Metal Planer Restoration 38: Turning and Threading new Studs for the Clapper Box
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 15 ก.ย. 2024
- Working on restoring the clapper box for my circa 1890's vintage New Haven Mfg. Co. Metal Planer. The original studs used to hold the cutter to the clapper box were needing replacing, so I turned a new set on my 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!
The hardest part about watching these episodes is the wait between episodes. Keep up the great work. Thanks for sharing.
Great work, Keith! Your videos are always top notch. As an old planner operator, I can make a couple of guesses about the differences in the stud sizes. The top two studs on the clapper get the greatest amount of stress, as the tool wants to pivot right at the bottom of the clapper. It's possible that a machinist made the decision in the past to use as large a diameter stud as was practical to beef up the top studs to gain a little more life out of them. Let me give you a little pro tip from the production line of the lathe section : When you have a bolt with a shoulder that's larger than the max thread dia. Rough turn the thread dia. first, then finish turn the shoulder. That way you don't waste any time turning such a long bolt to the diameter of the shoulder, only to go on to turn most of the first part of the bolt to a smaller (thread dia) size. Love your videos!
I always enjoy your video. I started working in machine shop making hydraulic cylinders in January of 1986. Now I work in machine shop in a company make urethane products I been there for 25 years. I have help many machinery repairman fix machines. I do like repairing machine, lucky the company I work for they let fix your own machines if you know how to do it. Love know how to scraper in a machine, not sure I would ever used. Something I would like to learn. Keep up the good work Keith. Waiting for to make the bevel gears.
Very nice Keith!
way to go on odd ball thread nice fix keep up the good work keep videos coming
Good job, enjoyed watching your videos....thanks
Thanks again Keith, allways a pleasure to recieve your latest work and explanations.
Once again,thanks for allowing me to look over your shoulder😁
Perhaps the reason for the different diameter clapper threads is that while operating the planer, the lower end of the cutting tool is pressed into the clapper, but the upper bolts are in tension and are taking all the load from the cutter in tension on the bolt. This could also account for the thickness difference between the caps. There is all kinds of microscopic movement in the heavily loaded in the cutter and holding apparatus that could account for the differences in otherwise similar parts, especially when taking the huge cuts these machines are capable of.
Thanks for sharing.
Keith,
It's a really good point to remind viewers of the need to allow the piecework to cool down after roughing out.
Enjoyable video, thank you.
Take care.
Paul,,
Thanks Kieth for another great video! It always amazes me watching you make threaded parts! I still can't figure out how you keep cutting the threads at the same spot each time you start a new pass on the threads.
Getting close finally. =) Cant want to see it make some chips.
Wake up to get ready for work at 05:30, a new video from vintage machinery is a great start to the day.
I’m got the opposite side of the coin.
I’m off to sleep when this finishes. 😀
Midnight in New Zealand
This clapper box is something, you did some admirable work on the metal planer so far, cannot wait to see it working.
In the fifties we were taught centres on both ends and used drive dogs!
I was taught that in the 80's.
Old school is knowledge to be put in ones base to build upon, the better the base all the better for you to get to your desired end result.
I fhink we are looking at the start of regulation of bolt sizes in the 1800's. Very cool. Thanks for the wonderful videos Keith.
I can't begin to remember where I read this,but I think that the railroads had a big role in the standardizing of screw threads. Which makes a lot of sense,if true.
Maintenance superintendents want to be able to buy nuts and bolts that fit. Not pay a machinist every time a bolt or nut needs to be replaced.
Love it Keith. I really enjoy these types of videos you do. Thanks again for sharing.
Thanks for sharing!
Thank you for pointing out the center marks on the heads and ends of the original studs, and the implication that they were turned on centers using lathe dogs. It's amazing what you can pick up once you understand some of the manufacturing processes.
THANK YOU...for sharing. Watched and very much enjoyed.
I'm waiting for the new episodes with more anticipation than Game of Thrones.
Thank you Keith.
Beautiful threads again. Mine never turn out as good as yours do every time.
I have run into the oddball size of threads on old machines, and try to get around them or make new parts. I am lucky that my great-grandfather had two sets of these oddball taps and dies. I do not use them often, but ones in awhile you have to go back to them. The standard we enjoy today didn’t come about until WW II when our threaded parts didn’t match the rest of the world. But that’s another story.
I am betting that the subtle differences in the clapper-box studs was necessitated by experience. They probably found that the two studs needed to be a little heavier, AND there was not enough room or material to make all four the same size.
A hundred plus years ago, the Strength of Materials was not a very well understood. Whereas today a part may only be 2x as strong as it needs to be, back then a part may have actually been 5x or 10x as strong and heavy as it needed to be. Thats one reason older machines tended to be so big.
If I were to ever get another lathe, a quick change tool holder would be a must have.
*munches popcorn* mrrfmrrf mrrf.... *gulp* can't wait to see that planner plane!
Great video, you make it look so easy! Also makes me want to go out in shop and turn something!
Thank you Keith
Nice job! The right comment.
I’ve been watching so long that when I click on one of your videos I say your intro in my head as you say it. Every time. 😂
Looks good!
Always interesting to watch, thanks for sharing
Can't believe that arrived first to view! Great video as always!
Hiya Keith
Really nice work, Keith.
Quick tip, Keith:
You don’t need to tap the holes for the keying pins. When you knock the studs out the back of the clapper with a hammer, plain pins will just fall out along with the studs.
Looking at the difference in wear on the threads, I have to wonder if the two larger studs were "modern" replacements for broken or bent originals...
That's what I was thinking also. Maybe two of the studs were worn out, bent, or broken, and they pulled out the closest bolt they had and turned it down to serve as a replacement. Then later they found it was too fat, so they ground down the sides so the cutters would fit on it.
Fixing up my 1939 Rivette lathe required some 32nd fractional size tools. I do have some old wrenches in this denominator.
I learned in WWII the US manufactures were told told to reduce tools and us 16th fractional sizes.
Go back to the 18th century and may 64th was in use.
Love that Starrett 221. Might want to show it and it's tenth reading capability sometime.
Keith took a look at the clapper box and got right down to work... nose to the grindstone.
Wow! I do love that Monarch lathe. You are blessed to have one of these, Praise Jesus. Great show Keith.
Keith, Great content.
Your solution is the pragmatic one. There is nothing to be gained by trying to replicate the original oddball thread. If anything it's more likely to speed up the demise of the machine by making it harder to maintain.
Wobblycogs Workshop. I have just put comment that highlights an English company that did make most of their machines and parts oddball sizes so as the spares were only available from them, but I don't think this is the case with Keith's planer ,more like a homebrew or in house replacement to get the machine back working soon as possible with whatever was available.
Great Work Keith
If they are too thin and you break one at least you know a good machinist who can make you another new one.
Does he know "THIS OLD TONY" ? Lol
@@joepollock9151 This Old Tony is more of a magician, he'd just snap his fingers and tell his cat to deliver them to Keith. Ether way he'd get the replacements though.
@@billtheunjust TOT is a God Among boys lol
I am enjoying this series hugely, and the amazing work by Keith. I am looking forward to seeing the machine working. BUT, (with my museum hat on) I do have a problem: Given that machine will outlast us all and probably TH-cam as well, in perhaps a couple of hundred years an 'Engineering Archaeologist' is going to be documenting the planer, measuring everything, and producing new material to explain the machine in a museum. He is going to find screw threads on certain parts that 'prove to him' that standard pitches were in use at the time. He'll probably also wonder how these were made without centres at either end of the studs. So, did they have readily available chucks at the time the planer was built? It's going to be a very confused story! Could I suggest you stamp the date on all new parts made for the machine? Those stamps are not going to get lost as any videos and documentation may well be.
you should rig up a rocker tool post for your clapper
First "down under" at 8:10 pm !!!
They don’t call them Centre Lathes for nothing :)
Nice video showing a fairly common set of operations.
Older lathes often had a small spindle bore so if a long part didn’t go down the spindle between the centre it was.
The other benefit is it is highly repeatable. You can take the part out and test fit.
The hard part is.getting the centre in both ends without a chuck. :)
Gotta love those odd ball diameter and thread some of the engines i have are equipped with 1/2 12 and one of them has a couple parts with 3/8 32
Hi Keith , You're getting better with every job now , Maybe the thread size and pitch was an early attempt at Metric done accidentally , then most of the world adopted it to be different to imperial not wanting to use fractions.
B U.S.M.= British United Shoe Machinery Company , made nearly all of their machine parts oddball sizes and threads so spare parts were not easy to make and the only available replacement parts obtainable from them .Google it .
Would it be possible for you to do a video on knurling sometime? If you have a project needing some knurling.
I wonder if the larger studs were acting as thrust surfaces? If you were taking a heavy cut to a shoulder or under a dovetail they might act to keep the cutter in a repeatable position as it traversed the part.
Great work on the studs one explanation for the different stud size might be they just grabbed what ever was available off the shelf maybe to finish a machine !!!
Chucks today aren't that cheep Mr money bucks.😁🤣😃😁
Keith, just watched a past clip about smaller straight edges you and Windy Hill forged. What about souvenir size? 2", 3" 4" Rucker's ,handy for a chap's desktop? Papers and stuff? Not precision ground, maybe a whizz down the side, but looking pretty? Even just for covetng!!!!! I'd buy one! I've got money you could have!
Not sure what sort of steel he used for these, but as long as he used some sort of higher tensile strength alloy the new screws should be stronger than the originals even with the reduced diameter.
I'm sure he'd prefer that these bolts fail before the iron in the clapper box. I think in a crash, the original iron clamping straps would have failed first, which explains why one of them at least seems to have been replaced in the past already.
?
@@MattOGormanSmith In the event of a crash the table should stop due to slippage in the belt driving the machine or shearing some sort of pin in a drive shaft meant exactly for this sort of situation. If those bolts break due to a crash, odds are you've thrown all those scraped surfaces way out whack.
@@siggyincr7447 I think @MattOGormanSmith is correct. You would want the shear to occur almost instantly with the bolts absorbing all the energy and failing, as opposed to the entire machine needing to "catch up". The belts would only slip once they've overcome friction and that would actually mean storing significant energy beforehand that would be transferred to the entire driveline and every part of the machine going into compression. I'd rather make a couple bolts.
@@TheDirtCreature That's an almost impossible scenario, the way the cutters are mounted means the bolts would have to be so weak as to not function properly as clamps. You could design a mechanism to do what you're talking about, but the existing machine isn't designed to work that way.
I'm impressed by the qualities of the steels available that long ago.
Henry Bessemer, whose steelmaking process would become the most important technique for making steel in the nineteenth century, demonstrated a process in 1856 of producing inexpensive steel and had a successful operation going by 1864. Before his advancements steel was produced in limited quantities for specialty applications such as military weapons. In the absence of structural steel builders used either cast or wrought iron.
Andrew Carnegie later scaled up the Bessemer process to a gargantuan scale in order to supply America's expanding rail lines with quality steel rails.
5/8-11 is strong. I would bet my life that those bolts won't break or stretch under tool pressure. Even with a tool crash I'll wager gear teeth break before those bolts see forces that come within 50% of their yield stregth.
Use dry ice to freeze your parts for interference fits
JOB WILL DONE, KEITH LET'S GO TO WORK...
an exact duplicate would duplicate the wear. New worn out parts? Purists' delight.
I probably would have made them 11/16-11 UNC to give it some more stiffness but 5/8 will for sure be more common.
Really nice job. Did you use 4140, or some other high-tensile steel?
I’m not sure I understand the differences in stud dimensions. Did you get that off the plans or off the old parts?
It occurs to me these might be ‘apprentice’ pieces and as such they are ‘within tolerance’ of the supervisor.
Any ways, great work. 👍
Very interesting, but you never talked about Mr. Turing.
I wonder if his lathe passed the Turing Test.
Thank you,like the machining. So why not machine the holes to same size? Then make all four studs the same? Know that would be more work but.. maybe you like the oddness, keep it as original as possible!
If you were feeling cute, you could have really baked some future machinist's noodle. Get some period appropriate scrap steel, cut and turn some 11/16" Whitworth square nuts and studs and rotary broach the heads for a 5mm security hex key. BTW - When is Adam EVER going to finish with his part of the Steam Stoker Engine project?
Oooo, you're evil! I _like_ that in a person.
I have noticed and enjoy watching how precise you make things. My question is how precise do you think they were making these parts originally? Where was their "good enough "? One thought I had on the bolts is that they may be making do with what they had. Or, They originally were going to use the bigger bolts till they discovered they were to big . They needed to use up stock so they mixed the two because it was "good enough" and besides no one is going to see it until a hundred years from now Keith Rucker decides to refurbish it. Just a thought from my time doing construction and seeing plans change to "make it work" and "good enough". Especially when time is money.
Your thumb is looking better.
May have been mentioned, but the last video I watched, was wondering if those top two were added at a later date? Would seem there would be another set of pads above the top two bolts to me if they originally had all 4. Maybe you have a photo of an original ad for reference.
I wouldn't be shrinking them bolts into that cast iron clapper box...
A very noob question: when you were bringing the heads to size, why was there that much runout on it? Id think it'd have none/less if you used the same chuck.
Americans, please assist: What are your common thread sizes to 1/2"? I want to buy a set of taps and dies, but don't want unicorns. Do I need both UNC and UNF? Maybe all the UNC and just some UNF, or doesn't it work that way in the US? Many thanks.
Here is a boxed set with the common sizes:
drillsandcutters.com/4-1-2-carbon-steel-40-piece-tap-and-die-set-with-hex-die
@@5tr41ghtGuy Thanks. That's what I was looking for. Knew there was as reason I've never seen anyone use a #5 screw.
@@johnalexander2349 Except on some old(er) lathes and machinery (gib screws).
John,
The most common threads for the USA are course thread with the exception of 1/4" and 1/2".
For example: 1/4" threads are seen almost equally in 20 TPI and 28 TPI
1/2" threads are usually 13 TPI but many are 20 TPI
Almost all other nominal sizes like 5/16", 3/8" and 7/16" are most common in course thread.
#4, #6, #8, #10 and #12 machine screws usually only come in one thread pitch like #4/40, #6/32, #8/32, #10/24 and 12/24 (although, #10 and #12 are common in course and fine threads like #10/24, #10/32, #12/24 and #12/32).
So, maybe buy the 1/4" and the 1/2" sizes in both pitches and buy course thread for the others.
So yes, buy mostly UNC and a couple UNF taps and dies (1/4" and 1/2").
Hope this helps to answer your question.
I don't think it would have been worth the trouble to machine the 4 bolts back like the original. What Keith did was absolutely fine for this kind of restoration.
After watching the video:
It's entirely possible they actually targeted specifically 0.650" since it's a decent round number. When you're essentially making arbitrary thread sizes then having nice round numbers of thousandths looks nice. It could even be that they were targeting 65 hundredths with ± ½ thou if their measurement tools were only that accurate.
Decimal inches were first proposed in England 1857. Not sure how long it took to become standard practice, for machinists and shops to update all their tools and measuring equipment, to start making new industrial designs based on those dimensions, and then for the new practice to 'cross the pond'. In the 1880s, I imagine some machinists still thought and designed mainly in fractional inches.
@@kindabluejazz that's an interesting bit of history which is also pretty relevant. While the instruments for decimal inches definitely existed in America at the time, most calipers I've seen from the period were fractional and something like a vernier scale caliper seems like a likely tool for moderate precision at the time.
I wonder: Would turning between centers have allowed you to dial in a diameter and apply it to all four studs, doing the batch of studs in parallel instead of one at a time? Back when I had shop access, I found that sneaking up on precise diameters took a lot of time measuring and subtracting. I don't have a good sense for how much time/bother it takes to swap parts when you're working between centers. Which is why I'm asking. I also don't know how much runout you introduce if you remove and replace a part between centers.
Hey Kieth.....Are you going to the Bash this year? I already made all my reservations.
Keith, watching you face off the head of the clapper stud, it appears that the bolt is wobbling, why would that happen? I thought that your chuck was trued up.
I remember you were restoring you great grandpa's Victor safe around 5 years ago... Did you ever finish making the dial?
Are there plans to remake the bars on the clapper box? They seem really worn.. Great work so far!
You need to add thread mics. to all those tools you have!
The last threading pass is called a spring pass.
You don't actually know if any of the old studs are original.
Wondering, did you use stress proof steel?
JIM
Likely the odd ones out are replacements for the originals. And on the replacement, best choice. Everyone and their dog has upgraded these machines over time, and as long as one is respectful towards the machine, then there's absolutely no reason to not make improvements on the design or even upgrades.
If this were my machine, you'd bet i'd throw stepper motors and modern ball thread screws to move stuff around. I'd keep it respectful and easy to undo, but if i decide to get the strong iron force of an old machine, i'd very much like to also make improvements to it. I call it "shop rent".
Back in the day, there was no such thing as standards. Probably the clapper bolts were made by two different people. What if you knurled the base of the clapper bolts like wheel studs on hubs?
Hey Keith, what material did you use and will you heat treat either the studs or the nuts?
Up early Mr. Rucker?
Wouldnt it be easier to use modern HT bolts (or cap screws) and turn the heads down to suit.
Problem would be finding ones of that length with that much thread.
When working on a restoration like this and you are creating replacement parts, do you typically scrap or keep the original items?
I know you don't need them, but I wish you included the extra center hole just for aesthetics and authenticity. After all the point of this is to create art, right?
I believe that the clapper box had only two studs originally. Two more were added when the users had the tools move when using the planer. The second set were made like yours with standard size hardware.
Hi Keith, what material did you use to make the bolts ?
If they turned everything between centers, how did they hold the stock to drill the center holes?
In production a mounted vice in a drill press was the most common method. Even if the center is slightly off once you start turning everything becomes concentric.
@@july8xx More likely they had one or more lathes with chucks in the factory for this type of work- at some point the ends need to be faced off. They probably started with 1" stock like Keith, so you cannot be very far off on your center if your finished size is .985
You chuck the stock in a 4 jaw, drill the best centers you can, then run it with a dog between centers. You can also do it by hand in a vise. The idea is this: get the best axis of rotation from a known piece of material. And it's a pretty simple thing to do, you just have to measure the item to figure out what it is.
Blondihacks just posted a video about this, lol
I'm not sure how "they" did it in the old days but, if you asked me to do it in my basement I'd use a square to find the "center" on both sides and drill holes in my drill press. As has already been mentioned, once you start turning the part will become concentric with the centers.
Not sure why the studs need to be press fit given the locking screws underneath will stop rotation.
I am curiuos about what the cam setup is that you use on the tool post when threading. I see your able to throw a lever of some form that will pull the tool post out of the thread depth when your at the end of the cut. I am sure you covered it in a prior vid. Can some one tell me where I can see what was done? Thankyou for anyones response
He just turns the cross slide wheel to bring the cutter out of the thread at the end rather than cutting a thread relief. It's a nicer way of doing it, but it does require practice.
You don't discuss materials for the clapper studs. I suggest at least a hardness test on the original studs. The planer tool may be changed/repositioned up to 15 times per day, thousands of times a year in a busy shop. The clapper studs and nuts are thus heavily stressed wearing parts and therefore must be made of durable materials. The studs on my Rockford planer check at 45 Rc and the nuts 50 Rc. Your requirements in your home shop will be far less stringent than everyday production but I submit low carbon steel studs to be a poor choice in this application as they will soon stretch and the threads deform under repeated tensionings.
The material you selected appears by looking at the chips and your feeds and speeds to be a free machining steel having limited tensile strength and wear properties. I strongly suggest you scrap the studs and remake them using at least 4140 pre-heat treated to Rc 30 and 4140 HT to Rc 40 for the nut - and strongbacks should you elect to replace them. It might be a trifle more difficult to machine but you will get the end properties and wear resistance you absolutely positively need for clapper studs.
Another point is the stud holes in the clapper. The shanks of the stud you showed as a sample was burred up apparently with a pipe wrench. The burr, forced back through the clapper body surely damaged the holes, therefore, I suggest skimming the holes a few thou to a common size before re-making the studs of a durable material.
The studs you made being of a leaded free-machining steel will spontaneously rust in Georgia's humid air. I suggest you frame them and display it in a prominant place where you can watch them rust over the next few months.
Adding - referring to E Designs' objection to reducing the clapper stud thread diameter:
The hardened original 3/4 - 10 clapper studs were at least the equivalent of Grade 8 and the low carbon steel 5/8 - 11 studs you propose to use are the equivalent of Grade 1. According to the charts the working loads for each respectively are 30,080 and 9300 lb. IOW the low carbon 5/8 -11 stud has roughly 31% the tensile strength of the hardened 3/4 - 10 original stud. A planer's cutting tool necessarily has to be located some distance from the tool shank clamping. Cutting forces have a larger leverage to the first clamp and the clamps are located closer together because of the limited space on the clapper. Thus, the tool restraint must be adequate to resist the tool shank slipping under the strongback. Therefore the tool clamping must be robust and made of materials sufficient to resist the clamping forces.
Which brings us around to keeping the original studs' nominal size and making them of hardened material.
I agree completely with everything you stated and would add that the two larger studs should be remade at the original diameter , i.e. 0.750.
Keith didn't specify the locations of the two larger studs, but they were likely located at the top of the clapper where they get exposed to higher tensile stresses. Though the slight reduction of diameter from 0.750 to 0.625 may not appear to be significant, its a staggering 50% reduction in cross area which may cause the new studs to stretch excessively and result in chattering.
It's almost never a good idea to substitute parts with weaker replacements. Between the 12L14 and smaller diameter, the new studs will stretch far more then the originals, and likely impair surface finish.
Its not going to get changed 15 times a day 1000s of times a year is it
It'll be closer to getting changed 15 times a year if that
It's an out dated antique
It'll find a use to crack.it up for fun a a few times a year but even if Keith were to sell.it its never going to into any sort of productive shop environment is it
Its not going to wear out anytime soon
@@fowletm1992 It's not an issue of the new studs failing or wearing out. The problem with the smaller studs is that they will stretch more than the originals which may cause the tool bit to vibrate. This results in chattering.
Kieth spent a lot of effort and money to make this planer better than when it left the factory. At this point, it would be foolish to make a stupid modification that diminishes the machine's performance.
@@fowletm1992 re-read my first paragraph, especially the last sentence where I begin: "Your requirements in your home shop will be far less stringent..." Low carbon steel bolts don't hold up well under repeated tensioning cycles which is why I suggested HT 4140 a low cost, readily available alloy steel and not a more costly superior material. Cheating on materials has a grave effect on the reliability of your work. Even something as mundane as clapper studs, an application where the man on the machine torques them "plenty tight" so the tool shank doesn't slip with a wrench whose length has been extended for convenience in reaching over the table.
There's a good reason why a designer more than a cenrury ago specified the materials in the clapper studs, nuts, and strongbacks. The rule then was as "just enough, no more" as it is today. Case hardened studs and nuts were the minimum requirements to meet the service life expectancy for the end user. My suggestion down-graded the material to OTC alloy steel and I did not reccommend case hardened triple high nuts. I thought my suggestion modest compared with the original supplied materials.
Further, this rebuilt planer will not be a mere static display. Keith put in many long hours reconditioning its working surfaces. I'm quite sure he anticipates using it many times a year.
How many pins can a lathe chuck chuck? 😉 Oh, and your “don’t forget...” is still missing the apostrophe. 😀
Since this is before Ford and mass production, I imagine there were different machines that didn't match run by men with different backgrounds .
If each man was assigned to a different section to make then that's the reason thread sizes don't match
Anyone know what's the rate a machinists charges to do this kind of work.
Keith, be really careful on the amount of interference you use on a cast-iron member, especially when the analysis is unknown and perhaps not as strong as modern cast irons. An interference of more than .001 at that size (.625) risks cracking the cast-iron member. Probably worth some research and maybe asking around to get that right. It would be a real crying moment if you heard that loud "CLICK" as the cast iron cooled from a shrink fitting. The brittleness of cast iron doesn't tolerate nearly the interference pressure that steel does.
You might find the history of screw threads interesting. www.sizes.com/tools/thread_history.htm Cheers Matthew