Fork survived, head tube didn't!

Interesting crash photos. The fork steering column looks ok, the head
tube is kaput.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos.ph...BikeCrashPhSpt

http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos.ph...ashedBikePhSpt

Rik O'Shea wrote:
Interesting crash photos. The fork steering column looks ok, the head
tube is kaput.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos.ph...BikeCrashPhSpt

http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos.ph...ashedBikePhSpt


interesting indeed.

On Sep 6, 5:02 am, Rik O'Shea wrote:
Interesting crash photos. The fork steering column looks ok, the head
tube is kaput.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos.ph...ep07/newport07...

http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos.ph...ep07/newport07...

How can a crash destroy the bottom of your head tube outwards? I've
seen stuff like that after casing a bmx or mtb jump landing, but hard
to see how that would happen on a road bike....

/s

On Sep 6, 10:00 am, Scott Gordo wrote:
On Sep 6, 5:02 am, Rik O'Shea wrote:

Interesting crash photos. The fork steering column looks ok, the head
tube is kaput.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos.ph...ep07/newport07...

http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos.ph...ep07/newport07...

How can a crash destroy the bottom of your head tube outwards? I've
seen stuff like that after casing a bmx or mtb jump landing, but hard
to see how that would happen on a road bike....

/s

It looks almost like something hit the fork from the left, or the bike
was lying on the ground on its left side and something landed on it.

jim beam wrote:
Rik O'Shea wrote:
Interesting crash photos. The fork steering column looks ok, the head
tube is kaput.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos.ph...BikeCrashPhSpt


http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos.ph...ashedBikePhSpt



interesting indeed.

wow, a whole day passes and the stupidity contestants don't comment on
how cfrp is "brittle", how it should all be aerospace spec and how it is
in fact satan's spawn.

but how silly of me! to expect sufficient interest in commenting
presumes an interest in the /subject matter/ rather than trying to bleat
ridiculous personal dislike of a random anonymous troll they found on
the interweb. on their employers time no less.

Scott Gordo wrote:
On Sep 6, 5:02 am, Rik O'Shea wrote:
Interesting crash photos. The fork steering column looks ok, the head
tube is kaput.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos.ph...ep07/newport07...

http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos.ph...ep07/newport07...

How can a crash destroy the bottom of your head tube outwards? I've
seen stuff like that after casing a bmx or mtb jump landing, but hard
to see how that would happen on a road bike....

but that's what makes them so dramatic...

Jambo wrote:
"jim beam" wrote in message
...
wow, a whole day passes and the stupidity contestants don't comment on how
cfrp is "brittle", how it should all be aerospace spec and how it is in
fact satan's spawn.

but how silly of me! to expect sufficient interest in commenting presumes
an interest in the /subject matter/ rather than trying to bleat ridiculous
personal dislike of a random anonymous troll they found on the interweb.
on their employers time no less.

Hey dood, this conversation is over... you got everything wrong, remember?
Let me recap:
you excreted:
1. CF has elastic stress strain ratio an order of magnitude greater than Al
alloys
2. "a typical yield limit on quality carbon bike componentry is ~3x that of
steel"
3. "damage to cfrp is inflicted at much higher levels than for metals"
4. "almost every bike uses a CF fork"
5. NDT is the same as NDI
6. "quarter" tapping is all you need to check CFRPs
7. CF forks have "millions upon millions of real life rider miles" with no
failures reported
8. people made up their experiences of failures of CF handlebars, seatposts
(those damn mtbr.com liars)
9. no, people don't know how to use CF forks, that's why they fail (those
damn ignorami)
10. no, it's the Chinese manufacturers' fault CF forks are faulty (those
damn Chinese)

All of which are wrong.

Oh, and before you say "putting words in my mouth", "red herring", "fud",
"fudge", "bull", "deceive", "prick", "**** you", and all the other lame
retorts you use, bear in mind everyone can see your previous posts to
confirm.

Anyway, whatsa matter, no one wants to play with you no more, so you go
trolling with "nyah nyah nyah"? Okay then, there's some of the attention
you crave...



wow.

1. the modulus of cf is much greater than that of al alloys. look it up.

2. reynolds forks published the data i cited. look it up.

3. yield is lower. look it up.

4. almost any modern road bike. look it up.

5. actually it is. look it up.

6. i didn't say that. look it up.

7. i cited that carbon forks have been used for millions and millions of
rider miles, and over the span of at least a decade - and that's true.
first you disputed that number somehow trying to say it's too high
[!!!], then you tried to misconstrue into red herrings of insisting on
aerospace standards for bikes, then started bull****ting about how forks
break jra. after 10+ years of your kind alleging that is going to
happen on r.b.t, where's the evidence? what's the failure rate?
1/1,000,000? 1/100,000? 1/1,000?

8. some of it /is/ bull****. people citing that phil wood hubs are
unreliable crap is /utter/ bull****. people with 5 chillies and zero
chillies in the same review? that's bull****. people emailing /me/
asking for endorsement of their product on mtbr? that's bull****.

9. that's not what i said - i, and others, have stated that if failure
is going to occur, it's usually preceded by warning signs that are
readily apparent. the only "trick" is not ignoring them.

10. a crap manufacturer does not mean that the /material/ is in
principal flawed. just like spokes, tubes, tires, etc. are not all
flawed every time one of them breaks.

just because i call you a bull****ter - because it's the truth - doesn't
give you license to put words in my mouth, then criticize them. and you
/definitely/ don't have license to call an aerospace tech a liar just
because he exposes your dumb ass to be a bull****ter.

bottom line - truth hurts and you're dead sore right now. and because
you're too ****ing dumb to figure this out for yourself, you'd better
understand that there's a direct causal relationship between bull****
and abuse. you don't like the abuse, then stop bull****ting.

jim beam wrote:

Rik O'Shea wrote:

Interesting crash photos. The fork steering column looks ok, the head
tube is kaput.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos.ph...ep07/newport07...

http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos.ph...ep07/newport07...

interesting indeed.

wow, a whole day passes and the stupidity contestants don't comment on
how cfrp is "brittle", how it should all be aerospace spec and how it is
in fact satan's spawn.

Are you suggesting that a metal head tube would have erupted like that
one did? I've never seen the like with any kind of metal frame.

The question remains: was the frame's structural failure a result of
the crash, or the cause?

Chalo

Chalo wrote:
jim beam wrote:
Rik O'Shea wrote:
Interesting crash photos. The fork steering column looks ok, the head
tube is kaput.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos.ph...ep07/newport07...
http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos.ph...ep07/newport07...
interesting indeed.
wow, a whole day passes and the stupidity contestants don't comment on
how cfrp is "brittle", how it should all be aerospace spec and how it is
in fact satan's spawn.

Are you suggesting that a metal head tube would have erupted like that
one did? I've never seen the like with any kind of metal frame.

no, the whole frame would completely mangled if it were metal
encountering a force of that magnitude.


The question remains: was the frame's structural failure a result of
the crash, or the cause?

result.

if that material were "brittle", the head tube would have broken its way
out and pieces would have broken from head tube leaving an exit hole
proportional to the size of the steer tube. instead however, we see the
pieces of the head tube are still attached, /and/ fracture consistent
with high energy absorption - so to the crash necessary to brute-force
the steer tube through a breach that is resisting it sufficiently to
re-close itself after exit must have been significant.

bottom line, i'd say this a pretty impressive result. the chumps that
are now stand about having bleated that cfrp is "brittle" must be
looking at this and feeling pretty damned stupid. or they should be -
assuming they ever knew anything about deformation and fracture in the
first place [which they haven't yet].

On Fri, 07 Sep 2007 05:55:45 -0700, jim beam wrote:

Chalo wrote:
jim beam wrote:
Rik O'Shea wrote:
Interesting crash photos. The fork steering column looks ok, the head
tube is kaput.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos.ph...ep07/newport07...
http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos.ph...ep07/newport07...
interesting indeed.
wow, a whole day passes and the stupidity contestants don't comment on
how cfrp is "brittle", how it should all be aerospace spec and how it is
in fact satan's spawn.

Are you suggesting that a metal head tube would have erupted like that
one did? I've never seen the like with any kind of metal frame.

no, the whole frame would completely mangled if it were metal
encountering a force of that magnitude.


So, given similar conditions, metal and carbon fiber behave differently.
What is the property (or properties) in respect of which they exhibit
different behavior? Brittleness comes to mind, but you've ruled that out.



The question remains: was the frame's structural failure a result of
the crash, or the cause?

result.

if that material were "brittle", the head tube would have broken its way
out and pieces would have broken from head tube leaving an exit hole
proportional to the size of the steer tube.

This sounds like something out of a Roadrunner cartoon. Coyote runs into
stone wall and leaves a coyote-shaped hole.



instead however, we see the
pieces of the head tube are still attached,

That hardly seems dispositive -- shards of safety glass are held in place
by a plastic layer, but that doesn't mean that the material as a whole
isn't brittle.


/and/ fracture consistent
with high energy absorption - so to the crash necessary to brute-force
the steer tube through a breach that is resisting it sufficiently to
re-close itself after exit must have been significant.

bottom line, i'd say this a pretty impressive result. the chumps that
are now stand about having bleated that cfrp is "brittle" must be
looking at this and feeling pretty damned stupid. or they should be -
assuming they ever knew anything about deformation and fracture in the
first place [which they haven't yet].