MadModder
Gallery, Projects and General => Project Logs => Topic started by: raynerd on September 25, 2010, 08:56:04 AM
-
A good friend was willing to sell me this Stuart Engine 10V at a very good price and I`ve never worked on castings so this will be new to me!
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10v1.jpg)
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10v2.jpg)
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10v3.jpg)
I believe he purchased it with a machine or some equipment and has never touched it, however the original buyer sadly did!! An attempt has been made at machining the con rod and this is so off centre it will annoy me so I`ll need to make this again from bar stock.
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10v5.jpg)
Am I right in thinking that he has also drilled the lugs on the base box - I would imagine these would originally be supplied without holes ?? These are also not central but I`m guessing I`ll have to live with this
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10v4.jpg)
I have a few more nights work on one or two things in my workshop (primarly my final attempt at fixing my stirling before it goes on the top shelf (aka the bin) ... but then work should commence!
-
Chris, there's a build it guide series running at the moment in Model Engineer Harold Hall......
Building is best done with a few jigs and fixtures as featured in the mag...
-
Hi John, yes I believe so. I must admit, I don`t get ME but I knew I was going to get this 10V a while ago so I managed to get hold of the articles 13th Aug and 27th Aug but apparently the new one is out and I need to get that asap. I`ve been struggling finding a copy.
It looks a nice little engine to build. I have read all that Harold Hall has wrote so far and I just wonder if some of the securing jigs/clamps are needed? - I`ve got quite a big 4 jaw chuck for my boxford and I`ve seen quite a few articles on the net just hold the castings directly in the chuck.
http://www.banjostring.co.uk/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/DSC00716.jpg
Not trying to be lazy.... it just seems that he keeps explaining how the article is based for the begginer with no mill, I`m thinking some of the holding jigs are more for working and holding jobs on a small lathe. A few of the jigs are holding the boxbed and standard to the lathe backplate but I could hold it direct in the large 4 jaw or even face it on the mill ... infact would the mill be a better option?!
That said, I may follow his plans to the T so that I get it right!
Chris
-
You could do away with a lot of those gigs if you have a decent size lathe and mill.
And No the castings don't come drilled, as its just the holes for mounting to a base I'd be inclined to open them up with a slot drill in the right location and then either use an oversize fixing or glue in a sleeve.
Jason
-
I have a copy of the original 1950's Percival Marshall book by E T Westbury on building the 10V. PM me if it's of interest.
Richard
-
Thanks Richard for your help!
I plucked up the courage to start machining some of my castings this evening. I seemed to have some sort of unfounded fear that I`d manage to chip or crack a casting some how, but strangely enough, it all went very well....infact, too well !
Despite reading all the books and the current ME article running at present on the 10V build, I chose to use my mill to true up the castings rather than mess around with jigs on the lathe. I`m not trying to be lazy but most of the books are aimed at lathe only workshops so I may as well utilise what I have. It was an excellent opportunity to use my X-axis controller power feed for the first time and I`m buzzing, it worked an absolute blinder! The finish is top notch and ten times better than what I was getting by hand and also the ease of use was great - find your left and right limits and just keep working between them taking cuts each time! It was luxury!!
Less woffle...here are some pictures, they are self explanatory:
Truing up the machine base and top.
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10va.jpg)
I was impressed with the finish using my power feed!
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10vb.jpg)
Box bed top and bottom
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10vc.jpg)
Feet of the standard
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10vd.jpg)
Standard top which will seat the cylinder "before"!
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10ve.jpg)
,...and after
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10vf.jpg)
And all the bits piled in position!
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10vg.jpg)
Machining the holes/slots for the fly wheel bushes - I was wanting to use an end mill but didn`t have one of the right size so a drill bit did the job just as well. I took it through nice and slowly.
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10vh.jpg)
And how the bearing fits in position
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10vi.jpg)
Ok, nothing amazing....I best get reading, onto the more taxing jobs now!!
-
Chris,
I'm amazed that when you milled the feet of the "standard" that it didn't come flying out of the vise. :bugeye: Reason being, your holding that part by very little with the jaws. Next question will be how parallel will those two surfaces be, the feet and where the piston will be attached. It'll be interesting when you bore out the hole how square it will be with the casting and the crank.
Good luck.
Bernd
-
Bernd, thanks for your input. :D I`m still learning! Could you offer any suggestions as to how I should have held it? I felt I had a good grip on it with my vice or I wouldn`t have attempted machinging, only doing light cuts, it wasn`t going anywhere. Much more secure than how I had it clamped down by the feet on the lathe.
I don`t see why there would be an issue with regards to the feet and top being parallel but I do think that when I bore the hole I`ll have to skim the top face as well so that the bore in the standard will be at 90deg to the face.
Advice appreciated..... I don`t post to show you how...I post for help and for people to pick up on these things so I can learn.
-
You might have been better securing the standard to a plate or block by bolting and then holding the block in the vice... :scratch:
Chris what size is that facing cutter you are using please?
-
John thanks for the suggestion although I think Bernd was talking about milling the feet; that the circular top of the standard wasn`t secure enough in the vice and I can understand where he was coming from. Although I thought it was secure and milling went OK, I did have concerns/thoughts about the issue at the time. Obviously I judged it was OK and went ahead. I wanted to mill the feet first so that this was the reference face and I could have used your idea of bolting this down, but without being faced I wouldn`t have liked to drill the holes in this for the cylinder so early on(and use these holes to bolt it down to a block).
Hummm, it is interesting.
How would most people go about boring the hole in the standard - I was going to use my mill but now pondering whether to mount on a faceplate on the mill!?! OR perhaps use Johns idea and drill the bolt holes on the feet of the standard and mount it on a block and hold it in the lathe in a 4 jaw.
John, the cutter was a 3MT I think 2" (or 2 1/4") from RDG - http://www.rdgtools.co.uk/acatalog/copy_of_FACEMILLS__INDEXABLE__2_MORSE_TAPER.html
-
...actually it has 4 tips so it must be the 2 1/4" but I`ll confirm when I get back to the workshop tonight.
-
My tuppence.
Machining the standard is crucial to the engine working properly and not binding.
What you should do (IMO) is chuck a piece of bar that's as good a fit to the standard bore as is possible (given it's not machined). Turn down the end and cut a thread then bolt the standard to it, face off the feet so they're flat (oversize)
Bolt the standard to a faceplate by it's feet and centre up the bore. Bore it out to correct size and without removing it, face off the cylinder mount - this ensures the bore is absolutely at right angles to the cylinder face (crucial).
Next remove the standard and chuck a piece of bar turning it down until the standard bore is a good fit on it (a very slight taper - using a bit of emery will assist here) push the standard onto the bar cylinder end first and machine the feet to size. This ensures the feet are square to the bore.
You must get those steps right, otherwise your engine *will* bind.
-
Chris,
kwackers has the procedure right. He was able to put into less words than I could.
Bernd
-
Chris,
kwackers has the procedure right. He was able to put into less words than I could.
Bernd
I agree.
You realy must get things square with these engines and the only reliable way to do this is by using the correct set ups. You have to think of a way to transfer the accuracy of your machine into the job once you understand this and learn some of the techniques the quality of your work improves greatly.
One tip with castings:- before you start cutting metal go over it with your digi vernier and try and work out what it will be like and what size it will be after you've machines it, the'rs bin many a job scrapped because the last operation has run out of metal.
Stew
-
Chris,
kwackers has the procedure right. He was able to put into less words than I could.
Bernd
the'rs bin many a job scrapped because the last operation has run out of metal.
Stew
Yayyyyy!!!!........Hands up those of us that have done that... :(
Great advice Stew...Definitely some to be be considered..
-
I will be watching this with interest Chris :thumbup:, always fancied a go at a Stuart but always been put off by castings!
NIck
-
Well thanks all for the replies and suggestions. I`ve tried to follow your advice and done the following this evening.
I did appreciate that when I bore the standard I would need to face up the top surface for the bore and cylinder mouning surface to be 90deg to each other so I have enough left on the length of the standard to work with it further.
So first up was using Kwackers advice of turning up a bar to fit well through the unmachined standard bore, thread the end (M10) and bolt up the standard. As you explined, this ensures the feet are square to the bore.
Sorry for the pictures, my camera battery has gone so they are taken on my phone!
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/v10v11.jpg)
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/v10v1a1.jpg)
Now the feet are machined, I made some clamps so that they can slot around the casting centre of each foot. This looks to be how it is done from looking at my pictures in the original book "How to Build a Model Steam Engine" machining a 10V. It seems to be nice and solid and secure.
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/v10v21.jpg)
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/v10v31.jpg)
So the next thing is going to be boring it out but it got late and I thought I`d leave it until tomorrow and see what you guys thought of my setup first...
Thanks again for the help so far.
-
Chris,
The last set ups are sooo much better than your first attempts. :thumbup:
I've never machined a small engine from castings. But, as a long time machinist, your first pics scared me somewhat...... :bugeye:
David D
-
Learning! :thumbup:
Lol, that being said, shouldn`t have been such a dumb a£$3 to attempt ! Glad you think it looks better, I think I`ll try and bore this out today.
Chris
-
Chris,
I agree the last set-ups look better, but in my opinion, your first would have worked - as you say, the critical thing was the face square to the bore, so you would have had to bore it on the same setup in the mill. Out of interest, did you notice it taking an even cut when you did the feet and top face again in the lathe?
The only thing I have noticed is that you bored the hole for the bearings square to the bottom of the base rather than the top of the base that you skimmed, or did you skim the bottom too? I think it'll be ok, but i was just thinking, would it not have been best the way you first did it, i.e. both mating parts done in the same vice on the same machine - therefore if there was a slight angle built into it, you could flip one of the parts around and they'd be square again? Again, I guess the critical thing is that the bearing holes are square to that top face on the base now you know the standard is spot in.
Enjoying this, keep up the good work. :thumbup: :clap:
Nick
-
......
Now the feet are machined, I made some clamps so that they can slot around the casting centre of each foot. .......
So the next thing is going to be boring it out but it got late and I thought I`d leave it until tomorrow and see what you guys thought of my setup first...
Chris,
just an observation from a non-engine-builder - in your last photo:
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/v10v31.jpg)
It looks like the profiled (brass?) straps are bending - maybe something more robust could be useful?
Dave
-
Thanks again for your comments....
Nick - I have to admit that when I did the feet again, it wasn`t a perfectly even cut at first so clearly although my original method cut the feet and top parallel, it didn`t cut the feet at 90deg to the bore. That being said, it was only a whisper out! My understanding is that now the feet are square to the bore, I bore and face the top surface and then use the same method for the feet again ensure the feet are parallel to the top cylinder mount surface. Just curious....if the cylinder mounting surface has been machined with the feet flat on the backplate - won`t the feet be parallel to the top surface anyway??
Regarding the bearing holes. I had skimmed the bottom first and then skimmed the top using the bottom as reference - I didn`t show this in my photos. I did think about this when I drilled for the bearings so I purposely mounted with the bottom face down...!? Since the bearings are screwed into position, there is apparently some movement in these anyway so I believe this isn`t too critical. Infact I think in the recent ME article, the writer explains that you can file the bearings holes by hand and do them slightly over size so that you can actually have some flexibility and adjustment in these.
Dave - the clamps are bending a little bit but they are a good thickness! - which suggests a little bit of heavy handedness perhaps. They are holding well and although I did consider making them out of steel (which I have) I choose brass so as not too over tighten and break the castings. Would others re-make these before going ahead and boring out? Last thing I want is the Standard slipping. I do feel it is centred well and the clamps are really holding down on the feet.
Thanks again for your ideas.
-
Looks a lot better to me Chris!
Regards the bearings, you can file the profile out. The only important part of them is the mating surface that they bolt onto (the actual dip is purely cosmetic). The skim you did on the mill is spot on since the four surfaces will all be planar (the two bearing mounts and the two standard mounts).
Regards the brass hold-downs, I'd remake these in steel. They shouldn't bend!
The castings will take an immense amount of pressure - providing they're flat on the faceplate. With regards holding stuff in place you ideally should apply pressure evenly to the entire foot of the casting. What you've got is simply holding the corner, if you think about it this offers very little in terms of 'friction' and it would be fairly easy to break the edge off if the casting was pushed to the side.
So what you've got is ideal - but, remake it in steel, it should then be packed up at the other end the same height as the casting and there should be no bend when you tighten it up.
Other than that looking good!
-
Chris, with regard to clamping iron castings one cannot clamp too hard, or too solid, iron having a very high compression strength. You've got about half again the length of column away from the faceplate as width of hold down, so the side pressure as you bore will be multiplied by about one and a half, so you really want those feet down solid. Steel is a definite, brass tends to have no spring in it at all, especially when it has already been taken past rebound, as the bending shows. If there is any question about alignment once you've clamped it down solid, and bored and faced the column, take a piece of round stock in your chuck, turn it to a push fit on the bored out guide, and hold it in place much as you did to face off the feet the first time, and reface them, taking as little off as possible, and still get the whole of the feet surfaced, and everything will be square and accurate. This particular part is the most critical of alignments for this form of engine and sets up all the other points of alignment, so getting this off a bit, will throw everything else off. The good news is the setup is right, just the wrong material for the clamps, and cast iron when right, machines very nicely. That is a very nice project to choose, and I'm looking forward to seeing the whole of the build, and eventually seeing it run. :bugeye: mad jack
-
and another tiny thing Chris - the repair-straps you've used for packing don't look to be anchored - my preference is that anything like that should have something other than just friction holding it in place - just imagine if that was spat out, with its relatively flat profile, when you were in front of it ....... (could be like some medieval weapon!)
Dave
-
OK, well all your advice taken onboard and all sound ideas which make sense!
So here we go boring the standard with new clamps. DMIOM - didn`t get your message in time and they were not anchored in this setup so your advice is duly noted for next time! Still no camera, so just a couple taken on my phone.
boring the standard:
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10vstandard1.jpg)
After testing the bore with my go/no-go gage the bore is an excellent fit for the guides. Considering this truthfully is my first time making an accurate bore so small - I`m pleased :ddb:
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10vstandard2.jpg)
Then as Kwackers suggested, turned up some silver steel that was already 16mm down to a very tight fit. Rubbed it down to a taper with some emory paper and pushed on the standard. I then skimmed up the feet which as it happened were almost true to the bore anyway,
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10vstandard4.jpg)
...a pile of parts...again ....but now the standard should be correct!!
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10vstandard3.jpg)
OK, now I would like to drill the feet of the standard and tap the holes to bolt it down to the soleplate; equally I`d like to drill the holes for the soleplate to the box base. I`ve got my BA tap set :ddb: but I`m not sure the best way of getting these to match up. I`m thinking I could make a jig or just mark out and drill ? Any thoughts or suggestions...?
-
I was going to say the straps looked alright but I think the advice from the others was correct when thought about more carefully!
Good work there, for drilling the holes, sure you could do it with careful marking but spot the holes properly - i did some the other day that weren't as critical and the drills wondered off a little even though I'd made deep centre pops! I little jig would probably be a better way ( a sort of template) then you'll get them all the same, just remember to use it the right way up each part.
What speed did you bore at? I thought cast iron should be pretty slow but whatever, it's worked well. :thumbup: :clap:
Nick
-
Don't know if it's the camera - but it does look mightily fast for cast iron!
Re the holes, milling machine. Use the dials (or DRO) to position them. All that matters here is that they're spaced out the same so they all match.
-
I don`t know what speed it was as I`ve currently no tacho (winter PIC project) and have converted the motor to 3 phase with inveter and vary control. I took the first passes very slow as suggested in both the ME article and the 10V book. However once I could "feel" the top layer had been cut, I jumped up the speed a bit.
The photo is posed - :) I`d already cut the bore!! :lol:
I think I`ll go for a jig and then I know they are all the same, especially without my DRO on the mill at present.
-
Ha, :D I've done that myself a few times!
Yeah, I would say a couple of hundred RPM would be about right for boring that. Saying that, I do everything slower on my lathe as it's good at doing slow!
Nick
-
Hi Craynerd, having come to model building from building full sized engines, I find looking at the model as if it were full scale, and taking the forces I would expect in full scale as a standard, I end up with solid mountings and good repeatability. Having rebuilt many engines and machine shop machines, I have developed standard procedures for differing levels of accuracy. The issue with steam engines is they tend to have many parts which must be either parallel to each other, or perpendicular, or either of the two to a round bore, and generally machined each separately. This means that more care must be taken, as error always creeps in, no matter how much care you take, and error usually "stacks", unless you take the opportunity to arrange it so such error as you know will arrive, can be put in the opposite direction as error expected in another part directly attached. With modern engines, most of the machining is in one casting, and it is much easier to get the full accuracy of the machine tool, as the limit of accuracy of the finished work. I learned about stacking error with the making of repair parts and having to match what I was making in replacement, to the accuracy already in place in what was being repaired. The good news is that people have been doing this as we do, for almost a couple hundred years, and with micrometers coming about only about a hundred years ago, so accuracy can be made to come to fruition by careful work, and most of all, an active imagination, as that is where you will see the error first, before you even measure it, once you are accustomed to how your machines behave.
I commonly use cigarette papers to check fit, or to move a cutter to a piece without actually touching off, and getting a true "zero", because the it touched off on the paper, which is reliably .001 thickness, and tears away, with the cutter, while not touching the work. For making holes that must align, I always use a center drill in the center pop, always drill in steps, and use one piece to guide the final drill size in the other piece it fits to. My milling machine is twenty years old Taiwanese and when I first got it, I tried to "coordinate drill" six holes using the dials of the machine, and found no two holes within five thousandths of where they should have been relative to each other. A DRO is a tremendous boon, and improves accuracy enormously, don't know how I got along without it. The biggest mistake beginning machinists tend to make is related to the idea that the machines are solid cast iron and steel, and thus can't flex or bend, while this is actually exactly opposite what they really do. It was all brought home to me some twenty five years ago when I was in an old machine shop, having just moved to the area, and waiting my turn to speak to the owner. A machinist had the large lathe going, with about a ten foot face plate, with a complex piece on it being turned, with interupted cuts all the way to the end of the machine work. The tool was a piece of high speed steel a foot square, and four feet long, the tool post on this lathe was probably three feet square, and four feet tall, and the lathe was turning at about 2 rpm, for the proper cutting speed for cast iron. Each time the cut came around, I watched the tool flex about four inches, the tool post flex enough to be plainly visible, and the blue half inch thick chip fly off and travel a good thirty feet, smoking in the oil where it lay. Up to that day, I knew intellectually, that all things move and bend, flexing and such, but did not know in my "spirit", which required seeing it, absorbing it, and re-arranging my thought processes around to incorporate this old knowledge into the intuitive part of the brain. Having seen it on a work piece well over a ton, I now can visualize the minute flex in small parts clearly, and make plans to accomodate the flex, and work around it. I hope this is helpful and not just me running my mouth and flexing my "experience", but I am entirely self taught, and have only a year of "machine shop" in high school for formal school, started as a mechanic, and learning by watching, and even more, by reading how it was done in the very old books, those such as Lindsey Publications reprints, mostly from the turn of the last century and in the first few decades since. I highly recommend this publishing house, it's easily found on the internet, and has great old books show how to do things with far simpler machinery, and far less tooling for measuring. I also want to say I am as eager as any on this site, to see you successfully complete what will be a beautiful engine, and hopefully watch a video of it running, I'm a bit envious of your engine, to tell the truth, and wish it were my project. It is looking great so far, and your careful work shows. :jaw: mad jack
-
I appreciate your reply MadJack. I`m only just really getting to grips with machining procedure. It has been a steep learning curve. I`ve been on here for just over a year now but there is just so much to understand it takes a long time to get to grips with everything. I know for a fact I went through months of just machining aimlessly to get to grips with my machines and understand how they worked...then months of trying to machine accurately...then months of realising I can`t be accurate unless my machines are so and so I spent months setting them all up properly....and now I`ve hit the stage where I want to machine an engine and so not only to parts have to be accurate but they have to be true to one another and I guess this is where procedure comes in. I do need to read more but as I explained before I think I use to skim read procedure to just read and get to grips with the simple machining process that was going on...not necessary read and understand the order.
Anyway...I`m getting there!
I have to admit that I have always used the classic excuse of " a bad workman always blames his tools" and I did blame my tools or get stressed with them BUT since spending time and a little money on new tools and getting my machines sorted I feel so much more comfortable in my shop and getting on with things. I feel I don`t have to "make do" any more and normally have the tool to hand ready to use and it seems jobs are going more smoothly and better than then use to. Anyway...long may it continue!!
Thanks again Madjack. I`ll keep pressing on!
Chris
-
Your engine is coming along nice Chris! The months will turn into years. I've been paid to be a machinist for 15 years now. I'm Going to school to help figure things out. It will never end. Every job is different. Hang in there(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v652/Powderkeg3418/Smilies/headgear65-Copy.gif)
-
Hello all, after drilling for the mounting bolts this eveing, I`m planning on moving onto the cylinder next. I have done a search "boring stuart cylinder" have have hit quite a few results but as with anything on the net, your never sure if it is done correctly (or like me, post for advice!!)
I know I`m taking your time but would anyone care to outline the major things I need to consider and perhaps does anyone have any links to a method that seems accurate that I should follow? I have obviously identified that the bore must be at 90 deg to the cylinder bottom (and I am under impression that the top face is not essential). I also believe that the cylinder mount where the steam chest will fit needs to be parallel to the main bore. I`m clear that by boring and then facing one end I`ll have the bore at 90deg to the cylinder face but I`m not clear how to ensure or even machine the steam face parallel to the bore with both the lathe and mill at my use.
Any help appreciated.
-
Some great points there Jack. I found out that with my brand new chinese machine, the dials were accurate over short distances of travel, however, if I wound it more than a couple of inches there was quite some error, which obviously got worse the further you went. Must be pitch error in the screws. I think a DRO would transform my machine, I used them at university and it made things so much better. Since I got my 2nd hand Harrison lathe and this mill, my work has drastically improved, so I think it's sometimes right to blame your tools Chris, I was struggling on with the machines I had and it was those all along. Technique is obviously a bit part of it though.
I also think that steam models generally are quite forgiving on tolerances though, it's better to have things with plenty of clearance rather than something with close tolerances and a boat load of friction. Limits and fits in model engineering are something, unfortunately, that you just have to get a feel for through experience, whereas if drawings were fully toleranced the builder would get results if he stuck to the tolerances.
Even on my hot air engines and flame gulpers which are notoriously difficult to get working, I've probably given more clearance in working parts than most people would, with good effect. Friction is the enemy but clearance (in moderation) can be your friend!
Chris,
you could clamp the square end of the cylinder up against and angle plate and mill it that way (see attached diagram) or I guess if you can get a good grip on it, clamp it in the vice with that face vertical.
Sure people will have better ideas though!
Nick
-
The way Nicks diagram above shows the facing of the steam chest face is fine.
What you're aiming for with the cylinder is the bottom to be faced at right angles to the cylinder, the cylinder bore to be parallel and the steam chest face to be parallel to the bore.
Obviously boring and facing the cylinder in one go will ensure the first. The second - just make sure your lathe isn't turning taper (some people use a boring bar between centres to ensure a parallel bore). For the steam chest the accuracy you'll get from bolting it to a face plate is more than enough (obviously check your face plate is at right angles to the bed and shim it to be so if it isn't).
As you surmise the top cap of the cylinder isn't important - although if it looks crooked you should sell your lathe - and mill - and any tools you may have. (You may keep one hammer though).
-
Hello Chris, Nick has made some very good points, as he says, steam engines are the most forgiving of model engines as they actually work above atmosperic pressure, and the first ones often had half an inch of clearance in the bore, and perhaps that much eccentricity and taper at times. I have recently just bored a cylinder for a tiny power steam engine, I used a four jaw chuck to get the bore as closely centered to the casting as possible, facing the end at the same time and then flipping it by loosening the jaw against the valve flat, and one other, putting the faced end flat against the chuck, which I know is accurate, but as you say, the second end needs to seal more than be perfectly square, so I concentrated on proper length and got that right, and it is in fact square with the bore.
I then took the cylinder and clamped a through bolt through an angle plate, the cylinder, and another angle plate, and bolted the angle plates to the table of my mill, then used a fairly accurate level to get the cast surface close to parallel to the table, and used a flycutter to face off the valve face. I used two angle plates because they were handy, and two offers much stronger support, far more against chatter than for any other purpose, not wanting the cylinder hanging out, however lacking a second angle plate, I would use an adjustable parallel, or carefully wedge the loose end of the cylinder with hardwood wedges, just enough pressure to ensure they stay in place, and not enough to tilt the cylinder up. I have used a file and dial calipers to measure the thickness of the cylinder wall to the face of the valve face on each end, and corrected a few thousandths difference with the file and finished the face with wet or dry sand paper laying on a surface plate, but the plate is not an absolute necessity, one can easily use something like an accurate angle plate as a standard to finishing, and for checking, or just a plain straight edge if you have one that is truly straight. The valve face must be pretty closely parallel to the cylinder bore, or the valve gear will tend to bind up, however a couple thousandths one way or the other can be compensated for, as long as it is flat, to ensure the valve seals well.
I use a set of magnifying lenses often a brand called "Optivisors", both for accuracy, and because my vision is not what it used to be, but they are useful for anyone doing accurate work, and I highly recomend them. Model engine builders fifty years ago, commonly finished the valve face with nothing but a file, and often took the cylinder to get it bored, lacking a lathe of their own, so it can be done quite well even with minimal tooling. For setting up your bolt circle to bolt the cylinder to the stanchion, you can plug the stanchion's bored hole with a plug machined for a tight fit, and with a "center pop" you can put a leg of dividers in, and scribe a hole circle on the top flange of the stanchion, if it takes six bolts to attach the cylinder, you can walk the dividers around, at the radius established for the circle, and careful stepping will give you an exact dividing into six, by the nature of Pi. If it calls for more, such as eight, one can walk the dividers around several times, incrementally adjusting smaller, until stepping all around puts the last leg back on the first mark. That flange can then be used to transfer the hole locations to the cylinder and also to the cylinder head, when it is machined. I think that should get you started on the cylinder, I am happy to be of assistance, I am not working on mine right now, because we are recovering from a flood over the past week, and my shop was running a foot deep, so it will be some time before I've got it cleaned up and working again, but I can sort of work by giving advise, and enjoying the work vicariously, if you find it helpful. I have a full and fairly complete machine shop, having retired from the business due to my health, but I started with a home made lathe, and hand tools, so I can adapt methods to what you have available to you, and if you do good work, carefully, you will have a very nice engine you will be quite happy to have built. I have Multiple Sclerosis, which limits my work to a couple hours a day, but does not interfere with my mind, and I am retired due to it, so what time I have, is mine and there is little effort in writing, so if I can assist, just ask, I enjoy seeing other's engines almost as much as seeing my own. Even the worst Chinese machine you can buy today is more accurate as a baseline, than the best of small lathes available for the hobbyist fifty years ago, so get well aquainted with all its warts and callouses, learn how they affect things, you will find ways around them, and eventually, an idea will pop into your head and you will remove a wart or two, and see a distinct improvement, leading to the next. I work on a 1948 Logan ten inch lathe mostly yet I have never stopped changing it, and improving it, even though it was a fine lathe when I bought it from e-bay close to twenty years ago, and rebuilt it fully. The main thing is getting to know your own equipment so you can immediately identify any issues that arise, and you will find it is absolutely true that the lathe can build its self, and is the only machine tool which can, and is necessary for the building of all others. I hope this is of some use to you, keep at it until you have all the parts of an engine laying around, and then you just put the parts together, simple, heh? :poke: mad jack
-
Jack,
thanks for sharing those techniques there, I am sure myself and many others will find them useful. I have done the divider thing before as a kid creating pretty patterns with a pair of compasses but never thought to apply it to bolted flanges, that is brilliant for me as I don't have a rotary table or any method of indexing - I used to try to use the 3 jaws of the chuck to do it, I guess with some piece of metal that caused the chuck to stop in the same place on each jaw it would have worked but it never seemed to give me perfect results, I wouldn't be able to bolt it on in any position.
Sorry to hear about your flood and your condition, you do amazingly well. :thumbup:
Good point about the machinery of old and the fact that people did so much with just hand tools, I don't know how they did it, they were truely skilled men!
Nick
-
Hi Nick, thanks for the kind words, I appreciate them. We were not the worst hit with the flood, and I am truly grateful for that, my shop is not under water since yesterday, and doors are open with a wind blowing through, most of what I lost is the kind of scavenged equipment motors and the like one collects for future projects.
I learned the trade from reading, a year in high school, and from working by hand, gradually accumulating tools. For all who do this sort of work, "Lindsey Books" reprints the text books and the general books written as the ideas were conceived, by the great men of machines, precisely for the working machinist at the time when the trade was going from measuring in fractions of an inch, to measuring in thousandths, because steam engines need much less precision than do gas engines, so the books tend to give far more than any modern text book can for those who work with budgets and minimal equipment. I have six or seven feet of shelf of books just from Lindsey's, an they include books like "South Bend Lathes: How to run a lathe", and books by other lathe and tool manufacturers explaining in detail, all the many uses their equipment can be in an automotive shop, for instance, so I can't recomend the books highly enough. For those of you in England, all the books by Edgar T. Westbury, are top notch couldn't be better, and are more easily found there than here in the colonies. Knowing that "good mechanics" built model engines at home, in their spare time, without a lathe, and perhaps a drill press as their only power tool commonly, fifty years and more ago, has kept me from giving up on any difficulty, I have scrapped a lot of pieces in my learning curve.
Lots of machine shops did not have rotary tables until the second world war so the techniques they developed for accurate and repeatable work and recorded are exactly the things we need in our small shops, so any pre-war books will help a lot. The real test will be when Chris gets to the part of drilling the ports for the cylinder, and setting up the valve face of the cylinder. It's not hard, just requiring very careful layout and workmanship. I'm thinking I should perhaps do those things to my cylinder when he gets there, just to have pictures to show.
Sorry, Chris, don't mean to take over your thread. I hope you don't mind, and get your cylinder straight, true, and square, so we can get on with the rest, it really does feel good to "almost have a hand in it", and I might finish my steam engine before I finish my radial engine, which is in dire need of attention and has developed a bad attitude toward me. ttfn :poke: mad jack
-
MadJack - sad to hear about your equipment ruined by floods. We have had rain here, flooded areas but thankfully it has not come near the house. Your advice and comments are really useful and I do read all your replies!
I`ve spent two nights on this now - and things are going slow...but what is the rush I guess!! I was hoping to bolt everything down (drill and tap) and then get the cylinder machined. It has taken me 2 nights to make the jigs, drill and tap and also just face up the cylinder to tidy it up.
I hope I did this all OK but it has seemed to have worked! It is getting late so here are some pics for you but more questions tomorrow!
Jig bolted to the bottom of the standard for drilling the feet
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10vjig1.jpg)
Now on sole plate
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10vjig2.jpg)
...and on the boxbed
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10vjig3.jpg)
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10vjig4.jpg)
Holes drilled and tapped - here it all is assembled! Well the holes align at least :D Looks good imo!
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10vjig5.jpg)
Cylinder Casting before
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10vjig6.jpg)
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10vjig7.jpg)
I then measured the cylinder and found I have plenty of meat on it so took it to the mill to tidy the two faces up a bit. Then I read the 10V book and he suggests plugging the bore and marking out from the curved half of the cylinder outside to find the centre of the cylinder bore section. It does say in the book that you need to find the centre based on the outside as the datum, not finding the centre of the current hole in the casting.
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10vjig8.jpg)
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10vjig9.jpg)
Now my first question - I didn`t go any further than this but am I right in thinking I only need it roughly centred. So I`ve used a centre to align with my mark on the plug - is this good enough?
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10vjig10.jpg)
Well it is late...off to bed!!
Chris
-
Chris
Fixed your image tags
Eric
-
Chris,
Nice work with the drilling jig, I never use them because I'm impatient but seeing that it has come out really well and i will probably try that next time. It's the attention to detail like that which will make it stand out from the rest and give you the satisfaction that you've done a really good job on it.
In my opinion the way you've lined the centre up looks alright to me.
Just out of interest, have you measured the position of the ports? Are they in the correct place etc, are you just supposed to clean those up with a file? They seem pretty deep so it doesn't look like you can change the position, this means that the amount you skim off each end is critical. Simply getting the correct cylinder length isn't good enough, you need to take the right amount off each end such that the ports lie in the right position - probably obvious but thought I'd mention it!
Nick
-
It has taken me 2 nights to make the jigs,
Holes drilled and tapped - here it all is assembled! Well the holes align at least :D Looks good imo!
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10vjig5.jpg)
Chris
So, 2 nights work to make a jig and drill a small number of holes and it fits right first time! Nice work Chris.. :clap:
How long would it have taken if it had gone horribly wrong without the use of the jig? :dremel:
Time well invested methinks.. :thumbup:
Well done, looking good so far..
-
Eric, thanks for sorting out my links. It was late when I finished!
John, yes a good point! If I hadn`t have used the jigs I could very well be ordering new castings so I guess it worked out well and was worth the time.
Looking at the plans, I think the central port is central to the cylinder length. I`ve got plenty on the cylinder so I`ve just taken the flashing off and tidied the surface up. I`ve still actually got a bit to take off both side! Is that what you mean?
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/cylinder.jpg)
Anyone any thoughts about the method of centralising the cylinder using this bung as shown. Does it need to be spot on, or will this method be accurate enough. I mean this is centred but is it accurate enough?
-
I think you can get away with a movement of a few thou so I wouldn't worry about the hole being absolutely centre in the casting.
What I would make sure though is the ring of holes are concentric with the bore (save drilling them oversize a bit later when you find they're offset!)
-
Do you mean the ring of holes for the cylinder covers?
How about turning down another tight fitting bar to insert in the bore (once the cylinder has been bored and faced) and then holding the bar in the chuck on the rotab and drilling the holes. Because it will be turning based on the bore they will then be concentric right?
-
Chris - if your mill's DRO has a PCD function then just use that - no need for the rotab; otherwise the rotab idea should be OK.
-
The rotary table idea sounds fine to me. It's not critical that you get the bore in the centre of the casting, what is critical is that when you bolt it to the standard, the bore is concentric with the bore for the crosshead on the standard. Also, the distance from the centre of bore on the cylinder to centre of valve guide might be, depending on how much you can move the eccentric on the crankshaft. Looking at the picture on Stuart website you can move the eccentric sheave either way on the crankshaft so that's not critical either.
incidentally - £502 + VAT so £590 for the finished 10V from Stuart!!!!!
Nick
-
Hi Chris, you are getting good advise from all corners it seems, the issue with the bore, the ports, and the cover holes all center around the fact the outside of the casting will remain as cast, other than the machined faces. If you center the rough cylinder in a four jaw, and use an indicator to get the two sides which are the same, equal, and then get the third round side within a few thousandths of the two, you will have centered the main part of the cylinder, and it will be fine. The center line of the center port, must be at the center of the cylinder, and in my experience, you will probably clean it and the other two ports a little bit with a slot cutter, but it is important for valve timing, that you get that port pretty well centered, within a few thousandths is easily close enough. As Nick said, once the boring is done, and the facing off of the ends, if you have a DRO, and it has the bolt circle function, that is the easiest way to get the hole in proper position, just remember the radius you use in that function and you can use it for the holes in the standard, and for both heads as well, and get pretty much dead on. You certainly did a fine job getting all your mounting holes drilled in proper and it is starting to look like an engine. The reason for starting the boring from centering on the outside of the casting is to ensure you make up for any shifting of the bore core in the pouring of the casting. Thirty years ago, no one expected the cast bore to be centered, but casting techniques have improved a lot, and people expect bores as cast to be central, and such. Off subject a bit, I lost very little, just some of the collection of junk that could someday be something else, mostly. All the important things are fine.
I appreciate you posting of the drawings, they help with perspective a lot. I think you're going to get through this rather quickly at the pace you've set, and will be steaming an engine in a few weeks or less. Getting the ports central, end to end, is critical because it will provide equal lengths for timing the valve, and minimize compromise, which is always a factor in steam timing. The casting is quite long to ensure you have plenty to get it centered. You're making wish I could close up my shop doors and pull my kit out, and get back to work on it, rather than the next week cleaning out all the trash and setting up shop again. I'm really looking forward to the video you're going to post when this engine is steaming and the grin goes from ear to ear. By the way, can you tell me what "PCD" stands for? We call it hole circle function, here in the colonies, and I can't guess what the PCD stands for. :beer: :jaw: :nrocks: jack
-
Jack,
Pitch Circle Diameter....... :thumbup:
David D
-
haha, thanks again for your replies. MadJack - I`m along way from a vid of it running...but I`m about to go to bed so I guess I can dream!!
OK, well first problem this evening of my own doing! Despite reading through and even replying to Andy`s message earlier today regarding the length of the cylinder and the fact that the ports should be central to the length. I`ve managed to do a superb bore that I`m really pleased with and then I went and faced off the bottom but not taken quite enough off. I don`t know how I`ve done it as I`ve checked and double checked but I`ve pulled it off the lathe with 0.03" to come off the full length and then realised that will make it short on that side!!
The cylinder should be 1.125" length with the ports symmetrical. My cylinder is 1.155" with the ports symmetrical and centered!
So my dilemma is that I need to take .015 off each side but of course now I`ve done the bore and faced up the bottom side symmetrical to it, I can only remove material from the one side (the full 0.03”). I know for sure I`d mess up my bore if I tried to recentre it and I don`t have any more material left to centre and then take a few more skims to true the bore up ....
I know this isn`t ideal but for 0.03" too large cylinder, could I increase the piston rod by 0.03" (or would it be half of that 0.015" ?)
Advice appreciated.
Despite my problem, I do have a few pictures!
My Go-no go gauge I knocked up for testing the bore:
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10vcylinder1.jpg)
I don`t know why I`m putting this up as this is where I`ve mucked up!! I need 0.015” more off this side!!!
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10vcylinder2.jpg)
Despite being deflated with my muck up, I still wanted to mock up the sort of setup for truing up the steam face I`m going to use later on. This is what I was thinking – will remove the vice and bolt the angle plate to the table:
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10vcylinder3.jpg)
Anyway….I can`t go anywhere until I sort out this cylinder length. Any suggestions would be appreciated. It would be simple to take it to size, the issue is of course facing up true to the bore which of course should be done in one opperation.
-
Couldn`t sleep thinking about how I was going to correct this.
I have decided I can`t re-centre it, I just couldn`t get it accurate enough. I also can`t rebore it to bring it to centre, not enough material.
My cylinder is actually 0.03" too long. Would it be worth, as I suggested last night, leaving the cylinder as it is and increasing both the piston rod and the rod the works the slide valve by 0.015". This will bring the piston to the centre of the current cylinder, I`ll just have a 0.015" bigger gap than expected at both ends, but in my eyes, that won`t matter?? It`ll just stop it bottoming out ?
I thought I could take the 0.015" from the top side if I like but that won`t do anything will it, I`d still have to increase the piston and sliding valve rod lengths). If anything it is the bottom side (which is the faced up side which I can`t touch) that needs the 0.015" off then it would be to size!!!!
Advice would be much much appreciated! :( :( :(
-
Chris,
I don't think the cylinder oal matters, that much. As long as the valve chest and cover can be made to match. :thumbup:
I think you may do more harm than good. If you try to correct it now. :scratch:
But! Who am I to give advice? I've never made one myself...... ::)
David D
-
Chris,
I don't understand why you can't just skim 0.015" off each end?
Nick
-
Couldn`t sleep thinking about how I was going to correct this.
I have decided I can`t re-centre it, I just couldn`t get it accurate enough. I also can`t rebore it to bring it to centre, not enough material.
My cylinder is actually 0.03" too long. Would it be worth, as I suggested last night, leaving the cylinder as it is and increasing both the piston rod and the rod the works the slide valve by 0.015". This will bring the piston to the centre of the current cylinder, I`ll just have a 0.015" bigger gap than expected at both ends, but in my eyes, that won`t matter?? It`ll just stop it bottoming out ?
I thought I could take the 0.015" from the top side if I like but that won`t do anything will it, I`d still have to increase the piston and sliding valve rod lengths). If anything it is the bottom side (which is the faced up side which I can`t touch) that needs the 0.015" off then it would be to size!!!!
Advice would be much much appreciated! :( :( :(
chris
2 methods spring to mind. Either clamp the face your sure is square to the bore down to your mill table,fly cut 0.015 off the other end (thus making it parallel to first face. then flip and take .015 off other end.
If you want to do it lathe then turn a scrap bit of bar in lathe so its a nice sliding fit in bore. without removing this bar from chuck put a couple of drops of super glue on it and slide cylinder on making sure you leave enough gap between back face and chuck to get a facing tool in. then face .15 from both ends. You may need to use tailstock support on the scrap bar to allow it to extend far enough out from chuck to get a facing tool down back of cylinder.
mat
-
Don't bother.
The slide valve is adjustable and there's enough room in the chest to adjust out the error without it hitting the end of the chest. Even if it did, you could easily take of the 15 thou of the inside of the chest to give the valve space.
-
You are hitting and hilighting every known problem imagineable when working from castings.
People imagine it is easier to work from castings than making from barstock, nothing could be further from the truth.
The first thing you must do when working with them is find your most critical datum point on each and every casting, and work everything out from that. In this case, it is the centre of your steam ports.
Find that position first by using your height gauge on your surface plate, blue up and scribe the centre line. Without touching anything, with a bit of maths, you can easily work out the height gauge settings for the top and bottom of the cylinder. Scribe those two lines on there. Now you should be able to split those lines by machining and you shouldn't be more than 0.002" out from centre and the actual length requirement. If you don't go too mad with the cutting, and take it very steady, measuring all the time, you should be able to get the cylinder length spot on.
As already mentioned, in this case, you are lucky in that the positions of the slide valve can be adjusted out. I have shown above how you should have gone about it if starting from scratch.
Your piston will be the next critical bit, and for that, your working datum should be the centre of the gudgeon pin hole. By working from that, your should be able to get the top and bottom in just the right places.
So really before doing anything else, go over your plans, find the datum points for each and every casting and mark them up on the plans with a pencil (not ink), and also put your new dimensions working out from it. Some parts might have more than one critical datum point at the start, so be careful when you are starting out.
As you machine each datum point, more datum points will be made that you can work to.
If you just dive in and machine willy nilly, you will end up buying a lot of replacement castings.
In a few months, I will be starting to work from castings again, after many years layoff from them. I have already started on my plans, finding out just where I am going to make my first cut.
Bogs
-
Thanks for the replies...it seems I have been lucky here in the fact that I can adjust the slide valve - thanks Kwacks, that did reassure me when I read it :med:
John, nice to hear from you again and thanks for your replies. I haven`t had to buy a new casting yet thankfully although I am in two minds as to whether I should buy the badly machined con rod that was done before I recieved the kit or if I should make it again from bar stock - however that is of now fault of my own. I have however, been waiting and putting off ordering this to save on postage should I need to order anything else while I build this!
Anyway...I`ll keep plugging away and be thankful that I got lucky this time.
If I remove it from the vice and bolt it to the table, does my method for facing off the steam surface look OK? - I just need to figure out how to set it up as parallel with the table as I can prior to cutting.
Cheers
Chris
-
The main critical bit is getting the valve face parallel to the bore. So your valve operating linkage runs parallel to the con rod centre.
I have attached a C-o-C to show how that can be achieved.
The diameter of the bar isn't critical as long as it doesn't bend when you push down on it and it has parallel sides, but the larger the better.
If you can mount it up like this in your vice, push down and tighten up, the port face will be parallel in the X axis to your bore. The only thing you have to watch out for is that it is square in the Y axis as well before taking your cut. But if you do it right, that should almost automatically align itself.
Bogs
-
Chris, either of the ways shown will work for milling the valve face. In the first one which I and a couple of others suggested, you've got to assume your angle plate is square and your end face is perpendicular to the bore - it should be as you did that in one setting. .... this is the reason you can easily just put it back in the lathe with the square face against the chuck - skim one end to length - they're now both square to bore, flip round skim other end to ensure ports are dead centre.
Bogs method is technically better as you're only only assuming your milling table is good there - it is probably also a more rigid setup. Take the cut in the x axis though as otherwise you'll need your mill trammed spot on too.
As somebody else said though, it's not going to make a great deal of difference to the running, you can adjust the valve on its rod and having 30 thou dead space in the top of the cylinder won't matter a jot - what is the clearance when at top and bottom dead centre?
Good points about castings by Bogs, I tried to make some stuff from castings when I was really young, the first things I tried to machine - you won't be surprised I just wasted them all. Haven't touched a casting since but am beginning to think I want to try a small engine like yours.
Cheers,
Nick
-
Funny isn't it?
I've never really thought about castings before - just got on and machined them. It just seems to make sense that you need to extract the finished product 'out' of the casting so you make sure you can!
Mind you a fair chunk of the machining I've done over the years is from castings so perhaps I'm just used to them. I have had a few failures though! :bugeye:
-
Kwackers,
A few casting suppliers nowadays seem to be using old castings as their pattern, rather than the corrected size patterns. This means that after metal shrinkage has occurred, the castings are in fact sometimes undersized.
So the first thing you must do is check that the bit you want to make will actually be able to come out of that casting. I don't know whether this is true of Stuart Turner, but a few people I know are complaining that after getting their datum points set, there is not enough metal left to put the fixings in. So then you have to resort to fiddling with dimensions, not just on the part you are making, but on the mating parts as well.
That is why you should check all your castings first, and mark up your start points.
Bogs
-
That would be really annoying as the only reasons I can see for buying something made from castings is so there's less work to do i.e. less material to machine away and so it looks top notch and more representative of the real thing, but if you have to start fiddling things it defeats the point of trying to build a recognised off shelf design and could compromise the overall look.
Does anybody know a supplier of really good quality casting / material kits?
Nick
-
Just to remind you that these Stuarts look very good! it was my error!!!
Chris
-
Sorry to slightly hijack, but just to answer Nick's question.
My next two kits that I have already bought are from Bruce Engineering. They are very good quality and have plenty of spare meat on them.
http://www.homemodelenginemachinist.com/index.php?topic=9233.0
They do some really nice out of the ordinary engines from the Anthony Mount stable. They really are outstanding engines, but not for the total beginner.
You will need to download their large catalogue from here.
http://www.pollymodelengineering.co.uk/sections/bruce-engineering/price-list.asp
Bogs
-
Hi Chris, again, the advise you've got is all good, but in truth, you need do nothing about the length, you can leave .015 dead space at each end, which I would recomend over leaving it all on one end, or you can simply leave the piston .030 thicker/longer and allow it to take up the extra space. The hardest way would be to increase the stroke when you machine the crank, so it has an extra .015 in stroke, and as John said, make notes on all the different things it would effect. You should have enough rod length to allow for adjusting the piston to equal travel and equal head space on both dead centers, or if necessary, add the .015 to the rod length, it should be threading into the cross head anyway, as you always have to adjust the length of the piston rod to set up your dead centers (top dead center and bottom dead center). The rod from the valve eccentric also is adjustable with threads and a lock nut I assume, and the rod running through the valve should have a nut on either end of the valve to set the timing, so if you have to make the valve rod fifteen thous. longer, no big deal. The main issue is you've got the port centered, and everything else is just individuality in your engine, nothing more or less. You can even claim you did it on purpose to get more horsepower, and draw diagrams demonstrating the truth in your statement.
As to machining the valve face, I would bolt the angle plate directly to the table, as you are "stacking tolerances", in clamping it in a vise. As a rule, you will tend to be more accurate, the more you work directly on the table of the mill, and the fewer parts of "jig" between the part being machined, and the table, assuming the mill is fairly accurate with respect to flatness of the table, perpendicularity of the spindle, and more importantly, perpendicularity of your quill travel. Much error has crept into work because the spindle was indeed perpendicular to the table, but the quill travel its self was not. You can test this by putting an indicator in the spindle with your best square on the table, and running the quill down and up, with the indicator against the square. If you are not certain of your square, you can do the same thing twice, once on each side of the quill, and if the reading is zero on both, your quill is indeed perpendicular, and if the reading is say .005 on one side, and .005 going the same direction with the quill i.e. down on both or up both sides, it is your square out of truth. All that said, you will have dead space top and bottom just to keep from hitting when things get loosened up a bit from running, I'd just go ahead and mill the valve face, and use the X axis for reasons stated by Nick I think.
Personally, I prefer castings to billet, as they save lots of metal and machine time when they're right, and in my experience, castings I've worked over the past ten years are substantially better than those I worked on thirty years ago, lots of them come from very high tech controlled atmosphere furnaces, being done with automated equipment, and with better quality original metal and a better knowledge of the ore going into the original foundry. You will note, most people who machine out of billet end up doing much work altering the final profile to more closely resemble castings, and how they make the whole of an engine look. As a final note, when you mill a flat at each end of the cylinder to drill your ports to meet the cast in ports on the valve face, it is worth the time and effort to move the table all around, with a drill bit in, or some drill rod, and ensure the shallow angle you will be drilling, will meet the port as clean and well as you possibly can as you will always deal with "wander" when drilling long skinny holes, but that is perhaps the hardest part of the cylinder operations, and not too hard after all. It's nice to see good workmanship such as yours, and a pleasure to watch it come about. cheers, :beer: jack
-
Yep, apologies Chris for :offtopic:
Bogs,
Thanks, that's good to know as I've been looking at Bruce Engineering ones. As you say, the Anthony Mount ones look lovely but they are bloomin' complicated! I remember seeing him serialise things in Engineering in Miniature and it sometimes took years!
Those castings you bought for both engines look good, I've always been tempted by the Scott Vacuum (flame licker) in the past but since then have made 1 and need to finish poppin so I doubt if I'll do another, even though the price seems pretty good from them. You're right though, the ones they have on display don't really do them justice, they should have gone to town and paid extra special attention to detail there.
I liked the look, and price of the atmospheric gas engine but have just read you really need acetylene to run it and I can't think that a source of small bottles of acetylene is going to be easy or cheap to come by! :doh:
I haven't noticed the stockport engine before which is a vertical flame licker, looks quite nice.
I agree with madjack, that is always the bit I have feared most on a slidevalve engine, drilling the ports - perhaps the reason I've never attempted one, On loco cylinders you usually have a face perpendicular to the valve face which can aid you because you can scribe lines on it and set them vertical.
I had it sussed that I was going to do that on my horizontal mill - clamp that face to the table at the right angle and simply put a drill chuck in the horizontal spindle - but that mill has gone now!!!!! Still, plenty of other ways I guess.
Looking forward to next installment. :thumbup:
Nick
-
As is probably obvious, Chris, I'm living vicariously right now, through your build, but I really want to see you build an engine you will enjoy for years, unlike my flamelicker, which I built twenty years ago, never got running until I was looking one exactly like it on this forum, running, and had to conclude if anyone could make it run, I could. I made two more cylinders, five more pistons and completely modded the valve, and made a new cam and crank assembly, as that was the main error I had made, screwing up the cam.
When the port drilling is to be done, it's a fairly easy task if you go at it right. The big issue is to get enough "flat" milled at the end edge of the bore, and use a center drill to ensure no wandering of the drill bit. I will be using an adjustable angle plate, with the valve face clamped to it, and having determined the angle of the holes leading to the ports by my measurements of the valve side of the cylinder thickness, and where in that port I want the holes to end up, and then on the actual mill, with either the drill in a chuck or a piece of straight rod, which is easier to see than the drill with flutes, and align the drilling by eye as the final decider when I clamp the adjustable angle plate. For the ports on my cylinder, it calls for at least three holes be drilled for each port, so it is a bit more complicated than just a single drilled hole, but I don't know what your plans call for as to those ports. If you don't have an adjustable angle plate, it can be well done with a regular angle plate and some wood shimming or aluminium arranged to get the hole through from each end, and end up inside the port well clear of the face, so as not to interfere with or distort the port, as its edge needs to be clean on each side of each port for good, clean timing. What John said about using old castings rather than making new patterns is a trick of the "cheap seats", and most businesses which operate that way go out of business rather quickly, in my experience. No casting kit I've bought in the last fifteen years or so has been anything less than great on the castings, no blow holes, good meat to allow quality workmanship, and the best metal clarity and proper allowing of cooling, leaving nary a one hard spot in perhaps a couple dozen casting projects, including a couple of cross slides for lathes, a filing machine kit, a couple of kits including a boring head, low profile indexing kit, the Tiny Power Ajax steam engine I'm building, and a few others I've forgotten at the moment. The pictures I saw suggest the Stuart kit is among the top of the line, as kits go, so I expect you have good castings with good metal, particularly with you description of the machining, as you weren't cussing them out, as you would if it were one of the others, not worth the iron cast out of.
I would clean up the ports and get them rectangular with good clean depth and bottoms, sharp corners for timing, and evenly spaced between the two outer ports and the central one, and spacing will determine if you can time it exactly or not. The depthing being even is to ensure you can easily get the drilled holes from the ends of the cylinder, directly into the proper port, with plenty of room to not having the drilling interfere with the port edge at all. The center port is pretty straight forward, just a matter of ensuring clearances, so you don't pierce the cylinder wall with the larger drill bit for the exhaust, quarter thirty two if I remember right. I hope you don't feel like I'm trying to run your shop for you, just want to see a good engine done to your own pleasure and enjoyment. :whip: :poke: jack
-
keeping :offtopic:
......you really need acetylene to run it and I can't think that a source of small bottles of acetylene is going to be easy or cheap to come by! ........
I don't know if you need it pressurised - but if not, how about making your own - get some handfuls of Calcium Carbide and a cup of tap water and craft a nice drip feed like a carbide lamp?
Dave
-
Hi Chris
Looks like your having fun with those castings :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:
Allot of crackin advice being posted too :bow: :thumbup:
Rob
-
MadJack -
I hope you don't feel like I'm trying to run your shop for you, just want to see a good engine done to your own pleasure and enjoyment.
NOT at all !! I appreciate the time your taking out to post your comments and advice - they have helped me no end! I`m just going down to the workshop now to drill the cylinder ports....so fingers crossed! I`ll keep you posted.
Chris
-
keeping :offtopic:
......you really need acetylene to run it and I can't think that a source of small bottles of acetylene is going to be easy or cheap to come by! ........
I don't know if you need it pressurised - but if not, how about making your own - get some handfuls of Calcium Carbide and a cup of tap water and craft a nice drip feed like a carbide lamp?
Dave
Hi Dave, I don't mean to keep it off topic, but where do you get Calcium Carbide in handfuls? I can find a source here for a one or two ounce tube, but that's all I've found. I could use some for a lamp I've got, and I'd like to build an engine that runs off it. That was the standard way to get acetylene all up through the thirties and forties, for welding. Info would be highly appreciated. :scratch: mad jack
-
MadJack - I hope you don't feel like I'm trying to run your shop for you, just want to see a good engine done to your own pleasure and enjoyment.
NOT at all !! I appreciate the time your taking out to post your comments and advice - they have helped me no end! I`m just going down to the workshop now to drill the cylinder ports....so fingers crossed! I`ll keep you posted.
Chris
Hi Chris, thanks for the good word, it'll be another week or so before I'm working on projects again, still cleaning, so I am really getting great pleasure out of watching you, as you're cracking away at it, and I wish I could be doing the same, or perhaps making a visit to your shop. That's the one thing missing from these forums, we can be so far away from each other, yet truly enjoy each others company in exchanging ideas and experiences. I seem to learn something every day from the various backgrounds and experiences of those who are building, and enjoy it thoroughly. I'm looking forward to seeing your ports turn out well, so you can get on with mounting valve gear and steam box and the like. Your's is like a kick in the pants, as my engine has been in the shop, waiting, for close on to seven or eight years, and seeing you build is driving me to get mine done, I want to actually steam it, I've only used air for engines before. great job, looking good. :poke: ttfn, mad jack
-
Cheers MadJack. I don`t know if I`m doing it right but I`m doing my best!
I`ve still been working on this over the weekend with some progress and what I did attempt seems to have gone well.
I first finished off the cylinder and also drilled the steam ports including drilling and tapping the exhaust. I must admit, I tapped the exhaust a little near to the edge than would have been ideal but it still worked out OK – no problems and looks just fine. The steam ports drilled just fine as well, no problem there and the cylinder looks very good. More pictures at the bottom, but this shows the ¼” recess on the cylinder bottom:
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/1-10v.jpg)
Got going on the cylinder covers. I wanted to use my rotary table to drill the 5 holes accurately so I turned to length on my 4 jaw, cut the recess that registers with the cylinder bore and then pulled it off the lathe and transferred it to the rotary table.
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/2-10v.jpg)
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/3-10v.jpg)
I then made some more markings and started to part it off:
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/4-10v.jpg)
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/5-10v.jpg)
Cylinder now finished and so is the top cover. I need to drill and tap the cylinder for the cover but I`m going to use the cylinder cover as the jig to mark out the position of the holes. I`ll do this later when I`m definitely happy with it all
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/6-10v.jpg)
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/7-10v.jpg)
Next job is to do the bottom cover but it tells me that I need to ream 5/32” and I don`t have this sized reamer. Truth is, I only have a hand full of odd sized reamers. I`m reluctant to buy a 5/32” reamer to use it only once but of course the rod going through which is supplied is 5/32”. I`m considering buying a metric reamer set and buying some 4mm silver steel and using this instead!?
Chris
-
There's no problem changing the size of the rod and reaming to fit. Remember to transfer that size through to everything it connects to. (Off the top of my head, that'll be the gland, slide valve & nut and whatever the connection to the eccentric is).
(Worth bearing in mind a 5/32" reamer is £2.75 from Arc Euro - is it worth the hassle?)
With regards 'sets' personally I dislike them. They're handy to have for emergencies but the quality is always a bit 'iffy'. Much better to buy high quality individual items.
All IMO, I have lots of sets of various items but the stuff I use most frequently is all purchased individually and I've always found it to give better results.
-
Hi Chris, kwackers is absolutely right, sets of reamers are not the way. For your one off job, I'd drill close to size, leaving say a sixteenth, and take a piece of silver steel or drill rod, turn it to five thirty seconds and polish it nice, and make a "D" bit type reamer, mill it half way through after turning a good radius on the end, stone the flat side, making sure you leave a few thousandths for stoning, don't go past half thickness, and harden the end. I have also taken a sharp drill bit, stoned the cutting lips to a radius, trying to be dead equal on both, and found the closest drill to size possible, drill it, and use the stoned on size drill as a reamer. It will follow the hole, and the radiuses on the cutting edges will act as a reamer, rather tight, but a smooth finish will result. Run it in and out several times, and test that the rod clears it. By the way, the cylinder ports look good and you definitely have the head well made, and well drilled for bolts. you're engine is moving forward quite nicely. Can't wait to see it run. It looks like the iron you've got is top notch, and works well, always a blessing with castings. Question for you, is that rotary table set up digital by yourself? I'm looking at doing the same thing, but interupted by the flood. I've got a cam to mill for my radial engine, and I don't like the dials and vernier on my taiwanese rotary table. On subject, I take it you cleaned up the ports on the valve face and have them nice and straight as to the edges which will control your "cutoff" and effect your valve timing. It looks like paint and polishing the engine up will be the most time consuming part, you're making very good progress, and your parts are looking very good. ttfn, :poke: jack
-
Madjack: thanks for the reply. Yes, the rotary table is digital and is the best thing I have made. It is a Vertex 4" Rotary table and I made a post on it here:
http://madmodder.net/index.php?topic=2242.0
The electronics is all down to Kwackers - a very very impressive microcontroller code which he has made freely available here, including circuit diagrams etc.:
http://www.mycncuk.com/forums/showthread.php/150-CNC-Rotary-table-lathe-head-indexing
It works a treat - truely amazing! Great for clock wheels as well. It`ll do any division from 0-999, continuous motion, set programs.... :smart: :ddb:
-
Hi Chris, that is a very impressive video, and I will be looking at Kwacker's log to see how he set it up. I've been sort of following your own build log on it, but didn't get in the very beginning, and was left a bit bemused by it, however, I've been messing around with stepper motors, controls, and your build had long convinced me to do the same with my eight inch table. I appreciate the link to Kwacker's build, and will follow it and get the rest of the electronics you show, but I didn't get the detail on. I never cease to be amazed at the variety of skills which such forums get assembled and interacting. Thanks very much for the info. :bow: jack
-
I never cease to be amazed at the variety of skills which such forums get assembled and interacting.
MadJack - I totally agree with that! If it wasn`t for that project and wanting to know more about how the PIC code was written, I then went to buy a development board and play around with PICs. I`m not expert, but I can now programme a PIC and make it do some nice things like my X-axis power feed!
Good luck, let us know how it goes.
The stuart is on hold for a few days until I get down to the Midlands Engineering show where I can purchase some taps, dies and reamers that I need.
All the best,
Chris
-
Wow that is great I have the same RT and have never fitted the plates as they looked confusing :doh:
This may be a future project for me :thumbup:
-
I managed to finish the more critical bottom cylinder cover today. As I mentiond in my last update, I needed a 5/32" reamer, I could have waited until the midlands show but a local friend I have recently made had one on hand to lend me so I could continue! No much to say (for a change) and had no camera with me, only my phone camera!
Turned down the central cylinder bore register, drilled and reamed right through
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/v11.jpg)
Turned it over and my nice chuck could hold the register (as guided in the original 10V book, but I think in the current ME articles he makes a jig or arbour for this bit) I then drillled this almost all the way through and tapped it 5/16(?) x 26tpi.
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/v21.jpg)
Parted off and it was finished... it took a bit of thinking this part but it worked out just fine
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/v31.jpg)
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/v41.jpg)
Bottom cylinder cover mounted on standard
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/4va1.jpg)
...everything together so far:
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/v51.jpg)
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/v61.jpg)
Feels like it is coming along nicely. I`m just waiting for my first disaster!
-
That's looking very nice, Chris! :clap:
DON'T think disaster. There will be no disaster. Trust me...... :thumbup:
David D
-
Nice work Chris, if you keep doing what you're doing there won't be any disasters. :thumbup:
-
You're really moving along on the build, Chris, it's looking more like an engine every day, and things are falling your way. The hardest part for me, was learning to deal with one single part at a time, and focus all my attention on it, once I got that down, every engine has been "easy", from lawnmowers to military aircraft, they all are individual pieces. I also want to say your build of your rotary table is the prime motivator for my upcoming build of the same for mine. I wish I had stepped in when I was still close to the electronics I used to work and once taught while in the Marines, instead of waiting until I was twelve and more years retired, and with no electronics test equipment, needing to get new tools for that side. Again, great engine, kind of makes me wish I was over there, you guys sound so much closer to each other, but I used to live in cities, back when I was young, and living out in the country may have it's shortfalls, but it has advantages as well. I do have one friend in town, four miles from here, and we borrow tools, ideas and the like back and forth, so its not isolation. Great job, and looking to see it turn. :nrocks: jack
-
Yes, I`ve progressed more since meeting and visiting MEs of which I have met a few now of this forum. I think what ALL of them don`t realise. Is actually, it is when they have been doing the sort of "turning basics" or "milling basics", when they are just going with the flow and taking their actions for granted, that I have learnt most!
I have another question about this build if someone could help me out. The bearings for the crank shaft are supplied as an alloy casting - half round with a flat at the top. I believe they are supplied as a single piece although I think it is also true that Stuart can supply these as two separate pieces rather than one length. I have unfortunately been handed the latter, or at least who ever started this before me cut it in two. I`m now totally confused. As I guessed before even reading the 10V book, the single piece can simply be drilled and reamed to size and then parted in two to make two pieces of identical bore position. Being supplied with two separate pieces, how can I ensure that the bore for the crank shaft axle is located in the same position for each?
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/bearings.jpg)
Chris
-
A jig...
-
Yea, thought of that but can`t think of how to form it?
The only other thought was to do the mounting holes first, bolt the bearings into position onto the soleplate and then mount the soleplate vertical with the bearings parallel to the drill and drill and ream right through the two. My only concern is that the large gap between the two bearings would mean my drill could wander.... still a decent idea, do you think?
Chris
-
Sounds complicated. Why not just do them one at a time?
You could use the soleplate as a jig and fit each one in turn, drilling and reaming them. Or you could just drill them, fit them both in their final positions and ream them to size. (The reamer will follow the holes you've already drilled).
-
The only other thought was to do the mounting holes first, bolt the bearings into position onto the soleplate and then mount the soleplate vertical with the bearings parallel to the drill and drill and ream right through the two. My only concern is that the large gap between the two bearings would mean my drill could wander.... still a decent idea, do you think?
Chris
Bang on there Chris :thumbup: ,,,then after boring they can be removed from the casting ( number them ) and mounted on a mandrel using the bore to turn the O/D
Rob
-
Chris,
I would definitely go with your method, that's going to ensure they're in line and it's no extra work :thumbup:
Nick
-
Hi Chris, The method you suggest, with each bearing done separately in the same side is a good one if you're sure the two sides are indeed parallel, and your angle plate is square. I think I would go with a jig, a simple enough one if you are not sure of the two sides being right on in place, just a block with the proper sized hole drilled, then the block milled off to give you the half hole you need, ensuring of course the block is square, and either drill mounting holes in both the bearings and the block, or a good solid clamp set up, and flycutting the top face of the bearing half, then center drilling, step drilling, and finally reaming. I suggest this, as it puts the bearing halves right together, and does not leave the unsupported width for the drill. I use a bushing on the shaft of the reamer when I'm reaming the cover bushing for the end of a Harley crankshaft, the bushing fits the reamer shaft, and into the needle bearing in the engine case, aligning the two. I would do the same if the reamer cutting edges don't cross the unsupported area, to ensure the reamer is parallel to the intended bore. Of course I have a crank case empty, in hand, to supply the inner needle bearing and to bolt the cover to. I've got about three inches between the needle bearing and the bushing, where the cam goes, so the shaft of the reamer definitely needs support to remain parallel. You're moving right along now, should be running soon :poke: enjoying watching the build. mad jack
-
I`ve been making some steady progress on this engine and finally I feel I`m getting somewhere. I finished the bearings but it was hard work. My drill wondered on the first hole which made it very tough to re-centre. I managed it by bolting a small strip of steel on the underside of the flat face which I used as the datum as it was this surface giving the relative position to the bore. I bolted both next to each other on this plate and then trapped in my vice. I then held it in the vice and pushed the drill through slowly from the other end. This worked really well and centered the hole. I finally reamed to size:
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/bearings1.jpg)
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/bearings2.jpg)
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10vcrank6.jpg)
I then went onto the crank:
I did the webs first. I cut the 2" stock in half and soft soldered the two pieces together drilling the holes and filing the radius (which worked well - I`m getting better at filing!)
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10vcrank2.jpg)
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10vcrank1.jpg)
Polished:
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10vcrank3.jpg)
And attached the assembly together ready for cutting the middle section out during my next session.
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10crank4.jpg)
-
Just a thought.
Why didn't you ream the two bearings in place (i.e. bolted to the soleplate)? It's generally much better to do this since if there is any tiny amount of misalignment you'll still end up with the bore inline.
I'd also suggest reaming under power rather than with a tap wrench.
-
Good point, it would have ensured alignment but it seems to have worked by the look of the pictures. The reamer he is using is a hand reamer though.
Nick
-
Kwackers - I know we discussed that and it was my plan BUT when I was drilling, I was concerned that those little 7BA bolts were under too much stress and I wasn`t happy with it. Don`t get me wrong, they bolt up good and tight but it just didn`t feel right. The method I used did work ok, thanks Nick and I`m totally lost as to using a reamer!! I believed these were hand reamers as they have the little square at the top and hence I used a wrench.... can you use them under power?
By the way - I know we also discussed just using D-reamers to do this job but I went to the midlands show a few weeks back and for £2.50 a pop - it was quicker and easier to get a reamer!
Chris
-
EDIT: just to add, the only thing I would say is that when I fitted the crank between the bearings it is a super tight fit and I`m going to have to turn a bit of the end of the bearings. Everything is to size, the bearings are not too long and the crank webs are not too wide so following the plans, I`m not sure why this has happened. I`ve about .5mm gap between the end of each bearing and the crank web.
Chris
-
I always ream under power, I've never had particularly good results with hand reaming. I just put the machine on slow and 'run it through'.
The type of reamer doesn't matter that much, the main difference between hand and machine reamers is just the taper at the start. More often than not you've just drilled the hole and swapping the drill for the reamer is the 'natural' way to do it. (Usual disclaimer of incompetence/ignorance applies here).
As for reaming in situ. There really shouldn't be much 'effort' required to ream the holes, if there is you've probably drilled them too much undersize.
Regards the 7ba bolts, lets hope they're not as flaky as you think! Having the bearings a good fit in the soleplate is what makes the bearings 'strong' the bolts are just there to stop them lifting. If you think about it when the engine is running, it'll be nodding along at a decent RPM, the crankshaft is unbalanced and there's a fair bit of hammering from the piston, compared to that the reamer is just tickling it with a feather....
-
Glad you said that as I have used a reamer under power, as you suggested, progressing from drill to the final ream. I just thought the hole was a bit big for reaming under power when I didn`t know if it should be! Cheers for the advice.
Chris
-
Hi Chris, i have been following your build of the 10v as i have just started to build one myself so i will be watching these posts with interest :thumbup:, Ray
-
Hi Ray, thanks for looking. Yes, I`ve just had a few weeks break on this build as I was making a few puzzles as shown in one of the other project logs. However, coincidentally, I started work on this again tonight so will be posting more pics soon!
Chris
-
Hi Chris thank you for the info i will keep reading your posts, Hope you enjoyed your brake :thumbup:
Ray
-
Got back on track with the 10V this week. Still hope to have it finished by Christmas. I got to the stage where I had finished the crank and con rod. This was a real pain because if you remember the con rod had been started, the only piece that had been touched on the entire set when I purchased it second hand (strange place to start?).
So got to here:
(http://www.raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/gettingthere10v.jpg)
I then machined the cross head which was quite straight forward and also started the piston rod. At this point I was desperate to try it out and turn it on the lathe so I connected it up and it turned! I must have done something right. At this point I realised I`d rushed and really it was only a truely happy sign if it would turn with the piston running in the cylinder. So I`ve done that and it is running as well.... a very happy chappy... crank, con rod, cross head, piston rod, bottom cover (with corrective bushing after my mistake as mentioned in an earlier post) and cylinder all align and run.
The following video just shows the con rod and cross head running and then with a second video of the piston rod running through the bottom cover (I was worrying about the bushing I had to do). But I`ve since had it turning with the piston in the cylinder earlier this evening.
Going to bed now a happy chappy...
Chris
-
Hi Chris, your making good progress with the engine, :thumbup:
Ray.
-
Chris, nice work - con rod looks complicated and it's spot on.
Nick
-
Cheers chaps - con rod was a pita! It was difficult enough to read about when working on it from scratch but it came in the kit like this:
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10v5.jpg)
Hole was off center, at an angle to the square face and low....anyway, I`ve managed to correct it and it seems to be running OK!
Thanks again for the reply.
-
I`m struggling to keep up with scrapman but I`ve been working on this during the odd few minutes I get in my free time so no construction pictures although most of these parts were quite straight forward.
So here is everything together
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10v.jpg)
Steam chest mounted -
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10v-1.jpg)
...eccentric mounting
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10v-2.jpg)
Flywheel, still needs more work but running true.
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10v-3.jpg)
Piston...
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10v-5.jpg)
Piston at the highest point in the cylinder, it gets a good sweep!
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10v-4.jpg)
Steam chest cover:
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10v-6.jpg)
Inside the steam chest:
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10v-7.jpg)
and my collection of bits so far...
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10v-8.jpg)
So I just have the glands, eccentric and valve parts to make and I should be able to give it a fire up. Still a while to go I guess but before Christmas I hope!
-
Brilliant Chris,
Great work and nice pics. Not far off at all - am confident you'll have a runner before Christmas.
NIck
-
It's coming along nicely Chris :clap: you will soon have it running,
Ray,
-
Been a bit poorly for the last few days, man flu. So I had it running at the weekend but on and off, things were a bit too tight and also I had made a couple of mistakes which I`ll post about later. But here is it running. I just reassembled it on the kitchen table, with a hanky in my hand feeling sorry for myself. Plugged it in to compressor and off it went!! Well that has cheered me up, think I`m feeling a bit better now as well :)
-
Congratulations on a RUNNER
Nice build Chris
Gerhard
-
Well done Chris, another runner :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
Tim
-
:D nice one Chris :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:
Rob
-
Cheers guys... taken a while to get here and it isn`t the prettiest example of a 10v but it runs! I made lots of mistakes... but I learnt from them.
It is currently in bits now ready for polishing and painting. Colour colour colour.... !? :coffee:
-
Chris.
Another smile time! :ddb: :ddb:
Colour? British Racing Green....... :thumbup:
David D
-
I use to have an MFG which was BRG. I`m now edging towards Oxford blue.
Chris
-
Chris - it's brilliant, well done :bow:
Lot of bits there. Blue sounds good.
Nick
-
Well done that man :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:
Nothing like a running engine to cheer you up :D
Stew
-
I use to have an MFG which was BRG. I`m now edging towards Oxford blue.
Chris
Chris.
My BGT was Mineral blue......
(http://i110.photobucket.com/albums/n95/Dayjo/Scan009November072010.jpg)
Loved the car, and the colour! :thumbup:
David D
-
That is sweet! Another runner, a collection of inert metal bits that put all together, suddenly becomes far more than the sum of the parts. I at least get a kick every time that happens! All Stuart engines have also that little extra, they look like they mean business. Solid and sturdy, everything meant to work forever. Well done. :bow:
:wave:
-
Thanks for all the posts guys. I joined this site short of a couple of a years ago and back then I could only just tell you the difference between a mill and a lathe ::) so everything I`ve got from reading the forums or meeting quite a few of you in person. So really appreciate all the advice, information and constructive criticism. This is certainly my biggest achievement yet! - thanks again.
I`m not ashamed to say I made quite a few errors during the build of which I`ve learnt from all of them. Here are my errors and how I got around them or the modifications I needed to do to overcome them:
First, in the video I don`t know if any of you noticed the brass end on the top of the steam chest. This is what it should look like:
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/10v-1.jpg)
However when I put the gland and packing in place I found my drill must have wondered so the hole supporting the other end of the valve rod was not in-line with the bore in the gland and jammed the valve rod. I couldn`t re-drill because you can only drill the hole through the gland. So I milled off the old support knob and drilled it through!! I then very very carefully bored a slight taper on the hole and turned down a stub of brass to enter the taper from inside the steam chest (so it wouldn`t pop out under pressure). It took ages and two attempts to get one that would just fit in and jam up in the taper. Perhaps a little more luck than judgment but my second attempt was perfect, I applied a little loctite and tapped it home. Filled it flat and re-drilled the hole, this time slowly and through the gland so I knew it was straight. OK - well now I have a little brass bell end on the top of my steam chest but it worked!
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/mod1.jpg)
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/mod2.jpg)
Second error was my threading on the piston. I haven`t got a clue why but on my initial test run I could just tell something was wrong with the piston. I took the cylinder top cover off and found the piston had a little movement on the piston rod (it wasn`t screwing down properly on it). Luckily I had an end mill about 0.05ish smaller than the size of a 7BA nut supplied. I aligned it on the mill and drilled the depth of a nut and hammered and loctited a nut on top of the piston. I threaded the end of the cylinder rod 7BA and this allowed my piston rod to screw really tightly onto the piston - no movement and no air escaping.
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/mod3.jpg)
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/mod4.jpg)
And finally, not really a modification and I`m still confused if I`ve done it right or wrong! It works but I`m not entirely happy. I was following the 10V build book and I read the instructions and still believe that they say to cut all the way through the eccentric. Reading the plans that came from Stuart, they definitely just say cut through one side. It still works but I`m not sure which is correct of if I have mis-read the plans.
(http://raynerd.co.uk/wp-content/upLoads/mod5.jpg)
So there you go....just a few pictures of my errors and how I corrected them! I know ideally I would have done it correctly from the start but you live and learn....
BTW, I`m thinking now Brunswick Green with a Cream flywheel!
Chris
-
Good saves on those parts Chris and nobody would be any the wiser but thanks for sharing. That sounds a nice colour scheme.
Nick
-
I decided to paint Brunswick green with a cream flywheel. I still need to put on the cylinder cover and then mount it on a wooden board. It is coming together slowly! Paint job isn`t great but I did my best. It went on OK and I left it 48 hours to dry (tin says 6!) but it still wasn`t hard and pulled a little bit on the nuts when I screwed them on. Still, I`m really pleased with the colours...cheers Kwackers for showing me the pics of your cream flywheel. I`ve copied you there, I think it looks great!!
Flywheel has inherited a bit of a wobble so I`ll take a look at that but it could be because the engine is only sitting on the board and isn`t bolted down. I don`t know but I`m really please with it, now painted and running!
-
Looking good Chris! :clap:
Would never have thought of cream for a flywheel! :scratch:
I usually paint them any colour you like..... As long as it's red! :thumbup:
David D
-
Thanks David, I remember reading you were into your red flywheels!
Could anyone give me any info regarding the sort of thing I should make for oilers on the crank bearings? Is it just simply a case of a "cup" with a narrow hole through to allow the oil to drain down directly?
Chris
-
Thanks David, I remember reading you were into your red flywheels!
Could anyone give me any info regarding the sort of thing I should make for oilers on the crank bearings? Is it just simply a case of a "cup" with a narrow hole through to allow the oil to drain down directly?
Chris
Simple cup oilers will work - except the hole must be VERY narrow indeed. A 1 mm hole, and the oil vanishes like water in Sahara. 0.5 mm is about the max. that´s somehow useful. Also, oil in a small open cup will gather dust, which will eventually block the small hole.
There are plans for needle controlled glass (=plastic) cylinder oilers at least in HMEM. They have a needle that blocks the hole, except when you lift it for a second, and they have a far larger oil reservoir than a cup. A lot more work than cups, of course, and some small bits. They´re almost watch making scale for a small engine like 10V. But if you don´t mind the work, they are far preferable.
:wave:
-
Whilst a tiny hole is ideal (allowing a slow but steady amount of oil to dribble through), for 'spot' oiling whilst the engine is running you can just consider them as a funnel which makes it easier to get oil into the hole rather than everywhere.
If you do this the size of the hole isn't too important - but no reason to make it bigger than the smallest drill you've got....
-
Looking good chris :thumbup: i like the cream flywheel,
Ray.
-
:lol: all my engines have red flywheels too Chris, not sure why but the cream looks great, might have to pinch that idea too!
Well done, that is another project to be proud of :thumbup:
Oh, the oiler - that's why I was going to reply. On the 'poppin' flame licker there is a design of oiler which is basically a cup as you say but as somebody else mentioned you can have a sort of needle going into the cup. Well this one is tapered on one end then bent around to give a bit of spring and fit inside the cup so it can be adjusted up or down - not a v good explanation sorry so will attach a sketch.
Nick
-
Nick, thanks for the reply. Is your description of an oiler to be used as a constant oil flow to adjust the flow rate by moving the taper pin up and down or is just a way of letting oil in and then pushing it down to close it off? Hope that makes sense? What sort of dia would you expect for the center hole?
-
Hi Chris, I think it's supposed to be adjustable flow but the cup is very small. I've sent you an e-mail, the hole for the one I saw is 0.020 which is about 0.5mm.
Cheers
Nick
-
Hi Nick, finally got a good look through your whole log, and you've done a fine job getting a good runner there. I thought the brass cap was intentional, if you hadn't have told us, you could have stuck with a "deliberate" change. It was a fine fix for a problem though, and seems to have worked well for you. The engine looks great too, as well as sounding good, now that paint's on it. I like to think of the cup oilers as a good target for the oil can, with periodic application, but I saw some good ideas on your post, like the bent wire with a point, that looks like it should be fairly easy to make, and something easy to adjust for constant oiling. When I think of constant, I think of the needle screws for a Harley oil pump, with a nice thread and a concentric taper but it is a bit large as a number eight screw I believe. I did like the idea of a cup with a needle you lift when you want oil, that sounds like it would be easy to turn, and at the same time, not a one shot kind of thing. Once you've got oil in the bearings, and the engine is running, but with little or no load, you shouldn't need much in the way of oil though, particularly with steel shafts in bronze bushings. A very nice running engine, that also sounds very good, too. :nrocks: mad jack