MadModder

You do not say whether you bought it new or second-hand. If it is new, take it up with the seller and request a refund or fix under warranty or test another sample to see if it does the same. If it is second hand, perhaps that is why it was being sold.

Makita spare parts are very reasonably priced and many people sell them. Exploded diagram here:

https://www.partshopdirect.co.uk/makita-dgd800-cordless-18v-lxt-die-grinder-spare-parts-s18461/

I have used that seller and they are acceptable. Another one is Miles Tool - usually a little more pricey but sometimes quicker. Also L&S Engineers - usually cheap if in stock, still cheap but slow if not in stock.

If you need to change the bearings, buy a quality make not some generic unknown form eBay.

I looked at the model last night, both the 3D version and physical one, and I came to the conclusion that my options 1-3 will NOT work.  I can't raise the outrigger ram motor, option 1, because that will interfere with the crane counterweight as it swings around.  I can move the rams to what I called the outside, option 2, because that will interfere with the fenders and wheels.  And I can't move the rams to the inside, option 3, because that will interfere with the outrigger extension motor.

WeldingRod suggested moving the outrigger pivot point in, and I thought about that, but I wasn't sure if that would be a help or a hinderance.  It did get me to thinking about moving things though.  Last night I played worked with the 3D model and lowered the outriggers 11mm so that the bottom of the outrigger was even with the bottom of the axle. 
That way I can accomplish several things.  I don't lose any ground clearance on the model, I reduce the amount of travel between the UP position of the outrigger and the ground, and I extend the outrigger ram - giving me more travel on the ram.  I'm gonna give WeldingRod the blame credit for this idea.  I've attached a screenshot of the revised 3D model.  Ignore all the extra crap - I forgot to turn it off before I saved the PDF last night.
 
The second attachment is a HIGHLY simplified front view of the Manitou.  Can’t see it?  Well, at least all the important bits are there anyway.  The white rectangle at the top is the upper frame of the crane.  Below the upper frame is the outrigger, it is shown in with the outrigger fully extended,  The horizontal line that runs all the way across from one side of the screen to the other is the level “ground”.  The vertical line on the left is the outside of the tires on that side.
 
Inside the orange blobby-circly-thingy is the outrigger pivot point, this point never moves with respect to the upper frame.

Inside the magenta blobby-circly-thingy is the outrigger ram lower pivot point when the ram is retracted, the angled white line is the ram centerline when retracted.  The small white circle to the upper-left of the magenta thing is the outrigger ram upper pivot point – this point never moves with respect to the upper frame.  The green circle shows the path the end of the outrigger ram would follow as it is swung around the ram’s upper pivot point.  The cyan circle shows the path that the ram’s lower pivot point will follow at the outrigger is swung around it’s pivot point.  The white line, the green circle, and the cyan circle all conveniently intersect at the same spot, the fully retracted position of the ram.

I determined that the outrigger ram has 27mm of usable travel.  Offsetting the green circle 27mm. and I get the red circle.  The stuff shown in green is with the ram fully retracted.  The stuff in red is with the ram fully extended.

The tan blobbish thing on the right contains the simplified outrigger pad, that’s the green inverted T, the pad pivot point, and line that shows the center-to-center distance between the pad pivot point and the outrigger pivot point.  The large white circle is the path the pad pivot point will follow as the outrigger ram extends and retracts.  All this crap just to get a couple of angles, and we’re still not done.

Where the red circle and the cyan circle intersect will be the position of the outrigger ram lower pivot point when the ram is fully extended.  Looking at this in the light of day I can see I made as boo-boo  19.6° does NOT equal 19.21°.  I think I know where I screwed up, when I changed the angular dimension style halfway thru the drawing - I changed it from X° to X.XX°.  I measured the angle between the two green lines so I could determine where the pad pivot point would be with the ram extended.  It measured 5°, but it was actually 5.39° - I just measured it.  That means my measured maximum pitch&roll angles will slightly too small, probably by less than ¼ - ½ degree.

OK – focus!  Back to draining the swamp.  With the pad pivot point‘s lowest position now fixed we can find where the pad touches the ground, the red inverted T.

Assuming that the crane will pivot on the outside of the tire, we draw a line from that point to the pad’s assumed contact point and measure the angle.  VIOLA, we get 9.11°-ish, remember I makada slight boo-boo way-back-when.  That’s the maximum roll angle I can hope to correct without blocks.  The vertical line on the right represents the distance between the front and rear outriggers.  When I connect the dots and measure the angle I get 7°-ish degrees as the maximum pitch angle that I’ll be able to correct without blocks.

I actually thought it would be more, but numbers don’t lie.

Don

I happy if that was any inspiration or help. My work is nowhere near same level of the gentlemen I linked, but they have been really inspirational to my work.

If I can make a toolholder, anybody can. For insert holder most important thing is pocket bottom: It must be flat and uniform and hard enough to support the insert. This is to prevent the relatively britle insert from breaking. Very accurate pocket is needed mostly to index the insert (you chip one, change new without disturbing the setup) and you are good to go - even if this happened just before finishing. Most of the time you could get away with just a fence on one side of the insert to counter the cutting forces. Some cases you could use just a pin to index one side of the insert (just put it to abut the insert to counter screw tightening torque, or tightening the screw might cam the insert out of index.

I made the pocket, because I wanted. I could just as easy to mill the top flat and put there a separate piece (fork kind of thingy) with glue/screw/solder and it would have worked fine, but milled pocket just looks more professional. Most likely does not affect my work at all, but we hobbyist work for the love of the art and not for profit.

That is actually a TCG American model but made in England, sold to Sweden, resold to Finland and I ended up buying it with 500€, because it one fried saw advertisement and offered to drive half the distance (about 740 km one way....) I rented the lorry on the morning, set off, buyer had a forklift to load and another friend offered come take it off near here at his storage, returned the lorry back late night. Weighting bit over a metric ton made it proverbial to transport home last 20 km and shove it into garage was another story.

There was a bunch of accessories with it. Some usefull, some worn out, some worn out beyond repair.

I needed to put new bearings into spindle and have new belt made. Crap load of cleaning and making sure that all oil galleries works. Nothing fatal or show stoppers, all basic stuff just a lot of TLC.

Making new shroud for the grinding wheel, balancing arbour and dust removal "system" has been taking some time too. Some fittings and features are still work in progress, I make them as I need them.

Pekka

WeldingRod:

That might help, what might help more is dropping the outriggers down so that they're even with the bottom of the axles.  This would move the pivot down not in.  That would effectively give me 10-12mm more of vertical travel just by eliminating some of the ground clearance under the outriggers.  But it wouldn't be eliminating any of the crane's ground clearance since the axles are that low already.  When you add in the additional 10-12mm of ram stroke that would give me I'm probably close to the 1-1/2" movement that redesigning the ram placement would have given me - with a lot less hassle.

It's a change from the Bruder original, but they were designed as toys - not scale models.  I can live with it.
Don

Well, I’ve got good news and bad news.

The good news is that all the parts have come in so I can start experimenting with the 6050 IMU and my Nano clone, to see if I can work out an auto leveling system for the Manitou.

The bad news is that last night I did some drawing to determine how much of a pitch and roll angle the crane could be at and I would be able to level it using the outriggers with no blocking.  Turns out it’s not so much.   I’ve attached a JPG of the 3D PDF since some people seem to not be able to view the PDF.   
 

In its’ current configuration the outrigger pad, circled in brown, will extend about another 3” to the right, actually 77mm for those of you that are Imperially challenged.  The outrigger will pivot around the location circled in blue.  The outrigger assembly is driven up and down by the ram, the yellow part right above the outrigger.  The ram will have about 3/4” of travel, call it 20mm.  This translates to about a 1-1/4”, call it 30mm, vertical travel of the leveling pad.  In itself, this is not bad.  However there’s almost 1” of ground clearance to the leveling pad, call it 24-25mm, so there’s less that 1/4” of actual vertical movement before the ram reaches the end of its’ stroke.  I’m going to have to either use blocks almost all the time, or I need to redesign the outrigger rams.

I think I’ve got 3 options on the redesign:
1) Raise the ram motors a lot – maybe 20-25mm!  I don’t know if I’ve got room to do this and still clear the molded in counterweight.

2) Move the ram motor assembly from centered on the outrigger to the far side of the outrigger.  The far side would be away from the 2 outriggers.  This would allow me to move the point where the ram attaches to the outrigger from the top of the outrigger to the bottom.  This would give me approximately an additional 20mm of ram travel.  The additional ram travel would give me an additional 30mm of vertical travel on the pad.  The problem with this option is I’m not sure I’ve got enough clearance between the wheel and the outrigger for the ram.

3) Move the ram motor assembly from centered on the outrigger to the inside of the outriggers.  The inside would be between the 2 outriggers.  The problem with this option is I’m not sure where the ram would be in relation to the outrigger extension motor.

If I can get another 20mm of ram travel, that translates to 30mm of vertical movement for the leveling pad at full extension.  I could lower the leveling pad about 1-1/2".  Which if I measured it right means I would be able to correct for a +/-13° roll angle and/or a +/-9° pitch angle on the crane.

Don