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

Member postings for Alf Jones

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

Thread: Any experience of the Warco GH Universal Mill?
17/11/2011 00:12:09
Hello all.
 
I have been looking at the Warco GH Universal mill:
 
 
and I was wondering if anyone already owns one, or has used one, and if so, if you had any positive or negative comments?
 
There was a review of the Warco WM-18 mill in MEW around 18 months ago, which was very positive indeed, and my sense is that the GH is a step upards in terms of robustness and features, for not a lot of additional money.
 
My thinking is that I would fit DRO's and a readout box to it, and potentially build up the column using the Epoxy Granite method if it feels like it needs it.
 
I was also wondering if you would expect this mill, for this amount of money to be usable "out of the box" or whether I should prepare for a complete strip and rebuild job as most people seem to go through with smaller Asian mills such as the Seig X1 and X3?
 
Any thoughts at all gratefully received.
Thread: What would the "perfect" IMLEC competitor model be like?
14/11/2011 14:23:49
Thanks Mr Ramon - some good idea's.
 
a 50% increase in efficiency would only leave something like a 2.5% efficient Loco - I think full size work at around 7%?
14/11/2011 12:35:44
Richard,
 
Do those idea's apply only to firetubes, or to water tubes as well?
 
I believe I have read that the stroke rate of a cylinder, if it was designed for absolute efficiency, should either be significantly slower ( in the 10's of strokes per minute ) or significantly faster, in the 000's of strokes a minute, and that the middle ground inhabited by Loco's is a poor choice. I have read this in at least two different places now, but can't currently find either one....
 
Is there any truth in that? It would suggest some type of gearing would be needed, which have never ( to the best of my knowledge ) ever existed on a full sized train.
 
 
I was also thinking about the drafting of a boiler. As I understand it, IMLEC is all about efficiency. Strong drafting of a boiler will certainly get the fire burning hotter, but also - I suspect - lead to a lot more heat disappearing up the chimmney. In my car, the engine designers have looked to eek out ever watt of power from the fuel in the name of efficiency, even to the point of re-burning some of the exhaust gases ( although this also helps with emissions ).
 
Would I be right in thinking that, if looked at purely in terms of efficiency - how much power can come out of a fixed amount of coal and turned into rotational work on a track - then there would be a careful balance to strike between too little draft and too much?
14/11/2011 09:31:55
Hello all.
 
I was reading the history of the IMLEC competition:
http://tinyurl.com/bsc3h2n
 
and I found it fascinating. The quote at the start appeals to me a lot. True experimental engineering.
 
Reading recent ME's, it seems that absolute scale isn't so much a requirement - as long as it looks and acts fairly like a train.
 
So I was wondering what the result would be if a person, or group of people, set out to design a train purely with IMLEC efficiency in mind. Would it look like an existing train? I'm assuming that, just like anything else in the world of engineering, loco's were designed with a mixture of opposing challenges in mind? So I would assume that none of the existing model designs - the LBSC type - would be focused entirely on efficiency, as opposed to top speed or other factors.
 
What are the key components in the design of a strong, highly efficient loco? Is it the boiler design? The power train? The weight of the loco?
 
Are there absolutes in this question? Would it be reasonable to say something like "A good competitor would always use (for example) Stephenson valve gear, and would never use Joy valve gear?" or would this type of decision be based on a number of other factors?
 
 
Thread: Engine 1000, or other Yarrow like designs - has there ever been a model?
07/11/2011 18:16:09
Hello, here I am.
 
Thank you for all of the information, it has been very useful, also to the people who sent me PM's with additional details. This has been most appreciated.
 
What I hadn't realised is the amount of complexity around "Yarrow-type" boilers - it's a whole seperate sub-species.
 
The reason I was initially interested was that the actual Yarrow boiler looks fairly easy to make ( straight water tubes, simple joints etc ). The boiler designs posted by Richard and Kinlet are anything but!
 
I am interested in starting a train - I am really a boat person to date - and while I think the LBSC designs are wondering, I can't get the enthusiasm up to build something that 50 other people have already done.
 
So I am wondering about picking a simple design, maybe something like a Super Simplex with the Joy Valve gear, and then spend some time "playing" with different area's, for example using a own-design Yarrow boiler, experimenting with Gas heating, maybe incorperating some of the lovely external lines of the 10000.
 
I want a platform which I can play with and experiment with over time. This thread has just hardened that determination. Expect more technical questions in the near future!!
 
I do have a question for this group. What what I know, the Yarrow designs are one of the most efficient boilers, when looking at Kg/steam per minute per M^2 of heating surface. I was wondering why they didn't see more use in trains?
 
 
Thread: Issue using Google Chrome
07/11/2011 17:58:50
Hello.
 
Looks like I am not alone.
 
My feeling is that there look to be a number of different issues with the forum design. I wonder if the developers have been developing in Internet Explorer, rather than something standards compliant?
 
It would be interesting to see if anyone is having any issues with Apple's Safari - it uses the same engine as Chrome does.
 
 
Thread: Bore and stroke ratio in steam engine.
07/11/2011 12:31:00
There is a slightly different way to look at it, and thats the function of the boat itself.
 
If you want an all out racing boat, it will be a very different engine design, and therefore selection of criteria such as bore vs stroke, and if you were making a tug to be used in bollard pulls, where torque would be major function, or if you want a nice simple, easy to live with boat, where you would choose a simple design.
 
If you wanted a high speed racer, general thinking is that the line to follow is an over-square stroke, multiple cylinders and a uniflow exhaust. The engine is driven purely by initial input pressure, which can be 1000's of PSI, and there is essentially zero benefit taken from the expansion properties of steam, as the engine is turning too fast. This might give an engine turning at 5,000 - 10,000 RPM, which would usually be coupled directly to a small racing designed prop.
 
For say a tug, where you look for maximum torque, then long stroked compound engines would be where you would start, giant propellors, and going to lengths to eek out every scrap of energy from the steam, such as the condensers discussed above.
 
Like anything else in this lovely hobby, the "right" answer depends on the question you started with.
 
One other thing I would say is that Jens make a comment about needing a "larger" boiler in his first post.
I would say that what is actually needed is a more efficient boiler, rather than a larger one. One of the big benefits of steam powered toy boats, over steam powered toy trains ( apart from the significantly lower drain on the wallet ! ) is that you get an unlimited supply of free water, so the question of boiler size comes less down to "how long will it run for before I have to fill her up" and turns into "How can I make enough water turn to steam"
 
You can make very small boilers which produce vast amounts of steam, as long as the water is available to actually make it in the first place.
 
 
Thread: Issue using Google Chrome
04/11/2011 19:47:34
Hello.
 
I use Google Chrome on two different computers, at two different locations, and it would seem that there are some compatability issues.
 
Private Messages lead to the browser tab crashing fairly frequently and writing a thread in the main forum, the text box often "hangs" - the cursor freezes and it can take up to a couple of minutes to clear.
 
I am active on a large number of forums, and this is the only one that has any issues.
 
I wonder if someone could investigate?
 
Thread: Engine 1000, or other Yarrow like designs - has there ever been a model?
04/11/2011 16:21:22
Hello.
 
I was wondering if anyone had any information regarding if an attempt had ever been made to produce a model version of the Engine 1000 loco, or anything similar?
 
The idea's behind a Yarrow boiler interest me, and the loco that was build is truly lovely to look at:
 
 
From what information I have, the actual Engine 1000 seems overly complex, two boilers, compound cylinders etc. Perhaps someone has built a free-scale or own design along similar if simplified lines?
 
Thanks in advance for any information
Thread: Small Steel Boilers
31/10/2011 22:13:38
Posted by JasonB on 31/10/2011 16:48:54:
"but I don't see why that can't be built in - the process is well known and calculations are available.If a design calls for 3mm copper, I wouldn't object to using 4mm or 5mm steel instead. It'll likely work out cheaper in materials."
 
[quote] 
3mm copper would more than liekly need 6mm steel for a start. [/quote]
 
This is the kind of information I was looking for. Please could you provide more information about this calculation? I had assumed that a steel would require less material than copper, before a wastage allowance was built in, assuming the use of mild steel. If it was a mild steel, I believe that the assumption is 7% per year ( compunding) as long as the boiler is kept full at all times. It looks like you have a different figure - please could you point me in the direction of your source so I can read up on it?
 
[quote]
As I've said earlier your average 3 1/2g loco or 2" traction engine with an 3mm copper boiler has say 10mm gap between the outer wrapper and the firebox. If you the change to steel you will either end up with an impractical 4mm water space or to keep the water spave the same reduce the grate area by 6mm all round so on a grate area on a copper boiler of 4" x4" = 16 sq inch you would end up with agrate in steel of 3.5"x3.5" = 12.25" which is quite a loss of area
 
I wonder if this is an argument based on scale appearance rather than boiler construction? My thinking is along the lines of a free-lance design, or maybe semi-freelance, so for me this wouldn't be a major issue I think.
 


As Dusty says its relatively easy to get a copper boiler tested at club level, some will also do steel but if they don't you could be looking a couple of hundread quid a year which will soon eat into any saving on materials. Stainless would definately have to be done by a professional inspector in the UK.
 
J

 
Right, now we're getting somewhere. If thats the main issue then for me thats an easy thing to sort out. Remembering that I posed my question relevant to me, then this seems to solve it.
I do have access to a chap who is fully certified for steel, stainless and also aluminium welding ( I'm assuming thats a completely no go zone?? ) for use with pressure vessels. He also does work with such dark arts as stir welding ( which I understand ) and electron beam welding ( which I really don't ) Via him, stainless steel falls from the proverbial heavens ( or more accurately the most astonishingly large and wasteful "scrap" bin you have ever seen. 6 foot rods in the scrap bin.....! ) and his firm will also provide test certification for not a very significant fee.
 
Thats why, for me, a steel boiler is so appealing - the cost is so low.
 
I understand this obviously isnt the case for everyone - I'm very lucky to be in this position - but I may as well take advantage of it if I can - that money could be far better spent at Tracy Tools or Chronos.
 
 
 

Edited By Alf Jones on 31/10/2011 22:15:00

31/10/2011 10:39:58
Hello.
 
My apologies for re-awakening a dormant thread, but I have read this thread, and others, and I am still none the wiser.
 
As I understand it, most of mainland Europe, and the US as well, use steel for boilers. I also believe that the vast majority of pressure vessels made at 1:1 scale, including boilers far in excess of any specification we have for at model scale, are also steel or stainless.
 
So I'm not sure what is special about model steam in the UK where we insist on Copper?
 
Some arguments have been put forward in this thread that I'm not sure are correct, such as time to raise steam - back of the envelope calculations suggest ..... to me at least.... that the time difference will be minimal.
Some line up better, such as wastage allowances, but I don't see why that can't be built in - the process is well known and calculations are available.If a design calls for 3mm copper, I wouldn't object to using 4mm or 5mm steel instead. It'll likely work out cheaper in materials.
 
If I can fit the boiler into scale, and it's safe, I don't really understand the problem.With Stainless, I don't believe that the issue is as significant as is being made out. Stainless is used, and has been used for years, by the flash steam world at vastly higher temps ( 700 degrees + ) and pressures ( 2000psi + ) for seasons on end with no sign of any issues despite regular testing.
 
The welding can be trickier, but the world HAS moved on from the times of LBSC, no matter if sometimes I wish it hadn't. Welding technology has moved on hugely, and there are a lot more competent Stainless welders these days, I think partly because the systems that have make high quality stainless welds easier to make. Parts that would have previously been made from formed sheet can now be CNC'd out of solid. In all, there are a lot more options available.
 
For myself personally, producing a steel boiler would be a lot cheaper, and likely as easy, if not easier, than producing a copper boiler, especially at large sizes. Stainless would add to the time and cost, but again from a purely personal point of view, I believe I can still produce/have produced, a stainless boiler at the same cost as copper which will be many times more resilient in every way to a copper boiler.
 
There is a separate case of the Insurance companies, but I believe that if the welds are signed off and the pressure tests passed, Insurance will be given.
 
So I get to the point where, if I was undertaking building a largish boiler which would work quite hard, and I had to choose between a copper/silver solder boiler and a stainless boiler, or even just an alloy steel boiler, then I personally would feel far more comfortable with a steel boiler.
 
Given that, and given that most of the rest of the world uses steel, I *STILL* don't understand the resistance to it? It almost feels like us UK model engineers are looking for reasons, any reasons, not to make a move to it.
 
Please don't take this thread as a rant, it's not. It's just me being confused, and looking to understand the situation better.
 
 
 

 
 
 
 

Edited By Alf Jones on 31/10/2011 10:43:26

Thread: Machining Titanium
30/10/2011 11:38:33
Thank you gentlemen.
 
With drilling, is it better to "peck" at the work, as you would brass, which might keep the heat down, or push it through in one go, which is more positive, but will increase heat?
 
Does any one have any information about what properties Ti has as an engine block, and suitable pistons to go with it? Can you make a Ti-Ti interface? Ti-Cast Iron etc?
 
I will also need to bore the Ti - any thoughts? Boring generally is a bit of a delicate operation - I'm not sure how to combine boring with "positive feed rates"?
 
Lastly, do anyone have any advice on tapping and threading?
30/10/2011 08:33:16
Hello all.
 
I have a model project in the works that I am building up to. It's still in the planning stage so I won't get too deeply into it (mostly because I'm still trying to decide if I'm biting off too much!! ), but one of the elements is an engine, likely a V-twin, dealing with super hot steam, in a situation where weight is a major issue.
 
Myself and a couple of friends are currently looking at aluminium, some of the hotter working alloys, and they don't seem to do what we need, so thoughts are turning to titanium.
 
I've done some reading about titanium, and here is the total of everything I know to date:
1) It work hardens like the devil
2) Use milk as the lubricant while cutting
3) Welding it is essentially impossible in the home workshop - too many specialised factors and tools needed.
 
4) Erm... thats it.
 
Obviously a period of attacking poor innocent lumps of titanium with machine tools is called for, but I was hoping to get advice from you good gentlemen before I start.
 
Given the absolute lack of knowledge, ANY advice you can give me would be very valuable.
 
I'm looking for basic information really - is there a knack to driling? Do you sharpen tools at different angles? What sort of methods can I use to avoid work hardening? feeds and speeds in lathes and mills etc etc etc.
 
Like I say - ANY advice or war stories you've picked up over the years will be hugely useful to me.
 
 

Edited By Alf Jones on 30/10/2011 08:33:45

Thread: Anyone have a Worden grinder? Experiences?
26/10/2011 13:44:03
Hi,
 
I'm thinking of getting the Worden grinder, along with some of the additional jigs.
 
My main uses for it will be for drills, lathe tools, d-bits etc, and I would also like to be able to sharpen chisels as well, and maybe occasionally touch up a milling cutter.
 
I know that the Quorn and the Stent, and I guess the Clarkson, are considered to be more "complete" in terms of their capabilities, but I am not sure I need all of that flexibly, and I AM pretty sure that I will never get something like the Quorn actually finished.
 
The Hemmingway page is here:
 
I was thinking of getting:
--- Worden Mk III
--- Radius grinding attachment
--- Traverse table
--- Chisel sharpening attachment ( plans )
 
I think this should cover all of my needs, and it all seems a lot more "do-able" than a quorn as well.
 
I was hoping to find anyone who currently has a Worden, and hopefully the attachments as well, and get your thoughts on them? Are you happy with the machine? Do you find yourself wishing you had more flexibility from something like a quorn? Would you build another one? Any tips in the build itself?
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