Here is a list of all the postings IanT has made in our forums. Click on a thread name to jump to the thread.
|Thread: Closed thread|
I'm with JA here - I don't understand what is going on here either (but I have been off-line for a few days)
So I may have missed something but I was following Graham's line of thought on drill sharpening and found it most interesting and informative. I would have found any "published" summary of this work most useful, so I'm very sorry if something (someone?) has upset him in some way.
Well I'm afraid it doesn't read like that to me Ian.
|Thread: Eureka Tool|
That's a really nice video Rod.
I've previously read the Eureka article and looked at the drawings but a (moving) picture is certainly worth a good deal more than thousand words in this case!
Thank you & regards,
|Thread: Perfectly ground Twist Drills every time.|
I believe it is mentioned here Graham
|Thread: indoor live steam locos|
It's a neat idea V8 but not new.
I'm very certain that live steam locos powered by an electric heating element (fed through the track) were experimented with (in either G0 or G1) many years ago. I probably read this either in the G1MRA Journal or Model Engineer, I cannot recall which right now. I guess the concept wasn't considered sufficiently better (or more efficient) than the spirit or solid fuels used back then and so the idea lay dormant until Hornby resurrected it for '00' - where it clearly has benefits given both the small spaces available and the pre-existing track power.
These days, self contained (radio-controlled) battery-electric locomotives are very common in G3 but I did ponder a kind of 'Hybrid' design a while back. Actually driven/controlled by an R/C electric motor set-up but with a low-pressure boiler that vented through the chimney via a valve gear (just to give chuffs!). This thought was prompted by seeing a G3 live steam loco that had been 'half-staged' - in that it was fully engineered as a live steam loco (and had been run on air) but without a boiler being fitted. Instead it had an electric motor drive to the rear axle as an "interim" measure. My 'hybrid' never got beyond the "ponder" stage though - for a start I'm not sure that the 'steam' would have actually been that visible - but it did make for an entertaining coffee break.
Of course '00' have had electric/oil smoke generators for many years...
16mm is a wee bit different Bazyle in that although it originally (generally) referred to 2' Narrow Gauge engines running on 32mm (so is a scale rather than a gauge) - it quickly came to encompass other N/G variants also based on 45mm track - and given that the actual N/G railways varied a quite a lot (both above and below two foot) I guess this was a more convenient naming convention. than anything else
But talking of "Purists" Bazyle - Gauge '3' used to be modelled in 1/2" scale before the war but then we moved closer to actual scale with 17/32nds (e.g. 13.49375mm/ft) although some die-hard 'Euro-Modernists' do insist on using a scale of 13.5mm/ft.
I used to be a 17/32nds kind of guy until I discovered the 'scaling' function on my CAD system. Since then I've been devoted to modelling at 13.486725 mm/ft - which I'm thinking of calling Gauge 3 "Finescale".
I will admit though that it does take a very practiced eye to spot that 0.2mm difference (in the overall locomotive length) when it's running at speed and you are a good 30ft away from it in the garden - and I'm afraid I'm still working on that one!
And after a quick dig in my archives, a photo of Mr M running his engines at said event.
I'm afraid it does not include a soundtrack of me coughing in the background though....
The very early days of 'model' railway gauges were somewhat confused and I seem to recall that part of the problem was exactly how the gauge was measured. I believe one German manufacturer originally measured their 'gauge' from the rail centre line but used the same rail section (3mm?) in each gauge and this was not clearly understood by others (in UK) trying to produce compatible products. Cannot for the life of me remember where I read this now though..
Anyway, essentially Marklin announced three gauges in 1891 (Spur I, II & III) and this was (obviously) a metric system. In part owing to the confusion about gauge dimensions and (I would also guess) the need for a clear Imperial standard, a committee of the Society of Model Engineers announced five "standard" UK gauges on Feb 1st 1899. As some people get confused by this issue, I'll point out that these were "Gauges" and not "Scales" - although I believe it was generally assumed they referred to standard gauge stock.
For the benefit of any railway modellers here, in 1941 the British Railways Modelling Standards Bureau (BRMSB) was formed, which led to the Model Engineering Trade Association (META) whose members were committed to meet BRMSB 'standards'. Of course different standards popped up elsewhere in the world (the US had their own standards for instance) However, as a lad peering into the window of BEC Models (in Tooting) I do recall wondering what META was/meant.....?
I mention all this as John has generally got things straight but there are these small differences in detail that either get confused (or get skimmed over) in just about everything I read on the subject
So Gauge '2' (for instance) was a 2" gauge which largely died out between the two WW's. Gauge '3' however is built to 2.5" gauge, which to be precise is 63.5mm. In Germany 'Spur II' is very similar to G3 but built to a gauge of 64mm. To be further pernickety - Gauge 3 is built to a scale of 1:22.6 and Spur II to 1:22.5 (same as LGB). As I'm feeling really pernickety, I'll also point out that Gauge 1 is built to 1.75" which is 44.45mm (and not 45mm) However, what is 0.5mm (or 0.55mm) between friends? Well I guess not much but then again you've no idea how much passion gets stoked up over the difference between 10mm and 3/8th in certain circles?
Anyway, getting back to this thread (Indoor live steam), a certain Mr R Marsh used to bring his coal fired 0-4-0's to the Gauge '3' AGM and run them on his 5 foot diameter (yes - that's 2.5ft radius) test track he that could fold in half and get into his car boot. It used to play havoc with my breathing though (ex-chain smoker I'm afraid) and it would be highly unlikely to be allowed in these days of H&S....
|Thread: Arrand for sale|
I have a few of his products and they are very nicely made.
|Thread: Myford super7 clutch|
Tim, this is a Mark 1 Super Seven.
I had a similar problem with clutch adjustment and if the 'lock' grub screw doesn't help fix it then there is a "push-rod" below that might be broken or chipped at the bottom (which means that you cannot get the full range of clutch adjustment). From memory, this is a fairly simple cylinder that was not difficult to replace with a newly made one (you cannot buy Mk1 clutch spares). My Mk1 clutch had a bit of a rattle, which was a clue to the presence of the broken bit inside.
The actual clutch adjustment can be quite fiddly to get just right and it's worth taking your time to get it spot on. I struggled at first with either a very tight clutch (almost impossible to move) and one that slipped badly. I dismantled my clutch and could not see any real (major) wear and eventually managed to get it set "just right" but it did take more than one or two attempts. Very much worth the effort though!
|Thread: Starrett Vice hold Downs|
The work piece shown in the diagram is (relatively) thin Peter and the hold-downs are enabling the whole top surface to be machined (shaped in this case) whilst still clearing the vice jaws. The work is also fully supported on it's lower/under side. Your Starrett's will be fully hardened and (should you not need them) I imagine that they will worth a reasonable amount if you can find the right buyer.
As ever, where Shaping is concerned, 'Delmar' is your friend! I think this shows the (correct) use of hold-downs pretty well.
They were (are?) commonly used in Shaper vices to hold work flat/down in the vice Peter.
I seem to recall someone wrote some articles in ME about using the Shaper, where his first 'project' was a pair of hold-downs for it.
|Thread: Wire stripper repair or bin?|
"The tool is die-cast, and no doubt from the Far East as is the norm nowadays"
You knew the correct answer in advance really Geoff didn't you?
Sympathy with your back by the way.
|Thread: Imperial fractions on drawings.|
Just about all my machines and measuring devices are Imperial but my favourite Vernier (the non-digital one!) has both Inch & mm scales. For some reason I find it much easier to read just the 'mils' off it these days. I also tend to draw (CAD) any new designs in metric/mm as I'm increasingly using metric fasteners and materials.
However, when turning (or milling) my machine dials are imperial, so of course it's natural to use Thou's but it runs a bit deeper than that. I still "think" in Thou's (probably always will do so) but it's not really a problem in practice. For most purposes (e.g. small distances) 0.1 mm is the same as 4 thou and I can do simple conversions in my head (so I can't be completely daft just yet!).
Whilst I do have full sets of Imperial drills (fractional, letter, No.) that will probably last me my lifetime, I now also have a full set of metric drills in 0.1mm steps up to 10mm that I find myself using more and more. And of course for larger dimensions they have these wonderful things called 'Calculators' to let you move quickly & accurately between the two systems.
As for tolerances - sorry but I don't do them. Generally I make a hole to roughly the required size and then make another bit to fit into it. If I want a very good fit (VG Fit?) - then I might ream or D-bit the hole first or if I want a really, really good fit (RRG Fit?), then a bit of lapping might occur (but I'm normally much too idle!). Fortunately, I don't work for Rolls Royce and it takes me quite long enough to build things as it is! But as usual, different horses for different courses - and everyone to their own..
|Thread: Repton RT1 Ball Turning Tool|
Like Norman, I too have the ball turner from RDG - another Christmas present (as I've already got lots of socks) !
Seems to work well enough (used on free-cutting steel) but my first job was to round one end of a centre nut for a Finger Plate I'd been making. I'd already turned and tapped it in anticipation of Father Christmas coming up with the goods but found that the front of the ball turner fouled the bottom of the chuck I was using on my Super 7. So it couldn't reach the work to round it.
I just found a longer length of bar and chucked it sticking out 2-3 inches. Turned & tapped it and I was then able to 'round' it OK, then part the new nut off. As I normally keep unsupported work as close to the chuck face as possible, it's something I will have to bear in mind when using this device. An "Up & Over" ball turner probably wouldn't suffer from this problem.
Thinking about it now (Note to Self !) I might also be able to get closer to short work (with the ball turner) using my ER32 chuck to hold the work as there is more clearance under it.
|Thread: What's wrong with T nuts? (compared to T Bolts)|
I can see the concern that with a T-Nut the bolt might be forced through the bottom and jack everything up - whereas a T-Bolt cannot do this. I guess it could happen - although never to me.
My understanding has always been that "best practice" is to make sure that the T-Nut/Bolt actually fits the T-Slot well and (where possible) is also supported on the top of the T-Slot. This clearly happens where (for instance) a flat block is bolted directly to the table and the base of it directly covers the top of the slot. However, it is also possible to clamp indirectly by the use of an auxiliary table or (for instance) the rather nice 1-2-3 blocks I got for Christmas (still finding different uses for them JS!). Both of these will help support the top of the T-Slot and have the added benefit of preventing distortion on a slotted lathe cross-slide for instance
However, I think the best practical advice is to use as many clamps as possible, don't over-tighten them and rather than go heavy with the clamps - just take a lighter cut. If you are worried enough to want to really tighten up your T-bolts/nuts - then perhaps it's time to stop and re-think your clamping arrangements.
|Thread: Running Down Tool|
I've got one similar to the Chronos one John (I may have brought it from them in fact) but it occurred to me later that it should be possible to modify one of my standard toolholders to take a front guide extension.
This would be a flat plate screwed to the front that could be simply bored to take the guides. I'd set the holder to centre height with the tool inserted, remove the tool, then screw the holder on and bore it at that height, I think it would probably work just fine.
|Thread: Myford Paint (Grey)|
Have a look at the spec on the engine enamel Adam - it's downloadable in PDF format. I think it will do and you can ask for any particular colour you need - including Myford.
It's also £6.68 per litre (34%) cheaper than the other one mentioned. My Grandmother wasn't Scottish but I'm sure I must have some Scottish ancestry somewhere?
You don't need two part for this Adam. If you are not going to strip right back, then do as Roy suggests and rub it down and then infill with car body filler. Rub this down again and then repaint the whole area with a good (oil-resistant) paint. I've used these people below before (no connection) and their engine enamel seems good enough for my needs.
If you don't want to strip your machine into separate parts, then you might get away with very careful masking off with tape (and old newspaper) if you take your time and cover everything up but it's much easier to work on separate components (and even then I mask up anything I don't want paint on - including inside the holes etc.)
Want the latest issue of Model Engineer or Model Engineers' Workshop? Use our magazine locator links to find your nearest stockist!
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.