Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Framebuilders
Reload this Page >

Titanium 31.7 x 1.2mm VS 34.9 x 0.9mm tubes

Notices
Framebuilders Thinking about a custom frame? Lugged vs Fillet Brazed. Different Frame materials? Newvex or Pacenti Lugs? why get a custom Road, Mountain, or Track Frame? Got a question about framebuilding? Lets discuss framebuilding at it's finest.

Titanium 31.7 x 1.2mm VS 34.9 x 0.9mm tubes

Old 12-23-20, 10:21 AM
  #1  
azza_333
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
azza_333's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 762

Bikes: A few

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 100 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Titanium 31.7 x 1.2mm VS 34.9 x 0.9mm tubes

So I did some number crunching and worked out the deflection (stiffness) of some different titanium tubes, with a standard length of 550mm, and a force of 91kg. I got the following results;

Diameter 31.7mm, Wall thickness 1.2mm = Defection 31.061mm
Diameter 34.9mm, Wall thickness 0.9mm = Defection 29.922mm

Noting that there is not a lot of difference between the two (Yes I am aware that 31.7mm x 1.2mm will weigh more)
Would there be much difference between the weld strengths and stiffness when comparing 31.7mm x 1.2mm, and 34.9 x 0.9mm, welded to a tube of the same diameter?

For some extra information, the bike will be used as a touring bike, and I am trying to decide on the seat and top tubes. the down tube will be 44.5 x 0.9mm
azza_333 is offline  
Old 12-23-20, 01:20 PM
  #2  
unterhausen
Randomhead
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Happy Valley, Pennsylvania
Posts: 20,869
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked 875 Times in 653 Posts
joining tubes of the same diameter gets a little funny. Both options will be strong enough, I don't think that's an issue at all. The real question is if you will be happy with the ride, which is virtually impossible to answer with an approximate stiffness calculation.

I assume you did fixed free end conditions with a tip load. That's probably a decent proxy for the actual end conditions, which are significantly more complex.
unterhausen is offline  
Old 12-23-20, 07:58 PM
  #3  
azza_333
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
azza_333's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 762

Bikes: A few

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 100 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by unterhausen View Post
joining tubes of the same diameter gets a little funny.
How is it funny?

Originally Posted by unterhausen View Post
Both options will be strong enough, I don't think that's an issue at all. The real question is if you will be happy with the ride
I was just hoping to get a bike stiff enough for up to 85kg rider, and 15kg of luggage. Several websites recommend a 34.9mm TT and ST for "bigger riders" but they don't list what a bigger rider is. They also don't list the wall thickness of the 34.9mm tubes.

If I can I would like to use a 31.7mm seat tube, so I can use a 27.2mm seat post for good compliance. I also don't really want an ovalize the TT, so the TT would need to be 31.7 if the ST is also 31.7mm. This all said if having that compromises the stiffness or strength of the frame, then that for me is a no go. I am fairly confident the the both tubes will have roughly the same stiffness, I am just trying to work out if the welds/joints will be significantly weaker or less stiff using the narrower 31.7mm tubes.

Originally Posted by unterhausen View Post
I assume you did fixed free end conditions with a tip load
Yep, that's what I calculated.
azza_333 is offline  
Old 12-23-20, 08:55 PM
  #4  
unterhausen
Randomhead
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Happy Valley, Pennsylvania
Posts: 20,869
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked 875 Times in 653 Posts
the "wings" of the mitered tube are very long and goes to the centerline of the unmitered tube. I think most builders do something to cut the miter short, but it's still pretty long. A smaller tube intersecting a larger tube has a nicer miter.

I think"bigger rider" really depends on your style. As someone that is 85kg, but usually not carrying quite that much weight, I don't feel the need for a particularly robust frame. A very strong 85kg rider might not agree.
unterhausen is offline  
Old 12-23-20, 10:10 PM
  #5  
azza_333
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
azza_333's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 762

Bikes: A few

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 100 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by unterhausen View Post
the "wings" of the mitered tube are very long and goes to the centerline of the unmitered tube. I think most builders do something to cut the miter short, but it's still pretty long. A smaller tube intersecting a larger tube has a nicer miter.

I think"bigger rider" really depends on your style. As someone that is 85kg, but usually not carrying quite that much weight, I don't feel the need for a particularly robust frame. A very strong 85kg rider might not agree.
Thanks for the answers, I might go with 31.7 x 1.2mm then.
azza_333 is offline  
Old 12-24-20, 12:18 AM
  #6  
azza_333
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
azza_333's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 762

Bikes: A few

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 100 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Bugger, they don't have 31.7x1.2mm tubing. I guess 34.9 its is then.
azza_333 is offline  
Old 12-24-20, 08:30 AM
  #7  
Tourist in MSN
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 7,729

Bikes: 1961 Ideor, 1994 Bridgestone MB-6, 2006 Airnimal Joey, 2009 Thorn Sherpa, 2013 Thorn Nomad MkII, 2015 VO Pass Hunter, 2017 Lynskey Backroad, 2017 Raleigh Gran Prix, Perfekt 3 Speed -age unknown, 1980s Bianchi Mixte on a trainer. Others are now gone.

Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2066 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 383 Times in 324 Posts
My 2017 Lynskey Backroad has a top tube and seat tube of the same diameter. My very cheap caliper measures 35 mm but the caliper is low in precision, could be 34.9.

There is a shim built into the frame, 27.2 seat post. I think the shim is aluminum, not titanium, I am making that guess based on color of the metal.

The only change in the frame that I can see in their website and my three year old frame is that my head tube is cylindrical.

They have lots of photos on their site, you can see how the welding looks where those two tubes are joined. And they cite more tube data on their website.
https://lynskeyperformance.com/backroad-touring-frame/

I pasted a pertinent photo below from the Lynskey website.





I have only done one tour on my Lynskey, but it handled a load just fine.



That said, if I recall you tour much lighter than I do.

Most of my riding on that bike is unladen. And it rides quite nice with or without a load.

Since you are using a pretty big downtube, thought you might want to see what the bottom bracket shell joints look like. Downtube was ovalized at bottom bracket shell.

Tourist in MSN is offline  
Old 12-26-20, 03:14 AM
  #8  
azza_333
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
azza_333's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 762

Bikes: A few

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 100 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Tourist in MSN View Post
My 2017 Lynskey Backroad has a top tube and seat tube of the same diameter. My very cheap caliper measures 35 mm but the caliper is low in precision, could be 34.9.

There is a shim built into the frame, 27.2 seat post. I think the shim is aluminum, not titanium, I am making that guess based on color of the metal.

The only change in the frame that I can see in their website and my three year old frame is that my head tube is cylindrical.

I have only done one tour on my Lynskey, but it handled a load just fine.
Wicked, thanks, that puts my mind at easy.
azza_333 is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.