Best Groupset in your opinion

Discuss light weight issues concerning road bikes & parts.
XCProMD
Posts: 757
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2008 10:25 am
Location: Cantabria

by XCProMD

AFAIK toughness was an issue with hexagonal cristalline aluminium. The other was cost.

by Weenie


hambini
Posts: 479
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2016 8:13 am
Location: Bristol UK / Cologne, Germany

by hambini

Superlight is very difficult to machine accurately. You have to prat around with heating it to a certain range otherwise the machining is not accurate and looks like a train crash. Bearing fits do not behave like 6061 or 7075 so they have to be adjusted.

And as far as where it's used. It is used in Aerospace but not widely, for the above reason. The ability to make the material is there, the ability to manipulate the material needs some more development.

hope that helps

Hambini
Hambini Aeronautical Engineer, Ex NASA, ex Lockheed - views expressed are my own...
Add me ON TWITTER!
Aerodynamic Masterclass in bicycle wheels
I fixed the bottom bracket from hell

mattr
Posts: 4637
Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 6:43 pm
Location: The Grim North.

by mattr

It's Aerospace, telephone number budgets are normal.

If not expected.
I once added up the retail cost of the scrap bins at a factory (part of a cost reduction drive) some of the bins had over a million quid in them.

2lo8
Posts: 539
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2016 10:32 am

by 2lo8

Do you have a link for this "superlight" aluminum? It seems to be different from supertetrahedral aluminum and obviously googling "superlight aluminum" is unhelpful.
[6.6kg of no carbon fiber]
[2lo8.wordpress.com]
Your one-stop source for information and reviews on cheap eBay bike junk.

hambini
Posts: 479
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2016 8:13 am
Location: Bristol UK / Cologne, Germany

by hambini

2lo8 wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 1:13 pm
Do you have a link for this "superlight" aluminum? It seems to be different from supertetrahedral aluminum and obviously googling "superlight aluminum" is unhelpful.
As far as I am aware, they are not the same (but I could well be wrong). I am no material expert but I believe one is the lattice in 3D and the other lattice structure is not quite as intricate so it's heavier.
Hambini Aeronautical Engineer, Ex NASA, ex Lockheed - views expressed are my own...
Add me ON TWITTER!
Aerodynamic Masterclass in bicycle wheels
I fixed the bottom bracket from hell

robertbb
Posts: 958
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2009 3:35 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

by robertbb

hambini wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 1:45 pm
2lo8 wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 1:13 pm
Do you have a link for this "superlight" aluminum? It seems to be different from supertetrahedral aluminum and obviously googling "superlight aluminum" is unhelpful.
As far as I am aware, they are not the same (but I could well be wrong). I am no material expert but I believe one is the lattice in 3D and the other lattice structure is not quite as intricate so it's heavier.
How easy is it to make tubes from, and to weld?

hambini
Posts: 479
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2016 8:13 am
Location: Bristol UK / Cologne, Germany

by hambini

robertbb wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 9:26 pm
hambini wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 1:45 pm
2lo8 wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 1:13 pm
Do you have a link for this "superlight" aluminum? It seems to be different from supertetrahedral aluminum and obviously googling "superlight aluminum" is unhelpful.
As far as I am aware, they are not the same (but I could well be wrong). I am no material expert but I believe one is the lattice in 3D and the other lattice structure is not quite as intricate so it's heavier.
How easy is it to make tubes from, and to weld?
I don't know. Thyssen Krupp would have those details.
Hambini Aeronautical Engineer, Ex NASA, ex Lockheed - views expressed are my own...
Add me ON TWITTER!
Aerodynamic Masterclass in bicycle wheels
I fixed the bottom bracket from hell

youngs_modulus
Posts: 575
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:03 am
Location: Portland, OR USA

by youngs_modulus

Something here doesn’t pass the sniff test. Despite several direct requests, Hambini is being extremely cagey about this wonder-material. Here’s the initial claim:
hambini wrote:
Thu Jan 10, 2019 7:45 am
One of the developments in material technology is a material called superlight. It's an Aluminium alloy with hexagonal crystalline construction. This is about 50% lighter than normal aluminium and almost all of the tensile strength. I have made a couple of these for test purposes for some of the pro cycling teams I supply.
Saying the material is an aluminum alloy called “superlight” effectively makes it un-googleable. There’s some vague detail about crystal structure and some outlandish claims about material properties, but these don’t make this mystery material any easier to search for.

Was Hambini being intentionally vague about this material? Maybe; maybe not. Hanlon’s Razor famously admonishes us not to attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by incompetence. It could be that the company that cooked up this amazing new alloy employed an incompetent, creatively-impoverished marketing team that came up with an incredibly generic name for the new alloy. Stuff like that happens from time to time.

But when I asked directly “which alloy is it?” Hambini never responded. But it’s easy to miss a post or two on this board; we’ve all done it. But I wasn’t the only one to ask:
hambini wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 1:45 pm
2lo8 wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 1:13 pm
Do you have a link for this "superlight" aluminum? It seems to be different from supertetrahedral aluminum and obviously googling "superlight aluminum" is unhelpful.
As far as I am aware, they are not the same (but I could well be wrong). I am no material expert but I believe one is the lattice in 3D and the other lattice structure is not quite as intricate so it's heavier.
2lo8 asked a simple, direct question, and Hambini managed to respond without actually answering. Instead, he did some technical handwaving about crystal lattice structures and disavowed expertise in materials. OK, he doesn’t have to be a materials scientist. But surely he can point us to a site/paper/press release that would help sate our curiosity. But no. Why not just post a link as requested?

Others are asking for details too, but they don’t get any concrete information either:
hambini wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:02 pm
robertbb wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 9:26 pm
How easy is it to make tubes from, and to weld?
I don't know. Thyssen Krupp would have those details.
But wait! Hambini threw us a bone and implied that thyssenkrupp (that’s how they write it) is the source of this very exciting material and will “have those details.” Woohoo! They’re a giant conglomerate that does quite a bit of aluminum smelting and materials development. Surely they’ve issued a press release about this very promising new material. We’ll certainly track it down now!

Nope. At least, I couldn’t find anything. Curiouser and curiouser.

On top of that, there’s Hambini’s bizarre interaction with FLO cycling. Among many other disputed points, Hambini claims that FLO’s attorney (solicitor, since Hambini is in the UK?) sent a letter to his his employer asking for him to be sacked for abuse of company resources. FLO claims that neither FLO nor its representatives sent any such letter. The whole thing is super-weird, IMHO, but this assertion by FLO rings true:
FLO Cycling wrote:What's odd, [sic] is Hambini continues to insist we sent the letter but refuses to provide any proof the letter is real.
That resonates precisely because Hambini has so far refused to provide any proof that “lightweight aluminum” is real. I think it would be wrong to attribute any one of these things to malice. But when you consider these points and others in context, a pattern seems to emerge, and it’s a somewhat disturbing one.

I and others have asked for basic information about Hambini’s amazing new alloy, and hasn’t provided it; he’s only dissembled. I’ll be frank: I don’t think Hambini is telling the truth about this material. No one else seems to have heard of it or have access to it. I work in exactly the same field that Hambini claims to, and none of his claims check out.

I could be wrong, of course. If I am, I expect Hambini will post the pined-for links to this material, probably from thyssenkrupp’s web site. If he doesn’t respond or continues his handwaving, it’s pretty safe to conclude that he’s making things up. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

But this raises a troubling question: if the source of this wonder-material is in fact Hambini’s imagination, what else is he making up? I’m not suggesting that he’s fabricated is wheel drag results or anything like that; Hambini’s pretty opaque about the details we’d need to reach a conclusion one way or the other.

Between that, the mysterious letter about FLO (that may or may not be from FLO) and Hambini’s immediate defensiveness in the face of criticism, this new “superlight aluminum” fails the sniff test, and miserably.

Mr.Gib
Posts: 3585
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 4:12 pm
Location: eh?

by Mr.Gib

I have never been disappointed by a post from youngs_modulus. It's not just the precision of his arguments, but the extraordinary literacy of the presentation as well. Thanks for the contribution. :thumbup:

I wonder if this is the end of Hambini here. I hope not. Although he is on double secret probation. :D
wheelsONfire wrote: When we ride disc brakes the whole deal of braking is just like a leaving a fart. It happens and then it's over. Nothing planned and nothing to get nervous for.

Mep
Posts: 491
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 4:11 pm

by Mep

Couldn't it just be the case that Hambini is not in a position to share technical specifics? I've certainly had to hold back bits of sensitive information (not bike related) from my workplace when posting in public forums like this. You could argue he should have just said that from the start instead of leading folks on, and there was definitely some sensationalism thrown in when speaking of the material, but I'm not sure that personal stab was warranted. I do agree however that this superlight material doesn't pass the smell test, but I don't really see the need to thoroughly establish the credibility of this aluminium alloy in this thread about groupsets.

Jugi
Posts: 495
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2018 8:10 am

by Jugi


youngs_modulus wrote:But this raises a troubling question: if the source of this wonder-material is in fact Hambini’s imagination, what else is he making up? I’m not suggesting that he’s fabricated is wheel drag results or anything like that; Hambini’s pretty opaque about the details we’d need to reach a conclusion one way or the other.
You do realize this is the internet, and this particular web page collects opinions of characters, some fictional, some factually present in this universe and some somewhere in between? And you are seriously concerned about statements presented in this thread?

mattr
Posts: 4637
Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 6:43 pm
Location: The Grim North.

by mattr

youngs_modulus wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 3:55 am
Something here doesn’t pass the sniff test. Despite several direct requests, Hambini is being extremely cagey about this wonder-material. Here’s the initial claim:
hambini wrote:
Thu Jan 10, 2019 7:45 am
One of the developments in material technology is a material called superlight. It's an Aluminium alloy with hexagonal crystalline construction. This is about 50% lighter than normal aluminium and almost all of the tensile strength. I have made a couple of these for test purposes for some of the pro cycling teams I supply.
Saying the material is an aluminum alloy called “superlight” effectively makes it un-googleable. There’s some vague detail about crystal structure and some outlandish claims about material properties, but these don’t make this mystery material any easier to search for.
More likely that it's just been a few paragraphs in one of the internal magazines/blogs at work. So replace "cagey" with "doesn't actually work with it, so doesn't know much more than already posted". And "the company isn't posting much until they've got the patents lined up".

I mean, i walked past the plant used to make the titanium SPF fan blades several times a week, and used to ride with the one of the aerodynamicists who developed the swept tip used on them. So i could make a few informed posts about the high level tech and concepts, ask me more than that, and i'm going to struggle. I know f**k all about the detail. My job was static combustion components. I knew LOTS about that. (Bit out of date now though. It's been a few years.)

hambini
Posts: 479
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2016 8:13 am
Location: Bristol UK / Cologne, Germany

by hambini

youngs_modulus wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 3:55 am
Lot's of stuff removed to try not to litter the thread.
It is not my duty to go searching the internet to find out details about materials so I can appease people on weightweenies. The entire basis of your argument is because you find a published paper about material X on the internet that it must not exist. Further, As you claim to work in the Aerospace industry, I would say you were somewhat naive and ignorant.

If I use an example that MattR will relate to. Rolls-Royce/Pratt and Witney make turbine blades in single crystals. They exist in real life but you will not find any papers on the intricacies of how they are made. At best only a general overview and that is only 25 years after they were developed.

If someone is going to make a superalloy, it isn't going to come to the bike industry first. They also aren't going to publish data where someone can copy it until their protection is in place.

Happy Trollling

Hambini
Hambini Aeronautical Engineer, Ex NASA, ex Lockheed - views expressed are my own...
Add me ON TWITTER!
Aerodynamic Masterclass in bicycle wheels
I fixed the bottom bracket from hell

alcatraz
Posts: 2103
Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2016 11:19 am

by alcatraz

The more voices we have out there the better, even if they disagree. The readers can still skim through and get the picture. :)

Lack of humility will not strengthen your argument. Time wasted.

Bluechip
Posts: 110
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2015 2:04 am

by Bluechip

I prefer the functionality of Sram mechanical over the smoothness of Shimano mech. As to electronic, I've only used Shimano on a couple of rides but it was not as nice as I was hoping. It could have been that I was riding mostly Sram mech at the time and was always hitting the wrong buttons. I haven't tried Etap yet but am looking forward to it. The shift sequences sound a little more intuitive to me. Now back to the off topic discussion of superlight aluminum.

by Weenie


Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post