Warco mill lubrication

[SillyOldDuffer]

On SillyOldDuffer Said:

 

Not sure what Peter expects of the manual.   Even those written for much more expensive machines tend to be terse.  Thing is a milling machine is a tool, not a consumer product.  It’s expected the owner already knows a bit.

Quite. I had the Harrison L5 manual, and apart from using correct English grammar it wasn’t much different from the one that came with my Warco WM180.

[Martin of Wick]

On Martin of Wick Said:

 

On my versions of the 16 all gears are metal.

 

 

Are you sure about that, Martin?

Have you handled the high/low gear cluster and confirmed it is metal?

Warco’s description of the WM18 says: “As with all Warco milling machines, this machine has metal gears.”

Not wrong, but they left out the word “some”.

Peter Venn, when I took my gear out there was no indication of any degradation to the high gear in spite of using white lithium grease on it for four years and using it far more often than the low gear. Damage to the low gear was almost certainly mechanical, not chemical.

[Martin of WickParticipant @martinofwick]

…Have you handled the high/low gear cluster and confirmed it is metal?…

Yep,

This is a 2009 machine and when it was part dismantled a few months ago to see if I could implement a belt drive retro fit, I had a good look and poke with a scribe and a scraper at all of the gears. Because of the operational gear noise I was expecting damage or wear or a part broken plastic gear.

To my astonishment all gears  turned out to be metal and in generally good condition, no signs of chipping or surface roughness or gross breakdown damage that I could observe ( I could only observe with a low power lens in situ, ie. not able pull them out to inspect with a loupe).

The motor to layshaft gears are both helical metal gears and are the ones that produce the spectacular howl at speed.

The layshaft HI LO gear cluster are metal straight cut as are the spindle sleeve gears, they add the percussion component to the symphony of sound produced by the milling head.

 

[DellParticipant @dell]

This is a WM16 that he has done a belt conversion on.

[Martin of WickParticipant @martinofwick]

Thanks Dell.

No disrespect to yourself, but the video is  typical of so many utterly unhelpful u tube stream-of-consciousness-with zero-useful-information-productions,  as the creator is carried away in a hysterical swoon by the enormity of their genius and sense of infallibility.

So information could have been included such as….

• What is the design of the pulley?
• How is it attached to the 3mm (or less)  of metal that projects above the bearing?
• How secure is that attachment?
• If  such a U tube  uber engineer, why not implement a two step design?
• Is it still working 4 years later, or was the pulley torn off to spin across the room and embed itself in the wall?

I must have watched dozens of u-tube James Watt wanabees telling everyone how they transformed their disfunctional type 16 milling machine to a Wunder-wunder uber maschinen with their belt drive conversion, none of which provided any actual detail of the bit that matters – how the secure attachment of the pulley was accomplished (apart from conversions that result in complete loss of quill movement).

Strangely, I have also never seen any discussion of the limited bearing area for pulley attachment and how that particular problem might be, or was addressed in a secure and safe manner for any belt conversion. Funny that.

Call me over cautious, but somehow I cant imagine that an alloy pulley absorbing power from a 1Hp motor  at 2000 rpm and heating up from belt hysteresis driving  a loaded milling spindle is going to be able to cling by faith, hope and charity to a narrow 3mm lip of metal  for very long.

If  such a miracle has somehow been achieved, I would dearly like to know how. Perhaps someone with a warco WM16 that they have successfully modified to belt drive could chip in here with their thesis, complete with photographs to assist…

 

 

 

[JasonBModerator @jasonb]

Why not ask this guy in the comments how his is performing after 5 years

He says how he fixed it and still has quill movement, tells you what rev range he has and why that did not need a 2 speed setup.

If you are worried about two screws taking the load, remove that part, drill for and add a couple of dowel pins to act as drive dogs with the screws then just retaining the pulley, one of those pind can go right down into the part – just position the circlip to miss it so not just the lip above taking the strain.

Treat the videos as ideas and work something out to suit yourself, none are likely to give working drawings etc..

Or this one that takes the belt to the other shaft so quill still works and you are using the same fixing as the old gear for the new pulley and you still get hi/low

[DellParticipant @dell]

This is who made the belt conversion for me and yes he is in Turkey but he was very helpful as all I did was give him pictures and measurements and I see he does a kit for the WM16 so it is possible and it’s not expensive.

https://www.mbbilici.com/Belt%20drive%20conversion%20kits?product_id=91

[Peter Venn]

On Peter Venn Said:

 

I’m going to the Midlands ME on Friday, and if Warco are there I might have a word with them about it.

Peter

Hi Peter, Warco haven’t been at any of the shows for a few years, and they are not on the MMEX suppliers list this year. MMEX

Regards Nick.

[Brian WoodParticipant @brianwood45127]

Martin,

I don’t know the Warco range of mills at all but earlier on in this discussion you said that the pair of helical gears were the ones that are so noisy in your mill.

As I am sure you know, helical gears generate a side thrust element when running as the teeth are designed to slide over each other, one of the reasons they are often chosen to run more quietly! Maybe, careful examination of tooth condition will give you some clues.

Are they more heavily polished on one side than the other which could suggest increased wear. Are the gears reversible on their shafts to even the wear? Are the shaft ends fitted with proper thrust gearings? If not the gears may have nothing to resist the thrust they are creating.

Look carefully in the root of the smaller gear and on the tip of the larger, have they been running one against the other? That would suggest the gear centre distances are too tight. Could you correct that if necessary?

Lubrication. There are High Pressure gear greases in inexpensive and handy tube form that will resist fling and stay on the gear teeth. Check on Google for gear greases–many to choose from.

These are all points I might look for—if asked to plump for one in particular look for thrust resistance. Bearings are expensive, other means might have been used instead.

I hope some of this is helpful

Brian

[Martin of WickParticipant @martinofwick]

Thanks for the help guys,  I have to admit to going through these loops a few times. The picture I provided above in the thread shows the construction and issue of the particular version on the mill I have.

It shows the top of the mill head with the quill assy locked in the lowest position and shows that there is 2 to 3 mm of spindle sleeve available above the bearing. It also shows the removed top bushing (used presumably to protect the splines of the quill and also carry the slotted speed plate).

The bush normally  sits on top of the spindle sleeve. The bush has a 1.5-2mm counterbore in the base and is held in place by friction alone, as a light press fit on top of the spindle sleeve. It is not screwed into place or retained by screws. The fasteners seen on the top of the bush are purely to retain the speed plate. after a light tap with a wood drift, I was able to twist this top bush off by hand. For the natural operation of the mill, this lightweight fit is adequate as the bush normally carries no load.

The belt conversions I am aware of all attach in some way to spindle sleeve (either securely or insecurely). I had a long exchange of e-mails and photos  with the guy in Turkey. He was indeed very helpful and when I queried the diameter of the pulleys to fit the bush, he asked me to check what was under the bushing. When He saw the photos, he was quite straightforward in stating  that his design would not be suitable because there was nothing of substance on the quill sleeve to attach either the bush or a pulley to. According to him, he was aware of this issue, but most of the units he has seen either have a longer sleeve extensions or have tapped holes in the sleeve itself (ie not only  the bush).

Had the spindle sleeve extended 10mm above the bearing instead of 3mm (or even extended 5 or 6mm, or had some threaded holes) it would be possible to secure the bushing (or a pulley or anything else) reliably to the spindle sleeve either by fasteners using the threaded holes or by by grub screws around the bush/pulley circumference locating in divots in the spindle sleeve. I had even considered using 3mm grubs on the bush circumference to lock  the top bush in position but tapping M3 would likely break through the base of the bush.

In the video that does show the exposed sleeve extension, shows on that model that it has threaded in this way  and also has about 10 to 12mm sleeve available above the bearing. I am forced to conclude that all the various videos of apparently successful belt installations work because the spindle sleeves are of this type and retained with fasteners into the top of the spindle sleeve.

As it is, if I implemented the common belt conversions as available, the belt pulley would fit over the bush fine and dandy.  I could then push the bush back onto the top of the spindle sleeve as originally installed. But with the friction of only a couple of mm of oily metal holding the bush / pulley combo in place, I suggest the probability of success is vanishingly low (even with loctite).

Anything is possible of course. I could completely dismantle the mill head, remove the spindle assembly, drill, tap, weld, screw, or whatever to attach in some way or another, some piece of metal that would extend, or allow the sleeve to be extended and a pulley fitted.

But it just aint worth the price in blood and treasure.

 

 

 

 

 

[Martin of WickParticipant @martinofwick]

Brian, Not even sure if the gears motor layshaft gears are helical, they might just be appallingly cut!  The picture of one of the one on the layshaft is above. The shot doesn’t show the angle very well. It is steep 75- 80 degrees and the one on the motor shaft has similar angle. They look badly made rather than badly worn!

 

 

 

[Martin of Wick]

On Martin of Wick Said:

 

The belt conversions I am aware of all attach in some way to spindle sleeve

 

 

 

So you did not look at the second video I posted, same machine in this vid

[Brian WoodParticipant @brianwood45127]

Martin,

I don’t know which picture you refer to. If it is the one the man did the conversion on with the gear “made of cheese” that was flashed across the view. After freezing the view, I would say it was a helical gear, but made in tufnol perhaps. You say all your gears are metallic so maybe yours is different.

Are there any thrust bearings in evidence to take out side thrust loadings, you make no mention.

Since writing earlier I have thought you might be able to correct centre to centre distance relatively easily, if the tips of the larger gear are bottoming in the smaller, by machining the tips down slightly to give some clearance. That won’t affect the gear meshing as such, unless they then fit more closely together by having the strain removed and still howl after that. Eccentric bushes come to mind but it might be a lot of work.

Back to you, I’m out of ideas now.

Brian

[Martin of WickParticipant @martinofwick]

Jason, thanks for that, but I am not quite sure which video you mean, the short or the long video. The short video shows how the pulley is retained by fasteners screwed into tapped holes in the spindle sleeve. It appears the common approach for American machines. As you see from the photo, the spindle sleeve on my version does not have such tapped holes.

The long video shows what for me would be only a partial solution of belt drive from motor to layshaft, it is still a gear drive from layshaft to spindle. Yes, there would be some reduction in noise, but not really a solution I would consider worthwhile  for the effort.

When I went down this rabbit hole originally, I was fired by optimism, all the vids showed how easy, quick simple etc. the belt conversion is. Surely a no brainer to implement. You just bang a pulley on the sleeve and off you go… Well it turns out that real life outside of the wundaweb is not that simple and one just has to accept it and move on. Other mills are available.

 

 

[JasonBModerator @jasonb]

depends how much work you want but I suppose the ring gear on the spindle could be made into a pully and the layshaft’s double gear also changed for a pulley then it is all belts from motor to layshaft and layshaft to spindle. Would just be the one speed ratio

[Martin of WickParticipant @martinofwick]

Brian, Pic is third from last post, page 1.  I may try slotting the motor mounts to move slightly away from the layshaft gear. Other than that Nothing to be done that is simple or worthwhile, I suppose the gears could be replaced eventually, but I doubt it would make much difference. I was hoping for a simple belt conversion from motor to spindle, but that is not easily implemented on my version of the WM16 either, so we move on!

Ear defenders are the go-to solution for the time being!

[Brian WoodParticipant @brianwood45127]

Martin,

It is hard to be sure if that gear is helical or not if it is the one shown next to the bush with two cap head screws aligned with the bore. The helix angle doesn’t really fall into the category of helical gearing and looking at the construction of the mill generally in the American video where plastic gears are exchanged for metal gears I think it will be like all the others and is actually straight cut. The mating gear on the motor should give a clue if drawn off and offered up to the larger gear. The bores should be in line with each other when they mesh together.

Perhaps ear defenders are the answer after all!

Brian

[Martin of WickParticipant @martinofwick]

Brian, it’s  a ‘Chelical’ gear ie Chinese ‘helical’! I cant detect any actual helix to the teeth and difficult to know why use such gears in any case. Probably what they had at the time.

The true angle doesn’t show well in the picture. In a side on view the teeth are set maybe 10 to 12% off the vertical. They mesh well enough with the motor gear given their rather rough appearance. Anyway they manage to do a reasonable job of turning the spindle.

Perhaps its a fiendish CCP plot to make all the yellow running dog lackeys of imperialism deaf!

[Brian WoodParticipant @brianwood45127]

Martin,

Just to be pedantic, helical gears have helix angles quoted in degrees, not percentages off vertical.

Some time ago I made a replacement first stage helical reduction gear for an Elliott Progress 2g drill for a forum correspondent (old forum) living in Scotland. Such spares are unobtainable.

The helix angle in that case was measured at 15 degrees. The gear was made to match in Whale grade Tufnol and runs in an oil bath, 16DP with 80 teeth; driven by a helical metal gear. He didn’t enlighten me as to how the original came to be so spectacularly wrecked but I suspect he selected low speed before the 3/4 HP motor had come to rest and literally tore it to pieces with the inertia in bringing the rotor to rest.

It was an interesting challenge, my first helical and being a relatively narrow gear, I cheated and ran the gear cutter straight across without attempting to rotate the indexing head spindle to follow the correct spiral path. I wasn’t equipped to do that anyway! I had of course angled the job accordingly. He was pleased with the result and I have no reason to believe it hasn’t worked well for him since.

Interesting as all this has been, I don’t think I can assist you any more, I hope it all works out for you in the end.

Regards   Brian

[Author]

Posts