basic frame building

1KW

1 kW
Joined
Jul 24, 2013
Messages
341
I'm tired of looking for $350+ dollar frame sets that need a bag to fit batteries.

I have a connection to a awesome tig welder. he has experience in everything but bike frame building(like everybody else lol).

I figured steel is steel, and won't be as sketchy as alumn for him to weld.

I see I can order a headset and bb from the internet. I can also get a smaller dirtbike streel swingarm. then have him build the frame out of plate to house the batteries. I'm sure as long as head tube is gusseted correctly this should be no problem.

what steel thickness and type is recommended? I know cro is harder to weld. is a jig needed ?
 
4130 Cromo is good for welding, and plenty strong. The thickness depends on the design. some designs could use thin wall, some will need thicker wall, and some may be better with a mix.

You got a budget in mind? I know I dropped $1k in doing my frame, and I welded it my self. I would have had to mortgage my house to pay a welder for the time it took, if I'd had to pay someone else.
 
As I am new myself I will not give any advices on your build and what material to choose.
But I think I saw I thread where one said he would post drawings for the frame he made. It was a monocoque design with a "tank" for batteries. I will try to find back to that thread and post the link for you. I guess that way you can have the correct geometry for your frame for best possible handling etc.
 
drunkskunk, I've been looking at your build thread recently. My budget is roughly 5-600 for the frame. I've found someone to weld it, but he doesn't want to mess with aluminum(cutting my current one up) as the slight weakness of alum
 
I'd also definitely say chromoly steel is your best bet for strength, weight, weldability, etc. (can easily be brazed, too).

My crazy-contraption bikes and trailers and whatnot prove to me that yes you *can* use just about any steel together to make a bike, but some of it isn't nearly as strong as chromoly and it can tend to stress fracture easier, and can much more easily just bend under load, or even just plain break off. :( (I've used everything for parts from old good chromo bike frames to junk walbike frames, to old retail signage and fixtures, to random metal bits found in scrap piles or builk trashday stuff, treadmill frames, etc.... the best longest-lasting stuff has been the old chromo bike frame bits).


For some really good tips and photos about building custom frames, you might look at AussieJester's threads here on ES, and the recycledrecumbent site, and WISIL, among others. There may also be some stuff at Sheldon Brown's site.
 
I have a related question, What is the common solution for the head tub on your own custom frame? Same with the pivots for the rear linkage? It seems like a lot of people are going Alum for the swing arm and then something like 4130 chromo for the rest...
 
stonezone said:
I have a related question, What is the common solution for the head tub on your own custom frame? Same with the pivots for the rear linkage? It seems like a lot of people are going Alum for the swing arm and then something like 4130 chromo for the rest...

If you would like an even lighter build try alu frame as well. You can see the thread of Emotos build with alu frame.

Emoto said:
Frame/swingarm is single 3mm 5083 this retains its strenth well after welding, no engineer this is my design and material choices + LOTTS of thinking.
I have made a removable brace that connects internally top to bottom but i think i have allready over engineered it, i may or may-not use it i think this will be mainly
used on road but design/strength wise i dont think will have any probs offroad with a simple wheel rim change.




Seems 5083 aluminum will withstand the welding OK. Don't know if you will need to heat threat the frame after welding.
Some alloys needs to be "slow cooked" after welding to regain their initial strength.

file.php


Click below to read more about strength of aluminum alloy. Or go to Lincoln Electric to read up on welding.

alum-1.jpg

Alloys are broken into two groups: heat-treatable alloys and non-heat-treatable alloys. A relative assessment of weldability is also given for each of these.

The non-heat-treatable alloys are composed of the 1XXX, 3XXX, 4XXX, and 5XXX series. It is not possible to strengthen these alloys by heat treatment. They can only be strengthened by cold working (also called strain hardening). The 1XXX alloys, such as 1100, 1188, or 1350, are essentially pure aluminum (99+% purity). They are relatively soft and weak, with good corrosion resistance, and are usually used where high electrical conductivity is required, such as for bus bars or as electrical conductors. They are also used in certain applications that require a high degree of resistance to corrosion. All of these alloys are readily weldable.

The 3XXX series of alloys have various levels of manganese (Mn) added to strengthen them and improve their response to cold work. They are of moderate strength, have good corrosion resistance, and are readily weldable. They are used for air conditioning and refrigeration systems, non-structural building trim, and other applications.

The 4XXX series of alloys have silicon (Si) added as an alloying element to reduce the melting point and increase their fluidity in the molten state. These alloys are used for welding and brazing filler materials and for sand and die castings. They are the least crack-sensitive of all the aluminum alloys.

The 5XXX series of alloys have magnesium (Mg) added in order to increase their strength and ability to work-harden. They are generally very corrosion resistant and have the highest strengths of any of the non-heat-treatable alloys. Increasing magnesium content in these alloys results in increasing strength levels. These alloys are commonly available in the form of sheet, plate and strip, and are the most common structural aluminum alloys. They are generally not available as extruded sections, because they are expensive to extrude. They are readily weldable, in most cases, with or without filler metal. However, there is an Al-Mg cracking peak at approximately 2.5% Mg, so care must be used in welding alloys such as 5052. It should not be welded autogenously (i.e., without adding filler metal). Weld filler metal with a high Mg content, such as 5356, should be used to reduce the crack sensitivity.

The heat-treatable alloys are contained in the 2XXX, 6XXX, and 7XXX alloy families. The 2XXX family of alloys are high strength Al-Cu alloys used mainly for aerospace applications. In some environments, they can exhibit poor corrosion resistance. In general, most alloys in this series are considered non-weldable. A prime example of a non-weldable alloy in this series, which is attractive to designers because of its high strength, is alloy 2024. This alloy is commonly used in airframes, where it is almost always riveted. It is extremely crack-sensitive and almost impossible to weld successfully using standard techniques.

Only two common structural alloys in the 2XXX series are weldable: 2219 and 2519. Alloy 2219 is very easily weldable and has been extensively welded in fabricating the external tanks for the U.S. space shuttle. This alloy gets its good weldability because of its higher copper content, approximately 6%. A closely related alloy, which is also very weldable, is 2519. It was developed for fabrication of armored vehicles. Although there are detailed exceptions to this rule, the designer should probably consider all other alloys in the 2XXX series to be non-weldable.

The 6XXX series of alloys are the alloys probably most often encountered in structural work. They are relatively strong (although not as strong as the 2XXX or 7XXX series) and have good corrosion resistance. They are most often supplied as extrusions. In fact, if the designer specifies an extrusion, it will almost certainly be supplied as a 6XXX alloy. 6XXX alloys may also be supplied as sheet, plate and bar, and are the most common heat treatable structural alloys. Although all alloys in this series tend to be crack-sensitive, they are all considered weldable and are, in fact, welded every day. However, the correct weld filler metal must be used to eliminate cracking. Additionally, these alloys will usually crack if they are welded either without, or with insufficient, filler metal additions.

The 7XXX alloys are the ones that usually trip designers up. They are the very high strength Al-Zn or Al-Zn-Mg-Cu alloys that are often used in aerospace fabrication, and are supplied in the form of sheet, plate, forgings, and bar, as well as extrusions. With the few exceptions noted below, the designer should assume that the 7XXX alloys are non-weldable. The most common of these alloys is 7075, which should never be welded for structural applications. In addition, these alloys often suffer from poor corrosion performance in many environments.

A few of the 7XXX series defy the general rule and are weldable. These are alloys 7003 and 7005, which are often seen as extrusions, and 7039, which is most often seen as sheet or plate. Some common uses of these alloys today are bicycle frames and baseball bats, both of which are welded. These alloys are easily welded and can sometimes offer strength advantages in the as-welded condition over the 6XXX and 5XXX alloys.

There is one other exception to the general rule that 2XXX and 7XXX alloys are unweldable. There are a number of thick cast and/or wrought plate alloys designed as mold plate material for the injection molding industry. These alloys, which include Alca Plus, Alca Max, and QC-7, are all very close in chemistry to 7075 or 2618. The designer should absolutely avoid structural welds on these alloys. However, welding is often performed on these alloys to correct machining mistakes, die erosion, etc. This is acceptable because there are only low stresses on such welds and, in fact, the weld is often in compression.

This discussion has tried to make a few points:

First, when designing a structure of any kind, don’t scroll through the nearest list of aluminum alloys and pick the strongest
Realize that some alloys, often the stronger ones, are non-weldable. Make sure the selected alloy is readily weldable
Recognize that some alloys or alloy families are more suitable for some applications than others

One more caveat: when welding aluminum, the designer must not assume that the properties of the starting material and the properties of the weld are equivalent.


Why Isn’t the Weld as Strong as the Original Base Metal?
A designer of steel structures generally assumes that a weld is as strong as the parent material, and the welding engineer who is responsible for fabricating the structure expects to make a weld which is as strong as the steel being used. It would be tempting to assume that the situation is the same when designing and fabricating aluminum structures, but it isn’t. In most cases, a weld in an aluminum alloy is weaker, often to a significant degree, than the alloy being welded.



Non-Heat-Treatable Alloys
Alloys in this category (i.e., 1XXX, 3XXX, 4XXX, and 5XXX families) are produced by a cold working process: rolling, drawing, etc. After the cold working process, the alloy is given the designation of an F temper (as-fabricated). Alloys are then often given a subsequent annealing heat treatment, after which they are classified as an O temper (annealed). Many alloys are sold in this condition. Thus the correct designation for a plate of 5083 which was annealed after rolling is 5083 – O. One of the attractive properties of these alloys is that they can be significantly increased in strength if they are cold worked after annealing. Figure 2 shows what happens to several alloys with varying amounts of cold work. For example, alloy 5086 rises in yield strength from approximately 18 ksi (125 MPa) to 40 ksi (275 MPa) and is now said to be strain-hardened. A complete designation for this alloy would be 5056-H36. The H temper designation can be somewhat complicated, since it is used to designate a number of processing variables. However, the last digit designates the level of cold working in the alloy, with 9 denoting the highest.

alum-3.jpg


A common mistake in designing welded structures using non-heat-treatable alloys is to look down a list of properties, disregard the O temper material, and choose an alloy of the highest temper because it is significantly stronger. This would seem to make sense, but it often doesn’t, because the heat of welding acts as a local annealing operation, significantly weakening the heat affected zone (HAZ) of the weld. If one plots the yield or tensile stress versus distance from the weld, a curve such as that seen in Figure 3 is obtained. If the design is based on the strain hardened properties, the allowable design stress will usually be above the actual yield point of the HAZ. Although it may seem counter-intuitive, the fact is this: No matter what temper one starts with, the properties in the HAZ will be those of the O temper annealed material due to the welding operation. Therefore, the design must be based on the annealed properties, not on the strain-hardened properties. Because of this, it usually doesn’t make sense to buy the more expensive strain hardened tempers for welded fabrications. One should design with and specify the alloy in the O temper and up-gauge as necessary.

alum-4.jpg


An obvious question is whether anything can be done to restore material properties after welding a strain-hardened material. Unfortunately, the answer is almost always no. The only way to harden these materials is through mechanical deformation, and this is almost never practical for welded structures.


Heat-Treatable Alloys
The situation is somewhat different when welding the heat-treatable alloys. Alloys are heat-treated by initially heating the material to approximately 1000°F (540°C), holding the temperature for a short time, and then quenching it in water. This operation is intended to dissolve all the alloying additions in solution and hold them there at room temperature. Alloys in this condition are said to be in the T4 temper and have significantly higher strengths than the same alloy in the O temper. Depending on the alloy, "natural aging" at room temperature can lead to further strength increases over time. This takes place over a matter of days or, at most, a few weeks. After that, the properties will remain stable over decades. If one buys T4 material, it is stable and the properties will not change over the course of a lifetime.

However, most alloys are given an additional heat treatment to obtain the highest mechanical properties. This heat treatment consists of holding the material at approximately 400°F (205°C) for a few hours. During this time, the alloying additions that were dissolved in the prior heat treatment precipitate in a controlled manner, which strengthens the alloy. Material in this condition is designated as T6 (artificially aged) temper, the most common heat-treated alloy temper.

Again, the complete temper designation system is actually much more complex than this, but understanding the T4 and T6 tempers will help to overcome some of the most common mistakes made when designing aluminum weldments. It is important to note that heat treatable alloys can also be strain-hardened after heat treatment, and this can further complicate the temper designation.

Remember that the aging treatment is performed at approximately 400°F (205°C). Any arc welding process gets the HAZ much hotter than this. Therefore, welding constitutes an additional heat treatment for the HAZ. Some alloys experience an additional solution heat treatment, while other alloys become overaged in the HAZ. This results in degradation of material properties, especially if the as-welded properties are compared to T6 properties. For example, the minimum specified tensile strength in ASTM B209 for 6061 – T6 is 40 ksi (275 MPa). Most fabrication codes require a minimum as-welded tensile strength of 24 ksi (165 MPa), which is a significant degradation.

As when designing for the non-heat-treatable alloys, the designer must not use the parent material properties in design. Realistic as-welded properties must be used. It is difficult to generalize what these properties are. They change from alloy to alloy and depend strongly on the starting temper of the alloy. Most design codes contain as-welded properties for aluminum alloys and these should be used.

With heat-treatable alloys, however, there are some ways to recover some of the material properties of the parent. Figure 4 shows a plot of tensile stress versus distance from the weld for 6061, revealing curves for both T4 and T6 material in both the as-welded (AW) and post-weld-aged (PWA) conditions. The PWA condition represents a weld that is subsequently aged for one hour at approximately 400°F (205°C). Post weld aging improves the mechanical properties for both T4 and T6 starting materials. In fact, often times it is better to weld in the T4 condition and post weld age after the welding process.




There is one final alternative to discuss. If after welding, the structure is given a complete heat treatment (i.e., solution treat at 1000°F [540°C], quench, age at 400°F [205°C]), all of the material properties (even in the weld) will be recovered and T6 properties will be obtained. This practice is frequently followed on small structures such as bicycle frames, but it is impractical for larger structures. Furthermore, the quenching usually causes enough distortion of the structure that a straightening operation is necessary before aging.

alum-4.jpg





Conclusions:
In the design of welded aluminum structures, too often the differences between steel and aluminum are not taken into account. To recap, common mistakes include:

Not all aluminum alloys are weldable. In general, the least weldable alloys are also the strongest alloys
The weld will rarely be as strong as the parent material
The HAZ will have O temper annealed properties for non-heat-treatable alloys regardless of the initial material temper
For the heat treatable alloys, the as-welded properties will be significantly lower than the properties of the T6 alloy temper
Post-weld heat treatment can help to restore the mechanical properties of welds in heat treatable alloys


This wall of text is not my work, to read up on your welding skills or to learn more about material strength follow the complete link below and read everything:
http://www.lincolnelectric.com/en-us/support/welding-how-to/pages/aluminum-design-mistakes-detail.aspx

They also have a great weld-how-to section

And a process and theory section worth looking into if it has been years since you done any welding or if you are just starting out to do welding.
 
How many watt hours? I csn maybe hit your pricepoint inc delivery.
 
Have you considered doing a carbonfiber frame? If you buy second hand frame in carbon fiber and build a battery box also made from carbon fiber and get that box nicely incorporated into the frame. Then you will have a super strong structure without the need for a heavy steel frame and the frame should be plenty durable.

Some of the downhill carbon fiber frames also have carbon fiber swing arms so you should even save some weight on that as well.
 
A carbon offroader frame is a false economy. You'll save just under two kilograms and introduce a brittle structure. Not worth it.
 
There is so much to search about frame building, so many different ways.

No matter how you decide to build, take the time to research geometry and suspension relation. Most custom built frames are poor in this matter, often they are robust and well fabricated but they don't handle good like a bike built on a DH frame from a renown manufacturer.

My suggestions:

Try and ride various DH and Freeride frames, of both monopivots and progressive virtual pivot suspension design. Try to understand the effect of various pivot placement on suspension tuning. Then make an idea for yourself for the kind of suspension design that you would like to build. I like both styles, when they are made working good. Generally, monopivots are riding better when the pivot point is high, and more complex suspension with linkage can do better with a pivot point close to the BB. Keep in mind that very few riders are happy with a shock placement that will push directly in their spine, so best is to deflect the shock angle by linkage, or place it to push in the front of the bike.

Try and compare various steer angles. This is very personnal and will change with experience and conditions, so you might consider building with variable geometry in mind. You don't need to make the head variable yourself, only big enough to let it fit a complete choice of angle set headset. That would be 1.5" or conic head tube, very solid to make it able to safely set a very slack steer angle when needed.

Build the rear triangle wide and long enough to clear 3" tires of the 3 common sizes, that is a cheap geometry variation and freedom of building options.

Design the seat tube angle so that it is pushing the saddle over the rear wheel as you lift it. This angle would ideally match or exceed the head angle, avoiding compression of the cockpit when setting it higher.

Try to make it look like a bicycle. Obstuction of the front triangle is practical to hold batteries, but doesn't let you build optimal shock placement and makes an obvious motorcycle look. The more your built frame will look like a bicycle, the better appearance it will have at the end, and the stealthier it will be when riding.

Just my 2 cents. Good luck with your build. Looking forward to see how it goes.
 
Well you might shorten the build time, but if you look at the prices you got to ask if it is really worth it.
No matter what material you will be using for your frame I am sure you will have access material for a headtube, cranck etc.
 
Love the frame great job !
I am building a bike very similar to yours out of 6061t0 x 0.062"
I am planning to heat treat it to t6 as this will improve the strength to approx 5x
" bit concerned about the distortion though, have to quench at 950 degrees f"
I would like to know the T state of your sheet before (T 0 or 3 or 6) welding and how is the frame holding up?
 
Agreeeing with others, I believe the design is much more important than the material, at least in the first round. A freeride bike is a better starting point than a DH, because DH is designed for dowhill (angles, etc.).
You don't need a jig if you have a lot of patience, welding must be performed symmetrically, alternating left side and right side.
About thickness, 2mm steel plate is heavy, now I'm building from 1.5mm, and I saw someone using 1.2mm. This range seems good. 1mm may dent too easily in the size of a battery box.
 
peters said:
Agreeeing with others, I believe the design is much more important than the material, at least in the first round. A freeride bike is a better starting point than a DH, because DH is designed for dowhill (angles, etc.).
You don't need a jig if you have a lot of patience, welding must be performed symmetrically, alternating left side and right side.
About thickness, 2mm steel plate is heavy, now I'm building from 1.5mm, and I saw someone using 1.2mm. This range seems good. 1mm may dent too easily in the size of a battery box.


From what I've gathered of info main difference between DH and Freeride is:

  • Downhill
  • slacker head tube angles
  • lower bottom bracket
  • usually more suspension travel
  • easier to pedal than most FR bikes
  • made for easy handling and speed

  • Freeride
  • steeper head tubes makes for easier turning
  • higher bottom bracket
  • more solid made as they do not need the extreme focus on weight as a downhill
  • made to take big air without breaking





Physically speaking, a motorcycle built for two systems are interconnected and pivotable about a common axis. One system is made up of fork with front wheel and the other consists of the frame with the engine and the rear wheel. With this division belongs to the driver and any passenger to the latter system.

The two systems can be held by a backward inclined axis control axis that runs down the middle through the steering head (see Fig.). Steering angle v is the angle between the steering axis and the roadway. The intersection of the road and the steering axis A is called the direction point and the distance from this point to the front wheel contact point B1 represents the front wheel run-e. Of great importance is also the location of the two rotating systems of gravity T1 and T2, as the wheelbase, the distance between the wheels touch points that influence driving behavior.
 
Freeride and DH frames are very similar and swapable. DH racing bikes are adapted to the race conditions, while freeriders don't care as much about the weight and settings. The build makes the main difference: Lighter and more expansive parts on DH racing bikes, freeriders usually prefer robustness and reliability to lightness. When they have many bikes and don't care about maintenance cost, freeriders are using modern DH racing rig.
 
What about head tube angle? Seems the steeper angle would give you more accurate steering with a freeride.
If you look at any sports motorcycles like R1, ZX-R etc compared to custom style bikes the head tube angle is very noticeable.

In the motorcycle world there are often very loud discussions about head angle. Some like choppers other hate them.
As I have no prior experience with bicycles I am not sure to what degree head angle really matter on a bicycle.
Seems from youtube's I've seen lately the downhillers have plenty of twist and turns down their steep trails, so maybe not that important on bikes as it is on motorcycles?
 
I meant the DH bikes are permanently on sloping trails, so the frame is possibly designed specifically for it, not for flat road or uphill riding. Freeride is different from this point of view, but a dirt motorbike can be a better example for high speed (if you want an offroad bike).

But there are other factors: after reading some descriptions, I found the "trail" parameter (marked "e" on the pic you included) is more important about steering than the HT angle. But "trail" can be calculated from HT angle, fork rake and wheel diameter, so they are not independent. Based on this, if you change to a smaller wheel for example, you need to slack HT angle for the same steering and stability. But this should be tested and confirmed...
 
Drunkskunk said:
The way it was explained to me, Freeride is last season's DH bike frame built up with all the heavy assed old parts you don't use any more.
Its more of a riding style than an actually bike design.
Yep. A freerider is a DH enthusiast who likes to ride with no rules and organization. Freeriders don't have a team and unlimited parts supply behind them, so they ride with what they can afford. When they have the money and don't care about breaking expansive components, they ride the same bikes as the DH racing teams. Manufacturers usually offer a cheaper version of their DH bike and call it Freeride, the like they offer the high end aftermarket package and call it Team. Freeride is not to be confused with Shore, that is a different ride and geometry.

Some freeriders are old school nostalgic, and like to build frames and components that were once famous, no matter the poor performance by today's standards. They are the reason why a neat Super Monster is still worth 1200$, and a straight Foes Tube as expansive as a new frame.

DH racing has evolved into more technical race tracks that are often won on pedal power down the mountain. Modern DH racing bikes are more "pedalable" and lighter, with variable geometry so they can be fine tuned for a specific race event. Many freeriders are gravity purists and like the overbuilt bikes from a few years ago.
 
thanks for the input! I'm assuming tig is the only way to go with our style bike frame building?

what is the absolute minimum requirement out of one? let's say I use non cromo but regular steel... 1" x 1" x .50+... and it's gussetted correctly.. should be no issue?

for swingarms, are you guys taking 4 plates and putting them together, or buy a thicker square tube to use?
 
If you build a steel battery box as a frame, it will be a hideous heavy pig of a bike. Bikes are made from thin-walled tubing for good reasons. Monocoque construction has had generations to catch on, but it never has among bicycles. And that's including designs that are not structurally compromised by having huge access holes cut in them.

Frame alignment is harder than you think.

Decent materials are more expensive than you think.

You will build things more than once, to have one example you are mostly satisfied with.

The deeper you get into a build project, the more a $350+ frame that needs a battery bag will look like a real bargain. While I encourage you to build your own things for the sake of building them, don't have any illusions about being able to yield a better product or better value than a commercial item for your efforts. You take the difficult, expensive route when you build your own.
 
4130 Cromoly is is 30% to 100% stronger than 1018 mild steel, depending on what spec you're comparing. it takes 30% more force to bend it, but 100% more force to break it.

It's false economy to think a mild steel bike will be cheaper. Mild steel is lower cost, but it may take twice as much to make the same strength frame, and it could end up twice as heavy.

TIG is good for sheet and thin wall, but for thicker stuff you may need to use MIG or heat it with a gas torch to get the steel to the right temps and avoid cracking it later. 4130 is fairly forgiving. Surprisingly, mild steel is less forgiving, and can lost a lot of strength at the welds. But your welder should know this and how to avoid trouble.

As for the swingarm, you can do either. it just depends on the design.
 
Has anyone tried HTS 2000 aluminum brazing? Tensile: 45,900 PSI -Shear strength: 31,000 PSI

I ordered some off Ebay and will try it.

Check the info and video before you judge based on previous alu brazing material.
http://www.aluminumrepair.com/more_info.asp
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCrixbXz4rc
 
Chalo said:
The deeper you get into a build project, the more a $350+ frame that needs a battery bag will look like a real bargain. While I encourage you to build your own things for the sake of building them, don't have any illusions about being able to yield a better product or better value than a commercial item for your efforts. You take the difficult, expensive route when you build your own.

This is very true.

The only reason I can think of to do it yourself is if what you want is something no one yet makes or has made that can be found used, unless you simply like the challenge and have a lot of disposable time/money, or you already have all the skills, machining/etc tools, and materials to build it with.

Or you just feel like doing it. ;)


I do stuff custom because no one makes what I want. I also don't do it very well, but it works well enough most of the time to do what I want, even if I complain about it a lot. :lol:


That said, if there is any way you can make it out of tubing for the structure itself, and then use a light material to enclose that for your battery box, you're structurally better off than building the box itself as a load-bearing frame section by itself.

My metal cargo boxes don't bear any actual structural load, except as the "kickstand", yet they deform a little even with just that load. Also, they occasionally get some impact damage from assorted reasons, and that is pretty severe--it'd mean major frame repairs if they were part of the frame, and something like that happened, or else just scrapping hte frame and making a new one. I doubt I could make them (without a tubing frame inside or outside of them) as a central part of the frame for cargo or batteries and still ahve access panels big enough to be useful, and still be strong enough to bear the load and stresses of connecting the bike's ends.

I considered making the new version of CrazyBike as a big box like that, with the walls of the box carrying the load, but I figure based on what I see of how the materials I have behave that I'd have to be using heavy/thick enough walls to triple the weight of simply using a tube framework around the box areas, and lightweight very thin panels that can be easily removed (magnets, etc, for instance) because they carry no load.

Another reason not to use the panels/box as part of the loadbearing structure is that when stuff happens that could tweak the frame, it'll tweak the box instead, and either make it difficult/impossible to remove the panels to access things without retweaking it, or actually remove them for you by breaking the connecting bits off (screws, etc), shearing them thru, etc., depending on how bad the tweak was. (even if it isn't a permanent deformation). I don't know for sure, but i think that using a tubing frame inside or outside it would prevent that.
 
Back
Top