DETAILED METHODOLOGY FOR DETERMINING TORQUE LIMITS

TO MAXIMIZE PRELOAD FOR

HIGH-STRENGTH THREADED FASTENERS

by

D. ANDY HISSAM

A DISSERTATION

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements

for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy
in
The Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering
to
The School of Graduate Studies
of
The University of Alabama in Huntsville

HUNTSVILLE, ALABAMA

2013
ii
iii
 ABSTRACT
The School of Graduate Studies
The University of Alabama in Huntsville

Degree Doctor of Philosophy College/Dept. Engineering/Mechanical and

Aerospace Engineering

Name of Candidate D. Andy Hissam

Title Detailed Methodology for Determining Torque Limits to Maximize Preload for High-
Strength Threaded Fasteners

High-strength threaded fasteners are an amazing product of engineering, and one of the

most common methods of making structural attachments. They are frequently used in structural

joints because of two important features: such fasteners allow disassembly and reassembly of the

joint, and they can generate high clamping loads called preload.

To achieve the full benefit of threaded fasteners, the initial preload must be maximized.

The benefits of high preload are well documented and include improved fatigue resistance,

increased joint stiffness, and better resistance to vibration loosening. For joints in shear, preload

resists relative motion, or slip, of the clamped members. Many factors, like elastic interactions

and embedment, tend to lower the initial preload placed on the fastener. These factors provide

additional motivation to maximize the initial preload. Also, in aerospace applications, maximized

preloads help to achieve the full structural capacity from the fasteners, thereby minimizing

weight. Of the available methods for controlling fastener preload, "torque control" is the most

common. Unfortunately, determining the torque to maximize preload is problematic and greatly

complicated by the large preload scatter generally seen with torque control.

This dissertation presents a detailed methodology for generating torque limits to

maximize preload for high-strength threaded fasteners. The methodology accounts for the large

scatter in preload found with torque control, and therefore, addresses the statistical challenges of

dealing with preload uncertainty. In developing this methodology, the probabilities of yielding

the bolt during installation were calculated. To calculate these probabilities, the expected scatter

iv
v
 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

In all of life's great endeavors, we require the support of others. I could easily list one

hundred people that have helped me during the course of my continued education and this

research. Without their help, this advanced degree and research would not have been possible. I

want to thank everyone that has made a contribution, regardless of how big or small. However,

there are a few people that I would like to give special thanks. These people played a major role

in helping me successfully reach this point.

First, I want to thank Dr. Mark Bower for encouraging me to continue my academic

studies. Without his support and encouragement, I would have never pursued this degree. He is

truly missed. I also want to thank Dr. John Gilbert for accepting me as a graduate student and

serving as my doctoral advisor. My first graduate class was with Dr. Gilbert back in 1998, and I

still remember how much I enjoyed his class. Therefore, how appropriate that I complete my

graduate studies working with him. I want to thank Neill Myers for acting as a sounding board

for many of my ideas. Over the past five years, we have had many technical and philosophical

discussions on fastener design and bolt preload. He always provided a fresh perspective when I

was struggling with a problem. I also want to thank John Forbes for his many years of support,

and most recently, for proofreading my dissertation. He performed a very thorough technical

review and provided many excellent editorial comments. I want to thank James Hodo and Bruce

Bice in the MSFC Materials Lab for helping me conduct fastener tests. Their background in

fastener testing and knowledge of the test equipment helped me tremendously.

I want to thank my parents, Frank and Rosemary, who from my early days as an

undergraduate, encouraged my education and supported me financially. Their moral support and

encouragement have always been fundamental to my success. I want to thank my wife and

daughter, Deborah and Melaina, for their faithful support. For the past several years, they have

had to tolerate stacks of books in the bedroom, spreadsheets taped to the walls, and a dominated

vi
computer. I could not have done it without them. Finally, I need to recognize my employer,

NASA, for providing me full financial support and the resources to do much of this research.

Ronald McDonald in the training office has been especially patient throughout my many years of

study. I also want to thank David Whitten and Richard Stroud for their support and for

recognizing the importance of this research -- which should ultimately benefit many projects and

programs. Thanks again to all. Your support and friendship are truly appreciated.

vii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

List of Figures .......................................................................................................................... xi

List of Tables ........................................................................................................................... xiii

List of Symbols ........................................................................................................................ xiv

List of Acronyms ..................................................................................................................... xvii

Chapter

I. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................... 1

A. Purpose of the Study ...................................................................................... 1

B. Statement of the Problem ............................................................................... 2

C. Bolt Preload ................................................................................................... 3

D. Torque Control............................................................................................... 4

E. Prevailing Torque .......................................................................................... 6

F. Objectives/Motivation ................................................................................... 7

G. Scope.............................................................................................................. 8

H. Outline of the Dissertation ............................................................................. 9

II. BACKGROUND ........................................................................................................ 11

A. The Screw Thread and Preload ...................................................................... 11

B. Torque-Tension Relationships ....................................................................... 12

1. Short-Form Equation ........................................................................ 12

2. Long-Form Equation ........................................................................ 13

3. Long-Form Equation with Prevailing Torque................................... 17

C. Preload Scatter ............................................................................................... 18

1. Friction.............................................................................................. 20

2. Preload Distribution .......................................................................... 22

viii
 D. Literature Review .......................................................................................... 23

III. APPROACH ............................................................................................................... 27

A. Torque Limits for Specific Fastener Combinations ....................................... 27

B. Criteria for Determining Torque Limits ........................................................ 28

1. Distortion Energy Criterion .............................................................. 28

2. Tensile Stress Area and Bolt Stress .................................................. 29

3. Fastener Yield Strength .................................................................... 30

C. Analytical Studies .......................................................................................... 31

1. Torque-Preload-Stress Relationships ................................................ 31

2 Statistical Interference of Bolt Stress and Strength .......................... 34

3. Tolerance Intervals ........................................................................... 38

D. Testing ........................................................................................................... 39

1. Preload-Torsion Tests ....................................................................... 40

2. Prevailing Torque Tests .................................................................... 43

IV. RESULTS .................................................................................................................. 47

A. Torque-Preload-Stress Relationships ............................................................. 47

B. Statistical Interference of Bolt Stress and Strength ....................................... 57

C. Tolerance Intervals ........................................................................................ 68

D. Preload-Torsion Tests .................................................................................... 70

E. Prevailing Torque Tests ................................................................................. 76

F. Propagation of Uncertainty ............................................................................ 81

G. Methodology Summary ................................................................................. 84

V. CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................................ 89

A. Implementing This Methodology .................................................................. 92

B. Recommendations for Future Work............................................................... 93

APPENDIX A: Derivation of an Equation for Calculating Shear Stress Due to

Torsion in a Preloaded Bolt ..................................................................... 96

ix
APPENDIX B: Randomized Order for Prevailing Torque Tests ....................................... 101

APPENDIX C: Torque-Preload-Stress Plots for 1/4"-28 Bolts ......................................... 103

APPENDIX D: Sample Calculation for Probability of Exceeding Yield Strength

Based on Stress-Strength Interference ..................................................... 106

REFERENCES .................................................................................................................. 109

x
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

1.1 Stresses in the Bolt During Installation ...................................................................... 2

2.1 Thread Geometry and Terminology ............................................................................ 14

2.2 Reaction of Input Torque in a Preloaded Joint ........................................................... 16

2.3 Plot Showing Preload Scatter for a Series of Tests ..................................................... 19

2.4 Depiction of Friction in Bolt Thread and Under the Nut During Tightening ............. 21

2.5 The Central Limit Theorem Predicts the Preload PDF Will Be Normal .................... 23

3.1 Examples of Different Fastener Combinations ........................................................... 28

3.2 Statistical Interference Between Installation Stress and Bolt Strength ....................... 35

3.3 Machine Used for Torque-Tension Testing ................................................................ 40

3.4 Section View of Bolt and Bolt Fixture ....................................................................... 41

3.5 Strain Gauge Installed on a 1/2" A286 Bolt................................................................ 42

3.6 Instrumented Bolt Installed on Torque-Tension Machine .......................................... 43

3.7 Locking Nuts Used for Prevailing Torque Tests ........................................................ 44

4.1 Axial and Torsional Stress with Constant Input Torque (1/2"-20 Fastener
Torqued to 925 in-lbs) ............................................................................................ 48
4.2 Effective and Axial Stress with Constant Input Torque (1/2"-20 Fastener
Torqued to 925 in-lbs) ............................................................................................ 49
4.3 Axial and Torsional Stress When Effective Stress Reaches 112,500 psi
(1/2"-20 Fastener) ................................................................................................... 50
4.4 Input Torque to Generate 112,500 psi Effective Stress, Including Effects
of Prevailing Torque (1/2"-20 Fastener) ................................................................. 51
4.5 Input Torque to Generate 112,500 psi Effective Stress for Different
Bolt Sizes ................................................................................................................ 52
4.6 Achievable Preload When Bolt is Torqued to 112,500 psi Effective Stress
for Different Bolt Sizes ........................................................................................... 53
4.7 Percent Preload Lost to Torsion for Different Bolt Sizes (each torqued to
112,500 psi effective stress) .................................................................................... 54

xi
4.8 Percent Preload Lost to Average Prevailing Torque for Different Bolt Sizes
(each torqued to 112,500 psi effective stress) ......................................................... 55
4.9 Magnitude of Effective Stress in Bolt Cross Section for Various Conditions
(1/2"-20 Bolt) .......................................................................................................... 56
4.10 Overlap of Distribution Curves for Different Population Coverages ......................... 67

4.11 Plot of k-values for 90%, 95%, and 99% Coverage with 95% Confidence,
One-sided ................................................................................................................ 70
4.12 Torque-Tension Plot for 3/8" Bolts ............................................................................ 71

4.13 Torsional Stress in 3/8" Bolts During Application of Torque and

After Installation Torque is Removed ..................................................................... 74
4.14 Axial Load (Preload) in 3/8" Bolts During Application of Torque and
After Installation Torque is Removed ..................................................................... 76
4.15 Normal Probability Plot for Preload Sample of Modified Lock Nuts ........................ 79

4.16 Normal Probability Plot for Preload Sample of Unmodified Lock Nuts .................... 80

4.17 Graphical Representation of Methodology for Determining Torque Limits .............. 88

A.1 Preloaded Bolt with Strain Gauge Wired into Wheatstone Bridge ............................. 97

A.2 Stress Elements for a Preloaded Bolt .......................................................................... 98

A.3 Stress Elements Showing Bolt Torsional Stress Only ................................................ 98

C.1 Axial and Torsional Stress with Constant Input Torque (1/4"-28 Fastener
Torqued to 75 in-lbs) .............................................................................................. 103
C.2 Effective and Axial Stress with Constant Input Torque (1/4"-28 Fastener
Torqued to 75 in-lbs) .............................................................................................. 104
C.3 Axial and Torsional Stress When Effective Stress Reaches 112,500 psi
(1/4"-28 Fastener) ................................................................................................... 104
C.4 Input Torque to Generate 112,500 psi Effective Stress, Including Effects
of Prevailing Torque (1/4"-28 Fastener) ................................................................. 105

xii
 LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

2.1 Comparison of Prevailing Torque to Installation Torque ........................................... 18

3.1 k-values for One-Sided Tolerance Intervals ............................................................... 39

4.1 Probabilities of Exceeding Yield Strength Based on Stress-Strength

Interference (Stress Uncertainty ±3σ = ±25%) ....................................................... 60
4.2 Probabilities of Exceeding Yield Strength Based on Stress-Strength
Interference (Stress Uncertainty ±3σ = ±35%) ....................................................... 62
4.3 Probabilities of Exceeding Yield Strength Based on Stress-Strength
Interference (Stress Uncertainty ±3σ = ±45%) ....................................................... 64
4.4 Test Results for 3/8" Bolts When Input Torque Equals 400 in-lbs ............................. 72

4.5 Test Results for 1/2" Bolts When Input Torque Equals 800 in-lbs ............................. 73

4.6 Comparison of Preload Means When Prevailing Torque is Present and

When Prevailing Torque is Removed (1/2"-20 Bolt) ............................................. 77
4.7 Comparison of Preload Variances When Prevailing Torque is Present and
When Prevailing Torque is Removed (1/2"-20 Bolt) ............................................. 78
B.1 Random Test Numbers ............................................................................................... 101

xiii
 LIST OF SYMBOLS

As tensile stress area, in2

D nominal bolt diameter, in

Ffr friction force

Fi initial bolt preload, lbs

Fmax maximum preload, lbs

Fmin minimum preload, lbs

Fn normal force

J polar second moment of area based on the bolt's tensile stress area, in4

K nut factor

nth number of threads per inch

P thread pitch, in

rb effective bearing surface radius, in

rt thread pitch radius, in

rtsa radius of tensile stress area, in

Slimit limit stress (permissible effective stress), lbs/in2

Sy bolt yield strength, lbs/in2

Su bolt ultimate strength, lbs/in2

Tb torque to overcome bearing friction, in-lbs

Ti input torque, in-lbs

Tlimit torque limit, in-lbs

Tpr prevailing torque, in-lbs

Ts torque to stretch bolt, in-lbs

Tth torque to overcome thread friction, in-lbs

Tτ thread reaction torque (torque that generates torsional stress in the bolt), in-lbs

xiv
β thread half-angle, degrees

γ utilization factor

λ pitch angle, degrees

μ coefficient of friction

μt thread coefficient of friction

μb bearing surface coefficient of friction

σ bolt axial preload stress (on bolt shank), lbs/in2

σn bolt axial preload stress (at the radius of the tensile stress area), lbs/in2

σeff bolt effective stress, lbs/in2

σeff_max bolt maximum effective stress, lbs/in2

τ bolt torsional shear stress (on bolt shank), lbs/in2

bolt torsional shear stress (at the radius of the tensile stress area), lbs/in2

Statistics and probability symbols

CV coefficient of variation

Fo test statistic to determine the equality of variances from two normal distributions

FS(x) cumulative distribution function (CDF) of strength

fL(x) probability distribution function (PDF) of load

k tolerance interval factor (k-value)

keff one-sided tolerance interval factor for effective stress

kstrength one-sided tolerance interval factor for bolt yield strength

n number of samples

S sample standard deviation

Seff sample standard deviation for effective stress, lbs/in2

Sstrength sample standard deviation for bolt yield strength, lbs/in2

sF random standard uncertainty of preload measurement, lbs

xv
sFT covariance factor for Fi and Tτ due to common elemental random error sources, in-lb2

sT random standard uncertainty of thread reaction torque measurement, in-lbs

to test statistic to determine the equality of the means of two normal distributions with
unknown variances

ueff combined standard uncertainty of effective stress, lbs/in2

̅ sample mean

̅ sample mean effective stress, lbs/in2

̅ strength sample mean yield strength, lbs/in2

z z-value

α significance level, %

γ degrees of freedom of the test statistic

μ mean of a random variable

μD difference between the means of bolt yield strength and effective stress , lbs/in2

μeff mean effective stress, lbs/in2

μS mean bolt yield strength, lbs/in2

σ standard deviation of a random variable

σD standard deviation of the difference between means of bolt yield strength and effective
stress, lbs/in2

σeff standard deviation of effective stress, lbs/in2

σeff_max maximum effective stress, lbs/in2

σS standard deviation of bolt yield strength, lbs/in2

Φ(z) standard normal probability function

xvi
 LIST OF ACRONYMS

ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials

COF Coefficient of Friction

CV Coefficient of Variation

ECLSS Environmental Control and Life Support System

IFI Industrial Fasteners Institute

NAS National Aerospace Standard

MMPDS Metallic Materials Properties Development and Standardization

MSFC Marshall Space Flight Center

PDF Probability Density Function

PPM Parts per Million

PPT Parts per Thousand

UN Unified

VDI Verein Deutscher Ingenieure (Association of German Engineers)

xvii
 Chapter I

INTRODUCTION

This chapter includes the purpose of the study, a statement of the problem, the motivation

for the research, and an outline of the dissertation. It also provides a brief description of three key

elements of this research: bolt preload, torque control, and prevailing torque.

A. Purpose of the Study

Threaded fasteners have long been one of the most common methods for making

structural attachments. Such fasteners are used in structural joints because of two important

features: they allow disassembly and reassembly of the joint, and they can generate high

clamping loads known as preload. The latter is important since the full benefit of a threaded

fastener is achieved when the fastener's initial preload is maximized.

Of the available techniques for controlling fastener preload, “torque control” is the most

common. After installation, a small percent of the initial preload is lost to phenomena such as

embedment. Embedment occurs when high spots on the threads and joint plastically yield due to

the initial high contact pressure. The remaining preload, or residual preload, is the preload that

will be available for handling service loads.

The purpose of this study is to develop a detailed methodology for determining torque

limits to maximize preload for high strength threaded fasteners.

1
B. Statement of the Problem

In order to maximize the bolt's initial preload using torque control, the installation torque

must be determined. The torque that will maximize the initial preload will stress the bolt to very

near its yield point. The bolt will yield when the effective stress due to tension and torsion

reaches the material’s yield strength.

A maximized installation torque, or torque limit, is dictated by the stresses placed on the

bolt during the assembly process. These initial stresses are a combination of tension and torsion.

Figure 1.1 shows the normal (σ) and shear (τ) stresses on the bolt shank created by load, , and

torque, . After the assembly torque is removed, a significant portion of the torsion stress in the

bolt will dissipate. For this research, testing has been conducted to investigate the magnitude of

this drop in stress. Other factors, like embedment, will tend to further decrease the preload stress

in the bolt. These reductions in stress will provide the additional load capacity in the bolt needed

to accommodate the external loads seen in service. From fundamental joint theory, it is known

that a preloaded bolt will only see a small percent of the external load. This percent is largely

dictated by the joint factor and loading plane. Without preload, or if preload is lost, the bolt sees

100% of the external loads.

Tτ

σ
τ
Fi
Tτ
Fi

Figure 1.1 Stresses in the Bolt During Installation

2
 Since torque limits are based on a bolt's initial stress, they can be determined by testing

individual fastener combinations, i.e., a single bolt and nut. Therefore, there is no need for more

complicated and costly testing of the overall structural joint.

Unfortunately, there is a large inherent variability in bolt preload when torque control is

used. This large variability, or scatter, in preload is due primarily to the variability in friction.

Since many factors influence friction, its variability can be high. In order to maximize bolt

preload, preload scatter must be thoroughly addressed. However, existing methods for

determining torque limits fail to fully consider this scatter, serving as a primary motivation for the

study at hand.

The present research is significant because it can benefit all mechanical systems that

contain fasteners. When preload is maximized, not only is the full fastener capacity utilized, but

system safety and reliability are improved. It is well known, for example, that fasteners in highly

preloaded joints are better isolated from insidious vibration loads which are often responsible for

premature joint failure. In a paper by V. E. Kahle, insufficient preload was identified as a root

cause of failure in a helicopter accessory drive. The report states, "failure occurred via a fatigue

mechanism, with the physical root cause for failure attributable to insufficient clamping load in

service, as well as other mechanical factors with respect to the connection [1]."

Three key elements of the present research are: bolt preload, torque control, and

prevailing torque. Each is discussed in the subsequent sections.

C. Bolt Preload

Bolt preload is the tension placed on a bolt at assembly. This tension can be very high

and often approaches the yield strength of the bolt. High bolt preload has many advantages and is

typically desired in structural joints. Its advantages include improved fatigue resistance,

increased joint stiffness, and better resistance to vibration loosening. High preload will also

3
increase the margin on joint separation. For joints in shear, it resists relative motion, or slip, of

the clamped members. Many factors, like elastic interactions and embedment, tend to lower the

initial preload placed on the fastener. These factors provide additional motivation to maximize

the initial preload. There are many methods of controlling bolt preload. The most common and

economical is torque control and the focus of this research. Torque control is discussed in more

detail in the next section.

It is a fundamental assumption of this research that preload should be maximized for a

majority of applications. The benefits of high preload have long been recognized. In a 1963

paper by Bernie Cobb, it states, "the rule is, always tighten a bolted assembly to the maximum

permissible preload [2]." More recently, VDI 2230 states, "the aim is to utilize the bolt strength

to the greatest extent [3]."

Finally, in developing this methodology, the bolt is assumed to be the weak link in the

fastener assembly. In other words, it is assumed that the bolt will fail before the nut or clamped

members. The nut should always be able to generate the full strength of the bolt. This is

generally the best accepted design practice. However, if the bolt is not the weak link, adjustments

may be needed in the installation torque.

D. Torque Control

Torque control is one method of applying preload to a bolt. Preload is placed on a bolt

by applying a predetermined torque on the nut (or bolt head), usually applied with a calibrated

torque wrench. Since only the installation torque is measured, torque control is an indirect

method of applying preload. Good design practice requires that fasteners in a structural

attachment be tightened incrementally using a defined pattern. Therefore, the final installation

torque is applied on the last tightening pass for a given group of fasteners.

Torque control is the most common method of applying preload to a bolt [4, 5]. As

Bickford states, "torque is king [5]." It is the most common because it is easy to implement and

4
relatively inexpensive. Unfortunately, it has one major drawback. The preload scatter associated

with torque control is very high, higher than almost any other method of applying preload.

Therefore, torque control is not appropriate when precise preload control is needed and should

not be used for preload critical joints. A preload critical joint is any joint that must develop a

specific preload with minimal scatter in order to operate properly and safely. In general a preload

critical joint cannot tolerate the preload scatter typically seen with torque control. Nevertheless,

torque control is sufficient for a majority of applications. Most joints can tolerate the wide range

of preload uncertainty and still operate safely.

There are two general approaches encountered for determining torque limits. The first

approach directly accounts for torsional stress. It considers both the axial preload and the

torsional stresses generated in the bolt during assembly. The second approach only accounts for

axial preload stress. It may account for torsional stress, but only indirectly. It does so by limiting

the axial stress at assembly. For example, the preload stress may be limited to 75% of yield

strength. By taking a percentage of yield strength, the intent is to cover both torsional stresses

and preload scatter. However, to ensure that bolt preload is in fact maximized, the first approach

must be taken.

Determining the torque that will maximize preload is problematic and greatly

complicated by the large preload scatter generally seen with torque control. When a known

torque is applied to a bolt, a preload results. Unfortunately, the resulting preload is a random

variable with large variability. Accounting for preload scatter was one of the main objectives of

this research.

Although more precise (and expensive) methods of applying preload exist, many

aerospace flight programs still use torque control. Two recent examples are the Environmental

Control and Life Support System (ECLSS) and the J2-X engine, both managed at Marshall Space

Flight Center (MSFC). ECLSS, currently flying on the International Space Station, provides

oxygen and drinking water for the flight crew and removes carbon dioxide from the cabin air.

5
Torque values for the ECLSS hardware were taken from MSFC-STD-486, Torque Limits for

Threaded Fasteners [6]. Similarly, the J2-X engine, currently under development, also uses

torque control for most of its threaded fasteners. One exception is the injector-main combustion

chamber interface which uses ultrasonic measurement for preload control. This critical joint

requires greater preload accuracy than can be obtained with torque control.

E. Prevailing Torque

Prevailing torque is the torque required to overcome a locking feature added to fasteners

to help maintain preload and provide additional resistance to vibration loosening. Although high

preload by itself will provide good resistance to vibration loosening, in severe vibration

environments, an additional locking feature is often desired. The prevailing torque locking

feature is generally added to the nut. Nuts with this feature are called prevailing torque nuts or

locking nuts.

When a locking nut is first installed, a torque must be applied to the nut to overcome the

prevailing torque. This torque is applied until the nut comes into contact with the clamped

members. Additional torque is then applied to preload the bolt. It is important to note that

prevailing torque creates no preload in the bolt. This research investigated the impact that

prevailing torque has on achievable preload and how it should be handled at assembly.

A wide variety of locking nuts are available. A common type is the all-metal, deformed

thread, locking nut. It is used in many aerospace applications. In this type, a portion of the

thread is purposely deformed, often on a cylindrical section at the top of the nut. During

installation, the deformed thread then causes interference with the bolt thread. This interference

creates prevailing torque. Another common type is the plastic-insert locking nut. An insert of

material, often nylon, is placed in the thread to create the prevailing torque. A common form uses

a ring of nylon retained at the top of the nut. The inner diameter of the nylon ring is smaller than

the outer diameter of the bolt thread. Therefore, when the nut is installed on the bolt, interference

6
results, creating prevailing torque. Due to the plastic material, these locking nuts cannot be used

in high-temperature applications. This type of locking nut has been evaluated in this research.

F. Objectives/Motivation

The primary objective of this research was to develop a methodology for determining

torque limits to maximize bolt preload for high-strength fasteners. This methodology had to

account for the large preload scatter typically seen with torque control, and therefore, address the

statistical challenges of dealing with this scatter. To meet these challenges, the probability of

yielding the bolt during installation had to be determined. In addition, the preferred sample size

for torque limit testing had to be defined. A secondary objective of this research was to

investigate the impact that torsion and prevailing torque have on achievable preload. Torsion and

prevailing torque will reduce the amount of preload that can be placed on a bolt, but to what

degree?

This methodology was developed for specific fastener combinations. A fastener

combination is defined as a specific bolt type, nut, washer(s), and lubricant. By defining specific

fastener combinations, fastener strength and geometry are fixed. Since friction is known to be the

main influence on preload and preload scatter, testing specific fastener combinations limits the

variables that influence friction. Once a torque limit is determined for a specific fastener

combination, it can be applied to any joint using that combination. Doing so eliminates the need

and the cost of lot-specific testing or joint-specific testing. Lot-specific testing requires testing a

sample of the fasteners that will be used in service. Joint-specific testing also requires testing the

exact joint configuration. While these approaches for determining torque limits may be better,

they are also much more costly and not an option for most designs or projects.

The torque limits created by this methodology can be placed in torque tables that are tied

directly to each specific fastener combination. Any joint design using that fastener combination

can use the torque limits shown in its torque table. Each torque table should clearly list the

7
associated fastener combination. The torque table should also list the maximum and minimum

preloads determined during testing. This information would greatly benefit the design engineer

and structural analyst during joint design.

This research was motivated by a major shortcoming in existing methods for

determining torque limits. All existing methods fail to fully address the statistical challenges of

dealing with preload uncertainty (or scatter). Some of the better methods may tell a user to apply

a "minimum" coefficient of friction or a "minimum" nut factor when calculating torque limits, but

they fail to define "minimum." Therefore, a methodology was needed that provides specific

details on how to handle the statistics of preload variability.

G. Scope

In developing this methodology, the focus was on:

1) applications where maximum bolt preload is desired. As discussed above, maximized

preload is beneficial in most structural applications. However, there are a few exceptions. In

these applications, a maximized preload may not be appropriate. Examples include: joints with

gaskets, joints where the bolt is threaded into a weak material, or joints where thermal loading

causes excessive stress in the bolt.

2) applications using high-strength fasteners. Generally, high-strength fasteners are

selected because they can be preloaded to a high value. High-strength fasteners generally have

ultimate strengths equal to or greater than 120 ksi. Nevertheless, this methodology could be

applied to lower strength fasteners.

3) applications where the bolt is tightened slowly. When fasteners are tightened with a

torque wrench, this is considered a slow operation. When fasteners are preloaded quickly, for

example, while using an impact wrench, other factors must be considered.

Finally, several areas were not investigated by this research. Although they are important

topics in fastener design and analysis, the following were not objectives of this research:

8
 1) To develop a new model for describing torque-tension relationships. Mathematical

models already exist that describe how input torque translates into preload. Although one of

these models was applied in this research, there was no intention of developing a new model for

the tightening process.

2) To investigate cases where bolts are preloaded to yield. In some applications, the bolt

is intentionally preloaded until it yields. This method of yield-controlled tightening is discussed

by Bickford [5] and VDI 2230 [3]. A drawback of preloading bolts to yield is that they can only

be used one time.

3) To develop new methods for selecting bolt sizes and for analyzing bolted joints.

These are vast topics within themselves. To select a bolt size, the minimum required clamping

load (preload) must be determined for the application. A comprehensive joint analysis requires

evaluation of all service loads and environments. In addition, the geometry of the joint must be

evaluated. These subjects are covered in detail by many sources [3, 5, 7, 8, 9].

H. Outline of the Dissertation

This dissertation presents a detailed methodology for determining torque limits to

maximize preload for high-strength threaded fasteners. It addresses the statistical challenges of

dealing with preload uncertainty when attempting to maximize preload. This methodology,

developed for specific fastener combinations, accounts for both torsion and prevailing torque

experienced by the bolt during installation.

Specifically, Chapter II provides background material that was important to the

development of this research. First, the screw thread and the geometry responsible for generating

preload are discussed. Next, two fundamental relationships for describing the torque-tension

interaction are addressed. This is followed by a discussion on preload scatter and preload

distribution and the many variables affecting them. The chapter concludes with a review of the

9
most relevant literature on torque control, bolt preload, and methods for determining torque

limits.

Chapter III outlines the overall approach that was taken to meet the objectives of this

research. The approach includes a combination of analytical studies and testing. Two analytical

studies were conducted which investigated: 1) the relationship between torque, preload, and

stress during bolt installation, and 2) the probability that the tightening process will yield a bolt.

In addition to the analytical studies, two series of tests were performed. The first investigated the

torsional stresses generated in a bolt during tightening. The second investigated the effect of

prevailing torque on preload.

Chapter IV summarizes the results from this research. It presents the most significant

findings from the two analytical studies and the two series of tests outlined in Chapter III. These

results are used to make key decisions about the final methodology. The chapter concludes by

summarizing the detailed steps of the methodology. Specific recommendations are given for key

statistical calculations.

Chapter V presents the major conclusions from this research. It also provides guidelines

for implementing this methodology and recommendations for future work.

10
 Chapter II

BACKGROUND

This chapter provides background material that was important to the development of this

research. First, the screw thread and the geometry responsible for generating preload are

discussed. Next, two fundamental relationships for describing the torque-tension interaction are

addressed. This is followed by a discussion on preload scatter and preload distribution and the

many variables affecting them. The chapter concludes with a review of the most relevant

literature on torque control, bolt preload, and methods for determining torque limits.

A. The Screw Thread and Preload

The screw is one of the classical simple machines identified centuries ago. However, the

screw can also be considered a special form of another simple machine, the inclined plane.

Fundamentally, the screw thread is an inclined plane wrapped on a helix. Most screws also have

a characteristic of another classical machine, the wedge. Fastener threads, which have an angle

between the threads, wedge against one another as they are tightened. This wedging action

creates additional friction and tends to keep the fastener threads locked together.

The ramp of the thread is a result of the pitch angle (λ). During tightening, one thread is

forced up the ramp of the other thread. As more preload is generated, the normal force between

the two threads increases. As a result, the torque to turn the nut (or bolt) must increase. While

the UN (Unified) thread is the subject of this research, the ramp also appears in all types of

threads including square and Acme. During tightening, sliding occurs in the direction of this

ramp.

11
 The wedge effect of the thread is due to the thread angle (generally 60°). This wedge

creates a clamping force on the threads which increases the normal force and friction, an increase

that is relatively large due to the large thread angle. This wedge effect does not occur in square

threads.

B. Torque-Tension Relationships

Several mathematical models exist that relate input torque and preload. These models are

often used to calculate an installation torque. Some are very basic and others are more detailed.

Two of the most common models, and a third variation, are discussed below.

1. Short-Form Equation

The most common and simplest equation relates the input torque to preload by a constant,

called the nut factor, and the nominal bolt diameter. The nut factor attempts to incorporate all the

factors that influence the torque-tension relationship. This equation, often called the short-form

equation, is:

where

is the input torque,

K is the nut factor,

D is the nominal bolt diameter, and

is the initial preload.

When using the short-form equation, a nut factor (K) is either estimated, taken from a

table, or determined by testing. The preload is taken as a percent of either proof strength or

yield strength. This percentage is generally assumed to be constant (e.g., 75% of yield).

Therefore, the short-form equation does not address the role torsion plays in achieving maximum

12
preload. To optimize bolt preload using this approach, the percent of yield strength would need

to vary with changes in the nut factor.

Using a nominal value of K in the short-form equation will provide a nominal value for

the installation torque. Therefore, a minimum K value (Kmin) is often recommended for

calculating installation torque, and a maximum K value (Kmax) for calculating minimum clamping

loads. Unfortunately, statistical definitions of Kmin and Kmax are generally not provided.

Some might argue that the "nut factor" approach for determining installation torque has

been used successfully for decades. This may be true, but the success was likely due to the

required conservatism in the calculations.

2. Long-Form Equation

Many additional equations are found in the engineering literature that relate input torque

to preload, thread geometry, and the coefficient of friction (COF). One of the first papers to

define this relationship was presented by N. Motosh in the Journal for Engineering for Industry in

1976 [10]. His paper shows how input torque results in bolt stretch, thread friction, and under-nut

friction. Other sources show similar equations [3, 5, 11, 12, 13]. On first observation, these

equations may appear to be different. But in each case, with a little algebraic manipulation,

substitutions, and/or simplification, these equations can be shown to be the same. The most

common form of this equation, discussed by Bickford in Introduction to the Design and Behavior

of Bolted Joints [5], is shown below. Often referred to as the "long-form equation," it is derived

from a free-body diagram of a fastener and the summation of forces experienced during the

tightening process.

The long-form equation is [5]:

( )

13
where

Ti is the input torque,

Fi is the initial preload,

P is the thread pitch,

μt is the coefficient of dynamic friction for the threads,

rt is the pitch radius,

β is the thread half-angle,

μb is the coefficient of dynamic friction of the bearing surface, and

rb is the effective bearing surface radius.

The thread geometry and terminology used in Equation (2.2) are shown in Figure 2.1.

force normal
to thread

λ = pitch
angle
2rb

β = thread
half-angle

2rt

P = thread pitch
2β

Figure 2.1 Thread Geometry and Terminology

14
When expanded, this equation becomes:

Therefore, the total input torque can be viewed as the summation of three torque terms:

. (2.4)

The first term is the torque required to stretch the bolt. The mechanical work done by this

torque is converted totally into strain energy. This strain energy is stored as stretch and twist in

the bolt. The second term ( ) is the torque needed to overcome friction between the bolt and

nut threads. The mechanical work done by this torque is converted into both strain energy and

heat due to friction. The strain energy is stored as twist in the bolt. The heat is generated as the

threads slide over one another. The third term is the torque needed to overcome friction

between the rotating nut and washer. The mechanical work done by this torque is converted

totally into heat due to friction. This heat is generated as the nut slides over the washer. By

observing the long-form equation, the relative magnitudes of these torque terms are shown to be

approximately 10%, 40%, and 50%, respectively [5]. Approximately 10% of the input torque

will stretch the bolt, approximately 40% will be lost to thread friction, and the remainder is

needed to overcome bearing surface friction. Therefore, the majority of input torque goes into

overcoming friction. The relative proportions of these terms are shown in Figure 2.2.

The long-form equation will be used to investigate the impact that torsion and prevailing

torque have on achievable preload and how torque is reacted in a structural joint. Although the

long-form equation itself is not used in the final methodology for determining torque limits, it

will be a helpful tool in making decisions about this methodology.

15
 10% Bolt Stretch
Ti = Tb+ Tth + Ts
Input Torque (Ti)

40% Thread Friction

Tb+ Tth

Tb 50% Bearing Surface

Friction

Angle of Nut Rotation

Figure 2.2 Reaction of Input Torque in a Preloaded Joint

When this equation is used to calculate an installation torque for a particular fastener, the

nominal geometry values for P, rt , β, and rb are typically used. Although a tolerance is

associated with each of them, these tolerances are small and contribute very little to the preload

scatter. These tolerances are given in fastener and thread specifications. Unlike the nominal

values used for geometry, the minimum coefficient of friction (μmin) should be used in these

calculations. The large variability in coefficient of friction needs to be considered when

calculating an installation torque. Similarly, the maximum coefficient of friction (μmax) should be

used to calculate minimum clamping load.

Finally, certain variables are not captured by the long-form equation. For example, the

equation does not reflect the variation between the bolt thread and nut thread due to their

tolerances. This variation can significantly affect the torque-tension relationship [14].

16
 3. Long-Form Equation with Prevailing Torque

The long-form equation with prevailing torque is identical to Equation (2.2) except for an

additional prevailing torque term (Tpr). Note that prevailing torque is a separate term that is

independent of preload. However, some in the engineering community argue that prevailing

torque gradually decreases with increasing preload.

The long-form equation with prevailing torque is:

( )

The magnitude of prevailing torque varies with the size of nut. Locking nut

specifications define the acceptable range of prevailing torque. Table 2.1 provides a list of nut

sizes and the associated maximum prevailing torque. It also lists the minimum suggested

installation torques for grade 8, lubricated bolts according to MSFC-STD-486 [6]. The ratio of

maximum prevailing torque to minimum applied torque is also given. As Table 2.1 shows, the

prevailing torque can be a substantial percent of the installation torque, especially for smaller

thread sizes.

17
 Table 2.1 Comparison of Prevailing Torque to Installation Torque

Ratio of Max Prevailing

Max Prevailing Min Applied Torque to Min Applied
Thread Size Torque (in-lb) * Torque (in-lb)** Torque (%)
.250-28 30 76.5 39.2%
.375-24 80 280.5 28.5%
.500-20 150 671.5 22.3%
.562-18 200 918 21.8%
.625-18 300 1377 21.8%
.750-16 400 2244 17.8%
.875-14 600 3570 16.8%
1.000-12 800 5406 14.8%

* per NASM25027, NAS3350, and MSFC-STD-486.

Nearly identical values given by SAE AS7251
** for grade 8, lubricated bolts per MSFC-STD-486

C. Preload Scatter

Preload scatter is the natural variability that occurs in preload when bolts are torqued.

Even when apparently identical fasteners are installed to an identical torque value, there can be

considerable variation in the preload. Preload scatter is often called preload uncertainty. The two

terms are considered synonymous in this paper. With torque control, preload scatter is often

reported at ±25% when lubrication is applied to the fasteners. This percentage jumps to ±35%

when lubrication is not used. Although preload scatter occurs in all preload methods, it is

especially high with torque control.

It is important to realize that the large variability seen in preload during testing is not due

to the errors associated with the measurement system. Instead, it is due to the large number of

factors that affect the torque-tension relationship. During testing, preload and input torque can be

measured with a high degree of accuracy. Although preload is not measured in the field, the

same high variability will occur.

18
 Test results presented in [15] show just how dramatic preload variation can be.

Figure 2.3 shows plots corresponding to 50 tests conducted on a series of 1/4 inch bolts over a

two-day period in December, 2008. This scatter in preload occurred even though the bolts were

aerospace grade and tested in a controlled environment.

Figure 2.3 Plot Showing Preload Scatter for a Series of Tests

As previously stated, preload scatter is often reported as a percentage, e.g., ±25% or

±35%. However, what do these percentages represent? Generally, this question goes

unanswered. By itself, a percentage does not give an indication of the population coverage. For

example, if the distribution is thin and tall, ±25% will cover much more of the population than

when the distribution is short and flat. The population coverage will be an important

consideration when it comes to the interference analysis discussed in Chapter III. Specifying the

preload scatter in terms of a standard deviation is preferred, for example, ±2 standard deviations

19
or ±3 standard deviations. A standard deviation provides a better indication of the population

coverage, especially if the distribution is normal. Bickford states that, "scatter can usually be

assumed to equal ±3 times the standard deviation [7]."

Many experimental studies have been performed to identify the factors that impact the

torque-tension relationship. As many as 75 factors have been found to be statistically significant

[5]. The natural variation in these factors also leads to the large preload scatter. Some of these

sources of error are major contributors, while others play a lesser role. The use of a prevailing

torque device in the fastener system introduces yet another source of error and preload

uncertainty. Ultimately, friction has been found to be the main influence on preload uncertainty.

Since many factors impact friction, their collective effect can be considered the main contributor

to preload scatter.

1. Friction

Friction is a force that resists the relative motion between parts. Friction is an empirical

property and can only be determined through testing. The friction force can be increased by

either: 1) increasing the normal force, or 2) increasing the COF. As previously stated, during the

installation of a bolt, a majority of the installation torque goes to overcoming friction.

Friction is given by:

where

is the friction force,

is the coefficient of friction, and

is the normal force.

20
This equation is valid at the condition of impending slippage, or while the body is slipping. If the

body is about to slip, μ is static friction. If the body is slipping, μ is dynamic friction. Dynamic

COFs are typically 25% less than static COFs.

During the installation of a bolt, friction forces occur in two locations: 1) in the threads,

and 2) under the nut. A simplified representation of the friction force in fasteners is shown in

Figure 2.4. In this representation, the normal force is created by the bolt preload, and the applied

force results from the applied torque. Although preload is the source of the normal force on the

threads, the geometry of the thread form ultimately determines its magnitude.

Friction Force Applied Force

(Due to Applied Torque)

Normal Force
(Due to Preload)

Figure 2.4 Depiction of Friction in Bolt Thread and Under the Nut During Tightening

Determining the normal force between the nut and washer is very straightforward.

However, determining the normal force for a fastener thread is challenging due to the complex

geometry of the thread form. First, thread geometry is defined by the pitch angle (λ), the angle of

the ramp that the opposing thread must slide up. The pitch angle is typically less than 10° for fine

threads. Second, thread geometry is defined by the thread angle, which is 60° for UN series

threads. This is the angle that causes a wedging action when the fastener is tightened. These two

angles are then wrapped in a helix to make up the thread. Every surface on the thread is a unique

combination of these two angles and its location on the helix. Friction acts on all thread surfaces

that are in contact. The resulting friction force helps to prevent the fastener from backing off

during use.

21
 When applying the long-form torque-tension equation, the COF used should correspond

to the preload value to be placed on the bolt. Often the COF is assumed to be constant and not to

vary with increases in preload. However, testing in this research has shown that this is not always

the case. By using a purely empirical approach to determine torque limits, this non-linearity

becomes a non-issue. In addition, the two COF terms in the long-form equation are often

assumed to be equivalent. However, again, testing conducted for this research has shown that this

is not always true.

Deformed-thread, all-metal locking nuts increase friction by compressing the bolt thread

which increases the thread normal force. This additional friction creates the locking feature and

also causes the prevailing torque. Nylon insert locking nuts also increase friction by compressing

the bolt thread. As the nylon insert locking nut is threaded onto the bolt, a thread is formed (not

cut) in the nylon insert. This creates a compressive force on the bolt thread. The nylon material

also tends to completely fill the area between the bolt threads, increasing the resistance to

vibration loosening.

2. Preload Distribution

Another important consideration when dealing with preload is the shape of its

distribution, or probability density function (PDF). Engineering literature presents conflicting

reports on the shape of preload distribution. For example, a recently released NASA standard for

the analysis of threaded fastener systems, NASA-STD-5020, states that "multiple tests have

shown the distribution to usually be normal" [9]. But, Bickford reports that preload distribution is

usually skewed right instead of being normal [7].

The central limit theorem can provide insight on the expected distribution for preload.

Since so many factors (or error sources) influence the torque-tension relationship, the central limit

theorem tells us to expect a normal distribution. Coleman summarizes this fact by stating, "the

central limit theorem states that if X is not dominated by a single error source but instead is

22
affected by multiple, independent error sources, then the resulting distribution for X will be

approximately normal [16]." So unless one factor (or error source) dominates all others, a normal

distribution can be expected. Even though the error sources themselves may not follow a normal

distribution, the resulting preload will be normal due to the large number of error sources.

Graphically, this concept is shown in Figure 2.5.

Thread Surface Plating Thickness Applied Torque Thread Pitch

Finish PDF PDF PDF PDF

Preload PDF

Figure 2.5 The Central Limit Theorem Predicts the Preload PDF Will Be Normal

D. Literature Review

A thorough literature review was conducted as part of this research. The reviewed

material came from many sources including books, journal papers, fastener specifications and

standards, Internet sites, and publications from technical societies like the Industrial Fasteners

Institute (IFI).

Many books have been written on the subject of bolted joint design and analysis. Two of

the most prominent are Bickford's Introduction to the Design and Behavior of Bolted Joints [5]

and the Handbook of Bolts and Bolted Joints [7]. They provide a thorough overview on all

23
subjects related to the bolted joint. Although they discuss methods for determining installation

torque, they do not completely address all of the issues with preload uncertainty (scatter). Books

on mechanical design, including Shigley's Mechanical Engineering Design [12] and Juvinall's

Fundamentals of Machine Component Design [13], also provide details on bolted joint design and

determining installation torque. But, again, they fail to fully address the statistical nature of

dealing with preload uncertainty. Similarly, a 2008 report from Sandia National Labs [17]

documents the current state-of-the art in bolted joint design and analysis. Although the preload

uncertainty associated with torque control is discussed, it does not completely address the impact

that preload uncertainty has on determining torque limits.

Two important papers on preload and torque control were written by Reiff [18, 19]. In

the first paper, he develops a torque-tension relationship that includes prevailing torque. He

argues that prevailing torque must be considered when defining installation torque, otherwise

errors will result. He defines the torque-tension relationship in terms of coefficient of friction and

prevailing torque (basically a variation of the long-form equation with prevailing torque). In the

second paper, he begins to address statistical tolerancing. Again, he defines the torque-tension

relationship in terms of coefficient of friction. The minimum and maximum values of preload are

taken as three standard deviations (3σ) from the mean. Unfortunately, he does not provide any

rationale or justification for using 3σ values. He also does not address the statistical penalty that

results from using limited test data.

In a paper by Croccolo [20], a method for determining coefficients of friction in bolted

joints is developed. He then uses these friction coefficients to relate installation torque to

preload. But, he doesn't fully consider the variability that can exist in preload for a given set of

parameters. He calculates a nominal preload value (again using the long-form equation) based on

his mathematical model of COF.

A better understanding of the expected preload and preload distribution during

installation could benefit all areas of bolted joint analysis, thereby reinforcing the need for the

24
development of the proposed methodology. One area of active research in joint analysis is self-

loosening. In a study by Nassar and Housari [21], it is shown that "for a known amplitude of the

cyclic excitation, bolt tension will have to be below a threshold value in order for the self-

loosening to start." Therefore, if the preload is above this threshold value, self-loosening can be

prevented. In another study by Dinger and Friedrich [22], preload generation and self-loosening

is investigated by three-dimensional finite element models which are verified by experimentation.

The self-loosening process is characterized by either complete or localized slip at the screw head

and thread contact surfaces. Finally, in paper by Kim, et al [23], different methods for modeling

the bolted joint were investigated. Four types of finite element models were studied -- all models

accounted for bolt preload.

Many specifications, standards, and handbooks on bolted joint design and analysis are

also available. The most comprehensive specification on this subject is Systematic Calculation of

High Duty Bolted Joints, VDI 2230 [3]. It provides a very detailed methodology for analyzing

high strength bolts and for determining installation torque. Tables of installation torque with

respect to coefficient of friction are included. The specification requires that minimum

coefficient of friction values be used for installation torques, but it fails to define minimum. It

also provides tables of expected coefficients of friction, but the range of values is large, making

proper selection difficult. Although it recommends testing be conducted to determine the

coefficient of friction for each specific application, the problem of defining "minimum" still

remains. VDI 2230 recognizes that torsion will limit the amount of preload that can be placed on

the bolt, and therefore accounts for torsion stress when determining torque limits.

Another notable standard, Torque Limits for Threaded Fasteners, MSFC-STD-486 [6],

also provides a method for determining installation torque. It requires that the preload stress not

exceed 65% of tensile yield stress of the bolt. But, using a constant percentage does not address

variability in preload and torsion as friction varies. Therefore, the method used by

MSFC-STD-486 will not maximize bolt capacity for each unique fastener combination.

25
 Finally, Threaded Fasteners - Tightening to Proper Tension, MIL-HDBK-60 [11],

provides a method for determining torque values and has similarities to VDI 2230. It defines the

torque-tension relationship in terms of coefficient of friction based on a variation of the long-form

equation. It also accounts for torsion stress when determining torque limits. But, it does not

address preload uncertainty.

In addition to specifications for determining installation torque, there are several

specifications for conducting torque-tension testing that should be mentioned. These include

ISO 16047, SAE J147, and NASM 1312-15 [24, 25, 26]. Although these specifications provide

detailed steps for conducting the tests, no detail is provided on how to reduce the test data or

calculate maximum or minimum values. ISO 16047 specifically states that it does not apply to

fasteners having self-locking features.

Lastly, dozens of torque tables can be found in fastener catalogs and on the Internet,

mostly for commercial or industrial grade fasteners. Their format and content vary greatly.

Some provide the clamping loads associated with the torque values, but they generally fail to

address the variability that can exist in these clamping loads. Some of these torque tables specify

bolt and lubricant, but none define the complete fastener combination as was done in this

methodology. The better ones warn that they provide suggested torque values and are for

guidance only.

26
 Chapter III

APPROACH

As stated in Chapter I, the primary objective of this research was to develop a

methodology for determining torque limits to maximize preload for high-strength threaded

fasteners. A secondary objective, closely related to the first, was to investigate the impact that

torsion and prevailing torque have on achievable preload. This chapter outlines the overall

approach that was taken to meet these objectives. The approach includes a combination of

analytical studies and testing which are described in detail below.

A. Torque Limits for Specific Fastener Combinations

All elements of a fastener system have an impact the torque-tension relationship. This

fact is recognized by MSFC-STD-486 which states, "Among the numerous variables which can

significantly influence the torque induced tensile load in a fastener system are the number and

type of washers used and the type of nut used [6]." Therefore, torque limits should be developed

for specific fastener combinations when feasible, not individual bolts. For this study, a fastener

combination is defined as a specific bolt type, nut, washer(s), and lubricant. Defining fastener

combinations in this way limits the factors that influence friction, the major contributor to preload

scatter. Parameters not directly associated with friction, such as bolt length and clamped

material, are not specified as part of this definition. Two examples of a fastener combination are

shown in Figure 3.1. Note the differences in the geometry of the bolt head and nut.

27
 1/4" Fastener Combination #1 1/4" Fastener Combination #2

Molykote P37 Inlox 88

Lubricant Lubricant

Figure 3.1 Examples of Different Fastener Combinations

Although lot-specific and joint-specific testing may provide better results, the cost

associated with this testing is often prohibitive. A much lower-cost alternative is to develop

torque limits for fastener combinations. These torque limits can be used with any joint using

these combinations. In addition, these torque limits can be placed in torque tables which list the

specific fastener combination, therefore, making fastener selection easier. The maximum and

minimum preloads can also be shown.

B. Criteria for Determining Torque Limits

To best explain this methodology, several fundamental concepts related to fastener design

and stress analysis must be defined. These include the distortion energy criterion, the tensile

stress area, and fastener yield strength.

1. Distortion Energy Criterion

This methodology was based on a fundamental argument: Install bolts with as much

initial preload as possible without yielding them. To help achieve this goal, the distortion energy

criterion for failure was applied.

28
 For ductile isotropic materials, the distortion energy criterion predicts yielding when the

effective stress (or von Mises stress) reaches the material's yield strength [27]. In other words,

yielding is predicted when:

where

is the effective (or equivalent) stress, and

is the material's yield strength.

Since fasteners, in general, are made of ductile materials, this criterion is appropriate. For

example, the A286 fasteners tested in this research have a percent elongation of 10-15%. In

aerospace design, yield strength is frequently called the "allowable" yield strength.

2. Tensile Stress Area and Bolt Stress

In this research, the tensile and torsional stresses are based on the bolt's tensile stress

area. The tensile stress area is a theoretical area used in stress calculations for threaded fasteners.

Originally determined through experimentation, the diameter of the tensile stress area was found

to fall between the thread's pitch and minor diameters. Several equations have been developed

for tensile stress area. Each is thoroughly discussed by Bickford [5].

The most common equation, and the one used in this research, is:

[ ] [ ]

where

is the tensile stress area,

D is the nominal bolt diameter,

is the number of threads per inch, and

29
 is the radius of the tensile stress area.

This area is used to calculate tensile stress in the bolt, and its equivalent radius is used to

calculate the torsional stress. In reality, the state of stress in a bolt is very complex due to the

bolt's geometry. Some localized yielding may occur in the bolt thread and in the fillet of the bolt

head. However, this occurs well before gross yielding and does not compromise the integrity or

function of the fastener. For this application, this localized yielding and associated stress

concentrations have been ignored because preloading a bolt is a static operation. Preload is

typically applied a limited number of times, and often only once. In addition, fasteners have the

ductility to accommodate small amounts of localized yielding that might occur. Nevertheless,

when cyclic loading (dynamic loading) occurs in the service life of the bolt, a fatigue analysis

should be performed.

3. Fastener Yield Strength

To implement this methodology, the yield strength of the bolt must be known. The yield

strength of commercial-grade bolts are generally provided by the bolt specification (e.g., SAE

J429). These specifications typically provide ultimate, yield, and proof loads. Unfortunately, the

same is not true for aerospace-grade bolts (e.g., NAS bolts). In general, aerospace bolt

specifications only provide the bolt's ultimate tensile strength. The designer and analyst must

either estimate the yield strength or determine it by testing. The methodology developed in this

dissertation specifies testing as the method for determining yield strength. However, when a

yield strength is provided by a bolt specification, its value can be used instead.

Testing to determine the yield strength of bolts is slightly different from testing standard

tensile specimens. Standard tensile specimens have a uniform cross-section in the gauge section.

In contrast, the cross-section of the bolt changes along its length, which includes the bolt head,

shank, and threads.

30
 Fastener test specifications identify two primary methods for determining the yield

strength of bolts: 1) the Johnson's 2/3 method, and 2) the parallel offset method. The Johnson's

2/3 method is specified by NASM 1312-8 (Fastener Test Methods, Method 8, Tensile Strength)

[28] and MSFC-STD-486 (Torque Limits for Threaded Fasteners) [6]. The parallel offset method

is specified by ASTM F606 (Standard Test Methods for Determining the Mechanical Properties

of Externally and Internally Threaded Fasteners) [29] and ISO 898-1 (Mechanical Properties of

Fasteners Made of Carbon Steel and Alloy Steel) [30]. Either method is acceptable for

determining the yield strength of bolts.

Finally, as the bolt's material strength increases, the yield and ultimate strengths typically

converge. As a result, a very high strength bolt preloaded close to its yield point will be closer to

its ultimate strength (Su) than a lower strength bolt. Also, material ductility generally decreases

as its strength increases. Therefore, for very high strength bolts (> 180 ksi), changes in the

methodology as presented may be desired. For example, the installation limit stress may need to

be decreased to ensure that the bolt's ultimate strength is not exceeded.

C. Analytical Studies

Two analytical studies were conducted to help make final decisions about the subject

methodology. The first study investigated the relationships between torque, preload, and stress in

a preloaded bolt by utilizing the long-form torque-tension equation and the distortion energy

criterion. The second study employed a process known as statistical interference to investigate

the probability that the tightening process will yield a bolt.

1. Torque-Preload-Stress Relationships

What are the relationships between input torque, preload, and effective stress in a

preloaded bolt, and how do they vary with changes in the coefficient of friction? In addition,

31
what impact do torsion and prevailing torque have on achievable preload? To address these

questions, the effective stress and long-form torque-tension equations can be used.

The effective stress in a bolt during tightening is given by:

where

is the bolt's effective stress,

is the bolt's axial preload stress, and

is the bolt's torsional shear stress (at the radius of the tensile stress area).

The bolt's preload stress is given by:

where

is the initial bolt preload, and

is the tensile stress area.

The bolt's torsional shear stress is given by:

where

is the thread reaction torque,

is the radius of the tensile stress area, and

J is the polar second moment of area based on the bolt's tensile stress area.

When combined, Equation (3.3) becomes:

32
 [( ) ( ) ] (3.6)

Input torque is related to preload by the long-form equation presented in Chapter II and is

repeated here for convenience:

( )

However, only a portion of the input torque creates torsion in the bolt. The torque associated

with under-nut friction causes no torsional stress in the bolt. The portion of input torque that does

generate torsion (Tτ), called thread reaction torque, is given by:

( )

or

. (3.8)

When prevailing torque is present, becomes:

( )

or

. (3.10)

When Equations (3.6) and (3.7) are combined, the resulting equation can be solved for bolt

preload (Fi):

33
 = . (3.11)
√ [ ( )]

Now, bolt preload is expressed in terms of COF, effective stress, and geometry. Variations of this

equation are found in [3] and [11]. When the effective stress is set equal to a permissible stress,

the preload will be maximized. Once the maximized preload is determined, Equation (2.2) can be

used to calculate the installation torque (or torque limit) that corresponds to this preload. Many

of the plots shown in Chapter IV are based on this equation.

A similar derivation can be made when prevailing torque is present by combining

Equations (3.6) and (3.9). Solving the resulting equation for preload is greatly complicated by the

prevailing torque term.

2. Statistical Interference of Bolt Stress and Strength

Both the maximum bolt stress experienced during installation and the bolt yield strength

are random variables. Therefore, when measured, their values will naturally vary from fastener to

fastener. Both variables can be described by probability density functions (PDFs). A PDF is a

mathematical model used to represent the distribution of a continuous random variable. When

plotted together, the PDF of bolt stress and the PDF of bolt strength will overlap. The amount of

overlap will depend on the distance between their means and the flatness of their distributions.

Figure 3.2 shows an example of probability distributions for bolt stress and bolt yield

strength. Since the variability in stress is greater than the variability in strength, its curve is

shorter and wider. The shaded area provides a relative indication of the probability of yielding

the bolt. However, integrating the area does not give the actual probability of yielding. The

method for determining this probability, called statistical interference analysis, is described

below. It is a common tool in reliability analysis.

34
 0.16
Bolt Yield Strength
0.14
Probability Density 0.12

0.1

0.08

0.06
Bolt Stress During
Installation
0.04

0.02

0
40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Bolt Stress and Yield Strength (ksi) Area Represents
Probability of
Yielding the Bolt

Figure 3.2 Statistical Interference Between Installation Stress and Bolt Strength

The probability that a load will exceed strength is given by [31, 32]:

where

is the probability of the load exceeding the strength,

is the cumulative distribution function of strength, and

is the probability distribution function of load.

This equation integrates (sums) the probability that a load, x, occurs at the same time that the

strength ≤ x. Therefore, the probability that a load equals x, is multiplied by the probability that

the strength ≤ x, and then summed over the full range of x. Remember, in probability, if events

35
are independent, then the probability of them both occurring together is the product of the

probabilities of them occurring separately.

When the distributions of strength and load are normal, the mathematics for calculating

this probability is relatively straightforward. From this point forward, the equations for

determining probability are given in terms of bolt yield strength and effective stress. First, a new

variable (D) is defined as the difference between bolt strength and effective stress [31, 32]. The

bolt will yield when D is less than zero. Since both strength and stress are normally distributed,

the new variable (D) will also be normally distributed. The mean of this new variable (μD) is:

where

is the mean bolt strength, and

is the mean bolt effective stress.

The standard deviation of this new variable (σD) is:

where

is the standard deviation of bolt yield strength, and

is the standard deviation of bolt effective stress.

Therefore, the probability of exceeding the yield strength becomes [31, 32]:

( )

where

Φ (z ) is the standard normal probability function.

36
 Taking this approach allows the use of the standard normal probability table to determine

probabilities. According to Sarafin [31], even when the distributions are not normal, this

approach can be taken to roughly estimate reliability. However, the assumed distributions are

more important the farther out in the tails the overlap occurs.

Equation (3.12) can also be used to find the probability of yielding for other distributions

or combinations of distributions (e.g., a normal and a Weibull distribution). However, the

mathematics becomes much more complicated. Computerized numerical integration will likely

be required to solve the equation. Weibull distributions are often used to model strength

variability [31, 33].

The coefficient of variation (CV ), defined as the ratio of the standard deviation and the

mean, provides a good indication of the variability (or scatter) in a random variable. That is:

where

σ is the standard deviation of the random variable, and

μ is the mean of the random variable.

The standard deviation by itself does not indicate the degree of variability. In order to fully

describe variability, the standard deviation must be considered in terms of the magnitude of the

mean. A distribution with a large CV will be short and wide while a distribution with a small CV

will be tall and skinny. In Chapter IV, coefficients of variation are used to determine the mean

and standard deviation of yield strength and effective stress. The coefficient of variation is also

called relative uncertainty. The standard deviation is called absolute uncertainty.

Ideally, the methodology for determining torque limits would rely totally on statistics and

probability. Unfortunately, factors exist that cannot be captured by testing. For example, testing

is performed in a laboratory, a very controlled environment. In the field, however, the

37
environment may not be as controlled, possibly leading to additional variability in the results.

The experience of the installer may also lead to additional variability. In the laboratory, torque

can be applied in a very consistent manner. But, in the field, the experience of the installer could

influence the results. To account for such factors, a knock-down factor may be applied to the bolt

yield strength. This factor accounts for any variable not captured by the torque limit testing.

VDI 2230 applies such a knock-down factor which it calls a "utilization factor" [3]. VDI 2230

recommends a value of 0.9 which will be adopted here. When the bolt's yield strength is

multiplied by this utilization factor (γ), the result becomes the "permissible" bolt stress which is

used to calculate torque limits. In aerospace design, this "permissible" stress is called the "limit"

stress.

3. Tolerance Intervals

The discussion in the previous section on statistical interference was based on the mean

(μ) and standard deviation (σ) of a population. In reality, however, the true population mean and

standard deviation are never known. Instead, their values are estimated from a set of samples.

The greater the number of samples, the better the estimate will be. Since the methodology is

based on a finite number of fastener tests, the effect of sample size must be addressed. It does so

by applying a proper k-value to define a tolerance interval.

A tolerance interval is a range about the sample mean that has a certain probability of

containing a specified percentage of the parent population. Tolerance intervals can be either

one-sided or two-sided. Since this methodology is interested in the interference of the upper tail

of the bolt stress distribution with the lower tail of the bolt strength distribution, one-sided

tolerance intervals are used. A one-sided tolerance interval is found by first multiplying the

sample standard deviation by a k-value. This product is then added to or subtracted from the

mean to give either the upper or the lower limit of the tolerance interval. The selected k-value

38
depends on the desired population coverage, the confidence level, and the sample size. A small

sample size results in a larger k-value, and therefore a greater "statistical penalty."

Table 3.1 provides a list of k-values for one-sided tolerance intervals for normal

distributions. Values are taken from DeVore [34]. This table provides three levels of population

coverage (90%, 95%, and 99%), each at two confidence levels (95% and 99%). Determining the

appropriate k-value to maximize preload will be addressed in Chapter IV.

Table 3.1 k-values for One-Sided Tolerance Intervals [34]

One-sided Intervals
Confidence Level 95% 99%
% of Population Captured 90% 95% 99% 90% 95% 99%
2 20.581 26.260 37.094 103.029 131.426 185.617
3 6.156 7.656 10.553 13.995 17.370 23.896
4 4.162 5.144 7.042 7.380 9.083 12.387
5 3.407 4.203 5.741 5.362 6.578 8.939
6 3.006 3.708 5.062 4.411 5.406 7.335
7 2.756 3.400 4.642 3.859 4.728 6.412
8 2.582 3.187 4.354 3.497 4.285 5.812
Sample Size n 9 2.454 3.031 4.143 3.241 3.972 5.389
10 2.355 2.911 3.981 3.048 3.738 5.074
15 2.068 2.566 3.520 2.522 3.102 4.222
20 1.926 2.396 3.295 2.276 2.808 3.832
30 1.777 2.220 3.064 2.030 2.516 3.447
100 1.527 1.927 2.684 1.639 2.056 2.850
200 1.450 1.837 2.570 1.524 1.923 2.679
300 1.417 1.800 2.522 1.476 1.868 2.608
∞ 1.282 1.645 2.326 1.282 1.645 2.326

D. Testing

In addition to the analytical studies above, two series of tests were performed as part of

this research. The first series of tests investigated the torsional stresses generated in a bolt during

tightening. The second series investigated the effect of prevailing torque on preload.

39
 1. Preload-Torsion Tests

A series of tests was run to investigate the impact of torsion on achievable preload. The

tests were conducted on a machine specifically designed for torque-tension testing. This machine

and the associated bolt fixture are shown in Figure 3.3. A section view through the bolt and bolt

fixture is shown in Figure 3.4. Preload and torsional stresses were measured every 0.2 seconds as

input torque was gradually applied to the fastener. Preload and torsional stresses were also

measured after the input torque was removed. The decay in preload and torsional stress was then

observed over time.

Test Bolt
Load cell to measure preload (Fi)

Motor driven input torque

Bolt fixture

Torque transducer to measure input torque (Ti)

Bolt fixture

Figure 3.3 Machine Used for Torque-Tension Testing

Bolts were instrumented with strain gauges to measure the torsional shear stress in the

bolt. Figure 3.5 shows one of the instrumented bolts. Although load cells exist for measuring

thread reaction torque directly, none were available for this research. By using strain gauges, the

torsional stress was measured on the shank of the bolt. For this measurement, a two-element

40
strain gauge was bonded to each bolt shank. A schematic of the strain gauge and the

configuration of the Wheatstone bridge are shown in Appendix A. The equation for calculating

the shear stress due to torsion in a preloaded bolt is also derived in Appendix A. During testing,

Equation A.11 was used to convert output voltage (VG) into torsional stress (τ). In these tests,

2" Diameter Steel

2" Steel Plate 2" Steel Plate
Compression Post (2X)

Fixture for
Holding Bolt
During Test

Input Torque (Ti)

Load Cell to Measure Applied to Nut
Axial Preload (Fi) Bolt Head Held Fixed
(with parts not shown) Air Gap

2" Steel Base

Figure 3.4 Section View of Bolt and Bolt Fixture

torsional stress was measured at the major diameter of the bolt. To obtain the torsional stress at

the radius of the tensile stress area , this stress would be multiplied by the ratio of the tensile

stress area diameter and the major diameter, which assumes that torsional stress varies linearly

with the radius of the bolt.

41
 Figure 3.5 Strain Gauge Installed on a 1/2" A286 Bolt

When applying this methodology, the thread reaction torque will be measured, not the

torsional stress. Once the thread reaction torque is known, the torsional stress may be calculated

using Equation 3.5.

For these tests, A286 bolts and locking nuts were used. A286 is one of the most popular

materials for aerospace fasteners because of its excellent high and low temperature properties. In

addition A286 is not susceptible to stress corrosion cracking [35]. Both 3/8" and 1/2" bolts were

tested. Figure 3.6 shows pictures of an instrumented bolt installed on the torque-tension machine.

The upper-right picture shows the torque transducer that was used to measure input torque.

42
 Strain
Gauge

Torque
Transducer

Figure 3.6 Instrumented Bolt Installed on Torque-Tension Machine

2. Prevailing Torque Tests

A series of tests was run to investigate the impact of prevailing torque on preload at high

values. Grade 8 bolts and locking nuts were used for these tests. Two sets of locking nuts with

nylon inserts were tested: one set as received from the manufacturer, and a second set with the

locking feature removed. The locking feature was removed by machining the inside diameter of

the nylon ring until no interference would exist with the bolt thread. This machining was

performed on a standard lathe. Figure 3.7 illustrates the two locking nut configurations.

All locking nuts used for these tests came from the same manufactured lot. If different

lots had been used, a true evaluation of the effect of prevailing torque on preload could not have

been made because other factors besides prevailing torque could have led to differences in the

measured preload.

43
 Machined
Nylon Ring

Lock Nut Modified Lock Nut

Figure 3.7 Locking Nuts Used for Prevailing Torque Tests

Two simple comparative experiments were conducted. The first investigated whether

prevailing torque impacts the magnitude of preload, especially at higher preload values. This

experiment compared the mean preload with a locking feature to the mean preload without a

locking feature. The null hypothesis for the first experiment was:

and the alternative hypothesis was:

The test statistic (to) for this hypothesis test was [36]:

̅ ̅

where

̅ and ̅ are the sample means,

and are the sample standard deviations, and

44
 and are the sample sizes.

The null hypothesis is rejected when:

(3.20)

where is taken from a t-distribution table.

The second experiment investigated whether prevailing torque impacts preload variance.

Variance is simply the square of the standard deviation. This experiment compared the preload

variance with a locking feature to the preload variance without a locking feature. The null

hypothesis for the second experiment was:

and the alternative hypothesis was:

The test statistic (Fo) for this hypothesis test was [36]:

where

and are the sample standard deviations.

The null hypothesis is rejected when:

(3.24)

where is taken from an F-distribution table.

All tests were run in a random order to help guard against nuisance factors. A random

number generator in Excel® was used to create the random order. The test order is shown in

45
Appendix B. Note: Non-locking nuts were also tested (as shown in Appendix B). However,

these nuts were tested for future evaluation, so their results are not presented here.

As a final evaluation of this test data, normal probability plots were generated. These

plots provide a graphical means of determining if the data approximates a normal distribution.

46
 Chapter IV

RESULTS

This chapter summarizes the results from this research. It begins by presenting the

findings from two analytical studies. The first study investigated the relationships between

torque, preload, and stress. The second study investigated the statistical interference between bolt

stress and strength during the installation process. The chapter then presents the results from two

series of tests. These tests investigated the impact that torsion and prevailing torque have on

achievable preload. Next, propagation of uncertainty is discussed, specifically, how uncertainties

in preload and thread reaction torque propagate into the uncertainty in effective stress. The

chapter concludes by describing the detailed steps of the methodology.

A. Torque-Preload-Stress Relationships

As described in Chapter III, when the effective stress equation and the thread reaction

torque equation are combined, the resulting equation can be solved for bolt preload. This

combined equation will be expressed in terms of effective stress, geometry, and coefficient of

friction. When the effective stress is set equal to the limit stress, the preload will be maximized.

This maximized preload can be determined for any given coefficient of friction and bolt size.

When the prevailing torque is excluded, solving this equation is relatively straightforward.

However, the presence of prevailing torque greatly complicates the solution. With the help of a

spreadsheet such as Excel®, solving this equation becomes manageable. For this study, the

coefficients of friction in the threads (μt) and on the bearing surface (μb) are assumed equivalent.

However, as confirmed by this research, this assumption is not always true.

47
 Large spreadsheets were generated to both make these calculations and to plot the results.

For this study, bolt sizes ranging from 1/4" to 3/4" were selected. Fastener geometry was based

on the NAS 670x series of bolts and NAS 1805 nuts. Note: This section does not address

preload scatter which is covered in detail in sections B and C of this chapter.

In Figures 4.1 and 4.2, the variations in stress are shown for a constant input torque. The

torque value was selected from MSFC-STD-486 for 160 ksi bolts lubricated with molybdenum-

disulfide (MoS2) dry film lubricant. In these plots, the maximum effective stress varies.

120000

100000

80000
Stress (psi)

Axial
60000 (Preload)
Stress

40000
Torsional
Stress
20000

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3
Coefficient of Friction

Figure 4.1 Axial and Torsional Stress with Constant Input Torque (1/2"-20 Fastener Torqued
to 925 in-lbs)

Figure 4.1 shows that for constant input torque, both axial and torsional stresses decrease

with increasing coefficient of friction (COF). There is a dramatic drop in axial stress as much of

the input torque is robbed by friction. There is also a gradual drop in torsional stress. It might be

expected that the torsional stress would increase with increases in friction. However, this plot is

for a constant input torque, so more of the input torque is being absorbed by the increased bearing

48
surface friction. Note: Figure 4.3 illustrates that as input torque is allowed to increase (to

maintain a constant effective stress), the torsional stress does increase with coefficient of friction.

300000

250000

200000
Stress (psi)

Effective
150000 Stress

Axial
100000
(Preload)
Stress
50000

0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
Coefficient of Friction

Figure 4.2 Effective and Axial Stress with Constant Input Torque (1/2"-20 Fastener
Torqued to 925 in-lbs)

Similarly, Figure 4.2 shows that both axial and effective stresses decrease with an

increase in the COF. This result is not unexpected. The figure also shows that the axial stress

due to bolt preload is the main contributor to effective stress. For lower COF values, torsional

stress increases the effective stress by only 5-15%. Therefore, for well lubricated bolts, the stress

due to torsion does not reduce the achievable preload as much as might be expected. However,

for higher COF values, the torsional stress has a more dramatic impact on effective stress. For

example, as the COF approaches 0.2, approximately 30% of the effective stress is due to torsion.

In Figures 4.3 through 4.8, variations in stress, input torque, and preload are given for a

constant permissible effective stress. In these plots, the input torque varies until the defined

effective stress is reached. For this study, the permissible effective stress was set to 112,500 psi.

49
This value is 90% of the assumed yield strength (125 ksi) for the 160 ksi A286 bolt used in this

analysis.

120000

100000

80000
Stress (psi)

Axial
(Preload)
60000 Stress

40000 Torsional
Lubricated Stress
Fasteners
20000

0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
Coefficient of Friction

Figure 4.3 Axial and Torsional Stress When Effective Stress Reaches 112,500 psi
(1/2"-20 Fastener)

Figure 4.3 shows the axial and torsional stresses in a 1/2"-20 bolt when the effective

stress reaches 112,500 psi. The axial preload stress drops dramatically as the coefficient of

friction increases. In other words, achievable preload drops as friction increases. In contrast, the

torsional stress increases with increases in coefficient of friction. This increase in torsional stress

is effectively stealing from the achievable preload. This plot clearly shows that to maximize

preload, friction must be reduced in the fastening system. This can be easily accomplished by

applying lubrication to the bolt threads and to the bearing surface (under the nut). With proper

lubrication, the coefficient of friction should fall within the range shown in Figure 4.3.

Over a realistic range of COF values, this plot also shows that axial (preload) stress is

always greater than torsional stress. The same is true for all bolt sizes. At lower COF values, the

axial stress can be 3 to 5 times greater. At higher COF values, it can be 1.5 to 2 times greater.

50
Since torsional stress is always lower than axial stress, torsion contributes less to the effective

stress. So, even given the factor of '3' in the effective stress equation for plane stress (refer to

Equation 3.6), the axial stress will always be the biggest contributor to effective stress.

2000.0

1500.0 No
Input Torque (in-lbs)

Prevailing
Torque

1000.0 Avg
Prevailing
Torque
Max
500.0 Prevailing
Torque

0.0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
Coefficient of Friction

Figure 4.4 Input Torque to Generate 112,500 psi Effective Stress, Including Effects of Prevailing
Torque (1/2"-20 Fastener)

Figure 4.4 shows the input torque required to generate an effective stress of 112,500 psi

in a 1/2"-20 bolt. As expected, this input torque increases as friction increases. Still, even though

the input torque is increased, the achievable preload drops (as shown in Figure 4.3).

This figure also shows the effect prevailing torque has on input torque. At lower COF

values, more input torque is required when prevailing torque is present. However, at higher COF

values, where torsional stresses become a larger percent of the effective stress, the required input

torque actually drops when prevailing torque is present. The prevailing torque values used in this

analysis were taken from the nut specification and are assumed to be constant. In reality, the

prevailing torque can be expected to vary with coefficient of friction.

51
 7000.0

6000.0
Input Torque (in-lbs)
5000.0 3/4-16
Fastener
4000.0 1/2-20
Fastener
3000.0 3/8-24
Fastener
2000.0 1/4-28
Fastener
1000.0

0.0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
Coefficient of Friction

Figure 4.5 Input Torque to Generate 112,500 psi Effective Stress for Different Bolt Sizes

Figure 4.5 provides the input torque required to generate 112,500 psi effective stress for

multiple bolt sizes. Again, as the coefficient of friction increases, so does the required input

torque. The additional input torque is needed to overcome increased friction in the fastening

system. In addition, as bolt size increases, so does the percent increase in torque.

52
 50000

40000
3/4-16
Fastener
Preload (lbs)

30000
1/2-20
Fastener
20000 3/8-24
Fastener
1/4-28
10000 Fastener

0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
Coefficient of Friction

Figure 4.6 Achievable Preload When Bolt is Torqued to 112,500 psi Effective Stress for
Different Bolt Sizes

Figure 4.6 shows the achievable preload for different fastener sizes when the fastener is

torqued to 112,500 psi effective stress. Again, as shown in Figure 4.3, preload drops with

increases in coefficient of friction and the corresponding increases in torsional stress. This drop

is more dramatic as the bolt size increases. Therefore, higher preloads can be achieved when

COF values are lower.

Figures 4.3 through 4.6 clearly show that when determining torque limits, torsional stress

must be considered in order to maximize preloads. In more traditional methods, preload is taken

as a percentage of yield or proof strength, regardless of the torsional stress. Therefore, using

these traditional methods, preload is not always maximized.

53
 40%

% Preload Lost to Torsion 30% 1/4-28

Fastener
3/8-24
20% Fastener
1/2-20
Fastener
10% 3/4-16
Fastener

0%
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
Coefficient of Friction

Figure 4.7 Percent Preload Lost to Torsion for Different Bolt Sizes
(each torqued to 112,500 psi effective stress)

Figure 4.7 shows the impact that torsion has on achievable preload. The percent of

preload lost to torsion is presented for various bolt sizes (each torqued to an effective stress of

112,500 psi). The percent preload lost is found by dividing the achievable preload using torque

control by the achievable preload using pure stretch. At lower COF values, the percent preload

lost ranges from 5 to 15%. At higher COF values, however, this percentage reaches 20% and

higher. Although greatest for the 1/4"-28 bolt, these percentages do not vary significantly with

bolt size.

54
 20%

% Preload Lost to Prevailing Torque 15%

1/4-28
Fastener
3/8-24
10% Fastener
1/2-20
Fastener
5%
3/4-16
Fastener

0%
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
Coefficient of Friction

Figure 4.8 Percent Preload Lost to Average Prevailing Torque for Different Bolt Sizes
(each torqued to 112,500 psi effective stress)

Finally, Figure 4.8 illustrates the impact that prevailing torque has on achievable preload.

The percent preload lost to prevailing torque is presented for different bolt sizes (again, with each

torqued to an effective stress of 112,500 psi). The average prevailing torque was used for this

analysis, so greater percentages will occur when the prevailing torques are at their maximum

values. The losses are greatest for smaller fastener sizes. For the 1/4" fastener, preload loss is

5% to 7% for low coefficients of friction and increases to 10% for higher values. For fastener

sizes 1/2" and greater, the percent preload lost to prevailing torque is below 3% for lower

coefficients of friction and remains below 6% for higher values. This plot shows that there is a

slight penalty for having prevailing torque.

55
 σeff = 99,130 psi σeff = 90,270 psi

σeff = 112,500 psi σeff = 112,500 psi

with preload and with preload and

torsion, COF = 0.10 torsion, COF = 0.15

σeff = 0 psi σeff = 112,500 psi

σeff = 112,500 psi σeff = 112,500 psi

in pure torsion in pure tension

Figure 4.9 Magnitude of Effective Stress in Bolt Cross Section for Various Conditions
(1/2"-20 Bolt)

Up to this point, this paper has focused on the effective stress that occurs at the outer

surface of the bolt (at the tensile stress area diameter). But, how does the effective stress vary

across the section of the bolt? Figure 4.9 shows the magnitude of the effective stress in the bolt

cross-section for various loading conditions. The two upper views illustrate the effective stress in

a bolt during installation: the left view for a COF of 0.10 and the right view for a COF of 0.15.

For each, the effective stress at the center is equal to the preload stress. As shown earlier, the

preload is greater when the COF is lower. The two lower views show the magnitude of effective

stress for a bolt in pure torsion and one in pure tension.

A bolt preloaded by torque is analogous to a transversely-loaded beam. When a

transverse load is applied, the outer fibers of the beam experience the greatest bending stresses.

These stresses decrease linearly to zero at the neutral axis. So, even if the beam's outer fibers

reach the yield point, the majority of its cross section remains below the yield point, and the beam

56
is far from complete failure. As stress further increases and once a majority of the

cross-section has exceeded the yield point, gross failure will occur as a plastic hinge is formed.

Like a transversely-loaded beam, a bolt preloaded by torque experiences the greatest torsional

stress on the outer fibers of the fastener. These torsional stresses decrease linearly toward the

center of the bolt. However, in contrast to the beam, the fastener also experiences a large axial

stress when torqued. At high preloads, when the fastener’s outer fibers reach the yield point, the

combined torsion and tension place a much larger percentage of the bolt's cross section near the

yield point (as shown in Figure 4.9).

B. Statistical Interference of Bolt Stress and Strength

When the distributions of bolt stress and strength are known, the probability of yielding

the bolt during installation can be determined. The method for calculating this probability, called

statistical interference, was described in Chapter III.

In order to perform a statistical interference analysis, the mean and standard deviation of

each distribution must be known. Unfortunately, this information is not always readily available.

For example, material and bolt specifications typically provide minimum values for strength, but

include nothing about its variability. Not even the Metallic Materials Properties Development

and Standardization (MMPDS) provides this information. One standard, ASTM E8/E8M-09

(Standard Test Methods for Tension Testing of Metallic Materials) [37], was found that contains

coefficient of variation (CV) data for materials. CV values for 0.2% offset yield strength are

provided and range from 0.01 to 0.02. According to Sarafin, the “coefficient of variation for

strength … is less than 0.05 for most commonly used, ductile metal alloys [31]." Therefore,

material strength coefficient of variation values from 0.01 to 0.05 were investigated.

The statistical data for bolt stress can be even more elusive. Chapter II stated that preload

uncertainty is often given in terms of a percentage (e.g. ±25%), but most sources fail to define the

statistical meaning of this percentage. One exception is Bickford, who states, "scatter can usually

57
be assumed to equal ±3 times the standard deviation [7]." Data encountered by the author further

supports this claim. However, for this study, the uncertainty in effective stress is needed, not the

uncertainty in preload. The absolute and relative uncertainties in effective stress were found to be

no greater than the uncertainty in preload (see section F in this chapter for a complete discussion

on this topic). Based on this finding, three levels of uncertainty in effective stress were

investigated: ±25%, ±35%, and ±45%. For each case, the percentage was assumed to equal ±3

standard deviations.

For this study, the bolt's yield strength is defined as:

(4.1)

where

is the population mean yield strength,

is the z-value for the yield strength, and

is the population standard deviation for yield strength.

The z-value is a standardized variable that represents the number of standard deviations from the

mean.

Next, the limit stress is set equal to yield stress. That is:

(4.2)

or

. (4.3)

Preload is maximized when the bolt’s maximum effective stress reaches the limit

stress. The bolt's maximum effective stress is defined as:

(4.4)

58
where

is the population mean effective stress,

is the z-value for the effective stress, and

is the population standard deviation for effective stress.

By applying Equations (4.1) through (4.4) and Equation (3.16), the probabilities of

exceeding the yield strength during bolt installation can be calculated. Tables 4.1, 4.2, and 4.3

summarize these probabilities which are given in both parts per million (PPM) and parts per

thousand (PPT). Each table represents a different level of effective stress uncertainty (±25%,

±35%, and ±45%) and lists probabilities for four different strength distributions, each at five

levels of population coverage. The magnitude of the population coverage is dictated by the

z-value. A larger z-value results in a larger population coverage. A sample probability

calculation is provided in Appendix D and corresponds to the case indicated by † in Table 4.1.

The selected population coverage will dictate the relative position of the two

distributions. Since the maximum effective stress is set equal to the yield strength, the curves

move farther apart as the coverage is increased. For example, in Figure 4.10, the plot on the right

represents 99% coverage for both strength and stress, which corresponds to the case indicated

by † in Table 4.1. The plot on the left represents 95% coverage and corresponds to the case

indicated by ‡ in Table 4.1. Since the overlap in the two curves on the left is much greater, the

chance of yielding a bolt is much greater. From Table 4.1, 21 bolts out of 1000 would be

expected to yield for 95% coverage. This number drops to 2 bolts out of 1000 for 99% coverage.

59
 Table 4.1 Probabilities of Exceeding Yield Strength Based on Stress-Strength Interference
(Stress Uncertainty ±3σ = ±25%)

Max Eff Stress = 100% Strength, Max Eff Stress = μ + 3σ and Yield Strength = μ - 3σ (99.87% COVERAGE)
Strength Effective Stress Stress-Strength Interference
Safety
Yield CV Mean SD Max CV Mean SD Φ Probability PPM PPT Factor
125 0.01 128.87 1.29 125 0.083 100.00 8.33 -3.42 3.09E-04 309 0 1.00
125 0.02 132.98 2.66 125 0.083 100.00 8.33 -3.77 8.16E-05 82 0 1.00
125 0.03 137.36 4.12 125 0.083 100.00 8.33 -4.02 2.92E-05 29 0 1.00
125 0.04 142.05 5.68 125 0.083 100.00 8.33 -4.17 1.53E-05 15 0 1.00
125 0.05 147.06 7.35 125 0.083 100.00 8.33 -4.23 1.15E-05 11 0 1.00

Max Eff Stress = 100% Strength, Max Eff Stress = μ + 2.33σ and Yield Strength = μ - 2.33σ (99.0% COVERAGE)
Strength Effective Stress Stress-Strength Interference
Safety

60
Yield CV Mean SD Max CV Mean SD Φ Probability PPM PPT Factor
125 0.01 127.98 1.28 125 0.083 104.68 8.72 -2.64 4.10E-03 4102 4 1.00
125 0.02 131.11 2.62 125 0.083 104.68 8.72 -2.90 1.85E-03 1853 2 1.00 †
125 0.03 134.39 4.03 125 0.083 104.68 8.72 -3.09 9.92E-04 992 1 1.00
125 0.04 137.85 5.51 125 0.083 104.68 8.72 -3.21 6.53E-04 653 1 1.00
125 0.05 141.48 7.07 125 0.083 104.68 8.72 -3.28 5.24E-04 524 1 1.00

Max Eff Stress = 100% Strength, Max Eff Stress = μ + 2σ and Yield Strength = μ - 2σ (97.72% COVERAGE)
Strength Effective Stress Stress-Strength Interference
Safety
Yield CV Mean SD Max CV Mean SD Φ Probability PPM PPT Factor
125 0.01 127.55 1.28 125 0.083 107.14 8.93 -2.26 1.18E-02 11826 12 1.00
125 0.02 130.21 2.60 125 0.083 107.14 8.93 -2.48 6.57E-03 6569 7 1.00
125 0.03 132.98 3.99 125 0.083 107.14 8.93 -2.64 4.12E-03 4122 4 1.00
125 0.04 135.87 5.43 125 0.083 107.14 8.93 -2.75 3.00E-03 2995 3 1.00
125 0.05 138.89 6.94 125 0.083 107.14 8.93 -2.81 2.50E-03 2503 3 1.00
 Table 4.1 (continued)

Max Eff Stress = 100% Strength, Max Eff Stress = μ + 1.645σ and Yield Strength = μ - 1.645σ (95% COVERAGE)
Strength Effective Stress Stress-Strength Interference
Yield CV Mean SD Max CV Mean SD Φ Probability PPM PPT Safety Factor
125 0.01 127.09 1.27 125 0.083 109.93 9.16 -1.86 3.18E-02 31766 32 1.00
125 0.02 129.25 2.59 125 0.083 109.93 9.16 -2.03 2.12E-02 21182 21 1.00 ‡
125 0.03 131.49 3.94 125 0.083 109.93 9.16 -2.16 1.53E-02 15330 15 1.00
125 0.04 133.80 5.35 125 0.083 109.93 9.16 -2.25 1.22E-02 12219 12 1.00
125 0.05 136.20 6.81 125 0.083 109.93 9.16 -2.30 1.07E-02 10679 11 1.00

Max Eff Stress = 100% Strength, Max Eff Stress = μ + 1.282σ and Yield Strength = μ - 1.282σ (90% COVERAGE)
Strength Effective Stress Stress-Strength Interference
Yield CV Mean SD Max CV Mean SD Φ Probability PPM PPT Safety Factor
125 0.01 126.62 1.27 125 0.083 112.93 9.41 -1.44 7.47E-02 74722 75 1.00

61
125 0.02 128.29 2.57 125 0.083 112.93 9.41 -1.57 5.77E-02 57737 58 1.00
125 0.03 130.00 3.90 125 0.083 112.93 9.41 -1.68 4.70E-02 46955 47 1.00
125 0.04 131.76 5.27 125 0.083 112.93 9.41 -1.74 4.05E-02 40498 40 1.00
125 0.05 133.56 6.68 125 0.083 112.93 9.41 -1.79 3.69E-02 36935 37 1.00
 Table 4.2 Probabilities of Exceeding Yield Strength Based on Stress-Strength Interference
(Stress Uncertainty ±3σ = ±35%)

Max Eff Stress = 100% Strength, Max Eff Stress = μ + 3σ and Yield Strength = μ - 3σ (99.87% COVERAGE)
Strength Effective Stress Stress-Strength Interference
Safety
Yield CV Mean SD Max CV Mean SD Φ Probability PPM PPT Factor
125 0.01 128.87 1.29 125 0.117 92.59 10.80 -3.33 4.28E-04 428 0 1.00
125 0.02 132.98 2.66 125 0.117 92.59 10.80 -3.63 1.42E-04 142 0 1.00
125 0.03 137.36 4.12 125 0.117 92.59 10.80 -3.87 5.39E-05 54 0 1.00
125 0.04 142.05 5.68 125 0.117 92.59 10.80 -4.05 2.54E-05 25 0 1.00
125 0.05 147.06 7.35 125 0.117 92.59 10.80 -4.17 1.54E-05 15 0 1.00

Max Eff Stress = 100% Strength, Max Eff Stress = μ + 2.33σ and Yield Strength = μ - 2.33σ (99.0% COVERAGE)
Strength Effective Stress Stress-Strength Interference
Safety

62
Yield CV Mean SD Max CV Mean SD Φ Probability PPM PPT Factor
125 0.01 127.98 1.28 125 0.117 98.28 11.47 -2.57 5.03E-03 5025 5 1.00
125 0.02 131.11 2.62 125 0.117 98.28 11.47 -2.79 2.63E-03 2629 3 1.00
125 0.03 134.39 4.03 125 0.117 98.28 11.47 -2.97 1.48E-03 1484 1 1.00
125 0.04 137.85 5.51 125 0.117 98.28 11.47 -3.11 9.37E-04 937 1 1.00
125 0.05 141.48 7.07 125 0.117 98.28 11.47 -3.21 6.72E-04 672 1 1.00

Max Eff Stress = 100% Strength, Max Eff Stress = μ + 2σ and Yield Strength = μ - 2σ (97.72% COVERAGE)
Strength Effective Stress Stress-Strength Interference
Safety
Yield CV Mean SD Max CV Mean SD Φ Probability PPM PPT Factor
125 0.01 127.55 1.28 125 0.117 101.35 11.82 -2.20 1.38E-02 13799 14 1.00
125 0.02 130.21 2.60 125 0.117 101.35 11.82 -2.38 8.58E-03 8578 9 1.00
125 0.03 132.98 3.99 125 0.117 101.35 11.82 -2.53 5.63E-03 5632 6 1.00
125 0.04 135.87 5.43 125 0.117 101.35 11.82 -2.65 4.00E-03 3995 4 1.00
125 0.05 138.89 6.94 125 0.117 101.35 11.82 -2.74 3.10E-03 3096 3 1.00
 Table 4.2 (continued)

Max Eff Stress = 100% Strength, Max Eff Stress = μ + 1.645σ and Yield Strength = μ - 1.645σ (95% COVERAGE)
Strength Effective Stress Stress-Strength Interference
Yield CV Mean SD Max CV Mean SD Φ Probability PPM PPT Safety Factor
125 0.01 127.09 1.27 125 0.117 104.87 12.24 -1.81 3.54E-02 35447 35 1.00
125 0.02 129.25 2.59 125 0.117 104.87 12.24 -1.95 2.56E-02 25617 26 1.00
125 0.03 131.49 3.94 125 0.117 104.87 12.24 -2.07 1.92E-02 19207 19 1.00
125 0.04 133.80 5.35 125 0.117 104.87 12.24 -2.17 1.51E-02 15141 15 1.00
125 0.05 136.20 6.81 125 0.117 104.87 12.24 -2.24 1.26E-02 12631 13 1.00

Max Eff Stress = 100% Strength, Max Eff Stress = μ + 1.282σ and Yield Strength = μ - 1.282σ (90% COVERAGE)
Strength Effective Stress Stress-Strength Interference
Yield CV Mean SD Max CV Mean SD Φ Probability PPM PPT Safety Factor
125 0.01 126.62 1.27 125 0.117 108.74 12.69 -1.40 8.03E-02 80310 80 1.00

63
125 0.02 128.29 2.57 125 0.117 108.74 12.69 -1.51 6.54E-02 65432 65 1.00
125 0.03 130.00 3.90 125 0.117 108.74 12.69 -1.60 5.46E-02 54564 55 1.00
125 0.04 131.76 5.27 125 0.117 108.74 12.69 -1.68 4.69E-02 46895 47 1.00
125 0.05 133.56 6.68 125 0.117 108.74 12.69 -1.73 4.17E-02 41673 42 1.00
 Table 4.3 Probabilities of Exceeding Yield Strength Based On Stress-Strength Interference
(Stress Uncertainty ±3σ = ±45%)

Max Eff Stress = 100% Strength, Max Eff Stress = μ + 3σ and Yield Strength = μ - 3σ (99.87% COVERAGE)
Strength Effective Stress Stress-Strength Interference
Safety
Yield CV Mean SD Max CV Mean SD Φ Probability PPM PPT Factor
125 0.01 128.87 1.29 125 0.150 86.21 12.93 -3.28 5.14E-04 514 1 1.00
125 0.02 132.98 2.66 125 0.150 86.21 12.93 -3.54 1.98E-04 198 0 1.00
125 0.03 137.36 4.12 125 0.150 86.21 12.93 -3.77 8.19E-05 82 0 1.00
125 0.04 142.05 5.68 125 0.150 86.21 12.93 -3.95 3.85E-05 39 0 1.00
125 0.05 147.06 7.35 125 0.150 86.21 12.93 -4.09 2.15E-05 21 0 1.00

Max Eff Stress = 100% Strength, Max Eff Stress = μ + 2.33σ and Yield Strength = μ - 2.33σ (99.0% COVERAGE)
Strength Effective Stress Stress-Strength Interference
Safety

64
Yield CV Mean SD Max CV Mean SD Φ Probability PPM PPT Factor
125 0.01 127.98 1.28 125 0.150 92.63 13.89 -2.53 5.64E-03 5640 6 1.00
125 0.02 131.11 2.62 125 0.150 92.63 13.89 -2.72 3.25E-03 3247 3 1.00
125 0.03 134.39 4.03 125 0.150 92.63 13.89 -2.89 1.94E-03 1944 2 1.00
125 0.04 137.85 5.51 125 0.150 92.63 13.89 -3.03 1.24E-03 1243 1 1.00
125 0.05 141.48 7.07 125 0.150 92.63 13.89 -3.13 8.64E-04 864 1 1.00

Max Eff Stress = 100% Strength, Max Eff Stress = μ + 2σ and Yield Strength = μ - 2σ (97.72% COVERAGE)
Strength Effective Stress Stress-Strength Interference
Safety
Yield CV Mean SD Max CV Mean SD Φ Probability PPM PPT Factor
125 0.01 127.55 1.28 125 0.150 96.15 14.42 -2.17 1.51E-02 15064 15 1.00
125 0.02 130.21 2.60 125 0.150 96.15 14.42 -2.32 1.01E-02 10075 10 1.00
125 0.03 132.98 3.99 125 0.150 96.15 14.42 -2.46 6.93E-03 6931 7 1.00
125 0.04 135.87 5.43 125 0.150 96.15 14.42 -2.58 4.99E-03 4987 5 1.00
125 0.05 138.89 6.94 125 0.150 96.15 14.42 -2.67 3.80E-03 3797 4 1.00
 Table 4.3 (continued)

Max Eff Stress = 100% Strength, Max Eff Stress = μ + 1.645σ and Yield Strength = μ - 1.645σ (95% COVERAGE)
Strength Effective Stress Stress-Strength Interference
Yield CV Mean SD Max CV Mean SD Φ Probability PPM PPT Safety Factor
125 0.01 127.09 1.27 125 0.150 100.26 15.04 -1.78 3.77E-02 37728 38 1.00
125 0.02 129.25 2.59 125 0.150 100.26 15.04 -1.90 2.87E-02 28724 29 1.00
125 0.03 131.49 3.94 125 0.150 100.26 15.04 -2.01 2.23E-02 22293 22 1.00
125 0.04 133.80 5.35 125 0.150 100.26 15.04 -2.10 1.78E-02 17806 18 1.00
125 0.05 136.20 6.81 125 0.150 100.26 15.04 -2.18 1.47E-02 14737 15 1.00

Max Eff Stress = 100% Strength, Max Eff Stress = μ + 1.282σ and Yield Strength = μ - 1.282σ (90% COVERAGE)
Strength Effective Stress Stress-Strength Interference
Yield CV Mean SD Max CV Mean SD Φ Probability PPM PPT Safety Factor
125 0.01 126.62 1.27 125 0.150 104.84 15.73 -1.38 8.37E-02 83677 84 1.00

65
125 0.02 128.29 2.57 125 0.150 104.84 15.73 -1.47 7.06E-02 70550 71 1.00
125 0.03 130.00 3.90 125 0.150 104.84 15.73 -1.55 6.02E-02 60224 60 1.00
125 0.04 131.76 5.27 125 0.150 104.84 15.73 -1.62 5.23E-02 52303 52 1.00
125 0.05 133.56 6.68 125 0.150 104.84 15.73 -1.68 4.64E-02 46371 46 1.00
 The final column in these tables lists the factor of safety, which is found by dividing the

yield strength by the maximum effective stress. In all cases the factor of safety is 1.0. This

column was added to make an important point about factor of safety. A factor of safety by itself

gives no indication of the reliability of a part or design. However, as observed in these tables, the

reliability varies greatly with the statistical definition of yield strength and maximum effective

stress. Yet, the factor of safety is the same for all cases.

These tables provide the probabilities of yielding a bolt when the strength and stress

distributions are known (i.e., the true population means and standard deviations are known).

Therefore, the utilization factor mentioned in Chapter III has not been included. The utilization

factor is only applied in the final methodology. When applied, it accounts for factors that may

impact the stress distribution, yet are not captured by the torque-tension testing.

These tables were created for bolts with 125 ksi yield strength. However, similar tables

can be made for bolts with other yield strengths. Although the means and standard deviations

will vary, the probabilities will remain the same. As yield strength increases, both the effective

stress and strength distributions will shift to the right and flatten out. The distance between their

means will also increase. Nevertheless, provided the same coefficients of variation are assumed,

the probabilities of yielding the bolt will not change.

Finally, these tables provide important information needed to define the methodology.

Specifically, they provide results for various percentages of population coverage and coefficients

of variation. These results are needed to define an acceptable probability of yielding the bolt

during installation.

66
 0.16 0.16
0.14 0.14
125 ksi 125 ksi
0.12 Yield 0.12 Yield
0.1 Strength 0.1 Strength
95% coverage 99% coverage
0.08 0.08
0.06 0.06

67
0.04 Effective Stress 0.04 Effective Stress

Probability Density

Probability Density
0.02 0.02
0 0
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Bolt Effective Stress and Yield Strength (ksi) Bolt Effective Stress and Yield Strength (ksi)

Figure 4.10 Overlap of Distribution Curves for Different Population Coverages

C. Tolerance Intervals

A tolerance interval provides a range that has a given probability of containing a specified

percentage of the population -- a probability based on a sample from the population. Since the

distributions of effective stress and bolt strength are based on samples (i.e., a defined number of

fastener tests), tolerance intervals are used by the methodology for determining torque limits.

The equations in this section are similar to the equations in Section B. The equations in

Section B are expressed in terms of assumed population parameters (μ and σ). In contrast, the

equations in this section are expressed in terms of estimates of population parameters ( ̅ and S)

which are based on a sample from the population.

The lower limit of the tolerance interval for the bolt’s yield strength is defined as:

̅ (4.5)

where

̅ is the sample mean yield strength,

is the one-sided tolerance interval factor for the yield strength, and

is the sample standard deviation for yield strength.

When yield strength is multiplied by the utilization factor discussed above, the product becomes

the limit stress . That is:

(4.6)

or

̅ . (4.7)

To maximize bolt preload, input torque is increased until the bolt’s effective stress reaches the

limit stress. This effective stress, the bolt's maximum effective stress , is defined as:

68
 ̅ (4.8)

where

̅ is the sample mean effective stress,

is the one-sided tolerance interval factor for the effective stress, and

is the sample standard deviation for effective stress.

Therefore, bolt preload is maximized when:

or when:

̅ (̅ ) . (4.10)

The input torque that corresponds to this condition is the torque limit.

From the previous section, it was shown that for 99% coverage, the probability of

yielding the bolt during installation falls between 1 in a 1000 and 6 in a 1000. However, that

analysis was based on a known population mean and standard deviation. In practice, one must

rely on a sample to estimate the population mean and standard deviation. Therefore, a k-value

must be used. A k-value, like the z-value used in the previous section, covers a certain

percentage of the population. However, unlike the z-value, the k-value has an associated

confidence level. A confidence level of 95%, most commonly used in research, is adopted here.

So, while the analysis in the previous section can help us select the appropriate percent coverage,

more information is still required to select the k-value, since the k-value also depends on the

sample size.

Figure 4.11 shows one-sided k-values plotted against sample size for 90%, 95%, and 99%

coverage, all at a 95% confidence level. A distinct knee occurs for sample sizes between 10-20.

Therefore, if at least 20 data points can be afforded (both in time and cost), then the "statistical

69
penalty" associated with sample size is greatly reduced. For very large sample sizes, the k-values

converge to the z-values (1.282 for 90% coverage, 1.645 for 95%, and 2.326 for 99% coverage).

5 k-value,
k-value

99%/95%
4
k-value,
95%/95%
3
k-value,
2 90%/95%

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Sample Size

Figure 4.11 Plot of k-values for 90%, 95%, and 99% Coverage with 95% Confidence, One-sided

D. Preload-Torsion Tests

Preload-torsion tests were conducted to investigate the impact of torsion on the preloaded

bolt. Both torsion and preload were measured during and after application of preload. During

these tests, an electric motor gradually applied input torque to the nut until a specified preload

was reached. The motor then maintained the torque for a short period (10 seconds). The motor

was then reversed until the preload was totally removed. Preload was measured with a load cell

that was integral to the torque-tension equipment. The bolts were instrumented with strain

gauges to measure the torsional stress. In total, eight bolts (four 3/8" bolts and four 1/2" bolts)

were instrumented. Each bolt was preloaded three times (three cycles). The test results from the

3/8" bolts are highlighted below.

70
 Figure 4.12 shows curves for the first torque-tension cycle for three of the 3/8" bolts. For

two bolts, the fasteners were lubricated with MoS2 paste (Dow Corning Molykote P-37). For the

third, no lubrication was applied (the nut was silver plated, but silver is a poor lubricant). In

terms of the short-form equation, the slope of each curve equals 1/KD. The steeper the slope, the

lower the fastening system friction will be. The intersection point with the x-axis indicates the

prevailing torque for each bolt's locking nut. For each bolt, the prevailing torque, as measured

with a torque wrench, closely matched the value indicated by the test system's torque transducer.

1956C32-6-01.txt 1956C32-7-01.txt 1956C32-8-01.txt

12000

Lubricated with
10000
MoS2 Paste

8000
Tension (lbs)

6000 Prevailing
Torque
No Lubrication
4000

2000

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Torque (in-lbs)

Figure 4.12 Torque-Tension Plot for 3/8" Bolts

For a given input torque, the preload is noticeably higher when lubrication is used, thus

illustrating the impact that lubrication has on the resulting preload. The installation torque for the

non-lubricated bolt could be increased to achieve the same preload as the lubricated bolt.

71
However, since the torsional stress will be higher, the same maximum preload could not be

reached without yielding the bolt.

Table 4.4 provides the test results for the two 3/8" bolts lubricated with MoS2 paste.

Since each bolt was preloaded three times, there are a total of six tests. Each bolt was tested with

the same type of nut, washer, and lubricant, therefore, they are considered members of the same

"specific fastener combination" as defined by this study. For an input torque of 400 in-lbs, the

table includes the measured preload and torsional stress as well as the calculated effective stress

for each test. The mean ( ̅ ), standard deviation ( ), the relative uncertainty ( ̅ ), and three

times the relative uncertainty (3 ̅ ) are shown at the bottom of the table.

Table 4.4 Test Results for 3/8" Bolts When Input Torque Equals 400 in-lbs

3/8"-24 Bolts

Thread
Preload Torsional Reaction Effective
Preload Stress Stress Torque Stress
Test # (lbs) (lbs/in2) (lbs/in2) (in-lbs) (lbs/in2)
1 6444.7 73401.5 23484.9 172.8 83919.0
2 6937.8 79018.5 20998.2 154.5 86986.7
3 6921.2 78829.6 20829.0 153.2 86692.9
4 7327.2 83452.9 22794.9 167.7 92321.2
5 9558.3 108865.0 21664.9 159.4 115150.7
6 9471.2 107871.9 20648.2 151.9 113645.9

̅ 7777 88573 21737 160 96453

1375 15664 1161 9 14172
⁄̅ 0.177 0.177 0.053 0.053 0.147
⁄̅ 0.531 0.531 0.160 0.160 0.441

Four important observations can be made from these results. First, the magnitude of

preload stress is approximately four times the magnitude of torsional stress. This result aligns

with the finding presented in Section A of this chapter which predicted preload stresses 3 to 5

72
times greater than torsional stresses for lubricated bolts (see Figure 4.3). Second, the absolute

and relative uncertainties in torsional stress (highlighted in purple) are much lower than the

absolute and relative uncertainties in preload stress (highlighted in blue). This result was true for

all bolts tested. Third, the absolute and relative uncertainties in effective stress (highlighted in

red) are less than the absolute and relative uncertainty in preload stress (highlighted in blue). It

might be expected that the uncertainties in effective stress would be higher than the uncertainties

in preload. However, due to propagation of uncertainty and the form of the effective stress

equation, the uncertainties in effective stress will likely be less than the uncertainties in preload

stress. Propagation of uncertainty is discussed in greater detail in Section F of this chapter.

Fourth, the preload scatter for these bolts (highlighted in green) is much higher than generally

experienced for lubricated bolts. Two test runs experienced especially high preloads which

resulted in this high preload scatter.

Similar observations are made for the two lubricated 1/2" fasteners, whose results are

shown in Table 4.5 for an input torque of 800 in-lbs.

Table 4.5 Test Results for 1/2" Bolts When Input Torque Equals 800 in-lbs

1/2"-20 Bolts

Thread
Preload Torsional Reaction Effective
Preload Stress Stress Torque Stress
Test # (lbs) (lbs/in2) (lbs/in2) (in-lbs) (lbs/in2)
1 13786.3 86218.4 20301.5 366.2 93113.2
2 17446.4 109108.0 20121.5 363.0 114539.0
3 17648.8 110373.9 19703.9 355.4 115529.8
4 13644.1 85329.2 18065.1 325.9 90885.2
5 16340.5 102192.0 16612.1 299.7 106165.4
6 17055.1 106660.8 17189.0 310.1 110738.0

̅ 15987 99980 18666 337 105162

1816 11357 1589 29 10738
⁄̅ 0.114 0.114 0.085 0.085 0.102
⁄̅ 0.341 0.341 0.255 0.255 0.306

73
 In a final series of tests, torsional stress was measured in the bolt shank both during

application of torque and after the installation torque was removed. For these tests, the input

torque was applied with a torque wrench because the torque-tension machine could not release

the input torque (to simulate removal of the torque wrench). The same 3/8" bolts shown in

Figure 4.12 were tested. Each bolt was torqued to 580 in-lbs. The resulting torsional stresses are

shown in Figure 4.13. Since the installation torque was applied with a torque wrench, a saw-

toothed increase in torsional stress occurred at the beginning of the tests.

1956C32-6-ST1-01.txt 1956C32-7-ST1-01.txt 1956C32-8-ST1-01.txt

40000

Torsion stress due to Ts , Tth , and Tpr

30000
Torsion (lbs/in2)

Lubricated with
MoS2 Paste No Lubrication
20000

10000

20 Minutes
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
Time (sec)

Figure 4.13 Torsional Stress in 3/8" Bolts During Application of Torque and After Installation
Torque is Removed

Clearly, torsional stress reached its maximum value at the maximum input torque. This

maximum torsional stress is due to the sum of the torque to stretch the bolt (Ts), the torque to

overcome thread friction (Tth), and the prevailing torque (Tpr). Immediately after the torque

wrench was removed (within 1 sec), the torsional stress dropped steeply. This drop in torsion was

74
greater for the lubricated bolts. After this initial drop, the torsion continued to decay gradually

over the next 20-30 seconds. For the 3/8" fasteners, the torsion continued to drop slightly over

the next 10 minutes. After that, the torsion remained nearly constant, even after 24 hours. For

the 3/8" bolts, the total drop in torsion ranged from 50 to 75%. Similar results were observed for

the 1/2" bolts, whose total drop in torsion ranged from 40 to 60%. Again, the torsion remained

nearly constant after the initial drop.

The next figure in this section, Figure 4.14, shows the axial load (preload) during these

tests. Like torsion, the preload reached its maximum value at the maximum input torque.

However, unlike torsion, preload did not drop after the installation torque was removed. Not

even a slight decrease in preload was noted, even after 24 hours. This result was surprising

because embedment is usually experienced after a bolt has been preloaded. The embedment can

often lead to a 5% decrease in preload. However, this did not occur in these tests, neither for the

3/8" bolts or the 1/2" bolts.

75
 1956C32-6-ST1-01.txt 1956C32-7-ST1-01.txt 1956C32-8-ST1-01.txt
14000

12000

10000 Lubricated with

MoS2 Paste
Tension (lbs)

8000

6000 No Lubrication

4000

2000
20 Minutes
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
Time (sec)

Figure 4.14 Axial Load (Preload) in 3/8" Bolts During Application of Torque and After
Installation Torque is Removed

E. Prevailing Torque Tests

Another experiment was conducted to investigate the impact of prevailing torque on

preload. Two simple comparative evaluations of the test data were performed. The first

compared the preload means for two nut types: one with a locking feature and another with the

locking feature removed. The second evaluation compared the preload variances for these same

nuts. Since all the locking nuts came from the same lot, a true comparison between the two types

of nuts could be made. Ten 1/2"-20 nuts of each type were tested. All fasteners were lubricated

with MoS2 paste (Dow Corning Molykote P-37). The preloads were measured at an installation

torque of 650 in-lbs.

Table 4.6 gives the results of the first evaluation. Based on the test data, the mean

preload without prevailing torque is approximately 5% higher than the mean preload with

prevailing torque. However, is this result statistically significant? Two significance levels (2.5%

76
and 5%) were considered. At a significance level of 2.5%, the data does not provide sufficient

evidence to conclude that the mean preload without prevailing torque is greater. However, at a

significance level of 5%, there is sufficient evidence to show a difference. Therefore, one can be

up to 95% confident that the mean preload with prevailing torque removed is greater.

Table 4.6 Comparison of Preload Means When Prevailing Torque is Present and When
Prevailing Torque is Removed (1/2"-20 Bolt)

Test
Statistic for
Test Data Summary Means Hypothesis Test
Nut Type Mean SD n to γ α tα , γ Null Hypothesis
Prev. Torque
14557 747 10 1.98 19.1 2.5% ±2.093 DON'T REJECT
Removed
Prev. Torque
13813 923 10 5% ±1.729 REJECT
Present

Table 4.7 shows the results of the second evaluation. Based on the test data, the preload

variance with prevailing torque is approximately 24% higher than the variance without prevailing

torque. However, is this result statistically significant? Again, two significance levels (5% and

10%) were considered. For both significance levels, the data does not provide sufficient evidence

to show a difference. Therefore, even at a significance level as high as 10%, one cannot conclude

that the preload variance (or standard deviation) is greater when the prevailing torque is present, a

somewhat unexpected result. If a greater number of lock nuts had been tested, a difference may

have been observed.

77
 Table 4.7 Comparison of Preload Variances When Prevailing Torque is Present and When
Prevailing Torque is Removed (1/2"-20 Bolt)

Test
Statistic for
Test Data Summary Variances Hypothesis Test
Nut Type Mean SD n Fo α F* Null Hypothesis
Prev. Torque 14557 747 10 1.528 5% 3.18 DON'T REJECT
Removed
Prev. Torque 13813 923 10 10% 2.44 DON'T REJECT
Present
F* = Fα, n1-1, n2-1

Using the data from these tests, normal probability plots were also generated. Normal

probability plots are used to determine if data comes from a normal distribution. Data points are

plotted against the z-values that would be expected if the data was indeed normal. When data

points fall close to a straight line, the distribution can be assumed to be approximately normal. In

other words, the more the points deviate from a line, the less likely that the distribution is normal.

Figure 4.15 presents the normal probability plot for the modified lock nuts (without prevailing

torque). Since the points fall reasonably close to a straight line, one can conclude that the preload

distribution for the modified lock nuts is approximately normal.

78
 2

1.5

0.5
z-value

-0.5

-1

-1.5

-2
13000 13500 14000 14500 15000 15500 16000
Preload (lbs)

Figure 4.15 Normal Probability Plot for Preload Sample of Modified Lock Nuts

Figure 4.16 presents the normal probability plot for the unmodified lock nuts (with

prevailing torque). In this case, the points fall further from a straight line, with a distinct hump in

the middle of the plot. Therefore, one cannot easily conclude that this data is normally

distributed. Since all the locking nuts came from the same manufactured lot, one can conclude

that the presence of the locking feature caused the preload distribution to be less normal.

79
 2

1.5

0.5
z-value

-0.5

-1

-1.5

-2
13000 13500 14000 14500 15000 15500 16000
Preload (lbs)

Figure 4.16 Normal Probability Plot for Preload Sample of Unmodified Lock Nuts

The data from this testing was also used to compare the coefficient of friction in the

threads ( ) and the coefficient of friction on the bearing surface ( ). The COF on the bearing

surface (under the nut) was found to be approximately 60% greater. At first, this might seem

surprising since the same lubricant was used on both surfaces. However, the COF is also dictated

by variables like surface finish. It is unlikely that the surface finish on the threads and on the

bearing surface will be the same.

Finally, how should prevailing torque be handled at installation? Two approaches can be

taken. The first approach measures prevailing torque for each locking nut and adds it to the

installation torque (or torque limit). The installation torque is typically defined on an engineering

drawing or an installation specification. The rationale for this approach is to account for the

variability in prevailing torque that can occur between individual nuts. It is argued that since the

magnitude of prevailing torque has no impact on the preload, then adding its measured value to

the specified installation torque should result in a more consistent preload. However, for this

80
approach to be effective, the methodology used to determine the installation torque should not

include the effect of prevailing torque. Otherwise, prevailing torque would be effectively added

twice, once during the testing to determine the torque limit and once again at installation. In

other words, the installation torque should be determined without using the locking nut.

Consequently, testing might not reflect the locking nut's actual geometry or the true impact of

prevailing torque on preload. In addition, the torque-limit testing would not include the torsional

stress created by prevailing torque. These issues represent a significant drawback to this

approach.

The second approach still measures prevailing torque at installation, but only to ensure

that it is within specification. The prevailing torque is not added to the installation torque. The

effects of prevailing torque are captured by the test data that is used to define the installation

torque. Therefore, its effect already appears in the torque limit. As a result, it is not added to the

specified installation torque at assembly. The methodology presented in this paper takes the

second approach. Prevailing torque is treated as another variable that contributes to preload

scatter.

F. Propagation of Uncertainty

The methodology for determining torque limits developed by this research requires three

measurements: preload , thread reaction torque , and input torque . Two of these

measurements ( and ) are required to calculate the effective stress. The uncertainty in both of

these measurements will propagate into the uncertainty in the effective stress. The effective

stress equation containing these two variables, repeated here for convenience, is:

[( ) ( ) ] .

81
As stated in Chapter II, the tolerances associated with fastener geometry are small and contribute

very little to the preload uncertainty. Therefore, nominal values are typically used and are

assumed to be constant.

The propagation of uncertainty in both preload and thread reaction torque can be

determined by the Taylor Series Method [16]. Applying this method, a Taylor series expansion is

used to evaluate the uncertainty in effective stress based on the uncertainties in measured preload

and thread reaction torque. In general terms, the combined standard uncertainty in the calculated

effective stress ( ) is:

( ) ( ) ( )

( ) ( ). (4.11)

When determining torque limits, the large random uncertainties will easily dwarf the systematic

uncertainties. Preload and thread reaction torque can be accurately measured within ±1%

(a combination of systematic and random uncertainty). This uncertainty is very small compared

to the ±25% to ±35% natural variation in preload (random uncertainty). When a propagation of

uncertainty calculation is made, the small systematic uncertainties will be negligible. Therefore,

systematic uncertainties, and their correlated effects, can be ignored.

Once the systematic uncertainty terms are eliminated, the propagation of uncertainty

equation for effective stress will be:

( ) ( ) ( ) ( )( )

82
where

is the random standard uncertainty (or standard deviation) of the preload

measurement,

is the random standard uncertainty (or standard deviation) of the thread reaction

torque measurement, and

is the covariance factor for Fi and Tτ due to common elemental random error

sources.

The final term in this equation, the correlated effects term, accounts for uncertainties due to

common error sources, that is, error sources that influence both measurements. In uncertainty

analysis, the correlated effects due to random errors are often neglected because measurement

uncertainties are assumed to be independent. As a result, the correlated effects term for random

uncertainty is dropped. If this is done, Equation (4.12) simplifies to:

( ) ( ) ( )

However, for this application, it was not known if the measurements of preload and thread

reaction torque were independent.

To check for the presence of a correlated effects term, the uncertainty in effective stress

shown in Table 4.4 can be compared to the uncertainty in effective stress calculated with

Equation (4.13). The uncertainty in Table 4.4 is calculated directly from the test results, that is, it

is the calculated standard deviation of the effective stress. In contrast, the uncertainty obtained

from Equation (4.13) is based on the standard deviations of preload and thread reaction torque

and propagation of uncertainty theory. If the two results are the same (or are nearly the same),

then a correlated effect is not present. If the results are different, then a correlated effect must

exist.

83
 From Table 4.4, the uncertainty in effective stress for the 3/8" bolts is 14,172 lbs/in2.

Based on Equation (4.13), the uncertainty in effective stress is 14,437 lbs/in2 -- a 2% difference.

Therefore, this suggests little correlation between the measurements of preload and torsional

stress. Similar results were obtained for the 1/2" bolts. Originally, it was suspected that there

would be a correlated effect, so this result was unexpected. Since these results are based on

limited test data, future testing is recommended to verify this finding.

Without a correlated effects term, Equation (4.13) predicts that the uncertainty in

effective stress will be less than the uncertainty in preload. This is due to the form of the

effective stress equation which takes the square root of the sum of the squares of the preload

stress and torsional stress. The test results shown in Tables 4.4 and 4.5 confirm this prediction.

For both the 3/8" and 1/2" bolts, the uncertainty in effective stress is less than the uncertainty in

preload.

Once the preload and torsional stresses that cause the effective stress to reach the limit

stress are determined, how then are these stresses tied to an input torque, the torque limit? In a

data acquisition system where multiple time-varying measurements are being made,

measurements are effectively taken at the same instant. Since input torque can also be measured

very accurately, the uncertainty associated with its measurement will be negligible. In this

respect, at a given time, input torque can be treated as a known value. Therefore, once the desired

combination of preload and torsional stress is found, their values can be linked directly to a

specific input torque, or torque limit.

G. Methodology Summary

This section describes in detail the methodology for determining torque limits to

maximize preload for high-strength fasteners. The methodology, based on the results and key

findings from this research, can be used to determine torque limits for any fastener combination.

84
Specific recommendations for tolerance interval factors and sample sizes are given. However,

these recommendations could be easily modified to meet the user's needs or preferences. For

example, Tables 4.1 through 4.3 could be used to select an alternate probability of yielding the

bolt during installation.

The specific steps for determining torque limits are:

• Procure 12 bolts each (of a desired size) from 3 lots, for a total of 36 bolts. Obtaining

bolts from three different lots may not always be feasible. In these cases, bolts of three

different lengths should be procured. This introduces some of the variability that would be

present in different lots.

• Perform axial tension (stress-strain) tests on 6 bolts from each lot (18 total tests).

Selecting this number of bolts for testing helps to lower the "statistical penalty" discussed in

Chapter III.

• Determine the yield strength for each bolt using the Johnson’s 2/3 method or the 0.2%

parallel offset method. The yield strength for the sample is then:

̅ (4.5)

A k-value based on 99% coverage and 95% confidence is recommended. This k-value should

come from a one-sided tolerance interval table. When yield strength is provided by a bolt

specification, that value can be used instead.

• Set the limit stress (Slimit) equal to 90% of the bolt yield strength (Sy).

(4.6)

• Procure 6 sets of nuts and washers (of the same size as the bolts) from 3 lots, for a total

of 18 sets. Theses nuts and washers will be used with the remaining 18 bolts for torque-

tension tests.

85
• Specify lubricant, when used, and exactly where it is applied. Also, specify whether the

lubricant is re-applied between cycles.

Note: Since each fastener combination is preloaded multiple times, the effect of preload

"cycle" will be reflected in the torque limit. The variation in preload with "cycle" can be

significant [6]. This variation was observed in this research, especially when lubrication was

not used. Therefore, using a lubricant is highly recommended.

• Perform three torque-tension tests for each fastener set (54 total tests). A fastener set

includes a bolt, a nut, a washer for under the nut, a washer for under the bolt head, and a

lubricant. Measure input torque, preload, and thread reaction torque through a full range of

input torque values. During each test, the bolt’s effective stress should not exceed the limit

stress, i.e., the data acquisition system should stop the test when the limit stress (permissible

effective stress) is reached. For each test and for the full range of input torque values,

calculate the effective stress using Equation (3.6):

[( ) ( ) ] (3.6)

• Generate a table (or curve) of input torque vs upper bound effective stress based on the

test data. Determine the upper bound effective stress for the full range of input torque values

using:

̅ (4.14)

A k-value based on 99% coverage and 95% confidence is recommended. The k-value should

come from a one-sided tolerance interval table.

• Determine the torque limit (Tlimit) from the input torque vs upper bound effective stress

table (or curve). The torque limit occurs when:

(4.9)

86
 or when:

̅ (̅ ) . (4.10)

Graphically, the torque limit can be found by drawing a horizontal line from the limit stress to

the intersection point on the input torque-upper bound effective stress curve. It is important

to note that this curve may not always be perfectly linear, especially when locking nuts are

used. From this intersection point, a line drawn vertically to the input torque axis defines the

torque limit.

If locking nuts were a part of the fastener combination, then the effect of prevailing

torque will be captured in the test results. Therefore, the prevailing torque is not added to the

torque limit at installation.

• In the torque table, clearly list the applicable fastener combination (bolt, nut, washer(s),

and lubricant), the torque limits with an allowable tolerance, the maximum and

minimum preloads (Fmax and Fmin), and the bolt yield strength (Sy) obtained from

testing. A torque limit tolerance of +0% to -5% is recommended.

A graphical representation of this methodology is shown in Figure 4.17.

87
 Limit stress (S limit) = 90% of yield strength = 0.9(Xstrength - kstrength Sstrength )
Effective Stress (psi)

Xeff + keff S eff (upper bound eff stress)

Xeff (mean eff stress)

Torque Limit (Tlimit)

Input Torque (in-lbs)

Figure 4.17 Graphical Representation of Methodology for Determining Torque Limits

88
 Chapter V

CONCLUSIONS

This research has developed a methodology for determining torque limits for high-

strength structural fasteners. This empirical-based methodology, described in detail in section G

of Chapter IV, maximizes the preload that can be placed on the fasteners during installation.

Once a torque limit is determined for a specific fastener combination, it can be applied to any

joint using the same combination. This research was motivated by the major shortcoming found

in other methods for determining torque limits: failing to fully address the statistical challenges

of dealing with preload scatter. Since preload scatter can be so significant (sometimes exceeding

±35%), it must be carefully considered, especially when maximized preload is desired. To meet

these challenges, the probability of yielding the bolt during installation had to be determined. In

addition, the preferred sample size for torque limit testing had to be defined.

During installation, the scatter (or uncertainty) in the bolt's effective stress was shown to

be less than the scatter in bolt preload. This result was observed in the torque-tension test data

from two bolt sizes. It was also predicted by propagation of uncertainty theory. The expected

scatter in effective stress was needed to determine the probabilities of yielding the bolt during

tightening.

This methodology, recognizing that friction is the main factor affecting the torque-tension

relationship and preload scatter, creates torque limits for specific fastener combinations. A

fastener combination is defined as a specific bolt type, nut, washer(s), and lubricant. The

fundamental approach is to control only the variables that influence friction. Therefore, variables

such as bolt length and clamped member material are not explicitly controlled. As a result, torque

89
limit testing is independent of the bolt length -- eliminating the need to test multiple bolt lengths.

However, this approach does require that each applicable fastener size (1/4"-28, 3/8"-24, etc.) be

tested.

When applying this methodology, tolerance interval factors (k-values) based on 99%

coverage and 95% confidence are recommended for both bolt strength and permissible effective

stress. Using these factors, the probability of yielding the bolt falls approximately between 1 in a

1000 (0.1%) and 6 in a 1000 (0.6%), which in the author's opinion is acceptable for bolt

installation. For most applications, the immediate consequences of yielding a single bolt during

installation are not catastrophic. In addition, yielding only occurs at the bolt's outer diameter, not

across its full section (as shown in Figure 4.9). More importantly, the consequences of not taking

full advantage of maximized preload can be far more serious. In contrast, a k-value based on

99.9% coverage, roughly equal to a 3σ value, is believed to be too conservative.

Approximately 20 tensile tests and 20 torque-tension tests should be conducted to

minimize the statistical penalty associated with limited testing. This recommendation is based on

the sharp increase in k-values that occurs below 20 data points. Furthermore, in order to capture

the variability between lots, the fasteners for these tests should be selected from multiple lots. A

minimum of three lots is recommended.

The specific fastener combinations should be clearly listed with the torque tables to

simplify fastener selection. Design engineers are often required to select an appropriate

combination of bolts, nuts, and washers. Therefore, having specific combinations already defined

simplifies this selection. In addition, the maximum and minimum preload values observed during

testing should always be listed with the torque tables. Sharing this information with the designer

and analyst will save them both time and effort.

Using this methodology, the prevailing torque of each locking nut should be measured at

installation to ensure that it is within specification. However, the measured prevailing torque is

90
not added to the installation torque because its effect is already included in the installation torque

value.

This research also investigated the impact of torsion and prevailing torque on achievable

preload. The results clearly show that torsion can significantly limit the achievable preload,

particularly when friction is high. At lower COF values, the percent preload lost ranges from 5 to

15%. At higher COF values, however, this percentage can reach 20% and higher. Therefore,

torsional stress must be considered when determining torque limit, otherwise, bolt preload cannot

be consistently maximized.

Prevailing torque is also shown to marginally reduce the achievable preload that can be

placed on the bolt. For the 1/4" fastener, preload loss is 5 to 7% for lower coefficients of friction

and increases to 10% for higher values. For fastener sizes 1/2" and greater, the percent preload

lost to prevailing torque is below 3% for lower coefficients of friction and remains below 6% for

higher values. Even though prevailing torque can be a large percentage of the installation torque

(as shown in Table 2.1), the prevailing torque itself does not add significantly to the effective

stress. Therefore, prevailing torque will reduce the magnitude of the achievable preload, just not

significantly.

Other significant observations and conclusions taken from this research include:

1) During fastener analysis, the coefficients of friction in the threads and under the nut

are sometimes assumed to be the same. However, in one series of tests, the coefficient of friction

under the nut was found to be significantly higher (60%) than the coefficient of friction in the

threads. Therefore, making such an assumption could lead to significant error in the calculated

bolt stress and preload when using relationships like the long-form equation.

2) Torsional stress in the bolt was shown to drop by 40 to 75% immediately after the

installation torque was removed. This drop was greatest when a lubricant was used. Most

importantly, this drop in torsional stress had no apparent effect on preload.

91
 3) The distribution of preload was found to be approximately normal when prevailing

torque was absent. However, when prevailing torque was present, the distribution of preload

appeared to be less normal. Since all of the locking nuts came from the same manufactured lot,

one can conclude that the presence of the locking feature was the reason for this difference.

4) Lubrication in the fastening system is highly desired. By reducing torsional stresses,

lubrication increases the maximum preload that can be placed on the bolt. It also reduces the

tendency of the threads to gall.

5) In addition to a bolt, nut, and washers, this methodology can also be applied to other

fastener combinations (e.g., a bolt, washer, and threaded insert).

A. Implementing This Methodology

Implementing this methodology is relatively straightforward -- a desired result. An

easy-to-implement methodology is more likely to be utilized than one that is overly complicated

and hard to execute. The test equipment required to measure input torque, preload, and thread

reaction torque is readily available. Strain gauges were used in this research to measure torsional

stress; however, instrumentation exists for measuring thread reaction torque directly. For

example, load cells available from PCB Load and Torque will measure both bolt tension and

thread reaction torque [38].

This methodology also requires a significant amount of statistical data reduction.

Fortunately, software programs like Excel® make this a relatively easy task. Once spreadsheets

are developed, torque limits can be easily calculated.

Finally, specifications are available, as needed, for conducting bolt tension and torque-

tension testing. NASM 1312-8 [28] and ASTM F606 [29] provide detailed instructions for

conducting bolt tensile testing. ISO 16047 [24], SAE J174 [25], and NASM 1312-15 [26]

provide detailed instructions for conducting torque-tension testing.

92
 Even though this methodology is relatively easy to implement, significant up-front cost

and resources would be required to develop a database of torque limits. This includes the cost of

purchasing and testing the fasteners. However, this cost should be viewed as an investment since

the torque limits developed can be applied to any future joint design that uses the same fastener

combination. In the long run, money is saved by eliminating the need for lot-specific or joint-

specific testing. In a world of limited resources, developing torque limits for specific fastener

combinations is an attractive alternative to these more costly approaches.

B. Recommendations for Future Work

Now that a new methodology for determining torque limits has been developed, it should

be fully implemented. In addition to torque-tension testing, implementation of this methodology

will require tensile testing of bolts, something not done as part of this research. It will also

require procurement of fasteners from multiple lots. Torque limits for several fastener

combinations should be determined.

Several areas of future work should also be considered. First, this research investigated

the probability of yielding the bolt when the load and strength distributions are normal. Even

when the distributions are not totally normal, the method of statistical interference used in this

research can be used to approximate this probability. However, what about cases where these

distributions deviate significantly from normal? Future work should investigate such cases.

Second, the methodology developed in this research was based on just reaching the yield

point, as shown in Figure 4.9. However, how much yielding can occur before a bolt becomes

compromised or non-functional? In its current revision, VDI 2230 actually makes an adjustment

to the polar moment of inertia that allows the bolt's cross section to go fully plastic. Future work

should investigate the amount of combined stresses that cause the bolt to become non-functional.

93
 Third, more testing should be conducted to investigate the correlated effects between the

uncertainties in preload and thread reaction torque. This testing can also be used to directly

compare the scatter in effective stress with the scatter in preload.

Finally, only one type of prevailing torque device was tested as part of this research, the

lock nut with a nylon ring insert. However, as discussed in Chapter I, several additional types of

prevailing torque devices are available. Future work should investigate the effect of other types

of prevailing torque devices on bolt preload, especially the all-metal locking nut which is

commonly used in aerospace design.

94
APPENDICES

95
 APPENDIX A

DERIVATION OF AN EQUATION FOR CALCULATING SHEAR STRESS DUE TO

TORSION IN A PRELOADED BOLT

When a bolt is preloaded by torque control, both tension and torsion are created in the

bolt. The current fastener test equipment at MSFC is only capable of measuring bolt tension

(preload) and input torque. For this research, a measurement of torsional shear stress was also

needed. To make this measurement, two-element strain gauges were bonded to the shanks of

multiple bolts as shown in Figure A.1. The two elements of the strain gauge were wired into the

adjacent arms of a Wheatstone bridge, also shown in Figure A.1.

In this appendix an equation is derived for torsional shear stress based on the output

voltage from the Wheatstone bridge. The torsional shear stress is expressed in terms of the

Wheatstone bridge output voltage (VG ), the excitation voltage (VEX ), the gauge factor (G ), and

two material constants, Young's modulus (E ) and Poisson's ratio (ν ).

During assembly, the general state of stress on the outer surface of a preloaded bolt is

shown in Figure A.2. The first stress element is oriented along the axis of the bolt. The second is

oriented at 45° to the bolt axis. The axes of the gauge elements themselves are also aligned at 45°

to the bolt axis, one at +45° and the second at -45°.

96
 +ε

VG VEX
-ε
Simplified
R4 Schematic
R3

R1

VG VEX

R2

Figure A.1 Preloaded Bolt with Strain Gauge Wired into Wheatstone Bridge

Bolt tension will cause equal strains (both in magnitude and sign) in the two elements of

the strain gauge. Since the strains are equal and since the gauge elements are mounted in adjacent

arms of the Wheatstone bridge, the effect of bolt tension will cancel. Therefore, tension will not

affect the output voltage of the bridge. Similarly, the effects from temperature changes, cross

sensitivity, and mounting on a curved surface will also cancel.

In contrast, bolt torsion will cause equal but opposite strains in the two elements of the

strain gauge, resulting in a voltage output in the Wheatstone bridge. Since there are two gauge

elements, the output voltage will be doubled. This fact is reflected in the derivation to follow.

97
 45°
Bolt
Preload
Bolt
Torsion

BOLT BOLT
AXIS AXIS

Figure A.2 Stress Elements for a Preloaded Bolt

Since the effects of tensile stress cancel, the Wheatstone bridge will only output a voltage

due to torsion (assumes no bending occurs in the bolt). Therefore, the strain gauges, wired in this

configuration, only indicate strain due to torsion. The stress elements for torsion only are shown

in Figure A.3.

45°

σ σ
τ
τ

τ
τ
σ σ
BOLT BOLT
AXIS AXIS

Figure A.3 Stress Elements Showing Bolt Torsional Stress Only

98
Derivation of Torsional Shear Stress Equation

First, the excitation voltage (input voltage) for the Wheatstone bridge is related to the

output voltage by [39],

Since the effects of tension cancel, only the resistance changes due to torsion require

consideration. For torsion, R3 changes by and R4 changes by - .

If R1 = R2 = R3 = R4 , and if is small compared to R, then Equation (A.1) becomes:

which reduces to:

Note: If a one-element strain gauge is assumed, 1/2 becomes 1/4.

Next, the gauge factor (G ) is defined as:

where

The gauge factor is provided by the gauge manufacturer and will have an approximate value

of 2.0. Solving for and plugging into Equation (A.3) provides:

Next, Hooke's law for 2D stress is:

For shear due to torsion, σxx = - σyy so Equation (A.7) simplifies to:

99
Solving for σ provides:

Since the magnitude of the normal stress (σ ) and shear stress (τ ) are equal for pure torsion,

Equation (A.9) can be written as:

Finally, combining Equations (A.6) and (A.10) gives:

Therefore, the shear stress due to torsion is now expressed in terms of one measured quantity (VG )

and four known quantities (E, G, VEX, and ν ), which is the desired result. This equation was used

to convert the output voltage measured during testing into torsional stress values.

100
 APPENDIX B

RANDOMIZED ORDER FOR PREVAILING TORQUE TESTS

Table B.1 Random Test Numbers

Random Sorted
Numbers Random Test
RAND() Nut Type Numbers Random Test Number

0.086826 locking 0.007156 locking modified 1

0.451363 locking 0.023325 non-locking 2
0.526340 locking 0.049030 locking modified 3
0.077264 locking 0.077264 locking 4
0.623977 locking 0.086826 locking 5
0.850574 locking 0.097939 non-locking 6
0.146260 locking 0.103729 locking modified 7
0.933502 locking 0.138414 non-locking 8
0.560202 locking 0.146260 locking 9
0.183473 locking 0.183473 locking 10
0.208642 locking modified 0.208642 locking modified 11
0.252083 locking modified 0.252083 locking modified 12
0.569813 locking modified 0.269352 non-locking 13
0.290212 locking modified 0.290212 locking modified 14
0.376890 locking modified 0.376890 locking modified 15
0.103729 locking modified 0.434106 locking modified 16
0.007156 locking modified 0.451363 locking 17
0.525226 locking modified 0.505624 non-locking 18
0.049030 locking modified 0.525226 locking modified 19
0.434106 locking modified 0.526340 locking 20
0.580361 non-locking 0.560202 locking 21

101
 Table B.1 (continued)

0.269352 non-locking 0.569813 locking modified 22

0.697287 non-locking 0.580361 non-locking 23
0.718522 non-locking 0.623977 locking 24
0.023325 non-locking 0.697287 non-locking 25
0.138414 non-locking 0.718522 non-locking 26
0.905426 non-locking 0.850574 locking 27
0.864800 non-locking 0.864800 non-locking 28
0.505624 non-locking 0.905426 non-locking 29
0.097939 non-locking 0.933502 locking 30

102
 APPENDIX C

TORQUE-PRELOAD-STRESS PLOTS FOR 1/4"-28 BOLTS

This appendix includes the torque-preload-stress plots for 1/4"-28 bolts. These plots are

identical to several of the plots shown in Chapter IV for 1/2" bolts except for the bolt size. They

are presented here for comparative purposes.

120000

100000

80000 Axial
Stress (psi)

(Preload)
60000 Stress

40000 Torsional
Stress
20000

0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
Coefficient of Friction

Figure C.1 Axial and Torsional Stress with Constant Input Torque (1/4"-28 Fastener Torqued
to 75 in-lbs)

103
 300000

250000

200000
Stress (psi)

Effective
150000 Stress
Axial
100000 (Preload)
Stress
50000

0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
Coefficient of Friction

Figure C.2 Effective and Axial Stress with Constant Input Torque (1/4"-28 Fastener
Torqued to 75 in-lbs)

120000

100000

80000
Stress (psi)

Axial
(Preload)
60000 Stress

40000 Torsional
Stress
20000

0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
Coefficient of Friction

Figure C.3 Axial and Torsional Stress When Effective Stress Reaches 112,500 psi
(1/4"-28 Fastener)

104
 250.0

200.0 No
Input Torque (in-lbs) Prevailing
Torque
150.0
Ave
Prevailing
Torque
100.0
Max
Prevailing
50.0 Torque

0.0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
Coefficient of Friction

Figure C.4 Input Torque to Generate 112,500 psi Effective Stress, Including Effects of Prevailing
Torque (1/4"-28 Fastener)

105
 APPENDIX D

SAMPLE CALCULATION FOR PROBABILITY OF EXCEEDING YIELD STRENGTH

BASED ON STRESS-STRENGTH INTERFERENCE

This appendix presents the method used to calculate the probabilities shown in Tables

4.1, 4.2, and 4.3 of this paper. The method for determining the mean and standard deviation of

yield strength and effective stress for a given CV and percent population coverage is also

demonstrated. This sample calculation corresponds to the case identified by † in Table 4.1.

STRENGTH

Given:

- yield strength (Sy) = limit stress (Slimit) = 125 ksi, the approximate yield strength of a

160 ksi A286 bolt

- coefficient of variation (CV) = 0.02

- 99% coverage, the z-value for this coverage is 2.33

_______________________________________________________________________

(3.16)

(4.3)

_______________________________________________________________________

Therefore

106
 and

EFFECTIVE STRESS

Given:

- maximum effective stress (σeff_max) = limit stress (Slimit) = 125 ksi

- coefficient of variation (CV) = .0833, assumes ±3σ = ±25%

- 99% coverage, the z-value for this coverage is 2.33

_______________________________________________________________________

(3.16)

(4.4)

_______________________________________________________________________

Therefore

and

107
PROBABILITY

_____________________________________________________________________

Applying Equation (3.15):

( )
√

______________________________________________________________________

Therefore

[ ]
( )
√

Using the standard normal probability table,

which means approximately 2 bolts in a 1000 will exceed the yield strength.

108
 REFERENCES

[1] Kahle, V. E. "Failure Analysis of a Helicopter Accessory Drive." Journal of Failure

Analysis and Prevention. Vol. 6(4) (2006): 38-43.

[2] Cobb, Bernie J. "Torque and Strength Requirements for Preloading Bolts." Product
Engineering (1963): 62-66.

[3] Verein Deutscher Ingenieure. Systematic Calculation of High Duty Bolted Joints,
VDI 2230, 2003.

[4] Industrial Fasteners Institute. Fastener Standards. 6th ed. Cleveland: Industrial Fasteners
Institute, 1988.

[5] Bickford, John H. Introduction to the Design and Behavior of Bolted Joints. 4th ed. Boca
Raton: CRC Press, 2008.

[6] NASA Marshall Space Flight Center. Torque Limits for Threaded Fasteners, MSFC-STD-
486B, 1992.

[7] Bickford, John H., and Sayed Nassar. Handbook of Bolts and Bolted Joints. New York:
Marcel-Dekker, 1998.

[8] NASA Johnson Space Center. Criteria for Preloaded Bolts, NSTS 08307, 1998.

[9] National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Requirements for Threaded Fastening
Systems in Spaceflight Hardware, NASA-STD-5020, 2012.

[10] Motosh, N. "Development of Design Charts for Bolts Preloaded up to the Plastic Range."
Journal of Engineering for Industry (1976): 849-851.

[11] Department of Defense. Threaded Fasteners - Tightening to Proper Tension,

MIL-HDBK-60, 1990.

[12] Shigley, Joseph E., and Charles R. Mischke. Mechanical Engineering Design. 5th ed. New
York: McGraw-Hill, 1989.

[13] Juvinall, Robert C., and Kurt M. Marshek. Fundamentals of Machine Component Design.
5th ed. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, 2012.

[14] Industrial Fasteners Institute. Test Application Handbook Relating to Mechanical

Fasteners. Division VI Aerospace Fasteners, 1995.

[15] Hissam, David A. "Results of Torque-Tension Testing of J2-X Fasteners." Presentation to

J2-X Engineering Review Board, January 21, 2009.

[16] Coleman, Hugh W., and W. Glenn Steele. Experimentation, Validation, and Uncertainty
Analysis for Engineers. 3rd ed. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, 2009.

109
[17] Brown, Kevin H., Charles Morrow, Samuel Curbin, and Allen Baca. "Guideline for Bolted
Joint Design and Analysis: Version 1.0." Sandia National Laboratories, SAND2008-0371,
2008.

[18] Reiff, John D. "A Procedure for Calculation of Torque Specifications for Bolted Joints
with Prevailing Torque." Journal of ASTM, Vol. 2, No. 3, JAI12879 (2005).

[19] Reiff, John D. "A Method for Calculation of Fastener Torque Specifications Which
Includes Statistical Tolerancing." Journal of ASTM, Vol. 2, No. 3, JAI12878 (2005).

[20] Croccolo, D., M. DeAgostinis, and N. Vincenzi. "Failure Analysis of Bolted Joints: Effect
of Friction Coefficients in Torque-Preloading Relationship." Engineering Failure Analysis
(2011): 364-373.

[21] Nassar, S., and B. Housari, "Effect of Thread Pitch and Initial Tension on the Self-
Loosening of Threaded Fasteners." Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology, Vol. 128,
(2006).

[22] Dinger, G., and C. Friedrich. "Avoiding Self-Loosening Failure of Bolted Joints with
Numerical Assessment of Local Contact State." Engineering Failure Analysis (2011):
2188-2200.

[23] Kim, Jeong, Joo-Cheol Yoon, and Beom-Soo Kang. "Finite Element Analysis and
Modeling of Structure with Bolted Joints." Applied Mathematical Modeling 31 (2007),
895-911.

[24] International Organization for Standardization. Fasteners-Torque/Clamp Force Testing,

ISO 16047, 2005.

[25] SAE International. Torque-Tension Test Procedure for Steel Threaded Fasteners - Inch
Series, SAE J174, 2013.

[26] Aerospace Industries Association. Fastener Test Methods, Method 15, Torque-Tension,
NASM 1312-15, 1997.

[27] Cook, Robert D., and Warren C. Young. Advanced Mechanics of Materials. 2nd ed.
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1999.

[28] Aerospace Industries Association. Fastener Test Methods, Method 8, Tensile Strength,
NASM 1312-8, 2001.

[29] ASTM International. Standard Test Methods for Determining the Mechanical Properties of
Externally and Internally Threaded Fasteners, Washers, Direct Tension Indicators, and
Rivets, ASTM F606, 2011.

[30] International Organization for Standardization. Mechanical Properties of Fasteners Made

of Carbon Steel and Alloy Steel, ISO 898-1, 2009.

[31] Sarafin, Thomas P. Spacecraft Structures and Mechanisms, From Concept to Launch.
Torrance, CA: Microcosm, Inc, 1995.

110
[32] Haldar, Achintya, and Sankaran Mahadevan. Probability, Reliability, and Statistical
Methods in Engineering Design. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2000.

[33] Federal Aviation Administration. Metallic Materials Properties Development and

Standardization, MMPDS-06, 2011.

[34] Devore, Jay L. Probability and Statistics for Engineering and the Sciences. 6th ed.
Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole, 2004.

[35] Barrett, Richard T. Fastener Design Manual, NASA Reference Publication 1228, 1990.

[36] Hines, William W., Douglas C. Montgomery, David M. Goldsman, and Connie M. Borror.
Probability and Statistics in Engineering. 4th ed. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, 2003.

[37] ASTM International. Standard Test Methods for Tension Testing of Metallic Materials,
ASTM E8/E8M-09, 2011.

[38] PCB Load and Torque, Inc., accessed October 14, 2013, http://www.pcbloadtorque.com.

[39] Dally, James W., and William F. Riley. Experimental Stress Analysis. 3rd ed. Boston:
McGraw-Hill, 1991.

111