Is it better or worse than aluminum sliding on aluminum.... hard to imagine
it being worse....
In my exercise apparatus folly, I got alum "collars" sliding over sq/rect
alum tubes. These are OK, cuz I have nylon as a kind of sliding bearing
between the two surfaces..
But the more compact designs have an alum slider *inside* alum channel, with
no easy or cost-effective way of utilizing nylon. But mebbe another
material, like brass or bronze, would help.
It's a possibility I could make the whole internal assembly out of nylon,
which would solve a lot of problems, but for now, another metal that's
better than alum on alum would help.
Opinions?
Usually you do want materials of differing hardness, but it all depends on
contact pressure, surface finish, and lubricant. If the contact pressure is
not too high and the surfaces well-lubed, Al on Al might work fine. For
higher pressures, you might want polished steel or bronze for use on Al.
DOOD!!!
You done woke me up!!!
I've been laboring under the notion that the "smaller should be softer than
the bigger".... iow, the slider, being quite small surface area-wise,
should be softer then the much larger tracks that it slides on.
And this is indeed true, all things being equal and esp. if you can finagle
nylon "consumables", but in this case, it actually makes quite a bit of
sense to just make the slider harder than the long tubes, etc.!! Quite the
shift in perspective for me!
Not the optimal situation, but better than what I got now, given that the
supports pretty much *must* be made from aluminum -- so far.
And the part is small enough that SS won't break the bank. Altho brass
would certainly be easier to work with.
And all-nylon would also work really well (frictioally), altho it's hard to
get out of the "non-metal" mentality.
Props!!
lum "collars" sliding over sq/rect >> alum tubes. These are OK, cuz I have
nylon as a kind of sliding bearing >> between the two surfaces.. >> >> But
the more compact designs have an alum slider *inside* alum channel, >> with
no easy or cost-effective way of utilizing nylon. But mebbe another >> mat
erial, like brass or bronze, would help. >> >> It's a possibility I could m
ake the whole internal assembly out of nylon, >> which would solve a lot of
problems, but for now, another metal that's >> better than alum on alum wo
uld help. >> >> Opinions? >> -- >> EA >> >> > > Usually you do want materia
ls of differing hardness, but it all depends on > contact pressure, surface
finish, and lubricant. If the contact pressure > is not too high and the s
urfaces well-lubed, Al on Al might work fine. For > higher pressures, you m
ight want polished steel or bronze for use on Al. > DOOD!!! You done woke m
e up!!! I've been laboring under the notion that the "smaller should be sof
ter than the bigger".... iow, the slider, being quite small surface area-wi
se, should be softer then the much larger tracks that it slides on. And thi
s is indeed true, all things being equal and esp. if you can finagle nylon
"consumables", but in this case, it actually makes quite a bit of sense to
just make the slider harder than the long tubes, etc.!! Quite the shift in
perspective for me! Not the optimal situation, but better than what I got n
ow, given that the supports pretty much *must* be made from aluminum -- so
far. And the part is small enough that SS won't break the bank. Altho brass
would certainly be easier to work with. And all-nylon would also work real
ly well (frictioally), altho it's hard to get out of the "non-metal" mental
ity. Props!! -- EA
No SS against Alum. snowballs will build instantly!!!
Think maybe hard ano with teflon on one of the parts, or both, allow the te
flon to be the barrier.
PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.