Tensioning spokes by "tone"

[David Damerell]

Trevor <[email protected]> wrote:
>David Damerell wrote in message ...
>>If unadjusted spoke crossings are what prevents truing from being "very
>>easy", why is truing a radial wheel also not very easy? This is the
>>question you are evading.
>The wheel with the corrected spoke shape is easier to tension and true than
>the wheel otherwise identical wheel. Why do you have a problem with this?
>You are stating that a radial spoked wheel is not very easy to true. I do
>not know why you find truing a radial wheel "not very easy".

This is the third time you have attempted this evasion.

>My suggestion was that you were overtensioning the spokes.

This is the second time you have attempted this evasion.

I can only presume that you are doing this because the question actually
asked cannot be adequately answered.
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> Kill the tomato!

 

[David Damerell]

Trevor <[email protected]> wrote:
>David Damerell wrote in message ...
>>>spoke failing.
>>You realise you've just admitted that higher tensions decrease spoke
>>fatigue failures, right?
>I know what I wrote. Higher tension unmodified spokes may result in lower
>fatigue failure at the expense of rim stability available with lower tension
>modified spokes.

So if we have no problems with rims buckling - which I don't - I should
continue to use high spoke tension.

How curious that you've come full circle to endorse Jobst's approach.
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> Kill the tomato!

 

[Trevor]

David Damerell wrote in message ...
>Trevor <[email protected]> wrote:
>>David Damerell wrote in message ...
>>>>spoke failing.
>>>You realise you've just admitted that higher tensions decrease spoke
>>>fatigue failures, right?
>>I know what I wrote. Higher tension unmodified spokes may result in lower
>>fatigue failure at the expense of rim stability available with lower
tension
>>modified spokes.
>
>So if we have no problems with rims buckling - which I don't - I should
>continue to use high spoke tension.
>
>How curious that you've come full circle to endorse Jobst's approach.
>--

Higher tension unmodified spokes may result in lower fatigue failure at the
expense of rim stability available with lower tension modified spokes.
I do not endorse his approach. Rim failure has been aimed at manufacture
rather than fitting. It is the incorrect assembly of the wheel which causes
failure. High spoke tension with an unmodified spoke line at the crossing
point causes buckling. This is unacceptable to me. My wheels have the
spokes suitably bent in fitting, and have sufficient tension to maintain rim
stability in all encountered conditions. To have spoke tension to as high
as the rim can withstand is nonsense.
]

Trevor

 

[David Damerell]

Trevor <[email protected]> wrote:
>David Damerell wrote in message ...
>>So if we have no problems with rims buckling - which I don't - I should
>>continue to use high spoke tension.
>>How curious that you've come full circle to endorse Jobst's approach.
>Higher tension unmodified spokes may result in lower fatigue failure at the
>expense of rim stability available with lower tension modified spokes.

So if we have no problems with rims buckling - which I don't - I should
continue to use high spoke tension.

>I do not endorse his approach.

Yes, you do. It is quite clear from what you say that someone like me -
who used to break spokes before getting a copy of "The Bicycle Wheel", but
has never buckled a rim in his life - should use high spoke tension to
minimise the failures that I can actually produce.
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> flcl?

 

[Trevor]

David Damerell wrote in message <82q*[email protected]>...
>>I do not endorse his approach.
>
>Yes, you do. It is quite clear from what you say that someone like me -
>who used to break spokes before getting a copy of "The Bicycle Wheel", but
>has never buckled a rim in his life - should use high spoke tension to
>minimise the failures that I can actually produce.
>--

Perhaps those people who never bounce kerbstones, hit potholes, speed humps,
ride off centre, bounce down rocky paths with the back wheel lifting or
cycle downhill in excess of 60mph could get away with using his method. I
cite my own method as more effective in combating spoke failure because it
directly addresses the problem which causes it.

I used to break spokes before reading the book. Higher grade spokes have
prevented fatigue failure within the same mileage. Buckling occurred
numerous times, once drastically resulting in a high speed fall with damage
to myself and the bike. The rim was scrapped. Lower tensions than that
advocated by trial in the book were then used. This resulted in a wheel
which did not buckle but was obviously unstable for my riding. Fix the
crossing point and the wheel becomes stable. If you are certain the wheel
is stable enough, it's your choice.

Trevor

 

[David Damerell]

Trevor <[email protected]> wrote:
>David Damerell wrote in message <82q*[email protected]>...
>>>I do not endorse his approach.
>>Yes, you do. It is quite clear from what you say that someone like me -
>>who used to break spokes before getting a copy of "The Bicycle Wheel", but
>>has never buckled a rim in his life - should use high spoke tension to
>>minimise the failures that I can actually produce.
>Perhaps those people who never bounce kerbstones, hit potholes, speed humps,
>ride off centre, bounce down rocky paths with the back wheel lifting or
>cycle downhill in excess of 60mph could get away with using his method.

I might have replied to this earlier but I was on the End to End - the
rear wheel on our tandem was of course built up in accordance with "The
Bicycle Wheel" and has been over its fair share of rough terrain and fast
descents with two c. 12st blokes and self-supporting luggage on - not to
mention the pedalling torque of said blokes standing on the pedals - in
the thousand-mile tour and a number of training rides.

Has it buckled? No. Broken a spoke? Not one. Is it even detectably less
true than when we started the journey? Nope.

You may need different wheels on your magical flying bicycle but I think
the rest of us will be served very well with Jobst's methods.
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> Distortion Field!