Weight Weenies
* FAQ    * Search    * Trending Topics
* Login   * Register
HOME Listings Blog NEW Galleries NEW FAQ Contact About Impressum
It is currently Fri Jan 19, 2018 7:03 am

All times are UTC+01:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 5898 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1252 253 254 255 256394 Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2013 7:03 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 4:29 am
Posts: 380
thisisatest wrote:
Klabs,
sorry, but there are quite a few parts of that quoted article that are way, way off base.
Equalizing left/right tension on a rear wheel does not help lateral stiffness.
Crossing spokes does nothing for radial stiffness.
Interlacing spokes can reduce spoke head movement, but its benefits are debatable. Many modern wheel systems, with and without straight pull spokes, forgo interlacing due to the results of their testing.
Spoke head movement isn't reduced to cut down on power loss due to friction.
there is more there, but that's all I remember...

Thanks thisisatest, no worries and appreciated. If you don't mind me asking ...

Equalizing left/right tension on a rear wheel does not help lateral stiffness ... other than bracing angle, what would you say helps lateral stiffness and why are builders so intent on using the 16:8 or 2:1 lacings?

Crossing spokes does nothing for radial stiffness ... what would you say helps radial stiffness?

Interlacing spokes can reduce spoke head movement, but its benefits are debatable. Many modern wheelsystems, with and without straight pull spokes, forego interlacing due to the results of their testing ... are you able to expand on this. Were the tests with 2x, 3x and/or 4x lacings?

Spoke head movement isn't reduced to cut down on power loss due to friction ... I do not remember mentioning Spoke head movement, but what would you say helps improve power loss in a wheel?


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2013 11:32 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 4:29 am
Posts: 380
I just saw this which means that it is impossible to achieve rear wheel bracing angles of 10 degrees unless a 16:8 or 2:1 hub is used (and then it would only achieved on the NDS). Perhaps that why 650 wheels are being talked about again ...
Perhaps front wheel bracing angles are 10 degrees.
So I need to do more reading. There seems to be so much contrary information out there ... :-(
{USERNAME} wrote:
Avg bracing angles and tension ratios based on an ERD of 587 24H 2xNDS 2xDS
Model...............NDS/DS Angle...Tension Ratio
Alchemy UL......7.8 / 3.7............48%
CK R45.............7.4 / 3.5............47%
DT240..............6.7 / 3.5............51%
Extralite SLX.....7.5 / 3.5............46%
Tune 170.........7.3 / 3.7............51%
WI T11..............7.7 / 3.3............43%


Top
   
Posted: Sun Jan 27, 2013 11:32 am 


Top
   
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2013 3:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 10:32 am
Posts: 603
Location: Estonia
rainerhq wrote:
Those U-shape chinese rims are very attractive, so I decided to build myself a pair of training wheels.
I´m 67kg (147lbs) and I live in very flat country.
Here´s my plan:
Front hub: Circus Monkey HRW, FTF 69mm
Spokes: 20 Sapim Laser, radial

About this builds front wheel...
Ebay seller said that radial lacing is allowed, but, well.
If I go 1x. How does it affect ride? Spokes will be a bit longer and it adds weight, but what else?

_________________
"Nothing compares to the simple pleasure of a bike ride"
Jamis Renegade Expert
Spark 900 RC


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2013 4:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2003 9:47 pm
Posts: 2196
Location: Santa Cruz, California, USA
There is no noticeable difference in ride between radial and 1x lacing.

Klabs, can you show where there is any "power loss" in a wheel? I think the amount of flexing/wind up is very small, and since the the system is basically a spring, is returned for the most part.


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 12:49 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 4:29 am
Posts: 380
Hi Eric, what I have read states spoke to spoke friction consumes energy which apparently is the reason for interlacing. I doubt this is very much and thisisatest has indicated that tests indicate that it is nolonger regarded as an issue ... thanks


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 2:14 am 
Offline
Shop Owner

Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 4:02 am
Posts: 1980
Location: NoVA/DC
KLabs wrote:
thisisatest wrote:
Klabs,
sorry, but there are quite a few parts of that quoted article that are way, way off base.
Equalizing left/right tension on a rear wheel does not help lateral stiffness.
Crossing spokes does nothing for radial stiffness.
Interlacing spokes can reduce spoke head movement, but its benefits are debatable. Many modern wheel systems, with and without straight pull spokes, forgo interlacing due to the results of their testing.
Spoke head movement isn't reduced to cut down on power loss due to friction.
there is more there, but that's all I remember...

Thanks thisisatest, no worries and appreciated. If you don't mind me asking ...

Equalizing left/right tension on a rear wheel does not help lateral stiffness ... other than bracing angle, what would you say helps lateral stiffness and why are builders so intent on using the 16:8 or 2:1 lacings?

Crossing spokes does nothing for radial stiffness ... what would you say helps radial stiffness?

Interlacing spokes can reduce spoke head movement, but its benefits are debatable. Many modern wheelsystems, with and without straight pull spokes, forego interlacing due to the results of their testing ... are you able to expand on this. Were the tests with 2x, 3x and/or 4x lacings?

Spoke head movement isn't reduced to cut down on power loss due to friction ... I do not remember mentioning Spoke head movement, but what would you say helps improve power loss in a wheel?


Personally, I'm a fan of 2:1 lacing. It does even out tensions to a large degree. If starting with a clean sheet of paper, one could then move the left flange to the left even more, increasing the bracing angle of the left side even more, increasing lateral stiffness, and still have decent tension differential.
The benefits are a product of many changes, not merely evening out tension. Conventionally, evening out tension means moving the left flange in towards the right. This trades lateral stiffness IN BOTH DIRECTIONS for a gain of left spoke tension. If the system does not load the wheel sideways at all (like if it was only going to be used on an indoor trainer), then spoke fatigue life could be improved with this. otherwise, it's a big fat fail.
Radial stiffness is mainly increased by using a rim with a very tall, triangular cross section. Think aero wheels. The newer blunt edge aero wheels give back a little radial stiffness. Whether increasing radial stiffness is a good thing or a bad thing is up to you.
Interlacing test results- I personally have not seen the results. If interlacing was beneficial, all the big companies with their wheelsystems would be doing it. Most are not. Considering all the effort a wheelbuilder puts in to making the spoke as straight as possible from flange to nipple, it is a bit odd that we choose to introduce a kink in the middle.
Power loss in a wheel is not a big issue, I don't believe it is even considered in wheel design. High lateral stiffness, sufficient torsional stiffness, spoke fatigue life, rim fatigue life, rim durability, serviceability, etc. (and aesthetics!) are the main issues.


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 3:51 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2005 4:08 am
Posts: 278
Getting a pair of H PLUS SON Archetype, and got a pair of hubs salvaged from a pair of Roval, can anyone help me out with getting the right spoke length?

The ERD for the Archetype is 595, this is my first time measuring a straight pull hub, can someone tell me how to properly measure them? Also the rear is a 2:1 so how do I get the right cross/length.

I've used the spocalc, is there anything else better out there?

Thanks


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 9:54 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 4:29 am
Posts: 380
Hi thisisatest, with 16:8 (2:1) what DS lacing (1x, 2x, 3x or even 4x) would you use for >90 kg riders, and what kgf spoke tensions would you expect ...

Although further increasing the NDS bracing angle improves NDS lateral stiffness but won't the DS bracing angle/DS lateral stiffness still be an issue (<4 degrees) ...

Although weight and strength can be issue, to improve DS bracing angle it would appear that we should be using 38 or 50mm deep rims and hubs with a >60mm dia DS flange. It appears that a DS bracing angle of >5 degress might be sufficient, in which case perhaps the 2:1 lacing becomes less important ... what do you think?

If you could get the hubs and rims, what do you think of an 18:9 or even a 20:10 ... thanks


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 11:12 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:38 pm
Posts: 293
virenque wrote:
Getting a pair of H PLUS SON Archetype, and got a pair of hubs salvaged from a pair of Roval, can anyone help me out with getting the right spoke length?

The ERD for the Archetype is 595, this is my first time measuring a straight pull hub, can someone tell me how to properly measure them? Also the rear is a 2:1 so how do I get the right cross/length.

I've used the spocalc, is there anything else better out there?

Thanks


I'd strongly recommend measuring the ERD of each rim individually. H PLUS SON recently changed the design slightly, increasing the ERD. Of the four rims I recently built, I think two were the new size and two were the old (slightly lighter) size. These were all from the same shop, ordered at the same time.

_________________
Blog: http://thesetbackpost.com/


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 5:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2005 4:08 am
Posts: 278
hubs i got are from this pair of roval, need to know how to get the length for the rear as it's a 2:1

Image


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 9:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 2:49 pm
Posts: 844
Location: Mårslet, Denmark
virenque wrote:
hubs i got are from this pair of roval, need to know how to get the length for the rear as it's a 2:1


I'm starting a build with exactly these hubs using Reynolds Assault rims (ERD 566mm). To my knowledge there is no tool available that can calculate the DS spokes on for these hubs. I was recommended to use x2 and 32 spokes in the DT calculator and subtract 2mm to take into account the adjecent placement of the DS spokes.

For my rims which use Internal nipples I have ordered 270mm for the front wheel, 274mm for the NDS and 260mm for the DS.

Edit: I haven't build the wheels yet as I'm waiting on delivery of the spokes. I'll report back when I know if they fit.

_________________
It's online again:The Machinist

My CAAD10:http://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=109014


Last edited by Anders on Tue Feb 05, 2013 9:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 10:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 4:29 am
Posts: 380
Hi Anders are those Reynolds Assault rims 46mm deep? What is the DS flange diameter of the Roval hub ... thanks


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 10:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 2:49 pm
Posts: 844
Location: Mårslet, Denmark
KLabs wrote:
Hi Anders are those Reynolds Assault rims 46mm deep? What is the DS flange diameter of the Roval hub ... thanks


Yes they are 46mm. The DS flange diameter is 61mm.

_________________
It's online again:The Machinist

My CAAD10:http://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=109014


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 12:18 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 7:24 pm
Posts: 350
I'd like to build a wheelset with the new Pacenti SL23 rims. It should be an all-circomstances wheelset (roads in flanders and a few times a year a cobble stone section, but that isn't the real goal of the wheelset).
Given my weight of 60kgs, would a 20/24 build be strong enough?

_________________
I Will make the leap


Top
   
Posted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 12:18 am 


Top
   
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 12:36 am 
Offline
in the industry

Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 7:25 pm
Posts: 3318
Location: Glermsford, Suffolk U.K
Klabs

Radial stiffness is almost entirely dependent on the radial stiffness of the rim (if steel spokes are used) which is why deep v rim are raidally stiff. If alloy or Ti spokes are used this is no longer true and the spokes do change radial stiffness.
High radial stifness allows few spokes to be used as the rim will deform less under load from lumps and bumps so the NDS spokes (as these are under less tension) will be less likely to lose tension. This helps spoke life.

This is a test has explained the benefits of 2:1 lacing with respect to lateral wheel stiffness but it does require a stiffer rim to pull it of as you do end up with fewer spokes unless you have a 27H drim and go for 18:9 lacing but not many rims around like this. For DS lacing on a 2:1 pattern why not use whatever you would use for that number of spokes DS. So for 16:8 then 3x DS would be sensible unless you build 32 pokes wheels 2x.

Wheel builders interlace mainly because it is what we have always done, we like the look and because it does no harm. Factory wheel builders to not because it does no harm and it make building the wheel simpler and that mean more money for them.

As for hub wind up as already said it is not a problem nor is wheel unwind up in general. For 28 spoke wheel I prefer 2x even though the spokes do not exit the hub in tangential way. Tortional stiffness will still be good and lateral stiffness is slightly increased. Also spoke do not cross the flange, I dislike that. Although 3x can work. You can worry about tortional stiffness more on disc brake wheels and then the way you lace will change a bit. Even than many 28 spoke disc brake MTB wheels will be 2x.

_________________
www.thecycleclinic.co.uk


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 5898 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1252 253 254 255 256394 Next

   Similar Topics   Author   Replies   Views   Last post 
There are no new unread posts for this topic. Another Shoe Thread

in MTB

LeDuke

10

902

Mon Jan 15, 2018 6:09 pm

LeDuke View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Thread together BB for BBRight

in Road

morganb

8

851

Wed Sep 27, 2017 6:09 pm

stevod View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. 2018 PRO thread

[ Go to page: 116 17 18 19 20 ]

in Cycle Chat

Nefarious86

296

20501

Fri Jan 19, 2018 6:46 am

jooo View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Ultra Torque L/H thread

[ Go to page: 1 2 ]

in Road

beanbiken

16

943

Tue Jul 25, 2017 3:24 pm

AJS914 View the latest post


All times are UTC+01:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 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:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited