| Author |
 Topic  |
|
SeanCostin
USA
32 Posts |
 Posted - 09/19/2012 : 19:41:18
|
Discussion to the Trike Class or to be named classification for 3 or more wheels is open. Please sumbit proposals on the definition for review. Discussion will be closed before Oct. 13 2012
Sean Costin
VP Land |
|
|
Larry Lem
USA
40 Posts |
Posted - 09/20/2012 : 11:29:58
|
Mike Mowett started this topic a year ago. We should either delete this topic of move that info here.
http://www.ihpva.org/forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=709
Someone with a "vested interest" should propose verbiage since that's the hard work.
Elements of good rules: clear, unambiguous, succinct, verifiable. The more qualitative elements, the more work for the inspectors. Keep them to as few as possible.
Good luck!
Larry Lem |
Edited by - Larry Lem on 09/20/2012 11:33:09 |
 |
|
|
n/a
10 Posts |
Posted - 09/21/2012 : 10:30:33
|
I propose moving the info here, since this subject heading is now more relevent and accurate, and the discussion wasn't taken very far before. Or, since it wasn't that much information, just keep Larry's link to the previous discussion. If Larry, Mike, or Don wish to cut and paste their previous posts, that would be helpful.
The current discussion is submitting proposals for review of the newly ratified trike class.
-Raymond |
|
|
|
SeanCostin
USA
32 Posts |
Posted - 09/23/2012 : 19:46:46
|
Thought I would drop in what we did with the WRRA as a potential guide.
Trike Recumbent
Same as Unfaired Recumbent, except vehicles in this class must have 3 or more weight bearing wheels, and two of those wheels
wheels must have a minimum track width of 250mm.
Rider Classifications
Records will be recorded separately for the following classifications:
Men or Women
Junior - 16 years old and below
Adult - 17 years old to 50 years old
Masters - 51 and above
|
|
|
|
Larry Lem
USA
40 Posts |
Posted - 09/24/2012 : 12:34:31
|
We should probably leave out rider classifications since that's a separate topic. (Side topic, not be discussed in this thread, but was there mention of a master's classification at the recent IHPVA general membership meeting? I haven't seen the meeting minutes, have only read about the new proposals concerning the 15 m rule, juniors, trikes. Are all rules up for consideration?)
-----------------------
Proposed rule verbiage:
Tricyles or vehicles with more than 2 wheels in which the wheels are not intended to travel in a single path or track (sometimes referred to as multi-track vehicles):
"Vehicles in this class must have 3 or more weight bearing wheels, and two of those wheels wheels must have a minimum track width of 250mm."
Larry Lem |
Edited by - Larry Lem on 09/26/2012 12:02:47 |
|
|
|
n/a
10 Posts |
Posted - 09/26/2012 : 19:18:57
|
I'm shy of using the term "wheel" since this is the IHPVA, and not WRRA, and so might have a wider range of interpretation. If someone wants to innovate with non-wheeled weight bearing members like skis, blades, ground effect, or other, I believe that should be allowed within the class. Just like "Trike" can mean 3 or more wheels, I propose that a "wheel" can mean all manner of weight bearing supports:
"A wheel can represent any manor of weight bearing support such as, but not limited to, wheels (proper), skis, blade skates, ground effect or similar, and is not limited to circular rolling elements such as bicycle or roller blade wheels. Hereafter, any such support will be referred to as a wheel."
|
|
|
|
n/a
10 Posts |
Posted - 09/26/2012 : 19:22:00
|
I would also like to disambiguate between trikes, and bikes with landing gear or outriggers:
"The three or more wheels much remain in contact with the ground throughout the record attempt." |
|
|
|
n/a
1 Posts |
Posted - 09/26/2012 : 19:57:46
|
Will it be possible to retrospectively allocate records to the trike (multitrack) category?
Should the rule be 3 or more wheels?
Tim Marquardt |
|
|
|
Larry Lem
USA
40 Posts |
Posted - 09/26/2012 : 21:22:05
|
Please write the full verbiage of the proposed rule. Listing the reasons for the words is great/necessary. Thanks for adding that.
I believe the plan for the "trike" category, and the junior classification is to go back and grab all of the previous performances/records. That is why we are happy that Mike Mowett is trying to keep all of the details.
Larry Lem |
Edited by - Larry Lem on 09/26/2012 21:23:29 |
|
|
|
n/a
2 Posts |
Posted - 09/27/2012 : 05:46:57
|
Why a minimum track width other than all three tracks not being aligned front to rear? Safety issues?
JJ |
|
|
|
Larry Lem
USA
40 Posts |
Posted - 09/27/2012 : 09:03:46
|
How do you define not being aligned? It has to be measurable. What is the minimum width for the "wheels" being out of line? I don't think it's about safety, it's about ensuring that there are no loopholes.
I do think we need the words "3 or more" in the requirement. Bike wheels are sometimes misaligned leaving two distinct tracks after riding through a puddle.
Larry Lem |
|
|
|
Alan Krause
23 Posts |
Posted - 09/27/2012 : 09:40:10
|
This is great stuff, keep working on it, I would like to remind everyone about this from the IHPVA Rules
section 2.0
(with a big snip ------ )
"In general, it shall be the intention of the IHPVA rules to avoid defining what type of vehicle may enter individual competitions, but to let the competition itself determine which type of vehicle is superior by a normal evolutionary process. Exceptions may be made if unavoidable (e.g., arm-powered vehicles.)
The spirit of these rules is to promote design innovation by establishing only the minimum necessary regulations and to promote the goal of human powered competition. The IHPVA Records Committee reserves the right to use "spirit-of-the-rule" judgment when deciding upon unclear issues."
---with more snip------ I encourage everybody to go look at the rules again.
I personally favor less specific definition to promote creativity in design.
|
|
|
|
n/a
2 Posts |
Posted - 09/27/2012 : 10:26:49
|
I'm a little new at this so forgive me if I ask more questions than I give answers. I think before a trike class can be established that the definition of a trike must be established. I agree with the "3 or more" principal. But does that assume there are only 'essentially' three touchdown points? Or,are we actually talking about multi-track vehicles of any number of touchdown points(greater than 2)? On other forums I have seen discussion on whether or not the vehicle must be able to stand without assistance. Would that be a requirement?
I will call the front to rear direction longitudinal for now. After rereading the question from my previous post, I no longer see a problem with a single track vehicle that has more than two wheels aligned in the longitudinal direction if someone wished to do that. By 'aligned' I mean you can take a string from front to rear of the bike and it cuts the center of all three wheels. It probably wouldn't make since to do that because of the additional rolling resistance and the likely loss from additional fairing material but so what? Also if someone wished to make a sidecar type vehicle one might wish to align 2 wheels longitudinally and have one wheel offset to one side.
Anyway, I can toss out examples all day long. So not knowing the history of this organization, is there already a definition of a trike?
JJ |
|
|
|
Larry Lem
USA
40 Posts |
Posted - 09/27/2012 : 12:07:29
|
| There is no definition of a trike at this time. |
Edited by - Larry Lem on 09/28/2012 06:50:27 |
|
|
|
n/a
10 Posts |
Posted - 09/28/2012 : 13:16:28
|
I believe defining what is a trike is sort of the whole point of this thread.
-Raymond |
|
|
|
n/a
10 Posts |
Posted - 09/28/2012 : 13:22:47
|
I like having easily measurable quantities, such as track and number of "wheels" defining the class. One of those up for discussion is the minimum track we would consider a trike. So far I have seen 250mm and 300mm proposed.
To my knowledge, the narrowist track I've seen is the Henry's "Backslider", which I would consider unambiguously a trike. Does anyone know what it's track is? I doubt it's less than 250mm, but I'd like to be sure before setting a value.
If anyone is considering something like the Backslider with less than 250 mm, I would suggest this is the time to speek up.
-Raymond |
Edited by - n/a on 09/28/2012 13:29:56 |
|
|
|
n/a
1 Posts |
Posted - 09/28/2012 : 19:27:08
|
I believe that Dennis Grelk and Warren Beauchamp both have unfaired tilting trikes that might have a track width of less than 250mm.
|
|
|
|
SeanCostin
USA
32 Posts |
Posted - 09/28/2012 : 20:10:42
|
I'm not sure the WRRA rule was well written. It should have said a track width greater than 250mm.
Ultimately we found that we had to draw the line somewhere on track width. Not too elegant, but there have not been any issues, or recent record attempts for that matter.
Sean
quote:
Originally posted by SeanCostin
Thought I would drop in what we did with the WRRA as a potential guide.
Trike Recumbent
Same as Unfaired Recumbent, except vehicles in this class must have 3 or more weight bearing wheels, and two of those wheels
wheels must have a minimum track width of 250mm.
Rider Classifications
Records will be recorded separately for the following classifications:
Men or Women
Junior - 16 years old and below
Adult - 17 years old to 50 years old
Masters - 51 and above
|
|
|
|
Don S
USA
88 Posts |
Posted - 09/28/2012 : 21:42:30
|
Since all trikes are multitracks but not all multitracks are trikes I suggest:
Trike Class:
For the purpose of these rules the trike class shall be open to any multitrack vehicle conforming to either of the following definitions and otherwise meeting the requirements of this section.
Trike: A type of multitrack vehicle having 3 or more weight bearing wheels designed to run on 3 tracks and designed to continuously support the vehicle on all 3 tracks while stationary or in motion.
Quad Style: A multitrack vehicle having 4 or more weight bearing wheels that continuously support the vehicle on two or more tracks while stationary or in motion.
There shall be no limit to the number of wheels or axles a vehicle may have.
All multitrack vehicles competing in the trike class must have sufficient track width to remain upright with or without a rider when stationary and must be capable of starting and stopping without any additional means of support or balance.
"it's important to understand what makes them fast. It's more important to understand what keeps them from going faster." DS |
Edited by - Don S on 09/28/2012 21:52:51 |
|
|
|
Don S
USA
88 Posts |
Posted - 09/29/2012 : 07:34:43
|
To ensure practical limits on track width add:
Tilting vehicles shall have sufficient track width to remain upright in the full tilt position when stationary.
"it's important to understand what makes them fast. It's more important to understand what keeps them from going faster." DS |
|
|
|
n/a
10 Posts |
Posted - 09/30/2012 : 15:07:23
|
I feel that leaning trikes are still trikes as long as they can be statically stable and keep all three wheels on the ground while running. If the leaning causes it to become statically unstable, I don't believe that should mean it is not a trike. That just means that that portion of the "operating envelope" is not statically stable.
Obviously, someone can keep making the track of a leaner narrower and narrower until some people start to question whether it is still a trike. That would be where the min track rule comes in. I imagine one could make a "leaner" with a very narrow track, say 100mm for example. I think that such a design would be to try and work around the rules, rather than be in the spirit of them, and so I would say such a vehicle was not a trike. Arbitrary, I know, but such are the challenges of coming up with good category language.
-Raymond |
|
|
|
Alan Krause
23 Posts |
Posted - 09/30/2012 : 21:42:15
|
Alice Here-
A different way to look at the idea. Maybe too "out there".
A trike defined as any # of wheels as long as those wheels form a triangle of any size or shape.
Anything else is multi-track. This would address trikes like Giovanni's, side car style, ect. Whether they need to stand by themselves is in my perception, a design rule, but also a performance requirement.
Also, coming from a Kinetic background where the rules state "cheating is a privilege, not a right" I know there are always going to be loophole seekers and exploiters. We can't help ourselves, we are humans with egos.
The new rule should be all about making as level a playing field as we can for everyone. |
|
|
|
Don S
USA
88 Posts |
Posted - 09/30/2012 : 22:09:43
|
As a follow up to my forum post on recumbents.com I'd like to withdraw my previous suggestion and suggest that the "trike" class be more accurately defined as the:
"Multitrack" class:
For the purpose of this rule a multitrack vehicle is defined as any vehicle having 3 or more load bearing wheels designed to run on 2 or more tracks and designed to continuously support the vehicle on said tracks while stationary or in motion. There shall be no limit on the number of wheels or axles a vehicle may have.
__________________________________________
At some point track width could become so narrow that the vehicle would be more accurately described as a single track with offset or dual wheels rather that a multitrack. I agree that some guideline is required but there are potential problems with stability tests and as much as I dislike setting a minimum track width I don't have a better solution.
"it's important to understand what makes them fast. It's more important to understand what keeps them from going faster." DS |
Edited by - Don S on 09/30/2012 22:58:24 |
|
|
|
Don S
USA
88 Posts |
Posted - 10/01/2012 : 21:04:06
|
Alice made a great point about the wheels forming a triangle though I would suggest changing it's context so that the definition for the multitrack class would read something like:
"...a multitrack vehicle is defined as any vehicle having 3 or more load bearing wheels arranged to form a polygon so that the vehicle will run on 2 or more tracks with a minimum track width of (?) mm and designed so that the wheels continuously support the vehicle on said tracks while stationary or in motion."
"it's important to understand what makes them fast. It's more important to understand what keeps them from going faster." DS |
|
|
|
upright mike
USA
27 Posts |
Posted - 10/05/2012 : 04:29:40
|
Below is the progression of the MultiTrack World Records as I see them. I used my "lists" of data online as an extensive reference for this information. These lists were in turn based on my research of IHPVA records, old publications or from Battle Mountain events. Note it is relatively easy to verify many of the early MultiTrack records, because they were also the official IHPVA records for Single-Rider or Multi-Rider vehicles at that time. The May 1987 HPV news article extensively documents the Allegro team's accomplishments and single rider world records. It is one of the most inspiring stories of human powered achievements that I've read.
This year at Battle Mountain, I picked up a copy of Human Power #1 Issue from Al and Alice's IHPVA collection. It is a gold mine of information with complete race results from the 1975/76/77 IHPSC where many of the first IHPVA records were set. And as its Cover Story is Ralph Therrio's world single-rider record in Paul Van Valkenburgh's quadracycle. Inside were photographs of this machine, and it could be verified that all four wheels were load-bearing. It set what would be the first Multitrack record in my opinion. There was a trike in 1975 that reached 41.81 mph, but this seems too close to a standard bicycle racing record to be truly judged as an exceptional performance or world record.
I apologize for the low resolution of these screen prints from my Excel spreadsheet. I don't know how to make them clearer without getting rid of some of the columns of information. Contact me directly if you want me to email you the Excel spreadsheet.
MEN'S SINGLE-RIDER
http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f152/uprightmike/MultiTrackRecords_MenSingleRider.jpg
WOMEN'S SINGLE-RIDER
MEN'S MULTI-RIDER
http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f152/uprightmike/MultiTrackRecords_WomenandMultiRider.jpg
 |
Edited by - upright mike on 10/05/2012 05:00:18 |
|
|
|
upright mike
USA
27 Posts |
Posted - 10/05/2012 : 07:51:10
|
Here is the list on the graphic above, but maybe easier to read.
LAND - MEN'S 200 METER FLYING START SPEED TRIAL (Single Rider, MultiTrack)
49.430 mph, Ralph Therrio, AeroShell, 1977, Paul Van Valkenburgh, Quadracycle, IHPSC Ontario, CA.
49.770 mph, Ralph Therrio, AeroShell, 1979, Paul Van Valkenburgh, Quadracycle, IHPSC Ontario, CA.
56.550 mph, Dave Grylls, Vector Single, 1980, Al Voigt & Versatron, Tricycle, IHPSC Ontario, CA.
58.890 mph, Dave Grylls, Vector Single, 1980, Al Voigt & Versatron , Tricycle, nonIHPSC, Ontario, CA.
59.680 mph, John Seibert, Allegro II, 1985, Don Witte, Tricycle, Alamosa, CO.
60.430 mph, Peter Thron, Allegro II, 1985, Don Witte, Tricycle, Alamosa, CO.
61.940 mph, John Seibert, Allegro II, 1985, Don Witte, Tricycle, Alamosa, CO.
63.010 mph, Peter Thron, Allegro III, 1986, Don Witte, Tricycle, Alamosa, CO.
66.084 mph, Chuck Royalty, Orion, 2008, Raymond Gage, Tricycle, Battle Mountain.
69.084 mph, Gareth Hanks, Completely Overzealous, 2012 Ben Goodall & TriSled, Tricycle, Battle Mountain.
70.101 mph, Gareth Hanks, Completely Overzealous, 2012 Ben Goodall & TriSled, Tricycle, Battle Mountain.
70.733 mph, Gareth Hanks, Completely Overzealous, 2012 Ben Goodall & TriSled, Tricycle, Battle Mountain.
71.789 mph, Gareth Hanks, Completely Overzealous, 2012 Ben Goodall & TriSled, Tricycle, Battle Mountain.
LAND - WOMEN'S 200 METER FLYING START SPEED TRIAL (Single Rider, MultiTrack)
51.840 mph, Rachel Hall, Allegro II, Don Witte, Tricycle, 1985, Alamosa, CO.
LAND - MEN'S 200 METER FLYING START SPEED TRIAL (Multi-Rider, MultiTrack)
57.060 mph, Vector Triple, Al Voigt & Versatron, Trike, 1979 IHPSC Ontario, CA
61.040 mph, White Lighting, Nortrop SAE, Trike, 1980 IHPSC Ontario, CA
62.920 mph, Vector Tandem, Al Voigt & Versatron, Trike, 1980 IHPSC Ontario, CA
|
Edited by - upright mike on 10/05/2012 08:00:51 |
|
|
|
upright mike
USA
27 Posts |
Posted - 10/05/2012 : 08:00:18
|
Note that in the early days of the IHPVA, the trike and the tandem were recognized as the most stable and fast designs. They were continuously setting the single rider and multiple rider records. This year at Battle Mountain, both the TRIKE and TANDEM categories were the fastest ever, and both over 70 mph for the first time. TriSled Gareth Hanks, Ben Goodall and Larry Lem, Tom Amick and Phil Plath made this year very very exciting.
Note that 32 years later the Vector Tandem is still the fastest MultiTrack Tandem in the world. At its time, it represented the ultimate vehicle for human powered speed. And it set the world speed record at low altitude. What would make things even more interesting, if someone, like TU Delft, with an already wide design, could design a new "Vector Tandem" Trike. Then put Sebastiaan and Jan Bos inside and see how fast they could go, considering they are currently the 2nd and 4th fastest riders already individually.
Already TU Delft is continuing another tradition started in the early days of the IHPVA. This was a time when smart students or engineers (like Northrop University or Versatron) designed a super aerodynamic shape and had some powerhouse Olympic-level athletes ride the bikes. |
Edited by - upright mike on 10/05/2012 08:17:43 |
|
|
|
upright mike
USA
27 Posts |
Posted - 10/05/2012 : 08:39:24
|
Okay, I'm about to violate the clause that usually says this publication can not be photocopied or Reproduced in any form...
Al and Alice, please don't sue - I need my money for my next trip to BM! ha ha! 
from Human Power Issue Volume 1, Number 1 ...
what would be the first multitrack record holder (the Aeroshell 2 quadracycle) Article by Paul van Valkenburgh
|
Edited by - upright mike on 10/05/2012 09:24:20 |
|
|
|
Alan Krause
23 Posts |
Posted - 10/11/2012 : 10:33:12
|
This is the type of reproduction that is OK Mike - Excerpts and partial publication of articles. Anyone can ask for permission for use.
The problem was entire copying and publication without permission and no prominent recognition of the source of the material, other than the scanned pubs.
These 1st issues are still for sale 10.00 + shipping if anyone is interested. We have most back issues in original paper format. 3.00 each + shipping.
The reason for protections - Our club is still seeking revenues and recognition for the pubs to support our goals of promoting Human Power.
Alice
|
|
|
|
Alan Krause
23 Posts |
Posted - 10/11/2012 : 12:00:11
|
Barclay says his track width on the "Backslider" trike is (about) 10.5 inches
~Al |
|
|
|
Don S
USA
88 Posts |
Posted - 10/11/2012 : 19:44:09
|
Thanks for posting Barclay's numbers. I've been a strong proponent of using stability as a defining criteria for trikes but the variables are so many that it becomes nearly impossible to define an easily tested criteria that wouldn't eliminate vehicles that in my opinion are unquestionable trikes. The previously suggested 270 mm track width requirement would disqualify Barclay's trike and having seen it first hand I have to agree with Raymond that the Backslider is unquestionable a trike.
I would like to suggest that a minimum track width of 254mm (10.0 in) be added to the defining criteria for the multitrack class. These are numbers easily verified by event organizers and easily understood by designers and builders of multitrack hpvs. While less than the minimum track width requirement of other organization these numbers would insure that any streamliner designed around a multitrack vehicle meeting the current requirements of these other organizations would be included in the International classification by the IHPVA.
"it's important to understand what makes them fast. It's more important to understand what keeps them from going faster." DS |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
