Originally Posted by
cyccommute
Brandt is wrong. There, I said it and I fully expect to be burned at the stake for it.
However, look at a wheel and how the spoke is attached to the rim or, rather, how a spoke isn't attached to a rim. If you build wheels, it becomes apparent rather quickly that there is nothing for the spoke to "stand" on. The nipple floats in the rim. If you crash the wheel into a curb, you can bend the rim and deform the rim enough to lose tension on spokes. If the wheel "stood" on the spoke, the spokes would deform as well but it is possible to leave the spokes completely untouched and have a bent rim.
It's easy to prove to yourself that the bike doesn't stand on the spokes as well. Get a rim (or section of rim), thread in a nipple, put the rim on the ground and push down on the spoke. Without spokes above it hanging from the rim, the spoke goes all the way through the rim and hit the ground. It doesn't "stand" on anything because the spoke never hits the ground. The spoke doesn't even "stand" on the tube or tire because the wheel doesn't need a tire to roll.
As you say, that is all very simplistic, or sophomoric stuff. You aren't arguing with Jobst, if you make those points. You are bouncing between your understanding of his work, and your simplistic models. Better you than me since I don't get his work either. But then over the decade or so you have been on Bikeforums, Jobst (did I miss the funeral?) hasn't exactly been a ghost. He always returned my emails and used to hang out a lot on other forums. If you had something to say you didn't have to wait till now.
Jobst's model is as follows (I hope). He, who designed the spoke tensionmeter that is the benchmark of the industry (if little used), measured spoke tension of loaded and unloaded wheels. His observation, which is presumably repeatable, or disprovable, is that the only change in tension occurs in a few spokes under the hub where tension decreases. That is not consistent with the as often as you like to repeat it "fact" that the hub hangs from the rim. If so where are the loads.
The contention is that in a pre-stressed structure, this change in spoke tensions is what one would expect if the wheel was supported by the ground through the spokes that are between the ground and the hub. One can say the spokes are compressed, or that the wheel stands on the spokes or whatever is in fact the correct terminology when dealing with pre-stressed load paths.
Disproving Jobst is basically a two step thing, make credible observations that reveal different results; or describe what is going on in the affected spokes by some other explanation than the one he gave. Saying stuff like that you can't push on a spoke just shows you are arguing with yourself.