Spoke Tension. Same Side.
#1
Spoke Tension. Same Side.
I keep coming back to my program for doing this stuff... because I can. Most recently I have added the ability, perhaps wasted, to deal with butted/non-butted spokes and work out the relative tensions, ratio of sines, as well as take into account elongation of the spokes when under tension.
In respect of elongation then, assuming I have got the sums right, it really does not seem to matter much. Perhaps 1/10th of a millimetre. Slightly disappointed and still concerned I might have the sums wrong there. One thing that does appear to drop out of things is relative tension for same side spokes.
Reading about the place it would seem that the goal is for equal tension in same side spokes but apparently due to tolerances and stuff you cannot achieve it within 'mumble' percent.
Perhaps another and more realistic reason why you are not going to achieve it is that same side spokes exit the flange on opposite sides and therefore at different axial angles because of the width of the flange.
Picture: This is a nominal 700C front wheel with the added bells and whistles. I have overdone the precision. Anyway it has some butted spokes. The Radial and Axial angles are for the Nipples and some trigonometry rule says I can transpose them to the hub.
Target tension was/is 130KGf with a Youngs Modulus of 180GPa/m^2. Program checks for spoke with smallest angle and then works out the rest based on that. Inner spokes on either side have the smallest angle and end up at 130KGf.
Outer spokes on the same side, apart from diving into the flange, have the larger angle and... end up at 112.66KGf. If and when I take out the dive into the flange that will get lower.
Of itself that seems/is significant and suggests that aiming for equal tension on same side spokes, assuming I read other people's words correctly, is perhaps a fallacy that should not necessarily be dismissed for reasons of accuracy of measurment but is in fact 'a real thing'.
...
In respect of elongation then, assuming I have got the sums right, it really does not seem to matter much. Perhaps 1/10th of a millimetre. Slightly disappointed and still concerned I might have the sums wrong there. One thing that does appear to drop out of things is relative tension for same side spokes.
Reading about the place it would seem that the goal is for equal tension in same side spokes but apparently due to tolerances and stuff you cannot achieve it within 'mumble' percent.
Perhaps another and more realistic reason why you are not going to achieve it is that same side spokes exit the flange on opposite sides and therefore at different axial angles because of the width of the flange.
Picture: This is a nominal 700C front wheel with the added bells and whistles. I have overdone the precision. Anyway it has some butted spokes. The Radial and Axial angles are for the Nipples and some trigonometry rule says I can transpose them to the hub.
Target tension was/is 130KGf with a Youngs Modulus of 180GPa/m^2. Program checks for spoke with smallest angle and then works out the rest based on that. Inner spokes on either side have the smallest angle and end up at 130KGf.
Outer spokes on the same side, apart from diving into the flange, have the larger angle and... end up at 112.66KGf. If and when I take out the dive into the flange that will get lower.
Of itself that seems/is significant and suggests that aiming for equal tension on same side spokes, assuming I read other people's words correctly, is perhaps a fallacy that should not necessarily be dismissed for reasons of accuracy of measurment but is in fact 'a real thing'.
...
#2
Mechanic/Tourist
WAY too much time on your hands...and yet you don't address interlacing, including on your diagram. But even if you accomplished a perfect model, what good is it, given that indeed there will be variation in tension even on a new wheel? Of course worrying about even tension on a used wheel is not just useless, it can be counterproductive.
Last edited by cny-bikeman; 01-28-18 at 04:13 PM.
#3
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 39,648
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
Liked 3,487 Times
in
1,913 Posts
The only fallacy here is your assumption that lines from inside or outside the flange would make a difference.
Two reasons why they don't.
1- from the point of view of bracing angle, the key is the angle at the rim, not the hub. Since the spokes are woven over under at the last cross, their line to the rim only differs by the effect of 1/2 a spokes section, or virtually zero.
2- more important is the net torque consideration. The sum of tensions of all the clockwise spokes must equal the sum of all the counterclockwise spokes. This is immutable according to Newton's Laws, and if it were not the case, the hub would rotate relative to the rim until it were.
So, respectively, and not knowing what you're trying to prove, you're all wet. This is an example of knowing a lot and understanding nothing. Like with an impressionist painting, you have to forget about the dots, and step back to see the picture.
Two reasons why they don't.
1- from the point of view of bracing angle, the key is the angle at the rim, not the hub. Since the spokes are woven over under at the last cross, their line to the rim only differs by the effect of 1/2 a spokes section, or virtually zero.
2- more important is the net torque consideration. The sum of tensions of all the clockwise spokes must equal the sum of all the counterclockwise spokes. This is immutable according to Newton's Laws, and if it were not the case, the hub would rotate relative to the rim until it were.
So, respectively, and not knowing what you're trying to prove, you're all wet. This is an example of knowing a lot and understanding nothing. Like with an impressionist painting, you have to forget about the dots, and step back to see the picture.
__________________
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; 01-28-18 at 03:41 PM.
#4
It is three cross.
However you are quite correct that I have not as yet included the effects of interlacing. No doubt you know how that will affect things which could have made your contribution slightly valuable if you would have explained but I guess that since you have not explained your interjection is worthless.
...
#5
The only fallacy here is your assumption that lines from inside or outside the flange would make a difference.
Two reasons why they don't.
1- from the point of view of bracing angle, the key is the angle at the rim, not the hub. Since the spokes are woven over under at the last cross, their line to the rim only differs by the effect of 1/2 a spokes section, or virtually zero.
2- more important is the net torque consideration. The sum of tensions of all the clockwise spokes must equal the sum of all the counterclockwise spokes. This is immutable according to Newton's Laws, and if it were not the case, the hub would rotate relative to the rim until it were.
So, respectively, and not knowing what you're trying to prove, you're all wet. This is an example of knowing a lot and understanding nothing. Like with an impressionist painting, you have to forget about the dots, and step back to see the picture.
Two reasons why they don't.
1- from the point of view of bracing angle, the key is the angle at the rim, not the hub. Since the spokes are woven over under at the last cross, their line to the rim only differs by the effect of 1/2 a spokes section, or virtually zero.
2- more important is the net torque consideration. The sum of tensions of all the clockwise spokes must equal the sum of all the counterclockwise spokes. This is immutable according to Newton's Laws, and if it were not the case, the hub would rotate relative to the rim until it were.
So, respectively, and not knowing what you're trying to prove, you're all wet. This is an example of knowing a lot and understanding nothing. Like with an impressionist painting, you have to forget about the dots, and step back to see the picture.
I almost get 1) in as much as it adds or subtracts from the axial angle although you seem to suggest the effect is minimal. Presumably you are saying CNYBikeMan is wrong. BTW as per my original post the angle used is the axial nipple angle at the rim which appears to agree with your insisted criteria but... nominally speaking, the axial angle at the rim/nipple is the same as that at the hub.
That's one of those trigonometry things you know so much about.
In respect of 2) you seem to be confusing the axial angle with the radial angle. Perhaps you should try to read harder before diving in and calling everyone else wet just because you come from New York. Newton is not immutable, as demonstrated by Einstein, but if you want to quote him pick Law 1) rather than general quoting just coz it makes you sound right.
That's fine. we've met before. I still have no idea why you feel so threatened.
#6
Mechanic/Tourist
Imbuing someone else's discussion of physical phenomena with their presumed emotion is difficult, and probably ill-advised when one perhaps has a preconceived notion.
#7
old fart
#8
Mechanic/Tourist
FB is threatened and my contribution is worthless. I'm waiting with bated (or maybe baited, as I'm just a fish) breath to hear your pronouncements as to other contributors' inner emotions and value.
#9
Of course I should be grateful for the electricity you have saved me by sending black pixels.
#10
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 39,648
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
Liked 3,487 Times
in
1,913 Posts
One Hook. Two big fish. I am quite surprised how fast those big boys hit the bait.... NOT.
I almost get 1) in as much as it adds or subtracts from the axial angle although you seem to suggest the effect is minimal. Presumably you are saying CNYBikeMan is wrong. BTW as per my original post the angle used is the axial nipple angle at the rim which appears to agree with your insisted criteria but... nominally speaking, the axial angle at the rim/nipple is the same as that at the hub.
That's one of those trigonometry things you know so much about.
In respect of 2) you seem to be confusing the axial angle with the radial angle. Perhaps you should try to read harder before diving in and calling everyone else wet just because you come from New York. Newton is not immutable, as demonstrated by Einstein, but if you want to quote him pick Law 1) rather than general quoting just coz it makes you sound right.
That's fine. we've met before. I still have no idea why you feel so threatened.
I almost get 1) in as much as it adds or subtracts from the axial angle although you seem to suggest the effect is minimal. Presumably you are saying CNYBikeMan is wrong. BTW as per my original post the angle used is the axial nipple angle at the rim which appears to agree with your insisted criteria but... nominally speaking, the axial angle at the rim/nipple is the same as that at the hub.
That's one of those trigonometry things you know so much about.
In respect of 2) you seem to be confusing the axial angle with the radial angle. Perhaps you should try to read harder before diving in and calling everyone else wet just because you come from New York. Newton is not immutable, as demonstrated by Einstein, but if you want to quote him pick Law 1) rather than general quoting just coz it makes you sound right.
That's fine. we've met before. I still have no idea why you feel so threatened.
You posted a false assumption, and I corrected it. Maybe I was a bit harsh, but you should expect that when you try to make nonsense sound scientific.
As I said, I have no idea what you're trying to prove, but suggest that you leave it in the oven a bit longer before trying to prove that generally accepted knowledge is wrong.
BTW knowing the words doesn't imply understanding. In my second point, there was no confusion of axial and radial angles, since i clearly referenced tortional considerations.
In any case I don't feel threatened, and doubt that CNY does either. However your reference to big guns, and reaction to being corrected has me believing that maybe you do. Keep working at it, READ the posts when folks are trying to correct your errors, and maybe you'll get there.
I don't have any exclusivity on the knowledge I've accumulated over years, and as countless posts prove, I don't mind sharing it freely.
__________________
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.
#11
My 'number', according to you, is right. However I appear to have messed up the units by adding per square metre when Pa is already 1N/m^2 or 1Kg/m^2, unless you are on Mars. I guess I just looked at the top of the tables.
Thank you very much for pointing out my mistake without properly explaining it.
#12
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 39,648
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
Liked 3,487 Times
in
1,913 Posts
It's clear that you don't want or appreciate anybody's help, so, I'll spare you.
OTOH if I find misinformation in the future, I may correct it so others don't get misled.
OTOH if I find misinformation in the future, I may correct it so others don't get misled.
__________________
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.
#13
working on my sandal tan
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: CID
Posts: 22,670
Bikes: 1991 Bianchi Eros, 1964 Armstrong, 1988 Diamondback Ascent, 1988 Bianchi Premio, 1987 Bianchi Sport SX, 1980s Raleigh mixte (hers), All-City Space Horse (hers)
Liked 2,600 Times
in
1,593 Posts
#14
Not at all. As previously suggested I did not expect anything less from you.
I posted a suggestion. You did not correct it. You immediately dived in and tried to rubbish it using Science yourself, Newton, in a misplaced effort to support your lack of point. Common Sophistry.
Generally accepted knowledge is that axial forces are distributed according to the ratio of sine of angles. Of course the author of Spocalc may be wrong. Perhaps you should send him an e-mail.
I have used ratio of sine of angles to demonstrate that the tension associated with same side spokes, without accounting for other factors which no-one else in this thread has really bothered to properly address other than your suggestion that it does not matter in respect of interleaving, is, necessarily, different.
Perhaps you need to read what you wrote again.... Here it is,
Sounds a bit radial to me.
On that one and in respect of other contributors so far I really do believe you do not feel threatened. You just line yourself up and meaninglessly, probably deliberately, attack stuff that of itself may be reasonable but you feel you have the opportunity to do so.
You once asked me 'What do you bring to the table?' and repeatedly thereafter have taken your axe to the table without sharing much more than your axe. That's OK. You call me. I call you.
I have used ratio of sine of angles to demonstrate that the tension associated with same side spokes, without accounting for other factors which no-one else in this thread has really bothered to properly address other than your suggestion that it does not matter in respect of interleaving, is, necessarily, different.
2- more important is the net torque consideration. The sum of tensions of all the clockwise spokes must equal the sum of all the counterclockwise spokes. This is immutable according to Newton's Laws, and if it were not the case, the hub would rotate relative to the rim until it were.
In any case I don't feel threatened, and doubt that CNY does either. However your reference to big guns, and reaction to being corrected has me believing that maybe you do. Keep working at it, READ the posts when folks are trying to correct your errors, and maybe you'll get there.
You once asked me 'What do you bring to the table?' and repeatedly thereafter have taken your axe to the table without sharing much more than your axe. That's OK. You call me. I call you.
#15
Really Old Senior Member
When I saw 130kgf for a front wheel it pretty much ended any thoughts of the OP's credibility.
#16
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 39,648
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
Liked 3,487 Times
in
1,913 Posts
Sadly, while you don't like the source or style of the criticism, nor the possible motives of the critic, that doesn't change the facts.
It's very simple, you've built up some sort of analysis, somehow showing that inside head and outside head spokes can't have equal tensions. I've explained that torsional equilibrium requires that they do and will.
So, you believe what you will, I'll believe what I will and anyone who cares will believe what they will.
__________________
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; 01-28-18 at 05:57 PM.
#17
Still waiting for the correction.
#19
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 18,341
Bikes: Stewart S&S coupled sport tourer, Stewart Sunday light, Stewart Commuting, Stewart Touring, Co Motion Tandem, Stewart 3-Spd, Stewart Track, Fuji Finest, Mongoose Tomac ATB, GT Bravado ATB, JCP Folder, Stewart 650B ATB
Liked 4,188 Times
in
2,471 Posts
So chorlton is a pseudonym of Trump's?
Their manor of rebuttal to facts seem much the same. Andy
Their manor of rebuttal to facts seem much the same. Andy
#20
I'm happy to have given you the opportunity to get that off your chest.
Sadly, while you don't like the source or style of the criticism, nor the possible motives of the critic, that doesn't change the facts.
It's very simple, you've built up some sort of analysis, somehow showing that inside head and outside head spokes can't have equal tensions. I've explained that torsional equilibrium requires that they do and will.
So, you believe what you will, I'll believe what I will and anyone who cares will believe what they will.
Sadly, while you don't like the source or style of the criticism, nor the possible motives of the critic, that doesn't change the facts.
It's very simple, you've built up some sort of analysis, somehow showing that inside head and outside head spokes can't have equal tensions. I've explained that torsional equilibrium requires that they do and will.
So, you believe what you will, I'll believe what I will and anyone who cares will believe what they will.
Perhaps you should file for a patent on that one.
#21
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 39,648
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
Liked 3,487 Times
in
1,913 Posts
Yes, and I was simply pointing out that this was wrong. As for waiting, just open your eyes for a moment since I very clearly explained why it wasn't possible at least twice already.
__________________
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.
#22
It's MY mountain
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Mt.Diablo
Posts: 10,028
Bikes: Klein, Merckx, Trek
Liked 3,236 Times
in
1,742 Posts
That would eliminate any contribution of interlacing, leaving just the angle effect.
#23
#24
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 39,648
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
Liked 3,487 Times
in
1,913 Posts
Seriously, stop being angry or defensive and open your eyes.
Consider --- the flange has spokes spiraling out in two directions, clockwise and counter-clockwise. The total torque of all the spokes equals zero, so, the sums of all the right pointing spokes has to equal the sum of all the left pointing spokes. Whatever else is happening cannot change this, so your original demonstration of tension difference must be flawed.
One of the most basic rules of engineering logic is that when you've proven an impossibility, you need to check your assumptions.
(that's 3)
__________________
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: 39,648
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
Liked 3,487 Times
in
1,913 Posts
Actually it would be easy to build a radial wheel with every alternating spoke having higher or lower tension, as long as the rim were stiff enough to withstand it. I could do this and "prove" that head inside spokes have higher tension than outer or vice versa.
My proof of equal (average) tension depends on the torsional considerations, which don't exist in a radial wheel.
__________________
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.