Nice Video Mr. Rucker. Looks like some commenters are confused and think this ia a precision rocket part, not something for a 100 year old steam engine. I enjoy your work!
I am one who in my mind question your machine choice for this project. But at the end you stated that you just like using this machine and that is really all that matters. I keep forgetting that this is your hobby and your doing it because you really enjoy it. Good job Keith!
He could have also invoked the historical argument that a horizontal mill would have been the machine of choice 100 years ago when the locomotive was originally manufactured. Or it could have been done on a shaper, but a mill, if available, would be faster.
Keith, the last few minuets of your video sticks in my mind, if you are not getting enough monies from UA-cam and your Patreon supporters maybe you should consider not making any more videos and just spend your time making money in your shop like you said. You need to think of yourself and family and what's best for you. You have given us many years of great video's , and we thank you.
Love the content ! I was drawn to this channel for the machining and I LOVED listening to the steam whistle when you did your videos at the museum. I miss the whistle ! Thanks
Love these beautiful old machine. I'd love to see a closeup of using the dials, having to take out backlash, re-zero etc. It's mind boggling that this kind of precision can be achieved with manual dials
Missed where you benched the castings and determined how much was coming off each side. That for me is more valuable information then watching chips come off.
I would always use the model H for milling power feed all axis plus rapid traverse. Rigidity is its main pluses , the time saved is the real big plus in a job shop all those parts would be on the table getting cut per side . Gang them up and cut away .
Keith, question?? Are you taking your measurements from outer size of the old ones or should you be working from the centre position of the holes?? As the hole centres would be what sets out the start position as a set point.
When I saw the Magic Marker X on the top side of the workpiece just before you started one of the side cuts I was wondering if Bozo had decided to make an encore appearance. Fortunately you caught on to the error before any damage was done. 😊
Should your initial reference point been the center of the bore for the pin? You still would of needed to face one side for a reference point but then once you bored through that would give you a spot to work outwards from on the four faces. My thoughts are that the working center of the bearing castings is the pin. Do the guides on the locomotive need to be measured and the slots cut to each of those individually? It seems that those would also be a critical dimension or are those taken up by shims? They are essentially rectangular bars running in a brass channel and irregularities will cause the brass to get eaten up.
Side to side isn't really critical and there is alot of extra material still to be removed from the bore. The length is adjustable with a wedge, check the connecting rod video from about a month ago how it goes together.
Saved me from asking. Was wondering if the bore hole needed to be centered or if there was a large amount to be removed so it doesn’t matter yet….. I guess will have to keep watching. Lol
@@ydonl I was wondering about bore centering myself. But, after the wedge adjustment comment (I didn't include it in my thoughts) the only 'centering' of the bore of importance would seem to be between the faces that haven't been machined yet. >] |X| [
You could have used the Planer if you wanted. It would have done the job just fine. Same with a shaper. Thanks for the video. See you at the Bar-Z. Jon
I believe the hole is vastly undersize anyway and since it gets bored out later anyway, you have some wiggle room. It's still a good idea to have roughly the same amount of metal removed from both sides or else the bore might not clean up later.
Keith: I was wondering, as have others here, shouldn't you be referencing the hole. making that in the middle of the casting. Of course you have not machines the recessed parts yet. At those axel bearings or rod ends? Great job, beautiful finish.
My machinist instructor got very annoyed about people putting stray tools on machine tables. "That doesn't live there. Put it away properly so you'll know where it is when you need it."
Great video, Keith. I would think that measuring from the hole would have been a better reference, but you're the one with the experience, not me. On a side note, my OCD is seeing that your overarm supports aren't lined up.
The first video (Bozo Comes to Town) shows the original bearing is split. Yes, of course it affects the total length, but the bore is going to be made pretty darn close to the existing diameter of the pin on the locomotive, so it will establish the overall length pretty darn close to what we might predict. If the bore was sloppy, that wouldn't be true. But it's also true that that bearing is going to wear in; the parts will sorta change dimensions as they get used, by intention, and what he's going to want is just that the sides remain parallel, and the hole fits the pin nicely. And as it wears, every once in a while, he'll come in and tweak the adjuster gizmo to tighten it up. Everything moves. Simple design. And it works great.
Keith, 19:00 fourth side, first pass. X is showing. Your piece is upside down. [Doubt it would make any difference...] Oh, you caught it. Good. Question: Is the relationship of the hole to the sides critical?
i see the flat surface you marked as the down side is now facing up is this right or wrong as you did state that all machining would be done the one way happy days also your measurements you are doing from outer surface should you not be using the center of the hole as the reference for all measurements you did also say a wile back that the hole had to be machined would this not have to be done first just asking is all should know better as you never read the comments but i did have a genuine points i think you could answer Cheers
The metal plate he bolted to the table is 90° to the cutter. When he makes the first cut, the side against the plate and the side he cut are now square. He then rotates the newly cut face against the plate. The next cut will be square to the first cut face and parallel to the first face that was against the plate during the first cut. He then continues rotating until he's cut all four sides.
When he starts, all four sides are only approximately straight. For the first cut, what he really needs is just stability; get it pretty close, and hold it there, and make the first reference surface. So there is no "precisely square to anything" for the first cut, except some approximation of the high points along that first side. Once we have that first straight side, we're off and running for the others. In the end, it is what it is -- the sides now define the geometry going forward; the whole will be tuned up based on the edges, and the grooves in the sides will be based on those edges. All the offending material will have been removed, and it may not line up exactly with some kind of average you could have taken from the casting at the beginning, but... that's perfectly okay! Castings are bigger than necessary so you can extract the goodness of your part from somewhere within those generous boundaries.
Back in the day, vertical mills simply weren't used for this kind of work (and were still fairly new). I'd really like to see this mill using a stack of slab/side-cutting wheels and gang cutting the slots in the bearings. That's how it would have been done back in the day, as well.
I was wondering about gang milling.... and HOW to get the spacings correct with only standard dimensioned cutters. (I wish I knew where my "Maching Shop Practices" textbook went off to...🤔🙄
@@markschweter6371 Oftentimes they would stack cutters together (staggertooth cutters at the ends) with machined shim/ spacers to obtain the correct width - some staggertooth cutters were ground with a "left" or a "right" stagger as well as a "center" just for the purpose (the idea being the stagger cutters would overlap themselves a bit). Another common method was to simply grind a slab mill to the correct width (single-use/function), and the slab mill could then be narrowed further for other jobs.
I was surprised to see you put the reference face down and then rotate the piece four times to square the work. Any error in your square reference would be cumulative. after the second cut, I would have flipped the work off of the reference face and kept the same edge on the temporary squaring fence. In this application, I assume tolerances are not that close.
He said in the video both faces are parallel, and I'm sure he checked or is familiar enough with his machines to know the expected accuracy they can churn out. He even said that because they're parallel he could use either face, but I think he didn't because that would probably compound any errors present in either face, and because I think it's best practice to do it that way anyway.
I can see why Keith likes using the horizontal mill for that, no-nonsense power and stability. But that errant tooth seemed like something that should have been fixed. In the meantime, could he have identified and removed that one tooth? It looked like they were individually mounted.
If you have one high tooth on a cutter with six teeth....pull that high cutter out....better cutting with 5 than one.....and won't be a balance problem at that cutter speed. That is, of course, assuming you have pulled all the cutters and verified there is no damage to the face mill body that is preventing the cutters seating fully. It looks like some damage there from a previous crash possibly?
As a point of interest, trying to pick up good techniques... 1) Is the mild steel bar for the "stop' hot-rolled, or dimensioned cold-rolled? 2) Would one ideally 'dust off' the face, mill or surface grind, to be used against the work? 3) Assuming using a parallel is overkill (and clamping it, instead of a spacer, possibly cause warp)?
Doesn't the squaring process need to be relative to the hole location, at least approximately? I know he's going to bore the hole, but its starting point needs to be pretty close to the right place, depending on how much extra meat there is around there.
Is it a problem long-term for that one cutter tooth to be biting before the rest? I thought I could see that the cut was progressing less smoothly than the table, so presumably one of the cutters was further out radially? (As opposed to being closer to the table, I mean). Anyway, I wish you many more no-bozo hours in the shop!
No, I don't think so. Some machine cutters can have one tooth that is just slightly lower than the rest to act as a sort of finishing pass. Then on some cutters they can have where one of the inserts cut flat and that helps improve the finish left from the cutter. All in all, along as the tooth isn't sticking down a lot further than the others are it shouldn't hurt anything. That's what I'm thinking is going on.
Setting face milling cutters for a very good surface finish (fire face on block and head) typically you run wiper inserts that is 30-50 microns(metric) higher. Basically running a "semi finishing" and finishing pass in one operation. Admittedly the wiper insert has a slightly different geometry.
I think the cutter is bent. it looks like the tool holder is not rotating about its center., could be the taper has damage or foreign matter in the tool holder taper
That does look a little odd, doesn't it? I think those arms aren't connected by anything at the moment. I can't remember for sure, but they probably slide independently into the attachment (when it's there), and then lock down to that thing. I'm thinking it would be pretty hard to set that up if both arms had to slide together -- more than twice as hard! :)
@@gregfeneis609Huh. Now you're challenging what's left of my memory! :-) I have a vague memory of that, too, now that you mention it. You've inspired me to keep an eye out for how that thing works! But clearly... they're not locked together. So... yup, it's a question!
I'm wondering why he didn't square the reference surface with a dial indicator as most machinists would have done to keep from trashing the casting, I guess he feels that part doesn't need to be very accurate.
The use of the term square in this situation is confusing since the bearings are rectangles. Less confusion could occur if the term perpendicular or right angle were used. In math a square has equal sides and internal angles.
A 7 tooth cutter full of worn inserts with only one tooth cutting, a carbon steel stop that he never indicated in and is assuming is "square". Chips under the part while machining an opposing face. Never indicates the machined faces in to accurately square the part up. Yep, a normal "That's good enough" Keith Rucker machining video. 😂
How much are you getting from UA-cam? I ask because some claim they are supporting themselves and their family only by making UA-cam videos. And some appear to be making a fortune.
Most of the UA-cam creators I watch sell T-shirts and mugs and all kinds of merchandise, as hard as these guys push to sell that stuff they must be making some good money selling that stuff. Keith doesn’t sell anything that I’m aware of so he’s probably missing out on a bunch of revenue, also he doesn’t pitch other items like health drinks and internet connections or security systems that other UA-camrs spend five minutes talking about. He is sponsored by American Rotary but he doesn’t do full time ads about it. I wish he would sell T-shirts, I wouldn’t mind having one with the Vintage Machinery logo on it to help support the channel.
If you put your mind to it, you can find on the web what you tubers make! The people that make these instructional videos don't make near what some of the entertainment based videos do. Like I said, look it up!
@@paulcopeland9035 Not sure about that. Someone made a video about what others earn from UA-cam, and he could not tell for sure. It was estimations and elaborated guesses. For instance he estimated that Andrew Camarata earned millions of dollars. And Camarata is not very different from Rucker regarding their content.
Thanks Keith and Windy Hills
Nice Video Mr. Rucker. Looks like some commenters are confused and think this ia a precision rocket part, not something for a 100 year old steam engine. I enjoy your work!
That H-mill did not even notice it was cutting that bronze. That is a powerful machine.
I am one who in my mind question your machine choice for this project. But at the end you stated that you just like using this machine and that is really all that matters. I keep forgetting that this is your hobby and your doing it because you really enjoy it. Good job Keith!
He could have also invoked the historical argument that a horizontal mill would have been the machine of choice 100 years ago when the locomotive was originally manufactured. Or it could have been done on a shaper, but a mill, if available, would be faster.
Nope ! , it's all about the fun factor.
The old adage- iffn you have it, flaunt it applies. Sides, it worked far better than the vertical mill😂
Nice with a morning coffee.
I also really like to see the horizontal mill put to use.
Liking the machine is good reason to use it! Great Video!
nice job Keith
Thank you 👍
Those bright little squares sure are pretty. Amazing process with the ancient technology.
Just as good, if not better than anything made today.
Good job
Well done!
Thanks Keith for the video. It look like every thing is going well.
Something i have done on my richmond model 0 mill glad to see I did mine correctly
Thanks Keith.
Once again thank you
I use my horizontal milling machine sometimes just because I want to. It's fun to use.
on any machine tool, the weight of the machine is a crucial factor to its precision and the ease to perform jobs
very gppd video.
Keith, the last few minuets of your video sticks in my mind, if you are not getting enough monies from UA-cam and your Patreon supporters maybe you should consider not making any more videos and just spend your time making money in your shop like you said. You need to think of yourself and family and what's best for you. You have given us many years of great video's , and we thank you.
Hey! Knock that kinda talk off! :-)
(I think he's wise. He'll be fine.)
tanks Mr Keith. You are perfect 🥰
Nice work , I enjoyed following along, Thank you!
Thank you very much. Glad you enjoyed ❤
Beast mode demonstrated.
Love the content ! I was drawn to this channel for the machining and I LOVED listening to the steam whistle when you did your videos at the museum. I miss the whistle !
Thanks
Happy Friday!!😊
Most excellent.
Horizontal of vertical , all nice, but I think: this is a planer job ! Greetings from Amsterdam
Connecting rods connect the crosshead and the powered (driving) axle. Coupling rods are the rods that join all the D and C axles.
Love these beautiful old machine. I'd love to see a closeup of using the dials, having to take out backlash, re-zero etc. It's mind boggling that this kind of precision can be achieved with manual dials
I'm shouting at the screen that you have the reference face facing up. Fortunately you heard me.
Thank you for your efforts!
Thank you for sharing.👍
Excellent!!!!!!!
Missed where you benched the castings and determined how much was coming off each side. That for me is more valuable information then watching chips come off.
I love it that you don't use older machines that are more correct for the original parts that were made in the period correct way.
I would always use the model H for milling power feed all axis plus rapid traverse. Rigidity is its main pluses , the time saved is the real big plus in a job shop all those parts would be on the table getting cut per side . Gang them up and cut away .
Keith, question??
Are you taking your measurements from outer size of the old ones or should you be working from the centre position of the holes??
As the hole centres would be what sets out the start position as a set point.
i Think the holes are well undersized; he will bore them in reference to the milled outsides.
@@errormadef4ultz, Thanks for explaining that, I was wondering about the same thing.
Hi Keith best luck 👍👍
From Poland
When I saw the Magic Marker X on the top side of the workpiece just before you started one of the side cuts I was wondering if Bozo had decided to make an encore appearance. Fortunately you caught on to the error before any damage was done. 😊
Should your initial reference point been the center of the bore for the pin? You still would of needed to face one side for a reference point but then once you bored through that would give you a spot to work outwards from on the four faces.
My thoughts are that the working center of the bearing castings is the pin.
Do the guides on the locomotive need to be measured and the slots cut to each of those individually? It seems that those would also be a critical dimension or are those taken up by shims? They are essentially rectangular bars running in a brass channel and irregularities will cause the brass to get eaten up.
Side to side isn't really critical and there is alot of extra material still to be removed from the bore.
The length is adjustable with a wedge, check the connecting rod video from about a month ago how it goes together.
Saved me from asking. Was wondering if the bore hole needed to be centered or if there was a large amount to be removed so it doesn’t matter yet….. I guess will have to keep watching. Lol
@@samuraidriver4x4Thanks, I was wondering the same thing
I'm not sure it would matter much even if the hole *was* a little off-center, based on what it is and how it works.
@@ydonl I was wondering about bore centering myself.
But, after the wedge adjustment comment (I didn't include it in my thoughts) the only 'centering' of the bore of importance would seem to be between the
faces that haven't been machined yet. >] |X| [
You could have used the Planer if you wanted. It would have done the job just fine. Same with a shaper. Thanks for the video. See you at the Bar-Z. Jon
Nice
Do you need to ensure that the hole is kept in place in reference to the edges?
I believe the hole is vastly undersize anyway and since it gets bored out later anyway, you have some wiggle room. It's still a good idea to have roughly the same amount of metal removed from both sides or else the bore might not clean up later.
Thanks for pointing this out, it was making me crazy while watching this.
@@jeaneitelman5699 Yeah, was wondering why dims weren't off the bore axes.
As commented elsewhere, can be dimmed in on boring op.
Great video👌👌👍👍
I know it would've been a diversion, but I'd've really liked to see the process of aligning all the cutters on that face mill.
I would have been inclined to blue up one face and mark some layout lines referenced off the central hole/bore.
Overkill.
@@ydonl Clearly not, the first set of castings were machined incorrectly and scrapped.
@@alangordon1677 Huh? I missed that. What? Where? When?
@@ydonl
ua-cam.com/video/8OZP6qWNDvE/v-deo.html
@@ydonl Kieth mentioned that in the video where he milled the faces.
I, also, like to see the mill used. Alternately, it would have been nice to see these done on the planer.
All went well this this time , thanks for the videos Keith 👏👏👏👍🍺
@csnelling4 you are very welcome. Thanks for tuning in 👍🐴🪵
Keith: I was wondering, as have others here, shouldn't you be referencing the hole. making that in the middle of the casting. Of course you have not machines the recessed parts yet. At those axel bearings or rod ends? Great job, beautiful finish.
Same thought will have to wait and see, sounds like some tolerances are low as heard each hole to milled to match each drive. :)
I don't think he's bored the hole to size, and he's likely confident enough that he has plenty of material to make up for any error
It's OK.. Bozo is at my shop this week......
I sat a trap for him... but no luck yet..!!
Well, at least keep him busy as long as you can!
Also Simplicity of the setup and there's far less fixturing on the horizontal than there is on the vertical it's a faster setup
I haven’t seen you check the centering of the bore!
My machinist instructor got very annoyed about people putting stray tools on machine tables. "That doesn't live there. Put it away properly so you'll know where it is when you need it."
I also wondered about the centre point of the hole but I guess this brass part can be adjustably fixed on the crank arm?
Did I miss how you established the angle between the long and short sides is a TRUE 90, or was that not necessary ! Um still learnin' lol
Great video, Keith. I would think that measuring from the hole would have been a better reference, but you're the one with the experience, not me. On a side note, my OCD is seeing that your overarm supports aren't lined up.
Will these be split or fitted as they are once the machining is done if split will that effect the overall length dimension. Great videos all the same
The first video (Bozo Comes to Town) shows the original bearing is split.
Yes, of course it affects the total length, but the bore is going to be made pretty darn close to the existing diameter of the pin on the locomotive, so it will establish the overall length pretty darn close to what we might predict. If the bore was sloppy, that wouldn't be true.
But it's also true that that bearing is going to wear in; the parts will sorta change dimensions as they get used, by intention, and what he's going to want is just that the sides remain parallel, and the hole fits the pin nicely. And as it wears, every once in a while, he'll come in and tweak the adjuster gizmo to tighten it up. Everything moves. Simple design. And it works great.
Keith, 19:00 fourth side, first pass. X is showing. Your piece is upside down. [Doubt it would make any difference...]
Oh, you caught it. Good.
Question: Is the relationship of the hole to the sides critical?
cool
i see the flat surface you marked as the down side is now facing up is this right or wrong as you did state that all machining would be done the one way happy days also your measurements you are doing from outer surface should you not be using the center of the hole as the reference for all measurements you did also say a wile back that the hole had to be machined would this not have to be done first just asking is all should know better as you never read the comments but i did have a genuine points i think you could answer Cheers
when there's one tooth proud like this, what procedure do you use to identify, and correct it?
Fly cutters usually give a good finish, isn't that right Keith
I’m curious as to alloy on the bronze. It’s very silver and seems hard, is it an aluminum bronze alloy?
I like it, too. H!
👍
How are you insuring that the hole is in the correct location? The block will be square with correct length and width with what your doing.
I’m not sure if understand how you can make everything square if the first side against the reference clamp hasn’t been squared?
The metal plate he bolted to the table is 90° to the cutter. When he makes the first cut, the side against the plate and the side he cut are now square. He then rotates the newly cut face against the plate. The next cut will be square to the first cut face and parallel to the first face that was against the plate during the first cut. He then continues rotating until he's cut all four sides.
When he starts, all four sides are only approximately straight. For the first cut, what he really needs is just stability; get it pretty close, and hold it there, and make the first reference surface.
So there is no "precisely square to anything" for the first cut, except some approximation of the high points along that first side. Once we have that first straight side, we're off and running for the others. In the end, it is what it is -- the sides now define the geometry going forward; the whole will be tuned up based on the edges, and the grooves in the sides will be based on those edges. All the offending material will have been removed, and it may not line up exactly with some kind of average you could have taken from the casting at the beginning, but... that's perfectly okay! Castings are bigger than necessary so you can extract the goodness of your part from somewhere within those generous boundaries.
Back in the day, vertical mills simply weren't used for this kind of work (and were still fairly new). I'd really like to see this mill using a stack of slab/side-cutting wheels and gang cutting the slots in the bearings. That's how it would have been done back in the day, as well.
I was wondering about gang milling.... and HOW to get the spacings correct with only standard dimensioned cutters.
(I wish I knew where my "Maching Shop Practices" textbook went off to...🤔🙄
@@markschweter6371 Oftentimes they would stack cutters together (staggertooth cutters at the ends) with machined shim/ spacers to obtain the correct width - some staggertooth cutters were ground with a "left" or a "right" stagger as well as a "center" just for the purpose (the idea being the stagger cutters would overlap themselves a bit). Another common method was to simply grind a slab mill to the correct width (single-use/function), and the slab mill could then be narrowed further for other jobs.
One tooth may not be higher than the others. It's likely that the sound you're hearing is from your feed rate being too slow.
I can't believe Keith made a mistake and then owned. He could have easily edited out and we would have been none the wiser.
Would it be worthwhile to salvage the chips and return them back to the foundry for the next project?
How does the material and the cutter head deal with the interupted cut?
X marks the spot.
Have you used the planer any? Haven't seen it in a while.
Keith, what about the center hole to edge diminishing.? I wouldn't have minded an hour long episode here. Thanks 17:52
His Beastie
I was surprised to see you put the reference face down and then rotate the piece four times to square the work. Any error in your square reference would be cumulative. after the second cut, I would have flipped the work off of the reference face and kept the same edge on the temporary squaring fence. In this application, I assume tolerances are not that close.
He said in the video both faces are parallel, and I'm sure he checked or is familiar enough with his machines to know the expected accuracy they can churn out. He even said that because they're parallel he could use either face, but I think he didn't because that would probably compound any errors present in either face, and because I think it's best practice to do it that way anyway.
I can see why Keith likes using the horizontal mill for that, no-nonsense power and stability. But that errant tooth seemed like something that should have been fixed. In the meantime, could he have identified and removed that one tooth? It looked like they were individually mounted.
If you have one high tooth on a cutter with six teeth....pull that high cutter out....better cutting with 5 than one.....and won't be a balance problem at that cutter speed.
That is, of course, assuming you have pulled all the cutters and verified there is no damage to the face mill body that is preventing the cutters seating fully. It looks like some damage there from a previous crash possibly?
So, if I understand this correctly, this face mill is operating as a fly cutter and will be until it is set up properly? Correct?
@@5x535 Yes. Fly cutters are used all of the time and actually do a better job with the surface finish. Ask any automotive machinist!!
Is it common to see one cutting edge more pronounced than others on that kind of milling cutter?
What was the position of the X at 18:35? Ooopsie!
What is the composition of the bronze?
As a point of interest, trying to pick up good techniques...
1) Is the mild steel bar for the "stop' hot-rolled, or dimensioned cold-rolled?
2) Would one ideally 'dust off' the face, mill or surface grind, to be used against the work?
3) Assuming using a parallel is overkill (and clamping it, instead of a spacer, possibly cause warp)?
Doesn't the squaring process need to be relative to the hole location, at least approximately? I know he's going to bore the hole, but its starting point needs to be pretty close to the right place, depending on how much extra meat there is around there.
Hi Keith, please fix your mounting for the parking attachment
Why do you care?
Is it a problem long-term for that one cutter tooth to be biting before the rest? I thought I could see that the cut was progressing less smoothly than the table, so presumably one of the cutters was further out radially? (As opposed to being closer to the table, I mean). Anyway, I wish you many more no-bozo hours in the shop!
No, I don't think so. Some machine cutters can have one tooth that is just slightly lower than the rest to act as a sort of finishing pass. Then on some cutters they can have where one of the inserts cut flat and that helps improve the finish left from the cutter. All in all, along as the tooth isn't sticking down a lot further than the others are it shouldn't hurt anything. That's what I'm thinking is going on.
Setting face milling cutters for a very good surface finish (fire face on block and head) typically you run wiper inserts that is 30-50 microns(metric) higher. Basically running a "semi finishing" and finishing pass in one operation. Admittedly the wiper insert has a slightly different geometry.
Wondering., if you would check your parts out on the surface plate, would they be square?
JIM 🎉
Maybe if he had invested a lot more time and effort, for a level of precision that isn't required on this job!
Now is he going to side mill with end mill or use overarm support and use a wide spur cutter to mill?
Hmmmm.... stay tuned, I guess!
Why use the H-mill.............."Because I can"
Ok, I'm back. I gave you a Like and this comment. Love your content and really like to watch your channel.
UoPTucson
You should fix that cutter. As is, you have 1 cutter out of 6 doing all of the work. The others are just there doing nothing.
I think the cutter is bent. it looks like the tool holder is not rotating about its center., could be the taper has damage or foreign matter in the tool holder taper
Looks like you might have a missing tooth on the cutter
9:00 How come the over arm support arms are retracted offset by like half an inch or so?
That does look a little odd, doesn't it? I think those arms aren't connected by anything at the moment. I can't remember for sure, but they probably slide independently into the attachment (when it's there), and then lock down to that thing. I'm thinking it would be pretty hard to set that up if both arms had to slide together -- more than twice as hard! :)
I thought he extended them using a handwheel, which implies they're on a gear rack or suthin'. 🤷
@@gregfeneis609Huh. Now you're challenging what's left of my memory! :-) I have a vague memory of that, too, now that you mention it. You've inspired me to keep an eye out for how that thing works!
But clearly... they're not locked together. So... yup, it's a question!
Ban Bozo from the shop!
I'm wondering why he didn't square the reference surface with a dial indicator as most machinists would have done to keep from trashing the casting, I guess he feels that part doesn't need to be very accurate.
Keith, move to other video platforms
The use of the term square in this situation is confusing since the bearings are rectangles. Less confusion could occur if the term perpendicular or right angle were used. In math a square has equal sides and internal angles.
Square in engineering means an angular reference not a silly shape of a rectangle with 4 equal sides.
Square: To assure the sides are at a 90° angle to each other.
“Square” or “Squared” doesn’t always mean a geometric shape in this case it means squared to an angle.
A 7 tooth cutter full of worn inserts with only one tooth cutting, a carbon steel stop that he never indicated in and is assuming is "square". Chips under the part while machining an opposing face. Never indicates the machined faces in to accurately square the part up. Yep, a normal "That's good enough" Keith Rucker machining video. 😂
How much are you getting from UA-cam?
I ask because some claim they are supporting themselves and their family only by making UA-cam videos.
And some appear to be making a fortune.
Most of the UA-cam creators I watch sell T-shirts and mugs and all kinds of merchandise, as hard as these guys push to sell that stuff they must be making some good money selling that stuff. Keith doesn’t sell anything that I’m aware of so he’s probably missing out on a bunch of revenue, also he doesn’t pitch other items like health drinks and internet connections or security systems that other UA-camrs spend five minutes talking about. He is sponsored by American Rotary but he doesn’t do full time ads about it. I wish he would sell T-shirts, I wouldn’t mind having one with the Vintage Machinery logo on it to help support the channel.
If you put your mind to it, you can find on the web what you tubers make! The people that make these instructional videos don't make near what some of the entertainment based videos do. Like I said, look it up!
@@paulcopeland9035
Not sure about that. Someone made a video about what others earn from UA-cam, and he could not tell for sure. It was estimations and elaborated guesses. For instance he estimated that Andrew Camarata earned millions of dollars. And Camarata is not very different from Rucker regarding their content.
pretty, but I fear with your Bozo comment you jinxed the job.
Who else was screaming at the screen: "Flip it over..."
Thanks for sharing
Oh tell the truth you just wanted to play with a new old toy