Old 06-28-10, 01:56 PM
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 27
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I've been trying to read as much as possible about aerodynamic field testing (with a powermeter) to determine optimum position, equipment, etc. It sounds like it's definitely feasible and sounds like a few people here have had good success with it. There's talk of roll-down tests, "half-pipe" courses, etc. I'm just wondering if there's any reason NOT to do this type of testing at a high school track. I've heard mention of going to a track, but I assume that's a velodrome and not a running track. It seems like a running track would be an ideal location since it's flat and wind effects should be negated due to the setup.

Is it too simple to assume that I could just go to a (running) track, do a few laps at a constant speed (or power) and then start comparing setups that way? For instance, say I go to the high school, cruise around for a few laps at a consistent speed (or power) with one setup, then do a few more laps with a different setup. It seems like I should get some comparable data for both setups to determine which is faster (ie, setup 1 needed 215 watts to go 20 mph and setup 2 needed 205 watts to go 20 mph). I feel like that should work but I may also be oversimplifying the whole thing.
bcellis is offline