# Will 19mm wide rims fit 25mm wide tyres?



## Mangusta (Dec 27, 2020)

If not, what are decent 17 wide alloy wheels 700c tubeless disc brake.

Seems like all wheels are now wider than 17.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

Sure


----------



## Catmandoo (Nov 20, 2020)

Yes,


----------



## Mangusta (Dec 27, 2020)

Damn. Wrong title.

Question should be Will 19mm wide rims fit *25mm *wide tyres?


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

Inner width? That’s pretty common. If so ur probably more limited by what your frame will fit.

I’ve got 19mm internal width and riding 38mm tires and could fit much bigger as long as the pressure is high enough it doesn’t fold over. The pressure would have to be pretty low such as when off-road


----------



## duriel (Oct 10, 2013)

By fit, do you mean they will go on? Yes.
They will not be 25 mm tires any more, probably a little narrower. 
The question is, 
1. will they fit through the brake calipers without releasing? .... probably.
2. will they fit through the seat/chain stays? ...probably.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

25mm are skinny. I think that’s what all the tour riders are riding these days and kinda the standard road tire. For sure will fit the rim n frame. I bet even 32s will fit the frame and no prob for the rim.


----------



## Catmandoo (Nov 20, 2020)

Mangusta said:


> If not, what are decent 17 wide alloy wheels 700c tubeless disc brake.
> 
> Seems like all wheels are now wider than 17.


In Ye Olden Dayes of mt. bike 26" wheels and tires, we used lightweight 19mm wide rims with 2.5" tires at 25 psi. Never rolled a tire. So, yes a 25 or 28 or 32 mm tire will work on what is now a narrow rim.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

Catmandoo said:


> In Ye Olden Dayes of mt. bike 26" wheels and tires, we used lightweight 19mm wide rims with 2.5" tires at 25 psi. Never rolled a tire. So, yes a 25 or 28 or 32 mm tire will work on what is now a narrow rim.


Sounds like 63.5mm tires will fit a 19mm diameter rim.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

19mm rims with 25mm tires work just fine. No problems using this combo.

As stated above wider rims make your tire width effectively wider. So a tire that measures 25mm on a 15mm rim will probably measure around 27mm on a 19mm rim. As long as there is room between your chain stays, you're good to go.


----------



## Mangusta (Dec 27, 2020)

OK.

I ve read 25 tyres benefit from 17 inner rim or narrower. 

But then most wheels now are 19c or wider. So what wheels do people buy for 25 tyres.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

Mangusta said:


> OK.
> 
> I ve read 25 tyres benefit from 17 inner rim or narrower.
> 
> But then most wheels now are 19c or wider. So what wheels do people buy for 25 tyres.


It sounds like you're overanalyzing the issue. 25mm tires work well for both 17mm and 19mm rims. HED Belgium Pluses are 20.8mm and will work with 25mm tires.

Don't over think it.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

Mangusta said:


> OK.
> 
> I ve read 25 tyres benefit from 17 inner rim or narrower.
> 
> But then most wheels now are 19c or wider. So what wheels do people buy for 25 tyres.


what benefit? aero?


----------



## Kerry Irons (Feb 25, 2002)

Mangusta said:


> I ve read 25 tyres benefit from 17 inner rim or narrower.


I would strongly suggest you stop reading whatever "source" that was. How a tire (tyre) might benefit either way from 2 mm difference in rim width is a complete mystery.


----------



## duriel (Oct 10, 2013)

If you are setting some kinda of world speed record around some corner, the size of the rim may come into some significance, at the very edge of traction and control. 
.... Is that where you ride?


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

rarely do I ride on that edge but planning for it takes a lot of time

If any of u have a good comparison u want done I’m getting a month membership:








Become a Pro Member | Bicycle Rolling Resistance







www.bicyclerollingresistance.com





I need to confirm my 38mm road tires w tubolito tubes are crushing you all in rolling resistance.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)




----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

The rolling resistance of the 38mm panaracer tlc is more in common with a gatorskin tire.
In theory though shouldn’t a fatter tire have lower rolling resistance? The tlc does have some slight tread where road tires are slick.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

But it isn’t a good comparison and the tlc will get down to 17 watts with “high pressure”, and the Grand Prix down to 15 watts. It all depends on air pressure, which then more so will skew the rolling resistance reality on a very rough road with an actual rider where a fatter tire will perform better.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

hummina shadeeba said:


> But it isn’t a good comparison and the tlc will get down to 17 watts with “high pressure”, and the Grand Prix down to 15 watts. It all depends on air pressure, which then more so will skew the rolling resistance reality on a very rough road with an actual rider where a fatter tire will perform better.


Do you really think you can feel a difference of 2W rolling resistance? How many watts rolling resistance do you think you would need to reduce in order to increase your average speed 1mph on a 40 mile ride?


----------



## tlg (May 11, 2011)

Lombard said:


> Do you really think you can feel a difference of 2W rolling resistance? How many watts rolling resistance do you think you would need to reduce in order to increase your average speed 1mph on a 40 mile ride?


Also bear in mind.... the bicyclerollingresistance test is done on a round drum covered in diamond plate. The contact patch is different than real world riding. And the hysteresis in the tire will be different on a diamond plate drum vs real world riding. There may not even be 2W difference.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

Lombard said:


> Do you really think you can feel a difference of 2W rolling resistance? How many watts rolling resistance do you think you would need to reduce in order to increase your average speed 1mph on a 40 mile ride?


i can feel knowing it's working. and the feel of bad rolling resistance tires is like dead wood or something. at the one extreme end there's those green tires that dont need air and at the other end of the spectrum would be i guess some tubeless super thin supple thing. i like the feel. i like the sound. being lighter of course is nice. but shooting for lowest rolling resistance ...it can be a lot of watts with some crap innertube and thick cheap tire. that will be noticeable for sure. the quest to save every watt is a noble pursuit.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

tlg said:


> Also bear in mind.... the bicyclerollingresistance test is done on a round drum covered in diamond plate. The contact patch is different than real world riding. And the hysteresis in the tire will be different on a diamond plate drum vs real world riding. There may not even be 2W difference.


indeed. they got my money anyway. they need another drum and i'll complain to them as a paying customer about that. no one is riding on diamond plate.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

Lombard said:


> Do you really think you can feel a difference of 2W rolling resistance? How many watts rolling resistance do you think you would need to reduce in order to increase your average speed 1mph on a 40 mile ride?


yes. 2w. i need every watt. i dont do the math just know im crushing you all in rolling resistance. what's on your wheels? and take into account my tires have small knobs that will be wearing down and ill only be getting better.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

hummina shadeeba said:


> indeed. they got my money anyway. they need another drum and i'll complain to them as a paying customer about that. no one is riding on diamond plate.


As P.T. Barnum said, there's one born every minute.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

a 93 pound load is used in the test.

but they are state of the art for measuring rolling resistance. the best comparison available. all they need is more weight and asphalt.


----------



## Kerry Irons (Feb 25, 2002)

hummina shadeeba said:


> The rolling resistance of the 38mm panaracer tlc is more in common with a gatorskin tire. In theory though shouldn’t a fatter tire have lower rolling resistance? The tlc does have some slight tread where road tires are slick.


These tables completely ignore the other half of tire resistance- suspension losses caused by overly high pressures and/or stiff casings. That come from the rough road surface we all ride on being translated into vertical motion of the frame and the resulting energy being dissipated in the rider's body. Think of those slow-mo videos of Paris-Roubaix. A fatter tire will only have lower resistance if 1) the casing is as compliant as the reference tire and 2) the fatter tire is run at lower pressure so as to reduce suspension losses. For narrower (25-28 mm) road tires, the lowest total resistance (hysteresis plus suspension losses) is at about 90-100 psi (6.2-6.9 bar) and as the tires get wider, the optimum pressure is lower. Just looking at those tables only tells you about hysteresis losses and is relatively meaningless.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

their rolling resistance comparison using the drum tells of the hysteresis of the tire but not suspension losses in the rider as you say. the two are inversely related and a highly pumped tire will have the lowest hysteresis in the tire but more suspension losses in the rider.

Continental Grand Prix 5000 23, 25, 28, 32 mm Comparison (bicyclerollingresistance.com)

reading the end of this they do bring up suspension and possible suspension losses in what they dub "tire drop". 

a simple test incorporating both hysteresis and suspension losses would be comparing how far the bike with its rider is able to coast.


Myths in Cycling (1): Wider Tires Are Slower – Rene Herse Cycles


----------



## Kerry Irons (Feb 25, 2002)

hummina shadeeba said:


> their rolling resistance comparison using the drum tells of the hysteresis of the tire but not suspension losses in the rider as you say. the two are inversely related and a highly pumped tire will have the lowest hysteresis in the tire but more suspension losses in the rider.
> 
> Continental Grand Prix 5000 23, 25, 28, 32 mm Comparison (bicyclerollingresistance.com)
> 
> ...


Rene Herse folks did roll-down tests a decade or so ago and that kicked off the research that showed the benefits of wider tires and lower pressures. They used a Soapbox Derby course. When this work was done, the "standard" road tire width was 23 mm and many were riding on 21mm and narrower. Jan Heine's work in this field has influence the entire road bike industry to move to wider tires at lower pressures and to not focus so much on these roller drum tests, which only consider hysteresis losses.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

Doesn’t get any easier than a soap box derby roll test. But the body on the bike might have some variation in how it responds and effect the roll. I imagine a fake rider that was just a weight wouldn’t get as far and the active rider helps preserve some of the momentum. Or would a fake rider (just a stiff weight) go further? I think a live rider, and their ability to “absorb” bumps, won’t allow their full weight to be subject to every perturbation in the road. Their 160lbs would only partially be displaced by the bumps and therefore get a further distance with less rolling resistance.


----------



## velodog (Sep 26, 2007)

Possible pertinent reading.









The Missing Piece: Suspension Losses


How does it work that wide tires are as fast as narrow ones? It is really simple: Comfort = Speed When your bike vibrates, energy is dissipated as friction. That energy must come from somewhere – it no longer is available to propel the bike forward, so your…




www.renehersecycles.com













Myths Debunked: Wide Tires DON'T Need Wide Rims


Our series of 'Myths in Cycling' continues with a look at rim width. You often hear that wider tires should run on wider rims. Intuitively, that seems to make sense – match the wider tire to a wider rim. You also hear that wider rims…




www.renehersecycles.com













How to Test Tire Performance


In the 15 years of Bicycle Quarterly, one of our discoveries has been that testing bicycle performance isn't easy, and that taking shortcuts often has led to erroneous conclusions. Carefully designed tests that replicate what happens when real cyclists ride on real roads have allowed…




www.renehersecycles.com










Research & Development – Rene Herse Cycles







www.renehersecycles.com













Science and Bicycles 1: Tires and Pressure


Most cyclists are interested in improving their bike's performance, because rolling along at considerable speed while expending relatively little effort is one of the great appeals of cycling. Before you can improve your bike's performance, you need to know what makes your bike faster, and…




www.renehersecycles.com


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

great links.
are suspension losses in the body in the actual tissues rubbing, as if friction producing heat, which i think was stated, or would it be more so a loss where you the rider is fighting with your muscles? will a fake rider maybe made of concrete have less susp losses? there would be no friction possible? im imagining a train on a track hitting a big bump and while the train would possibly even get suspended in the air from the track, jumping, i dont know where the loss would be.

how about comparing the rolling resistance with different frame and wheel materials.

trying to think of a benefit of a wider tire i dont think mentioned in the links:
strength, and think a bigger tire will make a stronger wheel.
easier to roll home with a flat if needed.
more drugs can be hidden in wheels when crossing the border.
can have the air pressure lowered to make daring off road escape if needed.





they call it impedance here:
PART 4B: ROLLING RESISTANCE AND IMPEDANCE (silca.cc) 

but still dont really say where the energy goes


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

Catmandoo said:


> In Ye Olden Dayes of mt. bike 26" wheels and tires, we used lightweight 19mm wide rims with 2.5" tires at 25 psi. Never rolled a tire. So, yes a 25 or 28 or 32 mm tire will work on what is now a narrow rim.


yep, matter of fact, it was common to run 2.35" tires on that width. And rims back then didn't have the 'tubeless" bead design where the tire would lock onto the rim strongly like today's tubeless rim designs.


----------



## velodog (Sep 26, 2007)

hummina shadeeba said:


> call it impedance here:
> PART 4B: ROLLING RESISTANCE AND IMPEDANCE (silca.cc)
> 
> but still dont really say where the energy goes


heat


----------



## tlg (May 11, 2011)

hummina shadeeba said:


> but still dont really say where the energy goes


It's right in the beginning.
*Rolling Resistance (Crr) and Casing Losses*

When we typically talk about Crr or rolling resistance we are simply referring to losses within the tire. As a tire is loaded, it will deform, and while the air-spring in the tire is nearly 100% efficient, the casing of the tire is not. As the casing deflects, heat is generated by the movement of the various casing materials. This heat, is energy lost from the system.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

I’m talking about suspension losses or impedance. I forget the exact wording but I think was described as friction between body tissue and seems a strange explanation! I’d think more so suspension losses would be our own muscles fighting the motion of the bike. Seems rational considering the how sitting on the military tank was exhausting

But how would a solid “rider” made of concrete do? There’d be no friction inside. Less or more suspension losses? Maybe then the rest of the bike and it’s materials decide.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

@hummina shadeeba I really think you need to overanalyze this less and ride your bike more. 😏


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

Can only ride so much and it’s raining. I’m interested. It’s a fundamental question. Suspension or impedance losses can be huge and it’s not clear where they go exactly. It seems a new term and not even fully defined as you can read below. 


__
https://www.reddit.com/r/BicycleEngineering/comments/coixum


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

hummina shadeeba said:


> Can only ride so much and it’s raining. I’m interested. It’s a fundamental question. Suspension or impedance losses can be huge and it’s not clear where they go exactly. It seems a new term and not even fully defined as you can read below.


It's not huge. It's not even YUUUUUUUGE.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

Lombard said:


> It's not huge. It's not even YUUUUUUUGE.


“yet we had to push the pedals with 290 Watts more. So where did all the energy go?”








The answer is simple: As the rider’s body vibrates, the tissues (muscles, tendons, skin, etc.) rub against each other. This can convert an enormous amount of energy into heat. How much? In a study of vibrating tank seats, the U.S. Army found that up to 2000 Watt were absorbed by a human body before the vibrations became too painful to endure.”
Seems huge. But 2000 watts or even much less turned to heat in a body would kill u in moments I imagine. I’ve never felt even warm from riding a rough road. I have felt tired.


----------



## tlg (May 11, 2011)

hummina shadeeba said:


> Can only ride so much and it’s raining. I’m interested. It’s a fundamental question. Suspension or impedance losses can be huge and it’s not clear where they go exactly.


No, it's very clear where they go.

For the 3rd time... HEAT


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

tlg said:


> No, it's very clear where they go.
> 
> For the 3rd time... HEAT


you say this because u read it and that’s all you need I guess. Got a link explaining or you don’t need one? And remember, again, I’m talking about suspension or impedance losses not rolling resistance in the tire.

friction of body tissue? Humm. How about shake me on a shaking table all day and see how warm I get.

but feel free to not respond if u have nothing to write other than has been stated already. Go ride your bike.

don’t see heat as a side effect here:








Vibration - Health Effects : OSH Answers


What are the health effects of hand-arm vibration? What are the symptoms of hand-arm vibration syndrome (HAVS)? Is Raynaud's phenomenon of occupational origin?




www.ccohs.ca


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

I'm finding this all very amusing.


----------



## tlg (May 11, 2011)

hummina shadeeba said:


> you say this because u read it and that’s all you need I guess. Got a link explaining or you don’t need one? And remember, again, I’m talking about suspension or impedance losses not rolling resistance in the tire.
> 
> friction of body tissue? Humm. How about shake me on a shaking table all day and see how warm I get.
> 
> but feel free to not respond if u have nothing to write other than has been stated already. Go ride your bike.


Get a physics book. Go to engineering school. 

It's... Heat


----------



## velodog (Sep 26, 2007)

hummina shadeeba said:


> But how would a solid “rider” made of concrete do? There’d be no friction inside. Less or more suspension losses? Maybe then the rest of the bike and it’s materials decide.


Is this concrete man of yours someone out of the Marvel universe? I don't think anything that he has to offer has anything to do with the reality of riding a bicycle.


----------



## MDM (Jun 10, 2020)

Kerry Irons said:


> Rene Herse folks did roll-down tests a decade or so ago and that kicked off the research that showed the benefits of wider tires and lower pressures. They used a Soapbox Derby course. When this work was done, the "standard" road tire width was 23 mm and many were riding on 21mm and narrower. Jan Heine's work in this field has influence the entire road bike industry to move to wider tires at lower pressures and to not focus so much on these roller drum tests, which only consider hysteresis losses.


Do you really believe that roll down tests are accurate/repeatable? Seems there are so many variables involved like weather conditions, rider position, etc. Also, bicyclerollingresistance.com uses diamond plate on their roller (I.e., it's not a smooth roller), which is fairly rough Roller Testing Explained | Bicycle Rolling Resistance. My road bike with 25 mm tires is faster than my other one with 38's in terms of average speed over the same courses.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

You can’t find a link explaining how vibrations in the body turn to heat and there’s none out there I can find. Think would be physiology not engineering. There’s no book im finding explaining and your repeats aren’t doing it


Yes often energy is turned to heat. Friction in the body producing 250 watts of heat? Don’t think so. But if u have any evidence post it. Till then it’s just repeat


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

velodog said:


> Is this concrete man of yours someone out of the Marvel universe? I don't think anything that he has to offer has anything to do with the reality of riding a bicycle.


If hundreds of watts are lost in the body as heat due to friction, a solid “rider” will have no friction. The point is to find where suspension losses go.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

What kind of suspension and impedence losses does a strawman have?


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

“Energy from vibrations applied to larger volumes instead produces tiny waves and bubbles, and only a very small amount of heat.”
- Power of tiny vibrations could inspire novel heating devices


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

Lombard said:


> What kind of suspension and impedence losses does a strawman have?


I don’t think that word strawman means what u think it does.

I look forward to evidence in the form of something other than people just saying impedance or suspension are lost as heat in the body. I know some of u are intent on believing, or just like to follow status quo, but can you show it? I have no evidence either way other than the little I’ve brought. So now you bring urs if u can or go ride your bike and leave the over analyzing to those interested


----------



## tlg (May 11, 2011)

hummina shadeeba said:


> You can’t find a link explaining how vibrations in the body turn to heat and there’s none out there I can find. Think would be physiology not engineering. There’s no book im finding explaining and your repeats aren’t doing it


Like I said get a physics book. You haven't read any physics books in the past 5 min.

If you want links....




__





Amazon.com : physics for dummies






www.amazon.com


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

In all ur reading have you come up with how the vibrations turn to heat? Or you didn’t read that part?

U obviously have nothing to add. Why not go riding?!

here’s some science maybe you were thinking of:





Shivering - Wikipedia







en.m.wikipedia.org


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

hummina shadeeba said:


> I don’t think that word strawman means what u think it does.
> 
> I look forward to evidence in the form of something other than people just saying impedance or suspension are lost as heat in the body. I know some of u are intent on believing, or just like to follow status quo, but can you show it? I have no evidence either way other than the little I’ve brought. So now you bring urs if u can or go ride your bike and leave the over analyzing to those interested


Well can you at least wait a few minutes while I make more popcorn?


----------



## tlg (May 11, 2011)

hummina shadeeba said:


> In all ur reading have you come up with how the vibrations turn to heat? Or you didn’t read that part?


This is basic physics.... like.... elementary school level!!
pssstttt.... that's how a microwave oven works





__





Amazon.com : physics for dummies






www.amazon.com


----------



## tlg (May 11, 2011)

.....


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

Lombard said:


> Well can you at least wait a few minutes while I make more popcorn?


you’ll have to tell tig to hold on and we wait for him. Hes told me three times it’s just heat and we wait for any explanation.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

He’s an engineer. It’s basic he says so he should have no trouble explaining.


----------



## tlg (May 11, 2011)

Lombard said:


> Well can you at least wait a few minutes while I make more popcorn?


If you do it in the microwave you'll make make it pop with vibrations.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

tlg said:


> If you do it in the microwave you'll make make it pop with vibrations.


I use the hot air popper. Makes me feel at home here.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

tlg said:


> This is basic physics.... like.... elementary school level!!
> pssstttt.... that's how a microwave oven works
> 
> 
> ...


he dares to put down his explanation. Is that ur final answer tig?

of course he left it extremely vague.

for starters, before I even open the wide web, any idea what frequency microwaves are? They aren’t coming off ur bike.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

Any other explanations tig?








Dielectric heating - Wikipedia







en.m.wikipedia.org





Maybe you should get that book


----------



## tlg (May 11, 2011)

hummina shadeeba said:


> he dares to put down his explanation. Is that ur final answer tig?
> 
> of course he left it extremely vague.
> 
> for starters, before I even open the wide web, any idea what frequency microwaves are? They aren’t coming off ur bike.











Microwave oven - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org




Further information: Dielectric heating

Consumer ovens work around a nominal 2.45 gigahertz (GHz)—a wavelength of 12.2 centimetres (4.80 in) in the 2.4 GHz to 2.5 GHz ISM band—while large industrial/commercial ovens often use 915 megahertz (MHz)—32.8 centimetres (12.9 in).[27] Water, fat, and other substances in the food absorb energy from the microwaves in a process called dielectric heating. Many molecules (such as those of water) are electric dipoles, meaning that they have a partial positive charge at one end and a partial negative charge at the other, and therefore rotate as they try to align themselves with the alternating electric field of the microwaves. Rotating molecules hit other molecules and put them into motion, thus dispersing energy.

*This energy, dispersed as molecular rotations, vibrations and/or translations in solids and liquids, raises the temperature of the food*, in a process similar to heat transfer by contact with a hotter body.[28] It is a common misconception that microwave ovens heat food by operating at a special resonance of water molecules in the food. As noted microwave ovens can operate at many frequencies.

------------------------------------------------------------------------








How does a microwave oven cook foods? Is it harmful if some of the microwave radiation leaks out and hits the skin?


Scientific American is the essential guide to the most awe-inspiring advances in science and technology, explaining how they change our understanding of the world and shape our lives.




www.scientificamerican.com





*David E. Hintenlang, associate professor nuclear and radiological engineering at the University of Florida at Gainesville, adds some further details:*

"Microwave ovens cook food by generating intermolecular friction between the molecules of the food.* The microwaves cause water molecules to vibrate; the increased friction between the molecules results in heat.*

# Amazon.com : physics for dummies


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

you found any microwaves or other high frequency waves coming off your bike?

you should read the links i post:








Dielectric heating - Wikipedia







en.m.wikipedia.org





*Dielectric heating*, also known as *electronic heating*, *radio frequency heating*, and *high-frequency heating*, is the process in which a radio frequency (RF) alternating electric field, or radio wave or microwave electromagnetic radiation heats a dielectric material. At higher frequencies, this heating is caused by molecular dipole rotation within the dielectric.


----------



## tlg (May 11, 2011)

hummina shadeeba said:


> you found any microwaves coming off your bike?


They're with your strawman made from concrete shaking on the table


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

tlg said:


> They're with your strawman made from concrete shaking on the table


*"Definition of straw man*

1*: *a weak or imaginary opposition (such as an argument or adversary) set up only to be easily confuted"


waiting for you to explain to me how microwaves or something are heating my insides from a rough road. are you going to as it looks like youre avoiding that and moved into the non-sensical? I assume the latter but lets see. you said it was simple. you said it was elementary school stuff. can you?


----------



## tlg (May 11, 2011)

hummina shadeeba said:


> waiting for you to explain to me how microwaves or something are heating my insides from a rough road.


Keep waiting with your silly strawman. 
I never said that.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

tlg said:


> This is basic physics.... like.... elementary school level!!
> pssstttt.... that's how a microwave oven works
> 
> 
> ...


WHAT is how a microwave oven works?


----------



## tlg (May 11, 2011)

hummina shadeeba said:


> its here for all to see. so you dont think suspension losses are heating bodies like microwaves or you do?


Vibrations cause heat. That is how a microwave works. I never said there were microwaves in the body. 
DERP


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

can you post anything showing vibrations as would be caused by a bike causing heat in a human? its elementary school stuff you say. you told me three times that's how it works but no explanation and told me to read a physics book. you have a book in mind that would explain what you know or cant you explain? its not in the last book you posted.


so like a microwave you say...but just without any high frequency electromagnetic waves getting into molecules causing friction. then how is it heating? friction of what?


you have access to the whole web. show me youre capable of backing up something youre so adamantly sure of, or dont and realize you have nothing and are full of it. dont just say it...show it.


----------



## tlg (May 11, 2011)

__





Amazon.com : physics for dummies






www.amazon.com


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

thats what i though.


----------



## Kerry Irons (Feb 25, 2002)

hummina shadeeba said:


> can you post anything showing vibrations as would be caused by a bike causing heat in a human? its elementary school stuff you say. you told me three times that's how it works but no explanation and told me to read a physics book. you have a book in mind that would explain what you know or cant you explain? its not in the last book you posted.


Hard to believe this is a serious request. Are you seriously suggesting that you need proof that mechanical energy (shaking of the human body) is translated into heat? How else could the energy be absorbed by the body? This is physics 101. Or maybe 7th grade science.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

Yea I find it hard to believe hundreds of watts of energy that were going toward a bicycle’s momentum are simply turned to heat in the body. I’ve looked and there’s lots of studies related to vibrations and consequences to the human body. No better evidence than just saying it?


----------



## tlg (May 11, 2011)

hummina shadeeba said:


> Yea I find it hard to believe hundreds of watts of energy that were going toward a bicycle’s momentum are simply turned to heat in the body.


Where did you make this up from?
Momentum is lost through mostly wind resistance. And tire resistance. 



https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/154167/when-we-catch-a-falling-object-where-does-its-kinetic-energy-go





Kerry Irons said:


> Hard to believe this is a serious request. Are you seriously suggesting that you need proof that mechanical energy (shaking of the human body) is translated into heat? How else could the energy be absorbed by the body? This is physics 101. Or maybe 7th grade science.


Maybe it converts the energy to light. But I don't know anyone who glows when they ride a bike.
Or maybe it converts the energy to fat. But I don't know anyone who gains several pounds when they ride a bike.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

hummina shadeeba said:


> Yea I find it hard to believe hundreds of watts of energy that were going toward a bicycle’s momentum are simply turned to heat in the body. I’ve looked and there’s lots of studies related to vibrations and consequences to the human body. No better evidence than just saying it?


Are you an engineer or a mad scientist?


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

Lombard said:


> Are you an engineer or a mad scientist?


U too can be an engineer.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

tlg said:


> Where did you make this up from?
> Momentum is lost through mostly wind resistance. And tire resistance.


Did u read the links? Read the definition for suspension/impedance losses. It is explained as a loss of the bicycle momentum as heat through vibration of body tissue. I thought we were past this part. It states this can be many times greater than rolling resistance in the tire.

if a body riding a bike has no possible friction, such as a block of concrete, there would be no friction in that body. I imagine a bike with a block of concrete rolling down a rough course will not get as far as a blob of water/fat/bones.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

hummina shadeeba said:


> U too can be an engineer.


But I don't have a choo choo.


----------



## tlg (May 11, 2011)

hummina shadeeba said:


> Did u read the links? Read the definition for suspension/impedance losses. It is explained as a loss of the bicycle momentum as heat through vibration of body tissue. I thought we were past this part. It states this can be many times greater than rolling resistance in the tire


No clue what you're rambling about. "Hundreds of watts" of momentum would equate to 20+ mph. Wind is the overwhelming resistance slowing you down. This is just simple physics. 
There are not "hundreds of watts" of energy taken from a bicycle’s momentum and turned to heat. That's ridiculous.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

I’m talking about suspension or impedance losses. If u bother to read what the links say and what I’m saying you’d find you’re actually agreeing with me in that the body converting possibly hundreds of watts in momentum to heat seems unrealistic. That’s what they say. That’s the definition of suspension or impedance losses










Suspension Losses Confirmed


Recently, Bicycle Quarterly's experiments on suspension losses have been replicated and confirmed: Higher tire pressures don't result in faster speeds – even on smooth pavement. Replicating results is a crucial part of science, which makes the new results an important milestone in the...




www.renehersecycles.com






but there’s room for variables as written below (gotten from discussion at bottom of the link just above): Micro jumps.




“However, I am not sure that this suspension losses are caused by vibrations in the body tissues. They could be trivially caused by micro-jumps due to road irregularities. In a jump, part of the energy is probably lost in the landing and not converted in forward motion. Even Josh Poertner seems to suggest a similar explanation.
However, apart from my hypothetical explanations, to establish if the losses are due to body tissue vibrations or micro-jumps, would be hard to do. Probably one should use a trike (able to travel for short distances with no one on board) with ballast and on a slope, and see if the results are the same, that is lower pressure leading to faster speeds. If the results are confirmed also for an unammend trike, then the reason for suspension losses is not body tissue vibrations but micro jumps.”

(the solid ballast (concrete) vs water/fat/bone roll test I also proposed).

the energy of course has to go somewhere. Bike suspension forks heat up but is it the spring itself’s internal friction, which would be analogous to our body on the bike, or is it friction of the other fork parts.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

wait..your graph has wind resistance as dominant past 12 km/h. I’ve seen it at 15mph. Also on that graph how would drivetrain losses not be paralleling rolling resistance losses and both should be linearly produced with rpm and parallel to each other, no?


----------



## tlg (May 11, 2011)

hummina shadeeba said:


> I’m talking about suspension or impedance losses. If u bother to read what the links say and what I’m saying you’d find you’re actually agreeing with me in that the body converting possibly hundreds of watts in momentum to heat seems unrealistic. That’s what they say. That’s the definition of suspension or impedance losses


The thread is 80 posts long. If you're referring to a link, add it. No one is going to guess which one you're talking about.

That link is a specific test... riding on rumble strips.  I'm not sure that translates to tire rolling resistance.
_Where did those 290 Watts go? After testing various pieces of equipment on the rumble strips all day, I knew where the energy went: My body was sore all over. I had experienced suspension losses on my own body! _
Why do you think his body was sore? He was doing work. It takes watts to do work.

But I do agree, not all '290' watts are being absorbed by the body. They are missing some things. There is going to be significant increases in rolling resistance and tire deformation (heat). 



> They could be trivially caused by micro-jumps due to road irregularities. In a jump, part of the energy is probably lost in the landing and not converted in forward motion.


This is more or less a correct explanation. Any forward motion transferred to vertical force lifting the bike/rider would have a reactionary force down into the ground ( causing heat). And the opposite when the bike/rider lowers 'land' on the ground. 

I wish I had a FLIR. This would be pretty easy to confirm. Riding on rumble strips should make the tires warmer.











> if a body riding a bike has no possible friction, such as a block of concrete,


This is not true. Solid objects have friction.









How Newton’s Cradles Work


Five metallic balls on slender threads sit side by side. As one on the end hits the rest, the one on the opposite end rises and falls. Why don't the balls in the middle move? It's complicated.




science.howstuffworks.com




Though a small amount of friction comes from air resistance, the main source is from within the balls themselves. So what you see in a Newton's cradle aren't really elastic collisions but rather inelastic collisions, in which the kinetic energy after the collision is less than the kinetic energy beforehand. This happens because the balls themselves are not perfectly elastic -- they can't escape the effect of friction. But due to the conservation of energy, the total amount of energy stays the same.* As the balls are compressed and return to their original shape, the friction between the molecules inside the ball converts the kinetic energy into heat. The balls also vibrate, which dissipates energy into the air* and creates the clicking sound that is the signature of the Newton's cradle.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

I don’t think the cradle is a relevant analogy. A block of concrete bolted to a bike frame is not moving in relation to the bike. There is no collision


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

I am really disappointed you guys couldn't wait for me to make more popcorn.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

Lombard said:


> I am really disappointed you guys couldn't wait for me to make more popcorn.


U don’t have to be the popcorn guy again and you can be an engineer this time. Give it a shot.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

hummina shadeeba said:


> U don’t have to be the popcorn guy again and you can be an engineer this time. Give it a shot.


Nope. I'm the popcorn guy. I sell beer and peanuts too.


----------



## Kerry Irons (Feb 25, 2002)

hummina shadeeba said:


> I’m talking about suspension or impedance losses. If u bother to read what the links say and what I’m saying you’d find you’re actually agreeing with me in that the body converting possibly hundreds of watts in momentum to heat seems unrealistic. That’s what they say. That’s the definition of suspension or impedance losses
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Give up. You're embarrassing yourself. The vibrations transmitted to the body by lack of compliance of your tires is converted to heat. It's such an amazingly simple concept that apparently you are unable to comprehend it.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

Kerry Irons said:


> It's such an amazingly simple concept that apparently you are unable to comprehend it.


You should tell all these guys to stop doing research and they’re embarrassing themselves and it just turns to heat:








PART 4B: ROLLING RESISTANCE AND IMPEDANCE


The concept of Impedance is a relatively new and uncharted territory for cycling blogs, yet is something that each of us have a feel for.




blog.silca.cc





Tell everyone to stop all research related to energy transfer and it just turns to heat duh. It’s all so simple they just haven’t figured it out like you have.

Who is embarrassed? Just me or tig too?
Tig:


tlg said:


> There are not "hundreds of watts" of energy taken from a bicycle’s momentum and turned to heat. That's ridiculous


the question is WHERE is it turning to heat. But best you not think about it. Wait for some authority to tell you. Is there one?

the great part is the answers can likely be figured through simple experiments as they’re doing and the resulting info could greatly alter bicycle design. Do u really want that fancy stiff bike or are seemingly outdated old steel bikes more efficient? Maybe Fignon wouldve beaten LEMOND with a softer saddle and more bar tape? For sure his over-pumped skinny tires didn’t help. Maybe he would’ve just said it turns to heat and he’s comfy in second place.


----------



## Kerry Irons (Feb 25, 2002)

hummina shadeeba said:


> You should tell all these guys to stop doing research and they’re embarrassing themselves and it just turns to heat:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You repeatedly question whether the shaking of human tissue can generate heat. Is this just a troll or do you really not believe this is how energy from road vibrations is dissipated? If you really don't believe it, then you either think it is dissipated in some other form or you don't believe the vibrational energy is dissipated. Please explain which of these you believe. Or are you just trolling.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

I question that 100s of watts of momentum would be lost to heat from friction between the organs of a body when riding a rough surface. If you have evidence that hundreds of watts of what would be momentum are lost to friction between organs of the body post it.



here we have maybe 8 watts lost to the contact between bike and body (ass and hands) on a cobblestone road at I believe 26 km/h:
Using Power as a Metric to Quantify Vibration Transmitted to the Cyclist (sciencedirectassets.com)

"The mean absorbed power corresponds to the rate of energy dissipated as heat by the vibration of the human body parts in contact with the bike." seems to suggest the friction is between bike and rider as apposed to inside the body.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

hummina shadeeba said:


> I question that 100s of watts of momentum ...


What on earth is a watt of momentum?


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

asgelle said:


> What on earth is a watt of momentum?


 i shouldve written energy or joules. watts are joules per second.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

hummina shadeeba said:


> i shouldve written energy or joules. watts are joules per second.


If that's what you meant, then what on earth is a Joule of momentum? The units for energy (Joule) are kg m^2/s^2 for momentum it's kg m/s. Do you understand how momentum, force, energy, and power are related?


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

i dont know any related math or terminology but feel safe in saying there is potential energy in a moving body/bike and that energy is lost somewhere due to rolling resistance or impedance. whatever term you want to use or is appropriate to use to define the potential energy stored in a moving body use that one and plug it in. if you want to explain how it should be defined go ahead.









Difference Between Momentum and Energy | Compare the Difference Between Similar Terms


Momentum vs Energy Momentum and energy (kinetic energy) are important properties of a moving object and governed by Newton’s Laws of motion. They are both




www.differencebetween.com


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

hummina shadeeba said:


> i dont know any related math


This is correct.


hummina shadeeba said:


> ... but feel safe in saying there is potential energy stored in a moving body/bike.


This is not.
Perhaps you should write less and read more.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

there's energy in a moving bicycle. as i said i dont know the terminology. got a problem with saying there's"energy" in a moving bike? i guess should be dubbed kinetic.

but thanks for your correction. seems im reading and writing.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

asgelle said:


> This is correct.
> 
> This is not.
> Perhaps you should write less and read more.


i take it back and still believe there is potential energy in a bicycle. potential energy is there as the bicycle is deflected by micro bumps. the kinetic energy of the moving bike is partially turned to potential. kinetic energy, or maybe can be formally dubbed momentum, is redirected upward against gravity when a bump is hit where it becomes potential energy.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

hummina shadeeba said:


> i take it back and still believe there is potential energy in a bicycle. potential energy is there as the bicycle goes up and over micro bumps. the kinetic energy of the moving bike is partially turned to potential. You have a problem with that?


I have no problem, it's wrong, but that doesn't pose a problem for me. Perhaps it's time to review the rule of holes.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

asgelle said:


> I have no problem, it's wrong, but that doesn't pose a problem for me. Perhaps it's time to review the rule of holes.


care to explain how a moving bicycle isnt turning its kinetic energy to potential as it hits micro bumps. if we go further and say..biggg bumps we have what we could term a jump and then its obvious there is kinetic turned to potential. go ahead. dont just say it show it. i think youre wrong and im right.

doesnt bother me talking about stuff im not familiar with. that's how you learn sometimes.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

hummina shadeeba said:


> doesnt bother me talking about stuff im not familiar with. that's how you learn sometimes.


It's been my experience that I learn very little when I'm talking (writing).

If you'd like tutoring in high school physics, my rate is $100/hr.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

asgelle said:


> It's been my experience that I learn very little when I'm talking (writing).
> 
> If you'd like tutoring in high school physics, my rate is $100/hr.


 im thinking i should be giving you lessons if you dont believe kinetic energy is being turned to potential as a bike goes over a jump. give your best explanation..if you dont ill assume youre wrong


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

hummina shadeeba said:


> im thinking i should be giving you lessons if you dont believe kinetic energy is being turned to potential as a bike goes over a jump. give your best explanation..if you dont ill assume youre wrong


Whatever you do, don't throw me in the briar patch.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

asgelle said:


> Whatever you do, don't throw me in the briar patch.


100$ seems awfully steep. https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20131209053122AA9FYZT

wonder if anyone else thinks a bike going over a jump isnt an example of kinetic turned to potential.


----------



## Kerry Irons (Feb 25, 2002)

hummina shadeeba said:


> I question that 100s of watts of momentum would be lost to heat from friction between the organs of a body when riding a rough surface. If you have evidence that hundreds of watts of what would be momentum are lost to friction between organs of the body post it.


Of course I don't "have evidence that hundreds of watts" is dissipated. That's because the only person throwing out such ridiculous numbers is you. Watts dissipated from rough road surface translated into vibration is in the 10s, not the 100s. And as you have repeatedly demonstrated, you have no idea of the physics here. As I noted early on, this is physics 101, which you either never took, flunked, or just plain don't remember. You're arguing from ignorance, and it shows.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

Kerry Irons said:


> Of course I don't "have evidence that hundreds of watts" is dissipated. That's because the only person throwing out such ridiculous numbers is you. Watts dissipated from rough road surface translated into vibration is in the 10s, not the 100s. And as you have repeatedly demonstrated, you have no idea of the physics here. As I noted early on, this is physics 101, which you either never took, flunked, or just plain don't remember. You're arguing from ignorance, and it shows.


Ignorance indeed and you obviously didn’t even read the studies posted. No I’m not the only one saying it and it’s what the study with the wattmeter and rumple strip showed.

Tig stepped up and gave his explanation of where he thinks the energy went which was interesting and related and showed he’s here for something.

Are you trying to tell me a bike going off a jump isn’t converting kinetic to potential energy?

Hear ye hear ye:
1.if you’re gunna get into a discussion about physics read what’s being talked about
2. If you don’t have an answer to the questions but want to just guess that’s great and beats claiming to know but not presenting anything.
3. That’s all that’s necessary if you want to be seen as productive


----------



## Kerry Irons (Feb 25, 2002)

hummina shadeeba said:


> Ignorance indeed and you obviously didn’t even read the studies posted. No I’m not the only one saying it and it’s what the study with the wattmeter and rumple strip showed.
> 
> Tig stepped up and gave his explanation of where he thinks the energy went which was interesting and related and showed he’s here for something.
> 
> ...


I'm not guessing, and I have read a lot of literature on the topic. Beyond that, I actually understand the difference between kinetic energy and momentum and potential energy, which you obviously do not.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

Kerry Irons said:


> I'm not guessing, and I have read a lot of literature on the topic. Beyond that, I actually understand the difference between kinetic energy and momentum and potential energy, which you obviously do not.


dont just say how much you know...show it: will someone going off a jump convert much of their kinetic energy to potential?

maybe by now you got around to actually reading the study that was being talked about. You still claiming no one believes such ridiculousness as hundreds of watts can be lost to impedance other than me?

but you say you dont guess and have read LOTS on the subject, what were you reading? dying to get your insight. lets see if you post any.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

@hummina shadeeba What did you say your occupation is again?


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

Lombard said:


> @hummina shadeeba What did you say your occupation is again?


i have a couple. why.. does it relate? what do you do for money?


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

hummina shadeeba said:


> i have a couple. why.. does it relate? *what do you do for money?*


I asked you first. You seem to profess to know a lot here and I was just curious if it applies to your career.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

Lombard said:


> I asked you first. You seem to profess to know a lot here and I was just curious if it applies to your career.


what did i profess to know? if youre indirectly saying i dont know what i claim to..what would that be? i relate what ive read. I pick up as i go. i design and make electric motors and batteries and have my own biz related to those and also teach


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

hummina shadeeba said:


> what did i profess to know?* if youre indirectly saying i dont know what i claim to..what would that be? * i relate what ive read. I pick up as i go. i design and make electric motors and batteries and have my own biz related to those and also teach


I did not say that, you did.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

Lombard said:


> I did not say that, you did.


you ask questions and i answered them all...are you going to answer mine? but its ok i dont really care what you do for money and not related. i cant remember claiming to know anything above, maybe you will tell me.

dare to answer whether you think kinetic turns to potential when you go off a jump? or give a guess on where the hundreds of watts go when rolling over a rumble strip as shown in the posted experiment? show me i dont know what im talking about dont just claim it folks. if you dont...what does that show us.


----------



## Kerry Irons (Feb 25, 2002)

hummina shadeeba said:


> you ask questions and i answered them all...are you going to answer mine? but its ok i dont really care what you do for money and not related. i cant remember claiming to know anything above, maybe you will tell me.
> 
> dare to answer whether you think kinetic turns to potential when you go off a jump? or give a guess on where the hundreds of watts go when rolling over a rumble strip as shown in the posted experiment? show me i dont know what im talking about dont just claim it folks. if you dont...what does that show us.


Potential energy is what an object has due to its height and mass above a reference point. Kinetic energy is half the mass of an object times the square of its speed. Your "going off a jump" example has nothing to do with converting kinetic energy into potential energy. The kinetic energy remains the same and the potential energy "appears" because the object is no longer "on the ground." Your apparent ignorance of fundamental physics is stunning. 

The energy dissipation from a bike rolling over rumble strips (or any road surface roughness) essentially goes two places: 1) hysteresis losses from flexing the tire and tube and 2) vibration transmitted to the rider's body. Any energy lost to frame flex is minor in comparison. The vibration transmitted to the rider's body is converted to heat. You have yet to offer any other explanation of where the dissipated kinetic energy could possibly go. And while measurements of energy loss from hitting a rumble strips can offer insight because the numbers are so large (differences not so easily lost in the noise) this has little to do with the losses we experience in road riding, which are an order or magnitude (or more) smaller.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

Kerry Irons said:


> The kinetic energy remains the same and the potential energy "appears" because the object is no longer "on the ground." Your apparent ignorance of fundamental physics is stunning.



youre right it's seventh grade physics:
Kinetic and Potential Energy: Jumping Frogs by Science With Cindy (teacherspayteachers.com) 
a body going off a jump is converting kinetic energy to gravitational potential as it goes higher, just as if going up stairs, and transferring back to kinetic as it returns to the ground.
Gravitational potential - Wikipedia

dont just say im ignorant...show it. cant you? so far its definitely looking to be the case as i described it and my links and looking confirm. 

no i didnt offer any other options as to where the energy lost on a bicycle going over rumble strip goes and there's no hidden places other than presented in the paper: body and bike and tires. Did you bother to read about the hundreds of potential watts lost there or you still saying im wrong about that too?


----------



## duriel (Oct 10, 2013)

... since this seems to be a slow day, where are the points and how many do I got.
some of you guys didn't take mine did you?


----------

