BTW, I¡¯m fairly sure the job can be done with two tools, and a darned close job with one!
Picture a parting tool. I thing we all agree that the center could be done with that, and the sides towards the smaller pulley done with the same tool, but setting the compound at the angle of the V and plunging with the compound
The other side, or all of it can also be done with a similar method Lautard described for turning balls. Do the math where the corner (left or right, depending on which side) meets the groove. Plunge in. Now do the math say shifted over .010 (or however small a step you want), plunge again, lather, rinse, repeat. You¡¯ll end up with a bunch of steps
The BOTTOM corners are at the right spots. Now get out a file, and get rid of the peaks. The smaller the shift, the smaller the peaks, and the more accurate you¡¯ll be
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Apr 17, 2020, at 7:22 PM, Robert Downs via groups.io <wa5cab@...> wrote:
?
I assume that the pulley must have worked OK but it certainly doesn¡¯t match the recommendations in Machinery¡¯s Handbook.? The angles given in there are 38 degrees max for a pulley nominal diameter of 4.2¡±.? But the groove? widths don¡¯t match, either.? Given that this pulley was sold for years and must have worked OK, I think that I would make it to the drawing at least as far as the grooves are concerned.? As several others have said, you probably don¡¯t need to remove as much metal from the inside as is shown.
?
Robert Downs
?
?
On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 09:35 AM, jmartin957 <jmartin957@...> wrote:
but you¡¯d need different form tools for each pulley diameter. ?The angles are different for each diameter.
Please explain. The factory drawing notes that all grooves are 43¡ã Included angle.
Raymond
