Husqvarna Homeqwner Saw Plastic Construction

[SawTroll]

I'm not so sure that Partner started that horizontal design.I have to think it might have first come out on the crappy Jonsered 500 series. I'm pretty sure it was a Electrolux deal any way you look at it.

Those Jonsereds were a little different though, as they had an upper bearing cap that wasn't part of the cylinder (like the Husky 350).

You are right that design is older than the Partner 400 (510, 1979 was the first).

 

[Dan_in_WI]

And sometimes it doesn't work like you planned - I had picked a thread forming case screw as opposed to thread cutting, in order to keep aluminum chips from getting in the electronics. They have tapered ends and a tri-lobe shape to form the threads (exactly like the hardware used on the Poulan engines). They were phillips head screw and I bought anti-cam out bits.

I'm curious...
Were the thread forming screws stock items, or did they have to be custom made? If stock hardware, are they available in a square drive version as well?

There are a lot of ladies on the production floor, and they didn't put any force on the driver at all (it is suspended). They'd hit the trigger and that tapered end of the screw would grind out a big cone of aluminum chips until it took a bite, and half the time even the anti-cam out bits would just bounce out of the screws. They got it eventually, but we still had to blow out the cases with an air hose. Years later I redesigned the extrusion for a different screw with coarser threads and a square drive head. If you've ever used square drive deck screws you know how solid they are, but some of them even had trouble keeping that bit in the screws at first.

Wouldn't the coarser thread require more force? Or does it dig in better than the finer pitch? Does the coarser pitch screw require more torque than the original?

 

[naturelover]

Gosh, didn't know May was "hate on the Engineer" month.....


Sent from my iPhone 5 using Tapatalk

 

[hamish]

Years later I redesigned the extrusion for a different screw with coarser threads and a square drive head. If you've ever used square drive deck screws you know how solid they are, but some of them even had trouble keeping that bit in the screws at first.

The square drive you refer to is properly know as a Robertson.

 

[Green Monster]

Husky = Poulan = Jonsered = Electrolux

Husky = Poulan = Jonsered = Electrolux

 

[Chris-PA]

I'm curious...
Were the thread forming screws stock items, or did they have to be custom made? If stock hardware, are they available in a square drive version as well?

They are off the shelf and not commonly available with Robertson drive head. Custom hardware requires paying for tooling and locks you in with a particular vendor which we try to avoid.

Wouldn't the coarser thread require more force? Or does it dig in better than the finer pitch? Does the coarser pitch screw require more torque than the original?

That is why the extrusion had to be redesigned - the screw bosses had to be larger.

The square drive you refer to is properly know as a Robertson.

Yes, but if I used that most wouldn't know what it was, so I called it square drive for clarity. I like them better than hex or Torx, with the exception that I have not seen any ball-end drivers.

 

[SawTroll]

Husky = Poulan = Jonsered = Electrolux

No, it isn't that simple! :msp_rolleyes:

 

[jrcat]

Gosh, didn't know May was "hate on the Engineer" month.....


Sent from my iPhone 5 using Tapatalk

Stick around.. may 30th is national slap an engineer day....uttahere2:

 

[thomas1]

Well poop-flinging bear, it was a tail of when things don't go right (or did you miss that?). And no, we didn't have to retain the entire production staff, just deal with the few who had no mechanical feel. Most never had any problem with it at all. What makes you think I wasn't "listening to the people on the floor who told you it was a bad idea in the first place." - do you really think they were suggesting better ideas or alternate hardware? The design worked fine for 10 years and no one thought it worth retooling the parts for - it was addressed when the parts were redesigned for other reasons.

Someone begs to differ.

That is why the extrusion had to be redesigned - the screw bosses had to be larger.

 

[Gologit]

Stick around.. may 30th is national slap an engineer day....uttahere2:

LOL...Engineers should be required to spend a lot of time actually working on what they design.

I'm thinking logging equipment and heavy machinery...working in field conditions, in the dirt, maybe in the rain, possibly at night with a flashlight held in their teeth, at the end of what's already been a long and dirty day.

Maybe they'd come up with something easier to maintain and repair if their focus was on something else other than ease of assembly and unit cost.

 

[cmarti]

Why are we being mean to guys who drive trains......I like trains....and fire trucks.....:msp_unsure:

 

[Chris-PA]

Someone begs to differ.

Well Poo Bear, reading comprehension must not be a strong point. As I wrote before, the part was not revised specifically to change that screw, it was changed when other things required the extrusion to be retooled. Then again you don't have any interest in that, or in the actual topic of this thread, you are just doing the only thing you ever do - flinging poo and being disruptive.

LOL...Engineers should be required to spend a lot of time actually working on what they design.

I'm thinking logging equipment and heavy machinery...working in field conditions, in the dirt, maybe in the rain, possibly at night with a flashlight held in their teeth, at the end of what's already been a long and dirty day.

Maybe they'd come up with something easier to maintain and repair if their focus was on something else other than ease of assembly and unit cost.

I agree. Engineers should be involved with both assembling and using their designs, and installing them where that is relevant. Engineering is about balancing often competing constraints, a giant compromise.

The person who builds it wants one thing, the person who uses it wants something else, and the person who pays for it yet another - and seldom are they aware of the needs of the others, and they are always whining. And that's before the guy who installs it or repairs it gets into the act.

 

[Philbert]

LOL...Engineers should be required to spend a lot of time actually working on what ...Maybe they'd come up with something easier to maintain and repair if their focus was on something else other than ease of assembly and unit cost.

You assume that designers or engineers have all the control? Often, they are given an impossible set of constraints by Marketing or Sales or Management staff, rather than a clean sheet of paper.

Things work best when they all work together , including the various 'customers' and end-users.

Philbert

(Chris is a faster typist - than me, but said basically the same thing!)

 

[Gologit]

Well Poo Bear, reading comprehension must not be a strong point. As I wrote before, the part was not revised specifically to change that screw, it was changed when other things required the extrusion to be retooled. Then again you don't have any interest in that, or in the actual topic of this thread, you are just doing the only thing you ever do - flinging poo and being disruptive.

I agree. Engineers should be involved with both assembling and using their designs, and installing them where that is relevant. Engineering is about balancing often competing constraints, a giant compromise.

The person who builds it wants one thing, the person who uses it wants something else, and the person who pays for it yet another - and seldom are they aware of the needs of the others, and they are always whining. And that's before the guy who installs it or repairs it gets into the act.

Whining? Is that how engineers see criticism and complaint about their designs?

Quite frankly I don't care about the needs of engineers. They have one job and that's to design something that I want and can use to make my business more profitable and my life easier.
They don't like "whining?" "Take whatever we design, pay your bill, and shut your mouth?"...is that the attitude?
Whining? Wow.

 

[thomas1]

Whining? Is that how engineers see criticism and complaint about their designs?

Quite frankly I don't care about the needs of engineers. They have one job and that's to design something that I want and can use to make my business more profitable and my life easier.
They don't like "whining?" "Take whatever we design, pay your bill, and shut your mouth?"...is that the attitude?
Whining? Wow.

My favorite engineering quote: "It shouldn't do that."

 

[thomas1]

Well Poo Bear, reading comprehension must not be a strong point. As I wrote before, the part was not revised specifically to change that screw, it was changed when other things required the extrusion to be retooled. Then again you don't have any interest in that, or in the actual topic of this thread, you are just doing the only thing you ever do - flinging poo and being disruptive.

That's weird, I could have sworn you said that it had to be redesigned because the screw bosses had to be larger? Let me see if I can go back through this thread and find it.

Oh look, here it is.

That is why the extrusion had to be redesigned - the screw bosses had to be larger.

I can see how you would forget writing that, it was almost 5 hours ago.

 

[Chris-PA]

Whining? Is that how engineers see criticism and complaint about their designs?

Quite frankly I don't care about the needs of engineers. They have one job and that's to design something that I want and can use to make my business more profitable and my life easier.
They don't like "whining?" "Take whatever we design, pay your bill, and shut your mouth?"...is that the attitude?
Whining? Wow.

Philbert is correct. There are many here who clearly have no idea of what goes on in a company that manufactures products, and believe engineers have the freedom to build whatever they want if only they were good enough. You really think engineers are the ones setting the parts cost limits? That's funny. It is usually dictated by management and most of all by customers.

Designing a product requires balancing the needs of a lot of people, and usually someone feels the compromise should have been made differently to optimize it for their particular needs (of the moment).

You are wrong about the "one job and that's to design something that I want and can use to make my business more profitable and my life easier" part.

On the day someone is buying the product they want it to be less expensive.

On the day you are using the product you want it to have the best performance/comfort/ease of use.

After a while you want it to last as long as possible.

On the day something went wrong you want it to be easy to repair.

And that is just one customer - the next one has slightly different tastes, management has limited development budgets, time and parts costs, and marketing/sales has usually neglected to tell the engineers about what the customer actually wants.

As for the whining about product designs - have you ever read the chainsaw forum on AS? Heck, we have become an nation of whiners.

Anyway, the proof of the pudding is in the eating, and I am not ashamed of my work. I don't presume to tell those who spend their careers out in the woods dropping trees how they should be doing their jobs, because it is not my area of expertise and I can't really know how it is done because I haven't lived it. Just as when you read posts by those without experience it jumps right out at you, the same is true for me when I read posts by people whining about this brand or that, or guessing why something is the way it is.

This thread started with me asking about a very specific aspect of saw construction that I was curious about, and wondering if anyone had any specific knowledge about why it was done that way. There was a little relevant discussion, but the thread immediately devolved into intentional disruption and axe-grinding by the usual crowd, along with a few folks volunteering their lack of understanding, so there's not much more to be gained from it.

 

[Chris-PA]

That's weird, I could have sworn you said that it had to be redesigned because the screw bosses had to be larger? Let me see if I can go back through this thread and find it.

Oh look, here it is.



I can see how you would forget writing that, it was almost 5 hours ago.

I can see why you would spend time looking for a phrasing that supports your agenda of disruption. Why are you posting here, when you clearly have no interest in or knowledge of the topic? Oh, that's right, it's an opportunity for the Poo Bear to fling poo.

 

[thomas1]

Philbert is correct. There are many here who clearly have no idea of what goes on in a company that manufactures products, and believe engineers have the freedom to build whatever they want if only they were good enough. You really think engineers are the ones setting the parts cost limits? That's funny. It is usually dictated by management and most of all by customers.

Designing a product requires balancing the needs of a lot of people, and usually someone feels the compromise should have been made differently to optimize it for their particular needs (of the moment).

You are wrong about the "one job and that's to design something that I want and can use to make my business more profitable and my life easier" part.

On the day someone is buying the product they want it to be less expensive.

On the day you are using the product you want it to have the best performance/comfort/ease of use.

After a while you want it to last as long as possible.

On the day something went wrong you want it to be easy to repair.

And from your responses you don't seem to listen on any day, because you already know what is best and everyone else is just whining.

And that is just one customer - the next one has slightly different tastes, management has limited development budgets, time and parts costs, and marketing/sales has usually neglected to tell the engineers about what the customer actually wants.

Now it's the marketing guy's fault that the engineer didn't ask what the end user actually wanted?

As for the whining about product designs - have you ever read the chainsaw forum on AS? Heck, we have become an nation of whiners.

No doubt, have you seen the posts from the guy who is always crying about how bad carburetors are?

Anyway, the proof of the pudding is in the eating, and I am not ashamed of my work. I don't presume to tell those who spend their careers out in the woods dropping trees how they should be doing their jobs, because it is not my area of expertise and I can't really know how it is done because I haven't lived it. Just as when you read posts by those without experience it jumps right out at you, the same is true for me when I read posts by people whining about this brand or that, or guessing why something is the way it is.

The posts where someone is full of oop: jump out, as well.

This thread started with me asking about a very specific aspect of saw construction that I was curious about, and wondering if anyone had any specific knowledge about why it was done that way. There was a little relevant discussion, but the thread immediately devolved into intentional disruption and axe-grinding by the usual crowd, along with a few folks volunteering their lack of understanding, so there's not much more to be gained from it.

I like your posts, they make me laugh.

 

[thomas1]

I can see why you would spend time looking for a phrasing that supports your agenda of disruption. Why are you posting here, when you clearly have no interest in or knowledge of the topic? Oh, that's right, it's an opportunity for the Poo Bear to fling poo.

I have no agenda.

-DSS