Bicycle Hub Insert Design for Stress Reduction

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing bicycle hubs experience high compressive stresses at contact surfaces between the insert and the body due to inadequate support, leading to inefficient force transfer and potential wear under heavy loads.

Innovation Solution

A bicycle hub design featuring a rectangular block insert with rounded ribs at both ends, fully supported by the groove and tooth sidewalls, ensuring even contact and reduced internal stress, along with rounded ends to prevent dirt accumulation and a force-fitted insert to prevent accidental dislodging.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Ease of manufacture

If a planar strip insert is used in the tooth, then the device complexity is reduced and ease of manufacture is improved, but large compressive stresses arise at the contact surfaces between the insert and the body/tooth during use

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveease of manufactureVSAvoidcompressive stress
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of manufactureVSStress or pressure

Solution Approach 1:

The insert is designed with rounded ends instead of sharp corners, creating a rectangular block with rounded ribs at the ends. This curvature distributes the compressive stresses more evenly across the contact surfaces, preventing stress concentration at sharp edges while maintaining the robustness of the rectangular block shape.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #14Spheroidality (Curvature)

Solution Approach 2:

The tooth is constructed as a composite structure combining the body (first portion) and the insert (second portion). This allows the insert to be optimized for force transfer while the body provides structural support, creating a composite element that can handle large forces with reduced internal stress.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #40Composite materials

2Device complexity

If the insert is supported only over part of its length and height, then the device complexity is reduced, but large compressive stresses and internal stresses arise in the insert during use

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedevice complexityVSAvoidinsert strength
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSStrength

Solution Approach 1:

The groove and insert both feature rounded ends that match each other, creating a continuous curved contact surface. This geometric matching ensures full-length and full-height contact between the insert and the groove sidewalls, distributing loads evenly and preventing stress concentration while maintaining a relatively simple groove structure.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #14Spheroidality (Curvature)

Solution Approach 2:

The insert geometry is changed from a simple planar strip to a rectangular block with rounded ribs at the ends. This parameter change in shape and support contact area significantly increases the insert's ability to resist internal stresses while maintaining ease of manufacture through standard forming processes.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Force

If the groove and insert extend over the entire length of the tooth, then the force transfer is improved, but the body is weakened by the grooves and the teeth need reinforcement

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveforce transferVSAvoidbody strength
Core Design Contradiction:
ForceVSStrength

Solution Approach 1:

The groove and insert extend over only part of the tooth length, specifically positioned where the sprocket wheel contacts the teeth. This localized approach provides full force transfer capability exactly where needed during operation, while leaving the rest of the tooth body intact and strong, avoiding unnecessary weakening of the overall structure.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

Rather than extending the groove and insert over the entire tooth length (excessive action), the solution uses partial action by limiting the groove length to only the necessary contact region. This provides sufficient force transfer for the sprocket engagement while minimizing the weakening effect on the tooth body.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Data Source

PatentEP3007908B1Bicycle hub for a bicycle transmission system
Publication Date: 2018.04.04 HOEK VAN ROBERTUS CORNELIUS WILHELMUS
  • EP3007908B1 patent drawingFigure 1~3

AI summary

A bicycle hub 1 comprises a hollow cylindrical body 3 which is provided with external splines having teeth 5 extending in axial direction. Each tooth has a first axial side 7 which is loaded during use by a sprocket wheel slid onto the body and an opposite, second axial side 9. Three of the teeth are composed of two portions, that is to say a first portion 11 which forms a whole with the body and a second portion which forms an insert 13. The insert partly forms the first side 7 of the tooth. The body is provided with three axial grooves 15 which accommodate the inserts 13. The inserts 13 partly protrude above the grooves and the height 17 of the inserts is approximately equal to the width 19 of the inserts.