First Testing Session with the New AeroSensor
In the last post, I just introduced ‘The New AeroSensor‘, not that I was excited or anything!! But I couldn’t wait to get them into action and see what they could do.
No doubt, as with anything like this, there is a learning curve. And when it has to do with aerodynamics, there is definitely a lot to learn.
As you can see on the left, I got the aerosensor and aerobody set up on my brother’s Canyon and headed to a stretch of road I thought would be suitable.
As always, I make notes on the order of tests and anything that needs to be noted from the runs themselves.
The CdA during the runs uses a rolling 30-second average, which means you start seeing the CdA after 30 seconds and assuming you keep a steady position, the CdA stabilises and you get a nice result. At the end of the run, brake, the lap counter is triggered and you can turn and accelerate up to speed for the return run.
Repeat a few out and backs to establish the baseline Cda and when you have a stable, repeatable number you can move on to your first test. Baselines are really important, after you’ve finished testing you repeat the baseline with the exact same position and equipment. If you are testing accurately, baseline 1 (start of the session) and baseline 2 (at the end of the session) will match and you can then trust the data of the tests between them.
Baseline 1 – CdA – 0.385 Baseline 2 – CdA – 0.392
- Canyon Road Bike
- Aero Club kit
- Abus GameChanger Helmet
- 38mm wheels
- no added aero shoe covers, socks or gloves
- Riding on the hoods
What did I Test?
Here’s the Test Schedule:
- Baseline 1
- Test 1 – Same Equipment, Aero Position
- Test 2 – Baseline position, with Rain Jacket
- Test 3 – Baseline position, with Gillet
- Test 4 – Baseline position, with Gillet Fully Unzipped
- Test 5 – Aero Position with MET Drone Helmet
- Baseline 2
I think there are still some things to work on before I accurately get the true CdA. It’s close, I’m sure, but what is clear is that the relative difference tells us it is working well.
I deliberately chose tests that were clearly faster or slower so I could tell if the results made sense. Again, it’s going to take me time to get the finer details…but you can see the results are very encouraging.
Aero Position is clearly much quicker, saving around 25 Watts over baseline…whereas my rain jacket (which is a bit of a parachute) is costing around 56 Watts!! This may be a bit much…and a result that makes me think it needs re-testing…but I’ll save that for another day.
In contrast, my Gillet is very tight fitting and only costs about 8-10 Watts when it’s zipped up and a further 5 watts if you fully unzip it and let it flap around.
Finally, the aero position with MET Drone helmet, saves an extra 5-6 Watts over the ABUS helmet. If that’s correct, the ABUS is really good…however, the MET should probably be used in a TT position, where it might outperform the ABUS by a bit more…maybe a test for another day 🙂 .
Though this was a bit of a rough and ready test session, I’m really happy to see the results line up with expectations. With limited equipment etc, it was some fairly basic testing…but it was a good test of the new sensors and they didn’t disappoint.
I’ll be back in Switzerland in a few days, so I’ll get a chance to do some more testing and start zeroing in on more accurate results. Also, I’ll be able to try it out on my TT bike, which will be interesting. The TT bike also offers a lot more adjustment to play with, so that will be fun 🙂
Click here to see Testing My TT bike:
Do you have a Goal we can help with?
With a coach, you are part of a team. Together we make a plan tailored to your goals and your lifestyle