In article , "jt" says...

1. How common is the existing method of adjustment?

Mmm. Not very, IMO.

2. Do I need to worry about these teeny-weeny screws having to do all that
work?

Yes.

3. Is the method I thought of reasonable - is it by any chance novel?

One very common way to do this is to make the long nut in two sections.
And then rig a means of adjusting the separation between the two.
For example, Hardinge pins one bronze cylindrical nut into
the casting, and threads another similar one in on top of it.

By turning the adjustable one, one can trim out the fixed lash
in the nut.

Another common setup is when the long square cross section
nut, like you have, is slit along one if its sides, and a
clamp screw tightens down. This is somewhat less precise
than the hardinge method, but probably a *lot* better than
the teeter-totter technique.

Jim

==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

"jim rozen" wrote in message
...
In article , "jt" says...

One very common way to do this is to make the long nut in two sections.
And then rig a means of adjusting the separation between the two.
For example, Hardinge pins one bronze cylindrical nut into
the casting, and threads another similar one in on top of it.

By turning the adjustable one, one can trim out the fixed lash
in the nut.


I thought of that, but wasn't sure there'd be enough room for another set of
threads; plus the nut fits inside a channel under the slide which means it
may be limitedto turning in 90 degree steps. I also thought of two nut
sections, and a set of four teeney-weeny screws running along the long axis
in the corners of the nuts, two to pull, two to push. Keeping it square
might be trouble.