Drag and Side Force Analysis on Bicycle Wheel–Tire Combinations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aerodynamic forces on bicycle racing wheels were investigated experimentally in a wind tunnel facility at the University of Calgary. The main geometric parameters investigated were the tire sidewall width, (21.40 mm≤T≤26.15 mm), rim depth, (55 mm≤D≤90 mm), rim width, (19.28 mm≤W≤25.75 mm), and angle of attack, (0deg≤ψ≤12.6deg). A total of six wheels and five tires were tested. Coefficient of drag area (CdA) and coefficient of side force area (CsA) versus angle of attack (ψ) were measured using a multi-axis force transducer. Wind tunnel conditions were set to simulate 2.94 m/s (6.6 mph) wind speeds and 13.4 m/s (30 mph) cyclist speeds. The performance of the wheel tire combinations was assessed using a wind-averaged drag method. The results show that the CdA of aerodynamic wheels is highly dependent on the wheel-tire combination. There is a strong linear correlation between wind averaged drag (CdA¯) and the ratio of the tire and rim width (T/W). The CsA of wheels is primarily controlled by the rim depth (D) and only weakly correlated with tire width (T).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".