basic odds and ends about wheel building

Discussion in 'UK and Europe' started by Bob Flemming, Mar 9, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Bob Flemming

    Bob Flemming Guest

    I re-built another wheel today, and it seems to be fine, but I have a few queries...

    1. How do people stress relieve? I have tried spoke-gripping method with the hands but this is
    proving to be a bit 'painful' as the spokes get tight....so I switched to a bit of 2x1 wood! Do
    other people use anything else other than their hands?

    2. It's not uncommon for a wheel to lose it's trueness after stress-relieveing has taken place.
    I guess this is the whole point - the spokes are beginning to settle down. How do you know
    when enough stress-relieveing has been done - when the wheel 'doesn't lose it's shape after
    such practice?

    3. In relation to a rear wheel - Is it good to have quite such a big disparity between the tension
    of the drive and non-drive spokes? I can't give you any figures because I haven't got measuring
    equipment. I'm running a 7sp freewheel on a 126 spacing and am pretty sure the axle is spaced
    correctly. It feels as thought the non-drive side could wind up quite a bit more, but the drive
    side spokes are pretty much 'there' I think.

    appreciate any comments...thanks.

    bob
     
    Tags:


  2. Pete Biggs

    Pete Biggs Guest

    Bob Flemming wrote:
    > I re-built another wheel today, and it seems to be fine, but I have a few queries...
    >
    > 1. How do people stress relieve? I have tried spoke-gripping method with the hands but this is
    > proving to be a bit 'painful' as the spokes get tight

    Gardening gloves help.

    ....so I switched to a bit of 2x1 wood! Do other people use
    > anything else other than their hands?

    They do but fingers are best, I understand.

    > 2. It's not uncommon for a wheel to lose it's trueness after stress-relieveing has taken place. I
    > guess this is the whole point -

    No it's not (but bedding in is a useful side effect of it). Stress releiving pre-stresses the spokes
    to reduce metal fatigue. See Jobst Brandt's explanations and instructions via
    http://draco.acs.uci.edu/rbfaq/FAQ/8c.1.html and Google Groups (and his book The Bicycle Wheel
    ...still haven't got a copy myself but have read many of his articles on r.b.t and his FAQ, etc).

    > the spokes are beginning to settle down. How do you know when enough stress-relieveing has been
    > done - when the wheel 'doesn't lose it's shape after such practice?

    Spokes just need to be pulled together once, enough, then true can be touched up if necessary. There
    is also the issue of spoke wind-up to deal with (also see Google Groups for that).

    > 3. In relation to a rear wheel - Is it good to have quite such a big disparity between the tension
    > of the drive and non-drive spokes?

    The difference is necessary for the dish, but the amount of difference will be less if thicker
    spokes are used for the drive side. But the rear left spokes do normally feel much less taut than
    rights so yours are probably ok.

    > I can't give you any figures because I haven't got measuring equipment. I'm running a 7sp
    > freewheel on a 126 spacing and am pretty sure the axle is spaced correctly. It feels as thought
    > the non-drive side could wind up quite a bit more, but the drive side spokes are pretty much
    > 'there' I think.

    Drive side shouldn't be very far off being as tight as possible.

    If the wheel dished properly (rim centred) then tension difference between sides will be correct.

    --
    ~PB FA: 62cm Ti frame: http://tinyurl.com/6stt
     
  3. Bob Flemming

    Bob Flemming Guest

    >> 2. It's not uncommon for a wheel to lose it's trueness after stress-relieveing has taken place. I
    >> guess this is the whole point -
    >
    >No it's not (but bedding in is a useful side effect of it). Stress releiving pre-stresses the
    >spokes to reduce metal fatigue. See Jobst Brandt's explanations and instructions via
    >http://draco.acs.uci.edu/rbfaq/FAQ/8c.1.html and Google Groups (and his book The Bicycle Wheel
    >...still haven't got a copy myself but have read many of his articles on r.b.t and his FAQ, etc).

    I am aware of his writings, but quite honestly, always find it quite difficult to understand. Bit
    above my head at times, he's a master of the cerebral this guy.. I've just read the article you
    cite, and *think* I'm getting it....but it's going to take another read :)

    >> the spokes are beginning to settle down. How do you know when enough stress-relieveing has been
    >> done - when the wheel 'doesn't lose it's shape after such practice?
    >
    >Spokes just need to be pulled together once, enough, then true can be touched up if necessary.
    >There is also the issue of spoke wind-up to deal with (also see Google Groups for that).

    Yes, I'm aware of spoke wind-up, but am pretty confident that this wasn't a problem at the time. I
    was curious that the wheel only stayed true after a few sessions of stress-relieving.

    >If the wheel dished properly (rim centred) then tension difference between sides will be correct.

    yeah, the dish is fine.

    anyway thanks

    bob
     
  4. Bob Flemming

    Bob Flemming Guest

    >>> 2. It's not uncommon for a wheel to lose it's trueness after stress-relieveing has taken place.
    >>> I guess this is the whole point -
    >>
    >>No it's not (but bedding in is a useful side effect of it). Stress releiving pre-stresses the
    >>spokes to reduce metal fatigue. See Jobst Brandt's explanations and instructions via
    >>http://draco.acs.uci.edu/rbfaq/FAQ/8c.1.html and Google Groups (and his book The Bicycle Wheel
    >>...still haven't got a copy myself but have read many of his articles on r.b.t and his FAQ, etc).
    >
    >I am aware of his writings, but quite honestly, always find it quite difficult to understand.

    I just need a good teacher, then I can understand everything...now I feel better! And he doesn't use
    his hands either. Good enough for me
    :)

    http://www.sheldonbrown.com/wheelbuild.html#seating

    bob

    >Bit above my head at times, he's a master of the cerebral this guy.. I've just read the article you
    >cite, and *think* I'm getting it....but it's going to take another read :)
    >
    >>> the spokes are beginning to settle down. How do you know when enough stress-relieveing has been
    >>> done - when the wheel 'doesn't lose it's shape after such practice?
    >>
    >>Spokes just need to be pulled together once, enough, then true can be touched up if necessary.
    >>There is also the issue of spoke wind-up to deal with (also see Google Groups for that).
    >
    >Yes, I'm aware of spoke wind-up, but am pretty confident that this wasn't a problem at the time. I
    >was curious that the wheel only stayed true after a few sessions of stress-relieving.
    >
    >>If the wheel dished properly (rim centred) then tension difference between sides will be correct.
    >
    >yeah, the dish is fine.
    >
    >anyway thanks
    >
    >bob
     
  5. J-P.S

    J-P.S Guest

    On Sun, 09 Mar 2003 14:14:38 +0000, Bob Flemming scrawled: ) 1. How do people stress relieve?

    I normally go cycling, but I think you want to make sure your wheel is OK before you do that.
    Needlework?

    J-P
    --
    CHAPTER 28: THE DREADED ELECTRIC PENCIL SHARPENER. HURRRRRRANG HUHHHHH.
     
  6. Eatmorepies

    Eatmorepies Guest

    "Bob Flemming" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    >
    > I re-built another wheel today, and it seems to be fine, but I have a few queries...
    >
    > 1. How do people stress relieve? I have tried spoke-gripping method with the hands but this is
    > proving to be a bit 'painful' as the spokes get tight....so I switched to a bit of 2x1 wood! Do
    > other people use anything else other than their hands?

    I sit down with the wheel in my lap and twist on the rim with a sort of pushing, pulling and
    generally leaning on the rim with my forearms. (I use Mavic 517 SUP)

    John
     
  7. "Bob Flemming" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    >
    > I re-built another wheel today, and it seems to be fine, but I have a few queries...
    >
    > 1. How do people stress relieve? I have tried spoke-gripping method with the hands but this is
    > proving to be a bit 'painful' as the spokes get tight....so I switched to a bit of 2x1 wood! Do
    > other people use anything else other than their hands?

    Old LH crank as recommended by sheldon brown www.sheldonbrown.com

    > 2. It's not uncommon for a wheel to lose it's trueness after stress-relieveing has taken place. I
    > guess this is the whole point - the spokes are beginning to settle down. How do you know when
    > enough stress-relieveing has been done - when the wheel 'doesn't lose it's shape after such
    > practice?

    I do it and then wind on another 1/4 turn - do it again and another 1/4 turn - 4 goes at that ans it
    always seems sorted

    > 3. In relation to a rear wheel - Is it good to have quite such a big disparity between the tension
    > of the drive and non-drive spokes? I can't give you any figures because I haven't got measuring
    > equipment. I'm running a 7sp freewheel on a 126 spacing and am pretty sure the axle is spaced
    > correctly. It feels as thought the non-drive side could wind up quite a bit more, but the drive
    > side spokes are pretty much 'there' I think.

    That's supposed to happen

    Russ
     
  8. W K

    W K Guest

    "Pete Biggs" <pLime{remove_fruit}@biggs.tc> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > Bob Flemming wrote:
    > >>> 2. It's not uncommon for a wheel to lose it's trueness after stress-relieveing has taken
    > >>> place. I guess this is the whole point -
    > >>
    > >> No it's not (but bedding in is a useful side effect of it). Stress releiving pre-stresses the
    > >> spokes to reduce metal fatigue. See Jobst Brandt's explanations and instructions via
    > >> http://draco.acs.uci.edu/rbfaq/FAQ/8c.1.html and Google Groups (and his book The Bicycle Wheel
    > >> ...still haven't got a copy myself but have read many of his articles on r.b.t and his FAQ,
    > >> etc).
    > >
    > > I am aware of his writings, but quite honestly, always find it quite difficult to understand.
    > > Bit above my head at times
    >
    > Mine too, but the major points sink in when you read enough if it enough times! :)

    I've actually read it and think its OK. I just wonder why you have to get the spoke all nicely set
    up before you stretch it? Surely you could rig it up to pre-stress it before you even make the
    wheel, never mind get it almost true.

    > > , he's a master of the cerebral this guy
    >
    > I think he's the master of plain writing, actually - to the point of being over-simplistic. eg.
    > "Bicycles don't accelerate". It's just that he writes about some difficult subjects,

    Maybe, but he does seem to throw in things that are a bit pseudo-science, including things that are
    downright wrong (e.g. ridges on knobles melt ice and make them more slippy). But the "bikes don't
    accellerate (much)" I'd have to agree with - although he almost always talks in the context of
    hardcore racing cyclists.

    >and has a bit of an attitude problem - which does get in the way.

    Attitude problem? "no such thing as puncture resistant tyres" ? He's extremely blinkered at times,
    some of which are very obvious as the above, some less so "rim rigidity makes no difference",
    "spokes are never broken by drive torque" (maybe true with skinny racers, but 2 nonskinny people on
    a tandem... with 16% hills? might make a difference to the analysis! ).
     
  9. Dave Kahn

    Dave Kahn Guest

    "Pete Biggs" <pLime{remove_fruit}@biggs.tc> wrote in message
    news:<[email protected]>...

    > Brandt's explanations and instructions via http://draco.acs.uci.edu/rbfaq/FAQ/8c.1.html and Google
    > Groups (and his book The Bicycle Wheel ...still haven't got a copy myself

    It's a thing of beauty. Amazon have got it for a shade under 16 quid ATM. Bargain.

    --
    Dave...
     
  10. Dave Kahn

    Dave Kahn Guest

    "Pete Biggs" <pLime{remove_fruit}@biggs.tc> wrote in message
    news:<[email protected]>...

    > It's just that he (Jobst Brandt) writes about some difficult subjects, and has a bit of an
    > attitude problem - which does get in the way.

    He can certainly be a bit prickly, and he doesn't tolerate fools gladly, but it's understandable
    considering a) some of the sustained and vitriolic attacks that are made on him; b) the way many of
    his detractors, who have clearly not read the book, accuse it of leaving out detail that is in fact
    not left out; c) some of the technically illiterate arguments he has to refute over and over again;
    and d) the way people are always asking him to spell out detailed points they could easily check by
    reading the book.

    --
    Dave...
     
  11. Dave Kahn

    Dave Kahn Guest

    "Eatmorepies" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:<[email protected]>...
    > "Bob Flemming" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]...

    > > 1. How do people stress relieve? I have tried spoke-gripping method with the hands but this is
    > > proving to be a bit 'painful' as the spokes get tight....so I switched to a bit of 2x1 wood!
    > > Do other people use anything else other than their hands?
    >
    > I sit down with the wheel in my lap and twist on the rim with a sort of pushing, pulling and
    > generally leaning on the rim with my forearms. (I use Mavic 517 SUP)

    This may help to relieve spoke wind-up and produce some satisfying pings, but it is not stress
    relief in the sense meant here. Twisting the rim does not increase spoke tension significantly, but
    rather slackens a few spokes temporarily. The idea is to increase the spoke tension sufficiently to
    give a permanent set to the high stress points within each spoke.

    --
    Dave...
     
  12. David Nutter

    David Nutter Guest

    Dave Kahn <[email protected]> said:

    > It's a thing of beauty. Amazon have got it for a shade under 16 quid ATM. Bargain.

    The delivery time is hideous unfortunately.

    Regards,

    -impatient david
     
  13. Andymorris

    Andymorris Guest

    Bob Flemming wrote:
    > I re-built another wheel today, and it seems to be fine, but I have a few queries...
    >
    > 1. How do people stress relieve? I have tried spoke-gripping method with the hands but this is
    > proving to be a bit 'painful' as the spokes get tight....so I switched to a bit of 2x1 wood! Do
    > other people use anything else other than their hands?
    >
    Yes it does hurt a bit, try an old pair of track mitts or gardening gloves.

    > 2. It's not uncommon for a wheel to lose it's trueness after stress-relieveing has taken place. I
    > guess this is the whole point - the spokes are beginning to settle down. How do you know when
    > enough stress-relieveing has been done - when the wheel 'doesn't lose it's shape after such
    > practice?
    >

    If the rim takes up a shape like a pringle (with two left and two right wobbles) of a few mm you
    have put in a little too much tension, back off a
    1/4 turn.

    If it throws a major pringle shape you may of stuffed the rim. This is very difficult to do with
    modern rims as the tension needed to do so would be very high.

    If its a fairly random wobble, its just the spokes bedding into the hub and is no problem.

    > 3. In relation to a rear wheel - Is it good to have quite such a big disparity between the tension
    > of the drive and non-drive spokes? I can't give you any figures because I haven't got measuring
    > equipment. I'm running a 7sp freewheel on a 126 spacing and am pretty sure the axle is spaced
    > correctly. It feels as thought the non-drive side could wind up quite a bit more, but the drive
    > side spokes are pretty much 'there' I think.
    >

    There is a big difference in the tension, check the dish and go by that, you will need a lot of
    tension in the drive side to keep the non drive side tight enough to stop the spokes going slack
    when you honk up hills. Keep stress relieving and watching for the pringle shape and you will be OK.

    --
    Andy Morris

    AndyAtJinkasDotFreeserve.Co.UK

    Love this: Put an end to Outlook Express's messy quotes
    http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/
     
  14. Jumpzkid

    Jumpzkid Guest

    "W K" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    > "Pete Biggs" <pLime{remove_fruit}@biggs.tc> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]...
    > > Bob Flemming wrote:
    > > >>> 2. It's not uncommon for a wheel to lose it's trueness after stress-relieveing has taken
    > > >>> place. I guess this is the whole point -
    > > >>
    > > >> No it's not (but bedding in is a useful side effect of it). Stress releiving pre-stresses the
    > > >> spokes to reduce metal fatigue. See Jobst Brandt's explanations and instructions via
    > > >> http://draco.acs.uci.edu/rbfaq/FAQ/8c.1.html and Google Groups (and his book The Bicycle
    > > >> Wheel ...still haven't got a copy myself but have read many of his articles on r.b.t and his
    > > >> FAQ, etc).
    > > >
    > > > I am aware of his writings, but quite honestly, always find it quite difficult to understand.
    > > > Bit above my head at times
    > >
    > > Mine too, but the major points sink in when you read enough if it enough times! :)
    >
    > I've actually read it and think its OK. I just wonder why you have to get the spoke all nicely set
    > up before you stretch it? Surely you could rig it up to pre-stress it before you even make the
    > wheel, never mind get it almost true.

    spokes bend at elboes when U lase the up so cant stress relive until laced look at some spoks taken
    out off a wheel some time.

    > > > , he's a master of the cerebral this guy
    > >
    > > I think he's the master of plain writing, actually - to the point of being over-simplistic. eg.
    > > "Bicycles don't accelerate". It's just that he writes about some difficult subjects,
    >
    > Maybe, but he does seem to throw in things that are a bit pseudo-science, including things that
    > are downright wrong (e.g. ridges on knobles melt ice and make them more slippy). But the "bikes
    > don't accellerate (much)" I'd have to agree with - although he almost always talks in the context
    > of hardcore racing cyclists.
    >
    > >and has a bit of an attitude problem - which does get in the way.
    >
    > Attitude problem? "no such thing as puncture resistant tyres" ? He's extremely blinkered at times,
    > some of which are very obvious as the above, some less so "rim rigidity makes no difference",
    > "spokes are never broken by drive torque" (maybe true with skinny racers, but 2 nonskinny people
    > on a tandem... with 16% hills? might make a difference to the analysis! ).

    Nope because drive torqs a very small fraction of spok load hub flange would brake 1st did U read
    the book????????? duh. JumpZkid
    --
    The opinions expressed are those of the JUMPHUNTER!!!!!!!!
     
  15. W K

    W K Guest

    "Jumpzkid" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > "W K" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:<[email protected]>...
    > > "Pete Biggs" <pLime{remove_fruit}@biggs.tc> wrote in message
    > > news:[email protected]...
    > > > Bob Flemming wrote:
    > > > >>> 2. It's not uncommon for a wheel to lose it's trueness after stress-relieveing has taken
    > > > >>> place. I guess this is the whole
    point -
    > > > >>
    > > > >> No it's not (but bedding in is a useful side effect of it). Stress releiving pre-stresses
    > > > >> the spokes to reduce metal fatigue. See
    Jobst
    > > > >> Brandt's explanations and instructions via http://draco.acs.uci.edu/rbfaq/FAQ/8c.1.html and
    > > > >> Google Groups (and his book The Bicycle Wheel ...still haven't got a copy myself but have
    > > > >> read many of his articles on r.b.t and his FAQ, etc).
    > > > >
    > > > > I am aware of his writings, but quite honestly, always find it quite difficult to
    > > > > understand. Bit above my head at times
    > > >
    > > > Mine too, but the major points sink in when you read enough if it
    enough
    > > > times! :)
    > >
    > > I've actually read it and think its OK. I just wonder why you have to
    get
    > > the spoke all nicely set up before you stretch it? Surely you could rig it up to pre-stress it
    > > before you even make the
    wheel,
    > > never mind get it almost true.
    >
    > spokes bend at elboes when U lase the up so cant stress relive until laced look at some spoks
    > taken out off a wheel some time.

    Oh really. I had in mind that the rig would stress relieve the elbows with one end being held in
    something approximating to a hub.

    > > > > , he's a master of the cerebral this guy
    > > >
    > > > I think he's the master of plain writing, actually - to the point of
    being
    > > > over-simplistic. eg. "Bicycles don't accelerate". It's just that he writes about some
    > > > difficult subjects,
    > >
    > > Maybe, but he does seem to throw in things that are a bit
    pseudo-science,
    > > including things that are downright wrong (e.g. ridges on knobles melt
    ice
    > > and make them more slippy). But the "bikes don't accellerate (much)" I'd have to agree with -
    although
    > > he almost always talks in the context of hardcore racing cyclists.
    > >
    > > >and has a bit of an attitude problem - which does get in the way.
    > >
    > > Attitude problem? "no such thing as puncture resistant tyres" ? He's extremely blinkered at
    > > times, some of which are very obvious as the above, some less so "rim rigidity makes no
    > > difference", "spokes are
    never
    > > broken by drive torque" (maybe true with skinny racers, but 2 nonskinny people on a tandem...
    > > with 16% hills? might make a difference to the analysis! ).
    >
    > Nope because drive torqs a very small fraction of spok load hub flange would brake 1st did U read
    > the book????????? duh. JumpZkid

    You write like that you look like some dumb troll, or a 13 year old.

    If you'd like to quote the figures, OK, but seeing as he only quotes roadie specific examples for
    everything else I doubt he's worked it out properly for the case I mention.
     
  16. W K <[email protected]> wrote:
    >"Jumpzkid" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >>"W K" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >>>Attitude problem? "no such thing as puncture resistant tyres" ?

    What Brandt says is that wet glass will cut anything, Kevlar strips or not. He's right.

    >>>above, some less so "rim rigidity makes no difference", "spokes are never broken by drive torque"
    >>>(maybe true with skinny racers, but 2 nonskinny people on a tandem... with 16% hills? might make
    >>>a difference to the analysis! ).
    >>Nope because drive torqs a very small fraction of spok load hub flange would brake 1st did U read
    >>the book????????? duh. JumpZkid
    >You write like that you look like some dumb troll, or a 13 year old.

    He does, but he looks like a 13 yo who's _read_ The Bicycle Wheel. Doubling or even tripling drive
    torque would still leave it a fraction of spoke load.
    --
    David Damerell <[email protected]> Kill the tomato!
     
  17. Jumpzkid

    Jumpzkid Guest

    "W K" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    > "Jumpzkid" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]...
    > > "W K" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:<[email protected]>...
    > > > "Pete Biggs" <pLime{remove_fruit}@biggs.tc> wrote in message
    > > > news:[email protected]...
    > > > > Bob Flemming wrote:
    > > > > >>> 2. It's not uncommon for a wheel to lose it's trueness after stress-relieveing has taken
    > > > > >>> place. I guess this is the whole
    > point -
    > > > > >>
    > > > > >> No it's not (but bedding in is a useful side effect of it). Stress releiving pre-stresses
    > > > > >> the spokes to reduce metal fatigue. See
    > Jobst
    > > > > >> Brandt's explanations and instructions via http://draco.acs.uci.edu/rbfaq/FAQ/8c.1.html
    > > > > >> and Google Groups (and his book The Bicycle Wheel ...still haven't got a copy myself but
    > > > > >> have read many of his articles on r.b.t and his FAQ, etc).
    > > > > >
    > > > > > I am aware of his writings, but quite honestly, always find it quite difficult to
    > > > > > understand. Bit above my head at times
    > > > >
    > > > > Mine too, but the major points sink in when you read enough if it
    > enough
    > > > > times! :)
    > > >
    > > > I've actually read it and think its OK. I just wonder why you have to
    > get
    > > > the spoke all nicely set up before you stretch it? Surely you could rig it up to pre-stress it
    > > > before you even make the
    > wheel,
    > > > never mind get it almost true.
    > >
    > > spokes bend at elboes when U lase the up so cant stress relive until laced look at some spoks
    > > taken out off a wheel some time.
    >
    > Oh really. I had in mind that the rig would stress relieve the elbows with one end being held in
    > something approximating to a hub.

    uh very clevr build a weel and UR back 2 square 1 so U sell spokes 4 thick flanges thin flanges
    leading trailing heads in heads out radil 2x 3x in evry length soounds lik,e a inventory
    nitemare!!!!!!! why not just stress relive 1nce their bent according to positon oh you already
    do.

    > > > > > , he's a master of the cerebral this guy
    > > > >
    > > > > I think he's the master of plain writing, actually - to the point of
    > being
    > > > > over-simplistic. eg. "Bicycles don't accelerate". It's just that he writes about some
    > > > > difficult subjects,
    > > >
    > > > Maybe, but he does seem to throw in things that are a bit
    > pseudo-science,
    > > > including things that are downright wrong (e.g. ridges on knobles melt
    > ice
    > > > and make them more slippy). But the "bikes don't accellerate (much)" I'd have to agree with -
    > although
    > > > he almost always talks in the context of hardcore racing cyclists.
    > > >
    > > > >and has a bit of an attitude problem - which does get in the way.
    > > >
    > > > Attitude problem? "no such thing as puncture resistant tyres" ? He's extremely blinkered at
    > > > times, some of which are very obvious as the above, some less so "rim rigidity makes no
    > > > difference", "spokes are
    > never
    > > > broken by drive torque" (maybe true with skinny racers, but 2 nonskinny people on a tandem...
    > > > with 16% hills? might make a difference to the analysis! ).
    > >
    > > Nope because drive torqs a very small fraction of spok load hub flange would brake 1st did U
    > > read the book????????? duh. JumpZkid
    >
    > You write like that you look like some dumb troll, or a 13 year old.

    goood guess!!!!!!

    > If you'd like to quote the figures, OK, but seeing as he only quotes roadie specific examples for
    > everything else I doubt he's worked it out properly for the case I mention.

    learn 2 apply basic consepts!!!!! U did read the book yah?????? JumpZkid
    --
    The opinions expressed are those of the JUMPHUNTER!!!!!!!
     
  18. W K

    W K Guest

    "David Damerell" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:wrz*[email protected]...
    > W K <[email protected]> wrote:
    > >"Jumpzkid" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > >>"W K" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > >>>Attitude problem? "no such thing as puncture resistant tyres" ?
    >
    > What Brandt says is that wet glass will cut anything, Kevlar strips or not. He's right.

    No, he actually says that if you ride through glass you get a puncture and its as simple as that.
    Aparantly he would never dream of riding with 4mm thick rubber, which probably makes most the
    difference. He certainly hasn't commuted through the post industrial wasteland on an everyday basis.
    Wet glass may cut many things, but you can reduce your chances with non racing tyres.

    > >>>above, some less so "rim rigidity makes no difference", "spokes are
    never
    > >>>broken by drive torque" (maybe true with skinny racers, but 2 nonskinny people on a tandem...
    > >>>with 16% hills? might make a difference to the analysis! ).
    > >>Nope because drive torqs a very small fraction of spok load hub flange would brake 1st did U
    > >>read the book????????? duh. JumpZkid
    > >You write like that you look like some dumb troll, or a 13 year old.
    >
    > He does, but he looks like a 13 yo who's _read_ The Bicycle Wheel. Doubling or even tripling drive
    > torque would still leave it a fraction of spoke load.

    If you are talking about bad pedalling styles and low gears you can make it very much higher than
    doubling or tripling. However, the example I am thinking was comparing front to rear, the ability to
    make back spokes go through bigger cycles of loading changes will make a difference - even if we are
    still at fractions of the actual tension on the spoke.

    Would you like to quote the actual calculations? Or do I have to line his pockets just to disagree?
    In brief, which of the concepts I mention show immediately that I have missed the boat?
     
  19. J-P.S

    J-P.S Guest

    On 11 Mar 2003 13:02:58 +0000 (GMT), David Damerell scrawled: ) What Brandt says is that wet glass
    will cut anything, Kevlar strips or ) not. He's right.

    From a pedant that's a bit of a generalization. I certainly wouldn't want to play a game of
    scissors-paper-stone-glass with you based on that particular rule set. Not that I imagine you're
    asking. What? Oh, go on, then. Stone. Stone. Paper. Scissors.... Hang on. Have you been practising?

    J-P
    --
    Choose your companions carefully, you may have to eat them....
     
  20. Dave Kahn

    Dave Kahn Guest

    "W K" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

    > Would you like to quote the actual calculations? Or do I have to line his pockets just to
    > disagree?

    Err... I thought you said you'd already read it.

    --
    Dave...
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...