When cycling on level ground at a speed greater than 14 m/s, aerodynamic drag is the most important resistive force. About 90% of the total mechanical power output is necessary to overcome it. Aerodynamic drag is mainly affected by the effective frontal area which is the product of the projected frontal area and the coefficient of drag. The effective frontal area represents the position of the cyclist on the bicycle and the aerodynamics of the cyclist-bicycle system in this position. In order to optimise performance, estimation of these parameters is necessary. The aim of this study is to describe and comment on the methods used during the last 30 years for the evaluation of the effective frontal area and the projected frontal area in cycling, in both laboratory and actual conditions. Most of the field methods are not expensive and can be realised with few materials, providing valid results in comparison with the reference method in aerodynamics, the wind tunnel. Finally, knowledge of these parameters can be useful in practice or to create theoretical models of cycling performance.

The SRM power measuring crank system is nowadays a popular device for cycling power output (PO) measurements in the field and in laboratories. The PowerTap (CycleOps, Madison, USA) is a more recent and less well-known device that allows mobile PO measurements of cycling via the rear wheel hub. The aim of this study is to test the validity and reliability of the PowerTap by comparing it with the most accurate (i.e. the scientific model) of the SRM system. The validity of the PowerTap is tested during i) sub-maximal incremental intensities (ranging from 100 to 420 W) on a treadmill with different pedalling cadences (45 to 120 rpm) and cycling positions (standing and seated) on different grades, ii) a continuous sub-maximal intensity lasting 30 min, iii) a maximal intensity (8-s sprint), and iiii) real road cycling. The reliability is assessed by repeating ten times the sub-maximal incremental and continuous tests. The results show a good validity of the PowerTap during sub-maximal intensities between 100 and 450 W (mean PO difference -1.2 ± 1.3 %) when it is compared to the scientific SRM model, but less validity for the maximal PO during sprint exercise, where the validity appears to depend on the gear ratio. The reliability of the PowerTap during the sub-maximal intensities is similar to the scientific SRM model (the coefficient of variation is respectively 0.9 to 2.9 % and 0.7 to 2.1 % for PowerTap and SRM). The PowerTap must be considered as a suitable device for PO measurements during sub-maximal real road cycling and in sub-maximal laboratory tests.

The aim of our study was to compare crank torque profile and perceived exertion between the Monark ergometer (818 E) and two outdoor cycling conditions: level ground and uphill road cycling. Seven male cyclists performed seven tests in seated position at different pedaling cadences: (a) in the laboratory at 60, 80, and 100 rpm; (b) on level terrain at 80 and 100 rpm; and (c) on uphill terrain (9.25% grade) at 60 and 80 rpm. The cyclists exercised for 1 min at their maximal aerobic power. The Monark ergometer and the bicycle were equipped with the SRM Training System (Schoberer, Germany) for the measurement of power output (W), torque (N⋅m), pedaling cadence (rpm), and cycling velocity (km⋅h⁻¹). The most important findings of this study indicate that at maximal aerobic power the crank torque profiles in the Monark ergometer (818 E) were significantly different (especially on dead points of the crank cycle) and generate a higher perceived exertion compared with road cycling conditions.

Numerous workers are exposed to vibrations which can turn out to be fatal for the health. Athletes can be included in this population, in particular cyclists who are exposed to vibration due to the irregularity of the road. This nuisance depends of the duration of exposure and the range of vibrations. While the worker is mostly directly excited by a vibrating system, the cyclist is indirectly subjected to it. He undergoes the vibrations of an excited sub-structure which is the bicycle. So the bicycle plays the role of a vibration filter or amplifier. In this paper we propose to (i) study the transmission of vibrations to the cyclist after excitation on a paving road, (ii) calculate the limit time of exposure to this type of excitation rate by the use of the standard ISO 5349 and the European directive 2002/44/EC, and (iii) compare the weighting curve of the standard with a vibrations transmissibility curve obtained between the collarbone and the stem. For this particular case of an excited sub-structure, a weighting curve is proposed by considering the first modal frequency of the bicycle.