|
Posted by Richard Edwards on September 9, 2008, 2:15 pm
Please log in for more thread options
I am sure that you will all be pleased to hear that my drive problems
are resolved!
The pulleys were looked at VERY carefully and I noticed a wear groove
that matched the "tail" of the inner most links. Checked the groove
section and noted 40 degrees inclusive. Fenner suggest 34 degrees for
pulley diameters under 118 mm diameter (which both link belt pulleys
are).
I put both pulleys up in a friends 15 inch Harrison and re-machined
the grooves to 34 degrees. Belt now sits lower in the groove.
The link belt appeared relatively new but was highly contaminated with
oil. I stripped off every individual link (50) washed in Swarfega
Heavy Duty Degreaser, then in Hot water and washing powder, finally in
1.1.1 Trichloroethane. Reassembled belt. Re-fitted pulleys and belt
and noted Keiths comments about tension, it is now B tight.
Refitted motor with new std V belt, aligned.
Tested!
Originally a .75mm cut on 50 mm diameter free cutting Mild Steel would
slow the part down to a crawl. Now a 3mm cut (6mm off diameter) hardly
changes the speed. Swarf is not blue so still some way to go <G>
Main reason IMHO is the included angle change to 34 degrees, the belt
is now sitting deeper in the groove.
Well pleased!
Many thanks to Keith for his comments on Tension. I actually checked a
neighbors Boxford. He has the older Canvas and Rubber type belt so did
not help a lot. If I had a Boxford I would definately look after the
belt, a change to the modern Nu-T-Link could give problems as it is
certainly not as flexible. Damn Boxford is definately quieter than the
Viceroy though! However bet it would not take a 3mm cut!
Richard
|
|
Posted by on September 10, 2008, 4:48 am
Please log in for more thread options
> I am sure that you will all be pleased to hear that my drive problems
> are resolved!
> The pulleys were looked at VERY carefully and I noticed a wear groove
> that matched the "tail" of the inner most links. Checked the groove
> section and noted 40 degrees inclusive. Fenner suggest 34 degrees for
> pulley diameters under 118 mm diameter (which both link belt pulleys
> are).
> I put both pulleys up in a friends 15 inch Harrison and re-machined
> the grooves to 34 degrees. Belt now sits lower in the groove.
>
> The link belt appeared relatively new but was highly contaminated with
> oil. I stripped off every individual link (50) washed in Swarfega
> Heavy Duty Degreaser, then in Hot water and washing powder, finally in
> 1.1.1 Trichloroethane. Reassembled belt. Re-fitted pulleys and belt
> and noted Keiths comments about tension, it is now B tight.
> Refitted motor with new std V belt, aligned.
>
> Tested!
>
> Originally a .75mm cut on 50 mm diameter free cutting Mild Steel would
> slow the part down to a crawl. Now a 3mm cut (6mm off diameter) hardly
> changes the speed. Swarf is not blue so still some way to go <G>
>
> Main reason IMHO is the included angle change to 34 degrees, the belt
> is now sitting deeper in the groove.
>
> Well pleased!
>
> Many thanks to Keith for his comments on Tension. I actually checked a
> neighbors Boxford. He has the older Canvas and Rubber type belt so did
> not help a lot. If I had a Boxford I would definately look after the
> belt, a change to the modern Nu-T-Link could give problems as it is
> certainly not as flexible. Damn Boxford is definately quieter than the
> Viceroy though! However bet it would not take a 3mm cut!
>
> Richard
Pleased to hear that you have got it sorted now Richard and cutting
nearly as well as a Boxford [VBG). I must say that I have always felt
that the Viceroy deserved to be more popular than it was but of course
it means that they can be something of a bargain although, like the
Boxford, they vary greatly in the specification. The heavier build,
larger ways and separate feed shaft were definite improvements over
early Boxfords but it appears that they were busily copying each other
as fast as they could anyway. I might risk a beer token on your final
statement though!!
Regards
Keith
|
|
Posted by Richard Edwards on September 10, 2008, 9:04 am
Please log in for more thread options
On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 01:48:23 -0700 (PDT), jontom_1uk@hotmail.com
wrote:
>> I am sure that you will all be pleased to hear that my drive problems
>> are resolved!
>> The pulleys were looked at VERY carefully and I noticed a wear groove
>> that matched the "tail" of the inner most links. Checked the groove
>> section and noted 40 degrees inclusive. Fenner suggest 34 degrees for
>> pulley diameters under 118 mm diameter (which both link belt pulleys
>> are).
>> I put both pulleys up in a friends 15 inch Harrison and re-machined
>> the grooves to 34 degrees. Belt now sits lower in the groove.
>>
>> The link belt appeared relatively new but was highly contaminated with
>> oil. I stripped off every individual link (50) washed in Swarfega
>> Heavy Duty Degreaser, then in Hot water and washing powder, finally in
>> 1.1.1 Trichloroethane. Reassembled belt. Re-fitted pulleys and belt
>> and noted Keiths comments about tension, it is now B tight.
>> Refitted motor with new std V belt, aligned.
>>
>> Tested!
>>
>> Originally a .75mm cut on 50 mm diameter free cutting Mild Steel would
>> slow the part down to a crawl. Now a 3mm cut (6mm off diameter) hardly
>> changes the speed. Swarf is not blue so still some way to go <G>
>>
>> Main reason IMHO is the included angle change to 34 degrees, the belt
>> is now sitting deeper in the groove.
>>
>> Well pleased!
>>
>> Many thanks to Keith for his comments on Tension. I actually checked a
>> neighbors Boxford. He has the older Canvas and Rubber type belt so did
>> not help a lot. If I had a Boxford I would definately look after the
>> belt, a change to the modern Nu-T-Link could give problems as it is
>> certainly not as flexible. Damn Boxford is definately quieter than the
>> Viceroy though! However bet it would not take a 3mm cut!
>>
>> Richard
>
>
>Pleased to hear that you have got it sorted now Richard and cutting
>nearly as well as a Boxford [VBG). I must say that I have always felt
>that the Viceroy deserved to be more popular than it was but of course
>it means that they can be something of a bargain although, like the
>Boxford, they vary greatly in the specification. The heavier build,
>larger ways and separate feed shaft were definite improvements over
>early Boxfords but it appears that they were busily copying each other
>as fast as they could anyway. I might risk a beer token on your final
>statement though!!
>
>Regards
>
>Keith
I echo all of your comments. I was just "checking the lie of the land"
with my feed comment. Seeing that you are confident enough to risk a
beer token, the bet is totally and irrefutably withdrawn!
Now I need to fettle my QCTP to get it to handle the new loads, will I
ever get my little engine built?
Best regards
Richard
|
|
Posted by Paul M on September 10, 2008, 3:17 pm
Please log in for more thread options
Hi Richard
I too have a Viceroy TDS and I was wondering how much tension you have
used?
I have never been sure of the correct tension and probably run it a
little slack as I was worried about damaging the motor bearings.
It would help if you could give me some idea of the free play at some
point on the belt.
Cheers
Paul
On Tue, 09 Sep 2008 19:15:54 +0100, Richard Edwards
>I am sure that you will all be pleased to hear that my drive problems
>are resolved!
>The pulleys were looked at VERY carefully and I noticed a wear groove
>that matched the "tail" of the inner most links. Checked the groove
>section and noted 40 degrees inclusive. Fenner suggest 34 degrees for
>pulley diameters under 118 mm diameter (which both link belt pulleys
>are).
>I put both pulleys up in a friends 15 inch Harrison and re-machined
>the grooves to 34 degrees. Belt now sits lower in the groove.
>
>The link belt appeared relatively new but was highly contaminated with
>oil. I stripped off every individual link (50) washed in Swarfega
>Heavy Duty Degreaser, then in Hot water and washing powder, finally in
>1.1.1 Trichloroethane. Reassembled belt. Re-fitted pulleys and belt
>and noted Keiths comments about tension, it is now B tight.
>Refitted motor with new std V belt, aligned.
>
>Tested!
>
>Originally a .75mm cut on 50 mm diameter free cutting Mild Steel would
>slow the part down to a crawl. Now a 3mm cut (6mm off diameter) hardly
>changes the speed. Swarf is not blue so still some way to go <G>
>
>Main reason IMHO is the included angle change to 34 degrees, the belt
>is now sitting deeper in the groove.
>
>Well pleased!
>
>Many thanks to Keith for his comments on Tension. I actually checked a
>neighbors Boxford. He has the older Canvas and Rubber type belt so did
>not help a lot. If I had a Boxford I would definately look after the
>belt, a change to the modern Nu-T-Link could give problems as it is
>certainly not as flexible. Damn Boxford is definately quieter than the
>Viceroy though! However bet it would not take a 3mm cut!
>
>
>
>Richard
|
|
Posted by Richard Edwards on September 11, 2008, 4:42 pm
Please log in for more thread options
wrote:
>Hi Richard
>
>I too have a Viceroy TDS and I was wondering how much tension you have
>used?
>
>I have never been sure of the correct tension and probably run it a
>little slack as I was worried about damaging the motor bearings.
>
>It would help if you could give me some idea of the free play at some
>point on the belt.
>
>Cheers
>
>Paul
WRT the motor to countershaft belt, I have mine so that I can just
twist it a quarter of a turn in the centre of the span.
My belting supplier suggests that the countershaft to top shaft link
belt should be "banjo string tight, whatever that means in the real
world. Very difficult to check this as you know, as there is no access
to the centre of the span.
Richard
|
| Similar Threads | Posted | | Link belt drive problems | September 6, 2008, 1:11 pm |
| Link belt drive rotation direction | April 6, 2008, 7:15 am |
| Belt drive question | August 13, 2008, 1:42 am |
| Re: Pulley problems | January 6, 2008, 5:29 pm |
| BT Internet problems | January 28, 2008, 6:45 am |
| OT Posting Problems | May 5, 2008, 6:56 pm |
| Myford ML7 with bearing problems! | April 11, 2008, 6:18 pm |
| Lathe Facing Problems | May 13, 2008, 7:33 am |
| Anyone got a B68 belt or two? | July 1, 2008, 12:18 pm |
| Drive pin clearance | May 2, 2008, 6:04 am |
|
|
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap
> are resolved!
> The pulleys were looked at VERY carefully and I noticed a wear groove
> that matched the "tail" of the inner most links. Checked the groove
> section and noted 40 degrees inclusive. Fenner suggest 34 degrees for
> pulley diameters under 118 mm diameter (which both link belt pulleys
> are).
> I put both pulleys up in a friends 15 inch Harrison and re-machined
> the grooves to 34 degrees. Belt now sits lower in the groove.
>
> The link belt appeared relatively new but was highly contaminated with
> oil. I stripped off every individual link (50) washed in Swarfega
> Heavy Duty Degreaser, then in Hot water and washing powder, finally in
> 1.1.1 Trichloroethane. Reassembled belt. Re-fitted pulleys and belt
> and noted Keiths comments about tension, it is now B tight.
> Refitted motor with new std V belt, aligned.
>
> Tested!
>
> Originally a .75mm cut on 50 mm diameter free cutting Mild Steel would
> slow the part down to a crawl. Now a 3mm cut (6mm off diameter) hardly
> changes the speed. Swarf is not blue so still some way to go <G>
>
> Main reason IMHO is the included angle change to 34 degrees, the belt
> is now sitting deeper in the groove.
>
> Well pleased!
>
> Many thanks to Keith for his comments on Tension. I actually checked a
> neighbors Boxford. He has the older Canvas and Rubber type belt so did
> not help a lot. If I had a Boxford I would definately look after the
> belt, a change to the modern Nu-T-Link could give problems as it is
> certainly not as flexible. Damn Boxford is definately quieter than the
> Viceroy though! However bet it would not take a 3mm cut!
>
> Richard