Relation between energy spend and force

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on developing a formula to relate the energy expenditure of a cyclist to the force applied on the pedals, particularly in scenarios like cycling uphill where velocity may be zero. It highlights that while power is defined as force times speed, this does not account for energy used when stationary, as cyclists still expend energy through metabolism and discomfort. Key factors influencing energy use include friction coefficients, slope, mass, pedal arm length, gear ratios, and wheel diameter. The relationship between force and friction is crucial, with the cyclist's force needing to equal the frictional force for equilibrium. Adjustments to the formulas are necessary when considering additional forces, such as gravity on inclines.
silverside
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
I'm working on a bicycling simulation. I'm looking for a formula which relates the energy that a biker spends per time unit to the force on the pedals.
I know that power = force * speed, but I'm not sure if this is appropriate here. For example what happens if a biker is on a steep hill with velocity 0? From the formula it follows that power is 0, but the biker still uses energy. What is the relation between this energy use and the force he exercises?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It's force*velocity of the pedal, not velocity of the bike.
 
The answer will depend to a crude approximation, upon (I believe, all of the following)
1. The coefficient of friction between the tires and the ground as well as friction in the bearings of the wheels, in the pedal and in the gears
2. The slope of the ground
3. The mass of the bicycle + cyclist
4. The length of the pedal arm, the gear ratio and the diameter of the rear wheel

At zero velocity, the work done is close to zero. The biker dissipates power from :
1. His normal metabolism, and
2. An additional contribution from a "discomfort factor"

Work done (or energy expended) by muscles is not the same as the physical quantity known as 'work', defined as the difference in some appropriate form of energy or the path integral of the component of the applied force along the direction of instantaneous displacement.
 
It's force*velocity of the pedal, not velocity of the bike.

The power going into the pedals (force*velocity of pedals) is equal (ignoring friction and drag) to the power of the bike (angular velocity of wheel times torque at the rear wheel).
 
silverside said:
I'm working on a bicycling simulation. I'm looking for a formula which relates the energy that a biker spends per time unit to the force on the pedals.
I know that power = force * speed, but I'm not sure if this is appropriate here. For example what happens if a biker is on a steep hill with velocity 0? From the formula it follows that power is 0, but the biker still uses energy. What is the relation between this energy use and the force he exercises?

The biker will accelerate until the force that the biker-bike system exerts will be equal to the force that friction exerts against them.
so

F = F_f

let the forces due to friction be:

F_f = C + c_1*v

Then the velocity of the biker (assuming he has reached equilibrium with friction) will be:

v=\frac{F_f-C}{c1} \rightarrow v=\frac{F-C}{c1}

the distance traveled after some time will be:

\sum_{t=0}^{t=i}{v_it}=\sum_{t=0}^{t=i}{\frac{(F_i-C)t}{c1}}

the energy usage of the biker will be:

P = \frac{F}{v} = \frac{Fc1}{F-C}

the total energy used by the biker since the start will be:

\sum_{t=0}^{t=i}{F_iv_it}=\sum_{t=0}^{t=i}{\frac{F_i(F_i-C)t}{c1}}

When the biker is on a steep hill you can simply adjust the first formula, because then the biker has not only the force of friction against him but also the force of gravity. When the biker is on a hill that has an angle A with respect to horizontal then:
F = F_f - \frac{F_z}{sin(A)}
 
Hello! Let's say I have a cavity resonant at 10 GHz with a Q factor of 1000. Given the Lorentzian shape of the cavity, I can also drive the cavity at, say 100 MHz. Of course the response will be very very weak, but non-zero given that the Loretzian shape never really reaches zero. I am trying to understand how are the magnetic and electric field distributions of the field at 100 MHz relative to the ones at 10 GHz? In particular, if inside the cavity I have some structure, such as 2 plates...
Back
Top