Dan P.

Members
  • Content Count

    719
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Dan P.

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Didbrook, Gloucs

Converted

  • Location
    London
  • Occupation
    blacksmith (ornamental)

Recent Profile Visitors

7,500 profile views
  1. I don't know! The connection in the photo above is the only thing coming close to anything that could be configured.
  2. Thanks for your extensive reply, Tim! Photo 1 and 2 are of a box on the side of the machine that may serve as a terminal box, though it does not contain what I would expect to find in a modern motor terminal. (There is an earth wire in the 2nd photo, it is just somewhat obscured). According to the original drawings, the existing motor should be "C.P. Motor 3 H.P. at 940 R.P.M.". The hammer is intended to run at 250 bpm. Have twiddled with the speed a bit, the hammer runs pretty well at more or less the rated bpm when I turn the speed controller from 65 (top speed, photo 3), where it would not run at all, down to 45 where it seems to work quite well. If the speed is turned down to 40, the motor craps out again. Interestingly when the clutch is disengaged, changing the speed has the predicted effect on the speed of the motor. Under load, however, the speed of the hammer remains constant irrespective of what speed the controller is at. Here is a link to two videos of the hammer working; As you can see, it seems to work okay, though it is clear that there is a lack of power when the clutch is first engaged, and also when I want to put the hammer "flat out" the motor slows or stalls (not belt slippage)
  3. Hi timgunn1962, it's nice to bump into you here, having benefitted from your many experiments and posts over at British Blades (especially as re/discoverer of "amal" burners, I think? Which has benefitted many over here). I had a "phone a friend" situation with this motor/vfd set up, and the friend in question did make it clear that a "delta" configuration was necessary, or at least preferred, for 1ph to 3ph VFD connection. However, on opening the conduit/terminal box on the motor, the wires that went into it just carried straight on through deeper into the motor. And of course they were all the same colour. So I crossed my fingers, said a few Hail Marys, and wired her up to the VFD, without dramatic incident. I will get some more photos when Im back at work tomorrow, but part of my problem is that this motor is, I think, original (1948), and does not have a plate to specify what is going on with it. I presume it is therefore by default in star configuration? Would that be a correct assumption? And thus perhaps an explanation of what is going wrong? The VFD is new, thus; ebay link removed
  4. It's riveted on, and I'm not keen to take out the rivets to find out. Thanks for the advice re; asbestos. I think I will try facing it with some leather, see what happens, otherwise send it off to the brake pad people to get re-done. Huh? I'll post some stuff when it's properly up and running. The hammer was made in 1948 for Seedland Bros., a manufacturer of chisels and plane irons in Sheffield. Ram is 1/2 Cwt. The hammer is well broken in, shall we say? Well used but not abused, and built like the proverbial brick sh^thouse!
  5. So, the hammer is in, and a VFD installed without hitch. The motor starts as it should, the flywheel flies, but the movement craps out under load. I saw this hammer under 3 phase power before I purchased it and it was fine. I lowered the motor speed, and the hammer performs to a functional but not optimal level. I have not tried to enter any settings on the VFD yet, and the instruction manual was not written for laymen. Is there something that the VFD itself can do for this weak torque? Any further pointers appreciated. Video attached of hammer crapping out before I lowered the motor speed on the VFD 904C4942-4068-4872-9568-C8CBE176CD66.MOV
  6. Many thanks for the suggestions. I'm not sure what's gone on, perhaps it took a bit of a ding in transit, but the brake pad makes insufficient contact with the other brakey part. The only thing to be done is to bring make the pad thicker=bring the two plates closer together. For interest, that disk in the last picture is part of a mechanism that goes forward to engage the clutch cone, and backwards to engage the brake. The brake (the part with the pad) rotates with the main shaft.
  7. I was wondering if the material was identifiable so that I could have some idea of how deep the "tread" pattern was. It does not contact the brake disc sufficiently to brake the hammer. Perhaps it is a problem that could be solved mechanically as you suggest, or by another means.
  8. Can anyone identify this material? It’s from the brake on my Massey mechanical. It is hard, it’s not rubber. I think it needs renewing. Or I might just glue some leather on top, see what happens. The hammer and a photo of the brake drum below;
  9. Spotted this on the Albert memorial in Kensington Gardens.
  10. No, it is prohibitively expensive in this country, unless you already have it from 30 years ago when they would install it practically free (or so I'm told). According to my electrician mate it's not really necessary either for the size of machines that I'm running. Thanks. I don't mind the hammer being a little faster, or a lot faster, actually, but if I got a new motor I'd likely have to get a new pulley anyway so no drama there, except of the £££ variety. It's mostly the bare facts of how electricity works that have me bamboozled.
  11. Thanks Owen. The hammer is 250 rpm (could go for a bit faster, maybe 300 rpm), the motor is 940 rpm. This motor has full load current of 13 amps, not that I really know what that means. I presume it is suitable?; https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Electric-Motor-Single-Phase-2-2Kw-3HP-4-pole-1400-rpm-3-HP/271904454684?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2649 Do you know if higher amperage (??) is something that the average sparky can help me with? The hammer is a Massey spring hammer. 250 bpm by design, though perhaps would benefit from greater speed. The ram weight is 1/2 cwt, but the springs must add another 30+ kg of inertia.
  12. Sounds like this would be rather above my pay grade. Is this what's meant by "slave motors"? You are selling me the VFD option. The old motor in question could do with being sped up a little. I did think of the soft start capacity but I'm guessing that's not so important with a mechanical hammer because it's only turning the flywheel to begin with. My main problem is that I would be inclined to get an electrician involved, which means £££.
  13. I am moving to a workshop which inly has single phase power. I'd be grateful to hear opinions, preferably born of experience, on whether to go with a VFD or whether to mount an appropriate single phase motor. The power hammer is mechanical, bow spring, 1/2 cwt, the existing motor is probably original (1948) or at least very old, 3 hp. I imagine the bow springs add considerably greater weight to the business end than coil springs do. I am electrically illiterate, so am leaning toward getting a new motor, but those old motors are beasts, and I am loathe to separate it from its old friend. I imagine the cost will likely be about approximate. Your thoughts?
  14. I've heard the rivetting/boiler maker thing about those hammers before. Might be right?
  15. The crown suggests the date of a royal warrant or similar, rather than the date of manufacture.