Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Next Project, Hepburn Walker Patent Configuration (Read 3511 times)
steel-pounder
Full Member
***
Offline



Posts: 161
Joined: Mar 26th, 2016
Re: Next Project, Hepburn Walker Patent Configuration
Reply #30 - Oct 29th, 2024 at 8:57pm
Print Post  
how about fixturing the receiver flat on a vertical rotary table so that the center point of the circle defining the 1.125 radius is on the center axis of the table. a flat end mill can then come in 90 to the face of the track? then rotate the receiver so the radius is cut?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
bobw
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 1498
Location: NW, Iowa
Joined: Mar 19th, 2013
Re: Next Project, Hepburn Walker Patent Configuration
Reply #31 - Oct 29th, 2024 at 9:30pm
Print Post  
steel-pounder wrote on Oct 29th, 2024 at 8:57pm:
how about fixturing the receiver flat on a vertical rotary table so that the center point of the circle defining the 1.125 radius is on the center axis of the table. a flat end mill can then come in 90 to the face of the track? then rotate the receiver so the radius is cut?


If I understood Greg correctly, this is exactly what they came up with.  In the original frame it looks to be just enough clearance to complete the arc and miss the barrel section of the frame.  It will need to be a long end mill.  Not sure how large will work but my guess it will need to be small, 1/4 but hopefully 3/8.
Bob
  

Robert Warren
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
LRF
Oldtimer
*****
Offline



Posts: 591
Location: MN
Joined: May 8th, 2010
Re: Next Project, Hepburn Walker Patent Configuration
Reply #32 - Oct 30th, 2024 at 3:00pm
Print Post  
bobw wrote on Oct 29th, 2024 at 9:30pm:
steel-pounder wrote on Oct 29th, 2024 at 8:57pm:
how about fixturing the receiver flat on a vertical rotary table so that the center point of the circle defining the 1.125 radius is on the center axis of the table. a flat end mill can then come in 90 to the face of the track? then rotate the receiver so the radius is cut?


If I understood Greg correctly, this is exactly what they came up with.  In the original frame it looks to be just enough clearance to complete the arc and miss the barrel section of the frame.  It will need to be a long end mill.  Not sure how large will work but my guess it will need to be small, 1/4 but hopefully 3/8.
Bob


Question Bob, I think I understand what you are purposing but to clarify for me, are you saying the centerline of the long endmill would be perpendicular to the radius you are cutting? And that same centerline would pass through the axis of rotation of the rotary table? Or the edge of the cutter would be a lined with the axis and perpendicular to the radius?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
GT
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 2043
Location: Northeast Wyoming
Joined: Jun 28th, 2015
Re: Next Project, Hepburn Walker Patent Configuration
Reply #33 - Oct 30th, 2024 at 4:14pm
Print Post  
"Question Bob, I think I understand what you are purposing but to clarify for me, are you saying the centerline of the long endmill would be perpendicular to the radius you are cutting? And that same centerline would pass through the axis of rotation of the rotary table? Or the edge of the cutter would be a lined with the axis and perpendicular to the radius?"

We haven't had time to dabble in this yet, but thoughts are that it will be lining up with the center of the cutter, and initially the thoughts are a larger diameter tool so the dish is less pronounced  = less file, gage and blueing work... The hangup will be what diameter tool fits between the cut we have to make and the rest of the action.  Without working a percentage of the radius of the tool in to our offset, it will be a sneak up to finish dimensions.  We'll model it in our software so we have a close idea - probably closer than we'd be able to measure...

Bob,
I'm not going to dovetail the lower lumps into my bottom metal, I had to weld some portions of the bottom metal already so now I'm making lumps and front lugs to weld into the casting before I machine it...  I'm also adding a lump to the rear of the bottom metal so the spring has less arc in its design and clears triggers a little easier.
G
  

"To invent, you need a good imagination and a pile of junk"  T. A. Edison
"The trouble ain't that there is too many fools, but that the lightning ain't distributed right" M.T.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
LRF
Oldtimer
*****
Offline



Posts: 591
Location: MN
Joined: May 8th, 2010
Re: Next Project, Hepburn Walker Patent Configuration
Reply #34 - Oct 30th, 2024 at 5:15pm
Print Post  
GT wrote on Oct 30th, 2024 at 4:14pm:
"....and initially the thoughts are a larger diameter tool so the dish is less pronounced 


It will create a dish and I do not think a larger cutter will fit, if Bob's drawing is correct. If you want to know the amount of the dish then I would simulate the operation in a solids CAD 3D model.

The way this was cut at Remington in their model shop was with a fixture using a scraping action, In my opinion. The scraper would follow a cam pattern. Machines like this were common back in those days. Actually, I would believe this operation in itself may have made this design to expensive to become a production commercial product.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
bobw
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 1498
Location: NW, Iowa
Joined: Mar 19th, 2013
Re: Next Project, Hepburn Walker Patent Configuration
Reply #35 - Oct 31st, 2024 at 12:18pm
Print Post  
Lynn, you brought up a good question.  I didn’t respond because Greg has a better handle on the answer than I do.  After all, I’m not an Engineering or machinist, just a knot-head hobbyist trying to figure this stuff out. Cheesy

Thinking out loud about this radius, and I’m not trying to minimize it’s importance, but here’s my take on the operation of the breech block.  On opening, the bb drops until it clears the front nose of this radius.  At that point it can start tipping but really nothing forces it to tip until it hits the valley in the trigger guard.  At that point it is force to tip.  This being said, the link has a ledge that engages the bottom of the bb so it can’t try to straighten back up, it will also follow the bb as the lever is opened.  See the disassembled picture, this picture shows the configuration of how it came apart.  So on opening, this radius does very little, other than not letting the bb tip too far.

On closing, when the finger lever is moved to closing, the bb comes free from the trigger guard and raises until it contacts our radius which then forces it to start the closing operation.  Looking at my drawing you will see the front nose of this radius is just below the bore centerline.  So as the bb closes, and a shell is in the chamber, the bb will come up hard into this radius and cam a tight shell into the chamber.  Once past the radius nose the bb can raise and close completely.   

This may seem simple, and if I’m correct, also shows the importance of the radius is in the last stage of closing only and only a loose guide for the rest of the operation.

Please correct me if I’m off on these assumptions.
Bob
  

Robert Warren
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
steel-pounder
Full Member
***
Offline



Posts: 161
Joined: Mar 26th, 2016
Re: Next Project, Hepburn Walker Patent Configuration
Reply #36 - Oct 31st, 2024 at 1:07pm
Print Post  
Bob, 

     Im not even close to being on the same plane as you in the world of gunsmithing.  that said it seems that using the notch and screws in the paten drawings would be an easier answer that the radius and bumps.   

when the lever is swung forward the BB drops, as it clears the recoil rails the screw contacts the top of the BB slots, further movement of the lever causes the link to pull the bottom of the BB to the front of the receiver forcing the BB to pivot around the screws and tilt rearward. closing the lever pushes the bottom of the BB to the rear pivoting the BB into the vertical position, as the link pivots into alignment with the vertical axis of the breech block it pushes the BB into battery.

dont know if this makes any sense but in the folds of my wee brain it seems it would work. the only problem I see is the screws in the sides of the receiver working loose 
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
GT
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 2043
Location: Northeast Wyoming
Joined: Jun 28th, 2015
Re: Next Project, Hepburn Walker Patent Configuration
Reply #37 - Oct 31st, 2024 at 1:39pm
Print Post  
Bob, 
from our modeling, you are correct.  There's not much to do with this arc, but some form of it has to exist to get things started.  A slight curve in the arc face from a mill has little effect except for the wear factor.   If parts are hardened correctly, it's mute - serves as a lube and crud reservoir. 
Yes, to mass produce these the effort would have been a considerable expense, even adding the lever feature to the Hepburn was an expense outside of normal production, probably the reason only 24 were made...  Roll Eyes  ( I know there's 23 listed) plus a few patent models like this one...
One of the curious features that has my mind wandering astray is including a curved transfer bar in the breech block... Have the sketch muddled through.  Not enough hours in a day...
G
  

"To invent, you need a good imagination and a pile of junk"  T. A. Edison
"The trouble ain't that there is too many fools, but that the lightning ain't distributed right" M.T.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Amoretti
Full Member
***
Offline



Posts: 209
Location: thermopolis, Wy
Joined: Nov 2nd, 2009
Re: Next Project, Hepburn Walker Patent Configuration
Reply #38 - Oct 31st, 2024 at 1:52pm
Print Post  
Could those radiesed ramps be made like the cocking plates in a Borchardt??  IE-seperate from the casting and screwed in or even welded in place??
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
LRF
Oldtimer
*****
Offline



Posts: 591
Location: MN
Joined: May 8th, 2010
Re: Next Project, Hepburn Walker Patent Configuration
Reply #39 - Oct 31st, 2024 at 2:02pm
Print Post  
Amoretti wrote on Oct 31st, 2024 at 1:52pm:
Could those radiesed ramps be made like the cocking plates in a Borchardt??  IE-seperate from the casting and screwed in or even welded in place??

From the drawing, the top of the ramps form the recoil lug shoulders for the BB when firing the rifle. I would think not and still keep with the concept of a reproduction of the original.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
bobw
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 1498
Location: NW, Iowa
Joined: Mar 19th, 2013
Re: Next Project, Hepburn Walker Patent Configuration
Reply #40 - Oct 31st, 2024 at 6:56pm
Print Post  
steel-pounder wrote on Oct 31st, 2024 at 1:07pm:
Bob, 

     Im not even close to being on the same plane as you in the world of gunsmithing.  that said it seems that using the notch and screws in the paten drawings would be an easier answer that the radius and bumps.  

when the lever is swung forward the BB drops, as it clears the recoil rails the screw contacts the top of the BB slots, further movement of the lever causes the link to pull the bottom of the BB to the front of the receiver forcing the BB to pivot around the screws and tilt rearward. closing the lever pushes the bottom of the BB to the rear pivoting the BB into the vertical position, as the link pivots into alignment with the vertical axis of the breech block it pushes the BB into battery.

dont know if this makes any sense but in the folds of my wee brain it seems it would work. the only problem I see is the screws in the sides of the receiver working loose 


I do understand what you are explaining but I think this is a more advanced/durable design, probably because of it being a military version.  There must have been a reason Remington changed the design from the patent drawing.

I hope Tom doesn’t mind, but I snapped a picture of the Creedmoor gun innards from his Hepburn book.  This appears to be completely different from the Patent drawing and the gun I am copying.
Bob
  

Robert Warren
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
bobw
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 1498
Location: NW, Iowa
Joined: Mar 19th, 2013
Re: Next Project, Hepburn Walker Patent Configuration
Reply #41 - Oct 31st, 2024 at 7:02pm
Print Post  
LRF wrote on Oct 31st, 2024 at 2:02pm:
Amoretti wrote on Oct 31st, 2024 at 1:52pm:
Could those radiesed ramps be made like the cocking plates in a Borchardt??  IE-seperate from the casting and screwed in or even welded in place??

From the drawing, the top of the ramps form the recoil lug shoulders for the BB when firing the rifle. I would think not and still keep with the concept of a reproduction of the original.


Lynn is correct on the lug shoulders.  Before I went that route I would probably check out EDM.
Bob
  

Robert Warren
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
steel-pounder
Full Member
***
Offline



Posts: 161
Joined: Mar 26th, 2016
Re: Next Project, Hepburn Walker Patent Configuration
Reply #42 - Oct 31st, 2024 at 7:10pm
Print Post  
Quote:
I do understand what you are explaining but I think this is a more advanced/durable design, probably because of it being a military version.  There must have been a reason Remington changed the design from the patent drawing.


BobW,  sorry if my previous post came off as an explanation it was ment as more of a question about if it wouldnt be an easier solution.   

     the picture of the parts you included from Toms Book looks way mor complicated to me.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
bobw
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 1498
Location: NW, Iowa
Joined: Mar 19th, 2013
Re: Next Project, Hepburn Walker Patent Configuration
Reply #43 - Oct 31st, 2024 at 7:15pm
Print Post  
Greg,
One of my hand drawing of this breech block.  (By the way, I think of my drawing being equal to your stock work) Grin    

Another steep 25 degree firing pin. 

Maybe this will help with your transfer bar thinking.
Bob
  

Robert Warren
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
bobw
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 1498
Location: NW, Iowa
Joined: Mar 19th, 2013
Re: Next Project, Hepburn Walker Patent Configuration
Reply #44 - Oct 31st, 2024 at 7:22pm
Print Post  
steel-pounder wrote on Oct 31st, 2024 at 7:10pm:
Quote:
I do understand what you are explaining but I think this is a more advanced/durable design, probably because of it being a military version.  There must have been a reason Remington changed the design from the patent drawing.


BobW,  sorry if my previous post came off as an explanation it was ment as more of a question about if it wouldnt be an easier solution.  

     the picture of the parts you included from Toms Book looks way mor complicated to me. 


I didn’t take your post in anyway except as you intended.  Not a problem.  After reading my reply, I didn’t word it very well.  It does sound like I was being short with you, but did not intend that.
Bob
  

Robert Warren
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6
Send TopicPrint