Need a mech eng definition for "male-female connection"

I'm trying to find a mechanical definition of a "male-female connection" (or separate definitions of male and/or female, used in the mechanical context). Does anyone know of such a definition (including the source) or a good mechanical engineering dictionary to use?

Reply to
Tom
Loading thread data ...

This is a complex subject.

It involves complex relationships.

I think it goes something like this:

Angle of the Dangle = Heat of the Meat x (Boob)^3 / Mass of the Ass.

Reply to
Al Smith

Plug and socket?

Reply to
Matt Pedersen

Dear Tom:

Tongue and groove? ;>) You've got plug and socket already...

Gender is less specific, but male-female is pretty industry standard.

You might like: URL:

formatting link
What kind of mechanism did you have in mind?

David A. Smith

Reply to
N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc)

I can't see the difficulty. A Google search on: definition male; threw up lots of mech-eng-related definitions - all based on discriminating between which has a part that enters or penetrates another, and which is designed to receive such an part.

Kelvin B. Hales Kelvin Hales Associates Limited Consulting Process Control Engineers Web:

formatting link

Reply to
Kelvin Hales

crossposted to sci.engr.mech.pedantry ...

;-) Rich

Reply to
Rich Grise

URL:

formatting link

In fact, I've just got an assignment to pick widths for a tongue-and-slot (for lack of a better term, at least in my headbone) joint; kind of a tongue and groove, but in the plan view: | __________________ _______________________v__ |_________ |________ _________| ________| 12" __________________| |__________________________ ^ | Here we're looking down at a flat plate, 12" wide (Y in the sketch) and a total of 16' (192") long, 1" thick. Machined Cast Aluminum. The longest piece we can start with is 8'.

Is there some kind of rule of thumb for the widths of the prongs, and the treatment of the corners? Or something I could look up?

And what kind of clearance do I need - this has to be a precision fit; from one end of the 16' to the other, we have to hold

0.010". It'll be sitting on something, but we don't know what yet - we don't have a table big enough. :-)

And I wonder if anyone has opinions about that joint. Would it be better all around to just use a third piece and make an ordinary lap joint?

And this is all bolts and pins - no welding. There would be long transverse pins in that tongue above.

If someone has a convincing argument for another way that's better and cheaper, I'm all ears, so to speak. :-)

Reply to
Rich Grise

I'll take a shot at this: I assume you are a mammal, and hence familiar with the connotation of the term "male" and "female" for a connector, in the usual sense.

So I expect it is the androgynous aspect that can be puzzling. Two forms come to mind:

1) A connector which has a male component and a separate female component. Two of these dual connectors fit together, male to female and female to male. 2) A connector which has a unitary design with a male element in a sheath, two of which will connect together. As an example, consider the the fingers of your left hand, with the finger tips bent to hooks. Your left hand willl hook to the fingers of your right hand, if similarly hooked.

Brian W

Reply to
Brian Whatcott

"Rich Grise" wrote in news:5%XGc.27094$ snipped-for-privacy@nwrddc03.gnilink.net:

You may wish to look at a multi-taper joint, commonly used in the woodworking industry to join straight pieces. I'm not good at ASCII art, so I will just describe it as two deep W's mated together, sort of a taper lock. After assembly, you could use tapered dowel pins vertically through the joint to lock it.

Reply to
Anthony

URL:

formatting link
>What kind of mechanism did you have in mind?

This is called a leg and clevis arrangement in aerospace.

Do you have to use cast aluminum?

Reply to
Jeff Finlayson

formatting link

I must have let the spell checker mess that up. That should be LUG and CLEVIS.

Reply to
Jeff Finlayson

The folks who make long steel transfer rails for machine tools typically use a "half and half" joint, rather than tongue and groove, sorta like this:

______________ ______________________ |______ |______ ______________________| |_______________

With this method, each piece has exactly the same thickness and strength, so you don't have a 1/3 - 2/3 thickness distribution, or a half-thickness on the male piece and two quarter-thicknesses on the female, or whatever. Dowel pins and screws hold the thing together.

The ends and shoulders on the rails (vertical lines on my sketch) are made to meet tightly. This adds to the ability of the assembly to resist bending in the plane of the joint. Outside corners on both ends of both parts are chamfered generously, to prevent corner interference, and to make sure that it's the faces that actually make contact.

A major reason for this kind of joint is that it's easy to make. You don't need to cut slots deep into one of the pieces. You can easily make the joint as long as you like, and therefore space the dowels as far apart as necessary to achieve the desired strength. Straight, flat mill cuts, of course, are a lot easier to keep precise than deep slots. And, if thickness adjustments are needed to get a nice fit and alignment, they can be made to either piece. With a tongue and groove arrangement, adjustment can be difficult and tricky - especially if the grooved piece happens to open or close a bit when it's middle is cut out.

Hope this helps!

KG __ I'm sick of spam. The 2 >

Reply to
Kirk Gordon

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.