Building a lever machine.... from scratch - Page 53

A haven dedicated to manual espresso machine aficionados.
User avatar
Chert

Postby Chert » Feb 10, 2019, 7:28 pm

I prefer the new knob. Thanks for keeping your work posted.

kitt

Postby kitt » Feb 10, 2019, 11:23 pm

Aesthetically ,I too prefer the new style knob , but the traditional lever fan part of me likes the original too .

I guess if no one likes the old style wood ones, you can always send them to me as well.... :D

perfectwheels

Postby perfectwheels » Feb 11, 2019, 1:28 am

+1 more for the new knob!

Paolo

Postby Paolo » Feb 11, 2019, 3:27 am

I go for the new design as well.

napierzaza

Postby napierzaza » Feb 17, 2019, 5:03 pm

I really like the right-most one's design but I don't know if it would be easy to turn or feel good in the hands. I have a profitec 700 and think a lot about getting custom knows since changes the feeling of using the machine so much.

turboyeast

Postby turboyeast » Feb 18, 2019, 2:48 pm

Hi Thomas,
You've been meticulously trying to reborne a Aurora Brugnetti. Defininately would go for the old knobs...the new knobs are not wrong, but belong to another machine... :wink:
Cheers, TY

User avatar
bidoowee

Postby bidoowee » Feb 19, 2019, 4:29 pm

Thanks all for the input! Ah - I see opinion divided along the classic lines: tradition vs innovation, neophiles vs nostalgics, moderns vs romantics - with the moderns, at least among those who spoke, seeming to have a slight edge.

turboyeast wrote:You've been meticulously trying to reborne a Aurora Brugnetti.


While this was certainly true to a great extent when I started the project, there were a number of decisions that have been taken along the way that make the machine a departure from the Brugnetti original. Obviously, there are significant upgrades on the inside, but there are subtle changes outside too: the level gauge is gone (too 19th century!), the manometer is flush-mounted and the whole exterior has been re-designed with a one-piece bonnet; all, I think, slight refinements on the original. Additionally, in what I think is a fitting celebration of an object designed with longevity so thoroughly in mind, all that was plastic is now wood. Plastic manufacturing is (more often than not) an additive process - as in this case with the original injection molded plastic handles. Making things with wood is (with a few notable exceptions) a negative one: material must be removed from the stock to reveal the form inside. It is a very interesting problem that designers face when they are negotiating the relationship between form and material. I'm reminded of architect Louis Kahn's famous quote:

''If you think of Brick, you say to Brick, 'What do you want, Brick?' And Brick says to you, 'I like an Arch.' And if you say to Brick, 'Look, arches are expensive, and I can use a concrete lintel over you. What do you think of that, Brick?' Brick says, 'I like an Arch.' And it's important, you see, that you honor the material that you use. [..] You can only do it if you honor the brick and glorify the brick instead of shortchanging it.''

Image

Louis Kahn - see the not-so-subliminal arch?

The positive molded plastic wants to be in the form of the original handle, the wood does not.

I can make handles that look like the old ones, but they are not true reproductions because they aren't made with the same industrial efficiency as the originals. A philosophical difference perhaps, but one that has a impact on the bottom line: if you prefer the old design, and want it made of wood, would you pay, say, $150 more than for the new design which is functionally equivalent and also made of wood?

Thinking that I know what the answer to that question is, I went ahead with the first production run.

A tray of rough-cut-to-length eight-sided hexagons - material-wise, the most efficient way to inscribe a hexagon in a square - and a lot faster than making round pieces of wood out of rectangular ones. And a couple of extra cylindrical ones for good measure.

Image

Cutting a bore.

Image

Bores all done and a few trials through the whole set of operations.

Image

Exterior Z-axis only profiling on the lathe.

Image

Sanding before the last machining operation. The shop vac is my friend.

Image

The final program for the exterior profile to be cut in the last operation. I love this kind of accidental design - geometry derived from the interaction of part shape, the tool engagement rules and the CAM algorithm.

Image

The last cutting operation. Just final detail sanding left.

Image

The process from start to finish: stock, back bore, front bore, exterior Z-axis profile, exterior X-Y profile, detail sanding and oil.

Image
★ Helpful

Sansibar99

Postby Sansibar99 » Feb 20, 2019, 3:02 am

Thomas, thank you very much indeed for this latest post - the excursion in design philosophy and your thoughtful process is really making this project such a special one!
LMWDP #422

LObin

Postby LObin » Feb 20, 2019, 8:32 pm

Still amazed by all the little details. No stone left unturned.
Like stealing a cafeteria tray at your nearest high school simply for the sake of this thread! Such dedication! :lol:

Can't wait to see, on here (or dare I say... live!) THE Machine!
Keep up the good work!

User avatar
Chert

Postby Chert » replying to LObin » Feb 20, 2019, 8:42 pm

I think that one came from A & W :lol: