StarFleet proprietary Screw Fastener? What Screw Fastener would you design/use in place?

I just remembered that in "Star Trek: Prodigy" episode 8 that Dal was using a proprietary StarFleet Emblem shaped Screw Fastener.

Spoiler: Star Trek: Prodigy Season 1 Episode 8

Why on earth would you use that shape, other than blatent fan service, to create a Screw Fastener with that shape of indentation? That's incredibly mechanically inefficient.

We all know that a properly designed Screw Fastener would have the outter ends of the contact surface have an angle between the plane of contact between tool and fastener be as close to 90° perpendicular to the circumferentially directed force of the Screw Driver's rotation for maximum torque delivery.

The Torx design is an example created that is quite popular that resists cam-out and is close to 90° perpendicular. Obviously there are other designs that are closer to being perfectly mechanically efficient.

Basic Slot & Phillips(Cruciform) designs deliver the mechanical forces perfectly, but have other fundamental design flaws like Cam-Out which causes slippage between the Screw Driver & Screw Head.

Which Screw Head Type do you think StarFleet would standardize upon?

Would it be an existing design, would it be a original design?

 

None.

They use self-screwing bolts. I prefer sockets myself. Hate screws, especially slot.

 

How would that work? Is it going to carry a mini electric Motor to Screw itself In/Out?

That seems awfully inefficient in terms of mass, complexity, weight, etc. And it isn't nearly as strong as a normal screw if you need to make space for a mini Electric Motor to Self Screw In/Out.

Or are you thinking of Self-Drilling Screws that allow you to drill into the material?

Are you thinking of Socket Cap Screws that go flush into the material and leave nothing protruding from the work surface?

Spoiler: Socket Cap Screw

Slot type was the first Screw type that became popular for humanity. It's not my favorite IMO. So many fundamental issues with it's basic design. I prefer other designs like:
Tri-point
Tri-groove
Tri-wing

Spoiler: Various Screw Drive types

Spoiler: Various Types of Screws

 

More like this. But, I'm just riffing on the idea of a self-sealing stem bolt from DS9.

That's my preference if possible. However, usually not possible in construction.

Unfamiliar with any of these.

 

Self Sealing Stem Bolts seem super heavy duty and only necessary for holding together large panels with no obvious methods of entry on either side. That's a speciality item where you need to know how to wirelessly contact the device to open/close a panel / door from either side.

Probably good for secret doors or compartment access that you don't want others to know about.

You usually need to plan for that and have enough material thickness to hide the Socket Cap Screws.

I updated my posts, you can see the shape and google them up.

They're unique in their design.

 

Thank you. It's interesting to see the variety. What makes a delta shaped one inefficient then?

There are so many variety and I've had poor experiences with a lot of others. So, why call out the delta as a bad design when each one has pluses and minuses?

 

The StarFleet Delta design has minimal surfaces going in the direction of the Screw Fastener's rotation.

Optimal Screw Design has the contact surfaces going with the direction of the users rotational direction.
Letting you waste the least amount of energy to apply torque to turn the Screw Fastener.

Inefficient designs makes you waste more energy to apply the same amount of torque to turn said Screw fastener.

It's bad design because it was designed for blatent fan service without any thought to function.

The StarFleet Delta makes for a inefficient shape.

Look at the Torx design.

Spoiler: Torx vs Hex Screw Fastener design

It's geometry is closer to optimal while not easily allowing Cam-Out to happen.

Spoiler: StarFleet Arrow-Head Emblem Screw Fastener

This thing only has 2x major points of contact when you're rotating clock-wise or counter clock-wise.

And most of the forces aren't in line with the direction of rotation, ergo wasting more force to rotate it.

 

That's Star Trek though...sorry, I guess I should be more outraged by blatant fan service.

I hate the Torx so damn much. When it works it's totally fine. When it strips it sucks so much and I hate them.

 

That's true with any screw that is stripped.

When the mass produce screws, they don't take the time to use high temps to harden the screws or use Carbonitriding to harden the surface. That would add cost to a bulk / cheap item.

 

No, Torx are worse, at least in my experience. I can manage Phillips and straight. I can't manage Torx.

 

You should try the other screws I listed, they might give you a better experience if possible.

There's an entire world of Screw Fasteners.

 

When you're working in the world of building codes I am less likely to try new. I don't need an inspector up my rear end about a screw.

 

I thought you were a Psychologist / Counselor / Therapist?

 

Licensed Mental Health Counselor. Not a psychologist as not a doctor.

And I'm building my own house.

 

IC. Have you thought of going with ICF (Insulated Concrete Form)?

Long term, it's more sustinable and you can pass it down from generation to generation.

No more crappy weakness of Wood based housing.

 

We did for the foundation.

 

I was thinking for the entire structure, not just the foundation.

 

Robertson. They’re high-torque, self-centering, resistant to cam-out and, most importantly, they don’t fall off the end of the driver!

 

I personally prefer a square driver. But here in America, it seems like it's most Phillips and Flathead in most stores.

--Alex

 

Lemme Guess, both of you are Canadian?

I've heard of Robertson, seen pictures of it, I have bits for it.

I've never held a (Robertson / Square Drive) Screw Fastener in my life here in the US.
I couldn't find it on a store shelf unless I probably go hunting for it on Amazon or a specialty screw shop.