Optimizing Channel Section Tolerances for Pin Jointed Machine Design

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mech King
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Channel Section
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on challenges faced in achieving consistent dimensions with BS10279:2000 Hot Rolled Steel Channels for a pin jointed machine design. The primary issues include variability in flange flatness and thickness, which complicates drilling and increases costs. Suggestions include exploring ASTM A6/6M for tighter tolerances and considering custom extrusions, although the latter may be more expensive. There is also a consideration of using aluminum sections, but concerns about strength and cost persist. Ultimately, the need for better quality materials may necessitate higher expenditures to ensure design integrity.
Mech King
Messages
69
Reaction score
0
I am deisigning a pin jointed machine that uses some standard channel section. I am having difficulty getting consisitency with the channel section (type BS10279:2000 Hot Rolled Steel Channels) dimensions due to the wide nominal tolerances.

Is anyone aware of any channel/U -Section that has much tighter tolerances over the flatness, height, length, thickness, radius' etc?

I dont' want to resort to welding jigged sheet steel together to obtain the correct dimensions.

If anyone is aware of anything then i would be more then greatful,

Cheers

Mech King
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
The only thing I know of is ASTM A6/6M which pretty much spells out the variations allowed in shapes and plates.

Just what kind of tolerances/problems are you wanting/experiencing? Could anything be solved by so,e properly selected limited local machining processes?
 
Hi Fred cheers for the reply,

my main issue has been with flatness of the channel flanges - which when drilling concentric holes, has become a more time consuming process with the obvious associated costs. Also, the flange thickness varies by about +/- 1.5mm if i remeber correctly, and if both flange thicknesses are out the the clearence will be greatly increased or reduced. Just wanted to get more consistency with it because each length of channel is widely different from the other it would seem.

I will okk into what you specified and see if i can get tighter tolerances.

cheers again

Mech king
 
Yeah. That's pretty much the run of the mill (pardon the pun). I honestly have never seen anything better that wasn't a custom extrusion.

Does it have to be steel? There are some more expensive, but mass produced aluminum sections that would fit your needs.
 
The Aluminium section will be too weak for the design, its a mechancial lift, i think i may be able to get away with AL section though, if i down-rated the max weight of the lift - which wouldn;t be out ofthe question. I also wanted to keep the lift as cheap as possible, but if it means i need to spend more to get better quality then that might have to be the way forward - i gues you can't have eberything in the quality, cost and time triangle lol.

Cheers

mech King
 
Posted June 2024 - 15 years after starting this class. I have learned a whole lot. To get to the short course on making your stock car, late model, hobby stock E-mod handle, look at the index below. Read all posts on Roll Center, Jacking effect and Why does car drive straight to the wall when I gas it? Also read You really have two race cars. This will cover 90% of problems you have. Simply put, the car pushes going in and is loose coming out. You do not have enuff downforce on the right...
I'm trying to decide what size and type of galvanized steel I need for 2 cantilever extensions. The cantilever is 5 ft. The space between the two cantilever arms is a 17 ft Gap the center 7 ft of the 17 ft Gap we'll need to Bear approximately 17,000 lb spread evenly from the front of the cantilever to the back of the cantilever over 5 ft. I will put support beams across these cantilever arms to support the load evenly
Thread 'What's the most likely cause for this carbon seal crack?'
We have a molded carbon graphite seal that is used in an inline axial piston, variable displacement hydraulic pump. One of our customers reported that, when using the “A” parts in the past, they only needed to replace them due to normal wear. However, after switching to our parts, the replacement cycle seems to be much shorter due to “broken” or “cracked” failures. This issue was identified after hydraulic fluid leakage was observed. According to their records, the same problem has occurred...

Similar threads

Back
Top