Rear wheel build with relatively thinner NDS spokes
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Fresno, CA
Posts: 4,454
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 128 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 12 Times
in
10 Posts
Rear wheel build with relatively thinner NDS spokes
I'm replacing the rim on a rear wheel. The spokes (all 14/15/14 butted) are fine, but I'm planning to replace either the drive-side or non-drive-side spokes so I can compensate for wheel dish. Non-drive-side spokes are under lower tension in a dished wheel, and using relatively thinner spokes on the non-drive-side means that the amount of spoke stretch (once wheel is built up to proper tension) is more comparable to the drive-side spokes.
I'll either swap the drive-side for 14g straight-gauge spokes, or swap the non-drive-side for 14/16/14 (or 14/17/14) butted spokes. For a 32-spoke rear wheel (10-speed Shimano hub, 130mm spacing) and a 200# rider, is there any basis to prefer the thicker spokes (14g + 14/15/14) vs the thinner spokes (14/15/14 + 14/16/14)?
Edit: the rear rim finally succumbed to an injury from 10 years prior, where a machine screw punched through an Armadillo tire and embedded itself in the tire-facing wall of the rim. See original thread for photos. At the time, I drilled out the punched section and sanded/polished it to remove stress risers. The rim developed a crack at the eyelet closest to that hole. Wheel wasn't over-tensioned and had never needed truing until someone improperly mounted the bike on a roof rack which ended up twisting the rim out of true.
I'll either swap the drive-side for 14g straight-gauge spokes, or swap the non-drive-side for 14/16/14 (or 14/17/14) butted spokes. For a 32-spoke rear wheel (10-speed Shimano hub, 130mm spacing) and a 200# rider, is there any basis to prefer the thicker spokes (14g + 14/15/14) vs the thinner spokes (14/15/14 + 14/16/14)?
Edit: the rear rim finally succumbed to an injury from 10 years prior, where a machine screw punched through an Armadillo tire and embedded itself in the tire-facing wall of the rim. See original thread for photos. At the time, I drilled out the punched section and sanded/polished it to remove stress risers. The rim developed a crack at the eyelet closest to that hole. Wheel wasn't over-tensioned and had never needed truing until someone improperly mounted the bike on a roof rack which ended up twisting the rim out of true.
Last edited by TallRider; 03-16-18 at 02:45 PM.
#2
Expired Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: TN
Posts: 11,543
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3674 Post(s)
Liked 5,431 Times
in
2,759 Posts
You don't want straight gauge spokes, whatever else is involved.
#3
Banned
I have a 30 year old set of 36 spoke wheels with 15ga straight DT spokes.. for my Road bike .
#4
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 643 Times
in
364 Posts
How much wheel building experience do you have? The issue with 17 gauge spokes is they wind up more easily so they are a little bit harder to work with. If it was me, (and it's not) since you are replacing the rim anyway, why not pick one of the asymmetric rims to minimize the amount of spoke tension differential.
__________________
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.
#5
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 12,905
Bikes: (2) ti TiCycles, 2007 w/ triple and 2011 fixed, 1979 Peter Mooney, ~1983 Trek 420 now fixed and ~1973 Raleigh Carlton Competition gravel grinder
Mentioned: 129 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4806 Post(s)
Liked 3,928 Times
in
2,553 Posts
...
I'll either swap the drive-side for 14g straight-gauge spokes, or swap the non-drive-side for 14/16/14 (or 14/17/14) butted spokes. For a 32-spoke rear wheel (10-speed Shimano hub, 130mm spacing) and a 200# rider, is there any basis to prefer the thicker spokes (14g + 14/15/14) vs the thinner spokes (14/15/14 + 14/16/14)?
I'll either swap the drive-side for 14g straight-gauge spokes, or swap the non-drive-side for 14/16/14 (or 14/17/14) butted spokes. For a 32-spoke rear wheel (10-speed Shimano hub, 130mm spacing) and a 200# rider, is there any basis to prefer the thicker spokes (14g + 14/15/14) vs the thinner spokes (14/15/14 + 14/16/14)?
2.0 ~/= 14 ga
1.8 ~/= 15 ga
1.6 ~/= 17 ga
1.5 = light!
I use either 14/2.0 or 15/1.8 for the ends. 14 only for the right rear. I get told regularly that going 15 ga/1.8 will lead to heads snapping off. Maybe so, but in my experience not until long after I've replaced them and the rims for other reasons.
Ben
#6
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Fresno, CA
Posts: 4,454
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 128 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 12 Times
in
10 Posts
How much wheel building experience do you have? The issue with 17 gauge spokes is they wind up more easily so they are a little bit harder to work with. If it was me, (and it's not) since you are replacing the rim anyway, why not pick one of the asymmetric rims to minimize the amount of spoke tension differential.
Asymmetric rims have never really caught on, in large part because they solve a problem that's not a big or common problem (plus some extrusion issues have led some asym rims to more cracking, which has hurt the reputation fo the category). Building with thicker drive-side spokes on a dished wheel is an alternate method of getting similar spoke stretch (though doesn't cover all the issues of dished wheels).
Yes. Intended purpose for this wheel, your weight, your riding style (including the hard to measure but real "how hard are you on wheels" and the roads you ride on. I'm 155 lbs and relatively kind to wheels and have been riding 14/17/14 (or 15/17/15) spokes forever except 14/16/14 on the drive side. (But I've been using the DT spokes for a while so it is 2.0/1/8/2.0, etc. I go one step heavier on my commuter/winter wheels.) If I were your weight I doubt I would use anything lighter than 14/15/14 (2.0/1.8/2.0.
I use either 14/2.0 or 15/1.8 for the ends. 14 only for the right rear. I get told regularly that going 15 ga/1.8 will lead to heads snapping off. Maybe so, but in my experience not until long after I've replaced them and the rims for other reasons.
I use either 14/2.0 or 15/1.8 for the ends. 14 only for the right rear. I get told regularly that going 15 ga/1.8 will lead to heads snapping off. Maybe so, but in my experience not until long after I've replaced them and the rims for other reasons.
#7
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 12,905
Bikes: (2) ti TiCycles, 2007 w/ triple and 2011 fixed, 1979 Peter Mooney, ~1983 Trek 420 now fixed and ~1973 Raleigh Carlton Competition gravel grinder
Mentioned: 129 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4806 Post(s)
Liked 3,928 Times
in
2,553 Posts
Ben
#11
working on my sandal tan
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: CID
Posts: 22,629
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)
Mentioned: 98 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3871 Post(s)
Liked 2,568 Times
in
1,579 Posts
Thicker spokes on the drive side will stretch less, but do you have a problem that can be definitively traced to DS spokes stretching too much?
There are reasons for using thinner NDS spokes, but if you only beef up the DS spokes instead, you haven't done anything to help the former, to my understanding.
There are reasons for using thinner NDS spokes, but if you only beef up the DS spokes instead, you haven't done anything to help the former, to my understanding.
__________________
RUSA #7498
Originally Posted by noglider
People in this forum are not typical.
Last edited by ThermionicScott; 03-16-18 at 03:57 PM.
#12
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Down Under
Posts: 1,936
Bikes: A steel framed 26" off road tourer from a manufacturer who thinks they are cool. Giant Anthem. Trek 720 Multiroad pub bike. 10 kids bikes all under 20". Assorted waifs and unfinished projects.
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1188 Post(s)
Liked 1,154 Times
in
640 Posts
I'd probably only do it if the DS spokes are really thick. I had issues with Sapim Strongs on a 26" wheel, the NDS would keep unscrewing because I couldn't get enough stretch on them without the DS being 160kg! That would have been a candidate for thinner NDS spokes to get enough elasticity to keep the nipples under load (I used Loctite instead, because that's what I had...it worked)
#13
Expired Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: TN
Posts: 11,543
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3674 Post(s)
Liked 5,431 Times
in
2,759 Posts
I don't see the point in using a straight gauge spoke, proven to be less durable than its DB sibling, in an attempt to prevent a "problem" that may not exist. Do the wheels you (OP) build suffer from too little NDS tension? Are you breaking spokes? AFAIK, most modern rims are not so fragile that you cannot achieve adequate NDS tension.
#14
Really Old Senior Member
If I'm building a wheel, I use a thinner NDS spoke, but I certainly wouldn't change 1/2 the spokes just because.
Wait until you have a problem.
Wait until you have a problem.
#15
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Fresno, CA
Posts: 4,454
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 128 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 12 Times
in
10 Posts
I'm looking for feedback on which way to go of [14 + 14/15/14] vs [14/15/14 + 14/17/14]. Or, whether it's worth the effort (in this case) to re-lace one side of the wheel vs just swapping the rim and keeping 14/15/14 spokes all around without touching the lacing (as Bill Kapaun suggests).
It's probably worth clarifying the reasoning behind having thinner NDS spokes to begin with. here's the background.
The issue with building dished rear wheels is that you have a narrow range of optimal tension. DS spokes have higher tension than NDS spokes, but
a) DS spoke tension can't be too high, or the rim will end up cracking by the eyelets
b) NDS spoke tension can't be too low, or the spokes will borderline go slack during the rotation of the wheel (esp when the wheel rolls over a bump or edge of a crack). The spokes facing the ground have slightly lower tension as a bicycle wheel rotates. Spokes going in-and-out of tension means slight flexing of spoke at the elbow. Do this enough times (billions of cycles), and spokes crack at the elbow. This is why NDS spokes are more likely to break, whereas rims are more likely to crack at the eyelets by DS spokes.
The value in having *relatively* thinner spokes on the NDS is that they stretch more for a given tension, so even though they are lower tension than the DS spokes, they stretch close to a comparable distance under that lower tension b/c the metal is thinner. This means the NDS spokes are less likely to go slack.
Straight gauge spokes aren't automatically less durable. In some cases they make the wheel build less durable, because they don't stretch as much and thus de-tension under a lesser hit.
It's probably worth clarifying the reasoning behind having thinner NDS spokes to begin with. here's the background.
The issue with building dished rear wheels is that you have a narrow range of optimal tension. DS spokes have higher tension than NDS spokes, but
a) DS spoke tension can't be too high, or the rim will end up cracking by the eyelets
b) NDS spoke tension can't be too low, or the spokes will borderline go slack during the rotation of the wheel (esp when the wheel rolls over a bump or edge of a crack). The spokes facing the ground have slightly lower tension as a bicycle wheel rotates. Spokes going in-and-out of tension means slight flexing of spoke at the elbow. Do this enough times (billions of cycles), and spokes crack at the elbow. This is why NDS spokes are more likely to break, whereas rims are more likely to crack at the eyelets by DS spokes.
The value in having *relatively* thinner spokes on the NDS is that they stretch more for a given tension, so even though they are lower tension than the DS spokes, they stretch close to a comparable distance under that lower tension b/c the metal is thinner. This means the NDS spokes are less likely to go slack.
Straight gauge spokes aren't automatically less durable. In some cases they make the wheel build less durable, because they don't stretch as much and thus de-tension under a lesser hit.
#16
Really Old Senior Member
A well built wheel with the same straight gauge spokes on both sides should last a very long time.
Since we obsess about minor things, I'd use this method-
Put your numbers in SpoCalc and determine what tension % you have on each side.
Calculate the cross sectional area differences of the "thin part" of the spoke.
Example- A 1.8mm spoke is 90% of a 2.0mm spoke.
90%^2 =81% cross sectional area.
I don't try to exactly match those, but stay "slightly thick" on the NDS.
I'm not totally sure if having exact "matching elongation" is "too much of a good thing", so I stay a bit conservative.
In the end, we can build fine wheels with a lot of different "theories" about what we want.
Quality of the build is more important.
Since we obsess about minor things, I'd use this method-
Put your numbers in SpoCalc and determine what tension % you have on each side.
Calculate the cross sectional area differences of the "thin part" of the spoke.
Example- A 1.8mm spoke is 90% of a 2.0mm spoke.
90%^2 =81% cross sectional area.
I don't try to exactly match those, but stay "slightly thick" on the NDS.
I'm not totally sure if having exact "matching elongation" is "too much of a good thing", so I stay a bit conservative.
In the end, we can build fine wheels with a lot of different "theories" about what we want.
Quality of the build is more important.
#17
working on my sandal tan
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: CID
Posts: 22,629
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)
Mentioned: 98 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3871 Post(s)
Liked 2,568 Times
in
1,579 Posts
I'm looking for feedback on which way to go of [14 + 14/15/14] vs [14/15/14 + 14/17/14]. Or, whether it's worth the effort (in this case) to re-lace one side of the wheel vs just swapping the rim and keeping 14/15/14 spokes all around without touching the lacing (as Bill Kapaun suggests).
It's probably worth clarifying the reasoning behind having thinner NDS spokes to begin with. here's the background.
The issue with building dished rear wheels is that you have a narrow range of optimal tension. DS spokes have higher tension than NDS spokes, but
a) DS spoke tension can't be too high, or the rim will end up cracking by the eyelets
b) NDS spoke tension can't be too low, or the spokes will borderline go slack during the rotation of the wheel (esp when the wheel rolls over a bump or edge of a crack). The spokes facing the ground have slightly lower tension as a bicycle wheel rotates. Spokes going in-and-out of tension means slight flexing of spoke at the elbow. Do this enough times (billions of cycles), and spokes crack at the elbow. This is why NDS spokes are more likely to break, whereas rims are more likely to crack at the eyelets by DS spokes.
The value in having *relatively* thinner spokes on the NDS is that they stretch more for a given tension, so even though they are lower tension than the DS spokes, they stretch close to a comparable distance under that lower tension b/c the metal is thinner. This means the NDS spokes are less likely to go slack.
Straight gauge spokes aren't automatically less durable. In some cases they make the wheel build less durable, because they don't stretch as much and thus de-tension under a lesser hit.
It's probably worth clarifying the reasoning behind having thinner NDS spokes to begin with. here's the background.
The issue with building dished rear wheels is that you have a narrow range of optimal tension. DS spokes have higher tension than NDS spokes, but
a) DS spoke tension can't be too high, or the rim will end up cracking by the eyelets
b) NDS spoke tension can't be too low, or the spokes will borderline go slack during the rotation of the wheel (esp when the wheel rolls over a bump or edge of a crack). The spokes facing the ground have slightly lower tension as a bicycle wheel rotates. Spokes going in-and-out of tension means slight flexing of spoke at the elbow. Do this enough times (billions of cycles), and spokes crack at the elbow. This is why NDS spokes are more likely to break, whereas rims are more likely to crack at the eyelets by DS spokes.
The value in having *relatively* thinner spokes on the NDS is that they stretch more for a given tension, so even though they are lower tension than the DS spokes, they stretch close to a comparable distance under that lower tension b/c the metal is thinner. This means the NDS spokes are less likely to go slack.
Straight gauge spokes aren't automatically less durable. In some cases they make the wheel build less durable, because they don't stretch as much and thus de-tension under a lesser hit.
BTW, in addition to 2.0/1.8/2.0 (14/15/14) and 2.0/1.5/2.0 (14/17/14) spokes, there are options for 2.0/1.6/2.0 (14/16/14) and 2.0/1.7/2.0 (gauge system is antiquated and we should stop using it). Consider one of those if your NDS spokes are coming loose.
__________________
RUSA #7498
Originally Posted by noglider
People in this forum are not typical.
Last edited by ThermionicScott; 03-17-18 at 11:34 AM.
#18
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Fresno, CA
Posts: 4,454
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 128 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 12 Times
in
10 Posts
A well built wheel with the same straight gauge spokes on both sides should last a very long time.
I don't try to exactly match those, but stay "slightly thick" on the NDS.
I'm not totally sure if having exact "matching elongation" is "too much of a good thing", so I stay a bit conservative.
In the end, we can build fine wheels with a lot of different "theories" about what we want.
Quality of the build is more important.
I don't try to exactly match those, but stay "slightly thick" on the NDS.
I'm not totally sure if having exact "matching elongation" is "too much of a good thing", so I stay a bit conservative.
In the end, we can build fine wheels with a lot of different "theories" about what we want.
Quality of the build is more important.
All of this is true. But as I said before, switching to heavier DS spokes wouldn't help your current NDS spokes at all! There's nothing magical about the proportion between NDS and DS spoke gauge; it's all about making sure you have the appropriate spoke gauge on the NDS.
BTW, in addition to 2.0/1.8/2.0 (14/15/14) and 2.0/1.5/2.0 (14/17/14) spokes, there are options for 2.0/1.6/2.0 (14/16/14) and 2.0/1.7/2.0 (gauge system is antiquated and we should stop using it). Consider one of those if your NDS spokes are coming loose.
BTW, in addition to 2.0/1.8/2.0 (14/15/14) and 2.0/1.5/2.0 (14/17/14) spokes, there are options for 2.0/1.6/2.0 (14/16/14) and 2.0/1.7/2.0 (gauge system is antiquated and we should stop using it). Consider one of those if your NDS spokes are coming loose.
My understanding is that the relative thickness of DS vs NDS spokes matters. I may be wrong. My understanding of the mechanism is that for a wheel with overall thicker spokes (that stretch less), the rim will deflect less than it would on a wheel with overall thinner spokes that flex more. This isn't the only factor, but it's *a* factor. Again, I might be wrong on this. I haven't read a lot about wheel physics in the last few years.
#19
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 7,063
Mentioned: 41 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4407 Post(s)
Liked 1,560 Times
in
1,023 Posts
My understanding is that the relative thickness of DS vs NDS spokes matters. I may be wrong. My understanding of the mechanism is that for a wheel with overall thicker spokes (that stretch less), the rim will deflect less than it would on a wheel with overall thinner spokes that flex more. This isn't the only factor, but it's *a* factor. Again, I might be wrong on this. I haven't read a lot about wheel physics in the last few years.
It is popularly believed that straight guage spokes aren't elastic enough and more likely to break over time, so I don't see the point of using them combined with butted NDS.
If I was building a light wheel on the cheap, I could see using straight gauge 2.0 DS with 1.8 NDS. But that would again be to make up for the low strength of the thin spokes, not because of some balance theory.
#20
afraid of whales
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Front Range, CO
Posts: 4,306
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 347 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times
in
5 Posts
This is not based on any engineering reasoning. If you test either configuration the double butted spoke fails first, it's the law (of superposition)....
#21
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 7,063
Mentioned: 41 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4407 Post(s)
Liked 1,560 Times
in
1,023 Posts
#22
Expired Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: TN
Posts: 11,543
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3674 Post(s)
Liked 5,431 Times
in
2,759 Posts
There have been numerous threads where Mr "explained" his theory. IIRC, one of the more entertaining involved his attempts to convince DT Swiss of their errors.
#23
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 7,063
Mentioned: 41 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4407 Post(s)
Liked 1,560 Times
in
1,023 Posts
But I would like to read any test the showed a narrower wire taking more cycles than a thicker one.
#25
Senior Member
At 200 lbs plus the bike I would recommend 36 double butted spokes. Since you are using the same type of rim to rebuild the wheel I wouldn't worry about the difference in spoke tension between the two sides.
Saying that I had a problem with a heavy, strong rider and a Power tap hub. The design of the hub made for more dish, so I added extra tension to the drive side to get a decent tension on the NDS and that solved the problem.
Saying that I had a problem with a heavy, strong rider and a Power tap hub. The design of the hub made for more dish, so I added extra tension to the drive side to get a decent tension on the NDS and that solved the problem.