The mechanisms of the Victorian era show the mechanics of those days were very clever. Don't rule out the same heat sources (think Thermite) that they used for welding and casting. for that matter, don't rule out the possibility that the pin was in the original mold and the casting poured around it! I doubt disassembly was one of their big priorities. John Ferrell http://DixieNC.US ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard Stevens" To: "'Microcontroller discussion list - Public.'" Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 12:01 PM Subject: RE: [OT] burner design and implementation > > > On Wednesday, June 01, 2005 2:43 PM, Peter [SMTP:plp@actcom.co.il] wrote: >> If I understand it right, at the >> time they would pack the receiver end (with a hole about the diameter of >> a man's thigh for a crank pin) into a basket with hot charcoal and leave >> it there until dull red. Then they would hammer the pin in using huge >> hammers and something in-between to prevent marring the pin. There is no >> telling what this does to the heat treatment of the part (if any, since >> it's Victorian technology). >> > Which brings up the question that I have been asking myself since I saw > the > original post. Those victorian engineers would have realised that the > thing > was likely to need dismantling at some stage in its lifetime. Applying > heat > only to the female part prior to assembly could have happened exactly as > Peter says, because the two parts were physically separate. But how would > the victorians have applied localised heat to the female part without > heating, and consequently expanding, the male part to an equal extent if > they started with the two parts assembled? > > R. > > -- > http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive > View/change your membership options at > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist > -- http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist