|
Post by Admin on Oct 13, 2021 12:08:25 GMT -7
This is entirely possible, although I ran for 2 days on concrete and noticed no difference adding the tennis balls, except for noise level through the floor.
Just because I didn't notice doesn't mean it didn't slow the movement. I can see the balls dampening at least the noise between the blocks and floor, and that in turn has to have an effect on tumbling action, even if it's small. I have it mounted to 133# of blocks, I'm not sure how it's tiny weights could move that much weight, I can't!
However I doubt the dowel being at least 1/8" if not 1/4" off from one side to the other helped any. Before I noticed that one side of the twin produced a slurry much faster, consistently. We will see how long the springs last after my "tampering". If they last more than 6 months I will make it a fully adjustable and locking sliding system. Eric
I see you are going to give @therock a run for his money. He's our McGuyver, but 133 lbs of block, I don't think even he would do that. LOL! JK guys, I love the can do spirit. Have you thought of a foam mat instead of balls? The kind they use for exercise equipment? I have a single lotto wth 2 cinderblocks and some pink foam under and I think that works fine.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 13, 2021 12:10:01 GMT -7
Thanks Tela @rockjunquie thanks for the vote of confidence, Eric D. WoW 133# of Blocks yeah that is a LOAD! Well Im gonna tell ya what I think I have 14 Tumblers Spinning full time from spring to end of fall right now just have 5 running 1 Lortone 2 LOT"O" Tumblers and two UV-s. The LOT"O"s are Okay I have 3 of them 2 in operation and 1 as a Spare. As far as Cost These tumblers the LOT"O" single is $197.00 and the double is $270,00 then The Thumler UV-4 is $195.00 the UV-10 is $245.00 Then the UV-18 is $335.00 Then the UV-45 which is 57 lbs Industrial is $ 650.00 all 4 of these Thumlers are UTRA QUITE have rubber feet and just sitting on the bench don't vibrate or move a nano of an inch. If I had known what I know now I would have purchased the THUMLER UV-4 for $2.00 less oh and by the way you can buy a 10 lb barrel and you then have a UV-10. Much more flexibility with them. I own a UV-10 and UV-18 and in my honest opinion I like them much better. Good luck with whatever you buy. Thank you Shucks it was nothing, If I were a young man Id do it again. I think all young men should be required to serve. In some Countries It Is Mandatory. there would be alot less SNOW FLAKES roaming around! I took an oath it was something like this>> I, R.C.D. do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God." I took this oath on Jan 21st, 1976. My oath has no expiration date.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 13, 2021 12:16:26 GMT -7
I tinkered with the Vibrasonic vibe and the Lot-O to a lesser amount. For what it's worth: The Vibrasonic is more of a self contained vibration device. It operates on a thick soft pad or a concrete surface about equally. The Lot-O depends on it's specified block foundation, but also the dowel location which may be a tricky adjustment. The Vibrasonic vibrates rocks even in a thick slurry and coarsest of abrasives. This is a nice capability but not necessary to polish. The Lot-O is easily slowed by thicker slurries. This is unfortunate when running coarser abrasives but by no means a problem for polishing, just stick with 220 or finer abrasives. The unmodified Vibrasonic bruised obsidian even in the thickest slurries. The Lot-O was hard pressed to bruise obsidian in the thinnest of slurries. Effect of modifications: The modification to the Vibrasonic shortened the distance of it's original vibration travel. But more importantly it softened the reversal speed of each vibration to reduce the impacts on the rocks. Changes were made by adding weight to the hopper and moving the hopper closer to the vibration source to attain these effects. In the case of the Lot-O testing would have to be performed to understand the effect of moving the dowel back or forward. Moving the dowel is in effect changing the amount of spring force and nothing to do with adding weight to hopper or moving hopper closer to vibration source. @ericd, as related to the AO 46 discussion
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 13, 2021 12:17:25 GMT -7
Components of a vibrating system: M is the mass of the hopper x is the length of travel of each vibration k is the spring force per distance of travel c is any form of shock absorption(probably not present in a rock vibe) F is the rotating force from the off-balance motor And then the geometry of the structure of the machine to consider. Moving the Lot-O dowel is changing variable 'k'. Unfortunately high level math would be involved to make predictable adjustments, or trail and error real world tests can be tried. So I used trail and error real world tests on the Vibrasonic and it took a long time to see if the modifications made a better polish because a batch had to be run each time. Believe, I was lucky to accomplish improvements. It would take a serious mathematician with serious testing equipment to make predictable modifications to a vibe.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 13, 2021 12:18:36 GMT -7
I tinkered with the Vibrasonic vibe and the Lot-O to a lesser amount. For what it's worth: The Vibrasonic is more of a self contained vibration device. It operates on a thick soft pad or a concrete surface about equally. The Lot-O depends on it's specified block foundation, but also the dowel location which may be a tricky adjustment. THE UV MODELS WORK RIGHT OUT OF THE BOX AT LEAST THE UV-10 and UV-18 NO MOVEMENT AT ALL.The Vibrasonic vibrates rocks even in a thick slurry and coarsest of abrasives. This is a nice capability but not necessary to polish. The Lot-O is easily slowed by thicker slurries. This is unfortunate when running coarser abrasives but by no means a problem for polishing, just stick with 220 or finer abrasives. THIS IS ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS I NOTICED THE UV TUMBLERS ARE NOT EFFECTED BY THE SLURRY THICKNESS AND ADDING WATER TO THIN THE SLURRY IS NOT NEEDED AS OFTEN. MANY TIMES I DON'T OPEN THE LID FOR 3 DAYS AT WHICH TIME IS THE END OF THE STAGE AND TIME TO DO A WASH OUT.The unmodified Vibrasonic bruised obsidian even in the thickest slurries. I SURELY HAVE NOT POLISHED EVERY OBSIDIAN KNOWN TO MAN, BUT I HAVE POSTED PICS OF SEVERAL TYPES OF OBSIDIAN. The Lot-O was hard pressed to bruise obsidian in the thinnest of slurries. ONE THING ABOUT A UV-10 OR UV-18 YOU CAN LOAD FULLER OF MEDIA AT A BIGGER RATIO OF MEDIA THAN STONES AND YOU GET A BETTER POLISH AS THE STONES HAVE LESS OF A CHANCE TO COLLIDE WITH ONE ANOTHER. Effect of modifications: The modification to the Vibrasonic shortened the distance of it's original vibration travel. But more importantly it softened the reversal speed of each vibration to reduce the impacts on the rocks. Changes were made by adding weight to the hopper and moving the hopper closer to the vibration source to attain these effects. I HAVE NOT DONE ANY MODIFICATIONS ON THE UV-s AS THEY WORK RIGHT OUT OF THE BOX. In the case of the Lot-O testing would have to be performed to understand the effect of moving the dowel back or forward. Moving the dowel is in effect changing the amount of spring force and nothing to do with adding weight to hopper or moving hopper closer to vibration source. Jim not starting a debate here I just answered questions comparing with your results on the Vibrasonic and mine with the UV.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 13, 2021 12:20:28 GMT -7
I view the dowel as a pivot point, not a spring tension adjuster. The further you move the pivot point from the motor and weights, the more motion you get at the front of the machine (or, the more effect the weights have on the weight on the other end of the see-saw, in this case rocks). I believe if I were to move the pivot point to, say, halfway between the motor and the load, the machine would shoot rocks out of the top of the barrel. I will try to attach a picture that makes an attempt at showing the motion of the machine relative to the pivot point as I see it. Keep in mind that the weights on the motor cannot move the springs horizontally as they are attached to the base, so the front of the machine can only travel up and down. As the back of the machine is sitting on a pivot, it cannot move up and down (or if it does, it is very slight). However the up and down motion at the front of the machine can move the top of the machine back and forth, pivoting on the dowel. The motor, as it sits overhanging the pivot, can use the weights to move it's self up and down, slightly, as the pivot is so close to it as opposed to the barrels.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 13, 2021 12:22:59 GMT -7
I view the dowel as a pivot point, not a spring tension adjuster. The further you move the pivot point from the motor and weights, the more motion you get at the front of the machine (or, the more effect the weights have on the weight on the other end of the see-saw, in this case rocks). I believe if I were to move the pivot point to, say, halfway between the motor and the load, the machine would shoot rocks out of the top of the barrel. I will try to attach a picture that makes an attempt at showing the motion of the machine relative to the pivot point as I see it. Keep in mind that the weights on the motor cannot move the springs horizontally as they are attached to the base, so the front of the machine can only travel up and down. As the back of the machine is sitting on a pivot, it cannot move up and down (or if it does, it is very slight). However the up and down motion at the front of the machine can move the top of the machine back and forth, pivoting on the dowel. The motor, as it sits overhanging the pivot, can use the weights to move it's self up and down, slightly, as the pivot is so close to it as opposed to the barrels. This is correct, the pivot point is changing which allows the hopper to travel more or less distance. So by changing the pivot point you increase or decrease the distance the Lot-O's flat spring is compressed or extended over on the left side of the photo. "According to Hooke’s law, the force required to compress or extend a spring is directly proportional to the distance it is stretched."
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 13, 2021 12:25:21 GMT -7
Jim not starting a debate here I just answered questions comparing with your results on the Vibrasonic and mine with the UV. No debate here Bob. The Vibrasonic would not polish obsidian or glass out of the box which was my concern. Not as well as the Lot-O anyway. This is truly a fault of the Vibrasonic. Most vibes are designed to polish Mohs 7 rocks and many vibes have difficulty polishing softer materials particularly obsidians and glass. My Vibrasonic is really ugly after mods but it does slap a polish down using only 20% media with glass in 4 days out of the rotary: And big rocks. Another test for a vibe:
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 13, 2021 12:26:56 GMT -7
But why did I have to spend time doing back yard trial and error modifications on the Vibrasonic to make it do well with glass and large rocks Bob ? Vibrasonic should have solved that issue. It did fine on average tumble size agates, and does just as well on them after the mods. The Vibrasonic engineer was about a 100 times more educated than I on vibration analysis and had a lot more resources. He should have solved these issues. What amazes me is my hopper is steel, no rubber or plastic lining. Rocks or glass against steel go figure. The mind would tell you that a hard steel hopper is going to ruin any chance of a fine polish. The aluminum oxides have little wear effect on the steel. AO is simply not aggressive compared to silicon carbide. The AO 220 step cleans the heavy rust coating on each batch before the polish step(s). Sometimes the hopper is really rusty(after sitting for a long period) and the AO 220 step has a nasty rust slurry. The steel is like a mirror after the polish step, and of course dull after the 220 step. The polish step is usually done when the milky white AO polish slurry begins to turn slightly brown from the removal of steel. Anyway, a lot can be learned about different types of abrasives when using a vibe with an exposed steel hopper.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 13, 2021 12:28:32 GMT -7
More people needs to experiment with certain brands of vibes to improve polish on softer stuff. A proper running Lot-O is a fine polishing machine. Unfortunately the end polish controls a successful outcome when tinkering with a vibe @ericd. The rocks must move fluidly in the vibe, call it the action. That is a given. Whether are not the spring is linear or non-linear really does not matter. The Lot-o spring is a hammock, perfect analogy. Moving that dowel has a big effect. An adjustable pivot point sounds like the way to go. I think you will find one setting will be the do-all setting. One issue with the Lot-O is it is that the off-balance generator is quite under powered IMO. So adjustments like adding weight to the hopper or forcing the hopper to travel too far may be beyond the ability of the off-balance generator to handle. On the other hand, the Vibrasonic has a big flat shaking table top with two threaded studs sticking up. An old school beast. You can bolt hoppers from 6 pounds to over 50 pound capacities and the 1/3 HP(power eating) motor for off-balance generator will handle them easily. The way I tamed the Vibrasonic was by adding weight to the hopper(a welded steel hopper) and lowered the hopper closer to the off-balance generator under the shaking table to reduce the vibration travel or distance. The result was a firm vibration with short travel and mild reversals on each vibration. It is the sharp reversals that bruises rocks(saw tooth wave verses sin wave). If you are going to tinker get a Vibrasonic. It is the experimenters dream. Built like a brick schnitt house. I got a used one for $300.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 13, 2021 12:29:52 GMT -7
For myself I really like the Mini-Sonic. Having a dial to control vibration is really nice. Have a load of Obsidian Pendants that were giving me fits in the UV, kept frosting on the thin edges. They are in the soap burnish now. By dialing back the vib rate a bit(and extra polish slurry and pea gravel) the frosting is gone. For regular a normal Agate/Wood load the UV-18 works fine. I have the 3 hopper, MT-14. Each of the 3 - 4 pound hoppers has it's own control which allows me to run just one for small loads. Just wish they made a larger hopper as the opening on the 4 pound hopper does not allow anything larger than 3 inch. A 8 to 10 pound hopper would be really nice. The mini-sonic is being reserved for AO only, and everything coming out of SiC get's a 5 hour soap run before the AO. Yes, would be nice if those Minisonics had bigger openings. The 2 Minisonic's mounted together on the Vibrasonic got replaced with a big mouth steel hopper made out of a 6 inch steel pipe because of their small openings. The newer steel one got a divider welded in the center for doing 2 big rocks without colliding and bruising. Must have done 50 batches in it. AO 220, then AO polish over and over. It took effort to bruise any material in any slurry in either. I'd forget them and let them coagulate, forget to put slurry additive in, under loaded it. Mini sonic hoppers slung low: Steel hopper before divider was added. It holds 8 pounds.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 13, 2021 12:34:23 GMT -7
I got a little over-zealous in my adjustments of the Lot O tuning dowel the other day and woke up to 4 broken secondary springs in the rear. It's taking a rest while I smooth out the dimple in the bottom of the barrels and order new springs. Although I AM going to try running with single springs in the back. It seems to be a lot more forgiving as far as adjustments go and equally competent as far as action. Might even be less of a load for the motor. I had heard this was a possibility if the dowel was moved to make the movement more aggressive. Can't recall if I mentioned it or not in an earlier post. How many hours do you think you had on the machine after moving the dowel until the springs broke? You have the double barrel correct? With the excess weight, perhaps it's not quite as forgiving with dowel movement.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 13, 2021 12:35:36 GMT -7
I had heard this was a possibility if the dowel was moved to make the movement more aggressive. Can't recall if I mentioned it or not in an earlier post. How many hours do you think you had on the machine after moving the dowel until the springs broke? You have the double barrel correct? With the excess weight, perhaps it's not quite as forgiving with dowel movement. I had run it through a full cycle and a bit more, I think the total run with the dowel 1/8" from the frame was 13 days and no broken springs/excellent action.
I have the double version of the Lot O, yes. It wasn't until I moved the dowel just barely under the frame, to the point of maximum attainable vibration, that it broke all the lower rear springs by the time I woke up. Didn't seem to affect the action one bit. I have also removed the 2 center front springs because it seemed too stiff. The single Lot O will bounce a few times if you give it a little bump downward. The Twin with 4 front springs doesn't. I'll see how the animal works tomorrow when the filler dries in the barrels. I love reinventing things that work just fine already There seemed to be a bit more bounce to the front on the machine as the motor neared a stop after being turned off, like I had mentioned seeing before in videos where the author gave the machine a bump. More noticeable was that I could now feel vibration through the concrete more than 30 feet away and could hear the buzz even though I was 3 rooms over with 2 closed doors. This small machine vibrating a 30'x50'x8" concrete slab with a 13' high block and brick building sitting on top of it? I guess so. Back to tennis balls. I have my dowel and the whole machine set very close to where it was at the factory these days, but do find I need to move the dowel around between 1/8" and 1/2" closer to the frame from stock for different types of loads, small vs large rocks, heavier materials, load density, and thickness of sugar slurry in ao500 and polish stages. I also like the faster action for the first stage since I can break down a teaspoon of 150/220 SiC in about 18-24 hours, clean out, and go again. At which point it's muddy enough to usually need a cleanout anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 13, 2021 12:38:57 GMT -7
I tinkered with the Vibrasonic vibe and the Lot-O to a lesser amount. For what it's worth: The Vibrasonic is more of a self contained vibration device. It operates on a thick soft pad or a concrete surface about equally. The Lot-O depends on it's specified block foundation, but also the dowel location which may be a tricky adjustment. The Vibrasonic vibrates rocks even in a thick slurry and coarsest of abrasives. This is a nice capability but not necessary to polish. The Lot-O is easily slowed by thicker slurries. This is unfortunate when running coarser abrasives but by no means a problem for polishing, just stick with 220 or finer abrasives. The unmodified Vibrasonic bruised obsidian even in the thickest slurries. The Lot-O was hard pressed to bruise obsidian in the thinnest of slurries. Effect of modifications: The modification to the Vibrasonic shortened the distance of it's original vibration travel. But more importantly it softened the reversal speed of each vibration to reduce the impacts on the rocks. Changes were made by adding weight to the hopper and moving the hopper closer to the vibration source to attain these effects. In the case of the Lot-O testing would have to be performed to understand the effect of moving the dowel back or forward. Moving the dowel is in effect changing the amount of spring force and nothing to do with adding weight to hopper or moving hopper closer to vibration source. @ericd, as related to the AO 46 discussion
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 13, 2021 12:42:42 GMT -7
I tinkered with the Vibrasonic vibe and the Lot-O to a lesser amount. For what it's worth: The Vibrasonic is more of a self contained vibration device. It operates on a thick soft pad or a concrete surface about equally. The Lot-O depends on it's specified block foundation, but also the dowel location which may be a tricky adjustment. The Vibrasonic vibrates rocks even in a thick slurry and coarsest of abrasives. This is a nice capability but not necessary to polish. The Lot-O is easily slowed by thicker slurries. This is unfortunate when running coarser abrasives but by no means a problem for polishing, just stick with 220 or finer abrasives. The unmodified Vibrasonic bruised obsidian even in the thickest slurries. The Lot-O was hard pressed to bruise obsidian in the thinnest of slurries. Effect of modifications: The modification to the Vibrasonic shortened the distance of it's original vibration travel. But more importantly it softened the reversal speed of each vibration to reduce the impacts on the rocks. Changes were made by adding weight to the hopper and moving the hopper closer to the vibration source to attain these effects. In the case of the Lot-O testing would have to be performed to understand the effect of moving the dowel back or forward. Moving the dowel is in effect changing the amount of spring force and nothing to do with adding weight to hopper or moving hopper closer to vibration source. @ericd, as related to the AO 46 discussion
|
|