I found this by accident however I’ve been waiting for someone to do this. I actually tested the same things in our testing lab almost exactly as you di but with very accurate lab loading and measuring. The results were close to yours as was my own conclusion. I don’t think I ever had a Clevice or ball link failure in flight of any of my big warbirds but I had a pretty good idea of the loads placed on them. Clevises and ball links are used on full sized race cars but these have been tested and certifications are used all all the time. Your safety washer idea is standard procedure on the race cars and a good idea. I shared this nice video with my young son who is just getting into giant scale modeling. I did structural engineering for my engineering career so it was a way of life for me. I’ve been retired for a number of years but still eat live and sleep this stuff. I even keep a note pad by my bed for middle of the night insights. Keep up the good work. I’ll try and follow you. Byron nelson.
Cool Byron! Thanks for the info in your comment! I enjoy putting these type of videos together! Thanks for watching! Will be doing some compression destruction testing soon.
Some of these were much stronger than I would have thought. Good Info! Honestly though, the best part was how surprised both of you looked when one broke. : )
Thanks Sachin! Glad you enjoyed it. Based on the Response and additional suggestions I think there will be 1 or 2 more of these testings for various ball joints.
Fantastic test! The results speak for themselves! Stress test of standard servos (like Hitec, JR, JX, Futaba, Tactic, Blue Bird, Savox), will be nice! Thanks!
Wow so happy I come across this channel. I'm putting together a xcalibur midsize turbine at the moment, and most people are saying the the clevis they use in the kit are not that great and are converting over to ball links. Just go's to show that people may think there doing the right thing but are they really? Great video mate liked and subbed just for being si good.
Excellent......that really was awesome! I have always wondered and pondered on the strength differences.....now i know...thanks to you. :) Greetings all the way from sunny 'Cape Town'.
put your Palm behind the parts to assist AutoFocus of the camera. 6:38 it's like Projet Farm but with RC stuffs.. loved it 9:27 felt so dangerous... hope he is well...
Excellent video. I honestly don't think I've ever seen this done before? Bottom line is its nice to know that these little connectors can take far more load than they are ever going to see. What do you think would happen if you hung that rig from even the strongest servos we use for this size model with a one inch arm? Love the videos and detailed build processes! Thank you!
Thanks Jay! Yea, all of these options will work just fine for what we use it for. Honestly I think that even the strongest servos on 8V or even 12V servos would struggle to hold 180+ lbs!
The advantage of the ball joint is they can compensate for a rod that's running at a slight angle. On my Avro Vulcan I have clevices at the servo end and ball joints at the moving surface, that way you don't get any binding up.
Thanks Kim. I think the aluminum balls would fail on the mounting bolt first. At least the smaller ones with 2mm screw would. The larger ones I couldn’t guess where the failure point would be.
Really interesting video Johnathon. It would be interesting to see some sort of longer-term durability test. I would imagine that failure in an aircraft would rarely be from a max load, but rather from repetitive movements, or the clevis somehow coming apart or loose over time... the servos or control surface would surely fail long before you got to the kind of load you were applying to the clevis. Still, If the clevis holds up to that kind of load, it is a good sign it would hold up to many many repetitive smaller loads... Thanks again for an interesting video!
Thanks Ted. Yea I think that any of these options shown in the video would work on any plane/jet. I think flutter of a surface because of loose joints or just dumb thumbs is way more likely!
Great info, I was really surprised at the ball links compared to the clevis, but what is the actual force exerted in flight, maybe the high weight is overkill, maybe the lower weight though much less then the clevis is sufficient.
Great video and great info my question would be “if using very high torque servos as some manufactures recommend are all the connections really able to take all that torque?”
They failed because the plastic stretched. Double adds nice support to eliminate side forces on the horn and also eliminates the chance of the ball pulling out. With regards to failure because the plastic stretches on the aircraft, I don’t think any normal plane would ever have that much force on the surface
People seems to over do everything, most of these will work on any project, some are just better for certain projects I personally like the Dubro HD ball ends, easier to install and with give the least amount of slop in those flutter prone jets. Not to mention getting the proper size hole for the clevis that doesnt cause slop is tough. I need to dig up my wire heat protection testing I did
Yea totally Keith! what this really shows is all of these options will work just fine for our applications and pick the one that works best for your specific plane or application.
I rarely trust the clevices in an ARF or RTF for the model they came with. Test some from the common foam RTF/PNF models such as Dynam's appx 1250 mm wingspan warbirds.
Would have been interesting to see where the Sullivan failed without the retainer clip. Those clips are easy to loose and I’ve seen people say fuckit and go fly anyways without which they are not designed to do.
I like Yr test method, don't no y people question, as Yr getting 170,to 190 on the pull which is mostly down surface,? On the push which is up will excerpt far more force limits,,, doesn't matter which plastics ball fail, and people put faith, in your quote( old school,) wins my jets, as your method, 👌
What you fail.to mention is that clevices, while supporting more weight, are more likely to fail than ball links at two placesthe rod thread where they split, AND the pin can AND WILL enlarge the hole in the control horn leading to flutter. I think you tested well, but as we all know, lab tests dont always reflect real world. I have have so many crevices fail on me that I have replaced even my glow setups with ball links. Going on 10 years now, not one ball link failure on everything up to 40% 3D monsters. Interesting video though.
Hey Mike. Totally agree with everything you said. This test was purely to test the failure point. What this test really showed was every single one of these options would be sufficient for our RC toys. Yes, some will last longer and be more problem free than others.
@@thelightersideofrc yeah, dynamic vs static is always intriguing. Me, tho, I'll take the security of nut and bolt over pin and clip any day. This vid actually sparked an interesting debate amongst our club members!
Great video Jonathan!! I have a drawer full of no-name 3mm clevises that I have got from some jet kits. I replaced many of them with the 4-40 Golden clevises because of the poor threading. I do however, have many jets with some ball links............now I am nervous. LOL!! Funny that you should do this test as I had just recently discovered a cracked all METAL 4mm ball link in the elevator on my Scorpion during a winter preventative maintenance checkup. These are much larger and robust than the plastic Dubro units. It did not fail, but the link was getting sloppy. I have ordered more all METAL ball links that are used for 1/8 car alignment rods, but maybe I should use them more often instead of the plastic ones. Thanks for the information!!
Thanks for watching Brent! it was fun doing this test. It made me realize that pretty much any of these options will work just fine for our applications!
