Things that will not turn you into a machinist

[7HC]

.....................................Years ago, it was a common lament among shutterbugs that they needed a better camera. Little did they realize that Ansel Adams could take a better photo using a pinhole camera than they could with $2000 Nikon. As others have noted, THAT is what this is about.

Bill

I get your point. That is what it is about for you. Maybe that's not what it is about for others......................

...............................Being a good machinist and having the right tools are not mutually exclusive. I would argue that given the chance, people should choose to learn machining with the right tools from the get-go if it is within their means. This isn't to say you should hold off starting machining because you can't afford the toys, but rather identify which toys would make your life easier and be used in the majority of your projects. For example, if you will do multiple tool changes on a regular basis, buying a QCTP is not cheating or cheapening the experience. It is smart... plain and simple.

Paul.

I agree. I get no great satisfaction from doing things the hard way just because I can. I feel much better about doing it quickly, accurately and easily, and using additional tools if necessary is fine with me.
Unless you have a 'hair shirt' type personality, taking the difficult path would seem to just lengthen the journey without adding anything to the experience.

Completing a difficult task in the only way possible can be very satisfying, but to do it like that when there is an easier alternative seems masochistic, to me at least.


M

P.S. I defy anyone to take a better picture with a pinhole camera (a box form of the camera obscura) and it's associated process for producing a visible print, than can be done with a modern 'point n' shoot', let alone a $2K Nikon.:whistle:

 

[george wilson]

I actually made a pinhole camera for my wife back in the 80's. They will take a picture that is in focus near and far,not like lens cameras where there is a limited depth of focus.

 

[twraska]

I get your point. That is what it is about for you. Maybe that's not what it is about for others.

You don't need a lot of stuff to be a good machinist, you need education. I would argue that education plus the right tools for the job makes a more effective and efficient machinist than a good education with the wrong tools.

I worked as a capenter in my past employment and people would laugh at the different tools I had. I had a Fein Multimaster for undercutting door plates for installing floating floors. People laughed at how much I paid for it and often made the same comments that I didn't need it and that somehow I was cheapening the trade image by using it. I didn't care because while they were still sweating, cursing and chiselling out their floor plates, I had already finished all my installs and was packing up to go home. I enjoyed that crummy part of the job because the tool did the work for me, and not me doing all the work for the lack of having the correct tool. I could have done the same job with inferior tools and would have still gotten a good result. It just would have taken me a great deal longer with a lot more frustration.

Being a good machinist and having the right tools are not mutually exclusive. I would argue that given the chance, people should choose to learn machining with the right tools from the get-go if it is within their means. This isn't to say you should hold off starting machining because you can't afford the toys, but rather identify which toys would make your life easier and be used in the majority of your projects. For example, if you will do multiple tool changes on a regular basis, buying a QCTP is not cheating or cheapening the experience. It is smart... plain and simple.

Paul.

Paul,
You summed it up better than I ever could! I agree with your statements 100%.

I'd like to add to what you said....... Over the years I've mentored several FFA projects of restoring old tractors, most down to a bare case and back together. Proper tools (and air tools) not only speed up the process but it keeps the job (and learning experience) interesting for the students. Then when they are done, not only do they know the mechanical,,,,, they know about the proper use of some 'fancy' tools.

Tim

 

[OrangeAlpine]

"P.S. I defy anyone to take a better picture with a pinhole camera (a box form of the camera obscura) and it's associated process for producing a visible print, than can be done with a modern 'point n' shoot', let alone a $2K Nikon."

Your statement says that any yahoo with a modern camera will take better pictures than any of the early masters. We can extend that to art, where I, with modern paints and substrates, will outdo Micheal Angelo.

You are confusing technology with talent, which is what this thread is all about.

Bill

 

[Analias]

You are confusing technology with talent, which is what this thread is all about.

Depends on what you mean by "talent". Some folks believe that talent is innate ability. Sure it can be developed and improved, but if you don't have it no amount of time or effort will make you equal to a master. I don't believe that's true. If you put in 10,000 hours of focused effort into any skill or trade you will get to a level of proficiency to be respected, if not coveted. Better tools make it easier to perform many tasks, but the knowledge of why you are doing what you are doing has to be there to make any tool beneficial.

Just my $0.02.

 

[george wilson]

I agree with you,Analias. I have seen many guys who have been working at a trade all their lives,who are not what I would call expert. Innate ability properly developed makes all the difference.

 

[7HC]

You are confusing technology with talent, which is what this thread is all about.

Bill

With respect, I submit that the two are not mutually exclusive.

A skilled and talented worker can file an exact ten thou from a work surface and maintain a parallel finish.

However, technology will allow an untalented and unskilled worker to achieve even better accuracy using a surface grinder or (unnecessary?) carbide inserts in a face mill; all he needs to know is how to read the figures on the (unnecessary?) DRO.

Both talent and technology can achieve the same result.

I'm not arguing that technology should always be used to supplant skill, but that it depends on the end result required.

If an accurately finished part, or maybe a bunch of them is the requirement, then surely there's no objection to efficiently producing them using CNC.

If it's desired that one should arrive at that finished part by first learning the basic manual skills and then the machining ones, then that's what one should do, though it won't necessarily make the finished part any better.

P.S I can't really argue 'art' with you though, as it's so subjective.)


M

 

[swatson144]

Tools ... They separate us from the beasts. Beavers can build some surprising dams but with tools we do a bit better.

I have lurked and watched this thread to see where it goes and as stated in the OP I can not precisely agree. Most of the items mentioned in my opinion do indeed help to make a machinist, while none of them preclude becoming a machinist. So to me it is all win win. I completely understand where the OP is coming from, owning the mentioned items make one a machinist like owning a NASA cap makes one an astronaut.

Carbide tools, like it or not they are here. I like it! The new professional machinists do not use HSS it isn't practical to have a worker spend an hour to grind a tool that is available for 5$. I recently took a full time job supporting the Navy doing overhauls. The young sailors saw some of the tools I ground and were wowed by them as a "lost art". Admittedly in my home shop I mostly use carbide as it is more effective and efficient. I'll likely never be without a good 38a wheel in JKor L hardness though ;-).

I see no real reason to push people to learn to grind HSS tools, use a slide rule, or a lantern post tool holder because that is how "I" learned. I started my machinist journey about 40 yrs ago. Back then a lot of stuff was in use because it was in hand (much like a hobby mach. shop), and frankly I am a bit jealous of the tooling the new people have available at such low cost. However if they have the old equipment it is a good idea to use it and bias short term purchases accordingly, as I'd rather cut with a lantern post than not have a good tailstock chuck or center.

Variable speed.... Dang it, we can't have it both ways! No carbide means HSS. HSS means a careful balance of feeds and speeds for success (no darker than straw colored chips) unless we have coolant systems then the sweet spot is broader (but coolant systems don't help make a machinist iaw op). I really don't think constantly changing levers or GULP belts makes a machinist. Being able to reduce metal to the proper size with the appropriate chips for the job at hand does. 6s and 9s on the lathe.

Micrometers... use them only if you like your parts to fit.

There is only a few things I believe don't make a machinist:

Not being inquisitive.
Assuming a self centering chuck actually is.
settling for a die vs single point when there is plenty of time
using the mill vs shaper
using shaper vs mill
not doing the arithmetic twice
not thinking
not considering the best way to do the job with what is available
not learning
not considering what to buy after having to do a job with what is available
doing a job that is expected to be repeated without making it as easy as possible so the future iterations are gravy
Finally as a salute to OrangeAlpine, buying a bunch of neat stuff you don't need at the expense of not having what you do need!

Steve

 

[OrangeAlpine]

"With respect, I submit that the two are not mutually exclusive."

No one said they were. Technology can enhance talent, but when it replaces talent, you are what we call "A machine operator". A guy that buys the goodies thinking it make him a machinest is on the "Machine Operator" track.


Bill

 

[samthedog]

"With respect, I submit that the two are not mutually exclusive."

No one said they were. Technology can enhance talent, but when it replaces talent, you are what we call "A machine operator". A guy that buys the goodies thinking it make him a machinest is on the "Machine Operator" track.


Bill

I work in an industry full of engineers, machinists and 3D designers. Given all the technology available, people with talent still stand out as the technology helps them to realize the things they have in their heads with that much more detail. I still hear occasional discussions though between the old engineers and the new. "Back in my day engineers were *real* engineers... we had to do all the math and used slide rules and chalk boards".

I find it funny how many imposters actually manage to do real work and produce real world results with all the unnecessary do-dads and gizmos that no self respecting afficianado would ever consider. Maybe I am the same... The older I get, the better I was.

Paul.