Analysis of Cyclist’s Drag on the Aero Position Using Numerical Simulations and Analytical Procedures: A Case Study

Pedro Forte, Daniel A. Marinho, Pantelis T. Nikolaidis, Beat Knechtle, Tiago M. Barbosa and Jorge E. Morais
Additional contact information
Pedro Forte: Department of Sports, Higher Institute of Educational Sciences of the Douro, 4560-708 Penafiel, Portugal
Daniel A. Marinho: Research Center for Sports Health and Human Development, 6201-001 Covilhã, Portugal
Pantelis T. Nikolaidis: School of Health and Caring Sciences, University of West Attica, 12243 Athens, Greece
Beat Knechtle: Institute of Primary Care, University of Zurich, 8091 Zurich, Switzerland
Tiago M. Barbosa: Departamento de Desporto e Educação Física, Instituto Politécnico de Bragança, 5300-253 Bragança, Portugal
Jorge E. Morais: Department of Sports, Higher Institute of Educational Sciences of the Douro, 4560-708 Penafiel, Portugal

IJERPH, 2020, vol. 17, issue 10, 1-9

Abstract: Background: Resistance acting on a cyclist is a major concern among the cycling fraternity. Most of the testing methods require previous training or expensive equipment and time-consuming set-ups. By contrast, analytical procedures are more affordable and numerical simulations are perfect for manipulating and controlling inputs. The aim of this case study was to compare the drag of a cyclist in the aero position as measured using numerical simulation and analytical procedures. Methods: An elite male cyclist (65 kg in mass and 1.72 m in height) volunteered to take part in this research. The cyclist was wearing his competition gear, helmet and bicycle. A three-dimensional model of the bicycle and cyclist in the aero position was obtained to run the numerical simulations. Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and a set of analytical procedures were carried out to assess drag, frontal area and drag coefficient, between 1 m/s and 22 m/s, with increments of 1 m/s. The t-test paired samples and linear regression were selected to compare, correlate and assess the methods agreement. Results: No significant differences ( t = 2.826; p = 0.275) between CFD and analytical procedures were found. The linear regression showed a very high adjustment for drag (R 2 = 0.995; p < 0.001). However, the drag values obtained by the analytical procedures seemed to be overestimated, even though without effect (d = 0.11). Conclusions: These findings suggest that drag might be assessed using both a set of analytical procedures and CFD.

Keywords: cycling; drag; comparison; CFD; analytical procedures (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/10/3430/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/10/3430/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:10:p:3430-:d:358203

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().