<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
  <channel>
    <title>LeeinEdmonton's Blog at LumberJocks.com</title>
    <link>http://lumberjocks.com/LeeinEdmonton/blog</link>
    <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 22:34:33 GMT</pubDate>
    <description></description>
    <item>
      <title>Working from the plans of others</title>
      <link>http://lumberjocks.com/LeeinEdmonton/blog/9965</link>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[<p>Iam a retired hobbyist &#38; I enjoy making toys which are then donated at Christmas to inner city kids. As a consequence I immediately deviate from the author&#8217;s finishing suggestions &#38; put no finish whatever on the toys &#38; rely entirely on contrasting colors of the wood species involved to provide interesting contrasts. Why ? With the recent scares concerning toys with toxic finishes (China) &#38; because I never see either the parents or the children who receive my toys I go with no finish because I do not want some child denied the use of one of my toys due to parent concerns as to the safety of the toy. That said&#8230;.. I usually build the toy I have selected to the author&#8217;s specs. And then the fun starts. You are all likely aware of David Wakefields design of the waddling duck of which perhaps a zillion have been made by daddies &#38; grandfathers. Well&#8230;.. It occurred to me that he has to design the toy in a manner that it can be made quickly or he will have a hard time making a decent living. I&#8217;m not so constricted. The first modification I made was to eliminate the wings integral to the body &#38; instead made the wings out of contrasting wood. <br />Of course this made the overall body wider hence the wheels had to be spaced further apart. Worked fine.<br />It then ocurred to me that the cheeks of the duck&#8217;s head should also be of contrasting wood. That too worked fine. <br />Then while the waddling makes the duck endearing, why not have it quack as well ? This meant a section at the rear of the duck had to be excavated with the drive axle passing through. A cam then mounted on the drive axle to contact a push rod angled through the body to the head. The upper half had to be seperate from the bottom half of the head and mounted on a pivot dowel so that the push rod would push it up &#38; down as the toy is pulled &#8230;. hence quacking. The angle has to be precise or binding will take place between pushrod &#38; cam resulting in a lot of fooling around to make the thing work properly. Even then, in knowing this, I still do a lot of fooling around to make it work consistantly. My wife shakes her head during the fooling around process&#8230;oh well.<br />As you can imagine my waddling &#8211; quacking duck has resulted in a lot of pencil markings on the author&#8217;s original plans.<br />So for those of you who feed your scraps into a woodstove, you might consider toy making instead to use them up and excersize your imagination to make it interesting for you.</p>


	<p>Lee</p>]]>
      </description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 22:34:33 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>http://lumberjocks.com/LeeinEdmonton/blog/9965</guid>
      <author>LeeinEdmonton</author>
      <dc:creator>LeeinEdmonton</dc:creator>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
