Don M's studs
05-18-2004, 03:15 PM
#16
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 846
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don,
How are the H-11 glass bead finished studs prone to hydrogen embrittlement if their not coated? That form of failure is specifically linked to hydrogen becoming infused in the metal during any electrolytic plating/coating/chemical process. Specification SAE AMS-2759/9B (Hydrogen Embrittlement Relief of Steel Parts)specifically states what I have been taught.... this form of embrittlement is applicable to carbon, low alloy, and martensitic stainless steels with a minimum strength of 180 ksi or greater, or roughly 40 HRC. It is also equivalent to the same materials in threaded fasteners at 150ksi or greater, roughly 34 HRC. This spec refers to baking times and temps required to remove the hydrogen from a variety of materials following processes such as etching, stripping, pickling, chemmilling, cad plate, chrome plate, nickel plate, etc. A bead blasted finish will not produce this embrittlement. As I mentioned before, a brush on black phosphate coating can easily be applied as a rust barrier.
IMO stock headbolts are reliably only good to 50psi. Sure, some have run 70+ (Timinva comes to mind first), but I have heard of plenty of others let go around the 50 range. 4340 when heat treated properly to it's medium level (It can also go to 260-280, but gets brittle) fits right in the 190 ksi range. This info comes from SAE AMS-2759/2C, Heat Treatment of Low-Alloy Steel Parts, Min 220 KSI.
Not sure who is selling the "Chineese" stuff, but after closely inspecing the studs from a midwest shop... it's not there
.
John
How are the H-11 glass bead finished studs prone to hydrogen embrittlement if their not coated? That form of failure is specifically linked to hydrogen becoming infused in the metal during any electrolytic plating/coating/chemical process. Specification SAE AMS-2759/9B (Hydrogen Embrittlement Relief of Steel Parts)specifically states what I have been taught.... this form of embrittlement is applicable to carbon, low alloy, and martensitic stainless steels with a minimum strength of 180 ksi or greater, or roughly 40 HRC. It is also equivalent to the same materials in threaded fasteners at 150ksi or greater, roughly 34 HRC. This spec refers to baking times and temps required to remove the hydrogen from a variety of materials following processes such as etching, stripping, pickling, chemmilling, cad plate, chrome plate, nickel plate, etc. A bead blasted finish will not produce this embrittlement. As I mentioned before, a brush on black phosphate coating can easily be applied as a rust barrier.
IMO stock headbolts are reliably only good to 50psi. Sure, some have run 70+ (Timinva comes to mind first), but I have heard of plenty of others let go around the 50 range. 4340 when heat treated properly to it's medium level (It can also go to 260-280, but gets brittle) fits right in the 190 ksi range. This info comes from SAE AMS-2759/2C, Heat Treatment of Low-Alloy Steel Parts, Min 220 KSI.
Not sure who is selling the "Chineese" stuff, but after closely inspecing the studs from a midwest shop... it's not there
.John
05-18-2004, 03:39 PM
#18
Administrator
Don:
Thanks for your reply.
Don, you said in your post "even stock bolts would have
been fine for a single charger truck." Well, my "stock" Cummins
Headbolts DID NOT hold the boost of those B-1 Turbos! That
is why I went to the 12mm studs at that time. I was seeing
60+lbs. of boost with those B-1's and as I said above, had
NO PROBLEMS with the truck after the 12mm studs were
installed, even with sustained use of the truck pushing
those 60+lbs. of boost!
I know that "Timinva" has been running the stock headbolts
on his truck with his twin turbos and so far, so good but IMO
he is on "borrowed time!"
----------
John_P
Thanks for your reply.
Don, you said in your post "even stock bolts would have
been fine for a single charger truck." Well, my "stock" Cummins
Headbolts DID NOT hold the boost of those B-1 Turbos! That
is why I went to the 12mm studs at that time. I was seeing
60+lbs. of boost with those B-1's and as I said above, had
NO PROBLEMS with the truck after the 12mm studs were
installed, even with sustained use of the truck pushing
those 60+lbs. of boost!
I know that "Timinva" has been running the stock headbolts
on his truck with his twin turbos and so far, so good but IMO
he is on "borrowed time!"
----------
John_P
05-18-2004, 04:22 PM
#19
DTR Advertiser
John,
I meant if the bolts, gaskets, and an o-ring was installed at the same time.
The point is...the stock bolts can provide the same clamping force as the 12mm 4340 studs you installed. At least close enough and there is no real benefit to them.
Don~
I meant if the bolts, gaskets, and an o-ring was installed at the same time.
The point is...the stock bolts can provide the same clamping force as the 12mm 4340 studs you installed. At least close enough and there is no real benefit to them.
Don~
05-18-2004, 04:41 PM
#20
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Drive till ya hit a Polar Bear, then go back 50 miles
Posts: 1,062
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by banshee
IMO stock headbolts are reliably only good to 50psi. Sure, some have run 70+ (Timinva comes to mind first), but I have heard of plenty of others let go around the 50 range.
IMO stock headbolts are reliably only good to 50psi. Sure, some have run 70+ (Timinva comes to mind first), but I have heard of plenty of others let go around the 50 range.
The other variability I see, vis-a-vis headgasket life, is the driver. I've been in many trucks where the drivers were not allowing the truck to come up to operating temps before getting into the throttle. With this sort of abusive driving style, I've seen o-rings and fire-rings, even with head studs, let go by 40 PSI.
I'm with Don on this one. We've got numerous single turbo trucks out there, pulling 50 and 60 PSI (the 60 PSI guys really need to consider twins) and our incidence of head gasket failure is less than 1%.
Rod
05-18-2004, 06:37 PM
#21
DTR Advertiser
Banshee,
The H-11 and the 4340 are both a common victim of hydrogen embrittlement. The ARP2000 material is not. This is one of the arguments for using it over tool steel. Quench and temper steel.
If you did not have to do a second process for corrosion control in the first place...you would already be ahead of the game. The ARP 2000 was designed for a wet or sweaty enviro. The others are commonly replaced now for their inability to deal with these troubles.
You should see the damage these fasteners have caused in the aircraft industry in terms of initial cost and their ultimate replacement. NO...wings did not fall off...but the potentilal was severe enough to warrant replacement of some fasteners by stopping the planes from flying until they were repaired.
These type of half baked solutions was what ARP and myself tried to avoid in the first place. Not just from a corrosion standpoint, but other areas as well. Including but not limited to block distortion, and proper clamping force applied to a flange that has proven to be a bear in the past.
The 4340 and the H-11 fell short. With essentially stock level clamp up from the 4340 12 mm's and the H-11 needing, in reality, a complete engine tear down and rebore or hone job...I just cant see the benefit for the majority of end users. This leaves most everyone out of the game when it comes to usability and end results. Except the high end guys that really go all out. 99% of folks in the Diesel performance world were not in that ultra high performance catagory.
All my customers asked me "what about studs" I cant tell you how many times I was asked this question. I always told them to hang tite and wait or use stock bolts. I knew the fastener solutions currently available and did not like any of them. If they had solid advantages behind them and they did not require an engine removal...I would have been tickled to recommend the products.
Now that ARP can provide the studs from a proven material...(not just a material that is "good enough" to use or has to be painted or otherwise) and provide a higher clamp up...I can tell ya...Everyone is asked to use studs that can fit them into the budget.
Was everyone who purchased the 14's told about block distortion possibilities and the need to rehone their blocks? Nope! It was either not discussed with the buyers or just plain not known.
Is it just a coincidence that the ARP2000 fit into the range of most everyones TQ wrench? 96 ft lbs using the ARP grease. Which BTW is included in the box. This provides 75% of yield. A solid number and not overdone by any means. Is it easier to use an allen head socket to drive the studs into the block? These are steps taken to make it a better experience for the guy in his driveway...not just the guy in the multi-million dollar shop. All for a price that is less than anything else. All things considered.
Im at a loss as to why a product that clearly has advantages to the stock bolts, the 4340's, is easier to install than anything else, and will severely limit or not even cause distortion in any year Cummins casting is such a sore spot.
The data, the material, and the facilities to have a high quality stud made was there long before I even came on the scene. I think I had a FORD at the time.
If I go the distance on a final solution for head gaskets and prove them viable I will have several obsticles: unethical vendors who will try and emulate the ideas, try and undercut me and go to the supplier themselves, or just plain gripe and whine how it will never work and cause disruptions in a public forum.
In the end...the ones who lose are the users.
Don~
The H-11 and the 4340 are both a common victim of hydrogen embrittlement. The ARP2000 material is not. This is one of the arguments for using it over tool steel. Quench and temper steel.
If you did not have to do a second process for corrosion control in the first place...you would already be ahead of the game. The ARP 2000 was designed for a wet or sweaty enviro. The others are commonly replaced now for their inability to deal with these troubles.
You should see the damage these fasteners have caused in the aircraft industry in terms of initial cost and their ultimate replacement. NO...wings did not fall off...but the potentilal was severe enough to warrant replacement of some fasteners by stopping the planes from flying until they were repaired.
These type of half baked solutions was what ARP and myself tried to avoid in the first place. Not just from a corrosion standpoint, but other areas as well. Including but not limited to block distortion, and proper clamping force applied to a flange that has proven to be a bear in the past.
The 4340 and the H-11 fell short. With essentially stock level clamp up from the 4340 12 mm's and the H-11 needing, in reality, a complete engine tear down and rebore or hone job...I just cant see the benefit for the majority of end users. This leaves most everyone out of the game when it comes to usability and end results. Except the high end guys that really go all out. 99% of folks in the Diesel performance world were not in that ultra high performance catagory.
All my customers asked me "what about studs" I cant tell you how many times I was asked this question. I always told them to hang tite and wait or use stock bolts. I knew the fastener solutions currently available and did not like any of them. If they had solid advantages behind them and they did not require an engine removal...I would have been tickled to recommend the products.
Now that ARP can provide the studs from a proven material...(not just a material that is "good enough" to use or has to be painted or otherwise) and provide a higher clamp up...I can tell ya...Everyone is asked to use studs that can fit them into the budget.
Was everyone who purchased the 14's told about block distortion possibilities and the need to rehone their blocks? Nope! It was either not discussed with the buyers or just plain not known.
Is it just a coincidence that the ARP2000 fit into the range of most everyones TQ wrench? 96 ft lbs using the ARP grease. Which BTW is included in the box. This provides 75% of yield. A solid number and not overdone by any means. Is it easier to use an allen head socket to drive the studs into the block? These are steps taken to make it a better experience for the guy in his driveway...not just the guy in the multi-million dollar shop. All for a price that is less than anything else. All things considered.
Im at a loss as to why a product that clearly has advantages to the stock bolts, the 4340's, is easier to install than anything else, and will severely limit or not even cause distortion in any year Cummins casting is such a sore spot.
The data, the material, and the facilities to have a high quality stud made was there long before I even came on the scene. I think I had a FORD at the time.
If I go the distance on a final solution for head gaskets and prove them viable I will have several obsticles: unethical vendors who will try and emulate the ideas, try and undercut me and go to the supplier themselves, or just plain gripe and whine how it will never work and cause disruptions in a public forum.
In the end...the ones who lose are the users.
Don~
05-18-2004, 07:07 PM
#22
DTR Advertiser
Originally posted by John_P
Don:
FWIW, the 12mm studs that were installed in my 96' 12 valve
were torqued to 120 ft.lbs., not 135. Those studs were coated
with the black oxide you guys described. They went 120,000
miles with no problems at all, including all the time I "punished"
them with continual 60+lbs. of boost with the B-1 Turbos I
tried for almost a year. Upon their removal, they looked
to be in excellent shape, no discoloration or corrosion on
ANY of them and they were alot easier to remove than I
thought they would be!
---------
John_P
Don:
FWIW, the 12mm studs that were installed in my 96' 12 valve
were torqued to 120 ft.lbs., not 135. Those studs were coated
with the black oxide you guys described. They went 120,000
miles with no problems at all, including all the time I "punished"
them with continual 60+lbs. of boost with the B-1 Turbos I
tried for almost a year. Upon their removal, they looked
to be in excellent shape, no discoloration or corrosion on
ANY of them and they were alot easier to remove than I
thought they would be!
---------
John_P
Why would you have them TQ'd so tight? Was this by design? Per the manufacturers instructions? The dealer?
Don~
05-18-2004, 07:17 PM
#23
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Laredo, Tx, 7 hours south of Dallas
Posts: 1,123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The studs I got from Piers had instructions to torque to 125Ft/Lbs w/ARP lube. I torqued 'em to 131Ft/Lbs.
They are now torqued to 120Ft/Lbs since the motor replacement (had a broken cylinder, or piston ring on old motor)
Merrick
They are now torqued to 120Ft/Lbs since the motor replacement (had a broken cylinder, or piston ring on old motor)
Merrick
05-18-2004, 07:32 PM
#24
DTR Advertiser
Were they 12mm or 14mm? 12mm studs are going to be way too close to failure at the TQ level using ARP lube. ARP lube is probably the most slipperiest stuff I have seen for fasteners. It cuts friction like nothing else. I cant believe they did not break. Actually I can...I forgot that I knew of a guy that broke one at 135 ft lbs using those instructions. At 131 you were so close to failure its not even funny. I would replace them if they are 12's...or get something from the actual manufacturer that says to TQ a 12mm 4340 stud to 125. Perhaps they hardened these studs to a level above the standard practice. In this case they are into the brittle zone.
This all assumes they are from 4340.
I wonder if the broken ring was caused from a distorted cylinder in the first place?
Don~
This all assumes they are from 4340.
I wonder if the broken ring was caused from a distorted cylinder in the first place?
Don~
05-18-2004, 10:17 PM
#25
Administrator
Don:
As I recall the "torque recommendation" on those 12mm
studs was 120 ft.lbs., but I will go back and check the
old paperwork and let you know. I do remember that
I used the ARP lube with the install. As I said above,
those studs went 120,000 miles with no problems at
all and they looked very good when they were recently
taken out. And let me tell you, those were 120,000 HARD
miles!!
----------
John_P
As I recall the "torque recommendation" on those 12mm
studs was 120 ft.lbs., but I will go back and check the
old paperwork and let you know. I do remember that
I used the ARP lube with the install. As I said above,
those studs went 120,000 miles with no problems at
all and they looked very good when they were recently
taken out. And let me tell you, those were 120,000 HARD
miles!!
----------
John_P
05-19-2004, 12:34 AM
#26
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Laredo, Tx, 7 hours south of Dallas
Posts: 1,123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Don M
I wonder if the broken ring was caused from a distorted cylinder in the first place?
Don~
I wonder if the broken ring was caused from a distorted cylinder in the first place?
Don~
They are 12mm studs, and they are what's in the truck now.
Thanks for the good info on tehm. I'll have to replace them soon.
Merrick
05-19-2004, 05:54 AM
#27
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 846
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don,
With A 190ksi bolt and a lightly oiled thread, 120 ft-lb of torque is not out of the question. The ideal percentage range of yield strength during fastener clamping depends upon usage, and it ranges from 75-90%. There is a gain to be seen in clamp load all the way up the yield line, to 100% yield strength, but variations in materials and torque measurement (torque wrenches aren't exactly accurate) cap that at 90. For 75% of 190ksi on a 12mm stud with an oiled thread I show charted at 114 ft. lbs. The extra 6 pounds will add a couple of percent of yield, but not nearly enough to cause any problems, and will increase clamp load on the gasket.
Rod,
Not sure as to the cause of the failures. I have heard about it from 12Vs, ETC and ETH 24Vs with single chargers, though. The pullers have fought the head gasket issues for a long time, but the tractor guys seem to have it figured out. Perhaps their 5/8" studs holding the head down has something to do with that.
FWIW I'm not trying to slam your studs Don. I'm not "whining" or "griping" either. Did I ever say they won't work as you claim? NOPE! As the title of the webpage shows, this is discussion forum... just discussing.
With A 190ksi bolt and a lightly oiled thread, 120 ft-lb of torque is not out of the question. The ideal percentage range of yield strength during fastener clamping depends upon usage, and it ranges from 75-90%. There is a gain to be seen in clamp load all the way up the yield line, to 100% yield strength, but variations in materials and torque measurement (torque wrenches aren't exactly accurate) cap that at 90. For 75% of 190ksi on a 12mm stud with an oiled thread I show charted at 114 ft. lbs. The extra 6 pounds will add a couple of percent of yield, but not nearly enough to cause any problems, and will increase clamp load on the gasket.
Rod,
Not sure as to the cause of the failures. I have heard about it from 12Vs, ETC and ETH 24Vs with single chargers, though. The pullers have fought the head gasket issues for a long time, but the tractor guys seem to have it figured out. Perhaps their 5/8" studs holding the head down has something to do with that.
FWIW I'm not trying to slam your studs Don. I'm not "whining" or "griping" either. Did I ever say they won't work as you claim? NOPE! As the title of the webpage shows, this is discussion forum... just discussing.
05-19-2004, 06:04 AM
#28
Administrator
Hey Banshee, you ever seen IGSCC? We get it here a lot with certain metals in borated water.
I think Scheids is putting 17 mm studs in mine or something like that. Got the Arias pistons installed with the new cam and fire ring on the block. Just told them last week to do the 35 / 40 mod on the turbo. For the money I am putting into it, I sure hope it runs when I finally get it back. Should be ready to pick up next week end. Was hoping it would be ready this week end so I would not have to travel on a holiday week end. Still doing work to the head they said.
Do those studs need a re-torque after a certain amount of time?
I think Scheids is putting 17 mm studs in mine or something like that. Got the Arias pistons installed with the new cam and fire ring on the block. Just told them last week to do the 35 / 40 mod on the turbo. For the money I am putting into it, I sure hope it runs when I finally get it back. Should be ready to pick up next week end. Was hoping it would be ready this week end so I would not have to travel on a holiday week end. Still doing work to the head they said.
Do those studs need a re-torque after a certain amount of time?
05-19-2004, 07:30 AM
#29
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 846
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don,
About the aircraft fasteners, I haven't seen any huge issues with fasteners in general on aircraft causing problems, but I'm pretty sure the Navy has a little more stringent corrosion control policy than most areas.
Joel,
I've seen it on some of the stuff that comes from the fleet units. It's a lot more common on the stuff that has been in use for a while, especially things that come back off aircraft carriers. Want to see some corrosion? Put something in the ocean for 6 months.. LOL. Seeing inter-grainular corrosion at work will change your mind about stainless not corroding!
John
About the aircraft fasteners, I haven't seen any huge issues with fasteners in general on aircraft causing problems, but I'm pretty sure the Navy has a little more stringent corrosion control policy than most areas.
Joel,
I've seen it on some of the stuff that comes from the fleet units. It's a lot more common on the stuff that has been in use for a while, especially things that come back off aircraft carriers. Want to see some corrosion? Put something in the ocean for 6 months.. LOL. Seeing inter-grainular corrosion at work will change your mind about stainless not corroding!
John
05-19-2004, 08:26 AM
#30
DTR Advertiser
Originally posted by banshee
Don,
With A 190ksi bolt and a lightly oiled thread, 120 ft-lb of torque is not out of the question. The ideal percentage range of yield strength during fastener clamping depends upon usage, and it ranges from 75-90%. There is a gain to be seen in clamp load all the way up the yield line, to 100% yield strength, but variations in materials and torque measurement (torque wrenches aren't exactly accurate) cap that at 90. For 75% of 190ksi on a 12mm stud with an oiled thread I show charted at 114 ft. lbs. The extra 6 pounds will add a couple of percent of yield, but not nearly enough to cause any problems, and will increase clamp load on the gasket.
Don,
With A 190ksi bolt and a lightly oiled thread, 120 ft-lb of torque is not out of the question. The ideal percentage range of yield strength during fastener clamping depends upon usage, and it ranges from 75-90%. There is a gain to be seen in clamp load all the way up the yield line, to 100% yield strength, but variations in materials and torque measurement (torque wrenches aren't exactly accurate) cap that at 90. For 75% of 190ksi on a 12mm stud with an oiled thread I show charted at 114 ft. lbs. The extra 6 pounds will add a couple of percent of yield, but not nearly enough to cause any problems, and will increase clamp load on the gasket.
Everyone I have spoken to so far is saying they had assembly lube included in the 4340 stud kit they received. Many actually are getting the ARP lubricant.
Engine oil is a different deal when talking about TQ applied so why even base your position on oil specs?
Do you care to comment on the use of ARP lubricant, using 120 ft lbs and the 4340 studs? This I really want to hear/read. Whichever position you take.
Don~