Member postings for Andy_H

Your reply turns my wince into an embarrassed grimace. That's a very relevant differentiator! I did realise the IT side of this site was all run on a voluntary basis.

Andy

Wow. This made me smile or perhaps I should say wince. If migration plans for the systems I work with involved an outage to end users of up to 7 days.... Let's just say I wouldn't still have a job!

Andy

Thanks for all the replies. Answering a few points raised.

Noel - I will send you a PM.

The belt size will be 6mm.

The difference between diameter and bore had occurred to me and I think the blind bore approach would be best as I freedom to position the motor accordingly.

No it doesn't have to be aluminium. I did say preferably but if pushed to explain that preference it might be difficult to come up with a good argument!

Andy

I could make one, once I've got a pulley this size on the new motor to get my lathe working. I think the term is "chicken and egg"

Andy

Not sure if this is the right topic - but seemed the closest match!

I need a 20mm pulley for round belts with 10mm bore (preferably aluminium). I found one on Amazon (although one reviewer said the bore was actually 8mm) and one on Aliexpress. Both reasonably priced but very long delivery time so obviously coming direct from China with all that entails.

I've spent several hours searching via Google but can find nothing from a UK supplier.

So just wondering if anyone has a "go-to" UK supplier they would use for such components - one that has evaded me in all my searching?

Andy

In the search for a replacement chuck for my small lathe (a Flexispeed Mk 2) I am currently considering Chronos options.

I wonder if anyone has any first hand experience (including like/avoid views) of the following two chucks?

NEW- 50mm 3 Jaw Chuck ON A 2 MT or Soba 70mm 3 Jaw Scroll Chuck 14 x 1mm Thread

Andy

Me too Mark

Andy

Chris - you are indeed correct. It's just down the road from me

Andy

Here in Norfolk we have Happisburgh... whoever would have guessed that has to be pronounced haze-borough!

and then of course there's Menzies which is ming-iss

Andy

Well that stirred up far more debate than I expected!

It seems I can pronounce it either way and whether my pronunciation is correct or wrong will simply depend on whose company I happen to in at that moment 😜

Andy

Excellent point: the DRO (or other measurement system) provide precision but the operator achieves accuracy which is a pretty binary outcome: it's either within the limits of required tolerances or it isn't.

A really trivial one this - the sort of thing best pondered over a cup of tea.

I was recently thinking about gib strips / gib adjusters. In particular the correct pronunciation.

Is it gib as in "gibbon" or is it jib as in, well.... jib.

So reasonable assumption, Google will quickly settle that for me. Yeah right! Looked at two online dictionaries with audio pronunciation. The first dictionary gave me my second pronunciation option and the second dictionary produced the other option.

So, I just have to ask: what is the generally accepted pronunciation?

I know, gives the impression I have to much time on my hands. Not the case, honestly 🙄 some things just tweak my curiosity!

Andy

I certainly don't consider myself any sort of expert on this matter, nor do I have DROs on my small lathe (although I have, quite a few years back used a larger machine that had them fitted). But just a personal view of the topic which are certainly not intended to disagree with the "pro camp" - just offered as a different perspective.

It's now possible to use AI to write a letter. Before that using a computer with voice recognition. Before that a word processor, an electric typewriter, a manual typewriter. And, before all of those things - a pen. In other words, none of that technology is essential in order to write a letter. It just makes the job (arguably, some might say) easier or, more to the point, quicker.

I think the point is it's easy to be drawn into the mindset that add-ons, gadgets, gizmos (to generalise) are essential and indespenible. I suppose in some cases "technology" (again generalising) can help in plugging a gap in skill or ability. But generally are not essential.

The first micrometer was invented in 1772. I'm not sure when DROs were first introduced but let's assume, for the sake of illustration, the 1980's. Just look at what was produced as a result of skill and ingenuity in that intervening period.

Another reason for my views here is my underlying beleif that engineering is inherently about ingenuity or "finding a way". This was excellently summed up by the first really knowledgeable engineer I ever met (actually one of my lecturers many years ago) who advised: an engineer is a person who can do for a bob what any fool can do for a quid. That principle in pretty ingrained in the way I approach challenges.

Andy

It seems my post has probably come across as, at best very naive and at worst careless and completely lacking any forethought!

In fact I've been pondering the problem for a few weeks and done quite a bit of research in various places, these forums included, where others have encountered the sample "problem" with exactly the same lathe (and its close cousins).

Many options have been considered by others (with lots of input from forum members). I obviously won't repeat all the options and the arguments for discounting them (including a spindle adapter) here but in summary there have been two solutions used by others that stand out:

1) Manufacture a new spindle.

2) Bore out the chuck and convert, and insert a bush threaded to suit the existing spindle (effectively an adapter in the chuck rather than on the spindle). Down side of this of course is it has to be repeated for each check or accessory to be mounted on the spindle.

and actually, none of these solutions is feasible without a usable chuck to hold the work in. That, you might say, is the chicken-and-egg situation I have here

Andy

There's some valid points here but, in my defence the diagram IS clearly marked as preliminary and not for production purposes. It was provided simply to provide an indication of the size of the piece and key features (to clarify some points raised in an earlier reply). The drawing also proposes what to do about the worm, gear!

As for the "beer money" point. Unfortunately, my post seems to have been misunderstood right from the outset. The purpose of the post was not originally asking for someone to offer to help (although someone has). It was instead seeking advice on how to go about requesting help and, more importantly, whether it this sort of job is considered too complex to expect anyone to help in the first place.

I fully accept the point about imperial measurements. I would do that on a final version of the drawing intended for production.

Andy

The reason for replacement is just to change the nose thread so as to make it possible to but replacement chuchs.

Andy

I have now produced a preliminary drawing.

I have also found a small company that claims to do small jobs at very competitive prices so I have requested a quote. I will see what comes of that.

Andy

Hi David - perhaps not a big job providing you have the machine to produce it on

The Cowell's spindle is now £195 +VAT. Wow!

On your last point - I don't actually have a Cowell's lathe.... that only came into the thread as a suggested possible replacement for the Flexispeed part.

Andy

A good suggestion thanks.

I've already made the enquiry today and already have an answer. Although both are 0.5" it is not a suitable replacement. Although at the price I'm rather relieved it's not an option!

Andy

Yes I do.

In fact I have always referred to it as a spindle but having seen it referred to in several other posts as a mandrel used it here.

Your question got my curiosity working though wondering how the two terms differ which led me to this definition:

a usually tapered or cylindrical axle, spindle, or arbor inserted into a hole in a piece of work to support it during machining

So my take on this is that, although a mandrel can be a spindle, the distinction is that it's something used with a workpiece, whereas I was referring to the machine not a workpiece - so should have used the term spindle!

Andy