Warren Nakkela Posted February 4, 2009 Author Share Posted February 4, 2009 Well let's see what happens Warren Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warren Nakkela Posted February 4, 2009 Author Share Posted February 4, 2009 Well shoot got it scanned and I have it in my pictures, Dang it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeatGuy Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 Thats ok ... I thought I was going nuts. how did you find this patent to begin with ??? I have been searching the USPTO for some time to find Nazel patents. Search options are limited beyond 1976. brad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warren Nakkela Posted February 4, 2009 Author Share Posted February 4, 2009 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nonjic Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 frosty, I know a bit about the Massey Hammers :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warren Nakkela Posted February 4, 2009 Author Share Posted February 4, 2009 Something may fall out of this yet! Frosty likes a direct connection to the hammer and, while I not very happy with it I think a helve is needed to gain acceleration beyond gravity. One thing I think that all will agree is that the oil must freely enter and leave the cylinder. On the rod end especially and on the head end one should not rely on factory fittings. Ports should be drilled around the circumference of the cylinder and a machined manifold welded to the cylinder. This should have an oversized fitting welded to the manifold. The rod should be only one half to three quarter of an inch smaller than the bore to reduce the displacement on the downstroke. I will show illustrations whenever I get the electrons to obey. Warren Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frosty Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 frosty, I know a bit about the Massey Hammers Yes John, I believe you do. So, what can you tell us about the 1902 # 707,246 patent beyond what the patent docs say? Are the more recent and considerably more complex control valving schemes actually more efficient? Better control? Run cooler? Etc.? Brad: The USPTO site is, like any gvt. site, almost impossible to navigate and severely out of date. The IBM free patent server went private and pay some years ago. If you search for "Patent Server" you should find the ones out there. However, Google, being Google, has a patent server that blows the other free servers out of the water. Search out "Google Patent." Oh yeah, pack a lunch and plenty of fluids, surfing patents is really REALLY addictive. Warren: It's not that I don't like a mechanical connection in a hydraulic or pneumatic device I just want some indication it'll actually improve things. If you're talking about a dead fall device using hydraulics to lift it then there might be a mechanical component that will improve things. Frosty Frosty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warren Nakkela Posted February 5, 2009 Author Share Posted February 5, 2009 Frosty: Where I am hung up on is that I think the hydraulic oil cannot flow fast enough to accelerate that hammer beyond gravitational acceleration. (32 feet per second squared) I hope that I am wrong, that would sure simpicate things. You will still need an inverted cylinder, however, so that the lower displacement end of the cylinder act on the downward motion of the hammer. This can be done with a crosshead slide. Warren Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warren Nakkela Posted February 5, 2009 Author Share Posted February 5, 2009 Here is the drawing that frosty was asking me for. Now tear it apart. But please remember that the idea is conceptual. I am not excited about the helve as it takes up too much space. I think, however, that hydraulics on the down stroke need the extra speed from a class three lever. Warren Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nonjic Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 I lwould have thought that the accumulator would work better on the other side of the valve block Hydraulic hammers do accelerate faster that 9.8mtrs sec sq. The later generation of massey pneumatic valving is superior in just about every way. With the integral receiver design you have a fully (and I mean fully) controllable single blow, the ram follows your hand lever motion 100% , either so slow you can barely see it moving to knock the anvil through the inertia block power, to stop it dead mid stroke. You have to try it to believe it. smart blokes those victorians ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warren Nakkela Posted February 5, 2009 Author Share Posted February 5, 2009 The accumulator gives the oil someplace to go when the hammer strikes. Warren Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warren Nakkela Posted February 5, 2009 Author Share Posted February 5, 2009 John: I suppose that it would work just fine between the pump and control valve but on an open center system there may no advantage. If the cylinder bottoms out with the rod extended it would accumulate oil under pressure that would add to the downward impulse of the hammer. That would be a plus. Warren Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frosty Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 Let's see, where to start. First, by it's very nature hydraulics is actually faster then pneumatics, being it's virtually incompressible. What makes hyd slower than pn in practice is the fluid's viscosity and the fact that most hyd devices are intended for power not speed. You wouldn't need a bunch of holes to allow enough flow, one big one is fine. The air ports in big hammers tend to be in the 1-2" sq/in range and that's more than enough for a high pressure hyd device as well. John's right, the accumulator's on the wrong side of the valve. You need relief on the high pressure side, not the return side in a high velocity stall situation. (Hammer hitting the anvil = high velocity stall) The flow to the return side just stops (pressure drop) in this case while the high pressure side spikes and needs a cushion. Have you ever had a water hammer in your plumbing? (bangs when you shut the water off suddenly) This is exactly the same thing, the water hammer is moving water, mass x velocity = energy. Energy x change = work. So when the column / pipefull of moving water has to stop suddenly the energy has to go somewhere and any sharp bend will concentrate the force. The result is a BANG as the water slams to a halt and transfers the energy to the plumbing. This all happens upstream of the valve or on the high pressure side. The water stream rinsing your toothbrush just stops flowing = pressure drop. However, there is a good reason for there to be an accumulator in the circuit to enhance both the drive and return strokes. It acts like a spring, actually IS a spring using air as the compressive medium. These serve two purposes: First as a safety device preventing the ram piston from ever bottoming out metal to metal. That is a BAD thing. Secondly, it begins to reverse the stroke while the compressor piston is cycling at Top Dead Center (TDC) and Bottom Dead Center (BDC) and not moving oil. This both stops the Tup and gets the Tup moving before the compressor piston starts moving oil to deccelerate and accelerate it and really REALLY improves efficiency. The same springy cushions at the top and bottom that prevent collision stores that energy and reimparts it to the Tup as it changes direction so your compressor piston and motor don't have to. John: Am I reading you correctly the newer valving scheme converts the hammer from a reciprocal master slave system to more resemble a stored air system like a modern utility hammer or steam hammer? Lets see if I can express this. The valving allows the Tup to move either direction or stop regardless of compressor piston position/direction? To do this the air flow would have to be directable (is that a word?) to either the top or bottom of the Tup piston independent of the compressor piston's direction. Hmmmm. That's clear as mud to me and I wrote it. hopefully you can decipher it and maybe explain or correct me more clearly. Frosty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frosty Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 (edited) This is a double post due to some weird glitch. If Glenn or Andrew will delete it for me I'd appreciate it. Frosty Edited February 5, 2009 by Frosty StOOpid thinky machines! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warren Nakkela Posted February 5, 2009 Author Share Posted February 5, 2009 Frosty, I knew that your gears were turning! Now let me see if I can get this straight. The way that the drawing is drawn the hammer is on the upstroke. But when the pressure is reversed the accumulator is in the high pressure (downstroke) circuit. What is wrong with that? Still, perhaps it should be between the pump and the control valve. Maybe a closed center system would be an improvement. Warren Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frosty Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 You need two accumulators one each on the high pressure line to each side of the cylinder. You need to protect the piston, etc. on the retract just as much as on the power stroke. Conserving energy on both strokes is good too though not as important seeing as all that lacking it will do is wear out motors and fatigue things faster and make for weaker blows. Not having a system to keep the piston from bottoming out can result in a catastrophic failure, read flying metal shards. Frosty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warren Nakkela Posted February 6, 2009 Author Share Posted February 6, 2009 You sure do need to protect the piston. Might be better to port the cylinder so that the piston can't bottom out. As long as the valve is open (in either direction) An accumulator upstream from the valve should do the trick. Frosty: I propose a test: Find a Hyd. pumping unit and hook it up to the cylinder that you like. Set the cylinder vertical and devise a plate on the rod end. With a scale set up behind and a video camera on slo-mo place a weight on the plate and retract the piston. The video will show how fast your piston will outrun gravity. Warren Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frosty Posted February 6, 2009 Share Posted February 6, 2009 I'll have to think about where the best place for the accumulators would be. You want them to do double duty, protect the machine and make it more efficient. It really is only a plumbing thing to make it work right. Why do the one and not take advantage of the other? I'm not sure what you're suggesting for the test to show. I spent 20 years as a driller and became intimately familiar with hydraulics though remain "untrained". Ram speed is entirely dependent on two volume numbers: #1 is pump volume and line capacity. #2 is piston diameter x travel. The calculations to determine force multiples vs. travel are exactly the same as for a lever or gear train once you convert from SQ/IN, GPM & PSI to distance from fulcrum or diameter. I guarantee I can make a hydraulic ram move a couple feet, or yards for that matter, with whatever amount of weight you desire faster than you can see. You spec the performance I'll tell you what you need for ram, pump and controls. I just don't want to be standing close by. It's why I never seriously considered building a fully hydraulic power hammer. Frosty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warren Nakkela Posted February 6, 2009 Author Share Posted February 6, 2009 (edited) Frosty: Cool. There is this site where there is this hydraulic speed calculator. It is http://www.baumhydraulics.com/calculators/cyl-speed.htm It would be great to see someone make a successful home built hydraulic forging hammer. I think hydraulics offer advantages over a big noisy compressor. Folks who have experience in hydraulics can be a great resource. I am becoming interested and at some point I may wish to build one myself. Just have to find an anvil. Warren When I clicked on the link I get the not found message. Try typing it in. Edited February 6, 2009 by Warren Nakkela Try typing in link Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frosty Posted February 6, 2009 Share Posted February 6, 2009 (edited) That's a handy site, thanks for the link. Quiet in what way? If you isolate the air compressor, say put it outside then a modern utility hammer is about as quiet as it gets. Till you let it rip of course. What I don't care for in this instance is being quiet a person might not realize the hammer is ready to go if the treadle is moved. Of course there are basic precautions to make this a non-factor. I REALLY like the red light plumbed to a pressure switch in the hammer air feed. If the hammer has air pressure the light is on. Period. This idea could be modified to a strong work light aimed at the anvil. Heck, a clever person could rig it so it went our or even dimmed when the hammer was cycling so it wouldn't interfere with seeing the heat. For a remotely powered hammer hydraulics could work well but I wouldn't use a piston, I'd use a hydraulic motor and crank. Better and safer still build a hydraulic forging press. My interest in building or owning a power hammer is self contained in the 100lb range, though I'll probably end up building a 25-40lb tire hammer as an interim tool. Frosty Edited February 6, 2009 by Frosty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warren Nakkela Posted February 6, 2009 Author Share Posted February 6, 2009 It only makes noise when the switch is on!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warren Nakkela Posted February 6, 2009 Author Share Posted February 6, 2009 More of the same: The original parameters on this thread was Hydraulics. Many a race and many a battle have been lost when victory was just around the corner. This thread should stay on topic unless it is determined that "it can't be done". Although it is a good way to while away the Winter months it is still worthwhile to explore the topic intil we come to a dead end. Brainstorming can lead to solving problems when otherwise no solution seems imminent. Warren Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nonjic Posted February 6, 2009 Share Posted February 6, 2009 On the massey hydraulic hammers the piston rod on the 3 ton hammer (closed die stamping hammer) was only 1.5" dia, and the piston head maybee 3" dia max. The H.T on the piston rods is phenominal (sp) they visibly whip when the hammer strikes. Frosty, on the latest generation of massey pneumatics some of the air from the compressor piston is constantly diverted into a resovoir cast into the cylinder, so in normal operation the hammer runs as you would imagine, but for clamp / high pressure hold up and single blows the hammer is using air that is stored (and constantly topped up) by the compressor piston. Ill dig you out a valve schematic at some point but it will give you a head ache On the hydraulic hammer, its dead easy. Top of ram to bagged accumulator, no return to tank. When the oil is addmitted under the piston it lifts the ram and compresses the gas in the accumulator. You then just need to release the oil as quick (or slow) as you like from under the piston head and it will be forced down by the energy stored above the piston. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warren Nakkela Posted February 7, 2009 Author Share Posted February 7, 2009 John N: That's simple. I like that. There must be some ratio between piston volume and accumulator capacity and also some way of precharging the accumulator and to maintain this charge over time. That is, residual pressure on top of the piston? Does Massey use a spool valve or do they have some other type for a more rapid release of oil? This information helps it all come together. Thank you. Warren Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frosty Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 (edited) You can make a hydraulically driven power hammer alright, I just wouldn't attempt to build one myself. The consequences of screwing up can be really catastrophic. John: I figured there'd have to be a reservoir of some sort to do what you describe seeing as no amount of creative valving could provide air pressure while the compressor piston is at the top or bottom of it's stroke. I've given myself enough headaches looking at valve drawings and schematics thank you very much. I'd like to pass on the newest and most complicated if I may. Now that's a very doable hydraulic hammer design! Dead easy is right. You wouldn't need a compressor piston like a pneumatic either, a constant supply of fluid from a pump would actually be better. It's the same basic idea as pneumatic spring brakes on trucks. Real trucks that is. The only problem I see is this is a striking hammer, one blow per tromp rather than a cycling hammer. Hmmmm. DRATS making the thing cycle brings up the same old hassle as a steam or Kinyon type utility hammer it's just oiler. Still, It'd be a killer for a really HEAVY hammer. Frosty Edited February 7, 2009 by Frosty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.