# Broken Steel Frame at top tube weld...3rd ride



## gearwhine (Aug 20, 2009)

F it...this is stupid. I thought people would be a little smarter about this sort of stuff. PM me if you are truly interested in more information.


----------



## smdubovsky (Apr 27, 2007)

Ouch. Glad to hear you weren't hurt.

Kinda hard to tell w/ the powder coat how big the welds are. Maybe one was undercut a little? All speculation on our part w/o REALLY being able to look at it.

Almost appears that it doesn't fail at the edge of the weld but at the edge of the HAZ. That would indicate a bad tube? Again, hard to tell what is weld filler and what is PC buildup at the joint. Edit: strike that - can see the haz continuing up inside the top tube. Cool failure though.


----------



## pvd (Jan 4, 2006)

That's some serious garbage. You should get your money back and never do business with that guy again. He's gotta be doing some seriously wrong stuff to have that kind of failure.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

*I agree...*

I bet there was just a little undercut somewhere. Getting the powder off would help to see what was happening with the weld, though. It could be a bad tube, it could be you hit something a lot harder than you think.

Either way, bummer about the bike, but glad you're ok. I'm betting the builder(s) will warranty. I know I would.

Interesting that there's not a TT vent hole in the HT, too. Is there a vent hole into the seat tube?

-Walt



smdubovsky said:


> Ouch. Glad to hear you weren't hurt.
> 
> Kinda hard to tell w/ the powder coat how big the welds are. Maybe one was undercut a little? All speculation on our part w/o REALLY being able to look at it.
> 
> Almost appears that it doesn't fail at the edge of the weld but at the edge of the HAZ. That would indicate a bad tube? Again, hard to tell what is weld filler and what is PC buildup at the joint. Edit: strike that - can see the haz continuing up inside the top tube. Cool failure though.


----------



## dr.welby (Jan 6, 2004)

Maybe somebody missed the butt when they made the miter?


----------



## jay_ntwr (Feb 15, 2008)

dr.welby said:


> Maybe somebody missed the butt when they made the miter?


Yeah, it "looks" thin to me and clearly fractured starting at the top of the top tube and finishing at the bottom. Either that or the tube was way too thin walled to start with, or both at the same time.


----------



## gearwhine (Aug 20, 2009)

out....


----------



## gearwhine (Aug 20, 2009)

out...


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

*You can't feel it*

The butt is internal and it's not something you'll be able to feel with your fingers. If you want to figure it out, you can cut the middle of the toptube and measure the end vs. the middle wall thickness with some (decent) calipers. Might need to remove the powdercoat from the area you're measuring to know for sure, though it should be pretty even in that general area.

The end at the head tube should probably be .7 to .9mm. The middle should be .4 to .6 or so. In other words, the headtube end should be .2 or .3mm thicker.

I would talk to the manufacturer before taking a hacksaw to the frame out of idle curiousity, though.

-Walt



gearwhine said:


> As far as I can feel and see...there is no butting whatsoever. Which made me go back to the original description before my purchase...and butted tube was called out.


----------



## smdubovsky (Apr 27, 2007)

Good idea on missin the butt. Gearwhine, you have mics to accurately measure the tube thickness?

I think vent holes are overrated. Can easily weld tubes w/o them (have to let the air in the tube come up to temp to equalize then weld the last 1/4" quick.) Not having rusting problems: priceless FWIW, Im in this habit because its not usually done on car roll cages. They'll drill a few wall thickness inspection holes after but I don't know anyone who does it before in every joint.


----------



## gearwhine (Aug 20, 2009)

out...


----------



## jay_ntwr (Feb 15, 2008)

gearwhine said:


> Butting is really that slight? I am no frame builder...I just always assume butting was a pretty short section that was of noticeable extra thickness. Thanks...learned something new.
> 
> I don't think I'll be cutting up the frame myself to check on those things.


Yes, they are on the order of .3mm, so about 12/1000ths of an inch. Take 4 hairs off your head, stick them side by side and that's about what we're talking about. On top of that, there's a transition that takes it from say .9 mm to .6mm so it's even harder to see. What would be interesting is if you did measure the end that is broken and see what the thickness is--may just be worth it to buy an inexpensive pair of calipers to do that just so you know. The picture makes it look like the wall of the tube is about 2-3 times the thickness of the powder coat. It just looks thin to me but there's no way to know without measuring it.


----------



## ScaryJerry (Jan 12, 2004)

I'm glad you have all your teeth and weren't killed by the oversight of this builder.


----------



## DWF (Jan 12, 2004)

I wouldn't jump to conclusions too quickly. I've seen plenty of bad tubes. You try to catch them before they make it into a frame and each tube should be measured. I've seen tubes from a notable mfr, where the butt was in the ~middle~ of the tube and not the ends. If you saw how tubes come out of the mill before they cut them, everybody would check them a lot closer than they do. *Nobody* here can tell you how or why it failed from a couple of pictures, they can only guess.

All that aside, IMHO, you should talk to the builder before you start airing your case on internet forums. The internet should be your last resort if you think you've been wronged. I've seen plenty of pro builders, many who post here, get raked over the coals for no good reason on MTBR by folks who don't have the whole story.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

*Great points.*

I can personally attest to what happens when you don't check every tube and just believe what the spec sheet says (and I've seen out of spec stuff from multiple manufacturers).

Worth repeating - you need to measure and check the butts on every tube you use. No exceptions.

I also agree that the builder should be contacted first. People make mistakes (I've certainly made plenty) - I bet he/she will do their best to make this right.

-Walt



DWF said:


> I wouldn't jump to conclusions too quickly. I've seen plenty of bad tubes. You try to catch them before they make it into a frame and each tube should be measured. I've seen tubes from a notable mfr, where the butt was in the ~middle~ of the tube and not the ends. If you saw how tubes come out of the mill before they cut them, everybody would check them a lot closer than they do. *Nobody* here can tell you how or why it failed from a couple of pictures, they can only guess.


----------



## gearwhine (Aug 20, 2009)

out...


----------



## pvd (Jan 4, 2006)

I looked at the frame specs on that bike and it says that it was made with OX Platnum, hard stuff. Quite a bit thin if you miss the butt too, especially combined with that radical kink in the top tube producing a loaded bow on impact could be what broke it, but it is tough to know.

I've hit stuff hard on full rigid and I've seek plenty of f'ed up bikes. This is quite extra bad.


----------



## gearwhine (Aug 20, 2009)

out...


----------



## Evil4bc (Apr 13, 2004)

Ouch !

Looks like a combination of 3 things already brought up in the thread 
1. No vent holes = no good and way too much heat + gas build up in the tube
2. Mitercut - either the builder completely cut the butted section off or there was allot of excess at the edges of his mitercut that wasent cleaned off .
3. Undercut / overheated weld this combined with #1 no vent holes is what really sealed the deal on this bike .

Sorry to see this , speak with the builder they should be more than willing to stand behind their work .


----------



## Manicmtbr (Jan 26, 2004)

Walt said:


> I can personally attest to what happens when you don't check every tube and just believe what the spec sheet says (and I've seen out of spec stuff from multiple manufacturers).
> 
> Worth repeating - you need to measure and check the butts on every tube you use. No exceptions.
> 
> ...


This is why I love my Waltworks. :thumbsup:


----------



## vulture (Jan 13, 2004)

A real certified welding inspector wouldn't say anything about something they could not see in person without removing the powdercoat and measuring the tubing. There are some serious variables here to armchair QB. This issue is between the builder and customer. Luckily there has been some learning here from what Walt had to say but other opinion stated as fact reads like facked to me.


----------



## pvd (Jan 4, 2006)

gearwhine said:


> I will say that I have 2 friends with this exact frame...and they have beaten it for almost a year now....and many other people do as well. I don't believe it's a design issue in the least.


A 33% failure rate is pretty bad in my book. That's not a number that would give me any confidence.


----------



## unterhausen (Sep 28, 2008)

seems to me that if the lack of vent holes was really an issue here the weld would have broken at the head tube/ top tube interface.

My thought is that it broke at the bottom, away from the weld, and the crack just propagated around the edge of the weld because that's the point of highest stress.


----------



## Feldybikes (Feb 17, 2004)

Looks to me like the weld was fine and it failed at the tube. Lack of vent holes, plus you were riding at 9000'. Probably the tube just blew up from the air pressure difference.











Yes, that's supposed to be a joke.


----------



## Rody (Sep 10, 2005)

Gearwhine,

I've seen this type of failure before in slow speed impacts when the top tube utilizes a mechanically hinged design...ie a bend in the top tube that is suppose to allow for more stand over height. 

The physical key to remember is that a material when manipulated or bent, will always be prone to returning to it's original form. In the case of your accident, when the front impact occurs that drives the wheel back under the bike, the tension force is transmitted across the length of the top tube. When there is a mechanical hinge in place, the tube will literally want to straighten back out, allowing for more yield than a straight tube. This excess yield will allow for the buckling of the down tube until the top member fails totally.

It appears that your tube failed not at the weld but just beyond in the heat affected zone, a generally weaker portion due to the process of joining. The triangular tear at the bottom of the top tube would indicate that it was the last portion to fail as the stress was brought down from the top portion.

Experience tells me bad design, not bad fabrication, but only you and the builder can shed light on the true origin of the issue once you work together in a professional discussion.

So glad you were not injured...bikes can be replaced, but you cannot. 

cheers,

rody


----------



## gearwhine (Aug 20, 2009)

pvd said:


> A 33% failure rate is pretty bad in my book. That's not a number that would give me any confidence.


You're taking it way too far...just because I have 2 friends riding it, doesn't mean many other people aren't. This is the one reason that I should not have posted this up...


----------



## gearwhine (Aug 20, 2009)

out...


----------



## Yogii (Jun 5, 2008)

If the joint that had broken was the HT-DT junction not the HT-TT junction, would the OP have been more seriously hurt? Also, REALLY check out your fork legs!


----------



## Joe Nation (May 16, 2007)

It's not a 33% failure rate PVD, unless there are only three frames in existence.

And with regard to the impact and the lack of other damaged parts, you'd be surprised. I'm not disagreeing with the OP's statement (seems pretty reasonable to me), but when a complex system like a bike/rider combo has an impact the forces are distributed and transmitted in all sorts of ways. If one major component absorbs a lot of the energy involved (ie by breaking the frame) then there is less energy left to pop tyres, taco wheels, bend forks etc. I've seen a number of bikes (mostly roadies) after being hit by cars and 8 times out of 10 only one major component (wheels, fork, frame) has any damage beyond road rash.

In any case, a failure like that is not acceptable under any circumstances. I hope it works out for you.


----------



## smdubovsky (Apr 27, 2007)

gearwhine said:


> This is the one reason that I should not have posted this up...


You didn't post the builder (good for you) so there is no reason NOT to post this. As an amateur frame builder I find it highly educational to see how frames fail and the conjecture on possible causes. This is a learning experience for most of us.


----------



## Schmitty (Sep 7, 2008)

Edited.. off base.

You can put a kink like that in a TT Plat tube? Seems crazy. Wonder if that's really a TT plat tt in there. And some of the comments on their site regarding that frame seem crazy too.. a huge wheel, and a huge rotor all in combo... yeouch.



-Schmitty-


----------



## jay_ntwr (Feb 15, 2008)

smdubovsky said:


> You didn't post the builder (good for you) so there is no reason NOT to post this. As an amateur frame builder I find it highly educational to see how frames fail and the conjecture on possible causes. This is a learning experience for most of us.


Yep, that's how I felt about it and why I was interested in the wall thickness measurement, just as a learning experience. And to the OP, when the failure mechanism is determined, please come back and let us know. I'm sure the builder will cover you and fix this and the next frame will last for a very long time, but I'd sure like to know why--don't need to know who, just want to know why. Thanks.


----------



## gearwhine (Aug 20, 2009)

out...


----------



## vulture (Jan 13, 2004)

Schmitty said:


> Ahh.. think I have the builder figured out. Read on a blog quite a while ago.. paraphrasing: "I've figured out how to bend butted tubes.. something no none else has done."
> 
> At the time I thought... uh oh.. there's a reason nobody bends fancy butted tubes.
> 
> ...


I believe the builder you are referring to fillet brazes. 
This particular post is one of the worst examples of people who don't really have enough data making assumptions, opinions, and mistakes, and spewing them forth as facts.


----------



## Blaster1200 (Feb 20, 2004)

Schmitty said:


> Ahh.. think I have the builder figured out. Read on a blog quite a while ago.. paraphrasing: "I've figured out how to bend butted tubes.. something no none else has done."
> 
> At the time I thought... uh oh.. there's a reason nobody bends fancy butted tubes.
> 
> ...


I think I've read the same blog, but if we're talking about the same blog, that person did a gradual bend over the entire double-butted tube (the frame was light green, if I recall correctly). This frame is from a different builder. The frame here in question has top tube that is straight but with a sharp bend close to the seat tube.

Edit: Vulture already clarified that it's a different builder.


----------



## pvd (Jan 4, 2006)

All you have to do is search 'gearwhines' past 20 posts and you will know exactly who the builder was. Zero speculation there.


----------



## unterhausen (Sep 28, 2008)

pvd said:


> All you have to do is search 'gearwhines' past 20 posts and you will know exactly who the builder was. Zero speculation there.


I did that and I don't see how you can bend a tube like that. It has to be cut and rejoined, doesn't it?


----------



## gearwhine (Aug 20, 2009)

pvd said:


> All you have to do is search 'gearwhines' past 20 posts and you will know exactly who the builder was. Zero speculation there.


Really dude...you are just here to cause trouble. You have no use whatsoever.

If it's so obvious, why do you need to point it out? truly....no use.


----------



## dbohemian (Mar 25, 2007)

Schmitty said:


> Edited.. off base.
> 
> You can put a kink like that in a TT Plat tube? Seems crazy. Wonder if that's really a TT plat tt in there. And some of the comments on their site regarding that frame seem crazy too.. a huge wheel, and a huge rotor all in combo... yeouch.
> 
> -Schmitty-


Actually, I looked it up and the Top tubes from the picture are 4130, although the DT's seem to be platinum and the TT has been cut and re-welded back together to make that extreme bend.

I have no idea what really happened here. But my gut tells me that an extreme kink in the tube and the lower strength of 4130 vs. the much higher strength of the DT is not a good mix.


----------



## pvd (Jan 4, 2006)

gearwhine said:


> Really dude...


You have got to be joking. You came hear airing YOUR dirty laundry. We aren't stupid here. You expect us not to figure it out. MTBR folk are pretty simple to figure out. 10 posts back?! Sesame Street simple.

If you didn't present this kind of thing in public. You wouldn't have to worry about any of this. But YOU did.

Rude is not dealing properly with the builder before throwing it out to the wolves.


----------



## unterhausen (Sep 28, 2008)

pvd said:


> Rude is not dealing properly with the builder before throwing it out to the wolves.


I have to say that there has never been a thread like this where I didn't figure out the builder. In this case I never heard of the builder beforehand, and I really am at a loss to say what he did wrong here. Seems like if anything, the TT is too stiff and failed due to extreme loads at the HAZ, which wasn't equipped to handle the loads.


----------



## DaveCC (Aug 16, 2009)

Everyone's referring to "it looks like...". 

Where's the evidence? I don't see a link or photo in this thread.

Thanks,
Dave


----------



## edoz (Jan 16, 2004)

DaveCC said:


> Everyone's referring to "it looks like...".
> 
> Where's the evidence? I don't see a link or photo in this thread.
> 
> ...


The OP has edited every one of his posts in this thread. I'm pretty sure there was a pic or a link before everything went south.


----------



## Blaster1200 (Feb 20, 2004)




----------



## gearwhine (Aug 20, 2009)

I swear to god...there was a reason I removed the post. 

At the same time...everyone cried fouls for posting it before we dealt with it. Please, continue to be bastards yourself.

Yes...maybe it was initially my fault...but for [email protected] sake...if you want to follow in my shoes...by all means...go for it, just know you're worse than me. Enjoy.

Love, -Nick


----------



## mitzikatzi (Sep 9, 2008)

Blaster1200 said:


> This was the bike that the open had with the broken top tube:


I for one would be happier if the Mods or the Poster removed this picture. It accomplishes nothing.


----------



## mitzikatzi (Sep 9, 2008)

Blaster1200 said:


>


Thanks


----------



## gearwhine (Aug 20, 2009)

Thanks Mitzikatzi

and I...for one as well...would love it if this was just locked in it's entirety.


----------



## pvd (Jan 4, 2006)

What a chicken $hit OP. Man up punk. So lame.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

*Locked...*

I don't think anyone is learning anything from this at this point.

-Walt


----------

