HOT: Active* forum members generally gain 5% discount at starbike.com store!
Weight Weenies
* FAQ    * Search    * Trending Topics
* Login   * Register
HOME Listings Blog NEW Articles FAQ Contact About




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 57 posts ] 
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Jul 26, 2013 10:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 5:56 am
Posts: 333
Advances in marketing materials will compensate, Mr.Gib.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 26, 2013 10:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 1:31 am
Posts: 329
Have no idea about carbon fiber and other building materials. Think aluminum alloys will be around for awhile because they are lightweight and easily worked and cheap. Frames, rims, cranks, brakes, etc. Aluminum alloy of some sort. What I think is coming is more integration. Recently we have had cranksets and bottom brackets molded into the frame. They seem to work well and are easy to install. And headsets that are molded into the frame and use drop in bearings. The integrated seatpost does not seem to be a very good idea since seatposts require a fair amount of movement. Storck has a frame where it uses mini V brakes molded into the frame. Having integrated brakes like this seems to save weight and be sort of simple in function. I'd like to see more road bikes use mini V brakes like the Storck bike. Other things to integrate: crankset/chainrings/pedals, seatpost/saddle(questionable), stem/bars(questionable), hub/spokes/rims. There are a few things on bikes you could make as one unit instead of separate parts bolted together.


Top
 Profile  
 
Posted: Fri Jul 26, 2013 10:26 pm 


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 27, 2013 9:37 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 10:40 pm
Posts: 75
Location: Transilvania
Zakalwe wrote:
You find fish in water too, but that doesn't mean water is made of fish.



Cool story Bro.
Fish aren't chemically bonded to water.
Water is simplistic example,, any substance remotely more complicated (eg, simple organic compounds) and above will have Carbon in it at the chemical level. Its pervasive nature was point being made.

_________________
No one would have believed in the formative years of the twenty first century that this world was being watched keenly and closely by intelligences greater than man's and yet as mortal as his own; that as men busied themselves about their various concerns


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 27, 2013 12:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 8:34 pm
Posts: 509
I think one of the neat things will be 3D printed Metallic Bikes. Just think of how light and stiff you could make a 3D printed ti bike if can vary tube thickness along the whole length of the tube, reinforce it internally with latice work if required, Graphics embedded as part of the print, no welding, between tubes - just print the whole thing as one.

Your labour costs would be incredibly low.

It could rival Carbon for stiffness and weight (maybe not Graphene, but something in the sub 7-800 gram range should be entirely possible)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 27, 2013 2:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 6:40 pm
Posts: 196
Metal 3D printers produce an extremely sub-par product with respect to material characteristics. This is for two reasons. (A) You cannot properly heat treat the material to achieve a good grain structure. This grain structure determines yield strength, how brittle the material is, hardness, etc. And (B) the composition of the doping elements in the material are generally engineered for printing performance to achieve better tolerances. This leads to materials being designed for ideal phase diagrams (when it turns to liquid and solid and such). Finally, there is also a problem in that you can't control the internal stresses of the members as you can when CNC'ing and welding. We're a LONG way off before 3D printing metal can compete with traditional building techniques.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 27, 2013 2:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 8:34 pm
Posts: 509
dvincere wrote:
Metal 3D printers produce an extremely sub-par product with respect to material characteristics. This is for two reasons. (A) You cannot properly heat treat the material to achieve a good grain structure. This grain structure determines yield strength, how brittle the material is, hardness, etc. And (B) the composition of the doping elements in the material are generally engineered for printing performance to achieve better tolerances. This leads to materials being designed for ideal phase diagrams (when it turns to liquid and solid and such). Finally, there is also a problem in that you can't control the internal stresses of the members as you can when CNC'ing and welding. We're a LONG way off before 3D printing metal can compete with traditional building techniques.


Maybe - and I would assume you've seen this - it looks promising http://www.bikerumor.com/2013/05/20/cha ... on-begins/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 27, 2013 3:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 6:14 am
Posts: 1229
Location: by Crystal Springs (Sawyer Creek Trail)
Notice that the main tubes aren't 3D printed? Titanium cannot match carbon. No matter how it is constructed.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 27, 2013 4:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2012 11:36 am
Posts: 20
Someday printers will have a high enough resolution and ability to have multiple printheads with different materials running through them.
A printer that can print/form metal, plastic, and other compounds simultaneously will be interesting.
Essentially a replicator like in Star Trek.
Maybe 50 years until this happens?
Tough to know since some technology grows exponentially.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 27, 2013 8:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2013 8:29 pm
Posts: 236
Horze wrote:
Zakalwe wrote:
You find fish in water too, but that doesn't mean water is made of fish.



Cool story Bro.
Fish aren't chemically bonded to water.
Water is simplistic example,, any substance remotely more complicated (eg, simple organic compounds) and above will have Carbon in it at the chemical level. Its pervasive nature was point being made.


Untrue. There are many, many, many compounds that do not involve carbon in any way, shape or form. You are correct in that organic compounds all have carbon in them, but that's only because organic compounds are defined partly by the presence of carbon.

The reason carbon is found in many places on our planet is simply that it is in the top 12 most abundant elements on the planet. It exists in every domain of life, but that doesn't mean it exists everywhere, and it doesn't mean it's the future of engineering. By your logic, oxygen and hydrogen would be the primary components of bicycles due to their prevalence in nature.

It's probably true that carbon compounds are going to be the main focus of engineering advancements for some time to come, but your logic that got you to that point is massively flawed.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jul 28, 2013 1:35 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 10:40 pm
Posts: 75
Location: Transilvania
sigismond0 wrote:
Untrue. There are many, many, many compounds that do not involve carbon in any way, shape or form. You are correct in that organic compounds all have carbon in them, but that's only because organic compounds are defined partly by the presence of carbon.


See below.

sigismond0 wrote:
The reason carbon is found in many places on our planet is simply that it is in the top 12 most abundant elements on the planet. It exists in every domain of life, but that doesn't mean it exists everywhere, and it doesn't mean it's the future of engineering. By your logic, oxygen and hydrogen would be the primary components of bicycles due to their prevalence in nature.


Indeed Carbon is the 4th most abundant element in the Universe. But Hydrogen is the most abundant.

No, my logic does not make any such claim of its wide use solely because it's abundant element. It's prevalence isn't only reason.
The element has an affinity in forming stable compounds with other structures. Because of this Carbon forms the largest majority of all compounds in the Universe. The structure of Carbon and compounds it can form makes it extremely useful in building "stuff" up. From simple organic compounds like Methane all the way up to Biology.
Because of this, Carbon can build up chains of itself, strong ones at that, into molecules of so called Polymers.

The Future of Engineering is only limited by human ingenuity. Natural Selection provides a convenient template for most common and workable denominator.



Re. 3D printing.
This is simply the automation of what can/is done by hand. The material is a prototype model. I don't expect such a model to be that useful or durable though. Just because it comes out of a machine doesn't make it better. Carbon frame production is already a form of rudimentary 3D printing, but done by hand.
It's just not very effective to build a frame this way.
Same argument applies to metal frame production. Instead of printing an entire frame using an alloy material, don't ask me how, the most plausible and closest explanation would be machining it instead. Again such a method proves very wasteful and expensive due to recycling involved. Assembling prefabricated tubes of Alloy or Carbon are simply most direct and cheap ways of building frames.

_________________
No one would have believed in the formative years of the twenty first century that this world was being watched keenly and closely by intelligences greater than man's and yet as mortal as his own; that as men busied themselves about their various concerns


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jul 28, 2013 1:44 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2013 9:16 pm
Posts: 83
Personally I would like to see more gadgets. Integrated sensor pickup. heads up displays, a reasonable power meter, hidden brakes are groovy, hidden multi-piston integrated brakes would be even more sexy, a hidden water bottle like on the shiv but for a road bike, adapting of smaller cassette gears to allow a smaller chainring, and lastly a more comfortable seat.

_________________
[img]<iframe%20height='160'%20width='300'%20frameborder='0'%20allowtransparency='true'%20scrolling='no'%20src='http://app.strava.com/athletes/1677950/activity-summary/ddf436fc1ca509b20d4637cfa80c928da771d2c6'></iframe>[/img]


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jul 28, 2013 1:56 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 5:56 am
Posts: 333
A different kid of advancement - the cardboard bicycle. (I'm sure many have seen already)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txSboSNQINs


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 23, 2007 12:41 am
Posts: 1315
Not material related but...

I remember reading an article years ago where a frame manufacture actually said it was the parameters of bicycle components that were holding them back with regard to constructing lighter, stronger frames...they were being built to accommodate component specifications... :noidea:

I guess that's why in some small ways you see companies such as LOOK & Cannondale designing chainsets to suit their frames...

_________________
"It never gets easier, you just go faster..." - Greg Lemond

"I enjoy climbing...I enjoy seeing people disappear behind me." - Robert Millar


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jul 28, 2013 6:03 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 8:53 am
Posts: 345
UCI has to go!!! right now.!!!!

The weight limit and double triangle rules are from 1907, and were created to keep the EU bike companies in business. If Lance could have raced on the Y frame, Trek and Cannondale would have been the only race bikes that anyone would have wanted and the EU builders would have went out of business back then, instead of being bought out over the past few years. They both had significant competitive advantage over everyone else. I would bet then they made those rules the UCI really had no idea what an unsafe bike looks like, screw that I still bet they have no idea what a safe bike look like now.

The riders and manufactures should be making the rules, no race radios, but you can have them in the big races, have to finish with in a certain time, but if we like you maybe not, lets measure the bikes for the 1st time with a jig that is not level on the race day of the year, or test for drugs on machines that do not meet the machines manufactures guidelines. Or my person fav, you can't have a women's TDF, because it's to complicated and we are upset on how you asked us. ( I know the drugs thing is with the labs, but as the governing body the UCI is responsible!! )

The UCI adds nothing to the sport, and have made no decisions that have improved the sport. At best they have keep it the same as it was in 1907.

C

I know nothing about bike building, but I do know that the bike manufactures are design to a "box" rule that has nothing to do with real life, except cost. There is no reason why we shouldn't be riding "lotus super bikes" that weight as little as consumer is willing to pay.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jul 28, 2013 6:25 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 4:12 pm
Posts: 2323
Location: eh?
kbbpll wrote:
Advances in marketing materials will compensate, Mr.Gib.


So true - brilliant. :D

_________________
swinter wrote:
Mr.Gib got it right


Top
 Profile  
 
Posted: Sun Jul 28, 2013 6:25 am 


Top
  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 57 posts ] 
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Attermann, Bing [Bot], ITTY, JURE, maverick_1, physeter, picshooter and 41 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

   Similar Topics   Author   Replies   Views   Last post 
There are no new unread posts for this topic. Cycling Technology

in Road

YinYang

4

1128

Wed Jan 08, 2014 6:12 pm

coloclimber View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Why is there that difference on my frame

in Road

isa

2

553

Wed May 07, 2014 4:45 pm

isa View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Look frame choice - 586 vs 595 vs 695

[ Go to page: 1, 2 ]

in Road

thencameyou

17

1658

Wed Jan 22, 2014 2:48 pm

denvertrout View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Bicycle frame analysis on FEA

in Road

An1MuS

11

1255

Thu Apr 17, 2014 12:22 pm

An1MuS View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Carbon frame painting in US?

[ Go to page: 1, 2 ]

in Road

Ltoddokc

15

1006

Fri Sep 05, 2014 8:08 pm

mjduct View the latest post


It is currently Mon Dec 22, 2014 5:21 pm

All times are UTC + 1 hour




Advertising   –  FAQ   –  Contact   –  Convert   –  About

© Weight Weenies 2000-2013
hosted by starbike.com


How to get rid of these ads? Just register!


Powered by phpBB