|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Speaking of innovation...
Speaking of innovation: Here's an article on wireless bicycle brakes
from a British online engineering magazine www.theengineer.co.uk http://tinyurl.com/3jr2qax One disturbing detail is the claim that "The current design enables the cruiser bike to brake within 250 milliseconds, meaning a cyclist travelling at 30kph has a 2m stopping distance." (Stopping at over 1.75 gees on a bicycle? Sorry, that's impossible in several ways.) I'm sure that statement is not the fault of the brake system designers, but the journalist. But if an engineering journalist gets such a thing wrong, how can we expect good information from the popular press? Now, having drawn attention to that exercise, it seems the designers were not really interested in bike brakes at all, except as a conceptual test bed. The actual exercise was to work on IT concepts related to reliability and speed, as explained much better in this article: http://www.itworld.com/mobile-wirele...ess-bike-brake or http://tinyurl.com/5uzk59x -- - Frank Krygowski |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Speaking of innovation...
On Oct 14, 8:48*am, Frank Krygowski
wrote: Speaking of innovation: *Here's an article on wireless bicycle brakes from a British online engineering magazinewww.theengineer.co.uk http://tinyurl.com/3jr2qax One disturbing detail is the claim that "The current design enables the cruiser bike to brake within 250 milliseconds, meaning a cyclist travelling at 30kph has a 2m stopping distance." *(Stopping at over 1.75 gees on a bicycle? *Sorry, that's impossible in several ways.) I'm sure that statement is not the fault of the brake system designers, but the journalist. *But if an engineering journalist gets such a thing wrong, how can we expect good information from the popular press? Now, having drawn attention to that exercise, it seems the designers were not really interested in bike brakes at all, except as a conceptual test bed. *The actual exercise was to work on IT concepts related to reliability and speed, as explained much better in this article:http://www.itworld.com/mobile-wirele...-wireless-apps... orhttp://tinyurl.com/5uzk59x Well (without having looked at any of the links), I will say they certainly picked an application where reliability is key. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Speaking of innovation...
On Oct 14, 8:48*am, Frank Krygowski
wrote: Speaking of innovation: *Here's an article on wireless bicycle brakes from a British online engineering magazinewww.theengineer.co.uk http://tinyurl.com/3jr2qax One disturbing detail is the claim that "The current design enables the cruiser bike to brake within 250 milliseconds, meaning a cyclist travelling at 30kph has a 2m stopping distance." *(Stopping at over 1.75 gees on a bicycle? *Sorry, that's impossible in several ways.) I'm sure that statement is not the fault of the brake system designers, but the journalist. *But if an engineering journalist gets such a thing wrong, how can we expect good information from the popular press? Now, having drawn attention to that exercise, it seems the designers were not really interested in bike brakes at all, except as a conceptual test bed. *The actual exercise was to work on IT concepts related to reliability and speed, as explained much better in this article:http://www.itworld.com/mobile-wirele...-wireless-apps... orhttp://tinyurl.com/5uzk59x -- - Frank Krygowski Frank, I stop in 8 feet. Have scars to prove it. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Speaking of innovation...
On Oct 14, 9:48*am, Frank Krygowski *
But if an engineering journalist gets such a thing wrong, how can we expect good information from the popular press? Got it. Anything "engineering" related, journalists included, is expected to be perfect. ALL other human endeavors are flawed. Frank, You are hilarious! DR |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Speaking of innovation...
Frank Krygowski writes:
One disturbing detail is the claim that "The current design enables the cruiser bike to brake within 250 milliseconds, meaning a cyclist travelling at 30kph has a 2m stopping distance." (Stopping at over 1.75 gees on a bicycle? Sorry, that's impossible in several ways.) A cyclist traveling at 30kph travels about 2 m in 250 ms, so the correct statement may be that a cyclist traveling at that speed may *start* braking after traveling 2 m. -- "Sanity is not statistical." --George Orwell |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Speaking of innovation...
DirtRoadie wrote:
Frank Krygowski ** But if an engineering journalist gets such a thing wrong, how can we expect good information from the popular press? Got it. Anything "engineering" related, *journalists included, is expected to be perfect. ALL other human endeavors are flawed. Frank, You are hilarious! An engineer to bungling the numbers that badly would be like a print journalist flagrantly misspelling common words, or a video journalist letting the camera wander off the subject. It's central to what they do, and you can expect them to do at least a passable job. Just like a fashion and celebrity reporter is supposed to get names and events right, and engineering reporter is supposed to get units and orders of magnitude right. Chalo |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Speaking of innovation...
On Oct 14, 11:18*am, Chalo wrote:
DirtRoadie wrote: Frank Krygowski ** But if an engineering journalist gets such a thing wrong, how can we expect good information from the popular press? Got it. Anything "engineering" related, *journalists included, is expected to be perfect. ALL other human endeavors are flawed. Frank, You are hilarious! An engineer to bungling the numbers that badly would be like a print journalist flagrantly misspelling common words, or a video journalist letting the camera wander off the subject. *It's central to what they do, and you can expect them to do at least a passable job. Just like a fashion and celebrity reporter is supposed to get names and events right, and engineering reporter is supposed to get units and orders of magnitude right. The error.appears to be confusing "response" time with "stopping" time. But Frank can barely restrain his distorted perspective that engineering is a discipline which somehow stands above all other human endeavors in its expectation of accuracy. As you aptly point out, this expectation is not exclusive to engineering. And in any arena, INCLUDING engineering, accuracy slips from time to time. Frank would see a story with a typo about a "bare" getting into trash at a campground and conclude that the story was erroneous because there is no such animal as a "bare." A more supple mind would simply make the mental correction from "bare" to "bear" and move on. DR |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Speaking of innovation...
On Fri, 14 Oct 2011 11:48:25 -0400
Frank Krygowski wrote: Speaking of innovation: Here's an article on wireless bicycle brakes from a British online engineering magazine www.theengineer.co.uk http://tinyurl.com/3jr2qax One disturbing detail is the claim that "The current design enables the cruiser bike to brake within 250 milliseconds, meaning a cyclist travelling at 30kph has a 2m stopping distance." (Stopping at over 1.75 gees on a bicycle? Sorry, that's impossible in several ways.) I'm sure that statement is not the fault of the brake system designers, but the journalist. But if an engineering journalist gets such a thing wrong, how can we expect good information from the popular press? By the look of other articles there the magazine does not employ journalists to write. It employs a copy-typist/sub-editor who takes press releases and cuts them to fit on the page. However it could be a mistake in translation somewhere along the line. the original press release ( http://idw-online.de/pages/de/news445601 ) says: "Mit der aktuellen Ausstattung schafft es das Cruiser Bike spätestens nach 250 Millisekunden zu bremsen, was bei einer Geschwindigkeit von 30 Kilometer pro Stunde einem Reaktionsweg von zwei Metern entspricht." Which I read as a reaction distance of 2 meters (for the mechanism). Making the design fail 100 times in 100 attempts is of course trivial..... Mike |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Speaking of innovation...
Frank Krygowski
But if an engineering journalist gets such a thing wrong, how can we expect good information from the popular press? DirtRoadie wrote: Got it. Anything "engineering" related, journalists included, is expected to be perfect. ALL other human endeavors are flawed. Frank, You are hilarious! Chalo wrote: An engineer to bungling the numbers that badly would be like a print journalist flagrantly misspelling common words, or a video journalist letting the camera wander off the subject. It's central to what they do, and you can expect them to do at least a passable job. Just like a fashion and celebrity reporter is supposed to get names and events right, and engineering reporter is supposed to get units and orders of magnitude right. Speaking of which, the first entry in this link from Mr Liebermann: http://showbikers.com/category/bicycle/future-bike/ used the descriptor, "very unique". sheesh! -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Speaking of innovation...
On Oct 14, 12:07*pm, AMuzi wrote:
Frank Krygowski * But if an engineering journalist gets such a thing wrong, how can we expect good information from the popular press? DirtRoadie wrote: Got it. Anything "engineering" related, *journalists included, is expected to be perfect. ALL other human endeavors are flawed. Frank, You are hilarious! Chalo wrote: An engineer to bungling the numbers that badly would be like a print journalist flagrantly misspelling common words, or a video journalist letting the camera wander off the subject. *It's central to what they do, and you can expect them to do at least a passable job. Just like a fashion and celebrity reporter is supposed to get names and events right, and engineering reporter is supposed to get units and orders of magnitude right. Speaking of which, the first entry in this link from Mr Liebermann:http://showbikers.com/category/bicycle/future-bike/ used the descriptor, "very unique". sheesh! I understand your (pedantic) point, but it relies upon the first definition found he http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/unique Jump to the third definition and the cited usage may be less objectionable. And your specific perspective is addressed in the commentary. I suppose we could endlessly debate whether language should or should not be allowed some flexibility and ability to evolve. DR |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Racing innovation? | DirtRoadie | Techniques | 39 | June 3rd 10 06:52 AM |
what innovation led to disk brakes that work well? | Tom Reingold | Techniques | 71 | December 8th 09 11:35 PM |
Speaking of speeds... | Phil Holman | Techniques | 1 | March 27th 06 04:10 AM |
speaking too soon:( | Dej | Australia | 0 | August 23rd 04 12:15 PM |
innovation - pedal grab | unigeee | Unicycling | 28 | April 14th 04 04:29 AM |