What's new
What's new

1910 Atlas power hammer

SOHC

Plastic
Joined
Aug 22, 2021
I have this old power hammer I am repairing, everything was going ok until it came time to shim the bearings, it has split type cast iron inserts, it has tight and loose spots, i can have it turning freely but its got about 20 thou play, I wanted around 6 though.

Also on both bearing caps the front right nut has a huge effect on the thing nipping up, if i don't fully tighten that nut it seems to turn, shaft is probably out of round, should i get a new shaft made and the bearing honed? 20220128_115334.jpg20210718_161930_IMG_4361.jpg
 
As is obvious, things are worn out-of-round with your power hammer's shaft & bearings. Before you make any decisions, take the shaft assembly out of the bearings. Assemble the bearings without the shaft in place and take micrometer readings in the vertical and horizontal directions, at each end and midpoint of each bearing.
I use what is known as a 'telescoping gauge' (some people call it a 'snap gauge') for this with an outside micrometer. Vernier calipers or digital slide calipers are not up to the job for this measurement.

Take the readings with the caps in place on the bearings, no shims, and cap bolts pulled up tight. Since there is a split joint in the bearings, you will likely need to take the 'horizontal' measurement with the telescoping gauge tilted from about 2:00 to 8:00 & from 4:00 to 10:00. A set of readings with the telescoping gauge extended from 12:00 to 6:00 should also be taken. What these readings will tell you is whether the bearings are worn badly out of round.

Using an outside micrometer, measure the shaft journals in the same manner. If you use the same micrometer with the telescoping gauge for the outside diameter readings on the shaft journal, you have consistency, even if the mike is out of calibration.

I would not hone the bearings until you determine what is going on with the shaft journals. Aside from that, the two bearings have to be in alignment, on a common centerline. If things are as bad as you describe, if the problem is out-of-round bearings, the amount of metal to be removed to get the bearings round again may be more than honing can handle. It takes a 'box' type hone and someone who knows how to use it to correct an out-of-round bore. A simple spring loaded hone will follow the bore as it finds it. f you need to take more than a few thousandths of an inch of metal out of the bearings to bring things into round again, you are likely looking at having the bearings re-bored. Ideally, this is a 'line boring' job, which insures both bearings are in line with each other. There are mechanics who have portable line boring bars for repair of heavy equipment on the jobsites or wherever the equipment is being used. A mechanic with a portable line boring bar should be able to line bore both bearings into true and round.

If you do have the bearings line bored, assemble the caps on the bearings with plenty of shims. This gives you the means to takeup for wear, or simply to adjust the bearing clearances once the shaft journals 'bed into' the bearings.

Making a new shaft, unless there is some really special features to it (such as a locking taper where the clutch/flywheel mounts), should be the lesser of the jobs.
 
If the shaft is not out of round maybe it's time to think about rebabbiting the bearings? Keith Rucker has a great how to video on YouTube:
Pouring Babbitt Bearings on the J. A. Vance Planer/Matcher - YouTube

I would think that's probably better than line boring as as least the bearings you wind up with would be appropriately sized to your shaft.

If the shaft is out of round maybe clean it up on a lathe and then rebabbit.

Joe what do you think? I am surprised you didn't mention redoing the babbit bearings. If he has to clean up the shaft and rebore the bearings that's going to be a lot more play unless he sleeves the shaft. Keith makes babbiting look rather easy in comparison.

Sent from my SM-J737V using Tapatalk
 
I think you are overthinking the situation. Its a power hammer, not a lathe spindle. Snug it up so it still spins, oil it well, (if it doesn't sling oil, you aren't using enough), and hammer some steel. Whats the worst that can happen?

It looks robust, any idea of the tup weight?
 
Adam:

I've poured quite a few babbitt bearings and am well familiar with it. The OP wrote that his hammer has 'cast iron bearing inserts'. He did not mention babbitted bearings, or I'd have suggested rebabbitting. Rebabbitting a shaft on a slow-speed machine like the OP's hammer is easily done, using the shaft itself as the 'mandrel' to form the babbitt. Done it that way a number of times.

Cleaning up the shaft may not be the ideal thing. If the shaft is badly worn and out of round at the journals, cleaning it up may wind up with a shaft with two journals smaller than the actual shaft diameter. Bad news in terms of stress distribution and how that shaft will behave in service on a power hammer. I do not know the design of the OP's hammer, but I'd imagine the manufacturer used a piece of straight shaft rather than shafting with journals a bit larger than the shaft diameter.
If the journal areas on a shaft of constant diameter are worn, the best approach is make another shaft. Running a shaft with 'necked down' journals (assuming the bearings could be rebabbitted) is not something I'd recommend in this application.

As noted, the OP speaks of 'split type cast iron inserts' in the bearings. Whether he is referring to the overall construction of the bearings and not mentioning babbitting, or whether the manufacturer used removable cast iron inserts is not explained by the OP. Consider the service a power hammer sees. Lots of stops and starts, and heavy impacts both torsionally as well as radially. The manufacturer may have taken this into account and figured these conditions would quickly pound a babbitted bearing into a failure. Cast iron makes a good plain bearing material, and has been used for machine tool spindle bearings (South Bend must have built thousands of lathes using cast iron spindle bearings).

Speaking from experience with large babbitted bearings in hydro turbines, as well as some stationary steam engine main bearings, I've seen babbitt that was literally pounded to the point of failure. The babbitt had been pounded to the point that the surface of the bearing showed the outlines of the 'keyways' in the bearing shell (keyways to mechanically lock in the babbitt). There were fatigue cracks in the babbitt. On the hydro turbines, we worked with Kingsbury (the original patentees of the tilting pad thrust bearing in the USA) in their repair division to address some of this in the big hydro turbine bearings. The pounding and fatigue cracking of the babbitt occurred with a high-tin babbitt containing a good percentage of copper and some antimony. No lead. Babbitt metal formulated for use in line shafting and 'general' mill bearings such as might be found on older woodworking machinery would be a 'leaded babbitt', quite a soft babbitt. It held up quite well in service if kept lubricated and shafting was in good alignment. The high tin babbitts are a lot harder and are generally used for high speed and more precision bearings, or for heavy load bearings such as medium or low speed diesel engine bearings, or for centrifugally cast bearings as used on high speed applications such as smaller steam turbines or centrifugal pumps. High tin babbitts usually are run with closer clearances. While a high tin babbitt might stand up to the impact loads a power hammer bearings would see, it is unlikely to have been used in that application. A power hammer for a blacksmith shop was set up with loose clearances in its bearings. A leaded babbitt could have been used, if the bearings were large enough to handle the shock loads.

easiest course of action if the shaft is OK and not needing to be turned down at the journals, and if the original bearings are babbitted would be to rebabbitt. The tried and true method is easy enough to do. The trick is finding the right grade of babbitt and making sure to get a good bond between the babbitt and the bearing shell. Older machinery and large turbine and steam engine bearings often have keyways to mechanically connect the babbitt to the bearing shell. Some of these keyways are dovetails, most are plain keyways. I've babbitted bearings where I've tinned the bearing shell first. I've babbitted plenty more where I just cleaned the bearing shell thoroughly (power wire brush, air needle scaler, or abrasive blasting) and with plenty of preheat poured in the babbitt and gotten good bearings. Plenty of rebabbitting was done using the shaft journals as the mandrel and a little light scraping to chamfer the edges and 'break the glaze' with a light crosshatch pattern scraped on the new babbitt.

I suspect the OP is into a bit more than a simple rebabbitting. That would have been too simple and too obvious.
 
Thanks for the replys it dose not have babbit but plane cast iron bearings, i am getting about 0.5mm play if i shim it till it turns nicely. I am trying to get a rool maker to take a look at it, I am worried it will get damaged flapping around
 
SOHC

Thanks for clearing up the matter of what type bearings your power hammer has. In light of it having cast iron bearings, I'd suggest the following:

1. measure the shaft journals with a micrometer, taking two readings at 90 degrees to each other, and several sets of those readings along the length of the journals.
From those readings, you can then make a kind of 'map' of the shape of the journals.

2. Using a telescoping gauge & the same outside mike, take a similar set of readings with the bearing caps in place, bolts snugged down. Again, you can then make
a 'map' of the bearing bores.

What these two sets of mike readings will tell you is:
-are the shaft journals still round
-are the shaft journals worn to a taper
-what the largest and smallest diameters of the shaft journals are

you will get the same information about the bearings.

The other item to check is the condition of the surfaces of the bearings and the shaft journals. If the shaft journals are worn to the point that they are deeply scored (grooved) or visible 'necked down', then the repair must address the shaft. Before the repair to the shaft is done, the same check of surface condition in the bearing bores has also to be checked.

Since the power hammer operates at relatively low speed and is not a precise machine tool, I'd say a running clearance of about 0.0015-0.002" per inch of shaft diameter would be about right. Thus: if the shaft journals were 1.5" nominal diameter, about 0.003-0.004" of clearance would be what I'd shoot for. There is a fine balance here between having too tight a bearing clearance for the application vs too loose a clearance. As you correctly state, you do not want the shaft flopping around in the bearings. With the application being a power hammer, you have some 'unbalanced reciprocating mass' (to wit: connecting rod, hammer block, springs, etc) aside from the impacts of the hammer hitting home on the work or tooling. Too much clearance and the shaft journals will slam up and around in the bearings. Too little clearance and the bearings will run hot, particularly when the impacts of the hammer squeeze out any oil film from them. I am giving you what, in engineering, is known as a "WAG" (wild ass guess) as to where I'd set the bearing clearances.

Getting back to the condition of the shaft and bearings: if the shaft is worn to the point that the scoring looks like a coarse thread and/or is necked down visibly at the journals, the shaft should not be run in the hammer. I am guessing the crank disc is solidly on that shaft, not about to come off easily. A repair that would likely work is to build up the worn journals using TIG welding (I would avoid flame spraying due to the impact loading the shaft journals see). A careful TIG weld buildup of the worn areas done a little at a time, and possibly peened with air needle gun will minimize distortion from weld stress. After that, the journals can be turned to correct diameter in a lathe.

As for the bearings, I'd look inside them. If you see plenty of undamaged smooth bearing surface, say about 80%, even with some scoring, the bearing should be OK. I'd run a heavier bodies oil, such as an ISO 68 or thereabouts, and possibly add a 'tackifier' to it like "Lucas Oil Extender" or "STP" (both of these are sold in US auto supply stores). If there is a lot of scoring such that there is not a continuous smooth and round bearing, and if they scored more than a maybe 0.010" deep, I'd look to line boring as I noted in my previous post. If you go with line boring, you will need to build up the shaft journals and turn them to match the new bearing inner diameters. Let's say, for example, that the bearings were originally 2.000 inch nominal bore. With some wear and scoring, you determine that 1/16" of metal has to come out of the bearings to restore a continuous smooth, cylindrical running surface. This opens the bearings to 2.0625" nominal ID. You then turn the shaft to get rid of the scored areas and do a weld buildup, adding maybe 1/8" of metal on each side of each journal. So, a shaft worn to maybe 1 31/32" (1 /32" approximate wear off a 2" nominal journal) winds up with a skim cut to get rid of the scored areas. This brings the shaft down to maybe 1 15/16" diameter. The ends of the turned-down areas have to be cut with a radius'd tool and no sharp corners. The welding is done using either TIG or MIG, and the as-welded diameter is 2 1/8". This gives enough meat to turn new journals at 2.0625" nominal, maybe a couple of thousandths under that. Shimming the bearing caps does the rest as far as setting the bearing clearance.

Before line boring the bearings, make sure to have plenty of shims under the bearing caps. This gives you adjustment to take up wear in the future.

If the bearings are only lightly scored, scoring you can barely catch a lightly-dragged fingernail in, I'd forego the line boring. Instead, I'd opt to do a light scraping on the bearings. All you are looking to accomplish is to break any sharp ridging on the scoring and take off minimal metal. I'd take something like a lathe parting (cutoff) tool blank with a nice sharp squared edge and use it as a hand scraper, holding it with both hands between thumb and index fingers and drawing it towards yourself on a kind of diagonal motion within the bearing as you work it around the inner circumference. You hold the bearing caps in a vise. Make sure to match-mark the caps as to which bearing they came off, and which way they face when mounted on the hammer. Use a prick punch or letter/number punches for this. Paint or marking pen marks tend to get obliterated during working on machinery.

When you get done giving the bearings their light scraping, polish them with something like a 'Scotchbrite' pad, then wipe with clean paper towels and solvent such as mineral spirits or automotive brake cleaner. Cast iron gives up 'free graphite', which is one of the beauties of it as a material. As such, it has some tendency to 'self lubrication' when used for bearings. As such, also, it tends to blacken your hands and wiping cloths if you are cleaning the bearing after scraping or polishing with an abrasive pad. I'd avoid using abrasive cloth or sandpaper.
 
I think you are overthinking the situation. Its a power hammer, not a lathe spindle. Snug it up so it still spins, oil it well, (if it doesn't sling oil, you aren't using enough), and hammer some steel. Whats the worst that can happen?

It looks robust, any idea of the tup weight?

I agree, its not a precision spindle. I would use timesaver lapping compound to remove the tight spots and then you can remove bearing shims until the clearance is mostly gone and be done with it. I doubt the shaft is out of round. You are definitely over thinking this.
 
Thank you all for the advice, I managed to get a tool maker to look at it and he sed just run it how it is its fine and will probably last another 120 odd years, i put it all together and just set it till it turned nicely and i could see slight movement if i put a crowbar under each end,

Problem I am faced with now is finding electricity to make it go, no 3 phase, my home made rotory phase converter won't get it spinning even just the crNk
 
In parts where there is no elektikery ,nor even shoes to wear,forging hammers are commonly run with single cylinder diesel engines.....seriously ,youll find any single phase motor will overload and blow fuses before the big flywheels get to half way speed.
 
In parts where there is no elektikery ,nor even shoes to wear,forging hammers are commonly run with single cylinder diesel engines.....seriously ,youll find any single phase motor will overload and blow fuses before the big flywheels get to half way speed.
I its running a 3 phase motor on 400v from a vfd
 








 
Back
Top