caloric

[Bill Cotton]

I have a Cateye bike computer, Velo8, on my training setup, that gives
Caloric reading. I am trying to find a constant that I can apply to the same
reading from my gps mileage reading. The first three reading are miles.
Below is days on my trainer at the same time, one hour.
Course Trainer Trainer Trainer Trainer Trainer
Max 24.20 17.00 25.50 28.50 29.40
Average 13.90 14.60 14.20 16.80 18.00
Distance 13.95 14.63 14.31 16.93 18.00
Mov Time 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Caloric 330.09 362.00 346.70 547.80 629.00



--
www.billcotton.com

[carlfogel@comcast.net]

On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 10:44:13 -0500, "Bill Cotton"
<Billcotton@comcast.net> wrote:

>I have a Cateye bike computer, Velo8, on my training setup, that gives
>Caloric reading. I am trying to find a constant that I can apply to the same
>reading from my gps mileage reading. The first three reading are miles.
>Below is days on my trainer at the same time, one hour.
> Course Trainer Trainer Trainer Trainer Trainer
> Max 24.20 17.00 25.50 28.50 29.40
> Average 13.90 14.60 14.20 16.80 18.00
> Distance 13.95 14.63 14.31 16.93 18.00
> Mov Time 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
> Caloric 330.09 362.00 346.70 547.80 629.00

Dear Bill,

The right-hand article should illuminate the matter:


http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/moa/pageviewer?frames=1&coll=moa&view=50&root=%2Fmoa%2Fmanu%2Fmanu0001%2F&tif=00240.TIF&cite=http%3A%2F%2Fcdl.library.cornell.edu%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmoa%2Fmoa-cgi%3Fnotisid%3DABS1821-0001-456

I assume that nothing has changed since 1869.

:-)

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

[Doc O'Leary]

In article <KrmdnVamTPvNa_7anZ2dnUVZ_uuqnZ2d@comcast.com>,
"Bill Cotton" <Billcotton@comcast.net> wrote:

> I have a Cateye bike computer, Velo8, on my training setup, that gives
> Caloric reading. I am trying to find a constant that I can apply to the same
> reading from my gps mileage reading. The first three reading are miles.
> Below is days on my trainer at the same time, one hour.
> Course Trainer Trainer Trainer Trainer Trainer
> Max 24.20 17.00 25.50 28.50 29.40
> Average 13.90 14.60 14.20 16.80 18.00
> Distance 13.95 14.63 14.31 16.93 18.00
> Mov Time 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
> Caloric 330.09 362.00 346.70 547.80 629.00

Drag is not a constant, we don't know how the device samples the
velocity, and it is meaningless to make your calculations without taking
the wind into account.

--
My personal UDP list: 127.0.0.1, 4ax.com, buzzardnews.com, googlegroups.com,
heapnode.com, localhost, ntli.net, teranews.com, vif.com, x-privat.org

[rechungREMOVETHIS@gmail.com]

On Dec 15, 7:00 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:

> The right-hand article should illuminate the matter:
>
> http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/moa/pageviewer?frames=1&coll=m...
>
> I assume that nothing has changed since 1869.

A modern rule of thumb for walking or running on firm level ground is
1 kcal/kg/km.

[carlfogel@comcast.net]

On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 20:48:45 -0800 (PST), rechungREMOVETHIS@gmail.com
wrote:

>On Dec 15, 7:00 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
>
>> The right-hand article should illuminate the matter:
>>
>> http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/moa/pageviewer?frames=1&coll=m...
>>
>> I assume that nothing has changed since 1869.
>
>A modern rule of thumb for walking or running on firm level ground is
>1 kcal/kg/km.

Dear Robert,

More seriously than my link to 1869 data about velocipedes, Bill's
question is how things are figured when an hour at ~18 mph on the
trainer is said to take about twice as many calories as the same hour
at ~14 mph.

Your rule of thumb is probably quite true, but the speed and distance
increased less than 30%, while the predicted calories increased
roughly 100%.

The difference is probably due to the fact that the power required to
overcome wind drag, which soon becomes the major factor, rises with
the cube of speed.

If we cube ~18/14, we get about 2.1, fairly close to the roughly
doubled calories that Bill's cyclocomputer claims.

There might be some fudge factor involved for tire drag and
transmission losses, which don't rise at the alarming rate of wind
drag.

Of course, the cyclometer may use some entirely different calculation.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

[rechungREMOVETHIS@gmail.com]

On Dec 15, 9:00 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
> More seriously than my link to 1869 data about velocipedes, Bill's
> question is how things are figured when an hour at ~18 mph on the
> trainer is said to take about twice as many calories as the same hour
> at ~14 mph.

Bill's computer is probably lying to him when he's using it on a
trainer.
http://www.geocities.com/almost_fast/trainerpower/

[Bill Cotton]

<rechungREMOVETHIS@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:43c5d0aa-9174-4b9f-badd-5b7d6cd571ef@i29g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> On Dec 15, 9:00 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
>> More seriously than my link to 1869 data about velocipedes, Bill's
>> question is how things are figured when an hour at ~18 mph on the
>> trainer is said to take about twice as many calories as the same hour
>> at ~14 mph.
>
> Bill's computer is probably lying to him when he's using it on a
> trainer.
> http://www.geocities.com/almost_fast/trainerpower/
I agree that my Cateye Velo8 cyclecomputer is lying as to the actually
calories, however, I like to know what constant(s) is being use in its
computer. I want to use such a constant in by free bikelog that I make
available each year. http://www.billcotton.com/my_training.htm possibly
relating altitude gains (that the gps averages out), into the mix.

[rechungREMOVETHIS@gmail.com]

On Dec 16, 5:48 am, "Bill Cotton" <Billcot...@comcast.net> wrote:
> <rechungREMOVET...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:43c5d0aa-9174-4b9f-badd-5b7d6cd571ef@i29g2000prf.googlegroups.com...> On Dec 15, 9:00 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
> >> More seriously than my link to 1869 data about velocipedes, Bill's
> >> question is how things are figured when an hour at ~18 mph on the
> >> trainer is said to take about twice as many calories as the same hour
> >> at ~14 mph.
>
> > Bill's computer is probably lying to him when he's using it on a
> > trainer.
> >http://www.geocities.com/almost_fast/trainerpower/
>
> I agree that my Cateye Velo8 cyclecomputer is lying as to the actually
> calories, however, I like to know what constant(s) is being use in its
> computer. I want to use such a constant in by free bikelog that I make
> available each year.http://www.billcotton.com/my_training.htmpossibly
> relating altitude gains (that the gps averages out), into the mix.

The Cateye Velo 8 appears to use speed as its basis for calorie
consumption, so it must be calculating calories as if all drag was
aerodynamic drag (i.e., flat ground and no wind). Accordingly, you
might be able to figure out the implied CdA (mass isn't going to
matter much) by using something like www.analyticcycling.com. Because
most trainers don't have the same drag characteristics as a rider
moving through still air, the calorie estimates for trainer rides will
be off.