Cycling Equipment · Public discussion

spoke squeezing test

Started by Email address hidden · · Last activity · 4 posts · 328 views

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Cycling Equipment
Published
22 May 2006
Last activity
22 May 2006
Original author
Email address hidden
Posts
4
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
328
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–4 of 4
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. squeeze parallel drive-side spokes and measure their tension

    new 700c 32-spoke rear wheel, box rim, eyelets, sockets
    2.0-1.8mm-2.0mm stainless steel spokes laced x3

    ceiling rope holds up drive-side-horizontal spoke at midspan.
    weights hang from midspan of parallel spoke above it

    http://home.comcast.net/~carlfogel/download/squeeze1_setup.jpg

    clamp squeezes opposite non-drive-side parallel spoke pair
    clamp tension increased from 0 by 1/3 turns of vise grip adjuster

    http://home.comcast.net/~carlfogel/download/squeeze1_clamp.jpg

    measure with Park tension gauge held level
    one post on 2.0mm section, other post on 1.8mm section
    this required tests to calibrate

    http://home.comcast.net/~carlfogel/download/squeeze1_calibrate.jpg

    http://home.comcast.net/~carlfogel/download/squeeze1_calibrate.txt

    tension
    tension tension change
    squeeze Park Mark upper lower upper lower upper lower
    weight upper lower spoke spoke spoke spoke spoke spoke
    lbs spoke spoke kgf kgf lbs lbs lbs lbs
    --- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
    -u- -l- -u- -l- -u- -l- -u- -l-

    0 22.5 20.8 108.6 91.1 238.9 200.5 n/a n/a
    5 22.5 21.0 108.6 93.0 238.9 204.6 0.0 4.1
    10 22.2 21.0 105.6 93.0 232.3 204.6 -6.6 4.1
    15 22.3 21.2 106.6 95.1 234.5 209.3 -4.4 8.8
    20 22.7 21.5 110.6 98.3 243.3 216.3 4.4 15.8
    25 22.9 21.9 112.6 102.5 247.7 225.6 8.8 25.1
    30 23.1 22.4 115.3 107.6 253.7 236.7 14.8 36.3
    35 23.5 22.8 122.3 111.6 269.1 245.5 30.1 45.1
    40 23.9 22.9 129.3 112.6 284.4 247.7 45.5 47.3
    45 23.9 23.0 129.3 113.6 284.4 249.9 45.5 49.5
    50 24.0 23.5 131.0 122.3 288.2 269.1 49.3 68.6
    55 24.2 23.9 133.8 129.3 294.3 284.4 55.4 83.9
    60 24.6 24.0 139.3 131.0 306.4 288.2 67.5 87.7
    65 24.9 24.1 143.4 132.4 315.5 291.2 76.6 90.8
    70 25.0 24.6 144.8 139.3 318.6 306.4 79.6 106.0
    75 25.1 24.8 146.4 142.0 322.1 312.5 83.2 112.0
    80 25.2 24.8 148.0 142.0 325.7 312.5 86.8 112.0
    85 25.2 25.0 148.0 144.8 325.7 318.6 86.8 118.1
    90 25.5 25.0 152.9 144.8 336.4 318.6 97.5 118.1
    95 25.6 25.1 154.5 146.4 339.9 322.1 101.0 121.7
    100 25.8 25.2 157.8 148.0 347.1 325.7 108.2 125.2

    http://home.comcast.net/~carlfogel/download/squeeze1_tension_absolute.jpg

    http://home.comcast.net/~carlfogel/download/squeeze1_tension_relative.jpg

    as in earlier tests . . .

    tension dropped at first on the higher-initial-tension spoke

    tension rose far faster on the lower-initial-tension spoke

    higher tension spoke gained less tension
    but ended up at higher tension

    at 30 lbs squeeze, the higher-tension spoke rose only 15 lbs
    calculations ignoring rim stiffness predict up to 10 times as much

    at 60 lbs squeeze, tension had risen only 60-80 lbs for both
    during test, alarming spoke bending beyond 60 lbs
    after test, very faint bend visible in spoke

    different results might be obtained from . . .
    a different rim (thicker, different eyelets or sockets)
    different spokes (straight 2.0mm, 36 instead of 32))
    different initial tensions for all spokes
    more closely matched initial tensions

    some questions . . .

    what leads to lower than expected tension increases?
    test differs from two-handed squeezing?
    test mis-measuring?
    low initial spoke tension?
    rim twisting due to offset of squeezed pairs?
    flimsy rim?

    how hard can you actually squeeze 8-9 times in a row?
    some estimates are only 30-50 lbs
    brace base of thumb on railing or edge of table
    curl fingers around rope tied to known weight
    try to raise weight an inch off floor 8-9 times
    one hand likely to be weaker

    how evenly tensioned are your spokes?
    tone not likely to be as accurate as tension gauge
    most models assume ideally even tension

    how high is your spoke tension?
    only a tension gauge can tell you

    how would would a symmetrical front wheel behave?
    drive-side spokes best candidates for testing
    usually highest tension, most likely to fail

    how much do wheels vary in reaction to spoke-squeezing?
    only testing different wheels will show what happens
    little more than a tension gauge is needed

    what happens to tension on other spokes around wheel?
    surprising results in earlier tests

    Cheers,

    Carl Fogel

  2. Quoted message said:

    squeeze parallel drive-side spokes and measure their tension

    Quoted message said:

    as in earlier tests . . .

    Quoted message said:

    at 30 lbs squeeze, the higher-tension spoke rose only 15 lbs
    calculations ignoring rim stiffness predict up to 10 times as much

    Squeezing a pair of spokes of unequal initial tension will cause the
    uneven gain in tension you see because of coupling through rim deflection.

    Quoted message said:

    some questions . . .

    what leads to lower than expected tension increases?
    test differs from two-handed squeezing?
    test mis-measuring?
    low initial spoke tension?
    rim twisting due to offset of squeezed pairs?
    flimsy rim?

    Flexible rims and low initial tension will cause less tension increase
    for a given amount of squeeze. Whether that's "less than expected"
    depends on your expectations. It's certainly predictable with knowledge
    of spoke and rim parameters and initial tension.

    I think you're chasing phenomena that aren't there. Just tension the
    wheel fully, squeeze hard and go ride.

  3. On Mon, 22 May 2006 11:46:25 -0400, Peter Cole
    <[email hidden]> wrote:

    [snip]

    Quoted message said:

    I think you're chasing phenomena that aren't there.

    [snip]

    Dear Peter,

    A bit of a Freudian slip?

    Cheers,

    Carl Fogel

  4. Quoted message said:

    On Mon, 22 May 2006 11:46:25 -0400, Peter Cole
    <[email hidden]> wrote:

    [snip]

    Quoted message said:

    I think you're chasing phenomena that aren't there.

    [snip]

    Dear Peter,

    A bit of a Freudian slip?

    Cheers,

    Carl Fogel

    Dear Monseigneur Fogel, Margrave of Brandenburg &. &. &. by His very
    humble and obedient servant, Jayboy, scribe of His Most Serene Highness
    the Reigning Prince of Americus,

    Are you chasing Freudian slips that aren't there?

    With obedient bowing and back-stepping from your resplendent chambers,

    Jay

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.