Good value in tensiometer?

[[email protected]]

Peter Chisholm writes:

>>> IMO, especially for someone who does not build wheels regularly,
>>> absolute tension accuracy is less important than having the
>>> ability to read the relative tension differences from spoke to
>>> spoke. Experienced builders may (or may not) be able to gauge
>>> tension uniformity by "plucking" the spokes and listening for
>>> differences in tone, but novices have a great deal of difficulty
>>> doing this.

>> It's exactly the other way around. It's very easy even for a
>> first-timer to tell tension differences by plucking the spokes. If
>> you're tone deaf it will be difficult and exercise won't help.

>> It is the absolute tension where the tensiometer is particularly
>> useful for a beginner, because it's otherwise almost impossible
>> tell what the tension is. A professional builder can probably find
>> the correct absolute tension from experience by listening to the
>> tone, or he can compare the tension to another wheel with known
>> tension.

> I cannot and don't even try, after 22 years and 'lots' of wheels
> built. When I hear about 'pros' who can tell torque and spoke
> tension with their 'hands', I just wanna giggle. If my car wrench
> said he tells cylinder head torque by 'feel', I'm going somewhere
> else.

That doesn't mean there aren't mechanics who have such sensitivity. A
study done on experienced mechanics tightening screws of various sizes
showed that they correctly tightened those that are small enough to
manually cause failure (up to 12mm bolts) and above that most said
they relied on torque wrenches.

The reason for this was obvious in that stripping threads or breaking
screws gave one a good sense of reasonable tightness. These men, no
doubt, started doing this in early youth and developed good
reliability. Similarly, I believe there are people who consistently
tension spokes properly when they work with a fixed numbers of spokes
per wheel like 32 or 36. I've repaired enough wheels on the road to
not have any qualms about having reasonable high spoke tension without
instruments. My tensiometer was designed for the purpose of writing
about spokes, not for my personal use, and I don't use it when
building wheels.

Pumping tires with a frame pump invariably results in lower than ideal
pressure because it is tedious and tiring, causing one to quit pumping
as soon as the tire is "hard enough". Besides after much pumping the
squeeze of the thumb isn't all that strong anymore. However, this is
an easily correctable condition.

Jobst Brandt

 

[[email protected]]

Antti Salonen wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
>
> > IMO, especially for someone who does not build wheels regularly,
> > absolute tension accuracy is less important than having the ability to
> > read the relative tension differences from spoke to spoke. Experieced
> > builders may (or may not) be able to guage tension uniformity by
> > "plucking" the spokes and listening for differences in tone, but
> > novices have a great deal of difficulty doing this.
>
> It's exactly the other way around. It's very easy even for a first-timer
> to tell tension differences by plucking the spokes. If you're tone deaf
> it will be difficult and exercise won't help.
>

Well, we exactly disagree.



> It is the absolute tension where the tensiometer is particularly useful
> for a beginner, because it's otherwise almost impossible tell what the
> tension is. A professional builder can probably find the correct
> absolute tension from experience by listening to the tone, or he can
> compare the tension to another wheel with known tension.
>
> -as

 

[[email protected]]

Tim McNamara wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "Qui si parla Campagnolo" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Antti Salonen wrote:
> > > [email protected] wrote:
> > >
> > > > IMO, especially for someone who does not build wheels regularly,
> > > > absolute tension accuracy is less important than having the ability to
> > > > read the relative tension differences from spoke to spoke. Experieced
> > > > builders may (or may not) be able to guage tension uniformity by
> > > > "plucking" the spokes and listening for differences in tone, but
> > > > novices have a great deal of difficulty doing this.
> > >
> > > It's exactly the other way around. It's very easy even for a first-timer
> > > to tell tension differences by plucking the spokes. If you're tone deaf
> > > it will be difficult and exercise won't help.
> > >
> > > It is the absolute tension where the tensiometer is particularly useful
> > > for a beginner, because it's otherwise almost impossible tell what the
> > > tension is. A professional builder can probably find the correct
> > > absolute tension from experience by listening to the tone, or he can
> > > compare the tension to another wheel with known tension.
> >
> > I cannot and don't even try, after 22 years and 'lots' of wheels built.
> > When I hear about 'pros' who can tell torque and spoke tension with
> > their 'hands', I just wanna giggle. If my car wrench said he tells
> > cylinder head torque by 'feel', I'm going somewhere else.
>
> LOL! Me, too.
>
> Plucking the spokes is way faster than fiddling with a tensiometer. I
> use my tensiometer to check the tension on one spoke, I think of it as
> the "master spoke" and then pluck the other spokes to compare tension.
> I am also a guitarist, so the tone method seems very natural to me.
> There are too many variables to tell what the absolute tension is by
> plucking, but relative tension is easy to discern. Therefore I use the
> tensiometer to determine absolute tension and plucking to determine
> relative tension.

Tim, just for giggles, build a wheel as described above and then use a
tensiometer to check the tension reading on each and every spoke. You
might be surprised.(Then, again, as a musician, you might just get it
pretty close. OTOH, a friend who is a very experienced builder was
pretty shocked at how variable the plucking method could be.)

 

[Tim McNamara]

In article <[email protected]>,
R Brickston <rb20170REMOVE.yahoo.com@> wrote:

> On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 09:09:57 -0500, Tim McNamara
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >Plucking the spokes is way faster than fiddling with a tensiometer.
> >I use my tensiometer to check the tension on one spoke, I think of
> >it as the "master spoke" and then pluck the other spokes to compare
> >tension. I am also a guitarist, so the tone method seems very
> >natural to me. There are too many variables to tell what the
> >absolute tension is by plucking, but relative tension is easy to
> >discern. Therefore I use the tensiometer to determine absolute
> >tension and plucking to determine relative tension.
>
> I wonder if you could use a $20 Korg tuner or similar to check
> relative tension.

Not enough sustain for the tuner to get a read on the signal.

 

[Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman]

[email protected] aka Jobst Brandt wrote:
> ...
> Pumping tires with a frame pump invariably results in lower that ideal
> pressure because it it tedious and tiring, so one quits pumping as
> soon as the tire is "hard enough". Besides after much pumping the
> squeeze of the thumb isn't all that strong anymore. This is an easily
> correctable condition.

Yes: <http://www.topeak.com/2006/products/minipumps/roadmorphg.php>.

--
Tom Sherman - Here, not there.

 

[RonSonic]

On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 15:32:48 -0500, Tim McNamara <[email protected]> wrote:

>In article <[email protected]>,
> R Brickston <rb20170REMOVE.yahoo.com@> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 09:09:57 -0500, Tim McNamara
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >Plucking the spokes is way faster than fiddling with a tensiometer.
>> >I use my tensiometer to check the tension on one spoke, I think of
>> >it as the "master spoke" and then pluck the other spokes to compare
>> >tension. I am also a guitarist, so the tone method seems very
>> >natural to me. There are too many variables to tell what the
>> >absolute tension is by plucking, but relative tension is easy to
>> >discern. Therefore I use the tensiometer to determine absolute
>> >tension and plucking to determine relative tension.
>>
>> I wonder if you could use a $20 Korg tuner or similar to check
>> relative tension.
>
>Not enough sustain for the tuner to get a read on the signal.

Even a very fast tuner like a strobe, will have trouble with the harmonic
content. It's a very messy note.

Ron

 

[[email protected]]

Tom Sherman writes:

>> ... Pumping tires with a frame pump invariably results in lower
>> that ideal pressure because it it tedious and tiring, so one quits
>> pumping as soon as the tire is "hard enough". Besides after much
>> pumping the squeeze of the thumb isn't all that strong anymore.
>> This is an easily correctable condition.

> Yes: <http://www.topeak.com/2006/products/minipumps/roadmorphg.php>.

I think you don't understand to what I was referring. Pumping with
one hand for 100psi is exhausting whether using a mini-pump 10^4 light
strokes or a Silca Impero 10^2 strokes. Unless pumping with a good
floor pump, tires are generally not as hard as one would like and it
isn't for lack of a pump (portable on the bicycle pump). That's why
so many folks defer to a CO2 bomb.

Jobst Brandt

 

[[email protected]]

Tim McNamara writes:

>>> Plucking the spokes is way faster than fiddling with a
>>> tensiometer. I use my tensiometer to check the tension on one
>>> spoke, I think of it as the "master spoke" and then pluck the
>>> other spokes to compare tension. I am also a guitarist, so the
>>> tone method seems very natural to me. There are too many
>>> variables to tell what the absolute tension is by plucking, but
>>> relative tension is easy to discern. Therefore I use the
>>> tensiometer to determine absolute tension and plucking to
>>> determine relative tension.

>> I wonder if you could use a $20 Korg tuner or similar to check
>> relative tension.

> Not enough sustain for the tuner to get a read on the signal.

Beyond that, with interleaved spokes, harmonics from two spokes
vibrating together makes a dirty mix of frequencies from which the
human ear can extract the valid tone. Spokes should be plucked near
the nipple to excite their higher mode that is readily identifiable
and easily compared with other spokes.

The tone deaf need not claim it can't be done, and thereby volunteer
publicly that they are afflicted with this deficiency.

Jobst Brandt

 

[Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman]

[email protected] aka Jobst Brandt wrote:
> Tom Sherman writes:
>
> >> ... Pumping tires with a frame pump invariably results in lower
> >> that ideal pressure because it it tedious and tiring, so one quits
> >> pumping as soon as the tire is "hard enough". Besides after much
> >> pumping the squeeze of the thumb isn't all that strong anymore.
> >> This is an easily correctable condition.
>
> > Yes: <http://www.topeak.com/2006/products/minipumps/roadmorphg.php>.
>
> I think you don't understand to what I was referring. Pumping with
> one hand for 100psi is exhausting whether using a mini-pump 10^4 light
> strokes or a Silca Impero 10^2 strokes. Unless pumping with a good
> floor pump, tires are generally not as hard as one would like and it
> isn't for lack of a pump (portable on the bicycle pump). That's why
> so many folks defer to a CO2 bomb.

The Topeak "Morph" pumps allow one to use upper body weight, just the
same a shop/home floor pump. I can easily obtain 100-110 psi in a
53-406 tires (sorry, I do not have any bikes with large diameter,
skinny tires) with a Topeak "Morph" pump.

Having a pressure gauge on the pump eliminates (assuming reasonable
gauge accuracy) the error caused by tired digits when performing the
"squeeze" pressure test.

--
Tom Sherman - Here, not there.

 

[[email protected]]

On 01 Oct 2006 21:35:27 GMT, [email protected] wrote:

>Tom Sherman writes:
>
>>> ... Pumping tires with a frame pump invariably results in lower
>>> that ideal pressure because it it tedious and tiring, so one quits
>>> pumping as soon as the tire is "hard enough". Besides after much
>>> pumping the squeeze of the thumb isn't all that strong anymore.
>>> This is an easily correctable condition.
>
>> Yes: <http://www.topeak.com/2006/products/minipumps/roadmorphg.php>.
>
>I think you don't understand to what I was referring. Pumping with
>one hand for 100psi is exhausting whether using a mini-pump 10^4 light
>strokes or a Silca Impero 10^2 strokes. Unless pumping with a good
>floor pump, tires are generally not as hard as one would like and it
>isn't for lack of a pump (portable on the bicycle pump). That's why
>so many folks defer to a CO2 bomb.
>
>Jobst Brandt

Dear Jobst,

Actually, my Topeak mini RoadMorph pumps my 700c x 26 tire to 100 psi
with about 140 strokes and happily goes beyond to the 120 psi that I
foolishly favor.

The 140 strokes on the Topeak are delightfully easy after all the
years I wasted pumping up hundreds of goathead flats with a somewhat
smaller and much cruder Zefal mini-pump that stowed in my frame bag.

The Zefal was just a miniature frame pump--no flexible hose, no
t-handle, no easy way to brace it against the ground while pumping,
though I learned to carry small towel as a pad and set my wheel on the
ground so that I had a crude brace. The built-in air gauge on the
Zefal showed a depressingly slow pressure rise of the kind that you
have in mind.

In contrast, the Topeak mini RoadMorph is a nice little fold-out floor
pump with flip-out foot pedestal, small flip-out t-handle, flexible
hose, and in-line pressure gauge.

Even the Topeak thumb-latch is nice. It's angled to one side, which
looked odd at first, but turns out to be much easier to use than the
straight thumb latch on my floor pump.

The Topeak has a wider barrel than the Zefal and is a bit longer, but
it's still enough of a mini-pump that it will just barely fit in my
frame bag. The bag is already crammed with a few tools and four spare
tubes, so I just clip the Topeak to my frame tube with its
quick-release attachment.

To emphasize just how pleased I am with the Topeak, I just deflated
and pumped up a tire with it, counting the 140 strokes to 100 psi.
Then I pumped it up to over 120 psi, put the wheel back in place, and
checked the pressure (125 psi) with my floor pump's gauge.

With my crude old hard-to-pump Zefal, you'd never have caught me past
90 psi, much less pumping a tire up as a test. But leaning on the
Topeak is like using a floor pump--you push down with your weight
against the ground, so it's much, much easier.

You're happy with your pump, so this post is really more for other
riders who are wondering what pump might work well for them. It took
me far too long to notice how many posters on RBT were praising the
Topeak mini RoadMorph and decide to give it a try after noticing how
many ways it improved on my crude old Zefal mini pump.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

 

[Mike Elliott]

On 10/1/2006 11:56 AM [email protected] wrote:

> Antti Salonen wrote:
>> [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>> IMO, especially for someone who does not build wheels regularly,
>>> absolute tension accuracy is less important than having the ability to
>>> read the relative tension differences from spoke to spoke. Experieced
>>> builders may (or may not) be able to guage tension uniformity by
>>> "plucking" the spokes and listening for differences in tone, but
>>> novices have a great deal of difficulty doing this.
>> It's exactly the other way around. It's very easy even for a first-timer
>> to tell tension differences by plucking the spokes. If you're tone deaf
>> it will be difficult and exercise won't help.
>>
>
> Well, we exactly disagree.
>

Unless there is some issue of technique that must first be mastered
before a good plucked tone can be produced, I would expect that the
ability of someone to tune two spokes to the same pitch by ear will
correspond to how easily they can tune a guitar by ear. Some folks can't
tune two strings anywhere near each other. They play air guitar.

-- mike elliott

 

[R Brickston]

On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 17:01:36 -0700, Mike Elliott
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On 10/1/2006 11:56 AM [email protected] wrote:
>
>> Antti Salonen wrote:
>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>
>>>> IMO, especially for someone who does not build wheels regularly,
>>>> absolute tension accuracy is less important than having the ability to
>>>> read the relative tension differences from spoke to spoke. Experieced
>>>> builders may (or may not) be able to guage tension uniformity by
>>>> "plucking" the spokes and listening for differences in tone, but
>>>> novices have a great deal of difficulty doing this.
>>> It's exactly the other way around. It's very easy even for a first-timer
>>> to tell tension differences by plucking the spokes. If you're tone deaf
>>> it will be difficult and exercise won't help.
>>>
>>
>> Well, we exactly disagree.
>>
>
>Unless there is some issue of technique that must first be mastered
>before a good plucked tone can be produced, I would expect that the
>ability of someone to tune two spokes to the same pitch by ear will
>correspond to how easily they can tune a guitar by ear. Some folks can't
>tune two strings anywhere near each other. They play air guitar.
>
>-- mike elliott

Yeah, but it can be a little more involved than straight pitch
comparison between two strings, part of it is done by tuning until the
beat frequencies slow down until they disappear (resonanate?).

 

[[email protected]]

On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 01:05:44 GMT, R Brickston
<rb20170REMOVE.yahoo.com@> wrote:

>On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 17:01:36 -0700, Mike Elliott
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>On 10/1/2006 11:56 AM [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>> Antti Salonen wrote:
>>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> IMO, especially for someone who does not build wheels regularly,
>>>>> absolute tension accuracy is less important than having the ability to
>>>>> read the relative tension differences from spoke to spoke. Experieced
>>>>> builders may (or may not) be able to guage tension uniformity by
>>>>> "plucking" the spokes and listening for differences in tone, but
>>>>> novices have a great deal of difficulty doing this.
>>>> It's exactly the other way around. It's very easy even for a first-timer
>>>> to tell tension differences by plucking the spokes. If you're tone deaf
>>>> it will be difficult and exercise won't help.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Well, we exactly disagree.
>>>
>>
>>Unless there is some issue of technique that must first be mastered
>>before a good plucked tone can be produced, I would expect that the
>>ability of someone to tune two spokes to the same pitch by ear will
>>correspond to how easily they can tune a guitar by ear. Some folks can't
>>tune two strings anywhere near each other. They play air guitar.
>>
>>-- mike elliott
>
>Yeah, but it can be a little more involved than straight pitch
>comparison between two strings, part of it is done by tuning until the
>beat frequencies slow down until they disappear (resonanate?).

Dear R.,

Here's the only attempt that I know of to test plucking versus an
expensive tension gauge:

http://www.ihpva.org/HParchive/PDF/hp53-2002.pdf#search=""bicycle spoke" tone program tension"
or http://tinyurl.com/pjus9

The tension gauge appears to win handily. One graph shows neat lines
that clearly distinguish between several spoke thicknesses. The other
looks like a shotgun blast.

There may, of course, be some big holes in the testing.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

 

[R Brickston]

On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 21:31:24 -0600, [email protected] wrote:

>On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 01:05:44 GMT, R Brickston
><rb20170REMOVE.yahoo.com@> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 17:01:36 -0700, Mike Elliott
>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>On 10/1/2006 11:56 AM [email protected] wrote:
>>>
>>>> Antti Salonen wrote:
>>>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> IMO, especially for someone who does not build wheels regularly,
>>>>>> absolute tension accuracy is less important than having the ability to
>>>>>> read the relative tension differences from spoke to spoke. Experieced
>>>>>> builders may (or may not) be able to guage tension uniformity by
>>>>>> "plucking" the spokes and listening for differences in tone, but
>>>>>> novices have a great deal of difficulty doing this.
>>>>> It's exactly the other way around. It's very easy even for a first-timer
>>>>> to tell tension differences by plucking the spokes. If you're tone deaf
>>>>> it will be difficult and exercise won't help.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Well, we exactly disagree.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Unless there is some issue of technique that must first be mastered
>>>before a good plucked tone can be produced, I would expect that the
>>>ability of someone to tune two spokes to the same pitch by ear will
>>>correspond to how easily they can tune a guitar by ear. Some folks can't
>>>tune two strings anywhere near each other. They play air guitar.
>>>
>>>-- mike elliott
>>
>>Yeah, but it can be a little more involved than straight pitch
>>comparison between two strings, part of it is done by tuning until the
>>beat frequencies slow down until they disappear (resonanate?).
>
>Dear R.,
>
>Here's the only attempt that I know of to test plucking versus an
>expensive tension gauge:
>
>http://www.ihpva.org/HParchive/PDF/hp53-2002.pdf#search=""bicycle spoke" tone program tension"
>or http://tinyurl.com/pjus9
>
>The tension gauge appears to win handily. One graph shows neat lines
>that clearly distinguish between several spoke thicknesses. The other
>looks like a shotgun blast.
>
>There may, of course, be some big holes in the testing.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Carl Fogel


3. Both the musical method and the
tensiometer are accurate enough for
use in establishing the correct tension
level of spokes in wheel building.

 

[[email protected]]

On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 04:01:46 GMT, R Brickston
<rb20170REMOVE.yahoo.com@> wrote:

>On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 21:31:24 -0600, [email protected] wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 01:05:44 GMT, R Brickston
>><rb20170REMOVE.yahoo.com@> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 17:01:36 -0700, Mike Elliott
>>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 10/1/2006 11:56 AM [email protected] wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Antti Salonen wrote:
>>>>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> IMO, especially for someone who does not build wheels regularly,
>>>>>>> absolute tension accuracy is less important than having the ability to
>>>>>>> read the relative tension differences from spoke to spoke. Experieced
>>>>>>> builders may (or may not) be able to guage tension uniformity by
>>>>>>> "plucking" the spokes and listening for differences in tone, but
>>>>>>> novices have a great deal of difficulty doing this.
>>>>>> It's exactly the other way around. It's very easy even for a first-timer
>>>>>> to tell tension differences by plucking the spokes. If you're tone deaf
>>>>>> it will be difficult and exercise won't help.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, we exactly disagree.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Unless there is some issue of technique that must first be mastered
>>>>before a good plucked tone can be produced, I would expect that the
>>>>ability of someone to tune two spokes to the same pitch by ear will
>>>>correspond to how easily they can tune a guitar by ear. Some folks can't
>>>>tune two strings anywhere near each other. They play air guitar.
>>>>
>>>>-- mike elliott
>>>
>>>Yeah, but it can be a little more involved than straight pitch
>>>comparison between two strings, part of it is done by tuning until the
>>>beat frequencies slow down until they disappear (resonanate?).
>>
>>Dear R.,
>>
>>Here's the only attempt that I know of to test plucking versus an
>>expensive tension gauge:
>>
>>http://www.ihpva.org/HParchive/PDF/hp53-2002.pdf#search=""bicycle spoke" tone program tension"
>>or http://tinyurl.com/pjus9
>>
>>The tension gauge appears to win handily. One graph shows neat lines
>>that clearly distinguish between several spoke thicknesses. The other
>>looks like a shotgun blast.
>>
>>There may, of course, be some big holes in the testing.
>>
>>Cheers,
>>
>>Carl Fogel
>
>
>3. Both the musical method and the
>tensiometer are accurate enough for
>use in establishing the correct tension
>level of spokes in wheel building.

Dear R.,

Yes, that's probably a quote from the conclusion of the author of the
study, but it seems unjustified by the text or by the data.

As I recall, he never quantified how much tension error he considered
acceptable, much less explained why.

Look at the outliers in the musical method graph and see whether you'd
have drawn the same conclusion that he does.

Other things being equal, which wheel would you want?

One whose spoke tensions matched the clear, obvious, linear accuracy
of the tension gauge?

Or one with the kind of scatter seen in the musical method (which, as
I recall, was never explained very well).

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

 

[M-gineering]

[email protected] wrote:

> The tension gauge appears to win handily. One graph shows neat lines
> that clearly distinguish between several spoke thicknesses. The other
> looks like a shotgun blast.

Holland Mechanics, who offer acoustic tensioning on their wheel truing
machines claim it is the most accurate method of measuring spoke tension
---
Marten Gerritsen

INFOapestaartjeM-GINEERINGpuntNL
www.m-gineering.nl

 

[[email protected]]

On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 08:52:22 +0200, M-gineering
<[email protected]> wrote:

>[email protected] wrote:
>
>> The tension gauge appears to win handily. One graph shows neat lines
>> that clearly distinguish between several spoke thicknesses. The other
>> looks like a shotgun blast.
>
>Holland Mechanics, who offer acoustic tensioning on their wheel truing
>machines claim it is the most accurate method of measuring spoke tension
>---
>Marten Gerritsen
>
>INFOapestaartjeM-GINEERINGpuntNL
>www.m-gineering.nl

Dear Marten,

Could be, depending on how the acoustic tensioning is done.

Here, we're pretty much talking about plucking and listening by ear,
which doesn't look too good in the graphs comparing an expensive
tension gauge and some kind of musical plucking method.

Holland may use an automated system, possibly something like this
improvement on the familiar torque wrench:

http://www.surebolt.com/surebolt.htm

The company's point is that hand-feel is inaccurate, but torque
wrenches aren't really much better because neither method measures
bolt tension, which is what counts.

Hand-feel and torque wrenches just measure torque--how hard it is to
turn a bolt head.

From that torque measurement, we then make a hopeful guess about bolt
tension, but the guess is inherently fuzzy because of all the friction
involved in the threads and washers and various sliding interfaces.

So that company skips the indirect torque method and measures bolt
tension directly. They ping the bolt sonar-style and look at the
results on an oscilloscope, measuring extremely tiny changes in
length, which are a direct measurement of the tension.

It's a clever idea, but more suited for NASA, as their site
explains--it's far too expensive for the amateur bicycle mechanic,
much like the $400 tension gauges. Even the much less expensive Park
gauge costs more than most people want to pay.

If you have a link to whatever process Holland uses, that would be
fascinating.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

 

[R Brickston]

On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 23:51:41 -0600, [email protected] wrote:

>On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 04:01:46 GMT, R Brickston
><rb20170REMOVE.yahoo.com@> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 21:31:24 -0600, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 01:05:44 GMT, R Brickston
>>><rb20170REMOVE.yahoo.com@> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 17:01:36 -0700, Mike Elliott
>>>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On 10/1/2006 11:56 AM [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Antti Salonen wrote:
>>>>>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> IMO, especially for someone who does not build wheels regularly,
>>>>>>>> absolute tension accuracy is less important than having the ability to
>>>>>>>> read the relative tension differences from spoke to spoke. Experieced
>>>>>>>> builders may (or may not) be able to guage tension uniformity by
>>>>>>>> "plucking" the spokes and listening for differences in tone, but
>>>>>>>> novices have a great deal of difficulty doing this.
>>>>>>> It's exactly the other way around. It's very easy even for a first-timer
>>>>>>> to tell tension differences by plucking the spokes. If you're tone deaf
>>>>>>> it will be difficult and exercise won't help.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, we exactly disagree.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Unless there is some issue of technique that must first be mastered
>>>>>before a good plucked tone can be produced, I would expect that the
>>>>>ability of someone to tune two spokes to the same pitch by ear will
>>>>>correspond to how easily they can tune a guitar by ear. Some folks can't
>>>>>tune two strings anywhere near each other. They play air guitar.
>>>>>
>>>>>-- mike elliott
>>>>
>>>>Yeah, but it can be a little more involved than straight pitch
>>>>comparison between two strings, part of it is done by tuning until the
>>>>beat frequencies slow down until they disappear (resonanate?).
>>>
>>>Dear R.,
>>>
>>>Here's the only attempt that I know of to test plucking versus an
>>>expensive tension gauge:
>>>
>>>http://www.ihpva.org/HParchive/PDF/hp53-2002.pdf#search=""bicycle spoke" tone program tension"
>>>or http://tinyurl.com/pjus9
>>>
>>>The tension gauge appears to win handily. One graph shows neat lines
>>>that clearly distinguish between several spoke thicknesses. The other
>>>looks like a shotgun blast.
>>>
>>>There may, of course, be some big holes in the testing.
>>>
>>>Cheers,
>>>
>>>Carl Fogel
>>
>>
>>3. Both the musical method and the
>>tensiometer are accurate enough for
>>use in establishing the correct tension
>>level of spokes in wheel building.
>
>Dear R.,
>
>Yes, that's probably a quote from the conclusion of the author of the
>study, but it seems unjustified by the text or by the data.
>
>As I recall, he never quantified how much tension error he considered
>acceptable, much less explained why.
>
>Look at the outliers in the musical method graph and see whether you'd
>have drawn the same conclusion that he does.
>
>Other things being equal, which wheel would you want?
>
>One whose spoke tensions matched the clear, obvious, linear accuracy
>of the tension gauge?
>
>Or one with the kind of scatter seen in the musical method (which, as
>I recall, was never explained very well).
>
>Cheers,
>
>Carl Fogel

Carl-

I wrote only this:

>>>>Yeah, but it can be a little more involved than straight pitch
>>>>comparison between two strings, part of it is done by tuning until the
>>>>beat frequencies slow down until they disappear (resonanate?).

Which has only to do with tuning a guitar by ear and one's ability to
hear tones.

However, I agree with that the tension gauge method will give the best
results.

 

[Mike Elliott]

On 10/1/2006 2:47 PM [email protected] wrote:

<snip>

> The tone deaf need not claim it can't be done, and thereby volunteer
> publicly that they are afflicted with this deficiency.

LOL!

-- mike elliott

 

[David Damerell]

Quoting <[email protected]>:
>The tone deaf need not claim it can't be done, and thereby volunteer
>publicly that they are afflicted with this deficiency.

One can have a cloth ear without being literally completely tone-deaf. I
always just reach for the tensiometer.
--
OPTIONS=name:Kirsty,menustyle:C,female,lit_corridor,standout,time,showexp,hilit
e_pet,catname:Akane,dogname:Ryoga,fruitkonomiyaki,pickup_types:"!$?=/,scores:
5 top/2 around,color,boulder:0,autoquiver,autodig,disclose:yiyayvygyc,pickup_bu
rden:burdened,!cmdassist,msg_window:reversed,!sparkle,horsename:Rumiko,showrace