Spoke worn at crossings

Carl Fogel said:

I was about to put an old spoke back into the wheel after measuring
its length when I noticed that the spoke felt funny.

Quoted message said:

The wear at the crossings on the straight 2 mm spoke is enough to be
quite noticeable just running it through my fingers.

Quoted message said:

Unworn sections measure 0.078 inches (1.98mm). The left upper wear
patch that's less shiny in this picture measures 0.068 inches
(1.7272mm). It's the crossing closer to the hub:

http://tinyurl.com/ya97mf

Quoted message said:

The wear patch on the other side of the spoke, further from the hub,
is much smaller:

http://tinyurl.com/yzazsl

Quoted message said:

Trevor advocated very low-tension spokes, which probably wore
impressively. My spoke is from an old wheel that was probably
low-tension by ignorance.

I've seen a lot of wheels and never saw one with long wear marks at
spoke crossings like those in your picture. Of course I can't tell
how deep they are, but the lighting makes them look deeper than any I
have seen. These are typically a fretting notch where they cross,
such that if you slide them apart with the fingers, they pop out of
engagement and readily snap back in, the divot being less than 0.1mm
deep on spokes with thousands of miles of service.

Your spokes seem to be 2.0mm with 0.25mm wear. Just the same, that
amount of wear in a smoothly abraded zone will most likely not cause a
spoke failure, considering that I haven't seen one do so in the many
wheels I have observed.

Quoted message said:

This wear supports Trevor's claim a few years ago about spokes worn
a third of the way through:

http://tinyurl.com/yhykoy

I don't believe it! Unless the spokes were slack, the movement at
these crossing points is independent of spoke tension. In fact, if
they were to move with more than fretting motions, you would hear them
creaking, especially when climbing standing, where lateral wheel
deflection occurs.

Jobst Brandt

Quoted message said:

Carl Fogel said:

I was about to put an old spoke back into the wheel after measuring
its length when I noticed that the spoke felt funny.

Quoted message said:

The wear at the crossings on the straight 2 mm spoke is enough to be
quite noticeable just running it through my fingers.

Quoted message said:

Unworn sections measure 0.078 inches (1.98mm). The left upper wear
patch that's less shiny in this picture measures 0.068 inches
(1.7272mm). It's the crossing closer to the hub:

http://tinyurl.com/ya97mf

Quoted message said:

The wear patch on the other side of the spoke, further from the hub,
is much smaller:

http://tinyurl.com/yzazsl

Quoted message said:

Trevor advocated very low-tension spokes, which probably wore
impressively. My spoke is from an old wheel that was probably
low-tension by ignorance.

I've seen a lot of wheels and never saw one with long wear marks at
spoke crossings like those in your picture. Of course I can't tell
how deep they are, but the lighting makes them look deeper than any I
have seen. These are typically a fretting notch where they cross,
such that if you slide them apart with the fingers, they pop out of
engagement and readily snap back in, the divot being less than 0.1mm
deep on spokes with thousands of miles of service.

Your spokes seem to be 2.0mm with 0.25mm wear. Just the same, that
amount of wear in a smoothly abraded zone will most likely not cause a
spoke failure, considering that I haven't seen one do so in the many
wheels I have observed.

Quoted message said:

This wear supports Trevor's claim a few years ago about spokes worn
a third of the way through:

http://tinyurl.com/yhykoy

I don't believe it! Unless the spokes were slack, the movement at
these crossing points is independent of spoke tension. In fact, if
they were to move with more than fretting motions, you would hear them
creaking, especially when climbing standing, where lateral wheel
deflection occurs.

Jobst Brandt

Dear Jobst,

Er, what don't you believe?

That you've seen a lot of spokes, but never seen ones like the 0.078
inch one whose wear to 0.068 inch I measured with a dial caliper?

That Trevor advocated low-tension wheelbuilding?

That Trevor's thinner spokes might been worn even deeper?

That low-tension spokes might wear more at the crossings and make
noises?

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Carl Fogel said:

I was about to put an old spoke back into the wheel after measuring
its length when I noticed that the spoke felt funny.
The wear at the crossings on the straight 2 mm spoke is enough to be
quite noticeable just running it through my fingers.
Unworn sections measure 0.078 inches (1.98mm). The left upper wear
patch that's less shiny in this picture measures 0.068 inches
(1.7272mm). It's the crossing closer to the hub:

http://tinyurl.com/ya97mf

Quoted message said:

The wear patch on the other side of the spoke, further from the hub,
is much smaller:

http://tinyurl.com/yzazsl

Quoted message said:

Trevor advocated very low-tension spokes, which probably wore
impressively. My spoke is from an old wheel that was probably
low-tension by ignorance.

I've seen a lot of wheels and never saw one with long wear marks at
spoke crossings like those in your picture. Of course I can't tell
how deep they are, but the lighting makes them look deeper than any I
have seen. These are typically a fretting notch where they cross,
such that if you slide them apart with the fingers, they pop out of
engagement and readily snap back in, the divot being less than 0.1mm
deep on spokes with thousands of miles of service.

Your spokes seem to be 2.0mm with 0.25mm wear. Just the same, that
amount of wear in a smoothly abraded zone will most likely not cause a
spoke failure, considering that I haven't seen one do so in the many
wheels I have observed.

Quoted message said:

This wear supports Trevor's claim a few years ago about spokes worn
a third of the way through:

http://tinyurl.com/yhykoy

I don't believe it! Unless the spokes were slack, the movement at
these crossing points is independent of spoke tension. In fact, if
they were to move with more than fretting motions, you would hear them
creaking, especially when climbing standing, where lateral wheel
deflection occurs.

Jobst Brandt

Dear Jobst,

Er, what don't you believe?

That you've seen a lot of spokes, but never seen ones like the 0.078
inch one whose wear to 0.068 inch I measured with a dial caliper?

That Trevor advocated low-tension wheelbuilding?

That Trevor's thinner spokes might been worn even deeper?

That low-tension spokes might wear more at the crossings and make
noises?

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

i believe that if they'd been tied & soldered, that wear would never
have happened...

Carl Fogel said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I was about to put an old spoke back into the wheel after measuring
its length when I noticed that the spoke felt funny.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The wear at the crossings on the straight 2 mm spoke is enough to be
quite noticeable just running it through my fingers.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Unworn sections measure 0.078 inches (1.98mm). The left upper wear
patch that's less shiny in this picture measures 0.068 inches
(1.7272mm). It's the crossing closer to the hub:

http://tinyurl.com/ya97mf

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The wear patch on the other side of the spoke, further from the hub,
is much smaller:

http://tinyurl.com/yzazsl

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Trevor advocated very low-tension spokes, which probably wore
impressively. My spoke is from an old wheel that was probably
low-tension by ignorance.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I've seen a lot of wheels and never saw one with long wear marks at
spoke crossings like those in your picture. Of course I can't tell
how deep they are, but the lighting makes them look deeper than any
I have seen. These are typically a fretting notch where they
cross, such that if you slide them apart with the fingers, they pop
out of engagement and readily snap back in, the divot being less
than 0.1mm deep on spokes with thousands of miles of service.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Your spokes seem to be 2.0mm with 0.25mm wear. Just the same, that
amount of wear in a smoothly abraded zone will most likely not
cause a spoke failure, considering that I haven't seen one do so in
the many wheels I have observed.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

This wear supports Trevor's claim a few years ago about spokes
worn a third of the way through:

http://tinyurl.com/yhykoy

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I don't believe it! Unless the spokes were slack, the movement at
these crossing points is independent of spoke tension. In fact, if
they were to move with more than fretting motions, you would hear
them creaking, especially when climbing standing, where lateral
wheel deflection occurs.

Quoted message said:

Er, what don't you believe?

The following:

"This wear supports Trevor's claim a few years ago about spokes
worn a third of the way through."

I think the linkage is unambiguous enough to leave no doubt about what
was unbelievable.

Don't patronize when it is your willful misinterpretation.

Quoted message said:

That you've seen a lot of spokes, but never seen ones like the 0.078
inch one whose wear to 0.068 inch I measured with a dial caliper?

Quoted message said:

That Trevor advocated low-tension wheelbuilding?

Quoted message said:

That Trevor's thinner spokes might been worn even deeper?

Quoted message said:

That low-tension spokes might wear more at the crossings and make
noises?

Jobst Brandt

Quoted message said:

Carl Fogel said:

Quoted message said:

> I was about to put an old spoke back into the wheel after measuring
> its length when I noticed that the spoke felt funny.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> The wear at the crossings on the straight 2 mm spoke is enough to be
> quite noticeable just running it through my fingers.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> Unworn sections measure 0.078 inches (1.98mm). The left upper wear
> patch that's less shiny in this picture measures 0.068 inches
> (1.7272mm). It's the crossing closer to the hub:

http://tinyurl.com/ya97mf

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> The wear patch on the other side of the spoke, further from the hub,
> is much smaller:

http://tinyurl.com/yzazsl

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> Trevor advocated very low-tension spokes, which probably wore
> impressively. My spoke is from an old wheel that was probably
> low-tension by ignorance.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I've seen a lot of wheels and never saw one with long wear marks at
spoke crossings like those in your picture. Of course I can't tell
how deep they are, but the lighting makes them look deeper than any
I have seen. These are typically a fretting notch where they
cross, such that if you slide them apart with the fingers, they pop
out of engagement and readily snap back in, the divot being less
than 0.1mm deep on spokes with thousands of miles of service.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Your spokes seem to be 2.0mm with 0.25mm wear. Just the same, that
amount of wear in a smoothly abraded zone will most likely not
cause a spoke failure, considering that I haven't seen one do so in
the many wheels I have observed.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> This wear supports Trevor's claim a few years ago about spokes
> worn a third of the way through:

http://tinyurl.com/yhykoy

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I don't believe it! Unless the spokes were slack, the movement at
these crossing points is independent of spoke tension. In fact, if
they were to move with more than fretting motions, you would hear
them creaking, especially when climbing standing, where lateral
wheel deflection occurs.

Quoted message said:

Er, what don't you believe?

The following:

"This wear supports Trevor's claim a few years ago about spokes
worn a third of the way through."

I think the linkage is unambiguous enough to leave no doubt about what
was unbelievable.

Don't patronize when it is your willful misinterpretation.

Quoted message said:

That you've seen a lot of spokes, but never seen ones like the 0.078
inch one whose wear to 0.068 inch I measured with a dial caliper?

Quoted message said:

That Trevor advocated low-tension wheelbuilding?

Quoted message said:

That Trevor's thinner spokes might been worn even deeper?

Quoted message said:

That low-tension spokes might wear more at the crossings and make
noises?

Jobst Brandt

Dear Jobst,

Er, don't assume that you are clear when the evidence is that you
aren't.

And try not to be so snippy and self-assured after stating at the
outset that your experience does not include such wear. That approach
keeps getting you into trouble.

You're doing this more and more.

Elsewhere today, you mis-attributed great gobs of another poster's
comments to me. Do you realize that you did that?

I just pointed out that your comment "I see no bicycles on that web
page" meant that you ignored Ryan Cousineau's clear directions to go
to the splash page for "fall cycling" in the link that he provided.

We all make mistakes. Taking offense where none is intended is not the
easiest way to learn from them.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Quoted message said:

I was about to put an old spoke back into the wheel after measuring
its length when I noticed that the spoke felt funny.

The wear at the crossings on the straight 2 mm spoke is enough to be
quite noticeable just running it through my fingers.

Unworn sections measure 0.078 inches. The left upper wear patch that's
less shiny in this picture measures 0.068 inches. It's the crossing
closer to the hub:

http://server5.theimagehosting.com/image.php?img=286awornspoke.jpg
or http://tinyurl.com/ya97mf

The wear patch on the other side of the spoke, further from the hub,
is much smaller:

http://server5.theimagehosting.com/image.php?img=288awornspoke.jpg
or http://tinyurl.com/yzazsl

This wear supports Trevor's claim a few years ago about spokes worn a
third of the way through:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech/browse_frm/thread/786ccc73bc49b704/11d77929af2d9fc7?lnk=gst&q=trevor+carl+worn&rnum=2#11d77929af2d9fc7
or http://tinyurl.com/yhykoy

Trevor advocated very low-tension spokes, which probably wore
impressively. My spoke is from an old wheel that was probably
low-tension by ignorance.

Interesting photos. I don't remember seeing this on any of my wheels.
Too bad I just threw out a bunch of wheels--I could have looked for
this phenomenon!

Whether this leads to breakage or not is dependent on a number of
parameters. Clearly these are very smooth notches and so the stress
concentration is low.

Quoted message said:

Unworn sections measure 0.078 inches. The left upper wear patch that's
less shiny in this picture measures 0.068 inches. It's the crossing
closer to the hub:

http://server5.theimagehosting.com/image.php?img=286awornspoke.jpg
or http://tinyurl.com/ya97mf

The wear patch on the other side of the spoke, further from the hub,
is much smaller:

http://server5.theimagehosting.com/image.php?img=288awornspoke.jpg
or http://tinyurl.com/yzazsl

Interesting pictures, especially since I have never observed such a
wear pattern on any of my wheels. I just checked the wheel on which I
recently replaced the rim that had an excessively worn braking surface
after over 60K miles of use. The spokes are very old and show some
surface corrosion, but there's no sign of noticeable thinning at the
crossing points.

I'm puzzled by the length of the wear marks in your pictures. For
these to be caused by wear between crossed spokes there would have to
be substantial movement - much more than seems possible in even the
lowest tension wheel that would still be stable. In contrast, the only
marks I can make out on any of my spokes at the crossing points are
much less than a millimeter across.

Do the other spokes in your wheel all show a similar wear pattern? If
not, is it possible that this spoke was damaged by a stick or other
foreign object that entered the wheel at some point? I'd also be
interested in the spoking pattern used in this wheel; standard 3 or 4x
spoking or some unusual pattern?

peter said:

Quoted message said:

Unworn sections measure 0.078 inches. The left upper wear patch that's
less shiny in this picture measures 0.068 inches. It's the crossing
closer to the hub:

http://server5.theimagehosting.com/image.php?img=286awornspoke.jpg
or http://tinyurl.com/ya97mf

The wear patch on the other side of the spoke, further from the hub,
is much smaller:

http://server5.theimagehosting.com/image.php?img=288awornspoke.jpg
or http://tinyurl.com/yzazsl

Interesting pictures, especially since I have never observed such a
wear pattern on any of my wheels. I just checked the wheel on which I
recently replaced the rim that had an excessively worn braking surface
after over 60K miles of use. The spokes are very old and show some
surface corrosion, but there's no sign of noticeable thinning at the
crossing points.

I'm puzzled by the length of the wear marks in your pictures. For
these to be caused by wear between crossed spokes there would have to
be substantial movement - much more than seems possible in even the
lowest tension wheel that would still be stable. In contrast, the only
marks I can make out on any of my spokes at the crossing points are
much less than a millimeter across.

Do the other spokes in your wheel all show a similar wear pattern? If
not, is it possible that this spoke was damaged by a stick or other
foreign object that entered the wheel at some point? I'd also be
interested in the spoking pattern used in this wheel; standard 3 or 4x
spoking or some unusual pattern?

Dear Peter,

You're right.

I finally figured things out after wasting lots of time taking
pictures of 18 drive-side spokes from an ordinary 3-cross pattern,
lining them up and turning them over in various ways.

Jobst is right, too--spoke tension isn't involved.

Nine drive-side spokes are worn one way, and the other nine are worn
the other way.

It turns out that there's a very simple explanation.

(D'oh!)

Here's the normal wear pattern, a small, sharp diagonal where these
two spokes crossed:

hub head

| | | |
| | | |
|\| |\|
| | | |
| | | | 70 mm from hub head

http://server5.theimagehosting.com/image.php?img=301aweardiagonal.jpg
or http://tinyurl.com/tkkm5

So far, so good.

Now I turn the left spoke over, take a larger picture, and--

Three very different worn patches appear:

hub head
1
2| | |^| <--two large, feathered pitted scrapes on both spokes
|^| |:|
|:| |:| 50 mm from spoke head
|v| |v|
| | | |
3| | | |
|^| | | <--smaller, smooth, unpitted scrape only on left spoke
|#| | | ends sharply at bottom 60 mm from spoke head
|-| | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | |\| <--diagonal on right spoke
| | | | left spoke turned over, diagonal now underneath
| | | | 70 mm from spoke head

http://server5.theimagehosting.com/image.php?img=302awearspokeprotector.jpg
or http://tinyurl.com/y2qsrc

Luckily, I had another old wheel of similar design that hadn't been
robbed of all the significant parts. Here's the explanation for the
three odd scrapes:

http://images5.theimagehosting.com/300awornspokes.jpg
or http://tinyurl.com/yeotfd

The grimy, oily 3-pronged foreign object wears the spokes
impressively. It touches both drive-side spokes at around 50 mm from
the hub, causing large wear patches with pits. It touches the outer
spoke again at about 60 mm, leaves no pits, and carves that sharp
edge.

So Jobst is right--the impressively deep, wide, pitted wear is much
more than spoke crossing wear and probably has nothing to do with
spoke tension.

But it's strange that he'd never seen such wear. Possibly his
experience does not include that foreign object.

I'm just disgusted that it took me so long to figure it out, but the
foreign object had been removed, along with the cassette, and I didn't
inspect enough spokes from enough sides.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Wanna stop this 'wear', tie and solder, dear Liazza, Tie and solder...

here we go!!!helmets on, flak jacket on....

Quoted message said:

peter said:

Quoted message said:

Unworn sections measure 0.078 inches. The left upper wear patch that's
less shiny in this picture measures 0.068 inches. It's the crossing
closer to the hub:

http://server5.theimagehosting.com/image.php?img=286awornspoke.jpg
or http://tinyurl.com/ya97mf

The wear patch on the other side of the spoke, further from the hub,
is much smaller:

http://server5.theimagehosting.com/image.php?img=288awornspoke.jpg
or http://tinyurl.com/yzazsl

Interesting pictures, especially since I have never observed such a
wear pattern on any of my wheels. I just checked the wheel on which I
recently replaced the rim that had an excessively worn braking surface
after over 60K miles of use. The spokes are very old and show some
surface corrosion, but there's no sign of noticeable thinning at the
crossing points.

I'm puzzled by the length of the wear marks in your pictures. For
these to be caused by wear between crossed spokes there would have to
be substantial movement - much more than seems possible in even the
lowest tension wheel that would still be stable. In contrast, the only
marks I can make out on any of my spokes at the crossing points are
much less than a millimeter across.

Do the other spokes in your wheel all show a similar wear pattern? If
not, is it possible that this spoke was damaged by a stick or other
foreign object that entered the wheel at some point? I'd also be
interested in the spoking pattern used in this wheel; standard 3 or 4x
spoking or some unusual pattern?

Dear Peter,

You're right.

I finally figured things out after wasting lots of time taking
pictures of 18 drive-side spokes from an ordinary 3-cross pattern,
lining them up and turning them over in various ways.

Jobst is right, too--spoke tension isn't involved.

Nine drive-side spokes are worn one way, and the other nine are worn
the other way.

It turns out that there's a very simple explanation.

(D'oh!)

Here's the normal wear pattern, a small, sharp diagonal where these
two spokes crossed:

hub head

| | | |
| | | |
|\| |\|
| | | |
| | | | 70 mm from hub head

http://server5.theimagehosting.com/image.php?img=301aweardiagonal.jpg
or http://tinyurl.com/tkkm5

So far, so good.

Now I turn the left spoke over, take a larger picture, and--

Three very different worn patches appear:

hub head
1
2| | |^| <--two large, feathered pitted scrapes on both spokes
|^| |:|
|:| |:| 50 mm from spoke head
|v| |v|
| | | |
3| | | |
|^| | | <--smaller, smooth, unpitted scrape only on left spoke
|#| | | ends sharply at bottom 60 mm from spoke head
|-| | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | |\| <--diagonal on right spoke
| | | | left spoke turned over, diagonal now underneath
| | | | 70 mm from spoke head

http://server5.theimagehosting.com/image.php?img=302awearspokeprotector.jpg
or http://tinyurl.com/y2qsrc

Luckily, I had another old wheel of similar design that hadn't been
robbed of all the significant parts. Here's the explanation for the
three odd scrapes:

http://images5.theimagehosting.com/300awornspokes.jpg
or http://tinyurl.com/yeotfd

The grimy, oily 3-pronged foreign object wears the spokes
impressively. It touches both drive-side spokes at around 50 mm from
the hub, causing large wear patches with pits. It touches the outer
spoke again at about 60 mm, leaves no pits, and carves that sharp
edge.

So Jobst is right--the impressively deep, wide, pitted wear is much
more than spoke crossing wear and probably has nothing to do with
spoke tension.

But it's strange that he'd never seen such wear. Possibly his
experience does not include that foreign object.

I'm just disgusted that it took me so long to figure it out, but the
foreign object had been removed, along with the cassette, and I didn't
inspect enough spokes from enough sides.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Peter Chisholm said:

Wanna stop this 'wear', tie and solder, dear Liazza, Tie and solder...

Quoted message said:

here we go!!!helmets on, flak jacket on....

Why? I don't see any spoke failures caused by this, so what problem
are you solving?

Jobst Brandt

Quoted message said:

Peter Chisholm said:

Wanna stop this 'wear', tie and solder, dear Liazza, Tie and solder...

Quoted message said:

here we go!!!helmets on, flak jacket on....

Why? I don't see any spoke failures caused by this, so what problem
are you solving?

Jobst Brandt

Not solving anything but, once again, proving something ....

Robin Hubert

Qui si parla Campagnolo said:

Wanna stop this 'wear', tie and solder, dear Liazza, Tie and solder...

here we go!!!helmets on, flak jacket on....

Dear Peter,

How would tie and solder have stopped the large wear patches on the
spokes from the plastic spoke protector?

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Robin Hubert said:

Quoted message said:

Peter Chisholm said:

Wanna stop this 'wear', tie and solder, dear Liazza, Tie and solder...

Quoted message said:

here we go!!!helmets on, flak jacket on....

Why? I don't see any spoke failures caused by this, so what problem
are you solving?

Jobst Brandt

Not solving anything but, once again, proving something ....

Robin Hubert

tee hee

On 21 Oct 2006 06:07:31 -0700, "Qui si parla Campagnolo" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Wanna stop this 'wear', tie and solder, dear Liazza, Tie and solder...

here we go!!!helmets on, flak jacket on....

HELMETS!!!!! Did you say HELMETS!!!!!

Burn the infidel!

Ron

RonSonic said:

On 21 Oct 2006 06:07:31 -0700, "Qui si parla Campagnolo" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Wanna stop this 'wear', tie and solder, dear Liazza, Tie and solder...

here we go!!!helmets on, flak jacket on....

HELMETS!!!!! Did you say HELMETS!!!!!

Burn the infidel!

Ron

No, no, no. More fitting to give his helmeted head a swipe across the forehead (forehelmet?) and watch if the added leverage created by the longer radius caused by adding the helmet's thickness to the outside of the skull snaps his neck or not...