Accuracy of SRM and power tap power monitoring systems for bicycling

Purpose: Although manufacturers of bicycle power monitoring devices SRM and Power Tap (PT) claim accuracy to within 2.5%, there are limited scientific data available in support. The purpose of this investigation was to assess the accuracy of SRM and PT under different conditions. Methods: First, 19 SRM were calibrated, raced for 11 months, and retested using a dynamic CALRIG (50-1000 W at 100 rpm). Second, using the same procedure, five PT were repeat tested on alternate days. Third, the most accurate SRM and PT were tested for the influence of cadence (60, 80, 100, 120 rpm), temperature (8 and 21degreesC) and time (1 h at similar to300 W) on accuracy. Finally, the same SRM and PT were downloaded and compared after random cadence and gear surges using the CALRIG and on a training ride. Results: The mean error scores for SRM and PT factory calibration over a range of 50-1000 W were 2.3 +/- 4.9% and -2.5 +/- 0.5%, respectively. A second set of trials provided stable results for 15 calibrated SRM after 11 months (-0.8 +/- 1.7%), and follow-up testing of all PT units confirmed these findings (-2.7 +/- 0.1%). Accuracy for SRM and PT was not largely influenced by time and cadence; however. power output readings were noticeably influenced by temperature (5.2% for SRM and 8.4% for PT). During field trials, SRM average and max power were 4.8% and 7.3% lower, respectively, compared with PT. Conclusions: When operated according to manufacturers instructions, both SRM and PT offer the coach, athlete, and sport scientist the ability to accurately monitor power output in the lab and the field. Calibration procedures matching performance tests (duration, power, cadence, and temperature) are, however, advised as the error associated with each unit may vary.

Limitations of asymmetric parallel-beam geometry

Bragg diffraction peak profiles and intensities in asymmetric (Omega-2theta) diffraction using a mirror-based parallel-beam geometry were compared with symmetric parallel-beam (theta-2theta) and conventional Bragg - Brentano (theta-2theta) diffraction for a powdered quartz sample and the NIST standard reference material (SRM) 660a (LaB6, lanthanum hexaboride). A comparison of the intensities and line widths (full width at half-maximum, FWHM) of these techniques demonstrated that low incident angles (Omega < 5&DEG;) are preferable for the parallel-beam setup. For higher &UOmega; values, if 2θ < 2Omega, mass absorption reduces the intensities significantly compared with the Bragg - Brentano setup. The diffraction peak shapes for the mirror geometry are more asymmetric and have larger FWHM values than corresponding peaks recorded with a Bragg - Brentano geometry. An asymmetric mirror-based parallel-beam geometry offers some advantages in respect of intensity when compared with symmetric geometries, and hence may be well suited to quantitative studies, such as those involving Rietveld analysis. A trial Rietveld refinement of a 50% quartz - 50% corundum mixture was performed and produced adequate results.