The wheelbuilding thread

Everything about building wheels, glueing tubs, etc.
KLabs
Posts: 380
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 4:29 am

by KLabs

WinterRider wrote:My interest in radial lacing rear FH's stems from my 3 triplet builds to date. First two feature NDS radial heads in... 36H and 24H in 26".
The last not a true triplet I guess.. 28H going 18-10. Came about only as the lightly used rim (Kinlin generic I believe.. low 400's grs) and new Shimano hub (lower end) were sitting here. IMO the 24H triplet in 700 isn't enough for my weight.. hence this assembly for an experiment/trial. To maximize tension balance I laced it heads out.. tension both side runs in the low 120's kgf range... fairly evenly balanced around the wheel.

I find the triplet concept interesting... time will tell riding though how practical it is at my weight level. Has added a good deal of interest for me building.. chasing our winter AWAY...

Sapim Strong spokes btw. Not WW.. but suit this trial I thought.

Hi WinterRider, I had an idea about your 18-10 lacing arrangement :)
Have a look at the following using a CK R45 32H 8/9/10spd hub and Stans Alpha 340 28H Rim ERD = 591mm ...

CK R45 32H 8/9/10spd hub, 130mm OLD, flange Ø = 51mm/51mm, CTF = 18.9mm/34.6mm
DS - 3xDS ... Bracing Angle = 3.8 degrees, 2xDS ... Bracing Angle = 3.9 degrees
NDS - 2 x 5 spoke Crows Foot lacing (with the 2 radial spokes heads out, the others heads in (good to very good torque control) ... Bracing Angle = 7.3 degrees :D

Total Bracing Angle (TBA) :)
- 3xDS ... 3.8 + 7.3 = 11.1 (good lateral wheel stiffness, very good control of torque effects)
- 2xDS ... 3.9 + 7.3 = 11.2 (good lateral wheel stiffness, good control of torque effects)

NDS ratio ... with these figures, DS spoke tension could be 90kgf :)
- 3xDS ... 52% * 18/10 = 93.6%
- 2xDS ... 53% * 18/10 = 95.4%

Using the above as an example, you could build a rear wheel like this (depending on TBA, which indicates lateral stiffness) using Sapim Laser or cxray spokes, Campagnolo or Miche Racing Box or Novatec F482SB/F162S or BHS SL211B or Shimano or Hope or Bitex hubs, and almost any Rims ... :)

Like NDS ratio, a rear wheel needs sufficient lateral stiffness for a riders weight and/or power. Although as a riders weight/power increases so does wheels lateral stiffness need to increase from average to good to very good to excellent :)
It would appear that TBA reflects lateral stiffness, or until proven otherwise :), where ...
- very bad < 10.0 degrees (very light rider/low to good power or light rider/low power)
- bad >= 10.0 and < 10.5 degrees
- average >= 10.5 and < 11.0 degrees
- good >= 11.0 and < 11.5 degrees (very light rider/very high power or light rider/very high power or normal rider(75/85kg)/high power or heavy rider/low to good power)
- very good >= 11.5 and < 12.0 degrees
- excellent >= 12.0 and < 12.5 degrees (heavy rider/high power)
- very excellent >= 12.5 degrees (heavy rider/very high power or very heavy rider/low to good power)

What do you think ... :)

by Weenie


bm0p700f
in the industry
Posts: 3709
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 7:25 pm
Location: Glermsford, Suffolk U.K
Contact:

by bm0p700f

Seriouly total bracing angle in mathematically meaningless. stop qoting it! You cannot add the bracing the angles and then work out the lateral tension/stifness component. You have to do that for the DS and then the NDS and then sum if you want to do that. Try doing the sums KLabs and you will see.

The individual bracing angles are enough and most of the lateral wheel stiffness comes from the NDS spokes but thin spokes are sufficent for good stiffness on the non drive side. You could always use K walker ACI alpina DB 2.0/1.7mm/2.0mm all round on the rear.
I am going to have to start building up my stock of these.

KLabs
Posts: 380
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 4:29 am

by KLabs

bm0p700f wrote:Seriouly total bracing angle in mathematically meaningless. stop qoting it! You cannot add the bracing the angles and then work out the lateral tension/stifness component. You have to do that for the DS and then the NDS and then sum if you want to do that. Try doing the sums KLabs and you will see.

The individual bracing angles are enough and most of the lateral wheel stiffness comes from the NDS spokes but thin spokes are sufficent for good stiffness on the non drive side. You could always use K walker ACI alpina DB 2.0/1.7mm/2.0mm all round on the rear.
I am going to have to start building up my stock of these.

Hi bm0p700f, no worries and to ask, do you have the maths to shows that Total Bracing Angle is meaningless?
Yes, definitely most of the lateral stiffness is coming from the NDS bracing but there is still some lateral stiffness coming from the DS.
The summing of DS/NDS lateral stiffness will determine the wheels mechanical lateral stiffness ... the principle here is mechanics which includes geometry :)

Actually I have done the sums/maths (and so far you have only written conjecture) ...

I just did a further check of the maths and it would appear that an FTF spacing of about 60mm is possible :)
Using a FTF spacing = 60mm, flange Ø = 51mm/51mm, CTF = 17.0mm/43.0mm, ERD = 600mm (Velocity A23), will produce
- Traditional 12:12, 14:14, 16:16, 18:18 spoke arrangement produces a NDS ratio = 41%, which is unacceptable
- 16:8 spoke arrangement produces a NDS ratio = 41% * 16/8 = 82%, which is very good
- 16:12 spoke arrangement produces a NDS ratio = 41% * 16/12 = 54.6%, which is acceptable
- 18:10 spoke arrangement produces a NDS ratio = 41% * 18/10 = 73.8%, which is good (WinterRiders excellent option)
- TBA = 11.8 to 12.5 degrees (3x to 0x), which is good to excellent lateral stiffness.

I know from the TBA that a 16:8, 16:12, and 18:10 spoke arrangement, should produce a rear wheel that is very strong and very laterally stiff, but a traditional spoke arrangement cannot be used because the NDS ratio = 41% is unacceptable (even though lateral stiffness is not an issue, the wheel is not radially stiff enough) :)
The 18:10 spoke arrangements, depending on NDS spoke lacing, is perhaps the best for durability and the 16:12 is perhaps the best for spoke breakage and repair :)
A heavy and powerful rider should find this wheel stiff and responsive :)
Although FTF = 60 is probably a little wide for NDS heads in lacing ... so FTF could be a little wider, say 62mm, and crows foot heads out lacing used :)

At this time there is no need to stop quoting TBA, and it would be wonderful if you tell me where it is wrong :)

Actually, if the DS/NDS bracing angles were each 6 degrees (or more), then we would not be having this discussion and this thread would not be necessary.
I have rarely seen a front wheel discussed in this thread and that is because left/right bracing angles are equal and >= 6 degrees, although this is changing with the introduction of disc brakes :)

Hey bm0p700f, do you have anything (mathematically) that simplifies, or assists, someone to decide that a hub, rim, and spoke lacing pattern can be used successfully for their weight and power ... all good, thanks :)

danny
Posts: 261
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2005 11:51 am
Location: arezzo (italy)
Contact:

by danny

anyone can tell me which is the maximum tension of spokes for chinese 20mm carbon rims? I use pillar 1420 blade spokes.

User avatar
WinterRider
Posts: 402
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2013 2:46 pm

by WinterRider

Bracing angles.

I can not find the post back into this series where the writer points to stronger/stiffer spokes on the NDS vs DS. That coincides with my idea/s per NDS stiffness relating to lateral tensions.. and then finding the higher tension triplet NDS lacings function superior.. for MY purposes.

Consider.. the scenario: you have 16 NDS spokes tensioned to 55 kgf. Remove 8.. lace those NDS remainder heads in and finish with 105+ kgf.. near DS tension. Higher tensions translate to durability and stiffness. That's my story.. and I'm stick'n to it... 8) for now.

KLabs I'll see what I can find from the empirical side via that hybrid crow's foot. I'd be inclinded to go 2 hybrid's.. and then two crossing using four holes.. both of course mirroring the other .. this NDS. Gives the advantageous flange angle of departure.. only means two radial's this route. Assuming all heads in. Yes the 36H hub is problematic.. with the desired quality and weight concerns. The H3 looks most promising to date.

bm0p700f
in the industry
Posts: 3709
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 7:25 pm
Location: Glermsford, Suffolk U.K
Contact:

by bm0p700f

The max tension will depend i part on the thickness of the spoke bed and that varies betwwen rim models like it does with alloy rims.

danny
Posts: 261
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2005 11:51 am
Location: arezzo (italy)
Contact:

by danny

yes it's true but anyone have experience with chinese carbon rims?

KLabs
Posts: 380
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 4:29 am

by KLabs

danny wrote:anyone can tell me which is the maximum tension of spokes for chinese 20mm carbon rims? I use pillar 1420 blade spokes.

Hi danny, you really need to provide more specifications about this rim ... can you provide a link which will provide details about this rim ... thanks :)

You could always assume the worst (to be on the safe side) and treat it like a Stans Alpha 340 rim or one of the lighter rims (seems a reasonable approach) ... :)

User avatar
WinterRider
Posts: 402
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2013 2:46 pm

by WinterRider

Anyone have any experience with this hub or company? Shown at 228 grs.

Your comments are welcomed.

http://store.velo-orange.com/index.php/vo-hi-lo-cassette-rear-hub.html

danny
Posts: 261
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2005 11:51 am
Location: arezzo (italy)
Contact:

by danny

my carbon rims are this but for tubular:
http://www.ebay.it/itm/New-Full-Carbon- ... 3f20578deb" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

KLabs
Posts: 380
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 4:29 am

by KLabs

Hi WinterRider, it looks like it could be an excellent 36H hub spec wise ... good find :)
Be interesting to know what the internal construction is ... :)
I wonder if the freehub is common and upgradeable to S11spd ... :)

Here's the maths ...
VO Hi-Low 36H Hub, FSC Ø 38.0/47.0mm, CTF 38.5/17.5mm, FTF = 56.0mm, ERD = 600mm (Velocity A23)
- 0xDS 0xNDS ... 7.8 + 3.6 = 11.4'
- 3xDS 3xNDS ... 7.4 + 3.4 = 11.1'
- NDS 2 x 5 spoke Crows foot = 7.7, DS 6 x 3 spoke Crows foot = 3.6 (Crows Foot radial spoke heads out, others heads in) = 11.3' ... good lateral stiffness, good torque control
- NDS 2 x 5 spoke Crows foot = 7.7, DS 3 x 5 spoke Crows foot and 3 x Radial spokes (heads in) = 3.6 (Crows Foot radial spoke heads out, others heads in) = 11.3' ... good lateral stiffness, very good torque control

NDS ratio = 46% * 18/10 = 82.8% ... very good :)

Please check my maths and confirm, and lets us know what the internals are like, and what freehub is used ... thanks :)

KLabs
Posts: 380
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 4:29 am

by KLabs

Hey WinterRider, the VO Grand Cru Touring Hub has stunning specs and is super easy to maintain (no tools required), http://store.velo-orange.com/index.php/grand-cru-4-bearing-hub.html ... just a little heavy (325g) :)

VO Grand Cru Touring 36H Hub, FSC Ø 60/60mm, CTF 40/17.5mm, FTF = 57.5mm, ERD = 600mm (Velocity A23)
- 0xDS 0xNDS ... TBA = 8.5 + 3.7 = 12.2' ... excellent
- 3xDS 3xNDS ... TBA = 8.0 + 3.5 = 11.5' ... very good

NDS ratio = 44% * 18/9 = 88% ... excellent
NDS ratio = 44% * 16/8 = 88% ... excellent
NDS ratio = 44% * 18/10 = 79.2% ... very good
NDS ratio = 44% * 18/12 = 66% ... good
NDS ratio = 44% * 12/8 = 66% ... good
NDS ratio = 44% * 14/10 = 61.6% ... good
NDS ratio = 44% * 16/12 = 58.6% ... acceptable
NDS ratio = 44% * 18/14 = 56.6% ... acceptable
NDS ratio = 44% * 12/10 = 52.8% ... acceptable
Last edited by KLabs on Thu Mar 07, 2013 4:19 am, edited 2 times in total.

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

by eric

Danny, when I tensioned my FarSports 24m tubulars I took the DS to 110kgf. I think if the rim can't handle that then its questionable if it's strong enough to ride on.

leejdavies
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Mar 08, 2013 11:47 am

by leejdavies

I'm building up some new wheels and just after some advice.

Stans Alpha 28h rear 3cross DS and radial NDS (does this work?) with CX-ray's

*OR*

Stans Alpha 24h rear 16:8 lacing pattern — understanding this provides a more equally spoke tension but which would build a better wheel? I assume through greater spoke count it'll be the 28h option?

Also, would a 20h front radially laced be strong enough for a rider ~78kg? Currently thinking of pairing a 24h to the 28 rear but also have the option to go 20h and save a few precious grams, although strength really is my obvious first concern hence thinking 24h.

And I know they increased the strength of the 340 last year but will it still stand up to the job for me or shall I opt for the 400 on the rear? I think the set up should still yield a sub 1500g wheelset which would be ace but I'd love something closer to 1300g so would rather the 340.

So in short — 20/24h or 20h-24h/28h for a ~78kg rider?

Any help/advice much appreciated.

by Weenie


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

by eric

How durable do you want these wheels to be? How hard are you on wheels- do you break spokes often? Rider weight is not the only factor.


A while back someone asked about soldering and tying improving wheel stiffness. I was re-reading Jobst's book last night and found that he did a test to determine that and found no improvement in either static lateral stiffness or tortional stiffness under load. Go read it for the details.

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post