George DeVeau (gfd@akguc.att.com) writes:
> One of the problems that I see with Knockoffs is that, unlike
> torquing a nut or bolt, there are no guides to quantify a
> "whack", maybe "Whack-Newtons".
My first thought on this thread was that possibly there was a slight
mismatch between axle and hub (e.g. one was a not-quite-perfect replace-
ment part of some sort), but perhaps that's a bit farfetched.
Some data points on the mallet and Whack-Newtons:
1) Uncle's Alvises (Alvii) are all equipped with Rudge knock-offs, and
all came with factory-supplied mallets. These were a specific weight
and soft-faced (perhaps lead-headed), to permit the user to whack
the knockoff directly without padding, and without knockoff damage.
2) User was instructed to simply whack the knockoff until it did not
budge any further, at which point it was considered tight enough.
3) I suspect that the physics of the heavy mallet head (regarding inertia
and how fast you could swing it) were selected such that a typical
effort to swing it would result in a good ballpark torque setting on
the hub. In other words, if Alvis had issued light hammers, the users
could beat the daylights out of the hubs without getting them tight
enough; if they sent out heavier hammers, like sledges, this would
give users the power to torque the knockoffs until the ears broke off.
-- Andy
|