bowl steady

[Max Taylor]

I am needing plans for a bowl steady made of bb plywood. I have a PM3520b that has a 10 in. swing or 20 in. blank. Any help out there? Thanky, Max

 

[GeorgeH]

http://www.davidreedsmith.com/Articles/MagSteady/magsteady.htm

http://www.easttexaswoodturners.org/Steadyrest-Mini.htm

http://www.turnwood.net/projects/SteadyRest.pdf

 

[John King]

Checkout following links and attached pdf file. - John

http://www.newwoodworker.com/stdyrstpln.html

http://www.woodcentral.com/articles/turning/articles_128.shtml

 

[Bill Boehme]

I like most all of them ...

The one by Tom Crosby of the Woodturners of East Texas is very nice and could easily scaled up in size for a larger lathe. In fact most of these are very much alike except for the first one which a clever idea for a spindle steady. The detailed step by step procedure in the plans by Ray Lanham is useful even if building a different design which is fortunate since the link given in the instructions no longer works. The plans offered by Tom Hintz are very similar to the others if they are the same as the free plans that he had several years ago. A couple bucks isn't too much to pay for already printed plans. I like the lock down mechanism on the plans by Dominic Greco. Finally, the use of aluminum T-track in the Fine Woodworking article is a clever idea that I would very seriously consider because of its sturdiness and ease of adjustment.

Bill

 

[John King]

Max - A pdf file that was attached to my original post was removed because it was a copyright article. You can find the article in Fine Woodworking Magazine, Issue No. 143, Page 14. The article is titled Shopmade Steady Rest.

My experience is that most public libraries have back issues of Fine Woodworking Magazine; therefore, no need to purchase a back issue to get the steady rest article.

Good luck. - John

 

[Bill Boehme]

Max, I have back issues for about the last 15 years so if you need it, I will loan it to you for a nominal fee (free).

 

[Bruce McElhaney]

Bowl Steady plans

I built one using this fine plan by Dominic Greco. I've used it on bowls vases and peppermills. It works great, however I rarely use it these days except for tall vases as my technique has improved and feel it's overkill for me. But If you tend to launch a lot of bowls, then you need one.

I would just add if you do use a bowl steady make sure the bowl is completely round, and keep the wheel pressure light as they can create marks on your finish. Some folks use masking tape on the finished wood where the wheels run to prevent that problem.


http://www.woodcentral.com/articles/turning/articles_128.shtml

 

[MichaelMouse]

I just hinted at how nice it would be to see a Oneway steady with appropriate block under the tree. New lathe, new block. Spindle steady fits the same base. That was fathers' day.

 

[odie]

I just hinted at how nice it would be to see a Oneway steady with appropriate block under the tree. New lathe, new block. Spindle steady fits the same base. That was fathers' day.

MM......

I have the Oneway Bowl Steady......and find it to be a well made attachment. It costs a hundred bucks, but I think it's well worth it. I did do some modifications to mine that improved the performance. It absolutely does soften the vibrations of the bowl while cutting the interior.....great! :cool2: I give it my recommendation........

otis of cologne.

 

[Donna Banfield]

Modifications?

Odie, you mention some modifications to your Oneway Bowl Steady, that made performance better. Could you share your modifications with us, and what improvement they made?

I have the Oneway Bowl Steady, and have already gone through a set of wheels trying to find the fine line between not enough support and too much (i.e., leaving long rubber skid marks on the bowl exterior).

 

[KurtB]

Donna,
Check this link that Odie left in the How To forum:

http://www.aawforum.org/vbforum/showthread.php?t=3714

KurtB

 

[odie]

Odie, you mention some modifications to your Oneway Bowl Steady, that made performance better. Could you share your modifications with us, and what improvement they made?

I have the Oneway Bowl Steady, and have already gone through a set of wheels trying to find the fine line between not enough support and too much (i.e., leaving long rubber skid marks on the bowl exterior).

Hi Donna......

Click on the link that KurtB left and you'll see it's a real easy fix to true up the two wheels to run true to each other. This is a major reason why the Oneway Bowl Steady didn't work for me like it's cracked up to be......and if Oneway manufacturing were on the ball, they'd do this to all their future bowl steadies at the factory.

One other suggestion I can make, is to make sure you don't put too much pressure of the wheels to your bowl......just a light pressure is all it takes to eliminate vibration. I've found that it's the soft rubber in the wheels that absorb that vibration......not pressure.

Of course, you'll find with many bowls, and species of wood, that a certain amount of warping takes place as the interior of the bowl is removed.....the thinner you wish to make the wall thickness, the more this will be apparent. As you bring the rim to thickness and proceed deeper into the bowl interior, you may want to also bring the wheels of the bowl steady to a position closer to where your tool is currently cutting.

One more thing.......the wheels of the OBS should always be positioned perpendicular to the spindle, not the bowl surface itself......but, I'll give you the credit for knowing that already! I'll bet there will be one or two reading this that didn't......ha!

I know you'll like that Oneway Bowl Steady......do the modification and play around with it......it's a great invention!

otis of cologne

 

[Donna Banfield]

Thank you KurtB and Odie...

I will try that 'fix' and see if my wheels last longer and the 'steadying' works the way I expect it should work.

I love Oneway stuff, but there are couple things that I just scratch my head with their products. But, nobody's perfect, especially me!

 

[MichaelMouse]

Odie says you know about keeping the wheels perpendicular to the axis of rotation, but he doesn't remind you that if they are curved across their section, it makes no difference if they meet the piece at different distances from the headstock. More or less why they're curved, rather than square-sided like the wheels on the spindle steady. And why they move independently by design rather than in unison.

The scrubbing you mention is produced by the same thing as the twist in your shavings - difference in diameter. The point in contact with the greater diameter wants to turn at a greater # of fps than the point in contact with the lesser diameter, and scrubs off material if you try to make it by squeezing it into the piece. So take advantage of the double curve of that skate wheel and keep the cross-slope to a minimum and you'll do fine. Just touch the curved surface to the wood and with any kind of modest slope, the shape should compensate. If you've got a severe taper, consider a flat as part of your design, and don't tell people it was for the steady to bear on.

Or remove it after the center's right.

 

[Bill Boehme]

Donna,
Check this link that Odie left in the How To forum:

http://www.aawforum.org/vbforum/showthread.php?t=3714

KurtB

Can you describe what happens when the wheels are not running in the same line?

 

[Donna Banfield]

Boehme, not sure if you were directing your question to KurtB or Odie. But the wheels on my bowl steady had very uneven wear --and I mean REALLY uneven wear, so that if one wheel was touching, the other wheel was more than a 1/4 inch away from the piece.

Like I said, it took a few times to figure out how much pressure to put on the scissors in the beginning, and those first few times likely took out much of that rubber; since that goof, I could never get the wheels to do the job they were supposed to.

I'll pick up a new set of wheels at a skate/ride shop, and a longer set of bolts/washers and try the fix when I'm turning bowls again.

 

[odie]

Can you describe what happens when the wheels are not running in the same line?

boehme.....

I haven't been on for a few days and I see this question was left hanging......sorry bout that!

Often times there is a single track on a bowl where the wheels will run well. In order to hit that right, the two wheels need to be running true to one another. Ultimately, it depends on the shape of your bowl as to where the best tracking will be.....some shapes are more usable in this respect.

If one wheel is off of that best track, I noticed it had a tendency to rub away the wheel rubber.

The more slanted the walls of the bowl, the more this tends to be so. Ideally, we would be turning cylinders for the wheels to not be affected negatively......but, what fun would that be?

otis of cologne

 

[odie]

Boehme, not sure if you were directing your question to KurtB or Odie. But the wheels on my bowl steady had very uneven wear --and I mean REALLY uneven wear, so that if one wheel was touching, the other wheel was more than a 1/4 inch away from the piece.

Like I said, it took a few times to figure out how much pressure to put on the scissors in the beginning, and those first few times likely took out much of that rubber; since that goof, I could never get the wheels to do the job they were supposed to.

I'll pick up a new set of wheels at a skate/ride shop, and a longer set of bolts/washers and try the fix when I'm turning bowls again.

Donna.......

Be sure to let us know how the skate wheels work out for you. I'm thinking the regular skate wheels have stiffer rubber than those supplied with the OW bowl steady.

I'm sure the original wheels will be available from Oneway manufacturing......I should probably get a spare set, although my wheels still have a lot of life left on them.

otis of cologne

 

[Bill Boehme]

boehme.....

I haven't been on for a few days and I see this question was left hanging......sorry bout that!

Often times there is a single track on a bowl where the wheels will run well. In order to hit that right, the two wheels need to be running true to one another. Ultimately, it depends on the shape of your bowl as to where the best tracking will be.....some shapes are more usable in this respect.

If one wheel is off of that best track, I noticed it had a tendency to rub away the wheel rubber.

The more slanted the walls of the bowl, the more this tends to be so. Ideally, we would be turning cylinders for the wheels to not be affected negatively......but, what fun would that be?

otis of cologne

Thanks Otis. If I understand what you are saying is that any scuffing caused by the wheels not tracking perfectly true is going to accelerate wear and the job of getting both of them tracking true is much more difficult, if not sometimes impossible, if they are not both running in the same plane.

 

[Jake Debski]

Donna.......

Be sure to let us know how the skate wheels work out for you. I'm thinking the regular skate wheels have stiffer rubber than those supplied with the OW bowl steady.

I'm sure the original wheels will be available from Oneway manufacturing......I should probably get a spare set, although my wheels still have a lot of life left on them.

otis of cologne

Obviously new wheels are the best, but I have a stack of various composition wheels, all gathered, for a couple of dollars, at the Salvation Army Store or Goodwill Boutique. I buy the inline skates and remove the wheels. You would be amazed at how often those skates look nearly unused. I don't have a OW steady but rather a home built for my hollow forms.

 

[odie]

Obviously new wheels are the best, but I have a stack of various composition wheels, all gathered, for a couple of dollars, at the Salvation Army Store or Goodwill Boutique. I buy the inline skates and remove the wheels. You would be amazed at how often those skates look nearly unused. I don't have a OW steady but rather a home built for my hollow forms.

Thanks Jake.......

That's good to know. I sometimes go to the local Goodwill, and the next time I do, I'll be sure to look for some inline skates.

Although the original OW wheels seem to be pretty soft, I can only guess as to how well a harder wheel would work. Your suggestion gives me the option to find out......and it would be pretty cheap to experiment.

otis of cologne

 

[odie]

Thanks Otis. If I understand what you are saying is that any scuffing caused by the wheels not tracking perfectly true is going to accelerate wear and the job of getting both of them tracking true is much more difficult, if not sometimes impossible, if they are not both running in the same plane.

Well, yes.....I think so, boehme......

I've been sitting here contemplating this for a few minutes, and if it weren't for Donna's post, I wouldn't have been aware of what kind of problems come up when the wheels do get badly worn. I'm still on my original set of wheels, and they're in good shape.

If I'm remembering correctly about the chain of events that led to my discoveries.........

Very early on, after purchasing the OWBS, I was (re)shaping the interior of a bowl that had already been finely sanded on the exterior surface. Because the surface the wheels were running on was so smooth, the rubbing off of rubber wasn't really noticeable on the wheel itself, but was apparent from "skid marks" left on the very smooth bowl surface itself. When I realized what was happening, I began to give the tracking of the wheels a hard look. When I discovered that the thickness of the scissor arms were the reason why both wheels didn't run exactly true to one another, I made the changes in the "upgrade post" that KurtB noted earlier in this thread. I just happened to have the correct machine screw and washers on hand to do the fix, so I was able to immediately do the correction and see the results on the same bowl right away. Even though what I'd seen was very minor skid marks, in the first place........after "the fix", they were eliminated, or significantly reduced.

I'm just thankful that I was working on the bowl I was, or I might not have ever noticed what was happening until long afterwards. If that bowl had been only rough sanded, I'd probably be here complaining, right along with Donna, about wheels that wear prematurely.

The wheels run best if the contact point is centered on the width of the wheel. Sometimes there is only one or two places on a particular bowl where this is possible.......like the apex of a curved surface, or an outward facing rim. If a bowl is in a "barrel" shape, there may be many places where the wheels could run and be suitable for the purpose.

In the case of the apex of a curved bowl, there is only one point where the wheels will run true, and if the wheels are not tracking true to one another, one wheel will not be on that track line.....and if not, this makes true tracking an impossibility, as the OWBS was designed.

I hope this explanation puts things in a clearer light for you.......and, maybe one or two others........

otis of cologne

 

[Jake Debski]

Thanks Jake.......

That's good to know. I sometimes go to the local Goodwill, and the next time I do, I'll be sure to look for some inline skates.

Although the original OW wheels seem to be pretty soft, I can only guess as to how well a harder wheel would work. Your suggestion gives me the option to find out......and it would be pretty cheap to experiment.

otis of cologne

Odie, some skates have black, hard rubber wheels, I don't buy them, as they tend to crush the wood fibers. They leave marks that have to be turned out, I was not able to sand them out. The gray and clear plastic wheels work fine as long as you only put enough pressure on the steady to add support but not enough to mark the piece you are turning. You could plan ahead also, especially for softer woods, and leave a little excess material at the contact point.

 

[odie]

Odie, some skates have black, hard rubber wheels, I don't buy them, as they tend to crush the wood fibers. They leave marks that have to be turned out, I was not able to sand them out. The gray and clear plastic wheels work fine as long as you only put enough pressure on the steady to add support but not enough to mark the piece you are turning. You could plan ahead also, especially for softer woods, and leave a little excess material at the contact point.

OK, thanks for the "heads up", Jake.....

I'll keep that in mind next time I'm at Goodwill.






Additional thought: I was working on an Ash bowl this afternoon, and was using the OWBS. As with many bowls, there was a certain amount of warping as the interior of the bowl was removed. This makes it difficult for the wheels of the OWBS to remain in a constant state of contact with the bowl.

As I was watching the warping happen before my eyes, the thought occurred to me that a spring tensioner, between the wheels and bowl, could be devised so that a slight amount of warping will not cause the wheels to lose contact with the bowl.

Anyone else thought about this???????

otis of cologne

 

[Bill Boehme]

As I was watching the warping happen before my eyes, the thought occurred to me that a spring tensioner, between the wheels and bowl, could be devised so that a slight amount of warping will not cause the wheels to lose contact with the bowl.

Anyone else thought about this???????

otis of cologne

That thought also crossed my mind. However, there are problems with applying spring tension that may well make the situation worse. When a spring is added to a movable system that contains mass, the system becomes tuned ... meaning that it will have a resonance at some frequency that will, in certain combinations of speed, diameter of the turning, and particular shape of the out-of-round turning will wind up beating itself to death. Adding viscous damping to the spring (i.e., a shock absorber) could help, but every time that conditions changed, a different viscous damper would be needed to prevent the spring loaded arm from "floating".

I think that it is mostly a fruitless effort to have a steady rest on a badly out-of-round turning. A better plan would be to plan a progressive turning approach working from the rim to the center of a turning and never go back to touch up out-of-roundness once the desired wall thickness has been reached.

I know that there are situations where a steady rest is essential, but I have not personally encountered any great need for one. I sometimes will lightly rub a couple fingers on the wall of the turning to dampen vibrations. I have found little leather pads that are designed for carvers that works well for this.

Bill

 

[odie]

That thought also crossed my mind. However, there are problems with applying spring tension that may well make the situation worse. When a spring is added to a movable system that contains mass, the system becomes tuned ... meaning that it will have a resonance at some frequency that will, in certain combinations of speed, diameter of the turning, and particular shape of the out-of-round turning will wind up beating itself to death. Adding viscous damping to the spring (i.e., a shock absorber) could help, but every time that conditions changed, a different viscous damper would be needed to prevent the spring loaded arm from "floating".

I think that it is mostly a fruitless effort to have a steady rest on a badly out-of-round turning. A better plan would be to plan a progressive turning approach working from the rim to the center of a turning and never go back to touch up out-of-roundness once the desired wall thickness has been reached.

I know that there are situations where a steady rest is essential, but I have not personally encountered any great need for one. I sometimes will lightly rub a couple fingers on the wall of the turning to dampen vibrations. I have found little leather pads that are designed for carvers that works well for this.

Bill

Howdy Bill......

Shock absorbers.......what a concept! It would be interesting to see if it worked......or my spring idea, for that matter. We could both theorize about these things, but without practical application, they remain just untested concepts.

You know, I wonder if either of our ideas would make any difference at all.....?.......because when the warping occurs, I'm usually well beyond the critical area of the rim, or anywhere near it. By that time, I'm usually well on my way to the base of the interior.

In the end, we all have our preferences in doing things. For myself, I've found the OWBS to be a device that delivers. It may not eliminate all vibration entirely......but, it does reduce it.....sometimes significantly. I wouldn't be without mine, now that I've used it with great success.

otis of cologne

 

[MichaelMouse]

Shock absorbers.......what a concept! It would be interesting to see if it worked......or my spring idea, for that matter. We could both theorize about these things, but without practical application, they remain just untested concepts.

The "spring" is the piece itself. As it contracts across the grain or adjusts to new stresses it can begin to flex. Answer is to not "set it and forget it" with the bowl steady. Start it in firm contact and check a couple of times during the hollowing process. Sometimes it's obvious, as when one wheel isn't rotating in synchrony with the second, sometimes subtle.

I'll normally snug back up once on a five-six inch deep piece, keeps the chatter marks to a minimum when taking the final passes.

 

[odie]

I've now tested the "spring modification" on the OWBS

For anyone who is interested in knowing, I drilled a couple of holes in the ends of the arms, opposite of the wheels. Using the holes, I installed a spring between the arms.

This week, I used the modified OWBS a couple of times, and from initial observation, I'd conclude that adding springs does improve the ability of the OWBS to eliminate vibrations.

The two bowls I used it with warped only minimally, so further testing is needed to fully test the modification.......but, things are looking positive!

otis of cologne.

If anyone is interested, I suppose I could come up with a photograph of the mod, but its a pretty simple thing to do.

 

[Al Neighbors]

Odie, when I'm hollowing a large bowl, I spray the outside of the bowl with a mixture of soap and water... about 4 water/1 soap... and keep it damp until I'm almost finished hollowing it, I mean just finishing up the inside bottom.
It doesn't warp until I'm finished.
I do use my homemade bowl steady on most of the bowls I turn.
Also, when I notice a wheel getting a little bit of a flat on the center of the tread, I hold it against my belt sander at an oblique angle, and at a slant, and let it roll the flat away. It works well.

 

[odie]

Odie, when I'm hollowing a large bowl, I spray the outside of the bowl with a mixture of soap and water... about 4 water/1 soap... and keep it damp until I'm almost finished hollowing it, I mean just finishing up the inside bottom.
It doesn't warp until I'm finished.
I do use my homemade bowl steady on most of the bowls I turn.
Also, when I notice a wheel getting a little bit of a flat on the center of the tread, I hold it against my belt sander at an oblique angle, and at a slant, and let it roll the flat away. It works well.

Now, there is an interesting idea from Al.....

.....putting h2o on the wood. Does it really work? I had always thought the bowl was warping from lack of all the "supporting wood" that's being removed.......

I'll keep the belt sander in mind when my wheels get flattened.......but, so far, I haven't had the need yet.....but, when it does......I'll remember your advice.

otis of cologne

 

[Bill Boehme]

I had always thought the bowl was warping from lack of all the "supporting wood" that's being removed.......

When the wood is part of a tree, there are all sorts of built-in internal stresses that are the natural result of the tree supporting itself. There is the compression load that wood in the lower trunk is carrying. If the wood is from a fork, then there were bending moments that required the wood to have internal stresses to counteract it. If the tree were leaning, then in order to hold the tree, the wood on one side of the trunk was in tension sort of like a guy wire while the other side had much greater compression. When the tree is cut into turning sized chunks, these internal stresses in the fibers of the wood can be thought of as a bunch of tiny springs that are all preloaded with some amount of compression or tension. As you cut away supporting wood, it provides the opportunity for these tiny springs to release some of their built up stresses by moving.

While the above internal stresses are not very predictable, another more familiar cause of internal stresses is caused as the wood dries and the cell walls shrink. This shrinkage is more predictable and varies according to species. In this case, the distortion and cracking occur as the wood dries rather than from removing "supporting" wood.

What does all of this mean? I don't know other than we need to be ready to deal with a lot of unpredictable movement ... and have lots of CA glue handy and dry wood slowly.

 

[odie]

Bill....

In so many words, I think you're saying the same thing as I indicated.....only I just tried to put it into fewer words.

When you remove wood, whatever stresses it was putting on the wood that's left.....isn't there anymore!

otis of cologne

 

[odie]

I've used the OWBS with spring attachment a half dozen times now.......It will add to the dampening effect some of the time, and other times it won't make any difference. boehme Bill is correct about one thing.......one bowl I tried it on vibrated more with the spring.....and that particular bowl worked properly using the OWBS the old way, with "fixed" wheels. It's useful......to a point. The bigger the diameter of the bowl, and the more it warps, the slower of a speed the lathe needs to be running for it to work. Some bowls will be benefited by it......others, not......it all depends on what you're trying to accomplish.

The spring is real easy to try out......just two holes drilled into the swing arms of the OWBS.

This is a good addition to the OWBS, but not useful all the time.......it gives me more options......and that, I like! :cool2:

If I had a little shock absorber, I might hook it up.......just to test boehme Bill's theory! If anyone else does test the shock absorber......let us know how it works out......ok?

otis of cologne.

 

[MichaelMouse]

When you remove wood, whatever stresses it was putting on the wood that's left.....isn't there anymore!

Not the full answer. You create a new dynamic which can be modified by moisture gain or loss, really.

Which is one of the reasons why a piece spun too hard for too long starts to look a bit long along the grain. It's starting to lose bound moisture, having thrown the unbound.

I like to keep the thickness of the piece consistent, something that won't benefit by a moving steady which allows the piece to squirm to a different dynamic. That's why I use a steady to keep the relationship to my gouge constant, and why a reset of the wheels prior to the final passes presses in on the endgrain portions while merely touching the long on a cross-grain bowl.

 

[rsser]

What do you mean by bound and unbound moisture MM?

Trying to understand your post.

TIA,

 

[MichaelMouse]

Wood technology. Water exists as free or unbound in the vessels and inside some cells, and as water molecules bonded by hydrogen ions to the sugars in the cellulose.

Normally this bound moisture runs around 30% by dry weight. It's when this moisture, which helped expand the structure of the cell walls begins to evaporate that shrinkage begins.

Free stuff. Chapters 2 and three cover the moisture/structure of woods. http://www.fpl.fs.fed.us/documnts/fplgtr/fplgtr113/fplgtr113.htm