Aluminum Frame Life Expectancy



Status
Not open for further replies.

Can

New Member
May 10, 2003
46
0
0
I think a much more important thought is how long you Aluminum frame is going to last. I have heard from unrelated professional sources that aluminum frames have a limited life span. Apparently the aluminum fatigues at any load, so every pedal stroke reduces the life of your frame, where steel, and titanium (not sure about carbon) only fatigue when large loads are placed on the frames that are virtually unattainable in cycling, and then the steel or titanium have a relatively long life even with frequent extreme loads. Aluminum also fails abrubtly, there is no warning to the breaking from feeling alone, it just snaps. Though for the price you can afford to buy a new one every 3-5 years... which is a valid consideration...
I am researching Carbon at the moment however I want the springy qualities of Steel or Ti, and I can flex my steel frame for the poster who says it is not a realistic consideration, it is nice having the stored potential energy in my frame to snap me into the next pedal stroke. I am going to choose steel, the ride qualities are comprable to titanium, and with the product Frame-Saver I will not have to be as concerned with corrosion. With the thousand dollars or so I will save, I am going to invest in clothing, shoes, a few cans of Frame-Saver, and a carbon fork. I have looked at a lot of manufacturers out there!! many many hours of browsing. If you have the budget, I would go with Serotta, Waterford, Sycip, Ti Cycles, Sampson, Steelman, or Seven. I have found Sycip to have great deals on Ti frames!! and the quality of all of these manufacturers is equisite (from what I have seen). I am going with Waterford, or Serotta, at the moment, I am looking into custom frames to treasure for the rest of my long cycling life. Though I am keeping my mind open to as many options as I can wrap my mind and time around. Don't forget fit is more important that any other aspect of the bike, unless your only going to use it for one event, and then I suppose you can endure. Serotta has the best fit experience, from what I have seen and heard.
Jacob.
 
D

David Storm

Guest
"Can" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> I think a much more important thought is how long you Aluminum frame is going to last. I have
> heard from unrelated professional sources that aluminum frames have a limited life span.
> Apparently the aluminum fatigues at any load, so every pedal stroke reduces the life of your
> frame, where steel, and titanium (not sure about carbon) only fatigue when large loads are placed
> on the frames that are virtually unattainable in cycling, and then the steel or titanium have a
> relatively long life even with frequent extreme loads. Aluminum also fails abrubtly, there is no
> warning to the breaking from feeling alone, it just snaps. Though for the price you can afford to
> buy a new one every 3-5 years... which is a valid consideration... I am researching Carbon at the
> moment however I want the springy qualities of Steel or Ti, and I can flex my steel frame for the
> poster who says it is not a realistic consideration, it is nice having the stored potential energy
> in my frame to snap me into the next pedal stroke. I am going to choose steel, the ride qualities
> are comprable to titanium, and with the product Frame-Saver I will not have to be as concerned
> with corrosion. With the thousand dollars or so I will save, I am going to invest in clothing,
> shoes, a few cans of Frame-Saver, and a carbon fork. I have looked at a lot of manufacturers out
> there!! many many hours of browsing. If you have the budget, I would go with Serotta, Waterford,
> Sycip, Ti Cycles, Sampson, Steelman, or Seven. I have found Sycip to have great deals on Ti
> frames!! and the quality of all of these manufacturers is equisite (from what I have seen). I am
> going with Waterford, or Serotta, at the moment, I am looking into custom frames to treasure for
> the rest of my long cycling life. Though I am keeping my mind open to as many options as I can
> wrap my mind and time around. Don't forget fit is more important that any other aspect of the
> bike, unless your only going to use it for one event, and then I suppose you can endure. Serotta
> has the best fit experience, from what I have seen and heard. Jacob.
>
>
>
> --

See http://www.efbe.de/defbefrm.htm , Public Reports
 
D

David L. Johnso

Guest
On Fri, 04 Jul 2003 07:00:32 +0950, Can wrote:

> I am going to choose steel, the ride qualities are comprable to titanium, and with the product
> Frame-Saver I will not have to be as concerned with corrosion.

The only fail-safe way to avoid corrosion inside a steel frame is to fill the tubes with lead. This
has been discussed here before.

--

David L. Johnson

__o | Some people used to claim that, if enough monkeys sat in front _`\(,_ | of enough
typewriters and typed long enough, eventually one of (_)/ (_) | them would reproduce the
collected works of Shakespeare. The internet has proven this not to be the case.
 
G

Goimir

Guest
"David L. Johnson" wrote:
>
> On Fri, 04 Jul 2003 07:00:32 +0950, Can wrote:
>
> > I am going to choose steel, the ride qualities are comprable to titanium, and with the product
> > Frame-Saver I will not have to be as concerned with corrosion.
>
> The only fail-safe way to avoid corrosion inside a steel frame is to fill the tubes with lead.
> This has been discussed here before.
>

Lead is actually a bad choice here. It will cause the steel to corrode due to its place on the
galvanic index. Sodium would be the material of choice here. It's light, and will corrode before the
steel does. And if you ever get cold, just add water! Instant heat!

(wear safety goggles when adding water to sodium)
 
P

Pete

Guest
"Goimir" <[email protected]> wrote

> > The only fail-safe way to avoid corrosion inside a steel frame is to
fill
> > the tubes with lead. This has been discussed here before.
> >
>
> Lead is actually a bad choice here. It will cause the steel to corrode due to its place on the
> galvanic index. Sodium would be the material of choice here. It's light, and will corrode before
> the steel does. And if you ever get cold, just add water! Instant heat!
>
> (wear safety goggles when adding water to sodium)

Seal *all* the holes, and pump all the air our of the frame. Not only do you avoid any oxidation, it
will lighter and faster.

Pete
 

Seamus

New Member
Mar 24, 2003
105
0
0
Seal *all* the holes, and pump all the air our of the frame. Not only do you avoid any oxidation, it
will lighter and faster.

No, no. Better by far to fill the frame with Helium. Inert gas so no oxidation and the added bonus of it being lighter than the air it replaced.

I wonder how much advantage would be gained by filling my tyres with Helium?

Or, living life on the edge, filling them with Hydrogen.
 
D

David Storm

Guest
A vacuum is "lighter" than helium of same volume....and nothing is more than inert than nothing.

"Seamus" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> wrote:
> > Seal *all* the holes, and pump all the air our of the frame. Not only
do
> > you avoid any oxidation, it will lighter and faster.
>
>
>
> No, no. Better by far to fill the frame with Helium. Inert gas so no oxidation and the added bonus
> of it being lighter than the air it replaced.
>
> I wonder how much advantage would be gained by filling my tyres with Helium?
>
> Or, living life on the edge, filling them with Hydrogen.
>
>
>
> --
> Seamus Byke Kultuur Never at... http://uk.geocities.com/bykekultuur/never.html Cycling Movies Big
> List at... http://uk.geocities.com/mikstar123/films.html
>
> >--------------------------<
> Posted via cyclingforums.com http://www.cyclingforums.com
 
J

Jasper Janssen

Guest
On 4 Jul 2003 22:00:29 +0950, Seamus <[email protected]> wrote:

>No, no. Better by far to fill the frame with Helium. Inert gas so no oxidation and the added bonus
>of it being lighter than the air it replaced.

But do it at a high pressure so the inevitable slow leaks take a long while to reintroduce oxygen.

>I wonder how much advantage would be gained by filling my tyres with Helium?

Wasn't there some discussion about F1 racers and dragracers' tyres being filled with H? Something to
do with the heat and combustion, IIRC, plus expansion with temperature.

>Or, living life on the edge, filling them with Hydrogen.

Better have disk or drum brakes then.

Jasper
 
D

David Kerber

Guest
In article <[email protected]>, usenet- [email protected] says...
> wrote:
> > Seal *all* the holes, and pump all the air our of the frame. Not only do you avoid any
> > oxidation, it will lighter and faster.
>
>
>
> No, no. Better by far to fill the frame with Helium. Inert gas so no oxidation and the added bonus
> of it being lighter than the air it replaced.
>
> I wonder how much advantage would be gained by filling my tyres with Helium?

Whatever it is, it wouldn't last long. He will go through the pores in most rubber with no
problem. ....

--
Dave Kerber Fight spam: remove the ns_ from the return address before replying!

REAL programmers write self-modifying code.
 
P

Pete

Guest
"Jasper Janssen" <[email protected]> wrote
>
> Wasn't there some discussion about F1 racers and dragracers' tyres being filled with H? Something
> to do with the heat and combustion, IIRC, plus expansion with temperature.

Dunno about dragsters, but USAF aircraft tires are filled with Nitrogen. 250
psi, generally.

Pete
 
R

R.White

Guest
Can <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> I think a much more important thought is how long you Aluminum frame is going to last. I have
> heard from unrelated professional sources that aluminum frames have a limited life span.
> Apparently the aluminum fatigues at any load, so every pedal stroke reduces the life of your
> frame, where steel, and titanium (not sure about carbon) only fatigue when large loads are placed
> on the frames that are virtually unattainable in cycling, and then the steel or titanium have a
> relatively long life even with frequent extreme loads. Aluminum also fails abrubtly, there is no
> warning to the breaking from feeling alone, it just snaps. <snip, or rather, snap>

I'm surprised more wings are not falling off of airplanes on a daily basis. ;)

The DC-3 will probably be the first aircraft to continuously be in operation for 100 years. IMHO,
it's not the material, but how it's used.
 
T

Tom Sherman

Guest
"R.White" wrote:
>
> Can <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> > I think a much more important thought is how long you Aluminum frame is going to last. I have
> > heard from unrelated professional sources that aluminum frames have a limited life span.
> > Apparently the aluminum fatigues at any load, so every pedal stroke reduces the life of your
> > frame, where steel, and titanium (not sure about carbon) only fatigue when large loads are
> > placed on the frames that are virtually unattainable in cycling, and then the steel or titanium
> > have a relatively long life even with frequent extreme loads. Aluminum also fails abrubtly,
> > there is no warning to the breaking from feeling alone, it just snaps. <snip, or rather, snap>
>
> I'm surprised more wings are not falling off of airplanes on a daily basis. ;)

Most light aircraft are built on a "fail safe" basis where the failure of one structural component
will not result in catastrophic failure. Heavier transport category aircraft generally use the "safe
life" design where structural components are replaced after a preset time in service.

> The DC-3 will probably be the first aircraft to continuously be in operation for 100 years. IMHO,
> it's not the material, but how it's used.

Long live the Gooney Bird!

Tom Sherman - Quad Cities USA (Illinois side)
 
R

R.White

Guest
Tom Sherman <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> "R.White" wrote:
> >
> > Can <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> > > I think a much more important thought is how long you Aluminum frame is going to last. I have
> > > heard from unrelated professional sources that aluminum frames have a limited life span.
> > > Apparently the aluminum fatigues at any load, so every pedal stroke reduces the life of your
> > > frame, where steel, and titanium (not sure about carbon) only fatigue when large loads are
> > > placed on the frames that are virtually unattainable in cycling, and then the steel or
> > > titanium have a relatively long life even with frequent extreme loads. Aluminum also fails
> > > abrubtly, there is no warning to the breaking from feeling alone, it just snaps. <snip, or
> > > rather, snap>
> >
> > I'm surprised more wings are not falling off of airplanes on a daily basis. ;)
>
> Most light aircraft are built on a "fail safe" basis where the failure of one structural component
> will not result in catastrophic failure. Heavier transport category aircraft generally use the
> "safe life" design where structural components are replaced after a preset time in service.
>
> > The DC-3 will probably be the first aircraft to continuously be in operation for 100 years.
> > IMHO, it's not the material, but how it's used.
>
> Long live the Gooney Bird!

And long live it shall!

If you haven't already seen one of these.... http://tinyurl.com/g3zt
 
R

Ryan Cousineau

Guest
In article <[email protected]ogle.com>, [email protected] (R.White) wrote:

> Tom Sherman <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> > "R.White" wrote:

> > Most light aircraft are built on a "fail safe" basis where the failure of one structural
> > component will not result in catastrophic failure. Heavier transport category aircraft generally
> > use the "safe life" design where structural components are replaced after a preset time in
> > service.
> >
> > > The DC-3 will probably be the first aircraft to continuously be in operation for 100 years.
> > > IMHO, it's not the material, but how it's used.
> >
> > Long live the Gooney Bird!
>
> And long live it shall!
>
> If you haven't already seen one of these.... http://tinyurl.com/g3zt

A turboprop-equipped DC-3? Cool!

--
Ryan Cousineau, [email protected] http://www.sfu.ca/~rcousine President, Fabrizio Mazzoleni Fan Club
 
P

Paul Southworth

Guest
In article <[email protected]>, Tom Sherman <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>Seamus wrote:
>> ... I wonder how much advantage would be gained by filling my tyres with Helium?
>>
>> Or, living life on the edge, filling them with Hydrogen....
>
>Hydrogen molecules are very small, so pressure loss would occur rapidly requiring frequent
>reinflation of the tires.

Gee I wonder if aircraft tires ever get hot.

Gives a new meaning to balooning a landing.
 
T

Tom Sherman

Guest
Paul Southworth wrote:
>
> In article <[email protected]>, Tom Sherman <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >Seamus wrote:
> >> ... I wonder how much advantage would be gained by filling my tyres with Helium?
> >>
> >> Or, living life on the edge, filling them with Hydrogen....
> >
> >Hydrogen molecules are very small, so pressure loss would occur rapidly requiring frequent
> >reinflation of the tires.
>
> Gee I wonder if aircraft tires ever get hot.
>
> Gives a new meaning to balooning a landing.

The tires get accelerated almost very rapidly from not rotating to the rotation speed of the
aircraft at landing. On large transport category aircraft, this can be in excess of 125 mph (200
kph). Since this does not occur instantaneously, the tire slides along the pavement and the
resulting clouds of tire smoke are clearly visible.

Transport category aircraft wheels are typically made from magnesium to save weight. Under emergency
braking, enough heat may be generated to set the tires and/or wheels on fire.

Tom Sherman - Quad Cities USA (Illinois side)
 
P

Pete

Guest
"Tom Sherman" <[email protected]> wrote

>
> The tires get accelerated almost very rapidly from not rotating to the rotation speed of the
> aircraft at landing. On large transport category aircraft, this can be in excess of 125 mph (200
> kph). Since this does not occur instantaneously, the tire slides along the pavement and the
> resulting clouds of tire smoke are clearly visible.
>
> Transport category aircraft wheels are typically made from magnesium to save weight. Under
> emergency braking, enough heat may be generated to set the tires and/or wheels on fire.

After landing, there is a cone shaped hazard area directly outboard from the wheels. This is in case
the split rims blow from the brake disk heat transfer.

Pete
 
G

Grl

Guest
That happens even with air. Lose about 10 lb. a week from my tires. Would be even faster
with hydrogen.

--

- GRL

"It's good to want things."

Steve Barr (philosopher, poet, humorist, chemist, Visual Basic programmer)
"Tom Sherman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Seamus wrote:
> > ... I wonder how much advantage would be gained by filling my tyres with Helium?
> >
> > Or, living life on the edge, filling them with Hydrogen....
>
> Hydrogen molecules are very small, so pressure loss would occur rapidly requiring frequent
> reinflation of the tires.
>
> Tom Sherman - Quad Cities USA (Illinois side)
 
G

Grl

Guest
It's because air has oxygen, a corrosive gas. Nitrogen is inert.

--

- GRL

"It's good to want things."

Steve Barr (philosopher, poet, humorist, chemist, Visual Basic programmer)
"Pete" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Jasper Janssen" <[email protected]> wrote
> >
> > Wasn't there some discussion about F1 racers and dragracers' tyres being filled with H?
> > Something to do with the heat and combustion, IIRC, plus expansion with temperature.
>
> Dunno about dragsters, but USAF aircraft tires are filled with Nitrogen.
250
> psi, generally.
>
> Pete
 
Status
Not open for further replies.