# Open Column Launch Engine from Kit



## zeeprogrammer (May 17, 2009)

So I ordered the Elderberry Launch Engine Kit from LittleMachineShop. I hope this will become my second engine. A mini-lathe and mini-mill is needed.

As you all know...I am very new to this hobby. No engine experience (bore and stroke?) and no machining experience (wobbler?) save for the last four months.

That's the main reason why I chose this kit. It comes with the materials (right...I know nothing about metal either...half hard brass?), the plans, and what looks like a decent intro into machining.

My first engine was from a casting kit. Some people suggest an engine from raw stock would have been a better choice. I can't say for sure yet but I currently lean towards agreeing. Mainly from the frustration I had with the flywheel. I had bought several of the same kit and found the two halves of the flywheel to be a little off. I couldn't figure out how to hold and/or cut the part so that I had a square rim and concentric hub. On the other hand, it was the simplest kit I could find and it ran despite my sloppy job. I got a lot of satisfaction out of it. A big portion of that satisfaction must be attributed to this forum from which I received a great deal of excellent help as well as recognition.

In thinking about what I just said...a raw stock kit is better. I was bound to make mistakes...hence I had to buy additional kits. (I found out later I could probably have bought replacement castings for the parts I mutilated.) I expect to make still more mistakes...but buying more raw stock is much easier especially when the kit tells me what type and size I need. This kit looks more complicated but it comes with more information on how to do it.

This is a picture of the raw bits that came with the kit...







The manuals are copyrighted so I don't think I can show you a picture of it. But the following link shows an engine that is nearly identical (thank you Harold Lee). The major difference is that the metal tube is plastic in the kit I got.

http://www.homemodelenginemachinist.com/index.php?topic=1863.msg14696#msg14696

The kit comes with two documents. One is the Drawing Set. I understand most of it (I had taken a drafting class back in high school...back when you used pencils and pens and liquid ink. And, I've had the pleasure of working with some fine mechanical engineers.) Still there are some symbols I don't know and will have to get some help on.

The 2nd document is the Construction Manual. It professes to be for the person who's interested but knows next to nothing. (It was written for me!) It's pretty good but they suffer from 'they don't remember what they didn't know'. (And I've found a couple of minor mistakes in scanning the notes.) Again, I know this forum will prove invaluable.

I must admit...I hope I can serve as an example to those others who, like me, lack experience and knowledge but have the desire to build.

As a side note...I'm also learning how to post to the forum. I think I got the picture right. Now I have to figure out how to size it. After all it's just bits of metal. The next picture will show smaller bits of metal...and the picture of that...even smaller bits. If I can make the picture smaller...the smaller bits might at least look bigger.

Let the story begin...and the (positive) criticisms and learnings...


----------



## steamer (May 17, 2009)

Jump in the water is fine.....have fun!


----------



## ChooChooMike (May 18, 2009)

I think you'll see that those Elderberry steam kits are mostly taken from Elmer's Engines.

Here's the picture from Little Machine Shop's page :






Here's the LMS link for the other kits

The mill engine kit is definitely Elmer's design.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (May 18, 2009)

steamer: I'm in the water. I'll hang out in the wading section for a while though...it's important to have some early successes (although we tend to throw new associates into the deep end at work ;D).

ChooChooMike: The mill engine was actually the first kit I bought after my first project. I either didn't notice or it wasn't clear in the LMS description that it was the 2nd in the series with the Launch Engine first. Thanks for putting up the pic. It's the very one.

Hobbyists Like Me: I've seen several references to 'Elmers Engines' but didn't know what it meant ???. A quick google references 'Elmer Verburg' who wrote a book 'Elmer's Engines'. Amazon has this book for $390! There are also several references to downloadable plans but I didn't look to see if they're free or not.


----------



## b.lindsey (May 18, 2009)

Looks like a nice project zee. Please do post progress pics...it may encourage others. There is a link on this site somewhere for scanned copies of Elmer's Engines, and there are many designs from simple to more complex. 

Best wishes on your launch engine project!

Bill


----------



## 90LX_Notch (May 18, 2009)

Give 'er hell Zee!


----------



## b.lindsey (May 18, 2009)

This should be the link for .pdf files of Elmer's Engines:
http://www.john-tom.com/html/ElmersEngines.html

Bill


----------



## ChooChooMike (May 18, 2009)

Click here : LMS link for the Elderberry kit for Elmer's Mill engine


----------



## zeeprogrammer (May 18, 2009)

Thanks for the link Bill! I'd seen it before but clean forgot. It reminded me that at some point I want to try live steam. But I want to begin with a boiler ready to go. I'm not nearly prepared to build my own.

Anyone have suggestions on a simple inexpensive boiler sized to work with the Launch Engine or the Model #2A I recently built?

ChooChooMike...yeah that's the mill engine. Thanks.

All...thanks for the support.

Man I wish I could be home this weekend. Family first!


----------



## b.lindsey (May 18, 2009)

What about the vertical boiler offered by PM Research. Inexpensive is relative but going with a known quantity definitely has advantages from a safety standpoint and with boilers that is critical!!

Bill


----------



## mklotz (May 18, 2009)

A safe, non-toy, ready-built boiler is going to be expensive - and, if one considers the liability costs, it should be. For example, a Stuart simplistic ready-to-run

http://www.stuartmodels.com/inprod_det.cfm/section/boilers/mod_id/91

comes in at 450UKP = $690 plus shipping.

Plus there's the whole business of learning how to operate a boiler safely.

For now, I'd stick with compressed air for the home shop and spend some time trying to locate a model engineering club in your area where you might find someone who might lend you some time on his boiler (with appropriate supervision). 

I think you've chosen wisely for your second engine project - forgiving bar stock and complex enough to develop some new skills yet simple enough to complete in a period that won't exhaust your enthusiasm.

Before making any chips, a good exercise would be to plan out the order in which you intend to make the parts along with notes about why part A must be made before part B. Compare your plan with what the construction book says and try to resolve any differences. Then, for each part, make a cutting schedule that details which operations are done in what order (and how the part is held for the operation) to arrive at the finished object. This need not be some huge documentations exercise - in many cases the plan can be completely mental - but it will help you immensely to have in mind a complete sequence from stock to part before you start. DAMHIKT.

And, of course, feel free to call on the expertise here to help resolve quandries. This thread promises to be a real gold mine for lurking novices so the more detail we can include, the more useful it will be.


----------



## Foozer (May 18, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> As you all know...I am very new to this hobby. No engine experience (bore and stroke?) and no machining experience (wobbler?) save for the last four months. . . .
> Let the story begin...and the (positive) criticisms and learnings...



You'll get it, as said in earlier post, develop a plan of sorts, to which past experience helps with the sequence. Some operations become standard, others are always going to be unique to the task. I spent a lot of years in body structures for the 777 given pieces of the puzzle to install. You want what! where?. First crack at it was always a guessing game, getting the order of operations with lots of "that aint right" Second time around was always the hardest, trying to avoid the mistakes of the earlier just made the job a real PIA. Third crack and process started a life of its own. After that they would give the job to someone else and hand me another new dodad. 

Your not alone in the learning process, it, as you know takes a bit of time to grow into. Whats the worse that can happen but an ever growing pile of furture "Re-purpose" material


----------



## radfordc (May 18, 2009)

When I started my first project I found that I ended up making every part at least twice (and some 3 or 4 times). This used up quite a bit if raw material. You may want to consider obtaining some cheap material to make "test parts" before attacking the real material. Blocks of plastic would make an ideal practice material....easy to machine, and cheap enough to keep trying until you get it right.

Charlie


----------



## AlasdairM (May 18, 2009)

As a total newcomer to model engineering, I will follow this thread with great interest - Zee please post lots of pictures so that a dunce like myself can follow what is going on ;D th_wwp

All the best with the build, A


----------



## shred (May 18, 2009)

FWIW, blocks & bits of UHMW plastic are available at Woodcraft stores around here for making fixtures and the like. It machines pretty well, though feeds and speeds are way off of course.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (May 18, 2009)

Bill: I looked at the PM boiler. Price is okay but I think it's because it's a kit. In any case as I'm about to tell Marv...it's too early for me.

Marv: I got ahead of myself. The boiler thought was indeed for much later. I shouldn't haven't confused things bringing it up now. Also, thanks for the good advice regarding planning. As for a 'gold mine' for others like me...that is a major hope. By the way...I was at the Deutches Museum last week. (I spent many hours there as a kid when I lived in Munich. Who knows...that may be where the bug bit me.) I walked into the gift shop and staring back at me was a huge poster of your avatar . My first thought was "it's Marv". Kind of eerie.

Foozer: I'll have to remember to keep the pile separate and take a picture when the project is done. That should be a hoot.

Charlie: The shame would be to get it right on the plastic and then still make it wrong in the metal. I can bet I would. I'm thinking of going ahead and buying extra raw stock anyway. Even if I end up not using it on this project (yeah...right) I wouldn't mind building up a little inventory...I have virtually nothing right now but some aluminum. And for the small amounts I intend to get/use/destroy, the price differential doesn't seem big enough. But to help 'those that follow', I hope to keep track of expenses and post that too.

Alasdair: I'll do my best. But you know what they say...the blind leading the blind?

Shred: Got your post while replying. Found it online. Looks interesting - my first thought was it might provide a way of adding color to a model?

Thanks for everyone's support. It'll be a slow start...especially if I keep writing missives.


----------



## mklotz (May 18, 2009)

Ah, the Deutsches Museum - heaven for the likes of us. When I was consulting for ERNO, I used to get business trips to Friedrichshafen occasionally. Usually managed a quick run up to Muenchen for a visit to the museum and a few liters of beer before heading back to Bremen.

Albert makes the perfect avatar for me. He was a physicist. So am I (although hardly of his caliber). He had an attitude and a twisted sense of humor. So do I. He had no faith in mankind. Neither do I. He distrusted and detested authority. Me? Well, we won't go there... 

But, more important, Albert said, "If only I had known, I would have become a watchmaker." which has always led me to believe that, behind that goofy, slightly bewildered face lay the mind of a budding model engineer.

I don't like the idea of making practice parts in plastic. It's too easy to "not worry about it" and fail to develop the focus and concentration one needs when working with the real material. Since that's unteachable (though not unlearnable), one needs lots of practice to hone one's mind for the day you have to tap one more 0-80 hole in a part that you have forty hours of work in. As you pointed out the material is cheap compared to the effort involved.

Metalworking, especially at the model engine level, is far more about training the mind than it is about training the hand. Ultimately, you'll learn as much about your own mentality as you'll learn about making whatever you're constructing.


----------



## b.lindsey (May 18, 2009)

Well said Marv, but I still have to smile at zee's comment about seeing the picture in the museum. I think most here would have the same reaction we are so used to seeing it now :big:

Bill


----------



## Majorstrain (May 18, 2009)

> Albert makes the perfect avatar for me. He was a physicist. So am I (although hardly of his caliber).



Got to say Marv, thanks to your avatar my 2 1/2 year old son knows the name Albert Einstein and how to poke his tongue out in the same way. :big: :bow: :bow: 
Phil


----------



## zeeprogrammer (May 18, 2009)

So I ordered some backup material...

Some info for the newbies like me...

The Launch Engine costs about $60. You get the raw stock, screws, nuts, pins, construction manual, and drawing set.

The Mill Engine costs about $80. More raw stock than the Launch Engine, screws, nuts, pins, construction manual, and drawing set.

I ordered enough raw stock to build at least 1 more of each engine. (I'm lying. I bought it not to build more but to replace the...uh...practice pieces. Yeah that's it...practice pieces.) Some material enough to build several. I bought in lengths of 12" and sometimes 6" for the more expensive bits. The total was $100 including shipping. So for the extra money in the kits...you get the material without guessing what you need and some decent manuals. (Although some drawings may be available for free...the construction manuals may be useful to the newbie like me.) However, I have not included additional screws, nuts, etc. (What can I possibly do to a nut? Well...lose it for one.) I also didn't bother with buying pieces that can be worked down to smaller sizes if needed. That is, I tried to buy exactly what was on the packing slip. So, yes, it's over the top but I was interested in building up some inventory for the rainy day.

I have little experience in purchasing metal and haven't done much looking around. But if anyone is interested...

OnLineMetal  Steel 1018 CRS 1" diameter was $7.12. $3.24 from SpeedyMetal.
OnLineMetal  Brass 360 HO2 1/4" square was $3.12. $2.21 from SpeedyMetal.

Guess who I bought from. But I haven't done enough to speak to service and the above is a poor (i.e. small) sample. I have no idea if the same holds true across the board. You can buy in inches so if a piece doesn't work out...it's pretty cheap to replace it.

CRS = cold rolled steel
HO2 = half hard

A book I've found very helpful to me is 'The Home Machinist's Handbook' by Doug Briney. My first projects came from there...the machinist's jacks, mallet, and machinist clamps that are on my welcome thread.

The forum? Priceless.

Now for the warning, disclaimer, excuses...Do not take any information I provide as correct. Same holds for any approach I take in making bits of metal smaller. I'm learning so assume there's a better way. Wait for the feedback from the more experienced members on the forum. (I say all that as if I'm actually going to post my progress. Ha.)


----------



## AlasdairM (May 19, 2009)

Great stuff Zee - and thanks for clarifying the CRS and HO2 - without your explanation I would not have had a clue, although I'm sure most everybody else on here already knows 

Having just got my first lathe and pillar drill, I'm practicing with various bits of metal - it all looks so easy when you see what the folks on here do, but in reality when I have a go ........ ;D

Like you, to begin with I know I'll need to scrap some bits ("practice pieces" ), but as long as I learn from the "mistakes" and do not repeat them too many times, it's all part of the fun

Following with great interest.

Regards, A


----------



## arnoldb (May 19, 2009)

Zee, best of wishes with the new build 

I keep my "practice"  pieces - to build smaller engines later on :big:

Man, the mention of the Deutches Museum brought back memories - spent a couple of consecutive days riding the U-Bahn from Karlsfeld to the museum in 1999 - couldn't finish the visit in one day ;D - then a day at the Flughthaven museum, and a couple of evenings at the Hoffbrauhaus ;D

Regards, Arnold


----------



## mklotz (May 19, 2009)

Some hints for Zee and future novice readers of this thread...

Getting a good finish on 1018 can be problematic - sharp HSS tooling and sulfurated cutting oil helps. 12L14 steel (the 'L' indicates the lead it contains as a machining lubricant) machines beautifully. 

Check the local hobby stores that cater to the RC folks. Often they will have a K&S metal display containing small sizes of rod in brass and sometimes copper, stainless and aluminum. While the prices are higher than the web suppliers, for a single piece they're often cheaper once one considers shipping costs and they have the advantage of immediate availability. These same shops often have pre-threaded studding in small sizes such as 2-56 and 4-40 as well. 

Don't buy small screws in short lengths. Buy them in 1/2" length and cut them to needed size with a cutoff disk in a Dremel. Often a box of 100 screws from MSC will cost less than one of those packages of five (why always an odd number?) from the local HD or Lowes and you'll have a lifetime supply.

When (dis)assembling something with small parts and screws, do it on a folded, "fluffy" white cloth (I use an old baby blanket) laid on your bench top. Since the surface is "dead", small parts, if dropped, will not bounce off into oblivion and the white surface makes them easy to locate.

Two essential tools for working with tiny screws and nuts are the jeweler's gemstone holder

http://www.micromark.com/GRIPSTER-NUT-STARTER-00-10,6735.html

and a pair of pearl tweezers

http://www.micromark.com/PEARL-TWEEZER,8033.html

It's also worthwhile buying a can of liquid, brush-on (electrical) insulation. While eminently useful for its intended purpose, you can also dip the tips of a pair of tweezers into it. The resulting resilient, slightly gummy, coating will help to prevent small parts from snapping out of the jaws.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (May 19, 2009)

Thanks Alasdair and Arnold.
Thanks Marv...I like that pearl tweezer.

So I figure on 'going by the book'...i.e. the construction manual. I figure most people just starting out might go that way until they have more experience to create their own trail. Still, I need to be careful when it comes to fitting parts. I've read enough to see that you have some options like fitting the cylinder the piston or the piston to the cylinder.

Having said that...be sure to read the manual completely before starting. In this case, the instructions start having you use the mill to create the base. That's fine but later as you start to work on the 2nd or 3rd part, the author mentions tramming. 'tramming' - the art of making the mill head/spindle perfectly perpendicular to the table. Granted, it may not be critical for the 1st part but still...tools should be properly adjusted, cleaned, and checked before using.

I don't think the method they propose for tramming is very accurate. I suggest you find other methods on this forum. The manual calls for using a 'straight length of round stock' and a square. Not good enough! There's better methods that take no more effort.

Reading the entire manual may also help to identify those tools that will be needed but have not been acquired yet. One tool they use is a 'vise stop'. I could use some help here. I don't know why it's called for, what it does, etc.

As I said before, one weakness of the manual is that, although they say this is for the newcomer to the hobby, there is much that they assume. One example, is they state 'in modern times we use Datum Dimensions' rather than Linear Dimensions. What? Huh? ??? I did a quick google...pardon me while I get some aspirin for my headache...Okay. Linear is the distance between two points. Datum is the distance from a reference. A little 'linear' math should get me the Datum. Let's see, 0.31 + 1.172 is 1.482 while the Datum is 1.485. I need more aspirin.

As a side note...the writer speaks in 1st person (I think). Quote, "the only business I've found"...etc. But the author is never identified. I have no idea who wrote this. But I'll tell you one thing that really irks me  is when I purchase something and it's not even been edited. The author doesn't know the difference between 'insure' and 'ensure' which is used several times so it's no typo. Yeah the price is low...but that's no reason for shoddy work.

Back to the 1st part. He or she is mounting a vise to the mill's table and using a 'Dial Indictor' (no...that's the way it was spelled) to square it. The picture shows a type of indicator I don't have (but want to get). I'll cross that bridge when I come to starting the first part (oh when will that be Carl?). I don't know what you call the thingies on the vise that do the actually gripping...but while the vise itself was square...they were not.

The first part calls for a 4-Flute cutter. But no mention of size. Sigh. While the manual talks about 'flex' and 'finish pass'...there's no mention of 'climb' cutting. I'll try to address that when I start the first part (oh when will that be Carl?!).

Another irksome thing is the use of a tool that is referred to as 'essential'. In this case, a Spindle Stop. But it's custom made!!! That should never be part of a beginner's kit!

It's good that this starts with the mill. I think I have a problem with my lathe. When I face a part...it's slightly convex. That tells me the spindle is not perpendicular to the cross slide. I've seen references on the forum to 'twist' of the bed. I don't know if that's it but my lathe is mounted on a wood desk in a basement and is probably moving around. Help here would be appreciated.

I don't mean to beat the manual up so much...the kit is $60...so what do you expect? As I've said before...I only started 4 months ago and have actually built some things. Thanks to reading a lot and being on this forum.

Okay...this is long enough. Boring without pictures. Hopefully it'll get more interesting soon (oh when will that be Carl??!!!).

I have a trip to make but hopefully I'll have something next week.


----------



## b.lindsey (May 19, 2009)

A datum can be a point, line or plane from which dimensions are referenced. Think of it in terms of an origin. The term seems to be more often associated with GD&T (or geometric dimensioning and tolerancing) which is an enhancement to traditional drafting standards. Linear measurements on the other hand can be of two types...absolute (measured from a common origin) or incremental (measured from the preceeding point). Either method is acceptable, but accuracy is best served by using absolute measurements. The math doesn't change, but if using incremental measurements, if the first point (hole location for example) is off, then so will all subsequent locations. This is less likely with the absolute method. 

Regards,
Bill


----------



## two dogs (May 19, 2009)

Zee,
Sorry to see that you're getting a little frustrated. It's easy to do
when something as large as this hobby is started.
One thing you'll need is a dial test indicator. LMS as well as others 
have this. This is probably what you see being used to square the 
vise. You'll use it to tram the head; what you'll want to do is have 
the body of the indicator parallel to the table and tha needle 
pointing down somewhat. Move the spindle down till the needle touches 
the table at one extreme side or other and then down a little more to 
center it in it's travel. Lock the spindle/head assy and rotate the 
spindle to the other side. Make sure the indicator doesn't "bottom 
out" or leave the surface of the table. Move the column HALF so the 
indicator moves HALF the difference. Go back and forth until you get 
it the same.
Don't worry about a vise stop. It's purpose is to locate multiple 
parts identically. Making a one off it won't matter.
Don't worry about linear vs datum dimensions. As long as you have 
dimensions to work with you'll be OK. Hopefully they'll all be from 
the same corner. (I just vented about Elmers dimensioning in another 
post).
The spindle stop. I'm thinking its to hold the spindle from rotating 
when you change tools. you should have gotten a wrench with the mill 
for this purpose.
As far as the size question on the endmill, it isn't that important; 
use what you have that is "size appropriate", that is don't use a 1/8" 
mill to side mill a pc of 3/8" thk material. Just leave .005/.01" for 
a finish pass and you should be fine. Try climb and conventional 
milling to see what works best for you.
Hope this helps. I'll post some more general info in another post


Mark

edit: just read Bills reply, very concise


----------



## two dogs (May 19, 2009)

OK, so much for the specifics. This can apply to anyone new to our hobby or to the techniques we use.
Not sure how much detail the construction manual gets into, but a few thoughts.
Now, I've been the trade for 35 years, but I'm a relative newbie when it comes to what we do here, so I've had to relearn some things. I can do things much differently at work owing to the machine difference.
First is, learn what you can expect from your equipment. What I can do at work resembles nothing about how I do at home in my shop. Try different things and make a mental (or written) note about what worked best. There can be several correct ways to do something. I'm constantly learning what I can and cannot do.
As a learning experience, try to make non-critical parts much better than they need to be. You will probably see parts toleranced to 1/32" or .010 on your plans. Try your hardest to make them to nominal. If you miss it may still work, but try to make the simple parts "dead on". Also start with the easiest parts. You may not get them within .001" but getting them close will give you confidence before you start the harder stuff.
Most of all, enjoy it! This is a very rewarding hobby, so don't burn out on it and ask questions if you're uncomfortable with something. There is a lot of talent here on this forum willing to help
Oh yeah, we love pictures! :big:


----------



## shred (May 19, 2009)

A vise-stop (also called a 'backstop') is a fixed piece (often attached to the vise somehow) that parts can be slid up to and clamped. If you're, say, drilling the same hole in a dozen parts, setup the first one against the stop, locate and drill it, then remove it and replace it with the next part.. seat it against the stop and drill.. rinse, wash, repeat.

Even if you aren't doing repetitive parts, I find them handy when using DROs as well since you can zero off the stop and then drive around to the coordinates you want to go for different parts (it works as well for handwheels, but is a little more complicated to manage)

Here's a couple pictures of various stops-- 









The black bit is a cheapy stop that clamps to the vise jaws. I usually zero on the right side of it (it's convenient for that since it has a nice flat side to run an edge finder into).

Here's a fancier one from Bob Warfield:






They don't have to be fancy.. Bogs (an excellent backstop advocate) mentions supergluing bits of stock to the vise sometimes to act as a stop.


----------



## Foozer (May 20, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> It's good that this starts with the mill. I think I have a problem with my lathe. When I face a part...it's slightly convex. T



I had that problem, ran me up a wall for a time. I was using the lead screw to get the bit up to the material, then i'd back it off a bit and used the compound slide screw to bring it back in. So if I turned the crosslide wheel clockwise I was slowly sucking up the lead screw backlash pulling the bit away from the material. To avoid that now I try to remember to keep all the various feed screws loaded against the direction I'm turning the crosslide. Installing some thrust bearings at the lead screw bearing block cut a lot of the play out, its just a quirk of the machine that if not properly addressed with spiteful glee, say "Howdy"

If I got the terminology right it might make sense 

I see why a lock down device is useful to prevent that inevitable creep. I'm sure machines built these days have such a device built in. Mine from the days of the dinosaur is lacking some of those bells and whistles.


----------



## AlasdairM (May 20, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> Okay...this is long enough. Boring without pictures. Hopefully it'll get more interesting soon



Don't worry - I find it highly interesting already, especially with the replies from Bill, Mark C, shred and Foozer - cracking stuff for a beginner to have explained without being at all patronising.

Have a good trip, A


----------



## Maryak (May 20, 2009)

Zee,

Don't worry toooooooo much about ending up slightly convex when doing a facing cut using a lathe. All the advise given is excellent especially the point referring to removing backlash from feed and lead screws. What happens, particularly with a heavier cut is that the load on the tool increases as you approach the centre, because the rpm and (powered), cross feed are constant but the cutting speed, (ft/min), slows down as the diameter gets smaller and is zero on the centreline, in other words the last itty bitty piece is chiseled off by the cross feed. Even with everything locked down there is still a tendency for the tool to move towards the tailstock. Very light cuts, (max 0.005"), as you get close help reduce this load.

Hang in there buddy, it's all downhill from here.

Hope this helps. ??? ???

Best Regards
Bob


----------



## zeeprogrammer (May 20, 2009)

Bill: (Linear vs. Datum) Thanks. Am I being too picky? Shouldn't the 'linear' math' have given me the same datum point instead of a difference of 0.003? Why shouldn't it be 0.000?

Mark: (frustrated) Oops. I was afraid of that. My apologies to everyone for giving the wrong impression. While it may appear that I whine/whing/rant a little...I'm really enjoying this immensely.

Mark: (dial indicator) Very happy this came up. I realized that my method for tramming the head was inaccurate (and frankly stupid). I'll have to correct that before I continue. As for the vise..I don't see how I can mount the kind of dial indicator I have to do that. So last night I ordered one from LMS that should work for me.

Mark/Shred: (vise stop) That's what I thought. It also looks like the author is using it to ensure the part doesn't move when milling against one end. Thanks Shred for the pics. That helped a lot!

Mark: (spindle stop) Oops again. Here I am talking about the mill and then I moved on to the lathe without warning. What the author calls a spindle stop is a thingie that mounts through the spindle of the lathe and is attached to the hole above the gearbox. I expect it's used like the vise stop...(see above)...but for the lathe. I think I can get by without it when I get to cutting (geesh Carl...when will that be?!)

Mark: (tolerance) Good point. I do try to hit nominal. This reminds me of some questions...the manual says things like 'a 2-place decimal so the tolerance is +/- 0.010'. Later I see that 3-place decimal has a tolerance of +/- 0.005. Neither of these seem right to me. I've seen in other projects that the drawing may provide the required tolerances. Especially when the tolerance is not symmetrical (e.g. +0.005/-0.000) But what is the rule for dimensions whose tolerances are not given? Without knowing anything else (i.e. the correct thing) I would have thought the tolerance would be +/- half the next decimal position. So 0.010 would be +/-0.005 and 0.001 would be +/- 0.0005. Feel free to open hand my forehead.

Shred: (vise stop) After re-reading your reply I saw the bit about zeroing off the stop. That's a useful tip. Thanks.

Foozer/Maryak: (convex) Thanks. I'll try again. Come to think of it...I have had some problems with things moving while I crank. I got a carriage stop and a carriage clamp but haven't used them yet...I expect those will help. Maybe the tool is too far out and flexes? What else should I look for?

Alisdair: Thank you.

Several weeks ago, I snapped the studs in half that came with the vise when I tried to mount it to the mill's table. I've been using the studs from the clamping kit. I tighten at least as much with no problem so I think the original studs were defective. This is a pic of what I do now.






I'd rather not use the (what do you call them?) clamps and studs. Some real long studs came with the clamping kit that I doubt I'll ever use or need as many (there's 4). Any reason why I shouldn't cut them down to use for clamping the vise?

As for the pic...I tried cropping to make the picture smaller. No go. What do I need to do? (This being the real reason why I posted the pic.)

Thanks all.


----------



## mklotz (May 20, 2009)

Get yourself a (free) copy of Irfanview

http://www.irfanview.com/

and use it to crop and resize your pictures to 800 x 600 pixels - plenty of resolution for forum purposes.

Your picture above is sized at 800 x 763 pixels and triggers the scroll bar.

Here's a picture sized to 800 x 600 pixels and the scroll bar isn't triggered.


----------



## b.lindsey (May 20, 2009)

zee, the math should have given the same result either way at least within .001 if there was some rounding like .0625 expressed as .063 on one dimension but added to the cumulative total in its original 4 decimal form. Without seeing the print I can't say for sure, but you are correct... things should add up!

Bill


----------



## zeeprogrammer (May 20, 2009)

mmmm Sorry Marv. Your pic shows with a scroll bar. I'm on a laptop but I also tried my (old) desktop.

Wait...I increased the resolution on my desktop and the scrollbar went away. I can't read anything but the pic looks great (but Albert looks like he's in a fun-house mirror). 

So there you have it...I have to get younger eyes or more powerful reading glasses.

Thanks for the irfanview. I'll check it out.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (May 20, 2009)

Bill. Thanks.
A closer look at the print shows the first linear dimension to be 0.31 while the first datum point is 0.313. There's the 0.003 difference. Why they did that...I have no idea. In fact, the 0.31 linear dimension is the only 2 decimal place linear dimension. All others on the drawing are 3 decimal places. I might think typo but the dimension is drawn nicely centered between the two arrows...and...there's a second one in the Y direction.

I hadn't explained earlier...there are two drawings for each (or most parts)...one using Linear and the other using Datum. One for the young folk and one for the old folk.


----------



## Foozer (May 20, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> mmmm Sorry Marv. Your pic shows with a scroll bar. I'm on a laptop but I also tried my (old) desktop.



I size them to 640x480 and still trigger the scroll bar, but its my end and not the forum. Zoom in so the print can be read and you know. Scroll bars are no big thing, quick flip of the Ctrl button and mouse wheel brings the pic in full view


----------



## two dogs (May 20, 2009)

Zee,
Don't apologise for being frustrated. If there is someone on this 
forum who doesn't get frustrated once in a while, I'd like to meet 
him. I only mentioned that because I sensed frustration and didn't 
want it to kill your entheuthiasm. Please vent and ask questions. 
That's what we're here for.
I know what you're talking about with regard to the lathe spindle 
stop. Again, like the mill vise stop, unless you're doing more than 
one part, I wouldn't worry about it yet.
As far as tolerancing, there is quite a bit of variety concerning what 
people do. What I've been used to the last 15 years or so is any
dimension without any tolerancing added is toleranced by what is 
called a block tolerance, typically +/- .010 for 2 place, +/-.005 for 
3 place and once in a while something for fractional. This should be 
in a box somewhere in the title block. Anything tighter (or looser) 
would be included with the dimension. This is what I'm used to and 
there are many people out there designing things so your mileage may
vary.
I figure you probably bought a dial test indicator. This can be used 
for squaring the vise and tramming the table. Wasn't sure if I was too 
clear about tramming the table in my earlier post so I have included a 
pic of how the indicator should be mounted.
I wouldn't cut the studs. You may want to clamp something to the table 
someday. Just get some grade 5 bolts and cut off the heads for your 
vise-holding studs
Again, have fun. This is a very rewarding hobby.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (May 20, 2009)

Hi Mark,

Your comments regarding tolerances jibes with what the manual says. So I guess the manual is okay (i.e. it's not a typo). Never happy to follow a specification only to find the specification was wrong. (Always question...never assume the experts don't make mistakes...they do...just fewer of them.)

Yes. It's a dial test indicator. Thanks for the pic. Once I realized that my method for tramming was poor...I played around with the dial indicator I have. Swinging it back and forth on the table is a bit twitchy but best I can tell...I'm about .001 off. When I get the dial test indicator I'll check again. I'll be happy with .001 (for now...and maybe for always).

As it turns out...I asked LMS if they'd had this problem before. They said no. I didn't ask for replacements but they said they were going to send new studs. Maybe it's because I had just placed the order for the dial test indicator (and have spent a pretty good wad there in the last few months)...but I think it's just because they provide great service. I've had a missing part and received a broken drill bit and they were very quick to replace them. Thanks for the tip (grade 5 bolts)...I may need them if I get too heavy handed.

Oh...just saw your post Foozer. Thanks. I don't mind the scroll bar really. I just think having smaller pictures that will enlarge when you click on them looks better than a big honking shot of a stud (although some may disagree with that statement). And you can post several small pictures and not have to scroll down as much to get past them. Not a big deal...especially if the pics are interesting and good. Yeah...that's what I have to work on. 'interesting' pics.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (May 26, 2009)

I said I need more 'interesting pics'. This isn't one of them.

I've been waiting for a dial test indicator to get started (for the mill). It hasn't shown up and I got tired of waiting so I got started on the hose couplings and exhaust pipe. All lathe work and no dependencies on other parts for fit.

Here's some statements/questions...anyone's comments would be very welcome:

Which to use to feed the tool? Carriage or compound? If I use the compound, it seems a smooth cut is elusive due to up/down or in/out forces from turning compound handle. If I use carriage hand wheel, it seems I get what appears like a very small thread. (I've also used power feed and get a real nice finish...but you can't do this against a carriage stop.) Also...when using carriage...I can move back and forth, back and forth, and still metal comes off. I tried both a HSS tool and a carbide. Light cuts.

Here's a pic but I don't think it will help...






I'm supposed to make a cut-off blade from a hack saw blade. (Thin...measures .023 and I need to cut a relief of 0.03). Just grind to shape. I suspect grind to look like a cut-off blade? Should the hack saw bits be ground off?

Thanks all.


----------



## Hilmar (May 26, 2009)

> It's good that this starts with the mill. I think I have a problem with my lathe. When I face a part...it's slightly convex. That tells me the spindle is not perpendicular to the cross slide. I've seen references on the forum to 'twist' of the bed. I don't know if that's it but my lathe is mounted on a wood desk in a basement and is probably moving around. Help here would be appreciated.



Zee, do you meant to say convex or concave?


----------



## Maryak (May 27, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> Which to use to feed the tool? Carriage or compound? If I use the compound, it seems a smooth cut is elusive due to up/down or in/out forces from turning compound handle. If I use carriage hand wheel, it seems I get what appears like a very small thread. (I've also used power feed and get a real nice finish...but you can't do this against a carriage stop.) Also...when using carriage...I can move back and forth, back and forth, and still metal comes off. I tried both a HSS tool and a carbide. Light cuts.



Zee,

Unless the compound has been set accurately, it will cut a taper along the part.

The carriage handwheel feed is pretty coarse say 10 times more than the compound handwheel feed. Using power feed with a carriage stop is OK as long as you watch it and disengage just before the carriage/saddle hits the stop, then feed the last itty bitty bit with the carriage/saddle handwheel.

Small parts tend to be pushed away from the tool and even with everything except the work dogged down it will cut until all the spring is out of the part.

Hope this helps ??? ???

Best Regards
Bob


----------



## zeeprogrammer (May 27, 2009)

Hilmar: Convex (I think). If you take the part and set it on a flat surface...it 'tilts' very slightly. Concave (cave) would be a scallop into the part and it would set flat (assuming the outer edge is a nice circle). I think a concave cut would be noticed if you run the tool past the center of the part...it should start cutting again.

Maryak: I'm thinking it means the compound is not square to the ways. I haven't done anything yet to see where the problem is. I'd be surprised if it has anything to do with the mounting of the carriage to the ways. Could bed twist do this? Hopefully it's not in the manufacturing of the cross slide (but it is a cheapie). Anyone have experience with this?

Flex...I'm still surprised by the forces involved even when making light cuts. It's really not like cutting butter...despite what they say. 

Newbie question: Are there general rules about direction of feed? I mentioned 'going back and forth'...should one do that or only cut in one direction? Under what conditions is it okay? I would expect cutter type is involved...any thoughts on that?

Thanks very much all.


----------



## two dogs (May 27, 2009)

Zee,
Is the tool perfectly on center? If it's not it will give you problems esp with small diameters

Mark


----------



## zeeprogrammer (May 27, 2009)

Mark,

Thanks. Yes that's another thing. I've been eye-balling it. A number of members have suggested better methods. I hope to try some tonight. I did adjust it once because I saw what appeared to be teeny tiny balls - bits really - that I took to mean metal was being rubbed...not cut...so the tool is too high. A small adjustment made it better but I'm still thinking I should expect a better finish. As some members will no doubt remind me...practice and experiment.

I'm using a quick change tool post but I'm not comfortable thinking I'm using it right. When I tighten down...the tool moves. Should it? And, it seems the knob and nut move.

Thanks for the question.

Carl


----------



## mklotz (May 27, 2009)

Ok, addressing some things in no particular order.

Tool on center?

Pinch a six inch scale vertically between the tool and the workpiece. If the scale remains vertical, the tool is on center. If the top of the scale tilts toward you, you're below center. If it tilts away from you, you're above center.

[Aside: Ultimately you may want to build a dedicated tool to set lathe tools on center but the above will work and it's quick and cheap.]

Advance tool with compound or carriage?

If you advance with the carriage, the tool is guided by the ways which are, at least nominally, aligned with the lathe spindle. If you advance with the compound, you're at the mercy of the compound alignment. Typically, the tool is advanced with the compound only when threading or (intentionally) turning tapers. 

Cutting direction?

Many lathe tools are ground to cut in only one preferred direction. The nomenclature is oft confusing. A "right hand" tool is meant to cut from the tailstock end of the work toward the headstock end. A "left hand" cuts from headstock toward tailstock.

There are tools that will cut in either direction, e.g., certain round nose tools.

If your cut is producing a thread-like appearance, reduce the feed rate and/or grind a small radius on the tool point. (A rounded cutting tool will "average" over the "threads".)

Concave facing?

Many lathes are set to purposely cut slightly concave when facing so the part will sit flat against a mating surface. If you're getting a convex surface, check that the tool is held rigidly and the cross slide gibs are snugged tight. Ensure that you're using a tool ground to make a facing cut.

Workpiece deflection?

Metal is surprisingly plastic. If you have more than three or four diameters sticking out of the chuck, you may need tailstock or steady rest support to minimize deflection.

I hope at least some of this helps. If you're still having problems, consider taking some photos of your setup. Sometimes a picture will reveal a glitch that doesn't surface in the written description.


----------



## Foozer (May 27, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> Mark,
> 
> Thanks. Yes that's another thing. I've been eye-balling it. A number of members have suggested better methods. I hope to try some tonight. I did adjust it once because I saw what appeared to be teeny tiny balls - bits really - that I took to mean metal was being rubbed...not cut...so the tool is too high. A small adjustment made it better but I'm still thinking I should expect a better finish. As some members will no doubt remind me...practice and experiment.
> 
> ...



I use a piece of flat stock 'bout 6 inches high, wide enough to rest on the ways. Set it up against the tailstock dead center and scribe a line. Also use same piece set upon the cross slide to scribe another line. Now I have an indicator for tool height covers both port and starboard, inboard and outboard requirements. Works with the QCTP, not with the rocker (not enough hands).

My tool holder also moves when the clamp is snugged down, its just the play in the device. I set the flat stock on the ways, check the tool bit against the scribe mark, adjust the screw as needed, clamp it down, check again and readjust. All depends upon where the contact pin meets the holder, above or below the centerline that causes the tool to nudge up or down when secured. Its just the way of the hobby type tool post.

Knob and nut move, oh ya, tighten the nut to secure the knob and they stay put. have to readjust and well, after a while its uh, hmm, well lets just say I have a few spare knobs now. Could bugger up the thread on the end to keep it from fully coming off, but what fun would I have then denying myself more of the "Where's Waldo game" looking for where off to did it go this time.

Life is to short to be taken seriously, cant solve all the little things so as long as no body parts are involved, enjoy the irony.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (May 27, 2009)

Marv: Thanks. The use of the scale to center the tool bit was one I was going to try tonight.
Foozer: I'll experiment with the line too. Thanks.

Marv: Advancing the tool. Thanks for using the term 'typically'. It helps to know the 'usual' way of things.

Marv: Definitely convex. I'll look into the tool. It's an area I need to learn much more about. However, I'm having trouble imagining how a tool, on its own, can create a convex cut. I'm still thinking the ways and compound are not square. Wouldn't that explain a taper? I'll try to let everyone know what I find...when I find it...if I find it.

Foozer: So 'quick change' should actually be 'quicker change' or 'not so slow change'.  Thanks.


----------



## Foozer (May 27, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> Foozer: So 'quick change' should actually be 'quicker change' or 'not so slow change'.  Thanks.



That's how I see it, a not so slow change. If I want the tool bit to stay put, well less likelihood of movement I use the rocker post. That thing, altho it keeps the bit closer in within the boundaries of the slides support, did I say I can confuse a rock? anyway it seems to take three hands to get that sucker on center. One to hold the shim stock (that methods works well) one to hold the bit and one to hold the wrench. Coordinated I am not.

Robert


----------



## zeeprogrammer (May 27, 2009)

Time to stop. It's not been a good night.  (But stay tuned...the story has a twist.)
Although I had some happy time making my first tool (cut-off blade from a hack saw) and using my grinder for the first time...I had crummy luck trying to thread a part with a die. It got worse when I switched to the mill.
Using my new dial test indicator to square my vise was a (frustrating) experience. After some time I got okay with it. (That or frustrated enough to think 'good enough').

Then it came time to trim one edge of the engine base.

The setup. The white thing to the left is a peanut. Got that from 4156df.







No vise stop and maybe that's part of the problem.

This is after cutting...






[Edit: Apparently my comments about climb/conventional milling were wrong. I'm removing them so as not confuse others who may follow. More likely, those that follow are more knowledgeable and I'll just end up continually embarrassing myself.]

See the wavy edge?

Then I wondered about the lock on the Y axis. I couldn't reach it because of the vise. So I went back. [Edit: Originally said X axis. The lock that affects the X axis is on the Y axis. Sorry.]

Duh. Used an Allen wrench and got to the lock. Locked down the X axis. Didn't even move the X axis - prayed there was some flex that would spring back.)

Result...






Seems pretty smooth to me.

[Edit: See where the part ended up? I'm told, and now believe, that's a conventional cut - shovel action. So I should be able to do still better with a final light climb cut. I'll experiment so more.]

Back to happy guy (except for the thread fiasco [Edit: And now the mistakes I've in this post.]).

Stopping while I'm ahead [Edit: ahead? I think not.].

When I remove the part from the vise I'm supposed to file the edges to deburr. I'm thinking it won't look good - that is - not smooth. One thought is to hold the part and slide across sandpaper. Better but there might be a taper to it (one end deeper than the other). I know I don't want to use a deburr tool. Jumpy. Any suggestions? ???

Thanks! ;D


----------



## joe d (May 27, 2009)

Carl

I'll leave the climb/conventional question for someone who can explain it better than I... but for the de-burring: lay a piece of emery cloth (300 - 400 grit) on a flat surface (a left-over pane of glass is good to have for this) and lay the work piece on this and move it about. Don't get lazy and just whap the emery down on the work-bench as this guarantees that you will find all the little bits of swarf that you thought you'd swept up.... trapped under the emery cloth,giving you a very bumpy ride! (No need to ask why I know this :big If you go through progessively finer grits of cloth, to 600 or 800 grit, and pay strict attention to the direction you move the work-piece, you can achieve a nice "brushed" finish with this technique.

Joe


----------



## Seanol (May 27, 2009)

Zee,
 If you look at the endmill from the top of the mill, and it is turning clockwise, and you are on the right side of the stock cutting in the Y axis:

When the cutter is turning clockwise if you move the table towards the column you are feeding the work into the rotation of the cutter. This is climb milling. I can produce a fine finish with light cuts but the cutter will pull the stock towards the column. If you have backlash in the Y screw it can drag the piece out of the vise if it is not tight. Care should be taken to make sure you are taking light cuts and the locks are slightly snug on the Y axis to prevent this. 

When the vise is moving away from the cutter you are moving the stock into the endmill teeth. This is conventional milling and it will remove more material faster at the expens of a slightly poorer finish. Adjusting to less feed with more speed on a light finishing cut can help here.

Hope this helps,
Sean


----------



## zeeprogrammer (May 28, 2009)

Joe: I was really just talking about getting rid of the burr. However, I'll need your suggestion for when it comes time to 'finish' the part. I do my sanding on a different table but even that's not really smooth. I like the glass idea. Thanks.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (May 28, 2009)

Seanol. Thank you. I went back to my post and edited it. I have no problem embarrassing myself but I detest giving bad information.

At least the exercise demonstrates the need to lock unused axes down.


----------



## Seanol (May 28, 2009)

Zee,
No problems. The only way to learn is from experience; yours or others. I have found other peoples experience is far cheaper but my experience usually does not need a repeat engagement!

Sean


----------



## zeeprogrammer (May 28, 2009)

Continuing...1st part completed...the base.

Trimmed the other end to size. 2.25". Well...2.255" if I believe my ability to measure. Now to drill the 8 holes used to mount the pillow block, port block, and cylinder. (I can use some of the terms...I just don't know what all of them mean yet. Pillow? Port?)

The instructions called for using an edge finder and moving the center drill as required. But the instructions also called for using scribe lines and a height gauge. Their idea being to use the edge finder and see that you're over the scribe mark. I can't say I understand that. I don't know how to use an edge finder yet and this would have been a good time to learn. But I went for the scribe lines only.

The instructions used an angle plate to set the base against for scribing. I don't have one so I used a 1-2-3 block.






Completion of scribing...






Touched and check...






First hole. You might not be able to tell but just to make sure I didn't hit the parallel, I moved it away. That leaves the corner I'm drilling 'floating' but it's aluminum and I took it carefully. When I did the two holes on the right, I reversed the placement of the parallels (the left one back up and the right one back). The four holes to the left are inboard enough to leave the parallels fully supporting.






All drilled...






Sanded down and scotchbrited...






Polishing is another area I need to improve. But I'm happy.

Doesn't quite compare to what other members do on this forum but it's a far sight better than those who do nothing!

Slow going. I'm coming across yet more tools I need to get (some would argue make) before I can do much more.

Thanks all.


----------



## PhillyVa (May 28, 2009)

zee

One step at a time grasshopper one step at a time...you'll get there. :big:

Regards

Philly


----------



## zeeprogrammer (May 28, 2009)

PhillyVa  said:
			
		

> zee
> 
> One step at a time grasshopper one step at a time...you'll get there. :big:
> 
> ...



Man did that bring back memories. My wife used to call me 'weedhopper'. I guess she stopped once I couldn't hop no more. ;D uh...no...that's not what I meant...

Thanks. That put a smile on my face.


----------



## two dogs (May 28, 2009)

Here ya go Carl:
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0od-cp_9dg[/ame]

Mark


----------



## zeeprogrammer (May 28, 2009)

Thanks Mark. I just tried it. Videos like these are very helpful.


----------



## AlanHaisley (May 28, 2009)

Carl,



			
				zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> The instructions called for using an edge finder and moving the center drill as required. But the instructions also called for using scribe lines and a height gauge. Their idea being to use the edge finder and see that you're over the scribe mark. I can't say I understand that. I don't know how to use an edge finder yet and this would have been a good time to learn. But I went for the scribe lines only.



I see that you sight located the crossing for the first hole. For the subsequent ones did you also go by sight or did you use the first hole as origin and dial to each of the others?

Alan


----------



## zeeprogrammer (May 29, 2009)

Alan,

I sighted them too. Your question implies I should have dialed to the others? Assuming so, I thought, why bother then with the other scribe lines? Perhaps as a way of verifying that I dialed accurately?

By the way...for other newbies like me...if you do scribe lines...do it lightly...only need to remove the dye...not metal.

Thanks Alan.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (May 29, 2009)

On a previous subject...convex cuts....

I faced a 1" dia aluminum piece tonight...
(For those who noticed my other posts tonight...I did the cutting prior to the wine. Only my typing may be affected. Well not only...but I won't be cutting.)

Not convex. Not concave. Checked with a machinist square with a light behind it.

Difference? Not sure. But I did use a carriage stop and held the carriage against it while I cranked the cross slide. There's not a way to lock the compound rest is there? (Or cross slide for that matter.)

Regards,


----------



## mklotz (May 30, 2009)

Since learning to use an edgefinder, I hardly ever do layouts any more. The machine can move to the new location much more accurately than I can (re)locate to a layout intersection line.

That is not to say that layout lines aren't useful for preventing gross mistakes. However, in most cases I can do a sufficiently accurate "sanity check" with calipers or a six inch scale.

My suggestion would be that, as a novice, you continue to layout but do the actual tool (re)location via the dials. As your confidence grows, you'll develop a sense for when you really need layout lines and when you can simply chuck the part in the vise and use the edgefinder and dials.

Most lathes have a positive carriage lock, often operated by tightening a nut located on the top of the carriage. It should be used in every instance where the cut does not require the carriage to move, e.g., facing, parting. I got annoyed fiddling with a separate wrench on my lock and made a handled nut to fit it so all that's required to engage it is a thirty degree twist of the handle.

Most lathes I've encountered have no singular compound lock but they do have gib adjustment screws. Mine has three so I replaced the middle one with a handled screw that allows me to lock the motion when necessary. Purists will admonish me for gib-adjustment-abuse but it works for me.

My lathe is a 12 x 36 so some of what I've written re locks may not apply to the smaller machines. Perhaps others with such machines will chime in.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (May 30, 2009)

While waiting for some tools to arrive...I thought I'd have a go at the crankshaft.

The instructions call for the pillow block bearing and rotary valve to be done first - flywheel after. The crankshaft has to fit all three so I'm thinking there's some dependencies here and that it might be best to 'fit' the crankshaft to the other pieces.

So instead of doing the whole crankshaft right now...I thought I'd just see what it would take and just get the crankshaft ready for machining. So I'll face it and put a countersink in for a live/dead center. It's a longish piece.

Being a long piece it seemed a handy time to learn how to use a follower. Here's my setup...







And the other side...






I don't know the names of the pieces...

Using the screws, I adjusted the pointy things until they were just touching the part. Then I tightened down the bolts. I hand turned the spindle to see what play there was and then ran at slow speed to double-check.

Then I faced it. Nothing came off where the follower was contacting the part...but you can tell there was a light rub. Okay?

A little smoke. Some spray coolant. But everything seemed to stay cool. I took light cuts. No coloration on the chips. (I had blue ones when I made my first project - a set of machinist jacks. Different steel.)

I left everything in place, chucked a center drill in the tailstock and drilled the countersink making sure I didn't go past the bevel on the bit. (Newbies...if you go past the bevel, the live/dead center will only contact the edge.)

Everything seems okay. I await the suggestions/criticisms of the knowledgeable ones... ??? ???

I have to turn this part down from ~0.875 to 0.2183 for 2.31. That's a lot of hard metal to me. Any thoughts/warnings you all can offer? ??? ???

Lastly...I have both a dead and live center...why wouldn't I always use the live center? ??? ???

Thanks all for your time.


----------



## RobWilson (May 30, 2009)

Hi zee ,Lastly...I have both a dead and live center...why wouldn't I always use the live center?  
The Dead center goes in your head stock when your turning between centers and rotates with the work,
Regards Rob


----------



## zeeprogrammer (May 30, 2009)

mklotz  said:
			
		

> Most lathes have a positive carriage lock, often operated by tightening a nut located on the top of the carriage.
> 
> Most lathes I've encountered have no singular compound lock but they do have gib adjustment screws. Mine has three so I replaced the middle one with a handled screw that allows me to lock the motion when necessary.



Thanks Marv. I do have a carriage lock. I hadn't tried it yet. Now that I see what a great difference it can make...I'm going to install it.

Gib adjustment screws: That's exactly how my mill does it to lock the table axes. When I was facing the crankshaft (my last post) I noticed the compound rest feed handle moving - it could be that I hadn't taken play out or the compound rest needs some adjustment. I'm still learning how to adjust things. I'll wait to use a handled screw until I learn more.

Thank you.

Rob...just saw your post. Yes I see. I haven't done something like that yet. Thank you.


----------



## AlasdairM (May 30, 2009)

Live centre vs. dead centre - I was pleased to see your question on this Zee, as I had no idea of the answer. I know Rob has answered the point, but the following expands this a bit more and may be of interest .....
http://www.cnczone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=77233

As I have said before, I think this is a great thread to follow, me being a fellow newbie etc.

Keep up the good work, and keep asking the questions!!

Regards, A


----------



## zeeprogrammer (May 30, 2009)

I just noticed my karma went up.

Thank you very much.





Just saw your post 'A'. Thank you. And thanks for the link. I enjoyed it.


----------



## mklotz (May 30, 2009)

I sense the live/dead center confusion arising again.

In the USA the conventional usage of the terms is:

dead center - a non-rotating center in the tailstock used to support the work. Since the work moves relative to the center, lubrication is required and, as the part heats up and expands, it may be necessary to back off the center slightly to reduce friction. Although arguably more accurate than a live center, they can be fiddly and require the machinist's attention.

live center - a tailstock center fitted with thrust bearings such that it rotates with the work, thus eliminating the friction problem of the dead center. Inevitably, there's a bit of play in the bearing(s) but, with a quality live center, the hobbyist seldom needs to worry about it.

Now, Rob described a dead center as going in the HEADstock and rotating with the work. This seems to disagree with what I wrote above but in reality it's just semantics. Rob's center is "dead" because it's not turning wrt the work. I've heard this usage from older American machinists and some European machinists.

Neither interpretation is right or wrong; it's simply a matter of usage. However, as a novice, you should be aware of the two interpretations since you may encounter both in the future.

For the job you've described, I would use the live center (USA interpretation) to support the work. Use the dead center when guiding taps, reamers and the like. Also, use the dead center when checking the TS alignment.

I gather that the stock is sticking out of the chuck that far because its diameter is larger than the spindle bore. (Normally, facing would be done with only a half inch or so of the stock sticking out of the chuck.)

It looks (can't quite tell from photos) as if your steady is attached to the carriage, in which case it's termed a travelling steady as opposed to the fixed steady that attaches to the lathe bed.

Supporting the stock with a travelling steady while turning the end down will be finicky. The steady jaws will need to be readjusted after every cut. That's doable but a real pain.

If you have a fixed steady, can you support the not-to-be-turned portion of the stock with it while making your cuts? That might be simpler than using the traveler.

Actually, given that you're going to support it with a TS center, I question whether you need a steady at all. 0.218 for 2.3" shouldn't be a problem assuming you take light cuts when you get near final diameter.


----------



## RobWilson (May 30, 2009)

Well Said mklotz, ;D, I am not the best at describing what i am trying to get across.
Rob


----------



## zeeprogrammer (May 30, 2009)

Marv: Thanks for clarifying terms. I used a traveling steady (I had said 'follower') but I did not move the carriage - only the compound while I faced. (I guess you could say I used it as a fixed steady.)

Yes, stock is sticking out because its diameter is larger than spindle bore.



			
				mklotz  said:
			
		

> Supporting the stock with a travelling steady while turning the end down will be finicky. The steady jaws will need to be readjusted after every cut. That's doable but a real pain.



I hadn't planned to use the steady while turning. I have to turn for ~2.3" out of 3". That leaves less than 0.7" to hold in the chuck. A steady would be painful indeed. So it's the live center I'll be using with smaller cuts as I get close.

Thank you.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (May 30, 2009)

I confess. One of the reasons I put off doing the port and pillow block before the crankshaft is that the instructions call for flycutting. I've never done that. In addition, although I have the flycutting holder...I only have blank tool bits. I would have to make them (yet another thing I haven't done before).

However, the instructions say the operation could be done with an end mill!

Yeah yeah. You're right. This thread about learning...not just building.

So...

I have the LMS set of 3 flycutters. 1/4, 3/16, and 5/16. Which to use? I'm thinking the 5/16...but would a knowledgeable one have some comments as to what goes into the decision? ??? ???

As for the cutter itself...I have a Ryobi out-of-the-box grinder. Used once to make a parting tool from a hacksaw blade (and a successful adventure by the way). Two questions: ??? ???

1) What shape am I trying for?
2) Does the bit needed to be honed? (In which case it's back to shopping.)

Thank you all. In the meantime...it's off to the books and google to see what I can see.

Oh...I know enough to keep a container of water nearby for cooling and to cool every few seconds. But that's all I know.

Here's some pics of the 1st operation on the blocks:

Need to trim width from 1.0 to 0.81. Here's the setup...






Trimmed one side by 0.10.
Touched the edge corners with scotchbrite to deburr a little then flipped over and trimmed the other side.






360 half hard (HO2) brass.

0.81 +/- 0.001. Good!

You might notice the plastic guard missing from the mill. I use a floor lamp with a magnifying glass in it between me and the work. I also wear glasses.

Thanks all.

Oh my. Before someone else points it out...I failed to lock the Z travel stop. Foo. I did lock the head and the Y axis though.


----------



## GailInNM (May 30, 2009)

Carl,
I have noticed in your milling photos that you have the end mill extended quite a distance from the collet. If your collet/spindle permits, you will improve the rigidity a lot by inserting the end mill into the collet as far as you can while still clamping on the solid portion of the end mill. I use endmills with a short flute length when ever possible and reserve the longer flute endmills for use only when I really need them.
Gail in NM,USA


----------



## zeeprogrammer (May 30, 2009)

GailInNM  said:
			
		

> If your collet/spindle permits, you will improve the rigidity a lot by inserting the end mill into the collet as far as you can while still clamping on the solid portion of the end mill.



Thanks Gail. Yes I have nearly 1/2" more of solid shank I can use...I will use it in future. I am learning just how important rigidity is.


----------



## mklotz (May 30, 2009)

> I have to turn this part down from ~0.875 to 0.2183 for 2.31. That's a lot of hard metal to me. Any thoughts/warnings you all can offer? Huh? Huh?



This is a bit late but...

When you're going to be turning down to a relatively small diameter (7/32 in your case), ensure that your center hole is small enough that you'll still be able to reach the work with the lathe tool without interfering with the TS center.

It's difficult to describe what I'm getting at clearly so do a little trial. Take a scrap of 1/4 (close enough to 7/32) and center drill it exactly as you did on the crankshaft piece. Now, install the TS center and see if you have clearance to take a cut on the stock with the lathe tool you intend to use for turning down the crankshaft.

In the extreme case of what I'm on about, if the diameter of the center drill hole is greater than 7/32 (e.g., you used a 1/4 or larger center drill) then the lathe tool is going to hit the tailstock center before you reach your target dimension. Even if it's less than 7/32, you may not have adequate clearance to get the lathe tool in to make the final cut(s).

When you get near your target dimension, let the part cool off while you take a coffee break. Removing a lot of metal will heat the stock and the consequent expansion will give you a false reading of the room temperature size.

This is rather nit-picky stuff but it exemplifies why we think through the complete operation thoroughly before making chips. I wouldn't bore you with such minutiae had I not made the mistakes detailed above myself.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (May 30, 2009)

Thanks Marv.

I had used a #1 center drill (~0.123 dia). So I think I lucked out...but only because I followed the instructions. Had I not had the #1, or had the instructions, I could have easily made that mistake. Thanks.

Also thanks for the tip on expansion. I'll have that coffee when it comes time.

There is nothing nit-picky to us newbies...and I can't imagine you could ever be boring. 

Your point is very important. I've made the mistake thinking I had thought the operation through up to the first cutting pass. Your point, I believe, is the operation is from setup to finished part (if not even up to removing the part) and one has to consider the path of the cutter along with everything else that moves.


----------



## Foozer (May 30, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> Your point is very important. I've made the mistake thinking I had thought the operation through up to the first cutting pass. Your point, I believe, is the operation is from setup to finished part (if not even up to removing the part) and one has to consider the path of the cutter along with everything else that moves.



Well not one to admit, wasn't me, was a case of too much coffee  Using a live center and watching the material progressively reduce in size till the cutting bit decides to chew on the live center for a while. Live center dia is greater than the dead center. Bit hit it well before the stock was close to size. All kinds of little things happen to us newbies, I just chalk em up as part of the "Adventure"


----------



## mklotz (May 30, 2009)

> There is nothing nit-picky to us newbies...and I can't imagine you could ever be boring.
> 
> Your point is very important. I've made the mistake thinking I had thought the operation through up to the first cutting pass. Your point, I believe, is the operation is from setup to finished part (if not even up to removing the part) and one has to consider the path of the cutter along with everything else that moves.



Thanks. My greatest fear is to turn into a boring old man.

Not to go all Zen on you but one thing I've learned is that metalworking, while being fun and gratifying, will also teach you a lot about how to think through problems thoroughly thus making you a better craftsman, a better citizen and, ultimately, a better person.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (May 30, 2009)

My fear was sitting on a porch watching the world go by. Now it's the fear of running out of time. (Well that and fire.)

Thanks Marv.
Thanks Foozer.


----------



## DavesWimshurst (May 30, 2009)

Carl,
Another thing that can help on small shafts is a half center which can be made from a dead center by grinding part of it away:







It gives more room for the tool but of course must be carefully adjusted and lubricated like any other dead center used in the tailstock.
Dave


----------



## zeeprogrammer (May 31, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> Marv: ...I walked into the gift shop and staring back at me was a huge poster of your avatar . My first thought was "it's Marv". Kind of eerie.



Had a good scare today. Went on facebook. My daughter had taken a '6 Impossible Questions' quiz. There you were again. Made me jump. Almost wanted to look behind me. ;D


----------



## mklotz (May 31, 2009)

Half-dead centers (I call them zombie centers) are one of those tools you'll need only a few times in your career but, when you do, there really aren't many good substitutes.

If you're one of those who haven't yet bought a live center, consider the type with interchangeable points, e.g.,

http://www.use-enco.com/CGI/INSRIT?PMAKA=251-3020&PMPXNO=2984208&PARTPG=INLMK3

I have one of these and the smallest point in the set of points has come into use many times although I still have my zombie and use it too.

Another advantage of the type with interchangeable points is the fact that it's easy to make special purpose points such as pushers and big pipe centers for it.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (May 31, 2009)

mklotz  said:
			
		

> Half-dead centers (I call them zombie centers)...


 :big:

I do have a live center. Didn't know their were different types other than 'carbide tipped'.

Well that's something else I need to do more of...peruse tool catalogs (why don't I have a stack of them or a computer near my throne? )

Thanks Marv.


----------



## mklotz (May 31, 2009)

Catalogues are a wonderful way to develop your analytical skills and increase your knowledge base.

By definition, anything offered in a metalworking catalogue is used in a lot of machine shops (else it wouldn't be worth offering it for sale) so it must be useful and probably worth knowing about even if your personal work doesn't immediately require it. Think of it as loading your mind with material that can inspire you when you need to solve some thorny problem of your own.

When you encounter a tool with which you're unfamiliar, don't gloss over it but rather try to imagine what it's used for, how it's employed and why it's superior to other ways of accomplishing the same task. Try to think of some task you've done or need to do that would be simplified by application of this tool (or a version of it that you build yourself).

Inevitably, some tools will presume the availability of resources you lack such as very powerful or special purpose machinery. Don't let that stop you. Try to think of ways you could make something that would perform a similar function with the tooling you have available.

Also, don't limit yourself to machine tool catalogues. Gunsmithing (Brownells), jewelry-making (Rio Grande), woodworking (many) and model-making (MicroMark) catalogues are rich idea sources.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (May 31, 2009)

As I'm sure you know Marv, the risk with catalogs of any kind, is the development of tool envy.  But it's just so much fun!

So I tried my hand at grinding a tool bit for my fly cutter. The downside? There were several...I'll get to some of them momentarily. The upside? I searched the forum...I'm not the only one with egg on their face.

I had trouble figuring out what shape was needed. (1st downside.) I ended up trying to copy what is a right-handed roughing lathe bit. That's correct...right-handed. (2nd downside - and I even mentioned in an earlier post that the spindle went clock wise). I didn't have time to go back...I have to get ready for a business trip. (You guys can make a tool in the time in takes to read this post...me?...I only count in hours.)

So I put a left-handed bit in the fly cutter and had a go on a piece of scrap aluminum.

I was surprised and impressed (upside) Until I ran my finger across it (downside). A little more experimenting. Slowing the feed rate made a huge difference (upside). The part was short so I kept moving the table so a cut would be made on the return trip of the cutter (downside). I'm apparently out of tram. And...I think I was using too high a speed from what I see in the forum.

Anyway...I'm out of time here.

But before I go...

Grinding tool bits is something I'd like to learn but maybe not right now. Any suggestions for a purchased cutter for my fly cutters? Was using the left-handed lathe cutter okay?

For other newbies...googling can help...but don't forget about the search bar on the forum. Lot's of good stuff here. (Not mine maybe...but there's a a bunch of very good people here.)


----------



## Jeff02 (May 31, 2009)

This might Help.

http://www.sherline.com/3052inst.pdf

http://www.sherline.com/grinding.htm

http://www.akpilot.net/How To Grind Lathe Tools/How To Grind Lathe Tools.pdf


----------



## Foozer (May 31, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> As I'm sure you know Marv, the risk with catalogs of any kind, is the development of tool envy.  But it's just so much fun!
> 
> So I tried my hand at grinding a tool bit for my fly cutter.



Grinding tool bits was my first, I guess, major hurdle. Bought of bunch of 1/4 and 5/16 inch blanks, went to town on the grinder. I can grind them every which way but what the diagrams show. The post with the Sherline info is a good one. Its clear and concise, just takes practice. Once I get a bit ground so that it cuts good, Boy-O-Boy that's my baby, the best cutter I have is the ugliest looking thing one could lay eyes upon, but leaves a nice smooth finish.

Fly cutter, getting that radius edge smooth by hand grinding, now that's an adventure. Its just a new skill and soon enough the hands will do what the brain ask of em.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (May 31, 2009)

Hey thanks Foozer.

Funny you mention the Sherline post. That's what I had next to me while I tried my hand at it.

Your point is a good one. If you don't try, you have nothing. If you try...maybe it's good...maybe it's not so good. But it's better than nothing.

Funny how I can give that advice to my kids..but don't listen to it myself. My biggest problem is overcoming the notion that there's a right way and a wrong way. 
There's many right ways.

Best regards.


----------



## mklotz (Jun 1, 2009)

If you want to practice lathe bit grinding, get a stick of ~1/4" square 1018 and practice with that. It's cheaper than HSS, the right dimensions and easier to grind. In a couple of hours, you'll have a good feel for how to hold things to generate the various angles. Once you're comfortable with the manipulations, graduate to the good stuff.

On a marginally related note, I've read that one shouldn't cool the HSS tool by dipping it in water (though most everyone does it). The thought is that doing so can cause micro-cracks that can eventually lead to tool failure.

Usually I grind several tools at the same time. When one gets too hot to hold comfortably, I lay it on a big chunk of aluminum that acts as a heat sink to suck the heat out of the tool and start grinding on another tool. Another variation of this is to make a heat sink tool bit holder out of a block of aluminum and use that to hold the tool while grinding.

I've also read that allowing the HSS to discolor from the heat is no big deal. (HSS is formulated to hold its properties at high temperature.) While grinding a carbon steel knife blade to the point where it discolors would be a big no-no, doing so with HSS is said to be OK. I don't know if this is true but I do have several tools with tips discolored from grinding and they seem to work fine.

Perhaps some of the members who know more than I on this subject would like to comment on what I've written. If I'm completely wrong, I'll be happy to delete this post so future readers aren't led astray.


----------



## Kermit (Jun 1, 2009)

http://yarchive.net/metal/hss_grinding.html


----------



## Maryak (Jun 1, 2009)

mklotz  said:
			
		

> On a marginally related note, I've read that one shouldn't cool the HSS tool by dipping it in water (though most everyone does it). The thought is that doing so can cause micro-cracks that can eventually lead to tool failure.



I'd read of this too, for a while I tried quenching in soluble oil and water, (coolant). There was no discernible difference. So back to good old water.

Before I use a single point tool or a HSS drill bit after grinding, I usually stone them with a small flat stone. If there are any micro cracks, perhaps this removes them. ??? ???

Best Regards
Bob


----------



## mklotz (Jun 1, 2009)

Kermit,

Thanks for that link. Since I read RCM regularly, that's probably where I picked up the ideas I wrote about.

It's nice to see that I wasn't completely off center in what I wrote.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 4, 2009)

Back from my business trip! I get to machine this weekend!

Thanks Kermit, Bob, and Marv.

Before my trip I went ahead and used a cheapie left-handed cutter (that came with the lathe) in the fly cutter and machined the brass piece that is going to produce the pillow block and bearing block.

This weekend I hope to saw the brass in two and finish the two parts. My thinking (right or wrong) is that the parts will work fine.

If I have time...I need to think about a way to tram the mill. I've seen several good methods and tools on the forum.

I can't help myself...on a side note...at the Houston airport I had another Marv sighting. That's 3 now in the space of a month. The time before that was years and years ago. Not thinking about machining when I'm working is getting pretty difficult.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 5, 2009)

I wanted to capture this safety boo-boo so others can avoid it...

http://www.homemodelenginemachinist.com/index.php?topic=5178.0

It made me realize just how things can shoot off and possibly hit someone.
If someone wants to watch...no matter from what distance...make sure they have more than adequate protection. I don't even want to scare them. From now on...if any one wants to watch me...there's going to be a thick piece of plastic, taller and wider than them, between them and the work. I'm okay with 'adequate' protection for myself...but when it comes to a loved one...


uh...I don't mean to imply I don't love me...but that's between me, myself, and I.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 5, 2009)

The pillow and bearing blocks are supposed to be 0.94" high, cut from a single piece of brass.

The single piece of brass I got in the kit was 1.88". The ends had to be squared and the part cut in two. Right. So squaring and cutting must not shorten the piece. I can do that. Right.

So I squared and cut and discovered that, no, I can't do that. Not without shortening the piece. Rats.

Now I have two pieces, each 0.878 long. Each off by 0.062". Foo.

For one of the pieces...no problem. There's a hole 0.53 from the bottom, diameter 0.219. Top of hole is nearly 0.2 away from top of block.

The other piece...hole is 0.53 from bottom, diameter is .4375. I would've had 0.1913 from top...now I have 0.1293. Problem is...the hose coupling thread is 0.16. So the hose coupling won't thread in all the way.

Possible solutions:

1) If 0.12 is enough...shorten the hose coupling thread.
2) Knock off a bit from the bottom of both blocks. That would require the piston rod to be a bit longer. Could shorten the columns. Might change the stroke.
3) Get another piece of brass (see earlier post...I was prepared for this) and do it again.

I'm thinking (sure you are)...for a small (simple?) engine like this...go for '1'. Can test without shortening the coupling thread. If it works...shorten it. If it don't...go for '3' and consider this practice. Avoid '2'...too many changes (and I'm an old dog).

I find it useful to know the thought process of the knowledgeable ones...so I recorded this. Not that I'm knowledgeable. It's also useful to know the thought process of the less-than-knowledgeable. Hope it's not boring.


----------



## DavesWimshurst (Jun 5, 2009)

Carl,
Could you make a shim piece to go under each pillow block and make it look like it is part of the design?
Dave


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 6, 2009)

DavesWimshurst  said:
			
		

> Could you make a shim piece to go under each pillow block and make it look like it is part of the design?



Dave...very good idea. Thank you. Wish I'd read your post, or thought of it, before I went and started drilling. 
 :rant:
Still...so far I've only drilled the mounting holes...not the crankshaft hole. It's probably not too late. Do I want to? Do I need to? If I try to fit the footprint I'll probably bugger it. Better to make it slightly larger, like a step. If the shorter thread for the coupling is not enough I guess I'd have to. Otherwise...why go through the trouble?
Thanks again. Very very useful tip whether now or a future build.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 6, 2009)

Finished the bearing (pillow block) woohoo1

Previous posts/replies talked about using an edge finder and the cranks' dials rather than eyeballing the center drill to the target. Some instructions I had found referred to zeroing out the crank dial. I didn't think my equipment had that capability. But of course it does. oh:
In any case...I dyed and scribed the part as a check...used the edge finder...and lo and behold...came right to it. (The picture may not show it due to parallax...but I was 'right on'.) I took the distance to move, added 0.1 for the edge finder, and divided by .0625. That gave the revs and a fraction. Then I multiplied the fraction by .0625 and that gave me the additional thous to move. Zeroed the crank dial and cranked away. Be sure to move the crank in the same direction...up to the edge for the edge finder and then on to the target. Did one axis, locked it down and then did the other.






Drilled and reamed the bearing hole. (Uh oh...the reamer didn't do anything. [Edit: I should have drilled 1/64 smaller and then reamed to size. Thanks Marv]) And drilled and tapped the two mounting holes. Polished with fine emery and some scotchbrite followed by brasso. I can't say I'm happy with the finish. It's okay but I've seen some really nice stuff on the forum.






The other brass part with dye is the bearing - port block. That's next.

I don't know what you call the thingy [Edit: Countersink. Thanks Marv]...I had it lying around for years...but I use it to knock off burrs on drilled holes and to put a small chamfer on them. I put it in the chuck that's used on the lathe's tail stock. Then, by hand, just give a few twists trying to keep it perpendicular. Works well enough.


----------



## mklotz (Jun 6, 2009)

> Drilled and reamed the bearing hole. (Uh oh...the reamer didn't do anything.)



What size was the drill? The drill should be slightly smaller than the reamer. The drill's function is only to remove the bulk of the material, leaving a few thou for the reamer to remove.
For holes <=0.5", I normally drill 1/64" undersize, then ream.

That "thingy" the name of which you do not know is called a countersink. Its intended use is to countersink a hole so a flat head screw seats flush. It's perfectly acceptable to use it for deburring (I do too) although you may want to make a more comfortable handle for it.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 6, 2009)

mklotz  said:
			
		

> For holes <=0.5", I normally drill 1/64" undersize, then ream.



Thanks Marv...that was the mistake I made. I drilled to the size called for rather than under. Oh well. I'll wait and see if I have problems. Happily I have more material should it be needed.

Countersink...of course. I knew that...forgot that...will probably forget again.

I will edit my post for others.


----------



## mklotz (Jun 6, 2009)

The only reason I'm so good at guessing your missteps is that I've made them all myself. ;D

Some other reamer hints:

Run them at about half of drilling speed.

Never turn a reamer backwards in a hole. It will ruin the edges.

Don't run them dry except in brass.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 6, 2009)

Thanks for the tips Marv. And I'm happy to know I'm following in your footsteps. ;D

The bearing-port block... woohoo1







About 0.06 shorter than spec but I'm thinking it'll be okay.

The hole dia is .4375 (7/16 or 28/64) so I used a 27/64 drill bit.
Once again I was happy the TP was nearby. 
As I was drilling, the bit grabbed and tried to shoot down into the part and gave up a very shrill whine. Luckily I had firm control on the feed handle. If I'd been a smarter puppy I would have had the z-axis travel stop set so that the bit wouldn't have gone into the vise. As it was...it didn't get that far.

Should I have used cutting oil? Should I have started with a smaller bit and worked up? ???

Then it came time to ream. That resulted in this thread...

http://www.homemodelenginemachinist.com/index.php?topic=5187.0

According to the instructions...I went and drilled and tapped the ports. That produced junk in the bearing hole. What to do? ??? I put the part in the vise and carefully reamed it again. What should I have done?

Loosely attached to the base to see what it looks like...


----------



## Foozer (Jun 6, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> As I was drilling, the bit grabbed and tried to shoot down into the part and gave up a very shrill whine.



Dont feel bad, I just did that very same thing. had that piece of bronze all nice and fitted, a tad to rambunctious with the drill bit and sucked that piece of bronze right out of the part. So sad, So sad. Next piece in progress, coffee break now and I'll step the hole size up bit by bit. That stuff is grabby using regular drill bits.



> According to the instructions...I went and drilled and tapped the ports. That produced junk in the bearing hole. What to do? ??? I put the part in the vise and carefully reamed it again. What should I have done?



Chicken or the egg, running the reamer thru by hand to break off the chips, done that many a time, easy with the reamer and you don't blow out the hole


> Loosely attached to the base to see what it looks like...



Looking good, can feel your pain with the "Hey the bit wont fit" problem. Spend the time to set it up and something goes haywire. Just part of the adventure. I, not having the experience, just chuckle to myself when the unknown pops up, we learn from it.


----------



## DavesWimshurst (Jun 6, 2009)

Carl, 
A drill ground on the tip like:






can stop the grabbing in brass and bronze. Sometimes just using a hand stone parallel to the length of the drill is enough, especially with small drills. They don't cut as well in steel after this treatment so I have extras set aside just for brass. Just partially locking the feed and clamping the part also works. I sometimes do this on the lathe when I don't want to modify a drill by slightly tightening the ram lock.
Hope this helps.
Dave


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 6, 2009)

Thanks Foozer. Thanks Dave.

More progress...the rotary valve.

Some of the first advice I got on this forum was to 'sneak up on the part'. There's a lot of good advice on this forum and I suspected this was one ;D and so I did. Turned down to near size (and learning that I can set the dial to zero helped a lot!) then sanding and test fitting...back and forth...back and forth...back and forth...but I got there. Even cooled it down or waited to allow the metal to settle. It fits...but I feel a little binding as I turn the port block. I expect (hope hope hope) that this will clean up after a little bit of running.






The rotary valve. Had some fun parting it off...the lathe stalled, 3 or 4 times, but I got through it. Cleaned it up. Looked good! Then I needed to drill/ream the hole for the set screw. Foo. Busted the tip off the center drill (that's the 2nd time now). Have no idea how to get it out. So I'll pretend it's an oil hole and went to the other side. Center drill (with a bigger center drill), drilled, and tapped. Same problem as before...junk now in the crankshaft hole. Went to the lathe and carefully reamed again. Oh happy day.






A test fit...(well really I just wanted to see what it looks like)...






Now for the sad part to come...and it will come...I still have to cut the two 'watchamacallits' on the valve (two cuts that go part way round the valve). It requires a rotary table and a slitting saw. One boo-boo and it's back to the beginning. (But it will be a little while...I have to get an arbor for the slitting saw and practice a bit before working the valve).

But I am prepared for my propensity to make boo-boos...Have Metal, Will Machine.


----------



## two dogs (Jun 6, 2009)

Hi Carl,
The "junk" in the center hole is unavoidable. Just re-ream and you're fine. I'm wondering why you've broken 2 center drills now. The material is carbon steel, right? How fast (RPM) are you going and are you using lube? That shouldn't be happening. Let us know and we'll figure out what you can do to avoid that.
I can't believe that they gave you a piece of matl, the length of which equals the finished lengths of BOTH PIECES. If you were to EDM them apart, they'd still be short! Poor planning on their part!
Now, as far as the whachamacallits, if there is a way you can post a drawing (without giving away any of the plan specifics), maybe we can help

Mark


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 6, 2009)

Hi Mark,

They are the #1 center drills...kinda small. I didn't use lube (at least on this one) until I got to the 2nd step with the drill bit. And...I may have gone too fast. It probably didn't help I was going into steel. I'm not too bothered about it...I see that this has happened to a couple of other members. More experience will help.

Yeah I was surprised about the length of the piece.

The whachamacallits are two grooves that go around the valve for about 200 degrees and are offset from each other by some angle.

The kit came with decent enough instructions...but they could have been better. Still, with the help of this forum...I'm getting through it.

I'm having loads of fun.

Thanks Mark.


----------



## two dogs (Jun 7, 2009)

Carl,
I prefer using a 90 deg spot drill over center drills for most things. The tips on center drills can be kinda fragile as you have seen.
This sounds like a kinda involved engine for one that appears simple. Kudos to you for having a good attitude. That last sentance in your last post says it all, "I'm having loads of fun." Keep having fun! :big:


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 7, 2009)

I really have the feeling that I'm cheating or developing bad habits. Readers will see what I mean but I must press on...time for the crankshaft.

This is the setup to machine the crankshaft. 0.875" down to 0.218....for 2.31" plus enough change for the live center. Tried to be careful in setting things up. Couldn't find a cutter that seemed to fit. Thought about a thread cutter...ended up with a carbide insert at an angle. Checked everything. Had some interference between the tool post and the live center. Took care of that. Locked down the live center, used a carriage stop, and started cutting lightly (0.003").






Had a little smoke (off the part...I quit smoking a year ago). Periodically used some coolant. I just have a spray bottle that puts out a stream. But things never got too hot. Long springy pieces.

Power feed up to near the stop then fed by hand and pulled back. Went pretty well.
Thought I'd up the feed rate...tried taking 0.01. Oops. Got more substantial strands of a goldish color. Quickly had a mass of stuff twirling around. This is what it looked like. The smoother looking strands are the 0.01 cuts...the springy looking ones are 0.003 or 0.004.






Backed off to 0.005 at a time and cleaned out the strands every once in a while. Needed to go from .875 down to .218 for .657. That would require some 65 passes. Took some time but I got there. See the dark spot behind the lathe? My tables are topped with hardboard. They're like a sponge. I don't really mind...they look cool as they are used (and they're replaceable). (In the back is a piece of plexi to keep the stuff that's thrown off the lathe off the wall.)






After much sanding...and trial fitting...the pillow block and rotary valve slip on. woohoo1 A lot of sanding. (I protected the ways with a paper towel when I sanded.) Prior to sanding the crankshaft had a slight taper of less than a couple thou from tail stock to head stock. I'll have to do something about that before I cut another long piece.






Flipped the part around. Had to remove some 1/2 inch or more. That would be a lot of facing. Hacksawed a big chunk then faced and sanded. The OD of the crankshaft didn't need turning down - just sanded it to brighten it.






Now just to see what it looks like so far...






Not finished with the crankshaft yet...needs a flat for the setscrew to hold the rotary valve and a flat, at an angle, for the flywheel. Also need a hole to attach the piston rod.

Pretty happy. Time to relax.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 7, 2009)

Hi Mark,

Saw your post while I was putting up my latest adventure.
That's twice I've seen talk about a spot drill. I don't know what it is...so I'll go look. Thanks.

Yeah, the engine's supposed to be the first in a series...I don't think it's as simple as my first engine - the model 2A (from castings). But it came with an instruction booklet...decent...but you have to read it very carefully. An important sentence can be easily missed...and like many things for the beginning machinist...they assume too much. On the up side...I think they presented the instructions, or the design, in a way to introduce a lot of different concepts to the beginner. I'm learning a lot.

One thing I'm getting concerned about...now that I just did a trial fit...is how things are going to line up with the crankshaft. If they don't...I may use paper shims...or loosen the screws and move things around as I tighten. None of which is in the instructions. But we'll see.

Yes this is great fun. I can't express how happy I am to have started it and how great this forum is.

Thanks for reading.


----------



## mklotz (Jun 8, 2009)

Spotting drill...

http://www.use-enco.com/CGI/INSRIT?PMAKA=SP891-6778

They come in a variety of sizes. For model work, 1/8, 3/16, and 1/4 make a good set.

Get the ones with a 118 deg point grind so a common drill will seat directly into the center hole.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 8, 2009)

Thanks for the link Marv.

Any advice on when a spot drill would be used over a center drill?

Or, asked another way...what are the differences in characteristics between the two?

The center drill, as I understand it, is stiffer than a (regular) drill bit and won't wander as much...so it's used to guide the (regular) drill bit. But Mark's point is a good one...the tip is pretty fragile.

Thanks.


----------



## mklotz (Jun 8, 2009)

A center drill, as the name suggests, is intended for making center holes in a workpiece to be mounted on the lathe, either between centers or in a chuck with tailstock support.

A spotting drill, as the name suggests, is meant for spotting a hole - creating an accurately placed divot to guide the drill and prevent it from wandering when it first touches down.

For most drilling operations, the preferred tool is the spotting drill. It's short, therefore stiff, and lacks the delicate tip of the center drill. Also, with the 118 deg tip, the divot perfectly matches the shape of the drill so the drill isn't cutting only on the edge of the guide hole when it touches down - a possible source of drill chipping with harder materials. That said, I've used a center drill to locate plenty of holes. It's not oh-my-god wrong but, as you discovered, tip breakage can be a problem.

Also, there are situations where I find a center drill easier to work with. For instance, if I'm tapping a 1/16" rod for a 00-90 thread, I find a #00 center drill is easier to use than a spotting drill.

One tip: If you use center drills in lieu of spotting drills, change them out for new ones on a regular basis before the tip fatigues. Since doing this, I've had much less problem with broken tips. Maybe my "fatigue" idea is personal black magic, but it works for me. It could be that the older ones are dull and I don't know it. I'm not going to try to sharpen a 1/8 diameter center drill. They're cheap enough to be regarded as disposable.


----------



## AlanHaisley (Jun 9, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> Alan,
> I sighted them too. Your question implies I should have dialed to the others? Assuming so, I thought, why bother then with the other scribe lines? Perhaps as a way of verifying that I dialed accurately?



If you think in terms of datum points, the first point, which you sighted in, can become the control for all other points on that face. The advantage to dialing after the first point is to make the others all accurately (within the precision of your mill table movements) located. If the first were off a bit, due to parallax or other error causer, at all of the points would be jointly consistent.

However, if you sight them in, on each point there is a possibility of a position error totally uncorrellated with the positions of all the other points.

Mark-up can serve as a check. In my case, there is a good chance of miscounting how many times the dial revolved. ??? Knowing the needed measure, and having markup lines, if I am off by a revolution on the dial I can easily see it. So, I just take the dial on around and then set to the specified graduation.

Alan


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 9, 2009)

mklotz  said:
			
		

> Also, with the 118 deg tip, the divot perfectly matches the shape of the drill so the drill isn't cutting only on the edge of the guide hole when it touches down - a possible source of drill chipping with harder materials.



Thanks Marv. The drill chipping? Or a ragged edge on the hole?



			
				AlanHaisley  said:
			
		

> In my case, there is a good chance of miscounting how many times the dial revolved.
> Alan



Thanks Alan. In my case...a better than good chance. But I'm getting better and more comfortable using the dials...now that I figured out how to zero them. :big:

Thanks all.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 12, 2009)

I've been having some adventures as I work towards making the cylinder. Cutting the side required grinding a lathe cutting tool. Here's a link to the thread where I posed my question. Pay no attention to the various suggestions regarding personal lubricants.

http://www.homemodelenginemachinist.com/index.php?topic=5206.0

So after some (not a lot...but some) success at grinding...I started the process of making the cylinder hole. Need 9/16". Center drilled...started with a small drill bit...and worked up to the 1/2"...my biggest drill bit. Whipped out the boring bar. Going to bore within 0.005 to 0.002 of the required diameter of 9/16". Once I do that...then I can ream to size. Uh...wait a minute...I don't have a 9/16 reamer. Nooooooooo! Another tool is needed!!!

Well here's where I am for now...






Do I remove the part (I haven't bored yet)...or leave it until I get the reamer? I think I'm okay. I have 1/16 to go yet.

Got some purchasing to do. Still need two dies, a slitting saw, an arbor for the slitting saw, and a 9/16 reamer. Wondering when it ends...knowing it never does. May as well get some more personal lubricant too.

What a great hobby.


----------



## vlmarshall (Jun 12, 2009)

Can you leave the part in the chuck until you get a reamer? If it were me, I'd pull it out unless I could get a reamer tomorrow.
Meanwhile, use your lathe (and grinder) to make a D-drill/reamer, a slitting saw arbor, and the two dies you need! ;D
Nice thread, I was actually wondering how you were doing today while I was at work. I've got a lot of respect for you guys learning on your own.


----------



## Foozer (Jun 12, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> I
> So after some (not a lot...but some) success at grinding...I started the process of making the cylinder hole. Need 9/16". Center drilled...started with a small drill bit...and worked up to the 1/2"...my biggest drill bit. Whipped out the boring bar. Going to bore within 0.005 to 0.002 of the required diameter of 9/16". Once I do that...then I can ream to size. Uh...wait a minute...I don't have a 9/16 reamer. Nooooooooo! Another tool is needed!!!
> 
> 
> What a great hobby.



You can just sneak up on the final bore size. Last couple of passes cutting just squeak <0.001 should get you a nice clean and round hole. Match the piston to fit.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 12, 2009)

vlmarshall  said:
			
		

> Can you leave the part in the chuck until you get a reamer? If it were me, I'd pull it out unless I could get a reamer tomorrow.
> Meanwhile, use your lathe (and grinder) to make a D-drill/reamer, a slitting saw arbor, and the two dies you need! ;D
> Nice thread, I was actually wondering how you were doing today while I was at work. I've got a lot of respect for you guys learning on your own.



Thanks 'vlmarshall'. Thanks very much.

I'm going to leave the part in the chuck until I can't stand waiting for the parts anymore. That should be in about an hour or so. ;D


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 12, 2009)

Foozer  said:
			
		

> You can just sneak up on the final bore size. Last couple of passes cutting just squeak <0.001 should get you a nice clean and round hole. Match the piston to fit.



Hi Bob. I must admit I'm thinking about it. I'm supposed to sand it to get rid of the reamer marks and then work the piston to fit anyway. Let's see what tomorrow brings.

Thanks.


----------



## vlmarshall (Jun 12, 2009)

Hahaha, yeah, I figured as much. ;D

Bore it out like Foozer said!



-Vernon


----------



## vlmarshall (Jun 12, 2009)

Hmmm, I'm one post too late. ;D


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 13, 2009)

While I think about what I'm going to do about reaming the cylinder (I ordered a reamer by the way)...I thought I could at least work on the mill and finish the crankshaft.

To finish it I needed to mill a flat for the rotary valve's setscrew, a flat at an angle for the flywheel's setscrew, and a hole for the pin that attaches to the piston rod.

To find the spot where the flat went, I moved the end mill up to the shoulder with a piece of paper in between. When the paper was pulled out of my hand...I stopped and then backed up the required distance. (All per instructions - but that's going to require a bit more practice.)

The flat for the valve's setscrew...







Now for the flat for the flywheel...the instructions called it a 'whistle slot'. I needed an angle plate. For those of you who remember...I tried making one as my first milling project...the result being two very neat holes in the table and no angle plate. A handy ever present reminder to double/triple check. In any case, the angle plate would have been too thick. So I used an old drafting triangle. Probably the first time I've used it in 40 years! (High school drafting class.)

I was careful to take out backlash and ease down but all of a sudden the head dropped a goodly amount even while I was holding onto the fine crank feel. I'll go back later and investigate further.






So now it was time to put the hole in for the pin. I don't have vise jaws with a groove so I thought I'd use a V block. Problem 1: the shaft was too small. Solution: Put a small square piece of aluminum behind it to hold. Problem 2: The hole is supposed to be lined up with the flat but I can't see the flat. Solution: Do the best I can. Problem 3: No space below the vise for the shaft to stick through. Solution: Let it stick up...small hole right? Light touch right? It would be here that a knowledgeable one would slap my forehead.

Made a light touch with a center drill. Sure enough. The thing wobbled like crazy. Revisit problem 3. Experimenting showed that if I moved the vise out far enough then a space opened up for the shaft. The next pic shows the final set up. (The parallels are there to hold the V blocks up.) This also helped problem 2. I could put a parallel against the flat and eyeball it square to the vise. (Close enough.)






So centered drilled, drilled, and reamed. Cleaned up the part...not real happy with the finish.






So let's see if the pin can be pressed in. Oh yeah. Easily. Slides right through and onto the floor. Instructions said I would be lucky if I could press it in. Is this lucky? Well it did mention using Loctite. Should be okay.

Now...about that reamer...


----------



## mklotz (Jun 13, 2009)

Carl,

Take a look at your picture with the plastic triangle. Downward forces from the endmill are going to try to push that triangle to the left and make it "squirt out" from under the part. You need something immovable behind the left edge of the triangle to keep that from happening.

There's nothing intrinsically wrong with using the plastic triangle except that it's not very durable. Over the years, I've made many small (shorter than vise jaws) aluminum triangles (each carefully engraved with its angle) that drop into the vise and back up against a vise stop to prevent the "squirt out" problem.

Alternatively, you can consider buying a set of commercial angle blocks, e.g.,

http://www.use-enco.com/CGI/INSRIT?PMAKA=630-4258&PMPXNO=945262&PARTPG=INLMK3

or

http://www.use-enco.com/CGI/INSRIT?PMAKA=422-3382&PMPXNO=7911574&PARTPG=INLMK3

or get a sine bar,

http://www.use-enco.com/CGI/INSRIT?PMAKA=637-7551&PMPXNO=2902858&PARTPG=INLMK3

and make some sizing blocks for various angles. [Don't let anybody tell you that you need gage blocks yet.]

Re: sloppy fit of pin in hole...

Did you check that the pin was the same size as the reamer? Stock material can be slightly off nominal size. Did you drill the hole smaller than the reamer size?

I hate to keep recommending more tools but maybe you want to consider an over and under reamer set? (Have we discussed those before?]

Loctiting the pin in the hole is perfectly acceptable. That part of the engine won't be getting very hot, even if run under steam, so you don't have to worry about the Loctite breaking down.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 13, 2009)

Hi Marv,

Yes I was bothered about using the triangle. I tightened down pretty good...but still.

Thanks for the links. Not sure they would work...1/4" thick is thicker than the crankshaft.

I have a sine bar...but to be honest...I didn't want to move the vice for this one cut. What I should have done is wait until all the other parts are done that needed the vice and then moved it.

No I hadn't checked the diameter of the pin. Should have. I did drill under 1/64 before reaming.

I just measured...the pin is 0.125. the reamer also 0.125. So I don't think it was intended to be a tight fit despite what the instructions said. Looking at the drawing, the hole tolerance is -0.000/+0.002. That also seems to indicate a 'loose' fit or the pin is supposed to be bigger than 0.125.

Would it be better to have reamed at 0.124? I do have a set of over/under and have the 0.124. Could I have pressed the pin in with 0.001? Then, had I measured the pin I would have been good.

I don't know enough about press fits and what tolerances are required. Could temperature have figured in and caused the metal to expand/shrink?

I haven't measured the hole...don't really know how I'd get an accurate measurement. 

Thanks Marv.


----------



## vlmarshall (Jun 13, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> ...I was careful to take out backlash and ease down but all of a sudden the head dropped a goodly amount even while I was holding onto the fine crank feel. I'll go back later and investigate further.



Ugh, I've had a mill do that, with a sticking gib, and too much play in the leadnut. I worked my way around it by moving off the part, down past the backlash, and then back up to height.
Time consuming, but it's better than having the endmill suck the head down into the part I'm trying not to ruin.




			
				zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> ...So let's see if the pin can be pressed in. Oh yeah. Easily. Slides right through and onto the floor. Instructions said I would be lucky if I could press it in. Is this lucky? Well it did mention using Loctite. Should be okay.



Ha, don't you hate that. .002" clearance is no press fit, and it's not your fault, nor the fault of temperature change.
A one thou press-fit is good in aluminum, I'd press it in with a vise.
Maybe they meant -.002"/ +.000" , but I'm just guessing.

 Have you learned the ball-bearing trick yet? Set a ball on the hole and tap it with a hammer. You'll close up the hole a bit and the pin will fit 'better'. I'd still Loctite this one, though.


All of you people working on more complex projects are making me envious.


----------



## mklotz (Jun 13, 2009)

Lots of questions... I've interleaved my answers

Yes I was bothered about using the triangle. I tightened down pretty good...but still.

***But you're tightening on the crankshaft, not the triangle. 

Thanks for the links. Not sure they would work...1/4" thick is thicker than the crankshaft.

***That's what pusher blocks are for. Eventually you'll have a whole box full in every conceivable size. It's what mistakes become when they transmogrify into tools.

I have a sine bar...but to be honest...I didn't want to move the vice for this one cut. What I should have done is wait until all the other parts are done that needed the vice and then moved it.

***I apologize. My vise is big enough that I can simply drop the (2.5") sine bar into it.

No I hadn't checked the diameter of the pin. Should have. I did drill under 1/64 before reaming.

***Good onya. You're not forgetting what you learned previously.

I just measured...the pin is 0.125. the reamer also 0.125. So I don't think it was intended to be a tight fit despite what the instructions said. Looking at the drawing, the hole tolerance is -0.000/+0.002. That also seems to indicate a 'loose' fit or the pin is supposed to be bigger than 0.125.

***Dumb tolerancing if they want a press fit. 0.125 -0.001/+0.000 would have made more sense. It's not that big a deal. Loctite is your (and my) friend. Type 609 is called, IIRC, "press fit assist" and is the best thing since sliced bread.

Would it be better to have reamed at 0.124? I do have a set of over/under and have the 0.124. Could I have pressed the pin in with 0.001? Then, had I measured the pin I would have been good.

***A thousandth is a bit on the large side for 0.125" but, with the assistance of a brass BFH, it would be possible.

I don't know enough about press fits and what tolerances are required. Could temperature have figured in and caused the metal to expand/shrink?

***A good tool for novices trying to deal with all the possible types of fits is my program, surprisingly named FITS. It isn't as thorough as MH but it works well for our less demanding work and is infinitely easier to use.

I haven't measured the hole...don't really know how I'd get an accurate measurement.

***Holes that small are usually measured with pin gages. 

http://www.use-enco.com/CGI/INSRIT?PARTPG=INSRAR2&PMAKA=616-8126&PMPXNO=950065

This is a specialized tool and you'll be happy to hear that you don't need to buy it yet. I'm simply showing you what I'm talking about with the URL.

On that note, I'm not a salesman for ENCO. It's just convenient to use their (or MSC's) on-line catalogue to dredge up a picture to show you what I'm talking about. No endorsement of the product shown is implied or intended.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 13, 2009)

vlmarshall  said:
			
		

> Ugh, I've had a mill do that, with a sticking gib, and too much play in the leadnut. I worked my way around it by moving off the part, down past the backlash, and then back up to height.



Ah...thanks Vernon...I think that's what I was doing wrong...I thought being high enough and cranking down to height would take out play...I'll 'play' with that.



			
				vlmarshall  said:
			
		

> Have you learned the ball-bearing trick yet? Set a ball on the hole and tap it with a hammer. You'll close up the hole a bit and the pin will fit 'better'.



No I hadn't heard about that. What if the hole is already chamfered? Oh...and the part is steel, not aluminum. I guess it would still work but require a heftier blow?

Thanks Vernon.


----------



## Foozer (Jun 13, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> I just measured...the pin is 0.125. the reamer also 0.125. So I don't think it was intended to be a tight fit despite what the instructions said. Looking at the drawing, the hole tolerance is -0.000/+0.002. That also seems to indicate a 'loose' fit or the pin is supposed to be bigger than 0.125.



I've drilled/reamed too many thousands of holes 0.187-0.190 to remember. Always a 0.187 reamer would end up at 0.188, close enough to. . . If I needed a hole to be on 0.187 I'd take the reamer and run the cutting edges against a piece of steel for a sec or two. This dulled it down enough so that the hole would be closer to the 0.187 size. Now on occasion some smart alec would pull out the electronic measure to the Nth decimal, reporting the hole at 0.1868, but thats another story. If you have the 0.001 undersized reamer go with that. The 0.124 reamer new and sharp probably leaves a 0.1245 to 0.125 hole. Pin will fit nice and snug. You can press a pin in with 0.001 undersized hole, heck drop the pin in the freezer for a while and the piece with the hole in the over at 250 degrees and they probably will slip together with ease. Once it returns to room temp you'll have the dickens of a time getting them apart. liquid nitrogen is great for this, but alas not recommended for home use


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 13, 2009)

***But you're tightening on the crankshaft, not the triangle. 

Yes. It's what I meant. My hope was enough pressure so it wouldn't move...I could have just as well taken out the triangle. But I believe I understand your point.

My sine bar is 3.75"...but regardless...any pics showing a sine bar inside a vise?

***Good onya. You're not forgetting what you learned previously.

Try not to with you watching ;D

***Holes that small are usually measured with pin gages. 

Well that was wierd. My company used to have a machine shop. They were throwing things out so some of the guys collected the stuff and hid it in a lab. Once in a while I troll through just to look.

Just yesterday I was looking at a box of pin gages wondering what in the world they were for. I didn't know they were called that either.

(They have a beautiful height gauge I've placed dibs on if they ever toss it. They also have a surface block that's at least 2.5' by 4' by 8" or so.)

Thanks Marv.

Hi Bob. Yes I have noticed that most of my holes seem to be a tad larger than expected. I hadn't thought about drilling smaller and sneaking up on it. Thanks.


----------



## mklotz (Jun 13, 2009)

> Yes. It's what I meant. My hope was enough pressure so it wouldn't move...I could have just as well taken out the triangle. But I believe I understand your point.



If you could have taken it out, then it's not supplying any support to the part. In addition to establishing the angle, it should support the part against the cutting forces.

I bring this up now because, although you got away with it this time, you may not be so lucky next time and the part will move while you're cutting on it. Backing up the triangle so it can't squirt out will prevent that from happening.

I don't have any pictures but imagine the sine bar sitting in the vise parallel to the jaws with its roller feet sitting on the "floor" of the vise - the flat horizontal part below the jaws. The part lies on the sine bar which is blocked up to get the correct angle. If the width of the sine bar is greater than the width of the part, the movable jaw can't close on the part so a pusher block is used between the movable jaw and the part.

It looks from your pictures that you're using a toolmaker's vise rather than a conventional milling vise. It's likely that the toolmaker's vise is too narrow to do what I'm describing so don't get overly involved with what I wrote.

Pin (sometimes called plug) gages are useful little critters. Did you know that they can be used in triplets to measure holes larger than the largest pin in the set? Take a look at the text file that accompanies my PLUG program.


----------



## Seanol (Jun 13, 2009)

Zee,
Maybe you know this but the v block can be turned around to the other, smaller v. It still might be too big but it should get you closer.

Hope that helps,
Sean


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 13, 2009)

Hi Marv,

I did a little search...precious little on 'pusher blocks'...but came across this in the forum...

http://www.homemodelenginemachinist.com/index.php?topic=2585.0

It had some of your posts...pusher block being different sizes of 1-2-3 blocks? Still having a little trouble visualizing things. Does this work...?

Put sine bar parallel to vise jaws. One end on the floor, the other propped up with blocks/scrap to get the required angle. Maybe use a parallel on the floor if the sine bar doesn't straddle right? Place the part on top such that the fence at the bottom of the sine bar keeps it from sliding down. Use blocks (aka 1-2-3 or the like) on either side of the part, or maybe just one side, so that the vise can clamp and hold. When a downward force is applied, the fence helps to keep the forces on the sine bar straight down...no squirting. Is that right?

You mentioned a 2.5" sine bar. Mine is too. I didn't realize the measure is between the centers of the rolls. I tried setting up so I could take a pic...the sine bar takes so much room it doesn't look like I can fit pusher blocks in sufficiently for the vise to hold.

I'm thinking I should use the angle plates but that still leaves the question of downward forces and their 'squirting' out. Probably a stop?

Interesting you mentioned the vise. I've never really been happy with it. Part of a 'starters set' from LMS. I've been considering getting a different one. In fact...I see from my instructions for the engine that a sine vise is used. Oh goodie.

That's been one downside of this 'beginners kit'. You'd think it would be such that someone could have success making an engine with few tools. Instead it seems to be designed such that you need every tool in the catalogs. At one point I'll be using the rotary table and facing the question I had earlier...lack of z room. I'm okay with it...whatever disappointments I'm having...are learning experiences. But a lot of people need some periodic successes to keep going. Or...the cost will put people off...again, I'm okay with this because I know I'm in it for the long run and will eventually need this stuff anyway.

Well...enough yak yak. Surprised people read all this anyway.

Thanks again Marv.

Sean...thanks. I did use the smaller v and it was still too big. Better that than too small I suppose ;D [Edit: Was reviewing the earlier pictures and realized Sean was right. I was using the bigger v. At least, it looks that way. It hadn't started that way but somehow when I went from my first attempt to the one shown in the pic...I got it turned around.]


----------



## Maryak (Jun 13, 2009)

Zee,

Not everyone is a brave as you when they start out machining. Hence the starters kit is just that. More power to you for having the guts to avago and your willingness to ask lots of questions. :bow: :bow: :bow: 

Best Regards
Bob


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 14, 2009)

Thanks Bob. I appreciate it. (Some of the trembling is beginning to subside. :big

The cylinder is still in the lathe. The race...work with the mill until the reamer arrives or let the forces to turn take over and take out the cylinder? Again...having still a 1/16 to bore...I can probably take the cylinder out. But anyway...

Doing the piston rod...

Trimmed the edges...1.780 by 0.250. Two parallels below...one to hold the part and one side of the top parallel and one to hold the other side of the top parallel. The orange bit you see is a bit of foam I cut from a halloween decoration. (I'm hoping the kids don't remember we had that. ;D)






Now for the hole that pins to the crankshaft. Used the edge finder (recently learned) to center side to side and then move in from the end...






Center drilled, drilled and reamed (0.125)...






Flipped the part over. The vise is square to the table, so used the edge finder again from the end to get to the desired spot.

[Edit: That was poor practice. As mentioned in a later post (thanks Marv) I should have had a scrap of metal under the part that I could have drilled into. For one thing...the part would have had more support rather than hanging in the wind...but more importantly...I could have moved directly from one hole to the next and this would have been much more accurate.]

Center drilled, drilled and reamed (0.063). Then put the part in my bench vise and used a file to round the ends. I had considered using a rotary table...but I'll have an opportunity to learn that when I finish the rotary valve.






Now how exciting is that? Trimmed four sides and drilled two holes. woo hoo. 

I have to put two bends in the piston rod using the bench vise. At first I thought I would wait to polish until after bending...but I thought that would make it harder. So I'll go ahead and polish now. I'll use some soft material between the part and the vise jaws when I bend...any cleanup should be minimal.

Now the only operations left with the vise is drilling some holes (more excitement!). I don't need the accuracy of the vise being square so I can remove it and prepare for the rotary table. Oops waiting on tools for that too...a slitting saw and arbor. Stuck. Well maybe I'd better get some work done around the house before I get caught. :big:


----------



## mklotz (Jun 14, 2009)

Carl,

New vise? That's not the same one as in the previous pictures.

A pusher block is any piece of metal used to transmit the force from the movable jaw to the part in order to hold it in place. Imagine that you had a 1/8" part sitting atop a 1/4" thick parallel. As you tighten the vise, it tightens first on the parallel and not at all on the part. So you stick a small chunk of, say, 3/16" stock between the part and the movable jaw so the force of the movable jaw acts on the part before it hits the parallel. That small chunk is a pusher block.

Nice job on the connecting rod. Let me offer one bit of advice for the future. Generally, the only critical dimension on a connecting rod is the distance between the two holes. It's a bit more accurate to space the second hole directly from the first. I would have put a bit of scrap between the part and the parallel, drilled the first hole, then used the mill handwheels to move the required distance before drilling the second hole. This would guarantee that the holes were at the required spacing. The scrap underneath the part allows you to drill the part without drilling into the parallel. It almost certainly doesn't matter for your engine but keep the ideas in mind for future jobs where hole-to-hole spacing is important.

You don't need the rotary table to round over such a small part. Hand filing is perfectly adequate, as you discovered. Other approaches include using a belt sanding machine or a jig to rotate the part against a rotary file held in the mill...

http://www.schsm.com/html/marv_klotz_41.html

Bending stuff in the vise can be tricky. Is an offset bend required? (Maybe you can show a sketch of the bent part - that wouldn't violate copyright) If so, I've got a trick for doing that.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 14, 2009)

mklotz  said:
			
		

> New vise? That's not the same one as in the previous pictures.
> 
> A pusher block is any piece of metal used to transmit the force from the movable jaw to the part in order to hold it in place.
> 
> ...



Hi Marv,

Same vise. Could be the photo angle or the V blocks makes it appear different. LMS calls it a 'heavy' milling vise.

Pusher block. In the pic with the V blocks and the crankshaft, I had a piece of square aluminum holding the crankshaft up to the V block. So I guess you'd call that a pusher block. Same for the parallel I used to hold the piston rod. More of a functional name then?

As for the two holes...had I thought about using scrap to drill into, I could have done just that, and moved from one hole to the next. Thanks for the tip...I didn't like having the part hanging in wind.

I had seen your jig in another thread some time ago...someday.

The offset bend is required according to the instructions/drawings. But I'm not convinced yet. I'm going to wait until I have the rest of the parts done and do some trial fitting. The instructions talk about using an 'angle finder'. Guess what I don't have. Also mentions a square and spacer shim. Two bends...from the side looks like
   _____
       \______

but the middle part is longer and the angle is much shallower. 0.06 from bottom of left end to bottom of right end. If/when I get there...I'll ask for that tip.

Thanks Marv.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 14, 2009)

Poor practice should be pointed out.
I have edited the post describing the drilling of the two holes in the connecting rod.
I'd rather someone learn from my blunders than repeat my blunders.

Thanks.

Wish there wouldn't be more...but I never bet on myself.


----------



## mklotz (Jun 14, 2009)

Carl,

You didn't need to edit your previous post but I appreciate you doing so - a karma point's worth of appreciation. You see, I have this vision of this thread being of great value to all the novices out there, most especially the lurkers, and touches like that just make it more useful.

I'm not sure what they mean by an "angle finder" but I don't think you need one to do a simple offset bend. Angle finder is sort of a generic name and could refer to any of a number of tools.

At any rate, the attached figure will show how I've done offset bends. Given the amount of offset required (the distance between the vise jaws in the figure), make two pusher blocks with a thickness equal to the required offset minus the stock thickness. Place them in the vise with the stock as shown, locating the ends of the pushers where the bends need to occur (if that matters - it may not). Hold everything together with cellophane tape if you haven't yet grown the obligatory machinish's third hand.

Once in place, simply crank the vise jaws closed and voila (not viola - a fat violin), your bend is made. Once removed from the vise, there may be a bit of spring back but that's easily dealt with fingers or parallel jaw pliers (another essential tool for this sort of work).

Obviously, this approach is meant for relatively thin parts that won't stress the vise. Don't try it with a piece of 1/4" steel.

What bothers me here is making the bend after so carefully spacing and drilling the holes. Obviously, the hole-to-hole dimension will change after the bend is made. But, not having seen the engine plans, maybe it won't matter.


----------



## tel (Jun 14, 2009)

That's how I do offset bends (or joggles if you want the scientific term  ) Marv - only keeping all them bits lined up while you get a bit of pressure on with the vise is not easy. Far better to just slit a longish bit of sheet metal of the appropriate thickness - the slitted end becomes your blocks, only firmly held together by the unslitted section at the top. Much easier.


----------



## mklotz (Jun 14, 2009)

Bonzer hint, Tel. Since the blocks may need to be machined to size anyway, why not mill the blocks and the required gap between them into a piece of scrap that serves as a holder. I'll have to give it a burl next time I do this.


----------



## RobWilson (Jun 14, 2009)

Hi ZEE ,Here is how i do it ,the lower part of the jig is held in the vice and the part bent then with the part held in the jig you can mark out the correct spacing for the holes, as it is already bent you don't need to take into account the bend allowance.
Rob


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 14, 2009)

Hi Marv,

Thanks very much. I appreciate the point. If I may say so...we share the same vision. 

I also wondered about the bend changing the relative position of the holes. I've been assuming the design took it into account. Several of the dimensions in the drawings make no sense (read...are simply wrong...I mean...obviously). So I'll just press forward and see what happens (pun intended). (The middle of the part is 0.49...with an offset of 0.0625...I calculate something a little less than 0.004 change in distance.)

Thanks Tel.

Rob...At this point my experience is limited and I'm likely to bugger up the tool. If I were doing more than one...I'd seriously consider it since it would also minimize the chance of buggering up the part...or rather...it would maximize the chance of making accurate duplicates


----------



## mklotz (Jun 15, 2009)

Ok, I took a look at the picture of the engine you're building on the LMS site (should have done that earlier).

It appears that changing the hole spacing in the conrod will only change the location of the piston in the bore for any particular angle of the crank. If said change in hole spacing were large it might cause the piston to hit the cylinder cover at TDC. However, assuming they allowed for some dead space in the design, small discrepancies almost certainly won't matter. Even if what I described occurs, shaving a few thou off the top of the piston would cure the problem. I think you're good to go. One less thing to worry about. 

Slight errors in the amount of conrod offset won't matter much either. They'll only affect where the conrod sits on the wrist pin (gudgeon for our English cousins). As long as that position is close to the pin center all will be well.

Does the kit contain those awful Phillips head screws to secure the cylinder cover? The engine would look much better with hex head screws or studs and nuts. Get the engine running with the kit parts and then think about replacing the screws when you start blinging.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 15, 2009)

mklotz  said:
			
		

> Does the kit contain those awful Phillips head screws to secure the cylinder cover?



Thanks for checking Marv.

The Phillips head screws...well of course it comes with those. And yes, I agree with several posts I've seen...awful. Personally, I like the hex head nuts. But to be fair, I haven't enough experience to comment on 'studs n nuts'.

To be perfectly honest...I doubt I'll take the engine any further. I'm already starting to wonder about the next project. [EDIT EDIT EDIT EDIT...not what I meant. I'm finishing this project. I meant I wasn't going to take the project further than a 'build out of the box'...going to use the 'awful Phillips' heads. Also, felt I was getting close to completion and so starting to think about the next project...don't want any down time between them. For sorry for the confusion.]

Thanks again.


----------



## Foozer (Jun 15, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> Thanks for checking Marv.
> 
> The Phillips head screws...well of course it comes with those. And yes, I agree with several posts I've seen...awful. Personally, I like the hex head nuts. But to be fair, I haven't enough experience to comment on 'studs n nuts'.
> 
> ...



Take the studs 'n nuts route. Use some a bit longer, set them in place, double washer and run the nut down, trim the screw to the end of the nut, now you have the stud(s) Remove and heat the components up to a red color and drop in some old dirty motor oil. You'll end up with blackened parts. Reassemble with only one washer and the stud(s) protruding from the nut(s) should all be even. Just that little touch looks so COOL.(if you mar up the pieces, cheat with a magic marker to hide the boo boo)


----------



## mklotz (Jun 16, 2009)

> To be perfectly honest...I doubt I'll take the engine any further. I'm already starting to wonder about the next project.



What's this? You can't wuss out on us now. You need to finish this. Maintaining one's sense of accomplishment is a key element of the zen of machining.

I'll tell you a little story to bolster your persistence.

My efforts in this hobby began back in the early 70s when I bought a Unimat. At that time, my only formal machine shop training was one semester in high school. As my first project, I picked something that I knew was really going to stress my abilities. It was Rudy Kouhoupt's two cylinder, double-acting marine engine with slide valves. Over the years, interrupted by a couple of consulting tours of duty in Europe, I managed to make some parts (quickly discovering the limitations of small multi-purpose machine tools). The problem was that, each time I returned to the engine I would examine some already-made part and say, "What an abortion. I can do better than that now." and start to remake the part. Some of the parts in that engine were "made" as many as six times.

Flash forward 15 years. After complaining to the Frau about never-ending projects, she says, "Build something simpler to reinforce your motivation." I completed one of Elmer's small oscillators and it (the engine and my wife's advice) worked. I was stoked. I bought a larger lathe and within a few months the marine engine was done and running. It "only" took fifteen years but it was done and it worked.

To this day I treasure both the first engine I started and the first engine I completed. They both have numerous flaws but I keep them in prominent places in the display cabinets because they represent a very important psychological lesson learned. Without that lesson and the efforts it prompted later I'd have a pretty boring retirement.

Given the relatively large investment of time and mental effort needed to get even a simple engine built, one has to be very careful about managing the psychology of our hobby. It's at least as important as the actual machining skills. Boxes of half-completed projects under the workbench can be terribly debilitating.

Now, get out there and finish your engine. It's an investment in your mental health.


----------



## ozzie46 (Jun 16, 2009)

Hear! Hear! Marv. Thm: Thm: Thm: I needed that little pep talk too.

 Ron


----------



## cobra428 (Jun 16, 2009)

ZEE!!!!
Listen to Marv. Don't bail on that engine! I looked at the previous posts and all looks just fine. So what's up stickpoke ???
Tony


----------



## bearcar1 (Jun 16, 2009)

Zee, I don't mean to derail this train but when you speak of "wondering about the next project", what is it exactly that you have in mind? th_wtf1 Finish what you have started and continue on from there, don't begin anew on something else thinking that it will be easier, it won't be, trust me. th_rulze The frustrations can be a bit overwhelming at times, especially when first starting out on ones own I know, :hDe: but you have all of us here that have been in the very same position at one time or another and we are all willing to support and share ideas and opinions on making chips. Please don't quite on us, :bow: you have progressed so far in a short amount of time, we are all anxious to see then end product, something you will proudly be able to say that you built it yourself. Give it some thought, pick yourself up by the bootstraps lad and forge ahead. stickpoke

BC1
Jim


----------



## vlmarshall (Jun 16, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> To be perfectly honest...I doubt I'll take the engine any further. I'm already starting to wonder about the next project.



WHAAAATTTT?!?!  ??? 

Don't stop now! Any project will have it's easy parts and tough parts. If you drop this one to go learn on another, sure, you'll get a little further, you'll have more experience. But, you've already got a set of plans in front of you that'll give you not only more experience, but a FINISHED ENGINE when you're done.

I'm worried that if you keep switching projects, you'll only experience the tough spots, miss out on the satisfaction of finishing one, and get bored of the whole thing.

Stick with it man!


----------



## Maryak (Jun 16, 2009)

Zee,

Listen to us, we know that for the most part this is a solitary pursuit, that's why most of us are members here, to share, to be inspired to learn from each other etc. YOU are part of our group, my day will be poorer without a Zee question to keep the gray matter active.

Don't think too much remember "It will be alright on the night."

Best Regards
Bob


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 16, 2009)

Oh my goodness. Oh my goodness.
I am so sorry.
That is not what I meant at all.

Oh I can't believe I did that. I am so sorry that everyone had to take that kind of time and effort.

No no no. I have no intention of stopping. What I meant was...

I intend to use the 'awful Phillips' screws and not go so far as to 'bling' the engine.

I am definitely finishing this engine. Never any doubt about it. I am anxiously awaiting a few tools and am hoping that I can complete this in the next couple of weeks. That's the reason for 'wonder about the next project'. I don't want a gap between finishing this project and starting the next.

Oh how I would like turn back time on that statement. Entirely my fault and I very much appreciate the reaction and time to respond.

Marv...thank you. And I hope to have a bigger/better lathe in less time than you had to wait.

Ron...thank you. If that pep talk helps other newbies 'stay in there' then this is worth it.

Tony...thank you. I'm not going anywhere.

Jim...thank you. This train has only one destination. Can't get off.

vlmarshall...thank you. Sticking with it man.

Bob...thank you. With such a great forum...hardly solitary to me.

All...thank you and I apologize again.
I would understand anyone reading that post and simply switching off. If anyone did, I hope you'll be back.

'nuff' said. Please put this behind you.

There should be a way to take karma away.


----------



## vlmarshall (Jun 16, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> I have no intention of stopping... I am definitely finishing this engine... Never any doubt about it... I'm not going anywhere... This train has only one destination... Can't get off...Sticking with it man.



 :big: Awesome. Don't worry about the misunderstanding. Switching projects is a BIG weakness of my own, I guess I projected it onto you. Oops. ;D

-Vernon


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 16, 2009)

Thanks Vernon.
I thought it was 'Vernon'. I wanted to make it more personal but I didn't want to take the time to go look. I was pretty intent at the time.


----------



## Foozer (Jun 16, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> I intend to use the 'awful Phillips' screws and not go so far as to 'bling' the engine.



I got ya on that, but come on, try the stud and nut route, like I don't want to be the only one fiddling with those tiny parts, having em slip from the fingers and the associated hour of "Hey where did it go" happen to


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 16, 2009)

And, of course...I got the 9/16 reamer today.
So off we go...time to get the cylinder out of the lathe (uh..bore, ream, and then take it out).

Need to bore to within 1/64 of the finished size before reaming.
I'm at 0.5 from the biggest drill bit I had.

Used this telescoping gauge to get to 0.546. Almost forgot...but didn't...0.01 on the cross slide is 0.02 on the diameter...whew.






At least...the caliper on the gauge said 0.546. Moved the gauge around in the hole to maximize the reading...same with caliper.

Then reamed. That's some reamer. I just know I'm going to have to shorten it some day. (As it turns out...I took the pic after reaming.)






Used the telescoping gauge again and calipered...0.564. Should be 0.5625. Cheap gauge? Swarf in the way? Poor measuring technique? Most likely the 1st and 3rd. I was pretty careful about the 2nd.

Side note: I have a cork plugging the spindle hole above the gear box to keep swarf from dropping into the gear box. Remove the cylinder, remove cork, and blow...

So now the cylinder is out. I won't drill the holes for the columns or cap, or polish the sides, until the piston is done. But I'll probably work on some other pieces first.

That's enough for tonight. Still reeling from my earlier 'fopaux'...time to medicate.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 16, 2009)

Foozer  said:
			
		

> I got ya on that, but come on, try the stud and nut route, like I don't want to be the only one fiddling with those tiny parts, having em slip from the fingers and the associated hour of "Hey where did it go" happen to



Believe me...I'm fiddling with tiny parts and wondering where did it go. ;D

But no...not this engine...it's going to be straight from the box...'kit-bashing', as the plastic modelers say, will come as I develop and learn.

Man...if I had to spend an hour...it's time for a new part...if I could.


----------



## bearcar1 (Jun 16, 2009)

OK. Done and done. Now that the formal apologies are out of the way it is good to see that you never left the saddle. Now, giddity-up! :big:

BC1
Jim


----------



## Foozer (Jun 16, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> Believe me...I'm fiddling with tiny parts and wondering where did it go. ;D
> 
> But no...not this engine...it's going to be straight from the box...'kit-bashing', as the plastic modelers say, will come as I develop and learn.
> 
> Man...if I had to spend an hour...it's time for a new part...if I could.



Cheaper to spend the hour than off to the store for a replacement, Like going for just a gallon of milk, Dozen donuts, cheesecake, salami and hard roll later, and then have to turnaround to go back for the milk.

Ok, built per plan works, I gotta go get a gallon of milk


----------



## kvom (Jun 16, 2009)

Don't think about shortening the reamer. You want it long so that it will efficiently seek/hit the center of the hole.


----------



## Maryak (Jun 17, 2009)

Zee,

Just shows the pen is mightier than the sword. : I'm so glad we misunderstood what you were trying to say. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





Best Regards
Bob


----------



## mklotz (Jun 17, 2009)

Telescopic gauge technique... Everybody seems to have his own technique but here's what I do.

Adjust the arms to a diameter just a bit larger than the bore, then snug down the lock screw so they stay in that position but are not locked so tightly that they can't be moved with gentle finger pressure.

Insert the thus prepared gauge into the bore. Since the gauge diameter is greater than the bore, you'll need to angle the gauge to do this. An angle of 30 or so degrees is good although this isn't particularly critical.

Now swing the arm of the gauge to align the gauge handle with the bore axis. This will force the telescoping elements into contact with the bore and compress them so their diameter matches the diameter of the bore. Try to keep the handle of the gauge centered relative to the bore while doing this so the telescoping arms can find the true diameter of the bore.

Once the gauge handle is aligned to the axis of the bore, carefully tighten the lock screw to lock the measurement. Withdraw carefully so you don't further compress the arms.

Measure gauge with a micrometer. Be very careful here. The mike has a 40 tpi thread so it has a tremendous mechanical advantage. Over-tightening it will easily compress the gauge and give a false (under) reading.

I generally take at least three readings and throw out the outlier(s) on the premise of bad technique.

If you have an inside mike, it probably came with a ring gage for setting its zero. Since this hole (in the gage) is accurately bored and lapped, it's great for practicing your telescopic gauge technique - you know what the bore must be so you can concentrate on getting the measurement.

Of course, as you undoubtedly know by now, there's no need for the cylinder to be any precise diameter since you'll make the piston to fit. In fact, there was no need to ream except for the finish that the reamer leaves behind. Boring the hole was important since boring will straighten out any irregularities left by the drills. Reamers don't straighten holes, they merely bring them to size (and usually improve finish).

Drilled holes are neither round, straight nor on size. The sequence is:
Drill to remove material.
Bore to straighten and make cylindrical.
Ream to bring to size.

Kvom is correct about reamer length. The idea is to grip the reamer by the very end of its (usually long) shaft so the tip where the cutting action occurs is free to "follow" the hole.
That said, if the machine is properly aligned, this is much less of a consideration. I regularly use short reamers with good results. In the real world, especially on small machines, shortening reamer shafts is a fact of life.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 17, 2009)

kvom: When the part becomes too long in the lathe or mill then the alternative to shortening the reamer is getting a longer/bigger lathe or mill. Not a bad alternative . Oh honey.....

Bob: Thanks.

Marv: Thank you for the tip on the telescopic gauge. The instructions I had was to compress, insert, and release. What bothered me was that sometimes one of the arms stuck. Your tip takes care of that.

Yes, I figured on fitting the piston to the cylinder. (And I should have deliberately checked that the material I have is actually larger than 9/16 before making the cylinder hole rather than relying on memory. It's okay...it's 5/8.) I reamed the cylinder per instructions. The instructions also talk about taking sandpaper and moving it in and out to remove the reamer marks and ensure any machining marks are in the direction of piston travel for less wear and better lubrication. My pinky is too big...not sure how to do that without causing a taper. [EDIT: I mentioned in an earlier post that the cylinder is not in the lathe so in my head there was no thought of doing this while the cylinder was turning in the lathe. I should be very clear here...no sticking a pinky or other piece of self into any thing that is turning or might potentially turn if a switch got hit. Thanks Marv.] The hole looks very smooth so maybe leave it?

Thanks all. Will it be the piston or the flywheel tonight?


----------



## mklotz (Jun 17, 2009)

> My pinky is too big...not sure how to do that without causing a taper.



Carl, I think you already know this but, for the benefit of any current or future novices reading this...

*DON'T EVER STICK YOUR FINGER IN A ROTATING BORE ON THE LATHE.*

Having a finger removed by twisting it off (think about that for a while) is sure to really, really spoil your day as well as your chances to be a concert pianist.

I'm sure (as I can be without seeing it) that the reamed hole finish is good to go. But, even if it were not, sandpaper isn't the right tool for this job. This is what lapping is all about. I don't want to get into a discussion of lapping right now, plus there have been many good discussions on the subject elsewhere in this forum. Leave the bore as reamed, make a well-fitting piston, and you'll be on your way.

Another preemptory tip:

When you're turning the piston, you'll be testing its size with the newly finished cylinder (which has now become a piston gage). A slight burr at the leading edge of the piston (the part that goes into the bore first) will interfere with its entrance into the bore. You'll think the piston is oversize and turn it down some more and end up with an undersize piston. DAMHIKT.

When the piston is within 0.010" or so of being on-size, use your chamfering tool to turn a tiny (say 1/32" wide or so) chamfer on the leading edge so there's no burr to interfere with the fitting.


----------



## Foozer (Jun 17, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> Marv: Thank you for the tip on the telescopic gauge. The instructions I had was to compress, insert, and release. What bothered me was that sometimes one of the arms stuck. Your tip takes care of that.



Hated those things, Like Marv said, multiple readings, throw out the high and low and go with whats left.


> Yes, I figured on fitting the piston to the cylinder. (And I should have deliberately checked that the material I have is actually larger than 9/16 before making the cylinder hole rather than relying on memory. It's okay...it's 5/8.) I reamed the cylinder per instructions. The instructions also talk about taking sandpaper and moving it in and out to remove the reamer marks and ensure any machining marks are in the direction of piston travel for less wear and better lubrication. My pinky is too big...not sure how to do that without causing a taper. The hole looks very smooth so maybe leave it?



Lots of info here about "Lapping" I havent had the opportunity to go that route, sounds easy enough and from my earlier "Magic Marker" gauge test what appears to be a smooth surface isnt



> Thanks all. Will it be the piston or the flywheel tonight?



Dart Board answer is Piston, Keep going, your taking a calm approach to this making. I think I need to grab a set of plans and set my own sel to follow them 

Oh ya Mic your new reamer, you wouldn't be the first to get one over sized. Before I retired one task was to drill ream a 1.000" +0.001-0.000 hole for a bearing. All jig set and power fed. New reamers ruined more parts than anything else, over under was the theme. Mic the reamer and it would be exactly 1.000." No good at all, would blow the hole over the +0.001 allowed.

If you haven't done so already , mic your reamers,


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 17, 2009)

Thanks Marv.

I had earlier mentioned that the cylinder was out, so in my head I hadn't even considered it...
In any case, I've editted the post to make it clear and ensure anyone reading that will understand the danger.
I really like the fact that we can edit prior posts (...wished I'd been a bit faster yesterday). Helps minimize the risk that someone reads something and doesn't go further to see someone say "well that's stupid!"

Thanks for the tip on the piston...I had already thought about the edge on the cylinder...I hope it would have occured to me to check the edge of the piston as I worked it.


Foozer...

I think you're right about the piston being next. And thanks about the tip on mic'ing the reamer. First I have to verify the mic.  It's at least 35 years old from the days when I was learning electronics and had to mic resistor leads. It's been banged about quite a bit since then. Saw your post with the magic marker.


----------



## mklotz (Jun 17, 2009)

Re testing micrometers...

From my web page...

If you're going to check a micrometer for accuracy, it's important to use a set of gage blocks that cause the spindle to seat at different orientations so drunken thread errors will be noticed. The preferred set for inch micrometers is: 0.105, 0.210, 0.315, 0.420, 0.500, 0.605, 0.710, 0.815, 0.920, 1.000. For metric micrometers the preferred set is: 3.1, 6.5, 9.7, 12.5, 15.8, 19.0, 21.9, 25.0. 

Ok, that's what the guys in the metrology lab would do. Lots of folks don't have a set of gage blocks or want to spend the money to get a tool that isn't going to be used that often. Personally, if money is tight, I'd get a set of pin gages since they can be used to measure holes as well as calibrating micrometers. The point here is that you want to test the micrometer at several points within its range - not just the single point available with the standard that came with the mike.

This is where belonging to a club or having some seriously mechanical friends can help immensely.  Sharing the use (and maybe cost) of a rarely used tool is really nice.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 17, 2009)

Goodie...everybody's out of the house...time for the piston.

Chucked and ready...






Faced and turned to size. Rats. Two rats. Very carefully snuck up on the size...barely taking anything off...trial fitting the cylinder between cuts. Oops. 1st rat. Slips right on. Hadn't expected that. .005 at a time...why did that round seem to cut so much more off? Was careful to take out backlash...besides...should have been gone at this point anyway. Oh well...nice fit. Maybe I'm lucky. 2nd rat. See that bump about 1/2" in or more? Well don't really care about that...there's a smaller one about 1/4" in. I do care about that.






Well if it's bad it's bad. Continue on. Need the practice with the next several steps anyway.

3 grooves. Used my threading tool. It's a very small touch.






Now for the slitting saw...here's the set up...






Now too happy. Seems to be hanging out there. But that's what the instructions say. There's two parallels under the part with my bit of halloween foam in between.

Lined up the slitting saw. Used paper on top of part and brought the saw down. Kept moving the paper until the saw held it. I wasn't about to turn on the saw.






Took small cuts at slow speed (instructions weren't too clear). 1st time using a slitting saw. Very scary. Hey...seems pretty good.






Now to drill/ream the hole for the pin that will hold the connecting rod.






Disaster.

Broke the drill bit. It sure didn't take much pressure. Or maybe I don't know what much pressure is.

Done for the evening. I'll start the do-over this weekend.

I could maybe salvage this...drill from the other side far enough into the bad side then cut the pin shorter. Nah. I have no idea how far the broken drill bit went.

Let's see if anyone has ideas on how to remove a drill bit. The material I'm drilling is 1018 CRS.

Can't get too upset when I find an excuse for a vodka martini.


----------



## 90LX_Notch (Jun 17, 2009)

Carl,

Sorry to have read about the broken drill bit. What "colorful" words did you use when it happened? I know I probably invented some new ones when that happened to me.

Bob


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 17, 2009)

90LX_Notch  said:
			
		

> Sorry to have read about the broken drill bit. What "colorful" words did you use when it happened? I know I probably invented some new ones when that happened to me.
> Bob



Hi Bob. Surprisingly...it was just an 'aw rats'. I'd already had the disappointment of a poor turning (that was an 'oh crap'). I was pretty happy to be able to be doing anything tonight. And, I was coming off a 'used a slitting saw for the first time and didn't hurt myself'. Now...had it been my second try....well...that kind of language I'll just keep to myself. No sense destroying the image some people have of me. :big:
Thanks. I hope your new words were 'one shots'.


----------



## mklotz (Jun 17, 2009)

Whenever you can (as in this case) drill first, slit/mill/etc. second. (Klotz's second law of machining). Whether you believe it or not, steel is flexible. You want the drill to see solid material all the way to the bottom of the hole. The saw/mill doesn't care much about cutting air.

Were you using a carbide tool to bring the piston to size? Carbide doesn't like to take fine cuts. It tends to "float" (my terminology - not a recognized machining term) until given a big enough bite at which point it takes the full depth cut. HSS doesn't have this annoying property. Grind a good HSS tool with a reasonable (for the job) radius on the tip and a scary sharp edge. Yes, more tool grinding. I know you don't like it but it's essential to the craft and you need to master it.

Don't try to salvage the part with the broken bit. Steel is cheap and it's not worth the frustration. We'll talk about removing broken drills/taps when you break one in a part in which you've got over forty hours invested. 

Terminology:

"the pin that will hold the connecting rod" is called a 'wrist pin' or, in UK-speak, a gudgeon.
Actually, in Europe, a gudgeon is a skinny fish frequently used as bait. Maybe our English cousins can explain how the name got associated with engines.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 17, 2009)

mklotz  said:
			
		

> Whenever you can (as in this case) drill first, slit/mill/etc. second.
> 
> Were you using a carbide tool to bring the piston to size?
> 
> ...



As a matter of fact...when I read the instructions I had thought to myself that I would rather have drilled first and then sawed. I should've asked the question on the forum first...the people here answer so quickly. Not that it would have made any difference in this case. The bit broke before getting to the slit.

Carbide? Uh..yes but now I'm glad I did. It provided the opportunity to learn that tidbit about float and then taking a chunk. (How do you like that for saying...'sure, I meant to do that'?)

So I came across as not liking to grind tool bits huh? Probably right but I'm sure it's temporary. Right now I want to build and I have the silly notion that I should be able to do a beginner's kit with beginner's skills. (I don't mean to put other newbies off...there are beginners kits and there are beginners kits.) I can see how grinding one's own tools will provide flexibility and satisfaction.

No salvaging.

'wrist pin'. Thank you. I always appreciate that kind of stuff.

Thanks Marv.


----------



## mklotz (Jun 17, 2009)

The (turned-down) piston is being held by the unturned stock at a good distance from the point at which the drill enters. I can't tell from the photo but there doesn't appear to be any support under the piston near the edge of the vise. Mayhaps the part pivoted slightly under the downward force of the drill. Little drills don't like that.

Since you don't have collets and a collet block (tell the Frau you need some for your next anniversary) try using a V-block or similar to grip closer to the point of drilling when you make the next one. Even a V-block on the unturned part would be better than what I see in the pictures. As in the bedroom, rigidity is a virtue in the shop.

Use some lubricant when you drill. Little drills like to get swarf-choked and lube will help it to slide off. Withdraw the drill often and toothbrush it while it's spinning to get the plaque off. (Klotz's second law of machining - never throw a toothbrush away.)


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 17, 2009)

mklotz  said:
			
		

> The (turned-down) piston is being held by the unturned stock at a good distance from the point at which the drill enters.



Yes. That bothered me too. Again...I was going by the instructions. This is the nth time that the instructions seem to fly in the face of 'good practice', or at least 'better practice'. But I don't want to be too negative about the kit. When I was starting out...gosh it must be all of four months now!...I had great difficulty finding something I felt I could do. The lesson for me is...seek help. And this forum provides that in abundance.



			
				mklotz  said:
			
		

> As in the bedroom, rigidity is a virtue in the shop.



Yeah..well when you're by yourself...it's a hobby. (She comes home in two months! Boy will I be virtuous!)



			
				mklotz  said:
			
		

> Use some lubricant when you drill.



We're talking machining right? (Well that's just bad. I won't blame a moderator for knocking this out.) Yes...I've used lube every time I drill and ream. But on that note, I came across a reference that indicated it wasn't done for brass. Your thoughts?

I think your remark about swarf has the most merit. I remember thinking at the time...'maybe I should pull up and clear' and then 'snap'. I'm not a fast guy you understand.


----------



## Foozer (Jun 18, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> Disaster.
> 
> Broke the drill bit. It sure didn't take much pressure. Or maybe I don't know what much pressure is.



Yup, piece may have shifted down a tad from the drill pressure. Vise holding part on the larger diameter, little lever action. Did the bit break just as it reached the saw cut, breaking out of the material and suddenly with less resistance your hand pressure causes the bit to cut more material. What gives first, the material being cut or the bit.

I have broken 1/2 inch bits from not watching when they break through the stock and I know better. When getting near the end of stock kinda "Peck at it" so the bit doesn't try to thread its way along that last little bit.

V-Block, I've seen you have one, as Marv suggested try that as the support for the next one. Don't worry, that wont be the last bit broken , don't fret over it either, it happens to everyone. My kid busted a new $40.00 3/4 drill bit a while ago "Gee dad I dont know how it happen"


----------



## mklotz (Jun 18, 2009)

Drilling lubricants - my take...

Brass - none needed but "peck" drill on deeper holes. Use the toothbrush.

Cast iron - contains graphite so lubricant not needed. Use the toothbrush.

Aluminum - kerosene keeps it from sticking to the drill/mill/reamer. Use the toothbrush.

Steel - sulfurated cutting oil. Use the toothbrush.

Copper - (whole) milk. Messy but it works. Copper is a royal ***** to machine so avoid using it whenever possible.

Every machinist has his favorite lubricant - everything from lard oil to bacon fat to ATF.
My ideas are only suggestions. Try different stuff and decide what works best for you. There is no "correct" substance. The important thing is to use something (except on brass and maybe CI).

Go to trade shows like EASTEC or WESTEC. Many vendors pass out small samples of their latest snake oil to try. At our usage scale, you'll get a year's supply for free.


----------



## AlasdairM (Jun 18, 2009)

Fascinating stuff Zee - I admire your attitude and the ability to ask the questions that spring up in my newbie mind!

With regard to Marv's "poser" re UK-speak and "gudgeon" 



			
				mklotz  said:
			
		

> Actually, in Europe, a gudgeon is a skinny fish frequently used as bait. Maybe our English cousins can explain how the name got associated with engines.



the following is lifted straight from the Oxford English Dictionary online -

noun 1 a pivot or spindle on which something swings or rotates. 2 the tubular part of a hinge into which the pin fits. 3 a socket at the stern of a boat, into which the rudder is fitted. 4 a pin holding two blocks of stone together. 

  ORIGIN Old French goujon, from gouge chisel.



Regards, A


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 18, 2009)

Foozer  said:
			
		

> When getting near the end of stock kinda "Peck at it" so the bit doesn't try to thread its way along that last little bit.



Foozer: Thanks for the tip. I would not have thought the bit would 'thread'.



			
				mklotz  said:
			
		

> Brass - none needed but "peck" drill on deeper holes. Use the toothbrush.
> Cast iron - contains graphite so lubricant not needed. Use the toothbrush.
> Copper - (whole) milk. Messy but it works. Copper is a royal ***** to machine so avoid using it whenever possible.



Why is it that I understand cast iron and graphite but the idea of brass and no lubricant bothers me?

But that reminds me...when trying to fit the cylinder to the piston I noticed that the cylinder hole had very nice edges on one end but somewhat ragged on the other. I think the ragged edge was the exit for the drill/reamer. The drill/reamer was new...I might have used the drill 2 or 3 times on cast aluminum. I'm thinking it's the brass being pushed out and torn away. Perhaps I fed the drill too fast? Could it have been caused by the reamer?

Whole milk in this house? She'd kill me.



Alasdair: Thanks. And thanks for the definition. I like that stuff. Some of my home reading includes 'the origin of words'.


----------



## kvom (Jun 18, 2009)

Most metals will burr at the edges of exit holes. You need to get a carbide deburring "pen" that can be run around the edges of holes to remove the burr. The same applies to milled edges (those burrs can cut!). You can use a file or abrasive paper to remove those, but I also like the carbide deburring tool.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 18, 2009)

kvom  said:
			
		

> You need to get a carbide deburring "pen" that can be run around the edges of holes to remove the burr.



Hi kvom.
One of these?







Any words of wisdom regarding use? I seem to do okay when I draw towards me...less effective when moving away. While it does a great job of deburring...it can (I can) dig in and not get a 'smooth' corner. Seems to start and stop. Is it just practice? Or some secret that newbies wouldn't know? How much pressure...that kind of thing.

Thanks.


----------



## vlmarshall (Jun 18, 2009)

The right pressure, angle, and even deburring tip, will make a lot of difference. I usually hold them with my index finger curled around the back side of the tip itself, to help control the blade.

Try holding the handle at different anges to the work, leading the blade at a steeper, or shallower, angle, until you find what works for each particular blade style.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 18, 2009)

When last we left our hero...he was crying uncontrollably. Let us give him another chance before we unceremoniously dump him for another hero.

As previously mentioned...I busted a drill bit in the piston. For those who have kept up with the serial matinee...(how many of you remember that?)...I had purchased additional material in anticipation of such a catastrophe. I've got 12" of 5/8" 1018 CRS ready to give up a piston.

Some of you may know this isn't the first time I have saved myself with additional material. That cylinder wasn't made with the material that came with the kit.

Unfortunately...I failed to provide for the possibility that I'd break a tool. i.e. the drill bit. (What...break a bit?...a tap? That only happens to other people. Not to newbies. Not to me.)

This weekend...we will have a piston. Come [EDIT: showed as 'trash'...I meant the double hockey sticks.] or high water. (Oops...the high water seems to be making progress. It just keeps raining and raining.)


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 18, 2009)

vlmarshall  said:
			
		

> The right pressure, angle, and even deburring tip, will make a lot of difference. I usually hold them with my index finger curled around the back side of the tip itself, to help control the blade.
> 
> Try holding the handle at different anges to the work, leading the blade at a steeper, or shallower, angle, until you find what works for each particular blade style.



I had no idea there were different blade styles. I've only seen the one. Time to do some googling.

Thanks Vernon.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 18, 2009)

So the busted drill bit...

A couple of members mentioned the possibility that the down force caused the piston to move down and that I might consider a V-block. One of the eagle-eyed members pointed out that I have one as he'd seen me use it. (A spy!)

I'm just trying to figure out how...






You'll note that the one end has a larger diameter. So even on the V block, the other end is hanging in the wind. Moving it to the left and cradling just the turned part would work for the wrist pin hole...but it doesn't look like the slitting saw can make it to depth. (Not shown are the 'pusher blocks' that Marv has discussed in order to hold the part with the vise.)

Seems no different than what I had where I used two parallels.

The instructions called for doing what I did...slit and then 'since we're there' drill the hole. I can see how it would help ensure the hole is 90 deg to the slit.

If I go with two separate operations...slit as I did it (forces are to the left...where I should have a vise stop) and then support the part from below and drill...how do I ensure the hole is perpendicular to the slit?

The instructions also called for parting off the excess after this. Why not do it before hand? That would make it sit nicely in the V block. Wouldn't have to part to size...just enough to knock off the bigger diameter?

Suggestions?


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 18, 2009)

Hey Vernon...seems we're playing badminton together but on different courts 

What tells you to use one over another?...uh...the deburring pen blades?


----------



## vlmarshall (Jun 18, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> Hey Vernon...seems we're playing badminton together but on different courts
> What tells you to use one over another?...uh...the deburring pen blades?


Sorry, good point; I'm dragging your thread off-topic with my posts! Briefly, some blades work better in holes than edges, some don't seem to work well anywhere, but I'm a packrat. The deburring tools I have at work have the hollow storage handles loaded with an even larger assortment. ;D


----------



## vlmarshall (Jun 18, 2009)

If I were making that piston, (and didn't have a fourth-axis, "Speedy Spacer", or even collet blocks available ) I'd turn more of the stock down to the finish diameter, and clamp it with your V-block(s).

If you MUST do the part in two mill setups, find something (gauge blocks? Parallels? The slitting saw itself?) to fit in the slot and set on 123 blocks, or gauge blocks, something parallel... or just run an indicator across it, or even in the slot itself, for that matter. There's no single correct way to do anything, I think. ;D


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 18, 2009)

vlmarshall  said:
			
		

> Sorry, good point; I'm dragging your thread off-topic with my posts!



Not at all!

I appreciate all the help and tips.

This thread is all about learning...machining...the forum...the members...how a common interest breaks down all kinds of barriers...

This is just such great fun.


----------



## vlmarshall (Jun 18, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> This is just such great fun.




It IS! I do this stuff for other people all day long, but then come home and stay up late making more metal chips, cruising two forums, and planning what I'm going to do tomorrow! 


(Way Off Topic)
I really enjoy MAKING things, and I don't understand why everyone I work with isn't the same way, and doesn't have little projects of their own, aside from the odd "Deck Umbrella post" or "Lawn Mower Trailer Hitch" or other boring thing.

Worse, they always seem to ask, "Whutcha makin', a bomb?"... like that's the only thing a person could possibly be making on their own. Scary, huh?


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 18, 2009)

I know what you're saying. You start talking about this exciting thing you're doing and you can see their eyes glaze over. Can't blame them though. Just not their interest.

But then there's those (I'm lucky to have a few at work) that are genuinely interested. And that's part of the fun and reward too. And if your family is interested...well...

It's like this forum...it's a good thing we're all separated. Can you imagine us in a room? We'd all be looking looking looking and asking questions and heaping praise...a poor guy wouldn't be able to get to his machines and work!

Okay...so now I'm off topic...better stop before I get all weepy.


----------



## Seanol (Jun 18, 2009)

Zee,
What about chucking in the milling vise and using the v block under the extended stock? You might have to shim it to get to the right height but it would stop the downward pressure from deflecting the stock. You could also use a clamping set up (like a 52 piece set) and with 123 blocks make a support under the extended stock.

Hope that helps,
Sean


----------



## Foozer (Jun 18, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> So the busted drill bit...



How far down in the hole did the bit break off at? Curious



> A couple of members mentioned the possibility that the down force caused the piston to move down and that I might consider a V-block. One of the eagle-eyed members pointed out that I have one as he'd seen me use it. (A spy!)
> 
> I'm just trying to figure out how...



Just a rambling here 

Put the fat lady on a diet, clip her at the knee, cut the extra off, or perhaps turn the stock 180 in your 3 jaw and run the fat end down to match the piston dia. If your 3 jaw is good on the run out might just meet the dia. spot on. worst case the dia are a smidgen off, probably not enough to worry about or nothing that a skinny shim wont cure in the V-Block. Clamp that down in the vise and do both operations.

Ya, what vlmarshall said, "I'd turn more of the stock down to the finish diameter, and clamp it with your V-block(s)."


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 18, 2009)

Hi Sean. Thanks. Your post (as well as others) got me thinking...

What about this...






So the idea is...put the part in the vise on top of the parallels. Slit saw. Force is -x...no -z. (I should install a stop on the -x end to counter the cutting pressure...but I haven't got one or the inclination to make one just yet.)

Then...put that clamping stuff in place...just enough to hold the part up to counter the z force yet enough room to let the drill pass through. Shim to suit.

This way I don't have to remove the part and I can make sure the hole is perpendicular to the slot.

Anything I'm missing?

Couple more questions...is 'chucking in the vise' the same as 'clamping in the vise' or does it really mean put the part in a chuck and then the chuck in the vise?

Also...what is a '52 piece set'? Is that the clamping kit? Like the stuff I show in the pic?



Bob...just saw your post. The bit broke well into the part. No chance of grabbing it and removing it. It's probably only 1/16" or so long but it may as well be 10'.

I thought about turning the part around and turning the other end down...but it seems risky in that I believe I went too far turning it in the first place.

But even if I didn't...in effect it's starting over which I was prepared to do in the first place...and more prepared when I didn't do a satisfactory job turning in the first place.

I have the metal so I'm thinking I'll just start over fresh. I'll keep the part...I have a box of such parts. Memories...and handy fishing weights. Drat...I quit fishing years and years ago.

Thanks Bob. Or is it Robert now. Hey! You're the one that remembered I have a V-block!


----------



## Seanol (Jun 18, 2009)

Zee,
Sorry about the terminology, I have been searching for a how to on turning an MT3 taper without a taper to copy and have "lathe on the brain.

Your setup is what I was thinking and the clamp set I described is what you have shown.

I would drill the hole before machining the slot so the drill doesn't try to force the slot closed, binding the bit. If you have to slot first I would insert a wood wedge, or shim, in the slot so it can't close up on you.

For small drills I peck drill the hole, i.e. small downfeeds and regular withdrawal of the drill bit. Not all the way out but up enough to stop cutting. One way that works well was in Machine Shop Trade Secrets and that was to set your quill stop a small amount below where you start and drill to it. Then spin it down a little more and repeat.

Good luck and I am following with interest,
Sean


----------



## Foozer (Jun 18, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> Hi Sean. Thanks. Your post (as well as others) got me thinking...
> 
> What about this...
> 
> Then...put that clamping stuff in place...just enough to hold the part up to counter the z force yet enough room to let the drill pass through. Shim to suit.



Should work, other end is sitting on bars, free end supported from underneath, sounds like a doable



> Bob...just saw your post. The bit broke well into the part. No chance of grabbing it and removing it. It's probably only 1/16" or so long but it may as well be 10'.


was curious if the bit decided to go south when it broke through into the slot, thats the point I have broken more bits at, the gap in a stack up of parts has claimed more than one bit 



> Thanks Bob. Or is it Robert now. Hey! You're the one that remembered I have a V-block!



Robert, too many Bobs here, OOPS you found the SPY 



Robert


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 19, 2009)

Foozer  said:
			
		

> ...was curious if the bit decided to go south when it broke through into the slot...



Hi Robert,

No, the bit didn't get as far as the slot...at least there's no hole nor dimple. It was a 3/64 (well close to it...I used a #56 I think) and I think I just poked rather than pecked. That is, it broke just when I was thinking I should pull up and let the chips out.

Geesh...I wonder how long the 'newbie-ness' lasts?

Thanks


----------



## Foozer (Jun 19, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> Hi Robert,
> 
> Geesh...I wonder how long the 'newbie-ness' lasts?
> 
> Thanks



Forever, lot of the process,s become easier by virtue of repetition but there is always something challenging over the horizon.


----------



## vlmarshall (Jun 19, 2009)

Y'know, Zeep, I was thinking about your clamping issue, and I thought I'd mention; the moving jaw on a machine vise pivots a bit, and when you're only clamping a part with one side, it'll close further on the empty side, pinching your part at only one point, in this case, the saw-cut end of your round stock. I know you couldn't have clamped that part in the middle of your vise, but a second piece of equal-size material on the opposite end of the jaws will help even them out and hold better.
Maybe you've already heard it, but I wanted to say it anyway.



Night, all. ;D
-Vernon


----------



## Maryak (Jun 19, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> Geesh...I wonder how long the 'newbie-ness' lasts?



Probably forever, well at least in my case, I like to learn something new everyday.


Best Regards
Bob


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 19, 2009)

vlmarshall  said:
			
		

> ...when you're only clamping a part with one side, it'll close further on the empty side, pinching your part at only one point,



Ah you're right Vernon. I'd read that somewhere...maybe here.
Thanks.



"Geesh...I wonder how long the 'newbie-ness' lasts?"

Robert and Bob...I don't mind the challenges and learning everyday...it wouldn't be fun otherwise...just wondering about the day, when the frequency of 'oh...that was dumb', will drop a little...it will won't it? A little?


----------



## kvom (Jun 19, 2009)

Foozer's advice to turn the piece and then clamp in the v-block is the right idea in my opnion. However, it seems that your hole and the slot need to be perpendicular, so if you have to reclamp it may be difficult to get the position exact.

What I would do is the following:

1) Turn stock to finish dimensions

2) Use the clamp that comes with the v-block to clamp the piece into the V. Leave enough stock protruding from the end of the v-block to cut the slot without moving the stock.

3) Clamp the v-block in the vise. It will need to be sitting on parallels high enough to clear the v-block clamp (i.e, the V of the block is vertical). Position it in the vise so that the exposed stock is clear of the end of the vise jaws.

4) Drill the hole. Use cutting fluid and peck to remove the swarf.

5) Cut the slot.

If you do not have the clamp but do have a second v-block then clamp the piece between the two blocks.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 19, 2009)

Turned down to where I was comfortable enough I could sand to fit.
Sand, polish, clean (both piston and cylinder), wait to cool, fitrepeat.
Kept a paper towel under the work to capture grit.







Now for grooves. I dont think placement is critical but want the groove depth and spacing between to be right. Used my threading tool. Started at the right, zerod the crank and moved left 0.29. Then moved in the cross slide until it just touched. Moved in another .005. Then back outmove down 0.09 and do the next groove. Repeat again another 0.09 down.

[This was another mistake I had made on the first part. I had moved in 0.0025 thinking ½ diameter. But the drawing shows 0.005 in from the outside. 0.005 is what I want. I hadnt realized this until I started this operation.]

Touched with scotchbrite to knock off the burrs. Need to remember to be careful and make sure its cleaned up before putting it into cylinder and gouging.

Pretty soon Ill be back to the bit breaking point. If successfulits lunchtimeelse its more waterworks.






Alright then

The slight step on the piston material is because I turned down with one tool (carbide) and then switched to another tool (HSS). The 2nd tool couldnt fit as close to the chuck. I ground the HSS tool per Marvs suggestion. Still not good but at least its more practice. No, I dont know why I switched tools. Practice? Yeahthats itpractice. [EDIT: Not the step out to the unturned diameter...but near there. Between the 'good' end and the significant shoulder.]

Now for the wrist pin. Will it be lunch? Or will our hero have another cry?

The setup






The resultour hero eats!!!

(Missed a pic...drilled, removed the clamps because they're in the way, then slotted.)






Thanks to everyone(Id list them but theres a bunch and Im sure Id miss someonebut you know who they are ( ;D))

Kvomdidnt see your post until I went to look for who to thank. ButI dont see how that helps hold the end up while drilling? AlsoI dont have a vise stop. I worried that the v block clamp wouldnt have enough oomph to keep the part from moving x. Heres a pic of what I think you were describing. (It has a piece of alumbut imagine one end has a bigger diameter that the end of interest.)






A small confession
The instructions called for drilling and reaming the wrist pin hole to 0.0625 (1/16). I didnt have a 3/64 bit so for the first try I used the closest thing I could finda #56. With that gone I didnt have anything else to use. So I used a 1/16 bit. No point reaming. So the question isjust keep going as is? Or loctite the pin into the piston? My problem with the latter is there may be a good chance of loctiting the connecting rod. Dont want to do that. So Im thinking the former.

Remove slit saw now. If its left init will be forgotten and someone (me) will reach by and owie.

Now its time to part it off. First a little cleanup on the wrist pin hole etc.
After cutting in a bit, (and the part is still being held) chamfer the end with a triangle file.

I still find parting to be difficult and scary. Stalled the lathe a couple of times. While the instructions didnt say to do thisI cut down to a diameter where I felt I could relatively easily snap the part off. Then I chucked the part in and carefully knocked the nib off with my facing tool. Didnt want to face because thered be no way I could get it square. The parting did a decent jobso I sandedand to quote Marvvoila






 woohoo1 (The peak)

Do it still fit the cylinder? Of course not.

Bummer(The valley)

 Most likely burrsitll get there.


----------



## 90LX_Notch (Jun 19, 2009)

Congrats Zee. Great job! Way to stay at it. Thm:


----------



## Maryak (Jun 19, 2009)

Zee,

Way to go. :bow: :bow: :bow:

Best Regards
Bob


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 19, 2009)

Thanks 90.
Thanks Bob.

Started the flywheel.

Have to replace the normal 3 jaw chuck jaws with the reversed ones.
Each jaw has a number on it 1,2,3.
Need to replace 1-1, 2-2, and 3-3. Replace them one at a time...else lose my place.

My little trick (yesI have onealthough it might not really belong to me).
I apply pressure to the 3 jaws with one hand and turn the chuck key with the other in the direction of opening the jaws.
As you do that, each jaw will pop in a little. When all three are the same distance from centerthen I reverse direction and close the jaws.

Took the opportunity to clean the jaws and chuck a little while I had it apart.

Chucked the flywheel and tried to make as square as possible. Cant push the flywheel against the jaws since the faces arent square.

Faced one side then flipped over. Now (according to instructions) I can set the flywheel up against the jaws.

Holding the carriage wheelhot chips burning me. So I installed the carriage clamp. Not sure about the lever though. I may remove it and use it as a wrench. There's not much travel so turning it back a quarter turn may not be enough to free the carriage. We'll see.






The flywheel is 2 in diameter. I notice that as I face, the surface looks greatthen when Im about ½ out from centera change occurs and stays that way to center. Two different finishes.

Why?

Got my 6-32 and 8-32 dies today!! Woo hoo.
Ah but there's a flywheel in the lathe.
(A fly in the ointment? Was that bad? That was bad.)

Time to take a break...


----------



## Maryak (Jun 19, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> The flywheel is 2 in diameter. I notice that as I face, the surface looks greatthen when Im about ½ out from centera change occurs and stays that way to center. Two different finishes.
> 
> Why?



Zee,

My take on why different finishes across the face. 

As the tool moves from the outside towards the centre of the job, the cutting speed in fpm is constantly reducing whereas the feed rate remains the same. The finish changes when the tool cannot cope with the reduction in fpm past its' tip at the constant rate of feed. To overcome this, increase the rpm or reduce the rate of feed if the finish is worse.

Best Regards
Bob


----------



## vlmarshall (Jun 19, 2009)

Congrats, Zee, that piston looks great!  :bow: I'm feeling project envy now. ( No fair, yours is bigger'n mine.)


Anyway, Maryak is correct about your facing surface finish. Can you increase spindle speed as you reduce your cutting diameter? Perhaps the flywheel has a few surface features you can cut in three passes, at three suitable speeds; a raised hub, a dished area, and a raised rim?


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 19, 2009)

Maryak  said:
			
		

> As the tool moves from the outside towards the centre of the job, the cutting speed in fpm is constantly reducing whereas the feed rate remains the same. The finish changes when the tool cannot cope with the reduction in fpm past its' tip at the constant rate of feed. To overcome this, increase the rpm or reduce the rate of feed if the finish is worse.



Thanks Bob. I'll give it a try and let everyone know the outcome.

Vernon...Thanks. And you're exactly right...rim, dished area, and hub. We'll see what happens.


----------



## Foozer (Jun 19, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> The resultour hero eats!!!



Ritz Crackers and Hot Mustard, Good to see you conquered that part


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 20, 2009)

Foozer  said:
			
		

> Ritz Crackers and Hot Mustard, Good to see you conquered that part


Thanks Robert.
Hm...what to drink what to drink? Decisions decisions. What's in front?

Here's a pic of the flywheel with the two different surface finishes...






Here's a pic of the flywheel with my trying to increase speed as I faced to center. Thanks Bob. I also tried different feed rates...slowing down as I moved to center. That gave even better results. I think with practice it would be still better.






As you suspected Vernon...rim, dish, hub (boss)...






I used the same approach as on the sides of the cylinder. Plunged a little then cut to the tapers. The question was...how do I know where the edges of the rims/hub/boss are? I didn't think they were critical. I'd very much like to know what others would have done. What I did was dykem the face and scribe where the edges were. Then carefully cut to the edges. After just a couple of passes, the edge helps keep you true. You can even tell by the sound of the tool when it comes up to the edge.

The drawing called for 30 degree angles to the dish. I don't have a cutter for that. I tried the thread tool...but that was pretty much of a disaster as most of you would have known without trying. I had a cutter with near 80 degree (~39 on each side) so I tried that. Set the cross slide at an angle to get the same angle on either side and to ensure the tool holder wouldn't hit the chuck. 30 degree, 38 degree...I thought it would be okay so long as the dish had sufficient valley to look okay. I think it does.

Now needs the hole in the boss for the set screw. The instructions call out an angle vise. I don't have one so this might be another adventure.

Then it's sanding and polishing. For the rim I thought I could mount the flywheel on the crankshaft or something similar and have the lathe chuck hold the crankshaft. Then the rim is completely clear and can be sanded in one go without having to flip. Speeds are low and not much force so should be okay.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 20, 2009)

A hole needs to be drilled into the boss 60 degrees to the bore.

I have no angle vise.

I have memories of Marv telling me to be careful of objects 'squirting out'.

The saw-toothed blocks (what do you call those) from the mill's clamping kit form a 30/60 angle. Hm...

What do you think...


----------



## Foozer (Jun 20, 2009)

> I used the same approach as on the sides of the cylinder. Plunged a little then cut to the tapers. The question was...how do I know where the edges of the rims/hub/boss are?



Keep forgetting how to format the "here" into links 
http://www.homemodelenginemachinist.com/index.php?topic=844.0

shows a method for flywheel recesses. It is a tad on the noisy side. 

Smooth finish on facing, speed and feed. I don't have a powered cross slide so cobbled a hack to do that. Slow 2.5 rpm motor that turns the cross slide. Its such a fine feed that the surface is baby bottom smooth. Takes a good 20 minutes to face a 4 inch piece

http://www.homemodelenginemachinist.com/index.php?topic=2086.0

Some ideas on the subject


----------



## Foozer (Jun 20, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> A hole needs to be drilled into the boss 60 degrees to the bore.
> 
> I have no angle vise.
> 
> ...


Step Blocks i think. Not that i know anything but a piece or two of an old soda can as chaffing material will help reduce the "Vise marks" on your flywheel. After you drill that hole tap it then and there using the same setup to keep the tap straight.

Double shot of tequila should the tap break


----------



## DavesWimshurst (Jun 20, 2009)

Carl,
Looks solid enough but be careful when the drill breaks through at an angle. The drill can break through on one side and pull itself into the hole like a coarse screw breaking the bit. DAMHIK
Dave


----------



## dparker (Jun 20, 2009)

Zee: I am really enjoying your building series posts. I had to learn what little I know by myself and find that I am learning a lot by following your thread. All your questions and all the answers are giving me a lot of hints on how I can do a better job when I am in my shop----Thank You---- for being willing to take the time and effort to ask the questions and show how you did several setups and why some were better than others.
Kudos to you for a very good build series.
don


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 20, 2009)

Robert...thanks for the links...I'll take a look soon. Right now I'm recovering...you'll see why soon. Didn't get to the tap yet so I don't need the tequila remedy. But a remedy will be needed and it will contain some of the same ingredients.

I had wondered about the marks on the back. The idea of a soda can cushion is a good one. I'll remember that.

Dave...are you a fortune teller on the side? Or did you hear the dim scream coming from eastern PA and knew what happened? Stay tuned...

don...thank you very much. If people are enjoying this...and especially if it helps them...then it's very worthwhile. (Someday it will give me an excuse to show off. But it's not today...)

So here we go...

Supposed to use the wiggler and disc point to find the center of the part. But that was with an angle vise in the +/-x direction. Further, the edges of the part are rounded and you would have to move +/-z to ensure you find the outer most edge.

In my setup, the direction is +/-y and the outer most edge of the part is near or under the vise top.

So insteadIll use the edge finder and the inner sides of the vise jaw.

Then, supposed to use the wiggler and needle point to find the edge of the boss (hub).

Then move in 0.13 inch, center drill, drill, spot face, and tap 8-32.

However, the 0.13 inch assumes a 30 degree angle. I cut at ~38 degrees (or is it 52?). I doubt the difference is very significantbut lesson here is to first understand the consequences of any changes I make.

Cedges thread on Getting Centered and Edgey was a big help in learning to use the wiggler. Thanks.

Almost had a disasterusing Marvs equation for determining the drill size needed, I calculated ~0.153. Way different than the charts 0.136. When I plugged in the charts numbers, the DOT was ~118%. Huh? It turns out the chart had the wrong major diameter. 0.184 instead of 0.164. Then I got a DOT of 70%. The chart is in The Home Machinists Handbook. Yet another reason not believe what you read/hearalways check. Should check Marv too.

Center drilled.
Drilled.
Screamed.

That was no 'dink' like when the #56 broke. This was a 'snap' followed by 'wha?' followed by 'nooooooooo!'. I'm sure you heard it. You had to hear it. A neighbor called (kidding).






WEAR GLASSES! This is what flew by...






I have a floor lamp with a magnifying glass...






Even then I wear glasses.

Normally the other lamp is on too. It's off for the pic. Also, the black cord you see on the floor isn't normally there. It's powering the camera.

BUT GOOD NEWS!!! I got the broken bit out! A little push from the hole and a pull from above with pliers.

THE BAD NEWS!!! No drill bit.

THE GOOD NEWS!!! Just yesterday I discovered a hardware store nearby that sells numbered drills.

Thanks everyone for making this such fun.


----------



## Foozer (Jun 20, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> I don't need the tequila remedy.



Drum Roll



> Center drilled.
> Drilled.
> Screamed.



Tequila Time. 

A piece of close fitting stock down the flywheel shaft hole, dab of loctite or other to keep it from moving will help reduce the bits tendency to "pull" when breaking through. 

Bit stuck in hole = Double Shot
Bit removed from hole = Double Shot

Love simple rules


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 20, 2009)

Foozer  said:
			
		

> A piece of close fitting stock down the flywheel shaft hole, dab of loctite or other to keep it from moving will help reduce the bits tendency to "pull" when breaking through.



Sounds good.

Any chance the stock would get stuck? Not from the loctite but from material from the part your drilling through?

Any chance the stock would gouge the hole when it's removed?

I agree with the rules...or rather...rule. Just not the tequila. But to each their own. ;D


----------



## Foozer (Jun 20, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> Sounds good.
> 
> Any chance the stock would get stuck? Not from the loctite but from material from the part your drilling through?
> 
> ...



Long as the stock is softer, shouldn't be a problem. Its just to provide some resistance for the bit as it breaks thru, also reduces the amount of displaced metal "volcano,burrs, PIA to clean up" on the exit.

Time to grab my bottle and head to the barn, see what wonderful boo boos I can do today


----------



## vlmarshall (Jun 20, 2009)

What a great thread, it's brightened my day.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 20, 2009)

Thanks Vernon!

Success! I mean...flywheel success! Still have a way to go on the engine.

Got the last #29 drill bit from the hardware store.

I had removed the flywheel so now the question was...how to put it back the way it was? I put the drill in by hand backwards and used the part sticking out to eyeball vertical. Nothing else had changed so my hope was that this would be good enough.

Very very carefully...very very slowly...(with more TP nearby) I drilled through to the center. Yippee.

Spot drilled with a 3/16 end mill (according to instructions). Then tapped. This would be the last operation. Oh the anxiety. Success! Does the set screw fit? Yes!!!

By the way, the instructions do not tell you how to determine what drill bit to use for what tap. This forum is an invaluable resource.

Polished the sides then used a 7/32 center punch as a shaft and set screwed the flywheel on that. Spun at low speed and sanded polished the outer rim.

Pretty happy. I need a lot more practice and learning on sanding/polishing but I'm pretty happy.







Another learning...I shouldn't have tightened the vise as tight as I did. You can see where the metal squeezed out a little on the sides of the rims. It'll take practice to know how much is enough.

Also...I wonder if I should have at least taken a couple of passes turning the diameter down. It would mean flipping the part around and trying to meet the same diameter from the other side. But I think the finish would have been better. Still...pretty happy.

Lots yet to do. Columns, inlet and exhaust pipes, holes to mount the cylinder cap...and sanding sanding sanding (it's the only method to hide my boo-boos, no painting on this project).

Thanks again everyone. There's a little bit of you in this build (but not the mistakes - those are all mine baby). ;D


----------



## Foozer (Jun 20, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> Thanks Vernon!
> 
> Success! I mean...flywheel success! Still have a way to go on the engine.



No double shot for you 



> Also...I wonder if I should have at least taken a couple of passes turning the diameter down. It would mean flipping the part around and trying to meet the same diameter from the other side. But I think the finish would have been better. Still...pretty happy.



Can mount flywheel on a mandrel (think that's the term) and run between centers, more accurate than the 3-jaw. Also allows for the slight skimming of the surfaces to remove any wobble, not that such a thing as wobble happens 

Small pic as example, dog is missing from mandrel, just an example shot


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 20, 2009)

Foozer  said:
			
		

> No double shot for you



Bummer.

Thanks for the pic.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 20, 2009)

Well this might be (will be) a longish post.

As you all may have noticed...I've had the opportunity to do nothing but machining for the last two days. No one in the house...I'm all alone - aside from the great people on this forum. (Great so long as they don't deny me my little rewards - eh Robert?)

Time to finish the cylinder

A port hole on the side, 6 holes on one end for the cap, and 4 holes on the other end for the columns.

The drawing shows TAP DRILL - .38 DEEP and then #8-32 THRU ONE WALL. The wall is only about .21 thick so I dont understand why the .38 DEEP. Is it a standard way of calling out for TAP DRILL operations?

The drawing also calls for a 7/32 (0.22) spotting operation (end mill?) which I dont have. Ill use 0.25. Operation calls to mill until a full circle is shown  acts as a face for the port pipe to seat against. Too far and you take away thread.

First the port hole. Its used as a reference to locate all the other holes. Otherwise I might (and I would) drill a cap mounting hole through the port hole.






The cylinders ends dont straddle the empty area in the middle of the vise so it has to be mounted to one side. As Vernon suggestedI have another piece on the other side of the vise in order to apply even pressure.

This is the second time a failed first part has come in handy (and another reason to keep a shelf of shame).

And now we see another consequence of changing something with insufficient understanding of the consequences. The 0.25 end mill is too big.

[EDIT: Also, I should have probably done the spot first then drilled the hole. If anything it might have pointed out if something walked on me. If you notice, the spot is offset from the hole.]






I trial fitted the cap. Nice! No play at all and the outer edge is even with the cylinders outer wall. Ill probably keep it mounted when I get to finishing the cylinders wall.

Question: I was hoping to simply sand the outer wall to finish. If I wanted to do some light turning to get rid of deeper blemishesany reason why I couldnt do that with the cap mounted so both would be turned to same diameter? (Foo. I probably should have done this before I did the port hole in the side.)

Now for the holes used to hold the cylinder cap. Instructions are a bit confusing here. First operation calls for setting the cylinder cap in place and doing a center drill (while holding it with a finger!). Then remove the cap and drill/tap the 1st hole in the cylinder. Then change to the clearance bit for the cap, bring the head down (no power) until the bit comes into contact with the thread and set the z stop. Put the cap on and drill through it (holding it down with an eraser!) Screw the cap down and do the other holes.

1)	Im not sure theres room to tap without moving the table.
2)	Instructions didnt say to do all the cylinder holes first.
3)	Why bother with the 1st center drill on the cap?

Well well see.

First thing is to find the center of the cylinder. Should already have the y direction. So use the edge finder inside the hole or outside? Ill go for outsideit should act more like a straight edge to the finder than the inside. (Yet another opportunity for better ideas from others.)

Actuallymaybe this is bettermeasure diameter with caliper, take half and add 0.1 from the edge finder. Then Im coming in from just one direction.

Question: Supposed to drill 0.38 deep. I thought for best accuracy, all operations are done at one place before moving. The operation is center drill, then drill (and if I had the proper equipmenttap). How do you ensure the same depth for each operation? I was going to use the Z stopbut if Im changing the drill bit out every timeId have to change the Z stop every time.

Wish I had some digital read-outs on the table. Thats a mod thats coming.

I still dont understand the instructions. Going to do the cylinder holes first. Then Ill do the cap. I can still use the cylinder as a reference for setting the z stop before doing the cap. For the cylinder holes, Ill use a digital caliper to see how far Im drilling. I do this by setting the caliper on top of column and measure to the top of the head. Zero it and watch while I slowly drill down.

Im thinking backlash is going to add some inaccuracy but I dont think these holes require it. StillI need to learn better practice.

So stay tuned for an edit if/when someone points out my evil ways.

I also need a better way to tap. Doing it all manually right now. Theres tap handles suited for the mill/lathe that help keep things square.

Drilled the six holes. Able to tap without moving anything.






Moved to one of the holes. 
Put in the clearance bit for the cap.
Set the z stop.
Then CAREFULLY held the cap on and drill a hole.
It helps that the cap has a shoulder and seats on the cylinder. You just have to press down. (I still dont like thiscertainly not as a beginners kit.)
[EDIT: If you're uncomfortable with the instructions...find a better way. Having my finger there really bothered me...and as expected...a couple of fine members pointed this out to me. Had I thought more about what I was trying to do and how I might do it...I might have come up with this to do the first hole...]






[EDIT: I am slowly learning that the clamping kit is your friend.]

Then screwed it down.






Then did the other holes.






Now for the bottom 4 holes. No pic. It's just the same stuff. But the bolt is on the bottom now and sticking out to the right.

Sanded the cylinder and cleaned it up.

The cylinder and cap...






Where I'm at now...






Still have the columns, input/exhaust ports, and cleaning up of the connecting rod.

The rotary valve still needs some grooves for which I have to use the rotary table. I'm saving that bit for last...never used the table.

And then there's the problem of the piston. It don't fit. It fit when I turned it down and put the cylinder on it. But it don't fit now. Well we'll see.

Again...thanks to everyone for their advice and tips. Thanks to everyone for reading this beginner's trials and tribulations.

I look forward to the advice and/or remonstrations for this post.

Ha! Foozer. I started celebrating when I started this post. Now I've celebrated enough that I have to stop. :big:


----------



## 90LX_Notch (Jun 20, 2009)

Carl,

Doesn't your Z fine feed collar have a scale on it? Should be .050 or .062 per rev like your x and y collars. One way to do the depth for multiple holes with Z stop would be as follows:

1) Zero the tool on the part.
2) Back the Z axis to clear the part.
3) Move X or Y to clear the part.
4) Use the fine feed on Z and adjust Z (tool) to the required depth.
5) Set the Z Stop.
6) Back the Z axis to clear the part.
7) Set X, Y to hole location and drill until Z comes in contact with the stop.
8) Repeat steps 6&7 for each hole.

You can also set your longitudinal travel for your lathe in the same manner using a stop if the compound is set parallel to the ways.
If this is unclear let me know and I'll take some pictures and post them up.

Bob


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 21, 2009)

90LX_Notch  said:
			
		

> Doesn't your Z fine feed collar have a scale on it? Should be .050 or .062 per rev like your x and y collars. One way to do the depth for multiple holes with Z stop would be as follows:
> 
> 1) Zero the tool on the part.
> 2) Back the Z axis to clear the part.
> ...



Yes! But doesn't that assume I'm not changing the tool and therefore not the Z? That was my problem.

If I center drilled all spots and then drilled all spots...I think I could have done what you suggested (if I'm understanding it right).

But if I'm changing the tool every time...that is...center drill, change to drill, drill, then change to center drill...my Z value would be different every time.

Also, you mentioned 'compound' which I understand on the lathe...but not the mill.

So yes, I'm confused and pics would help.

Oh and you're right...the scale is 62.5 for x, y, and z. I'd like to know why. It's inconvenient on one hand, but being a multiple of 1/16 is handy on the other hand.

Thanks Bob.


----------



## Foozer (Jun 21, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> Well this might be (will be) a longish post.
> 
> As you all may have noticed...I've had the opportunity to do nothing but machining for the last two days. No one in the house...I'm all alone - aside from the great people on this forum. (Great so long as they don't deny me my little rewards - eh Robert?)



Rewards? Plural 1 double = 3 singles Yup, my mechanics math is correct



> And now we see another consequence of changing something with insufficient understanding of the consequences. The 0.25 end mill is too big.



Looks like its a tad off center, could be the light, or the double's are blurring my vision 



> Now for the holes used to hold the cylinder cap. Instructions are a bit confusing here. First operation calls for setting the cylinder cap in place and doing a center drill (while holding it with a finger!). Then remove the cap and drill/tap the 1st hole in the cylinder. Then change to the clearance bit for the cap, bring the head down (no power) until the bit comes into contact with the thread and set the z stop. Put the cap on and drill through it (holding it down with an eraser!) Screw the cap down and do the other holes.



I'd use something other than a finger, center drill, odds are it wont catch and spin the part, but having a finger that close to what could be a sudden rotating object is not the best habit to develop. It hurts a lot more when you quit squeezing the finger with one hand muttering those colorful words for the neighbors to hear and take a look at the source of blood flow. And when the bride just has to tell everyone about her hubby's brilliance . . . 



> The operation is center drill, then drill (and if I had the proper equipmenttap). How do you ensure the same depth for each operation? I was going to use the Z stopbut if Im changing the drill bit out every timeId have to change the Z stop every time.



Piece of tape around the bit? works so-so. I've made little drill stops to fit the bit. Have to be diligent to clear the chips as the stop tends to act as a dam.



> I also need a better way to tap. Doing it all manually right now. Theres tap handles suited for the mill/lathe that help keep things square.



just search the board for the subject, lots of methods. Got some real fancy tapping stands shown herein. 



> Ha! Foozer. I started celebrating when I started this post. Now I've celebrated enough that I have to stop. :big:



Monterrey Jack and Cabernet? 

Robert


----------



## kvom (Jun 21, 2009)

> If I center drilled all spots and then drilled all spots



That's the best way.

The instructions are one way of ensuring that the holes in the cap and cylinder match up. Since the clearance hole in the cap and the tapped hole in the cylinder are different sizes, you need to ensure that the cylinder holes aren't too large. I think I would have drilled the cap holes first with the tap drill through to the cylinder, and then enlarged the cap holes separately.

If you have a DRO or accurate dials and edgefinding it's certainly fairly easy to position and drill the cylinder and cap separately.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 21, 2009)

Foozer  said:
			
		

> Looks like its a tad off center, could be the light, or the double's are blurring my vision
> 
> I'd use something other than a finger...
> 
> Monterrey Jack and Cabernet?



Off center...you're right. I hadn't moved anything...I just swapped the drill chuck for a collet and end mill. So I was a bit surprised. Any thoughts? I don't believe I bumped the table and the offset seems to be more than backlash could explain.

Yes...the finger use really bothered me. I struggled between trying to follow the instructions (other beginners will be building this) and doing what I (a newbie) thought better.

Jack and Cabernet? Great idea but I only have the crackers right now.



			
				kvom  said:
			
		

> I think I would have drilled the cap holes first with the tap drill through to the cylinder, and then enlarged the cap holes separately.
> 
> If you have a DRO or accurate dials and edgefinding it's certainly fairly easy to position and drill the cylinder and cap separately.



Yeah I thought about doing it separately. Accuracy wasn't critical (at least for the cap). But my question here is how to hold the cap? When I did the cylinder cap for my first model, the vise crushed the sides in a little.

With everyone's comments and the light of day...I think what I should have done is used the clamping kit to clamp the cap down onto the cylinder...do one hole...and install the screw...then remove the clamp and do the rest.

Here's a mock-up...






Thanks Robert and kvom.

I'm going to edit the post.


----------



## Foozer (Jun 21, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> Off center...you're right. I hadn't moved anything...I just swapped the drill chuck for a collet and end mill. So I was a bit surprised. Any thoughts? I don't believe I bumped the table and the offset seems to be more than backlash could explain.
> 
> Yes...the finger use really bothered me. I struggled between trying to follow the instructions (other beginners will be building this) and doing what I (a newbie) thought better.
> 
> ...



Zee, dont take anything I say as if I'm ragging on ya. I have a Devils Advocate nature and tend to forget some of the social rules.

I get split on edits, but I'm fairly even across the board on visual, audio, and tactile interpretations. A photo of a "wrong" way is often as valuable as the "right" way. Other side is not everyone reads the whole verse and plunges headlong into disaster. With the center drill, hold part down with finger, I personally, in an act of shear genius would do have done it that way, but raise up a storm if I saw my kids doing it. 

A piloted counter bore HERE keeps the cut on center, but again that's more tooling, more $$$ and at some point, unless you got the winning Lotto numbers, becomes just plain silly for a hobby. End mill should be able to cut the recess, a 2 flute I think is the type, have only seen that you have 4-flute versions. I think and someone chim in that has more experience on the subject, I would of cut the recess first and then the bolt hole. Five it a shot on your scrap piece. Looks like a 0.015 thou offset so something walked, Looks good to me.

Crackers? as in Going!


Dont see any pieces of soda can 'tween that nice cylinder and vise jaw, irony of the edit


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 21, 2009)

Foozer  said:
			
		

> Zee, dont take anything I say as if I'm ragging on ya.



Huh? I thought everything you said... ;D
No not at all. I appreciate everything you've said. Thanks.

As for 'the finger'...I mentioned it earlier...poor practice should be pointed out...not just for the 'practitioner' but for any newbie who might be reading this.

Yes, I should've done the spot first. Instructions seemed to indicate otherwise but I think you're right.

I do have 2 fluted end mills. I haven't learned yet when to use one over the other. I've been a 'loyal' (read 'biggish spender') at LMS so you might know the ones. The boxed set of 4 and 2 fluted end mills from 3/16 to 3/4.

I'm thinking some one's going to tell me to use 2 flute for plunge cuts?

Dad blast it...soda can pieces. Of course. No soda cans here but if I can't come up with an obvious alternative...I don't deserve being here. ;D

Thanks Robert.


----------



## mklotz (Jun 21, 2009)

I'm beginning to think you should throw the instructions away. Hold it with your finger? Holy &@#$ ! Who wrote these instructions? A hand surgeon trying to drum up business?

Here's a better approach - an expansion on what Kvom has already advised.

Superglue (cyanoacrylate) the cap to the cylinder. (Degrease mating surfaces with acetone or carburetor cleaner before gluing.)

Drill and tap all six holes right through the cap. Tap each hole immediately after drilling it. (Make one of the guided tap holders I've shown to do this job, perhaps.)

Remove cap (soak in acetone or heat with torch until glue breaks down)

Open up holes in cap to appropriate clearance size. Hold the (too small to hand-hold) cap by clamping it to a piece of scrap while you drill the clearance. (A clearance hole size isn't critical and the drill will want to follow the existing hole anyway.)

If you do a good job laying out the six holes, the cap should fit in all orientations, especially so given the "wiggle room" afforded by the clearance holes. Nevertheless, you may want to make an inconspicuous witness mark on the cap and cylinder before separating them so you can get them back together in the as-drilled orientation.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 21, 2009)

mklotz  said:
			
		

> Hold it with your finger? Holy &@#$ !
> 
> you may want to make an inconspicuous witness mark on the cap and cylinder before separating them so you can get them back together in the as-drilled orientation.



Aw man...I was hoping you wouldn't catch me. 
The post has been suitably (I hope) edited.

Great tip on the witness mark. Thanks.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 21, 2009)

I had started the hose couplings and exhaust pipe early on but when I realized the die I had was not appropriate I went on to other things.

As other members had pointed out (and some internet research also indicates), the die I had (hex shaped) is intended for re-threading and not for cutting new thread.

I got a round adjustable die and tried it on the piece I had started. What a difference! So much easier. I finished one hose coupling and the exhaust pipe. The exhaust pipe only differs in diameter (a bit larger) and a slightly larger hole on one end for half the length.

So now for the other two hose couplings (all 3 are supposed to be identical)

The general idea is to make two parts out of one piece. Turn each end down to size for a little over length. They dont have to meet in the middle as the piece is somewhat longer and will be parted at that point. Then use a small parting blade (the one I made out of a hack saw) to cut a groove for a thread relief. Turn the end down for the thread. Cut the thread. Turn the part around and do the other end. Bore the hole through. Then part one piece off and trim the other to size.

When I tried my new die on the first pieceI hadnt parted it yet. So it was nearly 1.25 long. I fitted it to the port block to see how the thread did. It fit well but I noticed it was at a very slight angle. (Itll look better when its only half an inch.) But the lesson here is that, as careful as I was to tap perpendicular to the blockI was off. I need to get/make tapping tools to ensure the tools are held square.

Chucked and ready






Turned, grooved, and turned the end down further. Then a small chamfer in preparation for threading.

Made use of the carriage stop and getting comfortable with zeroing the dials and using them. But Im getting suspicious that somethings off. Crank distance doesnt seem to agree with caliper. (So I do a lot of stopping and measuring.) This is another area to work on after the project.






Threaded. I turn the switch off, speed control to 0, and lock the emergency switch down to ensure the lathe wont accidently turn on. I use one hand on the chuck to keep it from turning and the other hand turns the die holder. Then turned the thread around and threaded up to the shoulder.










Then turned the part around and chucked holding onto the length that I just did. Repeated the turning/grooving/threading operation.

Then drilled it. Peck peck peck






Parted the one off then trimmed the other to size.

Here they arethe one on the right is the exhaust port.






Now I'll just duck under here and wait for what comes... :hDe:


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 21, 2009)

Now for the columns.
That's right...still putting off grooving the rotary valve (and there's that pesky non-fitting piston too).

I have one piece of hex brass and need to make 4 columns. Each end of a column has a 6-32 thread on it, one a bit longer than the other.

I'm thinking this...

Chuck the long piece leaving enough out to make the thread.
Turn to size and thread the end.
Move the piece out enough to part off the column and part it.
Repeat for the next two columns.
On the last piece, after threading the end, turn it around and trim to size.
Now I have 4 columns each with one end threaded.
Now turn and thread the other end of each column.

Questions...

1) Any concern about the 8" or so turning round inside the head?
2) If I actually get all four columns to be the same length (shoulder to shoulder) I'll be greatly surprised. Any suggestions to improve my chance of success?
3) Any other suggestions? (Just trying to avoid getting caught again. ;D)

Thanks.


----------



## mklotz (Jun 21, 2009)

> But the lesson here is that, as careful as I was to tap perpendicular to the blockI was off. I need to get/make tapping tools to ensure the tools are held square.



Yes, you do. (I hate saying I told you so.) Ensure that they're piloted too. In addition to keeping things straight, you'll break far fewer taps.

I know that, when just starting out, it's very frustrating to have to interrupt the project to make needed tooling. However, it needs to be done. Part of the zen is to learn to obtain satisfaction from using the tool to get something "just right". The real satisfaction comes later when you reuse the tool and pat yourself on the back for taking the time to make it so it's available whenever you need it. Besides, it'll take you only a couple of hours to make a guided tap holder.

Even by reversing the die, it's often impossible to get a complete thread right up to a shoulder using a die. The coupling/exhaust fittings may not seat fully on the shoulder when you screw them into their mating holes. Take your hacksaw blade cutoff bit and cut away the thread right next to the shoulder down to the minor diameter of the thread. Voila, (not viola, the musical instrument - the constant misspelling of this word is one of my personal annoyances and) they'll seat flat on the shoulder.


----------



## vlmarshall (Jun 21, 2009)

I really like watching your progress Zee. Like everyone else, I've lost my respect for the instructions you're following with that finger hold-down trick. 

Still, it's great to see your engine gaining pieces, and you not losing any.


Now, for turning the columns to equal length... could you face them to length in the mill first? Alternately, what about making a part stop for your lathe that locks inside the spindle tube?
Something like one of these:
http://www.sherline.com/tip9.htm
http://www.jfberns.com/spindls.htm
...or the one at the bottom of this page, that fits from the chuck end:
http://stevewithnell.wordpress.com/


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 21, 2009)

mklotz  said:
			
		

> I hate saying I told you so.



'told you so' is very acceptable on this thread.



			
				mklotz  said:
			
		

> The real satisfaction comes later when you reuse the tool and pat yourself on the back for taking the time to make it so it's available whenever you need it.



You're absolutely right. I'm done tapping on this project...but the lesson is learned.



			
				mklotz  said:
			
		

> The coupling/exhaust fittings may not seat fully on the shoulder when you screw them into their mating holes. Take your hacksaw blade cutoff bit and cut away the thread right next to the shoulder down to the minor diameter of the thread.



Great tip. Thanks. There was a thread relief built into the drawings for the coupling/exhaust. We'll see if it was enough. But the columns didn't show that for the end that goes into the cylinders. I'm just starting on them so the tip is very timely. The other end of the columns first goes through the base before a nut is placed so I don't think it's needed.

You mentioned 'ensuring the tools are piloted'. What does that mean? Is that where the end opposite to the business end has a hole or dimple so it can be held by a center or such?

Thanks Marv.


----------



## mklotz (Jun 21, 2009)

Don't worry about the 8" in the headstock. The spindle bore will constrain it from whipping. Long pieces sticking out the back of the bore are a concern but you don't have that problem.

I've done this job on a similar engine and it was finicky getting the lengths the same.
Were I to redo it today, here's how I would sort it out.

Cut four pieces of the hex stock to close to shoulder-to-shoulder length.

Stick all four in the milling machine and gang mill them to the required s-to-s length, thus ensuring they're all the same length. (Having them all the same is more important than their precise length in this application.)

Drill and tap each end 6-32. Loctite lengths of 6-32 threaded rod into each end to form studs. This has the further benefit that the rods are now threaded all the way to the shoulder (if that matters in the design - probably doesn't in your case.)

Of course, my approach is completely different from what the instructions say but you know already what I think of the instructions - and it ain't pretty.


----------



## mklotz (Jun 21, 2009)

Re: piloted tap holders...

http://www.homemodelenginemachinist.com/index.php?topic=464.msg2829#msg2829


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 21, 2009)

vlmarshall  said:
			
		

> lost my respect for the instructions you're following with that finger hold-down trick.
> 
> Now, for turning the columns to equal length... could you face them to length in the mill first?
> 
> Alternately, what about making a part stop for your lathe that locks inside the spindle tube?



Hi Vernon...thanks.

To be fair...the instructions called for using the finger and doing a center drill on the cap. So not a lot of pressure from the tool. Then using an eraser to hold it down for drilling. Still...I just don't like having a piece of me that close to something turning...I try to always turn off the machine before coming near it even if I'm not going to touch something. Can't always...but should always minimize the risk.

The problem with facing them first is that, while the overall length would be fine, it doesn't address the distance from shoulder to shoulder. I'd have to rely on accurately turning to distance each end's thread.

I like the idea of a spindle stop for the lathe. Like you suggest, it's good for making duplicate pieces and/or accurate length. But I haven't gotten my head around the two threaded ends.

Right now I'm left with doing the best I can...then line them up and see what's what. I can adjust longish pieces by using a thin parting tool on the end that goes through the base. That way, any thread that's damaged won't matter since they're not used. Not real comfortable with this idea but it's all I've got at the moment.

At least it's 'safe' 

Thanks again.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 21, 2009)

mklotz  said:
			
		

> Cut four pieces of the hex stock to close to shoulder-to-shoulder length.
> Stick all four in the milling machine and gang mill them to the required s-to-s length...
> Drill and tap each end 6-32. Loctite lengths of 6-32 threaded rod into each end to form studs.



Great idea. That would be the solution.

As much as people may not like this...I'm going ahead with the instructions. In part because I think there may be more opportunity for practice in getting this to work. You mentioned 'finicky' and sometimes that's a cue to 'work at it'. I'm worried that this may be taken as a sign of laziness - but I think the difference in amount of work is negligible.

Thanks Marv.

Oh and thanks for the link. I'll be sure to look.


----------



## Foozer (Jun 21, 2009)

ZEE Just a quick shot of a piloted counter bore, done on the drill press, not on stock center 







This was a 1/2 inch counter bore with a 1/8 inch pilot. Now if I needed to I could open the pilot hole up to what ever tap hole was required. But I just happened to have this from days ago. If I needed to do a lot of this type of process or had the less of a laid back personality I'd buy the thing, otherwise an end mill suffices.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 21, 2009)

Thanks Robert. Oh and I meant 'connecting rod' - I typed 'control rod'. I'm getting to that age where various parts of me don't listen anymore.

Four columns half done.
But having only done one end is not half done.
Need to be sure the shoulder-to-shoulder length is the same.
And, the other thread needs to go to the shoulder. Per Marvs suggestion, the shoulder will be cleaned up.






Sorry for the quality...if I'm going to keep taking pictures...I'm going to have to get a lighting system.

You can see why theres five pieces there. Another part for the 'shelf of shame'. The one on the right is a boo-boo (a bit short). I measure twiceI really do. But I must be one those 3 times the charm kind of people. Measure and measure often.

It may be hard to tell, but I forgot to chamfer the 3 threads on the left. The next one was chamfered. There was no problem threading any of thembut I think the 4th looks better.

Now for the fun part. I hope I don't end up adding even more to the 'shelf' and thinking..."yep...should've done the studs". Well...worse thing should be knocking off the threads and doing what Marv suggested. Have to be careful though. To some extent, the columns set the distance between the cylinder and the crankshaft.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 21, 2009)

Nope. Not going to do it. I keep looking at the things and the idea of getting all four to the exact same length just doesn't seem possible...at least not for me. Maybe it's not critical for this engine...but I'm going to go for Marv's suggestion.

I'll try to keep what I have so far though. Maybe use the threaded ends as a way to line up the other ends.


----------



## b.lindsey (Jun 21, 2009)

I have used the stud method numerous times but rather than using threaded rod which must be cut and ends cleaned up, i use appropriately sized set screws of the length needed. Maybe that's too easy but it makes for a nice end result.

Bill


----------



## mklotz (Jun 21, 2009)

In the time it took me to eat lunch and type the below, I see things have changed again.
Ah, well, in the words of Emily Latella,

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3FnpaWQJO0[/ame]



> As much as people may not like this...I'm going ahead with the instructions. In part because I think there may be more opportunity for practice in getting this to work. You mentioned 'finicky' and sometimes that's a cue to 'work at it'. I'm worried that this may be taken as a sign of laziness - but I think the difference in amount of work is negligible.



Since this engine is a learning experience, I can appreciate your intention to stick with the instructions. (At the least, you'll learn why many of us, most especially me, don't follow instructions.) 

I hate the process of cutting two or more rods to the same length in the lathe. After removing a rod to measure it, one needs to index the tool tip to the face of the stock after re-inserting it. It's extremely easy to touch off the tool against the stock face with a bit too much pressure and end up cutting the thing too short. For the columns, a difference of a few thou probably won't matter much but for something more demanding I always try to find an alternate approach.

A collet stop in a 5C collet can work in theory but I have had disappointing results in the past (probably my own fault). But you don't have collets yet (I think). On some 3jaw chucks, it's possible to fit a backstop but, even if possible, that's more tool making to draw you away from the project at hand and it may not work with your chuck.

Perhaps you could make a dummy collet. Scrap drilled with a blind hole just big enough to admit the hex bar and fitted with a setscrew to lock stock in place. After machining one end of each hex, mount scrap piece in chuck. The hex could then be inserted repeatedly to a fixed depth. The scrap piece would have to remain in the chuck until all four hexes were machined.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 21, 2009)

Bill...I think the set screw idea is great. I wished I had some. Yet another reason for me to start a collection of various screws, bolts, etc. I have basically nothing. I've seen the good tips of getting only one or two sizes and cutting as needed. Thanks.

Marv...that was great! Good laugh. :big:

So here's the result...






I found some 6-32s in an old junk drawer. I couldn't believe my luck. Right length too...just knocked off the head with a hacksaw.

Ganged the columns and used the mill to bring all to length. Got what I wanted but I think the setup could have been better. (No pic...there many better ways and no one would learn from this...except more about me. )

Held the column in a V-block and center drilled, drilled, and tapped. Had I the proper tapping tools...I would have done this on the lathe.

Still, they came out good. Now for sanding and polishing. Then it's the long awaited rotary valve......and non-fitting piston.

Rats. Daughter and son-in-law came over. Something about Father's Day.


----------



## Foozer (Jun 21, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> Marv...that was great! Good laugh. :big:


Was good, saved it for future use



> So here's the result...
> 
> Ganged the columns and used the mill to bring all to length. Got what I wanted but I think the setup could have been better. (No pic...there many better ways and no one would learn from this...except more about me. )



something like this, vertical is the end Mill cutter 







> Rats. Daughter and son-in-law came over. Something about Father's Day.



They bring Cheese cake?


----------



## 90LX_Notch (Jun 21, 2009)

Carl,

Great progress! 

 In regards to questions about my post: I'm charging the batteries for the camera and will take some pics. Afterall, a picture is worth 1000 words. No compound on the mill. I was noting that the same method works for the lathe if the compound is set parallel to the ways. Hopefully, I will be able to convey all of this with some pictures. Do you want me to post here or start a new thread?

Bob


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 21, 2009)

Foozer  said:
			
		

> They bring Cheese cake?



Are you kidding? They're too young. I have to wait a bit before they realize just how great a guy I am and deserving of goodies. They have no idea I would even want goodies. Idiots. Well HE is anyway. :big: My own Dad is still laughing and enjoying the revenge.

As for the gang...not what I did...wished I'd had the patience to wait.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 21, 2009)

90LX_Notch  said:
			
		

> Hopefully, I will be able to convey all of this with some pictures. Do you want me to post here or start a new thread?



Thanks Bob. No problem posting here - it's a learning thread.

Thanks again.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 21, 2009)

:rant: Time for a bit of a rant.
The instructions say 'they break down the process into the smallest step-by-step procedures to insure [ensure] your success'.
Baloney.
So to mount the rotary table...you use a 'custom holder' for the indicator.
Any mention of how to make that 'custom holder'? Nooooooo.
And then it says..."however, since these instructions are written for the person who is new to the Machinist Hobby, I'll show you how to mount your chuck with the hold down set." Oh har de har har.
This is advertised as a beginner's kit. BEGINNER's. There shouldn't be custom tools in here. If the goal is for the beginner to experience success so that they'll continue...then they ought to make it possible without a lot of surprises. At the least a 'what you need' section should have been included.
 :rant: :rant: :rant: and :rant:
Now...having gotten that off my chest...
I need to figure out how to mount the indicator so I can locate the center of the rotary table.
And then I'll mount the chuck.
And then I'll discover there's no room.
And then there'll be another rant.
So the lesson for the newbie thinking about getting into this hobby...either choose a project that's been recommended by someone (you trust) that will meet your needs or...be like me...dive in and take whatever comes your way...it's great fun. ;D


----------



## Foozer (Jun 22, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> :rant: Time for a bit of a rant.



Rx

Take two and call in the morning


----------



## vlmarshall (Jun 22, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> :rant: Time for a bit of a rant.
> ...
> So to mount the rotary table...you use a 'custom holder' for the indicator.
> Any mention of how to make that 'custom holder'? Nooooooo.
> ...



Haha, what kind of indicator do you have? There are many types of mounts available, and even more possibilities for fabrication.
Mounting the chuck, chucking on a piece of ground round stock, or gauge pin, or endmill shank, isn't so bad, what am I missing? I'm not picking on ya for ranting. Didn't your indicator come with ANY means of mounting it? Maybe I can send ya something to mount it with... and Guinness. ;D


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 22, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> Marv...that was great! Good laugh.
> 
> Ganged the columns and used the mill to bring all to length. Got what I wanted but I think the setup could have been better. (No pic...there many better ways and no one would learn from this...except more about me.)



Marv...your post deserved more than just a 'that was great'. Thanks for taking the time and effort.

Robert...Your suggestion is certainly better than what I'd done.

What I poorly did was...drilled four holes in a rectangular pattern in a length of 1x1/16 aluminum. Vertically inserted the columns such that two where against each other, some space, and then the other two against each other. Placed in a vise with V-blocks as pusher blocks. Seated them as the vise was closed. Used a square to keep vertical. Milled the tops. If you hadn't gasped yet...you should have. Took too many fingers to keep things aligned.

Unless you gang only against the flats, I believe you'd have problems with one column acting like a wedge. Maybe a simple vise stop (there's that tool again) would have been better.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 22, 2009)

Foozer  said:
			
		

> Rx
> Take two and call in the morning



Here's my call...feeling great! Got anything for a headache?



			
				vlmarshall  said:
			
		

> Maybe I can send ya something to mount it with... and Guinness.



Thanks Vernon. I appreciate the offer. (Very difficult to turn down, what with the Guinness - especially as you didn't specify quantity - I have visions of cases).

The only things the indicator came with was a small diameter and larger diameter 1/2" long round thingie that slides onto a dovetail on the indicator. I don't have the bit that goes from that to the chuck or collet. That was the 'custom holder' I was ranting about.

Time to fabricate a holder. While I think on that...I'll tackle the piston problem.

When the piston was made, I test fitted with the cylinder until it slipped on. Now it doesn't. It may be a small burr due to the chamfering that was done after fitting. So I'll try dealing with that first. Otherwise (or in addition to), I'll have to figure out some way to lap the cylinder's bore. The bore is 9/16". Maybe take a 9/16" rod of something and use as a lapper? What kind of material? What kind of polish?

While I think on that...I'll polish up the columns and connecting rod.


----------



## 90LX_Notch (Jun 22, 2009)

Carl,

I am going to assume you have a dial test indicator as opposed to a plain indicator because you mentioned the dove tails. I am also assuming that your RT has a center hole that is MT1 or MT2. In the attached pics for illustration purposes only, I put a "boo boo" of a JT33 taper project of mine in the vise. The Test Indicator post is mounted directly into a collet or a drill chuck. The post is located at the far end of the dove tail to get a bigger swept diameter. The Test Indicator's tip is moved to an appropriate angle to allow for the JT33 diameter to be swept. Gently rotate the spindle by hand and adjust x,y until the indicator reads 0 for the entire 360 degree rotation. What I did was to adjust at 90 degree intervals by moving half the indicated distance in the opposite direction and resetting 0 on the test indicator by rotating it's dial.

Note: Watch the movement of the test indicator needle and don't allow it reach it's limit of travel. If necessary make adjustments before 90 degrees of rotation. Also do a "dry run" with the indicator tip above the bore and rotate it 360, adjust x, y to get it concentric by eye before moving the tip into the bore. 

I hope this makes sense. The kids are be very needy as I type this and distracting me like you wouldn't believe.

Bob


----------



## Foozer (Jun 22, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> Here's my call...feeling great! Got anything for a headache?



Fab'ng the indicator holder ought to cure that, using it will surely solve it.  
	

	
	
		
		

		
			







> When the piston was made, I test fitted with the cylinder until it slipped on. Now it doesn't. It may be a small burr due to the chamfering that was done after fitting. So I'll try dealing with that first. Otherwise (or in addition to), I'll have to figure out some way to lap the cylinder's bore. The bore is 9/16". Maybe take a 9/16" rod of something and use as a lapper? What kind of material? What kind of polish?



Look HERE good stuff on it. Probably just a small burr, little wipe with some 400 grit paper to smooth it out.


----------



## mklotz (Jun 22, 2009)

For future reference...

The penultimate indicator holder for the mill is the "Zero-Set"

http://www.use-enco.com/CGI/INSRIT?PARTPG=INLMKD&PMPXNO=12387423&PMAKA=326-1124

IMNSHO it's the absolute best design since it's rigid, capable of holding the DTI in several ways, has a wide effective range and has a fine adjustment so you don't have to futz around tweaking the indicator stem to get the needle in the middle of the range.

Unfortunately, at ~$200 a pop, they're out of the "sensible" range for most folks, myself included. The options are to:

make your own - a lot of time for a seldom-used tool and an unrealistic task for a novice
just starting out

buy a cheap Chinese knock-off and fine tune it - what I did and works well. Not quite as smooth as the Cadillac model but that doesn't matter since the adjustment remains stationary after setting. It is, after all, merely a dongle to hold a DTI in a given location relative to the mill axis.

I can't immediately find a URL for the knock-off style but look around. They're out there.

Now, back to centering the RT.

First thing, as always in this trade, think about how accurately it must be centered for the job at hand. Will being off a couple of thou really matter? There are an awful lot of jobs out there where it won't. So let's consider some techniques that produce reasonable accuracy and don't even require a DTI.

Make a plug to fit the hole in your table. If the hole has a Morse taper, cut the tang end of an old MT drill or, alternately, buy an MT arbor - they're cheap. If the hole is cylindrical, simply turn a close-fitting plug. Drill and ream this plug 1/4" so a hardened alignment pin will fit into it. At the bottom of this hole drill and tap for something like an 8-32 screw. (More on the reason for this later.) Pop this plug in the RT hole.

Now, some ways to use this...

1. Put a 1/4" pin in the MM chuck/collet and fiddle the RT position until the pin slides freely into the hole in the plug.

2. Put your double-ended edge finder in the chuck/collet and seat the pointy end in the hole in the plug. Fiddle the RT until you can't feel any offset in the edge finder (note: mill not powered while doing this). Your fingers are incredibly sensitive and can detect much less than a thou offset. You can also use this option to fine tune a rough alignment done with #!.

3. Use the edge finder in conventional manner to perform the Osborne maneuver on the outer surface of the plug. (You can read about this maneuver on my website - OSBORNE.ZIP)

I prefer option #2 but any of these will work without a DTI. (I've made a lot of model engine parts on the RT and hardly ever used a DTI to align it.)

Nuances...

If the end of your plug sits below the RT table surface as mine does (rules out option #3), then you can make various custom pins to fit in the 1/4" hole and drop your part (that has a hole at the desired center of rotation) on the pin for automatic part centering on the table. The plug stays in place while you machine the part.

If your plug must be removed after centering and before mounting part to be machined, it may be difficult to get it out of the RT hole. (Especially so if the plug sits below flush as mine does.) This is where that 8-32 thread at the bottom of the hole becomes important. Fashion a miniature slide hammer from a length of 8-32 threaded rod and a chunk of heavyish scrap, thread into plug and pop that baby out without having to access the bottom of the table.

OK, maybe this is a bit more than Carl (or many of you other reader/lurkers) wanted to know (I've been accused more than once of providing "drinking from a fire hose" answers) but, remember that I'm trying to turn this thread into a sort of mini-course for the novice trying to build his first engine and learning stuff that will help him down the line even if he doesn't do it all right now. Remember, too much information is like too much cheese cake - it's just not possible.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 22, 2009)

Somehow lost my reply...I'll try again...



			
				90LX_Notch  said:
			
		

> I am going to assume you have a dial test indicator as opposed to a plain indicator because you mentioned the dove tails. I am also assuming that your RT has a center hole that is MT1 or MT2...I put a "boo boo" of a JT33 taper project of mine in the vise.



Thanks Bob. Your assumptions are correct. But I don't have a 'boo-boo' JT33 project. Or a successful one for that matter. 

Thanks for including the instructions on how to use.



			
				Foozer  said:
			
		

> Look HERE



Thanks Robert. Looks very helpful. I'll spend more time on it this evening.



			
				mklotz  said:
			
		

> First thing, as always in this trade, think about how accurately it must be centered for the job at hand. Will being off a couple of thou really matter?
> 
> but, remember that I'm trying to turn this thread into a sort of mini-course for the novice trying to build his first engine and learning stuff that will help him down the line even if he doesn't do it all right now.



Thanks Marv. That's basically the conflict. There's getting the job done and there's using a method as a learning opportunity. I'm trying to hold for the learning but I have a deadline coming up. The deadline is self-imposed...I hope to show the engine off when some family come to visit in a week or two. (Most of the family can't believe I'm doing this. I don't understand why.) In any case...I'll think about the ideas you and the others have provided and see what I can do.

Thanks all.


----------



## Foozer (Jun 22, 2009)

mklotz  said:
			
		

> For future reference...
> 
> penultimate



A word I had to look up, way out of my english language range



I know its ZEE's thread but have a relevant query

Ok, I get the plug and pin route for the close enough projects and the indicate till true for those needing spot on. I'm lathe bound, no mill, have a little 3 inch RT mounted on a cross slide attachment. Turned a plug for the RT center hole that has a small 60 degree nose on it. I set a clean turned round between these centers (lathe spindle dead center and RT plug center) and indicate with the magnetic holder off that to establish the RT position. Seems to work, does it sound right?

Thanks



> Remember, too much information is like too much cheese cake - it's just not possible.



'pecialy when its swathed with whipped cream and strawberries


----------



## mklotz (Jun 22, 2009)

Found it!

This old thread from the HSM site...

http://bbs.homeshopmachinist.net/showthread.php?t=25151&highlight=zeroit1

shows my knock-off Zero-Set as well as a particularly simple way to mount a DTI for easy adjustability.


----------



## mklotz (Jun 22, 2009)

> Ok, I get the plug and pin route for the close enough projects and the indicate till true for those needing spot on. I'm lathe bound, no mill, have a little 3 inch RT mounted on a cross slide attachment. Turned a plug for the RT center hole that has a small 60 degree nose on it. I set a clean turned round between these centers (lathe spindle dead center and RT plug center) and indicate with the magnetic holder off that to establish the RT position. Seems to work, does it sound right?



"Seems to work" and you're asking me if it sounds right? I think you've answered your own question. 

In effect, what you're doing is setting up a pump center which is my preferred way of centering stuff in the 4jaw.


----------



## 90LX_Notch (Jun 22, 2009)

Carl,

I didn't convey this well. You would indicate the MT bore of your RT. Then the mill would be centered to the axis of the RT as 0,0. I don't have a RT yet. I used the JT33 because it was the closest thing to a MT1 or MT2 dia. I could throw in the mill for illustration purposes. The idea was to show that for the required MT dia., your DTI should be able to cover it without having to make a custom holder.  

I think it took me less then 10 mins. to throw the JT33 in the vice, mount the indicator in the mill, set the idicator and zero the mill to the center axis of the JT33.

Bob


----------



## DavesWimshurst (Jun 22, 2009)

Carl,
If a burr on the piston is the problem you need to remove it. If you make the cylinder larger to accommodate the burr it will be loose when the burr wears off during the first minutes of running. Lap the cylinder if it's not smooth enough but then you'll probably need to make a new bigger piston. 

Filing
I would chuck it in the lathe and using a fine file gently file off the burr. This can be dangerous so I usually do it left handed holding the handle of the file in my left hand and the tip in my right so I don't work over the chuck. Don't wear rings, watches, long sleeves, jewelry etc when doing this!

Sanding
Perhaps safer would be to use something like an emery board stolen from your wife. You could make one from a popsicle stick with fine wet-dry paper glued on it. You can also use a strip of fine wet paper backed up by your 6" pocket rule.

Time travel
When parting off a part like your piston I like to start the parting cut then back the tool out, chamfer, deburr with fine file then finish the parting off action. Voila no burrs!

Whatever you do be careful when using hand tools near a spinning chuck. It is best to use a collet chuck for this if you have one. 

Dave


----------



## Foozer (Jun 22, 2009)

mklotz  said:
			
		

> "Seems to work" and you're asking me if it sounds right? I think you've answered your own question.
> 
> In effect, what you're doing is setting up a pump center which is my preferred way of centering stuff in the 4jaw.



Thanks, sometimes I fall into the "Hitting a stick of dynamite with a hammer seems to work" mindset, but sounding right. One Darwin award I could do without


----------



## Seanol (Jun 22, 2009)

Zee,
Going back to the columns in the vise:

When you have them flat to flat they may not all be the same diameter. If you put a piece of construction paper on the movable jaw it will take up any small irregularity you may have. If not, try doubling it. If they stick up high in the vise you can clam 2 parallels or 123 blocks on either side to help "extend" the jaws of your vise. It will still be unstable and small cuts will be needed but the blocks will be against the vise top and will help the tendency for deflection.

Kantwist clamps are the best for this as they pull up very square: http://www.use-enco.com/CGI/INSRIT?PARTPG=INSRAR2&PMAKA=505-4544&PMPXNO=945684

Looking good, can't wait till you are spinning it!

Sean


----------



## Foozer (Jun 22, 2009)

mklotz  said:
			
		

> Found it!
> 
> This old thread from the HSM site...
> 
> ...



That is just too clever. Love them elegant solutions, Now if the came in DayGlow Pink I'd never loose it.


----------



## mklotz (Jun 22, 2009)

All good advice, Dave. Especially the part about using a collet chuck.

Some further safety notes on filing/sanding in the lathe.

Never, not ever, use a file that doesn't have a handle. If it catches on a chuck jaw, that sharp file tang will be driven into your hand or your abdomen. Neither is a good idea.

Even if you're right-handed, hold the file handle in your left hand and the file tip in your right to avoid arching your left arm over the spinning chuck.

Even safer is run the lathe in reverse (turning CW when looking at the chuck) and file from back to front. This way, if the chuck catches the file it will throw it away from you rather than towards you. 

Never use a long strip of emery cloth to sand/polish. It's too easy for it double-wind around the work, trap a finger, and suck you in. Use a short (3-4") piece and hold it gingerly with your fingertips so that, if it snags, it will be snatched from your grasp.

Never wrap the emery cloth around your finger or hand while sanding.

Never, no never, attempt to sand the inside of a bore. Your fingers do not have universal joints where they join the hand.


----------



## mklotz (Jun 22, 2009)

Thoughts on gang-milling four hex rods...

Cylindrical scrap piece shorter than the rods. Drill (axial) hole large enough to just accept all four rods. Drill and tap radial hole in scrap to accept jam screw. Insert rods (with their ends protruding from both ends of the scrap piece) and tighten jam screw until all four rods are rigidly retained in scrap piece. Test retention with finger pressure.

Grasp in mill vise so ends of rods are accessible to end mill. Some packing pieces may be necessary to achieve this. Mill one end of rods to make even, mill other end to even, measure, mill to target size.

or, in the lathe...

Grasp scrap in lathe 3jaw. Machine rod ends. Reverse scrap in chuck, take evening cut, remove and measure rod length, reinsert in lathe and trim to target size.


----------



## Foozer (Jun 22, 2009)

mklotz  said:
			
		

> Thoughts on gang-milling four hex rods...
> 
> Cylindrical scrap piece shorter than the rods. Drill (axial) hole large enough to just accept all four rods. Drill and tap radial hole in scrap to accept jam screw. Insert rods (with their ends protruding from both ends of the scrap piece) and tighten jam screw until all four rods are rigidly retained in scrap piece. Test retention with finger pressure.
> 
> ...



Like this perhaps or at least thats what i get from the description, piece of scrap round as chaffing material. Set assembly in vise and trim ends to size, right? right!


----------



## vlmarshall (Jun 22, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> Thanks Vernon. I appreciate the offer. (Very difficult to turn down, what with the Guinness - especially as you didn't specify quantity - I have visions of cases).


Oops! That double-space before "Guinness" was supposed to contain an "A". I don't share Guinness well. ;D 



			
				Foozer  said:
			
		

> Like this perhaps or at least thats what i get from the description, piece of scrap round as chaffing material. Set assembly in vise and trim ends to size, right? right!


Ha, I've gotta try that. I've learned something today! 



			
				mklotz  said:
			
		

> Never use a long strip of emery cloth to sand/polish. It's too easy for it double-wind around the work, trap a finger, and suck you in.



Too true. This one almost got me years ago, with a strip of cloth-backed emery paper. Not fun. Listen to Marv.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 22, 2009)

I was only gone a few hours!!! (I forgot to log off when I went back to work...apologies to anyone who thought I was online.)

Marv: The dial indicator on a magnet...cool. I'll remember that.

Bob (90XL_Notch): You conveyed well. But no...the circle described by the indicator when in the collet is much smaller than the circle in the RT. I have to offset it somehow (like Marv's cool idea) or mount a smaller circle in the RT.

One thing I said in my reply (that didn't get posted) was...the instructions said to center the rotary table and then mount the 3-jaw chuck. I'm wondering why I couldn't mount the 3-jaw chuck and then center on with that. Not that it does me much good.

Dave: Yes. I was going to work the piston first. It fit once...it should again.

Dave and Marv: Regarding the file...I'm either surprised or not understanding...(first...I think Marv's suggestion to run in reverse is the way to go...but in any case)...I had been filing with my left hand holding the 'tip' (the business end) and my right hand holding the handle. Chuck turning CCW seen from the tailstock. That way, my right hand (being over the work) was further away and if things got away...it wouldn't be the handle coming at me. Further, I run slow. The tip of my file is square and at least 1/2" wide. If I run in reverse (CW from tailstock) I would hold the handle with my left hand and the tip with my right. Wouldn't I? Seems like better control to have more resistance against the more substantial tip.

Dave: When I parted...I cut part way in then used a triangular file to chamfer the piston's edge. Then finished the part.

Dave: Why is it better to use a collet chuck?

Sean: Thanks. And thanks for the tip and the link.

Back to the file (the abrasive type)...I've been doing it that way because I read it in a book.

LESSON: Just because a book (or instruction manual) tells you to do it one way...doesn't mean it's the best or the safest. Get as much input as you can and use common sense.

Oh and Marv...we can say what we want about 'instruction books'...but isn't what everyone is suggesting an 'instruction'. It's not the book...it's the quality of advice and that goes for people too. Luckily...this forum provides very good quality.

Marv and Robert: Good tip on ganging. Especially if I'd been doing both ends. Seems a bit more difficult if one end was already done and I was trying to match.

Marv: I must admit I'm guilty of long strips of emery cloth. Thank you.

Never stick a finger in a hole. Goes for wet willies too.

Vernon: Too late with the 'a Guinness'...you've set expectations. I consider the offer to still be open. 

Thanks all.

Showed some of the parts off at work today. They were suitably impressed. Course. they don't know the stories behind them like you all do. Ah...it's only a wart if you know about it.


----------



## shred (Jun 22, 2009)

I'd be real tempted to set a stop on the mill vice and cut the parts to length one at a time versus ganging them.

Touch off the stop, drive the X-axis over the length needed and cut the first one. Wind the Y-axis back, drop the next one in the stop and crank over on Y again... rinse, repeat.


----------



## vlmarshall (Jun 22, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> Vernon: Too late with the 'a Guinness'...you've set expectations. I consider the offer to still be open.



Print Attached File. Cut. Fold. Glue.

I made that a few years ago as a joke... finally it comes in handy. ;D 

View attachment GuinnessExtraStoutBottle4.pdf


----------



## kvom (Jun 22, 2009)

shred  said:
			
		

> I'd be real tempted to set a stop on the mill vice and cut the parts to length one at a time versus ganging them.
> 
> Touch off the stop, drive the X-axis over the length needed and cut the first one. Wind the Y-axis back, drop the next one in the stop and crank over on Y again... rinse, repeat.



That's how I would do it on a mill. For the columns on my current build I measured each with the height gauge and faced to length on the lathe, mainly because I needed to drill and tap the ends afterwards.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 22, 2009)

shred  said:
			
		

> I'd be real tempted to set a stop on the mill vice and cut the parts to length one at a time versus ganging them.



More than tempted. A vise stop is on my "need to purchase, make, or obtain by any legal (he says) means)" list of tools. It may be the one tool that has come up more often in this thread than any other.

Thanks shred.

Just saw your post kvom. My columns already had one end threaded. Would that have made a difference to your approach? Did you mark the columns with the height gauge? (How?)

Vernon...? [EDIT: Oh...I saw the attachment after I posted. That's great. Can I use it? I have a certain son-in-law...I see the opportunity for some fun. But it don't let you off...everyone on this forum knows what you meant. ;D]


----------



## 90LX_Notch (Jun 22, 2009)

Carl,

I looked at LMS's Rotatry Tables and the 4 and 6 inch RTs are listed as having a MT2 taper. The "A" dia. for a MT2 female is .700. "A" being the large end dia. I used my DTI to sweep a 1.000 id for a sleeve bearing. (See attached photos.) This was done by setting stem on the dovetail at the base of the DTI and adjusting the angle of the Contact (stylus, tip, etc). How big is the hole in your RT or am I really missing something? I would think this should work if you are just looking to center the Spindle to the RT. 

Note: On an AGD style DTI you can change the contact point angle in relationship to the indicator centerline. (See last two attached photos.) It's basically a friction clutch. The contact can be pushed beyond the end of the range of travel of the DTI. Just put it where you want it. 

A 1.000 dia. would probably be the max dia. that could be done this way for obvious reasons. In this setup, the closer the contact angle comes to 90 degrees, the working plane changes from that of vertical to horizontal. 

Bob


----------



## mklotz (Jun 22, 2009)

Answering some questions...

Foozer,

Yeah, like that. Maybe the push rod you show isn't needed if the rods are in a 1-2-1 configuration and the screw bears on the top '1'. Needs must try it and see.

Interesting math problem there. How does one compute the equivalent of the outer Soddy circle for four equal tangent hexagons?


Carl,

When you mount a 3jaw to a RT (not my cup of tea), the chuck axis has to be aligned to the RT axis and both must be aligned to the mill axis.

If you mount the RT and get it aligned, then, when you mount the chuck to the RT, you can use the RT to spin the chuck against a DTI mounted in the mill collet.

Try it both ways and you'll see what I mean.

Filing on the lathe...

The danger is that you'll file too close to the spinning chuck jaws, a jaw catches the tip of the file and propels it back toward you (lathe turning CCW). If that happens, an unhandled file tang can be driven into your hand or body. Also, your left hand/arm is dangerously close to the spinning chuck jaws. One absent-minded jerk (of the body) due to a sonic boom, earthquake, doorbell, whatever and you can get way too familiar with your machinery or end up as a Nicholson shish-ka-bob.

If you're right-handed:

lathe CCW - handle in LH, tip in RH
lathe CW - handle in RH, tip in LH

It would be nice if somebody would make a file that cuts on the pull stroke for the latter case above.

With a collet chuck, there are no chuck jaws. In addition to improved safety, collets:

are more accurate
grip without marring
grip better
can hold parts that can't be conveniently held in a 3jaw
can be used to advantage in the mill vise with collet blocks.

Well, I wouldn't exactly call what we're doing instruction since it's mostly reactive (you do something - we tell you it's wrong  rather than actually telling you what to do a priori) but your point is still well taken. There's a whole lot of folks out there who have the "hold my beer and watch this" approach to every problem and you don't want to be getting your guidance from them. Evaluating the teacher is an important part of all education.

Attaching emery strips to a wooden batten, as was suggested earlier, is a good idea but I find it hard to follow small, intricate contours that way so I usually hand hold the strip. However, I do always hold it in such a way that I can't hang on to it if the machine decides to grab it.

Emery works better for finishing if you put a drop or two of oil on it.

Scotchbrite works well too although it produces a slightly more matte finish (that polishes nicely with a stiched buff). Note that many different grades of Scotchbrite are available. The finest (usually white in color) does really nice work.

Rockler used to sell a package containing a graduated series of abrasive mounted on small foam pads for the woodworking guys. They do a fine job of blinging if one is into that - I'm not, I like the industrial look.

Looks like they still sell them...

http://www.rockler.com/product.cfm?page=11435

Their sanding cords are handy too...

http://www.rockler.com/product.cfm?page=9926

Spend some time in the local Rockler store if there's one close. They have a number of things that guys like us can use. Sign up with them and they'll send you lots of discount coupons. All my diamond sharpening blocks/stones were bought with discount coupons.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 22, 2009)

90LX_Notch  said:
			
		

> Note: On an AGD style DTI you can change the contact point angle in relationship to the indicator centerline. (See last two attached photos.) It's basically a friction clutch. The contact can be pushed beyond the end of the range of travel of the DTI. Just put it where you want it.



That's it! Thanks Bob. It seemed fragile and I didn't want to mess with it much. I think I can do this now. Thanks!

AGD? American Gage Design Specification?
DTI. Dial Test Indicator.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 22, 2009)

mklotz  said:
			
		

> It would be nice if somebody would make a file that cuts on the pull stroke for the latter case above.



If my assumption is right...this was a nice way of saying..."Zee, the file cuts in one direction...and it's not the direction you're holding the file in." To expose my ignorance further (remember...I just deal with 1's and 0's and the occasional electron), do files cut in one direction, both, better in one than the other?



			
				mklotz  said:
			
		

> Well, I wouldn't exactly call what we're doing instruction since it's mostly reactive (you do something - we tell you it's wrong  rather than actually telling you what to do a priori)



Before the fact...after the fact...I'll take good instruction any way I can.



			
				mklotz  said:
			
		

> Emery works better for finishing if you put a drop or two of oil on it.



Maybe someone will add to the 'True Grit' post and explain why. (Cause I don't know.)




			
				mklotz  said:
			
		

> Scotchbrite works well too although it produces a slightly more matte finish (that polishes nicely with a stiched buff). Note that many different grades of Scotchbrite are available. The finest (usually white in color) does really nice work.



I had no idea there was anything other than green! Are there other colors besides white and green?

The last several posts by everyone have been awesome. It's going to be real interesting to go through this thread and collect learnings.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 22, 2009)

My mistake. The instructions do call for additional measuring once the chuck is in place. But I think it's because they're using a custom holder to mount the 3-jaw chuck onto the rotary table (RT). There's also a couple of custom spacers. Remember my rant? Sigh.

I think I'm in luck though. I have a mounting kit! Aha!

But things get real complicated now. It doesn't help that the text's references to the figures don't match. Or that at the bottom of page 28...there's this...

"There's no need for"

For what? What don't I need? There's a page 29...but it has a new paragraph. Argh!

Instructions call for a dowel pin in the spindle, lower the spindle until the pin is in the chuck, then tighten the chuck. Spin chuck until you get a certain orientation then lock the chuck down. Remove pin from spindle and replace with DTI. Put pin back in the chuck as shown in figure 87 (which is figure 95). That sounds pretty strange to me. The idea then is to loosen the chuck and while using the DTI against the pin, bump the chuck to get it into position. Okay...that part makes sense...if I hadn't mounted the chuck on the 'purchased' mounting plate. I doubt the chuck will move at all. Maybe I could get a couple thou if I remove the nuts holding the chuck to the plate and use clamps instead.

Luckily, this thread is more about learning than getting an engine to run. (Don't no one say it. I will. If I don't get the engine to run...what did I learn?)

This is a little too much like the video that came with the Model #2A kit I bought. Towards the end of the project, the author did a "let's hurry up and get this done".

Sorry...I don't mean to keep going at this manual...it just really steams me to think how this can easily produce an unsatisfactory result for the beginner and so raises the chance that they'll just give up.

(Not me though! I'm already prepared to ruin this rotary valve and have another go. I may blubber for a while...but it's good for you. I mean me.)

The next part calls for putting the pin back in the spindle and moving it to some location. They are kind enough to specify the y distance. But they don't mention the x distance...and I believe that is going to depend on the diameter of the slitting saw.

Oh but first, put a longish screw (they don't say how long) in the detail to act as a reference.

Drat. I have to go find a screw. At least it's not custom. [EDIT: Wait. Wait. I can make one! Sheesh Zee. Wait. Wait. I already have one! The columns!] [EDIT number 2: The columns are a #6. The hole is a #8. Idiot. I'm going to bed.]

Here's a pic of what I have so far. Woopee. Just a 3-jaw chuck on an RT on a mill.






Do you see those clamps on top of the RT that clamp the turntable? You may need to remove them. The T-nuts used to clamp the chuck down interfere as you turn the table.


----------



## DavesWimshurst (Jun 22, 2009)

Carl,
"Do you see those clamps on top of the RT that clamp the turntable? You may need to remove them. The T-nuts used to clamp the chuck down interfere as you turn the table."
Now you make special T-nuts to hold the chuck to the R-table with the bolt hole enough offcenter to clear. Its so much fun to make tools to make tools to make tools...
Dave


----------



## 90LX_Notch (Jun 22, 2009)

Carl,

Correct on AGD- American Gage Design. I know it applies to Dial Indicators and now that I am thinking about it I forget if it applies to Dial Test Indicators. That may be an international standard. I forget, it's been awhile

Congrats on getting the RT mounted. Unless things are way off isn't there enough play in the plate, tee nuts and Allen screws to get the chuck concentric to the RT? One idea would be to open up the holes in the plate or slot it. The more experienced people can way in on that idea.

As far as the protruding tee nuts: I'd shorten them or make offset ones as Dave said.

There's always the make a fixture route. 

Bob


----------



## Seanol (Jun 23, 2009)

Zee,
What worked well for me for centering has been a co-axial indicator.
http://www.use-enco.com/CGI/INPDFF?PMPAGE=384&PARTPG=INLMK3&PMITEM=327-0059

It is the one on the bottom. I also use it for centering the tailstock in the lathe. You can usually pick one up from a vendor like CDCO or Shars for alot less and they help quite a bit. I am saving up for a good test indicator so this was an interim solution that has worked out quite well.

I have the same rotary table. You need to be careful when you turn the table. If you take a big cut and turn counterclockwise (looking down at the table from the front) you are climb milling and if you haven't set your backlash on the tight sided it can dig into your work. Make sure you only go counterclockwise after the cut is done to smooth up the sides.

Good luck,
Sean


----------



## b.lindsey (Jun 23, 2009)

For any that may be looking for a coax indicator...the SPI version is currently on sale at MSC for $119 (normally $186).

http://metalworking.mscdirect.com/CGI/NNPDFF?PMCTLG=37&PMPAGE=1 

The above link is for the Mid-June sales flyer. See page 24. I picked one up a few weeks back and was pleased with the quality.

Regards,
Bill


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 23, 2009)

DavesWimshurst  said:
			
		

> Its so much fun to make tools to make tools to make tools...



We now return to the rant.  Thanks Dave.



			
				90LX_Notch  said:
			
		

> I forget if it applies to Dial Test Indicators.
> 
> Unless things are way off isn't there enough play in the plate, tee nuts and Allen screws to get the chuck concentric to the RT?



DTI too. When I googled AGD...the wiki specifically mentioned DTI. That's why I included it in my reply.

I haven't measured yet to see if the chuck is concentric (enough) or not.

Thanks Bob.



			
				Seanol  said:
			
		

> I have the same rotary table. You need to be careful when you turn the table. If you take a big cut and turn counterclockwise (looking down at the table from the front) you are climb milling and if you haven't set your backlash on the tight sided it can dig into your work. Make sure you only go counterclockwise after the cut is done to smooth up the sides.



Thanks very much for the tip Sean. It would not have occurred to me.

Sean and Bill: Thanks for the links on the coax indicator.

Dave and Bob: As for the clamps...why not just remove them? I can't use them anyway since I'll be turning the table during the cut. By the way, not all of the nuts interfered. One thing I had not checked is to see if they would clear by rotating them. (i.e. the hole for the stud may not be centered - it barely interfered).


----------



## kvom (Jun 23, 2009)

> Just saw your post kvom. My columns already had one end threaded. Would that have made a difference to your approach? Did you mark the columns with the height gauge? (How?)



I didn't mark the columns. After determining the length and computing how much to remove, I chucked the column on the lathe and touched the lathe tool off to the face. Then I moved the carriage the appropriate amount. I have a DRO on the lathe, which makes this easy. However, a dial indicator attached to the bed with a magnet works just as well.


----------



## mklotz (Jun 23, 2009)

Answering some questions, etc.

Files are not abrading tools like sandpaper. They have distinct teeth so they're cutting tools. On all the files I've seen those teeth point away from the handle end of the file so the file cuts when you push it forward,

When using a file you lift it off the work on the return stroke - don't just drag it back. Dragging it back dulls the teeth prematurely.

Keep the file clean. I don't care for file cards but many do. Use a piece of scrap copper or brass to push parallel to the teeth. The soft metal will quickly wear to have "teeth" that are a perfect match to the file teeth pitch and will efficiently push the swarf out of the gullets between the file teeth.

Chalking the file before use (especially on soft metals) will help to avoid "pinning". Pins are the tiny bits of swarf that stick persistently in the gullets and prevent the teeth from cutting as intended. They can also mark the work and prevent you from getting a smooth finish.

There are special lathe files made for... wait for it... use on the lathe. They're single cut and have a steeper angle of the teeth relative to the file axis. This provides more of a shearing action. Buy them if you see them offered cheaply at a swap meet - they're good tools - but don't sweat it, ordinary files used judiciously are perfectly acceptable. 

Scotchbrite comes in (at least) maroon, green, grey, white (I *think* that's in order of coarsest to finest). There may be others but those are the ones with which I'm familiar.

I would have thrown that instruction book away a long time ago. I have an extremely short fuse for folks who can't take the time to write clearly and proofread what they write before foisting it upon the world. It's not my job to unravel what someone else thinks they've written.

With all due respect to the folks who mentioned it, I really don't think you need, want or even can use a coax indicator. They require enormous amounts of headroom in the mill - probably more than you have available. The good ones are expensive as well and the Chinese clones don't work all that well. (I speak from experience - I was given one and I used a couple of times before returning it to its box and using the box to prop a shelf.)

Furthermore, as a novice, you need to develop your skills using a DTI and an edgefinder. These are the fundamental tools and, unlike the special purpose coax, are devices you'll be using throughout your career in this hobby. Yes, you may need to make some holders and jigs, etc.. but that's another thing you need to adjust to. The reason that setup is 90% of most jobs is the fact that so many jobs require some widget that must be fabricated to achieve what you intend.

Climb milling on the RT...

Take a felt tip pen and mark arrows on the periphery of the RT (where they're visible when the table is covered by the chuck or work) showing the direction of rotation for NON-climb (i.e., conventional) milling. This will be CW (viewed from above). Now mark an arrow on the control handle to show which way to turn it to make the table move in the CW direction. (This will probably be CW also but I can't speak for every RT ever made.)

Sounds childish but do it anyway. Next time you're deep in some complex RT job you may thank me for the suggestion.

Finally...

MAKE YOURSELF A VISE STOP!! From your photos, it looks like your vise jaws project high enough to use this style...

http://www1.mscdirect.com/CGI/NNSRIT?PMPXNO=1802317&PMT4NO=65912359

A version of this is easily fabricated.

If the jaws have enough projection, you might get away with using a small machinist's parallel clamp...

http://www1.mscdirect.com/CGI/NNSRIT?PMPXNO=1757389&PMT4NO=65913148

For reasons I don't want to take the time to explain, I use stops based on the the design of a woodworker's bench stop - see attached diagram.

This is nothing more than a thin piece of stock with screwed on bits of stock. One end locks on the outside edge of the vise jaw and the other provides the stop. This design eats up a bit of the vise jaw capacity but it has the virtue of being made in a few minutes. The end pieces on mine are nicely machined but there's no reason they couldn't be simple screws. A piece of stock, drill and tap for two SHCS and Bob's your father's brother.


----------



## shred (Jun 23, 2009)

I mostly use a stop very like the link Marv posted-- a little clamp that attaches to one of the vise jaws. I think CDCO was giving a knockoff away free or $1 with orders a while back, but it's a simple project to make one-- square off a block. Mill a slot. Drill 3 holes in it. Saw it in half. Press fit pins in the outer holes of one half and tap the center one. Drill clearance holes in the remaining half.

If you use a screwless-type vice, you'll have to do something else though.


----------



## mklotz (Jun 23, 2009)

shred  said:
			
		

> If you use a screwless-type vice, you'll have to do something else though.



Many of the screwless vises I've seen, including the two I own, come with a tapped hole in the end of the fixed jaw. Requires nothing more than screwing a bit of scrap to the end of the jaw. Since many of these are imports, it's not unusal for the thread to be metric.


----------



## shred (Jun 23, 2009)

mklotz  said:
			
		

> Many of the screwless vises I've seen, including the two I own, come with a tapped hole in the end of the fixed jaw. Requires nothing more than screwing a bit of scrap to the end of the jaw. Since many of these are imports, it's not unusal for the thread to be metric.


 ;D Ah, that's funny. I'm home sick today and thought to myself "well, _mine_ don't!".. but wandered out to the garage to check anyway. Sure enough, there's a tapped hole in the fixed jaw that I'd never stopped to notice before.  :bow:


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 23, 2009)

kvom: Thanks for explaining. Another good idea I will file away.



			
				mklotz  said:
			
		

> Files are not abrading tools like sandpaper. They have distinct teeth so they're cutting tools. On all the files I've seen those teeth point away from the handle end of the file so the file cuts when you push it forward,



Mm. Another nice way of saying..."Zee, you dolt...you're holding the file backwards."

Just to be clear...I was using the file to put a chamfer on the part. The part was slowly turning in the lathe. Holding the file the way I was was backwards. To properly cut...I would have to hold the file with the handle (the tang) towards me. Which brings me back to...run the lathe in reverse. I don't trust file handles...I want the tang, with or without handle, away from me.

Thanks for all the tips. Very good.

Yes. I would have thrown the instruction book away...but I'm keeping it (good idea or not) so I can document my experience for the poor souls that follow.



			
				mklotz  said:
			
		

> MAKE YOURSELF A VISE STOP!!



OKAY! OKAY! Sheesh. Can anyone guess what my next project is?

Thanks Shred. Guess who's up to help me through my next project?


----------



## mklotz (Jun 23, 2009)

I got to the shop this afternoon and took a few pictures relevant to what I wrote about earlier.






Some of my vise stops. The one at the top has an adjustable stop. Along the top edge is a tiny T-slot with an above-the-jaw stop that is also adjustable. Below it is a longer one. On this one, the work stop sits outside the jaws so it can be used with very thin pieces without the need for a pusher block. The next two are non-adjustable stops hogged from whatever scrap was lying about. They're aluminum so, if I mill into them with a small cutter, I'm less likely to break the tool.

The thing on the left is not a stop. It's a solid lead false jaw. Very handy for holding oddly contoured work such as a casting because it will deform slightly to fit itself to the part.






Showing how the stop sits in the vise.

Some of you clever minimalists are probably asking, "Why doesn't he just bend a strip of metal into an 'S' shape and use that?" I tried that originally but it doesn't work well. Bending always leaves a rounded fillet on the inside of the bend and, because of that, the stop won't repeatably sit at the same location in the vise. Similarly, the work will not sit repeatably against the stop. The two stops on the left have undercuts on both the part that contacts the jaw and the part that contacts the work so that burrs and small bits of swarf have some place to go. It's important that the stop and the work locate against nice flat surfaces. 






A tool maker's vise fitted with a stop using the predrilled hole in the fixed jaw.






Two lathe files (left) next to an ordinary file. Note the much sharper angle of the teeth on the lathe file to obtain a more "slicing" cut which leaves a better finish. Also note that all the files have big, dull handles incapable of penetrating human tissue easily.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 23, 2009)

Thanks Marv.

I didn't know about 'lathe' files. Even though I had done some research...and read a book on using a metal lathe (which book showed a picture of holding the file...with tang away).

Lesson: Keep researching...keep reading.


----------



## kvom (Jun 23, 2009)

> it's a simple project to make one-- square off a block. Mill a slot. Drill 3 holes in it. Saw it in half. Press fit pins in the outer holes of one half and tap the center one. Drill clearance holes in the remaining half.



That's a project I made in school last summer, and the first thing I made that I could finish in one session. One modification to the standard model is to make the slot so that the part that clamps onto the face of the fixed jaw is thinner than your normal parallel (e.g., 1/8"). That way you can clamp thinner pieces.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 23, 2009)

THROW THE INSTRUCTION MANUAL AWAY!

1) It's incomplete.
2) More important...IT GIVES UNSAFE INSTRUCTIONS!!! [EDIT: I should say...IT DOES NOT GIVE SAFE INSTRUCTIONS...you'll see what I mean in the next edit below.]

I was not hurt...because I didn't even try this.

Besides the debacle with the 'finger on the cylinder cap' now it wants me to 'touch off the detail's shoulder using paper'. Yeah right. I got a spinning 3" slitting saw with a shoulder barely over 1/8" and a part in the way. There's not enough room.

[EDIT: The instructions did not say to do this with the saw spinning. And, I should've known this since I've already done one operation with the saw and paper (and no spinning). But the instructions are not clear and a beginner might easily think they should have the saw on. You can't count on people's common sense. I don't even count on mine.]

These instructions are NOT FOR THE BEGINNER. At least not without the help of a great forum like this one that will guide you and warn you of the dangers.

&(*^&* :rant:

Not to worry though...the core of me is ;D


----------



## vlmarshall (Jun 23, 2009)

Well, don't do it with the saw _spinning._ I guess you don't have any layout ink yet, so paint a dot of nail polish on your part, and, while turning the saw by hand, bring the head down until you scratch the ink/paint a bit. Set your cutter height from there, don't forget half of the saw's thickness.


----------



## Seanol (Jun 23, 2009)

Zee,
Like vlmarshall said, you can hand turn the cutter. I use cigarette paper and when it catches I set zero. I pull the paper back and forth so when the blade or end mill catches I don't mar the work.

Hope that helps,
Sean


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 23, 2009)

vlmarshall  said:
			
		

> Well, don't do it with the saw _spinning._ I guess you don't have any layout ink yet, so paint a dot of nail polish on your part, and, while turning the saw by hand, bring the head down until you scratch the ink/paint a bit. Set your cutter height from there, don't forget half of the saw's thickness.





			
				Seanol  said:
			
		

> Like vlmarshall said, you can hand turn the cutter. I use cigarette paper and when it catches I set zero. I pull the paper back and forth so when the blade or end mill catches I don't mar the work.



You know...I knew that...I'd already done it once (without turning on the spindle) when I slotted the piston. Why I was thinking I'd be turning on the spindle when locating the saw...I don't know. Oh yes I do. BECAUSE THE INSTRUCTIONS WERE NOT CLEAR! So I stand by what I said. Unsafe because the instructions do not specifically tell you not to.

Thanks. Very good tips. I like the nail polish (but I do have layout ink).

I'll use those tips when I make a new rotary valve.

That's right...I ruined the part. 

It didn't help that (despite warnings) I turned the RT the wrong way.
But even that wasn't a catastrophe. It was recoverable. The cut was too short so I simply offset the degrees to create a new 'zero'.

Would have been a good recovery. Would have.

When I went to do the second cut...the higher cut...the part tilted. Done.

Post mortem...

Yes. The instructions again. Put a parallel under the part to hold it up. Any idea what size parallel? No. I used the shortest (vertically). Any warning to keep the part as low as possible? Nope. Part was still too high. I think the parallel would have fit sideways and the part would have been lower. The chuck would have had more to hold. Was it me? Well yes to some extent...I should have noticed the part might be too high. But still, as a BEGINNER'S kit...the instructions should have been chock full of warnings. Grumble.

The initial setup...(per the stinking instructions!)...







Making cut one...
Had to remove the screw...the saw wouldn't come down far enough. I still don't know why that screw was needed. Also had to remove the parallels. Imagine turning the RT with those still in place?






Making cut two...uh nope...disaster...






Hey Foozer...I added to my 'shelf of shame'.

You've all been there...that was the very last machining operation. Just some sanding/polishing left. (Not as bad as firebird's recent catastrophe though.)

Time to sit down, kick back, and bend the elbow.

Success is around the corner. Maybe the 2nd corner...but around some corner.


----------



## vlmarshall (Jun 23, 2009)

Don't feel bad, Zee. Even in the professional shop, parts get killed. It's common practice, in a run of multiples of the same part, to make a few extra just in case.
Even for some single-part jobs, if they're not made from some exotic material, but have many setups and multiple operators (someone sawing stock, a lathe guy, a mill guy, heat treating, and a grinder guy), an extra part comes in handy.
Even if someone killes the extra part somewhere along the way, if it's still usable as a "setup part", it'll go with the good part through the rest of the more difficult steps, clearly marked as a dead part.


----------



## two dogs (Jun 23, 2009)

from the LMS website:

"These Elderberry Steam Engines come with the best drawings and construction booklets in the business. The drawings are all CAD generated, with complete dimensions and tolerances. The Construction Manual is a virtually complete how-to for using the mini lathe and mini mill.

The construction manuals for the Elderberry kits form a series. The launch engine is the first in the series. The mill engine contruction manual builds on skills learned from building the launch engine, and the toy loco builds on skills learned from building the other two projects."

if these are the best ??? WOW!!!!!!

I would highly recommend plans from Bill Lindsey at Workbench Minatures or Jerry Howell . The plans are excellent, but don't try to "teach" like what you've got, but these seem to be doing more harm than good.

HTH
Mark

P.S. no connection to Jerry or Bill, just a satisfied customer


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 23, 2009)

vlmarshall  said:
			
		

> Don't feel bad, Zee.



I do and I don't. I don't feel bad when it's learning something I don't know. I feel bad if I had been stupid. Unfortunately...this was close (and some might say - yeah right) to being stupid. Just look at the pic. The part is way high! I'm sure any one of you would have immediately seen the danger. Now sure...if that had been my first cut...but I've gotten a lot of good advice on this forum...I feel I should have caught that.

I appreciate your comment.



			
				two dogs  said:
			
		

> from the LMS website:
> 
> "These Elderberry Steam Engines come with the best drawings and construction booklets in the business. The drawings are all CAD generated, with complete dimensions and tolerances. The Construction Manual is a virtually complete how-to for using the mini lathe and mini mill.
> 
> if these are the best ??? WOW!!!!!!



I appreciate it 'two dogs'. But I need to be fair...don't take my word for it...see what others think. No doubt I've done some things wrong that others might not have...on the other hand...there are errors. And I'm disappointed in the clarity.

Bottom line...I got a learning that is much more valuable than the bit of metal and time I spent on it.

And what fun!

Just look at the bad luck some of the other members had today. Mine pales.


----------



## Foozer (Jun 24, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> BECAUSE THE INSTRUCTIONS WERE NOT CLEAR!



Clear and Concise? I think its in the male genes to ignore them anyway, part of the "never stop and ask for directions" while driving. 



> Hey Foozer...I added to my 'shelf of shame'.



I added another today, gonna need another shelf soon 

Ya try and tuck your part as far down into the jaws as you can while still leaving room for the saw. At least try to get two of those jaw teeth to bite. Little pieces of Soda can chaffing stock so the jaw marks are reduced  Looks like you have the room, you can use a piece of HSS tool stock for the standoff. Its as accurate as need be for your operation.


----------



## steamer (Jun 24, 2009)

Hi Zee,
Don't sweat it!
don't think your the only one who's tossed a part off a slitting saw.....That's called "experience" :big:

You can't buy experience....it's earned......you just earned some ;D....you should feel better already! ;D

This part don't come in a book Zee....your learning it the only way possible...by getting in the arena, sword drawn ready for the battle.....come what may....

good for you!  don't be discouraged...

Dave


----------



## DavesWimshurst (Jun 24, 2009)

Carl,
Your valve looks like it could have been formed on the end of a longer bar and the milling action done before cutting the now finished part free from the parent stock. An extra inch or so to grip in the chuck would do wonders your nerves! I had trouble with engine kits where they expected you to make 1/2 inch long piston from a 5/8 inch long piece of metal. :'(
Just be glad neither man nor machine was badly damaged , not to mention the laundry issue! :big:
Dave


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 24, 2009)

Robert: Thanks. I think you're right about what accuracy is required.
Dave(steamer): Thanks. No not discouraged. Hardly. As you noted...I learned something and that's worth something.
Dave(DavesWimshurst): Yeah I was thinking the same thing. Thanks for the confirmation.


----------



## mklotz (Jun 24, 2009)

> It didn't help that (despite warnings) I turned the RT the wrong way.



Remember this?



> Sounds childish but do it anyway. Next time you're deep in some complex RT job you may thank me for the suggestion.



Whoever wrote the latter must have had your best interests at heart. 

Two remarks...

Dave's advice is the key lesson to take away from this mishap. I'll even shout it...

NEVER REMOVE A PART FROM ITS PARENT STOCK UNTIL YOU ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO DO SO.

Parts with "handles" are just so much easier to work with that, when thinking through the machining of a part before starting work, it's worth trying to "design in" a handle that can be cut away as a last or near last step. An essential part of this "thinking through" process is visualizing how the part will be held at every stage of its machining. Think about the forces that will be exerted on the part by each machining operation. How will the part be "backed up" so it can resist this force? 

I mentioned earlier that I don't like 3jaw chucks on RTs and you've demonstrated one of the reasons why I have that opinion. RT operations often involve applying parallel-to-RT-table forces to small parts and a 3jaw doesn't provide a secure resistance to such forces.
A table-hole plug with a pin that fit the central hole on the part and a clamp would have been a far better option for the part as shown (or if it were a part that couldn't have a handle to hold it in the 3jaw).

Second remark...

It's not possible to write an "instruction book" to be used by a novice for a simple project.

I didn't say it was difficult; I said it was impossible. Even the most skilled members on this forum couldn't write such a book for the simple reason that they couldn't ever completely anticipate all the quandries a novice could face. It's impossible for a moderately skilled person to be aware of all the unconscious decisions he makes in getting a familiar-to-him job done. Don't believe me? Try writing an "instruction book" for your wife describing how to do some simple task she's never done (e.g. replacing a faucet washer) and then watch what happens when she attempts to "do it by the book".


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 24, 2009)

mklotz  said:
			
		

> Remember this?



I did...that's why the "(despite warnings)". 



			
				mklotz  said:
			
		

> NEVER REMOVE A PART FROM ITS PARENT STOCK UNTIL YOU ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO DO SO.



Ow. I already have tinnitus.  I won't assume anyone thinks I should have known this before now. I'll take it as an important tip...as well as the tips on 'thinking through'. Another skill to develop...not a 'born with skill'. Thanks.



			
				mklotz  said:
			
		

> RT operations often involve applying parallel-to-RT-table forces to small parts and a 3jaw doesn't provide a secure resistance to such forces.



Which is why I try to ask 'why' when someone states how to do something or what to use. Knowing the 'why' is the important part of learning. Maybe it should be obvious...but it isn't always.




			
				mklotz  said:
			
		

> It's not possible to write an "instruction book" to be used by a novice for a simple project.
> I didn't say it was difficult; I said it was impossible.



True enough...to a point. I'm sure you didn't mean instruction manuals should be dispensed with. While the manual can't be all things to all people, there should be a level of expected quality. Particularly with kits that profess to be for the beginner. A section on safety perhaps? A section on basic techniques?

I was not expecting a micro-step by micro-step instruction manual. Nor was I expecting a manual that professed to be for the beginner...not to be for the beginner. And they were pretty clear about who the intended audience was.

I probably came across as putting too much blame on the manual. I apologize for that. I don't mean to cop out. Ultimately...it's my responsibility alone.

My real complaint, for which I won't back down, is quality. Blatant poor quality is simply not acceptable. In anything. Which leaves open the question..."so just what is quality?" 

I don't want to sound as if I've been ragged on. I haven't been and I don't feel that way. I have absolutely no complaints with any member of this forum.

...I have a horrible feeling this is not going to go the way I intended...


----------



## mklotz (Jun 24, 2009)

Carl,

I'm not ragging on you (although I couldn't resist the I-told-you-so). Remember, I'm trying to use your thread to leave behind lessons learned for the future newbies who, I hope, will be directed to this thread for an at-length demonstration of what's involved in building a first engine (I know this isn't your first) starting from near zero experience.

The stuff that's "shouted" in all caps is to alert these future readers to the lesson learned and what nugget of instruction they should carry away from the operation described. It's not meant to chide you. In the future, I'll try to make that more explicit in the text when I do it.

No, I'm not suggesting instruction manuals should be foregone. If I buy a camera, I want a complete manual that describes all the not-so-obvious functions and how to access them.
But this is different. It can be safely assumed that everyone knows what a camera is for and roughly how it works. All that must be described is the peculiarities of the model to hand. It doesn't need to address all cameras and the art and zen of photography.

An instruction manual for machining an engine is a whole different thing. There's a wealth of tools that may be useful and available and a plethora of ways to accomplish any given operation. There's a minor infinity of associated safety issues. No author could ever hope to cover it all and, even if he did, the resulting six volume tome would be unwieldy, unreadable and unusable. I mentioned before that the instruction from this forum is reactive - we don't address the problem until it arises. None of us thought to tell you, a priori, about keeping handles on parts. In this sense, we've proven exactly what I said about the impossibility of writing an instruction manual. It just didn't occur to us because most of us do it without thinking about it.

Your manual, bad though it may be, still has some utility (beyond the heat it would supply in the fireplace  ). For the novice isolated somewhere away from mentors, unaware of on-line fora such as this, it might be very useful. He'd still discover the same problems with it you have, but he would be so glad for any help he'd probably overlook them. 

I think you already know what to do. Read the manual for whatever useful hints it may supply, disregard what seems wrong or inapplicable to you and flesh out the techniques you need with the forum. If it makes you feel any better, you should see how I rant and rave about some of the how-to articles I read in the amateur metalworking magazines. My wife is known to moan when a new issue arrives.


----------



## Foozer (Jun 24, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> I probably came across as putting too much blame on the manual. I apologize for that. I don't mean to cop out. Ultimately...it's my responsibility alone.
> 
> 
> I don't want to sound as if I've been ragged on. I haven't been and I don't feel that way. I have absolutely no complaints with any member of this forum.
> ...



Dont fret too much about it, your a software guy, you haven't spent your years head, neck and ears in the greasy nut and bolt land. With those years behind, many have learned the hard way what not to do. It becomes second nature, well hope so. Like hitting a tranny gear with a ball peen hammer, Why Not? Hardened steel fractures easily, little bit fly's of and penetrates arm, blood goes spurting across room (120 psi blood pressure sure sends a stream a-flying) But this i learned some 40 years ago, dont even think about it now, just know not to do it.

Your gonna have Trouser Changing experiences, best you can do is look over the situation and try to visualize what can go wrong relative to where you are. Avoid being in the path of the flying objects. When I cut trees dfown for firewood the "Bride" insist on hanging around, usually right where the tree will fall, and then I'm the bad guy asking her to move farther away, it just doesn't sink in  No way you can cover them all. Each "Test" will build upon the previous and before long you'll be writing a best seller of your Road to Success. Ok may not a best seller 

Robert


----------



## Maryak (Jun 24, 2009)

Foozer  said:
			
		

> Dont fret too much about it, your a software guy, you haven't spent your years head, neck and ears in the greasy nut and bolt land. With those years behind, many have learned the hard way what not to do.
> 
> Your gonna have Trouser Changing experiences, best you can do is look over the situation and try to visualize what can go wrong relative to where you are. Avoid being in the path of the flying objects.



Zee,

Robert is spot on here. Experience only comes from experiencing the good the bad and the ugly, (just ask Clint Eastwood). As one who has the unfortunate trait of learning the hard way the lessons have been "Hammered Home" over 4 decades. In less than a year your efforts and ability to learn are becoming legendary.

Best Regards
Bob


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 24, 2009)

Marv, Robert, and Bob...

Thanks. And thanks for understanding.
Obviously...I have some frustration. I'm past it.

On another note...I was feeling a little low with how this thread has been 'hijacked' (that's too strong a word) on occasion with rants and frustrations etc. On the other hand...for some of us...it's a part of learning. Some beginners may as well know it's not easy. But despite the occasional

 ??? : :-[ :'( :rant: oh: :shrug:

 it's a whole lot of fun and worth getting to

 ;D :big: :bow: Rof} Thm: :idea: th_wav.

Well worth it. And again, I have to say, this forum helps make it fun and worthwhile.

My intent is to do another of these. Oh yeah. I ain't going away.

At some point I'll be asking for help in choosing an appropriate project. No suggestions yet please. I'm developing a list of requirements, desires, and ideas that we can hash over.

Best regards,


----------



## SandyC (Jun 24, 2009)

;D

Hi Zee,

First off let me say it is VERY rare to come up against a new machinist with your DETERMINATION.
I am extremely impressed with your attitude to not giving up, where many others would.

As has been said, by many of the other guys, put this one (and all the previous ones) down to experience, we have all been there (and most will do so again)..... power to your elbow my good man.

Just an observation on the last PRACTICE PART ;D ;D.......which may or may not have a bearing on the outcome....but, which way were you running your mill spindle when using your slitting saw?
From the photo's in your post number 302 the tooth direction on the saw blade would suggest 'REVERSE' running (spindle).
If not, and you were running the spindle in the normal 'FORWARDS' direction then the blade is mounted the wrong way round...( the teeth should face the other way)...... as a result the forces on the cutter, and the job in hand, would have been far higher than they should have been, since the saw would be trying to cut with the BACK SIDE of the teeth (i.e. rubbing it's way through the metal)..... this in turn would put far more strain on the chuck mounting of the part leading to it being moved/ejected.

If, on the other hand, you were in fact running the spindle in 'REVERSE' then the teeth are facing in the correct direction, however, the forces on the saw holder are now such that you would run a severe risk of the blade clamp screw being loosened by the cutting pressure.

Just something to consider before/when you get to the same stage on the replacement part.

Keep up the good work, you are doing extremely well so far, and soon you will have a complete, and running, engine.

Best regards.

SandyC ;D


----------



## mklotz (Jun 24, 2009)

Sandy,

Yikes! Good catch. I hadn't noticed that. If he's running the saw backwards, it's no wonder it pushed the work out of the chuck. (Yet another thing one wouldn't think to put in the instruction manual.)

Carl,

Your rants and frustrations don't constitute hijacking - besides, you can't hijack a thread you started. Venting is good - ask your psychiatrist.

You're a very brave guy to publicize the difficulties you've encountered. Most folks wouldn't be comfortable doing that. Your straightforwardness and honesty is what makes this such a good thread. Keep on keeping on. You'll get there.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 24, 2009)

SandyC  said:
			
		

> Just an observation on the last PRACTICE PART ;D ;D.......which may or may not have a bearing on the outcome....but, which way were you running your mill spindle when using your slitting saw?



 :hDe:
My 'shelf of shame' is only exceeded by my 'shelf of idiocy'. oh:
I mean good grief.
I can't seem to do what should be the simplest things right.
Really really embarrassing...and I must confess it.

The saw is upside down. Oh man.

Well it should be pretty clear now...I may know my programming (I've never seen a backward's 1 or 0)...but hoo boy...I'm one big greenie here. Big big greenie.

And...I can't get the saw off. Is nice and tight.
And there's no reverse on the mill.

Did I ruin the saw? Well we'll see.

I am definitely going to start another thread/project after this.
I must redeem myself. Surely I can. (Picture a smiley praying here.)

Thanks SandyC.

I can't help but be laughing at myself.

Just saw your post Marv. How opportune. Goodie...I'm brave. I want to be good. Rof}


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 24, 2009)

Foo. That saw's not going anywhere.

Please continue with what you're doing while our 'hero' orders up another arbor and slitting saw. As soon as he stops blubbering.

Tried WD-40. Tried the freezer.
Heat?
I'll take any suggestions.
Right now the best one I have is the landfill.


----------



## vlmarshall (Jun 24, 2009)

Hmmm...That tight, eh? :-\
Well, heat will ruin the saw... I wonder if it'll ruin the holder. Is it heat-treated? 
Drill the bolt out, or at least drill the center of the bolt out with a small-diameter drill, all the way through. The center hole will let the bolt collapse a bit, and stretch a bit, relaxing it's hold on the saw blade.
Don't feel bad about loading the slitting saw backwards, I bet everyone's done it once.


----------



## mklotz (Jun 24, 2009)

WD40 is only useful for incinerating wasp nests. The penetrant of choice is Kroil. PBBlaster is a poor alternative but may be all you can get locally.

Does the arbor have a flat on it? If it does, lock the arbor in the bench vise so it can't turn and attack the outboard part with a strap wrench after it's soaked in penetrant in a warm spot for a while. If you don't have a strap wrench, some large adjustable pliers with rubber/leather padded jaws might work. Watch your hands. A slip is likely and you don't want to slip into the saw teeth and injure yourself.

Actually, the more I think about it, the more I like the idea of just getting a new saw and arbor. If the saw was run backwards, most of the teeth will have been dulled and you probably aren't set up to resharpen it. If you do buy new, don't discard the old one just yet. Some rainy Saturday when you're bored, you can use it as a test piece to refine your skills at unsticking frozen joints - a handy skill in this hobby (and life in general).

Hint for the next arbor. Replace the slotted screw that secures the blade with a hex-head screw so you have something to get a wrench on next time this happens. Mine are all like that.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 24, 2009)

vlmarshall  said:
			
		

> Is it heat-treated?



You're asking an ijit? :big:

Thanks Vernon.

Well our 'hero' has managed to dry his eyes. And after a long search around the house...found his vise grip. Oh yes...our 'hero' owns tools. It's the proper use of them that seems to escape him.

A vise, the vise grip, and a small sledge hammer (a surprisingly light tap)...the saw is loose.

So on we go.

Still Rof} at myself.

Just saw your post Marv...we seem to be a little out of sync.

Wish I'd seen it earlier...I might have put something between the jaws and the arbor.

I didn't have any of the tools you mentioned (which does not conflict with my earlier statement of owning tools). And, as you can see...I went ahead. Yes...some damage...but I was prepared to purchase another set anyway.

The only real concern is the saw itself. How would I know if the damage is such that a new saw is called for? Probably just the fact that it went wrong way?

The arbor had a flat head hex socket. Not slotted. Not that that helped. Your tip for a hex-head screw is very good.

Thanks.


----------



## vlmarshall (Jun 24, 2009)

Keep the socket-head cap screw, it'll resist being rounded into uselessness when you accidentally run the bolt head into something during a cut.
Toss the saw. What arbor size was it, 1.00"? What diameter? What thickness? Gimmie your address.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 24, 2009)

vlmarshall  said:
			
		

> Toss the saw. What arbor size was it, 1.00"? What diameter? What thickness? Gimmie your address.



No way man. I know too much about you. Remember? :big:

Besides, it gives me that extra impetus to order some other goodies too. 

What a cheesy try to get my address.

(Seriously...I appreciate it. Thanks.)


----------



## vlmarshall (Jun 24, 2009)

Rof}

Fine, be that way. ;D I tried! 


(rant)
Don't get burnt on shipping like I did a few weeks ago, with mcMaster-Carr.
I was ordering some 1/8" copper tubing. 3 feet of the stuff, more than enough, was something like $3.25 , and 6 feet was $3.75 ... so, of course, I order the extra, "free" length. I'm ordering through work, so I didn't get to see the shipping charges before hand.
Big mistake, shipping for a six-foot mailing tube was an extra $7.50 ! :rant:
No wonder the extra length was so cheap. So much for getting something for nothing.
The worst part, they could have just folded the tubing into a smaller tube, and it would have arrived straighter than when UPS brought it to me. :-\

(endrant)


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 24, 2009)

vlmarshall  said:
			
		

> I tried!
> 
> Don't get burnt on shipping like I did a few weeks ago,



If you want to call that a try...'Mr. Guinness offer'...I may have to modify my opinion of you. :big:
up? down?

re: shipping...don't forget handling. I made the mistake of ordering some stuff from a company...and then oops...forgot one little item and ordered that separately.

And for the price of the saws (yes...ruin the cheap stuff before I ruin the better stuff)...I should have ordered an extra. Extras?


----------



## vlmarshall (Jun 24, 2009)

haha, "Down"s the safer option. Actually, I'm out of Guinness, myself. 

Order some saws in various thicknesses.... and a vise stop...and indicator holder...and an edgefinder...maybe some gauge pins...a set of 1-2-3 blocks...a little sine bar.. a machinist's square...Hey, spending your money is easy.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 24, 2009)

vlmarshall  said:
			
		

> Order some saws in various thicknesses.... and a vise stop...and indicator holder...and an edgefinder...maybe some gauge pins...a set of 1-2-3 blocks...a little sine bar.. a machinist's square...Hey, spending your money is easy.



Oo. Oo. A vise stop. That'll get Marv off my back. But he won't respect me for it.


----------



## rleete (Jun 24, 2009)

Zee,

I'm enjoying this thread. While I'm also a newbie, I have more experience with the mechanical side of things. Even so, there are still times I do the dumb things, too. The fact that you're still at it, and not afraid to post the mistakes as well as the successes keeps it interesting and more "real". Seeing some projects that appear from thin air, seemingly self created doesn't help as much as seeing it come together slowly, warts and all. Keep at it!


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 24, 2009)

rleete  said:
			
		

> The fact that you're still at it, and not afraid to post the mistakes as well as the successes keeps it interesting and more "real".



Thanks rleete. I really appreciate it. We all learn from our mistakes...so why shouldn't others. It's something I tell people at work...if you boo-boo'd...own up to it. We'll learn from it...you'll be respected for it.


----------



## steamer (Jun 24, 2009)

I remembered a couple.....

Learn from others mistakes!,,,,you'll never live long enough to make them all yourself!
 ;D :big:

I want to make NEW mistakes...not one of those old ones....... ;D

Dave


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 24, 2009)

steamer  said:
			
		

> I remembered a couple.....
> Learn from others mistakes!,,,,you'll never live long enough to make them all yourself!
> ;D :big:
> I want to make NEW mistakes...not one of those old ones....... ;D



 Rof} I'm going to take those to work.

I made a new rotary valve sans grooves. No old mistakes...no new mistakes!!
Now for a new saw..."'To wait. To wait."


----------



## Seanol (Jun 24, 2009)

Zee,
I made a lot of the same mistakes when I started. I had no forum or mentor. I bought alot of books. The bedside reader(all 3), Machine Shop Practices and other tomes of reference. With those as my guide I was thoroughly lost!

Now that we have this great forum we can help you with the problems we all have faced in pursuing this exacting, exasperating and ultimately exhilarating endeavor!

If I was a betting man I bet your favorites are full of every machinist bookmark you can find. You will never stop learning and when you look back 1, 2 or 5 years from now on this engine you will ask yourself: "Did I really have so many issues with this?" Then you will see another person, similar to yourself, asking these questions and you will be in a position to give the hard earned advice you learned not only from here, but also from your "wall of shame".

Keep it up. I am posting my faults too (like almost setting the house on fire) in the hopes of leaving a legacy of posts that others can learn from. Not everyone is as good as Marv! (just kidding Marv)

We no longer have the "mentor" available in this era. They have all retired or moved on. We need to find new ways to learn and without someone over your shoulder going "if you do that it's going to hurt!" we sometimes stumble.

We are all here to help you along and you in turn will provide this same service to the future entrants to our little slice of heaven.

Waiting expectantly for your next post,
Sean


----------



## steamer (Jun 24, 2009)

Seanol,

You make a great point.....This mode of communication wasn't even a concept just a few years ago...my how we have all grown!

When I started out turning cranks for fun, I was working as an engineer for a highly respected machine tool manufacturer in Worcester Massachusetts.  That was a serious blessing as there was little information on doing any of this.  That blessing came in the form of two manuafacturing engineers who worked their way up from apprentice to master machinists and then to manufacturing engineering.  These two guys routed all the new jobs through the plant....they were the ones deciding on how it was going to be made and in what order.
For perspective...this plant was a thirteen acre machine shop....soup to nuts.
Now not all the things I did in my youth were terribly bright...but I did one thing and that was befriending these two. To my benefit, they took this wise arse punk kid under their wing.

I learned more about running a lathe from those two than any book I have ever showed me....and I have a room full of them...

John and Mark, where ever you are these days.. .....Thank you very much!

Dave


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 25, 2009)

SandyC  said:
			
		

> Just an observation on the last PRACTICE PART ;D ;D.......which may or may not have a bearing on the outcome....but, which way were you running your mill spindle when using your slitting saw?



Hi SandyC...I just wanted to come back around and thank you (and your eagle eye) again for taking the interest and time in my project, and more importantly, for taking the time to ask your question. In thinking about what happened...I would have thought the problem was how I had chucked the part and very likely I would have done the same thing again with the saw.

This is just another example of how the members on this forum are so helpful.

Sean...I know what you mean...the day will come when I'll forget what I didn't know.

Dave...you're right...it's the people. When I retire, it won't be the work or the projects I'll remember...it'll be the people. I'm still in love with my 4th grade teacher .


----------



## Maryak (Jun 25, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> I'm still in love with my 4th grade teacher .



Me too,

Where are you Miss Towler ? Where are you Miss Towler ? Where are you Miss Towler ? Where are you Miss Towler ? Where are you Miss Towler ? Where are you Miss Towler ? ......................................

Best Regards
Bob


----------



## vlmarshall (Jun 25, 2009)

Seanol  said:
			
		

> ... I bought alot of books. The bedside reader(all 3), Machine Shop Practices and other tomes of reference...



Ha, I just got around to buying those three, when MSC had a 45% sale. Nice books!


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 25, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> I'm still in love with my 4th grade teacher.





			
				Maryak  said:
			
		

> Me too,
> 
> Where are you Miss Towler ? ......................................



I didn't know you were in my class. And that wasn't her name. :big:


----------



## steamer (Jun 25, 2009)

now this is getting wierd.....besides her name was clearly Ms Metzger!
Dave

 :big: ;D


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 26, 2009)

Waiting for the slitting saw...

I was thinking about the next project. Visions of a beam engine, a locomotive...dreaming you know? Then I reread some of this thread...reality began to set in. I have much to learn. Much. Oh so much. In addition, I remembered why I started with the Launch Engine. So I brought out the Elderberry Mill Engine kit I had bought. Looked at the drawings and construction manual. Well...that's a sore that doesn't need reopening. After washing the salt out (yeah it's not any better)...I have to say...it still seems the way to go. (The 3rd kit in the series is a locomotive!)

So while I wait I'm preparing for the next one. I hope to do a better job on the thread. Some rules I'm setting for myself include:

1) No ranting. While it does me some good...it does no one else any good. I can't guarantee there won't be a grumble here and there...but I'll do my best.

2) Avoid any reference to the manual. Eventually, I'll have to deal with just drawings and I don't need to create a crutch.

3) Well I'll leave that to you all. What do you want to see? Where did I fail to meet expectations (assuming there were any)? [EDIT: I mean expectations...there were certainly failures. :big:]

Thanks all.


----------



## steamer (Jun 26, 2009)

Zee,

Rant and rave if you like....just keep making chips....you'll get there and we'll follow along...... ;D
I don't think I'm speaking for myself in saying:

Your doing just fine....no judging here is warranted or wanted....we all do things are own way and as long as we're all respectful of each other.....have at it. Helpfull hints and tips are offered.  Safety is the only restriction on behavior.

This is all why I come here.........It's a great place.

keep going


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 26, 2009)

steamer  said:
			
		

> Rant and rave if you like....just keep making chips....you'll get there and we'll follow along......
> 
> This is all why I come here.........It's a great place.
> 
> keep going



Thanks very much steamer.
Oh I'll rant and rave. Be sure of that. I just don't need to push it onto everyone else.
It's a very great place.
I'll keep making chips...I'll keep going...the last 4 months have been the most fun I've had in a long time.
And, I've met more interesting people on this forum than I have in a long time too.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 26, 2009)

BUMMER!!! Bummer! bummer.
I ordered the replacement slitting saw yesterday.
No expectation it would be here today.
Came home at 5:15 and sure enough...not here.
Fine. Time for some Chinese carry-out and a bottle of wine.
Half-way through the wine...package shows up!!!
Arrggg!
I don't drink and drive. I don't drink and machine.
Arrggg! I gotta wait!
Is this what they mean by 'machining teaches you patience'?
Arrggg!

Not only that...they got the order wrong. I ordered two slitting saws...just in case...you know? I got one. Now I have to be extra extra careful.

Oh sorry...didn't I recently say something about rants?

Oh man I can't wait for tomorrow.

(For those of you wondering...please note the time of this post. I didn't just come home and pop a bottle. Or did I? Or is just half-bottle gone? Just when did I come home? Why am I talking to you?)


----------



## Foozer (Jun 26, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> Oh man I can't wait for tomorrow.



Your staring at the mill right now aren't ya?


----------



## mklotz (Jun 26, 2009)

From what you've said, I believe this is your next project...

http://www.littlemachineshop.com/products/product_view.php?ProductID=3136&category=

Looking at it, it's a one-for-one knockoff of Elmer Verburg's horizontal mill engine, the plans for which are available free from the john-tom site...

http://www.john-tom.com/ElmersEngines/43_horizontal.pdf

so you're paying $80 for perhaps $30 worth of very common materials and an instruction book of dubious utility. While it's nice to have all the stock to hand, this isn't exactly a bargain.

Not to make you feel bad but, for the benefit of future readers of this thread, consider this when selecting a project. Elmer's plans are available and very well done. Engine kits aren't always the best choice when starting out.

I built Elmer's horizontal (I have his book) from stock early in my career.







It's an interesting project and you'll learn lots from doing it. It uses a slide valve which will test your skills a bit but, if you plan to build any more of his engines, it's good experience since he uses very similar designs in many of his other engines.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 26, 2009)

mklotz  said:
			
		

> From what you've said, I believe this is your next project...
> 
> http://www.littlemachineshop.com/products/product_view.php?ProductID=3136&category=



You are right. (Well maybe...keep reading.)



			
				mklotz  said:
			
		

> so you're paying $80 for perhaps $30 worth of very common materials and an instruction book of dubious utility. While it's nice to have all the stock to hand, this isn't exactly a bargain.



You are right. But compared to the experience of this forum (and you)...it's a drop.



			
				mklotz  said:
			
		

> Not to make you feel bad but...



Why stop now? (Seriously though...your tip is a good one and well appreciated.)

I don't feel bad about doing this. If I've given pause to the next person...then it's a win.

Seriously...what do you recommend Marv? For my part...I'd like to do another 'learning thread' (albeit better). I hope I've gotten across the idea that I get as much joy out of helping others as I do making things for myself. If there's a better project for accomplishing this...I'm all ears...and luckily so far...all fingers. (Not that I would do any project... I do, after all, have additional desires that need satisfaction. Did I just hear a song?)

My point though...just as doing the next project should be an improvement over the last...so should the next thread.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 26, 2009)

Foozer  said:
			
		

> Your staring at the mill right now aren't ya?



Yes. And my eyes keep straying to the new blade and the rotary valve just waiting to be cut. Must resist.

Yes...I'm leaning back...finishing the bottle and looking at the equipment.

Or did I finish it already? Or maybe I'm not leaning anymore? I never noticed mark on the floor before. And why am I talking to you? oooo deja vu.


----------



## steamer (Jun 26, 2009)

OK your shut off! :big: :big:
Zee.....really...have fun with it and don't worry so. It's just an engine.

Ok your mother will stop talking now :

Dave


----------



## vlmarshall (Jun 26, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> I was thinking about the next project. Visions of a beam engine, a locomotive...dreaming you know? ... (The 3rd kit in the series is a locomotive!)
> ...3) Well I'll leave that to you all. What do you want to see?




What? Wait, which series? What locomotive? Links, links!

That one gets MY vote for your next project. ;D


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 26, 2009)

vlmarshall  said:
			
		

> What? Wait, which series? What locomotive? Links, links!
> That one gets MY vote for your next project. ;D



Thanks Vernon. The 'series', if you will, is the Elderberry Launch Engine (which is the one I'm in the process of butchering now) then the Elderberry Mill Engine (another project that needs 'modification') and, apparently, the 'Elderberry British Toy Locomotive'.

I started on this road last Feb. Never cut metal before. But when I was a kid (and despite the innocent looking kid on the left...that was more than 40 years ago) I got bit by the bug. Bad. Magazines that showed steam engines and in particular, garden railway locomotives'...oh man...I'm finally living that dream. Whether I'll ever get to build, much less ride, a loco...we'll see.

But my chances of fulfilling that dream have increased a hundred-fold with the help of this forum.

By the way...check out your email. Hee hee. Ah hee hee.


----------



## Foozer (Jun 26, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> You are right. (Well maybe...keep reading.)



The one model Marv suggested, looks good, you can handle it. After all the fun I had over one silly part I started making a cylinder similar to the model shown. Thought it would be difficult but turned out (so far) a lot easier than I thought. Just cut a hunk off some brass stock and went for it. Flea Bay has lots of bar stock variety packs, like 18 inches of various sizes in one bundle, convenient for newbies like me. As Marv pointed out, the steam chest could be a challenge but what fun is easy


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 26, 2009)

Foozer  said:
			
		

> The one model Marv suggested, looks good, you can handle it. Flea Bay has lots of bar stock variety packs, like 18 inches of various sizes in one bundle, convenient for newbies like me.



Thanks for the vote of confidence Robert. When I started the thread on the Launch Engine, I already had the Mill Engine kit. Knowing that I would 'want to make duplicates' I ordered extra metal to cover both engines. Luckily...I still have some left!

Course...that assumes I'm successful tomorrow with finishing the rotary valve!


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 27, 2009)

Well here it is...the rotary valve...






Okay okay. If you cut with the sharp end...

Overall I'm pretty happy with it. The groove closer to the end is a little off but we'll see what happens before I go making another one.

I may have one other problem. I missed the fact that the drawing specified a half-inch diameter cutter for the groove. I used something significantly bigger. This affects the ends of the groove. Instead of a sharper incline coming out of the groove it's more of a low ramp. We'll see what happens.

Thanks for all the help.

Time for a little polishing, final fit of the piston, and investigation into whether the connecting rod has to be bent or not.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 27, 2009)

This picture was in the first post...






All the parts...






The wall of shame. What appears like dirt is the debris of my pride...






Now for fitting and assembling.


----------



## mklotz (Jun 27, 2009)

> I don't feel bad about doing this. If I've given pause to the next person...then it's a win.
> 
> Seriously...what do you recommend Marv? For my part...I'd like to do another 'learning thread' (albeit better). I hope I've gotten across the idea that I get as much joy out of helping others as I do making things for myself. If there's a better project for accomplishing this...I'm all ears...and luckily so far...all fingers.



Just so there's no misunderstanding...

I was objecting to the *kit*, not the engine choice. Buying the kit for the launch engine was probably a good idea. Now that you have some skills, the kit for the mill engine would be less necessary but it's a done deal so I'll shut up about it. My warning for future readers is in place and that's all I was trying to accomplish.

I think the horizontal mill engine is a fine choice for your next project. It's very straightforward yet has a few features that will help you to improve your skills. You'll learn some good stuff too - how slide valves work and how one goes about reversing a steam engine by altering the slide valve phasing wrt the piston motion. It's also an easy engine to get running. Since it's double-acting, it's more powerful and thus a bit more forgiving of minor inaccuracies. On the artistic side, it has lots of link motion when running so it's very intriguing to watch.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 27, 2009)

mklotz  said:
			
		

> I think the horizontal mill engine is a fine choice for your next project.
> 
> On the artistic side, it has lots of link motion when running so it's very intriguing to watch.



Then that's what's next!  Thanks Marv.

It may be a while before I get started...
First need to finish this one and play with it a bit.
Then equipment needs more adjustment, family visiting, I have some travel to do, etc.
And...I want to make (or purchase! ) a couple of sorely needed tools.

While I'm here...I'm starting the assembly and polishing some parts. Some of the brass has tarnished (is that the right word?). What is recommended for keeping the sheen? Some kind of clear coat? A wax? Leave it?

Thanks.


----------



## mklotz (Jun 27, 2009)

Brasso (tm), as the name suggests, is my stuff of choice for polishing brass on the rare occasions when I polish anything (bling ain't my thing). I've used paste wax to protect polished surfaces. It works for a while. Others prefer lacquer but that's beyond my patience level.

While building an engine, I keep a list of tools/jigs I need to make (not including the ones made immediately because they're needed to finish a part). Then, as a break between the concentration of making engine parts, I attack this list before starting the next engine. It's another Zen thing and I'm happy to see you think alike.

Tool making exercises your design abilities. With most engine building, you're simply trying to make a part that matches the print. With tool building, you need to think about the way(s) the tool will be used in your shop, design minimization and functionality, etc.. - invaluable skills when you face more complex jig and fixture design challenges.
[I liken perfect tool making to writing an assembler program that will completely zero core including itself.]

Some good choices for you (useful but not terribly difficult projects) would be:

Vise stop(s) 
Some means of holding your DTI in the mill chuck/collet
Piloted small tap holder(s)
A miniature depth gauge
A pump center for centering work in the 4jaw


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 27, 2009)

mklotz  said:
			
		

> Vise stop(s)
> Some means of holding your DTI in the mill chuck/collet
> Piloted small tap holder(s)
> A miniature depth gauge
> A pump center for centering work in the 4jaw



Thanks Marv. All good ones. (I had to look up 'pump center' but I found it.)


----------



## Foozer (Jun 27, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> Well here it is...the rotary valve...
> 
> Okay okay. If you cut with the sharp end...
> 
> ...



Your having way to much fun, don't you just love that compulsive behavior syndrome? [rag] So I know what you did last night, not a lot of hours between blurry keyboard and machine work. . . Be Careful . . . getting to enjoy your enthusiasm of the hobby but don't want to hear about you getting hurt[/rag]

The valve? thinking the dia of the cutter determines the timing, the start and stop for the steam flow. For the same depth of cut the cutter radius will change the effective timing. Exaggerated pic attached. Dont know the specs for the design so I could be way off in left field (as usual). White pie slices are what the timing changes would be. 

I know I'm terrible at description and I don't even drink


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 27, 2009)

Good news. It's assembled. 
Sad news. It's not a runner. 







There's at least 2 problems with it...

1) I think the piston is a bit too loose and air is getting around it. I may have overdone it when trying to fit. In addition, I suspect the cylinder bore is not true and that may have fooled me a bit. Part of the problem I believe, is that when the holes were made in the ends of the cylinder, particularly for the columns, metal was pushed towards center.

2) The rotary valve has a number of issues with it. For one, it's a tad short so it moves back and forth between the pillow blocks. That makes it difficult to keep the valve grooves aligned. For another, as I mentioned earlier, I think the grooves may be a little off and don't line up with the coupling as well as they could. This is probably minor in that they were fully exposed...just not centered. Third, but I don't know if this is an issue, the ends of the grooves are not cut correctly (as I also mentioned earlier.)

At a minimum, the cylinder will have to be redone. The piston may be okay. The rotary valve? I don't know.

So...do I put this on the shelf and get started with the next engine? If it were just me, for a number of reasons, I probably would. In making it run, will I truly learn something that I otherwise wouldn't? Keep in mind this is just my initial reaction.

I think the 'offset' on the rotary valve can be fixed by slotting the two holes that hold the pillow block. Unless I'm missing something...I think the placement of the grooves is alright too (but I haven't checked all of the ports). Lastly, I doubt the ends of the grooves are critical.

The bigger issue I think, and probably the one easiest to rectify is the cylinder. But I believe I'll find that the piston has to be redone too.

The engine does turn over a few revs but at high pressure. I have a pancake compressor so most likely I lose air too quickly to keep the engine running. I wonder if I should try the air compressor I use for tires etc. It has no storage tank...it just keeps running. If you spin the flywheel by hand...it spins pretty easily. Wouldn't that be a sign of no compression and a bad piston/cylinder fit?

Not a big disappointment mind you. If I do nothing else but put it on a shelf...I'm pretty proud of what I accomplished. And if I don't make it run...there's the next one!

Well I'll sit back and see what the reaction is. :big: (There are examples of this engine around so it's not like it can be particularly interesting to see this one run.)

Robert: Just got your post. Not to worry. As for the grooves...well you can see what I said above. Thanks.


----------



## vlmarshall (Jun 27, 2009)

Zee, 
It LOOKS great, I'd get it running!
Crank the engine over with the intake and exhaust plugged, if it STILL spins freely, blame compression.
Sounds like the cylinder bore may have gotten bellmouthed a bit. Would it be easier for ya to make a new piston, and straighten/enlarge the cylinder bore to fit?

Get some brass shim stock and a punch kit, and make a few thrust shims to stop the endplay in the valve.

I don't think you're too far away from having a running engine on your hands.


Great work, bud.

-Vernon

( Here's a cheap version of that punch set that I'm going to try, I use a much more expensive-but-identical-looking set at work all the time. 
http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/ctaf/displayitem.taf?Itemnumber=95547  )


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 27, 2009)

Vernon  said:
			
		

> Crank the engine over with the intake and exhaust plugged, if it STILL spins freely, blame compression.
> Sounds like the cylinder bore may have gotten bellmouthed a bit. Would it be easier for ya to make a new piston, and straighten/enlarge the cylinder bore to fit?
> Get some brass shim stock and a punch kit, and make a few thrust shims to stop the endplay in the valve.



Thanks Vernon.

Plugged the intake and exhaust. Spins freely. One other possibility would be leakage around the rotary valve. Doesn't seem to be - but I need to do some more checking.

My largest reamer is 9/16. I'd have no problem going for another but would boring be good enough?

Shims...good idea. But you'd see it. What's wrong with slotting the holes? They're over-sized anyway.

The Punch Set...another tool! And no doubt someone's going to say I can make them. 

'bud' huh? Just had to get that reminder in didn't you? :big:


----------



## Foozer (Jun 27, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> Good news. It's assembled.
> Sad news. It's not a runner.
> 
> [
> ...



Piston would have to be really "loose" to stop a runner, with air applied rotate the flywheel and feel for the "push" the air applies upon the piston, you can get a rough idea of the engines timing.

Odds are its your valve, hard to tell from the photo how far into the stock the slot goes (looks like the ends are close to the stock C/L from the photo) or how its keyed to the crankshaft. Piston just past TDC intake valve should begin to open. Piston near BDC intake valve should be closed, exhaust valve begins to open. Piston nearing TDC exhaust valve closing and cycle repeats. If the intake is open when the piston reaches BDC on the power stroke its return trip is blocked by the air pressure. 

The intake duration only needs a little squirt of air to pressurize the cylinder forcing the piston down. The exhaust should open at or before BDC to allow the piston unrestricted movement back to the top. 

You'll have it running in no time, little tinkering. Stick a piece of card stock in the valve stock with an on end photo. That way a better look at the timing can be made by those here that have more experiance with this valving system.

Looks good, I see a beam engine in your future


----------



## mklotz (Jun 27, 2009)

Don't shelve it! You *must* make it run! "Debugging" an engine is a critical skill and you need the practice. More importantly, you need the boost to your self-confidence. No matter how long it takes, you need to get it done.

Perhaps this will help - Of 33 or so engines in my collection, I've never built an engine that didn't run. OTOH, I've built only maybe four that ran the first time they were assembled. Post assembly fiddling is a fact of life.

Before you start remaking parts...

Lube everything that moves (don't forget the piston) if you haven't already. Something like turbine oil is a good choice or, lacking that, 3-in-1 or sewing machine oil will be fine. Also, bubbling oil after you supply air will indicate leaks if they exist.
(Don't go nuts if you see a few bubbles - that's expected since the engine has no real seals.)

Check that you've got airflow to the (revolving) valve. With the shaft removed, apply air and use a wet finger or whatever to ensure that air is actually getting to the valve. I offer this only for completeness. I don't really think this is your problem. 

Fiddle with the valve timing. Sometimes a small change in the phasing is all that's needed. Especially so given the "ramp" caused by using the wrong cutter. Consider shimming it if it's loose between the bearing blocks. (Perhaps there's enough slop in the bearing mounting holes to loosen the screws and push them a tiny bit closer.)

Check the piston fit by pulling the plastic hose off the cylinder, cover the port with your finger, and use the flywheel to drive the piston upwards. You should feel at least some resistance from the compressed air. If the engine turns over easily by hand, you probably don't have any piston/cylinder binding. I refuse to believe that, with all the care you've shown so far, the fit is so bad that you don't have some compression there.

If you do remake parts, remake the valve first. I'm more skeptical of it than of the cylinder/piston. Even if the latter have problems, the engine should run (perhaps at higher pressure) if it's being valved correctly. I would expect an engine like this to run on 5 psi or less. If it doesn't run at, say, 20 psi I would almost certainly suspect a valve problem.

BTW, it looks great!


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 27, 2009)

Foozer  said:
			
		

> Odds are its your valve, hard to tell from the photo how far into the stock the slot goes (looks like the ends are close to the stock C/L from the photo) or how its keyed to the crankshaft.
> 
> You'll have it running in no time, little tinkering. Stick a piece of card stock in the valve stock with an on end photo. That way a better look at the timing can be made by those here that have more experiance with this valving system.
> 
> Looks good, I see a beam engine in your future



I 'foresee' Marv saying the same about the valve. I'll investigate further.

Not sure I understand what you mean by an end photo? Happy to do it though.

Thanks for the support Robert. Yes...very interested in a beam engine some day.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 27, 2009)

mklotz  said:
			
		

> Don't shelve it!
> 
> Of 33 or so engines in my collection, I've never built an engine that didn't run. OTOH, I've built only maybe four that ran the first time they were assembled.
> 
> ...



I'll keep at it. Given my prior posts...you probably knew that. I need to increase the time between thought and keyboard.  (Didn't I learn that lesson just a few posts back?)

Lubed everything. I even 'poured' oil into the plastic tube so that a goodly amount was trapped...then blew into it with my mouth. It was like blowing bubbles in a glass of milk with a straw. Well not that bad...but it was easy...and a lot of the oil was found around the base. It was auto oil 30W.

Yes, air gets to the valve...you can even see it pushing on the oil that was left behind in the clear tube.

Remember too, that I said at high pressure it turned a few revs. Still the valve?

How do I fiddle with the valve timing? Turn it in relationship to the crankshaft? The setscrew sits on a flat. I suppose I could have screwed up the grooves relative to the setscrew. But I was pretty happy with it.

I'll check the piston fit as you suggest. It's a good idea. And while you refuse to believe it...I was surprised how the piston just slipped through when I dropped it in. Maybe overdid trying to fit...maybe the cylinder isn't truly round. When trying to fit piston the gap due to the oval would only have gotten bigger.

Thanks Marv.


----------



## Foozer (Jun 27, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> I 'foresee' Marv saying the same about the valve. I'll investigate further.
> 
> Not sure I understand what you mean by an end photo? Happy to do it though.
> 
> Thanks for the support Robert. Yes...very interested in a beam engine some day.



From the top so can see haow far into the daimeter of the valve the slot goes.

Original plan said to use a 1/2 dia cutter? and the depth of cut is? You used a larger diameter cutter, same depth of cut? That will throw the overall timing off. Can use a larger dia cutter if the depth of cut is adjusted. Will just make a more restricted passage but probably not so much as to affect the run or not run condition.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 27, 2009)

Some more thoughts...

What if the cylinder had a taper to it?

Also, recall that the bore was made before the cap and column holes were drilled and tapped. Remember I mentioned that I thought (tapping) the holes might have pushed metal into the cylinder? Might this be the reason the piston didn't fit anymore? Then, as I tried to fit the piston...I simply increased the gaps between the cylinder wall and the piston between each of the areas where the holes were?

Is it worth trying to measure the cylinder to see?

If I redo the valve I'll have to get the proper saw. Not a problem...just letting everyone know it'll be a little time.

Foozer: Same depth of cut... 0.031". It doesn't seem like it would be significant but I haven't done the math to see how much the grooves would have been lengthened.

Thanks.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 27, 2009)

No photo...but here's a diagram.
Looking from the top and folding up the sides.






The rightmost groove is closest to the shoulder of the valve. It's about 0.11" away. The leftmost groove was supposed to be 0.20". It ended up a little short...0.19" or so.

That's why I drew the intake with the groove a little to the right. But it's completely clear otherwise.

The exhaust is similar but better.

The port to the cylinder shows both grooves.

I think it should be okay. But that might still leave:

1) Timing - did I cut the grooves in relation to the crankshaft correctly? I think so.
2) Timing - are the longer grooves a problem? I don't know.
3) Leakage around the valve? I don't think so.

I also did as Marv suggested and unhooked the clear tube, applied air to the intake, and turned the flywheel by hand. There's certainly air coming out that would go into the clear hose. And it stops as you turn the flywheel cutting off the intake.

Is it worthwhile to try something more viscous in the cylinder to see if it blocks more air and provides more pressure on the piston. Hmm. Wouldn't that mean more resistance for exhaust stroke?

Thanks.


----------



## Foozer (Jun 27, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> Some more thoughts...
> 
> What if the cylinder had a taper to it?
> 
> ...



Taper with low air pressure could effect, but still wont stop a runner. Performance and engine efficiency degrade with loose fits but even a 49 nash with 500k miles on still is runnable. My little wobbler has so much piston clearance it hisses at ya, but it still goes 'round

0.031 thousand depth of cut? Your valve looks to be 0.500 in dia so a 0.031 depth of cut with a 0.500 cutter would look like the dwg. Nothing like your actual. Now I'm confused, easily done too.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 27, 2009)

Foozer  said:
			
		

> 0.031 thousand depth of cut? Your valve looks to be 0.500 in dia so a 0.031 depth of cut with a 0.500 cutter would look like the dwg. Nothing like your actual.



It probably would have helped had I drawn end points of the grooves.

One groove begins at 34 degrees and ends at 235. The other begins at 129 and ends at 324. Looking down the bore of the valve...you would see two 'C' shaped grooves, one offset from the other.

Your picture is right as far as how it would look taking the initial plunge cut. Then rotate the part while cutting. Remember the pic of the rotary table?

Or am I not understanding?


----------



## vlmarshall (Jun 27, 2009)

Can you connect an air source, disconnect the valve from the crankshaft, and turn the valve by hand while holding the crankshaft? I'd like to see just how much force that piston and cylinder can generate, rule out the piston fit, and work on the valve and timing.

Just a thought.


----------



## Foozer (Jun 27, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> It probably would have helped had I drawn end points of the grooves.
> 
> One groove begins at 34 degrees and ends at 235. The other begins at 129 and ends at 324. Looking down the bore of the valve...you would see two 'C' shaped grooves, one offset from the other.
> 
> ...



It my morning over caffeinated brain that failed to get it : New info helped

Now it makes sense, the increase in dia cutter effect would be minimal, 

Now the shetch looks more like your actually. Timing check


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 27, 2009)

Vernon  said:
			
		

> Can you connect an air source, disconnect the valve from the crankshaft, and turn the valve by hand while holding the crankshaft? I'd like to see just how much force that piston and cylinder can generate, rule out the piston fit, and work on the valve and timing.



Not sure I follow. I would feel the force on the valve, right? If I felt anything at all...I would have no idea how much is too little, too much, or baby bear. If I felt nothing...maybe that's the clue?

Foozer: You seem to agree then that any difference due to cutter diameter would be minimal.

Timing check? I'll re-verify the part. Maybe I missed something and cut the thing wrong.

Thanks all.


----------



## vlmarshall (Jun 27, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> Not sure I follow. I would feel the force on the valve, right? If I felt anything at all...I would have no idea how much is too little, too much, or baby bear. If I felt nothing...maybe that's the clue?
> Timing check? I'll re-verify the part. Maybe I missed something and cut the thing wrong.
> 
> Thanks all.


Not a force on the valve, a force on the piston. I'm just tossing out ideas.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 27, 2009)

Gotta go to the store. I have one hand holding the hose to the engine and the other hand holding the hose onto the air gun and activating it. I don't have any clamps and I don't think a barbed connector will be strong enough. My feet are too far away and my other appendages are worthless.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 27, 2009)

Vernon  said:
			
		

> Not a force on the valve, a force on the piston. I'm just tossing out ideas.



And I'm trying to catch (please reference my last post re: appendages) ;D.

...oh...I just typed a couple of whizbang sentences that would have made you look foolish. Instead...it would have been me. So we'll just set those aside for a better day.

Good idea. I'll try it.


----------



## vlmarshall (Jun 27, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> ...I just typed a couple of whizbang sentences that would have made you look foolish. ... So we'll just set those aside for a better day.




Haha, bring it. ;D Can you shoot video? I'll bet that you'll have that thing running in a short while, and I'd like to see it moving.


----------



## Foozer (Jun 27, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> Foozer: You seem to agree then that any difference due to cutter diameter would be minimal.



about a 2.8' increase 34' to 36.8' thereabouts, yup minimal. Timing should be on the conservative side keeping with the "beginners kit" theme


----------



## mklotz (Jun 27, 2009)

Since the valve position on the crank shaft is important (it determines valve phasing relative to piston position), are you *certain* that:

The flat on the crankshaft is properly placed relative to the pin that drives the connecting rod to the piston.

The setscrew in the valve is properly placed relative to the grooves in the valve.

The combination of those two determine proper valving operation. If either of those is fuggulated, it very likely can't run.

Stop fiddling with the piston/cylinder until the valving is sorted out. Occam's razor here.

Write the following in your shop notebook:

Don't commit on valve placement/orientation/etc. until the engine is running.

Next time you're at the hardware store, buy some lightweight oil to lubricate engines.
(Rea's Hardware (if they have them in the Keystone state) sells turbine oil.)


----------



## shred (Jun 27, 2009)

How much air are you able to feed it? PSI? Micro compressor or something larger?

If it turns over by hand without massive resistance, it'll spin with enough air pushing it and reasonably close valve timing.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 27, 2009)

Celebrations will be had shortly.
It's turning over.
No congratulations yet...please wait for video.
Need to pretty it up some.

shred...I think you're right. Fiddling with it enough may have gotten it 'loose' enough to run with enough air.

Here' hoping I'm not speaking too soon.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 27, 2009)

Despite the many warts and errors...it runs





It can be better. Will it be better? Well, not tonight.

 woohoo1 woohoo1 woohoo1

I intended to go through the thread and list everybody who had a part in this...there's too many and this thread is long.

Very many thanks to all. A special thanks to Rake60 for starting this forum. I'm sure I'm not the only one who would have been lost or taken much longer had it not been for this forum and the many excellent people on it.

As I said, it's not feasible to go through and name each contributor. Be assured that every post was meaningful and helpful (whether related to machining or developing camaraderie).

But if you go through the thread...there are two members that stand out...mklotz and Foozer. Thank you.

This is great fun. The most fun I've had in a long time. Some may think I'm putting this project away too soon...probably. But as a software engineer...I know the danger in continual improvement...you never finish.

I accomplished a number of goals...

1) To begin this hobby (that was big one).
2) To begin to learn (can't say finished...never will).
3) To build an engine that runs. Well it does! Sorta.

What I hadn't counted on was meeting such a fine group of people. That's just invaluable. I look forward to a long and fun relationship with them.

I'm here to stay! Getting ready to start the next project. With your help, I'd like to make it another learning thread (but aren't they all really?).

The project will be the Elderberry Mill Engine (the engine that started this thread).


----------



## GailInNM (Jun 27, 2009)

Thm:
Congratulations Carl!
You have a runner. 
The first of many I am sure.
 th_wav
Gail in NM,USA


----------



## 90LX_Notch (Jun 27, 2009)

Carl,

A huge congratulations to you on your successful build. Thanks for taking us all along for the "ride".  Thm: Thm: Thm: Thm:
 th_wav th_wav woohoo1 woohoo1

Bob


----------



## mklotz (Jun 27, 2009)

Yippee! Does small vicarious dance in front of computer. I knew you could do it.

Thanks for the thanks but, remember, it was you who actually got it to work. What do you think the problem was? As a physicist - we're always searching for the God particle and the Theory of Everything - I need to know or I'll lose sleep.

Just a few remarks...

The connecting rod is at quite an angle. It could be enough to induce friction on the crank pin as well as the wrist pin. Can the whole crankshaft be moved to the left (as seen in the video) so it's straighter? Maybe it really does need to be bent as per the plans?

Is that air input stub 3/16" diameter? If it is, the green silicone tubing available in aquarium supply stores will slip over it and stay in place so you don't have to handhold things. If not you can turn the existing stub down to fit the tubing you have.

Again, congratulations. Wasn't the feeling you have now worth a few hours of fiddling?


----------



## vlmarshall (Jun 27, 2009)

:bow: :bow: Congrats, Zeebuilder! th_wav th_wav

I'm really happy to see your engine running. I knew you could do it. ;D

Mklotz is right, that connecting rod is at a _severe_ angle. Fix it, don't stop quite yet.


----------



## bearcar1 (Jun 27, 2009)

Now THAT is way, WAY cool! 8) I am glad to see you finally have had success in your adventure and am looking forward to seeing your progress through another set of trials. :bow:

Now, Have yourself adeserving bottle of wine and go lie down! Rof}

BC!
Jim


----------



## Maryak (Jun 27, 2009)

Carl,
Congratulations woohoo1 woohoo1 woohoo1 :bow: :bow: :bow:


Best Regards
Bob


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 27, 2009)

Thank you Gain in NM.
Thank you Bob (90XL_Notch).

Marv. Thank you. Re: 'you who got it to work'...nope. It was all of us. I couldn't have done it without everybody's help. Credit goes to all. Yes...the feeling is worth it. Actually checked an aquarium store on the way back from hardware. I'll have to go on line. (It'll help if the next engine is a bit better too!).

I'll be counting on you and the rest of this forum for the next project.

Yes. It turns out the connecting rod has to be bent per plans. At least for my build. If anything...I didn't give it enough. If not adjusted right there can be some interference on the edge of the crankshaft or the columns. In this case...it just makes it. I think the 'severity', that Vernon points out, may be more effect of angle/video. And the fact that it's not quite enough. I think too that it's bent in one axis that it shouldn't be. But what do I know?

Oh there's lots that could be done better/right. The rotary valve could use some work as well as the cylinder. But I'm happy. I mean it moves!! This is better than when I used to design robots at my first job.

Vernon. Thank you. Fix it? I'll fix it when you fix your broken offers. :big:

What a great ride. I'm really looking forward to the next one. In the meantime...I need to make some tools and get Marv off my back. :big:

The engine isn't great...it won't win any prizes...but it runs and I built it! A stepping stone to the next. Maybe I really can fulfill that dream....

Got some more posts while writing this one...

Jim: Thank you. Hee. I'm halfway through that bottle.

Bob: Thank you. You and many others are a great inspiration.


Sorry Marv...forgot to answer your question about why. Hm...should I let you sleep? Well unfortunately I don't think it's a big thing. It could have been some slight interference. But I think it ended up that it needed to be run in a bit. It needed a lot because of the less than stellar quality on the valve, cylinder and piston. Takes quite a bit of air too.


----------



## rake60 (Jun 27, 2009)

Congratulations Carl!

I am sorry to have to tell you that the bug bite you have 
just received is a permanent affliction... 
 

Rick


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 27, 2009)

rake60  said:
			
		

> Congratulations Carl!



Thanks Rick. Your forum and its members made it possible.



			
				rake60  said:
			
		

> I am sorry to have to tell you that the bug bite you have
> just received is a permanent affliction...



Good! I'll tell the family not to waste their time looking for a cure.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 27, 2009)

I took another look at the video (I probably will a few more times )...
I see what Marv and Vernon are concerned about.
It's definitely the angle/resolution that makes it look like the connecting rod is at a severe angle. A closer look would show a kind of 'z' shape. Comes down from the piston...angles to the right...and then angles back down again to the crankshaft.

Here's a pic. The connecting rod could have been better. The angle going down to the crankshaft isn't as...clean...as it should be.


----------



## two dogs (Jun 27, 2009)

Carl,
Congrats! Feels good huh?
You did a great job on the engine and you learned a lot too! I'll be you'll find the next one will come about a lot easier.
One thing you might try is to put a few drops in the intake, hook'r up and let run for a while to break in. My last two rak Ok at first, but following the above procedure improved quite a bit in 20-30 minutes

Mark


----------



## ozzie46 (Jun 27, 2009)

Zee, while I have not posted regarding your build I have been following it faithfully as you asked all the right questions that I probably wouldn't have thought to ask. I have never built an engine yet but am in th eprocess of building 4 marine 2 cyls at the moment. 1 of the 4 is my "mistakes" engine. All of my goofed up parts go to it. I want to see if it will run and to keep it as a monument, if you will,to my 1st feeble attempt at engine building. I have learned a lot from your post and all the advise given by Marv and Foozer and everyone else. I will folow your next build too and maybe chime in this time. You have my admiration sir and congratulations on a runner. 


Ron


----------



## Seanol (Jun 27, 2009)

Zee,

Way to Go! I knew you had it in ya! Very nice effort for a first engine and while a lot of advice was given to help, you had to act on it! :bow:

Major kudo's to you! :bow: :bow:

I better get off my butt and get something posted tonite! :

Congrats again,
Sean


----------



## steamer (Jun 27, 2009)

Congrats Zee!

 :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow:

I new you could do it!.....and now YOU know!

Dave


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 27, 2009)

Mark: Thank you. I did put oil in the intake, but I need to find some proper clamps so I don't have to stand around holding a hose.

Ron: Thank you. Please chime in. Just showing support is a great help. And you never know what observation will make someone think..."oh! maybe that's it". Another pair of eyes always sees something different.

Sean: Thank you.

Dave: Thank you.

I was thinking earlier about my 'wall of shame'. That's really wrong. It's really part of the library of learnings.


----------



## Foozer (Jun 27, 2009)

Good Job

Better start on another while your on a roll. You've trials and tribulations have become a must for daily reading

Doc I need my ZEE fix!!!


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 27, 2009)

Thanks Robert. You've been a big help on this thread.
Now to disappoint...next thread may not start for a bit...but I don't think you'll suffer much withdrawal.

Parents are coming in a week or so.
I'm going to visit wife in a few weeks.
Wife comes back home shortly after that. Woo hoo!
And there's the special projects I need to do for Marv :big:
Plus the grand-daughter will arrive in August.

I haven't had baby-puke on me for more than 20 years. Say...I wonder if anyone has tried that for getting a drill bit or tap out of a piece of metal? Don't ask me to try it...I don't expect to break anything .


----------



## Foozer (Jun 27, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> Now to disappoint...next thread may not start for a bit...but I don't think you'll suffer much withdrawal.




No No No.. The voices will return without a proper diversion, of course I could continue the Plato Republic discussion with my fan club  We were just getting into the merits of the cave when you started this thread


----------



## PhillyVa (Jun 27, 2009)

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ,


 th_wav Way to go....Great runner th_wav

         woohoo1   woohoo1   woohoo1

Regards

Philly


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 27, 2009)

Hi Robert,

From the wiki...

"Plato asserts that it is the philosopher's burden to reenter the cave. Those who have seen the ideal world, he says, have the duty to educate those in the material world, or spread the light to those in darkness. Since the philosopher is the only one able to recognize what is truly good, and only he can reach the last stage on the divided line, only he is fit to rule society according to Plato."

A philosopher machinist. Interesting. This explains a few earlier posts.

Philly: Thanks very much.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 27, 2009)

If we all call it a rose...then it must be a rose.
 :big:
Blame Robert...he put me in a philosophical mood.


----------



## AlasdairM (Jun 28, 2009)

Just woken up here in the UK and logged on - brilliant stuff Zee/Carl. Mega congratulations. :bow:

As I've said before, as a fellow newbie - nowhere near as "advanced" as you are - this has been a tremendous thread to follow.

I have learnt more from this than the last two months of reading books and magazines etc. As you say, Marv and Foozer and all the other posters give fabulous, practical help and information without patronising in any way at all.

Summary - brilliant forum, and even better thread!!

Enjoy your "break", and I look forward very much to seeing the tools you make to keep Mr K off your back (and don't forget the piccies....) ;D

Regards, A


----------



## Foozer (Jun 28, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> If we all call it a rose...then it must be a rose.
> :big:
> Blame Robert...he put me in a philosophical mood.




We all sit at wait for you, the "Door Keeper" to allow us through the passage

OK, so you have to read Kafka now 

Still a good job and no wobble on the flywheel, thats a WooHoo


----------



## ariz (Jun 28, 2009)

Congrats zee!!! :bow: :bow: :bow:

I saw a day or two ago that it wasn't running, but I was sure that you could do it to run (apologize for my english, too many verbs here :-\)

very well done, now you can go to the next engine


----------



## kvom (Jun 28, 2009)

Nice to see it running!  ;D

You should be able to make a little hose barb to keep from having to hold the tube.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 28, 2009)

Alaisdair: Thanks. That gives as much satisfaction as building.

Robert: First, I have to get through the machinist books that are piling up. But if you have Cliff Notes...

ariz: Thank you. I'm always impressed by people who take the time and energy to learn another language. I wish I'd kept up with my German. (Right now I need to learn some Spanish - it's a job thing - but learning any language is interesting.)

kvom: Thanks. Yeah...I saw someone recently post some stuff about making a hose barb. Actually...what I want to do is find a small router table and make some decent displays...mount the engine...and install some proper piping to a fitting on the edge of the display. If I remember my aquarium days right...a hose barb can be a 'pain' to deal with.

As for the router table et.al., I already have the 'go' from my wife...I just can't make up my mind on what to get. I don't intend to do much else with it...maybe picture frames and small boxes. So it's the usual 'go inexpensive' or 'better' conundrum. It's all about the features I think.


----------



## bearcar1 (Jun 28, 2009)

Say Z', If you want to go cheap, er, uh, that is I mean inexpensive, you could make a very simple one from one of those "P-lam" faced shelves that they sell at Menard's and such. I made up one for a simple project once and have used it many times since. It clamps to a bench or table top. A single 3/4" hole bored through the piece to clear the cutter bit and four wood screws through existing holes in the router base to secure it to the bottom is all it takes. A super simple strip of square stock with a small through hole near one end and a wood screw to hold it to the slab to act as a pivot while the loose end is secured with a C-clamp all acts as a guide fence. Like I said, cheap, er, uh inexpensive, sorry. But it does function well. 

BC1
Jim


----------



## mklotz (Jun 28, 2009)

I thought you had said that you didn't put the specified bend in the connecting rod - hence the incorrect interpretation of the video. Troubleshooting across a continent isn't easy.

It works. That's what counts.


Hose barbs, etc. ...

For small engines, it's worth standardizing on a size for the air connectors. I chose 3/16" because that pairs perfectly with the green silicone aquarium tubing. The slight gumminess of the silicone means that it "grips" an unbarbed 3/16" stub tightly enough to stay on with the low air pressures typically used for these engines. None of my engines have barbed air stubs. A further advantage is that 3/16" stock doesn't need to be cut down to thread 10-32 (major diameter = 0.060 + 10*0.013 = 0.190", 3/16 = 0.1875"). As a result, all my air inlets are done with that thread.

The silicone tubing has other advantages. It doesn't deteriorate or harden with age and is impervious to oil and, seemingly, UV damage. Surprisingly, it can also be used with live steam. I've run several of my engines with the last link between the boiler and engine a piece of silicone tubing. The tubing remains, after several years use, supple and apparently undamaged. Petco is a national (USA) chain and I've never been in one of their stores that didn't carry the green silicone tubing. Plus, it's cheap

As you build more engines and a display stand, you'll want to have a manifold. (Note to self: take pictures of the "heptapus" I use at shows.) There are numerous options but, when you're working up your personal design, include a regulator and a water trap - you'll thank yourself later when you go to a show where the organizers supply air.

I don't have the patience to build my own throttle valves for each engine so I use the small brass valves sold in hardware stores for refrigerator water lines. As the name suggests, the heptapus has seven of them emanating from a common reservoir so seven engines can be separately controlled.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 28, 2009)

mklotz  said:
			
		

> I thought you had said that you didn't put the specified bend in the connecting rod - hence the incorrect interpretation of the video.



That's right. But I/we thought we'd wait until it was time to assemble the engine and see if it was necessary. As it turned out, it was necessary. Sorry that I hadn't mentioned it during the assembly process.

Thanks for the tips on the tubing, manifold, and valves. That should be a fun project in itself.

While I have no experience yet going to a model engineering show (I hope that gets rectified soon) I've been to plenty of industrial shows to know you can't go wrong to bring anything and everything you might need. (Even then...depending on where you are...you might not be allowed to use, much less connect, your stuff up.) Don't forget spares! Murphy's Law and all that. At work...if I want to really test a new development...I ask to demo it to the boss. If it's going to fail...it'll fail there.


----------



## Foozer (Jun 28, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> Hi Robert,
> 
> From the wiki...
> 
> "Plato asserts that it is the philosopher's burden to reenter the cave. "



No good deed goes unpunished . . . 

So your motor is running, now you can do a timing check. Timing tape (not hard to make) around the flywheel with TDC and the intake and exhaust points marked. Pull cylinder head and bring piston to Top Dead Center, align pointer to TDC mark on flywheel. With low air applied, slowly rotate flywheel and at the intake mark 34' the air should just begin to flow, stopping at the 235 mark. Ditto with the exhaust. Easy way to check valve relationship to piston movement.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 28, 2009)

Foozer  said:
			
		

> No good deed goes unpunished . . .
> 
> So your motor is running, now you can do a timing check. Timing tape (not hard to make) around the flywheel with TDC and the intake and exhaust points marked. Pull cylinder head and bring piston to Top Dead Center, align pointer to TDC mark on flywheel. With low air applied, slowly rotate flywheel and at the intake mark 34' the air should just begin to flow, stopping at the 235 mark. Ditto with the exhaust. Easy way to check valve relationship to piston movement.



Did I say I was a philosopher? And wouldn't this have been done when they created the plans? Are you suggesting I did something wrong? Or that they did? ;D

Seriously though...it's very helpful to understand how one would go about verifying the timing. Another member emailed me some info on how to do that too. Surprise surprise...you both suggested the same method. Well I guess it shouldn't be a surprise. Guess I'll go and learn how to do it.

Thanks Robert.

Wait...are you just trying to get a fix? Man that's the 2nd deceptive fellow I've run into here. (Yeah I'm thinking about you 'V'.) :big:


----------



## Foozer (Jun 28, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> Did I say I was a philosopher? And wouldn't this have been done when they created the plans? Are you suggesting I did something wrong? Or that they did? ;D
> 
> Seriously though...it's very helpful to understand how one would go about verifying the timing. Another member emailed me some info on how to do that too. Surprise surprise...you both suggested the same method. Well I guess it shouldn't be a surprise. Guess I'll go and learn how to do it.
> 
> ...



Like I had to actually mow some of the yard today to mask the twitching from the ZEE withdrawal systems

Not that anything is wrong with the design or method of producing the part, checking the timing is an expansion to the knowledge you have gained. With a degree wheel you can alter the timing and compare that against engine performance. Course then you'd have to make some sort of engine dyno, pony brake, gizmo to measure changes in horsepower, Ok hamster in a cage power to actually have comparative data. That or face the bride for forgetting her birthday. Oh wait that's me today


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 28, 2009)

Foozer  said:
			
		

> That or face the bride for forgetting her birthday.



Oh man thanks Foozer. This might be your greatest contribution yet. I've been so busy working on this engine and all...


----------



## 1Kenny (Jun 28, 2009)

Nice going Zee. This has been fun to watch.

Kenny


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 28, 2009)

Thanks Kenny.

The whole thing is such fun. It's such a struggle not to go ahead and get started on the next project...but must do laundry, wash dishes, eat something. :big:


----------



## bearcar1 (Jun 28, 2009)

zeeprogrammer  said:
			
		

> Thanks Kenny.
> 
> The whole thing is such fun. It's such a struggle not to go ahead and get started on the next project...but must do laundry, wash dishes, eat something. :big:



And don't forget to get a present for Foozer's wife's B'day!! Rof} Rof} Rof}


----------



## Foozer (Jun 28, 2009)

bearcar1  said:
			
		

> And don't forget to get a present for Foozer's wife's B'day!! Rof} Rof} Rof}



Funny Funny

She gives me one for dinner and the other for tonight's hopeful, not sure of the order


----------



## DavesWimshurst (Jun 28, 2009)

Carl,
Very nice engine, very useful lessons for the beginners in building small engines. :bow: 
I bet many of us who started before the net wished we had had such a great support group.
So you are going to make some special present for your wife now?
Dave


----------



## AlasdairM (Jun 29, 2009)

More re hose barbs etc....

I fly (which means I spend a fair amount of time crashing and repairing) radio controlled helicopters and aircraft, we use silicon fuel tubing and "pressure nipples" which I think may fit the job for model engines.

For example, if you follow this link http://www3.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0095p?FVPROFIL=&FVSEARCH=pressure+nipple you will see what I mean. Not sure what the thread is on the pressure nipple, but should not be too much of a problem to sort?

If you enter "fuel tubing" in the search box on the top right of the page you will get loads of choices of colours etc. As this fuel carries the exhaust gases from the muffler/silencer on IC engines to the fuel tank, I think it should withstand steam as well as air.

No idea if this helps, and I have never used TowerHobbies before, being in the UK - I simply used their site as an example.

Regards, A


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 29, 2009)

bearcar1  said:
			
		

> And don't forget to get a present for Foozer's wife's B'day!! Rof} Rof} Rof}



He's on his own. I need to worry about my own wife's birthday. :big:


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 29, 2009)

DavesWimshurst  said:
			
		

> Very nice engine, very useful lessons for the beginners in building small engines.
> I bet many of us who started before the net wished we had had such a great support group.



Thanks Dave. Yeah...this forum has been invaluable and will continue to be so.



			
				DavesWimshurst  said:
			
		

> So you are going to make some special present for your wife now?



I thought I did! You said it was a nice engine. And it's special...in it's way.


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 29, 2009)

Alasdair: Thanks.

I had actually gone to a hobby shop nearby to look for fittings but didn't find anything. I wonder though if the higher pressure of steam (air in this case) would be a problem? I think I was running at 80 or so PSI - at least initially, to get the engine to run in.


----------



## shred (Jun 29, 2009)

As it happens I was in the hobby store today and looked at some of the 'pressure fittings'. I couldn't figure out what the pressure was all about since they were drilled straight through (I was hoping for some sort of check-valve), but they came in several numbered threads-- #10-32 & such. They were in the airplane parts section, so go for a store that caters to the airplane builders.

It would be pretty easy for a handy fellow with a lathe and an appropriate threading die to crank one out too


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 29, 2009)

shred  said:
			
		

> It would be pretty easy for a handy fellow with a lathe and an appropriate threading die to crank one out too



Hee hee hee. Handy. Yes. Appropriate threading die. Hee hee hee.

I will be revisiting this whole topic when I get round to mounting my engines onto wooden display bases and providing piping and fittings so I can easily hook them up to air (or even steam in the future!) and run them.

Never wanting for a topic!


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 30, 2009)

Still doing some analysis and collecting lessons learned...

I mentioned earlier that I drilled/reamed the cylinder first and then turned/sanded the piston to fit. What I may not have been clear about is that I think the cylinder bore had a slight taper to it. It would fit onto the piston (while piston was in the lathe) better on one end than the other.

I also mentioned that it was after this operation that the holes in the cylinder were drilled and tapped for the columns. And, that I wondered if this causes metal (brass) to push/bulge into the cylinder's bore. This happened to be the end of the cylinder that didn't fit the piston as well.

Perhaps the holes were made a little too close to the bore?

If this is true, then there would be 4 bulges into the cylinder. If you image a circle drawn to touch the peak of each bulge then there would be 4 gaps between the drawn circle and the cylinder wall. Since it was the piston I was modifying...the gaps would remain allowing a lot of leakage. It would then require more pressure to move the piston.

Comments?

Would a telescoping gauge help me?


----------



## DavesWimshurst (Jun 30, 2009)

Carl,
If there are bulges in the cylinder walls they may show up as shiny spots as the engine gets some more running time on it. Telescoping gauges take practice to get accurate results. So sure get a set and practice using them. Others may have advice on brands, mine are Mitutoyo bought decades ago and work ok. 

Dave


----------



## zeeprogrammer (Jun 30, 2009)

DavesWimshurst  said:
			
		

> If there are bulges in the cylinder walls they may show up as shiny spots as the engine gets some more running time on it. Telescoping gauges take practice to ...



Thanks Dave. Very good tip. When I take it apart I'll check. It's at work right now drawing some interest.  Mainly that they can't believe a software guy did it. The mechies are worried. :big:

Have cheap telescoping gauges. Will practice. Marv and others gave some good tips on technique.

Thanks again.


----------



## robot909 (Dec 25, 2019)

Hello all.
What's up with the "photobucket" pictures not showing up full resolution?
thx


----------



## comstock-friend (Dec 26, 2019)

Photobucket held everybody hostage to access their photos. There are some work arounds (or there used to be), but in general the Photobucket hosted photos in all web board posts are now just frustration...


----------



## bobden72 (Dec 27, 2019)

comstock-friend said:


> Photobucket held everybody hostage to access their photos. There are some work arounds (or there used to be), but in general the Photobucket hosted photos in all web board posts are now just frustration...



If I see photo bucket I just don't bother as I do not want to have to sign up.


----------

