[TheForge] treadle hammer anvils

Thu Jan 9 11:46:00 2003

bob, tweaking this idea a bit. How about
a bolt on solid anvil like you did for
me? Bolts instead of welds at the points
where it joins the rest of the hammer.

If he is moving the whole thing on a
regular basis, what about metal casters
on the back, so that they would only
contact the floor when the whole unit
was tipped back?

With the wheels and the removable anvil,
Martha could take it around the shop.

Mike

Bruce Freeman wrote:
> 
> Bob,
> Maybe you could be clever and design a built-up anvil that BOLTS together with a minimum of bolts.  I'm thinking of something like an I-beam, stood on end, with a face plate (maybe 6" sqaure of 1" steel), as the "skeleton" of the anvil,with pieces that bolt to either side the web, between the flanges, to add mass.  The hard part would be to ensure that these pieces make sufficiently firm contact with the face plate that their mass makes a difference in the behavior of the anvil.  You'd want is such that tightening the bolts would tend to press the ends of these pieces firmly against the bottom of the face plate.  Angled studs might do this, or perhaps some affair involving wedges.
> Bruce
> NJ
> 
> >>> [email protected] 01/09/03 11:16AM >>>
> Bob,
> 
> The treadle hammer (finished and kits) that Centaur sells are from
> Kirkpatric, I don't know about the one advertised in the hammers blow.  But
> the Centaur/Kirkpatric ones do not have the adjustable head height.
> 
> Personally I'm a proponent of the solid or built up (i.e 4 2"x3" steel
> bars).  Just like a regular anvil, the solid body provides more "rebound"
> effect than do the tubular anvil bases.   I'll admit that the solid body is
> heavier than an empty tube and may make it more easily moved.  But if the
> tube is filled with concrete and scrap steel then there might not be so
> much difference.
> 
> I guess in the end you get what you want.  The empty tube base will work,
> but may not be as good as a solid base.  But if it does what you want it
> to, then I suppose it's just fine.
> 
> Then again, I'm not an expert in these things, just opinionated.
> 
> Dave Brown
> 
> At 09:14 01/09/03 -0500, you wrote:
> >i am building a treadle hammer for a friend. he is not sure whether to go
> >with a solid anvil or a tube type. it seems that most commercially
> >available t hammers have tube anvils with a plate on top, centaur,
> >kirkpatric (the same?) and the one advertised in the hammers blow.
> >
> >are there others that can be bought?
> >
> >any opinions on the functional difference between solid or tube anvils?
> >the guy i am making it for is concerned about moving it (weight). he lives
> >in a flood plain and his shop has 7' of water in it some springs. he
> >usaully loads thing up and moves it to high ground till the water goes down.
> >
> >bob s.
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/theforge
> >theforge mail list group photo site is
> >http://www.photoaccess.com
> >Login:  [email protected]
> >password:  anvil
> >___________
> 
> _______________________________________________
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/theforge
> theforge mail list group photo site is
> http://www.photoaccess.com
> Login:  [email protected]
> password:  anvil
> ___________
> 
> _______________________________________________
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/theforge
> theforge mail list group photo site is
> http://www.photoaccess.com
> Login:  [email protected]
> password:  anvil
> ___________

-- 
my website is
http://www.execpc.com/~ghs/