Have you tried the  http://www.lathes.co.uk/   site? Depending how illegible the name is could Midgley & Sutcliffe be an option? 


Best regards


Roger 

The "Tew" bit is definitely right, it's the second name where some of the letters are blurred, but the number of letters is right.


Yes, I've been using lathes.co.uk to find the history of my lathe (cracking site), it's on this page http://www.lathes.co.uk/portass/index.html in the 1939 advert some way down as the "Super £7.19.6"! But isn't featured anywhere else on his site so I might send him some photos.


Cheers,


Andy

Andy,

One thing that has occurred to me is that if it is only the first two or three threads that are damaged it may be practical to run a plug tap a couple of turns into the hole and it may not matter whether you use 3/16 BSF or 2BA as the difference between the two is not major. Of course this is assuming that the damaged threads are a small proportion of the total length of thread. My guess would be you are dealing with BSF as you suspect, but being a slightly smaller diameter (both at thread top and bottom) the BA tap might be safe as a first try even if it turns out to be BSF. Sadly though I used to have my father's old BA tap and die set, it vanished during a move (I think in the direction of my brother....).

Hi Roger,

As it turns out they were on lathes.co.uk after all, while I was looking there again I just found them by chance hidden under "Rodney"!!!

"Made by Tew & Gautrey in Church Street, Gogenhow, Northamptonshire"

So I was close with the name.


One like mine is at the bottom of http://www.lathes.co.uk/rodney/ with photos captioned (my underline) "The seldom-found, stand-alone Rodney vertical miller"


That's satisfying! And, because it was more commonly sold as an attachment for Myford lathes, if I do get really stuck there's probably someone in the Myford fan club who'll be able to help.


Cheers,


Andy

So half the problem solved ? I think that trying to remove the damaged threads is the best solution. They were probably damaged by someone trying to use the wrong thread, possibly metric 


When you have got your machines in good working order here's a project suggestion: A breath powered piston valve engine, 6mm bore.



https://youtu.be/qoLbLisxNLU


It's good as an icebreaker when starting to talk about engineering, just take it out of your pocket and give a blow (it also doesn't smell like my IC models do)


Best regards


Roger

Yes, I like those, I'd also like to have a go at a miniature Stirling engine sometime - but many other projects to come first!


Most likely along these lines is that I'd finally properly make something at the other end of the scale. About 15 years ago I built a 3m high 3m long beam atmospheric engine with a group of 10-12 year olds, to show them what used to be in the engine houses that surround us in SE Cornwall. It was hugely successful, and we showed it at several events, but we did rather cheat by powering it by a vacuum cleaner. (I was the health and safety governor at the school where we built it so thought I should be a little bit careful!) Ever since then I've wanted to try again, but actually making it steam powered - the nice thing is that it can be at VERY low pressure, but in turn this means a better piston seal than we were able to make at the time. But again, a few other jobs to come first.


You may have noticed I've kept very quiet about how those threads got damaged, I do know exactly how it happened. The machine was donated to me back when I was running the above schools' engineering club, but we had a very short window to dismantle and move it. ("If you can move it yourselves this lunchtime you can have it, otherwise it's going for scrap.") If we'd had a suitable sized three legged puller and a suitable spacer block it wouldn't have happened, what we did have was a number 4 Birmingham screwdriver. I shall say no more and move on before a hollow square is formed and my CEng is ceremoniously removed...


Anyway all sorted now, a gentle bit of drilling got rid of the mangled threads, and I found another screw on the machine which was the same size and which I could measure accurately. The biggest challenge last night was finding somewhere that sold 3/16" BSF x 3/4" cap head bolts! But they're on order now.


Coffee time over,


Cheers,


Andy

Arran Cameron:

Somebody will know the answer to this…


Almost all British machinery manufactured before 1950 used Whitworth, BSF, or BA fasteners. Manufacturers moved towards using metric fasteners in the 1970s and these have been the most commonly available and used family since 1980, although the proposal to use metric fasteners dates back 1965. Whitworth and BSF officially became obsolete in 1948 following an agreement between the UK, US, and Canada to standardise on the American UNC and UNF fasteners for future use. UNC and UNF fasteners were used in British machinery manufactured in the 1950s, 60s, and 70s where they gradually replaced Whitworth and BSF before themselves being replaced by metric fasteners.


1. Were UNC and UNF fasteners used across most industries in the UK or were they largely confined to specific industries such as automotive and machine tools? Were they regularly used in railways or shipbuilding?

2. Were the numbered sizes smaller than ¼ inch commonly used or did industry stick with BA fasteners until they moved to using metric fasteners?

3. Were UNC and UNF fasteners commonly used in construction? What are the most common family of fasteners used to hold together 1960s tower blocks and university buildings?

4. Was it easy to buy UNC and UNF fasteners from hardware and DIY shops in the 1960s and 70s or did they move directly from selling Whitworth and BA fasteners to metric fasteners?

I have read this whole thread with great interest.


 If Whitworth and BSF became officially obsolete in 1948, then my observations suggest that many industries ignored officialdom. This is possibly just as well. Many industries in the 1950s probably had the foresight to recognise that the standard used in countries where the metric system was well established - the standard now known as Isometric - was the "band waggon". A planned and phased move to that standard when the  time was ripe was preferable to converting to American standards with the prospect of a further conversion later.


To answer the initial questions:


1.  I served my time in the 1960s in the electricity supply industry. There, Whitworth and BSF were dominant and in continuing use by plant manufacturers.  I came across American Unified fasteners mainly on motor cars. At the time I put this down to the dominance of American organisations like Ford and GM. Ford was later a key player in the automotive industry's conversion to Isometric.


2. I believe that the smallest Whitworth size was 1/8 inch. I came across this size in domestic appliances but it was rarely found in the industrial environment, where the BA series was more popular for fasteners of this size. Whitworth sizes were popular from 3/16 inch upwards.


3. I have little experience of the construction industry at that time. On theatre electrical equipment, I came across both UNC and Whitworth. This caused confusion because the two standards were similar but not quite identical. A nut of one could sometimes be forced onto a screw thread of the other - not recommended practice of course. Confusion was further caused by the nut sizes (across the flats) being different.


4. I have long thought that a lot of obsolete stuff, surplus to industry's requirement, gets dumped on the home DIY market. The move from Whitworth to Isometric was somewhat sporadic, with Unified occasionally getting in the way. I remember once around 1975 in a hardware store, asking for some Isometric fasteners, and being told, rather pompously, "They will never catch on for years yet." Six months later, the  same shop was selling almost exclusively Isometric

• Quote

Re: UNC and UNF fasteners in Britain

Posted by mapj1 on Jun 5, 2019 4:09 pm

I fear, as 2BA is about 4 or 5mm dia, and thread pitch 0.81mm  (0BA is practically M6, 6mm dia, and 1mm pitch, and each higher  BA size is 90% of the dimensions of the preceding.)

You may not find it possible to get a gauge that is thin enough to fit down hole and engage sufficiently convincingly to be sure. Depending on the hole depth and the how much is damaged it may be safer to taper ream the damaged turns until a bolt fits. (and note that a brass bolt will reveal binding without damaging the steel, though go gently, you do not wish to snap the head off.)

regards Mike

As others have pointed out, the BA range was essentially metric based. 0BA is practically the same as M6 with a thread pitch of 1 mm but the thread profile is different. Other BA sizes do not have such clear round dimensions, though there is a logical system. I think one reason why BA did not catch on is because people prefer, to gauge numbers, sizes relating to actual physical dimensions in recognised measurement units, so that bolts can be easily related to bolt hole clearances, etc. To give a parallel example, the gauge sizes for self-tapping wood screws had a good purpose in the mid-20th century, but nowadays the actual thickness in millimetres is preferred. I remember a fiasco in the mid 60s when fitters requested the factory store to issue some sheet metal. Their request was in actual thickness as measured with a micrometer, but the storeman only knew gauge numbers. Two hours were wasted until someone found a conversion chart.


I recently required some 4BA screws for an electrical job. The nearest to this you can buy in shops nowadays is M3·5. I got what I wanted from E-bay without difficulty.

Thanks for your reply, Andy. Yes of course BA was successful in its day and served its purpose well. In my industry I came across BA sizes in instruments and other small assemblies. I was used for many other purposes, including bicycles.


In the 60s I had a Suzuki motor bike and Renault car, so I came across metric fasteners there, and bought myself a set of metric spanners (which I still have to this day). My first experience of Isometric fasteners in industry was in 1973 when I worked for a while for a subsidiary of Philips.


As you say, modern on-line shopping is marvelous for procuring "impossible" things. I have a Christmas tree lighting set from the 1950s which now has great sentimental value and I can still get spare bulbs to keep it going.

It was my Renault 4 which I got in about '78 that caused me to get the metric spanners and socket set which I sill use - that whole engine could be removed and stripped down with (IIRC)  10mm and 17mm sockets and spanners! I had a lot of fun with that car, shame about the rust that killed it...


Cheers, Andy