My First Kitless Slim Click Pen - Page 3 - International Association of Penturners
     International Association of Penturners
Pens for Service Members
 
Support The IAP

Go Back   International Association of Penturners > Community Forums > Show Off Your Pens!
  Forgot Password
Register FAQ Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Show Off Your Pens! Let's see your best work!


Logged on members can hide ads!

Welcome to penturners.org!

You've found the home of The International Association of Penturners. You are currently viewing our site as a guest, which gives you limited access to view discussions, photos, and library articles.

Consider joining our community today. You'll have full access to all of our content, be able to enter our contests, find local chapters near you, and post your questions and share your experience with our members all over the world.

Membership is completely free!!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-22-2018, 11:59 AM   #21 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Zionsville, IN
Posts: 482
Photos: 0

Default

Mal, looks like the suitable size has been found. Iíll bookmark online metals.
What I was referring to I get at a local hobby shop.
To Dans point, the act of drilling a tube will increase its OD if its not restricted in a collet. I think Iíll try it and report back.
I fully expect you to develop a version thatís ďdressedĒ.
PatrickR is offline   Reply With Quote Top
Old 03-22-2018, 12:34 PM   #22 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Zionsville, IN
Posts: 482
Photos: 0

Default

FWIW
I drilled a small section (all measurements with a cheap digital, so +/-)
Tube .311 OD, .235 ID
I tried a .294 bit . No Way
Next a .292 bit. The OD became .320, ID .304. Making a flexible yet sound tube with a ribbed exterior.
PatrickR is offline   Reply With Quote Top
Old 03-22-2018, 12:48 PM   #23 (permalink)
 
magpens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Coquitlam, BC, Canada
Photos: 67

Default

Thanks, Lewis, but there is a strength reduction with using that tube.

I assume the wall thickness is 0.049. . So 0.375 - 0.049 - 0.049 = 0.277" bore.

Currently I axially drill 15/64" = 0.234", so I would be losing (0.277 - 0.234)/2 = 0.021" .

That may or may not be satisfactory ... actually, I think it would be OK as aluminum is fairly strong.

Current wall thickness is (at center) (0.332 - 0.234)/2 = 0.049 ... I think I calc'd that right.

Your suggestion would certainly be OK on the ends where I bore out to "M" size = 0.295"

Do you think 6061 would be a better grade to use ? . I do not know what grade I bought for this job at Home Depot.
__________________
Mal

Kids rule the world !!! .... eventually if not already !







Last edited by magpens; 03-22-2018 at 12:52 PM.
magpens is offline   Reply With Quote Top
Advertisement
Old 03-22-2018, 12:59 PM   #24 (permalink)
 
magpens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Coquitlam, BC, Canada
Photos: 67

Default

Patrick,

I don't know about what you are doing there ... I mean I get it ... but I have serious reservations about the "flexible ... with ribbed exterior"

I think we can get to a dressed design but not via the route I am on. Will have to reduce the "M" size hole in both ends ... Maybe revert to a 7 mm full length brass tube, which is probably the minimum to accept a Parker ... hole is right around 0.250 and the Parker is 0.226, so that means 0.012 clearance ... OK. . Obviously we already know how to dress that.

That clicker becomes the clanger. . I won't be able to use the clicker mech I currently use. . An alternative is the Schmidt clicker from Greenwald or Milan but I think its OD is too big (bigger that 0.332).
__________________
Mal

Kids rule the world !!! .... eventually if not already !






magpens is offline   Reply With Quote Top
Old 03-22-2018, 01:00 PM   #25 (permalink)
 
stuckinohio's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Columbus Ohio
Posts: 1,506
Photos: 3

Default

I think 6061 would be one of the better grades. I think there are stronger grades of aluminum, but not sold in tube form.

I choose that size because you needed a size thicker than .33 and with an ID that could be bored out to .28 or .29

I do like Dan's idea of threading the bar stock to accept the nose cone and skipping the adapter.
__________________
Lewis
stuckinohio is offline   Reply With Quote Top
Old 03-22-2018, 01:02 PM   #26 (permalink)
 
stuckinohio's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Columbus Ohio
Posts: 1,506
Photos: 3

Default

You'll have to use the smallest clicker I linked to I think.
__________________
Lewis
stuckinohio is offline   Reply With Quote Top
Old 03-22-2018, 02:18 PM   #27 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Zionsville, IN
Posts: 482
Photos: 0

Default

Mal, just showing what happened when I drilled that tube to that size. Useless for your intent.
I measure the Schmidt clicker at .323 small enough, a much better mechanism and it would remove the need for a screw on nib.
PatrickR is offline   Reply With Quote Top
Old 03-22-2018, 04:08 PM   #28 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Saskatoon SK., Canada.
Posts: 2,891
Photos: 1

Default

2024-T3 is roughly about 1/3 stronger than 6061-T6 with 7075 alloys being roughly a third stronger again.

Good on you Mal for trying to make a better skinny pen. ;)
__________________
Pete
Proud to be the support staff and enabler of Marla Christensen.
Curly is offline   Reply With Quote Top
Old 03-22-2018, 08:01 PM   #29 (permalink)
 
stuckinohio's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Columbus Ohio
Posts: 1,506
Photos: 3

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Curly View Post
2024-T3 is roughly about 1/3 stronger than 6061-T6 with 7075 alloys being roughly a third stronger again.

Good on you Mal for trying to make a better skinny pen. ;)
Good to know!
__________________
Lewis
stuckinohio is offline   Reply With Quote Top
Old 03-22-2018, 08:03 PM   #30 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Winsted CT
Posts: 42
Photos: 0

Default Thanks for the Reply

Quote:
Originally Posted by magpens View Post
No attempt to color the aluminum, Gary. . The color is a photographic artifact and not real. . I don't understand how it came about but then I don't understand lighting for photography either.

As for the polishing there are a couple of options. . First, Silvo or probably Brasso metal polishes will do it ... there are others also specifically for metals.

I think I will probably try Mequiar's automotive cut polish to remove the fine scratches, followed by Novus 3 and then Novus 2 and then finally Mequiar's Plastix maybe, although that is not designed for metals. . That is my usual procedure with acrylics
Thanks for the Reply Mal.
Likes: (1)
Yankee Remedy is offline   Reply With Quote Top
Related Content
Logged on members can hide ads
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:16 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0

Content Copyright © 2003-2018 by Penturners.org, LLC; All Rights Reserved
Terms Of Service   Acceptable Use Policy