***R&D Thread: Aluminum 1 Piece Cap'd Valve Body

[Cokrkilr]

I'm not trying to be combative... its just other than dboggs, nobody had really thought of that problem or brought it to light, that's the one and only hurdle in this whole thing and it seemed to be overlooked by everyone... but dboggs.

So then when I said take a peek the valve before you guys get too far with air ports and this and that for it, figure this out. Dboggs was the only one that made it apperent he did look at one.

It can have 17 npt ports in it if you want, but if they don't connect air to the on off it all doesn't matter. And dboggs idea has been the best so far, the problem is finding a super short threaded screw to fit a very small area, to not obstruct air flow from the port but be short enough for.the feild screw to thread all the way in... usually standard 10/32 set screws are like 3/16", may be to long for this

[OPBN]

So rather than going from the FS hole, lets just put another hole in the bottom rearward of the FS hole connecting the passageways.

[dboggs79]

My reasoning for putting the passage to connect everything above the field strip was because there is already a hole being drilled and tapped in that location. So, cost differential shouldn't be anything there. Its just a matter of going a little deeper. As for the hole in the dump chamber, maybe. I'm assuming the machining for the dump chamber itself would be done on a lathe. So, that hole would more than likely be done on a mill. Another setup. But, since there wouldn't be any machining done for the regless end, might be a wash. Like I said before, this is something I've been wanting to do for awhile, I just don't have the resources to do it myself. I actually came close to chopping up a stock valve just to prove to myself that I wasn't crazy. Or wrong anyway, jury is still out on crazy. The final product I had in mind would be close, my best guess, about .750 shorter than what is pictured above.

[dboggs79]

I'm not trying to be combative... its just other than dboggs, nobody had really thought of that problem or brought it to light, that's the one and only hurdle in this whole thing and it seemed to be overlooked by everyone... but dboggs.

So then when I said take a peek the valve before you guys get too far with air ports and this and that for it, figure this out. Dboggs was the only one that made it apperent he did look at one.

It can have 17 npt ports in it if you want, but if they don't connect air to the on off it all doesn't matter. And dboggs idea has been the best so far, the problem is finding a super short threaded screw to fit a very small area, to not obstruct air flow from the port but be short enough for.the feild screw to thread all the way in... usually standard 10/32 set screws are like 3/16", may be to long for this

I think that 3/16" could be made up by modifying the field strip screw. Or just using a different screw altogether. I don't have access to any kind of CAD program right now. So alot of what im coming up with is just what I can draw on paper. Only so much to be expected from that.

[OPBN]

My reasoning for putting the passage to connect everything above the field strip was because there is already a hole being drilled and tapped in that location. So, cost differential shouldn't be anything there.

Ok, so you're talking about drilling and threading it the same all the way through ? I was thinking drilling a smaller hole within a larger hole and having to tap both. Your way might be easier for sure. Eyeing up the FS srew profile, there seems to be a fair amount of room for a plug.

[Cokrkilr]

Ok, so you're talking about drilling and threading it the same all the way through ? I was thinking drilling a smaller hole within a larger hole and having to tap both. Your way might be easier for sure. Eyeing up the FS srew profile, there seems to be a fair amount of room for a plug.

Its not as much as you'd think, the FS hole is already within a mm or two from popping into the npt port. The plug could theoretically go into the npt hole, but not too high or it will obstruct the on off port again, and also not have anything to thread to anymore.

[OPBN]

Its not as much as you'd think, the FS hole is already within a mm or two from popping into the npt port. The plug could theoretically go into the npt hole, but not too high or it will obstruct the on off port again, and also not have anything to thread to anymore.

What about moving the NPT port rearward 1/8" and drilling a second hole behind the FS screw to run through the NPT and up to the on/off passage?

[dboggs79]

Its not as much as you'd think, the FS hole is already within a mm or two from popping into the npt port. The plug could theoretically go into the npt hole, but not too high or it will obstruct the on off port again, and also not have anything to thread to anymore.

Correct. That's why I would tap the hole just below the inlet,plug it, then figure out what to do for the field strip screw.

[dboggs79]

What about moving the NPT port rearward 1/8" and drilling a second hole behind the FS screw to run through the NPT and up to the on/off passage?

You could. But if you're gonna do that, you'd be just as well off drilling the second whole and leaving the inlet where its at. Like you had mentioned before. I'm just trying to approach this in a way to do as little machining as possible and achieve the same end result.

[Cokrkilr]

What about moving the NPT port rearward 1/8" and drilling a second hole behind the FS screw to run through the NPT and up to the on/off passage?

That would work, but deviations from an original plan ( the stainless valve) usually cost more $$$ because of redrawing/programming, more tooling time etc etc

Also, I think the npt ports should be an order specific option, 1 normal, one on each side, or one side one back etc...

Putting the 3 ports in there then only using two takes away from the cleanliness of the valve that's wanted in the first place, by slapping a nasty looking 1/8npt plug in one port...

If I'm not going to get a cap out of this I may as well be on board.. I guess... lol

[Cokrkilr]

Hurdle #2. Officially, what power tube is this taking? If I have to mess up anything id rather it be my spare classic valve to take parts from. Not buy brand new x valve parts etc. Which is what this was originally going to be threaded for....

[dboggs79]

Hurdle #2. Officially, what power tube is this taking? If I have to mess up anything id rather it be my spare classic valve to take parts from. Not buy brand new x valve parts etc. Which is what this was originally going to be threaded for....

My vote would also be for the classic power tube. I don't see any benefit either way. But, it makes more sense to me to have an empty classic valve sitting than a stripped x valve.

Also, something I forgot to mention. The dump chamber will need to be machined shallower on this. Tapping the hole for a plug there is kinda sketchy. There isn't an abundance of material there. I would suggest a dump chamber that's about a 1/4" shallower to get around this. So, slightly devolumized. Plus!?

[Cokrkilr]

I don't see why getting a cap couldn't happen. They're pretty simple. Would give people a less expensive option.

Really all I want IS a cap, haha. But if they dont get made then I guess we'll see what I decide, I refuse to pre order though till I see at least 1 or 2 milled up and tested.

[Cokrkilr]

No other takers on the drilled to order air inlet? Id really only want left inlet and rear port for a gauge, a plug on the other side would look ugly IMO... shouldn't affect cost, but xmt will just have to pay attention to specific orders

[Cokrkilr]

Yeah, and Id only want the left side to be different from other valves, haha. I really don't mind about a rear hole either, but if its available id do it. If I never put a gauge there at least a plug on the back would look like it belongs there, like a velocity adjuster for someone that doesn't know what it is

Although... the triple port could set up for easy pneumag options right off the valve.