A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Techniques
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Selecting An Appropriate Bolt



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old April 20th 17, 03:03 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,345
Default Selecting An Appropriate Bolt

On Wednesday, April 19, 2017 at 8:56:36 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Thu, 20 Apr 2017 09:52:15 +0700, John B Slocomb
wrote:

On Wed, 19 Apr 2017 18:23:53 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 19 Apr 2017 18:43:02 +0700, John B Slocomb
wrote:


Metric thread pitch is described totally different than inch size
bolts. Inch size is threads per inch. Metric thread is thread pitch -
so in inch size bolts, a higher number is a finer thread - in metric a
higher number is a coarser thread. A 6X10 metric bolt is 6mm with a
thread pitch of 1mm crest to crest (or root to root - however you want
to measure it)

Who cares, along as the people involved know what you are talking
about? Ant metering system is just that, a system which works for
those that use it.

The old method of measuring gear ratios on a bicycle was to use "gear
inches" which described the diameter of a wheel that would move the
distance in one revolution. Rather archaic today but made perfect
sense to those that used it.


As far as the "grade" of the bolt - a "grade 8" is NOT always better
than a "grade 5" or even, possibly, in some cases, a "grade 2"

A grade 2 or grade 5 bolt may bend and stretch - and still hold, where
a grade 8 would simply snap. It depends on what kind of load is being
carried by the bolt - and how it is torqued. On the same vein, a bolt
that is undertorqued CAN fail faster than one that is overtorqued. A
properly tensioned bolt is "pre-stretched" just enough that any cyclic
load does not stretch the bolt any farther, so the bolt does not
fatigue in use.

An exciting theory and technically correct. although I would comment
that I've yet to see an under torque bolt break.

It's far from "theory" - I've seen numerous head bolts and manifold
bolts fail that were attributed to being under-torqued on vehicles
that were not properly PDId, and quite a few bolts that failed in
shear because they were not properly tightened, and/or the holes were
not properly de-burred, allowing the bolt to loose tension.
No use arguing with Slocumb though - you'll never get anything
through his thick skull.


You must have a tremendous amount of experience with nuts and bolts.
As I mentioned I've been fooling with them things for about 70 years
now and frankly I've never seen "numerous" head bolts fail. Yes, I've
seen head bolts fail, but I would use the term "rarely" not
"Numerous". I would have to say that if you have seen numerous head
bolts fail then you are associating with some very incompetent
mechanics.

And how does one determine that they were under torqued after they
have failed?

Notb incompetent mechanics - but poor factory assembly.

Don't take my word for the FACT the problem exists.

See:
http://www.croberts.com/bolt.htm
In particular Picture #10.

As for broken head bolts - see:
https://www.bimmerforums.com/forum/s...ken-Head-Bolts

Also see: http://www.boltscience.com/pages/Failure%20Modes.swf
and:
https://www.hiretorque.co.uk/failure...bolted-joints/
-Particularly item #3
3. Fatigue Failures

Fatigue failures typically occur within a couple of threads, where the
bolt engages into the internal thread. Failure is then reached due to
the high stress gradient within the region.

Fatigue failures can be particularly hazardous because they often
occur with no visible warning signs and the failure is often sudden.
Fatigue failures are often unknowingly avoided in gasketed joints
simply because the required crush for the gasket often dictates a
torque or bolt tension that minimizes the risk of a fatigue failure.
However, changing to a new gasket type later on which requires less
crush may be the initial cause of bolt fatigue failure.

It is not unusual to assume that a bolt has failed due to overload
when it has in fact failed from fatigue, which can also be a
consequence of self-loosening.

Also:
http://www.bluetoad.com/article/Bolt...0/article.html
and:
http://www.onallcylinders.com/2014/0...ener-failures/

Also:
https://www.excelcalcs.com/engineeri...-joints-fail?/
The first cause listed:
Insufficient Clamp force? - Usually by applying a measured torque load
to the nut bolted joints are tightened to achieve a specific clamp
load. Even under the most extreme applied loads, the clamping force
must prevent joint movement between clamped parts. Movement includes
both opening of the joint to form gaps and slipping. Loads applied to
the joint may be axial forces (in the direction of the bolt axis)
and/or shear forces (perpendicular to the bolt axis). If slippage
occurs then the joint may fail by the bolt loosening. If a gap in the
joint opens then a bolt failure by fatigue is more likely to occur.
Typically bolt fatigue failures occur because of insufficient preload
rather than poor fatigue strength of the bolt. Improving the method of
tightening can reduce the scatter in bolt preload and help guarantee
the minimum required clamping force

Pay particular attention to the sectionfollowing the "bolted
joint.xls" link which explains things in pretty plain language.


You may have worked on machines, including aircraft without fully
understanding what you were doing or why.

I have not only worked on cars and agricultural equipment and
industrial equipment (loaders and dozers etc) and been rather
extensively involved with amateur built/homebuilt/experimental
aviation, I have also taught automotive mechanics at the secondary
school AND post secondary (trade) level.


That Figure 10 was not a "failure" per se. The bolt did not break from under tightening - it wore the threads off. Eventually indeed it would have broken.

Head bolts on cars can be said to ALWAYS break from over-torquing. What occurs is that you over-torque the head bolts and then when the engine heats up and expands it blows the top of the bolt off from exceeding the mechanical strength of the bolt. Sometimes you can hear it go.

I rarely use a torque wrench because you can FEEL the torque that should be applied and using a torque wrench a number of times shows you that it almost always feels under-torqued. So you develope a feel for it. A correctly designed piece is supposed to use the mechanical strength of a large number of bolts and not the near maximum strength of a few. This is the mistake that is almost always made on that great "German engineering". They use calculations instead of common sense. Ten headbolts torqued within 10% of the proper torque are better than 6 headbolts designed to carry the load if properly torqued to exactly the correct value.

Which reminds me of what is becoming with the carbon fiber engineering these days. It isn't "great engineering" to make a 12 lb bike that can kill it's rider with a single manufacturing flaw.
Ads
  #52  
Old April 20th 17, 04:23 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
AMuzi
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,447
Default Selecting An Appropriate Bolt

On 4/20/2017 9:03 AM, wrote:
On Wednesday, April 19, 2017 at 8:56:36 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Thu, 20 Apr 2017 09:52:15 +0700, John B Slocomb
wrote:

On Wed, 19 Apr 2017 18:23:53 -0400,
wrote:

On Wed, 19 Apr 2017 18:43:02 +0700, John B Slocomb
wrote:


Metric thread pitch is described totally different than inch size
bolts. Inch size is threads per inch. Metric thread is thread pitch -
so in inch size bolts, a higher number is a finer thread - in metric a
higher number is a coarser thread. A 6X10 metric bolt is 6mm with a
thread pitch of 1mm crest to crest (or root to root - however you want
to measure it)

Who cares, along as the people involved know what you are talking
about? Ant metering system is just that, a system which works for
those that use it.

The old method of measuring gear ratios on a bicycle was to use "gear
inches" which described the diameter of a wheel that would move the
distance in one revolution. Rather archaic today but made perfect
sense to those that used it.


As far as the "grade" of the bolt - a "grade 8" is NOT always better
than a "grade 5" or even, possibly, in some cases, a "grade 2"

A grade 2 or grade 5 bolt may bend and stretch - and still hold, where
a grade 8 would simply snap. It depends on what kind of load is being
carried by the bolt - and how it is torqued. On the same vein, a bolt
that is undertorqued CAN fail faster than one that is overtorqued. A
properly tensioned bolt is "pre-stretched" just enough that any cyclic
load does not stretch the bolt any farther, so the bolt does not
fatigue in use.

An exciting theory and technically correct. although I would comment
that I've yet to see an under torque bolt break.

It's far from "theory" - I've seen numerous head bolts and manifold
bolts fail that were attributed to being under-torqued on vehicles
that were not properly PDId, and quite a few bolts that failed in
shear because they were not properly tightened, and/or the holes were
not properly de-burred, allowing the bolt to loose tension.
No use arguing with Slocumb though - you'll never get anything
through his thick skull.

You must have a tremendous amount of experience with nuts and bolts.
As I mentioned I've been fooling with them things for about 70 years
now and frankly I've never seen "numerous" head bolts fail. Yes, I've
seen head bolts fail, but I would use the term "rarely" not
"Numerous". I would have to say that if you have seen numerous head
bolts fail then you are associating with some very incompetent
mechanics.

And how does one determine that they were under torqued after they
have failed?

Notb incompetent mechanics - but poor factory assembly.

Don't take my word for the FACT the problem exists.

See:
http://www.croberts.com/bolt.htm
In particular Picture #10.

As for broken head bolts - see:
https://www.bimmerforums.com/forum/s...ken-Head-Bolts

Also see: http://www.boltscience.com/pages/Failure%20Modes.swf
and:
https://www.hiretorque.co.uk/failure...bolted-joints/
-Particularly item #3
3. Fatigue Failures

Fatigue failures typically occur within a couple of threads, where the
bolt engages into the internal thread. Failure is then reached due to
the high stress gradient within the region.

Fatigue failures can be particularly hazardous because they often
occur with no visible warning signs and the failure is often sudden.
Fatigue failures are often unknowingly avoided in gasketed joints
simply because the required crush for the gasket often dictates a
torque or bolt tension that minimizes the risk of a fatigue failure.
However, changing to a new gasket type later on which requires less
crush may be the initial cause of bolt fatigue failure.

It is not unusual to assume that a bolt has failed due to overload
when it has in fact failed from fatigue, which can also be a
consequence of self-loosening.

Also:
http://www.bluetoad.com/article/Bolt...0/article.html
and:
http://www.onallcylinders.com/2014/0...ener-failures/

Also:
https://www.excelcalcs.com/engineeri...-joints-fail?/
The first cause listed:
Insufficient Clamp force? - Usually by applying a measured torque load
to the nut bolted joints are tightened to achieve a specific clamp
load. Even under the most extreme applied loads, the clamping force
must prevent joint movement between clamped parts. Movement includes
both opening of the joint to form gaps and slipping. Loads applied to
the joint may be axial forces (in the direction of the bolt axis)
and/or shear forces (perpendicular to the bolt axis). If slippage
occurs then the joint may fail by the bolt loosening. If a gap in the
joint opens then a bolt failure by fatigue is more likely to occur.
Typically bolt fatigue failures occur because of insufficient preload
rather than poor fatigue strength of the bolt. Improving the method of
tightening can reduce the scatter in bolt preload and help guarantee
the minimum required clamping force

Pay particular attention to the sectionfollowing the "bolted
joint.xls" link which explains things in pretty plain language.


You may have worked on machines, including aircraft without fully
understanding what you were doing or why.

I have not only worked on cars and agricultural equipment and
industrial equipment (loaders and dozers etc) and been rather
extensively involved with amateur built/homebuilt/experimental
aviation, I have also taught automotive mechanics at the secondary
school AND post secondary (trade) level.


That Figure 10 was not a "failure" per se. The bolt did not break from under tightening - it wore the threads off. Eventually indeed it would have broken.

Head bolts on cars can be said to ALWAYS break from over-torquing. What occurs is that you over-torque the head bolts and then when the engine heats up and expands it blows the top of the bolt off from exceeding the mechanical strength of the bolt. Sometimes you can hear it go.

I rarely use a torque wrench because you can FEEL the torque that should be applied and using a torque wrench a number of times shows you that it almost always feels under-torqued. So you develope a feel for it. A correctly designed piece is supposed to use the mechanical strength of a large number of bolts and not the near maximum strength of a few. This is the mistake that is almost always made on that great "German engineering". They use calculations instead of common sense. Ten headbolts torqued within 10% of the proper torque are better than 6 headbolts designed to carry the load if properly torqued to exactly the correct value.

Which reminds me of what is becoming with the carbon fiber engineering these days. It isn't "great engineering" to make a 12 lb bike that can kill it's rider with a single manufacturing flaw.


There are cases where an experienced mechanic can torque
properly to within the correct range without a torque
wrench. Unfortunately, there are also times when you thought
you did, but you didn't. On some parts, the result of such
negligence isn't critical, unlike airplanes.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971


  #53  
Old April 20th 17, 05:55 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 445
Default Selecting An Appropriate Bolt

On Thu, 20 Apr 2017 16:17:14 +0700, John B Slocomb
wrote:

On Wed, 19 Apr 2017 23:56:34 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 20 Apr 2017 09:52:15 +0700, John B Slocomb
wrote:

On Wed, 19 Apr 2017 18:23:53 -0400,
wrote:

On Wed, 19 Apr 2017 18:43:02 +0700, John B Slocomb
wrote:


Metric thread pitch is described totally different than inch size
bolts. Inch size is threads per inch. Metric thread is thread pitch -
so in inch size bolts, a higher number is a finer thread - in metric a
higher number is a coarser thread. A 6X10 metric bolt is 6mm with a
thread pitch of 1mm crest to crest (or root to root - however you want
to measure it)

Who cares, along as the people involved know what you are talking
about? Ant metering system is just that, a system which works for
those that use it.

The old method of measuring gear ratios on a bicycle was to use "gear
inches" which described the diameter of a wheel that would move the
distance in one revolution. Rather archaic today but made perfect
sense to those that used it.


As far as the "grade" of the bolt - a "grade 8" is NOT always better
than a "grade 5" or even, possibly, in some cases, a "grade 2"

A grade 2 or grade 5 bolt may bend and stretch - and still hold, where
a grade 8 would simply snap. It depends on what kind of load is being
carried by the bolt - and how it is torqued. On the same vein, a bolt
that is undertorqued CAN fail faster than one that is overtorqued. A
properly tensioned bolt is "pre-stretched" just enough that any cyclic
load does not stretch the bolt any farther, so the bolt does not
fatigue in use.

An exciting theory and technically correct. although I would comment
that I've yet to see an under torque bolt break.

It's far from "theory" - I've seen numerous head bolts and manifold
bolts fail that were attributed to being under-torqued on vehicles
that were not properly PDId, and quite a few bolts that failed in
shear because they were not properly tightened, and/or the holes were
not properly de-burred, allowing the bolt to loose tension.
No use arguing with Slocumb though - you'll never get anything
through his thick skull.

You must have a tremendous amount of experience with nuts and bolts.
As I mentioned I've been fooling with them things for about 70 years
now and frankly I've never seen "numerous" head bolts fail. Yes, I've
seen head bolts fail, but I would use the term "rarely" not
"Numerous". I would have to say that if you have seen numerous head
bolts fail then you are associating with some very incompetent
mechanics.

And how does one determine that they were under torqued after they
have failed?

Notb incompetent mechanics - but poor factory assembly.

Don't take my word for the FACT the problem exists.

See:
http://www.croberts.com/bolt.htm
In particular Picture #10.

As for broken head bolts - see:
https://www.bimmerforums.com/forum/s...ken-Head-Bolts

Also see: http://www.boltscience.com/pages/Failure%20Modes.swf
and:
https://www.hiretorque.co.uk/failure...bolted-joints/
-Particularly item #3
3. Fatigue Failures

Fatigue failures typically occur within a couple of threads, where the
bolt engages into the internal thread. Failure is then reached due to
the high stress gradient within the region.

Fatigue failures can be particularly hazardous because they often
occur with no visible warning signs and the failure is often sudden.
Fatigue failures are often unknowingly avoided in gasketed joints
simply because the required crush for the gasket often dictates a
torque or bolt tension that minimizes the risk of a fatigue failure.
However, changing to a new gasket type later on which requires less
crush may be the initial cause of bolt fatigue failure.

It is not unusual to assume that a bolt has failed due to overload
when it has in fact failed from fatigue, which can also be a
consequence of self-loosening.

Also:
http://www.bluetoad.com/article/Bolt...0/article.html
and:
http://www.onallcylinders.com/2014/0...ener-failures/

Also:
https://www.excelcalcs.com/engineeri...-joints-fail?/
The first cause listed:
Insufficient Clamp force? - Usually by applying a measured torque load
to the nut bolted joints are tightened to achieve a specific clamp
load. Even under the most extreme applied loads, the clamping force
must prevent joint movement between clamped parts. Movement includes
both opening of the joint to form gaps and slipping. Loads applied to
the joint may be axial forces (in the direction of the bolt axis)
and/or shear forces (perpendicular to the bolt axis). If slippage
occurs then the joint may fail by the bolt loosening. If a gap in the
joint opens then a bolt failure by fatigue is more likely to occur.
Typically bolt fatigue failures occur because of insufficient preload
rather than poor fatigue strength of the bolt. Improving the method of
tightening can reduce the scatter in bolt preload and help guarantee
the minimum required clamping force

Pay particular attention to the sectionfollowing the "bolted
joint.xls" link which explains things in pretty plain language.


You may have worked on machines, including aircraft without fully
understanding what you were doing or why.


You are probably right although the A.F. thought I was competent. Or I
guess that they did as they kept promoting me and they had me managing
divisions for them. Shoot, they even had me writing the skill level
tests for my career field one time.Then when I retired from that job I
hired on as a mechanic again and ended up some years later being
promoted to "Operations Manager" for a fair to middling sized company
in Indonesia.


Peter principal at work? It was all "Government work"

I have not only worked on cars and agricultural equipment and
industrial equipment (loaders and dozers etc) and been rather
extensively involved with amateur built/homebuilt/experimental
aviation, I have also taught automotive mechanics at the secondary
school AND post secondary (trade) level.


  #54  
Old April 20th 17, 05:59 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 445
Default Selecting An Appropriate Bolt

On Thu, 20 Apr 2017 07:03:57 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Wednesday, April 19, 2017 at 8:56:36 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Thu, 20 Apr 2017 09:52:15 +0700, John B Slocomb
wrote:

On Wed, 19 Apr 2017 18:23:53 -0400,
wrote:

On Wed, 19 Apr 2017 18:43:02 +0700, John B Slocomb
wrote:


Metric thread pitch is described totally different than inch size
bolts. Inch size is threads per inch. Metric thread is thread pitch -
so in inch size bolts, a higher number is a finer thread - in metric a
higher number is a coarser thread. A 6X10 metric bolt is 6mm with a
thread pitch of 1mm crest to crest (or root to root - however you want
to measure it)

Who cares, along as the people involved know what you are talking
about? Ant metering system is just that, a system which works for
those that use it.

The old method of measuring gear ratios on a bicycle was to use "gear
inches" which described the diameter of a wheel that would move the
distance in one revolution. Rather archaic today but made perfect
sense to those that used it.


As far as the "grade" of the bolt - a "grade 8" is NOT always better
than a "grade 5" or even, possibly, in some cases, a "grade 2"

A grade 2 or grade 5 bolt may bend and stretch - and still hold, where
a grade 8 would simply snap. It depends on what kind of load is being
carried by the bolt - and how it is torqued. On the same vein, a bolt
that is undertorqued CAN fail faster than one that is overtorqued. A
properly tensioned bolt is "pre-stretched" just enough that any cyclic
load does not stretch the bolt any farther, so the bolt does not
fatigue in use.

An exciting theory and technically correct. although I would comment
that I've yet to see an under torque bolt break.

It's far from "theory" - I've seen numerous head bolts and manifold
bolts fail that were attributed to being under-torqued on vehicles
that were not properly PDId, and quite a few bolts that failed in
shear because they were not properly tightened, and/or the holes were
not properly de-burred, allowing the bolt to loose tension.
No use arguing with Slocumb though - you'll never get anything
through his thick skull.

You must have a tremendous amount of experience with nuts and bolts.
As I mentioned I've been fooling with them things for about 70 years
now and frankly I've never seen "numerous" head bolts fail. Yes, I've
seen head bolts fail, but I would use the term "rarely" not
"Numerous". I would have to say that if you have seen numerous head
bolts fail then you are associating with some very incompetent
mechanics.

And how does one determine that they were under torqued after they
have failed?

Notb incompetent mechanics - but poor factory assembly.

Don't take my word for the FACT the problem exists.

See:
http://www.croberts.com/bolt.htm
In particular Picture #10.

As for broken head bolts - see:
https://www.bimmerforums.com/forum/s...ken-Head-Bolts

Also see: http://www.boltscience.com/pages/Failure%20Modes.swf
and:
https://www.hiretorque.co.uk/failure...bolted-joints/
-Particularly item #3
3. Fatigue Failures

Fatigue failures typically occur within a couple of threads, where the
bolt engages into the internal thread. Failure is then reached due to
the high stress gradient within the region.

Fatigue failures can be particularly hazardous because they often
occur with no visible warning signs and the failure is often sudden.
Fatigue failures are often unknowingly avoided in gasketed joints
simply because the required crush for the gasket often dictates a
torque or bolt tension that minimizes the risk of a fatigue failure.
However, changing to a new gasket type later on which requires less
crush may be the initial cause of bolt fatigue failure.

It is not unusual to assume that a bolt has failed due to overload
when it has in fact failed from fatigue, which can also be a
consequence of self-loosening.

Also:
http://www.bluetoad.com/article/Bolt...0/article.html
and:
http://www.onallcylinders.com/2014/0...ener-failures/

Also:
https://www.excelcalcs.com/engineeri...-joints-fail?/
The first cause listed:
Insufficient Clamp force? - Usually by applying a measured torque load
to the nut bolted joints are tightened to achieve a specific clamp
load. Even under the most extreme applied loads, the clamping force
must prevent joint movement between clamped parts. Movement includes
both opening of the joint to form gaps and slipping. Loads applied to
the joint may be axial forces (in the direction of the bolt axis)
and/or shear forces (perpendicular to the bolt axis). If slippage
occurs then the joint may fail by the bolt loosening. If a gap in the
joint opens then a bolt failure by fatigue is more likely to occur.
Typically bolt fatigue failures occur because of insufficient preload
rather than poor fatigue strength of the bolt. Improving the method of
tightening can reduce the scatter in bolt preload and help guarantee
the minimum required clamping force

Pay particular attention to the sectionfollowing the "bolted
joint.xls" link which explains things in pretty plain language.


You may have worked on machines, including aircraft without fully
understanding what you were doing or why.

I have not only worked on cars and agricultural equipment and
industrial equipment (loaders and dozers etc) and been rather
extensively involved with amateur built/homebuilt/experimental
aviation, I have also taught automotive mechanics at the secondary
school AND post secondary (trade) level.


That Figure 10 was not a "failure" per se. The bolt did not break from under tightening - it wore the threads off. Eventually indeed it would have broken.

Head bolts on cars can be said to ALWAYS break from over-torquing. What occurs is that you over-torque the head bolts and then when the engine heats up and expands it blows the top of the bolt off from exceeding the mechanical strength of the bolt. Sometimes you can hear it go.


No, more head bolts fail from undertorque than overtorque. a properly
preloADED BOLT WILL not SUFFER A FATIGUE FAILURE, WHILE AN
UNDERTORQUED BOLT will EVENTUALLY FAIL DUE TO FATIGUE. iT MIGHT NOT
HAPPEN IN THE NORMAL LIFESPAN OF THE ENGINE - BUT IT will HAPPEN
UNLESS IT IS GROSSLY OVER-SPEC'D

I rarely use a torque wrench because you can FEEL the torque that should be applied and using a torque wrench a number of times shows you that it almost always feels under-torqued. So you develope a feel for it. A correctly designed piece is supposed to use the mechanical strength of a large number of bolts and not the near maximum strength of a few. This is the mistake that is almost always made on that great "German engineering". They use calculations instead of common sense. Ten headbolts torqued within 10% of the proper torque are better than 6 headbolts designed to carry the load if properly torqued to exactly the correct value.

Which reminds me of what is becoming with the carbon fiber engineering these days. It isn't "great engineering" to make a 12 lb bike that can kill it's rider with a single manufacturing flaw.


  #55  
Old April 20th 17, 06:03 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 445
Default Selecting An Appropriate Bolt

On Thu, 20 Apr 2017 10:23:50 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 4/20/2017 9:03 AM, wrote:
On Wednesday, April 19, 2017 at 8:56:36 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Thu, 20 Apr 2017 09:52:15 +0700, John B Slocomb
wrote:

On Wed, 19 Apr 2017 18:23:53 -0400,
wrote:

On Wed, 19 Apr 2017 18:43:02 +0700, John B Slocomb
wrote:


Metric thread pitch is described totally different than inch size
bolts. Inch size is threads per inch. Metric thread is thread pitch -
so in inch size bolts, a higher number is a finer thread - in metric a
higher number is a coarser thread. A 6X10 metric bolt is 6mm with a
thread pitch of 1mm crest to crest (or root to root - however you want
to measure it)

Who cares, along as the people involved know what you are talking
about? Ant metering system is just that, a system which works for
those that use it.

The old method of measuring gear ratios on a bicycle was to use "gear
inches" which described the diameter of a wheel that would move the
distance in one revolution. Rather archaic today but made perfect
sense to those that used it.


As far as the "grade" of the bolt - a "grade 8" is NOT always better
than a "grade 5" or even, possibly, in some cases, a "grade 2"

A grade 2 or grade 5 bolt may bend and stretch - and still hold, where
a grade 8 would simply snap. It depends on what kind of load is being
carried by the bolt - and how it is torqued. On the same vein, a bolt
that is undertorqued CAN fail faster than one that is overtorqued. A
properly tensioned bolt is "pre-stretched" just enough that any cyclic
load does not stretch the bolt any farther, so the bolt does not
fatigue in use.

An exciting theory and technically correct. although I would comment
that I've yet to see an under torque bolt break.

It's far from "theory" - I've seen numerous head bolts and manifold
bolts fail that were attributed to being under-torqued on vehicles
that were not properly PDId, and quite a few bolts that failed in
shear because they were not properly tightened, and/or the holes were
not properly de-burred, allowing the bolt to loose tension.
No use arguing with Slocumb though - you'll never get anything
through his thick skull.

You must have a tremendous amount of experience with nuts and bolts.
As I mentioned I've been fooling with them things for about 70 years
now and frankly I've never seen "numerous" head bolts fail. Yes, I've
seen head bolts fail, but I would use the term "rarely" not
"Numerous". I would have to say that if you have seen numerous head
bolts fail then you are associating with some very incompetent
mechanics.

And how does one determine that they were under torqued after they
have failed?
Notb incompetent mechanics - but poor factory assembly.

Don't take my word for the FACT the problem exists.

See:
http://www.croberts.com/bolt.htm
In particular Picture #10.

As for broken head bolts - see:
https://www.bimmerforums.com/forum/s...ken-Head-Bolts

Also see: http://www.boltscience.com/pages/Failure%20Modes.swf
and:
https://www.hiretorque.co.uk/failure...bolted-joints/
-Particularly item #3
3. Fatigue Failures

Fatigue failures typically occur within a couple of threads, where the
bolt engages into the internal thread. Failure is then reached due to
the high stress gradient within the region.

Fatigue failures can be particularly hazardous because they often
occur with no visible warning signs and the failure is often sudden.
Fatigue failures are often unknowingly avoided in gasketed joints
simply because the required crush for the gasket often dictates a
torque or bolt tension that minimizes the risk of a fatigue failure.
However, changing to a new gasket type later on which requires less
crush may be the initial cause of bolt fatigue failure.

It is not unusual to assume that a bolt has failed due to overload
when it has in fact failed from fatigue, which can also be a
consequence of self-loosening.

Also:
http://www.bluetoad.com/article/Bolt...0/article.html
and:
http://www.onallcylinders.com/2014/0...ener-failures/

Also:
https://www.excelcalcs.com/engineeri...-joints-fail?/
The first cause listed:
Insufficient Clamp force? - Usually by applying a measured torque load
to the nut bolted joints are tightened to achieve a specific clamp
load. Even under the most extreme applied loads, the clamping force
must prevent joint movement between clamped parts. Movement includes
both opening of the joint to form gaps and slipping. Loads applied to
the joint may be axial forces (in the direction of the bolt axis)
and/or shear forces (perpendicular to the bolt axis). If slippage
occurs then the joint may fail by the bolt loosening. If a gap in the
joint opens then a bolt failure by fatigue is more likely to occur.
Typically bolt fatigue failures occur because of insufficient preload
rather than poor fatigue strength of the bolt. Improving the method of
tightening can reduce the scatter in bolt preload and help guarantee
the minimum required clamping force

Pay particular attention to the sectionfollowing the "bolted
joint.xls" link which explains things in pretty plain language.


You may have worked on machines, including aircraft without fully
understanding what you were doing or why.

I have not only worked on cars and agricultural equipment and
industrial equipment (loaders and dozers etc) and been rather
extensively involved with amateur built/homebuilt/experimental
aviation, I have also taught automotive mechanics at the secondary
school AND post secondary (trade) level.


That Figure 10 was not a "failure" per se. The bolt did not break from under tightening - it wore the threads off. Eventually indeed it would have broken.

Head bolts on cars can be said to ALWAYS break from over-torquing. What occurs is that you over-torque the head bolts and then when the engine heats up and expands it blows the top of the bolt off from exceeding the mechanical strength of the bolt. Sometimes you can hear it go.

I rarely use a torque wrench because you can FEEL the torque that should be applied and using a torque wrench a number of times shows you that it almost always feels under-torqued. So you develope a feel for it. A correctly designed piece is supposed to use the mechanical strength of a large number of bolts and not the near maximum strength of a few. This is the mistake that is almost always made on that great "German engineering". They use calculations instead of common sense. Ten headbolts torqued within 10% of the proper torque are better than 6 headbolts designed to carry the load if properly torqued to exactly the correct value.

Which reminds me of what is becoming with the carbon fiber engineering these days. It isn't "great engineering" to make a 12 lb bike that can kill it's rider with a single manufacturing flaw.


There are cases where an experienced mechanic can torque
properly to within the correct range without a torque
wrench. Unfortunately, there are also times when you thought
you did, but you didn't. On some parts, the result of such
negligence isn't critical, unlike airplanes.

After a few "near misses" at the dealership I started spot checking
wheel torques on vehicles that had wheels removed for service - any
wheel that had been installed with an impact and not checked with a
torque wrench was possible grounds for dismissal.

I also spot checked head torque on new vehicles after PDI.We were paid
to check them. If not checked there washell to pay!
  #56  
Old April 20th 17, 06:18 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Sir Ridesalot
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,270
Default Selecting An Appropriate Bolt

On Thursday, April 20, 2017 at 1:37:18 AM UTC-4, Art Shapiro wrote:
On 4/17/2017 1:52 PM, Doug Landau wrote:

Get a new stem. This one is a flawed design. There is built-in problem with the shape of the part, and that is a lack of remaining metal around the bolt hole. The stem has been made bigger around the front bolt hole to overcome this, but it still has the 2-bolt-1-failure problem. The traditional shape does not make this concession to ease-of-handlebar-change, and carefully places the single bolt in the rear where there is plenty of metal surrounding the threads.
The traditional design is both less likely to experience a bolt failure, and - in the wild guess dept., be more likely to hold on to the bars and remain usable in the event that one does.


I'm he OP. It so happens that the rear bolt was the one that snapped,
which seems to contradict your assertion about the design's weak point.

Art


With all ofthe replies about just about everything else, did you get a definitive reply that ANSWERED your question about whether to use a Grade 5 or Grade 8 bolt?

If it were me i'd use the strongest grade I could get.

Cheers
  #57  
Old April 20th 17, 08:52 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,538
Default Selecting An Appropriate Bolt

On 4/19/2017 11:56 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 20 Apr 2017 09:52:15 +0700, John B Slocomb
wrote:

On Wed, 19 Apr 2017 18:23:53 -0400,
wrote:

On Wed, 19 Apr 2017 18:43:02 +0700, John B Slocomb
wrote:


Metric thread pitch is described totally different than inch size
bolts. Inch size is threads per inch. Metric thread is thread pitch -
so in inch size bolts, a higher number is a finer thread - in metric a
higher number is a coarser thread. A 6X10 metric bolt is 6mm with a
thread pitch of 1mm crest to crest (or root to root - however you want
to measure it)

Who cares, along as the people involved know what you are talking
about? Ant metering system is just that, a system which works for
those that use it.

The old method of measuring gear ratios on a bicycle was to use "gear
inches" which described the diameter of a wheel that would move the
distance in one revolution. Rather archaic today but made perfect
sense to those that used it.


As far as the "grade" of the bolt - a "grade 8" is NOT always better
than a "grade 5" or even, possibly, in some cases, a "grade 2"

A grade 2 or grade 5 bolt may bend and stretch - and still hold, where
a grade 8 would simply snap. It depends on what kind of load is being
carried by the bolt - and how it is torqued. On the same vein, a bolt
that is undertorqued CAN fail faster than one that is overtorqued. A
properly tensioned bolt is "pre-stretched" just enough that any cyclic
load does not stretch the bolt any farther, so the bolt does not
fatigue in use.

An exciting theory and technically correct. although I would comment
that I've yet to see an under torque bolt break.

It's far from "theory" - I've seen numerous head bolts and manifold
bolts fail that were attributed to being under-torqued on vehicles
that were not properly PDId, and quite a few bolts that failed in
shear because they were not properly tightened, and/or the holes were
not properly de-burred, allowing the bolt to loose tension.
No use arguing with Slocumb though - you'll never get anything
through his thick skull.


You must have a tremendous amount of experience with nuts and bolts.
As I mentioned I've been fooling with them things for about 70 years
now and frankly I've never seen "numerous" head bolts fail. Yes, I've
seen head bolts fail, but I would use the term "rarely" not
"Numerous". I would have to say that if you have seen numerous head
bolts fail then you are associating with some very incompetent
mechanics.

And how does one determine that they were under torqued after they
have failed?

Notb incompetent mechanics - but poor factory assembly.

Don't take my word for the FACT the problem exists.

See:
http://www.croberts.com/bolt.htm
In particular Picture #10.

As for broken head bolts - see:
https://www.bimmerforums.com/forum/s...ken-Head-Bolts

Also see: http://www.boltscience.com/pages/Failure%20Modes.swf
and:
https://www.hiretorque.co.uk/failure...bolted-joints/
-Particularly item #3
3. Fatigue Failures

Fatigue failures typically occur within a couple of threads, where the
bolt engages into the internal thread. Failure is then reached due to
the high stress gradient within the region.

Fatigue failures can be particularly hazardous because they often
occur with no visible warning signs and the failure is often sudden.
Fatigue failures are often unknowingly avoided in gasketed joints
simply because the required crush for the gasket often dictates a
torque or bolt tension that minimizes the risk of a fatigue failure.
However, changing to a new gasket type later on which requires less
crush may be the initial cause of bolt fatigue failure.

It is not unusual to assume that a bolt has failed due to overload
when it has in fact failed from fatigue, which can also be a
consequence of self-loosening.

Also:
http://www.bluetoad.com/article/Bolt...0/article.html
and:
http://www.onallcylinders.com/2014/0...ener-failures/

Also:
https://www.excelcalcs.com/engineeri...-joints-fail?/
The first cause listed:
Insufficient Clamp force? - Usually by applying a measured torque load
to the nut bolted joints are tightened to achieve a specific clamp
load. Even under the most extreme applied loads, the clamping force
must prevent joint movement between clamped parts. Movement includes
both opening of the joint to form gaps and slipping. Loads applied to
the joint may be axial forces (in the direction of the bolt axis)
and/or shear forces (perpendicular to the bolt axis). If slippage
occurs then the joint may fail by the bolt loosening. If a gap in the
joint opens then a bolt failure by fatigue is more likely to occur.
Typically bolt fatigue failures occur because of insufficient preload
rather than poor fatigue strength of the bolt. Improving the method of
tightening can reduce the scatter in bolt preload and help guarantee
the minimum required clamping force

Pay particular attention to the sectionfollowing the "bolted
joint.xls" link which explains things in pretty plain language.


You may have worked on machines, including aircraft without fully
understanding what you were doing or why.

I have not only worked on cars and agricultural equipment and
industrial equipment (loaders and dozers etc) and been rather
extensively involved with amateur built/homebuilt/experimental
aviation, I have also taught automotive mechanics at the secondary
school AND post secondary (trade) level.

I'm with Mr. Clare on all the info above. Those are good sources of
information. This is something we used to cover in great detail in
machine design classes.

--
- Frank Krygowski
  #58  
Old April 20th 17, 10:17 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Doug Landau
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,424
Default Selecting An Appropriate Bolt

On Wednesday, April 19, 2017 at 10:37:18 PM UTC-7, Art Shapiro wrote:
On 4/17/2017 1:52 PM, Doug Landau wrote:

Get a new stem. This one is a flawed design. There is built-in problem with the shape of the part, and that is a lack of remaining metal around the bolt hole. The stem has been made bigger around the front bolt hole to overcome this, but it still has the 2-bolt-1-failure problem. The traditional shape does not make this concession to ease-of-handlebar-change, and carefully places the single bolt in the rear where there is plenty of metal surrounding the threads.
The traditional design is both less likely to experience a bolt failure, and - in the wild guess dept., be more likely to hold on to the bars and remain usable in the event that one does.


I'm he OP. It so happens that the rear bolt was the one that snapped,
which seems to contradict your assertion about the design's weak point.

Art


I disagree. The traditional design has a single bolt whereas yours has two.. Therefore your chances of experiencing a quill stem bolt failure are 2X those of the owner of a traditional quill stem.

Doug
  #59  
Old April 20th 17, 10:25 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Doug Landau
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,424
Default Selecting An Appropriate Bolt

On Thursday, April 20, 2017 at 2:17:23 AM UTC-7, John B Slocomb wrote:
On Wed, 19 Apr 2017 22:37:15 -0700, Art Shapiro
wrote:

On 4/17/2017 1:52 PM, Doug Landau wrote:

Get a new stem. This one is a flawed design. There is built-in problem with the shape of the part, and that is a lack of remaining metal around the bolt hole. The stem has been made bigger around the front bolt hole to overcome this, but it still has the 2-bolt-1-failure problem. The traditional shape does not make this concession to ease-of-handlebar-change, and carefully places the single bolt in the rear where there is plenty of metal surrounding the threads.
The traditional design is both less likely to experience a bolt failure, and - in the wild guess dept., be more likely to hold on to the bars and remain usable in the event that one does.


I'm he OP. It so happens that the rear bolt was the one that snapped,
which seems to contradict your assertion about the design's weak point.

Art


And, if I remember correctly, after only 15 years too :-)


This is false logic. There are at least 15 parts on your bike; by your policy we should expect catastrophic part failure once per year.

  #60  
Old April 20th 17, 10:39 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Doug Landau
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,424
Default Selecting An Appropriate Bolt


With all ofthe replies about just about everything else, did you get a definitive reply that ANSWERED your question about whether to use a Grade 5 or Grade 8 bolt?

If it were me i'd use the strongest grade I could get.

Cheers


Yes, he did. Andy answered it definitively:
Original handlebar clamp bolts are Grade 8

What more do you need to know? He then went on to prove it by arriving at the same answer with different logic:
Grade 5 may be strong enough but for pennies difference I suggest an 8


He and then addressed the Ti question:

I wouldn't use Ti fasteners in a stem but some guys do and many don't die.


To arrive at this answer via different logic: Speedplay/x2 pedals in Titanium say "Not for riders over 175 Lbs". What else do you need to know? Yes I realize that the pedal shaft is a beam whereas the stem bolt is in tension. So what.

That said, I still want a Habanero.

-dkl

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Converting Brake mounting bolt to recessed bolt? Sir Ridesalot Techniques 18 August 23rd 09 12:49 PM
Selecting a Bike Katuzo General 46 July 26th 08 03:11 PM
selecting a BB [email protected] Techniques 5 September 12th 07 03:10 AM
Selecting the right chain heedcase Techniques 10 August 28th 04 02:32 AM
Selecting a new saddle Nick Kew UK 18 December 25th 03 11:47 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.