Well, I guess we can agree to disagree here Alan. But I find the approach you mention to be much less sophisticated in terms of the actual physical properties involved in the field. I'm a skilled technician so what I practice is not "back yard mechanics" - that was false modesty.
There's no luck involved. It's experience, both in an academic engineering sense, and a skilled mechanic sense in the field. The fact is, I've made it a life long study to understand the physics involved generally, and more specifically, the precise physical characteristics of fasteners, and how they interact with the surrounding material. If you do this, then you have a keen sense for the large range of variables that go beyond just the obvious ones such as metallurgy, temperature, galvanic conditions, lubricants/CoF, etc. Add on top of that the obvious variables in the field such as changing metallurgy, temp cycles, wear cycles, surface deformation, foreign particulate in the thread, etc. and a static torque setting looks pretty darn unsophisticatd.
My company makes the world's premier sub-surface sensing devices - mag, x-ray, nano are just a few of the technologies which we have pioneered in different applications. Our pipe line sensors scan most of the world's important pipelines for example. We actually do most of the standards setting in this regard. Our sensing devices are used extensively by Boeing and US Airforce for the purpose of flaw detection in critical aerospace parts. Why? Because our expertise materially exceeds theirs. We also happen to make the world's most precise thread gauges in part because there is some technological overlap here. So, rest assured, I'm not talking from the perspective of some dim witted shade tree mechanic "lucky enough" to have some smart engineer doing my thinking for me. What's important is to know that a static setting is not appropriate for all (not even most) field settings and environments, and to go get the knowledge and experience to know this.
There's no luck involved. It's experience, both in an academic engineering sense, and a skilled mechanic sense in the field. The fact is, I've made it a life long study to understand the physics involved generally, and more specifically, the precise physical characteristics of fasteners, and how they interact with the surrounding material. If you do this, then you have a keen sense for the large range of variables that go beyond just the obvious ones such as metallurgy, temperature, galvanic conditions, lubricants/CoF, etc. Add on top of that the obvious variables in the field such as changing metallurgy, temp cycles, wear cycles, surface deformation, foreign particulate in the thread, etc. and a static torque setting looks pretty darn unsophisticatd.
My company makes the world's premier sub-surface sensing devices - mag, x-ray, nano are just a few of the technologies which we have pioneered in different applications. Our pipe line sensors scan most of the world's important pipelines for example. We actually do most of the standards setting in this regard. Our sensing devices are used extensively by Boeing and US Airforce for the purpose of flaw detection in critical aerospace parts. Why? Because our expertise materially exceeds theirs. We also happen to make the world's most precise thread gauges in part because there is some technological overlap here. So, rest assured, I'm not talking from the perspective of some dim witted shade tree mechanic "lucky enough" to have some smart engineer doing my thinking for me. What's important is to know that a static setting is not appropriate for all (not even most) field settings and environments, and to go get the knowledge and experience to know this.
Last edited:
