This is just too neat to not pass on.

http://www.shipsnostalgia.com/guides...turing_Process

no CNC here.

Thank You,
Randy

Remove 333 from email address to reply.

no CNC here.

Nice!. No safety glasses either.

"Randy" wrote in message
...
This is just too neat to not pass on.

http://www.shipsnostalgia.com/guides...turing_Process

no CNC here.

Thank You,
Randy

Remove 333 from email address to reply.

Interesting! Some BIG swarf in a few of the pics.

--Very neat site and photo archive; decided to join!

--
"Steamboat Ed" Haas : Imagine what I could do if
Hacking the Trailing Edge! : I knew what I was doing...
www.nmpproducts.com
---Decks a-wash in a sea of words---

On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 08:06:54 -0400, the infamous Randy
scrawled the following:

This is just too neat to not pass on.

http://www.shipsnostalgia.com/guides...turing_Process

no CNC here.

Cool as hell is right, Randy. Man, I'd never seen a drill press that
big, but when I saw the guy cutting out the crank webs (1 foot thick
in one pass) with the cutting torch, I was impressed. Oh, later pics
show that it's using a template to guide the torch on its rounds.

Are those half inch thick pieces of swarf the guy is cutting into the
sides of the webs on the mill? Bigass chips, mon. Is that where you
use a face mill or flycutter? (pic with two webs on the table, one
marked 487/56, and the pic below it)

Those are (ahem) large engines!

--
Real freedom lies in wildness, not in civilization.
-- Charles Lindbergh

Larry Jaques wrote:
On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 08:06:54 -0400, the infamous Randy
scrawled the following:


This is just too neat to not pass on.

http://www.shipsnostalgia.com/guides...turing_Process

no CNC here.


Cool as hell is right, Randy. Man, I'd never seen a drill press that
big, but when I saw the guy cutting out the crank webs (1 foot thick
in one pass) with the cutting torch, I was impressed. Oh, later pics
show that it's using a template to guide the torch on its rounds.

Are those half inch thick pieces of swarf the guy is cutting into the
sides of the webs on the mill? Bigass chips, mon. Is that where you
use a face mill or flycutter? (pic with two webs on the table, one
marked 487/56, and the pic below it)

Those are (ahem) large engines!

--
Real freedom lies in wildness, not in civilization.
-- Charles Lindbergh

I saw those pics and it reminded me of a guy I know that had shaper
chips that looked like car coil springs sitting on his mantle piece from
a place he used to work.
Regarding the flame cutting I get stuff done on occasions by a company
that can do upto about 18" thick steel, I don't require anything like
that though.

Stupendous Man wrote:
no CNC here.

Nice!. No safety glasses either.

That's because the chips would go throught the glasses and come out the back
of your head.

"Randy" wrote in message
...
This is just too neat to not pass on.

http://www.shipsnostalgia.com/guides...turing_Process

no CNC here.

Thank You,
Randy

Remove 333 from email address to reply.

Thanks for the pictures.
HEADS UP!! Don't forget you can park your mouse on most of the pictures
and get a minimal description of what you are seeing.

Thanks again,

Ivan Vegvary

On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 13:17:43 -0700, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 08:06:54 -0400, the infamous Randy
scrawled the following:

This is just too neat to not pass on.

http://www.shipsnostalgia.com/guides...turing_Process

no CNC here.

Cool as hell is right, Randy. Man, I'd never seen a drill press that
big, but when I saw the guy cutting out the crank webs (1 foot thick
in one pass) with the cutting torch, I was impressed. Oh, later pics
show that it's using a template to guide the torch on its rounds.

Are those half inch thick pieces of swarf the guy is cutting into the
sides of the webs on the mill? Bigass chips, mon. Is that where you
use a face mill or flycutter? (pic with two webs on the table, one
marked 487/56, and the pic below it)

Those are (ahem) large engines!

Larry, I think that's a planer. And 4 and 5 down from there they're
using a vertical shaper to do the outside profile.

Pete Keillor

Larry Jaques wrote:
On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 08:06:54 -0400, the infamous Randy
scrawled the following:

This is just too neat to not pass on.

http://www.shipsnostalgia.com/guides...turing_Process

no CNC here.

Cool as hell is right, Randy. Man, I'd never seen a drill press that
big, but when I saw the guy cutting out the crank webs (1 foot thick
in one pass) with the cutting torch, I was impressed. Oh, later pics
show that it's using a template to guide the torch on its rounds.

Are those half inch thick pieces of swarf the guy is cutting into the
sides of the webs on the mill? Bigass chips, mon. Is that where you
use a face mill or flycutter? (pic with two webs on the table, one
marked 487/56, and the pic below it)

That is a BIG horizontal shaper!

Just think about how many times the folks working with those tools were
asked "So what do you do?" With an answer of "Oh I just operate a lathe,
shaper, cutting torch, with no other explanation regarding the SIZE of
the equipment"


Those are (ahem) large engines!

--
Real freedom lies in wildness, not in civilization.
-- Charles Lindbergh


--
Steve W.

On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 18:23:42 -0400, the infamous Pete Keillor
scrawled the following:

On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 13:17:43 -0700, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 08:06:54 -0400, the infamous Randy
scrawled the following:

This is just too neat to not pass on.

http://www.shipsnostalgia.com/guides...turing_Process

no CNC here.

Cool as hell is right, Randy. Man, I'd never seen a drill press that
big, but when I saw the guy cutting out the crank webs (1 foot thick
in one pass) with the cutting torch, I was impressed. Oh, later pics
show that it's using a template to guide the torch on its rounds.

Are those half inch thick pieces of swarf the guy is cutting into the
sides of the webs on the mill? Bigass chips, mon. Is that where you
use a face mill or flycutter? (pic with two webs on the table, one
marked 487/56, and the pic below it)

Those are (ahem) large engines!

Larry, I think that's a planer. And 4 and 5 down from there they're
using a vertical shaper to do the outside profile.

Ayup, mouseover showed "planing" so I guess they're shifting both
those big, honkin' webs under the shaper knife. Planing = shaping,
right?

--
The doctor can bury his mistakes, but an architect
can only advise his client to plant vines.
--FLW

On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 08:06:54 -0400, Randy
wrote:

This is just too neat to not pass on.

http://www.shipsnostalgia.com/guides...turing_Process

no CNC here.

Thank You,
Randy

Remove 333 from email address to reply.
========
Thanks for sharing.


Unka' George [George McDuffee]
-------------------------------------------
He that will not apply new remedies,
must expect new evils:
for Time is the greatest innovator: and
if Time, of course, alter things to the worse,
and wisdom and counsel shall not alter them to the better,
what shall be the end?

Francis Bacon (1561-1626), English philosopher, essayist, statesman.
Essays, "Of Innovations" (1597-1625).

On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 16:34:25 -0700, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 18:23:42 -0400, the infamous Pete Keillor
scrawled the following:

On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 13:17:43 -0700, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 08:06:54 -0400, the infamous Randy
scrawled the following:

This is just too neat to not pass on.

http://www.shipsnostalgia.com/guides...turing_Process

no CNC here.

Cool as hell is right, Randy. Man, I'd never seen a drill press that
big, but when I saw the guy cutting out the crank webs (1 foot thick
in one pass) with the cutting torch, I was impressed. Oh, later pics
show that it's using a template to guide the torch on its rounds.

Are those half inch thick pieces of swarf the guy is cutting into the
sides of the webs on the mill? Bigass chips, mon. Is that where you
use a face mill or flycutter? (pic with two webs on the table, one
marked 487/56, and the pic below it)

Those are (ahem) large engines!

Larry, I think that's a planer. And 4 and 5 down from there they're
using a vertical shaper to do the outside profile.

Ayup, mouseover showed "planing" so I guess they're shifting both
those big, honkin' webs under the shaper knife. Planing = shaping,
right?

Yep. Used on bigger pieces. It doesn't seem that easy to me to move a
table with a 10-20' stroke, but I guess it's easier than moving a 30'
ram. I've seen lots of planers in museums and such, never seen one
working. Man, that would be something. I really enjoy watching my
shaper do its thing.

Pete

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 18:23:42 -0400, the infamous Pete Keillor
scrawled the following:

On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 13:17:43 -0700, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 08:06:54 -0400, the infamous Randy
scrawled the following:

This is just too neat to not pass on.

http://www.shipsnostalgia.com/guides...turing_Process

no CNC here.

Cool as hell is right, Randy. Man, I'd never seen a drill press that
big, but when I saw the guy cutting out the crank webs (1 foot thick
in one pass) with the cutting torch, I was impressed. Oh, later pics
show that it's using a template to guide the torch on its rounds.

Are those half inch thick pieces of swarf the guy is cutting into the
sides of the webs on the mill? Bigass chips, mon. Is that where you
use a face mill or flycutter? (pic with two webs on the table, one
marked 487/56, and the pic below it)

Those are (ahem) large engines!

Larry, I think that's a planer. And 4 and 5 down from there they're
using a vertical shaper to do the outside profile.

Ayup, mouseover showed "planing" so I guess they're shifting both
those big, honkin' webs under the shaper knife. Planing = shaping,
right?

Well, in planing, the work moves on long bedways while the tool remains
stationary. In shaping, the tool moves and the work stays still. Planers
were used for surfacing long parts. Most planers were converted to
planer-mills near the end of that era. A few are still around, but the big
engines, big machine tools, and other things that required planing are not
as prevalent as they once were.

--
Ed Huntress

"Pete Keillor" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 16:34:25 -0700, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 18:23:42 -0400, the infamous Pete Keillor
scrawled the following:

On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 13:17:43 -0700, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 08:06:54 -0400, the infamous Randy
scrawled the following:

This is just too neat to not pass on.

http://www.shipsnostalgia.com/guides...turing_Process

no CNC here.

Cool as hell is right, Randy. Man, I'd never seen a drill press that
big, but when I saw the guy cutting out the crank webs (1 foot thick
in one pass) with the cutting torch, I was impressed. Oh, later pics
show that it's using a template to guide the torch on its rounds.

Are those half inch thick pieces of swarf the guy is cutting into the
sides of the webs on the mill? Bigass chips, mon. Is that where you
use a face mill or flycutter? (pic with two webs on the table, one
marked 487/56, and the pic below it)

Those are (ahem) large engines!

Larry, I think that's a planer. And 4 and 5 down from there they're
using a vertical shaper to do the outside profile.

Ayup, mouseover showed "planing" so I guess they're shifting both
those big, honkin' webs under the shaper knife. Planing = shaping,
right?

Yep. Used on bigger pieces. It doesn't seem that easy to me to move a
table with a 10-20' stroke, but I guess it's easier than moving a 30'
ram. I've seen lots of planers in museums and such, never seen one
working. Man, that would be something. I really enjoy watching my
shaper do its thing.

Pete

I saw some around 30 years ago. They make one heck of a chip, cutting steel.
I used one for a paperweight when I worked at _American Machinist_.

--
Ed Huntress

On Jun 8, 7:06*am, Randy wrote:
This is just too neat to not pass on.

http://www.shipsnostalgia.com/guides...d_Sons#The_Man...

no CNC here.

Thank You,
Randy

Remove 333 from email address to reply.

Thanks for the link!

Under the section titled “Later Engines”:” …This system had inherent
advantages over the standard four-stroke engine, as the two-stroke
running enabled a low operating speed (115 rpm), thus eliminating the
requirement for a reduction gearbox between the engine and propeller,
and as the engine was reversible, no reverse gear was required. …”

I found it unusual that a 2-cycle engine would allow them to have a
lower rpm than a 4-cycle one, since most common small 2-cycle engines
are used at higher rpm. But maybe it makes sense in that the power
stroke is spread out more evenly through its cycles.

I wonder how they started or reversed those big ship engines. Did
they use auxiliary engines for this?

wrote in message
...
On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 08:06:54 -0400, Randy wrote:

This is just too neat to not pass on.

http://www.shipsnostalgia.com/guides...turing_Process

no CNC here.

Thank You,
Randy

Way cool......and sort of sad too. America's industrial greatness will
remain a thing of the past. Unless we destroy all the lawyers and Wall
Street types who are busy trying to destroy us first.
Dave

I hate to be partisan about this Dave, but Wm Doxford and Sons was an
example of British industrial greatness - I'm doing my best to carry on the
tradition but with a Haas TL1 and and a chinese lathe I'm not in the same
league.

I think I agree about lawyers - can we add accountants, fund managers and
politicians to the list of those who should be re-trained to do some real
work !!

Michael Kellett (Dumfries and Galloway, Scotland)

On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 08:06:54 -0400, Randy wrote:

This is just too neat to not pass on.

http://www.shipsnostalgia.com/guides...turing_Process

no CNC here.

Thank You,
Randy

Remove 333 from email address to reply.


Glad ya'll liked it. Like I said too, cool not to pass on.

Thank You,
Randy

Remove 333 from email address to reply.

DoN. Nichols wrote:
... heat shrink fitting the webs to the pins in a big stack. ...

That's an operation that you don't want to screw up! I don't imagine
that there's any way to fix a mis-aligned web.

Those are (ahem) large engines!

Yep! Or *very* small workmen. :-)

Good one, DoN.


Bob

Is there anywhere in the world where such machines are still being used?
I imagine that even the ship-building Koreans/Japanese are using CNC
to build their engines. Large machines, but delicate by comparison.

The pictures are great, but what would be awesome to to stand beside one
of the planers while it was running. That would be a treat. Better
than Disneyworld, better than the Grand Canyon, better than sex ... no,
wait - scratch that last one.

Bob

On Jun 9, 8:54*am, Bob Engelhardt wrote:
Is there anywhere in the world where such machines are still being used?
* I imagine that even the ship-building Koreans/Japanese are using CNC
to build their engines. *Large machines, but delicate by comparison.

The pictures are great, but what would be awesome to to stand beside one
of the planers while it was running. *That would be a treat. *Better
than Disneyworld, better than the Grand Canyon, better than sex ... no,
wait - scratch that last one.

Bob

Catching the clap from one of those machines is probably worse too.

On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 21:35:41 -0700, Larry Jaques
wrote:
snip
I wondered how they fit those together. They're all cast in auto
enigines (or were) and I've seen huge old 20th century motors with
bolts going across the counterweights/webs for disassembly, IIRC.
snip
For good description of making built-up cranks see
http://lindsaybks.com/bks2/tsotm/index.html
"building large marine engine crankshaft"
$9.95 + SH

Both this and volume 2 of "Tricks and Secrets of Old-Time
Machinists" are worth the money. Amazing what was done with
minimal tools and lots of skill.

I have bought from Lindsay Books for years and am well satisfied
with their products and services.


Unka' George [George McDuffee]
-------------------------------------------
He that will not apply new remedies,
must expect new evils:
for Time is the greatest innovator: and
if Time, of course, alter things to the worse,
and wisdom and counsel shall not alter them to the better,
what shall be the end?

Francis Bacon (1561-1626), English philosopher, essayist, statesman.
Essays, "Of Innovations" (1597-1625).

On Tue, 9 Jun 2009 08:18:15 +0100, "MK" wrote:


Way cool......and sort of sad too. America's industrial greatness will
remain a thing of the past. Unless we destroy all the lawyers and Wall
Street types who are busy trying to destroy us first.
Dave

I hate to be partisan about this Dave, but Wm Doxford and Sons was an
example of British industrial greatness - I'm doing my best to carry on the
tradition but with a Haas TL1 and and a chinese lathe I'm not in the same
league.

Ooops...I was liking the pictures so much I didn't even read the
article on the page and just assumed I was looking at a company
involved in US ship building.

I think I agree about lawyers - can we add accountants, fund managers and
politicians to the list of those who should be re-trained to do some real
work !!
Michael Kellett (Dumfries and Galloway, Scotland)

I seriously doubt that parasites can be trained to be anything but
parasites. It's their nature. Let's just kill most of them with some
roach spray.
Dave

"F. George McDuffee" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 21:35:41 -0700, Larry Jaques
wrote:
snip
I wondered how they fit those together. They're all cast in auto
enigines (or were) and I've seen huge old 20th century motors with
bolts going across the counterweights/webs for disassembly, IIRC.
snip
For good description of making built-up cranks see
http://lindsaybks.com/bks2/tsotm/index.html
"building large marine engine crankshaft"
$9.95 + SH

Both this and volume 2 of "Tricks and Secrets of Old-Time
Machinists" are worth the money. Amazing what was done with
minimal tools and lots of skill.

I have bought from Lindsay Books for years and am well satisfied
with their products and services.


Unka' George [George McDuffee]

FWIW, there were built-up cranks used on some early motorcycles and other
small engines, as well. Some single-cylinder engines had press-fit crank
throws.

--
Ed Huntress

FWIW, there were built-up cranks used on some early motorcycles and other
small engines, as well. Some single-cylinder engines had press-fit crank
throws.

Quite a few still do.

And many of the current crop of small 2 strokes don't even have the
second side of the crank. They just have the crankpin sticking out with
the rod slid over it. Just like many of the model engines are made.


--
Ed Huntress




--
Steve W.

"Steve W." wrote in message
...

FWIW, there were built-up cranks used on some early motorcycles and other
small engines, as well. Some single-cylinder engines had press-fit crank
throws.

Quite a few still do.

And many of the current crop of small 2 strokes don't even have the
second side of the crank. They just have the crankpin sticking out with
the rod slid over it. Just like many of the model engines are made.

Yeah, I have one of those on my leaf blower.

--
Ed Huntress

wrote:
On Jun 8, 7:06 am, Randy wrote:
This is just too neat to not pass on.

http://www.shipsnostalgia.com/guides...d_Sons#The_Man...

no CNC here.

Thank You,
Randy

Remove 333 from email address to reply.

Thanks for the link!

Under the section titled “Later Engines”:” …This system had inherent
advantages over the standard four-stroke engine, as the two-stroke
running enabled a low operating speed (115 rpm), thus eliminating the
requirement for a reduction gearbox between the engine and propeller,
and as the engine was reversible, no reverse gear was required. …”

I found it unusual that a 2-cycle engine would allow them to have a
lower rpm than a 4-cycle one, since most common small 2-cycle engines
are used at higher rpm. But maybe it makes sense in that the power
stroke is spread out more evenly through its cycles.

Take a look at locomotive engines. Many of those are two strokes and
they turn reasonably slow.


I wonder how they started or reversed those big ship engines. Did
they use auxiliary engines for this?

Depends on the engine design. Most were set up so that you brought the
engine to a stop by shutting down the fuel, then as it was slowing you
activated the change gears to shift the exhaust and intake systems. Once
they were changed you just used the air start to kick the engine over in
reverse. If you timed it right you went from forward to reverse as fast
as a standard reversing gear set would allow.

Many "modern" 2 strokes can still run in reverse, BUT the results can be
interesting. One of our members found that out with one of our Detroit
equipped engines! He pulled into a parking spot, managed to let the
truck roll forward a bit with the trans in reverse. OOPS. He hit the
emergency shut down after a couple seconds but not until a HUGE cloud of
smoke came out the intakes and showed off the mistake.

--
Steve W.

In article ,
"Steve W." wrote:

Many "modern" 2 strokes can still run in reverse, BUT the results can be
interesting. One of our members found that out with one of our Detroit
equipped engines! He pulled into a parking spot, managed to let the
truck roll forward a bit with the trans in reverse. OOPS. He hit the
emergency shut down after a couple seconds but not until a HUGE cloud of
smoke came out the intakes and showed off the mistake.

Embarrassing but essentially harmless if you shut it down quickly. The
cost in new air cleaner elements could get up there, though.

We used to play that trick on newbie drivers. Let them clutch stall a
GMC 71 Series and watch them panic as it started and ran backward.

Ed Huntress wrote:
"Steve W." wrote in message
...
FWIW, there were built-up cranks used on some early motorcycles and other
small engines, as well. Some single-cylinder engines had press-fit crank
throws.
Quite a few still do.

And many of the current crop of small 2 strokes don't even have the
second side of the crank. They just have the crankpin sticking out with
the rod slid over it. Just like many of the model engines are made.

Yeah, I have one of those on my leaf blower.

I avoid those when I can afford to. If the pull starter is at the front
of the engine, there's likely a single-bearing cantilever crank with the
rear unsupported. Pull starter at the rear, there's another bearing at
the rear.
The two better weed trimmers I've owned - Black & Decker (McCullough)
and Echo - had rear starters.
The junkers, Craftsman (YardMachines), Ryobi, Homelite - had front starters.

"Torn Lawence" wrote in message
.. .
Ed Huntress wrote:
"Steve W." wrote in message
...
FWIW, there were built-up cranks used on some early motorcycles and
other
small engines, as well. Some single-cylinder engines had press-fit
crank
throws.
Quite a few still do.

And many of the current crop of small 2 strokes don't even have the
second side of the crank. They just have the crankpin sticking out with
the rod slid over it. Just like many of the model engines are made.

Yeah, I have one of those on my leaf blower.

I avoid those when I can afford to. If the pull starter is at the front of
the engine, there's likely a single-bearing cantilever crank with the rear
unsupported. Pull starter at the rear, there's another bearing at the
rear.
The two better weed trimmers I've owned - Black & Decker (McCullough) and
Echo - had rear starters.
The junkers, Craftsman (YardMachines), Ryobi, Homelite - had front
starters.

Dunno, I forget what brand it is. It's run great for four years now.

--
Ed Huntress

On Jun 9, 3:46*pm, "Steve W." wrote:
wrote:
On Jun 8, 7:06 am, Randy wrote:
This is just too neat to not pass on.

http://www.shipsnostalgia.com/guides...d_Sons#The_Man....

no CNC here.

Thank You,
Randy

Remove 333 from email address to reply.

Thanks for the link!

Under the section titled “Later Engines”:” …This system had inherent
advantages over the standard four-stroke engine, as the two-stroke
running enabled a low operating speed (115 rpm), thus eliminating the
requirement for a reduction gearbox between the engine and propeller,
and as the engine was reversible, no reverse gear was required. …”

I found it unusual that a 2-cycle engine would allow them to have a
lower rpm than a 4-cycle one, since most common small 2-cycle engines
are used at higher rpm. *But maybe it makes sense in that the power
stroke is spread out more evenly through its cycles.

Take a look at locomotive engines. Many of those are two strokes and
they turn reasonably slow.



I wonder how they started or reversed those big ship engines. *Did
they use auxiliary engines for this?

Depends on the engine design. Most were set up so that you brought the
engine to a stop by shutting down the fuel, then as it was slowing you
activated the change gears to shift the exhaust and intake systems. Once
they were changed you just used the air start to kick the engine over in
reverse. If you timed it right you went from forward to reverse as fast
as a standard reversing gear set would allow.

Many "modern" 2 strokes can still run in reverse, BUT the results can be
interesting. One of our members found that out with one of our Detroit
equipped engines! He pulled into a parking spot, managed to let the
truck roll forward a bit with the trans in reverse. OOPS. He hit the
emergency shut down after a couple seconds but not until a HUGE cloud of
smoke came out the intakes and showed off the mistake.

--
Steve W.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Thanks for the explanation. I subsequently found something about “air-
starting” from an old Audel’s book for marine engineers:
http://tinyurl.com/kqtr5n. Given the size of the diesel and the
pressures mentioned, I imagine that the compressed air system must be
impressive by itself.

On Tue, 9 Jun 2009 17:09:12 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Jun 9, 3:46*pm, "Steve W." wrote:
wrote:
On Jun 8, 7:06 am, Randy wrote:
This is just too neat to not pass on.

http://www.shipsnostalgia.com/guides...d_Sons#The_Man...

no CNC here.

Thank You,
Randy

Remove 333 from email address to reply.

Thanks for the link!

Under the section titled “Later Engines”:” …This system had inherent
advantages over the standard four-stroke engine, as the two-stroke
running enabled a low operating speed (115 rpm), thus eliminating the
requirement for a reduction gearbox between the engine and propeller,
and as the engine was reversible, no reverse gear was required. …”

I found it unusual that a 2-cycle engine would allow them to have a
lower rpm than a 4-cycle one, since most common small 2-cycle engines
are used at higher rpm. *But maybe it makes sense in that the power
stroke is spread out more evenly through its cycles.

Take a look at locomotive engines. Many of those are two strokes and
they turn reasonably slow.



I wonder how they started or reversed those big ship engines. *Did
they use auxiliary engines for this?

Depends on the engine design. Most were set up so that you brought the
engine to a stop by shutting down the fuel, then as it was slowing you
activated the change gears to shift the exhaust and intake systems. Once
they were changed you just used the air start to kick the engine over in
reverse. If you timed it right you went from forward to reverse as fast
as a standard reversing gear set would allow.

Many "modern" 2 strokes can still run in reverse, BUT the results can be
interesting. One of our members found that out with one of our Detroit
equipped engines! He pulled into a parking spot, managed to let the
truck roll forward a bit with the trans in reverse. OOPS. He hit the
emergency shut down after a couple seconds but not until a HUGE cloud of
smoke came out the intakes and showed off the mistake.

--
Steve W.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Thanks for the explanation. I subsequently found something about “air-
starting” from an old Audel’s book for marine engineers:
http://tinyurl.com/kqtr5n. Given the size of the diesel and the
pressures mentioned, I imagine that the compressed air system must be
impressive by itself.

Not really. Just a pipe from the plant air manifold to the engine :-)
The larger air start engines have an "air start" valve in the head and
use air in the cylinders to turn the engine over.

Cheers,

Bruce
(bruceinbangkokatgmaildotcom)

On Tue, 9 Jun 2009 18:03:01 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"Torn Lawence" wrote in message
. ..
Ed Huntress wrote:
"Steve W." wrote in message
...
FWIW, there were built-up cranks used on some early motorcycles and
other
small engines, as well. Some single-cylinder engines had press-fit
crank
throws.
Quite a few still do.

And many of the current crop of small 2 strokes don't even have the
second side of the crank. They just have the crankpin sticking out with
the rod slid over it. Just like many of the model engines are made.

Yeah, I have one of those on my leaf blower.

I avoid those when I can afford to. If the pull starter is at the front of
the engine, there's likely a single-bearing cantilever crank with the rear
unsupported. Pull starter at the rear, there's another bearing at the
rear.
The two better weed trimmers I've owned - Black & Decker (McCullough) and
Echo - had rear starters.
The junkers, Craftsman (YardMachines), Ryobi, Homelite - had front
starters.

Dunno, I forget what brand it is. It's run great for four years now.
The homelite I bought used (it was leaking oil from the muffler) for
$2 in 2003 is still working well.
Gerry :-)}
London, Canada

Is there anywhere in the world where such machines are still being used?

Bob

Not being used, but I visited an old shipyard last week, and they still
had some old machinery rusting away. One lathe I paced out was about 40
yards long from end to end. There was also the biggest shaper I've ever
seen - at least I think it's a shaper - about 20 foot tall.

Jordan

On 2009-06-09, Larry Jaques novalidaddress@di wrote:
On 9 Jun 2009 04:18:44 GMT, the infamous "DoN. Nichols"
scrawled the following:

On 2009-06-08, Larry Jaques novalidaddress@di wrote:

[ ... ]

Nope -- it is like a lathe cutter in the clapper box (to the
upper right in the first photo, and the upper left in the second photo.

[ ... ]

Ah, now that I know what I'm looking for/at, it's very clear. Thanks.

You're welcome.

[ ... ]

The next image is shaping the ID of the web bores, and the one
below that is heat shrink fitting the webs to the pins in a big stack.
"image:shrink1.jpg" and "image:shrink2.jpg" No -- I don't see the source
of the heat to expand the webs before shrinking them in place, but it
must be somewhere near there. :-)

I wondered how they fit those together. They're all cast in auto
enigines (or were) and I've seen huge old 20th century motors with
bolts going across the counterweights/webs for disassembly, IIRC.

Actually -- aren't they now forged steel instead of cast iron?

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

On 2009-06-09, Bob Engelhardt wrote:
DoN. Nichols wrote:
... heat shrink fitting the webs to the pins in a big stack. ...

That's an operation that you don't want to screw up! I don't imagine
that there's any way to fix a mis-aligned web.

Since they were using a vertical shaper on the bores of the
crank webs, is it possible that they were splined so you could not get
them a little out of line? (Though the ends of the crank pins in the
photos did not obviously show signs of splining.) It could still be a
key on the side not visible to prevent misalignment.

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

John Husvar wrote:
In article ,
"Steve W." wrote:
Many "modern" 2 strokes can still run in reverse, BUT the results can be
interesting. One of our members found that out with one of our Detroit
equipped engines! He pulled into a parking spot, managed to let the
truck roll forward a bit with the trans in reverse. OOPS. He hit the
emergency shut down after a couple seconds but not until a HUGE cloud of
smoke came out the intakes and showed off the mistake.

Embarrassing but essentially harmless if you shut it down quickly. The
cost in new air cleaner elements could get up there, though.

So can the cost of new underwear...


We used to play that trick on newbie drivers. Let them clutch stall a
GMC 71 Series and watch them panic as it started and ran backward.

Yeah this was the second time this rig was run to a call. I made it
look like it was a horrendous thing, then let him off the hook.

The only part of the Detroit I don't like is the NOISE IN THE CAB....
This beast is a 75 with an aluminum cab and NO sound insulation at all,
It does make me envy the rigs that had open tops though. I'm betting
they are quieter!

--
Steve W.

DoN. Nichols wrote:
The next image is shaping the ID of the web bores, and the one
below that is heat shrink fitting the webs to the pins in a big stack.
"image:shrink1.jpg" and "image:shrink2.jpg" No -- I don't see the source
of the heat to expand the webs before shrinking them in place, but it
must be somewhere near there. :-)
I wondered how they fit those together. They're all cast in auto
enigines (or were) and I've seen huge old 20th century motors with
bolts going across the counterweights/webs for disassembly, IIRC.

Actually -- aren't they now forged steel instead of cast iron?

Enjoy,
DoN.


Most are still cast iron. Same with the camshaft and connecting rods.
The rule of thumb is that a cast crank is good to about 400 HP. Turning
at a max of 5K or so.

--
Steve W.

"Steve W." wrote in message
...
DoN. Nichols wrote:
The next image is shaping the ID of the web bores, and the one
below that is heat shrink fitting the webs to the pins in a big stack.
"image:shrink1.jpg" and "image:shrink2.jpg" No -- I don't see the
source
of the heat to expand the webs before shrinking them in place, but it
must be somewhere near there. :-)
I wondered how they fit those together. They're all cast in auto
enigines (or were) and I've seen huge old 20th century motors with
bolts going across the counterweights/webs for disassembly, IIRC.

Actually -- aren't they now forged steel instead of cast iron?

Enjoy,
DoN.


Most are still cast iron. Same with the camshaft and connecting rods.
The rule of thumb is that a cast crank is good to about 400 HP. Turning
at a max of 5K or so.

--

I think most automotive crankshafts are cast steel, not cast iron. Most
camshafts are indeed cast iron, but most connecting rods are still forged
steel.

"Tim" wrote in message
...

"Steve W." wrote in message
...
DoN. Nichols wrote:
The next image is shaping the ID of the web bores, and the one
below that is heat shrink fitting the webs to the pins in a big stack.
"image:shrink1.jpg" and "image:shrink2.jpg" No -- I don't see the
source
of the heat to expand the webs before shrinking them in place, but it
must be somewhere near there. :-)
I wondered how they fit those together. They're all cast in auto
enigines (or were) and I've seen huge old 20th century motors with
bolts going across the counterweights/webs for disassembly, IIRC.

Actually -- aren't they now forged steel instead of cast iron?

Enjoy,
DoN.


Most are still cast iron. Same with the camshaft and connecting rods.
The rule of thumb is that a cast crank is good to about 400 HP. Turning
at a max of 5K or so.

--

I think most automotive crankshafts are cast steel, not cast iron. Most
camshafts are indeed cast iron, but most connecting rods are still forged
steel.





On our side of the pond the bulk of automotive cranks used to be cast iron.
Some of the "performance" variants of engines would come with cast steel
cranks. We used to give them a tap to see if they were steel - the cast
steel ones would go "ting" and the cast iron ones would just make a "dank"
noise.