Talk:Bushing (isolator)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Merging (ancient history)[edit]

Before anyone considers merging or splitting this page, please find some references for the text before conducting any such procedure. It seems silly to debate the name of an unreferenced article. Alan.ca 19:29, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]


It seems silly that an editor went ahead with this merge while ignoring my request not to. A plain bearing, such as a journal, is an entirely different animal to a bush, or bushing. Please justify this merger by reference to a mechanical engineering authority, not a common or garden dictionary. Shigley would probably be a good place to start, but my copy is at work. Greglocock 04:42, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In the automotive industry, in my 27 years experience, in 3 countries:

Plain bearing aka plain journal- a lubricated cylindrical bearing in which rotational sliding takes place at at least one interface

Elastomeric bush/bushing - a thing that connects two other mechanical systems, often of vaguely cylindrical appearance. Made of a polymer, and plastic or metal interfaces to the other parts. Does not usually have an interface designed for continuous motion. May have internal elements such as rate plates, and/or hydraulic damping. Usually expected to be compliant or allow relatively unconstrained motion in at least one degree of freedom.

Grommet - a soft cylindrical part that is used to line holes in hard bulkheads as a pass-through for wiring etc.

Nylon bushing - a dry lubricated cylindrical part that permits axial and/or radial motion at an interface.

Now, I put it to you that a one-size fits all article will find it hard to cover these. Greglocock 07:56, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To whomever edited my Talk. Never ever do that. If you disagree with what I say, do so, but not over my sig. Greglocock 12:02, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I have some years experience in the bearing industry. Plain bearing should not have been merged with bushing. A plain bearing is any bearing surface area which supports a load and attempts to reduce friction. This could be a cylinder (i.e. a bushing), a flat plate (thrust pad, tilting pad), a washer (thrust washer) or any number of odd shapes. A bushing is simply a shape of plain bearing. Have a look at the products of major plain bearing manufacturers such as GGB or Igus for an idea of the types of plain bearings which are manufactured. Please separate the articles again, this merger is incorrect. Jimmymagee 19:37, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Move?[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was Not done. Other editorial solutions arose and are now in progress rather than this move. DMacks (talk) 09:22, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bushing → Plain bearing —

Yeah well this is typical pedanticism caused by people who don't have the faintest idea of how parts are defined in practice. A rubber bushing/bush (UK useage) is used in a suspension part typically, and all the rotation is developed in torsion in the rubber. In a cylindrical plain bearing typically the torsion is carried in shear by an oil film between two metal concentric cylinders. I'm not going to indulge in stupid wiki games at this point. Greglocock (talk) 12:32, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What are you trying to say here? Wizard191 (talk) 14:51, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. A bushing is not a plain bearing. The first ref to hand is "Machine design" by Deutschman et al,p406, a plain bearing is a journal, that is there is sliding involved. A rubber bushing may or may not allow sliding. A bushing is not a subset of plain bearing. Greglocock (talk) 22:47, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A rubber bushing in the sense that you are using is just another name for a rubber isolator. Yes, they both take the form of a sleeve and mount in applications where torque is seen but a rubber isolator's purpose is not to reduce friction. Please do not be so narrow in your scope of the definition of the word; the majority of words have multiple meanings: [1], [2], [3] & [4]. The applications section, which is the only section referring to your use of the word, can be merged into vibration isolation or be used to start a new article on isolators and a hatnote used to refer to that usage.
As to your reference that states a "plain bearing is a journal", that is just a poor definition on the authors part because he obviously wasn't thinking about plain linear bearings (i.e. the bearings that igus make) or plain thrust bearings, which are most definitely not a journal but are a plain bearing. For other refs supporting my view: [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], etc. Wizard191 (talk) 00:35, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi all, sorry to interject, but I do have some observations that are relevant to the topic of how the term "bearing" is defined and therefore how the page naming should be on Wikipedia. Note that this article, right now currently, says "For example, a rotary plain bearing can be just a shaft running through a hole." That is correct (whether some people don't believe it or not). See also a discussion thread atTalk:Bearing (mechanical)#Definition redux. Then there are sleeve-type bearings, such as crankshaft bearings, which are physically (etically) the same thing as some other parts that get called "bushing". In my opinion, some parts that people call "bushings" are a subset of plain bearing. Meanwhile, other parts that are also called "bushings" by some people could be considered NOT bearings. The issue is that natural language has multiple senses for one word. Controlled vocabulary is something else again. The word "bearing" was originally literally the gerund of the verb "to bear". A bearing is an instance of one object being borne by another. The word is very abstract (thus nonspecific) at root. That's why in natural language the word "bearing" can branch off into so many senses. — ¾-10 02:23, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion Undo the merge that was done boldly but stupidly a couple of years ago and have separate articles for Plain Bearing and Bushing. Greglocock (talk) 03:23, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A reasonable option. Vegaswikian (talk) 09:05, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This option is better than nothing, for sure, but I don't know if its necessary. Can we not have a plain bearing article that has a section about bushings (of the bearing type not the isolator type)? Essentially a bushing is a plain bearing that is independent of the housing in which it is installed into, thus I don't understand why two separate articles are need. We can convert bushing into a disambig article that covers all of its meanings, including a bearing, an isolator, and a pipe fitting (and anything else I can't think of right now). Wizard191 (talk) 14:01, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If I understand everything correctly, we all agree on the course to take. It is what Wizard described, which is also in line with Greg's point, in that "Bushing" would become its own page (not conflated with "Plain bearing"), and it would be a disambig page, and one of the bluelinks would lead to a "#Bushing" section of "Plain bearing". — ¾-10 23:19, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well i've split them up, now you need to move the contents around to suit. Greglocock (talk) 04:22, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for splitting them. I have moved the info around into what seems to be logical locations to me. Hope all are happy now...I know I am. Wizard191 (talk) 01:52, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Feel free to continue working on this and discussing below, just wanted to formally close the reqmove. DMacks (talk) 09:22, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New merge Feb 2010[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Yup good idea. Greglocock (talk) 22:12, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Wizard191 (talk) 00:55, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Done! — ¾-10 00:42, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Meaning of "bushing"[edit]

Can the subject of this article be referred to as "bush"? Please comment at Talk:Bush#Bushing. – Uanfala (talk) 22:02, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Can it be called also "silent block"?[edit]

In fact, the Spanish article uses this term. George Rodney Maruri Game (talk) 01:20, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to be quite widespread but Silentbloc is a tradename, either Dunlop or Paulstra I think. Greglocock (talk) 04:16, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relationship with plain bearing bushing.[edit]

Is it related to the other bushing? George Rodney Maruri Game (talk) 01:23, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not really. One is for supporting a rotating shaft directly, the other is used to join two components together compliantly. Greglocock (talk) 04:17, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bushing_(isolator)&oldid=1200474694"