Don,

How much do you expect to pay for your next mill? There are
various systems which are less expensive than you may think.

For example, the "Shooting Star" BT-2 (2 axis, reasonable for a
lathe) currently sells for US$ 599.

Check out: http://www.star-techno.com/

(They seem to have changed the readout box since I picked mine up, which
may contribute to the higher price than I remember.)

Note the tiny led in the white circle with the word "DIA" under
it to the left of the Y-axis display. This is to tell you that you have
the multiply-by-two setting turned on.

That looks pretty good, and the price is better than what I have seen
elsewhere. Others might quickly point out that there are reasons for
that. I will probably contact them about their custom instrumentation
to see what they do on the medical front.

Bill

DoN. Nichols wrote:
On 2008-04-06, Bill Schwab wrote:
DoN. Nichols wrote:
On 2008-04-05, Bill Schwab wrote:
Just out of curiosity, what does a DRO measure on a lathe?
What you want it to. There is typically a button (labeled
something like "2X" to multiply the direct reading of radius to get the
diameter difference instead.

And there are times when the radial reading is more useful --
for example when cutting a groove for an O-ring or an e-clip you need to
cut it to a specific depth, not to a diameter.
My real question (not well articulated) was whether or not it "sees" the
compound's movements; it sounds like they do not, and DRO users keep the
compound locked most of the time.

That is for several reasons. In particular, as you may have
noticed, each additional axis increases the cost of a DRO, and you would
need two additional axes here -- the feed of the compound's handwheel,
and the actual angle at which it was set. Take both of these figures,
and a scientific calculator, and you can calculate how far the tool tip
moves in each direction -- and add those figures to the X and Y display
figures. Or -- add more intelligence to the DRO and let it calculate for
you. But remember that unless it is set parallel to the ways, you will
get changes in both axes at once.

Understood, but it should not be that hard to bump it with an indicator.


Of course, you could leave off the angle sensor for the
compound, and simply enter the angle manually if you change its setting.
Normally, I leave the angle set to 29.5 degrees (the best angle for
using it when threading to feed in almost along the flank of one side of
the thread) unless I need to cut a left-hand thread, or an Acme thread,
each of which requires a different setting to the compound.

Thanks for the look ahead.


But the other thing is that the sensor for the compound's motion
would be bulky enough to get in the way. The cross-slide and the
longitudinal motions are large enough so the system has sufficient room,
but one on the compound feed would be quite awkward.

The compound looks like a very nice way to create controlled axial
movements. It would seem far easier to bump the compound parallel to
the spindle and to use it for small motions than to try to get the
carriage to make the same small motion.

This is what a micrometer bed stop is for. It clamps to the
bed, and stops the motion of the carriage at a preset point. You can
change the point (in thousandths of an inch) by adjusting the micrometer
thumbwheel. So -- you adjust the micrometer and then use the normal
carriage handwheel to move the carriage into firm contact with the stop
again. And your setting is absolute position based on the movement of
the carriage. The compound reset to parallel the ways is at the mercy
of any motion of the carriage.

True, but so would be the motion of the toolbit, so a stop on the
carriage has the same limitation, right? If anything, it seems that a
stop on one side would exaggerate any misalignment, but I will have a
look. I have not found one yet, but it should be easy enough to make
for what I have in mind, which is (more or less) cleaning up a shoulder
at a desired location relative to another feature. For relative motion,
a fine thread and a dial indicator should do the job.


And -- it has a limited travel.

Noted. It would be useful only for small adjustments.



You can
stack a bunch of gauge blocks between the bed stop and the carriage to
define longer distances

Got it.



This kind of precise motion is seldom needed.

We might be talking about different things, but I learned a lot regardless.


Wait until you have actually *used* the lathe for a while
before deciding what you need.

Of course, but I'm getting a lot out of this. The real purpose is to
tease out what I might have wished I had asked six months from now. My
mill purchase was a mix of homework and some luck. I tried to take some
of the chance out of this purchase and was mislead. I see no gain (and
a lot to lose) by punishing that just for the sake of it, but I did need
to get a crash course in lathe work in order to make an informed decision.

Thanks!

Bill

On Apr 5, 8:45*pm, Bill Schwab wrote:
...
The compound looks like a very nice way to create controlled axial
movements. *It would seem far easier to bump the compound parallel to
the spindle and to use it for small motions than to try to get the
carriage to make the same small motion. *Just my mill-based experience
(perhaps naively) transferring to a machine I am only beginning to
understand.

Bill

I mistakenly guessed that as a newbie, too.

It doesn't work unless you have a carriage micrometer stop or
lengthwise dial indicator (or the work is so short you can lock the
carriage to the ways), and then you don't need to do it.

Plan the job so you can always measure. I leave a zero reference
somewhere, usually the faced-off right end of the bar even if I'm
going to shorten it later.

I set the compound at 29 degrees for threading and leave it there. Any
time you turn the compound you have to realign the toolpost as well or
you'll break your parting tool, and then you need a long axial or
radial surface which the workpiece may not have.

On my lathe the compound handle hits the tailstock when turned
parallel to the ways. I've set it to 5 degrees a few times so the
compound dial effectively reads 0.0001" infeed, although shaving off a
few tenths is difficult. 5 is less than ARCSIN(0.0001) but minus
errors are easier to fix.

***When the compound is at 29 degrees for threading the tool moves
axially slightly less than half the compound travel. SIN(30) = 0.5.
Really this is all you need to cut a shoulder accurately.

The cutting diameter changes but you shouldn't make sharp inside
corners because they concentrate stress. I either countersink the part
that fits against the shoulder or add a slight rounded undercut. Ball
bearings are countersunk so the shoulder they seat against doesn't
have to be perfect all the way in.

Jim Wilkins

DoN. Nichols wrote:
On 2008-04-06, Bill Schwab wrote:
DoN. Nichols wrote:
Well ... the sensors on the mill are not being confused by
backlash in the leadscrew and nut, which the dials progressively are.
I respectfully disagree: the dials are tricked by uneven wear in the
leadscrew (and the DRO is not). Backlash confuses the _operator_ if
same is not paying attention.

The sensors in the mill are part of the DRO, not part of the
leadscrew/nut/dials assembly.

I know that.


Backlash results in positional errors both depending on the
direction of approach,

But you cannot call mis-reading the dials relative to a good screw an
error of the machine; it is operator error. I know Harold gets a lot of
grief, and I am starting to feel it too, but I read, I thought, I
practiced, and I came to understand it. Backlash does not cause a
positional error in reverse, period; improper interpretation of the
dials causes the error. All one has to do is retreat and go back
forward, or work against the dials based on measurements, or re-zero in
the direction (though I have yet to do that).


and in absolute errors when the leadscrew is not
able to move the table to the position which the dial numbers would
suggest.

Agreed. That is part of what I said above.


The cross-slide leadscrew on my Clausing when I first received
it was badly worn -- enough so that it looked like this in the middle
(use a fixed pitch font like Courier to avoid distortion of the ASCII
drawings.):

I freely admit that a DRO can compensate for this, and said so above.
Personally, I would rebuild the machine to have fresh new screws, but
you are correct.




/\__/\__/\__/\__/\__/\__/\__

Instead of like this as it should
_ _ _ _ _ _ _
/ \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/ \_

The total backlash was 0.070" (out of a total of 0.100" expected motion
for a full rotation of the leadscrew. Since the leadscrew was only this
worn in the middle, you could expect an error of about 0.035" in the
middle if it was zeroed at the unworn sections near the end. And in
reality, since the majority of the wear was during power crossfeed to
part off workpieces -- most other work was done by a bed turret, the
error on feed was probably significantly greater than on the return as
would be used when boring the ID of a workpiece.

But a DRO would be measuring the actual position of the
cross-slide, not what the leadscrew dial thought it was commanding, so
it would be free of the error and the lathe would be better used with
the DRO readings and with a blank dial until the leadscrew was replaced.
(It has long ago been replaced, of course.)

We are saying the same thing, except that I do not consider the
dead-space in the dial readings to be a failure of the machine; being
tricked by it is a failure of the operator.



CAD drawings meet my needs, but they could certainly be simpler if they
needed to show dimensions only for the first of such holes. As it is, I
end up creating extra dimension layers for my more complicated parts.
Two layers are fairly common, usually split among milling and drilling
operations. I think three is my record to date.

O.K. And these depend on the accuracy of the leadscrews in the
absence of a DRO.

Very true.


Note that backlash in a milling machine's worn leadscrew can
also result in serious damage to the workpiece and/or the cutter. If
you are climb milling, the cutter can pull out the backlash resulting in
too strong a chip load on the cutter.

True again, which is why I think the manual process is a good idea: one
ends up with the slack removed, limiting the opportunity for what you
describe. Any pilots among us might think of it being analogous to a
procedure turn. However, the amount of backlash is not terribly
relevant to the DRO/manual debate, as long as it is consistent. When
the screw wear varies greatly over the length, the DRO wins - I do not
deny that.

Bill

The Davenport's wrote:
As I said, the slack is there unless you do what the manual process
requires.

Bill

No...the slack is ALWAYS there...even ball screws have backlash...not much,
but it's still there

But you can arrange for the cutting pressure to hold the mating surfaces
of the nut and screw in contact. Think through manually cutting a
window, and you will see that is precisely what happens.

Bill

On Apr 6, 10:17*am, Bill Schwab wrote:
The Davenport's wrote:
As I said, the slack is there unless you do what the manual process
requires.

Bill

No...the slack is ALWAYS there...even ball screws have backlash...not much,
but it's still there

But you can arrange for the cutting pressure to hold the mating surfaces
of the nut and screw in contact. *Think through manually cutting a
window, and you will see that is precisely what happens.

Bill

Think through cutting a shoulder in, turning a diameter, an angled
shoulder out and a larger diameter. That was my first G-code lesson.

Jim Wilkins

The Davenport's wrote:
"Bill Schwab" wrote in message
...
Gunner Asch wrote:

People also flew around the world in Ford Trimotors for a long time.
I'm not advocating that, though I wouldn't mind flying a Trimotor once.


Bill...an inexpensive DRO will allow you to work faster, far more
accurately and do a number of operations that would take you hours to
do, in just a few minutes
Faster, sure, no question. More accurate? I might want to debate that
one.

Time to turn into the ass I was trying to avoid being...

YES more accurate. Unless you do this for a living or have done if for a
hobby for longer than a week and a half, you don't have a lot of room to be
throwing statements like that around

A couple of decades as an engineer gives me some room. And in fact, I
do now actually earn a portion of my living doing this stuff. That is
part of why I shelled out the bucks for a lathe, to enhance my capabilities.




However, it also could easily become a crutch. Had I not mastered
scales and dials and built muscle memory to keep backlash from nailing me,
I would have been hosed trying to use an RT. I look forward to bragging
about the work in question, but I can't do it yet. Titanium space station
parts it's not, but I am convinced I am right about practicing the basics.


They also work very well on lathes
I cannot yet comment from experience, but the compound looks awfully handy
to remain locked. Just a thought from a newbie.

Keep that thought in mind...the newbie part, that is

On a lathe yes, NOT on a mill - sorry to disappoint you.


I've got around 40 years doing this stuff...from things I've read from
Gunner and DoN, they each have at least that much or more time in this. AND
this what we do for a living...so between the three of us, we're talking
about 120 years or so of collective experiance.

If I did not respect your opinions, I would not have sought them in this
recent screwup with the lathe. However, I am not a complete machine
shop green horn, and I am a very experienced engineer. I will from time
to time disagree with you, and would hope you would be man enough to
debate vs. reduce yourself to name calling.



I'm not saying that we have all the answers, but you barely have the
questions and you're tell us how things actually are. How you do that, I'm
not sure.

See above.

Bill

Gunner,

Is a pencil a crutch, or is a stick and a tray of wet clay the proper
tool?

You can be a purist, and work on your chi, or you can turn out work.

It's not about purism, it's about practice. I look forward to showing
you the RT pieces I made in the fall. Had I not worked out dials and
backlash and practiced manual methods, I would not have been able to
build them.

Bill

People also flew around the world in Ford Trimotors for a long time.
I'm not advocating that, though I wouldn't mind flying a Trimotor once.


Bill...an inexpensive DRO will allow you to work faster, far more
accurately and do a number of operations that would take you hours to
do, in just a few minutes
Faster, sure, no question. More accurate? I might want to debate that
one.

Time to turn into the ass I was trying to avoid being...

YES more accurate. Unless you do this for a living or have done if for a
hobby for longer than a week and a half, you don't have a lot of room to
be throwing statements like that around

A couple of decades as an engineer gives me some room. And in fact, I do
now actually earn a portion of my living doing this stuff. That is part
of why I shelled out the bucks for a lathe, to enhance my capabilities.

Being an engineer is not the same as making the chips.




However, it also could easily become a crutch. Had I not mastered
scales and dials and built muscle memory to keep backlash from nailing
me, I would have been hosed trying to use an RT. I look forward to
bragging about the work in question, but I can't do it yet. Titanium
space station parts it's not, but I am convinced I am right about
practicing the basics.


They also work very well on lathes
I cannot yet comment from experience, but the compound looks awfully
handy to remain locked. Just a thought from a newbie.

Keep that thought in mind...the newbie part, that is

On a lathe yes, NOT on a mill - sorry to disappoint you.

I'm not disappointed, YOU said that you are a newbie on a lathe...MY comment
was to your comments regarding using a lathe


I've got around 40 years doing this stuff...from things I've read from
Gunner and DoN, they each have at least that much or more time in this.
AND this what we do for a living...so between the three of us, we're
talking about 120 years or so of collective experiance.

If I did not respect your opinions, I would not have sought them in this
recent screwup with the lathe. However, I am not a complete machine shop
green horn, and I am a very experienced engineer. I will from time to
time disagree with you, and would hope you would be man enough to debate
vs. reduce yourself to name calling.

And just where did I reduce myself to name calling? Well, other than
refering to myself, that is.



I'm not saying that we have all the answers, but you barely have the
questions and you're tell us how things actually are. How you do that,
I'm not sure.

See above.

Bill

Jim,

On Apr 5, 8:45 pm, Bill Schwab wrote:
...
The compound looks like a very nice way to create controlled axial
movements. It would seem far easier to bump the compound parallel to
the spindle and to use it for small motions than to try to get the
carriage to make the same small motion. Just my mill-based experience
(perhaps naively) transferring to a machine I am only beginning to
understand.

Bill

I mistakenly guessed that as a newbie, too.

It doesn't work unless you have a carriage micrometer stop or
lengthwise dial indicator (or the work is so short you can lock the
carriage to the ways), and then you don't need to do it.

Plan the job so you can always measure. I leave a zero reference
somewhere, usually the faced-off right end of the bar even if I'm
going to shorten it later.

I set the compound at 29 degrees for threading and leave it there. Any
time you turn the compound you have to realign the toolpost as well or
you'll break your parting tool, and then you need a long axial or
radial surface which the workpiece may not have.

On my lathe the compound handle hits the tailstock when turned
parallel to the ways.

Mine appears to be fine in that orientation, but I see where you are going.


I've set it to 5 degrees a few times so the
compound dial effectively reads 0.0001" infeed, although shaving off a
few tenths is difficult. 5 is less than ARCSIN(0.0001) but minus
errors are easier to fix.

***When the compound is at 29 degrees for threading the tool moves
axially slightly less than half the compound travel. SIN(30) = 0.5.
Really this is all you need to cut a shoulder accurately.

The cutting diameter changes but you shouldn't make sharp inside
corners because they concentrate stress.

One thing that made me cringe was stepped block used in airplane
construction. They've apparently worked for decades, but it sure looked
like an crack waiting to happen.


I either countersink the part
that fits against the shoulder or add a slight rounded undercut. Ball
bearings are countersunk so the shoulder they seat against doesn't
have to be perfect all the way in.

Do you undercut the shoulder? Or, do you face the shoulder first and
then turn any radius adjacent to it? I understand the related
movements, but I do not quite see how to apply it.

Bill

The Davenport's wrote:
People also flew around the world in Ford Trimotors for a long time.
I'm not advocating that, though I wouldn't mind flying a Trimotor once.


Bill...an inexpensive DRO will allow you to work faster, far more
accurately and do a number of operations that would take you hours to
do, in just a few minutes
Faster, sure, no question. More accurate? I might want to debate that
one.
Time to turn into the ass I was trying to avoid being...

YES more accurate. Unless you do this for a living or have done if for a
hobby for longer than a week and a half, you don't have a lot of room to
be throwing statements like that around
A couple of decades as an engineer gives me some room. And in fact, I do
now actually earn a portion of my living doing this stuff. That is part
of why I shelled out the bucks for a lathe, to enhance my capabilities.

Being an engineer is not the same as making the chips.

No, but I do both. Granted I am much more of an engineer than a machinist.






However, it also could easily become a crutch. Had I not mastered
scales and dials and built muscle memory to keep backlash from nailing
me, I would have been hosed trying to use an RT. I look forward to
bragging about the work in question, but I can't do it yet. Titanium
space station parts it's not, but I am convinced I am right about
practicing the basics.


They also work very well on lathes
I cannot yet comment from experience, but the compound looks awfully
handy to remain locked. Just a thought from a newbie.
Keep that thought in mind...the newbie part, that is
On a lathe yes, NOT on a mill - sorry to disappoint you.

I'm not disappointed, YOU said that you are a newbie on a lathe...MY comment
was to your comments regarding using a lathe

That's because I am a newbie on a lathe. But when it comes to other
aspects of machining, I cease to be newbie.

What you seem to find annoying is a combination of thinking through a
complex decision and a considered disagreements about machining in
general that arose along the way.



I've got around 40 years doing this stuff...from things I've read from
Gunner and DoN, they each have at least that much or more time in this.
AND this what we do for a living...so between the three of us, we're
talking about 120 years or so of collective experiance.
If I did not respect your opinions, I would not have sought them in this
recent screwup with the lathe. However, I am not a complete machine shop
green horn, and I am a very experienced engineer. I will from time to
time disagree with you, and would hope you would be man enough to debate
vs. reduce yourself to name calling.

And just where did I reduce myself to name calling? Well, other than
refering to myself, that is.

"keep that in mind, the newbie part that is". "but you barely have the
questions". If I look around, I will find a crack about "a week and a
half" or something. Sounds like name calling to me.

Bill

On Apr 6, 10:49*am, Bill Schwab wrote:
Jim,
...
On my lathe the compound handle hits the tailstock when turned
parallel to the ways.
Mine appears to be fine in that orientation, but I see where you are going..

It's only a problem for small, short parts running between centers. I
use collets if at all possible.

One thing that made me cringe was stepped block used in airplane
construction. *They've apparently worked for decades, but it sure looked
like an crack waiting to happen.

Where are they used? My aircraft construction books are mainly
training manuals for WWII production workers. I don't plan to build an
airplane but there's a lot of generally useful metalworking info in
them.

Do you undercut the shoulder? *Or, do you face the shoulder first and
then turn any radius adjacent to it? *I understand the related
movements, but I do not quite see how to apply it.

Depends on the job. The loaded inner side of a needle-bearing axle
journal would be undercut axially into the shoulder, then faced
smooth. The outer end would be grooved (to end the thread, but same
idea) since it isn't loaded as much. I'm not making race cars, just
oversized stainless steel wheels for lifting equipment used outdoors.
BTW, unhardened journals and welding-rod needles work fine, like they
do on floor jacks.

Generally the finish on the diameter is more critical so I rough the
length, finish the diameter, then risk a groove from re-establishing
the tool position on the shoulder.

It helps enormously that I almost always get to specify and design the
part, either for my home projects or for an electrical engineer who
lets me do whatever I want after I slip "Young's Modulus is, uh, 29E6
for this steel" into the discussion.

Jim Wilkins

On Sun, 6 Apr 2008 07:38:54 -0500, "The Davenport's"
wrote:

snip
I cannot yet comment from experience, but the compound looks awfully
handy
to remain locked. Just a thought from a newbie.

Keep that thought in mind...the newbie part, that is

I've got around 40 years doing this stuff...from things I've read from
Gunner and DoN, they each have at least that much or more time in this.
AND
this what we do for a living...so between the three of us, we're talking
about 120 years or so of collective experiance.

Ive only been doing it for about 12 yrs actually. Not even that
long..but Ive spent 12 yrs as a machine tool mechanic, diagnosing,
fixing, setting up and teaching folks to run both manual and CNC
machine tools, and trouble shooting metal cutting machines when they
take a ****, or stop making accurate parts. Or worse..making good
parts ALMOST all of the time....

Then there is the home shop..shrug

snip
Gunner



Mea culpa...

I stand corrected.

I wonder why I thought you'd been doing this longer.

Mike

Cause Ive learned a LOT in those 12 yrs?
G

If I dont know how to cut metal, I cant tell if a machine is working
correctly or not, and if the problem is machine related, program or
operated related.

IE..I know how its Supposed to work..so when it stops doing it
correctly..I have to find out why., and how to correct it.

Gunner



"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner

On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 10:37:31 -0400, Bill Schwab
wrote:

Gunner,

Is a pencil a crutch, or is a stick and a tray of wet clay the proper
tool?

You can be a purist, and work on your chi, or you can turn out work.

It's not about purism, it's about practice. I look forward to showing
you the RT pieces I made in the fall. Had I not worked out dials and
backlash and practiced manual methods, I would not have been able to
build them.

Bill

Bill, Im sure you turn out fine work. I look at things from a
production viewpoint. Its my job to make sure machines and operators
turn out the maximum amount of work, to specs, in the shortest amount
of time. Its one of the things I do for a living in the Meat World.

Ive seen some marvelous work turned out with a hacksaw and a file.
Atistry in metal. The idiot savant Abraxis is an example.

One of the old exercises for apprentic machinist was to make a perfect
cube, using nothing more than a file, for a grade. Took a considerable
amount fo time to do, yet all apprentices had to do it.

Me..Id stick it in a shaper and face the thing properly, then surface
grind it to tolerance. Doesnt take anywhere near as much time, time I
can spend learning/making/doing other things, or out shooting, nailing
the lady friend or playing with the critters (not necessarily in that
order of course G)
Other people would use a mill of some sort...chuckle..but Im a shaper
head at heart.

Gunner





"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner

Jim,

On Apr 6, 10:49 am, Bill Schwab wrote:
Jim,
...
On my lathe the compound handle hits the tailstock when turned
parallel to the ways.
Mine appears to be fine in that orientation, but I see where you are going.

It's only a problem for small, short parts running between centers. I
use collets if at all possible.

A 5C setup will appear, but not right away.



One thing that made me cringe was stepped block used in airplane
construction. They've apparently worked for decades, but it sure looked
like an crack waiting to happen.

Where are they used? My aircraft construction books are mainly
training manuals for WWII production workers. I don't plan to build an
airplane but there's a lot of generally useful metalworking info in
them.

It was a long time ago. I know who showed it to me, and AFAIK can still
contact him, which I should do. For now, my recollection is that they
were used to connect pieces of sheet metal onto spars or similar
structures. That's pushing quite a few cobwebs out of the way, so take
it for what it is worth.

Enjoy the books!



Generally the finish on the diameter is more critical so I rough the
length, finish the diameter, then risk a groove from re-establishing
the tool position on the shoulder.

It helps enormously that I almost always get to specify and design the
part, either for my home projects or

Same here. I design with the strengths and weaknesses of my machines
firmly in mind.


for an electrical engineer who
lets me do whatever I want after I slip "Young's Modulus is, uh, 29E6
for this steel" into the discussion.

Well done - just don't mention permitivity or you'll get an earful

Bill

Gunner,

Bill, Im sure you turn out fine work. I look at things from a
production viewpoint. Its my job to make sure machines and operators
turn out the maximum amount of work, to specs, in the shortest amount
of time. Its one of the things I do for a living in the Meat World.

I have no argument with that. However, building custom weirdness as I
do, it has been invaluable to me to be able to function absent encoders
for every axis a new machine or fixture brings into play.

May your spindles run true.

Bill

On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 21:06:21 -0400, Bill Schwab
wrote:

Gunner Asch wrote:

People also flew around the world in Ford Trimotors for a long time.

I'm not advocating that, though I wouldn't mind flying a Trimotor once.


Bill...an inexpensive DRO will allow you to work faster, far more
accurately and do a number of operations that would take you hours to
do, in just a few minutes

Faster, sure, no question. More accurate? I might want to debate that
one. However, it also could easily become a crutch. Had I not mastered
scales and dials and built muscle memory to keep backlash from nailing
me, I would have been hosed trying to use an RT. I look forward to
bragging about the work in question, but I can't do it yet. Titanium
space station parts it's not, but I am convinced I am right about
practicing the basics.


They also work very well on lathes

I cannot yet comment from experience, but the compound looks awfully
handy to remain locked. Just a thought from a newbie.

An operational difference between mill and other tools (RT, lathe,
etc) is that direction is often reversed on a mill, less so on lathe
compound or RT.

I view the DRO on a mill like an autodark welding helmet. I'd gotten
along fine without either for quite a while, but after trying them I
decided if either quit working it'd be replaced before sundown. That
eventualy happened with the (ancient) DRO on my mill, and it was
indeed replaced before sundown.

I don't have a DRO on the lathe and don't feel any need for one.

On Apr 6, 3:06*pm, Bill Schwab wrote:
....
Well done - just don't mention permitivity or you'll get an earful

Bill

I'm pretty good with electrical engineering too. One of my tasks as a
lab and CAD room manager at MITRE was showing young EE co-op students
how to use the schematic capture and simulation tools. That quickly
turned into how to make simple, practical, efficient designs instead
of the cookbook stuff they knew from textbooks. One guy used a relay
coil to sense low battery voltage in a portable device. In addition to
opening when the batteries discharged, it significantly hastened it.
Another ordered a case of Polaroid film for the scope camera to figure
out exactly how fuses blow. He was really downcast when I showed him
the I-squared-T curves in the back of the Littelfuse catalog. They
knew the theory reasonably well but none of the practical details.

When I received my chemistry degree the profs told us
'Congratulations, but you aren't yet a chemist. What we've taught you
qualifies you to listen and understand when you get a job and they
explain how everything really works.'

The earfulls at MITRE were about digital radio communication theory,
which makes thermodynamics look easy.

Jim Wilkins

On Apr 6, 2:32*pm, Gunner Asch wrote:
...
One of the old exercises for apprentic machinist was to make a perfect
cube, using nothing more than a file, for a grade. Took a considerable
amount fo time to do, yet all apprentices had to do it.
....
Gunner

Interesting. I've seen machinists' faces go from smug to panic when
the part I wanted them to make required some careful hand work, like
filing to a curved line. It didn't help that I had made a sample.

Jim Wilkins

Jim Wilkins wrote:
On Apr 6, 2:32 pm, Gunner Asch wrote:

...
One of the old exercises for apprentic machinist was to make a perfect
cube, using nothing more than a file, for a grade. Took a considerable
amount fo time to do, yet all apprentices had to do it.
....
Gunner


Interesting. I've seen machinists' faces go from smug to panic when
the part I wanted them to make required some careful hand work, like
filing to a curved line. It didn't help that I had made a sample.

Jim Wilkins

After using a file for many years I was shown by one of my engineering
workshop instructors, when he saw me filing a radius, how to file a
radius correctly and it made the world of difference to the outcome. I
thanked him but have often wondered why such basic information was not
taught as standard, maybe it was thought we didn't need to know that
sort of thing because of the courses we were on and it way too basic.
It's not something I have ever run across in a book either but have not
looked specifically for it.

On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 04:47:15 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 01:34:17 -0600, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 14:40:43 -0400, Bill Schwab
wrote:



Do you ever indicate your compound parallel to the spindle?

No. I have a 2" DI mounted with a magnet to the carriage. I use that
a lot. If I were to put a DRO on my lathe, it'd be first on the
carriage and thence on the tailstock as for drilling. Won't happen
anytime soon if ever.
Plunger style long travel dial indicator works just hunky dorry on a
tailstock.
And pretty well on the cross slide also.

Using a 3-4" long travel indicator, put the punger against the ass end
of the drill chuck in the tailstock ram. Now you have a mechanical
DRO. Hold the indicator to the tailstock nose with a magnet, or a hose
clamp.

The same can be done with the cross slide. And the carraige.

And IS done every day in machine shops all across the planet.

Its not rocket science

Magnet hint: this is not a good place for supermagnets. Ordinary
ceramic magnets are better. Supermagnets hold well -- but they also
hold ferrous swarf with such tenacity they're about impossible to
clean. Ceramic magnets can be cleaned in a jiffy with a blast of
compressed air.

On Apr 6, 7:33*pm, David Billington
wrote:

*After using a file for many years I was shown by one of my engineering
workshop instructors, when he saw me filing a radius, how to file a
radius correctly and it made the world of difference to the outcome. I
thanked him but have often wondered why such basic information was not
taught as standard, maybe it was thought we didn't need to know that
sort of thing because of the courses we were on and it way too basic.
It's not something I have ever run across in a book either but have not
looked specifically for it.

I was taught to scribe the curve, file a 45 bevel, then cut down the
points to an octagon, then cut those, etc, keeping the flat widths
equal, just like planing a wooden ship spar round. The first cuts were
with a rasp, the last with a single-cut "hand" or "pillar" file.

What is your method?

Jim Wilkins

Jim Wilkins wrote:
On Apr 6, 7:33 pm, David Billington
wrote:

After using a file for many years I was shown by one of my engineering
workshop instructors, when he saw me filing a radius, how to file a
radius correctly and it made the world of difference to the outcome. I
thanked him but have often wondered why such basic information was not
taught as standard, maybe it was thought we didn't need to know that
sort of thing because of the courses we were on and it way too basic.
It's not something I have ever run across in a book either but have not
looked specifically for it.


I was taught to scribe the curve, file a 45 bevel, then cut down the
points to an octagon, then cut those, etc, keeping the flat widths
equal, just like planing a wooden ship spar round. The first cuts were
with a rasp, the last with a single-cut "hand" or "pillar" file.

What is your method?

Jim Wilkins

I've done the same but I was thinking of filing the final smooth curve.
On say a 90 degree corner and holding the piece with each face at about
45 to horizontal what I did originally, as I had never been shown, I
just moved the file forward and rocked it from the near face to the far
face so the contact point travels away form you to create the curve. The
instructor showed my to start with the file parallel with the far face
and moving the file forward, rock it back, to end the stroke with the
file parallel to the near face, in this way the contact point travels
back towards you during the operation. This instantly gave me a much
better finish and radius and it's the way I've done it ever since..

On 2008-04-06, Tom wrote:
DoN. Nichols wrote:

[ ... ]

My 12x24" Clausing (from 1957) has a dial which is calibrated 0.000-0.100
on a 10 TPI leadscrew. It was a light industrial machine in its day, not
a hobby toy. I suspect that the dials reading in direct diameter change
are more recent machines.

My Monarch (1958) has a crossfeed dial graduated 0.000-0.500" on a 4tpi
feedscrew as well as graduated 0.500-0.000" for internal boring. Apart from
cosmetic differences, the dial has the same graduations as a local 1944 Monarch
of the same size. However I imagine my dial is a lot bigger than yours as
it's 5" in diameter, so maybe Clausing costing clerks had a say in your
dial and the subsequent graduations? :-)

I certainly would not want to try to read 0.000-0.500" on a dial
the diameter of mine, while 0.000-0.100" works out fine. How big a
Monarch is yours -- the 10EE or one of the larger ones? That 4 TPI
leadscrew suggests a larger machine to me.

Note that I have a spare compound from an earlier Clausing
picked up from eBay, and the dial diameter is about half the one which I
have. If I ever have to put that one into service, I will transplant
the dials from the newer one onto it -- or make a new set of dials.
(Actually, since the dial is a collar around the actual mounting of the
crank to the leadscrew, all I need to do is to turn and graduate a
larger collar -- and make something to hold the index line to match it.

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 11:32:40 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 10:37:31 -0400, Bill Schwab
wrote:

Gunner,

Is a pencil a crutch, or is a stick and a tray of wet clay the proper
tool?

You can be a purist, and work on your chi, or you can turn out work.

It's not about purism, it's about practice. I look forward to showing
you the RT pieces I made in the fall. Had I not worked out dials and
backlash and practiced manual methods, I would not have been able to
build them.

Bill

Bill, Im sure you turn out fine work. I look at things from a
production viewpoint. Its my job to make sure machines and operators
turn out the maximum amount of work, to specs, in the shortest amount
of time. Its one of the things I do for a living in the Meat World.

Ive seen some marvelous work turned out with a hacksaw and a file.
Atistry in metal. The idiot savant Abraxis is an example.

One of the old exercises for apprentic machinist was to make a perfect
cube, using nothing more than a file, for a grade. Took a considerable
amount fo time to do, yet all apprentices had to do it.

Me..Id stick it in a shaper and face the thing properly, then surface
grind it to tolerance. Doesnt take anywhere near as much time, time I
can spend learning/making/doing other things, or out shooting, nailing
the lady friend or playing with the critters (not necessarily in that
order of course G)
Other people would use a mill of some sort...chuckle..but Im a shaper
head at heart.

Gunner

The cube test is a fairly common one but back in the "Old Days",
according to my Apprentice Master, you made a surface plate. You took
three raw castings and using a planer machined them as flat and smooth
as you could get them. Then, using a hand scrapper, you made them
really flat. To check you tried the three pieces against each other,
back and forth, scrape a bit here and scrape a bit there. Of course
you also made your own scrapers and ground your own tool bits.

When you got a surfacer plate to where the boss said it was "good" you
could call yourself a machinist.


Bruce-in-Bangkok
(correct email address for reply)

On Mon, 07 Apr 2008 00:33:22 +0100, David Billington
wrote:

Jim Wilkins wrote:
On Apr 6, 2:32 pm, Gunner Asch wrote:

...
One of the old exercises for apprentic machinist was to make a perfect
cube, using nothing more than a file, for a grade. Took a considerable
amount fo time to do, yet all apprentices had to do it.
....
Gunner


Interesting. I've seen machinists' faces go from smug to panic when
the part I wanted them to make required some careful hand work, like
filing to a curved line. It didn't help that I had made a sample.

Jim Wilkins

After using a file for many years I was shown by one of my engineering
workshop instructors, when he saw me filing a radius, how to file a
radius correctly and it made the world of difference to the outcome. I
thanked him but have often wondered why such basic information was not
taught as standard, maybe it was thought we didn't need to know that
sort of thing because of the courses we were on and it way too basic.
It's not something I have ever run across in a book either but have not
looked specifically for it.

Years ago when I was an apprentice I made a smart ass remark about
knowing how to file already. The apprentice master heard me and put me
to work snagging castings with a 24 inch ******* file. After about a
month of that I had learned two things (1) there is quite a lot to
filing, and (2) never sass the boss. I suppose the former has helped
me but I know that the latter has been a life saver any number of
times.




Bruce-in-Bangkok
(correct email address for reply)

On 2008-04-06, The Davenport's wrote:

[ ... ]

Keep that thought in mind...the newbie part, that is

I've got around 40 years doing this stuff...from things I've read from
Gunner and DoN, they each have at least that much or more time in this. AND
this what we do for a living...so between the three of us, we're talking
about 120 years or so of collective experiance.

Well ... let's be honest he

1) My first metalworking was in trying to make an equivalent of
an Ampex 351 tape recorder. There, I had a hand held electric
drill, a pseudo drill-press stand for that, a coping saw and
hacksaw, files and an ancient 6" bench grinder. This would have
been around 1958 or so.

2) I first touched a lathe (with no training, just to do
a simple thing with a small one at work, back around
the summer of 1960. Based on that, I guess that I've been at it
nearly 50 years.

3) However, it was many years after that before I got regular
access to a lathe and a milling machine at work. Perhaps around
1970 or so -- and I got some training from the genuine machinist
who worked there. I was an electronics technician at the time,
and wanted to learn to do other things to make my projects at
home look nicer.

4) perhaps a couple of years later, I got a Unimat SL-1000 (mostly
lathe, but played at being a mill and a drill press too. :-) I
learned a lot about how to work around weaknesses in the
machines at that time. I was living in a single-bedroom
apartment, so I had no space for larger machines -- just the
Unimat and a sensitive drill press -- plus the afore-mentioned
pseudo drill press holding an electric drill motor.

5) I got married, and moved into a house. At this point, I was
able to pick up an Atlas/Crafstman 6x18 lathe, and somewhat
later a floor-standing 16-speed drill press. This was around
1976-1977.

6) Worked with the genuine machinists over the years at work,
learning what I could from them. Expanded the house around 1985
or so, and had room in the garage, plus I was getting close to
retiring. so -- I got a little CNC lathe (Emco-Maier), a
Bridgeport BOSS-3 CNC machine (with problems), a 12x24"
Clausing. A Nichols horizontal mill, a Rockwell/Delta 7"
shaper, a small mill built around the milling head for the
manual Emco-Maier Compact-5 and a good x-y base, a small heat
treating oven (to which I married an Omega controller for
accurate heat treating), horizontal/vertical 4x6 bandsaw, and an
Emco 3-wheel vertical bandsaw, finger brake, corner notcher, and
shear, 8" bench grinder

The 12x24" Clausing lathe came with a bed turret, so I got to
teach myself production work using that, as well as using it as
a normal toolroom lathe.

So -- exactly where do you say I started? It has been rather
spread out. But, I've always kept my eyes and ears open
whenever I had a chance to learn how to do something. That is
*always* of interest to me.

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

Jim,

On Apr 6, 3:06 pm, Bill Schwab wrote:
....
Well done - just don't mention permitivity or you'll get an earful

Bill

I'm pretty good with electrical engineering too. One of my tasks as a
lab and CAD room manager at MITRE was showing young EE co-op students
how to use the schematic capture and simulation tools. That quickly
turned into how to make simple, practical, efficient designs instead
of the cookbook stuff they knew from textbooks. One guy used a relay
coil to sense low battery voltage in a portable device. In addition to
opening when the batteries discharged, it significantly hastened it.




Another ordered a case of Polaroid film for the scope camera to figure
out exactly how fuses blow. He was really downcast when I showed him
the I-squared-T curves in the back of the Littelfuse catalog. They
knew the theory reasonably well but none of the practical details.

High speed images can be useful, even when we understand why something
happens. I have never had the fun myself, but heard lots of war stories
about having cameras control events to get the timing right. At 100,000
frames per second (!!!!), the event has to be ready when the camera is
running.



When I received my chemistry degree the profs told us
'Congratulations, but you aren't yet a chemist. What we've taught you
qualifies you to listen and understand when you get a job and they
explain how everything really works.'

That's about right. I might phrase it a little differently, but formal
education prepares one to begin the real learning.



The earfulls at MITRE were about digital radio communication theory,
which makes thermodynamics look easy.

Somehow I suspect I might see it the other way around - thermodynamics
is too much like chemistry for my tastes. Takes all kinds.

Bill

On Mon, 07 Apr 2008 00:59:55 +0100, David Billington
wrote:

Jim Wilkins wrote:
On Apr 6, 7:33 pm, David Billington
wrote:

After using a file for many years I was shown by one of my engineering
workshop instructors, when he saw me filing a radius, how to file a
radius correctly and it made the world of difference to the outcome. I
thanked him but have often wondered why such basic information was not
taught as standard, maybe it was thought we didn't need to know that
sort of thing because of the courses we were on and it way too basic.
It's not something I have ever run across in a book either but have not
looked specifically for it.


I was taught to scribe the curve, file a 45 bevel, then cut down the
points to an octagon, then cut those, etc, keeping the flat widths
equal, just like planing a wooden ship spar round. The first cuts were
with a rasp, the last with a single-cut "hand" or "pillar" file.

What is your method?

Jim Wilkins

I've done the same but I was thinking of filing the final smooth curve.
On say a 90 degree corner and holding the piece with each face at about
45 to horizontal what I did originally, as I had never been shown, I
just moved the file forward and rocked it from the near face to the far
face so the contact point travels away form you to create the curve. The
instructor showed my to start with the file parallel with the far face
and moving the file forward, rock it back, to end the stroke with the
file parallel to the near face, in this way the contact point travels
back towards you during the operation. This instantly gave me a much
better finish and radius and it's the way I've done it ever since..
Learned that in grade ten shop class (grade 9 was in the old school
with no shop)
Gerry :-)}
London, Canada

David Billington wrote:
Jim Wilkins wrote:
On Apr 6, 2:32 pm, Gunner Asch wrote:

...
One of the old exercises for apprentic machinist was to make a perfect
cube, using nothing more than a file, for a grade. Took a considerable
amount fo time to do, yet all apprentices had to do it.
....
Gunner


Interesting. I've seen machinists' faces go from smug to panic when
the part I wanted them to make required some careful hand work, like
filing to a curved line. It didn't help that I had made a sample.

Jim Wilkins

After using a file for many years I was shown by one of my engineering
workshop instructors, when he saw me filing a radius, how to file a
radius correctly and it made the world of difference to the outcome. I
thanked him but have often wondered why such basic information was not
taught as standard, maybe it was thought we didn't need to know that
sort of thing because of the courses we were on and it way too basic.
It's not something I have ever run across in a book either but have not
looked specifically for it.

I have not seen it either - can you explain it for us?

Bill

Bill Schwab wrote:
David Billington wrote:
Jim Wilkins wrote:
On Apr 6, 2:32 pm, Gunner Asch wrote:

...
One of the old exercises for apprentic machinist was to make a perfect
cube, using nothing more than a file, for a grade. Took a considerable
amount fo time to do, yet all apprentices had to do it.
....
Gunner


Interesting. I've seen machinists' faces go from smug to panic when
the part I wanted them to make required some careful hand work, like
filing to a curved line. It didn't help that I had made a sample.

Jim Wilkins

After using a file for many years I was shown by one of my
engineering workshop instructors, when he saw me filing a radius, how
to file a radius correctly and it made the world of difference to the
outcome. I thanked him but have often wondered why such basic
information was not taught as standard, maybe it was thought we
didn't need to know that sort of thing because of the courses we were
on and it way too basic. It's not something I have ever run across in
a book either but have not looked specifically for it.

I have not seen it either - can you explain it for us?
In case you didn't see my response to Jim Wilkins, I posted the following.

I've done the same but I was thinking of filing the final smooth curve.
On say a 90 degree corner and holding the piece with each face at about
45 to horizontal what I did originally, as I had never been shown, I
just moved the file forward and rocked it from the near face to the far
face so the contact point travels away form you to create the curve. The
instructor showed my to start with the file parallel with the far face
and moving the file forward, rock it back, to end the stroke with the
file parallel to the near face, in this way the contact point travels
back towards you during the operation. This instantly gave me a much
better finish and radius and it's the way I've done it ever since.

Bill

On Apr 7, 8:02*am, David Billington
wrote:

In case you didn't see my response to Jim Wilkins, I posted the following.

I've done the same but I was thinking of filing the final smooth curve.
On say a 90 degree corner and holding the piece with each face at about
45 to horizontal what I did originally, as I had never been shown, I
just moved the file forward and rocked it from the near face to the far
face so the contact point travels away form you to create the curve. The
instructor *showed my to start with the file parallel with the far face
and moving the file forward, rock it back, to end the stroke with the
file parallel to the near face, in this way the contact point travels
back towards you during the operation. This instantly gave me a much
better finish and radius and it's the way I've done it ever since.
Bill

You mean filing lengthwise to smooth it after shaping crosswise to the
line?

I'm OK with the rocking motion but I have a hard time keeping the
pressure equal on both sides of the file, especially after the flats
are gone and I can't see the angle of the lines between them to
correct. For the last bit of finish I use my squared-up belt sander
and the same smooth rotation of the part. The sander has a free-hand
area above the backing plate that does an excellent job of smoothing
the sharp edges on either side of the radius curve. The 1" sander I
have doesn't cut to shape as fast as a good coarse file, though.

I can do almost as well with a hand-held angle grinder by rotating the
body of the tool with both hands.

Jim Wilkins

Gunner Asch wrote:

Once you have found this value..take your trusty magic marker and on a
piece of cardboard hanging over the lathe, write "Reads .xxx, cuts
.xxx)

Damn, that's the part I keep skipping!

Jim Wilkins wrote:
On Apr 7, 8:02 am, David Billington
wrote:

In case you didn't see my response to Jim Wilkins, I posted the following.

I've done the same but I was thinking of filing the final smooth curve.
On say a 90 degree corner and holding the piece with each face at about
45 to horizontal what I did originally, as I had never been shown, I
just moved the file forward and rocked it from the near face to the far
face so the contact point travels away form you to create the curve. The
instructor showed my to start with the file parallel with the far face
and moving the file forward, rock it back, to end the stroke with the
file parallel to the near face, in this way the contact point travels
back towards you during the operation. This instantly gave me a much
better finish and radius and it's the way I've done it ever since.

Bill


You mean filing lengthwise to smooth it after shaping crosswise to the
line?

Yes filing perpendicular to the radius axis rather than parallel, that's
how I normally file the flats also on narrow pieces, wider pieces I
would file parallel to the radius axis.
I'm OK with the rocking motion but I have a hard time keeping the
pressure equal on both sides of the file, especially after the flats
are gone and I can't see the angle of the lines between them to
correct. For the last bit of finish I use my squared-up belt sander
and the same smooth rotation of the part. The sander has a free-hand
area above the backing plate that does an excellent job of smoothing
the sharp edges on either side of the radius curve. The 1" sander I
have doesn't cut to shape as fast as a good coarse file, though.

I have a 1" belt linisher also, don't know how I lived without one
before I got it. My neighbour liked it as well and kept popping around
to use it until he bought one of his own. As you say about the
unsupported section it leaves a much better finish the running the piece
against the platen, it seems every time the join comes around it takes
slightly more off a radius and makes for a poorer finish.
I can do almost as well with a hand-held angle grinder by rotating the
body of the tool with both hands.

Jim Wilkins

On Apr 6, 4:44*pm, Don Foreman wrote:
On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 04:47:15 -0700, Gunner Asch





wrote:
On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 01:34:17 -0600, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 14:40:43 -0400, Bill Schwab
wrote:

Do you ever indicate your compound parallel to the spindle? *

No. *I have a 2" DI mounted with a magnet to the carriage. *I use that
a lot. *If I were to put a DRO on my lathe, it'd be first on the
carriage and thence on the tailstock as for drilling. *Won't happen
anytime soon if ever. *
Plunger style longtraveldial indicator works just hunky dorry on a
tailstock.
And pretty well on the cross slide also.

Using a 3-4" longtravelindicator, put the punger against the ass end
of the drill chuck in the tailstock ram. *Now you have a mechanical
DRO. Hold the indicator to the tailstock nose with a magnet, or a hose
clamp.

The same can be done with the cross slide. And the carraige.

And IS done every day in machine shops all across the planet.

Its not rocket science

Magnet hint: *this is not a good place for supermagnets. *Ordinary
ceramic magnets are better. * Supermagnets hold well -- but they also
hold ferrous swarf with such tenacity they're about impossible to
clean. *Ceramic magnets can be cleaned in a jiffy with a blast of
compressed air.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Hi,
check our website for your travel, fishing&outdoors needs. See how you
could make money on Travel.
visit
www.altextravel.com

On Mon, 7 Apr 2008 11:55:34 -0700 (PDT), Altex Travel
wrote:

On Apr 6, 4:44*pm, Don Foreman wrote:
On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 04:47:15 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:
On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 01:34:17 -0600, Don Foreman
wrote:
On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 14:40:43 -0400, Bill Schwab
wrote:

Do you ever indicate your compound parallel to the spindle? *

No. *I have a 2" DI mounted with a magnet to the carriage. *I use that
a lot. *If I were to put a DRO on my lathe, it'd be first on the
carriage and thence on the tailstock as for drilling. *Won't happen
anytime soon if ever. *
Plunger style longtraveldial indicator works just hunky dorry on a
tailstock.
And pretty well on the cross slide also.

Using a 3-4" longtravelindicator, put the punger against the ass end
of the drill chuck in the tailstock ram. *Now you have a mechanical
DRO. Hold the indicator to the tailstock nose with a magnet, or a hose
clamp.

The same can be done with the cross slide. And the carraige.

And IS done every day in machine shops all across the planet.

Its not rocket science

Magnet hint: *this is not a good place for supermagnets. *Ordinary
ceramic magnets are better. * Supermagnets hold well -- but they also
hold ferrous swarf with such tenacity they're about impossible to
clean. *Ceramic magnets can be cleaned in a jiffy with a blast of
compressed air.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Hi,
check our website for your travel, fishing&outdoors needs. See how you
could make money on Travel.
visit
www.altextravel.com

What the heck does this have to do with a lathe or metalworking
trades, Mr. Spammer? Advertising has long been prohibited in the
group.

Reported to Google abuse (news injection and honeypot return
address) and Yahoo abuse (web hosting, see below) for TOS/AUP.

AND I WANT TO RECEIVE FOLLOW UP FROM A HUMAN BEING from both sites
stating that this lUser's e-mail and web hosting accounts are closed.

Other rec.crafts.metalworking readers please feel free to join in.

Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600]
(C) Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp.

C:\Documents and Settings\Ownertracert www.altextravel.com

Tracing route to premium4.geo.yahoo.akadns.net [216.39.62.48]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 13 ms 12 ms 13 ms netblock-208-127-175-1.dslextreme.com [208.127.1
75.1]
2 12 ms 12 ms 12 ms LAX1.CR1.Gig10-0-119.dslextreme.com [66.51.203.4
9]
3 23 ms 22 ms 22 ms netblock-66-51-198-182.dslextreme.com [66.51.198
.182]
4 24 ms 23 ms 23 ms PAT2.SJC.yahoo.com [206.223.116.16]
5 71 ms 70 ms 69 ms so-0-0-0.pat2.dcp.yahoo.com [216.115.101.150]
6 111 ms 110 ms 111 ms ge-0-0-8.p149.pat2.dce.yahoo.com [216.115.96.33]

7 107 ms 106 ms 107 ms ge-2-1-0-p161.msr1.re1.yahoo.com [216.115.108.27
]
8 105 ms 105 ms 107 ms ge-1-45.bas-b1.re4.yahoo.com [216.39.57.1]
9 107 ms 106 ms 107 ms p4w21.geo.re4.yahoo.com [216.39.62.48]

Trace complete.

C:\Documents and Settings\Owner

Bill,
I personally think the lathe is junk. How many spindle speeds do you have
?(probably 9), you need 12. How fast is the slowest speed in back gear? You
really need around 30 rpm. You probably have around 90 rpm and that is too
fast for a 12" machine. How many threads will it cut? (38). A good machine
will cut 80 in inch alone. An inch machine will have a 4 or 8 TPI lead screw
for the carraige and a 10 TPI for crossfeed and compound. The good chinese
machines have dual graduations on the carraige and compound both inch and
metric. Most metric machines have .02 graduations. Check the thread dial.
You probably have a metric machine. If you elect to keep it, you MUST
completely dissassemble it and clean it. It will be full of chips, swarf and
grit. Assume nothing, check everything including spindle parrallelism to the
bed ways. You get what you pay for. If you ever get a chance to use a class
machine, you will never own the one you just bought.
Steve


"Bill Schwab" wrote in message
m...
Hello all,

It appears that my news server and reader were not happy with each other.
Unless I miss my guess, Earthlink's server screwed up, and Thunderbird
failed to gracefully recover. No doubt Google will help fill the gap.

The machine looks great, but Enco had indeed told me to expect 10 tpi
screws on the cross and compound - in email. I called on Wednesday and
responded in email yesterday; they appear to be chewing on it. They were
upfront in saying that I have 30 days to return the machine, and so far
have claimed that replacement screws are not an option. On the phone the
tech hinted that this might have been and unexpected design change, and an
exchange for an "old one" might be an option, he returned my call (faster
than) as promised and recanted, saying the machine has always had 8 tpi
screws. No offense to the tech, I am not completely convinced I buy that
last part.

Note that I am convinced that the tech who sent the original emails did so
in good faith; he was communicating with someone else who appears to have
made the real mistake of confirming the erroneous.

If there are indeed 10 tpi options, I consider that the way to go. Let's
assume that the original data they provided was nonsense and that the
machine has always had 0.125 dials. The question is what to do: return an
otherwise great buy, or live with the dials?

As I told Enco, if this had happened on a mill ("Oh, I KNOW those are
0.1" - sorry, he really did say that, apparently not appreciating the
irony, but I digress) I would be seriously mad. I work manually, and
(thanks to you guys) have gotten pretty good at it. Being able to
dimension from zero and pick off the last two numbers as a dial reading is
not something I will give up: 0.1 or 0.2 dials are a must on a mill.

But what about a lathe? Staring at the thing, the carriage motion appears
to be course (0.02" gradations), so the precision would appear to happen
on the cross and compound. It looks like a world of working "against the
dials" by measuring and removing metal until the part is (hopefullyg)
staring back at me, as opposed to zero and trust the dials. As Harold and
others worked hard to help me understand, there is another realm of
trusting the dials to rough and measure to correct, but 0.1/0.2 dials go a
long way on a mill. But back to the lathe, IF I am correct that most work
will be measure and remove, how bad would 0.125 dials really be?

What would you do in my shoes? I realize that Enco has not yet presented
options, but given my newbie status with lathes, I need to get some advice
to make a good decision. It is quite possible that I might have bought
this machine knowing about the dials, but we would have a similar
conversation before I did it.

Another question I should ask: do any of you know of a 12x36 (or so)
cam-lock lathe with 0.1 dials? I did some quick checking on the Grizzly
site, and found what looks like the same basic lathe, but no mention (that
I saw) of the screw pitch. That said, their manual is GREAT and answers
many of my "why is this stuck?" kinds of questions.

BTW, I know at least some responses to this type of question lurk in posts
I have yet to see. I will start digging now that I can post again.

Thanks!

Bill

Bill,
Please do not get me wrong. I am not prejudiced against Chinese machines.
They are great value for money, but you need to understand what you are
buying. I have had very good luck with some, but I have really seen some
junk. Buyer beware! The good machines are usually made in Taiwan and the
junk made on the mainland, but that rule is very gray now with the much
larger trade between Taiwan and the mainland. I have witnessed extensive
trade volume with China through a close associate. On some lots of
machinery, we have seen 1 in 4 received as failures in some shape or form!
Worst of all, most resellers never carry parts. Do not expect after sales
support!
Steve

"Steve Lusardi" wrote in message
...
Bill,
I personally think the lathe is junk. How many spindle speeds do you have
?(probably 9), you need 12. How fast is the slowest speed in back gear?
You really need around 30 rpm. You probably have around 90 rpm and that is
too fast for a 12" machine. How many threads will it cut? (38). A good
machine will cut 80 in inch alone. An inch machine will have a 4 or 8 TPI
lead screw for the carraige and a 10 TPI for crossfeed and compound. The
good chinese machines have dual graduations on the carraige and compound
both inch and metric. Most metric machines have .02 graduations. Check the
thread dial. You probably have a metric machine. If you elect to keep it,
you MUST completely dissassemble it and clean it. It will be full of
chips, swarf and grit. Assume nothing, check everything including spindle
parrallelism to the bed ways. You get what you pay for. If you ever get a
chance to use a class machine, you will never own the one you just bought.
Steve


"Bill Schwab" wrote in message
m...
Hello all,

It appears that my news server and reader were not happy with each other.
Unless I miss my guess, Earthlink's server screwed up, and Thunderbird
failed to gracefully recover. No doubt Google will help fill the gap.

The machine looks great, but Enco had indeed told me to expect 10 tpi
screws on the cross and compound - in email. I called on Wednesday and
responded in email yesterday; they appear to be chewing on it. They were
upfront in saying that I have 30 days to return the machine, and so far
have claimed that replacement screws are not an option. On the phone the
tech hinted that this might have been and unexpected design change, and
an exchange for an "old one" might be an option, he returned my call
(faster than) as promised and recanted, saying the machine has always had
8 tpi screws. No offense to the tech, I am not completely convinced I
buy that last part.

Note that I am convinced that the tech who sent the original emails did
so in good faith; he was communicating with someone else who appears to
have made the real mistake of confirming the erroneous.

If there are indeed 10 tpi options, I consider that the way to go. Let's
assume that the original data they provided was nonsense and that the
machine has always had 0.125 dials. The question is what to do: return
an otherwise great buy, or live with the dials?

As I told Enco, if this had happened on a mill ("Oh, I KNOW those are
0.1" - sorry, he really did say that, apparently not appreciating the
irony, but I digress) I would be seriously mad. I work manually, and
(thanks to you guys) have gotten pretty good at it. Being able to
dimension from zero and pick off the last two numbers as a dial reading
is not something I will give up: 0.1 or 0.2 dials are a must on a mill.

But what about a lathe? Staring at the thing, the carriage motion
appears to be course (0.02" gradations), so the precision would appear to
happen on the cross and compound. It looks like a world of working
"against the dials" by measuring and removing metal until the part is
(hopefullyg) staring back at me, as opposed to zero and trust the
dials. As Harold and others worked hard to help me understand, there is
another realm of trusting the dials to rough and measure to correct, but
0.1/0.2 dials go a long way on a mill. But back to the lathe, IF I am
correct that most work will be measure and remove, how bad would 0.125
dials really be?

What would you do in my shoes? I realize that Enco has not yet presented
options, but given my newbie status with lathes, I need to get some
advice to make a good decision. It is quite possible that I might have
bought this machine knowing about the dials, but we would have a similar
conversation before I did it.

Another question I should ask: do any of you know of a 12x36 (or so)
cam-lock lathe with 0.1 dials? I did some quick checking on the Grizzly
site, and found what looks like the same basic lathe, but no mention
(that I saw) of the screw pitch. That said, their manual is GREAT and
answers many of my "why is this stuck?" kinds of questions.

BTW, I know at least some responses to this type of question lurk in
posts I have yet to see. I will start digging now that I can post again.

Thanks!

Bill

On 2008-04-27, Black Dragon wrote:
Steve Lusardi wrote:

Please do not get me wrong. I am not prejudiced against Chinese machines.
They are great value for money, but you need to understand what you are
buying. I have had very good luck with some, but I have really seen some
junk.

I take it you've never seen any of the junk made here in the USA?


I personally have not seen any junk tools made in the USA.

--
Due to extreme spam originating from Google Groups, and their inattention
to spammers, I and many others block all articles originating
from Google Groups. If you want your postings to be seen by
more readers you will need to find a different means of
posting on Usenet.
http://improve-usenet.org/

On Sun, 27 Apr 2008 12:34:18 -0500, with neither quill nor qualm,
Ignoramus30765 quickly quoth:

On 2008-04-27, Black Dragon wrote:
Steve Lusardi wrote:

Please do not get me wrong. I am not prejudiced against Chinese machines.
They are great value for money, but you need to understand what you are
buying. I have had very good luck with some, but I have really seen some
junk.

I take it you've never seen any of the junk made here in the USA?


I personally have not seen any junk tools made in the USA.

Then you haven't been buying them here for long enough, Ig.

--
Happiness in marriage is entirely a matter of chance. If the dispositions
of the parties are ever so well known to each other or ever so similar
beforehand, it does not advance their felicity in the least. They always
continue to grow sufficiently unlike afterwards to have their share of
vexation; and it is better to know as little as possible of the defects of
the person with whom you are to pass your life.
-- Jane Austen, Pride and Prejudice, 1811