MUNI technology

At 12:42 PM 6/16/98 +0800, Nic <unicycle@tartarus.uwa.edu.au> wrote:
>Firstly I’m amazed at the level of detail and fanaticism that everybody seems
>to be carrying this MUNI thing to. Admittedly i’ve only had the chance to go
>seriously muni-ing once, and it was really fun, but it seems that the equipment
>is becomingmore important than the sport.

Greenway, Simon <simon.greenway@roke.co.uk> wrote
>I have to agree with Nic, we musn’t loose sight of what MUni-ing is all about -
>to me ( and I hope you all agree ) Its getting out there and doing it - it
>doesn’t matter whether you do it on your 20" Tawainese model or 26" Space Age
>technology model filled with helium, just so long as

There are a few comments I would like to make on this subject. First, I am a
pretty serious Muniest. I ride between 40 and 50 miles a week, and try to do a
30+ mile ride on technical and strenous terrain on the weekends. My Muni has a
few thousand miles on it, and is really starting to show wear and tear. A cheap
muni is great if all you intend to do is ride once a month on easy trail, but if
you’re serious you need a lot more. I would almost agree that the equipment is
becoming more important than the sport, and I think it’s necessary. Right now I
am limited by my equipment more than my ability. I can basically break an axle
at will. I have to be reserved in my riding style to save cranks, axles, frames,
etc. I don’t “Peck” (hoping up stuff thats too hard to roll) very often because
I know it will kill the cycle. Since the equipment is a limiting for me, it is
very very important. For the sport in general, equipment is absolutely central.
Mountain Biking did not catch until there was good stuff out there. Sure some
people just want a cool and expensive bike, and then never ride it. But those
people have enabled us (I am an avid mountain biker as well) to have good
equipment that can handle the stress of hard core mountain biking. Also, scale
of economy has brought the price of a mountain bike down significantly. So why
don’t I have an expensive muni? I simply can’t afford anything fancy. But I
still want to encourage people to buy good munis if they have the means, and I
definitely want to encourage Muni technology even if it is expensive. So I agree
with Simon and Nic that riding is most important, but remember that riding can
only be enabled with the right equipment, which simply isn’t currently
available.

Happy Trails, Brett Bymaster bymaster@purdue.edu
http://shay.ecn.purdue.edu/~bymaster

Firstly I’m amazed at the level of detail and fanaticism that everybody seems to
be carrying this MUNI thing to. Admittedly i’ve only had the chance to go
seriously muni-ing once, and it was really fun, but it seems that the equipment
is becomingmore important than the sport.

Drawing the obvious parallel with MTB, you get the case where people don’t think
they can go offroad without at least front suspension, usually full suspension,
and a thousand dollar frame. In truth you can have a hell of a lot of fun on a
$200 bike!

While I appreciate that sometimes its nice to indulge yourself and get some good
quality workmanship, the concept of paying more than $200 for a single wheel is
quite scary! I was going to buy a Sem, but opted for a Viscount - half the
price. . . i dunno, maybe i’m just cynically turned off by consumerism.

What do other people think about money vs. quality vs. fun. . .

Too bad we can’t get a decent CHEAP indestructible unicycle hey.

Nic

BTW, i’m just ranting and raving cause i’m in exam mode.

Re: MUNI technology

stressed out Nic wrote:
>
> Firstly I’m amazed at the level of detail and fanaticism that everybody seems
> to be carrying this MUNI thing to. Admittedly i’ve only had the chance to go
> seriously muni-ing once, and it was really fun, but it seems that the
> equipment is becomingmore important than the sport.
>
> Drawing the obvious parallel with MTB, you get the case where people don’t
> think they can go offroad without at least front suspension, usually full
> suspension, and a thousand dollar frame. In truth you can have a hell of a lot
> of fun on a $200 bike!
>

Not for long ! All current MTU’s are made with 1940’s technology. To get a
crank, axle and wheel set up that will last more than a few hundred hours you
need to get into 90’s technology. Right now that means mandatory one-offs and
that means an equally mandatory price of $1000 and upward.

Re: MUNI technology

After my first post about losing sight of the sport for the technology, I must
admit that as a juggler I get prop fetish at least two or three times a year and
have to buy a new set of clubs / balls / prop / toy or whatever. So, i
definitely understand the concept of buying a CF uni because it looks cool. What
I still don’t understand is how it is possible to destroy axles so easily. I
regularly bunnyhop off things about half a metre high (higher than my 20" wheel,
and although I think my bearings are gone (they click a bit) i haven’t destroyed
anthing serious yet. Is it simply because i’m relatively light - 75kg, or aren’t
I trying hard enough! :wink:

What is it that causes all this stuff to break? style and technique, faulty or
weak equipment, or simply the fact that you’re continually riding over
unpredicable terrain that jolts the frame in bad directions. I guess it’s the
last point.

Oh well, must go practise. . .

Nic

Brett Bymaster wrote:
>
> At 12:42 PM 6/16/98 +0800, Nic <unicycle@tartarus.uwa.edu.au> wrote:
> >Firstly I’m amazed at the level of detail and fanaticism that everybody seems
> >to be carrying this MUNI thing to. Admittedly i’ve only had the chance to go
> >seriously muni-ing once, and it was really fun, but it seems that the
> >equipment is becomingmore important than the sport.
>
> Greenway, Simon <simon.greenway@roke.co.uk> wrote
> >I have to agree with Nic, we musn’t loose sight of what MUni-ing is all about
> >- to me ( and I hope you all agree ) Its getting out there and doing it - it
> >doesn’t matter whether you do it on your 20" Tawainese model or 26" Space Age
> >technology model filled with helium, just so long as
>
> There are a few comments I would like to make on this subject. First, I am a
> pretty serious Muniest. I ride between 40 and 50 miles a week, and try to do a
> 30+ mile ride on technical and strenous terrain on the weekends. My Muni has a
> few thousand miles on it, and is really starting to show wear and tear. A
> cheap muni is great if all you intend to do is ride once a month on easy
> trail, but if you’re serious you need a lot more. I would almost agree that
> the equipment is becoming more important than the sport, and I think it’s
> necessary. Right now I am limited by my equipment more than my ability. I can
> basically break an axle at will. I have to be reserved in my riding style to
> save cranks, axles, frames, etc. I don’t “Peck” (hoping up stuff thats too
> hard to roll) very often because I know it will kill the cycle. Since the
> equipment is a limiting for me, it is very very important. For the sport in
> general, equipment is absolutely central. Mountain Biking did not catch until
> there was good stuff out there. Sure some people just want a cool and
> expensive bike, and then never ride it. But those people have enabled us (I am
> an avid mountain biker as well) to have good equipment that can handle the
> stress of hard core mountain biking. Also, scale of economy has brought the
> price of a mountain bike down significantly. So why don’t I have an expensive
> muni? I simply can’t afford anything fancy. But I still want to encourage
> people to buy good munis if they have the means, and I definitely want to
> encourage Muni technology even if it is expensive. So I agree with Simon and
> Nic that riding is most important, but remember that riding can only be
> enabled with the right equipment, which simply isn’t currently available.
>
> Happy Trails, Brett Bymaster bymaster@purdue.edu
> http://shay.ecn.purdue.edu/~bymaster

RE: MUNI technology

I just wanted a carbon MUni because it’s cool . . .

jf

______________________________ Reply Separator


Subject: MUNI technology Author: “Greenway; Simon”
[SMTP:simon.greenway@roke.co.uk] at MSXGATE Date: 6/16/98 1:07 AM

I thought I’d throw my threepence in here (2 cents or whatever), since I
probably helped to originate this string of conversation.

First of all I’d like to give the purpose behind my choice in Uni: it’s not to
wow everyone to say ‘look what I’ve got’, it’s because I wanted a durable Uni
that could stand up to
a) Me b) lots of rough terrain, by choosing different (not to say less good
quality) components the price of a DM can be bought down to nearly (say
within $50) of a Pashley. The fact that it looks good (personal opinion) is a
bonus to me.

I have to agree with Nic, we musn’t loose sight of what MUni-ing is all about

  • to me ( and I hope you all agree ) Its getting out there and doing it - it
    doesn’t matter whether you do it on your 20" Tawainese model or 26" Space Age
    technology model filled with helium, just so long as you get out there and
    hit the trails ! Its nice to play with the technologies but we shouldn’t turn
    into a bunch of folks who won’t acknowledge each other because your machine
    didn’t cost over $1000. We all have something in common - a sense of fun and
    a Unicycle.

C’mon let’s keep it together, one wheel forever…

Simon.D

--------------------------±--------------------------
|
Simon Greenway | I.O.U o
a.A.U@mindless.com | /#\ Romsey, Hampshire, UK. | Idiots On Unicycles |
| O
--------------------------±-------------------------- English
http://members.tripod.com/~derek_b/muni2.HTM

  • check out Polaris report, due 16th/17th June 1998 *
    --------------------------±--------------------------

    On 061698 “stressed out Nic” wrote something along the lines of:

> Firstly I’m amazed at the level of detail and fanaticism that everybody seems
> to be carrying this MUNI thing to. Admittedly i’ve only had the chance to go
> seriously muni-ing once, and it was really fun, but it seems that the
> equipment is becomingmore important than the sport.
>
> Drawing the obvious parallel with MTB, you get the case where people don’t
> think they can go offroad without at least front suspension, usually full
> suspension, and a thousand dollar frame. In truth you can have a hell of a lot
> of fun on a $200 bike!
>
> While I appreciate that sometimes its nice to indulge yourself and get some
> good quality workmanship, the concept of paying more than $200 for a single
> wheel is quite scary! I was going to buy a Sem, but opted for a Viscount -
> half the price. . . i dunno, maybe i’m just cynically turned off by
> consumerism.
>
> What do other people think about money vs. quality vs. fun. . .
>
> Too bad we can’t get a decent CHEAP indestructible unicycle hey.
>
> Nic
>
> BTW, i’m just ranting and raving cause i’m in exam mode.

RE: MUNI technology

Nic wrote:
>What do other people think about money vs. quality vs. fun. . .

Everybody has their price point. Some of us have lots of disposable income and a
fanatical interest (drool). Others have a mild interest. Others have no budget
at all. Many of us live in areas where it’s hard to even order a decend
off-the-shel unicycle!

What we unicyclists lack is freedom. Freedom of choice of brands and parts. The
amount of experimentation that’s going on these days is the best thing that
could be happening for our sport (besides people flooding to learn to ride). We
will have more choices of parts, and people will become more aware of the
technology, effort and attention going into unicycling.

Our freedom is still very limited in two major areas: seats and crank arms.
Finding some decent, straight, cotterless crank arms that are short enough for
most unicycling is really hard. Add to that we’d like them to be made of
something lighter than steel, and not easy to bend or break.

Oh yeah. I forgot axles. All off-the-shelf unicycle axles will eventually break
after a while of heavy use (lots of hopping or off-road riding by adults). And
changing axles can be very difficult. I spend last weekend buying tools (vice
and gear puller) to change a Miyata axle.

Normal bicycle (converted to unicycle) axles just don’t have what it takes for
our kind of stresses. The only solution is to use a larger diameter axle which
requires changing the bearing system and probably cranks as well. Ouch. Or
building from high-end BMX parts, which is equally or more expensive.

But in any case, there will always be those who like to tinker and experiment,
those who will ride no matter what, and others to hopefully offer financial
support to the tinkerers by buying the results of their work. That’s me!

I’ve ordered a carbon frame from Roger Davies because I figured I could afford
it (instead of air conditioning for my car). I forgot to consider the expense of
NUC and UNICON this year, but that’s another story. Even when my new toy arrives
from England I have to shop for a rim, spokes, tire , cranks and pedals. But
like the rest of us, I can choose them based on my level of committment and
financial freedom.

Ride on!

John Foss

Too bad we can’t get a decent CHEAP indestructible unicycle hey.

Nic

BTW, i’m just ranting and raving cause i’m in exam mode.

RE: MUNI technology

>What is it that causes all this stuff to break? style and technique,

It’s metal fatigue. Rider weight and riding style are big factors, but several
types of activity will fatigue your axle faster. The main ones are:

  1. Lots of hopping. If you’re learning hopping tricks (jump rope, for instance)
    or doing lots of hopping over things like curbs, people, rocks. A few very
    high hops don’t do much, it’s all the accumulated little ones that add up.

  2. Long cranks. The longer the cranks, the more leverage you have. This enables
    George Peck to ride up things where others might have to take the elevator.
    As you add length to the crank you increase the torque at the axle, and just
    plain riding uphill will eventually do the damage.

Gradually your axle becomes more brittle until it crystalizes and snaps, usually
right where the crank attaches. This is not a scientific explanation, just one
based on the many axles I’ve broken over the years, up to the (old) Miyata axle
that snapped on me a couple weeks ago.

jf

RE: MUNI technology

Jez wrote:
>Sorry for being an excessively pedantic metallurgist.

It’s okay. To be involved in the design of unicycles we must learn a little
about a lot of specialized areas, and let experts like you fill in our gaps…

>I like Roger’s idea of a 25.4 mm axle. Second, changing the shape, or rather
>making sure that there’s no changes of shape in the axle, because changes of
>shape mean stress concentrators. Again, I’m quite keen on Roger’s idea of using
>splines to fix the crank.

If you build it, they will come. I’ll buy the first one (or have I already
ordered it?).

jf

RE: MUNI technology

Technical questions ? Not a chance! What’s the saying, “If you build it, they
will come”. Mike,

RE: MUNI technology

On Wed, 17 Jun 1998, Foss, JohnX wrote:

> >What is it that causes all this stuff to break? style and technique,
> It’s metal fatigue. Rider weight and riding style are big factors, but several
> types of activity will fatigue your axle faster. The main ones are:

> Gradually your axle becomes more brittle until it crystalizes and snaps,
> usually right where the crank attaches. This is not a scientific explanation,
> just one based on the many axles I’ve broken over the years, up to the (old)
> Miyata axle that snapped on me a couple weeks ago.

Oooo… can’t let that one go. You’re right about the problem being fatigue,
caused by the excessive loads when hopping and made worse by the added leverage
of longer cranks. However, as for ‘crystalisation’, no.

The metal crystalises as soon as it solidifies. The fact that its crystalline
has nothing to do with fatigue. Loading the cranks by hopping up and down causes
work hardening, not crystallisation, that’s what results in brittleness then
crack growth then failure.

Sorry for being an excessively pedantic metallurgist.

But anyway, of more relevance to unicycling would be ideas as to how to stop
this happening. Well, it happens in normal cotterless bicycle axles because of
the small diameter and the stress concentrations that occur at the start of the
square taper. To make it stronger then first, and most importantly, make it
bigger. I like Roger’s idea of a 25.4 mm axle. That should be easily strong
enough and its easy to get metal in that size. Using a big diameter also has
another advantage - you can hollow it out and use a tube. This will save plenty
of weight but won’t affect the fatigue strength too much. Second, changing the
shape, or rather making sure that there’s no changes of shape in the axle,
because changes of shape mean stress concentrators. Again, I’m quite keen on
Roger’s idea of using splines to fix the crank.

Anyway, if anyone wants to ask technical questions about this, then ask away.

Jez Weston

Re: MUNI technology

Foss, JohnX wrote:

> Jez wrote:
> >Sorry for being an excessively pedantic metallurgist.
>
> It’s okay. To be involved in the design of unicycles we must learn a little
> about a lot of specialized areas, and let experts like you fill
>
> in our gaps…
>
> >I like Roger’s idea of a 25.4 mm axle. Second, changing the shape, or rather
> >making sure that there’s no changes of shape in the axle, because changes of
>
> >shape mean stress concentrators. Again, I’m quite keen on Roger’s
> idea
> >of using splines to fix the crank.
>
> If you build it, they will come. I’ll buy the first one (or have I already
> ordered it?).

yep ordered, I just have to build it!

Roger

          ----------------------------------------------------
                       Roger.Davies@Octacon.co.uk
                      Stockton, North East England

For information on the Durham Juggling Festival
http://homepages.enterprise.net/mini/fest98.htm

          For information on The British Unicycling Convention
             <a href="http://homepages.enterprise.net/mini/buc5.htm">http://homepages.enterprise.net/mini/buc5.htm</a>

RE: MUNI technology

>But anyway, of more relevance to unicycling would be ideas as to how to stop
>this happening. Well, it happens in normal cotterless bicycle axles because of
>the small diameter and the stress concentrations that occur at the start of the
>square taper. To make it stronger then first, and most importantly, make it
>bigger. I like Roger’s idea of a 25.4 mm axle. That should be easily strong
>enough and its easy to get metal in that size. Using a big diameter also has
>another advantage - you can hollow it out and use a tube. This will save plenty
>of weight but won’t affect the fatigue strength too much. Second, changing the
>shape, or rather making sure that there’s no changes of shape in the axle,
>because changes of shape mean stress concentrators. Again, I’m quite keen on
>Roger’s idea of using splines to fix the crank.
>
>Anyway, if anyone wants to ask technical questions about this, then ask away.

what kind of metal are we talking about? I remember taking a broken axle into an
engineer he put it in a gadget to test its hardness? and then told me that he
would have to import the steel because it was harder than anything held in stock
in NZ. Where does this hard/not hard? business fit into the theory?

cheers Harold


Harold Jarvie hjarvie@bigfoot.com Wellington New Zealand
http://bigfoot.com/~hjarvie

Re: MUNI technology

H Jarvie wrote:

> >But anyway, of more relevance to unicycling would be ideas as to how
> to
> >stop this happening. Well, it happens in normal cotterless bicycle
> axles
> >because of the small diameter and the stress concentrations that
> occur at
> >the start of the square taper. To make it stronger then first, and
> most
> >importantly, make it bigger. I like Roger’s idea of a 25.4 mm axle. That
> >should be easily strong enough and its easy to get metal in that
>
> >size. Using a big diameter also has another advantage - you can
> hollow it
> >out and use a tube. This will save plenty of weight but won’t affect
> the
> >fatigue strength too much. Second, changing the shape, or rather
> making
> >sure that there’s no changes of shape in the axle, because changes of
>
> >shape mean stress concentrators. Again, I’m quite keen on Roger’s
> idea of
> >using splines to fix the crank.
> >
> >Anyway, if anyone wants to ask technical questions about this, then
> ask
> >away.
>
> what kind of metal are we talking about? I remember taking a broken axle into
> an engineer he put it in a gadget to test its hardness? and then told me that
> he would have to import the steel because it was harder than anything held in
> stock in NZ. Where does this hard/not hard? business fit into the theory?

Material: tube 3/4" od, 1/2" id 41/30 CrMo

The reason I have looked at using 3/4" rather than 1" is that this what is used
in BMX hubs and I can get bearings that are only slightly bigger than the ones I
normally use.

Roger

          ----------------------------------------------------
                       Roger.Davies@Octacon.co.uk
                      Stockton, North East England

For information on the Durham Juggling Festival
http://homepages.enterprise.net/mini/fest98.htm

          For information on The British Unicycling Convention
             <a href="http://homepages.enterprise.net/mini/buc5.htm">http://homepages.enterprise.net/mini/buc5.htm</a>