PICTURES -- Hydraulic assist for the arbor press

Your operating outside its design limits. If you continue to overload it its going to eventually crack the frame somewhere. you may have seen some the same size but higher tonnage rated. the metal frame may then have been of cast steel instead of cast iron. If you want more tonnage get a bigger press. If it breaks catastrophically, you may get injured.

LOL. Stuporamous seems more appropriate.

This isn't a good idea. I'd abandon it unless you are planning to post pictures of how you welded your broken frame back together.

Wes

I would be more worried about it shearing off a tooth or two on the rack gear. That is probably the weakest part of the arrangement.

Enjoy, DoN.

On 9 Mar 2008 04:13:52 GMT, with neither quill nor qualm, "DoN. Nichols" quickly quoth:

I'd be worried about cracking that counterweight off the casting by getting too rambunctious with the little 4T jack. Bets as to when we see that pic on Iggy's site? ;)

-- The best and safest thing is to keep a balance in your life, acknowledge the great powers around us and in us. If you can do that, and live that way, you are really a wise man. -- Euripides

Or maybe the press lifting off the table & dropping onto his foot?

MikeB

On Sun, 09 Mar 2008 08:51:41 -0400, with neither quill nor qualm, bq340 quickly quoth:

Nah. I'd be willing to bet that it's well anchored to the table.

-- The best and safest thing is to keep a balance in your life, acknowledge the great powers around us and in us. If you can do that, and live that way, you are really a wise man. -- Euripides

I was looking at arbor presses in the enco flyer tonight and noticed a steep increase in weight vs tonnage. They all look alike, but they get more massive for a reason.

Wes

Grade 5 7/16 bolts (fine thread).

Chances are overwhelming that I will abandon this idea, seems like the risk is not worth taking.

The press is bolted to the table. The table has a 1/4" thick top. The bolts are 7/16"thick grade 5. As I said, I now think that doing what I did, was a mistake.

On Sun, 09 Mar 2008 09:11:36 -0500, with neither quill nor qualm, Wes quickly quoth:

Well DUH!

Do you suppose there is any chance in hell that the original engineer who designed that press would have foreseen the possibility that someone would place a jack beneath the counterweight, and he would have designed that into the shape? I don't think so, either.

Engineers design for lightness where possible, and heavy-dutiness (new word?) where required. I think Don and I are on track as to any potential weaknesses in the design in regard to jacking there.

-- The best and safest thing is to keep a balance in your life, acknowledge the great powers around us and in us. If you can do that, and live that way, you are really a wise man. -- Euripides

On Sun, 09 Mar 2008 11:45:21 -0500, with neither quill nor qualm, Ignoramus1775 quickly quoth:

Good call.

-- The best and safest thing is to keep a balance in your life, acknowledge the great powers around us and in us. If you can do that, and live that way, you are really a wise man. -- Euripides

On Mar 8, 6:48=A0pm, Ignoramus1775 wrote: =2E..

=2E..

Well, I was trying to give Iggy a clue as to why that jack is a *bad* idea.

Wes

I now agree that it was a bad idea. Thanks for some enlightenment in this regard.

You can get the same effects (more force/broken press) simplier and easier by just putting a long extension on the lever. Not that anyone would ever actually do such a thing. [:>)].

Don Young

Don't be a quitter. Continue your stupid efforts as before.

He doesn't understand the concept of a cheater bar or pipe yet. Slow down.