Comments on: E-Hub

By: sveti jebem

sveti jebem — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 13:44:51 +0000

Oh, here is the link:
http://www.elaphe.si/elaphe.php#Business

By: sveti jebem

sveti jebem — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 13:42:34 +0000

I am from Slovenia. I heard about it, and will be very glad if this thing succeeds.

I fear there is a lot of money in advertising and sponsorships, most probably big companies will wait until the patent rights fall and steal it.

It is very small market here (Slovenia has population of less than 2 million, and our managers find it extremely difficult to launch a product worldwide.

Fellow countryman Andrej Detela invented a very versatile and inexpensive direct drive electric motor. As I know is the best on the market (especially in case of mass production), but he only made a small business with Japan.
His business partner imports cheap Chinese electric bikes in for our market.

By: dbrower

dbrower — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 15:25:29 +0000

It seems to me that having it on the hub side of the freewheel pawls give it some opportunities missing in ones that are on the other side -- in particular, no feedback into the pedals. I too am dubious about the ultimate value, but I'm not willing to write it off completely, yet.

UCI disapproval of energy storage devices would seem to be a killer, though. For those not concerned about race legality, an e-hub that was an electric hub seems like a batter idea, and probably not more expensive.

-dB

By: tOM Trottier

tOM Trottier — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 22:07:30 +0000

Would seem much simpler/lighter to have the crank arm be spring steel.

tOM

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 16:43:38 +0000

Hmmm, okay someone tell my why this would release its stored energy into the wheel instead of feeding back into the legs of the cyclist through the cranks, just when the legs are at their weakest?

About the only use I could see for this is to provide dampening of the pedal stroke when riding rough surfaces, mixed terrain, gravel, cobblestones. Even then, properly wide, lower pressure tires would do a better job absorbing the bumps.

By: clever-title

clever-title — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 19:43:01 +0000

I found another spring system here:
http://www.abc.net.au/local/stories/2008/12/09/2441780.htm?site=ballarat
which uses a spring-loaded chainring to do the same thing (store enegry during may power and release it in dead spots)

Overall, there's no way to increase power by storing it, but some riders may prefer to have a more even power output. The real difference is little more than noise in the data when you consider the momentum of the rider & bike, so it comes down to a personal perception of comfort, as it was for Biopace.

By: Captain

Captain — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 08:16:53 +0000

If it's an internal spring it is storing and releasing energy, something that is explicitly outlawed by UCI rules. I would be surprised if really has UCI approval.

There is also a ton of research going back 20-30 years on eliptical chainrings, most of it concluding that there's no benefit. Doing the same thing in a different manner doesn't really change the physics of it. Reducing the time spent in the dead spots does not seem to equal a gain in power output.

By: clever-title

clever-title — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 00:05:47 +0000

Now I remember a similar system I saw in the 1980s. In place of a traditional chainring, the spider had 5 spring-loaded arms attached to curved chainring segments. When pedaling with more force, the spring-arms effectively made a smaller chainring, and a larger one whne pedalling with less force.

The idea was to create a kind of automatic transmission for a bike, but it seems like it would work similarly in practice.

By: eradler

eradler — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 20:00:39 +0000

A perfect application of the spring system would be support when starting from stand still after braking has loaded the spring…

http://www.hyperbike.cc

By: Ron

Ron — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 18:46:47 +0000

Oh, and here's my poston E-Hub's experimental validity.