Member postings for not done it yet

but the reality is that the technology doesn't yet exist to permit long durations without recharge,

Wrong again, I afraid! It does exist. The French have recently demonstrated an 'on-the-go' charging system that can supply an electric vehicle with 20kW. Suffient for a reasonably sized car to travel at the speed limit.

Installed on through routes/trunk roads/motorways it may well offer the long distance traveller to travel considerable distances without needing to recharge at a static charging point.

Perhaps not yet developed to commercial reality, but simply a practical demonstration track to show it can be achieved. I expect they will develop it further as time goes by. Look it up, if interested. Fully Charged has it on video.

Oil well supplies will run out, believe me. They aren't making any more. (The current stuff was produced millions of years ago). Electric from renewable energy (or at a push, non-carbon technologies) is the way forward. Petrol and diesel cars are both on the way out. No matter what either, or both, cost comparatively (which was rebutted very early on with this thread) or in any other way.

It has long been government policy to move industry and people to larger conurbations. Blame the government for short-sightedness, if anyone/anything, but please don't harp on about the fuel - it is the engine designs that are to blame, along with those that set out the rules for testing.

Andrew,

How many threads were engaged for the bolt to break, rather than stripping the threads. Presumably the bolt was not screwed down tight with head to aluminium, or bottomed out? It might not be the same story for a man-sized bolt like 18mm!​

Work done will be the same whatever the handle size, but longer ones reduce the force needed. ?

If you must, but work done will be force multiplied by displacement (mustn't say distance, but practically the same here), but if the handle is twice the length only half the rate of doing work would be required to turn it at the same speed (not angular), albeit at half the rate of displacement. Basically, as a theoretical example, a seven stone weakling may actually be able get the job done (at a lower rate of doing work), with a longer handle while a 14 stone strapping lad/lass could do it with the shorter handle. But it might take twice as long for the weakling, with both working at the same % capacity of their power output (if one was 'twice'as strong as the other). OK?

that will reduce the size to 15.5mm with thread is that right ,Seems so far apart in size ,finding this hard to get my head round ,I will get there i hope .

Sort of, but only a bit over half of the material will be removed, the other half is needed to engage with the other thread.

19mm is likely a more common (so cheaper) size. Virtually the same as 3/4".

18mm is not that big. Just need a handle size commensurate with the job. Work done will be the same whatever the handle size, but longer ones reduce the power needed. I think Abom was tapping about an inch and a quarter, handraulically, on a recent video -but I maybe he has enough beef to swing most handles!

Packmule,

I note from your original post that you apparently ordered a good make initially. Did you choose the cheapest of a range of qualities available from the various suppliers?

Further, it would appear (to m3) that it is likely a 4 jaw self centering chuck (you say 'the screw thread will close three jaws'? These, IMO, are only good for perfectly round or square (or octagonal) items. With any deviation from the above, one pair of jaws will tighten before the other, which could cause problems. Buying the bottom of the range is not always a good decision I'm afraid. I try to avoid that scenario, but have been caught out by banggood recently.

If the chuck is a scroll type, it would appear that the jaw is at fault, not the scroll. Can you confirm exactly the type of 4 jaw you bought originally, please.

I usually consult 'engineering toobox dot com.

There it quotes 0.614 x pitch.for metric threads, so 1.228 x pitch reduction, but that would not leave anything to be cut at the internal crests, so JB's rule of thumb is good.

As a point of note, 18mm coarse 2.5mm pitch) is not listed as a 'standard' size on that site - only 16 and 20mm. 18mm is quoted for 1.0, 1.5 and 2.0mm pitches. But if you have a tap and die of that size, they obviously exist!

5C collets also fit spin-indexers , indexing fixtures, and other gadgets. To the best of my knowledge none of these things are made for ER.

Knowledge improvement time!

I believe you will find, if you look hard enough, an ER spin indexer available from ArcEuro. Named after the late John Stevenson?

It will accept both 5C and ER32 collets. Look it up, along with the square and hex indexers.

Or "nearenuff", "closenuff" or eqwivalent of a gnat's sumthing....

So will petrol - it will run out, 'cos the dinosaurs aren't making any more! And petrol is likely no better than diesel when push comes to shove.

The electric revolution is coming; ICE vehicles, as we know them today, will be a thing of the past. Nowt to do with diesel prices compared to petrol, I might add.

Aren't they a bit like ''Stephenson' s'' this and that - only these japanese pull saws likely came from china?

Vic and Diesel are like Blowlamp and Bitcoin...

Please enlighten, or do you mean the same as 'like a dog with a bone'?

No replies to your earlier posting, I see.

I'm no expert and know diddly squat about steam loco builds, but as I see it if it was OK and isn't now it is unlikely anything to do with the timing. It would seem that something else has changed. Steam pressure or delivery seem the only obvious culprits, but maybe my post will wake up a few of the loco builders and runners!

Pretty much too much, I would guess. You have a slitting saw with a likely 1" arbor? That would leave less than 1 1/2" of clear blade and you are trying to cut 1.414 inches deep (possiblybmore if the bar is oversized)? Doesn't leave much clearance anywhere, if any at all. In fact, at 100mm, that is less than 4" diameter. Likely heat from expansion is enough to cause problems.

Yup, Three threads in the same vein started in just the last month!

I read somewhere that petrol and diesel are the waste products of the oil cracking process

A by-product might be a better description. We should not be wasting anything from this valuable resource!

The price has nothing to do with how much of any one fraction one might get from a barrel.

Little fifferent than mixing one gallon of water with two gallons of oil - on separation, the one gallon of water is not worth twice that of the oil.

Cost and worth are not the same thing with oil fractions.

A barrel of oil can be fractionated, initially into the full range of boiling point components - from gases, volatile liquids, less volatile liquids, to (eventually) remaining solids. This would vary with the type of crude, particularly dependent on origin (north sea oil is more valuable as it contains more of the lighter components).

Further refining can be arranged to crack the longer carbon chain constituents into smaller carbon chain liquids and gases.

Each stage costs money and the final range of products may each have a different value, dependent on how useful they might be. Fuels for burning are not particularly exciting, do not require so much refining and have less value than feedstocks for, say, plastics production. The design of the cracking process can tailored to achieve different ratios of final products (more, or less, of one constituent compared with another),

I note a trend in this type of thread, from this poster, which have undertones of 'diesel haters'. Very much akin to nimbyism where renewable energy instalkations might be involved. The OP, I think, needs to look more closely at the refining industry before jumping to incorrect conclusions in order to try to stir up more hysterical claptrap about different oil fractions. Diesel is not only burned in vehicle engines. The same fraction, and closely related ones, are burned in oil fired central heating installations which are still a popular choice for home heating in places which do not have gas mains.

SO to conclude I assume that if I believe the measurements I take as to the alignment with the x and y axis are correct with reference to themselves, I can simply run a indicator across the rear surface of the table with reference to the spindle?

Sorry, but wrong again. The table could be perfectly level and the head at a rediculous angle and the indicator would not change. Try it.

All contact measuring tools are flxible at some level of force. Consistency is the important factor. Think here of measuring internal and external dimensions for a close fit - ie comparative readings.

Outside measurementsis apparently easy and could be measured (probably inaccurate in the absolute sense) at any pressure. However measuring the inner dimension would not be satisfactory as one would be using a secondary transfer tool and likely deformed differently. Common sense needs to be applied - a light but adequate pressure and, above all, consistency.

Remember, too, that sensitive measuring tools do not take kindly to heavy handling. Micrometers, for instance use a fine screw thread which would easily be damaged if overtightened and would definitely wear out much faster than they should if used in that manner.

Beware banggood. I have bought lots of items from them and been pleased with the value for money. BUT, if one has a complaint for rubbish products they are USELESS as far as sorting it out. So if you get something that is duff, don't expect to easily get a replacement or your money back.