History of Machine Tools

Errol Groff snipped-for-privacy@snet.net

I don't have suggestions for electronic research, but the main English history was written up in the late 1800s by Samuel Smiles, from whom we get most of the info on Henry Maudslay, James Nasmyth, and like. I don't have the text references, but the titles are close to "industrial biography," and "lives of the engineers." In the U. S. Joseph Roe's 1916 "English and American Tool Builders" is still a standard. The mentioned article from the 100 year issue of Am Machinist is good. Mid-20th-century texts by academics are Robert Woodbury's "Studies in the History of Machine Tools," and Abbott Payson Usher's "A history of Mechanical Inventions."

One form of electronic research might be for the students to learn to search for patents electronically, using the free Alternatif software available through the U. S. Patent and Trademark Office site. All of the mechanical patents from 1790 top present are now available (minus those lost in the Patent Office fire of 1836-7?).

Imo, the history and the hands on shouldn't be at opposite poles of the curriculum. Learning the mechanical history "can be" an excellent way to learn to think about more than the mere operation of the tools. Frank Morrison

Ok, Errol. I dug out my well-thumbed hardbound copy, which I'll send to you on Monday. Only about 20 copies were hardbound, so it's a rare one, but it will stand up better than the softbound copies.

You've got it for two months.

Ed Huntress

Whose name is stamped in gold on the lower right corner of the cover? If there's no name, the publisher may have made another run that we editors didn't know about, for key advertisers or something. The 20 copies (roughly) were for the editorial and publishing staffs.

Ed Huntress

I guess I was pretty lucky! My copy is also a hard bound.

Boy! I'm really feeling too cool. *S, Really!

Thanks for the info.

Regards,

Stan-

As far as it goes, I wouldn't disagree. But studying the background and history of one's field is one mark of a professional, in the old sense of the word. I'd like to think that people getting into the field as a career, rather than just as a job, would be interested in how their industry got where it is today.

If the students aren't curious about it, then there isn't much point in forcing it upon them. But I believe quite a few would be interested.

I used to lecture on dimensional metrology, often to young people who were new to the field, and I remember a lot of questions about the background of the technology. They seemed interested in the way things were done in "the old days," mostly because they were amazed at how one could measure to such extreme accuracies without the benefits of electronic technology.

Jesus Christ, now G&L's joined the Liars' Club :-( It's documented all over the place; M.I.T. and John Parsons built the first functional NC machine. It ran in 1952. I even have a jpeg (somewhere) of an ashtray made on the thing. It used a Cincinnati Hydrotel for the base machine. Parsons-Bendix-Dynapath-Autocon was the first maker of ANY nc control. All this is discussed in any of the early books on NC ... you don't have any of those ?

As for Battleboob's concerns, perhaps if they researched the *ideas* behind revolutionary machine tools instead of the boring/useless 'who when where' aspect of it ? I am continually amazed by the number of 'CNC machinists' who don't have a clue about basic machining functions and processes.

I think its a great idea for the students to understand the history of cnc machines, but perhaps looking for the history of machinists would be in order. :)

They will be on milk cartons soon.

Or beer bottles.

L8ters Bing

A few topics to consider:

The impact of electrification and the availability of small reliable electric motors, the change from main lineshaft driven machinery to individually powered mobile machines.

The role of the machine tool in the general shift toward standardized parts and procedures, the advent of "scientific management", Taylorism, the rationalization movement.

Backlash against machinery/technology in general, Luddites. Who gained, who lost, as machine tools/manufacturing facilities became more advanced and capable?

A thorough treatment of these topics would be beyond the scope of the assignment, but some students might want to explore how machine tools developed in a larger context.

I had that issue but some sucker borrowed it and never brought it back. Some kid could plagiarize it for his whole essay.

John

Great link, Mark! I am wasting a lot of time looking around in this archive. Thanks! :-)

Al

Hey Errol,

History Channel:

Also, contact David MacMillan on this list or modeleng-list. He is into very old machine stuff.

Take care.

Brian Laws>I am preparing a research assignment for my students on this subject.

Though I agree with the value of learning how to use the tools effectively I also feel that anyone who doesn't wonder about those who came up with the tools is sadly lacking, and would benefit greatly from a study of the self discipline that those great men operated under. Any really well rounded machinist must hold men like Whitworth, Maudslay and Colt in awe, and their workmanship improves as they realize they are following in the footsteps of such great human beings.

Also; Wilkinson, (HBM) Whitney (Milling machine), and many others. I believe we become a little like our heros when we study their lives, and those who discovered how to turn tool paths into data a machine can follow automatically are certainly worthy of the same study. The "drones" are the ones who don't care about such things, in my opinion.

I don't read this as a lie at all. It's all in how you read things. I believe they are telling the history of G&L, not the history of machine tools.

Therefore they are stating they built "THEIR" first NC machine tool in 1955.

It would be different had they put "invented the first NC machine tool".

Mark Fields

I was rummaging around on that link for a couple of hours til I fell asleep at the computer. A lot of those parts looked familiar since I have rebuilt a couple of those Mills. The spur gears look like the table feed gears and the bevel gear may be the one that supplied power to the quill feed. Those old machines still do the job. Not too many CNC's can remove metal as fast as a #5 vertical.

Very good site. Thanks.

John

A very good position to take, Glen

Regards,

Stan-

Hi again Ed..

I guess I have brand 'X.' There is no Gold name on it. *shucks!

Also, I would be interested in which articles you wrote. Would you please list them for me?

You see... You are part of the history as well. *Smile

Best regards,

Stanley Dornfeld

Aha. Then there were other copies hard-bound, besides the special run made for those of us who worked on it. They probably were presentation issues for advertisers. Andy Ashburn, who was the Editor then, may know. I'll ask him when I get to it.

I'd be interested, too. You're assuming my memory is good for sorting out which items I wrote in an issue written 26 years ago. That's a lot of assumption. I was trying to blend my style with the overall style of the book, so it's a little hard to remember which ones I actually wrote -- especially since I had a hand in editing most of the book, and we tend to forget what we actually wrote versus what we just edited.

I'll take a look this evening and try to remember. I can tell you this, though: Sometime in the mid-'90s, the current owners of American Machinist (Penton Publishing) ran a special issue that, essentially, was a rip of the

100th Anniversary Issue, which had been published by McGraw-Hill, the original owners. They just lifted the pieces verbatim -- including two or three of mine -- without acknowledgment of where they came from or who wrote them. Then they put a new byline (sort of) on them, saying "edited by," and listing some member of their current staff.

They own the material and there was nothing explicitly unethical about it. But it really grated the hell out of those of us who spent a year of our lives researching and writing it.

I realize that every time I look in the mirror...

I believe the first Numerically controlled machine tool was developed as a joint venture of the Devlieg machine tool company and the Massachusetts institute of technology (M.I.T.).

Read "Tools For The Job" by LTC Rolt. Superb book, and Tom Rolt was also a pioneer in the preservation of industrial archaeology.

Names to conjure with are "Watt & Boulton" "Bramah", "Whitworth", various US gunsmiths, and the Norton grinding wheel company. The RAC Cadillac re-assembly trial is worth studying too.

-- Die Gotterspammerung - Junkmail of the Gods