Drafting effects of the third-position cyclist on the second-position cyclist’s power output in a three-man drafting line

The purpose of this study was to determine whether a second-position cyclist benefitted, in terms of decreased power requirement, from the presence of a third-position cyclist. It was hypothesized that the second-position cyclist would experience a decrease in power requirement with the presence of a third-position cyclist compared to the absence of a third-position cyclist, and that this decreased power requirement would be magnified during the faster trials. Twelve trained cyclists served as second-position subjects. Subjects completed 12 total trials each: 2 solo trials at a moderate speed (MS), 2 solo trials at a high speed (HS), 2 MS trials in a 2-cyclist line, 2 HS trials in a 2-cyclist line, 2 MS trials in a 3-cyclist line at, and 2 HS trials in a 3-cyclist line. Significant main effects were observed for speed (p = 0.000), condition (p = 0.001), and speed-condition interaction (p = 0.017). Post hoc analyses revealed significant differences (p \u3c 0.001) in power production between the solo condition and 2-line condition and between the solo condition and the 3-line condition at both speeds; however, there was no significant difference between the 2-line and 3-line conditions (p = 0.216), despite an average power savings of 4.74% more in the 3-line condition. When the HS data for the eight fastest cyclists was compared, the 3-line condition required an average of 26.88 W less (a 9.18% power reduction) than the required power output of the 2-line condition (p \u3c 0.05). Power output reductions within this range of 4.74-9.18% could prove beneficial to performance throughout the course of a long-distance race

Social science at 190 MPH on NASCAR's biggest superspeedways

In aerodynamically intense stock-car races like the Daytona 500, the drivers form into multi-car draft lines to gain extra speed. A driver who does not enter a draft line (slipstream) will lose. Once in a line, a driver must attract a drafting partner in order to break out and try to get further ahead. Thus the effort to win leads to ever-shifting patterns of cooperation and competition among rivals. This provides a curious laboratory for several social science theories: (1) complexity theory, since the racers self-organize into structures that oscillate between order and chaos; (2) social network analysis, since draft lines are line networks whose organization depends on a driver's social capital as well as his human capital; and (3) game theory, since racers face a "prisoner's dilemma" in seeking drafting partners who will not defect and leave them stranded. Perhaps draft lines and related "bump and run" tactics amount to a little-recognized dynamic of everyday life, including in structures evolving on the Internet

The duality of innovation : implications for the role of the university in economic development

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Engineering Systems Division, 2007.Includes bibliographical references (p. 259-269).The university is increasingly seen as an engine of regional economic development. Since the 1980s the university's role has been framed in terms of its contribution to industrial innovation. The conventional wisdom views this contribution as occurring primarily through the technology transfer model. The university, in this way of thinking, must move closer to industry and the marketplace by translating research into deliverables for commercialization. This dissertation challenges the empirical validity of this view. Two case studies of industrial upgrading form the empirical core of this research: the machinery industry in Tampere, Finland and the NASCAR motorsports industry in Charlotte, North Carolina. In each case I analyze the university's role from the ground up using a conceptual framework that views the innovation as a social process that has a dual nature: analytic and interpretive. From an analytic perspective innovation is a problem-solving activity. From an interpretive perspective innovation is an ongoing conversation. I find that in neither case is the university's most important contribution to each industry's upgrading made through the technology transfer model. In Tampere, whose core innovation process is interpretive, the local university creates spaces for interaction and conversation that enable knowledge integration, provides interlocutors for exploratory conversations, and educates engineers.(cont.) In Charlotte, whose innovation process is analytic, the local university plays essentially no role. NASCAR teams rely on business partners for technology transfer and attempts to make the university active in technology transfer for the industry have yet to succeed. The duality of innovation helps to explain the university's role in the Tampere case and its absence in the Charlotte case. I argue that the technology transfer model implicitly assumes that innovation is analytic and thus misses the interpretive side of innovation. The case study findings suggest three things. First, the university has a distinctive ability to make interpretive contributions to industrial innovation. Second, practices emphasized by the technology transfer model, such as patenting and technology commercialization, do not account for the university's interpretive role. Third and finally, too much emphasis on the technology transfer model may put at risk the university's interpretive capabilities and hence its most distinctive contribution to industrial innovation.by Carlos Andrés Martínez Vela.Ph.D