Member postings for Pero

Hi Paul

My standard ones are Eclipse but it is a long time since I have purchased one. It might be worth searching under the brand name to see if anything comes up.

An alternative is the T type blade sold by Eccentric Engineering ( advert this page ) but I note these are actually 12 mm rather than 1/2" so may not fit your toolholder. The T shape can also be problematic with some holders. On the plus side they are available in a number of widths, the construction makes for easier parting with less jams and the material is Cobalt HSS, so harder than standard HSS..

Sounds a bit like an advert but I don't get a discount - just a happy user of a number of their products.

Pero

Hi. My technique ( actually I was taught it by a cabinet maker friend of my late Father ) for maintaining the original colour of timber is as follows:

1. Sand smooth.
2. Apply a coat of clear varnish ( origInaly polyester but newer formulations would probably work as well  and allow to dry thoroughly.
3. Sand with a fine grade of sandpaper.

Repeat 2 and 3 using finer grades of sandpaper until you are happy with the surface finish.

Rub down the surface with Danish Oil ( aka Scandinavian Oil ) and steel wool, wipe down and allow to dry. Repeat as necessary until the required finish is achieved - it will produce an nice satin finish.

Finally ( thank goodness ) apply a coat of good quality, clear hard furniture wax and buff.

Maintenance is a new coat of wax from time to time. Spills may affect the surface finish and should be wiped up as soon as possible, hopefully before it penetrates the wax, but the underlying varnish will protect the wood in most cases.

It does take a long time but produces a great finish.

Pero

Geoff

I can't help much but I have much the same problem. The only option for known quality bronze that I have been able to find is to buy new bronze bar of the required alloy composition - a rather expensive option. However purchasing pure metals separately to create an alloy of known composition may be just as expensive - or even more so.

I would also be interested in the reasons for not making your own bronze - dangerous fumes perhaps or difficulties in getting the metals to combine to form the alloy or some other reason. I know that manganese bronze is not recommended - I think because of the high melting point of manganese and also with difficulties in casting this alloy but I would have thought the lower melting point alloys would be feasible.

I have the raw metals ( and alloyed bronze ) and an induction furnace but have not proceeded further pending further investigation and the creation of a master and molds for the castings.

Best of luck and let us know how you get on..

Pero

Gerry

I have a crane very similar in appearance to the one in your picture. The main difference is that mine is rated to  2 tons with minimum jib extension.

The main difference between the two is size - everything is bigger ( and heavier ) The metal tubes are all larger in cross section with much increased wall thickness, the ram is much higher rated and even the wheels and axles are larger and stronger. It also has a brace on the back ( red ) part of the jib.

To upgrade the 500 kg version to this specification would mean a total re-build ( basically throw it away and start again ).

Having had one for some decades, for my use, which is very infrequent, I would have been much better off hiring the specific lifting apparatus needed for the job in hand, your requirements may differ. In practice mine sulks, in pieces which is the only way I can store it, in a corner and threatens to injure me every time I walk past it.

My comment on heavier is also pertinent. The last time I assembled the crane I found that the weight of the individual components ( legs, jib etc. ) was starting to get toward my limit of lift. Always something to think on as one gets older.

The other problem with the bigger crane is longer legs - very awkward to use unless you have a very large and open shed to work in - mine is now way too cluttered for the crane to be used indoors.

My recommendation, if you can justify having one on hand, would be sell your current one a buy a larger model. The cost of the change over would probably not be much greater the up-rating your present with the subsequent risks that entails.

An alternative that I have considered in the past is to acquire ( or hire ) a manual pallet stacker. These have the advantage of a relatively small footprint - if you have a bench to park the forks under when it's not in use - and can lift a significant weight ( up to 2000 kg for some models ) up to very useful heights ( more than 2 m in some cases ).

Best of luck whichever option you go for.

Pero

Edited By Pero on 09/02/2021 04:20:23

Hi Liam

To start with the last part of your question first:

Why - because I planned to build a traction engine ( still planning that many years later and yet to get started! )

Which lathe - there are lots but I don;t feel quite so bad about it having read some of the posts here.

My first lathe was a Myford ML7 - about 40 years ago. It was an ex-display model, never powered up. It fitted my budget, apart from the things needed to run a lathe - motor, tools etc. and what to my mind was about the right size for the available space ( at the time ) and my very much undefined requirements. I did look at the second hand market but lathes were not plentiful ( in Western Australia ), mostly clapped out and way over-priced. I still have the lathe and have used it for making all sorts of bits and pieces - apart from the traction engine. All subsequent lathes were brand new.

The second lathe was a bit of a flight of fancy - a Sieg C3 - the idea was to have separate imperial and metric set-ups. Totally unnecessary of course. Lathe itself is fine and now well set up with accessories ( as is the Myford ).

Main issues with the above were limited diameter through the spindle, bed length and screw cutting. Later addressed on the Myford by the addition of a screw cutting gearbox.

A couple of decades on and planning toward retirement all of the above problems were addressed by the purchase of a large ( by hobby standards ) Chinese gap-bed lathe. Basic specs - 1 m between centers, 400 mm swing, 58 mm through the spindle, 3 ph 7.5 hp motor and all up weight ( it has an integral cast iron base ) of close to 2 tonnes. This is an industrial lathe and built to much higher specs than most of the small hobby lathes. Biggest problems, starting with installation, are size and weight. You need to have room for the lathe, including getting it through any doors, and a substantial concrete floor to sit it on. Everything that goes with it is also heavy. My 250 mm grip-tru style chuck with its D1-6 backplate weighs in at close to 40 kg, I can still lift it ( just ) but would not be able to manouvre it into position without additional lifting assistance. Something worth considering as the years go by.

The others are little lathes picked up along the way. A C0 baby lathe. Cowells ME 90 and a bunch of Taig ( = Peatol ) lathes. The last purchased because they are modular and easily adaptable for special operations, e.g the fitting of a high speed spindle in place of the standard headstock. The Cowells is just nice to look at (as well as to use ).

There is also a watchmakers lathe, also ex China but generally marketed under brand name from Germany. Useful for hand work although it also has many of the standard lathe facilities.

The small lathes are more easily stored and can be used indoors when the workshop is too hot, too cold or too unfriendly.

If I were starting again I would still probably start with something like the ML7 ( or preferably its much later cousins ). If starting with a plan to do bike or car work I would aim for something a little larger but not too extreme. For most people the big jobs are few and far between and it is probably going to be more cost effective to sub these out, Remembering that everything on a big lathe - from tooling to chucks is also bigger, heavier and a lot more expensive than on a small bench top lathe.

Pero

ps I am attending regular meetings of Lathes Anonymous and have not purchased a new lathe for more than 5 years - but have lapsed and bought a few accessories and tooling from time to time.

Easy on the conspiracy theories Steve!

Checking on various electrical items from a prestige Australian 'manufacturer' some years ago I found that all were imported from elsewhere - China, Malaysia, Philippines, even Romania. Although I did note that prices had been increased - presumably to take advantage of the cheaper labour costs ( or possibly the mugs who buy the stuff ).

I later discovered that it was possible in some cases to buy direct from the factory supplying these items at a fraction of the cost. QC checks confirmed that these were not seconds or otherwise incomplete - just no supplied with the Australian 'manufacturers' label.

The point of the above is that buying from the 'local manufacturer' in this day and age is no guarantee that the item will not have been made ( and quite likely well made ) almost anywhere overseas. Basically the same issue with a lot of the engineering tools and equipment purchased with well known brand names.

The criminals responsible for the item at the top of the page can pop up anywhere in the world - often financed in one country and made in another -, and likely slip their trash into supply lines in many countries, with third world ones being likely soft targets as they are less likely to be detected.

With expanded world trade and the proliferation of products on the market it becomes more and more difficult for electrical safety authorities to maintain checks on all items, let alone detect the deliberately dodgy ones.

Pero

No, just a bog standard ML7, but the carbon steel tools don't last very long.

I always thought they were pretty well balanced fellows - a chip on both shoulders!

Just in response to Adrian's comment I have one of these furnaces purchased ex China. Looks good but I have not used it in anger yet. However, I am impressed with the Myfordboy video which gives me some additional confidence.

These kilns, which all look the same in all the pictures, actually come in a range of sizes based on the weight of material that can be melted in the graphite crucible provided. However the weight of material is quoted for gold - so you can't melt as much aluminium for your money - a higher weight can be achieved with brass or zinc - same volume its just the metal which has a higher specific gravity. It took a few readings of the description before I twigged to this and fortunately ordered the largest size. It's still not huge but should be adequate for smaller parts.

Pero

Alan

I don't know the mechanism affecting the coiled glass but I do know that a similar effect can be seen in suspended lengths of most metals, plastic, wood etc. The thinner the section and the longer the unsupported length the greater the resulting bend.

The force acting of course is gravity but how the molecular structure responds ( differently I suspect in each of the above materials ) is beyond my mostly retired pay grade.

Pero

Mica can be " cut " using a pair of sharp nippers - preferably of the end cutting variety. The type used in electronics would be suitable for this size of work. You need to nibble away of the edges until you reach the desired shape.

Pyrex would be suitable but would be difficult to cut to shape and ideally you should anneal the cut edge prior to use. A possible source, if you want to try it, is the base plate for a 3D printer. These can be acquired quite cheaply in the smaller sizes and possibly used uncut if it is possible to fit the square sheet behind the round hole.

Pero

Here in darkest Australia I have had both a pair of shoes and a pair of workboots ( neither Clark's ) kept for several years unused, one pair in the original cardboard box and one in the airing cupboard, both of which fell apart on first use. The boots fell apart in the garden which was disappointing, the shoes at the optician leaving bits stuck to the floor both on the way in and the way out. Very embarrassing!

Since a good pair of boots should last for quite a few years I would say the sole material is not fir for purpose. The same could be said for the shoes however as these are typically expected to have a shorter lifespan the rapid breakdown of an item which is unlikely to be recycled is perhaps an environment benefit. No, I don't believe it either but I'm sure the shoe companies would push this line if they think of it.

As others have noted it is not something I have encountered with regularly worn shoes. As an example, two pair of shoes bought at the same time, one worn to death with no damage to the sole other than expected wear, the second pair worn the day after with immediate failure of the sole. Perhaps there is someone out there that can explain the chemistry, it's beyond me.

It also makes me query the long term survival of polyurethane insulation materials and adhesives where one would hope for decades of performance - hopefully better chemistry, but I will be more cautious in future use.

Back on the treatment of sticky plastic, one benefit of hand sanitizer is that it usually contains glycerine or similar as a moisturiser which is good for most plastic surfaces in addition to your hands!I have on occasion used talc but have found that over time it just results in a rather dirty sticky surface as the cure is only skin deep and the underlying deterioration continues.

Pero

Thanks for the link Michael. It's made my ( New ) Year!

Now, I wonder if the offer dancing lessons?

Pero

Oh the luxury of having enough floor space to operate a pallet truck!

Actually I do have enough floor space - it's just that it's taken up with too much junk - lathes, milling machines etc.

The problem is, every time I clear a little space something new sneaks in to take up even more room. Curse those internet sales!

Perhaps I will elevate tidying-up on the perennial list of New Year resolutions.

Pero

A note of caution on the subject of castors.

The general recommendation on the use of castors is that the maximum load should be limited to 2 times the allowable loading of an individual castor, not 4 times as would seem at first glance to be acceptable ( for a unit with four castors). The reasons being to allow for uneven distribution of weight ( think lathe here ) and to allow for any irregularities in the floor surface which may result in the weight suddenly bring transferred to only two of the castors.

Individual circumstances will vary, but generally I stick to the recommendation as the additional cost of higher rated castors is small when you consider the value of the item being moved.

Ready built dollies or kits are generally rated to take this into consideration.

With higher load rating castors used on items that are constantly loaded and infrequently moved there is also less tendency for the tyre of the castor to develop a flat spot which can make subsequent movement difficult. Steel or other rigid tyred castors reduce this problem ( as the bearings also play a part ) but are less pleasant to use than the resilient tyred castors which are more commonly encountered. However comfort is probably not an issue when the item is being moved very infrequently and over very short distances.

Pero

You will lose a little through evaporation. Quick test - if you can smell it, then there is some present in the evaporating water - the stronger the smell the more acid that is present in the vapour. However the human nose is quite sensitive and it takes relatively few molecules for the brain to register its presence.

In this instance the bulk of the acid will slowly concentrate in the reducing water volume.

Pero

The problem is residual gunk ( aka paint pigment particles ) which gets into the base of the bristles and forces them apart. Hard to prevent even with very thorough cleaning.

A clean with a strong solvent before wrapping or tying the bristles to shape will help to prolong life, however I generally treat brushes as a consumable item which will eventually pass their use-by date. The initial cost of the brush is often the critical factor here.

On non-critical jobs I often use el-cheapo brushes and discard after one use - the cost of the solvent to clean them properly often exceeding the cost of the brush ( unless of course you are using water-based paints ).

Incidentally for brush washing I use the three jar system. First jar for the initial clean, then into the second and finally the third for the final wash. When the solvent in the first jar becomes too dirty it is discarded and the jar washed. Jar 2 then is promoted to jar 1 and jar 3 to jar 2. The newly clean jar is filled with clean solvent and becomes jar 3. This hopefully results in minimal particulate matter being present in the final wash.

Pero

Simon you have just mentioned the unmentionable elephant in the room - well nearly 8 billion of them to be nearer the mark!

However, I have seen interviews with noted climate scientists who have proclaimed, with a straight face, that humans do not contribute to global warming it is only their activities that cause this. They then go on to condemn farm animals as shameless contributors to green house gas production. Could these be possibly the rantings of religious vegans?

Apart from the breathing, belching and other unmentionables expelled by humans, the loss of habitat, destruction of soil and watercourses, lakes and marshes are all a result of the gross overpopulation of all of the continents and most of the islands on the planet. That includes Australia which, although it has an extremely low population density, we have still managed to irreversibly damage most of the more benign parts and a large area of the parts that are not quite so benign.

Since Australia has a low birth rate population growth is largely determined by the immigration rate but while we have a housing driven economy in which predominantly migrants build houses for other migrants using imported building materials and then fill them with imported appliances and government, industry and the unions think this is a good thing it is unlikely that things will change in the short term.

There endeth today's sermon ( well tomorrow's actually - this is just my first draft ).

Pero

A query if I might.

In the discussion on VFDs the subject of EMC filters is regularly raised.

As one who prefers not to interfere with others I am quite happy to fit one BUT I have yet to see any comment on what type of filter is required ( there are EMC filters and there are EMC filters ). It needs to meet both legal requirements ( if any ) and to do the job it is there to do.

If it is the small metal encased type costing a few dollars ( or pounds ) I am quite happy to fit them whether needed or not. However if it is the massive type costing a great deal more than a high quality ( i.e. expensive ) VFD then I need to know that the expense can be justified ( i.e. is there really a problem that needs fixing ).

Any advice from the suitably qualified - by training or experience - would be welcomed.

On the subject of enclosures - a good idea even if the VFD is located some distance from the machine. It is amazing just how far swarf will travel, especially aluminium, and where it will end up. Quite a few CFDs have an inbuilt fan which will draw air ( and light swarf ) into the internals with possible sad results. An enclosure will also provide protection against the odd flying missile - broken tool, chuck key etc.

Pero

Presumably not Chain of Custody or even Commander in Chief.

Ahh. So many acronyms, so few letters in the alphabet!

Something to do with protecting the commercial advertisers I believe.

I'm sure one of the Mods will explain all shortly.

Pero