# Spoked flywheel for the Webster



## deere_x475guy (Feb 2, 2008)

With all the talk about spoke flywheels going on I decided I would make mine today. It's a little bigger than the plans called for but I figured I needed the weight because I am using aluminum. I used Marv's flywheel program to get me started. I have to fess up though the 5 1/4" holes that are in near the Hub shouldn't be there....I didn't start at 36 degrees like the print out called for. I started at 0....DUH... At least it ended up between the webbing and I was able to duplicate the screw up with just drilling 4 more holes 72 degrees apart.))

First I milled out the narrow part of the flywheel







Then I drilled all my holes using a 1/4" drill





Then I milled the excess material between the holes






Here's what I ended up with.


----------



## Brass_Machine (Feb 2, 2008)

Hey Bob,

Thats pretty sharp. I like.


Eric


----------



## Bernd (Feb 3, 2008)

Nice looking flywheel there Bob. Now that makes me want a rotary table. This could be bad for the machine shop buget. ;D

Bernd


----------



## Powder keg (Feb 3, 2008)

Just tell people those are "Speed Holes" They make the engine "run better" No one will second guess the builder LOL

Great job! Wes


----------



## mklotz (Feb 3, 2008)

I'm pleased to see that the program worked for you - even if you tried to outsmart it. 

Actually, I kind of like the extra holes in the webs. Gives it a sort of 'racing' look.


----------



## SignalFailure (Feb 5, 2008)

Nice Bob, wish I had the gear to make such a thing.

I think the extra holes look just fine - if you hadn't fessed up I would have been none the wiser!

There's a mechanical method for achieving a similar result in the plans for this Elmers engine...

http://www.john-tom.com/ElmersEngines/24_beam.pdf


----------



## tattoomike68 (Feb 5, 2008)

I have made some *Bonus* holes in my years of working.

I just tell the customer. "*no extra charge*"


----------



## mklotz (Feb 5, 2008)

SignalFailure  said:
			
		

> Nice Bob, wish I had the gear to make such a thing.
> 
> I think the extra holes look just fine - if you hadn't fessed up I would have been none the wiser!
> 
> ...



Interestingly, the test piece for the program was exactly this flywheel. I happened to have some brass of the right dimension and this was the first tapered-spoke wheel I found in my project book. I had no intention of building the engine - just wanted to test the program - but the flywheel looked so pretty after doing it that I decided to go ahead and build the engine to display it.


----------



## rake60 (Feb 5, 2008)

I DID intend to build Elmer's Beam Engine.

I had no rotary table or program to make the flywheel.
Holes were laid out using a simple formula and a a calculator.

*B = D x sin( 360 / (2 x N))
where 
B = distance between bolt holes
D = diameter of bolt circle
N = number of holes in circle*

It may have not been the correct or safe way, but it went kind of like this.





















It's nothing to brag about, but it worked for me....

Great stuff here guys! I've worked with a lot of old salts who could lay out
a bolt circle with a set of dividers quicker that I can write a program to 
gain the same results.

My point is, if you really want to make it you *CAN*! 

Rick


----------



## SignalFailure (Feb 6, 2008)

Well I'm glad to see some of you guys have made Elmer's Beam - as a relative noob I'll be asking some questions when I start mine no doubt  I have to do a conversion to metric first though and I plan to build it at about twice the size...ouch!

Paul


----------



## gilessim (Feb 6, 2008)

Rick, nice work! but how did you make those circular cuts without a rotary table?

Marv, how do I get your programs to run on my mac? I see that most of them are not in dos, do you know of a utility to run them on a mac?

Giles


----------



## mklotz (Feb 6, 2008)

Giles,

Most of them ARE written to run under DOS but will execute just fine under Windows.
I run them here at home under XP pro.

I know nothing of Macs. There must be Windows emulators for Macs. Most (not all) of the programs don't do any fancy memory manipulation so I would expect them to run under an emulator. But, then, what do I know?

Rick,

I too want to know how you cut those arcs without a rotary table.


----------



## compound driver 2 (Feb 6, 2008)

Hi
mark out the arcs chain drill and use a hand file the same way a clock maker would do them.
Its surprisingly easy to hit 5 thou with a decent file and some looking.

Cheers Kevin


----------



## compound driver 2 (Feb 6, 2008)

Sorry missed this bit off the last post.

Id have to agree with Rick its much faster to use a pair of dividers to mark out a bolt circle
than it is to write all these computer programs. Down with computers up with dividers LOL.

Cheers kevin


----------



## mklotz (Feb 6, 2008)

Kevin,

Using dividers is fine ASSUMING ONE CAN DO THE ASSOCIATED MATH. My experience with newbies and not a few so-called professional machinists is that most of them can not do even the simplest mathematical computations. For many, computing the chord length for a given number of holes might as well be calculus.

I've had numerous Luddites make comments similar to yours. So many, in fact, that I took the time to write some thoughts on the subject - see below. If we abandon the use of the computer, should we also abandon CAD programs and return to the drafting board?

Remember, one of the goals of this forum is to help folks who want to build engines. Anything that makes things easier for them is worth discussing here. 

======================================================================================


WHY WRITE A PROGRAM ?

	I've been asked on many occasions why I would bother to write a
program that does little more than provide information readily available in
certain reference texts. My answer is, "Why would one buy a scientific
calculator if one already has a book with a table of trig functions in it?"

	GAGE is a good example. It allows you to find (sheet/wire) gage
number given thickness/diameter or vice versa. This is information easily
available in 'Machinery's Handbook' or a wealth of other references. Why
write such a program?

	AVAILABILITY

	First, not everyone has the needed reference work to hand or
necessarily knows instantly which book to pull from the shelf. Even if one
has the book, finding the information can often be tedious. In the
information age, it's generally easier to find data via the web than to search
for it in one's (even perhaps extensive) home library. If the information is
stored on your computer, you're always within a few keypresses of having it to
hand. In fact, the ready availability and locatability of information is, in
my mind, a more important asset of the computer than it's ability to do
lightning fast computation.

	CONVENIENCE

	If you're a regular computer user, as many of us are today, you
already know that typing some simple command, like 'GAGE' is far easier than
searching out the book, scanning the index, finding the page, reading the
table usage information, and then interpolating to find the desired
information. Where appropriate, my programs tabulate output into a file which
can be printed and carried to the shop for reference and that's a lot easier
than dragging a bulky book to the shop and trying to hold it open with your
anvil as a book weight.

	SPEED

	What computers are all about. Being able to get an answer rapidly
makes you are more likely to 'do it right the first time' and to explore
alternate solutions to the problem. Often a well written program will
effortlessly provide 'more information than you asked for' and that can be a
boon to creativity.

	ERROR MINIMIZATION AND LONG TERM MEMORY

	If the code is written correctly, a program 'remembers' FOREVER EXACTLY
how to solve a given problem. The human mind is never capable of this long
term precision. Beyond remembering the mechanization of solution, it can also
remember all the likely errors to check for, catch typos, and just generally
formalize the input to the point where most simplistic errors will be caught.

	ADAPTABILITY

	By utilizing an easily edited data file as input, the well-written
program provides a means whereby the user can tailor the program, or add to its
data base without the need to understand in detail the interior workings of the
algorithm.


----------



## compound driver 2 (Feb 6, 2008)

I put down a simple solution to dividing a bolt circle and you call me a Luddite! get stuffed! Even a complete bloody fool can step off a circle to form a bolt circle.

Luddite! I use solidworks 05 and Autocad 14. Luddite! I have a degree in mechanical engineering but also have the ability to open a set of dividers.

I was being lite hearted and WILL NOT BE INSULTED I did not deserve it.

Why dont you go learn to use hand tools you may even find its more fun than a computer!


----------



## AllThumbs (Feb 6, 2008)

uhmmmm, yeah, I doubt anyone was trying to insult anyone. Remember, it's easy to mis-read the tone in any post on a message board. I always say, when in doubt, assume the best (not the worst). Especially on a message board.

Eric


----------



## gilessim (Feb 6, 2008)

Kevin, I have great respect for your work and the way you work, but I feel that I must point out that Marv didn't call you a Luddite





> I've had numerous Luddites make comments similar to yours


and IMHO there was no insult directed at you!, I got the impression that Marv was just trying to point out to the lesser experienced members , the validity of a computer, regarding certain engineering problems.

Giles


----------



## mklotz (Feb 6, 2008)

Sorry, Kevin, if you inferred that I regarded you as a Luddite. I don't and should have been more careful in my wording. My apologies.

Nevertheless, I stand behind what I wrote. There are always multiple ways to get something done. Each of us has a favorite method but that is not license to denigrate other ways to do the job. The skill set of our readers varies widely and it's our job to offer as many techniques as possible so they can select one that suits their abilities. For some that will be laying out by hand and filing. For others it will be using a rotary table on a mill with a worksheet generated by a program.

What we don't need to see is an evaluation of the purity of the method used.

Oh, and BTW, I do use hand tools regularly. In fact, I've built quite a few of them.


----------



## rake60 (Feb 6, 2008)

mklotz  said:
			
		

> Rick,
> 
> I too want to know how you cut those arcs without a rotary table.



Well I already said in my post that it wasn't safe. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




The bore of the flywheel was .125"
I chucked up a short length of 1/8" drill rod in the mill vise that was a very close but
movable fit to the bore. Then I improvised a mini strap wrench that could be securely 
tightened up on the OD of the flywheel. With the 1/8" corner hole already drilled, I lowered 
a 1/8" end mill into a hole and slowly rotated the part around on the drill rod until
the end mill reached the next hole. The handle on my little strap wrench was about 6" 
long and gave me a the feeling I had control over it. Keep in mind the web thickness 
was only 1/16"

It's certainly *NOT* a method I would recommend!

Rick


----------



## mklotz (Feb 6, 2008)

Splutter! Sounds a bit like my rounding over jig.

I tried something along those lines once when I was starting out. Bought a rotary table the next day IIRC.


----------



## rake60 (Feb 6, 2008)

LOL

A rotary table is DEFINATLY on my next to buy list!

Rick


----------



## deere_x475guy (Feb 6, 2008)

Whew....all I wanted to was share...


----------



## rake60 (Feb 6, 2008)

I'm sorry Bob

We did kind of get carried away here.

Many forums would consider that "Thread Highjacking"
That was by NO means the intention!
When someone throws an idea in the fire and it flairs into something more
that can teach an old dog like me a new trick, I see it as a positive event.
I sincerely hope that you are not from the "Highjacked" school of thought.

Rick


----------



## deere_x475guy (Feb 6, 2008)

Absolutely not... I was actually enjoying reading about the alternative ways of doing this. I am lucky enough over the years to have accumulated tooling. My daughters are both out of college now and both my wife and I work, so I do keep a little for tooling each year. I think it's great that alternative ways come up of doing things. Lots of folks don't have some of the equipment I have yet....so it's helpful to all of us to learn other whys to do the same task.)). It's all good Rick. Now...I better head back out to the tractor and finish plowing so I can get to work in the morning....we are getting pounded here.


----------



## compound driver 2 (Feb 7, 2008)

HI
I think one of the things that worries me about all this is the fact that if we offer beginners a way to get round a problem using computer software theres no chance for them to learn the old ways of doing things. learning to do a job the old way lets people learn what has to be done to complete the job in hand. If all we do is churn out numbers from a computer there is no need to understand what is being done. Come the day that a problem is found that a computer program has not been written for the chap is then stumped. 

Rick asked how to cut an arc with out a rotary table and I answered him, dividers and a file. Marking out a bolt hole circle has been done for many years with out the need to understand cords and such. Simply scriving a circle and stepping off around it works and works perfectly. Once the job has been done a few times the math in most cases becomes visible and easy but in many cases not required. 

I have watched plate layers marking out very complex shapes on huge steel plates with out a clue to the math used. They were simply taught how to do it and carried on from there. Showing some one how to mark out with dividers and a rule is a more permanent solution to the problem than asking them to use a computer for every problem encountered. In my honest oppinion its also a better way to help them taken alongside the computer programs.

I dont detract from computers in engineering and infact a lot of what I do would end if I didnt have the use of programs like solidworks. But i do say that we owe it to beginners to show them the non computer way as well as the computer way.


----------

