Cycling Equipment · Public discussion

Square taper

Started by Email address hidden · · Last activity · 14 posts · 826 views

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Cycling Equipment
Published
13 February 2007
Last activity
15 February 2007
Original author
Email address hidden
Posts
14
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
826
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–14 of 14
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Back to an old subject, I thought it might add some background to the
    problems of crank attachment by showing some examples of failure and
    wear from which the square taper suffers.

    http://pardo.net/bike/pic/fail-002/000.html

    Among these pictures that Pardo collected are some that show crank
    interfaces with cracks at the corner of the square bore and spindles
    with fretting marks on the flanks. There is also a spalled bearing
    that attests to the bearing load of such a small spindle even with 1/4
    inch bearing balls.

    Note that the load is carried by the small area on the spindle where
    there is no fretting erosion, the clean part above the area with
    scrape wear, while the scraped area serves more for withstanding
    bending loads form the outboard pedal than transmitting pedaling
    torque. This also shows that these interfaces are dynamic rather than
    fixed as they appear to the observer. That is why these designs are
    being changed as we have seen from Campagnolo and Shimano.

    Although not everyone sees these failures, I have had plenty and that
    is why I am no as skeptical about the reasons these design changes
    come about. Unfortunately some newer contributors, like ISIS, either
    haven't seen enough failures or don't have the experience of trying to
    solve such problems. We've seen it even by Shimano with two versions
    of Octalink, both suffering from the same failure mode.

    Jobst Brandt

  2. Quoted message said:

    Back to an old subject, I thought it might add some background to the
    problems of crank attachment by showing some examples of failure and
    wear from which the square taper suffers.

    http://pardo.net/bike/pic/fail-002/000.html

    Among these pictures that Pardo collected are some that show crank
    interfaces with cracks at the corner of the square bore and spindles
    with fretting marks on the flanks. There is also a spalled bearing
    that attests to the bearing load of such a small spindle even with 1/4
    inch bearing balls.

    Note that the load is carried by the small area on the spindle where
    there is no fretting erosion, the clean part above the area with
    scrape wear, while the scraped area serves more for withstanding
    bending loads form the outboard pedal than transmitting pedaling
    torque. This also shows that these interfaces are dynamic rather than
    fixed as they appear to the observer. That is why these designs are
    being changed as we have seen from Campagnolo and Shimano.

    Although not everyone sees these failures, I have had plenty and that
    is why I am no as skeptical about the reasons these design changes
    come about. Unfortunately some newer contributors, like ISIS, either
    haven't seen enough failures or don't have the experience of trying to
    solve such problems. We've seen it even by Shimano with two versions
    of Octalink, both suffering from the same failure mode.

    Jobst Brandt

    let's imagine, just for a moment, that /you/ want to go to a big pipe
    spindle for reasons of stiffness and weight saving. how would /you/
    attach cranks to the ends?

  3. Quoted message said:

    We've seen it even by Shimano with two versions
    of Octalink, both suffering from the same failure mode.

    I agree that the square taper is not ideal, but what is the best
    alternative at this time? It seems that they all have issues or have
    not been in service long enough to tell. I've never had issues with
    square taper or Octalink personally... that is all I've tried.

    What are you using these days?

  4. jim beam said:
    Quoted message said:

    Back to an old subject, I thought it might add some background to
    the problems of crank attachment by showing some examples of
    failure and wear from which the square taper suffers.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    http://pardo.net/bike/pic/fail-002/000.html

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Among these pictures that Pardo collected are some that show crank
    interfaces with cracks at the corner of the square bore and
    spindles with fretting marks on the flanks. There is also a
    spalled bearing that attests to the bearing load of such a small
    spindle even with 1/4 inch bearing balls.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Note that the load is carried by the small area on the spindle
    where there is no fretting erosion, the clean part above the area
    with scrape wear, while the scraped area serves more for
    withstanding bending loads form the outboard pedal than
    transmitting pedaling torque. This also shows that these
    interfaces are dynamic rather than fixed as they appear to the
    observer. That is why these designs are being changed as we have
    seen from ISIS, Campagnolo and Shimano.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Although not everyone sees these failures, I have had plenty and
    that is why I am not as skeptical about the reasons these design
    are being made. Unfortunately some newer contributors, like ISIS,
    either haven't seen enough failures or don't have the experience of
    trying to solve such problems. We've seen it even by Shimano with
    two versions of Octalink, both suffering from the same failures.

    Quoted message said:

    let's imagine, just for a moment, that /you/ want to go to a big
    pipe spindle for reasons of stiffness and weight saving. how would
    /you/ attach cranks to the ends?

    I find the Shimano 7800 attachment currently the best. The problem I
    foresee lies in the overhung outboard bearings that move in the BB
    shell. Bearing cups have a left hand thread on the right side to
    prevent unscrewing. Just as pedals, these cups move under load, and
    overhung, they do that more than when they are internal, their thread
    spacing being the same as internal cups but the leverage greater.

    Diplomacy could help here. I would like to see emissaries from ISIS,
    Shimano, Campagnolo, and whoever else is a player, get together and
    agree on a reasonable BB width and diameter as well as how should be
    retained. This would not just be a policy meeting but a homework
    report, each coming back with test results of their favored solution.

    I believe that the bearing cups need a conical seat just as pedal
    spindles do, to not require a left hand thread (for their inevitable
    motion) just supported on threads, a known unusable interface.

    Jobst Brandt

  5. Quoted message said:
    jim beam said:
    Quoted message said:

    Back to an old subject, I thought it might add some background to
    the problems of crank attachment by showing some examples of
    failure and wear from which the square taper suffers.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    http://pardo.net/bike/pic/fail-002/000.html

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Among these pictures that Pardo collected are some that show crank
    interfaces with cracks at the corner of the square bore and
    spindles with fretting marks on the flanks. There is also a
    spalled bearing that attests to the bearing load of such a small
    spindle even with 1/4 inch bearing balls.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Note that the load is carried by the small area on the spindle
    where there is no fretting erosion, the clean part above the area
    with scrape wear, while the scraped area serves more for
    withstanding bending loads form the outboard pedal than
    transmitting pedaling torque. This also shows that these
    interfaces are dynamic rather than fixed as they appear to the
    observer. That is why these designs are being changed as we have
    seen from ISIS, Campagnolo and Shimano.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Although not everyone sees these failures, I have had plenty and
    that is why I am not as skeptical about the reasons these design
    are being made. Unfortunately some newer contributors, like ISIS,
    either haven't seen enough failures or don't have the experience of
    trying to solve such problems. We've seen it even by Shimano with
    two versions of Octalink, both suffering from the same failures.

    Quoted message said:

    let's imagine, just for a moment, that /you/ want to go to a big
    pipe spindle for reasons of stiffness and weight saving. how would
    /you/ attach cranks to the ends?

    I find the Shimano 7800 attachment currently the best. The problem I
    foresee lies in the overhung outboard bearings that move in the BB
    shell. Bearing cups have a left hand thread on the right side to
    prevent unscrewing. Just as pedals, these cups move under load, and
    overhung, they do that more than when they are internal, their thread
    spacing being the same as internal cups but the leverage greater.

    Diplomacy could help here. I would like to see emissaries from ISIS,
    Shimano, Campagnolo, and whoever else is a player, get together and
    agree on a reasonable BB width and diameter as well as how should be
    retained. This would not just be a policy meeting but a homework
    report, each coming back with test results of their favored solution.

    I believe that the bearing cups need a conical seat just as pedal
    spindles do, to not require a left hand thread (for their inevitable
    motion) just supported on threads, a known unusable interface.

    Jobst Brandt

    fair enough!

  6. Quoted message said:

    Back to an old subject, I thought it might add some background to the
    problems of crank attachment by showing some examples of failure and
    wear from which the square taper suffers.

    http://pardo.net/bike/pic/fail-002/000.html

    [snip]

    Great post. Very informative, with nice photos. THanks for the hard
    work. I'll beware of my Campy square taper cranks.

    I thought I was really something wearing through an alum water bottle
    cage with (soft) plastic bottles. Now I see I'm a bush-leaguer. I
    want to see those levers when they wear all the way through, or at
    least form some nice cracks. At the rate you're going it's going to
    take about 800,000km, at least, and given you do 15,000km/yr that will
    be about 53 years, so I guess that would make the levers "overbuilt".
    You may have to shift your riding from "mixed and hilly terrain" to
    fishermans wharf. Time is short.

    Bill Westphal

  7. Ron Ruff said:
    Quoted message said:

    We've seen it even by Shimano with two versions
    of Octalink, both suffering from the same failure mode.

    I agree that the square taper is not ideal, but what is the best
    alternative at this time? It seems that they all have issues or have
    not been in service long enough to tell. I've never had issues with
    square taper or Octalink personally... that is all I've tried.

    What are you using these days?

    And I'll also ask. Mr. Brandt, which cranksets are you using on your
    bicycle today? Given the problems you state with square taper bottom
    brackets and cranksets, and the new outboard design cranksets, have
    you switched? You state there are still problems with the bearing
    cups with the new outboard style, but are they still enough
    improvement for you to switch?

  8. Russell Seaton said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    We've seen it even by Shimano with two versions
    of Octalink, both suffering from the same failure mode.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    I agree that the square taper is not ideal, but what is the best
    alternative at this time? It seems that they all have issues or have
    not been in service long enough to tell. I've never had issues with
    square taper or Octalink personally... that is all I've tried.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    What are you using these days?

    Quoted message said:

    And I'll also ask. Mr. Brandt, which cranksets are you using on your
    bicycle today? Given the problems you state with square taper bottom
    brackets and cranksets, and the new outboard design cranksets, have
    you switched? You state there are still problems with the bearing
    cups with the new outboard style, but are they still enough
    improvement for you to switch?

    I'm still riding Dura-Ace square taper cranks, like the ones shown but
    with the pedal modification so I no longer break a crank per 10,000
    miles (which was once per year or more).

    http://pardo.net/bike/pic/fail-001/FAIL-016.html
    http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~damerell/bikes/brandt-cranks.jpg
    http://pardo.net/pardo/bike/pic/fail/FAIL-030.html

    Jobst Brandt

  9. Hi Ron,
    you said;
    I've never had issues with
    square taper or Octalink personally... that is all I've tried.

    What do you mean that's all I've tried... how long have you been riding
    bike. Didn't the 60's Schwinn Sringray have a one piece crank. As I recall
    it was a one piece crank. I had my bike 13 years. I left it at a friends
    house.
    Then another friend rode the bike. I saw my bike at my friends house, but
    the crank was gone. Other friend said the crank broke. I was a kid. I never
    got the crank serviced or oiled/greased. It had the same chain, rims, wheel
    bearings-everything, except the bannana seat, we used to have to get a new
    one or cover the old one.
    Anybody else had one of those old 20" Stingray bikes. Mine was green, my
    brother had a blue one, my friend had a purple one, another friend had a
    dark green one.
    The old style Schwinn Stingray:
    http://www.cyclesportandfitness.com/images/STINGRAY_PUR.jpg

    Greg 🙂

    "Ron Ruff" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    We've seen it even by Shimano with two versions
    of Octalink, both suffering from the same failure mode.

    I agree that the square taper is not ideal, but what is the best
    alternative at this time? It seems that they all have issues or have
    not been in service long enough to tell. I've never had issues with
    square taper or Octalink personally... that is all I've tried.

    What are you using these days?

  10. g said:

    What do you mean that's all I've tried... how long have you been riding
    bike. Didn't the 60's Schwinn Sringray have a one piece crank. As I recall
    it was a one piece crank.

    I can't remember back that far... but I must have learned how to ride
    on my sister's department store bike when I was 6. Then I adopted a
    rusty contraption that my Dad had as a kid. Around the age of 10 I got
    my own bike... a Sears with a 3sdp trigger shift. I rode that through
    college. I suppose all of those had 1 piece steel cranks, and they
    never failed. I don't recall ever even being inspired to take them
    apart...

  11. "Ron Ruff" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    g said:

    What do you mean that's all I've tried... how long have you been riding
    bike. Didn't the 60's Schwinn Sringray have a one piece crank. As I
    recall
    it was a one piece crank.

    I can't remember back that far... but I must have learned how to ride
    on my sister's department store bike when I was 6. Then I adopted a
    rusty contraption that my Dad had as a kid. Around the age of 10 I got
    my own bike... a Sears with a 3sdp trigger shift. I rode that through
    college. I suppose all of those had 1 piece steel cranks, and they
    never failed. I don't recall ever even being inspired to take them
    apart...

    60's Schwinn Stingrays did have one piece cranks. On occasion, Schwinn one
    piece cranks would fail - I think at the threads where the pedal mounted,
    but I can't remember for sure. Schwinn was very good about warranting them.
    Kerry

  12. Quoted message said:

    I'm still riding Dura-Ace square taper cranks, like the ones shown but
    with the pedal modification so I no longer break a crank per 10,000
    miles (which was once per year or more).

    http://pardo.net/bike/pic/fail-001/FAIL-016.htmlhttp://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~damerell/bikes/brandt-cranks.jpghttp://pardo.net/pardo/bike/pic/fail/FAIL-030.html

    Jobst Brandt

    How would one go about getting such modifications made?

  13. Steve Palincsar said:
    Quoted message said:

    I'm still riding Dura-Ace square taper cranks, like the ones shown but
    with the pedal modification so I no longer break a crank per 10,000
    miles (which was once per year or more).

    http://pardo.net/bike/pic/fail-001/FAIL-016.html
    http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~damerell/bikes/brandt-cranks.jpg
    http://pardo.net/pardo/bike/pic/fail/FAIL-030.html

    Quoted message said:

    How would one go about getting such modifications made?

    Make a drawing of a 90°conical (stainless steel) ring that exactly
    fits the thread relief of your pedal, indicating it cut in half with a
    thin saw. Give the cranks to the shop and specify a 90° countersink
    centered on the threaded bore just large enough to accept the conical
    ring. That dimension is the major diameter of the pedal spindle...
    as shown in the picture.

    Jobst Brandt

  14. On 15 Feb 2007 09:02:06 -0800, "Steve Palincsar" <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    I'm still riding Dura-Ace square taper cranks, like the ones shown but
    with the pedal modification so I no longer break a crank per 10,000
    miles (which was once per year or more).

    http://pardo.net/bike/pic/fail-001/FAIL-016.htmlhttp://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~damerell/bikes/brandt-cranks.jpghttp://pardo.net/pardo/bike/pic/fail/FAIL-030.html

    Jobst Brandt

    How would one go about getting such modifications made?

    Dear Steve,

    http://pardo.net/bike/pic/fail-001/FAIL-016.html

    http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~damerell/bikes/brandt-cranks.jpg

    Jobst's conical lug-nut-style modification takes a friendly machinist:

    "Not everyone has access to a machine shop and design equipment to
    modify their pedals and cranks. I have, and have secured them so they
    no longer move and also let themselves be unscrewed as a normal bolt.
    This is not something a bicycle shop can do. It takes a lathe and
    milling machine with a skilled operator. As I said, it takes a split
    45 degree collet that clamps into the thread relief of the pedal
    axle."

    http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech/msg/d53d383f938bc230

    Cheers,

    Carl Fogel

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.