So,
I have a 1997 hudson, which in its day was a top boat (it won the world champs). It's an early stern mounted wing rigger design which has been resprayed once, but still original tubular metal wing rigger.
How much faster, if at all, would people anticipate a new, top level boat would be?
I race masters B level (UK), so say over 1000m would you be talking a few seconds, 10 seconds?
I haven't weighed the boat, but it is definitely at least several kg heavier than a few year old Fluiddesign.
Cheers, Leon
On 24/09/2020 16:01, Leon Warrington wrote:
So,
I have a 1997 hudson, which in its day was a top boat (it won the
world champs). It's an early stern mounted wing rigger design which
has been resprayed once, but still original tubular metal wing rigger.
How much faster, if at all, would people anticipate a new, top level
boat would be?
I race masters B level (UK), so say over 1000m would you be talking a
few seconds, 10 seconds?
I haven't weighed the boat, but it is definitely at least several kg
heavier than a few year old Fluiddesign.
Cheers, Leon
I seriously doubt that you'd detect any difference in the speed at which that boat can be driven.-a What deeply intrigues me is the near total
lack of comparative testing of equipment & the implicit assumption that newer (or what some fancied sculler used) is somehow going to be better.
"A few seconds" would be a huge margin.-a For a base time of 7:15 for 2K,
a 5 sec speed increase (1.16%) would require a power increase of ~4%.
While feasible, when someone makes that claim one should demand the
evidence or, better still, conduct one's own objective testing.
Since singles are limited to 14kg (a daft rule, beloved only of
blazerati as, if boat weight actually mattered that much, the rule would deliberately disadvantage the lighter sculler), I'd be astonished if
your boat was "definitely at least several kg heavier than a few year
old" xx.-a And, if I may introduce just a hint of science into the discussion, there are compelling theoretical grounds to show that a
lighter version of the same boat may go no faster, or even be a little slower - there's a minimum weight of boat, for any given sculler & technique, below which boat speed tends to fall.
Rowing equipment selection seems too often based on the natural desire
to have the latest gizmo rather than on actual evidence.-a Shiny new toys aren't necessarily high performers, even if someone won the last WC in
that model.-a What matters, still, is not the colour, nor the style of rigger, nor the material of construction, nor the name of the maker, nor
the weight of the boat (within reason), but how well you can work with
that boat, how confident you feel in it, how well you scull & how fit & strong you are.
Cheers -
Carl
On 24/09/2020 18:33, carl wrote:
On 24/09/2020 16:01, Leon Warrington wrote:
So,
I have a 1997 hudson, which in its day was a top boat (it won the
world champs). It's an early stern mounted wing rigger design which
has been resprayed once, but still original tubular metal wing rigger.
How much faster, if at all, would people anticipate a new, top level
boat would be?
I race masters B level (UK), so say over 1000m would you be talking a
few seconds, 10 seconds?
I haven't weighed the boat, but it is definitely at least several kg
heavier than a few year old Fluiddesign.
Cheers, Leon
I seriously doubt that you'd detect any difference in the speed at
which that boat can be driven.-a What deeply intrigues me is the near
total lack of comparative testing of equipment & the implicit
assumption that newer (or what some fancied sculler used) is somehow
going to be better.
"A few seconds" would be a huge margin.-a For a base time of 7:15 for
2K, a 5 sec speed increase (1.16%) would require a power increase of
~4%. While feasible, when someone makes that claim one should demand
the evidence or, better still, conduct one's own objective testing.
Since singles are limited to 14kg (a daft rule, beloved only of
blazerati as, if boat weight actually mattered that much, the rule
would deliberately disadvantage the lighter sculler), I'd be
astonished if your boat was "definitely at least several kg heavier
than a few year old" xx.-a And, if I may introduce just a hint of
science into the discussion, there are compelling theoretical grounds
to show that a lighter version of the same boat may go no faster, or
even be a little slower - there's a minimum weight of boat, for any
given sculler & technique, below which boat speed tends to fall.
Rowing equipment selection seems too often based on the natural desire
to have the latest gizmo rather than on actual evidence.-a Shiny new
toys aren't necessarily high performers, even if someone won the last
WC in that model.-a What matters, still, is not the colour, nor the
style of rigger, nor the material of construction, nor the name of the
maker, nor the weight of the boat (within reason), but how well you
can work with that boat, how confident you feel in it, how well you
scull & how fit & strong you are.
Cheers -
Carl
I should have added:-a a significant part of the resistance the boat encounters is from the other fluid that you pass through, namely the
air.-a If, into a strong headwind, your speed falls by 20%, then wind resistance is now causing roughly half of the total drag.-a In still air
the wind drag is significant, & reducible.
The main source of that wind resistance is the sculler & the oars.
If the wind is coming from the side, then you incur additional
hydrodynamic drag due to the boat crabbing along the course to overcome
the leeway induced by the aerodynamic side-force - hulls are not
optimised for this, but again this is reducible.
Cheers -
Carl
On 25/09/2020 12:38, carl wrote:--- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
On 24/09/2020 18:33, carl wrote:
On 24/09/2020 16:01, Leon Warrington wrote:
So,
I have a 1997 hudson, which in its day was a top boat (it won the
world champs). It's an early stern mounted wing rigger design which
has been resprayed once, but still original tubular metal wing rigger. >>>
How much faster, if at all, would people anticipate a new, top level
boat would be?
I race masters B level (UK), so say over 1000m would you be talking a >>> few seconds, 10 seconds?
I haven't weighed the boat, but it is definitely at least several kg
heavier than a few year old Fluiddesign.
Cheers, Leon
I seriously doubt that you'd detect any difference in the speed at
which that boat can be driven. What deeply intrigues me is the near
total lack of comparative testing of equipment & the implicit
assumption that newer (or what some fancied sculler used) is somehow
going to be better.
"A few seconds" would be a huge margin. For a base time of 7:15 for
2K, a 5 sec speed increase (1.16%) would require a power increase of
~4%. While feasible, when someone makes that claim one should demand
the evidence or, better still, conduct one's own objective testing.
Since singles are limited to 14kg (a daft rule, beloved only of
blazerati as, if boat weight actually mattered that much, the rule
would deliberately disadvantage the lighter sculler), I'd be
astonished if your boat was "definitely at least several kg heavier
than a few year old" xx. And, if I may introduce just a hint of
science into the discussion, there are compelling theoretical grounds
to show that a lighter version of the same boat may go no faster, or
even be a little slower - there's a minimum weight of boat, for any
given sculler & technique, below which boat speed tends to fall.
Rowing equipment selection seems too often based on the natural desire
to have the latest gizmo rather than on actual evidence. Shiny new
toys aren't necessarily high performers, even if someone won the last
WC in that model. What matters, still, is not the colour, nor the
style of rigger, nor the material of construction, nor the name of the
maker, nor the weight of the boat (within reason), but how well you
can work with that boat, how confident you feel in it, how well you
scull & how fit & strong you are.
Cheers -
Carl
I should have added: a significant part of the resistance the boat encounters is from the other fluid that you pass through, namely the
air. If, into a strong headwind, your speed falls by 20%, then wind resistance is now causing roughly half of the total drag. In still air
the wind drag is significant, & reducible.
The main source of that wind resistance is the sculler & the oars.
If the wind is coming from the side, then you incur additional hydrodynamic drag due to the boat crabbing along the course to overcome the leeway induced by the aerodynamic side-force - hulls are not
optimised for this, but again this is reducible.
Cheers -
Carl
Funnily - if anyone finds ignorance funny among those paid well to
extract the last 0.1% of performance from their crews - I've just seen a 2016 publication on wind drag reduction on oar shafts: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877705816306452
The wheel re-invented - yet again, but only 16 years late. We applied boundary layer trip strips to the oars of the GBR eight for Sydney 2000. Since when they've been quietly forgotten by our sport.
Such a shame, since science really can help in our sport. It is easier
to gain performance by applying known science than to buy it in the form
of new kit.
Cheers -
Carl
--
Carl Douglas Racing Shells -
Fine Small-Boats/AeRoWing Low-drag Riggers/Advanced Accessories
Write: Harris Boatyard, Laleham Reach, Chertsey KT16 8RP, UK
Find: tinyurl.com/2tqujf
Email: ca...@carldouglasrowing.com Tel: +44(0)1932-570946 Fax: -563682
URLs: carldouglasrowing.com & now on Facebook @ CarlDouglasRacingShells
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com
Such a shame, since science really can help in our sport. It is easierAmen to that! Although Christmas is coming and who doesn't like shiny new kit or geeky new gadgets...? ;-)
to gain performance by applying known science than to buy it in the form
of new kit.
On Friday, 25 September 2020 at 14:10:48 UTC+1, carl wrote:
Such a shame, since science really can help in our sport. It is easier
to gain performance by applying known science than to buy it in the form
of new kit.
Amen to that! Although Christmas is coming and who doesn't like shiny new kit or geeky new gadgets...? ;-)
The IET's (Institution of Engineering and Technology) Surrey local network recently hosted a webinar given by Prof Steve Haake from Sheffield Hallam University. It was great to see how he and his team had approached a range of different sporting challenges from a scientific and engineering perspective. Although his work includes aerodynamic and hydrodynamic analyses applied to a number of sports, sadly rowing didn't feature - I wish it did. Improving our understanding of the physics and engineering behind our sport and burying the myths and folklore surely can only benefit us all.
The webinar was recorded but I've not managed to work out where it's posted online. In the meantime, Steve's website is stevehaake.com with links to various other talks he's given (and a plug for his book "Advantage Play").
| Sysop: | Nitro |
|---|---|
| Location: | Portland, OR |
| Users: | 5 |
| Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
| Uptime: | 219:14:02 |
| Calls: | 132 |
| Files: | 706 |
| Messages: | 83,339 |