Got the Rockstomper beadlocks installed, and made a pretty detailed article with lots of pics.

Description / analysis will also apply to the homebrew "2 flat ring" beadlock styles too.

Overall, I am very very pleased.

Scott....if you have comments or questions about my article, please pm or e-mail me.

http://www.pirate4x4.com/tech/beadlocks

Enjoy!!

<i>* Edit by Lance (It's now an official Pirate Tech article. ;) )</i>

"<i>The do-it-yourself approach appeals to me as I can do the welding my <b>safe</b></i>"

;)

How come no one runs a bead of high grade flexible silicone around the weld? this is done on all the wire wheels around the spoke mounting surface that lowriders are running they seem to hold up pretty good until the spokes come loose and break through.I've seen a big tub of the stuff at a tire shop up here.
This would ensure no leaks
good article :beer:

BB's in the tires? Really??

Why have we all been dealing with lead wheel weights on the rims if that's all it takes? :D

Does it really make a big difference on an unbalanced tire/wheel combo?

Maybe I should've left the dirt inside the tire when I mounted.. :D

If you want to corect the coning, you can put a ring between the rings so there is metel to metel conection along the inside edge of the rings.

How come no one runs a bead of high grade flexible silicone around the weld?

Well, that should work, but really there's no reason the weld shouldn't be airtight if done properly.

can't really give a long term report on how well the BBs work....not many miles yet (not enough to work out the flat spots yet - it takes a good 30 miles in the winter here)

Will post info when i get it.

If you want to corect the coning, you can put a ring between the rings so there is metel to metel conection along the inside edge of the rings.

yea, I'll look at this, or maybe just a few "tabs" if I run into problems at all.....but I will prob be fine

the ones i made have 36 bolts and i can feel your pain on mounting the rings. that is a shitload of bolts to keep tighting down. i am going to roll up some 3/16x 1/2" wide strips to weld on the inside of the ring to make it less prone to coneing in. this should solve the problem and make it much easier to torque down. did the bb's work? a very good write up. thanks
http://bbs.off-road.com/wwwthreads_uploads/53-640887-beadlock&tire1

i also want to know if the bb thing works. does it?

click on the pics gets me dead links.... :confused:

I would think that the BB thing would be only good for steel wheels.

I think it would be a problem in my champions due to gaulding and the strength of steel BBs.

Just a thought.

I'll drive the beast to work tomorrow (47km one way) and report on the BBs.

DRM - the new link is the POR mirror, and Lance and i are both on slow hillbilly dial up so he han't got the big pics up yet.

You can see the other copy at:

http://billavista.tripod.com/Beadlocks/Beadlocks.htm

thanks...


just a tip - narrow the table a bit - even at 1024x768 I have to scross a little to see it all..

Ok, I am thinking about the issue with the outer ring coning in... Seems like metal there would not be the answer, since it would either need to be too think so you can get a good tight seat, or if you made it big enough to tough you limit how tight you can clamp the ring.

So how about a rubber ring to sit in there, roughly the thickness of the tire bead, just there to give the rings an equal surface to clamp down on, and also keep out dirt, and keep the outer ring from compressing in as bad...

But where would you find rubber to cut a 14" diamater, 1/3" wide, same thinckness as the tire bead, and be easy to cut into that shape? :confused:

DRM has a good idea going here, a good setup to even the load would be something of similar make of a tire. Hmmm what is similar to a tire bead..... Ahh I know a tire bead! so if this is really an issue go get yourself a tire and cut off the bead and problen solved :-P

If it is really a problem should be the question

good and informative artical. Well done.

Thank you for writing it.



But still, NO ONE has posted a price!!!

What is the *average* price one could expect to pay for a set of these??


-mark

Prices should be on their website.

I got in before the end of year increase. and so paid $75 per kit (one wheel). I believe the price is now $90 per ?

thank you.


new cage has first buget... but at least now I have a better idea how much lunch money to start saving :D

FYI - the large pics have been uploaded. :)

Your tech article is the :nuke: Billavista- NICE WORK!!!

You know what I really liked the most?
Well with all the 120v welding machine bashing that seems to go on around here-----Look everybody at what someone who knows whats up can do with a 120v Lincoln SP125 not even a HIGH amperage new style model. Also note the thickness of the ring being welded AND the size of the assembley (big heat sink).
Notice his selection of wire size for all of the given above.
Thanks Bill-YOU ROCK!,
weldpro

Originally posted by DRM
Ok, I am thinking about the issue with the outer ring coning in... Seems like metal there would not be the answer, since it would either need to be too think so you can get a good tight seat, or if you made it big enough to tough you limit how tight you can clamp the ring.

So how about a rubber ring to sit in there, roughly the thickness of the tire bead, just there to give the rings an equal surface to clamp down on, and also keep out dirt, and keep the outer ring from compressing in as bad...

But where would you find rubber to cut a 14" diamater, 1/3" wide, same thinckness as the tire bead, and be easy to cut into that shape? :confused:

DRM has a good idea going here, a good setup to even the load would be something of similar make of a tire. Hmmm what is similar to a tire bead..... Ahh I know a tire bead! so if this is really an issue go get yourself a tire and cut off the bead and problen solved :-P

If it is really a problem should be the question

You guys beat me to it. I was thinking this same thing on the way home yesterday. Called the local shop and asked if they had any old swampers laying around, the did and said if I wanted to come cut them up I could have at it. Take the tire beada of both sides on two swamps and slip it in there. May not be superpretty, but might help out some. Just a thought.

I dunno about using another tire bead... seems like it would be too big an OD to fit to the inside of the beadlock bolts...

Now, if you are using 15" rims, some 14" tire beads may be better sized, but probably way thin...

Originally posted by DRM
I dunno about using another tire bead... seems like it would be too big an OD to fit to the inside of the beadlock bolts...

Now, if you are using 15" rims, some 14" tire beads may be better sized, but probably way thin...

I see your point, but even if you just cut it into strips, but for that matter, any tire would work. The only reason I would assume swamps to be a frist choice to rob the tire bead from would be that the beads would be similar in size rather than a 14" passenger car tire. You might have to double up if you used one too thin, but who knows.

I might be in good shape since I'm running 16's, maybe step down to a 15" swamp bead and give it a shot, that's assuming that I ever get enough money to buy this stuff :D

O-ring material is another possibility. It comes in big rolls for the DIY o-ring kits. I'm sure most sizes up to about 1/2" but don't know about bigger.

Great article, Bill. Thanks much! :)

You know, I never even considered cutting a slit in the bead material to make it a smaller diameter - duh :clown:

And the O-ring idea is a good one too!

I will be using 16.5" beadlocks, and I have a dead 15" bogger here I may just try that out....

why not go to the big rig boneyard and cut circles into some old mudflaps. then there's no slits.
Easy

...Someone mentioned tabs... It wouldn't be hard to measure all the bead thicknesses (Swamper, BFG, Goodyear, etc)(and the SQUISHED thickness, not the relaxed thickness), and make maybe 8 tabs for the rims... When you order your beadlocks you just tell them you're running swampers, and you get a set of swamper tabs, etc...?

...I think metal would actually be BETTER (assuming they are the correct thickness for the bead used... Because BillaVista talked about "when you tighten one, it loosens the ones beside it"... If you had metal at one edge, it might speed up the mounting process, because of the fact that each turn of the bolt would squish the rubber more... Because of the leverage of the metal. If that makes any sense.

My 2 cents.

Wouldnt the best answer be to spotface the bolt mating surfaces to correct the angle?

...Or even better, would be a (also mentioned :rolleyes: ) complete ring, that looked like:

http://www.ssimicro.com/~warbler/temp/LockRings.jpg

...That'd also help center the rings, and if you made it wider to accomodate the bolts too, it'd help line up the bolts...

...You'd have to make different thickness rings for the different tire bead thicknesses though...

...If you could use the right dia. & thickness pipe or tube (ya, it'd be big :D), it shouldn't be a whole lot to cut 'em up on a lathe... Just a little bit time consuming, that's all... With a CNC lathe it'd be a joke.

2 more cents. :D

I think the metal ring might be a good way to go. Something thinner than the bead so that any coneing would go to the outside and help tighten on the bead. Think leverage: Non-compressable metal VS compressable rubber.

I know it's a bad name to some right now, but my Stockton Wheel beadlocks are actually set up with a dual-height stepped ring so that it self-centers the bead and then you don't have to worry about coneing because the ring is stiffer.

Just some possibilities.

-John

Yeah and you'd likely have to change your spacer with every new set of tires.

Originally posted by mike
Yeah and you'd likely have to change your spacer with every new set of tires.

And that is exactly why I would NOT want that setup...

Originally posted by mike
Yeah and you'd likely have to change your spacer with every new set of tires.

Ok, true... But how much wear are the spacers going to get? Maybe some rock knicks, right?

...What I was envisioning was the possibility of a "spacer-swap program"... Where, when I decided to go from BFG to TSL, I could mail my ring back to Rockstomper, and he would mail out a TSL ring... Because if he cleaned up the BFG ring, it could be passed on to someone purchasing some BFG's. I would think they'd be good for at least 5 years of use, as they're not a wear surface, and will only experience 5-10 lbs/sq-in throughout their use (If you stuck with 10-20 lbs/in as the torque to use) plus the occasional (or frequent :D) rock knicks and shit, which can be ground out/filled...

...Plus, they're still just OPTIONAL.

...You could also use two half-rings (ie cut the ring I drew in half through the top pic) between which you could add 1/16" or 1/8" spacer rings... If the set came with a 1/4" thick ring which could be spaced to 1/2", you could accomodate any tire, and if you didn't need the rings, you could either ask that they be left out, or hang 'em on your wall or whatever...

Originally posted by ColdNorth


... will only experience 5-10 lbs/sq-in throughout their use (If you stuck with 10-20 lbs/in as the torque to use) ...
...

Better double-check your math there, bud. :p

Guys, you all seem real quick to add even more steel to an already VERY HEAVY wheel setup.... have you even thought about that aspect?

Originally posted by Lloyd


Better double-check your math there, bud. :p

...Pretty sure I'm correct... If you have a stationary bar being pulled down in the middle and supported upwards at each end, then the total force downwards has to equal the total force upwards, and since 10-20 is pulling down, each end has to support 1/2 of that, being 5-10.

...Or did I just dream that while I was asleep in class? :D

...Though, I did bugger up the units, because 10-20 foot-lbs is not 10-20 lbs/sq inch. :rolleyes: But you get the point. It's all equivalent (in that the bead and metal ring would each see the equivalent force of a bolt tightened to 5-10 foot-lbs, though it wouldn't be measured that way)...

Yeah, the rotational moment of one of these wheels plus the tire of your choice is enormous. More steel? And stacking metal shims? Please. How about a plain old V-belt? Costs a couple of bucks, and for larger rigs they come in (can you guess?) ...... LARGER SIZES! I used to have several in the 5/8 -3/4 - 7/8" wide range hanging in a shed, these were for alternator and air compressor drive on 855 ci Cummins in an old Freightliner, if memory serves. Hard rubber, cord reinforced, and infinitely adjustable for length with a pocket knife.

Since it's BillaVista's thread, I'll give him the optton of explain the clamping force calculation. ;)

Originally posted by Lloyd
Yeah, the rotational moment of one of these wheels plus the tire of your choice is enormous. More steel? And stacking metal shims? Please. How about a plain old V-belt? Costs a couple of bucks, and for larger rigs they come in (can you guess?) ...... LARGER SIZES! I used to have several in the 5/8 -3/4 - 7/8" wide range hanging in a shed, these were for alternator and air compressor drive on 855 ci Cummins in an old Freightliner, if memory serves. Hard rubber, cord reinforced, and infinitely adjustable for length with a pocket knife.

Since it's BillaVista's thread, I'll give him the optton of explain the clamping force calculation. ;)

...Fine. :flipoff2:

My brain is totally incapable of coming up with the simplest solution to any problem. :D :D

...Looks like there's enough room in there to completely hide the v-belt, too, so it wouldn't be sticking out any.

Originally posted by Lloyd
How about a plain old V-belt? Costs a couple of bucks, and for larger rigs they come in (can you guess?) ...... LARGER SIZES! I used to have several in the 5/8 -3/4 - 7/8" wide range hanging in a shed, these were for alternator and air compressor drive on 855 ci Cummins in an old Freightliner, if memory serves. Hard rubber, cord reinforced, and infinitely adjustable for length with a pocket knife.


Holy machined steel Batman - We have the easiest, cheapest, and best answer so far! :D

the k.i.s.s. plan came into the pic

Good discussion going here.

On the steel vs rubber spacer.

The rubber spacer (o ring, cut bead, v belt, whatever) will help the coning problem, which is good, but it will do bugger all to help the "almost impossible and atkes forever to get them torqued" problem

Reason being, as i mentioned in the article, bith the real tires bead, and whatever rubber spacer you use will have significantly less resistance to compression than the bolts have resistance to stretch. And that's the problem. What you need is something that, ideally, has greater resistance to compression than the bolt has to stretch.

Here's why.

The only way a bolt can exert a clamping load is to act like a stretched spring, and to do that it has to stretch, i.e. grow a little longer. It may seem unlikely that the bolt actually stretches, but this is precisely what happens in any bolted joint (or should). Now, by the same laws, the parts being clamped also deform, but usually much less. The amount of clamping force a bolt applies is a direct result of how much it has stretched (microscopically). Now it is not at all prcactical to measure this stretch, and so some clever guy figured out that the amount the bolt stretches can be related to the torque it takes to tighten the bolt....but, this is only true and predicatable when the parts being bolted are much more rigid than the bolt. When we try and clamp down on the rubber ring, it is very difficult to stretch the bolt (i.e get an accurate and consistane torque reading, until the point where we have squished the bead so thin it become much less compressable. And this is without taking into account the settling and creep that is likely to happen in our rubber / metal joint.

So, anyway, that's why some sort of metal flange, heavy or not, is the better solution.

But at least eliminating the coning would be a good step....so the bolts aren't trying to lever their own heads off.

What if the rings were made conical to begin with?

Make the inside lip thicker than the outside lip?

If you cut a chunk out, you'd see a wedge.

Trail and error to get an approximate degree.

It still wouldn't be perfect, but it would relieve some of the stress on the bolt heads.

Of course, it'd also add to the production costs. :D

Bill, I mostly agree with what you've said, but if you put a metal ring in there you're just going to apply most of the clamping force to it, and not to the tire bead. Maybe this is OK, but you'd have to be sure that the ring was enough thinner than the tire bead to apply enough force to the bead vs. the ring to begin with. How much is enough? I don't know, and everyone probably has to answer that themselves. Assuming the same compressibility for tire bead material vs. v-belt, you're still splitting the force about in half by going that route, but it should eliminate the coning (my reason for suggesting it). Will the compressed rubber go to plastic vs. elastic deformation under that much force, with all the clamping force being slowly transferred to the steel spacer? Probably to some extent. I think this is why you've got to check the torque on the locks regularly, and also why H8monday observed that his MRT locks eventually gave metal-metal contact while DRM didn't. Different brands/types of tires undoubtedly do this at different rates depending on compound. For this reason I still prefer to try the v-belt.

Clamping force sample calculation:

Remember that the modern screw is derived from the Spiral of Archimedes, who had the brilliant idea of winding his lever around a cylinder. A 3/8" bolt is about an inch in circumference (take the RMS thread diameter for a real calculation), so for 15 lbs-ft torque -> 180 lbs-in x 3/16 in radius gives 960 lbs rotational force at the thread surface. No one has said yet if these are 16 or 24 tpi bolts, so let's just use 16. Neglecting thread friction and bolt stretch gives over 15,000 lbs clamping force. Per bolt. How many are there again? 36 bolts -> over half a million pounds of clamping force on the ring. Now to be generous let's say that there's a 1" wide patch of the tire bead clamped so on a 16.5" wheel (17" at shoulder) gives ~ 25 square inches, so the rubber bead is under 20,000 psi. There are probably mistakes here and I more than enough stupid assumptions, but it's just an example. Don't believe me? Go put your fingers under a bolt and start cranking, let me know how close to 15 ft-lbs you get - and remember that steel ring didn't bend easily.


See y'all in a couple of weeks, I'm going to take some time off and try to finish our house.

ok so how did the bbs work?

Ok guys, here's my experience with this so called problem...

I have first generation MRT beadlocks... They simply have nutserts welded onto the rim. The bead is clamped into place, and there is no centering mechanism, like with champion locks. When you put the ring on and bolt it down (18 bolts total) the ring simply clamps the rubber in place. It does not bottom out. MRT recommends 10ft/lbs of torque on these rims. When the bolts are torqued down, they too have a gap and do not set evenly on the rim. I have had these rims for about 5 years now, with two sets of tires, and I have never broke ONE SINGLE BOLT.

Lloyd,

I hear what you're saying, good points. But it shouldn't be too hard to figure the optimum metal width required to accomplish sufficient compression / sealing of the bead...i figure about 3/16" wothout thinkling much. True it's going to differ by tire, but hom many people are going to be using these on tires that aren;t Swampers or have big Swamper like beads? my 35" BFG beads aren't so much thinner than the TSL's that the same optimum width wouldn;t work...just the TSL bead would be squishde a bit more.

Your clamping force example is interesting, but to be really useful we need to make the same calculations for the forces the ring / bolts experience from the other side, i.e from the bead "pushing back" as the tire rolls down the road. the numbers may stack up equally quickly, but may not? Half a million pounds of clamping isn;t nearly so impressive if you have 499 000 lbs of "unclamping force":D

Lance....stop bringing common practical sense into our dandy little tech discussion:flipoff2: Seriously...you hit on what I am hoping for, that the design overkill (number and size of bolts) are so great that they overcome the problems. I just can't get out of my head those big gaps under the bolt heads....it's like making a regular bolted joint, but instead of drilling the hole perpendicular to the parts, drilling it at an angle...yeuch.

If Scott or any other designer is reading this, I have another idea.

What if you placed the bolt holes and bolts closer to the center of the wheel, so that there was enough room around them (shanks of the bolts) for some custom spacers (like thick washers). You could source and offer differnt widths for different tires, and even develop an equation so people could measure their tire beads and know what they needed.

'course this still wouldn;t be as good as solid machined ring, IMHO. Just looking for the cheap and easy options.

I doubt this has any difference for practical application purposes,
but here I go anyway.

Since now some of the maufacturers as using countersunk bolt
heads, wouldn't that allow for somewhat more bolt-head/shift
due to ring "coning", thus giving slightly more bolt-head contact
surface? I would think...

Or, another idea: Almost everybody has seen a small block chevy
motor. (I hope anyway) take a look at the rocker-arm pivot balls.
if the beadlock ring bolt-hole was countersunk with a spherical
female cone shape, and something like the SBC valve pivot ball
was used between the lock-ring plate and the bolt, you would always have 100% bolt-head surface contact. ***

***But then, to the above, that's just a bandaid for the initial
problem anyway.....

thicker bead lock rings? use of aluminum-bead thickness spacer
rings would be my personal fav.


--Sherpa

Very nice article BTW....good job Bill.

I am getting beadlocks made by a machine shop tommorow. A freind of mine works there and they have a CNC plasma cutter. It is only costing me $167 for all four wheels. I am making them for 16.5" wheels and they will be pretty similar to the Rockstomper locks. I really hope that my dimensions are going to work because it would be a pretty expensive lesson if they don't work. I think they will work fine though. I will keep you guys posted and send pics next week.;)
If they work good, who else wants some?:D

OK lads,

here's the firts impression of the BB's.

Disclaimer: - hard to give a definitive impression at this point because I still have an out of balance rear driveshaft, 2 "machined with an angle grinder" wheel spacers (old centers trimmed down) on the front, plus with all the leak testing on the beadlocks it's possible I got water inside, and therefore ice - possibly even freezing the bb's in clumps a bit ??? Not to mention the BBs do nothing to make the TSls round.

Oh - and the roads were pretty bad that day, so no way I was going over a 100 on an icy road in a locked Jeep on TSLs.

BUT...initial impression...WAY better than the old 20+oz of lead stuck all around the rim. In fact - I used to think it took 30km to warm out the flat spots, but everything was pretty smooth after about 5km.

I did feel (seat of pants guess) like I would have been better with 12ox inside vice 8 - I don't know why - just a feeling.

So - as good as equal or inside-the-tire patches - prob. not. Better than traditional rim weights - yes, and with no trail vulnerability.

I am going to add a cup of antifreeze to keep them from freeze clumping in the winter. A friend reports excellent results balancing with just 24 fluid oz of antifreeze - but I'm not happy with the dynamics of all that fluid sloching around in there.

Another option:

How about some 1/4", 5/16', 3/8" etc. aluminum rod. It would be easy enough to bend into a circle of the correct dia. and wouldn't add shit to the weight. Although at a radius of 7" to 8", whatever was used wouldn't make that big a difference on the polar moment of the wheel.

Low weight, cheap and easy. Sounds like the perfect date :D