Super Rigid Wheels
07-15-08, 08:52 PM
#1
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 13
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Super Rigid Wheels
So right after my freshman year of high school I got a job at a LBS I've been there just over a year and have built up a few wheels. From what I have learned about building wheels Shorter spokes translates to a more rigid wheel. This caught my attention and I decided to try and make a real rigid set of wheels (not really build just get a list of parts) I've so far figured:
High Flange Hubs
Velocity deep Vs
Straight Gauge Spokes
Now radially laced spokes would gain shorter spokes, BUT with crossed spokes you can tire and solder, thus decreasing spoke length even more.
I'm not sure if you can get away with 2 cross on drive side so I figured on three cross drive and two cross nondrive, all tied.
Perhaps crowsfoot tied on both sides.
To finish I'd go with clincher tires with crazy high psi so you can feel the paint on the road.
Any ideas on what would work the best, shoot
Thanks all -John
High Flange Hubs
Velocity deep Vs
Straight Gauge Spokes
Now radially laced spokes would gain shorter spokes, BUT with crossed spokes you can tire and solder, thus decreasing spoke length even more.
I'm not sure if you can get away with 2 cross on drive side so I figured on three cross drive and two cross nondrive, all tied.
Perhaps crowsfoot tied on both sides.
To finish I'd go with clincher tires with crazy high psi so you can feel the paint on the road.
Any ideas on what would work the best, shoot
Thanks all -John
07-15-08, 09:57 PM
#4
Senior Member
Other than I'd suggest skipping the tieing and soldering I'd say fill your boots.
Spokes are stretched like rubber bands in tension. They NEED to retain some ability to alter their tension without being tied to something in the middle. I've never understood the reasons for tieing and soldering and certainly many excellent and likely better wheels have been done without it. Remember that you can't push a rope and to all intents and practical considerations our spokes are ropes.
And it's not just about being rigid in the load holding. If you're looking to create a highly responsive wheel then staying with spokes that are close to tangential on the rear will result in the power from the hub affecting them less than other lacing options. On the front and assuming a rim brake rather than a disc hub you can use radial spoking for some advantage. And your high flange hubs are a good idea as well for the same reason.
The deep V's however are a mixed blessing. It may result in a shorter spoke but they are far, far heavier than smaller section rims. Weight at the rims is weight in rotary motion that you need to spin up and brake down with every change in speed. It's sort of like you're having to speed up and slow down the rims TWICE instead of just once. Excess weight on the rim thus counts for twice or three times as much as weight in your backpack.
If you want a wheeset that makes it feels so repsonsive that it's like there's almost nothing under you then you want a rim that is light and that means a smaller section and longer spokes. Couple that with some light tubes and tires and the bike will feel alive and literally like it's responding to your thoughts rather than your muscles. Lace it up with some nice small guage butted spokes to the big flange hubs and you'll have a far more optimum wheelset for where it counts than your big aero rim option. Your way may or may not optimize one aspect but it's doing so at the expense of too many others that are more important. The ONLY place that big aero rims excell is when you're riding at consistent fast speeds where alterations in speed are minor and occur over a longer time like in a triathalon ride or some other style of racing or serious long country training rides that are much like racing. For real world city or town riding where you're track standing one instant and dashing across an intersection the next you want wheels that respond more quickly.
Spokes are stretched like rubber bands in tension. They NEED to retain some ability to alter their tension without being tied to something in the middle. I've never understood the reasons for tieing and soldering and certainly many excellent and likely better wheels have been done without it. Remember that you can't push a rope and to all intents and practical considerations our spokes are ropes.
And it's not just about being rigid in the load holding. If you're looking to create a highly responsive wheel then staying with spokes that are close to tangential on the rear will result in the power from the hub affecting them less than other lacing options. On the front and assuming a rim brake rather than a disc hub you can use radial spoking for some advantage. And your high flange hubs are a good idea as well for the same reason.
The deep V's however are a mixed blessing. It may result in a shorter spoke but they are far, far heavier than smaller section rims. Weight at the rims is weight in rotary motion that you need to spin up and brake down with every change in speed. It's sort of like you're having to speed up and slow down the rims TWICE instead of just once. Excess weight on the rim thus counts for twice or three times as much as weight in your backpack.
If you want a wheeset that makes it feels so repsonsive that it's like there's almost nothing under you then you want a rim that is light and that means a smaller section and longer spokes. Couple that with some light tubes and tires and the bike will feel alive and literally like it's responding to your thoughts rather than your muscles. Lace it up with some nice small guage butted spokes to the big flange hubs and you'll have a far more optimum wheelset for where it counts than your big aero rim option. Your way may or may not optimize one aspect but it's doing so at the expense of too many others that are more important. The ONLY place that big aero rims excell is when you're riding at consistent fast speeds where alterations in speed are minor and occur over a longer time like in a triathalon ride or some other style of racing or serious long country training rides that are much like racing. For real world city or town riding where you're track standing one instant and dashing across an intersection the next you want wheels that respond more quickly.
07-16-08, 02:42 AM
#5
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 8,688
Mentioned: 46 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1074 Post(s)
Liked 295 Times
in
222 Posts
For rigid wheels:
high flange is good
straight gauge spokes are good.
high spoke count is good
smaller rims are good
(for a rim brake) radial lace, heads-in is good
For a rear wheel wider (tandem, internal gear, SS) hub is good.
Tied and soldered spokes won't do squat. The whole idea of the tied cross acting as an extension of the flange doesn't hold. It won't help with lateral loads as one of the spokes is free to move laterally anyhow. It won't help with torsional loads either as you can't get a push worth mentioning through a spoke
high flange tends to have more material outside the spoke holes, so 2X shouldn't be a problem
Crow foot is a so-so issue. Sure, you get a few radial spokes to help with lateral rigidity(if laced heads-in), but are they really worth the effort?
If I wanted ultra (lateral)rigid wheels I'd first source the widest hubs I could find(probably an internal gear), Then I'd do some machining and cut 4 metal rings to act as my new, larger hub flanges. Their inside edge would be drilled after the spoke holes on the hub and screwed in place, and their outside edge would be drilled for the coming lace. By widening the flange I'd be able to lace 2X, heads-in while retaining a high spoke count. And with the wider flange 2X would give the same angle as 3X on a smaller flange.
high flange is good
straight gauge spokes are good.
high spoke count is good
smaller rims are good
(for a rim brake) radial lace, heads-in is good
For a rear wheel wider (tandem, internal gear, SS) hub is good.
Tied and soldered spokes won't do squat. The whole idea of the tied cross acting as an extension of the flange doesn't hold. It won't help with lateral loads as one of the spokes is free to move laterally anyhow. It won't help with torsional loads either as you can't get a push worth mentioning through a spoke
high flange tends to have more material outside the spoke holes, so 2X shouldn't be a problem
Crow foot is a so-so issue. Sure, you get a few radial spokes to help with lateral rigidity(if laced heads-in), but are they really worth the effort?
If I wanted ultra (lateral)rigid wheels I'd first source the widest hubs I could find(probably an internal gear), Then I'd do some machining and cut 4 metal rings to act as my new, larger hub flanges. Their inside edge would be drilled after the spoke holes on the hub and screwed in place, and their outside edge would be drilled for the coming lace. By widening the flange I'd be able to lace 2X, heads-in while retaining a high spoke count. And with the wider flange 2X would give the same angle as 3X on a smaller flange.
Last edited by dabac; 07-16-08 at 03:07 AM.
07-16-08, 06:29 AM
#6
Making a kilometer blurry
Other than I'd suggest skipping the tieing and soldering I'd say fill your boots.
Spokes are stretched like rubber bands in tension. They NEED to retain some ability to alter their tension without being tied to something in the middle. I've never understood the reasons for tieing and soldering and certainly many excellent and likely better wheels have been done without it. Remember that you can't push a rope and to all intents and practical considerations our spokes are ropes.
And it's not just about being rigid in the load holding. If you're looking to create a highly responsive wheel then staying with spokes that are close to tangential on the rear will result in the power from the hub affecting them less than other lacing options. On the front and assuming a rim brake rather than a disc hub you can use radial spoking for some advantage. And your high flange hubs are a good idea as well for the same reason.
The deep V's however are a mixed blessing. It may result in a shorter spoke but they are far, far heavier than smaller section rims. Weight at the rims is weight in rotary motion that you need to spin up and brake down with every change in speed. It's sort of like you're having to speed up and slow down the rims TWICE instead of just once. Excess weight on the rim thus counts for twice or three times as much as weight in your backpack.
If you want a wheeset that makes it feels so repsonsive that it's like there's almost nothing under you then you want a rim that is light and that means a smaller section and longer spokes. Couple that with some light tubes and tires and the bike will feel alive and literally like it's responding to your thoughts rather than your muscles. Lace it up with some nice small guage butted spokes to the big flange hubs and you'll have a far more optimum wheelset for where it counts than your big aero rim option. Your way may or may not optimize one aspect but it's doing so at the expense of too many others that are more important. The ONLY place that big aero rims excell is when you're riding at consistent fast speeds where alterations in speed are minor and occur over a longer time like in a triathalon ride or some other style of racing or serious long country training rides that are much like racing. For real world city or town riding where you're track standing one instant and dashing across an intersection the next you want wheels that respond more quickly.
Spokes are stretched like rubber bands in tension. They NEED to retain some ability to alter their tension without being tied to something in the middle. I've never understood the reasons for tieing and soldering and certainly many excellent and likely better wheels have been done without it. Remember that you can't push a rope and to all intents and practical considerations our spokes are ropes.
And it's not just about being rigid in the load holding. If you're looking to create a highly responsive wheel then staying with spokes that are close to tangential on the rear will result in the power from the hub affecting them less than other lacing options. On the front and assuming a rim brake rather than a disc hub you can use radial spoking for some advantage. And your high flange hubs are a good idea as well for the same reason.
The deep V's however are a mixed blessing. It may result in a shorter spoke but they are far, far heavier than smaller section rims. Weight at the rims is weight in rotary motion that you need to spin up and brake down with every change in speed. It's sort of like you're having to speed up and slow down the rims TWICE instead of just once. Excess weight on the rim thus counts for twice or three times as much as weight in your backpack.
If you want a wheeset that makes it feels so repsonsive that it's like there's almost nothing under you then you want a rim that is light and that means a smaller section and longer spokes. Couple that with some light tubes and tires and the bike will feel alive and literally like it's responding to your thoughts rather than your muscles. Lace it up with some nice small guage butted spokes to the big flange hubs and you'll have a far more optimum wheelset for where it counts than your big aero rim option. Your way may or may not optimize one aspect but it's doing so at the expense of too many others that are more important. The ONLY place that big aero rims excell is when you're riding at consistent fast speeds where alterations in speed are minor and occur over a longer time like in a triathalon ride or some other style of racing or serious long country training rides that are much like racing. For real world city or town riding where you're track standing one instant and dashing across an intersection the next you want wheels that respond more quickly.
Regarding rotating mass, the difference between having a Deep-V and having a massless, imaginary rim, would still only amount to ~0.2% of your total power requirements in a crit with really tight corners, at pro speeds and accelerations. In a hard climb, rotating mass has such a small effect that it's not even worth typing this sentence about it. You can read and argue this here, but please read through it to see the points and counter points -- this is a proof that the effect of rotating mass is hugely exaggerated in cycling. https://www.bikeforums.net/road-cycling/384667-rotating-mass-what-does-cost-you.html
07-16-08, 08:28 AM
#7
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 396
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
I disagree that straight spokes are stiffer. Double butted spokes allow for more total tension, and due to their narrower cross section where they intersect, they offer a straighter path from hub flange to rim.
07-16-08, 09:47 AM
#8
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Spartanburg, SC, USA
Posts: 255
Bikes: 1983 Fuji Touring Series IV, Masi Volumetrica 3VC
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times
in
4 Posts
Tying and soldering spokes doesn't do anything to the stiffness of the wheel:
https://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/tied-soldered.html
Regards,
John.
https://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/tied-soldered.html
Regards,
John.
07-16-08, 09:50 AM
#9
Making a kilometer blurry
Thinner spokes are easier to stretch, so the wheel is easier to flex.
I don't see how a DB spoke can be brought to any higher of a tension. Tension limits are dictated by the rim, not the spokes.
I don't see how a DB spoke can be brought to any higher of a tension. Tension limits are dictated by the rim, not the spokes.
07-16-08, 09:54 AM
#10
Making a kilometer blurry
Tying and soldering spokes doesn't do anything to the stiffness of the wheel:
https://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/tied-soldered.html
Regards,
John.
https://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/tied-soldered.html
Regards,
John.
