By continuing to use this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more

Member postings for Peter G. Shaw

Here is a list of all the postings Peter G. Shaw has made in our forums. Click on a thread name to jump to the thread.

<< First < Prev 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 Next > Last >>
Thread: Another 'What Mill' Question
11/09/2010 17:03:37
One of the problems with using a hammer or other shock tool is that the shock must be taken through the bearings etc which is something I do not like. However, in MEW96 page 28 George McLatchie gives information on a screw extractor for these machines which essentially allows one to apply pressure to the (non)removable item whilst retaining the pressure within the shaft itself. There is thus no shock loading on the bearings.
 
It does mean some turning, left hand internal screwcutting, and a slight reduction to a locking nut on the machine, although I made a replacement nut rather than mangle the original. 
 
It works, and works extremely well, but I suppose in this instance it may be too far gone. Still, it could be worth a try.
 
Good luck,
 
Peter G. Shaw
Thread: Is this hobby dying?
09/09/2010 11:27:45
jsk,
 
Couldn't agree more with you about letting them have a go. And similar to you, I have had a basic sort of education in electronics and do in fact have lots of electronic test gear & bits & pieces at home. Unfortunately, none of my children or grandchildren have shown any interest in it, and wouldn't I love to at least show them how to build even a lamp flasher (astable multivibrator) from basic components, but no, there are too many other distractions.
 
Oh well, back to my monastic life tinkering with whatever takes my fancy.
 
Regards,
 
Peter G. Shaw
Thread: help with seeing
09/09/2010 11:19:39
As a follow-up to my earlier post, I have deliberately avoided vari-focal lenses for two reasons. I'd be interested to know what other people think.
 
Firstly, I have heard bad reports from drivers where the varying focal length has resulted in difficulties with distance judging. As a result I have stuck with bi-focals and ok, I do have the problem where the dashboard is out of focus with the lower lens, but it doesn't take much to slightly lower the head for the top lens to be satisfactory. But see second note below.
 
My second problem is that I have ankylosing spondylitis which has now resulted in limited neck movement, hence I am concerned about the constant neck movement required to obtain the correct focus. I've also had operations to limit the worst effects of Meniere's disease in one ear, but this has had the unfortunate side-effect that head movement and indeed vibration can cause slight involuntary up and down movement of the eyes - due I understand to the deliberate damage done to the semi-circular canals.
 
As I say, I'd be interested to know if anyone else has had these sort of problems, and how they go on. And sorry for hi-jacking the thread.
 
Regards,
 
Pater G. Shaw.
Thread: Is this hobby dying?
08/09/2010 17:26:52
Thankyou for your kind comments re my grandson.
 
He is well aware of the less savoury aspects of vet life. When all said and done, his dad (not my son) comes from farming stock, he himself has been involved in rearing guinea pigs and chickens, has also had one or two weeks work experience with a vet, and given half a chance helps his dad with his agricultural contracting business.
 
On a personal basis, I hope he manages to do it because I think it may well be better paying than engineering, but at the same time, I do hope he retains his interest in engineering. Certainly I'm doing my best to assist him, but without pushing him too hard.
 
To be honest, his only problem is that if he doesn't get on with people, eg his English teacher, he doesn't put the work in. Which is a shame because he needs English! Otherwise, on current grades he'll get there without too much effort.
 
Regards,
 
Peter G. Shaw
Thread: help with seeing
08/09/2010 12:08:07
I now have three pairs of bi-focals. All three pairs have reading lens' at the bottom whilst the top lens is designed for specific purposes: 2'/600mm for the computer; 7'/2000mm for the telly; and some long distance value for driving/singing/general outdoors.
 
In the workshop, I tend to use the computer glasses (lazy like you) in conjunction with clip on magnifying lens (2.5x I think) and/or a small magnifying glass.  I most often use the total combination when attempting to look at tipped tools to see if they have chipped.
 
I had to insist on the telly glasses as the optician didn't think I needed them - but they do help. The computer glasses were accepted straight away whilst the long distance glasses are a good few years old, and again there was no problem getting them. He is aware that I do lathe work, and what I use in additional lens' but doesn't say anything about them, and frankly, I am ok with what I do anyway. Probably the biggest problem is when I use the computer glasses with the clip on lens, and then try to move around the workshop when everything over a few inches away is totally blurred. Idle you see, but that's my problem.
 
Good luck with your quest - I never thought 50 years ago that the day would come when I could no longer see each leaf on that tree 5 miles away (!), but it has, and I now have to make the appropriate adjustments. You have my sympathy.
 
Regards,
 
Peter G. Shaw
Thread: Another 'What Mill' Question
08/09/2010 11:52:53
Hi ChrisH,
 
Like you I was constrained by weight, size and money in that order. Which was why I bought the Warco MiniMill.
 
In retrospect, what I forgot, or more likely never thought about, was that these machines can be disassembled into two or more reasonably sized chunks. Which meant that the weight problem wasn't! I could therefore have installed an X3 or equivalent.
 
I used an old Haltrac hoist to lift both the the lathe (125kg fully assembled, but somewhat less  with as much as possible removed) and the MiniMill (68kg fully assembled, but easy to solit into two parts both of which can be lifted without aids). So what I am suggesting is that you should, if possible, go for a larger machine rather than a smaller one.
 
Regards,
 
Peter G. Shaw
Thread: Is this hobby dying?
08/09/2010 11:34:50
Is the hobby dying? I think this will depend on two main factors.
 
The first is that as people become older, and realise that "for the want of a nail, the shoe was lost" - but unfortunately they can no longer obtain the nail, unless they make it themselves! In other words, as people come to reject the idea of throwing away perfectly good "stuff" because the spares are not available, so they will turn to repairing it themselves. A good example from some years ago when a small bracket on a manual lawnmower broke. It's owner was unable to take it for repair, incapable of doing it herself, and in all probability not have a clue as to trying to obtain a spare part from the manufacturer. I made a new bracket out of a piece of m.s. angle.
 
The second reason is that of interference by officialdom saying that you cannot do "that there here" syndrome etc. I remember reading many years ago in ME, someone, possibly in a letter, saying that there was a move afoot to ban the use of powered equipment by householders on the grounds of safety. Fortunately it never came to pass, but if ever it did, where would that leave us? Then there are the H&S people who, at the moment have no jurisdiction over what we do as amateurs in our own premises (this does not mean that I condone unsafe working practices), but what if H&S do get a foot into our workshops? Plus, of course, the council planners who can insist that you stop doing whatever it is you are doing if they get to know about it - see the story of Jesse Moody in ME around 1994.
 
I became involved in this hobby many years ago when one particular 00 gauge locomotive kept derailing and I decided that it needed new wheels with a larger tread and deeper flange and so started a chain of events which resulted in the present workshop. And now, I am primarily interested in learning how to use the tools, and to make other tools and adaptors for the equipment.
 
People have mentioned that in general it is the older settled people who can afford the hobby. To an extent this is true, but I would point out that a lot of the major costs are for equipment and are usually few and far between and may only be a one-off. Let's face it how many people buy a new lathe every three or so years, whereas there are some people who think nothing of replacing their car that often. So really, although the cost of a lathe can be expensive, an expensive lathe is likely to be a once in a lifetime event and hence the cost per year, say, does become quite low. 
 
I am very fortunate in that my eldest grandson has shown himself to be gifted - even his school has said so. Right from an early age he has shown a remarkable practical ability - I mean, how many 5/6/7 year olds would you trust to insert wall plugs with a hammer, and ok, I had to stop him before he knocked it through to next door, but even at that tender age he was showing his ability. He's now 15, and a few years ago I gave him free run of the workshop only asking that he didn't hurt himself - I even said that I wasn't bothered if he broke something - at least he was learning. So now he has done turning, milling, hand screwing, heat treatment of silver steel etc. He is doing engineering at school for GSCE - it's just a pity that he want's to be a vet! It's my hope that this hobby will remain alive and kicking so that children such as my grandson can continue on in the tradition.
 
Regards,
 
Peter G. Shaw 
Thread: How to drill a square hole?
21/07/2010 13:23:03
I do remember reading about this on a number of occasions. Yes it is apparently possible - see MEW 14 etc and MEW112.
 
As I understand it, the idea is to have (for a square hole) a triangular cutter which is allowed to move around whilst being rotated. Sorry, I know that doesn't make sense, but it's the best I can do at the moment. What happens is that the cutter starts to dig in at the corners, rotates, and the next cutter point swivels round to produce the next corner. and so on.
 
But what about using a broach. Here you would have a piece of tapered hardened steel (silver steel) with transverse cutting edges on all four sides. Pressing the device into a circular hole then cuts the corners. For a better description try Len Mason's book Using the Small Lathe. I suppose it's like reaming, but in an axial dimension rather radial.
 
Good luck,
 
Peter G. Shaw
Thread: Antivirus
19/07/2010 21:35:25
Just to answer Denise's point about where to get help if needed.
 
There is a very good help board on the Motley Fool called "Help With this blasted Computer." Provided one can access the internet by some means, the people on that board will do their damndest to get anyone out of trouble.
 
I have no connection with that board, but I have had help from them - not for any virus etc, but for other things, hence my offering this information.
 
Regards,
 
Peter G. Shaw
 

Thread: Massey Ferguson Tractor on front cover of ME 4382
19/07/2010 21:27:43
Donald & Engine Builder,
 
Ok, it doesn't matter whether it's a '35 or a '65. Similarly does it really matter what's on the front cover?
 
Put it another way. Why do you buy the magazine? Is it because of the front cover? Or is it because of the content? I submit that most of us on these forums buy these magazines because of the internal content. In which case the cover is totally irrelevant.
 
Another way to look at is to consider what is the purpose of the front cover? Is it attract the regular subscribers? Hardly, because being "regular" they are going to get it willy-nilly. No, the purpose of the front cover is like the purpose of the greengrocer's shop window. Or any shop window for that matter. I.e. to attract people to have a look inside and perhaps buy. In my view, someone who buys either of these magazines because of the cover isn't really into engineering as such, because if they were, then they would scan the contents page and then make a decision whether to buy or not.
 
For what it's worth, exactly the same discussion arose in MEW some time ago when Dave Fenner's daughter graced the front cover "wrapped" around a lathe. There were adverse comments about the suitability of the attire etc. But exactly the same arguments as I have outlined above applied in that instance.
 
Gentlemen, you are also asking why does a vintage rally report appear in an engineering magazine. Surely steam is vintage, and from what I remember of ME there was a lot of that in it. Along with all sorts of other things, most of which were of no interest to me. What about the reminiscences of various people from times past about mills and their machinery?Or doesn't that matter because it's steam? It's all engineering.
 
Anyway, let's be honest about one thing. We've all had our say, and no doubt the editor and his sidekick will be reading this with interest. Also, you could consider filling in the survey that comes out every so often and usually, I think, ask for any other comments.

Regards,
 
Peter G. Shaw
19/07/2010 16:48:25
Hey, that's not a MF35: it's a MF65.
 
For a start, the '35 type had a similar front grill to the orginal Grey Fergie (TED20). Secondly, the front axle of the '35 was the same as or similar to the TED20.
Thirdly, the '35 had similar wheels to the TED20.
 
I admit it doesn't look as big as I remember the '65, but we all know how reliable 40 year old memory is.
 
How do I know? Spent many happy hours on top of a TED20, drove at a friends farm the original Grey '35, and finally had the memorable experience of driving a '65 with only one brake working! And that was on a Yorkshire hill farm.
 
Finally, have a look at this: http://www.tractordata.co.uk/massey_ferguson/pages/massey_ferguson_65_1962/index.htm.
 
Alternatively just type in to Google MF 65 and look at second item down. 
 
FWIW, I always thought the '65 to be big and numb whilst the '35 was a useful little tractor good in confined spaces.
 
By the way, although I don't take ME anymore (it doesn't appeal to me), I remember there being a picture of a John Deere tractor on the front - big single cylinder jobby I think and which required a starting pistol cartridge to get it running.
 
I also think someone did a model landrover once. Apache? That also appeared on the front. As has a Triumph motorbike in MEW.
 
Anyway, I like the Fergie - brought back some memories!

Regards,
 
Peter G. Shaw

Edited By Peter G. Shaw on 19/07/2010 16:52:58

Thread: Chester Mini Mill - X2?
19/07/2010 15:04:53
Many thanks to those who wished me well after the operation. Yes, all is going well and I'm only doing what I feel like doing. Any sign of stress, and I back off.
 
Fortunately, I can still operate the computer.
 
Regards,
 
Peter G. Shaw
18/07/2010 21:25:14
Hi Deril,
 
As I said: someone will be along to correct me - and they did! And ok, your other person knows what he is doing. Unfortunately, my own experience of some electronics people is that they don't know what they are doing - I took a tape recorder in for servicing once when I was young and naive - it came back worse than when it went in. Fortunately, a colleague was sufficiently knowledgable to teach me how to put it right myself, and since then I have learned rather more about electronics. Also I have had  experiences in other fields where it has cost me to prove that the so-called experts are not! Hence my scepticism.
 
As it happens I have the higher powered mill by Warco - John please note - with I think, the American based board. Unfortunately, it being 10 days after an abdomen operation, looking at my mill is temporarily out of the question, but I don't recall there being a transformer at all.
 
Never mind, it's all grist to the mill (ah-hem) and I am learning. I imagine that the system operation should be very similar so all the info gleaned so far should be of help if my own does indeed fail at some point.
 
One interesting point, John. Looking at the power circuit, I designed and built the identical configuration when I was trying to convert an oscilloscope. Maybe the actual values were not the same, but it didn't work. As far as I could tell, the 7815 was powering up before the 7915, which faced with power from the 7815 then refused to work. To get round it, I ended up designing a different -ve supply which probably relied on the +ve supply for it to work. It's along time ago so I can't remember the exact details, but it did work, although the overall project didn't. And anyway, a brand new 'scope solved the problem!
 
Regards,
 
Peter G. Shaw
 
 

Edited By Peter G. Shaw on 18/07/2010 21:31:41

18/07/2010 11:42:02
John,
 
Ok, so there is a transformer after all, but your diagrams don't show it. So where is it?
 
Regards,
 
Peter
17/07/2010 21:14:05
Hi Deril,
 
Having read your post, I am left wondering about this because there are a number of oddities.
 
 The way you write suggests that you have very little electric/electronic knowledge as you imply that someone else has done the initial testing. Without trying to be obnoxious etc, does this other person actually know what they are doing? You see, I'm not at all sure that these machines have a transformer in them. Now I could well be wrong, and no doubt someone else will correct me, but the information I have gleaned so far does suggest this.
 
Another pointer is that historically, the X2 machines did have problems with MOSFET failures, indeed this was one of the reasons why one seller stopped selling them. However, it does seem that there are a number of electronic versions around for these machines, some of which are American designs and which appear to be being used on the uprated versions, and are possibly more reliable.
 
Now, as regards spares, since it is a Chester MiniMill, why not try Chester themselves? Another possible source that has been mentioned on these boards is Machine Mart. But in either case be prepared for a hefty bill for a replacement board.
 
If it definitely is a transformer, there is always a remote chance that it might be repairable. It all depends on just where the fault is. It may just be that one of the connections has broken. Now if it happens to be the connection to the outermost winding layer, then it may be possible to unwind one turn, and remake the connection. Very much a long shot, and may be impossible if the winding has been impregnated with something.
 
Other than that, I can't help you, so good luck in your quest.
 
Peter G. Shaw
Thread: Disassembling of Minimill / X2-clone / XJ-12 Ballbearings
05/07/2010 13:55:35
Three photos which I hope will make it easier to understand what I did.
 
Here goes.....



 
Does this help? If not ask again.
 
In the top photo, I used a piece of shim steel about 15mm wide and the full depth of the black block. It has one hole through which the top screw fits. The shim then just hangs there until clamped by both screws. Th idea is to twist the block round vertically so that the horizontal shaft moves away from the milling head itself.
 
In the second photo, the two washers are placed between the cover plate and the block and over the screws. It can be fiddly as they are small, and drop off easily.  The idea is to lift the cover plate away from the block thus allowing the worm inside freedom to rotate.
 
In the bottom photo, the idea is to move the block around  until the shaft can rotate without binding, and the knob can rotate without binding against the block. It could even be that turning the black block round through 180 degrees sideways could help. It all depends on the location of the various holes. Mine are very poorly drilled, and I have plans to replace it sometime.
 
Regards,
 
Peter G. Shaw
 

Edited By Peter G. Shaw on 05/07/2010 14:04:31

05/07/2010 13:20:11
Hi Marcus,
Firstly, sorry about the words I used. I was probably trying to be very precise in what I was saying assuming  good  English.
 
Second, your drawing is the same as mine, and therefore wrong as my machine is not quite the same. I will now go and take some photos etc.
 
I'll report back later.
 
Regards,
 
Peter
 
ps. I sent you an email via "My messages". Did you get it?
 
Thread: Measuring tool accuracy
04/07/2010 12:15:51
Well, I started this thread just over 12 months ago, and never thought it would engender (now that's a word I've never used before, and don't really know where it came from!) such a correspondance.
 
Since then I've bought the 25mm, 50mm & 75mm micrometer standards from Mitutoyo and repeated the tests a number of times. Same conclusions as before which suggests that my measurement technique must be about right.
 
I've also come to the conclusion that digital verniers are a p-in-the-b in respect of batteries because I discovered somewhere that despite the On/Off button, they don't actually switch off: they only blank the display. Which means that as long as the battery is in them, they are consuming power. Same source did state that the Mitutoyo devices have the lowest current usage, but one can buy a lot of batteries for the price of a Mitutoyo!
 
Staying with digitals and batteries, I also discovered that SR44 batteries are a slightly different composition to LR44 batteries, hence have a slightly higher voltage, and hence last longer before the display starts blinking. Interestingly, the more consistent of the two electronic verniers is specified for use with SR44 batteries whilst the other one is specified with LR44! Which means that when I stop using the digital vernier, I end up taking out the battery.
 
However, I've also come to realise that the micrometer is much easier to use on external surfaces due to it's wider measuring surfaces. Also that I think that dial verniers are possibly slightly easier to use than the digitals. Certainly there is less confusion caused by the uncertainty of the last digit. Against that the digitals are more flexible with their resettable zero.
 
So, I've spent yet more money! And ok, as someone said, maybe I do have too much money, but so what, I can't take it with me. Anyway, I've now bought a S/H Starrett 25-50 micrometer, cleaned it, lubricated it (drop of 3-in-1) reassembled, readjusted and tested it. Accurate at 25mm. About ½div (0.005mm) high at 50mm. Also bought a Starrett 150mm dial vernier with a .01mm resolution. As far as I can tell seems to be accurate.
 
If nothing else, at least the vernier and the mic's are all to the same resolution.
 
I've decided to keep the good electronic vernier, & sell the poor one, but at £7.99 new, it isn't exactly going to break the bank if no-one buys it. I'm going to experiment with the old dial vernier to see if I can get the depth guage part of it to match the jaws: there's about 0.3mm difference, and if I can, then present it to my grandson who has expressed a liking for it. I'm also going to keep the slide vernier (0.05mm resolution) as for a lot of purposes it's more than adequate, and is unlikely to go faulty: the only problem is that of reading the scale - magnifying glass here I come.
 
So there we are, the end of my quest for a better comparable readings in my instruments. Does that make sense? What I mean is that I want them to all read the same, and I think I've now achieved that.
 
Regards,
 
Peter G. Shaw
Thread: Noise? In Essex/East London
22/06/2010 15:54:49
FWIW, I have the Warco version, and yes it is noisy, even when it's not cutting anything. 

Some people reckon it's down to the gears, and if you change to a belt drive, it becomes a lot quieter. Enter "X2 belt drive quieter" into Google, and the top two entries will tell you more. Remember, these mills are very similar, ie use a lot of the same parts, as the Sieg X2 and clones.

I use mine in my garage - and I usually wear sound protectors. Not because it's so extremely loud, but because I have lost one ear due to Menieres, and don't wish to lose the other.

HTH,
 
Peter G. Shaw
Thread: BallBearings and gears on miniMill XJ9512(aka xj12 / fervi-t058 /...)
13/06/2010 11:46:45
Hi pfav,
 
The other thread on which you posted the exact same question probably gives as much information as is available.
 
FWIW, my machine uses the 7206AC lower, 6206RZ upper as standard, but MarcuSweden is, I think, using the 30206Q for the upper and either the 32206BJ or 32206 QCL7 for the lower, however apparently the 32206 is slightly wider so the shaft is slightly lower so the top bearing only has about 70% contact.
 
Apparently as well, the 32206 handles more power than the 30206, but the 30206 is a considerable improvement on the originals.

The above info is extracted from the other thread.
 
Regards,
 
Peter G. Shaw
<< First < Prev 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 Next > Last >>
Magazine Locator

Want the latest issue of Model Engineer or Model Engineers' Workshop? Use our magazine locator links to find your nearest stockist!

Find Model Engineer & Model Engineers' Workshop

Sign up to our Newsletter

Sign up to our newsletter and get a free digital issue.

You can unsubscribe at anytime. View our privacy policy at www.mortons.co.uk/privacy

Latest Forum Posts
Support Our Partners
cowells
Sarik
MERIDIENNE EXHIBITIONS LTD
Shopping Partners
Subscription Offer

Latest "For Sale" Ads
Latest "Wanted" Ads
Get In Touch!

Do you want to contact the Model Engineer and Model Engineers' Workshop team?

You can contact us by phone, mail or email about the magazines including becoming a contributor, submitting reader's letters or making queries about articles. You can also get in touch about this website, advertising or other general issues.

Click THIS LINK for full contact details.

For subscription issues please see THIS LINK.

Digital Back Issues

Social Media online

'Like' us on Facebook
Follow us on Facebook

Follow us on Twitter
 Twitter Logo

Pin us on Pinterest

 

Donate

donate