Arrow Revolution Digital Motorized Dead Bolt

[Old Canuck]

There is a mechanical issue that I am trying to solve.

ref: http://www.arrowrevolution.com/

I installed the deadbolt yesterday. The passage set latch takes all of the load so that the deadbolt does not have any friction from its strike plate. I lubricated the strike mechanism.

If I throw the bolt with the mechanical key, it extends a full one inch and in this position, you cannot push the deadbolt in as it gets locked.

When the bolt is thrown by the electric motor, it stops about 3/16ths short of one inch and the deadbolt is not locked in that position. If you push it back in then it blocks at about 1/2". I think that that block action is from the Arrow's drive unit. The problem also occurs when the the bolt is thrown by the motor into the strike or into the air [strike plate not a factor].

There is rotational slack where the tail piece goes through the strike and where the tail piece goes into the motorized drive. This contributes to the limited throw.

If I cause the bolt to throw and resist the movement with my hand, it seems to be able to develop a lot of force, so that is not the issue.

I think that the tail piece between the strike and the motor drive could be twisted to correct this problem. After the bolt motors out, using the key I can see that the tail piece needs to rotate by another 10-15 degrees to get the bolt fully extended and locked. Please also note that when the bolt throws [short] the inside handle cannot be rotated any further to move the bolt. So the mechanism is at a dead stop and the bolt is thrown short; so the limitation is not related to friction.

The problem is in part a result of combined rotational slack at both ends of the tail piece [motor drive and strike]. Putting a small twist into the tail piece would compensate for that. And a further amount might be required beyond that. Is the problem widespread and simple not recognized? If you have one of these dead bolts, please see if the key throws the dead bolt further than the motor drive.

Anyone have any other ideas? [I will contact customer support on Monday, but I do not have much hope on getting any intelligent life on the phone.]

[keysman]

Anyone have any other ideas? [I will contact customer support on Monday, but I do not have much hope on getting any intelligent life on the phone.]

You might be surprised.. often the customer support tecks are very helpful.
Just a guess here, but it sounds like your timing may be off. IE. The bolt and the locks were not installed correctly.
I did not look at the specific deadbolt you mentioned, so my suggestions could be completely off base.

Normally to install a deadbolt :
With the door open:
1. Check to see that the bolt is installed correctly. It maybe upside down. When assembled The “ Key part” should be installed so the notches of the key face upward .( the flat part or bottom of the key should be parallel to the ground)
2. Put the bolt in the locked position: If necessary use a screwdriver or the “ lock part “ to FULLY extend the bolt. Check to see that the bolt is in the “ Dead locked “ position.
3. With the “ key part” in hand, turn the tail piece to the position it would be in if the door was locked.
4. Install “ key part”
5. Test.
I hope this helps.

[Evan]

I agree with Keysman...

It sounds as if the cylinder tail piece might be put on in an incorrect position so the lock is not timed correctly or is "out-of-synch"...

Troubleshoot that before you spend time on the phone with the technical support people...

~~ Evan

[Old Canuck]

We have a vulnerable design!

News from Tech Support: The support agent was very knowledgeable. There is a design problem and the problem is as I described above.

There is rotational slack in the tail piece at the motor drive [thumb turn] and latch. As the thumb screw is mechanically blocked at 90 degrees of rotation, the slack means that the rotation at the latch is less than 90 degrees and the dead bolt does not fully extend and dead latch. If pressure is applied to the end of the deadbolt, it very easily is pushed fully back into the strike. That outcome creates a method to easily defeat the lock by drilling into the door frame and applying light pressure onto the end of the dead bolt. This [grade two] deadbolt does not come with a steel strike plate back-box.

Arrow states that their tail piece is thicker and that this problem then does not occur if their tail piece is used. For deadbolts supplied without a lock core or when the dealer replaces the Arrow lock core, this problem will occur. I think that they created a thicker tail piece as a band-aid when they discovered the problem. I have the KeyMark tail piece.

Arrow stated that their tail piece would fit the KeyMark and M3 cores, my dealer stated that they would not. So the reality is not known.

Arrow suggests that the tail piece can be shimmed at the strike and the motor drive end and the problem will be fixed. I found some credit card like stock that worked well and that plus the tail piece stacked up to 2.55mm. Now the dead bolt works perfectly. The shim runs from the lock core around 1/4" longer than the tail piece. That way the shim does cannot migrate.

This is all a design error as the designer assumed that the strike only requires 90 degrees of travel and that limiting the thumb knob travel to 90 degrees would work correctly. The designer ignored two realities. One that there are two sources of rotational slack and that in the real world, tail pieces are not built to create a snug fit in Arrow's hardware.

Most will install and not notice that the bolt does not fully throw and lock. I expect that that would include most professionals as well.

So how does one best shim the tail piece? Perhaps my idea about twisting the end of the tail piece might be more practical. A professional would not want to spend time fussing with this. It took me a long time to get right, finding shim material etc.

The install manual refers to 25mm [1"] screws for the latch and strike plate. Supplied screws are 20mm [3/4"]. Is there any standard for grade two deadbolt fastener minimum lenths? If a deadbolt is certified A156.36 grade two with 1" specified screws, does it still qualify with to that standard with 3/4" screws? -All rather wimpy.

[cledry]

Sadly I would say that at least 80% of deadbolts installed by builders in our area do not throw the their deadlocked position due to the fact that the frame is not prepped to the proper depth. I haven't used the Arrow deadbolt of which you speak, but I will now check the tailpiece if I use one.

Is it possible you could post photos of the part that requires shimming. I would like to see if a good solution can be had.

I think two possible problems with makeshift solutions present themselves.

1) Twisting the tailpiece may work on the short term, but the real possibility exists of the tailpiece becoming straight again through use.

2) Shimming presents a possible problem with the shim shifting or falling out.

[keysman]

1) Twisting the tailpiece may work on the short term, but the real possibility exists of the tailpiece becoming straight again through use.

I don't think tail pieces are meant to be "twisted". There is a reason they come from the factory straight.
You also run the future possibility of the tail piece breaking off inside the door . Then you have a real fun problem. Especially if you are locked outside.
Additionally .. it could be a problem to install/ remove the deadbolt with a twisted tailpiece.

[keysman]

...Arrow stated that their tail piece would fit the KeyMark and M3 cores, my dealer stated that they would not. So the reality is not known.

Is this the same dealer who sold you "SAMPLE" cores? I would generally take the word of the factory over a dealer ... and this dealer has a history of " not knowing nothin' " go back to the dealer and ask for the tail piece.. it is yours . You PAID for it.
I would look for another dealer.. they can't be much worse.
It seems odd that tech support didn't offer to send you the correct tailpiece or at the very least direct you to the parts department.

[Old Canuck]

Shimming:

Retention: I cut a plastic shim that was the same width as the tail piece and a bit longer. It is radially contained at two points, the strike and the thumb turn. The lock core and the thumb turn also constrain the position of the shim along the axis.

With the bolt retracted the tail piece is horizontal. Placing the shim on top of the tail piece creates binding as the tail piece is constrained at three points and does not align perfectly. This creates a problem as the tail piece is rotated and friction builds as the bolt extends. I placed the shim on the bottom side of the tail piece and now things are very smooth. The bolt throws with the thumb turn with very slight force and deadlocking pawl now does drop behind the bolt.

I found that some moly grease plus syn motor oil on the strike mechanism improved things a lot. [Sorry if my terminology is not right.]

I gather that shimming tail pieces is really not a standard practice and no particular methods or materials are recommended. Yes, metal would be preferred to plastic as plastic may fail and lubricants may accelerate that. Ideally, one would shim the tail piece from both sides to not create an radial offset at the lock core end. Such an offset can bend the tail piece as it is rotated, creating friction and a spring resistance.

Yes, same dealer who supplied sample cores ..... I will pursue.

Arrow really needs to disclose the need for the factory tail piece and/or provide a shimming solution in the box.

[keysman]

...Arrow really needs to disclose the need for the factory tail piece and/or provide a shimming solution in the box.

Why are you blaming Arrow? The lock out of the box worked correctly. YOU are responsible for changing the factory set-up. The dealer who sold you the Keymark is responsible to make sure you have the correct parts.. The dealer HAD the correct parts, they failed to test the replacement or provide you with working parts for the replacement core. ( just plain lazy and/or incompetent)

[Old Canuck]

A thumb turn that limits travel to 90 degrees and a requirement for a specific tail piece thickness can lead to a significant problem and the installation manual should not be silent about this. So you replace the supplied 5 pin consumer core with a high security core and then the dead bolt pawl fails to lock the bolt. You replace a low security core to get a dead bolt that will not dead lock.

I still have to find out about the comparability of the Arrow tail piece with KeyMark and M3.

Are there other deadbolts that fail to work as intended if a different tail piece is used?

Anyone ever had to shim a tail piece before?

[keysman]

You replace a low security core to get a dead bolt that will not dead lock.

The core is only 1 part .. the tailpiece does the actual work.

Are there other deadbolts that fail to work as intended if a different tail piece is used?

The deadbolts that I just checked :
Schlage
Medeco
Multilock
Lori
Emhart
Kwikset
All had manufacture specific tail pieces. IE> not interchangeable with other manufacturers.

Anyone ever had to shim a tail piece before?

That is the first time I have ever heard of doing that.

[Evan]

A thumb turn that limits travel to 90 degrees and a requirement for a specific tail piece thickness can lead to a significant problem and the installation manual should not be silent about this. So you replace the supplied 5 pin consumer core with a high security core and then the dead bolt pawl fails to lock the bolt. You replace a low security core to get a dead bolt that will not dead lock.

I still have to find out about the comparability of the Arrow tail piece with KeyMark and M3.

Are there other deadbolts that fail to work as intended if a different tail piece is used?

Anyone ever had to shim a tail piece before?

Most businesses wouldn't be using a gimmicky lock like this...

You probably should have looked at a Best BASIS tubular lock set with the PIN pad option for keyless entry where the electronics interact with a solenoid which allows the exterior lever handle to operate as opposed to directly driving the bolt... Key override functions as a normal storage function lock set would...

You were the one who wanted the touchscreen lock, it probably did have the wow factor and whole coolness thing going for it...

As far as replacing one type of CYLINDER -- CYLINDER with another, these are not "cores", you should always use the tailpiece/cam from the OEM cylinder you removed from the lock, even if it requires modification to do so... It is designed and tested by UL to work with the lock you purchased... A replacement cylinder that the maker of the cylinder has not made a specific claim that "this product is a drop-in replacement for xx model of xx brand lock" may not guarantee that it is compatible with every lock out there...

What you are complaining about here is the same as someone who has a fancy OEM mortise lock set installed on their door and is whining about not being able to use the deadbolt function because the high security cylinders they obtained have Adams Rite cams on them and they didn't know how the cam interfaces with the lock and thought it wasn't a big deal...

You have a consumer lock and you are perhaps being provided with service by someone who can't ANSWER your questions because they AREN'T installing it in the door themselves... An experienced locksmith would see what is going on and would have most likely modified the original tailpiece provided by Arrow to work with the Medeco cylinder...

You are experiencing this issue entirely because you insisted on installing this lock yourself using parts other than the ones included in the box with the lock which were designed and tested to work with the lock without possessing an adequate grasp of the craft of locksmithing to be able to make modifications to the cylinder or tailpiece as needed which would be durable and not potentially cause a lock out or lock in if they failed... Often times there is somewhat more to installing a lock than drilling the holes in the door in the right places and assembling the parts according to the directions...

~~ Evan

[Old Canuck]

The lock dealer supplied the dead bolt with the KeyMark cylinder retrofitted by them, let me off of that hook.

The door had a preexisting passage handle and deadbolt. I did not need a digital lock set. I do see the point where the interaction of the tail piece and the strike mechanism would not then be a issue. The application is a home-office, I did not want to look industrial.

It is odd [to me] that the tail piece incomparable hardware in my case is all owned by corporation or holding company. Some standards are conspicuous in their absence. So I have learned a lesson and like many, one learns the hard way. I did get to see the Arrow core and tail piece, totally different.

I saw that many digital entry devices have problems with the surfaces of the buttons wearing off. There will not be an issue of that nature with a glass surface capacitive touch screen device. However, service line is not established. Physical buttons can also show what numbers are in use via wear, polishing or soiling.

I did get to see the Arrow core and tail piece, totally different.

I will post back when the M3 hardware is installed and lessons learned from that.

[Old Canuck]

I received and installed 3 Medeco M3 cores. Same problem with the tail piece as with the KeyMark Core.

The locksmith ordered a M3 core specifying that it was to be used with the Arrow Revolution. The tail piece supplied my Medeco was identical to that for the KeyMark. Not really a surprise. [1.8mm, 2.5mm is required] And the guy who did a functional trial of the M3 in the deadbolt at the shop did not check for the locking pawl problem; an organizational learning disability. "Once wiser, twice stupid."

So I had to shim it again. This time I cut metal shims, not plastic which could fail.

I called Arrow/Medeco tech support, one team for both products; so they could not wiggle of the hook and state that it was not their problem.

I got some evasive BS about manufacturing tolerances. I stopped that deflection and stated that the problem is absolutely not tolerances but incompatible specifications. Finally I was told that they are aware of the problem and they are seeking design change options, including reducing the widths of the openings in the latch mechanism and the thumb turn to work with typical tail pieces.

[C locked]

It may be a stupid question. But what is the mechanism that allows /blocks the motor turn mechanism at turn and stop at 90 degrees. surely if it'd allow it, filing the "stop" a little. To allow the mechanism to actually throw 90 degrees. Would fix the problem.