wefalck

Somehow it didn’t klick with me, that you started another log here. Daniels’ book seems to be widely used, indeed, in the trade. I don’t own a copy, but have a variety of other, mainly antiquarian books on watch- and intrument-making. I’ll have to watch this log then as well ...

OK, should wait then for the pinas. I was thinking of the many shell-first (or at least part-shell), were there isn't a hard chine. Think of all the Nordic boats from the middle ages on or the Arab dhows, where builders plank up the shell up to around the chine and then start putting the timbers in. All is done by eye, using only an inclinometer to measure the angle of each strake. I was thinking of the pure technical process of construction, not of the design process based on some formulae. I am curious to see then how this determines the shape from that perspective.

Now you have to do the copper pots for the pantry as well

What kind of stove ?

Technically speaking, not historically, there should not be a link between the building method as such and the presence or otherwise of a chine. In both, carveel and clinker planking, one can introduce an angle between two consecutive planks. What is technically possible, however, does not tell you what was done. You obviously could only rule out a feature, if it is technically not possible.

I couldn't agree more !

Me culpa, of course, you are right ! Sometimes my native German gets in the way. There cleat = Klampe.

As I was on the boat-davits I also tackled the anchor-cranes in a similar way. ********************************* Anchor-cranes As noted above, the bow anchors are handled with two pairs of cranes that are positioned on either side of the anchor pocket. These cranes will be painted white in compliance will the prescribed livery. Hence, it does not matter what material is underneath and I first attempted to laminate them up from laser-cut Canson-paper parts. There are actually two sets of different cranes, one with three sheaves and one with two sheaves. They were made up from four and three layers of Canson-paper respectively and cemented together with lacquer in the usual way. The sheaves at the end are held by brackets that were lacquered on. Sheaves were turned and lacquered in. However, in the end the result was not as crisp as I had wished for. Set-up for milling the flats onto the davits The milling seen through the stereo-microscope So I turned back to brass, starting with pieces of 1.2 mm diameter wire. A spigot to fit into the sockets already installed on the boat were turned on and the other end received a male centre. The piece then was transferred to the dividing-head on the mill, supported by the tailstock. The four long flat sides were milled on with a small-diametre burr. The flat section is 0.8 mm high and 0.6 mm wide. The sides of the future brackets were milled flat. After re-chucking, a starter slot for the sheaves was cut with a circular saw. In the meantime, the sheaves of 0.9 mm diameter were turned from the same brass rod and the grooves, which are 0.3 mm apart were marked with a pointed turning-tool. The main craine has three sheaves, while the auxilliary one has two sheaves only. They were all turned in one piece and I did not bother to drill the sheaves for axles. The brackets on the cranes were bent to accomodate the sheaves, which were soldered in place. The shape of the cranes then were finished with files and abrasive discs in the handheld drill. The only photograph (blow-up) on which one can discern the belaying point for the anchor-tackle The tackles are belayed on clamps or belaying pins – the photographic evidence is not clear and on the drawings these were omitted. I decided in favour of clamps as these were easier to make. Set-up for the first step in making clamps A piece of 2 mm brass rod was chucked up in the dividing-head set vertically and a flat of 0.3 mm width and 0.9 mm height was milled on. This piece then was transferred to the lathe, where the T-shape and the 0.3 mm diametre spigot were turned. After parting off, the clamp was finished in a pin-vice using small files and an abrasive disc in the handheld drill. Turning the rough shape of the clamps and their spigot The clamps filed to shape As the clamps are fitted to the sides of the davits, 0.3 mm holes had to be drilled for their spigots. I did not want to do this before bending the davits, as it would have weakend them and the hole might become distorted in the process. However, it turned out the davits could be clamped conveniently in the mini-vice in the dividing attachment on the mill. Set-up for drilling the anchor-cranes Drilling the anchor-cranes as seen through the stereo-microscope The clamps were soldered into the holes. This completed the construction of the davits. The four anchor-cranes in place (they are about 10 mm high) To be continued ...

I once (a long time ago) bought a small pocket calculator, unpacked it and started to type on it wildly - until I ran into a problem. Only then I reluctantly unpacked the manual and on the first page I read this: "Do you also belong to those, who unpack, start typing wildly, resign and then look for the manual ... ?" So, you are not alone ...

Not sure from memory, but I think the PROXXON tools have a fine M8x1 thread (not the standard M8x1.25). Both, the tightening nut for collets and the chucks have the same thread. The PROXXON collets indeed are hard (not quite as my watchmaking lathe collets), but rather durable - I had their pillar drill for 35 years now without issues concerning the collets. PROXXON supplies a 3.2 mm collet for imperial measure tools, not sure, whether Dremel supplies collets for metric tools. I would normally use collets and not a 3-jaw-chuck - much more secure, better concentricity and less bulky. For some years I had a PROXXON power supply, but at some stage I seem to have killed it - probably one of the capacitors is gone, but I don't have the knowledge and instruments to check and replace it. I then pulled out an old model railway transformer, got a variable speed-control off ebay and set up a power-supply station integrated into my work-bench. It was different types of sockets for different tools and purposes. I then cut off the PROXXON proprietary plugs from my 12 V tools and replaced them with standard low-voltage plugs, for which I had installed a socket in the power-supply. The proprietary plugs are there to forces the innocent into buying the PROXXON transformers (they use the same marketing trick on their small table-saw for instance). Apart from this marketing trick I never had any issue with their tools and the only time I burnt out their bench-grinder motor, I got very quickly and at a reasonable price a replacement motor (was my fault, as I used it for too long continuous periods). I could have sent the transformer for repair, but doing this from France would have been too expensive. BTW, I don't have a hand-held drill from neither of the two companies, as the very early and primitive model of this kind of drills I bought some 45 years ago still works fine. It is essentially a motor in an aluminium housing with a switch at the end. A brass-tube is screwed onto the motor shaft that is threaded for a collet-nut. A set of metric and imperial collets in steel came with it. The hexagonal steel nut doesn't show wear, but I rarely need the spanner for tightening - it seems that the Dremel-cone is rather steep, so needs a lot of force to close the collet securely, while collets for my drill and the PROXXON ones are more shallow. Surprisingly the motor and its bearings have survived continuous intensive use for almost half a century now.

Watched the whole presentation on Wednesday evening. Very good and eloquent. Good to see another geologist at work here and putting the technological development into its socio-economic, cultural, resource geology and ecological context. Really appreciated it.

Only after my last comment, shortly before going to bed, I noticed that there were felt-washers between the bobbins and the frames. While such a machine is an interesting engineering design challenge, I think there are too many degrees of freedom to make it really practical - unless you go into industrial production. Many of these variables have to be re-adjusted for each type of thread. For a three-strand rope I count at least eight: for each bobbin the friction and the tightness of wrapping the thread, the rope tensioning device and the winding speed that has to be adjusted as that bobbin fills up. All these have to be re-adjusted each time you start a new cycle. Personally, I would think carefully about the maximum length of rope I need and arrange a batch-type rope-walk for that length. With a proper set-up, there are only two variables to control: the overall tension of the threads, if set-up continuously, and the number of twists for the threads. The tension you can control with a weight and you take note of the weight you used for a good rope. The number of twists you can count and record. Therefore, the settings are quite reproducible, something that I would find difficult to achieve for these continuous rope-making machines.

Don’t know why the manufacturer used these bulky thumbscrews. The parts are commercial hardware, perhaps for that. The bobbin will run on the screw thread which will not allow a smooth running. I would use a bolt with just a short thread on it. There should be a spring washer between the frame and the bobbin. Just pulling together the frame will not allow precision control, but jam the bobbin. The tightening nut either has to have a nylon insert, or there has to be a locking nut to not work lose.

Weren't the bolts for the feed bobbins meant to adjust the tension of the individual threads ? Uniform tension on all the threads is important for a smooth rope.

Boley (or Boley-Leinen) are considered prime makers, as are Levin. For some reason Boley prices are highter than the other (German) makes. Boley is one of the few makers, who are still in business, together with Bergeon (who are more of a distributor) and Levin. The Paulson lathes in the USA were actually made by Boley at a time when labour was cheaper in Germany than in the USA. If you want to know more on what was/is on the market Tony Griffiths in the UK has compiled a very comprehensive Web-site on small lathes: www.lathes.co.uk. If you want to learn more about these lathes, I would recommend to get hold of a copy of this book: CARLÉ, D. DE (1985, 4th edition): The Watchmakers and Model Engineer‘s Lathe – A User‘s Manual.- 193 p., London (Robert Hale). Makes you drool, but unfortunately virtually all of the suppliers have ceased to exist. And yes, 'druxey' is right, you should look for one with a cross-slide. Crosslides alone are somewhere around 250 to 500 €/£/US$ depending on the make, but I have people asking ridiculous prices on ebay these days. For a single collet I would pay between 10 and maximum 20 €, depending on the size and state. In a set they my come cheaper. Sherline sells acceptable 8 mm collets, but I still would rather go for antiques. However, their chucks are good value and I have several of them for 'rough' work. 'druxey' is also right about the collet-holding lever-tailstock, one should have one. The simple tailstocks are ok for supporting the work in a dead-centre, but whatever adapters people offer as after-market attachments, they are not so useful for drilling. It would be not too difficult to convert a simple tailstock into a lever-stock with a runner that has a socket for ER11-collets. If the tailstock is bored for 8 mm runners (and not for 7 mm as many are) than you will be able to find 8 mm diameter ER11-arbors on ebay. ER11-collets clamp down to 0.5 mm and hold drills much more securely than WW-collets.

Indeed. I am writing up my posts first in a word-processor document, which then is really a continuous narrative in which I am able to go back and check, what I have done.

Well, that is true up to a point. I have noticed that prices have gone up dramatically over the past 15 years or so in particular and would not be able to get anymore, what I bought 20 or 30 years ago. If my memory is correct (I am too lazy to pull out my records), I paid for my first quite complete set (a 6 mm Wolf, Jahn & Co. so-called D-bed or Geneva-style lathe) in 1988 around 1300 £ (I burnt a performance prime in my first job for that, at lot of money considering that my annual salary as a civil servant was 12k£ ). While initally this was a somewhat blue-eyed and innocent acquisition (I didn't know anything really about such lathes) with a practical purpose, it has become since a side-hobby in itself. Under today's circumstances one may need to think more carefully about the tasks one wants such a lathe for. For me the bigger (8 mm) lathe is my only 'real' lathe, but one could think of some model engineering lathe for the bigger work and use a watchmakers lathe with a limited kit only for the real small and delicate work. One of the main advantages of a well-kitted out watchmakers lathe is the flexibility and variety of work-holding. I am sorry, that I put the bug in the head of some of you and it may be unfair ...

Watched the whole presentation this evening. Very good and eloquent. Good to see another geologist at work here and putting the technological development into its socio-economic, cultural, resource geology and ecological context. Really appreciated it.

The silicone 'brushes' can be bought in most art-shops and through the usual auction Web-sites. They are meant to be used instead of palette-knives in painting with pastose acrylics and for sculpting in soft materials.

Sorry for that. You would have to register for the Forum. I wasn't sure, whether it would work for 'outsiders'.

By chance someone just posted a picture of such boat-cover made with silk-paper and white glue on our German forum:

Thanks for the friendly comments. As to sources for watchmakers lathes, there are several answers to that. Second hand ones: - by word of mouth and 'connections' - the usual auction sites - certain used tool traders There are very few makers these days and most would be out of reach for hobbyists: - Schaublin S.A. and Bergeon S.A. in Switzerland - Levin in the USA (but for these you really have to take a loan on your house) - there is one Chinese manufacturer, who makes lathes similar to the old ones

Silkspan, either in Northamerican understanding (silk paper) or European understanding (silk cloth), would have also been my suggestion. Military modeller use for tarpaulines in the likes also tissue paper: steam-iron out all embossments and stiffen it with acrylic or other varnish. Cut out the pattern and drape it over the boat. It may be better to use solvent-based varnish, as this can be softened for more compliant draping. Paint as required. These boat-covers had usually triangular flaps with eyelets sewn on, through which a rope would be roved to tie down the cover.

Maybe his workshop wasn't big enough ?

Speed is not so much the point, but regularity is important. For this you need a constant pull on the serving yarn and regular feed along the rope being served. This is on a model scale difficult to achieve by other means than a serving machine. Essentially, a serving machine is nothing else but two hooks that are driven synchronously so as not to impart a twist onto the rope being served. On of the hooks needs to be adjustable in position so that the rope can be tensioned. So, you need two identical sets of cog-wheels. Plastic ones are the cheapest, brass ones more posh and durable, but also far more expensive. Plastic ones can be found in model shops. There are also speciality suppliers, such as hpc-gears in the UK, who sell gears in brass, steel, nylon and delrin (https://www.hpcgears.com/). I gather cheapo plastic ones can be had for a couple of quid. Then you need some steel rod for the connection and the axles cum hook. That you get in DIY stores. You also a crank or something to turn one of the cog-wheels into a crank. Finally, you need some sort of base-board and two pieces of wood as brackets plus some screws to keep everything together. You can improve the machine by adding some self-lubracting bushings, rather than just drilling holes into the wood. They can be found on the Internet or in some model shops. For added sturdiness, I would probably make such machine much lower than the ones offered commercially. Not sure why they choose such spidery design. On the other hand, a high clearance under the rope being served allows you to use a self-travelling spool of yarn, as per the design by 'archojofo' here on the forum. If you had an old meccano set, you could fashion such machine also from those parts. Lego might work as well.