Low Racer Recumbent Bike Frame

A thesis submitted to the

Faculty of the Mechanical Engineering Technology Program
of the University of Cincinnati
in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of

Bachelor of Science

in Mechanical Engineering Technology

at the College of Engineering & Applied Science

by

ERIC CONNER

Bachelor of Science University of Cincinnati

May 2011

Faculty Advisor: Laura Caldwell

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ....................................................................................................... I
TABLE OF CONTENTS .......................................................................................................... II
LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................ IV
LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................... V
ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................................. V
INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 1
BACKGROUND ..................................................................................................................................................... 1
PROBLEM STATEMENT ........................................................................................................................................ 2
NOMENCLATURE ................................................................................................................................................3
COMMERCIALLY AVAILABLE OPTIONS ........................................................................ 4
FRONT WHEEL DRIVE FRAME............................................................................................................................... 4
LONG WHEELBASE FRAME .................................................................................................................................. 5
SHORT WHEELBASE FRAME ................................................................................................................................. 6

CUSTOMER FEEDBACK AND ANALYSIS ........................................................................ 7

SURVEY ANALYSIS .............................................................................................................................................. 7
PRODUCT FEATURES AND OBJECTIVES ................................................................................................................ 9

ALTERNATIVE DESIGNS AND SELECTION .................................................................. 10

THREE PIECE BOX FRAME .................................................................................................................................. 10
TWO PIECE BOX FRAME ..................................................................................................................................... 10
SINGLE PIECE TUBE FRAME ............................................................................................................................... 11
CALCULATIONS .................................................................................................................. 13
LOAD DISTRIBUTION ON PINS ............................................................................................................................ 13
CALCULATING FORCE AT FORK ANGLE ............................................................................................................. 14
CALCULATING FORCE ON SEAT BRACKET ......................................................................................................... 15
CALCULATING MAXIMUM STRESS ON FRAME.................................................................................................... 16
DRAWNING .......................................................................................................................... 17
FABRICATION ...................................................................................................................... 18
SCHEDULING AND BUDGET ............................................................................................ 21
ITEMIZATION .................................................................................................................................................... 21
BUDGET ............................................................................................................................................................ 22
CONCLUSSION..................................................................................................................... 24
BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................................... 25
APPENDIX A - RESEARCH................................................................................................ A1
APPENDIX B - SURVEY ...................................................................................................... B1
APPENDIX C – QFD ............................................................................................................. C1
APPENDIX D – PRODUCT OBJECTIVE ........................................................................... D1

ii
APPENDIX E –SCHEDULE ................................................................................................. E1
APPENDIX F -BUDGET ....................................................................................................... F1
APPENDIX G -CALCULATIONS ....................................................................................... G1
APPENDIX H - DRAWING ................................................................................................. H1

iii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Recumbent Mid-Rise................................................................................................. 1
Figure 2: Recumbent Vocabulary (3) ....................................................................................... 3
Figure 3: LowRacer FWD ........................................................................................................ 4
Figure 4: LowRacer LWB ........................................................................................................ 5
Figure 5: LowRacer SWB ......................................................................................................... 6
Figure 6: Three Piece Box Frame ........................................................................................... 10
Figure 7: Two Piece Box Frame ............................................................................................. 10
Figure 8: Single Piece Tube Frame ......................................................................................... 11
Figure 9: Riders Profile and Seat ............................................................................................ 13
Figure 10: Load Distribution .................................................................................................. 13
Figure 11: Front Fork Force .................................................................................................... 14
Figure 12: Loading on Seat ..................................................................................................... 15
Figure 13: Shear & Moment diagrams.................................................................................... 15
Figure 14: Maximum Stress Point .......................................................................................... 16
Figure 15: Solid Works Drawing ............................................................................................ 17
Figure 16: Frame Mold ........................................................................................................... 18
Figure 17: Stage 1 composite wrap ......................................................................................... 19
Figure 18: Stage 2 Kevlar wrap .............................................................................................. 19
Figure 19: Carbon fiber wrap .................................................................................................. 20

iv
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Results of Customer Requirements ............................................................................ 7
Table 2: Characteristic .............................................................................................................. 8
Table 3: Weight Objective Method......................................................................................... 11
Table 4: Itemized Schedule ..................................................................................................... 21
Table 5: Itemized Budget ........................................................................................................ 22

v
ABSTRACT

An old age idea has been brought to the light over the last few decades. Recumbent are
now gaining popularity around the world with the introduction of clubs and races been hell
across the North America. With a heightened popularity, comes in increase in demand and
request specifications.
Recumbent bikes unlike the standard upright bikes many are familiar with, have a more
relaxed seating position similar to a recliner or slouching in a chair. The benefit of the
method of seating is that is increase the amount of blood flow throughout the body more
importantly the pelvic and legs of the rider, allowing for a greater distance with enjoyable
comfort.
Several varieties of recumbent bikes are in existence depending on the desire of the
enthusiast. The three class are; high risers, mid riser and low racers. Within these categories
there are three sub section; long wheel base, short wheel base with front wheel drive and
short wheel base with rear wheel drive. Each and every one of these unique creations is
custom designed for each individual rider.
The key components of sizing the rider for a recumbent bike are; weight - so that the
frame can with stand the total load in a dynamic condition, seated height - for properly
placing and length of the seat, inseam – to determine the distance the crank has to be and the
measurement for the knee to the ankle for the crank rotation.
The components of this project was design to decrease the amount of cost a high end
recumbent bike would usually cost, at the same time significantly reduce to weight. The
overall idea was to produce a top grade low racer recumbent framing system that would be
reasonably prices, available and lighter in weight after manufacturing.

v
LOW RACER RECUMBENT BIKE FRAME Eric Conner

INTRODUCTION

BACKGROUND

To distinguish between recumbent bicycles and the standard upright bicycles, look at the
seat position in figure 1. Recumbent bicycle are design for the rider to be in a reclined similar
to a lounge compared to the standard upright bicycle, for this reason the recumbent bike is
more ergonomic. The seat design allows for more distribution of the rider weight over a
larger area, and there is more support given to the lower lumbar, this allows for better blood
flow to the legs while riding. (1)

Figure 1: Recumbent Mid-Rise

Recumbent bicycles are also considered to be more aerodynamic compared to an

upright, since there is a considerably smaller profile when it comes to head wind. Recumbent
bicycles comes in many configurations: long wheel base, short wheel base, under and over
seat steering, front and rear wheel drives and much more. With a wide variety of categories
the recumbent design can be constructed, many possibilities are available to fit an
individual’s needs and preferences. (2)

1
LOW RACER RECUMBENT BIKE FRAME Eric Conner

PROBLEM STATEMENT

The current market for high performance recumbent bike is costly, which makes for a
difficult decision for many riders to choose cost over performance. With several models on
the market, each design has weight spectrums ranging from 19 pounds to 50 pounds. The
lighter frames, usually comes with a higher price tag due to material selection. The cost
ranges from $500 for a pure enjoyment of riding style bike to well over $10,000 for a lighter
high performance style. The propose solution is to build a recumbent bike frame that would
be comparable to a high performance frame in performance and weight for a fraction of the
cost.

2
LOW RACER RECUMBENT BIKE FRAME Eric Conner

NOMENCLATURE

In this report various terms will be used to describe the recumbent bicycle. These are the
common terms used by cyclist all around the world. Figure 2 shows these terms and their
respective location, which will aid in clarifying the report.

Rear Brakes Handlebars

and Assembly

Crank and
Frame Pedals
Idlers

Cassette

Derailleur Fork Tubes

Figure 2: Recumbent Vocabulary (3)

3
LOW RACER RECUMBENT BIKE FRAME Eric Conner

COMMERCIALLY AVAILABLE OPTIONS

FRONT WHEEL DRIVE FRAME

Figure 3, a Front Wheel drive (FWD) recumbent model, is characterized by having the
entire drive train system connected to the front wheel. There are key components that must
be properly located to ensure a smooth operation for this system. First, proper placing of the
idlers, this ensures that there is no rubbing between the frame and the chain in order to
achieve the highest amount of efficiency and helps with the longevity of the components.
Secondly, the designer must ensure that the system moves in a complete unison; the crank,
pedals and idler must move along the same path as the wheel when engaged in turning or
maneuvering. The advantage of this structural design is the reduction in the amount of chain
utilized, which makes it easier to control its sagging and increase efficiency. (4)

Figure 3: LowRacer FWD

4
LOW RACER RECUMBENT BIKE FRAME Eric Conner

LONG WHEELBASE FRAME

Figure 4 shows a Long Wheelbase (LWB) recumbent model has a longer distance
between the front and rear wheel measuring over 60 inches or so. Usually the steering on
LWB HPV’s are located as an under seat operation, but with the lower racer design there is
minimum clearance. There is a familiar similarity between the LBW recumbent bicycle and
the standard upright bicycle; the pedals of both bicycles are located before the front wheel
and the drive mechanism is located at the rear. This design opposes a major disadvantage to
its counter parts, the excessively long chain can cause reduction in output, and the total
length reduces performance. (5) The LWB frame also has a major advantage; it is the most
familiar riding style to majority of cyclist making it easier to master even for novice cyclist.

Figure 4: LowRacer LWB

5
LOW RACER RECUMBENT BIKE FRAME Eric Conner

SHORT WHEELBASE FRAME

Figure 5 is the design of the most common of all the short wheelbase (SWB) recumbent
bikes are amongst the most desired of them all. As pictured in figure 5, the bikes name comes
from the total system having a smaller wheel in front then in the rear. With the pedals and
crank being located in front of the short wheel, the power transfer from the crank connection
to the chain then is transferred to the rear cassette to propel the bike.

Figure 5: LowRacer SWB

. This design is most sought after because of its ability to produce maximum power
output, therefore there is an increase in efficiency. The SWB recumbent bike wheel base
measures usually between 42 to 48 inches measure from the axels and commonly with a
20inch wheel in front and 26 inch wheel in the rear. SWB are the perfect design for sharp
turns and uphill tracking, therefore there frame designs are used for the fastest race bike;
combined with lightweight material SWB recumbent become sought after for racers all
around. (3) This design does have its drawbacks with the length of chain need for this bike.
The rider/designer must realize that the chain must be either routed to be out of the way of
the front wheel or that the chain will rub the front wheel during turns. (6) During interviews
from recumbent bike riders most if not all recommend and ride low racer with short wheel
base. See Appendix A for more research and interviews conducted

6
LOW RACER RECUMBENT BIKE FRAME Eric Conner

CUSTOMER FEEDBACK AND ANALYSIS

SURVEY ANALYSIS

In order to determine what the needs of the customers were for this product seven surveys
were constructed and distributed to bicycle enthusiast.

Table 1: Results of Customer Requirements

Customer
importance

Current Satisfaction

Planned Satisfaction

Relative weight %
Designer's Multiplier
CUSTOM
FEATURES
Fit 5.00 1.10 3.57 4.00 14%
Weight 4.29 1.10 2.43 3.00 14%
Size 3.86 1.10 3.43 4.00 12%
Durability 3.86 1.10 3.43 4.00 12%
Efficiency 3.86 1.00 3.71 4.00 10%
Ease of Operation 3.71 1.00 4.14 4.20 9%
Handling 3.14 1.00 3.43 4.00 9%
Cost 2.86 1.10 3.57 4.00 8%
Safety 3.57 1.00 4.14 4.20 8%
Comfort 1.86 1.00 3.71 4.00 5%

The results in Table1, shows six different columns that will impact the design of the
recumbent bike frame. The first column shows a list of features that must be incorporated
into the design of the frame. These items were surveyed two ways; first was how important
are each one of the feature when if a new frame was being designed and how satisfied are
you with the current designs. The results from those sections of the survey generated
columns, “Customer Importance” and “Customer Satisfaction.” The numbers in these
columns are based off a “five point” scale with “one” being least importance or least satisfied
and “five” being very important or very satisfied. See appendix B for full survey and
calculations.

With the information obtained from the survey, the designer estimates a multiplier for
how much impact they will have on each specific feature during the design ranging from no
impact to ten percent. For this frame design table 1 shows that there are five critical arrears
the designer will impact; durability, fit, cost, size, and weight. After the designer multiplier is
given to each feature and the frame is designed, an assumption that a re-survey of the new
frame design will yield the column “Planned Satisfaction.” Planned satisfaction is higher
than the customer satisfaction due to the fact that the design wants to be better than current
market and outperform the requirements.

7
LOW RACER RECUMBENT BIKE FRAME Eric Conner

The last column in table 1 is relative weight percent. Relative weight percent is
calculated all the columns if table 1. See Appendix C for detail calculations and equations.
This percentage tells the designer how important each feature is when the new frame is
designed. With this information the designer knows were the main focus and most time
should be spent to meet the customer requirements.

The engineering characteristics can be found in Appendix C. These characteristics are

identified by the designer and are considered to be the key items for designing and
manufacturing the frame. Each characteristic is view across all the product objectives then
the column is added together, this number is included in the relative weight. The things that
impacted the most was the ideas that would meet the requirements of the customers, seen in
Table 2

Table 2: Characteristic

8
LOW RACER RECUMBENT BIKE FRAME Eric Conner

PRODUCT FEATURES AND OBJECTIVES

The product features and objectives are the same items from the survey (See Appendix B
for survey). Each of the customer features are ranked by percent of importance, from there,
values are assigned from the engineer as an added multiplier. The engineering characteristics
describe how the designer is going to meet each feature through measurable criteria. The
other remaining product features and objective are: efficiency, handling, safety, cost and
comfort. See Appendix D for a complete list of feature and relative engineering
characteristics. The five most important product features are:

Fit: 14%
1. Each bike is specifically designed for each individual operator at time of purchase regardless of
gender. Nonadjustable.
2. Human factors
- Measure of the rider’s inseam to determine the distance at which the crank will be located
from the rider while seated.
- The distance from rides knee to their ankle to determine the height the crank should be in
relation to the riders crank stroke.

Weight: 14%
1. 25 to 35 pound range

Size: 12%
1.) Will not exceed 80 inches in length
2.) The back rest will not exceed 12inch in width

Durability: 12%
1. Quality materials selected based upon material properties for usage
Use design factor of safety

Efficiency: 10%
1.) Minimize the friction between the chain and frame, by incorporating idlers to guide the chain
links away from other surfaces.
2.) Crank placement determined by power and torque from the seat position

Eases of Operation: 9%
1. The bike is manufactured so that the only operator is the person riding it. There will be no need
for another person’s assistance through the entire operation of riding the bike.

9
LOW RACER RECUMBENT BIKE FRAME Eric Conner

ALTERNATIVE DESIGNS AND SELECTION

Below are three alternative design models: Three Piece Box frame, Two Piece Box
Frame and Single Piece Tubular Frame. Each one of these sketches has identifying locations
of the main hardware (crank, front, forks, and rear axle).

THREE PIECE BOX FRAME

The first concept sketch shown in figure 6 consists of three separate components, the
main frame, and rear fork and seat bracket. This ridge frame design offers a strong support
for the rider, but has two flaws. Since this design is constructed in three separate pieces,
attaching if all the parts need to happen, rather with the use of common material, rivets or
bolts. The two flaws are at the two connection joints, they oppose a problem because
connection points are under extreme stress. Remember this frame will be under compression
and tension from the rider and dynamic loading.

Figure 6: Three Piece Box Frame

TWO PIECE BOX FRAME

The second concept sketch shown in figure 7 is very similar to the Three Piece Box
design, but only has two pieces not three. This design would be stronger than the Three Piece
design due to the fact that once the pices are connect together, there is only one joint that
would have stress localized.

Figure 7: Two Piece Box Frame

10
LOW RACER RECUMBENT BIKE FRAME Eric Conner

SINGLE PIECE TUBE FRAME

The third concept sketch shown in figure 8 is the one that is selected for design. This
design is considered to be the strong since it is constructed using one full piece of material
without seems. This design also is the easiest to produce and in the least amount of time and
handling., which insures structural integrity.

Figure 8: Single Piece Tube Frame

These three concepts were evaluated using a weighted decision matrix using a five-point
scale. The scores range from zero being inadequate to four being excellent. Only the design
criteria that were different between the two concepts were scored using relative weights
taken from the QFD See Appendix C. Table 3 shows the design criteria and the rating
designated to each design by the engineering. The highlighted items are the critical
differences. The Single Piece Tube design score the highest, therefor it will be the design use
and produced.

Table 3: Weight Objective Method

DESIGN WEIGHT TWO PIECE BOX FRAME THREE PIECE BOX FRAME ONE PIECE TUBULAR FRAME
CRITERIA FACTOR SCORE RATING SCORE RATING SCORE RATING
Fit 0.17 4 0.68 4 0.68 4 0.68
Weight 0.13 3 0.39 2 0.26 4 0.52
Size 0.11 4 0.44 4 0.44 4 0.44
Durability 0.11 3 0.33 2 0.22 4 0.44
Ease of Operation 0.1 3 0.3 3 0.3 3 0.3
Efficiency 0.09 4 0.36 4 0.36 4 0.36
Handling 0.08 4 0.32 4 0.32 4 0.32
Safety 0.08 3 0.24 3 0.24 4 0.32
Cost 0.08 3 0.24 3 0.24 4 0.32
Comfort 0.04 4 0.16 4 0.16 4 0.16
1 3.46 3.22 3.86

11
LOW RACER RECUMBENT BIKE FRAME Eric Conner

Although a lot of the design criterion were rated the same, the important differences are
safety, durability, cost and weight. Safety was impacted by the sharp edged that exist in the
box style design, so the design with smooth rounded parts were rated higher. Durability was
impacted by the ability for the bike to stand the riders weight and the dynamic loading
condition, so giving the idea that joint and bond location propose weakness in structure
therefore the single modeled piece was rated higher. Cost and weight was impacted by extra
material that would be needed to combine the piece from the “Three” and “Two” piece
designs, so the Single piece design was rated higher.

12
LOW RACER RECUMBENT BIKE FRAME Eric Conner

CALCULATIONS

LOAD DISTRIBUTION ON PINS

Figure 9 is the profile of the rider in position on the seat. The ride has a total weight of
190 pounds which is loaded on the two brackets of the seat that has a overall rating of 250
pound limit. Instead of including a factor of safety the design calculation will use the
distribution of the 250 pound limit for the seat. The head of the rider is said to weigh 12
pounds, the remaining of the 238pouns is distributed 50/50 for the torso and legs.

Figure 9: Riders Profile and Seat

The load for figure 10 must be found across the two main supports of the entire system,
which is the front and rear wheel. The free bodies diagram in figure 10 shows the force
acting on the system. The two unknowns Z(rear wheel) and W (front wheel) must be found
using the distance and weight distribution of the rider. The loads are W=131lb and Z=119lb.
See appendix G for full calculations.

12” 11” 15” 13”

51”

Figure 10: Load Distribution

W=131lb

Z = 119lb

13
 LOW RACER RECUMBENT BIKE FRAME Eric Conner

CALCULATING FORCE AT FORK ANGLE

Due to the rake angle of the front fork, a new position “R” is required to be calculated.
Figure 11 shows the front wheel with W already defined from the previous calculation, bow
R and M must be found for the fork location.

R
131
M
lb

Figure 11: Front Fork Force

The calculations below show the force load and loading condition for the front fork with
the applied loads. As displayed “R” the fork location has a negative (downward) orientation,
which is opposite of “W” the normal force from eh wheel axle. There is also an “M” moment
at the same location show in positive position but is a negative moment. See appendix G for
full calculations.

R= -131lb

( )

M=-786inlb

14
LOW RACER RECUMBENT BIKE FRAME Eric Conner

CALCULATING FORCE ON SEAT BRACKET

Point P1, P2x and P2y are the only points for which the load is applied. Figure 8 show
the free body diagram that represents the rider’s weight distribution, force from the pedals,
and distance. Appendix G can be viewed for further detail regarding the calculations, free
body diagrams, shear and moment diagrams. There is an addition 60degree force added,
cause by the angle at which the pedal are engaged.P1 is -401.5 lb, P2x is 45 lb and P2y is -
73.55 lb. For full calculation details see Appendix G.

12 lb 119 lb 119 lb 60o

13”

14”
P2y

P1 P2x

Figure 12: Loading on Seat

Figure 13 is the shear and moment diagrams that represent the combination of the load with their point
distances, to achieve the maximum load.

Figure 13: Shear & Moment diagrams

The shear and moment diagrams in figure 13 will be used to identify the point location
on the frame that has the maximum bend moment. These values are used in the next section
along with moment of inertia and radii of the tube for calculating maximum psi.

15
LOW RACER RECUMBENT BIKE FRAME Eric Conner

CALCULATING MAXIMUM STRESS ON FRAME

The location can be found in figure 14. The maximum stress occurs at point P2y from
the calculation; this is the stress due to the bending moment. The equation Mc/I was used to
in calculation were the cross sect of 2inch hollow diameter with a 0.110 inch thickness. See
Appendix G for detailed calculation.

Maximum Stress Location

Figure 14: Maximum Stress Point

( )( )

( )

* 5(carbon fiber strength multiplier)

The Factor of Safety is calculating using the yield strength of Aluminum 6061-T6 this is
because, Aluminum is a homogeneous mixture and the building material used for the frame
(carbon fiber and Kevlar) in not. But one thing that is known is that Carbon fiber yield
strength is five time great that of Aluminum 6061-T6. According MIT (Massachusetts
Institute of Technology) allowable factory of safety for dynamic systems is 4 of greater.

16
LOW RACER RECUMBENT BIKE FRAME Eric Conner

DRAWNING
Figure 15 is the shop drawing of the frame system. It also includes the front and rear
wheels to show the correct profile of the frame. Also included are the front forks and crank
which all these parts were purchase commercially. As for the seat used, it was also
commercially purchased it can be seen in Appendix I (other photos). Refer to Appendix H for
product drawings, which outline the specification of the frame design, dimensions, overall
geometry and build of materials.

Figure 15: Solid Works Drawing

17
LOW RACER RECUMBENT BIKE FRAME Eric Conner

FABRICATION
The fabrication process was down in several steps to ensure that the epoxy has ample
time to cure to its final state. First the mold was created using the solid works model
converted into CNC langue. Figure 16 is the final 3D life size model of the frame.

Figure 16: Frame Mold

The Styrofoam mold is the back bone of the composite material. It allows for easy
application and guidance for laying the first few layers to harden. The image depicts two
separate piece because for two reasons; the first being the soldworks model has the main
frame section in the side plan while the rear attachment is on the top plan. Then the total
finish frame was too big for the CNC machine to handle in one piece. Appendix H gives a
more in-depth idea of the different plans.

18
LOW RACER RECUMBENT BIKE FRAME Eric Conner

Figure 17 is the first stage of composite wrap. The Styrofoam was wrap using fiberglass,
Kevlar and a curing epoxy to harden the composite material. The Kevlar was added in the
first stage to reinforce the point carrying the greatest load.

Figure 17: Stage 1 composite wrap

Once the first stage is cured roughly 7 to 10 days depending on air temperature, the
Styrofoam core was extracted to achieve a light weight frame. Stage 2 can be seen in figure
18, it has a Kevlar composite wrap with an extra reinforcement.

Figure 18: Stage 2 Kevlar wrap

Same as Stage 1, the stage also has to be cured completely taking 7 to 10 days
temperature and humidity dependent. This stage will begin providing the strength needed to
support the rider and the entire dynamic loading. Kevlar has the greatest strength in the
tensile portion or the “bottom half” of the cross-section if the frame was split on the top plan.

19
LOW RACER RECUMBENT BIKE FRAME Eric Conner

The final stage, Stage 3 is the carbon fiber warp. It is composed of 4 layers of 3k (by weight)
2x2 twilled material. This material has the same amount of strength in both MD and CD
direction, reducing weak spots. Figure 19 show the fully completed frame in its proper
profile.

Figure 19: Carbon fiber wrap

20
LOW RACER RECUMBENT BIKE FRAME Eric Conner

SCHEDULING AND BUDGET

ITEMIZATION
Table 4 below is a project schedules so that everything such as design, purchase,
fabrication, assembly, and testing can be seen when they are needed to be taken place.
January 30 thru February 12 is considered to be a design freeze. During this time there will
not be any major changes to the frame design. This built in design freeze helps keeps the
designer on target for getting the project done on time. This is done by forcing the designer to
keep the latest 3D model and move on to the next forecasted task, fabrications. March 20 thru
March 26, is a break were there will be no meetings with respective advisors. During this
time a few things should be happening; most if not all the part should be at the designers
disposal, fabricating the frame should nearly be finished, and the assembly should be taking
place. See Appendix E to view the full itemized schedule.
11/21 - 11/27

12/05 - 12/11

12/12 - 12/18

12/19 - 12/25
11/28- 12/04

12/26 - 1/01

1/09 - 1/15

1/23 - 1/29

2/06 - 2/12

2/20 - 2/26

3/06 - 3/12

3/20 - 3/26

4/03 - 4/09

4/17 - 4/23

5/01 - 5/07

5/22 - 5/28

5/29 - 6/04
1/02-1/08

1/16-1/22

1/30-2/05

2/13-2/19

2/27-3/05

3/13-3/19

3/27-4/02

4/10-4/16

4/24-4/30

5/08-5/14

5/15-5/21
TASK
Proof of design contract 8
8
Concepts sketches 8
8
3D software model design 5
5
Design Calculations 26
26
Part ordering 23
26
Real size 2D print 2
26
3D mold 16
16
Lay Carbon materials Part 1 2
2
Design Freeze 9
9
Lay Carbon materials Part 2 16
16
Lay Carbon material Part 3 30
30
Oral 1 1
1
Report 1 15
15
Assembly and test 27
16
Demo (advisor) 11
20
Demo (ALL) 18
20
Oral 2 25
24
Final report 5
8

Table 4: Itemized Schedule

Table 4 has two dates for each task; the date in line with the task was the original
prediction. As for the actual date the task was achieved, the date below the predicted task.

21
LOW RACER RECUMBENT BIKE FRAME Eric Conner

After the design, fabrication, and part ordering is complete, next comes the assembly of
the components and testing. These seven weeks are critical; a perfect fit of all fabricated part
must fit the parts purchase. The seven week timeline allows for error in part ordering,
therefore reordering of a specific item can be achieved in time to assembly and test. Another
one week buffer is built into the schedule between testing and demonstration the finished
product, so that proper functions are displayed properly.

BUDGET
For this project the purchasing of part is spread out over fifteen weeks, starting during
the holiday break and going thru to March 20. Part ordering is critical when trying to design
some new and improved on a set budget; with this several part companies and be contacted in
order to find the best deals for top quality parts. Table 5 is a forecasted cost for all materials
and may change depending on the generosity of companies when ordering there parts for his
project. See Appendix F for a list of item to be purchased for the frame project.

Table 5: Itemized Budget

Frame Parts Forecast Actual
Cost Cost
Fabric Composite $400 $1,000
Resin $175 $350
Vacuum Pump $150 xxx
Material Kit $75 $75
Pump Line $25 $25
Fiber Glass $100 $100
Foam Core $300 $40
Material
CNC Machining XXX $50

Bike Parts
Double Chan $60 $60
Idler
Idler Hardware $30 $30
Shift Cable $30 $30
Single Chain $40 $40
Idler
Front Wheel Hub $50 $50
Rear Derailleur $50 $50
Chain $40 $40
Sprocket Kit $140 $140
Front Wheel $250 $185
Front Tire $50 $50

22
LOW RACER RECUMBENT BIKE FRAME Eric Conner

Rear Axle Forks $45 XXX

Handle Bar Kit $45 $45

Cassette $50 $50

Front Forks $225 $225
Brake Pads $55 $55
Brake System $70 $70
Front
Brake System $70 $70
Rear
Crank Set $130 $130
Rear Wheel $200 $200
Rear Tire $50 $50

Subtotal $2,905 $3,210

Miscellaneous $435 $350

(15%)

$3,340 $3,560

Table for above has 3 different columns; Items, forecasted cost and actual cost. Due to
unforeseen mishaps such as temperature and time, I went over budget by $220from buying
extra materials i did not budget for and not pricing accordingly.

23
LOW RACER RECUMBENT BIKE FRAME Eric Conner

CONCLUSSION
With the growth of recumbent enthusiast globally, a wider range of improvement and
satisfaction in manufacturing must also grow. With the creation of a new generation of
recumbent bikes suitable for everyone’s style, shape and requirements, cost is plays the key
turning point for which selection is determined. This final product was design of a specific
individual, but can be altered in the manufacturing phase to deliver customer needs and
requirements for a significantly reduce cost. By making high performance recumbent bikes
affordable, the numbers will soon rise opening the doors for greater opportunity.

24
LOW RACER RECUMBENT BIKE FRAME Eric Conner

BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. The First Recumbent Bike? Patent Pending Blog - Patents and the History of Technology.
[Online] February 17, 2005. [Cited: September 26, 2010.]
[Link]
l.
2. Linear Limo LWB Recumbent Bike. Linear. [Online] 2003. [Cited: Septemeber 26, 2010.]
[Link]
3. Recumbent LWB. [Online] [Cited: October 22, 2011.] [Link]
[Link]/[Link].
4. SlowWheel Cycling - Patents and the History of Technology. [Online] May 28, 2006.
[Cited: September 26, 2010.]
[Link]
5. Short Wheelbase Recumbents Are Just Like The Sports Car Of Recumbent Bikes. [Online]
[Cited: September 26, 2010.] [Link]
[Link].
6. Recumbent Bicycle. Recumbent Glossary of Terms and Definitions. [Online] [Cited:
Novemebr 14, 2010.] [Link]
7. check your pulse when your low racer loose! recumbent-bike-thruth-for-you. [Online]
[Cited: September 26, 2010.] [Link]
8. Catrike 700 Recumbent Trike. Bicycle Man. [Online] 1998. [Cited: September 26, 2010.]
[Link]

25
APPENDIX A - RESEARCH

Interview with customer, September 23, 2010

Miguel Jensen Didulo, Recumbent Bike Builder, London, Ontario Canada
Safety
Cheap to build
“X-Seam” perfection
Short wheelbase design
Precision of steering
Aerodynamics at under front bracket
Affordable to purchase

Interview with customer, September 23, 2010

Mike Mowett, Recumbent Bike Racer, Saint Clair Shores, MI
Ability to keep body tight
More effective seat angle
Steering effectiveness
Rear driven equal more power
Chest steering location
Short Wheel base design
Chain loop routing
Safe
Affordable to purchase

[Link] Great seat angle

.com/Buyer%27s%20Guid Sleek design
e/[Link]
9/26/ Recumbent
Tight steering
Trike Perfect steering location
Expensive
Plain
Chain drag

Appendix A1
 [Link] Seat is too upright for
blog/bicycle_technology/page/2/ 9/26/10 maximum blood flow
Early Recumbent Bike
Steering column is
extremely high

Not Aerodynamic

Short Wheelbase design

Maximum power for

outpuy

Here is an early (1949) recumbent bike which is similar to

many recumbent bikes seen on the road today. An even
earlier recumbent was by Jarvis, and the recumbent that set
world speed records was by Charles Mochet. Other bikes
in the Bicycle Technology Category.

Appendix A2
 [Link] Great seat angle
[Link]/Buyer%27s%
20Guide/[Link]
Sleek design
9/26/ Low Racer Tight steering
Perfect steering location
Expensive
Hard to obtain Plain
$4700 Chain drag
Ridged Frame
Carbon fiber dressed
Lightweight
Fast

[Link] One person operation

m/recumbents/catrike/catri
[Link]
Efficient operation
9/26/Catrike 700 Simple to operate
Recumbent Tadpole Hard Cornering
Tricycle Tough Steering
East to learn
Self-standing

Wheels Front 16 " (349)

• Wheel Rear 700c
• Weight 33 Pounds (15.0 Kg)
• Wheel Base 45" (1143mm)
• Wheel Track 27.5” (699mm)
• Total Width 31.5" (800mm)
• Seat Height 7.00 " (178mm)
• Turning Circle 18' 4 " (5.59m)
• Turning Radius 110" (2.78m)
• Gear Inch Range 25” to 130”
• Ground Clearance 2.25” (57mm)

Appendix A3
 [Link] Poor Seat Angle
com/patent_pending_blog/ Bad Steering Location
2005/02/the_first_recum.ht
ml 9/26/05 First Cheap Materials
Recumbent Bike 1902 Short Wheelbase
Good Design
Close/tight handling

An early recumbent bicycle, to J. Jarvis,

1902. Constructed of non-finished metal, which
cause rustiness.

[Link] Too high for a lower racer

ke/[Link] 9/20/10 Rear Wheel Seat angle too high of degree
Drive Recumbent bike. 20 pounds
Steering is too high
Front and rear wheel same size
Control location is poor
Solid piece framing
Properly located idler for chain

 Rides nicely.
 Trail seems right.
 Cockpit position feels right and is comfy.
 Crakes & shifting work well
 Seat and frame seem solid when cranking on it.
 20 pounds

Appendix A4
APPENDIX B - SURVEY
Recumbent Bike Redesign
CUSTOMER SURVEY

The purpose of this survey is to recognize and understand what factors are weighed when designing
a recumbent bike, also to acknowledge the efficiency of the current production models.

How important is each feature to you for the design of a new recumbent bike?
Please circle the appropriate answer. 1 = low importance 5 = high importance AVG
Safety 1 2- (1) 3-(2) 4-(3) 5-(1) N/A 3.85

Durability 1 2 3-(3) 4-(2) 5-(2) N/A 3.86

Fit 1 2 3 4 5-(7) N/A 5.00

Cost 1-(1) 2-(1) 3-(3) 4-(2) 5 N/A 2.86

Comfort 1-(1) 2 3-(4) 4 5 N/A 1.86

Ease of operation 1-(1) 2 3-(1) 4-(3) 5-(2) N/A 3.71

Handling 1-(1) 2-(1) 3-(2) 4-(2) 5(1) N/A 3.14

Size 1 2 3-(3) 4-(2) 5-(2) N/A 3.86

Weight 1-(1) 2 3 4-(1) 5-(5) N/A 4.29

Efficiency 1 2-(1) 3-(1) 4-(3) 5-(2) N/A 3.86

How satisfied are you with the current market recumbent bikes?
Please circle the appropriate answer. 1 = very UNsatisfied 5 = very satisfied AVG
Safety 1 2 3 4-(6) 5-(1) N/A 4.14

Durability 1-(1) 2 3-(1) 4-(5) 5 N/A 3.43

Fit 1 2 3-(4) 4-(2) 5-(1) N/A 3.57

Cost 1-(1) 2-(1) 3 4-(3) 5-(2) N/A 3.57

Comfort 1 2 3-(3) 4-(3) 5-(1) N/A 3.71

Ease of operation 1 2 3-(1) 4-(4) 5-(2) N/A 4.14

Handling 1 2-(2) 3-(1) 4-(3) 5-(1) N/A 3.43

Size 1 2 3-(4) 4-(3) 5 N/A 3.43

Weight 1-(1) 2-(3) 3-(2) 4-(1) 5 N/A 2.43

Efficiency 1 2 3-(4) 4-(1) 5-(2) N/A 3.71

How much are you will to pay for a recumbent bike that meets all of your needs? $1000 - $1500___ AVG
$1500 - $2000___
LOW MODERATE MAXIMUM $2000 - $2500_2__
AVG: $2572 $2860 x > $3000 $2500 - $3000__2_
$3000 - ABOVE_3__
Thank you for your time. a

Appendix B1
APPENDIX C – QFD

Appendix C1
APPENDIX D – PRODUCT OBJECTIVE
Product Objectives
Recumbent Low Racer Fame
The following is a list of product objectives and how they will be obtained or measured
to ensure that the goal of the project was met. The product objectives will focus on the
structural design of the recumbent bike low racer. The bike style is suitable for low traffic
area.

Fit: 14%
2. Each bike is specifically designed for each individual operator at time of purchase regardless of
gender. Nonadjustable.
3. Human factors
- Measure of the rider’s inseam to determine the distance at which the crank will be located
from the rider while seated.
- The distance from rides knee to their ankle to determine the height the crank should be in
relation to the riders crank stroke.
Weight: 14%
2. 25 to 35 pound range

Size: 12%
3.) Will not exceed 80 inches in length
4.) The back rest will not exceed 12inch in width
Durability: 12%
4. Quality materials selected based upon material properties for usage
Use design factor of safety

Efficiency: 10%
3.) Minimize the friction between the chain and frame, by incorporating idlers to guide the chain
links away from other surfaces.
4.) Crank placement determined by power and torque from the seat position

Eases of Operation: 9%
2. The bike is manufactured so that the only operator is the person riding it. There will be no need
for another person’s assistance through the entire operation of riding the bike.

Handling: 9%
1. The bike will have smooth steering, by using bearings and the minimum amount of
clearance between the fork tube and hub. This will reduce rubbing, grinding, and
friction when turning the steering.
Safety: 8%
1. No sharp edges to cause injuries
5. Attached mirrors
6. Manual braking system
7. Ability to place feet down and up without interruptions

Cost: 8%
8. The manufacturing of the entire system cost will range from $2500-$3200.

Comfort: 5%
The seat will be designed to conform specially for the rider contour/body shape and torso length.

Appendix D1
APPENDIX E –SCHEDULE

Appendix E1
APPENDIX F -BUDGET

Appendix G1
 APPENDIX G -CALCULATIONS

12lb 119lb 119lb

12” 11” 15” 13”

”
Z 51”
W
( )( ) (- )( ) ( )( ) ( )( )

( ( )

W=131lb

Z = 119lb

119lb
107lb

9” 11”” 15” 13”

-12lb

-131lb

[Link]

[Link]

[Link]

9” 11” 15” 13”

” Appendix G1
 R
W
M

R= -131lb

( )

M=-786inlb

119lb 119lb 600

12lb
13lb

12” 11” 15” 5” 13” 14”

”
P2x
P1 P2y

( )- ( ) ( )- ( )- ( )( ) ( )( )

( )

( )

Fy = 0=-12lb-73.55lb-119lb+P2-119lb-90sin (60)

401.5lb

Appendix G2
 197lb

78lb

12” 11”” 10” 5” 13” 14”

-12lb

-85.55lb

-204.55lb

12” 11”” 10” 5” 13” 14”

-66lb

--536.5lb

-1597lb

-2582lb

Appendix G3
( )( )

( )

* 5(carbon fiber strength multiplier)

Appendix G4
APPENDIX H - DRAWING

Appendix H1
Appendix H2
Appendix H3