Wheelbuild Q: 3 Leading, 3 Trailing, and interlacing...
 

I laced up my first 3-Leading, 3-Trailing pattern for my kid's 20" mountain bike, rear wheel. I'm curious to hear any thoughts.

I've read differing opinions as to interlacing on this pattern. I chose to interlace but am having second thoughts about my approach.

Tonight I'll be lacing up the front wheel, and am going to modify my pattern slightly.

Let's call the black spoke my key spoke. The two spokes that come after it I'll call #2 and #3.

The interlacing pattern I followed is:

- Key Spoke: over, over, under
- #2 spoke: over, under, over
- #3 spoke: under, over, over

The problems are apparent from the photo -- lots of deflection, and lots of paint rub-off during tensioning.

I have no doubt this is a sturdy build, but tonight I'm going to lace the front wheel in the following pattern:

- Key Spoke: over, over, over (no interlace)
- #2 spoke: over, over, under
- #3 spoke: over, under, over

So basically just shift the interlacing by one. I'm hoping this will reduce the spoke deflection, and be kinder to the yellow powdercoat finish.

Sorry I didn't take a picture of the whole wheel. I'll see how the front wheel holds up with the modified lacing, then may redo this wheel just to pretty it up. This would be pretty slick with bladed spokes.

http://www.booboodog.net/images/wheels/3l3t.jpg

Huh?
:popcorn

You're making it way too complicated. Get a book on wheelbuilding and read it, then follow the instructions. I like this one: https://www.wheelpro.co.uk/wheelbuilding/book.php
Steve
(Attached image: 20" wheel built cross-3 using this book. Notice at the hub flange the spokes alternate between "inside" and "outside")

Sorry bro, I'm talking about 3 Leading 3 Trailing. You may have missed that part.

It looks something like this:

http://i769.photobucket.com/albums/x...x3l3t02480.jpg

This? Building a 3-Leading-3-Trailing Wheel

Too complicated for me. :D
Steve

Yes!

That's one page I referenced where the builder advocates for interlacing.

The image of the Strida wheel I posted is not interlaced, helluva lot cleaner looking build, but my some accounts doesn't hold tension as well and can be finicky when truing.

I'm hoping my 2/3 interlaced approach will work out.

Good luck! Post images when you're finished.
Heh... *my* Strida wheels look like this:
Steve

Looking at that, I'm not sure you need to interlace spokes. It is common not to interlace straight pull spokes.

Looking at your diagram, I'd probably do:

Black spoke #1: (over over over) (no interlacing)
#2 either (over over under) or (over over over, no interlacing).
#3 (over over under)

There were comments a while ago about a practice of doing a woven interlace: (over under over) on a standard 3 cross wheel. I think the conclusion is that too short of crosses, and it actually made a weaker wheel.

How do you lace a Key Spoke over, over, under?

Interesting notion. Being a kid's wheel, the stakes are low, but I'm still curious about finding the line between "weaker" and "too weak."

Maybe #3 can go "over, under, under" to avoid any weaving.

I'll play with my options tonight, and perhaps worry about the consequences only if it ends up in the truing stand more than once.

I'll post up some completed pics on Friday.

You're right, to be technically correct, the other spokes laced around the key, but for the purpose of this discussion, it's clearer to describe it that way.

I like that. At least a little less bending of the spokes. I suppose one has to also make sure one's lacing pattern is stable, so inbound and outbound spokes are essentially mirror images.

My symmetry concern is the #1 spoke, not being interlaced, will be at a different tension than the #2 and #3 spokes in each group of three.

But if I wanted simple, I'd have opted for standard 3X.

:foo:

Are you doing triples on the nipple end? If so, it is quite possible you'll have both varying length of spokes, as well as varying tension. In particular, I'd anticipate the middle spoke to be at lower tension than the end two spokes.

I think one of the arguments for crossing is that when pedaling, one has the pulling spoke, and the trailing spoke. The pedaling force tends to straighten the pulling spoke, which in turn bends the trailing spoke, and increases the tension on the trailing spoke (or reduces the tendency for tension to decrease with pedaling). So, an inequality with lacing could potentially change how the rim moves when pedaling.

Nonetheless, I'm doubting it will be a significant issue on a 20" wheel.

Triples? In not following you. You mean another cross outside of what's shown in the photo? No, this is it.

The spoke length calculates the same as a standard 3X. With it built, I'm not discerning any difference in length or tension from one to the next, based on how much spoke is sticking out the head of the nipple, or based on plucking tone.

Oh, I was thinking the photo was groups of 6 spokes all on the same side, but now I see, the standard R/L alternating, just having groups of pulling spokes/trailing spokes. That makes more sense.

I doubt you'll even notice the difference between interlaced and non-interlaced spokes.

Awesome, I've been thinking about doing a wheelset like this for a long time. (In fact, I have a 40h Phil I've been keeping just for this so I can do 32F, 40R.) Might be hard to find a suitable rim though, with centered holes.

Anyway, I was not planning on interlacing the spokes at all, because some of the crosses are so close to the flange. Just a PITA to lace.
But I don't think there's any harm in it either. Interlacing doesn't affect spoke tension when it's in the stand, only dynamically, and really not that much at all even then. Lots of vintage wheels were built without interlacing.

Then you've probably read some some of the same online bloggers / posters I have who recommend spokes a millimeter or two longer, to account for the deflection due to interlacing. Don't. I measured my ERD for this rim, it's 2mm smaller than published, I ordered the drive side spokes within 0.1mm of calculated length, and non-drive 1mm longer than calc. My spokes are all at the top of the nipple, more or less. In other words, about just the right length.

I don't know why anyone would be worried about tension differences when the only reason to build such a wheel is for appearance, and the only way anyone can appreciate that is with the bike standing still a lot of the time.

There you're totally wrong, unless you're just trying to throw insults.

There's nothing wrong with having a nice looking ride, but not at the expense of creating a weak wheel.

By the accounts I've read, this 3L 3T pattern is a sturdy build. So nothing is lost; experiences is gained.

And any half-decent wheel builder is aware of the importance of even spoke tension for a reliable wheel.

In addition, while I agree with you that appearance is a primary consideration for this lacing pattern, I'm finding it's an attention-grabbing way to demonstrate wheel building to my 6 and 8 year olds. Visually, it's a simpler pattern to count out, and with the mixed colors, to follow along.

I'm not going to start building this pattern regularly, but it's a nice change from the same old same old.

I'm not drawn to it.

Ok, I haven't trued up the 2nd wheel (front wheel) yet, just pre-tensioned it. But I'm so far liking the change to the interlacing better that what I did with the rear wheel. I'll see how it works out once I get it in the truing stand.

I am worried those outside, non-interlaced spokes are a little floppy (i.e. maybe too long?). If that's the case, I'll nip a couple of millimeters off and run them back through my spoke threading gizmo.

But for now, here are some pics: the modified interlacing (notice also the lack of damaged powdercoating), and the pair.

http://www.booboodog.net/images/wheels/3l3t-front.jpg

http://www.booboodog.net/images/wheels/3l3t-pair.jpg

keep in mind that you're building bicycle wheels, not making baskets.

Regardless of the pattern, it only makes sense to weave the last cross. The weave puts a slight bend into each spoke, and allows them to transfer load between the mated pairs. This improves resiliency, and increases the deflection working range.

Weaving more than once brings the weave too close to the hub and creates excessive bending. For this reason many builders who build 1 and 2x patterns don't weave at all.

BTW- while I don't believe there's any mechanical advantage (and often disadvantages) in exotic lacing patterns, I salute those who dabble in them just for the heck of it. There's nothing wrong with doing something different, even (especially) if only for the cool factor.

Good to know!

Actually, I hadn't read any of the blogs/posts you mention. I just remember seeing that spoking pattern years ago and thinking it would be a fun build especially when the web site said the 40h would never be built. CHALLENGE ACCEPTED!

But I don't worry about 1mm spoke differences anyway. I don't usually worry about 2mm differences for that matter. The only time I worry about spoke length to those increments is when I use alloy nipples, and then I don't even worry that much. I do try to fill the slot but if it sticks out the end of the nipple a mm or two that's no thing.

Oh! I forgot!

So my other concern is I'm building these with alloy nipples. I always use brass, but this time I relaxed my specs because, well, color.

Anyhow, I definitely don't want spokes too short that aren't engaged with the alloy nipple head, and I'm always concerned about the nipple bottoming out before reaching full tension if I order too long.