I have been doing quite a bit of lathe work using a kool-mist this week and
due to cold weather have the shop closed up. I came down with a flu or
something on day 2.
They spec sheet says it totally safe, but does anyone know something
different?
Maybe just the fact that I have been breathing a lot of water vapor could
make it easier to get sick?
--
Stupendous Man,
Defender of Freedom, Advocate of Liberty

On 2009-01-29, Stupendous Man wrote:
I have been doing quite a bit of lathe work using a kool-mist this week and
due to cold weather have the shop closed up. I came down with a flu or
something on day 2.
They spec sheet says it totally safe, but does anyone know something
different?
Maybe just the fact that I have been breathing a lot of water vapor could
make it easier to get sick?

You were breathing misting coolant vapor, not clear water, right?

--
Due to extreme spam originating from Google Groups, and their inattention
to spammers, I and many others block all articles originating
from Google Groups. If you want your postings to be seen by
more readers you will need to find a different means of
posting on Usenet.
http://improve-usenet.org/

Stupendous Man wrote:
I have been doing quite a bit of lathe work using a kool-mist this week
and due to cold weather have the shop closed up. I came down with a flu
or something on day 2.
They spec sheet says it totally safe, but does anyone know something
different?
Maybe just the fact that I have been breathing a lot of water vapor
could make it easier to get sick?

I just saw an article on the subject, but can't
find it now. The gist was that there seemed to
be more asthma-like symptoms and complaints where
it was used. The problems were thought to be tramp
oil and mist out of ph specification rather than
uncontaminated fresh mist.

"Stupendous Man" wrote in message
...
I have been doing quite a bit of lathe work using a kool-mist this week and
due to cold weather have the shop closed up. I came down with a flu or
something on day 2.
They spec sheet says it totally safe, but does anyone know something
different?
Maybe just the fact that I have been breathing a lot of water vapor could
make it easier to get sick?
--
Stupendous Man,
Defender of Freedom, Advocate of Liberty


That's the down side of mist coolers. Lots of liquid dust.

You were breathing misting coolant vapor, not clear water, right?

It's about 5% Kool mist, butyl acetate, listed and being non-hazardous. I
think i will wear a mask next week.
--
Stupendous Man,
Defender of Freedom, Advocate of Liberty

On Jan 29, 1:52*pm, "Stupendous Man" wrote:
I have been doing quite a bit of lathe work using a kool-mist this week and
due to cold weather have the shop closed up. I came down with a flu or
something on day 2.
They spec sheet says it totally safe, but does anyone know something
different?
Maybe just the fact that I have been breathing a lot of water vapor could
make it easier to get sick?
--
Stupendous Man,
Defender of Freedom, Advocate of Liberty

http://www.aerias.org/DesktopModules...x?articleId=99

On Jan 29, 3:23*pm, Jim Stewart wrote:
Stupendous Man wrote:
I have been doing quite a bit of lathe work using a kool-mist this week
and due to cold weather have the shop closed up. I came down with a flu
or something on day 2.
They spec sheet says it totally safe, but does anyone know something
different?
Maybe just the fact that I have been breathing a lot of water vapor
could make it easier to get sick?

I just saw an article on the subject, but can't
find it now. *The gist was that there seemed to
be more asthma-like symptoms and complaints where
it was used. *The problems were thought to be tramp
oil and mist out of ph specification rather than
uncontaminated fresh mist.

The one time I used it I got sick. The oil in it seemed to coat
my lungs and make trouble. I'll never use misted coolants again.

Dan

In article
,
wrote:

On Jan 29, 3:23*pm, Jim Stewart wrote:
Stupendous Man wrote:
I have been doing quite a bit of lathe work using a kool-mist this week
and due to cold weather have the shop closed up. I came down with a flu
or something on day 2.
They spec sheet says it totally safe, but does anyone know something
different?
Maybe just the fact that I have been breathing a lot of water vapor
could make it easier to get sick?

I just saw an article on the subject, but can't
find it now. *The gist was that there seemed to
be more asthma-like symptoms and complaints where
it was used. *The problems were thought to be tramp
oil and mist out of ph specification rather than
uncontaminated fresh mist.

The one time I used it I got sick. The oil in it seemed to coat
my lungs and make trouble. I'll never use misted coolants again.

This happened to me as well. Once. I got a half-mask respirator, and a
better sprayer. Now I get more coolant on target and less in the air,
and the respirator handles what does get in the air.

Joe Gwinn

"Stupendous Man" wrote in message
...
I have been doing quite a bit of lathe work using a kool-mist this week and
due to cold weather have the shop closed up. I came down with a flu or
something on day 2.
They spec sheet says it totally safe, but does anyone know something
different?
Maybe just the fact that I have been breathing a lot of water vapor could
make it easier to get sick?
--
Stupendous Man,
Defender of Freedom, Advocate of Liberty


I won't breathe that stuff anymore, it makes me sick. I wonder if I could
fill the thing with Vodka?

"Buerste" wrote in message
...

"Stupendous Man" wrote in message
...
I have been doing quite a bit of lathe work using a kool-mist this week
and due to cold weather have the shop closed up. I came down with a flu or
something on day 2.
They spec sheet says it totally safe, but does anyone know something
different?
Maybe just the fact that I have been breathing a lot of water vapor could
make it easier to get sick?
--
Stupendous Man,
Defender of Freedom, Advocate of Liberty


I won't breathe that stuff anymore, it makes me sick. I wonder if I could
fill the thing with Vodka?

You could fill it with peanut oil, like they do at Volkswagen, but I don't
know how they treat it. But don't take this seriously. They must have a
sophisticated atomizer of some kind, and the Kook-Mist rig probably won't
handle the viscosity. It sure works great for VW, however.

There were several epidemiological studies, mostly done in Europe, that
showed all kinds of problems resulting from mist coolant. However, I doubt
if they tried the Kool-Mist formulas, which are supposed to be benign.

Benign, schemign, I'm not breathing no steenking atomized chemicals. I have
no idea how they're getting away with it, because the active chemical (butyl
acetate?) is identified as a hazard to eyes and lungs when you look at the
chemical itself.

It could be that there is no evidence that such a dilute solution is a
hazard. Still, it's not for me.

--
Ed Huntress

When used as directed by the manufacturer, its a safe product.
However, using one without properly cleaning and disinfecting it on a
regular basis could contribute to additional breathing problems for
people who have asthma, severe allergies and other respiratory
difficulties.

AsianDoll

Since its my school semester break I have been using my free time
playing games like a href=http://www.gamestotal.com http://www.gamestotal.com
/a a href=http://uc.gamestotal.com http://uc.gamestotal.com /a
a href=http://gc.gamestotal.com http://gc.gamestotal.com /a a
href=http://3700ad.gamestotal.com http://3700ad.gamestotal.com /a
a href=http://manga.gamestotal.com http://manga.gamestotal.com /a

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"Buerste" wrote in message
...

"Stupendous Man" wrote in message
...
I have been doing quite a bit of lathe work using a kool-mist this week
and due to cold weather have the shop closed up. I came down with a flu
or something on day 2.
They spec sheet says it totally safe, but does anyone know something
different?
Maybe just the fact that I have been breathing a lot of water vapor
could make it easier to get sick?
--
Stupendous Man,
Defender of Freedom, Advocate of Liberty


I won't breathe that stuff anymore, it makes me sick. I wonder if I
could fill the thing with Vodka?

You could fill it with peanut oil, like they do at Volkswagen, but I don't
know how they treat it. But don't take this seriously. They must have a
sophisticated atomizer of some kind, and the Kook-Mist rig...

That was not intentional. g I meant Kool-Mist.

--
Ed Huntress

On Jan 29, 10:17*pm, "Buerste" wrote:
"Stupendous Man" wrote in message

...

I have been doing quite a bit of lathe work using a kool-mist this week and
due to cold weather have the shop closed up. I came down with a flu or
something on day 2.
They spec sheet says it totally safe, but does anyone know something
different?
Maybe just the fact that I have been breathing a lot of water vapor could
make it easier to get sick?
--
Stupendous Man,
Defender of Freedom, Advocate of Liberty

I won't breathe that stuff anymore, it makes me sick. *I wonder if I could
fill the thing with Vodka?

http://ask.metafilter.com/95484/At-w...l-spirits-burn

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
snip----
You could fill it with peanut oil, like they do at Volkswagen, but I don't
know how they treat it. But don't take this seriously. They must have a
sophisticated atomizer of some kind, and the Kook-Mist rig probably won't
handle the viscosity. It sure works great for VW, however.

Boelube works that way, although you must use a Boelube device. Works great,
and is especially good on difficult to machine materials.


There were several epidemiological studies, mostly done in Europe, that
showed all kinds of problems resulting from mist coolant. However, I doubt
if they tried the Kool-Mist formulas, which are supposed to be benign.


I can't imagine any vapor being good for one's lungs---aside from water.
Too much of that can be a bad thing, too.

Harold

"Harold and Susan Vordos" wrote in message
. ..

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
snip----
You could fill it with peanut oil, like they do at Volkswagen, but I
don't know how they treat it. But don't take this seriously. They must
have a sophisticated atomizer of some kind, and the Kook-Mist rig
probably won't handle the viscosity. It sure works great for VW, however.

Boelube works that way, although you must use a Boelube device. Works
great, and is especially good on difficult to machine materials.

I don't know that one, but I haven't followed it for 5 years or so. VW's
machining economics are somewhat different than ours -- coolant disposal in
Europe costs several times more than it does here, for example -- and
they're subject to stricter health standards. But they said they were
getting good tool life and that the economics strongly favored the
peanut-oil mist.

They use an *extremely* lean spray: around 125 ml (roughly 1/2 cup) of oil
per machine, per shift.



There were several epidemiological studies, mostly done in Europe, that
showed all kinds of problems resulting from mist coolant. However, I
doubt if they tried the Kool-Mist formulas, which are supposed to be
benign.


I can't imagine any vapor being good for one's lungs---aside from water.
Too much of that can be a bad thing, too.

Same here.

--
Ed Huntress

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"Harold and Susan Vordos" wrote in message
. ..

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
snip----
You could fill it with peanut oil, like they do at Volkswagen, but I
don't know how they treat it. But don't take this seriously. They must
have a sophisticated atomizer of some kind, and the Kook-Mist rig
probably won't handle the viscosity. It sure works great for VW,
however.

Boelube works that way, although you must use a Boelube device. Works
great, and is especially good on difficult to machine materials.

I don't know that one, but I haven't followed it for 5 years or so. VW's
machining economics are somewhat different than ours -- coolant disposal
in Europe costs several times more than it does here, for example -- and
they're subject to stricter health standards. But they said they were
getting good tool life and that the economics strongly favored the
peanut-oil mist.


It's not new. I purchased the setup way back---about 1990. It's not
cheap! $90/gallon, and it is used straight from the container. Wouldn't be
the least bit surprised if it was made from peanut oil. Needless to say,
that's not mentioned.

They use an *extremely* lean spray: around 125 ml (roughly 1/2 cup) of oil
per machine, per shift.

I don't recall the consumption now, but it was low as well. I purchased the
stuff when I was building a gasketed filter press for my refining service.
Bought a sheet of unknown stainless, from which I made the retaining washers
for the filter media. I had to trepan the discs from the sheet material,
which was about .150" thick. I used a boring head with a hand ground tool,
but had no luck, breaking the tool several times. I realized I was having
a lubrication problem using sulfur based oil, so I investigated and found
Boelube. Solved the riddle perfectly.

I used a vacuum cleaner (discharged out of doors, with no filter to clog)
to pick up the vapors. I don't like breathing any of that stuff.

Ever run a centerless grinder?

You have no clue about mist until you've been around one.

Harold

I'd be concerned about being in the vicinity of any airborne liquid
droplets, and I'm a bit surprised that this has been a standard method for
machining. The concept just seems like it would be an obvious health hazard
when things like plumbing and electronics manufcturing are going to
lead-free processes, mainly out of rampant paranoia, IMO.

I haven't used a coolant or a cutting lubricant system on any of my hobby
metalworking machines, but a mist system would probably have to be my last
consideration.
Misting seems like a great idea for a greenhouse though, if people aren't
occupying the same space.

Since misting has been discussed here several times recently, I've been
wondering if an evacuation system could be utilized to minimize risk to the
folks that use mist, kind of like the removal of dust in a woodworking shop
is commonly done.

One probably wouldn't want to listen to a shop-vac whine while they're
concentrating on work and safety, or get involved in a expensive collection
system, but an almost silent squirrel cage blower intake may be sufficient
to pull the stray mist into a containment system/vessel.
The relatively high velocity air flow of a shop-vac probably wouldn't be
required anyway.

The mist will very likely condense or accumulate upon contact with a cool
surface, so trying to lift it upward could result in a messy drooling pickup
inlet.

Evacuation of mist to the outdoors would also be evacuating heated shop air,
so it becomes an issue of throwing away energy costs while heating a shop
for personal comfort.

I suppose some sort of indoor containment system could be safely utilized
with lower energy cost waste. I almost hate the over-use of the term HEPA,
kinda like the abuse of the term mil-spec, but I wouldn't think that a
sophisticated refrigeration unit with specialized high dollar filters would
be required for capture or containment of mist for a home shop machine (or 2
or 3).

Something more along the lines of passing the airflow thru a couple of
layers of screens at a low angle may be capable of capturing most of the
mist which could drop into a bucket maybe. At most, I speculate that a small
system might include a power supply and some Peltier coolers on a plate to
get the mist to drop out of the air stream.

When examining a water/oil separator for a compressed air system, the swirl
created by fins causes moisture to contact the sides of the container where
it naturally drops to the bottom of the bowl/cannister, then sits there
until it's drained by means of opening a petcock.

The water/oil separators work very well and are especially effective for
their intended/normal applications. I don't think it would take a
supergenius like the doofus that promotes the Dyson? vacuum cleaner to
invent a really cool-looking vortex or cyclone separator for a little mist.

--
WB
..........
metalworking projects
www.kwagmire.com/metal_proj.html


"Stupendous Man" wrote in message
...
I have been doing quite a bit of lathe work using a kool-mist this week and
due to cold weather have the shop closed up. I came down with a flu or
something on day 2.
They spec sheet says it totally safe, but does anyone know something
different?
Maybe just the fact that I have been breathing a lot of water vapor could
make it easier to get sick?
--
Stupendous Man,
Defender of Freedom, Advocate of Liberty

Since misting has been discussed here several times recently, I've been
wondering if an evacuation system could be utilized to minimize risk to
the folks that use mist, kind of like the removal of dust in a woodworking
shop is commonly done.

I have a system set up using a 6 inch muffin fan from a computer and some
motorhome sewer tubing that gets a large percentage of the smoke when i am
using soluable oil with water, but the mist is way too much volume for it to
get. I am going to have to do something, the windows only open to 1x2 feet,
and a fan doesn't fit well.
I guess I would be better off wearing more clothing , the woodstove blazing,
and all windows open, but its been around 25 degrees in the morning around
here. No palms in this part of California.
--
Stupendous Man,
Defender of Freedom, Advocate of Liberty

The squirrel cage/centrifugal blowers are much more effective when trying to
direct air flow thru/along lengths of ducting or tubing. The forced air
furnace type blower (but a smaller version), will push or pull air very
effectively, as demonstrated when used with duct work associated with forced
air heating or cooling systems.

Fans work well enough when they need to move air from one side of a panel to
the other, but perform poorly when used with ducts.
I believe any duct with wavy or irregular walls would be especially bad when
utilizing an ordinary fan for air flow. There are specially designed
industrial axial fans that do a good job of moving air thru ducts, but the
typical computer/appliance fans deliver poor performance.

The weather might not be so great now, but soon your environment will
improve drastically. I've been as far north as San Francisco in September,
and it seemed to get really cold at night, but that was mainly because I
spent the previous couple of months in the LA area.
Here in western PA we're having some nasty, old fashioned winter weather.
The low temps were in the -7 to -5 F range for about a week straight and I
don't think the highs were even as much as 25 F.

--
WB
..........
metalworking projects
www.kwagmire.com/metal_proj.html


"Stupendous Man" wrote in message
...
Since misting has been discussed here several times recently, I've been
wondering if an evacuation system could be utilized to minimize risk to
the folks that use mist, kind of like the removal of dust in a
woodworking shop is commonly done.

I have a system set up using a 6 inch muffin fan from a computer and some
motorhome sewer tubing that gets a large percentage of the smoke when i am
using soluable oil with water, but the mist is way too much volume for it
to get. I am going to have to do something, the windows only open to 1x2
feet, and a fan doesn't fit well.
I guess I would be better off wearing more clothing , the woodstove
blazing, and all windows open, but its been around 25 degrees in the
morning around here. No palms in this part of California.
--
Stupendous Man,
Defender of Freedom, Advocate of Liberty

"Harold and Susan Vordos" wrote in message
.. .

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"Harold and Susan Vordos" wrote in message
. ..

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
snip----
You could fill it with peanut oil, like they do at Volkswagen, but I
don't know how they treat it. But don't take this seriously. They must
have a sophisticated atomizer of some kind, and the Kook-Mist rig
probably won't handle the viscosity. It sure works great for VW,
however.

Boelube works that way, although you must use a Boelube device. Works
great, and is especially good on difficult to machine materials.

I don't know that one, but I haven't followed it for 5 years or so. VW's
machining economics are somewhat different than ours -- coolant disposal
in Europe costs several times more than it does here, for example -- and
they're subject to stricter health standards. But they said they were
getting good tool life and that the economics strongly favored the
peanut-oil mist.


It's not new. I purchased the setup way back---about 1990. It's not
cheap! $90/gallon, and it is used straight from the container. Wouldn't
be the least bit surprised if it was made from peanut oil. Needless to
say, that's not mentioned.

They use an *extremely* lean spray: around 125 ml (roughly 1/2 cup) of
oil per machine, per shift.

I don't recall the consumption now, but it was low as well. I purchased
the stuff when I was building a gasketed filter press for my refining
service. Bought a sheet of unknown stainless, from which I made the
retaining washers for the filter media. I had to trepan the discs from
the sheet material, which was about .150" thick. I used a boring head
with a hand ground tool, but had no luck, breaking the tool several times.
I realized I was having a lubrication problem using sulfur based oil, so I
investigated and found Boelube. Solved the riddle perfectly.

I used a vacuum cleaner (discharged out of doors, with no filter to clog)
to pick up the vapors. I don't like breathing any of that stuff.

Ever run a centerless grinder?

You have no clue about mist until you've been around one.

Harold

I've never run one, but I've sure been around them.

--
Ed Huntress

"Wild_Bill" wrote in message
...
I'd be concerned about being in the vicinity of any airborne liquid
droplets, and I'm a bit surprised that this has been a standard method for
machining. The concept just seems like it would be an obvious health
hazard when things like plumbing and electronics manufcturing are going to
lead-free processes, mainly out of rampant paranoia, IMO.

I haven't used a coolant or a cutting lubricant system on any of my hobby
metalworking machines, but a mist system would probably have to be my last
consideration.
Misting seems like a great idea for a greenhouse though, if people aren't
occupying the same space.

Since misting has been discussed here several times recently, I've been
wondering if an evacuation system could be utilized to minimize risk to
the folks that use mist, kind of like the removal of dust in a woodworking
shop is commonly done.

One probably wouldn't want to listen to a shop-vac whine while they're
concentrating on work and safety, or get involved in a expensive
collection system, but an almost silent squirrel cage blower intake may be
sufficient to pull the stray mist into a containment system/vessel.
The relatively high velocity air flow of a shop-vac probably wouldn't be
required anyway.

The mist will very likely condense or accumulate upon contact with a cool
surface, so trying to lift it upward could result in a messy drooling
pickup inlet.

Evacuation of mist to the outdoors would also be evacuating heated shop
air, so it becomes an issue of throwing away energy costs while heating a
shop for personal comfort.

I suppose some sort of indoor containment system could be safely utilized
with lower energy cost waste. I almost hate the over-use of the term HEPA,
kinda like the abuse of the term mil-spec, but I wouldn't think that a
sophisticated refrigeration unit with specialized high dollar filters
would be required for capture or containment of mist for a home shop
machine (or 2 or 3).

Something more along the lines of passing the airflow thru a couple of
layers of screens at a low angle may be capable of capturing most of the
mist which could drop into a bucket maybe. At most, I speculate that a
small system might include a power supply and some Peltier coolers on a
plate to get the mist to drop out of the air stream.

When examining a water/oil separator for a compressed air system, the
swirl created by fins causes moisture to contact the sides of the
container where it naturally drops to the bottom of the bowl/cannister,
then sits there until it's drained by means of opening a petcock.

The water/oil separators work very well and are especially effective for
their intended/normal applications. I don't think it would take a
supergenius like the doofus that promotes the Dyson? vacuum cleaner to
invent a really cool-looking vortex or cyclone separator for a little
mist.

--
WB

One thing that we hobbyists often forget is that machine tools used in
production today are mostly fully enclosed. In some cases (more in Europe
than here in the US) they're also fully ventilated. And the exhaust from
these systems is NOT ventilated to the outdoors. It generally goes to some
kind of central collection system.

--
Ed Huntress

In article ,
"Ed Huntress" wrote:

One thing that we hobbyists often forget is that machine tools used in
production today are mostly fully enclosed.

Of course, with a fully enclosed (and CNC) tool, might as well use flood
coolant rather than a mist...

Still using a can of oil and a brush, given my unenclosed manual tools.
Might consider cooling with compressed air, if I get a better compressor.

--
Cats, coffee, chocolate...vices to live by

"Ecnerwal" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Ed Huntress" wrote:

One thing that we hobbyists often forget is that machine tools used in
production today are mostly fully enclosed.

Of course, with a fully enclosed (and CNC) tool, might as well use flood
coolant rather than a mist...

Not necessarily. Most of today's advanced cutters, with multiple coatings of
ceramic materials (titanium nitride, titanium carbide, titanium
carbo-nitride, aluminum oxide, etc., etc.) can't tolerate thermal shock. So
they're often run dry, at speeds that produce red-hot chips. Or, if
necessary, some can be run with mist coolant. The coatings with aluminum
oxide won't work properly unless the AlOx is hot enough to vaporize, so they
don't cool them at all.

But running flood coolant, particularly in milling operations, will crack
the coatings all to hell.


Still using a can of oil and a brush, given my unenclosed manual tools.
Might consider cooling with compressed air, if I get a better compressor.

You probably don't need cooling at all, unless you're running your tools at
maximum speeds. What you and I need is lubrication, not cooling.

--
Ed Huntress

Yep, I was thinking of fully enclosed machines as about the only alternative
for a mist system while I was writing, and picturing the enclosed Haas
mini-mill that someone mentioned the other day.

I would very likely need a fire extinguisher before coolant with my
machines. I generally just dribble a bit of cutting lubricant out of a
plastic dispenser bottle while cutting metals.

I've managed to get some blue chips once in a while, but only maybe a
handful, certainly not wheelbarrows full.

Even if I were set up to do production-like quantities of a part
occasionally, I would very likely just rig up a gravity feed dribble
spout/tube to deliver cutting lube to the cutting tool.

I can easily suspect a couple of HSMs here actually looking for enema kits
at a Goodwill thrift shop.

--
WB
..........
metalworking projects
www.kwagmire.com/metal_proj.html


"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"Wild_Bill" wrote in message
...
I'd be concerned about being in the vicinity of any airborne liquid
droplets, and I'm a bit surprised that this has been a standard method
for machining. The concept just seems like it would be an obvious health
hazard when things like plumbing and electronics manufcturing are going
to lead-free processes, mainly out of rampant paranoia, IMO.

I haven't used a coolant or a cutting lubricant system on any of my hobby
metalworking machines, but a mist system would probably have to be my
last consideration.
Misting seems like a great idea for a greenhouse though, if people aren't
occupying the same space.


One thing that we hobbyists often forget is that machine tools used in
production today are mostly fully enclosed. In some cases (more in Europe
than here in the US) they're also fully ventilated. And the exhaust from
these systems is NOT ventilated to the outdoors. It generally goes to some
kind of central collection system.

--
Ed Huntress

"Wild_Bill" wrote in message
...
Yep, I was thinking of fully enclosed machines as about the only
alternative for a mist system while I was writing, and picturing the
enclosed Haas mini-mill that someone mentioned the other day.

I would very likely need a fire extinguisher before coolant with my
machines. I generally just dribble a bit of cutting lubricant out of a
plastic dispenser bottle while cutting metals.

I've managed to get some blue chips once in a while, but only maybe a
handful, certainly not wheelbarrows full.

Even if I were set up to do production-like quantities of a part
occasionally, I would very likely just rig up a gravity feed dribble
spout/tube to deliver cutting lube to the cutting tool.

I can easily suspect a couple of HSMs here actually looking for enema kits
at a Goodwill thrift shop.

--
WB

LOL! Yes, I'll bet you could rig up something from one of those. g

This whole subject needs a good venting here. Over the years I've seen an
endless stream of misconceptions about coolants and lubricants, and, of
course, we have a wide range of hobbyists and commercial shops represented
here, using many different types and vintages of machines. Most of us
hobbyists, running 60-year-old toolroom-type lathes and HSS tools, have no
business running coolant of any kind. We should be using cutting oils, not
soluble oils or synthetics. And, except for people using better production
machines of more recent vintage, few of us run carbide at its limits,
either, and have little or no need for coolants. Coolants come into play
when you're running close to the temperature tolerance of your tools, and
you're trying to extend tool life lost to heat softening. Lubricants reduce
tool loads, give better finishes, and extend edge sharpness lost to
abrasion. Water-soluble (miscable) coolants and synthetic solutions, with
few exceptions, are only mediocre lubricants. Most of us would be better off
with lard oil or mineral-based cutting oils.

Maybe we'll get around to it one of these days, and really dig into the
subject.

--
Ed Huntress

.........
metalworking projects
www.kwagmire.com/metal_proj.html


"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"Wild_Bill" wrote in message
...
I'd be concerned about being in the vicinity of any airborne liquid
droplets, and I'm a bit surprised that this has been a standard method
for machining. The concept just seems like it would be an obvious health
hazard when things like plumbing and electronics manufcturing are going
to lead-free processes, mainly out of rampant paranoia, IMO.

I haven't used a coolant or a cutting lubricant system on any of my
hobby metalworking machines, but a mist system would probably have to be
my last consideration.
Misting seems like a great idea for a greenhouse though, if people
aren't occupying the same space.


One thing that we hobbyists often forget is that machine tools used in
production today are mostly fully enclosed. In some cases (more in Europe
than here in the US) they're also fully ventilated. And the exhaust from
these systems is NOT ventilated to the outdoors. It generally goes to
some kind of central collection system.

--
Ed Huntress

This whole subject needs a good venting here. Over the years I've seen an
endless stream of misconceptions about coolants and lubricants, and, of
course, we have a wide range of hobbyists and commercial shops represented
here, using many different types and vintages of machines. Most of us
hobbyists, running 60-year-old toolroom-type lathes and HSS tools, have no
business running coolant of any kind. We should be using cutting oils, not
soluble oils or synthetics. And, except for people using better production
machines of more recent vintage, few of us run carbide at its limits,
either, and have little or no need for coolants. Coolants come into


OK, educate me. I am using a series one Bridgeport mill and a 70s Graziano
lathe. I mostly use carbide indexable cutting tools, but some solid carbide
and HSS mills. What lubricants (available in California) would be best for
steel and titanium? I am with happy with kerosene for aluminum , and cut
magnesium dry.
I generally keep my speeds and feeds to the low side to reduce tool costs,
and avoid blue chips. Should I let the work get really hot, and then have to
figure shrinkage into the final dimension?

I personally disagree with bashing of flood coolant as used on
lathes. (and, granted, I do not have much experience).

First, with reasonable speeds, flood coolant is not being sprayed
around by rotating parts that are being turned. Not enough centripetal
force, at speeds that seem reasonable to me. The only way it would get
sprayed around, for me, is if it would find its way on the chuck
itself, as in turning near the chuck.

The solution is to make or install a chuck guard, and be done with it.

The improvements in finish, carbide tool life, etc, that coolant
brings, are rather dramatic. It comes with a few hassles, coolant
cleaning, but they are worth it.

The above assumes that your lathe is already set up for flood coolant,
has a sump, pump, shield in the back, chip tray that drains into the
sump, etc.

I really wish I had a good way to run flood on my Bridgeport, but I
cannot think of any way to do it.

i

"Stupendous Man" wrote in message
...
This whole subject needs a good venting here. Over the years I've seen an
endless stream of misconceptions about coolants and lubricants, and, of
course, we have a wide range of hobbyists and commercial shops
represented here, using many different types and vintages of machines.
Most of us hobbyists, running 60-year-old toolroom-type lathes and HSS
tools, have no business running coolant of any kind. We should be using
cutting oils, not soluble oils or synthetics. And, except for people
using better production machines of more recent vintage, few of us run
carbide at its limits, either, and have little or no need for coolants.
Coolants come into


OK, educate me. I am using a series one Bridgeport mill and a 70s Graziano
lathe. I mostly use carbide indexable cutting tools, but some solid
carbide and HSS mills. What lubricants (available in California) would be
best for steel and titanium? I am with happy with kerosene for aluminum ,
and cut magnesium dry.

You'll generally get better performance in steel by using a mineral-based
cutting oil or a vegetable oil than a water-soluble oil. Sulfur is a nice
touch, especially if you're inclined toward high feedrates. It stinks,
however.

Blaser makes some of each. Check them out. As for titanium, I'd give Blaser
a call. There are several other suppliers, some a lot cheaper than Blaser.

I generally keep my speeds and feeds to the low side to reduce tool costs,
and avoid blue chips. Should I let the work get really hot, and then have
to figure shrinkage into the final dimension?

Only if you're doing production work. Chances are you don't have enough
spindle speed to get hot chips while leaving the work cool; if you did, you
wouldn't be asking these questions. g That game starts at around 2,000
sfm. (600 m/min.)

So you're stuck with hot chips and possibly a hot workpiece if you go fast.
But if you're going slowly enough to avoid blue chips, how much is your
workpiece really heating up, anyway?

--
Ed Huntress

"Ignoramus20251" wrote in message
...
I personally disagree with bashing of flood coolant as used on
lathes. (and, granted, I do not have much experience).

First, with reasonable speeds, flood coolant is not being sprayed
around by rotating parts that are being turned. Not enough centripetal
force, at speeds that seem reasonable to me. The only way it would get
sprayed around, for me, is if it would find its way on the chuck
itself, as in turning near the chuck.

Iggy, if you're not turning fast enough for that coolant to fling half way
across the shop floor, you aren't turning fast enough to justify
water-miscable coolant.


The solution is to make or install a chuck guard, and be done with it.

The improvements in finish, carbide tool life, etc, that coolant
brings, are rather dramatic. It comes with a few hassles, coolant
cleaning, but they are worth it.

The above assumes that your lathe is already set up for flood coolant,
has a sump, pump, shield in the back, chip tray that drains into the
sump, etc.

I really wish I had a good way to run flood on my Bridgeport, but I
cannot think of any way to do it.

There are two reasons that water-miscible coolants are used in industry:
First, they're cheap compared to oil. Second, they let you run your tools
balls-to-the-wall -- fast enough that tool life is already on the threshold
of deteriorating rapidly from the speed. That's where you want to be in
production turning. They do NOT tune those jobs for maximum tool life. They
tune them for lowest total production cost.

We used coolant in the small shop I worked in for one reason only: It was
cheap.

Because they're cheap, coolants can be economical overall in a commercial
shop, even if you aren't pushing surface speeds to the limit. But they don't
make a lot of sense in most hobby shops, unless you have a CNC mill with a
15,000 rpm spindle.

--
Ed Huntress

Ignoramus20251 wrote:

I personally disagree with bashing of flood coolant as used on
lathes. (and, granted, I do not have much experience).

First, with reasonable speeds, flood coolant is not being sprayed
around by rotating parts that are being turned. Not enough centripetal
force, at speeds that seem reasonable to me. The only way it would get
sprayed around, for me, is if it would find its way on the chuck
itself, as in turning near the chuck.

The solution is to make or install a chuck guard, and be done with it.

The improvements in finish, carbide tool life, etc, that coolant
brings, are rather dramatic. It comes with a few hassles, coolant
cleaning, but they are worth it.

The above assumes that your lathe is already set up for flood coolant,
has a sump, pump, shield in the back, chip tray that drains into the
sump, etc.

I really wish I had a good way to run flood on my Bridgeport, but I
cannot think of any way to do it.

i

You can run flood coolant on your Bridgeport. You have to find or
fabricate the perimeter shields to contain spray / splash (they attached
to the mill table) and plumb the two ports at the back of the T nut
insertion / removal channels at each end of the table to your coolant
tank.

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"Ignoramus20251" wrote in message
...
I personally disagree with bashing of flood coolant as used on
lathes. (and, granted, I do not have much experience).

First, with reasonable speeds, flood coolant is not being sprayed
around by rotating parts that are being turned. Not enough centripetal
force, at speeds that seem reasonable to me. The only way it would get
sprayed around, for me, is if it would find its way on the chuck
itself, as in turning near the chuck.

Iggy, if you're not turning fast enough for that coolant to fling half way
across the shop floor, you aren't turning fast enough to justify
water-miscable coolant.

Sorry Ed, that just isn't true.

JC

On 2009-01-30, Pete C. wrote:

Ignoramus20251 wrote:

I personally disagree with bashing of flood coolant as used on
lathes. (and, granted, I do not have much experience).

First, with reasonable speeds, flood coolant is not being sprayed
around by rotating parts that are being turned. Not enough centripetal
force, at speeds that seem reasonable to me. The only way it would get
sprayed around, for me, is if it would find its way on the chuck
itself, as in turning near the chuck.

The solution is to make or install a chuck guard, and be done with it.

The improvements in finish, carbide tool life, etc, that coolant
brings, are rather dramatic. It comes with a few hassles, coolant
cleaning, but they are worth it.

The above assumes that your lathe is already set up for flood coolant,
has a sump, pump, shield in the back, chip tray that drains into the
sump, etc.

I really wish I had a good way to run flood on my Bridgeport, but I
cannot think of any way to do it.

i

You can run flood coolant on your Bridgeport. You have to find or
fabricate the perimeter shields to contain spray / splash (they attached
to the mill table) and plumb the two ports at the back of the T nut
insertion / removal channels at each end of the table to your coolant
tank.

Well, the question is how to work with the shields on.

If I could find a way to do it, I would be delighted to proceed.
--
Due to extreme spam originating from Google Groups, and their inattention
to spammers, I and many others block all articles originating
from Google Groups. If you want your postings to be seen by
more readers you will need to find a different means of
posting on Usenet.
http://improve-usenet.org/

On the subject, sort of....

I quit using RapidTap and such, for drilling or anyplace it would
"smoke", as it gave me a bad cough and a sore throat every time. Lotta
that stuff isn't as good for your health as it is for your sanity
(ease of work..no broken taps), etc.

On the subject of heat and carbide, it was pretty amazing at IMTS2008
to see Valenite (I think) and Hurco (I think) running a rough milling
technique called "Ram Cycle Milling" (I think).
Anyway, all my "I thinks" aside, on a 50 taper spindle they used about
a 3" diameter roughing mill by 2" depth of cut and literaly rammed it
into the work doing an edge cut (followed later in the demo by a
pocket cut), and would cut at high force and reasonable feed for only
about 1 or 2 seconds, back off for 1 second, and repeat. Scary to
watch, but nothing but the chips seemed to get hot.

Take care.

Brian Lawson,
Bothwell, Ontario.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

On Fri, 30 Jan 2009 09:40:47 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"Ecnerwal" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Ed Huntress" wrote:

One thing that we hobbyists often forget is that machine tools used in
production today are mostly fully enclosed.

Of course, with a fully enclosed (and CNC) tool, might as well use flood
coolant rather than a mist...

Not necessarily. Most of today's advanced cutters, with multiple coatings of
ceramic materials (titanium nitride, titanium carbide, titanium
carbo-nitride, aluminum oxide, etc., etc.) can't tolerate thermal shock. So
they're often run dry, at speeds that produce red-hot chips. Or, if
necessary, some can be run with mist coolant. The coatings with aluminum
oxide won't work properly unless the AlOx is hot enough to vaporize, so they
don't cool them at all.

But running flood coolant, particularly in milling operations, will crack
the coatings all to hell.


Still using a can of oil and a brush, given my unenclosed manual tools.
Might consider cooling with compressed air, if I get a better compressor.

You probably don't need cooling at all, unless you're running your tools at
maximum speeds. What you and I need is lubrication, not cooling.

On Fri, 30 Jan 2009 10:45:00 -0800, "Stupendous Man"
wrote:
SNIP
OK, educate me. I am using a series one Bridgeport mill and a 70s Graziano
lathe. I mostly use carbide indexable cutting tools, but some solid carbide
and HSS mills. What lubricants (available in California) would be best for
steel and titanium? I am with happy with kerosene for aluminum , and cut
magnesium dry.
SNIP


Well, I can use my own "drool" now, just thinking about that
Graziano!!!! ZOWWEEE!!

Take care.

Brian Lawson.

"John R. Carroll" wrote in message
...

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"Ignoramus20251" wrote in message
...
I personally disagree with bashing of flood coolant as used on
lathes. (and, granted, I do not have much experience).

First, with reasonable speeds, flood coolant is not being sprayed
around by rotating parts that are being turned. Not enough centripetal
force, at speeds that seem reasonable to me. The only way it would get
sprayed around, for me, is if it would find its way on the chuck
itself, as in turning near the chuck.

Iggy, if you're not turning fast enough for that coolant to fling half
way across the shop floor, you aren't turning fast enough to justify
water-miscable coolant.

Sorry Ed, that just isn't true.

JC

Oh, boy, shades of cool-grinding HSS. g

OK, John, please tell me why it's not true.

--
Ed Huntress

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"John R. Carroll" wrote in message
...

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"Ignoramus20251" wrote in message
...
I personally disagree with bashing of flood coolant as used on
lathes. (and, granted, I do not have much experience).

First, with reasonable speeds, flood coolant is not being sprayed
around by rotating parts that are being turned. Not enough centripetal
force, at speeds that seem reasonable to me. The only way it would get
sprayed around, for me, is if it would find its way on the chuck
itself, as in turning near the chuck.

Iggy, if you're not turning fast enough for that coolant to fling half
way across the shop floor, you aren't turning fast enough to justify
water-miscable coolant.

Sorry Ed, that just isn't true.

JC

Oh, boy, shades of cool-grinding HSS. g

OK, John, please tell me why it's not true.

Well drilling and tapping for two but believe me Ed your tools and finishes
will defenitely benefit from a steady stream of coolant.
A travelling shield ( on the cross slide) and a coolant stream are worth the
trouble.

I had a guy instruct me on the fine art of facing, drilling and then tapping
pillar supports once. I'd finished fifty of the things without a hitch by
the time he'd realized the joke was on him.
Shall I tell a story or sing a song?
LOL

JC

On 2009-01-31, John R. Carroll jcarroll@ubu wrote:
Well drilling and tapping for two but believe me Ed your tools and finishes
will defenitely benefit from a steady stream of coolant.
A travelling shield ( on the cross slide) and a coolant stream are worth the
trouble.

That's what I have, a traveling shield and a chuck shield. Works
great.

i

I had a guy instruct me on the fine art of facing, drilling and then tapping
pillar supports once. I'd finished fifty of the things without a hitch by
the time he'd realized the joke was on him.
Shall I tell a story or sing a song?
LOL

JC



--
Due to extreme spam originating from Google Groups, and their inattention
to spammers, I and many others block all articles originating
from Google Groups. If you want your postings to be seen by
more readers you will need to find a different means of
posting on Usenet.
http://improve-usenet.org/

"John R. Carroll" wrote in message
...

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"John R. Carroll" wrote in message
...

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"Ignoramus20251" wrote in message
...
I personally disagree with bashing of flood coolant as used on
lathes. (and, granted, I do not have much experience).

First, with reasonable speeds, flood coolant is not being sprayed
around by rotating parts that are being turned. Not enough centripetal
force, at speeds that seem reasonable to me. The only way it would get
sprayed around, for me, is if it would find its way on the chuck
itself, as in turning near the chuck.

Iggy, if you're not turning fast enough for that coolant to fling half
way across the shop floor, you aren't turning fast enough to justify
water-miscable coolant.

Sorry Ed, that just isn't true.

JC

Oh, boy, shades of cool-grinding HSS. g

OK, John, please tell me why it's not true.

Well drilling and tapping for two but believe me Ed your tools and
finishes will defenitely benefit from a steady stream of coolant.

OK, let's explore this, because this is the heart of what I'm talking about.
This is where carrying over production practice to hobby practice can result
in misconceptions.

Yes, a stream of fluid will flush chips and greatly improve drilling and
tapping. Through-hole flushing is best, but a well-directed stream helps a
lot if the holes aren't too deep, even without through-hole flushing.

But that's NOT because it's coolant. It's because it's fluid. As you know,
gun drilling in difficult material was (maybe still is) done with
through-hole flushing of oil, not coolant. Oil is a much better lubricant
and it will give better performance in most cases.

However, it's expensive; modern cutting tools often don't need it (as many
don't need, or benefit from, cooling); and it's a mess when applied as a
flood in production. Anyone who has been around a gear-hobbing production
operation that uses a flood of oil lubricant knows all about it. I used to
go through a pair of leather-soled shoes every few months when I was
covering gearmaking. g

In a hobby operation, most people don't have a sump, a pressure coolant
system, and flex nozzles. They don't have through-hole tools with glands and
pressure fittings. But some get the idea that it's the coolant that's the
issue here, when the fact is that coolant is just a lot cheaper and leaves
somewhat less slime on the floor. And it creates some problems that you
don't have with oil, which matter in production but not in a hobby shop.

A travelling shield ( on the cross slide) and a coolant stream are worth
the trouble.

As for tools benefitting from it, what kinds of tools, run at what surface
speeds? Again, let's separate the layer-cake exotic coated carbides, CBN,
ceramics, coated diamond and so on that you may be using in your commercial
operation, often with radiused edges that we could barely get to cut in our
old (or Chinese) machines, from the HSS and plain grades of carbide used in
the typical hobby shop. This is, after all, RCM, and this kind of basic info
is of greatest interest and use to hobbyists.

In general, in commercial machining, tool life is a minor factor in the
production cost equation, as you know. In a home shop, it's a very big deal.
Oil will, in most cases, give longer tool life under hobby-shop conditions
than will water-miscible oil. We don't need cooling unless we're pushing the
envelope for maximum production rates. We need lubrication to protect tool
edges and to reduce cutting forces, partly to get the most out of the feeble
horsepower our old machines have and partly to minimize the spring of those
old machines, like my South Bend 10L.

You mention improved surface finish with flood coolant. Again, compared to
what? At what speeds, and with what kind of machines? Most hobby machinists
use a brush or drip lubrication. If we have the luxury of pressure
lubrication, we may get better finishes with flood *coolant* (although I
doubt it -- try using some modern mineral-based oil on the same job some
time), but it's NOT because we're using coolant. It's because we're using
pressure to get fluid into the cut interface a little better than you can
with drip or by brushing ahead of the cut.

One place where the different effects of lubrication really show up is in
cutting a deep, long thread, or an Acme thread. Try it with sulfated oil, or
even a plain mineral-based cutting oil, and then with a typical coolant, on
a long screw on a 50-year-old lathe. That's a real test, and the oil, in my
experience, beats the coolant hands-down. There's just a lot less drag on
the tool, which pays off in several ways.


I had a guy instruct me on the fine art of facing, drilling and then
tapping pillar supports once. I'd finished fifty of the things without a
hitch by the time he'd realized the joke was on him.
Shall I tell a story or sing a song?
LOL

I'm not sure I'm following you, but it sounds like a production story. I
don't think I've ever made 50 of anything in my home shop.

--
Ed Huntress

Ignoramus20251 wrote:

On 2009-01-30, Pete C. wrote:

Ignoramus20251 wrote:

I personally disagree with bashing of flood coolant as used on
lathes. (and, granted, I do not have much experience).

First, with reasonable speeds, flood coolant is not being sprayed
around by rotating parts that are being turned. Not enough centripetal
force, at speeds that seem reasonable to me. The only way it would get
sprayed around, for me, is if it would find its way on the chuck
itself, as in turning near the chuck.

The solution is to make or install a chuck guard, and be done with it.

The improvements in finish, carbide tool life, etc, that coolant
brings, are rather dramatic. It comes with a few hassles, coolant
cleaning, but they are worth it.

The above assumes that your lathe is already set up for flood coolant,
has a sump, pump, shield in the back, chip tray that drains into the
sump, etc.

I really wish I had a good way to run flood on my Bridgeport, but I
cannot think of any way to do it.

i

You can run flood coolant on your Bridgeport. You have to find or
fabricate the perimeter shields to contain spray / splash (they attached
to the mill table) and plumb the two ports at the back of the T nut
insertion / removal channels at each end of the table to your coolant
tank.

Well, the question is how to work with the shields on.

If I could find a way to do it, I would be delighted to proceed.

Probably the reason you don't find many Bridgeports setup for flood,
though you can find pictures of the setup.

A couple possibilities:

- Mini cam and an LCD monitor hanging along side the DRO, pretend you're
a surgeon.

- Convert to CNC.

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"John R. Carroll" wrote in message
...

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"John R. Carroll" wrote in message
...

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"Ignoramus20251" wrote in
message ...
I personally disagree with bashing of flood coolant as used on
lathes. (and, granted, I do not have much experience).


OK, let's explore this,

Let's not and say we did Ed.
LOL
One thing your analysis omits is the lazy factor, if you want to call it
that, especially in a HSM environment.


because this is the heart of what I'm talking about.
This is where carrying over production practice to hobby practice can
result in misconceptions.

Yes, a stream of fluid will flush chips and greatly improve drilling and
tapping. Through-hole flushing is best, but a well-directed stream helps a
lot if the holes aren't too deep, even without through-hole flushing.

But that's NOT because it's coolant. It's because it's fluid. As you know,
gun drilling in difficult material was (maybe still is) done with
through-hole flushing of oil, not coolant. Oil is a much better lubricant
and it will give better performance in most cases.

OK but I've seen a lot of guys ruin a drill when the squirt bottle runs ot a
half inch before the hole does.


However, it's expensive; modern cutting tools often don't need it (as many
don't need, or benefit from, cooling); and it's a mess when applied as a
flood in production. Anyone who has been around a gear-hobbing production
operation that uses a flood of oil lubricant knows all about it. I used to
go through a pair of leather-soled shoes every few months when I was
covering gearmaking. g

In a hobby operation, most people don't have a sump, a pressure coolant
system, and flex nozzles. They don't have through-hole tools with glands
and pressure fittings. But some get the idea that it's the coolant that's
the issue here, when the fact is that coolant is just a lot cheaper and
leaves somewhat less slime on the floor. And it creates some problems that
you don't have with oil, which matter in production but not in a hobby
shop.

I've never seen a lathe without a sump or a pan so you have me there.


A travelling shield ( on the cross slide) and a coolant stream are worth
the trouble.

As for tools benefitting from it, what kinds of tools, run at what surface
speeds?

HSS or indexable uncoated carbide turning tools


Again, let's separate the layer-cake exotic coated carbides, CBN, ceramics,
coated diamond and so on that you may be using in your commercial
operation, often with radiused edges that we could barely get to cut in our
old (or Chinese) machines, from the HSS and plain grades of carbide used in
the typical hobby shop. This is, after all, RCM, and this kind of basic
info is of greatest interest and use to hobbyists.

In general, in commercial machining, tool life is a minor factor in the
production cost equation, as you know. In a home shop, it's a very big
deal. Oil will, in most cases, give longer tool life under hobby-shop
conditions than will water-miscible oil. We don't need cooling unless
we're pushing the envelope for maximum production rates. We need
lubrication to protect tool edges and to reduce cutting forces, partly to
get the most out of the feeble horsepower our old machines have and partly
to minimize the spring of those old machines, like my South Bend 10L.

Exactly, and soluble oil (lard based) is probably what I'd be using.
Can you still get that sruff?


You mention improved surface finish with flood coolant. Again, compared to
what? At what speeds, and with what kind of machines? Most hobby
machinists use a brush or drip lubrication. If we have the luxury of
pressure lubrication, we may get better finishes with flood *coolant*
(although I doubt it -- try using some modern mineral-based oil on the
same job some time), but it's NOT because we're using coolant. It's
because we're using pressure to get fluid into the cut interface a little
better than you can with drip or by brushing ahead of the cut.

Consistency counts Ed. A coolant stream at low preassure that doesn't need a
third hand is going to give a better result overall because it's consistent.
Oil that isn't brushed on appropriately isn't much good.

I had a guy instruct me on the fine art of facing, drilling and then
tapping pillar supports once. I'd finished fifty of the things without a
hitch by the time he'd realized the joke was on him.
Shall I tell a story or sing a song?
LOL

I'm not sure I'm following you, but it sounds like a production story. I
don't think I've ever made 50 of anything in my home shop.

Mold shops don't do production anything Ed, at least they didn't in those
days.

JC