building a wheel spokes at weird angles
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
building a wheel spokes at weird angles
I put in figures in a spoke calculator online for the hub and rim, but initial lacing up the angles look weird. Should I continue?
#2
Senior Member
Thread Starter
#1 Wheel Building SPOKE CALCULATOR Now Online | PROWHEELBUILDER
Using this calculator, nuvinci n360 32h rear on 26 inch Alex rim should be 234.9mm, and I ordered 234mm spokes
Using this calculator, nuvinci n360 32h rear on 26 inch Alex rim should be 234.9mm, and I ordered 234mm spokes
#3
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Cedar Rapids, IA
Posts: 1,643
Bikes: 1997 Rivendell Road Standard 650b conversion (tourer), 1988 Schwinn Project KOM-10 (gravel/tour), 2013 Foundry Auger disc (CX/gravel), 2016 Cannondale Fat CAAD 2 (MTB/winter), 2011 Cannondale Flash 29er Lefty (trail MTB)
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 167 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times
in
5 Posts
Looks fine to me. Look at a completed wheel and you'll see that all the spokes are at an angle.
#5
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Im mainly worried about the angle they make with the rim. All of my other wheels have the spoke making a 90 degree angle with the rim. Then, on a hub this big I'm not sure if it is possible to have it 90 degrees.
I'm also starting to think I made a mistake assuming 2-cross. For a hub this heavy maybe 4 cross is a better idea.
I'm also starting to think I made a mistake assuming 2-cross. For a hub this heavy maybe 4 cross is a better idea.
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 28,682
Bikes: 1990 Romic Reynolds 531 custom build, Merlin Works CR Ti custom build, super light Workswell 066 custom build
Mentioned: 109 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6556 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 58 Times
in
36 Posts
You need to read up on wheel building. Cross number has absolutely nothing to do with hub weight. Cross number is chosen only for the purpose of arranging the spokes at exactly the tangent angle to the hub that you show in your photo. That allows the hubs to pull the rim around with the greatest efficiency. The larger the flange, the fewer the crosses. The smaller the rim diameter, the fewer the crosses. The more spokes, the greater the crosses. With a hub that large, you are likely limited to 2X at a normal number of spokes.
Only radial spokes which aren't used to drive a wheel will be radial to the rim. Any crossed spokes must approach the rim at a smaller angle to the tangent.
Only radial spokes which aren't used to drive a wheel will be radial to the rim. Any crossed spokes must approach the rim at a smaller angle to the tangent.
Last edited by rpenmanparker; 04-24-14 at 03:30 PM.
#7
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Spoke crosses likely makes for a stronger wheel though, no? With a hub this heavy, I probably want as strong a wheel as possible
#9
Seńor Member
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 5,065
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 648 Post(s)
Liked 291 Times
in
215 Posts
if you were to go to four cross
the angle would be even more severe
when i laced my twenty six inch alfine wheel last year i went with three cross
as it had been laced into a 700c rim
and i am mildly unsatisfied with the angle at the hub
so if i ever re lace it i will go with two cross
the reason yours looks so weird at the rim is because you only have spokes in one side of the hub
put the first set into the other side of the hub and the rim will be pulled toward the centre and have less of an angle when viewed from the side
the angle would be even more severe
when i laced my twenty six inch alfine wheel last year i went with three cross
as it had been laced into a 700c rim
and i am mildly unsatisfied with the angle at the hub
so if i ever re lace it i will go with two cross
the reason yours looks so weird at the rim is because you only have spokes in one side of the hub
put the first set into the other side of the hub and the rim will be pulled toward the centre and have less of an angle when viewed from the side
#11
Senior Member
Yes spoke crossing does make for a stronger wheel , it why most wheels are built as 3 cross .
#12
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Hmm, well apparently they recommend a 1x pattern. Lacing Question: all spoke heads in?
#13
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 28,682
Bikes: 1990 Romic Reynolds 531 custom build, Merlin Works CR Ti custom build, super light Workswell 066 custom build
Mentioned: 109 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6556 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 58 Times
in
36 Posts
No, not really. And you don't have a choice to cross spokes more than they can. It is self limiting.
#14
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 28,682
Bikes: 1990 Romic Reynolds 531 custom build, Merlin Works CR Ti custom build, super light Workswell 066 custom build
Mentioned: 109 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6556 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 58 Times
in
36 Posts
No that is not true. Most wheels are 3X because the rim and hub sizes and spoke number make 3X give tangent spokes. If the number that resulted in tangent spokes were 2X, that is what would be used. Yes, you can choose lower numbers of crosses than the proper number, but that is hardly ever done. Not because of strength, but because of the desire to have the spokes tangent to the hub.
#15
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 38,544
Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter
Mentioned: 139 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5703 Post(s)
Liked 2,426 Times
in
1,341 Posts
I have a personal guideline for 700c wheels where I try to keep the separation of the two parallel spokes no more than 3" or so at the hub. That means reducing the number of crosses when using ultra large flanges. By the same token, smaller rims call for smaller separation at the hub.
If you want a rough guideline, keep spoke separation at the hub smaller than the 1.5x the distance between the same spokes at the rim, preferably nearer to 1x that distance.
If you want a rough guideline, keep spoke separation at the hub smaller than the 1.5x the distance between the same spokes at the rim, preferably nearer to 1x that distance.
__________________
FB
Chain-L site
An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.
Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.
“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN
WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
FB
Chain-L site
An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.
Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.
“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN
WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
#16
Senior Member
No that is not true. Most wheels are 3X because the rim and hub sizes and spoke number make 3X give tangent spokes. If the number that resulted in tangent spokes were 2X, that is what would be used. Yes, you can choose lower numbers of crosses than the proper number, but that is hardly ever done. Not because of strength, but because of the desire to have the spokes tangent to the hub.
is true for the rear wheel
#17
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 28,682
Bikes: 1990 Romic Reynolds 531 custom build, Merlin Works CR Ti custom build, super light Workswell 066 custom build
Mentioned: 109 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6556 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 58 Times
in
36 Posts
Do you have documentstion for that? The point is you want the driving spokes to be tangent to the hub circumference. Once you have that, more is not better. Take a tandem wheel with 40 spokes for example. Yes you use 4X commonly, and yes it is a strong wheel. But that is be ause of 40 spokes not 4X. The 40 spokes just happen to demand 4X.
#18
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 38,544
Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter
Mentioned: 139 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5703 Post(s)
Liked 2,426 Times
in
1,341 Posts
No that is not true. Most wheels are 3X because the rim and hub sizes and spoke number make 3X give tangent spokes. If the number that resulted in tangent spokes were 2X, that is what would be used. Yes, you can choose lower numbers of crosses than the proper number, but that is hardly ever done. Not because of strength, but because of the desire to have the spokes tangent to the hub.
Tangent spoking (it's still called tangent even if it's really secant spoking) is needed for hub to rim torque loads. Truly tangent means the smallest change in tension for any given torque load, with things getting progressively worse as the spoke line of action passes closer to the axle.
Obviously, front non/disc wheels don't benefit from tangent spokes, but the hub flange might if it isn't designed for radial.
__________________
FB
Chain-L site
An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.
Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.
“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN
WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
FB
Chain-L site
An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.
Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.
“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN
WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
#19
Senior Member
here some reading for you , repenmanparker .http://sheldonbrown.com/wheelbuild.html
#20
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 28,682
Bikes: 1990 Romic Reynolds 531 custom build, Merlin Works CR Ti custom build, super light Workswell 066 custom build
Mentioned: 109 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6556 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 58 Times
in
36 Posts
The tangent spoke combinations are 4x/36, 3x/28 and 2x/20 Most wheels are 3x on 32h wheels because that's as close to tangent as possible, and 4x would be beyond the centerline.
Tangent spoking (it's still called tangent even if it's really secant spoking) is needed for hub to rim torque loads. Truly tangent means the smallest change in tension for any given torque load, with things getting progressively worse as the spoke line of action passes closer to the axle.
Obviously, front non/disc wheels don't benefit from tangent spokes, but the hub flange might if it isn't designed for radial.
Tangent spoking (it's still called tangent even if it's really secant spoking) is needed for hub to rim torque loads. Truly tangent means the smallest change in tension for any given torque load, with things getting progressively worse as the spoke line of action passes closer to the axle.
Obviously, front non/disc wheels don't benefit from tangent spokes, but the hub flange might if it isn't designed for radial.
#21
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 38,544
Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter
Mentioned: 139 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5703 Post(s)
Liked 2,426 Times
in
1,341 Posts
Thanks for that detail. Your "tangent" combinations correspond to shallow 700C rims and small flange hubs, right. Deeper or smaller rims, and/or higher flanges would all reduce the number of crosses that give spokes tangent at the hub. Correct me please, if that is incorrect. I am always trying to get it right.
Tangent means at right angles to the radius. So a (truly) tangent spoked wheel will have the parallel spokes coming from adjacent holes in the rim meeting the hub at the centerline 180° apart. Rim size has little to do with this, it's about how the spokes leave the hub. Those combinations I listed before are the ones that meet the test. As a rule, add/subtract 1 cross for every 8 holes.
Since the parallel spokes aren't truly parallel, they're not perfectly tangent, but they're as close as you're going to get. Perfectly tangent spokes would happen when the distance between two spoke holes in the rim is equal to the hub flange diameter, and the parallel spokes actually are. However, that might mean rough angles at the rim which is what the OP is worried about.
__________________
FB
Chain-L site
An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.
Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.
“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN
WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
FB
Chain-L site
An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.
Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.
“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN
WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
Last edited by FBinNY; 04-24-14 at 04:59 PM.
#22
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Seattle
Posts: 246
Bikes: 91 Trek franken '81 Schwinn Voyager
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
The tangent spoke combinations are 4x/36, 3x/28 and 2x/20 Most wheels are 3x on 32h wheels because that's as close to tangent as possible, and 4x would be beyond the centerline.
Tangent spoking (it's still called tangent even if it's really secant spoking) is needed for hub to rim torque loads. Truly tangent means the smallest change in tension for any given torque load, with things getting progressively worse as the spoke line of action passes closer to the axle.
Obviously, front non/disc wheels don't benefit from tangent spokes, but the hub flange might if it isn't designed for radial.
Tangent spoking (it's still called tangent even if it's really secant spoking) is needed for hub to rim torque loads. Truly tangent means the smallest change in tension for any given torque load, with things getting progressively worse as the spoke line of action passes closer to the axle.
Obviously, front non/disc wheels don't benefit from tangent spokes, but the hub flange might if it isn't designed for radial.
#23
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: St Peters, Missouri
Posts: 30,225
Bikes: Catrike 559 I own some others but they don't get ridden very much.
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1572 Post(s)
Liked 642 Times
in
363 Posts
Im mainly worried about the angle they make with the rim. All of my other wheels have the spoke making a 90 degree angle with the rim. Then, on a hub this big I'm not sure if it is possible to have it 90 degrees.
I'm also starting to think I made a mistake assuming 2-cross. For a hub this heavy maybe 4 cross is a better idea.
I'm also starting to think I made a mistake assuming 2-cross. For a hub this heavy maybe 4 cross is a better idea.
__________________
My greatest fear is all of my kids standing around my coffin and talking about "how sensible" dad was.
My greatest fear is all of my kids standing around my coffin and talking about "how sensible" dad was.
#24
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 38,544
Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter
Mentioned: 139 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5703 Post(s)
Liked 2,426 Times
in
1,341 Posts
However, there is a benefit to tangent spoking on rim brake front wheels. Interlaced spokes provide degree of resilience that radial spoke lack. This reduces shock stress at both the hub and rim.
__________________
FB
Chain-L site
An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.
Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.
“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN
WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
FB
Chain-L site
An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.
Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.
“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN
WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
#25
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 38,544
Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter
Mentioned: 139 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5703 Post(s)
Liked 2,426 Times
in
1,341 Posts
It's all about the angles rather than number of crosses. As you said, ideally you'd like for the spokes to enter the rim at a 90 degree angle but be tangent to the hub. You can't have both so you have to compromise. In general larger diameter hubs = fewer crosses. I'm thinking 2 cross for this build is going to work out just fine.
Also consider that torque considerations are related to the spokes line of action and how far from the axle it passes. Often 2x or even 1x on a very large flange passes farther out than the diameter of a small flange hub.
__________________
FB
Chain-L site
An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.
Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.
“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN
WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
FB
Chain-L site
An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.
Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.
“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN
WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.