Introducing ... the "Steel Webster"

[awake]

My very first IC engine (actually, first engine of any kind) - based on the Webster design, but modified to suit personal preferences and materials on hand. A major difference, as suggested by the title, is that it is made (almost) entirely of steel. The only exceptions are the piston (cast iron), the cylinder fins (aluminum), the small end bearings and rocker arm bearings (brass), and the valve guides (bronze). Except for the plain bearings just mentioned, all other bearings are metric sized, flanged ball bearings (metric because they are cheap on eBay).

I began the build on November 16, 2019, and while there are still some things to be done (mounting the gas tank, for example), it did achieve its first run Saturday night (or maybe it was early Sunday morning!). Here is the YouTube video of its second run (I was so excited and surprised when it started up the first time, with almost no fiddling and adjusting, that I failed to get a video of it - and I promptly killed it when I tried adjusting the needle valve):

<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KA-9Qec2eYc" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KA-9Qec2eYc</a>

A major goal was to use materials on hand rather than buying - thus the use of steel throughout, as I have plenty of that but not a lot of aluminum, particularly in the sizes that would be needed. As it turned out, the only items purchased for this engine - not counting tooling, which I assure my wife does not count - were the ignition components (points, condenser, coil, spark plug), a package of needles to make the needle valve, and a couple of different sizes of flanged bearings (eBay specials, fortunately purchased before everything in China came to a stand-still). Everything else came out of my scrap bin, including some parts that were fabricated via weld-up.

I have put this in the From Plans forum ... hopefully this is the right place, even though I did not build it exactly according to the Webster plans.
Would it be appropriate / helpful / okay / of any interest to go ahead and do a series of posts detailing the build? And if so, is this the right forum to put the build posts in? I await your feedback (please be gentle - remember that I am a newbie!), and even if the consensus is not to provide the detail, I will want to follow up (in whatever forum is appropriate) with some questions about how to fine-tune it - I don't really know what I'm listening for as I attempt to adjust the needle valve and throttle.

[awake]

Here are some CAD renderings reflecting the tweaks I made to the design:

[Admiral_dk]

Congratulations on your first runner 

Always a major milestone to pass - and in this case a good runner too 

Best wishes

Per

[Roger B]

Very nice job    It's always very satisfying when it runs 

[awake]

Thank you both! I was more than a little surprised (pleasantly) when it came to life. Even though it had a good "bounce-back," I know the compression is less than perfect, because I can hear it leaking down when I turn it by hand. At least at the moment, this is without any gaskets; from what I can tell, the leaking is mostly or entirely in the cylinder, not in the valves - could well be the connection between the head and the cylinder, since that is not as carefully polished and precise as other parts. (For example, the faces of the valve block and the head, where they connect, are polished to a mirror finish, as are the faces of the individual pieces of the valve block.) But, I did have bounce-back, and I did have the "snort" of the intake valve on the intake stroke, so I thought I'd give it a try, using my best guess for the exhaust and ignition timing and needle setting. I had to spin the flywheel by hand, as I haven't made any sort of starter connector yet, and it took a few spins to get it to turn over all the way, but ... surprise, surprise, it started running. Yes indeed, a major milestone, and incredibly satisfying!

[Craig DeShong]

You're embarrassing us all with an engine that runs 'out of the box'.  I've had one or two myself, but with most of them it's been more pleading, begging, and cajoling. 

Congratulations on a fine runner!

[b.lindsey]

Well done Andy. Congrats on a fine runner!!

Bill

[awake]

Thanks, Craig and Bill!

Craig, given the incredible Crossley Otto Langen you just completed, I don't think you have any reason to be embarrassed - more like the other way round! And once you see all the parts I botched and butchered along the way, you may feel more pity than anything else!

Andy

Sent from my Lenovo TB-8504F using Tapatalk

[90LX_Notch]

Awesome! Congratulations on your first runner.  Nicely done.

-Bob

[Bear]

Very nice. I am just starting out, no lathe yet, and for a first build, your's looks a little ambitious for me.

[awake]

Thanks, Bob and Bear!

Bear, the Webster is often considered a starter project, but that is with respect to building an IC engine. For actually starting out as a beginner, the general recommendation is to make a basic compressed-air engine, something like a simple wobbler, as the first project -- much, much easier as a place to start, a lot fewer parts, a lot more forgiving, etc.

A major factor in why I was able to / chose to jump straight to this engine as my very first engine project is that I have already been a home / hobby machinist for 10-15 years, with two lathes, two mills, and a lot of other equipment and tooling. (I need to sell one of the mills, because I never use it - but I do use both lathes!) I've made quite a number of precision projects of various sorts through the years - just not engines before now.

Were it not for that lengthy experience and plenty of equipment, I do not think I could have completed this project at all, much less in 4 months. And even with that lengthy experience and equipment, this project definitely stretched me; I had never made such teeny tiny parts before! (And by the way, some of those teeny tiny parts got made several times, as I broke bits or had other oh-crud moments!)

But here's the thing - 10-15 years ago, I had never had any experience with metal-working other than welding. I got a couple of hours of "instruction" from a friend, who also was an invaluable help in buying and repairing my first lathe; I read at LOT and asked a lot of questions; and I learned by doing. Once you get a lathe, start in on a project; from the very beginning, work to hit +/-.001", and then start working on hitting +/-.0002". Of course, there are many parts / operations that do not need this level of precision, and it is better to move on rather than to beat yourself up over a lousy .0001" that doesn't matter in the first place. But aiming for that .001" or .0001" builds your ability to hit it when it does really matter.

Your skills will grow quickly. It doesn't take 10-15 years - I could certainly have taken on this project much, much sooner - maybe after a few months?? or a year?? I certainly was tackling some high-precision projects fairly early on (just nowhere near the number of parts, nor the tiny size). The reason I didn't build an engine before now is that I just didn't have time. Well, actually, I don't have the time now, either, but the itch got to be too much ...

[awake]

Finally I'm getting a chance to start the build log - sorry it has taken so long. Work has been crazy busy as we have worked to adjust to the new paradigms enforced by the current pandemic!

The build log begins with the frame; the CAD file is included as the first two attachments below (one as an image, one as the .pdf file).

Now, before we go any further, I plead for grace - I have not a single bit of training in drafting, so I am sure I have not laid this out or drawn it up in the best possible way. I would greatly appreciate [gentle and kind] pointers on how I could improve these drawings!

As I mentioned in the opening post, a significant part of what drove my interpretation of the Webster was use of materials on hand, which meant almost entirely steel. The frame is no exception; it began life as a couple of pieces of fairly heavy c-channel - which first had to be wire-brushed to remove the rust (attachment 3 below).

After chamfering the mating edges, these were clamped together (attachments 4 and 5), tacked (attachment 6), and welded (attachments 7-8). Yes, it had been a while since I had done any TIG welding, and the results show the lack of practice!

[awake]

Continuing on the frame ...

To clean up the weldment, I mostly used my restored Southbend 7" shaper - I really like using the shaper for squaring up parts, since I can let it run while I do something else (attachment 1 below).

I didnt get a picture of  what happened next - I milled off the closed "top" and cut / milled the sides to give me the overall shape that I wanted. You can see that shape in attachment 2 below. This picture shows that not everything happened in logical sequence - as you can see, before I trimmed this end to be flat and to length, I had already made and added the bearing flanges - which was premature, as later I had to remove one of them to complete other parts of the frame and the ultimate assembly.

Not shown are the various operations I did to give me a flat inside surface where needed (rather than the angled and rough surface of the c-channel) - again, the shaper did the bulk of this work, but some of the setups were a little on the "just barely" side.

I don't have pictures of drilling the various holes in either side of the frame (yes, I hear that sigh of relief!) - and indeed I didn't drill them all at the same time, because I kept figuring out new holes that were needed as the design went along! But I do have a picture of what is arguably the most important hole, the main bore in which the bearing flanges mount, which in turn hold the crankshaft (attachment 3 below).

Finally, attachment 4 below is a shot of an operation that actually occured after the first run, when I further tweaked the design to create a mount for the gas tank - this notch will accommodate a bit of tubing with a set screw in it, allowing it to clamp the rod that holds the gas tank mount at the desired height.

[Roger B]

Some interesting techniques  Not that many modelers have a shaper. Don't worry about the drawings, mine are just electronic back of an envelope style, yours look quite professional 

[awake]

Thanks! Yes, the shaper has been a nice addition to the shop. It is not as all-purpose as the mill, of course, and it is not overly quick. But its ability to work across a surface unattended is a great convenience, and for some things, it is invaluable. One example was reaching "inside" the frame to work on the inside surfaces - I didn't have an endmill long enough to manage that, but on the shaper I could set the piece sideways and reach "across" to work on the inside surface. Unfortunately, I don't seem to have taken any pictures of that. But later on I'll show a picture of the shaper in use cutting keyways, since I don't have a set of broaches.