|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Scamdium strikes again!
Michael Press wrote:
In article , jim beam wrote: Michael Press wrote: In article , "Skippy" wrote: "jim beam" wrote in message t... [edit] be careful of terminology. while there is a lot of confusion about which term describes what in certain quarters, where i came from, endurance limit describes the "knee" in the s-n graph of mild steel, while fatigue limit describes the stress level to survive an arbitrary number of stress cycles, say 10^7. it's the design, stress risers, material quality, etc., that determine fatigue life more than anything else, particularly once you get away from the simple alloys systems. don't be afraid of properly deployed aluminum alloys - aluminum alloy wings stay on planes for a good long time.... And am I right in thinking they're held on with rivets, mostly? That got me wondering about this cracking-round-eyelets thing that rattles on and on in RBT. I saw someone on TV restoring an aircraft. drilling the holes for the rivets involved at least a 3 step process (pilot, bigger drill, finishing drill). I assumed this was to produce a smooth round hole. I'm willing to believe that holes in rims are a one step process. This could leave a comparatively rough and ovalised hole. Could this lead to more serious crack propogation? Bicycle rim holes should be finished with a grommet so machining is a negligible contribution to rim hole failure. Experience of many people show that thick anodizing of bicycle rims is a much greater contributor to rim failure. sorry, but there's no proven connection with anodizing. the originator of this allegation used a dye penetrant test as "proof". all dye penetrant testing shows is that cracking is present - it is entirely uninformative as to cause. deployment of an inappropriate test should warn of flawed theory, but the fact that cracking is often out of plane with any potential anodizing cracks shows just how wildly off base it really is. please don't propagate this old wives tale any more michael. Aluminum oxide and aluminum have different bulk physical characteristics. Among these are ductility and elastic modulus. A bicycle rim undergoes considerable strain. Different things can happen. The differential of elasticity between the Al2O3 and Al results in a shear stress at the boundary. This could result in a relative displacement of the two layers, and this would be observed as exfoliation of the Al2O3 in flakes. This is not observed. The boundary between the Al and the Al2O3 is not a sharp one, but gradual, so the shear stress is not large. Another possibility is that the low tensile strength of the Al2�3 results in fracture of the Al2O3 layer. This is observed. yes it is. The fractures produce a stress riser propogating the crack into the Al progressively weakening it until in theory, yes. the rim fails. but not in practice. the anodizing cracks are very observable and they're not aligned with the rim cracking! yet again, examine this pic: http://web.onetel.net.uk/~davidwgreen/rimpics/4.JPG rim cracking /is/ however aligned with the extrusion axis, so much so that long cracks jump back and forth between different extrusion lines, but keep the same direction. /that/ is not anodizing. The same phenomenon is experieneced when a scab forms over a wound. If the skin is stretched the scab can crack and open the wound. |
Ads |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Scamdium strikes again!
jim beam wrote: Michael Press wrote: Another possibility is that the low tensile strength of the Al2?3 results in fracture of the Al2O3 layer. This is observed. yes it is. Th e fractures produce a stress riser propogating the crack into the Al progressively weakening it until in theory, yes. the rim fails. but not in practice. the anodizing cracks are very observable and they're not aligned with the rim cracking! yet again, examine this pic: http://web.onetel.net.uk/~davidwgreen/rimpics/4.JPG rim cracking /is/ however aligned with the extrusion axis, so much so that long cracks jump back and forth between different extrusion lines, bu t keep the same direction. /that/ is not anodizing. Yet another bit of photographic "evidence" from you which is not evidence at all. Cracks from anodizing are not so evident in this photo and it is not evident that the rim is anodized at all. If one can discern such cracks, there do seem to be corresponding cracks in the rim. Whatever: it is not at all clear enough. What IS evident is that the rim has all sorts of stress risers from scoring, on the inward facing surface that is not contacted by the brake pads. This is not a polished aluminum rim, it has either been deliberately scored or poorly manufactured. If there are cracks in the rim aligned with that scoring, big deal: that is the whole reason why the manufacturer is supposed to polish aluminum rims in the first place. But your photo isn't really clear enough to even be sure those are cracks, and not just well-placed dirt. MANY posters in this group have seen the difference between the otherwise identical polished aluminum MA2 and the heavily anodized MA40. They know anodizing rims encourages crack formation, the more so the heavier the anodizing. With your long track record of phony photographic "evidence", you'll have to do A LOT better. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Scamdium strikes again!
41 wrote: jim beam wrote: Michael Press wrote: Another possibility is that the low tensile strength of the Al2?3 results in fracture of the Al2O3 layer. This is observed. yes it is. Th e fractures produce a st ress riser propogating the crack into the Al progressively weakening it until in theory, yes. the rim fails. but not in practice. the anodizing cracks are very observable and they're not aligned with the rim crac king! yet again, examine this pic: http://web.onetel.net.uk/~davidwgreen/rimpics/4.JPG rim cracking /is/ however aligned with the extrusion axis, so much so that long cracks jump back and forth between different extrusion lines, bu t keep the same direction. /that/ is not anodizing. Yet another bit of photographic "evidence" from you which is not evidence at all. Cracks from anodizing are not so evident in this photo and it is not evident that the rim is anodized at all. If one can discern such cracks, there do seem to be corresponding cracks in the rim. Whatever: it is not at all clear enough. What IS evident is that the rim has all sorts of stress risers from scoring, on the inward facing surface that is not contacted by the brake pads. This is not a polished aluminum rim, it has either been deliberately scored or poorly manufactured. If there are cracks in the rim aligned with that scoring, big deal: that is the whole reason why the manufacturer is supposed to polish aluminum rims in the first place. But your photo isn't really clear enough to even be sure those are cracks, and not just well-placed dirt. So, I looked at the other pictures and see they are not from the above but that they have been well commented on already. I note that, contrary to Jack Daniel's assertion in that original thread, that the rims were low mileage and in good shape, the brake track is heavily scored and there is corrosion on the outside. He also fails here to link JPEGs 1-3, which show the inner surface of the rim pulling out in a large circle around the eyelet. In short: manufacturing defect, too short sockets. And like I say above, the rim is heavily scored, these are natural stress risers so why shouldn't cracks be expected there? It is not an anodized rim anyway. Lastly: with the too short sockets, once could easily see how the tension could get too high without this being seen by the stress-relief method, since only one wall was at first getting all the load. In short: again another piece of photographic "evidence" from this poster which is nothing of the kind. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Scamdium strikes again!
jim beam wrote:
Mark Hickey wrote: jim beam wrote: So then maybe you can explain the tremendously failure rates between anodized rims and the same rim without anodizing (something I've seen even with modern "thin anodized" rims. It's OK to try to shoot holes in theory, but unless you have some other more plausible theory, it's all hand-waving. so what rims are available both anodized and unanodized? and what's your data? all i've seen is a bunch of misdiagnosed assertions that happen to coincide with "tension as high as the rim can bear". There have been many of them over the years. Recently, I've seen the diffence even between the black and silver versions of the Mavic Open Pro rims (probably 20% of the wheels I've sold have had black rims, but 100% of the rim failures have been with black rims). I'm also curious as to what might keep anodizing from cracking "in plane" with typical rim-killing cracks. Seems to me that the same stresses that kill the parent material would certainly be likely to flex the brittle anodizing enough to create a crack in the same plane. study this: http://web.onetel.net.uk/~davidwgreen/rimpics/4.JPG the crack is not radial, it's tangential, therefore it's not initiating from any anodizing crack. anodizing cracks, as you'll know if you've looked at them under a magnifier, extend strictly radially from the rim hole. I'm still not following how it's impossible for the brittle anodizing to crack where there's enough tension to eventually crack the parent material. In fact, I can't imagine that the anodizing would NOT crack first (it being much more brittle than the parent material). The fact that the initial "typical" anodizing cracks might not match the profile of a particular failure doesn't seem to be much of a "proof" of anything, IMHO. Or is this just another "Jobst said it so I'm going to try to convince everyone it's not true" issue? there's nothing wrong with jobst's work when it's something within his actual sphere of knowledge. but given that that sphere is apparently much smaller than he cares to admit, the problem comes when he starts making flawed presumptions about stuff he doesn't actually know or can be bothered to research. and it gets worse when he tries to b.s. a metallurgist on basic materials theory about which he hasn't got the faintest clue. Perhaps, but I'm still not convinced you are doing anything different than you claim Jobst does above. There is enough anecdotal evidence over the last couple decades to support Jobst's claims on this matter, and little I've seen to refute it. IMH0, you're well short of countering the evidence of thousands of anodized rims. Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $795 ti frame |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Miranda Devine strikes again. | geoffs | Australia | 38 | June 20th 06 03:12 AM |
Buzzard attacks, broken chains & lightning strikes. | Dave Lawrance | UK | 21 | September 25th 05 12:34 PM |
Reinforcement Man Strikes Again! (new seat reinforcement!) | Fuego | Unicycling | 6 | July 7th 05 09:27 PM |
Reinforcement Man Strikes Again! (new seat reinforcement!) | Fuego | Unicycling | 0 | July 7th 05 03:09 AM |
Hell Ride (the Empire strikes back) | Hitchy | Australia | 109 | March 30th 04 03:27 AM |