Member postings for Versaboss

I promised I will come back to that problem - and here I am.
And because I have now also seen the second instrument, it became quite clear in what trade they were used.

But first some more pictures.

Instrument in the box.

Instrument standing vertically

Instrument from below

A couple of the 'Rollers'.

Now, as usual, friend SOD was not too far away from the truth with his first picture - if he had drawn a gear instead of a disk,! As it was clear after seeing the second instrument, it came from the quite well-known (but now disappeared) firm Maag Zahnräder Zürich. Not for watch gears though,but for large ones. Maybe also for the cutting tools, as they were famous for their gear cutting machines also.The rollers would go into a tooth space, and the single leg with the ball point to some point on the next tooth. The DTI would then show if the tooth on the other side is in tolerance. Naturally, the instrument would have been calibrated before, in a way unknown to me.

Now the second instrument, which shows the name on the dial and on the back side

Here, the rollers can be mounted on the central arm and on the right side, after removing the hook arm. These two parts have a constant distance, but can be moved together left/right with the small thumb wheel on the right side.
The large knob in the center clamps the slide. The measuring item is the hook on the left side. As you can see, there are a lot of different rollers small ones on the left side of the box, the large ones on the right.
I suspect it has the same purpose as the first instrument, maybe for smaller/finer gears.

Now the owner has to decide what to do wit them - I would take the DTI if he would make me a good price

Kind regards,
Hans

An interesting discussion about something I don't understand very well. Anything higher than differential calculus was too much for me back in my schooldays, long ago...
However, for unknown reasons rooting back in time I found in my stack of unread/partially read books the following one:
The Mathematical Experience, by Philip J Davis and Reuben Hersh. Wikipedia says a lot about these two mathematicians. The book has an interesting comment by the New Scientist on the front page: "An instant classic, it deserves to be read by everyone with an interest in the future of the human race". Oh well, maybe I should read more than just a few pages, but it is quite hard work for me. And my "interest in the future of the human race" is maybe not so high now.

But what bears reference to this thread is the beginning of the first chapter, which has the title "What is Mathematics?" This is followed by what the authors call a naive definition: "Mathematics is the science of quantity and space".

Thinking hard about that,
Hans

Unfortunately, I have only this single picture, but I will see if I can put my hands (and camera) on that thing.
May need a couple of days, though.

Kind regards
Hans

A friend of mine has another colleague who does house clearings (I hope that's a understandable and correct description). Among the stuff he found lately were 2 boxes with some measuring instruments. We have no idea for what this device can be used, so I present it here to the cumulative wisdom.

As far as I can see, the Compac indicator has 0.002 mm resolution!

Kind regards,
Hans

Fantastic, Martin, I'm really surprised and pleased!

Btw, this part was 3d-printed, it is for mounting and centering a small stepper motor. So no problem with the sharp corners. Well, the print was maybe not of the highest quality, but sufficient for the purpose.

Regards, Hans

Hi Martin, thanks for this, I will see if I can recreate something similar.

Meanwhile, something which I think would be difficult to do. To be honest, I'm not sure if I added enough dimensions to copy it exactly, but some guesses would be good enough...

Kind regards,
Hans

Sorry, Martin, but I have to come back to that. What I didn't tell is that I have the three months free trial of MOI on my computer, and up to now I couldn't find out how to do what I asked above.

It is true that MOI can do things which are difficult to do with any other CAD program (e.g. that 'Sunburst' in the example video, https://youtu.be/1B8g42hHJqg ). But for an all-purpose mechanical CAD I think it's not the right choice. You may have another opinion, that's your right.

I will be very interested to hear what SOD (Dave) says when he gets the round tuit!

Kind regards,
Hans

Now, Martin, can you please show us how to produce a workshop drawing with MOI (as that's what Nigel finally wants!)

Kind regards,
Hans

Many thanks for some eye-opening comments. I think (now) that the way to do it is drawing the parts massive (as SOD did) and then hollowing it out.

To be honest, once in my trials I could arrange the two parts correctly, but during the printout my 3D printer died a silent death. Later I could not repeat that. The program has the so-called mates, which are shown as small coordinate systems with colored axes. Unfortunately, I could nor arrange them in the correct relationship. There are only two operations possible: flip the primary axis (but which is that?), and reorient the secondary axis. IF they would be oriented correctly, then the "megadoodles of computing power" would mate the two parts as intended.

It might be that later I will find that the parts are not strong enough, So I will then use SOD's method to construct them more massively.

Btw, I use a program called languagetool, which shows me a lot of my errors when writing this text. Even missing commas...

Kind regards,
Hans

Hi all,
as there are several CAD threads running at the moment, I dare to add another one.

I was drawing two parts, as follows:
(tried to do my best to hide all traces about the program I used, as it is not favourably regarded here...)

Part 1:

Part 2:

The problem is the following: assemble part 2 on the surface of part 1, centrally, forming a Tee (hope I explain that good enough). Like a steam dome on a locomotive should make it clear.

With my program I found not out how to do that, so I printed both parts separately and used epoxy glue to join them.

The diameters of the two parts are the same.

How can it be done in Freecad, Solid Edge or Fusion?

Kind regards,
Hans

No reamer used for my turntable bearings, just carefully turning/boring (and some 3M microfinish foil)

Kind regards,
Hans

Last year I also bought one of these generic bandsaws (seems only the colour is different, mine is red). And I also broke the blade on a simple cut, It looked just as in Bill's picture above. Nothing to lose, much to gain I thought and used the technique of grinding the ends in wedge form and soldered the blade with silver solder. Lost about 12 mm in length, I think after a second incident it would be too short. I first was a bit afraid because the soldering looked not very reliable (gas bottle was almost empty), but after some grinding the blade moves now through the guides with only a slight thump. I did already some cuts and up to now all is ok. Two replacement blades (quite expensive here, about 9 blades equals the price of the saw) resting in a drawer now.

Kind regards,
Hans

Edited By Versaboss on 16/03/2022 22:06:27

If you want a kind of wood which really doesn't warp, then look at 'Panzerholz'.
Warning: it is expensive and not easy to procure.

Made by Delignit

Kind regards,
Hans

Edited By Versaboss on 06/02/2022 14:52:48

I have a couple of the small Humbrol tins, which I bought when I built my Stuart 10V. Can't remember exactly when that was, but surely more than 30 years ago.Thea are stored upright, have no skin and are usable like new.
I have als some bought about a year ago, not yet sure how they will behave...

Kind regards,
Hans

It is good being active on other forums also. I suspected having seen that before, but did not remember where. So I asked around, and in a couple of hours I got the answer.

This quick-change taper belongs to an Aciera 22 drilling machine. See here

Kind regards,
Hans

Edited By Versaboss on 25/01/2022 12:32:58

They are also used on the Mikron F75 milling machine.

F75

Although I never found out how the vertical head is oiled.I think mine looked a bit different from the picture at Tony's.

Used grease iirc, but I did not know better back then 54 years ago.

Regards,
Hans

Oh well - this thread lingers around now over 5 pages, and going back a year or so there are several others under the Turbo CAD title. So, after long and hard thinking, I want to present my personal opinion about these problems.
First question: why is it so hard to learn CAD? I think it has a lot do do with the terrifying not ergonomic and unsightly user interfaces in most of these programs.
I want to show that with some examples. I looked at Jason's video on page 4, and enlarged it as far as I could. In the tool bar I counted about 60 icons or tools, maybe some more. The enlarged picture is a bit hazy. This is Alibre, everybody here knows what Jason uses.
Then I tried the same with Solid edge and Onshape. About the latter I will tell you more in a moment.
On Solid edge I counted about 80 Icons - and now the crux of this. My monitor is about 35 cm wide. But on this size I have to use a loupe to see the tools large enough.
Onshape has in the sketch mode about 24 icons/tools. and in the 3D mode about 27. All black on white, no fancy colors.

Solid edge:

Onshape sketch

Onshape 3D

So, for heavens sake, why is no one (and especially Mr Graham) trying that program. It costs nothing more than filling out a registry form, runs in any browser (read no special computer resources needed) and makes very nice workshop drawings.
Now I hear the howling: it is in THE CLOUD!!! Yes, what's the problem I ask. This forum here is from the user's viewpoint also in the cloud. And the drawings become PUBLIC!!! Can you imagine how many such public drawings exist. Say 100000 users, each 10 documents, that's already a million. And I remember very well the beginnings of Alibre, then called Xcad, and they promised the first 100000 people would get it for free. I was in the 90thousends, and I got it! What I mean is that an estimate of 100000 users is possibly much too small. Further, there is no search function, and you can give a name which means nothing , should someone see it.
Btw. Onshape has a forum, and when I had some problems I got very competent answers, from users and even from the developers.
And one more thought, a bit naughty but necessary: why are people afraid of the cloud, but use their ffull name in a forum with worldwide access?
Ok, this entry was very hard work for me, so I stop better here and wish all a Happy New Year

Hans

Maybe you find this one interesting too, I found it in a magazine some days ago, and to be honest I could not find the answer, except perhaps if I would unearth some long gone geometry formulas. But from the type of mag I suspect one should find the answer 'just by thinking hard' - if you know what I mean.

The question is: how much larger is the area of the outer triangle than the area of the small one.
The triangles are equilateral, should that not be clear

Ignore the yellow line, that's an artefact of my CAD drawing.

Hmm ... when you use a DTI in the same position as the tool which was used before to turn the bar, then it is no wonder that it shows nothing! You have to measure the diameters at both ends with a micrometer.

It wonders me some times that none of our experienced members immediately jumps up on such a blatant error.

Regards,
Hans

The Versaboss household has two radio controlled clocks, which update only once in a day, at midnight. As the switchover happens later, they are not correct at the morning. But they have a button, marked 'wave', and pressing this forces an update. A bit annoying, but I can live with that...

Kind regards,
Hans