Re: Threading Gear Confusion
Thanks Robert for the background on yourself. I myself have always wondered where and how you became so knowledgeable on these wonderful machines. You are amazing. Bob Duvall?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Feb 11, 2019, at 4:32 PM, Robert Downs via Groups.Io < wa5cab@...> wrote: I forgot to add that the “101” in the Atlas change gear part numbers being the same as the “101” in the Sears part numbers is just a coincidence.? Until the Clausing hands began to get the upper hand around 1957, Atlas had a pretty good part numbering system.? Unlike most companies, whatever part number was first assigned to a part stayed with it as long as it was in use on something.? There are still a handful of parts on the 3996 that were first assigned back in the early 1930’s.? The system was that the first one or more numbers and/or letters identified the first machine that it was used on.? Then there was a hyphen followed by a sequence number.? 9-1, for example, was the first part number assigned for the Atlas 9” lathe in probably the Summer of 1931.? The headstock was 9-2, and so on.? 9-101 just happened to be the next number when they got to the change gears.? And instead of the second change gear being 9-102, they added another hyphen and the tooth count. Revisions to a part got a suffix letter beginning with A.? The only thing that their system doesn’t do is tell you for sure whether or not a revised part was backwards compatible.? In most cases it isn’t because a revised part that was backwards compatible kept the same part number.? But there are a few exceptions to both rules. ? Robert Downs ? On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 3:22 PM Robert Downs via Groups.Io <wa5cab=[email protected]> wrote: Ignoring the gears for the 6”, which are smaller, between 1932 and today, Atlas/Clausing made two versions of the change gears for the 9”, 10” and 12” lathes.? From 1932 until about 1937 they all had 3/8” faces and 3/8” hubs and were made with tooth counts between 20T and 96T.? These all had part numbers which are also cast into the gears of the form 9-101-nn, where “nn” is the tooth count.? Beginning with the Atlas 10F and the Craftsman 101.07362, 101.07382 and 101.07402, the gears were changed to 1/2” hubs (everything else remaining the same) and the cast-in part numbers became 9-101-nnA.? The bolts, sleeves, bushings, spacers and the shafts that the screw gear mounts on all became 1/8” longer.? After a few years, Atlas ceased production of the non-A gears except for the 96T and instead you had to buy an “A” gear and face off 1/16” from each end of the hub.? After a few more years, they quit making the 96T and they are more difficult to find than the others. ?
|
Re: Threading Gear Confusion
I forgot to add that the “101” in the Atlas change gear part numbers being the same as the “101” in the Sears part numbers is just a coincidence.? Until the Clausing hands began to get the upper hand around 1957, Atlas had a pretty good part numbering system.? Unlike most companies, whatever part number was first assigned to a part stayed with it as long as it was in use on something.? There are still a handful of parts on the 3996 that were first assigned back in the early 1930’s.? The system was that the first one or more numbers and/or letters identified the first machine that it was used on.? Then there was a hyphen followed by a sequence number.? 9-1, for example, was the first part number assigned for the Atlas 9” lathe in probably the Summer of 1931.? The headstock was 9-2, and so on.? 9-101 just happened to be the next number when they got to the change gears.? And instead of the second change gear being 9-102, they added another hyphen and the tooth count. Revisions to a part got a suffix letter beginning with A.? The only thing that their system doesn’t do is tell you for sure whether or not a revised part was backwards compatible.? In most cases it isn’t because a revised part that was backwards compatible kept the same part number.? But there are a few exceptions to both rules. ? Robert Downs ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 3:22 PM Robert Downs via Groups.Io <wa5cab= [email protected]> wrote: Ignoring the gears for the 6”, which are smaller, between 1932 and today, Atlas/Clausing made two versions of the change gears for the 9”, 10” and 12” lathes.? From 1932 until about 1937 they all had 3/8” faces and 3/8” hubs and were made with tooth counts between 20T and 96T.? These all had part numbers which are also cast into the gears of the form 9-101-nn, where “nn” is the tooth count.? Beginning with the Atlas 10F and the Craftsman 101.07362, 101.07382 and 101.07402, the gears were changed to 1/2” hubs (everything else remaining the same) and the cast-in part numbers became 9-101-nnA.? The bolts, sleeves, bushings, spacers and the shafts that the screw gear mounts on all became 1/8” longer.? After a few years, Atlas ceased production of the non-A gears except for the 96T and instead you had to buy an “A” gear and face off 1/16” from each end of the hub.? After a few more years, they quit making the 96T and they are more difficult to find than the others. ?
|
Re: Threading Gear Confusion
Scanning, printing and selling manuals on WW-II, Korean War and Vietnam War US radio manuals has been a business of mine since 1999, and for many years before that I made and sold copies.? Around the end of 2011? I for whatever reason became interested in getting most of the rest of the accessories made for my Atlas 3996.? And in the course of that quest joined several internet groups.? I pretty soon learned that the availability of catalogs, manuals and parts lists was about the same or worse and the quality of what was available was generally as bad as it was with the radio manuals.? So I added them to my quest, except that other that in the few rare cases where someone wanted an actual hard copy reprint, I didn’t charge anything for them.? I have never been happy with a scan that wouldn’t produce a hard copy at least as good as the original, so I spend a lot of time cleaning up and in some cases correcting the scans.? And while I was at it, reading the manuals and in many cases the original drawings.? I’ve spent quite a few hours talking to several people at Clausing.? Plus since 1981 I’ve owned and used a 3996 and over the years most of its accessories.? And refurbished or parted out some of the bench models. ? Robert Downs ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Bryan Lund
Sent: Monday, February 11, 2019 15:19
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [atlas-craftsman IO] Threading Gear Confusion? Robert, you are a fountain of Atlas knowledge. Can you illuminate for the group how you came to acquire all of this information? ? On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 3:22 PM Robert Downs via Groups.Io <wa5cab=[email protected]> wrote: Ignoring the gears for the 6”, which are smaller, between 1932 and today, Atlas/Clausing made two versions of the change gears for the 9”, 10” and 12” lathes.? From 1932 until about 1937 they all had 3/8” faces and 3/8” hubs and were made with tooth counts between 20T and 96T.? These all had part numbers which are also cast into the gears of the form 9-101-nn, where “nn” is the tooth count.? Beginning with the Atlas 10F and the Craftsman 101.07362, 101.07382 and 101.07402, the gears were changed to 1/2” hubs (everything else remaining the same) and the cast-in part numbers became 9-101-nnA.? The bolts, sleeves, bushings, spacers and the shafts that the screw gear mounts on all became 1/8” longer.? After a few years, Atlas ceased production of the non-A gears except for the 96T and instead you had to buy an “A” gear and face off 1/16” from each end of the hub.? After a few more years, they quit making the 96T and they are more difficult to find than the others. ? The “A” suffix gears were only made up through 64T because at the same time, they introduced the 32T/16T compound gear which on the 10F is called the Stud Gear.? ? The non-A gears can be installed on the 10F but it requires two 1/16” thick double-keyed spacers for each gear so used.? Atlas never made this thin spacers.? So basically, you have no use for the non-A gears and definitely have no use for a 96T gear. ? The gear charts do not specify the non-A gears.? The gear numbers in the charts are the tooth counts, not part of the part number. ? If you have a 64T gear with a hub ID larger than the double-keyed bushings, it did not come from Atlas and does not belong with your machine.
You also do not need a non-A 64T gear.? And the T used in some of the documentation simply means “tooth”.? It is not part of a part number and it does not appear on any of the Atlas made gears.? If you have a gear that does, it did not come from Atlas but from some other make of lathe or was made from a stock gear from some OEM like Boston.? But so long as it has a 1/2” hub and 3/8” face, it is usable on your 10F
? Robert Downs ? ? I am confused by the gears for my Atlas 10F lathe ?
Almost all my threading gears (called change gears?) have an 'A' after
the number designation, like 24A. I also have a 24. The width of the
thread is identical between the two. The only difference I can see is
that each side of the gear is very slightly wider in the 24A. Is this
the difference between a 'A' and a non-'A'? Like I said most of my
change gears are the 'A' type, but the (heavy, hinged) gear cover that
has the table of the gears needed to make a thread all specify the
non-'A' type. Since nearly all my gears are the 'A' type, do I have
another problem?
I was looking for another 64 gear, without the 'A', on the internet. I
saw one that said '64 T'. The center bore was about 5/8" but the bore of
my 64 gear is 3/4". It appears this may be the difference between a 'T'
and a non-'T', but the image of the gear did not say 64T. It said 64. If
it were not for the seller being aware of where the 64 came from, one
could buy a wrong gear. Is this an atypical situation, or is it common
for a 'T' gear to not say it is a 'T' gear on the side?
Stan
--
|
Re: Threading Gear Confusion
Robert, you are a fountain of Atlas knowledge. Can you illuminate for the group how you came to acquire all of this information?
Bryan
On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 3:22 PM Robert Downs via Groups.Io <wa5cab= [email protected]> wrote: Ignoring the gears for the 6”, which are smaller, between 1932 and today, Atlas/Clausing made two versions of the change gears for the 9”, 10” and 12” lathes.? From 1932 until about 1937 they all had 3/8” faces and 3/8” hubs and were made with tooth counts between 20T and 96T.? These all had part numbers which are also cast into the gears of the form 9-101-nn, where “nn” is the tooth count.? Beginning with the Atlas 10F and the Craftsman 101.07362, 101.07382 and 101.07402, the gears were changed to 1/2” hubs (everything else remaining the same) and the cast-in part numbers became 9-101-nnA.? The bolts, sleeves, bushings, spacers and the shafts that the screw gear mounts on all became 1/8” longer.? After a few years, Atlas ceased production of the non-A gears except for the 96T and instead you had to buy an “A” gear and face off 1/16” from each end of the hub.? After a few more years, they quit making the 96T and they are more difficult to find than the others. ? The “A” suffix gears were only made up through 64T because at the same time, they introduced the 32T/16T compound gear which on the 10F is called the Stud Gear.? ? The non-A gears can be installed on the 10F but it requires two 1/16” thick double-keyed spacers for each gear so used.? Atlas never made this thin spacers.? So basically, you have no use for the non-A gears and definitely have no use for a 96T gear. ? The gear charts do not specify the non-A gears.? The gear numbers in the charts are the tooth counts, not part of the part number. ? If you have a 64T gear with a hub ID larger than the double-keyed bushings, it did not come from Atlas and does not belong with your machine.
You also do not need a non-A 64T gear.? And the T used in some of the documentation simply means “tooth”.? It is not part of a part number and it does not appear on any of the Atlas made gears.? If you have a gear that does, it did not come from Atlas but from some other make of lathe or was made from a stock gear from some OEM like Boston.? But so long as it has a 1/2” hub and 3/8” face, it is usable on your 10F
? Robert Downs ? ? I am confused by the gears for my Atlas 10F lathe ?
Almost all my threading gears (called change gears?) have an 'A' after
the number designation, like 24A. I also have a 24. The width of the
thread is identical between the two. The only difference I can see is
that each side of the gear is very slightly wider in the 24A. Is this
the difference between a 'A' and a non-'A'? Like I said most of my
change gears are the 'A' type, but the (heavy, hinged) gear cover that
has the table of the gears needed to make a thread all specify the
non-'A' type. Since nearly all my gears are the 'A' type, do I have
another problem?
I was looking for another 64 gear, without the 'A', on the internet. I
saw one that said '64 T'. The center bore was about 5/8" but the bore of
my 64 gear is 3/4". It appears this may be the difference between a 'T'
and a non-'T', but the image of the gear did not say 64T. It said 64. If
it were not for the seller being aware of where the 64 came from, one
could buy a wrong gear. Is this an atypical situation, or is it common
for a 'T' gear to not say it is a 'T' gear on the side?
Stan
|
Re: Threading Gear Confusion
Thanks everyone for the explanation.
Stan
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 2/11/2019 1:22 PM, Robert Downs via Groups.Io wrote:
Ignoring the gears for the 6”, which are smaller, between 1932 and
today, Atlas/Clausing made two versions of the change gears for the
9”, 10” and 12” lathes.? From 1932 until about 1937 they all had 3/8”
faces and 3/8” hubs and were made with tooth counts between 20T and
96T.? These all had part numbers which are also cast into the gears of
the form 9-101-nn, where “nn” is the tooth count.? Beginning with the
Atlas 10F and the Craftsman 101.07362, 101.07382 and 101.07402, the
gears were changed to 1/2” hubs (everything else remaining the same)
and the cast-in part numbers became 9-101-nnA.? The bolts, sleeves,
bushings, spacers and the shafts that the screw gear mounts on all
became 1/8” longer.? After a few years, Atlas ceased production of the
non-A gears except for the 96T and instead you had to buy an “A” gear
and face off 1/16” from each end of the hub.? After a few more years,
they quit making the 96T and they are more difficult to find than the
others.
The “A” suffix gears were only made up through 64T because at the same
time, they introduced the 32T/16T compound gear which on the 10F is
called the Stud Gear.
The non-A gears can be installed on the 10F but it requires two 1/16”
thick double-keyed spacers for each gear so used.? Atlas never made
this thin spacers.? So basically, you have no use for the non-A gears
and definitely have no use for a 96T gear.
The gear charts do not specify the non-A gears.? The gear numbers in
the charts are the tooth counts, not part of the part number.
If you have a 64T gear with a hub ID larger than the double-keyed
bushings, it did not come from Atlas and does not belong with your
machine.
You also do not need a non-A 64T gear.? And the T used in some of the
documentation simply means “tooth”. It is not part of a part number
and it does not appear on any of the Atlas made gears.? If you have a
gear that does, it did not come from Atlas but from some other make of
lathe or was made from a stock gear from some OEM like Boston. But so
long as it has a 1/2” hub and 3/8” face, it is usable on your 10F
Robert Downs
*From:*[email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
*On Behalf Of *Stan Gorodenski
*Sent:* Sunday, February 10, 2019 23:18
*To:* [email protected]
*Subject:* [atlas-craftsman IO] Threading Gear Confusion
I am confused by the gears for my Atlas 10F lathe
Almost all my threading gears (called change gears?) have an 'A' after
the number designation, like 24A. I also have a 24. The width of the
thread is identical between the two. The only difference I can see is
that each side of the gear is very slightly wider in the 24A. Is this
the difference between a 'A' and a non-'A'? Like I said most of my
change gears are the 'A' type, but the (heavy, hinged) gear cover that
has the table of the gears needed to make a thread all specify the
non-'A' type. Since nearly all my gears are the 'A' type, do I have
another problem?
I was looking for another 64 gear, without the 'A', on the internet. I
saw one that said '64 T'. The center bore was about 5/8" but the bore of
my 64 gear is 3/4". It appears this may be the difference between a 'T'
and a non-'T', but the image of the gear did not say 64T. It said 64. If
it were not for the seller being aware of where the 64 came from, one
could buy a wrong gear. Is this an atypical situation, or is it common
for a 'T' gear to not say it is a 'T' gear on the side?
Stan
|
Re: Threading Gear Confusion
Ignoring the gears for the 6”, which are smaller, between 1932 and today, Atlas/Clausing made two versions of the change gears for the 9”, 10” and 12” lathes.? From 1932 until about 1937 they all had 3/8” faces and 3/8” hubs and were made with tooth counts between 20T and 96T.? These all had part numbers which are also cast into the gears of the form 9-101-nn, where “nn” is the tooth count.? Beginning with the Atlas 10F and the Craftsman 101.07362, 101.07382 and 101.07402, the gears were changed to 1/2” hubs (everything else remaining the same) and the cast-in part numbers became 9-101-nnA.? The bolts, sleeves, bushings, spacers and the shafts that the screw gear mounts on all became 1/8” longer.? After a few years, Atlas ceased production of the non-A gears except for the 96T and instead you had to buy an “A” gear and face off 1/16” from each end of the hub.? After a few more years, they quit making the 96T and they are more difficult to find than the others. ? The “A” suffix gears were only made up through 64T because at the same time, they introduced the 32T/16T compound gear which on the 10F is called the Stud Gear.? ? The non-A gears can be installed on the 10F but it requires two 1/16” thick double-keyed spacers for each gear so used.? Atlas never made this thin spacers.? So basically, you have no use for the non-A gears and definitely have no use for a 96T gear. ? The gear charts do not specify the non-A gears.? The gear numbers in the charts are the tooth counts, not part of the part number. ? If you have a 64T gear with a hub ID larger than the double-keyed bushings, it did not come from Atlas and does not belong with your machine.
You also do not need a non-A 64T gear.? And the T used in some of the documentation simply means “tooth”.? It is not part of a part number and it does not appear on any of the Atlas made gears.? If you have a gear that does, it did not come from Atlas but from some other make of lathe or was made from a stock gear from some OEM like Boston.? But so long as it has a 1/2” hub and 3/8” face, it is usable on your 10F
? Robert Downs ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Stan Gorodenski
Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2019 23:18
To: [email protected]
Subject: [atlas-craftsman IO] Threading Gear Confusion? I am confused by the gears for my Atlas 10F lathe ?
Almost all my threading gears (called change gears?) have an 'A' after
the number designation, like 24A. I also have a 24. The width of the
thread is identical between the two. The only difference I can see is
that each side of the gear is very slightly wider in the 24A. Is this
the difference between a 'A' and a non-'A'? Like I said most of my
change gears are the 'A' type, but the (heavy, hinged) gear cover that
has the table of the gears needed to make a thread all specify the
non-'A' type. Since nearly all my gears are the 'A' type, do I have
another problem?
I was looking for another 64 gear, without the 'A', on the internet. I
saw one that said '64 T'. The center bore was about 5/8" but the bore of
my 64 gear is 3/4". It appears this may be the difference between a 'T'
and a non-'T', but the image of the gear did not say 64T. It said 64. If
it were not for the seller being aware of where the 64 came from, one
could buy a wrong gear. Is this an atypical situation, or is it common
for a 'T' gear to not say it is a 'T' gear on the side?
Stan
|
Re: Atlas / Craftsman 10F-12 10" & 12" Lathe Half Nuts / Split Nut
Raymond? One of the e-bay 1/2 nut sellers is not far from me there is nothing wrong with the brass he uses its not straight brass, it meant for bearing use. Now i feel that delron is questionable. I first hand experience with plastics, plastic? will never replace metal?
GP
On Sunday, February 10, 2019, 12:25:10 PM EST, Dave Matticks <dpm100@...> wrote:
I don't think brass would be my choice either.? I'm in the process of making a set of tumbler gears for a Rockwell 11" lathe.? 932 bronze was actually cheaper than brass would have been.? Kind of strange but McMaster had the best price, less than half of Alro!? New shaft and bored levers straight and round.? Couple pics.? Dave?
Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device
-------- Original message -------- From: mondosmetals <jwrey@...> Date: 2/5/19 08:22 (GMT-06:00) Subject: Re: [atlas-craftsman IO] Atlas / Craftsman 10F-12 10" & 12" Lathe Half Nuts / Split Nut
BTW: I am not certain brass is the best choice of material. I think the E-Bay sellers are machining them from brass because it is a common material, easy to machine, and is much softer than the leadscrew and will be kind to it. I would prefer C932 Bearing Bronze (aka SAE 660 bronze). I asked one of the sellers who was making them in his shop if he could do it in bronze but he declined. Bearing bronze is about 30-40% more costly than C360 brass. Alas, I do not have the machinery nor have I yet acquired the skill set to make them myself.? Meanwhile, the ZAMAK split nuts for a 3/4" leadscrew are still available from Clausing. Raymond
|
I was just doing some research [wasting time] on YouTube and came across a guy building a table top using concrete mortar mix. It is impressive, because it is so easy and would make a great lathe bench. Or at least that is what I thought after watching it. I was thinking about finding a section of granite counter top large enough to use as a lathe bench but this is better. Better because I can make it any dimension I want, it is super strong, it can be light or it can be heavy as you wish and you ever try to drill granite? Lets just say this, you definitely don't want to, it takes diamond bits and it is hell.
The cast bench top can be made heavy in an attempt to strengthen the lathe and damp vibration. The mortar mix is "much" stronger then regular concrete. It can be poured from 1 inch to 6 inches thick, sets up super fast, has very little shrinkage and can even be deployed in as little as an hour. In the video the guy used a plasticizer additive that smooths out the mix and makes it much more easy to work.
if this interest you watch the video, the guy does a good job on the video, it moves right along and is detailed enough so you can easily replicate what he does with little special skills,or if you got concrete skills you could do some very cool stuff with this mortar mix method. I'm thinking if I do this, and I probably will, I am going to attempt to cast some custom I-beam lags for my lathe bench with round holes in the main beam section and precast holes for bolting the legs on and inserts for leveling feet. You could even make your cast bench top special made with pre-drilled plates to use the cast lathe bench lags. I have a set, my lathe came on but I wanted something more heave duty so I made a rolling workbench out of those.
You could use blocks of wood embedded in the mold to make voids in the cast bench for lighter weight but with a honey cone or square relief pattern on the bottom for strength and lightness. If you watch the video you can see what I mean on how you could place these into the mold. On the video he made the mold out of melamine faced particle board and the top of the pour is actually the bottom of his table. If I did it, I would make the bottom of the mold the bottom of the bench. Then trowel finish and level the top of the poured concrete while embedding 2 large plates with pre-drilled and threaded holes for bolting the lathe down. The mounting plates would only need be "close" to level, you would be shimming it to level the lathe bed perfectly any way. I can tell you, it is worth getting a precision level and going through the trouble to level your lathe bed to perfection. I see the difference in Turing longer items and my saddle and my tail stock ride the entire length of their travel much smoother then before the lathe was leveled.
If you do some research on precast concrete you can see the applications for this mortar mix could well be almost unlimited if you want to get creative making things. The mortar mix is not cheap but neither is steel or good wood. In fact this looks like it could be reasonably cheaper then steel or wood and better due to the possible vibration damping effect. The guy in the video used 2 55 lb bags of mortar mix and his table is 1.5 inches thick, he did not give dimensions that I saw but his table is reasonably good sized.
The concrete bench top could be painted with any color epoxy concrete sealer or garage floor paint/sealer and it would look a lot nicer then raw concrete and be oil proof, well, as much as any garage floor epoxy would be any way.
Let me know if you like this idea or you think I might be better off making a set of concrete boots and being thrown into a lake... haha
~
|
|
|
I am confused by the gears for my Atlas 10F lathe
Almost all my threading gears (called change gears?) have an 'A' after
the number designation, like 24A. I also have a 24. The width of the
thread is identical between the two. The only difference I can see is
that each side of the gear is very slightly wider in the 24A. Is this
the difference between a 'A' and a non-'A'? Like I said most of my
change gears are the 'A' type, but the (heavy, hinged) gear cover that
has the table of the gears needed to make a thread all specify the
non-'A' type. Since nearly all my gears are the 'A' type, do I have
another problem?
I was looking for another 64 gear, without the 'A', on the internet. I
saw one that said '64 T'. The center bore was about 5/8" but the bore of
my 64 gear is 3/4". It appears this may be the difference between a 'T'
and a non-'T', but the image of the gear did not say 64T. It said 64. If
it were not for the seller being aware of where the 64 came from, one
could buy a wrong gear. Is this an atypical situation, or is it common
for a 'T' gear to not say it is a 'T' gear on the side?
Stan
|
Re: My Frankenstein Atlas
I have to go look.... but I think my 10F has the same teeth....?
|
Re: Atlas / Craftsman 10F-12 10" & 12" Lathe Half Nuts / Split Nut
I don't think brass would be my choice either.? I'm in the process of making a set of tumbler gears for a Rockwell 11" lathe.? 932 bronze was actually cheaper than brass would have been.? Kind of strange but McMaster had the best price, less than half of Alro!? New shaft and bored levers straight and round.? Couple pics.? Dave?
Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
-------- Original message -------- From: mondosmetals <jwrey@...> Date: 2/5/19 08:22 (GMT-06:00) Subject: Re: [atlas-craftsman IO] Atlas / Craftsman 10F-12 10" & 12" Lathe Half Nuts / Split Nut
BTW: I am not certain brass is the best choice of material. I think the E-Bay sellers are machining them from brass because it is a common material, easy to machine, and is much softer than the leadscrew and will be kind to it. I would prefer C932 Bearing Bronze (aka SAE 660 bronze). I asked one of the sellers who was making them in his shop if he could do it in bronze but he declined. Bearing bronze is about 30-40% more costly than C360 brass. Alas, I do not have the machinery nor have I yet acquired the skill set to make them myself.? Meanwhile, the ZAMAK split nuts for a 3/4" leadscrew are still available from Clausing. Raymond
|
I have 2 QC toolpost from CDCO never had problems i recommend it
GP
On Saturday, February 9, 2019, 7:02:26 PM EST, n5kzw <n5kzw@...> wrote:
I put an album in the Photos section named DIY_QCTP with a photo of the same name.? I don't remember where I saw the photo or sketch that inspired it.? There was another sketch out there that had the clamp section as a loose piece with a pivot point machined into the back instead of saw slot ending in a hole.? The tool post and tool holders are not hardened, but I've been using them for to or 15 years and haven't noticed any wear.? The tool holder for 1/2" tooling is a little thin on the bottom, but it does not deflect.? There is a 1/8" spacer with an oversized dovetail slot under the tool holder to raise it up over the hump on the cross slide.? The tool post block is about 2"x 2" and 1.5" tall.? I used a knee mill to make it.? I don't know how this compares to other QCTP technologies, but it is at least as rigid as my lathe.
|
I put an album in the Photos section named DIY_QCTP with a photo of the same name.? I don't remember where I saw the photo or sketch that inspired it.? There was another sketch out there that had the clamp section as a loose piece with a pivot point machined into the back instead of saw slot ending in a hole.? The tool post and tool holders are not hardened, but I've been using them for to or 15 years and haven't noticed any wear.? The tool holder for 1/2" tooling is a little thin on the bottom, but it does not deflect.? There is a 1/8" spacer with an oversized dovetail slot under the tool holder to raise it up over the hump on the cross slide.? The tool post block is about 2"x 2" and 1.5" tall.? I used a knee mill to make it.? I don't know how this compares to other QCTP technologies, but it is at least as rigid as my lathe.
|
Re: My Frankenstein Atlas
I think Roberts advice is sound: get a new headstock if you want to operate the lathe as originally intended.
With that said, the mods you described “sound reasonable” if there is in fact a VFD and /or position sensor involved. Positive drive would make sense on the pulley. There would be some slippage, but that’s a different thread I guess. Beyond that wild assumption....yes, this is an experiment in Frankensteinism.
On Sat, Feb 9, 2019 at 2:12 PM Stan Gorodenski < stanlep@...> wrote: Robert,
I was really down and out when I saw what had been done. This is the
sort of dumb jury rigged things people sometimes do who work on there
own cars. I never expected this from a machinist.? As the evening wore
on I realized what I need to do to bring it back to original and to get
rid of the mickey mouse manner of attaching the pulley with set screws
to the spindle. If you are interested in what I will do, send me a
private email message so I can get your email address and then I will go
into more detail.
Stan
On 2/9/2019 12:16 AM, Robert Downs via Groups.Io wrote:
The headstock at least certainly qualifies for “Frankenstein”.? The
gear and whatever that is under it did not come from Atlas.? My guess
is that the PO had an eddy current sensor sensing the very fine teeth.
The step pulley, as much as I can see of it, looks original.? But
there is no set screw supposed to be in the pulley.? It should have
one hole drilled through so that it comes out between the two
bushings, which do belong there.? It is only tapped part way through
the hole for an oil plug that looks like a bull-nose set screw.? The
pulley, with the missing direct drive pin pulled out, should be ?free
to spin on the spindle (when it was originally assembled).? Besides
the bull gear and collar, it is also missing the small spindle gear
and undoubtedly the back gears.? The bull gear is about an inch
thick.? The small gear is about 5/8” thick.? It has a keyway cast in
the face that fits up against the spindle.? You can see the keys cast
into the small end of the pulley.
Your probably least expensive way to fix the headstock is to buy
another complete headstock.? Do you know what the model number is?
Robert Downs
*From:*[email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
*On Behalf Of *Stan Gorodenski
*Sent:* Friday, February 8, 2019 22:51
*To:* [email protected]
*Subject:* [atlas-craftsman IO] My Frankenstein Atlas
I read the manual on how to remove the headstock spindle and what I read
and what I saw made no sense. First, there is supposed to be a collar
held in place by a set screw. The collar is inside the headstock housing
and butts against the rear headstock housing. I can see where there once
was a collar because I can see many circular indentation marks left by a
set screw.
Second, the manual said to drive the spindle from the rear until the key
emerges from the the large spindle gear. This is the gear toward the
front of the housing. However, this made no sense because I did not see
a square hole in the large gear from which the key would emerge.
Instead, I saw a diagonal cut into the side of the front gear that has a
set screw (this is shown in the attached image). The pulley assembly
also has two set screws. I loosened all the set screws and proceeded to
drive the spindle out. Of course, no key emerged (since, as I said,
there was no square gap in the large gear next to the spindle). There is
a slot in the spindle for a key, but no key. What I saw was the spindle
slightly ground into to accept the set screw for the large gear (this is
shown in the image), and the? same thing for the two set screws in the
pulley assembly.
I have a real frankenstein. What the manual calls a large gear I think
is from something else that was modified to fit the spindle. There is no
square slot to accept the key, and, although not seen in the image, the
so called teeth do not look like the teeth of a gear. The pulley
assembly appears to also have been from something else because it is
sleeved to fit the diameter of the spindle. Maybe pulley assemblies were
sleeved, but what is strange about this one is that the set screws were
obviously home made because each set screw is a different diameter. It
is like the person who did this did not have two set screws of the same
size. Since there are indentation marks indicating there once was a rear
collar but not now, it appears the spindle may have come from another
lathe.
Would you all agree this is a frankenstein? I think I can find someone
to mill a slot for a key on the large 'gear', but I probably would still
have to use the set screw to keep it from moving back and forth. I know
the lathe I have is not worth as much as it should be because of
modifications that were made to it that I mentioned last year, but the
situation with the spindle makes it even less valuable.
Stan
|
Re: My Frankenstein Atlas
Robert,
I was really down and out when I saw what had been done. This is the
sort of dumb jury rigged things people sometimes do who work on there
own cars. I never expected this from a machinist.? As the evening wore
on I realized what I need to do to bring it back to original and to get
rid of the mickey mouse manner of attaching the pulley with set screws
to the spindle. If you are interested in what I will do, send me a
private email message so I can get your email address and then I will go
into more detail.
Stan
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 2/9/2019 12:16 AM, Robert Downs via Groups.Io wrote:
The headstock at least certainly qualifies for “Frankenstein”.? The
gear and whatever that is under it did not come from Atlas.? My guess
is that the PO had an eddy current sensor sensing the very fine teeth.
The step pulley, as much as I can see of it, looks original.? But
there is no set screw supposed to be in the pulley.? It should have
one hole drilled through so that it comes out between the two
bushings, which do belong there.? It is only tapped part way through
the hole for an oil plug that looks like a bull-nose set screw.? The
pulley, with the missing direct drive pin pulled out, should be ?free
to spin on the spindle (when it was originally assembled).? Besides
the bull gear and collar, it is also missing the small spindle gear
and undoubtedly the back gears.? The bull gear is about an inch
thick.? The small gear is about 5/8” thick.? It has a keyway cast in
the face that fits up against the spindle.? You can see the keys cast
into the small end of the pulley.
Your probably least expensive way to fix the headstock is to buy
another complete headstock.? Do you know what the model number is?
Robert Downs
*From:*[email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
*On Behalf Of *Stan Gorodenski
*Sent:* Friday, February 8, 2019 22:51
*To:* [email protected]
*Subject:* [atlas-craftsman IO] My Frankenstein Atlas
I read the manual on how to remove the headstock spindle and what I read
and what I saw made no sense. First, there is supposed to be a collar
held in place by a set screw. The collar is inside the headstock housing
and butts against the rear headstock housing. I can see where there once
was a collar because I can see many circular indentation marks left by a
set screw.
Second, the manual said to drive the spindle from the rear until the key
emerges from the the large spindle gear. This is the gear toward the
front of the housing. However, this made no sense because I did not see
a square hole in the large gear from which the key would emerge.
Instead, I saw a diagonal cut into the side of the front gear that has a
set screw (this is shown in the attached image). The pulley assembly
also has two set screws. I loosened all the set screws and proceeded to
drive the spindle out. Of course, no key emerged (since, as I said,
there was no square gap in the large gear next to the spindle). There is
a slot in the spindle for a key, but no key. What I saw was the spindle
slightly ground into to accept the set screw for the large gear (this is
shown in the image), and the? same thing for the two set screws in the
pulley assembly.
I have a real frankenstein. What the manual calls a large gear I think
is from something else that was modified to fit the spindle. There is no
square slot to accept the key, and, although not seen in the image, the
so called teeth do not look like the teeth of a gear. The pulley
assembly appears to also have been from something else because it is
sleeved to fit the diameter of the spindle. Maybe pulley assemblies were
sleeved, but what is strange about this one is that the set screws were
obviously home made because each set screw is a different diameter. It
is like the person who did this did not have two set screws of the same
size. Since there are indentation marks indicating there once was a rear
collar but not now, it appears the spindle may have come from another
lathe.
Would you all agree this is a frankenstein? I think I can find someone
to mill a slot for a key on the large 'gear', but I probably would still
have to use the set screw to keep it from moving back and forth. I know
the lathe I have is not worth as much as it should be because of
modifications that were made to it that I mentioned last year, but the
situation with the spindle makes it even less valuable.
Stan
|
Re: My Frankenstein Atlas
The headstock at least certainly qualifies for “Frankenstein”.? The gear and whatever that is under it did not come from Atlas.? My guess is that the PO had an eddy current sensor sensing the very fine teeth. ? The step pulley, as much as I can see of it, looks original.? But there is no set screw supposed to be in the pulley.? It should have one hole drilled through so that it comes out between the two bushings, which do belong there.? It is only tapped part way through the hole for an oil plug that looks like a bull-nose set screw.? The pulley, with the missing direct drive pin pulled out, should be ?free to spin on the spindle (when it was originally assembled).? Besides the bull gear and collar, it is also missing the small spindle gear and undoubtedly the back gears.? The bull gear is about an inch thick.? The small gear is about 5/8” thick.? It has a keyway cast in the face that fits up against the spindle.? You can see the keys cast into the small end of the pulley. ? Your probably least expensive way to fix the headstock is to buy another complete headstock.? Do you know what the model number is? ? Robert Downs ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Stan Gorodenski
Sent: Friday, February 8, 2019 22:51
To: [email protected]
Subject: [atlas-craftsman IO] My Frankenstein Atlas? I read the manual on how to remove the headstock spindle and what I read
and what I saw made no sense. First, there is supposed to be a collar
held in place by a set screw. The collar is inside the headstock housing
and butts against the rear headstock housing. I can see where there once
was a collar because I can see many circular indentation marks left by a
set screw.
Second, the manual said to drive the spindle from the rear until the key
emerges from the the large spindle gear. This is the gear toward the
front of the housing. However, this made no sense because I did not see
a square hole in the large gear from which the key would emerge.
Instead, I saw a diagonal cut into the side of the front gear that has a
set screw (this is shown in the attached image). The pulley assembly
also has two set screws. I loosened all the set screws and proceeded to
drive the spindle out. Of course, no key emerged (since, as I said,
there was no square gap in the large gear next to the spindle). There is
a slot in the spindle for a key, but no key. What I saw was the spindle
slightly ground into to accept the set screw for the large gear (this is
shown in the image), and the? same thing for the two set screws in the
pulley assembly.
I have a real frankenstein. What the manual calls a large gear I think
is from something else that was modified to fit the spindle. There is no
square slot to accept the key, and, although not seen in the image, the
so called teeth do not look like the teeth of a gear. The pulley
assembly appears to also have been from something else because it is
sleeved to fit the diameter of the spindle. Maybe pulley assemblies were
sleeved, but what is strange about this one is that the set screws were
obviously home made because each set screw is a different diameter. It
is like the person who did this did not have two set screws of the same
size. Since there are indentation marks indicating there once was a rear
collar but not now, it appears the spindle may have come from another
lathe.
Would you all agree this is a frankenstein? I think I can find someone
to mill a slot for a key on the large 'gear', but I probably would still
have to use the set screw to keep it from moving back and forth. I know
the lathe I have is not worth as much as it should be because of
modifications that were made to it that I mentioned last year, but the
situation with the spindle makes it even less valuable.
Stan
|
And the same milling attachment fit the 10D on and all of the early and late 12”. ? Robert Downs ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of mike allen
Sent: Friday, February 8, 2019 16:08
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [atlas-craftsman IO] Quick Change Post changed to lathe color? keep in mind that the milling attachment was probably a option
& may have been purchased at a later date
??? ??? animal
On 2/8/2019 11:46 AM, Stan
wrote: I looked online at the color for K08309007. It pretty much matches what
is on the lathe which contradicts the color of the milling attachment.
However, like you said, it is my lathe and so I can paint it whatever
color I want (pink with black polka dots?). I think I will probably
paint it Chrysler blue or if the automotive paint store has color close
to the milling attachment I'll get that. I think my friend had painted
it the blue color with a brush because I see slop over on the Atlas tag.
Stan
|
Re: Quick Change Post changed to lathe color
Actually, over the 21 years that Sears sold the 3/8” bed 12” and sleeve bearing 6” ?lathes, they changed the color maybe every two or three years.? We’ve seen several shades of green, blue, red and at least one year, gold.? Sometime near the end of production, they changed to the same Dark Machinery Grey as the Atlas badged machines had always been.? Then in 1957 when the 3/8” bed 12” machines (10” and 12”) and the 101.07301 were retired, the color on the new 12” and everything else (Atlas and Craftsman) was changed to Machinery Gray.? Unfortunately, although even in the 1930’s some of the catalogs had color, all of the lathe photos were half-tone (monochrome). ? As a comment on an earlier post, over the decades, Machinery Gray, possibly from oil drying on it, slowly takes on a slight green or olive hue.? This color was used on the 12” and accessories and the 618, 101.21400, 3950 and 101.21200 up through the end of production.? The 10100 and 10200 changed to light blue in the mid 1970’s. ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Andrei
Sent: Friday, February 8, 2019 12:20
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [atlas-craftsman IO] Quick Change Post changed to lathe color? Lathes that were sold as Craftsman came in a color close to the current Krylon-Industrial Regal Blue (part number K08309007). You may not find this in home centers and may have to order it online, as it is not part of the Krylon consumer products. It is from Krylon-Industrial, which may be a division or a separate company (not sure about that).? Atlas lathes came in industrial machinery gray (grey, if you live in England). I am not aware of any "matching" modern color because Altas used whatever industrial gray was available at the time. Which means there were slight variations in hue. Consequently, any modern industrial gray color should be fine. MSC sells a Rustoleum product called Industrial Choice which matches the Rustoleum branded Dark Machinery Gray (Rustoleum part number?V2187838). Of course, considering the fact that the machine is yours, you can paint it in any color you want. Just make sure you use a high quality paint. I have seen some really neat lathes painted in all sorts of light and dark colors and they looked just as good as those painted in standard factory colors (I have seen some painted white, very light gray, red, lime, emergency yellow, purple).
My Craftsman 12” lathe still has the original paint, which is a dark machinery grey. ? Kurt S. ? From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Stan Gorodenski
Sent: Friday, February 8, 2019 11:21 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [atlas-craftsman IO] Quick Change Post changed to lathe color ? The color of your lathe brings up another question I have. I am in the
process of removing and checking everything out and so this will be a
good time to paint it because it needs it. It is painted a blue color
like your lathe (which is similar to Ford blue for car engines). Is this
the original color? The milling attachment is sort of a light gray-green
color which makes me think this was the original color. Probably the
colors varied with the years and so maybe the milling attachment is the
best indicator to go by.
I plan to spray the lathe with engine enamel from a spray can. Would
another paint be better, excluding a spray gun with a hardener? A spray
gun is more trouble and expense than I want to get into.
Stan
On 2/8/2019 6:27 AM, mondosmetals wrote: No Tee-nut needed for the QCTP. I used a length of ground flat bar,
5/16 x 1 x 2 11/16 (T W L). I made my own bolt then drilled and tapped
a hole to match the bolt. Threaded the bolt in so it was just a tad
short of the bottom surface then used a cold chisel and a hammer to
set a couple of divots across the end of the bolt so it can't be
threaded any further through. I have been using this for > 8 years
with any problems.
Dimensions:
Plate = 5/16 x 1 x 2 11/16
Main shaft and threads = 9/16" NF
LOA = 3 7/8
Shoulder at plate = 5/8" D x 1/4" L
Upper thread length = 1 1/2"
Bottom thread = 9/16 NF
Bottom thread length = 19/64" (makes it 1/64 shy of flush with bottom
of plate to prevent interference.)
|
I read the manual on how to remove the headstock spindle and what I read
and what I saw made no sense. First, there is supposed to be a collar
held in place by a set screw. The collar is inside the headstock housing
and butts against the rear headstock housing. I can see where there once
was a collar because I can see many circular indentation marks left by a
set screw.
Second, the manual said to drive the spindle from the rear until the key
emerges from the the large spindle gear. This is the gear toward the
front of the housing. However, this made no sense because I did not see
a square hole in the large gear from which the key would emerge.
Instead, I saw a diagonal cut into the side of the front gear that has a
set screw (this is shown in the attached image). The pulley assembly
also has two set screws. I loosened all the set screws and proceeded to
drive the spindle out. Of course, no key emerged (since, as I said,
there was no square gap in the large gear next to the spindle). There is
a slot in the spindle for a key, but no key. What I saw was the spindle
slightly ground into to accept the set screw for the large gear (this is
shown in the image), and the? same thing for the two set screws in the
pulley assembly.
I have a real frankenstein. What the manual calls a large gear I think
is from something else that was modified to fit the spindle. There is no
square slot to accept the key, and, although not seen in the image, the
so called teeth do not look like the teeth of a gear. The pulley
assembly appears to also have been from something else because it is
sleeved to fit the diameter of the spindle. Maybe pulley assemblies were
sleeved, but what is strange about this one is that the set screws were
obviously home made because each set screw is a different diameter. It
is like the person who did this did not have two set screws of the same
size. Since there are indentation marks indicating there once was a rear
collar but not now, it appears the spindle may have come from another
lathe.
Would you all agree this is a frankenstein? I think I can find someone
to mill a slot for a key on the large 'gear', but I probably would still
have to use the set screw to keep it from moving back and forth. I know
the lathe I have is not worth as much as it should be because of
modifications that were made to it that I mentioned last year, but the
situation with the spindle makes it even less valuable.
Stan
|
Stan Gorodenski
Robert