wheel build

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by hwttdz
I'm thinking about building some wheels, I want them to be aero, and durable and under 1800g for the pair would be nice.

My current plan is velocity deep v rims, ultegra hubs, and dt spokes and nipples. I'm undecided about lacing pattern and number of spokes, even spoke and nipple type. I can go 28, 32 or even 36 spokes. I've heard that aluminum nipples on rims without eyelets doesn't work that well, is this true? They save 40ish grams a pair. What would you suggest for spoke count, pattern, gauge and nipples allloy or brass?

(besides alloy comes in pretty colors, anyone know where to get velocity rims in colors?)

Velocity USA - [email hidden]
Phone🙁616)243.3400 Toll Free🙁800)453.6126 Fax🙁616)243.0500
3546 Roger B. Chaffee Blvd., SE Wyoming MI 49548-2328

Contact them for a dealer that carries the rims you want.
There are dealers that deal regularly with Velocity USA that can get what you want.
I suggest not using alloy nipples with these rims.
You can save some weight by using DT Revolution spokes up front and left rear. I suggest using 3X patter throughout for good durability.
If you can afford it, using DURA ACE hubs will help you shave some weight without sacrificing durability.
I certainly wouldn't use less than 32 spokes in the rear. Depending on your weight, you may get by with 28 spokes in front (then 2X for 28 spokes) and save 20 - 30 grams.

These are the same rims used to build the velocity spartacus and spartacus pro wheels. These are 16 or 20 front and 20 or 24 rear. But you think 28 is too few? I'm torn on one hand I want 36 spoke wheels that can take a licking and keep on ticking, on the other hand I want wicked fast flat ground wheels. Would 28 be more aero? I've heard spoke count doesn't affect wind resistance much. Extra spokes add marginal weight and for flat ground.... But I do have to carry my bike 10 floors of stairs every day sometimes more often.

How much would it cost to get them built if I supplied all the parts?

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by hwttdz
These are the same rims used to build the velocity spartacus and spartacus pro wheels. These are 16 or 20 front and 20 or 24 rear. But you think 28 is too few? I'm torn on one hand I want 36 spoke wheels that can take a licking and keep on ticking, on the other hand I want wicked fast flat ground wheels. Would 28 be more aero? I've heard spoke count doesn't affect wind resistance much. Extra spokes add marginal weight and for flat ground.... But I do have to carry my bike 10 floors of stairs every day sometimes more often.

How much would it cost to get them built if I supplied all the parts?

Durability and lateral stiffness goes down as spoke count goes down.
If you weigh less than 175 lbs. you could go with 28 spokes with these rims. Yes, you could go with 16 front and 20 rear, but you loose durability and lateral stiffness.
$50 for a quality build is a reasonable price.

For a wheelset for those 200 pounds and under, the Aerohead rim, 32 hole front and rear, works fine IF laced properly. 2 cross is sufficient with 32 spoke wheels.

Use Revolutions on the front and non-drive and 14/15 DB on the drive side.

The problems with aluminum nipples are wrenching, fatigue and poor bearing surface. Use the best wrench you can afford, round UP on spoke length (if SpokeCalc says 293.2 mm, use 294 mm) and lubricate the bearing surfaces with dry moly spray. A Q-tip soaked in the dry moly spray works well on the nipple seats.

Dip the nipple heads in the moly spray and let dry before touching. A florist's "frog" can be used as a stand for drying.

The dry moly is an industrial product, available from McMaster.com. Its like spray paint that looks like graphite BUT DOESN'T conduct electricity and promote galvanic corrosion like graphite. Once its dry (and it dries FAST), its fairly resistant to smudging but it will still leave the fingers dirty.

I read somewhere that radial lacing on the non-drive side of the rear wheel increases the wheel's durability. Apparently this is because, due to the dish on rear wheels, the spokes on the non-drive side tend to be at rather low tension, and when the rider applies power to the drivetrain, the "non-driving" spokes on the non-drive side can actually go slack. The constant oscillation between slack and taut is supposed to promote fatigue. Sounds plausible to me, but I haven't broken enough spokes to be able to say for sure.

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by mjw_byrne
I read somewhere that radial lacing on the non-drive side of the rear wheel increases the wheel's durability. Apparently this is because, due to the dish on rear wheels, the spokes on the non-drive side tend to be at rather low tension, and when the rider applies power to the drivetrain, the "non-driving" spokes on the non-drive side can actually go slack. The constant oscillation between slack and taut is supposed to promote fatigue. Sounds plausible to me, but I haven't broken enough spokes to be able to say for sure.

That might be possible for large diameter hub shells but for Ultegra, Dura Ace and Campy stuff, the torsional stiffness of the relatively small hub shells does not transmit enough torque to detension the trailing spokes.

The spokes most likely to fail on radial non-drive lacings would be the drive side given their bearing of 90% or more of the torque load.

Now, look at Ksyrium SSL's (aluminum spokes). Radial drive side lacing. With spokes that are very poor in fatigue life (aluminum). How does this work? Any wheel builder that has experimented with an all-radial laced rear wheel will tell you the spokes will soon fail. But not on the SSL???

Look at the hub on these wheels. Much larger diameter increases the torsional stiffness, allowing more torque load to be carried by the non-drive side. The drive side spokes only slightly increase their tension from wind up and this increasse in tension is uniform. The bracing angles are also closer, leading to a more even tensioned wheel.

RE: Non-drive side radial spoking:
One thing I pretty much overlooked until some folks mentioned it in another thread, is, will such spoking void the hub's warranty? It looks to me that most manufacturers state that this is the case.

Radial lacing should only be done with solid flanged hubs that are forged. Many hubs are machined from solid bar stock and this has improper grain structure for radial lacing.

But most commercial hubs should work fine. Its the custom, botique hubs that might be problematic.

From my observations on current model wheels, it seem that either the drive side or non drive side has to be crossed. If both sides are radial then the wheel will not efficiently transfer torque and the spokes will break rather quickly. Now Weisse Luft to your thoughts.........

"Now, look at Ksyrium SSL's (aluminum spokes). Radial drive side lacing. With spokes that are very poor in fatigue life (aluminum). How does this work? Any wheel builder that has experimented with an all-radial laced rear wheel will tell you the spokes will soon fail. But not on the SSL???"

the SSL ksyriums dont have broken spokes because the majority of the torque is transferred across the hub to the "non-drive side" with spokes that are laced tangentially. The lacing has more to do with the torque transfer than the hub flange and this is proven by the ksyriums.

Now hwttdz i think that if you want a set of aero AND light wheels then the Deep V is the wrong place to start. My opinion leans towards the semi aero "aero-head" rim as Weisse Luft has suggested. It is much much lighter, and built with the right spokes i believe it would handle the job much better. It might be worth looking into aero spokes such as the "New Aero" by DT (i think) as these are quite light and still aero (im not sure of the cost of these). You may wish to run a normal sized aero spoke on the drive side the same way that Campag does on its wheels for a little extra strength and durability. I personally believe radial laced on the front could be quite effective although if the hubs' warranty is voided by this then maybe not such a good idea. Good luck and have fun. (i think wheel building is the funnest way to customise)

It seems that most people agree that higher cross numbers are more durable; however, I have also read that radial lacing the non drive side of the rear wheel prevents those spokes from experiencing a fatigue cycle. So what are the advantages of radial? And why are all wheels excepting non drive side, not build three cross? I think someone mentioned stiffness in a certain direction.

Another concept that interests me is the offset spoke bed, or off center rim or zero system (or whatever else people choose to call it). But I don't see why people don't just use different length spokes on both sides to adjust for this. Anybody used these rims? how are they?

About the aerohead rim, I think you think I'm more interested in weight than I am. The aerohead are 400 g a rim and the deep v 520 so we're only talking about 140 g. I do have a good grasp on physics so I understand those 140 grams contribute as much to the inertia of my bicycle as 500 grams on the frame.

What's the flat land performance benefit of a 30 mm rim compared to a 20 mm rim? What about aero spokes? Aero spokes are very expensive.

To Weisse Luft: what's the advantage of moly spray? prevents corrosion? I was under the impression that both brass and aluminum, two of the metals I'm using are resistant to corrosion. I think DT spokes are nickel alloyed (stainless) and also resistant to corrosion? So if one did this then the nipples would appear black.

Alloy nipples? go? no go?

Think any of those wheelbuilding books would discuss materials choice? they would address spoking patterns, right?

Thanks for all your help guys.

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by hwttdz
It seems that most people agree that higher cross numbers are more durable; however, I have also read that radial lacing the non drive side of the rear wheel prevents those spokes from experiencing a fatigue cycle. So what are the advantages of radial? And why are all wheels excepting non drive side, not build three cross? I think someone mentioned stiffness in a certain direction.

Another concept that interests me is the offset spoke bed, or off center rim or zero system (or whatever else people choose to call it). But I don't see why people don't just use different length spokes on both sides to adjust for this. Anybody used these rims? how are they?

About the aerohead rim, I think you think I'm more interested in weight than I am. The aerohead are 400 g a rim and the deep v 520 so we're only talking about 140 g. I do have a good grasp on physics so I understand those 140 grams contribute as much to the inertia of my bicycle as 500 grams on the frame.

What's the flat land performance benefit of a 30 mm rim compared to a 20 mm rim? What about aero spokes? Aero spokes are very expensive.

To Weisse Luft: what's the advantage of moly spray? prevents corrosion? I was under the impression that both brass and aluminum, two of the metals I'm using are resistant to corrosion. I think DT spokes are nickel alloyed (stainless) and also resistant to corrosion? So if one did this then the nipples would appear black.

Alloy nipples? go? no go?

Think any of those wheelbuilding books would discuss materials choice? they would address spoking patterns, right?

Thanks for all your help guys.

Radial spoking can increase or decrease the spoke support angle compared to crossed spoke due to the thickness of the hub flange. Radial spokes are shorter than 3X by about 5%. Most common front and rear hubs don't cover radial spoking. The stress on the hub flange is highly concentrated on the smallest possible cross-section with radial spoking. Radial spoking is also more demanding on the spokes.
Offset spoke bed on a rear rim.... or a front used for disc brakes, helps equalize the spoke support angle and therefore helps distribute the load more evenly. This is done with the Velocity Aerohead OCR rim for road, Velocity Synergy for MTB... and some others. I have used the Aerohead rims and the Synergy rims with very satisfying results. You can't just adjust spoke lengths to accomplish the same effect, because you need to keep the rim centered.
There will be a very small aero advantage to the Deep V compared to Aerohead. Since there is a larger cross-section the rim is stiffer. However, it weighs a bit more, so getting them up to speed requires more energy.
Aero spokes tend to be more fragile, but if installed correctly will give the intended advantage. If they twist by 30 or more degrees, most of the aero advantage is lost, and if the go more than 45 degrees... they become an aerodynamic drag.
The moly spray does have a couple of advantages that the other poster already covered... lubrication + electrical insulation. Any disimilar metals exposed to sufficient oxidation and other contaminents will act to corrode.
Quality alloy nipples will work and save weight, but they also are considerably softer and tend more toward corrosion. Brass/stainless interface at the threads is more electrically suitable and will provide for better adjustability down the road.
Jobst Brandt's book "the Bicycle Wheel" talks about materials and spoking patterns. The choice of a higher cross section rim is a subject of debate, with plusses and minusses.
The weight is a disadvantage... but there are other advantages.
We ride the MTB version of the Velocity Deep V on our tandem. These rims are very reliable and trouble free. I think you are overstating the wieght disadvantage for the Deep V.
I ride the Velocity Aeroheads, with Aerohead OCR for the rear, on my road bicycle. They too have proven to be very reliable.

On the point of corrosion at the joint, both brass and aluminum do corrode with the stainless steel spoke being protected through the thin layer of chromium oxide that confers stainless steel it passive nature.

But in the electrochemical pair of brass and aluminum, its the aluminum that preferetially corrodes as an anode (loss of electrons, oxidation). If aluminum nipples are used on bare rims, the joint is less likely to corrode BUT assembly is a pain since the sliding friction of two aluminum surfaces is prone to galling (microscopic welding and tearing). The contact pressures are very high, making most oils and greases ineffective. Standard anti-seize greases also do not work well and may promote corrosion. Graphite will work BUT its conductive and very cathodic (noble) and promotes corrosion.

This leaves molybdenum disulfide as the choice lubricant. And since its available in a dry film preparation, it works well.

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by hwttdz
What would you suggest for spoke count, pattern, gauge and nipples allloy or brass?

28, cross 3, 14/17/14 (DT Revolution), brass

I recently built a pair using above with Ultegra hubs and Matrix ISO-T rims. They are incredibly light!

hwttdz just a poit of note, the weight difference between the aero head and deep V may be 120g (u say 520-400=140???) but that is quite a lot when you consider this is 240g over the pair of wheels. The offset spoke bed of the aero head OCR rim would be beneficial in regards to build strength and may bring the wheels up to somewhere near the strength of a Deep V wheelset. Now i believe with the correct build (my suggestion: 2X28 front and 3X28/32 rear with any good quality spokes and ultegra hubs)
On the topic of spokes i know that aero spokes are a little more expensive but i dont believe that they are any less durable than spokes of a similar weight that are round/butted. Rolling the spokes to make them flat should infact make them atleast as strong.
I dont know about the chemical qualities of spokes and nipples etc but Weisse Luft puts forward a strong case in regards to this and lubing sounds like a good idea in any case with the lube that he recommends. My thoughts from past experience would be to go with brass nipples on aero head rims as opposed to alloy nipples on deep V rims. (i believe the durability would then lean towards the aero heads also having a lower weight than the deep V).

End result:

aero head w/ocr rear, F:2X28 R:3X28/32, Brass nipples, DT new aero front and rear non-drive/traditional aero on drive side, and ultegra hubs.

Yeah about the weight I guess I missed the 2, 240 g, thanks for picking that up.

I've heard that aero spokes in comparison to rim depth are almost inconsequential (power diff at constant speed<<1%), so why would I use them? Why not the alloy nipples even if I do go with the aerohead?

Yeah i think aero spokes are more of a psychological thing than anything else, but if u dont want them dont get them, as simple as that. A good set of 14/17/14g butted spokes would be just as durable and light and probably cost less. My feelings on the alloy nipples come from a personal experience with them. I have rounded a few on my wheels (and i am very careful with them using correct spoke key) and have also broken some whilst "just riding along". This may not be a good generalisation of this product but i feel that you would be better off with brass nipples than alloy ones, the durability advantage outweighs the lower weight. With aero head rims/brass nipples u could much more easily achieve your weight goal than you could with deep v's/alloy nipples while also costing less and being as durbale (or more so).