Cycling UK Forum

Our latest project, traction control system for 220 Voyager, using sand as a medium to provide enhanced adhesion in both traction and braking modes is hardly "heavy engineering".
Light precision eng is more like it ..... Guess what ?
Not a drop of thread lock in sight.
Nuts and bolts, plain washers and twin bent beam locknuts, ( Philidas ).
7 - 10G loads .... a doddle ....

there is some interesting reading here;

http://www.boltscience.com/pages/vibloose.htm

for anyone who wants to know more.

cheers

landsurfer wrote:...Not a drop of thread lock in sight.
Nuts and bolts, plain washers and twin bent beam locknuts, ( Philidas ).....

Would you care to comment on the use of locknuts, and why those were chosen over alternative methods of retention?

I note with interest that Philidas reckon it is OK to fit their 'turret nuts' either way round; I'm not sure I fancy that, or that the nut would always be fit for re-use afterwards, but what do I know?

cheers

Brucey wrote:

landsurfer wrote:...Not a drop of thread lock in sight.
Nuts and bolts, plain washers and twin bent beam locknuts, ( Philidas ).....

Would you care to comment on the use of locknuts, and why those were chosen over alternative methods of retention?

I note with interest that Philidas reckon it is OK to fit their 'turret nuts' either way round; I'm not sure I fancy that, or that the nut would always be fit for re-use afterwards, but what do I know?

cheers

Quite happy to forward you the Stress Engineers report.
The calculations, modelling, finite element analysis, and all aspects of a professional Railway Group Standard stress report meeting all EN standards will, no doubt, be of no use to you ...will it!
Because you know better .....

Ps ... Any mechanic, fitter, technician or engineer will tell you that bolts, washers and locknuts are never re-used .... doh !

Hi,

landsurfer wrote: ... Quite happy to forward you the Stress Engineers report. The calculations, modelling, finite element analysis, and all aspects of a professional Railway Group Standard stress report meeting all EN standards will, no doubt, be of no use to you ...will it! Because you know better ..... Grow up ...

I'm sure that your bolted connections are very well designed... but that wasn't the question. It may surprise you to know that I was genuinely interested to know if there was a particular reason or not for the use of one retention system over another.

I guess not then.

'Grow up' indeed....

Brucey wrote:

landsurfer wrote: ... Quite happy to forward you the Stress Engineers report. The calculations, modelling, finite element analysis, and all aspects of a professional Railway Group Standard stress report meeting all EN standards will, no doubt, be of no use to you ...will it! Because you know better ..... Grow up ...

I'm sure that your bolted connections are very well designed... but that wasn't the question. It may surprise you to know that I was genuinely interested to know if there was a particular reason or not for the use of one retention system over another.

I guess not then.

'Grow up' indeed....

Quite.
Had a quick chat with a mate, who used to work in railway engineering. They certainly did used to use Loctite in some applications in his time there- exactly the sort that you indicated- where you get a steel bolt but which is clamping softer materials, where the whole principle of stretching the bolt would damage the other components. I actually use very simple equipment that, likewise, cannot use a torque-type approach to secure a bolt as it would damage the components, and I spend some time teaching other people this so they don't damage their equipment.

My mate now works in much heavier engineering, and I gather that even there they also have applications where a torque system would probably not be suitable, where, for instance, they use non-metallic bolts for electromagnetic reasons. He thinks they may even use some kind of material to secure those bolts, but as he doesn't work on the shop floor now he didn't know offhand what they actually used.
Like I said, and you said, it's horses for courses. And to suggest that locktite type solutions are in some way wrong in principle is a bit, well, you know....let's say, 'unscientific'.

landsurfer wrote:Our latest project, traction control system for 220 Voyager, using sand as a medium to provide enhanced adhesion in both traction and braking modes is hardly "heavy engineering".
Light precision eng is more like it ..... Guess what ?
Not a drop of thread lock in sight.
Nuts and bolts, plain washers and twin bent beam locknuts, ( Philidas ).
7 - 10G loads .... a doddle ....

Interesting they still use sand, like the old steam locomotives did. Hopefully it is an improvement on the original Voyager braking systems, which stank like nothing on earth.

Gerrymcm: on the first page you (jokingly) lament that this turned out not to be simple. For simple, Park Tool has an interesting page on “Basic Thread Concepts”. The section called “Thread Preparation” lists a few Loctite products and their suitable applications on bicycles.

Samuel D, thanks for those links I'll have a read.
Gerry

With the unresolved clicking in my Campag square-taper Bottom Bracket unit ( AC-H ), I did wonder if the next step was to plaster some version of Loctite between the BB housing ( cylinder ) and the inside of the Left-hand cup.

Has anyone tried anything like that ?

yup, this can work OK if there is a tiny clearance there to be made up. As to what clearance can be taken up with any given product, best to seek the manufacturer's advice there; bearing retaining compounds are commonly 'more or less the same stuff as threadlock' but they are more viscous as they come out of the bottle, so are more likely to fill bigger gaps.

IME the manufacturers of such products are somewhat optimistic about the largest gaps that can be thus filled, certainly in a bottom bracket context. If you have a larger gap to be filled, I'd suggest using an epoxy resin of some kind, ideally one with a filler in it, which will give it higher strength (in gaps).

So overall, something like 'JB Weld' if you are needing to bridge a 0.5mm gap, ordinary epoxy if it is about 0.25mm, and a bearing retaining compound if it is ~0.15mm would be about right.

BTW if you have a noise, but no obviously slack clearances, I'd suggest that some further diagnosis might be a good thing to do before wading in with the adhesive.

cheers

Hi,
I would stay away from adhesive down there.
There are Loctite gap fillers, IIRC they quote 0.5 mm, be care full that it might prove very difficult to break the joint later.
Have you looked at your pedals?

If there's movement you will see the witness marks on mating faces.

Thanks. More diagnosis first before gunge.

Pedals already swapped between various bikes to eliminate them as the problem.

Hi,

Graham wrote:Thanks. More diagnosis first before gunge.

Pedals already swapped between various bikes to eliminate them as the problem.

Mmmm.... my creaking was steel crank arms, rally cheap and nasty, now check often, BB lockring come loose / broken also same bike.