[AT] Getting water out of a gearbox/now bearing life

Mike meulenms at gmx.com
Fri Jun 5 10:09:14 PDT 2015


Charlie, you could actually do that yourself with an inexpensive IR 
thermometer. Now that you have a new one, after a bit of a drive, check 
the temp by the zero speed sensor. If the old one is noticeably higher, 
time to change it.

Mike M


On 6/5/2015 12:04 PM, charlie hill wrote:
> True enough I guess Steve.  Also the folks at GM have no interest in me
> keeping my truck for 20 years and putting 500,000 miles on it.
> Statistically, folks like me are way beyond an anomaly.   Still it would be
> nice and at 10 times 2 bucks or even 100 times 2 bucks it would be an
> interesting gadget to have. It would not have to read the actual bearing
> race temperature.  All it would need to do is read the extremes at the
> location of the zero speed sensor and report an out of range event that
> would reset if it was short term.
>
> Charlie
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephen Offiler
> Sent: Friday, June 05, 2015 9:18 AM
> To: Antique tractor email discussion group
> Subject: Re: [AT] Getting water out of a gearbox/now bearing life
>
> On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 7:30 AM, charlie hill <charliehill at embarqmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> You know, it just occurred to me regarding what I wrote below,
>> That hub assembly already has a zero speed sensor built into
>> it.  Surely it would not have been too hard for GM's engineers to
>> put a high temperature alarm in there two.  I guess it would have
>> cost them a dollar or two.  With the price of a new truck comparable
>> to my '06 now being in excess of $50,000 you would think they could
>> afford to throw it in though.  Then again maybe the 2015's have that
>> feature?
>>
>> Charlie
>>
>>
> Nobody offers this feature as far as I know, and I'll acknowledge it is a
> REALLY interesting idea, but the devil is in the details.
>
> The system cost (temperature detection device, its mounting and sealing
> within the bearing assembly, plus the wiring, plus the hardware components
> and some software to interpret the signal inside a computer somewhere) is
> potentially quite a bit greater than the $1-2 you suggest.  Ten times that
> figure would not surprise me even a little bit.
>
> But I think the real issue is statistics.  Somebody at GM, I can *assure*
> you this is a fact, has done a Design Failure Modes and Effects Analysis
> (DFMEA) on those bearings as well as every single other piece of the
> truck.  They consider the likelihood of failure within a certain mileage or
> timeframe (often 150,000 miles)  and they consider the negative effects of
> a failure.  They rank every single component and system on the entire truck
> and put the vast majority of time and effort into knocking down the most
> likely failures with the most severe consequences.  I've worked for a major
> automotive supplier in the past, and part of my job was creating and
> maintaining DFMEA documents for the components we manufactured, so I know
> exactly what I am talking about here.
>
> In short, I am certain that those hubs/bearings have been the subject of a
> DFMEA and they fell way back behind many other possible failure points and
> got lost.  So no money, zero point zero dollars, allocated for your
> temperature sensors.
>
> SO
> _______________________________________________
> AT mailing list
> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
> _______________________________________________
> AT mailing list
> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
>




More information about the AT mailing list