Baby Wadkin Bursgreen in California: Advice on an AGS10

[Fitzroy]

My AGS10 blade slipped when I first got it and I found that the outer flange had become dished due to over tightening, so it had limited contact with the blade. Having 'undished' it and flattened it on a sanding plate I've never had any slippage issues. I hold the blade in a gloved hand and nip the nut up, that is really all it takes on my saw.

 

[Vann]

Hi Vann,
Are you talking about the locating pin like there is a hole for in the trenching heads?

I don't know if it's the same pin location as used for trenching heads - but this is the arrangement on my 1936 Wadkin CK radial arm saw. I had to remove the blade guard for these photos as this early model doesn't have a hinged door (instead the entire cover is rotated and lifted off - a PITA, and probably the reason for a change in design shortly after)

Back flange, showing spindle and driving pin.

Blade placed on spindle.

Front flange and nut fitted. There is a hole in the front flange for the pin.

It would be unusual for the blade to slip, even with fairly light tightening pressure, I just nip them. The act of turning the saw off tightens the nut up. My personal saw runs a 450mm blade without a driving pin and doesn’t slip...

I had a cow of a job getting the blade off this 1946 CK (that had stood in the rain for ~10 years before I got it). Once I got the nut half a turn the blade slipped and I had nothing to lever against.

Note the MDF benchtop!! I bought this one for parts. Surprisingly the motor still worked!!

As I don't use my gear much it's sometimes over a year between blade changes. I'm worried that over that sort of time the nut may seize - and have to be cut off . So I've re-fitted drive pins to my CK and PK.

Cheers, Vann.

 

[KT_NorCal]

I don't know if it's the same pin location as used for trenching heads - but this is the arrangement on my 1936 Wadkin CK radial arm saw. I had to remove the blade guard for these photos as this early model doesn't have a hinged door (instead the entire cover is rotated and lifted off - a PITA, and probably the reason for a change in design shortly after)

Back flange, showing spindle and driving pin.

Blade placed on spindle.

Front flange and nut fitted. There is a hole in the front flange for the pin.

Hi Vann,
First of all, Wadkin was apparently serious about their blade flanges... they look the size of dinner plates! Interesting.... So the pin dead ends into the outer blade flange? At least from the picture it looks like it doesn't go all the way through which sort of requires you to use custom pins depending on what blades you are running. Are the pins threaded in or do they just slot into a non-though hole in the inner flange?

And thanks for taking that picture, sorry If it created a hassle getting the thing apart!

Not sure the measurements are on that CK, but the trenching heads (these are 1" arbor) about 0.2045 inches between the outer arbor edge and the inner pin edge. Was hard to measure accurately as the pin seems to be an oddball size (0.3455 or about 11/16) and I didn't have anything that fit it tightly.

As I don't use my gear much it's sometimes over a year between blade changes. I'm worried that over that sort of time the nut may seize - and have to be cut off . So I've re-fitted drive pins to my CK and PK.

Cheers, Vann.

In the past I've used paraffin/spirits mixture on threads I was worried about being able to get apart again at some undetermined point in the future. You would just have to remember to not crank down hard on it... like putting antiseize on spark plugs... just have to back off the torque a bit..

 

[Vann]

Hi Vann,
First of all, Wadkin was apparently serious about their blade flanges... they look the size of dinner plates! Interesting.... So the pin dead ends into the outer blade flange? At least from the picture it looks like it doesn't go all the way through which sort of requires you to use custom pins depending on what blades you are running. Are the pins threaded in or do they just slot into a non-though hole in the inner flange?

The PK has a 1.25" spindle. The pin is 1/2" and threads into the inner flange (1/2"BSW). The hole in the outer flange goes right through.

The CK has an inch spindle. The pin is smaller (it's bedtime here so I'm not going out to measure right now) and again threaded into the inner flange. The outer flange again has a through hole (must be hidden in my photo).

I'll measure the CK tomorrow, as IIRC your saw spindle is also one inch, so possibly similar.

Cheers, Vann.

 

[KT_NorCal]

The PK has a 1.25" spindle. The pin is 1/2" and threads into the inner flange (1/2"BSW). The hole in the outer flange goes right through.

The CK has an inch spindle. The pin is smaller (it's bedtime here so I'm not going out to measure right now) and again threaded into the inner flange. The outer flange again has a through hole (must be hidden in my photo).

I'll measure the CK tomorrow, as IIRC your saw spindle is also one inch, so possibly similar.

Cheers, Vann.

That 1' bar sticking out of the arbor hole on the trenching heads isn't acutally the arbor in question, just a hold down support from an old Delta Unisaw sliding table attachment that coincidentally was a machined 1" diameter rod... That said the Delta 40B that they will be used on is a 1 inch arbor so probably similar class as your CK although it's a "turret" design RAS so a bit more compact than the CK and maybe not as heavily built.

When I restore it I was planning on modifying the inner flange (and outer as well I guess) to accept a proper sized pin. Not sure how the inner flange on this saw is mounted yet... if it's easily removed then maybe I'll just make a bespoke set of flanges for the trenching heads and dado sets. Might be able to get a little more real estate that way as well... the arbor is a bit shorter than that CK arbor from the look of it.

Attached a pic of one... not mine, but hopefully mine looks similar when I'm done with it.

 

[Vann]

...The CK has an inch spindle. The pin is smaller (it's bedtime here so I'm not going out to measure right now) and again threaded into the inner flange. The outer flange again has a through hole (must be hidden in my photo).

I'll measure the CK tomorrow, as IIRC your saw spindle is also one inch, so possibly similar.

The pin I have is 1/4" but it's loose and I suspect it should be 5/16" - but don't have time to check it out at present. The spindle and pin are at 7/8" crs.

The pin has a slotted end - visible in this pikkie.

Cheers, Vann.

 

[clogs]

on my old big'un Wadkin the pin was just a slide fit in the blade and a little tighter on the shaft hub....guess, so it didnt fall in the rubbish inside the saw.....
When I lived in France and bought new blades locally I had to drill my own hole in the new blade for the pin....
I thought my pin was about 3/8ths diameter.....but I am getting old....
We used to call those pins shear, guide or drive pins.....of course they would never shear in that particular job....

 

[KT_NorCal]

The pin I have is 1/4" but it's loose and I suspect it should be 5/16" - but don't have time to check it out at present. The spindle and pin are at 7/8" crs.

The pin has a slotted end - visible in this pikkie.

Cheers, Vann.

Ahhh. Ok. All makes sense now... and crap. I totally forgot about the arbor nut as it will definitely interfere with any pin given the spacing. So, custom length threaded pins will definitely be needed...

Once I get back to my nighttime shop class I'll get an inside micrometer on the holes in the trenching heads and get a good measurement. The pin is obviously only meant to be a loose slip fit, so I can work back from that.

 

[KT_NorCal]

I went over to a friend's place today to try and get the bearings, spacer, etc., off the arbor and even with his huge arbor press it didn't want to budge. Just to make sure I was doing the right thing, per the pic below, this whole mess is supposed to come off the back, correct?

We put a bearing splitter behind that bearing up against the rear of the blade flange and used that to anchor it on the arbor press to press against. It really didn't want to come off to the point it looked like the arbor was starting to flex. Not wanting to bend the arbor we quit while we were still ahead of the game. Is there any specific technique others have used for this?

Honestly never run up against an arbor that a standard arbor press was not able to press off the bearings with ease (my friend's is taller than me and I'm 6'2"), so I'm a bit stumped and don't want to mess up the arbor as it had pretty much nill run-out.

Thanks for any thoughts.

 

[Gremmy]

I went over to a friend's place today to try and get the bearings, spacer, etc., off the arbor and even with his huge arbor press it didn't want to budge. Just to make sure I was doing the right thing, per the pic below, this whole mess is supposed to come off the back, correct?

We put a bearing splitter behind that bearing up against the rear of the blade flange and used that to anchor it on the arbor press to press against. It really didn't want to come off to the point it looked like the arbor was starting to flex. Not wanting to bend the arbor we quit while we were still ahead of the game. Is there any specific technique others have used for this?

Honestly never run up against an arbor that a standard arbor press was not able to press off the bearings with ease (my friend's is taller than me and I'm 6'2"), so I'm a bit stumped and don't want to mess up the arbor as it had pretty much nill run-out.

Thanks for any thoughts.

View attachment 127941

Hey you are correct that this is how it all comes apart. Might be a silly question but you’ve undone the grub screw(s) in the end collar? See my photo.
Give the collar a whack with a wooden drift to break any surface bond if it’s slightly corroded onto the shaft.

 

[KT_NorCal]

Hi Gremmy, yes for sure, I took them completely out (and even squirted in some ATF/acetone in both at the time). I'm probably going to heat cycle that back retaining ring as it does look like it is on there quite tight. There is really no corrosion on this arbor at all... as it looks in the pics is the way it came out of the saw, so I don't think that is it.

I had a ponder when I got home and what I think is happening is that the arbor is flexing a bit under pressure and it's basically locking the whole assembly together as a result. I'm not sure we had it exactly centered on the arbor press because of the bearing splitter which I think contributed to the issue.

I'll have access to a large "H" press again in a couple weeks where I'll be able to align it precisely, so I'll heat cycle it a few times and have a go at it again.

Worse comes to worse I'll destroy the bearings and pull the bits off individually, but that is an annoying amount of work for something that should be straightforward!

 

[KT_NorCal]

So, that was a pain. The bearings did not want to come off this stupid AGS arbor. As I said before I tried it on my friend's massive arbor press and it didn't want to budge. Plan B was a big hydraulic H press.... that didn't work either. The arbor was starting to flex so I quit that while I was still ahead... Plan C was to cut the rear bearing off and try pull everything off piece by piece which is what finally worked.

The bearings were on this thing insanely tight.... I measured the areas under the bearings at 17.02mm in back and 17.03mm in front. Bearing races were 17mm even. Also the arbor is bizarrely recessed between the bearing seats (part with blue tape in the pic)... it measured 16.92mm. Have zero concept of why they would do that. Anyone know?

Cutting the outer race. Managed to not score up the bits around it too badly.




Race broken off.... notice there is ZERO evidence of any grease in the bearing. Why you should always make the effort on these old saws.




The shrapnel.






Getting the final bearing off. What I don't show is that it also took a 5k degree carburizing flame to get the inner race hot enough to get just a few mm of movement. Then I was able to get thicker steel under it and get it the rest of the way off.








The arbor cleaned up ok, but I'm not sure why they designed it to have them so insanely tight. This must expand the inner race so I'll have to make sure that is in spec for the replacements.

The rear bearing was clearly destroyed, but the front one was:
94P - FRANCE - SNR6203 E1

I'm going to assume they are both the same, but is this the same bearing that others have swapped out?

Thanks!

 

[deema]

I use 6203 2RS with a couple of shim washers to replicate the original bearings.
Getting the spindle apart can be challenging on occasions. Well done fir getting there.

 

[KT_NorCal]

Also did some more prep work on the arbor housing. I turned it flat as it looked like someone attacked it with a file at the factory. I'm drawing up the bits I'm going to have to make to make a working parallelogram style riving knife so I wanted to have a surface that was referenceable. While I was at it I cleaned up the bolt hole a bit as it was clearly just filed and the bolt only had one small point to seat against.






Also measured the face of the flange with a very accurate gauge. The inner seat ring was only out 0.0005 at one point, but the outer seat ring was a mess. Out at both points where the outer flange pin holes are deformed by 5 thou... bad enough that you can rock the removable outer flange across them... and not much better anywhere else. I'll clean them up on the lathe next week.

I lapped the face of the outer flange... it was a mess too. I'll grind that completely flat next week as there is no real easy way to chuck it up in a lathe.

The Dado arbor nut face is a mess as well... also out 5 thou at both pin holes.... so I'll lap that as well.

 

[KT_NorCal]

I use 6203 2RS with a couple of shim washers to replicate the original bearings.
Getting the spindle apart can be challenging on occasions. Well done fir getting there.

Thanks for all the info/help along the way!

Why would you need the shims?

 

[deema]

The shims just push the bearings back a smidge from the flange and position the spindle correctly to allow the right amount of adjustment to be available for alignment of the spindle to the riving knife.

 

[KT_NorCal]

The shims just push the bearings back a smidge from the flange and position the spindle correctly to allow the right amount of adjustment to be available for alignment of the spindle to the riving knife.

Ah, are they thinner than the ones on there or is that just a mod to get you some additional space?

I am thinking of upgrading the bearings a bit as there is a little leeway given the measurements involved.

 

[deema]

The original bearings would have been 88503, however, I have always found them very very difficult to source, they are basically the 6203 with an extended inner race. So, to arrive back at the original dimensions, I add 2.2mm shim washers (2mm and a 0.2mm) to the front and rear bearing, you don’t need any between the two bearings as the spacer rests against the outer races.

 

[Lefley]

I love reading the way people take things apart and fix, I’ve had a metal lathe on my list of things to buy. Almost bought one many times but it was always the China model and I always chickened out knowing a metal lathe should have tight tolerances and China would not be in that sentence. So I keep looking for a used American or other type non Chinese lathe.

 

[KT_NorCal]

The original bearings would have been 88503, however, I have always found them very very difficult to source, they are basically the 6203 with an extended inner race. So, to arrive back at the original dimensions, I add 2.2mm shim washers (2mm and a 0.2mm) to the front and rear bearing, you don’t need any between the two bearings as the spacer rests against the outer races.

I'm 100% sure these are original for this saw, so they likely used 6203s in these later saws. The big issue is that with shaft measurements of 0.670" under the bearings these are way out of spec with such a heavy interference fit unless you go all the way to the far end of the scale. What I'm guessing is that they were looking to get a much more accurate running bearing without actually using expensive bearings.... so, these by nature would have run quite hot in a production setting.

For instance, assuming a few things you get a variance for a 17mm shaft of between +0.001mm and +0.009 for an interference fit that keeps the bearings in spec.... and this shaft measures in at 17.18mm.... ???

No wonder they were a pain to take off.

This also means that if you do use one of these saws in a production setting (cabinet shop or some such), you should really plan on changing bearings every few years at a minimum...