Welcome to the Access Norton Forum. Login as a VIP member to remove the advertising banners.


Big-end Journal Wall thickness

Norton Models (not Commando or P11)

Big-end Journal Wall thickness

Postby Possum » Tue Jan 24, 2017 7:01 pm

I tried to post this late last night & lost it into the void...so apologies if it is repeated elsewhere; I am better on a micrometer than a computer.

Does anybody have a 600cc &/or a 650cc crankshaft pulled apart?

I am interested in knowing the inside diameter of the hollow core of the crank-pin (Big-end) journals, to see if Norton altered the wall thickness of the journal, or just the outside diameter & stroke of the journal.

For example, the 500cc crank-pin journal is 1.500" diameter with a core of 1.000" diameter.

Possum
Posts: 33
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 6:16 pm

Re: Big-end Journal Wall thickness

Postby Rohan » Tue Jan 24, 2017 7:48 pm

Can't help with the 650cc stuff, although that was discussed here somewhere a while back.
The 650cc crank was a lot stronger than previous.

The 600cc Model 99 cranks used the same crank journal - and rods - as the 500.
Once they were hotrodded a bit, thats why they started having crank problems.
What was good for a mild 500cc was rather marginal for a 600 cc.
As all the old timers chime in with as soon as this subject is raised.
They weren't known as detonators for nothing ....

Oddly too, hollow tubes can be stronger than solid shafts, wall thickness and hollow size depending.
Graphing it shows a web of crossing lines/curves, not a simple exercise and not one size/ratio will always be stronger...

I seem to recall also some discussion about internal machine marks and stress raisers and poor machining,
so all food for thought... (might have been Commando though ?).
hth.

Rohan
Posts: 8068
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2010 5:30 pm

Re: Big-end Journal Wall thickness

Postby Possum » Fri Jan 27, 2017 11:43 pm

Seems the core diameter did not change from 500 to 650; just the journal diameter from 600 to 750.

So the hairline crack in the journal radius of the 650 crank that I have recently acquired, is the result of the core being increased to 1-1/4" diameter. Presumably in an attempt to reduce weight...

Another doorstop!

Possum
Posts: 33
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 6:16 pm

Re: Big-end Journal Wall thickness

Postby Burgs » Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:57 am

Hi Possum
I have a 650SS crank that I can strip down and measure if you still require it?
It's a 1963 year model and I have to strip it down anyway.

Best regards
Burgs

Burgs
Posts: 109
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 2:38 pm
Location: Australia

Re: Big-end Journal Wall thickness

Postby Rohan » Sun Jan 29, 2017 12:01 am

Possum wrote:Seems the core diameter did not change from 500 to 650; just the journal diameter from 600 to 750.



Just to be clear here, precisely what is this 'core diameter' you mention ?

And, is not the 650 near about the same as the 750 ?

Rohan
Posts: 8068
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2010 5:30 pm

Re: Big-end Journal Wall thickness

Postby Possum » Fri Feb 24, 2017 12:05 am

I measured 500cc, 600cc & 650cc and found them all to have a 1" I.D. big-end journal core.

Possum
Posts: 33
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 6:16 pm

Re: Big-end Journal Wall thickness

Postby Rohan » Fri Feb 24, 2017 12:53 am

Which actually means the 650 has a lot more metal there than the small journal 500 and 600 versions...

Rohan
Posts: 8068
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2010 5:30 pm

Re: Big-end Journal Wall thickness

Postby wot » Thu Mar 02, 2017 1:24 pm

Some sort of British engineering?

Rohan wrote: hollow tubes can be stronger than solid shafts

wot
Posts: 39
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2012 10:04 am
Location: s. e. michigan

Re: Big-end Journal Wall thickness

Postby Rohan » Thu Mar 02, 2017 3:26 pm

Not at all - have a look in any standard engineering textbook.

Having a hole through the middle distributes the stresses around the shaft.
Depending on the dimensions, this means a large circular hollow shaft is usually (much) stronger
than a smaller solid shaft, for the same metal.
Ribs fillets and fillers in aircraft often have hole(s) in them for the same reason.

Rohan
Posts: 8068
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2010 5:30 pm

Re: Big-end Journal Wall thickness

Postby dynodave » Thu Mar 02, 2017 3:34 pm

Possum wrote:I measured 500cc, 600cc & 650cc and found them all to have a 1" I.D. big-end journal core.


A few years ago I asked around about 88SS cranks rumored being different. I had measured mine and on BenG face book page and he also emailed me confirmed the smaller diameter core for the uprated SS crank core size but I failed to write the size down. :(
My (bogus) 88SS crank is standard so I am not going to tune all the way to hopefully give it a chance to live and not blow up.
free forum information is very often worth about 1/2 of what you paid for it.
User avatar

dynodave
Posts: 930
Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 5:59 pm
Location: Hamilton Mass USA

Re: Big-end Journal Wall thickness

Postby wot » Mon Mar 13, 2017 11:58 am

Rohan wrote:Not at all - have a look in any standard engineering textbook.

Having a hole through the middle distributes the stresses around the shaft.
Depending on the dimensions, this means a large circular hollow shaft is usually (much) stronger
than a smaller solid shaft, for the same metal.
Ribs fillets and fillers in aircraft often have hole(s) in them for the same reason.


Amazing, you drill a hole in a round bar and that makes is stronger.

So a 1.750 diameter bar with a 1.000 diameter hole through it is stronger that a solid 1.750 diameter bar? And this hole "distributes stresses" to add strength? Does it get stronger with larger holes? How about a 1.625 diameter hole, leaving 0.062 wall thickness?

Maybe you should get that 'standard engineering textbook' out and calculate the section modulus of a solid 1.750 diameter as opposed to a 1.750 diameter with a 1.000 diameter hole.

wot
Posts: 39
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2012 10:04 am
Location: s. e. michigan

Re: Big-end Journal Wall thickness

Postby Rohan » Mon Mar 13, 2017 1:36 pm

Per weight of metal, have you done the sums ???

Don't forget there HAS to be a hole through it - to supply oil to the bigends.
And to allow for sludging up and still supply oil.
And the overall weight also has to meet the balance factor requirements....

How about a 1.625 diameter hole, leaving 0.062 wall thickness?

Obviously there are limits - do the sums, and see how they graph out.

P.S. Not unrelated, have you ever noticed that (for many years) motorcycle frames
were made from large hollow tubing. As distinct from from small diam solid rod.
For the same metal, do the sums....

Rohan
Posts: 8068
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2010 5:30 pm

Re: Big-end Journal Wall thickness

Postby worntorn » Thu Mar 16, 2017 7:20 pm

Ocean going ships use hollow drive shafts. At one time solid shafts were used but breakage became a problem as horsepower levels rose. A hollow shaft solved the problem.

Glen

worntorn
Posts: 3405
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 11:43 pm
Location: Langley, B.C.


Return to Other Nortons

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bernhard and 8 guests