Ford Powerstroke Diesel Forum banner
21 - 40 of 79 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
287 Posts
Discussion Starter · #21 ·
Thanks guys! I think I'll pick up a new gasket today to have on hand for when I pull the head. If I see any scraping/marking, I'll replace it. If not, I'll re-use and return the new one. Spent the night kicking myself over this one. I stood there and stared at everything for a good 5-10min before proceeding to make sure I wasn't missing anything and it was ready to go. Spilt milk now I guess.

Side note, since we chatted about it before, I decided to keep the injectors but did put on new gaskets, including the copper washer. I also replaced the coolant line that runs along the back firewall to the degas bottle. That had been cut and spliced so figured I'd replace it while I had things out and it was easy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
287 Posts
Discussion Starter · #23 ·
Didn't take pics today but got a fair amount done (for me). Pulled the passenger head back out and dropped in a new HG - this time with the studs in place. I failed to mention before, but I did chase and clean all the stud threads. So, with the ultralube, everything went together smoothly. Just finished the torque sequence up to 210. Injectors are in and torqued. I still need to do the lifter bolts. Tomorrow, I plan to recheck the torque then get the oil rail in. Then start building and installing the DS Head. Overall, it's going smooth as I plod along.

By the way, I did soak the studs ends and nuts that were a little discolored from surface rust. The evaporust cleaned them off but also stripped the black paint. I expect that will leave them susceptible to further rust so I plan to put those (or as many as I can) inside where they'll stay oil soaked. There's no pitting or damage with the exception of one where, at the very tip, the threads look pinched slightly and catches the nut. I opted to leave the nut on rather than backing it off completely to avoided damaging the threads on the nut. There's plenty of good thread to still be fine.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,985 Posts
That's weird that the paint was removed. I use the product all the time, and it doesn't remove paint. It's why for me suitable for restorations. However, it does remove carbon and mill scale. I use it also to remove the mill scale on the steel I make the engine lift brackets. Mill scale is dull; these studs are shiny black. So I wonder now what the coating actually is.

If you take out the rivets, she could have several picture frames. I would only caution that you might want to go over the edges of the head gasket that she has. The edges can be razor-sharp. I cut one finger when I was taking the gaskets apart for analysis.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,985 Posts
I've kept parts in the solution for days without paint issues. It's something with the ARP coating, nothing you've done. I wasn't expecting that.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,066 Posts
I've kept parts in the solution for days without paint issues. It's something with the ARP coating, nothing you've done. I wasn't expecting that.
I second the paint removal
Got the stuff since you had such a good review
I am working on a 1989 International S1754 dump truck project -- the air cleaner retaining straps were pretty rusty -- so said "will put Jacks rust stuff to the test" -- put the straps in a 5 gallon bucket and poured the gallon of vaporust over them (submerged) -- left for a day -- the rust was gone (woo hoo, it works) but also the paint (no big deal) was gonna paint them to match the truck anyways

Side note; Works pretty good to remove paint from my hands -- Nason black frame paint -- (who knows what was on the air cleaner straps)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,985 Posts
Interesting.

I have paint come off when there was rust under it. I'm going to have to play with this more. There were a lot of parts with my truck I used this on and had to abrade the paint off afterward.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,066 Posts
Does make the old wire brush look like new again tho

I was impressed how well the rust was removed from the parts -- had todo a little brushing a few times during the soak -- these straps were off a different truck, which was a lot rustier
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,985 Posts
I took some pictures and images of parts I was working on with this rework in case I was going to make a video about the painting - not sure I will. But I just grabbed some of the items and through them into a YT vid. No editing, and ignore the turbo housing. Not in sequence either.

This is after a two-day soak. One part of the /degas bracket did not have full coverage of the Evapo-Rust, so there was some rust remaining. But all paint that had a solid foundation was intact. Where there is rust under the paint, I had to abrade to get it loose.

While vinegar is much cheaper, it pulls out hydrogen and therefore we get flash rust. And even if you use vinegar first then Evapo-Rust, you can still have rusting although it takes a longer time.

YT is still processing the HD version.



.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
287 Posts
Discussion Starter · #32 ·
Didn't get much done yesterday because we had company. However, I did go back and check the torque on the PS studs. Several of them took a bit to get back to 210. I have a digital torque wrench so could see they had dropped to around 190. Mainly the center ones (1st ones in the sequence).

I tried researching retorquing to see what the concensus was but it seems all over the place. Do you guys retorque after letting it sit overnight? When retorquing do you back off 1 at a time by 1/4 turn them pull back into spec? Or just check it again 210 and call it? Any benefit to retorquing after a 2nd or 3rd overnight of sitting?

Also, just to confirm some torque specs. I'm seeing 23 ft lb for the rocker box but found one place that said "late model" is 46 ft lb. Anyone know for sure on the 05 what I should be torquing to?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,985 Posts
Based on my discussions with ARP, they chose the "standard" stud alloy to achieve slightly higher tension than the stock bolts. Period. The torque sequence is a general standard for preloading fasteners; the tightening pattern follows the manufacturer's work in determining even tension. That's it.

More specifically than International, Ford developed a revised sequence based on testing the contact load (PreScale Film) and possibly strain gauging the bolts when researching the issue. An engineering approach.

The Ford procedure follows a typical approach to settling a wide part with multiple fasteners, i.e., heads, manifolds, and high-pressure vessels, with a Torque/Angle approach. First, torque to compress the objects - flatten any bow and compress soft gaskets. Then angular rotation to wind the fastener to a specific length, the degree of turn based on the thread angle.

ARP had no interest in determining that using an engine and gasket assembly but did use the revised pattern or sequence. And due to the different fastener alloys and "clamp load" for the ARP studs and "yield load" of the stock bolts, along with the thread pitch differences between the two, you can't use the TTY procedure on the studs.

Torque is a measurement of 85% of the force it takes to overcome friction in the threads and under the nuts/heads. Angular tensioning is an application of fastener stretch.

Engineering analysis has shown that when you have compressive materials under preload/clamping load, they can compress over time. Most of our gasket thickness is stainless steel, with some folds and a sealant that compresses. That compression should occur at a much lower force than achieving full tension. But it does walk.

This is not new science; it's been known for years and is incorporated into the engine design. ARP engineers are not smarter than Ford engineers. So your materials and tensions are adjusted for all this. You can't overcome the poor design of a product you buy from a supplier (International). Who doesn't anticipate the bending moment your upgraded power requirements might be and allow the distortion across the head's width - but this has nothing to do with the fasteners; I just had to get that out.

The sequence I did was first to flatten and compress the gaskets using the torque values from the updated Ford procedure. Then spit the remaining ARP final torque value into segments. I also waited for 30 minutes between the second to last and the last torquing. Based on engineering studies, thirty minutes is the majority of post compression after a tightening/loading. It can continue, and in some cases of extreme importance, the wait time can be 24 hours. I plan on re-torquing the studs after 500 miles of service. We'll have to see if that ambition wains.

It would not be unexpected for the center studs/bolts to have a higher degree of relaxation. While the fasteners have the same tension across the width of the head, the gasket under the fasteners does not. The ends of the heads have a much higher clamping load per square inch of surface area and are stiffer due to the boxed end of the heads (less distortion).

If yo are at full torque value, then back off and re-torque at the final value. However, if the nut is off even a slight amount, the asperities between the thread and under the nut will be different, and will be subject to some relaxing over time. But the gaskets sealant will be compressed.

After my primary Mac computer is finished "restoring" from time machine, I'll add a pictorial of the gasket compression at the ends.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
287 Posts
Discussion Starter · #34 ·
but this has nothing to do with the fasteners; I just had to get that out.
Haha. Don't hold back.


If yo are at full torque value, then back off and re-torque at the final value. However, if the nut is off even a slight amount, the asperities between the thread and under the nut will be different, and will be subject to some relaxing over time. But the gaskets sealant will be compressed.
OK. So you're saying, if I'm at max (210 in this case), back off to retorque again. However, you lost me after that. How do I know if the nut is off even a slight amount? And won't they be subject to some relaxation regardless if the nut is off slightly or not?

In my head, the center studs were loose/relaxed after sitting because they were first ones in the sequence. Often as I go through a torque sequence and it pulls the metals together, the first previous nuts end up loosened as I go along. I assume this is the metals getting sucked in/straightened relieving the load from the 1st ones. I'm tempted to go try to retorque (or better worded, check that they are all 210 spec) again today to see if they loosened anymore after another night of sitting. My concern is that, in reality, every time you check, you have potential to slightly tighten further so risk over torque?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,066 Posts
Breaking up the torque process into steps helps alleviate the first torqued bolts (center most) showing less -- hmm, does that even make sense ?
Gotta do small steps when torquing head bolts -- the center bolts will "loosen off" as you tighten the outer bolts
Just can't do the sequence in three steps and expect a weak design head to hold the torque -- there that makes better sense, lol

I don't know what arp want for torque, but for a 210 final -- 50 for the first torque (x2) 100 on the second (x2) 150 on third (x2) 190 fourth (x2) 210 final - do not stop the wrench movement during a torque, it is important to have a steady, smooth pull until the wrench clicks -- plan your pulls to make sure you have enough room / arm strength to do it in one smooth motion

x2 = go back and run the sequence again with the same torque setting -- seem like over kill ? noone likes leaky gaskets on a 6.0
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
287 Posts
Discussion Starter · #36 ·
Yeah, I did the 2x for most steps. Not all but certainly the first, one of the middle steps and the final. I broke it up into 5 steps (65, 95, 135, 180, 210). The first step had a ton of variation between the first 65 pull and the 2nd.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,985 Posts
The problem with the second hit of a previously applied torque is the static friction can be higher than the dynamic friction when the bolt/nut was torqued. Bolt torqued to 200lbft. The elastic tension decreases to what would be achieved at 190lbft. Static friction is higher than 200lbft, so the torque wrench clicks off, yet the fastener is at a lower elastic tension.

The only way to confirm is to mark the nut/head, back off, and retighten in a dynamic mode.

Rectangle Slope Triangle Font Plot



Reference papaer.




This is not the video I was looking for, but it illustrates the elastic interactions between bolts of a round or rectangular flange. It's most likely why when Ford got into problem-solving of the 6.0L head failures, then changed the sequences from what International had done, to achieve a better-balanced result.

While this is a single pass, it still occurs with stepped-torque, although the variation is lessened.

 
  • Like
Reactions: Hydro

·
Registered
Joined
·
287 Posts
Discussion Starter · #38 ·
The problem with the second hit of a previously applied torque is the static friction can be higher than the dynamic friction when the bolt/nut was torqued. Bolt torqued to 200lbft. The elastic tension decreases to what would be achieved at 190lbft. Static friction is higher than 200lbft, so the torque wrench clicks off, yet the fastener is at a lower elastic tension.

The only way to confirm is to mark the nut/head, back off, and retighten in a dynamic mode.
This makes perfect sense to me. Thanks! I did recheck the torque on passenger side. It's solid and holding. I know that's exactly the scenario your explaining with the static tension. However, I feel confident with it given when I retorqued yesterday, the bolts moved into 210 (dynamic). Plus the oil rail and standpipes are all in place and I have no motivation to take them off again...

However, I think I'll do this method for the drivers side, which I expect to start placing soon. I'm about to jack up the engine and get the DS engine mount back in place, then wait for one of my kids to get out of school so I can get some help working the lift while I place it. I still have a ton to do but it's fun to be on the downhill side of the job finally and see it start coming back together. I'm trying to be slow and methodical so I don't misstep again like I did with the PS studs...

FYI, I opted to torque the Rocker Carrier to 23 ft-lb. All but one source said to do that. Plus it seems to be pretty irrelevant compared to the 210 ft-lb of studs that will be holding it in place when it's all said and done.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
287 Posts
Discussion Starter · #39 ·
Phew. Got the DS Head in place and torqued down to 210. I swear that side was harder that the PS. I'll retorque tomorrow and move on.
Automotive tire Gas Automotive wheel system Engineering Auto part



Here's a pic of where I supported the engine while the mount was out. This was right after I raised it back up and was reinstalling the mount.
Automotive tire Gas Automotive wheel system Engineering Auto part



Here's my next hang up. I temporarily placed the fuel bowl back in to make sure the fuel lines were routed right and lining up. They're not. The Drivers side is slightly off. I can probably force that one to work. The passenger side though is WAY off. I don't understand why. I stared at it for quite a while trying to see if I had it installed wrong but I don't see an alternative way. It's several inches off from the mark. Any tips here. Am I missing something? Part of me wonders if the BPD adapter plate positions the housing 8n a slightly different angle. Or maybe assumes a different version of fuel line (e.g. From a different year or something). Sorry the pic is off rotation. Not sure why it's loading that way. You can see the PS line is way off though and can get to that point without beding it.
Motor vehicle Gas Automotive tire Auto part Nut



Driver side routing view. You can see it's just slightly off. Still requirea bending to get in place.

Automotive tire Motor vehicle Automotive design Rim Alloy wheel
 

Attachments

21 - 40 of 79 Posts
Top