A very small Shaping Machine ...

.

Neil,

An interesting question ... and I don't know the answer

But; personally, I would not consider it an improvement, changing the spec to include ferrous metals.

• There are many existing designs capable of handling Ferrous
• The cutting forces would [presumably] need to be higher
• Therefore the machine would need to be stronger.
• This rapidly escalates, as the specification creeps.

Having spent some years designing vibration test fixtures: One of the important lessons learned was that stiffness can be designed-in, but strength generally cannot. Therefore by restricting the range of materials, and depths, to be cut; I hope to build a compact, lightweight, machine which does what I need.

Others may well have different requirements; and I would be happy to participate in a bigger project.

MichaelG.

Was around at a local engineers workshop the other day, he had two tables of old planer machines that hes going to make a work bench from, 3 tons each, probably 10ft x 3ft.

MichaelG, I'v got a copy of "English Mechanic and Mirror of Science", May 1868 (a year after the Paris exhibition), it has an article on Vautrin's miniature planer, along with an etching of it mounted in a bench vice, over the next day or so I'll scan it to my album. Ian S C

Ian,

That's wonderful

Thank You

MichaelG.

The Adept No1 would be ideal - mounts in a bench vice. One went for peanuts (and if you've bought peanuts recently you'll understand that alanogy isn't what it used to be) at the recent St Albans exhibition tool stand. Still feeling the pain of not snapping it up.

A starting point might be two angle plates set up like the Adept for chassis and table, then an old cross slide & top slide for the mechanism. For vertical adjustment it does not need to be a parallel slide so a hinged action migth be simpler. A good size lift up screwcutting/boring holder could make the clapper and double up on the lathe.

Like the grinder idea Nobby. Also a good basis for a clock wheel engine with a small cutter frame in the holder and room for a big indexing plate hanging over the front.

Bazyle,

I agree that the Adept No.1 is about the right size, but ... unless they are more accurate than appearances suggest, I doubt it would satisfy my requirements.

This is, I think, an excellent example of the compromises that have to be made if one designs a small shaper that is capable of working Iron. ... As per my remark in reply to Neil.

Note: I am pondering the use of a Ball Slide [or a Crossed Roller Slide] for the ram.

... Happy to be proven wrong if I have mis-judged the Adept. !!!

MichaelG.

Michael

As the basis for a 'one-off', might not a Pultra (or similar) lever cross slide be a possible starting point? Accuracy and quality are a 'given' and the castings are generally good. A similar, but lesser strength basis might be the Unimat SL.

If either of the above are of interest, I have a spare SL base and MIGHT have a Pultra lever slide.

PM if of interest.

Rgds

Bill

Hello Michael, good afternoon.

I have under construction (although at this time stopped because of a fire) one small shaping machine built basically following the book by David Gingery.
I fabricated it basically from solid aluminum and cold rolled steel. You can see photos in my **ALBUM** and a short **MOVIE**, two years old. I made the conversion from inches to millimeters and, if I remember it correctly, I reduced a few millimeters on the scale.
In my opinion it would not be difficult task to reduce the size and also mount a lever to manual.
And it would probably be cheaper than one made from casts.

Hope this helps

Dias Costa

Bill,

Good thinking!

... I have sent a PM

MichaelG.

Dias,

Excellent photos in your album ... Thank you.

Unfortunately, the Gingery machine is much bigger than I want ... unless I scaled it down to [say] 1/5th.

Do you think it would be practical to scale-down your modified version to that extent?

I basically want a high precision Shaper, about the size of a Toaster.

MichaelG.

.

Edit: Sorry ... I forgot to compliment you on the Movie.

Edited By Michael Gilligan on 22/10/2013 17:02:36

hi Nobby,

i build miniature steam locos in 3.5" and 5"g, and i cant think of any situation where i want to create a 1" dia shape in steel 4" long. if i had to i would probably use a ball ended end mill, or would mill with a square edge then add isopon filler!

cheers,

julian

Oh Julian;

That's cheating! No, I think you really need a shaper to slow you down.

Another JohnS.

Hello, MichaelG, good evening.

MG: Excellent in your photos.
DC: Thank you for your kind words.

MG: Unfortunately, the Gingery machine is much bigger than I want ... unless I scaled it down to [say] 1/5th.
Do you think it would be practical to scale down your modified version to that extent?
I basically want a high precision Shaper, about the size of a Toaster.
DC: When I started building my shaper machine I never worked with one and did not know its working intricacies.

So then, after deciding to change some dimensions (do not remember which ...), I followed this path:
1 - Because I didn't intend to use bicycle chain and sprocket-wheel for movement and instead use synchronized wheel and belt, I searched market for wheels and belt I needed to support the cutting effort.
2 - Insisted on reading the book by David Gingery until I have understood well the role played by different components.
3 - Realized which components should be the first to be manufactured knowing they will be structural constraints of the size of the remaining components.
4 - Fabricated the remaining components to fit the dimensions of the first components (see ref. 3).
5 - Did a temporary installation to test the movements using a small motor that I had and I liked the result.
That is the current situation.

This text continues in the next post...

Hope this helps

Dias Costa

Edited By dcosta on 23/10/2013 00:02:01

Hello, MichaelG, good evening.

This is the second and last parte of my text:

I think that a reduction to 1/5th is not possible. If we consider that the side panels of the structure of my shaper machine is 180mm wide and 280mm high, a reduction of 1/5th result in 36mm wide by 56mm high. I think the other components destined to suffer stress, even for brass or aluminium, for a so small size machine would have to be very small and will not support the cutting effort.
Also the resulting size (around 10mm) of the gap between the two panels where the rotary motion is converted into reciprocating motion would be of a size which would not fit the mechanics required.
I think, whatever the shaper machine you'll get, so that it produces high-precision surfaces as you want, it will benefit from a movement of very regular nature which, I think, only a system that uses wheels (with engine or hand crank) will produce.

MG: Sorry ... I forgot to compliment you on the Movie.
DC: Do not worry. Thank you for your kind words.
Let me tell you that I have not had conditions to test the cutting capabilities of my shaper machine because the fire in my workshop. However you can look up some movies on Youtube by Mr. Rick Sparber. He built a shaper machine strictly following the book of Mr. Gingery and shows it on Youtube cutting some metal.
Mr. Rick Sparber helped me with important views in the construction of my shaping machine.

I would like to know that my poor mastery of the English language has allowed me to share with you my opinions.

Hope this helps

Dias Costa

Edited By dcosta on 23/10/2013 00:04:26

Michael, I don't think anyone has mentioned this but there is a construction article of a small, simple hand shaping machine in ME #2681 (Oct 9 1952). See pic. If you're interested and don't have that issue, PM me.

OMG,

Thanks for posting that picture ... it clearly shows the scale upon which I am hoping to work.

In fact the article was mentioned by Keith Long, on page1 of this thread; and there is a PDF of the article here.

If you have the subsequent issues of ME, could you please check something for me ...

Was there any follow-up to the article, or PostBag discussion ?

Much appreciated.

MichaelG.

Dias,

Thank you for the additional information about your machine.

Your English is perfectly adequate, and I do appreciate your taking the trouble to describe what you have done.

The picture posted by OMG gives a good idea of the size of machine I want, and [as you mentioned] it would not be practical to scale-down the Gingery design.

MichaelG.

It should not be too hard to make that little shaper, and make it right handed if required. Ian S C

Michael

There doesn't appear to be any follow up article or discussion in letters of the shaper over the next 6-8 issues. You might find something in a search of the index, but it probably wouldn't be that easy to spot.

Keith

Nothing else turns up in Dias's database either (thanks again, Dias).

Sorry, Keith - I didn't catch your edit.

Edited By OMG on 23/10/2013 17:09:36

Thanks to all, for your inputs

MichaelG.