First project?

[John11668]

A beginners Dilemma

Do I go for a kit from with castings and risk a disaster if I scrap one?
Great potential for a pleasing (encouraging) result.

Or do I go for a set of plans so I only risk my own raw material.

What is a good first project?

 

[cobra428]

Hi John11668,
A simple oscillating air engine out of bar stock. You make a boo boo and you just start again.

Tony

 

[Blogwitch]

As Tony has said, go for one of the easiest things to build you can find, say a dead simple wobbler.

That way you will get an almost a guaranteed runner, and a smile on your face fairly quickly. Then take your experiences from that onto your next project.

Get say three or four fairly simple ones under your belt, then go for a more challenging exercise.

There is nothing more offputting than having a failure at the start of a new challenge.


Bogs

 

[stevehuckss396]

Maybe Metal Butcher can suggest one of Elmers more simple designs. He has built about half of them, some simple and some very complex.

 

[Tin Falcon]

John the first engine I started was a casting kit. But it was set aside for a couple years due to a broken tap in the cylinder. Later removed and finished.
Here are the usual suspects I recommend for starters.
1) the McCabe runner http://npmccabe.tripod.com/mccaberunner.htm

2) The little Machine Shop.com oscillator http://www.littlemachineshop.com/Projects/OscillatingEngine.php

3) David a simple oscillator http://www.john-tom.com/MyPlans/SteamPlans3/HobbitEngineringDavid/DavidHobbitEngWobbler.PDF

4) last but not least this one I have not built one but is touted as a beginner engine. I would say a good second or better yet third build. http://www.john-tom.com/MyPlans/SteamPlans3/RiverQueenEngine/RiverQueenPlansInstruction.pdf

here are a couple I have built

Tin

 

[Deanofid]

Hi John;

Casting kits offer problems for new builders that may not seem apparent, since all the pieces look like they are already in their basic shape. What that really means is, they have no reference surfaces, making it difficult for a new builder to find any place on the things to make a start.

An engine from bar stock is your best bet. Like others have mentioned, an oscillator (wobbler) offers a good chance for success for your first go. If that doesn't appeal to you, look for plans for a bar stock single acting steam/air engine that uses a spool valve.

Tell us what you have to work with, machine wise, and someone may be able to link to prints that suit your equipment.

Good luck,

Dean

 

[John11668]

Hi dean
I have a boxford AUD lathe
and Deckel FP1 miller ( well equipped ) See my post in Welcome for pics

Maybe not best suited to very small scale stuff

 

[Tin Falcon]

imho something with a piston diameter of 3/8 to 3/4 is a good size to work with. you can also scale a model up or down if needed. You may not want to do this first time out . more to think about and another step needed to get to the end. also doubling the size of the engine requires 8 times the material.

I have a 7x10 lathe a mini mill , a 7" shaper and a 9" south bend. you see photos of some of my engines. A buddy of mine has a sherline and has several engines half the size of mine that is what he has become comfortable with. do not be afraid to change things on the print and substitute materials. yes there are some limitations.
I know several guys that have taken 1 set of prints and did several builds of that engine in different sizes with different mods and materials. I have doen this myself. With several engines.. And do not be afraid to as specific questions.
If you find a print you like on the web someone here has likely built it and can help you through.

Relax have fun . select a print. make a part. then another to fit against the first. then the next. etc. if you make a part that can not be used, set it aside and make another. one of my engines I tapped the wrong side of the block. Instead of tossing the par i made a design change and ended up with a mirror image of the original print. And tolerances are needed on prints for manufacturing. in the hobby shop things just need to fit. The frame of one of my oscilators is a1/2 inch longer than what the print called for. I decided the piece of scrap I found was good as is and decided not to cut it.
Jump in have fun make some chips learn a thing or two eventually you will have an engine.
Tin

 

[ChooChooMike]

2) The little Machine Shop.com oscillator http://www.littlemachineshop.com/Projects/OscillatingEngine.php

A hearty welcome John11668 and a strong recommendation for Little Machine Shop's oscillator/wobbler kit.

I actually just finished my 5th engine - another wobbler :

http://www.homemodelenginemachinist.com/index.php?topic=8860.0

I've been meaning to post a build thread.

I'm just getting started on LMS's engine. I bought the DVD/plans/materials kit a couple of years ago:

http://littlemachineshop.com/products/product_view.php?ProductID=3485

on sale now for $45. Figured I'd better knock out another simple engine to get more experience with my Sherline mill & lathe before going back to something more complicated. I've got a stack of engine kits waiting to be built

Mike

 

[Troutsqueezer]

Tin, nice looking display you have there. I like the use of different bases.


John, I started with Elmer's #25. I never machined a darn thing in my life and it turned out well. Didn't even have to throw any parts away. My wife liked it so well she even put it on her knick knack shelf next to the kitchen sink.

-Trout

 

[thayer]

John,

My vote would be for Elmer's #25 Wobbler as well. It was my first, followed by his #2 Twin Vertical Wobbler. You can see them both in action at this link.
http://www.homemodelenginemachinist.com/index.php?topic=8906

Thayer

 

[mcr]

From a personal perspective I think it very much depends on your state of mind:
Do I build a simple achievable project that I may not be particularly interested in OR do I go for a more complex project which is well outside my comfort zone because I really want one?
I went for the second approach but be prepared for:
Lots of disappointments, lots of scrap, lots of bad moods, lots of comments such as "why not try something a little less difficult ".
I had all of these but I had one major advantage, One to one help from an experienced metal worker who had infinite patience.
I also tried to view each task I completed as a model in its own right, I was never in a rush to finish (the model engine I made did in fact take about 14 months to complete) and took pride in each part that was made.
Which ever route you take the best move you have made is joining this group I have discovered more from reading these posts every night after work than I ever could from a pile of books.
Have fun

 

[firebird]

Hi John

Take a look at my recently completed wobbler. I got a bit carried away with it in the end but you will find plenty of info and photos to build a basic engine that will run. Its all here on this forum. http://www.homemodelenginemachinist.com/index.php?topic=4779.0 If you get stuck just shout up and we will jump in to help.

Cheers

Rich

 

[bearcar1]

John, I too would recommend that a first time builder should select a simple engine made from bar stock, the reason being that if one makes the inevitable mistake, the piece can simply be started over from materials that are commonly available. May I suggest building Elmer's #25 as already suggested or The Pug from drawings that are in the download section here on HMEM. I think you will find them both enjoyable to build as they do not require special tools or fancy machine setups to successfully achieve a working engine. There certainly are any number of other choices but for a novice, either one of these would be a great starting point.

BC1
Jim

 

[student123]

John,

Speaking as a beginner part way through 1st project, didnt even know what the bits (eg flywheel) were for.
It wasn’t till late in the day that I got to 'aha -so that’s how it all fits together'.
With 20/20 hindsight, I would early on have done a quick & dirty form prototype to visualise how it all fits together (eg in clay). If you're familiar with engines then you may not need to do that.

I feel the advice already given to pick a simple one , eg a wobbler is good. One where there are plenty of pics on the web, if you get stuck you can take a look at what someone else did.


Mike

 

[stevehuckss396]

I say go for the V8!

Just kidding!!

If you look thru the file section, there is a file called DoubleHOSC. It is a double sized HOSC horizontal wobbler that was designed by the very generous Gail Graham. It has a 2" diameter flywheel and a base of about 3 " square. 1/2" bore and stroke. If i remember correctly there are only 8 pieces.

If you cant find the file PM me with your address and i'll email it to you if interested.

 

[Tin Falcon]

Speaking as a beginner part way through 1st project, didnt even know what the bits (eg flywheel) were for.
It wasn’t till late in the day that I got to 'aha -so that’s how it all fits together'.

Many prints have a assembly view or a 3d assembled drawing. this can help.

With 20/20 hindsight, I would early on have done a quick & dirty form prototype to visualize how it all fits together (eg in clay). If you're familiar with engines then you may not need to do that.

An option here that is often used is redraw the parts in a parametric drawing program. Then assemble the parts for a 3-D computer model. The beauty of a 3-D computer model is you can view it from any angle and turn it just like a real part . you just cant actually touch and feel. .
The most affordable is Alibre CAD @ $100, IIRC you can still download and use it for free for 30 days then it becomes crippleware if you do not license it.
The late great Elmer Versburge recommended redrawing parts on a 3 x 5 file card this helps familiarize you with the part and dimensions and allows you to have a copy of the print near the machine and protects the original print or book form shop damage.
Tin

 

[John11668]

Thanks for the opinions guys !

I am familiar with engines but well out of practice in precision work .
Will bear all your suggestions in mind .