PDA

View Full Version : How would you turn these?



rsser
16th Jan 2010, 01:53 PM
S&P grinder tops.

Peter Hromek's work.

Best I can do with the pic.

wheelinround
16th Jan 2010, 01:58 PM
Offset turning (http://www.scrollsaws.com/WoodLathe/offsetturning.htm)

robert brown
16th Jan 2010, 04:14 PM
Hi ern.

I would turn them with a flare at the top and then carve and sand the un wanted area.

Robert.

orraloon
16th Jan 2010, 04:26 PM
First impression is offset tutning but the ridge near the top makes me think it has been shaped after turning. Perhaps a product of both.
Regards
John

Texian
16th Jan 2010, 04:45 PM
Yeah John, I wondered about that ridge too. So Ern, does Peter show how he does it?

Woodwould
16th Jan 2010, 04:53 PM
I would turn a flare and then saw the waste off and spokeshave, rasp, sand to desired shape - much the same process as for a cabriole leg.

Grumpy John
16th Jan 2010, 05:38 PM
One word, Escoulen.

Added: But don't ask me how.

Woodwould
16th Jan 2010, 05:44 PM
CNC router! :q

dai sensei
16th Jan 2010, 08:50 PM
Hi ern.

I would turn them with a flare at the top and then carve and sand the un wanted area.

Robert.

:whs:

Jim Carroll
16th Jan 2010, 08:55 PM
As the others have said turn of centre then shape the underneath part.

Have done a similar thing on cutlery handles but not with the ridge underneath

Jim Carroll
16th Jan 2010, 09:03 PM
Just been thinking again, turn to round first then turn like you would a three sided handle but only do 2 sides then offset the whole thing to round the top

China
16th Jan 2010, 10:25 PM
How would you turn these? I wouldn't they look good but I don't think they would feel good in your hand, and would be awkward to use

Little Festo
17th Jan 2010, 04:14 PM
My guess would be just tilting axis. Turn the bottom of the top piece at 90 degrees leaving a flare at the top to accomodate the curve then turn small sections after changing the tilt to achieve the curve etc. Peter Hromek certainly produces some fine off-centre work. From memory he was an engineer earlier in his life so he has a good background to help conceive some of his creations (have not read any info on his site - just browsed the Australian Woodworker's story on him last month).

His website - chec the menu - containers (dose not refer the them as bowls).

:: Peter Hromek - Woodworks :: (http://www.salzundpfeffermuehlen.de/english/start.html)

Peter

Grumpy John
17th Jan 2010, 07:24 PM
Definitely doable using an Escoulen chuck. I had a crack at it tonight when I got home from work, but too embarrassed to show the result. I'll keep at it and post results when I've got something I won't be ashamed of.

RETIRED
17th Jan 2010, 07:28 PM
Definitely doable using an Escoulen chuck. I had a crack at it tonight when I got home from work, but too embarrassed to show the result. I'll keep at it and post results when I've got something I won't be ashamed of.Not that long then?:D

rsser
18th Jan 2010, 06:22 AM
The top of the right one appears to have 2 facets facing the viewer.

We don't get to see the other side of any shown on the website.

If it was round, what would that mean for the no of centrings? 3?

Allen Neighbors
19th Jan 2010, 12:01 PM
What Robert said. :D Easiest, for a lazy bloke like me.

Frank&Earnest
19th Jan 2010, 12:26 PM
What Robert said. :D Easiest, for a lazy bloke like me.

And why not? :D Another discussion about "because I can" turning, and a demonstration of the "when all you have is a hammer, all problems look like nails" proverb.

A lathe is a versatile instrument, and one can become a virtuoso playing it. But even the most accomplished violinist can not replace an orchestra. Do the purchasers of the salt and pepper grinders buy them for the turning skill or for the pleasing design?

And from here the discussion inevitably continues about the intrinsic value of the hand made v the machine made, and what is what, ad infinitum...:D

rsser
19th Jan 2010, 03:10 PM
No.

wld've thought doing multiple ones to sell, a standardised machine method is the only way to go. I don't give a hoot whether a lathe was harmed in the making of the product tho it seemed likely; if it was a CNC router I'd be just as interested in how it was done.

Little Festo
19th Jan 2010, 07:43 PM
Definitly off-set turning of some description. He specializes in off-set turning. He will be in Brisbane demoing in the middle of this year - see the December Australian Woodworker.

Peter

Frank&Earnest
19th Jan 2010, 08:11 PM
No.

wld've thought doing multiple ones to sell, a standardised machine method is the only way to go. I don't give a hoot whether a lathe was harmed in the making of the product tho it seemed likely; if it was a CNC router I'd be just as interested in how it was done.

Sorry Ern, far from me suggesting that was the reason for your thread. I was just commenting on the direction the discussion had taken and saying to Allen that there is no shame in using whatever, laziness or not. I keep forgetting that my abstract talk might be taken personally. Seems I rubbed Robert the wrong way also, for the same reason.

Can somebody please make an emoticon that means "I play (hard) the ball, not the man, and hope everybody else does the same? :)

rsser
19th Jan 2010, 08:22 PM
Yeah Peter, it was that run-down that got me interested. Frankly, they're the only grinders I've seen that stood out for design.

F&E, thanks, no hard feelings.

tea lady
19th Jan 2010, 09:53 PM
Looks like someone should bring the enscoulon (Spelling? ) chuck to Groggy's for experimental research purposes.:cool:

tea lady
19th Jan 2010, 10:11 PM
I don't think they have facets. I think it is just reflections. I reckon its done like this, kinda. With two center points. Turn the main axis first like a trumpet shape, then Off to the side. Maybe held in the ball chuck thingy on the eschel.....chuck from the bottom, turn a beret shape.:cool:
127300

rsser
20th Jan 2010, 04:16 AM
Think it may have been shown off at GJ's bash??

The name is actually a corruption. When the inventor's missus came out into the shed and said it was all out of whack, the frenchman said 'ees skew, non?'

ps I'd put money on 2 diff circs on the facing side

Frank&Earnest
20th Jan 2010, 11:25 AM
OK, if we are talking solid geometry, here is my 2 bob, then. :wink:

With the tools I have, drill press, bandsaw and lathe: :p

starting from a square blank:

- mark the centre 1 and the secondary centres 2
- drill a screw recess in 1 and flat bottom holes at 2 with a Forstner bit or similar.
- mount the blank on the lathe with centre 1 and turn a dome (leaving a few mm square at the bottom)
- cut the dome in 4 sections with the bandsaw
- mount each section on the lathe with centre 2 and finish.

Apologies for the crude schematic.

rsser
20th Jan 2010, 12:28 PM
Bravo, the gauntlet is thrown down :D

And another contender is labouring in a locked shed at a secret location :oo:

It's the eccentric flared-top turn-off :rolleyes:

Grumpy John
20th Jan 2010, 04:19 PM
Half an hour on the Escoulen, and I managed a reasonable copy. Got the arc wrong on the top, but that's easy to correct. I'll bring the Escoulen to Groggy's on the 31st. if anyone wants to have a crack at it.
I got a bit excited and forgot to take a few pictures that would have made things a bit easier to understand :doh:.


127338 127339 127340

127341 127342 127343

127344 127345 127346 127347


All credit must go to the Wierd and Wonderful one, without whose help I would not have been able to figure it out. Finish straight off the tool Ken :2tsup:.

hughie
20th Jan 2010, 04:52 PM
Hmm looks like your very close GJ and if this was the way he probably hand finished the tops on a belt sander and by hand the final rub

TTIT
20th Jan 2010, 04:57 PM
............I got a bit excited and forgot to take a few pictures that would have made things a bit easier to understand :doh:..Got that right :C . . . . . . but I think I get the idea :shrug:

rsser
20th Jan 2010, 05:18 PM
Great work GJ.

But I'm still convinced Hromek had two faces under the overhang.

So F&E, how's the gauntlet pick-up faring?

Frank&Earnest
20th Jan 2010, 05:53 PM
Great work GJ.

But I'm still convinced Hromek had two faces under the overhang.

So F&E, how's the gauntlet pick-up faring?

What do you mean? You actually want me to make one? ie four? :oo: I am just a thinker...:D

PS. what do you mean by "two faces" ? Also, the two in the picture have different curves, will be interesting to see which method can accommodate both, but will be difficult to be sure without photos from the back.

rsser
20th Jan 2010, 06:03 PM
What do you mean? You actually want me to make one? ie four? :oo: I am just a thinker...:D

And a good one at that ;-}

But we are hands-on folk here :D

faces = facets in earlier post

3 centres you ran with ... assume the unseen back is just one curve?

Frank&Earnest
20th Jan 2010, 06:32 PM
And a good one at that ;-}

But we are hands-on folk here :D

faces = facets in earlier post

3 centres you ran with ... assume the unseen back is just one curve?

I think I got what you mean: an angle under the top "point", like in a medieval helm's face. If that is indeed the case my method would seem to be appropriate, once the right distance between centre 1 and centre 2 has been found, because the high point already ends in a 90 degrees angle. The transition from the round base to the top would have to be smoothed by hand, though, can't see how to do it on the lathe, not even with an offset centre. Still haven't seen a lathe that produces square corners, but I am ready to be amazed...:D

Frank&Earnest
30th Jan 2010, 11:36 PM
OK, Ern, here it is. Only modification from what said before is the central convexity of the dome, because I realised that in the original the point is a bit lower than the top.

All scaled down to make a needle/toothpick box (did not know they existed before reading that thread :D)

Frank&Earnest
30th Jan 2010, 11:38 PM
And this is the finished box. Silky oak, Shellawax.

mick61
31st Jan 2010, 12:11 AM
Well Done:hooray::clap::woot:
Mick:D

tea lady
31st Jan 2010, 12:29 AM
:2tsup: Cute.

Allen Neighbors
31st Jan 2010, 03:16 AM
F&E. Such a mind!! Utterly amazing... the ability to transfer thoughts to your hands!! :D
Well done! I don't think like that. I can copy, but you can dream up stuff. And then do it. Good job!! :U

rsser
31st Jan 2010, 07:42 AM
Bravo!

wheelinround
31st Jan 2010, 08:48 AM
:hooray::clap: well done FE and in miniature as well


Something I'd like to know is how long did it take to set up FE Also GJ ??

a comparison between the $415.00 chuck and a home made jig. :;

Frank&Earnest
31st Jan 2010, 11:08 AM
Sorry Ray, don't get the question. Didn't take much for Ern to set me up...:D
and there is no jig at all here, the only "set up" time is changing the drill bits on the press and the jaws on the lathe.

There is no comparison with the Escoulen chuck either, because made this way the piece does not require offset turning, it is just a small box with a funny lid. The only "mechanical" improvement in finishing would be to find the exact diametre of a spindle sander that would produce consistently the closest approximation to the curve required to obtain the two faces/facets/meeting surfaces.

In any case, as it is, it is not an exact copy, more sanding on the top would be required for a closer approximation. If it is accepted that some sanding is required with either method, GJ's would be equally appropriate and probably quicker.

Thanks all for the compliments, it's not much really, you make me blush...:-

wheelinround
31st Jan 2010, 12:40 PM
Sorry Ray, don't get the question. Didn't take much for Ern to set me up...:D
and there is no jig at all here, the only "set up" time is changing the drill bits on the press and the jaws on the lathe.

There is no comparison with the Escoulen chuck either, because made this way the piece does not require offset turning, it is just a small box fith a funny lid. The only "mechanical" improvement in finishing would be to find the exact diametre of a spindle sander that would produce consistently the closest approximation to the curve required to obtain the two faces/facets/meeting surfaces.

In any case, as it is, it is not an exact copy, more sanding on the top would be required for a closer approximation. If it is accepted that some sanding is required with either method, GJ's would be equally appropriate and probably quicker.

Thanks all for the compliments, it's not much really, you make me blush...:-

:doh::U Like the way you think FE never saw it that way but I got a laugh and you understood. Yes I meant how long did it take to set up your device to turn, against setting up the Escoulen chuck of GJ's.

Sanding and final shaping I can understand especially when doing more than one or as a pair.:roll:

I can see the benefits of the Eu-so-long chuck so many possibilities but the total cost of such :no: not when you not selling the finished items.

I'd love to have a go at one maybe if the Hand's On Show ever gets off the ground.

Grumpy John
31st Jan 2010, 06:06 PM
Ray I did a repeat performance of turning the top at Groggy's Turn-out today and I don't think it took more that 20 minutes to finish, albeit a pretty rough job. Others that were paying attention, and not being hassled by the peanut gallery, may be able to give a better estimate of the time taken.

wheelinround
31st Jan 2010, 06:10 PM
Ray I did a repeat performance of turning the top at Groggy's Turn-out today and I don't think it took more that 20 minutes to finish, albeit a pretty rough job. Others that were paying attention, and not being hassled by the peanut gallery, may be able to give a better estimate of the time taken.


Not bad John :2tsup:

rsser
31st Jan 2010, 06:15 PM
It was good work GJ, and there were a lot of peanuts ;-}

hughie
31st Jan 2010, 08:55 PM
Thanks all for the compliments, it's not much really, you make me blush...:-

awe shucks F&E your a right smart thinker. :2tsup:

rodent
31st Jan 2010, 11:47 PM
So it,s a cabriol leg on a pepper grinder ?