racer Posted December 28, 2006 Report Share Posted December 28, 2006 Hey all, I was talking to a physicist the other day who said he had intended to do his master's thesis on the physics of the bicycle and gave up because the math was just too complex. This was before modern computers and he was including the rider as a dynamic variable...duh. Rider as a dynamic variable...the nerve. ANYWAY... @ mike I don't get your point about the contact patch being flat and the cup being flat so the different radii don't apply....what? They are both flat and the analogy is pretty much perfect. The inside edge of the tire is a smaller radius circumference than the centerline. Just like the cup. Imagine gluing a non-conical tubular section between the cups to represent the upright position of the tire. The moment you lean over, you are rolling in a circle. If the paper cup thing doesn't do it for you, then why do YOU think a wheel rolls in a circle when it leans over? @ all As for counter-steering vs gravity vs precession... I believe it is the angular acceleration or lateral g that drives the "counter-steer" effect. However, the question I find most interesting at the moment is whether something more than gravity affects how fast the bike flicks over so to speak. Does a bike dropped from a static or standing still position in the paddock fall slower of faster than a bike flicked into a corner at speed? And why? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.