Maintenance Manuals

[Mark]

Well as I am increasingly intrigued by the mechanics of bikes. There
is a lot I just have never taken apart, put back together, and frankly
don't fully understand how things work. I wondered if there is a book
that is accepted as "the book to have on bike maintenance" that shows
pictures and step by step instructions much the way the Chiltons book
does for auto repair.

I'd also be interested in books on bike design. Now I would like to
keep the theory to a practical level. No I have no idea to turn this
into an engineering project. I am already married to an engineer and
the last thing one needs is two engineers in the same house. lol

[jim beam]

Jambo wrote:
> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
> news:euednT6T9bbqepvanZ2dnUVZ_j-dnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>> Michael Press wrote:
>>>> jb: "the sky is blue"
>>>> pc: "liar!"
>>> At midnight? The sky is definitely not blue.
>>> When raining, the sky is not blue.
>>> When overcast, the sky is not blue.
>>>
>>> "The sky is blue". What is the sky?
>>> Is it an object to be taken into a laboratory?
>>> Is it an object at all? What do we mean when we say "is"?
>>>
>>> When I step out into the open air and look upward,
>>> sometimes I observe a blue field.
>>>
>> and that is the point - rather than define conditions, peter cole simply
>> argues to the contrary, rhyme, reason or none!
>
> HAHAHA! Typical beamboy bull**** - fyi, your statement has been refuted, so
> don't even try to pretend that you meant something else! THE POINT IS THAT
> THE SKY IS NOT ALWAYS BLUE, BUT YOU SAID IT IS! Cornered like a rat again,
> lying tard.

er, moron, i did not say "always". i made a deliberately open statement
for the definition of conditions. you, obviously, are too moronic to
figure that out.


>
>> and if conditions don't allow a contrary argument, why, he'll simply step
>> back to a previous point, then misconstrue!
>
> And if conditions don't apply as in beamboy world, beamboy obfuscates and
> abuses in attempts to cover up!
>
> Ignorant lying fraud.
>
>

how old are you? moron.

[jim beam]

Jambo wrote:
> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
> news:L_edndvhgsxOeZvanZ2dnUVZ_rfinZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>> wow! analytical and on-target! am i still reading r.b.t?
>
> What would you know about it, beamboy? Riding on someone's back again, as
> if you understand it?
>
> Lying ****tard.
>
>

off your meds? moron.

[jim beam]

jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> Jay Beattie writes:
>
>>>>> Should wheel building _require_ the use of a $60 single purpose
>>>>> tool to prevent unrepairable rim damage? Absolutely not.
>
>>>> But regrettably it does. My 1970's-standard optimum tension by
>>>> "feel" will crack modern rims.
>
>>> I don't know about your feel, but four years ago I built two sets
>>> of touring wheels for a coast-to-coast fully loaded tour that
>>> included many miles of off-road. No tensiometer, no problems with
>>> strength, no problems with staying in true, no cracks in the Sun
>>> CR18 rims. My "feel" seems to be working.
>
>> Good work. I think with a heavier rim there is less worry. On a
>> 400 gram rim (Velocity Aerohead OC), I check my tension. When I did
>> not check my tension, I cracked rims. Now that I have built maybe
>> four or five of these wheels, I probably could do it without a
>> tensiometer -- but I own one, so what the hell.
>
> In that respect, I haven't used my tensiometer since I wrote about
> wheels, or before that time.

that's a telling confession! and of course, it's /totally/ unrelated to
ability to tell whether anodizing causes rim cracking!


> I needed the tensiometers I built to
> quantify tension for publication. I use my floor pump to inflate
> tires and because it is a two stage pump that has a gauge, I watch the
> gauge because felling the tire after each stroke is a drag and the
> pump force doesn't revel ho high it is pumping.
>
> Before a ride, I check tire pressure by bouncing the front and rear on
> the floor before going out the door.
>
> http://home.comcast.net/~carlfogel/download/PMP_004.jpg
> http://gallery.roadbikereview.com/showphoto.php?photo=1122&cat=500&size=big&sort=1
>
> Jobst

[Ozark Bicycle]

On Oct 16, 10:57 pm, "Jambo" <-...@-.-> wrote:
> <spikenett...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>
> news:1191852548.561741.61310@22g2000hsm.googlegrou ps.com...
>
>
>
> > On Oct 7, 4:12 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
> >> ...Big Snip...
>
> >> Bull****.
>
> >> You wrote this, accusing Jim Beam of fraud, with as much evidence as
> >> claims that NASA faked moon landing pictures. You couldn't have been
> >> clearer:
>
> >> "You tightened down the tension spring adjustment screw of your Park
> >> Tool TM-1 Tensiometer to give about double actual values."
>
> >> You have no evidence, no credibility, and not enough character to be
> >> ashamed.
>
> >> Stop emailing me with duplicates and excuses.
>
> >> Carl Fogel
>
> > Fogel,
>
> > Are you being completely accurate here?
>
> > I believe you have mischaracterized the situation, representing it as
> > if beam was a first time poster whose veracity I maligned.
>
> > In actual fact beam has flat out admitted in earlier threads that he
> > "bull****s". I noted this well at the time. And as any unbiased reader
> > of RBT should have noticed, he has been shown by many to be a
> > practiced, relentless, and unrepentant prevaricator. As such he has
> > displayed an unmatched talent for disrupting and subverting
> > discussions, driving off potentially valuable contributors in the
> > process. Look no further than this thread, now more than 300 posts
> > long, that he waylaid with his antics back at about post number four
> > and led into divisiveness.
>
> > In light of the above and in response to his abusive challenge of
> > "deny this, prick" to a veteran and valuable contributer of this
> > group, I asked him to deny that he hadn't "jimmied" the tensiometer in
> > the picture he proffered. I called him a pathetic little fraud.
>
> > Remember, beam already admits that he "bull****s". I wanted him to
> > admit that he wasn't doing so now. I wanted him to admit that he
> > hadn't cooked the picture and by so challenging him, I wanted to raise
> > the possibility that he actually had done so and I also wanted to
> > underscoring his penchant for fraud.
>
> > Curiously you jumped in between as an apologist for beam. The
> > challenge was directed to him but yet you acted as his surrogate. If I
> > had know that you would do so, I would have been, as stated earlier,
> > clearer and more expansive in my challenge.
>
> > Concerning the emailing of duplicates and excuses, here again I do not
> > believe you are being completely accurate, I apologize for any
> > duplicate of a post I might have emailed you in error by
> > unintentionally hitting the "Reply to Author" button as opposed to the
> > closely adjacent "Reply" button. I did intentionally email once
> > explaining how you might remove the seven duplicate posts that now
> > appear in this thread because this seemed to distress you and I felt
> > partly responsible. I explained how this might have occurred, but this
> > was not an excuse.
>
> > With regard to the question of character and credibility, I am happy
> > to let the reader judge for himself.
>
> Beamboy used tape on his Park.


Prove it!

[BigJulie]

sutherland's

http://www.amazon.com/Sutherlands-Handbook-bicycle-mechanics-Sutherland/dp/0914578065/ref=pd_bbs_2/102-4791940-4852967?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1191039436&sr=8-2


On Sep 29, 12:05 am, Mark <mblackwell1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Well as I am increasingly intrigued by the mechanics of bikes. There
> is a lot I just have never taken apart, put back together, and frankly
> don't fully understand how things work. I wondered if there is a book
> that is accepted as "the book to have on bike maintenance" that shows
> pictures and step by step instructions much the way the Chiltons book
> does for auto repair.
>
> I'd also be interested in books on bike design. Now I would like to
> keep the theory to a practical level. No I have no idea to turn this
> into an engineering project. I am already married to an engineer and
> the last thing one needs is two engineers in the same house. lol

[Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com]

On Sep 28, 10:05 pm, Mark <mblackwell1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Well as I am increasingly intrigued by the mechanics of bikes. There
> is a lot I just have never taken apart, put back together, and frankly
> don't fully understand how things work. I wondered if there is a book
> that is accepted as "the book to have on bike maintenance" that shows
> pictures and step by step instructions much the way the Chiltons book
> does for auto repair.
>
> I'd also be interested in books on bike design. Now I would like to
> keep the theory to a practical level. No I have no idea to turn this
> into an engineering project. I am already married to an engineer and
> the last thing one needs is two engineers in the same house. lol

Sutrherlands, Zinn books and the Park book are all great for your
reference library. Add Schraener's and Brandt's books on
wheelbuilding.

[landotter]

On Sep 28, 11:05 pm, Mark <mblackwell1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Well as I am increasingly intrigued by the mechanics of bikes. There
> is a lot I just have never taken apart, put back together, and frankly
> don't fully understand how things work. I wondered if there is a book
> that is accepted as "the book to have on bike maintenance" that shows
> pictures and step by step instructions much the way the Chiltons book
> does for auto repair.
>
If you need immediate help, the Park Tool site is really a superb
resource.

http://parktool.com/repair/

[M-gineering]

Mark wrote:

>
> I'd also be interested in books on bike design. Now I would like to
> keep the theory to a practical level. No I have no idea to turn this
> into an engineering project. I am already married to an engineer and
> the last thing one needs is two engineers in the same house. lol
>

the usual suspects:
bicycles & tricycles / sharp/ mit press
bicycling science/wilson /mit/ press
touring bikes Tony oliver out of print
bicycle design, mike burrows
Shimano 2010 catalogue aka The Data book


--
/Marten

info(apestaartje)m-gineering(punt)nl

[smokeystrodtman@gmail.com]

On Sep 28, 11:05 pm, Mark <mblackwell1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Well as I am increasingly intrigued by the mechanics of bikes. There
> is a lot I just have never taken apart, put back together, and frankly
> don't fully understand how things work. I wondered if there is a book
> that is accepted as "the book to have on bike maintenance" that shows
> pictures and step by step instructions much the way the Chiltons book
> does for auto repair.
>
> I'd also be interested in books on bike design. Now I would like to
> keep the theory to a practical level. No I have no idea to turn this
> into an engineering project. I am already married to an engineer and
> the last thing one needs is two engineers in the same house. lol

I've also found the Zinn books and the wheel book by Gerd Schraner to
be good sources. I don't have Jobst's book yet but probably will
someday.

Smokey

[ycleptor2@cs.com]

On Sep 29, 12:05 am, Mark <mblackwell1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Well as I am increasingly intrigued by the mechanics of bikes. There
> is a lot I just have never taken apart, put back together, and frankly
> don't fully understand how things work. I wondered if there is a book
> that is accepted as "the book to have on bike maintenance" that shows
> pictures and step by step instructions much the way the Chiltons book
> does for auto repair.
>
> I'd also be interested in books on bike design. Now I would like to
> keep the theory to a practical level. No I have no idea to turn this
> into an engineering project. I am already married to an engineer and
> the last thing one needs is two engineers in the same house. lol

And there's Talbot's Designing and Building Your Own Frameset, but I
had no idea it was so expensive now. I'll have to move mine to the
safe!

http://www.amazon.com/Designing-Building-Your-Own-Frameset/dp/0960241833

Cheers,

[Anthony DeLorenzo]

On Sep 28, 9:05 pm, Mark <mblackwell1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I wondered if there is a book
> that is accepted as "the book to have on bike maintenance" that shows
> pictures and step by step instructions much the way the Chiltons book
> does for auto repair.

Hi Mark,

I noticed that (before the thread shifted to a discussion on
wheelbuilding) no one mentioned the four-volume Barnett's manual. It
uses detailed step-by-step procedures. I've been very happy with it.

Regards,
Anthony

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article <1191039479.922619.176200@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups. com>,
BigJulie <julianshapiro@gmail.com> wrote:

> sutherland's
>
> http://www.amazon.com/Sutherlands-Handbook-bicycle-mechanics-Sutherland/dp/091
> 4578065/ref=pd_bbs_2/102-4791940-4852967?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1191039436&sr=8-2
>
>
> On Sep 29, 12:05 am, Mark <mblackwell1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Well as I am increasingly intrigued by the mechanics of bikes. There
> > is a lot I just have never taken apart, put back together, and frankly
> > don't fully understand how things work. I wondered if there is a book
> > that is accepted as "the book to have on bike maintenance" that shows
> > pictures and step by step instructions much the way the Chiltons book
> > does for auto repair.
> >
> > I'd also be interested in books on bike design. Now I would like to
> > keep the theory to a practical level. No I have no idea to turn this
> > into an engineering project. I am already married to an engineer and
> > the last thing one needs is two engineers in the same house. lol

At a much lower price, Zinn and the Art of Mountain Bike Maintenance
(and the similar Road Bike Maintenance) are good Chilton-level books.
I'd just get the one for your primary kind of ride, as much of the
material overlaps, and the differences aren't liable to catch you out
unless you're a roadie and you decide to start doing your own fork
maintenance on your MTB.

Sheldonbrown.com seems like it has directions on virtually every
mechanical repair known to cycling, so it's almost as good as having
your own bike manual.

I make no submission on most bike design books, but regular contributor
here Jobst Brandt literally wrote the book on bicycle wheels, called
"The Bicycle Wheel," and it covers both the theory of wheels and the
proper procedure for wheelbuilding.

--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos

[jim beam]

Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> In article <1191039479.922619.176200@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups. com>,
> BigJulie <julianshapiro@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> sutherland's
>>
>> http://www.amazon.com/Sutherlands-Handbook-bicycle-mechanics-Sutherland/dp/091
>> 4578065/ref=pd_bbs_2/102-4791940-4852967?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1191039436&sr=8-2
>>
>>
>> On Sep 29, 12:05 am, Mark <mblackwell1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Well as I am increasingly intrigued by the mechanics of bikes. There
>>> is a lot I just have never taken apart, put back together, and frankly
>>> don't fully understand how things work. I wondered if there is a book
>>> that is accepted as "the book to have on bike maintenance" that shows
>>> pictures and step by step instructions much the way the Chiltons book
>>> does for auto repair.
>>>
>>> I'd also be interested in books on bike design. Now I would like to
>>> keep the theory to a practical level. No I have no idea to turn this
>>> into an engineering project. I am already married to an engineer and
>>> the last thing one needs is two engineers in the same house. lol
>
> At a much lower price, Zinn and the Art of Mountain Bike Maintenance
> (and the similar Road Bike Maintenance) are good Chilton-level books.
> I'd just get the one for your primary kind of ride, as much of the
> material overlaps, and the differences aren't liable to catch you out
> unless you're a roadie and you decide to start doing your own fork
> maintenance on your MTB.
>
> Sheldonbrown.com seems like it has directions on virtually every
> mechanical repair known to cycling, so it's almost as good as having
> your own bike manual.
>
> I make no submission on most bike design books, but regular contributor
> here Jobst Brandt literally wrote the book

/a/ book.

> on bicycle wheels, called
> "The Bicycle Wheel," and it covers both the theory of wheels and the
> proper procedure for wheelbuilding.
>

procedure, yes. theory? some of it is badly awry. spoke tension "as
high as the rim can bear" for example is based on a fundamental
misunderstanding by the author and that is of the most practical [and
costly] consequence to the novice builder - excess tension can cause a
higher propensity for rim buckling and directly cause rim cracking. the
book should should be amended to specify spoke tension "as determined by
the rim manufacturer".

[Frank Drackman]

"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
news:mZSdnW2KsY96yWPbnZ2dnUVZ_gOdnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
> Ryan Cousineau wrote:
>> In article <1191039479.922619.176200@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups. com>,
>> BigJulie <julianshapiro@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> sutherland's
>>>
>>> http://www.amazon.com/Sutherlands-Handbook-bicycle-mechanics-Sutherland/dp/091
>>> 4578065/ref=pd_bbs_2/102-4791940-4852967?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1191039436&sr=8-2
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sep 29, 12:05 am, Mark <mblackwell1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> Well as I am increasingly intrigued by the mechanics of bikes. There
>>>> is a lot I just have never taken apart, put back together, and frankly
>>>> don't fully understand how things work. I wondered if there is a book
>>>> that is accepted as "the book to have on bike maintenance" that shows
>>>> pictures and step by step instructions much the way the Chiltons book
>>>> does for auto repair.
>>>>
>>>> I'd also be interested in books on bike design. Now I would like to
>>>> keep the theory to a practical level. No I have no idea to turn this
>>>> into an engineering project. I am already married to an engineer and
>>>> the last thing one needs is two engineers in the same house. lol
>>
>> At a much lower price, Zinn and the Art of Mountain Bike Maintenance (and
>> the similar Road Bike Maintenance) are good Chilton-level books. I'd just
>> get the one for your primary kind of ride, as much of the material
>> overlaps, and the differences aren't liable to catch you out unless
>> you're a roadie and you decide to start doing your own fork maintenance
>> on your MTB.
>>
>> Sheldonbrown.com seems like it has directions on virtually every
>> mechanical repair known to cycling, so it's almost as good as having your
>> own bike manual.
>>
>> I make no submission on most bike design books, but regular contributor
>> here Jobst Brandt literally wrote the book
>
> /a/ book.
>
>> on bicycle wheels, called "The Bicycle Wheel," and it covers both the
>> theory of wheels and the proper procedure for wheelbuilding.
>>
>
> procedure, yes. theory? some of it is badly awry. spoke tension "as
> high as the rim can bear" for example is based on a fundamental
> misunderstanding by the author and that is of the most practical [and
> costly] consequence to the novice builder - excess tension can cause a
> higher propensity for rim buckling and directly cause rim cracking. the
> book should should be amended to specify spoke tension "as determined by
> the rim manufacturer".

I guess that we all saw that coming...sad

[Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman]

"jim beam" aka evan williams wrote:
> Ryan Cousineau wrote:
>> ...
>> I make no submission on most bike design books, but regular
>> contributor here Jobst Brandt literally wrote the book
>
> /a/ book.
>
>> on bicycle wheels, called "The Bicycle Wheel," and it covers both the
>> theory of wheels and the proper procedure for wheelbuilding.
>>
>
> procedure, yes. theory? some of it is badly awry. spoke tension "as
> high as the rim can bear" for example is based on a fundamental
> misunderstanding by the author and that is of the most practical [and
> costly] consequence to the novice builder - excess tension can cause a
> higher propensity for rim buckling and directly cause rim cracking. the
> book should should be amended to specify spoke tension "as determined by
> the rim manufacturer".

I wonder if "jim" has a macro for anti-Jobst replies?

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
A Real Cyclist [TM] keeps at least one bicycle in the bedroom.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

[M-gineering]

landotter wrote:
> On Sep 28, 11:05 pm, Mark <mblackwell1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Well as I am increasingly intrigued by the mechanics of bikes. There
>> is a lot I just have never taken apart, put back together, and frankly
>> don't fully understand how things work. I wondered if there is a book
>> that is accepted as "the book to have on bike maintenance" that shows
>> pictures and step by step instructions much the way the Chiltons book
>> does for auto repair.
>>
> If you need immediate help, the Park Tool site is really a superb
> resource.
>
> http://parktool.com/repair/
>

also available as ' the big blue book of bicycle repair'

--
/Marten

info(apestaartje)m-gineering(punt)nl

[Mark]

On Sep 29, 8:54 am, landotter <landot...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sep 28, 11:05 pm, Mark <mblackwell1...@yahoo.com> wrote:> Well as I am increasingly intrigued by the mechanics of bikes. There
> > is a lot I just have never taken apart, put back together, and frankly
> > don't fully understand how things work. I wondered if there is a book
> > that is accepted as "the book to have on bike maintenance" that shows
> > pictures and step by step instructions much the way the Chiltons book
> > does for auto repair.
>
> If you need immediate help, the Park Tool site is really a superb
> resource.
>
> http://parktool.com/repair/

No not immediate help. When I was a kid a bike lasting very long
wasn't happening. Part of it was because we were on them constantly
and part because about all we ever did to keep them going was keep the
chain oiled, (with extra motor oil or the old 3 in one oil) brakes and
fix flats and tires. Yeah I tinker with many things. But the more I
tinker, the more I learned that there usually is a reason they do
things like they do.

Sometimes its for the Sears reason. I ended up with a Sears lawn
tractor that I had to work on yesterday. When they put the cover on
what I was working on they didn't use a phillips or slotted screw.
They didn't use something the common allen wrench would take off
either. Instead they used a star bit knowing full well most people
that might try to work on it wouldn't have one. I did. ha ha. Yet
the average homeowner would get frustrated trying to get that simple
thing out and you guessed it call Sears to get them to do the repair
for them.

My recent bike purchase would likely be called entry level and in the
scheme of things would be considered relatively inexpensive. Though
its not the $100 Walmart special, its not the $1000 bike either.
Still it cost as much as my first car and this time I want to learn
how to keep it riding well. Maybe I will have more fun on my bike
than I had in my first car. On second thought I doubt it.

Mark

[frkrygow@gmail.com]

On Sep 29, 10:04 am, M-gineering <ikmotgeens...@m-gineering.nl> wrote:
>
> Shimano 2010 catalogue aka The Data book

:-) Well said!

- Frank Krygowski

[Peter Cole]

Frank Drackman wrote:
> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
> news:mZSdnW2KsY96yWPbnZ2dnUVZ_gOdnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>> Ryan Cousineau wrote:
>>> In article <1191039479.922619.176200@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups. com>,
>>> BigJulie <julianshapiro@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> sutherland's
>>>>
>>>> http://www.amazon.com/Sutherlands-Handbook-bicycle-mechanics-Sutherland/dp/091
>>>> 4578065/ref=pd_bbs_2/102-4791940-4852967?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1191039436&sr=8-2
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sep 29, 12:05 am, Mark <mblackwell1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>> Well as I am increasingly intrigued by the mechanics of bikes. There
>>>>> is a lot I just have never taken apart, put back together, and frankly
>>>>> don't fully understand how things work. I wondered if there is a book
>>>>> that is accepted as "the book to have on bike maintenance" that shows
>>>>> pictures and step by step instructions much the way the Chiltons book
>>>>> does for auto repair.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd also be interested in books on bike design. Now I would like to
>>>>> keep the theory to a practical level. No I have no idea to turn this
>>>>> into an engineering project. I am already married to an engineer and
>>>>> the last thing one needs is two engineers in the same house. lol
>>> At a much lower price, Zinn and the Art of Mountain Bike Maintenance (and
>>> the similar Road Bike Maintenance) are good Chilton-level books. I'd just
>>> get the one for your primary kind of ride, as much of the material
>>> overlaps, and the differences aren't liable to catch you out unless
>>> you're a roadie and you decide to start doing your own fork maintenance
>>> on your MTB.
>>>
>>> Sheldonbrown.com seems like it has directions on virtually every
>>> mechanical repair known to cycling, so it's almost as good as having your
>>> own bike manual.
>>>
>>> I make no submission on most bike design books, but regular contributor
>>> here Jobst Brandt literally wrote the book
>> /a/ book.
>>
>>> on bicycle wheels, called "The Bicycle Wheel," and it covers both the
>>> theory of wheels and the proper procedure for wheelbuilding.
>>>
>> procedure, yes. theory? some of it is badly awry. spoke tension "as
>> high as the rim can bear" for example is based on a fundamental
>> misunderstanding by the author and that is of the most practical [and
>> costly] consequence to the novice builder - excess tension can cause a
>> higher propensity for rim buckling and directly cause rim cracking. the
>> book should should be amended to specify spoke tension "as determined by
>> the rim manufacturer".
>
> I guess that we all saw that coming...sad
>
>

And completely wrong, it's not what the book says at all.

[jim beam]

Frank Drackman wrote:
> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
> news:mZSdnW2KsY96yWPbnZ2dnUVZ_gOdnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>> Ryan Cousineau wrote:
>>> In article <1191039479.922619.176200@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups. com>,
>>> BigJulie <julianshapiro@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> sutherland's
>>>>
>>>> http://www.amazon.com/Sutherlands-Handbook-bicycle-mechanics-Sutherland/dp/091
>>>> 4578065/ref=pd_bbs_2/102-4791940-4852967?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1191039436&sr=8-2
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sep 29, 12:05 am, Mark <mblackwell1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>> Well as I am increasingly intrigued by the mechanics of bikes. There
>>>>> is a lot I just have never taken apart, put back together, and frankly
>>>>> don't fully understand how things work. I wondered if there is a book
>>>>> that is accepted as "the book to have on bike maintenance" that shows
>>>>> pictures and step by step instructions much the way the Chiltons book
>>>>> does for auto repair.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd also be interested in books on bike design. Now I would like to
>>>>> keep the theory to a practical level. No I have no idea to turn this
>>>>> into an engineering project. I am already married to an engineer and
>>>>> the last thing one needs is two engineers in the same house. lol
>>> At a much lower price, Zinn and the Art of Mountain Bike Maintenance (and
>>> the similar Road Bike Maintenance) are good Chilton-level books. I'd just
>>> get the one for your primary kind of ride, as much of the material
>>> overlaps, and the differences aren't liable to catch you out unless
>>> you're a roadie and you decide to start doing your own fork maintenance
>>> on your MTB.
>>>
>>> Sheldonbrown.com seems like it has directions on virtually every
>>> mechanical repair known to cycling, so it's almost as good as having your
>>> own bike manual.
>>>
>>> I make no submission on most bike design books, but regular contributor
>>> here Jobst Brandt literally wrote the book
>> /a/ book.
>>
>>> on bicycle wheels, called "The Bicycle Wheel," and it covers both the
>>> theory of wheels and the proper procedure for wheelbuilding.
>>>
>> procedure, yes. theory? some of it is badly awry. spoke tension "as
>> high as the rim can bear" for example is based on a fundamental
>> misunderstanding by the author and that is of the most practical [and
>> costly] consequence to the novice builder - excess tension can cause a
>> higher propensity for rim buckling and directly cause rim cracking. the
>> book should should be amended to specify spoke tension "as determined by
>> the rim manufacturer".
>
> I guess that we all saw that coming...sad
>
>
what's sad? having to correct gross error? or being gullible so that
having smoke blown up your skirt seems like it's a good thing?

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article <1LadnYtQHvW8CmPbnZ2dnUVZ_sCtnZ2d@comcast.com>,
"Frank Drackman" <frankdrack@yahoo.com> wrote:

> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
> news:mZSdnW2KsY96yWPbnZ2dnUVZ_gOdnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
> > Ryan Cousineau wrote:

> >> I make no submission on most bike design books, but regular contributor
> >> here Jobst Brandt literally wrote the book
> >
> > /a/ book.
> >
> >> on bicycle wheels, called "The Bicycle Wheel," and it covers both the
> >> theory of wheels and the proper procedure for wheelbuilding.
> >>
> >
> > procedure, yes. theory? some of it is badly awry...
>
> I guess that we all saw that coming...sad

Actually, thanks to killfiles, I didn't see it at all.

--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos

[carlfogel@comcast.net]

On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 16:38:15 -0400, Peter Cole
<peter_cole@comcast.net> wrote:

>Frank Drackman wrote:
>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
>> news:mZSdnW2KsY96yWPbnZ2dnUVZ_gOdnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>>> Ryan Cousineau wrote:
>>>> In article <1191039479.922619.176200@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups. com>,
>>>> BigJulie <julianshapiro@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> sutherland's
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.amazon.com/Sutherlands-Handbook-bicycle-mechanics-Sutherland/dp/091
>>>>> 4578065/ref=pd_bbs_2/102-4791940-4852967?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1191039436&sr=8-2
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sep 29, 12:05 am, Mark <mblackwell1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Well as I am increasingly intrigued by the mechanics of bikes. There
>>>>>> is a lot I just have never taken apart, put back together, and frankly
>>>>>> don't fully understand how things work. I wondered if there is a book
>>>>>> that is accepted as "the book to have on bike maintenance" that shows
>>>>>> pictures and step by step instructions much the way the Chiltons book
>>>>>> does for auto repair.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd also be interested in books on bike design. Now I would like to
>>>>>> keep the theory to a practical level. No I have no idea to turn this
>>>>>> into an engineering project. I am already married to an engineer and
>>>>>> the last thing one needs is two engineers in the same house. lol
>>>> At a much lower price, Zinn and the Art of Mountain Bike Maintenance (and
>>>> the similar Road Bike Maintenance) are good Chilton-level books. I'd just
>>>> get the one for your primary kind of ride, as much of the material
>>>> overlaps, and the differences aren't liable to catch you out unless
>>>> you're a roadie and you decide to start doing your own fork maintenance
>>>> on your MTB.
>>>>
>>>> Sheldonbrown.com seems like it has directions on virtually every
>>>> mechanical repair known to cycling, so it's almost as good as having your
>>>> own bike manual.
>>>>
>>>> I make no submission on most bike design books, but regular contributor
>>>> here Jobst Brandt literally wrote the book
>>> /a/ book.
>>>
>>>> on bicycle wheels, called "The Bicycle Wheel," and it covers both the
>>>> theory of wheels and the proper procedure for wheelbuilding.
>>>>
>>> procedure, yes. theory? some of it is badly awry. spoke tension "as
>>> high as the rim can bear" for example is based on a fundamental
>>> misunderstanding by the author and that is of the most practical [and
>>> costly] consequence to the novice builder - excess tension can cause a
>>> higher propensity for rim buckling and directly cause rim cracking. the
>>> book should should be amended to specify spoke tension "as determined by
>>> the rim manufacturer".
>>
>> I guess that we all saw that coming...sad
>>
>
>And completely wrong, it's not what the book says at all.

Dear Peter,

Here's what the 3rd edition says:

FINDING THE RIGHT TENSION

The following method works well in determining proper spoke tension
for conventional road rims of up to 43 0 grams with 36 spokes. Tighten
all the spokes a quarter turn at a time, starting at the valve stem
hole. Once a distinct tone can be made by plucking, and spokes are not
easily squeezed together by grasping them in pairs, it is time to
check tension. After each round of tightening, test the tension by
stress relieving. If the wheel becomes untrue in two large waves
during stress relieving, the maximum, safe tension has been exceeded.
Approach this tension carefully to avoid major rim distortions. When
the wheel loses alignment from stress relieving, loosen all spokes a
half turn before retruing the wheel

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

[jim beam]

carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 16:38:15 -0400, Peter Cole
> <peter_cole@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> Frank Drackman wrote:
>>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
>>> news:mZSdnW2KsY96yWPbnZ2dnUVZ_gOdnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>>>> Ryan Cousineau wrote:
>>>>> In article <1191039479.922619.176200@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups. com>,
>>>>> BigJulie <julianshapiro@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> sutherland's
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.amazon.com/Sutherlands-Handbook-bicycle-mechanics-Sutherland/dp/091
>>>>>> 4578065/ref=pd_bbs_2/102-4791940-4852967?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1191039436&sr=8-2
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sep 29, 12:05 am, Mark <mblackwell1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Well as I am increasingly intrigued by the mechanics of bikes. There
>>>>>>> is a lot I just have never taken apart, put back together, and frankly
>>>>>>> don't fully understand how things work. I wondered if there is a book
>>>>>>> that is accepted as "the book to have on bike maintenance" that shows
>>>>>>> pictures and step by step instructions much the way the Chiltons book
>>>>>>> does for auto repair.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'd also be interested in books on bike design. Now I would like to
>>>>>>> keep the theory to a practical level. No I have no idea to turn this
>>>>>>> into an engineering project. I am already married to an engineer and
>>>>>>> the last thing one needs is two engineers in the same house. lol
>>>>> At a much lower price, Zinn and the Art of Mountain Bike Maintenance (and
>>>>> the similar Road Bike Maintenance) are good Chilton-level books. I'd just
>>>>> get the one for your primary kind of ride, as much of the material
>>>>> overlaps, and the differences aren't liable to catch you out unless
>>>>> you're a roadie and you decide to start doing your own fork maintenance
>>>>> on your MTB.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sheldonbrown.com seems like it has directions on virtually every
>>>>> mechanical repair known to cycling, so it's almost as good as having your
>>>>> own bike manual.
>>>>>
>>>>> I make no submission on most bike design books, but regular contributor
>>>>> here Jobst Brandt literally wrote the book
>>>> /a/ book.
>>>>
>>>>> on bicycle wheels, called "The Bicycle Wheel," and it covers both the
>>>>> theory of wheels and the proper procedure for wheelbuilding.
>>>>>
>>>> procedure, yes. theory? some of it is badly awry. spoke tension "as
>>>> high as the rim can bear" for example is based on a fundamental
>>>> misunderstanding by the author and that is of the most practical [and
>>>> costly] consequence to the novice builder - excess tension can cause a
>>>> higher propensity for rim buckling and directly cause rim cracking. the
>>>> book should should be amended to specify spoke tension "as determined by
>>>> the rim manufacturer".
>>> I guess that we all saw that coming...sad
>>>
>> And completely wrong, it's not what the book says at all.
>
> Dear Peter,
>
> Here's what the 3rd edition says:
>
> FINDING THE RIGHT TENSION
>
> The following method works well in determining proper spoke tension
> for conventional road rims of up to 43 0 grams with 36 spokes. Tighten
> all the spokes a quarter turn at a time, starting at the valve stem
> hole. Once a distinct tone can be made by plucking, and spokes are not
> easily squeezed together by grasping them in pairs, it is time to
> check tension. After each round of tightening, test the tension by
> stress relieving. If the wheel becomes untrue in two large waves
> during stress relieving, the maximum, safe tension has been exceeded.
> Approach this tension carefully to avoid major rim distortions. When
> the wheel loses alignment from stress relieving, loosen all spokes a
> half turn before retruing the wheel
>
> Cheers,
>
> Carl Fogel

which is as complete a description of how to achieve spoke tension "as
high as the rim can bear" as there ever was!

[Peter Cole]

carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 16:38:15 -0400, Peter Cole
> <peter_cole@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> Frank Drackman wrote:
>>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
>>> news:mZSdnW2KsY96yWPbnZ2dnUVZ_gOdnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>>>> Ryan Cousineau wrote:
>>>>> In article <1191039479.922619.176200@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups. com>,
>>>>> BigJulie <julianshapiro@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> sutherland's
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.amazon.com/Sutherlands-Handbook-bicycle-mechanics-Sutherland/dp/091
>>>>>> 4578065/ref=pd_bbs_2/102-4791940-4852967?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1191039436&sr=8-2
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sep 29, 12:05 am, Mark <mblackwell1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Well as I am increasingly intrigued by the mechanics of bikes. There
>>>>>>> is a lot I just have never taken apart, put back together, and frankly
>>>>>>> don't fully understand how things work. I wondered if there is a book
>>>>>>> that is accepted as "the book to have on bike maintenance" that shows
>>>>>>> pictures and step by step instructions much the way the Chiltons book
>>>>>>> does for auto repair.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'd also be interested in books on bike design. Now I would like to
>>>>>>> keep the theory to a practical level. No I have no idea to turn this
>>>>>>> into an engineering project. I am already married to an engineer and
>>>>>>> the last thing one needs is two engineers in the same house. lol
>>>>> At a much lower price, Zinn and the Art of Mountain Bike Maintenance (and
>>>>> the similar Road Bike Maintenance) are good Chilton-level books. I'd just
>>>>> get the one for your primary kind of ride, as much of the material
>>>>> overlaps, and the differences aren't liable to catch you out unless
>>>>> you're a roadie and you decide to start doing your own fork maintenance
>>>>> on your MTB.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sheldonbrown.com seems like it has directions on virtually every
>>>>> mechanical repair known to cycling, so it's almost as good as having your
>>>>> own bike manual.
>>>>>
>>>>> I make no submission on most bike design books, but regular contributor
>>>>> here Jobst Brandt literally wrote the book
>>>> /a/ book.
>>>>
>>>>> on bicycle wheels, called "The Bicycle Wheel," and it covers both the
>>>>> theory of wheels and the proper procedure for wheelbuilding.
>>>>>
>>>> procedure, yes. theory? some of it is badly awry. spoke tension "as
>>>> high as the rim can bear" for example is based on a fundamental
>>>> misunderstanding by the author and that is of the most practical [and
>>>> costly] consequence to the novice builder - excess tension can cause a
>>>> higher propensity for rim buckling and directly cause rim cracking. the
>>>> book should should be amended to specify spoke tension "as determined by
>>>> the rim manufacturer".
>>> I guess that we all saw that coming...sad
>>>
>> And completely wrong, it's not what the book says at all.
>
> Dear Peter,
>
> Here's what the 3rd edition says:
>
> FINDING THE RIGHT TENSION
>
> The following method works well in determining proper spoke tension
> for conventional road rims of up to 43 0 grams with 36 spokes. Tighten
> all the spokes a quarter turn at a time, starting at the valve stem
> hole. Once a distinct tone can be made by plucking, and spokes are not
> easily squeezed together by grasping them in pairs, it is time to
> check tension. After each round of tightening, test the tension by
> stress relieving. If the wheel becomes untrue in two large waves
> during stress relieving, the maximum, safe tension has been exceeded.
> Approach this tension carefully to avoid major rim distortions. When
> the wheel loses alignment from stress relieving, loosen all spokes a
> half turn before retruing the wheel
>
> Cheers,
>
> Carl Fogel

Yes, I know, I have that edition.

It also describes, in a previous section "Final Tensioning", use of a
tensiometer (with drawing), and comparison by tone to a known good wheel
as methods of achieving proper tension.

In the context, the method described above is given as an alternative
with the stated qualifications (<430g, 36 spokes), presumably for those
without tensiometers.

He goes on to say that for heavy rims or road rims with less than 32
spokes that tensioning is usually at the limit when nipples can no
longer be easily turned.

The overall impression I get is that Jobst is trying to give people a
feel for how tight spokes should be. It seems obvious that, for rims
where the manufacturer has specified a maximum spoke tension, those
limits should be observed, and a tensiometer is required to do that.

From its online manual, Mavic indicates that conventional 3 cross
wheels should have tensions in the 70-90kg range. They also set weight
limits on their road wheels (2008) for 100kg, bike rider & gear. Both
seem low. Perhaps wheel builders using Mavic product should read the
fine print carefully and never build without a tensiometer.

It would be interesting to know what the actual tension would be if the
quoted procedure was followed for the kind of rim described. As far as
I know, no one has reported that.

[Hobbes@spnb&s.com]

On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 19:46:48 -0700, jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:

>Frank Drackman wrote:
>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
>> news:mZSdnW2KsY96yWPbnZ2dnUVZ_gOdnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>>> Ryan Cousineau wrote:
>>>> In article <1191039479.922619.176200@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups. com>,
>>>> BigJulie <julianshapiro@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> sutherland's
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.amazon.com/Sutherlands-Handbook-bicycle-mechanics-Sutherland/dp/091
>>>>> 4578065/ref=pd_bbs_2/102-4791940-4852967?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1191039436&sr=8-2
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sep 29, 12:05 am, Mark <mblackwell1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Well as I am increasingly intrigued by the mechanics of bikes. There
>>>>>> is a lot I just have never taken apart, put back together, and frankly
>>>>>> don't fully understand how things work. I wondered if there is a book
>>>>>> that is accepted as "the book to have on bike maintenance" that shows
>>>>>> pictures and step by step instructions much the way the Chiltons book
>>>>>> does for auto repair.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd also be interested in books on bike design. Now I would like to
>>>>>> keep the theory to a practical level. No I have no idea to turn this
>>>>>> into an engineering project. I am already married to an engineer and
>>>>>> the last thing one needs is two engineers in the same house. lol
>>>> At a much lower price, Zinn and the Art of Mountain Bike Maintenance (and
>>>> the similar Road Bike Maintenance) are good Chilton-level books. I'd just
>>>> get the one for your primary kind of ride, as much of the material
>>>> overlaps, and the differences aren't liable to catch you out unless
>>>> you're a roadie and you decide to start doing your own fork maintenance
>>>> on your MTB.
>>>>
>>>> Sheldonbrown.com seems like it has directions on virtually every
>>>> mechanical repair known to cycling, so it's almost as good as having your
>>>> own bike manual.
>>>>
>>>> I make no submission on most bike design books, but regular contributor
>>>> here Jobst Brandt literally wrote the book
>>> /a/ book.
>>>
>>>> on bicycle wheels, called "The Bicycle Wheel," and it covers both the
>>>> theory of wheels and the proper procedure for wheelbuilding.
>>>>
>>> procedure, yes. theory? some of it is badly awry. spoke tension "as
>>> high as the rim can bear" for example is based on a fundamental
>>> misunderstanding by the author and that is of the most practical [and
>>> costly] consequence to the novice builder - excess tension can cause a
>>> higher propensity for rim buckling and directly cause rim cracking. the
>>> book should should be amended to specify spoke tension "as determined by
>>> the rim manufacturer".
>>
>> I guess that we all saw that coming...sad
>>
>>
>what's sad? having to correct gross error? or being gullible so that
>having smoke blown up your skirt seems like it's a good thing?

This is NOT torquing a bolt until it starts to strip and then backing off a
little. Stop pretending it is. The phrase "as high as the rim can bear" does NOT
equal "higher than the rim can bear." Using the specified tension from the
manufacturer is a convenient, well documented determination of how high a
tension the rim can bear. Not a bad thing. Not necessarily in conflict with the
other.

If you want to keep beating this horse please continue in private, there's
nothing but bones and maggots left and it smells bad. Stop.

[Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com]

On Sep 29, 10:44 pm, Ryan Cousineau <rcous...@sfu.ca> wrote:
> In article <1LadnYtQHvW8CmPbnZ2dnUVZ_sCtn...@comcast.com>,
> "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > "jim beam" <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote in message
> >news:mZSdnW2KsY96yWPbnZ2dnUVZ_gOdnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
> > > Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> > >> I make no submission on most bike design books, but regular contributor
> > >> here Jobst Brandt literally wrote the book
>
> > > /a/ book.
>
> > >> on bicycle wheels, called "The Bicycle Wheel," and it covers both the
> > >> theory of wheels and the proper procedure for wheelbuilding.
>
> > > procedure, yes. theory? some of it is badly awry...
>
> > I guess that we all saw that coming...sad
>
> Actually, thanks to killfiles, I didn't see it at all.
>
> --
> Ryan Cousineau rcous...@sfu.cahttp://www.wiredcola.com/
> "I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
> to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos

Which killfile do you use> And is it applicable to Google groups?

Been here before...some authors beg for killfile.

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article <1191159475.086238.76060@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.c om>,
"Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com" <peter@vecchios.com> wrote:

> On Sep 29, 10:44 pm, Ryan Cousineau <rcous...@sfu.ca> wrote:
> > In article <1LadnYtQHvW8CmPbnZ2dnUVZ_sCtn...@comcast.com>,
> > "Frank Drackman" <frankdr...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > > I guess that we all saw that coming...sad
> >
> > Actually, thanks to killfiles, I didn't see it at all.
> >
> > --
> > Ryan Cousineau rcous...@sfu.cahttp://www.wiredcola.com/
> > "I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
> > to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos
>
> Which killfile do you use> And is it applicable to Google groups?
>
> Been here before...some authors beg for killfile.

My primary newsreader is the venerable MT-Newswatcher on the Mac. It has
an integrated killfile system which allows me to kill articles by
subject, author, with or without a time limit, and in a single group,
across all groups, or in just one branch of a hierarchy (eg I could kill
an author, but only in rec.bicycles.* groups, so I could still read
their sci.astronomy posts). It surely has more power than even that, but
I have not yet needed it.

--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos

[jim beam]

Hobbes@spnb&s.com wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 19:46:48 -0700, jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
>> Frank Drackman wrote:
>>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
>>> news:mZSdnW2KsY96yWPbnZ2dnUVZ_gOdnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>>>> Ryan Cousineau wrote:
>>>>> In article <1191039479.922619.176200@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups. com>,
>>>>> BigJulie <julianshapiro@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> sutherland's
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.amazon.com/Sutherlands-Handbook-bicycle-mechanics-Sutherland/dp/091
>>>>>> 4578065/ref=pd_bbs_2/102-4791940-4852967?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1191039436&sr=8-2
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sep 29, 12:05 am, Mark <mblackwell1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Well as I am increasingly intrigued by the mechanics of bikes. There
>>>>>>> is a lot I just have never taken apart, put back together, and frankly
>>>>>>> don't fully understand how things work. I wondered if there is a book
>>>>>>> that is accepted as "the book to have on bike maintenance" that shows
>>>>>>> pictures and step by step instructions much the way the Chiltons book
>>>>>>> does for auto repair.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'd also be interested in books on bike design. Now I would like to
>>>>>>> keep the theory to a practical level. No I have no idea to turn this
>>>>>>> into an engineering project. I am already married to an engineer and
>>>>>>> the last thing one needs is two engineers in the same house. lol
>>>>> At a much lower price, Zinn and the Art of Mountain Bike Maintenance (and
>>>>> the similar Road Bike Maintenance) are good Chilton-level books. I'd just
>>>>> get the one for your primary kind of ride, as much of the material
>>>>> overlaps, and the differences aren't liable to catch you out unless
>>>>> you're a roadie and you decide to start doing your own fork maintenance
>>>>> on your MTB.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sheldonbrown.com seems like it has directions on virtually every
>>>>> mechanical repair known to cycling, so it's almost as good as having your
>>>>> own bike manual.
>>>>>
>>>>> I make no submission on most bike design books, but regular contributor
>>>>> here Jobst Brandt literally wrote the book
>>>> /a/ book.
>>>>
>>>>> on bicycle wheels, called "The Bicycle Wheel," and it covers both the
>>>>> theory of wheels and the proper procedure for wheelbuilding.
>>>>>
>>>> procedure, yes. theory? some of it is badly awry. spoke tension "as
>>>> high as the rim can bear" for example is based on a fundamental
>>>> misunderstanding by the author and that is of the most practical [and
>>>> costly] consequence to the novice builder - excess tension can cause a
>>>> higher propensity for rim buckling and directly cause rim cracking. the
>>>> book should should be amended to specify spoke tension "as determined by
>>>> the rim manufacturer".
>>> I guess that we all saw that coming...sad
>>>
>>>
>> what's sad? having to correct gross error? or being gullible so that
>> having smoke blown up your skirt seems like it's a good thing?
>
> This is NOT torquing a bolt until it starts to strip and then backing off a
> little. Stop pretending it is. The phrase "as high as the rim can bear" does NOT
> equal "higher than the rim can bear."

you don't understand the problem. because the rim doesn't pretzel
doesn't mean it's not at its strength limit. pretzel means yield. but
fatigue loading for aluminum is typically 1/3 yield. if spoke tension
is close to the limit of gross yield, it surely shouldn't be too hard to
understand that point loading is also beyond that necessary to ensure a
decent fatigue life - particularly in highly anisotropic materials like
rim extrusions where strength is much lower perpendicular to the
extrusion axis.

> Using the specified tension from the
> manufacturer is a convenient, well documented determination of how high a
> tension the rim can bear. Not a bad thing. Not necessarily in conflict with the
> other.
>
> If you want to keep beating this horse please continue in private, there's
> nothing but bones and maggots left and it smells bad. Stop.

ignorance is no excuse. i want the facts corrected so that people stop
wasting their money by prematurely destroying their rims with excess
spoke tension. what do /you/ want? other than to not be confronted
with uncomfortable reality that's you've been misled of course.

[Peter Cole]

jim beam wrote:
> Hobbes@spnb&s.com wrote:
>
>> This is NOT torquing a bolt until it starts to strip and then backing
>> off a
>> little. Stop pretending it is. The phrase "as high as the rim can
>> bear" does NOT
>> equal "higher than the rim can bear."
>
> you don't understand the problem. because the rim doesn't pretzel
> doesn't mean it's not at its strength limit.

Which "strength limit"?

> pretzel means yield.

No, it doesn't. It means to buckle.

> but
> fatigue loading for aluminum is typically 1/3 yield. if spoke tension
> is close to the limit of gross yield, it surely shouldn't be too hard to
> understand that point loading is also beyond that necessary to ensure a
> decent fatigue life - particularly in highly anisotropic materials like
> rim extrusions where strength is much lower perpendicular to the
> extrusion axis.

Hoo boy! Just how do you relate spoke tension to fatigue *at the spoke
bed* without knowing the thickness of the bed? What a howler!

Anisotropic, my eye.

>
>> Using the specified tension from the
>> manufacturer is a convenient, well documented determination of how
>> high a
>> tension the rim can bear. Not a bad thing. Not necessarily in conflict
>> with the
>> other.
>>
>> If you want to keep beating this horse please continue in private,
>> there's
>> nothing but bones and maggots left and it smells bad. Stop.
>
> ignorance is no excuse. i want the facts corrected so that people stop
> wasting their money by prematurely destroying their rims with excess
> spoke tension. what do /you/ want? other than to not be confronted
> with uncomfortable reality that's you've been misled of course.

Tell Mavic (as an interested and passionate consumer advocate) that they
shouldn't be so coy about publishing the (weak) specs on their rims.
They like stickers, tell them to add one. Problem solved.

[jim beam]

Peter Cole wrote:
> carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:
>> On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 16:38:15 -0400, Peter Cole
>> <peter_cole@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Frank Drackman wrote:
>>>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:mZSdnW2KsY96yWPbnZ2dnUVZ_gOdnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>>>>> Ryan Cousineau wrote:
>>>>>> In article <1191039479.922619.176200@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups. com>,
>>>>>> BigJulie <julianshapiro@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> sutherland's
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.amazon.com/Sutherlands-Handbook-bicycle-mechanics-Sutherland/dp/091
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 4578065/ref=pd_bbs_2/102-4791940-4852967?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1191039436&sr=8-2
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sep 29, 12:05 am, Mark <mblackwell1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Well as I am increasingly intrigued by the mechanics of bikes.
>>>>>>>> There
>>>>>>>> is a lot I just have never taken apart, put back together, and
>>>>>>>> frankly
>>>>>>>> don't fully understand how things work. I wondered if there is
>>>>>>>> a book
>>>>>>>> that is accepted as "the book to have on bike maintenance" that
>>>>>>>> shows
>>>>>>>> pictures and step by step instructions much the way the Chiltons
>>>>>>>> book
>>>>>>>> does for auto repair.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'd also be interested in books on bike design. Now I would
>>>>>>>> like to
>>>>>>>> keep the theory to a practical level. No I have no idea to turn
>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>> into an engineering project. I am already married to an
>>>>>>>> engineer and
>>>>>>>> the last thing one needs is two engineers in the same house. lol
>>>>>> At a much lower price, Zinn and the Art of Mountain Bike
>>>>>> Maintenance (and the similar Road Bike Maintenance) are good
>>>>>> Chilton-level books. I'd just get the one for your primary kind of
>>>>>> ride, as much of the material overlaps, and the differences aren't
>>>>>> liable to catch you out unless you're a roadie and you decide to
>>>>>> start doing your own fork maintenance on your MTB.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sheldonbrown.com seems like it has directions on virtually every
>>>>>> mechanical repair known to cycling, so it's almost as good as
>>>>>> having your own bike manual.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I make no submission on most bike design books, but regular
>>>>>> contributor here Jobst Brandt literally wrote the book
>>>>> /a/ book.
>>>>>
>>>>>> on bicycle wheels, called "The Bicycle Wheel," and it covers both
>>>>>> the theory of wheels and the proper procedure for wheelbuilding.
>>>>>>
>>>>> procedure, yes. theory? some of it is badly awry. spoke tension
>>>>> "as high as the rim can bear" for example is based on a fundamental
>>>>> misunderstanding by the author and that is of the most practical
>>>>> [and costly] consequence to the novice builder - excess tension can
>>>>> cause a higher propensity for rim buckling and directly cause rim
>>>>> cracking. the book should should be amended to specify spoke
>>>>> tension "as determined by the rim manufacturer".
>>>> I guess that we all saw that coming...sad
>>> And completely wrong, it's not what the book says at all.
>>
>> Dear Peter,
>>
>> Here's what the 3rd edition says:
>>
>> FINDING THE RIGHT TENSION
>>
>> The following method works well in determining proper spoke tension
>> for conventional road rims of up to 43 0 grams with 36 spokes. Tighten
>> all the spokes a quarter turn at a time, starting at the valve stem
>> hole. Once a distinct tone can be made by plucking, and spokes are not
>> easily squeezed together by grasping them in pairs, it is time to
>> check tension. After each round of tightening, test the tension by
>> stress relieving. If the wheel becomes untrue in two large waves
>> during stress relieving, the maximum, safe tension has been exceeded.
>> Approach this tension carefully to avoid major rim distortions. When
>> the wheel loses alignment from stress relieving, loosen all spokes a
>> half turn before retruing the wheel
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Carl Fogel
>
> Yes, I know, I have that edition.
>
> It also describes, in a previous section "Final Tensioning", use of a
> tensiometer (with drawing), and comparison by tone to a known good wheel
> as methods of achieving proper tension.
>
> In the context, the method described above is given as an alternative
> with the stated qualifications (<430g, 36 spokes), presumably for those
> without tensiometers.
>
> He goes on to say that for heavy rims or road rims with less than 32
> spokes that tensioning is usually at the limit when nipples can no
> longer be easily turned.
>
> The overall impression I get is that Jobst is trying to give people a
> feel for how tight spokes should be. It seems obvious that, for rims
> where the manufacturer has specified a maximum spoke tension, those
> limits should be observed, and a tensiometer is required to do that.
>
> From its online manual, Mavic indicates that conventional 3 cross
> wheels should have tensions in the 70-90kg range. They also set weight
> limits on their road wheels (2008) for 100kg, bike rider & gear. Both
> seem low. Perhaps wheel builders using Mavic product should read the
> fine print carefully and never build without a tensiometer.
>
> It would be interesting to know what the actual tension would be if the
> quoted procedure was followed for the kind of rim described. As far as
> I know, no one has reported that.

to avoid pretzel? what's the point? longevity depends on avoiding rim
cracking and fatigue, and the manufacturer has reported that already.
increasing tension doesn't increase strength so there's no point seeking
more of it.

[Peter Cole]

jim beam wrote:
> Peter Cole wrote:

>> It would be interesting to know what the actual tension would be if
>> the quoted procedure was followed for the kind of rim described. As
>> far as I know, no one has reported that.
>
> to avoid pretzel? what's the point?

I'm not sure what you're trying to say. Jobst infers that following his
alternate procedure will result in a spoke tension of around 100kg.

> longevity depends on avoiding rim
> cracking and fatigue, and the manufacturer has reported that already.
> increasing tension doesn't increase strength so there's no point seeking
> more of it.

Mavic (and most others I presume) spec a min and max. I haven't seen
anyone (including Jobst) recommending using more than the max spec. So
what's the problem?

You seem to be sure that Jobst's alternate method will produce higher
than max spec spoke tensions. How do you know that?

I've used lots of wheels, Mavic & others, the only cracking I ever got
was with Mavic Reflex rims (2). I don't know what tension they were
built to, I don't think it was very high, they had to be Locktited. All
of my other rims just wore out on the brake track.

[jim beam]

Peter Cole wrote:
> jim beam wrote:
>> Peter Cole wrote:
>
>>> It would be interesting to know what the actual tension would be if
>>> the quoted procedure was followed for the kind of rim described. As
>>> far as I know, no one has reported that.
>>
>> to avoid pretzel? what's the point?
>
> I'm not sure what you're trying to say. Jobst infers that following his
> alternate procedure will result in a spoke tension of around 100kg.

"infers"??? how can you infer a number??? oh, wait, it's /convenient/
to state it after the fact! my mistake.

>
>> longevity depends on avoiding rim cracking and fatigue, and the
>> manufacturer has reported that already. increasing tension doesn't
>> increase strength so there's no point seeking more of it.
>
> Mavic (and most others I presume) spec a min and max. I haven't seen
> anyone (including Jobst) recommending using more than the max spec. So
> what's the problem?

what is numerical about "as high as the rim can bear"??? modern deep
profile rims can take much more stress before they buckle, but the alloy
from which they are made is just as anisotropic and very similar in
yield. a rim stiff enough to take double spoke tension [as determined
by the jobstian method] before buckling isn't going to make rims last
very long when it comes to cracking. use of a tensiometer is therefore
essential.

>
> You seem to be sure that Jobst's alternate method will produce higher
> than max spec spoke tensions. How do you know that?

because i've tried it!


>
> I've used lots of wheels, Mavic & others, the only cracking I ever got
> was with Mavic Reflex rims (2). I don't know what tension they were
> built to,

er,...

> I don't think it was very high,

that's a cop-out - for someone purporting to be an engineer, it's also
remarkably incurious.

> they had to be Locktited.

eh? aren't you one of those that condemns loctite?

> All
> of my other rims just wore out on the brake track.

as will happen to all rims if accident or excess spoke tension doesn't
kill them first.

[jim beam]

Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
> "jim beam" aka evan williams wrote:
>> Ryan Cousineau wrote:
>>> ...
>>> I make no submission on most bike design books, but regular
>>> contributor here Jobst Brandt literally wrote the book
>>
>> /a/ book.
>>
>>> on bicycle wheels, called "The Bicycle Wheel," and it covers both the
>>> theory of wheels and the proper procedure for wheelbuilding.
>>>
>>
>> procedure, yes. theory? some of it is badly awry. spoke tension "as
>> high as the rim can bear" for example is based on a fundamental
>> misunderstanding by the author and that is of the most practical [and
>> costly] consequence to the novice builder - excess tension can cause a
>> higher propensity for rim buckling and directly cause rim cracking.
>> the book should should be amended to specify spoke tension "as
>> determined by the rim manufacturer".
>
> I wonder if "jim" has a macro for anti-Jobst replies?
>
that's "corrective", not "anti-jobst".

[Jambo]

"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
news:9-Wdna115r728p3anZ2dnUVZ_q7inZ2d@speakeasy.net...
> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>> I wonder if "jim" has a macro for anti-Jobst replies?
>>
> that's "corrective", not "anti-jobst".

That's "anti-Jobst", not "corrective".

[Peter Cole]

jim beam wrote:
> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>> "jim beam" aka evan williams wrote:
>>> Ryan Cousineau wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>> I make no submission on most bike design books, but regular
>>>> contributor here Jobst Brandt literally wrote the book
>>>
>>> /a/ book.
>>>
>>>> on bicycle wheels, called "The Bicycle Wheel," and it covers both
>>>> the theory of wheels and the proper procedure for wheelbuilding.
>>>>
>>>
>>> procedure, yes. theory? some of it is badly awry. spoke tension
>>> "as high as the rim can bear" for example is based on a fundamental
>>> misunderstanding by the author and that is of the most practical [and
>>> costly] consequence to the novice builder - excess tension can cause
>>> a higher propensity for rim buckling and directly cause rim
>>> cracking. the book should should be amended to specify spoke tension
>>> "as determined by the rim manufacturer".
>>
>> I wonder if "jim" has a macro for anti-Jobst replies?
>>
> that's "corrective", not "anti-jobst".

Who do you think you are fooling?

[spikenettles@earthlink.net]

On Sep 30, 11:23 pm, jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:

Peter Cole wrote:

snip

> > You seem to be sure that Jobst's alternate method will produce
> > higher than max spec spoke tensions. How do you know that?

> because i've tried it!

Specifically, which 36 hole, conventional cross-section rim of 430 or
less grams did you try this on and what is your source for the
manufacturer's recommended spoke tension range? I'm asking because
I've learned from previous threads to not believe anything you say.
The exclamation point you put after your statement doesn't lift it
above the normal credibility level of zero.

> modern deep profile rims can take much more stress before they > buckle.... a rim stiff enough to take double spoke tension [as > determined by the jobstian method] before buckling isn't going to > make rims last very long when it comes to cracking. use of a > tensiometer is therefore essential.


Everyone would be aware of this either from their own knowledge,
experience and common sense or from having read Jobst's book. Nothing
like stating the obvious as if it's an original and profound
revelation from the sage of RBT, jim - never in doubt, often in error
- beam.

--

Spike

[Peter Cole]

jim beam wrote:
> Peter Cole wrote:

>> Mavic (and most others I presume) spec a min and max. I haven't seen
>> anyone (including Jobst) recommending using more than the max spec. So
>> what's the problem?
>
> what is numerical about "as high as the rim can bear"??? modern deep
> profile rims can take much more stress before they buckle, but the alloy
> from which they are made is just as anisotropic and very similar in
> yield. a rim stiff enough to take double spoke tension [as determined
> by the jobstian method] before buckling isn't going to make rims last
> very long when it comes to cracking. use of a tensiometer is therefore
> essential.

Jobst excluded heavy and/or deep section and/or low spoke count rims
from his alternate method.

If you had a tensiometer, and a manufacturer's max spoke tension spec.,
it would seem obvious to anyone to use both. The obvious context of his
method is where a spec and perhaps even a tensiometer weren't available.

>> You seem to be sure that Jobst's alternate method will produce higher
>> than max spec spoke tensions. How do you know that?
>
> because i've tried it!

I don't believe you've reported this before. What rim and what was your
final tension?


>> I've used lots of wheels, Mavic & others, the only cracking I ever got
>> was with Mavic Reflex rims (2). I don't know what tension they were
>> built to,
>
> er,...
>
> > I don't think it was very high,
>
> that's a cop-out - for someone purporting to be an engineer, it's also
> remarkably incurious.
>
> > they had to be Locktited.
>
> eh? aren't you one of those that condemns loctite?

I cite the Locktite as evidence they weren't too high. I didn't build
the wheel. It was my first bike purchase when I reentered cycling many
years ago. I only became curious after the fact when a wheel that had to
be Locktited to keep nipples from unscrewing also cracked spoke holes. I
started learning about wheels. That was my last wheel to use Locktite.
Also my last one to crack.

[carlfogel@comcast.net]

On Mon, 01 Oct 2007 00:25:06 -0700, spikenettles@earthlink.net wrote:

>On Sep 30, 11:23 pm, jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
>Peter Cole wrote:
>
>snip
>
>> > You seem to be sure that Jobst's alternate method will produce
>> > higher than max spec spoke tensions. How do you know that?
>
>> because i've tried it!
>
>Specifically, which 36 hole, conventional cross-section rim of 430 or
>less grams did you try this on and what is your source for the
>manufacturer's recommended spoke tension range? I'm asking because
>I've learned from previous threads to not believe anything you say.
>The exclamation point you put after your statement doesn't lift it
>above the normal credibility level of zero.
>
>> modern deep profile rims can take much more stress before they > buckle.... a rim stiff enough to take double spoke tension [as > determined by the jobstian method] before buckling isn't going to > make rims last very long when it comes to cracking. use of a > tensiometer is therefore essential.
>
>
>Everyone would be aware of this either from their own knowledge,
>experience and common sense or from having read Jobst's book. Nothing
>like stating the obvious as if it's an original and profound
>revelation from the sage of RBT, jim - never in doubt, often in error
>- beam.

Dear Spike,

Sorry, but people aren't actually reading "The Bicycle Wheel," which
is probably why they don't quote it.

The book does _say_ to use a tensiometer to determine the correct
tension, but only in the sense of measuring an already established
correct tension for later use in building the next identical wheel.

The book says that the correct tension is _first_ determined by other
methods, namely raising tension on 36-spoke count wheels until
squeezing spoke pairs together produces a deformed wheel or when the
spokes on low-count or deep-section wheels can no longer be tightened
without excessive windup:

"The final tension of a wheel built by feel is affected by the mood of
its builder. By using a tension measuring tool a builder can establish
proper tension, then repeat it. Such a tool, a tensiometer, measures
the deflection of a spoke over a given span in response to a standard
load. The dial is calibrated in tension or displacement. Either
measure is equally useful for wheel building. It is not necessary to
know the actual tension but only that the tension has reached the
desired mark. The correct maximum tension for a specific wheel design
must still be determined first by stress relieving. For some deep
section rims or wheels with few spokes, the limit of tension is
reached when spokes can no longer be tightened further without
excessive windup. For subsequent wheels of the same type the
tensiometer can accurately and quickly determine whether spokes have
reached the predetermined tension."

--3rd edition

Obviously, deep-section 36-spoke rims can stand more tension before
distorting than MA-2's.

I'm not arguing about wheel-building methods, just pointing out that
people who want to claim that Jobst's book says something ought to
provide quotes to back up their claims.

As far as I can see, Jim Beam's description is closer to being
accurate--the book says to raise tension until the rim fails to stay
in shape if you squeeze the spoke pairs, or to tighten low-count
spokes until the spoke wind-up reaches some undefined "excessive"
point.

If anyone has suggestions about other passages, I'll be glad to search
my scanned 3rd edition or browse through the first two editions. None
of them have an index (indexing was expensive back then), so I
sympathize with text-scholars who vaguely remember whatever edition
they have saying _something_ and are having trouble finding it.

(The deep section/low count/spoke windup comments were added in the
3rd edition. The book was re-written almost sentence by sentence,
twice, so don't be surprised if you have trouble finding things.
Remember, the first edition was based on and referred to 5, 6, and 7
speed rear wheels--things changed rapidly between 1981 and 1993.)

The only example of specific tension in the 3rd edition is this: "If
its spokes are tensioned to 1000 N, a 36-spoke wheel will support
approximately 400 kg."

The 1,000 Newtons mentioned is just an example for an ensuing
discussion of when spokes might go slack, not a specific tension
recommendation. It's the equivalent of 102 kgf, and a common figure
for many wheels today.

In any case, Jobst expects that to be reduced by 30% through the
constriction of the inflated tire:

"Although spoke tension is the principal static load on the rim,
tubular tire inflation has a similar effect. When inflated, the tire
becomes fatter and shrinks in circumference. The resulting force
depends on the tire cross section, cord angle and inflation pressure.
A tubular racing tire, inflated to 0.86 MPa, for instance, shrinks
with a force of 300 N (see Equation 8 in Part III). Its effect on
spoke tension can be detected with a tensiometer."

--3rd edition

That reduces the _effective_ spoke tension from about 100 kgf to about
70 kgf. Dianne's measurements suggest about a reduction of about 15
kgf for 700c box-section clinchers.

On a less pedantic note, the "kgf" commonly used nowadays for spoke
tension does not appear in the 3rd edition of 1993, just the two cited
passages with "kg".

It's possible that tensiometers were so rare back in 1981-1993 that no
manufacturers gave recommended kgf (or kg or newton or pound) tensions
for their rims, and that Jobst was simply giving the best possible
advice for the era when you had to find the right tension yourself.
Only after tensiometers became widely available would manufacturers
start giving the recommendations that can still be darned hard to find
today.

If so (and it's just a theory that tension recommendations were scarce
or non-existent), then Jobst was simply suggesting that using a
tensiometer to record whatever tension you found best by using other
methods was a quick and convenient way to build the next wheel.

Build the first wheel by raising tension until spoke-squeezing put it
out of true or the spokes began to wind up excessively (before anyone
sneers, try to define how much wind-up is excessive), measure the
results with a tensiometer (and also use it to check for even tension
all around the wheel), record the tension, and presto! The next wheel
is much quicker and easier to build because you just tighten it to the
X marked on your tensiometer.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

[jim beam]

spikenettles@earthlink.net wrote:
> On Sep 30, 11:23 pm, jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
> Peter Cole wrote:
>
> snip
>
>>> You seem to be sure that Jobst's alternate method will produce
>>> higher than max spec spoke tensions. How do you know that?
>
>> because i've tried it!
>
> Specifically, which 36 hole, conventional cross-section rim of 430 or
> less grams did you try this on

i've done this test on several wheels with different rims - mavic open
pro, x517, x618, etc. and of course, an ma2. spoke count and lacing
make no difference.


> and what is your source for the
> manufacturer's recommended spoke tension range?

i called mavic's tech department. 1-888-go-mavic. they're very helpful.


> I'm asking because
> I've learned from previous threads to not believe anything you say.

that's a personal issue for you spike. if i state something like
"modulus = stress/strain", you can independently verify "believability"
for yourself. and you could verify "believability" of the above too if
you had a tensiometer. and used it.


> The exclamation point you put after your statement doesn't lift it
> above the normal credibility level of zero.

that's a personal issue for you spike.

>
>> modern deep profile rims can take much more stress before they > buckle.... a rim stiff enough to take double spoke tension [as > determined by the jobstian method] before buckling isn't going to > make rims last very long when it comes to cracking. use of a > tensiometer is therefore essential.
>
>
> Everyone would be aware of this either from their own knowledge,
> experience and common sense or from having read Jobst's book. Nothing
> like stating the obvious as if it's an original and profound
> revelation from the sage of RBT, jim - never in doubt, often in error
> - beam.

"obvious"? it's apparently not "obvious" to jobst since he doesn't
cover this in his book. kind of a serious omission since the excess
spoke tension his procedure causes is directly responsible for rim
destruction that costs consumers and manufacturers a small fortune.

[Peter Cole]

carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:

> Sorry, but people aren't actually reading "The Bicycle Wheel," which
> is probably why they don't quote it.
>
> The book does _say_ to use a tensiometer to determine the correct
> tension, but only in the sense of measuring an already established
> correct tension for later use in building the next identical wheel.

To me, this would presume no manufacturer's spec on max spoke tension.
Otherwise, if you had a max spec and a tensiometer, why exceed it?


> The book says that the correct tension is _first_ determined by other
> methods, namely raising tension on 36-spoke count wheels until
> squeezing spoke pairs together produces a deformed wheel or when the
> spokes on low-count or deep-section wheels can no longer be tightened
> without excessive windup:

> Obviously, deep-section 36-spoke rims can stand more tension before
> distorting than MA-2's.

What this approach does is determine the maximum spoke tension by
finding the rim buckling point and then backing off considerably to
establish a safety margin.

The buckling point is determined by the rim cross section (thin column
buckling). The load that causes this buckling is circumferential
compression. It's not obvious to me that the wider, less tall cross
sections of older rims like the MA-2 buckled under less load than the
newer narrow/tall cross sections (Reflex, Open Pro). My guess is that
the MA-2 would be (a little) more buckle resistant, if anything.


> I'm not arguing about wheel-building methods, just pointing out that
> people who want to claim that Jobst's book says something ought to
> provide quotes to back up their claims.
>
> As far as I can see, Jim Beam's description is closer to being
> accurate--the book says to raise tension until the rim fails to stay
> in shape if you squeeze the spoke pairs, or to tighten low-count
> spokes until the spoke wind-up reaches some undefined "excessive"
> point.

There is nothing wrong with this method until the spoke tension exceeds
that which the spoke bed can take without cracking. Presumably, it is
that limit which is reflected in the manufacturer's maximum spoke
tension spec. -- for those who publish such things.

A quick look at online data seems to show Sun recommending 110kg max for
all road rims, and Mavic 70-90kg for "classic" rims. This would seem to
indicate Mavic rims have weaker spoke beds, at least in "classic" rims,
something many of us have observed directly. Other Mavic rims have max
tension spec up to 160kg.

My question was what is the actual tension achieved with Jobst's method
using rims that fit his criteria. He implies that will get you to around
100kg.


> The only example of specific tension in the 3rd edition is this: "If
> its spokes are tensioned to 1000 N, a 36-spoke wheel will support
> approximately 400 kg."

> The 1,000 Newtons mentioned is just an example for an ensuing
> discussion of when spokes might go slack, not a specific tension
> recommendation. It's the equivalent of 102 kgf, and a common figure
> for many wheels today.

All the equations in the back of the book seem to take 100kg as nominal
spoke tension. I assumed that the "buckle point" method got him there
with the typical rims he referenced, otherwise I don't know why he'd use
it as a nominal number.


> In any case, Jobst expects that to be reduced by 30% through the
> constriction of the inflated tire:

> (see Equation 8 in Part III). Its effect on
> spoke tension can be detected with a tensiometer."

One of us is misunderstanding that equation. I interpret it to mean that
the circumferential force from tire inflation nets (compression minus
expansion) to ~400N. Immediately above in equation #7, he calculates the
compressive rim force from spoke tension at 5730N, roughly a 7% change
in spoke tension, assuming a purely linear effect.

I don't understand what this has to do with anything, though.


> If so (and it's just a theory that tension recommendations were scarce
> or non-existent), then Jobst was simply suggesting that using a
> tensiometer to record whatever tension you found best by using other
> methods was a quick and convenient way to build the next wheel.

That's what he said. If spoke breakage isn't a limit (as shown), then
the only limits to spoke tension are rim buckling and bed cracking.
Buckling can be experimentally determined easily with his method.

As for bed cracking, if Jobst's method gets you to 100kg for "classic"
rims, you're good for all Sun road rims (according to them), but a bit
high for Mavic. Since Mavic knows how to make rims that can take 160kg
or more, it seems like they made their "classics" a bit on the dainty
side. Perhaps they should have made that better known -- even a feature:
"Our rims require 20% less spoke tension!".

[spikenettles@earthlink.net]

On Oct 1, 3:11 am, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
> On Mon, 01 Oct 2007 00:25:06 -0700, spikenett...@earthlink.net wrote:
> >On Sep 30, 11:23 pm, jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
> >Peter Cole wrote:
>
> >snip
>
> >> > You seem to be sure that Jobst's alternate method will produce
> >> > higher than max spec spoke tensions. How do you know that?
>
> >> because i've tried it!
>
> >Specifically, which 36 hole, conventional cross-section rim of 430 or
> >less grams did you try this on and what is your source for the
> >manufacturer's recommended spoke tension range? I'm asking because
> >I've learned from previous threads to not believe anything you say.
> >The exclamation point you put after your statement doesn't lift it
> >above the normal credibility level of zero.
>
> >> modern deep profile rims can take much more stress before they > buckle.... a rim stiff enough to take double spoke tension [as > determined by the jobstian method] before buckling isn't going to > make rims last very long when it comes to cracking. use of a > tensiometer is therefore essential.
>
> >Everyone would be aware of this either from their own knowledge,
> >experience and common sense or from having read Jobst's book. Nothing
> >like stating the obvious as if it's an original and profound
> >revelation from the sage of RBT, jim - never in doubt, often in error
> >- beam.
>
> Dear Spike,
>
> Sorry, but people aren't actually reading "The Bicycle Wheel," which
> is probably why they don't quote it.
>
> The book does _say_ to use a tensiometer to determine the correct
> tension, but only in the sense of measuring an already established
> correct tension for later use in building the next identical wheel.
>
> The book says that the correct tension is _first_ determined by other
> methods, namely raising tension on 36-spoke count wheels until
> squeezing spoke pairs together produces a deformed wheel or when the
> spokes on low-count or deep-section wheels can no longer be tightened
> without excessive windup:
>
> "The final tension of a wheel built by feel is affected by the mood of
> its builder. By using a tension measuring tool a builder can establish
> proper tension, then repeat it. Such a tool, a tensiometer, measures
> the deflection of a spoke over a given span in response to a standard
> load. The dial is calibrated in tension or displacement. Either
> measure is equally useful for wheel building. It is not necessary to
> know the actual tension but only that the tension has reached the
> desired mark. The correct maximum tension for a specific wheel design
> must still be determined first by stress relieving. For some deep
> section rims or wheels with few spokes, the limit of tension is
> reached when spokes can no longer be tightened further without
> excessive windup. For subsequent wheels of the same type the
> tensiometer can accurately and quickly determine whether spokes have
> reached the predetermined tension."
>
> --3rd edition
>
> Obviously, deep-section 36-spoke rims can stand more tension before
> distorting than MA-2's.
>
> I'm not arguing about wheel-building methods, just pointing out that
> people who want to claim that Jobst's book says something ought to
> provide quotes to back up their claims.
>
> As far as I can see, Jim Beam's description is closer to being
> accurate--the book says to raise tension until the rim fails to stay
> in shape if you squeeze the spoke pairs, or to tighten low-count
> spokes until the spoke wind-up reaches some undefined "excessive"
> point.
>
> If anyone has suggestions about other passages, I'll be glad to search
> my scanned 3rd edition or browse through the first two editions. None
> of them have an index (indexing was expensive back then), so I
> sympathize with text-scholars who vaguely remember whatever edition
> they have saying _something_ and are having trouble finding it.
>
> (The deep section/low count/spoke windup comments were added in the
> 3rd edition. The book was re-written almost sentence by sentence,
> twice, so don't be surprised if you have trouble finding things.
> Remember, the first edition was based on and referred to 5, 6, and 7
> speed rear wheels--things changed rapidly between 1981 and 1993.)
>
> The only example of specific tension in the 3rd edition is this: "If
> its spokes are tensioned to 1000 N, a 36-spoke wheel will support
> approximately 400 kg."
>
> The 1,000 Newtons mentioned is just an example for an ensuing
> discussion of when spokes might go slack, not a specific tension
> recommendation. It's the equivalent of 102 kgf, and a common figure
> for many wheels today.
>
> In any case, Jobst expects that to be reduced by 30% through the
> constriction of the inflated tire:
>
> "Although spoke tension is the principal static load on the rim,
> tubular tire inflation has a similar effect. When inflated, the tire
> becomes fatter and shrinks in circumference. The resulting force
> depends on the tire cross section, cord angle and inflation pressure.
> A tubular racing tire, inflated to 0.86 MPa, for instance, shrinks
> with a force of 300 N (see Equation 8 in Part III). Its effect on
> spoke tension can be detected with a tensiometer."
>
> --3rd edition
>
> That reduces the _effective_ spoke tension from about 100 kgf to about
> 70 kgf. Dianne's measurements suggest about a reduction of about 15
> kgf for 700c box-section clinchers.
>
> On a less pedantic note, the "kgf" commonly used nowadays for spoke
> tension does not appear in the 3rd edition of 1993, just the two cited
> passages with "kg".
>
> It's possible that tensiometers were so rare back in 1981-1993 that no
> manufacturers gave recommended kgf (or kg or newton or pound) tensions
> for their rims, and that Jobst was simply giving the best possible
> advice for the era when you had to find the right tension yourself.
> Only after tensiometers became widely available would manufacturers
> start giving the recommendations that can still be darned hard to find
> today.
>
> If so (and it's just a theory that tension recommendations were scarce
> or non-existent), then Jobst was simply suggesting that using a
> tensiometer to record whatever tension you found best by using other
> methods was a quick and convenient way to build the next wheel.
>
> Build the first wheel by raising tension until spoke-squeezing put it
> out of true or the spokes began to wind up excessively (before anyone
> sneers, try to define how much wind-up is excessive), measure the
> results with a tensiometer (and also use it to check for even tension
> all around the wheel), record the tension, and presto! The next wheel
> is much quicker and easier to build because you just tighten it to the
> X marked on your tensiometer.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Carl Fogel

Thank you for your response, Carl. I have quoted and responded to
some of it below.

>Sorry, but people aren't actually reading "The Bicycle Wheel," which
>is probably why they don't quote it.

In the case of jim beam, even if he did read Jobst Brandt's The
Bicycle Wheel, I think he would continue to misquote it.

>The book does _say_ to use a tensiometer to determine the correct
>tension, but only in the sense of measuring an already established
>correct tension for later use in building the next identical wheel.
>The book says that the correct tension is _first_ determined by other
>methods, namely raising tension on 36-spoke count wheels until
>squeezing spoke pairs together produces a deformed wheel or when the
>spokes on low-count or deep-section wheels can no longer be tightened
>without excessive windup:

Within the context of the whole book, put in the simplest terms, the
author recommends that a tensiometer be used to measure proper spoke
tension. In the Third Edition under the paragraph on page 104 titled
"Final Tensioning" he states, "Spoke tension can be directly measured
with a tensiometer...." Elsewhere, on page 118, in the paragraph
titled "Tensiometer" the author says, "By using a tension measuring
tool a builder can establish proper tension, then repeat it." Nowhere
does the author restrict how the tensiometer measured proper tension
is determined. The one method that he helpfully sets forth on page
105 is, he notes, for "...conventional road rims of up to 430 grams
with 36 spokes." For other wheel systems such as those with heavy
rims, with deep section rims, and those with fewer than 32 spokes, he
does not provide a method but does observe that tensioning may be at
its limit when nipples are not easily tightened. The author in no way
precludes determining proper spoke tension from rim manufactures
recommendations, from measurements of manufacturers' prebuilt wheels,
from a reliable wheelset that has already served long and hard, or by
other means.

It would be nice if there was a single, easy, and all encompassing
answer to the question: What's The Proper Tension? But, such an answer
is not possible; the situation does not allow for it. The author of
course knows this, and so doesn't provide such an answer. A few
readers, I imagine, are disappointed. Bizarrely, one individual
gives the author an answer and then says he is wrong.

--

Spike

[Jambo]

"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message

> that's a personal issue for you spike. if i state something like "modulus
> = stress/strain", you can independently verify "believability" for
> yourself.

Just like you can verify "believability" of beamboy statements like
-"sikorski [sic] materials lecture more than 30 years ago" on non-existent
CF helo rotors
-cracking sound made by CF is used as damage indicator by aircraft
manufacturers
-he is a "former metallurgist"... er, make that "metallurgist"
-etc, etc, etc...

[Jambo]

"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
news:dvydnYv169EZbp3anZ2dnUVZ_tninZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
> spikenettles@earthlink.net wrote:
>> Specifically, which 36 hole, conventional cross-section rim of 430 or
>> less grams did you try this on
>
> i've done this test on several wheels with different rims - mavic open
> pro, x517, x618, etc. and of course, an ma2. spoke count and lacing make
> no difference.

Then you should be able to post pictures of these on your little flickr
website. At least 4 rims mentioned there.

[spikenettles@earthlink.net]

On Oct 1, 8:17 am, jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
> spikenett...@earthlink.net wrote:

> > I've learned from previous threads to not believe anything you say.
>
> that's a personal issue for you spike.

Actually, it's not a personal issue; it's a personal observation. The
same observation made by many others who have read your posts.
--
Spike

[Peter Cole]

jim beam wrote:
> spikenettles@earthlink.net wrote:

>> Everyone would be aware of this either from their own knowledge,
>> experience and common sense or from having read Jobst's book. Nothing
>> like stating the obvious as if it's an original and profound
>> revelation from the sage of RBT, jim - never in doubt, often in error
>> - beam.
>
> "obvious"? it's apparently not "obvious" to jobst since he doesn't
> cover this in his book. kind of a serious omission since the excess
> spoke tension his procedure causes is directly responsible for rim
> destruction that costs consumers and manufacturers a small fortune.

Cover what? A specific manufacturer's specific max tension limit? Should
he have an appendix? Monthly updates? Why not just have Mavic be more up
front about their rims? Like a sticker: Warning! Do not exceed spoke
tension of 90kg or your rims will crack! That should do it. They could
add it to all the useless stickers they plaster their rims with. After
all, they say just that in the "tech" manual they hide (password
protected) on their crappy flash site.

[jim beam]

Peter Cole wrote:
> carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:
>
>> Sorry, but people aren't actually reading "The Bicycle Wheel," which
>> is probably why they don't quote it.
>>
>> The book does _say_ to use a tensiometer to determine the correct
>> tension, but only in the sense of measuring an already established
>> correct tension for later use in building the next identical wheel.
>
> To me, this would presume no manufacturer's spec on max spoke tension.
> Otherwise, if you had a max spec and a tensiometer, why exceed it?
>
>
>> The book says that the correct tension is _first_ determined by other
>> methods, namely raising tension on 36-spoke count wheels until
>> squeezing spoke pairs together produces a deformed wheel or when the
>> spokes on low-count or deep-section wheels can no longer be tightened
>> without excessive windup:
>
>> Obviously, deep-section 36-spoke rims can stand more tension before
>> distorting than MA-2's.
>
> What this approach does is determine the maximum spoke tension by
> finding the rim buckling point and then backing off considerably to
> establish a safety m