HCBBS Forum (English)
Submit Chemical Projects / Find Solutions
Amplify Your Requirements on a Broader Chemical Platform *Engineering · Technology · Equipment · Solutions*
Submit Request

Nut problem in HG/T20613-2009

2010-07-29View Original

Thread Content

HG/T20613-2009 stipulates that nuts matching fully threaded studs must use GB/T6175~6. However, GB/T6175 does not have M27 and M33 studs, and HG/T20613 does not have size tables for these two specifications. How to choose the standard of nuts? How to determine the processing size?
Reply #22010-09-13
Alas, this question seems simple, but no one has answered it after so long. Ask another question: How did your company handle this problem?
Reply #32010-09-13
After looking carefully, it seems that there are really no M27 and M33 specifications in 6175. I guess the standard just quoted 6175 and did not notice this problem. I have used it before, and the purchasing department did not report that it was not available. I guess there are some on the market. It is impossible to have broken codes based on this standard.
Reply #42010-09-13
Reply 3# lne Our company's external manufacturing unit said that they could not buy it and could only buy 6170. Later we asked the other party to process it according to the thickness specified in 6175 and about the nominal diameter, and the other dimensions were according to 6170
Reply #52013-10-29
In the second publication of HG/T20613-2009, it is stipulated that the nuts for pipe flanges (M39-M56) should comply with 20613, and the size table of the nuts is also given.
Reply #62013-10-30
Nut thickness = M diameter during processing. For other processing dimensions, please refer to other thread standards. We have been purchasing. Maybe the nut processing factory you are looking for is more serious. Ours is what you want;P
Reply #72015-10-17
I am also encountering this problem now. After many years, can anyone give a reply? @boyirensheng
Reply #82015-10-17
Another collision between theory and practice, the conclusion is that practice defeats theory, or in other words, the imperfection of theory and standardization leads to the thread standard being nothing more than the manufacturing process strength level, material specification (screw nut size), pitch heat treatment process, etc. What the poster mentioned is that there are actually such products in production, but it is true that such regulations cannot be found in standardization. The conflict is that the product is designed or produced and I don’t know how to write these execution standards. Generally, in this kind of situation, the words "non-standard customization" appear.
Reply #92015-10-17
HG/T20613-2009 can be used directly.
Reply #102020-04-23
Why are there no 8.8 fully threaded studs here? There are 8.8 nuts.

Submit a Project

**Looking for Chemical Technology, Equipment & Solutions?** No Registration Required Broader Platform Exposure | Global Chemical Service Provider Connections

Submit Request — Free Consultation

Disclaimer

This is an automated machine translation of the original thread. Some technical terms may have inaccuracies; the original text shall prevail. Click "View Original" at the top right to access the source page, which supports IP-based automatic real-time language translation. Please watch out for contact details and sales inducements to prevent fraud. All content and translations are for reference only, representing solely the poster's personal views. For enquiries, email service@hcbbs.com.