#31
|
|||
|
|||
US steel trade war
On Fri, 09 Mar 2018 15:32:23 +0100, Emanuel Berg
wrote: AMuzi wrote: What do you have handy? A milling machine is fast if you're making a lot of miters but a file works just fine for one I have a big stationary vertical drill if that is what you mean by "milling machine", so then it is just a matter of getting the round saw/drill thing (?) and some sort of arrangement to fixate the tube? To answer your question. No a drill press is not a vertical milling machine :-( But yes, you could use a drill press with a hole saw to miter the end of a tube. Alignment might present a problem but can be overcome. On the other hand if you know how to file it might even be quicker, for one tube end, to simply mark the tube and file to shape. There is a very old application called "Tubemiter.exe" that has been around for years and years that given tube diameters and joining angle will print out a template that you can wrap around a tube to mark the actual cut. -- Cheers, John B. |
Ads |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
US steel trade war
On Fri, 9 Mar 2018 14:54:00 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote: On 3/9/2018 8:52 AM, AMuzi wrote: On 3/9/2018 12:54 AM, Emanuel Berg wrote: AMuzi wrote: Aluminum is no good for a bike frame because it's too harsh and stiff. Aluminum won't work either because it's too soft and noodly. That went on just forever with, as always, much digression. One on-topic question on aluminium/aluminum I thought about asking is how do they cut the pipes so to get those roundish forms so that for example the top and down tube aligns so well with the head tube? What do you have handy? A milling machine is fast if you're making a lot of miters but a file works just fine for one: http://www.yellowjersey.org/photosfromthepast/MAK8B.JPG IIRC, Cannondale pioneered using CNC to cut the miters with added tabs, slots, etc. to allow more precise alignment prior to welding. That doesn't matter for Emanuel's projects, though. Maybe someday he'll want to splurge on a full set of frame building fixtures like these: http://www.henryjames.com/bicyle-par...equipment.html http://www.alexmeade.com/Tools.htm BTW, lots of people call those "jigs" but industrial tool designers would call them "fixtures." The word "jig" is supposed to apply to things that physically guide the cutting tool, not just hold parts in position. OK, that's enough pedantry for today. Actually some of the old guys that used to build classic bikes used a lot simpler fixtures then those sold by Henry James (cheaper too). I remember a youtube about some old Japanese builder of classic steel bikes who seemed to have a fixture for holding the seat tube and bottom bracket at 90 degrees for brazing and then aligning everything else with hand tools to the BB/Seat Tube assembly. Although admittedly the Henry James "hold everything" fixture is probably faster if you are churning out quantities of frames. -- Cheers, John B. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
US steel trade war
John B. wrote:
Although admittedly the Henry James "hold everything" fixture is probably faster if you are churning out quantities of frames. What workstandish tools and stays should you get to hold tubes? I have all the everyday carpentry clamps and so on, of course, but they hardly give that kind of confidence. -- underground experts united http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573 |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
US steel trade war
On Sat, 10 Mar 2018 09:13:23 +0100, Emanuel Berg
wrote: John B. wrote: Although admittedly the Henry James "hold everything" fixture is probably faster if you are churning out quantities of frames. What workstandish tools and stays should you get to hold tubes? I have all the everyday carpentry clamps and so on, of course, but they hardly give that kind of confidence. If you are talking about a frame building fixture then see: https://tinyurl.com/ycns6zu2 -- Cheers, John B. |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
US steel trade war
John B. wrote:
If you are talking about a frame building fixture then see: https://tinyurl.com/ycns6zu2 I'm talking about holding tubes/pipes in general but yes I suppose holding a bike frame, even an incomplete frame, is the same thing, only even more difficult with more complex balance issues, protruding parts... -- underground experts united http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573 |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
US steel trade war
On Sat, 10 Mar 2018 10:37:50 +0100, Emanuel Berg
wrote: John B. wrote: If you are talking about a frame building fixture then see: https://tinyurl.com/ycns6zu2 I'm talking about holding tubes/pipes in general but yes I suppose holding a bike frame, even an incomplete frame, is the same thing, only even more difficult with more complex balance issues, protruding parts... If you are talking about holding a single tube, say while you file a miter on the end then most shops will use something like: http://steintoolsforbikes.com/produc...olding-blocks/ Often made from two blocks of hard wood for bench work but usually machined from metal is used in a machine. -- Cheers, John B. |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
US steel trade war
On Sat, 10 Mar 2018 07:17:58 +0700, John B wrote:
Actually some of the old guys that used to build classic bikes used a lot simpler fixtures then those sold by Henry James (cheaper too). I remember a youtube about some old Japanese builder of classic steel bikes who seemed to have a fixture for holding the seat tube and bottom bracket at 90 degrees for brazing and then aligning everything else with hand tools to the BB/Seat Tube assembly. When I built my frame in the shop of a friend, his technique was to start with that connection and to have it plumb and square to the faces of the BB, which he considered the reference point for the frame. Every other tube was added without rigid fixtures, using a flat table and supports. Then each new tube was aligned relative to the faces of the BB. His goal was to build a frame with no residual internal stresses, so that if you were to saw through the top tube the ends would remain aligned. "Why" is something I didn't quite understand, except that when the last joint was done the frame was almost perfectly aligned and required only a few tweaks at the dropouts. The frame I built has held up for over a decade now, but let's face it most frames hold up for many decades unless they are damaged. Although admittedly the Henry James "hold everything" fixture is probably faster if you are churning out quantities of frames. Yep. His complaint about this was that clamping the frame into a rigid fixure and then brazing away resulted in a frame with internal stresses that were not relieved. After finishing the brazing or welding the frame usually has to be forcibly aligned. My friend thought that was a bad thing. I am not sure it makes any difference in terms of longevity and seems very unlikely to make any difference in the performance of the frame. OTOH, the best frame builder around here had a Henry James fixture and the bike he built for me is the best riding one I have ever been on (or was until I mangled it in my cash last summer. Have a replacement on order). |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
US steel trade war
On Sat, 10 Mar 2018 10:06:11 -0600, Tim McNamara
wrote: On Sat, 10 Mar 2018 07:17:58 +0700, John B wrote: Actually some of the old guys that used to build classic bikes used a lot simpler fixtures then those sold by Henry James (cheaper too). I remember a youtube about some old Japanese builder of classic steel bikes who seemed to have a fixture for holding the seat tube and bottom bracket at 90 degrees for brazing and then aligning everything else with hand tools to the BB/Seat Tube assembly. When I built my frame in the shop of a friend, his technique was to start with that connection and to have it plumb and square to the faces of the BB, which he considered the reference point for the frame. Every other tube was added without rigid fixtures, using a flat table and supports. Then each new tube was aligned relative to the faces of the BB. His goal was to build a frame with no residual internal stresses, so that if you were to saw through the top tube the ends would remain aligned. "Why" is something I didn't quite understand, except that when the last joint was done the frame was almost perfectly aligned and required only a few tweaks at the dropouts. The frame I built has held up for over a decade now, but let's face it most frames hold up for many decades unless they are damaged. I think that using the Bottom Bracket as the basic reference point is the common way of building a frame. Although admittedly the Henry James "hold everything" fixture is probably faster if you are churning out quantities of frames. Yep. His complaint about this was that clamping the frame into a rigid fixure and then brazing away resulted in a frame with internal stresses that were not relieved. After finishing the brazing or welding the frame usually has to be forcibly aligned. My friend thought that was a bad thing. I am not sure it makes any difference in terms of longevity and seems very unlikely to make any difference in the performance of the frame Given that the fork blades often are sold as a straight tube and the frame maker then bends them to the proper radius to achieve the desired trail obviously the act of simply bending a frame tube can't be as evil as it sounds :-) OTOH, the best frame builder around here had a Henry James fixture and the bike he built for me is the best riding one I have ever been on (or was until I mangled it in my cash last summer. Have a replacement on order). -- Cheers, John B. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
US steel trade war
On 3/10/2018 8:04 PM, John B. wrote:
On Sat, 10 Mar 2018 10:06:11 -0600, Tim McNamara wrote: On Sat, 10 Mar 2018 07:17:58 +0700, John B wrote: Actually some of the old guys that used to build classic bikes used a lot simpler fixtures then those sold by Henry James (cheaper too). I remember a youtube about some old Japanese builder of classic steel bikes who seemed to have a fixture for holding the seat tube and bottom bracket at 90 degrees for brazing and then aligning everything else with hand tools to the BB/Seat Tube assembly. When I built my frame in the shop of a friend, his technique was to start with that connection and to have it plumb and square to the faces of the BB, which he considered the reference point for the frame. Every other tube was added without rigid fixtures, using a flat table and supports. Then each new tube was aligned relative to the faces of the BB. His goal was to build a frame with no residual internal stresses, so that if you were to saw through the top tube the ends would remain aligned. "Why" is something I didn't quite understand, except that when the last joint was done the frame was almost perfectly aligned and required only a few tweaks at the dropouts. The frame I built has held up for over a decade now, but let's face it most frames hold up for many decades unless they are damaged. I think that using the Bottom Bracket as the basic reference point is the common way of building a frame. Although admittedly the Henry James "hold everything" fixture is probably faster if you are churning out quantities of frames. Yep. His complaint about this was that clamping the frame into a rigid fixure and then brazing away resulted in a frame with internal stresses that were not relieved. After finishing the brazing or welding the frame usually has to be forcibly aligned. My friend thought that was a bad thing. I am not sure it makes any difference in terms of longevity and seems very unlikely to make any difference in the performance of the frame Given that the fork blades often are sold as a straight tube and the frame maker then bends them to the proper radius to achieve the desired trail obviously the act of simply bending a frame tube can't be as evil as it sounds :-) OTOH, the best frame builder around here had a Henry James fixture and the bike he built for me is the best riding one I have ever been on (or was until I mangled it in my cash last summer. Have a replacement on order). " Given that the fork blades often are sold as a straight tube and the frame maker then bends them to the proper radius to achieve the desired trail obviously the act of simply bending a frame tube can't be as evil as it sounds :-)" Right in principle but everything has limits. Also there's a difference between some small structural loss from crystal slip on a raked fork and internal stress plus cyclic loading in a closed brazed or welded figure. Fork failure at the curved portion of a blade is virtually unknown yet tube failure from initial misalignment is sadly regular. Not epidemic mind you but frequent enough to be a known issue. -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
US steel trade war
On Sun, 11 Mar 2018 11:05:18 -0500, AMuzi wrote:
On 3/10/2018 8:04 PM, John B. wrote: On Sat, 10 Mar 2018 10:06:11 -0600, Tim McNamara wrote: On Sat, 10 Mar 2018 07:17:58 +0700, John B wrote: Actually some of the old guys that used to build classic bikes used a lot simpler fixtures then those sold by Henry James (cheaper too). I remember a youtube about some old Japanese builder of classic steel bikes who seemed to have a fixture for holding the seat tube and bottom bracket at 90 degrees for brazing and then aligning everything else with hand tools to the BB/Seat Tube assembly. When I built my frame in the shop of a friend, his technique was to start with that connection and to have it plumb and square to the faces of the BB, which he considered the reference point for the frame. Every other tube was added without rigid fixtures, using a flat table and supports. Then each new tube was aligned relative to the faces of the BB. His goal was to build a frame with no residual internal stresses, so that if you were to saw through the top tube the ends would remain aligned. "Why" is something I didn't quite understand, except that when the last joint was done the frame was almost perfectly aligned and required only a few tweaks at the dropouts. The frame I built has held up for over a decade now, but let's face it most frames hold up for many decades unless they are damaged. I think that using the Bottom Bracket as the basic reference point is the common way of building a frame. Although admittedly the Henry James "hold everything" fixture is probably faster if you are churning out quantities of frames. Yep. His complaint about this was that clamping the frame into a rigid fixure and then brazing away resulted in a frame with internal stresses that were not relieved. After finishing the brazing or welding the frame usually has to be forcibly aligned. My friend thought that was a bad thing. I am not sure it makes any difference in terms of longevity and seems very unlikely to make any difference in the performance of the frame Given that the fork blades often are sold as a straight tube and the frame maker then bends them to the proper radius to achieve the desired trail obviously the act of simply bending a frame tube can't be as evil as it sounds :-) OTOH, the best frame builder around here had a Henry James fixture and the bike he built for me is the best riding one I have ever been on (or was until I mangled it in my cash last summer. Have a replacement on order). " Given that the fork blades often are sold as a straight tube and the frame maker then bends them to the proper radius to achieve the desired trail obviously the act of simply bending a frame tube can't be as evil as it sounds :-)" Right in principle but everything has limits. Also there's a difference between some small structural loss from crystal slip on a raked fork and internal stress plus cyclic loading in a closed brazed or welded figure. Fork failure at the curved portion of a blade is virtually unknown yet tube failure from initial misalignment is sadly regular. Not epidemic mind you but frequent enough to be a known issue. You are talking about two very different thing. One, a permanently deformed tube, and secondly a non-deformed tube that has been deflected from its normal alignment and would return to the normal alignment if freed from its attachments. One of the problems is that simply welding or brazing two or more pieces together will normally result in some distortion. Thus the cold setting that many frames undergo before being *finished* :-) -- Cheers, John B. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
FS or Trade Carbon Compact Crankset - Trade 172.5 for 175 | mike | Marketplace | 0 | June 30th 07 12:35 AM |
Trade 46T or 42T 130 for 48T 130 | BW | Marketplace | 0 | August 22nd 06 02:05 PM |
FS or Trade: Look PP396 Exc $49 or Trade for Time Impact | mike | Marketplace | 0 | February 20th 06 03:06 AM |
Trade:Basso steel | VAMAINT | Marketplace | 0 | August 10th 04 02:21 PM |
For Trade: My XL jersey for one smaller, even trade no $ | Mark T | Marketplace | 2 | July 18th 03 09:36 PM |