Technology
Aerodynamichs
When CEEPO decided to design a bike specifically to compete in non-drafting triathlons, one of the obvious objectives was to attain the best possible AERODYNAMICS. We work with top aerodynamicists, and we spent many hours in the wind-tunnel optimizing the drag coefficient characteristics of our products. We have tested our production models against some of the bike frames that are considered benchmarks in this area, and the results have demonstrated superior benchmark breaking aerodynamics.
For design and testing, CEEPO has benefitted from the invaluable contribution, knowledge, and experience of Professor, Nobumasa Sekishita, PhD, from the Department of Mechanical Engineering at Toyohashi University of Technology, Japan. Wind-tunnel tests have been performed at the Kawasaki Heavy Industries facility, also in Japan.
Since most of our frames have been designed exclusively for non-drafting triathlon bike racing (not for time trials or draft legal races), CEEPO ignored UCI regulations to produce the best triathlon bikes possible. CEEPO’s non-drafting frames offer the down tubes and seat tubes with the highest airfoil aspect ratios in the industry (higher than what the UCI allows). The airfoil aspect ratio, as it pertains to bicycle frame tubes is explained in the figure below:
The Effect of Tubing Shapes on Frame Aerodynamics
Both the size and shape of bicycle frame tubing has a significant impact on the frame’s aerodynamic drag, with streamlined and airfoil-shaped tubing generally having less air resistance than nearly any other shape, also, a thin airfoil section will nearly always generate less drag than a thick airfoil section, provided the length of the airfoil is constant. The coefficients of drag(cd) for several test shapes are provided below. (all test shapes have the same frotal area)
These test examples show that the shape plays a very important role in aerodynamics. The triangle shape, while having the same frontal area as the plate shape, has 10% less drag than the plate due to the improved aerodynamic shape of it is downwind side.
When you compare bike frames, you cannot take each one of them to a wind tunnel for individual testing. But you can study the way the frame is designed.
|
|
| Frame Tube Comparison |
Downtube dimensions
(Aspect Ratio = Length / Width) |
| Frame |
Length |
Width |
Aspect Ratio |
| CEEPO VENOM |
80 |
26 |
3.08 |
| CERVELO P3C |
81 |
29 |
2.79 |
| CERVELO P2C |
81 |
29 |
2.79 |
| CANNONDALE SLICE |
79 |
31 |
2.55 |
| LOOK 496 |
78 |
31 |
2.52 |
| SPECIALIZED TRANSITION |
74 |
30 |
2.47 |
| CEEPO STINGER |
70 |
30 |
2.33 |
| QR LUCERO |
67 |
29 |
2.31 |
| KESTREL AIRFOIL PRO |
75 |
37 |
2.03 |
| PINARELLO CRONO |
61 |
31 |
1.97 |
| BMC TT02 |
64 |
33 |
1.94 |
| CALDORA PHX |
70 |
36 |
1.94 |
| KUOTA KALIBUR |
72 |
38 |
1.89 |
| ORBEA ORDU |
75 |
40 |
1.88 |
| SCOTT PLASMA |
74 |
45 |
1.64 |
| PINARELLO MONTELLO |
71 |
44 |
1.61 |
| KUOTA K-FACTOR |
56 |
38 |
1.47 |
