The wheelbuilding thread

Everything about building wheels, glueing tubs, etc.
alcatraz
Posts: 3181
Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2016 11:19 am

by alcatraz

ofsinreno wrote:
Mon Jan 13, 2020 6:57 am
Have your looked into Berd?

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk
Only read about them. I'd be concerned with longevity and stretch over time. But I don't know anything about the technology. I'm interested in carbon spokes. The kind that can be replaced. They're out there and they're very light. Priced are dropping...

by Weenie


Slammed
Posts: 162
Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2015 12:32 am

by Slammed

ofsinreno wrote:
Mon Jan 13, 2020 6:57 am
alcatraz wrote:
Slammed wrote:
Wed Jan 08, 2020 5:30 am
I'm building a new set of race wheels for the upcoming season but can't decide on spokes. The rims are schmolke TLO45s and the hubs are extralite 20/24. I weigh around 63kg and race 15-25 crits a year with a few road races thrown in. I'm tempted to go with Sapim cx supers on the front and rear nds and normal cx rays drive side. I'm slightly worried that the cx supers won't withstand a full season of crit smashing. I know 30 or 40 grams is fairly meaningless, but getting under 1000g would be nice. Are there any other spokes I should look at? or should I just stay with Sapim?
Other than the hubs being quite exotic and not so race friendly, I'd say your idea is quite good. Supers on front and NDS and cx-ray drive side.

You only have 6 spokes transmitting torque so you probably won't be winning sprints against other riders with similar power. The wheelset will not fail, except for maybe the hubs and bearings. I like extralite hubs but I wouldn't race on them. Sure your weight will help to keep things in one piece.

The hubs are compatible with carbon spokes as the spokes don't touch at the crosses (assuming straightpull). If you dare running really exotic spokes you can try and find those. The ones I've seen are around 2.9gr. I don't know their longevity.
Have your looked into Berd?

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk
Berd spokes are round so they're not very aero. I'd use them in an ultralight mtb or climbing wheelset but not for road racing. A 75g weight reduction isn't very tangible, but bladed spokes should actually make a difference in the real world.

Slammed
Posts: 162
Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2015 12:32 am

by Slammed

ofsinreno wrote:
Mon Jan 13, 2020 6:57 am
alcatraz wrote:
Slammed wrote:
Wed Jan 08, 2020 5:30 am
I'm building a new set of race wheels for the upcoming season but can't decide on spokes. The rims are schmolke TLO45s and the hubs are extralite 20/24. I weigh around 63kg and race 15-25 crits a year with a few road races thrown in. I'm tempted to go with Sapim cx supers on the front and rear nds and normal cx rays drive side. I'm slightly worried that the cx supers won't withstand a full season of crit smashing. I know 30 or 40 grams is fairly meaningless, but getting under 1000g would be nice. Are there any other spokes I should look at? or should I just stay with Sapim?
Other than the hubs being quite exotic and not so race friendly, I'd say your idea is quite good. Supers on front and NDS and cx-ray drive side.

You only have 6 spokes transmitting torque so you probably won't be winning sprints against other riders with similar power. The wheelset will not fail, except for maybe the hubs and bearings. I like extralite hubs but I wouldn't race on them. Sure your weight will help to keep things in one piece.

The hubs are compatible with carbon spokes as the spokes don't touch at the crosses (assuming straightpull). If you dare running really exotic spokes you can try and find those. The ones I've seen are around 2.9gr. I don't know their longevity.
Have your looked into Berd?

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk
Berd spokes are round so they're not very aero. I'd use them in an ultralight mtb or climbing wheelset but not for road racing. A 75g weight reduction isn't very tangible, but bladed spokes should actually make a difference in the real world.

joerg
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2020 9:57 pm

by joerg

Esteemed wheelbuilding experts,

I'm very new to this field but none the less very excited to build my first real set of wheels. To practice I've taken apart some old easton wheelset of mine and rebuild it with fresh spokes. As far as I can tell the result is quite ok.
Now I would like to build a new set of wheels for my road bike. System weight is about 95 kg and my preferred terrain is hills and mountains. So light and stiff is more important to me than aero. My reference are my current Mavic Ksyrium Elite S. I like them quite a lot, but I think the new set can be quite a bit more sexy.
My current plan is to use Halo RS6 hubs 24/32, DT swiss 411 rim, symmetrical in the front and assymetrical in the rear. I'm still a bit unsure about the spokes.

Sapim CX Ray seem to be THE spoke for hand build wheels. For my weight Sapim CX Sprint seem to be a good choice for the drive side... However I'm still wondering
* Can the wheels that I'm imagining work? Or did I miss something?
* Is 8 spokes differencs front to back a problem? Most examples that I find only have 4 spokes difference.
* Given that I plan to build a 32 spoke rear wheel, should I really opt for CX sprint? Or should I use CX ray all around?
* The rear weel drive side will be 3x crossed. How about the non drive side? Would you recommend also 3 x crossed or radial?

Thank you so much for your advice!

bm0p700f
in the industry
Posts: 5567
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 7:25 pm
Location: Glermsford, Suffolk U.K
Contact:

by bm0p700f

Less of the esteemed.

RR411 is the wrong rim for you. It's not a stiff rim. If you insist on using it you will need stiffer spokes than cx Ray's.

If you want dt rims then pick the rr511 in 20f/24r or 28r. Uses sapim.force triple butted or sapim cx force. Dt swiss have the silver alpine III spoke. Piller have options too. Cx sprint t would work for a 28 drilling. Lace 2x and you'll be happy. Thinner spokes on the left side of the rear wheel only serves to make the wheel less laterally and radially stiff. These are two characteristics you best of maximising.

If you want an alternative that I have built lots off then take the kinlin xr31t and rt rims in 20h front and 24 rear. I lace sapim cx Ray's radial front and cx force triple butted 2x for the rear wheel. You could use round laser and force spokes. Triple butted help reduce the risk of spoke failure at the elbow.

I use miche primato hubs because they are relaible due to there simplicity and big bearings.

If you use the halo hubs spoke lengths may differ.

The above suggestion is a very stiff wheelset that is no heavier than what you have planned. It's also more aero and will feel very responsive.

alcatraz
Posts: 3181
Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2016 11:19 am

by alcatraz

At 95kg system weight you could go 20/24 unless you're a sprinter or use a lighter alloy rim. Then 20/28 would be better, which seems to be the case here.

I checked specs on the primato synthesi and it says 433gr (or 443gr). Is this for the rear alone or a set?

Is the OP touring the world? If a service every 3 years is acceptable you can cut some serious weight off the hubs and go with 15267 or 6902 hub shell bearings @ near 200gr.

I'm curious to ask bmp0. Your heavier/endurance customers that buy wide flanged hubs like the primato and go with an alloy rim and a relatively low spoke count like 24-28. Don't they sometimes break NDS spokes (or crack DS rim drillings) because of the bad tension balance a wide flanged 1:1 hub creates, only to be aggravated by the higher fluctuations by using an alloy rim? Do you recommend asymmetric rims for such builds?

joerg
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2020 9:57 pm

by joerg

Thank you bm0p and alcatraz for your comments.

My initial idea was to use a less stiff but light rim like the DT 411 and compensate that by using more spokes. My back-of-the-envelope calculation was that with the DT 411 I save approx. 100 g per wheel compared to the DT 511. The additional 8 spokes when going from 24 to 32 spokes then add approx. 50 g. So in total I would save 50 g of rotating mass. In addition with 32 spokes I should get more even forces in the rim, which I imagine should help for long term stability. The additional spokes are probably disadvantageous for the aerodynamics, but that's ok for me.

So how large is the difference in stiffness between a DT 411 with 32 spokes compared to a DT 511 with 24 spokes?

The recommended kinlin rims and the much hyped Aforce AL33 are quite hard to get here in continental Europe. Would the H + son archetype be a good alternative?

robertbb
Posts: 1573
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2009 3:35 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

by robertbb

alcatraz wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 2:36 am
I'm curious to ask bmp0. Your heavier/endurance customers that buy wide flanged hubs like the primato and go with an alloy rim and a relatively low spoke count like 24-28. Don't they sometimes break NDS spokes (or crack DS rim drillings) because of the bad tension balance a wide flanged 1:1 hub creates, only to be aggravated by the higher fluctuations by using an alloy rim? Do you recommend asymmetric rims for such builds?
Really good question, interested to see his answer here too.

bm0p700f
in the industry
Posts: 5567
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 7:25 pm
Location: Glermsford, Suffolk U.K
Contact:

by bm0p700f

alcatraz wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 2:36 am
At 95kg system weight you could go 20/24 unless you're a sprinter or use a lighter alloy rim. Then 20/28 would be better, which seems to be the case here.

I checked specs on the primato synthesi and it says 433gr (or 443gr). Is this for the rear alone or a set?

A set of hubs. They are dependable hubs. Used hundreds and they dont go wrong. If they do all spares down to the ratchet rings are avialable
.


Is the OP touring the world? If a service every 3 years is acceptable you can cut some serious weight off the hubs and go with 15267 or 6902 hub shell bearings @ near 200gr.

Never found a 15267 bearing to be relaible

I'm curious to ask bmp0. Your heavier/endurance customers that buy wide flanged hubs like the primato and go with an alloy rim and a relatively low spoke count like 24-28. Don't they sometimes break NDS spokes (or crack DS rim drillings) because of the bad tension balance a wide flanged 1:1 hub creates, only to be aggravated by the higher fluctuations by using an alloy rim? Do you recommend asymmetric rims for such builds?
I use the asymmetric rear kinlin for this wheelset. Built alot of them and not one 20/24r has ever gone wrong as far as i know. I put a life of the rim warranty on them. I build with washers. No spoke failures no cracked rims. No alloy nipples failures. I have sold these to heavy aggressive riders. This combination of parts are truly made for each other. Washers stop the rims from cracking. I have built with over 1000 kinlin rims now and I dont think one of my wheels has cracked in service. All of them get washers though.

I can place the wheel on the left hand end cap and heave down with all my strength and still the NDS spokes dont loose tension and the wheel remain true. I test every one like this. I dont hold back. In fact I test most my wheels this way before I send them out. Well I dont put all my weight on them, thats unnecessary. Loading a wheel latterly till spoke just go slack is. With this kinlin miche build I cant side load enough to slackened spokes. I'm not strong enough.

This is why the 28 spoke rear is a bit unnecessary. I dont mess about.

This is why tension balance as a guide to a good wheel is frankly bulshit. The borg31 as I call it has a tension balance of 52% with an asymmetric rim. That enough. Wide flange spacing mean higher lateral stiffnes and lower spoke length changes with loading. Spoke length changes are the cause of fatigue.

Wheel stiffness dictates the size of the spoke length changes not the tension balance. Increasing spoketension by moving the left hand flange inboard means lateral stiff drops and the length changes caused by lateral loads are higher. So fatigue should occur at a faster rate.

I have build stable wheels with a 1:1 hub made by miche with 16:49mm spacing r/l. These are very stiff laterally. Again not one has gone wrong although an italian customer damaged a spoke by getting so.ething caught in the wheel. That's not the wheels fault. This wheel works due to the high lateral stiffness.

Often you here cited wheels with high tension balance are more relaible due to the spokes not going slack under load. But this is false read on. The ratio of load vs length change is stiffness in that plane. The length change results in a tension change not the other way around. So wheel stiffnes in the plane of the load dictates the length change and the fatigue suffered by that load.

The dt swiss 240 hub can replace the miche hub without changing spoke lengths so direct co.parions can be made. The dt hub has 33/17mm spacing compared to 39/16mm spacing for the miche hub. The 3mm offset rim alter those dimensions by adding 3mm to the right and subtracting 3mm of the left. The dt hub and asymmetric rim gives a 66% tension balance.

Edit the numbers below refer to lateral stiffness imparted by the spokes.
Now that also means with the miche hub using the symmetric vs asymmetric rim you see a 8% reduction in lateral stiffness with the asymmetric rim but only a 1% improvement in radial stiffness. This loss is offset by the high nds tension which does reduce the risk of rim cracking (to practically zero in this wheelset) and allows tubeless tyres to reduce tension and still high side loads cant detension spokes. With the symmetric rim it is possible for high side loads to de tension spokes with tubes tyres fitted. Hense the use of the asymmetric rim has a use here. For non tubeless wheels asymmetric rims dont offer an advantage for spoke life.

Using the dt swiss hub may increase NDS tension but the loss in lateral stiffness vs the miche hub both with asymmetric rims of 20%. That's alot so the spoke length changes will be 20% higher and so will the fatigue rate. Given spokes dont detension with the miche hub and asymmetric rim, further improving the tension balance by moving the NDS flange further in serves no purpose.

Tension balance is not a good way to judge a rear wheel.

Oddly I have had spoke failures at the nipple with 32h drilling of this rim. Not with the shallower kinlin only this one. The problem is solved by lacing with interfacing the spokes. Odd I know and why I dont build with the rim in 32h drilling. For the reasons above this drilling is completely unnecessary.

The terms used to describe wheels are often wrong in the sense that they obscure what actually happening and therefore lead to misconceptions that get repeated because they sound reasonable.

The figures used here come relative calculations based on equations given in this paper.

Bicycle Wheel Spoke Patterns and Spoke Fatigue 1 - Duke People - Duke University

They may not be measured numbers but the physics here is well worn but not often used to justify an arguement. Often statements like high NDS tension must be better are made without evidence or qualifying statement. It is nearly assumed that it's better because it more like a front wheel. It's still not a front wheel. That a better wheel because of the wide flange spacing. The even tension balnce means lower tensions are needed which is why front rims rarely crack and there is no load difference right to left.
Last edited by bm0p700f on Mon Jan 20, 2020 9:12 am, edited 6 times in total.

bm0p700f
in the industry
Posts: 5567
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 7:25 pm
Location: Glermsford, Suffolk U.K
Contact:

by bm0p700f

joerg wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 8:29 pm
Thank you bm0p and alcatraz for your comments.

My initial idea was to use a less stiff but light rim like the DT 411 and compensate that by using more spokes. My back-of-the-envelope calculation was that with the DT 411 I save approx. 100 g per wheel compared to the DT 511. The additional 8 spokes when going from 24 to 32 spokes then add approx. 50 g. So in total I would save 50 g of rotating mass. In addition with 32 spokes I should get more even forces in the rim, which I imagine should help for long term stability. The additional spokes are probably disadvantageous for the aerodynamics, but that's ok for me.


So how large is the difference in stiffness between a DT 411 with 32 spokes compared to a DT 511 with 24 spokes?

The recommended kinlin rims and the much hyped Aforce AL33 are quite hard to get here in continental Europe. Would the H + son archetype be a good alternative?
50g ofrotating mass saved. Well that will make *f##k* all difference to how fast you can ride or accelerate. Excuse my french. As for a-force or kinlin rims not being available in europe well uk retailers do ship abroad. I sell kinlin and other rings to folk all over europe. It's pretty easy and we have not left the eu yet.

bm0p700f
in the industry
Posts: 5567
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 7:25 pm
Location: Glermsford, Suffolk U.K
Contact:

by bm0p700f

I hope that makes sense.

alcatraz
Posts: 3181
Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2016 11:19 am

by alcatraz

True. 15267 not being an industry standard you'd be pressed to find big brand bearings that size.

Rar12 has 53.8mm flange separation and two 6902 (industry standard) bearings at 207gr. That's gotta be hard to beat.

F482SB-SL has 56.6mm flange separation. Seems ~55mm is not uncommon.

That's good news about that 55mm ftf tension balance being ok. Tension imbalance appears to be the price to pay in order to maximise stiffness.

The negative side is that if an amateur does attempt to build that he/she is more likely to fail. You'd need to stay within that smaller window of acceptable values, then you'd be golden. More power to the pro wheelbuilders :).

Also another question is, how do you anticipate a riders stiffness needs? A 2000w sprinter vs a 150w weekend warrior has two different needs. More is better is too simple a guideline.

bm0p700f
in the industry
Posts: 5567
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 7:25 pm
Location: Glermsford, Suffolk U.K
Contact:

by bm0p700f

A mistake above. The % numbers refers to lateral stiffness imparted by the spokes not the total lateral stiffness.

bm0p700f
in the industry
Posts: 5567
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 7:25 pm
Location: Glermsford, Suffolk U.K
Contact:

by bm0p700f

Miche primato synthesi hubs are 425g for a pair. People a weak. Power output does not load wheels much as average power is always low. The wheel can handle peak power loads (mine can anyway). Side loads from rocking the bike are more significant. Customers email me telling me about them. They tell me how tall they are and how much power they kick out. None of these things are important as there is not fixed way this can be taken into account. There weight has some bearing and only in the amount of side loading they can manage. Of course that depends on how much they rock the bike and how they deliver there power strokes. These are vague questions, so no point in asking them.

The Bitex rar12 is the best of the lower cost light weight hubs yet the bearings in those wheels dont outlast the rims. They use 3x6802 and 1x6902. The problem is the 6802 wheel bearing. It leads to premature wear of both shell bearings. If you ride in all conditions, a Bitex rar12 hub is not the most reliable. It's not the worst choice either. In my every day wheels and my race wheels I have either my own miche made disc brake hubs, a set of Royce or miche primato synthesi hubs. All of these have bearings chosen to tolerate high loads. The same goes for my triplet hub when I can bring them into production. That leads to long bearing life. For alloy rims, bearings should to out last rims or get close. Average rim life in the uk is only 7000 to 10000km. Those that get longer are not braking much or not riding on filthy roads in inclement conditions. Either that or they are riding on roads that require little braking. Not many get 10000km from the beatings on lightweight hubs.

Hense I dont build eith the cheap light weight hubs. I dont like hubs were bearing are changed many times through a rims life. If your going have light do it properly either extralite or carbon ti. Going for the in between is dicking about and condemning yourself to frequent bearing changes which in turn lead to sloppy bearing fit and more frequent changes for the sake of a 120g which we cant notice.

Too many buy the snake oil that I must have light wheels. The wheels in my commutor bike are 1600g. That's a 15kg bike with panniers before load. They do it without issue. Those are not heavy wheels regardless of how heavy you are. The hubs are Royce carbon shell ti flange which were a 40th birthday present to myself. Therefore I will use them for years to come. Using a miche hub would give me similar bearing reliability and I have had 24 spoke wheels in a similar bike with thin cx Ray's (velocity aileron rim) for 25000 km again with rear load.

I have had spoke and nipples failures back on a few wheels and I have learnt from those. Either I changed how I build them in some way or stop building that wheel for anyone. A failure should never happen which is why I cant be arsed running wheel for riders. I am changing with a failure and that's a waste of resources.

We should be building wheels to maximise the life we get out the resources we use. I ride primarily for transport. That's also an efficient use of resources. Thus is what bikes and wheel building is about. Let's not forget that.

I do build light wheels too but I try to make them reliable as well. They are for nicer days though as no light hub copes well with very wet conditions and no all the light wheels I have built have had a higher incidence rate of damage. Rims are damaged in crashes more easily. I have even had a customer with a carbon ti hub had the flange break and NDS beating explode after a nasty pothole incident. The carbon rim appeared fine but it got replaced anyway. That has never happened to a miche hub. The rim goes first.

Light hubs also are more likely to suffer from bearing seat distortion (depending on there design) leading to shorter bearing life power sprinters may also load hubs in a way that helps this along.
Last edited by bm0p700f on Mon Jan 20, 2020 10:41 am, edited 3 times in total.

alcatraz
Posts: 3181
Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2016 11:19 am

by alcatraz

Clearly states 2x6902 + 2x6802 on their homepage. Is it a typo?

http://www.bitexhubs.com/htm/pd_detail.php?no=RAR12

by Weenie


Post Reply