Stainless Steel 316 Bearing Interference

I have an application where we have an 1 5/8" SS 316 shaft oscillating thru 100 deg in a SS 316 bearing ( 1 " in length ) with marine grease. We are
committed to 316 beacuse of corrosion issues.
We have found when tolerances get down the two can " grab " together. I was aware of this issue and allowed > 0.003" - but this can cause problems apparently. Over 0.005" seems to work OK.
Are there any " rules of thumb " as to what clearances should be in this type of situation ?
I have been unable to find anything so far.
Any inputs much appreciated.
Thanks in advance John B
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
John Blundell wrote:

I seem to remember, dimly, through more than 30 years of fog, that my mechanical engineering design book by Shigley had a table that showed what clearance is required between a shaft and a hole for various types of fits (force, interference, running and sliding, etc.)
Almost any mechanical design book or designers or machinists handbook should have this information.
I vaguely recollect that the hole has to be several thousandths larger than the shaft, even for a force fit.
Olin Perry Norton
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Galling will be load and lubrication dependent, among other things. If you're using only moderate to light loads you might get away with using the 316, esp. if you use a heat cured moly disulfide or tungsten sulfide coating.
If it were us, I would look at using other materials as the bearing surfaces, esp. if the loading is high. Grease will not be sufficient to prevent galling regardless of the clearance in this case.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.