A new class for MEX

Advert

New Replies

Report Bug

Help/FAQs

A new class for MEX

This topic has 22 replies, 13 voices, and was last updated 10 February 2015 at 13:21 by chris stephens.

Viewing 23 posts - 1 through 23 (of 23 total)

Author

Posts
8 February 2015 at 14:49 #178956
John Stevenson 1
Participant
@johnstevenson1
How about a class at the next MEX for innovation. ?

Probably have to be tools as models are just models. Things like a Quorn could have won first year out of design as could say the GHT dividing head but years on we get the same items regurgitated by different builders.

OK some may have a slight mod but not enough to innovate it from it's original design.

Stepperhead comes to mind and Alan was entitled to his gold on this machine. OK there have been similar machines but his take on design was far enough removed to make it unique.

Things that come to mind whilst being unique but simple are the boring head made years ago by Ivan Laws company Model Engineering Services. A boring head that was made on a lathe only, no milling dovetails and a power feed to boot.

They also did a simple machine vise with massive jaw opening for it's size and anti lift jaw by means of a long supported tongue.

It would make a good class as every year there would have to be something new, and a rehash of a previous Quorn or GHT dividing head would be ignored and there has been previous provenance.

Something that would do the mag good as well in that there would be untold articles, well at least one, to run in the mag.

Could also incorporate new technology as well like some CNC or parts 3D printed but not always.

Points awarded first to innovation, use, ease of build and finish last, so a hastily cobbled up idea with crow $hit weld would not be penalised. The whole idea is to get new ideas out there and new blood. It can then be left to other to copy and add finess if required.

What say you ?
Advert

8 February 2015 at 14:49 #4475
John Stevenson 1
Participant
@johnstevenson1
8 February 2015 at 15:04 #178958
Stuart Bridger
Participant
@stuartbridger82290
Gets my vote.
8 February 2015 at 15:32 #178964
Anonymous
Hmmm, the trouble with innovation is that it is even more controversial, and difficult to judge. And there's very little that is truly innovative. Been there, done that and won a prize, and suffered the put downs.

If I'd come up with something really innovative I'd be trying to patent it and flog said patent for loadsa hard cash rather than entering MEX for the glory.

Andrew
8 February 2015 at 15:34 #178965
Michael Gilligan
Participant
@michaelgilligan61133
+1 vote in favour from me.

MichaelG.

.

Edited for clarity, because Andrew beat me to the Post.

Edited By Michael Gilligan on 08/02/2015 15:36:25

Edited By Michael Gilligan on 08/02/2015 15:37:10
8 February 2015 at 15:53 #178967
John Stevenson 1
Participant
@johnstevenson1
Posted by Andrew Johnston on 08/02/2015 15:32:22:

Hmmm, the trouble with innovation is that it is even more controversial, and difficult to judge. And there's very little that is truly innovative. Been there, done that and won a prize, and suffered the put downs.

If I'd come up with something really innovative I'd be trying to patent it and flog said patent for loadsa hard cash rather than entering MEX for the glory.

Andrew

Sorry Andrew don't agree with that on two points.

First innovation and what's new, doesn't have to be new, only new to the use and users.

Take as an example the lift up screw cutting tool that was derived by Mike Cox, John Moore [ Bogstandard ] and myself at roughly the same time. Now someone did their homework and found out that this was invented around 1900.

But what happened to it between 1900 and now ? Fact is it disappeared but if you build one and use it you will wonder, like me, why didn't we have these years ago. They are simple to build, no advanced machinery like CNC is needed and best of all they work straight out the tin.

In fact because it's still relatively unknow it could still be entered this coming year, it ticks the boxes. Even if it didn't win it would make more people aware.

Now as regards patents, the user base based on Model Engineers or to be more correct home workshops is possibly 1% of the total cost to obtaining a patent which is no more that a license to sue somebody else.

Also remember you need a world patent [ read mega, mega bucks ] or it will be copied in another country, or even a country that ignore patents.

A classic example of this is 2Linc in the States have the patent on the spring loaded engraving tool. I could make and sell these here with no problem as they can't get a British patent due to an expired prior art patent.

Me I'd rather have the glory

No seriously something like the lift up screw cutting tool has made my life so much better it is reward in itself

edit – spelling.

Edited By John Stevenson on 08/02/2015 20:03:09
8 February 2015 at 16:20 #178972
JasonB
Moderator
@jasonb
As tooling was supported by such a small number of entrants would another class be worth it with maybe just the one entry?

If you want to go down this route then just a separate award mabe the "JS Challenge Cup" or does one of the existing single awards already cover this sort of thing? that could be given to an innovotive item within the existing workshop tooling section.

J

PS Andrew no reason you can't enter the original item after you have got the patent and flog them out of your boot in the carpark
8 February 2015 at 17:44 #178990
Another JohnS
Participant
@anotherjohns
I like this idea.

Patents: Andrew – the government organization that I work for USED to hold lots of patents (we were something like 10x the income per person than any other government department in the western world) but lots of patents have been given up as the patent maintenance fees are higher than the income. The big winner was one for Fiber Bragg gratings; most of the other patents cost more than they bring in.

Another JohnS.
8 February 2015 at 18:12 #178993
Roger Williams 2
Participant
@rogerwilliams2
Heres a suggestion, just think of the hundreds of 4 way tool posts that arent used anymore !. So, a section for who can come up with the best adaptation of one for something else, apart from a door stop. Better than throwing them in the scrap.Ive one that has a seperate indexing handle on it that could be perhaps modified for use on a milling machine table !!.
8 February 2015 at 18:21 #178995
JasonB
Moderator
@jasonb
Could there be a sub class for novel ways to hold a tool in said toolpost? I may be in teh running for that.
8 February 2015 at 19:26 #179005
Michael Gilligan
Participant
@michaelgilligan61133
Posted by JasonB on 08/02/2015 18:21:48:

Could there be a sub class for novel ways to hold a tool in said toolpost? I may be in teh running for that.

.

Are those long threaded components "tuned dampers" to reduce chatter

MichaelG.
8 February 2015 at 20:58 #179013
John Haine
Participant
@johnhaine32865
Another vote from me!
8 February 2015 at 22:37 #179021
Bazyle
Participant
@bazyle
Sounds good provided they aren't all CNC and £D printing which is where much of the future inovaton is most likely.

I think the lift up tool holder resurfaced because people were getting inverter drives with reverse. With linehsafts and early electric motors reversing wasn't as quick as using the carriage handle.
8 February 2015 at 23:55 #179026
John Stevenson 1
Participant
@johnstevenson1
Posted by Bazyle on 08/02/2015 22:37:55:

Sounds good provided they aren't all CNC and £D printing which is where much of the future innovaton is most likely.

I think the lift up tool holder resurfaced because people were getting inverter drives with reverse. With lineshafts and early electric motors reversing wasn't as quick as using the carriage handle.

I agree Bazyle, I was thinking more jigs and fixtures type of projects as opposed to whole machines or such.

As regards reverse, can't see this as basically from WWII industry has had instant reversing machines via clutches etc.

Virtually every Harrison and Colchester even made from then had instant reverse but they still had to invent things like the Ainjest high speed threading insted of a simple too lholder ?
9 February 2015 at 09:30 #179043
Michael Checkley
Participant
@michaelcheckley34085
This is a really good idea and as previously mentioned would encourage new ideas as well as modifications to existing equipment.

There is plenty of encouragement about at the moment for companies to invest in research to ensure the UK remains a leader in technology so it seems only right that model engineers should follow the trend. I wonder how much of our day to day technology started life in a garden shed?

Rather than a separate class should 'innovation' be a noticeable part of the judging in every class? perhaps not quite as much in a judging of scale detail but I`m sure even for these classes there is still plenty of room for improvement in existing designs as well as new ways of doing things.
9 February 2015 at 09:47 #179046
Anonymous
Posted by John Stevenson on 08/02/2015 23:55:39:

Virtually every Harrison and Colchester even made from then had instant reverse but they still had to invent things like the Ainjest high speed threading insted of a simple too lholder ?

That's innovation for you.

Andrew
9 February 2015 at 09:55 #179048
jason udall
Participant
@jasonudall57142
Where as I would value innovation over polish..would the “majority” of visitors?

Despite the nature of the show/exhibition. .many attend to look at the shiny things…
And its footfall that pays for the venue…

That said..there aught to be room for “what the hell it works”…class

Maybe a kind benefactor might donate a suitable trophy..and get such a class added…
9 February 2015 at 11:15 #179066
Anonymous
I'm no great expert on patents, although I do have a couple to my name, albeit as a co-inventor. I would agree that they are probably less important than they were, especially in the commercial world. There is a view that if you don't have the cash to sue anyone infringing your patent, then said patent isn't worth the paper it is printed on. However, they do have their uses. When companies are bought up a portfolio of patents can help as it represents IP, which is a selling point. That is what we are trying to do, build up a portfolio of patents so that we can get more money when we sell up. Well, there's no harm in dreaming!

While it is expensive to obtain a patent it is relatively cheap to put in an application, and can be a simple way of finding out about prior art.

Andrew
9 February 2015 at 12:41 #179081
Tim Stevens
Participant
@timstevens64731
One thing I would find very useful in this slot is 'A comprehensive guide to current and recent Mills of the same basic type'. This would assist greatly in finding alternative sources of parts, as well as advice etc. I would start with a set of pictures, and a listing of the differences from the basic design.

Regards – Tim Stevens
9 February 2015 at 12:45 #179082
Michael Gilligan
Participant
@michaelgilligan61133
Posted by jason udall on 09/02/2015 09:55:26:

That said..there aught to be room for "what the hell it works"…class

Maybe a kind benefactor might donate a suitable trophy..

.

I dread to think what a suitable trophy might look like !!

'Fit for Function' … but without the polish

MichaelG.
9 February 2015 at 12:56 #179084
John Stevenson 1
Participant
@johnstevenson1
Bit like a scrap heap challenge trophy ?
9 February 2015 at 14:40 #179096
John Haine
Participant
@johnhaine32865
"Sounds good provided they aren't all CNC and £D printing which is where much of the future inovaton is most likely."

Good grief!
10 February 2015 at 13:21 #179207
chris stephens
Participant
@chrisstephens63393
What ho Sir John,

An excellent and welcome idea, but no more than is expected from a real tool user who has and uses his little grey cells to great effect,. If there is a minor problemette with the idea it would be that seeing a lovely bit if shiny metal innovation on a table, even when accompanied with a description, says absolutely nothing to the average stick-in-the-mud old fogey about its use. Granted there a few who will see and understand straight away, but to many the only way to show an innovation's benefit (if no benefit it would be a solution in search of a problem) would be to see it in use. Speaking from experience of demonstrating at shows, taking for example a tangential tool holder, many paid absolutely no interest in it till it was shown to work and work well, then they got interested and asked for plans and info. Perhaps any bit of innovation should be accompanied with a you-tube type video, instead of a paper description, to show the the great unthinking masses (T firmly in C) its use.

As for the presentation cup/award for the JohnS Challenge, why not have a competition for the design. Oh maybe not, you would need a cup for that design and then a design for that etc etc.

chriStephens, (also a John Stephens' son )
Author

Posts