New Bike!

I'm really getting into biking now. It's a great way to stay in shape and a lot of fun. It also meets one of my goals of minimizing fossil fuel use.

So here's a photo of the new bike, a 2008 Gary Fisher X-Caliber 29er. It's on order and will be here soon.The bike is a 29er, meaning it has 29" wheels. Regular mountain bikes have 26" wheels and have been built that way since they were invented in the late 70's/early 80's. The first mountain bikes were fabricated from used bike parts. The 26" design was more of a "use what is available" approach instead of an engineered design.

Twenty-nine inch wheels are relatively new - only on the market for about five years - and are starting to have a large market share. The larger wheel has several advantages, one of which is decreased angle of attack. For small bumps, rocks, and tree roots, the wheels will roll over the obstacle easier and less speed will be lost. This ultimately saves energy for use somewhere else (can you say hills?). The large wheels also have a larger contact patch with the ground, resulting in better traction on steep climbs and better cornering without losing control. The smoother and more in-control ride results in slightly faster average speeds than a 26" bike and less fatigue over long distances.

As a downside, the bike weighs more. The bigger wheels add a pound or two of weight. Since the weight is on the far outside edge of the wheel farther from the axle center, more energy is required to spin the wheels up to speed. There are different opinions on how much this affects the rider (and I intend to analyze the difference mathematically in another post). It will definitely take more energy to accelerate the bike up to speed compared to a similar 26" bike. The bike still weighs pounds less than my current mountain bike.

I'm looking forward to the new ride. This will be my first bike sized to fit with high quality components. The 27 speed drive will give me more choices in cadence while riding. Hydraulic disc brakes will eliminate mud and water from decreasing brake performance. Check back to find out how it rides!

Hot Air

The following joke was in the Summer 2007 issue of The Bent (publication of Tau Beta Pi engineering honor society):

Realizing he was lost, a balloonist dropped down to ask directions. "Excuse me, but I'm a little off course" he shouted. "I promisted to meet a friend an hour ago, I don't know where I am."
A woman hollered back: "You're in a hot air balloon hovering approximately 30 feet above the ground. You're at exactly 40 degrees, 22minutes, and 21 seconds North latitude and 70 degrees, 30 minutes, and 33 seconds West longitude."
"Amazing," the balloonist replied. "You must be an engineer!"
"I am," she replied, "How did you know?"
"Well," answered the balloonist, "everything you told me is technically correct, but I can't use your information. I'm still lost and you haven't been much help at all. If anything, you've delayed my trip."
The woman thought for a moment, then replied: "You must be in management."
"I am," replied the balloonist, "but how did you know?"
"Well," said the woman, "you don't know where you are or where you're going. You've risen to your position due to a large quantity of hot air. You made a promise that you have no idea how to keep, and you expect people beneath you to solve your problems."
"In fact," she said, "you're in exactly the same position you were before we met, but somehow it's now my fault."

This joke hits on several good points, and I'm sure that is why it was included in this issue. Maybe engineers do need to work on communicating with others in management, but is that the only issue?

Many companies have a shortsighted goal of raising the shareholder value without looking at the long term effects. My last internship was a great example of such a situation. Several pieces of equipment were installed based on low bids without looking at the lifecycle cost. What was purchased and installed definitely had a lower purchase cost, but the price the company payed for the low end equipment was an additional several thousand dollars a month in operating costs. In addition, the low cost supplier was located in a different state. Just getting the supplier in the door of the facility for repair is incredibly costly when mileage, wages while traveling, expenses, and a hotel are figured into the labor cost. Compare this to a local distributor with a better product, saving thousands a month in operating cost for just a slightly higher capital cost, with a full inventory of replacement parts 20 minutes away. Money was not saved going with the lowest bid. Any savings was gone in just a few months of operation.

In other examples, management has held back research and development trying to save costs. For one turbine manufacturer, management would not pay for a $32,000 casting for testing purposes, stating that a lower cost alternative would need to be found. Six months later, the part is purchased for $31,500. $500 was saved, but the company lost six months in the race to get a patent and beat other manufacturers to the next generation of turbomachinery. Was money saved this time? When a single unit of the turbine manufacturer's equipment would sell for millions of dollars, $500 is nothing. When the lead competitor beats the company to the technology and market share is lost, that $500 would seem like a stupid amount to worry about.

What is the answer? Spending frivolously is certainly not; costs should be kept to a minimum whenever possible. Instead, if one option costs more, ask why. There is probably a reason, and the extra cost may or may not be beneficial. Look to the long term when investing in technology and ask the technical experts on the subject (engineers) to determine the best course of action.

I Created a Blog!!!

I finally created a blog. Why? There are a lot of little things on my mind that I'm going to put somewhere and share. Using my old website is a clumsy process and small updates take too long. In a matter of minutes, I can type something here and everything will organize and update itself. Less work for me!

This blog will not so much have a theme, but just a variety of topics. I will probably rant often about energy and what we need to change, and the same for transportation in this country since both are my areas of research for my MS in mechanical engineering here at ISU. I will also post about bicycling and any notable rides, and possibly race reports starting in 2008 when I hope to start competing. I'm sure there will be a lot of other postings on the subject of engineering, music, events, etc.

My inspiration to start this blog is mostly from a friend's blog, Iowa Dave. I have read his blog regularly for the past year or more and find it a neat way to communicate. Feel free to comment on my posts!