Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 34
  1. #1
    me have long head tube TallRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Chapel Hill, NC
    Posts
    4,097
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    how much danger to flange from half-radial rear wheel?

    Okay, so there's been a few discussions about half-radial rear wheels (where the non-drive-side spokes are laced radially, whereas the drive-side spokes are the normal cross pattern). I don't mean to repeat these discussions, but rather want to raise a specific question.

    First, the background: Sheldon Brown makes a plug for half-radial rear wheel near the bottom of his wheelbuilding page. Here's what he says:

    Quote Originally Posted by Sheldon Brown
    More and more rear wheels now are built "half-radial" with semi-tangent spoking on the right side and radial spoking on the left. Radial front wheels offer mainly esthetic benefits, but half radial rear wheels can be substantially more durable than conventional ones, in cases where the wheel is highly dished. The high amount of dishing called for to make room for more and more sprockets has caused an increase in spoke breakage on the left side of rear wheels. This is caused by metal fatigue.

    A spoked wheel relies on having all of the spokes in constant tension. A highly dished rear wheel starts with very light tension on the left side spokes. The torque of hard pedaling combined with cyclical weight loading can cause the left side "leading" spokes to occasionally go completely slack momentarily.

    Repeated cycles of tension and slackness cause these spokes to fatigue at the bends, and ultimately break.

    With half-radial spoking, the amount of dish is very slightly less to begin with if you run the radial spokes up along the inside of its flange ("heads out.") In addition, since there are no "leading" spokes, no amount of torque on the hub can reduce the tension on any of the spokes. In fact, if you have an old wheel that has been breaking left side spokes, "half rebuilding" the wheel into a half radial will solve the problem once and for all.

    I used to think that this was exotic, cutting edge technology, until I happened to look at a couple of Model A Fords in a local parade. Their wheels were highly dished inward, and were laced in the same half-radial pattern, for the same reason.
    One of the major problems with radial spoking is that the spokes pull directly away from the spoke flange, and can more easily tear out of the flange than with tangential spoking, because with tangential spoking there's a lot more aluminum resisting the pull of the spoke on the flange hole. For this reason, radial spoking voids the warranty of a lot of Shimano hubs (although Shimano makes some hubs that are warranted for radial spoking, with somewhat altered design).
    Radial spoking the non-drive-side of a rear wheel would technically void the warranty of most Shimano hubs, but should not be a practical danger because non-drive-side spokes of dished rear wheels are significantly lower tension than drive-side spokes.

    Sheldon notes elsewhere that even non-warranted Shimano front hubs can typically be built up radially, at lower tension, and with no danger, and I assume that this would translate to the rear non-drive-side spokes. But I'm not sure - is there good reason to think that radially-laced non-drive-side spokes pose any danger to the flange of a forged hub shell (in my case, used Shimano 105)?
    Sheldon also specifically recommends (in the text that I quoted) half-rebuilding a rear wheel with radial non-drive-side spoking, so I don't think the worry of stress risers from spoke-indentations from previous tangential lacing on used hubs is much of a worry.
    Last edited by TallRider; 01-24-07 at 09:42 AM.

  2. #2
    Small Member maddmaxx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    My Bikes
    Leader home built hardtail, Diamondback Response
    Posts
    7,126
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    The new generation 105 hub (new with the change to 10 speed) is rated for radial spoking by Shimano. I would stick to 32 holes or fewer as the problem gets worse as the holes get closer together.

  3. #3
    Making a kilometer blurry waterrockets's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Austin (near TX)
    My Bikes
    rkwaki's porn collection
    Posts
    26,112
    Mentioned
    20 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Yeah, I think if the hub is rated for radial, it's ok at full tension. I wouldn't undertension a rear wheel just so I could lace radially with a shimano hub. Rear wheel tension is too valuable.

    Personally, I think it's a much better design to lace radial on the drive side. If you do that, you give the drive side spokes a better angle of approach to the rim, so the non-drive spokes will have to be higher tension to compensate. This works to even the tension between the left and right sides.

    Conversely, if you radially lace the non-drive side, you give the non-drive spokes the pulling advantage, so they will need to be at an even lower tension, which worsens the tension differential.

    I think radial drive and 3x non-drive is a great design if you've got a hub that supports it.

  4. #4
    me have long head tube TallRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Chapel Hill, NC
    Posts
    4,097
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I debated mentioning which hub I'm using because I'm wanting to ask a general question as well as figure out what to do in my particular situation. I'm thinking this would be safe enough because the rear wheel has taller flanges than the front (so spacing won't be way close) and the tension will be lower b/c the non-drive spokes (but I wouldn't build the wheel at lower tension than should be, because non-drive-spokes need all the tension they can legitimately have). I noted that Sheldon talks about building front wheels at slightly lower tension (which you can easily get away with) if you want radial lacing with a hub not rated for radial lacing. I cited that to imply that a well-built rear wheel with correct tension will have lower tension on the non-drive-side so half-radial will probably not endanger the flange.

    Sheldon doesn't seem to have any worries about half-radial even with a rear hub not rated for radial, and even if that rear hub is used. I think he's right, from a theoretical angle, but wanted to get feedback specifically on that question. Sorry if it wasn't clear the first time around.

    The wheel I'm building will be 128mm-spaced using a 7-speed freehub and 27" rim for use on my commuter bike. Hub is the 36-hole 105SC, gold-ish or puke-ish paint job, from the early/mid 1990's, used but in good shape and just overhauled. Road, will be well-built, used with 27x1.25" tires, although I ride plenty of roads that get eaten up by buses. Standard 3-cross lacing should be plenty strong on a 36-hole well-built wheel, but I'd like to try the half-radial lacing.

  5. #5
    Senior Member DannoXYZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Saratoga, CA
    Posts
    11,507
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Yeah, I've built some of these left-side radial wheels without any problems. The only issues I've seen with hub-flanges have been due to multiple wheel-builds with different lacing-patterns. This ends up cutting up the hub-flanges in multiple angles. The final build using radial just happens to be the last straw for the flanges. If you use a new hub, and build it first with the radial left side, I doubt you'd have any problems.

  6. #6
    me have long head tube TallRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Chapel Hill, NC
    Posts
    4,097
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    This is why I'm particularly curious about a used hub that already has indentations from spokes being laced 3- or 4-cross. Sheldon specifically recommends re-lacing the non-drive-side of a wheel if you start breaking spokes there, so he apparently doesn't seem to think that it's a problem because the non-drive-side of a dished wheel won't have very high spoke tension (plus of course the fact that in a spoked wheel, hitting potholes or whatnot will only lower spoke tension on specific spokes, it won't cause spoke tension to spike).
    Here are some closeup pictures of the flange of the hub that I'll be using for my build. It's clearly worn from being laced 3-cross (36-hole hub) and I'm guessing Sheldon would say "don't worry - you can still do half-radial" while people who have responded to this thread would say "just lace it 3-cross again for safety's sake." The wheel will still be plenty strong without doing the half-radial thing, so it ain't as if that's necessary. Pictures are of the non-drive-side flange (which would be holding the radial spoking if I do a half-radial build).





  7. #7
    I'm band already? lubes17319's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    in a ditch
    My Bikes
    ...take me places.
    Posts
    1,047
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    All I know is that I have a custom 30-spoke hub now. (the other break is on the opposite side of the hub, non-drive side)
    The trash can will have it soon.


  8. #8
    me have long head tube TallRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Chapel Hill, NC
    Posts
    4,097
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by lubes17319
    All I know is that I have a custom 30-spoke hub now. (the other break is on the opposite side of the hub, non-drive side)
    The trash can will have it soon.
    yeah, but I know (from your picture that you're running a singlespeed rear wheel, probably without much dish, so your non-drive-side spokes are high-tension and thus put a lot more stress on the flange than non-drive-side spokes of a multi-speed dished rear wheel. Not really data that's helpful for my question.

  9. #9
    me have long head tube TallRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Chapel Hill, NC
    Posts
    4,097
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I asked Sheldon about this issue, and he responded with what I expected him to say (but he'd not said directly in his wheelbuilding article):

    Quote Originally Posted by Sheldon Brown
    There's no problem with this, because the tension is very low on the left side of a derailer type rear wheel.
    Anyway, I think I'm going to go ahead and build up that 7-speed freehub with radial non-drive-side spoking. And a 480g single-wall welded-seam Araya 27" NOS rim. And butted spokes.

  10. #10
    Senior Member miamijim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Tampa, Florida
    Posts
    12,086
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Two thoughts on radial lacing the non-drive side.....

    When doing so you decrease by half the number of drive spokes. On 32 spoke wheel there are 16 drive spokes so your pedaling forces are divided amongst 16 spokes. With a radial laced non-drive side you only have 8 spokes handling the load.

    If I remeber correctly shorter radial spokes (in comparison to 3X or 4X) have a higher tension with same dish. This increase in tension will, obviously, increase tension on the hub. The higher tension, will, as S notes, decrease slacking of the spoke which may lead to less breakage at the elbow.

    My personal thoughts after 2,000 plus wheel builds:

    If your non-drive side spokes are going slack under pedal forces your wheel is not correctly tensioned/built from the start. Fix the problem of flexing first.
    WWW.CYCLESPEUGEOT.COM 2005 Pinarello Dogma; 1991 Paramount PDG 70 Mtb; 1976? AD Vent Noir; 1989 LeMond Maillot Juane F&F; 1993? Basso GAP F&F; 1989 Terry Symmetry; 2003 Trek 4700 Mtb; 1983 Vitus 979

  11. #11
    me have long head tube TallRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Chapel Hill, NC
    Posts
    4,097
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by miamijim
    When doing so you decrease by half the number of drive spokes. On 32 spoke wheel there are 16 drive spokes so your pedaling forces are divided amongst 16 spokes. With a radial laced non-drive side you only have 8 spokes handling the load.
    What you are saying is that only the "trailing" spokes (angled back from the hub flange toward the rim, not forward) are transmitting torque to the rim from the pedaling action. And you're right that normally you have, in a 32-spoke wheel, 8 trailing spokes on drive- and non-drive sides. However, nearly all of the torque is transmitted by drive-side spokes anyway. Typically ~5% of torque is handled by non-drive-side spokes, unless you have a very stiff hub flange in which case you could get 15%. So radial non-drive isn't actually hurting things here.

  12. #12
    Making a kilometer blurry waterrockets's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Austin (near TX)
    My Bikes
    rkwaki's porn collection
    Posts
    26,112
    Mentioned
    20 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by timcupery
    What you are saying is that only the "trailing" spokes (angled back from the hub flange toward the rim, not forward) are transmitting torque to the rim from the pedaling action. And you're right that normally you have, in a 32-spoke wheel, 8 trailing spokes on drive- and non-drive sides. However, nearly all of the torque is transmitted by drive-side spokes anyway. Typically ~5% of torque is handled by non-drive-side spokes, unless you have a very stiff hub flange in which case you could get 15%. So radial non-drive isn't actually hurting things here.
    That's interesting, where did that 5% figure come from? If I chuck my bike up in a trainer, lock the rear brake, stand on a horizontal pedal, and measure tension changes vs. no pedal force, this is what I'll see?

    Regardless, 8 spokes dealing with the torque is a non-issue. Spoke tension increases from pedaling force are very, very small.

  13. #13
    me have long head tube TallRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Chapel Hill, NC
    Posts
    4,097
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by waterrockets
    That's interesting, where did that 5% figure come from? If I chuck my bike up in a trainer, lock the rear brake, stand on a horizontal pedal, and measure tension changes vs. no pedal force, this is what I'll see?
    Regardless, 8 spokes dealing with the torque is a non-issue. Spoke tension increases from pedaling force are very, very small.
    I think from reading Jobst Brandt and others.

    Btw, just checked. I was wrong on the stat. Typical thin-centered aluminum-shell hubs will transmit 13% of torque to the non-drive-side flange.

    The 5% comes in reference to your second comment - spoke tension differences caused by pedaling torque, on the drive-side of a rear wheel with low-flange hub, will come in at about 5% increased tension in trailing spokes and 5% decreased tension in leading spokes.

  14. #14
    Making a kilometer blurry waterrockets's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Austin (near TX)
    My Bikes
    rkwaki's porn collection
    Posts
    26,112
    Mentioned
    20 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by timcupery
    I think from reading Jobst Brandt and others.

    Btw, just checked. I was wrong on the stat. Typical thin-centered aluminum-shell hubs will transmit 13% of torque to the non-drive-side flange.

    The 5% comes in reference to your second comment - spoke tension differences caused by pedaling torque, on the drive-side of a rear wheel with low-flange hub, will come in at about 5% increased tension in trailing spokes and 5% decreased tension in leading spokes.
    Interesting. Thanks. I guess a shaft-bodied hub like a modern Ultegra would get a lot closer to 50%. Good data for a future build I'd like to do: radial drive side -- torque transmission through the hub will be important.

  15. #15
    me have long head tube TallRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Chapel Hill, NC
    Posts
    4,097
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by waterrockets
    Interesting. Thanks. I guess a shaft-bodied hub like a modern Ultegra would get a lot closer to 50%. Good data for a future build I'd like to do: radial drive side -- torque transmission through the hub will be important.
    I'm not sure how high the torque transmission on the current ultegra hubs (and the like) are. I remember it being discussed awhile back but don't remember if there were any conclusive stats.

    What's your reason for wanting to build a half-radial rear wheel with radial drive side? Other than its looking cool? I know that Shimano or Mavic builds some aftermarket wheel with this design, but I don't understand the reasons for the design.

    One downside of greater torque transmission to the non-drive-side is that, when building with normal (3- or 4-cross) lacing pattern, it means that the leading spokes on the non-drive-side are going to lose a greater degree of their tension - which matters more on the non-drive-side since those spokes are lower tension already because of wheel dish. However, I still doubt the difference matters in any problematic way, because spoke tension might decrease 2.5% under heavy pedaling.

  16. #16
    Gone, but not forgotten Sheldon Brown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Newtonville, Massachusetts
    My Bikes
    See: http://sheldonbrown.org/bicycles
    Posts
    2,301
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by timcupery
    Okay, so there's been a few discussions about half-radial rear wheels (where the non-drive-side [left] spokes are laced radially, whereas the drive-side [right] spokes are the normal cross pattern)....

    One of the major problems with radial spoking is that the spokes pull directly away from the spoke flange, and can more easily tear out of the flange than with tangential spoking, because with tangential spoking there's a lot more aluminum resisting the pull of the spoke on the flange hole. For this reason, radial spoking voids the warranty of a lot of Shimano hubs (although Shimano makes some hubs that are warranted for radial spoking, with somewhat altered design).
    Radial spoking the non-drive-side of a rear wheel would technically void the warranty of most Shimano hubs, but should not be a practical danger because non-drive-side [left] spokes of dished rear wheels are significantly lower tension than drive-side [right] spokes.
    Bingo! This is a non-issue because the tension on the left side spokes is so low on a derailer type rear wheel.

    Sheldon "Imaginary Problem" Brown
    Code:
    +-----------------------------------------------------------+
    |       Always listen to the experts.                       |
    |       They'll tell you what can't be done, and why.       |
    |       Then do it.              --Robert A. Heinlein       |
    +-----------------------------------------------------------+
    [COLOR=blue][CENTER][b]Harris Cyclery, West Newton, Massachusetts[/b]
    Phone 617-244-9772, FAX 617-244-1041
    [URL= http://harriscyclery.com] http://harriscyclery.com[/URL]
    Hard-to-find parts shipped Worldwide
    [URL=http://captainbike.com]http://captainbike.com[/URL]
    Useful articles about bicycles and cycling
    [URL=http://sheldonbrown.com]http://sheldonbrown.com[/URL] [/CENTER] [/COLOR]

  17. #17
    me have long head tube TallRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Chapel Hill, NC
    Posts
    4,097
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Sheldon "Imaginary Problem" Brown
    Bingo! This is a non-issue because the tension on the left side spokes is so low on a derailer type rear wheel.
    Great. Glad to have someone finally respond to that specific point - it's the crux of what I've been trying to ask (although as usual I had lots of other ideas floating and layered around it so the misdirection may have been largely my fault).

  18. #18
    Senior Member miamijim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Tampa, Florida
    Posts
    12,086
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Sheldon Brown
    Bingo! This is a non-issue because the tension on the left side spokes is so low on a derailer type rear wheel.

    Sheldon "Imaginary Problem" Brown
    Code:
    +-----------------------------------------------------------+
    |       Always listen to the experts.                       |
    |       They'll tell you what can't be done, and why.       |
    |       Then do it.              --Robert A. Heinlein       |
    +-----------------------------------------------------------+
    Its all relative to the equiptment being used. Are you using a cassete hub or an old school freewheel style? Is it 126, 130 or 135mm spacing? Do you have an offset rim? On my wheels the spoke tension is almost the same on both sides due to me choice of components. In fact, I believe my rear wheel uses the same length spokes on both sides.

    A 126 mm 7 sp. freewheel is a dreadfull wheel to dish.
    give a 135mm cassette with a 7 speed and I gaurantee it can be reverse dished
    WWW.CYCLESPEUGEOT.COM 2005 Pinarello Dogma; 1991 Paramount PDG 70 Mtb; 1976? AD Vent Noir; 1989 LeMond Maillot Juane F&F; 1993? Basso GAP F&F; 1989 Terry Symmetry; 2003 Trek 4700 Mtb; 1983 Vitus 979

  19. #19
    me have long head tube TallRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Chapel Hill, NC
    Posts
    4,097
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'm not sure it's possible to reverse-dish a 7-speed 135mm-spaced hub - I'd have to look at spokecalc and check, but asymmetrical rims only get you 3-4mm of difference and I think the dish on such a wheel is more than that. But you're right that the specific type of hub does matter somewhat. But using the same length spokes on both sides isn't particularly impressive, since a typically-dished road rear wheel will have 1 or possibly 2mm difference between the spokes anyway, so even without using an asymmetrical rim it's easy to get away with using the same-length spokes.

    As I've noted above, I'm using a 7-speed freehub with 126mm spacing that I may bump up to 128. So there's going to be a lot of dish. The rim isn't offset - I highly doubt that there are any offset rims available in the 27" diameter

  20. #20
    Senior Member miamijim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Tampa, Florida
    Posts
    12,086
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    tim...PM sent
    WWW.CYCLESPEUGEOT.COM 2005 Pinarello Dogma; 1991 Paramount PDG 70 Mtb; 1976? AD Vent Noir; 1989 LeMond Maillot Juane F&F; 1993? Basso GAP F&F; 1989 Terry Symmetry; 2003 Trek 4700 Mtb; 1983 Vitus 979

  21. #21
    Making a kilometer blurry waterrockets's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Austin (near TX)
    My Bikes
    rkwaki's porn collection
    Posts
    26,112
    Mentioned
    20 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by timcupery
    What's your reason for wanting to build a half-radial rear wheel with radial drive side?
    It's stronger (assuming the hub body isn't too flexy, causing spoke fatigue).

    The problem with rears with gears is the uneven spoke tension. If you go radial drive-side, the spokes approach the rim at a steeper angle. If you're looking at a 3x or 4x wheel edge-on, the spokes all depart pretty close to the axle, tangential to the flange. If you look at a radial wheel edge-on, the spokes all depart as far from the axle as they can, and as close to the rim as they can. Since the hub flange is straight, the radial spokes get a steeper approach angle than the 3x or 4x tangential spokes.

    This steeper angle means that the drive side has more leverage on pulling the rim to its side. The non-drive side has to fight this leverage advantage harder, with more tension. So, the radial lacing on the drive side results in higher tension on the non-drive side.

    Here's a really quick diagram exaggerating the effect. The wheel on the right has a radial drive side, and you can see the steeper spoke angle.


  22. #22
    Gone, but not forgotten Sheldon Brown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Newtonville, Massachusetts
    My Bikes
    See: http://sheldonbrown.org/bicycles
    Posts
    2,301
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by miamijim
    Its all relative to the equiptment being used. Are you using a cassete hub or an old school freewheel style? Is it 126, 130 or 135mm spacing? Do you have an offset rim? On my wheels the spoke tension is almost the same on both sides due to me choice of components. In fact, I believe my rear wheel uses the same length spokes on both sides.

    A 126 mm 7 sp. freewheel is a dreadfull wheel to dish.
    give a 135mm cassette with a 7 speed and I gaurantee it can be reverse dished
    Tim is using a Shimano cassette hub.

    As I wrote at http://sheldonbrown.com/wheelbuilding

    "...half radial rear wheels can be substantially more durable than conventional ones, in cases where the wheel is highly dished."

    I have never recommended the half radial pattern for anything other than highly dished wheels.

    Sheldon "Apples And Locomotives" Brown
    [COLOR=blue][CENTER][b]Harris Cyclery, West Newton, Massachusetts[/b]
    Phone 617-244-9772, FAX 617-244-1041
    [URL= http://harriscyclery.com] http://harriscyclery.com[/URL]
    Hard-to-find parts shipped Worldwide
    [URL=http://captainbike.com]http://captainbike.com[/URL]
    Useful articles about bicycles and cycling
    [URL=http://sheldonbrown.com]http://sheldonbrown.com[/URL] [/CENTER] [/COLOR]

  23. #23
    Senior Member DannoXYZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Saratoga, CA
    Posts
    11,507
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by miamijim
    Two thoughts on radial lacing the non-drive side.....

    When doing so you decrease by half the number of drive spokes. On 32 spoke wheel there are 16 drive spokes so your pedaling forces are divided amongst 16 spokes. With a radial laced non-drive side you only have 8 spokes handling the load.

    If I remeber correctly shorter radial spokes (in comparison to 3X or 4X) have a higher tension with same dish. This increase in tension will, obviously, increase tension on the hub. The higher tension, will, as S notes, decrease slacking of the spoke which may lead to less breakage at the elbow.
    Why would radial spokes have more tension? Wouldn't that pull the rim over to that side and mess up the centering between the axle-nuts? Imagine unlacing just the non-drive side half of an already built-up wheel and relacing it radially. Wouldn't the tension on the left side have to be exactly the same as before in order to centre the rim?

    The problem with hub-flanges breaking with radial isn't the actual tension it's the direction that the tension is being applied.

    EDIT: Or did you mean that there's higher tension on non-drive side because you're reduced spoke-count by 1/2? That would indeed require more tension on the smaller number of spokes on the left side. But if Tim was going to build his wheel with 16-spokes on the left side, then the tension would be the same as with 16 crossed spokes.

  24. #24
    Senior Member miamijim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Tampa, Florida
    Posts
    12,086
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by DannoXYZ
    Why would radial spokes have more tension? Wouldn't that pull the rim over to that side and mess up the centering between the axle-nuts? Imagine unlacing just the non-drive side half of an already built-up wheel and relacing it radially. Wouldn't the tension on the left side have to be exactly the same as before in order to centre the rim?

    The problem with hub-flanges breaking with radial isn't the actual tension it's the direction that the tension is being applied.

    EDIT: Or did you mean that there's higher tension on non-drive side because you're reduced spoke-count by 1/2? That would indeed require more tension on the smaller number of spokes on the left side. But if Tim was going to build his wheel with 16-spokes on the left side, then the tension would be the same as with 16 crossed spokes.
    PM sent
    WWW.CYCLESPEUGEOT.COM 2005 Pinarello Dogma; 1991 Paramount PDG 70 Mtb; 1976? AD Vent Noir; 1989 LeMond Maillot Juane F&F; 1993? Basso GAP F&F; 1989 Terry Symmetry; 2003 Trek 4700 Mtb; 1983 Vitus 979

  25. #25
    Senior Member miamijim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Tampa, Florida
    Posts
    12,086
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    I was asked to make public what is in my private PM's.

    PM 1

    To minimize dish remove as many washers/spacers as possible from the driveside. Space it so your chain is right next to the droput. On the NON drive side add spacers to achieve your desired width. If your starting with a 126mm hub and space out to 130 your decreasing your dish by 4-5mm. Using a 135mm hub you'll decrease your dish by a minimum of 9mm. Both of these scenarios are with a standard rim. With an 'offset rim' dish will be reduced further. With the proper selction of componets 'negative' dish is possible.

    PM 2

    If you have a choice of lacing the NON drive side 4X 3X or radial the radial lacing will have a higher tension because the spokes are shorter. Think of a drooping wire on a telephone pole. The shorter you make that telephone wire the more tension it has. There, of cours, is a trade off to this. If your a believer in the 'S' theory you wont break the heads because the spokes not losong tension the regaining thus beating up the spke head. But, you will risk ripping the spokes out of the hub because of the increase intension.

    Radial lacing as solution for 3X/4X spokes breaking on the NON drive side is a poor solution to the problem.

    If proper equiptment is selected and a wheel is properly built pedaling forces shouldnt slacken the NON-drive side.
    WWW.CYCLESPEUGEOT.COM 2005 Pinarello Dogma; 1991 Paramount PDG 70 Mtb; 1976? AD Vent Noir; 1989 LeMond Maillot Juane F&F; 1993? Basso GAP F&F; 1989 Terry Symmetry; 2003 Trek 4700 Mtb; 1983 Vitus 979

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •