Durability Of Velocity Aerohead Rims In 20/24 Hole Drillings.

On Nov 6, 11:21*am, Jobst Brandt wrote:
Ed who? wrote:
I am considering rebuilding a set of wheels that had Alex 20/24
hole rims. *They went about 5K miles before the spokes started to
pull thorough the rims.
I am considering using these hubs and Velocity Aerohead and
Aerohead O/C rims but am wondering about the durability because of
my previous experience with the Alex rims.
I currently have a set of these Velocity rims but in 32 hole
configuration that have been flawless for the past 10K miles.
BTW, I only weigh about 160 pounds.
As I understand it you have a set of hubs you would like to re rim
and you would like your work to last more than 5000 miles.
A key point is: suddenly applied loads double the stress on any
structure when compared to statically applied loads.
In your experience 32 hole rims last at least twice as long as 20/24
hole rims and the weak point appears to be the rim (where some rims
have an eyelet).
I am not convinced an eyelet is going to solve things unless you get
one that transfers the force to the inner wall of the rim - I don't
think they make those any more.
If I were trying to get more miles out of those hubs - or
specifically rims attached to those hubs - I would select a rim that
could be run at the lowest pressure possible (consistent with Josh
above). *That would mean tubeless at 80 lbs. *I am told the A23 was
designed to be convertered and I know that Stan's Alpha rims were
designed to be run tubeless.
A key point is I've been told the spoke that is supporting the
weight is the spoke in tension immediately above the hub. *All the
other spokes are keeping the wheel round as the top of the rim tries
to deform inward. *The more the top of the rim can deform inward the
more the load on the spoke above the hub is reduced. *Long story
short: a shallow section like the A23 should reduce the peak loads
on the eyelet area and tubeless at low pressures should reduce the
suddeness of the load effectively reducing the peak stress on the
eyelet area.

You have been misled (pronounced my-seld) again. *The load is carried
by compressing the bottom spokes between hub and road. *If they are
too loose and become slack from loading, the spoke nipples unscrew or
worse, the wheel collapses, having no lateral rim position for lack of
spoke pull to the sides.

Use the A23 tubeless if you want ot stick with those hubs.

What does "tubeless" have to do with cracking rims?

Jobst Brandt- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Tubeless allows lower tire pressures which means less sudden loading
conditions and a larger contact patch. The larger contact patch un
loads the rim over a larger area (this is based on the free body
digram of all road to rim loads being imposed by tire forces at the
bead.). The smeared unloading should reduce the peak cyclic load on
the part of the rim that holds the nipple. The part that cracks.

On Thu, 04 Nov 2010 19:37:31 -0400, Steve Sr.
wrote:

Hello,

I am considering rebuilding a set of wheels that had Alex 20/24 hole
rims. They went about 5K miles before the spokes started to pull
thorough the rims.

I am considering using these hubs and Velocity Aerohead and Aerohead
O/C rims but am wondering about the durability because of my previous
experience with the Alex rims.

I currently have a set of these Velocity rims but in 32 hole
configuration that have been flawless for the past 10K miles.

BTW, I only weigh about 160 pounds.

Thanks,

Steve

Thanks for everyones input. I agree with Andrew that the spoke count
is on low side for durability.

As I mentioned, the original rims started to fail at about 5K miles
and were replaced under warranty. The new set had about 5K miles on
them when a minor crash took out the front wheel. Since I have 5K on
the rear which is where the original failed I was planning on
rebuilding both to be done with it. Were these over tensioned? I have
no way of knowing.

I am primarily looking at rebuilding these as a secondary/spare set
and not wanting to break the bank doing it. This includes reusing the
spokes if at all possible. This is one reason why I was looking at the
Aerohead. I believe that the ERD was close enough to use the old
spokes. The hubs are radial in the front and radial/3 cross in the
rear if that matters.

Steve

Ed wrote:

I am not convinced an eyelet is goint to solve things unless you get
one that transfers the force to the inner wall of the rim - I don't
think they make those any more.

A single eyelet (grommet) serves two valuable purposes: It provides a
better bearing surface for the spoke nipple head, and it helps prevent
galling damage at the drilling from initiating cracks into the rim
extrusion.

Double eyelets (sockets) are still offered by Mavic, Rigida, and Alex
on a few models. Whether they actually transfer any load to the
internal wall of the rim depends on the specifics of the socket and
the rim extrusion and manufacturing tolerances. On modern deep and
semi-deep section rims, sockets offer the benefit of keeping nipples
from going astray within the rim channel while the wheel is being
laced.

Chalo

Steve Sr. wrote:
On Thu, 04 Nov 2010 19:37:31 -0400, Steve Sr.
wrote:

Hello,

I am considering rebuilding a set of wheels that had Alex 20/24 hole
rims. They went about 5K miles before the spokes started to pull
thorough the rims.

I am considering using these hubs and Velocity Aerohead and Aerohead
O/C rims but am wondering about the durability because of my previous
experience with the Alex rims.

I currently have a set of these Velocity rims but in 32 hole
configuration that have been flawless for the past 10K miles.

BTW, I only weigh about 160 pounds.

Thanks,

Steve

Thanks for everyones input. I agree with Andrew that the spoke count
is on low side for durability.

As I mentioned, the original rims started to fail at about 5K miles
and were replaced under warranty. The new set had about 5K miles on
them when a minor crash took out the front wheel. Since I have 5K on
the rear which is where the original failed I was planning on
rebuilding both to be done with it. Were these over tensioned? I have
no way of knowing.

I am primarily looking at rebuilding these as a secondary/spare set
and not wanting to break the bank doing it. This includes reusing the
spokes if at all possible. This is one reason why I was looking at the
Aerohead. I believe that the ERD was close enough to use the old
spokes. The hubs are radial in the front and radial/3 cross in the
rear if that matters.

Steve

Another path is to give those hubs away and get a set of 36h
Shimano hubs. Hubs are an area in which Shimano shines, dirt
cheap and very tough. Rims cost the same in any drill.

You'd also have the opportunity to build 3x front and rear.
Bonus.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Nov 6, 2:04*pm, Chalo wrote:
Ed wrote:

I am not convinced an eyelet is goint to solve things unless you get
one that transfers the force to the inner wall of the rim - I don't
think they make those any more.

A single eyelet (grommet) serves two valuable purposes: *It provides a
better bearing surface for the spoke nipple head, and it helps prevent
galling damage at the drilling from initiating cracks into the rim
extrusion.

Double eyelets (sockets) are still offered by Mavic, Rigida, and Alex
on a few models. *Whether they actually transfer any load to the
internal wall of the rim depends on the specifics of the socket and
the rim extrusion and manufacturing tolerances. *On modern deep and
semi-deep section rims, sockets offer the benefit of keeping nipples
from going astray within the rim channel while the wheel is being
laced.


Alex R390s have been nothing but rock solid in my experience. Not too
light or too heavy, much like a CR18 in that regard. Socketed and
cheap. If they hold up to my buddy Shep, they'll pretty much stand up
to most folks.

landotter wrote:
On Nov 6, 2:04 pm, Chalo wrote:
Ed wrote:

I am not convinced an eyelet is goint to solve things unless you get
one that transfers the force to the inner wall of the rim - I don't
think they make those any more.
A single eyelet (grommet) serves two valuable purposes: It provides a
better bearing surface for the spoke nipple head, and it helps prevent
galling damage at the drilling from initiating cracks into the rim
extrusion.

Double eyelets (sockets) are still offered by Mavic, Rigida, and Alex
on a few models. Whether they actually transfer any load to the
internal wall of the rim depends on the specifics of the socket and
the rim extrusion and manufacturing tolerances. On modern deep and
semi-deep section rims, sockets offer the benefit of keeping nipples
from going astray within the rim channel while the wheel is being
laced.


Alex R390s have been nothing but rock solid in my experience. Not too
light or too heavy, much like a CR18 in that regard. Socketed and
cheap. If they hold up to my buddy Shep, they'll pretty much stand up
to most folks.

At 485g I'd expect so:
http://www.alexrims.com/product_deta...=1&cat=1&id=44



--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Nov 6, 2:50*pm, AMuzi wrote:
landotter wrote:
On Nov 6, 2:04 pm, Chalo wrote:
Ed wrote:

I am not convinced an eyelet is goint to solve things unless you get
one that transfers the force to the inner wall of the rim - I don't
think they make those any more.
A single eyelet (grommet) serves two valuable purposes: *It provides a
better bearing surface for the spoke nipple head, and it helps prevent
galling damage at the drilling from initiating cracks into the rim
extrusion.

Double eyelets (sockets) are still offered by Mavic, Rigida, and Alex
on a few models. *Whether they actually transfer any load to the
internal wall of the rim depends on the specifics of the socket and
the rim extrusion and manufacturing tolerances. *On modern deep and
semi-deep section rims, sockets offer the benefit of keeping nipples
from going astray within the rim channel while the wheel is being
laced.

Alex R390s have been nothing but rock solid in my experience. Not too
light or too heavy, much like a CR18 in that regard. Socketed and
cheap. If they hold up to my buddy Shep, they'll pretty much stand up
to most folks.

At 485g I'd expect so:http://www.alexrims.com/product_deta...=1&cat=1&id=44



Probably more like 500g on a real scale. A proper amount of metal for
real world use. The Adventurers I built up scaled at something like
650g. With 900g 47mm Continentals. The trick is to stay at speed. ;-)
And ride with slow clydes.

On Nov 6, 12:53*pm, Steve Sr. wrote:
The hubs *are radial in the front and radial/3 cross in the
rear if that matters.

24H, 3x? Does not seem likely.

DR

On Nov 6, 1:06*pm, landotter wrote:
On Nov 6, 2:50*pm, AMuzi wrote:





landotter wrote:
On Nov 6, 2:04 pm, Chalo wrote:
Ed wrote:

I am not convinced an eyelet is goint to solve things unless you get
one that transfers the force to the inner wall of the rim - I don't
think they make those any more.
A single eyelet (grommet) serves two valuable purposes: *It provides a
better bearing surface for the spoke nipple head, and it helps prevent
galling damage at the drilling from initiating cracks into the rim
extrusion.

Double eyelets (sockets) are still offered by Mavic, Rigida, and Alex
on a few models. *Whether they actually transfer any load to the
internal wall of the rim depends on the specifics of the socket and
the rim extrusion and manufacturing tolerances. *On modern deep and
semi-deep section rims, sockets offer the benefit of keeping nipples
from going astray within the rim channel while the wheel is being
laced.

Alex R390s have been nothing but rock solid in my experience. Not too
light or too heavy, much like a CR18 in that regard. Socketed and
cheap. If they hold up to my buddy Shep, they'll pretty much stand up
to most folks.

At 485g I'd expect so:http://www.alexrims.com/product_deta...=1&cat=1&id=44

Probably more like 500g on a real scale. A proper amount of metal for
real world use. The Adventurers I built up scaled at something like
650g. With 900g 47mm Continentals. The trick is to stay at speed. ;-)
And ride with slow clydes.- Hide quoted text -

The R390 web-page claims that it is a racing and tri rim, 500g seems
pretty heavy for a racing rim. -- Jay Beattie.

On Nov 6, 6:19*pm, Jay Beattie wrote:
On Nov 6, 1:06*pm, landotter wrote:









On Nov 6, 2:50*pm, AMuzi wrote:

landotter wrote:
On Nov 6, 2:04 pm, Chalo wrote:
Ed wrote:

I am not convinced an eyelet is goint to solve things unless you get
one that transfers the force to the inner wall of the rim - I don't
think they make those any more.
A single eyelet (grommet) serves two valuable purposes: *It provides a
better bearing surface for the spoke nipple head, and it helps prevent
galling damage at the drilling from initiating cracks into the rim
extrusion.

Double eyelets (sockets) are still offered by Mavic, Rigida, and Alex
on a few models. *Whether they actually transfer any load to the
internal wall of the rim depends on the specifics of the socket and
the rim extrusion and manufacturing tolerances. *On modern deep and
semi-deep section rims, sockets offer the benefit of keeping nipples
from going astray within the rim channel while the wheel is being
laced.

Alex R390s have been nothing but rock solid in my experience. Not too
light or too heavy, much like a CR18 in that regard. Socketed and
cheap. If they hold up to my buddy Shep, they'll pretty much stand up
to most folks.

At 485g I'd expect so:http://www.alexrims.com/product_deta...=1&cat=1&id=44

Probably more like 500g on a real scale. A proper amount of metal for
real world use. The Adventurers I built up scaled at something like
650g. With 900g 47mm Continentals. The trick is to stay at speed. ;-)
And ride with slow clydes.- Hide quoted text -

The R390 web-page claims that it is a racing and tri rim, 500g seems
pretty heavy for a racing rim. -- Jay Beattie.

Certainly. However, it's a damn good rim for non-racing roadies who
want durability. I do have a feeling that it probably wouldn't slow
any champs down compared to an OP.