text:
- Still to come, Bryan vs. Reigns. We get another Los Matadores promo before going to commercial.
- We get a replay of Heyman kissing Ryback on the cheek.
Elimination Match: Tensai and Brodus Clay vs. Jack Swagger and Antonio Cesaro vs. The Usos
We go right to the ring and the match begins. The winner of this match will get a future title shot. Real Americans mix it up before it's Uso vs. Clay. Uso with a big shot in the corner. Clay catches him in mid-air and slams Jimmy Uso hard. Clay with another slam. Clay barely hits a backbreaker and drops another splash. Clay tags in Cesaro. The Usos double team Cesaro in their corner. Cesaro fights back and nails a big uppercut. Cesaro suplexes Uso. Tensai tags himself in on Uso. Tensai grabs Cesaro and holds him high for about a minute before slamming him. 2 count by Tensai. Cesaro with an uppercut. Tensai with a right hand. Tensai clotheslines Cesaro to the floor. Tensai and Uso go at it now. Tensai drops Uso and runs over him with a big clothesline. Tensai knocks Swagger off the apron. Tensai drops Uso and covers for 2 but Cesaro, who had tagged himself in, rolls Tensai up and Tons of Funk are eliminated.
Cesaro stays in and goes at it with one of the Usos. They dump Uso out to the floor as we go to commercial.
Back from the break and Swagger is in control of one of the Usos. During the break, Cesaro hit another giant swing. More tags and offense from the Real Americans. Fans start chanting for JBL and then Jerry Lawler. Uso finally tags in as does Swagger. Uso unloads. Cesaro gets sent to the floor. Samoan Drop on Swagger. Uso with the rear splash in the corner for a 2 count as Cesaro made the save. Usos leap out to the floor and take out Swagger and Cesaro. Zeb Colter looks on. Swagger applies the Patriot Lock but Uso rolls through and kicks Swagger away. Uso with a huge kick to the jaw. Uso climbs up top but Cesaro tries to stop him. The other Uso takes out Cesaro. Swagger suplexes Uso from the top but didn't see the Usos tag. Jimmy Uso nails a splash from the top for the win and a future title shot.
Winners and New #1 Contenders: The Usos
- Cole has an update on The Miz - he does not have a broken neck but does have a broken thorax. Dusty Rhodes is being kept overnight at a local hospital.
- Still to come, Bryan vs. Reigns in the main event. We see footage from a reading celebration earlier today at a school in Detroit.
- Back from the break and we get another video from Bray Wyatt and The Wyatt Family. Bray talks about his world. In his world, when one of his animals are sick, he puts them down. We see clips of Bray hitting Sister Abigail on various Superstars. Bray says he's going to put them all down.
- We see footage of what happened to Dusty Rhodes earlier tonight.
- We see Daniel Bryan walking backstage as lots of Superstars cheer him on. Brie Bella stops him and they hug. Bryan heads to the ring as we go back to break.
Roman Reigns vs. Daniel Bryan
Back from the break and The Shield are in the ring. Daniel Bryan is out next to a big pop.
Before the match starts, Orton makes his way out to watch things from ringside. Rollins and Ambrose are also at ringside. The three have a private talk as the match begins. Bryan takes Reigns to the corner with kicks.
Bryan keeps control with kicks. He whips Reigns by his leg and keeps him grounded. Bryan works on the leg until Reigns kicks him off. Bryan with a headbutt and more kicks. Reigns turns it around in the corner now. More back and forth action. Bryan with another takedown and focus on the leg of Roman Reigns. Bryan unloads with forearm shots for a 2 count. Reigns with a huge clothesline to the back of the head. Reigns stomps away now. Bryan turns it around with more offense. He keeps working on the leg and Reigns goes back down. Reigns drops Bryan in the corner and works him over some more. Reigns with a big headbutt and another clothesline in the corner. Reigns nails a suplex and covers for 2. Reigns with another suplex and pin attempt. Reigns with a headlock now. Bryan fights to his feet but Reigns knocks him to the corner. Reigns charges in the corner but misses and gets dropped into the turnbuckle. Bryan with a big kick. Bryan goes to the top and nails a missile dropkick. Reigns ends up on the floor. Bryan runs the ropes and hits a suicide dive but Reigns catches him. Reigns rams Bryan into the apron and then tosses him into the barrier. We go to commercial.
Got a news tip or correction? Send it to us by clicking here.
Short URL: http://winc.cc/mlZFXr
WrestlingInc.com is the largest independently owned wrestling website in the world (Source: Alexa).
Follow us (@WrestlingInc) on Twitter, become a fan on Facebook:
Please see the Comments FAQ and make sure that you agree to our rules before posting.comments powered by Disqus
Funniest WrestleMania Moments, Vince McMahon And Other WWE Stars On St. Patrick's Day, 'Mania Facts
Luke Harper On Vince McMahon And The Bludgeon Brothers, Reaction To Screaming Local Talent, More
ROH Episode 338 Recap: Tenille Dashwood In Action, Flip Gordon Vs. Shane Taylor, Bullet Club Tension
WWE MYC Star In Lingerie MMA Fights, Sasha Banks And Others React To Avengers Trailer, Samoa Joe
WWE Looks At The 10 Best Women's Matches In WWE History (Videos)
Nikki Bella Challenges Ronda Rousey?, Tommaso Ciampa Rips Toys R Us, ESPN - WWE Power Rankings
Ronda Rousey On Upcoming WrestleMania 34 Match, Showing Up To WWE Events Instead Of MMA Fights
Sound Off: How Excited Are You For WrestleMania 34?
WWE WrestleMania Sponsor Says Fabulous Moolah Battle Royal Name Is "Unacceptable"
WWE Changes Name Of Fabulous Moolah Memorial Battle Royal
Backstage News On Two More Title Matches To Be Announced For WrestleMania 34
WWE Announces Location Of WrestleMania 35
Photo: Brian Christopher Badly Beaten After Fight With Chase Stevens In Hotel Room
No Evidence Against Roman Reigns In Jon Bravo Video, Which Wrestlers Were Named
Backstage News On Jeff Hardy And WWE's Ultimate Deletion Match, Reby Hardy Lashes Out Over Jeff?
Cesaro On Being In WWE: "I'm Happy To Be There, But, Then Again, I'm Not Happy To Be There"


text: Your Questions Answered: ALZHEIMER'SDeKOSKY, STEVENNeurology Now: July-August 2006 - Volume 2 - Issue 4 - p 35 Department: Ask the Experts In Brief Author Information Answers on Alzheimer's, stroke, Parkinson's and aneurysm Steven T. DeKosky, M.D., is chairman of the neurology department and director of the Alzheimer's Disease Research Center at the University of Pittsburgh. He is also principal investigator of the multicenter trial to determine effect of Ginkgo biloba in decreasing the incidence of dementia and specifically Alzheimer's. Q Will taking the Ginkgo biloba herbal extract help prevent dementia and specifically Alzheimer's disease? Figure. D A There are theoretical reasons to suspect that Ginkgo biloba might be helpful in preventing–or at least slowing–the development of Alzheimer's disease through the supplement's powerful antioxidant effects. In addition, some animal and cell culture models have suggested that Ginkgo biloba might have some specific effects on one of the proteins, Beta-amyloid, involved in the disease. But we won't know if it is effective in preventing dementia until we have the results of an ongoing 3,000-person clinical trial. That trial, which is sponsored by the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine and the National Institute on Aging at the National Institutes of Health, will be completed in 2008. Several studies have assessed Gingko biloba in dementia or Alzheimer's disease and found variable effects. The most recent large placebo-controlled double-blind study, which tested the supplement for six months in people who had already developed Alzheimer's disease, found that Ginkgo biloba did not have significant effects compared to placebo. A secondary analysis of data from that trial seemed to show that the supplement might improve behavioral symptoms of Alzheimer's, but since the study wasn't originally designed to look at this, more studies would be needed to look at that specific outcome. Even though there's no proof that Ginkgo biloba works, many people take it in hopes that it will be helpful. What we do know is that it probably isn't harmful. It doesn't appear to have interactions with any of the currently prescribed Alzheimer's medications and there don't appear to be any serious side effects.Copyright © 2006, AAN Enterprises, Inc.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
First you'll need to determine if you have been hosted on Emark or Account Support servers. If you were set up with hosting by Visual Aventures before 2010 and haven't been moved (you would have been notified) you are on the Emark servers. If you still don't know or are having problems, just contact us.
Accessing Your Hosting Account
Account Support – To access your hosting account control panel (called Vdeck) visit accountsupport.com and login with your hosting account credentials. These are often the same as your FTP login but are different from your WordPress login.
Emark – To access you hosting account control panel (called cPanel) visit youdomainname.com/cpanel and login with your hosting account credentials. These are often the same as your FTP login but are different from your WordPress login.
What to do when you have a problem
First, contact Visual Adventures at 970.325.3256
If it is an emergency or you have not heard back from Visual Adventures in a timely manner, call hosting support at
Account Support – http://www.accountsupport.com/support/contact.bml
Emark – 866.513.3315 or firstname.lastname@example.com
We are now setting up WordPress sites with a plugin that will back up your site to a directory on your hosting, a dropbox account, an Amazon S3 account, and several other services. Even better, it's automated, so you don't have to do it yourself. Give us a shout if you're interested in this service.
Is Your Site Up to Date?
Every now and again a site gets hacked because the software is not up to date. Give us a shout if you're concerned about this. Normally, the minimum charge of 15 mins. Is all that is required to update your site and plug-ins.
Terms and Conditions:
Account Support – please visit here: http://www.fatcow.com/legal/index.bml
Emark – Right now the terms and conditions page for Visual Adventures' Emark Hosting accounts is down as they are redesigning their website. In short, here's what you should consider:
Visual Adventures and Emark Hosting do not guarantee 100% uptime (no hosting services do)
Do not put illegal things on your site or do illegal things with it. (Note: if you site gets hacked, illegal things may be put on your site and may cause and interruption in service).
Visual Adventures and Emark Hosting do not guarantee site backups. They are usually made, but you should have backups made for your site files yourself. Note: in your cPanel there is a backup wizard.
If you're interested in the full/real list of terms and conditions we will acquire it for you.


text:
What does SCD mean in Aircraft & Aviation?
This page is about the meanings of the acronym/abbreviation/shorthand SCD in the Miscellaneous field in general and in the Aircraft & Aviation terminology in particular.
Side Cargo Door
Usually found on a 747 Freighter or 747 passenger Combi ie: 747-867F/SCD
Find a translation for SCD in other languages:
Select another language:
What does SCD mean?
- Doctor of Science, DS, ScD(noun)
- an honorary degree in science
Discuss this SCD abbreviation with the community:
Use the citation below to add this abbreviation to your bibliography:
"SCD." Abbreviations.com. STANDS4 LLC, 2018. Web. 24 Mar. 2018. <https://www.abbreviations.com/term/1448021>.


text:
DOT chief says garage project is misunderstood
Redeker:: Parking, commute time misinformation at issue
Updated 11:05 pm, Sunday, September 30, 2012
State Transportation Commissioner Jim Redeker says he wants to set the record straight.
He says he understands that commuters are suspicious of the state's plan to hire a private developer to replace the Stamford rail station's deteriorating garage and develop the site.
He acknowledges that fears may be fueled by a similar outcry over the financial details of a public-private partnership that gave a Milford-based company a 35-year deal and most of the profits of the state's 23 highway rest stops in return for an overhaul. Redeker said he hopes efforts to get input from residents of Stamford and nearby towns using the station will help squelch concerns.
"It comes down to can the state DOT be trusted to make the right decision?" Redeker said. --¦ But unlike with the rest stops, these are my daily customers, my taxpayers, and if they feel somehow that we don't care, that's a problem."
Redeker said the project got a harsh reception due to misinformation that the DOT was willing to boost commute times for users to draw interest from developers.
Two impressions provoked much of the controversy: that the DOT had ruled out proposals to maintain commuter parking on the current Station Place site and that parking was likely to be moved a quarter-mile away to accommodate development, Redecker said. The quarter-mile is a maximum distance requested in the proposal, he clarified.
"Our goal is to have the same or a shorter commute time," Redeker said.
After a strong rebuke from Stamford commuters two weeks ago at a hearing and calls for more outreach by the DOT before moving forward, Gov. Dannel P. Malloy announced plans Thursday for a five-member advisory council to provide guidance to the DOT in choosing a potential development project involving the station.
Redeker said a leaflet will be distributed to Stamford commuters to dispel misinformation. He said he wants to clarify the DOT's openness to maintaining parking where it is today and other bullet points, including the DOT's intent to maintain approval of the facility's daily and monthly rates.
Stamford Mayor Michael Pavia said the DOT did not do a good job of explaining the process to residents and commuters and how to provide feedback.
"The state did not distribute the information as completely as it should have and they did not do it clearly," Pavia said.
Redeker said the state's process of choosing a private developer to deliver the work and limit the state's investment is a shift in practice. Previously, the state would first design a project and then seek public input through extensive hearings before doing the work itself or hiring a company to do so.
Under the new review process, the DOT is legally bound to keep the final pool of proposals confidential to shield the ideas of the developers which are considered proprietary, Redeker said.
"This is for the DOT a new thing and is a new thing for the state of Connecticut and really the first public-private-partnership-type deal we're doing on a project like this ... ," Redeker said. --¦ But I want to assure commuters that my goal is that at the ribbon-cutting everyone will say `this is great.' "
Redeker said the state's decision to halt the project in 2008 and pursue a public-private partnership for transit-oriented development at or around the station was motivated by a lack of state tax funds for big infrastructure projects, and an assessment of the cost to design, bid and build the garage itself.
The DOT's analysis concluded a project led by the agency could take more than three years and cost an estimated $60 million, nearly double the currently allocated $35 million, which is considered the maximum amount the state is willing to invest, Redeker said.
"What we concluded then is that for the DOT to do that would take a very long time and not be affordable," Redeker said.
State Rep. William Tong, D-147th district, and state Sen. Carlo Leone, D-Stamford, said they both asked the state to provide a better defined process for commuters to participate in the state's decision-making while understanding the limitations imposed by the public-private contracting process.
"We've made it clear and I got a commitment from the commissioner that he felt the same way -- that the commuters are paramount and a priority," Tong said.
Leone said involving private developers will help finance a plan to address a wider scope of improvements to the station than the state could fund alone, but that local input is necessary to ensure the project is done correctly to accommodate future growth and be in step with the city's vision.
"It's hugely important that we do it right," Leone said. "It has to meet the needs of the commuters and the city, and we have communicated with the commissioner and the DOT that if it doesn't it is a deal-breaker."
Residents can send their opinions on the garage project to email@example.com to be considered by the agency.


text:
b. Nov. 13, 1977, Prescott, Az.
d. Nov. 14, 1977, Prescott, Az.
COD: Respiratory failure
d/o Darrell Lee & Doris Florence (Gilcrease) Excell
Site # U/010/O
Hampton Funeral Home, Prescott, Az.
Burial: Nov. 16, 1977
Mt. View Cemetery records
Contributed on 4/4/05
Record #: 21859
On this site you can upload gravestone photos, locate ancestors and perform genealogy research. If you have a relative buried in Arizona, we encourage you to upload a digital image using our Submit a Photo page. Contributing to this genealogy archive helps family historians and genealogy researchers locate their relatives and complete their family tree.
Submitted: 4/4/05 • Approved: 9/15/13 • Last Updated: 9/15/13 • R21859-G0


text:
The Sun Cluster product is an integrated hardware and software solution that you use to create highly available and scalable services. Sun Cluster Concepts Guide for Solaris OS provides the conceptual information that you need to gain a more complete picture of the Sun Cluster product. Use this book with the entire Sun Cluster documentation set to provide a complete view of the Sun Cluster software.
This chapter provides an overview of the general concepts that underlie the Sun Cluster product.
This chapter does the following:
Provides an introduction and high-level overview of the Sun Cluster software
Describes the several views of the Sun Cluster audience
Identifies key concepts that you need to understand before you use the Sun Cluster software
Maps key concepts to the Sun Cluster documentation that includes procedures and related information
Maps cluster-related tasks to the documentation that contains procedures that you use to complete those tasks
This chapter contains the following sections:
The Sun Cluster environment extends the Solaris Operating System into a cluster operating system. A cluster is a collection of one or more nodes that belong exclusively to that collection. In a cluster that runs on the Solaris 10 OS, a global cluster and a zone cluster are types of clusters.
In a cluster that runs on any version of the Solaris OS that was released before the Solaris 10 OS, a node is a physical machine that contributes to cluster membership and is not a quorum device. In a cluster that runs on the Solaris 10 OS, the concept of a node changes. In this environment, a node is a Solaris zone that is associated with a cluster. In this environment, a Solaris host, or simply host, is one of the following hardware or software configurations that runs the Solaris OS and its own processes:
A "bare metal" physical machine that is not configured with a virtual machine or as a hardware domain
A Sun Logical Domains (LDoms) guest domain
A Sun Logical Domains (LDoms) I/O domain
A hardware domain
These processes communicate with one another to form what looks like (to a network client) a single system that cooperatively provides applications, system resources, and data to users.
In a Solaris 10 environment, a global cluster is a type of cluster that is composed only of one or more global-cluster voting nodes and optionally, zero or more global-cluster non-voting nodes.
A global cluster can optionally also include solaris8, solaris9, lx (Linux), or native brand, non-global zones that are not nodes, but high availability containers (as resources).
A global-cluster voting node is a native brand, global zone in a global cluster that contributes votes to the total number of quorum votes, that is, membership votes in the cluster. This total determines whether the cluster has sufficient votes to continue operating. A global-cluster non-voting node is a native brand, non-global zone in a global cluster that does not contribute votes to the total number of quorum votes, that is, membership votes in the cluster.
In a Solaris 10 environment, a zone cluster is a type of cluster that is composed only of one or more cluster brand, voting nodes. A zone cluster depends on, and therefore requires, a global cluster. A global cluster does not contain a zone cluster. You cannot configure a zone cluster without a global cluster. A zone cluster has, at most, one zone cluster node on a machine.
A zone-cluster node continues to operate only as long as the global-cluster voting node on the same machine continues to operate. If a global-cluster voting node on a machine fails, all zone-cluster nodes on that machine fail as well.
A cluster offers several advantages over traditional single-server systems. These advantages include support for failover and scalable services, capacity for modular growth, and low entry price compared to traditional hardware fault-tolerant systems.
The goals of the Sun Cluster software are:
Reduce or eliminate system downtime because of software or hardware failure
Ensure availability of data and applications to end users, regardless of the kind of failure that would normally take down a single-server system
Increase application throughput by enabling services to scale to additional processors by adding nodes to the cluster
Provide enhanced availability of the system by enabling you to perform maintenance without shutting down the entire cluster
For more information about fault tolerance and high availability, see Making Applications Highly Available With Sun Cluster in Sun Cluster Overview for Solaris OS.
Refer to High Availability FAQs for questions and answers on high availability.
This section describes three different views of the Sun Cluster software and the key concepts and documentation relevant to each view.
These views are typical for the following professionals:
Hardware installation and service personnel
System administrators
Application developers
To hardware service professionals, the Sun Cluster software looks like a collection of off-the-shelf hardware that includes servers, networks, and storage. These components are all cabled together so that every component has a backup and no single point of failure exists.
Hardware service professionals need to understand the following cluster concepts.
Cluster hardware configurations and cabling
Installing and servicing (adding, removing, replacing):
Network interface components (adapters, junctions, cables)
Disk interface cards
Disk arrays
Disk drives
The administrative console and the console access device
Setting up the administrative console and console access device
The following sections contain material relevant to the preceding key concepts:
The Sun Cluster 3.1 - 3.2 Hardware Administration Manual for Solaris OS includes procedures and information that are associated with hardware service concepts.
To the system administrator, the Sun Cluster product is a set of Solaris hosts that share storage devices.
The system administrator sees software that performs specific tasks:
Specialized cluster software that is integrated with Solaris software to monitor the connectivity between Solaris hosts in the cluster
Specialized software that monitors the health of user application programs that are running on the cluster nodes
Volume management software that sets up and administers disks
Specialized cluster software that enables all Solaris hosts to access all storage devices, even those Solaris hosts that are not directly connected to disks
Specialized cluster software that enables files to appear on every Solaris host as though they were locally attached to that Solaris host
System administrators need to understand the following concepts and processes:
The interaction between the hardware and software components
The general flow of how to install and configure the cluster including:
Installing the Solaris Operating System
Installing and configuring Sun Cluster software
Installing and configuring a volume manager
Installing and configuring application software to be cluster ready
Installing and configuring Sun Cluster data service software
Cluster administrative procedures for adding, removing, replacing, and servicing cluster hardware and software components
Configuration modifications to improve performance
The following sections contain material relevant to the preceding key concepts:
The following Sun Cluster documents include procedures and information associated with the system administration concepts:
The Sun Cluster software provides data services for such applications as Oracle, NFS, DNS, Sun Java System Web Server, Apache Web Server (on SPARC based systems), and Sun Java System Directory Server. Data services are created by configuring off-the-shelf applications to run under control of the Sun Cluster software. The Sun Cluster software provides configuration files and management methods that start, stop, and monitor the applications. If you need to create a new failover or scalable service, you can use the Sun Cluster Application Programming Interface (API) and the Data Service Enabling Technologies API (DSET API) to develop the necessary configuration files and management methods that enable its application to run as a data service on the cluster.
Application developers need to understand the following:
The characteristics of their application to determine whether it can be made to run as a failover or scalable data service.
The Sun Cluster API, DSET API, and the "generic" data service. Developers need to determine which tool is most suitable for them to use to write programs or scripts to configure their application for the cluster environment.
The following sections contain material relevant to the preceding key concepts:
The following Sun Cluster documents include procedures and information associated with the application developer concepts:
Sun Cluster Data Services Planning and Administration Guide for Solaris OS
All Sun Cluster software tasks require some conceptual background. The following table provides a high-level view of the tasks and the documentation that describes task steps. The concepts sections in this book describe how the concepts map to these tasks.Table 1–1 Task Map: Mapping User Tasks to Documentation
Install cluster hardware
Sun Cluster 3.1 - 3.2 Hardware Administration Manual for Solaris OS
Install Solaris software on the cluster
SPARC: Install SunTM Management Center software
Install and configure Sun Cluster software
Install and configure volume management software
Sun Cluster Software Installation Guide for Solaris OS
Your volume management documentation
Install and configure Sun Cluster data services
Sun Cluster Data Services Planning and Administration Guide for Solaris OS
Service cluster hardware
Sun Cluster 3.1 - 3.2 Hardware Administration Manual for Solaris OS
Administer Sun Cluster software
Administer volume management software
Sun Cluster System Administration Guide for Solaris OS and your volume management documentation
Administer application software
Your application documentation
Problem identification and suggested user actions
Create a new data service


text:
What can I do with this Major? Major to Career Converter (site registration is required)
Major of the Month Archives
Occupational Outlook Handbook
Vocational Biographies
With this program, you can engage in virtual-shadowing with up to 1,001 professionals to get the inside scoop on as many careers. Login using the information below.User/School Name: ODU Password: panthers
Inside Career Info is a searchable collection of hundreds of candid career reports written by "insiders", successful professionals who are actually doing the job.
Career Zone Match Holland Interest codes with occupations
Dictionary of Occupational Titles O*NET College Board Career Browser (clustered occupations)Job Profiler (read actual profiles of people in many careers)
Career Videos
The first step in career development is increasing self-awareness. By using TypeFocus to identify your strengths and preferences, you will come to understand the underlying logic for making sound career choices. To register for TypeFocus, contact the Career Center. The Career Liftoff Interest Inventory
The Career Liftoff Interest Inventory assesses the interests of individuals and compares them to the interest profiles of various career fields. Based on your interests, Liftoff will identify careers you should investigate further. To register for this assessment, contact the Career Center.
Type Logic
Type Logic is a great resource for additional information on your personality type.
Career Zone (Match Holland Interest codes with occupations)
Career Development Center Erskine Hall, Room 111Ohio Dominican University1216 Sunbury RoadColumbus, Ohio 43219
Phone: (614) 251-4733Fax: (614) firstname.lastname@example.com
Office Hours:
Monday – Friday: 8:30 am - 5:00 pm


text:
I was told by Safelink that once I no longer qualify for my Safelink phone I can transfer the minutes to a regular Tracfone.
Does anyone have any tips to maximize the value of this transfer? Should I wait to the last day or so of my Safelink expiration, or is it safe to do this 30 or so days after the date? I remember TF used to provide some grace period after the date of service expiration to transfer minutes. Thanks.
When SL learns you no longer qualify they remove the automatic minute addition program from your phone and it continues as a regular Tracfone. The phone with the remaining minutes and days remains yours. From then on you do whatever you want with the phone and remaining airtime. They do not want you to return the phone they want you to keep it active by adding paid airtime.
You can upgrade your SL phone at your expense as often as you want while still with SL..


text:
Balancing on bikes
Hallo all, this is my very first SDMB post, woohoo!
Cant beleive no-one has mentioned this yet, but doesnt a bike balance when it's moving on account of the curved profile of the tyres? If the bike leans, the rubber on the outside of the tyre makes contact with the ground, but has a smaller circumference than the middle of the tyre and so pushes the bike vertical once more. Please point out the glaring error that i'm missing, teeming millions, 'cos i can't see it myself.
Welcome to the Straight Dope Message Board, badgerboy, glad to have you with us.
It's helpful when you start a thread if you provide a link to the Staff Report that you are commenting on. It may be obvious today, when that Staff Report is showing on this week's list... but in a few days, when it's buried amongst the hundreds of other Staff Reports, it will be harder to know what you're talking about. So, here's the link to the bicycle balancing staff report.
I'll let Karen answer your question, but I'm not sure why the tire shape would be different if standing or moving? Also, the smaller circumference would tend to push to bicycle away from vertical, wouldn't it? -- once the bike starts to lean, it would lean more, I think. But that's just my wild-arse opinion, early in the morning.
Link fixed, thanks PBear! -- Dex
Last edited by C K Dexter Haven; 07-06-2002 at 07:53 AM.
In the film "HELP!" you might see some Beatles riding on snow bikes with skis where the wheels should be.
No gyroscopic wotnots and doodahs here. But when you're going 20mph it's easier to stay upright than when standing still.
Hi gang,
I'm not a regular here, but just read The Straight Dope daily. I do have considerable experience and knowledge about bikes and riding, and thought I'd throw out a couple of ideas.
The subjects of why bikes balance has two or more components. One is the question of stability, which is a measure of how easy it is to balance the bike. A second is the question of why or how the bike and the rider manage to keep balanced on those two places where the tire contacts the ground.
For stability, the gyroscopic forces do help. Anyone can take a simple wheel and roll it along the ground, and observe that when it starts to lean left, it also turns left, thereby bringing its point of contact with the ground back underneath its center of gravity. It's widely observed that a bike with big heavy tires is more stable than a bike with very light racing tires.
As reported, trail also improves stability. This has been known by framebuilders for years. Racing bikes are designed to have less trail, producing quicker and more responsive handling. Touring bikes are designed with more trail for greater stability.
The ultimate question of how a bike balances is really quite simple. First, the question has to be re-worded "how does a rider balance a bike". The next step is to consider what it means to balance. In this case, it means to keep the center of gravity of the bike and rider located directly above the patches of tire that contact the ground.
So far, this is pretty obvious. The less obvious part is that the rider can't just move the center of gravity around (or at least not easily). It's much easier to move the tire contact patches underneath the center of gravity, and this is what is done when you steer the bike. When you start leaning to the right, you turn the front wheel to the right, and it then moves to the right. This brings the contact patches back under your center of gravity, and you are (briefly) balanced again. Of course, the job is never done, and you have to continually make small corrections to stay up.
As proof of this concept, just go to a bike track (a.k.a. velodrome), and watch the races. In one version of track races, the two riders want to force the other rider to go first for the early stage of the race. The race can evolve into a contest of who can go slowest, and the racers can end up performing "track stands" for minutes at a time. A track stand is a matter of pedaling forward and backward with the front wheel turned at an angle, and keeping the tire contact patches under their center of gravity. Track stands require practice to perfect, but do prove that gyroscopic forces and specific bike frame geometry are not required to balance a bike.
Steve Kurt
I was intrigued by the stuff in the column about the odd research bikes. The link provided showed only one odd-looking bike, with no explanation for what appeared to be a tire made of Danish pastry. I'd like to see the one with contra-rotating anti-gyros, and I'd like to see the unridable bike. The good professor apparently did a lot of work, and I wonder if the university makes it available.
"You know what they say about sleeping dogs; you can't trust 'em." --Oliver Faltz
Read the Report with interest. (BTW, the link Dex supplied above actually points to the Jackal article; some admin type might wanna fix it.) But, although I candidly confess to only a high school physics education, I have spent a lot of time in pedals. With some trepidation, then, Im going to venture to disagree with even the corrected analysis.
First, as KL acknowledges, the gyroscopic effect has little to do with balance. A conclusion proven, IMHO, by something mush simpler than Professor Kleins counter-gyroscoped bike. Bear in mind that a bicycle can be kept balanced at extremely slow speeds, i.e., just barely moving. (Whereas standing on pedals, i.e., balancing a nonmoving bike, is a skill mostly limited to racers and messengers.) Obviously, some other factor is at work.
On the other hand, I dont think trailing is the answer. It explains a different kind of stability than that originally raised, viz, Why is it easier to balance on a moving bike than a non-moving one? Trailing has nothing to do with this. Rather, it explains why a freely-pivoting front wheel stays true to the line of travel instead of wobbling all over the place. Indeed, so stable that an experienced rider (say, ten years old) can ride hands free. But not, and maybe this is what KL had in mind, until traveling at a fairly good clip, i.e., somewhat faster than that needed to stay balanced with hands on.
So, what does keep a bike up? I dont know what to call it, but the only thing with which I can think to compare this (better analogies welcome) is balancing a broomstick on a finger tip. Holding your hand still, its practically impossible, yet a fairly simple trick if youre allowed to move. And takes only a small amount of movement, all within a circle, say, six inches across.
That, I would submit, is why a moving bike is easier to balance, and why it doesnt need to be moving very fast. What youre doing, as Steve says, is getting and keeping the tires contact points under the center of gravity. Necessarily a dynamic process and therefore one which (for all but the most expert riders) requires movement.
Nor need this be forward movement. That arises only because of the freewheel nature of conventional drive trains, which permit bikes to coast without pedaling. By contrast, non-freewheeling bikes, e.g., stunt bikes and some racers, indeed can be balanced in place, i.e., by moving a few inches forward-and-back, just like the broomstick.
PBear, your explanation of why it's easier to balance a moving bike than a nonmoving bike is not an explanation at all. Just saying that it's a "dynamic process" and "requires movement" doesn't explain anything. Here is my stab at it:
Balancing the bike, as pointed out earlier, is an exercise in keeping the contact patch directly below the center of gravity (I'll point out how this is an oversimplification later, but it suffices for now). This involves moving the contact patch side-to-side (since the contact patch is long enough front-to-back that you don't have to worry about falling over in those directions). When a bike is moving quickly, you can make a very small adjustment to the handlebars and have the wheels move sideways relative to the CG very quickly. This is demonstrated by those stationary trainers that let your front wheel float freely on rollers, and you stay balanced by letting it track side-to-side as you turn the handlebars slightly. (example: http://www.graberproducts.com/cache/373/373.GIF)
The slower the bike is moving, the longer these corrections take, and the more care it takes to balance. Once you reach a lower bound in speed, it's easier to completely change your approach and use a "trackstand" method of balancing, which involves keeping the wheel turned to one side and going forward and backward to move the front wheel from side to side. (as an aside, you can do this even with a freewheel bike if you know what you're doing. If you have even a very small bump to use to oppose forward motion, you can use it to go backwards and keep your balance, and even on perfectly flat ground, I can "bounce" off my brakes to go backwards if I really work at getting the timing right. You do look like a complete dork doing this at a stoplight, though )
As for the "keep the contact patch under the center of gravity" oversimplification, you're really trying to put it where gravity and inertia are trying to push you. When you're riding in a straight line, the right place to put the contact patch is directly below the CG, but when you're turning, you want your contact patch to move towards the outside of the turn, so you don't fall over due to inertia (picture a plumb bob dangling from the end of your handlebar -- it'll point in the direction you want the contact patch to be in relation to the CG).
Which leads me to the real reason trail is good: If you have positive trail, as bikes do, turning the handlebars to the right moves the contact point of the front wheel to the left, which makes the bike behave as if you're leaning, and counters your forward inertia which is soon to be slightly-to-the-left inertia. Think about a bike with negative trail, and you can see that by turning the handlebars to the right, you're moving the contact patch to the right too, which works against you and makes you fall to the left.
I've never spent a minute in a physics class, but here's a way to experience negative trail on most bikes. Turn the handle bars backwards and ride it. I used to do it all the time when I was a kid. It works best on bikes with coaster brakes, as there's no front brake caliper to hit the forks and interfer with turning the handle bars. Maybe I've had a few too many kick balls to the head, but it seems to me that someone wasted a lot of time "designing" a bike with negative trail.
1) Trail has nothing to do with the balancing of a bicycle. This is obvious because trail does not increase with velocity, yet stability does. If trail were the answer any bicycle with trail would be as easy to balance when stationary as when moving.
The draisene (grandfather of the bicycle) had fixed wheels on both ends; it had no trail yet it was stable. Trail does not add stability _per_se_ but it does minimize the adverse effect that steering inputs otherwise would have on that stability.
2) You cant cancel gyroscopic force. Not unless you can revoke Newtons first law. Gyroscopic effect is inertia that is forced to move in a circle. And it has a plane, not a direction. Adding a second spinning wheel cannot and will not cancel the force of the first. In fact, if the planes of spin are coincidental or parallel, the effect will be compounded, regardless of the direction of the spinning.
Consider a tandem-rotor helicopter such as the CH-47 Chinook. If the second spinning wheel trick were effective, the gyroscopic force of each rotor (yes, they counter-rotate) would cancel that of the other. Helicopters are like Frisbees® in that the primary mechanism of their stability is the gyroscopic effect imparted by spinning. And since tandem and twin-rotor helicopters do fly quite handily, the forces obviously _do_not_ cancel.
3) The track stand incorporates torque and torsion and a number of other dynamic factors in combination to offset the loss of gyroscopic stability, none of which disproves the efficacy of -- or need for -- gyroscopic force.
4) The Beatles skis were about as wide as a gymnasts balance beam. No extraordinary dynamics are necessary, just normal human balance.
Åãî Èìïåðñêîå Âåëè÷åñòâî
Öàðü Ðîññèè
His Imperial Majesry
Aleksandr Nikolaevich
Czar of Riussia
Its centrifugal force
Bicycles make it easy to convert forward motion into centrifugal force.
When your balance tells you that you and the bike are falling left, for example, you turn the front wheel left to correct. This puts the path of your wheel of your bike on a wide left arc. All of yours and the bike's mass (centered roughly around waist level), wants to continue moving straight. The resulting centrifugal force "twists" the top of the bike back upright.
Or another way, you could call it simple inertia. The wheels and their contact with the ground move the bottom of the bike left, and inertia makes the rest of the bike go straight (which effectively is to the right, relative to the wheels)
Blessed be those who go around in circles, for they shall be known as Big Wheels.
A dual-rotor helicopter does not, in fact, have any gyroscopic forces acting on it. The primary mechanism of a helicopter's stability is that the thing providing lift is above the center of gravity of the vehicle. A helicopter doesn't flip over for the same reason that a suitcase doesn't flip over when you're holding it by the handle.
Certainly, the gyroscopic effect does contribute, and it helps, but it's hardly the most important effect, as experiments prove.
I don't believe that trail is wholly responsible for keeping you up, but it is a big factor affecting the stability of your bike. Trail gives the bike a self-correcting property which helps you stay up, and without it, you certainly would not be able to ride hands-free.
If you were to put two giant flywheels on opposite ends of a steel bar, spinning in opposite directions, and then rotate the entire mess around an axis perpendicular to the steel bar, the system as a whole would not resist rotation, but the two flywheels' gyroscopic forces would try to bend the bar.
No, Galt, Im afraid it is your logic that is faulty. In fact, it is self-defeating. Trail is not a dynamic property, so what physics is at play that causes its effect to be greater at speed?
Answer? None, because trail does not create stability, at rest or at any speed.
But were getting off into the weeds here by mingling separate phenomena and separate dynamic principles. What initially keeps a bicycle upright is another matter from what allows the rider to change its direction without destroying that equilibrium.
If you roll a car tire down a hill, will it not remain upright until it runs out of steam? Of course it will, and completely without the benefit of trail (well, okay, it does have a little trail on account of the incline). Thats a demonstration of gyroscopic stability. And that is what tends to keep the bicycle upright.
The gyroscopic force of the wheel increases with speed. And as speed increases the rider's handlebar inputs decrease. This happens in part because the rider's input is dampened by the greater stability of the faster-spinning wheel -- the same force nets a smaller displacement of the wheel and in part because he doesnt want road rash. The radical inputs you make when youre slow and squirrely would toss you on your keester at 40 m.p.h. It's the same trail but the gyroscopic forces and the stability both have increased.
And as I already noted, the draisene was stable but completely without trail. It had no steering mechanism so it didnt need it. The need for trail only arose when steering was incorporated into the design.
Rake and trail dont directly add stability; they serve to minimize the loss that otherwise would occur when you turn the front wheel (I know I wasnt supposed to mention rake but I have a bicycle with a trailing-axle fork that refuses to be ridden hands-off). This is an entirely separate phenomenon from that which keeps you upright in the first place.
As for the track stand, what force do you suppose your leg is applying to the frame of your bicycle while you have your foot atop the front wheel? Its called torque. It doesnt matter whether its applied by the front brake or backpressure on a fixed gearset or your foot or a log or the banking of a velodrome, torque is torque. And the torque causes flexing in your frame, fork, headset and wheels. This is called torsion.
Chronos, you are correct that the fuselage of a helicopter is essentially a pendulum dangling beneath a rotorhead, but there always is a net effect from the spinning rotors. All helicopters tend to drift in flight in reaction to all those forces. Its called translating tendency and is compensated for by mast tilt, control rigging and pilot input. The pilot instinctively nulls it out in forward flight but, at a hover, it is more noticable.
But the magic is in the flying part, and thats the rotating wing, a.k.a. the rotor. The rotor does the flying and the fuselage is just along for the ride (mostly). The rotor system must have oodles and oodles of gyroscopic stability because thats all that keeps it from slicing and dicing the fuselage and all its occupants. In fact, if its r.p.m. is permitted to decay excessively, the rotor can lose enough of its coning to allow it to contact the fuselage, usually with disastrous consequences. In the mid-1980s there was a spate of mishaps with Robinson R-22s chopping off their own tail rotors because the pilot let r.p.m. bleed off, then pitched the nose up.
My point is that in any helicopter the gyroscopic forces created by the rotor system are indispensable. No helicopter can fly without them. Period. And some helicopters use identical, counter-rotating, concentrically mounted rotors. Those helicopters simply could not fly if the gyroscopic forces cancelled out.
And a bicycle has to have its gyroscopes. Is not the First Law of Cycling "wheels that don't roll, fall down?" But if you want to steer it, you gotta have trail.
His Imperial Majesty
Aleksandr Nikolaevich
Czar of Russia
So far you've failed to back up anything you've said, and it sounds like you want to just wave your hands and throw out terms like "dynamic property" without defining them and mumble about torque and torsion and hope we buy it. I don't.
CzarNicholas, there is ample evidence to suggest that gyroscopic forces are not necessary for balancing a bicycle. A Razor scooter has far less gyroscopic force than a regular bicycle, yet it is no more difficult to balance. And as someone mentioned, ice bikes with no front wheels are not hard to balance.
Which is not to say that gyroscopic forces don't play any role in bicycle dynamics. It does improve stability. I believe the counter-rotating wheel bike could not be ridden hands-off. And small wheeled bikes tend to be twitchy and difficult to ride hands-off, at least in my experience.
As for the gyroscopic forces on helicopter blades, read the replies again carefully. There are gyroscopic forces on each rotor, but on a two-rotor helicopter the gyroscopic forces on one rotor cancles that of the other. Besides, it's centrifugal force that keeps the rotor in shape, not gyroscopic.
I just have to chime in here.
A bicycle in motion is balanced primarily by the rider's input to the handlebars. If the rider presses forward on the right bar (counter-clockwise torque), the front wheel is steered to the left forcing the bottom of the tires to the left. There is nothing to force the rest of the bike and rider to the left so inertia causes them to go straight. With the majority of the bike and rider going straight and the contact patches of the tires going left the bike has no choice but to lean to the right. To restore balance, the tires must be brought back to their position under the bike. This is accomplished with rearward pressure on the right bar (clockwise torque). This is an on-going, dynamic process.
When a bike with positive trail is leaned to the right, gravity applies clockwise torque, which, if the bike is moving, tends to restore balance. The greater the trail, the greater the clockwise torque - increased stability. Because of this effect of trail it is possible to ride no-handed by shifting one's body weight.
In executing a turn on a bike, a rider initiates the turn by applying torque to the steering (handlebars) in a direction opposite the direction of the turn. This causes the bike to lean in the direction of the turn. Throughout the turn torque is constantly applied to the steering by a combination of trail's effect and rider input. Finishing the turn entails applying torque to the steering in the direction of the turn to bring the tires back under the bike.
During the turning the vector sum of gravity and inertia (centrifugal force) must pass through the contact patches of the tires or the bike will spin out or high-side depending on the direction of error.
Does anyone have any numbers on the torques and accelerations involved? I calculate the angular momentum of a rolling bicycle at less than 3 Nms, and I don't see how conserving that tiny angular momentum is going to compensate for the wobbling of a 100 kg rider.
Nametag is my hero - chorpler
Let Nametag henceforth be known as the subjunctive king! - trupa
Galt, I'm sorry if you're put off by the technical jargon. It's an unintended consequence from 20 years as a military and commercial aviator.
By the way, I tried your experiment. I held my bicycle straight up, then tilted it a little. And sure enough, the wheel turned, just like you said. Then I let go.
Darndest thing, would you believe it fell over? I can't figure why, shouldn't the trail have saved it?
Then I picked it up and pushed it. It rolled straight and true for a few feet, slowed a bit, began turning left, and then fell over again. So what dynamics is at work that allows trail to function at speed but diminishes as the bicycle slows? I'm so confused!
If you still dont get it, let Professor Bloomfield explain it to you:
As for ruts, they dont change the laws of physics. In my experience, a rider who looses control in ruts does so because he fails to steer straight down them. He turns the front wheel causing the tire to contact the walls of the rut, slowing the wheels rotation and diminishing gyroscopic stability. Not to mention that the knobbie now wants to climb up the side of the rut, wresting control from the rider.
As for the track stand, I have seen track riders come to a complete stop no back-and-forth for several seconds. I have seen MTBers remain absolutely motionless for the better part of a minute (fat tires simplify the matter). They might twitch the handlebars, and they might shift their weight about, but the tires remain fixed to the same location on the ground. Oh, and you can find information elsewhere on the Internet stating that on 25 November, 1977, one David Steed kept a bicycle upright and stationary for 9 hours and 15 minutes. Stationary. Motionless. Without rolling. Which sort of refutes the contention that rolling is at all necessary.
As for the link you provided, it refers to sum angular momentum of the system, also known as gyroscopic precession. Although precession always occurs with it, it is not synonymous with the basic gyroscopic force.
Considered as a system, when an outside force is applied to any spinning gyroscope, the change manifests itself 90 degrees in the direction of rotation. This is gyroscopic precession, a.k.a. sum angular momentum. This is why a bicycle wheel feels like its twisting funny if you hold it between your hands and have someone spin it up, then try to turn it. It isn't turning in the direction in which you pushed, but another 90 degrees around in the direction of rotation. This is also why a top falls over in a gradually decaying spiral when it looses its momentum (before it hits the ground).
If you mount two wheels on the same axle and spin them in oppsite directions, it is the gyroscopic precession that cancels. Precession is directional because the input was directional. Gyroscopic force _is_not_ directional; it acts in a plane and cannot be cancelled.
And, by the way, any definition of torque will include some phrase akin to twisting force. Sitting on your bicycle _does_not_ apply torque until you start turning something.
Chronos, youre looking at my finger and not at the moon. I mentioned coning of rotor blades because it is part and parcel to the physics that is necessary to preventing the rotor from doing a veg-a-matic routine on the fuselage. You cant create centrifugal force without also creating gyroscopic force; they both are manifestations of inertia being forced to travel in a circle. Like gyroscopic force and gyroscopic precesion, they are joined at the hip.
This is lapsing into a long-winded aerodynamics lecture, but here goes. All winged aircraft owe their stability to a relative equilibrium of aerodynamic forces. Consider a simple airplane flying straight and level. What makes it turn, for instance, is causing one wing to generate more lift than the other. This tilts the vertical component of lift, disrupting the equilibrium that existed when you were straight and level. The weight that had been in direct opposition to lift now needs a counterbalance. Equilibrium is restored when the airplane turns, its now-angular lift component balanced by an equally-angular centrifugal force.
A helicopter has wings too, they just happen to rotate. Although pilots sometimes refer to it as a rotor disk, it obviously is not a disk. Neither do these wings create lift in some magical, uniform disk-shape; they obey the same physics as airplane wings and only create lift directly above each individual rotor.
All aircraft -- airplanes, gliders, helicopters, gyrocopters, balloons, blimps, dirigibles, zeppelins, hang gliders, parasails and parachutes alike (with the exceptions of military fighters and aerobatic airplanes) -- are designed to seek this equilibrium. With the particular exceptions noted, positive dynamic stability is a good thing.
Particularly at a hover a helicopter has little aerodynamic equilibrium apart from that created by the big fan on top. In a manner of speaking, the fuselage is borrowing its stability from that generated by the rotor system. In forward flight it gets considerable slipstreaming but even then it still is just tagging along with that oh-so-stable rotor system.
You probably have seen amphibious helicopters, usually with pontoons mounted on the skids. Have you noticed that you never see one shut down the engine(s) while on the water? They cant. Or start it either. The dynamic forces generated by the slow-turning rotors would cause them to rock so hard theyd tip over.
All helicopters rock about when starting or stopping their rotors, particularly those with 2-bladed rotor systems (Hueys, Cobras, Jet Rangers, etc.). But when the rotors are up to speed they create a gyroscopic force that resists that wobbling and, in resisting, (somewhat) dampens it. And the wobbling is violent enough that it could capsize any amphibious helicopter (including the enormous Chinook).
Land-based helicopters arent immune to this transitory imbalance, either. Some helicopters such as the Hughes/Schweitzer 269 & 300 -- suspend their skids from shock absorber-like devices known as an Oleo struts. As their rotors are being engaged, these shock absorbers can amplify the rotor-induced rocking in a harmonic phenomenon known as ground resonance. If allowed to proceed unchecked, ground resonance will shake the aircraft apart before the rotor reaches operational speed. The pilots one consolation is that when the rotor blades come loose, hell be safe in the eye of the hurricane.
The pilot relies on that gyroscope for bigger reasons, too. He counts on it being a nice, stable flying disk that he can, through manipulation of aerodynamic forces, cause to change velocity and direction. Fortunately for him, because of its gyroscopic force, it wants to remain horizontal, just like a well-thrown Frisbee®.
All gyroscopes resist change; that is their fundamental property (and the reason they are an essential component in guidance systems). The helicopter pilot uses to his advantage the fact that his rotor system -- owing to gyroscopic forces -- wants remain horizontal.
If the rotor system did not have its own nominal "steady state," the whole wretched aircraft would be uncontrollable. And that goes for Chinooks and Kamans and Kamovs with their counter-rotating rotor systems as well. In fact, their rotor systems, like those of all large helicopters, have such a powerful gyroscopic force that the pilot requires hydraulically-boosted controls to be able to budge it.
Sure, a helicopter can fly without gyroscopic force. So can a Frisbee®. Oh, sorry, thats not called flying, its called FALLING.
I apologize for the helicopter tirade but the issue at hand was gyroscopes, and I can think of no more powerful a gyroscope on earth than the spinning rotor system on a CH-53.
Razor blades and ski bikes? Youve left out roller blades and slalom water skis and ice skates and the Beatles skiing chairs. These devices keep the user so close to the ground that no extraordinary dynamics is required; the normal human sense of balance does the trick. The moment arm from the ground to the bottom or the users feet is very short. And the moment arm to the users center of gravity is, in comparison, extremely long. Not that far from the forces present when youre walking, actually.
His Imperial Majesty
Aleksandr Nikolaevich
Czar of Russia
If you don't know a subject, there's no shame in admitting that you don't know it, and allowing yourself to be educated. Pretending that you know it and making up a bunch of jargon will never get you very far, especially not on a board like this one.
you've hit on a great idea! We need to build a bicycle with a fixed front fork - unsteerable and see if CzarNicholas can ride it.
High-wire performers do it. Of course they need a twenty-foot pole to keep their balance - but then they are not royalty.
Skates and roller blades are different. On those, the user is free to lift a foot and put it down anywhere. Balance is achieved by placing the contact point carefully below the center of gravity. Or more precicely, the average position of the contact points is below the center of gravity. On a bicycle, you can't lift a wheel and put it down in a different spot. The only way to move the contact point is to turn the handlebar, and let the forward motion move the front wheel to the side. The trail makes this action semi-automatic. So you see why trail works better at higher speeds.
Good news. It turns out David Jones article, The Stability of the Bicycle, Physics Today (1970) is available online c/o Joel Fajans, UC Berkeley. Unfortunately, its only pdf of a scan, and not a great scan at that, but better than nothing. Easier to read, I found, when printed out (as opposed to trying to read onscreen). Also, be warned it's a big download (almost 9 MB)
FWIW, in the course of my travels, I came across many articles on the subject, of which these were (for me, at least) the most informative:
An Introduction to Bicycle Geometry and Handling, Karl Anderson (emphasizing side-to-side corrections, but also giving significant weight to trail)
Ask Lou, Physics Central and How Things Work, Louis Bloomfield (slightly different articles, to the same general effect; both emphasize trail, but give weight to side-to-sode corrections)
Exploratoreum (San Francisco) (discussion of Balancing and Steering starts about halfway down the page; continues here) (emphasizing side-to-side corrections)
Forces and Balance in a Bicycle (emphasizing side-to-side corrections)
Balancing a Bike, Herb Weiner (emphasizing trail)
rec.bicycles FAQ, especially 9.35 on gyroscopic forces (debunked); see also 9.15 (discussing, among other things, turns) and 9.16 (trackstands)
How you steer a bicycle, Joel Fajans (good discussion of countersteering); see also Physics & Bicycling
PhysLink.com, Matthew Allen (emphasizing gyroscopic effect, but not discussing Jones)
why make it difficult?
Hi folks,
this is actually my 2nd post. The first time this was addressed i got so frustrated at Lingle's response, i had to get in here and post. I see i was ignored the first time, so i thought i'd write again. Oh, i'm not mad or anything, it's just that it seems everyone seems to take this much farther than it should be. A moving bike balances easier because the rider can readily and precisely move the contact patch from, and to, either side of the center of gravity (CG), causing the bike to fall sideways and turn (i think we all agree it turns by leaning). The only way to move the CG on a stationary bike is to pick it up and move it. Not very easy.
Hey Staubej. Its not a matter of making it difficult. It is a difficult puzzle. The center-of-gravity theory, which you may note I expressed myself above, explains only part of the story. Mind, I think/agree its the part most directly relevant to the original moving/nonmoving bicycle question. For that matter, it was the starting point of Jones article. But, as he demonstrated there and others have argued here, theres a lot more to overall bicycle stability. Which I, at least, find even more interesting than the original question. But, you know, to each his/her own.
BTW, staubej, I did a search for your prior post and couldn't find it. Only your simultaneous almost-identical post (also referring to an earlier post) in the motorcycle thread. Are you sure it was this board? Or did you perhaps change user name?
Hi PBear,
i too, searched for my other post, w/o any success. It was months ago when this question was first raised and Lingle went into a diatribe about gyroscopic effects. I would agree there is more going on w/ stability, but i was mearly commenting on getting the thing to turn. Thanks for reading!
Folks, here's what NASA has to say on the matter:
"Any rotating wheel or body tends to stay in its plane of rotation (due to Newton's laws). That is why a bicycle stops wobbling when you get up speed and why a spinning top stays upright. The spinning bicycle wheel or top gives stability to the system."
Makes you wonder how they ever managed to put a man on the moon, don't it.
His Imperial Majesty
Aleksandr Nikolaevich
Czar of Russia
CzarNick: The NASA statement is correct, but note that it emphasizes speed. Even at moderate to slow speeds, gyroscopism contributes, just not enough to greatly affect the much larger mass of the rider. Nor, of course, does NASA purport to be giving an explanation of all aspects of bicycle stability. It's merely illuminating (actually, suggesting that teachers illuminate) an abstract physics principle by reference to something to which kids can relate in their everyday experience.
Staubej: No worries. Was just puzzled. Now that I think about it, I think I've seen references to lost threads due to a board crash, though I wasn't here at the time. Maybe that's the explanation.
Yeah, there were a couple months worth of stuff (everything from Dec. 9th to whenever the board crash was in February) that is lost for good. The first thread on the first bicycle stability column was part of that.
As for the bicycling stuff, I'm just amused to see someone attempting to lecture Chronos on elementary mechanics. It's especially amusing because the "lecture" come to completely incorrect conclusions.
For example, the track stand is accomplished not by any torsion applied to the frame, but by keeping the contact patches under the center of gravity. Notice how in a track stand, the front wheel is generally turned to the side? That's because the goal is to be able to move the contact patches from side to side, to counteract the movement of the center of gravity.
Ever tried to ride a bike as slow as possible? You end up steering from side to side rapidly to try to keep the contact patches under you. If I ride my bike in a light snow, I can see the path that the bike follows, and it tends to gently wander a couple inches from side to side. Why is this? Because as I inadvertantly lean a little bit to the side, the front wheel moves slightly towards that side. This puts the contact patches back under me. I can't say that I've ever tried going out to where the trolley tracks run in the middle of the road and riding in the groove, but I doubt that it would be possible.
CzarNicholas, you stated:
>>>As for ruts, they dont change the laws of physics. In my experience, a rider who looses control in ruts does so because he fails to steer straight down them. He turns the front wheel causing the tire to contact the walls of the rut, slowing the wheels rotation and diminishing gyroscopic stability. Not to mention that the knobbie now wants to climb up the side of the rut, wresting control from the rider.>>>
I disagree. Clear your mind and consider this: A bicycle rider who loses control in a rut does so because he has lost control of lateral movement of the bicycle beneath his center of gravity. Gyroscopic effect has nothing at all to do with balance on a bycycle. With both wheels in a rut, I will crash and you will crash. Think about how a unicyclist maintains balance while stationary. It is accomplished by short forward-and-backward movements of the wheel, which affords front-to-back and lateral adjustments of the unicycle beneath the center of gravity. A bicyclist doesn't have to worry about front-to-back stability because the two tires provide that stability. Look here:
Erm, similar thing with balancing on a skateboard. :-p
CzarNicholas said:
Also regarding gyroscopic force, you appear to be saying what everyone else is calling gyroscopic force is really gyroscopic procession, and then state there is a completely different force that is gyroscopic force. Your description of gyroscopic force appears to be centripetal force, but then you state that they are not the same thing. So what is gyroscopic force?
Re: Balancing on bikes
the main balancer on a moving bike is matching speed with the corresponding lean and handle bar turn. those three variables all must be in harmony. gyroscopic force does not help you stay balanced.... it is a small force that must be dealt with by the three previously mentioned variables, but does not contribute to an easier way to balance.
the faster the bike goes, the more control a rider has in his small handlebar turns and leans. control meaning, each turn of the handle bars of a given measure will do more *work* on the system, as speed increases.
starting at equilibrium going 100 mph..... if you lean with a force of 5 ft-lbs (which is how any fall will begin..... with a lean), you will be able to counteract this force easier, with a handlebar twist, than at 50 mph, because the tire is coming into contact with twice as much road.... this extra speed and road contact makes each handlebar twist more meaningful to the bikes' previous counteractions. each lean/twist produces more G's the faster and faster you go, which creates a lower center of gravity of the system, (majority of mass (your body) is at top of bike, but the more G's exerted, the more this "topheaviness" is lessened).
so any lean at a higher speed will result in a more stable, "self-equalizing" system. (when counteracted with either a speed change or handle bar turn obviously)
to summarize: the imperfection that makes you fall to one side or other is a lean. at 0mph the lean is devastating because there is no way to draw center of gravity to bottom point of tire. at 100 mph you are able to counteract the lean with a G force change, drawing the center of gravity back to the bottom of the tire. the easiest way to do this is to speed up so that you are pulling more G's, so that as far as the system is concerned, your COG is right were it should be.
at 0 mph, if you lean, you will fall unless someone pushes on the top of your head straight into the center of the bike & rider. this would smash the bike into the ground so that you wouldn't fall, which is same thing as pulling some G's around a corner.
Fuel, reasonable description, but would be better using realistic speeds.
Bindlestiff said:
Well, I am not to bright in the physic's department, I am however the nephew of a ex-pro motorcycle rider. I asked him how the guys on the street bikes lean into turns and not fall over and how they stand the motorcycles back up. He told me that they have to pull it down into the turns and then control how fast the bikes stand up. It explains why you see guys get thrown off the bikes when exiting a turn. If anyone can help explain how and why this works and the connection between this and the initial question
|Thread Tools
|Display Modes
Linear Mode


text:
Arizona State University, Tempe: Nicholas Fornwalt, South Portland; Zach Chamberlin, Gorham.
Saint Joseph's College of Maine, Standish: Matthew Barlion, Auburn; Maryanne Bear, Gorham; Joseph Murphy, Poland; Katie Walsh, Casco.
Saint Michael's College, Colchester, Vt.: James Coolidge, Poland, cum laude; James Coolidge, Windham, cum laude; Andrew Marshall, Kittery; Courtney Seavey, Old Orchard Beach.
Advanced Degrees
Saint Joseph's College of Maine, Standish: The following students graduated in December with a Master of Business Administration degree: Stephanie Briggs, Limerick; Daniel Cobb, Gray; Richard Garcia, New Gloucester; Donald Hebert, Kennebunk; Sarah Mehlhorn, Limerick; Lacy McMoarn, Biddeford; Catherine Palleschi of Gorham.
St. Lawrence University, Canton, N.Y.: Casey Hart of Portland has been elected to Beta Beta Beta national biological honorary society.
Susquehanna University, Selinsgrove, Pa.: Kayla Bibeau of Freeport was named to the 2014 edition of Who's Who Among Students in American Universities and Colleges.
College for ME-Androscoggin announced that Michael Roy of Lewiston, University of Maine Augusta, and Joshua Shea of Auburn, University of Southern Maine's Lewiston-Auburn College, were named recipients of the First Class Scholarships for adult students, age 25 or older.


text:
This week's Highlight Zone Play of the Week comes from North Side's 85-44 sectional semi-final win over East Noble. In the third quarter Tre Crews throws up an alley-oop to Mike Davis who throws it down with two hands.
January 31, 2014: Homestead's Caleb Swanigan hits a buzzer-beating three to help the Spartans beat DeKalb.
February 7, 2014: Marion's James Blackmon Jr. beats the buzzer with a three in a win over Blackhawk Christian.
February 14, 2014: East Nobles Kourtney Edwards feeds Kaven Edwards for the lay-up.
February 21, 2014: Snider's Tre'Von Covington throws down a two-handed jam in a win over Homestead.
February 28, 2014: Marion's James Blackmon Jr. moves into 10th place in Indiana High School basketball history in career scoring.


text:
Daetwyler to strengthen its Technical Components Division management
The Board of Daetwyler Holding Inc. has appointed Dr. Markus Heusser as the new head of the Technical Components Division and a member of the Executive Management. He will take up his new position at the beginning of August 2010.
Until the end of 2009, Markus Heusser (43) headed Sulzer's Metco Thermal Spray division, the market leader in thermal coatings, generating some CHF 400 million in revenue, employing 800 people and offering more than 50,000 products. Today, Markus Heusser works directly for Sulzer's CEO, coordinating the Group-wide restructuring programme and leading major acquisition projects. Before joining Sulzer, Markus Heusser worked as a consultant and integration manager with McKinsey&Co for about seven years. Markus Heusser is a Swiss national and holds an MBA from the University of St. Gallen and a doctor's degree in finance from the University of Fribourg.
This new appointment to the management of the Technical Components Division was prompted by the acquisitions of ELFA in spring 2008 and Reichelt at the beginning of 2010. Together with the previous companies, Maagtechnic and Distrelec, Daetwyler has four strong, well positioned brands in specialist and catalogue distribution across Europe. Daetwyler is seeking to exploit the existing growth potential by realising strategic synergies in purchasing, product management, catalogue production and market development activities.
For this challenging position, Markus Heusser brings significant experience in strategy development, integration projects and the distribution of complex product ranges, making him the ideal person to complement and strengthen the Daetwyler Group's Executive Management.
Dätwyler Holding AG
The Daetwyler Group is an international multi-niche player dedicated to industrial component supply and distribution of engineering and electronic components. Its activities concentrate on attractive niches that offer opportunities to increase value added and sustain profitable growth. The Group's four divisions - Cables, Rubber, Pharmaceutical Packaging and Technical Components - are focused on the manufacturing, pharmaceutical and datacom industries. With more than 40 operating companies, sales in over 80 countries and some 4,500 employees, the Daetwyler Group generates approximately CHF 1,200 million in revenue. Daetwyler has been listed on the main board of the SIX Swiss Exchange since 1986 (security number 3048677).


text:
THE EXECUTIVE'S NEW COACH Believe it or not, he (or often she) can help cure those little behavioral defects you suffer from and make you a better manager. Smart companies pay the bill gladly.
(FORTUNE Magazine) – I HATE MEMOS. My people know that. If a deal didn't go through, tell me face to face. Even when I get good news in a memo, I'm inclined to yell. I know I shouldn't. So I got a gadget, a mechanical daisy with sunglasses and guitar that sits in a glass and oscillates with the volume of my voice. It tells me when I'm yelling. Also, I instructed my secretary to hold up a stop sign when I'm screaming at someone. Like a recovering alcoholic, I take it one day at a time. Patience, patience. Tolerance, tolerance. A 49-year-old banker
Like a growing number of managers, this recovering screamer is under the care of an executive coach. A decade ago that title belonged mostly to people who helped the boss pick a hairstyle or deliver a speech without notes. No longer. In the stressful 1990s, a coach is an outside counselor assigned to improve an executive's managerial skills and straighten out his personality disorder, not his wardrobe. The coaching business is thriving at American Express, AT&T, Citibank, Colgate, Levi Strauss, Northern Telecom, Procter & Gamble, and many other major companies.
Who needs an executive coach? Where do you find the right one? How much do they cost? Can he or she -- women are well represented in this field -- really alter behavior? Or is this a voguish sham? This new brand of coaching is grounded in and fueled by the empowerment movement, that vastly popular drive to tap creative energy throughout a corporation. In one indication of their new power, employees at a growing number of U.S. companies are being asked by top management what they think of their bosses' strengths and weaknesses. This bottom-up assessment of performance then factors into a manager's job evaluation. Already, a majority of the companies atop FORTUNE's annual Most Admired list conduct such upward evaluations (see box). In its most elaborate form, the process is called 360-degree feedback. The executive in the center is reviewed by a full circle -- superiors, subordinates, peers, and customers, both outsiders and those within the corporation who use his goods and services. The reasoning is simple: If managers are battering and terrifying the talent around and beneath them, they're likely to be wounding the bottom line. Enter the coaches. It's difficult to estimate how many there are. Some large management consulting firms offer coaching as part of their broader services. Many coaches are single practitioners. Some wear three-piece suits and pass through corporate corridors as unnoticed as purchasing agents on a visit. Others favor tweeds and plaids and have the warm and furry look of college psychology professors. Fees range from $1,500 for a single day (which is never enough) to $100,000 or more for a coaching program that lasts several years. Think of those who are coached as players. A player may be anyone from a $60,000-a-year middle manager up to the CEO, although more commonly that person will be a leading contender for the CEO's job. What players lack is not technical ability but the skill to lead and get along with others. Most players fall into one of two categories. The first is usually a white man in his late 40s who has soared because he's an outstanding engineer or has mystical intuition about coming reversals in exchange rates. He has recently been promoted to a position where he has authority over people not like himself, folks in marketing perhaps or communications. ''The only management style he knows is how to shout orders and take names,'' observes Alicia Whitaker, director of global career planning for Colgate. ''He makes people feel like idiots for coming to him with a question or suggestion.'' He finishes people's sentences for them, refuses to listen, and castigates not only his own subordinates but also those of peers, so that people in other departments refuse to work with his people. The second category is typically a woman, not necessarily white, about a decade younger than the male archetype. Her brilliance and dedication to the job have catapulted her through the lower ranks. Now, however, she must work with equally talented peers, and she hasn't mastered the complex game of competition and cooperation played at her new managerial level. She sees male chauvinism everywhere; some is real, some imagined. She isolates herself and her section from the rest of the company. Holly Regier, a senior consultant at Lee Hecht Harrison, best known for its outplacement services, describes a first encounter with one such player: ''There was a negative aura about her. She was curled up in her chair, her lower lip curled too. I had the sense of meeting a porcupine in heat.'' Regier became her coach, not to find her a new job outside the company but to help her keep her current one. Why doesn't the employer simply fire such handicapped players? With corporations everywhere thinning managerial ranks, there is no shortage of potential replacements. Usually the player who gets coaching is a very valuable talent with unique technical expertise. Also, much of the corporate managerial system itself is troubled these days, so sending in a substitute does not necessarily solve the problem. Many middle-aged white males were raised in a corporate structure as rigid and hierarchical as the Marine Corps. Some coaches don't belong in the game. Understanding business culture in general and the folkways of a player's company in particular are critical. Robert Mintz, director of human resources for Time Inc. Magazines (of which FORTUNE is one), interviewed 25 psychiatrists and psychologists as potential coaches and found them all ''clueless,'' stuck with a 1950s image of how corporations work.
Hiring a bad coach could even be dangerous. Sure, the player may be aware that others consider him a bit autocratic. But when a coach presents him with a pile of interviews demonstrating that his colleagues, friends, and family are unanimous -- he's a despot -- the effect can be devastating. ''Confronting this for the first time is like a parachute jump,'' says G.P. Alexander, a coach at the Center for Creative Leadership in Greensboro, North Carolina. To avoid broken egos, he and his colleagues carefully highlight for the plummeting player all the positive things people have to say about him. How to find the right coach? Players almost never do the hiring. The program begins when a superior, perhaps one as commanding as the CEO or the board of directors, tells human resources to find someone to civilize the general counsel before the entire legal department walks out the door. HR must make a couple of fundamental decisions, including whether the coach should operate covertly or in the open. The argument for secrecy is that the player may consider the order to see a coach so embarrassing that he won't want colleagues to know about it. ''It is still unacceptable for senior people to be seen as needy,'' observes Colgate's Whitaker. ''Help of this kind is regarded as something for psychotics -- which it is not -- or maybe something spouses need because the company has moved them around the country so much.'' But by operating in the open, the coach can interview subordinates, peers, and superiors to collect more detail on the player's style. There is an additional, subtler reason for openness. Image generally lags behind reality. So even after the beast in the general counsel has been tamed, associates might continue to think of him as a monster. Says Dr. Leonard M. Moss, a New York City psychiatrist and coach: ''By interviewing potential mutineers around the general counsel you reassure them the company is dealing with the problem, and they see themselves as part of the solution.'' As a consultant to Mobil Oil for more than 20 years, Moss is one psychiatrist who knows corporate culture well. Some coaches are simple behaviorists, others deep analysts, and most somewhere in between. The behaviorist wants to stop the player from screaming at the office, without investigating where the screams originated -- say, with a mother who habitually locked the player in the closet when he was 13. ''We don't have a right to ask executives to bare their souls,'' argues psychologist Ellen Hart, a vice president of Gemini Consulting. About 250 of Gemini's senior consultants often function as coaches while helping corporate clients with major overhauls. ''It's a company's right to fix you as a manager, but not as a person.'' Analysts often want to know about mothers and closets and much more. Moss, one of them, bristles at Hart's dismissal of psychoanalysis in the workplace. ''Do you think you can cure someone who is seriously disturbed simply by pointing out to him he's disturbed?'' Moss asks. ''Unless you deal with the roots he will go right back to the same behavior.'' How do coaches put theory and technique into practice on the playing field of business? Meet four who represent a range of the good coaching available, beginning with the least intrusive and least expensive and ending with the most probing and priciest.
THE LINE COACH In his New York City office, H. Peter deLisser crouches into the three-point stance of the interior lineman to act out his metaphor. ''The two sets of skills that I teach managers are listening and talking, which are like blocking and tackling,'' says de Lisser, 64, who for 13 years was a college football coach. His academic credentials are first-rate, a bachelor's degree from Williams College and a master's in English from Middlebury. But unlike the others on this list, he has no advanced degree in psychology. His approach is behaviorist. He does not explore why a manager is a bully, any more than a football coach puzzles over what childhood trauma made his linebacker a little too ferocious. The linebacker's late hits bring penalties, so the coach trains the costly behavior away. Similiarly, deLisser focuses on the symptoms that spurred human resources to bring him onto the case. Generally it's that the manager doesn't know how to communicate. ''Not 5% of the executives in this country know how to listen,'' says deLisser. ''And when they talk they are telling somebody else 'I'm the boss' or 'I'm smarter than you are' or 'I'm angry.' '' To teach the skill of balanced conversation, deLisser forces his player to drill, drill, drill. He charges $2,500 for four sessions of two hours each. ''When you block you keep your head up, your feet underneath you, and your toes pointed forward,'' says deLisser. ''In conversation you pay attention to the other person's words, facial expression, and tone of voice.'' Here is one of deLisser's drills for the executive who won't listen: The coach and the player under instruction have a two-way conversation. When it's the player's turn to talk, he must pick up a word from the last sentence the coach uttered and use it in a declarative sentence of his own. The coach must | then use a word from the player's last sentence, and so on, as the dialogue rolls forward. It's impossible to play the game without concentrating on what the other person is saying. DeLisser instructs the player to keep practicing with a friend.
THE CLAIRVOYANT Dee A. Soder, 46, sizes up players so fast she often awes them with her powers. When Ken Dubuque was a junior officer at Mellon Bank, Soder invited him to take a couple of quick personality tests. ''Among other things, she told me that if I collected books they would be arranged not only by subject but by size as well,'' says Dubuque. ''I was astonished. She was absolutely right.'' Dubuque, now an executive vice president, came to realize that he would get along better with fellow bankers if he were less of a perfectionist. Soder coaches secretly. She believes the player's colleagues can add nothing she can't figure out for herself. ''If you ask associates about the client, you get a picture that is filtered through the eyes of people with biases,'' she maintains. Soder begins her $10,000 reform program by asking the player to send his or her autobiography as well as a forecast of what the future will bring. Then she calls the player into her New York City office for half a day of exams. On one written test she allows the player ten minutes to answer such queries as: ''Most people won't work unless they are pressed to do so. True or false?'' Simultaneously, she tries to distract the subject so that he'll worry he's running out of time. ''I do vaguely annoying things like asking him whether he'd like a cup of coffee,'' says Soder. If he gets flustered and irritated, he's rigid. If he takes distraction in stride, he's flexible. Soder shows the player a photograph of two men and three women in conversation on a plane. Two of the women could be executives. The third is a flight attendant. ''I ask what the women are talking about,'' says Soder. ''If he ignores the flight attendant, he probably has a status problem.'' After analyzing the results over a weekend, Soder brings the coachee in for three two-hour sessions in which they work out strategies for defeating his or her handicap. He is instructed to keep a diary recording when he lost his temper. What were the circumstances? When a player controls an outburst, he should reward himself with a new tie or theater tickets. Soder remains available for years afterward for refresher courses and phone calls to give spot advice and boost player morale. As I was leaving her office after our first interview, Soder politely advised me that I might not be CEO material. ''You were sitting down when I met you in the waiting room,'' she explained. ''A person looks more authoritative standing. Also, a CEO doesn't expect to be kept waiting long enough to take a seat.'' She's a quick study.
THE JUMP SCHOOL In leafy woods on the outskirts of Greensboro spreads the Center for Creative Leadership, an attractive fieldstone and glass retreat far from urban corporate bustle. The center's many projects include Apex, the Awareness Program for Executive Excellence, operated by psychologists G.P. Alexander, 55, and Randall White, 41. Apex is intense and analytical. ''This is easy for people who are introspective and like root canal,'' quips White. It is also expensive: $35,000 for the program and perhaps another $10,000 for travel. At those prices companies rarely send anyone but executives making $200,000 a year or more. In Apex's half dozen years, about 75 executives have gone through the program. Coaches Alexander and White first travel to the player's workplace, where they interview not only him but his family and as many as 20 colleagues as well. A player may be a touch resentful that the CEO or perhaps the board of directors questions his leadership skills. White is reassuring. ''We provide private swimming lessons for Olympic-class swimmers,'' he explains. The company is paying Apex big fees only because the executive is highly esteemed. After the coaches have collected their interviews, the player flies to the center for a two-day session. Coaches and player plunge into the data and such questions as: Why is he uncomfortable in large groups? Why is he so rigid? Why does he humiliate subordinates? Says Alexander: ''Very existential issues start to come up. Some clients talk about how they have so few friends, how they wake up at 3 A.M. and wonder what they've done with their lives.'' Coaches and player winnow the list of defects down to the four or five that most need changing: failure to delegate, failure to listen, and so forth. ''If the client tries to change too much, he'll be overwhelmed,'' says Alexander. Back at the office the player picks a local coach, someone from human resources perhaps, to make sure he sticks to the reform program. Apex keeps track of the client's progress for at least two years.
THE SUBMARINE For the ultimate in deep analysis, coaching's equivalent of the three-man submarine Alvin that takes long voyages exploring the ocean floor, call KRW International. The initials represent the last names of the three principals: Fred Kiel, based in Minneapolis; Eric Rimmer in Sussex, England; and Kathryn Williams in Winston-Salem, North Carolina. Over 2 1/2 months, KRW interviews the player in three sessions of two hours apiece; up to 30 subordinates, peers, and superiors for 1 1/2 hours each; and 15 or so friends and family members, including parents and children, for 1 1/2 hours each. Children under 12 are excused. Clearly, this scrutiny is intended only for the top level, an executive vice president, say, who is the leading candidate to succeed the CEO in three years. He may be so irascible and demanding, however, that the rest of the senior staff might quit on the news of his elevation. How much does a KRW makeover cost? ''We don't publish our prices,'' says Williams. ''But we're cheaper than looking for a CEO outside the company.'' Headhunters commonly charge one-third of a recruited executive's total cash compensation for the first year. Williams is cerebral and animated, and she talks too fast, as her own executive coach has pointed out to her. She elaborates on her points with allusions to psychoanalyst Erich Fromm's Escape From Freedom and other scholarly sources, and although she does so without affectation, she might seem overbearing to players uncertain of their intellectual breadth. Once KRW has collected a foot-high stack of interviews, coaches and player -- and sometimes the player's spouse -- retire to a retreat for three days and pore over the report. The impact can be overpowering. One player cried when he read that his 85-year-old father said he loved him but had never been able to express his feelings. Another traced his troubles to a physically debilitating childhood illness. He compensated by studying relentlessly and making himself the smartest kid anywhere. But he has carried through life a compulsion to make others feel stupid. ''Out of the 50 people who have gone through the program, only two basically said they won't change,'' says Williams. The other 48 have, with their coaches, created a plan to transform themselves. The smartest kid, for example, concluded he would rise higher as an executive who develops people than as one who puts them down. His aides are instructed to signal him when they see a relapse coming on. KRW stays in close touch, calling some players as often as twice a month over a year and a half. The coaches also ask subordinates and peers about the player's progress from time to time. IN ALL THE PROGRAMS, from deLisser's drills to Williams's deep probes, strong and consistent follow-up is essential. Colleagues around the player have to act as assistant coaches. But even with that reinforcement, can coaching really alter behavior permanently? Humans resist change, and that includes not just the players but those around them too. Change, Williams points out, is uncomfortable and destabilizing, and it transforms all kinds of relationships. Subordinates who may have wanted more autonomy are often equivocal about taking more reponsibility and blame. When a crisis strikes, everyone tends to revert to his or her old behavior, victim as well as tormentor. Some players fear that coaching will emasculate them. A frequent question for Apex coaches is ''You're not going to take my edge off, are you?'' It's a reasonable worry. A senior vice president can wonder why he should take a chance on doing things differently. The totality of what he is has brought him a long way. Yes, but probably no further. And that's part of what makes coaching work. Players are almost always ambitious as well as disciplined and highly energized, qualities that lifted them to the level where their shortcomings became obvious. Says Williams: ''When they turn all that horsepower toward changing themselves, the results are phenomenal.'' Even modest improvements can justify hiring a coach. Says Jerome Abarbanel, vice president of executive resources for Citibank: ''An investment of $30,000 or so in an executive who has responsibility for tens of millions of dollars is a rounding error. Coaching is a success if one subordinate who was too intimidated to speak before comes up with a good idea.'' Some human resources directors have come to think that all executives should be assigned coaches when they are promoted to new levels of responsibility, whether they clearly need it or not. There's a case for that. As companies shrink, they demand more effort, inspiration, and versatility from everyone who remains, down to the novices and apprentices. An executive who obstructs that creativity, innocently or not, ought to get coached -- or get out.
% -- You finish the boss's sentences (and everyone else's for that matter). -- Your colleagues' people refuse to work with your people. -- You're being bypassed for assignments and don't know why. -- You throw a morale-building party, and your subordinates fail to show up.


text:
Karen felt his hand rest on the centre of her back, guiding her towards the terminal exit. She shuddered slightly, unsure as to whether she wanted him there or not. This was foolish, of course she wanted him. But she didn't want the 'him' of the past few years, the slightly distant stranger she wasn't sure she knew. She wanted Harry, her Harry. Her mind slowly wandered back to Valentines' Day, nearly twenty years ago. She had been sitting in a hot, stuffy lecture theatre at University, young, carefree and innocent, delighted that the drone of the professors voice was coming to a close.
"Any questions?" he had asked. The room was silent for a moment, then a tall, skinny figure rose from his seat, scraped back his long, floppy dark hair and cleared his throat.
"I just wanted to ask Karen Taylor whether she wanted to have dinner with me tonight." He said, very simply. A murmur of voices echoed around the room. Karen blushed a dark crimson and giggled childishly. She looked across to the other side of the room where he still stood. He smiled at her, absorbing her into his deep brown eyes. She managed to compose herself enough to squeak "That would be lovely, thank you." Before sinking down in her seat out of view of the hundreds of people clearly staring at her.
She shivered again, how was it that then he could melt her with a glance? Now, she couldn't bear for him to touch her coat. No. She knew exactly why she didn't want him to touch her. Because he had touched her…Mia. She couldn't stomach the thought of what he had done to her.
The truth was of course, she didn't know. She hadn't dared ask what had happened. She still didn't know what the necklace had meant. She didn't want it to have been sex or even love and a necklace. She hadn't asked. She didn't want to know. No. She didn't want to know if he had had sex with her. What she wanted was for Harry to tell her that he hadn't, that he loved only his wife, that he was sorry, and for him to sweep her off her feet. She wanted to melt in his gaze again. But, she couldn't.
She pulled the car onto the drive and heard him sigh beside her.
"Home again." He said. Looking across at her, she avoided his gaze. Instead going into 'mummy mode' and directing Daisy and Bernie towards the house, dealing with coats, hats, scarves, mittens, and boots in the porch.
She had successfully avoided the conversation about the necklace after Christmas and between New Year. She had kept herself busy until he left for New York on the 2nd January. Now, however, he was back and the question and the tension couldn't stay floating in the air for much longer.