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

Member postings for Paul Kemp

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

Thread: 5 inch 0-4-0 Shunter
24/04/2019 10:53:29

Ron,

Cracking job, well done, you have every right to be pleased. I am sure you and the grandchildren will get a lot of enjoyment from running it. That looks a nice track too.

Paul.

Thread: Viceroy AEW
22/04/2019 11:05:39

Ian,

I too have an Elliot 00 Omnimill. I have had it running for just over a year now, and I love it! I am currently building a 6" scale traction engine and it has done everything I have asked of it. The only job I haven't done on the cylinder block on it was boring it out for the liner and facing the end flanges and fly cutting the saddle and that is because I didn't have a boring head for it at the time and also had access to a Kearns HBM so it made more sense to use that for that job. I cut all my gears on it using the horizontal spindle, I did find the three table feeds a little limiting for that as even the slowest was a bit too fast but like Nigel I have it set up with VFD's so just engaged a faster speed on the spindle and then slowed it with the VFD to suit the cutter which gave an acceptable feed rate. The feed on mine is a shaft drive to the gearbox on the table with a single speed belt reduction off the main spindle gearbox input. Later ones have a seperate motor on the feed so if you stick a VFD on that you have infinitely variable feeds too.

I haven't found any real problem with rigidity on the vertical head, I regularly use a 2" 4 insert face cutter to hog off metal. The ability to swivel the head was invaluable when drilling the steam ports and the ability to swing the head in combination with extending or retracting it also means you can get the cutter over any part of the table. Having to re-tram the head when extending or retracting it can be a slight annoyance at first but now I can set it in a minute or two. 3MT in both spindles means tooling is interchangeable. When machining the TE cylinder I was able to set it up on the table saddle down, machine the top face with the vertical head, swap the face mill to the horizontal spindle and machine the valve chest face so at one setting I had 2 reference faces flat and square. As Nigel says you can also use MT shank drills and reamers - last weekend I drilled and reamed a 7/8" hole in my cross head without having to take it off the table and transfer to the radial arm drill.

It's old (almost as old as me) has a fair bit of backlash in the table nut and the slides could benefit from a pass with a scraper but it does everything I need and I won't be getting rid of it out of choice any time soon!

Paul.

Thread: Imperial Tube
21/04/2019 20:17:26

Er...... I think the clue is in the title?! 6 1/2" OD by 6.00 ID (I think with my limited maths that's about 1/8" wall thickness) and given its a smokebox probably 4 - 5" long, it's not going to be that long anyway. I would assume the exact material is immaterial but non ferrous probably best for a corrosion point of view. If you got a piece of 1/8" copper plate it shouldn't be too hard to roll it round a former if it's well annealed. Sorry don't have any suggestions for a piece of tube though.

Oops Jason beat me too it!  If it's a traction engine then agree with Jason, steel would be best, more possibilities for supply too, I got a piece of 13" OD pipeline tube for mine and turned it down to 12 5/8".

Paul.

Edited By Paul Kemp on 21/04/2019 20:22:01

Thread: Lathe controls position
21/04/2019 11:15:03
Posted by vintage engineer on 21/04/2019 11:07:00:

You used to be able to get lefthand cheque books.

You used to be able to get cheque books too! Come to that we used to have a bank in town that you could walk too, now it's £6 on the bus to see one. When you go inside its full of computers and you won't find a counter! I think that makes the banking system truly ambidextrous, you don't need a pen!

Paul.

Thread: Copper for boiler construction
14/04/2019 23:33:21

Paul,

There was recent mention of this in another thread. Always best to consult with the tester that you propose to use for your boiler (they will likely want to see it during the stages of construction anyway if they are following the code precisely) but I think it unlikely they will want to see certs for the copper. If they do you could ask how many ME suppliers of materials provide these for copper as a matter of course! It's only really relevant for copper if you are TIG welding it to determine the arsenic content. Steel is a different matter.

Paul.

Thread: 5 inch 0-4-0 Shunter
14/04/2019 20:46:22

Ron,

Sounds good, I am sure it will run as well aa it looks. Going to post some video of it in action? Look forward to seeing it in action.

Paul.

Thread: Folding Bike design & build
09/04/2019 18:06:37

He says it weighs 10kg?

Nice job.

Paul.

Thread: Steam Boiler
08/04/2019 19:41:52

Not in England you can't if you want to go the club testing route as the code specifically precludes stainless as a generic and I imagine NI is the same, not sure about the South though. You might be OK with a commercial test and a commercial insurer as long as you can do the numbers and get a design approved. Could be complicated and expensive though!

I can see the logic precluding stainless as a material given its propensity for cracking and sudden failure but other places in the world as well as Europe allow it, maybe we are stuck in the dark ages.

Paul.

Thread: Is there a way to mask silver solder
08/04/2019 13:48:54

Michael / (Terry?),

Tippex works quite well on exposed surfaces. Not sure how effective it would be on a shaft / hole though. Better approach might be to make the bush with an undersized bore and then line ream it in situ.

Paul.

Thread: Motor Gland
07/04/2019 13:45:43

Dave,

Visit your local City Elctrical Factors they will likely have something in either plastic, brass or steel. However some old motors I have had some very odd threads which don't match modern standards. The one on my mill dating back to around 1960 I had to tap out to (from memory) 22mm in order to get a gland that would accept screened cable.

Paul.

Thread: from a 3.5 inch Gezina to 5 inch tramway Plettenberg locomotive
07/04/2019 13:33:18

Werner,

Looks a very nice little track and with the tight curves very prototypical. The flange squeal adds to the atmosphere! On heritage railways over here they are sometimes using graphite blocks which are sprung loaded into the root of the flange from a holder to provide 'lubrication' and extend the life of the wheel profiles by reducing wear. Might be something to experiment with on your home track to save the olive oil.

Paul.

07/04/2019 12:09:21

Werner, very nice, looks to steam very well. I like that steam pump runs very smooth at low speed. I take it from the flange squeal you are running on steel rail in your garden?

Paul.

Thread: Machinery Directive and CE marking
06/04/2019 13:35:32
Posted by Robert Atkinson 2 on 06/04/2019 05:38:13:
Posted by Paul Kemp on 05/04/2019 19:58:07:
Posted by Robert Atkinson 2 on 05/04/2019 17:19:47:
Posted by Cabinet Enforcer on 05/04/2019 17:13:29:

Robert, if your new all singing all dancing CNC clipboard jiggler brings down an overflying 737, then rest assured the lack of a suitable technical file will be the very least of your problems.

But if you have a valid Technical Construction File they can't do anything to you!

And there exactly in your last sentence lies the problem. A horse can be lead to water ....................

Paul.

You are being obtuse again I'm not sure what not being able to mae somone do somthing even when provided with the "tools" ha to do with my comment. From the rest of you post I'll guess you are saying that having a TCF does not stop the plane crash. This is true, but it means that there is something wrong with the requirements, not wht the manufactuer did. Unless they could prove the manufacturer knew there was a real risk and ignored it because they met the letter of the requlation (this would be wilfull negligence or similar legal term) the manufacturer is not liable.

I have been responsible for reviewing a suppliers qualification tests (RTCA DO-160, aviation not CE) and was accused of being very "black and white" about a minor exceednce (1 count of the measurement instrument over the prescribed limit liine). My response was that if it is on the limit line and the aircraft crashes I have no justification to make. One count over and I (and my employer) could be liable. True if one count over caused the crash then on the limit would almost certainly have the same effect. Problem is that even i the exceedance did not cause the crash scrutiny can be appilied to related areas. I bet there are a lot of people at Boeing right now havein deep thoughts about compliance. For things like this lawers are very black and white and if they are working for the insurance company you could be out of luck.

Robert G8RPI.

Robert,

I am being obtuse (again?). If I am being obtuse then you are being acute. Dave (SOD) summed up the underlying theme of my posts very well I think. Regulation is not fully prescriptive and where it isn't has to be interpreted considering the intent and as he rightly says this is normally achieved by 'case law'.

The example you state of exceeding a limit is irrelevant to the discussion as that is prescriptive. Legislation lays down a limit, limit exceeded, clearly non compliant, job done.

However clearly from your original question the application of the legislation in this case is not prescriptive and therefore must be interpreted. If it were prescriptive and there was a clause stating this legislation is all encompassing and applicable to commercial, non commercial and any use then you would have quoted it rather than ask an (obtuse) open question.

You have been provided with several specific examples of legislation clauses and been given opinion of their interpretation which apparently go no where close to satisfying your opinion and your opinion clearly is not open to being swayed. In fact I doubt that if the president of the EU posted here the intent of the regulation is not aimed at model engineers you would still argue the point.

So let's reverse the burden of proof and have you quote the specific clauses that you interpret as showing why a model engineer in his shed producing an item of tooling for his own use in his own shed with no intent to place it on the market or put it into use without commercial gain MUST CE mark it and Must comply with the Machinery Directive.

If you can do that in the black and white terms of your aviation compliance example like a go or no go gauge I may entertain further debate. Otherwise I have better things to do.

Paul.

Thread: Vickers Bl 8 inch Howitzer cannon of 1917
06/04/2019 01:27:10

Mal, that is truly a thing of beauty. As said before there is some cracking work there. Keep posting please, very interesting.

Paul.

Thread: Fings wot I've learned in a month
06/04/2019 01:19:56

Good man! Have been reading your exploits from the beginning, makes entertaining reading and I like your style!

Remember no one knows everything, the key to success is knowing enough! The key to successful purchasing is getting what you need that will perform as well as you need it to (not neccesarily as well as everyone else thinks it should) at the right price for you.

End of it all is there is a tremdous amount of self satisfaction to be gained when you churn out something that works as you want by your own efforts with the equipment and knowledge you have. Enjoy yourself and keep safe.

Paul.

Thread: Machinery Directive and CE marking
05/04/2019 19:58:07
Posted by Robert Atkinson 2 on 05/04/2019 17:19:47:
Posted by Cabinet Enforcer on 05/04/2019 17:13:29:

Robert, if your new all singing all dancing CNC clipboard jiggler brings down an overflying 737, then rest assured the lack of a suitable technical file will be the very least of your problems.

But if you have a valid Technical Construction File they can't do anything to you!

And there exactly in your last sentence lies the problem. A horse can be lead to water ....................

Paul.

Thread: Using a propane cylinder for partable compressed air.
05/04/2019 14:29:20
Posted by Simon Williams 3 on 05/04/2019 09:23:02:

Paul Kemp makes a perfectly valid point in that he is correct, the PED doesn't proscribe the inspection and test intervals for a pressure vessel, it is to be determined on the basis of a risk assessment done by a competent person. My point was that a regular disciplined regimen is written in law.

The fact that many of us don't comply doesn't make it right.

And no, a casual user cannot be the "Competent Person" (which phrase has a specific meaning) making the risk assessment.

HTH Simon

I don't think I mentioned a casual user? However at home I could easily be defined as a casual user. At work I am a member of a professional body with formal engineering qualifications and more years experience than I care to count. Does that make me an incompetent casual user at home? Self certification is never a good idea, independent inspection and certification is always better. Strange though that the PED does not preclude 'self certification' don't you think? Funny old world.

Paul.

05/04/2019 14:23:28
Posted by A Smith on 05/04/2019 12:41:40:

When testing a diving air cylinder with air, with the cylinder in a pit, the test adaptor failed and was expelled at high speed, retained only by the long hose used to connect the air supply. The adaptor hit the leg of a very robust cast iron bench and cracked the leg. The remains of the adaptor looked like it had been through a hydraulic press. I was about 30 or so yards away and thought that a bomb had exploded. The individual conducting the test wasn't great on thread forms and had found an adaptor that "fitted".

I pressure test things as part of my professional life (40 years on from the above) and I would not consider re-purposing a gas cylinder for industrial use. At home? I would only consider it if I could hydrostatically test it to at least twice the working pressure. Darwin rules OK.

Why would you pressure test a diving cylinder with air????? No self respecting or competent establishment would do that and clearly from the comment re the fitting thread form the operative was not competent to test a balloon! There is a world of difference between a diving cylinder and the average home compressor tank something like a factor of 15 on pressure.

Paul.

Thread: Machinery Directive and CE marking
05/04/2019 14:04:59
Posted by Robert Atkinson 2 on 05/04/2019 07:01:27:
Posted by Paul Kemp on 04/04/2019 22:26:27:

How do you interpret this?

"For the purposes of these Regulations, machinery or partly completed machinery shall not be regarded as being placed on the market or put into service where—

(a)it does not have affixed to it either the CE marking, or any inscription likely to be confused with the CE marking, and—

(i)it will not be put into service in an EEA state;

(ii)it is imported into an EEA state for re-export to a country which is not an EEA state; or

(iii)it is imported into an EEA state other than in the course of a business by a person who intends to use it other than in the course of a business; or"

The second bit applies to trade fairs and is irrelevant.

i would say as you don't put a CE Mark on your home made tools the first part is satisfied and as a "hobbyist" is not intending to use it for business (iii) is nearly there too except it's not been imported. Any proper lawyers out there?

Paul.

Ahh, you are ignoring the "and" in point a,

AND "it will not be put into service in an EEA state" put into service means using.

Conformance is not about making, selling or business use. The lathe you buy as a hobbyist has to conform to the same requirements as one used by business. Domestic appliances have to conform too. Selling is not a requirement, selling, marketing OR putting into use requires compliance otherwise you could give non compliant items away free with a token compliant ones.
It is true that you will only have an issue for home use if something goes wrong. Unfortunatly it's then too late.

Neil's approach is OK for the LVD but what about Machinery. EMC and Pressure directives?
Following good practice is the best defence agnst both incidents and their cnsequences.

Dear Robert,

Pray where am I ignoring the 'and' in point a? Also putting into service is dealt with in the first line.

Lets go through the extract step by step; the first sentence clearly states of you read it correctly that an 'object' is not considered to have been placed on the market or put into service where the following criteria are met.

the first is as you state "a" and it does have an and at the end, so the inference is "a" (not being CE marked) must be met plus other conditions. As I stated we don't mark the stuff we make so "a" is dealt with.

(i) has no "and" or "or" at the end so we must assume this was intended as a stand alone and obligatory with "a". However that tends to override the whole premis of the first paragraph so like most EU regulation is poorly written as putting into service and placing on the market are joined together in "a" but now apparently separated again by (i)! For proper clarity the two things should be dealt with separately.

(ii) has an "or" at the end so the implication is this need not be met if some other following condition is. So we can ignore that.

(iii) also has an "or" at the end but the paragraphs following are completely unrelated to your question as they deal with bringing the object into the EEA for the purposes of advertising / demonstration at a trade fair. Sadly (iii) is also extremely poorly written and you have to read it several times if you are the average man on the street to extract a meaning! Basically it says if a person imports the object not in the course of business and intends to use it for a non business related use we are ok. See my last para where I stated (iii) "is nearly there" so I clearly took note of the and and tested the other text for fit! The problem for a test case on this particular part of the legislation is the context centres only on import and not manufacture. I don't know because I haven't looked and really don't have the inclination to spend time on it if there is anywhere else in the legislation that answers this question but given that bikepete's linked abstract comes from section 2 which is basically definition and application it really ought to be dealt with in this para. So another opportunity for the lawyers to get rich arguing over interpretation of the intent.

I would make three comments; firstly that as others have stated / alluded to, I also, from your responses would question your motives. Secondly as a compliance professional I am surprised by your interpretation of my post and the assumption I had stopped at "a" when I clearly referred to (iii). Thirdly the question you pose despite some having given you legislative examples as you initially requested is not clear cut and can only really be proven by case law. A well used legal principle is the reasonable man test, common sense says if you are making something in your shed for your own use in a leisure activity for which there is no intention to place it on the market or cause harm to anyone but yourself the directive would not apply. Sadly sense is not that common anymore it seems!

best regards,

Paul.

04/04/2019 22:26:27

How do you interpret this?

"For the purposes of these Regulations, machinery or partly completed machinery shall not be regarded as being placed on the market or put into service where—

(a)it does not have affixed to it either the CE marking, or any inscription likely to be confused with the CE marking, and—

(i)it will not be put into service in an EEA state;

(ii)it is imported into an EEA state for re-export to a country which is not an EEA state; or

(iii)it is imported into an EEA state other than in the course of a business by a person who intends to use it other than in the course of a business; or"

The second bit applies to trade fairs and is irrelevant.

i would say as you don't put a CE Mark on your home made tools the first part is satisfied and as a "hobbyist" is not intending to use it for business (iii) is nearly there too except it's not been imported. Any proper lawyers out there?

Paul.

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

Latest Forum Posts
Support Our Partners
ChesterUK
Ausee.com.au
Eccentric Engineering
Eccentric July 5 2018
Warco
Allendale Electronics
Sarik
TRANSWAVE Converters
emcomachinetools
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