On 11/23/2013 12:02 PM, Nightcrawler® wrote:

"bud--" wrote in message
eb.com...
On 11/22/2013 10:15 PM, Nightcrawler® wrote:

Lugs are not structural and the lug is not steel. The handbook torque
values are likely way too high.

The handbook is for nuts and/or bolts.

That is a good source, but the torque recommended by the manufacturer
of the lug should be used.

Um, the term ubiquitous was used. Do you know what that word means in the
context used?



What a great idea. You start with an engineered lug where expansion
rates are critical for a reliable connection, and replace the screw
from elsewhere. Steel would be a particularly bad idea.
Did you install the lug that failed for Danny?

Oh, you so funny. The replacement was from an engineered lug. It is just
a bit longer.


You shouldn't drive the screw past the threads if you are using a wire
size within the rated (minimum size) capacity of the lug.

You would be surprised. Not all wire is equal. Locomotive cable
compresses
more readily than standard copper wire. When using crimp terminals we
often
soldered them afterwards. The fine strands have a way of working loose,
even
after max compression with a hydraulic crimper. Not all of the
terminations
I had to make were static. Vibration and movement are present. My work
was
not residential, it was industrial. Regardless, I still had lugs bottom
out
using a conductor well within the lug's rating. Do not approach me as if I
have minimal experience with such things, it is rather arrogant of you.


I read about some American researchers working aboard a Russian
scientific survey ship and they were amazed at the Russian ship's
engineer who was able to get things to work with incredible feats
of improvisation. I too had to make a lot of my own parts doing
industrial and government contracting work. "We look for things, we
look for things that make us go" (The Pakleds from Star Trek TNG) ^_^

TDD