On 25 Oct 2013 02:09:38 GMT, "DoN. Nichols"
wrote:
On 2013-10-24, Larry Jaques wrote:
On 24 Oct 2013 03:27:31 GMT, "DoN. Nichols"
wrote:
On 2013-10-23, Larry Jaques wrote:
On 23 Oct 2013 04:42:35 GMT, "DoN. Nichols"
[ ... ]
O.K. But no comment about the part quoted below where I
explained at least why *I* read it as implying semi-frequent
disassembly?
My mind read "thermal cycles", as in night/day changes, so I didn't
want to get into it. After rereading it a few times, I came to side
with you on that, too.
And we now have, elsewhere in this thread, an explanation of
just what the situation is. (I read that last night after posting the
previous article.)
Yeah, 99.9% of the time, the OP forgets to include about 90% of the
detail needed which would get them a -good- answer the -first- time.
sigh
[ ... ]
I bought one of the HF gun kits and used it on my '91 F-150 doors to
hold the trailer mirrors on. Worked like champs for years, and AFAIK,
are still working. For $17, you cannot go wrong. Maybe he can use one
of them.
http://www.harborfreight.com/45-piec...-kit-1210.html
[ ... ]
Yes. The "Nutserts" are two-part items, in which the threaded
part expands an outer collar -- in contrast to a "Rivnut" which is a
single piece and which has a part thinner which expands to hold it
firmly in place.
HF's jobs are real (knockoff) rivnuts, then.
Just very poorly photographed, then. :-)
You expect otherwise in today's life? Half the pics I see lately were
taken by gasp damned cellphones by their overcaffeinated owners.
'sCriminal, it is.
I spent some time buying Rivnuts and Rivnut tools from eBay
auctions, and people there seem to toss "Rivnut" and "Nutsert" in
interchangeably in the same auction. Trying to maximize the numbber of
hits, I guess. :-)
The old rivnuts we used at Southcom were swaged in from behind. Those
had angled shoulders which the nut itself filled in when it was
swaged.
Yet another style -- and not matching the Rivnuts as originally
made and sold by B.F. Goodrich -- the ones who own(ed) the "Rivnut"
name.
OK. Those I inspected with were very thin, maybe 1.5-2 threads, max.
I had fun as a QA inspector until I took it into my entire life.
Everything became go/nogo and it damnear kilt me, increasing my
already far too high intake of alcohol. I'm glad I was able to walk
away from both. I sure learned a lot there, though.
Glad that you were able to walk away from both. Always
remember, "Perfect is the enemy of good enough."
Thanks, and I agree.
My first experience with the Rivnuts and the tooling was when I
worked for a company which built (among many other things) flight
simulators. That was also where I first experienced *proper* crimp
terminals and tooling. :-)
It's amazing how well proper tools and crimprings work, isn't it?
But I wasn't in the position of having to inspect things, though
I learned that the proper crimpers left one or two raised dots on the
crimped area, depending on the size, so an inspector could tell whether
the right tooling had been used on the terminals (where the color
defined the size). Off by two sizes (and thus back to the proper number
of dots) the mismatch was *extremely* obvious.
BTDT.
[ ... ]
I used 3 and have had the set for 20 years since, so I'm fine with the
smaller sets. If it was something I used weekly, yes, sets of 100
would be a good thing.
O.K. I sometimes use twenty on a single project.
I've been surprised that I haven't needed/used more of them, too.
You'll be happy to hear that replacements are sold in bags of 100.
That is good news.
With 4 or 5 sizes being included in the original kit, having 100ea of
the nuts would have at least doubled the kit price. And most people
will use just one or two sizes the most frequently, so I think they
did the right thing.
The tool shown in the auction above has to be adjusted for both the
size of the Rivnut, and the thickness of the sheet metal into which it
is being installed. Get it too loose, and the Rivnut will turn
(especially if you have the ones without the key), and get it too tight
and you strip out the threads. I don't see provisions on the HF tool to
make such adjustments, though they may exist.
Thread the tool's screw back in and give it another OOMPH! ?
If it did not draw in fully -- but not very useful if you strip
out the threads by over-drawing. :-)
True, but with all those threads, it's less likely.
But the compound leverage of the *proper* tool can strip the
threads out of the 6-32 and 8-32 at least. The rest against which the
Rivnut is pulled is threaded on the OD, and can be adjusted to give just
the right degree of crimp -- for a single style of Rivnut, and a single
thickness of metal. Change either (or both) and you have to re-adjust.
Makes them a lot better for repeating jobs than for one or two Rivnut
insertions.
Yes, I suppose you're right. But it's as much the tool user as it is
the tool, IMHO. Big JoeBob can easily strip any size nut while little
JoAnn can't crimp the little ones hard enough.
I've got the lever tools for 4-40 through 1-4/20, some wrench
and Allen key tools for 8-32, 10-32, and 1/4-20, and a hand-pumped
hydraulic tool for all the sizes, and both the aluminum Rivnuts, and the
steel ones. No way the lever style tool would do 1/4-20 in steel.
I'd also likely
try swaging with a small chisel around the squozen side to keep it
from rotating. Back up the nut onto something solid and tap the
chisel down perpendicular to the axis in a few places around the
threaded area...
|
-0- (but tighter to the hole)
|
Well ... since it turns out that he is putting these in hollow
extrusions as part of sliding-door frames, there is no real way that he
could get to the backside to stake them as above.
True. Yes, "stake" was the term I searched for and missed, thanks.
However -- there are plain Rivnuts, and Rivnuts with keys (a
raised radial part on the underside of the flange or the underside of
the countersink head). There is a related tool to the lever insertion
tool to cut the notch for these. With these (and proper assembly) there
is no way they would spin once installed.
[ ... ]
Anti-seize is cheap.
If you can get enough of it to prevent corrosion forming, and
keep it there, yes.
I don't recall having any trouble with any screw or spark plug I put
a/s on, ever. I've had one tube of aluminum-based a/s for 35 years
now and it's going strong. I don't do much with aluminum, so maybe
that makes a difference. It works well on s/s to steel, steel to
steel, and steel to aluminum head (spark plugs), though.
But that is a much thicker piece of aluminum, thick enough to
have a number of threads engaging -- not the one or two threads which
would happen with the aluminum thickness described in the original post
(0.080"). A 12.5 TPI (2mm pitch) screw would only get one thread in the
metal. 32 TPI (e.g. 6-32, 8-32 or 10-32 to name common ones which I
believe the OP mentioned) would only have 1.6 threads in the aluminum
sheet.
Isn't that why we're suggesting rivnuts? To get away from the
single-thread security?
Yes. But you were mentioning the anti-sieze on spark plug
threads, which can't be that thin. :-)
Yeah, I used small amounts on those and fingers to even it out,
wetting all the threads with it while taking off the excess. Nary a
problem. Boy, were those easier to remove the next time, though!
But I was thinking in terms of the rivnuts
rather than a single sheet. I probably wouldn't keep anything around
which broke so often, reengineering it to a higher performance the
second time it died, if not the first. Aren't we all wired that way?
g (Here on Wreck.Metalheads, anyway.)
Yep -- but some things are harder to re-do, especially if they
are commercially installed metal-framed sliding doors (as is the case
here). Hard to get new extrusions of the proper thickness for tapping
and still of the proper outside dimensions, and also if you replaced
them with solid bar milled to the necessary shape, they would be a lot
heavier than the tracks were made to handle.
Verily.
Ciao!
--
The beauty of the 2nd Amendment is that it will not be needed
until they try to take it. --Thomas Jefferson