Binxsy

I am using a 1/8th in Julian 48 rim and a surly new hub. The surly hub is listed as a medium height flange, forged alloy etc. Anyway I was going to do a radial lacing but I am really wondering if it is necessary. I figured out the length using a single cross and the spokes I have are the right length for both. So should I void the warranty on my hub and do radial or single cross? I am mainly concerned about the strength of the wheel. According to Sheldon the smaller the flange the higher the chances of the hub breaking are increased. It worries me more since I am using a 48, but surly does make hubs with toughness in mind.

Also the lacing pattern for a single cross would be every other spoke on the hub facing in and out and im guessing the side with the spoke head facing out is the underneath spoke. The rim is drilled in a manner with the holes offset so there would be one spoke hole in between each two pair cross right?

Retro Grouch 

You say you are mainly concerned about the strength of the wheel and you are using a 48 hole hub.

The more material the spoke has to pull against the stronger the wheel is going to be. In this case, radial doesn't make any sense to me. Frankly one cross doesn't make sense to me either.

JohnDThompson 

Radial spoking is never "necessary," but may be done for cosmetic (most commonly) or weight savings (dubious efficacy). If you're concerned about wheel strength and are using a 48 hole hub, don't bother with either radial or one-cross and built it three-cross instead.

ThermionicScott 

+1 to the above -- not sure if radial is ever "necessary". I'll defer to the experts, but I think with 48 spokes, you would use four-cross if you wanted to get the spokes tangent to the hub flange.

dabac

Heads-in radial is a measureable amount stiffer sideways. For me, who like to run my brakes close to the rim, this was the cure for an annoying "swosh, swosh" when honking.

Necessary, dunno. Easily recognizable difference - sure.

HillRider

A 48H hub is going to have relatively little metal between spoke holes and radial lacing needs all the support it can get. I concur with the 3X or 4X lacing recommendations for this hub.

mrrabbit 

1-cross introduces an interlacing problem in many cases...hence why most folks go 2, 3 and 4.

https://www.mrrabbit.net/wheelsbyflemingapplications.php

Grab the spreadsheet...view the "t-chart" tab.

=8-)

fietsbob

other patterns.. 4 or 5 cross , more spokes to cross ..
or, 'crowfoot' in Groups of 3... 32, 2 cross, 16, radial.

5 cross is such that 1st cross is passing in the opposite direction.
same as 4 cross on a 36 hole build,
material between holes is in compression , rather than shear.

Binxsy

This is why I was thinking of doing radial, im not running brakes in the front but I know I will wack the wheel or someone else will.

Also I already ordered the spokes so its more of radial or single cross. I dont want to send them back. So was my single cross pattern correct? I though heads where supposed to be out on radial?

bobotech

I was always under the impression that radial is the weakest of the wheel building patterns. I thought that 2 or higher cross patterns were the strongest respectfully.

mrrabbit 

Heads in, elbows out radial lacing puts the elbows out about 1-2mm more on average. This provides for just a teeny itsy bitsy touch of extra lateral strength.

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, cross average out the inside elbows (1/2) and outside elbows (1/2) for just a teeny itsy bitsy touch of less lateral strength.,

Downside to elbows out radial lacing is the it leaves a mark by the flange holes like you get with crossed lacing. Elbows in radial lacing avoids this...

=8-)

Binxsy

I dont care about that to much, so this setup is mostly fine eh?

IthaDan 

No front brake, 48 spoke wheels. Hmm, is this a BMX bike?

Seriously, I'd love to see the bike that's getting built like this, I have a feeling this is just the tip of the iceberg.

Retro Grouch 

You have to define what you mean by strongest.

Radial spokes try to pull the hub flange apart right where it's weakest so, from that viewpoint, laceing the spokes so they are more tangential is stronger. Radial laceing makes it possible to obtain a more advantageous braceing angle on all of the spokes so, from that point of view, it's better.

The extra stiffness that you get from having all of the spokes heads in - I suppose that's true. Breaking out hub flanges - that really happens and when it does it can be a ride ender.

Retro Grouch 

Ever try to tighten the spokes on a 20" 48 spoke wheel?

Binxsy

Polo...

IthaDan 

How could I forget. Amazingly frustrating.

fietsbob

well 1X you can further strengthen it with a tied and solder job at the cross.
perhaps instead of the weave..

Kimmo 

That's for when the objective is aerodynamics; IMO it's prolly a measurable difference, since the wheel's frontal area is significantly less that way.

fietsbob

Or just clearance, Brompton spokes head out, on a narrow hub.
[but rim is smaller than even 406 20" ... 349.

dabac

If I remember the Rinard measurements right, radial heads-in was 14% stiffer sideways than radial heads-out. At a guesstimate, it'd put it at about 7% stiffer than a cross lace.

SortaGrey

I recently re-laced a 36 hole triplet rear to radial on the NDS. Much radially stiffer than the cross lacing it replaced... very noticeable. All of 14%.. in this scenario I'd guess much more.

Looigi

No. Zipp Firecrest and some Mavic rear wheels use radial on the drive side because it can be stronger than cross. By comparison to a cross pattern, the spokes are shorter, have the greatest cone angle, and don't have to bend crossing other spokes.

Cross is necessary to transfer torque from the hub to the rim. In the above examples, cross patterns are used on the more lightly stressed non-drive side.

A high cross pattern puts the stress more tangentially on the hub flange and this can help mitigate the problem with weak hub flanges. If the hub/flange is adequately strong, radial can be stiffer and stronger.

Kimmo 

My feeling is Looigi is correct.

mrrabbit 

With all else considered equal,

How does a 14g length of stainless steel at 3X become stronger at radial?

Or did you really mean to say that a shorter length in radial lacing transfers applied torque sooner to the rim providing a slight improvement in response time?

=8-)