Ian P | 04/08/2013 21:40:21 |
![]() 2747 forum posts 123 photos | Following my (successful, to me) centre height increasing experiment I am now thinking about making a more engineered solution. What I don't know is a reliable way of machining opposite sides of a block whilst ensuring both faces and features are exactly parallel to each other. The lathe in question is a Boxford, and the headstock locates on one prismatic and one flat shear. The height of the flat face has to be just right relative to the triangular groove if it is to sit properly. A method of machining male and female versions using only/mainly a vertical mill has defeated me so far. On the lash-up I showed on this thread, **LINK** (its quite safe, its only a forum topic) I used a pair of standard Vee blocks and a length of ground bar. After machining the face of a 10.5" diameter disk I could not see daylight at any point across the face with ground straight edge so as crude as the rasing method was there was no sacrifice of accuracy. I was thinking of using aluminium for the headstock block, it will never see any wear so I cannot forsee it being a problem. Raising the tailstock can be done with a spacer plate interposed between the upper and lower castings. Any thoughts anyone?
Edited By Ian Phillips on 04/08/2013 21:42:15 |
Andrew Johnston | 04/08/2013 23:24:22 |
![]() 7061 forum posts 719 photos | When I made a set of risers for my dividing head and tailstock I started with a chunk of hot rolled steel; less likely to distort after machining. The risers were made as a pair, and only separated as the last operation. They were marked with two 'V' stamps so they can always be placed in the same orientation as they were machined. I machined the surfaces using a 1" side and face cutter in a horizontal mill, with the work clamped directly to the table. The sides and a T-slot for tenons were machined at one setting with a narrower side and face cutter. Having fitted tenons I then used those tenons in the T-slot of the mill table to align the block to machine a slot on the other side for the tenons on the dividing head to sit in. Of course this assumes that the mill table T-slots are parallel to the movement of the table, but on any decent mill they should be. Regards, Andrew |
Bazyle | 04/08/2013 23:43:47 |
![]() 6956 forum posts 229 photos | The saddle has a surface that is exactly parallel crossways relative to the V and flat on its underside and in relation to the bed. Thus if you place it (on parallels) upside down on a surface plate with a bar in the V you can measure the height of the bar relative to the flat. This enables you to calculate the depth of the V and and after machining to check it. You would probably want to scrape it to the bed before moving to machine the top. For the top, after machining the inverted V leaving the flat too high you can place the saddle on it and from its deviation from parallel to the plate calculate how much to take off the flat. Once close it might be a viable trick to place the block on the bed and use a tool on the saddle to rack it back and forth to act like a shaper to make a fine cut off the flat that is parallel to the bed. You could just cheat by slitting the block horizontally along the flat side, parallel to the bed, and put in forcing screws |
Bazyle | 05/08/2013 00:03:27 |
![]() 6956 forum posts 229 photos | Actually I think the most critical part is not the heights but getting the two Vs, male and female, dead parallel without introducing a twist on the head about a vertical axis. Reference flats on both sides of the block dead true to one another and reference parallel clamped on the mill table should take care of that. Height and lateral shift errors can be taken out in making and setting the tailstock but twist is a killer to fix. |
Ady1 | 05/08/2013 00:50:56 |
![]() 6137 forum posts 893 photos | Much of this kind of work used to be done on shaping/planing machines, then finished by hand More recently it's milled, then finished with a surface grinder |
Michael Gilligan | 05/08/2013 07:19:35 |
![]() 23121 forum posts 1360 photos | Ian, Have you thought of by-passing the tricky machining ? John McNamara seems to be having great success using Epoxy Concrete. MichaelG. . Edit: Added hyperlink Edited By Michael Gilligan on 05/08/2013 07:22:09 |
Weldsol | 05/08/2013 14:55:55 |
74 forum posts | How about mounting the block so that where you want the vee is horizontal put your cutter in and cut a vee groove on one side then move the table across and put another vee groove on the opposite side. So now you have your two grooves opposite one another ( both female ) mount a round bar of the appropriate dia, in one groove to become the male ( held in by socket head screws ) Maybe not what you were after but it would work
Paul |
John McNamara | 05/08/2013 15:42:32 |
![]() 1377 forum posts 133 photos |
Hi Ian
When I did this on my lathe (Epoxy bedding the cast steel saddle after a bed regrind, it worked perfectly. The saddle is ) it is very heavy I had to crane it into position it has been in constant use for several years now. In this case I used pre set jack screws set in blocks of steel attached to the saddle using the way wiper mounting holes to mount them, to pre position the lathe saddle then applied the epoxy to the saddle and carefully placed it on the lathe bed sitting it back on the jack screws to set. Positioning the saddle in three planes took hours! The "Pour" only a few minutes Edited By John McNamara on 05/08/2013 15:55:42 Edited By John McNamara on 05/08/2013 16:02:02 |
John McNamara | 05/08/2013 16:22:30 |
![]() 1377 forum posts 133 photos | Edit above should have said all measurments by volume not "both" |
Michael Gilligan | 05/08/2013 18:07:10 |
![]() 23121 forum posts 1360 photos | Brilliant write-up, John On the subject of threaded inserts; have you tried bigHead fasteners ? I used them years ago, on F-Board [honeycomb cored panels, with GRP skins] and found them excellent. MichaelG. |
Michael Gilligan | 05/08/2013 18:44:32 |
![]() 23121 forum posts 1360 photos |
Posted by Weldsol on 05/08/2013 14:55:55:
So now you have your two grooves opposite one another ( both female ) mount a round bar of the appropriate dia, in one groove to become the male ( held in by socket head screws ) Maybe not what you were after but it would work Paul . Paul, Yes, that arrangement works very well ... although matching the diameter of the bar to the size of the vee is tricky. The camera mount on my Zeiss macro stand uses exactly that arrangement; but they use a slightly oversize bar, to make sure it clamps properly. Strictly speaking; Ian's job would need perfect registration of the bar with the plane surface; and this might prove to be a tricky fitting job. MichaelG.
|
Ian P | 05/08/2013 19:36:30 |
![]() 2747 forum posts 123 photos | I've now got quite a lot of food for thought! so thanks to all. From the replies I now realise that maintaining the headstock spindle axis parallel to the bed (in both planes) is not as hard as I thought as the 'half' machined block can be inverted and then aligned as suggested by Andrew. Epoxy as described bt John McN (in a detailed and very lucid explanation) all makes sense but I'm not sure its the way to go for this raising block. Basically it is only half an inch thick and sits between the lathe bed and the underside of the headstock with the critical fact being the exact parallelism and close fitting to all the mating geometry. Once made and fitted its a fixed part and there is no sliding movement, its purely a spacer. I used a round bar and vee blocks for my lash-up but to preserve as much rigidity as possible I aim for maximum surface contact area, that must be better than line contact only. I think the hardest part is getting the height of the flat face correct relative to the vee. Gang milling a block of cast iron followed by a bit of hand fitting/scraping is what it needs really, there are a lot of 4.5" Boxfords out there that are waiting to be converted to 5" (and 5 to 5.5).
Ian P
both the upper and lower faces |
Ian P | 05/08/2013 20:24:06 |
![]() 2747 forum posts 123 photos |
Posted by MICHAEL WILLIAMS on 05/08/2013 19:54:01:
Cut from solid / test pieces which are short replicas of male and female V's / (Or) one/two roller test pieces .. Reference edge / reference plane . Fabricated construction / loose pieces / gib strips / gib blocks / adjustable features . Only one side of each V has to be precision / mate one + gib other . MikeW
Must admit I had not thought of that, it certainly reduces the precision require to make the blocks, Now I'm thinking, no gib strips, but still have the screws to push the faces into contact, then inject an epoxy of some type into the gap to make the whole thing into a solid entity. Overall I have high regard for Boxfords engineering and design, but one thing that does not impress me is the really marginal headstock to bed fixings. There are just two 3/8" Whit bolts with seriously restricted head access that are screwed upwards into the head casting I have never needed to get to the ones on my lathe but I have been told that its only possible to loosen/tighten them with the aid of specially cranked spanners. |
Bazyle | 05/08/2013 22:00:08 |
![]() 6956 forum posts 229 photos | With the alignment provided by the V the head hardly needs more fixing. I made a special spanner decades ago - it only needed to be 1/8 mild steel but I think those flat ratchet spanners now available would do. Don't some modern import lathes have jacking and adjusting screws now so rather small areas actually taking the strain. Not brilliant long term but at least you can correct them. The disadvantage of the 5in is no greater width on the ways so less solid than 4 1/2 in. Not sure how often a mere 1 in dia is going to help. |
Ian P | 05/08/2013 22:41:12 |
![]() 2747 forum posts 123 photos | Bazyle You are right, its a valid point about the bed not being any wider so in theory there is a loss of overall rigidity. Boxford decided the bed was substantial enough for a 5" centre height so converting a 4.5 to 5" should be completely acceptable providing its done properly. Raising a 5" to 5.5 is a more dubious procedure and I have not tried it yet. What I did was raise a 4.5" headstock by more than 1" using vee blocks and odds and ends, and surprise, surprise it works well,
Apart from turning 10.5" diameter aluminium parts I have today been taking heavy cuts off large 6" diameter lumps of EN24T. I say heavy but the depth of cut is about 0,5mm and the feed rate as fast as I can push it using the top slide. There is some chatter but only at the most overhanging point (the 6" blank is 4" long) which when I look at it, seems quite a long way from the front bearing (backplate+chuck+4" Ian P
|
Please login to post a reply.
Want the latest issue of Model Engineer or Model Engineers' Workshop? Use our magazine locator links to find your nearest stockist!
Sign up to our newsletter and get a free digital issue.
You can unsubscribe at anytime. View our privacy policy at www.mortons.co.uk/privacy
You can contact us by phone, mail or email about the magazines including becoming a contributor, submitting reader's letters or making queries about articles. You can also get in touch about this website, advertising or other general issues.
Click THIS LINK for full contact details.
For subscription issues please see THIS LINK.