Member postings for Cabinet Enforcer

Michael, the ctek mxs 5 appears to do all the useful features of the NOCO. Unless you tell us what specific features you are after then no-one can offer any more specific advice, can they?

I killed two aldi chargers, one just died, another decided that all batteries were faulty, they also don't like charging deep discharged batteries even when they were working properly, the ctek will do so as long as you disconnect the battery.

The left one has the latest revision battery cover, the right one has the slightly recessed one of an older model, but the new AOS logo, so I would say the right one is fake. Also hard to tell from photo, but the screen looks a shade darker than I would expect.

Duncan, I know that 2xxx aluminium suffers from stress corrosion cracking, if 6082 is strong enough at the intended temperature range then it would be preferable for that reason.

Exactly which aspect of the 17 page report that does not feature the word diesel once, contradicts the telegraph article?

You should note that the headline observations (and to a lesser extent the detail of it) of the report do not consider the wider context of transport policy and changing usage, nor do they appear to be corrected for economic activity levels.

In a nutshell, despite many regulatory steps taken to reduce PM10 levels, the observed incidence is not falling as fast as it should, even worse, it is not falling as fast as it used to before the early 2000's. This has been caused by two factors 1) Increased use of diesel vehicles 2) Real world emissions of newer diesel vehicles have not realised the incresed demands placed by regulation (Volkswagen et al).

The only apparent outright falsehood I can see is the suggestion in the Telegraph that NOx emmissions, (or any of the other diesel filth) is somehow a newly discovered aspect of diesel engines.

The political point scoring is tedious, since the Tories would have done exactly the same, had they been in power at the time.

The pulleys are doubles as the belt calcs for the full 1.1Kw say there should be two belts, nothing so fancy as two sizes Of course the pulleys don't line up perfectly so two belts can't be used, if I had a working lathe I could machine a new spacer for the spindle, maybe I will get a round tuit now I remeber it needs doing.

Pulleys are 71mm and 106mm, this gives speeds from 60 to 2000. There isn't huge amounts of torque left at 60 though, and I suspect it could do with both belts on at lower speeds too as slip can start to be an issue if you push it hard. Motor is 4-pole.

In retrospect I would not have chosen these sizes and now would probably go with a 60mm or 56mm and a 125mm to get the low end more usable, and have an alternate set in the cupboard with maybe a 2500 top end.

Getting the pulley ratio yet lower would require an intermediate pulley, or perhaps looking at alternate belt/pulley types, this wasn't possible when I did mine as it was the first lathe I bought and it was broken when I bought it.

I can relay my experience with a warco 280 if that would help. I was unable to juice the tacho board on the back of the display unit so that it would run of its own accord. I was unhappy about running mains voltage wires into the front of the headstock just for the sake of the tacho, so I butchered a phone charger and wired it into the fused supply in the control box, then ran the 5V cable through and patched it in to the power supply board after some testing to work out how far back up the circuit I needed to put it to get it all working.

You can of course use the VFD display to show speed, but I preferred the VFD to be properly enclosed in the control box, and the tacho to come from measuring the actual spindle speed, in case I alter the pulleys.

As for the motor fitment, the 280 has threaded holes in the bed, revealed when the rear control box is removed, the 250 may well be the same?

So I cut off the lower half of the control box, and mounted the VFD in the upper half.

The threaded holes were at the spacing for an 80 frame motor, I chose the higher power option at 1.1Kw, and just mounted it on threaded bar and nuts, which allows for tensioning the belt (if a little rudimentary).

I then used nutlink belt and a pair of taperlock pulleys to finish the job, obviously they go straight on the motor, but happily the 280 spindle is a simple M40 thread so the old pulley was spun off and easily replaced with a taperlock one.

The whole thing was so easy that I was able to get the lathe going without needing a working lathe to make parts, obviously I could refine the setup a little now, but it works well enough as it is.

Neil, in the case of PSSR, the terms "owner" and "user" are defined in the interpretation section and their meaning is restricted to that definition, and should not be interpreted as the "common" meaning.

For example, when you get your tyres changed on your car, the chap who inflates them is not the "user" of the system, it's the business who employs him. Similarly, the person who is operating a model steam engine may not the "user" of the model.

Schoools are the most obvious example, students may well use a model, but the school is the "user".

I'm surprised at the lack of facts in this thread, given how long the legislation has been around.

Haven't a clue, as I haven't done any turning at that size yet, though the motor speed is about 110rpm at a spindle speed of 75.

I originally intended to get two pairs of pulleys, for high and low, but i went down the middle just to get the lathe up and running, I haven't found the need to change yet. I must get around to measuring up again for the largest size that'll fit under the guard so I can make up a low range set, I think it will be needed eventually.

Mark,

I run a 1.1kW 80 frame 4 pole motor on my inverter converted WM280.

I use taperlock z section pulleys of size 71mm (motor) to 106mm (Spindle)

This motor power and belt /pulley setup should ideally be run with twin belts, a larger motor pulley would reduce this need, in practice one belt is fine most of the time, I couldn't be bothered to make a custom mount for the motor to facilitate lining up the pulleys to run 2 belts.

The pulleys give a ratio of circa 0.67, and in practice give a speed range of 75-2000 Rpm.

If I were to spec this up again I would go for a ratio nearer 0.5, which would give a slightly more usable low speed with a top end still at 1500.

The current setup with just 1 belt means the belt slips before the motor stalls, which is fine for my somewhat beginner level experience.

John,

I converted a warco 280, the bed casting has threaded holes on the back at 80 frame foot mounting size. I perched a 1.1KW 4-pole motor on some studding and drove the spindle with taperlock v-belt pulleys and some nutlink belt. The large DC motor mounting plate was removed, and if you wish to retain the belt cover interlock then a bracket needs to be made for it, otherwise I found it extremely simple to implement.

I had to modify the splash guard on mine, though it was an earlier model with a smaller DC motor, there is more space on the later ones, so modifications may not be needed.

Commercially available stabilisers are intended for small children's bicycles, the bolts supplied were likely adequate for the application.

If you want stabilisers for an adult size bike then you will need the whole lot made from scratch, not just the attachments. Any system using U-bolts is unlikely to be suitable for an adult bike, the frame will be damaged before sufficient clamping loads can be achieved.

If you seek a stable cycling platform, stabilisers are not the answer, you need a tricycle.

No legitimate seller will allow PayPal for a collection, they are wide open to being scammed. The only exception might be for cars, where change of ownership is easier to show

That would be the myth busters panel, now up to case 340-odd, and all catalogued on the HSE website, here: **LINK** there have been various press items on the panel, I think the most recent would be on the release of a University of Exeter study of the cases submitted to the panel.

I have a nook HD+ running 4.2 also, I have just checked and the digital editions are working fine for me on the standard browser without changing any settings.

Have you tried ticking the "request desktop site" box in the browser menu?

I think it will help if you re-examine what is meant above. If your inverter can do a controlled interval stop it is using DC injection braking (do check the manual on this however).

For an e-stop, the DC injection braking is much preferable to killing the power, either before or after the inverter, as killing the power means the motor will coast down under its own momentum, which can take rather a long time, especially on larger machines or if you have something hefty in the chuck.

Some inverters can have more than one stop condition, with different ramp times on the DC injection, for example one slowish on a small stop button, and one harsh stop on an e-stop circuit.

Beware using braking if your lathe has a threaded spindle, it can have entertaining results.