Metal Planer Restoration 39: Making a Bevel Gear Blank on the Metal Lathe
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 3 ต.ค. 2024
- Turning a blank to cut a bevel gear from out of a cast iron casting on the metal lathe. \
Support VintageMachinery.org on Patreon:
/ vintagemachinery
Make a one time donation to VintageMachinery via PayPal:
www.paypal.me/...
Please Visit: www.vintagemach...
Sponsored by:
American Rotary Phase Converters
www.americanro...
Use checkout code "Vintage10" for a 10% discount on all AD, ADX and AI converters!
I'm not a machinist but can sit for hours binging in your work and videos. Thank you for the entertainment and fine post editing.
Same here. It is calming like watching fish swim .
come to think of it, I don't ever think in all my years, if I've ever seen a bevel gear manually cut?..🤔 I'm so glad I watch your channel Keith..🤓
Well Done Keith.
The next one will be a learning experience for a lot of us
You remind me of my grandfather. He never met a machine he couldn't repair. His drive to learn was legendary.
You would be a great instructor. I worked with leather, now retired, but love to watch and learn people work with other materials. Thanks for these videos.
Is it not a blessing to see this genius do things that make a very hard task look easy? WOW!
There is no one like our Mr Keith Rucker. May Jesus continue to bless and gift him to be able to do things that are incredible; and then share it with us. WOW!
Thank you kind Sir.
Looking forward to seeing you cut the gear teeth. This has been a great series, thanks for sharing. We really appreciate your efforts on this.
Cheers
Well done Keith. Good idea on the Delrin.
Hi Keith - I was impressed by the way you machined that casting - not an easy job when you know that there's not a lot of material to spare - great job.
I worked in the product engineering side of a Big Three car company’s Engine Division. We designed and built prototype engines. Our Layout & Inspection Department used layout fluid (Machinist’s blue) by the barrel! The gear blank that Keith machines here (& the Fireball Tool plate that Abom79 just machined) are simple enough to eyeball for finish stock condition. But a big V8 cylinder block casting with many cores - you have to put the raw casting up on the surface plate and go back & forth between the crankcase to the water jacket cores to the cylinder bores to the head decks to equalize the casting for core shift. It wasn’t unusual to get halfway thru & discover you didn’t have sufficient finish stock. Paint over all your carefully scribed layout lines & start over. Our best layout inspectors could lay out 2 blocks in a day. But sometimes, especially first castings for a new program, took several days - and a half-gallon of blue! I really enjoy watching Keith & Keith & Adam & Tom machining manually. That’s what it was like when I started my career at the Big 3. We started to switch to CNC machines in our experimental machine shops by around 1969. Seems like yesterday, but it’s 50 years ago!
When did you start at the company and what department did you start? Sounds like you have some good stories about how complex parts were machined before the days of CAD. Something that’s fascinating to me as I’ve been rebuilding old ornamental machines from before they had all the computers and it amazes me how good they were then.
Which big 3 COMPANY Steven Ford GM Chyrsler?
Nicely done. It doesn't look like you ran into any voids or hard spots on the casting. That's a plus. Looking forward to you cutting the bevel gear. The fact that the teeth are wider at the larger diameter than the smaller, seems like it would be a tough. I think of the challenge of doing that when the planer was originally made. Your equipment would have been something they could have only dreamed about!
Good job Keith
Awesome video! Thanks for sharing!
Thanks for sharing. Great work!
Thanks for that, Keith. I was wondering how you were going to approach the cutting of that compound angle on the teeth; good idea to use Delrin as the practice piece, so much could go wrong, you don't want to screw up that casting! Looking forward to the next step.
You're a good teacher the best I've seen thank you so much
Having never cut a bevel gear myself it is going to be interesting to see the set up. I understand the theory now to put it into practice.
I see your over here learning also :)
We also have a similar video, and look forward to your watching our video！
Thank you for sharing and explaining to us hobbyists 👍🤠 i love your kind of working and solving problems ..😎
Better late than never...Thanks Keith...!
Yep, I do the same thing with Acetal rod when I cut gears for racing gear boxes. You got to make sure when you cut a gear. Stay safe and healthy.
Great segment Keith. I don't think I have ever seen a bevel gear cut on TH-cam. Good stuff! Stay safe...
This is a very interesting part of the project and I look forward to seeing more of this work.
Watching his videos is so relaxing that I fall asleep 🤣 😅 I enjoy every video he makes, even though sleepy I still learn much about it, it's a a shame I don't have a lathe machine, thank for teaching us, regards from a fan
Keith, Awesome video. I’m looking forward to your next video on cutting teeth on this bevel gear, thanks for sharing your video.!.!.!.
Nice save! Learned about some new techniques on this one.
Cutting bevel gears has got to be fun! I want to see that! Subscribed and waiting!
Another great video, Keith...
That would be great to post a video showing the learning process cutting the plastic gears.
Can't wait to see the planer in action! You're going to be able to restore anything all in house soon 👌😊
Braze the teeth on the old one to practice and you will have a spare gear. That will help you in you setup as well.
great idea. It would help.
Probably not a bad idea.
Probably never need a spare gear, so repairing it would probably be a waste of time.
And if you think it would work after you repaired it, you would just stop there. No need to make a new one.
Using the old gear to help your setup to make a new gear is a good idea, but doesn't need the repair job.
I was wondering if that would work? Will the chipped teeth at the end of the gear sustain the stress?
Hello Keith, just like your way of sneaking up on the dimensions. This will work out just fine. Keep up the great work too. VF
Waiting anxiously for the next installment. I have a bevel gear blank sitting on a shelf that has been there for years...chicken to wreck it cutting the teeth. Maybe now i'll try it...after you knock
one out
Exceptional presentation, great content
Doubleboost would call that a Bell End casting. Glad you were able to get a good blank out of the casting. Waiting on the gear cutting. Nice work.
Very interesting, looking forward to the follow on.
Hi Keith, off to new dimensions. With worry in your comments, we know there is triumph very near. Keep up the tuning.
I'm not a machinist, so I was happy that I had decided the bore would be cut as the 'reference surface' for the remaining operations before you said so (it shows I am learning something about things, like order-of operations, from watching channels like yours). Greetings from down under, I trust you and yours are keeping well.
Don’t you find that Keith ALWAYS does that? I think of a question I would ask and ... it’s answered.
If you didn;t have a set of fancy mandrells, you could just turn a light press fit spindle to hold it, with a drilled and tapped end to tighten it down.
Of course, if he had used bar stock steel it would have been a 'from one end only' operation (apart from parting off) [ 24:45 watch that springy setup screech] but no, Keith wants to be authentic and reset at least twice let alone having less to grab hold of when gear cutting.
I guess bevel gearmaking is all in the angles.... I applaud the Delrin trial run - good idea.
super system for small tasks
well explained
9:27 you had me looking up definition for holidays hehe.
@@flat-earther a break from work, also can be a trip somewhere. But I'm a Limey. Anyone know if it's American or regional to a few states?
I think it's a "Fennerism"
@@alstonofalltrades3142 Holidays is a term used by my shipwright friends for places missed when painting, varnishing. Makes perfect sense the way Keith used the term. I guess the idea is you missed a spot while thinking of a holiday or vacation. Don't know if it is regional or if it came here from elsewhere. I just learned it from the guys I worked with. I've heard it used here since but I'm from the San Francisco Bay Area in California so we get phrases from all over. Now I know a new use for the word.
@@alwaysbearded1 ahh nearly always a problem with trips! I was thinking also that the surface was all neat and shiny as wanted, except there was still a few 'breaks' in the surface
Awesome!
Reminds me of machining cast oil field valve bodies. Never really knew what we'd wind up with until we started getting at least close to final dimensions. I like the way you think through the different processes. Thanks for the video.
That's why Keith is such a wealthy man. He knows how to think.
So much great information here!
I breathed a sigh of relief once the back cut of the bevel was made. As soon as that was done, I knew there was enough material to get this done perfectly. Maybe other people saw it earlier, but that's when I was convinced.
Great job, eagerly waiting for next vedio..
we're getting close wih the planer! anxious!! let's cut some metal already!!
I'm looking forward to the next step.
Keith, why not cast a cylinder then lay out and drill centers on each end, then turn the outside diameter on centers along with as much of the ends as you can reach of the ends for a working surface, then you could use the working surface to bore the center to the size of a mandrel you own or with an adjustable one as you have, then finish the work as. you have in your video. You could make the cylinder as long as you want to allow for several blanks to practice on or as spares in case of another failure which appears to be from debris between the gear teeth.I would guess the major expense in casting the blank is the labor, not the iron so any reasonable length should be near the same price. Thanks for sharing your skills and time, Much obliged!
So...does this mean you got your own 3D Printer now? They are addicting, and I can see you creating lots of patterns now. Clark's going to be busy! LOL
Addictive?
@@dvddale111 correct..ADDictive. :)
@@WreckDiver99 Additive??
Wow glad the casting worked Clarke will be happy! Looks nice . looking forward to the rest !!
Thanks!
I never realized how much my OCD dislikes run out. My eye was kind of twitching until you ran the last couple of passes on the last taper and eliminated the last of the casting roughness.
don't feel bad when I first started watching these machining processes the people were putting up on TH-cam I was blowing the chips out of the way 😆😆😆
Yeah, you could see the light flickering on the casting as it turned telling you there was still some rough surface to remove.
There is a measurement from the back of the hub to the point of the teeth called the point backing. It puts the teeth in the correct position.
14:20 - measure the bore of the old one. Why not measure the shaft that the gear will fit on?
Was thinking the same thing
Mr. Rucker I think that’s one of the finest pieces of work that I’ve seen you do I truly enjoyed it! I was very certain from the beginning that it might not work but I thought if this can be done you will be the man to do it. Thank you I can’t wait for the next part!
If these videos are intended to be instructional as I assume they are meant to be, it would sure be nice to show ALL tools used in measurement (such as that neat device measuring the bore), so that the uninitiated might learn. Otherwise a good video.
Keith measures the bore and says it measures 1 inch 156 and a half (1.1565"). Then he says 1/64 is 165 and a quarter thou (though I'm sure he meant 156 not 165).
Things wrong here are that the gage was reading 1.0535" not the 1.1565" that Keith stated.
1-1/64" is 1.015625" and 1-5/32" is 1.15625". So when Keith thought he was measuring 1.1565" he made a mistake by saying he was just barely over 1-1/64" when he really should have thought he was barely over 1-5/32". Even though the actual reading of 1.0535" was not near either of those fractions.
Keith did figure out his error later and was shooting for 1.053 and something. So the part did fit in the end. But I don't think he ever realized that 1.053" is not anywhere near 1-1/64".
I understand why it's critical to match parts exactly, but in cases like this wouldn't it have been safe to assume that the original part was meant to have a 30° face bevel with a 60° back cut?
Hmmm, wouldn't it have been easier to Chuck it between centers? Then after all external cuts were completed it would Chuck up true to finish center bore
Hiya Keith
Given the issues with the casting and attempting to find a good way to hold it, would a different (better?) method have been to put the casting in a four jaw, get the core centered within the limits of casting, drill and boring to a nominal size before putting the casting on a mandrel to turn?
Once it was on the mandrel, it could be turned between centers and all your alignment would have worked. And because it was in the four jaw, you could center that bore on any of the surfaces you wanted to choose?
With all the concerns about light cuts because it wasn't held firmly in the jaws, four jaw, bore and mandrel would seem to be a workable solution.
I should have kept watching. Doh!
I think it's time I purchased a set of those expanding mandrels for my shop.
I can see a pattern of parallel bands on the bevel part of the blank that was cut with the compound at 29°. Is that an artifact of a flaw in the compound's lead screw?
I saw the same thing and my thought it is caused by hand feeding the compound which isn't consistent and it pauses slightly leaving a slightly burnished line...
@@TheAggromonster I guess it could be from hand feeding, I was thinking it was too regular for that, but maybe Keith is a regular guy!
@@TheAggromonster power feed on the compound is a very rare feature for a lathe
156 tenths = 1/64, you meant to say
fifteen and five eigths, thou
@@Biggus_Mickus My calculator doesn't do mm. They told us in school 43 years ago we were going to change over to the metric system, I'm still waiting.
@@roysmith3198 We should have, years ago!
Metric has its place, but when your are restoring a machine built with US Customary units, you stay in that standard. Moreover if your machinery is calibrated in USC units, it’s best to stay with them as well. Officially, an inch is defined as 25.4mm.
Either system is neither good nor bad. Like motor oil, use the one that give you the most peace of mind.
The problems occur when we have to mix and match, just ask NASA about the Mars probe that crashed.
Keith measures the bore and says it measures 1 inch 156 and a half (1.1565"). Then he says 1/64 is 165 and a quarter thou (though I'm sure he meant 156 not 165).
Things wrong here are that the gage was reading 1.0535" not the 1.1565" that Keith stated.
1-1/64" is 1.015625" and 1-5/32" is 1.15625". So when Keith thought he was measuring 1.1565" he made a mistake by saying he was just barely over 1-1/64" when he really should have thought he was barely over 1-5/32". Even though the actual reading of 1.0535" was not near either of those fractions.
Keith did figure out his error later and was shooting for 1.053 and something. So the part did fit in the end. But I don't think he ever realized that 1.053" is not anywhere near 1-1/64"
What ever works works. I think I would have tried an expanding center and turned the back round off the center hole. Then the drill through the center won't be going sideways as it drills. Boring seems the only option. What type of Iron is this - grey ?
I would have made the casting without the taper at all. You did mention it, but that really should have been made from bar.
I have cut straight and helical spur gears but never any bevel gears.. I am quite interested to see the process. Cheers; Mike in Louisiana
Stupid question time.
Would the initial cleanup on the casting have been better off done between centres?
The hole appears to be pretty true so working from there, and getting the bit that was in the jaws initially centred I think might have been easier.
Or am I completely wrong?
Great! Now I have bore micrometer envy. Thanks Keith.
You didn't say but I assume your preference for cast iron over wrought is for natural lubricity?
Hi Keith,
have you ever finished the ice cream churning machines?
They had a bevel gear like this.
Yeah me wife who watches these with me keeps asking about the ice cream churner.
probably best to cast that one vertically with the flange at the bottom of the flask,
can you not just set the dividing head at the appropriate angle then use the horizontal mill as normal? or are the profile of the teeth different?
@@bluegreenash The profile of the teeth has to be different. As the radius of the gear gets bigger and the tooth count remains the same, the teeth have to get wider to have the teeth and the gaps between them the same size. And the gaps have to be the same size as the teeth because they have to mesh with the teeth and the gaps on the other gear. So the teeth on a bevel gear are sort of wedge-shaped.
I’m a bit confused by the 1 1/64” bore dimension you were talking about.
That size being 1.0156. I hope you were just saying it wrong :)
Keith measures the bore and says it measures 1 inch 156 and a half (1.1565"). Then he says 1/64 is 165 and a quarter thou (though I'm sure he meant 156 not 165).
Things wrong here are that the gage was reading 1.0535" not the 1.1565" that Keith stated.
1-1/64" is 1.015625" and 1-5/32" is 1.15625". So when Keith thought he was measuring 1.1565" he made a mistake by saying he was just barely over 1-1/64" when he really should have thought he was barely over 1-5/32". Even though the actual reading of 1.0535" was not near either of those fractions.
Keith did figure out his error later and was shooting for 1.053 and something. So the part did fit in the end. But I don't think he ever realized that 1.053" is not anywhere near 1-1/64"
screensnot Thanks for clearing that up :). So long as it fits in the end. I’m looking forward to seeing the cutting of the teeth.
@@screensnot He was doing something all machinist have been guilty of at least once In their lives, he left out the hundreds place when saying it out loud, as in, " point zero one five six two five." Instead he omitted the "zero" and rounded the number up, saying instead, "one six and a quarter". A mistake yes, but he was only off by six and a quarter ten thousadths. I've heard machinists make this (slight) error so many times that I automatically correct it in my head without a second thought. (p.s. I am aware that while I am not using the exact, correct nomenclature, I am using the most commonly used nomenclature, just as I would in a conversation with another machinist)
Well, that was interesting. Was wondering how you were going to turn that shaft. Never seen that expanding mandrel before. And what in tarnation did you do with that caliper? Did you use the OUTSIDE of the jaws? What? And did the underside of that step ever really clean up? You kind of hid it after the initial work.
Dial calibers have four different ways to measure.
1 outside jaws
2 inside jaws
3 depth rod
4 step gauge
The step gauge is from the head of the gauge. There are a couple of videos on how to do it, including one by Starrett
ctjctj2 thanks, I was totally unaware of the last use.
14:00 How do you know that the original was one and one sixtyfourth? Isn't it possible that the original was one inch and the one sixtyfourth is just wear from 100 years of use?
Yes exactly. Old = wear. I realized that watching Mr. Pete, when he was off his
measure by 0.002 and it fit very well I thought he just eliminated years of wear.
There are dimensions that change with wear and ones that don't. Not all the surfaces are in moving/rubbing/bearing contact. If you understand how the gear works, you can know which ones would wear over time and which wouldn't. The reality is that in the 1880s, 1/64" tolerances were likely about as good as things were made unless it was absolutely necessary, and then individual parts were likely just hand fitted with files and stones and cloths. Most of those lengths and widths are not really critical and the machine design will accommodate typical manufacturing variances - he is just trying to match the way it was for 'restoration' reasons. Ultimately he needs to size replacements to fit the other existing parts and make it work right - he is very experienced in restoring old equipment and knowing how to do that.
He has the engineering drawings for the machine, so I would presume he got the dimension from there. If he did only measure it on the original parts, I’m sure Keith would’ve measured the shaft to ensure a good fit.
@@mlenstra I'm quite sure no one can leave a comment now unless it is "great job, looks great or thank you so much. The man was asking a question. Keith does not need a team of comment defense lawyers. This is for you also kinda blue.
Roy Smith, relax man. It’s a question in a public comment section, where others are free to chime in, and I did. I wasn’t defending or attacking anyone. Newer viewers may not have seen any videos in which Keith mentions having the full set of drawings, so I thought mentioning that bit of info would add to the discussion and help answer the original question of how Keith knows the dimension should be 1 1/64”.
Is that iron cast strong enough to be used as a gear? Wasn't it better to cut it from a steel bar?
Why cast and not say, .... tool steel? Will cast take a beating better?
Like the sculptor says when looking at a block of grannet, "it's in there somewhere, all I have to do is take off all the stuff that doesn't belong."...nice work.
Thank you for going to the trouble of sharing it with us.
could not steel have been used in leu of casting?
why bother with a casting of the rough shape if your going to machine the whole thing.... you could have simply bought a short bar of Cast Iron and started with that.... that would have saved you alot of setup.
Because he likes doing it this way? He did mention that he could have just gotten a piece of bar and worked from that, but wanted to do the casting instead. This is a hobby, he does a lot of it the way that he wants to just because he wants to do it that way.
Original bore was 156.5 not 153.5 You are too narrow.
It actually measured 1.0535"
Keith was reading the mic backward (sort of).
In the end, he was probably checking the old against the new, and seeing the same number, even if he didn't know the correct number.
Wow!! Get my notebook out. What a lot of info today. Thanks Keith
May be I missed an argument/reason for it, but why messing around with a casting instead simply making the part from round stock?
Would it have been easier (in hindsight) being it is a one off part and relatively small, to just cast a simple cylinder?
For a one-off part like this I would probably start with a piece of round bar stock. You can get continuous cast iron bar in many sizes for a pretty reasonable price, and could even use ductile iron to reduce the risk of more tooth breakages in future. If there is no strict requirement to use cast iron you could also go for something like 1045 steel.
Maybe he was having other castings made and this was just easy to throw in with the rest? If the pattern is 3D printed you save material without any significant increase in the difficulty of making it.
I agree with your prototype approach.
Wonderful video, thank you. Out of curiosity, since the foundry was having difficulty making a "mushroom" casting why not just an oversized plug and do the extra machining? Thanks again keep up the great work.
Did the drive dog bolt catch your thumb? It crossed my mind on the last video. They are a little bit of a transition. I was thinking a big set screw might be nicer. Good job on cleaning up the the casting.
Why not cast it as a solid billet, just a bit more machining?.
I wonder how was this piece was originally cast? Seems like their would be as many failures as successes maybe centrifugal casting? Any idea about how the part was made originally Keith?
Please don't upload incomplete video
THANK YOU...for sharing. Very much enjoyed.
the Knee on my milling machine has been real stiff and making a clackity clack sound. I better fix it before I end up having to do what you showed us in this video!
Just call Adam to get him to make it perfect in the four jaw...
or the 6 jaw
@@majorphoto The idea behind the 4 jaw is 4 independently adjustable jaws, a 6 jaw is just a glorified 3 jaw, so it can't handle odd shapes and off center parts.
The interest that I had in watching this video was exceeded only by the amazement of your unlimited skills and abilities.
Very good video, thanks,
John
Great job!!! ... Good saving that casting! .. Well worth the effort! :)
14:45 1/64 is 0.015625 (156.25 thou) not 165.25
A question out of ignorance on casting for the bevel gear. You mentioned that they had trouble getting metal to flow to the high edge of the piece. Might it work better if the piece was cast with a verticle orientation and the mold separation line was at or slightly above the shoulder of the piece?
Having seen some of Abom's videos from the casting place, I'd guess the forms might not have the vertical capacity for that.
Greetings from the UK. With regard to calculations for cutting bevel gears - or any gear, for that matter, may I recommend a book by Ivan Law called Gears and Gear cutting. It has a section devoted to cutting bevels in the home machine shop. This book is part of the Workshop Practice series. Very well known here in Britain and I'm sure easily available in the United States.
The problem for us old school engineers is that we never can stop learning.
The young one's today just understand us old guys down on the shop floor, we mostly either learnt it on the job or worked it out as we went.
The next part of this bevel gear machining operation will be interesting to watch.
ROBERT: -"The young one's today just DON'T understand us old guys". Moreso they DON'T WANT TO understand us old guys. "Put it in the CNC machine, set it and forget it"...
Thanks for sharing!