![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
I came to this page as a layman hoping to learn more about screw threads - and even after reading the page I am little the wiser. The diagrams are extremely confusing, as they do not resemble screws as I know them and the diameter markings make no sense. What, for instance, is "Dmaj" the measurement of? According to the first diagram, it measures something beyond the physical dimensions of the screw. Furthermore, what is "nominal outer diameter?" Is this the diameter from thread-tip to thread-tip or from trough to trough? If so, it should state this explicitly rather than use jargon.
In short, I think this article could do with some major editing to make it more understandable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Newzild ( talk • contribs) 08:44, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
Engineering standards are an inherently technical topic, and simplification would reduce the value to technical readers. The warning should be removed and the article should not be modified.~~Jack~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.127.236.130 ( talk) 02:39, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
I recently added specific references where applicable. when I tried to add the references template to the References section it did not appear. I've never had this problem before. Will someone please troubleshoot my work? Stephen Charles Thompson ( talk) 03:21, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
May I know where to get the international standard for M0.8 pitch, major diameter, pitch diameter and minor diameter specification?
The added table columns on hexagonal bolt heads seem off-topic. This article is about screw threads, which are used on many other products than hexagonal nuts and bolts. This information, which isn't covered in the referenced screw-thread standards, could be moved to the articles on screw or bolted joint, and should have references to the relevant source standards. Markus Kuhn ( talk) 10:56, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
due to physic's methods the pitch should be expresed in mm/spin units —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.38.150.30 ( talk) 18:03, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Should not the calculation for H be P/2 * sin(60)?
Also there is no mention of the concepts: root radius, root truncation, crown truncation, lead flank, trailing flank, lead angle, -- 71.38.172.8 ( talk) 16:11, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
ISO 261 http://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_q=ISO+261&num=10&btnG=Search+Scholar&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_occt=title&as_sauthors=&as_publication=&as_ylo=&as_yhi=&as_allsubj=all&hl=en -- 222.64.17.90 ( talk) 01:49, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Papers of ISO 261 citations are not traceable http://scholar.google.com/scholar?start=0&q=allintitle:+ISO+262&hl=en
and yet the website of http://www.iec.ch/ is not traceable physically, other than email which is not sufficiently convince the readers-- 222.64.17.90 ( talk) 02:00, 31 July 2009 (UTC) It's just the matter that the webmaster of the site needs to add the info of physical address
The org is there as referred by http://www.springerlink.com/content/r6137369018t47q0/ -- 222.64.17.90 ( talk) 02:56, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
http://www.springerlink.com/content/8n12h4311606626k/
http://findit.lib.rmit.edu.au:9003/sfx_local?ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&ctx_id=10_1&ctx_tim=2009-07-31T13%3A10%3A2EST&ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsfxit.com%3Acitation&rft.genre=journal&rft.jtitle=Chromatographia&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&sfx.title_search=contains&url_ctx_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Actx&url_ver=Z39.88-2004 -- 222.64.17.90 ( talk) 03:13, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V4T-4S1C889-4&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=2f0126b9a815a4b8e8b57cc3dd83ebae -- 222.64.17.90 ( talk) 02:20, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
http://oskicat.berkeley.edu/search/X?SEARCH=t:(Reliability%20Engineering%20%26%20System%20Safety%20)&SORT=D -- 222.64.17.90 ( talk) 03:25, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
BTW, what is the difference between Springer New York and Springer US ??? Are there publisher's identifier around???
http://www.springer.com/advertisers?SGWID=0-110-12-69408-0
http://www.google.com/#hl=en&q=Springer+New+York&aq=f&oq=&aqi=g2&fp=-Pw1cEIpNGU -- 222.64.17.90 ( talk) 03:00, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Japan has a metric thread series that is not-quite-ISO, made in accordance with Japanese Industrial Standard (JIS). I encountered them during an engineering job where a U.S. firm had their manufacturing performed by a Japanese company. Standard ISO metric screws and nuts will interchange with JIS metric screws and nuts, but due to tolerance differences, they cannot be torqued to full specification when mixed. True ISO metric screws are more likely to strip the threads out of tapped JIS metric holes. It may be worth pointing out, but not belaboring, in the article.— Quicksilver T @ 01:23, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
In the diagram the Ds denote what would normally be called the radii, not the diameters. Is this correct? (e.g. would an M20 screw have a 20mm diameter, or a 2x20=40mm diameter?) 11:43, 9 August 2010
Well you wouldn't, he didn't put the s as a subscript because it's a plural, you cock.
You should have to look carefully, you cock.
It would be clearer if the set of equations started with Dmaj = D(nominal diameter) if that is the relation
The text talks of tolerance classes h and g but these are not mentioned in the reference text (ISO 965-1). This uses d and d2 which are not mentioned on this page I think are Dmaj and Dp. some consistency would be useful even where it does not exist in the standards.
The notation M8x1.25 is more commonly used to indicate the length of the bold e.g. M8x60 would be am M8(coarse) bolt 30mm long —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.229.216.245 ( talk) 09:13, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
major diameter is once denoted as D, another time Dmaj: "[...] major diameter D and [...]" vs. "[...] major diameter Dmaj and [...]" - confusing for me.
On top of it, I believe the table is plain wrong: when I measure M4, M6, M8, it has major diameter of 3.6, 5.6, 7.7, according to the table it should be major diameter D=4.0, 6.0, 8.0 81.6.48.229 ( talk) 21:43, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
If "thread depth" is , as it appears to be from the nearby diagram, then shouldn't this come out as ≈0.541 × P, rather than ≈0.614 × P as stated? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.175.14.204 ( talk) 15:52, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
So either the diagram needs to be changed, or the text changed, or the one half needs to be put in some how. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mtanquary ( talk • contribs) 21:48, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
I visited this page hoping to find recommended tap drill sizes for ISO metric threads - it does seem a reasonable thing to include, either in "Preferred sizes" or, more probably, "Wrench sizes", which might become "Wrench and tap sizes". As an electronic, rather than a mechanical, engineer I should prefer to leave the edit to someone more expert, but probably could do it if asked. JMBryant ( talk) 17:17, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on ISO metric screw thread. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:17, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
Surely an M8 internal thread (nut) should match an M8 external thread (bolt) - using the description above the matching bolt for an M8 bolt would be 8-thread height - eg M7 .. this isn't right .. 5.198.10.236 ( talk) 16:22, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
afaik the nominal diameter is always the same as the major diamater - eg see table here
https://www.newmantools.com/tech/threadm.htm
I used to own a pamphlet that showed both Japan and France had different diameter x pitch combination for bolts / screws smaller than M6, eg M5x0.9. Below that there were differences between the two. Other than that the German DIN 13 had M5.5x0.9. I still own a thread gauge that includes a blade marked 0.9 located between blades marked 0.8 and 1. These historical oddeties are useful for those who may be restoring, say, old French cars or old Japanese motorcycles etc etc. Back in the late 1960s I remember looking at then new Japanese motorcycles that carried a tag warning "ISO metric threads". Peter Horn User talk 18:36, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
15.3 Metrisches DIN-Gewinde (veraltet) Auszug aus DIN 13 (ungültig) und DIN 13-1 (ungültig) Außengewinde Ohne speziellen Hinweis fertigt EMUGE die Abmessungen mit Toleranzen nach DIN ISO 965-1! ❚ ❙ ❘ ➤ Gewindetabellen 15 519
Außengewinde
1,7 0,35 1,473 1,518 0,045 0,010 1,256 1,346 0,090 1,473 1,544 0,071 0,010 1,256 1,346 0,090 2,3 0,4 2,040 2,090 0,050 0,015 1,795 1,920 0,125 2,040 2,120 0,080 0,015 1,795 1,920 0,125 2,6 0,45 2,308 2,358 0,050 0,020 2,036 2,176 0,140 2,308 2,388 0,080 0,020 2,036 2,176 0,140 5,5 0,9 4,915 4,978 0,063 0,026 4,357 4,581 0,224 4,915 5,015 0,100 0,026 4,357 4,581 0,224
1,7 0,35 1,629 1,700 0,071 1,428 1,473 0,045 1,629 1,700 0,071 1,402 1,473 0,071 1,246 2,3 0,4 2,200 2,300 0,100 1,990 2,040 0,050 2,200 2,300 0,100 1,960 2,040 0,080 1,780 2,6 0,45 2,488 2,600 0,112 2,258 2,308 0,050 2,488 2,600 0,112 2,228 2,308 0,080 2,016 5,5 0,9 5,320 5,500 0,180 4,852 4,915 0,063 5,320 5,500 0,180 4,815 4,915 0,100 4,331
I removed the paragraph below due to the failed verification tag. It also lacks clarity.
Using the multiplication sign could cause misunderstanding. Therefore the pitch is always indicated with two decimals. (e.g., M10×1.25×30). As a length of 1,00 mm obviously is not valid as well as a pitch of 16 mm on an M8 bolt would not be valid (M8×16), using the multiplication sign is unambiguous. Refer to paragraph 12.2 of ISO 965-1:2013 for this. failed verification
-- Srleffler ( talk) 16:59, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
Came here to find the major and minor diameters for M3. Nope - not included. I'm sure that the article very faithfully follows all the wikipedia standards and the ISO standard that specifies the thread. This is not a good reason to remove useful information, however, AT ALL. Polymath uk ( talk) 15:25, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
Simple Thread Designation | Thread Designation | Pitch (MM) | Basic Major Diameter
(External Threads) |
Basic Minor Diameter
(Internal Threads) |
M1 | M1x0.25 | 0.25 | 0.982 | 0.729 |
M2 | M2x0.4 | 0.4 | 1.981 | 1.567 |
M3 | M3x0.5 | 0.5 | 2.980 | 2.459 |
M4 | M4x0.7 | 0.7 | 3.978 | 3.242 |
M5 | M5x0.8 | 0.8 | 4.976 | 4.134 |
M6 | M6x1 | 1 | 5.974 | 4.917 |
M7 | M7x1 | 1 | 6.974 | 5.917 |
M8 | M8x1.25 | 1.25 | 7.972 | 6.647 |
M9 | M9x1.25 | 1.25 | 8.972 | 7.647 |
M10 | M10x1.5 | 1.5 | 9.968 | 8.376 |
M12 | M12x1.75 | 1.75 | 11.970 | 10.106 |
M14 | M14x2 | 2 | 13.960 | 11.835 |
M16 | M16x2 | 2 | 15.960 | 13.835 |
M18 | M18x2.5 | 2.5 | 17.960 | 15.294 |
M20 | M20x2.5 | 2.5 | 19.960 | 17.294 |
M22 | M22x2.5 | 2.5 | 21.960 | 19.294 |
M24 | M24x3 | 3 | 23.950 | 20.752 |
M27 | M27x3 | 3 | 26.950 | 23.752 |
M30 | M30x3.5 | 3.5 | 29.950 | 26.211 |
M33 | M33x3.5 | 3.5 | 32.970 | 29.211 |
M36 | M36x4 | 4 | 35.940 | 31.670 |
M39 | M39x4 | 4 | 38.940 | 34.670 |
M42 | M42x4.5 | 4.5 | 41.940 | 37.129 |
M45 | M45x4.5 | 4.5 | 44.940 | 40.129 |
M48 | M48x5 | 5 | 47.930 | 42.587 |
M52 | M52x5 | 5 | 51.930 | 46.587 |
M56 | M56x5.5 | 5.5 | 55.930 | 50.046 |
Polymath uk ( talk) 15:34, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
An important part of this article matches word-for-word some content which is claimed as copyright at Engineer's Edge. I can't figure out which is copied from which. It would seem odd that text would be copied from Wikipedia and then claimed as copyright. The Wikipedia text evolved somewhat between about 2008 and 2010. Lithopsian ( talk) 18:12, 24 January 2023 (UTC)