Universal Grinding machine construction series?

[Diane CarneyModerator @dianecarney30678]

I am posting this as a bit of an experiment. I would like to try to gauge the reaction to a proposed construction series. I am mindful that only a very small percentage of the readership partakes in this forum and also that if the reaction here is completely negative and I decide to run it anyway I will never hear the end of it.

Anyway… here goes:
I have been offered a long article – a full construction series with very many drawings – for a universal grinding machine. The machine is part manual and part CNC and is manufactured from stock material – no castings. The table is 23 inches x 5 inches and the between centres grinding capacity is 12 inches long x 5 inches dia. When complete it will be a surface grinder, a cylindrical grinder and an internal grinder also.

The writer is known to us and his work is thorough and clear.
This is something a little out of the ordinary for Model Enginer and I think it has great value. What are your thoughts?

Diane

[Diane CarneyModerator @dianecarney30678]

[TomfileryParticipant @tomfilery]

Diane,

Surely you mean for MEW (rather than ME) – otherwise what is the point in having the two titles?

Regards Tom

[KWILParticipant @kwil]

Go for it Diana. We will not doubt learn a few tricks.

[OuBallieParticipant @ouballie]

Diane,

I'd be interested, as I am in need of one.

Geoff – Three classic cars need restoring.

[simondavies3Participant @simondavies3]

Diane,

I would be very interested to read this. Not sure that I would ever build it in its entirety but the designs and processes would definitely be of interest. As an aside, could you contemplate having the entire series of articles (assuming you do publish) collated together so that it is possible to read without hunting for sections, or losing the flow of the design?

Simon

[Anonymous]

At first glance it wouldn't seem that I'd be interested, as I already have a surface grinder and cylindrical grinder with external and internal capability. However, I would be keen to read the series, especially if it dealt with the design calculations and trade offs needed to get the necessary sub-micron accuracy., rather than just a blow by blow account of making the parts.

What would also be very valuable is a practical discussion of how to use surface and cylindrical grinders, such as wheel selection versus material and finish, coolant or no coolant, feedrates, step overs, sparkout strategies and the like.

Regards,

Andrew

[Ian PParticipant @ianp]

Put me down as another positive vote.

I'm not saying I would build the whole thing but apart from reading what sounds like an interesting article I would probably learn something about how grinding machines work in practice.

As regards ME/MEW (as Tom brought it up) I'm not fussed but the thought of having 'tools' making articles mixed in with ME appeals to me so if its a voting matter, stick to your guns Diane!

Ian P

[Steamer1915Participant @steamer1915]

I would welcome such a series – especially in ME.

Steve.

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Posted by Tomfilery on 11/09/2013 14:29:27:

Diane,

Surely you mean for MEW (rather than ME) – otherwise what is the point in having the two titles?

Regards Tom

.

As Tom so rightly says … This should be in Model Engineers Workshop !!

[assuming that title continues to exist]

MEW has come-in for criticism recently, because [with the notable exeption of the StepperHead series] it does not run articles of this calibre.

I regret to say this is probably "the final straw" for my subscription to MEW.

MichaelG.

 

 

 

 

Edited By Michael Gilligan on 11/09/2013 16:24:31

[Neil GreenawayParticipant @neilgreenaway71611]

Hi All,

I would be interested to read this article however only subscribe to MEW – if you look at the title of MEW I would have thought it would be better suited to a workshop magazine. I do find it difficult recently to see what direction MEW is heading in for the future? My interests are more around workshop machinery but still enjoyed learning about other machines (clocks, steam, stirling etc) as it was another wing of my engineering career and hobby so to speak!

Neil

[michael coleParticipant @michaelcole91146]

Posted by Andrew Johnston on 11/09/2013 15:37:57:

What would also be very valuable is a practical discussion of how to use surface and cylindrical grinders, such as wheel selection versus material and finish, coolant or no coolant, feedrates, step overs, sparkout strategies and the like.

I would much like such a article. Mostly I would like second Andrew comment as above.

It is one thing to read up on lathe work and then have a go yourself, This is I think most of us start out, but I would not think of doing this with a grinder unless I had some very detailed instrections first.

Mike

[JasonBModerator @jasonb]

Another vote to stick it in MEW.

Whatever way you go if there are lots of drawings make sure they are reasonably correct

J

[Gray62Participant @gray62]

Yep, it gets my vote whichever magazine runs it, should prove interesting

CB

[DerryUKParticipant @derryuk]

Diane is Editor of ME and doing her best for her magazine. Bravo!

Should still be in MEW though.

[Stephen BensonParticipant @stephenbenson75261]

Sounds like another nail in the MEW coffin

[Anonymous]

Posted by CoalBurner on 11/09/2013 16:38:12:

Yep, it gets my vote whichever magazine runs it

Half in one, half in the other?

Andrew

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Andrew a.k.a Solomon

MichaelG.

[Harold Hall 1Participant @haroldhall1]

Could you Diane give a very approximate estimate as to how long, long is.

Also, I would have thought that you must have a limit to how many non modelling pages you can justify in the magazine, but maybe not. However, if so, then would it not limit the number of non modelling pages which could be devoted to the smaller workshop articles which would surely suit a larger number of your readers.

Harold

[Russell EberhardtParticipant @russelleberhardt48058]

It sounds interesting even if I won't be building it. Another vote for putting it in MEW.

Russell.

[Tony Pratt 1Participant @tonypratt1]

Gets my vote, but MEW is the place for it.

Tony

[Another JohnSParticipant @anotherjohns]

As a "Model Engineer", interested in more than just "workshop"s, put it where it belongs, in "Model Engineer".

(I'll bet the originators of the magazine split were thinking more about lining their pockets than about such contentious issues!)

Another JohnS.

[BazyleParticipant @bazyle]

I'm in favour.

Has there been a series like the shaper series in either mag with details of commercial units (smaller ones suitable for the amateur) and techniques? I know there was the swing grinder a few years back.

[colin hawesParticipant @colinhawes85982]

Sounds very interesting to me. I don't mind which magazine as I get both. My opinion is that there should be a small amount of tools.tooling,machines and their use in ME. and a small amount of application to modelmaking in MEW. Colin

[Rik ShawParticipant @rikshaw]

Hello Diane – Ask yourself this – if you were to publish in the form of a book instead , how many copies would you expect to sell?

Rik

Edited By Rik Shaw on 11/09/2013 19:11:38

[Author]

Posts