Just wanted to clear up the bearing / pressed fit clearence issue.
When the shaft is the correct size, 3.08mm, it is an excellent fit in
the bearings, almost press fit, as well as a good press fit into the
pressed endbell.
The major problem is finding/making shafts that are 3.08mm in diameter,
pretty hard (to resist bending under load and crashes) and corrosion
resistant to weather.

The two options I have explored so far a
Supposedly 3mm drill rod which turned out to be 1/8" (3.18mm) and the
shafts out of junk CDRom drives. The CDRom shafts work perfect. They are
hard, corrosion resistant, easy to machine and the perfect size
(probably centerless ground) but I only have enough for 8 more shafts
with no reliable and cheap source.
I tried the drill rod and found it didn't machine very well, was not
round and does corrode.

Yesterday I got a quote back from a company that they could supply
shafts in 416 stainless for $20.00 per meter. +0.000,-0.002 with a 25
micron finish. I ordered 3 meters which should give me enough to make 60
shafts. Surely enough to get me started.
I will still have to turn down the last 5mm of the shaft to 1.45mm but
should be able to do that easy.

James wrote:
Hi,
I'm in need of some shafting that measures 3.08mm and is pretty true.
I have some 3mm A-0 drill rod that is 3.18mm but can't turn it precise
enough with my equipment to get the desired size.

I would really like something like 416 stainless.

Any ideas or help?

Thanks
James

"James" wrote in message
news:5W0Td.13709$ds.13031@okepread07...
Just wanted to clear up the bearing / pressed fit clearence issue.
When the shaft is the correct size, 3.08mm, it is an excellent fit in
the bearings, almost press fit, as well as a good press fit into the
pressed endbell.
The major problem is finding/making shafts that are 3.08mm in diameter,
pretty hard (to resist bending under load and crashes) and corrosion
resistant to weather.

The two options I have explored so far a
Supposedly 3mm drill rod which turned out to be 1/8" (3.18mm) and the
shafts out of junk CDRom drives. The CDRom shafts work perfect. They are
hard, corrosion resistant, easy to machine and the perfect size
(probably centerless ground) but I only have enough for 8 more shafts
with no reliable and cheap source.
I tried the drill rod and found it didn't machine very well, was not
round and does corrode.

Yesterday I got a quote back from a company that they could supply
shafts in 416 stainless for $20.00 per meter. +0.000,-0.002 with a 25
micron finish. I ordered 3 meters which should give me enough to make 60
shafts. Surely enough to get me started.
I will still have to turn down the last 5mm of the shaft to 1.45mm but
should be able to do that easy.

A couple of minor, but potentially important points: When you say "resist
bending," I hope you mean "permanent deformation" in bending. Hard steel and
soft steel have the same stiffness; hard steel does not resist bending any
more than soft steel does. But, once bent, the hard steel will spring back,
while the soft steel may stay permanently bent, depending on how far you
bent it in the first place.

That's not exactly the correct explanation but I hope you get the picture.
You're probably aware of that already, but, just in case...

The other thing is the "25 micron finish." More likely you mean 25 microinch
finish. That's a fairly fine finish. 25 microns would be almost 40 times
coarser (around 980 microinches) which is extremely rough. Finicky people
will further point out that a roughness measurement requires both the units
(microinches or microns) and the measurement method (Ra, which is roughness
average, is most common). So a surface roughness measurement would be
specified, for example, as 25 µin. Ra (or Rt, or RMS, etc., etc.). Ra used
to be called "AA," for "arithmetic average, and some people still use that
term.

All of these may be important if real money is on the line and you make a
specification for some material. It probably doesn't matter at all for this
job.

I've never turned 416 but supposedly it machines pretty easily, as stainless
goes. It sounds like the right material for your application.

--
Ed Huntress

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
"James" wrote in message
news:5W0Td.13709$ds.13031@okepread07...
Just wanted to clear up the bearing / pressed fit clearence issue.

Ah, one more thing. You're paying roughly $1/shaft for the material, which
you have to cut off and turn on the end. If you're going to do 200 or so at
a time, you should look into having them fully turned and cut to length by a
small screw-machine shop. I'm taking a WAG here but I think you'll be right
around $2/each to have them done.

Also, your motor mount looks like another screw-machine job. Both parts are
very simple for screw-machining and are just the kind of thing that
screw-machine shops do every day.

You could go to alt.machines.cnc and ask for a quote. You want the guy
called "Dobie Dave," who uses the name "Why" on the "From" line. He's there
once or twice a week. This is exactly what he does, and he's very good with
short runs like this. I can get his email address if you want; he may use
his real on in the NG, I don't remember. And, since I interviewed him for an
article one time, I could tell you his real name if you need it. g

I don't hang out there anymore or I'd check with him myself.

--
Ed Huntress

On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 20:55:05 -0500, "Robin S."
wrote:


"Eric R Snow" wrote in message
.. .

So Harold didn't post numbers. That's no reason to insult him.

Who was insulting?

However, because you seem to know it all, (almost),

I hope I'm misreading you as you misread me. It looks like you're insulting
me.

here are some
numbers so your knowledge will be complete.

Thank you. This is precisely what I was looking for.

How about round to less
than .00005, to size within .0001, on parts about 1.375 O.D., 1.500
long, with a 1.125 I.D.?

How were the parts measured?

Dimensioned in inches. Parts were nitrided to
about 65 Rc. These were done in quantities, cheaply. These parts were
first ground by someone who didn't know how to set up the grinder and
were out of round (triangular) almost .0015. Since the tolerance was
.0002 total all the parts were scrap. The next shop did 'em right.
Maybe the person who told you that centerless grinders couldn't make
round parts was the same one who ground and scrapped the first run of
the above parts.

That could be possible. I believe the reference was Cliff. This is why I
suggested a discussion between Cliff and Harold. While it is unlikely that
such a discussion would take place, there's a certain chance the comment
would trigger a further discussion (which it has).

Regards,

Robin


Well Robin, it sure sounded like you were equating Harold with Cliff,
as if they had something in common. Because of the way I read your
message I replied a little tongue in cheek. The parts were measured
with micrometers and vee blocks and an indicator with .00002"
resolution. The mike was plenty good enough for the .0002 tolerance
O.D. measurement. The indicator was used with the vee block to check
for roundness. Oh yeah, a dial bore gauge was used for the I.D..
ERS

On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 17:59:42 -0800, "Harold and Susan Vordos"
wrote:


"Eric R Snow" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 16:33:27 -0500, "Robin S."
wrote:


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

Sorry, Robin. You have been misinformed. A properly set up centerless
will
yield what is, for all practical purposes, dead round parts. Only
when
they are run *on center* do they not. In fact, they are capable of
very
close work, with outstanding repeatability.


No numbers? You should discuss with Cliff...

Regards,

Robin

So Harold didn't post numbers. That's no reason to insult him.
However, because you seem to know it all, (almost), here are some
numbers so your knowledge will be complete. How about round to less
than .00005, to size within .0001, on parts about 1.375 O.D., 1.500
long, with a 1.125 I.D.? Dimensioned in inches. Parts were nitrided to
about 65 Rc. These were done in quantities, cheaply. These parts were
first ground by someone who didn't know how to set up the grinder and
were out of round (triangular) almost .0015. Since the tolerance was
.0002 total all the parts were scrap. The next shop did 'em right.
Maybe the person who told you that centerless grinders couldn't make
round parts was the same one who ground and scrapped the first run of
the above parts.
ERS

Thanks, Eric. That smart assed punk kid needs to be taught some respect.
I've spent more hours running a centerless than that smart mouthed little
******* has been in the shop. It's plain damned amazing how someone can
work in the trade for a couple years and get so knowledgeable that they know
all about things they've never touched.

I failed to disclose any numbers because that serves no purpose. A
centerless grinder is capable of working to millionths, but not in the
hands of a fool, as you discovered. I ran countless production runs of
relatively small quantities (a few hundred parts) that were held to .00050"
with no effort. Roundness was never a problem, and size was only because
the machines take several hours to warm up, so you're constantly backing off
the wheel until it settles down. A job was often finished before the
machine was up to full operating temperature.

By the way, Cincinnati talks about the tri-lobed condition in their
operator's manuals. It's real easy to avoid.

Your job would have been a serious challenge due to wall thickness, but
light passes, 5/16" above center, with plenty of coolant, with all the
grinding coming at the front of the wheel, allowing the balance of the wheel
to spark the part, and they would come out beautifully.

Harold

Harold,
I don't think I would go so far as calling Robin a punk assed kid. You
oughta cut him a little slack.
ERS

jim rozen wrote in
:

In article , Dan Murphy
says...

Good idea. Wht not knurl the end of the shaft with a straght knurl?
That way you can have a more "open" tolerance and still maintain a
press fit.

I don't think that's really needed. An adjustable reamer could
be tweaked with a couple of setup pieces to get the correct
press without knurling the shaft. It would be one more additional
step that really does not make the final product any better.

There's already little enough surface area in the design as
is, knurling would tend to reduce that even more.

True enough. After thinking about just that (small surface area), staking
the end cap on to the shaft might be the better way to go. Or use heat.

Dan

Thank you Ed!!
My idea is to prototype them here and get someone to mass produce them
so your post is VERY helpful.

Thanks again

Ed Huntress wrote:
"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"James" wrote in message
news:5W0Td.13709$ds.13031@okepread07...

Just wanted to clear up the bearing / pressed fit clearence issue.


Ah, one more thing. You're paying roughly $1/shaft for the material, which
you have to cut off and turn on the end. If you're going to do 200 or so at
a time, you should look into having them fully turned and cut to length by a
small screw-machine shop. I'm taking a WAG here but I think you'll be right
around $2/each to have them done.

Also, your motor mount looks like another screw-machine job. Both parts are
very simple for screw-machining and are just the kind of thing that
screw-machine shops do every day.

You could go to alt.machines.cnc and ask for a quote. You want the guy
called "Dobie Dave," who uses the name "Why" on the "From" line. He's there
once or twice a week. This is exactly what he does, and he's very good with
short runs like this. I can get his email address if you want; he may use
his real on in the NG, I don't remember. And, since I interviewed him for an
article one time, I could tell you his real name if you need it. g

I don't hang out there anymore or I'd check with him myself.

--
Ed Huntress

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
snip-----

I've never turned 416 but supposedly it machines pretty easily, as
stainless
goes. It sounds like the right material for your application.

--
Ed Huntress

It's a wonderful experience, especially if your idea of stainless revolves
around 304, 316 or 440C. You get the idea. You might compare it as if
it's the leadloy of stainless. It's reputed to machine better than 303 S,
and I'm inclined to agree, although I'm not sure if it's better than 303 Se,
which I like to machine.

Harold

"James" wrote in message
news:H34Td.13722$ds.10359@okepread07...
Thank you Ed!!
My idea is to prototype them here and get someone to mass produce them
so your post is VERY helpful.

Thanks again

Well, good. Now watch Dave say I'm out of my tree on the price, and they'll
be $7/each. g

Seriously, I don't think so. Once I went to your site and got a look at your
components I realized this is a screw-machine job.

--
Ed Huntress

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

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
snip-----

I've never turned 416 but supposedly it machines pretty easily, as
stainless
goes. It sounds like the right material for your application.

--
Ed Huntress

It's a wonderful experience, especially if your idea of stainless revolves
around 304, 316 or 440C. You get the idea. You might compare it as if
it's the leadloy of stainless. It's reputed to machine better than 303
S,
and I'm inclined to agree, although I'm not sure if it's better than 303
Se,
which I like to machine.

I have bad memories of machining 304 and 316 back when I worked in a shop,
and I've only tried 303 once, giving me little basis for comparison. So I've
since found a long list of reasons not to use stainless for my hobby
projects.

However, I want to try some 416, since several here and on AMC have said how
nice it is to machine.

--
Ed Huntress

"Harold and Susan Vordos" wrote

Ive spent more hours running a centerless than that smart mouthed little
******* has been in the shop. It's plain damned amazing how someone can
work in the trade for a couple years and get so knowledgeable that they know
all about things they've never touched.



How many readers do you know that read anything Cliff has to say?
Certainly I do not, not even a glance, although I don't have him bonked.
What's the point? He's not worth the effort for me to do so, and for you
to suggest I enter into dialogue with him on a subject about which he likely
knows less than even you do is absurd. Further, I'm not interested in
anyone that spends their time tearing to shreds the likes of Gunner. Gunner
is what he is, and I accept him that way. He has some wonderful qualities,
qualities that many others could use to better themselves as human beings.
Gunner posts many things that don't interest me, but rarely are they
unimportant to at least a few readers. I haven't noticed him spending his
time tearing others down, not that he isn't capable. Having established
that, should you have need to challenge something I have to say in the
future, follow your own advice and bring it to me directly, not through
innuendo or snide comments.


Slander? Chuckle! I call 'em as I see them. You want me to have a
different opinion of you, show me something different than you've been
showing me. If you want my respect, try showing some. You could have
chosen a dozen ways to make your comment (that you claim was a question) and
have it be one instead of a left handed compliment. I don't think you're
clever, and I don't think you're cute. If you want to discuss an issue,
stand up like a man and ask a question so it appears to be one. In case you
haven't noticed, I tend to have fairly friendly conversations with people
that show respect, which I gladly return. I share with them, to the best
of my ability, that which I have learned through the years. Sometimes I'm
even wrong. You want in on some of my questionable knowledge, act like it.

Harold



Well said, Harold. Robin, you just dig the hole you're in deeper with
every post. If you would accept what is being said here rather than arguing
every point, you might get some sort of benefit from the conversation. As
it is, it looks like these gentlement are wasting their breath and time on
you..... they are trying to do you a favor, whether you realize it or not.

Mark

In article , M says...


..... they are trying to do you a favor, whether you realize it or not.

By calling him 'snot-nosed??'

Harold has helped me a *great* deal in the past. It didn't
come in that form.

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

"M" mark@maxmachinedotcom wrote in message
...


Well said, Harold. Robin, you just dig the hole you're in deeper with
every post. If you would accept what is being said here rather than
arguing
every point, you might get some sort of benefit from the conversation.

"smart assed punk kid"

"smart mouthed little *******"

I haven't cornered the market on defending one's self - and working
alongside dozens of toolmakers leaves me with some understanding of the size
of a machinist's/toolmaker's ego.

As
it is, it looks like these gentlement are wasting their breath and time on
you..... they are trying to do you a favor, whether you realize it or not.

The only favor I was asking for was info on centerless grinding.

This is an idle interest as I am not being trained as a machinist and will
probably never touch a centerless grinder. It's certainly no skin off my
back.

Regards,

Robin

"Ed Huntress" wrote in
:

I have bad memories of machining 304 and 316 back when I worked in a
shop, and I've only tried 303 once, giving me little basis for
comparison. So I've since found a long list of reasons not to use
stainless for my hobby projects.

However, I want to try some 416, since several here and on AMC have
said how nice it is to machine.


I've read the same. I don't see a lot of difference between 303 and 416. I
should say "good" 303. Some of the cheap import stuff is pretty bad but
overall 303 cuts great. 416 can be run a little faster without burning up
your tools, but I don't find that big of a difference over 303. We often
run 303 on our demo parts at machine tool shows. It cuts good, looks good,
easy to put a 16 Ra or better finish on it. Plus if a guy takes away a demo
part it will look good for years. I was just in a shop and saw a demo part
I dreamed up and ran about 15 years ago. The guy had it on a shelf with a
bunch of other demo parts from shows. It looked like it just came off the
machine 10 minutes ago. OTOH, I'm used to cutting it on brand new, rigid,
CNC Swiss machines so YMMV.
I was on the phone with a customer today. He is quoting a job in Grade 1
Ti. I'm reassuring him that he'll have no problems with it. Titanium cuts
great, I tell him, and give him some speeds, feeds, and tool
recommendations. He normally cuts Kovar, has never cut brass or steel, so
it's all relative.

Dan

"Dan Murphy" wrote in message
.. .
"Ed Huntress" wrote in
:

I have bad memories of machining 304 and 316 back when I worked in a
shop, and I've only tried 303 once, giving me little basis for
comparison. So I've since found a long list of reasons not to use
stainless for my hobby projects.

However, I want to try some 416, since several here and on AMC have
said how nice it is to machine.


I've read the same. I don't see a lot of difference between 303 and 416. I
should say "good" 303. Some of the cheap import stuff is pretty bad but
overall 303 cuts great. 416 can be run a little faster without burning up
your tools, but I don't find that big of a difference over 303.

I think that my friend Dobie Dave on ACM, who probably has machined miles of
the each of those alloys in his Brownies, has said exactly the same thing.

All I need is a stainless steel that has good corrosion resistance
(something that makes me hesitate to get into 303) and that I can machine
reasonably well on my old lathe. I suppose I could take the time to learn
the skills for machining 304 and 316 really well, but I turned one hell of a
lot of 304 in a manual turret lathe many years ago, and it took a very
careful touch to keep from work-hardening it, particularly when I was
end-drilling. You had to behave like a machine yourself, like a servo-motor
that just went at it blindly.


We often
run 303 on our demo parts at machine tool shows. It cuts good, looks good,
easy to put a 16 Ra or better finish on it. Plus if a guy takes away a
demo
part it will look good for years.

What machines are those, Dan?

--
Ed Huntress

James wrote:

Hi,
I'm in need of some shafting that measures 3.08mm and is pretty true.
I have some 3mm A-0 drill rod that is 3.18mm but can't turn it precise
enough with my equipment to get the desired size.

I would really like something like 416 stainless.

Any ideas or help?

Thanks
James
http://www.cencogrinding.com/

Nice outfit - does high quality. I have bought some custom items - small small
order that is - 1 of this and 1 of that ....

They do the production for Latrobe (sp) drills....

Martin

--
Martin Eastburn, Barbara Eastburn
@ home at Lion's Lair with our computer
NRA LOH, NRA Life
NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder

On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 08:17:56 -0800, Eric R Snow
wrote:


Harold,
I don't think I would go so far as calling Robin a punk assed kid. You
oughta cut him a little slack.
ERS

I agree..."sanctimonious prick" fits better.

Gunner

Rule #35
"That which does not kill you,
has made a huge tactical error"

"Ed Huntress" wrote in news:sEdTd.3851$NT2.275
@fe09.lga:

What machines are those, Dan?

Tsugami. http://www.remsales.com/machines/pag...t/tsugami.html

I machined loads of stainless before I started working at Rem, and loads
more since. I've been here going on twenty years. Jeez, where does the time
go?

Dan

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
snip-----

I have bad memories of machining 304 and 316 back when I worked in a shop,
and I've only tried 303 once, giving me little basis for comparison. So
I've
since found a long list of reasons not to use stainless for my hobby
projects.

However, I want to try some 416, since several here and on AMC have said
how
nice it is to machine.

--
Ed Huntress

I fully understand your apprehension, and , had my experiences come at the
hands of 304 or 316, I would not touch any stainless unnecessarily either,
if it weren't for knowing better.

The real benefit of machining 303 S, 303 Se, and 416, is that you rarely, if
ever, suffer problems with surface tearing, making working to close
tolerance much easier. They will also respond to very light cuts, unlike
mild steel. If you'd like to try any of them and enjoy quite good
success, I'd suggest positive rake unless you're taking some serious
roughing cuts with carbide inserts, at which time you'd have better luck
with negative rake tooling. Once you're removed the majority of the
material, be certain to get back to positive rake. I always lube with
sulfur based oil to prevent any buildup on the tool tip, especially if I'm
running HSS, which works fine, too, just slower. In either case, surface
finish is improved by the oil. Regardless of your tool of choice, positive
rake is quite important to good finish work in stainless. It works wonders
even in the ugly grades, 304 and 316.

Regards corrosion resistance, unless you're parts would be subjected to a
particularly bad chemical environment, I'm not convinced you need worry.
Even not passivating, with exposure to wet conditions, the worst you're
likely to experience is some very minor surface rusting, and that may not
occur.

Aside from 416 heat treated, these alloys do not make great bearing
surfaces because they're quite soft and readily gall.

One other alloy I highly recommend, although it does take a little
experience to master, is 17-4 PH. It cuts well (when you understand how)
and, being precipitation hardening, is very easy for the home shop type to
heat treat. It has excellent corrosion resistance and tensile strength.
Because it heat treats at relatively low temperatures, one experiences
little distortion and no scaling, with the added benefit of being able to
machine relatively close tolerance work before heat treat, assuming you
allow for the minor shrinkage that occurs in heat treat.

Give it a go , Ed. I think you'll like what you discover.

Harold

"Dan Murphy" wrote in message
...
"Ed Huntress" wrote in news:sEdTd.3851$NT2.275
@fe09.lga:

What machines are those, Dan?

Tsugami. http://www.remsales.com/machines/pag...t/tsugami.html

I thought that might be it. We've probably run into each other at an IMTS or
another show over the years.


I machined loads of stainless before I started working at Rem, and loads
more since. I've been here going on twenty years. Jeez, where does the
time
go?

Right out the window. g

--
Ed Huntress

However, I want to try some 416, since several here and on AMC have said how
nice it is to machine.

I have used 416 to make some parts for one of my model engines.
IMO, it machines easier than drill rod.

I tend to use a lot of drill rod because it is easy to get;
I'm beginning to think that it might be worth it to pay a extra
for 12L14 just to make my life easier.

chuck

"Robin S." wrote

I haven't cornered the market on defending one's self - and working
alongside dozens of toolmakers leaves me with some understanding of the
size
of a machinist's/toolmaker's ego.

As
it is, it looks like these gentlement are wasting their breath and time
on
you..... they are trying to do you a favor, whether you realize it or
not.

The only favor I was asking for was info on centerless grinding.


Exactly my point. If you already knew Harold was touchy about his
experience, why bait him with comments about Cliff? Why not use his
knowledge and give him some of the respect he deserves for a lifetime of
learning his trade? Giving him respect costs you nothing, and pleases him.
What is the point of behaving as you did if it only causes dissent? It seems
that your ego is causing more problems than Harold's....

I am not close friends with Harold, but we are the same age, and I greatly
respect his experience and accomplishments even though he took a different
path than I. I have visited him at his home, and he has been to my place.
Anyone that reads the newsgroup knows that Harold has strong opinions and a
short fuse (sometimes!). Why not be a little more diplomatic in your
approach to the "old timers"? It would benefit you greatly.

Mark

In article , M says...

I am not close friends with Harold, but we are the same age, and I greatly
respect his experience and accomplishments even though he took a different
path than I. I have visited him at his home, and he has been to my place.
Anyone that reads the newsgroup knows that Harold has strong opinions and a
short fuse (sometimes!). Why not be a little more diplomatic in your
approach to the "old timers"? It would benefit you greatly.

I agree with your comments. I would add the respect has to flow
both ways though.

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

"Ed Huntress" wrote in
:

I thought that might be it. We've probably run into each other at an
IMTS or another show over the years.

I'm pretty sure we've met. I used to do the press conferences in the
morning before the show started. We haven't done those in a while, but I'm
sure we'll start again now that we've hired a marketing guy.

Dan

"jim rozen" wrote in message
...
In article , M says...

I am not close friends with Harold, but we are the same age, and I
greatly
respect his experience and accomplishments even though he took a
different
path than I. I have visited him at his home, and he has been to my place.
Anyone that reads the newsgroup knows that Harold has strong opinions and
a
short fuse (sometimes!). Why not be a little more diplomatic in your
approach to the "old timers"? It would benefit you greatly.

I agree with your comments. I would add the respect has to flow
both ways though.

Jim

Jim,
I'm at a loss to understand your position. My comments that started this
ugly exchange are copied he

"Sorry, Robin. You have been misinformed. A properly set up centerless will
yield what is, for all practical purposes, dead round parts. Only when
they are run *on center* do they not. In fact, they are capable of very
close work, with outstanding repeatability."


If you can point out to me where I was not paying due respect to another,
I'd be grateful. I felt my answer to Robin was more than adequate to
dispel the notion that parts can't come out round, that the machine was not
suited to the application. I simply stated facts, with no personal attack
of any kind. It might not hurt for you to go back and read how that mess
got started. If you still feel I'm the one that is responsible, please
explain it to me.

Harold

In article , Harold and Susan Vordos says...

I agree with your comments. I would add the respect has to flow
both ways though.

I'm at a loss to understand your position. My comments that started this
ugly exchange are copied he

(quote one)
"Sorry, Robin. You have been misinformed. A properly set up centerless will
yield what is, for all practical purposes, dead round parts. Only when
they are run *on center* do they not. In fact, they are capable of very
close work, with outstanding repeatability."

I did see that comment. I also saw the later one:

(quote two)
"That smart assed punk kid needs to be taught some respect.
I've spent more hours running a centerless than that smart mouthed little
******* has been in the shop. It's plain damned amazing how someone can
work in the trade for a couple years and get so knowledgeable that they know
all about things they've never touched. "

Granted in between the two, he did compare you to cliff. But honestly
the two quotes above are pretty far apart. You did not address the
second to robin true. You knew he would read it.

If you can point out to me where I was not paying due respect to another,
I'd be grateful. I felt my answer to Robin was more than adequate to
dispel the notion that parts can't come out round, that the machine was not
suited to the application. I simply stated facts, with no personal attack
of any kind. It might not hurt for you to go back and read how that mess
got started. If you still feel I'm the one that is responsible, please
explain it to me.

Umm. I thought things were going pretty well until he drew the
cliff-analogy. Granted that started the ball rolling. Your reply
was pretty strong - it was a bit of an eye-opener for me, I thought
when I read it there was maybe something going on back-channel between
the you and robin, or that maybe you were having a bad day otherwise.
I've never been compared to cliff. Not sure what I would do in that
case...

Granted there are few here who know as much as you do on that particular
subject. It wasn't clear to me that robin was questioning your expertise
on it as questioning the applicability in the application under question.
I will indeed have to look again at what transpired.

Does this all fall under the 'by the time you're old enough to know
a lot about something, that means you can react strongly to the
younger guys in the shop' rule?

Sometimes the younger guys know more than the more experienced hands
on some subject. Does that mean they get to react just as strongly, to
them?

What is to be respected, knowledge or wisdom? I would say both.
Grace under pressure is when the young buck kicks sand on your
shoes, and you make it clear that a) you know more about it then he
does, b) you do it in an even-handed tone, and c) he feels bad and
apologizes because you've been so nice to him.

I think c) is unlikely now.

Oddly I cherry-pick both your, and robin's, posts here. You for
the wisdom - long years of experience. Robin because he's one
of the posters here who is currently deep in industry, in the
machining field he's been trained for. I guess I'm really just
muddying the waters here but in my defense you did ask me
to explain my comments - I don't think that any one person
is responsible, as you say.

You two may be years apart but I suspect you closer together than
you both realize. Certainly if the two of you were put in a room
with 98 other people you would stand out as the most closely matched
in skills.

Respectfully - Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

"jim rozen" wrote in message
...
In article , Harold and Susan Vordos says...

Granted in between the two, he did compare you to cliff.

While I'm possibly fanning the flames by posting, I have only one thing to
add.

I was not comparing Harold to Cliff. I thought they should discuss (again,
the literal meaning of my words) this matter as Cliff (if my memory serves)
has previously stated that centerless grinders do not make round parts.

Of course, with Cliff he might talking a couple of millionths of an inch,
but that's besides the point.

The only comparison between Cliff and Harold is that they both (seem) to
have great knowledge and experience in their respective fields. These fields
happen to be at the opposite ends of the manufacturing spectrum, however.

Regards,

Robin

"jim rozen" wrote in message
...
In article , Harold and Susan Vordos says...

I agree with your comments. I would add the respect has to flow
both ways though.

Rather difficult when it goes only one way, regardless of effort. But
please read on---for there is more to this than meets the eye.


I'm at a loss to understand your position. My comments that started
this
ugly exchange are copied he

(quote one)
"Sorry, Robin. You have been misinformed. A properly set up centerless
will
yield what is, for all practical purposes, dead round parts. Only
when
they are run *on center* do they not. In fact, they are capable of very
close work, with outstanding repeatability."

I did see that comment. I also saw the later one:

(quote two)
"That smart assed punk kid needs to be taught some respect.
I've spent more hours running a centerless than that smart mouthed little
******* has been in the shop. It's plain damned amazing how someone can
work in the trade for a couple years and get so knowledgeable that they
know
all about things they've never touched. "

Yep, I said it, and under the circumstance, as I knew it, I'd say it again.
Understand that this isn't about the current thread, but about a young
person that has exercised his assumed right to never show respect to others,
at least ----not to me. If you've read the other replies, you'll see that
I'm not the only one that interpreted his comments the way I did.

You may recall my lumpy introduction to RCM many years ago----which, for
some, apparently never got any better. That gives them license to ignore
me, not to belittle me. If they choose to make what appear to be statements
displaying their contempt for me, they should expect nothing less than that
in return. However, in this instance it's entirely possible I, along with
others, may have misinterpreted comments he made, which I addressed in my
post to him earlier.

Granted in between the two, he did compare you to cliff. But honestly
the two quotes above are pretty far apart. You did not address the
second to robin true. You knew he would read it.

Just as he knew I'd read his post where it was assumed I was being compared
to Cliff.

If you can point out to me where I was not paying due respect to another,
I'd be grateful. I felt my answer to Robin was more than adequate to
dispel the notion that parts can't come out round, that the machine was
not
suited to the application. I simply stated facts, with no personal
attack
of any kind. It might not hurt for you to go back and read how that
mess
got started. If you still feel I'm the one that is responsible, please
explain it to me.

Umm. I thought things were going pretty well until he drew the
cliff-analogy. Granted that started the ball rolling. Your reply
was pretty strong - it was a bit of an eye-opener for me, I thought
when I read it there was maybe something going on back-channel between
the you and robin, or that maybe you were having a bad day otherwise.

That, in a nut shell, is it. I explained that above. Some people make
decisions and don't prefer to make another. Maybe they've not seen a good
reason to do so. I prefer to not second guess anyone's motive, but can
clearly see their attitude, and their spelling it out for me convinces me I
was reading it correctly.

You and I started out pretty lumpy, too, but each of us appear to have
managed to learn to respect the other, even when we don't agree (which,
surprisingly, isn't often).

Bad day? At my age, most of them are. Do your hands ache routinely?
(Arthritis). Vision in the toilet? Short of energy? Ringing in your
left ear, and it ain't the phone? Getting old isn't fun, Jim. Enjoy your
youth.

I've never been compared to cliff. Not sure what I would do in that
case...

Likely something like I did. None of us enjoy the suggestion that we aren't
up to much. But then, as I understand it now, I have to assume that I
was *not* compared to Cliff, and for that I offered my apology.

Granted there are few here who know as much as you do on that particular
subject. It wasn't clear to me that robin was questioning your expertise
on it as questioning the applicability in the application under question.
I will indeed have to look again at what transpired.

Perhaps you now understand that I accept responsibility for my
misunderstanding. My reaction would have been proper, in my opinion, had
it been true. For that I would not have offered an apology.

Does this all fall under the 'by the time you're old enough to know
a lot about something, that means you can react strongly to the
younger guys in the shop' rule?

Nope, and I hope you understand that I have the utmost respect for anyone
that has mastered the trade, with age making no difference. I bow to those
with skills I don't have, but I also expect the same in return. Life isn't
about everyone collecting everything they desire and not giving anything in
return. I respect you and your years of education and experience in your
chosen field. I expect that I receive the same for my meager
accomplishments.

Sometimes the younger guys know more than the more experienced hands
on some subject. Does that mean they get to react just as strongly, to
them?

Chuckle! I get your point, and I'm not sure it was ever more evident that
with the then very young Australian doctor that made the connection between
ulcers and helicobacter pylori bacterium. His experiences with the medical
profession boggle the mind, and were made even more difficult by the fact
that he was outside his field of expertise. I'd like to think I'm better
than that, Jim. I listen to and pay great respect to a friend that is
young enough to be my son, a mold maker. I also encourage and advise him
to the best of my ability. I have an ego, but try to temper it with logic,
wisdom and good sense.

What is to be respected, knowledge or wisdom? I would say both.
Grace under pressure is when the young buck kicks sand on your
shoes, and you make it clear that a) you know more about it then he
does, b) you do it in an even-handed tone, and c) he feels bad and
apologizes because you've been so nice to him.

I think c) is unlikely now.

Yeah, probably so----but it has little to do with what transpired in the
past couple days, at least as I see it. That was just the proverbial
straw. The attitude I thought existed was clearly stated. Why would
anyone show respect or attempt to rectify a misunderstanding when they have
no care, no respect, no desire? I'm OK with that. There are plenty of
skilled people that I can have an exchange with without the acrimony. It
hasn't been my practice to seek out young people for company, anyway.

Oddly I cherry-pick both your, and robin's, posts here. You for
the wisdom - long years of experience. Robin because he's one
of the posters here who is currently deep in industry, in the
machining field he's been trained for. I guess I'm really just
muddying the waters here but in my defense you did ask me
to explain my comments - I don't think that any one person
is responsible, as you say.

Not muddying the waters in my opinion, Jim. I'm one of those people that
rarely puts a problem away without a resolution. I generally like to get
things resolved and make or accept any necessary apologies. If that isn't
possible, the least that I would expect is that everyone involved at least
understands what the hell all the commotion is about. While it's unlikely
anything good came from this, perhaps you and I understand somewhat better
what really transpired, and that things are not always as they appear. I
asked for your opinion, and I got it. You delivered what I think is a fair,
level handed opinion. That's what I expected, and I thank you for it.

You two may be years apart but I suspect you closer together than
you both realize. Certainly if the two of you were put in a room
with 98 other people you would stand out as the most closely matched
in skills.

Respectfully - Jim

Interesting comment, Jim.

Harold

"Robin S." wrote in message
news

"jim rozen" wrote in message
...
In article , Harold and Susan Vordos
says...

Granted in between the two, he did compare you to cliff.

While I'm possibly fanning the flames by posting, I have only one thing to
add.

I was not comparing Harold to Cliff. I thought they should discuss (again,
the literal meaning of my words) this matter as Cliff (if my memory
serves)
has previously stated that centerless grinders do not make round parts.

If that be the case, I owe you an apology--and you have it here. I had no
way of knowing that such a statement had been made at any time by Cliff.
I've never read anything that indicated he knows the slightest thing about
machining, let alone centerless grinders, which are in a world all their
own. So you'll understand my ignorance, I read Cliff's drivel until I
realized all he did was pick on Gunner, at which point I quit reading. I
don't look at anything he has to say, although it's there should I have
need. I don't plonk people, I simply ignore them.

When you suggested I have a conversation with Cliff, to me, with my lack of
understanding that he had made comments on and appeared to know something
about centerless grinding (which is questionable if he thinks they can't
make round objects), the only thing I could read into your post was you
intended to compare me to another that, in my opinion, lends nothing to this
news group and has no clue. If you don't understand how that might come
across, perhaps when you've spent a great deal of your life in the shop and
have earned the respect of your peers, it will make sense then. I've worked
hard for my knowledge and the respect I've earned and don't appreciate
anyone making light of it. After all, some of us don't have all that much
we've accomplished in our lifetime, and don't like what little we have
accomplished belittled. Surely you can understand that.

You can dislike me all you want, but you'll come to understand that when I
speak of machining, it's not conjecture. I've "been there, done that" and
know what I'm talking about, although you may find circumstances may make
things different for some situations and my experience may not apply. For
sure, however, when it comes to centerless grinding, there is no doubt in my
mind that they are capable of holding a few millionths in the hands of one
qualified. That was and is my point. If you understand why rigid hones
make round holes out of tapered and irregular holes, you will then
understand why a centerless makes parts round, *so long as they are not
operated on center*, which is easy to do if one changes part size but not
blade height. That won't make sense to you until you get your hands dirty
on the machine.

Robin, I'm more than willing to get along with anyone and everyone.
However, they must have a similar desire. You and I haven't really gotten
along in the many years I've frequented this forum, and you've made it
abundantly clear you have no desire to do so now. That might also help you
understand my comments previously. I'm old enough to be your grandfather,
but you seem to see me as nothing more than some dude your age whom you
don't like. Had you shown me a modicum of respect through the years, my
attitude towards you would be far different from what it is. Now that
you've made it clear I read you correctly, I accept it. How we can
co-exist is for you to leave me alone, which I will do in kind for you.
Understand that I refuse to have a relationship with anyone that isn't
willing to extend to me the common courtesy of showing respect I feel we owe
each and every person we encounter in life, until they have provided a
reason not to.

Of course, with Cliff he might talking a couple of millionths of an inch,
but that's besides the point.

Whether a particular machine is, or not, may be questionable, but the
concept is capable. Operators make the difference. Again, that's why I
tried to not provide hard figures. They have no meaning, only on a given
machine and operator. High precision is a different animal from normal
work. How you hold your mouth may make the difference. :-)

Harold

In article , Harold and Susan Vordos says...

You may recall my lumpy introduction to RCM many years ago----

Er, not *that* lumpy. At least as I recall. There were
worse....


er guys in the shop' rule?

Nope, and I hope you understand that I have the utmost respect for anyone
that has mastered the trade, with age making no difference. I bow to those
with skills I don't have, but I also expect the same in return. Life isn't
about everyone collecting everything they desire and not giving anything in
return. I respect you and your years of education and experience in your
chosen field. I expect that I receive the same for my meager
accomplishments.

Honestly I think I have maybe a few more years of experience than
robin but my formal training in the area of things that discussed
here is probably well below his. Really. My sum total of formal
training the machining fields is *two* (count 'em, two) night
classes which I took about 25 years ago because I had purchased
a used (*very* well used) atlas 9" lathe.

I have worked as a research engineer since then, of course. I know
things he doesn't know, he knows things I don't know.

Sometimes the younger guys know more than the more experienced hands
on some subject. Does that mean they get to react just as strongly, to
them?

Chuckle! I get your point, and I'm not sure it was ever more evident that
with the then very young Australian doctor that made the connection between
ulcers and helicobacter pylori bacterium. His experiences with the medical
profession boggle the mind, and were made even more difficult by the fact
that he was outside his field of expertise.

My understanding was, he "proved" the point by infecting himself with
the bacterium, deliberately. Thus giving himself and ulcer. Then
he "cured" the ulcer with a dose of penicillin.

The drug companies certainly understood the meaning of the experiment.
Overnight they had all their ulcer medications re-classified as OTC
instead of prescription. That was about the time I lost all respect
for them.

Oddly I cherry-pick both your, and robin's, posts here. You for
the wisdom - long years of experience. Robin because he's one
of the posters here who is currently deep in industry, in the
machining field he's been trained for. I guess I'm really just
muddying the waters here but in my defense you did ask me
to explain my comments - I don't think that any one person
is responsible, as you say.

Not muddying the waters in my opinion, Jim. I'm one of those people that
rarely puts a problem away without a resolution. I generally like to get
things resolved and make or accept any necessary apologies. If that isn't
possible, the least that I would expect is that everyone involved at least
understands what the hell all the commotion is about. While it's unlikely
anything good came from this, perhaps you and I understand somewhat better
what really transpired, and that things are not always as they appear. I
asked for your opinion, and I got it. You delivered what I think is a fair,
level handed opinion. That's what I expected, and I thank you for it.

You two may be years apart but I suspect you closer together than
you both realize. Certainly if the two of you were put in a room
with 98 other people you would stand out as the most closely matched
in skills.

Interesting comment, Jim.

My guess is that if you went back in time and met yourself
at robin's age, you might give yourself the same reaction you are giving
him at the moment. Maybe.

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

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

If that be the case, I owe you an apology--and you have it here.

I appriciate you saying that. Further, I appologize for not making myself
clear enough and for *pushing* when (we know now) there was certianly no
reason.

I had no
way of knowing that such a statement had been made at any time by Cliff.
I've never read anything that indicated he knows the slightest thing about
machining,

Cliff, I think, is something of a sport hunter. On occation things related
to manufacturing bubble to the surface, but the signal to noise ratio can be
a turn-off.

I've worked
hard for my knowledge and the respect I've earned and don't appreciate
anyone making light of it. After all, some of us don't have all that
much
we've accomplished in our lifetime, and don't like what little we have
accomplished belittled. Surely you can understand that.

I certainly understand it. I think I'm too young to take that point of view
as my own, however.


You can dislike me all you want, but you'll come to understand that when I
speak of machining, it's not conjecture.

I don't dislike you at all. I don't dislike anyone here either. Also, I
don't question your knowledge or experience. You have more than proven
yourself to anyone who reads this forum habitually.

I view relationships within this group as I do relationships at work. Some
people I tolerate, others I enjoy working with. I enjoy reading your posts
as there's almost always something of value. Not many here can say that
about their posts (me included).

I've "been there, done that" and
know what I'm talking about, although you may find circumstances may make
things different for some situations and my experience may not apply.

I think that's one of the few things I am certain of in metalworking.

For
sure, however, when it comes to centerless grinding, there is no doubt in
my
mind that they are capable of holding a few millionths in the hands of one
qualified. That was and is my point. If you understand why rigid hones
make round holes out of tapered and irregular holes, you will then
understand why a centerless makes parts round, *so long as they are not
operated on center*, which is easy to do if one changes part size but not
blade height. That won't make sense to you until you get your hands
dirty
on the machine.

I think I'll have to take your word for it. I don't know anyone else who has
run a centerless grinder.


Robin, I'm more than willing to get along with anyone and everyone.
However, they must have a similar desire. You and I haven't really
gotten
along in the many years I've frequented this forum, and you've made it
abundantly clear you have no desire to do so now.

Well, in a way your right. I don't actively try to get along with anyone
here. I see this forum as a place to get and give (more of the former)
information. I do try not to be rude (although I'm not always successful) as
this is a courtesy I extend to any person I do not know (wherever I happen
to interact with them).

That might also help you
understand my comments previously. I'm old enough to be your grandfather,
but you seem to see me as nothing more than some dude your age whom you
don't like. Had you shown me a modicum of respect through the years, my
attitude towards you would be far different from what it is.

I don't believe I have an attitude towards you and I find it unfortunate
that you read a post in a certain light just because it is marked with my
name. This is not a dig, just my perspective.

How you hold your mouth may make the difference. :-)

I can tell how hard a friend of mine is working because of how his tounge
moves (outside his mouth, of course) as he's operating a machine or tool.
I'm surprised it doesn't get burnt when he's using a facemill...

Regards,

Robin

In article , Robin S. says...

I don't believe I have an attitude towards you and I find it unfortunate
that you read a post in a certain light just because it is marked with my
name.

Well put.

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

sdf
"jim rozen" wrote in message
...
In article , Harold and Susan Vordos says...

You may recall my lumpy introduction to RCM many years ago----

Er, not *that* lumpy. At least as I recall. There were
worse....

Hard to imagine! But I'm pleased to have persevered. Great bunch of guys
here!


Honestly I think I have maybe a few more years of experience than
robin but my formal training in the area of things that discussed
here is probably well below his. Really. My sum total of formal
training the machining fields is *two* (count 'em, two) night
classes which I took about 25 years ago because I had purchased
a used (*very* well used) atlas 9" lathe.

I'm not as concerned with the amount of training so much as the width of the
training. I had no education regards machining, just what I got in high
school. I was fortunate to land a job that was seeking people just like
me, mechanical aptitude, but no bad habits, so they could be specifically
trained. Sadly, the training was job specific, so while I got excellent
training from top notch people, the training suited the facility, so it's
more or less job specific. I am woefully lacking in certain areas, such
as gear machining. It was not a requirement for the job, so it never
happened. Had it not been for my last job, where I worked in a job shop
that had to produce any and everything, generally for the aero-space
industry, I might have never learned enough to function on my own, but that
short period of time, coupled with my prior years of experience, was the
fastest and best learning curve I encountered. I strongly suggest anyone
interested in learning machining seize the opportunity to work in just such
a shop. It's the best OJT you can get, and teaches plenty about adhering
to proper procedures, for the vast majority of the work is well scrutinized
by QC. I'm not keen on slop work, never have been. Making *good* parts
is
far more important that just making parts.

I have worked as a research engineer since then, of course. I know
things he doesn't know, he knows things I don't know.

I think that goes with almost any job, Jim, regardless of education. I
can
honestly say I doubt I'd find many people here with chemical degrees that
know the procedure for refining gold chemically, and I know almost nothing
about chemistry. I had a need to know, they likely never have had the
need. They could explain to me why the process works, but may not know it
such that they could apply it. I've learned that almost everyone brings
something to the table. Whether it is of use to me, or not, becomes the
question.


with the then very young Australian doctor that made the connection
between
ulcers and helicobacter pylori bacterium. His experiences with the
medical
profession boggle the mind, and were made even more difficult by the fact
that he was outside his field of expertise.

My understanding was, he "proved" the point by infecting himself with
the bacterium, deliberately. Thus giving himself and ulcer. Then
he "cured" the ulcer with a dose of penicillin.

That's pretty much how he went about it, but over a long period, with plenty
of setbacks and insults from his peers. His story was published in
Reader's Digest, October, 1993, long before I had a scanner. I was so
impressed that I typed it (verbatim) into my computer and still have it for
reference. I had a bleeding ulcer in the mid 80's and have been plagued
by a bad stomach for years. I gave up smoking my pipes as a result (that's a
good thing), plus couldn't drink coffee or soft drinks for years. It got
to the point where I couldn't enjoy a light scotch and water, my favorite
drink.

The drug companies certainly understood the meaning of the experiment.
Overnight they had all their ulcer medications re-classified as OTC
instead of prescription. That was about the time I lost all respect
for them.

While it's true that they did just that, I'm not convinced it was because of
their greed (which is likely a first!). The timing doesn't go hand in hand
with the change in sales. What they did was likely a result of the patent
running out on the first generation of these drugs, and they were being made
by many other pharmaceutical houses and sold at relatively low prices. I
have no idea who pushed for them to be sold OTC, but I'm certainly grateful
for it happening. The move to OTC sales really benefited me, for I take
cimetidine daily, and have for years. I recall with chagrin the cost was
something like a couple bucks/pill at one time. I discovered that I
overproduce acid, and that kept my stomach in horrible condition, but
perfect for helicobacter. Just a year ago I was treated yet again, and this
time, for what appears to be the first time, the level of bacteria has been
lowered (or eliminated) such that I can once again enjoy a glass of wine, or
that light drink of scotch I mentioned, and not be sorry. Also, for the
first time, I was treated with two antibiotics, not just one. Treatment
included bismuth. As you likely know, unlike earlier concepts, diet plays
almost no role in treatment aside from ignoring things that irritate.


My guess is that if you went back in time and met yourself
at robin's age, you might give yourself the same reaction you are giving
him at the moment. Maybe.

Well, to be perfectly honest, I don't think so. I'm not convinced Robin is
anywhere nearly as cocky as I was. I had a tremendous amount of growing up
to do at that age. I'd have likely been much harder on myself, at least
with my present attitude. Had it not been for my exceptional ability on
the machines, I'd have been dismissed early on. Surely my demeanor wasn't
much of an asset. I was damned lucky to survive my youth, from all
indications.

Harold

In article , Harold and Susan Vordos says...

My guess is that if you went back in time and met yourself
at robin's age, you might give yourself the same reaction you are giving
him at the moment. Maybe.

Well, to be perfectly honest, I don't think so. I'm not convinced Robin is
anywhere nearly as cocky as I was. I had a tremendous amount of growing up
to do at that age. I'd have likely been much harder on myself, at least
with my present attitude. Had it not been for my exceptional ability on
the machines, I'd have been dismissed early on. Surely my demeanor wasn't
much of an asset. I was damned lucky to survive my youth, from all
indications.

I hope robin's reading this.... :^)

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

sounds to me like you're looking for a lawyer....