did you stress-relieve the wheel? if not then the spokes will just carry on breaking.
cheers
Spokes on Maddux 3.0 Disc
Re: Spokes on Maddux 3.0 Disc
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Re: Spokes on Maddux 3.0 Disc
LinusR wrote:Got a couple of pairs of new spokes and replaced broken one. This revealed a slight cock up. My measurements were 2mm short.Instead of (Rear 280mm and 278mm; front 278mm both sides) they should be (Rear 282mm and 280mm; front 280mm both sides). It seems even though I've built plenty of wheels and served an engineering apprenticeship, I can't measure a spoke...
I'm now tempted to rebuild the rear and the front wheel (event though no breakages on the front) and service (squirt grease into them
) the hubs while I'm at it. I am again checking my measurements and believe that I am incapable of measuring a spoke. I now believe the front wheel may not be 280 both sides but in fact 280/282. I can get a complete set of silver spokes (36 x 280 and 36 x 282) for £45. I think I'm gonna have to check my measurements again... Re: Spokes on Maddux 3.0 Disc
Brucey wrote:did you stress-relieve the wheel? if not then the spokes will just carry on breaking.
cheers
I knew you'd say that! Just because I cannot measure a spoke, I am not totally incompetent... just slightly...
Re: Spokes on Maddux 3.0 Disc
if you stress-relieved the wheel and you have broken further spoke(s) it means one of several things
1) that the stress-relief was ineffective for some reason
2) that the spokes which have broken subsequently were already cracked and were doomed to break anyway
3) that there is a systematic problem of some kind (eg with the build, the spokes themselves, or the fit in the hub, or the fit in the rim) .
If 3) then you will break spokes for ever and it won't matter what you do. Best idea is to rebuild the wheel with new spokes if it is going to be a big problem to break further spokes.
If 2) (and not 3) then you shouldn't break many spokes before it settles down. If you broke one or two spokes before you stress-relieved the wheel properly, you might expect to break a further one or two spokes (which had already cracked) but if you break more than that in the subsequent few thousand miles then 1) or 3) likely applies.
FWIW you ought to be able to buy a full set of DB stainless spokes (both wheels) for about £20 from cyclebasket. BTW when checking spoke lengths, best be sure that the extant spokes are the right length, by eyeballing where the end of the spoke is in the nipple. When measuring spokes, much the best idea is to remove a spoke and measure it directly using a steel rule.
cheers
1) that the stress-relief was ineffective for some reason
2) that the spokes which have broken subsequently were already cracked and were doomed to break anyway
3) that there is a systematic problem of some kind (eg with the build, the spokes themselves, or the fit in the hub, or the fit in the rim) .
If 3) then you will break spokes for ever and it won't matter what you do. Best idea is to rebuild the wheel with new spokes if it is going to be a big problem to break further spokes.
If 2) (and not 3) then you shouldn't break many spokes before it settles down. If you broke one or two spokes before you stress-relieved the wheel properly, you might expect to break a further one or two spokes (which had already cracked) but if you break more than that in the subsequent few thousand miles then 1) or 3) likely applies.
FWIW you ought to be able to buy a full set of DB stainless spokes (both wheels) for about £20 from cyclebasket. BTW when checking spoke lengths, best be sure that the extant spokes are the right length, by eyeballing where the end of the spoke is in the nipple. When measuring spokes, much the best idea is to remove a spoke and measure it directly using a steel rule.
cheers
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Re: Spokes on Maddux 3.0 Disc
Brucey wrote:if you stress-relieved the wheel and you have broken further spoke(s) it means one of several things
1) that the stress-relief was ineffective for some reason
2) that the spokes which have broken subsequently were already cracked and were doomed to break anyway
3) that there is a systematic problem of some kind (eg with the spokes themselves or the fit in the hub, or the fit in the rim) .
If 3) then you will break spokes for ever and it won't matter what you do. Best idea is to rebuild the wheel with new spokes if it is going to be a big problem to break further spokes.
If 2) (and not 3) then you shouldn't break many spokes before it settles down. If you broke one or two spokes before you stress-relieved the wheel properly, you might expect to break a further one or two spokes (which had already cracked) but if you break more than that in the subsequent few thousand miles then 1) or 3) likely applies.
cheers
1) Incorrect. I am an excellent stress reliever of wheels. There is no-one equal.
2) Possibly cracked. I don't know. Doomed to break anyway? This second spoke to break (non-drive side like the first) is probably like all the other spokes on the wheel - poor quality. They both broke on the thread inside the nipple. They are all PG 15g spokes and painted black. I'm replacing them with 14-15-14 DB ones and silver. I don't like painted spokes.
3) Probably all the spokes are institutionally of low quality. I'm hoping the hubs and fit in the rim are ok and worth the effort of time and cost of shelling out 45 quid. I like to keep stuff working.
I bought the bike new in August 2016 and probably ridden it on average once a week since then (I have other bikes). I use it off-road in the summer and as a winter road bike. Breaking a spoke after three years and another half a year later is not bad going. It's not good but it's not terrible. I should say I am really happy with this bike especially for the price - about £750 (sale price). I changed the original brakes which were pretty poor, and I put a longer cage rear mech and bigger cassette on the back.
Re: Spokes on Maddux 3.0 Disc
black painted spokes can either be painted stainless or they can be painted non-stainless. If the latter then I would say yes change them; they may be made of vary cheap steel, full of inclusions. [If stainless steel is manufactured to meet a particular corrosion test standard, it is arguably less likely to have inclusions in it; they also affect the corrosion performance.] Black painted stainless spokes may not be as good as the same spoke, polished in fact; this is because of the effect of a scratch in the paint; that region is almost guaranteed to become anodic and may possess some of the features of a corrosion pit earlier than it might otherwise; this will encourage cracks to grow faster than they otherwise might.
Spokes breaking near the nipple is often caused by there being a kink in the spoke near the nipple, which is misaligned to the spoke. This is a potentially controversial topic, but in some cases I think standard stress-relief procedures may not deal with this very well; in fact it may even make things worse, not better.
For example the most commonly applied procedure is the 'parallel spoke squeeze' (PSS) one recommended by Jobst Brandt. In this you squeeze parallel pairs of spokes, loading them at the midpoint, or slightly above if the crossings are high. The spokes deflect in the plane of the wheel, and the usual thing (with a hub flange of average size) is that the highest load coincides with the upper part of the spoke being more or less back in line with the axle. When the spoke is released it will elastically deform if the nipple cannot articulate in the plane of the wheel. If this happens it means the stress relief has been ineffective, since it leaves the spokes under elastic stress.
Since rims are often drilled on a stagger but not angle-drilled in the plane of the rim, I believe this stress-relief method is not a good match for such rims; it allows the spoke to take a 'set' from the lateral angle but not the in-plane angle. Note that whenever the flange diameter is about the same size (or larger) vs the flange spacing, the (compound) angle from a nipple in a 'straight drilled rim' to the spoke as much or more caused by the flange diameter than the flange spacing. In older (eg rim braked small flange) hubs there is not usually much in-plane angle, so the PSS method is usually OK. In many cases the spoke goes past centre and the whole movement may be within the allowance of the nipple to articulate within the rim.
Due initially to a simple misunderstanding, and later through choice, especially with large flange hubs, I have most often stress-relieved wheels by pushing crossings towards one another, i.e. I load the spokes at right angles to the 'parallel spoke squeeze' method. This does three things
1) it helps to complete the usual 'angle set' of the J bends at the hub ( in a way that is not otherwise normally achieved since they always 'spring back' slightly.)
2) it preserves the in-plane angle of the spokes during stress-relief, so is likely to be more effective when a large flange hub is used.
3) because the crossings are lower down on the spoke, the lateral angle of the spoke to the nipple is not so greatly changed during stress relief.
I avoid building wheels with big nipple angles, but I have stress-relieved many wheels which have been built like this by other people. If the angle at the nipple is unavoidably bad, I will 'set' the spokes slightly before stress-relief. Between this and the stress-relief method used, spoke breakage seems a rare event, even in wheels that are bad enough I would never have built them like that.
cheers
Spokes breaking near the nipple is often caused by there being a kink in the spoke near the nipple, which is misaligned to the spoke. This is a potentially controversial topic, but in some cases I think standard stress-relief procedures may not deal with this very well; in fact it may even make things worse, not better.
For example the most commonly applied procedure is the 'parallel spoke squeeze' (PSS) one recommended by Jobst Brandt. In this you squeeze parallel pairs of spokes, loading them at the midpoint, or slightly above if the crossings are high. The spokes deflect in the plane of the wheel, and the usual thing (with a hub flange of average size) is that the highest load coincides with the upper part of the spoke being more or less back in line with the axle. When the spoke is released it will elastically deform if the nipple cannot articulate in the plane of the wheel. If this happens it means the stress relief has been ineffective, since it leaves the spokes under elastic stress.
Since rims are often drilled on a stagger but not angle-drilled in the plane of the rim, I believe this stress-relief method is not a good match for such rims; it allows the spoke to take a 'set' from the lateral angle but not the in-plane angle. Note that whenever the flange diameter is about the same size (or larger) vs the flange spacing, the (compound) angle from a nipple in a 'straight drilled rim' to the spoke as much or more caused by the flange diameter than the flange spacing. In older (eg rim braked small flange) hubs there is not usually much in-plane angle, so the PSS method is usually OK. In many cases the spoke goes past centre and the whole movement may be within the allowance of the nipple to articulate within the rim.
Due initially to a simple misunderstanding, and later through choice, especially with large flange hubs, I have most often stress-relieved wheels by pushing crossings towards one another, i.e. I load the spokes at right angles to the 'parallel spoke squeeze' method. This does three things
1) it helps to complete the usual 'angle set' of the J bends at the hub ( in a way that is not otherwise normally achieved since they always 'spring back' slightly.)
2) it preserves the in-plane angle of the spokes during stress-relief, so is likely to be more effective when a large flange hub is used.
3) because the crossings are lower down on the spoke, the lateral angle of the spoke to the nipple is not so greatly changed during stress relief.
I avoid building wheels with big nipple angles, but I have stress-relieved many wheels which have been built like this by other people. If the angle at the nipple is unavoidably bad, I will 'set' the spokes slightly before stress-relief. Between this and the stress-relief method used, spoke breakage seems a rare event, even in wheels that are bad enough I would never have built them like that.
cheers
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Re: Spokes on Maddux 3.0 Disc
Brucey wrote:
Spokes breaking near the nipple is often caused by there being a kink in the spoke near the nipple, which is misaligned to the spoke. This is a potentially controversial topic, but in some cases I think standard stress-relief procedures may not deal with this very well; in fact it may even make things worse, not better.
I am surprised you have not suggested that it is the part of the thread that is not screwed into the nipple is the weak spot as the spoke is - obviously - narrower there and just as it enters the nipple it is not supported by the corresponding thread in the nipple, if you follow. I would hypothesise that in this case - because it snapped off just at the first thread - this spoke fractured at the weakest point. A weak point in a poor quality spoke. The fact that it is a 15g PG spoke contributes to this weakness.
I did use the Jobst stress-relieving method.
Re: Spokes on Maddux 3.0 Disc
Brucey wrote:black painted spokes can either be painted stainless or they can be painted non-stainless. If the latter then I would say yes change them; they may be made of vary cheap steel, full of inclusions. [If stainless steel is manufactured to meet a particular corrosion test standard, it is arguably less likely to have inclusions in it; they also affect the corrosion performance.] Black painted stainless spokes may not be as good as the same spoke, polished in fact; this is because of the effect of a scratch in the paint; that region is almost guaranteed to become anodic and may possess some of the features of a corrosion pit earlier than it might otherwise; this will encourage cracks to grow faster than they otherwise might.
I think the broken spoke is stainless steel. It has a very weak attraction to my fridge magnet.
Not sure if it is clear from this photo how it has failed
Re: Spokes on Maddux 3.0 Disc
the spoke has five main weak spots;
1) at the J bend
2) at the spoke thread
3) where the transition to the head is
4) where the transition to the butt is
5) where one spoke crosses another
the order above is (roughly) with the most likely failure highest. Far more spokes break at the J bend than they do at the nipple, which suggests that the strength of the spoke is not seriously compromised at the thread, and/or that it is usually compromised more greatly elsewhere.
The spoke thread is rolled not cut; this preserves more of the core diameter of the spoke, since about half the thread profile is pushed outwards beyond the original spoke diameter. It also work-hardens the material and preserves the grain structure of the material (which remains favourably aligned parallel to the surface). It even changes the residual stress distribution in the surface of the spoke in a favourable fashion. In the right material, done in the right way, rolled threads are far superior to cut threads and should not be regarded in the same light at all.
However in the wrong material, rolling a thread may cause serious damage . Note also that if the spokes are painted non-stainless, and the coating is damaged or absent at the screw thread, corrosion will accelerate the cracking rate. Adding a dose of waxoyl inside the nipple counterbore will help inhibit corrosion.
But regardless of the spoke, breakage at the nipple is (IME) most often associated with a bad stress relief and nipples that are not in line with the spoke. A small residual stress in bending becomes a severe fatigue load in use.
In your photo it looks like it is a typical fatigue failure, that has probably initiated at the 10-o'clock position. It may be that this aligns with the position of the J bend such that it makes sense from the POV of a kink/residual stress near the nipple....?
cheers
1) at the J bend
2) at the spoke thread
3) where the transition to the head is
4) where the transition to the butt is
5) where one spoke crosses another
the order above is (roughly) with the most likely failure highest. Far more spokes break at the J bend than they do at the nipple, which suggests that the strength of the spoke is not seriously compromised at the thread, and/or that it is usually compromised more greatly elsewhere.
The spoke thread is rolled not cut; this preserves more of the core diameter of the spoke, since about half the thread profile is pushed outwards beyond the original spoke diameter. It also work-hardens the material and preserves the grain structure of the material (which remains favourably aligned parallel to the surface). It even changes the residual stress distribution in the surface of the spoke in a favourable fashion. In the right material, done in the right way, rolled threads are far superior to cut threads and should not be regarded in the same light at all.
However in the wrong material, rolling a thread may cause serious damage . Note also that if the spokes are painted non-stainless, and the coating is damaged or absent at the screw thread, corrosion will accelerate the cracking rate. Adding a dose of waxoyl inside the nipple counterbore will help inhibit corrosion.
But regardless of the spoke, breakage at the nipple is (IME) most often associated with a bad stress relief and nipples that are not in line with the spoke. A small residual stress in bending becomes a severe fatigue load in use.
In your photo it looks like it is a typical fatigue failure, that has probably initiated at the 10-o'clock position. It may be that this aligns with the position of the J bend such that it makes sense from the POV of a kink/residual stress near the nipple....?
cheers
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Re: Spokes on Maddux 3.0 Disc
Brucey wrote:the spoke has five main weak spots;
1) at the J bend
2) at the spoke thread
3) where the transition to the head is
4) where the transition to the butt is
5) where one spoke crosses another
the order above is (roughly) with the most likely failure highest. Far more spokes break at the J bend than they do at the nipple, which suggests that the strength of the spoke is not seriously compromised at the thread, and/or that it is usually compromised more greatly elsewhere.
The spoke thread is rolled not cut; this preserves more of the core diameter of the spoke, since about half the thread profile is pushed outwards beyond the original spoke diameter. It also work-hardens the material and preserves the grain structure of the material (which remains favourably aligned parallel to the surface). It even changes the residual stress distribution in the surface of the spoke in a favourable fashion. In the right material, done in the right way, rolled threads are far superior to cut threads and should not be regarded in the same light at all.
However in the wrong material, rolling a thread may cause serious damage . Note also that if the spokes are painted non-stainless, and the coating is damaged or absent at the screw thread, corrosion will accelerate the cracking rate. Adding a dose of waxoyl inside the nipple counterbore will help inhibit corrosion.
But regardless of the spoke, breakage at the nipple is (IME) most often associated with a bad stress relief and nipples that are not in line with the spoke. A small residual stress in bending becomes a severe fatigue load in use.
In your photo it looks like it is a typical fatigue failure, that has probably initiated at the 10-o'clock position. It may be that this aligns with the position of the J bend such that it makes sense from the POV of a kink/residual stress near the nipple....?
cheers
On the wheels I have built myself any spoke spoke failure has only ever been at the J bend (I can only think of two or three failures over the past 22 years, since I've been building wheels. I've only built about 10 pairs of wheels.) All the wheels I have built I have used the Jobst method as explained in his book, and using near identical SS silver 14-15-14 butted spokes. The two spokes on the Maddux rear wheel have failed "at the spoke thread" - near the beginning of the thread. The Maddux spokes are painted SS 15g plain gauge spokes (36 spoke wheel). I conclude from this that the failure is due to one or more of the following:
1) Plain gauge SS 15g spokes are too weak at the thread even in a 36 spoke wheel (compared to a 14-15-14 spoke of same material).
2) The spoke material is poor quality stainless steel and poor resistance to fatigue under normal load (ie under my fat derriere).
3) There is poor quality control from the spoke manufacturer and I've been unlucky to have had bad spokes.
4) Stress relieving at time of wheel-building was either not done correctly or at all.
5) Painting them black has had a negative impact on their fatigue life.
It certainly is not due to my stress-relieving technique - unless my technique is unsuitable for painted, SS, 15g, PG spokes or poor quality (which it well could be).
For this reason - and I base this on this single pair of wheels - I would not recommend building wheels with SS, 15g, PG spokes - even if they are not painted black.
Re: Spokes on Maddux 3.0 Disc
you have not mentioned the rim; in fact the way the rim is drilled determines
a) if the spoke is liable to have a kink immediately adjacent to the nipple or not and
b) how that part of the spoke reacts to stress relief.
IIRC several of the maddux wheelsets I have seen have had near-parallel rim drillings which don't allow much nipple articulation and will result in kinks near the nipples. If yours are like this too then as I have previously described, using PSS stress-relief is liable to be either ineffective or even counterproductive. Stress-relief is not a one-size fits all process; it should be done differently in some wheelsets, and the rim is a major determinant.
There is no doubt that 15G spokes are not as strong as 14G ones, but that (and several other things) won't push the failure location from the J bends to the nipples. If anything 15G spokes are arguably more likely than ever to fail at the J bend, because the spoke never fits the hub terribly well.
How is the failure initiation point 'timed' vs the J bend?
cheers
a) if the spoke is liable to have a kink immediately adjacent to the nipple or not and
b) how that part of the spoke reacts to stress relief.
IIRC several of the maddux wheelsets I have seen have had near-parallel rim drillings which don't allow much nipple articulation and will result in kinks near the nipples. If yours are like this too then as I have previously described, using PSS stress-relief is liable to be either ineffective or even counterproductive. Stress-relief is not a one-size fits all process; it should be done differently in some wheelsets, and the rim is a major determinant.
There is no doubt that 15G spokes are not as strong as 14G ones, but that (and several other things) won't push the failure location from the J bends to the nipples. If anything 15G spokes are arguably more likely than ever to fail at the J bend, because the spoke never fits the hub terribly well.
How is the failure initiation point 'timed' vs the J bend?
cheers
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Re: Spokes on Maddux 3.0 Disc
Brucey wrote:you have not mentioned the rim; in fact the way the rim is drilled determines
a) if the spoke is liable to have a kink immediately adjacent to the nipple or not and
b) how that part of the spoke reacts to stress relief.
IIRC several of the maddux wheelsets I have seen have had near-parallel rim drillings which don't allow much nipple articulation and will result in kinks near the nipples. If yours are like this too then as I have previously described, using PSS stress-relief is liable to be either ineffective or even counterproductive. Stress-relief is not a one-size fits all process; it should be done differently in some wheelsets, and the rim is a major determinant.
There is no doubt that 15G spokes are not as strong as 14G ones, but that (and several other things) won't push the failure location from the J bends to the nipples. If anything 15G spokes are arguably more likely than ever to fail at the J bend, because the spoke never fits the hub terribly well.
How is the failure initiation point 'timed' vs the J bend?
cheers
No I didn't mention the rim, nor the nipple for that matter. The Maddux rim is drilled without being offset to accommodate spokes on either side of the hub - unlike say, a Mavic Open Pro. I'm not sure quite what you mean when you say "near-parallel rim drillings". The rim holes appear to be drilled perfectly radially (along a radius line) toward their corresponding opposite holes. The original spokes and their 14mm nipples do not seem to sit very well. But my replacement spoke with a 12mm nipple seems to sit better in both planes compared to the 14mm originals.
[edit] as we have observed before, the label is wrong. They are not "eyeletted".
Your point about why didn't it break at the J-bend instead of the nipple is an interesting one. It may be that the spoke is quite well supported by the large flange hub.
The rim seems to be ok and that's why I am prepared to replace the spokes and rebuild the wheel. Having had two spokes fail on the wheel in near identical fashion they would appear to be the weak point. So rebuilding with a new set of spokes and 12mm nipples may build a more robust wheel. Of course, if the spokes are more robust: am I tempting fate by causing the rim to fail in future rather than a spoke? Maybe it is better that the spokes fail and not the rim or hub flange? I think the answer to this is no doubt "yes". Perhaps Cannondale and Maddux's lawyers have pondered the same question. I'll have to rebuild it with care and let you all know how I fare.
Re: Spokes on Maddux 3.0 Disc
yes, 'near radial' would be a more accurate description than 'near parallel', poor choice of words on my part.
FWIW those rims are not the same model but they are made the same way as other maddux branded rims I have seen and the wheel will have the same sort of problems; there is a distinct kink where each spoke enters its nipple and (for the reasons I described earlier) I don't think PSS stress-relief will address this very well.
Different nipples will help if they are able to articulate more in the rim, which some can. But a short nipple never looks as kinked as a longer one (even if it is), and a DB spoke with a short butt in it can see the same load and have a compound bend in it near the end instead of a more obvious kink. The fatigue loads can be about the same and about as damaging.
I suspect that unless you do something different re spoke angle/spoke setting/stress relief, a rebuild won't necessarily solve your spoke breakage problem, just ameliorate it slightly by virtue of the increased thickness of 14G spoke ends, and that the spokes will be newer.
Hoping for third time lucky with this question; How is the failure initiation point 'timed' vs the J bend?
cheers
FWIW those rims are not the same model but they are made the same way as other maddux branded rims I have seen and the wheel will have the same sort of problems; there is a distinct kink where each spoke enters its nipple and (for the reasons I described earlier) I don't think PSS stress-relief will address this very well.
Different nipples will help if they are able to articulate more in the rim, which some can. But a short nipple never looks as kinked as a longer one (even if it is), and a DB spoke with a short butt in it can see the same load and have a compound bend in it near the end instead of a more obvious kink. The fatigue loads can be about the same and about as damaging.
I suspect that unless you do something different re spoke angle/spoke setting/stress relief, a rebuild won't necessarily solve your spoke breakage problem, just ameliorate it slightly by virtue of the increased thickness of 14G spoke ends, and that the spokes will be newer.
Hoping for third time lucky with this question; How is the failure initiation point 'timed' vs the J bend?
cheers
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Re: Spokes on Maddux 3.0 Disc
Brucey wrote:
Hoping for third time lucky with this question; How is the failure initiation point 'timed' vs the J bend?
cheers
I didn't understand it first time around
Care to explain?Re: Spokes on Maddux 3.0 Disc
Brucey wrote:
I suspect that unless you do something different re spoke angle/spoke setting/stress relief, a rebuild won't necessarily solve your spoke breakage problem, just ameliorate it slightly by virtue of the increased thickness of 14G spoke ends, and that the spokes will be newer.
Oh ye of little faith
[edit] And when the rim breaks I will have been vindicated 