Mezz Wavy Joint

RDeca said:
Why would it? The only ones I've seen come lose are QR. Talking with my dad. A few months ago He's had his radial Blackout carbon shaft breaker come lose on him a few times. He sold it. Not sure what the problem was. I didn't like that cue atall when I tried it....the butt felt like a cheap piece of crap and the thing would oscillate like crazy when smashing a rack.

I've never owned a radial joint cue So I can't really say anything about the joint.
Click to expand...

The clamping force of a threaded joint is based on the applied torque, screw diameter and the friction forces of the joint. By definition, there is a limited amount of torque that a person can apply to assembling the cue without tools. Thus, some of the torque that a person applies is used just in the friction between the pin and the threads in the shaft. That torque used to overcome the tight tolerances in the wavy joint reduces the torque that is clamping the joint faces together. It's pretty basic, possibly pedantic, but real and measurable.

Radial is a garbage thread, also. A couple of hundred years of screw design should be enough to convince anyone. I guarantee that NASA, Boeing, Mercedes, etc. don't use any threads that aren't a v-groove design for holding two components together.
 
DeeDeeCues said:
The clamping force of a threaded joint is based on the applied torque, screw diameter and the friction forces of the joint. By definition, there is a limited amount of torque that a person can apply to assembling the cue without tools. Thus, some of the torque that a person applies is used just in the friction between the pin and the threads in the shaft. That torque used to overcome the tight tolerances in the wavy joint reduces the torque that is clamping the joint faces together. It's pretty basic, possibly pedantic, but real and measurable.

Radial is a garbage thread, also. A couple of hundred years of screw design should be enough to convince anyone. I guarantee that NASA, Boeing, Mercedes, etc. don't use any threads that aren't a v-groove design for holding two components together.
Click to expand...
Neither does NASA use wooden parts. Just trying to understand the relevance of the lumpy trough. Best I can figure, they are self tapping?
 
DeeDeeCues said:
I've never had a 3/8-10 come loose.

Snug, tight tolerance fit between male and female is counterproductive to the main objective of a joint screw... Which is to provide clamping force, which is decreased by friction in the threads.
Click to expand...
Scripted a decent rebuttal, but then remembered I didn't care and don't want to engage. Nothing personal, just in general.

I will say you're considering only what suits your narrative. There's benefits to a more tightly toleranced assembly that outweigh clamping force. Assuming you claim is valid to begin with.
 
DeeDeeCues said:
I guarantee that NASA, Boeing, Mercedes, etc. don't use any threads that aren't a v-groove design for holding two components together.
Click to expand...
I'll go further and say those same manufactures not only provide torque specs for those fasteners so the clamping force is adequate, but also factor in cost when making decisions on what type of fasteners to use.
 
The_JV said:
I'll go further and say those same manufactures not only provide torque specs for those fasteners so the clamping force is adequate, but also factor in cost when making decisions on what type of fasteners to use.
Click to expand...

I've done work for Boeing, Airbus, and NASA. If they needed a special thread, cost wouldn't be a factor.
 
The_JV said:
Scripted a decent rebuttal, but then remembered I didn't care and don't want to engage. Nothing personal, just in general.

I will say you're considering only what suits your narrative. There's benefits to a more tightly toleranced assembly that outweigh clamping force. Assuming you claim is valid to begin with.
Click to expand...

My narrative is to assist people making an informed decision. Having all these bastard threads makes things more difficult and more expensive for players, cue repair people, and manufacturers. The manufacturers benefit in profits because of the people who buy into their unsubstantiated claims.
 
DeeDeeCues said:
My narrative is to assist people making an informed decision. Having all these bastard threads makes things more difficult and more expensive for players, cue repair people, and manufacturers. The manufacturers benefit in profits because of the people who buy into their unsubstantiated claims.
Click to expand...
May I ask if you think a higher toleranced joint screw assembly would aid in developing a more uniform clamping force along the mating surfaces of the butt/shaft..?

We're not trying to hold a couple of pieces of sheet metal together.
 
A thread holds parts together by tension.
When the tension is sufficient, no vibration the mated parts endure will allow the tension to go to zero and one part unthread itself from another.
Thread friction only makes it harder to screw on and off.
 
The_JV said:
May I ask if you think a higher toleranced joint screw assembly would aid in developing a more uniform clamping force along the mating surfaces of the butt/shaft..?

We're not trying to hold a couple of pieces of sheet metal together.
Click to expand...

It shouldn't. In reality, it should be a hindrance, especially if everything isn't perpendicular enough.
 
DeeDeeCues said:
It shouldn't. In reality, it should be a hindrance, especially if everything isn't perpendicular enough.
Click to expand...
Well this is one of the aspects a joint with tighter tolerances could provide you.

A sloppy pin thread may only have a only a small fraction of it's leading surface area loaded up when developing that clamping force on joint shoulders. That makes for clamping force and subsequent holding friction, offset to one side joint. It is this type of situation that produces a greater likely hood in a joint becoming loose.

Joint shoulders should be faced square to the pin once it has been installed. Much like the female shoulder should be faced within the same set up used to cut the internal threads.

Perpendicular should not be an issue.
 
DeeDeeCues said:
The manufacturers benefit in profits because of the people who buy into their unsubstantiated claims.
Click to expand...
They do not want you copying their work. That's why mezz does it. That and they were probably worried about lawsuits when they entered the American market using a regular 5/16x14

They could care less that the tap cost 600.
and plenty of brands are offering wavy shaft options now. So mezz owners have options besides mezz.
What claims does mezz make about their joint? I've never seen any marketing on it.

I haven't seen the wavy2 but I will say the origional wavy starts to screw together very nicely and easily. I don't have any worries of fouling the threads.
 
The_JV said:
I'll go further and say those same manufactures not only provide torque specs for those fasteners so the clamping force is adequate, but also factor in cost when making decisions on what type of fasteners to use.
Click to expand...
You can easily make a 3/8 x 10 just as difficult to screw on or off as a Wavy... Just make the minor diameter really small on a phenolic joint... You can make it extremely difficult to get on and off... I make cues and had this exact scenario with a cue I made recently... I hated it and had to put it back in the lathe and fix it...

None of this Mezz crap really effects you if you're just a player.. but when you're trying to make cues and these cues are fairly popular these days, these retarded, stupid pins cause you some head ache...

And everything Deedee said is on point.
 
garczar said:
Gimmick or not when tight they stay tight unlike almost every other 3/8x10 cue i've owned. I had two 3/8modifieds that needed to be tightened all the time. I know various factors/tolerances can result in un-snug joints but both shafts on my Mezz are super tight.
Click to expand...
I've owned 50-100 3/8x10 and can't recall one ever having come loose.. now uniloc is another story. I've had plenty of those come loose.
 
RDeca said:
They do not want you copying their work. That's why mezz does it. That and they were probably worried about lawsuits when they entered the American market using a regular 5/16x14

They could care less that the tap cost 600.
and plenty of brands are offering wavy shaft options now. So mezz owners have options besides mezz.
What claims does mezz make about their joint? I've never seen any marketing on it.

I haven't seen the wavy2 but I will say the origional wavy starts to screw together very nicely and easily. I don't have any worries of fouling the threads.
Click to expand...
Why would mezz be worried about law suits from using 5/16 x 14? That makes no sense at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top