Mechanical engineering question.

I mentioned the adjustable (telescoping) dinghy trailer the other day and how it used to have plastic inserts / collars taking up the small (1mm or so) gap between the inner and outer, galvanised box steel sections.

I quickly tried using tape the other day but found when you put enough on to fill the gap, you couldn't actually slide the sections together past a couple of inches and by the time you removed enough to allow said, you were back to quite a gap again. ;-(

I still think a small band of fibreglass at the key points could be a workable solution but I had another more mechanical solution / thought.

What if instead of the M10 bolts that currently located the adjustment by going though both inner and outer sections (and in some instances, also hold other brackets in place), what if I drilled though one side of both tubes say 20mm (the outer is 50 x 50 box, the inner smaller obviously) and turned up some suitably long x 20mm OD, 10mm ID spacer tubes that could be fitted though said 20mm holes and then stop up against the inside of the opposite inner, when nipping them up it would now pull the 'inner' section hard up against the inside of the outer section, whilst the interference fit of the spacer would also keep the other two tubes aligned on the opposite side?

This is the same process I've used many times when fitting towbars to cars where the only fastening was to the bottom of a hollow box section and they provide suitable spacers in the kit to avoid you crushing the box (drill bolt hole right though, open top one up, drop spacer into hole etc).

In the case of this trailer, you could actually run it with all the nuts and bolts finger tight as the insertion of one tube into the other seems to be sufficient to provide the strength (and in the case of the axle halves, the turning resistance) so my only real 'concern', is the opening up of the holes on one side from M10 to M20 (say) [1]?

I understand the stresses are at their least in the middle of the box sections (especially when the holes go though horizontally and most of the loads are vertical) but what does the panel think?

My goals here are to retain the ease of adjustment / takedown (you can then carry it in an estate car / MPV or even on a roofrack / boot) but to remove any of the clanking, especially when the trailer is lightly loaded.

Cheers, T i m

[1] The spacer and suitable washer could stay on the bolt, effectively forming a bolt with a bigger shoulder.
Reply to
T i m
Loading thread data ...

That could work. The issue might be fretting, because you are always going to get some "flex" at the clamped joints.

I don't think I would worry about the loss of strength caused by the larger hole.

I once fitted a fibreglass "dolphin" fairing to an old British bike without any of the proper fittings. I used fittings fabricated from aluminium sheet, clamped with rubber sheet and penny washers but, even so, they regularly failed from fretting fatigue at the contact sites. But ordinary "chassis" aluminium is particularly bad for both fretting and fatigue. I think you would be unlucky to fail your steel tubes in the same way. I would, though, regularly look out for fretting if you do this. It is worth putting grease on the joints IMHO. Although this will reduce the friction (and increase the chances of movement) it will also provide a barrier to air access and reduce the risk of fretting wear.

Reply to
newshound
<snip>

Understood.

FWIW, the axle stubs (independent suspension unit, mudguard, length of 'inner' gauge square tube) would 'normally' be inserted to full depth because that still leaves the trailer wide enough for pretty well anything we are likely to put on it. That said, the 'axle' would only be held in at two points (bolts) which are only maybe 1/4 of the length of the axle tube apart.

So, if the wheel was loaded it's possible that (because the bolt holes are quite close), that the inner box could be rotated (on the mating surfaces) until the outer end of the inner tube (or the sides of the M10 bolts / holes AND spacers / holes on the non clamped sides, whichever happens the soonest) and the inner end on the inner tube does the same at the bottom. Once 'settled' however I can't see any reason it would move further (It would look like some very slight camber)?

Ok, thanks. I was hoping that a 20mm diameter hole drilled in one side wall of 50mm x 50mm square tube (that was mainly under a vertical bending type load) would put the hole in the least stressed area of the section?

I made the same by using a 'bubble' screen from a racing bike as a mould for a fibreglass copy, inverting the final form and fabricating a joining strip to fix them both together to form said 'dolphin nose'. This was then mounted on the bike using a home made sub-frame and the fairing was held on with nylon number plate screws with rubber sheet between the two. There was no engine vibration as this was an electric 'motorcycle' but there was quite a bit of road vibration because of the highly inflated tyres (lower rolling resistance on the track). ;-)

Oh.

How much actual movement to you need for said fretting though? Are we talking even at molecular / granular levels?

Again, FWIW, both tubes are galvanised and I'm not sure how 'smooth a surface that gives? Would any high spots tend to get crushed at the fasteners and so help bind the two surfaces together?

Understood.

Thanks for the feedback. ;-)

Cheers, T i m

p.s. If I were to open up one side (the same side <g>) of each hole for said spacer, I could pin one hole in place first (put a captive nut into the inner section) and then drill the larger holes though both tubes at the other point(s), (in the hope of making the holes as concentric / unstressed as possible).

p.p.s. I think I might still go for some form of 'collar' to help resist any movement of the inner tube in the outer and so also minimise any fretting.

Reply to
T i m

Havn't quite got my brain around the geometry (but I will come back to this later)

That's correct.

<snipped>

Not very much movement. There is no clear cut definition. On very big structures (say, tunnelling or earthmoving equipment, or large mobile cranes) you might get what tribologists would recognise as fretting at maybe a millimetre stroke. More conventionally, we'd think of it as movements of maybe tens of microns. Sometimes you will see fretting between parts that are a close fit, for example ball bearing races on their shafts or housings, and the movements there might be only a micron.

The effect of fretting would be to loosen a joint that you thought was tight. I can't see any real prospect of getting a fatigue crack that would propagate right through a tube. And even if it did, my picture of your chassis is that each movement is defined by a pair of rails, not a single rail (assuming you don't have adjustment on the "tow-bar" part). So if a single "joint" failed the structure would still be held together by the parallel joint. I'm not quite clear if your axle stub is on a single square tube, or a pair of square tubes.

Just about the only atomically smooth surface over relatively long distances is freshly cleaved mica. Hot dip galvanised surfaces are normally rougher than the substrates, they even feel "spikey" to the touch. As you say, the high spots get crushed when surfaces are clamped together. But actually the real area of contact under a tightly clamped joint (for example between the washer and the main component for a bolt tightened up to its yield point) might only be 10% of the nominal area. For metals, the only place you see high real areas of contact is along the contact line between an olive and the cones in a compression fitting. I can't immediately find a link to a really good image, but here's something that shows the idea (it's a bit misleading because it is talking about lubricated contacts).

formatting link

Sorry, a bit confused about this too.

Collars are good, I'd try to do that too.

Reply to
newshound
<snip>

Thanks.

Interesting, thanks.

Because material is effectively moved / removed between the compressive dimensions (and hence forces) of the fasteners?

A picture speaks 1000 words (hopefully). ;-)

formatting link
To help break down the picture, the main X member is 50x50 tube with a smaller section stub welded in the middle facing forwards. The main

50x50 spine tube then bolts to that (and that bit is then 'fixed' as such).

Into both ends of said main X member go small(er) section stubs that also carry the suspension units and mudguards etc. These are held in place by 2 x M10 bolts in one of possibly 2/3 different 'widths'.

Into the main spine section slides an equally long length of smaller section that carries the tow hitch, bow snubber and jockey wheel and that is also held in place (lengthwise) by one or two M10 bolts.

You might also be able to see from the picture the green plastic collar / bushing that helps align / quieten the telescoping interface.

Interesting, thanks. I was sort of envisioning that with any form of insert that was transferring the compressive forces on the joint from the bolt though to the inner surface. Eg, if no washer was used (as with an external nut / bolt) would the 5mm 'material' of said spacer (M20 OD, M10ID for M10OD bolt) have as much area in contact with the inside box section as the skirt of a nut might (had you been able to get one in there etc)?

Thinking on from that ... would a countersunk 'Nutsert' set into the inner tube offer as good a fastening as said spacer (and would remove the need to open the opposite sides up to 20mm etc, but would require the need to replace the bolts with machine screws but would allow the use of a 'locknut' on the thread sticking out the other side)?

Looks 'deep'. ;-)

<snip>

Sorry ... an alternative to the above (goal) would be to have a 20mm drill bit on a 10mmOD mandrel to ensure the holes though the faces of the outer and inner box sections on one side remained concentric with the M10 holes on the other? I'd drill them though in-situ because I have no idea how accurate (relative to the geometry of the sections themselves) any of the holes actually are. Pinning the two sections together at one bolt hole would at least ensure some of it was held still / straight etc. ;-)

Yes, I think I'll have to get the 3D printer out. ;-)

Cheers, T i m

p.s. If using spacers, should I just use mild steel or would it be worth using stainless (and how with they react with the mild steel / galv / zinc of the existing components)?

Reply to
T i m

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.