Are there any tips for going down hill. I get scared even at little
hills and can’t seem to stay on.
Norman Patterson
Re: How do you go down hill?
number one important rule, remember to breathe!! you’d be surprised how easy it is to forget…
try holdin’ on to the seat with one hand, that’ll help stabilise you. another thing to try is movin’ along 1/2 a revolution at a time, stillstand for a quick second to get your bearings then continue. others will probably have better/more advice.
good luck!!
doc
Try and put as much weight as you can on your back pedal without moving backwards, and you should slow down enough to have some control. However, depending on the steepness of the hill, this does not always work, but it should at least help you keep your speed down within reason.
(practice)^100
for steeper hills
(practice)^99 * (pull up on the seat)
But really as was mentioned, lean back a little and keep the rear foot weighted.
-gauss
On descents, it is much easier to keep the unicycle under control than it is to REGAIN control.
So, keep it steady. Plenty of back pressure on the rising pedal. Instead of propelling the uni, you are ‘releasing its potential energy’ at a steady rate.
It should feel like you are leaning back ever so slightly.
A digital approach (step, stop, step, stop) is easier on steep hills than simply going down at a smooth and controled pace.
You may feel that the rising back pedal is lifting you out of the seat. First response: stand up on the pedals, allowing you to put more weight on that rising pedal. Second response: hold the front of the seat and pull it upwards. What you are really doing is pulling yourself downwards, thus applying more ‘weight’ to the rising pedal.
As a short term measure, you can put longer cranks on to increase the torque available. As you get better, you will find that your skill will make it easier anyway.
Have fun… it can be one of the most exilarating (sp?) parts of riding a uni.
A bit more…
Mike is spot on, as far as my experience is concerened. The bit about steep hills is especialy true; I tend to think of it more as ‘resist, flow, resist’, as I usualy try not to stop completely- which can eat up oooodles of energy on long decents and may be more than one can muster and continue riding. Attempting to stop may also pitch you forward more than you can controll…
You may try to manage steep inclines by slightly traversing the task.
Being too far back will send the cycle out front and you on your tail (and some times for a tumble). Too far forward is usualy just desaster, yes? Regarless, be mentaly prepared to transition to free flight and landing (crash management…).
The ‘lean back slightly’ advice I’d qualify a bit: when you’re leaning back, it’s so that you can bear down and resist the rising pedal, and is cyclec- almost the opposite of weight shifting up a hill! You venture out from directly over the axel only to counter another force (or to initiate a motion, in other activities). I had far more early failed off-road decents from leaning back too far (out of fear) and trying to stop than riding too far forward. Focus on being over the axel, and ride back to counter pedal forces. Riding back too far is often signaled by the feeling that the cycle is running away from you.
On short (less than 40’) fast (very steep) decents, it’s important to not attempt to stop at all- nor slow the cycle in a resistive weight shift manor; rather, focus on controlling your spinning and riding the decent out. Having ‘The Little Voice’ tell you that you MUST and CAN helps, too. On scarry stuff, it talks me all the way down.
-Christopher
Leaning back also helps if you have to bail out… one of the more amusing UPDs I’ve had was trying to bail out forwards while going downhill. I managed to coast for a few metres without any feet on the pedals! Then I fell off…
Phil, just me
This brings up an important point in downhill riding. You should always try to stay at the back of the balance envelope so you don’t fall forwards while going downhill. If you fall forwards while going downhill you’ve messed up. Forward dismounts while going downhill (especially in muni) can get nasty due to the unintentional coasting and forward tumbles. If you fall off while going downhill you should always try to make sure you fall off the rear of the uni. If you fall off the rear the worst that’s going to happen is that you end up on your rear.
Lean back, keep the uni in control (once you loose control going downhill it is very difficult to get it back in control), and if you fall off make sure you fall off the back.
Practice riding slowly on level ground. The balance that you learn by riding slowly will help you when riding slowly uphill and downhill.
duh
When you say youre having trouble going down the hill, i dont understand. It doesnt matter how you go down the hill does it? Its best if your rolling, but that doesnt neccesarily have to be on your unicycle. Think of yourself as one big tire flying down the hill, and just roll all the way to the bottom.
On a second note, pay attention to nothing i say and go back to your busy life.
scott
Not true. I was going down a rather steep hill, about 45 degree slope, and halfway down it my tire lost its grip. So I stuck my foot down, but it got sucked under me and I fell on it. I had a hard time standing on it again because it bent around in unnatural ways. The worst thing when you fall off your rear is still worse than this, could hit your head on a rock for instance.
Re: How do you go down hill?
>Focus on being over the axel, and ride back to counter pedal forces.
When going up or down hills, remember that your center of gravity must
be over the point of contact of the tire with the ground which is very
different from being over the axle on hills, especially steep ones.
This point of contact is forward of the axle when going up a hill and
backward of the axle when going down a hill. Thus, when going up or
down hills, the focus should be where the tire contacts the ground and
where the axle is only relates to where the center of the pedals are.
When one adjusts to this differ focus for balance feedback, going both
up and down hills should become much easier. Finally, I will reiterate
what others have said (informally) using more formal terms (rephrasing
what I’ve just said in this paragraph and adding some precision as
well):
When going up hill, one must lean forward (toward the hill) so the
center of gravity is within the balance envelope centered over the tire
contact area which is in front of the axle by wheel radius times
sine(hill angle).
When going down hill, one must lean backward (again toward the hill) so
the center of gravity is within the balance envelope centered over the
tire contact area which is in back of the axle by wheel radius times
sine(hill angle).
Note that when hill angle is zero (no hill = level ground), the
sine(hill angle) = 0, so the center of gravity is within the balance
envelope centered over the tire contact area which is directly under the
axle.
Down hill balance technique has been very well explained by others, so I
won’t go (further) into that subject.
Perhaps even more important is the fact that as the hill gets steeper,
the balance envelope becomes smaller or at least changes shape. The
balance envelope is the area where the center of gravity must remain for
a continued state of dynamic balance. If the center of gravity ever
leaves the balance envelope, by definition the rider and unicycle fail
to maintain balance and fall. The size and shape of the balance
envelope is also determined in large part by the rider’s strength.
Skill doesn’t affect the size and shape of the balance envelope itself,
but greatly determines how well and easily a rider stays within it.
Well I hope this helps someone to better understand how to manage hills.
Sincerely,
Ken Fuchs <kfuchs@winternet.com>
Re: How do you go down hill?
> On descents, it is much easier to keep the unicycle under control than
> it is to REGAIN control.
>
> So, keep it steady. Plenty of back pressure on the rising pedal.
> Instead of propelling the uni, you are ‘releasing its potential energy’
> at a steady rate.
>
For short but steep descents, you sometimes want to just let the uni go out
of control and try your hardest to stay on. This lets you ride things like
bombholes where (unless you have a brake fitted and monster climbing
ability) there’s not much chance of riding them slowly.
I’ve seen Roger doing this on a coker down a steep grassy bank and it was
truly a scary sight, but on a smaller unicycle it isn’t so scary and it’s a
really useful technique.
Joe
Re: How do you go down hill?
I am not sure about the out of control bit… it is really a spin out while
reducing speed gently - if you can.
The best fun was riding up the bank then turning at full speed in an arc
across the bank by leaning down the hill as tightly as I could (may be a 3m
arc). It gives a great sensation and I got some great comments while doing
it. I didn’t make it one time when the wheel buckled under me with the
sidewards load, the wheel then sprang back into shape and catapulted me off
down the hill!
Roger
The UK’s Unicycle Source
----- Original Message -----
From: “Joe Marshall” <localhost@127.0.0.1>
Newsgroups: rec.sport.unicycling
To: <rsu@unicycling.org>
Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 11:23 AM
Subject: Re: How do you go down hill?
> > On descents, it is much easier to keep the unicycle under control than
> > it is to REGAIN control.
> >
> > So, keep it steady. Plenty of back pressure on the rising pedal.
> > Instead of propelling the uni, you are ‘releasing its potential energy’
> > at a steady rate.
> >
>
> For short but steep descents, you sometimes want to just let the uni go
out
> of control and try your hardest to stay on. This lets you ride things like
> bombholes where (unless you have a brake fitted and monster climbing
> ability) there’s not much chance of riding them slowly.
>
> I’ve seen Roger doing this on a coker down a steep grassy bank and it was
> truly a scary sight, but on a smaller unicycle it isn’t so scary and it’s
a
> really useful technique.
>
> Joe
>
>
>
> rec.sport.unicycling mailing list -
www.unicycling.org/mailman/listinfo/rsu
>
>
fear not and be just a bit further behind the hub than you would normaly be.
If you are afraid, get off! Fear will get you hurt. I have a feeling you are just begining to ride unicycles, so why not learn to ride up hills? I would also learn to fall off properly. At the first hint of balance loss straighten your body and spread your feet as if you were doing jumping jacks in gym class. If you think about it grab the seat. BAM-land squarely on your feet! If you have no stubbed toenails head straight for some curb furniture and hop back on.
The more unicycling and bicycling you do , the better shape you will be in. If you keep at it next summer this problem will probably solve itself. carjug
Re: How do you go down hill?
On Mon, 30 Sep 2002 00:25:59 -0500, Ken Fuchs <kfuchs@winternet.com>
wrote:
…good observations about leaning, and also:
>Perhaps even more important is the fact that as the hill gets steeper,
>the balance envelope becomes smaller or at least changes shape. The
>balance envelope is the area where the center of gravity must remain for
>a continued state of dynamic balance. If the center of gravity ever
>leaves the balance envelope, by definition the rider and unicycle fail
>to maintain balance and fall. The size and shape of the balance
>envelope is also determined in large part by the rider’s strength.
>Skill doesn’t affect the size and shape of the balance envelope itself,
>but greatly determines how well and easily a rider stays within it.
Ken, you did a great job in explaining and quantifying leaning on
hills in an “exact” way. However, I don’t understand your above
“exact” treatment of balance envelope, especially the remark that
skill doesn’t affect the size and shape of the balance envelope.
Isn’t it so that when a rider (with a given strength) is on the edge
of the balance envelope, his skill plays an important role in whether
he can recover or not?
Or alternatively, two riders of the same muscular strength (and same
hill, same unicycle) are at the edge of their balance envelope (which
according to you is the same for them). The skilled one will react
quicker and more appropriate, while the unskilled one fails to use his
power exactly right and falls off. From that, it would follow that the
balance envelope is NOT the same for them.
Or stated in yet another way: I find that uneven terrain doesn’t
nearly knock me off my uni as easily as a year ago. I like to think of
this as if my balance envelop has become wider. My strength may have
increased somewhat in the last year due to MUniing, but my MUni skill
has gone up more markedly.
All in all, I would say that the size (and shape?) of the balance
envelope is also affected by a rider’s skill.
Klaas Bil
If you had this signature, I have forged it.
Can I imagin myself naked in gym class too?; otherwise, I don’t think I’d be able to invoke the Spread-Eagle Ejector Seat… Seems like a formula for pain, to me; I don’t recommend abandoning controll of the cycle.
-Christopher
Re: How do you go down hill?
>>Skill doesn’t affect the size and shape of the balance envelope itself,
>>but greatly determines how well and easily a rider stays within it.
The balance envelope is the result of physical laws. If the center of
gravity is inside the balance envelope, continued balance is possible.
If the center of gravity is on the edge of the balance envelope, the
recovery must start immediately and in the right direction to avoid a
fall. If the center of gravity is outside the balance envelope,
continued balance is physically impossible and a fall will occur.
>Isn’t it so that when a rider (with a given strength) is on the edge
>of the balance envelope, his skill plays an important role in whether
>he can recover or not?
Skill definitely improves the probability of continued balance anywhere
inside the balance envelope. However, skill is not a physical quantity
and thus can’t affect the size or shape of the balance envelope.
>Or alternatively, two riders of the same muscular strength (and same
>hill, same unicycle) are at the edge of their balance envelope (which
>according to you is the same for them). The skilled one will react
>quicker and more appropriate, while the unskilled one fails to use his
>power exactly right and falls off. From that, it would follow that the
>balance envelope is NOT the same for them.
The balance envelope is the same for riders of equal strength using the
same equipment. The skilled rider can easily avoid the edge of the
balance envelope as he precisely controls the unicycle and the unskilled
rider struggles to stay inside and is barely in control of the unicycle.
Skill in this context means the ability to control where the center of
gravity will go (and direction [turns] of travel). The balance envelope
for both riders remains exactly the same, whereas their respective
abilities (skill) to stay within it are vastly different.
For example, let’s say that these two riders are at the edge of their
balance envelope, specifically a 45 degree forward lean. Both must
immediately use maximum forward acceleration to remain (regain)
balance. If not, they both fall outside the balance envelope and fall
down as predicted by the laws of physics. One surely argue that the
skilled rider has a higher probability of success, but his greater skill
can’t change the laws of physics and consequently give him a larger
balance envelope. The balance envelopes are identical in size and shape
irrespective of any skill differential between the two riders.
>Or stated in yet another way: I find that uneven terrain doesn’t
>nearly knock me off my uni as easily as a year ago. I like to think of
>this as if my balance envelop has become wider. My strength may have
>increased somewhat in the last year due to MUniing, but my MUni skill
>has gone up more markedly.
Uneven terrain is a physical property of the riding surface and does
indeed affect the balance envelope, probably in both shape and size.
Hitting a sudden dip or bump will definitely cause a change in the
balance envelope. A bump will cause a forward contraction of the
balance envelope and if the center of gravity is still inside the new
balance envelope, continued balance is still possible. Rough terrain
will result in a smaller average balance envelope.
>All in all, I would say that the size (and shape?) of the balance
>envelope is also affected by a rider’s skill.
I understand the desire to want to define the balance envelope to be of
both physical properties and unicycle balance skill, but how does one
precisely do that? We all know what skill is in this context, but it
can’t be precisely quantified. Therefore, a balance envelope measure
that depends on such a skill quantity can’t be precisely defined.
I suggest we stick with the traditional definition of balance envelope
which is all physical properties that may result in continued balance.
Note how being outside the balance envelope always results in an UPD.
This simple fact will make this definition very useful as it is applied
to various unicycling situations.
A useful digression would be to consider how the balance envelope is
affected by crank/pedal position. The horizontal (aka safety) position
would have the maximum sized balance envelope. The vertical (aka dead
spot) position would have the minimum sized balance envelope. As the
crank rotates, the balance envelope expands and contracts between the
maximum and minimum size in a manner similar to simple harmonic motion.
This effect is noticed in level riding, but it is even more readily
noticed when going up or down hills which gets us back close (within a
stone throw) to the original topic of this thread.
Hills make the balance envelope smaller because a certain percentage of
the rider’s power output must be applied exclusively to climbing or
resisting a downhill, leaving a smaller net power output to deal with
balance. With downhills, brakes should allow the use of more of the
rider’s power output to deal with balance and thus allow a larger balance
envelope, since the brake can absorb most of the downhill resistance
energy needed to avoid a “terminal” velocity down the hill. Anyone with
brakes care to comment on this downhill brake, balance envelope
hypothesis?
Sincerely,
Ken Fuchs <kfuchs@winternet.com>
Re: How do you go down hill?
“Ken Fuchs” <kfuchs@winternet.com> wrote in message
news:mailman.1033449664.28667.rsu@unicycling.org…
> For example, let’s say that these two riders are at the edge of their
> balance envelope, specifically a 45 degree forward lean. Both must
> immediately use maximum forward acceleration to remain (regain)
> balance. If not, they both fall outside the balance envelope and fall
> down as predicted by the laws of physics. One surely argue that the
> skilled rider has a higher probability of success, but his greater skill
> can’t change the laws of physics and consequently give him a larger
> balance envelope. The balance envelopes are identical in size and shape
> irrespective of any skill differential between the two riders.
Firstly, can you not recover from > 45 degree forward lean in some cases. If
not why not? Yes it would take a high amount of power applied through the
tyre, quite a lot greater than the amount of downwards force on the tyre. I
think this might not be possible for a smooth tyre on a smooth surface, but
for a knobbly tyre on a non smooth surface it surely can in some cases push
along more than it is pushing upwards, without rolling up.
> I suggest we stick with the traditional definition of balance envelope
> which is all physical properties that may result in continued balance.
> Note how being outside the balance envelope always results in an UPD.
> This simple fact will make this definition very useful as it is applied
> to various unicycling situations.
I think whilst it doesn’t take account of the riders skill, you are
definately taking account of the strength of the rider aren’t you?
> A useful digression would be to consider how the balance envelope is
> affected by crank/pedal position. The horizontal (aka safety) position
> would have the maximum sized balance envelope. The vertical (aka dead
> spot) position would have the minimum sized balance envelope. As the
> crank rotates, the balance envelope expands and contracts between the
> maximum and minimum size in a manner similar to simple harmonic motion.
> This effect is noticed in level riding, but it is even more readily
> noticed when going up or down hills which gets us back close (within a
> stone throw) to the original topic of this thread.
Like here, where okay at the dead spot the envelope is the same regardless
of power, but surely the effect on the balance envelope of the other pedal
positions is reduced if you’re stronger and can pedal more smoothly.
> Hills make the balance envelope smaller because a certain percentage of
> the rider’s power output must be applied exclusively to climbing or
> resisting a downhill, leaving a smaller net power output to deal with
> balance. With downhills, brakes should allow the use of more of the
> rider’s power output to deal with balance and thus allow a larger balance
> envelope, since the brake can absorb most of the downhill resistance
> energy needed to avoid a “terminal” velocity down the hill. Anyone with
> brakes care to comment on this downhill brake, balance envelope
> hypothesis?
Again here, the power of the rider is being taken into account.
Is there a description / analysis of the whole balance envelope thing
somewhere, ie. with equations rather than text arguments? I’d especially be
interested in a proper analysis and proof of there being a certain angle of
lean which a rider can’t get out of which is constant no matter the rider’s
leg power.
Joe
Re: Re: How do you go down hill?
I, too suggest elevating my optionion to the level of tradition. 
Hey- a nitt! Commence picking: exiting the envelope isn’t neccessarly a UPD- at least I hope it isn’t; otherwise, all dismounts would be unintended…
Sooooooo- a skilled rider, because of superiour technique, expends less energy riding chalanging up/down hill tasks- and thus has more energy at her disposal to be judiciously applied. Ergo, more power available for balancing=larger envelope (and the converse, of coarse). Ergo, skill=envelope size.
Ever try balancing a Uni by itself? You’ll find it’s balance ‘envelope’ is very, very small and unforgiving. Regardless of what forces play on it (how it is oriented), we straddle this point. The ‘envelope’ I see as the ‘area’ (degree out of plane) in which we can recover from a fall- all positions in which we aren’t balanced on the relative point exactly. The further away from the balance point, the more difficult it is to recover, that is, return to the balance point. Very close to the balance point, recovery becomes so trivial a task that it goes unnoted. As we grow in skill, so does the zone of trivial recovery. The very concept of the envelope has to be skill based, as it is all perceptual, yes?
Finaly, all positions that are not the balance point are unstable- and therefore are transitional. This includes points that are easy to recover from.
-Wooot! I babbel so much I impress myself.
-Christopher