corrado33

Yes, and if you apply it WEEKLY, you're ALWAYS in the short term.

I know how WD-40 should be used and how it shouldn't be used. I'm not saying it's the right solution, but it certainly wouldn't HURT anything. All it'd do is clean out the housings weekly, which is more than most bikes get.

cyccommute 

It's a joke only one person gets. Lone voice in the wilderness.

Mr IGH

Except I am a pro, built over 1000 wheels....

I love that a shop is featuring the Alpine spokes, extra expense for customer, no perfomance advantage, perfect. Next he'll be telling use about 40H DB spoked wheels are for clydes, can't build a strong 32 spoke wheel....

cyccommute 

ummmmmm... ya, ok...not really. WD40 is not "kerosene in a can". The solvent is "Stoddard's solvent" which is a lower boiling cut of petroleum than kerosene. The oil used in WD40 isn't a 5 wt oil. It is a light mineral oil but it's thinner than 5 wt. It also makes up about 25% of the WD40 mixture which isn't a "tiny, tiny, amount".

Finally, kerosene is relatively low in aromatics when it comes to the petroleum that it is produced from. It has some aromaticity but it's mostly unsaturated hydrocarbons. Refineries strip out the aromatics as much as possible so that they can be sold as commodity chemicals. They have far greater value than kerosene and engines that use this cut of fuel...turbojets... perform better without all the aromatics in the fuel,

Nope, not "fish oil". It just a light mineral oil and not nearly as bad as most people assume. I don't use it that often but it does have its uses. It often does a good job of bringing old sticky shifters back to life.

cyccommute 

He thinks he's Galileo but like so many Galileo wannabes, he more of an Arnold Spinosa.

Who's Arnold Spinosa? Who knows but he was wrong and no body remembers him

Mr IGH

For the case of 2.0 spokes vs 2.0/1.8 spokes:
Tensile strength; straight gauge spokes have higher tensile strength than the double butted spokes, the smaller cross section is the reason.

Fatigue limit; the straight gauge spoke have higher fatigue limit compared to double spokes. Again, the cross section is the determining factor. For fatigue limit, the thinner cross section allows more flex in the j-bend and the DB spoke fails first.

Both of these results are well known, any freshman engineering student studies this, it’s the basis of future engineering education.

When the individual spoke is used in the wheel system, it is still a linear system, superposition applies. These results have been confirmed casually by friends and colleagues when they used FEA computer simulations to investigate and calibrate their modeling.

All of this is freshman engineering education, nothing here is a mystery. Any one claiming different must address actual engineering science, not just quote old bicycle shop myths.

One of my clubmates works for a local aerospace company doing FEA simulations. He got into a discussion with one of the biggest proponents of this myth (author of a wheel book, RIP) author shut down. At the time, my clubmate was assisting an adjunct professor at MIT who got involved is the discussion. They were amazed, no amount of real life results or computer simulation was going to sway the faithful.

Mr IGH

The same principal of engineering superposition also blows away the myth that spoked wheels "stand on the bottom spokes". Just try and use a 2.0mm spoke as a compression element, I dare you. The real story is that some folks don't understand relative tension vs actual tension. It's similar to electrical ground, some folks don't understand the concept of relative vs actual and how to use them in engineering design/analysis. Without that basic understanding, everything is magical.

forresto2

The funniest WD-40 advice was a guy on youtube saying using WD-40 to wipe down their Polyprop kayak after each use would keep it looking brand new and restore the plastic to like new.

Best use for WD-40 I have seen so far still failed:
Marijuana, hydrocodone found hidden in fake WD-40 can during traffic stop - The Buffalo News

forresto2

How about "tighten bolts and much as you can without stripping them?"

elcruxio

You should know that the tensile strength of a spoke isn't relevant. If a spoke gets stress that's near its tensile strength limit, something has gone very badly wrong. Also, spokes don't break at the middle, they break at either end where the spoke is thickest.

Higher fatigue limit where it does not matter since the middle of the spoke is very rarely the place where a spoke breaks.
Also, could you please explain why it is, that supposed more flex at the j-bend causes less fatigue life? This has got me interested. However as a counter, the butted spoke bends more easily to conform the wheel build, thus radically lessening stress at rim, where a straight gauge spoke is constantly at higher stress than a butted one. This is one of the main reasons why my wife broke a spoke on our last tour and I didn't even though she had straight gauge spokes and I had butted spokes. If the wheelbuild is not 100% optimal in terms of angles the straight gauge is going to be stressed more than the butted spoke.

This is interesting, since I did not know engineers in general study bicycle spokes and wheels.

I have no idea how this has anything to do with anything...
What is interesting though is that are your friends and colleagues who have access to FEA programs also proper knowledge of bicycle wheel building and the complexity involved in a bicycle wheel? Because it's one thing to model something resembling a bicycle wheel but another thing entirely to completely model the wheel as it is with individual parts etc.

Again, I have no idea how this has anything to do with anything. We know fairly well how a bicycle wheel works and why spokes break.

You're using a lot of authority sources (one might say it goes as far as to be an argumentative fallacy) but don't bring anything of substance to the table. What I got out of this message was that engineers know a lot and even freshmen know a lot and that's why you're supposedly right and everyone else is wrong. The one thing of substance you had to say was not explained, just stated as truth.

elcruxio

You do realize, no one believes a wheel stands on it's bottom spokes right? No one with a right mind believes a wheel has compression happening at the spokes. A wheel stands because it is a tensioned system where the hub is pulled in all directions by the spokes. Where the "standing on it's bottom spokes" comes from is from the fact that the bottom spokes have less tension due to rim deformation. But they are not compressed, they still have tension.

And this brings us to why butted spokes are superior (or are they? If one were to believe you, it would seem that spoke makers such as DT Swiss do not employ engineers).
You must have heard of spoke elongation right? that's what happens when the spoke is subjected to tension. Now a butted spoke with a thinner cross section elongates more than a straight gauge spoke. This is a good thing, because when the bottom spokes experience less tension, the butted spokes allow for the rim to deform a larger distance than the straight gauge, before they lose tension to a significant degree.
We also know that a common wheel failure mode is the on / off tension of spokes in a wheel which has too little tension for the stresses the wheel experiences. If a spoke is slackened and tensioned repeatedly for thousands of repetitions it will fail sooner than a spoke that experiences constant yet variable tension.

forresto2

By themselves neither side of this spoke argument is funny but put those 2 sides together in a bike store and it would leave me with a smile on my face.

cyccommute 

The word is supposition as in a hypothesis or (scientific) theory. Using butted spokes has been tested and show to decrease the stresses on the spoke and reduce fatigue failure. Jobst Brandt who was an engineer, bicyclist, author and, more importantly, a wheel builder says in the Bicycle Wheel

Adding extra metal to the head of the spoke like triple butted spokes isn't just for "people who don't know what they are doing" but is based on sound engineering principles.

Sadly, not everyone understands this. Although I just used Jobst Brandt to prove a point, he was one of those people. A large part of the problem lies in a misunderstanding of what compression and tension are. Engineers tend to use a decrease in tension as an increase in compression. They assume that compression and tension are equal and opposite forces acting on the same member. But tension has to decrease to zero before compression can start and this is clearly not the case for bicycle wheels. You are correct that a decrease in tension at the bottom of the wheel is simply less tension. But if you suppose that tension and compression are just two sides of the same coin...like acceleration and deceleration...the math comes out wrong.

Pretty much nailed it. But that won't change his mind.

shelbyfv

Seems he's been going on about this for even longer than I thought https://www.bikeforums.net/bicycle-me...eel-turns.html

shelbyfv

For any who remain unconvinced, a short read where DT Swiss explains their spoke building process https://www.pinkbike.com/news/To-the...okes-2013.html "To reiterate, our butting is done by forging which actually increases the strength of the spoke. So the end result is a product that is not only lighter but also stronger." Five minutes to Google....

WizardOfBoz

I remember the joke about someone mistaking "Atom Balm" (kind of vicks on steroids) with Preparation H. But the song was "Ring of Fire" by Johnny Cash.

Crankycrank

The extra heat is bad enough but I can't imagine shrinking anything down there smaller than it already is with the Preparation H either.