Public Bike Stands - Part 2

jimmy1000

Hi folks,

It's been about 4 months since I posted on here doing some research for a college project to design a new public bike stand. Having been through various stages of the design process (and several different concepts!) I've now settled on a design and would welcome your feedback again.

The design is based on the concept of using the stand to secure one wheel in position with a rotating arm, while the other wheel and bike frame are secured using the cyclist's own lock which also locks the rotating arm in positition.

The attached images show the concept of the design. I haven't got around to drawing the bike in but hopefully the idea is clear. The first image shows different projections of the stand and the second shows the rotating arm in locked and open positions. The stand will be made of cast iron and the rotating arm and the outer edge of the fixed part of the stand will be powder coated to prevent damage to the bike. The holes in the spoke of the stand are different sizes so that differnt size locks can fit snugly in position and also offer the option that the lock can pass through two of these holes to remove any slack thus making it harder for thieves to break.

[Embedded Image Removed]Please let me know what you think - any flaws, improvements or just your impression of the idea...

Many Thanks, [Embedded Image Removed]

Stark

I don't see any attached images.

Have you costed the design? It sounds pricey.

reallyunique

This is a bit freaky!!! I was thinking of your original post only this evening as I was forced to lock my bike to an "architect-designed" bike stand. It just about worked too. No substitute for the standard ones but I couldn't find any normal ones. Swore furiously at the lack of any proper bike facilities in Sandyford and at property companies in general.

On your design: I think it only locks the wheel though I could simply be misinterpreting the drawings. If so then simply removing the wheel would allow the remainder of the bike to be removed.

How will the lock deal with wheels of different sizes (700C vs 20"). I know smaller wheels tend to be BMX or children's bikes but my daughter's 24" is nearly as expensive as my old MTB. Even smaller wheels might need to be accommodated if the lock is to serve a community wider than just commuters.

As a Bike Stand it appears to do it's job. It allows a bike to "stand", one wheel slightly raised and for at least one size of wheel to be "tethered". I hesitate to use the word 'secured' in the context of my current understanding of the design.
Perhaps adding a second "hoop" of metal or a post with some sort of mounting brackets attached, placed where the other wheel or the frame would be, could allow the main body of the bike to be secured. This might have to be a sloping or curved bar to ensure that bikes of various sizes could be accommodated.

Just an opinion, of course and from someone who has never designed street furniture. I'd be eager to see a drawing showing how the bike would sit in the stand as this would give my untrained eye a better understanding of the design.

petethedrummer

Edit: ignore. reallyunique has asked my question.

jimmy1000

reallyunique wrote: »

This is a bit freaky!!! I was thinking of your original post only this evening as I was forced to lock my bike to an "architect-designed" bike stand. It just about worked too. No substitute for the standard ones but I couldn't find any normal ones. Swore furiously at the lack of any proper bike facilities in Sandyford and at property companies in general.

On your design: I think it only locks the wheel though I could simply be misinterpreting the drawings. If so then simply removing the wheel would allow the remainder of the bike to be removed.

How will the lock deal with wheels of different sizes (700C vs 20"). I know smaller wheels tend to be BMX or children's bikes but my daughter's 24" is nearly as expensive as my old MTB. Even smaller wheels might need to be accommodated if the lock is to serve a community wider than just commuters.

As a Bike Stand it appears to do it's job. It allows a bike to "stand", one wheel slightly raised and for at least one size of wheel to be "tethered". I hesitate to use the word 'secured' in the context of my current understanding of the design.
Perhaps adding a second "hoop" of metal or a post with some sort of mounting brackets attached, placed where the other wheel or the frame would be, could allow the main body of the bike to be secured. This might have to be a sloping or curved bar to ensure that bikes of various sizes could be accommodated.

Just an opinion, of course and from someone who has never designed street furniture. I'd be eager to see a drawing showing how the bike would sit in the stand as this would give my untrained eye a better understanding of the design.

Thanks UR - at least I know I need to make the drawings clearer! The concept of the stand is that the bike frame and one of the wheels is locked using the cyclist’s own lock as is normal. The difference is that the cyclist's lock also secures into position the rotating arm which in turn secures the other wheel.

With regards wheels/bikes of different sizes – the stand is designed to take a 26-29” wheel, wheels of smaller diameter would be accommodated by raising the wheel off the ground to sit into the loop and the bike would then rest at an angle. I have to do some more detailed design to work out the limitations and whether the ergonomics could be adjusted to accommodate smaller bikes but the stand will definitely suit the vast majority of bikes.

I’ll do up a drawing showing the stand with bike in place this evening and post it up to give a clearer picture of how it functions.

cython

jimmy1000 wrote: »

Thanks UR - at least I know I need to make the drawings clearer! The concept of the stand is that the bike frame and one of the wheels is locked using the cyclist’s own lock as is normal. The difference is that the cyclist's lock also secures into position the rotating arm which in turn secures the other wheel.

With regards wheels/bikes of different sizes – the stand is designed to take a 26-29” wheel, wheels of smaller diameter would be accommodated by raising the wheel off the ground to sit into the loop and the bike would then rest at an angle. I have to do some more detailed design to work out the limitations and whether the ergonomics could be adjusted to accommodate smaller bikes but the stand will definitely suit the vast majority of bikes.

I’ll do up a drawing showing the stand with bike in place this evening and post it up to give a clearer picture of how it functions.

Might I suggest uploading such a drawing as a jpeg or PNG graphic? Some browsers don't support bitmaps, so it means embedding, or a simple click to view are ruled out for them.

happytramp

Throw up some rough sketches of the stand with a bike in it. Don't worry if the sketches are rubbish it'll give us a good understanding as to how the bike sits into the stand.

Lumen

jimmy1000

Thanks Lumen, I was trying to do that last night by just pasting the jpeg in but whenever I did a preview the image disappeared.

jimmy1000

Stark wrote: »

I don't see any attached images.

Have you costed the design? It sounds pricey.

At a very rough calculation It's working out at about €200 although this is hugely dependent on the number of units to be manufactured because the materials and manufacture are only a small percentage of the figure.

manwithaplan

Does the rotating arm go through the front spokes? It seems a bit fiddly but it's a neat enough idea. Make sure that it's oriented the right way so that the drive side of the bike faces outwards. The sizing would have to be fairly precise because the rotating arm would need to engage the wheel forward of the front forks - otherwise the direction of closure would probably run foul of the spokes.

petethedrummer

Have you any drawings of it with a bike in it?

oh and can i have the moon on a stick please.

lennymc

is cast iron the best material to use? In my (very limited) experience of cast iron, a good whack with a hammer, and it will shatter, although I may be wrong. Would stainless steel be a better option?

jimmy1000

manwithaplan wrote: »

Does the rotating arm go through the front spokes? It seems a bit fiddly but it's a neat enough idea. Make sure that it's oriented the right way so that the drive side of the bike faces outwards. The sizing would have to be fairly precise because the rotating arm would need to engage the wheel forward of the front forks - otherwise the direction of closure would probably run foul of the spokes.

Well it's the fixed part of the stand (cradle I guess it could be called) that passes through the spokes and the rotating arm then closes onto this, forming a closed loop between the cradle and arm. But yes, the drive side would face outwards and the cradle / arm would engage forward of the forks.

jimmy1000

petethedrummer wrote: »

Have you any drawings of it with a bike in it?

oh and can i have the moon on a stick please.

Drawing this evening, moon tomorrow.

manwithaplan

jimmy1000 wrote: »

Well it's the fixed part of the stand (cradle I guess it could be called) that passes through the spokes and the rotating arm then closes onto this, forming a closed loop between the cradle and arm. But yes, the drive side would face outwards and the cradle / arm would engage forward of the forks.

I think I was misled by the drawing (or more likely by the fact that I can't read drawings properly!). It looked to me as if the rotating arm had a short piece at 90 degrees (the bit in red) that would engage the wheel. If the short bit in red on the plan view is actually a fixed part of the stand, it probably shouldn't be coloured. If it is part of the rotating arm and doesn't go through the spokes, I find it hard to see how it would engage with the cradle as that would appear to require it to go through the wheel rim.

cdaly_

Look at the image where it says 'Front View' and 'wheel of bike sits in here'. You 'hang' your front wheel on that hook (ie hook goes between spokes and rim rests on it) and then the red bit closes down on top of the tyre.. Then you lock the frame and rear wheel through the "holes for user's lock" section to lock the rotating arm.

manwithaplan

All is now clear - thanks. I really am technically challenged.

cdaly_

Which brings to mind an issue with the design. Will it need to be accompanied by instruction signage for the technically challenged?

tomasrojo

cdaly_ wrote: »

Look at the image where it says 'Front View' and 'wheel of bike sits in here'. You 'hang' your front wheel on that hook (ie hook goes between spokes and rim rests on it) and then the red bit closes down on top of the tyre.. Then you lock the frame and rear wheel through the "holes for user's lock" section to lock the rotating arm.

I get it now. I wasn't quite getting it before.

I guess that a mini-lock might be be too short to reach through both the bike's frame and the holes in the bike stand? Or is it sufficient to put your lock through the holes in the bike stand alone?

Ray Palmer

I'm a qualified draftsman and I find the drawings hard to understand because you have no scale on it. Average person will need to see a bike in it. For a college project you need both.

Mention of materials is needed.

Don't forget wheels come in different widths too.

kincsem

I couldn't figure out the drawings and gave up. Why not mock up the lock in wood (or cardboard), and show it on a bike?

Why not make a bicycle holder that is a bit like the cardboard boxes that new bikes are shipped in? If it split in two halves (a bit like a book opening in two), then you could wheel the bike into it, then close it, and lock it. Just leave cut out gaps for the handlebars and pedals.

ur mentor

really would like to see a bike in it so that I can understand it before I comment.

cdaly_

Something like this (BFO lock in yellow):

tomasrojo

I think some people won't like having to lift the front wheel (laziness, feebleness).

Also, it strikes me that moving parts on something exposed to the elements might prove troublesome (rust and seizing, since no-one is going to maintain these, I imagine).

It's clever though. Provided the main source of security is the owner's own lock securing the bike frame to the immoveable part of the stand.

Tonyandthewhale

I have to say I don't like it. It's a lot better than a lot of bike stands out there but I still don't see any clear advantage over a shefield stand or even a good stout, reasonable long pole.

Bike stands that aren't intuitively usuable are a pain, they're only a major pain the first time you use them as from then on in you either know how to use them or know to avoid them but it's still an unnecessary hassle and one you don't get with a sheffield stand where it's immediately clear that you throw your bike against this yoke and lob a lock around it. Don't under-estimate the potential of average people to be confused by seemingly simple bike stands either. Last week four of us spent a good five minutes trying to get our bikes into the bike stands outside Decathalon in Bordeaux (for some reason France is full of badly thought out bike stands) which I think were just not designed for bikes with drop handle-bars to fit in despite the fact that the shop they served sold such bikes.

I'm a bit confused by the diagram but are we expected to one wheel onto a hook thing and then lock it in place with the rotating arm? Because my touring bike can weigh 30kg when fully loaded and I only weigh 60kg so I don't want to have to lift it anymore than I have to. Even lifting the relatively unweighted front wheel is a hassle since that can cause the rear to wobble and fall over often resulting in chainring lacerations in my leg.

You also seem unclear about what range of wheel sizes this bike can accomodate. Can I just point out that there's no point designing a rack that can't be used to lock up folding bikes and bmx's and kid's bikes as well as normal sized road and mountain bikes. Such bikes don't tend to be locked up as much as the standard size bikes but that's no reason to discriminate against them especially since you're competing with an existing product (the sheffield stand) which can be used to lock any size bike with no loss in functionality.

It's a clever design and would be a great design if it wasn't for the fact that there's already a more intuitive, universably usable, presumably cheaper and more reliable (no moving parts) product already available.

Can you explain the advantage of your system? And how this/these advantage(s) outweigh the disadvantages? I get that you can lock two wheels as well as the frame with this type of stand but I'm still going to need to carry two locks until all bike stands are designed like yours. And frankly I'd still like to use two locks as two different locks means any would-be thief will need two different tools so I'm not really going to benefit from the rotating arm.

jimmy1000

cdaly_ wrote: »

Something like this (BFO lock in yellow):

Right, apologies - I was playing ball this evening and only just got back to this. Thanks CDaly for your graphic, it's pretty much what I was going to post although scale might be slightly different:

[Embedded Image Removed]


I haven't had a chance to read through the posts yet so will get back again shortly...

jimmy1000

Hmm, it seems I'm not doing this jpeg thing right - can anyone tell me how to insert one into a post?

In the meantime I've attached the picture, it doesn't show the lock but I think you've got the idea by now anyway...

jimmy1000

tomasrojo wrote: »

I think some people won't like having to lift the front wheel (laziness, feebleness).

Also, it strikes me that moving parts on something exposed to the elements might prove troublesome (rust and seizing, since no-one is going to maintain these, I imagine).

It's clever though. Provided the main source of security is the owner's own lock securing the bike frame to the immoveable part of the stand.

The idea is that the arm will be encased in powder coating meaning that rust shouldn't be an issue. Also It would be sized such that a standard sized wheel would sit in the cradle and rest on the ground. You may have to raise the front end of the bike slightly to place it into the cradle but I don't think anyone who is active enough to cycle in the first place would really object to that - or would they? It could in theory be designed out and it's something I'd considered, the loop part could be attached to the rotating arm, with just a horizontal post where the cradle is now so that the bike just slides into position but I decided against this as it would add weight to the arm and make it more clumsy looking.

Ray Palmer

Moving parts means trapped fingers! Maintence would be an issue and size will prove costly. As a concept it might be worthy of college but practicaly you are not on a winner.

If you consider the factors in the project like suggesting it for hire bikes and not general public use it could be worthy. Ignoring practicaliies is not a good idea for your project.

jimmy1000

Tonyandthewhale wrote: »

I have to say I don't like it. It's a lot better than a lot of bike stands out there but I still don't see any clear advantage over a shefield stand or even a good stout, reasonable long pole.

Bike stands that aren't intuitively usuable are a pain, they're only a major pain the first time you use them as from then on in you either know how to use them or know to avoid them but it's still an unnecessary hassle and one you don't get with a sheffield stand where it's immediately clear that you throw your bike against this yoke and lob a lock around it. Don't under-estimate the potential of average people to be confused by seemingly simple bike stands either. Last week four of us spent a good five minutes trying to get our bikes into the bike stands outside Decathalon in Bordeaux (for some reason France is full of badly thought out bike stands) which I think were just not designed for bikes with drop handle-bars to fit in despite the fact that the shop they served sold such bikes.

I'm a bit confused by the diagram but are we expected to one wheel onto a hook thing and then lock it in place with the rotating arm? Because my touring bike can weigh 30kg when fully loaded and I only weigh 60kg so I don't want to have to lift it anymore than I have to. Even lifting the relatively unweighted front wheel is a hassle since that can cause the rear to wobble and fall over often resulting in chainring lacerations in my leg.

You also seem unclear about what range of wheel sizes this bike can accomodate. Can I just point out that there's no point designing a rack that can't be used to lock up folding bikes and bmx's and kid's bikes as well as normal sized road and mountain bikes. Such bikes don't tend to be locked up as much as the standard size bikes but that's no reason to discriminate against them especially since you're competing with an existing product (the sheffield stand) which can be used to lock any size bike with no loss in functionality.

It's a clever design and would be a great design if it wasn't for the fact that there's already a more intuitive, universably usable, presumably cheaper and more reliable (no moving parts) product already available.

Can you explain the advantage of your system? And how this/these advantage(s) outweigh the disadvantages? I get that you can lock two wheels as well as the frame with this type of stand but I'm still going to need to carry two locks until all bike stands are designed like yours. And frankly I'd still like to use two locks as two different locks means any would-be thief will need two different tools so I'm not really going to benefit from the rotating arm.

Ok - with regards to different sizes of bikes - the design is by no means meant to be complete, I intend to review the concept with bikes of a range of different shapes and sizes but have not progressed that far yet.

I've done up two further drawings tonight with a kids 12" bike and a boys 20" bike as attached. The 20" bike fits the stand without a problem but there are clearly issues in getting the full functionality of the stand when used with a kids 12" bike. It should be noted that this does not prevent the kids bike from being locked to the stand only that the functionality is reduced. It could also be questioned who would want to steal the 12" wheels off a kids bike anyway?

Lastly, the stand isn't really designed for people who carry two locks around with them - its intended to improve security for the large majority of people that only use one lock. From that point of view I'm afraid it doesn't offer you any advantages - the point is that its not you that needs them most!

petethedrummer

Don't get put off by critical comments. Use them to beat your design to death early and by the end it will be a good design or you'll know if its not a runner. I hate when I design software, send it out for a review and it comes back with no comments. It just means world of pain later in a project.

I presume you get marked on the design process and not just the end result, so put down all the critical comments you receive in a spreadsheet and then a description of how you incorporated or rejected those comments.

AIR-AUSSIE

I would think the drawings need to be better possibly 3D so that someone not familiar with side views etc has an idea what's going on. Depending on what year you are in college and how much work is expected of you of course. I realise this might be too much work, but just a pointer. Everyone prefers 3D clearer to see what's happening and often makes it look cooler.

Also what is the benefit of this design over just a plain bar bike stand? A plain bike stand can hold I'd say 4 bikes in quite a small area. Can this only hold one? If so what's the advantage of this bike stand over a conventional one?

Also currently I think the design would be a bit of eye sore on streets and I don't think any architect/planner would be too interesting in putting on a street as they prefer quite minimalist street furniture usually. Do you have any idea on how to improve the aesthetics? Is there parts of the stand that aren't actually doing anything, i.e. are wasted?

Here's bike stands I like or at least aren't ugly:





I think a well designed Bike Stand could almost look like a sculpture while still being functional. I really like the last one although its not clear from the photo how functional it is

jimmy1000

petethedrummer wrote: »

Don't get put off by critical comments. Use them to beat your design to death early and by the end it will be a good design or you'll know if its not a runner. I hate when I design software, send it out for a review and it comes back with no comments. It just means world of pain later in a project.

I presume you get marked on the design process and not just the end result, so put down all the critical comments you receive in a spreadsheet and then a description of how you incorporated or rejected those comments.

Cheers Pete. Comments are what I’m here for – good or bad!

As you say it’s more about the process than the end result and getting good quality feedback is a crucial part of the process.