| Gallery, Projects and General > Gallery |
| Small Machine Vice |
| << < (2/2) |
| slowcoach:
Cheers :thumbup: |
| awemawson:
--- Quote from: Meldonmech on January 24, 2013, 02:37:25 PM --- Sparky, you are quite right, the guide bar is attached to the moving jaw, and prevents it from lifting. David --- End quote --- I would have thought that it is primarily to keep swarf out of the screw rather than prevent lifting, as it also needs the same clearances as the moving jaw, and when extended that clearance would be magnified by the jaw spacing. |
| sparky961:
--- Quote from: awemawson on January 25, 2013, 06:05:11 AM --- --- Quote from: Meldonmech on January 24, 2013, 02:37:25 PM --- Sparky, you are quite right, the guide bar is attached to the moving jaw, and prevents it from lifting. David --- End quote --- I would have thought that it is primarily to keep swarf out of the screw rather than prevent lifting, as it also needs the same clearances as the moving jaw, and when extended that clearance would be magnified by the jaw spacing. --- End quote --- I see your point, and agree to an extent. It wouldn't positively remove all lifting/twisting from the jaw. I do think that it would be considerably better than if only the jaw itself was constrained by a dovetail slide, box ways, or the like. The greater the distance between vice ends, the better the effect. It would have to be shimmed pretty snug to work, but the magnification you talk about would actually be a division (making the jaw move less than the slide) if you consider the geometry. Not as good as the "Kurt" style that splits the force in and down, but not bad given the simplicity. Maybe my thinking is backwards, but I wouldn't hesitate to give this design a try myself at some point. The biggest disadvantage that I see for it is requiring clearance for the bar to stick out the back when the vice is closed fully. -Sparky |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Previous page |