A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Techniques
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Fork survived, head tube didn't!



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #17  
Old September 11th 07, 05:46 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
jim beam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,758
Default Fork survived, head tube didn't!

Jambo wrote:
"jim beam" wrote in message
...
Jambo wrote:
"jim beam" wrote in message
t...
still me wrote:
Bottom line - I've never seen a steel frame do that, no matter what
the crash conditions.
it won't - it'll plastically deform and do so at a lower stress level.
Yeah, because "for a 6061 with E = 69GPa, and 275MPa yield, that gives an
elastic
deformation limit of 0.275/69 x 100% = 0.04%."

CF still sucks.
no it doesn't - on a specific modulus basis, it's about the best
material out there right now.
Yeah, because "for a 6061 with E = 69GPa, and 275MPa yield, that gives an
elastic
deformation limit of 0.275/69 x 100% = 0.04%."

i don't understand the problem people have with a superior [stronger]
material - just because the deformation mechanism is different. stronger
is better. lighter is better. more fatigue resistant is better.
carbon is impressive on all three counts.
Yeah, because "for a 6061 with E = 69GPa, and 275MPa yield, that gives an
elastic
deformation limit of 0.275/69 x 100% = 0.04%."

if you want to make meat out of that typo mr. modulus, try omitting the
formula - because that gives the correct answer. moron.


Really? You get 0.04% instead of 0.4%? And then you base your whole
"brittle" argument on your mistaken arithmetic?


we were being quoted plastic elongation numbers and being asked to
compare with elastic elongation in an apples to oranges scenario. i
point out in an apples to apples comparison, that the elastic distortion
range of aluminum [at 0.4% or even 0.04%] is still way less than 1.5%
for carbon. sure, i made a typo, but the science was right and the
conclusion was right.


" 1. peter cole doesn't know what the **** he's talking about.
2. he's attempting to deceive."



HAHAHAHA! ****tard idiot!


and what do we have from you? gross scientific error, compounded by
further gross scientific error after what should have been a period in
which corrective research could have been conducted, all spiced up with
lies and lunatic moon howlings!

conclusion? you need to see a doctor. i doubt he'll be able to do much
for your i.q., but he might be able to stabilize your behavioral
episodes, once the kind gentlemen in the white coats release you from
the padded cell.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
1" Fork steer tube into 1'1/8' head tube?? Is it possible [email protected] Techniques 4 November 10th 06 12:53 AM
Survived a Coker head-on collision with a bike in NYC! HardcoreCokerRider Unicycling 21 April 10th 05 07:35 AM
Head tube space to relax fork angle ? Gwood Mountain Biking 4 October 20th 03 12:04 AM
threadless fork stuck in head tube.. Jim Price UK 2 August 13th 03 03:49 PM
Head tube angle/increased fork travel Alan McClure Mountain Biking 3 June 27th 03 01:28 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:29 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.