Dynamic vibration testing of fasteners: fastener self-

loosening theory, vibration testing practical applications,

comparison of the international standards and
recommendations on how to set-up a meaningful testing
protocol.
Franck Pichoff1,a, Matthieu Kummel1 and Morten Schiff1
1
Vibrationmaster Technology Centre s.à r.l., Foetz, Luxembourg

Abstract. Vibration can be desirable, such as when it is used to make music. More often,
however, vibration is undesirable. It can introduce stress into mechanical systems and
create fatigue that decreases service life. It can also loosen fasteners. Following a
discussion on the root causes of the self-loosening of fasteners, two practical examples
illustrate the benefits and possible applications of vibration testing of fasteners, according
to either standardised testing protocols or customised testing strategies simulating real-life
conditions of the assembled parts. The requirements and protocols of the international
standard ISO 16130, the USA national aerospace standard NASM 1312-7, the German
national standard DIN 25201-4 B and its predecessor DIN 65151 are compared, with
insights on their most suitable applications. Finally, the article describes a lean
methodology to design a meaningful testing protocol.

Introduction
Vibration can be desirable. For example, it can be controlled to make music or speech. More often,
however, vibration is undesirable, wasting energy and creating unwanted noise and wear. It can
introduce stress into mechanical systems and create fatigue that decreases service life. It can also
loosen fasteners. When they loosen and fail, devices fail catastrophically. Production lines grind to a
halt. Vehicles crash. Planes drop from the sky.
The vibration testing of fasteners is key to deliver safe engineering by ensuring that all fasteners
are fit for purpose and will not fail in service. The applications of such testing range from validating
engineering drawings and computer simulations, to certifying fasteners for OEM supply, to teaching or
demonstrating competitive advantages of innovative fastening solutions.

____________________________________________________________
a
Corresponding author: [email protected]
Colloque Supméca 2017

1 The theory behind fastener self-loosening from transverse movement

Bolted joints can be easily disassembled. This is a major benefit, but it also presents the danger of
unintentional loosening in operational conditions. To prevent self-loosening, it is important to
understand how and why it occurs, as well as to have a means of testing to ensure safe and practical
solutions.
Bolted joints rely on the clamping force, also called preload, that results from the tightening
torque. The fastening will not come loose if the clamping force acting on the bolts is sufficient to
overcome the transverse force and creates sufficient friction grip to prevent transverse movement
between the clamped parts. However, if a transverse force acting on the joint is greater than the
frictional resistance of the preload, relative motion occurs between the mating threads and the fastener
bearing surface. In this case, the bolted joint will behave as a simple inclined plane. Repeated
transverse movements can completely loosen fasteners.

1.1 Where does the tightening torque go?

To better understand the phenomenon of self-loosening, we first have to study the tightening process.
A tightening torque MA is necessary to fasten a bolt. It is the combination of the torques [1] related
to the friction under the head MK, the friction in the threads MG and the friction in thread pitch (MTP):
MA = MK + MG + MTP (1)

In many cases, only about 10% of the tightening torque leads to joint preload MTP (Fig. 1). If
friction under the head MK or friction in the threads MG is increased by only 5%, this can lead to a
reduction in preload of 50% [2].

Figure 1. Three types of friction at work

The torques related to the friction under the head MK, the friction in the threads MG and the friction
in thread pitch MTP are calculated using the following formulas [1]:
D
MK = FV x KM x µK (2)
2

d2 µG
MG = FV x x a (4)
2 cos
2

F xP
MTP = V (5)
2xπ
Where FV = the preload in the bolt; µK = friction under the head of the bolt; µG = friction in the
thread; P = thread pitch; DKM = effective diameter for the friction in the bolt head or nut-bearing area;
and d2 = thread pitch diameter.
Les Assemblages Mécaniques

In a bolted joint, the thread pitch friction MTP is less than the combined friction in the thread MG
and under the head MK. This is called self-locking. The tensile force generated by the elongation of the
bolt shaft and by the force of compression generated in the objects being tightened remains balanced:
MTP < MK + MG (3)

1.2 Why do bolted joints self-loosen?

In practice, most bolted joints experience influence from the surrounding environment. This can lead
to a change in the balance (Equation 3) and a spontaneous decrease in the preload.
To loosen a bolted joint, the moment ML is necessary:
ML = MK + MG – MTP (6)

The pitch torque MTP works to unfasten the bolt. This is because of the helix angle of the thread
pitch, also known as the internal off torque. Thus, when the internal off torque is larger than the
retention moments MK + MG, rotational self-loosening will take place [3]:
MTP > MK + MG (7)

1.3. Rotational self-loosening

The transverse movement required to overcome the frictional resisting force, also called ‘theoretical
limiting displacement’ SGth or ‘marginal slip’, can be calculated as follows [1]:
FV x µK x L3
K
SGth = (8)
12 x E x I

Where SGth = theoretical limiting displacement; FV = the preload in the bolt; µK = friction under
the head of the bolt; LK = clamping length of the bolt; E = Young’s modulus of the bolt; and I =
second moment of area of the bolt.

2 Practical applications of dynamic vibration testing of fasteners

Testing fasteners or complete bolted joints in service condition is the most practical way to compare
the resistance to self-loosening of different fastening solutions, or to validate the fastener
specifications selected for a mechanical design, respectively.
The Junker vibration test — named after Gerhard Junker, who published the breakthrough article
“New Criteria for Self-Loosening of Fasteners Under Vibration” in 1969 [4] — has become the
standard for dynamic testing of fasteners and analysis of their self-loosening behaviour.

2.1 Recommendations concerning the test rig and which data to collect

A dynamic vibration test bench applies a transverse oscillary motion on a glider plate to create cyclic
vibration of variable frequency and amplitude. The bolted joint being tested clamps together the glider
plate and a fixed plate. The clamping force is measured in real time and plotted on a graph.
A modern Junker test bench (Fig. 2) should comply with the requirements of ISO 16130, DIN
25201-4 B and the former DIN 65151 standards. The test rig should allow for the measurement of the
transverse displacement and the transverse force applied to the fastener. It should also allow for the
calculation of the fastener’s friction coefficient from the relationship between the applied torque and
the achieved tension.
The test data should be displayed in a graphic chart (Fig. 2) with various visualisation filtering
options and should be exportable in .CSV files for further analysis. Such Junker test benches allow for
a highly accurate assessment of the fasteners’ self-locking performance, as well as statutory ISO and
DIN testing.
Colloque Supméca 2017

Figure 2. Vibrationmaster J121 fastener vibration and torque test bench, compliant with ISO 16130,
DIN 25201-4 B and DIN 65151, with web-based user interface

2.2 Application example 1: how to compare different fastening solutions?

The development of new fastening products requires an understanding of their self-loosening

behaviour. Fastener manufacturers and distributors rely on vibration testing to benchmark the
performance of substitute products. Comparing the anti-loosening characteristics of locking solutions
is also the object of many research articles [6-9] comparing the effect of parameters such as the
clamping length, the surface finish and treatment, or various locking systems (e.g. wedge lock washers
or chemical locking).
The fasteners being compared are submitted to a standardised vibration test, such as ISO 16130 or
DIN 25201-4 B. The results are displayed in a chart plotting the measured clamping force against the
number of load cycles (Fig. 3), to compare the resistance to self-loosening of the test samples.

Figure 3. Comparison of the self-loosening behaviour of fasteners tested on Vibrationmaster J121

2.3 Application example 2: how to validate a new mechanical bolted joint design with a
“tested-by-me” approach?

In the early design stage, engineers can validate their new bolted joint design with a bespoke vibration
test reproducing the actual service condition of the application, also called “tested-by-me” protocol.
We have seen in section 1 that fasteners will not come loose if the clamping force acting on the
joint is sufficient to overcome the external transverse force that the application meets during actual
operation and to prevent movement between the clamped parts.
The “tested-by-me” approach involves building the bolted joint in the vibration test rig using the
same material, dimensions and surface properties as in the actual application. In a vibration test, the
bolted joint will be subjected to increasing vibration displacement and thereby transverse force, until
the exact point at which the displacement and transverse force become large enough to overcome the
frictional resistance in the joint, induce movement between the clamped parts and start rotational self-
loosening. This point is known as the marginal slip. The design engineer will then compare the
Les Assemblages Mécaniques

measured transverse force value from the vibration test rig to the requirement for the actual
application.
A corrective coefficient factor CF shall be applied to relate the measured transverse force in the test
rig and the transverse force that would result from the same conditions in the application.
The maximal transverse force value that can be withstood by the bolted joint FR in real conditions
is:
FR = FT x CF (10)

Where FT = the measured transverse force at which the bolted joint starts self-loosening.
FR can be compared to the calculated maximum transverse force FC estimated for the application
during the design stage. The bolted joint design is validated if the real transverse force required to self-
loosen the bolted joint FR is higher than the calculated transverse force handled by the application, as
follows:
FR > FC (11)

3 Which tests are needed to stay safe?

The purpose of the test is to determine which standards and test regime are most appropriate for a
particular application. If the purpose is to benchmark fasteners or to meet an insurance claim, ISO
16130 and DIN 25201-4 B provide standardised assessment of the self-loosening behaviour. In cases
where it is more important that the tests reflect the real conditions of the application, it is
recommended to apply more demanding bespoke test criteria, also called “tested-by-me” protocol.

3.1 A brief description of the three standards

Table 1. Brief description of DIN 25201-4 B, ISO 16130, NASM 1312-7 and “tested-by-me” protocols
ISO 16130:2015
DIN 25201-4 B NASM1312-7 Bespoke “tested-by-me”
The standard for
The toughest conditions For impact testing protocols
aerospace
The DIN 25201-4 B, The ISO 16130 is not as The “Fastener Test These protocols represent
published in 2010, rigorous as DIN 25201-4 Methods 7 Vibration” an important
supersedes DIN 65151 B but follows similar was published by the experimental approach to
and is significantly more principles. Aerospace Industries testing for the real world.
rigorous. It defines new Association of America in Testing products to meet
It introduces manda- tolerances on the test 1997 and is quite differ- specific performance
tory reference and machine. It introduces rent from the Junker test. characteristics beyond the
verification tests, torque measurements into This test is an impact conditions specified in
specifies quality tole- a vibration test standard. and shock test that invol- the formal standards
rances on the fastener Finally, ISO 16130 ves securing the fasteners requires innovative
adaptors in the test sets evaluation thresholds to be tested in cylinders testing strategies designed
fixture, requires the use and specifies three quality mounted in slots within a to replicate the real
of a test washer, sets a levels for evaluating the reciprocating fixture. The service conditions.
standardised clamp ratio, self-locking behaviour of fixture is vibrated at 30 This is a common-
defines the initial preload bolted joints. Hz at an amplitude, peak place occurrence in the
level and sets out strict to peak, of 0.45 inches automotive and defence-
test reporting procedures. (11.4mm). aerospace sectors, and the
The DIN 25201-4 B A problem with using practice is spreading into
also sets criteria for eva- this test to assess the self- other sectors. ‘Tested-by-
luating whether a locking loosening of fasteners is me’ product development
element has adequate that the bolt preload is strategies result in
self-locking behaviour. not measured during improved products over
testing. the long term and a
competitive edge that can
be sustained.
Colloque Supméca 2017

3.2 DIN or ISO? The testing standards and the choices you need to make
Table 2. Comparison chart between ISO 16130 and DIN 25201-4 B standards
ISO 16130 DIN 25201-4, B
Testing criteria Authors’ comments
The standard for aerospace The toughest conditions
Hardware requirements
Test washer Yes, secured from rotation Yes, secured from rotation. A specified test washer must
Dimensions and roughness be used with each test in
must comply with DIN EN order to standardise
ISO 7093-1 embedding and ensure
- Plane-parallelism and reproducible results
flatness must comply with
DIN EN ISO 4759-3
- Hardness must be 200HV
for fastener class up to 8.8
and 300HV for fastener class
above 8.8
- Washers must be grounded
Fastener adaptors Yes, secured from rotation Yes, secured from rotation
Test Bench requirements
Transverse displacement Relative movement up to Relative movement up to
±1.5mm for fasteners with ±1.0mm shall be possible for
dimensions up to 25.4mm / fasteners with dimensions up
1” UTS to 24mm
Fastener adaptors Infinitely variable, preferably Infinitely variable
during operation and
adjusted through electronic
control
Test frequency 12.5Hz with a possible 12.5Hz
frequency range of 10Hz to
15Hz at an accuracy of ±3%
Clamping force measurement ±2% as measured on the ±0.6% as measured on the
uncertainty entire measuring chain entire measuring chain
Transverse displacement ±3% as measured on the ±3% as measured on the
measurement uncertainty entire measuring chain entire measuring chain
Other tolerances Clearance between stationary Clearance between stationary
plate and glider plate must be plate and glider plate must be
1mm ±0.05mm under load 1mm
Stationary plate and glider Stationary plate and glider
plate shall be concentric plate shall be concentric
within ±0.1mm
Test settings and requirements
Measured variables Maximum self-locking Only ISO includes a range of
torque torque measurement in the
test (we believe this makes
ISO the most useful protocol)
Necessary tightening torque
value to achieve initial
clamping force
Initial clamping force Initial clamping force
Clamping force during test Clamping force during test
relative to cycles relative to cycles
Transverse displacement
under load
Maximum self-locking
torque after vibration test
Testing temperature
Les Assemblages Mécaniques

Table 3. Comparison chart between ISO 16130 and DIN 25201-4 B standards (cont.)
ISO 16130 DIN 25201-4, B
Testing criteria Authors’ comments
The standard for aerospace The toughest conditions
Test settings and requirements (cont.)
Reference test to assess the Assess the effective Assess the effective
effective displacement displacement that makes an displacement that makes an
unsecured joint self-loosen unsecured joint self-loosen
within 300 cycles ±100 within 300 cycles ±100
cycles cycles
Verification test Verification tests (3x) must Verification tests (12x) must 3 tests should be sufficient
be completed be completed with a duration with good test equipment
of 2,000 cycles or until delivering reproducible
complete loss of clamping results
force
Reuse of fasteners Allowed if parts are not Not allowed Pre-stressed elements should
visually damaged. NEVER be allowed to be re-
used. A used fastener will be
elongated and may have
exceeded its yield strength
and changed material
properties
Initial clamping force 75% of calculated ultimate 50% of VDI 2230 with μtot
clamping force total coefficient of friction =
0.14
Clamp ratio (fastener length As short as possible, 1:1.7 The clamp ratio is very
to diameter ratio) preferably around 1:2.0 to important when testing. The
1:2.5 lower the ratio, the greater
risk of self-loosening. This is
particularly important in view
of current trends to use short
fasteners
Use of lubrication Yes. SAE30 for steel parts Lubricating the fasteners is
and molybdenum sulphide important to obtain
paste for stainless or electro- reproducible friction values
galvanized parts and test results
Test evaluation and reporting
Evaluation method - Number of cycles until Residual clamping force after
complete loss, or 2,000 cycles
- Residual clamping force
following a defined number
of cycles, or
- Number of cycles until
fatigue fracture of the bolt
Evaluation of self-locking - 100% to 85% residual 100% to 80% residual The residual preload is
behaviour preload = Good self-locking clamping force after 2,000 crucial – 60% loosening
behaviour cycles = Aadequate self- cannot be acceptable (the
- 85% to 40% residual locking behaviour DIN approach is more
preload = Acceptable loss of rigorous)
preload
- 40% to 0% residual preload
= Poor self-locking behaviour
Test report requirements All test parameters, The type of test fittings used,
information about the tested the test parameters, test
fastener system, test bench bench manufacturer and
manufacturer and model, model, the result of the test
fasteners used, name of including graph of clamping
testing laboratory, date of force against cycles, the
testing, inspector name, lot permissible usage of the
number of the tested securing element
fasteners
Colloque Supméca 2017

3.3 A summary chart to compare ISO 16130 and DIN 25201-4 B standards

Tables 2 and 3 above are very detailed; however, a simpler data visualisation method can be designed
to illustrate the difference between ISO 16130 and DIN 25201-4 B standards. The various parameters
are grouped into 10 categories. An arbitrary rating from 0 to 10 is attributed to each category, where
grade 10 is the toughest, most accurate, and most repeatable criterion, to obtain a radar comparison
graph (Fig. 4):

Figure 4. Comparison chart between ISO 16130 and DIN 25201-4 B

Even though ISO 16130 requires additional measurements (e.g., the maximum self-locking torque)
and allows for larger displacement values, DIN 25201-4 B is more consistent and adds criteria like
lubrication, tighter tolerances on washers and increased accuracy on measured values. Also, the DIN
25201-4 B requires a new test washer and sample for each test, which prevents embedding and
improves the reproducibility of the test results.

4 Testing with rigour: how to conduct DIN 25201-4 B or ISO 16130

tests?
Dynamic testing of the self-loosening behaviour of bolted joints follows a similar pattern for all test
standards. An initial reference test is carried out to determine the effective displacement at which the
unsecured joint self-loosens, followed by verification testing with the secured joint.

4.1 First step: defining suitable testing parameters

To start the reference test, the unsecured bolted joint (i.e., the fastener without fastener locking
element) must be placed in the test bench. Starting from zero, the displacement is gradually increased
until the point at which the fastener completely self-loosens after 300 load cycles, ±100 load cycles.
Once this efficient displacement has been discovered, three subsequent control tests with fresh
components are required to ensure that the initial reference test results are consistent (Fig. 5).

Figure 5. Three control reference tests conducted on an unsecured bolted joint without locking element.
Les Assemblages Mécaniques

4.2 Second step: comparing different anti-loosening solutions

The next stage is to conduct the verification test. The exact same test conditions are set, including the
same effective displacement. Then, the locking product is introduced, and the secured bolted joint is
tested to determine whether and at what point the secured bolted joint starts to loosen. Several
verification tests must be made in order to ensure the test reproducibility (Fig. 6).

Figure 6. Verification test of the fastener secured with the locking product, under the same test conditions as the
control reference tests from Fig. 5.

4.3 Analysing and reporting according to DIN 25201-4 B and ISO 16130

The results of the clamping force against the number of load cycles must be plotted in a graph. The
securing performance is then assessed according to the percentage of preload remaining after a set
number of load cycles. On the graph, the curve must show that it is unlikely that the fastener would
have failed if the test continued.
In the test report, the type of locking mechanism and its fitting position must be described, as well
as the test frequency, clamp length to diameter ratio, clamping, effective transverse displacement and
lubrication used.
The final part of the report should detail the conditions under which the fastener’s securing element
can be used and, if the test determined it, the level of pre-stressing force at which the fastener can be
expected to fail. Details such as lubrication, surface coatings and the range of diameters are also
required. Refer to the official standards for the complete list of information that should be indicated.

Conclusion
Analysing the self-loosening behaviour of fasteners is a critical step to ensure the safety of assembled
parts. Even though computer modelling and simulation are progressing, the experimental approach by
applying cyclic transverse force on fasteners under preload is still the most valuable method to
evaluate their anti-loosening performance. Tracking the reduction of the clamping force under
vibration can be complemented with torque-tension relationship analysis and transverse force and
displacement measurements to obtain a broader understanding of the fastener behaviour and calculate
actual friction values, all of which can be used to select the ideal fastener for each application.
Standardised protocols according to DIN 25201-4 B or ISO 16130 can be applied to run these
tests. Alternatively, bespoke “tested-by-me” protocols can be designed to better reflect the real service
conditions of the bolted joint.
Colloque Supméca 2017

References
1. German national standard, DIN 25201-4:2010 Anhang B, „Prüfvorschrift zum Nachweis der
Losdrehsicherheit von gesicherten Schraubenverbindungen“ (2010)
2. P. R. Bonenberger, “Fastening: The Truth About TORQUE and TENSION”, Assembly Magazine, (Sept.
2001), http://www.assemblymag.com/articles/83789-fastening-the-truth-about-torque-and-tension
3. R. Friede, J. Lange, “Self-loosening of prestressed bolts”, in: Nordic Steel Construction Conference, Malmö,
Sweden (Sept. 2009), http://www.nordicsteel2009.se/pdf/106.pdf
4. G. H. Junker, “New Criteria for Self Loosening of Fasteners under Vibration”, SAE International Automotive
Engineering Congress, Paper No. 690055, pp. 314-335 (1969)
5. International standard ISO 16130:2015, “Aerospace series – Dynamic testing of the locking behaviour of
bolted connections under transverse loading conditions (vibration test)”, International standard organisation
(2015), https://www.iso.org/standard/55728.html
6. S. Saha, S. Srimani, S. Hajra, A. Bhattacharya, S. Das, “On the anti-loosening property of different fasteners”,
Proceedings of the 13th NaCoMM Conference on Machines and Mechanisms (NaCoMM), IISc Bangalore, India,
pp. 229–232, (2007), https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267971666_On_the_Anti-
Loosening_Property_of_Different_Fasteners
7. A. Bhattacharya, A. Sen, S. Das, “An investigation on the anti-loosening characteristics of threaded fasteners
under vibratory conditions”, in Mechanism and Machine Theory, 45(8): 1215-1225, (2010),
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/245126630_An_investigation_on_the_anti-
loosening_characteristics_of_threaded_fasteners_under_vibratory_conditions
8. S. Samanta, S. Das, R. Roy, K. Bhukta, A. Pal, S. Das, “Comparison of Anti-Loosening Characteristics of
Various M14 Threaded Fasteners”, Indian Science Cruiser, vol. 26, No. 6, pp. 22-27 (2012),
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265252303_Comparison_of_Anti-
Loosening_Characteristics_of_Various_M14_Threaded_Fasteners
9. U. Ince, B. Tanrıkulu, E. Kılınçdemir, S. Yurtdaş, C. Kılıçaslan, “Experimental investigation on self-
loosening ofpreloaded stainless steel fasteners”, in Third International Iron & Steel Symposium, Karabük,
Turkey (Apr. 2015), https://www.researchgate.net/publication/313932262_Experimental_investigation_on_self-
loosening_of_preloaded_stainless_steel_fasteners