Tool My most hated tool

[Susquatch]

Unless the perpetrators didn't realize what they were doing, I doubt the magazine can accomplish anything. It simply costs too much to hire the requisite lawyers to force a change. Sad really.

The top roll acts kind of like a rotating tangential tool. The bottom roller is less clear, I think its action is a little different with the cutting face not the flat surface but the V's which notch a triangle out of the helical grooves created by the upper wheel.

Believe it or not, I am so curious about this that I watched a dozen YouTube videos. I learned nothing. All it accomplished was to further entrench my dislike of YouTube.

There were quite a few examples of single cutter horizontal cut knurling as well.

One of them showed a single light pass is the middle of some stock as well as a shot of the horizontal alignment of the grooves in the cutting wheel to achieve that result.



All this watching and studying only accomplished one thing - a massive headache.

They show swarf chips, and you talk about chips, but all I see is a varient of pressure knurling. I simply cannot see any cutting action there at all.

One video even portended to describe the theory. That particular author has no clue what the word theory means. His only accomplishment was to bore me to death. If I never ever watch another of his videos it will be way too soon.

I still have that suspicious feeling that I am missing something simple but critical. Perhaps the teeth on the wheel are not the same as they are on a pressure wheel. Maybe they are like tiny little scoops that start to scoop out a cut above the centerline and then pull the swarf out below the centerline? Are these wheels different in some important way? If so, where do you get them?

If what I am asking has any relevance, could you post a close-up photo of a cutting wheel for me?

Last, but not least, how does such a cutter establish its timing? Are they somehow matched to the diameter in a way that establishes equally sized contiguous nubs? Or do they somehow space out their cuts to establish integer intervals?

 

[DPittman]

One video even portended to describe the theory. That particular author has no clue what the word theory means. His only accomplishment was to bore me to death. If I never ever watch another of his videos it will be way too soon.

Ya I watched that one too

 

[Dabbler]

@Susquatch I spent a bit of time researching cut knurling - most guys take the approach "I don't know how or why it works, but here's my expertise" All it is, is experience. sigh. I went through almost all of the YouTube vids on cut knurling, and then I had to work out how it works for myself..

Here goes - and I'd be happy to have someone in the know correct me here -

You know rotary broaching, where the cutter is offset at a 3 degree angle and the workpiece gets progressively swaged, less than a thou per cutting point? Topologically cut knurling has to be the inside out version of this process: as the piece turns, it drags the knurling wheel across it, while turning the cutter swaging, not cutting the knurl into it. What sets it apart, is that at each contact, the pressure is oblique and wipes a tenth or 2 per contact,

I hope to your Engineer's mind that i made some sense.

I wondered why cut knurling wheels don't resemble saw teeth on each tip, and then it dawned on me, that it would actually increase the cutting pressure to do so....

 

[Susquatch]

@Susquatch I spent a bit of time researching cut knurling - most guys take the approach "I don't know how or why it works, but here's my expertise" All it is, is experience. sigh. I went through almost all of the YouTube vids on cut knurling, and then I had to work out how it works for myself..

Here goes - and I'd be happy to have someone in the know correct me here -

You know rotary broaching, where the cutter is offset at a 3 degree angle and the workpiece gets progressively swaged, less than a thou per cutting point? Topologically cut knurling has to be the inside out version of this process: as the piece turns, it drags the knurling wheel across it, while turning the cutter swaging, not cutting the knurl into it. What sets it apart, is that at each contact, the pressure is oblique and wipes a tenth or 2 per contact,

If I understand you correctly, it really makes no sense to call it "cut knurling". Instead, it might be better to call it low pressure knurling.

The important difference being that it takes MUCH LESS pressure to swage or deform a part if the contact or swaging area is tiny. PSI is a function of both force and area. One can have both low force and low area to achieve the same metal deforming psi. Or said differently, the strength of the material to resist permanent deformation is easily overcome by very low forces if the contact area is reduced proportionately.

I have to go look at this in the shop to fully appreciate it, but you have opened the door wide open to understanding it and I am VERY grateful for that.

Just imagine, a few insightful words from a fellow named Dabbler is worth more than 30 youtube videos. No wonder I like this forum!

Thank you!

 

[gerritv]

Peter, thanks for passing that along. I've sent it to the editor, not sure if they can do anything. Disappointing. Seems like a lack of morals, and no shame about it.

Susquatch, The top roll acts kind of like a rotating tangential tool. The bottom roller is less clear, I think its action is a little different with the cutting face not the flat surface but the V's which notch a triangle out of the helical grooves created by the upper wheel. I use lots of coolant from a spray bottle to clear the chips (so the bearings don't last forever, but they are cheapo router bearings)

USA has a fairly simple tool, DMCA takedowns, no discussion involved. He could see his whole site taken down. Although he didn't copy the drawings directly so might get away with it. Still, it sucks to see this.

 

[gerritv]

The wheels for cut knurling have a sharp edge, unlike pressure knurls where this edge doesn't matter.The various angles involved result in the edge cutting, the angles providing relief to the cutting edge. The fact that cut knurling doesn't really increase the diamenter of the object provides a hint that it is cutting, not deforming or swaging.
And yes, there are some totally clueless twits on YT who describe this, incorrectly. Dave M is the expert in doing a truly pathetic job on this (and most other topics). I had interaction with him on some d-bit grinder stuff, I gave up.
I found the best, reliable info on manufacturers sites, e.g. https://accu-trak.com/knurl-holders/cut-type-knurling.html/

The 'We Can Do That Better' video(that was linked to earlier in this thread ) at the end shows the cutting action, with chips streaming off the leading edge of the wheel.

 

[VicHobbyGuy]

Although he didn't copy the drawings directly so might get away with it. Still, it sucks to see this.

I don't understand the fuss..it looks like an ordinary build log to me, and there are hundreds of those online. And the credit is given to the magazine and author right at the start.

Better that than the scam sites like homemadetools and affiliates which promise 'free' plans and give only ads for plans for sale. Just IMHO, of course.

 

[VicHobbyGuy]

The fact that cut knurling doesn't really increase the diamenter of the object provides a hint that it is cutting, not deforming or swaging.

I get the knurler out pretty often to hide mistakes where I've made a part too small, so I am forewarned about cut knurlers!

 

[Mcgyver]

I don't understand the fuss..it looks like an ordinary build log to me,

No issue with the build log. Its the redrawing of my drawings and giving them away that is wrong. That removes a big reason to buy the magazine which cheats the whole process, and those who legitimately designed and published the content. He has a pattern of doing this.

What would you think of someone buying a set of knurling tool drawings from Doug Gray, copying them, then posting them for free? If that went on, why would the Doug Gray's of the world continue to offer anything? It doesn't go on because its unethical.

I understand you correctly, it really makes no sense to call it "cut knurling". Instead, it might be better to call it low pressure knurling.

No, its definitely cutting, extensive amounts of tiny chips flowing off in a stream of squirt bottle applied coolant. There is negligible force involved, its not deforming the material. The head is rather light and wouldn't stand up to making a knurl by plastic deformation.

 

[VicHobbyGuy]

, and those who legitimately designed and published the content.

It's complicated.
Perhaps a lot of people would order $50USD sets of 2010 magazine back issues if that build log didn't exist.
OTOH, perhaps the free advertising the magazine gets will encourage people to subscribe to that expensive publication.

 

[VicHobbyGuy]

What would you think of someone buying a set of knurling tool drawings from Doug Gray, copying them, then posting them for free? If that went on, why would the Doug Gray's of the world continue to offer anything? It doesn't go on because its unethical.

What about people drawing up plans from an existing commercial product, or by copying (with slight variations) free plans from the internet and then offering them for sale?
I don't see a lot of moral high ground on either side of the issue.
I know it is 'a larger issue' but in the case of knurlers...really..how many people in the entire world are likely to make these - free plans or not?

 

[gerritv]

It's neither complicated nor is USD33 for HSM/year expensive.
That build log would have done what you suggest without him also providing the actual drawings. That is the issue, re-publishing something that is not his work.

 

[Susquatch]

Important Thread Update - The Forum Admin Team has decided to delete all links to external copies of material originally published by Home Shop Machinist Magazine because we have learned that the material is copyrighted by the magazine and the author at these links does not have permission from Home Shop Machinist Magazine to reproduce the subject content. Canadian Hobby Metal Workers does not condone Patent or Copyright Infringements. Back copies of the magazine (March/April 2010) and magazine subscriptions are available from the original publisher at www.homeshopmachinist.net.

This action does not in any way imply any wrong doing by the members who posted these links. They did not know that this was copyrighted material. We would like to thank @Mcgyver who is the original author of this article for bringing this to our attention.

 

[Dabbler]

how many people in the entire world

If I may - I don't see this as a scope issue, where the damage is limited in scope to a few individuals. While true, it misses the point.

In this case there is only one reference - an article and detailed plans. He reproduces the plans so reading the article is irrelevant, It is a kind of 'snatching the glory' away from the person he learned it from. That is a moral breach of a kind. I applaud his skill in making the tool, and even possibly improving it. He mitigates this by referencing both the author and magazine he got it from, but it isn't his design. just his small (possible) improvements.

This has to be balanced by the fact that once reproducible plans are out there, people will distribute them. That is just a fact of life. Think of how many great tool designs (and great tools) were copied and made cheaper - by more than one country - undermining the brilliant originating company with a cheap, inferior product mimicking the the real one. Similar moral breach in my world.

 

[Dabbler]

[update] Tom is in the 'maker community] which seems to share information very freely - for instance 3D printer designs - which has benefited millions of people directly. So there is incentive to be over-sharing. I seriously doubt that 'Tom Maker' is feeling he is doing anything wrong, despite the harm he is doing to Hacker.

 

[VicHobbyGuy]

nor is USD33 for HSM/year expensive.

It's $43USD ($55CAD) to Canada...whatever...

 

[Susquatch]

If I may - I don't see this as a scope issue, where the damage is limited in scope to a few individuals. While true, it misses the point.

In this case there is only one reference - an article and detailed plans. He reproduces the plans so reading the article is irrelevant, It is a kind of 'snatching the glory' away from the person he learned it from. That is a moral breach of a kind. I applaud his skill in making the tool, and even possibly improving it. He mitigates this by referencing both the author and magazine he got it from, but it isn't his design. just his small (possible) improvements.

This has to be balanced by the fact that once reproducible plans are out there, people will distribute them. That is just a fact of life. Think of how many great tool designs (and great tools) were copied and made cheaper - by more than one country - undermining the brilliant originating company with a cheap, inferior product mimicking the the real one. Similar moral breach in my world.

You are correct, but after reviewing Copyright law at length, I can say that its actually more black and white than that.

Unless one has permission from the copyright owner:

It is not OK to make a copy of copyrighted software, and make it available for free download.

It is not OK to copy a copyrighted book, and make it available for free download.

It is not Ok to rewrite a copyrighted book and make it available for free download.

It is not OK to copy a magazine article and make it available for free download.

It is not OK to rewrite a magazine article and make it available for free download.

However, IT IS OK to do a review of the article or document a build, as long as in so doing one is careful not to reproduce or copy the original content without permission and as long as you give attribution to the original source.

 

[Susquatch]

Doesn't this apply to most tool designs- that they are part of a process of ongoing improvement and 'evolution'?

I'm a complete novice at the machining hobby, but I thought that cut knurlers existed before that HSM article in 2010.

There is nothing wrong with copying an article in a magazine that you purchased as long as its for your own personal use. You cross the line when you make it available for others (free or not).

Similarly, anyone can make a cut knurling tool for their own use.

If you read this entire thread, you will see that this isn't about the tool itself or even the cut knurling process. Its about the copyrighted magazine article.

 

[Mcgyver]

What about people drawing up plans from an existing commercial product, or by copying (with slight variations) free plans from the internet and then offering them for sale?

Those are not comparable. He didn't reverse engineer anything, he sat down with my drawings in front of him and replicated it. As for someone taking free drawings and selling them, I think that likely** unethical. There is legal, and there is right and wrong. Very often they are not the same thing.

** a lot of missing context on making a call there, under copyright or not, 200 year old public domain stuff or new content from someone, etc

I know it is 'a larger issue' but in the case of knurlers...really..how many people in the entire world are likely to make these - free plans or not?

That is a heck of a justification. So if I take something of yours, a defence is "it wasn't worth much"? Ethics and morals, right and wrong are principle based, not volume based.

I don't see a lot of moral high ground on either side of the issue

I am dumbfounded that you see no moral difference. I put a huge effort into creating, and the publisher published, with an implicit ethical and moral understanding if not legal one (the former is really the important part) that "hey we are selling this copyrighted content that you can buy if you like". Copying it and selling/giving away is the act of scoundrel. (changing the odd thing matters not but is just an attempt at legal circumvention....but you can't circumvent right and wrong. Retyping a book and changing or few words, or redrawing and changing few things does not negate that.)

It's complicated. Perhaps a lot of people would order $50USD sets of 2010 magazine back issues if that build log didn't exist.

Exactly. As for complicated, not its not. Possessing the IP is not a birth right. A deal is proposed and one decides if they accept it or not. If too dear, peace, don't buy it. However that is hardly a defence for stealing it.

It's also (along with other articles) slated to appear as part of book. You think whats intended to be in the book being stolen and distributed won't result in lower sales? For that matter, the more this goes on, the more it erodes the value of issues held by subscribers (which do have value)

OTOH, perhaps the free advertising the magazine gets will encourage people to subscribe to that expensive publication.

That is grasping at straws as a justification. The publisher or author are fully capable, and the only rightful ones who can, make a decision to give it away for promotional purposes.

Can you please answer my question": "What would you think of someone buying a set of knurling tool drawings from Doug Gray, copying them, then posting them for free?"

 

[Mcgyver]

I'm done with this. Thank you gents for your support and kind comments....time to go make something