# Make your own polymer (UHMWPE) spokes?



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Hi guys

I want to make my own set of polymer spokes.

On a rope splice, which applies to any industry using high performance polymer rope, the bury is held in via a Chinese finger trap method.. this is typical for rope splicing. The glue does not take the load; it's only there to help the rope develop some initial tension and clamp down on the bury holding it via friction.

The devil is in the details. splices tend to take a set and slip a bit, making the length difficult to get right.

On to materials,
After my research, it seems DM20 is the way to go for UHMWPE. It's a new material from DSM with massively improved creep characteristics.
UHMWPE is so bad with creep, standard high performance materials would simply be unsuitable for spokes, until just a few years ago.
I have a 100M reel of 1.8mm DM20...

Another couple of options: Vectran and PBO. Both have good creep characteristics and could be used for spokes.
Everything here applies to those too if you were to source 1.5-2.0mm Vectran or PBO.

I have another idea to get the weight down to ~1.7g per spoke and an even better/easier design. Here is what I came up with:








I am thinking to take a butted spoke, 2.3mm/2.00mm, and roll or press or stamp the end to 0.8mm thick to achieve an eye where it threads into the nipple. This way one could do a 2nd bury splice here eliminating the long metal bury. This part comes to ~0.65 g each and with a rope weight of about 1.2G = 1.85G per spoke!!

This compares to about 2.5-2.6G per spoke I'm getting with Berd's method because of the longer steel spoke end that needs to be buried.

The strength of the part is still a bit iffy. It would be better if we could find some 12g/14g butted spokes (2.6mm/2.0mm) so there's more material to smash to make the eye... or even 11g or 10g.
That or the part could be made custom from scratch...
I know several manufacturers whom could make such a part but it would need to be a pretty large qty to be cost effective.
For example:
https://www.gallmachine.com/gallery
THB, a spoke manufacter would be best suited to make such a part...

Here is a "quick" FEA assuming 60,000psi yield strength. I know alot of spoke manufacturers get their yeild strength to 120,000psi and up, but's it's still pretty iffy and more material would be nice.

(link incoming)


----------



## hoolie (Sep 17, 2010)

In the amount of time it took you to type that post, I could have ordered some double butted DT spokes. Kinda like the ones on my Chris King hub/Dt spokes/WTB Frequency Team rim that has been solid for 5 years of 1500-2000 ft descents. Granted, that wheelset should implode at any moment (really, its thrashed). Sorry to be kinda brutal, but just buy some spokes and go ride your bike, man. You dont need to re invent the wheel. Too mean?


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Cool story, bro

Here's the image









Pretty iffy.. that's only 100kgf load.
Maybe a good choice for a high spoke count wheel and 1.5mm line.
I think it might be better to get some 12ga spokes and belt sand down and end to 2.0mm for threading, use the 12ga section to create the eye.

I think I'll focus on making a wheel with the "spear" method first... getting distracted.


----------



## compengr (Dec 11, 2008)

I can see how this could be viewed by some as a waste of time, but count me interested. 

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## hoolie (Sep 17, 2010)

Yes, its interesting. I would like to ride some of these sring wheels. OP got me to check out Berd Spoke site.


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

I still think there's got to be a way to do it without splicing. Everything I've thought of so far though would be a skosh heavier... still lighter than steel, though.


----------



## Schulze (Feb 21, 2007)

I like where you're going with this. 

Another option is to make the anchor out of aluminum - easier to manufacture, lighter, allows for custom colors. Bump up the diameter of the threads and make the nipple an internal nipple like the I9 spoke system.

Prototyping could be done with 3d printing. In fact you could send the CAD model you have to a number of companies and have examples in your hand in a few days.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Interested in what okashira comes up with.


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

okashira said:


> View attachment 1222704
> 
> I am thinking to take a butted spoke, 2.3mm/2.00mm, and roll or press or stamp the end to 0.8mm thick to achieve an eye where it threads into the nipple. This way one could do a 2nd bury splice here eliminating the long metal bury. This part comes to ~0.65 g each and with a rope weight of about 1.2G = 1.85G per spoke!!


This is the way to go. You're taking advantage of the ability to splice rope and saving weight as a result, plus you're doing away with the inelegant super-glued spoke shaft mechanism.

You're basically looking for a 2-56 (2mm x 56 tpi) eyebolt which can thread into a standard alloy nipple. The threads should be long enough to compensate for any variation in string lengths. Something in the likeness of this:









A 2-56 alloy eyebolt like this likely isn't commercially available, but I bet it could be stamped quite easily. Ti might also be practicable, but more expensive.

Using eyebolts over inserted spoke shafts is an advantage when building the wheel, since twisting the rope can be prevented during nipple tensioning. It also has the potential to be lighter.

For the critics out there, please quit sucking the life out of innovation. Berd has a cool product, and they've worked hard to protect their idea and market opportunity. But I think it's possible to do even better than Berd, so why not just let this guy figure it out? I'm subbed and may be ready to jump in on the project financially if needed.


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

Darth Lefty said:


> I still think there's got to be a way to do it without splicing. Everything I've thought of so far though would be a skosh heavier... still lighter than steel, though.


This is basically what Pi-Rope is doing, using adhesive (I presume), although I'm not sure. In any case, they are using different materials.

Thing is, if you want it to be as light as possible, you don't want to be using materials other than the rope as much as possible. So on the hub end you have to splice to avoid using a bolt of sorts, and you can't just tie a knot because that will creep.

On the nipple end of the spoke you've either got to use a threaded spoke shaft inserted into the core of the rope, or do another splice around an eyebolt of sorts. Either way, it's going to be very labor-intensive.


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

Just remembering now here that a Fiber Fix spoke does not use the threads at first, only for adjustment. It cinches under its own tension - sort of like the finger cuff mentioned above.

Has anyone built a whole wheel with Fiber Fix spokes? Only sort of kidding :-D

Photo found at Peter White Cycles


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

Just sent out a swarm of Alibaba inquiries for rod-shaped alloy M2 eyebolts, specifically asking for a 30mm 56tpi-threaded rod immediately adjacent to an eye of 4mm in diameter. I set my MOQ to 1000 but said I was flexible. I also asked what kind of tension these bolts can handle, and, if it helps at all, said the bolt should be lightweight.

I'll see what kind of information I can learn, and whether these bolts could be a viable option.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

I dont know why the FEA image doesnt work; try here:

https://i.imgur.com/BKNIEwH.gif

I did find a #2-56 threaded eyebolt commercial
https://www.amazon.com/Sullivan-Products-2-56-Threaded-Eyebolts/dp/B0006O8OA8
But I don't need to do an FEA to determine that would be way to weak. Probably wouldn't even take 15kg.

@sissypants 2mm hole.
I can make some drawings and cad file if you want to send to suppliers.

I can easily prototype this by brazing the threaded end of a spoke to a drilled piece of spring steel(for strength) sheet with a hole drilled.
That or I can use a press and stamp and end of a 2.6mm spoke.
My chinese carbon rim came in over the weekend, and it's only drilled for internal nipples 14g. So I can't fit anything larger then that. :-/ If I use a 12g spoke I'll need to machine one end down to 2.0mm and thread it.


----------



## Aglo (Dec 16, 2014)

sissypants said:


> Just sent out a swarm of Alibaba inquiries for rod-shaped alloy M2 eyebolts, specifically asking for a 30mm 56tpi-threaded rod immediately adjacent to an eye of 4mm in diameter. I set my MOQ to 1000 but said I was flexible. I also asked what kind of tension these bolts can handle, and, if it helps at all, said the bolt should be lightweight.
> 
> I'll see what kind of information I can learn, and whether these bolts could be a viable option.


I don't know if you did mentioned it, but spoke threads should be rolled instead of cut.

Other option that occurred to me was to bend a spoke and braze it with brass.


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

okashira said:


> @sissypants 2mm hole.
> I can make some drawings and cad file if you want to send to suppliers.


Any drawings would help! I am hopeless with CAD even though I've tried, if I could redo my education I'd go for mechanical engineering 

This is the best I've done 









A 2mm hole would be just enough to fit a 1.8mm rope, but I guess that's all that's needed?

I think made-to-order Titanium bolts would actually be the best bet -- stronger and lighter. They also won't be too expensive. Titanium right from the manufacturer is much cheaper than bike-specific parts sold by the piece on Amazon from second-party dealers.

I think your plan for a prototype bolt would work, but I wouldn't want to repeat that 24, 28, or 32 times! I think some bolt can be sourced that will be strong enough and affordable.

I'm putting my bets either on Allied Titanium or a specialty Titanium bolt manufacturer in Shenzhen, China. Inquiries sent to both.


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

Aglo said:


> I don't know if you did mentioned it, but spoke threads should be rolled instead of cut.


Good point, thanks for that!



> Other option that occurred to me was to bend a spoke and braze it with brass.


I'm not sure I see what you're after?


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Your drawing is pretty good. Yes I don't think we need more then 2mm. If we end up sourcing 2mm rope we may need something like 2.1mm to fit it. 
just add another thing to your drawing: 
outside diameter around the 2mm hole ~4-5mm
Change 30mm to ~20-22mm maybe.
Titanium with rolled threads would be nice.
On that note this could be another source for DM20 in something like 1.5mm - 2mm size. Just remove the polyester cover. I have some samples coming.
https://www.mastrant.com/on-line-shop/product/3908-guyrope-mastrant-m-3-mm-1-8-in
https://www.mastrant.com/on-line-shop/product/3907-guyrope-mastrant-m-2-mm-3-32-in


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

sissypants said:


> Good point, thanks for that!
> 
> I'm not sure I see what you're after?


I think he means take a 14gauge spoke, bend it around to make an eye and braze it.
I am not sure it will be strong enough (it will elongate the eye.)


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

If a supplier has trouble with the #2-56 threads, perhaps just ask them to supply 2mm rod only.
Then they can be rolled manually with a Hozan tool.
On that note, does anyone have a Hozan tool? I would like to know how close to an eye the hozan tool can roll threads. What sort of spacing to the flange from the end of the threads is needed?
I know a Phil wood tool will not work. It will only roll about 10mm of threads. We need 15-20mm IMHO.


----------



## Aglo (Dec 16, 2014)

okashira said:


> I think he means take a 14gauge spoke, bend it around to make an eye and braze it.
> I am not sure it will be strong enough (it will elongate the eye.)


Yes, that's what I meant.
The elongation of the eye, and if the braze will hold are my biggest concerns, but wanted to post to know your thoughts on it.


----------



## Aglo (Dec 16, 2014)

Shouldn't the inside of the eye around the corners be less sharp, or it's not a problem?

If we are passing the splice through the eye shouldn't the eye be a bit bigger as we are passing "two" threads through it?

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

I'll take okashira's recommendation to reduce the rolled thread length to 20mm. I'm a weight weenie after all. Here's the updated drawing. I'm currently negotiating with Allied Titanium.








Can a Hozan tool roll Titanium? It might be intended for only alloy and steel, pardon my ignorance.

I'm afraid that bending a spoke to make an eye would severely compromise the strength of the material and it might not hold, although I like the idea. It's not hard to bend a spoke, so unbending that wouldn't be too hard either.

That Mastrant rope looks really affordable! Are you sure the DM20 rope is easy to extract? Is it just a matter of pulling it out? Or did they use adhesive of any sort?


----------



## d-ron (May 23, 2011)

Thinking outside the container here, but what if the spoke was a loop of material? It would then require only one splice and it can be a rope splice, which I think is easier. It will double up the spoke, but theoretically the tension in each half of the loop will be half the total spoke tension, so you could use half the rope diameter. It should save weight because you only need metal on the nipple side. See attached diagram.









Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

d-ron said:


> Thinking outside the container here, but what if the spoke was a loop of material? It would then require only one splice and it can be a rope splice, which I think is easier. It will double up the spoke, but theoretically the tension in each half of the loop will be half the total spoke tension, so you could use half the rope diameter. It should save weight because you only need metal on the nipple side. See attached diagram.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


I mentioned the loop idea in the other thread (ha) and that's what the Fiber Fix does. But the cow hitch won't work, the rope is too big to pass two strands through.

It would be cool to have a system that did not rely on getting the length exactly right on every spoke.

If you were designing this from scratch it wouldn't be out of line to make a hub to go with them...


----------



## compengr (Dec 11, 2008)

Or a rim

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## d-ron (May 23, 2011)

Copy all. This is a neat design exercise here. I'm really curious to see how it turns out. Keep us updated.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


----------



## TwiceHorn (Jun 18, 2014)

Just for the record, it is entirely possible that a rope/fiber supplier would consider or give an exclusive supply agreement to one player in the bicycle or spoke industry. 

Kind of a precarious way to protect an "invention," but stranger things have worked. Berd may be applying for a patent, also.


----------



## Schulze (Feb 21, 2007)

sissypants said:


> I think made-to-order Titanium bolts would actually be the best bet -- stronger and lighter. They also won't be too expensive. Titanium right from the manufacturer is much cheaper than bike-specific parts sold by the piece on Amazon from second-party dealers.
> 
> I think your plan for a prototype bolt would work, but I wouldn't want to repeat that 24, 28, or 32 times! I think some bolt can be sourced that will be strong enough and affordable.
> 
> I'm putting my bets either on Allied Titanium or a specialty Titanium bolt manufacturer in Shenzhen, China. Inquiries sent to both.


Titanium is a poor design choice.


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

Schulze said:


> Titanium is a poor design choice.


What is a better design choice? I'm no materials expert but I thought titanium was about four times as strong as alloy. Going with steel would defeat the purpose.


----------



## Schulze (Feb 21, 2007)

Aluminum would fill the strength requirements while being cheaper and lighter.


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

d-ron said:


> Thinking outside the container here, but what if the spoke was a loop of material? It would then require only one splice and it can be a rope splice, which I think is easier. It will double up the spoke, but theoretically the tension in each half of the loop will be half the total spoke tension, so you could use half the rope diameter. It should save weight because you only need metal on the nipple side. See attached diagram.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Cool idea, but yeah, I'm afraid the cow hitch would be a bit challenging. I could see threading this through a straight pull hub itself, but then the wheel builder is the one who has to do the rope splicing, and that gets challenging very quickly. You could use a hook instead of an eyebolt at the nipple site, but then you have an issue of spokes falling off the hook when not tensioned.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Aglo said:


> Shouldn't the inside of the eye around the corners be less sharp, or it's not a problem?
> 
> If we are passing the splice through the eye shouldn't the eye be a bit bigger as we are passing "two" threads through it?
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk


Yes it's a problem. They need to be nicely rounded. This can be done manually or by the supplier.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Aglo said:


> Shouldn't the inside of the eye around the corners be less sharp, or it's not a problem?
> 
> If we are passing the splice through the eye shouldn't the eye be a bit bigger as we are passing "two" threads through it?
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk


I'm not going to pass the splices thru the eye; not a fan of the method. I prefer to splice directly into the hub. This also allows for a smaller hole.
Like this


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Schulze said:


> Aluminum would fill the strength requirements while being cheaper and lighter.


I think that is iffy. The problem is the threads. They will work initially for some rolled 7075; but will fail with fatigue.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Yes you can do that. I think it wouldn't look as nice though. :-D
youtube how to splice a continuous loop.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

I suppose 7075 or better could work. The nipples are aluminum after-all. But I wouldn't want to do with 14g. 13g would be better. male threads are weaker then female, especially at this small size.
Are there 13g aluminum nipples?


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

What prevents one from building a wheel from one continuous string, tensioned at a single nipple? The string would be threaded in the order in which a wheel is typically built.

In theory, at least...


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

sissypants said:


> What prevents one from building a wheel from one continuous string, tensioned at a single nipple? The string would be threaded in the order in which a wheel is typically built.
> 
> In theory, at least...


Have fun truing your wheel 
And your final tension adjustment would need to be crazy long... like 200mm!


----------



## Aglo (Dec 16, 2014)

okashira said:


> (...)
> Are there 13g aluminum nipples?


Sapim makes them, don't know how hard is to source them.



sissypants said:


> What prevents one from building a wheel from one continuous string, tensioned at a single nipple? The string would be threaded in the order in which a wheel is typically built.
> 
> In theory, at least...


I like the way you think, but I don't think that will work.
And imagine if a spoke fails, you would be biting the dust real quick :/.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

okashira said:


> Have fun truing your wheel
> And your final tension adjustment would need to be crazy long... like 200mm!


Oops  I knew I was underthinking something. Now I feel stupid :/

Your splice into the hub is really nice, it looks sharp!


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

Aglo said:


> If we are passing the splice through the eye shouldn't the eye be a bit bigger as we are passing "two" threads through it?


So there are two ways I see how to do this:

1. Splice through a 2mm eye (so the loop passes through the eye) such that the rope is only 1.8mm thick.

2. Use the splice joint as a "knot" to prevent passing through the 2mm eye, such that the rope will be 3.6mm thick at this point.

The loop itself will not be 3.6mm thick, it will only be 1.8mm thick.

I hadn't considered #2 until I re-read your post. Maybe #2 is the best way to go, since otherwise the spoke will have to be spliced onto the hub (the way okashira is doing it) AND onto the eyebolt. This would be unreasonably demanding for a non-DIY project and also make controlling the length of the rope quite challenging.

Although I really like how okashira splices right onto the hub since that is the cleanest solution, I'm inclined to build the spoke without the hub or eyebolt, and use the splice joints as stable "knots". Think about how hard it would be to replace a spoke if you didn't have your splicing tools on hand, or didn't know how to splice.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Here is a improved design.
This one assumes a 2mm shaft butted to 2.7mm. Smash the 2.7mm end to 1.17mm thick.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

This one still only weighs 0.86g.
304 or 302 stainless is probably the best starting point. It's cold worked so easily and the same material used for most spokes already.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Impressive stuff here
https://www.armare.it/en/arc?arc[id...toreProdotto]=1354&arc[identificatoreCalza]=0

1mm and 200kg break strength!!
Could make amazing spokes for race spec wheels.
Use thinner 2.0.2.3 butted spokes with the smaller hole and go for 60kg max tension.
Coulld be pretty aero (1mm!!!) and ~1.7g per spoke.

SK99 means creep, though.
The 1.5mm stuff is good for 450kg :eekster:


----------



## Schulze (Feb 21, 2007)

okashira said:


> I think that is iffy. The problem is the threads. They will work initially for some rolled 7075; but will fail with fatigue.


Al spokes (yes, with threads) have been done for decades.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

With 14ga threads?


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

The last design is no good.
Pressing the eye to one side puts too side load and bends the threads.
I'll revise and center it again
Ignore this, bad analysis.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Centered...

I do take it back on the above analysis.
I assumed that the load was parallel to the shaft. In reality the splice and the nipple can swivel. I think either design will work.
View attachment 1222941

View attachment 1222942


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

I think I have a problem. How can one end of the rope be spliced onto the hub AND the other end be spliced onto the eyebolt?

There are two directions to approach this, neither of which work:

1. Splice the rope onto the hub using a standard Brummel lock
2. Splice the eyebolt onto the rope using a one-side-fixed Brummel lock, but it's impossible to pull the eye through point A (see 0:57 here, 



) because the bolt is fixed inside the loop. The bolt will be at least 4mm in diameter at its widest point.

Alternatively,

1. Splice the eyebolt onto the rope with a standard Brummel lock
2. Splice the rope onto the hub using a one-side-fixed Brummel lock, but again, it's impossible to pull the eye through point A (see 0:57 of above video) because the loop is fixed to the hub.

So the eyebolt has to go first no matter what. The only way I see this working is the following:

1. Use a rope with 1mm diameter (small enough that a spliced loop can fit through a hub spoke hole
2. Splice the eyebolt onto the rope with a standard Brummel lock
3. Splice a loop into the other end of the rope with a one-side-fixed Brummel lock.
4. Pull the loop through the spoke hole in the hub
5. Secure the loop in place behind the spoke hole in the hub using a small metal rod (old spoke?) and simultaneously engage the eyebolt with the rim nipple to maintain tension on the spoke. Maintaining tension will prevent the small metal rod from falling out.

All of the sudden this is getting way too complicated, and we need a 1mm rope made from a non-DM20 material.

So, I'd like to consider a point brought up previously by d-ron of using a continuous loop. In this case the rope would be spliced once after being threaded through both the hub and the eyebolt. However, we are now using twice as much rope, so weight savings are negligible. Hence, once again this is not satisfactory.

Maybe threaded spoke shafts are the only way to go?


----------



## Aglo (Dec 16, 2014)

You can just use the method *okashira* posted on the other thread.


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

Aglo said:


> You can just use the method *okashira* posted on the other thread.


Thanks for bringing that back up! I guess that works. A stitched whipping isn't as solid as a physical lock in the splice, but as long as the spoke stays under tension it should work fine, I guess.


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

I don't see how you can do a splice at both ends and maintain the tolerances you need


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

Darth Lefty said:


> I don't see how you can do a splice at both ends and maintain the tolerances you need


1. Make a Brummel lock splice at one end of the DM20 rope
2. Measure the desired length on the rope from the end of the loop created in step #1 and mark with a sharpie (mark A). Make two additional marks (mark B & C) 5mm on either side of the first mark.
3. Slide the eyebolt so that it covers mark A.
4. Perform a simple splice into the rope through mark B, then pull the rope through until mark B and C are both at the junction of the loop.
5. Pull the rope taught and fasten with a stitched whipping.

To install the spoke, you'd pull the loop through the hub flange just like Berd does and secure it with a small piece of rope before pulling it back taut.

You could even do steps #2-5 on the wheel with the eyebolt engaged with the nipple 1-2 turns, so you know your spoke length will be correct. Then you have ~15mm for additional tension.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

A bury splice is actually stronger then a brummel lock splice. Because the lock puts shear stress on the line. That said a lock splice may be a better choice for tolerances...


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Here is how to do lock splice with one side already in the hub


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

'You could even do steps #2-5 on the wheel with the eyebolt engaged with the nipple 1-2 turns, so you know your spoke length will be correct. Then you have ~15mm for additional tension."


This is exactly what I plan to do. Even better if you make a jig that has you make the splice while the eye is threaded into a dummy wheel that will intentionally make the line a couple mm too short. Then rely on splice and line settling to get that extra 2mm back


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

okashira said:


> A bury splice is actually stronger then a brummel lock splice. Because the lock puts shear stress on the line.


Ha, a bury splice is so much easier and faster. Come to think of it you're right about it being stronger (when under tension). Is there any need to do a stitched whipping? That's mostly superficial, right?

Simplified plan:

1. Make a bury splice at one end of the DM20 rope around hub flange
2. Engage the eye bolt 2 turns into the nipple on the rim, run the rope through the nipple, and pull taut.
3. Make a bury splice as tightly as possible around the eyebolt and pull rope taut.

I'm pretty optimistic about this, it might not take so long to actually do this.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

The most annoying part of the splice is the taper. I have an idea to make that faster... so like a 15 degree cut with a 3d printed jig for a fast taper...


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Here is the new drawing since the prior attachment looks broken.
Added more thread length. I figured you can always cut it off if you're an advanced weight weanie. The extra gives more leeway for tensioning and tolerancing your splicing.


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

So the point of the extra length is it for taking up more strain than steel? Or is for extra tolerance on spoke length? This is not a single-wall rim but you might get to a point where the threads are scratching through the rim strip.

And meanwhile: how do you keep the spoke from twisting when you tension it? Do you have a certain spoke wrench in mind? Is there one that's like an end wrench, like the turnbuckle wrench that comes with R/C cars? I don't see how my Park wrench or a spokey would do it.

On the splices: I still feel like you guys are making this harder because you want to be cleverer. If you make a loop, you can make a spoke that can be removed like a normal spoke and has one splice to do. Make two splices with one onto the hub and it can't. I'm sure that's why the Berd version has only one.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

The extra length is for several reasons

1.) the spoke do stretch more then steel, maybe 50%
2.) there is also a small amount of viscoelastic stretch, hence need to retension after a day.
3.) to account for rope settling and splice settling
4.) to make it easier to get the length right

If the threads are too long, and about to pierce the rim tape, you can always cut the end of the thread off.

I am not sure that a loop is any easier then two eye splices. With a loop splice you have to do two buries anyway, which is the most annoying part. And it may be harder to get the length right. It may also be less aesthetically pleasing.
One benefit would be that you can use 1mm line, and a much smaller hole would be needed in the eyebolt we're designing, making it possible to manufacturer from a 2.3/2.0 butted spoke (ie Sapim Strong)

I ordered some Sapim Strong and Sapim 12g spokes to start testing making a pressed end eye bolt.

Does anyone have a Hozan threader I can use?


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Darth Lefty said:


> So the point of the extra length is it for taking up more strain than steel? Or is for extra tolerance on spoke length? This is not a single-wall rim but you might get to a point where the threads are scratching through the rim strip.
> 
> And meanwhile: how do you keep the spoke from twisting when you tension it? Do you have a certain spoke wrench in mind? Is there one that's like an end wrench, like the turnbuckle wrench that comes with R/C cars? I don't see how my Park wrench or a spokey would do it.
> 
> On the splices: I still feel like you guys are making this harder because you want to be cleverer. If you make a loop, you can make a spoke that can be removed like a normal spoke and has one splice to do. Make two splices with one onto the hub and it can't. I'm sure that's why the Berd version has only one.


Yes you need to hold the end (eyebolt) to keep the rope from twisting. I used an open ended wrench and pliers. But it's better to use an external spoke wrench.


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

What about fishing knots? I recall the note in the other thread about knots pulling loose but there's a whole class of them that uses lots of friction from multiple wraps.


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

Darth Lefty said:


> So the point of the extra length is it for taking up more strain than steel? Or is for extra tolerance on spoke length? This is not a single-wall rim but you might get to a point where the threads are scratching through the rim strip.


Most carbon rims are at least 25mm deep, which amounts to the distance between the internal rim bed and the external rim bed being about 18-20mm, plus the nipple is another 10mm inside of the wheel compared to the internal rim bed, so you have at least 28m of usable distance in most carbon rims. This would not work for single-wall alloy rims, however (like my Mulefuts).

I do think it's really important to have as much threaded length as is reasonable because it will be tricky getting precise tolerances.



Darth Lefty said:


> And meanwhile: how do you keep the spoke from twisting when you tension it? Do you have a certain spoke wrench in mind? Is there one that's like an end wrench, like the turnbuckle wrench that comes with R/C cars? I don't see how my Park wrench or a spokey would do it.


Okashira is spot on.



Darth Lefty said:


> On the splices: I still feel like you guys are making this harder because you want to be cleverer. If you make a loop, you can make a spoke that can be removed like a normal spoke and has one splice to do. Make two splices with one onto the hub and it can't. I'm sure that's why the Berd version has only one.


Again, Okashira is right on. You end up still having to introduce two splices, plus use thinner line (which can be broken or cut through more easily). You also have that "looks different" element, which I'm not a fan of. You lose that "aero" contour in the center of the spoke as well (not that it matters that much), plus you're going to end up using more rope total per spoke (by at least 1.5x).


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

Darth Lefty said:


> What about fishing knots? I recall the note in the other thread about knots pulling loose but there's a whole class of them that uses lots of friction from multiple wraps.


Knots can weaken the tensile strength of dyneema (and most ropes) by up to 70%. If we're using 2mm rope, this might not be a huge problem, but a simple splice looks like it will be almost as easy as tying a good knot once you get the process down, plus you don't decrease tensile strength.


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

I got my first official quote for eyebolts today, $1/piece in Grade 5 titanium. Rolled threads. Excludes shipping, tax, and payment fees, so probably more like $1.25 per piece all said and done.

I think I'll get at least two much cheaper quotes in 7075 aluminum alloy, more like $0.10-$0.25/piece.

7075 alloy is 36% lighter than Ti anyway. I know it's not as durable, but hey, we use alloy nipples.


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

Darth Lefty said:


> What about fishing knots? I recall the note in the other thread about knots pulling loose but there's a whole class of them that uses lots of friction from multiple wraps.


Tying a knot in 2mm uhmwpe doesn't work very well.


----------



## Aglo (Dec 16, 2014)

sissypants said:


> I got my first official quote for eyebolts today, $1/piece in Grade 5 titanium. Rolled threads. Excludes shipping, tax, and payment fees, so probably more like $1.25 per piece all said and done.
> 
> I think I'll get at least two much cheaper quotes in 7075 aluminum alloy, more like $0.10-$0.25/piece.
> 
> 7075 alloy is 36% lighter than Ti anyway. I know it's not as durable, but hey, we use alloy nipples.


If you take the i9 spokes as an example, you will see they are much thicker and butted, don't think you will be able to get the eyebolt thick enough to keep them durable unless you use internal nipples also custom made.


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

Aglo said:


> If you take the i9 spokes as an example, you will see they are much thicker and butted, don't think you will be able to get the eyebolt thick enough to keep them durable unless you use internal nipples also custom made.


I have nothing against sourcing custom internal nipples and making wider bolts, but I'm not sure why the eyebolt needs to be thicker than 2mm if that works for normal spokes? Going above-and-beyond on a weight-weenie project is kind of counterintuitive.

We will, on average, be engaging all of the nipple threads compared to typical wheel builds where only a few threads are engaged, on average.


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

So far $1/piece in Grade 5 titanium (MOQ 1000pcs) is my best quote, that's from Baoji Metals Ltd. I'm trying to get them to agree to a "test" batch of 150 pieces at that price.

In 7075 alloy I have a quote from Dongguan Weimi Technology looking at $1.45/pc. for 1,000 pieces, $1.06/pc. for 2,000 pieces. Left-hand threads are rolled. Expensive! I'm trying to get them to $1.45/pc for 500 pieces or $1.06/pc. for 1,000 pieces.

Eight other places turned me down right away because they only make bolts M3-M5 or larger, or because my MOQ was too small.


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

sissypants said:


> I have nothing against sourcing custom internal nipples and making wider bolts, but I'm not sure why the eyebolt needs to be thicker than 2mm if that works for normal spokes?


But it's not really about thread engagement, it's about the cross section at the thread minor diameter. Steel is much stronger at a given section. Aluminum spokes use bigger threads from what I can learn


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

Perhaps I've missed it here, but how are you going to get the eyebolt through the spoke hole? Assuming that you're going to affix it (and the threaded rod) to the spoke before lacing?


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

Darth Lefty said:


> But it's not really about thread engagement, it's about the cross section at the thread minor diameter. Steel is much stronger at a given section. Aluminum spokes use bigger threads from what I can learn


Yeah, you're right. Ti is best, but man this is getting expensive. I'm feeling my wallet and am hesitant to take on 1,000 Ti bolts.

$1/bolt @ 1,000 pcs
$14/100ft. DM20 rope
$20 small rope puller/splicer

The bolts make this investment pretty crazy considering I already have 4.3g Pillar X-tra Aero spokes and will only be dropping 100g on the wheelset.

I can't decide...

On the other hand, I have spokes laying around. Might as well cut them up and spear them into some rope for starters, then go from there.


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

mikesee said:


> Perhaps I've missed it here, but how are you going to get the eyebolt through the spoke hole? Assuming that you're going to affix it (and the threaded rod) to the spoke before lacing?


In the proposed system, the eyebolt fastens to the nipple, the spoke/rope is spliced through the eye of the eyebolt. At the hub, the spoke is spliced to either fasten like a Berd spoke with a small fragment of rope or is spliced directly into the hub.

The eyebolt would never need to be pulled through the spoke hole because either 1) the hub side of the spoke is spliced directly onto the spoke, or 2) the splice on the hub side of the spoke can be shoved/pulled backwards through the spoke hole (spoke hole can be drilled bigger or beveled if need be).


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

I should have looked up the splices long before. I thought I needed to braid rope back on itself like I learned in Scouts 30 years ago when we made rope out of twine, and then forgot 29 years ago when I never did it again. But it's just grabbing the end and pulling it through. Gonna stop complaining about it now!

I did note one website said to bury it 72 times its diameter for Dyneema. That's 5-1/2 inches for 2mm rope. Really?


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

How is wheel building going to go? Are we going to build a wheel with wire spokes and replace them one at a time? I guess there's a minimum wheel build you could do with six or eight spokes a side that would hold its shape before you go in and snug it all up


----------



## Aglo (Dec 16, 2014)

Darth Lefty said:


> How is wheel building going to go? Are we going to build a wheel with wire spokes and replace them one at a time?


I'm planning lacing the wheel width rope spokes from the start, I don't see the point of lacing them first with steel spokes.


----------



## Aglo (Dec 16, 2014)

sissypants said:


> I have nothing against sourcing custom internal nipples and making wider bolts, but I'm not sure why the eyebolt needs to be thicker than 2mm if that works for normal spokes? Going above-and-beyond on a weight-weenie project is kind of counterintuitive.
> 
> We will, on average, be engaging all of the nipple threads compared to typical wheel builds where only a few threads are engaged, on average.


What *Darth Lefty* said.
The i9 spokes aren't "super" thick at the thread and thicker than normal spokes in general to look cool, they have to be thicker than steel spokes to support the same tension.


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

I thought it might be easy to buy a box of steel 2-56 eye bolts just to try out the technique, but so far I can only find them in $3 4-packs with nuts, carded for hobby stores. I guess they aren't _that_ standard. Seems like they bottom out at 6-32.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

I will do one of my DT swiss x1700 first, then my new chinese rim. Have not started. Was still waiting on my DM20.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Rope finally came in















I 3d print this to help get nice clean cuts.
I forgot to add another cut at like a 15 degree angle to make a fast taper.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

yeah that may be overkill as long as you keep it tensioned.
I think you an get away with 90mm = 3.6"


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

@sissypants
some quick replies

I think grade 5 titanium isn't strong enough. Needs to be an alloy.

I think 304 ss aka 18-10 ss is a better starting point:
Its inexpensive
It cold works like a champ
It's great with fatigue

You can send the drawings I made to the suppliers....
I can also ask some american companies.
We can also consider a mini kickstarter to raise funds and distribute the eyebolts.

let's do some prototyping first to make sure the design is even any good anyway.

I really want to stick with 14ga because I have not seen 13ga or 12ga aluminum nipples
and my Chinese rim is for 14g only!


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

okashira said:


> I think grade 5 titanium isn't strong enough. Needs to be an alloy. I think 304 ss aka 18-10 ss is a better starting point


304 ss is also nearly 3x heavier than 7075 alloy and still much heavier than grade 5 titanium. But we need something that works, so if you think it'll do I'm all for it!

You're still getting a <1g weight calculation from your updated model for 304 ss, correct?



> You can send the drawings I made to the suppliers....


Will do. It would be great if you ask some American companies as well.



> We can also consider a mini kickstarter to raise funds and distribute the eyebolts.


Definitely, happy to help and happy to pledge, let me know how you want to do that. Send a PM if you want or just start something.



> I really want to stick with 14ga because I have not seen 13ga or 12ga aluminum nipples


Sounds good.

That 3D printed apparatus is sweet!


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

sissypants said:


> I'm afraid that bending a spoke to make an eye would severely compromise the strength of the material and it might not hold, although I like the idea. It's not hard to bend a spoke, so unbending that wouldn't be too hard either.


Circling back to this (heh heh) I remembered that Z-bend spokes were a thing. If those worked then so should a loop. If there's a sort of latch effect happening from how the Z bend loads up then we can make a latch behind our loop by wrapping it once back around. Not unlike this safety pin style, though I'm imagining a much shorter loop https://www.homedepot.com/p/Everbil...nc-Plated-Safety-Pin-2-Piece-815408/204276312


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

0.95G for the longer threads. You could cut it down the threads and it would be 0.83g.
















If you want to do titanium, it has to be Ti 6Al-4V and heat treated, and then the threads rolled. Yes I think the Hozan threader could roll them.
It would be iffy though. I am not sure titanium spokes use 14g. They might use 13g.
Ti-6Q2 (Ti-62222s) might work, but I guarantee you the Chinese won't have that alloy. They will have 6Al-4V, though. It's very common.
If we can find 13g aluminum nipples, i can redesign the part for 13g to beef it up a bit, and maybe the weight comes down to ~0.6-0.7g with 6Al-4V.
Note the dyneema is like 1.1-1.2g total weight comes to like 2.1-2.2g with the dyneema and the longer 304ss end.


----------



## Aglo (Dec 16, 2014)

Darth Lefty said:


> Circling back to this (heh heh) I remembered that Z-bend spokes were a thing. If those worked then so should a loop. If there's a sort of latch effect happening from how the Z bend loads up then we can make a latch behind our loop by wrapping it once back around. Not unlike this safety pin style, though I'm imagining a much shorter loop https://www.homedepot.com/p/Everbil...nc-Plated-Safety-Pin-2-Piece-815408/204276312


I had to think for 3sec on what you were talking about with Z-bend .

When I was talking about bending a spoke and braze it with brass I was referring to something like the picture bellow, the yellowish area is where the braze is made.


----------



## Aglo (Dec 16, 2014)

okashira said:


> 0.95G for the longer threads. You could cut it down the threads and it would be 0.83g.
> 
> View attachment 1223158
> 
> (...)


*okashira* do you think the 1.1mm thickness of the eye will be ok, will not this value cause too much stress on the fibers?


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

I thought 1.1 is ok for 1.8mm line, based on gut feeling. 0.8mm was not, that's why I made it thicker.
We can test it.
It does need to be nicely rounded.
I can buy a 300kg scale and do some break testing with a wench.

According to sampson , they say at least 3:1... which means we need 1.8*3 = 5.4mm! 4.5mm with a 1.5mm line

But that's for safety applications with lots of movement of the eye. In our case, the eye will be pretty stationary, it's worth testing?

Page 38:
www.samsonrope.com/Documents/Rope_Users_Manual_WEB.pdf


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

sissypants said:


> In the proposed system, the eyebolt fastens to the nipple, the spoke/rope is spliced through the eye of the eyebolt. At the hub, the spoke is spliced to either fasten like a Berd spoke with a small fragment of rope or is spliced directly into the hub.
> 
> The eyebolt would never need to be pulled through the spoke hole because either 1) the hub side of the spoke is spliced directly onto the spoke, or 2) the splice on the hub side of the spoke can be shoved/pulled backwards through the spoke hole (spoke hole can be drilled bigger or beveled if need be).


Huh. OK. Sounds needlessly complex.

_...i say as i sit on the sidelines fascinated by where this is (potentially) going._


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

If we're gonna source parts custom, I will design a new part with better bend radius for the eye. If anyone finds a or knows of a 13g aluminum nipple, I can design one for 13g and titanium alloy. With ti alloy ends we could end up with really strong spokes at just 1.9g each, but wouldn't be worth it if there aren't any aluminum nipples like 14g.


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

Any theories what Berd's "customized coating" might be?

I'm seeing why Berd have done it with a regular spoke end. They don't need to get the length of the string very precise if they're sliding it over a couple inches of spoke end. 

Do you suppose they have roughed up the spoke so the bury works better? or would that abrade the string

On the other hand, windup: With the eye you will be able to use an end wrench on the nipple and put an Allen wrench through the eye, so you can use a regular nipple. With the spoke end you need to hold the spoke with pliers and do the nipple with a socket from the back of the rim.

In the other weight-weenie direction from larger titanium, is smaller steel. What about using a 15g steel spoke and not a 2.0 at the outer end? Alloy nipples definitely available. It seems like they might get cycled less in strain due to the longer stretch of the Dyneema spreading it out... and the large MTB tire and stiff carbon rim doing a better job distributing the load among more spokes at a time.


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

Okashira, how did you con Marlow into selling you 1.8mm DM20 rope? This is really strange business. After several emails back and forth Nicole forwarded me to Chrissy (the boss) finally ended like this:

"Unfortunately no, we are not able to sell to end users and a MOQ would still not allow us to do so. Again, I apologize for the inconvenience."

They are unwilling to sell, at any price, at any amount. I offered to buy 10,000 meters of rope to meet any MOQ requirements.

Maybe I should try emailing from my LLC account with my commercial signature.


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

Darth Lefty said:


> Any theories what Berd's "customized coating" might be?


I'm not sure where you read about this, but I googled it and found a Yahoo article stating the following:



> Berd's special spokes use a customized coating to increase resistance to wear and tear, abrasion, moisture, and UV exposure as well.


Polyurethane (PU). 99% sure. Marlow offers PU treatment on a lot of their ropes. Subsequent heat treatment (referred to as HPC technology by some vendors) might also help.



> I'm seeing why Berd have done it with a regular spoke end. They don't need to get the length of the string very precise if they're sliding it over a couple inches of spoke end.


That, and... it's cheap. Plus it doesn't look different.



> Do you suppose they have roughed up the spoke so the bury works better? or would that abrade the string


Epoxy adhesive? It's probably a "customized coating" or "proprietary material".



> In the other weight-weenie direction from larger titanium, is smaller steel. What about using a 15g steel spoke and not a 2.0 at the outer end?


I definitely like this idea of going smaller with a steel bolt. Okashira's take on durability? What kind of tension would this take?


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Pm me I will give you contact


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

sissypants said:


> I'm not sure where you read about this, but I googled it and found a Yahoo article stating the following:
> 
> Polyurethane (PU). 99% sure. Marlow offers PU treatment on a lot of their ropes. Subsequent heat treatment (referred to as HPC technology by some vendors) might also help.
> 
> ...


Marlow's 1.8mm DM20 is heat stretched and PU.

On spoke tension, so titanium and/or 15ga steel might work best on wheels with 32,36,40 spokes. Where you can target like <70Kgf tension. Might be a good combo with 1.5mm line instead of 1.8.

My wheels are 28 spoke so I will probably want a little more tension...

PS I have a friend in town visiting so I won't have much time to work on this for next 5 days


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Tweaked to lower mass.

0.77g for 302ss
0.424g for Ti Alloy

Total spoke weight 
1.92g 302ss
1.57g Ti

Still using the 1.1mm thickness, we will do some testing to see if 1.1mm is okay or we need to make it thicker (~2mm)


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Nov 19, 2013)

may need a patent lawyer to verify you won't infringe on Berd patent if you intend to sell

SPOKE COMPOSED OF BRAIDED FIBER WITH HUB AND RIM TERMINATIONS

of course, keep building it,

maybe not sell any, till the all clear is vetted


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

127.0.0.1 said:


> may need a patent lawyer to verify you won't infringe on Berd patent if you intend to sell
> 
> SPOKE COMPOSED OF BRAIDED FIBER WITH HUB AND RIM TERMINATIONS
> 
> ...


If he is potentially in violation selling or not selling won't necessarily be protection. Not selling would probably reduce damage liabilities though.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

tuckerjt07 said:


> If he is potentially in violation selling or not selling won't necessarily be protection. Not selling would probably reduce damage liabilities though.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


Oh cmmon, this is a DIY project  If it ever would hit the market it would be because it is so different from Berd that it makes sense to market it.

I wouldn't market until I could improve on the hub interface and materials used. My chemistry background is coming in handy  DM20 isn't the only material out there like this.


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

sissypants said:


> Oh cmmon, this is a DIY project  If it ever would hit the market it would be because it is so different from Berd that it makes sense to market it.
> 
> I wouldn't market until I could improve on the hub interface and materials used. My chemistry background is coming in handy  DM20 isn't the only material out there like this.


Is it likely they'll take action, no. However, full disclosure is that they can solely based on the fact of it being made. Commercialization has no bearing in the matter.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## TwiceHorn (Jun 18, 2014)

Okashira and I have had the patent infringement discussion in PMs. I bring it up because it's such a common misconception, but the statute provides:

whoever without authority *makes, uses, offers to sell, or sells *any patented invention, within the United States, or i*mports into the United States* any patented invention during the term of the patent therefor, infringes the patent.​
So, even making one or two or three in your garage is patent infringement for which one can be sued. However, patent infringement lawsuits are very expensive and no patent owner is likely to sue you for making a few infringing products that don't significantly cut into the market for the product.

Berd's patent hasn't been granted yet, so there's nothing to sue over. But it will be granted soon.


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

Why not Kevlar, after all? It’s available for cheap at retail. Cursory search gave $23 for a roll of 700# test, 1.8mm rope from Emma Kites via Amazon. That would be a bike’s worth. It’s not obvious if it’s name brand Kevlar or which version. I guess you could call and find out. You could also paint it with PU.

Spinergy Spox are still available, I just looked. They are made of a fiber called PBO, trade name Zylon.


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

I was just reminiscing about bending piano wire (spring steel) to make landing gear, or worse, rubber motor hooks, for my model airplanes. That stuff was tempered _hard_. Looking up spokes, even CX-Ray spokes are not as hard as that stuff is, and a straight spoke is less than half the strength. Made me unafraid of both trying to bend it, or the result breaking because of the bend.


----------



## Aglo (Dec 16, 2014)

TwiceHorn said:


> Okashira and I have had the patent infringement discussion in PMs.(...)


I don't want to start a discussion about patent infringement, but apart from the type of fiber, that is commercially available, and that has a splice loop at one end of the rope, that they can't reclaim patent, what we are talking about is, in my opinion, different enough to not infringe their patent.
To be completely honest I don't even think that they have enough ground to be granted a patent on their product, but it's not my job to judge, I just like to thinker with things.
But I honestly do want to know your opinion on if we will be infringing their patent if we build a spoke the way we have been speaking, I ask this because you clearly know more about patents than me and, I bet, more than most reading this thread.

Thanks!


----------



## Aglo (Dec 16, 2014)

Darth Lefty said:


> I was just reminiscing about bending piano wire (spring steel) to make landing gear, or worse, rubber motor hooks, for my model airplanes. That stuff was tempered _hard_. Looking up spokes, even CX-Ray spokes are not as hard as that stuff is, and a straight spoke is less than half the strength. Made me unafraid of both trying to bend it, or the result breaking because of the bend.


Are you talking about making an eye by bending a spoke?
If so, think about it this way, J-bend spokes are bent spokes .


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

Aglo said:


> Are you talking about making an eye by bending a spoke?
> If so, think about it this way, J-bend spokes are bent spokes .


Yeah but that's done with a lot of tooling and some science. I want to do it with a pair of pliers and my hands. How good is good enough?


----------



## Aglo (Dec 16, 2014)

The most importar thing on my opinion is precision and repeatability, the best and fastest way to achieve this is to use/make a rig.
So, three or four removable pins and a fixed nut to thread and fix the spoke should be all we need.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Darth Lefty said:


> Why not Kevlar, after all? It's available for cheap at retail. Cursory search gave $23 for a roll of 700# test, 1.8mm rope from Emma Kites via Amazon. That would be a bike's worth. It's not obvious if it's name brand Kevlar or which version. I guess you could call and find out. You could also paint it with PU.
> 
> Spinergy Spox are still available, I just looked. They are made of a fiber called PBO, trade name Zylon.


Both vectran or pbo would be a better choice then Kevlar. 
Compared to all 4, DM20 has the best 
Uv resistance
Strength/weight
chemical resistance
Abrasion resistance

It's available. I will post up a source for 1.5 mm size also.
I think I posted a a source for 1.8mm vectran as well

Kevlars abrasion resistance and poor chemical resistance really makes it hard to use for spokes


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Aglo said:


> I had to think for 3sec on what you were talking about with Z-bend .
> 
> When I was talking about bending a spoke and braze it with brass I was referring to something like the picture bellow, the yellowish area is where the braze is made.
> 
> View attachment 1223164


I kinda like this, worth a try.
TBH this might be a good way to produce these easily.
Have them CNC wire bent from spring steel. Then manually braze them all. or figure out a way to lock it without a braze.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

@Aglo I am liking your idea of bending a wire around to make a loop.
We could have spring steel wire CNC bent into that shape, and brazing can be done in large quantities in an oven, just place a 10mm long piece of braze rod right on the joint and pop it in the oven.
Use a low enough temperature braze filler and one can maintain some pretty good hardness on the wire.
CNC wire bending:





They could be bent, quenched, then the brazing process and tempering could be combined in 1 step; threads rolled after brazing.

round spring steel wire has the further advantage of making a nice smooth round for the splice to sit on.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

@Aglo I am liking your idea of bending a wire around to make a loop.
We could have spring steel wire CNC bent into that shape, and brazing can be done in large quantities in an oven, just place a 10mm long piece of braze rod right on the joint and pop it in the oven.
Use a low enough temperature braze filler and one can maintain some pretty good hardness on the wire.
CNC wire bending:





They could be bent, quenched, then the brazing process and tempering could be combined in 1 step; threads rolled after brazing.

round spring steel wire has the further advantage of making a nice smooth round for the splice to sit on.
http://www.amtekcompany.com/diwire-desktop-cnc-wire-bender/


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Outdated


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Outdated


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

I am not a patent lawyer, so I am all ears to what others have to say. 

Does Pi-Rope have a patent on Vectran Polyester for spokes? How do they secure their end bolts to the Vectran braid? If it's indeed adhesive I wonder what kind of strength they can get.

This is a huge point of frustration for me, why can you just go out there and patent your favorite material for your favorite purpose? In my world of work, this would be akin to patenting your favorite gene for designing drugs for a certain cancer so nobody else can work on it (which was ruled against at the highest levels of jurisdiction). What's the diff?


----------



## TwiceHorn (Jun 18, 2014)

sissypants said:


> I am not a patent lawyer, so I am all ears to what others have to say.
> 
> Does Pi-Rope have a patent on Vectran Polyester for spokes? How do they secure their end bolts to the Vectran braid? If it's indeed adhesive I wonder what kind of strength they can get.
> 
> This is a huge point of frustration for me, why can you just go out there and patent your favorite material for your favorite purpose? In my world of work, this would be akin to patenting your favorite gene for designing drugs for a certain cancer so nobody else can work on it (which was ruled against at the highest levels of jurisdiction). What's the diff?


Generally speaking you cannot patent a new use for a known material. However, if that material must be modified in some way to make it work (as by using the "bury splice" to fix a metallic pin in the fiber), then the combination of the material and the modification may be patentable.

When the Berd patent issues, its claims are simple enough that I will come back here and post them and do a little thumbnail analysis that might be useful for some of the peanut gallery. I'm on a number of hobby boards where patents come up rather frequently and so maybe it will be nice to correct some of the misapprehensions about them.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

sissypants said:


> I am not a patent lawyer, so I am all ears to what others have to say.
> 
> Does Pi-Rope have a patent on Vectran Polyester for spokes? How do they secure their end bolts to the Vectran braid? If it's indeed adhesive I wonder what kind of strength they can get.
> 
> This is a huge point of frustration for me, why can you just go out there and patent your favorite material for your favorite purpose? In my world of work, this would be akin to patenting your favorite gene for designing drugs for a certain cancer so nobody else can work on it (which was ruled against at the highest levels of jurisdiction). What's the diff?


no!! There is no patent for vectran or dm20 for use on spokes.
Berds pending patent is very specific , related to their buried spoke end, super glue and their pulling the splice thru the hub and using the short piece of dyneema to hold it in the hub.
There is no mention of material.


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Nov 19, 2013)

okashira said:


> no!! There is no patent for vectran or dm20 for use on spokes.
> Berds pending patent is very specific , related to their buried spoke end, super glue and their pulling the splice thru the hub and using the short piece of dyneema to hold it in the hub.
> There is no mention of material.


yeah that is how it looks

the method they patent is the way of using standard hubs and standard rims for a braided fiber spoke...and what is patented is the hub connection and the chinese finger trap thing

maybe...I am no lawyer...


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

Back to Kevlar (since I'm lazy). If we are wetting it out with PU then do we really need to worry about abrasion or UV resistance? The stuff from Emma Kites was black, too, not yellow, which should help.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Darth Lefty said:


> Back to Kevlar (since I'm lazy). If we are wetting it out with PU then do we really need to worry about abrasion or UV resistance? The stuff from Emma Kites was black, too, not yellow, which should help.


Do you already just happen to have some ~1.8mm kevlar?
I don't think PU will help much with the abrasion. You could just rub right through it. I think you'd want a double braided / covered rope. It's the actual UHMWPE fibers that resist abrasion because they are so slick and tough.
It is also less chemical resistant. UHMWPE will just last alot longer.
I have a 100m roll, and I think that sissy ordered 100m roll so we can sell you some of it.


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

okashira said:


> Do you already just happen to have some ~1.8mm kevlar?
> I don't think PU will help much with the abrasion. You could just rub right through it. I think you'd want a double braided / covered rope. It's the actual UHMWPE fibers that resist abrasion because they are so slick and tough.
> It is also less chemical resistant. UHMWPE will just last alot longer.
> I have a 100m roll, and I think that sissy ordered 100m roll so we can sell you some of it.


I actually haven't pulled the trigger on that roll yet. I'm kind of not sure yet whether I'm going to pull the trigger on this project unless we can distribute costs on whatever eyebolt design we come up with. I want to make sure the numbers add up.

This seems to be the most easily accessible product out there:

https://www.amazon.com/Mastrant-MM02031-Diameter-MASTRANT-M-Braided/dp/B079C73DQX/ref=sr_1_1

It's 2mm instead of 1.8mm, so for all practical purposes, basically the same thing. If the 1.8mm roll is still available I would get that though.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

sissypants said:


> I actually haven't pulled the trigger on that roll yet. I'm kind of not sure yet whether I'm going to pull the trigger on this project unless we can distribute costs on whatever eyebolt design we come up with. I want to make sure the numbers add up.
> 
> This seems to be the most easily accessible product out there:
> 
> ...


That won't work. I already got some. It's not braided. And it's 2mm with the polyester cover.
Mastrant shipped me samples direct from the Czech Republic; only the cover is braided, not the DM20.


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

Oh, thanks for checking already! I emailed the supplier and they said the rope was 2mm but apparently they weren’t familiar with the product. Maybe I’ll pull the trigger on the rope from the supplier you sent me.

Braided vectran wouldn’t work for our application?


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

sissypants said:


> Oh, thanks for checking already! I emailed the supplier and they said the rope was 2mm but apparently they weren't familiar with the product. Maybe I'll pull the trigger on the rope from the supplier you sent me.
> 
> Braided vectran wouldn't work for our application?


Vectran is good. I would say it's the 2nd best choice to DM20.

Not as chemical resistant or abrasion resistant and not as stiff.
But much better then Kevlar


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

okashira said:


> I have a 100m roll, and I think that sissy ordered 100m roll so we can sell you some of it.


Thank you for your kind offer but I think part of the goal here should be that anyone crafty can do it with supplies they can get easily. That's one major reason I keep harping on other fibers and bending straight spokes to make the ends. I don't mind being in on a group buy to lower the price. I've been doing those since usenet. But so far the Dyneema has an embargo and the Ti ends just seem like more luxury than engineering.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Outdated


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Outdated


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Here is what I think ill do for my front wheel spokes....

For my rear wheel, I ended up with a 28H because of a deal I got on a DT Swiss 180 hub, so I'll use 1.8mm DM20 with some custom ends that we're designing (or a bury)

For my front wheel, Ill go for a 36H or 40H and use these spokes:
無標題文件
PSR AERO 1432

They are 3.2mm wide, which is perfect. I'll drill a 1.35mm hole in the flat section and thread the 2mm end longer. Perfect.
It will reduce the strength of the spoke, to perhaps 200kg or so, which is why ill use the smaller 1.25mm line and a higher spoke count with a bit lower tension.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Another good option; these were hard to find:
無標題文件
https://www.bikeonlineshop.net/pillar/phd-aero-1345-spoke-black

They are 13g. I might use these, and use a belt sander to get the diameter down to 2.0mm , before rolling threads on them.

I received the 2.6mm / 2.3mm butted spokes I ordered, will take them to a machine shop to try and flatten the 2.6mm end when I get a chance this week.

*******************************
I was about to send this design off to a USA mfg, but I realized I need to do a strength test with a splice around 1.1mm thick material, to see if it needs to be thicker....
If anyone has any comments now would be the time before I send it for quote and engage a manufacturer.
I will send it to these guys first; I have worked with them before.
Case Studies - Buyken Metal Products - CNC, Metal Fabrication, Quality, Kent Washington


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

okashira said:


> Another good option; these were hard to find:
> 無標題文件
> https://www.bikeonlineshop.net/pillar/phd-aero-1345-spoke-black
> 
> ...


I like the design a lot, I hope it works well!

Glad to hear you've got a manufacturer ready to roll.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Here is a wire bent design as suggested by someone here...
Weight comes to 1.1g or so.
Manufacturing is an issue. Can't braze spring steel it because it would soften too much. Can't weld spring steel.
Can't weld 302ss because it would also be softened.
Brazing cold worked 302ss may work.

Edit: actually welding might work. The wire pressed together and ultrasonically welded or maybe even spot welded.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Guys, I will be in Shanghai from the 19th to the 5th. 
I don't have alot of time in the meantime, but if anyone finds some relevant supplier in Shanghai. I may be able to visit them for quotes or some manufacturing guideance or prototype inspection.

I'll bring some DM20 with me that i can splice into any prototype parts for strength testing


----------



## TwiceHorn (Jun 18, 2014)

Okashira has already reviewed these, but since there's a bit of a collaborative effort on this, figured I'd post the other two major fiber/flexible spoke patents for the inspiration/consideration of others.

This is kind of the pioneer and may be a bit speculative. https://patents.google.com/patent/US5110190A

This is one of another set of three that may pursue a red herring https://patents.google.com/patent/US8794714B2

The reason we have patents in the first place is to document ideas so that others can rely on them in their own work. Sometimes these failed or unsuccessful for uknown reasons ideas can provide important inspiration to others.


----------



## Aglo (Dec 16, 2014)

Regarding the 2.3mm(13G) alloy nipples, besides Sapim and Pillar that I can't find available anywhere, I found some guys that you might want try to contact: https://www.newsonsportec.com/


----------



## Aglo (Dec 16, 2014)

okashira said:


> Here is a wire bent design as suggested by someone here...
> Weight comes to 1.1g or so.
> Manufacturing is an issue. Can't braze spring steel it because it would soften too much. Can't weld spring steel.
> Can't weld 302ss because it would also be softened.
> ...


I arrived at the same conclusion as you.
I also considered spot welding, but I don't think it will work because the spokes are too thin, but I'm no expert on welding, so it may work.
Other option that occurred to me was to leave a bigger tail after the loop and wrap it around the spoke for a couple of turns and solder the wrap, but don't know if it will hold.


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Nov 19, 2013)

Aglo said:


> I arrived at the same conclusion as you.
> I also considered spot welding, but I don't think it will work because the spokes are too thin, but I'm no expert on welding, so it may work.
> Other option that occurred to me was to leave a bigger tail after the loop and wrap it around the spoke for a couple of turns and solder the wrap, but don't know if it will hold.


electronic spot welding would do that perfectly methinks.
current is adjustable. it's commonly used for thin metals that can't take too much heat
such as lithium battery straps


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Nov 19, 2013)

how would you connect to the loop, like a larkshead ?


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

127.0.0.1 said:


> how would you connect to the loop, like a larkshead ?
> 
> View attachment 1224180


Spot welding, ultra sonic welding, or brazing 302ss.

I was also looking for an idea like this, it would make the cost really low even for lower quantities using CNC wire bending. But I am worried the extra material to make a knot or self locking mechanism as such would add alot of weight.

1.1g is still pretty good. It gives a final spoke weight of about 2.15g for a 29er using 1.8mm DM20.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Buyken declined to quote.





This could work well for the 302ss wire bend design.

drawn 302ss wire in 2mm is available all the way to 300,000psi tensile strength (660kg break strength!) at very low cost.
That's probably too hard, we will want something like 1/2 hard, or 180,000psi, so the bends can be made and threads rolled.

As long as the HAZ (heat affected zone) of the weld doesn't extend out of the area where the wire is doubled up, it will remain nice and strong.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

TwiceHorn said:


> Okashira has already reviewed these, but since there's a bit of a collaborative effort on this, figured I'd post the other two major fiber/flexible spoke patents for the inspiration/consideration of others.
> 
> This is kind of the pioneer and may be a bit speculative. https://patents.google.com/patent/US5110190A
> 
> ...


Thanks TwiceHorn.

Yeah Spinergy's method is pretty cool.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Asking these guys to quote both...
CNC Wire Forming - Custom Welding - Wire Straightening & Cutting Services - Franklin Park, IL


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

@sissypants So you had a quote for gr5 titanium part.
For some reason I thought gr5 Ti was pure Ti, which it's not. It IS 6Al-4V.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

https://www.ebay.com/itm/5Pcs-Titan...h=item26073c6856:g:h8EAAOSwaDtb19vK:rk:2:pf:0

Use with the Berd method and get a 1.9g spoke.


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

okashira said:


> Here is a wire bent design as suggested by someone here...
> Weight comes to 1.1g or so.
> Manufacturing is an issue. Can't braze spring steel it because it would soften too much. Can't weld spring steel.
> Can't weld 302ss because it would also be softened.
> ...


It'd be funny if you could call it electroforged like a Schwinn Varsity or a Stingray.

Also, tied and soldered spokes used to be a thing. https://www.wheelfanatyk.com/blog/tying-and-soldering-made-easy/

I laughed a little at item 4 on that page's list. "A time when the price of labor was lower and craftsmanship was valued more highly." One of those clauses can be true but not both in the same sentence!


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

Darth Lefty said:


> I laughed a little at item 4 on that page's list. "A time when the price of labor was lower and craftsmanship was valued more highly." One of those clauses can be true but not both in the same sentence!


It depends honestly. In an employer sided market it can hold true. Wages are low due to a surplus in able bodied workers and workers are just thankful to have a job are not complacent and go above and beyond to keep it.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Aglo (Dec 16, 2014)

127.0.0.1 said:


> how would you connect to the loop, like a larkshead ?
> 
> View attachment 1224180


That is an option but we could just splice through the eye like we have being talking. But I think your suggestion would put less stress on the rope.

@okashira, if instead of making the eye with a round shape we make a tear drop shape, it would be less susceptible to stretch and probably lighter.

Do you think the 302ss is easily rolled with the Hozan head?


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Aglo said:


> That is an option but we could just splice through the eye like we have being talking. But I think your suggestion would put less stress on the rope.
> 
> @okashira, if instead of making the eye with a round shape we make a tear drop shape, it would be less susceptible to stretch and probably lighter.
> 
> Do you think the 302ss is easily rolled with the Hozan head?


Most spokes are 302ss.


----------



## Aglo (Dec 16, 2014)

okashira said:


> Most spokes are 302ss.


If I recall correctly my Sapin and DT are non-magnetic so you are most probably right. But I am almost sure my Wheelsmith are magnetic, have to check it later to be sure.
Anyway, I ordered a 300Kg scale and some non chromed plated silver stainless spokes to do some brazing tests.
Now I want to order some 12 strands Dyneema DM20 rope, either 2mm or 1.8mm, but I'm a little lost here, I know you should be extra busy now, but can you help me here and share some links of sellers that ship to Europe?
Thanks.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Aglo said:


> If I recall correctly my Sapin and DT are non-magnetic so you are most probably right. But I am almost sure my Wheelsmith are magnetic, have to check it later to be sure.
> Anyway, I ordered a 300Kg scale and some non chromed plated silver stainless spokes to do some brazing tests.
> Now I want to order some 12 strands Dyneema DM20 rope, either 2mm or 1.8mm, but I'm a little lost here, I know you should be extra busy now, but can you help me here and share some links of sellers that ship to Europe?
> Thanks.


Two places
Marlow 1.8mm
Email Chicago Yacht Rigging.

Armare.it
https://www.armare.it/en/

I ordered some SK99, kite line on their website, 1.25mm. I then emailed them if they could make it from DM20
They said yes and changed the order to DM20, same price.

I think they have 1, 1.25, 1.5, 1.8 and 2

On 302ss, 302ss is non magnetic when annealed, but becomes magnetic as you cold work it. The spokes that you have that are magnetic are probably just more cold worked.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

I have a Ti company looking at custom forging.
Ti 6Al-4V. aka Grade 5.
This part would be 0.5g. or 1.6g for whole spoke.

Cut off threads after tension and you can get 1.4-1.5g.

The extra thread length is needed, helpful. I am shooting for 22-24mm long. You can always cut off excess.
Longer threads makes it easier to get the length right.








Can also do 1.8mm with 302ss, perhaps, about 0.8g.


----------



## Zonic Man (Dec 19, 2003)

@okashira--check your PM's. I sent you one yesterday.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

@Zionic sorry they are sold.

I am getting about 275kg break strength for this design. Good enough, IMHO, even for 28 spoke wheels. Amazing for 1.4g-1.6g spokes.
The eye and the shaft fail at about the same time.


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

okashira said:


> @sissypants So you had a quote for gr5 titanium part.
> For some reason I thought gr5 Ti was pure Ti, which it's not. It IS 6Al-4V.


Sorry for the delay, yes, it was from Dongguan Weimi Titanium parts. They were quoting $1.27/pc @ 1000 pcs and $1/pc @1500 pcs. They were rolling threads and forging the bolts. It was grade 5 titanium.

Best way to reach them in particular is on Alibaba, but I'm sure there are more options out there.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

@sissy,
Ok I sent them the new design.

Here is the file for the cutter jig if you have a 3D printer. The taper works great. No need for the tedious tapering of the tail.
you can print out mm measurements on paper and glue/tape it if you want.
https://1drv.ms/u/s!AuqwBZb5n5Jqg_YY0IsM9fDLRtww2A


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

@sissy

Here is what I got from the supplier you shared:

"CNC Machining service can macnufacture this parts, actually, Forged service need more lager quantity support."

Are you sure they said they would forge the part for qty 1,000?

My other Ti place says they think the qty will need to be 5,000 for a forging. They are still working on the quote.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Removed old protoype that was built before an aspect patent was granted


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

okashira said:


> @sissy
> 
> Here is what I got from the supplier you shared:
> 
> ...


This was their reply:



> Hi,
> 
> Thanks for your quick response.
> 
> ...


In retrospect I don't think it was clear whether we were discussing machining or forging.

I talked to a friend of mine who owns a successful machine shop in Grand Rapids, MI (where I live) and he said he didn't think forging would be economical under 10,000 pieces. He said machining the bolts and rolling the threads would be the best way to go, and 7075 would be just fine given the tension we'll be using. He also was very skeptical of brazing or welding a bent spoke together as brazing adds material (makes it heavier) and isn't nearly as strong as a machined eye, and welding would just break guaranteed.

He was happy to do a run of 1,000 pieces on a friend basis, but I have no idea about his pricing. I know I'd get a discount, but not a huge one because margins aren't super big. He does have about 40 CNC machines though.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

sissypants said:


> This was their reply:
> 
> In retrospect I don't think it was clear whether we were discussing machining or forging.
> 
> ...


That's great. Ask him to do a run of 500-1000, at least for prototype and testing purpose!
6Al-4V, please! 7075 is just not strong enough for 14ga, especially machined. Even forged would be iffy at 13ga, and 13ga alum nipples are hard to find.
Sure it will hold 120kg of tension, but it will break at 200kg new, and fatigue down to 100kg in 1,000 miles.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

You guys are making great progress. Hoping to sponge off of y'all's hard work and brains in time. 

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

okashira said:


> That's great. Ask him to do a run of 500-1000, at least for prototype and testing purpose!
> 6Al-4V, please! 7075 is just not strong enough for 14ga, especially machined. Even forged would be iffy at 13ga, and 13ga alum nipples are hard to find.
> Sure it will hold 120kg of tension, but it will break at 200kg new, and fatigue down to 100kg in 1,000 miles.


Edit: Will post up after I get a quote.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Just a heads up: 

Chicago Yacht Righing is no longer carrying/selling DM20. 




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

I’ve been emailing Manuela from Armare. Hoping to get a quote tomorrow.

Out of curiosity, what is the diameter of 2.0mm DM20 at proper tension? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## TwiceHorn (Jun 18, 2014)

That's some really impressive engineering/manufacturing. Berd's patent will issue on 12/11 and I can give you guys the claim/coverage summary.


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

TwiceHorn said:


> That's some really impressive engineering/manufacturing. Berd's patent will issue on 12/11 and I can give you guys the claim/coverage summary.


I'm all ears and appreciate your expertise!

I'm sure Berd is reading this thread as well 

The only thing that my approach and Berd's approach have in common is the use of DM20 rope.

Eyebolts will be used which thread directly into the nipples, unlike a threaded rod which threads directly into the nipples
The rope is spliced through the eye of the eyebolt, unlike the threaded rod which is buried into the rope core and held in place with adhesive when not under tension.
The rope is fixed to the hub by a bury splice around the hub flange, unlike a bury splice which is pulled through the flange and fixed with a small strand of fiber placed through the splice loop on the inside of the flange.
I'm using DM20 2.0mm rope instead of DM20 1.8mm.

My use of the bury splice at the hub flange is different in design, though I'd be interested to hear your opinion on whether Berd could claim rights to any bury splice used in any manner to secure the spoke to a hub.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Sky International don’t carry any DM20 below 3mm. 

Dropped Teufelberger an email asking about their 1.5mm DM20. Although, according to them/their catalog, they seem to make SK99 stuff with similar performance as it pertains to stretch and creep. We’ll see if they get back to me. 

Still waiting to hear back from Manuela at Armare. Might try emailing that other contact listed above. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Aglo (Dec 16, 2014)

Same problem here, can't find DM20 stuff thinner than 3mm.
I emailed Armare, and Manuela got back to me asking what diameters and quantities I want, but have not heard from her since my reply.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

I got some 1.25 Dm20 from Armare no problem.. 100meters.
I just ordered sk99 racing line and replied to their email asking to change to dm20.
It's been delivered already but im still in China until the 6th.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Le Duke said:


> I've been emailing Manuela from Armare. Hoping to get a quote tomorrow.
> 
> Out of curiosity, what is the diameter of 2.0mm DM20 at proper tension?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


The Marlow DM20 I got is near 1.7mm under tension.
I think 2.0 is a bit overkill.
1.5 or 1.8 is better IMHO 
The Armare 1.25 I got was rated at like 268kg break strength

Sucks to hear you guys can't get Dm20 from cyr. But i think Armare Italy will work out. They didn't have a problem with my 100meter custom order.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

I asked if I could order 50m. I wonder if they just didn’t want to do an order that small. 

I’ll re-engage with a bigger order length. I'm going to try to order 100m of 1.5mm DM20 from Armare.

That said, if anyone is interested in parting with some of their material, I'd certainly be interested in relieving you of your excess DM20. 

Likewise, I'll gladly sell some of my DM20 if/when I'm actually able to order it. 100m, even with massive waste of material and using 400mm per spoke, would still make 250 spokes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

okashira said:


> The Marlow DM20 I got is near 1.7mm under tension.
> I think 2.0 is a bit overkill.
> 1.5 or 1.8 is better IMHO
> The Armare 1.25 I got was rated at like 268kg break strength
> ...


So, I've been reading up on some of the Dyneema materials.

Depending the material, they (various manufacturers) generally recommend that the static load is no higher than 20% of the break strength. Is that going to impact your plans, particularly with the 1.25mm DM20, and its 268kg break strength?

That said, I was looking at Mastrant's 2mm DM20 guy rope, which has a 75 daN working load and a 250 daN strength, which works out to 30%.

Am I thinking about this the wrong way?


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

No, you're being logical.
You can go for more then 20% though, since the application is well constrained and not shock loaded like, say, riggings or safety lines.
1.25mm would be better for 36 or 40 spokes wheels. 
I would go for 1.8mm for 28 or 32.
Armares 1.8mm dm20 is good for like > 350kg.

I already posted this about Mastrants guy rope you don't want to use that stuff... it's with a cover and the core is not braided 
What we need is called "single braid" or "hollow braid" or "12-stand"
None of Mastrants products are appropriate.

2mm single braid DM20 would probably break at 400kg if it is quality stuff.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Here is how I ordered.
Select racing line or kite line.
Select single braid/no cover.
Select WHITE or CLEAR color.
Chose your size and order 100m.

Then email them and ask for DM20 instead. They said the sk99 and dm20 same price.

I don't know if they offer 1.8. you could order 2.0 and ask if they can target 1.8.

Maybe the kite line has an option for 1.8.
















They may not want to be bothered with setting up custom orders via email. I'm sure they get alot of inquiry without people following through.
If you order and pay in advance, you'll get better service, I think.
Their english also seems a bit limited.


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

Does DM20 gradually recover from its stretch if the load is removed, like rubber? I was wondering if the spokes could be pre-stretched, and then how much time you would have before they got a few mm shorter again.

(although I can't think of a really good way to put that much force on that many spokes at home without just going ahead and building them into a wheel)


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

sissypants said:


> Will post up after I get a quote.


So my friend who owns a machine shop got back with me and said that this product at this scale is just not economical for him as he isn't set up to do these kinds of projects. He did try to make it work and talked to guys. He also tapped two other local shop owners who do small stuff but they didn't feel they could offer a competitive price.

Unless any of you have a connection, I think outsourcing to China for the eyebolts will be ideal, and it will probably end up around $1.25/pc. after freight.

Shall I send out another round of quotes? I don't really want to be the one handling the up-front costs on this.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Here's the other question I have.

Would the "Chinese Finger Trap" method work with 2mm 12-strand? Or is it too wide, internally, to work with something like a 2mm section of welding rod?


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Wouldn't these poly spokes result in a wheel that moved considerably more under high side loads?

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Yes. There is a bit of viscoelastic stretch that recovers on the order of hours to minutes. It's useful if you have a spoke slightly too short.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

It will still work.
Let me point out that the surface finish on those ti welding rods I got from eBay were perfect for the finger trap method. Really grippy. It would even hold on without glue at the end.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Suns_PSD said:


> Wouldn't these poly spokes result in a wheel that moved considerably more under high side loads?
> 
> Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


You should read up on the materials in question.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Got bored this evening before dinner and did some basic math. I calculated the breaking load per square millimeter (which isn't really a thing with a braided rope) of material. One of the more interesting things is that the breaking strength of these materials seems to go down, on a breaking strength vs. cross sectional area, as they increase in diameter. More air space? Not sure.

All of the data were pulled from manufacturers' websites. One important caveat related to error. There are one or two companies that used daN instead of kgf. 1 daN = 1.019 kgf, so, call it 2%. Teufelberger listed in in daN. So, if you really care, knock 2% off those to get kgf breaking loads.

The theoretical, non-existent products are based 1.5 and 2.0mm theoretical DM20 material using the highest and lowest calculated values for Sky International's English Braids Dynastay (DM20) products. Meaning, I took the 1.5 and 2.0mm diameters, cut it in half (radius), squared that value, multiplied it by pi, then multiplied it by the highest and lowest calculated breaking loads. It would be great if they actually existed, but, at this point in time, Gideon at Sky International confirms the smallest diameter they sell is 3mm.


----------



## robbnj (Jul 19, 2013)

Suns_PSD said:


> Wouldn't these poly spokes result in a wheel that moved considerably more under high side loads?
> 
> Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


I was thinking the same as I was reading through the thread.
I understand that the "spoke" will be under high tension which should prevent it, but it's hard to compare a solid metal spoke to a piece of "rope" in my mind's eye.

I'd have to see a rope that has virtually no stretch capability to begin to even consider the two as similar.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

robbnj said:


> I was thinking the same as I was reading through the thread.
> I understand that the "spoke" will be under high tension which should prevent it, but it's hard to compare a solid metal spoke to a piece of "rope" in my mind's eye.
> 
> I'd have to see a rope that has virtually no stretch capability to begin to even consider the two as similar.


High tension has very little to do with lateral "flex" in a wheel, regardless of whether the spoke is metal or polymer.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Armare's 1.5mm sk99 is rated at 450kg :-O


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

okashira said:


> Armare's 1.5mm sk99 is rated at 450kg :-O


Did they ever provide you with specs on the DM20 you bought?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## robbnj (Jul 19, 2013)

Le Duke said:


> High tension has very little to do with lateral "flex" in a wheel, regardless of whether the spoke is metal or polymer.


I'm likely using incorrect terminology, but are you saying if I loosen all my spokes by a fair amount, the outer rim will continue to run true relative to the hub, even with a strong side load presented?
(and the hub will also remain true to the center of the periphery of the rim under load?)

It's oversimplifying, but I think of a steering wheel having flexible spokes. Press hard against the wheel rim at 3 and 9 o'clock, and it will move toward the dash while the hub remains in the same place. The less tension on those spokes, the more the rim can move.

I thought it was the tension on the spokes that kept it all centered and true (and why I paid my LBS to properly tension the spokes to true my wheels).


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

robbnj said:


> I'm likely using incorrect terminology, but are you saying if I loosen all my spokes by a fair amount, the outer rim will continue to run true relative to the hub, even with a strong side load presented?
> (and the hub will also remain true to the center of the periphery of the rim under load?)
> 
> It's oversimplifying, but I think of a steering wheel having flexible spokes. Press hard against the wheel rim at 3 and 9 o'clock, and it will move toward the dash while the hub remains in the same place. The less tension on those spokes, the more the rim can move.
> ...


I'd ask you how/if a spoke made from flexible steel wire and one made from a piece of polymer rope are functionally different. If you press on the rim, in this scenario, the spokes would stretch. If a DM20 spoke has no appreciable difference in stretch under load, compared to a CX-Ray, why would it build a more laterally flexible wheel?

Also:

https://www.sheldonbrown.com/rinard/wheel_index.html

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Nov 19, 2013)

^I gotta stop reading this thread. researching what is being posted here on deflection led me down a path where I remembered I used to race hard on spinery rex-x and did not die nor break any bones or bleed out, and that was sheer luck. I raced for 16 months on Rev-X and only cracked the carbon arch on the rim, never the spokes themselves. so then I see all the past rev-x career ending injuries....pictures...stories...oh man ....


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

127.0.0.1 said:


> ^I gotta stop reading this thread. researching what is being posted here on deflection led me down a path where I remembered I used to race hard on spinery rex-x and did not die nor break any bones or bleed out, and that was sheer luck. I raced for 16 months on Rev-X and only cracked the carbon arch on the rim, never the spokes themselves. so then I see all the past rev-x career ending injuries....pictures...stories...oh man ....


I was racing on the road a bit after the height of the Rev-X boom, but I found a picture of me next to a due on them while looking through some old pictures.

I'd hope that any remaining, intact copies are reserved for wall or shop art at this point.


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

Le Duke said:


> I'd ask you how/if a spoke made from flexible steel wire and one made from a piece of polymer rope are functionally different. If you press on the rim, in this scenario, the spokes would stretch. If a DM20 spoke has no appreciable difference in stretch under load, compared to a CX-Ray, why would it build a more laterally flexible wheel?
> 
> Also:
> 
> ...


You picked a bad example. CX-Rays are bladed so shape could be tuned to account for lateral flex. Are they, no idea. Could they, absolutely.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

tuckerjt07 said:


> You picked a bad example. CX-Rays are bladed so shape could be tuned to account for lateral flex. Are they, no idea. Could they, absolutely.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


I might be wrong, but the cross sectional area of a CX-Ray is the same as a "normal" double butted 2.0-1.5-2.0mm spoke. Per Sapim and other manufacturers, their bladed spokes are a Laser with an extra forging step to ovalize the spoke. I believe Sapim makes claims about enhanced durability due to this extra forging step, but have never seen anyone able to verify that.

And, I believe that cross sectional area is really the only thing that matters (given the same material), in terms of a spoke's individual contribution to wheel stiffness. Basically, a 2mm straight gauge spoke wheel, given the same hub and rim, will always be "stiffer" than a similar wheel built with double butted spokes.


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

Le Duke said:


> I might be wrong, but the cross sectional area of a CX-Ray is the same as a "normal" double butted 2.0-1.5-2.0mm spoke. Per Sapim and other manufacturers, their bladed spokes are a Laser with an extra forging step to ovalize the spoke. I believe Sapim makes claims about enhanced durability due to this extra forging step, but have never seen anyone able to verify that.
> 
> And, I believe that cross sectional area is really the only thing that matters (given the same material), in terms of a spoke's individual contribution to wheel stiffness. Basically, a 2mm straight gauge spoke wheel, given the same hub and rim, will always be "stiffer" than a similar wheel built with double butted spokes.


Cross section matter yes. However, the way it is forged, the final shape and other factors can all influence its resistance to deformation in a given direction.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

tuckerjt07 said:


> Cross section matter yes. However, the way it is forged, the final shape and other factors can all influence its resistance to deformation in a given direction.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


I've never seen anyone a) claim a bladed spoke produces a laterally stiffer wheel than its parent spoke and b) never seen test results that would back that up. If that data existed, that would be good to have. Mostly to justify my own expenditures. 

Personally, I only use them to help me, amateur wheelbuilder, control/prevent spoke wind up.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

Le Duke said:


> I've never seen anyone a) claim a bladed spoke produces a laterally stiffer wheel than its parent spoke and b) never seen test results that would back that up. If that data existed, that would be good to have. Mostly to justify my own expenditures.
> 
> Personally, I only use them to help me, amateur wheelbuilder, control/prevent spoke wind up.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


It was just a bad example due to the potential variables they added versus a non-bladed spoke.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

tuckerjt07 said:


> It was just a bad example due to the potential variables they added versus a non-bladed spoke.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


True.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Le Duke said:


> Did they ever provide you with specs on the DM20 you bought?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Yes. 238 daN spliced break load for the 1.25


----------



## robbnj (Jul 19, 2013)

Le Duke said:


> I'd ask you how/if a spoke made from flexible steel wire and one made from a piece of polymer rope are functionally different. If you press on the rim, in this scenario, the spokes would stretch. If a DM20 spoke has no appreciable difference in stretch under load, compared to a CX-Ray, why would it build a more laterally flexible wheel?
> 
> Also:
> 
> ...


From what I know of "rope", it is braided and generally will have more "stretchability" than the same material made as a solid strand of the same or even smaller thickness (of course, until it reaches maximum stretch).

I understand that if the UHMWPE rope-spoke is tensioned the same as a metal spoke, the whole assembly will act just like a common bike wheel.

Where my train of understanding derails is your statement that tension has little to do with the lateral flex of the rim with relation to it running true to the hub.
I'm asking that if tension has little to do with it (lateral flex), does it mean little or no lateral flex will occur even if tension is reduced on all spokes in a traditional setup?

And a question that's more on-topic: If the rope has to be tensioned to match a metal spoke's tension, why not use a solid strand of the UHMWPE instead of rope?
(or was it an issue of how to connect a solid strand to the rim and hub?)


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Le Duke said:


> I've never seen anyone a) claim a bladed spoke produces a laterally stiffer wheel than its parent spoke and b) never seen test results that would back that up. If that data existed, that would be good to have. Mostly to justify my own expenditures.
> 
> Personally, I only use them to help me, amateur wheelbuilder, control/prevent spoke wind up.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I've been flexing my rear rim under hard cornering forces into my chain stay and my bike shop has had to replace spokes and true my wheel a handful of times. 
I have the flat Sapim spokes on a rear heavy duty Nobl CF wheel. The spokes are all oriented so that they point forward and back. 
The bike shop mechanic told me "the sapims are a good choice for a road bike as they are more aero. However you would have more lateral side to side strength with a round spoke, and the way you ride, you need it. "
I think it's pretty obvious that with the flat side facing out, that spoke is going to move more in that plane. 
Now maybe Poly spokes stretch more, yet pop back, and if you can spare the clearance, that's going to work really well? I dunno. 
I'm not sure for an aggressively ridden, enduro 29er, Poly spokes are a good choice. Not sure. 
For my wife's gently ridden 27.5" rig, the Poly spokes seem ideal.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

robbnj said:


> From what I know of "rope", it is braided and generally will have more "stretchability" than the same material made as a solid strand of the same or even smaller thickness (of course, until it reaches maximum stretch).
> 
> I understand that if the UHMWPE rope-spoke is tensioned the same as a metal spoke, the whole assembly will act just like a common bike wheel.
> 
> ...


Because you can't tie a knot in a solid strand of UHMWPE.

And you obviously can't splice it.

And, regarding your tension question, read the link I posted. Damon Rinard answers your question. He even posts a graph to illustrate exactly what happens with each quarter turn, decreasing tension.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Suns_PSD said:


> I've been flexing my rear rim under hard cornering forces into my chain stay and my bike shop has had to replace spokes and true my wheel a handful of times.
> I have the flat Sapim spokes on a rear heavy duty Nobl CF wheel. The spokes are all oriented so that they point forward and back.
> The bike shop mechanic told me "the sapims are a good choice for a road bike as they are more aero. However you would have more lateral side to side strength with a round spoke, and the way you ride, you need it. "
> I think it's pretty obvious that with the flat side facing out, that spoke is going to move more in that plane.
> ...


If your mechanic uses the words "strength" there, that's the first sign that he has no clue what he's talking about.

I'd like him to explain how two spokes, with the same cross sectional area, and same material, are going to move differently if they are anchored in the same place at each end. What he said makes no sense and doesn't match up with what materials scientists have known for years.

Here's a good thread:

Https://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=125588

Please read all the way through.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## robbnj (Jul 19, 2013)

Le Duke said:


> And, regarding your tension question, read the link I posted. Damon Rinard answers your question. He even posts a graph to illustrate exactly what happens with each quarter turn, decreasing tension.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I did read it. My takeaway (based on his statement - I am not an engineer) is that a reduction of tension DOES increase lateral flexibility, but the deflection is not significant when dealing with very light lateral loads (25 pounds) as seen on a road bike.

He only used 25 pounds in order to show deflection occurs, but he was afraid to damage a wheel by using more weight than that.

I wonder what kind of lateral load a 200lb rider exerts on an MTB wheel when cornering hard at a reasonable speed? I'd have to guess it's more than 25 pounds? My bike weights about 26 pounds. I would think that just standing it at a 45 degree angle would put about 6 pounds lateral load on each wheel (25lbs/2 wheels=12.5, 12.5/2 to account for the 45 angle= 6 lbs)

Perhaps on a road wheel that sees little to no lateral stress spoke tension has little importance, but on an MTB wheel that sees high lateral loads, it would be far more important? 
<making sure I'm not in a road bike discussion as I type this>


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

robbnj said:


> I did read it. My takeaway (based on his statement - I am not an engineer) is that a reduction of tension DOES increase lateral flexibility, but the deflection is not significant when dealing with very light lateral loads (25 pounds) as seen on a road bike.
> 
> He only used 25 pounds in order to show deflection occurs, but he was afraid to damage a wheel by using more weight than that.
> 
> ...


I have to ask, based on your example:

Why would an MTB rider on a BERM exert a higher lateral load on a wheel than a road rider going 50mph down a road? Given that a road tire has far, far higher amounts of traction on pavement than an MTB tire does on loose dirt, I have a hard time imagining that, short of casing a jump, you'd ever impart as much lateral force into an MTB wheel as you would a road wheel.

Also, below is Damon Rinard's statement from that article re: spoke tension. Until a wheel goes completely slack, there is no difference in lateral wheel stiffness, as he clearly says. Bolded text by me.

"Some believe that a wheel built with tighter spokes is stiffer. It is not. *Wheel stiffness does not vary significantly with spoke tension unless a spoke becomes totally slack.*

I measured the deflection of Wheel #2 while gradually loosening the spokes in quarter turn increments. *The wheel did not display any significant change in stiffness until the spokes were so loose some became totally slack*.

If the spokes are so loose that some become slack, the wheel becomes much more flexible. The last two data points below, 9 and 10, taken when the spokes were so loose the wheel was almost sloppy, show that the wheel becomes significantly more flexible when spokes on the detensioning side of the wheel actually become slack. That is expected: a slack spoke cannot add stiffness to the wheel; it buckles easily in compression.

_A wheel whose spokes become slack while riding is a weak wheel, because slack spokes cannot support the rim. This can be avoided to a large extent by building wheels with tighter spokes. If spokes are tighter initially, then the sudden increase in flexibility shown in data points 9 and 10 is less likely to occur in use because a tighter wheel can bear a higher load before spokes become slack._"

The last part, italicized by me, relates to wheel strength (re: durability), and has nothing to do with lateral stiffness.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## robbnj (Jul 19, 2013)

Le Duke said:


> I have to ask, based on your example:
> 
> Why would an MTB rider on a BERM exert a higher lateral load on a wheel than a road rider going 50mph down a road? Given that a road tire has far, far higher amounts of traction on pavement than an MTB tire does on loose dirt, I have a hard time imagining that, short of casing a jump, you'd ever impart as much lateral force into an MTB wheel as you would a road wheel.


The key is LATERAL load. Going straight down a road produces RADIAL load, but almost no lateral load. The author himself says so. Cornering is where the lateral load comes into play.



> Also, below is Damon Rinard's statement from that article re: spoke tension. Until a wheel goes completely slack, there is no difference in lateral wheel stiffness, as he clearly says. Bolded text by me.


So, once deflection occurs due to spoke tension being reduced, it doesn't increase as tension is reduced more by unthreading the spoke. This could make sense as any change would likely be VERY hard to measure (how much movement occurs with a quarter turn of a spoke nipple?), but his own chart shows different.


> "Some believe that a wheel built with tighter spokes is stiffer. It is not. *Wheel stiffness does not vary significantly with spoke tension unless a spoke becomes totally slack.*


 Yet, the chart he provides shows a change with every turn. The change may be insignificant under an insignificant load, but I don;t think the loads caused by MTBers would be insignificant (maybe they are? maybe hard cornering indices no lateral stress on an MTB wheel?)



> I measured the deflection of Wheel #2 while gradually loosening the spokes in quarter turn increments. *The wheel did not display any significant change in stiffness until the spokes were so loose some became totally slack*.
> 
> If the spokes are so loose that some become slack, the wheel becomes much more flexible. The last two data points below, 9 and 10, taken when the spokes were so loose the wheel was almost sloppy, show that the wheel becomes significantly more flexible when spokes on the detensioning side of the wheel actually become slack. That is expected: a slack spoke cannot add stiffness to the wheel; it buckles easily in compression.
> 
> _A wheel whose spokes become slack while riding is a weak wheel, because slack spokes cannot support the rim. This can be avoided to a large extent by building wheels with tighter spokes. If spokes are tighter initially, then the sudden increase in flexibility shown in data points 9 and 10 is less likely to occur in use because a tighter wheel can bear a higher load before spokes become slack._"


This sounds odd to me. I always understood that the hub "hangs from the rim", as opposed to being "supported by the spokes". If spokes are all equally loose, but still attached, can't you still roll down the path (at least in a straight line)?

I'm thinking we may be talking in two different paths here. Are you leaning toward the idea of SIGNIFICANT lateral deflection (as defined by the rather unscientific test in your link) as opposed to your statement that there is NO deflection when spokes are loosened?
Would you hop on an MTB that had all spokes detensioned to the point just before they are slack, and bomb a trail with it?


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

robbnj said:


> The key is LATERAL load. Going straight down a road produces RADIAL load, but almost no lateral load. The author himself says so. Cornering is where the lateral load comes into play.
> 
> So, once deflection occurs due to spoke tension being reduced, it doesn't increase as tension is reduced more by unthreading the spoke. This could make sense as any change would likely be VERY hard to measure (how much movement occurs with a quarter turn of a spoke nipple?), but his own chart shows different.
> Yet, the chart he provides shows a change with every turn. The change may be insignificant under an insignificant load, but I don;t think the loads caused by MTBers would be insignificant (maybe they are? maybe hard cornering indices no lateral stress on an MTB wheel?)
> ...


My point, which I did not explain well enough, is that cornering at 50mph+ and no loss of traction is going to exert more lateral load than cornering at 30mph on loose terrain, or 30mph on a berm.

The chart shows the exact opposite of what you think it does. Note that the Y-axis is DEFLECTION IN INCHES. In this case, more is bad, and less is good. And, as the spokes are loosening, as you go from left to right on the X-axis, DEFLECTION is actually decreasing very slightly, until you get past the 8th quarter turn. Which means that the wheel was actually getting STIFFER, laterally. As the data table right next to that chart shows, *deflection is actually decreasing*, from the first quarter turn to the eighth quarter turn.

No, I wouldn't hop on an MTB with detensioned spokes, because it would be a very weak wheel, and I'd break spokes, and maybe the rim at some point.


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

Bikes make coordinated turns. The only time your wheel gets a lateral load of any significance is when you crash, or if you hop up and down on the side of it like freestyle BMX, or if you corner like Marc Marquez. Can we get back to the Dyneema?


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

Darth Lefty said:


> Bikes make coordinated turns. The only time your wheel gets a lateral load of any significance is when you crash, or if you hop up and down on the side of it like freestyle BMX, or if you corner like Marc Marquez. Can we get back to the Dyneema?


 Um, on a berm during a turn where the berm angle perfectly aligns with the resultant force, would be the only place this would be correct? That's the only way you could make a "coordinated" turn. Otherwise, you are implying a significant side-loading force when you turn, seems that this could be pretty easily drawn out in a force diagram.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Darth Lefty said:


> Bikes make coordinated turns. The only time your wheel gets a lateral load of any significance is when you crash, or if you hop up and down on the side of it like freestyle BMX, or if you corner like Marc Marquez. Can we get back to the Dyneema?


Horsecrap, and I (on a Foxy 29) and the entire SB130/ 150 forums have the rub marks on the inside of our chain stays to prove it.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

If you are having wheel stiffness issues, why not use thicker spokes? 




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

I'm back in town and the 1.25 DM20 from Armare is here.
Perhaps I should ask if they can do some 1.8, on a group buy?


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

Sweet! So at 40h that will do about eight wheels, is my math right?


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

Jayem said:


> Um, on a berm during a turn where the berm angle perfectly aligns with the resultant force, would be the only place this would be correct? That's the only way you could make a "coordinated" turn. Otherwise, you are implying a significant side-loading force when you turn, seems that this could be pretty easily drawn out in a force diagram.


The _tire _gets a lateral load, but it's reacted on the rim. The lean of the bike takes care of the resulting force through the plane of the frame and wheels. The angle is the arctangent of gravity and yaw, that's what I mean by coordinated. Compare the situation to a spoked car wheel for a counter example where you feel the yaw and the wheel DOES get a lot of side force.


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

deleteme


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

I just bought 100m of 1.5mm SK99 from Armare. Sent them an email asking to change to 1.5mm DM20. I'll post updates as they arrive.


----------



## robbnj (Jul 19, 2013)

Scanning through the thread again. 
Regarding the methods of connecting to the hub & rim and being able to adjust tension: What about incorporating a miniature turnbuckle instead of trying to mimic the threaded nipple and shaft of the spoke?
One end of the turnbuckle secures to the rim, the rope is looped and "chinese finger-trapped" through the eyelets on the 'buckles, and through the holes in the hub (which would have to be radiused to not cut through the rope). No need to secure hardware to the rope, and you get a wider range of adjustment (I think).


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

robbnj said:


> Scanning through the thread again.
> Regarding the methods of connecting to the hub & rim and being able to adjust tension: What about incorporating a miniature turnbuckle instead of trying to mimic the threaded nipple and shaft of the spoke?
> One end of the turnbuckle secures to the rim, the rope is looped and "chinese finger-trapped" through the eyelets on the 'buckles, and through the holes in the hub (which would have to be radiused to not cut through the rope). No need to secure hardware to the rope, and you get a wider range of adjustment (I think).
> 
> View attachment 1227838


Very cool idea, I had the same thought but never posted up about it because for one these are a bit (a lot) heavier, they are also more expensive, and arguably more challenging to make durable at the weights we are trying to achieve. There's just no way a turnbuckle could be had for under 3/4 of a gram. Kinda defeats the purpose.


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

What function does that add vs a screw eye and standard spoke nipple?


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Darth Lefty said:


> Sweet! So at 40h that will do about eight wheels, is my math right?


Pretty close. Too bad it seems to be hard to find lightweight hubs in 36 or 40h. Know any?


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

robbnj said:


> Scanning through the thread again.
> Regarding the methods of connecting to the hub & rim and being able to adjust tension: What about incorporating a miniature turnbuckle instead of trying to mimic the threaded nipple and shaft of the spoke?
> One end of the turnbuckle secures to the rim, the rope is looped and "chinese finger-trapped" through the eyelets on the 'buckles, and through the holes in the hub (which would have to be radiused to not cut through the rope). No need to secure hardware to the rope, and you get a wider range of adjustment (I think).
> 
> View attachment 1227838


It's a fine idea. Just too heavy.


----------



## robbnj (Jul 19, 2013)

Darth Lefty said:


> What function does that add vs a screw eye and standard spoke nipple?


I had read that looping the rope and "finger-trapping" it into itself (like sailors do) would be easier stronger than trying to secure the rope to a threaded rod.
With 'buckles, there would only be the necessity to attach the rope to itself (i.e. stronger setup).

I figured micro turnbuckles would be quite light, maybe just slightly heavier than the rod/nipple and screw eye setup, but a reasonable tradeoff for the strength and simplicity it would give.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Okashira,

Think 1.5mm DM would be sufficient for a 28 spoke wheel (carbon rim)? 143lb rider, 120mm bike.

Sent my email to Armare at 11:48am MST yesterday. No response yet. Hoping they'll get back to me today re: the SK99 to DM20 change.

Update:

Just got an email from Irene at Armare. They only make/sell 1.25 and 2.0mm DM20. Went with the 2.0mm material. I have no concerns about running 28h hubs now. I'm interested to see what the rated breaking load is on the 2mm DM20.

Any reason not to go with the Brummel/Bury?

https://www.animatedknots.com/brummeldemo/index.php


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Also, did you pay VAT from Italy to the US? I was charged 20.99E VAT...


----------



## robbnj (Jul 19, 2013)

Suns_PSD said:


> Horsecrap, and I (on a Foxy 29) and the entire SB130/ 150 forums have the rub marks on the inside of our chain stays to prove it.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


And let's not forget the lateral load placed just due to pedaling (isn't that why spoke tensions are different on opposites sides of the hub?)...


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

robbnj said:


> And let's not forget the lateral load placed just due to pedaling (isn't that why spoke tensions are different on opposites sides of the hub?)...


No, that's mostly related to hub geometry.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

The DM20 in 2.0mm is rated at 558 daN. Or, 569 kgf. Whoa.


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

...yes, to make room for the sprockets. Every few years the cluster gets wide enough they had to make the hubs wider or else the drive side spokes get too close to vertical (120->126->130 for 5, 6, 8 speed). That's one reason Boost and offset rims are good, to even up the angle, and it's one that's weirdly not first mentioned as they go on about chain stay length which seems like more of a stretch. It's also why Santana the tandem company went to a QR160 rear hub. They have some good figures about it on their website. https://santanatandem.com/wheel-tech

Okashira, I don't know of any super light 40h hubs. Speaking of tandems, most such things I know of are for less fancy / more "normal" tandem bikes. I suppose an average hub could be drilled 40h as long as the flange is large enough, if you could ask them to do it.


----------



## robbnj (Jul 19, 2013)

Le Duke said:


> No, that's mostly related to hub geometry.


To dish the assembly?


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

robbnj said:


> To dish the assembly?


As hubs get wider and the bracing angles (with spokes, between the hub flanges and rim) get closer to being equal, spoke tensions can be closer to equal as well.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Le Duke said:


> Okashira,
> 
> Think 1.5mm DM would be sufficient for a 28 spoke wheel (carbon rim)? 143lb rider, 120mm bike.
> 
> ...


Brummel is okay. It just takes longer then a simple bury.
I think Brummel is a good choice.
Yes I was charged VAT, and I asked about removing VAT, and they would not remove it.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

okashira said:


> Brummel is okay. It just takes longer then a simple bury.
> I think Brummel is a good choice.
> Yes I was charged VAT, and I asked about removing VAT, and they would not remove it.


Likewise.

They also added 40 Euro + for the upgrade from 1.5 SK99 to 2.0 DM20.

All in, pretty expensive. But, I'll have enough for quite a few wheels.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Updates...

1.) I got a call from local Ti company, they have some quotes for me on forged eye screws. I need to call them Monday.

2.) Had some time over past couple days, here is where I am at.
I decided to undo the ones I had made, and swap them around. The reason is the straight pull hubs are counterbored one one side. With spliced spokes, you will want the rope coming OUT of the counterbored side, because it will sit on a sharp edge if you go the normal way.
So I am swapping them in pairs.
My question is, is this okay? Will is mess up the crossing method?
See the 3rd picture with the blue arrows to show what I mean. Those two have already been swapped.
The one X'd in red is one I need to remove and swap to the opposite direction.






















3.) Random notes.... Buy regular j-bend hubs for these spokes. Much simpler and cleaner.
I might need some help getting them laced int he 3cross method correctly again, lol. Assuming I didn't mess everything up by swapping the spoke directions.

4.) The Chinese machine shop sissypants got a quote from completely ignored me after I sent them drawings and 3d models. Not cool on their part.
I got another manufacturing contact while I was in Shanghai I need to follow up on.


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

okashira said:


> The Chinese machine shop sissypants got a quote from completely ignored me after I sent them drawings and 3d models. Not cool on their part.


Not cool, I'll try get back in touch with them on Alibaba. When you do it on Alibaba they want to get a high response rate so it's in their interest to reply. Plus, they pay for every lead on Alibaba.


----------



## MarkMass (Sep 10, 2006)

This thread is soooo awesome! 

I'm in for group orders on fiber, eye screws and what-not. I really want someone to build a wheelset for me, though.



okashira said:


> Updates...
> 
> 1.) I got a call from local Ti company, they have some quotes for me on forged eye screws. I need to call them Monday.
> ...
> ...


(Sheeeett.. I think you just did some engineering for them! :nono:
Maybe send old prelim drawings and models to Chinese shops get a quote?)


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Another quick question re: Brummel. 

Obviously you aren't relying on the bury method for the loop, but still using a bury with the remaining material after the Brummel lock. How much material should you have in the short end that you bury in the main strand? 

I'm guessing the 72x is not necessary here, maybe not even half of that. Is there any recommendation on how much material to bury after the Brummel? 20x? 30x?


----------



## Schulze (Feb 21, 2007)

Le Duke said:


> The last part, italicized by me, relates to wheel strength (re: durability), and has nothing to do with lateral stiffness.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I wouldn't waste too much time on it. We have people posting confidently on this forum who literally cannot interpret a basic stress-strain graph that is taught to every first year engineering student. They've been thinking the wrong way for so long that they just cannot be helped.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Le Duke said:


> Another quick question re: Brummel.
> 
> Obviously you aren't relying on the bury method for the loop, but still using a bury with the remaining material after the Brummel lock. How much material should you have in the short end that you bury in the main strand?
> 
> I'm guessing the 72x is not necessary here, maybe not even half of that. Is there any recommendation on how much material to bury after the Brummel? 20x? 30x?


With the brummel, the bury is still meant to take the load. The lock is just there to prevent slippage under no load or handling. (This is a very useful thing for a spoke, to keep the length from slipping!)
You can maybe do 45x-50x. 20x, no way.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

okashira said:


> With the brummel, the bury is still meant to take the load. The lock is just there to prevent slippage under no load or handling. (This is a very useful thing for a spoke, to keep the length from slipping!)
> You can maybe do 45x-50x. 20x, no way.


Cool. Just trying to get an idea of how much material I'd be looking at for a given length of spoke.

How long were your titanium end pieces? I already have a Hozan thread roller (used it today on a CX-Ray from Germany that was 3mm too long).

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Le Duke said:


> Cool. Just trying to get an idea of how much material I'd be looking at for a given length of spoke.
> 
> How long were your titanium end pieces? I already have a Hozan thread roller (used it today on a CX-Ray from Germany that was 3mm too long).
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Long enough to make 3 spoke ends per piece.
I cut them 73mm long.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

One side done.
Looking at the inside of the hub, it appears that the inner splice tends to wrap around this sharp corner point on the DT 350. I am not sure if I rounded them all very well here. We will see what happens.
It's definitely better to start from scratch so you have room to dremel off all the appropriate the sharp edges. It was a pain doing it in place.


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

okashira said:


> One side done.
> Looking at the inside of the hub, it appears that the inner splice tends to wrap around this sharp corner point on the DT 350. I am not sure if I rounded them all very well here. We will see what happens.
> It's definitely better to start from scratch so you have room to dremel off all the appropriate the sharp edges. It was a pain doing it in place.
> View attachment 1228290
> ...


That looks great! Great attention to detail and patience.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Quote from local Ti company.
They decided to quote the bent and spot welded version @ qty 500 and 1000

About $4.61 each in qty 1000. Could be worse. Still cheaper then full on high end Ti spokes. Hah.
If it were 10,000, it may come down to $3.00 at the minimum is my guess.

I asked them to pursue a forging and to give me feed back on feasibility and to quote 5,000, 10,000, 20,000 units, as well as tooling costs.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Le Duke said:


> The DM20 in 2.0mm is rated at 558 daN. Or, 569 kgf. Whoa.


How many spokes will you run? 32, 36?
I would have been tempted to go with 1.5.
Maybe I should try to build my other X1700 with the 1.25 line and see how it holds up.
The downside is the 1.5 will be pretty flexible (but nice damping/softer ride)

With your 2.0 keep in mine you will need to have a slightly longer bury... maybe use 76mm long Ti ends.
I have been running about 60-70mm of bury (too short) on my splices, I will report how they hold up once I finish and ride with this damn wheel.

Note I have been designing the eye bolts for 1.8mm line, with 2.0mm hole. It might be difficult to use the 2.0mm hole with 2.0mm line.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Darth Lefty said:


> ...yes, to make room for the sprockets. Every few years the cluster gets wide enough they had to make the hubs wider or else the drive side spokes get too close to vertical (120->126->130 for 5, 6, 8 speed). That's one reason Boost and offset rims are good, to even up the angle, and it's one that's weirdly not first mentioned as they go on about chain stay length which seems like more of a stretch. It's also why Santana the tandem company went to a QR160 rear hub. They have some good figures about it on their website. https://santanatandem.com/wheel-tech
> 
> Okashira, I don't know of any super light 40h hubs. Speaking of tandems, most such things I know of are for less fancy / more "normal" tandem bikes. I suppose an average hub could be drilled 40h as long as the flange is large enough, if you could ask them to do it.


You're right.. With 36h or 40h, you could drill smaller holes for 1.5 or 1.25mm line. No need for the typical 2.5mm hole. Could easily fit 36 or 40H on a typical hub.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

You guys are killing it. 

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

okashira said:


> How many spokes will you run? 32, 36?
> I would have been tempted to go with 1.5.
> Maybe I should try to build my other X1700 with the 1.25 line and see how it holds up.
> The downside is the 1.5 will be pretty flexible (but nice damping/softer ride)
> ...


Well, I'm not sure just yet.

I've got a spare DT Swiss 180 28h hub hanging around here, but no rim for it. I'm a little concerned that I'd be treading in unknown water, though, by going for 28h right out of the gate.

But, as I said, I'm 143lbs, riding a 120/100mm bike, and prefer to skip over the top of rocks rather than plow. So, I'm guessing/hoping that the 2mm DM20 will provide the ride I'm looking for.


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

So how are you measuring tension? I suppose it's possible to do the math on the elasticity and get a reasonable guess what you'd see on a tensiometer


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

So, here's my plan.

I'm going to install a single spoke on a wheel that I already have built and tensioned at 110kgf. I'll bring it up to tension, then check it and tighten it a couple of times over the course of a couple days as necessary to bring it back up to tension/true. Maybe a couple, just to be safe. Two on each side of a wheel, for example. 

Then, I'm going to pluck that spoke like you would a string on a bass or guitar, and compare that to the notes on a tone generator app on my phone. If I can match that to a tone/frequency, I'll know that B flat (just an example) is 90kgf, and E is 110kgf. Sounds crazy, I know, but it should work.


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

Le Duke said:


> So, here's my plan.
> 
> I'm going to install a single spoke on a wheel that I already have built and tensioned at 110kgf. I'll bring it up to tension, then check it and tighten it a couple of times over the course of a couple days as necessary to bring it back up to tension/true. Maybe a couple, just to be safe. Two on each side of a wheel, for example.
> 
> Then, I'm going to pluck that spoke like you would a string on a bass or guitar, and compare that to the notes on a tone generator app on my phone. If I can match that to a tone/frequency, I'll know that B flat (just an example) is 90kgf, and E is 110kgf. Sounds crazy, I know, but it should work.


I'm not sure the resolution of the tone frequency will be sufficient to tension to tolerances you want. It's an experiment though, I'll be very curious to see the data 

I have perfect pitch. Imagine tensioning a wheel to extreme precision without a tensiometer


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

sissypants said:


> I'm not sure the resolution of the tone frequency will be sufficient to tension to tolerances you want. It's an experiment though, I'll be very curious to see the data
> 
> I have perfect pitch. Imagine tensioning a wheel to extreme precision without a tensiometer


FWIW, I don't even own a tensiometer. Never have. I've borrowed one a couple of times to check my own work building wheels, but that's it. A finely tuned ear and fingers have been sufficient to get a wheel into riding condition, and the tensiometer just confirms things.


----------



## MikeDee (Nov 17, 2004)

Le Duke said:


> So, here's my plan.
> 
> I'm going to install a single spoke on a wheel that I already have built and tensioned at 110kgf. I'll bring it up to tension, then check it and tighten it a couple of times over the course of a couple days as necessary to bring it back up to tension/true. Maybe a couple, just to be safe. Two on each side of a wheel, for example.
> 
> Then, I'm going to pluck that spoke like you would a string on a bass or guitar, and compare that to the notes on a tone generator app on my phone. If I can match that to a tone/frequency, I'll know that B flat (just an example) is 90kgf, and E is 110kgf. Sounds crazy, I know, but it should work.


If you think that the plucked frequency of the polymer spoke should be the same as the stainless spoke for same tension, you would be wrong. Better to do one spoke at a time and the trueness of the wheel would determine the correct tension.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

MikeDee said:


> If you think that the plucked frequency of the polymer spoke should be the same as the stainless spoke for same tension, you would be wrong. Better to do one spoke at a time and the trueness of the wheel would determine the correct tension.


Did you even read my post?

I didn't say anything about plucking a steel spoke. At all.

I'd bring the polymer spoke up to tension (meaning, the wheel back to true), then determine its frequency once it settled at the same number of kgf as the others on the same side. This is the "install a single spoke" portion of the post you quoted. I am very clearly talking about a single polymer spoke here, given the very specific nature of this thread.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Schulze (Feb 21, 2007)

It would be easier to get a $30 300kg scale and tighten the spoke to a measured value, then pluck and correlate freq with tension.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Schulze said:


> It would be easier to get a $30 300kg scale and tighten the spoke to a measured value, then pluck and correlate freq with tension.


Ah. Nice idea. Thanks!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

Nice job on the lacing and building! This is a great thread.


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

The empirical approach is ok but there are four different spoke tensions on a modern MTB thanks to dishes on both ends. I'd rather make data. But I'm wondering if there will be room to measure with a Park tensiometer between the 3" long spoke end, and the crosses. I'll see if I can work out the distension tomorrow if I have a boring lunch. I looked up Spox tensiometer recommendations and they weren't out of line with normal spokes, these shouldn't be either.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

I think they will read a lower tension on a meter.
if you want to use natural frequency to determine tension, keep in mind the crossing point where it contacts another spoke, this will affect the length and the natural frequency of the spoke, which is a function of length.


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

Yes, they have no baseline bending strength like a round steel spoke so there's only the tension. It'll be like Spox or like bladed spokes which are all on the upper end of the chart.

I have some confusion. The TM-1 chart lists Spinergy SPO at 2.6mm, Spinergy's website lists SPOX at 3mm. Are these different products?


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Nov 19, 2013)

each hand-made braided spoke will have slight differences... frequency tuning each one would not be as accurate as say, frequency tuning set of very identical metal spokes. each braided spoke under same exact tension might 'tune' differently...perhaps the differences are statistical noise and you can accurately tension with a chromatic tuner

I would imagine slapping a snark on the rim and plucking away, and tuning all spokes to (some setting on the snark) will be pretty close.

or maybe this would be a good way for field testing how the spoke tension is doing over time vs initial build

they are cheap

https://www.amazon.com/Snark-Instrument-Clip-Chromatic-Tuner/dp/B003VWKPHC


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

I am finished except the last couple, waiting on replacement nipples


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

Wow! That's cool.

I've been playing around with the idea of a conversion factor for the Park TM-1 today and I'm just not satisfied. The tool has a few compromises in its design that make the properties of the spoke (diameter, stiffness) part of the result and it adds tension while you use it. That's why the card included just has an individual listing for each most popular type of spoke and no approach to other oddballs. Reasonable just to do the calibration with a load cell as suggested above.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

I think a sub 400g front XC wheel is possible. Eyeing a prince front hub and, carbonfan XC rim to build one just for the accomplishment. 
Will needs some Ti eyebolts....

I'm eager to test this x1700. I'm concerned about a few things .. I built it with a few niggles...

Too short burys on some of the splices.

Concerned about the short burys on the Ti ends (I'm amazed Berd gets away with it)

Concerned about the threading on the Ti rods. I think the rods are cold worked and very brittle. 
They should probably be stress relived or even annealed before threading but I decided to try it anyway. I did have issue threading some of them and you could see some chipping / cracking coming from the tread rolling process.
The issue is stress relieve or annealing would require heat treatment in an inert atmosphere which could be done economaclly.... in bulk.


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

okashira said:


> I think a sub 400g front XC wheel is possible. Eyeing a prince front hub and, carbonfan XC rim to build one just for the accomplishment.
> Will needs some Ti eyebolts....


If you're going for the record, I would suggest Extralite Hyperboost (front 78g), Tune Prince is heavier (89g for 6-bolt blinged-out Skyline CeramicSpeed). I have also heard a few positive long-term reviews of Hyperboost, not so much of the Tune Prince series.

https://fairwheelbikes.com/extralite-hyperboost-disc-front-hub/

Carbonfan makes great rims, you may want to see if they can do a T800/T1000 special order to further reduce the weight. I own these BTLOS rims and they weigh 279g and 282g:

https://btlos.com/mountain-bike/cross-country-trail-carbon-rims?filter=1,6,34

BTLOS is usually willing to do custom manufacturing as well at very affordable prices:

Assuming you use 24 spokes and the spokes are 1.6g/ea. and the nipples are 0.32g ea. you're looking at:

Rim: 280g
Spokes: 38.5g (1.6g * 24)
Nipples: 8g (0.32g * 24)
Hub: 78g
*Total: 404.5g*


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Nov 19, 2013)

calibrating spokes with a snark as I mentioned above ? yeah, with metal spokes...nope.

wanted to say my idea of chromatic tuning with a Snark to check spoke tension is problematic in real use...and only good if you do not ride the wheel or actually use it. 

I tested three wheels last night. Two wheels were normal 3 cross spoke patterns, one was no overlapping spokes. In a bike stand, Snark tuner is very accurate and repeatable when a specific spoke was struck, but each spoke, even on a perfect wheel, will not 'tune' the same as the others next to it. 

so I rolled down the hallway and back... bodyweight only, and retested. All spokes were now different on the Snark from initial test.

so, the chromatic scale and a Snark has too fine resolution to be practical....and just tiny deflection will change a spoke frequency, and that is at same temperature, and not even actual riding, just rolling with bodyweight.

it might be practical if Snark showed on screen 1/2 octave range instead of one note range...but with it's small screen and small display range, problematic


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

Note of a 14/15 steel butted spoke on a 700c wheel with some reasonable assumptions:

98 kgf: F# / Gb, 330 Hz
109 kgf: G4
123 kgf: G# / Ab
138 kgf: A4, 440 Hz

This roughly corresponds to the +-20% range and 130 kgf limit in the Park TM-1 instructions, for example. So yeah, there's not a lot of scale to work with.

To do this calculation for the fiber spokes, need values for mass per length of the rope (linear density) and length of free section (wavelength). It's going to be an octave-ish higher.

Wave speed in cm/sec = sqrt( (tension in dynes) / (linear density in g / cm) ), Tension force conversion is 9.88E5 dyne/kgf
Frequency = 2 x wave speed / spoke length in cm

Done in CGS and not MKS just because that's how I found the equations


----------



## Aglo (Dec 16, 2014)

In my opinion, due to the DIY nature of the spokes, I don't think that spoke frequency is be the best approach, as suggested before a +150Kg scale for calibration and the use of a Jobst Brandt design tensiometer should produce better results.


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

^^^Agreed, I just enjoy this stuff


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

No need for Snark
Just this app
"Spectrum analyzer" on play store.
It identifies the peak and labels it. Works great. Hold the microphone right near the spoke.

The spokes are not constant mass per length due to the splice and the end, but they should be pretty consistent spoke to spoke. You will probably go for something around 650-700Hz. Higher pitch then steel spokes.


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

I figured since the rope-over-spoke section would be quite a lot heavier than a spoke alone much less the rope, it would be safe just to omit it from the wavelength. The whole length would have multiple modes and make a nasty chord but the highest note would still be from the unsupported length of the rope alone.

The app I found a couple years ago was "ProTuner" and it did what I wanted although I hadn't launched it in a long time and it's acting broken now. Edit... yep it's a goner.

I also have the Gates belt drive tensioner app but it just doesn't work that well.


----------



## Aglo (Dec 16, 2014)

I use this one:
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.vuche.asap

When truing my wheels I just place the cell phone on the truing stand and pluck the spokes while running the app. I did change some options to help me discerning the peaks.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Outdated Info


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Deleted


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

If you're going to try the 2mm welding rod from eBay, I recommend having them stress relieved. Also, use dt Swiss nipples without prolock. 
I tried using cn spoke nipples, these nipples required me to roll the threads deeper, which leads to chipping / cracking of the threads. The material is drawn so it's really brittle and stress relive will fix it.

It needs to be done in an inert atmosphere... 1100°F for 2 hours and furnace cool. 

You can probably get away without it, using DT nipples and rolling shallow, but the material will be brittle.
I did finish my wheel and did some in bike testing... No broken spokes yet, and I did some hard bouncing on concrete. (I'm using NON stress relived titanium)
Had to re-tention a bunch of times. You think they are tight enough, but they keep going.make sure you stress the snot out of the wheel and tension, probably to 600Hz or so minimum on 3-cross.
My tension dropped link crazy upon mounting a tire at 40psi.

Don't ride until you are positive everything is stressed and you use some loctite 290 to thread lock.


----------



## poynt (Jan 15, 2004)

sissypants said:


> If you're going for the record, I would suggest Extralite Hyperboost (front 78g), Tune Prince is heavier (89g for 6-bolt blinged-out Skyline CeramicSpeed). I have also heard a few positive long-term reviews of Hyperboost, not so much of the Tune Prince series.
> 
> https://fairwheelbikes.com/extralite-hyperboost-disc-front-hub/
> 
> ...


I have a Extralite Carbonfan build on the go and am looking at front 384g and rear 455g using Berds so I would love to know what your method could come up with! but based on 1.91g for spokes and nips I could drop overall weight to sub 800g!!!!


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Just got my 2mm DM20. 

Looks nice, but it isn’t 2mm. It’s 3mm. Which won’t fit through spoke holes in any hub I own without extensive modification, and perhaps more importantly, doesn’t grip a 2mm straight gauge spoke I used as a test.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

What is the diameter under tension?
With 2.0mm you will need a longer bury.
If they sent you 3mm, Armare should send you another order.

Here is my Marlow 1.8mm DM20


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Placing one end on the floor, stepping on it and pulling up with a good amount of force, it's almost exactly 3mm. My caliper battery just died, so here is a shot of a 2.0/1.8 spoke laying on the roll.










Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

That looks like they sent you the wrong stuff.
I have some 1.25mm and it does measure about 1.5mm under light tension.
I also have some 4mm sk99 (rated over 3,000kg!) That I thought would be cool to keep around , it measures about 3.2-3.7 under light tension....


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Yeah. I’m going to write them an e-mail after Christmas and ask them to send me what I paid for. 

If they won’t, I’ll escalate with PayPal. 3mm is not 2mm. They wouldn’t send a racing yacht crew something other than what they ordered; I expect the same treatment. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Email them now. Tell them what you got you need 2mm.maybe get the 1.5mm instead if they will make it, this 1.25 measures almost 1.5... I should break test some


----------



## poynt (Jan 15, 2004)

Okashira, you mentioned before that with your present splice method it would be easier to use jbend hubs. So what I'm asking is, is it possible with straightpulls or just a lot fidlier, seeing as the majority of most new light hubs have gone that way.


----------



## VegasSingleSpeed (May 5, 2005)

okashira said:


> I had one pull out while tensioning. The threads were bad, so when I was grabbing the spoke end, it put a torque on the glued joint.


Does this suggest that the strength of this union relies more on the glue than the "finger trap"?


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Got bogged down in Christmas things. Finally sent them (Armare) an e-mail today. We’ll see what they say. 

Edit: I’m deleting the pictures pending resolution. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

poynt said:


> Okashira, you mentioned before that with your present splice method it would be easier to use jbend hubs. So what I'm asking is, is it possible with straightpulls or just a lot fidlier, seeing as the majority of most new light hubs have gone that way.


It's fine, you will just need to do alot of dremeling to round the edges, and run the spokes the opposite direction from the design direction. I am using a DT swiss 350 straight pull for the prototype wheel.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Let us know what they say. Let's try to get them to do 1.5mm or 1.8mm. 

The 1.25 DM20 I have is pretty large, and it's really hard to splice. Having trouble getting a needle inside. Armare's 4mm Sk99 is easy to splice, so is Marlow's 1.8mm.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

I just ordered a Tune Kingkong front hub, place had them on sale for like $130 shipped. Also a 30mm ID front rim from Carbonfan, 360g.
This will go with my DT swiss 180 rear hub and 27mm ID rear carbonfan rim.

I have not rode my test wheel much, only about 6 miles, but it's been good.
I don't notice any more compliance... when i lock out my fork, i still feel every little bump in the road...

I had had to true it a good dozen times, but it seems to finally have settled down.

I think the issue is that the splices and buries have to be set at a high tension.
So, I designed this lacing and tensioning rig.

It will allow one to measure, splice, lace tension and remeasure in a repeatable way up to 200Kg load with the toggle puller. I think it will be pretty essential to lacing new wheels efficiently.
I mean, you can do it manually, like I did, but it will cause alot of additional tensioning, measuring and truing, until everything it set.








setting the buries and splices at a high load is critical. hand pulling with pliers to 30kg is not enough, you gotta tension them to at least 120kg so the buries are fully set.
Ive already ordered all the parts and ill start my rear wheel with the 180 and 27mm ID carbonfan once I assemble it.

I was not happy with just using a basic spoke length calculator so I CADDed up my new wheel and hub so I can make some exact measurements of needed length, hopefully I can correlate that back to spoke length calcs so once can get proper target spoke lengths with fiber spokes and a regular calculator by applying an offset or something. I did it so i can measure a spoke length on an already laced/spliced spoke radial from the hub flange for easy measurement in the rig.
In this case, I will target 288mm, radially, measured from the hub flange (on this side)
This rear wheel will be internal nipples so i'm using the measurement from the center of the hub hole to the inner of the hole INSIDE the rim, adding another 2mm for the nipple thread, and another 2.5mm for extra length for safety so I can actually thread it in.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Still waiting to hear back from Armare. Will initiate a PayPal claim on Tuesday. Hoping to get this resolved in a positive manner.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Le Duke said:


> Still waiting to hear back from Armare. Will initiate a PayPal claim on Tuesday. Hoping to get this resolved in a positive manner.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I hope they reply Monday. Maybe they were on vacation.
I am having issues with the 1.25 DM20 I got from them.
I am not sure it's single braid. I can't splice it at all. It's almost impossible to insert a needle into the center. OTOH, the marlow 1.8 is really easy to splice
Have you tried the 2mm/3mm line you got? can you splice it?


----------



## hirschmj (Sep 10, 2010)

Guys this is the most fascinating thing I've read in a long time.

Keep it up! Amazing work so far.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

I lots of updates but not much time to list it all out

I have done some break testing of spokes, getting about 290-300kg (with the Marlow 1.8mm DM20 line)
I have the jig built and putting it to use, it's working well.

I used the jig and tensioned spokes with a 300kg scale, recording the natural frequency vs tension and charted it, so it can be used to determine spoke tension

I have videos of everything - hope to get it organized soon.


----------



## Schulze (Feb 21, 2007)

That's neat. Where are the spokes breaking?


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Schulze said:


> That's neat. Where are the spokes breaking?


they were braking at the at the end of the spoke end taper (the fiber broke)

I did get a call from Berd today. I guess they want to enforce their patent, obviously they are not happy about this thread.
He was worried I made my initial inquiry to them just to "find out information" about the product, which was not the case. I was ready to buy until they came back and said they had to build them themselves or send it all to a "trusted bike shop" :-/
I invited Charlie to post here, hopefully he does.
Anyway, I don't know if they want information to be removed from the thread, to pursue me legally, for me to stop my wheel project, or what their specific goal was, but he did try to find out more personal info about me and a couple members here who were looking at making these spokes for themselves. 
He did not make any specific requests; only inquires. Hopefully they post here or make some specific demands.


----------



## BerdSpokes (Jan 25, 2019)

Hey everyone, Berd Spokes here! We are sincerely flattered by your interest in our spokes. On the other hand, we are excited to say that we were recently granted a patent (United States Patent No. 10,150,332) on December 11th, 2018.

https://patents.google.com/patent/US10150332B2/en

This means that making our spokes is considered infringement of our patent. This is an excerpt from the USPTO website:

"Infringement of a patent consists of the unauthorized making, using, offering for sale, or selling any patented invention within the United States or U.S. Territories, or importing into the United States of any patented invention during the term of the patent. If a patent is infringed, the patentee may sue for relief in the appropriate federal court. The patentee may ask the court for an injunction to prevent the continuation of the infringement and may also ask the court for an award of damages because of the infringement."

If you have any questions or would like to discuss further, please reach out to us through our contact form at Berd Spokes | Contact. Thanks!


----------



## 006_007 (Jan 12, 2004)

BerdSpokes said:


> Hey everyone, Berd Spokes here! We are sincerely flattered by your interest in our spokes. On the other hand, we are excited to say that we were recently granted a patent (United States Patent No. 10,150,332) on December 11th, 2018.
> 
> https://patents.google.com/patent/US10150332B2/en
> 
> ...


Welcome to MTBR Berd. Awesome first post throw down.


----------



## TwiceHorn (Jun 18, 2014)

Sorry folks, I went OTB and broke a finger and collarbone, so have been incommunicado.

The patent is linked above. Infringement is determined by comparing the claims of the patent to a device accused of infringement (accused device). The claims are the numbered paragraphs (really sentences) at the end of the patent. The rest of the patent text and drawings (called the specification) is an interpretation guide for the claims.

A claim that does not refer to another claim is called an independent claim. In the Berd patent, Claims 1 and 19 are independent.

1. A spoke for use in connection with a wheel, the spoke comprising:
a braided fiber having a first end and a second end; and
a rod having a first end and a second end, whereby the first end of the rod is threaded,
wherein the second end of the rod is disposed inside the first end of the braided fiber, and wherein the braided fiber is configured to frictionally engage with the rod when tension is applied thereby reducing a diameter of the braided fiber surrounding the rod and increasing a holding force on the rod to inhibit the braided fiber from detaching from the rod.

19. A wheel comprising:
a tire affixed to a rim;
a hub comprising:
a flange including at least one aperture;
a plurality of spokes comprising a braided fiber having a first end and a second end;
a rod having a first end and a second end, whereby the first end of the rod is threaded, wherein the second end of the rod is disposed inside the first end of the braided fiber, and wherein the braided fiber is configured to frictionally engage with the rod when tension is applied thereby reducing a diameter of the braided fiber surrounding the rod and increasing a holding force on the rod to inhibit the braided fiber from detaching from the rod, and
wherein the first end of the rod is fastened to the rim by means of a nipple.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

TwiceHorn said:


> Sorry folks, I went OTB and broke a finger and collarbone, so have been incommunicado.
> 
> The patent is linked above. Infringement is determined by comparing the claims of the patent to a device accused of infringement (accused device). The claims are the numbered paragraphs (really sentences) at the end of the patent. The rest of the patent text and drawings (called the specification) is an interpretation guide for the claims.
> 
> ...


1 and 19 seem the same to me.
Yes, obviously the wheel I have built does violate this part of patent, as I buried a spoke end into the fiber just like berd describes.
I did build the wheel before the patent was issued. Berd didn't ask me to cease my project so I am not sure what to do... is my wheel okay since i build it before December? :-DD


----------



## TwiceHorn (Jun 18, 2014)

Continuing,

One reads the claims above as sort of a "checklist" to determine if the features recited in the claim are present in the accused device. Dependent claims, that refer to another, incorporate the recitations of the claim to which it refers, so Claim 2 adds itself to claim 1, claim 3 adds itself to 2 and also to 1, etc.

For Claim 1, the elements are fairly straightforward: a braided fiber, a threaded rod, and the Chinese finger-cuff arrangement to secure the fiber to the rod (described in the "wherein clause").

Claim 19 is essentially similar, except that the spokes of Claim 1 are recited in an assembly with a tire, rim, hub, and flange. So claim 1 claims a single spoke, claim 19 an entire wheel.

But, if you can find everything contained in a claim in an accused device (Okashira's or someone else's spoke or wheel), then that device infringes. If even one element is missing, there is no infringement except under extraordinary circumstances. That there are further elements in the accused device is immaterial. If a single claim is infringed, the patent is infringed.

The claims I think are simple enough that most folks can do an infringement analysis, so I won't do one here. Claims sometimes are much longer, have more elements in them, more arcane languagr, and can be a challenge to interpret. But the basic idea is just as presented here.


----------



## 006_007 (Jan 12, 2004)

okashira said:


> 1 and 19 seem the same to me.
> Yes, obviously the wheel I have built does violate this part of patent, as I buried a spoke end into the fiber just like berd describes.
> I did build the wheel before the patent was issued. Berd didn't ask me to cease my project so I am not sure what to do... is my wheel okay since i build it before December? :-DD


Depends - are you building them to sell them to others? If so, then Berd has every right to request that you stop.

If you are building them yourself, for yourself, and showing the rest of us a cool project (at a level that berd is not willing to show) then I think Berd would look like less of a penis with ears to leave it be.


----------



## TwiceHorn (Jun 18, 2014)

okashira said:


> 1 and 19 seem the same to me.
> Yes, obviously the wheel I have built does violate this part of patent, as I buried a spoke end into the fiber just like berd describes.
> I did build the wheel before the patent was issued. Berd didn't ask me to cease my project so I am not sure what to do... is my wheel okay since i build it before December? :-DD


See the above post for more patent info.

The patent statute says the following:



> Except as otherwise provided in this title, whoever without authority *makes, uses, offers to sell, or sells *any patented invention, within the United States *or imports* into the United States any patented invention *during the term of the patent* therefor, infringes the patent.


Because yours was made before the issue date and presumably you won't sell any, or import any, you are ok there, as long as you don't make any more of them, or sell what you've got. I honestly don't know if "using" the patented invention, when it's a thing and not a method or process, gives rise to patent infringement.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Wow, they must be owned by Specialized.


----------



## KingOfOrd (Feb 19, 2005)

Whoa, who's the snitch?


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

As I have pointed out earlier, there are two fundamental differences between spokes proposed in this thread (okashira's initial build aside) and Berd spokes, specifically:

1. The use of an *eyebolt* to secure a spliced end of the rope to the nipple seated in the rim. Here Berd buries a shaft in the braided rope, held in place under tension like a finger-trap, which threads into the nipple.

2. The use of a splice *directly around the hub flange* to secure the rope to the hub. Here Berd uses a bury splice with a small piece of material placed inside the splice hole to hold the end of the splice behind the hub flange.

Berd has not mentioned either of these concepts in their patent which are both crucial to design of spokes discussed in this thread, which, as TwiceHorn has pointed out, makes this invention not a violation of the Berd patent as far as I am aware.


----------



## TwiceHorn (Jun 18, 2014)

sissypants said:


> As I have pointed out earlier, there are two fundamental differences between spokes proposed in this thread (okashira's initial build aside) and Berd spokes, specifically:
> 
> 1. The use of an *eyebolt* to secure a spliced end of the rope to the nipple seated in the rim. Here Berd buries a shaft in the braided rope, held in place under tension like a finger-trap, which threads into the nipple.
> 
> ...


I will just note that as to the flange and hub, neither Claim 1 nor Claim 19 reference how the spoke is attached to the flange or hub. That would then fall into the category of "additions" to the claimed subject matter that do not affect infringement.


----------



## TwiceHorn (Jun 18, 2014)

Reiterating, every element recited in a patent claim must be present in an accused device for that to infringe the claim and thus the patent.

Each patent claim is analyzed separately for infringement. Because only one claim need be infringed to establish infringement of the patent, it is common for only one or two of the claims to be infringed.

Also, here is how to read dependent claims:

Claim 3 of the patent may be re written as follows:

[1.] 3 A spoke for use in connection with a wheel, the spoke comprising:
a braided fiber having a first end and a second end; and
a rod having a first end and a second end, whereby the first end of the rod is threaded,
wherein the second end of the rod is disposed inside the first end of the braided fiber, and wherein the braided fiber is configured to frictionally engage with the rod when tension is applied thereby reducing a diameter of the braided fiber surrounding the rod and increasing a holding force on the rod to inhibit the braided fiber from detaching from the rod.
[2. The spoke of claim 1, ]wherein the second end of the rod is fastened to an inside of the first end of the braided fiber with adhesive.
[3. The spoke of claim 2, ]wherein the adhesive consists of ethyl cyanoacrylate glue.

Underlining indicates the addition of claims 2 and 3 to claim 1. The brackets indicate deleted text.


----------



## robbnj (Jul 19, 2013)

Anything made by you before the patent was granted is exempt. Time travel doesn't exist.

Infringement is possible in the US simply by you copying and executing their design, even for personal use (and if they go after anyone for that, they are d-bags - would it really be worth the expense to go after you legally?).

If your method is significantly different than theirs, then you're not infringing. The key is in determining whether the differences are significant enough. Their patent has to be very specific as there is so little that is functionally different from a metal-spoked setup.

Make an adhesive the method of securing the rod inside the "rope" and you've bypassed the finger trap patent. Or use a spoke chunk with an eyelet on one end and threads on the other. 
Change the method the rope attaches to the hub.
You now have a significantly different product.
Done.

Look at Spyderco knives. That hole in the blade has to be circular for them to be able to go after anyone who does something similar. Make the hole a trapezoid, and they've got nothing on you.


----------



## TwiceHorn (Jun 18, 2014)

Also, it appears that using a patented device made before the patent was granted would constitute infringement. Although what Okashira has done presents a very unique fact pattern, if, in fact, one of his made designs infringes. I express no opinion on that issue.

I am a lawyer, I did not stay at a Holiday Inn last night.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

TwiceHorn said:


> Also, it appears that using a patented device made before the patent was granted would constitute infringement. Although what Okashira has done presents a very unique fact pattern, if, in fact, one of his made designs infringes. I express no opinion on that issue.
> 
> I am a lawyer, I did not stay at a Holiday Inn last night.


Does it matter if he isn't selling it?


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Jayem said:


> Does it matter if he isn't selling it?


I thought that it does matter, but I have since been educated that even _making _the item constitutes infingement.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

TwiceHorn said:


> Reiterating, every element recited in a patent claim must be present in an accused device for that to infringe the claim and thus the patent.
> 
> Each patent claim is analyzed separately for infringement. Because only one claim need be infringed to establish infringement of the patent, it is common for only one or two of the claims to be infringed.
> 
> ...


Perfect, I think this helps.

So the claims themselves are treated as "and" statements
The dependent claims are treated as "and" statements to the prior claims
Items within each claim are treated as "and" statements

Individual claims are treated as "or" statements. (this patent has two individual claims)

To elaborate, this tells me that if one was drafting their own patent, it would be desirable to limit the number of items within a claim and to reduce the number of dependent claims, would it not?


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

TwiceHorn said:


> Also, it appears that using a patented device made before the patent was granted would constitute infringement. Although what Okashira has done presents a very unique fact pattern, if, in fact, one of his made designs infringes. I express no opinion on that issue.
> 
> I am a lawyer, I did not stay at a Holiday Inn last night.


you disagree with robbnj, but since you didn't stay at the Holiday Inn i'll have to side with you (I am guessing that is some kinda lawyer joke  )


----------



## TwiceHorn (Jun 18, 2014)

As noted above the patent act forbids making using selling offering to sell and importing. Any single one of those acts is an act of infringement.

As a practical matter, there are no damages if there are no sales, or none that can be easily quantified. But patent litigation is often pursued primarily for the injunction against further infringement.


----------



## TwiceHorn (Jun 18, 2014)

Almost. Every claim is separate from every other claim in the sense that it is different and must be considered on its own. They are "or" statements as against each other. 

The patent has 20 claims. Two of the claims 1 and 19 can be read alone. The other 18 incorporate other claims. That's just shorthand notation so you don't have to repeat the claim language 20 times in full.


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

TwiceHorn said:


> As noted above the patent act forbids making using selling offering to sell and importing. Any single one of those acts is an act of infringement.
> 
> As a practical matter, there are no damages if there are no sales, or none that can be easily quantified. But patent litigation is often pursued primarily for the injunction against further infringement.


Theoretically by giving instruction here they could go after damages that way, no?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## robbnj (Jul 19, 2013)

TwiceHorn said:


> Also, it appears that using a patented device made before the patent was granted would constitute infringement. Although what Okashira has done presents a very unique fact pattern, if, in fact, one of his made designs infringes. I express no opinion on that issue.
> 
> I am a lawyer, I did not stay at a Holiday Inn last night.


You design/invent, and build a widget.
Fred patents your invention.
You now have no rights to the widget that you invented, built, and still own because Fred holds the patent on it?

Color me intrigued.


----------



## robbnj (Jul 19, 2013)

tuckerjt07 said:


> Theoretically by giving instruction here they could go after damages that way, no?
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


Nope. Public knowledge by way of the patent. The patent actually must be detailed enough that someone could use it to make the item you've patented.

If the instrcution is shared in order to educate, it's cool. But, don't be a d-bag and share the instrux in order to help people infringe the patent.


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

robbnj said:


> Nope. Public knowledge by way of the patent. The patent actually must be detailed enough that someone could use it to make the item you've patented.
> 
> If the instrcution is shared in order to educate, it's cool. But, don't be a d-bag and share the instrux in order to help people infringe the patent.


That's not 100% accurate. The patent has to be clear enough that someone skilled in the art could use it, not just Joe Blow Public.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## TwiceHorn (Jun 18, 2014)

tuckerjt07 said:


> Theoretically by giving instruction here they could go after damages that way, no?
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


Yes. Supplying commodity parts and instructing assembly into an infringing device is generally known as "active inducement" of infringement. Supplying specially made components, less than a whole, that are assembled into an infringing device is generally known as "contributory" infringement. This stuff can get super-complicated.

Talking about a published patent application or granted patent, and what it discloses, alone is not likely to be considered any type of infringement. It would require suppplying some parts to a specific customer and giving them information to assemble the parts into an infringing whole.


----------



## TwiceHorn (Jun 18, 2014)

robbnj said:


> You design/invent, and build a widget.
> Fred patents your invention.
> You now have no rights to the widget that you invented, built, and still own because Fred holds the patent on it?
> 
> Color me intrigued.


That is a different deal entirely.

Here every infringing act except use either didn't occur (sales, importation) or occurred prior to grant (making). Although it is a unique fact pattern, I believe use alone is sufficient to constitute patent infringement. There is an argument that infringement by "use" only occurs with method or process claims.

There can also be liability from the date of publication rather than grant, if the claims dont change between publication and grant, which didn't happen here.


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

TwiceHorn said:


> Yes. Supplying commodity parts and instructing assembly into an infringing device is generally known as "active inducement" of infringement. Supplying specially made components, less than a whole, that are assembled into an infringing device is generally known as "contributory" infringement. This stuff can get super-complicated.
> 
> Talking about a published patent application or granted patent, and what it discloses, alone is not likely to be considered any type of infringement. It would require suppplying some parts to a specific customer and giving them information to assemble the parts into an infringing whole.


Thanks, I'm better versed in tech patents so I wasn't sure how that would apply here.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## TwiceHorn (Jun 18, 2014)

tuckerjt07 said:


> Thanks, I'm better versed in tech patents so I wasn't sure how that would apply here.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


Haha I have to laugh at "tech." This is "tech." It's insulting to all kinds of engineers to consider only IT things "tech." The name "Big Tech" is a misnomer and fallacious.

I saw a ridiculous headline a few years ago: "Boeing goes high tech" referring to installation of wifi equipment on an airliner. As if 100 years of aircraft design and manufacture is somehow "low tech." GMAFB.

/end rant

To your point, however, most "tech" patents, presumably meaning software, contain method or process claims that consist of a series of steps rather than a list of physical items or components. Indirect (meaning inducement of or contributory infringement) gets very, very tricky. Much easier to deal with "apparatus" claims.


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

TwiceHorn said:


> Haha I have to laugh at "tech." This is "tech." It's insulting to all kinds of engineers to consider only IT things "tech." The name "Big Tech" is a misnomer and fallacious.
> 
> I saw a ridiculous headline a few years ago: "Boeing goes high tech" referring to installation of wifi equipment on an airliner. As if 100 years of aircraft design and manufacture is somehow "low tech." GMAFB.


And I have to laugh at you for rejecting a word used in a way that has become ubiquitous.

Seriously though, it wouldn't even need to be used in this case if the courts had some semblance of an understanding about software.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

So basically, all of us that are making our own home-made tire sealant are doing it illegally? 

I mean, technically, that's what all of us that are doing this are doing. We've figured out how to make something that works as well as what is sold by Stans, Orange, etc., we are using at least a very similar make-up and many of the same materials, and so on.

I'd have to believe that the court would favor in your favor if you supplied your information on your process. While you may have been inspired by Berd to build your own polymer spoke wheels, you came up with your own open-source process to make these, in fact, you've documented it in this thread many times over, and these processes are different than Berd. That's what we did with sealant, we experimented with many materials until we settled on a formula that does what we want. They are simply trying to "strong arm" people in this thread that are interested in doing it themselves, because it's been revealed that it's something that can be done individually without big machinery and equipment. I'm sure they aren't happy about that.


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Nov 19, 2013)

patent fights are not simple

a water balloon patent fight cost 17 million dollars so far for the patent owner, and could go as high as 50 million by the time it is done
-
no one on either side can fight patents in courts unless you got financial backing deep enough
-
if Berd wants to pursue this they can



it's probably best for the homemade poly spoke crowd to walk away from this issue

for small potatoes sales like berd spokes, both sides, at a minimum, likely will be out $750,000 in legal fees just to -start- a patent battle


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

Jayem said:


> So basically, all of us that are making our own home-made tire sealant are doing it illegally?
> 
> I mean, technically, that's what all of us that are doing this are doing. We've figured out how to make something that works as well as what is sold by Stans, Orange, etc., we are using at least a very similar make-up and many of the same materials, and so on.
> 
> I'd have to believe that the court would favor in your favor if you supplied your information on your process. While you may have been inspired by Berd to build your own polymer spoke wheels, you came up with your own open-source process to make these, in fact, you've documented it in this thread many times over, and these processes are different than Berd. They are simply trying to "strong arm" people in this thread that are interested in doing it themselves, because it's been revealed that it's something that can be done individually without big machinery and equipment. I'm sure they aren't happy about that.


Not the same, I just did a quick Google patent search and the first three tire sealant patents are all expired.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Schulze (Feb 21, 2007)

Well this thread got interesting. I have to wonder why Berd bothered patenting something that is essentially tying rope in a known fashion, that anyone can do on their kitchen table. 

At any rate, I'll respect their patent.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

tuckerjt07 said:


> Not the same, I just did a quick Google patent search and the first three tire sealant patents are all expired.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


Surely someone has a patent, Slime, WTB, etc. Patents can be renewed, I remember for a while that we all thought the FSR patent was expiring and it'd always end up renewed, until it eventually did expire, but it was way down the road from what we originally thought.


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

Jayem said:


> Surely someone has a patent, Slime, WTB, etc. Patents can be renewed, I remember for a while that we all thought the FSR patent was expiring and it'd always end up renewed, until it eventually did expire, but it was way down the road from what we originally thought.


With the recent relative explosion in that area I would think they are all expired. There is also the unique and not obvious criteria. With multiple holders holding patents on a relatively simple item they may be scared to push too hard on litigation out of fears of invalidation. The two I gave a skim at looked so similar I'm not sure how the second got granted.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## compengr (Dec 11, 2008)

No patent expert, but I didn't think you could just renew. That would defeat the whole point of them expiring. I thought you could add to a patent, which would in a way renew, but couldn't just hit a button to get another 17(?) years. 

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

compengr said:


> No patent expert, but I didn't think you could just renew. That would defeat the whole point of them expiring. I thought you could add to a patent, which would in a way renew, but couldn't just hit a button to get another 17(?) years.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


You can't except in the rare case you can get Congress involved.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## TwiceHorn (Jun 18, 2014)

tuckerjt07 said:


> And I have to laugh at you for rejecting a word used in a way that has become ubiquitous.
> 
> Seriously though, it wouldn't even need to be used in this case if the courts had some semblance of an understanding about software.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


Didn't mean to pick at you. It is the ubiquitousness of the term "tech" and its current definition with which I have a problem.

The courts and principally the Supreme Court have jacked up software patent (and copyright to an extent) law to a fare the well. Still, its abstract yet material nature presents some difficult problems.


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

TwiceHorn said:


> Didn't mean to pick at you. It is the ubiquitousness of the term "tech" and its current definition with which I have a problem.
> 
> The courts and principally the Supreme Court have jacked up software patent (and copyright to an extent) law to a fare the well. Still, its abstract yet material nature presents some difficult problems.


I get what you're saying. I still use the word technology in the sense you described. To me, "tech", is referring to an industry.

It's rooted in ignorance on their behalf. Not a pejorative, I wouldn't expect a lay person to grasp all the concepts at play. Some of the criteria they settled on with Alice borders on the absurd.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## TwiceHorn (Jun 18, 2014)

Jayem said:


> So basically, all of us that are making our own home-made tire sealant are doing it illegally?
> 
> I mean, technically, that's what all of us that are doing this are doing. We've figured out how to make something that works as well as what is sold by Stans, Orange, etc., we are using at least a very similar make-up and many of the same materials, and so on.
> 
> I'd have to believe that the court would favor in your favor if you supplied your information on your process. While you may have been inspired by Berd to build your own polymer spoke wheels, you came up with your own open-source process to make these, in fact, you've documented it in this thread many times over, and these processes are different than Berd. That's what we did with sealant, we experimented with many materials until we settled on a formula that does what we want. They are simply trying to "strong arm" people in this thread that are interested in doing it themselves, because it's been revealed that it's something that can be done individually without big machinery and equipment. I'm sure they aren't happy about that.


Patents cover very specific things, not general notions like "tire sealant" or "flexible spokes." You may be infringing a patent on a tire sealant with your home brew or maybe not. Depends on whether that formulation was patentable, and when, and whether anyone patented it.

There are quite a few patents for "flexible spokes" of different configurations. Some are even expired or about to.

Patent infringement is, for the most part, "strict liability," meaning you need not intend to infringe a patent, but if you do you do.


----------



## TwiceHorn (Jun 18, 2014)

And no a patent cannot be "renewed." It has a term of 20 years from its earliest filing date. It is subject to payment of maintenance fees at 3.5, 7.5, and 11.5 years after its grant date. Failure to pay those results in early expiration.

There are some procedures by which improvements on an original idea are patented that can appear to be "extensions" of the original patent, but they are not. They are patents on the improvements, only.

There is so much misinformation about patents out there, particularly on technical hobby boards like this one, which is a big reason I decided to give some examples on this thread because it has such concrete examples.


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

TwiceHorn said:


> And no a patent cannot be "renewed." It has a term of 20 years from its earliest filing date. It is subject to payment of maintenance fees at 3.5, 7.5, and 11.5 years after its grant date. Failure to pay those results in early expiration.
> 
> There are some procedures by which improvements on an original idea are patented that can appear to be "extensions" of the original patent, but they are not. They are patents on the improvements, only.
> 
> There is so much misinformation about patents out there, particularly on technical hobby boards like this one, which is a big reason I decided to give some examples on this thread because it has such concrete examples.


You also have the instances where you can get Congress to act if the USPTO drug its feet or interference happened. I do know those are extremely rare but they happen.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## TwiceHorn (Jun 18, 2014)

tuckerjt07 said:


> You also have the instances where you can get Congress to act if the USPTO drug its feet or interference happened. I do know those are extremely rare but they happen.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


Oh yes, you are correct. There is such thing as a patent term extension, and it is an extension of the 20 year term. They are available only for pharmaceuticals or other items subject to approval by the FDA and compensate for "lost term" pending FDA approval.

Pharma patent practice is super-rarefied stuff. Ordinary electro-chemical-mechanical types like me almost consider it an entirely different field.

And, there are automatic term "adjustments" to compensate for PTO delay that usually appear on the face of the patent and are typically a matter of months or days. These just happen according to a formula that accounts for unusual delays by the Patent Office (PTO).

The Berd patent has a term adjustment of 118 days. Assuming maintenance fees were paid, it would expire on May 5, 2036. But you have to add 118 days to that. Generally, we don't consider that too big a deal because in a lot of cases, patented technology is pretty obsolescent by the time it's 20 years old. Not always, but most of the time.


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

Schulze said:


> Well this thread got interesting. I have to wonder why Berd bothered patenting something that is essentially tying rope in a known fashion, that anyone can do on their kitchen table.
> 
> At any rate, I'll respect their patent.


As will I. As soon as I get a chance, I will go through the thread and cull out any information or anything that may be seen as encouragement on how to violate their patent, and the details of their methodology.


----------



## andrew k (Dec 9, 2013)

spit balling here... what if one looped the cord through two spoke holes then tensioned at the hub. This would reduce nipple weight and threaded spoke weight at the rim and avoid the patent, but make it harder to true/tighten. aren't there hubs that tighten at the hub though?


----------



## andrew k (Dec 9, 2013)

To be clearer, I would thread the cord through a nipple that has threads on the outside. The outside nipple threads would mate with threads on the inside of the hub flange. Pull that cord into one rim hole and out the next on the same side. This open end could then be fed back through another hub flange nipple or just tied off. Tensioning would be done by screwing the hub flange mounted nipple away from the hub. This would reduce total weight and more importantly rim weight. It also skips the tricky and sketchy (to me) aspects of the fingerlick design.

This ‘fat hole’ nipple could also be placed in the rim and not the hub. Seems a better and lighter system to me.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

tuckerjt07 said:


> Not the same, I just did a quick Google patent search and the first three tire sealant patents are all expired.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


Well, I found this, granted in 2004. Filed in 2002, application dated 2003. That means at worst, it'd expire in 2022, right?

*US Patent 6,782,931*


> What is claimed is:
> 
> 1. A system for converting and retrofitting a bicycle wheel having a tire with an inner cavity engaged to a rim with an inner channel, comprising: a strip of rim tape disposed within said channel; a strip of sealing tape disposed within said channel, wherein said sealing tape completely covers said rim tape; and a liquid sealing compound disposed within said channel and said cavity and adapted for disposal within said wheel for sealing along said sealing tape and said beads, wherein said sealing compound comprises: about 3 parts by volume liquid latex; about 7 parts by volume water; and about 6 parts by volume propylene glycol.
> 
> ...


Also see: United States Patent Application 20030136490


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

Jayem said:


> Well, I found this, granted in 2004. Filed in 2002, application dated 2003. That means at worst, it'd expire in 2022, right?
> 
> *US Patent 6,782,931*
> 
> Also see: United States Patent Application 20030136490


Potentially, however that one is covering more than sealant which is a different problem statement. That's describing an entire system. You could probably get around it simply by removing the standard rim tape if you ever had to.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## TwiceHorn (Jun 18, 2014)

tuckerjt07 said:


> Potentially, however that one is covering more than sealant which is a different problem statement. That's describing an entire system. You could probably get around it simply by removing the standard rim tape if you ever had to.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


This is correct. This is directed to Stan's kits for "non-tubeless" rims, but as part of it recites the broad formula for the sealant.

Also note that it expired early (June 2018) for failure to pay maintenance fees.

And a very similar one, US7055569B2, also expired early.


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

TwiceHorn said:


> This is correct. This is directed to Stan's kits for "non-tubeless" rims, but as part of it recites the broad formula for the sealant.
> 
> Also note that it expired early (June 2018) for failure to pay maintenance fees.
> 
> And a very similar one, US7055569B2, also expired early.


I would imagine, layman's guess, that they probably decided it wasn't enforceable thus not worth paying?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

andrew k said:


> To be clearer, I would thread the cord through a nipple that has threads on the outside. The outside nipple threads would mate with threads on the inside of the hub flange. Pull that cord into one rim hole and out the next on the same side. This open end could then be fed back through another hub flange nipple or just tied off. Tensioning would be done by screwing the hub flange mounted nipple away from the hub. This would reduce total weight and more importantly rim weight. It also skips the tricky and sketchy (to me) aspects of the fingerlick design.
> 
> This 'fat hole' nipple could also be placed in the rim and not the hub. Seems a better and lighter system to me.


Pi-Rope has done something similar which requires proprietary hubs, as you need a threaded flange. With braided rope, you need to splice to get a strong junction, I'm not sure how splicing would fit into this description. Splicing is much stronger than knots or adhesive of any kind.

I'd really avoid running rope through adjacent nipple holes as rims aren't designed to handle the stresses of a properly tensioned "spoke" laying across the rim bed. Alternatively, if you were to take two adjacent nipples and thread eyebolts into these adjacent nipples, then run rope from one hub flange through eyebolt 1, across to eyebolt 2, and down to the opposite flange on the other side of the hub, the angular force exerted on those two eyebolts for a properly tensioned spoke would torque the nipples out of the rim.

One idea I have proposed earlier involves two adjacent eyebolts (A and B) attached to two adjacent nipples (A2 and B2) set on the rim bed. One end of the rope would be spliced into eyebolt A, passed through the corresponding hub flange, routed across the hub shell and passed through the opposite flange, and spliced taught through eyebolt B. Tensioning would be done by adjusting either nipple A2 or B2. Of course, a compatible spoke lacing pattern would have to be identified. This method would be faster and easier to build as it requires half of the amount of splicing. I think it would still be easy to true the wheel.


----------



## andrew k (Dec 9, 2013)

sissypants- you are probably right about threading the cord through the rim. 

i think it should be possible, however, to make a proprietary nipple with an inside portion that accepts the cord through the middle. The cord could be overhand knotted to prevent it from pulling through the nipple. This would probably be a weak point. Rather than a proprietary hub, i would think it would be possible to slip a female proprietary nipple into the hub and rim to accept the proprietary male (outside threaded) nipple (the one with the cord through the middle). Maybe there just isn't enough room in the hub hole for the cord and a male/female sheath around it?

your eyebolt solution sounds tenable as well.


----------



## TwiceHorn (Jun 18, 2014)

tuckerjt07 said:


> I would imagine, layman's guess, that they probably decided it wasn't enforceable thus not worth paying?
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


Pretty good guess. Or not worth enforcing these last few years given that no one other than Stans seems to sell that type of kit and now plain ol rim tape, valves and sealant are the order of the day.

Might be surprised too how often these fees just get missed from someone dropping the ball. It's discovered later and everyone just shrugs their shoulders and says "oh well." The fees can be paid much, much later upon payment of a hefty surcharge.


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

Like people forgetting to pay the yearly fee for "microsoft.com".


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

@sissypants I think that idea falls apart at needing independent tension for every spoke. But I like it. Keep thinking. I still like the loop idea too. Patent got ends? Loop got no ends!


----------



## poynt (Jan 15, 2004)

so what about what pi-rope have been doing, different material and propirotary hub interfaces, anything there that coulds be adjusted


----------



## andrew k (Dec 9, 2013)

i just looked at pi-rope. they seem to be doing just what i suggested above. Maybe it isn't possible, but i would think it would be possible to make a proprietary nipple that would be able to slide into most hubs - avoiding the need for a proprietary hub.


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

Darth Lefty said:


> @sissypants I think that idea falls apart at needing independent tension for every spoke. But I like it. Keep thinking. I still like the loop idea too. Patent got ends? Loop got no ends!


Darth, in all reality, would you actually need to tension two adjacent spokes independently? Instead of truing your wheel with 28 spokes, can't you true it with 14 spokes? That is, assuming each of these adjacent pairs of spokes share the same tension.

The only reason I'm not a fan of the loop idea is because it seems like it would look "not cool". I do think you'd end up using nearly the same amount of material, maybe a little more, but that would outweigh the time spent doing a single splice rather than two for each spoke.


----------



## sissypants (Sep 7, 2016)

andrew k said:


> i just looked at pi-rope. they seem to be doing just what i suggested above. Maybe it isn't possible, but i would think it would be possible to make a proprietary nipple that would be able to slide into most hubs - avoiding the need for a proprietary hub.


The problem is the hub flange is soo small that by the time you have a female nipple behind the flange and going through the flange, and a male bolt going into the flange, you've got nothing left to epoxy in the rope, not to mention tensile strength of the system. Besides, you'll be adding weight (0.3g for the nipple, plus another 0.2-0.5g for the male bolt) and that defeats the purpose. It's also more complexity, more hardware, etc. You could make the hub flanges bigger, but you really don't want that extra nipple in the system, it just defeats the purpose.


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

sissypants said:


> Darth, in all reality, would you actually need to tension two adjacent spokes independently?


If they are "adjacent" on the rim, yes. Each side has a different tension for dish.

If they are "adjacent" on the hub yes too. Look at your lacing pattern. Gotta have crosses to receive the torque loads. Otherwise the torque will pull the string through the eye. Unless it's a rim brake front.

I'm not saying there's no solution, I just can't visualize it yet.


----------



## Schulze (Feb 21, 2007)

How about a purpose made hub shell? Make it so one piece of string goes from nipple to nipple and wraps partially around the hub where it is clamped. Then you can tension each side from the rim side. 

Just the shell, say for a DT 350. Swap over internals.


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

ooh, here's an idea to go with that. No hub holes at all. Hub torque received by friction of all the strings each wrapped halfway around it.

Maybe you could macramé the strings into a kind of braid around the hub, push the hub into the center, tension it up.

That would be a nightmare to start truing, I bet!


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Hey guys, I'm quite certain I'm going to attempt to build, slowly for my kid, a real WW hard tail 24" bicycle over the next 3-4 months to have it ready for when she is tall enough. Which is, uh definitely beyond my mechanical abilities.

I'm planning to Alibaba a lot of stuff (i.e. bars, stem, cf frame mainly).

Wheel choices appear to be pretty limited in this category so I'm probably going to have something built. Wondering if one of you wheel builder side guys would be interested in installing some Poly spokes on provided rims/ hubs?

Also, if anyone has a lead on some inexpensive yet lightweight 24" wheels I'd love to hear it. Chinese made CF wheels would be ideal.

Thanks!


----------



## PHeller (Dec 28, 2012)

So this thread is pretty much dead in the water because of Berd's cease and desist?


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Nov 19, 2013)

I thought this thread was deleted or hidden and surprised it is here. wtf ? I have no stake in this just watchin and boom, it's back.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Bump


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

Suns_PSD said:


> Bump


I'd let this die. If they bothered to C&D bringing back up isn't really advised.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## okashira (Feb 13, 2009)

tuckerjt07 said:


> I'd let this die. If they bothered to C&D bringing back up isn't really advised.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


Berd did not send a C&D. They have a good product and their patent(s) should be respected, however.


----------



## MaineLotus (Jun 27, 2016)

Anyone able to source 12 strand DM20?


----------



## scar4me (May 16, 2010)

And.....
In looking outside the box to solve the cord-to-nipple interface issues....

Anyone have thoughts on using donor Pillar 1432 spokes?
Cutting them off leaving a short section of flat blade and then drilling them to attach the cord?
You would already have the nipple thread, and easily be able to thread more\cut it off to length.
It would also be reasonable to get 2 cord/nipple interfaces out of each J bend spoke. 
(@ ~$1 a pop for each spoke, and already having a spoke thread roller it works out pretty economical)

Bits that concern me....
It's only 3.2mm wide, so would have to be a 1.5mm cord.
For a one off 32h wheel I'm on the verge of thinking it's a goer, but the tolerances on the bladed hole drilling would be exceptionally slim.

I'm thinking it could be possible to leave it a bit longer ~10mm put 2 holes, and loop though both. But then you've got a non-inline force being applied at the holes when tensioned.

Anyone got any opinions in this approach?


----------



## MaineLotus (Jun 27, 2016)

That's the exactly the approach I'm going to try. I figured I'd setup a jig in a drill press to ensure accuracy when drilling and chauffeuring. Close to sourcing some 1.5mm DM20 - not easy to find.


----------



## MaineLotus (Jun 27, 2016)

Test spoke end. Next step is test the eyelet for strength under tension with a piece of spliced 2.0mm DM20.


----------



## MaineLotus (Jun 27, 2016)




----------



## scar4me (May 16, 2010)

MaineLotus said:


> View attachment 1308113
> View attachment 1308115
> View attachment 1308117


Looking really good!

With the bent spoke approach....
Would it be an idea to splice the loop, then feed this through the hole in the spoke end, and loop over the thread, and pressed joint?
This way the tension on the cord is helping force the joint together, and further reduce the risk of it failing at that join?
(also makes it easier to swap an end if there is a failure of the thread or anything)

TBH i'm probably over thinking it, as that joint may be strong enough on it's own as it is.


----------



## MaineLotus (Jun 27, 2016)

The spoke end is formed and then TIG welded, so there isn't really a joint to come apart. I did some destructive tests and it didn't not fail at the weld - the alloy spoke nipple stripped out. Maybe difficult to see in pictures - the DM20 is spliced to the spoke end and hub, there isn't any looping through either.


----------



## MaineLotus (Jun 27, 2016)

Front wheel laced up. They are easier to lace than steel spokes, so far so good.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

Cool!


----------



## investigator (Feb 5, 2020)

Guys, great project. I ordered 100 meters of rope. I think to combine 2 methods. For attaching to the hub: loop (



) + berd's technology. And to the rim is an analog of Pi Rope Or the method proposed by MaineLotus.

MaineLotus, please say. Did you use spokes to make metal loops or bent from a wire and cut a thread?
How is the operation of the wheels?


----------



## MaineLotus (Jun 27, 2016)

For the spoke ends, I used Pilar bladed spokes and formed the eyelet. The eye was then TIG welded and finally powder coated.


----------



## be1 (Sep 4, 2013)

MaineLotus said:


> For the spoke ends, I used Pilar bladed spokes and formed the eyelet. The eye was then TIG welded and finally powder coated.


looks great! do you think this is better than steel spokes?

seems like a fun project


----------



## MaineLotus (Jun 27, 2016)

Pillar spokes are steel - stainless steel. As short as the spoke ends are, they are the heaviest part. I do have some bladed ti spokes to experiment with, but not sure how they'll work out.

I may have misread your question - I think overall they are better than steel spokes. Lighter and have some compliance (from the reviews I've read).


----------



## be1 (Sep 4, 2013)

i am intrigued. well-done!

i have been following this for awhile. to me the string to metal interface seemed like the weak point. looks like you nailed it.


----------



## investigator (Feb 5, 2020)

MaineLotus said:


> For the spoke ends, I used Pilar bladed spokes and formed the eyelet. The eye was then TIG welded and finally powder coated.


But did you bend it manually or did you use some kind of attachment?
Firms that bend the wire, I can not do this because they have wire in coils, and there are more radii.


----------



## MaineLotus (Jun 27, 2016)

I created a metal form that is essentially to steel plates that come together to press the spokes into an eyelet.


----------



## investigator (Feb 5, 2020)

MaineLotus, I would be grateful if you reset the device photo (%
I will do something similar.


----------



## MaineLotus (Jun 27, 2016)

I had one of these from when my son was a cub scout and repurposed it for this project.

https://www.amazon.com/Revell-Axle-Straightener-Tool-Building/dp/B004AFAH3Q

You'll need to drill it appropriately and use a piece of nail or screw to help form the eyelet. I used a large vice to press the two halves of the die together to to form the part. In the photos, I used a spoke end that was already formed, I didn't have any raw materials left.


----------



## jonahcrtr (Dec 23, 2020)

MaineLotus said:


> I had one of these from when my son was a cub scout and repurposed it for this project.
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Revell-Axle-Straightener-Tool-Building/dp/B004AFAH3Q
> 
> You'll need to drill it appropriately and use a piece of nail or screw to help form the eyelet. I used a large vice to press the two halves of the die together to to form the part. In the photos, I used a spoke end that was already formed, I didn't have any raw materials left.


Any updates on how this has gone, I've been re-reading the whole thread and your system seems to be good


----------



## MaineLotus (Jun 27, 2016)

jonahcrtr said:


> Any updates on how this has gone, I've been re-reading the whole thread and your system seems to be good


The spokes have worked out well - rode 3-4 times a week on aggressive single track from spring through fall with no failures. I did have to re-lace the rear wheel, but that was entirely my fault. I didn't bury the splice enough and had some tension loss issues. Overall I really like the spokes, light and very strong.


----------



## jonahcrtr (Dec 23, 2020)

MaineLotus said:


> The spokes have worked out well - rode 3-4 times a week on aggressive single track from spring through fall with no failures. I did have to re-lace the rear wheel, but that was entirely my fault. I didn't bury the splice enough and had some tension loss issues. Overall I really like the spokes, light and very strong.


How did tensioning work, was there a lot of stretch?


----------



## MaineLotus (Jun 27, 2016)

There is, initially. I tensioned to 130kgf and then re-tensioned after 24 hours. But after that, there has not been any tension loss in several months of use.


----------



## jonahcrtr (Dec 23, 2020)

MaineLotus said:


> There is, initially. I tensioned to 130kgf and then re-tensioned after 24 hours. But after that, there has not been any tension loss in several months of use.


One final question, where did you source your DM20? Thanks


----------



## MaineLotus (Jun 27, 2016)

Armare Ropes in Italy. My order of 1.5mm DM20 came through as 2.0mm. The size worked out ok though, but ordering 2.0mm may yield 2.5mm, which I think would be too large.


----------



## jonahcrtr (Dec 23, 2020)

MaineLotus said:


> Armare Ropes in Italy. My order of 1.5mm DM20 came through as 2.0mm. The size worked out ok though, but ordering 2.0mm may yield 2.5mm, which I think would be too large.


Perfect, thank you. Sorry to bother you again but in your last picture(i believe it's titled forming.jpg), does your process start by bending the spokes into a U shape then putting them in the jig, and then tightening it in the vice to make the final O shape?


----------



## MaineLotus (Jun 27, 2016)

Yep, that's exactly how they're formed.


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

MaineLotus, very nicely done. I might try this. Were you able to weigh the final product and see how much weight you saved?


----------



## seeburglar (Oct 7, 2019)

Hey Everyone,

I love this forum, and love that people had similar ideas to me (albeit wayyyy more flushed out). I'm thinking of attempting this (for science of course), but am struggling to find DM20.

Maybe I'm confused, but it seems that DM20 isn't the actual cord, but is the material that the cord is made from. Searching on Armare's website, I can't seem to find any DM20, but I have found SK99

@mainlotus, can you help me clarify what rope you actually used? Also what length was your minimum order?

Thanks in advanced!


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

I could never get Armare's website to work for me.


----------



## MaineLotus (Jun 27, 2016)

TylerVernon said:


> MaineLotus, very nicely done. I might try this. Were you able to weigh the final product and see how much weight you saved?


Hi Tyler,

Almost half the weight over CX-Rays. Here's 32 284mm CX-Rays compared to 32 DM20 spokes.


----------



## MaineLotus (Jun 27, 2016)

seeburglar said:


> Hey Everyone,
> 
> I love this forum, and love that people had similar ideas to me (albeit wayyyy more flushed out). I'm thinking of attempting this (for science of course), but am struggling to find DM20.
> 
> ...


DM20 is the material it's made from. I ordered a 215meter spool, I think that's their minimum. Send them an email, they should respond to you.


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

How does Berd get their black material? Just dip it in some sort of dye?


----------



## eb1888 (Jan 27, 2012)

This guy left Dyneema in the orange 



dye for a week.

A guy I talked to at Atomik mentioned painting them black after the multiple stretch process.


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

Well that's pretty simple!

I'm thinking of a cunning plan - to machine custom spoke ends out of aluminum then attach them to the rim with internal nipples.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

MaineLotus said:


> DM20 is the material it's made from. I ordered a 215meter spool, I think that's their minimum. Send them an email, they should respond to you.


That's a lot of spokes! 
How is the project coming along?

Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


----------



## MaineLotus (Jun 27, 2016)

Suns_PSD said:


> That's a lot of spokes!
> How is the project coming along?
> 
> Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


Project was completed last spring, I've been riding these for about a year now.


----------



## MaineLotus (Jun 27, 2016)

TylerVernon said:


> How does Berd get their black material? Just dip it in some sort of dye?


It can be ordered in black, I had a choice of several colors when I ordered a spool of DM20.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

MaineLotus said:


> Project was completed last spring, I've been riding these for about a year now.


Photos, weights, etc?

Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


----------



## MSU Alum (Aug 8, 2009)

TylerVernon said:


> How does Berd get their black material? Just dip it in some sort of dye?


I think so. I have a Berd wheelset and like them. I've heard of people who order the white spokes and use a Sharpie to blacken them, or to touch up black spokes. Mine have not lost any color.


----------



## MaineLotus (Jun 27, 2016)

Suns_PSD said:


> Photos, weights, etc?
> 
> Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


I posted photos, including weights, look a few posts up.


----------



## MaineLotus (Jun 27, 2016)

MSU Alum said:


> I think so. I have a Berd wheelset and like them. I've heard of people who order the white spokes and use a Sharpie to blacken them, or to touch up black spokes. Mine have not lost any color.


Berd just orders black material, DM 20 can be made in practically any color. I doubt they dye the material.


----------



## MSU Alum (Aug 8, 2009)

MaineLotus said:


> Berd just orders black material, DM 20 can be made in practically any color. I doubt they dye the material.


How is that material colored when it's being produced? Is there a dye added during the process that makes it permanent, and is the natural color just white?


----------



## MaineLotus (Jun 27, 2016)

MSU Alum said:


> How is that material colored when it's being produced? Is there a dye added during the process that makes it permanent, and is the natural color just white?


Not sure. The material doesn't have much, if any, porosity. A year of single track, sometimes wet\muddy conditions, and the spokes still look new. During the splicing process, I make small marks on the spokes, and the permanent marker wears off after a while.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

MaineLotus said:


> I posted photos, including weights, look a few posts up.


So you did.

Very impressive weight at (edited) 2.6 grams per spoke.

What metal is the eyelet made from?

Going in to production?

I've had great luck with my 2 sets of Berds and I really like them. If I had one complaint it would be that their mechanism for torqueing the spokes requires spoke access holes in the rim bed. I'm tired of re-taping wheels and would really prefer wheels without the nipple holes. I know that building wheels is harder this way but it seems like the better solution.


----------



## MaineLotus (Jun 27, 2016)

Suns_PSD said:


> So you did.
> 
> Very impressive weight at 1.6 grams per spoke.
> 
> ...


Thank you! The metal eyelets are made from Pillar 1432 spokes (stainless). I'd like to try a Ti bladed spoke for an even lighter wheel. I can tension the spokes on the outside, although I usually remove the rim tape and true the wheels from inside (yes, it is a hassle). I think these are lighter than Berd since the metal spoke is much shorter. What's the weight of 32 Berd spokes?


----------



## MSU Alum (Aug 8, 2009)

MaineLotus said:


> Thank you! The metal eyelets are made from Pillar 1432 spokes (stainless). I'd like to try a Ti bladed spoke for an even lighter wheel. I can tension the spokes on the outside, although I usually remove the rim tape and true the wheels from inside (yes, it is a hassle). I think these are lighter than Berd since the metal spoke is much shorter. What's the weight of 32 Berd spokes?


I think they're 2.5 grams each, or 80 grams for 32. I calculate yours at 2.6 grams each? But they're probably the same really. From their site:










But their site also has:
Weight: (64 pcs x 260mm) 156 g
They do have a spoke length calculator. It's all above my head, but you can probably get the real weight based on wheel size.








Spoke Calculator


This page helps customers calculate the specifications of their custom spokes and wheels.




berdspokes.com




I'd be interested in what you come up with.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

I added to my response, apparently I did my math wrong. And your 2.6 per spoke. As I recall I came up with Berds being 2.2 to 2.3 grams per spoke. Honestly I think that difference is so small as to be completely irrelevant.

Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

215m is 22 32 spoke wheels. I'd be interested in splitting a roll haha.


----------



## dzilar (Sep 2, 2020)

I've spent quite a bit of time unsuccessfully trying to track down other suppliers that sell by the meter.
If anybody has some extra DM20 rope, or is looking to go in on a spool, I'd be interested in 50-60m!


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Can I just say that this thread is outstanding. Thank you so much to the guys who have put so much work in and been generous enough to share their findings!

Disappointing that Berd chimed in half way through the thread, discouraging what is clearly a DIY project. Shame. I was also about the pull the trigger on some Berds - mainly after an improvement in ride quality, but of course the weight can't be ignored - but given this thread I have decided to have a crack at making my own instead.

Here in the UK we have various sailing companies who seem to offer similar stuff - one of which are quoting 477kg breaking load for a 2.0mm cord, sold by the metre: Rooster Spectwelve - per metre. That will be plenty enough I feel (I will be more concerned by the joins than the cord itself!). Their site also has some nice tutorials for splicing and 'chinese rope trick' looping.

They offer a starter kit for about £20 ($28US) which looks ideal to have a play around with... Starter Splicing Kit (Small)

I have a reasonable amount of what-I-think-will-be-useful tools (TIG welder, access to all sorts of spokes, spoke thread rolling tool, milling machine, lathe, various lumps of metal, etc) and experience in fabricating stuff, so I think this little project should be possible.

How are yours holding up @MaineLotus and @okashira ?

And a couple of questions for anyone who has seen these things in real life...

- It looks the Berd spokes simply 'chinese rope trip' a couple of inches of plain cylindrical spoke into the cord, is that right? (Scary)

- What are you guys doing about holding them into the hub? An eyelet with the main length then pulled back through the eyelet to lock it off? (Sorry if I've missed it in this thread - I saw a few photos but couldn't quite work it out).

The Berd methed looks... well... pretty crap (I mean it obviously works, it just looks untidy), from the detailed photos I've seen here: Blackcat wheels: Berd spoked wheels. Why your mother or grandmother would do it faster?

Thanks again guys!

Edit: Ok, so initially it seems I'll need DM20 rather than the Spectwelve, as the SK78 creeps significantly more? However the data in this document doesn't seem to show much of a difference - around 1.6% elongation at 50% breaking load for the DM20, vs 1.9% sh for the SK78... https://www.norfolkmarine.co.uk/product-details/marlow.pdf

At wheelbuilding levels that looks like around 2.25mm stretch vs 3mm (based on a 300mm spoke at ~125kg tension). Not huge... any experiences?


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Alright, so it looks like Marlow's D12 Max99 cord is made from SK99 material, and exhibits less elongation per unit load than DM20 from the PDF above (Fig 5, Page 9). The major plus - it is available here in the UK for a reasonable price (£2 / $2.80 a metre): Marlow 2mm D12 MAX99 (priced per metre)

Edit: Even cheaper here, under US$2: https://southeastsailboats.co.uk/products/marlow-sk99-d12-max-2mm

I figure 500mm per spoke should be enough to account for screw-ups and the overlap for making an eyelet, so I'll order a length and some tools and see what happens...

Edit: having read through this thread again I can see how everyone has done stuff, thanks guys! Obvious now why Berd do the hub end like they do, the splicing part is critical and you can't be trusting customers to do it! I'm still amazed the Chinese finger trick works at the rim end, but fair play.


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Pretty sure this is going to work...




























Welding spokes is tricky! May try some bladed ones to reduce the need to "bridge the gap".

The 2mm cord I ordered has come out about 2.2mm once stretched / loaded up, which is fine by me.

Berd must be using some sort of glue on their rim end fixture, even rolling a huge long thread on the spoke it wouldn't hold.

Next up: make a proper jig for some less hillbilly testing!


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Cranked her up to 200kg tension (jig has a 2:1 ratio, eg. 100kg in the steel spoke = 200kg in the rope) and it holds just fine, despite my buries being too short - ideally should be 110mm at this diameter rope, but they are 75mm and 90mm.

Stretch at this load is about 3mm. 'Rim end' eyelet has deformed a little, so that needs a rethink.

Backed tension off to 130kg and will leave overnight to see how much the tension drops off and how much it stretches. Promising so far!


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

OK so... the overnight stretch increased length by 0.15mm and dropped tension to 116kg as a result. All good - as expected and easy to correct.

Tried some glued Chinese finger tricks, not happy with the results. Messy to do, slipped when the rope frayed at 170kg (tapered the end of the spoke to try and prevent this).










The heatshrink was an attempt to squeeze the epoxy into the joint.


It looks like, once bedded in, the spokes behave pretty consistently - I got repeatable averages of 0.9mm of stretch per 50kg of load.

Bedding them in however produces wild elongation as the bury splices seat themselves - total stretch through 7 cycles from 0 to 140kg, plus one to 210kg, and back again added 9mm to the length. 6mm of that was on the first loading.

I figure if I can build a spoke, load it once to get it the splices seated, it'll need to be around 3mm shy of the final spoke size at this point. There's about 8mm thread available in a double square nipple after the initial thread-on, so that works out fine.

To put numbers on that... my rear wheel needs 300mm spokes. So I'll need to make the spokes initially at 291mm. One load cycle to bed the splices = 297mm. That'll be just long enough to reach the nipple threads for lacing (have read that Berd spokes exhibit the same characteristic). Then at full tension after a few load cycles, add 3mm to get to 300mm. Then the double square nipple has an extra 2mm 'headroom' for cock ups, ha.

Apologies for the waffle - this is as much getting things straight in my head and writing them down so I don't forget, as it is for shared info!


Have a second spoke sat at 116kg tension now ready for re-measuring tomorrow. Hoping the results will confirm the first test.


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Spoke tension dropped in the same way again, good to know it's consistent.


Realised I was stupid messing about trying to weld spokes when I have silver solder at my disposal.

Here's my first 3 attempts, straight after soldering / brazing, still covered in flux. This is much less temperamental and a lot easier than welding, plus gives a much neater result IMO.










A quick check of the interface between rope and spoke eyelet - this has seen 10+ loadings to 140kg and back, plus a couple to 200+. No fraying so I think that's safe. Same deal at the 'hub' end - I'd looped it through some 3mm thick aluminium with a 2.5mm chamfered hole, as close to a real hub as I could muster.










Love the way silver solder flows, almost organically! Here's one after a quick clean up with wire wool.










And finally for today... loaded a V2 eyelet up to 210kg, then backed off to 130kg to sit over the weekend.










I've got hubs already, rims are due in 10 days ish, so I'm looking forward to getting started now! Wheelset weight should be around 1250-1300g (even with a chunky I9 SS rear hub).


----------



## Grinchy8 (Jul 6, 2021)

Fascinating thread


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Getting closer to a final solution now.

Decided on a standard / plain bury at both ends. Brummel locks add time and complexity to the build, and only serve a purpose when the spoke is at zero tension. With reasonably careful handling, a bedded down splice won't slip during lacing.

Creating the spokes is a little tricky though, with around 10-12mm of 'stretch' being produced due to the splices bedding in during the initial loading up. I plan to make a jig which allows me to load the spokes once they've been built, hopefully settling the splices enough to allow them to reach the nipple once the rim is introduced. Fingers crossed! I will also run a couple more threads on the spokes to allow them to safely stick out the top of the nipple a little if required.

Weights.... All of these are 274mm spokes +/- a couple of mil. Sapim Race, Sapim Laser (the 'base' for a CX Ray) and a DIY jobby.




























Hoping to finalise an eyelet forming jig today, since my rims arrived yesterday ahead of schedule!


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Doing some more research into creep in these materials...

Found the following data which was interesting. It's only at low loads (60N) but shows that 1.5mm SK99 suffers about 80-85% as much stretch as, and similar creep to, 1.5mm DM20. Obviously 2mm SK99 exhibits less than both: Figure 1 from New insights in synthetic fiber rope elongation and its detection for ultra lightweight tendon driven series elastic robots | Semantic Scholar

I guess this is due to the fact that SK99 offers much higher maximum load ratings than DM20 - I've seen max load ratings for 2mm SK99 published at anything from 600-800kg, with DM20 around 400-420kg.

So... when they are tested at a *percentage *of breaking load the DM20 shows less creep than SK99, however at the same _*absolute *_load the SK99 will perform better (for the same thickness rope). That gives me a little more confidence that it'll be up to the job given that it'll be used at more like 100kg static load (spoke tension), which is way down on the maximum.

I'm also wondering if having the majority of the spoke as a double thickness will help - for example... the rope part will be around 260mm long (based on a 300mm spoke and a 40mm eyelet at the rim end). With an eye length of ~10mm at each end (as in, the loop that goes through the eyelet at the rim end and the spoke hole at the hub end) and a 110mm bury (50x diameter) for each splice, that leaves only a very short amount (10mm) in the centre of the spoke that's single thicknes - the rest of the spoke is doubled up. We shall see anyway!

Found another German supplier of DM20 in 2mm too, for anyone interested: Single Braids


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Think I'm just about at the point where I can start making spokes...

Spent quite a lot of time on fishing forums (hear me out...) yesterday investigating how they make lures, spinners etc. There are specific tools for doing this:










Which produce things like this, in wire up to ~2mm thick.










So that got me thinking. It was always a bit of a pain to close up the gap in the 'regular' eyelet, making the two ends touch together to allow soldering, and forming the eyes was a slow and inconsistent process. I decided to try making a little jig for bending and forming the above style of eye, figuring it would be easy enough to drop some solder on there afterwards to hold everything in place.

Behold, the ugliest jig ever made, lovingly sculpted from a lump of scrap. If anyone ever wants to know how this abortion of a tool works, I'm happy to try and explain...










Makes these little badboys in a smidge over 30 seconds though.










Although there was significant iteration...










Played around with different thread lengths on the spoke and also ensuring the nipple could be turned successfully from both sides. When the wheel is fully built with rim tape, tyre etc on you can only do 1/4 turns on the nipple, but I figure that'll be enough for any truing adjustments.

Just poke a bit of spoke through the eye...










Spoke key clears easily.



















Quite like the 'steam punk' look of the spoke with the solder and flux contrasting against the clean anodising of the nipple and the high-tech look of the rope, so not sure how much work I'll do cleaning them up...

Note that 'spoke' above has been re-used at least a dozen times now, so there are a few stray / frayed fibres kicking about, and the splice also has way too little burying as my eyelets have got gradually shorter.

The eagle-eyed will also spot something important in the above photo... which reared its head when I went for an all out 'lets try and break this thing' stretchathon.










Quite a bit of deformation in the box section...










And finally, BANG! I started the tension at about 210kg, then just kept winding until it broke, so I'm not quite sure where it got to eventually. Probably not much more given how it failed...

So, what's gone wrong? Looking a couple of photos above, you can see the spoke itself necking down. I wondered why everything was feeling a bit odd and like tension wasn't increasing! The spoke ended up snapping at 1.62mm thickness (measured after the break - started at 1.80mm), with the rope still perfectly intact - despite the frayed bits and the undersized bury splices (down to about 35x diameter full length, meaning the tapering started at about 20x diameter!). I'm not sure how much the soldering process has affected this - the spoke turns cherry red at points, which is about 800 degrees C. I'm wondering if, with a bit of pre-heating of the silver solder, I can bring this temp down a bit. The solder will start to flow at about 650, so it's a pretty tight window for such a small part - but perhaps if I do this process with the lights off it'll give me a bit more sensitivity to the working range.

Final weight all soldered up etc.










Again, apologies for the huge post - as before, I'm hoping to leave some 'instructions' which may allow someone else to have a crack at this while getting things straight in my own head.

Next step - time to get making some eyes!


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Or not. Plan D. E? Who knows. New eye design anyway.

Main takeaway: rope spoke got to 300kg tension, at which point the Sapim Race spoke gave way at 150kg (nipple felt like it was binding despite grease on threads).

Then I attacked it with a file and it was pretty boring (the bury just slips), but proves its fine for at least a few rock strikes.


----------



## Grinchy8 (Jul 6, 2021)

AdamR83 said:


> Think I'm just about at the point where I can start making spokes...
> 
> Spent quite a lot of time on fishing forums (hear me out...) yesterday investigating how they make lures, spinners etc. There are specific tools for doing this:
> 
> ...


Very interesting approach, twisting up for the eye.
Why is solder required if the eye has been twist formed?

I'm also interested in the jig description, since it was used for other purposes, I'm not sure which holes are bizness and which are legacy.


----------



## SB Trails (Sep 14, 2012)

AdamR38...this is THE best thread..enjoying all your posts..

What about a blade spoke bent over with a simple spot weld..?

Or..take one of your current bent spokes and just flatten the end and spot weld that back to the main shaft of the spoke end..


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

This thread makes me happy that I paid for Berd spokes. 

Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Suns_PSD said:


> This thread makes me happy that I paid for Berd spokes.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


Best post in this entire thread! 

Seriously though, it's cool to see such variation in humans. This project has been absolutely pointless for me in a way, but there is a lot of satisfaction in riding a bike / trail that you _really _built yourself (I build my own frames too).



SB Trails said:


> AdamR38...this is THE best thread..enjoying all your posts..
> 
> What about a blade spoke bent over with a simple spot weld..?
> 
> Or..take one of your current bent spokes and just flatten the end and spot weld that back to the main shaft of the spoke end..


Thanks dude! The blade spoke bent over will work, as shown in this thread on Page 19... quite expensive to buy a load of bladed spokes but... I'm thinking 'so what' at this point. I am considering it. Probably would silver solder rather than weld though as my skills aren't really up to welding such small sections neatly!



Grinchy8 said:


> Very interesting approach, twisting up for the eye.
> Why is solder required if the eye has been twist formed?
> 
> I'm also interested in the jig description, since it was used for other purposes, I'm not sure which holes are bizness and which are legacy.


With the twist eye, it 'creeps' without loads of twists or a further mechanical fixing. You can use a haywire twist, but that would be 4 or 5 'curls' and then 4 or 5 more 'twists' to lock it off. Long, heavy, complicated.

I'll try and grab a video of the jig in use, I think that'd be easiest!


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Been busy building a frame the last few days, but got a neat tool through to start prepping the hubs.



















Looks like it will be worth doing, it is rounding off a few corners here and there.

Edit: done!










Oh, and found this failed eyelet - the solder in tension wasn't up to the job, hence the spiral design (which held to nearly twice the load).










Need to crack on and make a batch of eyes and a jig for creating the spokes next.


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Frame is pretty much done now, so time to make spokes!

Added 10 more threads to each to give 'headroom' in case they stretch more than anticipated.










Had to make a new jig for the new twist. Took a few attempts and still needed a bit of 'touch' to get them consistent, but it did the job.










The final two testers...










Spokes all got cleaned and sanded to help with solder adhesion. Surprisingly dirty!










Process...




























Part 2...



















Twist army ready for the bench grinder and some solder - tomorrow all being well.


----------



## Grinchy8 (Jul 6, 2021)

Thanks for the pics in the jigs


----------



## shirk (Mar 24, 2004)

Glad I came back to see if this thread was updated. Thank you for sharing your work.

I have some bladed spokes from a set of dead wheels that will be perfect for this. Also have silver and brazing skills to make similar spoke ends.


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Always a pleasure to share this stuff with anyone who appreciates it, especially if it assists in others getting stuck into DIYing!

If you have a set of suitable spokes already kicking about then it sounds like a no-brainer to me


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Bit more progress today.

Dip in flux, heat, dab of solder, repeat...



















15 mins in warm sodium hydroxide solution had all the flux away nicely.



















Weight of 32 pieces










First spoke done!



















Jig to check the length










The other 31 cut to length, ready to taper at home tonight










Makes a total weight of ~115g for 32 spokes, or 3.6g each. So not all that light in the end  I guess the twist design has a lot of 'doubled up' material and a lump of solder too. Not to worry, I'm more interested in the ride quality.


----------



## shirk (Mar 24, 2004)

Berd's are 2.5g and they claim 1.8mm at the mid section. 

With a shorter spoke section and shorter burries I wonder how close a DIY can get to the Berd weight.


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

The same weight or less, I'd expect. Some pics of that sort of setup on page 18 I think.

My view for a couple of hours last night...




























Sometimes the simple tools are best...










FOUR HOURS (!!) later...



















One of the buries slipped during lacing, easy enough to adjust in situ...










Spoke lengths came out nicely (this is just laced up and nipples set by hand)





































'Finished' it about 2pm, tension had dropped by 6pm so bumped it back up again. Hopefully it'll just need one more going over and then it'll stay tight.

'Labour intensive' has been the phrase of the day. I'm not really looking forward to doing the front one!


----------



## Grinchy8 (Jul 6, 2021)

Look like plenty of threads left on the spokes for further tension adjustments.
740g for a rear is competitive!


----------



## shirk (Mar 24, 2004)

Awesome. Looks great.


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Finished the front wheel










Turns out this material needs 2 rounds of re-tightening, but settles down after that. A bit of pre-stretching by hand while building works a charm too.

About half way through lacing the front wheel I came up with an alternative way... it would involve half as much splicing / tapering. The rope crossing back over itself locks into the flange pretty well - I think it would be enough to 'isolate' them so truing can be carried out individually. Hard to get a photo but hopefully the below makes sense...



















This would also be lighter and much less faff to build. Maybe I'll do another wheel in this way sometime, or at least remove a couple of spokes from an existing 'normal' wheel and add a 'double rope spoke' to test it.

Anyway - this project was part of a larger one which was to build a frame / bike. More info here for anyone interested: DIY Steel 29er Singlespeed Frame Build - ARSE 29er

I'll report back once they've had some riding


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Well the wheels are still alive after 20odd miles including a bit of light trialsing... they have both come a tiny bit out of true (less than 2mm) which I put down to differing rates of bedding in for each spoke and eyelet. Hopefully one last fettle and they'll be reet.

Hard to say how they ride exactly as there have been so many changes compared with what I'm used to (more modern forks, lighter rims, lighter bars, bigger tyres, bigger diameter wheels, lower tyre pressures) but the bike does have a lovely general compliance about it in the directions it needs to.



I don't usually use Strava but do stick it on every now and again to compare significant bike changes and see how my fitness is getting along, and PRd by a few seconds on a fairly fast ~1:20min descent - the rough final section felt much smoother than I remember!



Despite the muck, they've come up clean after a hose down too. Winner.


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Found one spoke thats had a scuff... no drop in tension, but will keep an eye on it. Will be a good test!

And thought this video might help convey them better than photos.


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

Honestly curious if you can hear a difference in the wheels with that loop of metal so close to the rim. Seems like there'd be more wind noise.

Not remotely suggesting that it'd matter for 99% of us -- just that it'd be there.


----------



## Mikevdv (Sep 26, 2018)

Oh **** adam ,

I've been down almost this exact road. I've trialed numerous spoke materials that are easily available. sk99, sk75 and a few other materials of lower creep, 
All did not hold tension in an acceptable manner over time. (required tightening every few days) 

Dm20 is the only one with potential . 

got my rear wheel to 691g.


----------



## wschruba (Apr 13, 2012)

AdamR83 said:


>


This isn't a bad idea, but run the free ends UNDER the transverse cord. This is how (not exactly, but same idea) you tie off a cleat.


----------



## tom tom (Mar 3, 2007)

What about using a 50 mm long J Bend spoke. You could always use some heat shrink to hold it in place while building.


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Mikevdv said:


> Oh **** adam ,
> 
> I've been down almost this exact road. I've trialed numerous spoke materials that are easily available. sk99, sk75 and a few other materials of lower creep,
> All did not hold tension in an acceptable manner over time. (required tightening every few days)
> ...


Thanks for this input, Mike! Glad you've been able to get it to work. Weirdly I've not experienced the same as you - I'm nearly 150 miles in since last touching the wheels. Perhaps it is the 'max' (pre heat treating and stretching) treatment of this stuff, or that it is a bit thicker (and thus a much higher load capacity) which is allowing me to get away with it!

How have you connected at the hub and rim ends, and how much bury do you have? I wonder if there is potential for 'creep' there also.



wschruba said:


> This isn't a bad idea, but run the free ends UNDER the transverse cord. This is how (not exactly, but same idea) you tie off a cleat.


Sadly my brain can't process that... haha. Do you mean the piece of rope that disappears off the left of my photo should go off to the right instead, and vice versa? That was how I plan to do it on the wheel I'm building next week...



tom tom said:


> What about using a 50 mm long J Bend spoke. You could always use some heat shrink to hold it in place while building.


Cheers for the idea Tom! I had toyed with this but I'm fairly sure that won't hold. I think a lot of the reason it does with a hub is because the head on the elbow physically locates in the hub shell on a normal wheel. I have in fact seen spokes pull through a flange before where the spoke head was 2.6mm and hub hole 2.5mm!


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

mikesee said:


> Honestly curious if you can hear a difference in the wheels with that loop of metal so close to the rim. Seems like there'd be more wind noise.
> 
> Not remotely suggesting that it'd matter for 99% of us -- just that it'd be there.


Missed this! Yes, with the bike upside down and the rear wheel spun up fast, there is a humming aerodynamic drag kinda sound which is much louder than normal spokes. I also noticed that drop offs with a side wind require a bit more care - the front end really does like to wander off. Not sure if this is a 26 vs 29er thing (haven't ridden big wheels before this bike), because the bike is so light, or because the spokes catch the wind more, but my feeling is its a combination of all 3, and you'd barely notice it on, say, a burly 650b enrduro bike.


----------



## wschruba (Apr 13, 2012)

AdamR83 said:


> Sadly my brain can't process that... haha. Do you mean the piece of rope that disappears off the left of my photo should go off to the right instead, and vice versa? That was how I plan to do it on the wheel I'm building next week...


Keep the orientation of the cords the same, but run them under the cord that wraps over the flange. Your spokes will be against the flange, rather than passing over the hump created by your tension lock.


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Excellent solution. Thank you!


----------



## ohio (Jan 26, 2004)

AdamR83 said:


> Excellent solution. Thank you!
> 
> View attachment 1966681


This just gave me the quick thought - if you doubled up similarly (i.e. each end terminated at its own nipple) but used a girth hitch / cow hitch and used half the holes in the flange (or a 16H hub if you could find one in MTB spacing) you could avoid having to do any of the splices after lacing/threading the hub. With a girth hitch you push the loop through, have plenty of room for your spoke ends through that loop, and then viola, you've laced two spokes. Not sure what the strength ends up being, pulling at that tight angle against the loop though... the hitch you've used above has really healthy angles on it.


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

That's an interesting idea - thank you!

I just had a quick look at that hitch and apparently it reduces breaking load to around 50%. However, there would still be some reduction in strength over 'plain' rope anyway due to the tight bend at the rim end and through the hub flange, so it's not going to be miles out...

One thing is that it's not easy to get one strand of this stuff through a hub hole, two would be impossible. Obviously Berd do it with a much thinner gauge of rope, but for a DIY solution I think the 'headroom' of a beefier rope is useful. You could open up the hub, perhaps even to a 'slot', but then it's never going to accept normal spokes again... All food for thought. Thanks for your input!


----------



## ohio (Jan 26, 2004)

Ah, didn't catch how much thicker the rope you are using was. Makes sense. Depending on how deep down the rabbit hole you want to go, I bet you could convince a domestic hub MFG (Hope, I'm assuming in your case) to sell you some undrilled hub bodies.


----------



## Mikevdv (Sep 26, 2018)

AdamR83 said:


> Thanks for this input, Mike! Glad you've been able to get it to work. Weirdly I've not experienced the same as you - I'm nearly 150 miles in since last touching the wheels. Perhaps it is the 'max' (pre heat treating and stretching) treatment of this stuff, or that it is a bit thicker (and thus a much higher load capacity) which is allowing me to get away with it!
> 
> How have you connected at the hub and rim ends, and how much bury do you have? I wonder if there is potential for 'creep' there also.


I had huge buries used entire half spoke length and even lockstitched it to be sure. 
was using both 1.5mm and 1.8mm UHMPE. SK99, SK75, aliexpress line and some other "low creep" material I got from a manufacturer that was supposed to be better than sk99 but not as good as dm20. 

I was using straigtpull spokes however and there may have been some settling of the ends there. 
Still I had rode and retightened like 10 times and it would still creep statically over time. and significantly when ridden. the wheels remained rideable. but it was not sustainable the amount of spoke thread I was eating into on a regular basis. to maintain what I believe is the tension necessary for a strong wheel and it kept getting worse over time. 

I calibrated my tensometer to each string by using a jig to measure the deflection at 120kgf set to that value they wouldn't hold tension and continually creep over time even statically at room temp. Let alone stored in hot car scenerio or ridden hard. . 

Your luck may make me want to revist this on flange hubs, I like some of your soluitons, they are pretty smart. 

Are you measuring spoke tension? or just "spokes still feel tight", "wheel hasn't broken yet" 
Just want to confirm your info is accurate before I buy some hubs to take another swing at this.


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Sorry to hear of the issues you've had Mike! Seems like you've given it a really good go.

How are you attaching at the rim end?

I did a bunch of spoke tension testing in a jig similar to yours by the sounds of it, but in the end have gone on feel as measuring tension accurately was tricky due to the variation in bury length and how the splicing / tapering was carried out exactly.

I appreciate this may not be the "right" way to do it, but I'm an experienced wheelbuilder (a few thousand over the last 25 years) so have a reasonable handle on it. I'd estimate current 'tight side' tensions are in the region if 50-60kg. I'm a light rider, on an XC orientated bike with 315g carbon rims, so I don't need a lot of tension. I completely appreciate a big burly guy racing enduro may have completely different requirements - maybe that's where DM20 becomes critical.

As I think has been discussed in this thread already, spoke tension doesn't affect wheel stiffness or strength (because the materials we use obey Hooke's law) - so, as long as the spokes don't ever drop to zero tension we are all good. However, of course one of these has a lower stiffness than a regular steel spoke, so for the same load they will give a little more.

One thing to note on this topic is that manufacturers often specify a maximum tension, but it is just that. We don't have to use that tension - a bit like we don't choose to use the maximum tyre pressure printed on an MTB tyre sidewall.

So overall, I'm using a material with a much higher ultimate strength (it was bought as 2mm but measures about 2.3mm even at high tension after having taken a set), at a lower tension than most others use. This gives such large headroom that I think it is a large factor in allowing the Marlow SK99 D12 Max material to work just fine. I guess its a classic case of YMMV!


I've built another wheel today which will get a much harder time than I've given mine! I'll post up more info when I can, but for now I'll say that the 'hitch' method of hub attachment is excellent. Much faster, neater, more secure, better 'spoke' angles. I'm even tempted to rebuild my wheels like this!


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

And here is the 'more info':


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

Thank you for continuing this project. I love how you've followed up on some of the initial alternative ideas we brainstormed back at the beginning


----------



## Mikevdv (Sep 26, 2018)

AdamR83 said:


> Sorry to hear of the issues you've had Mike! Seems like you've given it a really good go.
> 
> How are you attaching at the rim end?


Rim end was the same method as you. started with soldered spokes (no twists) passed static load testing but failed in the wild more often then I'd like so switched to welded ends. which held up solidly.

Riding the wheels is where things got interesting. 
....the dynamic loads on spokes were pretty crazy. I had a lot of odd failures. loop ends tearing , long buries pulling out.. knots melting, soldered spokes cracking, and pretty crazy creep rates....they were ridden very severely, eventually sorted it all of it out but the creep and quit there. Stuff that statically I didn't see


I'm a 200llb wrestler on an enduro bike and don't ride lightly I don't think a 315g low tension carbon rim woulda passed my testing gauntlet.
I fear for my wheels life when they approach these tensions ....possibly unfounded...but it seems I bend wheels inward. when i get lazy about keeping my spokes tight.
Given the impact loads in mtb, I don't think it takes much to get a spoke momentarily to the zero tension range dynamically so I've sold myself on the tighter is better mantra (rightly or wrongly)
.
Glad you got it working Given you are using a 2.0-2.3mm rope the stress rate (F/A) will be much much lower, your also running about 1/2 my spoke tension, you've got about 1/3 the stress of what mine were seeing so would creep considerably slower. if it's good. I would strongly advice keeping them out of a hot car in summer and they'll likely give lots of life. with a few tension tune ups now and again.

I REALLY admire the way you have secured the rope on the hub side....this is brilliant and also facilitates a larger rope diameter. as you don't have to pull 2x thickness to through the hub hole compared to the methods I was using. The twisted spoke is also pretty nice, and some Brilliant yet simple jig work there as well.

Overall very well done....you did better than I did for sure.

I DID manage to best all commercially available XC wheelsets on weight and it cost me $500 cdn in parts. so would still love to revive this on my bikes.
I have a flanged hub on one of my fatbikes, maybe I'll give it another go with some thicker rope and see how it turns out.


----------



## Mikevdv (Sep 26, 2018)

One other thing I realized with the thicker diameter, you will likely struggle far less with the bury pulling out and elasticity of the material eating into too much of the threaded portions of the nipples. I struggled greatly with this.

2.0mm or greater is definitiely the way to go, stronger, still light, less stress for creep and far far less fussyness

again well done. ,


----------



## ChargeCooker (11 mo ago)

I have been following this thread with great interest for a while, I think I will try making some spokes. Have you seen these wheels by One-K? Their solution for the rim connection looks very neat and I think it would work very well for a Dyneema spoke with an eye splice. It looks like it would not be too difficult to machine out of bar stock. One K Wheels show 930g road wheelset with carbon fiber spoke system


----------



## shirk (Mar 24, 2004)

A couple pics that better show what is going on with these spoke/nipples on the One K system. 


__
http://instagr.am/p/CUxWT3HKjan/


__
http://instagr.am/p/CWBW79Qqe3t/


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

Pretty cool. Investment castings with post machining of the hole and threads? Or they are small enough to maybe be stamped out somehow

Presume they have already worried about and reassured themselves about strands rubbing on screw threads


----------



## ChargeCooker (11 mo ago)

I think those parts are cast titanium with a drilled and tapped hole, I would make more of a groove for the top of the loop to sit in and protect it from the threadded screw but maybe their casting method prevents them from having undercut features.


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

After all the talk earlier why Dyneema is ideal and we shouldn't worry about other fibers, especially not carbon fiber since it would be too stiff and can't tolerate a corner, here it's come around again


----------



## Mikevdv (Sep 26, 2018)

that looks difficult, UHMPE is lighter and stronger than carbon fibers, and DM20 overcomes the creep issues, 

I would see no reason to want to use carbon fibers. 
If anyone has a lead on DM20 in the 1.5mm- 2.0mm range. I'm interested. and could l step up a bit of cash to help with a roll. 

I tired. 
Marlow, 
English braids
Armare

And a few other manufacturers i've contacted aren't carrying anything smaller than 2.5mm 
at that size I have to start drilling hubs and weight benefits are mostly lost. 
1.8mm is ideal


----------



## dzilar (Sep 2, 2020)

Thank you Adam and everyone else sharing their development! I've been messing around with a similar hub attachment method on some straight pull hubs, but have only made it through ~5 rides before failure each time. The new hitch method for J bend hubs seems rock solid, and I have built up one wheel with it so far- I trust it enough that I plan to make 3 more when I have the time. I've using 2mm Robline Ocean Stat20 XG, generic straight spokes that I cut down and attach to the rope (not sure how much detail is okay to share here), and hubs/rims from aliexpress. So far, I haven't had any problems with spoke stretch, or attachment failure at the rim. Only abrasion at the hub, which I believe is solved entirely by using J bend hubs like Adam.

Here are a handful of photos I've captured throughout my journey that others may find helpful:

I've been prepping my hubs using dremel grinding and polishing bits, but it seemed a bit inconsistent and took around an hour per hub. This is a hub that I'm pretty happy with after only 20 minutes, which I "flossed" with Mitchell Abrasives #48 abrasive cord. Useful stuff!










Here's a simple jig that I made to set spoke lengths without having to do math. I set the alignment using an existing wheel, then swap out the hub and rim. Double length spokes are attached to the rim on one side, threaded through the hub, and then attached at the other end. At this point, they cannot be adjusted or removed from the hub. The rim/hub stay mostly concentric, but I try to get a bit of tension on each spoke initially to account for rope stretch, and I have to be a bit clever with the order I build spokes in to maintain concentricity. If you're confident on your spoke lengths, Adam's jig is probably better. I'm far less experienced with wheelbuilding! I use double square nipples and spoke pliers to adjust tension. I've found if I set spoke length to just baaarely engage with the nipple initially with a bit of force, they end up the correct length at tension.











Here's a fun one! Cheap trainer from Craigslist + 2 dial indicators makes a pretty nice truing stand in my opinion! I adjust dish on the bike. Also, you can see in this photo and the last one how I wrapped the rope around the straight pull hub flanges. This method is much less secure than the J bend hitch method, and it's very difficult to smooth out the edges on a straight pull hub compared to a J bend. After a few failed attempts, I tried applying some adhesive at the spoke/hub interfaces, but it was a bit too brittle and didn't last much longer. It seemed worth a try initially to save a bit of weight, but I paid for it in wasted materials.









And here's a photo of the last wheel I built. Right now, I'm at 0:20 for hub prep, 1:00 for spoke end prep, 1:00 to attach the first half of the spoke ends to the ropes, and 1:00 per side to loop the spokes through the hubs and finish the second ends. So 4:20 give or take, not including tensioning. Even with no tension, the hitches are rock solid and don't want to slip when I tug on one side. Impressive!









This is a new one! I haven't had any wear close to this from riding (and some of our trails are quite rocky). I think this happened while transporting the wheel in my trunk, where it got a bit friendly with the disc rotor from another wheel. Still holding tension pretty well though, and would probably be fine to ride for awhile.
Oh well, not too difficult to swap out a single spoke. Something to be mindful of in the future! 

EDIT: Rode through some rocky singletrack this morning, spoke held up. Breakings strength is around 800lbf, and I'd estimate there's still 40% of the fiber intact so it's probably fine. Still going to replace it.










Welllll that was a lot. Hope someone finds it useful.


David


----------



## ChargeCooker (11 mo ago)

dzilar said:


> Thank you Adam and everyone else sharing their development! I've been messing around with a similar hub attachment method on some straight pull hubs, but have only made it through ~5 rides before failure each time.


Did they fail at the hub? It seems the way you laced the straight pull hub put a bend in the rope at the hub; the rope does not pull out straight along the bore axis of the spoke hole, but makes a bend once it exits the hub. Is there a way to lace the wheel so that the rope follows the bore axis of the hub's spoke hole?


----------



## dzilar (Sep 2, 2020)

ChargeCooker said:


> Did they fail at the hub? It seems the way you laced the straight pull hub put a bend in the rope at the hub; the rope does not pull out straight along the bore axis of the spoke hole, but makes a bend once it exits the hub. Is there a way to lace the wheel so that the rope follows the bore axis of the hub's spoke hole?


Yes, failures at the hub. Looping the spokes through the way I initially tried didn't lock them nearly as effectively as the new hitch method, and I suspect that they were able to slip back and forth a bit under high load. (28h, 175lb with gear) The smaller radius of the hub flanges compared to J bend probably also didn't help, and the straight pull counterbores made it much harder to smooth the edges sufficiently.
Didn't try other lacing patterns.


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

dzilar said:


> Thank you Adam and everyone else sharing their development!


A pleasure - and thanks for sharing your ideas too! I've just ordered some of the abrasive cord, that looks very handy.

May I ask where you sourced the Robline cord? I had that on my radar, but not found a decent supply here in the UK yet. I'm about ready to rebuild my rear wheel - issues with the 'double loop' spoke attachment method down at the hub end, meaning a pretty fierce cross, has seen them start to fray. Nothing like in your photo above, but just planning ahead...

Really great to see a few more people tackling this job and enjoying it. Again, thanks for sharing.


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Mikevdv said:


> I tried.
> Marlow,


Which exact Marlow have you used? I've had success with 2mm SK99 D12 Max (pre-stretched with heat, which reduces creep).


----------



## dzilar (Sep 2, 2020)

AdamR83 said:


> A pleasure - and thanks for sharing your ideas too! I've just ordered some of the abrasive cord, that looks very handy.
> 
> May I ask where you sourced the Robline cord? I had that on my radar, but not found a decent supply here in the UK yet. I'm about ready to rebuild my rear wheel - issues with the 'double loop' spoke attachment method down at the hub end, meaning a pretty fierce cross, has seen them start to fray. Nothing like in your photo above, but just planning ahead...
> 
> Really great to see a few more people tackling this job and enjoying it. Again, thanks for sharing.


I got the Robline cord from segelservice. Shipping to the US ended up being around $40, but they gave me a spool discount and I ended up with 100m for around $250 all in. Pricey, but I have really been burning through it so I'm glad I ordered as much as I did.

Just built up a matching rear last night. This time, I used my jig to determine the length of a single spoke pair on each side. I then matched the rest of the spokes to those lengths using my jig, a bit like you showed in your video. This wheel took just over 3 hours not including tensioning, which I think is pretty reasonable. Would be hard to get it done much faster I think.










Are you seeing fraying on most of the spokes, or just a few? With my straight pull hub failures, I'd see one or two spokes start to fray over time, and my tire would quickly get to the point that it started to rub my stays.


----------



## Mikevdv (Sep 26, 2018)

dzilar said:


> I got the Robline cord from segelservice. Shipping to the US ended up being around $40, but they gave me a spool discount and I ended up with 100m for around $250 all in. Pricey, but I have really been burning through it so I'm glad I ordered as much as I did.
> 
> Just built up a matching rear last night. This time, I used my jig to determine the length of a single spoke pair on each side. I then matched the rest of the spokes to those lengths using my jig, a bit like you showed in your video. This wheel took just over 3 hours not including tensioning, which I think is pretty reasonable. Would be hard to get it done much faster I think.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the link....you are my hero


----------



## Mikevdv (Sep 26, 2018)

AdamR83 said:


> Which exact Marlow have you used? I've had success with 2mm SK99 D12 Max (pre-stretched with heat, which reduces creep).


I tried to order their 1.8mm dm20 but they didn't have it. 
So haven't used any Marlow branded products. 

I'm insisting on dm20 because of the graphs below... my failed trials.... and limited success with dm20 8 strand. 
we operate in the 250-300MPa stress range or higher so creep is to be expected in this application









I believe the prestretching helps with the "bedding in" of visoelastic? stretch but SK99 will still creep over time. 
I tried some sk78 which has similar creep properties of SK99 and "something else" that was better than both...but not as good as DM20 I got from speaking with a rope manufacturer. Wasn't happy with the performance of any of them. 










I made 1 or 2 spokes from Dm20 8 strand old kite surfing lines...they held solid tension by comparison to the others but were a bugger to splice, pretty thin diameter (1.5mm), old frayed used up lines.....but I was able to confirm Dm20 works as advertised. 

So proved out my concept and build methods. but not re-attempting until I get my hands on some dm20

Nice to see robline makes it.


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

I've made contact with Justin at Robline UK, and he's agreed to supply me direct. Was fascinated we are using the stuff for spokes!

100m rolls of the Robline Ocean Stat20 XG DM20 in 2mm thickness are in stock, and priced at £65 plus shipping at £12 per consignment.

I'm going to order a roll for myself, but have good shipping links with the US (and the rest of the world) via FedEx if anyone would like a roll too. 48hr shipping to most of the USA would be around £20, for example, so a lot cheaper overall than Segelservice (total cost door to door around US$130).

I'd tried Segelservice but they won't ship to the UK now (thanks, Brexit!) - funny how these things work out sometimes...


----------



## ChargeCooker (11 mo ago)

AdamR83 said:


> I've made contact with Justin at Robline UK, and he's agreed to supply me direct. Was fascinated we are using the stuff for spokes!
> 
> 100m rolls of the Robline Ocean Stat20 XG DM20 in 2mm thickness are in stock, and priced at £65 plus shipping at £12 per consignment.
> 
> ...


I would love to buy a roll, I'm in the UK, how are you wanting to organise this?


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

@ChargeCooker , I've added a custom item to my website for you - figured this is a good 'balance' as it offers some security for you, and makes it easy for me to take payment. Hope that works for you? If not let me know and we'll figure something else out. Cheers!









TartyBikes Charge


Buy TartyBikes Charge as well as a wide range of Workshop and other trials bike products from the world's leading trials bike shop, TartyBikes.




www.tartybikes.co.uk


----------



## Lorence Design (10 mo ago)

Hi, I would love to join in as well. Cool if I order on your website?
I'm a sailboat rigger and racer, and bicycle enthusiast. I have some unique ideas of how to terminate the rope in a lightweight strong and clean way that I would like to experiment with. I'm running Carbon DT Swiss XRC330s for my test wheels. 
Would love to find some straight pull hubs (28 spoke) to test with too if anyone has any suggestions or hand-me-downs, or ones for sale.
Stoked to have found this thread. I've been experimenting now for a while.
Thanks
Ryan



AdamR83 said:


> I've made contact with Justin at Robline UK, and he's agreed to supply me direct. Was fascinated we are using the stuff for spokes!
> 
> 100m rolls of the Robline Ocean Stat20 XG DM20 in 2mm thickness are in stock, and priced at £65 plus shipping at £12 per consignment.
> 
> ...


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Lorence Design said:


> Hi, I would love to join in as well. Cool if I order on your website?


Absolutely Ryan, feel free to go ahead. Glad to hear you've found the info here useful so far, though I am sure everyone will agree it'd be great to have your sailing-related experience added to this thread too!

I'm going to put an order in tomorrow with Justin, anyone who has ordered by that point I'll tag onto the same order. Cheers guys.


----------



## ChargeCooker (11 mo ago)

AdamR83 said:


> @ChargeCooker , I've added a custom item to my website for you - figured this is a good 'balance' as it offers some security for you, and makes it easy for me to take payment. Hope that works for you? If not let me know and we'll figure something else out. Cheers!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I have made an order, thank you very much for all your efforts.


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

A pleasure 

Thank you Tony, Geoffrey and Deniz - I'll give Justin a call now to place the order. As soon as the line lands with me, I'll get it shipped straight out. You will all receive tracking by email (Tony, yours will be from DPD; Geoffrey and Deniz, you'll get an email from FedEx). Any problems, I'll be in touch.

Looking forward to seeing what you all come up with!


----------



## ChargeCooker (11 mo ago)

My plan is to make joined pairs of spokes with finger trap metal ends but have them tension at the hub, it would have to be a straight pull hub. At the rim the string would just loop through pairs of spoke holes (prob non consecutive ones), the spoke holes would need protective eyelets; something like a smoothed out spoke nipple but could be made of plastic since they don't need to hold threads and would only be under compressive loads. Moving the hardware and weight to the hub would make a wheel with a lower moment of inertia.

Check out my latest DIY project, an integrated carbon fibre saddle and seatpost.


----------



## Lorence Design (10 mo ago)

ChargeCooker said:


> My plan is to make joined pairs of spokes with finger trap metal ends but have them tension at the hub, it would have to be a straight pull hub. At the rim the string would just loop through pairs of spoke holes (prob non consecutive ones), the spoke holes would need protective eyelets; something like a smoothed out spoke nipple but could be made of plastic since they don't need to hold threads and would only be under comperssive loads. Moving the hardware and wieght to the hub would make a wheel with a lower moment of inertia.


My thoughts exactly. Removing all metal from the rim, and tensioning at the hub would make the most gains, a task which NONE of the major brands I have seen yet even attempt. What is the point if you're not shooting for the moon?



AdamR83 said:


> A pleasure
> 
> Thank you Tony, Geoffrey and Deniz - I'll give Justin a call now to place the order. As soon as the line lands with me, I'll get it shipped straight out. You will all receive tracking by email (Tony, yours will be from DPD; Geoffrey and Deniz, you'll get an email from FedEx). Any problems, I'll be in touch.
> 
> Looking forward to seeing what you all come up with!


Looks like I missed the boat on this order, but I will stay in touch and probably try to pick some Robline up in the next week or two (or whenever you get another group order). I am experimenting with the Mastrant now, but somewhere in their specifications, they say the core is braided. I'm sure if I had done some more reading in this thread I would have seen that it was UNI instead. It makes life harder, but not impossible. I'm going to do some experiments to failure with this stuff and see if I can find a reliable way to create loops.

Adam, Thanks for helping facilitate this group finding the right stuff to continue experimenting. I envision a kit where a DIYer could cut all his own spokes from a length of this dm-20 and reliably create spoke-ends wherever they wish with a simple locking device I'm working on. NOT pay $8 per spoke and never be able to repair your own. The major problem I have yet to solve is: How to tension at the hub when you don't have straight-pull hubs. I don't want to end up in a niche where you need straight pull hubs to use my spokes.


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Just a quick message for now... @Lorence Design , I've made more available for you. Not had the proforma from Justin yet, so I'm sure I can tag another roll on. Thanks!


----------



## wschruba (Apr 13, 2012)

Lorence Design said:


> My thoughts exactly. Removing all metal from the rim, and tensioning at the hub would make the most gains, a task which NONE of the major brands I have seen yet even attempt. What is the point if you're not shooting for the moon?


Shimano (and others) abandoned this in the 90s. They are a pain to tension/true--the right side nipples are largely inaccessible when a cassette is installed, and for a disc brake hub, you'll likely have the same issue on the left side. I9 'fixed' this with the long aluminum spokes that have traditional flats on them up near the rim.

I would be curious if two 90 degree turns (through the spoke holes on the rim) would be enough to allow you to individually tension either end. I would suspect not--you usually need a tight bend (the same way music wire is tensioned individually) or a friction-increasing transition, like @AdamR83 did on the red hubs. It may not be necessary, per se, but it would require that you have a dead straight/round rim to begin with. Mavic had a version of the Cosmic that had carbon fiber 'spaghetti' spokes that were double-ended and performed the function of two spokes each. They were captured in the hub plate, though.


----------



## ChargeCooker (11 mo ago)

wschruba said:


> I would be curious if two 90 degree turns (through the spoke holes on the rim) would be enough to allow you to individually tension either end. I would suspect not--you usually need a tight bend (the same way music wire is tensioned individually)


I have been thinking about this issue too and suspect a loop or two would be needed either like this crude drawing or at 90 degrees wrapped like the threads on a screw.








However, I see your point about pairing the spokes up causing trouble with the radial truing of the rim, maybe I could modify the above crude drawing idea to just being a spliced eyelet of a singular spoke.


----------



## Mikevdv (Sep 26, 2018)

For the people in US and Canada, Robline is available at most marine supply stores. West marine etc.... It'll be a custom order but I managed to find a marine store to get me some. It's on it's way and so this project is revived for me. 

@AdamR83 If you talk to robline, let them know that the 1.5-1.8mm diameter (12 strand) would be ideal it allows you to pull your eye splice through spoke holes rather than make them on the bike. it's also lighter yet still has plenty of strength. 

Robline is a subsidiary of teufleburger(sic?) (didn't even try)
who are the premier maker of kitesurfing lines in the 1.5-2.0mm diameter so they have the machinery to do this. 

Also if you can get them in white pleasing the gods of matchy match is a multicoloured pack of sharpie markers away.


----------



## Mikevdv (Sep 26, 2018)

@Lorence Design If using mastrand that is sleeved, alot of knots can likey be used on sleeved line as the inner core isn't as stressed or subject to melting from friction tightening once a sleeve is in place. I've had good luck with a product known as Q power-line (a sleeved UHMPE uni) in strength tests with figure 8 knots making looped ends. But this would be dependent on the sleeve quality and diameter 

Sewing can also work, even better if the loop is attached to the other part in a way where friction of the joint takes most of the load of instead of the stitching. (making a larks head knot for example) 

This is how I started this project was just gunna make a stopper knot on a straight pull spoke and then tie it off to a bent spoke end with a larks head. 
That almost worked....


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

AdamR83 said:


> Just a quick message for now... @Lorence Design , I've made more available for you. Not had the proforma from Justin yet, so I'm sure I can tag another roll on. Thanks!


Order now confirmed and paid for. Will post up when the rolls are shipping out.

That's great info Mike, thanks for sharing! Justin at Robline UK did actually mention the waffleburger (yeah I'm not gonna try either) when I was chatting to him. I decided on 2mm for a 'safety factor' in the areas which see rubbing, but if there is enough appetite for smaller stuff I'll happily ask the question.


----------



## Lorence Design (10 mo ago)

wschruba said:


> Shimano (and others) abandoned this in the 90s. They are a pain to tension/true--the right side nipples are largely inaccessible when a cassette is installed, and for a disc brake hub, you'll likely have the same issue on the left side. I9 'fixed' this with the long aluminum spokes that have traditional flats on them up near the rim.


Good point, I have read about this, but I plan to use different hardware adjusted from a different angle, which may ease this trouble.


----------



## Lorence Design (10 mo ago)

AdamR83 said:


> Order now confirmed and paid for. Will post up when the rolls are shipping out.
> 
> That's great info Mike, thanks for sharing! Justin at Robline UK did actually mention the waffleburger (yeah I'm not gonna try either) when I was chatting to him. I decided on 2mm for a 'safety factor' in the areas which see rubbing, but if there is enough appetite for smaller stuff I'll happily ask the question.


Adam, Thanks again for checking in with me. Been away from the computer all weekend and missed your message. I'll be lingering more often as I start some experiments and post some results. I still have some other problems to solve and parts to prototype before I need the robline in hand for a test-build.


----------



## Mikevdv (Sep 26, 2018)

@AdamR83 If you are concerned about rubbing, On my kitesurfing lines, (same ropes/material) In areas prone to friction chafe, I have soaked them in melted paraffin wax (dripped on) and Extended the life from about 4 months of use to well over 2 years. some of that is due to decreased sand accumulation but that scenario is valid in mtb applications as well. Might be worth a try, I wouldn't do it under tension as there is risk of creep and or it won't penetrate much. This may (or may not help) but I was getting frustrated changing kite lines so often and this 100% stopped it.


----------



## ChargeCooker (11 mo ago)

It might be worth investigating wax emulsions to see if you can get tha same benefit, without the heat problems of metled wax. Wax emulsions are water based liquids with microscopic wax particles; when the water evaporates, the dry wax is left behind. It is sold as dry wax lube for bike chains, I use one called "Squirt chain lube". The chain lube type might be too soft for this purpose, other formulations of harder wax might be better.

Alternatively, the plastic liner of brake housing might be good as aprotective sleeve for chafing areas.


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

@Lorence Design - you're welcome! I've tagged your extra roll onto the order.

@Mikevdv and @ChargeCooker - this is brilliant info, thank you. I actually use Squirt / Smoove as chain lube, and it does go fairly hard. I think either way, preventing dirt getting into the fibres _and _adding a barrier to prevent cord to cord contact can only be a good thing. I spoke with Justin about this, and he recommended a separate external sheath as a sacrificial part - said he would send me some overbraid to try out. I'll report back on that one.

On a similar note, here's some photos I've been meaning to post up for a while. This seems a good a time as any!

I recently noticed spoke tension had dropped a small amount... I am unsure exactly why, but I think it's due to abrasion at the spoke crossing and also where I've done the 'crossed eyelets' down at the flange. As mentioned up above, I'm hoping the hitch method at the hub will solve the second one...

Due to the above, along with adding further tension and not quite making the spokes the right length to start with, I had to shorten a couple of spokes in the rear wheel as the spoke was very close to the rim tape:










Which gave me chance to inspect the cord. The fibres were full of very fine gritty particles (the clean bit has been pulled out from a bury, for comparison).










And I think this gritty-ness has sped up the wear process:










Another thing to mention - I've bought two separate batches of Marlow SK99 D12 MAX, and they felt rather different. For the wheels on the above bike, I had used the first batch, of which the cord is a lighter colour, less stiff, less waxy, more slippery and a slightly larger diameter (around 0.2mm). The wheel I built for Ali Clarkson (red I9 front hub) used the second batch, with opposing characteristics.

I am wondering if there has been a mix up in supply, and I have been sent standard SK99 initially - the heating, pre-stretching and other 'treatment' would account for the change in feel / characteristics of the second batch...

Either way - I'm looking forward to giving the Robline a try with a new lacing method.


I've dropped some Smoove on a bit of cord to see how it works. If you 'open up' the fibres first by pushing the cord together and wiggling a bit, it will wick in nicely. Pulling the cord taut will then make it 'splurge' back out again and sit on top. So I'll leave this to harden and see how it feels.

Looks like paraffin wax has a melting point of somewhere between 45 and 65'C, so it should be 'safe' for UHMWPE - though quite a lot more messy than a bottle of Squirt / Smoove!










Great to share ideas and solutions with you, chaps!


----------



## ChargeCooker (11 mo ago)

AdamR83 said:


> Great to share ideas and solutions with you, chaps!


It's good bouncing ideas around, I have learned lots from you all.

I think you will have to let the smoove dry under tension to squeeze as much out as possible, otherwise I think it will cause huge problems tensioning the line with swollen fibres. I wonder how much weight it adds to the line, too much and it defeats the whole purpose of using UHMWPE. Maybe it would be better to apply a sealing coat of some kind of aerosol spray as a surface treatment to a newly built wheel to stop the ingress of dirt.


----------



## shirk (Mar 24, 2004)

Adam you should see an order for a spool of the Robline from Canada. That's me. Hopefully I can tag in on the order. If not we can chat via email.


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Thanks - yep all come through, and it was yours that I tagged on yesterday


----------



## shirk (Mar 24, 2004)

Awesome.


----------



## Vogelfrei (11 mo ago)

dzilar said:


> 1:00 for spoke end prep, 1:00 to attach the first half of the spoke


Thank you David for your photos! I'm starting this weekend and I'm wondering how to attach the first half of the spoke. Seems like you glued the spoke inside the rope (well I got to that idea and cannot understand if you did the same). Will it be better to: 1) insert the spoke from the rope's end and than apply glue from the outside? 2) insert spoke from the rope's end with preapplied glue or find a way to squeeze glue inside before inserting thw spoke 3) cut a bit of the inside of the rope before inserting the spoke? 4) insert the spoke about 4cm before the rope's end and than push the spoke from inside to the rope's end till right protruding di lenght?

Thank you for your kid help. I'm building a Unicycle wheel so if the project will go right I'll test it with 2xforces than a normal bicycle setup.


----------



## dzilar (Sep 2, 2020)

I like Bob Smith Insta-Flex Thin CA. They don't supply adequate data sheets as far as I can tell, but I did enough testing to trust it with a 50mm bond length for my purposes. This adhesive has a low enough viscosity to wick into joints quite well. I wrote up a step-by-step of some bonding techniques I have developed that I am more than happy to share, but I'm not sure I can post it here unfortunately.


----------



## Vogelfrei (11 mo ago)

dzilar said:


> I like Bob Smith Insta-Flex Thin CA. They don't supply adequate data sheets as far as I can tell, but I did enough testing to trust it with a 50mm bond length for my purposes. This adhesive has a low enough viscosity to wick into joints quite well. I wrote up a step-by-step of some bonding techniques I have developed that I am more than happy to share, but I'm not sure I can post it here unfortunately.


Would you pm it to me? I'm a new user here so cannot pm you (or don't know how)


----------



## ChargeCooker (11 mo ago)

@dzilar I'd like to get a copy of your guide too, please.


----------



## Bovelius (10 mo ago)

ChargeCooker said:


> @dzilar I'd like to get a copy of your guide too, please.


I would be very grateful for a copy, new in the forum's so can't pm.


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Also keen to see your method if you are happy to share, thanks @dzilar !

Those who are awaiting the Robline, I'm sorry this is taking longer than expected. I confirmed it was in stock at the time of ordering, but it seems that meant in stock at Robline Europe, not Robline UK 









So hopefully everything will get to me Wednesday at the latest. I am on holiday from Wednesday afternoon, but the other guys here know the score and will ship out if I'm gone before the parcel arrives. Thanks for your patience.


----------



## Vogelfrei (11 mo ago)

AdamR83 said:


> Also keen to see your method if you are happy to share, thanks.


I wish I could help, but I'm a new user so cannot start writing to anyone 🤗


----------



## Mikevdv (Sep 26, 2018)

@dzlillar 
How do you true/tighten it without twisting the spoke? 

I like the simplicity of a straight section of spoke. Would be less fussy than theading/bending/welding spoke ends that I'm currently doing. I spun a couple till failure playing with the concept and concluded it would need a custom flat or something for me to proceed further. 


@AdamR83 regarding your spoke loosening could be creep could be slipping of the bury.... as I proceed further on this they recommend 71 x diameter for a secure bury. This isn't really possible if using an eye splice on each end and 2mm rope so some gluing or lockstitch is likely needed and efficient from a weight perspective. It's considered a religious crime not to lock stich your buries in the kitesurfing world. 

My previous trials I had considerable slipping across all materials when ridden hard despite the longest buries possible. until I lock stitched all the buries. Another Fussy labour operation to consider but only required 4 or 5 stitches and it no longer slipped. Some materials were better than others and the 2.0mm Robline has a good hold but I'm not going to risk it on my attempts to get a reliable build.


----------



## dzilar (Sep 2, 2020)

I hold the spokes with a set of spoke pliers from Unior. They're a bit finicky, but I haven't found a better option using cheap straight pull spokes.

Wheel update: have somewhere between six and eight rides now, wheels are still true and spokes look to be holding up just fine. Minor tension variations, probably from the rope settling in. Not worried about it, but planning to take the tires off and touch up the tension soon.

EDIT: That Hozan 4th hand tool looks so much better, definitely picking one up. Thanks wschruba


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

AdamR83 said:


> So hopefully everything will get to me Wednesday at the latest. I am on holiday from Wednesday afternoon, but the other guys here know the score and will ship out if I'm gone before the parcel arrives. Thanks for your patience.


Delivery company have apparently messed up - looks like the delivery will get here on Thursday now. I'll get everything as ready as I can to make posting out easy for the guys here in my absence. Again, apologies for this taking longer than expected!


----------



## wschruba (Apr 13, 2012)

Mikevdv said:


> @dzlillar
> How do you true/tighten it without twisting the spoke?
> 
> I like the simplicity of a straight section of spoke. Would be less fussy than theading/bending/welding spoke ends that I'm currently doing. I spun a couple till failure playing with the concept and concluded it would need a custom flat or something for me to proceed further.
> ...





dzilar said:


> I hold the spokes with a set of spoke pliers from Unior. They're a bit finicky, but I haven't found a better option using cheap straight pull spokes.
> 
> Wheel update: have somewhere between six and eight rides now, wheels are still true and spokes look to be holding up just fine. Minor tension variations, probably from the rope settling in. Not worried about it, but planning to take the tires off and touch up the tension soon.


I don't know if the Competition Twist Resist is still available, but it's easy to fabricate from a Hozan 4th hand (or other brands, but the Hozan winds up being the most ergonomic). They do just fine grabbing onto round spokes, too, for what it's worth.


----------



## Mikevdv (Sep 26, 2018)

wschruba said:


> I don't know if the Competition Twist Resist is still available, but it's easy to fabricate from a Hozan 4th hand (or other brands, but the Hozan winds up being the most ergonomic). They do just fine grabbing onto round spokes, too, for what it's worth.


That will do sir!

Damn this thread is like the 1st net effective application of "group think" I've ever encountered.
any normal people can't be bothered to nerd out on spokes, which has filtered this group to only the hardcore. 


My progress: Spokes average about 2.5g target wheel weight 1140g










My first first trial: 691 g rear wheel straigtht pull spokes


----------



## dundundata (May 15, 2009)

Mikevdv said:


> That will do sir!
> 
> Damn this thread is like the 1st net effective application of "group think" I've ever encountered.
> any normal people can't be bothered to nerd out on spokes, which has filtered this group to only the hardcore.


I've been reading through some of this thread even if you're all a little nuts 😉


----------



## opcolu (10 mo ago)

Just finished reading this entire thread all the way through, and I gotta say... you guys are absolute legends. From Okashira's contributions and eyelet ideas through the first half of the thread, to the later builds and research from AdamR83, Mikevdv and others. The looped/hitched 2-spoke hub attachment is absolutely inspired, and once you see it, it seems so obvious, but everyone else missed it before it was posted here. My genuine appreciation for all the work, effort, info, and sharing on here.

Needless to say, I want in! I've built close to 100 wheels at this point, have all the gear needed, and have a penchant for weight weenie wheelsets for mountain and road. I'd like to approach this from a shamelessly weight biased angle, and as much as I love the spiral-soldered spoke technique, it sure is a heavy way to do things. This brings me to a few questions:

1. Adam: any chance you could enquire about 1.5mm or 1.8mm DM20 cord from your contact at Robline/Teufelberger? What's the minimum order for a custom braided cord size? Would enough people be interested in this to go in on it with me?

2. Whatever happened to the 2mm threaded eyelet concept that Okashira and Sissypants were looking into? M2 eyelet bolts are pretty common, and it seems like a modification to only the thread would get you to where you needed to be. A supplier could even sell un-threaded versions and we could roll our own threads in them. This seems like the lightest possible solution even if it's made from 302 stainless. Ti sounds like fun, but I get the feeling aluminum nipples would gall with the Ti, requiring the use of brass nipples which negates any weight saved from the small Ti eyelet.











3. A combination of 1.5mm cord, the loop/hitch technique at the hub, and small 25-30mm eyelet bolt with a single 75mm (50x1.5mm) bury on each end would almost certainly be the lightest per-spoke weight I have ever seen by a large margin (0.9g per eyelet + 0.53g DM20 = 1.43g per spoke). Would there be sufficient interest to place a large quantity order for eyelets and 1.8mm or 1.5mm cord and then distribute it as a kit perhaps along with the radius cutting tool and anything else required?

It seems like the eyelets and single bury per spoke would get the labor, complexity and time down to a very reasonable amount, along with the weight and cost. We just need to numbers to make it happen.

What do you guys think?

Regards,
Owen


----------



## Mikevdv (Sep 26, 2018)

@opcolu 

I've found "should work" and "actually works" are 2 very different concepts in the wild. 
Surviving in the wild is the ultimate goal here, I've put about 500kms on a "should work" concept and it went to crap in so many ways. 
Some predictable others not so much. 
A good design process always goes like this for me. 

Come up with brilliant idea, 

Test the physics of the concept. 
Proclaim "this is totally gunna work!" 
Build functional prototype, Test in real world. 
fail in some unexpected manner. 
Build better prototype 
Fail better
Repeat. 

I'm still in this cycle so not considering investing much yet at this point. 
But I do agree 

1) 1.8mm dm20 
2) a pre-threaded eyebolt with a cm or two of extra thread to accommodate rope stretch. 
3) A reasonable cost hand held rapid eye splicing tool that works on the 1.8mm rope diameter 
(knitting spokes with welding wire is stupidly fussy)

put those 3 together and you can pretty much throw away stainless spokes.
If the spoke concept works ( it's totally gunna work!) 


1) just needs a batch load 1000m-10,000m investment from most inquires I've made with rope manufacturers. 
2) a few alibaba contacts and you'll have this. but nothing exists commercially so it'll come at a cost. 
3) I hereby issue this challenge to the creative members of this forum!.


----------



## shirk (Mar 24, 2004)

opcolu said:


> 2. Whatever happened to the 2mm threaded eyelet concept that Okashira and Sissypants were looking into? M2 eyelet bolts are pretty common, and it seems like a modification to only the thread would get you to where you needed to be. A supplier could even sell un-threaded versions and we could roll our own threads in them. This seems like the lightest possible solution even if it's made from 302 stainless. Ti sounds like fun, but I get the feeling aluminum nipples would gall with the Ti, requiring the use of brass nipples which negates any weight saved from the small Ti eyelet.
> 
> View attachment 1976025


What was the idea to make an M2 thread match the M2.2 rolled thread on a spoke? Just run the M2 bolt through a thread roller die? 

Would something like the Sapiam Self Locking thread hold on an M2 eye bolt? These have a deformed thread, I wonder if they would lock secure to the M2 thread.


----------



## shirk (Mar 24, 2004)

Mikevdv said:


> 3) A reasonable cost hand held rapid eye splicing tool that works on the 1.8mm rope diameter
> (knitting spokes with welding wire is stupidly fussy)


F-10 D Splicer? 









D-SPLICER fixed


The D-SPLICER fixed is available as a single needle with a fixed handle and comes in 4 sizes. The needles can not be replaced. Needle φ Rope φ in mm Rope φ in inches F10 1 mm 0-2 mm 0- 5/64 F15 1.5…




d-splicer.com


----------



## opcolu (10 mo ago)

Mikevdv said:


> @opcolu
> 
> I've found "should work" and "actually works" are 2 very different concepts in the wild.
> Surviving in the wild is the ultimate goal here, I've put about 500kms on a "should work" concept and it went to crap in so many ways.
> ...


Hi Mike,

I 100% agree... the concept isn't exactly mass production ready, but it's also moving pretty quickly in the right direction. I should make it clear that I have no ambition to commercialize any of this... it's likely that "rope spokes" will remain in the fringes of the nerd wheelbuilding world, especailly anything looking like a DIY kit. This is purely for the purposes of getting kits onto people's hands at a reasonable cost where they aren't scouring the net for obscure knitting tools and spools of performance rigging rope they aren't familiar with.

This appeals to me for its weight, potentail low cost (compared to $6 Sapim CX Super Spokes), and ease of adaptibility to any wheel size, shape, or lacing pattern. I don't stock spokes, so ordering the correct spokes for every wheel I build is probably the most time consuming and frustrating part of any wheel build I do. This makes that a thing of the past (albeit with more labour!)

Question for you: why 1.8mm over 1.5mm? Have you tried both? Does the 1.5 creep more? Is it more of a pain to work with? Maybe 1.5mm is better suited for road builds where 1.8mm would be best for XC? If you can share any experience here I would appreciate it.



shirk said:


> What was the idea to make an M2 thread match the M2.2 rolled thread on a spoke? Just run the M2 bolt through a thread roller die?
> 
> Would something like the Sapiam Self Locking thread hold on an M2 eye bolt? These have a deformed thread, I wonder if they would lock secure to the M2 thread.


I'd rather not take risks with the threaded portion so any solution would need to have the proper M2.2 x 0.45 thread pattern. My understanding is that this is achieved by rolling the threads into a 2mm diameter steel rod (spoke), which crushes the threads partway in and forces material outwards as well resulting in a net M2.2 thread from an original 2.0mm diameter. A realiable wheel needs to be able to be trued and re-built if needed, and iffy spoke threading will make that difficult.

I reached out to half a dozen suppliers on AliExpress, so I'll see what they say. One alerady replied and actually understood the request clearly, but had an MOQ of 500kg which is a non-starter since that's half a million spoke heads that may not even work 

I have attached the drawing I provided to those vendors in case anyone knows someone who might be able to make these parts. They pretty much need to be forged to get that shape, or I suppose could be 3D printed for a smaller production run. Cast parts won't be strong enough and will fatigue and crack. Threads should be rolled, not cut (they usually are at this size anyhow)

I'll keep everyone posted on what I hear.



shirk said:


> F-10 D Splicer?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


This looks perfect! I'll add it to the kit list.

Cheers,
Owen


----------



## wschruba (Apr 13, 2012)

I believe that someone further upstream did investigate the eyebolts with similar results. Prohibitively expensive for something that simply may not work.

May be better to work backwards from McMaster Carr--find the manufacturer, contact directly, purchase "half finished" eyebolts. I suspect (with no engineering training) that the eye would shear off where it transitions to the threaded portion. Spokes are prone to breakage from fatigue at the elbow, and it's a much more gradual transition.

I wonder (and have no time to investigate) if simple (rolled) threaded wire would survive as a bury better than trying to use adhesive/excessively long splices. With a suitable axle, the Hozan threading tool can roll ~4cm worth of threads. Of course, that's right back to the issue of how to prevent the end of the cord from fraying around the bury. Spoke threads are a weak point, even rolled. 13 gauge wire might be used instead, but the holes in the rim may need to be enlarged for 13 gauge nipples. Also difficult to find any material other than brass for 13g nipples.


----------



## ChargeCooker (11 mo ago)

My Robline from @AdamR83 was delivered today. 100 metres plus spool is 337g


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Been away for a few days and missed a lot! Great to see some further progress.

@ChargeCooker - glad your line got to you safely. I hope everyone else has either had theirs by now or at least has tracking? Please let me know if not.

I will ask about 1.5mm and 1.8mm line - if a positive response, will let you know @opcolu 


Having thought about this whole project a bit more, and spent some time on other bikes without 'rope spokes', for me the main benefit is the ride feel (eg. weight is less of a factor).


----------



## opcolu (10 mo ago)

AdamR83 said:


> Been away for a few days and missed a lot! Great to see some further progress.
> 
> @ChargeCooker - glad your line got to you safely. I hope everyone else has either had theirs by now or at least has tracking? Please let me know if not.
> 
> ...


Hi Adam,

Thanks for looking into the 1.5-1.8mm rope from Robline. I actually got a response from Marlow and I'm working through a quote now. The rep there confirmed that the smallest they could manufacture with DM20 and 12-braid was 1.8mm, so asked her for a quote on that. I hope to hear back today with pricing and MOQ.

For the rest of the gang:

I made some good progress with the spoke eyelets. I have three separate manufacturers that provided proper quotes and it actually looks pretty reasonable. I'll detail these out below and perhaps folks here can provide feedback.

Quote 1: PDM Industries - 64 cents per piece for 1000 pieces. 39 cents a piece for 5000. Shipping is extra. Eyelet bolts will be exactly per the drawing but the inner radius will be smaller as per the picture. I guess this is how they manufacture standard eyelets, and making any changes here requires custom tooling which drives the costs way up. See quote attached.

Quote 2: SHH - 59 cents for 1000 pieces with the option to buy 5 pieces for testing. Given the high cost of shipping 5 pieces, and their refusal to provide any more than 5 pieces for a sample, I would just opt for the 1000 pieces. See quote attached.

Quote 3: JM-Fastener didn't provide a quote yet, but is looking into the possibility of spot welding a slightly different eyelet style that would look a bit like this, except with the end folded over and spot welded:










I personally think the first two option are a lot more practical, and given they are forged parts, I think they would be much stronger and less likely to fail than a spot weld. I get the feeling the spot welded option will be quite a bit cheaper, but 39 cents a piece for the forged parts is already incredibly low cost.

If these work, you'd be looking at a total spoke cost that is lower than even the cheapest straight-gage spokes, and probably only about twice the labor of a standard wheel build.

Anyone here interested in going in on this with me? I'm happy to build up a few wheelsets for longer-term testing, but that's only like 112 of the 1000 parts. It would be great to split up costs and get more people testing. Keep in mind that this is by no means a guaranteed success, and you might end up with eyelets that fail either immediately or after some period of use. Only building and testing some wheels will tell (or testing then on a test jig).

Any feedback would be well appreciated!

Cheers,
Owen


----------



## shirk (Mar 24, 2004)

I would certainly commit to taking taking 2-3 wheelsets worth off your hands. The forged version should be the stronger option vs welded.

My Robline showed up this week from the UK to Vancouver no issues.


----------



## Mikevdv (Sep 26, 2018)

@opcolu I'm in for 2 hundred bucks worth.... more if someone tries them first and says they work.

@shirk if you need more robline try fogh marine in Toronto...call and ask for cam....he's the rope guy,
Won't have it in stock but might be able to get you some from the distributor.


----------



## SB Trails (Sep 14, 2012)

Owen..good job..this is moving in the right direction for sure... count me in for a 75 pieces..
If i had my pick--- it would be for the forged..


----------



## Mikevdv (Sep 26, 2018)

@opcolu I'm a little concerned you might have gotten the the thread a little off by not using "freedom units". 
spokes are measured by "gauge" so assume they are non metric?
from limited research spokes I believe are a #2-56tpi? At least that's what my hozan spoke threader indicated.

It's close so maybe it's all interchangable but for such small thread sizes it might matter.

Anyways I'm not certain but worth verifying before ordering for sure.


----------



## wschruba (Apr 13, 2012)

@AdamR83 if you've any more rolls of the D20, I'd be willing to buy in.

As for the eyelets, I'd go in for ~150 of them.

@Mikevdv yes, spokes are technically wire gauge/imperial. That said, I'm reasonably certain that the threading can be expressed as a metric function. I'd need to find my loupe and compare it to ISO threading.


----------



## Mikevdv (Sep 26, 2018)

Trying to understand what we are doing to wheel strength with rope spokes I did some research
basically trying to avoid this










I found a really interesting paper on wheel strength against buckling.
I feel other than direct rim rock impacts which it believe rim sidewall hook strength often dominate. 
tacos caused by buckling is the dominant wheel failure modes and is something a flexible spoke could have negative consequences for .



What I took from this

From a wheel buckling perspective. (taco'd or localized warping )
1) Tighter spokes are stronger . 
2) More spokes are stronger .
3) More flexible spokes are mildly stronger (EsAs)^-0.25
4) Stiffer rim is mildly stronger (EI)^0.25

So how that translates into a wheel build...

Dm20 with a modulus of ~90GPa vs steel ~200-300 gPA the rope spokes are more flexible for the same diameter. should make for better buckling resistance

Thinking practically it requires more rim distortion before the structure becomes unsupported and prone to buckling failure and as that distortion occurs more spokes get involved in the support. Jobst Brandt says something similar

Thinner spokes also present little increased buckling risk however we are getting to the areas beyond what would be considered "safe working loads" for these materials. (measured at 20% of the breaking strength) so rope failure becomes increasingly likey as diameter decreases and tension increases and things slowly degrade. 

The dm20 2.0mm at 400kg break strength has a margin I'm comfortable with and I'll tighten my spokes at or near max tension and likely get a lighter stronger cheaper wheel.....


----------



## dundundata (May 15, 2009)

I certainly couldn't output his kind of power.


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

dundundata said:


> I certainly couldn't output his kind of power.


Has power got anything to do with that one? It's not front wheel drive.
Extreme lateral loads on a deep dish rim?


----------



## dundundata (May 15, 2009)

I imagine the speed he's doing and cranking on the bars has some effect, it's moving and taking abuse too.


----------



## mjdelay21 (11 mo ago)

Hey all, just found a supplier of very cheap, small Technora cords with black polyethylene coating on the fibers.






Braided Technora® 950 - Spools (BLACK) | Twinline, LLC


Available Lengths: 250 ftCharacteristics:Black braided Technora® 950 Lb. (minimum tensile strength). Black solution or doped dyed yarns are manufactured...



estore.twinline-usa.com




they sell 250 feet for $49 plus shipping for the 950, which is equivalent strength to the robline DM20 that is popular on this thread.
they carry a 400, 600, 950 and 1200lb rated technora 12 bundle round braid.

Technora is a more uv resistant para aramid (similar to kevlar).
This opens up the options of using different diameter lines to get various spoke stiffnesses. Or for true weight weenies, you could use the 400lb test line for a very lightweight build indeed.

Did some research on creep, and it seems to be near identical to kevlar or about an order of magnitude better than DM20.
UV resistance is acceptable, with a 25% strength loss after the equivalent of a full year of exposure to direct sunlight from a single fiber, and this should be much better with the coating and carbon black shielding most fibers from most of the UV.
Technora should be significantly more abrasion resistant and have less sensitivity to detensioning cycles than DM20, and is a little bit stretchier (~4.6% elongation at failure versus DM20 at around 3%). 
It can tolerate temperatures up to 500C without melting, and retains its strength well up to around 200C.

TLDR: SHINY NEW CHEAP ROPE that might eventually snap if you leave it alone in death valley for 10 years. BUT can be cast into basically any other polymer including things like PEEK. Also it might not get as messed up by brake rotors or sticks.


----------



## CamW (Apr 15, 2012)

While interesting you seem to have neglected modulus/stiffness. It appears to be nearly half of that of DM20.


----------



## Mikevdv (Sep 26, 2018)

Although low modulus of spokes is actually beneficial in wheel strength there becomes a practical limit with conventional spoke nipples and thead Where you run out of thread or space trying to create tension as the spoke stretches. As it stands on 2mm dm20. I find I’m already doubling the thread length of my spoklets and have to pull hard in the spokes and engage them under tension in order to have some usable space left after the wheel is adjusted and. tensioned. Basically I’m already at the limit where it becomes cumbersome and difficult to build a good wheel I wouldn’t want to go with lower modulus

An update on my dm20 wheels:
Wheels are light 615g for the rear getting the bugs worked out before doing the front








They are fast…as other mentioned I’m pretty sure I feel some compliance from them and feel it’s advantageous in super rocky terrain. PRs have been set on some ugly stuff. 

They are staying tight…..beyond basic settling they are measurably holding tension better than other uhmpe fabrics I’ve tried dm20 working as advertised

they are holding up(ish). After a few progressive huck to flats to make sure they were safe I’ve been beating the living hell out of them finding the worst rockiest nastiest trails to ride them on nothing catastrophic has occured

I’ve had issues with the spokes fraying and eventually breaking at the eye splice to the hub. Something I believe is entirely my fault and solvable.. I did not prep the hub properly although I sanded it using rope sanding string I did not pay much attention to the angle the spoke would be pulling exiting the hub and therefore did a spotty job where it was needed most















I’ve put about 100km of savage use on these wheels broken 2 and frayed about 8 spokes all in the same failure mode with no repeats after re prepping the hubs. This failure only occurs when riding the most bone jarring trails….stuff that’s >10km of “hike a bike” for most people and has an enormous cycle count and amplitude of impacts.... these have also resulted in multiple other failures on my bike. tires cuts... pedals smashed, CSU creaks, bottom bracket creaks and carbon crank inserts coming loose.....ya know, the normal stuff.. ;o)
But that's mountain biking. 

“Normal” trails have not caused any failures.

regarding modulus here is a video demonstrating why flexible is beneficial






this situation is readily predicated by a finite element analysis


----------



## CamW (Apr 15, 2012)

Intriguing.The failure mode in that video doesn't appear to happen in practice with modern, well built wheels, so it's not something I'd be concerned about. 

I guess as long as you have "enough" spoke stiffness you'll be fine and going higher beyond that isn't necessarily better. However you define "enough" is probably tricky though. DM20 seems to have enough stiffness. I'd be concerned about the Technora listed above venturing well below that "enough" line though.


----------



## mjdelay21 (11 mo ago)

CamW said:


> While interesting you seem to have neglected modulus/stiffness. It appears to be nearly half of that of DM20.


I was not neglecting it, but rather trying to improve strength with reduced weight by increasing stretch, I had not looked at lateral stiffness or stretch length requirements before that post, but have done a lot of modeling work since. 

@CamW:
You are spot on that it is difficult to determine what "enough" spoke stiffness is, but for me what I settled on was that at the very least a spoke should be stiff enough that it will fail at or slightly before the point where the rim fails. Turns out the easiest way to make the rim fail is lateral buckling or taco-ing. I characterized my carbon rim stiffness using their resonant frequencies, and used this plus the expected failure strain of T700 to determine how far the rim can flex in its first lateral bending mode before it snaps. Turns out the thin Technora is in fact "too stretchy" for structural reasons, regardless of any practical wheelbuilding limitations, as the rim can snap before the spokes get anywhere close to breaking.
The thicker Technora is probably just barely stiff enough, as it is reaching its maximum load right before the rim fails. 


@Mikevdv: I agree that on a nearly full length DM20 spoke, the stretch of the Technora would be too large. I am building slightly differently than most people here, with an emphasis on reliability and damping characteristics using straight pull hubs. My interest was in getting the same amount of stretch out of a shorter length of rope, as with my construction method the unbonded, non steel length of the spoke that does the stretching is only around 160mm, whereas you are probably working in the 240mm range. The thicker Technora spokes are 60% as stiff, and I am using 66% of the length, so this seems about right to me.

My current build method of choice is to drill out the hole in a straight pull hub to a large enough diameter that I can fit an adhesively bonded spoke made with 2mm DM20 or Technora and a double or triple butted spoke through it. The spoke has its middle section cut out and replaced with rope. This lets me build without any splicing at nearly 100% strength retention on my ropes, and avoid any sliding contact between rope and metal, giving significantly better abrasion and weathering resistance for a given spoke stiffness and size. There is a small weight penalty for the extra length of steel, but it is mostly inboard weight, and could be offset by using a lighter weight cord (such as the Technora).

I have also been working on balancing the lateral stiffness on the drive side and non drive side spokes by changing the length of the bonded section of spoke on the head side, so that the wheel bends symmetrically when cornering and also doesn't try to collapse sideways as much when you land on it hard.

Additionally, I have figured out how to bond DM20 and Technora ropes into 4mm OD stainless steel ferrules. The strength of this connection is pretty good, at over 160kgf when done properly over a 4mm bond length that weighs only around 0.15g. This ferrule can be used to replace the spoke head on straight pull hubs, and fits in standard hubs with no modification needed, though it is still recommended that you deburr the spoke hole on the outside a little bit. 

Other fun fact that I have discovered is that the bond strength with Technora is ~50% better than when using DM20 per bonded length.

Pictures and more detailed explanations will be incoming soon after i finish my first wheelset.


----------



## SB Trails (Sep 14, 2012)

Mikevdv... what if you pre-stretch the spokes.... hanging weight or two points on a vice then opened up and held stretched for a few days...


----------



## Mikevdv (Sep 26, 2018)

@mjdelay....some smart stuff going down in you post. Curious to see your build.

"Turns out the easiest way to make the rim fail is lateral buckling or taco-ing."
Agree 100% came to the same conclusion.

"Turns out the thin Technora is in fact "too stretchy" for structural reasons, regardless of any practical wheelbuilding limitations, as the rim can snap before the spokes get anywhere close to breaking"

Likely you mean "before the spokes take any significant loads?"
I would consider spokes not failing as the more desire-able of the two outcomes? .....In a near limit buckling case if a spoke snaps first, it would make it more likely the unsupported rim would buckle and fail. than if the spoke stayed intact. So we don't want spokes failing.

However I agree there is certainly a balance point there that needs to be thought through. Too flexy and the spokes don't support the load sufficiently Too stiff and they go slack in with radial impact too easily and don't participate in the structure to resist lateral buckling. Rim + spoke flexibility will go hand in hand with the overall performance. I'm curious to understand how you attempted to match these more clearly.

I'm not sure where the optimal match point is but I matched my dm20 spokes with a rim that has a low moment of interia. (more flexible, also light) In order to hopefully provide more allowable deformation from the rim prior to it failing. With the more flexible spokes offsetting the increased buckling tendency by maintaining support through a larger range of rim deformations. (possibly flawed logic here...but convinced my self...then rode the **** out of them...) 

Here were the top two choices for "flexy rims" 
btlos M27AS 








light bicycleAM 930s 








I went with the btlos, lighter cheaper likely more flexible based on shape.


----------



## Mikevdv (Sep 26, 2018)

SB Trails said:


> Mikevdv... what if you pre-stretch the spokes.... hanging weight or two points on a vice then opened up and held stretched for a few days...


The settling and compression of the buries in the splices is what causes most of the settling.
I basically build the wheel twice I put it together, leaving the ends of the eyesplices sticking out the back of the buried portion then tighten it to like 60 or 70Kg force (the most I can get before running out of turns. ) . Leave it like that for a day or 2 then then loosen off the spokes one at a time readjust the bottom eye-splices to just barely allow engagement while pre-tensioning the spoke under my full grip strength. (I had to make a spoke pulling too to do this job) Then I lock-stitch the splices in place at this length and tighten the wheel to full tension. (~100kg)


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Mikevdv said:


> Here were the top two choices for "flexy rims"
> btlos M27AS
> 
> I went with the btlos, lighter cheaper likely more flexible based on shape.


This is what I have, been very happy with them.


Rebuilt my rear wheel yesterday with the 2mm Robline, in advance of an endurance event. I had seen some fraying in the original spokes and wanted to ensure no failures. However, I probably needn't have bothered. The grit and abrasion have taken their toll though, with a few obvious potential failure spots.

The 'highest' (nearest the rim) spoke crossings were pretty much all fine, but I have dropped a bit of Smoove (a slightly thicker Squirt) on the crossings on the front wheel and there is a noticeable drop in friction now, even though this was done with the wheel all built up and under full tension.


Photos in no particular order.... but this first one I thought it was interesting that the spoke previously was moving around against the hub shell. I am fairly sure this indicates that my spoke tension was too low, and they were becoming fully slack at points. I thought I could feel this sometimes - those fast, rolling compressions that would bottom out suspension - so perhaps this confirms. This also might account for the very different amounts of fraying on my front (almost none at all) and rear wheels (see photos below) - if two things are touching but move in unison you don't see any wear, but if they slide over each other you get marks.






































__
Sensitive content, not recommended for those under 18
Show Content






































I'm going to echo others comments about how much 'give' the 2mm Robline has. So much more than the previous Marlow SK99 D12 Max stuff I used - the spokes have come out about 2-3mm too long, even with building them 3mm short.

I'm going to have to re-splice them all to a shorter length, which is a bummer. Still, at least with my eyelet technique this can be done easily. So, if you are planning to use the straight spoke bury / glue method, size your spokes way down - perhaps 5mm shorter than a normal steel spoke - and be prepared for a fight to get them to connect to the nipples the first time!

I think the Robline will build an even more forgiving wheel though, which I'm looking forward to trying out.

Compared with the Marlow stuff, the Robline feels like it has a less tough coating (or no coating) and it's also much more 'fabric-y' feeling - less stiff in the hand. Noticeably lighter too when you have a bunch of 'spokes' made up.

If I were to build more wheels, it'd be a close call at the moment as to which material I'd prefer to use... that is unless the Robline rides amazingly and truly does have zero creep (yesterday's effort is still sat in the truing stand waiting to see if tension drops off).


And in related news: (kind of) proof that what we are feeling is actually a real thing:






There are some fairly important points not included in the video to make it less nerdy, but in short the comparison is with a 2.0mm plain gauge steel spoke (I had asked for 1.8mm but Stef and I got wired crossed!) and the Young's modulus data for the rope spoke was measured in my jig. Based upon feel from building that wheel yesterday, the 2mm Robline will be significantly more forgiving than the material used in the video.

Target spoke tensions for 'high, medium and low' conditions were 40, 70 and 100kg - in order to simulate tension Stef had to 'freeze' the spokes to get them to shrink (pretty clever!). However, with the rim being a 'real' model as well, the spoke beds change position slightly due to spoke tension, so the 40kg target ended up with around 33kg tension. I think it will be a similar drop in terms of % for the other load cases. Hopefully I've explained that successfully...

Anyway, thought it was interesting (and kind of obvious in the end!) that the rim affects radial compliance, and the spokes govern torsional and lateral. Also, as has been mentioned previously, that starting spoke tension doesn't have any effect on wheel stiffness really - you just need 'enough' for them not to go fully slack.


----------



## Mikevdv (Sep 26, 2018)

@AdamR83

do this is to prevent fraying at the lower joint that section meets with too much pressure if you are using eye splices

you are also going to really struggle if using normal spoke thread length if trying to achieve higher tensions. with the dm20. After building my wheels I wouldn’t want to attempt it

regarding tension drop off it took 2 rides to stabilize tension on the dm20. I haven’t had to touch my wheels since. I believe Most of that is compression of the fabric in the eye splice. I needed about 2.5 extra turns after the wheel was built and settled keep that in mind when factoring in your spoke length


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Thanks Mike! That's a great solution. I've personally moved away from that hub attachment method this time, instead trying the 'hitch' style where one bit of rope does two spokes.

As an aside, this method locks in place really well - I've been individually de-tensioning and removing single spokes in order to shorten them and there's no slipping at all at the hub (obviously the other of the pair remains at full tension).

My latest wheel with the Robline DM20 didn't lose tension over the course of 2-3 days which is promising - it's now back on the bike and ready for a test ride today. The line looks awfully skinny compared with the Marlow stuff from before!


----------



## Mikevdv (Sep 26, 2018)

I admire your hitch method and that would be my preferred method but my hub has some sharp edges on the flange that would be obvious wear points as the hitch tightened so I avoided it. your i9s have a beveled edge where you can get away with it.

for reference I lock stitched my eye splices as well previous trials indicated this was necessary but it is dependent on the rope it’s friction coefficient and the bury depth. I didn’t attempt to ride the 2mm dm20 without the lock stitches so might be alright


----------



## Vogelfrei (11 mo ago)

I confirm the hitch method is good. I'm using 2mm Robline in a 36er unicycle build. I retensioned it about 6 times now. I ended up using long nipples, short nipples and than reversed nipples inside the rim. Best way to grab the nipples seems like: 1st spoke end (called A) inserted only the minimum, other end (called B) had been cut about 3mm shorter, than thighten A to max for a night, than untighten A and "move" some extra mm to B. That thighten A to max and wait one more night. Than "move" extra mm to B, and so on untill B grab the nipple. Than max tension to B and A and after a couple of days I can detension A and B, balance the lenght and than tighten them for the last time. Can also confirm about the lateral risk of tacoing: the torque of a unicycle can be feel riding the wheel and cannot make sharp turn now to avoid tire rubbing in the frame due to the rim shiftingsideways during hard cornering on one wheel


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

How's everyone's wheels getting on? I already have a little fraying on the relatively newly built Robline rear wheel, down at the hub end which is a bit weird. I'll grab a photo sometime.

For now... I have a new set of wheels to build for another bike, and been playing around in my head with a method that uses one single length of rope per side. It could even be extended to one single piece per wheel. I am a little nervous of this due to the consequences of a failure, but reckon I'll go for it anyway (one piece of rope per side).

Lacing will involve a fairly simple jig to hold the rim and hub in situ, but with just four splices per wheel and half the stretch during building (all will become clear, haha) it should mean much quicker lacing and building time.

I also spent an hour tonight knocking up a new bending jig for a V2 style eyelet, which has come out pretty well I think. This is the first and only one I completed, after about half a dozen test runs. The soldering is a bit naff as I didn't prep anything properly, and it needs a good mechanical testing, but in theory this size joint would take 750lbs / 350kg of pure tension before failure, so with it mostly in shear I'm hopeful.










A big benefit of this is no post-soldering grinding, so there's no sharp edge left and no chance of nicking the main body of the spoke.


----------



## Mikevdv (Sep 26, 2018)

@AdamR83 that type of solder joint did not hold up sufficiently for me on the wheel in the wild.
although they held up in low speed stright pull strength testing. and broke at the spoke-let thread not at the solder joint. On the bike subjected to cycles and muliple load directions the solder joint cracked in > 50% of the spokes. After some hard cycles. usually 1 or 2 would fail per ride on my bully test grounds.

You can and surely will give it a go and it's possible the accuracy of your jig helps things but having gone down that road, I'm predicting they will fail....so don't overcommit time to that idea based on static tests. Trial a few in an existing wheel and see how it goes. 

I switched to mig welding. i'd tig them if I had the welder. would like to attempt one of those tig "cold pulse" welds that are often sold on aliexpress tig welders... useless for most applications but I feel minimum heat affected zone is preferrable on a heat treated thin wire and full strength weld penetration is not necessary just to keep the ends from pulling apart. my existing mig welded spoke-lets fail at 260kg (stronger than a pillar 1420 so good enough for the wild) but weaker than a straight gauge spokes they are made from as they fail in the heat affected zone near the base of the weld.

My wheels are holding up well now without any serious fraying or other failures.
i've put over 200km of hard off-road rocky riding on them since the last spoke failure. and inspect regularly with no concerning signs at this point.
I'm confident in them now. further durability reports to come


----------



## visus (Feb 4, 2009)

mjdelay21 said:


> Additionally, I have figured out how to bond DM20 and Technora ropes into 4mm OD stainless steel ferrules. The strength of this connection is pretty good, at over 160kgf when done properly over a 4mm bond length that weighs only around 0.15g. This ferrule can be used to replace the spoke head on straight pull hubs, and fits in standard hubs with no modification needed, though it is still recommended that you deburr the spoke hole on the outside a little bit.


Would you mind detailing this a bit more? I just got a killer deal on some 2023 370 SP hubs and I’m thinking about trying a fiber spoke build with BTLOS rims (M-i34A premiums are my current frontrunner and they have free shipping until the end of the month). Are you using a ferrule like this: McMaster-Carr ?
I’m struggling to find a 5/64” fitting which would be the closest imperial equivalent to 2mm. The load rating is also only 90lbs (41kg). I’m assuming that’s a function of the friction between the cable and ferrule when crimped so it should be much higher bonded. What adhesive are you using?


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Thanks for your input @Mikevdv ! All extremely useful and taken on board.

Could I ask what solder you used? And if there was any gap the solder was required to fill? I don't remember seeing any photos in the thread but will look again now... if not, do you have any of this type of eyelet you made, please?

Thanks in advance!


----------



## Mikevdv (Sep 26, 2018)

solder type
Lead free non flux cored silver solder. Used a flux paste
gap none: I held the ends together with vice grips to take up any tiny gaps present. And waited for it to cool before releasing. there may be a touch of preload because of this but I bent them to be in contact so it would be minimal

also used long contact area as I dont have much faith in the solder joints without a decent surface area

here is one that’s still alive


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Hmm. Looks like you covered all the bases! Thanks Mike. Time for Plan C...


----------



## Vogelfrei (11 mo ago)

Tomorrow I'll test the 2nd wheel (my son's). I'm still using hitch method and a splash of glue on the end


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Some photos of what I've been playing about with today... Can add words later for anyone interested!


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Double post...


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Made up the rest of the "eyes" and cut some lengths of rope today.

You can see the offset of the legs on the "eyes" here, about 10-12 degrees in total to match the spoke angle on each side of the wheel. Pleased with how these come out - very repeatable, no post processing, no soldering (so no flux removal either), and only take a couple of minutes each including rolling the second thread. Additional benefit: no need to hold the spoke while tensioning to prevent twisting 










There's two 5m pieces of rope here - looks like I'll only need around 4.3-4.4m per side, but wanted to be safe! So perhaps a few grams to come off. Either way, pretty light for 28 spokes...










Rims due in about a week, looking forward to getting building!


----------



## mjdelay21 (11 mo ago)

visus said:


> Would you mind detailing this a bit more? I just got a killer deal on some 2023 370 SP hubs and I’m thinking about trying a fiber spoke build with BTLOS rims (M-i34A premiums are my current frontrunner and they have free shipping until the end of the month). Are you using a ferrule like this: McMaster-Carr ?
> I’m struggling to find a 5/64” fitting which would be the closest imperial equivalent to 2mm. The load rating is also only 90lbs (41kg). I’m assuming that’s a function of the friction between the cable and ferrule when crimped so it should be much higher bonded. What adhesive are you using?


I initially tested simple straight ferrules with pr1500 cyanoacrylate adhesive and it was barely stronger than just crimping. This will remain true for any practical adhesive, as the shear strength is typically very low.
The important part of the solution I have since come up with is that it relies on trying to simultaneously crush and pull on a conical section of rope and glue composite, rather than shearing the bondline around the outside of the rope. PI rope spoke wheels do the same thing.








If you look closely at the ferrules they are using here, you can see how the rope and adhesive material at the ends of the ferrules are bigger than at the start.

I have been using sections of stainless steel tubing: McMaster-Carr Stainless Tube

I cut off around 7-8mm of tubing, preferably use as long of a segment as you can fit into the hub when your wheel is assembled before the tube from one spoke touches the rope from the next one.
I then flatten the ends on a belt sander, lightly deburr the inside of the tube, and machine out the inside of the tube to create a tapered hole using a tool like this: 15 degree engraving tool. or this tapered ball endmill. I make this hole as deep as I can before the top edge of the tube actually forms a point.

You need to be careful when using this tool as a drill bit/ reamer, as if you snag on the stainless it will snap, so go fast and use a small amount of force.
I made a simple clamping block to hold the tubes while reaming out of a random hunk of aluminum by drilling a hole slightly bigger than the tube OD in it and slitting it down the middle so it can bend in the vise and grab the tube.

To attach the rope to the ferrule, I pull my rope segment through it from the side with the larger ID, and stop just short of the end. I then fray the rope intentionally, trying to spread out the fibers as much as possible for about 1CM away from the end. Then I put some adhesive onto this frayed section and quickly pull the other end of the rope so that the adhesive laden bundle of frayed fibers lodges into the ferrules tapered section. You can pull fairly hard before the rope will pull through, even with the adhesive still wet. I then go back a couple of times as it dries and fill the ferrule back with adhesive until it is completely filled with hardened adhesive and fiber. If the fibers are still dry at all, the joint could be questionable.

I have tested this method with ferrule lengths from 3.5-8mm and taper angles from 12 to 20 degrees and I consistently see failures between 140-200KGF with my current adhesive. I have not tested this on a full wheel yet, as for my rear wheel I was trying something different, so I don't know how it will fare under cyclical loading. However, I will likely be rebuilding the rear wheel with this method in the next couple of months.
I believe that you could get significantly better performance if you could lengthen the ferrule to fit through an enlarged spoke hole, much like the PI Ropes picture above.
I can also provide pictures if any of my description is unclear.


PROGRESS UPDATE:

I have been testing cheap Vectran 600 purchased from twinline USA for UV resistance, and it has suffered no noticeable damage after a solid 50 days out in the sun in central California. I have found that vectran and technora both have dramatically better bonding characteristics than DM20, and the Vectran should be almost 10x as abrasion resistant, as well as being thinner, lighter, and having a higher specific stiffness. Pi ropes used Vectran for their spokes as well.

Here is a picture of my latest spokes and assembled rear wheel.
I concluded that low radial and high lateral and torsional stiffness was optimal and selected this set of Carbon Beam rims from Aliexpress in the 380G 30mm width variant.
















They are very round and flat, and have a nice matte finish. The spoke holes are in a straight line and the offset is consistent with the manufacturers drawings. They also came in under the claimed weight, and I bought a 330g variant for my front wheel as well. Radial stiffness is approximately 254 for the 380g variant and 232 for the 330g variant, with a lateral stiffness in excess of 100 for both. (I used acoustic testing for this).

Built the left hand spokes and right hand spokes with different bond lengths to equalize tension between DS and NDS spokes when wheel is dished properly. This also results in symmetric stiffness past the point of de-tensioning and no tendency to taco when impacted radially. I have dished the wheel and found that theoretical stiffness calculations matched reality on this very closely, as when the wheel is true and centered, the tensions are within 4% from NDS to DS. If my spokes did not have different stiffnesses this difference should have been around 33% for my wheel and hub configuration. Been smashing it into rocks and the rim does not care even when multiple spokes fail or go completely slack. Rode it down some chunky trails with no spoke failures for over 6000ft of descent, although many spokes got quite loose(<20KGF), but then snapped a spoke on a light rim strike at the beginning of the next ride and rode it down a chunky trail before landing a jump hard and failing two more spokes.















The new spokes. Multiple failed spokes after a ride.

The ropes have been pulling off of my 1.6-2.0mm butted spoke stubs intermittently, but I have been regluing them in an attempt to fix any poor initial bonds. I found during testing of different diameters of technora that there is in fact a significant chinese finger trap effect which contributes *very significantly* to the strength of the bonded joint.
Testing with 2.3mm technora resulted in bond failure at only 63kgf on a 50mm length bond to 1.6mm steel spokes, while 1.4mm technora resulted in a 210kgf bond failure.
I found that the robline DM20 was failing around 130KGF at this bond length, Which I thought would be acceptable at the time given the wheel is rated to 130KGF max avg spoke tension, but it seems that between manufacturing inconsistencies and fatigue I am sometimes dropping below 70-80kgf. I have been spot treating this by stepping on the spokes, fixing ones that break, and repeating, and hopefully this will fix the problem permanently.

If it does not, I am going to rebuild the spokes from scratch using much thinner Vectran ropes to maximize the chinese finger trap effect. They should have similar stiffness to the DM20 and be a bit lighter, but given I hadn't tested their UV resistance, I was hesitant to use the Vectran for my first build.


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

Fascinating. Never underestimate a man willing to fiddle til things work the way he envisions.


----------



## Grinchy8 (Jul 6, 2021)

Amazing, 1.75oz, and no soldering. Just a thread roller required.


----------



## Mikevdv (Sep 26, 2018)

I like the simplicity to the spoke-let build this is beautifully simple 

looking at your paper drawing I'm not quite sure how you are going to lace it yet though. 
hub hitches and eyesplices? or is this planned to be 1 continous string per side? 

I advise against the latter due to the failure mode (if you could somehow get a reasonable tension)
Dyneema is tough AF but spinning a sharp rock or stick into THE spoke while under tension would likely get the front wheel to turn the bike into a catapult or the rear wheel into a drift bike/frame grinder

I've so far had one good stone throw that did some spoke damage with heavy chafe still holding OK. but it's certainly possible. 

Regardless impressed at the beautiful simplicity you keep coming up with. 
Mine method is firmly on the side of fussy and overcomplicated but I got to where I'm at by starting this the simplest way I could think of and failing many times. 

The slowest part of my build is the stretching/settling/compression of the eyesplices. 
Usually means I have to build the wheel 2 x plus 2-3 follow up tightens then lock stitch it by hand once built. 

I've been thinking of ways to make a jig to do the stretching simply(ish) 
The difficulty being it's pre spliced to the hub and would need high force. I want to pull to 200kg/spoke to stop any significant compression in the wild and do multiple spokes at a time for efficiency. 
without requiring the services of a machine shop.


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Thanks, Mike! This is a version 3 build and I must have discounted a dozen other ideas along the way, there's nothing wrong with fussy or time consuming if it gets the job done  

I share the concerns you have, mostly. Certainly, a break in one continuous piece could be game over for the wheel, but I don't think the failure would be anything like instant.

I do plan to use a single length, weaved around the hub and rim. So the wooden jig is to hold the rim and hub in situ, allowing this to be carried out.

With the hitch method at the hub, this holds the rope really firmly. I've removed single spokes in the past to shorten and re-splice (for the same reasons as you, too much stretch), and the other of the same pair doesn't slip. Similarly, I'm planning to splice around 50mm together up at the rim end. Haven't tested this 'properly', but on gut feel (and perhaps confirmed by mjdelay21's experiments) the taper on a bury isn't doing much gripping, its the main body of the rope which causes the friction.

So, I'm hoping a combination of the above will mean that you could technically cut one spoke, and the rest of the wheel will remain intact (at least enough to get home).

I'm also hoping, because there will effectively be two lengths of rope per spoke nipple fixing, and there are close to zero tapers / buries, that there will much less stretch during tensioning. Theoretically it should at least halve, perhaps even better with the reduced burying used.

The major downside to this method is that it doubles the load at each nipple. I hope to get around this by using low static spoke tension and nipple washers. Time will tell!


Regarding the pre-stretching, I had decent results by building the spokes in a jig which held both the hub and nipple, then grabbing the hub by hand and rotating it - obviously the smaller the flange, the higher tension induced. Some sort of attachment to the disc mount would allow you to really give it some beans...


----------



## Mikevdv (Sep 26, 2018)

Rotating the hub that’s the kinda simplicity I wanted….. Friggin beauty

4 fixed hooks at the quadrants to balance the load Rotate using the brake centerlock tool 

4 spokes stretched at once then I can lock stitch using a basic sewing machine off the rim 

Just need to weld some bar into a cross attach some bolts or whatever on the ends to fix the eye splices on and a center axle…..easy jig and great jig upon which to build splices to a fixed length

NICE!
Thanks so much


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Did some more thinking... spokes now lock in place individually despite a continuous length being used for the whole wheel, meaning a breakage won't affect the wheel structure any more than a normal spoke failure.

The angles / lines of action of the forces match up better to the spokelets, too. This system also means reduced splicing therefore a shorter build time and hopefully less bedding in / stretching under initial tension.



















Tracking from BTLOS updated today, rims are in the country, so hoping they will arrive early next week.

Projected wheelset weight around 1100g, which I think is pretty decent for 6 bolt hubs with 'regular' flanges. Will they stand up to my abuse though? Hopefully


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Right so... long story short, I think the Robline is too slippery for this system.

The hitch method worked on Ali Cs wheel with the Marlow stuff, but it appears the Robline slips through at the hub and at the spokelets, meaning a VERY wonky wheel very quickly  I could then grab a big handful of front brake and the wheel would 'reset' itself and straighten up a bit!










Have more pics I'll upload for anyone interested. Wheel weight 529g, rim 325g.



















Lacing only takes about 45 mins (only 4 splices per wheel), so I'll re-do it with some spare Marlow SK99 D12 Max I have (this is pre stretched while being heated, and has a coating to increase friction). If that doesn't work, will look at Vectran or PE sleeved stuff.










Getting the spoke lengths right is super easy with the jig, and you can even pre-tension everything a bit. There was less stretch and bedding in during tensioning than previous methods, to the point where there's still a bunch of threads left on all the nipples.


----------



## Mikevdv (Sep 26, 2018)

Awesome ….brilliant failure 

I’m surprised the hitch at the hub slipped. The sharp edge of the dt hub flange is the likely culprit…giving the rope a space to slip…this would also destroy the spokes quickly under tension and motion and the reason I didn’t try to hitch my hubs.

The larks head/cow hitch at the spokelet I’m not surprised at slippage as this was one of the first attachment methods I tried and later abandoned due to its inability to hold tension Albeit on thinner and much more slippery line. So didn’t want to discourage you from giving it a go as there was a good chance it would work 

you could tie off the spokelet loop by making a figure 8 knot without much strength loss but knots are super fussy to get the length right will creep almost constantly in use and a ***** to untie once tensioned if you didn’t nail the length. an eye splice is much less fussy

I’m building another set on some Btlos 30As wheels. In order to smash rocks on 2.6” tires 
Other than a jig I won’t be altering my build methods considerably


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Yeah, with hindsight the Cow hitch was totally unsuitable for what I was attempting. Happy to take pointers where its clear I'm going to make a mess of things, especially from guys with experience such as yourself, Mike! (Note to self: this is the first time I've gone "yeah that'll be fine" on a project like this, and it failed! Normally I test and test but didn't this time.)

Instead, I did some testing yesterday - the Robline IS a heck of a lot more slippery than the Marlow. The Marlow has a PU treatment so I guess thats where the difference comes in. I'd estimate, based upon how much of my weight was put into the cord, that before slipping the hitch at the hub takes about 25kg in Robline and double that in Marlow. With opposing spokes pulling against each other, I can see how a 25kg difference in tension builds up, but 50kg might not. So that explains things. Either way, I bought some Vectran to try as well, so I'll repeat the same test before deciding which line to use for the next attempt. I think the system has mileage, just requires a few tweaks.

A bull hitch at the 'rim end' easily held all my 70kg weight in Robline though, however it does bed down quite a lot, perhaps 5mm increase in effective spoke length, and then becomes almost impossible to separate / resize because its so tight...

Tying method 2: 




So... I came up with this tool.










A regular spoke with a regular nipple, screwed on "too far" so a handful of threads are poking out the top. Then, remove the head from one of your build nipples, and screw that on.

This means I can now get thread engagement (and thus spokelet position) up to 5mm closer to the hub for making the spokes. Then, you can bed it down by hand, adding Xmm to the spoke length, and replace the tool with a normal nipple. This may be handy for you Mike, if you're planning to pre stretch/bed your splices in future, as it will allow accuracy and repeatability. I highly recommend the hub and rim jig I've made too, its so much easier to size the spokes and also get them consistent sizes. You can pre stretch the spokes pretty well simply by pushing the middle of them down towards the bench, rather than having to rotate the hub.










All of the above may all go out the window though, as I figure the crux of this system is making the hub end secure, and the rim end could actually slide through the spokelet happily (providing no ill effects from abrasion) - it would in fact ensure constantly balanced tension between the spoke pair. So I may try that.


Looking forward to giving the vectran a go tomorrow!


----------



## wschruba (Apr 13, 2012)

I'm not sure the "cow hitch" you are using will ultimately be a good idea (though, be fair, PE ropes are super slippery, and many classic things don't work well)...I use it to hang my hammock from loops when they're available, but if I'm using a synthetic cord (instead of sisal/natural), I need to run an extra 2-3 times between the hammock eyelet/loop to make it stable.

Most of the fishing knots Fishing Knots that are still in use have been modified for extra turns/locks, simply because using braided lines (which are the same class of stuff we're using for spokes!) are so slippery that they simply undo themselves.


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

The Vectran line holds a lot better in the hub. Noticeably more friction when working with it too. Very similar to Dyneema to splice etc, but a little more stiff and it springs back into shape more easily when you compress it.

Was all going well until I grabbed a big handful of front brake and the spokelets deformed  look like they have 'peeled' away a bit, so not sure solder will help here.










So... back to the first edition eyelet. Some proper cutters made this job a lot faster and easier! Plus, only having to make 14 rather than 28 saves a lot of time... 










Couldn't find any solder, so will try and get some tomorrow and build the wheel up again. Determined to make this work! I think it will now.

Playing about with spoke tension, the wheel felt alright (about the same as what I've been riding for the past 6 months on the other bike) at under 40kg, and the opposing spokes don't go fully slack when really side loading the wheel.

Only time will tell if the rim is up to the job given only half the spoke holes are used, but its rated to 135kg static spoke tension, and 95kg rider weight. At 40kg static tension and 70kg rider, I reckon that's enough margin...


----------



## Mikevdv (Sep 26, 2018)

Seeing the final product with its long unsupported spans I have a few words of caution. although you have. 28 spokes 
This appears to be the structural equivalent of a 14 spoke rim with double thick spokes. It’a because of shorter unsupported spans that more spoke wheels are stronger.

the spokes purpose is to keep the noodly rims from deforming inwards or to the side this is accomplished by supporting the rim at many points so no section is allowed to deform to failure or to buckling instability. More spokes=shorter unsupported sections = stronger wheel

Long unsupported spans are free to move alot. Good for flex/compliance but seems probable you have gone past the limit

one of the advantages of dyneema is that it can flex a bunch while retaining some tension and support..this allows other spokes to join in on the support Allowing more flex while retaining support. The result is a flexy wheel that can resist buckling by spreading the load to more spokes with less stress per spoke
By eliminating support points across the rim span you have likely negated this improvement.

Potentially leaving a noodly 14 spoke wheel

Giver a go but do so with caution


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Thanks for your input as always, Mike. All valid points and well explained!

I'm hoping I've fallen on the "just ok" side of the line. Looking at the Bike Ahead wheels, and though obviously designed from the ground up in this way, it seems these unsupported sections can work for lighter riders. Time will tell!

I finally got a wheel to work and hold together properly today. Its been quite a battle if I'm honest, and wish I'd just gone for the "2 spokes with one length of rope, hitch at the hub, eye splice at the rim" method. With the new jig, this would have been a pretty straightforward build and known to be reliable. I think this is what I'll do for the rear.










Ended up with bull hitches at the rim end and these hold firm, though did need a good bedding down.


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Well, I gave the wheel a fair bit of abuse on today's ride. Hit a hidden ditch hard enough to almost bottom the forks and make my arms collapse, hit some choppy rocky and rooty stuff at high speed (PRd a few descents, it's running really fast and dry here at the moment), and tackled a few tight and steep berms.

Going in straight lines, if you'd told me I'd swapped to coil forks I wouldn't have questioned that. There's a nice amount of compliance and filtration going on. Under heavy loading it is obviously a bit flexy, but the 35mm SID and this wheel feels similar overall to a full compliment of spokes (same rim) and a 32mm SID. So, I'll keep running it for now.

Wheel remained true to within 1mm and tension hasn't dropped, so providing the PU coating does its job against UV, I'm sold on Vectran. If anyone wants to lay their hands on about 75m of the Robline DM20 still on the roll, plus a couple of used 5m lengths which will be useful for playing around with, let me know. I measured it from the roll and its actually 1.7x1.9mm, so may technically be 1.8mm!


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Built the rear wheel with a hitch at the hub, the twisted, soldered eyelets, and a full compliment of 28 spokes. 668g total for the rear wheel, wheelset weight ended up at 1209g. No idea where I got 1100 from, serious brain fail there.

Anyway, the hitch method combined with the jig is my fave so far. There's only half as many buries / splices to do, only the second spoke of the pair has to be made to a specific length (the first one is simply spliced through the eyelet, bedded down, and then pulled through the hub ready to make the second spoke), and the spokes end up very consistent in length, bury length and pre-bedding (making it easier to build the wheel). None of the nipples have run out of threads this time. One or two are close and have a couple left, but most have at least half a dozen.

Overall there is a lot of time saved - I'd say around 4 hours per wheel for the whole thing, from starting to make the twisted spokelets right through to a finished wheel. I can stand that for the weight reduction and improved ride quality on offer.

Ended up using Vectran on the drive side and Marlow SK99 D12 Max Dyneema on the disc side. Mainly because I didn't have enough Vectran, but figured it gives the two materials a direct real world comparison. A side note here, the Vectran buries feel a lot more secure as the material has a noticeably higher coefficient of friction, and with it being 8 strand there is more of a 'mechanical' lock, too. 8 strands rather than 12 also decreases splicing time - every little helps! The treated Dyneema is also a fair bit stiffer to handle, if you compress it ready to push the fid in it'll stay put, whereas the Vectran springs back into shape. Another tip I discovered today: the cord is slightly flattened having come off a roll. If you push the end of the fid up the inside of the cord in the same orientation as the flattening, it slides much easier!


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

So, a couple of rides in now, and some observations:

- The Vectran spokes pick up dust a lot more easily. They are noticeably brown compared with the Dyneema ones.

- I've also got a pretty serious abrasion mark on one of them already, worse than any of the Dyneema spokes that have been in service for quite a while. Could be coincidence, might not be.

- The Vectran spokes have either bedded in more at the splices or they _have_ suffered creep. I'm right up to the ends of the nipple threads on the rear wheel now, whereas I'm not on the Dyneema side of the same wheel. My guess would be the 8 strand construction beds down more, so even though the material is 'zero creep' you do effectively see elongation when spliced into a spoke.

- The wacky front wheel still feels pretty flexy, but I love the vibration damping and overall the flex is manageable. Its also stayed true. For an upcoming long race (100 miles) I'm going to go back to a 32mm SID (currently on 35mm) to try and 'disguise' the flexy wheel a bit and discourage myself from loading the front end too hard.

Overall, I think Dyneema is more suited in the end, but I'll wait until these are dying until relacing.


----------



## Mikevdv (Sep 26, 2018)

Thanks for the update Adam. still going strong? 

My 1st set of wheels are still going after I took care of hub preparation issues I've had no failures and tension is holding acceptably after many miles. No major concerns beyond one scuffed spoke that I replaced. 

Builidng a second set 
2nd set the rear is done, 700g (standard build btlos 30AS rim) and has survived my abusive validation test course. I will build an extralight 30AS for the front These will be my "heavy wheels" running 2.6 tires for maximum float on rocky terrain. Wheelset weight will be ~1250g 
I'm using goldix hubs (dt 240 36T ratchet knockoff) 
The hubs have proven reliable excluding the outboard driveside rear bearing which is getting a bit gritty but easily replaceable with higher quality bearings. for the price I'd recommend them as an Aliexpress diamond in the rough. 

Cost of the set is ~$800 Canadian in parts and about $5000 if you were to include my engineering labor rate. 

My build methods are still very inefficient all eye splices that I adjust/resplice to fit on the wheel after initial tensioning Then lock in place with hand stitching.....I have accepted this as necessary/not worth improving for the limited number of wheels I will build. 

Overall great success. 
Plan to build a final set of ultralight fatbike wheels and will likely sell off a few of my straightpull wire spoke carbon wheelsets now that I am confident in the dyneema spokes.


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

All sounds very positive Mike! Thanks for the heads up on the hubs too, interesting to know there are some reliable parts coming from Aliexpress, ha.

The wheels on my full sus bike had a few issues during a recent event, losing me around 10 mins having to true and tension them mid-ride. The course was pretty choppy and temperatures were way higher than normal over here, which I think contributed. Can't tell any difference between Dyneema and Vectran now they're all bedded in.

The singlespeed rig has the front wheel built with Marlow Dyneema and the rear with the Robline stuff. I've got a couple of spokes on the drive side of the rear which are very frayed down at the flange, and need replacement before a race this weekend. Not sure yet which material I'll use or how exactly to build it (which method), but I better get my skates on to give enough time to let the wheel settle in and give it a ride!

Overall I'm also happy with the time the wheels take to build given the benefits, and how infrequently they need work. Though I very much appreciate most others will fall on the other side of the line!


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Some pics related to the above...










This was down to under 4 of 12 strands when I inspected it, but still holding on! I'm sure the load is reduced at this point due to the hitch, but I was impressed.










I'm 99% sure this is due to the Robline not being coated, so its much more slippery than the Marlow or the Vectran. Due to this, each power application sees the hitch slip one way a touch, and a heavy brake application sees it slip back the other way. Over time, this "sawing" action cuts through the line.

More examples of fraying - not as bad, but decided to change all the drive side spokes before a race this weekend.










Bolted the wheel in place through a hole in the bench, and just did one at a time, with a basic / quick truing of the wheel between each. Took 10-15 minutes per spoke pair, and they all sized up easily due to effectively being made in the perfect jig!


----------



## Mikevdv (Sep 26, 2018)

Update: This got interesting....I tested a rope spoke wheel to overload failure in the real world.

Ill post a full detailed failure analysis shortly. It will be long detailed and bore most people to tears. However I work with composites and found examining the rim extremely fascinating.... there is a lot going on here

In short my conclusion no observable defect in spoke or rim....both performed admirably.....severe overload condition.... spoke strength >> rim strength my manufacturing methods are solid.

A tougher rim is likely a good idea for my riding style in DH/Enduro conditions. but I don't know if t that would have helped in this scenerio


----------



## Mikevdv (Sep 26, 2018)

*Equipment. *
Bontrager XR2 2.6 tire. 19psi (too low for conditions being ridden)
Bike: Scott Ransom 170mm
Rim: BTLOS 30AS Standard Construction rear wheel
Spokes Robline DM20 2.0mm 400kg break strength. eye-spliced and lock stitched.
Spoke-lets. Hand made, threaded and mig welded from dtswiss champion 2.0mm spokes previously tested to 250kg break strength.
Hubs: Goldix
Rider weight: 190lbs
Spoke tension adjusted and measured to 100kgf...measured just prior to this run.

Location:
Sentier De Moulin Quebec "Super G"

*What happened?*
This is a very popular run and has been used for a Redbull downtime event since i last rode it. I haven't ridden it in a year. but remember it being playful with smooth landings....so was freely sending any of the lips. I popped off a lip and what used to be a smooth backside landing was now dug up and blown out AF with rocks everywhere.
I was going about 30km/h jumped the lip and landed at the bottom on a rock shaped like a curb ~ 8-10ft of verticle from peak to landing by my guesstimate









The rim snapped, tire exploded and blew off. seized the rear of the bike and I went down and I slid to a stop. Elbows knee pads gloves took it all I have 1 or 2 small scrapes from the friction inside the pads.

*The damage:*
The wheel assembly showed at least 15 points of visible damage green nipples are drive side orange non drive side









*#1* This is clearly the point of impact. Rim sidewalls were smashed. The wheel was compressed inwards and to the side until unsupported and shows a lateral buckling failure with the wheel taking a "potato chip" shape. This was not at the wheel seam and I see no evidence of manufacturing issues here


















*#2 on above wheel image: *The spoke broke 90 degrees from the point of impact.
On impact the supported wheel would attempt to take an oval shape This spoke and the ones above it would be the most highly stressed trying to prevent the rim from ovalizing. The ones below would also be highly stressed but have some tension relief in the vertical direction as the bottom of the rim compressed inwards.









The failure was in the middle of the spoke, not at the tail of my splice or at my lock stitching. This material has at least 400-450 kg of break strength. Surprisingly it did not break at the spoke-let, which is somewhat weakened by the welding heat and tested as my weakest link in pull testing. . I have tried to minimize the heat affected zone by doing a shorter tack weld...possibly I was succesful? Still this was surprising.
These spokes were new undamaged and ridden about 3 x and had achieved their final set tension measured at ~100kgf with reasonably even tension. Due to the severity of impact and that this material is stronger than a steel spoke and still broke, I conclude that steel spokes would not have prevented a failure in this case. Also I conclude that there were no issues with my spoke manufacturing contributing to this failure.

*#3-4 in wheel image*
The rim cracked here both on the inner and outer surface sidewalls stayed intact. this further explains the broken spoke (at 3) tried to hang on but couldn't 



















*Points 5,6,7,8,10,11,12,15*
All of these points had cracks on the upper surface of the rim. under rim tape Similar to the image above. When bending outward to take an oval shape this thinner surface would be at high stress. Rim sidewalls spoke bed and inner surface remained intact at least visibly. 
many spokes were engaged in preventing complete disintegration of this rim. I believe the ropes spokes did an outstanding job in energy absorption and holding this together. Also have no concerns about the spoke bed strength on this rim.

*Point 9 broken spoke #2*
WTF? 
The rim is ok in this area, it should have been relatively insulated from stress of the impact. it's right next to the valve. Seems like an unlikely candidate to break. 

*Summary* 

Both the spokes and rim failed in multiple locations with no evidence of manufacturing defects so it seems under this loading condition. The rim and spoke flex was not grossly mismatched. 

If the rim had been destroyed and the spokes stayed intact I would have concluded that the spokes flexed excessively allowing the rim to exceed its allowable deformation resulting in a cracking/failure. 

If the rim failed in a single location I would conclude it was likely allowed to overflex by the flexible spokes

If the spoke-lets had failed I would have concluded that my shoddy manufacturing likely contributed an early demise.

If the rim failed at a seam or the valve I would conclude a manufacturing issue with the wheel/bad luck contributed to the failure.


*For comparison to conventional stuff. *

After this failure I replaced the wheel with a spare (same rim with pillar 1420 wire spokes) I had to shelf that wheel after a few runs breaking a spoke under much less severe conditions.
I have also used aluminum rims (bontrager 30mm) in these same locations and permanently bent them after a few runs as well ."Ride fast break ****"

*Conclusion *
Since both the spokes and rims failed in multiple locations the wheel assembly was subject to an unsalvageable severe impact and overload condition. Consistent with something like a 10ft jump at 30km/h jump onto a sharp rock by a 200lb man with under pressurized tires onto a 400g rim. I don't see any evidence that the rope spokes contributed to an early failure. It seems likely the stronger rope spokes prevented more severe rim destruction by spreading the load across the wheel. 

*Recommendations (for myself) *
1) Inspect your landing before sending it.....conditions change.
2) The tire pressure from yesterdays XC ride is not OK for todays DH run
3) Do stupid things win stupid prizes.(see 1 and 2)
4) I have no concerns with rope spokes on these rims even for severe XC riding
5) I should use stronger rims for Enduro style riding. Prior to buckling it appears the loads grossly exeeded the limits of this rim.
6) I should perform some tests and calculations to understand allowable rim flex vs spoke flex before considering rope spokes on a pair of stiffer stronger Enduro wheels for doing stupid things.There is still some unresolved concern that excessive spoke flex could result in premature rim failure if the flex is mismatched.


----------



## shirk (Mar 24, 2004)

Glad you are okay, perhaps lucky it was rear wheel vs front wheel (see Bernard Kerr's front wheel explosion at RedBull Hardline). Lots to digest here. Thank you for sharing full details.


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Impressive failure Mike!

Did the spoke fail at the end of a splice? That was the only place I had one start to break during my testing.


----------



## 1955 (Dec 18, 2017)

glad you're all right
XC wheels for DH riding? It's dangerous.


----------



## Mikevdv (Sep 26, 2018)

Technically speaking all mountain rims for all mountain riding. It was a pedal up location and not a triple crown in sight. 

My choice in equipment was solid:..my choice to jump blind into that particular location was dangerous dumbassery. 

When I got to bottom I heaved the bike into the van and repeated the run on my xc bike but rolled the hill….nothing dangerous there unless you make it that way


----------



## Vogelfrei (11 mo ago)

@Mikevdv The main issue is that rope spokes are able to lateral elongation driving to more frequent side hit on the rims. I think your spokes allowed the rim to slightly slide sideway while landing just before receiving the most of the impact... than the side of the rim crushed. Using steel spokes avoid this issue.
I'm still building another unicycle wheel (now I'm waiting a 29" latex tube to fit in my 36" rim)... my worst issue is to deal with a 36er disc brake unicycle hub with about 70mm distance from the flanges and almost vertical long elongatin spokes: while hard accelerating the wheel "wobble" towards the pushing crank... so I understand deeply the side issue related to my spokes.


----------



## Grinchy8 (Jul 6, 2021)

So what material has the best longer term results? The 2.5mm Marlow SK99 D12 Max? 
About how much material to built two 32 hole 29er wheels? 20 meters?


----------



## Grinchy8 (Jul 6, 2021)

opcolu said:


> Hi Adam,
> 
> Thanks for looking into the 1.5-1.8mm rope from Robline. I actually got a response from Marlow and I'm working through a quote now. The rep there confirmed that the smallest they could manufacture with DM20 and 12-braid was 1.8mm, so asked her for a quote on that. I hope to hear back today with pricing and MOQ.
> 
> ...


where did this end up @opcolu


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Grinchy8 said:


> So what material has the best longer term results? The 2.5mm Marlow SK99 D12 Max?
> About how much material to built two 32 hole 29er wheels? 20 meters?


My experience is that the Marlow works best overall.

Length depends on your lacing style and eyelet length, but given a ~60x diameter bury its not tricky to calculate.


----------



## Mikevdv (Sep 26, 2018)

For my construction methods, 
which don't rely on sketchy eye splices without lock stitches, sketchier hitches, and creeping lines
(@AdamR83)😁😝🤪

Robline oceanstat20 2.0mm (dm20) for the win.... but then one of my wheels blew into 15 pieces. 🤦‍♂️


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Ha! Perhaps I need to mark up some of my eye splices. I'm pretty sure they aren't slipping, but you raise a good point. 

"The proof is in the pudding" as they say, though my gut feel is that you put more load through the bike than I do.


----------



## Grinchy8 (Jul 6, 2021)

I've got the Marlow Dyneema SK99 D12 Max on order. My calcs have it at 34 m for the two buries per spoke, 24 m for one bury per spoke, and 15 m for no buries (knot + protected style spoke insert, I was idly curious).

Above lengths for a mullet, 60x bury, 32 hole rim, etc.


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Keen to see what you come up with!

I was also wondering if knots are perfectly adequate for our application, especially when using a line that has a max load way higher than a regular spoke... that dodgy "14 spoke" wheel I built seems to work fine and has a knot at each spokelet, so...


----------



## jmann28 (Jan 19, 2011)

I’ve been in the target archery world for 15 years. I’ve been building custom strings and cables for 10. All archery equipment is strung with uhmwp. Two companies used to be the main producers of material to build with. BCY and Brownell (who closed their business but rumors are they’re coming back to market). This completely blew my mind to see this stuff being used for spokes!! Are there any videos out there showing how guys are building these spokes with this material? I can’t understand how they’re doing this. 

We stretch out strings at 300-400lbs of tension for a few hours to get all the stretch out. Is the process similar? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Letting the wheel sit at tension for a couple of days does the trick. Though DM20 is said to have zero creep.

Here's a video I did with pro rider Ali Clarkson, should give an idea of the process (though has been refined since, and documented in this thread):


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

@jmann28 , What sort of diameter or breaking load is something like the BCY X-99, any idea?









BCY String Materials X99 - 1/8lb spool : WD50


Latest material by BCY Fibres. 80% Dyneema, 20% Vectran. Smaller diameter to BCY-X so will require approximately 2 to 4 extra strands for the same diameter string to BCY-XBCY String Materials X99 - 1/8lb spool : WD50 - BCY X-99 String MaterialThe latest s



www.quicksarchery.co.uk





A regular butted stainless steel spoke is around 700lbs, the 2.5mm SK99 Dyneema is around double that.


----------



## Grinchy8 (Jul 6, 2021)

Another potential option:
Premium Ropes DX Core 99 Dyneema SK99 Single Braid, 2mm
Available on this link for US shipping (By foot)

The premium ropes corp site/store also has it for international shipping, by meter


----------



## Grinchy8 (Jul 6, 2021)

AdamR83 said:


> I was also wondering if knots are perfectly adequate for our application, especially when using a line that has a max load way higher than a regular spoke... that dodgy "14 spoke" wheel I built seems to work fine and has a knot at each spokelet, so..


Since my webfoo was weak when I was searching for an instock, 2mm line, that would ship US, I ended up with 2.5. It's immensely strong and 30%-50% weakening for a knot will still be strong enough, I think.

I'll give the knot book a look, but I was thinking the 'monkey fist' (no idea how much material that uses) which is common in the soft shackle world, or the old standby, the figure 8, which is common in the rock climbing world. For a 'full loop' spoke, the intertwined overhands (or something more complex that will slide, like a hangman) could also work.

<Edit - see the video below. Don't try these above . . .>


----------



## Grinchy8 (Jul 6, 2021)




----------



## NKOTB (Sep 7, 2013)

opcolu said:


> Just finished reading this entire thread all the way through, and I gotta say... you guys are absolute legends. From Okashira's contributions and eyelet ideas through the first half of the thread, to the later builds and research from AdamR83, Mikevdv and others. The looped/hitched 2-spoke hub attachment is absolutely inspired, and once you see it, it seems so obvious, but everyone else missed it before it was posted here. My genuine appreciation for all the work, effort, info, and sharing on here.
> 
> Needless to say, I want in! I've built close to 100 wheels at this point, have all the gear needed, and have a penchant for weight weenie wheelsets for mountain and road. I'd like to approach this from a shamelessly weight biased angle, and as much as I love the spiral-soldered spoke technique, it sure is a heavy way to do things. This brings me to a few questions:
> 
> ...


Hi guys, been lurking around this thread a lot lately, as I’m really curious to try this kind of wheel.

Any news on these? I’d sure buy into this if it’s happening.


----------



## Grinchy8 (Jul 6, 2021)

I was curious if 2.5mm sk99 would friction bind on a 2mm spoke (used a 70mm insert length). The answer was no.
It may work for a longer insert length but at that point the weight savings of the sk99 (especially this larger diameter cordage) in the system are pretty minimal.


----------



## Grinchy8 (Jul 6, 2021)

The 2.5mm sk99 is 5.3 g/m (scale measures only to nearest gram)


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

Forgiveness if this has already come up or been tried but I don't think so. I had an idea.

What if instead of a standard nipple you used a bolt with a spherical shoulder, or a spherical washer? Flat head might be good enough for DIY. You then have male threads about 8-32 or M4 sticking out of the rim. For the nut/hanger, you could smash some threaded tubing and put a hole in it, or come up with something nicer. There have to be more options at 8-32 or M4 than at 2-56. Just looking at McMaster there are closed eye bolts and spade bolts you could put in with a coupler. Given the size (3.7x stress area) maybe you could move to some lighter materials than steel. And it would get us out of hot work (brazing or welding), for which not everyone is set up or willing


----------



## VanSyncro (Jul 10, 2011)

sissypants said:


> What prevents one from building a wheel from one continuous string, tensioned at a single nipple? The string would be threaded in the order in which a wheel is typically built.
> 
> In theory, at least...


Interesting Idea, but others have responded to the practicality of it. However riffing off of the idea- maybe use one string to replace 2 spokes with a nipple on each end, cutting the number of splices in half. Still a custom hub, but...


----------



## wschruba (Apr 13, 2012)

VanSyncro said:


> Interesting Idea, but others have responded to the practicality of it. However riffing off of the idea- maybe use one string to replace 2 spokes with a nipple on each end, cutting the number of splices in half. Still a custom hub, but...


It's hard to get that to tension both halves at different levels with the materials being used (hence the hitches from above...which are obvs still slipping, from the damage to the sounds posted). It's nice to think that a perfect wheel would have perfectly balanced spokes...but nothing is perfect.


----------



## Ole (Feb 22, 2004)

AdamR83 said:


> View attachment 1991519
> 
> 
> The Vectran line holds a lot better in the hub. Noticeably more friction when working with it too. Very similar to Dyneema to splice etc, but a little more stiff and it springs back into shape more easily when you compress it.
> ...


I don't quite understand how this wheel tranfer torque from the rim to the hub. The leading spokes are also the trailing spokes, so as one gets tighter, the other gets looser, and the hub will rotate a huge amount before any real tranfer of torque happens.


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Ole said:


> I don't quite understand how this wheel tranfer torque from the rim to the hub. The leading spokes are also the trailing spokes, so as one gets tighter, the other gets looser, and the hub will rotate a huge amount before any real tranfer of torque happens.


Keep reading...


----------



## Vogelfrei (11 mo ago)

I cannot find where I bought my robline 2mm! Can anyone write me an online shop which can sell Robline Oceanstat20 2m
in Europe?


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Was it through me / TartyBikes?

I have the majority of a roll I won't use, prefer different stuff with my method. If you like me to check exactly how much and work out a price, just let me know.


----------



## markifi (24 d ago)

actually i retract my reply as it's silly and heavy


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Not silly at all - but yes, I think a turnbuckle would be fairly heavy.


----------



## markifi (24 d ago)

in the meantime i've read the whole thread and i find it very intriguing. huge grain of salt on the following essay as it's all theoretical for now.
i can't shake the mid-line tensioning idea so here's another lighter variation on the turnbuckle; the whole idea hinges on whether a slit the size of ~3.8mm can even be opened up in the ~2mm rope which might be a physical impossibility:

mid-spoke tensioning but using a regular nipple
two cross lacing pattern
~4 cm regular spoke in the hub, nipple in between the first and the second cross of the lacing, very close to the hub, some spoke key might fit that space
spliced eye of the dyneema cord has an extra hole through the loop made with a fid for the nipple to fit through
special nipple "washer" that can hold that abomination securely, this would be more like a rod with another hole through it and meant to be perpendicular to the mid-line nipple
stopper knot on the end of the dyneema cord meant to fit in the rim, glued before assembly so the knot never loosens up
could have less rotational inertia than any of the ones discussed because the knot in the rim should be very light
a ***** to work on
heavier exactly by as much as the special "washers" and the extra epoxy weighs
about the "washer": this could even be square rod with a hole in the side. it'd only need to be long enough to hold the tortured hole-y split spliced eye of the rope. a stubby little thing. 5 mm wide aluminium or carbon fibre rod with a ~3.8mm hole in the side. very little material in the middle to hold all the torque but the torque arms with which it needs to hold two 50 daN forces are only about 2mm. that works out only ~1 Newtonmetre on either side. as an even more convoluted idea to make the whole thing even more labour intensive than it already is we could braid our own dyneema through this "washer" using 2 strands on either side of it, and terminate in a button knot rim-side. this would eliminate the worry about being able to open a large enough hole through the side of the rope (40 hour wheels anyone?)


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Having a hard time trying to picture your ideas in my mind... but I do like the thought of reducing rotational mass by having all the 'gubbins' down near the hub. If you have a way of doodling the above, I'd love to see it!

I am 99% sure you can shove something of 3.8mm diameter inside a braid of Dyneema - the issue may come in that a pretty large stress riser would be introduced by this. From my experience / testing, you'd need a long and careful taper at this join. That said, it seems Berd gets away without tapering their inserted spoke at all, so maybe I was testing way over the loads the spokes actually see.


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

tom tom said:


> What about using a 50 mm long J Bend spoke. You could always use some heat shrink to hold it in place while building.
> 
> View attachment 1966642
> 
> View attachment 1966643


Was re-visiting this thread for some info... A local rider has asked me to build her some hill climbing wheels as light as possible. So obviously string spokes are important!

Having come across this again, I think the idea might have legs. So I'm going to try it on the test rig, but with an M2 washer over the spoke, giving something a bit more significant for the cord to grab onto. A Form G washer in M2 flavour is around 7mm diameter, so given the fact that you can pull the eye splice tight around the spoke, it may work - and save a significant amount of labour time...


----------



## markifi (24 d ago)

AdamR83 said:


> doodling the above











?
edit: the second drawing depicts the thing much bigger than how big it needs to be. the first is more what i had in mind, the second was a bit rushed


----------



## Mikevdv (Sep 26, 2018)

markifi said:


> i can't shake the mid-line tensioning idea so here's another lighter variation on the turnbuckle; the whole idea hinges on whether a slit the size of ~3.8mm can even be opened up in the ~2mm rope which might be a physical impossibility:


_This would work.... easily. 

_


markifi said:


> stopper knot on the end of the dyneema cord meant to fit in the rim, glued before assembly so the knot never loosens up


_I did a lot of trials using knots the key problem was them tightening once heavily loaded stretching the line. Once tight they were impossible to adjust. Glueing them is a good idea and not something i tried. From the rim side you would likely want to sleeve and glue them...sleeving would gives extra volume and add chafe/cut protection. also increases the knot size and reduces friction on the loadbearing line preventing severe break strength deterioration from the knot. 
#330 paracord casing makes a lovely sleeving material. 
If the knot tightened significantly you could still adjust at the eye splice....I feel like this should work . 

_


markifi said:


> about the "washer": this could even be square rod with a hole in the side. it'd only need to be long enough to hold the tortured hole-y split spliced eye of the rope. a stubby little thing. 5 mm wide aluminium or carbon fibre rod with a ~3.8mm hole in the side. very little material in the middle to hold all the torque but the torque arms with which it needs to hold two 50 daN forces are only about 2mm. that works out only ~1 Newtonmetre on either side. as an even more convoluted idea to make the whole thing even more labour intensive than it already is we could braid our own dyneema through this "washer" using 2 strands on either side of it, and terminate in a button knot rim-side. this would eliminate the worry about being able to open a large enough hole through the side of the rope (40 hour wheels anyone?)


_square rod would cut the eyesplice you'd have to file it off or use round bar. Ideally a teardrop shaped channel for stress relief but now we're back into small fiddly custom parts. _


----------



## markifi (24 d ago)

all great points


Mikevdv said:


> them tightening once heavily loaded stretching the line


yes i thought that might be quite tricky. what i think about is tying all the stopper knots in a continuous line, stretching to a few dozen daN with a lashing and a ring, then stretch to ~150 daN using a hydraulic car jack somehow. repeat every 12 hours for 3 days, then epoxy the knots. only after this would i cut the line to segments and start splicing eyes on. the whole thing needs some space but not a lot of fiddling or making any jig



Mikevdv said:


> file it off


yeah maybe not a bad idea. the reason for the square shape is both easy drilling and that you already have so little material next to the hole and a round bar would further decrease it 4 times perhaps. rounding over edges could be done in a deburring tumbler


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

A barrel nut would do the job. I should think it'd need to be loaded up like this though, to prevent the loop from slipping over the end of the 'T':



https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/223739538962











Obviously you 'ignore' the thread (or it could be drilled out), but as standard the hole is nicely chamfered to accept the nipple, no special parts to make... Though, in steel and in a size large enough to accept the nipple, you're looking at around 5g each just for the barrel.

(Just realised I drew it the other way round... was thinking about really short straight pull spokes and the nipple in the rim as normal, but it could be 'reversed' easily.)

That's an interesting idea @mikesee with splicing the nipple straight into the line! Have you tried loading that up?


Further thoughts... another related idea is a grub screw (looks like M4 would be the 'right' size given the nut dimensions) with an upside down nyloc nut (so the nice rounded part sits in the rim). Lock the grub screw to the nut (red Loctite), use a barrel nut to catch the spoke like in the photo above. Can be tensioned with a hex socket 'from the top' on initial build, then once the wheel is fully built you could use an allen key in the grub screw head (facing down towards the hub) for further adjustments.











eBay also showed me these strange 'round nuts' while I was browsing, not seen them before!









M3 Round Thumb Nuts with Side Hole Jump Rope Lock Fixed Nut Nickel / Black Zinc | eBay


Find many great new & used options and get the best deals for M3 Round Thumb Nuts with Side Hole Jump Rope Lock Fixed Nut Nickel / Black Zinc at the best online prices at eBay! Free delivery for many products.



www.ebay.co.uk





Just realised the above solution is similar to the Sugino wheel a customer brought in asking me to rebuild for him. Super tech - I did not fancy it!


----------



## Vogelfrei (11 mo ago)

Adam thank you for your response. I found where I bought last time and got my ropes yesterday. 
The question is... *why are you all still neglecting post #458 solutions?* I did build my son's unicycle wheel and it is still going strong. I am now slowly buying better hubs and going on lacing my unicycles' wheel without real issue. The only issue I'm facing is about a 36er wheel and its extreme spokes elongation, but I am trying in these night another idea to have it solved without using reversed nipples solutions (which works but I prefer to find a pleasant idea)


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

For me at least, the testing I did on my rig showed failure at significantly lower loads than other solutions. Even with a nice taper on the steel section, the line failed where it met the spoke.

However, as they say, "good enough is good enough"! I bought some of the Bob Smith glue a couple of days ago, and am going to revisit the glued option. It looks to be the lightest, easiest, least work, best looking option if I'm honest!


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

OK so... not sure what I was playing at before, but the glue method certainly seems to perform on the jig. I have a feeling the keys to making this work are:

- A high quality, very thin, wicking cyanoacrylate glue. The stuff I tried before wasn't particularly thin, and certainly didn't want to wick down into the fibres. Have used Bob Smith Insta-Flex here, about 6 drops per spoke, which was a little too much.

- A non-uniform texture on the spoke. On previous attempts I rolled a long thread, which did add friction, but not as much as roughing the spoke against a rotating abrasive disc (or belt sander). I've also found, on trials bike brakes, that using an angle grinder to roughen the rims offers much better braking than a uniform (milled / knurled) texture on the sidewall. The pad material used in this case is polyurethane, so I guess that's a not too distant cousin of UHMWPE.

Anyway, I managed to load up a couple of spokes to over 200kg with no issues. One in Marlow SK99 D12 Max, and another in the Robline. Both using a plain gauge 2.0mm / 14g spoke. Each of these lines claim to be 2.0mm diameter, but I measure the Robline at more like 1.8...










The Robline displayed noticeable necking at the end of the metal section (ground to a point to reduce stress riser), the Marlow didn't.










The colour on the Marlow hides the glue a lot better, and with it being much stiffer from the PU treatment, the end doesn't get frayed while working.

I guess a lot of the elongation seen was due to the eye splice, but there was approx 3x (!) as much with Robline (about 10mm as opposed to 3mm). Obviously this will be reduced by using the hitch method at the hub, but I can see how you guys are using all the nipple threads now!

Toight like a toiger. And still holding strong. Forgot to bring the tension meter home, but this is at least 200kg - the nipple on the steel spoke was groaning and struggling to turn, the design of the test rig is such that the rope spoke sees double the load of the steel one.

- YouTube

Edit: How on earth do I embed a YouTube video? 

I then tried squeezing the steel spoke against the frame to add even more tension - would have thought over 250kg at that point, maybe even 300. This was a couple of minutes after applying glue, and full cure strength is said to be an hour, so that's a good sign.

Can't take credit for this solution, but for those interested... just 50mm overlap!










Overall... I'm satisfied this will work well, and going to build at least one wheel with this method in the near future.


----------



## Mikevdv (Sep 26, 2018)

Sick nice to see you getting good luck with the glue a pillar 1420 is in the 270kg range so you are good
enough









I had to re-run a tension test to calibrate a new spoke tensionmeter to the rope spokes. So i ran one up to failure I’ve adjusted my welding to minimize heat a bit better since my last build

















Failed at about 310kg in the heat affected zone. The nipple isn’t failing yet so could be stronger but it’s stronger than the metal spokes I normally run


Onto my 3rd wheelset now. Eyesplicing and spoke ends are pretty easy it’s the readjustment after settling that’s still the time consuming part.

maybe I’ll glue one and run it up to failure see where I get I believe you are right about the glue viscosity @AdamR83


----------



## Vogelfrei (11 mo ago)

Thank you Adam for your testing. I am still struggling with my 36" unicycle wheel and reading such a different elongation between Robline (my build) and Marlow SK99 D12 Max makes me still hope. However about the glue metod I am using 25mm of insert now... I'm 76 kgs and I jump over my unicycle: not a single alu nipple failed! In my picture a 50 mm spoke, inserted 24mm, 2mm of pressed spoke and the threaded end in an inverted alu sapim polyax.








I rebuilt the wheel several times due to elongation. Now that everyspokes is well tightened I'm fighting with spokes cutting at the hub side. Need to find that rope sander you wrote about.


----------



## Vogelfrei (11 mo ago)

Feel free to suggest me the right tool to cut the rope instead of using a kitchen scissor!


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Vogelfrei said:


> Feel free to suggest me the right tool to cut the rope instead of using a kitchen scissor!


I use some generic Dyneema scissors. They are brilliant, well worth the ~£20 I paid for them. They give a clean cut every time with no effort: dyneema scissors - Google Search

Edit: these appear to be the exact ones I have, just sold under a different name and "for kevlar": Fiber Optic Kevlar Shears with Protective Pouch


I'm shocked and amazed such a short glued section holds, that is amazing! My gut feel is that the Robline glues better than the Marlow - it feels a lot more like fabric when working with it, the Marlow is quite stiff and waxy from the heat and PU treatment. Also wondering if the elasticity of the Robline helps to reduce loading at the join when the wheel is in use.

I tested my glued Marlow spoke to failure yesterday, in conjunction with a spoke tension meter to get a more accurate number. Hard to say exactly where it went because I was squeezing it by hand at the time, but it was at around 180kg before I added the squeeze - so over 200 at failure. Perhaps not quite high enough for me to want to use it like that. The steel section pulled right out of the line, with a bit of a bang noise as it went.

I'll do the same test with the Robline variation today to see if the gluing is any better. Will also do another with some Vectran if I have any spare, it seems to have similar stretch characteristics to the Marlow, but with less slipperyness from post-treatment, so perhaps for this construction method it is a "unicorn". The wheels built with it are still fine, though they have only had a couple of hundred miles of use.


----------



## Vogelfrei (11 mo ago)

AdamR83 said:


> I use some generic Dyneema scissors. They are brilliant, well worth the ~£20 I paid for them. They give a clean cut every time with no effort: dyneema scissors - Google Search
> 
> Edit: these appear to be the exact ones I have, just sold under a different name and "for kevlar": Fiber Optic Kevlar Shears with Protective Pouch
> 
> ...


Please Adam let me know about the Vectran stress test. I would prefer a spoke that wouldn't require too much filing at the hub part right now I've plenty of grip using the glue even with 24mm of overlap with Robline, but it is unsuitable for my unicycle. Do you think that Marlow is more prone to cutting at the hub?


----------



## Mikevdv (Sep 26, 2018)

My 2mm dm20 splices to 50mm of 2mm spoke Sanded alcohol washed and Glued with gorilla glue brand superglue (pretty thick) pulled out with a whopping 10kg of force…

I’m concluding the glue used is critical

Uhmpe is notoriously **** for bonding and may require some special preparation for good strength… 200kgf is easily achieved on a mountain bike 

Also of important note, berd is using thinner than 2mm rope which will have a tighter hold on the splice

unicycle guy carry on…your loads are less the hub issue is solvable but you WILL have to sand it i use a spherical head dremel bit to take the edge off then attack it with sanding rope sweeping 45 degrees around the appropriate-spoke exit angle. Both steps were necessary 

there are a few other chafe points on hubs depending on hub type how you attach it and how you lace a wheel

here is a photo of a lacing pattern that avoids them


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Vogelfrei said:


> Do you think that Marlow is more prone to cutting at the hub?


To me, it seems like the Marlow is more resistant to this. The coating it has is quite waxy, it feels much more durable to the touch than the Robline.

Mike, I think youre right. Any glue is poor for UHMWPE, but perhaps the act of gluing adds texture to the spoke, onto which the line grips? That may account for the differences in joint strength when a thinner (1.8mm instead of 2.0mm, for example) cord is used.

Here's my failed joint:










You can see the negative weave pattern of glue left on the spoke. Any glue left within the cord hadn't stuck at all, it crumbled away with a bit of flexing by hand. The Marlow is perhaps "worse" than the Robline for this due to the coating, it appears there's no chance glue can penetrate into the fibres. 

Still plan on testing that and Vectran asap, forgot my stuff yesterday!


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

The Robline joint failed at just under 200kg. Had to get creative with my jig to add this much load, it was so stretchy! The glue seems to have stuck quite well to the line, but not wicked very well - each dab of glue was a noticeable lump.

Vectran got to around 250kg before it failed, with a huge bang that shot the spoke end across the workshop! The glue has wicked and adhered well to this one, it left a single stiff and uniform section where the spoke pulled out. The material was a little more stretchy than the SK99 D12 Max, but nothing like Robline.










Both of these materials seem to have pulled the glue off the spoke, it's noticeably smoother than the photo above. So a different failure mode to the Marlow stuff, I think.

For reference, the Vectran I'm using is 2.5mm Marlow Excel V12, so its way over the size of the spoke. If I could find some in 2mm, or perhaps use a 13g spoke, it should hold even better.


Conclusion... I think I'm going to build a set of road wheels with the Robline, using a little more glue, and see how I get on. From there, I'll decide what to use for MTB wheels. At the moment I'm thinking Vectran as it just generally feels a lot less fragile.


----------



## TheOtherMAJ (7 d ago)

I had been lurking this thread awhile back, trying to figure out a rope build for my BMX flatland bike. I just came back to check in and was surprised to see new posts, so I thought I'd de-lurk to thank everyone here. I built a wheel set last spring after seeing Adam's first few posts in the thread, which solved a few of my early issues, so big thanks for that. And the collab with Ali was fun to watch.










I built the wheels with 1.5mm Marlow Kiteline SK99, and anchored the spokes with an aluminum eye coupler held with an M3 bolt through the rim (rim-side only for tensioning). Lacing is 2/3 radial for stiffness with 1/3 3-cross for torque. I also stress tested the spokes to about 250kg on a jig similar to what Adam used, and the rope and coupler held just fine. 

I've seen some wear at the rear hub on the crossing spokes only, and will be replacing them soon. The straight laced spokes are holding up fine, so it's likely from shared tension between leading and trailing spokes. Changing to a hitch lace shown earlier in the thread might help, but if I re-lace it so one rope handles only leading or only trailing spokes, I expect they'll hold up better. I'll probably try the hitch lace first, then re-lace if it wears out again.

I shared a build video to my Instagram awhile back if anyone wants to see the process. Again, huge thanks to everyone in this thread. These wheels ride so much smoother than my old set, the ride quality is perfect for a flatland build.


----------



## Vogelfrei (11 mo ago)

This is the glue I'm using. I do not count exactly the number of drops, I guess that every drop will be around 1/500 of 28gr so I don't need to use less drops... maybe that could be why I don't suffer from nipples issues. Hope it could help all those that still don't glue the spoke to the rope


----------



## Mikevdv (Sep 26, 2018)

As an fyi 
Berds break at about 270kg. 
And it’s the rope that breaks before the joint 






Similar to my “good enough” value from pillar 
1420. 

So overall im totally confident with my spoke design

The reason I’m not using the glue joint is 

1. it requires custom hardware preventing spoke rotation when tightening will be a ***** without the flat that berd uses 

2. It’s patented and they won some awards for it it’s likely not as trivial as we suspect. The finger cuff takes the load while the glue is there to prevent loosening under jerk loads I worry about fatigue and jerk loading 

3. Mines stronger 😎


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Vogelfrei said:


> This is the glue I'm using.


Haha. Cool. Exactly the same as the Bob Smith stuff then  thank you for sharing!


Looks from the video that Berd would improve their strength if they tapered the end of the spoke. Still, if 270kg is good enough, its good enough. Something for us all to aim for, thanks for sharing Mike!


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

TheOtherMAJ said:


> I shared a build video to my Instagram awhile back if anyone wants to see the process. Again, huge thanks to everyone in this thread.


A pleasure to share, and the same back at you! Such a cool system you've made there, thanks for sharing. Tons of work but hugely rewarding I bet!

Your build has given me the confidence to try some 1.5mm and 1.8mm line on the test rig. Looks like Marlow offer the Kiteline Race in 1.8mm now as well (previously was only in 1.3mm and 1.5mm), so I have some of that on the way.

Also found a polyester covered Vectran line, which is 2mm. Max load is around 250kg so it might be too weak, but I'll try it given that the sheath will remove abrasion issues and add friction at the hub hitch.

Also planning to test all of the different lines for stretch at a given load, I hope this will help me understand the material differences a little better, and assist @Vogelfrei with the upside down nipple problem!

I'll also test glued joint failure point on 1.8mm vs 2mm spokes. My gut feel is that the spoke ideally needs to be "1 size up" from the diameter of line used (eg. 2mm spokes for 1.8mm line), but keen to see just how much difference it makes.

In related news, the Park TM-1 at the shop had a replacement spring recently, which I didn't know about, and wasn't recalibrate afterwards. Having done that this weekend, it was way out, hugely under-reading. Eg. It showed 50kg when I had 75kg load on! So the failure strengths I mentioned above may need increasing significantly. I need a better system like Mike has!

Robline DM20 in 1.8mm came free from a 1.8mm spoke at 200kg, so I am fairly sure on a 2mm spoke it was higher than that, both in terms of logic and what the tension meter was saying before it was calibrated.


----------



## Mikevdv (Sep 26, 2018)

AdamR83 said:


> I need a better system like Mike has!


@AdamR83
https://www.amazon.ca/Klau-Portable-Digital-Hanging-Backlight/dp/B07QRG78Y3/ref=sr_1_3_sspa?crid=Q673NL5NL4AA&keywords=tension+meter&qid=1673303841&sprefix=tension+mete,aps,191&sr=8-3-spons&psc=1&spLa=ZW5jcnlwdGVkUXVhbGlmaWVyPUExR0xIU1FCSVE1V0hLJmVuY3J5cHRlZElkPUEwMTUyNTE1MzIyWkVRR1IzOUNVRiZlbmNyeXB0ZWRBZElkPUExMDE0NTExTllFSlUxSVQzSThOJndpZGdldE5hbWU9c3BfYXRmJmFjdGlvbj1jbGlja1JlZGlyZWN0JmRvTm90TG9nQ2xpY2s9dHJ1ZQ==

They aren't too expensive. You can likely find it on aliexpress super cheap.
I checked it vs my gym weights. Seems accurate.

I purchased one a long time ago to verify different repair methods and knots for my kitesurfing line repairs.
I also use it to calibrate my spoke tension meter to whatever weird material or bladed spoke I'm using as those lookup tables and tension meters aren't even close when dealing with different spokes and spoke makers. And I will probably use it to measure load while creating a manual spoke stretching machine.

I like the individual spoke stretch/binning tool that Berd uses in the above video I posted
I mentally went through what I would need to speed up my wheel builds and that sort of high speed automated spoke stretcher was the piece I would need to make the faffery of this profitable. Interesting that's exactly what Berd has used to overcome the problem....and when it doesn't stretch to the perfect length they just throw it in a different pile....no faffery involved.....In my opinion this machine is the most innovative part of their build. 

I monitor spoke tension regularly and for the wheels I've built it takes 2 sometimes 3 re-adjustments of the eye splice length to get the spoke to it's final settled length and holding 100kg in tension.

2 years in.....6 wheels made....going strong....
well except for the following:

1 wheel exploded into 15 pieces 
4 failed spokes from hub chafe....no repeats after re-sanding. 
2 damaged spokes from random trail debris/crashes/wheel transport. 

In that time I've also trashed 2 carbon rims 1 aluminum rim 1 hub and broken 2 spokes on wire wheels so not abnormal for how I roll.


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Awesome, thanks Mike, have bought one of those. 

Sounds like these spokes are working out pretty well for you compared to normal ones, especially given the other benefits. 

Yeah the Berd stretcher is a good system. I guess they have to bed each splice in or customers will struggle with wheel building. One plus of using their method. Though for DIY I still think the hitch is best.

Perhaps whatever data I churn out regarding sttetchiness of different materials will be useful to you as well. I'm almost certain the Marlow SK99 2mm won't need resplicing after first stretch / bed in, for example.


----------



## Vogelfrei (11 mo ago)

Mikevdv said:


> . it requires custom hardware preventing spoke rotation when tightening will be a *** without the flat that berd uses


I just use a bit of leverage... Long leverage video
It took me about 40-50 minutes for 32 spokes


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Nice, good work!

I had a similar idea which I plan to develop in the next few days, though I am lucky enough to have access to an arbor press which should make things a bit faster.


----------



## Grinchy8 (Jul 6, 2021)

AdamR83 said:


> Looks like Marlow offer the Kiteline Race in 1.8mm now as well (previously was only in 1.3mm and 1.5mm), so I have some of that on the way.


I was looking for this over the weekend and only found a US source for 1.5mm. Would 1.5mm work fine with a looped/welded spoke?


----------



## Vogelfrei (11 mo ago)

@Mikevdv 
I looked at the item you are using to calibrate your spokes tension... it's great! I already own it and didn't thought about using it for that purpose! You're right!


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Grinchy8 said:


> I was looking for this over the weekend and only found a US source for 1.5mm. Would 1.5mm work fine with a looped/welded spoke?


I see no reason why not, however I haven't yet tried this exact line myself. Have some arriving later this week though, all being well...


----------



## CrozCountry (Mar 18, 2011)

Don't forget that the spoke has to go through holes in the hub, especially if you are using J bend hub flanges.


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Done some faffing around this morning. Obviously I won't be using these tools to make anything, its just a fun project showing how one might be able to make spoke ends that look and function a bit like the Berd ones.

Couple of M5 bolts chopped up a bit with the grinder, welded to a bit of plate...










Squish...










Ta daa!










Turny turny and holdy holdy...



















Decided to add a 'stopper' so that the crimp would be in exactly the same place each time, and at 90 degrees.










Another simple jig - shove spoke into tube, butt cutters up against end of tube, same length spokelet every time. Could have just crimped the end of the tube I guess, but it's nice to have a little bit of length adjustment by screwing the bolt in and out.










I have one of the scales Mike suggested arriving soon. Luckily, about one of the only things Chinese sellers do well is add the size of the product in a handy photo  So it should go straight into this jig...



















Turning the T handle at the bottom pulls the sliding 'carriage' down and adds tension. Carriage designed in such a way that it can be removed if necessary, and won't rotate while loading up the spoke. M5 thread so 0.8mm of stretch per rotation. First estimates are that stiffer spokes will be around 3 turns to 100kg, flexier spokes more like 6 turns. Nipple is held captive by the end of the threaded rod (with a small clearance) so test pieces can be loaded into the jig by hand - nipple rotates freely by hand, and the loop in the spoke will go over the hook on the scale.

Totally OTT? Probably. Been fun to get the grey matter working? Absolutely!


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

CrozCountry said:


> Don't forget that the spoke has to go through holes in the hub, especially if you are using J bend hub flanges.


I'm unsure of how the other guys do it, but I use a jig that holds the hub and rim in situ. You can pass the line through the hub, adding a spokelet to the free end. Then, screw a nipple on a couple of turns, pull the line tight by hand, adjusting at the hub as you go, and cut it where the second spoke will finish. Then screw a nipple onto a spokelet a couple of turns, slide the cord over the spokelet and set in place. 2 spokes made from one section of cord, no need to get the end through the hub.

Again, this isn't something I will be doing, just mentioning how it could be done...


----------



## AdamR83 (Jan 21, 2021)

Today's faffing...

Figured testing a double spoke would be better, since this way it removes the splicing operation (and associated bedding in) and it's closer to how they will be in a wheel. Adjusted the jig as necessary and then went for it...










Left to right:

Marlow V12 Vectran 2.5mm
Marlow D12 Max SK99 2mm
Marlow SK99 1.8mm (was sold as Max but don't think it is...)
Marlow Kiteline Race SK99 1.5mm

The first 3 are glued onto a 14g / 2mm spoke, the 1.5mm line is onto a butted 2.0/1.8 spoke.

And very nicely it glues too!










Each of the lines have their own slightly different characteristic when gluing - some wick faster, some slower, some seem to spread out further and others leave the glue in more concentrated lumps.

Wound her up...










And some more...










Then noticed the rig wasn't too happy!










Can't believe that aluminium rivnut didn't pull out, impressive. I guess that's what you get for building it out of bits of scrap  So I welded some extra bits on to beef it up, should be ok now.

Weight for a double spoke, each approx 300mm length, in all of the 4 materials tested so far. The Robline will end up the same as the 1.8mm SK99 I should think.





































I still have to do the Robline (hopefully tonight) and write up the results - it's pretty interesting though...

Once again, just doing this for a bit of fun and won't be putting these spokes or the method anywhere near a set of hubs & rims.


----------

