http://www.flickr.com/photos/27683124@N07/3614881435/

and the next two pictures.

I suspect they are knurling wheels of some sort. Seeing how one was mounted
presumably you just press them against a rotating part?

--
Michael Koblic
Campbell River, BC

They look like knurls, but they could be intended to be used for other
purposes. It's not apparent to me if they are typical/conventional type
knurls or possibly the cutting type.

All of the knurls intended for metalworking that I've seen, IIRC, are
supported at both sides by a holder because of the high force required to
displace the material of the workpiece (for conventional type knurls).

I don't recognize the company logo of a W inside a diamond, or the A.B.T.C?
on the other one.

I think it's likely that these pieces were used as knurls with the home shop
made tool holder, but pressing knurls into metal workpieces requires a lot
of force, and would be somewhat abusive to use them on a small precision
machine.

There are scissor type knurling tools that don't require force from the
cross feed to knurl a workpiece. They have a screw between the two floating
knurl-holder arms, which is tightened to apply force to the knurls.
The stress of knurling is maintained within the parts of the knurling tool,
and not applied to the lathe parts.

--
WB
..........
metalworking projects
www.kwagmire.com/metal_proj.html


"Michael Koblic" wrote in message
...
http://www.flickr.com/photos/27683124@N07/3614881435/

and the next two pictures.

I suspect they are knurling wheels of some sort. Seeing how one was
mounted presumably you just press them against a rotating part?

--
Michael Koblic
Campbell River, BC

On 2009-06-11, Michael Koblic wrote:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/27683124@N07/3614881435/

and the next two pictures.

I suspect they are knurling wheels of some sort. Seeing how one was mounted
presumably you just press them against a rotating part?

Not just knurling, but decorative knurling with those grooves.
Yes, you just press them, not move them along the workpiece as you would
with normal knurls.

Probably for use in gold watch cases and the like.

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 ---

This is more along the lines I was thinking of.. decorative embossing of
softer and/or thinner materials.

--
WB
..........
metalworking projects
www.kwagmire.com/metal_proj.html


"DoN. Nichols" wrote in message
...

Not just knurling, but decorative knurling with those grooves.
Yes, you just press them, not move them along the workpiece as you would
with normal knurls.

Probably for use in gold watch cases and the like.

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 ---

DoN. Nichols wrote:
On 2009-06-11, Michael Koblic wrote:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/27683124@N07/3614881435/

and the next two pictures.

I suspect they are knurling wheels of some sort. Seeing how one was
mounted presumably you just press them against a rotating part?

Not just knurling, but decorative knurling with those grooves.
Yes, you just press them, not move them along the workpiece as you
would with normal knurls.

Probably for use in gold watch cases and the like.


Thanks.

I have gone through the auction loot for the umpteenth time (on this
occasion with a view of adapting the tiny little QCTP to my Taig - see
http://www.flickr.com/photos/2768312...7618494533622/
for those interested - hardly a moon rocket!).
Every time I look I find something new I did not appreciate before.

--
Michael Koblic
Campbell River, BC

Being parallel to the axis of rotation - I don't think Knurling myself.

I think crimping wheels - put a wiggle edge on metal to splice and solder
or just make stronger.

I have a large set - 4" wide and 2-3" in diameter.

Martin

Michael Koblic wrote:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/27683124@N07/3614881435/

and the next two pictures.

I suspect they are knurling wheels of some sort. Seeing how one was mounted
presumably you just press them against a rotating part?

On 2009-06-13, Michael Koblic wrote:

[ ... ]

I have gone through the auction loot for the umpteenth time (on this
occasion with a view of adapting the tiny little QCTP to my Taig - see
http://www.flickr.com/photos/2768312...7618494533622/
for those interested - hardly a moon rocket!).

One feature which is missing is a stop on each tool holder which
can be adjusted so every time you drop it on the toolpost it is at the
same height. Normally it consists of a threaded stud projecting upwards
from the tool holder with a knurled nut on that to engage the top of the
toolpost, and a smaller standard hex nut to lock it in place. Each tool
goes in its own holder and is preset for height, so when you swap tools
during a project, you don't have to keep adjusting the height every time
you change.

Note, BTW, that the tool you have in the photos is probably a
bit of an overload for the Taig -- a large radius round nose tool. You
want something with a much smaller radius for most cutting, so you don't
load the motor down so much.

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 ---

DoN. Nichols wrote:
On 2009-06-13, Michael Koblic wrote:

[ ... ]

I have gone through the auction loot for the umpteenth time (on this
occasion with a view of adapting the tiny little QCTP to my Taig -
see
http://www.flickr.com/photos/2768312...7618494533622/
for those interested - hardly a moon rocket!).

One feature which is missing is a stop on each tool holder which
can be adjusted so every time you drop it on the toolpost it is at the
same height. Normally it consists of a threaded stud projecting
upwards from the tool holder with a knurled nut on that to engage the
top of the toolpost, and a smaller standard hex nut to lock it in
place. Each tool goes in its own holder and is preset for height, so
when you swap tools during a project, you don't have to keep
adjusting the height every time you change.

Especially as each toolholder has slightly different dimension :-)

I saw the stops on the commercially available QCTP from the Little Machine
Shop and on several that people made themselves from scratch. In all honesty
the person who made *this* toolpost did not think things through. Even I
know enough now not to design it that way. However...it's there. The best I
can say is that I can use the 10 or so 3/16 toolbits which I could have done
before only with a lot of shimming. I cannot see myself adding the stops to
all 15 or so toolholders. I would rather design something from scratch,
allowing me to have a handle at the top of the QCTP and the ability to
attach at least two toolholders at the same time as well as the stops etc.
etc. (I think the originator thought he would attach 4 toolholders at the
same time - in its present form the toolpost does not allow this.) OTOH come
to think of it each toolholder has 3 set-screws so maybe I can draft the
middle one for this duty (or replace it by a suitable post).

Or I can splash $100 on the commercially available QCTP. I understand that
the toolholders that come with it include one for parting tools although the
details are sketchy. Parting has been a major problem - the only parting
tool I have has been ground at a slight angle from a 1/4 toolbit so it binds
and chatters terribly. I have not got around to grinding another one.

Note, BTW, that the tool you have in the photos is probably a
bit of an overload for the Taig -- a large radius round nose tool.
You want something with a much smaller radius for most cutting, so
you don't load the motor down so much.

I only put it in the holder to measure the height - the top of the round
nose is nice and flat and when fiddling with the gauge etc. less likely to
draw blood.

--
Michael Koblic
Campbell River, BC

On 2009-06-13, Michael Koblic wrote:
DoN. Nichols wrote:
On 2009-06-13, Michael Koblic wrote:

[ ... ]

I have gone through the auction loot for the umpteenth time (on this
occasion with a view of adapting the tiny little QCTP to my Taig -
see
http://www.flickr.com/photos/2768312...7618494533622/
for those interested - hardly a moon rocket!).

One feature which is missing is a stop on each tool holder which
can be adjusted so every time you drop it on the toolpost it is at the
same height. Normally it consists of a threaded stud projecting
upwards from the tool holder with a knurled nut on that to engage the
top of the toolpost, and a smaller standard hex nut to lock it in
place. Each tool goes in its own holder and is preset for height, so
when you swap tools during a project, you don't have to keep
adjusting the height every time you change.

Especially as each toolholder has slightly different dimension :-)

:-)

I saw the stops on the commercially available QCTP from the Little Machine
Shop and on several that people made themselves from scratch. In all honesty
the person who made *this* toolpost did not think things through. Even I
know enough now not to design it that way. However...it's there. The best I
can say is that I can use the 10 or so 3/16 toolbits which I could have done
before only with a lot of shimming. I cannot see myself adding the stops to
all 15 or so toolholders. I would rather design something from scratch,
allowing me to have a handle at the top of the QCTP and the ability to
attach at least two toolholders at the same time as well as the stops etc.
etc.

Note that the toolposts like the Aloris and clones thereof may
have two stations -- but they are not intended to have both stations
loaded at the same time. One is for turning (tool is at right angles to
the axis for turning along the length of the workpiece), and the other
for boring and facing (tool parallel to the axis, so it can either reach
inside a drilled hole in the workpiece to enlarge it, or can move along
the face of the end of the workpiece.

There are versions which have a third station, and perhaps even
a forth one. For up to three stations -- it is still intended to have
only one toolholder at a time. Among other things, the locking system
is not assured to lock fully on more than one station at a time.

The post which you have is capable of having two holders
installed and tightened equally, as there are separate screws to lock up
each station -- just as there is for the Dickinson style toolposts used
on Myfords, and on my Compact-5/CNC. Actually, the one for the
Compact-5/CNC would probably be very good for the Taig as well. It is
way too small for my 12" Clausing. :-)

Aloris does have a four station one with individual locking for
each station, so you can set it up like a turret toolpost with your
choice of tools -- though usually you have to leave one station empty,
as a turning tool with a boring/facing tool one station clockwise from
it will have the tools interfering with each other. But the
four-station toolposts are designed to be rotated from tool to tool
after being loaded with the needed tools in the various stations. This
is like the four sided turret toolposts found on some machines.
Ideally, these have an indexing mechanism so you can rotate the turret
precisely one face at a time without having to take time to set it up
precisely at each change.

(I think the originator thought he would attach 4 toolholders at the
same time - in its present form the toolpost does not allow this.) OTOH come
to think of it each toolholder has 3 set-screws so maybe I can draft the
middle one for this duty (or replace it by a suitable post).

Perhaps -- though try to also retain its function as a setscrew
(just use a longer one) so you grip the tool in the middle as well as at
the ends to minimize bowing in the middle which could lead to chatter
when cutting.

Or I can splash $100 on the commercially available QCTP. I understand that
the toolholders that come with it include one for parting tools although the
details are sketchy. Parting has been a major problem - the only parting
tool I have has been ground at a slight angle from a 1/4 toolbit so it binds
and chatters terribly. I have not got around to grinding another one.

Not sure about the ones which fit the Taig size of lathe, but
the ones for the AXA and BXA sizes hold a pre-made blade parting tool,
and hold it at an angle so you don't have to grind a rake angle into the
top of the tool. I tend to use "T-profile" parting tools in mine. The
profile looks sort of like this (view with a fixed pitch font like
Courier, as proportional pitch fonts are likely to produce distortion).

/~~/
/ / /
/ / /
/__/ / ~
[ ]/ ~
|| ~
|| ~
|| / About 15/16" high -- for the BXA size, smaller for the
|| / AXA. About 6" long.
|| /
||/ The '~' mark where the drawing is cut off.
--

The above is the end-on view, and the wider top and narrower bottom
makes it easier to set up the tool so the bottom does not drag on the
sides of the cut.

The top of the tool fits against the top of the slot in the
holder, and near the front of the slot is a cutaway where a tapered
piece fits in and is drawn by a long screw to wedge the blade in place.
If you adjust the degree of extension (either by sharpening the tool
bit by grinding off some of the end, or by loosening the clamp and
sliding the tool out to cut closer to the center of a large workpiece,
or pulling it in to make it more rigid for cutting a harder material)
you will need to re-adjust the height. If you have an extension which
you use most of the time, you might want to make a gauge which could
allow you to restore the normal extension quickly after sharpening, so
you don't have to adjust the tool height.

Note, BTW, that the tool you have in the photos is probably a
bit of an overload for the Taig -- a large radius round nose tool.
You want something with a much smaller radius for most cutting, so
you don't load the motor down so much.

I only put it in the holder to measure the height - the top of the round
nose is nice and flat and when fiddling with the gauge etc. less likely to
draw blood.

O.K. As long as you realize that it is an awkward tool to use
in metals with such a small lathe. It might be nice for getting a nice
finish on plastics.

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 ---

DoN. Nichols wrote:

Note that the toolposts like the Aloris and clones thereof may
have two stations -- but they are not intended to have both stations
loaded at the same time. One is for turning (tool is at right angles
to the axis for turning along the length of the workpiece), and the
other for boring and facing (tool parallel to the axis, so it can
either reach inside a drilled hole in the workpiece to enlarge it, or
can move along the face of the end of the workpiece.

There are versions which have a third station, and perhaps even
a forth one. For up to three stations -- it is still intended to have
only one toolholder at a time. Among other things, the locking system
is not assured to lock fully on more than one station at a time.

The post which you have is capable of having two holders
installed and tightened equally, as there are separate screws to lock
up each station -- just as there is for the Dickinson style toolposts
used on Myfords, and on my Compact-5/CNC. Actually, the one for the
Compact-5/CNC would probably be very good for the Taig as well. It is
way too small for my 12" Clausing. :-)

This would only be possible by cutting a 7/64 hex key very short and
tightening the screws 1/8 turn at a time and then only for tools directly
opposite each other - you cannot fit two holders on at right angles. I
venture it is quicker to use only one tool at a time as one can access the
screw head through the hole opposite. Doing it the other way would probably
drive me crazy very quickly.

snip

(I think the originator thought he would attach 4 toolholders
at the same time - in its present form the toolpost does not allow
this.) OTOH come to think of it each toolholder has 3 set-screws so
maybe I can draft the middle one for this duty (or replace it by a
suitable post).

Perhaps -- though try to also retain its function as a setscrew
(just use a longer one) so you grip the tool in the middle as well as
at the ends to minimize bowing in the middle which could lead to
chatter when cutting.

OK, I did not realize that could be a problem. The Taig toolpost that came
with the machine has only two set screws. I note that the LMS toolholders
have four.

Perhaps this sort of arrangement might work:

http://littlemachineshop.com/product...y=100520820 4

Or I can splash $100 on the commercially available QCTP. I
understand that the toolholders that come with it include one for
parting tools although the details are sketchy. Parting has been a
major problem - the only parting tool I have has been ground at a
slight angle from a 1/4 toolbit so it binds and chatters terribly. I
have not got around to grinding another one.

Not sure about the ones which fit the Taig size of lathe,

I found it:

http://littlemachineshop.com/product...ory=-419988835

http://littlemachineshop.com/product...y=100520820 4

http://littlemachineshop.com/product...dID=-316770619

the ones for the AXA and BXA sizes hold a pre-made blade parting tool,
and hold it at an angle so you don't have to grind a rake angle into
the top of the tool. I tend to use "T-profile" parting tools in
mine. The profile looks sort of like this (view with a fixed pitch
font like Courier, as proportional pitch fonts are likely to produce
distortion).

The one I have has a V-profile with the top of the V whole 0.002 wider than
the bottom and the whole V is tilted about 7-10 degrees off vertical.

As a matter of fact I wondered about the rake angles for parting tools. They
also sell (as do others) parting tools ground from a 1/4" bit. I could find
no info about their geometry.

The top of the tool fits against the top of the slot in the
holder, and near the front of the slot is a cutaway where a tapered
piece fits in and is drawn by a long screw to wedge the blade in
place. If you adjust the degree of extension (either by sharpening
the tool bit by grinding off some of the end, or by loosening the
clamp and sliding the tool out to cut closer to the center of a large
workpiece, or pulling it in to make it more rigid for cutting a
harder material) you will need to re-adjust the height. If you have
an extension which you use most of the time, you might want to make a
gauge which could allow you to restore the normal extension quickly
after sharpening, so you don't have to adjust the tool height.

I shall have to look at one to appreciate it. But it answers one of my
questions (I think): The parting tools also need a rake (at least for
aluminium and steel).

Note, BTW, that the tool you have in the photos is probably a
bit of an overload for the Taig -- a large radius round nose tool.
You want something with a much smaller radius for most cutting, so
you don't load the motor down so much.

I only put it in the holder to measure the height - the top of the
round nose is nice and flat and when fiddling with the gauge etc.
less likely to draw blood.

O.K. As long as you realize that it is an awkward tool to use
in metals with such a small lathe. It might be nice for getting a
nice finish on plastics.

I think the guy had to have worked with plastics a lot. Some of the other
tools have big contact areas. There are other what I take to be parting
tools with the top of the V 1/8" or more and no rake. I tried them on
aluminium just to see what happens and stopped pretty sharpish.

This is turning into a full time job :-)
Today I bought $15 digital calipers and after an hour of experimenting I
think I found a way to convert them to measure the carriage travel.
Some flower baskets are next...

--
Michael Koblic
Campbell River, BC

On 2009-06-14, Michael Koblic wrote:
DoN. Nichols wrote:

[ ... ]

The post which you have is capable of having two holders
installed and tightened equally, as there are separate screws to lock
up each station -- just as there is for the Dickinson style toolposts
used on Myfords, and on my Compact-5/CNC. Actually, the one for the
Compact-5/CNC would probably be very good for the Taig as well. It is
way too small for my 12" Clausing. :-)

This would only be possible by cutting a 7/64 hex key very short and
tightening the screws 1/8 turn at a time and then only for tools directly
opposite each other - you cannot fit two holders on at right angles.

You can if they are short enough -- or have 45 degree beveled ends.

There is no reasonable need for two on opposite sides of the
post.

I
venture it is quicker to use only one tool at a time as one can access the
screw head through the hole opposite. Doing it the other way would probably
drive me crazy very quickly.

Indeed so.

snip

(I think the originator thought he would attach 4 toolholders
at the same time - in its present form the toolpost does not allow
this.) OTOH come to think of it each toolholder has 3 set-screws so
maybe I can draft the middle one for this duty (or replace it by a
suitable post).

Perhaps -- though try to also retain its function as a setscrew
(just use a longer one) so you grip the tool in the middle as well as
at the ends to minimize bowing in the middle which could lead to
chatter when cutting.

OK, I did not realize that could be a problem. The Taig toolpost that came
with the machine has only two set screws. I note that the LMS toolholders
have four.

The more setscrews you have, the more rigid the clamping for a
longer tool. If you only can use two, use one near the cutting end and
the next one in, so the spacing is minimized.

Perhaps this sort of arrangement might work:

http://littlemachineshop.com/product...y=100520820 4

Hmm ... if you've got a place to mount it. As shown, it would
remove the middle screw from play as a clamping screw.

Or I can splash $100 on the commercially available QCTP. I
understand that the toolholders that come with it include one for
parting tools although the details are sketchy. Parting has been a
major problem - the only parting tool I have has been ground at a
slight angle from a 1/4 toolbit so it binds and chatters terribly. I
have not got around to grinding another one.

Not sure about the ones which fit the Taig size of lathe,

I found it:

http://littlemachineshop.com/product...ory=-419988835

O.K. Those are piston style, which certainly could not handle
two tool holders at once. The lever turns a cam inside the body, and
the clamping position for the lever is 90 degrees different for the two
stations. (The wedge style moves two wedges down at the same rate, so
two holders of *precisely* the same size in the dovetail would clamp at
the same point of lever travel -- but the odds of such precision in
dovetail width are pretty slim. :-)

http://littlemachineshop.com/product...y=100520820 4

The holder for the parting tools has no rake -- this one simply
clamps through the bar along the top being held down by the four cap
screws. This means that you will have to grind a little rake at the end
of the parting tool's top. And after a certain number of
re-sharpenings, you will have to grind off the end and make a new rake.

http://littlemachineshop.com/product...dID=-316770619

All of these parting blades seem to be of the 'T' shape which I
described.

the ones for the AXA and BXA sizes hold a pre-made blade parting tool,
and hold it at an angle so you don't have to grind a rake angle into
the top of the tool. I tend to use "T-profile" parting tools in
mine. The profile looks sort of like this (view with a fixed pitch
font like Courier, as proportional pitch fonts are likely to produce
distortion).

The one I have has a V-profile with the top of the V whole 0.002 wider than
the bottom and the whole V is tilted about 7-10 degrees off vertical.

That is the kind which was made for the old Armstrong style tool
holders to go into lantern style toolposts. Those used the angles at
the top and the bottom to clamp the parting tool into the holder, but
you would have to grind the top flat from side to side, and with a rake
for proper parting.

A trick to make the 'T' style work even better is to grind a
shallow 'V' parallel to the length along the top. This causes the chip
formed to be pinched in narrower, and thus to clear out of a deep
parting slot more readily.

As a matter of fact I wondered about the rake angles for parting tools. They
also sell (as do others) parting tools ground from a 1/4" bit. I could find
no info about their geometry.

The tool itself probably has no rake, but some toolholders can
provide an adjustable rake. One style, which I originally found on
jeweler's style lathes, has a segment of a circle at the bottom of the
slot, and a rocking steel wedge which fits the curve. You adjust the
angle (and the height of the tip) by loosening one clamp screw and
tightening the other, to change the tilt of the rocking steel wedge. Of
course, the bottom of a lantern style toolpost has a similar rocking
piece, but only one clamping screw.

The top of the tool fits against the top of the slot in the
holder, and near the front of the slot is a cutaway where a tapered
piece fits in and is drawn by a long screw to wedge the blade in
place. If you adjust the degree of extension (either by sharpening
the tool bit by grinding off some of the end, or by loosening the
clamp and sliding the tool out to cut closer to the center of a large
workpiece, or pulling it in to make it more rigid for cutting a
harder material) you will need to re-adjust the height. If you have
an extension which you use most of the time, you might want to make a
gauge which could allow you to restore the normal extension quickly
after sharpening, so you don't have to adjust the tool height.

I shall have to look at one to appreciate it. But it answers one of my
questions (I think): The parting tools also need a rake (at least for
aluminium and steel).

Yes. You *can* make a rake by grinding the top, but your tool
lasts through more resharpenings if you have the rake built into the
holder.

In the case of the holders which you pointed out, this would
require the parting tool holder to be taller. Perhaps aim for about 8
to ten degrees rake.

I like the choice of thicknesses offered in the actual parting
tools.

[ ... ]

O.K. As long as you realize that it is an awkward tool to use
in metals with such a small lathe. It might be nice for getting a
nice finish on plastics.

I think the guy had to have worked with plastics a lot. Some of the other
tools have big contact areas. There are other what I take to be parting
tools with the top of the V 1/8" or more and no rake. I tried them on
aluminium just to see what happens and stopped pretty sharpish.

:-)

This is turning into a full time job :-)

Of course. :-)

Today I bought $15 digital calipers and after an hour of experimenting I
think I found a way to convert them to measure the carriage travel.

The main thing is to preserve the part covered with the fabric
in the beam. The jaws can be milled off without problems (ideally with
the head removed at the time. :-)

Some flower baskets are next...

:-)

Enjoy,
DoN.


P.S. That 3" milling vise looks cute. A clone of the Kurt Anglock
style, but smaller and more affordable. Now if I could just
find a 2" of the same design for the Emco C5 mill (adaptation of
the mill column for the Compact-5 lathe, but with a heftier X-Y
table below it.

--
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 ---

DoN. Nichols wrote:

This would only be possible by cutting a 7/64 hex key very short and
tightening the screws 1/8 turn at a time and then only for tools
directly opposite each other - you cannot fit two holders on at
right angles.

You can if they are short enough -- or have 45 degree beveled ends.

These *aren't* :-)

There is no reasonable need for two on opposite sides of the
post.

Seppuku?

OK, I did not realize that could be a problem. The Taig toolpost
that came with the machine has only two set screws. I note that the
LMS toolholders have four.

The more setscrews you have, the more rigid the clamping for a
longer tool. If you only can use two, use one near the cutting end
and the next one in, so the spacing is minimized.

Perhaps this sort of arrangement might work:

http://littlemachineshop.com/product...y=100520820 4

Hmm ... if you've got a place to mount it. As shown, it would
remove the middle screw from play as a clamping screw.

After your comment it would make more sense to make this arrangement on the
distal set-screw rather than the middle one.

http://littlemachineshop.com/product...ory=-419988835

O.K. Those are piston style, which certainly could not handle
two tool holders at once. The lever turns a cam inside the body, and
the clamping position for the lever is 90 degrees different for the
two stations. (The wedge style moves two wedges down at the same
rate, so two holders of *precisely* the same size in the dovetail
would clamp at the same point of lever travel -- but the odds of such
precision in dovetail width are pretty slim. :-)

http://littlemachineshop.com/product...y=100520820 4

The holder for the parting tools has no rake -- this one simply
clamps through the bar along the top being held down by the four cap
screws. This means that you will have to grind a little rake at the
end of the parting tool's top. And after a certain number of
re-sharpenings, you will have to grind off the end and make a new
rake.

It seems less hassle than having to grind a whole new parting tool from 1/4"
stock.
http://littlemachineshop.com/product...dID=-316770619


As a matter of fact I wondered about the rake angles for parting
tools. They also sell (as do others) parting tools ground from a
1/4" bit. I could find no info about their geometry.

The tool itself probably has no rake, but some toolholders can
provide an adjustable rake. One style, which I originally found on
jeweler's style lathes, has a segment of a circle at the bottom of the
slot, and a rocking steel wedge which fits the curve. You adjust the
angle (and the height of the tip) by loosening one clamp screw and
tightening the other, to change the tilt of the rocking steel wedge.
Of course, the bottom of a lantern style toolpost has a similar
rocking piece, but only one clamping screw.

I have seen a home made one like that.

Yes. You *can* make a rake by grinding the top, but your tool
lasts through more resharpenings if you have the rake built into the
holder.

It just occured to me that it might be simplest just to make a separate
toolpost just for the parting tool along the line of the original Taig
toolpost just with a shallower groove inclined at 8-10 degrees and half an
inch wide to allow the use of commercial parting blades *if* one parted at a
single distance only. Is the groove on the toolholder that holds the
T-shaped parting tool shaped in any special way or can one just get away
with a rectangular profile?

In the case of the holders which you pointed out, this would
require the parting tool holder to be taller. Perhaps aim for about 8
to ten degrees rake.

I like the choice of thicknesses offered in the actual parting
tools.

Which is why I am interested in the commercial ones rather than having to
cobble something that small and thin using a bench grinder.

Today I bought $15 digital calipers and after an hour of
experimenting I think I found a way to convert them to measure the
carriage travel.

The main thing is to preserve the part covered with the fabric
in the beam. The jaws can be milled off without problems (ideally
with the head removed at the time. :-)

I took them apart and put back together again. The main hassle I see is to
find attachment points on the Taig. I hate drilling and tapping any of the
tools if I do not have to. Fortunately the Taig has a surfeit of T-slots.

P.S. That 3" milling vise looks cute. A clone of the Kurt Anglock
style, but smaller and more affordable. Now if I could just
find a 2" of the same design for the Emco C5 mill (adaptation of
the mill column for the Compact-5 lathe, but with a heftier X-Y
table below it.

??? Which one? LMS?

--
Michael Koblic
Campbell River, BC

On 2009-06-15, Michael Koblic wrote:
DoN. Nichols wrote:

This would only be possible by cutting a 7/64 hex key very short and
tightening the screws 1/8 turn at a time and then only for tools
directly opposite each other - you cannot fit two holders on at
right angles.

You can if they are short enough -- or have 45 degree beveled ends.

These *aren't* :-)

That's what your milling machine is for. :-)

OK, I did not realize that could be a problem. The Taig toolpost
that came with the machine has only two set screws. I note that the
LMS toolholders have four.

The more setscrews you have, the more rigid the clamping for a
longer tool. If you only can use two, use one near the cutting end
and the next one in, so the spacing is minimized.

Perhaps this sort of arrangement might work:

http://littlemachineshop.com/product...y=100520820 4

Hmm ... if you've got a place to mount it. As shown, it would
remove the middle screw from play as a clamping screw.

After your comment it would make more sense to make this arrangement on the
distal set-screw rather than the middle one.

What about if you use the middle screw, and make it a
particularly long one, with the knurled height-adjusting nut and the
locknut below the head but well above the holder? You'll have to loosen
the locknut and re-adjust the height nut anyway if you change the tool
bit in the holder, so that should not be a problem.

And you don't need the extreme overhang anyway -- just a
knurled nut large enough in diameter so it overlaps the side of the
toolpost. The overhang on that one would proably reach to the middle of
your holder, which is just air anyway. :-)

I can't seem to find the 1147 toolpost that the one with the
overhang fits anyway. :-) I wanted to see just what that screw was
supposed to touch.

[ ... ]

http://littlemachineshop.com/product...y=100520820 4

The holder for the parting tools has no rake -- this one simply
clamps through the bar along the top being held down by the four cap
screws. This means that you will have to grind a little rake at the
end of the parting tool's top. And after a certain number of
re-sharpenings, you will have to grind off the end and make a new
rake.

It seems less hassle than having to grind a whole new parting tool from 1/4"
stock.

Agreed.

[ ... ]

Yes. You *can* make a rake by grinding the top, but your tool
lasts through more resharpenings if you have the rake built into the
holder.

It just occured to me that it might be simplest just to make a separate
toolpost just for the parting tool along the line of the original Taig
toolpost just with a shallower groove inclined at 8-10 degrees and half an
inch wide to allow the use of commercial parting blades *if* one parted at a
single distance only. Is the groove on the toolholder that holds the
T-shaped parting tool shaped in any special way or can one just get away
with a rectangular profile?

The groove is a little deeper where the wider T-head is. Or the
slot is slightly tilted to fit the V-shaped parting tools, and this
works with the T-head ones as well.

But why make a separate toolpost -- just make a separate tool
holder to fit your existing toolpost.

In the case of the holders which you pointed out, this would
require the parting tool holder to be taller. Perhaps aim for about 8
to ten degrees rake.

I like the choice of thicknesses offered in the actual parting
tools.

Which is why I am interested in the commercial ones rather than having to
cobble something that small and thin using a bench grinder.

Understood.

Today I bought $15 digital calipers and after an hour of
experimenting I think I found a way to convert them to measure the
carriage travel.

The main thing is to preserve the part covered with the fabric
in the beam. The jaws can be milled off without problems (ideally
with the head removed at the time. :-)

I took them apart and put back together again. The main hassle I see is to
find attachment points on the Taig. I hate drilling and tapping any of the
tools if I do not have to. Fortunately the Taig has a surfeit of T-slots.

Indeed so.

P.S. That 3" milling vise looks cute. A clone of the Kurt Anglock
style, but smaller and more affordable. Now if I could just
find a 2" of the same design for the Emco C5 mill (adaptation of
the mill column for the Compact-5 lathe, but with a heftier X-Y
table below it.

??? Which one? LMS?

This one:

http://littlemachineshop.com/products/product_view.php?view=classic&ProductID=3487


It showed up in the left sidebar yesterday. I had to search for it
today. They seem to move these things around.

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 ---

DoN. Nichols wrote:

[...]

That's what your milling machine is for. :-)

After milling 8 t-nuts down to size over a whole afternoon I am wary of
doing the same to 15 or so very small parts when I can use one at a time :-)

[...]

What about if you use the middle screw, and make it a
particularly long one, with the knurled height-adjusting nut and the
locknut below the head but well above the holder? You'll have to
loosen the locknut and re-adjust the height nut anyway if you change
the tool bit in the holder, so that should not be a problem.

And you don't need the extreme overhang anyway -- just a
knurled nut large enough in diameter so it overlaps the side of the
toolpost. The overhang on that one would proably reach to the middle
of your holder, which is just air anyway. :-)

I can't seem to find the 1147 toolpost that the one with the
overhang fits anyway. :-) I wanted to see just what that screw was
supposed to touch.

I could not find it either. I am sure there are several ways to skin this
particular feline.

[ ... ]

It just occured to me that it might be simplest just to make a
separate toolpost just for the parting tool along the line of the
original Taig toolpost just with a shallower groove inclined at 8-10
degrees and half an inch wide to allow the use of commercial parting
blades *if* one parted at a single distance only. Is the groove on
the toolholder that holds the T-shaped parting tool shaped in any
special way or can one just get away with a rectangular profile?

The groove is a little deeper where the wider T-head is. Or the
slot is slightly tilted to fit the V-shaped parting tools, and this
works with the T-head ones as well.

But why make a separate toolpost -- just make a separate tool
holder to fit your existing toolpost.

OK. I suspect that the depth and width of the part of the slot that
accommodates the transverse portion of the 'T' is not critical - as long as
the vertical part of the T is snug against the side of the holder. This
should be doable even with my Kalashnikov-like skills.

I have two toolposts now:
1) the original Taig which clamps the tools into it directly - there are no
separate holders
2) The "auction" toolpost with many holders, none of which would take a 1/2"
parting tool from LMS. Each holder is 0.612 tall. Any taller and the height
adjustment will diminish significantly. OTOH It may be worth having a go and
make a slightly taller one but given the way the holders are milled to fit
the post it will not be a simple propostion - not in my hands, anyway.

The thought was simply to take an existing chunk of aluminium and mill a 10
degree inclined slot with a deeper portion near the top, drill and tap for
set screws and a central holding screw, make a posh handle like I made for
the Taig toolpost and voila!
However, if my daughter's guilt stretches to a LMS QCTP I shall be grinding
tops of the parting tool to get the rake. No point having a dog and barking
yourself.

BTW, in my studies I came across an interesting conversation from this forum
that you had about year 2000 with a gentleman called R. Bastow (sp?) who I
believe went under the pseudonym "tee-nut". It related to parting tools and
their use. He seemed to advocate a side relief ground in the top part of the
tee back from the cutting edge as well as the shallow v-groove along the top
like you mentioned earlier. Actually it was only then I grasped how it was
supposed to work but could not get to visualize the practicalities of making
such a feature. The nearest I got was clamping it in the mill vise and run a
pointy contersink along the top.

Interestingly, he never mentioned the top rake but at his stage of life he
may have been taking it as given. I read a few of his other posts and his
knowledge of the subject seemed encyclopaedic.

Talking about spirited threads, I have to mention another one that I came
across: Ed Huntress holding forth on grinding HSS tool bits in 2001. A
really well presented argument including extensive research showing
convincingly (to me anyway) how an oft repeated lie becomes the truth.

[...]

P.S. That 3" milling vise looks cute. A clone of the Kurt Anglock
style, but smaller and more affordable. Now if I could just
find a 2" of the same design for the Emco C5 mill (adaptation of
the mill column for the Compact-5 lathe, but with a heftier X-Y
table below it.

??? Which one? LMS?

This one:

http://littlemachineshop.com/products/product_view.php?view=classic&ProductID=3487


It showed up in the left sidebar yesterday. I had to search for it
today. They seem to move these things around.

Just like most supermarkets. I have got a 2" which looks similar but then I
would not know the subtle differences. All's I know that mine still lifts
things up a bit when tightened.

--
Michael Koblic
Campbell River, BC

On 2009-06-16, Michael Koblic wrote:
DoN. Nichols wrote:

[...]

That's what your milling machine is for. :-)

After milling 8 t-nuts down to size over a whole afternoon I am wary of
doing the same to 15 or so very small parts when I can use one at a time :-)

Mill a long piece of stock to the T-nut profile, and then cut it
into individual T-nuts. Probably a good idea to drill and tap them all
before cutting them free.

[ ... ]

I can't seem to find the 1147 toolpost that the one with the
overhang fits anyway. :-) I wanted to see just what that screw was
supposed to touch.

I could not find it either. I am sure there are several ways to skin this
particular feline.

Indeed.

[ ... ]

The groove is a little deeper where the wider T-head is. Or the
slot is slightly tilted to fit the V-shaped parting tools, and this
works with the T-head ones as well.

But why make a separate toolpost -- just make a separate tool
holder to fit your existing toolpost.

OK. I suspect that the depth and width of the part of the slot that
accommodates the transverse portion of the 'T' is not critical - as long as
the vertical part of the T is snug against the side of the holder. This
should be doable even with my Kalashnikov-like skills.

No problem with the right sized cutters.

I have two toolposts now:
1) the original Taig which clamps the tools into it directly - there are no
separate holders

Right. I've actually got two of those -- one for use without
the headstock riser block, and one for use with it.

2) The "auction" toolpost with many holders, none of which would take a 1/2"
parting tool from LMS. Each holder is 0.612 tall. Any taller and the height
adjustment will diminish significantly. OTOH It may be worth having a go and
make a slightly taller one but given the way the holders are milled to fit
the post it will not be a simple propostion - not in my hands, anyway.

Two V grooves the same depth and the proper spacing apart.
Easiest with a horizontal mill with two V cutters separated by the right
size spacer, but doable by other systems as well.

The thought was simply to take an existing chunk of aluminium and mill a 10
degree inclined slot with a deeper portion near the top, drill and tap for
set screws and a central holding screw, make a posh handle like I made for
the Taig toolpost and voila!

The screws really should operate a clamp bar, as it is easy for
setscrews to slip on the narrow top of the parting tool.

However, if my daughter's guilt stretches to a LMS QCTP I shall be grinding
tops of the parting tool to get the rake. No point having a dog and barking
yourself.

:-)

BTW, in my studies I came across an interesting conversation from this forum
that you had about year 2000 with a gentleman called R. Bastow (sp?) who I
believe went under the pseudonym "tee-nut".

Yes -- it was a serious loss to the newsgroup when he died.

It related to parting tools and
their use. He seemed to advocate a side relief ground in the top part of the
tee back from the cutting edge as well as the shallow v-groove along the top
like you mentioned earlier. Actually it was only then I grasped how it was
supposed to work but could not get to visualize the practicalities of making
such a feature. The nearest I got was clamping it in the mill vise and run a
pointy contersink along the top.

That sounds like a good way to dull the countersink. The
parting tool is HSS (High Speed Steel) and likely even a high cobalt
version thereof. What you want is a grinding stone in a Dremel type
tool, with a diamond used to dress the stone to form the negative of the
'V' needed. Something like this:
________
________
[]
||
||

Interestingly, he never mentioned the top rake but at his stage of life he
may have been taking it as given.

With the industrial tool holders which he was familiar with, the
rake would be provided by the holder. It is only when you get to the
tiny ones for Taig and Sherline sized lathes that you lack this.

I read a few of his other posts and his
knowledge of the subject seemed encyclopaedic.

Indeed so.

Talking about spirited threads, I have to mention another one that I came
across: Ed Huntress holding forth on grinding HSS tool bits in 2001. A
really well presented argument including extensive research showing
convincingly (to me anyway) how an oft repeated lie becomes the truth.

The thread about whether you should quench the HSS as you grind?
I agree with his position that you should not.

[...]

P.S. That 3" milling vise looks cute. A clone of the Kurt Anglock
style, but smaller and more affordable. Now if I could just
find a 2" of the same design for the Emco C5 mill (adaptation of
the mill column for the Compact-5 lathe, but with a heftier X-Y
table below it.

??? Which one? LMS?

This one:

http://littlemachineshop.com/products/product_view.php?view=classic&ProductID=3487


It showed up in the left sidebar yesterday. I had to search for it
today. They seem to move these things around.

Just like most supermarkets. I have got a 2" which looks similar but then I
would not know the subtle differences. All's I know that mine still lifts
things up a bit when tightened.

Event the Kurts need a little help. They now come with some
small O-rings which fit under the moving jaw, and are compressed by the
pull-down feature to pull down the workpiece at the same time. The
design of these is that there is an angled projection below the moving
vise jaw which engages a matching angle on the moving nut, so when you
tighten it it slides on that angle to pull the jaw down tightly. Some
of the clones have a problem in that the angled portions are not ground
smooth, so they stick instead of slide where they should.

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 ---

"DoN. Nichols" wrote in message
...

Mill a long piece of stock to the T-nut profile, and then cut it
into individual T-nuts. Probably a good idea to drill and tap them all
before cutting them free.

These were nuts in a clamping kit that did not fit my slots. One by one. All
six surfaces. Good for the character...

I have two toolposts now:
1) the original Taig which clamps the tools into it directly - there are
no
separate holders

Right. I've actually got two of those -- one for use without
the headstock riser block, and one for use with it.

Several sources including Taig dealers allude to a "rear toolpost" -
apparetly you can clamp the parting tool upside down and mount it in the
rear post the other side of the spindle. I could not work out what the
benefit of such arrangement would be.

The thought was simply to take an existing chunk of aluminium and mill a
10
degree inclined slot with a deeper portion near the top, drill and tap
for
set screws and a central holding screw, make a posh handle like I made
for
the Taig toolpost and voila!

The screws really should operate a clamp bar, as it is easy for
setscrews to slip on the narrow top of the parting tool.

Ah. What about an arrangement like this one:
http://home.iprimus.com.au/stevor/lathetools.htm
?

The nearest I got was clamping it in the mill vise and run a
pointy contersink along the top.

That sounds like a good way to dull the countersink. The
parting tool is HSS (High Speed Steel) and likely even a high cobalt
version thereof. What you want is a grinding stone in a Dremel type
tool, with a diamond used to dress the stone to form the negative of the
'V' needed. Something like this:
________
________
[]
||
||


A dental drill in the mill??? Comrade Kalashnikov does not get on with
Dremel...

Talking about spirited threads, I have to mention another one that I came
across: Ed Huntress holding forth on grinding HSS tool bits in 2001. A
really well presented argument including extensive research showing
convincingly (to me anyway) how an oft repeated lie becomes the truth.

The thread about whether you should quench the HSS as you grind?
I agree with his position that you should not.

I have no reason to disagree. I thought the argument was compelling. I
watched a DVD recently published by a prolific author and machinist who dips
his tools (in a nicest possible way) when grinding. Throughout the program I
wondered why you would worry about a bit of heat in HSS which will get hot
working anyway and was developed for that reason.

I think the issue is almost a social commentary on human behaviour. Was it
Stephen Covey who said "If you want to find North it is better to consult a
compass than to take poll of all those present"? You would have thought that
such issues would not arise in something like engineering which is a
discipline on the whole based on facts (unlike medicine or politics). Yet it
happens. I still remember the discussion on crimping vs. soldering and the
passions involved in that one!


--
Michael Koblic
Campbell River, BC

On 2009-06-17, Michael Koblic wrote:

"DoN. Nichols" wrote in message
...

Mill a long piece of stock to the T-nut profile, and then cut it
into individual T-nuts. Probably a good idea to drill and tap them all
before cutting them free.

These were nuts in a clamping kit that did not fit my slots. One by one. All
six surfaces. Good for the character...

I still think that it would be easier to make one long one and
cut it to make multiple ones -- rather than trying to fix a bunch of
purchased ones -- especially if the purchased ones are partially hardened
as they should be.

I have two toolposts now:
1) the original Taig which clamps the tools into it directly - there are
no
separate holders

Right. I've actually got two of those -- one for use without
the headstock riser block, and one for use with it.

Several sources including Taig dealers allude to a "rear toolpost" -
apparetly you can clamp the parting tool upside down and mount it in the
rear post the other side of the spindle. I could not work out what the
benefit of such arrangement would be.

The chips fall down from the slot instead of building up on top
of the parting tool.

The stresses on the carriage are different, and if the carriage
moves, it clears the slot a little, instead of possibly digging in and
breaking the parting tool.

I would use them on my Clausing, if the cross-slide were
equipped with a rear T-slot.

The thought was simply to take an existing chunk of aluminium and mill a
10
degree inclined slot with a deeper portion near the top, drill and tap
for
set screws and a central holding screw, make a posh handle like I made
for
the Taig toolpost and voila!

The screws really should operate a clamp bar, as it is easy for
setscrews to slip on the narrow top of the parting tool.

Ah. What about an arrangement like this one:
http://home.iprimus.com.au/stevor/lathetools.htm
?

Hmm ... first off -- I don't like that topmost photo, which is
encouraging you to grind on the sides of a standard grinding wheel.
There are wheels made for such use -- but the standard ones can break as
a result of the lateral loading, spewing chunks of stone at high speed
towards everyone nearby.

As for the side clamping -- you would have to mill a groove in
the holder, and a matching groove in the clamp plate, to clear the wider
'T' top of the parting tool. You can make the groove a little wider
than needed to allow for slight mis-positioning of the grooves, as long
as you have a lot of meat clamping from both sides.

As for using the hacksaw blade -- fine for shallow grooves for
C-clips and the like, but bad news for deep parting, as the blade will
almost certainly bend and give you either a concave or convex end which
will need to be trued with a facing tool.

The nearest I got was clamping it in the mill vise and run a
pointy contersink along the top.

That sounds like a good way to dull the countersink. The
parting tool is HSS (High Speed Steel) and likely even a high cobalt
version thereof. What you want is a grinding stone in a Dremel type
tool, with a diamond used to dress the stone to form the negative of the
'V' needed. Something like this:
________
________
[]
||
||


A dental drill in the mill??? Comrade Kalashnikov does not get on with
Dremel...

The mill doesn't spin fast enough for what you need -- and a
dental drill will burn up like a countersink would. The cobalt HSS of
the parting tool is too hard to use metal tools on -- you have to
*grind* it.

But -- the precision is not that critical -- use a hand-held
Dremel and guide your hands by the vise which is holding the parting
tool with just the 'T' head clear.

Talking about spirited threads, I have to mention another one that I came
across: Ed Huntress holding forth on grinding HSS tool bits in 2001. A
really well presented argument including extensive research showing
convincingly (to me anyway) how an oft repeated lie becomes the truth.

The thread about whether you should quench the HSS as you grind?
I agree with his position that you should not.

I have no reason to disagree. I thought the argument was compelling. I
watched a DVD recently published by a prolific author and machinist who dips
his tools (in a nicest possible way) when grinding. Throughout the program I
wondered why you would worry about a bit of heat in HSS which will get hot
working anyway and was developed for that reason.

He would have the habit of quenching because he *started*
machining back when high carbon steel was the common tool bit material
-- and quenching was *necessary* for those, or the tool would get hot
enough to anneal.

HSS changed things a lot -- but not for everyone. And the
habits of quenching lasted a long time as people learned from other
older machinists.

I think the issue is almost a social commentary on human behaviour. Was it
Stephen Covey who said "If you want to find North it is better to consult a
compass than to take poll of all those present"?

:-)

You would have thought that
such issues would not arise in something like engineering which is a
discipline on the whole based on facts (unlike medicine or politics).

Machining is an art as much as an engineering matter.

Yet it
happens. I still remember the discussion on crimping vs. soldering and the
passions involved in that one!

:-) (Of course, it helps that I have a large number of crimping
tools and the terminals to use with them. I learned about crimping
working for an aerospace manufacturer, and while I also learned how to
do *good* solder joints where required, I prefer crimping if I have a
choice.

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 Jun 16, 11:15*pm, "DoN. Nichols" wrote:
On 2009-06-17, Michael Koblic wrote:
...
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *You would have thought that
such issues would not arise in something like engineering which is a
discipline on the whole based on facts (unlike medicine or politics).

* * * * Machining is an art as much as an engineering matter.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Yet it
happens. I still remember the discussion on crimping vs. soldering and the
passions involved in that one!

* * * * :-) (Of course, it helps that I have a large number of crimping
tools and the terminals to use with them. *I learned about crimping
working for an aerospace manufacturer, and while I also learned how to
do *good* solder joints where required, I prefer crimping if I have a
choice.

* * * * Enjoy,
* * * * * * * * DoN.

I think some of the dispute comes from listening to the old guy who is
supposed to know everything. I am becoming that old guy and have made
an effort to read the appropriate manuals instead of repeating
whatever I heard way back when. For example:

http://www.connex-electronics.com/?u...imp_guide.html

IIRC the specs for one of their terminals give current ratings from
50A for a hand crimp to 350 for the high-end hydraulic press dies.

jsw

On Jun 17, 4:15*am, "DoN. Nichols" wrote:

* * * * He would have the habit of quenching because he *started*
machining back when high carbon steel was the common tool bit material
-- and quenching was *necessary* for those, or the tool would get hot
enough to anneal.

* * * * HSS changed things a lot -- but not for everyone. *And the
habits of quenching lasted a long time as people learned from other
older machinists.

* * * * Enjoy,
* * * * * * * * DoN.

When I grind tool bits, I will probably cool the HSS periodically.
Not because the HSS needs it, but because if I do not cool it, it
burns my hands. This may theoretically lead to microcracks. But
since I usually do some light grinding on the fine wheel after all the
heavy grinding, I figure the layer with any microcracks is ground off.
Sometimes I even polish the HSS using some fine sandpaper. At any
rate I have never observed any problems from keeping the HSS cool
enough to hold.

But do not accept or reject what I say without having tried it.
Theory is nice, but sometimes it just does not make a difference.
That is what I have found about polishing HSS tool bits. I read it is
suppose to provide longer tool life. But I am not convinced.
Certainly there is no dramatic difference in tool life that is
obvious.

Dan

"DoN. Nichols" wrote in message
...

I still think that it would be easier to make one long one and
cut it to make multiple ones -- rather than trying to fix a bunch of
purchased ones -- especially if the purchased ones are partially hardened
as they should be.

Possibly.
At an additional cost.

Several sources including Taig dealers allude to a "rear toolpost" -
apparetly you can clamp the parting tool upside down and mount it in the
rear post the other side of the spindle. I could not work out what the
benefit of such arrangement would be.

The chips fall down from the slot instead of building up on top
of the parting tool.

The stresses on the carriage are different, and if the carriage
moves, it clears the slot a little, instead of possibly digging in and
breaking the parting tool.

I would use them on my Clausing, if the cross-slide were
equipped with a rear T-slot.

OK. Worth considering then.

The thought was simply to take an existing chunk of aluminium and mill
a
10
degree inclined slot with a deeper portion near the top, drill and tap
for
set screws and a central holding screw, make a posh handle like I made
for
the Taig toolpost and voila!

The screws really should operate a clamp bar, as it is easy for
setscrews to slip on the narrow top of the parting tool.

Ah. What about an arrangement like this one:
http://home.iprimus.com.au/stevor/lathetools.htm
?

Hmm ... first off -- I don't like that topmost photo, which is
encouraging you to grind on the sides of a standard grinding wheel.
There are wheels made for such use -- but the standard ones can break as
a result of the lateral loading, spewing chunks of stone at high speed
towards everyone nearby.

As for the side clamping -- you would have to mill a groove in
the holder, and a matching groove in the clamp plate, to clear the wider
'T' top of the parting tool. You can make the groove a little wider
than needed to allow for slight mis-positioning of the grooves, as long
as you have a lot of meat clamping from both sides.

As for using the hacksaw blade -- fine for shallow grooves for
C-clips and the like, but bad news for deep parting, as the blade will
almost certainly bend and give you either a concave or convex end which
will need to be trued with a facing tool.

So fiddling with a 1/4" piece does not seem so bad after reading this. There
is of course always the commercial option :-)

--
Michael Koblic
Campbell River, BC

On 2009-06-17, Jim Wilkins wrote:
On Jun 16, 11:15*pm, "DoN. Nichols" wrote:

[ ... ]

I think some of the dispute comes from listening to the old guy who is
supposed to know everything. I am becoming that old guy and have made
an effort to read the appropriate manuals instead of repeating
whatever I heard way back when. For example:

http://www.connex-electronics.com/?u...imp_guide.html

IIRC the specs for one of their terminals give current ratings from
50A for a hand crimp to 350 for the high-end hydraulic press dies.

Interesting. From what I see -- the choice of crimper is a
function of the size of the terminals, and the wires proper for those
terminals.

For example, with the AMP crimp terminals, all sizes from 28 Ga
to 10 Ga are handled with either ratcheting hand-held tools -- or
automated crimpers fed terminals on tape from spools.

All sizes from 8 Ga through 4/0 use hydraulic tools. The 8 Ga
through 2 Ga may be done with hand held and pumped hydraulic tools with
the dies integral with the tool -- or with a hydraulic slave cylinder
powered by either a foot pump or an electric pump. The ones from 1/0
through 4/0 are only crimped in larger hydraulic crimp heads which are
only powered by the foot pump or the electric pump. Yes, I have
examples of all of these except the production tooling for the tape-fed
terminals.

I don't have the proper tooling for crimping the Power-Pole
terminals which your web site shows -- but would like to add it to my
collection. :-)

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 2009-06-17, wrote:
On Jun 17, 4:15*am, "DoN. Nichols" wrote:

* * * * He would have the habit of quenching because he *started*
machining back when high carbon steel was the common tool bit material
-- and quenching was *necessary* for those, or the tool would get hot
enough to anneal.

* * * * HSS changed things a lot -- but not for everyone. *And the
habits of quenching lasted a long time as people learned from other
older machinists.

* * * * Enjoy,
* * * * * * * * DoN.

When I grind tool bits, I will probably cool the HSS periodically.
Not because the HSS needs it, but because if I do not cool it, it
burns my hands. This may theoretically lead to microcracks. But
since I usually do some light grinding on the fine wheel after all the
heavy grinding, I figure the layer with any microcracks is ground off.
Sometimes I even polish the HSS using some fine sandpaper. At any
rate I have never observed any problems from keeping the HSS cool
enough to hold.

It may also be that you don't get it hot enough to cause the
microcracks in the first place. Cooling to keep your hands from burning
probably requires more frequent dipping than might otherwise be done by
someone with a holder and working just to keep the HSS from turning
blue. :-)

But do not accept or reject what I say without having tried it.
Theory is nice, but sometimes it just does not make a difference.
That is what I have found about polishing HSS tool bits. I read it is
suppose to provide longer tool life. But I am not convinced.
Certainly there is no dramatic difference in tool life that is
obvious.

Perhaps one at the grinding rates and production rates in
industrial production -- which is mostly done with inserts these days
anyway -- for cutting rates which even HSS can't handle. :-)

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 Jun 18, 12:57*am, "DoN. Nichols" wrote:

When the HSS bit gets too hot to hold I wait about 10 seconds for the
heat to spread out before quenching it. So far I haven't seen any part
of the edge chip off. Gunner's idea to use a drill chuck is fine for
roughing, but I have to hold the bit directly in my fingers to be able
to feel how evenly it is contacting the wheel, to grind one unfaceted
hollow face that's easy to stone when it dulls.

http://picasaweb.google.com/KB1DAL/T...43778674022866

The hand Anderson crimper is like a bolt cutter, with dies shaped like
( ), not much different from the smaller Amp solderless terminal
crimper. A wire rope ferrule swaging tool might work for non-critical
jobs, or you can solder them. The powered one (Tyco, not Anderson) has
four points closed inward by a cam.

jsw

In article ,
"DoN. Nichols" wrote:

On 2009-06-17, Michael Koblic wrote:

"DoN. Nichols" wrote in message
...

Mill a long piece of stock to the T-nut profile, and then cut it
into individual T-nuts. Probably a good idea to drill and tap them all
before cutting them free.

These were nuts in a clamping kit that did not fit my slots. One by one.
All
six surfaces. Good for the character...

I still think that it would be easier to make one long one and
cut it to make multiple ones -- rather than trying to fix a bunch of
purchased ones -- especially if the purchased ones are partially hardened
as they should be.

I have two toolposts now:
1) the original Taig which clamps the tools into it directly - there are
no
separate holders

Right. I've actually got two of those -- one for use without
the headstock riser block, and one for use with it.

Several sources including Taig dealers allude to a "rear toolpost" -
apparetly you can clamp the parting tool upside down and mount it in the
rear post the other side of the spindle. I could not work out what the
benefit of such arrangement would be.

The chips fall down from the slot instead of building up on top
of the parting tool.

The stresses on the carriage are different, and if the carriage
moves, it clears the slot a little, instead of possibly digging in and
breaking the parting tool.

I would use them on my Clausing, if the cross-slide were
equipped with a rear T-slot.

You can use the upsidedown holder from the front, by running the lathe
in reverse. I have been doing exactly that on my 5914.

My current holder is a Dorian D30BXA-7-71C, which takes blades cutting a
2mm wide slot. This is a bit small, and chatters on the larger diameter
workpieces. I will also be getting a D30BXA-71-26, which takes larger
blades. In both cases, one can use a slot grip blade or a HSS T-blade.

Dorian made these holders to be reversible, and they work just fine.
These holders are on page P-22 of the Dorian catalog.

Joe Gwinn

On 2009-06-18, Jim Wilkins wrote:
On Jun 18, 12:57*am, "DoN. Nichols" wrote:

(well ... actually I didn't write what follows, which appears to
be all new text. :-)

When the HSS bit gets too hot to hold I wait about 10 seconds for the
heat to spread out before quenching it. So far I haven't seen any part
of the edge chip off. Gunner's idea to use a drill chuck is fine for
roughing, but I have to hold the bit directly in my fingers to be able
to feel how evenly it is contacting the wheel, to grind one unfaceted
hollow face that's easy to stone when it dulls.

O.K.

http://picasaweb.google.com/KB1DAL/T...43778674022866

The hand Anderson crimper is like a bolt cutter, with dies shaped like
( ), not much different from the smaller Amp solderless terminal
crimper.

Hmm ... except that the Anderson perhaps does not have the
ratchet assembly to assure a complete crimp before release? And the amp
crimpers (at least the ratchet controlled -- not the "field repair" ones
which *are* small diameter bolt shears -- will typically have a single
or a double dot in the die faces to mark whether it was done by the
proper size crimper for the particular terminal in question.

And this shape is for the pre-insulated ones, not for the bare
ones. The AMP crimpers also includes a separate crimper to crimp the
wire insulation grip -- to one of three sizes depending on the thickness
of the insulation involved. (This secondary crimp is the "Diamond Grip"
part of the P.I.D.G. designation)

A wire rope ferrule swaging tool might work for non-critical
jobs, or you can solder them. The powered one (Tyco, not Anderson) has
four points closed inward by a cam.

The powered one for *which* terminals? the four-point design is
common on smaller machined uninsulated terminals -- usually for
insertion in multi-pin connectors. Daniels is one maker of such
crimpers for smaller terminals. Amphenol for others. And often for the
same connectors, there are pins formed from sheet metal, with a "Type F"
crimp. Two pairs of flags -- the front ones bent to a double 'U' around
the wire, and the rear ones bent to a circle around the insulation.

The wire crimp looks like this (viewed with a fixed-pitch font
like Courier):

/)
\)

And for the insulation support:

_
/ \ Left side is closed, right side is slightly open
\_/

The powered ones for the PIDG style ring, fork, or press-on
terminals from 8 Ga up through 4/0 use the same shape as the smaller
PDIG ones -- but with the actual size embossed in the plastic of the
insulation instead of the dots used by the smaller ones up to 10 Ga.

Powered ones for insertable terminals (probably the PowerPole
ones would qualify) would be likely to use the four indentor design, but
for pre-insulated terminals, it is unlikely.

Part of the problem with crimp terminals is that there are so
many choices, and thus places to go wrong.

But I would never solder a pre-insulated terminal onto the wire.

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 2009-06-18, Joseph Gwinn wrote:
In article ,
"DoN. Nichols" wrote:

On 2009-06-17, Michael Koblic wrote:

[ ... ]

Several sources including Taig dealers allude to a "rear toolpost" -
apparetly you can clamp the parting tool upside down and mount it in the
rear post the other side of the spindle. I could not work out what the
benefit of such arrangement would be.

The chips fall down from the slot instead of building up on top
of the parting tool.

The stresses on the carriage are different, and if the carriage
moves, it clears the slot a little, instead of possibly digging in and
breaking the parting tool.

I would use them on my Clausing, if the cross-slide were
equipped with a rear T-slot.

You can use the upsidedown holder from the front, by running the lathe
in reverse. I have been doing exactly that on my 5914.

As long as the lathe does not have a threaded nose. My 5814
came with a 2-1/4x8 threaded nose, but now has a L-00 (probably from a
5900 series machine) so I could do this.

My current holder is a Dorian D30BXA-7-71C, which takes blades cutting a
2mm wide slot. This is a bit small, and chatters on the larger diameter
workpieces. I will also be getting a D30BXA-71-26, which takes larger
blades. In both cases, one can use a slot grip blade or a HSS T-blade.

Dorian made these holders to be reversible, and they work just fine.
These holders are on page P-22 of the Dorian catalog.

Thanks. If I decide that I can afford that, I will try them.
But I get rather good behavior from the right-side-up one in the BXA
sized holders anyway.

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 ---

In article ,
"DoN. Nichols" wrote:

On 2009-06-18, Joseph Gwinn wrote:
In article ,
"DoN. Nichols" wrote:

On 2009-06-17, Michael Koblic wrote:

[ ... ]

Several sources including Taig dealers allude to a "rear toolpost" -
apparetly you can clamp the parting tool upside down and mount it in the
rear post the other side of the spindle. I could not work out what the
benefit of such arrangement would be.

The chips fall down from the slot instead of building up on top
of the parting tool.

The stresses on the carriage are different, and if the carriage
moves, it clears the slot a little, instead of possibly digging in and
breaking the parting tool.

I would use them on my Clausing, if the cross-slide were
equipped with a rear T-slot.

You can use the upsidedown holder from the front, by running the lathe
in reverse. I have been doing exactly that on my 5914.

As long as the lathe does not have a threaded nose. My 5814
came with a 2-1/4x8 threaded nose, but now has a L-00 (probably from a
5900 series machine) so I could do this.

Yes, it would be ugly with a threaded spindle nose. Picture machinist
being chased around the shop by a 75# chuck.

But I knew that you had changed to a L00 nose, which is what my 5914 has.


My current holder is a Dorian D30BXA-7-71C, which takes blades cutting a
2mm wide slot. This is a bit small, and chatters on the larger diameter
workpieces. I will also be getting a D30BXA-71-26, which takes larger
blades. In both cases, one can use a slot grip blade or a HSS T-blade.

By the way, the chief consequence of the chatter is to dull the carbide
insert, making cutoff harder to do. The dulling was quite abrupt. The
insert doesn't look different, but one can feel and see with a magnifier
that the cutting lip is blunted.

The chatter is the same, reversed or not, and is most likely caused by
using a blade that isn't quite stiff enough for the diameter of the work
being cut off. Dulling did not happen with 1" diameter 6061 on
1018/12L14 stock, but did happen with 3" diameter 6061 stock.


Dorian made these holders to be reversible, and they work just fine.
These holders are on page P-22 of the Dorian catalog.

Thanks. If I decide that I can afford that, I will try them.

Evilbay? It would be hard to hurt one of these holders.


But I get rather good behavior from the right-side-up one in the BXA
sized holders anyway.

I do that too, now that the lathe has been tightened up. But I can be
more aggressive with the reversed setup operated manually, with feel.

Joe Gwinn