×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Is more hardness necessary in this application?

Is more hardness necessary in this application?

Is more hardness necessary in this application?

(OP)
Hello,
I am designing a rotary yoke device that is used as a spanner wrench to unthread 2 components. Actuation will be steady hydraulic, impact will not be used. I would like to make the yoke out of 3" plate. I am considering using 4140 moderately hardened, or possibly A514 as-is. It appears that the spanner pin holes in the yoke will have enough compressive strength based on my calcs, but I have concerns about the holes becoming egg shaped long term due to cold flow. Would it be prudent to specify the 4140 with extra hardness (& reserve tensile strength as a side benefit) to prevent the holes egging-out, or do think A514 in its as-received state would suffice?

Best Regards.

RE: Is more hardness necessary in this application?

Do your calc's take into account that you will not have perfect alignment? That is, there must be a tolerance to the dimensions between the mating surfaces, do your calculaitons take that tolerance into account?

Without being much more specific, I don't believe you will get a definative answer. If the difference in cost of the material is not an issue, I think I'd look at using the 4140 and if yielding or wear resulted in a short service life, you could get the contacting surfaces flame or induction hardened. A514 material does not seem to be suitable for surface hardening. You have mentioned that the general stress levels should be low enough not to cause a problem, but the contact stress levels may be. The surface hardening would take care of the high contact stresses.

rp

RE: Is more hardness necessary in this application?

(OP)
I took the tolerance issue into account by factor of safety.
I should clarify: I don't necessarily need a definitive answer, I would just like to hear people's opinions/experiences- like you shared.
I like the idea of localized hardening, thank you for the information.

Regards.

RE: Is more hardness necessary in this application?

Consider plain steel with an removable insert of some harder steel for the contact surfaces. Wear and replacement time are minimized.

RE: Is more hardness necessary in this application?

Can you make the pins larger diameter in the yolk and then tapper them to the working tips?
This would spread out the stress on the yolk and reduce the risk for distortion.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Plymouth Tube

RE: Is more hardness necessary in this application?

(OP)
Brimstoner - this is the parallel conclusion I arrived at today. I'm likely going to use drill bushings.

EdStainless - Great idea. I think I can achieve this partly with the drill bushing idea, and I may be able to upsize the base of the pins.

Thanks to all.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources