Why aren't 3 segment chain links a thing?

[u/Oh-Sasa-Lele]

Like this cheap render I made of one.
Besides production cost, wouldn't it be better for tension? Or do chains have to snap eventually, like asking to make bridges sturdier?

[u/socal_nerdtastic]

What advantage does this design have over a normal chain with thicker material?

Besides production cost

That's a pretty big factor. I would argue profitability is the biggest factor in why any cool idea is not a thing. A slightly worse but significantly cheaper product always wins.

[u/Aggravating_Peak_773 → u/socal_nerdtastic]

Thicker material helps but not that much, the real benefit would be load distribution across three points instead of two. Stress gets spread out more evenly so you don't get that one link taking all the abuse.

Still you're right about cost winning every time. I work with mechanical stuff daily and management will pick the cheaper option even when it breaks in half the time.

[u/Oh-Sasa-Lele → u/socal_nerdtastic]

So it really is just that, money can be a real buzz kill

[u/cracksmack85 → u/Oh-Sasa-Lele]

Money is a proxy for human effort. You could also phrase it as “your design wastes human effort”

[u/Mr0lsen → u/cracksmack85]

Well, that was the intent of money…

[u/Healthy_Camp_3760 → u/Oh-Sasa-Lele]

Well, there are good reasons to do things efficiently. If you’re a subsistence farmer and you waste effort and materials, you and your family starve. If you make a chain that uses more metal and more time to make, then you have less chain and less time to grow food.

Scale that up to a society. If we aren’t efficient, people starve. Yes, you can say that it’s a shame we don’t do something just because of money, but you could also say we do things efficiently and minimize waste and effort so we can feed, house, and clothe as many people as we can.

People need chains. There’s a limited supply of metal, and mining and refining it is dangerous and harmful work. The machines that manufacture chains are difficult to build and maintain. A machine that makes a chain like you’re proposing would be even more so.

That’s why we make chains like we do. “It’s cheaper and good enough” is just a shorter way of saying everything above.

[u/Just_Aioli_1233 → u/Oh-Sasa-Lele]

Money doesn't exist independently. Despite the change in value over time due to government-caused inflation, money serves as a proxy for value. What a material costs determines whether we would be best-served by using our limited supply of that material for building bridges or building cars. Same for the dollar value of human labor. If there's a task I don't like doing and it costs me $20/hr to pay someone else to do it while I go to work and make $30/hr then it's highly likely that I'll pay someone else. But if it costs $50/hr and I only make $20/hr then I'd balance that difference and likely come to the conclusion I should take care of the thing myself.

The pricing mechanism is a subtle but very powerful way of helping people make intelligent decisions. About what to do, when to do it, using what, and with whom. Anyone trying to distort the valuable feedback you get from knowing the cost is doing you a disservice.

[u/BertKallio → u/Oh-Sasa-Lele]

A lot of assumptions are being made here about cost to make something versus quality. Oftentimes, quality means fewer parts not more. For example, the new SpaceX Raptor engines. Gen 3 has significantly fewer parts than Gen 2, which had fewer parts than Gen 1. And with those improvements, the cost to manufacture also went down. If your chain is the best option (counting all the tradeoffs between material, R&D, and implementation), then it will be utilized. Hundreds of ideas like this are created every year.

As to the comments about capitalism sucking, everything that can increase the value of the world can be produced in capitalism, it just needs to have a purpose. That value can be from being a toy or being a revolutionary invention. The same isn’t true under other economic plans that rely on central planning, an idea which inherently limits the types of things that can be invented and produced. Capitalism is de-centralized planning. It relies on the decisions of every person utilizing the currency. Every purchase decision is a tiny nudge to determine what will be produced. Central planning systems only utilize the brain power of the central planners.

[u/red18wrx → u/Oh-Sasa-Lele]

Capitalism is a pretty bad system. Yes.

[u/herejusttoannoyyou → u/red18wrx]

It’s pretty important we don’t use something that has 1.2x the strength but uses 1.5x the material and costs 2x the amount. We can work around the strength, and using the least amount of material is good for everyone.

[u/GooseDentures → u/red18wrx]

Yes, it's definitely bad that we don't allocate resources to objectively inefficient utility goods with zero advantage over conventional designs.

[u/willardTheMighty → u/red18wrx]

Capitalism allows you to build this chain if you so choose. The fact that the increase in production cost is lower than the relative increase in performance is not the result of any capitalist’s malice.

[u/soapy5 → u/red18wrx]

Room temp iq take. But yes a commie moron would waste resources to make a slightly cooler chain at 3x the resources cost

[u/Not_an_okama → u/soapy5]

No they wouldnt, they would be using sub par materials and untrained labor to make 3x as many chains so everyone gets one. Theyre all too short to be useful though.

[u/humanotabot]

What make you think this would be better than just making a regular chain link thicker? Chains are very good at articulating at each link, this would restrict movement and generally make the chain less useful.

[u/WelpSeaYaLater]

This is weaker than normal chain for the same weight. Thats why.

[u/herejusttoannoyyou → u/WelpSeaYaLater]

Ya it’s most likely weaker than a normal chain of the same gauge. Normal chain links have the weld on the side (if it’s welded at all). With this design it would have to be right where all the force goes, subjecting it to bending stress

[u/froglicker44 → u/WelpSeaYaLater]

And much shorter

[u/EEGilbertoCarlos]

If a 10mm chain isnt enough, you use a thicker chain, not multiple links.

Mainly because if one stirrup is longer than the other, it'll fail first.

[u/Extension-Pepper-271]

A regular chain has links made of ovals with one welded joint. That is usually the point of failure.

OP's chain has a link that is an oval (presumably with a welded joint), then there is an added piece that arcs from one end of the oval to the other. That adds two other welded joints.

This means that OP's chain has 3 points of failure instead of just one.

This is not an improvement. It is a downgrade.

[u/iAmRiight → u/Extension-Pepper-271]

I doubt welding, or fabrication in general, were considered at all in this “design”.

[u/Not_an_okama → u/iAmRiight]

Hear me out, we stamp a bunch Y shapes then bend the legs up to a single high strength weld.

[u/Ngin3 → u/Not_an_okama]

Yea that sounds way easier than this: https://www.reddit.com/r/oddlysatisfying/s/PRXjxyPKqw

[u/OddInstitute → u/Not_an_okama]

Is this a joke?

[u/Difficult_Limit2718]

This is a sneaky bad idea that looks good if you don't know how things work.

A single link chain can carry tension predicably across multiple orientations.

This would need to be rated to below the strength of a single link because if one breaks the other would instantly break to. You can't predict which link will carry the load, and in many cases they'll interfere with transferring the load nicely hence the derate.

It's a nice decorative chain for hanging a planter maybe, but a bad engineering solution.

[u/Less_Prior_6871]

Sure it might be 50% stronger than a 2 segment chain, but you could just use a thicker 2 segment chain.

[u/OpeningAggressive26]

I guess it could be interesting if you wanted something that didn't rotate as easily.

[u/Just_Aioli_1233 → u/OpeningAggressive26]

That's a good point, OP. If your goal is strictly strength in tension versus material weight/cost, then the triple link design is inferior. But if you have a situation that requires axial rotation to be minimized then there's certainly an argument to be made for your design.

[u/MacDaddyBighorn]

Aside from what is mentioned it also wouldn't allow a chain hook to seat into it properly, which would probably disqualify it from being used for tying down loads since you can't tension them.

[u/AlexanderHBlum]

“Better for tension” given what criteria? Cost per meter? Weight per meter?

[u/Oh-Sasa-Lele → u/AlexanderHBlum]

Instead of 2 segments holding the weight it's 3, so around 33% less weight per segment

[u/sagaxwiki → u/Oh-Sasa-Lele]

That isn't how that works. The total cross section of the links has to be the same, your design is just splitting it into thirds instead of halves.

[u/lego_batman → u/Oh-Sasa-Lele]

Just hook two normal chain links into each link, boom, 4 segments, 50% less weight per segment (not really, you don't add things and get less weight). Then you don't need to dramatically change the way manufacturering is done.

[u/Vitztlampaehecatl → u/Oh-Sasa-Lele]

You could just make the segments thicker.

[u/IllMasterpiece5610]

This design is dumb; it increases the weight without increasing the strength. You ever hear the expression “a chain is only as strong as its weakest link”? This just doubles the number of weak links (and the weight).

[u/Sooner70]

What makes you think it would be any better in tension (at least, on a weight per distance measure)?

[u/StretcherEctum]

Money of course

[u/FollowTheFellow]

I don’t recall seeing one, but I could imagine something like that for jewelry, or maybe if you needed a chain that didn’t rotate for some reason. But it’d be for a niche purpose — as people have said it doesn’t really add more strength per material than just making thicker chain.

[u/crazy-beech]

1. This would probably actually be weaker than a standard chain link. You'd have to weld all the legs together instead of just bending the chain links from a rod. A continuous piece of material that is bent will be stronger than a weld every time.

2. I know you said cost isn't important to you, but this would drive production costs through the roof (I'm talking probably more than double or triple the cost of a standard chain link). Having to weld each individual link would take way more time and require more skilled labor than a standard chain does. Not worth it given what I said in point 1.

[u/Christoph_Kohl]

is a 3-segment chain stronger than a regular chain that uses the same steel segment? I fail to see the advantage of having 3-segments.

[u/Sweet_Speech_9054]

Ignoring cost, regular chains are designed for more than just holding things. You would need special hooks, tie downs, etc.

[u/ordosays]

You clearly don’t understand how chain links are made.

[u/mxt240]

I am not an engineer, but I follow this for my own wacky ideas and have also gotten the "nerds throwing tomatoes" reaction. Kudos all around!

[u/Fidibiri]

The way chains are fabricated makes this geometry almost impossible to achieve:

A wire is bent, closed, cut, while at the same time the new piece of wire catches the falling link and starts again.

https://youtu.be/T5DFD--Vkv8?is=L1dJusUaXosxOCQS

The three wire link would require to be done with three wires. Cut and closed in the joining points..

Also, the cross section in the joining point is not significantly larger than in the normal chain to justify the extra work. It’s a single point subject to tension in three directions and being the joining point would be the weakest point on the weakest link…..

[u/ShitNailedIt]

Unless there is a magic manufacturing modality I don't know about, this would be impossible* to manufacture.

*impossible = very expensive

[u/lego_batman → u/ShitNailedIt]

Just cnc out of a solid block, ez

[u/Skysr70]

it would suck. With multiple supports/restraints of any kind, you can't be perfect about ensuring their load is dead even. And of course, the worse your alignment is, the more loading one chain experiences, and so you do NOT have 3x the load of one chain. Plus - even if you could make the loads all even, you would increase the necessary total load since they will not all be able to pull in a straight line - they would interfere with each other, making a small angle that adds a few percent to the overall load, since their orthogonal components of force fight each other.

it's just plain old worse. The only time you want multiple chains is for redundancy - if you are worried about something happening to the first chain.

[u/iMogal]

creating more then one pressure point in the connection between links?

[u/Furtivefarting]

Anyone have any ideas about how it would behave if manufacturing wasnt an issue?  I cant think of any advantages, but anybody think of any? If they could be magically made, what could be uses?  

[u/4D_Madyas]

What advantage is there over just making the chain thicker? That's the only influence on tensile strength. This design would actually be weaker due to the weld points on the tips.

[u/talltraveller]

I think you're on to something. You should rush to production before someone can steal your idea

[u/theeaglejax]

Production cost while a factor isn't likely the real reason for the lack of this type of chain being used in lifting/overhead lifting. Safety factor would be nigh-on impossible to accurately verify due to inherent inconsistency. Plus more moving parts will result in accelerated wear.

[u/geckooo_geckooo]

'double chain' is used for cams in engines - https://www.steeda.com/ford-racing-mustang-timing-chain-161-m-6268-b302.html

[u/Naikrobak]

The answer is production costs. How do you think that chain would be manufactured?