Static coefficient of friction between copper or brass

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating the torque required to tighten a threaded terminal made of copper alloy, specifically focusing on the coefficient of friction between copper components. Participants explore the implications of using a coefficient of friction value of 1.0, as suggested by various sources, and its impact on torque calculations using Motosh's equation.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant mentions using Motosh's equation and cites a coefficient of friction of 1.0 for copper-copper interactions, but expresses concern that this leads to excessively high torque values.
  • Another participant asks for the pitch of the screw and the angle of contact, suggesting that these factors influence the friction calculation.
  • A participant confirms the average coefficient of friction for copper as 1.00, stating that while the resulting torque may seem high, it should be considered accurate.
  • Further details are provided about the screw's pitch (0.0833 inch) and thread angle (60 degrees), with a participant noting that the calculated torque of 2771 lb-ft seems too high based on the yield strength of the copper alloy.
  • Questions arise regarding the realistic safety factor to apply given the high torque requirement, prompting discussions about the necessity of such loading levels.
  • One participant suggests that it may be preferable to avoid designing for loading to yield and questions the rationale behind the chosen fastener size and loading requirements.
  • A later reply indicates that for the calculated yield clamping force of 12315 lb force, the high torque requirement is expected, and recommends considering a lower coefficient of friction, potentially through lubrication, to reduce torque needs.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the appropriateness of the coefficient of friction value of 1.0 and its implications for torque calculations. There is no consensus on the correct coefficient to use or the necessity of the high torque values derived from the calculations.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight potential limitations in their calculations, including assumptions about the coefficient of friction, the influence of screw pitch and angle, and the implications of yield strength on torque requirements. These factors remain unresolved in the discussion.

Platanus3
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Hello all

I'm trying to calculate a torque needed to tighten a threaded terminal. (Both male and female parts are copper alloy)

I'm using Motosh's equation which requires me to use the coefficient of friction.

Web sources tells me that the copper-copper coefficient of friction is 1.0.

The problem is that coefficient of friction value of 1.0 gives me a torque value that seems to be too high.

Can anyone advise me on this issue?

Thanks.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Whats your the pitch of your screw? Also the angle at which the contact is made between the 2 points, I imagine the force to calculate friction would be from the axial force created from turning the screw.
 
If you are using the generally accepted Motosh equation, I have verified the average coefficient of copper to equal 1.00, the result you are getting may not be what you want but it should be considered accurate.
 
bsheikho said:
Whats your the pitch of your screw? Also the angle at which the contact is made between the 2 points, I imagine the force to calculate friction would be from the axial force created from turning the screw.

Sorry for the late response.
Pitch is 0.0833 inch because the threads belong to unified fine thread (1.500-12UN-2A and -2B)
Thread angle is 60 degree (I believe a standard value), so I used alpha value of 30 degree in Motosh equation.
My machinery handbook tells me to calculate the yield clamping force and yes it does take the friction between threads into account. But the value is too high. I get like 2771 lb-ft of torque.
 
JBA said:
If you are using the generally accepted Motosh equation, I have verified the average coefficient of copper to equal 1.00, the result you are getting may not be what you want but it should be considered accurate.

OK. If then, what is the realistic safety factor I should apply?
The result seems too high.
For 1.500-12UN-2A (and 2B), I get like 2771 ft-lbs of torque.
Yield strength I used is 45,000 psi (Copper alloy)
 
How much force are you trying to get out of the terminal once tightened?
 
Mech_Engineer said:
How much force are you trying to get out of the terminal once tightened?

Mech_Engineer said:
How much force are you trying to get out of the terminal once tightened?

I'm using yield clamping force which calculates to be 12315 lb force
 
It is always preferable to stretch a fastener beyond its required design contact or tensile loading but this can be achieved without actually designing for loading to yield. Are you sure that you really require a level of loading that high?

Is your fastener size based entirely upon getting a required design load or compensation for potential thermal expansion loosening or contact pressure loss; or is there some other factor that is causing you to use a fastener size greater than what would be required for sufficient fastener grip (i.e. for an electrical service it might be current carrying capacity) causing you to select a bolt loading higher than what is required.
 
Platanus3 said:
I'm using yield clamping force which calculates to be 12315 lb force

For that level of force and a frictional coefficient of 1.0, I'm not surprised you need 2700 ft-lbs. You will need to lower the coefficient of friction (maybe with a grease) if you want to reduce the torque requirement.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
4K
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K