|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
for Clive efficient running of wire spoked wheels abandoned urcm
On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 10:11:33 -0800 (PST), thirty-six
wrote: It concludes you're a dumbass. Oh good, abuse. I was wondering when that would be along, you've tried everything else other than rational argument. Guy -- http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/urc GPG public key at http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/pgp-public-key.txt |
Ads |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
for Clive efficient running of wire spoked wheels abandoned urcm
On 22 Nov, 22:57, "Just zis Guy, you know?"
wrote: On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 10:11:33 -0800 (PST), thirty-six wrote: It concludes you're a dumbass. Oh good, abuse. I was wondering when that would be along, you've tried everything else other than rational argument. Rich |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
for Clive efficient running of wire spoked wheels abandoned urcm
On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 16:01:43 -0800 (PST), thirty-six
wrote: Rich Comfortably off, thanks. Probably because I use rational and scientifically supportable arguments when building things. Guy -- http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/urc GPG public key at http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/pgp-public-key.txt |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
for Clive efficient running of wire spoked wheels abandoned urcm
On 23 Nov, 19:40, "Just zis Guy, you know?"
wrote: On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 16:01:43 -0800 (PST), thirty-six wrote: Rich Comfortably off, thanks. *Probably because I use rational and scientifically supportable arguments when building things. Guy --http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/urc GPG public key athttp://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/pgp-public-key.txt You really are a dick. There may be a conlusion made of an anaysis, but an analysis is not conclusive. |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
for Clive efficient running of wire spoked wheels abandoned urcm
Ian Smith wrote:
On Sat, 21 Nov 2009, Naqerj wrote: Ian Smith wrote: Since I was actually interested in the answer, I said I wouldn't but, if you really are interested in the answer... There is no structural [1] reason for the spokes to remain tight as long as they continue to behave elastically as a part of the wheel[2] as a whole. In a normal [3] bicycle wheel this means that the spoke tension can be infinitesimal without compromising the rigidity of the wheel. So, there is no structural reason for the spokes to remain tight, as long as they remain tight (since only by remaining tight will they continue to behave elastically - if they are not tight they buckle). Rubbish. A spoke won't buckle because it's not tight - there's no force to buckle it. You have to go beyond the point of going slack and actually apply some compression to it before it buckles. It will even take some compression before it buckles - depending on what gauge and how long it is. [2] A normal [3] bicycle wheel is not constructed in a way that allows spokes to act in compression so, when the tension drops to zero, the spoke ceases to act as an elastic part of the wheel. Exactly. So, you don't believe that what 36 said was basically correct. Wrong again. This is exactly why I didn't want to answer that question out of context. The *whole paragraph* you quoted showed an understanding of way a wheel works radially - it did not show understanding (or misunderstanding) of the lateral behaviour of a wheel because it said nothing about lateral behaviour. Seeing as the main thing you two were squabbling about was lateral behaviour, that's why I considered it particularly odd that you quoted that bit. So there we are, back where we started. At which point I shall bow out because I see no point at all in going round in a circle again. -- Andrew |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
for Clive efficient running of wire spoked wheels abandoned urcm
Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 18:15:16 +0000, Naqerj wrote: There is no structural [1] reason for the spokes to remain tight as long as they continue to behave elastically as a part of the wheel[2] as a whole. In a normal [3] bicycle wheel this means that the spoke tension can be infinitesimal without compromising the rigidity of the wheel. If you are building cart wheels then I guess that's true The first sentence is true of most structures. The second sentence is certainly not true of a cart wheel until you substitute 'compression' for 'tension' ... though I've never built a cart wheel so I could be wrong if they're not made in the way I think they are. but for a bicycle wheel with pneumatic tyres the spokes need to remain under at least some residual tension at all times. But that residual tension can be so small as to be indistinguishable from zero. If the strain on a wheel goes beyond the point where a few spokes reach zero tension, the behaviour of the wheel changes because the 'slack' spokes are no longer contributing to the rigidity of the wheel. Nothing really bad happens at that point, though it's not an ideal way to build a wheel. Pneumatic tyres have nothing to do with it. -- Andrew |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
for Clive efficient running of wire spoked wheels abandoned urcm
Rob Morley wrote:
On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 18:15:16 +0000 Naqerj wrote: [4] What qualifies as "tight", for example. tight = under tension Ah, but how much tension? That's the problem. For example having tight hold of something is generally understood as implying a firmer grip than just having hold of it. slack = not under tension. That's less controversial -- Andrew |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
for Clive efficient running of wire spoked wheels abandonedurcm
On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 22:14:08 +0000
Naqerj wrote: Rob Morley wrote: On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 18:15:16 +0000 Naqerj wrote: [4] What qualifies as "tight", for example. tight = under tension Ah, but how much tension? Enough that it doesn't go slack during the normal cycle of loading. That's the problem. Why? For example having tight hold of something is generally understood as implying a firmer grip than just having hold of it. Tight enough that you don't drop it under stress, just like the spoke that doesn't go slack? |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
for Clive efficient running of wire spoked wheels abandoned urcm
On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 21:50:20 +0000, Naqerj wrote:
Ian Smith wrote: On Sat, 21 Nov 2009, Naqerj wrote: Ian Smith wrote: Since I was actually interested in the answer, I said I wouldn't but, if you really are interested in the answer... There is no structural [1] reason for the spokes to remain tight as long as they continue to behave elastically as a part of the wheel[2] as a whole. In a normal [3] bicycle wheel this means that the spoke tension can be infinitesimal without compromising the rigidity of the wheel. So, there is no structural reason for the spokes to remain tight, as long as they remain tight (since only by remaining tight will they continue to behave elastically - if they are not tight they buckle). Rubbish. A spoke won't buckle because it's not tight - there's no force to buckle it. You have to go beyond the point of going slack and actually apply some compression to it before it buckles. It will even take some compression before it buckles - depending on what gauge and how long it is. It won't buckle if it has exactly, perfectly zero load, no. However, that's a pointless thing to say. An exactly, perfectly straight strut won't buckle either, but I was confining myself to discussion of behaviours exhibited in the real world. A spoke with a tiny compressive load will buckle. [2] A normal [3] bicycle wheel is not constructed in a way that allows spokes to act in compression so, when the tension drops to zero, the spoke ceases to act as an elastic part of the wheel. Exactly. So, you don't believe that what 36 said was basically correct. Wrong again. This is exactly why I didn't want to answer that question out of context. The *whole paragraph* you quoted showed an understanding of way a wheel works radially Nonsense. He's forgotten all sorts of things radially - for example he rages on about how everyone else is treating the rim as rigid and it must be allowed to deflect inwards, then he says exactly the wrong thing - that loads distribute round the rim to the top - demonstrating that actually, he is assuming the rim is rigid. The paragraph in question he starts with a wrong statement that there is no reason for spokes to remain tight. In a bicycle wheel. That's rubbish - if they don't, they buckle and if they buckle wheel failure is close behind. (Your argument above is irrelevant because I don't believe you can build a wheel that has just the right tension that spokes lose tension but the rim doesn't apply any significant compression.) The rest of his paragraph was his reasoning for the opening assertion. As previously noted, it is not possible to reach wrong conclusion from correct reasoning. Seeing as the main thing you two were squabbling about was lateral behaviour, that's why I considered it particularly odd that you quoted that bit. Nonsense. I am disagreeing about the behaviour of spoked wheels. I am not confined to lateral behaviour. Indeed, I would say that 26's main arguments are about radial behaviour - that's what he says everyone but him has forgotten (just before he demonstrates that if he hasn't forgotten it, he doesn't know how to handle it). So, we are back to 36 being very wrong about wheel behaviour, and you saying he has demonstrated good understanding. regards, Ian SMith -- |\ /| no .sig |o o| |/ \| |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
for Clive efficient running of wire spoked wheels abandoned urcm
On 24 Nov, 07:16, Ian Smith wrote:
On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 21:50:20 +0000, Naqerj wrote: *Rubbish. *A spoke won't buckle because it's not tight - there's no force *to buckle it. *You have to go beyond the point of going slack and *actually apply some compression to it before it buckles. *It will even *take some compression before it buckles - depending on what gauge and *how long it is. It won't buckle if it has exactly, perfectly zero load, no. *However, that's a pointless thing to say. *An exactly, perfectly straight strut won't buckle either, but I was confining myself to discussion of behaviours exhibited in the real world. *A spoke with a tiny compressive load will buckle. The buckling of a tension spoke is irrelevant, if it was of any significance the rim would already likely have suffered permanent deformation. The drilling at the hub and the slip joint at the rim mean that getting a spoke into compression is difficult unless bloody minded. He's forgotten all sorts of things radially - for example he rages on about how everyone else is treating the rim as rigid and it must be allowed to deflect inwards, then he says exactly the wrong thing - that loads distribute round the rim to the top - demonstrating that actually, he is assuming the rim is rigid. You must be confusing me with someone else. I state that the rim is constrained, by the spokes, from spreading. This does make the rim effectively stiffer. This is why spokes need to be considered with the rim rigidity as there gauge, length and number all affect the rim. The paragraph in question he starts with a xxxx [CORRECT}statement that there is no reason for spokes to remain tight. *In a bicycle wheel. *That's rubbish - if they don't, they buckle and if they buckle wheel failure is close behind. NOT TRUE. Rattling spokes are simply annoying. A buckled spoke canniot cause wheel failure. * (Your argument above is irrelevant because I don't believe you can build a wheel that has just the right tension that spokes lose tension but the rim doesn't apply any significant compression.) Huh? All loading is significant. The rim is put under bending by the riding load. This is significant, that is why we have tension spokes, to reduce the rim deformation to a manageable level and to locate the central rotating bearing. Nonsense. *I am disagreeing about the behaviour of spoked wheels. *I am not confined to lateral behaviour. *Indeed, I would say that 26's main arguments are about radial behaviour - that's what he says everyone but him has forgotten (just before he demonstrates that if he hasn't forgotten it, he doesn't know how to handle it). Correctly controlling radial behaviour results in improved lateral behaviour of a rim under greater loads. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Wire spoked car wheels? | [email protected] | Techniques | 23 | December 11th 08 03:19 AM |
RBT opinions on fancy-spoked wheels? | Paul Myron Hobson | Techniques | 28 | March 30th 07 09:06 PM |
Development of the the wire-spoked wheel | [email protected] | Techniques | 14 | July 23rd 05 06:57 PM |
OT-ish: BIG spoked wheels | B.B. | Techniques | 3 | December 7th 04 05:41 AM |
How to true bladed spoked wheels | John Baughman | Techniques | 51 | October 25th 03 02:16 AM |