Member postings for ChrisH

Interesting, the comments here. For my part I would go with leaving the garage door in place and building an insulated stud wall behind. Insulation is important, you can't get enough! You don't want it cold anymore thatn youy want the damp (rain) to get in! Unless the machines are huge then they will fit probably through a standard doorway if stripped down into manageable chunks - well, that worked for me!

Interesting also the difference between English and French planning. We have just converted an attached garage in France into living space with a bedroom over and although the planning application had to go via the village Mairie to the planning department AND to a church planning department for approval (because the property was within the 'eye' of the village church) and all had to approve, all they wanted to know was what the outside elevations would look like, would it match and conform to existing, and size and style of windows was very important - they stipulated what we could have. How we blocked up the doorway, made inter-connecting doors on both levels, insulated the place, supported walls, wired the place for sockets and lights - our problem, not theirs, it is assumed that the builder takes responsibility to make sure it is right and conforms (to what I am not sure) and the builder has to guarantee his work for 10 years. If you do it yourself..............? At least we were not plagued with officious building inspectors nit-picking throughout like we would have been done here!

Edited By ChrisH on 21/04/2014 21:53:06

Stainless steel and aluminium can 'weld' together in the right situation, a sort of corrosion I think between the two, the two bits end up 'solid' anyway - ask anyone who has a boat with stainless fittings on an aluminium mast! You can buy from yacht chandlers some grunge in a tube to protect the bits in question, but best avoid the situation arising in the first place if at all possible.

Also, stainless can be brittle - hence you never hammer test it; hence, another point to bear in mind when in material selection mode.

Chris

Count me in as another watching this build with great interest! This engine interests me as a possible future build too, after completing the present planned stuff.  Good luck with it Allan.

I too was wondering about the swarf-free machining and then greatly relieved to see the little swarf bits that Jason has highlighted - my machines, you can't usually see the machines for swarf, it just seems to build up SO quickly.....

Chris

Edited By ChrisH on 09/04/2014 19:12:11

Edited By ChrisH on 09/04/2014 19:12:47

One thing to bear in mind when planning electrical outlets/loads is that most of the time, probably all of the time unless you have a load of mates round all getting stuck in at once, there will be mainly only one high electrical consumer on at once, ie, just the lathe or just the mill, plus if you have electrical heating the heater, as multitasking in the workshop is very rarely an option even for the ladies, I would have thought, who usually claim to be able to multitask and then end up doing several tasks only so-so instead of one well done for which thought I will probably get into trouble especially if Senior Management gets to read this.

Chris

Favourite tools are a 1lb 12oz hammer and a 10in Barco Adjustable Spanner.

The hammer I have had for 40 years this year. It has a shortened shaft as that made it easier to use to full effect in the sometimes cramped for space conditions in a ship's engine room. It is by far the nicest hammer I have to use, it always feels like an old friend when I pick it up.

The same applies to the 10in Barco adjustable spanner - otherwise known as a 'shifter' - that I have had for about 45 years now, give or take a year! Essential bit of kit when in the engine room (along with a torch, notebook and pen and a rag!) In my opinion it is far nicer than any other 'shifter' I have handled, even the modern Barco ones, well balanced and with nice curved edges, a pleasure to use.

Both tools I still use on a frequent basis when doing engineering stuff - wouldn't want to be without either!

Chris

I think if I was going to go down this route I would build the tapping fixture that Harold Hall describes in one of his books - I think it is in the Workshop Projects book in the Workshop Practise Series. It's mode of operation seems very good and sensible, it's cheaper as it's only materials you are buying, some of which you may already have, and you would have the satisfaction of making something yourself that works and is very useful.

Chris

There's a lot that is a dream here Neil!

I still can't see the post Danny, but if it's visible in Oz, well, I must have hit the 'ignore member' button, perhaps when I edited the post on my iPad - (big fingers, little spaces, clumsy operator, late night, the worse for drink, etc etc).

Well, you live and learn, never knew what the 'ignore member' button did before!

Chris

Clive, many thanks for the info on traps for the Asian Hornet. Pesky blighters aren't they? Seems like the more that are trapped and killed the better, esp the queens. I do not have a hive as no space but would like one, so am very interested in what you write on bees!

Chris

Last night Harold Hall had posted a reply on this thread to which I replied.

This morning his reply has gone, it's just not there at all. Makes it look as if I made it up.

What is going on?

Chris

Clive - what is the device that traps the hornets?  Is it easy to make?

Edited By ChrisH on 03/04/2014 23:08:28

Clive - what is the device that traps the hornets?

Harold, delighted to have you posting on this forum again! I have followed your book on milling and have had no cause to disagree with what you have written; things like speeds that you have suggested have served me well so far.

It was just reading/seeing on another website quite different speeds quoted made me question what might be right or not; realising that the home workshop machines would not have the capability to match the more 'professional' machines were slower speeds the more appropriate? I feel this is indeed the case here. I feel this is quite possibly so as it was significant that the speed and feed rates I employed in my last post were only achievable on my mill if I used a lot of coolant/ lubricant, but I was looking to see if I could increase my work rate as I am a very slow worker! The use of neat cut oil enabled a faster work rate, whether I would continue down that path in the future is debatable as it is more messy and takes longer to clear up as you go along, so it's swings and roundabouts. I spend less time machining and more time cleaning up!

As I said earlier, I am still at an early learning stage, not only in how to do stuff but also in what is good/achievable for my machines, but it is very interesting and informative to hear what others, more experienced than me, have to say on what works for them, and seeing how that might be applied in my case.

Chris

Edited By ChrisH on 03/04/2014 23:01:06

Edited By ChrisH on 03/04/2014 23:03:06

Thanks for all the responses, it has helped me no end

Andrew, I came back and read your reply after trying a run at 600 rpm for the 16mm end mill, 3-4mm cut at 9mm deep, using a feed rate I later measured at just a tad over 3in/min using pretty near flood cooling using neat cut oil. I say pretty near, the table floods if I use too much, but I need a good flow to cool the tool/job and stop the smoke, so it's a balancing act. I am pleased to say it worked out very well, then read that it was roughly what you had recommended, so very pleased to have found that. Good surface finish too.

I am still without a lot of mill experience so it's very early into the 'touchy-feely' learning curve, but I know what you mean John from other disciplines, so learning, but not there yet!

I guess it is all suck it and see, what works and what doesn't, and being aware of the difference between commercial and home workshop practices.

Cheers

Chris

Edited By ChrisH on 03/04/2014 13:52:09

Now am totally confused - easily done these days.

On another thread there was a link to Tomstechniques.com website in the USA, a very informative site, very interesting for the beginner, and on one of his videos he discusses cutting speeds. So for mild steel - to which I took to be the BDMS or Black MS we use here in the UK - he suggests a cutting speed of 100ft/min, giving an RPM of 640 for a 5/8in, or 16mm, cutter.

However, I have been going by Harold Halls 'Milling, a complete course' book, and by 'Model Engineer's Handbook', who suggest cutting speeds for a 5/8in or 16mm cutter achieved by RPM of 375 and 385 respectively, which has worked pretty well in my mill I have to say.

But why is there such a variation? And what RPM do the team think is a good One for this size cutter?

Furthe query on feed rates, the milling feed rates recommended I see suggest (to me) very fast feed rates, up to 3in/min. What formula determines feed rates?

Chris

Edited By ChrisH on 02/04/2014 10:51:58

My first ship in 1964 had a Doxford engine, but I thought the company went burst in the 70's, certainly by the 80's.

I am amazed that a broken con-rod did so little damage that they could make the engine run with the just broken con-rod and attached bits removed.

Doxford engines - opposed piston 2strokes - had spherical main bearings. Taking crankshaft deflections was a nightmare as the readings were all over the shop!

I believe an old Port Line ship built in 1955 is, or was until recently, still going having been converted into a cruise ship - where they get the Doxford spares from is any bodies guess! You can google m.v Port Sydney and read all about it!

Having said that, it was a very resourceful voyage that Clive's son had, if a bit traumatic! Wouldn't have liked a cargo of granite - sailed on an ore carrier once, never again, reckoned if we hit trouble it would have none of the floating characteristics considered desirable.

i have sailed on a ship where we had two units disabled, on a V14 medium speed engine, but all the bits were still going round and round and up and down, just the fuel pumps lifted on the two units, one unit was off to balance the other, but never on an in-line engine with bits missing.

I am still amazed at the story, when the con-rod snapped that would have allowed the cross-head complete with piston and piston rod - a not insignificant weight of metal - to drop down onto the bottom end, and what damage did the broken co-rod with the piston etc dropped down on it do before they managed to stop the job? Glad not to have been on that ship!

Chris

Edited By ChrisH on 20/03/2014 20:18:50

Edited By ChrisH on 20/03/2014 20:21:18

Brilliant Allen, well done, it's been a pleasure to follow your project through on here and you must feel very proud to see a lovely engine running so well.

Chris

The case for dehumidifier water rather than rain water becomes stronger............!

Bazyle, why should one not use demineralised water on model boilers?

On the first generation container steam ships in the 70's, operating watertube boilers at 62 bar pressure, 540 deg.C superheat, we made our own boiler water firstly distilling by evaporation from sea water - which was good enough for all domestic services and drinking water on board. The distilled water was then demineralised before it was deemed good and pure enough to be allowed to be used in our boilers. If it was necessary for those boilers then it should be OK for model boilers surely, or am I missing something - which is quite possible!

Chris

PS  I would have thought dehumidifier water should be fine for use in a boiler.

Edited By ChrisH on 13/03/2014 18:32:07

Hi,

I have a part completed 3 cyl radial aero engine very similar to the Osprey Engine by Gerald Smith, but with unfortunately no plans to enable me to complete it without a load of reverse engineering and research, as I am not familiar with these engines.

Does anyone have any plans of the Osprey or of a similar engine that I might be able to have a copy of please.

Photos of my engine are in my (only) album on here and on the thread "What engine is This?"

Chris

Hi - thanks Ady1 and Jason, it does have a look of the Osprey about it, except there are some differences, for instance, from what I've read so far would indicate on the Osprey that the push rod tube acts like an air intake tube as well and the fuel/oil mixture therefore floods all the crankcase providing lubrication throughout, whereas my engine takes inlet air straight from the crankcase, not that an air inlet into the crankcase is provided for just yet! But there are similarities, certainly. So now for plans.

I might start another thread to see if anyone has plans of the Osprey, seeing as how Gerald Smith is sadly no longer with us, rather than continue and confuse this thread.

Chris