Spoke Length: Measurement Methology And Criticality? - Page 5

Michael Press wrote:
> In article <F9idnf4l-uXpPl3anZ2dnUVZ_vzinZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
>> jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
>>> Pete Cresswell writes:
>>>
>>>>> Torque on a hub with radial spoking will cause a significant
>>>>> increase in spoke tension while braking. That will not occur with
>>>>> cross laced spoking, even x1.
>>>>>> I'm guessing the "small flange racing hubs" that he refers to as
>>>>>> occasionally failing are in a whole different (lower) class of
>>>>>> strength from the Sturmey DynoHub.
>>>>> Campagnolo record hubs do that. I have examples.
>>>> So... bottom line... You wouldn't have any second thoughts about
>>>> lacing 2x on a Dynohub wheel?
>>> No problem.
>>>
>>>> It's not a religious issue or anything... just seems that if I'm
>>>> going to have 30+ spokes left over from a box of 75 it will be
>>>> more aesthetic for them to fit three of my wheels instead of one.
>>>> Also, I wonder if there is some hub-diameter-related engineering
>>>> reason why Rohloff recommends 2x.
>>> That's a good reason for selecting a spoke pattern, so long as it
>>> doesn't adversely affect spoke durability, which this probably
>>> doesn't. Just keep an eye on the spoke line into spoke nipples and,
>>> if necessary, improve that spoke line manually.
>>>
>> how are you going to do that without introducing residual stress?
>
> Apparently jb does not understand this as well as he has
> professed. The answer is that the final manual stress relief
> will insure that the residual stress plus cyclic stress
> will not bring the spoke near yield.
>

apparently, the great michael press, master of misaligned reality,
either doesn't bother to read countless past postings on this subject,
or he doesn't understand them if he has read them.

correspondingly, i can't be bothered to re-write it all for you, save as
to correcting the fundamental misconception that you seem to share with
jobst - fatigue happens /well/ below yield.

now, you go back to being a schmuck, and i'll go back to waiting for
jobst to figure out how his advice on one subject contradicts his advice
on another.

On Feb 23, 6:51 pm, jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
> Michael Press wrote:
> > In article <F9idnf4l-uXpPl3anZ2dnUVZ_vzin...@speakeasy.net>,
> >  jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
> >> jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> >>> Pete Cresswell writes:
>
> >>>>> Torque on a hub with radial spoking will cause a significant
> >>>>> increase in spoke tension while braking.  That will not occur with
> >>>>> cross laced spoking, even x1.
> >>>>>> I'm guessing the "small flange racing hubs" that he refers to as
> >>>>>> occasionally failing are in a whole different (lower) class of
> >>>>>> strength from the Sturmey DynoHub.
> >>>>> Campagnolo record hubs do that.  I have examples.
> >>>> So... bottom line...  You wouldn't have any second thoughts about
> >>>> lacing 2x on a Dynohub wheel?
> >>> No problem.
>
> >>>> It's not a religious issue or anything... just seems that if I'm
> >>>> going to have 30+ spokes left over from a box of 75 it will be
> >>>> more aesthetic for them to fit three of my wheels instead of one.
> >>>> Also, I wonder if there is some hub-diameter-related  engineering
> >>>> reason why Rohloff recommends 2x.
> >>> That's a good reason for selecting a spoke pattern, so long as it
> >>> doesn't adversely affect spoke durability, which this probably
> >>> doesn't.  Just keep an eye on the spoke line into spoke nipples and,
> >>> if necessary, improve that spoke line manually.
>
> >> how are you going to do that without introducing residual stress?
>
> > Apparently jb does not understand this as well as he has
> > professed. The answer is that the final manual stress relief
> > will insure that the residual stress plus cyclic stress
> > will not bring the spoke near yield.
>
> apparently, the great michael press, master of misaligned reality,
> either doesn't bother to read countless past postings on this subject,
> or he doesn't understand them if he has read them.
>
> correspondingly, i can't be bothered to re-write it all for you, save as
> to correcting the fundamental misconception that you seem to share with
> jobst - fatigue happens /well/ below yield.
>
> now, you go back to being a schmuck, and i'll go back to waiting for
> jobst to figure out how his advice on one subject contradicts his advice
> on another.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

its semantical foggery. diminshing returns. its like on what vector is
the earth narrow pole facing?

datakoll wrote:
> On Feb 23, 6:51�pm, jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
>> Michael Press wrote:
>>> In article <F9idnf4l-uXpPl3anZ2dnUVZ_vzin...@speakeasy.net>,
>>> �jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>>> jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
>>>>> Pete Cresswell writes:
>>>>>>> Torque on a hub with radial spoking will cause a significant
>>>>>>> increase in spoke tension while braking. �That will not occur with
>>>>>>> cross laced spoking, even x1.
>>>>>>>> I'm guessing the "small flange racing hubs" that he refers to as
>>>>>>>> occasionally failing are in a whole different (lower) class of
>>>>>>>> strength from the Sturmey DynoHub.
>>>>>>> Campagnolo record hubs do that. �I have examples.
>>>>>> So... bottom line... �You wouldn't have any second thoughts about
>>>>>> lacing 2x on a Dynohub wheel?
>>>>> No problem.
>>>>>> It's not a religious issue or anything... just seems that if I'm
>>>>>> going to have 30+ spokes left over from a box of 75 it will be
>>>>>> more aesthetic for them to fit three of my wheels instead of one.
>>>>>> Also, I wonder if there is some hub-diameter-related �engineering
>>>>>> reason why Rohloff recommends 2x.
>>>>> That's a good reason for selecting a spoke pattern, so long as it
>>>>> doesn't adversely affect spoke durability, which this probably
>>>>> doesn't. �Just keep an eye on the spoke line into spoke nipples and,
>>>>> if necessary, improve that spoke line manually.
>>>> how are you going to do that without introducing residual stress?
>>> Apparently jb does not understand this as well as he has
>>> professed. The answer is that the final manual stress relief
>>> will insure that the residual stress plus cyclic stress
>>> will not bring the spoke near yield.
>> apparently, the great michael press, master of misaligned reality,
>> either doesn't bother to read countless past postings on this subject,
>> or he doesn't understand them if he has read them.
>>
>> correspondingly, i can't be bothered to re-write it all for you, save as
>> to correcting the fundamental misconception that you seem to share with
>> jobst - fatigue happens /well/ below yield.
>>
>> now, you go back to being a schmuck, and i'll go back to waiting for
>> jobst to figure out how his advice on one subject contradicts his advice
>> on another.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> its semantical foggery. diminshing returns. its like on what vector is
> the earth narrow pole facing?


you're so right. but total vacuum allows misinformation and b.s. to
propagate.

"jim beam" wrote:
> [...]
> correspondingly, i can't be bothered to re-write it all for you, save as
> to correcting the fundamental misconception that you seem to share with
> jobst - fatigue happens /well/ below yield.[...]

Now "jim beam" is claiming that fatigue does NOT happen at stresses well
below yield. That would turn the materials engineering world on its head!

Of did "jim beam" actually intend to write that fatigue DOES occur well
below yield stress?

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

On Feb 23, 7:18 pm, jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
> datakoll wrote:
> > On Feb 23, 6:51�pm, jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
> >> Michael Press wrote:
> >>> In article <F9idnf4l-uXpPl3anZ2dnUVZ_vzin...@speakeasy.net>,
> >>> �jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
> >>>> jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> >>>>> Pete Cresswell writes:
> >>>>>>> Torque on a hub with radial spoking will cause a significant
> >>>>>>> increase in spoke tension while braking. �That will not occur with
> >>>>>>> cross laced spoking, even x1.
> >>>>>>>> I'm guessing the "small flange racing hubs" that he refers to as
> >>>>>>>> occasionally failing are in a whole different (lower) class of
> >>>>>>>> strength from the Sturmey DynoHub.
> >>>>>>> Campagnolo record hubs do that. �I have examples.
> >>>>>> So... bottom line... �You wouldn't have any second thoughtsabout
> >>>>>> lacing 2x on a Dynohub wheel?
> >>>>> No problem.
> >>>>>> It's not a religious issue or anything... just seems that if I'm
> >>>>>> going to have 30+ spokes left over from a box of 75 it will be
> >>>>>> more aesthetic for them to fit three of my wheels instead of one.
> >>>>>> Also, I wonder if there is some hub-diameter-related �engineering
> >>>>>> reason why Rohloff recommends 2x.
> >>>>> That's a good reason for selecting a spoke pattern, so long as it
> >>>>> doesn't adversely affect spoke durability, which this probably
> >>>>> doesn't. �Just keep an eye on the spoke line into spoke nipples and,
> >>>>> if necessary, improve that spoke line manually.
> >>>> how are you going to do that without introducing residual stress?
> >>> Apparently jb does not understand this as well as he has
> >>> professed. The answer is that the final manual stress relief
> >>> will insure that the residual stress plus cyclic stress
> >>> will not bring the spoke near yield.
> >> apparently, the great michael press, master of misaligned reality,
> >> either doesn't bother to read countless past postings on this subject,
> >> or he doesn't understand them if he has read them.
>
> >> correspondingly, i can't be bothered to re-write it all for you, save as
> >> to correcting the fundamental misconception that you seem to share with
> >> jobst - fatigue happens /well/ below yield.
>
> >> now, you go back to being a schmuck, and i'll go back to waiting for
> >> jobst to figure out how his advice on one subject contradicts his advice
> >> on another.- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -
>
> > its semantical foggery. diminshing returns. its like on what vector is
> > the earth narrow pole facing?
>
> you're so right.  but total vacuum allows misinformation and b.s. to
> propagate.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

man the pumps!

On Feb 22, 6:38 pm, landotter <landot...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Going rate around here is$40-50 bucks plus spokes.

it was only a matter of time

mk5000

"I live 5 miles as the crow flies from the San Andreas fault, here in
California. We have small earthquakes every couple days or so..but
most are never felt. I did however lose a home to an earthquake in
1983. The entire town was leveled..but there were only a very few
injuries, and 1 death..and to this day..Im not sure it wasnt a
homicide of opportunity IRRC."--gunner

Per landotter:
>Do it yourself. It's
>easier than ya think. Once ya lace in the first spoke in the second
>run on a side--usually the d'oh kicks in.

Did it. First I tried looking at an existing wheel. Spend about
2 hours thinking I'd messed up on the spoke length.

Then I turned to Google for instructions from somebody who
knew...

The "d'oh" kicked in about 2 am the next morning.



> Don't forget to get your rim
>label aligned with the hub label for extra points!

Label, this thing is supposed to have a label? -)


Only loose end now is tension. Some of the spokes are clearly
way more tensioned than others and I'm guessing it's just a
matter of systematically tightening/loosening without losing the
alignment or introducing hop.
--
PeteCresswell

gonna work on hop first or lateral first?

Per datakoll:
>gonna work on hop first or lateral first?

There wasn't any detectable hop.

I've got the lateral down to less than a millimeter and figure
it's time to quit while I'm ahead.

Checked them all with a tensiometer (sp?), and got each within
what seems like a reasonable range when compared with 2mm shorter
spokes on a couple of professionally-built Rohloff rear wheels
that've been through quite a bit of punishment with no problems.
--
PeteCresswell

On Mar 1, 5:13 pm, "(PeteCresswell)" <x...@y.Invalid> wrote:
> Per datakoll:
>
> >gonna work on hop first or lateral first?
>
> There wasn't any detectable hop.
>
> I've got the lateral down to less than a millimeter and figure
> it's time to quit while I'm ahead.
>
> Checked them all with a tensiometer (sp?), and got each within
> what seems like a reasonable range when compared with 2mm shorter
> spokes on a couple of professionally-built Rohloff rear wheels
> that've been through quite a bit of punishment with no problems.
> --
> PeteCresswell

no hop? place a credit card (Citibank is popular)across the rim edge,
clamp to the stand or support and roll it.