Re: I fixed a broken spoke!

Quoted message said:

someone said:

Quoted message said:

> If you are breaking non-drive side spokes, this indicates without
> a doubt that they are [censored] spokes. (based on info from your
> previous posts, that you don't weigh 400lbs,etc)

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Even the best spokes fail if they are not formed to the hub and
stress relieved. Don't push it off on the spoke manufacturer when
it's the builder who needs to take measures to make the wheel
durable.

Quoted message said:

Stress relief is just going around the wheel sort of pinching the
spokes?

There's more to it than that, but yes. A better method of stress
relief is to stand the wheel on its axle and press down on the rim
with hands diametrically opposite, once between each pair of spokes.

However, first the outbound spokes must be manually bent to lie flush
against the flange.

doing that before raising spokes to full "stress relief" tension will
ensure the angle to which they will be bent is too acute. the hub holes
will deform [seat] under tension, and it is /that/ angle to which the
spokes must be formed, if any, *NOT* the angle /before/ the hub holes
are seated. but given that the hub flanges are canted and that the
angle which the spoke manufacturer already provides is already
appropriate, there's no point in this exercise in the first place.
spoke quality is item #1 in the fight against fatigue, not witchcraft.

Quoted message said:

Then by grasping pairs of spokes on opposite
sides of the wheel and squeezing them together will make sure that
your wheel is not too tight.

Jobst Brandt

jim beam said:

but given that the hub flanges are canted and that the
angle which the spoke manufacturer already provides is already
appropriate, there's no point in this exercise in the first place.

You never answered this question the first time, so let's try again...
How are the hub flanges canted optimally for all the variations of
wheels? In bound vs. out bound, crossing pattern, and rim size all
affect the angle in question. I don't see hubs marketed for each
variation, and I don't see holes labeled for inbound and outbound
spokes. Do small wheels (think recumbent) usually use the same hubs as
diamond frame bikes? If so, do they have a much higher incidence of
spoke breakage?

--
Dave
dvt at psu dot edu

Everyone confesses that exertion which brings out all the powers of body
and mind is the best thing for us; but most people do all they can to
get rid of it, and as a general rule nobody does much more than
circumstances drive them to do. -Harriet Beecher Stowe, abolitionist and
novelist (1811-1896)

dvt said:

jim beam said:

but given that the hub flanges are canted and that the
angle which the spoke manufacturer already provides is already
appropriate, there's no point in this exercise in the first place.

You never answered this question the first time, so let's try again...
How are the hub flanges canted optimally for all the variations of
wheels? In bound vs. out bound, crossing pattern, and rim size all
affect the angle in question. I don't see hubs marketed for each
variation, and I don't see holes labeled for inbound and outbound
spokes. Do small wheels (think recumbent) usually use the same hubs as
diamond frame bikes?

99+% of recumbents use the same hubs [1], if for no other reason than
cost and availability.

Quoted message said:

If so, do they have a much higher incidence of spoke breakage?

No. Typically, smaller wheels are laced 2X or even 1X to avoid large
angles at the rim. In addition, 32 and 36 spoke wheels are common,
which means more spokes per unit length of rim than larger wheels. And
whatever lateral forces the wheels do see are smaller due to shorter
moment arm from contact patch to hub.

[1] I happen to have several recumbents that use OEM custom Phil Wood
hubs, but those are the exception to the rule.

--
Tom Sherman - Post Free or Die!

dvt said:

jim beam said:

but given that the hub flanges are canted and that the angle which the
spoke manufacturer already provides is already appropriate, there's no
point in this exercise in the first place.

You never answered this question the first time, so let's try again...

dave, some threads get too long and windy. if you want to /ensure/ i
read a question that's somehow important, post a new thread. and make
sure i'm not on vacation, traveling, otherwise busy or disinterested.

Quoted message said:

How are the hub flanges canted optimally for all the variations of
wheels?

they're not. they're optimized for the commonest configuration 32/36,
3x. road hubs for road rims, mtb hubs for 26" rims, etc. roughly 3°
for drive, 6° for non-drive.

Quoted message said:

In bound vs. out bound, crossing pattern, and rim size all
affect the angle in question. I don't see hubs marketed for each
variation, and I don't see holes labeled for inbound and outbound
spokes. Do small wheels (think recumbent) usually use the same hubs as
diamond frame bikes? If so, do they have a much higher incidence of
spoke breakage?

if you want to demonstrate something dave, do the math for the spoke
angle given that a hub hole may be larger diameter than the spoke and
seated in a flange of given thickness. then compare that to the stock
spoke angle of ~95°.

jim beam said:

Quoted message said:

In bound vs. out bound, crossing pattern, and rim size all
affect the angle in question. I don't see hubs marketed for each
variation, and I don't see holes labeled for inbound and outbound
spokes. Do small wheels (think recumbent) usually use the same hubs as
diamond frame bikes? If so, do they have a much higher incidence of
spoke breakage?

if you want to demonstrate something dave, do the math for the spoke
angle given that a hub hole may be larger diameter than the spoke and
seated in a flange of given thickness. then compare that to the stock
spoke angle of ~95°.

I think I saw those calculations a while ago - it was in a book called
"The Bicycle Wheel", I think.

Quoted message said:

jim beam said:

Quoted message said:

In bound vs. out bound, crossing pattern, and rim size all
affect the angle in question. I don't see hubs marketed for each
variation, and I don't see holes labeled for inbound and outbound
spokes. Do small wheels (think recumbent) usually use the same hubs as
diamond frame bikes? If so, do they have a much higher incidence of
spoke breakage?

if you want to demonstrate something dave, do the math for the spoke
angle given that a hub hole may be larger diameter than the spoke and
seated in a flange of given thickness. then compare that to the stock
spoke angle of ~95°.

I think I saw those calculations a while ago - it was in a book called
"The Bicycle Wheel", I think.

LOL ;-)

--
Tom Sherman - Post Free or Die!

jim beam said:

dvt said:

jim beam said:

but given that the hub flanges are canted and that the angle which
the spoke manufacturer already provides is already appropriate,
there's no point in this exercise in the first place.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

You never answered this question the first time, so let's try again...

Quoted message said:

dave, some threads get too long and windy. if you want to /ensure/ i
read a question that's somehow important, post a new thread. and make
sure i'm not on vacation, traveling, otherwise busy or disinterested.

Nice try, jim. Here's the record:

<http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech/browse_frm/thread/1c072f5d8b7c8892/83a78e954c0f932d>

Scroll down to messages 103-110. You responded to that exact subthread,
so I know you were reading it. But you failed to answer the question.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

In bound vs. out bound, crossing pattern, and rim size all affect the
angle in question. I don't see hubs marketed for each variation, and I
don't see holes labeled for inbound and outbound spokes. Do small
wheels (think recumbent) usually use the same hubs as diamond frame
bikes? If so, do they have a much higher incidence of spoke breakage?

Quoted message said:

if you want to demonstrate something dave, do the math for the spoke
angle given that a hub hole may be larger diameter than the spoke and
seated in a flange of given thickness. then compare that to the stock
spoke angle of ~95°.

You made the claim. It's your job to prove it. Here's the claim you
made, in case you've forgotten:

"the spoke elbow comes pre-formed with the best resultant angle and the
hub flange is canted and drilled also to give the best resultant angle."

You made no reservations about wheel size, lacing pattern, or any of the
other things you tried to add in later when questioned. And what about
dished wheels? Or rims with offset spoke beds?

I'm looking forward to your response.

--
Dave
dvt at psu dot edu

Everyone confesses that exertion which brings out all the powers of body
and mind is the best thing for us; but most people do all they can to
get rid of it, and as a general rule nobody does much more than
circumstances drive them to do. -Harriet Beecher Stowe, abolitionist and
novelist (1811-1896)

Jasper Janssen said:

On Mon, 04 Dec 2006 19:33:43 -0800, jim beam <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

doing that before raising spokes to full "stress relief" tension will
ensure the angle to which they will be bent is too acute. the hub holes
will deform [seat] under tension, and it is /that/ angle to which the
spokes must be formed, if any, *NOT* the angle /before/ the hub holes
are seated. but given that the hub flanges are canted and that the
angle which the spoke manufacturer already provides is already
appropriate, there's no point in this exercise in the first place.
spoke quality is item #1 in the fight against fatigue, not witchcraft.

Spoke heads are bent at about a 95 degree angle, which is just about
appropriate for the inside spokes, but the outside spokes need to be bent
a bit further than 90 degrees. The fact that the spoke head angle isn't 90
degrees and that the flange is not at the same place in the dimension
along the axle as the rim is means that there is always asymmetry between
inside and outside spokes and therefore they are *not* already perfectly
formed.

Jasper

they're not "perfectly" formed, but they're good enough given that the
hub flanges are canted and that the hub holes deform! and don't forget
that the spokes interleave making the exit angle of the spoke about the
same for both inbound and outbound spokes at full tension - unlike when
untensioned, the time at with "correcting the spoke like" is
[prematurely] advocated.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

jim beam said:

> In bound vs. out bound, crossing pattern, and rim size all
> affect the angle in question. I don't see hubs marketed for each
> variation, and I don't see holes labeled for inbound and outbound
> spokes. Do small wheels (think recumbent) usually use the same hubs as
> diamond frame bikes? If so, do they have a much higher incidence of
> spoke breakage?
>
if you want to demonstrate something dave, do the math for the spoke
angle given that a hub hole may be larger diameter than the spoke and
seated in a flange of given thickness. then compare that to the stock
spoke angle of ~95�.

I think I saw those calculations a while ago - it was in a book called
"The Bicycle Wheel", I think.

Dear J.,

Here's Jobst's diagram in "The Bicycle Wheel," for anyone curious
about specifics, as opposed to the rhetorical questions and
why-don't-you-look-it-up so common on RBT:

http://i12.tinypic.com/2dako69.jpg

thanks carl, but that's not what i was trying to describe - i was
talking about the angle that results from having a 2.0mm spoke in a
2.4mm hub hole for a 3.4mm flange thickness.

Quoted message said:

Jobst's diagram shows spoke angles from hub to rim of 7.3 and 3.5
degrees.

which is how the hub is canted.

Quoted message said:

So a slightly widened 95-degree elbow angle is reasonable for inner
spokes that may be at 97.3~93.5 degrees.

if the hub flange is canted, the spoke angle is from the point raised
for the spoke not sitting square in the larger hub hole, not from the
angle associated with flange spacing.

Quoted message said:

(Various front and rear hub widths probably don't change the angles
much for 700c cross-3 wheels. Spoke elbows on tiny wheels for Moultons
and recumbents may suffer from the orthopedic problems that afflict
many dwarves, but small rims usually make very strong wheels.)

Jobst recommends bending outer spokes enough to lie flat on the hub
flange (and bending all spokes enough at the rim to "correct the spoke
line."😉

Sapim disagrees. Here's their FAQ comment on 95 degree elbow angles
and whether spokes should be bent ("forced"😉 to change the angle:

"If material is forced while lacing the hub, the spokes can be pulled
over causing material weakness."

"The original bend angle of 95� should remain intact."

http://www.sapim.be/index.php?st=fa

Elsewhere in "The Bicycle Wheel," Jobst mentions that steel spokes
will bed into aluminum hubs, which have largely replaced the steel
hubs that were popular when his first edition came out:

"When spokes are properly tensioned the aluminum flange material on
which they bear is usually under enough stress to conform to the
spokes." --p. 59, "The Bicycle Wheel," 3rd edition, Jobst Brandt

they do indeed.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/38636024@N00/104463818/

Quoted message said:

There's a good drawing of a "Spoke Seating in the Flange" next to the
text quoted above (and oodles more interesting stuff, such as
correcting the spoke line), but anyone interested will need to get
their own copy . . .

http://sheldonbrown.com/harris/books.html#brandt

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Quoted message said:

Jasper Janssen said:

Quoted message said:

doing that before raising spokes to full "stress relief" tension
will ensure the angle to which they will be bent is too acute. the
hub holes will deform [seat] under tension, and it is /that/ angle
to which the spokes must be formed, if any, *NOT* the angle
/before/ the hub holes are seated. but given that the hub flanges
are canted and that the angle which the spoke manufacturer already
provides is already appropriate, there's no point in this exercise
in the first place. spoke quality is item #1 in the fight against
fatigue, not witchcraft.

Quoted message said:

Spoke heads are bent at about a 95 degree angle, which is just about
appropriate for the inside spokes, but the outside spokes need to be
bent a bit further than 90 degrees. The fact that the spoke head
angle isn't 90 degrees and that the flange is not at the same place
in the dimension along the axle as the rim is means that there is
always asymmetry between inside and outside spokes and therefore
they are *not* already perfectly formed.

I agree and in addition, a spoke elbow that is, perhaps, 85° and needs
to be 95° cannot be opened to that angle once in place. That is the
reason for not reusing spokes that have been taken out of a wheel.
The inbound and outbound spokes being difficult to recognize and the
ones with acute angles may not fit the new wheel.

eh? so which side of the fence do you sit here jobst? if the inbound
and outbound spokes can't be told apart after they've been used, there's
no necessity to "correct the spoke line", right?

dvt said:

jim beam said:

dvt said:

jim beam wrote:
> but given that the hub flanges are canted and that the angle which
> the spoke manufacturer already provides is already appropriate,
> there's no point in this exercise in the first place.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

You never answered this question the first time, so let's try again...

Quoted message said:

dave, some threads get too long and windy. if you want to /ensure/ i
read a question that's somehow important, post a new thread. and make
sure i'm not on vacation, traveling, otherwise busy or disinterested.

Nice try, jim. Here's the record:

<http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech/browse_frm/thread/1c072f5d8b7c8892/83a78e954c0f932d>

is this the 'unanswered' question?
"I've been watching this thread, hoping that I wasn't the only one with
this question. How do you "cant and drill" a hole in the hub flange so
that both inbound *and* outbound spokes are "optimized?" If the hole was
so canted, would that mean that the hubs should not be deformed during
the build?"

if so, i'd have thought the answers obvious. maybe that's why i didn't
bother answering.

Quoted message said:

Scroll down to messages 103-110. You responded to that exact subthread,
so I know you were reading it. But you failed to answer the question.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

In bound vs. out bound, crossing pattern, and rim size all affect the
angle in question. I don't see hubs marketed for each variation, and
I don't see holes labeled for inbound and outbound spokes. Do small
wheels (think recumbent) usually use the same hubs as diamond frame
bikes? If so, do they have a much higher incidence of spoke breakage?

Quoted message said:

if you want to demonstrate something dave, do the math for the spoke
angle given that a hub hole may be larger diameter than the spoke and
seated in a flange of given thickness. then compare that to the stock
spoke angle of ~95°.

You made the claim. It's your job to prove it. Here's the claim you
made, in case you've forgotten:

"the spoke elbow comes pre-formed with the best resultant angle and the
hub flange is canted and drilled also to give the best resultant angle."

You made no reservations about wheel size, lacing pattern, or any of the
other things you tried to add in later when questioned. And what about
dished wheels? Or rims with offset spoke beds?

I'm looking forward to your response.

unless you want a full custom hub, the economics don't support
accommodating non-standard configurations.

two hub pics for consideration:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/38636024@N00/316202144/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/38636024@N00/316202143/

for the cynics, i didn't happen to have any 2.4mm rod about for the hub
hole pic, but if you don't believe the hub holes are perpendicular to
the flange, do this experiment yourself.

for dave, no, there's nothing sinister about this hub being black or
large flange. it just happened to be a virgin hub at the top of my
parts box.

Jasper Janssen said:

On Mon, 04 Dec 2006 19:33:43 -0800, jim beam <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

doing that before raising spokes to full "stress relief" tension will
ensure the angle to which they will be bent is too acute. the hub holes
will deform [seat] under tension, and it is /that/ angle to which the
spokes must be formed, if any, *NOT* the angle /before/ the hub holes
are seated. but given that the hub flanges are canted and that the
angle which the spoke manufacturer already provides is already
appropriate, there's no point in this exercise in the first place.
spoke quality is item #1 in the fight against fatigue, not witchcraft.

Spoke heads are bent at about a 95 degree angle, which is just about
appropriate for the inside spokes, but the outside spokes need to be bent
a bit further than 90 degrees.

no they don't - for this reason:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/38636024@N00/104463818/
you also forget the interleaving of the spokes averaging the angles on
both sides of the flange.

Quoted message said:

The fact that the spoke head angle isn't 90
degrees and that the flange is not at the same place in the dimension
along the axle as the rim is means that there is always asymmetry between
inside and outside spokes and therefore they are *not* already perfectly
formed.

no. see above.

jim beam said:

dvt said:

jim beam said:

dvt wrote:
> jim beam wrote:
>> but given that the hub flanges are canted and that the angle which
>> the spoke manufacturer already provides is already appropriate,
>> there's no point in this exercise in the first place.

Quoted message said:

> You never answered this question the first time, so let's try again...

Quoted message said:

dave, some threads get too long and windy. if you want to /ensure/ i
read a question that's somehow important, post a new thread. and make
sure i'm not on vacation, traveling, otherwise busy or disinterested.

Nice try, jim. Here's the record:

<http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech/browse_frm/thread/1c072f5d8b7c8892/83a78e954c0f932d>

is this the 'unanswered' question?
"I've been watching this thread, hoping that I wasn't the only one with
this question. How do you "cant and drill" a hole in the hub flange so
that both inbound *and* outbound spokes are "optimized?" If the hole was
so canted, would that mean that the hubs should not be deformed during
the build?"

if so, i'd have thought the answers obvious. maybe that's why i didn't
bother answering.

Quoted message said:

Scroll down to messages 103-110. You responded to that exact subthread,
so I know you were reading it. But you failed to answer the question.

Quoted message said:

> In bound vs. out bound, crossing pattern, and rim size all affect the
> angle in question. I don't see hubs marketed for each variation, and
> I don't see holes labeled for inbound and outbound spokes. Do small
> wheels (think recumbent) usually use the same hubs as diamond frame
> bikes? If so, do they have a much higher incidence of spoke breakage?

Quoted message said:

if you want to demonstrate something dave, do the math for the spoke
angle given that a hub hole may be larger diameter than the spoke and
seated in a flange of given thickness. then compare that to the stock
spoke angle of ~95°.

You made the claim. It's your job to prove it. Here's the claim you
made, in case you've forgotten:

"the spoke elbow comes pre-formed with the best resultant angle and the
hub flange is canted and drilled also to give the best resultant angle."

You made no reservations about wheel size, lacing pattern, or any of the
other things you tried to add in later when questioned. And what about
dished wheels? Or rims with offset spoke beds?

I'm looking forward to your response.

unless you want a full custom hub, the economics don't support
accommodating non-standard configurations.

two hub pics for consideration:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/38636024@N00/316202144/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/38636024@N00/316202143/

for the cynics, i didn't happen to have any 2.4mm rod about for the hub
hole pic, but if you don't believe the hub holes are perpendicular to
the flange, do this experiment yourself.

for dave, no, there's nothing sinister about this hub being black or
large flange. it just happened to be a virgin hub at the top of my
parts box.

Dear Jim,

The canting of the outside hub flanges is indeed obvious, once I
looked carefully.

Alas, I can't take very good pictures, but here's a used 1998 Shimano
7-speed cassette hub that shows the canting that you're talking about.

The inside of each flange is as dead-on to the camera as I could
manage, and is 90-degrees to the axle.

The outside of each flange angles noticeably inward, toward a rim.

You can see the dirty spoke holes on the outside of each flange
because of the canting.

An on-screen protractor shows that the outside of the drive-side
flange is angled about 10 degrees inward toward a rim, while the
outside of the non-drive-side flange is angled inward a bit less,
about 7~8 degrees.

In Explorer click on the lower right to enlarge images.

Drive-side hub flange, outside canted inward about 10 degrees:

http://i12.tinypic.com/49fvs3t.jpg

Non-drive-side hub flange, outside canted inward about 8 degrees:

http://i10.tinypic.com/43ykwmx.jpg

Onscreen protractor and ruler:

http://www.markus-bader.de/MB-Ruler/

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

jim beam said:

Quoted message said:

I agree and in addition, a spoke elbow that is, perhaps, 85° and needs
to be 95° cannot be opened to that angle once in place. That is the
reason for not reusing spokes that have been taken out of a wheel.
The inbound and outbound spokes being difficult to recognize and the
ones with acute angles may not fit the new wheel.

eh? so which side of the fence do you sit here jobst? if the inbound
and outbound spokes can't be told apart after they've been used, there's
no necessity to "correct the spoke line", right?

How do you get from "difficult" to "can't be told"?

Or are they the same, for you?

jim beam said:

unlike when
untensioned, the time at with "correcting the spoke like" is
[prematurely] advocated.

Who advocates correcting the spoke line on an untensioned wheel?

Quoted message said:

The canting of the outside hub flanges is indeed obvious, once I
looked carefully.

"Most hubs have their flanges angled inward slightly to reduce the
difference between the elbow bends of inbound and outbound spokes."

The Bicycle Wheel, third edition, page 96.

jim beam said:

Jasper Janssen wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Spoke heads are bent at about a 95 degree angle, which is just about
appropriate for the inside spokes, but the outside spokes need to be bent
a bit further than 90 degrees.

no they don't - for this reason:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/38636024@N00/104463818/
you also forget the interleaving of the spokes averaging the angles on
both sides of the flange.

Quoted message said:

The fact that the spoke head angle isn't 90
degrees and that the flange is not at the same place in the dimension
along the axle as the rim is means that there is always asymmetry between
inside and outside spokes and therefore they are *not* already perfectly
formed.

no. see above.

"If the spokes have a good snug fit at the flange, the outbound spokes
may have a slight bow where they emerge from the spoke holes. Push these
spokes down against the flange near their elbows with your thumb so that
they make contact against the flange. Inbound spokes usually lie flat
and need no correction. These adjustments require skills that come with
practice."

"The Bicycle Wheel", third edition, page 96.

The context is for a tensioned wheel.

I can't see what's so controversial about carefully taking the bow out
of a tensioned wheel if one exists. Ditto for bows at the nipples.

Peter Cole said:

jim beam said:

unlike when
untensioned, the time at with "correcting the spoke like" is
[prematurely] advocated.

Who advocates correcting the spoke line on an untensioned wheel?

Sheldon Brown for one, http://sheldonbrown.com/wheelbuild.html, under
"Initial Spoke adjustment":

"Once the wheel is laced, adjust all of the nipples so that each is
screwed equally far onto its spoke. You should be able to do this with a
screwdriver, preferably electric. A good starting point is to set them
all so that the threads just disappear into the nipples. If the spokes
are a bit on the short side, you may have to leave a few threads
showing. The important thing at this stage is to get all 36 spokes to be
as close as possible to the same setting, all pretty loose. Some may be
a bit tighter or looser, but they should all be adjusted the same to
provide a baseline. [...]

At this stage, the spokes will not be running straight, but will be
noticeably curved where they leave the hub. The leading spokes, in
particular, will be swooping outward as they leave the hub then
gradually curving back toward the rim. Before you start applying tension
to the spokes you should bend them by hand so that they fit snugly
against the sides of the hub flanges. This can be done easily by
pressing on each spoke in turn with your thumb about an inch out from
the hub. If you don't do this, the spokes will still be slightly curved
when the wheel is finished. [...]"

Note that this isn't Procrustean forcing of the spoke bend angle, just
helping taking the curve out, but still could be described as
"correcting the spoke line". I found Sheldon's description to be spot
on, and some gentle pressure about an inch out from the hub just to take
the worst of the curves out before starting to bring the tension up
seemed to work well for me.

jim beam said:

dvt wrote:

Quoted message said:

is this the 'unanswered' question?
'I've been watching this thread, hoping that I wasn't the only one with
this question. How do you "cant and drill" a hole in the hub flange so
that both inbound *and* outbound spokes are "optimized?"'

I snipped the last bit, leaving the specific question.

Quoted message said:

if you don't believe the hub holes are perpendicular to
the flange, do this experiment yourself.

I never doubted that hub flanges were canted. I *don't* understand why
you consider that cant optimal when there are so many different ways to
lace a wheel.

--
Dave
dvt at psu dot edu

Everyone confesses that exertion which brings out all the powers of body
and mind is the best thing for us; but most people do all they can to
get rid of it, and as a general rule nobody does much more than
circumstances drive them to do. -Harriet Beecher Stowe, abolitionist and
novelist (1811-1896)