Still confused on damping factor
Posted: January 12th, 2016, 2:52 pm
Say I row one minute at the rate of 20 SPM in DF 100 and DF 200. Which one results in more distance? I assume DF 200. Correct?
Oars | Indoor Rowers | SkiErg | BikeErg
https://c2forum.com/
The DF is not a major factor here. Each erger will have a different sweet spot in the DF range (about 80 to 220 on a clean machine at sea level). But even for an individual it might vary depending on the type of row that is being done. Some ergers increase the DF for very short, intense pieces. C2 recommends a range of 115 to 140.bcjm wrote:I am trying to understand the DF concept first. If the only difference is the DF, will higher DF produces longer distance (in the PM) when rowing the same amount of time?
Sorry, Jackarabit but you have it a bit backwards. Drag factor is a numerical representation of the rate of deceleration of the flywheel and it is calculated and revised by the monitor on every stroke by viewing the stream of pulses that are coming from the flywheels interaction with the generator/pickup unit. Using this drag factor and the known moment of inertia of the flywheel the monitor calculates power and converts it to the various units we view on the screen. Drag factor is controlled by the amount and density of the air passing through the flywheel, which the user controls primarily by setting the damper. C2JonWDrag factor references a vaned flywheel which is slowed or decelerated at rates determined by regulating the entry of air to an enclosing chamber (controlled frictional braking). Drag factor controls the rate of deceleration of that wheel and influences the speed and timing of the erger's inputs (muscular exertion) for best effect, but the erger produces all the work.
Yes, that's correct. The machine measures work that you put into the flywheel. Changing the drag factor only changes how that work is applied to the fan. A very rough analogy is changing gears on a bicycle- you can pedal hard or easily in any gear. C2JonWI thought I can get a clear yes/no answer.
Is this a correct: The performance calculation is solely based on the energy(watts) the rower puts in. Energy is determined by the rpm of the flywheel(when pull)and the weight of the flywheel(changed by the DF). PM maps the energy input to the speed of a boat. This is the only explaination makes sense to me.
To the first sentence, yes. To the second - not at all. For one thing, the weight of the flywheel is constant. And, as its name implies, the drag factor is determined by the rate at which the flywheel is slowed by the drag of the air. With regard to the third, it is based on a "standard boat" and I believe that the 4x was the particular boat chosen.bcjm wrote:I thought I can get a clear yes/no answer.
Is this a correct: The performance calculation is solely based on the energy(watts) the rower puts in. Energy is determined by the rpm of the flywheel(when pull)and the weight of the flywheel(changed by the DF). PM maps the energy input to the speed of a boat. This is the only explaination makes sense to me.
Very rough indeed. I would think that a much closer analogy would a variable parachute drogue pulled behind a bike on a windless day. Then there is the matter of the intermittent nature of the force applied to the erg as opposed to the relatively continuous force applied to the crank of the bike. There is no doubt a periodic variability of the amount of force applied on a bike, but it does't drop to zero. I realize that C2 uses the gear analogy because it sort of gives a feeling for the drag effect, but I think that it has led to a lot of confusion on the part of those who try to draw additional conclusions from it. I also realize that my drogue alternative is unlikely to help anyone new to erging.c2jonw wrote:A very rough analogy is changing gears on a bicycle- you can pedal hard or easily in any gear. C2JonW
NO. "Distance" is related only to the amount of Work done.Say I row one minute at the rate of 20 SPM in DF 100 and DF 200. Which one results in more distance? I assume DF 200. Correct?
Bob, I knew I was going to get called out on that and consider the message delivered... I used the bicycle analogy to point out the idea that the erg is not like a weight stack at the gym where bigger numbers mean more work. The erg, like a bicycle, is a reactive device that responds to user input and the gear/drag factor does not determine how hard the workout is. As you point out, analogies can fall apart pretty quickly upon closer examination.Very rough indeed. I would think that a much closer analogy would a variable parachute drogue pulled behind a bike on a windless day. Then there is the matter of the intermittent nature of the force applied to the erg as opposed to the relatively continuous force applied to the crank of the bike. There is no doubt a periodic variability of the amount of force applied on a bike, but it does't drop to zero. I realize that C2 uses the gear analogy because it sort of gives a feeling for the drag effect, but I think that it has led to a lot of confusion on the part of those who try to draw additional conclusions from it. I also realize that my drogue alternative is unlikely to help anyone new to erging.