I found a "How to make one"; Model Engineering 8 March 1956 #2859.
I would post but the Copyright owners police sites. I know they made Jim Earl take down a lot of stuff.
Individual emails can be honored.
-
Welcome back Guest! Did you know you can mentor other members here at H-M? If not, please check out our Relaunch of Hobby Machinist Mentoring Program!
A different way of work holding
- Thread starter 8ntsane
- Start date
I found a "How to make one"; Model Engineering 8 March 1956 #2859.
I would post but the Copyright owners police sites. I know they made Jim Earl take down a lot of stuff.
Individual emails can be honored.
I have a B&S version of that tool. I have had it for years and never knew what it was for. Obviously I must have not needed it. I'm not a machinist but just a home grown one. Hopefully the photos I've attached will come through.
Les
He never quite explained what he was doing, I assume he was cutting the hole at a different angle, not sure why. If not then why did that non center cutting endmill make it as far as it did?
Frank[/QUOTE]
Frank
What he is doing in that Vid is a mod to bolt up a old style Q-jet manifold to the later model cyl heads. GM changed the bolt angles on the centre two on each side. Common mod really for the car guys.
On those cast iron intakes they are not near as fragile as one might think. Ive tooken many off over the yrs I ran my shop, and heaved them over into the scrap pile, and the corners never broke off.
Usually that mod was to mod auluminum intakes to fit the later fuel injection heads. Most wouldn,t spend the time on those old Q-jet manifolds. They where junk to begin with.
Frank[/QUOTE]
Frank
What he is doing in that Vid is a mod to bolt up a old style Q-jet manifold to the later model cyl heads. GM changed the bolt angles on the centre two on each side. Common mod really for the car guys.
On those cast iron intakes they are not near as fragile as one might think. Ive tooken many off over the yrs I ran my shop, and heaved them over into the scrap pile, and the corners never broke off.
Usually that mod was to mod auluminum intakes to fit the later fuel injection heads. Most wouldn,t spend the time on those old Q-jet manifolds. They where junk to begin with.
Les
Thanks for posting your pics
Im sure there will be a few of us that will want to make one of these tools. I would think it would be usefull to reach inside a bore to check for taper.
May not be as accurate as a snap gauge, and mic.
Still would be a tool of many uses.
I've added the right-angle DI arm to my project list. It's probably like making a surface gauge - You don't need to, but it would make an interesting project in itself.
If you place the pivot point exactly half-way between the equators of the two balls, it would read close to 1:1. There would be some cosine error, but this thing isn't really for measuring. It's more for dialing in a surface in the chuck. Numbers aren't the real issue. Movement is.
The way I see it, the arm has been removed and put back the other way around. The flat on one side of the larger ball should face the point of the DI.
If you place the pivot point exactly half-way between the equators of the two balls, it would read close to 1:1. There would be some cosine error, but this thing isn't really for measuring. It's more for dialing in a surface in the chuck. Numbers aren't the real issue. Movement is.
The way I see it, the arm has been removed and put back the other way around. The flat on one side of the larger ball should face the point of the DI.
<SNIP>If you place the pivot point exactly half-way between the equators of the two balls, it would read close to 1:1. There would be some cosine error, but this thing isn't really for measuring. It's more for dialing in a surface in the chuck. Numbers aren't the real issue. Movement is.
The way I see it, the arm has been removed and put back the other way around. The flat on one side of the larger ball should face the point of the DI.[/QUOTE]
Hawkeye, I have to agree with you about the flat side. I had wondered about that also but not even knowing what the thing was good for I was not sure.
Les
The way I see it, the arm has been removed and put back the other way around. The flat on one side of the larger ball should face the point of the DI.[/QUOTE]
Hawkeye, I have to agree with you about the flat side. I had wondered about that also but not even knowing what the thing was good for I was not sure.
Les
Les
Im just wondering, how is the shaft retained in the housing? I can only see the one side, and can only assume the shaft has a dimple on both sides with a pointy set screws to retain the shaft on both sides, and still let it pivot.
Any chance of having a peek at that, and let us know your findings, or better yet a few pics?
Im just wondering, how is the shaft retained in the housing? I can only see the one side, and can only assume the shaft has a dimple on both sides with a pointy set screws to retain the shaft on both sides, and still let it pivot.
Any chance of having a peek at that, and let us know your findings, or better yet a few pics?
You are correct, the shaft swings on two small pivots whose adjustment is is retained by mini nuts. Also I pictured the mounting end for the dial indicator. In a previous post it was suggested that the shaft was rotated so the small flat is away from the dial indicator. I also believe that the flat should rest on the indicator shaft.
Les
