Tensioning spokes by "tone"

[David Damerell]

Trevor Jeffrey <[email protected]> wrote:
>David Damerell wrote in message ...
>>That is awkward, because they would if your theory was correct. So we
>>deduce what, exactly?
>It applies to cross spoked wheels.

That's an evasion. You suppose that it is un-reshaped spoke crossings that
make truing more difficult. A radial wheel has no such crossings. Why,
then does truing not prove easy on these wheels?
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> Distortion Field!

 

[David Damerell]

Trevor Jeffrey <[email protected]> wrote:
>David Damerell wrote in message ...
>>That's odd; elsewhere you stated that radially spoked wheels and other
>>designs without spoke crossings were _more_ prone to fatigue failures.
>>However, if what you say here is accurate, they eliminate the primary
>>cause of such failures. How do you explain that discrepancy?
>It is not the crossing which causes shortened fatigue life, it is the
>variation in tension, the speed of variance and the frequency of variance.
>Crossing the spokes reduces this due to the shared load, as long as the
>route of the spoke is direct from rim to crossing and crossing to hub.

Due to the shared load? What does that mean?

If the spokes pass load to each other the joint must necessarily move
laterally irrespective of their shape at the crossing, because they only
touch each other side to side; any force exerted there must cause a
lateral movement. If they do not, then your claimed benefit is a fiction.
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> Distortion Field!

 

[Trevor Jeffrey]

David Damerell wrote in message ...
>
>That's an evasion. You suppose that it is un-reshaped spoke crossings that
>make truing more difficult. A radial wheel has no such crossings. Why,
>then does truing not prove easy on these wheels?

Overtensioning the spokes will make any wheel difficult to true.

Trevor

 

[Trevor Jeffrey]

David Damerell wrote in message ...
>Trevor Jeffrey <[email protected]> wrote:
>>David Damerell wrote in message ...
>>>That's odd; elsewhere you stated that radially spoked wheels and other
>>>designs without spoke crossings were _more_ prone to fatigue failures.
>>>However, if what you say here is accurate, they eliminate the primary
>>>cause of such failures. How do you explain that discrepancy?

>>It is not the crossing which causes shortened fatigue life, it is the
>>variation in tension, the speed of variance and the frequency of variance.
>>Crossing the spokes reduces this due to the shared load, as long as the
>>route of the spoke is direct from rim to crossing and crossing to hub.
>
If it is not, the rocking moments are such that fatigue failure due to
bending
is the predominant factor.


>Due to the shared load? What does that mean?
>
>If the spokes pass load to each other the joint must necessarily move
>laterally irrespective of their shape at the crossing, because they only
>touch each other side to side; any force exerted there must cause a
>lateral movement. If they do not, then your claimed benefit is a fiction.
>--

Yes the joint does move laterally because of the differential between the
spokes' tension. The direct line between crossing and hub and crossing and
rim makes for a better constraint than a spoke not pre-formed. The
preformed spoke has less 'give' in it than one allowed to follow a natural
curve. This means the angular displacement at the hub juncture is smaller
for the same load differential of the spokes.

Trevor

 

[David Damerell]

Trevor Jeffrey <[email protected]> wrote:
>David Damerell wrote in message ...
>>That's an evasion. You suppose that it is un-reshaped spoke crossings that
>>make truing more difficult. A radial wheel has no such crossings. Why,
>>then does truing not prove easy on these wheels?
>Overtensioning the spokes will make any wheel difficult to true.

Which is not pertinent, since it is not the case that all wheels or
anything like it are built with the tension you feel is excessive. In
particular machine-built wheels are not (as are some human-built wheels)
and are often retrued in service.

Why, then, does truing not prove easy on these wheels?
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> Distortion Field!

 

[David Damerell]

Trevor Jeffrey <[email protected]> wrote:
>David Damerell wrote in message ...
>>Trevor Jeffrey <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>David Damerell wrote in message ...
<>>>That's odd; elsewhere you stated that radially spoked wheels and other
<>>>designs without spoke crossings were _more_ prone to fatigue failures.
<>>>However, if what you say here is accurate, they eliminate the primary
<>>>cause of such failures. How do you explain that discrepancy?
>>>It is not the crossing which causes shortened fatigue life, it is the
>>>variation in tension, the speed of variance and the frequency of variance.
>>>Crossing the spokes reduces this due to the shared load, as long as the
>>>route of the spoke is direct from rim to crossing and crossing to hub.
>If it is not, the rocking moments are such that fatigue failure due to
>bending is the predominant factor.

So if this factor is more important than ordinary variation in tension,
why are radial wheels not less prone to spoke failure?

>Yes the joint does move laterally because of the differential between the
>spokes' tension. The direct line between crossing and hub and crossing and
>rim makes for a better constraint than a spoke not pre-formed. The
>preformed spoke has less 'give' in it than one allowed to follow a natural
>curve. This means the angular displacement at the hub juncture is smaller
>for the same load differential of the spokes.

Wouldn't higher tension also decrease that angular displacement? Why,
then, do you recommend the lowest possible tension?
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> Distortion Field!

 

[Trevor Jeffrey]

David Damerell wrote in message <-ej*[email protected]>...
>Trevor Jeffrey <[email protected]> wrote:
>>David Damerell wrote in message ...
>>>That's an evasion. You suppose that it is un-reshaped spoke crossings
that
>>>make truing more difficult. A radial wheel has no such crossings. Why,
>>>then does truing not prove easy on these wheels?
>>Overtensioning the spokes will make any wheel difficult to true.
>
>Which is not pertinent, since it is not the case that all wheels or
>anything like it are built with the tension you feel is excessive. In
>particular machine-built wheels are not (as are some human-built wheels)
>and are often retrued in service.
>
>Why, then, does truing not prove easy on these wheels?

From your previous messages, I deduce the wheels you mean are, radial spoked
and high tension, and machine built and now low tension. Please give a
definite description of the wheels you find difficult to true. Maybe then I
may be able to answer the question. Rim material diameter,depth and width,
approx. weight. Drilled, with or without eyelets or ferrules. spoke gauge,
material and pattern. Hub type material and dimensions. Your question
appears too vague. Who finds truing not easy on what wheels? Professional
mechanic, team mechanic, experienced amateur or inexperienced.

Trevor

 

[Trevor Jeffrey]

David Damerell wrote in message ...
>Trevor Jeffrey <[email protected]> wrote:
>>David Damerell wrote in message ...
>>>Trevor Jeffrey <[email protected]> wrote:

>>>>It is not the crossing which causes shortened fatigue life, it is the
>>>>variation in tension, the speed of variance and the frequency of
variance.
>>>>Crossing the spokes reduces this due to the shared load, as long as the
>>>>route of the spoke is direct from rim to crossing and crossing to hub.
>>If it is not, the rocking moments are such that fatigue failure due to
>>bending is the predominant factor.
>
>So if this factor is more important than ordinary variation in tension,
>why are radial wheels not less prone to spoke failure?

Radial wheels are more prone to fatigue failure of the spokes because they
do not have the crossings which are inherrent in a tangential spoked wheel.
The crossing of the spokes reduces the loading rate of the spokes, not
available in a tangential spoking.

>
>>Yes the joint does move laterally because of the differential between the
>>spokes' tension. The direct line between crossing and hub and crossing
and
>>rim makes for a better constraint than a spoke not pre-formed. The
>>preformed spoke has less 'give' in it than one allowed to follow a natural
>>curve. This means the angular displacement at the hub juncture is smaller
>>for the same load differential of the spokes.
>
>Wouldn't higher tension also decrease that angular displacement? Why,
>then, do you recommend the lowest possible tension?

Only with risk of an overly compressed rim, with the risk of buckling. I
also have concern that leaving the spokes flexing may produce a crack
initiation site (not investigated). The higher spoke tension does not
address the rim stability problem of which I feel is more important than a
spoke failing.

Trevor

 

[Benjamin Lewis]

Trevor Jeffrey wrote:

> David Damerell wrote:
>> Trevor Jeffrey <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> David Damerell wrote:
>>>> That's an evasion. You suppose that it is un-reshaped spoke crossings
>>>> that make truing more difficult. A radial wheel has no such
>>>> crossings. Why, then does truing not prove easy on these wheels?
>>> Overtensioning the spokes will make any wheel difficult to true.
>>
>> Which is not pertinent, since it is not the case that all wheels or
>> anything like it are built with the tension you feel is excessive. In
>> particular machine-built wheels are not (as are some human-built wheels)
>> and are often retrued in service.
>>
>> Why, then, does truing not prove easy on these wheels?
>
> From your previous messages, I deduce the wheels you mean are, radial
> spoked and high tension, and machine built and now low tension. Please
> give a definite description of the wheels you find difficult to true.
> Maybe then I may be able to answer the question. Rim material
> diameter,depth and width, approx. weight. Drilled, with or without
> eyelets or ferrules. spoke gauge, material and pattern. Hub type
> material and dimensions. Your question appears too vague. Who finds
> truing not easy on what wheels? Professional mechanic, team mechanic,
> experienced amateur or inexperienced.

David's point is not that truing radial wheels is difficult; it's that it's
not *more* difficult than truing wheels with crossed spokes, even if the
spoke crossings are not "reshaped" according to your methods.

--
Benjamin Lewis

Hey! I'm only fourteen, sickly 'n' thin
Tried all of my life just to grow me a chin
It popped out once, but my dad pushed it in. -- FZ

 

[Benjamin Lewis]

Trevor Jeffrey wrote:

> David Damerell wrote in message ...
>> Trevor Jeffrey <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> David Damerell wrote in message ...
>>>> Trevor Jeffrey <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>>>> It is not the crossing which causes shortened fatigue life, it is the
>>>>> variation in tension, the speed of variance and the frequency of
> variance.
>>>>> Crossing the spokes reduces this due to the shared load, as long as
>>>>> the route of the spoke is direct from rim to crossing and crossing to
>>>>> hub.
>>> If it is not, the rocking moments are such that fatigue failure due to
>>> bending is the predominant factor.
>>
>> So if this factor is more important than ordinary variation in tension,
>> why are radial wheels not less prone to spoke failure?
>
> Radial wheels are more prone to fatigue failure of the spokes because
> they do not have the crossings which are inherrent in a tangential spoked
> wheel. The crossing of the spokes reduces the loading rate of the
> spokes, not available in a tangential spoking.

That's quite an interesting claim. Do you really mean to say that in
wheels with crossed spokes the primary cause of spoke failure is
side-to-side rocking, but that if you completely remove this cause by
switching to radially spoked wheels, the "loading rate" is increased so
much that the failure rate is even worse? I think you'll have to give us
some evidence to back that one up. I'm not holding my breath.

--
Benjamin Lewis

Hey! I'm only fourteen, sickly 'n' thin
Tried all of my life just to grow me a chin
It popped out once, but my dad pushed it in. -- FZ

 

[David Damerell]

Trevor Jeffrey <[email protected]> wrote:
>David Damerell wrote in message ...
>>Trevor Jeffrey <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>David Damerell wrote in message ...
>>>>>Crossing the spokes reduces this due to the shared load, as long as the
>>>>>route of the spoke is direct from rim to crossing and crossing to hub.
>>>If it is not, the rocking moments are such that fatigue failure due to
>>>bending is the predominant factor.
>>So if this factor is more important than ordinary variation in tension,
>>why are radial wheels not less prone to spoke failure?
>Radial wheels are more prone to fatigue failure of the spokes because they
>do not have the crossings which are inherrent in a tangential spoked wheel.

But you said above that in a crossed wheel without the crossings reshaped,
the rocking is the predominant factor. Radial wheels do not have that
rocking.

>>Wouldn't higher tension also decrease that angular displacement? Why,
>>then, do you recommend the lowest possible tension?
>Only with risk of an overly compressed rim, with the risk of buckling. I
>also have concern that leaving the spokes flexing may produce a crack
>initiation site (not investigated). The higher spoke tension does not
>address the rim stability problem of which I feel is more important than a
>spoke failing.

You realise you've just admitted that higher tensions decrease spoke
fatigue failures, right?
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> flcl?

 

[David Damerell]

Trevor Jeffrey <[email protected]> wrote:
>David Damerell wrote in message <-ej*[email protected]>...
>>Which is not pertinent, since it is not the case that all wheels or
>>anything like it are built with the tension you feel is excessive. In
>>particular machine-built wheels are not (as are some human-built wheels)
>>and are often retrued in service.
>From your previous messages, I deduce the wheels you mean are, radial spoked
>and high tension, and machine built and now low tension. Please give a
>definite description of the wheels you find difficult to true.

No, sorry, you've tried that evasion before.

As I pointed out at the time, it is not about me in particular, but rather
that if your theories were correct, wheels with uncrossed spokes would
have been found more easy to true throughout the roughly hundred years
that we have had the option of building wheels with either crossed or
uncrossed spokes.

Why has that not been found to be the case?
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> flcl?

 

[Trevor]

Benjamin Lewis wrote in message ...
>Trevor Jeffrey wrote:
>
>> David Damerell wrote:
>>> Trevor Jeffrey <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> David Damerell wrote:
>>>>> That's an evasion. You suppose that it is un-reshaped spoke crossings
>>>>> that make truing more difficult. A radial wheel has no such
>>>>> crossings. Why, then does truing not prove easy on these wheels?
>>>> Overtensioning the spokes will make any wheel difficult to true.
>>>
>>> Which is not pertinent, since it is not the case that all wheels or
>>> anything like it are built with the tension you feel is excessive. In
>>> particular machine-built wheels are not (as are some human-built wheels)
>>> and are often retrued in service.
>>>
>>> Why, then, does truing not prove easy on these wheels?
>>
>> From your previous messages, I deduce the wheels you mean are, radial
>> spoked and high tension, and machine built and now low tension. Please
>> give a definite description of the wheels you find difficult to true.
>> Maybe then I may be able to answer the question. Rim material
>> diameter,depth and width, approx. weight. Drilled, with or without
>> eyelets or ferrules. spoke gauge, material and pattern. Hub type
>> material and dimensions. Your question appears too vague. Who finds
>> truing not easy on what wheels? Professional mechanic, team mechanic,
>> experienced amateur or inexperienced.
>
>David's point is not that truing radial wheels is difficult; it's that it's
>not *more* difficult than truing wheels with crossed spokes, even if the
>spoke crossings are not "reshaped" according to your methods.
>

I did not infer it was more difficult to true a radial spoked wheel.

Trevor

 

[Trevor]

Benjamin Lewis wrote in message ...
>Trevor Jeffrey wrote:
>
>> David Damerell wrote in message ...
>>> Trevor Jeffrey <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> David Damerell wrote in message ...
>>>>> Trevor Jeffrey <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>>>> It is not the crossing which causes shortened fatigue life, it is the
>>>>>> variation in tension, the speed of variance and the frequency of
>> variance.
>>>>>> Crossing the spokes reduces this due to the shared load, as long as
>>>>>> the route of the spoke is direct from rim to crossing and crossing to
>>>>>> hub.
>>>> If it is not, the rocking moments are such that fatigue failure due to
>>>> bending is the predominant factor.
>>>
>>> So if this factor is more important than ordinary variation in tension,
>>> why are radial wheels not less prone to spoke failure?
>>
>> Radial wheels are more prone to fatigue failure of the spokes because
>> they do not have the crossings which are inherrent in a tangential spoked
>> wheel. The crossing of the spokes reduces the loading rate of the
>> spokes, not available in a tangential spoking.
>
>That's quite an interesting claim. Do you really mean to say that in
>wheels with crossed spokes the primary cause of spoke failure is
>side-to-side rocking, but that if you completely remove this cause by
>switching to radially spoked wheels, the "loading rate" is increased so
>much that the failure rate is even worse? I think you'll have to give us
>some evidence to back that one up. I'm not holding my breath.
>
>--

Experience.

Trevor

 

[Trevor]

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. Spoke failure is still not an issue with minimal tension
modified spokes. Do not harp on about it.

Trevor

 

[Trevor]

David Damerell wrote in message ...
>Trevor Jeffrey <[email protected]> wrote:
>>David Damerell wrote in message <-ej*[email protected]>...
>>>Which is not pertinent, since it is not the case that all wheels or
>>>anything like it are built with the tension you feel is excessive. In
>>>particular machine-built wheels are not (as are some human-built wheels)
>>>and are often retrued in service.
>>From your previous messages, I deduce the wheels you mean are, radial
spoked
>>and high tension, and machine built and now low tension. Please give a
>>definite description of the wheels you find difficult to true.
>
>No, sorry, you've tried that evasion before.
>
>As I pointed out at the time, it is not about me in particular, but rather
>that if your theories were correct, wheels with uncrossed spokes would
>have been found more easy to true throughout the roughly hundred years
>that we have had the option of building wheels with either crossed or
>uncrossed spokes.
>
>Why has that not been found to be the case?
>--


Be specific. I know not which theories you attribute to me, nor who finds
what difficult?

Trevor

 

[Benjamin Lewis]

[email protected] wrote:

>
> Benjamin Lewis wrote in message ...
>> Trevor Jeffrey wrote:
>>
>>> David Damerell wrote in message ...
>>>> Trevor Jeffrey <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> David Damerell wrote in message ...
>>>>>> Trevor Jeffrey <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>> It is not the crossing which causes shortened fatigue life, it is
>>>>>>> the variation in tension, the speed of variance and the frequency
>>>>>>> of
>>> variance.
>>>>>>> Crossing the spokes reduces this due to the shared load, as long as
>>>>>>> the route of the spoke is direct from rim to crossing and crossing
>>>>>>> to hub.
>>>>> If it is not, the rocking moments are such that fatigue failure due
>>>>> to bending is the predominant factor.
>>>>
>>>> So if this factor is more important than ordinary variation in
>>>> tension, why are radial wheels not less prone to spoke failure?
>>>
>>> Radial wheels are more prone to fatigue failure of the spokes because
>>> they do not have the crossings which are inherrent in a tangential
>>> spoked wheel. The crossing of the spokes reduces the loading rate of
>>> the spokes, not available in a tangential spoking.
>>
>> That's quite an interesting claim. Do you really mean to say that in
>> wheels with crossed spokes the primary cause of spoke failure is
>> side-to-side rocking, but that if you completely remove this cause by
>> switching to radially spoked wheels, the "loading rate" is increased so
>> much that the failure rate is even worse? I think you'll have to give
>> us some evidence to back that one up. I'm not holding my breath.
>
> Experience.

I rest my case.

--
Benjamin Lewis

Hey! I'm only fourteen, sickly 'n' thin
Tried all of my life just to grow me a chin
It popped out once, but my dad pushed it in. -- FZ

 

[David Damerell]

Trevor <[email protected]> wrote:
>I did not infer it was more difficult to true a radial spoked wheel.

What you said was;

"When the wheel is tightened up for service it
will be seen upon inspection that movement at the crossing points is
minimal. It will be found that truing up becomes very easy, with each
nipple movement placing an obvious related movement at the rim."

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.
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> flcl?

 

[Trevor]

David Damerell wrote in message ...
>Trevor <[email protected]> wrote:
>>I did not infer it was more difficult to true a radial spoked wheel.
>
>What you said was;
>
>"When the wheel is tightened up for service it
>will be seen upon inspection that movement at the crossing points is
>minimal. It will be found that truing up becomes very easy, with each
>nipple movement placing an obvious related movement at the rim."
>
>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". My suggestion
was that you were overtensioning the spokes. Overtensioning spokes assists
in buckling rims and tearing hubshells as well as popping nipple heads and
spoke heads, and also tearing rims. Only you can answer why you find truing
radial wheels "not very easy", perhaps you can enlighten us. I do not use
radial wheels.

Trevor

 

[Trevor]

Benjamin Lewis wrote in message ...
>I rest my case.

You can stand it on your head for all I care. Why not hang it from the
light pendant?

Trevor