Using never-seize on lug nuts

[Happycampersrus]

http://www.ntsb.gov/events/1999/truckbus/initiatives.htm

September 1992 Special Investigation:

Wheel Separation in Medium and Heavy Trucks

· Wheel separation accidents constitute about 0.3 percent of all truck accidents; the leading causes of wheel separations from medium to heavy trucks are improper tightening of wheel fasteners and bearing failure, both the result of inadequate maintenance.

· Federal and State oversight of wheel inspections and recalls appeared to be adequate; however, most Federal and State reporting forms do not differentiate between tire and wheel failures.

· Trucking industry lacked uniform model guidelines for maintenance and inspection of all types of medium to heavy trucks, and the industry did not have a uniform recommended practice that specifies how often wheel bearings should be inspected.

· Undertightening of wheel fasteners usually resulted from the failure to follow recommended wheel maintenance practices; overtightening more easily resulted from an air impact wrench instead of a torque wrench.

Recommendations: The Safety Board issued six recommendations to the following recipients: American Trucking Associations, National Wheel and Rim Association, Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association, Truck Trailer Manufacturers, and Society of Automotive Engineers (H-92-98 through -101); Federal Highway Administration (H-92-102); and Department of Transportation (H-92-103).

http://www.ntsb.gov/publictn/1992/sir9204.htm

· Inadequate inspection guidelines, including frequency and procedures for the proper inspection of wheel fasteners and lubrication of bearings.
· Lack of uniform maintenance guidelines among manufacturers.
· Failure by carriers and mechanics to adhere to recommended maintenance guidelines published by wheel manufacturers. 

These are from the National Transportation Safety Board not some magazine.
That was a quick search and the numbers have probably changed since then and I don't want to waste a whole sunny saturday just to prove that heavy equipment can loose wheels due to poor or flawed (your own way)maintenance practices. Even though it's a small percentage it does happen.

Us as bus owners mostly do are own maintenance and inspections so this will probably never happen to us, but it can happen.

[jjrbus]

Happy I always appreciate anybody that posts and can verify there postings. I dont pay much attention to an article in such and such a publication. Just becuse it is in there. My best example would be the prestigious Wall Street Journal. Who run articles by financial experts!!! Some of whom are going to have trouble coming up with the cash for there next bottle of wine!
Anyway thanks!!

[Stan]

quote "· Wheel separation accidents constitute about 0.3 percent of all truck accidents; the leading causes of wheel separations from medium to heavy trucks are improper tightening of wheel fasteners and bearing failure, both the result of inadequate maintenance." unquote

Doesn't that paragraph get right to the problem. Proper maintenance and proper torque will eliminate almost all wheel failures.  Whether the retaining nuts are put on dry or lubricated, the important thing is the proper torque.  A walk around to check tires, wheels and wheel bearings at every stop is good advice.

[Barn Owl]

What would FleetOwner have to gain by just making crap up? How long do you think FleetOwner would keep publishing if they spread disinformation and loose their credibility? They would loose their advertising dollars and then their jobs. I'm not saying everything that is printed is gospel or perfect, that's why there are corrections in almost all publications. But the pooh, poohing going on here is surprising even to me. Just the fact that it could lead to over tightening and wheel damage would be enough to make me stop. Seems that no matter how much evidence Happycampersrus throws up there will change some minds. I say we get the author of that article to weigh in on this one. I will shoot him the link in his email and ask for a response.

Oh, and guess what I found. Yesterday I was rotating the wheels on the car I bought for my daughter, and on the wheel bolts (Yes, bolts not nuts. Seems to be a quirky European thing; this is a Volvo, I've had a VW with them also) there was anti-seize. I just put them back in and torqued them to the factory setting. Drove to D.C. and back (500 mile round trip) and didn't loose a wheel. I'm really not going to loose sleep over this one.

[gus]

Magazines are pretty much alike, they publish some good stuff and some real garbage.

A while back I read an article about motor home tires supposedly written by a self proclaimed "expert" who had been a tire dealer for many years. The article was so full of major mistakes that it was painful. So I wrote the editor and pointed them out to him.

The editor agreed about the mistakes but still defended the article. What else could he do, he published it without checking the facts?  Well, he could have admitted that he had made a mistake but editors don't do a lot of that.

I repeat, just because it appears in a trade magazine doesn't make it so. A little research and a little common sense go a long way.

[Barn Owl]

I agree, and for me personally, Happpycampersrus has dug up enough for me to believe that never-seize should not be used on the lug nuts. At UPS we use a lot of never-seize, but they do not use it to mount the wheels. If they thought it was beneficial they would include it in their PMI's and methods. I think this has become more of an emotional issue than one based on logic. For so many it has made them feel good to put never-seize on lug nuts it's hard to stop that feel good practice. Why not use the same logic to debunk the use of CF-2 oil?  We all accept that CF-2 40wt is the only oil you should run in your two stroke DD. Why? The manufactures, publications, web sites, etc. all say so. I have now seen enough manufactures, publications, and web sites to support the fact that it is not a good practice to use never-seize on lug nuts. I was in the other camp until I read that article, then I switched. Now after reading Alcoa's procedures, I feel that I did the right thing. I realize that probably no one on this board will ever have a wheel fall off solely because of the use of never-seize, that is not the point; it's the education gained, and the ability to share, and apply, what we learn. BTW..... I like all busnuts, whether they use anti-seize or not.

[Barn Owl]

 Below is my email to Kevin and his reply:


****************************************************************************
Kevin,

Your article was referenced to on a Bus Conversion bulletin board. It has sparked a little bit of controversy. I would like to invite you to share your credentials and expertise with us. If you read the threads you will see the purpose behind my invitation.

Link:

http://www.busconversions.com/bbs/index.php?topic=3536.0

Thank You,

Laryn Christley
(Barn Owl)

*****************************************************************************

Laryn,

This subject always sparks some controversy as it is a common practice in the field. Yet it is not considered acceptable by ANY wheel, hub or fastener manufacturer. In fact, the only lubricant that you will ever seen mentioned is 30-weight oil.

As for my credentials, I have been in the truck tire service business for the past 25 years, starting as a technician in my family's tire dealership. For the past 11 years, I have worked for the Tire Industry Association and currently serve as the Senior Vice President of Training. I developed a training and certification program for truck tire technicians that has currently trained and/or certified more than 25,000 people since 1997. I am an active member of the Technology and Maintenance Council of the American Trucking Associations and have chaired several Task Forces for that organization. I was also part of the Task Force that updated the TMC User's Guide to Wheels and Rims, which is recognized as the industry standard for heavy duty truck wheel and rim maintenance. I have spoken at numerous industry conferences throughout North America on a variety of subjects associated with truck tires and wheels.

I also do some expert witness testimony on the side and have witnessed first-hand how a plaintiff's attorney uses the published guidelines against a defendant. As I stated earlier, none of the current rim manuals or industry publications even mention anti-seize compounds and I personally know the top engineers with Alcoa, Accuride, Hayes-Lemmerz, ConMet, and other manufacturers of wheels, hubs and fasteners. All would agree that the use of anti-seize compounds alters the torque and clamping force relationship in a negative manner. And most can point to specific incidents of "wheel-offs" where the use of such compounds was a contributing factor.

Unfortunately, the people with 20+ years of experience who have never experienced a wheel-off even though they use anti-seize compounds can only attribute their success to luck. Should they ever have an accident, the evidence will be all over the wheel end in question and it will be used against them.

Feel free to share this with others since my intention was to educate the Fleet Owner readers on the potential consequences of using these compounds.

Regards,

Kevin Rohlwing

*****************************************************************************

Fellow Busnuts,

Whether you have agreed or not, I want to thank everyone who has participated in this discussion. I have the utmost respect for all of the posters and consider you all friends. I learn something new everyday here and I know I have only started bus kindergarten. I'm not writing this to be the end of this discussion, please keep posting if you would like to add to it.

Laryn

[ol713]

     I agree with gus  - - - - The article about trucking industry wheels
     is interesting, but,  we do not put on the kind of miles that trucks do.
     Our main problem is rust and a lot of years between tire changes.
     I do not speak from reading and research,  I can relate to 10 years
     of experiance and use of a anti-seize compound.
     Like Gus stated,  What does anti-sieze compound have to do with it?
                                 Good luck,   Merle.

[gus]

The more letters a person has after his name the less I am impressed or the number of years experience. I am especially skeptical of engineers since engineers have caused mechanics so much misery over the years. I'm supposedly an engineer myself according to the paperwork but I'm not impressed with that either. Kevin may know what he is talking about and he may not. I'm waiting to see some proof.

Throughout all this discussion there has not been one factually supported case of a wheel coming off solely because anti-seize was used. Just because a wheel comes off and anti-seize happened to be used does not mean that anti-seize was the cause.

This whole thing reminds me of when Lycoming said years ago that the use of auto fuel in their aircraft engines would cause all kinds of airplanes falling out of the sky. When pinned down they could not come up with one supported case of that happening. Again, they told about all kinds of aircraft accidents when using auto fuel but every single one was caused by something else and just happened to be using auto fuel at the time. Today many many small aircraft use auto fuel, mine included, and I still haven't heard of a failure caused by auto fuel.

I'm not saying that these guys are wrong, I'm just saying, "show me the proof".

[Tony LEE]

MCI  MC7 Service manual states where corrosion or galling is a problem, "a light application of a lubricant can be applied to the first three threads of a stud and the first three threads of inner cap nut. Care should be taken to keep all lubricant from the ball seat of stud hole or ball faces of cap nuts."

[Happycampersrus]

"Show me some proof"

It's this simple

If you add lubricant anywere other than the place specified, you can over torque the wheel and cause a catastrophic failure of the rim or fasteners.

The proof is in the NTSB reports I referenced and they cited this. The proof is in the wheel manufacturer manuals and they cited this. 

Do you not believe the wheel manufacturer has tested the idea of Anti-seize and found it to cause over torquing damage??


Kevin Rohlwing wrote

"I also do some expert witness testimony on the side and have witnessed first-hand how a plaintiff's attorney uses the published guidelines against a defendant."

I have first-hand knowledge of this also. That is exactly what is going to happen at a trial when Anti-seize is found on the wheel.

[jjrbus]

 We should send a letter to Permatex, see what thier opinion is!

[Stan]

Since NTSB and all other experts quoted in this thread state that the problem of using anti seize is incorect torque, I would expect them to do some tests and tell everyone what is the correct torque when using anti seize.  They have gone to the trouble of doing tests with 30 weight oil (engine oil, straight mineral oil or can you now use 15-40?) so why not do the same tests with antiseize since it appears to be used by so many trucking companies.

The quote from MCI to oil the threads to prevent galling is interesting, but oil is very poor for this application, compared to anti seize, over long periods of time.

More wheels and studs have been ruined on both cars and trucks by idiots with impact wrenches than by any kind of lubrication on the threads.  Has anyone on this board ever bought a used vehicle that didn't have some stretched studs?

[Happycampersrus]

"Since NTSB and all other experts quoted in this thread state that the problem of using anti seize is incorect torque, I would expect them to do some tests and tell everyone what is the correct torque when using anti seize.  They have gone to the trouble of doing tests with 30 weight oil (engine oil, straight mineral oil or can you now use 15-40?) so why not do the same tests with antiseize since it appears to be used by so many trucking companies."


Simply because 30wt oil is the only thing the manufacturer recommends using and that is the only product they want you to use.

The wheel manufacturer and the wheel fastener manufacturer evidently feels that anti-seize is not the PROPER product for their application, so they don't recommend using anti-seize.

IF the wheel manufacturer thought that anti-seize was a good idea:
(1) They would endorse it.
(2) They would list the proper torque for Anti-seize on lugs.
(3) Don't you think they would have their own Anti-seize type product to use on their wheels to make $$$ off of ??

Don't panic guys I have an email request in to Alcoa to get their opinion on this. I am waiting on a reply.

[kyle4501]

There are many things going on when you bolt a wheel on. Hub piloted mounting causes less stress in the rim. The ball seat or taper on stud piloted wheels induces more stress in the rim itself. That's why they changed to hub piloted.

For those that don't know, friction is what makes a bolted connection work. If there was no friction, the parts would freely slide around. The nut would turn, the rims would slide around on the hub, etc. Those putting lubricants on the mounting surfaces scare hell out of me! This lubrication allows the wheel to shift & that adds more stress to the studs. If corrosion is a problem, there should be a better solution (not easier, BETTER).

The use of 30 weight oil has been tested so that the results are known & predictable. The various anti-seize compounds have different additives in them which affect their lubricity. That makes publishing torque values for them impossible.

IF things were so simple & it didn't matter what you use, then why do the rim manufacturers post so many warnings?

Why do so many think 'proper torque' is important even tho they have no idea what 'proper torque' is, how the engineer arrived at the specified number, & how clamping force is affected by lubricants, wear, abused parts, etc.

I'm also amazed by the number of people who delight in engineer bashing (Although, I do know a few who would benefit from a good bashing  ) when all they know is what they have seen & know damn little of the real reasons behind it.  (OOPS, didn't see that soap box, sorry.)

The real reason you don't see more wheels falling off is the fact that it is an abuse tolerant design. If you think your wheel hardware needs anti seize, I'm guessing that the hardware was abused last time & needs replacement. OR the environment is causing corrosion & the hardware should be replaced & proper anti corrosion measures taken. OR it has been too long since the wheels were removed & you need to deal with that issue.
NONE of the proper solutions to the problem should involve compromising the integrity of the stud - nut interface.

Be careful so you can spend more time enjoying your trip!