I have a DT Swiss 240s front hub that I believe is for radial lacing. I am wanting to lace myfront wheel 2x though. Is there any problems with doing this? It is a 20 spoke wheel.

I think the radial pattern puts a higher shear load on the hub flange than 2X,

and you compensate for any wind-up with cross patterns balancing out.

tie and solder the last cross for extra points.

+1. Any cross lacing is easier on a hub than radial. If the hub will tolerate radial lacing any thing else is a cinch.

Tie and solder if you want to waste a lot of time and effort for absolutely no benefit.

20 hole 2 cross is almost a tangent pull .. guess hub flange diameter is the hidden factoid

3X 32 hole (Rohloff) the spokes cross like a 4 cross 36 hole.


tie and solder is style points..

For 20h hub with a crossing scenario - go 1 cross.

Interlacing will not be a problem.

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

Grab the spreadsheet.....open...use the t-chart tab.

View the table for 1x, look up 20 hole on the left - green on the right means both the crossing and interlacing will work.

=8-)

That's a bit harsh. Unless you suffer one of the extremely rare mid-shaft breaks, t&s does keep a broken spoke from flailing around, with the potential for mischief that brings. I'd call that beneficial.
Got my race wheels with their silly low tension rating t&s because of that.

I'm guessing it could also reduce fretting at the cross, for those few who have that as an issue.

But I'm not expecting any benefit from it while JRA.

Old rule of thumb (for 700c/27" at least) was divide spoke count by 9. Truncate the result down to the whole number. That's the max crosses. Eg 20/9 = 2.23, so 2X max.

Isn't flange radius a factor?

Typically only by a few degrees for the vast majority of hubs we use...

=8-)

I meant concerning that /9 rule. Is that what you meant? Cause I don't follow...

What Ex Pres gave you was the band-aiders, novice's, math dropout's, jerry rigger's equivalent of what I provide in the "t-chart" tab of the spreadsheet.

As to the hub radius, already answered...

=8-)

I'll take an easy to remember, 99% good rule of thumb over a perfect spreadsheet any day.

IMO such an approach saves more time during most of the time than you'll lose some of the time.

1. That's if you remember...it'll take longer for you to search and peruse by minutes that it will to just hit https://www.mrrabbit.net

2. So you are now going to build all 32 and 36 hole wheels 4X and all 48 hole wheels 5X?

=8-)

Or, I could use a slide rule and the ridiculously complicated formula a guy showed me the other week

Nah stuff it, I'll just use a computer

t = 360 * Crossings / Spokes_Per_Side

cos(t) =

If value is between 0.00 and .8660, then theoretically you are good to go without worrying about spokes blocking heads or severely kinked interlacing.

Nothing complicated about the above...

=8-)

There has never been any real advantage to radially spoked wheels other than style points.

There has always been a teeny-tiny advantage to radial wheels in weight and aerodynamics, and probably a barely-measurable tad more stiffness. All adding up to little more than the placebo effect, but it's there.

Also, they're easier to true.

It was comprehensive, about three or four times as much of it. This guy is quite an ubergeek; he reminds me of Adam Savage. I should've pulled out my phone and recorded the demo...

You guys are hilarious. So what's the difference between a radial rated hub and a standard? Are they just more heavy duty flanges? I will try 2x. I tend to stand up a lot and wanted the best scenario for loading up the front end.

The hub has to be stronger to take radial loads.