4
4GSR
Forum Guest
Register Today
I recall seeing these listed in my old bearing books. They are referred to as "instrument bearings". But I don't recall them showing one that big!
I made a 2 spindle duplicating carving machine that I had in the Toolmaker's Shop in Williamsburg(though it belonged to me). It was the size of a queen size bed. I sold it to the museum when I left.
Anyway,I made those exact type bearings for the swinging arms of the machine. One arm held the stylus and the other held the router. Those bearings were the ideal type as they could be adjusted to have no play in any direction.
I turned the "cones" in the lathe,after the "cups" that held the bearings were made. Everything was made out of 01 drill rod. Rather than hardening the cups and the cones,I mounted the cups in the tailstock of my lathe,and the cones were turned in place in the chuck,so they were concentric. I put hardened bearing balls 1/16" in diameter into the cups,and ran the lathe while pressing the cones into the cups,against the revolving bearing balls with the tailstock quill. This made polished and work hardened grooves in the cups and the cones without any hardening with heat. Heating and quenching would just have invited out of roundness and other problems.
These bearings worked great,and no trouble was ever experienced in the 15 or so years that we used the carving machine to make wig heads for the wig shop,or other carving jobs that came along. I really made the machine for carving arched tops and backs for guitars,and guitar necks. I did use the machine for that purpose over the years.
The machine was simply too large to put into my own shop at the time(and still would be too large!) I am slowly making a much smaller SINGLE spindle carving machine for myself.
I never bothered to take any pictures,sorry.
BTW,I do have an American WWII torpedo gyroscope myself. It seems to have more conventional bearings to support the gyroscope. There is a bit of thrust play and sideways play which I assume could be adjusted out. These are such beautifully made devices!
American torpedos had all kinds of defects in their design which took a few years of arguing with the powerful Naval Ordinance Dept. to get resolved. Meanwhile,American submariners got blamed for missing targets. American torpedos porpoised up and down,giving a 50-50 chance of just running under the target. The magnetic exploders did not work. English torpedos also had this defect. Happily,this cause premature explosions on torpedos mistakenly fired at a British warship when they were scrambling to sink the Bismark. They disconnected their magnetic detonators after that!!The firing pins of American torpedos also did not work properly. IIRC,they bent upon impact,unless the torpedo hit at a GLANCING angle(then they DID go off). Subs were told to try to hit ships with glancing blows while that defect was being worked on. As if it wasn't hard enough just finding themselves in a proper position to shoot at ships in the first place.
They found a German torpedo that had run up onto a beach and designed a new American torpedo around the German one. I think Westinghouse did that.
I never read about ANY defect in the Japanese torpedos,or the German ones,either!
Stupidly enough,the Ordnance Dept. never allowed TESTING of their FINELY MACHINED torpedos before the war. I read that they finally agreed to let the submariners test a torpedo against an old ship,but specified that any damage to the ship would have to be repaired and PAID for by the submarine service!! What a bunch of crap!!!!!
By many measures we were out teched by our enemies in WWII (there are some notable exceptions), and won the war the way Grant won the civil war, by grinding them down using our industrial might.