Member postings for Baldric

I seem to remember reading somewhere that 16mm my be a bit tight, and as I was given a 85% complete set of 5/8" slot (1/2" studs) I have used that. I have considered changing to 12mm studs & making the t-nuts to suit but for the gain it is a lot of work when I have clamps that work. I have so far found it fairly easy to get extra studding, just have to ignore a few metric only suppliers.

If I was starting from scratch I would probably investigate the 16mm t-nuts, perhaps buying a single one to check it fits every where easily.

If I need smaller studs for some vices or items that 1/2" won't fit I will probably make odd t-nuts in metric though as I do agree that is easier to get hold of at your average DIY shed & probably cheaper now.

Baldric.

I have been using Windows 11 for about a month now, I am still getting used to the start menu being in the middle of the task-bar, and whilst I know you can change that back to the left I will try and get used to it as I am sure I will start to see it on customers systems soon.

The only software I have found I can not run is my version of Adobe Premiere Elements 12, but I am not sure if I had used that on Windows 10 and it is rather old now, it won't even start in compatibility mode. Photoshop elements 12 is fine though,

Baldric,

The title says "Pm11 240v ac to 240v dc" on their website I can't see a 240v dc motor, is that the correct voltage?

Baldric.

Thanks for the replies, especially Phil, very clear with reasons, I will proceed with option 2 or 3, just got some decorating to do first.

I will spend some time looking at the Blondihacks videos, for those interested they are **LINK**

Looking at these videos has made me consider checking the tube supplied was cut square, if not sort that out sooner rather than later.

Mark.

I purchased the GLR Kennions boiler about 10 years ago, after a rather long pause I am now starting to build it, I have formed the flanges with no issue and I am looking at the sequence for soldering the fire-box. There appear to be several options.

1. As described in the ME article that came with the kit, solder the tubeplate to the firebox, fit the tubes in the firebox tubeplate, make pallions and solder from above (water side)

2. As described in another (old) thread by here, as above, tubeplate to firebox, then tubes, but invert the tubes/tubeplate and solder from the fire-side as described by "Fizzy" & others in one of the comments.

3. Fit the tubes, invert, solder the tubes, then solder the tubeplate to the firebox.

In all cases I was going to add a ridge to the tubes so that they can not fall through, and look to use the other tubeplate to align the tubes. Heat reflecting blocks & blankets to be used as required. I was going to use 3 rivets (not tightened) to locate the tubeplate in the firebox.

Using option 3 I would not need a cyclone burner, but if I need one I will get it as I will probably need that in the future.

Can anyone say which option is best & why? I am sure I will get a few contradictory replies, but if there are reasons at least I can then make an informed decision.

Also, as silver-solder re-melts at a higher temperature than it first melts at, all items previously soldered will be located with something other than silver-solder & I can use kaolin to protect them, do I need to use a higher temperature solder for the first joints?

Thanks in advance.

Mark

I used this guy for a Bridgeport move

**LINK**

I did a similar job a couple of years ago, a 2 start square thread, I used gears rather than belts, but I did need to get a big gear ratio, I had to make the "banjo" and I 3d printed the gears as it was a one-off to make the part & 2 taps.

Not sure why this image is on it's side, it is not on my PC.

The cutter is 1/16", I used the handle on the dividing head to driver the table, the return was made & faster easier by making an adapter to use a socket on the nut driven from a drill.

Baldric

It looks like this could date from the 1930-now, so an idea of age would be good...

**LINK**

Baldric

About 14 years ago I was involved with a project associated with BBC radio, there were plans to insert the PIPs early in to the digital feeds, but I believe it was dropped as not only is it going to depend on the transmission medium (FM/DAB/Freeview/Freesat/sky), but also what the receiver does with it. At about the same time listening to radio via the internet was becoming more wide-spread, that added a whole host of other variations. There is also the route the signal takes to an FM transmitter, that will probably be digital, with minimum delay, I used to here on my radio it switch from one transmitter to another as there was a small repeat of part of a word.

If you want accurate time I would suggest PC time, if set from an external source, or AM/FM radio.

Also of note there was talk of stopping the analogue transmissions, but I am not sure what happened to that proposal.

Baldric.

John,

I like that idea for the sensor, I can probably do something similar.

I have a 6" rotary table, I think it is a Vertex one, I also do have an Elliot 5" universal dividing head I could use, but I would then need to consider the work to add a stepper motor to this.

Regarding the gears, they are 14DP, with 111, 95, 82, 44, 31 & 15 teeth, if this is not practical using the rotary table for hobbing I may have to do one tooth at a time. I would be interested in your thoughts on the suitability of the equipment I have available.

Before starting work on any of this I will need to also look at the cost & availability of such a hob.

Baldric.

Thanks for that Joe, I will start to look in to all of that.

Baldric.

I would also like to thank Joe for highlighting the Bresenham algorithm, I was just working out how to resolve the issue I had with my existing steeper driven rotary table where I could end up with an error. I have come up with something similar, in that for each division, I will take the number of steps required for a full revolution, then work out the difference between the n and n+1 divisions, and use that to advance the table, rather than just using the number of steps divided by the number of divisions. Using this method does mean that after 1 full revolution the table should be exactly where it started rather than a few steps out for some numbers, with the "extra" steps added regularly.

Baldric,

Joe,

Thanks for replying.

At the moment I am considering how I will make the gears I require, buying a single hob does appeal rather than having to buy several gear cutters and cut all the teeth one at a time, either-way also adding a power-feed to the X-axis would sound sensible to me as well.

I spent 12 years working in TV studios, maintaining. repairing & modifying the electronic kit, so can do the electronics, I now write software in C++, just I use Visual Studio, so that should also not be a problem in making any changes that suit my needs, so anything I can get from you will be a great starting point for me. The bit I am not so familiar with is some of the issues associated with interfacing the hardware to the software

Baldric.

Thanks, I will read through that.

I don't think that does gear hobbing, and I made an equivalent of that from MEW 249, here.

I found the article on using a stepper motor with a rotary table to hob gears interesting, I will need to make some gears for my 3" Foden and had been wondering about doing this. I have already driven my rotary table using a previously published article with an Arduino and I am generally happy with that, but don't think it has the speed to cope with hobbing. What seems missing is any link to the code used in the article, is that available anywhere? I did try using the search on this site, but it only titles that did not seem to match.

Has anyone done this using a Bridgeport, if so any tips on where to mount the sensor? I have an older step-pulley head, that I expect to run at it's lowest speed.

My rotary table has a 90:1 gearing, I appreciate this means the stepper will have to work harder, but I guess I can reduce the micro-stepping to compensate for that.

Thanks in advance,

Baldric.

Oldiron, I would have had to get some material in to do that job or cut up a largish sheet, so for me it was easier to design & print, also a good exercise in CAD, even if a simple one. Before I moved I did use a aluminium u-channel screwed to the wall, they then hung of that, it worked but 11 holders took up quite a bit of room.

Baldric.

My Boxford has a shelf, but not a very long one, it normally has a few bits on it, but not room for 11 holders.

Baldric.

I did look on Thingiverse, there was nothing that I liked, there are some there but I felt they would take up a lot of wall space as the holder would be along the wall rather than perpendicular to the wall. The are a few designs to hold indicators in the toolpost though that look interesting.

Baldric.

I have built a workshop but didn't really want to just put my Dickson tool holders on a shelf, I had seen various designs & a supplier of a pre-made one, then a friend pointed me in the direction of a 3d-printed holder that sits on a bar. Using this as inspiration I thought I could design something that I can screw to the wall. I decided I would make them as individual items so I can just print more as I want. Here is the end design.

I printed one, only to find that not all the dickson (style) holders were the same, so some didn't fit. A quick change and here is the first one attached to the wall.

I now need to print another 10, at about 2 hours each it will take a time! 2 more are printing as I type, I could have got it to print more in one go, but I don't want it running overnight really.

Having done this I may make more special storage for other lathe accessories, such as allen keys, chuck keys and chuck jaws, all good for learning 3d-cad, this time may be Solid Edge so I can compare that with Fusion360.

For those interested the design was complete in Fusion360, the hardest part was working out how to put in the screw-holes perpendicular to the back, then put the counter-bore from the front, but not at an angle. After a bit of looking at web-pages I realised what I needed was to create a plane from the back, offset forward, draw on that and make holes from there, simple once I realised that.

Baldric.