Development and validation of a low- cost system for assessing aerodynamics in cycling using computational fluid dynamics
Author
Wolbert, Felix Alphonsus Johannes
Term
4. semester
Education
Publication year
2017
Submitted on
2017-06-07
Pages
10
Abstract
Formål: At udvikle og validere en lavpris-metode til at vurdere aerodynamik i cykling ved hjælp af computational fluid dynamics (CFD), så bike fitters (fagpersoner, der tilpasser rytterens position) har et alternativ til vindtunneltest. Metode: Der blev opbygget et lavpris 3D-scanningssetup til at indsamle geometri af rytter og cykel, hvorefter CFD blev brugt til at simulere luftstrømmen. En eliterytter gennemførte tre kørestillinger med tre gentagne forsøg per stilling (i alt ni) på scannings-/CFD-systemet, og de samme ni forsøg blev udført i en vindtunnel til validering. I alle forsøg blev drag-koefficienten (et standardmål for aerodynamisk modstand) målt. Resultater: Sammenlignet med vindtunnelmålinger viste systemet en gennemsnitlig nøjagtighed på 91,8%. Præcisionen (gentagelighed på tværs af forsøg) var 94,8% mod 97,5% i vindtunnellen. Konklusion: Metoden viser potentiale som et alternativ til vindtunneltests til vurdering af aerodynamisk performance i cykling, især for bike fitters. Yderligere forbedringer kan øge ydeevnen.
Purpose: To develop and validate a low-cost way to assess cycling aerodynamics using computational fluid dynamics (CFD), providing an alternative for bike fitters who lack access to wind tunnels. Method: A low-cost 3D scanning setup was built to capture rider and bike geometry, followed by CFD to simulate airflow. One elite cyclist completed three riding positions with three repeated trials per position (nine in total) on the scanning/CFD system, and the same nine trials in a wind tunnel for validation. In all trials, the drag coefficient (a standard measure of aerodynamic resistance) was measured. Results: Compared with wind tunnel measurements, the system showed an average accuracy of 91.8%. Its precision (repeatability across trials) was 94.8%, versus 97.5% for the wind tunnel. Conclusion: This low-cost approach shows promise as an alternative to wind tunnel testing for assessing cycling aerodynamics, especially for bike fitters. Further refinements may improve performance.
[This abstract was generated with the help of AI]
Keywords
Documents