't say that.

As I said go for a quick google if you don't believe me. There are plenty of sites that refer to core strength and hill climbing. Or else go find a serious hill.

Is it possible to ride hands free up a steep hill? No. Why not? Because you need tension through your arms and chest to keep your butt on the seat.
human909
 
Posts: 4849
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:48 am

Re: Hill climbing simulation on flats - possible?

Postby one_damo » Mon Aug 09, 2010 9:40 am

Ross wrote:
one_damo wrote:Hi All,

Wondering if you can give some advice - I'm about to sign up for the Fitz Challenge ( http://www.ocf-fitz.com/ ) in October later this year and as I'm looking at the 160km ride, I'm more and more thinking about the late preparation I can do to help cope (a little bit at least) with the 2300m of climbing.



I would suggest you come to Canberra one weekend and ride or at the very least drive the course to see what you are in for. It's pretty tough, especially as you get past Tharwa and head up Fitz's Hill and beyond. Maybe the ~100km Tharwa Challenge might be more suited if you haven't done much hill training.



Yeah, was actually considering doing that very soon. Going to Canberra for a scope-out i mean. Chickening out and taking the 100km option instead is almost a done deal.
User avatar
one_damo
 
Posts: 126
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 9:12 am
Location: Epping, Sydney

Re: Hill climbing simulation on flats - possible?

Postby brentono » Mon Aug 09, 2010 12:25 pm

human909 wrote:
mikesbytes wrote:So when I was racing yesterday I should of had my hands on the hoods and not in the drops when I was seated climbing?


I didn't say that.

As I said go for a quick google if you don't believe me. There are plenty of sites that refer to core strength and hill climbing. Or else go find a serious hill.

Is it possible to ride hands free up a steep hill? No. Why not? Because you need tension through your arms and chest to keep your butt on the seat.

"Or else go find a serious hill." Now your talking... :)
Hill climbing simulation on flats - possible?

Now back to the original question, and if we are going to use the books, and a 10% incline. Yes. :!:
Stay out of your seat, the whole time and you will achieve Hill climbing simulation... OK.
It is reported that subjects produced greater power (~8%) when performing anaerobic test
in the standing position. It has been observed (in an abstract) a slightly greater (up to 12%)
increase in maximal cycling power during standing. If power is increased by standing,
where does that extra power come from? It is reported (in an abstract) that the
increased power in the standing position resulted from additional power from
the upper body (transferred across the hip). It is interesting that ankle-,
knee-, and hip-joint powers did not differ with position in that investigation.
This data suggest that, although additional power might be generated in the standing
position, the biomechanics of power generation in the leg segments are unchanged.
This finding has implications for the positive influence of upper body strength and
dynamics during hill climbing.
I take it from this, that if you spend time, out of the seat on your trainer, you will strenthen
your upper body, and simulate hill climbing training.
Hope that helps, and if you can pull that one off, your a better person than I, respect :D
Cheers,
BrentonO
Lone Rider- I rode on the long, dark road... before I danced under the lights.
User avatar
brentono
 
Posts: 3674
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 12:33 pm
Location: Perth DubyaEh.

Re: Hill climbing simulation on flats - possible?

Postby human909 » Mon Aug 09, 2010 12:46 pm

brentono wrote:I take it from this, that if you spend time, out of the seat on your trainer, you will strenthen
your upper body, and simulate hill climbing training.

I would take it that if you "spend time, out of the seat on your trainer, you will" improve your out of the seat ability. This is not the same as seated hill climbing ability! Furthermore anaerobic tests aren't particularly relevent when discussion hill climbing, unless you are talking short hills.

For long hills then you normally want to be seated. But being seated on steeper hills as discussed puts increased load on you core chest muscles. Standing mostly relieves this increased load but it has efficiency losses.
human909
 
Posts: 4849
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:48 am

Re: Hill climbing simulation on flats - possible?

Postby brentono » Mon Aug 09, 2010 1:07 pm

human909 wrote:
brentono wrote:I take it from this, that if you spend time, out of the seat on your trainer, you will strenthen
your upper body, and simulate hill climbing training.

I would take it that if you "spend time, out of the seat on your trainer, you will" improve your out of the seat ability. This is not the same as seated hill climbing ability! Furthermore anaerobic tests aren't particularly relevent when discussion hill climbing, unless you are talking short hills.

For long hills then you normally want to be seated. But being seated on steeper hills as discussed puts increased load on you core chest muscles. Standing mostly relieves this increased load but it has efficiency losses.


"Furthermore anaerobic tests aren't particularly relevent when discussion hill climbing"
Anaerobic tests can be up to 12 minutes (a pretty reasonable hill climb- if you've been on one)
and let's see if you can stay out of the seat at an incline, on your trainer for 12 minutes, go bud! :D

"Standing mostly relieves this increased load but it has efficiency losses"
subjects produced greater power (~8%) when performing anaerobic test
in the standing position. It has been observed (in an abstract) a slightly greater (up to 12%)
increase in maximal cycling power during standing.

Which part don't you understand. :?:
(as stated before, don't bother stalking me, if you want "silly debates" go see Christine, I'm out) :lol:
Won't bother responding to any more of your posts, got better things to do. :roll:
Cheers,
BrentonO
Lone Rider- I rode on the long, dark road... before I danced under the lights.
User avatar
brentono
 
Posts: 3674
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 12:33 pm
Location: Perth DubyaEh.

Re: Hill climbing simulation on flats - possible?

Postby human909 » Mon Aug 09, 2010 1:27 pm

brentono wrote:"Furthermore anaerobic tests aren't particularly relevent when discussion hill climbing"
Anaerobic tests can be up to 12 minutes (a pretty reasonable hill climb- if you've been on one)
12 minutes of anerobic riding!!! :shock: You have to be kidding me! What is your brain doing for oxygen that entire time? When your muscles anerobically you by definition are building up an oxygen debt. You can't spend 12minutes continuouly adding to that debt.

brentono wrote:and let's see if you can stay out of the seat at an incline, on your trainer for 12 minutes, go bud! :D

I could do it for hour if needed. Its all about intensity.

brentono wrote:"Standing mostly relieves this increased load but it has efficiency losses"
subjects produced greater power (~8%) when performing anaerobic test
in the standing position. It has been observed (in an abstract) a slightly greater (up to 12%)
increase in maximal cycling power during standing.

Which part don't you understand. :?:

None of it. But you don't seem to understand the meaning of efficiency.

brentono wrote:(as stated before, don't bother stalking me, if you want "silly debates" go see Christine, I'm out) :lol:
Won't bother responding to any more of your posts, got better things to do. :roll:
Cheers,
BrentonO

How is this a silly debate? You are making baseless claims and I am disagreeing.
human909
 
Posts: 4849
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:48 am

Re: Hill climbing simulation on flats - possible?

Postby mikesbytes » Mon Aug 09, 2010 1:57 pm

human909 wrote:
mikesbytes wrote:So when I was racing yesterday I should of had my hands on the hoods and not in the drops when I was seated climbing?


I didn't say that.

As I said go for a quick google if you don't believe me. There are plenty of sites that refer to core strength and hill climbing. Or else go find a serious hill.

Is it possible to ride hands free up a steep hill? No. Why not? Because you need tension through your arms and chest to keep your butt on the seat.


Perhaps I have better core strength that most and therefor don't notice it.

While I understand what you are saying about riding hands free up a steep hill, riders who use a lot of hamstring can come closer to balancing the pull the pedal with the hamstring against the push of the pedal with the quads and therefor don't have to use as much upper body to balance the motion as those who use less hamstring.
A helmet saved my life
User avatar
mikesbytes
Super Mod
Super Mod
 
Posts: 14807
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 10:42 pm
Location: Tempe, Sydney

Re: Hill climbing simulation on flats - possible?

Postby human909 » Mon Aug 09, 2010 2:24 pm

mikesbytes wrote:Perhaps I have better core strength that most and therefor don't notice it.

While I understand what you are saying about riding hands free up a steep hill, riders who use a lot of hamstring can come closer to balancing the pull the pedal with the hamstring against the push of the pedal with the quads and therefor don't have to use as much upper body to balance the motion as those who use less hamstring.


True that. Riding no hands up moderate hills you definately use your hamstrings.

Also I'll happily admit that my core strength isn't as strong as it could be. Riding up 20-25% grades on Sunday let me know about it. When you have 22 chainring and a 32 rear you don't need leg strength to get up those hills, just spin away while seated.
human909
 
Posts: 4849
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:48 am

Re: Hill climbing simulation on flats - possible?

Postby toolonglegs » Mon Aug 09, 2010 3:04 pm

human909 wrote:Is it possible to ride hands free up a steep hill? No. Why not? Because you need tension through your arms and chest to keep your butt on the seat.


I suppose it depends what you consider a steep hill...but to me the climbs of the Giro could be called pretty steep and I seem to recall a guy riding them no hands while doing a wheelie on a road bike the entire climbs.
Image
User avatar
toolonglegs
 
Posts: 14380
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 7:49 pm
Location: Somewhere with padded walls and really big hills!

Re: Hill climbing simulation on flats - possible?

Postby brentono » Mon Aug 09, 2010 3:08 pm

human909 wrote:

None of it. But you don't seem to understand the meaning of efficiency.


How is this a silly debate? You are making baseless claims and I am disagreeing.

"You are making baseless claims ......." :lol:
The Effect of Cycling Position on Economy and Cadence During Hill Climbing At Various Power Outputs
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise:
May 2001 - Volume 33 - Issue 5 - p S22
Conclusions: These data suggest that there are no differences in economy between seated and standing climbing,
despite a significant difference in cadence.


http://journals.lww.com/acsm-msse/Fulltext/2001/05001/The_Effect_of_Cycling_Position_on_Economy_and.120.aspx#

".... baseless claims " (most of what I quoted came from Scientific Journals) :roll:
Suck on that, and see... (clown) :lol:
Cheers,
BrentonO
Lone Rider- I rode on the long, dark road... before I danced under the lights.
User avatar
brentono
 
Posts: 3674
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 12:33 pm
Location: Perth DubyaEh.

Re: Hill climbing simulation on flats - possible?

Postby human909 » Mon Aug 09, 2010 3:23 pm

brentono wrote:Suck on that, and see... (clown) :lol:

Why do you act like that dude? How about just keeping things pleasant?

Rudeness aside, thats interesting research. I'll happily admit that standing might not be less efficient. Though I've certianly read otherwise elsewhere. It wasn't a pillar of my argument anyway. Either way anybody knows that standing is generally more tiring than sitting. Thats why we have seats. :wink:
human909
 
Posts: 4849
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:48 am

PreviousNext

Return to Training

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ignoto



Popular Bike Shops
Torpedo 7 Torpedo7 AU
Ground Effect Ground Effect NZ
Chain Reaction Cycles CRC UK
Wiggle Wiggle UK
Ebay Ebay AU

“Bicycles BNA Twitter
“Bicycles BNA Facebook
“Google+ BNA Google+
“Bicycles BNA Newsletter

> FREE BNA Stickers
> BNA Cycling Kit