Stuart Engine for beginners?

My Dad and I are planing to visit the Midlands Engineering exhibition in October and plan to buy a Stuart engine to make. Now we are both beginners but are willing and eager. We have a decent selection of tools which include a Super 7 and an Emco FB-2 milling machine.

We had set our eyes on a No.1 engine as it seemed a nice size and not so fiddly but is this perhaps too big for our machinery?

Again, we will be taking to slowly and we'll be here regularly flying the "help" flag so we feel confident but this might be an indication that we haven't the slightest clue what we're about to undertake.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated,

Mark and Jon Gould in the Netherlands

I dont think that you will have many problems making a Stuart No 1 on your equipment.

Here is the address of a site that shows how to do it:

http://www.steves-workshop.co.uk/steammodels/stuart1/introduction/introindex.htm

Please keep us informed of progress and don't hesitate to ask any questions.

Tot ziens.

Brian

Edited By Brian Hutchings on 28/07/2017 13:04:26

.

Hi Mark,

For my first build I made a Stuart 'James Coombes' engine.

There is lots of different techniques required to make the engine but nothing too demanding so I found it a good project to practice initial skills upon. - IMHO it's also an interesting engine to look at with quite a few visible moving parts and will run nice and slowly.

There is basic turning, milling, taper turning etc, etc which is all good practice.

I just wish they also made a 1/6th scale one also in addition to the 1/12th scale that is produced. (I can hear Jason's voice telling me to fabricate one. . )

I made a build log here :- **LINK** if you are interested.

Whatever you choose enjoy yourself.

Nick

My first 'real ' engine build ,after a couple of oscillators, was the S10V which can be seen on my YouTube channel; followed by the 'Stuart Progress' & latterly the S50 horizontal, all easily enough to build for any model maker with basic skills, they all cover the basics as Nick has mentioned above.



All Stuart kits are eminently suitable for budding modellers... enjoy

George

Gents,

Thanks for posting back so quickly. Your models all look outstanding and we will be reading your build log Nick, thanks for that.

I can see that a small surface plate and height scribe are a nice addtition

Keep you posted,

Mark and Jon

A lot of the stationary engine models from all the various makers are designed with the Myford user in mind and that is why you do not see many models with flywheels larger than 9" (225mm) as that was about the largest that could be comfortably machined in the Myfords gap bed. All milling would have been done using the lathe with the addition of a vertical slide so you will not find anything that can't be handled on your machines.

The work required to make a No1 is really no different to that of the more usual beginners 10V, 10H or S50 it is just a bit bigger so just as suitable to lear on than the smaller engines.

J

PS Nick, at 1/6th scale the James Coombes would lack detail you would be better off making a bigger Waller, Clarkson or Farcot engine all of which are of a similar style but as they don't use the common components of the generic 2" x 1" Stuart cylinder are more detailed and closer to the originals. Now hurry up and get a new workshop sorted so you can get started on one of these.

Thanks for the encouragement Jason, we are eager to get stuck in. With the wealth of knowledge behind us on this website, we'll be going in with full (ish) confidence.

The gear you have should be fine for doing a number 1 engine. I did a couple some years back, using my Myford ML7 and a 10 inch shaper. The column is probably the most challenging piece. The bored column engines like the 10V and most of the other Stuart engines do make it easier to keep everything aligned properly.

I've also done a 10V using just a Unimat 3 (with the milling attachment.) So you would easily fit that on your gear. But I would suggest going for a larger engine if possible, as being a bit less fiddly for a first attempt.

John

Our kit came in. All parts look ok, however there are 2 very large protrusions from the casting process inside the bore of the cylinder. The 2 cans of paint are tiny! My wife has bigger nail varnish tins than these two.

What I also found disappointing is the "book" they sold us for £9,50 which is nothing more than few photo copies stapled together.

Oh well, upwards and onwards. We expect to start the build this month sometime. First we have a DRO to fit to the FB-2 and some work space to arrange.

Mark

I will be back with photo's of mistakes, blemishes and other general faux pas for you all to giggle at

Edited By Mark Gould 1 on 21/08/2017 14:27:49

Edited By Mark Gould 1 on 21/08/2017 14:28:09

.

What is the chosen one Mark.?

Nick

We went for a No. 1 engine. Mainly because of the size. I perhaps foolishly thought that a big engine would be a little less fiddly and more forgiving when it comes to tolerances. We will do our best and i will map out our progress here, even if it gets ugly. This will be a warts and all build thread

.

No you are right bigger is more forgiving. A few thou here and there will not matter on an engine that size as much as one of their smaller offerings.

Nick

Ok thanks Nick. We proceed with enthusiasm

There used to be a proper booklet on building the #1 engine. I have a copy somewhere although I am not sure if I could put my hand on it. Anyway, you can always ask on here if you need ideas about how to hold parts for machining.

John

One thing that's noticeable on You Tubes of the No.1 and 10V is the way they vibrate at anything more than very low revs. This certainly affects my 10V, and I think it's due to the absence of balancing webs on the crankshaft.

This didn't occur to me until after I'd built it, but I think if I was starting a new one I'd try to work some balance in.

.

I made a No.4 and put balance on the crank webs. - They worked well and the engine showed little vibration even at high speed.

But lets remember this is this chaps first build and unless he wishes to actually use the engine at a later date it will probably (and look best) just spending it's life on a slow tickover.

I would advise at this stage for him to stick to the original drawing as much as possible. Lets face it there are countless No.1's out there made this way that spend both working and demonstrating lives. - If he wished at a later date to incorporate 'bolt on' balances it's not too much of a major task with an engine of this reasonable size I would think.

Mark, I don't know what the book advises but I would start at the bottom and work up. i.e Bedplate, sole plate then the crank and bearings. Spend as much time as needed getting the bearings and crank correct and in the right position. If this is not done properly the rest of the build will become a fight all the way through and not a pleasure.

Nick

Thanks for the tips gents. We will attempt to run the engine on compressed air before we even think about steam. There is a lot to think about. Starting at the bottom seems like good advice and also seems to be the way to go from the research we have already done.

Thanks again,

Mark

P.S. Regarding the balancing; at the moment we will concern ourselves with making it as well as we can. Ironing out vibrations will be done later but thanks for the heads up Mick.

It would not be hard to add balance weights at a later date, easy enough to make then "C" shaped ones with a slot to fit over the rectangular crank webs retained by a screw, this is what is used on engines like the Swan and 5A

This thread was a good source for those building the No 1 until the picture links were altered.

It is still possible to follow along if you have the album open in another tab and flick between the two.

It is just a bit of along job to alter 655 links

I just happened to be looking through an old ME and it seems great minds think alike, similar balance weights to what I mentioned above by a certain K.N. Harris as one of several mods to the St No1.