What does it take?

[GlennW]

Glenn, you are reading too much into my post.

Ah....but I new exactly where you were headed

A good example:

1) Machinists in production environment with decades of experience tells me to hammer on a part in a four jaw to align it.
2) Instructor says, you touch my lathe with a hammer and I cut your arm off.
Who's right??

I'm not a golfer, but...

If you had a question about your game, would you prefer to discuss it with Tiger Woods, or the editor of Golf magazine?

[BryceGTX]

Glenn, you are reading too much into my post.

Ah....but I new exactly where you were headed

A good example:

1) Machinists in production environment with decades of experience tells me to hammer on a part in a four jaw to align it.
2) Instructor says, you touch my lathe with a hammer and I cut your arm off.
Who's right??

I'm not a golfer, but...

If you had a question about your game, would you prefer to discuss it with Tiger Woods, or the editor of Golf magazine?

I think the more correct question is: Would you talk to Tiger woods or the guy that taught Tiger woods.

Tiger woods may not understand what you are doing wrong. However, his instructor has seen everything that anyone can do wrong.

No brainer.. talk to his instructor.

Next question relevant to this discussion, if Tiger woods says one thing and his instructor says the opposite.. Who is right?

Bryce

[mechanicalmagic]

As in cut, not ground. Turned on a lathe.

Cutting, on a lathe requires a (relatively) sharp edge to remove a chip.
Grinding, on a lathe requires a (relatively) sharp edge to remove a chip.

In both cases a sharp edge removes material. One case it is the edge of a tool, the other the sharp edge of a stone. Yes they are different in terms of the scale of the chip.

Dave J.

[Harold_V]

1) Machinists in production environment with decades of experience tells me to hammer on a part in a four jaw to align it.
2) Instructor says, you touch my lathe with a hammer and I cut your arm off.

It would seem that you should ask your instructor (who appears to be better qualified in dispensing fairy tales than teaching setup procedures) how one is to move a part without applying a force in keeping with that which is necessary to re-orient the part. Maybe now you understand why this person is teaching a class instead of plying his trade.

This is much like the often quoted concept of never placing anything on the mill table but the work involved.

Well, I have owned my current Bridgeport since 1977. It has had hammers, files, stock, you name it, placed on the right hand side of the table since the day it was purchased. The surface there is no different from the surface elsewhere on the machine, which still bears the original flaking. One need not slam down items, they can be placed carefully, which is, and always has been, my habit. I also use a hammer when orienting an object in a four jaw. How else would you move the part?

Some of the finest machinists I have had the pleasure to know, and with which I have shared time in a shop, seem to be able to use a hammer on a lathe without damaging the machine or the part. But then, most of us understand the difference between an eight ounce ball peen, or a soft hammer, and a 12 pound sledge.

Harold

[toastydeath]

I am a production machinist who has also been to school for machining. I think you guys are starting to mistake the analogies you're using for the situation itself.

I think Kant would say we're arguing about a pure representation here, in the absence of an intuition of the possible object represented in our understanding.

There are going to be some great instructors in machining out there, but they're not the rule. The guy teaching Tiger Woods is not the same as the average golf instructor - I guarantee you Woods knows more about golf than 99.5% (probably conservative) of instructors. The guy coaching Woods NOW, however, is being paid to be the best at what he does, and is being paid appropriate to his skill level. He is not being paid by John Average at the local course to learn the subject in the first place. He's being paid by one of the best in the world to push the limit of what "the best in the world" means.

As for "Who is right," when Tiger Woods and his coach say different things - who cares? You are not good enough to even begin to consider the subtleties of the points. Chances are, no matter which one you decided was right, your game would improve because they're so much better than you are, the both of them, that the point actually under discussion is made moot - they'd show you how their system works, and make you proficient in it.

And so it is in machining, and engineering, and any other subject. My instructors at college (two colleges, actually), for the most part, have known virtually nothing about the practice of machining and actually getting parts made. They know about the bookwork and a little of the theory. And my co-workers, for all their skill, know almost nothing about the theory of machining and why the things they do work.

How many professors teaching in colleges have never worked in engineering? Many, and while they're going to teach you the equations, they could never design a car like some of the students they produce.

And yet, there will be some instructors who have designed cars, and understand why they did what they did. And the students they produce will never be able to do that.

So really, limit the argument from authority and start evaluating the actual arguments being proposed. If you do not have the background to evaluate the argument, perhaps it is best to leave the item undecided in your mind until such a time that you can make a call on it.

[gmann109]

I've never worked as a professional machinist but I've been around manufacturing to a great extent and for a long time. In that capacity, I've seen lots of scrap made from good blueprints and, conversly, I've also seen perfectly good items made from poor blueprints.

So we are looking for only true machinists, eh? It sounds like, according to some anyway, a home shop machinist who is more or less self-taught will never be able to make the grade. I thought that was the point of this website.

Well, since I work alone, I'm not in need of any titles and I wil continue to do as I've done in the past. I shall keep learning and improving my skills sans titles.

I'm sure glad this is only the internet and not reality. LOL.

[toastydeath]

So we are looking for only true machinists, eh? It sounds like, according to some anyway, a home shop machinist who is more or less self-taught will never be able to make the grade. I thought that was the point of this website.

I think the lesson here is that you will never, ever learn certain things if you don't work in a machine shop for at least some amount of time. But in the same vein, you'll never learn OTHER things if you never do machining for the sheer joy of it, in a home shop or in a class, etc.

So a production machinist will never learn some of the things the HSM knows, and vise versa.

Evey decision a person makes to do or not to do something has information inherent to it that is available no other way.

[gmann109]

So we are looking for only true machinists, eh? It sounds like, according to some anyway, a home shop machinist who is more or less self-taught will never be able to make the grade. I thought that was the point of this website.

I think the lesson here is that you will never, ever learn certain things if you don't work in a machine shop for at least some amount of time. But in the same vein, you'll never learn OTHER things if you never do machining for the sheer joy of it, in a home shop or in a class, etc.

So a production machinist will never learn some of the things the HSM knows, and vise versa.

Evey decision a person makes to do or not to do something has information inherent to it that is available no other way.

It seems then that ah HSM person will be at an extreme disadvantage trying to get better at machine work since they may never be able to experience working in a machine shop. It sounds hopeless. I'm sure glad I don't believe that.
By the way, are those professional machinists to whom you refer the ones who driilled all those holes in the tables of the used Bridgeports I looked at in the past ten years?

[toastydeath]

So we are looking for only true machinists, eh? It sounds like, according to some anyway, a home shop machinist who is more or less self-taught will never be able to make the grade. I thought that was the point of this website.

I think the lesson here is that you will never, ever learn certain things if you don't work in a machine shop for at least some amount of time. But in the same vein, you'll never learn OTHER things if you never do machining for the sheer joy of it, in a home shop or in a class, etc.

So a production machinist will never learn some of the things the HSM knows, and vise versa.

Evey decision a person makes to do or not to do something has information inherent to it that is available no other way.

It seems then that ah HSM person will be at an extreme disadvantage trying to get better at machine work since they may never be able to experience working in a machine shop. It sounds hopeless. I'm sure glad I don't believe that.
By the way, are those professional machinists to whom you refer the ones who driilled all those holes in the tables of the used Bridgeports I looked at in the past ten years?

Not to be rude, but I don't think you understand what I wrote.

All I was saying was that there's an aspect to the activity that is only possible through that particular experience, not that it would be preternaturally difficult to learn machining outside a production environment. I didn't even say it was critical or necessary; just that it exists.

And to be fair, I flipped it around and accused the production machinist of not knowing things about machining that the HSM does.

[gmann109]

So, T.D., you apparently believe that machine work cannot be learned by study. According to you, one must have worked as a machinist to have any understanding of the trade.

If that were true, There would be no medical schools, no law shools, no technical schools. Only the reality of the trade would be sufficient to prepare one for the process. Your attempt to mollify that by balancing it with the other side is somewhat transparent.

And, of course, I presume from what you say (here and on PM) that you have been a proffesional machinist and, being rather proud of that fact, you're telling rest of us that we'll never get it, since we won't be having that experience. That's what I'm getting from your statements anyway.

Well, some of us have been peripherally involved in working near and around the machining trades. Perhaps watching and being involved in the manufacturing of aircraft and rocket engines for many years might get us some credit.

It's a bit of a generalizatoin and honestly, it sounds like you're trying to teach granny how to suck eggs. LOL.

Regards.

[SteveHGraham]

When I studied physics, I studied under people who were excellent physicists. A grad student is not unlikely to find himself studying under a Nobelist. And in physics, a Nobel actually means something. It's not like the political Nobels certain hacks have received.

When I studied law, nearly all of my professors were people who had done little or no legal work, and who could not find their way to the courthouse. If you hired them to defend you on a parking violation, you might get the death penalty. Hopeless incompetents. One purpose the law school served was to provide an asylum where these ineffective people could earn a living and avoid taking charity. Although considering their high salaries and nanny benefits, I guess "charity" is a fitting term for their situations.

By and large, the law professors were much more arrogant.

Funny how that works.

[gmann109]

When I studied physics, I studied under people who were excellent physicists. A grad student is not unlikely to find himself studying under a Nobelist. And in physics, a Nobel actually means something. It's not like the political Nobels certain hacks have received.

When I studied law, nearly all of my professors were people who had done little or no legal work, and who could not find their way to the courthouse. If you hired them to defend you on a parking violation, you might get the death penalty. Hopeless incompetents. One purpose the law school served was to provide an asylum where these ineffective people could earn a living and avoid taking charity. Although considering their high salaries and nanny benefits, I guess "charity" is a fitting term for their situations.

By and large, the law professors were much more arrogant.

Funny how that works.

I agree in re the issue of arrogance in law school professors. In my case, attending the night section of a law school, most of my professors were actually working lawyers - DDA's, Partners, Family Law solos, etc. so they had sort of a ground level approach which was helpful, albeit served with an occasional dose of arrogance. LOL.

I think that if a person has great interest and applies himself, good machining practices can be learned and carried out successfully. It helps to have a mentor, which thankfully, I've had. It can be done otherwise, however, if a person has the will.

So much for generalizations. LOL.

By the way, to get back on the topic of your thread. I got the Kurt vise yesterday and I can't say enough about the quality and precision of the unit. To my great pleasure, my friend brought over a spare Kurt swivel for it that needed only a good bead blasting and some paint. You can't make up a friend like that.

For my part in repayment, he knows that he's free to come over whenever he wants and use my bead blaster, the metric side of my Enco lathe. He has, inter alia, two Monarchs, one big and one small that only do U.S. threads. (He usually does his metric on his two CNC centers but occasionally he has a special need), my TIG welder (He has one but mine is larger), my bead blaster (he seldom works on anything dirty since he's doing new metal but occasionally he does repairs for clients on older equipment) and anything else I have. He also gets good conversation and coffee and an occasional free legal tip.

That's how knowledge is transferred.

Regards.