Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Cadence Lock Issues

Collapse
X
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Cadence Lock Issues

    Hi,

    I figured I would make a separate post for this - mainly because the forum search function makes it really hard to find information relating to the Cadence lock issues in other posts.

    So I've now done 3 runs with my Forerunner 235 - once with firmware 3.10, once with firmware 3.13b and once with firmware 3.13b but with a Wahoo TICKR Run chest strap HRM attached.
    Run 1 https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/975234830 (3.10 firmware and 235 optical HRM)
    Run 2 https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/977945044 (3.13b firmware and 235 optical HRM)
    Run 3 https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/978756577 (3.13b firmware and Wahoo TICKR Run chest HRM)
    If you expand out the Heart Rate graph and then add an overlay for Cadence you'll better see the cadence lock issue.
    For all intents and purposes it has been the same run - though you'll see that I had to stop on the last two runs and re-route due to exhaustion - I'm not a runner and I'm pushing the limits of my current ability trying to improve my cadence and pace, which may or may not be working lol

    The second run (the first with 3.13b) clearly demonstrates the cadence lock problem - my BPM and SPM are the same almost the whole way through.
    The run I did today with the HR strap shows a clear difference between BPM and SPM.
    The HR is a lot less spiky too - but that is to be expected with a chest strap vs. a wrist based HRM, and is still less spiky than the first run with 3.10 shows.

    Anyway - does anyone know if there is a way to fix this? Has anyone tried the latest firmware release (3.20) to see if that helps? Or does anyone know if Garmin are aware of the issue and if they're working on it?

  • #2
    2nd ST

    Ahh New Zealand... that was nice

    How to fix this? improve your fitness so your bpm is different from your spm

    Seriously, it's obviously one of the big challenges for optical HRMs. I don't think there's anything YOU can do about it but maybe run differently. From all my runs I did so far I did not much experience that problem myself. Don't know, maybe I've been just lucky so far, maybe I have a lucky physiology for this...?

    However. Are you sure the HR is really wrong on your second run? You expected it to be higher?

    You have a Tickr Run, this device can also broadcast over Bluetooth. So I suggest on your next run you track your HR with the chest strap with a smartphone app. I am using Polar Beat, from Polar Flow I can then export a TCX. Also from GC you export the TCX of your 235s "optical" HR and then upload both to mygpsfiles.com/app.

    You can check my thread where I posted most of my comparisons between the FR235 and a chest strap:
    https://forums.garmin.com/showthread...ata-Comparison

    Maybe you want to try to apply different paces in your run. Just to see how your FR235 will handle changing HR and paces. You can also try to tighten up the watch a tad more. Somebody said he had better results wearing the watch on the inside of the wrist.

    Good luck
    My FR235 tests and comparisons to a chest strap HRM:
    FR235-HRM-and-Sleep-Data-Comparison

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by philippe.berini View Post
      Ahh New Zealand... that was nice

      How to fix this? improve your fitness so your bpm is different from your spm ....

      Good luck
      Yeah there are some beautiful spots to run in New Zealand. I prefer trail running in the bush but it's not so bad running along the coast line near home

      Thanks for the suggestions. I am pretty suspicious of the second run's results just because the heart rate does differ a fair bit to the other two runs, but also because it is almost exactly the same as the recorded SPM at each point for a really long stretch of the run.

      The watch placement suggestion is actually a really good one that I will experiment with. I actually wanted the watch as much to track my crossfit style workouts as much as running (and yes, I do realise that it's not really designed for this) and having used both a Fitbit Surge (which was okay) and a Tomtom Spark (which was terrible) for this purpose I have already done a lot of trial and error to get the most consistent and reliable results while working out.
      Oddly though I've never thought to pay much attention to how much watch was placed while running. Stupid but true!

      For what it's worth - the 235 does a much better job of tracking workouts than either the Surge or the Spark ever did. But I'm well aware that a wrist based optical HRM will never be perfect in that regard.

      For my third run with the HR strap I decided I didn't want to run with my phone, otherwise I would have done as you suggested. I may do so for my next run and see how we get on. Although that will be with the 3.20 firmware so it gets hard to compare apples to apples.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by carl.andersson View Post
        Yeah there are some beautiful spots to run in New Zealand. I prefer trail running in the bush but it's not so bad running along the coast line near home
        Can't remember I did any running ober there, but had some nice walks and hikes... and flights

        Thanks for the suggestions. I am pretty suspicious of the second run's results just because the heart rate does differ a fair bit to the other two runs, but also because it is almost exactly the same as the recorded SPM at each point for a really long stretch of the run.
        good point...

        The watch placement suggestion is actually a really good one that I will experiment with.
        And don't forget tightness... Before I got the watch I thought it might not work for me as I have quite hairy arms/wrists, but luckily it does. Don't have to wear it inside..


        I actually wanted the watch as much to track my crossfit style workouts as much as running
        Crossfit... sounds like trouble to me. Sometimes I do a quick workout after a easy run, not much. Just a few sets of situps, pushups and a few weights/dumbbell excercises for arms and shoulders.

        I tried to track my HR there too... as soon as I was using a dumbbell, the FR got stuck around 70 where i started off. The chest strap gave me spikes of over 160 when doing pushups, but the FR remained "cool".

        I might have put an HR graph in my thread. otherwise check this: https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/976860508

        It should be way higher, I wasn't taking much breaks, just cycled quickly through a few exercises...

        I'm getting a wahoo as well for workouts and tennis.

        But I'm well aware that a wrist based optical HRM will never be perfect in that regard..
        I'm not aware of that... Send back an iPhone 20 years into the past and they will say "wow, perfect"

        For my third run with the HR strap I decided I didn't want to run with my phone, otherwise I would have done as you suggested. I may do so for my next run and see how we get on. Although that will be with the 3.20 firmware so it gets hard to compare apples to apples.
        Well, if it get's better that wouldn't matter then!
        My FR235 tests and comparisons to a chest strap HRM:
        FR235-HRM-and-Sleep-Data-Comparison

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by philippe.berini View Post
          Crossfit... sounds like trouble to me. Sometimes I do a quick workout after a easy run, not much. Just a few sets of situps, pushups and a few weights/dumbbell excercises for arms and shoulders.
          I tried to track my HR there too... as soon as I was using a dumbbell, the FR got stuck around 70 where i started off. The chest strap gave me spikes of over 160 when doing pushups, but the FR remained "cool".
          I've not had results that poor! Anything that results in a lot of flexion through your forearms causes major problems for the optical HRM - push-ups are really bad in that respect. So I know if I have a session with a lot of push-ups or bar work then my results won't be great.

          Originally posted by philippe.berini View Post
          I'm not aware of that... Send back an iPhone 20 years into the past and they will say "wow, perfect"
          Good point. What I should have said is that I'm aware that current technology has some serious limitations/flaws, and rather than getting upset about them I work around it.

          Originally posted by philippe.berini View Post
          I'm getting a wahoo as well for workouts and tennis.
          I'm probably going to wear my Wahoo for all my workouts and runs. The main point for me personally buying the 235 was for all day heart rate tracking. Being able to use the built in HR tracking for a workout/run if I need to is nice but I can use the Wahoo if I want more accurate results and then make use of the all-day tracking information that the 235 gives me.

          Comment


          • #6
            I used the Other profile when I did my daily push-ups earlier today and HR recording was all kinds of messed up. Even though I had GPS set to off it still showed me wandering around the building when I was actually sitting quite still between sets.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by R_Tellis View Post
              I used the Other profile when I did my daily push-ups earlier today and HR recording was all kinds of messed up. Even though I had GPS set to off it still showed me wandering around the building when I was actually sitting quite still between sets.
              As noted above push-ups are one of optical HRM's biggest weakness. Not sure how you got a map of you walking around if you had GPS turned off? My sessions with GPS turned off show no mapping data?

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by carl.andersson View Post
                As noted above push-ups are one of optical HRM's biggest weakness. Not sure how you got a map of you walking around if you had GPS turned off? My sessions with GPS turned off show no mapping data?
                I figured it wouldn't be great, was just checking it out since I didn't have any issues with my one short bike ride the day after I got the watch. I've seen some other posters saying they had a similar issue with the Indoor Run profile still showing a GPS trace shortly after release so not unheard of.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by carl.andersson View Post
                  I've not had results that poor! Anything that results in a lot of flexion through your forearms causes major problems for the optical HRM - push-ups are really bad in that respect. So I know if I have a session with a lot of push-ups or bar work then my results won't be great.
                  Maybe it could be worn around the ankle?


                  Good point. What I should have said is that I'm aware that current technology has some serious limitations/flaws, and rather than getting upset about them I work around it.

                  I'm probably going to wear my Wahoo for all my workouts and runs. The main point for me personally buying the 235 was for all day heart rate tracking. Being able to use the built in HR tracking for a workout/run if I need to is nice but I can use the Wahoo if I want more accurate results and then make use of the all-day tracking information that the 235 gives me.
                  Same here... I do not have comfort issues with a chest strap, well, my with Polar H7 I used so far. I hope the wahoo has also a comfy strap or that I can just connect the wahoo sensor on Polars strap.


                  It's too bad, I was hoping they had fixed the GPS off issue, but it remains. Run indoors and no GPS still gives me a gps track. I'll try to turn it on and odd again to see if it helps.
                  My FR235 tests and comparisons to a chest strap HRM:
                  FR235-HRM-and-Sleep-Data-Comparison

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Cadence lock = crossover problem -> known issue for optical sensors based on that link posted in another thread : http://www.edn.com/electronics-blogs...p-5-challenges - apparently a company called PerformTek has it under control.

                    Anyway I got it yesterday on my FR235 (upgraded to FWv3.20/HRv2.30) for the first time too on an easy run with 4 fast 400s on the track, it managed to "catch" itself at the end of the 3rd fast 400 but no for the 4th. Only way to get out of it was to stop running...

                    FR235 vs HRM3 :

                    Last edited by WEBVAN; 12-10-2015, 06:42 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by WEBVAN View Post
                      Cadence lock = crossover problem -> known issue for optical sensors based on that link posted in another thread : http://www.edn.com/electronics-blogs...p-5-challenges - apparently a company called PerformTek has it under control.

                      Anyway I got it yesterday on my FR235 for the first time too on an easy run with 4 fast 400s on the track, it managed to "catch" itself at the end of the 3rd fast 400 but no for the 4th. Only way to get out of it was to stop running...

                      FR235 vs HRM3 :

                      I guess that means, after the 4th fast, when you slowed down, your spm did not change or get even faster? Could you share your GC activity or post a pic of your FR HR with a pace overlay?
                      My FR235 tests and comparisons to a chest strap HRM:
                      FR235-HRM-and-Sleep-Data-Comparison

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Yes it hung at 159 for a few seconds instead of going down with the pace like the HRM3 and then locked onto cadence and went up. What's interesting is that it had started doing that at the end of the third rep but somehow corrected itself.

                        It would be trivial for Garmin to prevent that from happening using internal cadence and actual measured speed but that still means they must find an HR to display...I'd vote for having it blanked out until it can be determined with decent confidence.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          cadence lock issues - my experience

                          Hi everyone,

                          My experience of the cadence lock issues:

                          * First few runs on software version v3.10 - No issues with heart rate tracking cadence, apart from it being a bit spiky. This was actually an improvement for me over the scosche rhythm+, where I usually have an issue for the first 1-2kms of a run where the heart rate seems to track cadence, before settling down and then tracking heart rate correctly.

                          * Upgraded to v3.13b - Did two runs, both with issues where a few km into the run it started tracking cadence.. and even after stopping a few times it just kept going back to it. I then downgraded to v3.10, and the issue has disappeared again.

                          I cant say for sure that it was the upgrade that caused the issue to appear (it may have been a bit colder on those days and I wasn't wearing gloves).. but im a bit reluctant to upgrade to 3.20 if it reintroduces the cadence lock!

                          Apart from this, Im really enjoying using the 235!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            The HR part was apparently untouched between 3.10 and 3.13 so I wouldn't read too much into this. Had your HR gotten close to your cadence on the 3.10 runs without the cadence lock problem? I only got it yesterday because my HR got close, HR/156 vs CAD/162 when the problem occurred, slowing down after the end of a rep.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by WEBVAN View Post
                              The HR part was apparently untouched between 3.10 and 3.13 so I wouldn't read too much into this. Had your HR gotten close to your cadence on the 3.10 runs without the cadence lock problem? I only got it yesterday because my HR got close, HR/156 vs CAD/162 when the problem occurred, slowing down after the end of a rep.
                              Thanks for clarifying that WEBVAN, that gives me a bit more confidence upgrading to 3.20.

                              Definitely on my second run my HR will have been nowhere near my cadence.. cadence was up in the 180s/190s, and heart rate down in the 120s/130s.. unless I slowed down / stopped momentarily to cross a road or something which may have brought my cadence down briefly.

                              Heres a screenshot.. HR started off fine for a few km, then suddenly jumps up to cadence. Theres then a drop where I stopped to try and solve the issue, but it jumped up again. I then switched it off hence the flatline.

                              cadenceandhr.jpg
                              Last edited by PETERDHM; 12-10-2015, 07:19 AM.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X