Victorian Sweatshop Forum
Sign up Calendar Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment  
Amelia (Shipwreck)

Junior Member
Registered:
Posts: 8
Reply with quote  #1 
Math and tech has come a long way since 1924 when Singer made my 66-4 Treadle machine.
I'm on a quest to build a better Treadle base utilizing new insights into the physics of a system, and technological changes.
I still want to keep it treadle and foot powered, with no electronics. I plan to build a new base from scratch, not abuse a beautiful antique.
.
Design problems I want to address:
1. Counter clockwise motion.
There are many ways to keep a rod from reversing now. I would like to explore them.
.
2. System efficiency-
How much work (in the physics sense) is performed by the machine? And the machine + treadle? Are there any easy wins to reduce the work by the humans and increase the efficiency of the system as a whole?
Should a larger diameter flywheel of the same weight be considered? Should the belt be exchanged for a chain and sprockets added?
.
Possible solutions:
1. Add a 'cruiser brake' to the lower flywheel. This brake is inside the hub and engages when the week is turned counter clockwise. This solution presents other problems, such as connecting the hub to the flywheel, or if the bicycle wheel is used instead of the flywheel, weight would have to be added and balanced. This doesn't begin to touch the idea of using a bike chain to drive the system. And the possibility a tensioner would need to be introduced.
...my brain hurts.
0
Chillin in NC

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 254
Reply with quote  #2 
Welcome and good luck with your quest.  I look forward to seeing the progress and final result!  [thumb]
__________________
Regards,  Dan
0
Jim/Steelsewing

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 2,389
Reply with quote  #3 
If I were to use a bicycle hub to power a treadle I'd get all crazy and order a Shimano Nexus 8 speed coaster... which would be an insane thing to do unless the machine was a chain stitch and even then.... Yeah. Okay. I should stop now before I break something.
__________________
It's a beautiful day in the neighborhood.
There is grace within forgiveness, but it's so hard for me to find - Ben Gibbard
My adventures with VSM's: http://steelsewing.blogspot.com
*QuiltnNan and asshat may be synonymous...
0
pgf

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 2,215
Reply with quote  #4 
Shipwreck --  Cool project!

Since you didn't mention it, you might not know:  I guess because chain stitchers really don't like going backwards, Willcox and Gibbs treadles have had reverse brakes since their inception around 1860.  (Singer used the same mechanism in the treadles for the Model 24 chain stitch.)  It consists of a rubber ball in a cage mounted on the upward-moving side of the treadle wheel, near the operators right thigh.  (Remember that on these machines, the hand wheel turns away from the operator.)  When the treadle turns the correct direction, the rubber ball sort of bounces along in the cage.  When the wheel tries to reverse, the ball jams firmly in place, and the wheel won't move.  You can see the tapered bulge that holds the 3/4" ball in this photo.
screenshot_2.png 

I've also seen discussions about brake levers on old Wheeler and Wilson treadles.  Those seem to be wooden riders that also jam when the wheel goes the wrong way.

paul


__________________
My machines: http://projects.foxharp.net/sewing_machines/by-age
0
Amelia (Shipwreck)

Junior Member
Registered:
Posts: 8
Reply with quote  #5 
Wow! No I didn't know about that!
I was considering the kids' bike hub or a one way bearing, but the ball solution is darn elegant!
0
Cecilia

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 180
Reply with quote  #6 
Paul, that’s so cool!!!! (And what a beautiful treadle base, too...) Who knew they had rubber balls in 1860... hadn’t thought of that until now. ;-).
__________________
Saving the World... One Sewing Machine at a Time!
0
denaliskyfire

Member
Registered:
Posts: 46
Reply with quote  #7 
Simplicity itself! Elegant solution and hassle free. I wonder how long the rubber ball lasted before it needed to be replaced.
__________________
-Naomi

Denali Skyfire Custom Crafts
0
Amelia (Shipwreck)

Junior Member
Registered:
Posts: 8
Reply with quote  #8 
Well, in the modern era- that's just another super bounce ball from the grocery store, right?
0
Amelia (Shipwreck)

Junior Member
Registered:
Posts: 8
Reply with quote  #9 
@Jim
I'm on the Treadle On group on Facebook, one of them mentioned you might be interested in the math/physics involved in this project?
0
KalamaQuilts

Avatar / Picture

Junior Member
Registered:
Posts: 5
Reply with quote  #10 
I know people are generally taller today than in the glory days of treadle machines. I wonder if any of the issues you mention and higher machines in general have been address in modern treadles which are still made and sold. 
Fun thinking project. I'm 5'1" so my treadle is perfect, other than the same problem across all cabinet machines of the time, you aren't situated behind the needle but the machine center. Something to think about in your rebuild. 
0
stitchntime

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 324
Reply with quote  #11 
Quote:
Originally Posted by KalamaQuilts
I know people are generally taller today than in the glory days of treadle machines. I wonder if any of the issues you mention and higher machines in general have been address in modern treadles which are still made and sold. 
Fun thinking project. I'm 5'1" so my treadle is perfect, other than the same problem across all cabinet machines of the time, you aren't situated behind the needle but the machine center. Something to think about in your rebuild. 


Someone on here posted some pictures of (I think) a German treadle machine that was wider and had the needle centered on the operator.  Pretty nifty. 

Regarding size, I find old domestic treadles very cramped for leg/knee space.  Industrial treadles on the other hand seem spacious in comparison.  I'm not sure if the cramped quarters are due to economics or the size of the average user.

Interesting thread.  Keep posting your progress please.  I'm impressed at how efficient a properly tuned 130 year old treadle base can be, even with simple cone and common bore bearings.

Greg
0
Cecilia

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 180
Reply with quote  #12 
I was thinking of a way to raise a Singer treadle base by 6” or so. I have a plan in my head but it involves welding or machining. And I don’t have welding or machining stuff.
__________________
Saving the World... One Sewing Machine at a Time!
0
kndpakes

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 114
Reply with quote  #13 
More knee room both vertically and horizontally would be a big help to me with both electric and treadle cabinets. Sears introduced the "Sit-Right Franklin"in 1916 with a 4 page spread in the catalog about the wonders of sitting directly in front of the needle. Here is a clip from the 1917 catalog showing how the operator is centered on the needle. It really is annoying and eventually painful to sew for long periods of time in a narrow cabinet when you have to scrunch to the side to feed the fabric. 

1917SitRightFranklin.jpg

0
leecopp

Junior Member
Registered:
Posts: 5
Reply with quote  #14 
Treadles can be fun to mess with ..
I use foot powered industrial treadles for my domestic and industrial machines.

1. Larger / heavier band wheel
a.) Takes  More energy to spin up and slow down
b.) allow you to sew faster
c.) Takes less effort to maintain speed .. not sure but .. if we consider the resistance of the sewing machine to be a TORQUE value X , the big wheel should require less force to balance out the torque resistance of the machine. 

But then I confuse myself thinking about the force applied by the treadle plate might be the same for either size bandwheel since it has approximately the same force arm for either bandwheel.

Ok .. for item C ... I dont know.

The big gotcha is the speeding up and slowing down.  I would suggest that most actual sewing is for fairly short seams .. certainly less than a couple feet. This means speed up and slow down efforts probably swamp out any efficiencies of sewing fast .

I have converted all three of my active industrial treadles to smaller domestic wheels because they speed up and slow down easier.

Thanks for the fun diversion.


Lee in Florida

Fwiw I am a big guy, usually treadle with one foot and stradle the left leg..

The mountain bike analogy works well with the  multi sprocket front gear and small gear cluster at the rear for tuning speed/rpm/effort.

The direction brake with simple hard rubber ball works pretty slick. I have found that with my treadles you can watch/sense which way things are rotating and can often start hands free.  For me at least, stopping requires the hand.

Cecillia Mentions wanting to raise the deck without welding. I have successfully used a wood spacer to even out the deck for an old patcher treadle. This is not high art, but can be done for testing.. Remember some old treadles irons barely reached the top of the band wheel and utilized the drawer  /side  assemblies to get the deck at the right height.


Happy day.

0
leecopp

Junior Member
Registered:
Posts: 5
Reply with quote  #15 
Re: Bandwheel size.

THe smaller band wheel yields more piercing power .. check out pictures of old treadle powered leather sewing machines.
0
Amelia (Shipwreck)

Junior Member
Registered:
Posts: 8
Reply with quote  #16 

Science!

OK.

So I have researched flywheels, rotational inertia, and dual-mass flywheels.

The basic formula for rotational inertia of a hoop is mass x radius^2

Here are my findings:

  1. The diameter of the wheel affects rotational inertia far more than weight. 
  2. When it does come to weight-t he distribution of it matters a lot. Spokes are good, hub weight is almost irrelevant, and the weight out at the edge of the rim is the most impactful.

So the singer 66-4 wood cabinet has a 12.5", 4lb cast iron flywheel.

My husband's bike has a 22" rim, that's only 2.5lb. 

Because radius is squared, the larger, lighter wheel has almost exactly the same rotational inertia as the smaller, heavier wheel. I.E. It's no harder to push, and will remain turning just as long as the smaller wheel.

The gain here is in the ratio from the bike wheel to the handwheel (which has a 2.5" diameter)
The original ratio is 1/5- Meaning for each 1 revolution of the lower wheel, the machine makes 5 stitches.
If the bike wheel is used, the ratio is 1/8.8 Meaning for each 1 revolution of the lower wheel, the upper wheel makes 8.8 stitches, and is the same effort to start/stop.


test1.png 



0
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.