Page 2 of 20 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 196

Thread: Salisbury diff housing failures

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Kingston, Tassie, OZ.
    Posts
    13,728
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Similar failures can occur after buttressing a bone fracture such as a humerus or femur IF the buttress plate is not removed after fracture has healed. I had mine removed after 12 months for this reason. Like steel tubes bone is flexible. Further fractures will occur either side of the stiffened section if uneven forces are applied across/ along the length of the member.

    The Cast centre of the salisbury differential where the axle tube enters is a stress/ failure point when load excedes the design strength

    JC
    The Isuzu 110. Solid and as dependable as a rock, coming soon with auto box😊
    The Range Rover L322 4.4.TTDV8 ....probably won't bother with the remap..😈

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Gold Coast
    Posts
    5,101
    Total Downloaded
    0
    while the MD actuator block was the place of failure, is it fair to say it was the cause.

    Think about the definition of cause.....

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    13,786
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by steveG View Post

    I've heard that the 130's have thicker tubes than 110's. Anyone know the thickness of each one?
    Steve
    I have a SIII Sals I cut open and posted the wall thickness on here. From memory it was 5.8 mm.


    Quote Originally Posted by djam1 View Post
    Maybe some form of brace from side to side could prevent it?
    There are plenty of braces or stiffeners available for Dana 60s (which are basically the same axle). Buying or designing one that won't foul the suspension or fuel tank on a 110 is a bit more of an issue.
    e.g. (not endorsing this one, just an example)


    Quote Originally Posted by uninformed View Post
    while the MD actuator block was the place of failure, is it fair to say it was the cause.

    Think about the definition of cause.....
    Caused no, however contributed to may be fair. Every non-MD sals I have seen fail failed where the tube goes into the centre. Every MD-equipped sals has failed at the actuator block (bearing in mind that is only 2 - Red October's 110 and the one on JRTs website).

    I recall the MD installation instructions for a sals locker were explicit about making sure the hole in the housing had rounded corners and the actuator block welded on in short runs using a cold weld. Which suggests they were at least aware of the possibility.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Kingston, Tassie, OZ.
    Posts
    13,728
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by isuzurover View Post
    I have a SIII Sals I cut open and posted the wall thickness on here. From memory it was 5.8 mm.




    Caused no, however contributed to may be fair. Every non-MD sals I have seen fail failed where the tube goes into the centre. Every MD-equipped sals has failed at the actuator block (bearing in mind that is only 2 - Red October's 110 and the one on JRTs website).

    I recall the MD installation instructions for a sals locker were explicit about making sure the hole in the housing had rounded corners and the actuator block welded on in short runs using a cold weld. Which suggests they were at least aware of the possibility.
    Very true, it is all about the flex/ load cycles at stress raisers, causing crack propagation and then failure

    jc
    The Isuzu 110. Solid and as dependable as a rock, coming soon with auto box😊
    The Range Rover L322 4.4.TTDV8 ....probably won't bother with the remap..😈

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Gold Coast
    Posts
    5,101
    Total Downloaded
    0
    apparently the 110's fitted with load levelers were a bit more prone to bending and failure....mind you Id say 99% of all this comes from overloading.

    Ben, another thing to have to design the truss around is the A frame mount and ball joint...

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    13,786
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by uninformed View Post
    ...

    Ben, another thing to have to design the truss around is the A frame mount and ball joint...
    That is part of the suspension isn't it

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    867
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by inside View Post
    I haven't had this happen to me but what I have had is a bent axle housing, only slightly but enough neg camber for the axle to touch the inside of the stub axle.

    Searching around there seems to have been a few failures where the axle housing has snapped on the long side. For any metal expert people out there can you conclude what the first picture shows as far as metal failure? The failures seem to happen due to very loaded expedition vehicles so I'm thinking it's the weight combined with bad roads.





    Here's another vehicle. Seems very overloaded.





    Looking at the registration (North West Province South Africa) and the vegetation (mopani) I'd say this is somewhere in Southern Africa around the tropic of Capricorn.
    A pot-hole would be the culprit.

    An axle brace could have helped, but considering the depth of some pot-holes in Africa, maybe not.........

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    'The Creek' Captain Creek, QLD
    Posts
    3,724
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Fatigue failure at the stress raiser caused by the abrupt change in stiffness from the thin walled axle tube into the cast housing.

    IMHO nothing to do with the plug weld.

    IMHO for carrying heavy loads, long distances over rough roads, they should have used a heavier wall thickness for the axle tube.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Seaforth NSW
    Posts
    933
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Bush65 View Post
    Fatigue failure at the stress raiser caused by the abrupt change in stiffness from the thin walled axle tube into the cast housing.

    IMHO nothing to do with the plug weld.

    IMHO for carrying heavy loads, long distances over rough roads, they should have used a heavier wall thickness for the axle tube.

    In the red 110 it sure looks like the tube has just pulled out of the cast centre, maybe it had not been plug welded.

    I have seen Series 3s where a full weld had been added around the joint and would be very wary of that as a solution - more likely to fail because of the weld there.

    Bob

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Geelong, VIC
    Posts
    4,442
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Bush65 View Post
    Fatigue failure at the stress raiser caused by the abrupt change in stiffness from the thin walled axle tube into the cast housing.

    IMHO nothing to do with the plug weld.

    IMHO for carrying heavy loads, long distances over rough roads, they should have used a heavier wall thickness for the axle tube.
    Looking at the photo of the center housing showing the opening where the tube has pulled out, the remainder of the tube is still inside.
    To me it doesn't look like it has failed where it enters the housing, but that the crack has initiated from the outboard edge of the plug weld.

    Am I missing something?

    Steve
    1985 County - Isuzu 4bd1 with HX30W turbo, LT95, 255/85-16 KM2's
    1988 120 with rust and potential
    1999 300tdi 130 single cab - "stock as bro"
    2003 D2a Td5 - the boss's daily drive

Page 2 of 20 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Search AULRO.com ONLY!
Search All the Web!