**** Post for FREE via your newsreader at post.usenet.com ****
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:As you see in their references, "the Bicycle Wheel" is not one of the
sources of their work.
No it is not in the references, but on the other hand it does seem to be
one of the sources. Not just because of what he writes, but also because he
does cite extensively another article where your finite element model and
experimental tests to try to back it up are described. Furthermore, it
seems this Prof. Gavin's undergraduate thesis was on the finite element
modelling of bicycle wheels and corresponding experimental tests, and it
appeared coincidentally in 1986.
Undergraduate theses are part of the public record and should be available
from either Princeton, his advisor one Prof. Robert Mark there, or from the
author himself. I believe you might find it entertaining to request a copy
and to examine it for any familiarities, if one is produced.
Gavin notes in the article:
"In 1984 and 1985, fatigue tests on stainless steel
bicycle spokes were carried out for Wheelsmith, Inc. at Stanford University."
Were you involved with these? From his description, the spokes seem to have
been tensioned into a wheel. Were they stress relieved?
Quoted message said:Fatigue life can be directly deduced from the computed values and
graphs in "the Bicycle Wheel" by including a number of stress cycles
to the stresses listed. Of course this would be useless because
spokes do not fail from fatigue unless they have residual stress from
manufacture and assembly of the wheel.
Perhaps this is why he seems to be saying that a wheel should be getting
near failure after only one out and back cross-country trip.
Quoted message said:missing so long. Besides, what are these guys doing plowing tilled
soil. I did a thorough analysis including tire inflation effects
spoke angles etc. and published about 20 years ago in "the Bicycle
Wheel".
Unfortunately you have left yourself open for mischief by publishing where
the standard scientific indexes were sure not to find you. You found
Wiedemer, but how would he have found you? By looking in "Books in Print"?
Quoted message said:Today there are great finite element and finite difference programs
that will give dynamic pictures on the screen. All this
instrumentation is some sort of retro-science. Stress-strain
relationships for metals in many configurations are "boiler plate" and
don't need to be mechanically verified.
Any model incorporates assumptions, such as that the rim sections between
spokes are flat, or even that the programming, whether of end user or
vendor, is correct- not always the case. Once such a model and its computer
implementation have been tested experimentally to a satisfactory degree,
people may then go on to just use the model (and various computer
implementations, after basic testing of the programming) without further
ado. That was what you yourself felt the need to verify with your model,
although you remarked on having too much experimental scatter for a
satisfactory result. There is nothing wrong with trying again with more
modern instruments, over varying terrain, at least once or twice.
Since both you and Prof. Wiedemer appear to be both active and retired,
have you ever considered proposing to him that you write together a review
article for an appropriate journal, where you not only set the historical
record straight, but make an illuminating analysis?
--
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN
Please excuse the inconvenience allegedly caused by our son. Send
us the bill for all the damages, and we can settle this to your
satisfaction, without any need for a public record of the incident.
Most Sincerely, George and Bar
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
*** Usenet.com - The #1 Usenet Newsgroup Service on The Planet! ***
http://www.usenet.com
Unlimited Download - 19 Seperate Servers - 90,000 groups - Uncensored
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=