OK, don¡¯t have any idea about proper terminology and deep groove or not really doesn¡¯t mean anything in this application. The left bearing is fixed in position because it is clamped into housing #7 by cap #3. The spindle #1 itself is fixed in position into that bearing being clamped up to the shoulder with #6 between the shoulder and inner race, and #4 nut is holding it tight. That takes care of the longitudinal position of the spindle. On the right side, the spindle is supported by the #8 bearing, which is camped tight to the #1 spindle using the #9 nut with the #6 spacer between the inner race and the shoulder on the spindle. These leaves the od of the #8 bearing to land wherever it lands in the bore of the casting, it is not touching any shoulder, just pocketed in the cavity and one would assume originally filled with grease.
If you look at the drawing, the V shaped cavities towards the middle between the two bearings, in the housing, probably had a rope wick as a seal, to contain the grease. Same with the truncated V-groove on the inside of the #3 nut, probably had some sort of packing in there to contain the grease.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Jan 13, 2021, at 4:35 PM, David Kumm <
davekumm@...> wrote:
I think my terminology is screwed up so I apologize.? I've always considered a deep groove bearing trapped on either the inner or outer to be fixed or locating.? From the pictures I see on the web it looks like to be fixed, both the inner and outer must be trapped.? If only one is, the other is floating relative to the trapped one, not necessarily to the shaft or housing.? Am I on the right track or still on the wrong road?? Dave
Nut 9 pinches the inner race of the bearing to the shoulder on the spindle with #6 spacer between. The positions the bearing to be in the middle of the bore in the #7 housing¡ floating distance wise in the bore. OD of the bearing is probably a light press fit in the bore.
On Jan 13, 2021, at 3:04 PM, David Kumm <
davekumm@...> wrote:
It looked to me like the nut #9 was pinching the inner against #6 on the rear.? Dave
Look at the print, in the lower left corner it lists the item #¡¯s, the name, their part number and the QUANTITY, on the #6 it shows 2 required. The front bearing gets pinched to a shoulder on the od with the #3 cap. The rear bearing is spaced to be in the bore in the rear, but not tight to any shoulder. This is pretty typical construction of this type of spindle.
On Jan 13, 2021, at 2:40 PM, David Kumm <
davekumm@...> wrote:
Brian, am I reading the diagram wrong.? #6 spacer on the front bearing looks to be duplicated on the back, just not numbered.? A machine I'm working on right now has a similar diagram and only numbers identical items once but there is no number on what looks like the back spacer so maybe there is none.? Dave
The front bearing locates the spindle assembly and the rear bearing floats in the bore, pretty simple to see from the print, even if his has a single wide bearing in the front rather than double.
On Jan 13, 2021, at 2:23 PM, David Kumm <
davekumm@...> wrote:
Joe, that rear bearing looks to have a spacer on the inner ring to trap the bearing.? I wonder if the bearing changed or on earlier versions a bearing with an extended inner ring was used.? Those types of bearings became hard to source so Tanny might have decided to add a spacer rather than change their castings to accept a different thickness bearing.? totally just guessing here but I don't see many bearings just floating on a spindle.? Dave
Another question on my rebuild project.? The saw was built with open cage bearings and large grease reservoirs.? Upon the advice of some on FOG I went with sealed bearings.? The bearings I removed front and rear were the same, same size, steel shields.? Now I found a parts diagram from Tannewitz and they show a double row bearing for the wheel side which makes sense.? Also it looks like the double row bearing would seat in position and the rear bearing floats in the housing.? I will measure the space for the front bearing to ensure its sized for a standard bearing width.? ?It looks like a past owner put the wrong bearing in the front.? Any reason not to use a double row bearing?? Based on the quality of the machining from Tannewitz I am pretty sure alignment would not be an issue.? Also with the smaller single row bearing on both sides it looks like the upper wheel / shaft / bearing assembly could move back and forth.? the bearings are a press fit but still seems odd.? Pic attached from the manual.
