Torque Wrenches - my answer...

[Huw Powell]

> Except that VAG get around this by specifying torque: the product of
>  the length of the torque wrench and the force applied.  In doing so
>  the length of the wrench becomes irrelevant.

Exactly... which is why the length of the extension is also irrelevant.
  It transfers the torque, rather than multiplies it.

Keep in mind that even 258 ft-lbs is a *lot* of torque.  Triple what we
put on lug bolts, double that of axle bolts - and more than any of these
engines produced in consumer form.

I realize this is getting rather arcane, and not necessarily serving the 
needs of those who simpy want to do the job and not have their crank 
pulley fall off.  I also don't want it to turn into a urinating contest. 
  Just trying to get the physics right out of curiosity more than anything.

>> Which I am perfectly happy with, sort of.  Except for one little 
>> thing.  That is that the length of the torque wrench handle is an 
>> unknown, unspecified variable, so the "problem" can't really be 
>> "solved." Luckily we have that 330 ft-lb figure form one of Phil's
>>  many manuals.
>> 
>> One resolution of that undefined variable might be if Audi expects
>>  its techs to use a VAG standard issue torque wrench, with known 
>> length. Then all the numbers fall into place nicely.

> It was a REAL struggle for me to understand during my college days, 
> but the fact is, torque applied to one end of a tool such as the 
> #2079 will be exactly the same on the other end of the tool no matter
>  how long that tool is.

Let's try to leave tool length out of this, ok?  My spam filter might
take issue with the thread...

> Almost everyone in the long string agrees to the fact that force 
> applied to one end of a beam multiplied by the distance equals 
> torque.  The struggle is trying to understand that torque (moment) is
> a constant when applied to one end of a beam along the entire length
> of that beam. For reference please see Strength of Materials 2nd 
> addition page 212 by Ferdinand L. Singer.

I think that was what I was trying to say.  There wouldn't happen to be 
an on-line reference that coincides with that book, would there?

-- 
Huw Powell

http://www.humanspeakers.com/audi

http://www.humanthoughts.org/