Spoke threads exposed on new wheel - Safe?

"Dave S" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Last night, I built a new rear wheel for cross riding using a Record 36 hole hubs, a Ritchey OCR
Comp rim (called Trekking on web site) and DT 14/15 spokes.

On inspection, I noticed that the left side as 2-3 threads exposed all around whereas the right
side has 5-6 threads exposed. I'm comcerned that the spokes are too short and I don't have enough
threads embedded in the brass nipples.

Is this wheel safe or should I rebuild it with longer spokes?

Rebuild it. 1 or 2 is ok in a pinch. 5 or 6 is NFG. Especially on the drive side.

Cheers,

Scott..

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

Last night, I built a new rear wheel for cross riding using a Record 36 hole hubs, a Ritchey OCR
Comp rim (called Trekking on web site) and DT 14/15 spokes. In doing the research, I noticed that
Ritchey's web site gave the ERD as 596 mm whereas Damon Rinard's Spocalc gave it as 605 mm. Perhaps
Ritchey has redesigned the rims? At any rate, I called Ritchey and the rep talked to a wheel
builder who gave the ERD 599. Hmm... Right between the two values... I plugged the 599 value in
Spocalc and built the wheel using 290's on the left and 288's on the right. At this point, I've
tensioned them to 70 kg on the left and 115 on the right. On inspection, I noticed that the left
side as 2-3 threads exposed all around whereas the right side has 5-6 threads exposed. I'm
comcerned that the spokes are too short and I don't have enough threads embedded in the brass
nipples. Is this wheel safe or should I rebuild it with longer spokes?

I would rebuild with the proper length spoke. I sounds like your spokes are too short by a few mm.
If you look at your spoke nipples you can see that they are not threaded all the way. About half the
nipple is unthreaded. So if you can see exposed threads, there are more unexposed threads that are
not engaging the nipple.
---------------
Alex

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by Alex Rodriguez
In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

Last night, I built a new rear wheel for cross riding using a Record 36 hole hubs, a Ritchey OCR
Comp rim (called Trekking on web site) and DT 14/15 spokes. In doing the research, I noticed that
Ritchey's web site gave the ERD as 596 mm whereas Damon Rinard's Spocalc gave it as 605 mm. Perhaps
Ritchey has redesigned the rims? At any rate, I called Ritchey and the rep talked to a wheel
builder who gave the ERD 599. Hmm... Right between the two values... I plugged the 599 value in
Spocalc and built the wheel using 290's on the left and 288's on the right. At this point, I've
tensioned them to 70 kg on the left and 115 on the right. On inspection, I noticed that the left
side as 2-3 threads exposed all around whereas the right side has 5-6 threads exposed. I'm
comcerned that the spokes are too short and I don't have enough threads embedded in the brass
nipples. Is this wheel safe or should I rebuild it with longer spokes?

I would rebuild with the proper length spoke. I sounds like your spokes are too short by a few mm.
If you look at your spoke nipples you can see that they are not threaded all the way. About half the
nipple is unthreaded. So if you can see exposed threads, there are more unexposed threads that are
not engaging the nipple.
---------------
Alex

I agree with Alex.
On the Spoke Calc site there is a way to measure ERD:
Effective Rim Diameter (ERD) is the diameter on which you want the ends of the spokes to lie. Most people prefer it near the end of the spoke nipple. If you want to measure your own rim (recommended, just to be sure), then follow these instructions:

Insert two old spokes into holes exactly opposite each other on the rim. Count holes to be sure.
Screw some nipples onto the spokes.
Pull them tight and measure dimension A in the figure (the diameter to the edge of the nipples, where the spokes dissapears into them). Do this at several spots around the rim and average the measurements.
Measure the length of a nipple (dimension B in the figure) and add it twice (once for each nipple). The result is Effective Rim Diameter (ERD). Thus,
ERD = A + 2B.

Effective Rim Diameter (ERD) is the dimension you type into the spreadsheet for "ERD, effective rim diameter". Of all the dimensions you actually might measure, ERD is the most critical dimension affecting spoke length, so it makes sense to measure it a few times at different places around the rim. Always count to make sure you use spoke holes that are actually opposite each other!

It is a pain to get the wheel built and find out the spokes aren't the correct length.
The Ritchey PRO Trekker Girders I have measure ERD 605 mm.
I used 294 mm right and 296 mm left. The spoke length came in fine on my Shimano XTR and DURA ACE hubs.

It is a pain to get the wheel built and find out the spokes aren't the correct length.
The Ritchey PRO Trekker Girders I have measure ERD 605 mm.
I used 294 mm right and 296 mm left. The spoke length came in fine on my Shimano XTR and DURA ACE hubs. [/B][/QUOTE]

Mine are 32 spoke 3X.
Where did you find the 36 hole version?

Dave S <[email hidden]> wrote:
: Last night, I built a new rear wheel for cross riding using a Record 36 hole hubs, a Ritchey OCR
: Comp rim (called Trekking on web site) and DT 14/15 spokes.

: In doing the research, I noticed that Ritchey's web site gave the ERD as 596 mm whereas Damon
: Rinard's Spocalc gave it as 605 mm. Perhaps Ritchey has redesigned the rims?

: At any rate, I called Ritchey and the rep talked to a wheel builder who gave the ERD 599. Hmm...
: Right between the two values...

: I plugged the 599 value in Spocalc and built the wheel using 290's on the left and 288's on the
: right. At this point, I've tensioned them to 70 kg on the left and 115 on the right.

: On inspection, I noticed that the left side as 2-3 threads exposed all around whereas the right
: side has 5-6 threads exposed. I'm comcerned that the spokes are too short and I don't have enough
: threads embedded in the brass nipples.

I also had less than ideal results with an OCR rim. I just built a wheel with a Ritchey Aero Road
OCR rim that spocalc lists as 606mm, and I ended up with about 1mm protruding out the back end of
the nipples. Looking at spocalc again, it has in parentheses "ERD is nipple contact dia + 3mm for
nipples". Does that comment mean I needed to make some adjustment to the numbers before plugging
them into the calculator? I know I had the right hub dimensions, because I verified them calipers.
Anyone have a good technique for measuring ERD?

- mark

Dave S said:

Last night, I built a new rear wheel for cross riding using a Record 36 hole hubs, a Ritchey OCR
Comp rim (called Trekking on web site) and DT 14/15 spokes.

In doing the research, I noticed that Ritchey's web site gave the ERD as 596 mm whereas Damon
Rinard's Spocalc gave it as 605 mm. Perhaps Ritchey has redesigned the rims?

At any rate, I called Ritchey and the rep talked to a wheel builder who gave the ERD 599. Hmm...
Right between the two values...

I plugged the 599 value in Spocalc and built the wheel using 290's on the left and 288's on the
right. At this point, I've tensioned them to 70 kg on the left and 115 on the right.

On inspection, I noticed that the left side as 2-3 threads exposed all around whereas the right
side has 5-6 threads exposed. I'm comcerned that the spokes are too short and I don't have enough
threads embedded in the brass nipples.

Is this wheel safe or should I rebuild it with longer spokes?

The 2mm showing on the left is trivial but the right needs to be redone. Just curious but what
lengths did you use? Normally rights are 2mm shorter than lefts.

--
Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org Open every day since 1 April, 1971

daveornee said:

I agree with Alex. On the Spoke Calc site there is a way to measure ERD: Effective Rim Diameter
(ERD) is the diameter on which you want the ends of the spokes to lie. Most people prefer it near
the end of the spoke nipple. If you want to measure your own rim (recommended, just to be sure),
then follow these instructions:

The OP has the advantage of an easy of way of calculating what size spokes to use for his rebuild:
whatever size he used + the length of exposed thread!

--Josh

Josh Gatts <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

daveornee said:

I agree with Alex. On the Spoke Calc site there is a way to measure ERD: Effective Rim Diameter
(ERD) is the diameter on which you want the ends of the spokes to lie. Most people prefer it
near the end of the spoke nipple. If you want to measure your own rim (recommended, just to be
sure), then follow these instructions:

The OP has the advantage of an easy of way of calculating what size spokes to use for his rebuild:
whatever size he used + the length of exposed thread!

--Josh

Dear Josh,

You practical devil! Even if there are objections that I can't imagine, I admire your approach.

You probably know the apocryphal story of Edison asking a college graduate who wanted to work in his
lab to determine the volume of an empty glass light bulb.

After the slide-rule expert finished laboriously measuring curves and calculating an approximate
answer, Edison taught him a practical lesson by filling the bulb with water, pouring the water into
a graduated cylinder, and announcing the exact volume.

Thanks,

Carl Fogel

<< On inspection, I noticed that the left side as 2-3 threads exposed all around whereas the right
side has 5-6 threads exposed. I'm comcerned that the spokes are too short and I don't have enough
threads embedded in the brass nipples. >><BR><BR>

They are too short. You could use 16mm nipps tho, which may fix the problem.

Peter Chisholm Vecchio's Bicicletteria 1833 Pearl St. Boulder, CO, 80302
(303)440-3535 vecchios.comvecchios.comOpen ↗ "Ruote convenzionali costruite eccezionalmente bene"

<< The 2mm showing on the left is trivial but the right needs to be redone. Just curious but what
lengths did you use? Normally rights are 2mm shorter than lefts. >><BR><BR>

Just for info, on OCR rims, I use 1mm difference.

Peter Chisholm Vecchio's Bicicletteria 1833 Pearl St. Boulder, CO, 80302
(303)440-3535 vecchios.comvecchios.comOpen ↗ "Ruote convenzionali costruite eccezionalmente bene"

<< Anyone have a good technique for measuring ERD? >><BR><BR>

Wheelsmith rods...

Peter Chisholm Vecchio's Bicicletteria 1833 Pearl St. Boulder, CO, 80302
(303)440-3535 vecchios.comvecchios.comOpen ↗ "Ruote convenzionali costruite eccezionalmente bene"

daveornee <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

It is a pain to get the wheel built and find out the spokes aren't the correct length. The Ritchey
PRO Trekker Girders I have measure ERD 605
mm. I used 294 mm right and 296 mm left. The spoke length came in fine on my Shimano XTR and DURA
ACE hubs.

Mine are 32 spoke 3X. Where did you find the 36 hole version?

My LBS ordered them for ~$30. Eyelets not available in the 36 hole version.

Dave

01 Nov 2003 01:52:20 GMT Josh Gatts said:

The OP has the advantage of an easy of way of calculating what size spokes to use for his rebuild:
whatever size he used + the length of exposed thread!

Rather than concentrate on the exposed thread, which is only part of the unengaged thread, he should
measure from the other side of the spoke nipple. Measure how far down below the spoke head the end
of the spoke stops. You can do this rather easily with a bit of wire, or a paper clip, or even screw
in a loose spoke from above and count turns.

-
-----------------------------------------------
Jim Adney [email hidden] Madison, WI 53711 USA
-----------------------------------------------

"Jim Adney" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

01 Nov 2003 01:52:20 GMT Josh Gatts said:

The OP has the advantage of an easy of way of calculating what size spokes to use for his
rebuild: whatever size he used + the length of exposed thread!

Rather than concentrate on the exposed thread, which is only part of the unengaged thread, he
should measure from the other side of the spoke nipple. Measure how far down below the spoke head
the end of the spoke stops. You can do this rather easily with a bit of wire, or a paper clip, or
even screw in a loose spoke from above and count turns.

You could also measure the length of a nipple to the base of the slot (N), the length of the
threading (T) on a spoke, and the length of exposed thread
(E). If your existing spoke is length L, you buy spokes of length L + N - T
+ E. Heh heh.

It's fun to come up with these things, but in reality a couple of unengaged threads aren't the
end of the world (6 *exposed* threads, which is what the OP was talking about, are more than I
would accept, though.) I would personally just do the easiest thing (the way I originally
recommended, IMHO), and maybe add 1mm to account for the fact that the threads begin a little way
into the nipple.

I just noticed that Peter Chisholm has recommended just replacing the nips with 16mm. That's
probably the best & cheapest solution, although it may look a little goofy.

Thanks for the idears.

--Josh

Josh Gatts said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The OP has the advantage of an easy of way of calculating what size spokes to use for his
rebuild: whatever size he used + the length of exposed thread!

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Rather than concentrate on the exposed thread, which is only part of the un-engaged thread, he
should measure from the other side of the spoke nipple. Measure how far down below the spoke head
the end of the spoke stops. You can do this rather easily with a bit of wire, or a paper clip, or
even screw in a loose spoke from above and count turns.

Quoted message said:

You could also measure the length of a nipple to the base of the slot (N), the length of the
threading (T) on a spoke, and the length of exposed thread (E). If your existing spoke is length
L, you buy spokes of length L + N - T + E. Heh heh.

Quoted message said:

It's fun to come up with these things, but in reality a couple of un-engaged threads aren't the
end of the world (6 *exposed* threads, which is what the OP was talking about, are more than I
would accept, though.) I would personally just do the easiest thing (the way I originally
recommended, IMHO), and maybe add 1mm to account for the fact that the threads begin a little way
into the nipple.

When threads are exposed, they just show that they are insufficiently engaged because threads in the
nipple do not start until a few mm inside the nipple shaft. Spokes should be visible at the nipple
head and protrude at least to be close to the bottom of the screw driver slot.

Quoted message said:

I just noticed that Peter Chisholm has recommended just replacing the nips with 16mm. That's
probably the best & cheapest solution, although it may look a little goofy.

That won't help much, the threads in most longer nipples not being any longer than the short ones.
It will only be a cover-up, not an improvement in thread engagement.

Jobst Brandt [email hidden]

<[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Josh Gatts said:

It's fun to come up with these things, but in reality a couple of un-engaged threads aren't the
end of the world (6 *exposed* threads, which is what the OP was talking about, are more than I
would accept, though.) I would personally just do the easiest thing (the way I originally
recommended, IMHO), and maybe add 1mm to account for the fact that the threads begin a little
way into the nipple.

When threads are exposed, they just show that they are insufficiently engaged because threads in
the nipple do not start until a few mm inside the nipple shaft. Spokes should be visible at the
nipple head and protrude at least to be close to the bottom of the screw driver slot.

Quoted message said:

I just noticed that Peter Chisholm has recommended just replacing the nips with 16mm. That's
probably the best & cheapest solution, although it may look a little goofy.

That won't help much, the threads in most longer nipples not being any longer than the short ones.
It will only be a cover-up, not an improvement in thread engagement.

Thanks for the clarifications and corrections. In particular, I didn't know about the threading in
long nipples.

--Josh

or (B): simply measure the depth of the hole from the bead diameter, 622-mm for a 700c. don't
forget to 2x it.

One of the first wheels I built also came up short on the spoke threads, and several spokes were
showing about 5-6 threads.

I stress relieved this wheel using leather gloves and none of the nipples failed, so I just took
that as an indication that the wheel was safe, since the most stress the nipple threads would ever
be under would be when I stress relieved.

That wheel has proven reliable.

Ed Chait

"Josh Gatts" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

"Jim Adney" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

01 Nov 2003 01:52:20 GMT Josh Gatts said:

The OP has the advantage of an easy of way of calculating what size spokes to use for his
rebuild: whatever size he used + the length of exposed thread!

Rather than concentrate on the exposed thread, which is only part of the unengaged thread, he
should measure from the other side of the spoke nipple. Measure how far down below the spoke
head the end of the spoke stops. You can do this rather easily with a bit of wire, or a paper
clip, or even screw in a loose spoke from above and count turns.

You could also measure the length of a nipple to the base of the slot (N), the length of the
threading (T) on a spoke, and the length of exposed thread
(E). If your existing spoke is length L, you buy spokes of length L + N - T
+ E. Heh heh.

it's 56-TPI so 6 exposed will be 6/56 inches too long.