Wanted copies of old model engineer

[JCSteam]

Hi I'm looking for copies of the following articles in model engineer;

Year:1958 volume: 119 issue: 2999 page:606
Title: A Large Bore Lathe Spindle Pays Off

Year:1948 volume:99 issue:2466 page:219
Title: Slide-Rest Improvements

If you can help me locate a copy of these two articles I would be very greatful.

Regards

Jon

 

[goldstar31]

My thoughts are that you should get the ME and Engineering in Miniature details from the indices which ARE on the net-- and once you you have the Cleeve lists, ask again

Martin Cleeve started writing in 1953. His name was Kenneth Cleeve Hart.

I had to scrap my collection owing to copyright issues!

N

 

[b4dyc]

I have both those issues on my hard drive in PDF but not uploaded to a hosting site. So if no one else has them, they are available.

 

[bmac2]

I’ve got from 1926 to 1964 except 1948. Being its 59 years old I don’t imaging there is any patent infringement :hDe:

View attachment ME Page 6.pdf

View attachment ME Page 7.pdf

View attachment ME Page 8.pdf

 

[bazmak]

When i built Heilan Lassie i had to buy 6 months back issues from 1947
the year of my birth.First thing i did was photo copy all the relevant pages
TWICE and buit up to ring binder manuals.Well worth the effort

 

[JCSteam]

Ok I have the lists Norm mentions, I've found 60 odd articles in all from Cleeve, and that is only looking at volumes 080-121. He did write a lot didn't he.

I've started sifting through some of the articles in the hope I can find what I'm needing, if I can get sat at a computer I'll reformat the excel sheet and put the whole list up on here as to the copies and articles I'll be researching. It'll take me longer to type than to read two of the articles with how much info I have. On a desktop computer I can reformat it, and put it in a new sheet in less than 5minutes, plus turn the kettle on for a brew.

 

[MariusTitulescu]

I have both those issues on my hard drive in PDF but not uploaded to a hosting site. So if no one else has them, they are available.

Same here. It can be quite a predicament when this happens.

 

[goldstar31]

I have said that 'Cleeve' wasn't straight forward in the sense that his articles followed each other in the correct order.

Probably one should separate what the pattern of things in say 1953 and now. Again, many of the construction articles is dependent on a much later article.

Cleeve wrote on how to make a better and BIGGER spindle but few then and certainly fewer now have a proprietary Myford fixed steady . Of course, one has to remove the centre to drill the spindle and then do the variation of a theme from Mr Morse where Morse started on a 10" sine and a infeed of a quarter of an inch--- AND GOT IT WRONG! Cleeve pegged his top slide( cries of 'Ouch!'
It was all held in a three jaw chuck that had adjustable holes to get to that elusive tenth of a thous. Screwcutting was done with a swing tool holder and somewhere he mentions TWO.

Of course measurement was done- with homemade micrometers.

At least, in marks out of ten, I got some of the sums right!

and so on

Norm

 

[JCSteam]

Norm I've got the article on the big bore conversion. Handy that all Myfords share the same sized spindle diameter.

I was reading it last night, or some of it at least before little ones bed time came. It would be a handy mod, and plus I do have a fixed steady and a traveling steady that came with the lathe so it's then only figuring out the taper and actually having the balls and experience to go at it, and try and make a new spindle.

I did see a YouTube video, where a guy made a new spindle for a myford ml7 I think it was. Made up the drawings himself and machined the thing to size, then low and behold a new spindle that worked well ran true and had no wear at all.

 

[PopAlexandra]

I’ve got from 1926 to 1964 except 1948. Being its 59 years old I don’t imaging there is any patent infringement :hDe:

Thanks a lot! I was looking for them for a couple of days now.

 

[goldstar31]

Norm I've got the article on the big bore conversion.
I was reading it last night, or some of it at least before little ones bed time came. It would be a handy mod, and plus I do have a fixed steady and a traveling steady that came with the lathe so it's then only figuring out the taper and actually having the balls and experience to go at it, and try and make a new spindle.

I'm pleased about the existence of the two steadies. Of course, have a go as there are a lot of very worthwhile additions which need a spindle of some sort.

As far as tapers are concerned, I would settle for the No2MT rather than the very limited No1 which presently fit the present spindle and tailstock 'poppet' on your lathe. I suspect that a lot of so called Morse Tapers are not Morse tapers but there is no reason why you shouldn't settle for your own and do a peg on the tailstock. Others may disagree!
Cleeve made his own and there is an article somewhere about him putting a piece of round carbide in one of his. My thoughts for what they are worth are that you cannot have too many centres. I suspect that I have males, females, halfs, rotating and square ones as well as jumpers from 1MT to 2MT and vice versa as well as Number 3's to go on the mill drill and the Sieg!

Of course, I've also got them to fit the Unimat and the watchmaker's turns.

Having a couple of good clock gauges does help to set tapers. I've got a set of Imperials and , like Cleeve, one in tenths.

Most people have little or no plans for 'interchangeability' and it seems OK to have stuff which can swop from machines mentioned but also to tool and cutter grinders.

Not everone agrees!:hDe:

Worth a thought or two, methinks

N

 

[JCSteam]

I know that a MT2 taper has a better range of tools available now a days, and for less than the MT1 stuff.

It's been said that because of the nose thread 7/8" x9TPI, and MT1 taper on the spindle that my lathe is actually a ML1 or 2, but im sure the beds are smaller than on mine. Would make a good task to make a new one, and I'm interested about this pegging of the tailstock. (Sounds painful).

Need to find the reference amongst the hundreds of articles written by Mr Cleeve.

 

[goldstar31]

If I said 'tailstock', I'm having a senior moment as Cleeve pegged the topslide.

It means that whatever, there is a fixed taper.

Mumble, mumble about little men with white coats!


Grovel, Grovel

N

 

[JCSteam]

If I said 'tailstock', I'm having a senior moment as Cleeve pegged the topslide.

It means that whatever, there is a fixed taper.

Mumble, mumble about little men with white coats!


Grovel, Grovel

N

Norm not your error, mine! Looks like I had a senior moment at just over 30! (There's no hope for me).

I still don't get what is meant by pegging the top slide though, I assume it involves a peg and a top slide, am I close??

Is it reference to fixing the topslide at a correct angle and making sure that it cannot move from that location. Then the top slide can be used as a fixed reference for future tapers. I saw a video about setting the topslide to the correct angle, which was worked out using trigonometry, and extending the line past where the point was then setting up the angle from there knowing the distance that the top slide should travel, gets the hypotenuse length knowing you want that certain angle gives you the mirrored angle going the other way plus the different angle (which is used to set up) sounds more complicated than I can explain it. But effectively with a little maths and knowing the travel of your slide, plus the angle and opposing angle the top slide angle becomes far easier to set up from a fixed point, ie a long concentric bar, or a spindle. (Hope someone followed that??)

 

[goldstar31]

Followed you? I'm way in front. I did Euclid, I did Pythagoras, I did- well, I have an IQ which is well outside the Three Standard Deviations from the Mean and-- all that jazz! I was simply born with the ability- and that is that!

The common mistake is that trigonometry is usually based on 12 inches and - oh, yes, and I'm a Freemason and teach as a mentor the newer candidates. Back to old Euclid and his right angle triangle but- as I said- change the hypotenuse to 10 inches instead. In engineering, it is a sine bar of either 10 or easier to handle a 5 inch one. You make a =n imaginary triangle by propping the 10" sine bar by one side of a quarter of an inch and the angle is what Morse wanted to use. Today, the tapers are ever so slightly different and the only possible explanation is that no one could work to it in practical terms.

I could wander off and do a dissertation about statistics and tolerances but it would serve no purpose in my machines or yours. My Jo blocks and my sine bar are workshop grade and playing about with water baths and controlled temperatures are not for us.
So we have to do our best and get a decent shiny ground centre and adjust our top slide to track with a clock gauge with an elephants foot instead of a cutting tool in the tool holder. You simply put a peg in to lock the top slide to the boring table.
All future tapers will then follow the setting.

Cleeve didn't quite describe it that way but that, as I have said before, is what is a practical solution consistent with the sort of machinery and conditions that we have.

Clear as mud?

Norm

 

[bazmak]

In simple terms what Norm means is to set the compound to the correct angle
for morse taper (they are all the same angle) once you have it right and
turn and checked the angle you can drill and DOWEL (peg) the slide.I do it regularly the swivel vice on the mill springs to mind.I dont have a sine bar
so use a sample MT item and clock it with a dial indicator. Thats what i like about CURLY he kept the words and music simple for us begginers

 

[bmac2]

Thanks a lot! I was looking for them for a couple of days now.

Pop I have them filed old school. Takes up a lot more space but I can find them fast. Rof}



I keep telling myself I want to scan them and put them on one of my network drives but I think that will have to wait until after I get “Cake and Coffee” at work.