开云体育

I believe your lathe is by Real Bull and not Seig.

Later..........John


***
See what's free at
.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

G'day all.
I recently told you of my testing of the leadscrew mechincal fuse, it
works!. Yes, I damaged the 80T gear. Thankfully it is not beyond
recovery, so that it is now in the tuit basket.
I had previously purchased a spares kit from LMS and this morning dug
the replacement 80T gwear out of the bag. Surprise! the key way is
3mm wide not 4mm as for my lathe. I know my key is 4mm because a few
weeks ago I dropped my key in the swarf (on the floor I thought) No
amount of grovelling could find it so I grabbed a MS tent peg and
milled a new key; actually I used a file. BTW I found the key hiding
under the control box this morning.
I recently got an idler sleeve and key from LMS only to find tha the
key on that is 3mm as is the replacement LS key I purchased. The 57T
& 65T gears I purchased from LMS also have 3mm keyways whilst the
gears that came with the lathe have 4mm key ways. Thankfully a file
can address most of the problems. I can probably file a T profile key
for the sleeve, 3mm one side and 4mm the other.
The QUESTIONS:-
When and how did the change occur? My lathe has similar features to
the yellow Cummins, eg, square not H shaped saddle, way wipers, ball
oilers, nut on RH end of lead screw, etc. Some much earlier posts
commented that the yellow Cummins lathe was not made by Sieg.

Have others with yellow Cummins or Chestern Conquest lathes had the
same experience? The present Cummins lathe is blue and the pictures
don't show the features I refer to.

Have you found other dissimilarities?

Maybe Chris of LMS is lurking so he could comment?

Finally, why are Tuit baskets square??

One good turn deserves another.
Regards.
Ian



Be sure to check out for small mills and lathes.
Yahoo! Groups Links





--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.22/739 - Release Date: 3/29/2007 1:36 PM

First, thanks for all your feedback Mike, John, Ian and Mike - you
guys have added a lot to my sense of what's involved in this
endeavor. I should at least clarify my tolerances.

The wall thickness can actually be anywhere between 16thou and
32thou, and every one that I make can be in that range (don't all
need to be identical); the only restriction here is that it still be
flarable. Also, the thickness should be relative to the 0.437" outer
diameter of the main part of the tube (the 0.437" can be plus/minus
5thou or maybe even 10thou). It is important that the
0.625" "outward rolled-like bead" be clean and rounded (a picture
would really help here - I have a photo and a schematic but don't
know how to share it with you guys). Otherwise, the surfaces don't
need to be perfect, so for example, as John points out, the inside of
the tube can be done with just drill/bore (if I'm using the right
wording).

What I first need to do is make sure I understand the procedural
options here. Each of you guys have added something unique to try,
and I've been reading your instructions over and over. What's just
now becoming a little clearer to me are things like what does the
tailstock do, what are the options for supporting the piece, what are
centers, etc., and most importantly, what is a mandrel and how is it
used (so that I can implement Mike's technique or variant thereof -
the mandrel seems to be a key here.) It certainly would be helpful
to see one of these machines up close and in action. I even looked
on youtube but only one video came up when I searched on "mini-lathe"
and it wasn't very enlightening.

Nicipi




Be sure to check out for small mills and lathes.
Yahoo! Groups Links

Hi, Clint. I just saw your drawings of the tool post modification in the photos section. I have done this with a smaller post, except that I used set screws (or grub screws, as our British brothers and sisters call them) comming up from the bottom. To adjust, just undo the retaining nut on top, lift up the post, back off the top screw slightly, engage (run further in) the bottom screw tightly, and replace the post as per normal. This sometimes take a few tries, but once the height is achieved, all is well. Great drawings, by the way!. Ron.



Be sure to check out for small mills and lathes. Yahoo! Groups Links

Hi again Nicipi (is that your preferred handle?),

It's probably within the capabilities of these machines. More readily
so at just 1" length. You'll want a reasonably rigid toolpost so I
suggest you look at the lapping job that people do to these Asian
machines to improve that area.

I'd certainly use a mandrel as Mike suggested. Depending on your
tolerances and surface finish needs you may need to use a reamer but
that seems tedious for 100 items. They aren't cheap either but at
least it's not a 1-off. OTOH, you may be happy with just drilled and
bored.

At that length you may be able to avoid needing the tailstock and
centres. You're inside the usual 3 diameters rule of thumb BUT you're
going pretty thin walled and can't afford too much flex. You'll soon
figure out if the extra messing about with the T/S is worth it.

Something to note. 3-jaw chucks are not the most precise. Their design
is necessarily a compromise. Re-read Mike's suggested steps and you
will notice that the job is not removed from the chuck from beginning
to end. This negates the innacuracies of a 3-jaw. Your job will be
created true to spindle axis and remain that way - unless you're silly
enough to remove it and subsequently try to re-chuck it. You won't get
it back to the same axis again. The alternative is to use a 4-jaw
chuck and set up with a dial gauge. For your application I'd try to
stay with the 3-jaw. It's so much simpler to set up. I'm just making
sure you're aware of some of the hidden finnesse in Mike's method.
With planning, you should be able to nut out a 3-jaw method along the
lines Mike suggested.

John


--- In 7x12minilathe@..., "nicipi" <nicipi@...> wrote:

Yes, this is essentially a thin wall tube. But I am after 1 inch
lengths in the end. And I need many - like 100. The dimensions are
very important, which is why I'm having trouble finding the tubing
that I need (McmasterCar, etc.) So my take from your concern is the
0.016 inch is not within the precision of a mini-lathe, or is not a
safe operation? Does having a short length like 1 inch seem more
reasonable to achieve this objective?

Be sure to check out for small mills and lathes.
Yahoo! Groups Links

Looks as though it might be: 5W = 5 watts, R66 = 66 ohm. Not sure

As to wattage, if you can't get 5 watts from Maplin or

I wonder what made it burn out, though? Hopefully, it was

Andy
ftr1d <ian.fletcher@...> wrote:
Hi, I have just purchased a 240 volt Clarke 300m with a

board. A new board will cost ???85 so I am looking to repair it. The

fault I can see is a blown ceramic block, one of a pair, which is
marked 5WR 66J and is in R1 position on the board. I assume it is

creamic resistor? Does anyone have a circuit diagram or can give

specification of the part. Thanks Ian






---------------------------------
New Yahoo! Mail is the ultimate force in competitive emailing.

I agree that it's .66 ohm. Although all manufacturers have their own
way of creating part numbers, they're all pretty consistent with
numbers to the right of R being decimal. If it was a 66 Ohm resistor
the part number would be 5W66RJ. Here's an excerpt from the Ohmite
catalog that tells you how to create their part numbers. The part
number for 5 watt .7 Ohm resistor would be 805FR70 - they just happen
to use F instead of W.