Lacing a Chris King ISO front hub
Doug T
"The front ISO should be laced 3-or-more-cross with the rotor (left)
side pulling spokes (relative to braking direction) heads out/elbows
in (when laced 3-cross). The final cross of the pulling spoke must be
on the outside so that, as braking force is applied, increased pulling
spoke tension will pull the crossed spokes towards the center of the
hub and away from the caliper."
I think I may have done the exact opposite of this based on following
Sheldon Brown's instructions. Does it REALLY matter which way the
spokes are oriented (heads out vs. heads in, final cross inside vs.
outside). What are the consequences of flipping the pattern?
Thanks,
Doug T.
AMuzi
Probably none.
This was discussed ad nauseum here years ago as regards
drive side rear spokes (the same problem as a brake hub but
on the other side).
An inside spoke deflects less than an 'outie' spoke under
drive/braking torque. We all agreed the effect is minor in
the real world where other factors outweigh it.
--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
raamman
I wiould guess the wheel would be more likely to pretzel under severe
braking/ impact (eg minor pit in the road)
thirty-six
If you've interlaced the spokes without working elbows at the crossing
then the crossings will move laterally. This is the largest problem,
for this leads to failure at the spoke elbows. With a correctly built
tied and soldered wheel (no weaving, double ties) any lateral movement
at the crossing is infinitesimal, so it matters not way it is supposed
to move or not.
thirty-six
That's the problem (made worse through overtensioning of spokes) with
the simple interlaced pattern as fitted to economy machines of the
last 50 years.
Ron Ruff
> I think I may have done the exact opposite of this based on following
> Sheldon Brown's instructions. Does it REALLY matter which way the
> spokes are oriented (heads out vs. heads in, final cross inside vs.
> outside). What are the consequences of flipping the pattern?
CK's recommendation is a good policy, but if your clearance is good
you don't need to worry.
Jay Beattie
Why? I would think the recommendation is to maintain clearance
between the outside spokes and the caliper and adjusting disc, if
there is one. I would not think that the orientation of a spoke head
would have much effect on the structural integrity of the wheel or the
incidence of over-load failure. -- Jay Beattie.
raamman
>
> - Show quoted text -
When mirrored (flipped around) what would you say is the distance from
the elbow of the spoke to the head ? multiply that by two and subtract
that distance from the overall width of the hub/ the base of the
triangle that is providing the rigidity to the rim. There is a reason
spokes are laced from the edge of the hub instead of directly from the
centre of the hub.
Jay Beattie
Every conventional wheel has an equal number of spokes radiating from
the inside and the outside, so I don't see how flipping the pattern
(or not flipping the pattern) would have any effect on dish or net
spoke angle or tension. Plus, the CK recommended pattern would place
"pulling" spokes (leading spokes with refrences to the forces exerted
by a front disc brake) radiating out from the inside of the flange,
with less support and a lower angle to the rim than the trailing
spokes. Shimano recommends a reversed pattern. I build my disc
wheels both ways and have found that it makes no difference,
particularly since I have plenty of clearance to my calipers. -- Jay
Beattie.
raamman
how much clearance to the calipers is not really an issue; how the
wheel reacts under load, while extreme braking with an impact coming
at one side or the other, does, I think. I have experienced rim
warping/deflection on new (self-built) rims under heavy braking at
speed, the only thing is that when I started building my wheels I was
a bit confussed about the spoking cross-over direction and this was
the result. It may be a minor difference but under the loads and
forces on a wheel everything becomes magnified during heavy braking-
that may be the crucial difference- I don't know, I don't have an
engineering background (unfortunately). I am not going to try to
convince you to redo your wheels; or pretend that others who may have
the engineering degrees have their math wrong. It bothered me when I
discovered I reversed the build on my wheels, as I am sure it bothers
you too- but it wasn't worth it (to me) to rebuild them once they were
done and ridden; and you probabally realize that once trued up your
spokes have the stress grained into them- so you are going to spend
another $20-$30 for a rim costing perhaps only twice that ? is that
worth it ? hey, s- happens man- there are more important things to
agonize about in a day; consider it an ongoing experiment,it may take
a long time or never, you know ? enjoy the ride regardless.
Dan O
I might have done the same thing, but had pulled up Sheldon's
instructions again just before re-assembling my rear wheel with a new
hub. (ISTR splitting the crankcase on an engine like several times
one day 'cause of putting it together wrong :-)
http://sheldonbrown.com/wheels/index.html
> It may be a minor difference but under the loads and
> forces on a wheel everything becomes magnified during heavy braking-
> that may be the crucial difference- I don't know,
For sure I get into heavy braking now and then. Can't recall any side
impacts since building it, but have had that combination of
circumstances plenty of times for sure.
> I don't have an
> engineering background (unfortunately). I am not going to try to
> convince you to redo your wheels; or pretend that others who may have
> the engineering degrees have their math wrong. It bothered me when I
> discovered I reversed the build on my wheels, as I am sure it bothers
> you too- but it wasn't worth it (to me) to rebuild them once they were
> done and ridden; and you probabally realize that once trued up your
> spokes have the stress grained into them- so you are going to spend
> another $20-$30 for a rim costing perhaps only twice that ? is that
> worth it ? hey, s- happens man- there are more important things to
> agonize about in a day; consider it an ongoing experiment,it may take
> a long time or never, you know ?
Re-using spokes, I mixed the inside and outside spoke elbows on each
side. So far, so good. The wheel stays truer now and is way easier
to true since rebuild - what with the grease on eyelets and spoke
threads. It helps that I now have a tensionmeter(?) thingie, too.
> enjoy the ride regardless.
You said it!
Tºm Shermªn™ °_°
> [...]It helps that I now have a tensionmeter(?) thingie, too.
> [...]
No "n": "tensiometer".
Or you can be 1950's retro: "Tension-O-Meter". :)
--
Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.
raamman
>
> - Show quoted text -
the side impacts I refer to are minor deflections in road surface/
debris when under extreme braking- there is a reason a wheel will warp
to either side when it does
I never thought to mix the spokes when relacing- now I have boutique
wheels and don't have to touch them at all- big freaking difference
between what I bought and the best I ever built (sadly)
I bought one of those park tensionmeters for the day I had build or
fix a wheel- still sits in it's box in the tool cabinet- if only I had
what I have then....
Michael Press
<43768b43-c193-44b7...@i32g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,
Doug T <doug....@cox.net> wrote:
You get it wrong somehow and have to lace the wheel again?
I've laced a few wheels and refer to exact spoke by spoke
instructions every time. Unless you lace wheels a few times
a year you forget. Sooo, follow the instructions exactly to
minimize the chance of error. The structural rationalizations
for a particular configuration do not add up to much in the
real world. More important is that you lace so that the
cross pattern is most open where the tube stem is.
--
Michael Press