AsorA Bahn

grizzmo said:
Ok some more progress made on the masts. Mk2 version.
View attachment 352968
The bits before assembly, steel parts mig welded , brass /copper to be soft soldered together.
Made a mistake on this one, the 5mm brass rod should of been threaded into the post, except I drilled a 5mm hole in the post :rolleyes:.
Oh well this one can be glued in.

View attachment 352969
Assembled before painting. 2 different base types for different spots.
Threaded one is to go through the baseboard supports and be held on with a nut.
The other is to go into the 100mm Besser blocks I use as the track base. I turned it down to 8mm but newer ones will be 10mm, stronger and quicker to make.
A lot will need the separate round rod for the base as I will not know deep they will need to be smacked into the ground until I try.
With a separate base rod I can smack in a long 8mm rod then cut it to the right length and drop the finished mast on top.

View attachment 352970
Mk1 on the left, Mk2 centre and right, all painted.
I like the Mk2 version much better, the original will not go to waste and can be used in a siding somewhere after I cut the top off.
I made the insulators narrower and longer, with a smaller spacing on the fins.
1mm copper wire for the tie hooks instead of the 1.6mm, should make for a neater support of cables.
The crossbar is longer and the brace has less of a angle, I worked out a neater way to weld them together too.
I changed the top feeder cable supports too, looks better to me and they are much quicker to make.

Edit. I am a dope, on the middle mast I see I have welded the top insulator support 90' out. Oh well a few minutes with the cut off wheel in the grinder an a zip back together the right way this time. :rofl: :rofl:

On the whole quite fun to make and if I make the bits in batches they shouldn't take too long to make enough to get a section of catenary in.
Next challenge will be to make the long multi track crossing support frames they have at stations.
I have an idea to try out with ally channel which I hope should look ok, and keep with the theme of being affordable.

Everything was slowed down by a lathe failure, something is shot in the headstock gearbox for the leadscrew and carriage drive, plus the pinion gear was bent and its bearing broken on the carriage gearbox. Still not sure what happened. The carriage was hardly able to be moved by the handwheel.


View attachment 352971
Using the lathe to repair its self with the leadscrew, drive shaft and carriage gearbox removed.
The carriage is bolted to the bed and machining a new bearing with the top slide and tailstock only. The carriage pinion after some heating and smacking with a wooden mallet with the straight section in the vice.
Amazingly I got it from 1.37mm out to 0.12mm out in 2 goes, close enough to straight for me.


View attachment 352972
New bearing in the carriage gearbox ready to reassemble, that took 3 goes to get right:rofl:.

View attachment 352973
All back together and usable again. No drive to the leadscrew or carriage drive so manual drive only.
The headstockdrive gearbox is to the bottom left and is a real PITA to pull apart and get back together right. I had to do it when I first got it 10 years ago.
That can wait till winter time when I have days to waste and nothing better to do.
Click to expand...
Now that's a proper lathe! Makes mine look very Toytown -but then again, I'd need to reinforce the floor to take something that size!
 
Northsider said:
Now that's a proper lathe! Makes mine look very Toytown -but then again, I'd need to reinforce the floor to take something that size!
Click to expand...
Smaller lathes are better for making smaller parts, you get a better feel for how cuts are going on tiny bits and using tiny drill bits.
This lathe is good and has many useful features but its nowhere near as rigid as a big lathe.
I have to run the parting tools upside down and cut in reverse to get reliable parting without snapping tools or damaging parts.
Any flex pushes the tool away instead of digging in.
 
Last edited:
grizzmo said:
Smaller lathes are better for making smaller parts, you get a better feel for how cuts are going on tiny bits and using tiny drill bits.
This lathe is good and has many useful features but its nowhere near as rigid as a big lathe.
I have to run the parting tools upside down and cut in reverse to get reliable parting without snapping tools or damaging parts.
Any flex pushes the tool away instead of digging in.
Click to expand...
That sounds like a great tip, I often have issues with parting off work.
 
dunnyrail said:
That sounds like a great tip, I often have issues with parting off work.
Click to expand...
I've heard of running a lathe backwards -mainly when boring- but not for parting off. Presumably this is to counter any wear in slides and/or bearings: the tool geometry will be the same.
My lathe has been wired  not to run in reverse. It is a refugee from the school workshops, where pupils would go from 'full ahead' to 'full astern', Casey Jones style, breaking the drive belts in the process. Running the tool into the chuck also occurred, and once (not on  my shift, and not on my machine) reversing the carriage under feed until it hit the tailstock; which fractured the feedshaft mounting :eek: . Which is why the leadscrew is disconnected, too...
 
Northsider said:
I've heard of running a lathe backwards -mainly when boring- but not for parting off. Presumably this is to counter any wear in slides and/or bearings: the tool geometry will be the same.
My lathe has been wired  not to run in reverse. It is a refugee from the school workshops, where pupils would go from 'full ahead' to 'full astern', Casey Jones style, breaking the drive belts in the process. Running the tool into the chuck also occurred, and once (not on  my shift, and not on my machine) reversing the carriage under feed until it hit the tailstock; which fractured the feedshaft mounting :eek: . Which is why the leadscrew is disconnected, too...
Click to expand...
Yeah any wear and flex in the system with the tool upside and running in reverse.
The tool just gets pushed up and away from the job instead of digging in and snapping/damage to the job.
Haven't snapped a parting tool since doing it this way, used to happen way too regularly before.
The same tool geometry, it just sits above the centre line.

Can you mount the tool post behind the job? Then with a parting tool upside down its the same running normaly.
I have heard screw on chucks can come off cutting in reverse, I have never had one, so can't say for sure if its true or not.
 
Last edited:
Northsider said:
Now that's a proper lathe! Makes mine look very Toytown -but then again, I'd need to reinforce the floor to take something that size!
Click to expand...
Reminds me of a safety officer who looked at our concrete cube-crusher in the site laboratory, and asked what force the crusher exerted. We explained it was xxx tons, so he asked whether the floor was reinforced to take that pressure :lipssealed::lipssealed::lipssealed::lipssealed:
 
Rhinochugger said:
Reminds me of a safety officer who looked at our concrete cube-crusher in the site laboratory, and asked what force the crusher exerted. We explained it was xxx tons, so he asked whether the floor was reinforced to take that pressure :lipssealed::lipssealed::lipssealed::lipssealed:
Click to expand...
Probably quite a sensible question, if you're not trained in concrete crushing
 
Northsider said:
I've heard of running a lathe backwards -mainly when boring- but not for parting off. Presumably this is to counter any wear in slides and/or bearings: the tool geometry will be the same.
My lathe has been wired  not to run in reverse. It is a refugee from the school workshops, where pupils would go from 'full ahead' to 'full astern', Casey Jones style, breaking the drive belts in the process. Running the tool into the chuck also occurred, and once (not on  my shift, and not on my machine) reversing the carriage under feed until it hit the tailstock; which fractured the feedshaft mounting :eek: . Which is why the leadscrew is disconnected, too...
Click to expand...
My lathe nit wired for reverse running. I think I would be slightly reluctant to even tray that as I am not sure if the motor would take it so be happy to try what grizzmo grizzmo suggests with the parting off tool.
 
Paul M said:
Probably quite a sensible question, if you're not trained in concrete crushing
Click to expand...
Not nessecelery (to quote an old comedian) - you have a hydraulic machine with two faces (upper and lower) that press together ........... all the force is in the machine.

The sensible question might have been to ask how the machine worked :nerd:
 
dunnyrail said:
My lathe nit wired for reverse running. I think I would be slightly reluctant to even tray that as I am not sure if the motor would take it so be happy to try what grizzmo grizzmo suggests with the parting off tool.
Click to expand...
That's a shame it really is a easy way to achieve reliable parting off , are you able to mount the toolpost behind the the work piece?
Some lathes have a extra mounting spot or T slots in the carriage.
If so you can run normal direction with the parting tool upside down, a lot less convenient thou.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom