Shims redeux: the simplest cheapest (best?) fix?

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Hylourgos
    Forum Newbie
    • Jun 2005
    • 10
    • .

    Shims redeux: the simplest cheapest (best?) fix?

    I recently queried the group and searched the archives on shim replacement (thanks again for helpful responses). One of my shims had sheared and I needed a quick fix so I could get back to a project that had to be done right away. Based on my needs, I decided to use the following two separate methods, both of which were mentioned in the archives, but only once each--so they may not have produced much notice--and one (the brass shims) was never tried as far as I know, someone just suggested it. I read of no negative responses. The two methods:

    *Brass shims. These *should* be an ideal material for the shims, better than SS anyway.

    *3M Marine 5200.

    Here was the procedure:

    1. Use standard method of disassembly to access the guide holder and shims (http://www.bt3central.com/forum/topi...TOPIC_ID=16878)

    2. Clean up everything in the area. Vacuum, compressed air, then a swab of acetone. Then I took my Dremel and buffed the aluminum guides lightly. Another swab of acetone.

    3. Fabricate brass shim. Using a digital caliper (didn't have a micrometer on hand), I measured the SS shim at .008 thickness. I had on hand some brass shim stock that was .005, which should do. If it doesn't then I'll try something thicker--the play between the aluminum guides is enough to support much thicker stock, which would probably be a better fix, but I was in a hurry, so....

    The brass stock, BTW, I got from a Hobby Lobby store, is made by K&S engineering, stock #5250, sold for $1.99, and is 4" x 10". It cuts easily with a razor knife. I used one factory edge on a 4" side for the length of the shim and made it just a tad wider than the SS one--there's plenty of overhang room on the aluminum guides for a wider shim on the lateral edges (the ones pointing towards the front and back of the saw); likewise, the 4" length is a bit longer but makes for fine tabs. Bent it over a straightedge (make sure to try and get the interior edge--the one *parallel* to the front and back of the saw--the correct width) and cut about 1/4" along the crease on both ends to form the tabs. The bends were not very crisp, but with this thin of brass stock, just tightening up the guide holder forms it nicely.

    4. Lube the aluminum guides. Since I had the thing halfway apart anyway, I took the opportunity to lube the adjustment screws for miter and height. I use a formula that is fairly "dry" and slippery (wire-pull lube + powdered graphite). Used a small dab of the same stuff smeared on all aluminum surfaces that contact shims.

    5. Adhere shims to guide holder. Got out the trusty 3M marine 5200, spread on a thin layer with a razor edge to the guide holder aluminum surfaces (being careful not to get it around the shim set screw openings).

    6. Pop the shims on, reassemble. Use loctite on guide holder and arbor mount screws.

    7. Readjust the shim set screws, again using loctite. This is easy and necessary (I noted upon disassembly that one of mine had been over-tightened, which may have led to the failure).

    8. Give the 5200 a day or so to dry. Use the fast-cure if you can.

    As I mentioned, I had to get a project done right away, so I used it without letting the 5200 cure fully. Everything was smooth and glided easier than I ever remember it to have been. The shims showed no signs of movement. So, I'm hopeful.

    If this works out, it seems the best fix for the shim problem so far, but I wanted to canvass this groups opinions. Norman Haven's shim supports seem to be the favored cure, but if the 5200 works as it has for others (http://bt3000.com/Shims/), then it's far easier, quicker and cheaper than machining. I don't understand anyway, from a material perspective, why the shims have to move at all relative to the aluminum bed of the guide holder. The brass shims are also worth considering: for $2 and maybe 2 minutes of "work" making them, they're an improvement over the SS units economically, materially, and temporally (i.e., you can get them quicker).

    So, what do you think? I'm interested to hear the voices of experience.

    H.
  • Hylourgos
    Forum Newbie
    • Jun 2005
    • 10
    • .

    #2
    OK, wait now--44 looks and not one opinion? C'mon guys, let me know: does this sound like a winner or is it backyard engineering at its worst?

    Don't be shy,
    H.

    Comment

    • Tube Crafter
      Forum Newbie
      • Dec 2003
      • 60
      • Austin, TX.

      #3
      Kudos on a great bit of ingenuity (and perseverance)! I'd be interested to see a photo or drawing of the shims you made. Also, did you notice any play after installing the thinner material? One other thing; while you had everything apart, did you happen to notice anything that looked like it could be used to adjust the angle of the blade holder to the table? There's a big variation in these saws from one example to the next, and no one yet seems to know for sure what causes it. In some, the blade is almost perfectly parallel to the ribs and side edges of the table. In others, there's so much difference, the fence will barely (or barely not) adjust to compensate. I have two BT3100s, but haven't had time to tear down the "bad" one. I keep hoping someone else will figure it out.

      Comment

      • LCHIEN
        Internet Fact Checker
        • Dec 2002
        • 21032
        • Katy, TX, USA.
        • BT3000 vintage 1999

        #4
        quote:Originally posted by Hylourgos

        OK, wait now--44 looks and not one opinion? C'mon guys, let me know: does this sound like a winner or is it backyard engineering at its worst?

        Don't be shy,
        H.
        OK, sounds like it should work, to me.

        Loring in Katy, TX USA
        If your only tool is a hammer, you tend to treat all problems as if they were nails.
        BT3 FAQ - https://www.sawdustzone.org/forum/di...sked-questions

        Comment

        • Black wallnut
          cycling to health
          • Jan 2003
          • 4715
          • Ellensburg, Wa, USA.
          • BT3k 1999

          #5
          Wellsir first I am not a metallurgist. That said what I do know is brass on brass is not self lubricating and aluminum on aluminum galls without much pressure. Stainless is harder than both other mentioned metals. I suspect that long term stainless will last longer than brass without wearing the aluminum. Another problem with brass is it work hardens to the point of being very brittle although this may never be an issue in your intended application.
          Donate to my Tour de Cure


          marK in WA and Ryobi Fanatic Association State President ©

          Head servant of the forum

          ©

          Comment

          • Hylourgos
            Forum Newbie
            • Jun 2005
            • 10
            • .

            #6
            Hey TC, thanks for the comments. I'll try to respond to some of them inter-textually:

            [quote]Originally posted by Tube Crafter

            Kudos on a great bit of ingenuity (and perseverance)! I'd be interested to see a photo or drawing of the shims you made.

            >I normally would've, but was in such a rush....

            Also, did you notice any play after installing the thinner material?

            >Nope. But then the play is adjustable via the set screws, which I was careful to recalibrate.

            One other thing; while you had everything apart, did you happen to notice anything that looked like it could be used to adjust the angle of the blade holder to the table? There's a big variation in these saws from one example to the next, and no one yet seems to know for sure what causes it. In some, the blade is almost perfectly parallel to the ribs and side edges of the table. In others, there's so much difference, the fence will barely (or barely not) adjust to compensate. I have two BT3100s, but haven't had time to tear down the "bad" one. I keep hoping someone else will figure it out.

            >That's a good question. I didn't notice any problems by sight or by the cuts I made, but I should put a dial indicator on the blade to see. There might be .003" difference owing to the different shim thicknesses--but I'm not at all concerned about that in a cut, since the wood will move that much on any given day. However, when I next do this I plan to install thicker brass shim stock on both sides. Perhaps this might be a good case for installing different thicknesses of brass stock if you have a unit whose (aluminum) guides are out of true--assuming that's the cause.

            Thanks for the feedback!
            H.

            Comment

            • Hylourgos
              Forum Newbie
              • Jun 2005
              • 10
              • .

              #7
              quote:Originally posted by Black wallnut

              Wellsir first I am not a metallurgist. That said what I do know is brass on brass is not self lubricating and aluminum on aluminum galls without much pressure. Stainless is harder than both other mentioned metals. I suspect that long term stainless will last longer than brass without wearing the aluminum. Another problem with brass is it work hardens to the point of being very brittle although this may never be an issue in your intended application.
              >Neither am I any sort of engineer or metallurgist, but I have seen plenty of brass sleeve bearings housed in aluminum, so I presume they'll work. But your points are salient, so time will tell on my BT3000.

              >Thanks for the comments,
              H

              Comment

              • Tom Miller
                Veteran Member
                • Mar 2003
                • 2507
                • Twin Cities, MN
                • BT3000 - Cuttin' it old school

                #8
                Here's my concern, and why I think this might only be a short term solution:

                Since brass is much softer than the stainless steel, your set screws will have more of a tendency to dimple the shims, rather than spreading out the force. This means the contact area between the shim and the moving Al part is greatly reduced, and you may wear through the (thinner to start with) brass shims rather quickly.

                I think Ryobi used SS in this application more for it's mechanical properties more than its suitability as bearing material. If the shims were 1/4" thick, then perhaps brass would get the nod, because it would have the required mechanical stiffness. (This is partly what makes me think shims were an after-thought after they realized that Al on Al was not going to work. Just think how much less trouble the shims would be if they were 1/4" thick brass bars captured in the guide holder, and adjusted by set screws.)

                Also, I think the reason that adhesives are not used to hold the shims is because the set screws are meant to push the shims away from the guide holder and against the moving motor mount.

                That's my guess, anyway.

                Regards,
                Tom

                Comment

                • Hylourgos
                  Forum Newbie
                  • Jun 2005
                  • 10
                  • .

                  #9
                  Tom,

                  Thanks for some great observations...

                  [quote]Originally posted by Tom Miller

                  Here's my concern, and why I think this might only be a short term solution:

                  Since brass is much softer than the stainless steel, your set screws will have more of a tendency to dimple the shims, rather than spreading out the force. This means the contact area between the shim and the moving Al part is greatly reduced, and you may wear through the (thinner to start with) brass shims rather quickly.

                  > Good point. After some use I'll remove them and find out just how much dimpling and how uneven the wear was. However, I think that brass as a material is up to the challenge. Is .005 up to the challenge? Hard to say, perhaps not....

                  I think Ryobi used SS in this application more for it's mechanical properties more than its suitability as bearing material. If the shims were 1/4" thick, then perhaps brass would get the nod, because it would have the required mechanical stiffness. (This is partly what makes me think shims were an after-thought after they realized that Al on Al was not going to work. Just think how much less trouble the shims would be if they were 1/4" thick brass bars captured in the guide holder, and adjusted by set screws.)

                  >I too suspect they were almost an after-thought (ball bearings would've been nice, I've been trying to figure out how to work some in, but that would've been cost-ineffective for Ryobi), and that the choice of SS was for durability. If only they had made them a little thicker, the SS would have suffered fewer failures.

                  >Yes, 1/4" brass would be nice, but I don't see *that* much thickness necessary--perhaps something between .005" and .25"?. I'm hoping .010 or .015 will work, which will be the size of the next ones I install. In either case, brass will be a better bearing surface than SS--although I doubt anyone would actually notice it, which makes Ryobi's decision not a bad one.

                  Also, I think the reason that adhesives are not used to hold the shims is because the set screws are meant to push the shims away from the guide holder and against the moving motor mount.

                  > Yet another good point. The only thing that would counter this is if the shim were 1) thick enough to resist dimpling at the set screws, and 2) the set screws were adjusted before the (flexible) adhesive cures. The post that originally suggested the 3m marine 5200 claimed to have been using it successfully for over a decade.

                  > The only way we'll know whether these concerns are valid is to wait a while with the brass installed then inspect them. I'll try to get back and give a report after a few months of use (ha...if they last that long!).

                  Comment

                  • stav
                    Forum Newbie
                    • Jun 2005
                    • 42
                    • Orlando, FL, USA.

                    #10
                    I recently purchased a used BT3K that has this shim problem. Got a great deal, so I didn't worry about it too much. After some research I also came to the conclusion that stainless steal probably isn't the best solution. I was wondering if it would be possible to substitute some of that UHMW tape for the shims. Seems like it should be strong enough and it offers a better sliding surface that metal on metal. I'm open to any thoughts.

                    Here is a link to the type that WoodCraft sells. http://www.woodcraft.com/family.aspx...1&FamilyID=902

                    Comment

                    • Black wallnut
                      cycling to health
                      • Jan 2003
                      • 4715
                      • Ellensburg, Wa, USA.
                      • BT3k 1999

                      #11
                      quote:Originally posted by stav

                      I recently purchased a used BT3K that has this shim problem. Got a great deal, so I didn't worry about it too much. After some research I also came to the conclusion that stainless steal probably isn't the best solution. I was wondering if it would be possible to substitute some of that UHMW tape for the shims. Seems like it should be strong enough and it offers a better sliding surface that metal on metal. I'm open to any thoughts.

                      Here is a link to the type that WoodCraft sells. http://www.woodcraft.com/family.aspx...1&FamilyID=902
                      First Welcome to the Forum! Although UHMW is a great bearing material I do not see how you would be able to use it and still use the set screws on the Guide holder to eliminate play.
                      Donate to my Tour de Cure


                      marK in WA and Ryobi Fanatic Association State President ©

                      Head servant of the forum

                      ©

                      Comment

                      • monte
                        Forum Windbag
                        • Dec 2002
                        • 5242
                        • Paw Paw, MI, USA.
                        • GI 50-185M

                        #12
                        Why not just convert to the BT3100 style shims? It's inexpensive and seems to be a much better shim solution than the BT3000 has.
                        Monte (another darksider)
                        Reporting Live from somewhere near Kalamazoo

                        http://community.webshots.com/user/monte49002

                        Comment

                        • Black wallnut
                          cycling to health
                          • Jan 2003
                          • 4715
                          • Ellensburg, Wa, USA.
                          • BT3k 1999

                          #13
                          quote:Originally posted by monte

                          Why not just convert to the BT3100 style shims? It's inexpensive and seems to be a much better shim solution than the BT3000 has.
                          Not to hi-jack this topic but the "why not" for me is with the simple addition of Norm's Shim Supports and a new set of shims that can be had for next to nothing the shim problem evaporates forever.

                          I do agree that the upgrade is also an option to fix the problem and is also a one time fix. Time will tell if the new style shims and guide holder last as long as some shims on saws, that get used BTW, going back to the early 90's.
                          Donate to my Tour de Cure


                          marK in WA and Ryobi Fanatic Association State President ©

                          Head servant of the forum

                          ©

                          Comment

                          Working...