Voir la source de WHPVA Proposals

=='''Proposals and Ongoing Business'''==

'''This page lists outstanding proposals and items of IHPVA business. In order to have a reliable record, only users with sysop privileges can edit it. If you want to make a comment or suggest an item for inclusion, please use the "discussion" tab at the top of the page. Alternatively, send an e-mail to: <chair (jabberwocky!) @whpva.org> ((remove '(jabberwocky!)' )).

----

====Proposal for Changing Qualification for IHPVA Membership  and  Nominations for IHPVA Chair====
Status: Open for discussion

To: IHPVA Board<br>
From: Richard Ballantine, Chair<br>
1 December 2005<br>

Dear Friends -

The year 2005 has seen exciting developments and changes for the IHPVA. I am pleased with the progress we have made and thank you very much for the energy and time you have given the IHPVA. I hope that before year end we can deal with two issues.

'''I. Proposal to change membership qualification in the IHPVA.'''

IHPVA members are identified as national organisations. The British Human Power Club represents Britain, the NVHPV the Netherlands, and so on. This method has several problems.

1. Some countries have several HPV organisations. Differences may be by type of activity (flying, hand-cycles), or by region, or interest (racing, touring, utility), or nature! It is neither fair nor practical for only one organisation in each country to have IHPVA membership. 

2. The IHPVA has eleven members. We should welcome new members. However, new HPV organisations are usually too small to qualify as a national organisation. Think of how your HPV group began. The start was probably very small.

I have membership queries from Russia, Brazil, Korea, and Canada, among others. In each case, the groups are dynamic and intensely involved with HPVs, but are small. It is not fair nor sensible to make a group of 25 to 50 people in a large country such as Russia or Brazil the only IHPVA-recognised organisation for the whole country.
	
3. The IHPVA has no regulations or procedures which apply to national organisations. We do not tell national organisations what to do. IHPVA rules are about requirements and conditions for international performance records and competitions. There is not a word about the definition of a national organisation. 

I would like the IHPVA Board to change the basis of membership in the IHPVA, so that all HPV organisations, large or small, have the opportunity to join the IHPVA. Instead of limiting membership to one organisation per country, we could offer membership to all human power groups actively using and promoting HPVs and human power through events, newsletters, web sites, and publications. I suggest that such groups should have a minimum of 25 members.

Each IHPVA member group would have a vote proportional to the number of individual members. This is in accord with the structure suggested when the IHPVA was reorganised in 1998. As well, I suggest that new members should have a trial period during which they are associate members, before becoming full members with voting rights. This will give new members time to learn and benefit from the experience of existing groups.

Change must involve some risk. For example, my own British Human Power Club, while very active, is not especially large. HPV organisations in countries such as Russia or even Korea could well grow larger, and have more voting power.

The most important thing is for the IHPVA to grow! Our job and mission is to promote the development and use of human power. The better we do this, the better and happier we will be. 

Here is my proposal:

'''Membership in the IHPVA shall be open to any organisation active in the use and promotion of human-powered vehicles, with 25 or more members.<br>
1. Admission to membership is by decision of the IHPVA Board.<br>
2. New members are associate members with limited voting rights for one year, and thereafter are full members.<br>
3. Members must provide a representative to the IHPVA Board.<br>

The above needs the addition of more details about registering the number of individual members within a member organisation, and about voting procedures. However, for discussion and eventual voting, I would like us to concentrate on the main issues. Do we agree that a change in membership qualification would be good? Do we like the proposal to open membership in the IHPVA to any organisation active in the use and promotion of human-powered vehicles, with 25 or more members? If so, we can refine the wording of the proposal and the details of the conditions.

I look forward to your comments!


'''II. Election of Chair'''<br>
The end of 2005 is the end of my third term as chair of the IHPVA. I think it is time for a change. I would like to offer myself as vice-chair for the IHPVA. This way, I can be a help for the new chair, and be in a position to follow through on the good work we have accomplished so far.

Who do you like as a possible new chair for the IHPVA? 

My best to all of you,

Richard Ballantine


====Proposal for a Separate HPV Velodrome Hour Record====
Proposed by Richard Ballantine, 17 June 2005<br>
Status: Status: Passed 6 October 2005

I propose that the IHPVA recognise a separate velodrome hour record for HPVs. Here is my thinking.

To stimulate general public interest in the technology and performance of HPVs we need an event which is readily accessible, inexpensive, and repeatable.

Many countries have velodromes. These venues are already surveyed and marked for distances, and have timing equipment operated by professional technicians. There are no problems with wind, rain, or daylight. A qualified observer must verify that a record attempt rider stays within the appropriate marked sections of track, but otherwise, there is little administration and no expense for the IHPVA. Riders and teams making record attempts are on a pay-as-you-go basis with velodrome officials, the same as conventional cyclists. 

I would not expect velodrome record speeds to be as high as those set by the best streamliners on fast circular courses, such as automobile test tracks. In fact, I imagine that running a really fast streamliner on a velodrome would be very stressful for the rider; the lap times would be extremely quick.

The beauty of a HPV velodrome hour record, especially for the general public, is that it gives direct comparison with the performances of UCI-legal 'safety bikes'. The straight-line 200-metre sprint speeds attained by top HPV streamliners are astonishing, but have little relevance to everyday cycling and sport. 

Another beauty is: if someone in, say, Canada, sets a new HPV velodrome hour record, then a person in, say, Brazil, can challenge the record without having to travel thousands of miles at great expense in order to do so. There is also something very important: communication. Riders and teams have a direct link with each other.  

Yet another plus — assuming the IHPVA approves recognition for a Restricted HPV Class (which seems hopeful) — is that lots of people can make record attempts. As ever, rider performance will be important, but so will design and technology. Winning is very much a case of rider AND machine.

I discussed the idea of a HPV velodrome hour record with HPV manufacturers at Zandvoort, and they love it. As we all understand, HPV manufacturers are small firms and cannot promise to put up big prizes. Nevertheless, if the HPV velodrome hour event becomes popular, I would hope to develop sponsorship from manufacturers, and suppliers of components, accessories, and services. 

The IHPVA needs new events and new ideas to stimulate interest in HPVs. I have talked to many riders and builders about the HPV velodrome hour record, and they all like it — a lot! The event is a natural . . . I believe that if we create this opportunity, we will see record attempts made all over the world.

I am an optimist by nature. But the way to test new ideas is to try them! I hope you will share my enthusiasm and drive for moving the IHPVA in new directions, and support the proposal to recognise a separate HPV velodrome hour record.

Best wishes,

Richard Ballantine


=====Comment by Marc Tauss=====

Would be nice to make different record category for different size of
velodrome... For example, the 166 m of Geneva velodrome is much slower than
the 250 meter of Köln or Bordeaux... The angle of Bordeaux is around 37
degrees while Geneva is almost 50 degrees... There are nomally for wooden
velodrome 166, 200, 250 meter then 333 meter and 500 meter normally rather
in hardtop.

Regards !

Marc TAUSS - Switzerland

=====By Richard Ballantine=====

Marc's suggestion makes sense. The idea is to give each rider and machine an equal opportunity. If velodrome length and surface is a significant factor in speed, then we should take this into account.

=====By Bill Gaines=====
I agree that this make sense to recognize Velodrome efforts.  These venues are different than top speed sites & are generally will be more accessible.

Length is only one factor.  Older tracks have less slope, and while they may set a record early on, they will be "outclassed" in short order.
The newest tracks are designed for speeds that are lower than what our vehicles are capable of. As far back as the 1982 event in Carson, riders remarked that they were having to "turn in" quite a bit to stay on the track.

Bill Gaines
o\_oo+       o-\_oo+      <o-\_oo+)      O\-o+

=====Jean-Charles Gosselin=====

Sorry but I don't follow you in this complicated way of setting plenty of
record categories. We should try to remain simple.

Why not setting up a category for the beautiful 57.35 m velodrome in my
garden with angles from 0 to 10 degrees ? I'm sure my 13 month boy is the
fastest on this distance in his category on a his 30 cm seat high HPV.

We can not please everybody by setting as much categories as competitors.

Whether is important ? Let's make dry and wet air categories. Carbon fiber
is expensive ? Let's make a steel, aluminium or bamboo categories. Please
don't open the door to non sense.

Jean-Charles Gosselin - France-HPV


=====Bill Gaines=====

My mentioning of track "angle" was not necessarily to use that as a catagory defining feature, but to remind everyone that all tracks, (like all straight sites) are not in and of themselves equal.  While earliy records will be set at various sites, the list of "competitive" tracks will grow short,  

I am putting together a spreadsheet, based on info from Bike Culture on tracks with slope info. More to define where length catagories should be divided (example: 330m tracks should be with 333m tracks IMHO)

Bill Gaines

o\_oo+ o-\_oo+
0\-o+ ~\_/~


=====Ian Humphries=====

An IHPVA record for each size velodrome? No. I agree with Jean-Charles.

The respective national bodies can keep records for individual velodromes if
necessary.  

(Jean Charles congratulations on your boy :-)

Sincerely<br>
Ian Humphries

=====Richard Ballantine=====

Congratulations, indeed!

Let's see what Bill's analysis of different velodromes shows. We want to keep things simple, but also be fair to riders.

- Richard


=====Mark Olaf Slot=====
	
Velodromes are not built for average speeds in excess of 80 km/h. It will be
extremely stressful (if even possible) to race trough the curves with this
high speed. Therefore, we would expect records with lower average speeds,
possibly around 60-65 km/h would be realistic. Of course, if the curves of
the velodrome somehow sets the limit for going faster, then the larger
velodromes would eneable higher speeds. In the end, the record speed would
be dependent on the curve radius and slope angle of the velodrome and
possibly the riders manoeuvrability to keep the HPV on the track. It is no
problem riding extremely fast in a streamliner; the problem is more about
keeping the HPV on the track. This doesn't seem to encourage the development
of faster HPV's, but rather the development of faster velodromes and
encourage riders to take dangerous risks in order to ride faster through the
curves in order to get that special velodrome record. This is clearly not
what we want.

On the other hand, if anyone wants to set a record on a velodrome (and the
rider thinks at his cruising speed the curves would not be an overwhelming
problem), the attempt should be recognized without all the wind restriction
rules etc. as if the record attempt was made anywhere else on a legal track
with legal conditions. No special velodrome record category should be made.
The record should be regognized as any other record.

This could be practical for setting (personal, national, unfaired etc.)
records where the speed is below 60-65 km/h and the problem with handling
the HPV through the curves is of minor importance.

Kind regards,
Mark Olaf Slot
HPV-club Denmark




----


====Proposal for Restricted HPV Class====
Proposed by Richard Ballantine, 15 June 2005<br>
Status: Passed 9 November 2005 (sooner, actually, but announcement delayed by spammers)

'''Proposal<br>
The IHPVA shall recognise performance records for a Restricted Class of HPV. Rider can be seen from the front, with allowance for handlebars, controls, and structural elements such aschassis or transmission. Disk wheels are permitted. Briefly, in front of the rider, the machine is unfaired; behind the rider, anything is allowed.

'''Comment by Richard Ballantine<br>
The current HPVA Competition Rules for land performance records recognise one vehicle class: open. The requirements are human power only, no energy storage, and no sailing. The intention of these simple, minimal rules is to promote design innovation.

And so it once was. In the early days of the IHPVA, streamliners vied for world records at IHPVA Championships. The premier event was the 200-metre sprint. However, as designs refined and speeds became faster, teams seeking records increasingly made use of venues with environmental advantages, such as less air pressure, long run-ups, and gradients exactly at the slope which is legal for IHPVA records. Today, streamliners compete for records once a year at Battle Mountain, and occasionally on special tracks. Annual IHPVA Championships continue to feature the 200-metre sprint event, but it has been years and perhaps decades since a record was set at an open IHPVA Championship.

There are perhaps 5,000 individual members in IHPVA-affiliated HPV clubs around the world. There many more thousands of HPV riders who do not belong to clubs. Of all these thousands of HPV enthusiasts, only a few are involved with record-performance streamliners. Velomobiles are increasingly popular — hurrah! — but at this stage number at most a few hundred. For various practical reasons, most HPVs are unfaired. At the recent CycleVision, 4/5 June, Zandvoort, Netherlands, there were 300 entries for the races. Although there were a good number of velomobiles, and a few fully-faired HPVs, the vast majority of entries were unfaired.

The HPV world has clearly changed. It is time for the IHPVA to recognise and encourage the development of the unfaired HPVs now in widespread use. I propose that the IHPVA recognise a restricted class for HPVs. The definition, courtesy of Ben Wichers Schreur of NVHPV (Netherlands), is simple: the rider can be seen from the front, with allowance for handlebars, controls, and structural elements such as chassis or transmission. Disk wheels are permitted. Briefly, in front of the rider, the machine is unfaired; behind the rider, anything is allowed.

The definition for the proposed restricted class is deliberately broad and general, so as to include all current 'unfaired' HPVs except those with a front fairing. As earlier IHPVA Board discussions on vehicle classes have shown, there are many opinions about what is 'unfaired'. The exact point of IHPVA competitions is to encourage design innovation. It is important that a restricted class, if instituted, lead to technical improvements. If someone has, or devises, a way of going faster, then they deserve a chance to perform. A practical advantage of the simple definition proposed is that it is easy to apply. You don't need a slide-rule or calculator. This is important for race organisers.

A restricted HPV class for IHPVA competitions will open up a new era in record-attempt performances. Records can be set at venues throughout the world, without great expense. There is little advantage to running an unfaired, sub-50 MPH HPV at a specialised place such as Battle Mountain.

Imagine . . . if you had a fast unfaired HPV and a strong set of legs, wouldn't you like to have a crack at setting a record? That is exactly how lots and lots of people all over the world will feel — if we give them the chance, by establishing a restricted HPV class for IHPVA Competitions.

As an HPV pioneer, competitor, and your current chair, I am deeply committed to the development and promotion of HPVs. I was thrilled to see 300 HPVs on the Zandvoort track, most of them unfaired. It is time to do something for these people, and that means now! We should not become involved yet again in long-winded technical debates or differences. Let us make a simple rule, and if necessary, refine and improve it later.

The IHPVA stands for progress and innovation. Please join Ben Wichers Schreur and myself and give your immediate and enthusiastic support for the proposal to create a restricted HPV class. It needs just one word: yes!

Best wishes,

Richard Ballantine

----


====Proposal for Junior Category for IHPVA Records====
Proposed by Richard Ballantine, 27 April 2005<br>
Status: Passed

Proposal<br>
3.2.1.4.1 Junior Riders: The IHPVA shall recognize separate records for male and female junior riders in events up to the hour, by age on date of record attempt, in three age groups: 8 through 10; 11 through 13; 14 through 16.

Comment by Richard Ballantine<br>
We have had several requests for the IHPVA to establish a junior category for IHPVA records, the most recent from Jonathan Woolrich, organiser for Battle Mountain this year. There was a discussion of a junior category a while ago. It trailed off on the question of how to divide age groups. 

I reviewed the idea of a junior category with Bill Gaines, chair of the Records Committee, and we agree that it would be good to at least make a start by creating a junior category with large age divisions. If at a later point in time more exact age divisions are desired, the rule can be amended. 

IHPVA Board members, please advise your reactions and votes as soon as possible. 

Thank you.

----

====Proposal for Modification of IHPVA Rules for Speed Trial Records====
Proposed by Matjaz Leskovar, 10 October 2004<br>
Status: Open for Discussion

Summary by Matjaz Leskovar<br>
The IHPVA competition rules should assure that the HPV is propelled only with human power and that the influence of other potential power sources (wind, gravity, stored energy, etc.) is negligible. The performed analysis showed that already at a nearly flat course with the IHPVA permitted slope 2/3 percent the gravity propelling power is comparable with the rider power, and that the slope influence on the HPV maximum velocity is so large that a successful high-speed record attempt is nearly impossible without the assistance of a “perfect slope�? course. Therefore a simple modification of IHPVA land vehicle competition rules for speed trial records is proposed. The essence idea of the proposed rules change is that for speed trial records rides in both directions are necessary, and that the official record speed is determined as the average of the speeds in both directions.

To read the complete proposal, see [[Proposal For IHPVA Land Vehicle Competition Rules Modification]]

----

====Make Human Power eJournal the official technical journal of the IHPVA====
Proposed by Richard Ballantine, 28 May 2004<br>
Status: On hold

The old HUMAN POWER - The Technical Journal of the IHPVA has been made the technical journal of the HPVA. The editors and and many of the people who produced HUMAN POWER have moved on to a new organization, HuPI-The Human Power Insitute, which is publishing a new HUMAN POWER eJournal which is freely available on the internet. See [[IHPVA Board NEWS]] for more details.

----

====IHPVA Bylaws and Constitution====
Status: On Hold

There has been a good deal of work towards creating a set of bylaws for the IHPVA. The issues are complex, and the project has been put on hold while IHPVA communications and voting procedures are improved.

----

====Event Organizer’s Handbook====
Status: On Hold

Project to create a basic how-to guide for all aspects of organizing events of every size and type, from small rides to championship and record attempts. Inclusive of rules and regulations, model forms, and all the useful information and experience IHPVA volunteers have accumulated over the years, from how to organize first aid to recipes for high-energy brownies. Essential for every person working on events – and that is quite a few people.

Christian Meyer has already produced a good deal of material suitable for a handbook. Electronic publishing should enable the IHPVA to produce an Event Organizer’s Handbook as PDF files suitable for CD-ROM disks or downloading. This will make updates simple and economic.

-----

====Links====

[[IHPVA representatives]] - List of IHPVA Board members.<br>
[[IHPVA Board NEWS]] - General news, reports, and announcements.<br>
[[IHPVA Agenda Requests]] - Board member requests and suggestions for Agenda items at meetings.<br>
[[IHPVA Meeting Room]] - When a meeting is scheduled or in progress, this page will list and link all the Agenda items. Meetings will also be announced by e-mail.<br>
[[IHPVA Voting]] - Where voting on proposals takes place.<br>