RE: [CR] Group Physics here stinks! (on topic)

(Example: History:Norris Lockley)

Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2002 09:12:19 -0600
To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
From: "Michael Kone" <bikevint@tiac.net>
Subject: RE: [CR] Group Physics here stinks! (on topic)


Hey CR folks - I'm getting a lot flack on the entropy argument for frame flex - people essentially arguing that frame flex leads to lost energy so flex is significant.

I just went riding with my engineering/physicist friend that works at NIST (National Institute of Standards - the research facility that had a Nobel Prize winner last year) and he was incredulous when I told him what folks have been e-mailing to me. He said of COURSE there is ENTROPY - but it is less than one percent and perhaps closer to one tenth of a percent. The key is that the entropy energy loss is INSIGNIFICANT to the benefits of having SOME flex in a frame. This is why, for years, every engineer I've met has been quick to point out that frames DON'T to a SIGNIFICANT extent abosorb energy.

Why does all this matter? Why is it on topic? Because one of the main - if not the main - drawing card of steel frames is the sweet ride they provide. If people are numb to the ride and the fun feel of a great frame, than at some point why not ride a stiff aluminum frame with a carbon fork and call it a day. If framebuilders ever loose sight of ability to tune the ride in steel for a wonderful pleassurable ride than I'm afraid the future of great steel bikes is rather dim.

Mike Kone in Boulder CO