Re-inventing the wheel

[robinson46176]

OK, maybe not the wheel. Just the SS SPT power coupler. I intend to design a new coupler for my own use that will easily and instantly connect and disconnect without moving either the attachment or the headstock. It occurs to me that it may have already been done and someone may be using such a thing right now. I'm always happy to steal a good idea rather than designing something from scratch.
I have several possibilities in mind.
-
Those who know me well know that I modify a lot of stuff (or build from scratch) to suit "me"... always have.

[charlese]

OK, maybe not the wheel. Just the SS SPT power coupler. I intend to design a new coupler for my own use that will easily and instantly connect and disconnect without moving either the attachment or the headstock. It occurs to me that it may have already been done and someone may be using such a thing right now. I'm always happy to steal a good idea rather than designing something from scratch.
I have several possibilities in mind.
-
Those who know me well know that I modify a lot of stuff (or build from scratch) to suit "me"... always have.

Lots of luck with your invention. So far my solution is three couplers, kept (usually) in a drawer right next to the Mark V. Sometimes there is only one left in their drawer, but then I can find my other two.

[foxtrapper]

T'would be easy enough to make a coupling tube with deeper ends and a coil spring in the center. Just push it to one side far enough to escape the connector, and then slip it out.

You could even make a prototype in the lathe.

[robinson46176]

T'would be easy enough to make a coupling tube with deeper ends and a coil spring in the center. Just push it to one side far enough to escape the connector, and then slip it out.

You could even make a prototype in the lathe.

That was one of my possibilities except that I was thinking of just a deeper end on just the machine end. That is probably the easiest and most in compliance with the "KISS" principle.
-
Another thought involved a small over-center clutch system with ball bearings for the disengaged mode. Much more complicated and heavier but would be capable of shifting in and out on the fly with a small lever.
There are also small electric clutches like a smaller version of your riding tractor mower deck clutch.
-
Yet a 3rd would involve an engagement by a sliding collar, which at the most basic level has commonly been used on farm equipment for many years including manual shifting PTO drives. Sort of a third cousin to one of the synchronizers in a manual shift transmission. Of course it also would need ball bearings to handle the disengaged mode of a high speed machine.
-
One reason I was thinking about clutches is that I grew up around and used for 20 years shoe manufacturing and repair machinery that drove from line shafts and different sections were kicked in and out of engagement as needed with smoothly operating clutches.
In case anyone is curious I'll attach some pictures of shoe finishers so you will have an idea what I'm talking about. These are pretty much the same as what I used for 20 years and the machines were about 10' to 11' long.
The Sutton 2000 is like what I have now. It has no clutches since it has about 6 motors and you just flip a switch to start a section. I bought it used, a new one is just a little more money than a brand new large size Hummer. My finisher sits in the corner of the woodshop and will be used there from time to time for wood sculpting and forming operations on the sanding sections. A 7'x24' back room holds all of the rest of the shoe equipment for my western boot rebuilding shop. I now have twice the equipment I had back when I worked at it daily. So far into my retirement it is just sitting there looking pretty.
I think that by looking at the finisher pics you can see why I made adapters so I could use many of those wheels/brushes on a Shopsmith.

[mbcabinetmaker]

I would definatly be interested in a couple of those couplers!

Mark

[cityslicker2]

Interesting topic. Couple of observations: in order to remove the coupler w/o moving either the headstock or the SPT it seems to me that the tolerances of the fit at each end would have to be compromised to allow the sideways movement. Second, wouldn't you think SS has given a lot of thought to this if there were a simpler method? I just dont have the creative juices I guess.

[mbcabinetmaker]

Francis

Have you made any headway with this project. I am very interested.

Thanks
Mark

[robinson46176]

Francis

Have you made any headway with this project. I am very interested.

Thanks
Mark

Hi Mark:
I made some good progress today... I have been tossing ideas in the trash left and right.
Making one is simple. Making it strong and safe and inexpensive can be another matter. I am also trying to keep it as absolutely simple as possible. The easiest way would be to make it telescope and lock it with a pin of some sorts but that would make a serious hazard in that area where something like a sleeve could catch. I'm making the prototype out of an original coupler but a finished one would be made from scratch. I'm considering machining one out of aluminum.
I did wince a little when I cut the sacrificed coupler in two pieces but I still have 8 of them.
I need to pick up a couple of hardware items tomorrow but I am hopping for a test run yet this week. I'm also building horse fence and working on one of my trucks this week. I also have to empty a building I am renting to a son-in-law. Not so awful much stuff to move but hard to find places to put it.
I'm still looking at some other ideas for the same function. I try to not allow tunnel vision to take over.
-
I do have a group question... Is there any case that anyone can think of where the coupler being an inch or even two longer would interfere? The one I'm working with will be the original length but a couple of other possibilities "might" need a bit more length.

[dusty]

Hi Mark:
I made some good progress today... I have been tossing ideas in the trash left and right.
Making one is simple. Making it strong and safe and inexpensive can be another matter. I am also trying to keep it as absolutely simple as possible. The easiest way would be to make it telescope and lock it with a pin of some sorts but that would make a serious hazard in that area where something like a sleeve could catch. I'm making the prototype out of an original coupler but a finished one would be made from scratch. I'm considering machining one out of aluminum.
I did wince a little when I cut the sacrificed coupler in two pieces but I still have 8 of them.
I need to pick up a couple of hardware items tomorrow but I am hopping for a test run yet this week. I'm also building horse fence and working on one of my trucks this week. I also have to empty a building I am renting to a son-in-law. Not so awful much stuff to move but hard to find places to put it.
I'm still looking at some other ideas for the same function. I try to not allow tunnel vision to take over.
-
I do have a group question... Is there any case that anyone can think of where the coupler being an inch or even two longer would interfere? The one I'm working with will be the original length but a couple of other possibilities "might" need a bit more length.

I can't see where a longer coupler would become a problem.

I also can not imagine why you think the coupler needs to be redesigned unless you have ideas for using it in a manner other than what we normally do.

Remember, it is designed to break apart as a safety measure.

[mbcabinetmaker]

Thanks for the up date Francis. Dusty Francis is working on a coupler that could be put on or taken off of the accessory without moving the head stock, to me that would be a great invention as I usually keep my 520 set up for some type of sawing.

Mark