lancelot | 15/10/2013 21:39:32 |
![]() 63 forum posts 4 photos | who all would use a bigger drill to give 75% engagement in brass or ally...and 50% in steel or iron...is there a real need to tap close to thread to thread sizes... John. |
David Littlewood | 15/10/2013 22:28:15 |
533 forum posts | John, I suggest you buy this book, should answer your questions and many more besides. David |
jason udall | 15/10/2013 22:49:22 |
2032 forum posts 41 photos | John If I understand your question. using "oversize" drills when tapping. the effect is to reduce the thread depth cut in the side of the hole . This makes tapping easier but weakens the joint similarly making the "bolt" under size ===easier on die but weaker this can be offset to a degree by using longer engagement.. depending on the material, using less engagement can be a tradeoff..tougher material.=same strength for the reduced engagement
|
Andrew Johnston | 15/10/2013 23:51:11 |
![]() 7061 forum posts 719 photos | I aim for an engagement of around 60-65% in all metals. You simply do not need the extra thread depth in internal threads. Some years ago I did some experiments using 6082 aluminium alloy, as I needed to use it with highly loaded high tensile (grade 12.9) steel M4 SHCS. I drilled holes at 3.4, 3.5 and 3.6mm and then machine tapped them with a spiral flute tap. The 3.6mm hole represents less than 60% engagement. The SHCS broke before stripping the thread in the 3.6mm hole; I didn't bother testing the other two holes sizes. Regards, Andrew |
Martin W | 16/10/2013 00:18:57 |
940 forum posts 30 photos | Andrew What length was the tapped hole that you used and do you think that ratio of bolt diameter to loaded thread length would hold roughly true across a range of thread diameters? I suppose the critical point is where the tapped hole fails before the screw/bolt fails, any feeling for this? I appreciate different steels will fail at varying stresses but a ball park guess could be useful. Cheers Martin Edited By Martin W on 16/10/2013 00:20:51 |
Thor 🇳🇴 | 16/10/2013 11:02:05 |
![]() 1766 forum posts 46 photos | Hi John, As suggested a 65% engagement in steel should be sufficient for most purposes. Have you checked Harold Hall's website about tapping drill sizes? The next page will give taping drill sizes and depth. Regards Thor |
lancelot | 16/10/2013 11:10:27 |
![]() 63 forum posts 4 photos | Hi David,I have a very similar one to that book, Jason,as we are all Model engineers, I based the % of thread on the scaled down models, I think Andrew is closer to my way of thinking,,after all in full size ,a thread tolerance would be given on the drawing...if we were building an aircraft engine full size And if we were going to fly it would you be in it with nuts and bolts at 60% engagement ?...on the other hand look at the lack of broken taps and lower stress levels... John. |
Andrew Johnston | 16/10/2013 11:11:03 |
![]() 7061 forum posts 719 photos | Martin: From memory the thickness of the test piece was around 12mm. However, as I understand it when a bolt is tightened it stretches slightly, so that only two or three threads carry the load, irrespective of the overall length of thread. The key calculation is the shear strength of the internal thread versus tensile strength of the external thread core. Generally shear strength is greater than tensile strength, so the bolt breaks before the thread strips. That's why you can use an ordinary nut with a high tensile bolt. It also means that small diameter, coarse threads are especially weak; the classic is the US 6-32UNC thread. Remember also that taps tend to extrude slightly as well as cut, so the engagement is often a bit larger than might be expected. As always there are caveats; one also has to look at the crushing load per unit area on the thread surface, particularly important for fine pitch threads, where the bearing area may be small. For fine pitch threads I may tend towards 65-70% engagement, particularly for the ME 40tpi series. On the other hand, for stainless steel I'll often go to 50% as it can be difficult to drive the tap otherwise. Regards, Andrew |
Gordon Wass | 16/10/2013 11:14:09 |
57 forum posts | It's reckoned that a thread will distort under load, only about 3 threads carry any load. I was taught this years ago, may not be entirely correct. Think of the thickness of a nut, and how much clearance there is on a standard nut and bolt |
David Jupp | 16/10/2013 11:39:08 |
978 forum posts 26 photos | As for only a few threads carrying the load, that is very dependent upon how the joint is designed. In a nut/bolt combination the bolt is in axial tension, with the nut is in axial compression so the threads tend to mismatch a little, first thread takes most load, there is little contribution to strength after the first few threads. Bolt in a tapped hole is very different - axial stresses in both parts are in tension, so thread pitch gets stretched in both members. There will be less induced pitch mismatch, so stresses are more evenly distributed. |
Martin W | 16/10/2013 11:49:31 |
940 forum posts 30 photos | Andrew Thanks for the detailed reply it certainly clarifies things a lot for me. I have to admit that I have tended to use the 'specified' drill sizes for tapping even though the subject of clearance has been raised in other threads on this forum! As a result I have tapped threads using, if this is the correct terminology, a 'starter' then 'intermediate' and 'finishing' tap for each hole. Thankfully as most of the tapping I do is fairly small I could use the mill or lathe to power drive the tap. Gordon & David, thanks for your replies too. Cheers Martin An ancient but still learning and enjoying it. Edited By Martin W on 16/10/2013 11:50:56 |
lancelot | 16/10/2013 13:15:57 |
![]() 63 forum posts 4 photos | Thank you all for such detailed answers to my original question, sort of makes me think about the bloke who won his clubs competotion by entering a real cracker of an engine build...he much later told one of his friends (the whole thing was held with engineering glue...no threads at all) John, |
Gone Away | 16/10/2013 17:27:57 |
829 forum posts 1 photos | Read the book David Littlewood recommended. It's inexpensive. Read it from cover-to-cover. It will explain all .... and a whole lot besides |
Please login to post a reply.
Want the latest issue of Model Engineer or Model Engineers' Workshop? Use our magazine locator links to find your nearest stockist!
Sign up to our newsletter and get a free digital issue.
You can unsubscribe at anytime. View our privacy policy at www.mortons.co.uk/privacy
You can contact us by phone, mail or email about the magazines including becoming a contributor, submitting reader's letters or making queries about articles. You can also get in touch about this website, advertising or other general issues.
Click THIS LINK for full contact details.
For subscription issues please see THIS LINK.