SRAM has created a number of new crankarm prototypes in conjunction with Autodesk that use generative design to attempt to maximize their properties.
What is generative design? Well, rather than starting with a drawing of what they believe a product should look like, the designer instead defines the parameters needed for the final result - for a crank arm that might be its length, strength, weight, Q factor and construction method (forged vs 3D printed). These parameters are then entered into a computer software, in this case Fusion 360, and thousands of potential designs are generated in just a few hours. SRAM isn't the first mountain bike brand we've seen use this technique and there have been similar experiments in design optimization from
Robot and
Starling in the past few years.
Autodesk claims these designs are unlike any a human could come up with and SRAM has now selected a number of them to prototype for real-world testing.
Forbes reports that, "The end results from the design team employ differing materials of construction, and vary from something that still looks quite a bit like any other crankarm, but with significant portions of material removed, to a futuristic design that resembles a structural truss."
SRAM chose to focus on the crankarm because, unlike other areas of the drivetrain, it has remained generally identical to the version we were riding when the sport was invented. It's a structural component, so it has to be safe, but SRAM believed there was an opportunity to reduce the weight if it was approached in a new way. The titanium truss pedals in the video above certainly look lighter than conventional cranks but we don't currently have any concrete numbers on them, other than that they are apparently able to handle up to 10 g of force.
The method doesn't just remove material but it removes time from the process as well. By reducing the steps involved, its claimed an engineer can go from the design phase to the final product more quickly, and that ultimately means a cost-saving over the course of the R&D process.
At the moment, this is all early prototyping and there's no guarantee that it will be taken forward into a real-world product. Instead, SRAM is using it as a learning experience for its future product developments. Will King, Senior Design Engineer at SRAM, said, "We design products to get to the podium in the Tour de France, or to hope for medals in the Olympics. This helps us get to the finish line faster and more educated—to see where material needs to be, and where it can be removed. Generative design has a great app for our traditional construction materials, helps us understand loads and constraints, and pushes ideas we can evaluate.”
Basically, while the more unorthodox designs the software has generated are unlikely to ever be stocked on shelves, SRAM may be able to produce lighter, stronger and cheaper cranks in the future because of its experimentation. We look forward to seeing what real-world results come from this very cool partnership.
239 Comments
Pinkbike: nah mate looks weak dont trust it.
So it would be reasonable not to trust it without more proof of the viability of the final product.
The first is an engineering claim, I’d claim.
Generative Design has been around for a while now and while it will prove in time that the results produced can be better than a manual design the additive manufacturing process used to produce them still has a long way to go. Porosity in the material build up can be an issue and I certainly wouldn't trust them for something as key as a pair of cranks for a number of years yet!
Ha ha
"We design products to get to the podium in the Tour de France, or to hope for medals in the Olympics." - Will King, Senior Design Engineer at SRAM
If this is the product of this goal only, it works. because with crashes you most likely not gonna win any medals at Olympics and TDF.
"Manufacture cranks that will hold up in a crash" therefore is another goal that needs to be considered. Frankly it bites the main goal: winning Olympics.
btw. the x shape shape you see on the rf evolve and sram gx cranks is created with a similiar algorithm. seems to work alright?
You were saying?
Brilliant, now there is more space for more lead since the crank is lighter...
Imagine riding off a three foot drop on your full suspension MTB - not a problem. Now imagine dropping off of that and landing on your heels with your back straight and knees locked - this is going to be a whole different experience.
Sweet, then you/I can drink more coffee!
We've talked about using this at work, but for structural/non visible sheetmetal parts (automotive stuff).
And now that I write this, I accualy have time and a part to try this with.
Look, it might be all good, and maybe they have done a thorough job (and continue to do so) with this project, but the problem is I have a tiny caveman brain.
The visuals make me nervous, even if they end up being just as strong. If I saw engineers removing material from the wing of an airplane that I was about to fly 1000 miles in and was supposed to be just as strong after testing, I still couldn’t get on that plane.
And the comment about “cost savings” makes me snicker because it’s not like the money saved in R&D would be passed on to us. They’d probably come up with a new slogan like “Vulture “ and actually raise the price.
(That said: If it's not in a Terminator movie kind of way, but helping me pedal, that would be OK)
The problem with topology optimization in general is that it's extremely sensitive to the boundary conditions and selected loads of your FE model.
Most of the optimization routines also do a horrible job of exploring the possible solution set. GE had a competition obviously targeted at topology optimization---a simple design from a human that maximized MOI ended up being far superior compared to the computer generated solutions.
www.ge.com/news/reports/jet-engine-bracket-from-indonesia-wins-3d-printing#:~:text=A%20jet%20engine%20bracket%20designed,receive%20%247%2C000%20in%20prize%20money.
Engineers haven't needed computers to design parts for 100 years. It's not going to change any time soon.
Also I feel like my Autodesk app management suite on my work computer has been listening to me now after this page came out....
Sarcasm?
I can see generation/optimisation becoming more useful very soon, but currently and in the immediate future it's pretty worthless. The crank above is a good example of this. It's an awful design.
Also @AgrAde: My job is impossible without computers
Stress flows through a part in a way that encourages engineers to use simple, broad shapes that don't allow stresses to be concentrated in edges or bends. Using weird shapes like this can work on a part with very well controlled loads, but even a crank is too variable for this imo. Changes in the ratio between bending and torsion in the crank (say, a heavy person with narrow cleats vs a light person standing on the edges of their flat pedals) can mean large changes in the way stresses manifest in the material and mean high stresses in under-built areas in the crank. A simple broad shape (like a hollowtech XTR crank) will experience much smaller changes in the peak stresses across a range of load scenarios. And that's not even considering pedal strike or crashes.
I'm prepared to eat my words if I could see how they've run the simulations and it's very comprehensive, and strong compared to other cranks for its weight across all scenarios and crash/impact loads, but my thoughts are currently not. I'd love to see it compared to a tubular 3d printed ti crank with well-optimised geometry.
I do think that a very good looking, good performing crank could be designed using this one as a basis.
My point is that the computer is currently still used purely as a calculator. It doesn't "do" the design work.
Does aluminium float in mud?
No, my bike sinks when I ride through mud.
That's how it works, right?
Is that 10 grams or 10G as in g-force?
Cos my 10G is probably higher force than yours, without a weight for the 10G of force to act upon it means nothing, its just 10x gravity, or 10x your normal weight.
Bike stuff is usually designed for a 300 pound rider. If otherwise, the manufacture will make the weight limit prominently known.
The new 2023 Fuel EX
10 grams! Not a force. That's a mass, needs acceleration to make a force.
You probably meant G, but that's not a force either. G is acceleration, needs mass to make a force.
And if it did means grams, well, 10 grams at an implied 1 G is not impressive.
Going metric to 15.099mm offering 8.3% more rigidity!
... and these savings will be passed on to the consumer, riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight? Cheap high end cranks for all!
Bones are complex strutures, but yet, simple and beautifuly "design"
The concept is interesting for Adding Manufacturing design.
All our parts were designed for tradicional (cost effective) machines.
I for once thurst Shimano and their new cranks, and I know I'll maintain my way of living and don't need to sell my house to continue with my sport.
Do this cranks will cost less or equal to existing ones?
What are the major advantages, besides some grams less, and a real pain to clean up?
Humans are always looking for improvement, but sometimes, what's needed, is just saddle time!
My only concern is that SRAM has a track record of selling items that don’t seem out of beta testing. Some stuff works great (35mm chassis forks, current Code brakes). Some have worked poorly for years (3 generations of Avid/SRAM brakes, Reverbs).
Nobody bats 1000, but I sincerely hope that any products derived from this process are field tested to a degree of reliability that matches or exceeds the product they replace.
At one point, every.....single....pair of OEM SRAM brakes I saw had the master cylinders fail. Likewise, every Reverb from the first 3 generations would inevitably go soft. To SRAM's credit, their current brakes have proven reliable. The Reverb has an IFP bleed that keeps it working right between (still hateful) rebuilds. But these weren't manufacturing problems, they were engineering problems. That persisted for years.
If SRAM is pushing new crankarm designs, I really, really, really hope they're ready to go from day 1. Neat looking underdeveloped cranks (in pretty colors) were a thing back in the 1990's. A bad thing.
This sure will be the future, as the human brain will never be capable to „guess“ such complex structures. Only nature and maybe AI can do that.
Anyone else have this problem?
lol.
Commentator:
"World Champ (insert name here) is riding new parts that were designed using AI(!), in a collaboration w/ AutoDesk & SRAM. That is crazy, it is the future! Look at them go! Amazing what those engineers have done!"
Totally otherwise uninformed Forbes reader who only sees cycling during olympics, saying to self:
"Oh wow, AutoDesk and SRAM are really at the forefront on technology. I'd love to have those parts on a new bike in my garage. Aannnd, I wonder if this AutoDesk company could have a technology that would make me a hero at work!"
Cut to commercial: "AutoDesk....revolutionizing the world we live in with AI(!)"
Totally otherwise uninformed Forbes reader who only sees cycling during olympics, saying to self:
"I'm calling this AutoDesk comapany when I get into the office on Monday! Imma gonna be a HERO AT WORK! IT WAS IN FORBES!"
"It broke? Don't worry we will fix it in the next update... that you will have to pay for."
Also stoked to see a Stache hangin up as a "featured" bike. One of the best bikes that Trek killed. Hoping to eventually see a spiritual replacement now they only make the 1120. 29+ was what it was, really I just want them to keep making a slack XC bike with sliding dropouts.
This is a case where they weren't. Those crank arms have lost more stiffness and strength than they have lost weight. They've gone backwards. A hollow tube is the stiffest and lightest shape, then you modify that to fit a pedal and chainring/axle and you're done.
Removing the walls like they've done loses all integrity.
Note: This comment was not generated by an AI bot
Lol. Autodesk be drunk
If loads are higher during pedaling you would be absolutely right but thinking through it I'd put my money on drops...
Join Pinkbike Login