|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Right-side or dual-side powermeters on R9100 or R8000 cranks are likely inaccurate
I'm not sure how many people this affects, but GPLama, an Aussie Youtuber, recently documented that a number of right-side powermeters installed on drive-side, current generation Shimano crankarms produced readings that were 6-8% lower than a known power input. This guy tested Stages, Pioneer, 4iiii, Watteam, and Shimano's own DA powermeter, so it doesn't matter who made the meter. He believes that left crank power is correct, and that the issue is due to the asymmetrical crankarm design.
This means that if you have a dual powermeter setup by anybody on a R8000 or R9100 crank, you likely can't trust your total power or your power balance readings. He seems to think that 6800 cranks should be much closer to correct readings (see comments in Reddit thread). Presumably this would affect any Shimano crankset of that era also. The differences may not be as pronounced riding outside; his testing protocol was mainly indoors. Keith Wakeham, one of the original designers of 4iiii's powermeters, posted on his blog about this. He thinks it's a fundamental engineering issue. |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
interesting. thanks for posting!
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
precision with a powermeter is arguably more important than their accuracy. As long as values are consistent, it doesnt matter if they are lower than the true numbers. still just as functional as a training tool.
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
can/have powermeter mfgs simply use a fudge-factor to correct for those erroneous right-side readings? Last edited by wallymann; 07-03-2019 at 11:16 AM. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Giant having the least diff%. Like always, they make the cheapest yet the best quality stuff out there.
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Power meters work by measuring the strain caused by loads applied to the crank. These loads are converted to torque, and then multiplied by crank speed to derive power. But strain in the crank can be caused a variety of different loads on different axes. For example, a radial load on a crank (as when standing on pedal with the cranks vertical) may cause a strain, but that load does not generate any torque. So one important aspect of power meter design is make sure that the off-axis loads are cancelled out, and only the loads perpendicular to the crank are used to derive torque. The problem with right side power meters is that the shape of right side cranks are more complex than left side cranks. This means that strain patterns due to loading are more complex, which makes cancelling off-axis loads is more difficult. Off-axes loading will produce larger errors in torque measurement, and the size of those errors will vary with the distribution of off-axis loads. Off-axis loading will change with pedaling technique - for example, the pattern of off-axis loading when seated and spinning will be different than when standing and grinding. I'd expect that the magnitude of error in right side cranks will vary significantly between seated and standing, or between sprinting and TTing. The problem of off-axis load can be solved, but it requires a more complex design, with many more strain gauges positioned in different locations on the crank. The calibration also becomes more complex, as the crank will have to be calibrated with loads from a variety of directions. And there will be slightly more complex formulas to convert strain to torque, using more strain measurements to resolve and extract only the drive torque. (Just for a little background - in a previous life I designed and developed multi-axis load cells for robotic applications, which used arrays of strain gauges applied to specially designed structures to resolve loads into the 3 force and 3 torque components about the X, Y & Z axes.) |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Quote:
If it were a constant bias, then sure, I totally agree with you. Except that your power balance metrics would be off, but different riders may or may not pay as much attention to that. Quote:
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Quote:
A right crank has spider arms sprouting from it, often some distance out the crankarm. Loads are transferred from the crankarm to the spider arms in different proportions, depending on crank position (and off-axis loads). The affect of the spider arms can be mitigated somewhat by moving the strain gauges further out on the crank arm. Unfortunately, you'll then run into space constraints, as there may not be enough clearance between the crankarm and the chainring and front derailleur cage. Right crank power measurement can be accurate and repeatable, if the crank arm is designed properly. But that would take a great departure in shape from the current Shimano crank design. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|