to change a Honda Accord 1988 model timing belt

"jim beam" > wrote
> why is the pulley bolt not staked? if it's tightening, it doesn't need
> to be!

Exactly.

"Elle" > wrote in
ink.net:


>
> If you said instead something like, "I disagree with Elle re why the
> bolt is so tight, and this is why... ", then that would be one thing.
> But instead you flat-out assert my theory is wrong. It subtracts from
> the credibility and authority of the site, IMO.


Reasonable enough.

I'll change the text to that.



--
TeGGeR®

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

"TeGGeR®" > wrote
> "Elle" > wrote
> > If you said instead something like, "I disagree with Elle re why the
> > bolt is so tight, and this is why... ", then that would be one thing.
> > But instead you flat-out assert my theory is wrong. It subtracts from
> > the credibility and authority of the site, IMO.
>
>
> Reasonable enough.
>
> I'll change the text to that.

I changed my site earlier today to indicate that this matter was my theory.

Much as I want to believe that there's no way the bolt is actually axially
loaded per what 300+ ft-lbs of torque would produce, no other explanation
makes sense to me.

If this bolt is truly "special," then I'm betting what's special about it is
the material.

Anyway.

TeGGeR® wrote:
> jim beam > wrote in
> :
>
> <snip>
>
> I must say, this thread has been very educational. Early on I had trouble
> explaining what I knew by logic, because I didn't know the terms.
>
> I learned about fretting, precession, recession, and the difference between
> direct torque and clamped-mass applications. I even learned that the name
> for a simple one-closed-end industrial wrench is a"slug wrench".
>
> Thanks to jim and Elle for all that. Now, back to the battle!
>
>
>
>
>>why is the pulley bolt not staked? if it's tightening, it doesn't
>>need to be!
>
>
>
>
> Then why aren't other car's pulleys staked? They're all installed so that
> the bolt will LOOSEN as the engine turns. The setup is otherwise identical
> to the Honda one: Plain washers, woodruff key, no thread locker, etc. These
> are just as difficult to remove as Honda bolts, and NONE comes loose once
> tightened properly.

i disagree. my experience is that they're /much/ easier to remove.
i've worked on many different types of vehicles over the years and i've
yet to experience a pulley bolt quite like the honda.

>
> A bike pedal bolt's principles of operation is not the same as a
> clamped-mass bolt's operation. You cannot use the two as equivalants.

dude, with respect, i gave you /two/ examples early on. you've latched
onto pedals, and to your credit, you seem to have used it as a reason to
check into some of this subject, but you've not addressed the other
example i gave you, the locking ring for a fixed gear bike, which is a
purely rotational reaction, not precessional like the pedal. lock rings
tighten in use. if you'd ridden a fixed gear bike, you'd know. you can
start riding with it loose and a couple of rides later, that thing's
locked solid. no heating going on there. and more importantly, you can
initially feel the drive sprocket "float" when you resist pedaling, and
you can feel the float get less & less each time as the lock ring
tightens. you need to look more into the whole lash concept. and check
some driveshaft splines.
>
> jim, the theory of tightening after final setting is bunk. You will not
> find any references anywhere to *tightening* precession in a clamped-mass
> application because there is no such thing. You WILL find scads of
> references to *loosening* precession in a clamped mass, because there IS
> such a thing.

for precession? you're not looking. the left side of big rig wheel
lugs are l/h threads and they tighten in use. that's why service techs
have chuffing great 1000 ft.lb impact drivers. same for pedals on bikes.

this is not related, but as a theoretical thinking question, do bike
wheels get stronger as spoke tension is increased? please, no cheating
by looking it up - work it through.

"Elle" > wrote in
k.net:

> "TeGGeR®" > wrote
>> "Elle" > wrote
>> > If you said instead something like, "I disagree with Elle re why
>> > the bolt is so tight, and this is why... ", then that would be one
>> > thing. But instead you flat-out assert my theory is wrong. It
>> > subtracts from the credibility and authority of the site, IMO.
>>
>>
>> Reasonable enough.
>>
>> I'll change the text to that.
>
> I changed my site earlier today to indicate that this matter was my
> theory.


And I've changed mine.
http://www.tegger.com/hondafaq/faq.html#crankbolt

I think it's only fair I be allowed to include a new page expanding on my
reasons for my beliefs, which have been greatly strengthened by my
research.

Additionally, I have emailed the Bolt Science website at the email address
on their Contact page. Getting a repply is hit-and-miss with most Web
sites, but if I get an answer I'll share it here. And if it can be
determined that I'm wrong, I will issue a public apology to you, and make
the necessary corrections to my site. If you're wrong, I expect the same
from you.


>
> Much as I want to believe that there's no way the bolt is actually
> axially loaded per what 300+ ft-lbs of torque would produce, no other
> explanation makes sense to me.


My next door neighbor is a graduate physicist (no kidding!). He'd be ideal
to ask this question of, but unfortunately he's one of the least
approachable people I know. Too bad.


>
> If this bolt is truly "special," then I'm betting what's special about
> it is the material.


There are a number of "special bolts" used in various locations on many
Hondas. Suspension, transmission casing to engine/body, crank bolt, and
several other locations. Their "specialness" seems to differ based on their
application.

In the case of the rear supension, they're normal 10.9 bolts, but they have
unusual features, like fine threads, fluting on their shanks, and nylon
inserts in the threads.



--
TeGGeR®

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

Elle wrote:
> The explanations that do exist predominantly speculate it's either "heat
> cycling," rust, or both.

if you want the best possible automotive example of heat cycling or rust
on a honda, look at the exhaust system and its multiple fasteners.

feel free to discuss...

"TeGGeR®" > wrote
> "Elle" > wrote
> > "TeGGeR®" > wrote
> >> "Elle" > wrote
> >> > If you said instead something like, "I disagree with Elle re why
> >> > the bolt is so tight, and this is why... ", then that would be one
> >> > thing. But instead you flat-out assert my theory is wrong. It
> >> > subtracts from the credibility and authority of the site, IMO.
> >>
> >>
> >> Reasonable enough.
> >>
> >> I'll change the text to that.
> >
> > I changed my site earlier today to indicate that this matter was my
> > theory.
>
>
> And I've changed mine.
> http://www.tegger.com/hondafaq/faq.html#crankbolt
>
> I think it's only fair I be allowed to include a new page expanding on my
> reasons for my beliefs, which have been greatly strengthened by my
> research.

Just my opinion:

I give the reasons for my beliefs at my web site, so of course you should
feel free to do the same. You should also feel free to rebut every reason I
give for my theory. That's in the spirit of healthy technical debate.

What I don't think is constructive, though, is simply saying, "Elle's site
is wrong." Elaborate on why you think it's wrong, and I will think it fair.
For whatever my puny opinion is worth. It will also, IMO, help maintain
integrity.

It's not a crime to propose why some phenomenon happens.

> Additionally, I have emailed the Bolt Science website at the email address
> on their Contact page. Getting a repply is hit-and-miss with most Web
> sites, but if I get an answer I'll share it here. And if it can be
> determined that I'm wrong, I will issue a public apology to you, and make
> the necessary corrections to my site. If you're wrong, I expect the same
> from you.

Here's my two cents on how to promote optimal group problem solving on the
internet or anyplace else:

When I'm right, I do not expect--and do not want--an apology from anyone on
technical matters. Similarly, I don't generally issue apologies when a
theory or hypothesis I put forward is found to be wrong.

I think that sort of display tends to discourage people from seeking the
truth. It also injects ego (doesn't matter on whose side) into this. It may
or may not become obvious that your or my theory is wrong. If it does, I
think that the goal has been accomplished: New knowledge!

We're both operating in good faith here, as far as I can tell, re trying to
explain a technical phenomenon.

I don't have confidence that the experts at BoltScience will be able to
address this problem adequately, but I'll hear out whatever response they
have. I do think their site is pretty good, though, for general bolt
information purposes.

I would be more interested in what Honda Company says about the material.

> > Much as I want to believe that there's no way the bolt is actually
> > axially loaded per what 300+ ft-lbs of torque would produce, no other
> > explanation makes sense to me.
>
>
> My next door neighbor is a graduate physicist (no kidding!). He'd be ideal
> to ask this question of,

You already answered it, for the greater part, earlier. I checked it. (It's
a bit of guesstimating, as I think you're aware, because that's the nature
of much engineering/technology.) It sounds like Bozo is capable of
discussing this further, with numbers, as well. Jim may be acquainted with
bolt stress calculations, too.

The stress achieved in a 14 mm nominal diameter/1.25 pitch bolt (typical
pulley bolt for many Hondas) torqued to 300 ft-lbs is darn near the ultimate
tensile strength of Grade 8 (or for metric, 10.9) steel. Never mind
exceeding the elastic strength (though this may be close to the ultimate
strength for this bolt material)...

Now I don't buy rust per se getting in there at all; based on the location;
the appearance of my own pulley bolt; and Jim's observations of how quickly
the bolt tightens after driving.

All told, these realities make me think that maybe the bolt material, under
high stress and at high temperatures, is, over time, being melded with the
metal of the crankshaft. That "crack" sound and the dust rising feed into
this a bit. (OTOH, it's a helluva lot of torque needed to break the bolt
free. I have heard smaller cracks with smaller bolts.)

Maybe this "melding" is what people have in mind when they talk about "heat
cycling" of the bolt.

But then on the third hand I would think the head of that pulley bolt would
shear off the way the heads of some of the suspension bolts so readily do
when it's being torqued to free it. The suspension bolts are only 10 mm
IIRC, but still, it doesn't take much torque at all to tear off one of their
heads.

> but unfortunately he's one of the least
> approachable people I know. Too bad.

My two cents again: The work of physicists is more black and white than
engineers' and technicians'. Indeed, I imagine he'd have a huge hurdle to
overcome with the reality that torque on real bolts rarely correlates to a
precise axial load. S I wouldn't look at this person as an authority.

I would trust BoltScience people a lot more, but still have doubts they can
take the time to really study what's behind this high torque needed to
remove the Honda pulley bolt.

> > If this bolt is truly "special," then I'm betting what's special about
> > it is the material.
>
>
> There are a number of "special bolts" used in various locations on many
> Hondas. Suspension, transmission casing to engine/body, crank bolt, and
> several other locations. Their "specialness" seems to differ based on
their
> application.

Well they don't seem to be labeled "special bolt" at the www.slhonda.com and
in the manuals the way the pulley bolt is. I was looking at my 91 Civic's
suspension bolts at www.slhonda.com earlier, to see if they're as expensive
as the pulley bolt (at about $6). Some are. They're longer, but they also
have splines on them. As you note below.

I agree that there are bolts that have "special" applications though, and
are accordingly spec'd by Honda and then purchased from a bolt manufacturer.

> In the case of the rear supension, they're normal 10.9 bolts,

Do you know this based on trying to drill/saw these recently?

I am sure you're right, but it's based only on my own attempts to drill/saw
them.

On my pulley holder tool, before I was tuned into the differences between
pulleys, and so before I used the hose as a spacer, I actually bent a Grade
8 bolt trying to get the thing to work. I had to buy a third one. This to me
is evidence (imprecise, but ballpark) of what kind of forces we're talking
about being applied to the pulley bolt when we try to free it. It's
stunning, IMO, that one rarely, if ever, reads of pulley bolts being damaged
during the removal process. Now why is that? Like you, I can't believe it's
made of something stronger than 10.9. And yet...

So I don't know. Oughta grab one from the junkyard and have it tested
somewhere. I wish I had hope Honda Company would respond to a query like
this, but I don't know that they would, for a few reasons.

Car Talk's Tom and Ray might entertain it. (I recall you're not wild about
them, but I think they're honest and say when they don't know.)

> but they have
> unusual features, like fine threads, fluting on their shanks, and nylon
> inserts in the threads.

Agreed.

"SoCalMike" > wrote
> Elle wrote:
> > The explanations that do exist predominantly speculate it's either "heat
> > cycling," rust, or both.
>
> if you want the best possible automotive example of heat cycling or rust
> on a honda, look at the exhaust system and its multiple fasteners.

True. There must be lofty (and valid) explanations of why certain exhaust
bolts are so tough to remove after years of operation. I wouldn't buy that
it's just rust. (So far though PB Blaster has dealt with all the exhaust
bolts I've needed to free just fine.) Chemical action between the bolt metal
and the female side, abetted by heat? Whatever minerals (or whatever) are on
the threads at the start have the potential to thoroughly seize the bolt up
at high temperatures?

Just checked the parts site and I see one of the exhaust bolts is called a
"special bolt" too.

I suppose "special" may be a 10.9 designator. Or it's a fine thread
designator, since the 91 Civic's pulley bolt is 14 mm/1.25 mm pitch. The
standard fine thread pitch for a 14 mm nominal diameter bolt is 1.5 mm.

The exhaust "special bolt" is a fine thread, but a standard one.

> feel free to discuss...

I don't want to drag you into an online battle.

"TeGGeR®" > wrote
> "Elle" > wrote
> > I changed my site earlier today to indicate that this matter was my
> > theory.
>
>
> And I've changed mine.
> http://www.tegger.com/hondafaq/faq.html#crankbolt

Looked it over. You've drug a whole Usenet battle unrelated to the goal of
fixing Hondas onto your site.

I don't support Jim's precession theory.

You have not represented my position accurately.

You did much more than you said you were going to do.

You're frustrated. I'm annoyed. I don't want my site linked to yours.

But I remain happy to agree to disagree, FWIW.

"Elle" > wrote in
news
> "TeGGeR®" > wrote
>> "Elle" > wrote
>> > I changed my site earlier today to indicate that this matter was my
>> > theory.
>>
>>
>> And I've changed mine.
>> http://www.tegger.com/hondafaq/faq.html#crankbolt
>
> Looked it over. You've drug a whole Usenet battle unrelated to the
> goal of fixing Hondas onto your site.
>
> I don't support Jim's precession theory.


OK.


>
> You have not represented my position accurately.




So then your theory revolves completely around heat distortion?

The only way heat could affect torque is if the bolt screwed itself in
further while it heated, and if its receiving hole did not also grow
longer. Simple elongation will not do anything unless that elongated
material can creep around the threads and stay elongated for evermore.


--
TeGGeR®

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/