The wheelbuilding thread

Everything about building wheels, glueing tubs, etc.
bm0p700f
in the industry
Posts: 3505
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 7:25 pm
Location: Glermsford, Suffolk U.K
Contact:

by bm0p700f

In the U.K spaim stright pulls are special order only through the distributor. they don't stock them. Bite the bullet and by the kit. More spokes might go.

by Weenie


User avatar
euan
Posts: 1487
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 11:20 am

by euan

So I'm going to be building a triplet rear wheel using a BHS SL211. I'm just a little bit confused about the SCC part of Jeremy's formula. SCC is defined as spoke circle diameter multiplied by pi. Is the spoke circle diameter the distance from centre to centre of opposite spoke holes?

Thanks for any help.
"Step forward the climber and all those who worship at the altar of lightness" - R. Millar

bm0p700f
in the industry
Posts: 3505
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 7:25 pm
Location: Glermsford, Suffolk U.K
Contact:

by bm0p700f

I interpreted the same way you have. It spits out sensible results that way.

diarmuidc
Posts: 42
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 6:42 pm

by diarmuidc

Looking at getting a set of wheels built up. Thinking Ambrosio Crono F20, Record 32H hubs and DT Revs as spokes.

A few questions
1. Are the DT Revs a bad idea, esp on DS rear? Mainly going for them because they are much cheaper than the CX-Rays
2. What cross on these? 2x front 3x back?
3. Was considering the Nemesis but would that be overkill for me and my 62kg frame? I don't exactly ride Pave (but do race Irish roads)

Thanks

User avatar
euan
Posts: 1487
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 11:20 am

by euan

bm0p700f wrote:I interpreted the same way you have. It spits out sensible results that way.


Where I'm getting confused is that in the example I saw, the flange diameter wasn't multiplied by pi and it produces a difference of over 1mm

For example the plan is to lace a Stans Alpha 340 to the SL211. ERD is 593, flange diameter is 49.3 and spacing is 16.75. For 48x5 DT Spoke Calc gives a 290.2mm spoke length. From my understanding of Jeremy's formula to get the adjustment for triplet you do:

290.2 - (49.3*pi)*0.0104

However following the example it would be:

290.2 - 49.3*0.0104
"Step forward the climber and all those who worship at the altar of lightness" - R. Millar

bm0p700f
in the industry
Posts: 3505
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 7:25 pm
Location: Glermsford, Suffolk U.K
Contact:

by bm0p700f

Euan as I have never done it I cannot say for sure. The latter calc gives a result closer to Mackers method of 2.3 or 3.4x fro2x or 3x wheels.

Diarmudic 3x lacing for 32H please. Rev's will be fine I am running a set of 28H RR415 with Sapim Lasers all round and they are fine. However there is alittle bit of flex when standing up and putting out some torque. The use of 2.0/1.8/2.0mm spokes DS helps cure that problem and leads to a durable rear wheel. You could try ACI's 2.0/1.7/2.0mm spokes or Sapims D-light 2.0/1.65/2.0mm spokes for greater stiffness over revs/lasers.

I would use Sapim spokes as they are cheaper than DT spokes and ust as good and Race DS and Lasers NDS is a combination that works well.

User avatar
euan
Posts: 1487
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 11:20 am

by euan

So far I've used three different methods and have got values ranging from 287 up to 289. Fun fun fun.
"Step forward the climber and all those who worship at the altar of lightness" - R. Millar

bm0p700f
in the industry
Posts: 3505
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 7:25 pm
Location: Glermsford, Suffolk U.K
Contact:

by bm0p700f

Then use 288mm and all will be well I hope.

User avatar
kavitator
Posts: 1141
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2008 9:07 pm
Location: Slovenia---that forest land

by kavitator

Question about lacing patteren

Why some wheels didnt have standard over-under patteren (at 2x cross)?
just under- under or over- over

Or for straight pull spokes that is not important (like Campagnolo Bora 2)?

bm0p700f
in the industry
Posts: 3505
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 7:25 pm
Location: Glermsford, Suffolk U.K
Contact:

by bm0p700f

My understanding is the under over or over under crossing was to brace the spokes to help prevent unwinding and improve wheel stiffness. I cannot see however how it does either. I have always built under-over/over-under beause I think it looks better.

I cannot see any good reason why laing under under or over over would not work as well.

User avatar
kavitator
Posts: 1141
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2008 9:07 pm
Location: Slovenia---that forest land

by kavitator

spoke is virtualy shorter - but has any effect on stiffnes?
like tideing and soldering at crossing - i didnt try but it has no effect on stiffnes ( prowheelbuilders internet book)

unwinding is problem mostly at NDS where spokes mostly are radial

i got better feeling with over under (or under over) than over over or under under - when put tension on spokes

at crossing they just " glue" togehter :)

eric
Posts: 2196
Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2003 9:47 pm
Location: Santa Cruz, California, USA
Contact:

by eric

On the rear it makes a difference which way the pulling spokes go. If the last cross has the pulling spoke on the outside (head out), tension on it will pull the spokes inward. If it's on the inside (head in), tension on the pulling spoke will pull the spokes outward. That reduces clearance between the spoke and derailleur cage.

I read somewhere that Mavic did an experiment on their pro neutral support wheels, lacing them each way and recording what happened. They found that the heads in lacing for pulling spokes made more reliable wheels. I wish I could find that reference again.

I've done both and haven't noticed a difference, but since I only build wheels for myself my sample size is too small.

bm0p700f
in the industry
Posts: 3505
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 7:25 pm
Location: Glermsford, Suffolk U.K
Contact:

by bm0p700f

I also have a better feeling when building a wheel with the spokes interlaced. Mavic do some of there wheels without interlacing though don't they.

thisisatest
Shop Owner
Posts: 1980
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 4:02 am
Location: NoVA/DC

by thisisatest

eric wrote:On the rear it makes a difference which way the pulling spokes go. If the last cross has the pulling spoke on the outside (head out), tension on it will pull the spokes inward. If it's on the inside (head in), tension on the pulling spoke will pull the spokes outward. That reduces clearance between the spoke and derailleur cage.

I read somewhere that Mavic did an experiment on their pro neutral support wheels, lacing them each way and recording what happened. They found that the heads in lacing for pulling spokes made more reliable wheels. I wish I could find that reference again.

I've done both and haven't noticed a difference, but since I only build wheels for myself my sample size is too small.


i remember that test. heads out had marginally shorter lifespan. pulling spokes with all elbows left and with all elbows right were off the back.
i typically build with pulling spokes heads out bc i find it easier/more intuitive to turn the hub that way when building.

by Weenie


dane476
Posts: 205
Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2006 8:34 pm

by dane476

Hi
I have a set of ultegra wh-r6600 wheels but the rear hub is knackered, would this dura ace hub work??? http://item.mobileweb.ebay.co.uk/viewit ... 6061493269
Cheers

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post