Discover the critical differences between anti-loosening and self-locking threads. Learn ISO-compliant solutions for automotive, aerospace, and industrial applications.
38% of mechanical failures stem from thread loosening—costing manufacturers $12B annually. This guide compares anti-loosening and self-locking thread technologies using ASME and DIN standards, helping engineers select optimal solutions for vibration-prone environments.
Feature | Anti-Loosening Threads | Self-Locking Threads |
---|---|---|
Locking Mechanism | Friction enhancers (nylon/patches) | Geometric thread deformation |
Preload Retention | 60–75% after 10⁶ cycles | 85–92% after 10⁶ cycles |
Installation Torque | +20–30% vs standard threads | -5–10% vs standard threads |
Reusability | 3–5 cycles max | 10+ cycles with 90% efficiency |
Cost Premium | 15–40% | 50–120% |
ISO Standards | ISO 7040 (prevailing torque) | ISO 10664 (self-locking) |
Case Study: Boeing 787 uses self-locking threads in 72% of airframe joints, reducing in-flight loosening by 89%.
Thread Type | 20Hz Random Vibration | 50Hz Sine Vibration |
---|---|---|
Standard ISO Metric | Loosened in 38 minutes | 62% preload loss in 2hrs |
Prevailing Torque | Survived 8hrs (85% preload) | 22% preload loss in 24hrs |
Geometric Self-Lock | No loosening after 72hrs | 8% preload loss after 100hrs |
Vibration Frequency
500Hz: Geometric self-locking
Temperature Range
300°C: All-metal solutions only
Maintenance Requirements
Cost Analysis
Standards Compliance
Surface Preparation
Torque Sequencing
Post-Installation Verification
Free Resource: Download Our Thread Loosening Prevention Checklist
Contact Person: Mrs. Irene chen
Tel: +86-13527934468