Bike Forums

Bike Forums (https://www.bikeforums.net/forum.php)
-   Bicycle Mechanics (https://www.bikeforums.net/bicycle-mechanics/)
-   -   Wheelbuilding: Spoke question (https://www.bikeforums.net/bicycle-mechanics/1127451-wheelbuilding-spoke-question.html)

Layingback 11-22-17 06:42 AM

Finite element analysis of the spoke
 

Originally Posted by Mr IGH (Post 19986228)
- Proper spoke for the application.
- Lightweight rims (sub 500gm) don't require anything beyond 2.0/1.8/2.0 spokes.
- A 32 spoke wheel with sub 500gm rim built properly will reach end-of-life from rim failure, not spoke breakage. This is esp true with today's 130mm/135mm hubs with less dish than BITD 120mm 6-speed freewheel hubs.
- Using heavier 2.3mm butts at the bend instead of 2.0mm is to compensate for poor wheel building skills, not to add any actual advantage for properly designed and properly build wheels.
- DT 2.3/1.8/2.0 spokes don't offer any advantage over standard 2.0/1.8/2.0 spokes.
- DT doesn't use 2.3/1.8/2.0 spokes on any of their premade wheels and none of them have more than 28 spokes (those are MTB wheelsets, road wheelsets are 24 spoke for disc, 20/16 for road)....
- The canard about double butted spokes relieving stress at the bend and adding to spoke life doesn't follow the simplest engineering principals known to successful 1st year engineering students....
- No one has ever demonstrated the "DB spokes make the wheel stronger" theory with computer simulations either....
- The reason why no one has demonstrated the theory with computer simulation it is because it's false....

I can do the analysis in Ansys to come up with a definitive answer to your hypothesis. Just because it has not been done does not mean it is either true or false. That perception is flawed logic.

Layingback 05-28-18 10:04 PM

danmyersmn, Did your wheel build happen?
 

Originally Posted by Layingback (Post 20008790)
I can do the analysis in Ansys to come up with a definitive answer to your hypothesis. Just because it has not been done does not mean it is either true or false. That perception is flawed logic.

I wondered how round and even your tension turned out.

Bike Gremlin 05-28-18 10:46 PM


Originally Posted by Layingback (Post 20008790)
I can do the analysis in Ansys to come up with a definitive answer to your hypothesis. Just because it has not been done does not mean it is either true or false. That perception is flawed logic.

Does sound interesting. Could you (also?) test if there's a point in (very) diminishing returns in terms of wheel's strength when handling vertical (radial) and lateral loads as spoke tension increases - all other things being equal?

Layingback 06-03-18 11:58 PM


Originally Posted by Slaninar (Post 20365225)
Does sound interesting. Could you (also?) test if there's a point in (very) diminishing returns in terms of wheel's strength when handling vertical (radial) and lateral loads as spoke tension increases - all other things being equal?

Rim quality (in Aluminim: heat treatment, joining process, cross section design) greatly affect vertical and lateral loads. Spoke tension eveness is affected by the rim strength, which inturn affects structure.

Bike Gremlin 06-04-18 01:54 AM


Originally Posted by Layingback (Post 20375386)
Rim quality (in Aluminim: heat treatment, joining process, cross section design) greatly affect vertical and lateral loads. Spoke tension eveness is affected by the rim strength, which inturn affects structure.

Agree. Doesn't answer the question though, but you are not obliged to answer - it's your time, knowledge and good will. :thumb:


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:16 PM.


Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.