steamech marine twin

[boatmadman]

Phil,

Thats great stuff, very helpful.

I have one question, on the bearing block drawing, what does the 21mm dimension refer to?

Ian

 

[Blogwitch]

Thanks for that Phil.

I actually have a set of the laser cut parts, I will have to check what the dimension is for the PCD of the hold down bolts that you say are incorrect.

I will see if I can find them tomorrow and give you a bit of feedback as to what they actually are on what I have been sold.


John

NB

I have just checked the original drawings and they are correct at a PCD (pitch circle diameter) of 18mm, you are showing the PCR (pitch circle radius) which is 9mm.

You had me worried there, but I will still check them out.

 

[ironman]

John, when did you get their laser cut parts? Are they good quality? I am thinking about the investrment. Thanks, Ray

 

[Blogwitch]

Ray,

It is a bit of a long story, but I will keep it short.

A few years ago, maybe 4 or 5, I sent away to Steamech, an email, asking when the laser cut bits would be back stock. As usual, no reply.

About a year later, out of the blue, I had an email off him stating that he had very limited quantity in stock, so I bought a set, complete with the plans.

Soon after, he went out of stock again, and haven't seen them on sale since.

The quality is absolutely great. Except for dressing off the sprue hangers, they are ready to fit (I would polish them first).

When I first got them, I measured up the con rods, machining joining link and caps, and when I worked it all out, when the links are removed, the big end hole in the the cap and rod would be an almost perfect fit dimension.

Sorry it isn't a better picture. The dull ones are from much thicker plate.

All you can really do is send the email, and hopefully wait until he deems it time to contact you, if ever.


John

 

[Majorstrain]

I have one question, on the bearing block drawing, what does the 21mm dimension refer to?

Thanks Ian,
the 21mm refers to a post-midnight brain fart by me. *club*

There is definitly something a bit "fishy" with the dimensioning scheme in Majorstrain's drawing of the bearing block. The radii at the ends of the bearing block are not concentric with the bolt holes. The bolt centers are at 22 mm. The 21 mm dimension is actually to the point of tangency where the 3mm radius at the ends of the part merge with the sides of the part. If you look at the original drawing that Bogs posted, the overall length is 27 mm and the overall width is 6 mm. Thus 27-6=21mm. That dimension is a "resultant" dimension, and is somewhat meaningless

Your spot-on Brian,
The sequence of events goes like this.
1- 3D the part, forgot the end radii
2- Get the computer to do the hard work drawing the part and then I dimension it putting hole centre lines in.
3- Decide it has too much clutter and remove the centre lines as well as some lower duplicated dimensions. (should have been all)
4- Just b4 posting, check the original drawing and note the radii.
5- Nip back and fillet the part (There is the fishy bit oh
6- And lastly and unnoticed the total length dimension of 27 slides back to the radii centre mark and becomes 21mm.
Wallah, 27mm becomes 21mm. A valid dimension but not the one it was meant to be.

Good thing I'm not flying, That reads like an accident report (swiss cheese factor) scratch.gif

Edited to show the correct sequence of events

You had me worried there, but I will still check them out.

Bogs,
I've got the wife to tattoo the meaning of PCD on my forehead. Sorry for the heart stopper, now I just need to find some glasses.

Always happy to help (and spread "Confusion and Delay")
Phil

 

[Brian Rupnow]

Majorstrain--I posted, then went out and cut the lawn. As I was buzzing around on my riding mower I got thinking, "Hmmm---That answer I posted wasn't done correctly."---I come off as kind of a Dick!!!"--I came back in and removed my post. Sorry---Brian (The drawing is still a bit (Ahem)---fishy. If one looks at the original drawing, the part is dimensioned as being 27m long. What you have done is shown a part that is now 28 mm long. According to the original drawing that Bogs posted, the radii at the ends of the part are not concentric with the bolt holes. They can not be, if the part is built as per the original drawing. 27-(3+3)=21. The hole centers are at 22mm. You need to remove the top 22mm dimension and give an overall length of the part ---IF you want what you have drawn to be the same as the original drawing.

 

[Majorstrain]

No worries Brian,
Your a master at CAD and I greatly appreciate your expertise.
I'm slowly discovering cause and effect of last minute changes. The only counter measure is check the Bl--dy drawing b4 letting out into the real world. ;D

"Hmmm---That answer I posted wasn't done correctly."---I come off as kind of a Dick!!!"

Nope, never took it that way. It was very constructive.

the shortening of the piston rod is bugging me, so I've removed it until I can confirm the issue.

Cheers all,
Phil

 

[Majorstrain]

Time for some fresh eyes to scrutinize the dimensions.

The assembly drawing contains the shortened piston rod. I don't see any error that I have made that would require the rod to be shorter but that doesn't mean there isn't one.

See what you can find.

Here is the revised piston rod drawing.

The rod is 2.55mm shorter to stop it hitting the head and to set up equidistant travel between the ports.

Cheers
Phil

 

[Twmaster]

What a shame that joker is selling such defective plans. Also a big shame as it's a neat looking engine I'd possibly like to make someday.

Some people's children....

 

[Blogwitch]

Phil,

If you remember the original query about the thickness of the bearing block.

That thickness would have a direct relationship to the length required for the piston rod. The thicker the base, the shorter the rod would need to be, or the longer the columns would need to be, plus most probably loads of other things as well. So everything is interlinked one way or another.

That is why I wanted to get the dimension from the horse's mouth. That would prove whether they come under the 'fit for use' ruling that is in operation in most countries.

If his plans are seriously wrong, thus unfit for purpose, then people can demand their money back.

It is good you are trying to solve the problems to give us a working set of drawings, and please do carry on.


John

 

[scoop]

Hello all
The recent activity on this thread has got me interested in these plans again after a long time in the drawer,little did I think that just asking for a simple dimension would generate so much enthusiasm for a cure.Having no ability or access to cad systems or the like means that to find out that much of the plan is suspect is dissapointing.
However if the plan as drawn does not describe a functioning engine and is therefore "unfit for purpose",then surely this leads to a situation whereby anybody who amends the drawings creates a different engine alltogether and could therefore be fully justified in releasing a full set of corrected drawings and claiming them as his own.If someone on this site managed to create a working set of plans by use of his or her ability and made them available through this site then I would asume the original seller could not really complain too much.

Any views on my logic?

regards Steve C

 

[Maryak]

However if the plan as drawn does not describe a functioning engine and is therefore "unfit for purpose",then surely this leads to a situation whereby anybody who amends the drawings creates a different engine altogether and could therefore be fully justified in releasing a full set of corrected drawings and claiming them as his own.If someone on this site managed to create a working set of plans by use of his or her ability and made them available through this site then I would assume the original seller could not really complain too much.

Any views on my logic?

regards Steve C

Steve,

It's a fine line between pleasure and pain. ;D

Best Regards
Bob

 

[Majorstrain]

If you remember the original query about the thickness of the bearing block.

That thickness would have a direct relationship to the length required for the piston rod. The thicker the base, the shorter the rod would need to be, or the longer the columns would need to be, plus most probably loads of other things as well. So everything is interlinked one way or another.

That is why I wanted to get the dimension from the horse's mouth.

Too true John, the draftsman's word is defiantly the last word on the matter. Let us know what you hear.

It certainly is a critical dimension and I have made two assumptions in my working up of the virtual engine.
Assumptions being the optimum word! and that brings to mind an old saying.
"Assumption is the mother of all stuff ups" ;D of course it was pronounced with more colour when I heard it back in my apprenticeship.

The first assumption was a direct measurement off the drawing that was printed on A4 paper. I compared the other dimensions on the block and came up with a 2:1 scale.
The second assumption was that all the other linear dimensions were metric and it was a good chance that the missing dimension was too. The measured dimension was 6mm give or take a smidgen for line thickness. 6.35mm or 1/4" would have been a drawing a longer bow.

I'm not too worried about "unfit for purpose", It only cost me the price of a meal at Macca's (mental note: must stop eating there, I could buy some more plans for stuff I probably won't get around to building) and I've seen a lot worse plans out there.

What I would like to see on this engine is the revering levers linked or one lever to do the job.
Is it a full size practice to have them separate and if so what advantage does it give, or was it just easier to model this way.
*beer*
Phil

 

[doubletop]

I've spoken to the guys wife again. Had a pretty long conversation but he was busy. Phone numbers were exchanged and an expectation of a return call but as that hasn't happened so I'll paraphrase the conversation with his wife.

I explained there was a bit of interest by this forum in this engine that probably has resulted in the purchase of plans recently. I suggested he take a look at this thread and respond himself but that hasn't happened either.

These plans were drawn up by him about 10 years ago and a local (Christchurch NZ) company did the laser cut parts. So its an entirely NZ enterprise. Since then his interests have shifted from steam to RC cars so now all the parts have been sold and there is no expectation of any more parts being produced. John Bogs said that he had seen this engine available from Asia. Apparently it was a rip off of these plans but a threat of action closed that source down.

I raised the issue of disappointment to the non response to emails. But apparently he had had so many "dumb" questions he has given up responding to queries as he doesn't want to get involved in lengthy debates. It was acknowledged that yes there could be missing dimension but couldn't they be worked out? Trouble was the QA process 10 years ago and being too close to it to notice missing dimensions.

That's about it, its plans only from now on. A pity really as I would have been interested in doing this engine with the laser cut parts.With the number of people now with plans, and some with parts, a mass build off looked like a possibility.

Pete

 

[Blogwitch]

Pete, many thanks for chasing it up.

At least we know the answer now, he doesn't give a rat's a**e about his customers.

So all I can say to anyone who is reading this post, don't buy anything off that site.

I will now send details to Paypal to see if they will cancel his money trading methods, or force him to do something with his defective plans, and to reply to queries about them.

That method certainly worked with Chronos when I reported them to Paypal over bad selling methods a few months ago.


John

 

[tmuir]

That method certainly worked with Chronos when I reported them to Paypal over bad selling methods a few months ago.

John

That reminds me I need to have a go at Chronos as despite taking my money over 2 months ago for everything I ordered they didn't deliver one part and when I questioned them about it I got a curt response from them that they knew they hadn't sent me that part and I would get it when it came in.
Its time for me to demand my money back from them as it still hasn't arrived.

Also the response on Steamech no longer interested in steam explains why last year he sold off all his casting for his TEs last year.
They are fantastic brass cast wheels and a nice laser cut other parts. When I do come to built it I hope there isn't any major problems with it too.

 

[Blogwitch]

Tony,

I reported Chronos for purely what you are experiencing. Still having items shown as in stock for sale when they were out of stock. If you notice now, they are very quick to get the OUT OF STOCK sticker put up.
I know that it is difficult for them to keep everything up to date on a website such as theirs, but it is now a lot better than it used to be.

Because I had reported them, they took it upon themselves not to deal with me any more, but a quick word in someone's ear soon had that sorted.

Don't be afraid to DEMAND action, you are in the right, and as such, you should be treated fairly.

In this country, as far as I know, they are not allowed to take a payment for an item unless it is in stock and on it's way to you. So ask them for the interest back on your payment as well, you won't get it, but you will get very fast action, especially if you mention that you will be contacting the people who you made the payment thru, such as Paypal or a credit card.

There is too much of this going on nowadays, and it is up to us little people to show these companies that they are there to serve us, not the other way around.

If you don't like their methods of operation, then complain, with threats to go higher if needs be. They are in the wrong, so they have no comebacks against yourself.

Unless you stated that you would hang on until the item was in stock, they should have refunded your money straight away. It is better in your pocket than theirs.

John

 

[tmuir]

I agree Bos.
Time for me to bring that recpt back inside from my workshop and send them an email.
Its only a bit over 10 pounds but it was for a 1inch die holder for my lathe which I won't know.
If I knew I would have to wait months I wouldn't of ordered it and would of just made one. I only purchased it as they had some other items that I did need and when purchasing from overseas I like to pad my orders a bit to help spread the cost of postage.

I might only place small orders from them but it has already cost them money as I saw something on ebay just last night that looked useful and for a good price, but when I saw it was Chronos selling it I decided not to buy it as I'm not giving them any money whilst they are holding my money for an item not delivered.

 

[boatmadman]

Having just re found my steamech plans and components in the bottom of a drawer, I thought I would resurrect this thread and ask:

Did anyone resolve the missing dimension issue?

Ian

 

[Blogwitch]

Only what you have read about.

I contacted Paypal over the issue many moons ago, but he must have squirmed his way out as he is still selling the plans, and never answers emails.


John