A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Techniques
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

caloric



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 15th 07, 04:44 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Bill Cotton
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 49
Default caloric

I have a Cateye bike computer, Velo8, on my training setup, that gives
Caloric reading. I am trying to find a constant that I can apply to the same
reading from my gps mileage reading. The first three reading are miles.
Below is days on my trainer at the same time, one hour.
Course Trainer Trainer Trainer Trainer Trainer
Max 24.20 17.00 25.50 28.50 29.40
Average 13.90 14.60 14.20 16.80 18.00
Distance 13.95 14.63 14.31 16.93 18.00
Mov Time 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Caloric 330.09 362.00 346.70 547.80 629.00



--
www.billcotton.com


Ads
  #2  
Old December 16th 07, 04:00 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,934
Default caloric

On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 10:44:13 -0500, "Bill Cotton"
wrote:

I have a Cateye bike computer, Velo8, on my training setup, that gives
Caloric reading. I am trying to find a constant that I can apply to the same
reading from my gps mileage reading. The first three reading are miles.
Below is days on my trainer at the same time, one hour.
Course Trainer Trainer Trainer Trainer Trainer
Max 24.20 17.00 25.50 28.50 29.40
Average 13.90 14.60 14.20 16.80 18.00
Distance 13.95 14.63 14.31 16.93 18.00
Mov Time 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Caloric 330.09 362.00 346.70 547.80 629.00


Dear Bill,

The right-hand article should illuminate the matter:


http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/cgi-b...S1821-0001-456

I assume that nothing has changed since 1869.

:-)

Cheers,

Carl Fogel
  #3  
Old December 16th 07, 05:48 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 631
Default caloric

On Dec 15, 7:00 pm, wrote:

The right-hand article should illuminate the matter:

http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/cgi-b...rames=1&coll=m...

I assume that nothing has changed since 1869.


A modern rule of thumb for walking or running on firm level ground is
1 kcal/kg/km.
  #4  
Old December 16th 07, 06:00 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,934
Default caloric

On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 20:48:45 -0800 (PST),
wrote:

On Dec 15, 7:00 pm, wrote:

The right-hand article should illuminate the matter:

http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/cgi-b...rames=1&coll=m...

I assume that nothing has changed since 1869.


A modern rule of thumb for walking or running on firm level ground is
1 kcal/kg/km.


Dear Robert,

More seriously than my link to 1869 data about velocipedes, Bill's
question is how things are figured when an hour at ~18 mph on the
trainer is said to take about twice as many calories as the same hour
at ~14 mph.

Your rule of thumb is probably quite true, but the speed and distance
increased less than 30%, while the predicted calories increased
roughly 100%.

The difference is probably due to the fact that the power required to
overcome wind drag, which soon becomes the major factor, rises with
the cube of speed.

If we cube ~18/14, we get about 2.1, fairly close to the roughly
doubled calories that Bill's cyclocomputer claims.

There might be some fudge factor involved for tire drag and
transmission losses, which don't rise at the alarming rate of wind
drag.

Of course, the cyclometer may use some entirely different calculation.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel
  #5  
Old December 16th 07, 06:48 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 631
Default caloric

On Dec 15, 9:00 pm, wrote:
More seriously than my link to 1869 data about velocipedes, Bill's
question is how things are figured when an hour at ~18 mph on the
trainer is said to take about twice as many calories as the same hour
at ~14 mph.


Bill's computer is probably lying to him when he's using it on a
trainer.
http://www.geocities.com/almost_fast/trainerpower/
  #6  
Old December 16th 07, 02:48 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Bill Cotton
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 49
Default caloric


wrote in message
...
On Dec 15, 9:00 pm, wrote:
More seriously than my link to 1869 data about velocipedes, Bill's
question is how things are figured when an hour at ~18 mph on the
trainer is said to take about twice as many calories as the same hour
at ~14 mph.


Bill's computer is probably lying to him when he's using it on a
trainer.
http://www.geocities.com/almost_fast/trainerpower/

I agree that my Cateye Velo8 cyclecomputer is lying as to the actually
calories, however, I like to know what constant(s) is being use in its
computer. I want to use such a constant in by free bikelog that I make
available each year. http://www.billcotton.com/my_training.htm possibly
relating altitude gains (that the gps averages out), into the mix.



  #7  
Old December 16th 07, 05:59 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Doc O'Leary[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10
Default caloric

In article ,
"Bill Cotton" wrote:

I have a Cateye bike computer, Velo8, on my training setup, that gives
Caloric reading. I am trying to find a constant that I can apply to the same
reading from my gps mileage reading. The first three reading are miles.
Below is days on my trainer at the same time, one hour.
Course Trainer Trainer Trainer Trainer Trainer
Max 24.20 17.00 25.50 28.50 29.40
Average 13.90 14.60 14.20 16.80 18.00
Distance 13.95 14.63 14.31 16.93 18.00
Mov Time 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Caloric 330.09 362.00 346.70 547.80 629.00


Drag is not a constant, we don't know how the device samples the
velocity, and it is meaningless to make your calculations without taking
the wind into account.

--
My personal UDP list: 127.0.0.1, 4ax.com, buzzardnews.com, googlegroups.com,
heapnode.com, localhost, ntli.net, teranews.com, vif.com, x-privat.org
  #8  
Old December 16th 07, 06:37 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 631
Default caloric

On Dec 16, 5:48 am, "Bill Cotton" wrote:
wrote in message

... On Dec 15, 9:00 pm, wrote:
More seriously than my link to 1869 data about velocipedes, Bill's
question is how things are figured when an hour at ~18 mph on the
trainer is said to take about twice as many calories as the same hour
at ~14 mph.


Bill's computer is probably lying to him when he's using it on a
trainer.
http://www.geocities.com/almost_fast/trainerpower/


I agree that my Cateye Velo8 cyclecomputer is lying as to the actually
calories, however, I like to know what constant(s) is being use in its
computer. I want to use such a constant in by free bikelog that I make
available each year.http://www.billcotton.com/my_training.htmpossibly
relating altitude gains (that the gps averages out), into the mix.


The Cateye Velo 8 appears to use speed as its basis for calorie
consumption, so it must be calculating calories as if all drag was
aerodynamic drag (i.e., flat ground and no wind). Accordingly, you
might be able to figure out the implied CdA (mass isn't going to
matter much) by using something like www.analyticcycling.com. Because
most trainers don't have the same drag characteristics as a rider
moving through still air, the calorie estimates for trainer rides will
be off.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:42 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.