Methods for Threading Blind Holes in Thin Materials

Source: Getty Images

Reader Question: I keep running into situations where a customer’s print calls for full thread depth in a blind hole, but there's barely enough material to make it work. Am I missing something, or is this a design problem?

Unfortunately, a blind hole in thin material with a full thread depth called out is too common a design for manufacturing (DFM) issue we as machinists all witness. However, parts need to be made regardless, so what is the best way to handle it? Knowing the machining techniques available and a little thread math (not just the thread spec), and being able to provide options, makes you a better resource to the designers you work with. It also allows you to make better parts with more reliable machining processes too.

Featured Content

Apply AI and GPU Simulation for More Efficient CAM Programming READ MORE

10 Minutes to Influence U.S. Manufacturing Policy READ MORE

Do Shops Need More Machinists or Better Tooling? READ MORE

When a designer calls out full thread depth on a blind hole, they’re likely laser focused on the fastener and forgot to see the bigger picture. They need a certain amount of thread engagement to hit their pull-out spec or torque requirement, and they’ve (maybe) done that math. What they haven’t done — and perhaps didn’t know — is the machining math that lives inside that same hole. To a designer, a blind hole in 3D looks like a cylinder, and if the bottom of the fastener isn’t touching, it’s good to go. To you, it looks like three things competing for the same space.

The Depth Stack-Up

Before a single full thread exists in a blind hole, depth has already been consumed from three different places. First, the drill point. A standard drill doesn’t leave a flat floor; it leaves a cone. That cone consumes meaningful depth, and you can’t always drill deeper, especially on a thin part or near some other intersection. Second, the tap can’t make full threads from the first revolution. It needs a lead-in to carefully work its way into the material, usually in the form of a chamfer before the teeth are fully engaged. Depending on the tap style this could be two to four thread pitches. A plug tap needs more runway than a bottoming tap. Neither one starts at zero. Lastly, we need clearance between the tap and the bottom of the hole. The tap needs room to stop without crashing, and possibly space for chips not to pack against a dead end.

Once you stack those three together, fastener clearance that looked generous in 3D can come up short on usable threads. This may mean the planned fastener can’t seat all the way.

The Conversation Worth Having

Before you start problem-solving the machining, ask one question: “What’s driving the thread depth callout?” Most designers are solving for pull-out force, a torque value or an internal assembly standard. Find out which one and you’ll often find more flexibility than the print suggests.

It may be as simple as changing the fastener and updating the print to your recommendations. However, it may require more design and process considerations. Pull-out strength is heavily influenced by engagement length, but also by how the thread is made. You can sometimes deliver the same holding strength with less depth simply be changing the method of making the hole. Showing a designer the competing constraints and offering solutions is a different conversation than telling them the part is wrong.

Making the Hole

Once you’ve aligned on what the hole needs to accomplish, you have real options in how you make it. Hole preparation is where you bank or burn usable depth before the tap arrives. A standard drill is fast but leaves a cone. End milling to a flat bottom recovers that depth at a cycle time cost. A reduced-angle or flat-bottom drill sits in the middle, faster than end milling and close enough to a flat floor to matter when depth is tight. It’s an option a lot of shops skip over when they’re more focused on tools they have on hand.

Tap selection has real leverage here. Switching to a bottoming tap recovers two to three thread pitches of usable depth. Form taps go further, producing stronger threads and sometimes enabling you to hit a pull-out spec with less engagement. They require a different pre-drill size, generate higher tapping forces and aren’t right for every material, so know the tradeoffs before reaching for one. Thread milling is often the right call when the geometry gets difficult. A thread mill starts cutting near the bottom of the hole without a tap’s lead-in penalty, so you can get nearly the full hole depth working for you. It costs more in cycle time and programming complexity.

A Simple Way to Think About It

When a blind threaded hole is pushing the limits of the material, work through this question before you cut: What depth do I have? Run the numbers on drill point, tap lead-in and clearance zone, and see what’s left for usable thread. You can then compare this to the designer’s intent regarding pull-out force, torque or assembly constraints. The answer may open methods you couldn’t use if you just followed the print.

The Takeaway

Designers are good at designing. They’re not always familiar with what happens inside a blind hole on a machining center. That’s not a criticism; it’s just a division of expertise. Your job isn’t only to execute the print. It’s to understand what the print is asking for well enough to recognize when the geometry is working against you, and to come to that conversation with options. Run the numbers. Know what’s being lost to the drill point, the tap lead-in and the clearance zone. Know which method gets you the most usable thread in the space you have.

Do you have a machining question? Ask the expert. John Miller leans on more than a decade of industry experience to answer machining questions from MMS readers. Submit your question online at mmsonline.com/MillersEdge.