# 9" SM Utilathe Restoration



## YYCHM (Sep 26, 2019)

I picked up this 9" Utilathe (Thanks Phil) that's in pretty decent shape for it's age IMHO.






Note the headstock, tailstock, and tool post risers (3").  I want to delete those but unfortunately I'm missing the original 16T headstock drive gear and idler gear bracket.






This is the original gear train.






This is the gear train with the risers installed.  Same gear ratio as the original just different sizes to accommodate the risers.






While in the process of re-assembling the machine and thought I would see if the main gears would mesh without the idler and risers installed.

Well.... they do within 0.09".  That's how much I would have to shim the headstock higher.

The question I have for you all is.  *Is this a viable configuration in the first place (i.e. running with the idler deleted)?  *


----------



## YYCHM (Sep 28, 2019)

No comments on my gear train dilemma?

Is my proposal feasible at all or a bad idea?


----------



## Brent H (Sep 28, 2019)

Hey Craig,

I 'll get things going: Should work as your ratio is correct.

Issues: Gotta shim carefully, backlash would need to be figured in, but should be small maybe 5 to 6 thou?

Alignment of the head stock and the cross feed and keeping those gears all nice?  perhaps it is all straight? 

Less teeth in contact taking up the load on the feed?  

maybe others have ideas ?


----------



## RobinHood (Sep 28, 2019)

I would see if I could shim the QC gear box the 9 thou. That would allow the headstock to remain in its original position and thus would be at the same level as the tailstock.
Just make sure the leadscrew is not bending and you can still move the carriage freely all the way to the headstock without it binding.
If that does not work, your only choice (using your two gears at hand) is to shim the headstock, which would require the corresponding tailstock shim as well.


----------



## YYCHM (Sep 28, 2019)

Drop the Feed Box.  Brilliant!!!  That would never have occurred to me.  Easy enough to try.

Thanks!

Well.... I tried it.  The carriage runs end to end just fine, no binding.  The half nut however, does not fully engage, which makes sense once you think about it.  The nut would need to be lowered which a no go.

Back to the drawing board.

BTB - The gear I'm missing is 28T not 16T as stated in my OP.


----------



## YYCHM (Oct 4, 2019)

Did some runout checks today.

The headstock spindle runout is < 0.0005".  Hardly registers on my TDI.

The face plate (chuck mounting plate?) runout looks to be 0.004" and the chuck body runout measured 0.005"

A chucked endmill shank measured 0.007".

Looks like I need to do some chuck tuning.  It's a 3 jaw chuck, that's bolted(3) to a mounting plate that spins onto the spindle (if that makes sense?).

Apparently I can try loosening the chuck bolts and nudging the chuck over a bit to improve it's runout?  Anyone have experience doing this kind of thing?


----------



## RobinHood (Oct 4, 2019)

YYCHobbyMachinist said:


> Apparently I can try loosening the chuck bolts and nudging the chuck over a bit to improve it's runout? Anyone have experience doing this kind of thing?


Yes, if the register in the back of the chuck allows.  When you have the chuck off the backing plate, check runout of the plate. Remove it from the spindle and reinstall to see if it repeats. If not, then you have a plate-to-spindle register issue. 

If all the above checks out and you have determined for sure it is the chuck body, you may then machine the backplate-to-chuck register a bit smaller to allow for the chuck to be bumped around. Also, check that there is room for the bolts to shift a bit. You may have to enlarge the bolt holes as well.

Stefan Gotteswinter has a video out on doing just that - he ends up with near zero runout on his “non-adjustable” 3J.

I have done the same to an old Chinese 3J. Together with regrinding the jaws themselves, it turned out to be a very respectable scroll chuck.


----------



## YYCHM (Oct 4, 2019)

Spent the last three mornings or so (an hour here, an hour there before work) making a shoe for the taper attachment.






The slot in that thing is 1.2" wide and 0.6" deep.  It took 120 passes on my mini-mill and toasted a nice 6flt 7/8" end mill.  The RPMs were correct according to LMS's cutting speed calculator, and I took 0.01 cuts.  What's the expected life time of an endmill anyways?  I seem to be going through a LOT!






This was an interesting discovery. That screw and bushing locks the cross slide nut, you remove it (which allows the cross slide to float) and screw it into the TA saddle extension like so.  Look at how much smaller the bushing v.s. the extension slot is?  Seems to work, but wasn't expecting that kind of discrepancy.






Sample taper cut using the TA.  That's 10deg (Max) over about an inch.  Ya, I could have done that with the compound but I was curious.  Too much stick out on the sample, hence the poor finish.  Should have set up using then tail stock, but didn't feel like it.  The silly tail stock riser weights in at 45 lbs.






This thing is really loud with the lead screw engaged!  Like... wear hearing protection loud.  It's all coming from this gear train.  With out engaging the lead screw it's smooth as silk and just hums along?

Have to come up with a safety guard/cover for those gears soon.  Just an accident waiting to happen.


----------



## RobinHood (Oct 4, 2019)

YYCHobbyMachinist said:


> toasted a nice 6flt 7/8" end mill. The RPMs were correct according to LMS's cutting speed calculator, and I took 0.01 cuts.


Probably not enough feed rate. I learned the hard way with a 1” rougher in some mystery alloy: burnt up a SKF & DORMER Cobalt endmill by not feeding it fast enough. I also probably ran the first endmill too fast.

Here is the toasted one:





And its buddy that was run afterwards for many feet at 160 rpm, 2”/min feed and 0.050 DOC. Still very sharp.





They both started out brand new.

Time to set up the T&C to sharpen some endmills - some day


----------



## YYCHM (Oct 4, 2019)

RobinHood said:


> Time to set up the T&C to sharpen some endmills - some day



Sooner than later please.   I have a box of larger end mills (1/2" - 1") that desperately need attention.


----------



## RobinHood (Oct 4, 2019)

YYCHobbyMachinist said:


> Sooner than later please.   I have a box of larger end mills (1/2" - 1") that desperately need attention.


Noted...


----------



## PeterT (Oct 5, 2019)

RobinHood said:


> Stefan Gotteswinter has a video out on doing just that - he ends up with near zero runout on his “non-adjustable” 3J.



Stefan has another vid where he does a mini teardown review of Asian 5C collet chuck and then dials it very true on the lathe. It is a front mount style. I'd have to watch again but I recall he machined the backplate in-situ on the lathe but the step is slightly undersized so the mating chuck recess is not engaged with a tight fit which is the norm. I don't know the undersize allowance number but lets call it 0.005" diametric as opposed to 0.001" sliding fit. This allows him to loosen the bolts a bit & dial the chuck true (within .005/2=.0025 float). You grip an accurate dowel pin or whatever, get it running true with DTI & secure the chuck into that position. Same principle I have seen others use on ER-40 chuck/backplates.

Now this cant be as good as radial set screw systems (which are typically big $) because the front mount chuck could drift away and out of alignment, particularly under heavier cuts. But maybe because the typical turning operations in collet chucks are lighter duty, or maybe you can get away with it for longer on smaller HP lathes, not sure. But it allows for adjustments that are a whole lot easier than the alternatives. I'm considering doing an ER this winter so I'll let you know.

But ideally your workhorse 3J chuck should be quite solid to the spindle to allow heavier cutting & be as true as possible, particularly if you are re-gripping work & expecting some repeatable concentricity. Unfortunately that's where jaw regrinding/replacing comes into play if everything upstream of that is in good shape. I think back in the good old days, the chuck you were sold was probably ground on your lathe & that was that. Depending on the lathe style, the critical surface is the taper on the spindle nose. Its job its to make the chuck accessory concentric. The screw or camlock pins job is to axially retain it there. Where it gets interesting is on some machines the screw is expected to fulfill both roles. That has drawbacks. Not insurmountable, but you may require countermeasures.


----------



## YYCHM (Oct 5, 2019)

GOOD GOD, look what I found between the chuck and the face plate!!!











Do you think that was there before I unbolted the chuck or settled there while unbolting the chuck?

Got to wonder now what's floating around inside the cuck.


----------



## PeterT (Oct 5, 2019)

Am I interpreting your picture correct? Is this the recess in the back of the chuck supposed to fit (snugly) over the boss lip of the back plate? If so, its hard to image they could have even been mated that way with amount of swarf around the lip. Maybe most of it just came loose when dismantling & sprinkled down over the lip? Its common for swarf to work its way into the jaws & into spindle tube if you don'y clean it periodically. But I'm interested in that chuck mounting.


----------



## YYCHM (Oct 5, 2019)

Yup, that's the registration boss and recess.  It's not very deep.


----------



## PeterT (Oct 5, 2019)

My chuck recess fits to like within 0.001" (OD to ID) so hard to imagine even the tiniest amount of swarf even fitting in there.


----------



## YYCHM (Oct 5, 2019)

Ya, I didn't think that much stuff could have been between the chuck and the plate without the chuck being seriously out of wack.  There is a pocket between the chuck and the spindle nose that must have been full of swarth. Once I have this mess cleaned up, I'll have it serious look at the registration boss.  It doesn't look all that healthy upon first inspection.

Should probably flush out the chuck and lube it while I have it off to.

I found it interesting that the chuck bolts were metric (13 mm), is that to be expected?


----------



## historicalarms (Oct 6, 2019)

Greg, from the photo it looks as thought there is a second "smaller dia."recess cut into the chuck back plate that would easily collect the scarf you are seeing and it be released from its holding spot when the bolts are loosened.

    I tried "flushing my 3-jaw" a couple of times but gave up on the results and just disassembled it fully for a cleaning now.  It can't be re-assembled incorrectly, it can only go back together as was originally manuf. so don't hesitate to take it apart. One pointer tho is to # mark each jaw and chuck tightening bolt and it's pocket with a marker in order that they can be removed from the body...will speed up reassembly, eliminating any 'trial & error".

    edited for clarity: actually it can be reassembled in the wrong order but it wont damage anything if it is, it is easily spotted when the jaws work in  wrong unison...hense the marking eliminates the trial & error.


----------



## trlvn (Oct 7, 2019)

YYCHobbyMachinist said:


> Should probably flush out the chuck and lube it while I have it off


We should all probably do that much more often than we do!

Craig


----------



## YYCHM (Oct 7, 2019)

These screws aren't budging!  Do I dare trying one of those manual impact drivers?






Ok... got her apart with the aid of an impact driver.  She's pretty clean in there.  No swarth that I can see.

Should I grease the internals or just oil them?


----------



## YYCHM (Oct 7, 2019)

Looks like the runout on the face plate chuck registration boss is 0.0016"


----------



## Brent H (Oct 7, 2019)

Is the back plate thick enough to machine flat and redo the fit?  All new back plates need machining.  You should be able to flatten it and machine a new fit.  

You need to make sure you make the headstock 90° to the bed way first.  Or the face plate machines zero across the face. 

Take a thin cut across face and then run dial indicator across - should be 0 to 0 from near to far


----------



## trlvn (Oct 8, 2019)

YYCHobbyMachinist said:


> Should I grease the [chuck] internals or just oil them?



That question seems to incite religious wars!  

"Oil gets flung out while spinning."

"Grease attracts swarf."

FWIW, I used grease on the gears on the _inside_ of the chuck.  I sprayed a dry lube on the scroll side so it would hopefully not fill up with swarf. 

Craig


----------



## YYCHM (Oct 8, 2019)

trlvn said:


> That question seems to incite religious wars!



I hear you about the debate LOL, couldn't find a consensus on the web so I posed the question here.

I greased the inside gears and lightly oiled the scroll side.  Makes sense to me.

Now..... having reinstalled the chuck, the chuck body runout is a dismal 0.015" !!!  It was 0.005" before I dismounted it, and I'm sure I mounted it in the same orientation it came off in.  One step forward two steps back.

Craig


----------



## historicalarms (Oct 8, 2019)

Dry as dry can be, any lube will just compound the scarfe build-up. All of the "moving pieces" are hardened and the limited amount of movement we subject them to with just a hand tool (chuck wrench) wont damage them in any way and it should be dry enough in your basement that rust/oxidization wont affect the chuck neither.

   My shop is subject to weather changes and therefore some condensation will start a little discoloration of the chuck outside body from time to time but internally it is perfectly fine.


----------



## YYCHM (Oct 8, 2019)

Phew..... got her back to 0.005".  I tried all three possible chuck orientations and the best was what I thought was the original.  Still I had to tap her over a good 0.02".  Need to mark this orientation permanently now.

So, I guess this would mean I have to turn 0.002" off the mounting plate boss in order to attain 0.003".  Does that sound correct?

I don't feel confident enough in my machining skills to actually attempt it.

Craig


----------



## YYCHM (Oct 8, 2019)

Snow day today, so after putz'n with the chuck, I made up a guard to limit operator exposure to those nasty lead screw drive gears.






Not eloquent, but should do the trick.  Those exposed gears were an accident waiting to happen.


----------



## PeterT (Oct 8, 2019)

YYCHobbyMachinist said:


> Phew..... got her back to 0.005".  I tried all three possible chuck orientations and the best was what I thought was the original.  Still I had to tap her over a good 0.02".  Need to mark this orientation permanently now. So, I guess this would mean I have to turn 0.002" off the mounting plate boss in order to attain 0.003".  Does that sound correct? I don't feel confident enough in my machining skills to actually attempt it.



I’ll give an example. Let’s say you have a dial test indicator (DTI) resting on the OD top of a perfectly accurate hardened dowel pin held in the chuck jaws. It measures +0.001” (high) and -0.003” (low). We calculate runout by (low – high) / 2. Runout = (-0.003 – 0.001) / 2 = (-0.004)/2 = -0.002”. This means the dowel axis is 0.002” lower than the spindle axis. Remember to obey the corresponding low & high sequence order in the brackets and also the +/- sign, then it always works regardless of DTI readings. I've attached a sample of different reading combinations. It doesn't matter if you null the needle to zero at a low or high position as long as you follow the procedure.

Now we have established runout and want to correct the chuck so the dowel axis is 0.000” meaning coincident with the spindle axis. This presumes the chuck recess is completely flush tight against the back plate lip in the offending direction, i.e. you can’t alter it anymore to improve the runout. You need to remove the same 0.002” on the offending side of the back plate lip in order to displace the chuck that amount. But that is equivalent to a radius which means the back plate lip diameter must be reduced by 2 times that: 2 * 0.002 = 0.004”.

Notice we are talking about runout of the dowel reference part held the chuck jaws, not the chuck body or any other unrelated feature. However, if the chuck jaws grip the dowel inconsistently or non-repeatedly, then all bets are off. This problem is common in 3 jaw / scroll chucks, more-so older, worn chucks. Count yourself lucky if you are within 0.001” runout. Before you do any back plate machining or jaw grinding, check this first. Grip the dowel, measure runout, mark the amount and direction with a felt pen on the chuck. Remove the dowel,  unwind the scroll & repeat a few times. Ideally same tightness & across all key slots. Also chuck a larger diameter dowel to see if readings vary. If the readings are consistent amount and direction, its probably chuck/spindle alignment. If the readings are dancing around, then its probably jaw related (assuming spindle is in good shape). If the chuck scroll is in good shape, maybe you can buy a set of new jaws & be back in business.

If jaws are unobtanium or the chuck is a direct screw mount to spindle with no intermediary backplate (lip), then jaw grinding is probably the next step. Some guys have no problems taking this on, but do some research as to equipment involved & how to properly pre-load the jaws.


----------



## YYCHM (Oct 9, 2019)

1/2 the high - low reading span?  Heck I'm better off than I thought!!!

Spindle < 0.0005"
Plate 0.002"
Chuck 0.0025"
Stock 0.0035"

That's not bad at all.


----------



## YYCHM (Oct 30, 2019)

In my quest to delete the 3.5" risers on my machine I ended up purchasing a parts machine located in Ontario LOL.

All the gory details can be found in this thread https://canadianhobbymetalworkers.com/threads/in-need-of-a-gear.1686/  Was fun to say the least and I made some long distance friends in the process.






Here are the correct gears installed on my machine.






Here is the threading dial indicator I got in the deal.






And I scored this nice chip/drip tray.






Tail stock to spindle alignment looks good.






A bit of a problem here, the tool post that came with the riser kit is too tall.  I may cut it down, haven't decided yet.






I have this height adjustable tool post that I could make work.  I think it's robust enough?

Next up is installing the rear gear train cover.  I've run out of room between the lathe and my mill, so have to decide what to do about that.


Many Many Many thanks to Brent and David for helping me get all this stuff to Alberta.

Craig


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 1, 2019)

Got the gear cover installed today.  Really helps noise wise.  Also installed an ESD SW.






Had to mod my mill table to accommodate opening the gear cover LOL.  Rapidly running out of room in my humble shop space.






This is the 4 jaw I snagged.  It's huge compared to the 3 jaw.  Can't wait to try it out.






Got the tool post, steady rest and tail stock all sorted out now.






Pretty much complete other than two missing gits oilers.  RobinHood has a couple of those, I just need to make time to pick them up.

I suppose a face plate would be nice to have.  I wonder what the head stock dead center taper is for these things are?


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 1, 2019)

You will laugh at this one, or simply write me off as a Darwin award candidate.






I needed to make some new hold down bolts for the tool post, steady rest and tail stock.  The bolts I have are 3 1/2" too long.

Well.... I decided to make the bolts from ready rod and not feeling like hauling out the hack saw, I thought use the band saw.  I clamped firmly but not excessively not wanting to damage the threads on the unused rod.

Upon applying power,  the saw blade spun the ready rod, which then proceeded to unscrew itself from the bandsaw clamp as the saw blade followed the threads (or did the threads follow the sawblade?) at a very high rate.  YIKES!  I lifted the bandsaw head, and shut down. LMAO, how stupid is stupid.

Things went much better on my power hacksaw.

Maybe we could use a Lessons Learned topic AKA. How NOT to do things topic.


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 1, 2019)

On a more serious note.






Should I be concerned with this gear misalignment?  It's there, you can see it, and feel it.  Haven't figured out how to measure it.  The only way to eliminate it, is to push the idler gear on to it's bushing deeper or mill the back side of the bushing.

Thoughts?


----------



## historicalarms (Nov 2, 2019)

that gear mesh wont hurt a bit, not enough  "pressure" exerted on those gears to do any damage in a lifetime of use. 

    and a tip over your trials of cutting ready-rod in your bandsaw...just cut a slot in one side of a couple of nuts that  correspond to the r-r size & pitch. thread them onto the rod, positioning the slot so that it is upright and will be positioned where the holding jaws will pinch the nuts closed a bit on the r-r threads, easily stop's the spin.

    I took the time to split a pair of nuts every time I had to cut a different sized rod and retained them for safe keeping, I now have a complete set from 1/4 up to 1" for quick use when needed.


----------



## Johnwa (Nov 2, 2019)

historicalarms said:


> that gear
> 
> I took the time to split a pair of nuts every time I had to cut a different sized rod and retained them for safe keeping, I now have a complete set from 1/4 up to 1" for quick use when needed.



Good idea!  Split nuts work great for holding threaded rod in a 3 jaw too.  I’ve never thought about having a set of them.  Instead I have a few split nuts in some random spots.


----------



## Johnwa (Nov 2, 2019)

Craig
I’d move the stop switch in front of the lathe so you don’t have to reach over to hit it.


----------



## PeterT (Nov 2, 2019)

Split nuts is a good idea although I've had to continue the cut through the other side a bit, albeit that was on a lathe chuck setup. In any case there isn't a lot of vise contact area on the tangent of a circular section & now that is greatly reduced by removing thread material. Only the crown of each thread is contacting. Generally in a vise setup if I think its iffy. I will just insert a scrap piece of wood in there. It crushes ever so slightly & makes for more friction. Also in your case, protects the threads from getting marred & then potential issues with using that section for another project.


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 2, 2019)

Well, it looks like this tool holder ain't up to the task.  I was attempting to part off some shims and it kept spinning out of alignment.  Too much tool offset.  When I torqued her down as hard as I could, I pulled the mounting bolt right out of the T-NUT. Stripped the T-NUT threads.  Tomorrow those bolts get mig'd to their T-NUTS.

Broke my part off blade in the process.


----------



## PeterT (Nov 2, 2019)

Something doesn't seem right for that amount of force. My hunch is some combination of factors. The parting tool tip not ground quite right, either rake or sharpness.... Or not positioned to center axis of the bar stock looking on end. Or its going in at a slight angle vs. perpendicular & getting bound up. Or if you are using one of those bevel top profiles, it might be drawing that side it into the work & binding. I usually part with a neutral tool unless I have a rigid setup. If the cutter is in good shape the finish is about the same. The chips should ideally be nice even little curls vacating out of the slot (but crappy alloys can mess this a bit). Occasional bit of cutting oil to keep the tool happy. Overly heavy feed pressure on the dial means something is not right.

Since you already have a hole, I would recommend choking up on the amount the blade extends by a LOT unless I'm missing something. All you have to do is get through the annular section, not part to the center. The more it extends, the more flex & chance of chatter. 
*EDIT* see post #41, I think we are seeing the rear of the parting blade so disregard, although you should still strive for minimal stick out

What did your chips look like? Did it feel like the tool was digging either side to side or up/down?


----------



## trlvn (Nov 3, 2019)

@PeterT has made a lot of good suggestions.  One thing I'd add is to check the interface between your tool post and the compound.  That is a shop-made spacer block in between, right?  Does it sit flat on the compound and does the tool post sit flat on it?  If it is permitting any sort of rocking or flexing motion, that might explain your results.

Craig


----------



## PeterT (Nov 3, 2019)

I just realized looking at your parting assembly, that is probably the rear end of the blade sticking out, so disregard that part.

Agree with Craig, the riser block should be machined or at least very flat and parallel on both faces.

Two very quick setup checks you can/should do is using a typical 6" steel rule. Make sure you have at least a skim pass on work surfaces so they are true.
Centerline - lightly trap the ruler with the parting tool. The ruler should be straight up, not angled in or out. Adjust tool height as necessary. Other pic shows low tool height example
Parallel - put the rule contacting the end of the work and contacting the parting blade. Rotate & lock down the toolpost as necessary.


----------



## francist (Nov 3, 2019)

I don't think I've seen a tool post rigged like that before. It's almost like two incarnations of something hanging off the side, one holding a parting tool attached to another which attaches to the tool post. That's a lot of lever advantage hanging off the side.

I would look at the spacer block as well as has been mentioned by Peter and Craig. If it's aluminum it can be a bit slippery on its own and not help matters. The old square of brown paper bag between mating surfaces does work and can help an otherwise borderline situation.

A deeper T-nut might be something to consider as well, the one in the photo doesn't look to be very thick. That in itself won't solve the entire problem, but I think it might give a little more purchase and not strip threads so easily. Just something to think about.

-frank


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 3, 2019)

The tool holder is a bit of a contraption (it came with my mini lathe).  With the cut off tool installed the blade sticks way out from the anchor point.  Not only did it tend to spin, the height adjustable piece wanted to cock over.  I broke the blade when I lowered it in order to eliminate the tendency to cock, so my fault entirely.  A dull blade probably didn't help the situation. Can't really make the T-NUT any thicker.  It's the same depth as the one that came with the lath, only that one is welded to the bolt.


----------



## Johnwa (Nov 3, 2019)

I made a t-nut for my lathe out of a piece of ½ “ stock. You have to mill of the edges so it is an actual T. You get twice as many threads engaging.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 3, 2019)

Johnwa said:


> I made a t-nut for my lathe out of a piece of ½ “ stock. You have to mill of the edges so it is an actual T. You get twice as many threads engaging.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk



Ok, I get it now.  Makes sense.

Craig


----------



## francist (Nov 3, 2019)

You can also make them on the lathe if no mill is available.

-frank


----------



## PeterT (Nov 3, 2019)

What the guys are talking about is milling a T profile which would give the extra material shown in red. This gives more thread engagement.

But a 1/2" threaded post can hold a high amount of tension force. The usual thing you hear about with Gronk torquing is the cast iron goes 'tink' along the orange lines & then you have a cracked compound to deal with, so go careful there. The surfaces really do have to be flat good, but nothing you cant accomplish with basic machining & stroking it across some 600 paper on glass. A smooth mat finish. Also check the bottom of the tool post. If its Chinesium, chances are good it may not be flush. A bit of blue on either side & re tightening will tell you the story, particularly if this is the same tool post you will use for turning. The paper gasket is a good idea, but ideally yous shouldn't need it.


----------



## PeterT (Nov 3, 2019)

I feel like I read about this exact same thing on another forum. There could be something to that blade holder. But in the mean time...

Green arrow - check that the corner of the slot for the blade does not have a slight radius from milling. The blade corner will not seat properly in this undesirable fillet & this acts as a pivot point rather than being mated flush on the inside blade face where it gets support. A better solution is an undercut, but that's another $ manufacturing step. Kind of like chamfering & de-burring. 

Red profile - I know the wedge is popular & supposedly makes a better finish on one side of the parting slot. But as you are sorting out your issues I would make it square looking on end (just for 1/4" or so). Parting isn't a great way to finish a side at the best of times, but generally you need a rigid setup to use 'other' tip geometry. So 90-deg profile looking down at the tool, enter straight in & you should see a nice full width shaving come off.

How much blade stick out did you have when you tried it?


----------



## PeterT (Nov 3, 2019)

I like these T-style parting blades. The HSS ones aren't much different cost than regular. They are simple to sharpen, just straight into the grinding wheel with sufficient rake clearance. The sharper the better. The fit most common parting blade holders but check yours first.


----------



## PeterT (Nov 3, 2019)

Another common source of error for parting holders that have the positive rake angle built into the holder. You have your parting setup working perfectly. say its extended enough for 1/2" stock. Then you need to part some 1" stock. So you loosen the clamp & extend the blade a bit. Now it cuts like crap. Why? because now the tool tip has risen above the center line of the stock relative to where it was before & is probably now rubbing, not cutting on the edge. (Hence the ruler check I mentioned).

The reverse can also be true & this can get exciting because the tool is below center axis & prone to digging into the work. Particularly bad on gummier materials like aluminum. Something will have to give & usually the cheapest thing is your work if you are lucky.


----------



## Hruul (Nov 5, 2019)

This the T-nut that i made for my lathe.  Used the lathe to "square" up the metal that i had.  Then cut the sides out with a hacksaw and filed till it fit.   Not great but it works, didn't have access to a mill or milling on my lathe.


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 8, 2019)

Well.... todays project was a tool post.







Took the better part of 8 hours to make.

Started off by PHS'ing off a 1 3/4" piece of the 2" X 2" square stock Janger sourced for our group buy (Thanks John).

Next, I squared the cut ends off with a fly cutter on my mini-mill.  Geepers those things fling chips every where.  I had chips in my shirt pockets,  chips stuck to my eye glasses magnets, chips in my pant cuffs.

Next, I located and drilled the 3/8" center hole on the mini-mill.

With the post mounted on the lathe, I made a dimple on it with the tail stock live center.  Now I know where the tool point should be.

Back at the mill, I located the dimple and offset by 0.5 of 3/8" and proceeded to mill a 3/8" slot 0.4" deep.  That's 40 passes on a mini-mill at 0.01" per pass

Finishing, amounted to locating, drilling and taping the tool hold down screws.

Ya, 8 hours... efficient I am not..... BUT.... "locate" is a deceiving word in terms of tool changes and table traverses,
as is the term drill!!!






The ruler check.


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 9, 2019)

Per johnwa's suggestion, I crafted an actual T-Nut to mount the tool post.






I drilled and taped the T-Nut for 75% thread engagement.  Also, I used a cutdown carriage bolt as it appeared to
fit closer than ready rod which seems undersized some what.


----------



## Brent H (Nov 9, 2019)

That's looking pretty beefy now!


----------



## PeterT (Nov 9, 2019)

Does your compound have a gib lock on the other side? Something like this?


----------



## Brent H (Nov 9, 2019)

The 9" utilathe has 4 set screws to set the gib clearance but there is no lock - flat gib with 4 detents to retain the screw ends


----------



## Janger (Nov 9, 2019)

YYCHobbyMachinist said:


> Well.... todays project was a tool post.
> 
> 
> View attachment 6482
> ...



awesome! Are you getting better results? The tool looks perhaps a tiny touch high.


----------



## PeterT (Nov 9, 2019)

Brent H said:


> The 9" utilathe has 4 set screws to set the gib clearance but there is no lock - flat gib with 4 detents to retain the screw ends



Interesting. OK so that could be another source of slight movement drift in the overall tool holding assembly, although there isn't a lot you can do about it without modifying the compound by adding a lock (which I would research well before embarking on).

I was going to suggest rotating the compound to say 45-deg vs your current parallel to bed axis position to get more footprint area between compound & cross slide for rigidity. But if you cannot lock it, then 45 or more orientation would work against you because it will now find backlash movement between the lead screw & nut, worse that torque force across your dovetails as you have it now. But your carriage is locked during parting, riiiiight? 

A lot of guys are removing their compound & slide & replacing with a beefy solid base, especially on smaller lathes. They claim more rigidity, better turning finish, better tolerance holding - all good things. Its on my list but, but involves some potential mods to the cross-slide too so I want to be sure.

Anyways, hope your parting goes better now. Keep us in the loop.


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 9, 2019)

PeterT said:


> A lot of guys are removing their compound & slide & replacing with a beefy solid base, especially on smaller lathes. They claim more rigidity, better turning finish, better tolerance holding - all good things. Its on my list but, but involves some potential mods to the cross-slide too so I want to be sure.



I did that very thing on my mini-lathe.






Loved it.  Not only was it more rigid but there was a lot more room to work with (space is tight on a mini).  I hardly ever used the compound after making it.  Not sure It can be done on my Utilathe without modifying the cross slide.

Truth be told, I've done lots of parting off in the past on my mini.  Why all of a sudden things are going sideways on this Utilathe has me baffled.  Maybe it does have something to do with the compound being in place?  There is no means of locking it.

Won't be able to try parting off again until I mod the new tool post to accept the cut off tool.  I did do some facing off with the new post and that went well.


----------



## Dabbler (Nov 10, 2019)

Put an indicator base  on the flatway of your lathe, and your point on your tool post.  push and pull and see how much play you have.  it will be a lot more than you think.  then check the compound, the cross slide, etc.  it may be that one fo your gibs needs adjusting.  this is how you tell.  (feeling the gibs isn't always diagnostic).  This is how Bert taught me to get everything tight.

P.S. even after getting it all tight, there is always some movement.  you can't get it all out.

I agree that substituting a solid block for the compound is very good at getting the most out of the smaller lathes.


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 11, 2019)

Things are not going very well at all...…… Geepers, I'm only trying to part off 1/4" wall 1 3/4" pipe here.






This is what's left after breaking the blade 3 times now.  I don't think I have managed to make a single pass with out some disaster happening.






Things seem to be going really well and then BANG.  On my last attempt the blade broke, the tool post was spun and the work piece dislodged itself from the chuck






This is really strange..... look at that finger of metal that appears to have peeled into the center.  It' a good 1/16" thick.  There was 1/16" to go to part off.

One thing I have notice now is the power of the machine.  When things were going sideways on my mini it would stall, indicating it was time to sort the problem out.  This machine just keeps turning until something fails.   With NO warning to boot.


----------



## PeterT (Nov 11, 2019)

Did it go bang just as the tool was coming through to the the inside wall? Is that what you mean by finger of metal?


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 11, 2019)

PeterT said:


> Did it go bang just as the tool was coming through to the the inside wall? Is that what you mean by finger of metal?



No where near breaking thru the ID.  The tool slot is .139 and the ID is .124.  That finger of metal measures 0.062 thick.


----------



## Chicken lights (Nov 11, 2019)

YYCHobbyMachinist said:


> Things are not going very well at all...…… Geepers, I'm only trying to part off 1/4" wall 1 3/4" pipe here.
> 
> View attachment 6527
> 
> ...


I had no idea this was going to cause you this much grief. I’m sorry this isn’t as simple as I thought it was going to be for you


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 11, 2019)

Chicken lights said:


> I had no idea this was going to cause you this much grief. I’m sorry this isn’t as simple as I thought it was going to be for you



No worries.  It's all part of the learning process.  New machine, new stuff to sort out.  I hope the shims I cut on the band saw and PHS work for you, they ain't pretty.

Craig

P.S.  Wait until you start turning...… You'll find out.  There's more to it than meets the eye.  But it's fun, fun, fun.


----------



## PeterT (Nov 11, 2019)

I don't quite understand your dimensions. What is the annular (wall) thickness you have to part through (for example 0.250) and how much depth of cut did you get in before problem? Like half way = 0.100 or 3/4 way like 0.200, or close to the bore ID like 0.245. Whats the .062" measurement, does it coincide with your blade thickness for example?

Is the green arrow showing breakthrough of the tool into the ID or you just happen to lay a chip there? 

What I'm getting at is, if you are 'nearly' through the annular thickness (red line depiction) and  the blade is just starting to peek through in one area of the ID, then its plausible that this is the snatch & grab point. Thic could be because the ID is slightly irregular but a big culprit could be if you have backlash


----------



## PeterT (Nov 11, 2019)

Just eyeballing, but this looks pretty close to your full wall thickness no?
Again, is green arrow pointing to breakthrough of parting slot to ID?


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 11, 2019)

Sorry, I slipped a digit here.  The ID is 1.25 and I had parted to 1.39. So had 0.07 to go before break thru.  I've noticed there is a lot of backlash on my cross slide.  Gibs need adjustment?


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 11, 2019)

PeterT said:


> Just eyeballing, but this looks pretty close to your full wall thickness no?
> Again, is green arrow pointing to breakthrough of parting slot to ID?



Yes, but like 0.0625 too soon, and the piece peeled back looks just that peeled.  I don't get it?  So the pipe ID might not be concentric with the OD?  To add to the confusion, I had mounted the pipe on the chuck using the ID as the gripping surface.


----------



## trlvn (Nov 12, 2019)

YYCHobbyMachinist said:


> Sorry, I slipped a digit here.  The ID is 1.25 and I had parted to 1.39. So had 0.07 to go before break thru.  I've noticed there is a lot of backlash on my cross slide.  Gibs need adjustment?


I'm not an expert but I think that backlash is likely the problem.  I think that the cutter is grabbing into the work and pulling the cross-slide forward--that's why the cutter broke through into the interior.  However, that depth of cut is too much...so something has to give.  

How much back rake do you have on the parting tools?  Less back rake should mean the tool won't be as likely to self-feed.  Does the tool holder hold the blade level or does the blade cant up to the work?  If the latter, you probably don't need to grind any back rake into the tool.

Are you SURE you're on centre?  You should be able to do a facing cut (say on aluminum) and not leave any nub.

How much wear is there in your cross-slide screw and nut?  On my lathe, the cross-slide (and compound) feed nuts are made from brass and are intended to be replaced when worn.  My screw has a bit of wear too but replacing the nut reduced the backlash to around a third of the original.  Then with the gibs adding a bit of drag, it usually behaves.

Craig


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 12, 2019)

Yikes.... I pulled the cross slide off to have a look at the screw and nut.






The nut is pretty darn loose and the screw doesn't even look like an acme thread in the middle.  Pretty much shot I'm thinking.

Why would that screw wear like that on a brass nut?


----------



## Brent H (Nov 12, 2019)

Those are not the ones I shipped are they?   Hopefully not - the combo I sent you should be better ?


----------



## Johnwa (Nov 12, 2019)

The brass or bronze nut picks up “dust” particles and acts as a lap.
That looks a lot like my Southbend xslide screw.  Replacement screw sections  and nut used to be on eBay but I can’t find any right now.  For the Southbend the old screw had to be cut off and a new section spliced in.


----------



## Brent H (Nov 12, 2019)

If those are the originals,, change them out with the ones you got from the old lathe.  During my Lathe reconstruction making a new cross slide nut and compound nut took almost 0.050" of play out of the lathe and makes a world of difference in performance


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 12, 2019)

Brent H said:


> If those are the originals,, change them out with the ones you got from the old lathe.  During my Lathe reconstruction making a new cross slide nut and compound nut took almost 0.050" of play out of the lathe and makes a world of difference in performance



Ya, the imaged depicts the screw that was delivered with my machine.  I installed the screw and nut you sent me from the parts machine and WOW 210% better.  I can't feel any lash in the cross slide now.  Good call on your part for sending it to me, I didn't think I needed it.  THANKS!!!


----------



## historicalarms (Nov 12, 2019)

I have bought Acme thread ready rod at a Bolt Supply House in Red Deer so I'm sure you can find some in Cowtown. the nuts are available as well but they are steel (can probably be jury-rigged to work as well) Your brass might hopfully be in good enough shape to re-use with a new chunk of ready rod tho.


----------



## historicalarms (Nov 12, 2019)

Looks like you got fixed up while I was typing. is your brass cut crossways thru the threads? the one on my lathe is and there is a set screw that pulls the threads together a smidge so that a small bit of backlash can be adjusted out of it.


----------



## Brent H (Nov 12, 2019)

Good work Craig!
That will help a lot.  Make sure now that your parting tool is adjusted spot on centre or just a hair high as buddy in the  video suggests to keep the tool from pulling in.  

is your cross feed screw 8 tpi x 9/16 left hand?   I think it was ?


----------



## Dabbler (Nov 12, 2019)

One word of caution when parting, and I forgot to mention it at the outset.  your tool should be set about .001 or a 'little' more ABOVE the centre line.  This is exactly the same problem as the 29.5 degree angle for threading - it is insurance.  If you are at the centre line or below, the tool will pull into the work - no matter how good your screw is.  you want the tool to always be pushed away from the work.

I went from having no success at all at parting to clean, quiet parting with just this one change.

[edit - we posted at the same time!]


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 12, 2019)

Dabbler was bang on when he said give the whole top end a good push pull to see what's what in terms of movement.  I had no idea the slide was that loose.

Cross feed nut is not split, so no means of adjustment.

Cross feed screw appears to be 10 tpi LH 0.497"


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 12, 2019)

This is the replacement blade I got from BB.






That tip back rake is going lower the tip some.  I may have to modify my tool post to allow for adjustment.






Very interesting end profile.  It's tapered in 2 dimensions.


----------



## Brent H (Nov 12, 2019)

Hey Craig, 

That style blade is designed to fit into a parting tool holder that is also tapered or dovetailed to that profile.  That can be an issue for you if your holder is designed to hold just a flat blade.  I ordered a blade and it came like that and I ground off the angles to make it flat and fit my blade holder more properly.  Ticked me off as the taper/angle was not mentioned.   Lots of things like that to watch out for.


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 12, 2019)

Brent H said:


> Hey Craig,
> 
> That style blade is designed to fit into a parting tool holder that is also tapered or dovetailed to that profile.  That can be an issue for you if your holder is designed to hold just a flat blade.  I ordered a blade and it came like that and I ground off the angles to make it flat and fit my blade holder more properly.  Ticked me off as the taper/angle was not mentioned.   Lots of things like that to watch out for.



The blade came with the holder as a set and the holder has some peculiar angles to it.  I can only assume it's all correct.  It worked pretty well on my mini.


----------



## Brent H (Nov 12, 2019)

roger that!

Mine are all flat


----------



## PeterT (Nov 12, 2019)

That's the classic style that has relief on one side only & supposedly finishes the part on the zero clearance side. The top slop & point is intended to break through slightly ahead so the part comes off with little to no burr. But unless you have a rigid setup, they also can gave a tendency to drift & usually always that's bad news. I don't find that HSS finishes the face all that well unless all the planets align. I usually part with the expectation that I'm going to finish that face. The T style has side relief on both sides, the top edge of the T does all the cutting. I typically grind them square looking down at the top (neutral) so the chip curls straight back & it has the least propensity to wander left or right into the cut. The rake angle is a function of material, similar to regular cutting geometry.


----------



## PeterT (Nov 12, 2019)

_That tip back rake is going lower the tip some. I may have to modify my tool post to allow for adjustment._

That's where the adjustable dovetail toolposts are worth it. You preserve the rigidity of your blade clamping but just need to tweak the height up or down with the adjusting wheel. Adding shims takes fiddling & rarely ends up being as rigid. Don't assume the nominal blade height will work out the same as your previous setup, repeat the setup procedure. Remember its the point of the tool should be on center of the stock, the 9-o'clock position or using the vertical ruler method. Every time you regrind / extend / retract... the blade you need to reconfirm horizontal position & squareness. At least start there, you may find very slight variations improve the cut as Dabbler says.


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 12, 2019)

Things are going much much better now.


----------



## PeterT (Nov 12, 2019)

Excellent. Parting brings the worst out in a lathe and the operator so your perseverance paid off. Good lead screw backlash, appropriate dovetail fit & overall rigidity are key ingredients for turning.


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 14, 2019)

Finished up my Tool Post yesterday.






I was originally thinking 2 tool, but the milling was going so smoothly I went 4 tool.  I'm loving 2 flute end mills. They seem to give me less grief that 4 flute for some reason.  Ya, in hind sight now, I should have position the screws differently.






With the tool post finished I tried some threading.  1/2" 13TPI.  I ran the machine at 180 RPM not wanting to crash the saddle, and that was more than quick enough for me.  Can't picture running at recommended cutting speed, it would have traversed in the blink of an eye LOL.  For depth, I took her down 0.01 per pass until the nut just started to fit and then 0.005 until she threaded on.  This was my second attempt at threading ever.  It went well, I re-entered the thread bang on every pass.  Not having to fool with change gears is going to make threading a much more appealing proposition.


----------



## Brent H (Nov 14, 2019)

Right on Craig!!!!!

Very happy for you that your lathe is working out!!  

indeed, threading is one of the exciting things on a lathe - always leave enough bail out space


----------



## YYCHM (Dec 9, 2019)

So with all the grief I was having parting off, I decided to make a monolithic tool post replacement for the compound rest.






At 3" in dia I may have to thin it down some should I find space is tight.  Should be rigid enough I would think.






In order to build the replacement post I had to replicate the mounting boss that is on the compound rest.






I managed to nail the replication pretty darn close.  She fits nice and tight.






I'm wondering if this recess on the compound mounting surface is significant.  Thoughts?


----------



## Brent H (Dec 9, 2019)

Hey Craig,
There seems to be a bit of a difference in the way your compound is set up.  I have the donor parts on the measuring table and will send pics soonest.


----------



## Hruul (Dec 10, 2019)

Hello Craig,

That looks like my compound rest as well.  I do not recall if there is a recess around the centre on mine though.


----------



## DPittman (Dec 10, 2019)

YYCHobbyMachinist said:


> So with all the grief I was having parting off, I decided to make a monolithic tool post replacement for the compound rest.
> 
> View attachment 6819
> 
> ...


To hold grease/oil??


----------



## Brent H (Dec 10, 2019)

Hi Craig,

the parts are the same as the one I have here.  I would suggest that the relief is there to make sure the swivel will sit flat and properly rotate.


----------



## RobinHood (Dec 10, 2019)

I believe the recess is to improve the stability of your compound and move the load of the cutting forces out from the center to reduce the “rocking” tendency.





Above is a sketch of your assembly (I am doing this from memory). You have two brass wedges that come in from the side that engage on the tapered boss. They pull it into the bore and “lock” the compound at the set angle to the cross slide.

schematic A) shows the forces without the recess (the bending is greatly exaggerated). Note where the opposing resulting force acts: very close to the applied force and the moment arm is very short.

schematic B) shows the forces with the recess: the moment arm is much longer.

Imagine your tool sitting on top of the compound at some distance from the center. You can appreciate that  arrangement A) is way less stable than arrangement B)

In the picture above, bottom right, you can see a grinding wheel hub nut. It has a very wide recess to move the clamping force 1 3/8” out from the center to support an 8” grinding wheel. It also uses a washer (shown to the left of it) to further distribute the force and help stabilize the wheel.

Same principle in your compound case.

I would machine the recess in your solid block. It would make things even better for not much more work on an already very good improvement.


----------



## YYCHM (Dec 10, 2019)

It have crossed my mind that perhaps the recess was there to move the support stresses away from the boss and mounting hole.  I'll be adding it to my tool post.


----------



## YYCHM (Dec 11, 2019)

Recess added.


----------



## YYCHM (Dec 14, 2019)

Final configuration of my monolithic compound replacement tool post.











I can now re-deploy the original tool post that came with my lathe when it was in it's riser configuration.


----------



## YYCHM (Jan 2, 2020)

Does this sound right to you?  I've always considered "forward" meaning towards the spindle.  Do you agree?

On my Utilathe with the lead screw reverse lever set in one position, the power carriage and cross feed move in opposing directions?  ie engaging the carriage power feed moves the saddle towards the spindle yet engaging the cross feed moves the tool post away from the spindle.  Changing the lead screw reversing lever position just swaps the behavior.

Is this behavior correct?  Is something installed backwards?


----------



## historicalarms (Jan 3, 2020)

My Tiwaneses 1340 works exactly the same. Probably a gear positioning issue that the first inventor of internal power cross feed saddle mechanismns overcame and everybody else can't come up with a more simple cost effective method so they just fallow suit.


----------



## RobinHood (Jan 3, 2020)

YYCHobbyMachinist said:


> Is this behavior correct? Is something installed backwards?



I can’t remember 100%, but I think my 9” Utilathe was like that.

My guess it has to do with space availability in the apron. In order to have the cross slide feed in toward the center, you would need another gear to change the direction.

Both the SM 1120 and the SM 1340 (and the Colchester) traverse in while feeding toward the headstock; they have much larger aprons compared to the 9” Utilathe though.


----------



## Dabbler (Jan 3, 2020)

YYC that sounds right.  It is the same with my 12X37...


----------



## Brent H (Jan 3, 2020)

The 1020 also feeds in for power cross feed and the apron advances towards the head stock when in forward mode.  The 9 inch uses its lead screw as the feed drive as well and the lead screw has a longitudinal key way that turns a worm drive on the back of the apron just before the half nuts.  This worm drive  (keyed to the lead screw) rotates the gears in the apron that advance the apron or the cross feed.  I think there is just the feed clutch mechanism gears between the cross feed gear and the worm drive where there are two more gears involved in the longitudinal feed.


----------



## PeterT (Jan 3, 2020)

I think it varies by lathe. On my 14x40, the carriage traverses R>L with shifter UP+LEFT in normal forward spindle direction. If I move shifter DOWN+RIGHT, the crossfeed engages from operator to rear of lathe direction.  I also have a knob on the headstock that switches carriage direction from R>L and L>R so the above is reversed. And another knob that switches from powerfeed to threading engagement. So the combination of knobs & shifter allows pretty much any permutation. But when I was fiddling around on another 14x40, the default directions & controls were slightly different. If I ever switch lathes I will have to get electroshock therapy to cleanse my brain from hardwired habits.


----------



## YYCHM (Jan 7, 2020)

Today's project was a chuck key to replace the bent key that came with my lathe. 

How do you bend something like that???  The flats are 0.4" wide!  Would need access to a press to straighten if it can be straightened at all.

Was a fun afternoon of sawing, turning, milling, drilling and tapping.


----------



## Johnwa (Jan 7, 2020)

By having it in the chuck when you hit start!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## PeterT (Jan 8, 2020)

Yup, what John said. Which is just one Darwin move better than having it launch it out of the chuck on startup... through the wall, your skull... etc.
That's why new keys typically have a spring on them as a physical feedback, they cant stay in. I hate them myself & remove them. But we have to play safe with our toys.


----------



## PeterT (Jan 8, 2020)

When I made some keys I threaded the end of the boss so I could locate the tommy bar mid way & it stays put. But I also like the sliding feature. You can still position mid way but also extend the handle for leverage or work around obstructions. I'm thinking of machining a groove in the ends for a O-ring so the bar cant drop out, but easy to remove etc


----------



## YYCHM (Jan 8, 2020)

The tommy bar on my key is held in place with a hex head grub screw.  Your 0-Ring idea has given me an idea that might resolve an issue I have with vise tommy bars on my mini-mill...….  Thanks!


----------



## YYCHM (Jan 11, 2020)

The manual for my lathe states:

Spindle nose taper No. 3M
Spindle center        No. 2M

What does that mean?  What taper should I get for my spindle?


----------



## Dabbler (Jan 12, 2020)

Your spindle is a Morse Taper #3.  Your tailstock seems to be a Morse Taper #2.


----------



## YYCHM (Jan 12, 2020)

My Amazon ordered 2.5X45 tap and drill bit arrived (needed to mound the carbide insert tool) and with a few days off I finally got a chance to finish and try my ball turning attachment.






The attachment replaces the compound rest and mounts on the x-slide via this arrangement






The base is on the left and the turret (for lack of a better word) is on the right.  Tool post is in the middle. 3/8" carriage bolt for a handle.  The base and turret were made from 3" steel round stock I had left from making my monolithic tool post.






The interface between the base and turret is pretty simple.  I need to remember to grease it when I re-assemble.






My tool post is only 0.75" high so here I had to turn down a piece of 1.5" aluminium round stock to 1.25".
The round stock was drilled and tapped for 3/8" and mounted on a bolt stub.






First go produced a bit of an egg, not real bad but an egg never the less.  Finish is terrible.  I think that carbide inserts is just a little too pointy for aluminium?  The stick out on the 3/8" bolt stub probably didn't help matters either.






I managed to make her a little more round by adjusting the tool post.

I'm pretty please with how this project turned out.  I should replace the handle with something more eloquent and try turning some steel next.

Cheers


----------



## PeterT (Jan 12, 2020)

Round shiny balls, here we come! LOL

I cant quite see how your handle is orientated but just make sure - you don't want to be rotating in close proximity to chuck jaws. So go through the motion range before commencing cutting. Even so, I can see where the rotation might be progressively increasing a bit with each pass as the ball forms more completely on the head stock side & this may vary by diameter & chuck stickout.


----------



## YYCHM (Jan 13, 2020)

How much head stock gear back lash is considered acceptable?  I've noticed some back lash between the pulley shaft and main spindle when in high range.  It's there, I can feel it and I can see it occurring between the spindle gear and the a gear on the pinion shaft.  How does one measure it?  I don't perceive any back lash in low range.

Thanks.


----------



## Brent H (Jan 13, 2020)

Well, there will always be some backlash in gearing for clearance to run and all that fun stuff.  Your Lathe has basically two sets of gear ranges - the high range and low speed range and then pulley changes to get different speeds within the high or low selection.   Probably, there will be more wear in the range the lathe was/is mostly used in.  The "more wear" will show as an increase in  backlash,  That being said, once the lathe is running and the gears are meshing wear will typically appear as noise.  hard to say what would be the noise level of a "new" machine.


----------



## Dabbler (Jan 14, 2020)

Backlash isn't a factor in the gear train, as long as you are aligned properly, and there is not ongoing wear of the gears.  Even in the QCGB, the threads and feeds are not affected by backlash concerns.


----------



## Marc Moreau (Jan 16, 2020)

Brent H said:


> Those are not the ones I shipped are they?   Hopefully not - the combo I sent you should be better ?


Thank you nice video good information


----------



## YYCHM (Jan 20, 2020)

Knocked off another to-do list item.






Crafted an arbour to mount my PA $13.03 degree wheel.






That diagonal slice through the spindle mounting shaft sure does a nice job of locking the arbour in the spindle.


----------



## YYCHM (Jan 22, 2020)

Todays project was to install the spring tensioned motor mount that came on the parts machine BrentH and I scored.






The mount that came with my machine didn't have the tensioner depicted here and relied on the motor weight to tension the v-belt.  I've noticed that the motor bounces a little when stopping my big 4 jaw chuck so I thought the tensioner might prevent that.  It helps but hasn't eliminated the bounce.  Note that pipe in the chip tray.  I now have to use that as a snipe in order to lift the motor for belt position changes.






Dismounting and mounting the motor from the front with the head stock in place wasn't fun at all.  In the end I got her done with minimal cursing.






While I was at it, I re-positioned the ESD switch to the front of the lathe per johnwa's suggestion.  It was previously mounted above the head stock beside the fwd/rev switch and required reaching over the machine to hit it.  Thanks for pointing that safety flaw out John.


----------



## YotaBota (Jan 22, 2020)

Ref the belt tensioner - mine must be home made as well, it works okay but it just looks a bit rough for a factory build. The front slot holds the motor in tension and the rear slots holds motor up keeping the tension off the belt to change speeds. A bonus here is I can use the rear slot to take the tension off the belt when I'm done for the day (week,,,month).


----------



## YYCHM (Jan 22, 2020)

YotaBota said:


> Ref the belt tensioner - mine must be home made as well, it works okay but it just looks a bit rough for a factory build. The front slot holds the motor in tension and the rear slots holds motor up keeping the tension off the belt to change speeds. A bonus here is I can use the rear slot to take the tension off the belt when I'm done for the day (week,,,month).



You have the exact same arrangement my machine came with even the elongated handle (which I thought was home made).  I liked being able to prop the motor up, however, the range of motion never allowed the tension notch to be used.  Do you have the belt/gear cover for your machine?  I had to switch to the short handle in order to close the belt/gear cover.


----------



## YotaBota (Jan 22, 2020)

I still have the belt guard in place, with belt tensioned the guard closes. When I'm done for the day I just take the belt off and let the motor down so the guard will close and not hit the handle.
The ball maker is something else on my roundtoit list, yours looks good.


----------



## YYCHM (Jan 22, 2020)

My reverse lockout solution LOL.


----------



## YYCHM (Jan 22, 2020)

UH-OH...…. Looks like my tail stock spindle is toast






Here is a capture of the MT2 bore, it's in rough shape.  I pulled all sorts of metal fragments out of there when I cleaned her up.

No wonder my tail stock chucks were wandering all over the place, hard to remove and the arbours scored.

Brent, do you think your MT2 reamer can save this?

Craig


----------



## Dabbler (Jan 22, 2020)

It might need boring first.  It will save the reamer from having to cut too much.


----------



## Brent H (Jan 22, 2020)

Sounds like a call from the doctor is in order.  I will let you know and arrange an appointment time.


----------



## YotaBota (Jan 22, 2020)

Amazon has coarse/fine reamer sets for $12 and up. Not to cut in on the doctors house call out fee but, you could always get the set and then rent them out.


----------



## Brent H (Jan 22, 2020)




----------



## historicalarms (Jan 23, 2020)

This really does fall under a "farmers fix" definition but I did read it somewhere in either a Brownells gunsmithing kinks book or one of the Guy Letard shop story books.

    a fellow had the same chewed up internal morse taper tailstock as your appears to be Craig. He claimed that he mixed up a batch of "Liquid Steel" epoxy and gooped up the tailstock with it then coated a new morse taper stub with release agent and inserted it snugly into the tailstock, let it set for the specified time and then just tapped it out with a long bar .

    I guess it worked good enough to garner a 'write-up" but I would wonder how straight the new taper is compared to the axis of the machine as it kind of uses the old chewed up seat as a "line-up".  He might have just got lucky with a "one-off" but you might also...your only out a small tube of liquid steel and if it doesn't work it can be just bored out with the reamer you need to buy if it doesn't work.


----------



## historicalarms (Jan 23, 2020)

Just was finishing my morning coffee and started to think about the above...ya I know its dangerous for a hobby machinist & a farmer to think with the same mind...but anyhow I hit the "mix" button and this turd fell out of the "finished" chute.

    To circumvent a bit of the "alignment" issues I thought it would be a good idea to install a shaft with a "known center" cut in the end in the headstock chuck...now after the goop-up of the socket I would use a dead center as a stub and inset it into the socket. Now, firmly, run that dead center point up into the shaft center in the chuck and let it sit that way while the epoxy set up...this should align the new socket perfectly with the lathe axis....in theory anyways...I think it would be an "in a pinch" fix for a "low horsepower" machine such as we use.


----------



## Dabbler (Jan 23, 2020)

woah!  the epoxy thing should only be a VERY last resort, just prior to making your own drawtube for the tailstock!
--it is _impossible _to align the newly minted hole to anything like accurately in line to the bore.

With that much material to take out, just reaming it won't make the hole concentric or aligned.  it has to be removed, chucked up in a 4-jaw, accurately bored then reamed.

The gun guys have somehow promulgated the myth that a reamer is a cutting tool.  (ref: via chamber reamers).  this has never been true - but some guy guys don't mind working with dull tools and have misaligned chambers.  Even a chamber should be bored first then finish reamed.

Even coarse/fine reamers are finish tools.  You cannot properly cut the hole to be true with them. As a temporary fix while making a new drawtube, yes it will be sort of close, but never to tenths.


----------



## Johnwa (Jan 23, 2020)

I have a reamer if you want to try it. The existing socket should be aligned reasonably well even with the scoring. The reamer should follow it fairly well.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## YYCHM (Jan 23, 2020)

Johnwa said:


> I have a reamer if you want to try it. The existing socket should be aligned reasonably well even with the scoring. The reamer should follow it fairly well.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk



Hey John, I'll take you up on that offer thanks.  PM sent.

Craig


----------



## YotaBota (Jan 23, 2020)

I guess it all depends on how close to perfect you need/want to be. You might get away with chucking the quill and mounting a reamer in a boring bar holder and then be slow with lots of lube. The Y and Z axis would need to be sooooooooo close to perfect to have it work well. And if the homespun method doesn't work there's always the machine shop.


----------



## Tom Kitta (Jan 23, 2020)

https://www.americanmachinist.com/m...l-applications-chapter-11-reaming-and-tapping

The problem is abuse - i.e. cutting too much with a reamer - "Therefore, reamers should not be used for heavy stock removal.". However, cutting too little with a reamer may lead to rubbing which is also bad - reamer has to cut! Note that you cannot be slow - recommendation is for 200 - 300% feed of drilling but not more otherwise you risk rubbing. 

Also I wonder whatever tail-stock tube would be hardened metal - I would check first.


----------



## Brent H (Jan 23, 2020)

Hey YYC - I made a new tailstock spindle for my lathe.  It was not that bad of a job.  It takes a but of time and such but not impossible.
I can check my old spindle and see what material it was - it might be cast iron.  I made the new one out of 4140 - might be overkill.  
machined it came out to less than 0.0001 over the 7” length  and I drilled and tapered for the #2 morse and reamed the final clean up.  The left hand acme thread - well - you can thread it like I did or you can machine an insert out of brass or steel or you can chop off your old spindle thread part, machine it and pressfit it into the new spindle.  

I was just checking my setup today and I am zero across 10” of  a test bar, so that is good.   Line boring your tailstock —- longer topic


----------



## historicalarms (Jan 23, 2020)

Well Craig you opened up a big box of worms with this one hey  LOL

   I do mostly agree with Dabbler on the reamer thing but will add that a million usable chambers are plain cut with chamber reamers for every one that is first bored to a starting stage (other than the rifling boring done on every blank). Sometimes a chambered barrel will show up that is beyond use (reamer chatter marks or an egg shaped, oblong chamber opening is most common)  but for the most part comercial production chambering is "usable" by everyone other than the most discernible shooter trying to excel in a type F competition . 

   I have been lucky in all my chambering, in 25 or more chambers cut I haven't had a failure or even a slight issue show up. I have cut both stainless & 4140 C.M. barrel steel and have use both a "floating reamer holder" & a solid set-up...I like the solid better but both work satisfactory. My theory is that the reamer pilot & it's fit to the bore has as much to do with success as anything. I order any reamers I need with a "live pilot" that is easily changed to on that fits a particular barrel "perfectly"... not an easy loose fit nor a tight fit...it cant bind at all nor can it allow any movement that will turn into a chatter.  It also becomes very plain very quickly that quick ins and outs of the reamer for cleaning is essential (don't forget to swab the bore every cleaning episode as well).

    Back to Craig's repair with Johns reamer. I'm not sure how I would attack this, both ways I can come up with will have potential for failure...even more-so than my proposed "farmer fix" LOL.

    Does the reamer have a pilot of any sort at the small dia. ? My first thought was to chuck the reamer up in a 4 jaw and then feed the tailstock barrel into it using its own drawbar but I can visualize enough radial cut pressure to cause the fed barrel to flex a bit...this will result in an oblong chamber cut I think .

    The other option I thought of would be to chuck the tailstock barrel in a 4 jaw and mount the reamer in a floating set-up mounted to the cross-slide. This would absolutely require a pilot of some sort at the small end of the reamer otherwise chatter at either end would ruin the tailstock barrel. 

   A solid reamer set-up could be fashioned on the cross slide as well but centering & angles would have to be perfect in every direction or again a miss-shaped hole will result. 

    That Farmer fix might not be the most logical in most minds but I have seen some very expensive equipment put back into production for the rest of the season with some very unorthodox "repairs".


----------



## YYCHM (Jan 23, 2020)

Tom Kitta said:


> Also I wonder whatever tail-stock tube would be hardened metal - I would check first.



My file test indicates that it isn't hardened.

What's a roughing reamer for as compared to a fine reamer?  I see they sell them as sets.


----------



## YYCHM (Jan 23, 2020)

I'll throw this out there.....

Could attempting to ream make it worse than it already is?


----------



## YotaBota (Jan 23, 2020)

I can't see you making it worse but that's just an opinion, hopefully one of the ninja's reamer experts can add more clarity to this.


----------



## Dabbler (Jan 24, 2020)

If you are deeply cutting, as in this case, the taper will not be in alignment with the bore.  As I said before, it has to be removed, cleaned up by boring, and the last .002 to .005 taken with a reamer.  The ONLY way to ensure concentricity and alignment.


----------



## Johnwa (Jan 24, 2020)

What if we were to mount the reamer in the spindle with a collet and the advance the quill to ream?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Dabbler (Jan 24, 2020)

The problem is that the reamer will follow the hole's least resistance.  The damage certainly isn't symmetric, and the large flakes that will come off will tend to divert the reamer.  It doesn't take much to get it off center (or worse ream an oblong hole - I speak from experience here).  

It is surprisingly easy to chuck it in a 4 jaw chuck, set up the taper, and take a skim cut with a boring bar.  This will take out all the random scratches and potentially hard spots from compressing the chips into the bore, and make reaming the way you suggest a dream.

Another tip:  when you chuck the reamer  and ream, don't do it under power!  doing it by hand is far more controlled, and you can 'feel' the reamer work.  Don't take more than 2 turns before removing, cleaning the reamer and bore, and then continuing...  That way your reamer will last for the next time you need it.

I have a MT3 reamer that has restored 5 or 6 tailstocks, and it is still very sharp.

BTW, if your boring is off a fraction of a degree, it doesn't matter,  the reamer will restore the correct angle.  If you are off, say a half degree on a MT3, it is out very little over the length, which is easily corrected by the reamer.  The .020 - .030 depth of scratches is far too much to ream alone.


----------



## Brent H (Jan 24, 2020)

Hey Craig,

here is what is left :

i think you wanted the main spindle?





What ever Craig doesn’t want is up for sale.  The little gear for the apron drive handle is there but the spindle is bent.  Would take a bit to get it working.


----------



## YotaBota (Jan 24, 2020)

What is the main spindle bearing like? If no one "needs" the spindle and the bearing is good I'll could relieve you of that as well.


----------



## YYCHM (Jan 25, 2020)

Dabbler said:


> If you are deeply cutting, as in this case, the taper will not be in alignment with the bore.  As I said before, it has to be removed, cleaned up by boring, and the last .002 to .005 taken with a reamer.  The ONLY way to ensure concentricity and alignment.



With this in mind I setup to try boring which is something I have never done before...






This is not good  A very light pass made a big mess of the bore on my test piece.

What's going on here?


----------



## Johnwa (Jan 25, 2020)

I’m guessing that your tool is rubbing. There doesn’t look to be a lot of clearance. Personally I wouldn’t use carbide.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## YotaBota (Jan 25, 2020)

I ran into the same thing with a KMS boring bar. From the tip of the tool downward it needs to ground so the bottom of the tool doesn't hit the inside arc of the bore. I was having the same trouble trying to do an inside thread until I notice the the bottom of the bar hitting the inside of the bore. It took quite a bit of grinding but I got it done.


----------



## Johnwa (Jan 25, 2020)

Craig
what is the OD and length of your tailstock quill.  Also what size of key way?


----------



## YYCHM (Jan 25, 2020)

Johnwa said:


> Craig
> what is the OD and length of your tailstock quill.  Also what size of key way?



OD              1.179"
Len             6.0"
Key Way     0.125"

Craig


----------



## Johnwa (Jan 25, 2020)

Darn, I have a spare Southbend quill but it’s 1.065x5 ¼” key way.

I also have this at 0.94”OD with an unused 2Mt socket in the end.
It could possibly be sleeved up to 1.18” but you would have to improve your boring significantly for it to work.  . I think a deeper key would be needed.


----------



## RobinHood (Jan 25, 2020)

Craig, I agree with @Johnwa , your tool is probably rubbing. You could try to change the tool angle to give you more clearance. Also, raising it might work.

if you want, we can try to repair it using my SM1340. Your TS quill should fit nicely into the 4-jaw and we can first bore it as @Dabbler suggested (and you are trying) and then we can ream it with the reamer you have.


----------



## YYCHM (Jan 25, 2020)

RobinHood said:


> Craig, I agree with @Johnwa , your tool is probably rubbing. You could try to change the tool angle to give you more clearance. Also, raising it might work.
> 
> if you want, we can try to repair it using my SM1340. Your TS quill should fit nicely into the 4-jaw and we can first bore it as @Dabbler suggested (and you are trying) and then we can ream it with the reamer you have.



Thanks Rudy, I'll contact you once I have a reamer in hand.

In the mean time, I'll keep poking at this boring challenge. Raising the tool helped but not to the point of being acceptable.  What kind of boring bar do you use?

Craig


----------



## RobinHood (Jan 25, 2020)

I just have cheap cemented carbide and shop made HSS ones. The carbide ones I did regrinding the clearance angles much like @YotaBota did on his. Much better result.

here are some (l to r: shop made hss, bar with hss tool, cemented carbide set - angles reground)


----------



## Johnwa (Jan 25, 2020)

For mild steel, aluminum and brass I use one like this
https://www.busybeetools.com/products/boring-bar-d-e-5-8-sq.html
mine uses 1/4” HSS bits.

For harder stuff one like this
https://www.busybeetools.com/products/boring-bar-indexable-glanze-1-2in-d.html
(I think I got mine off amazon)


----------



## PeterT (Jan 25, 2020)

I'm glad you said that John. 62$ at Busy Bee vs. 17$CDN equivalent on Ali (with the faster delivery). I've seen them even cheaper elsewhere but I've bought a few things from this Leader store & they seem to be pretty consistent. It pays to check around. Plus these suppliers offer a wider range of shank sizes & Left/Right, different inserts/configurations...  
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/32270202520.html?spm=2114.12010612.8148356.49.69d249f2IFxdun


----------



## Dabbler (Jan 25, 2020)

More tips for boring:  reduce stick out as much as possible while you are learning.  Use the largest diameter boring bar that will fit into the bore to reduce flex in the bar.  For practice cuts, try less than a 2" stick out, to minimize variables.  The tool should have, if possible neutral rake -  boy this one got me for a while when I was learning.  I tried to set the point at the center line with a positive rake and it was a disaster!  Positive rake pulls in the point, which leads to vibration.  Negative rake can vibrate, but to a lesser extent.

One more thing: don't worry about scratches or bad surface finish.  The reamer will polish it up well enough.  If you have galling or ridges, you can clean them up with a 1/3 plug, cut to a MT, and covered with 300 or 600 wet and dry.  REMEMBER the bore is for straightness, the actual taper (or .002-.004 of it) will be cut by the reamer.

To make the 1/3 plug you cut your MT in wood, and check for fit. cut it in half.  sand off remainder so it is around 30=40% of the circle.  Now use it as a hone to take out the ridges, or the galls.  Galls will spoil the reamer finish if left in....


----------



## YYCHM (Jan 25, 2020)

Chuck taper damage.  On the left is the 3/8" that came with my lathe.  On the right is the 1/2" I purchased from BB.
The 1/2" was damaged first usage, so the tail stock spindle flaw was already there.

The spindle damage aligns with the recessed area of the original chuck?

So.... what caused this in the first place?  Swarth in the spindle taper?

Should I trash these tapers?


----------



## RobinHood (Jan 26, 2020)

The damage to your chuck tapers was most likely due to the fact that they were not seated properly in the quill because it in turn has internal damage.
The quill in your TS does not have a flat for the anti-rotation tang of the taper to engage in when fully seated. It relies entirely on the self-locking property of the MT2 itself. So if in the past, there was swarf in the bore and the taper tooling inserted on top of it, the taper did not lock properly. When the rotational forces were large enough, the tools would spin and gall the softer of the two materials (it seems that was the bore). It’s like when a drill bit starts turning in a chuck that was not tight enough: the drill shank galls and rolls up a burr.

i would just stone your drill chuck shanks carefully to take all the burrs off and use them in the refreshed quill.

When you use taper tooling that does not have a draw bar, give it a little tap with a soft mallet to seat them properly. This ensures that they lock.


----------



## Johnwa (Jan 26, 2020)

I seem to recall reading somewhere that the holding power of a 2MT was only adequate for drills up to about ¾”. Above that you need the driving tang or some alternate method to keep it from slipping.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## YYCHM (Jan 26, 2020)

YotaBota said:


> I still have the belt guard in place, with belt tensioned the guard closes. When I'm done for the day I just take the belt off and let the motor down so the guard will close and not hit the handle.



Found an image of my original motor mount.






I'm thinking the handle had a extension added (dark area)?  As pictured it's in it's relaxed state, so no way the cover would close.  Also, the tensioned slot could never be achieved.






I had to slot out the mounting holes an 1/8" on the tensioning bracket to make it fit on my bed, another discrepancy.


----------



## YotaBota (Jan 27, 2020)

The handle does look modified, it may have added leverage during a belt change since the motor can be a bit heavy. 
When I put the new motor on mine I left the motor mount bolts loose, put the belt on, put the handle in the tensioned slot then tightened the bolts. Leaving the bolts loose let the motor find a spot that set the handle in the slot and still had tension to run the spindle. IIRC moving the motor up on the mount moved the handle toward the front of the machine.


----------



## Brent H (Jan 28, 2020)

Craig,

I have the 4140 piece I machined a couple thou too small for my lathe tailstock.   It needs the threads for the handle in the back and you would need to size it diameter wise.  Has the #2 morse taper.    What are the threads required?  1/2” LH ACME or 9/16?


----------



## YYCHM (Jan 28, 2020)

Brent H said:


> Craig,
> 
> I have the 4140 piece I machined a couple thou too small for my lathe tailstock.   It needs the threads for the handle in the back and you would need to size it diameter wise.  Has the #2 morse taper.    What are the threads required?  1/2” LH ACME or 9/16?








SPINDLE:

OD              1.179"
Len             6.0"
Key Way     0.125"

SCREW:

1/2” LH ACME  (Assuming ACME implies a fixed pitch)


----------



## Brent H (Jan 28, 2020)

Hey Craig,

what are the grooves running around your spindle for?

ACME is a trapezoidal type thread (like a square thread but at 29°).  

is it 1/2 and 10 threads per inch or 8?   

What you can do is make a threaded insert with your good Acme threads - I can send you drawings.  - I will machine the piece I have to length for you - if you have the exact diameter I can machine the OD as well.  

1/2 acme is a bugger to thread on the lathe as it is not much bore diameter to get a boring bar into.  They sell taps but they can be costly.  

easy way is to  press fit your current threads into the new spindle - Abom79 makes a new acme treaded tailstock spindle and makes a brass insert - have a gander on youtube.


----------



## YYCHM (Jan 28, 2020)

Brent H said:


> Hey Craig,
> 
> what are the grooves running around your spindle for?
> 
> ...



10 TPI.  Haven't a clue what the grooves are for (there is a hole drilled through the second groove to the screw).  Oil reservoir for the gits oiler perhaps?


----------



## Brent H (Jan 29, 2020)

This could be a plan:





I would send you the spindle part - you would need to add the 1/4 longitudinal groove and the oil hole (check out my post for pics of the one I made)


----------



## YotaBota (Jan 29, 2020)

I bought a 1/2x10tpi LH and a 3/8x10tpi RH from MPI Tools and it worked out to just under $65 usd to my door. I made a new cross slide nut and it worked out well considering I've seen the taps for $100 usd and more just for one tap. 
https://mpitools.com/product-category/acme_taps/


----------



## Brent H (Jan 29, 2020)

Yotabota, 

That is good to know.  9/16 is about the limit to internal thread acme and it takes prep.  I had success running the chuck backwards onto the tool bit verses running forward and feeding away from the chuck.  

With a tap you could make the threaded insert out of brass or bronze as was done on Abom79's video (he internal threaded though)


----------



## Hruul (Jan 29, 2020)

Thanks Yotabota!  Going to have to look into ordering some of these.  I think the cross slide nut on my lathe is getting worn.


----------



## Johnwa (Jan 29, 2020)

Here’s a picture of the spare quill that I have.  It has a threaded bronze insert held in with a roll pin.  It looks like the roll pin was put in, bored out and then a tap was run through.  It seems like a hard way to do it, but I can see where the roll pin has a partial thread cut in it.
I’ve seen similar attachments but with the roll pin far enough off center to not interfere with the threads.


----------



## YYCHM (Jan 29, 2020)

Not quite ready to trash the scored spindle in order to obtain an ACME thread insert yet.






But look what happens to be the right thread.  That's the cross slide nut.  Also, I'm seeing ACME thread couplers are available.  One of those could be turned round to make an insert.


----------



## historicalarms (Jan 30, 2020)

I have bought Acme 1" threaded rod & nuts (in-stock, not a special order thing) at a bolt supply store in Red Deer and they had a  rack of smaller sizes as well, there should be a fastener place in cowtown somewhere that carries that stuff.


----------



## Brent H (Jan 30, 2020)

Hey YYC. Are you dead sure on the diameter of the spindle?  I can turn it to exact as I can get and then ship it out to you. If I blow it, well, then there is no wasted shipping - LOL


----------



## YYCHM (Jan 30, 2020)

Brent H said:


> Hey YYC. Are you dead sure on the diameter of the spindle?  I can turn it to exact as I can get and then ship it out to you. If I blow it, well, then there is no wasted shipping - LOL



OD  is 1.179"

The alignment slot is 0.125" wide and 0.125" deep.

Craig


----------



## YotaBota (Jan 30, 2020)

Just for comparison, mine at the 2" mark is 1.181.


----------



## Brent H (Jan 30, 2020)

Personal question YYC - Does your shaft have any wiggle when you put it about half way into the bore of the tail stock?  LOL

like can I shoot for 1.180” ?


----------



## YYCHM (Jan 30, 2020)

Yup...…. Make it 1.180" please.


----------



## YYCHM (Jan 30, 2020)

Well...… I figured out why the motor is bouncing






This pulley is really loose on the motor shaft.  Tightening down the lock screw cants the pully and pulls it eccentric.
It's almost as if the bore on the pulley is tapered?  It fits on the shaft one way but not the other.






The motor shaft is a little chewed up but appears to be 5/8".

I was a little perplexed by the motor bounce.  With the belt removed is runs real smooth.  Install the belt and the motor would bounce.  Was really noticeable in low gear.

With luck the pulley Brent has sent me will fit the motor shaft better other wise I'll have to figure  out how to bush the slop out.


----------



## Brent H (Jan 30, 2020)

I believe you might be a happy man - or at least a man with a couple pulleys 

the one pulley I put the reamer through and it was 5/8 (the 4 step).  The 3 step one was on the lathe and is sleeved 

package should be there by Wednesday - hopefully Monday!


----------



## PeterT (Jan 30, 2020)

I have a belt tension hinge plate on my lathe motor & if I leave it loose so the weight of the motor holds tension, it starts doing some happy dance harmonics & I see it in the cut finish. I think the way its supposed to work (or at least the conclusion I've come to on my lathe) is to get the correct belt tension but also fix the motor position so its secure. I think I saw a 'hanging motor' tension setup on a tablesaw or something & probably stuck in my brain.


----------



## YYCHM (Jan 30, 2020)

PeterT said:


> I have a belt tension hinge plate on my lathe motor & if I leave it loose so the weight of the motor holds tension, it starts doing some happy dance harmonics & I see it in the cut finish



In high gear the machine sounds like it's surging and the motor bounce is less pronounced.  The pully is canted such that the amount of eccentricity is more at the small sheave end.  In any event, too much vibration and fuss.  This needs to be rectified.  I'm hoping the scored motor shaft doesn't demand a new motor be sourced.


----------



## Brent H (Jan 30, 2020)

Does the shaft measure out ok?  If you clean up the roughness and the shaft is running true the pulley I sent should be good to go.


----------



## YYCHM (Feb 2, 2020)

Brent H said:


> Does the shaft measure out ok?  If you clean up the roughness and the shaft is running true the pulley I sent should be good to go.








The motor shaft measures out as 0.625".  It's chewed up pretty good.  Looks to me someone deployed the motor without a key installed.  The pulley measures 0.643" on motor side and 0.624" at the outboard side, so no wonder it's flopping around.  Jamming the key as far as it will go towards the motor seems to improve things BUT still not good.

Your rescue package is in Calgary and should be delivered tomorrow.  THANKS!


----------



## Brent H (Feb 4, 2020)

Cleaning up the Mill after some cast iron work and went off to machine a tailstock piece for YYC ..... interesting process. It was a chunk of 4140 I made my new tailstock from.  This one donated itself to my scrap bin after I bored my tailstock 0.010” over sized - argh - anyway, I had made a #2 morse taper in it already so it was a good candidate.  Also the cast iron work was for the slide part of my sexy taper attachment that came with the 9 inch donor lathe that now resides in many places.  

to start I machined a #2 morse taper mandril using the taper attachment.  The taper is some ridiculous  0.5994 in/ft  or 1.4307° so I made the piece out of 3/4 round stock, reduced diameter to .7000” (max diameter of #2 Morse).  The length of the taper is 2.56” and the small diameter is 0.5720”. Basically if I went in 0.064” on the small end the taper should end at 0.00 at the big end over 2.56”.  (Hopefully not confusing).  I used a dial indicator to make sure the cut was 0.064”.












So after dialling things in on the 4 jaw and getting set up I started cutting away.  At work I can plow off 0.050” at 1200 Rpm and all is good.  - no so on the wee baby lathe - amazing chatter and made for a neato art deco piece but YYC would not be a happy camper with more oil grooves.  LOL




 

Shooting a final dimension of 1.180” , I was happy to stop here:





shows about 3 to 4 tenths over top and bottom - some spit and polish should do’er up fine!





Will ship it off to you soon YYC

hopefully it fits a-ok.  When I did mine I did not mill the 1/4” groove right through.  I left an inch without it so it was not a place shite could collect.  I will post about the taper attachment more on my discussion about fixing my 10 inch - also about scraping in a taper key for my compound without proper tools


----------



## YYCHM (Feb 4, 2020)

Looks good Brent!

Thanks,

Craig


----------



## YYCHM (Feb 15, 2020)

3 weeks in transit and my $22.65 Amazon MT2 reamers finally arrived.






Not a stitch of English on the packaging.  Oh well, time to clean up that trashed tailstock spindle bore.






For a first go, I attempted a manual ream using a chucked center as back stop.  This arrangement didn't appear to be doing anything.  If it was, it would take forever to remove the spindle damage.






Next I tried driving the reamer with the chuck using a socket as a driver.  The reamer was essentially free floating and should follow the insitu taper (Dabbler has his doubts).  Turning the roughing reamer at 50 RPM had the spindle bore blemish removed in less than a minute.  I was rather surprised at that.  I then used the finishing reamer for approx. 30 sec.  These things can remove a lot of metal very quickly.  It would appear that the spindle is made of a very soft steel (the bandsaw cut through it like butter).






Spindle bore before reaming.






Spindle bore after reaming.  Bore looks and feels 200% better.  Finish ream a little bit more?






Because the taper moved back, I had to trim some material off the spindle nose.  I cut off thin slices with the band saw until my centers and chucks started engaging the MT2 again.  So far I've only had to trimmed 9/32 off.

Something that surfaced in all of this, is that the taper on my BB 1/2" chuck is garbage.  At it's max dia it only measures 0.656".  No wonder that thing wobbles around.


----------



## YotaBota (Feb 15, 2020)

Nice, looks like all is well. How do the non BB tapers fit?


----------



## YYCHM (Feb 15, 2020)

YotaBota said:


> Nice, looks like all is well. How do the non BB tapers fit?



Two live centers, two dead centers, and my 3/8" Jacobs chuck all fit nice and tight now.  I blued them all and checked them for high spots and didn't find anything to be concerned about.  

That BB 1/2" has been a problem since day one, I should have taken it back.  Not only did the taper not hold, it chewed up drill bit shanks.  I just drove the MT2 taper off only to find the JT33 taper is galled and chewed up as well. Total garbage.


----------



## YotaBota (Feb 15, 2020)

Ya gotta love it when a plan comes together. I needed a JT33/MT2 a while ago and had to get it online, KMS didn't even have a listing for one.


----------



## YYCHM (Feb 17, 2020)

Another to-do-list item bites the dust.






A new carriage stop.  This one I made of aluminum and it actually works.  Can't budge that puppy.






As opposed to this one, which I made of steel.  This one you could bump along with carriage, it didn't hold well at all. 

Bad design from the get go, the way clamp(jaw?) had a tendency to cant.


----------



## Brent H (Feb 17, 2020)

Your spindle hits the mail tomorrow.  Sorry for the delay- nice job on the stop!!!!!  Sweet!!!   Will be one of my projects .....some time ...- LOL


----------



## YYCHM (Feb 17, 2020)

Brent H said:


> Your spindle hits the mail tomorrow.  Sorry for the delay- nice job on the stop!!!!!  Sweet!!!   Will be one of my projects .....some time ...- LOL



Thanks Brent.  Looking forward to a nice tight spindle


----------



## YYCHM (Feb 18, 2020)

YotaBota said:


> I bought a 1/2x10tpi LH and a 3/8x10tpi RH from MPI Tools and it worked out to just under $65 usd to my door. I made a new cross slide nut and it worked out well considering I've seen the taps for $100 usd and more just for one tap.
> https://mpitools.com/product-category/acme_taps/



I attempted to order a 1/2x10tpi LH tap on-line from MPI.  Canada wasn't a shipping option.  How did you order yours?


----------



## Hruul (Feb 18, 2020)

I asked the same thing.  I ended up sending an email request through the MPI website, and through a series of emails I ordered them through Paul @ MPI tools.   He was super helpful and they should be at my house today once I get home.  Paul needed my address for shipping costs, and then sent a paypal invoice that I had to accept.  Sent the taps USPS with tracking the whole way through USPS.  There are also some available on Ebay from a different seller.


----------



## YYCHM (Feb 18, 2020)

Hruul said:


> I asked the same thing.  I ended up sending an email request through the MPI website, and through a series of emails I ordered them through Paul @ MPI tools.   He was super helpful and they should be at my house today once I get home.  Paul needed my address for shipping costs, and then sent a paypal invoice that I had to accept.  Sent the taps USPS with tracking the whole way through USPS.  There are also some available on Ebay from a different seller.



Ok, I emailed them as well.   What did the shipping come to?


----------



## Hruul (Feb 18, 2020)

MIne was $11.64 US for both taps that Yotabota bought.  Seems I bit expensive, but I could not figure out how to set my paypal account to have an us address to use my dad's p.o. box in the states.


----------



## YYCHM (Feb 18, 2020)

Hruul said:


> MIne was $11.64 US for both taps that Yotabota bought.  Seems I bit expensive, but I could not figure out how to set my paypal account to have an us address to use my dad's p.o. box in the states.



Paul was quick to reply.  $10-$11 US is pretty much the min rate for international USPS these days.  Even for a 5 cent screw in a padded envelope.

Well..... that was easy.  Exchange rate sure sucks though.

And...….. I just got the USPS tracking #.  Man that was a quick transaction.


----------



## YYCHM (Feb 19, 2020)

Today's project was operation scrounge.  I need a piece of brass in order to make a ACME 1/2" 10tpi LH nut to sleeve into the tail stock spindle Brent H is sending me.  Looking around my shop area and shed the only thing I could find was a brass valve I had liberated from a 20# propane tank with my Sawzall.  Well.... there was a good inch of usable brass there so I set out to make a sleeve out of it.






Here I'm lobbing off all the valve appendages with the band saw.  The piece with the white thread tape is the prize.






I milled all the corners off in an attempt to come up with something somewhat cylindrical.






Think we can turn that into a cylinder?  Let's find out.






50% turned.  Hey this is working.






That will do for now.  Will figure final dimensions once the spindle and ACME tap are here.

The only part that gave me grief was attempting to drill out the last 1/8" of the center, most of it was 13/32" to begin with.  The 13/32" bit grabbed the 1/4" exit hole so hard the stock spun in the chuck.  Ended up drilling it out in 4 steps. (not sure my description makes much sense?)

 Is brass fickle that way?


----------



## Marc Moreau (Feb 19, 2020)

Can't see the pictures ?


----------



## Brent H (Feb 20, 2020)

Hey YYC, 

I forgot to write down the tracking number - back at work....Hopefully you get that package by the end of the week - Monday at the latest!


----------



## Hruul (Feb 20, 2020)

Hello YYC, 

I have never dealt with brass yet either, but from what I have heard it is grabby unless you have the correct grind on the drill bits that you are using on it.


----------



## YYCHM (Feb 20, 2020)

So when the brass sleeve I was making grabbed the drill bit the chuck taper slipped.






The taper galled and chewed up the tail stock spindle bore AGAIN.  I guess new chuck tapers are in order.

I reamed out the spindle damage and trimmed it back again.

Having reamed, cut, and turned that spindle twice now I'm convinced that it's made of cast iron.  The swarf produced sure looks like what you get when drilling cast iron.

Are these things typically made of cast iron?  Seems kind of soft for this kind of application.


----------



## Dabbler (Feb 20, 2020)

When drilling very soft things such as brass or copper, you have to take a stone and 'file' the cutting edge to something near 90 degrees.  Goes for milling cutters too.  I've seen a 3/4 HSS milling cutter dragged out of an R8 collet and break the cutter!


----------



## Tom Kitta (Feb 20, 2020)

https://handycrowd.com/drilling-brass-the-easy-and-safe-way/
Here they have more pics of what Dabbler is explaining. Even has a video.


----------



## YYCHM (Feb 21, 2020)

Any idea what a MS2 taper is?  The tail flat on this taper BB sold me is stamped MS2/JT33.






It's 0.66" at the large end and 0.59" at the small end, over a span of 2.5".

MT2 is 0.70 to 0.572 over 2.56"


----------



## Johnwa (Feb 21, 2020)

Try this site
http://web.archive.org/web/20130505164428/http://shopswarf.orconhosting.net.nz/morse.html


----------



## Tom Kitta (Feb 21, 2020)

It is not so much the actual length that has to be precise but the angle for proper engagement with width smaller then max (or it sticks out) and equal or bigger then the min (or it will just not engage).

It happens that some Chinese stuff is not up to spec on the angles and concentricity.


----------



## Brent H (Feb 21, 2020)

Donuts and machining....yummy!


----------



## YYCHM (Feb 21, 2020)

Marc Moreau said:


> Can't see the pictures ?



Marc, are you still having issues seeing the post #200 images?

Craig


----------



## Marc Moreau (Feb 21, 2020)

No perfect nice pictures Thank You


----------



## Dabbler (Feb 21, 2020)

MS2 is a legit taper;  it was used in Britian until the MT took over the world, and before R8 was well known.  I remember seeing it in Machinery's handbook years ago.


----------



## trlvn (Feb 22, 2020)

Dabbler said:


> MS2 is a legit taper;  it was used in Britian until the MT took over the world, and before R8 was well known.  I remember seeing it in Machinery's handbook years ago.



I did a little searching and found some stuff like this:

https://www.banggood.com/MACHIFIT-M...-Cutter-Arbor-p-1596336.html?cur_warehouse=CN

It says the outside diameter is 22 mm (0.87 inches) and seems to be referred to as MS-22.  I take it that there are other sizes?  I couldn't find anything like a specification of the MS tapers or a chart with common sizes.  Anybody?

The measurements that YYC quoted (0.66" to 0.59") equate to 16.75mm and 14.99mm.  Does that mean he has an "MS-16.75" taper?  That doesn't exactly roll off the tongue!

Craig T


----------



## YYCHM (Feb 26, 2020)

Worked on that replacement tailstock spindle Brent H sent me today.






Can't believe I managed to mill the 1/8" slot in it without toasting the end mill.





Was a lot of passes at 0.005 per pass and a very slow feed rate.  I'm running a mini-mill and I really don't think I could  have accomplished it without a DRO.






Ended up the center hole in this brass sleeve I salvaged from the propane valve wasn't quite concentric with the OD.
I should have realized that would happen. Live and Learn






So the threaded sleeve I press fit to the spindle is a wee bit off, but, it doesn't appear to affect function.

I might re-do this part should I ever come across a suitable piece of brass. A better approach would have been to fit a solid plug to the spindle and then drill it with the spindle cucked in the lathe.






So now I have a nice new 4140 tailstock spindle that fits the tailstock better than the original by a long shot.

THANKS Brent!!!!


----------



## Brent H (Feb 26, 2020)

Cool beans brother!

Glad it worked out!  You may need to add a tap of the mallet to set the taper so things don't spin - the harder material seems to need a bit of a tap  - so great you could turn that project into a winner!  After I made it a bit small for my tail stock it was sort of in limbo.  

Once I see how milling in the indexing goes I will send you some pics!  Starting on parts and pieces for the steady and follow rest.......

Woo hoo!


----------



## YYCHM (Apr 3, 2020)

This headstock drive pulley keeps migrating away from the headstock.  I diligently check the pulley lock screws to make sure they are tight, but it still moves.  Today I found the pulley had migrated a good 1/4" (away from the headstock) from what I consider to be where it should be.  Is this the drive belt system's way of telling me that it's out of alignment and where it settles is where it should be?


----------



## Bofobo (Apr 3, 2020)

Did you at any point remove the pulley to see if the spindle has a set for a screw? Does it make an unpleasant noise when out of alignment? Could you put in or create a narrower “set” for a set screw?


----------



## YYCHM (Apr 3, 2020)

Bofobo said:


> Did you at any point remove the pulley to see if the spindle has a set for a screw? Does it make an unpleasant noise when out of alignment? Could you put in or create a narrower “set” for a set screw?



"a set for a screw"?  What is that?

"noise when out of alignment" Not really, seems to run smoother when in the position I think it should be in.


----------



## RobinHood (Apr 3, 2020)

How does the pulley bore compare in size to the shaft? The set screw may be lifting the pulley off the shaft (because its bore is too large) and then you have the pulley ”walking” on the shaft. Joe Pie talks about that phenomenon wrt parts walking right out of a chuck. You can actually try this yourself: lightly clamp a tapered part into the 3J and wiggle it in a circular motion; you can get it to come right out of the chuck without ever undoing it.

Remedy of a oversized / tapered pulley bore would be to sleeve it for a tight sliding fit.



YYCHobbyMachinist said:


> a set for a screw"? What is that?



I believe what Bofobo means is a dimple (or small flat) in the shaft that the point of the set screw can sit in. It stops axial movement and also makes it easy to take the pulley off because there is not raised burr.


----------



## Bofobo (Apr 4, 2020)

Robin if the hood understood.


----------



## Marc Moreau (Apr 4, 2020)

YYCHobbyMachinist said:


> View attachment 8441
> 
> This headstock drive pulley keeps migrating away from the headstock.  I diligently check the pulley lock screws to make sure they are tight, but it still moves.  Today I found the pulley had migrated a good 1/4" (away from the headstock) from what I consider to be where it should be.  Is this the drive belt system's way of telling me that it's out of alignment and where it settles is where it should be?


I don't have thoses pulley mine on top have 2  and on the motor I have only a single.


----------



## YYCHM (Apr 4, 2020)

Bofobo said:


> Robin if the hood understood.








The pulley set screw engages the shaft key.  That shaft measures 0.625" (5/8"), the pully bore measures 0.626".  It fits rather well.  I just realized that the key has broken into two pieces.  Could that have something to do with this?

@Brent H to the rescue..... he sent me a key with all the misc parts from the parts machine we canalized.  Will see if this rectifies the issue.


----------



## RobinHood (Apr 4, 2020)

YYCHobbyMachinist said:


> I just realized that the key has broken into two pieces. Could that have something to do with this?



For sure. Depending where the setscrew was pushing on the key...

0.626 is a nice sliding fit - you should be good to go with the new key.


----------



## Bofobo (Apr 4, 2020)

where in the pulley is the set screw located? Why does the old key have 2 contact marks? And I suggest possibly loctite on the set screw to alleviate some possibility of working loose


----------



## YYCHM (Apr 4, 2020)

Bofobo said:


> where in the pulley is the set screw located? Why does the old key have 2 contact marks? And I suggest possibly loctite on the set screw to alleviate some possibility of working loose



The set screw is located at the second sheave from the outboard side.  Where it sets on the key is the mark nearest the break in the key.  Obviously the key got switched 180 deg at some point in time hence the two contact marks.  I applied Loctite to the screw when I replaced the key thanks.

Craig


----------



## Brent H (Apr 4, 2020)

@Marc Moreau  - you should have a double pulley on the motor which will give you all the speeds properly.  I had to make a new one for my lathe.  It was a good project (see my 10" Utilathe restoration) .  You could probably make one out of steel verses the cast iron one I made.  I have the original broken one if you require measurements to make one?

@YYCHobbyMachinist : glad you have the spare key!  when your pulley is on take a straight edge and verify that the upper and lower pulleys are in the same plane so the belt is riding nice and straight and not trying to pull in any direction.


----------



## Marc Moreau (Apr 4, 2020)

Brent H said:


> @Marc Moreau  - you should have a double pulley on the motor which will give you all the speeds properly.  I had to make a new one for my lathe.  It was a good project (see my 10" Utilathe restoration) .  You could probably make one out of steel verses the cast iron one I made.  I have the original broken one if you require measurements to make one?
> 
> @YYCHobbyMachinist : glad you have the spare key!  when your pulley is on take a straight edge and verify that the upper and lower pulleys are in the same plane so the belt is riding nice and straight and not trying to pull in any direction.


Yes you could send the measurement ,are they hard to find  ? I never did a job like that ?


----------



## Marc Moreau (Apr 4, 2020)




----------



## Marc Moreau (Apr 4, 2020)

I forget to tell I had cut the end of the motor shaft. The shaft was in contact when I was closing the cover.


----------



## YYCHM (Apr 22, 2020)

Today I setup to turn between centers as I wanted to check my tailstock alignment.






First pass kind of says it all.  Something is out, I'm turning a taper.






Over 5 1/2" there is a 0.024" discrepancy in the diameter of my test piece.  0.727" dia near the headstock to 0.703" dia at the tailstock.

Soo now, how do I go about figuring out in which plane(s) the tailstock is out?  Do I need to purchase a test bar?

Craig


----------



## RobinHood (Apr 22, 2020)

Hi Craig, it seems that your tailstock is too far towards the operator. You need to move it away from you. I would start with about 12 thou ( use a dial indicator on the TS quill). Take another cut. Measure. Adjust TS by half the error until all taper is gone.


----------



## YYCHM (Apr 22, 2020)

RobinHood said:


> Hi Craig, it seems that your tailstock is too far towards the operator. You need to move it away from you. I would start with about 12 thou ( use a dial indicator on the TS quill). Take another cut. Measure. Adjust TS by half the error until all taper is gone.



Well there you go.  There is a witness mark on the tailstock casting that currently indicates exactly what you describe.  I'll move her over and try again.

Thanks!

Craig


----------



## RobinHood (Apr 22, 2020)

You are welcome.
Those marks are usually just for rough setting of center. Adjustment either side is expected to get true parts (or intensional tapers, for that matter).


----------



## PeterT (Apr 22, 2020)

Once you get the tail stock dialed in you will enjoy another bonus - much improved drilling accuracy when using the tail stock chuck which is misaligned by the same amount. If you have been seeing drill wobble or even breaking smallish drills & center drills, this is why. TS alignment is important.


----------



## YYCHM (Apr 22, 2020)

PeterT said:


> Once you get the tail stock dialed in you will enjoy another bonus - much improved drilling accuracy when using the tail stock chuck which is misaligned by the same amount. If you have been seeing drill wobble or even breaking smallish drills & center drills, this is why. TS alignment is important.



That's exactly why I decided to check it!  Was having all kinds of drill bit wobble.


----------



## YYCHM (Apr 23, 2020)

Well... it took 5 adjustment passes, but I have her down to 0.0005" diameter discrepancy (taper towards the tailstock) over 5 1/2".  That will make it 0.002" over 22".  Don't think I'm gonna be able to make it any better.


----------



## RobinHood (Apr 23, 2020)

Excellent job, Craig.


----------



## PeterT (Apr 23, 2020)

Yes good job. Now that you know the drill, if you ever wanted to make a useful tool from basically scrap, I'm pretty confident the way I described a homebrew in post#6 would be perfectly acceptable.
https://canadianhobbymetalworkers.com/threads/edge-technology-alignment-bar.1963/#post-21275

With that tool you don't have to go through turning & cutting & measuring diameters. Just set it between centers, get a dial reading on the headstock disc, compare to tailstock disk., move the TS so it agrees. Its that simple. You can physically watch the dial displace to the target reading as you tweak the tailstock over & tighten it down (which is another source of error). Your TS may drift out of position over time, or if you ever consciously move it to cut tapers, its good to have quick & accurate way to restore co-axial alignment. As  mentioned in that post, the longer you make your tool, the more inherently accurate it is all other things equal.


----------



## YYCHM (Apr 23, 2020)

Anyone know where I can get a 3/8" - 16 X 1-1/2" long set screw in Calgary?


----------



## Dabbler (Apr 23, 2020)

I'd try bolt supply, or order direct from Spaenar if you don't mind the pick fee.


----------



## Bofobo (Apr 24, 2020)

Foothills fasteners has always been good to me.


----------



## YYCHM (Apr 25, 2020)

Well this is interesting...….






The way this tailstock interfaces with it's base is nothing like I thought it was.  That cross slot isn't dovetailed.  The only thing holding the tailstock to the base are the two adjustment screws and the clamping bolt.  That screw on the front of the base does absolutely nothing.

I took her apart to figure out why I couldn't get the offside adjustment bolt out.  It should be a 3/8-16 X 1 1/2" hollow set screw but had been replaced with a hex head bolt that had the shank ground down.  The end of the bolt was flared so bad I had to cut the head off to get it out.

Any idea why a hollow set screw is specified?


----------



## Johnwa (Apr 25, 2020)

My Southbend tailstock is similar. I don’t know it was a design feature or not but it allows you to add shims to raise the center.
I think my set screws are dogpoint which alleviates the mushrooming issue.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Brent H (Apr 25, 2020)

Hey Craig, 

The set screw design with the point will dig into the center and keep the assembly together without it being basically clamped together by the bolt that holds your tail stock in place.  

I am not home but " I think"  I have one if you cannot find one - other place to check is Amazon - you need a cone point or high hold set screw.

My Utilathe is the same screw but I have a rectangular block with 2 bolts in between the set screws/  You can make a temporary one by grinding a point on a 3/8 - 16, cut off the bolt head and then cutting a slot for a screw driver.  Use that one as your adjustment and only tighten right up on the allen head one you have that is good.  - if you can get a high grade bolt - all the better


----------



## YYCHM (Apr 26, 2020)

Had to recalibrate my tailstock after taking her apart.






Figured I'd dial it in using that test piece I had turned down.  This arrangement reveals all kinds of things you don't realize are happening.  Just tightening the tailstock spindle lock can knock her out by 0.001".  So should one set it up with the spindle locked or unlocked?  It's not locked when drilling.


----------



## Brent H (Apr 26, 2020)

Set it up with it locked like you are turning between centers.  When you are drilling, the bit (provided it is sharpened evenly), will center and cut fine - remember, it is a drill so it is not the most accurate hole producer - drill chuck itself will be off a bit from the get go.

Best to set up between centres locked cocked and ready to rock!


----------



## Marc Moreau (Apr 26, 2020)

Brent H said:


> Set it up with it locked like you are turning between centers.  When you are drilling, the bit (provided it is sharpened evenly), will center and cut fine - remember, it is a drill so it is not the most accurate hole producer - drill chuck itself will be off a bit from the get go.
> 
> Best to set up between centres locked cocked and ready to rock!


If some body have a youtube an explain how to use this thing I would like to understand ? Do you install a dial caliper on the carrier and move  left to right and the caliper needle not moving ?


----------



## PeterT (Apr 26, 2020)

Marc, this Youtube shows the general concept of a test bar. It has 2 identical diameters on either end so you reference off the headstock diameter with an indicator, then move to the tailstock end & make the in/out adjustment of tail stock to give same same dial reading. What YYC did is turned some stock, measured any taper by taking micrometer reading of the 2 end diameters & adjusted the tailstock in/out until the 2 diameters were the same = no more taper. Its the same concept, just a different path.

Ask away if its still not clear.


----------



## Marc Moreau (Apr 28, 2020)

Thank you now I understand.


----------



## YYCHM (May 9, 2020)

Another to-do-list item bites the dust.

My 4-Jaw chuck takes a hex key of all things and I didn't get a chuck key with it.  I've been using an Allen wrench to date, so today I decided to craft a proper chuck key for it.






I got a little smarter this time around and setup a mill stop so that I could relocate the work piece in the vise after repositioning to mill all 6 hex faces.






Here I'm using a hex nut to locate face 3 of 6.  Once you have faces 1, 3, and 6 cut you can locate faces 2, 4, and 5 with a parallel off the table.






Looks kind of strange but functions.


----------



## RobinHood (May 9, 2020)

Great idea using a hex nut as an indexing guide. Well done.


----------



## YYCHM (May 9, 2020)

RobinHood said:


> Great idea using a hex nut as an indexing guide. Well done.



Wasn't my invention, I found the technique on the internet.  Seems to work quite well.  I've made a few hex items using this method.

Stuff like this https://www.omnicalculator.com/math/hexagon really solves the math problems to, such as how much do I need to mill off the circumference to create a face.


----------



## RobinHood (May 9, 2020)

I think I stumbled upon that web calculator when I was looking for a formula to calculate the inscribed circle radius for a hexagon. I knew the diameter I wanted, but needed the side length for my steady rest project - a write-up is coming soon as I am almost done with it...


----------



## YYCHM (May 9, 2020)

This is what I have been making my chuck keys out of and other 3/4" stuff from....

Any one recognise this MSM color coding?  I acquired this piece back in the day of weighing stuff from the cut off bin.






It's mildly magnetic so I assume SS of some sort.  Very strange stuff to work with.

Was a bitch to drill through, and a bigger bitch to tap.  Turned nicely though?  Seems to have some hard layers?


----------



## PeterT (May 9, 2020)

Pretty sure I have some of the same MSM stainless, I recognize the colors. And yes it was un-fun to machine. Hot chips & work hardens, does not like skim cuts. End result was ok but as you experienced, drilling & tapping was a lot more heads up than it should have been. Next time for sure I would go a drill size larger over the usual 70% thread or whatever the drill chart says. I figure it might be one of 302, 304 or 316. Something lower on the machine-ability scale.

I've turned both 303 & 416 SS & find they quite a bit nicer to work with. Mind you I had some better inserts which helped.


----------



## PeterT (May 9, 2020)

If you guys get stuck on weird geometry issues, reach out to one of us CAD guys. Often times its easier & faster to draw up the part and spit out dimensions in any kind of format or orientation you can dream of. I use to love manual drafting and I still appreciate it, but there is no comparison to a modern number cruncher.


----------



## RobinHood (May 10, 2020)

PeterT said:


> If you guys get stuck on weird geometry issues, reach out to one of us CAD guys. Often times its easier & faster to draw up the part and spit out dimensions in any kind of format or orientation you can dream of. I use to love manual drafting and I still appreciate it, but there is no comparison to a modern number cruncher.



Thanks for the offer @PeterT! My other option could be to retire my cog wheel and saw dust computer and buy something more modern....


----------



## RobinHood (May 10, 2020)

YYCHobbyMachinist said:


> It's mildly magnetic so I assume SS of some sort. Very strange stuff to work with.



It 304 SS for sure - I have a bar leftover from a project for my brother that required 304 SS. I went to MSM to buy it - exact same colour coding.

Yes, either take a very big chip fast or a really small one very slow. If it heats up and you are close to dimension, you are pretty much toast as the next cut needs to go through the hard layer or the tool just rubs. I bought special inserts for SS - made a huge difference. They work very well in AL as well. The SS inserts seem much sharper than regular steel/alloy steel inserts. Really sharp HSS works well too. Just go slow and use coolant/cutting fluid.

Oh the fun working with SS...


----------



## Chicken lights (May 10, 2020)

PeterT said:


> If you guys get stuck on weird geometry issues, reach out to one of us CAD guys. Often times its easier & faster to draw up the part and spit out dimensions in any kind of format or orientation you can dream of. I use to love manual drafting and I still appreciate it, but there is no comparison to a modern number cruncher.


How long does it take you to do a drawing? (Obviously the more complex the longer it takes)
If I drew something up on paper would it take you long to replicate it? Your drawings are always really trick


----------



## RobinHood (May 10, 2020)

Here is MSM colour chart:


----------



## PeterT (May 10, 2020)

Chicken lights said:


> How long does it take you to do a drawing? (Obviously the more complex the longer it takes)
> If I drew something up on paper would it take you long to replicate it? Your drawings are always really trick



As you say, more complex = more time. But generally if you can sketch the pertinent views & dimensions, I can work from that. To use proper cad terminology, what I build is the the 3D model. Its a rendition of the physical part. Then 'drawings' are generated from that, those contain the different views, dimensions, sections.... basically what the fabricator needs to make the thing. The drawings can be PDF files so easily email-able. Or with a mouse click, of the format that the water jet / laser cut shops require.


----------



## Dabbler (May 10, 2020)

Ive put my toe in the water for CAD - I keep getting hung up on the mindset needed to do it in the first place.  I always want to start with the dimensions, as that is closer to how I think (detailed oriented, etc)...

I have yet to figure out a good 'mind set' to approach CAD, and the tutorials always are for the worng version, so it is totally distracted from learning the process, just o figure out the menus!


----------



## historicalarms (May 11, 2020)

Dabbler said:


> Ive put my toe in the water for CAD - I keep getting hung up on the mindset needed to do it in the first place.  I always want to start with the dimensions, as that is closer to how I think (detailed oriented, etc)...
> 
> I have yet to figure out a good 'mind set' to approach CAD, and the tutorials always are for the worng version, so it is totally distracted from learning the process, just o figure out the menus!



    MeeeTooo!!
  I think the most important thing for CAD usage is an above average computer skill l& understanding...something I never acquired. I owned 2 cad programs, one was a rudimentary "cheap" offering that I thought would be 'easy to learn but it wasn't...and then my I.T. SIL pirated a Auto-cad "PRO" download & a manual 4 inches thick to go with it...they both soon became forgotten icons on a computer screen.


----------



## Brent H (May 11, 2020)

ACAD - sadly the program is way to complex for just simple things - its easy to draw simple things in it, just not as well suited to a basic circle square line triangle type thing.

I have no use for the 3D modelling - perhaps I can see things in the matrix without it - but 2D works fine for me.  It could go back to drafting in high school....

I was lucky to be one of those kids that was ground floor computing - learning to program in Basic, Fortran, Pascal etc and AutoCad was version 6 at the time.  I think the best version of AutoCad for me was the 2006 version that allowed you to first start dropping pictures in and scaling from that.  Then they got all greedy and wanted subscriptions etc

Our machine shop just got their first CNC plasma table - I can send AutoCAD drawings over and they can produce parts - pretty cool!   As for the actual machining CNC - not sure I will ever do any of that - ya never know, but I lack the patience to sit at a desk programming all day and then watch a tool smash itself to bits and wreck a piece because I missed a step.  

For farting around and learning CAD there is NanoCad for free out there and it seems to work well.  If PeterT can draw it out, however  - very nice! 

@Dabbler mentions starting with Dimensions - That is pretty much how I use the Auto Cad for laying things out and drafting the parts - Start with a line, draw another at 90* and then off set the lines to the dimensions I want something to be ......perhaps a good set up at the start John and then just use that template for your drawings and you would find it easier.  Seems to be the way with the programs - takes hours to get the first set up and then you are good to go....Just need to survive the first stage........


----------



## YYCHM (May 11, 2020)

Gee thanks Brent, now I remember why I gave up on these things....  I decided to try your nanoCAD.  It's better than
QCAD or LibreCAD, this only took me three hours to figure out, but I'm thinking I would be hard pressed to reproduce it.  Maybe another 3 hours to figure out how to change the dimension scaling.


----------



## Brent H (May 11, 2020)

HAHAHAHA!

Awesome! - you were able to dimension your drawing in a font you can read!   that typically takes years!


----------



## YYCHM (May 19, 2020)

Today my drill chuck refused to eject from the tail stock.






All this managed to do was spin the chuck's JT33 taper.  She's stuck in there real good.






This had no effect what so ever.






Hmmm..... I ain't got nothing small enough and long enough give it a boot from behind.






Finally this worked. It's my spare cross slide screw which just happens to be the same thread as the tail stock. Interesting that it didn't take much to pop her out with this method.  That's a 6" long crescent wrench.






The damage.  A scored MT2 taper and messed up spindle nose. 

Not sure why this is happening to me?  Maybe the BB chuck and taper are junk?  The tail stock spindle should be aligned with the headstock spindle now.


----------



## PeterT (May 19, 2020)

Glad you got it off. It happens on my lathe occasionally. If a hard free spin turn of the TS wheel doesn't work to self release, then I remove the wheel & just put any old metal rod & tap axially from behind. Its just hitting the end of the tang. One time I also warmed the quill with a heat gun a bit but not sure it did much. I'd be a bit apprehensive of hitting the chuck from behind like that just because there has to be a little side component force that is then transferring into you chuck/arbor assembly & your TS assembly including the fit of your quill barrel. Actually screw jacking in like that is a perfect solution. 

I don't have a good answer on why. Minor debris, higher axial force from heavy drilling or either of the arbor or mating quill socket are scratched are the usual reasons given. I have good surfaces on both but I now know if I install it bone dry or its been in there for a while, it has a higher chance of sticking. Supposedly the taper angle is self releasing but all it takes is a bit of sandpaper action & those surfaces can mate up hard as you experienced. I now use the tiniest amount of thin lubricant & seems like that is the happy medium. It wont free spin like a fully lubricated oiled surface, but it helps a lot with sticking. So like a spritz of WD40 or thinner (which contains a bit of light oil) on a clean paper towel & basically all wiped off. I now avoid using the handy rag to clean the arbor & hole because inevitably it could be a bit oily and have chips on it. If there wasn't any grit on the surfaces before, you probably stand a good chance of putting some on by wiping with a not clean rag. 

To my mind, an off-spec arbor should theoretically release easier than a perfect one. If the taper is shallower or steeper, it has less contact area along he length. Same deal if it was slightly not circular. But obviously something is happening, so maybe its not that simple. Maybe bad fit means micro annular gap and that could maybe distort a bit & jam in tighter? Or the gap is a tiny place for grit to become lodged? I came close to lapping mine but resisted the urge. I think you would have to have a very 'known' precision lap or sacrificial arbor, otherwise probably stand a good chance of making the socket worse, nevermind cleaning out the compound & all that fuss.


----------



## Johnwa (May 20, 2020)

Is it one of those cases where the tang is jamming?


----------



## YYCHM (May 20, 2020)

Johnwa said:


> Is it one of those cases where the tang is jamming?



Don't think so.  It would appear that it spun a little and galled at the spindle nose.  The taper has a score where it meets the spindle nose and the inside of the spindle nose has a narrow shallow section that's messed up.

What the symptom of the tang jamming?


----------



## Johnwa (May 20, 2020)

There was a thread on it a while back.  It jams if the tang is a bit bigger than the far end of the spindle bore.


----------



## YYCHM (May 20, 2020)

A few turns of the MT2 reamer and an hours worth of emery work appears to have cleaned up the spindle bore.






Here I'm attempting to cleanup the chuck taper.  Been working at it with emery for over an hour now.

That chuck has a visible wobble in this configuration?  I wonder if I should replace the whole thing?


----------



## RobinHood (May 20, 2020)

Is the wobble in your chuck or the MT2 arbor? You could check the arbor between centres to see if it runs true.

The wobble could also be runout in either (or both) your 3J and/or the drill chuck.


----------



## YYCHM (May 20, 2020)

RobinHood said:


> Is the wobble in your chuck or the MT2 arbor? You could check the arbor between centres to see if it runs true.
> 
> The wobble could also be runout in either (or both) your 3J and/or the drill chuck.








Ok, I did some measuring.  What's coming out of the chuck jaws is aligned with the taper.  It's the chuck sleeve that's wobbling around.

Further playing around revealed that the chuck taper may have been sitting proud in the tail stock spindle.  After cleaning things up (including running the MT2 reamer into the spindle) the taper now sits a good 3-4mm deeper in the spindle and the tail stock screw ejects the taper with plenty of room to spare.  I'm thinking the taper was hung up on the mouth of the spindle and not seating fully.  The location of the damage to the spindle and taper would suggest that as well.

Will see what happens now.


----------



## Dabbler (May 20, 2020)

deleted.


----------



## RobinHood (May 20, 2020)

That’s good news. Your chuck is in working order. Good job on finding the culprit (not sitting far enough in the spindle) and getting the ejector to work for you.

I have had taper arbors that were a little short (not the tang type) for consistent ejection. So I made a special bolt for the back of it to “lengthen” it to make sure it comes out without trouble.


----------



## YYCHM (May 20, 2020)

RobinHood said:


> I have had taper arbors that were a little short (not the tang type) for consistent ejection. So I made a special bolt for the back of it to “lengthen” it to make sure it comes out without trouble.



As in drilled and taped them?  All my centers (2 live and 2 dead) are stubby (ie no tang) and don't eject via the TS screw.  How does one hold a taper in a lathe chuck so that it can be drilled and tapped?


----------



## RobinHood (May 20, 2020)

YYCHobbyMachinist said:


> As in drilled and taped them?



no, the arbor came with a tapped hole in the back (It can accept a drawbar). Some people make / buy screw-in tangs. I just made a special, low profile headed bolt.


----------



## Tom O (Jun 7, 2020)

Have you seen these at Madmodders?
https://madmodder.net/index.php/topic,13067.0.html


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 8, 2020)

Hatched another birds nest today 






Man, those things just materialize in the blink of an eye.

Ya, I know, we have had this discussion already.


----------



## Marc Moreau (Jul 9, 2020)

Stop and clean stop and clean stop and clean But the result will be fantastic.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 9, 2020)

OK..... I need to do something about the vibration this lathe is exhibiting, it's noticeable to say the least.






As far as I can tell it's all coming from these two pulleys.  If I remove the belt the motor just purrs.  Install the belt and she starts to shake.  At some speeds you can see the motor rocking/bouncing.  Disengaging the feed box and lead screw has no effect other than reduce the noise level.






This is the metal bench it's mounted on.  The table top has a sheet of 1-1/2" MDF in it, and the U channel legs are welded on.  There are diagonal cross braces across the back side, and the legs are stabilized depth wise with welded U channel and L channel across the front and back.  I braced the bench against the adjacent wood bench with that L bracket you see on the right.






And these aluminum pucks and a bolt sucking the two tables together.






I can feel the lathe vibrations clear down to the far end of this wood bench.  My mill doesn't do this, and it has two belts and three pulleys, it just humms.

So what would you suggest I do here?  Is it wonky pulleys?  Need a heavier bench to soak up the vibrations?

Craig


----------



## DPittman (Jul 9, 2020)

YYCHobbyMachinist said:


> OK..... I need to do something about the vibration this lathe is exhibiting, it's noticeable to say the least.
> 
> View attachment 9948
> 
> ...


Your belts appear to be in good shape but I have table saw that has old belts on it and partly because it doesn't get used often it always runs rough with a vibration for the first few minutes because of the "memory" in the belts of the curvature of the pulleys.  It does get smoother after continuous running however. Do you notice if it is any better with your lathe after running for a while?


----------



## Dabbler (Jul 9, 2020)

Can you use your mag base and a dial indicator to check the pulley isn't wobbling either radially or axially?


----------



## PeterT (Jul 9, 2020)

On my lathe I was getting kind of a harmonic vibration shortly after I changed my belt to a new one. First I thought something was up with the belt but eventually determined I kind of misunderstood the motor hinge plate. I assumed the hinge action allowed the motor weight to add belt tension by its weight. The clue was I could see the motor kind of oscillating & then could get worse - resonance or harmonics or whatever the right word is. The plate actually has to be locked down to prevent float (with appropriate belt tension). Problem went away after that, at least on my lathe.

You could have other issues as people have mentioned but maybe worth a check.


----------



## DPittman (Jul 9, 2020)

PeterT said:


> The plate actually has to be locked down to prevent float (with appropriate belt tension)


Hmmn....I think I better check my table saw Peter.  I know it has a hinged mechanism that floats and is not locked i to position....maybe its SUPPOSED to be locked also.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 9, 2020)

PeterT said:


> On my lathe I was getting kind of a harmonic vibration shortly after I changed my belt to a new one. First I thought something was up with the belt but eventually determined I kind of misunderstood the motor hinge plate. I assumed the hinge action allowed the motor weight to add belt tension by its weight. The clue was I could see the motor kind of oscillating & then could get worse - resonance or harmonics or whatever the right word is. The plate actually has to be locked down to prevent float (with appropriate belt tension). Problem went away after that, at least on my lathe.
> 
> You could have other issues as people have mentioned but maybe worth a check.



No mechanism to locking down, just a spring tensioner.  I'm now playing the mag base game trying to DI the runout on the pulleys.

Craig


----------



## PeterT (Jul 9, 2020)

DPittman said:


> Hmmn....I think I better check my table saw Peter.  I know it has a hinged mechanism that floats and is not locked i to position....maybe its SUPPOSED to be locked also.



Well, a table saw was my mental reference point too. But it might also be OK for table saw but not necessarily for metal lathe. I happened to see a different table saw and it had a rudimentary lock down. On belted sanders I've seen the motor hard bolted & the tensioner axle on a cam swivel (but hard mounted) or heavy spring. So who knows. But the thing about a spring is... well, it springs. It doesn't dampen.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 9, 2020)

Well..... on the surfaces I could reach with a mag base and DI I got the following.

Head Pulley - 0.007 radial and 0.006 axial runout.

Motor Pulley - 0.007 radial and 0.016 axial runout.

I dunno, what does that tell you?

What's the expectation on a pulley?  They look pretty crude from the get go.

Craig


----------



## Brent H (Jul 9, 2020)

How are the pulleys in line Craig?  If you put a straight edge across the pulleys are they in the same plain?   Do you have any heat issues with the belt?   Any abnormal wear ?


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 9, 2020)

Brent H said:


> How are the pulleys in line Craig?  If you put a straight edge across the pulleys are they in the same plain?   Do you have any heat issues with the belt?   Any abnormal wear ?



Looks to me they are out of plane with each other by about 1/8".  Which may explain why I had one pulley that had a habit of walking down it's shaft over time.  No heat issues, no abnormal belt wear.

Craig


----------



## Dabbler (Jul 9, 2020)

.007 radial isn't enough on its own to do much.  Back to the harmonic premise:  if the motor is free to move both up and down, it can oscillate with a fair amount of energy.


----------



## PeterT (Jul 10, 2020)

Was your motor added on later in life & maybe mounted somewhat differently than stock? Maybe more HP & therefore weight? I don't know SM lathes much at all other than occasional pics.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 10, 2020)

PeterT said:


> Was your motor added on later in life & maybe mounted somewhat differently than stock? Maybe more HP & therefore weight? I don't know SB lathes much at all other than occasional pics.



This is a Standard Modern 9" Utilathe not a South Bend.  The motor is not original, but it's mounted on the factory mounting plate.


----------



## PeterT (Jul 10, 2020)

Sorry for typo, meant to say 'SM'


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 10, 2020)

@YotaBota , @Hruul How are your machines for vibration?  What manner of bench do you have them mounted on?

Craig


----------



## YotaBota (Jul 10, 2020)

Vibration hasn't been a problem. I do have a hard time keeping the spindle nut tight, it likes to back off and that causes chatter but at least it's an easy fix. There is a slug under the set screw but it just doesn't want to stay tight.
Here's a pic of my bench, it's okay but not very solid, there is a lot of wobble from the base only being sheet metal. I'm going to add a 1x3 tube frame to the base and proper legs to stiffen it up. All the storage is a good thing to have, it keeps everything close and easy to find.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 10, 2020)

@YotaBota I like your curtain.  I finally had to rig one up to as my mini-mill was tossing stuff clear over to the washer and drying with the fly cutter LOL.

I'm thinking your bench is heavier and more rigid than mine.

Craig


----------



## PeterT (Jul 10, 2020)

YYCHobbyMachinist said:


> The motor is not original, but it's mounted on the factory mounting plate.



Your bench looks beefy to me & guessing you have the machine mounted securely on the lugs so that should be OK. 

What I was getting at is if your replacement motor is substantially heavier, then possibly its no longer a match for the stock spring if it was intended/sized for a lighter motor. Whether it fits the plate bolt pattern is kind of inconsequential. But I still don't have a clear read on the spring. Is it just meant to kind of keep some temporary tension on the belt but you are supposed to secure the motor plate down vs the spring/plate combination is 'live' and free to pivot?

Was it doing this all along & you just started noticing it? Or was it running fine up a point & now something different? Is the spring tension adjustable to see if it improves? Something has loosened up over time? A picture or more information would be helpful.


----------



## YotaBota (Jul 10, 2020)

I used 3/4 plastic water pipe for the frame and dollar store shower curtains to try and contain the chips. I didn't glue any of the connections in case I need to reconfigure.
The bench (Home Depot) itself seems fairly sturdy but the wheels are only attached to the sheet metal base and that has a lot of give. I added a heavier wood top as well to give it a bit more mass.
When I bought the machine I put a new 110v motor on it and use a link belt for the drive. The link belt is a bit noisier than a regular v-belt it won't take set if left under tension.
PeterT - Here are a couple of pics of the belt tensioner on my machine. Pushing the handle away slackens the belt (lifts the motor) for pulley changes, pulling the handle up out of the slots lets the weight of the motor tension the belt and the handle drops into the slot to hold the tension. Craig's machine had riser blocks when he acquired it and the tension handle was modified to make it work.
I don't see an issue with Craig's bench either, if the machine was a 1440 or something 6 or 7 hundred plus pounds it might be different but the lathe is less than 300 lbs.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 10, 2020)

PeterT said:


> Your bench looks beefy to me & guessing you have the machine mounted securely on the lugs so that should be OK.
> 
> What I was getting at is if your replacement motor is substantially heavier, then possibly its no longer a match for the stock spring if it was intended/sized for a lighter motor. Whether it fits the plate bolt pattern is kind of inconsequential. But I still don't have a clear read on the spring. Is it just meant to kind of keep some temporary tension on the belt but you are supposed to secure the motor plate down vs the spring/plate combination is 'live' and free to pivot?
> 
> Was it doing this all along & you just started noticing it? Or was it running fine up a point & now something different? Is the spring tension adjustable to see if it improves? Something has loosened up over time? A picture or more information would be helpful.



It's kind of a long story but here are the high lights.

The motor mount the machine came with relied on motor weight alone, it had no spring tensioner.  It was later replaced with the tensioned version.  Neither mounts have a means of lock down.

As delivered the motor pulley was pooched and had a visibly wobbled.  Someone had mounted it without the key in place.  That was later replaced and really improved things.

It has always vibrated to a certain extent and I always just assumed that's the nature of belt drives until I got my RF30 and marveled at how smooth it runs.

I'm just trying to figure out what's causing the vibration and motor bounce.






This is the tensioner.  Loose or tight doesn't seem to make a difference.

I just aligned the motor and headstock pulleys into the same plane and that helped a little.

Craig


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 10, 2020)

@YotaBota You have the same mount as what I started with.  I have since switched to the tensioned version.

Something I've always wondered about is that my bench is tall and narrow and not all that heavy.  33" tall and 16" wide.  But I can't see how that would influence the motor bounce.


----------



## historicalarms (Jul 10, 2020)

Craig, it's not out of the realm of possibility that it is only a belt problem, usually found at the end joints. Farmers have a $hit load of "belt" experience and I "are one". The belt blemish required to produce a bounce that turns into a bearing destroying vibration at 1725 rpm can be almost un-seeable, sometimes only a slight shinny spot is all you will see on the belt sidewalls...you cant see the defect itself but the vibration can be significant.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 10, 2020)

historicalarms said:


> Craig, it's not out of the realm of possibility that it is only a belt problem, usually found at the end joints. Farmers have a $hit load of "belt" experience and I "are one". The belt blemish required to produce a bounce that turns into a bearing destroying vibration at 1725 rpm can be almost un-seeable, sometimes only a slight shinny spot is all you will see on the belt sidewalls...you cant see the defect itself but the vibration can be significant.



Ok, I assumed a new belt would be a sure thing improvement.  I'll try the original belt again and see if it changes things.

Craig


----------



## YotaBota (Jul 10, 2020)

historicalarms said:


> Craig, it's not out of the realm of possibility that it is only a belt problem, usually found at the end joints. Farmers have a $hit load of "belt" experience and I "are one". The belt blemish required to produce a bounce that turns into a bearing destroying vibration at 1725 rpm can be almost un-seeable, sometimes only a slight shinny spot is all you will see on the belt sidewalls...you cant see the defect itself but the vibration can be significant.


+1
I've been having good luck with "Continental" brand belts, the LORDCO and PA belts don't last very long and aren't cut/joined straight/flat. When laid on the table there was a visible bump at the joint in these cheaper brands, that would would cause nasty vibration.
Craig - when you go thru the pulley speeds, low to hi, does the vibration consistently ramp up or is it just in the one speed?


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 10, 2020)

YotaBota said:


> Craig - when you go thru the pulley speeds, low to hi, does the vibration consistently ramp up or is it just in the one speed?



I would say consistent between sheave positions but more pronounced in low range it that makes sense.

Man wish I had access to another machine just to compare.

I just swapped chucks to see if that had any effect.  Nothing changed.

Craig


----------



## Hruul (Jul 10, 2020)

YYCHobbyMachinist said:


> @YotaBota , @Hruul How are your machines for vibration?  What manner of bench do you have them mounted on?
> 
> Craig


I have not run mine in quite sometime.  The last time I ran it I don't recall any vibration.  Mine is mounted on the stand/workbench that it originally came with (looks like the one in the manual picture) which I have added weight too by storing additional chucks and other equipment inside.  Also built a wooden drawer system for inside the middle.

I don't have a spring tensioner on mine, part of it is missing.  I did place a short piece of pipe insulation between the motor mount and the chip pan as the motor bounces a bit and does hit the chip pan a little.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 10, 2020)

Swapped belts for the one @Brent H sent me.  A little better but not much.  So gained a little by switching belts and setting the pulleys co-planar.  Neither caused a WOW improvement.






As an example of what I'm experiencing, at 900 RPM no load those chuck keys jiggle and dance around a bit.  AND Ya I probably shouldn't be leaving them on top of the headstock like that

Craig


----------



## YotaBota (Jul 10, 2020)

I just checked mine at 900rpm and 250rpm with the 3Jaw chuck in place and it's rock steady using your scientific chuck keys on the head stock technique.


----------



## Johnwa (Jul 10, 2020)

You could apply some downward pressure on the motor and see if that makes a difference.  I’m not sure it will if you’re getting the vibration unloaded.


----------



## francist (Jul 10, 2020)

Are the set screws tight and the pulley(s) snug on the shafts? I had something like this happen once and it drove me nuts trying find it. In the end it came down to a slight bit of looseness in one of the pulley bores and while they lined up fine when stopped, under power the tension of the belt would cause the pulley to slightly cock off at a certain point in the revolution. Drove me crazy because without the belt on they were dead straight. Just a thought.

-frank


----------



## Tom O (Jul 10, 2020)

Try it with the chuck off and is there any swarf in the spindle bore.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 10, 2020)

Tom O said:


> Try it with the chuck off and is there any swarf in the spindle bore.



No significant change with the chuck removed other than the noise level diminished.

A couple more observations here.  

With just the motor running with no belt, there is a felt vibration in the metal table.

With the belt installed there is more vibration in high range than low range.  I had confused the situation.

The vibration has a distinct harmonic to it.

The two changes made so far have improved things.  Changing belts and aligning the pulleys axially.

Is something going on in the headstock maybe?

Craig


----------



## YotaBota (Jul 10, 2020)

That motor vibration could be being amplified thru the headstock by the belt. I don't think the motor should have any vibration, is the vibration still there with the pulley removed?


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 10, 2020)

YotaBota said:


> That motor vibration could be being amplified thru the headstock by the belt. I don't think the motor should have any vibration, is the vibration still there with the pulley removed?



The motor vibration is very minor but it's there. About the same as what my mill exhibits.

I'm wondering if this table isn't amplifying things.  We have metal on metal with long spindly narrow legs resting on concrete.


----------



## Brent H (Jul 10, 2020)

How old is the motor Craig?  Any bearing changes made?   Many times the non drive Bearing end of the motor fails and it does not show up as a big issue until things really go south.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 10, 2020)

Brent H said:


> How old is the motor Craig?  Any bearing changes made?   Many times the non drive Bearing end of the motor fails and it does not show up as a big issue until things really go south.



Who knows, it came with the lathe.  It's a made in England GRIPHON, with a big honking capacitor mounted on it. About the same physical size as the LEESON 3/4 HP on my PHS.  Some one purposely obliterated the HP rating on the info plate with a punch.  I doubt it's had bearing changes ever.

Craig


----------



## YotaBota (Jul 10, 2020)

Have tried putting the headstock pulley onto the motor? The motor pulley may be out of balance. 
If the pulleys fit well and are tight, here are my suggestions to eliminate the headstock. 
Try these steps:
1.    Is the vibration still there with the spindle in neutral? if the vibration goes away then you have a spindle issue. if the vibration is still there then that would eliminate the spindle. If it's still there - 
2.    remove the pulley shaft and check the bearings. if the bearings seem okay - 
3.    remove the pulley shaft gear and reinstall the shaft and see if the vibration is still there. If the vibration goes away then there would be a problem with the idler shaft components - bearings, gears or the shaft - 
If all above checks okay and the vibration is still there then you're down to the pulleys, the pulley shaft or the motor. Bearings are cheap if yours are iffy.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 10, 2020)

YotaBota said:


> I don't think the motor should have any vibration, is the vibration still there with the pulley removed?



Pulled the motor pulley, and got the same thing, so I don't see how switching pulleys will make a difference?

Don't get me wrong here.  The vibration I feel in the table is what I'd call motor hum.

BTB - Are your pulleys the same size?  My head stock pulley is larger than the motor pulley, but I guess swapped that shouldn't make a difference ratio wise.

Craig


----------



## YotaBota (Jul 11, 2020)

Putting the spindle pulley on the motor was just a test to see if the vibration changed. 
My motor pulley is about 5" and the spindle pulley is about 6". Swapping the pulleys won't make any difference to the ratios but will increase the spindle speeds.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 11, 2020)

YotaBota said:


> Try these steps:
> 1.    Is the vibration still there with the spindle in neutral? if the vibration goes away then you have a spindle issue. if the vibration is still there then that would eliminate the spindle.



How do you put the spindle in neutral?

I swapped the pulleys and didn't notice any real difference other than high range with max RPM sheave position caused my power bar to trip.  I need to swap them again and see if power bar trip still occurs, maybe it had always done that.

Craig


----------



## Johnwa (Jul 11, 2020)




----------



## YYCHM (Jul 11, 2020)

Daaaaa….. Oh that neutral......LOL

Ok..... swapped the pulleys back and max high range no longer trips my power bar.

As for placing the spindle in neutral......  The vibration is essentially non existent in all speed ranges with the spindle in neutral.   So, now we know where the vibration is originating from.

Probably not a good thing to find out

Craig


----------



## Brent H (Jul 11, 2020)

No Craig - it is a good thing.  A bad thing is to have the vibration and things disintegrate.  

Your lathe uses 3 x 6203 and 1 6203 2RS bearings and then the one Timkin bearing.  12175/12303.  You can find them all pretty reasonable.  

You could probably change all the bearings for about $125 - I would do the  motor as well - you should also run your lathe directly off an outlet and not a power bar to be sure it can draw full start up power etc.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 11, 2020)

Brent H said:


> No Craig - it is a good thing.  A bad thing is to have the vibration and things disintegrate.
> 
> Your lathe uses 3 x 6203 and 1 6203 2RS bearings and then the one Timkin bearing.  12175/12303.  You can find them all pretty reasonable.
> 
> You could probably change all the bearings for about $125 - I would do the  motor as well - you should also run your lathe directly off an outlet and not a power bar to be sure it can draw full start up power etc.



Funny thing here is that Phil, the nice retired English chap who sold me the machine and was desperately trying to convince his wife to move back to England to be closer to their children and thus ditching such things, told me he had recently replaced all the bearings?  Nice Guy, and I really believe that he did.  The only thing he did mention that was his method of pre-loading the spindle hadn't been all that scientific.

Everything feels tight from the outside and I don't see any significant spindle run out?

Craig


----------



## Brent H (Jul 11, 2020)

Ok - that was my next thought.  Loosen the set screw on the ring and tighten up the ring until the spindle is a bit stiff.  Back off 1/4 to 1/2 turn and check spindle.  If it is good to rotate nicely - you are set.  Lock the set screw. My lathe was making shite noise and the bearing closest to the nut was the issue.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 11, 2020)

Brent H said:


> Ok - that was my next thought.  Loosen the set screw on the ring and tighten up the ring until the spindle is a bit stiff.  Back off 1/4 to 1/2 turn and check spindle.  If it is good to rotate nicely - you are set.  Lock the set screw. My lathe was making shite noise and the bearing closest to the nut was the issue.



That nut wasn't on there very tight?  What the heck do I use to tighten it down with?  All's that's on it is a single hole about 5mm dia and 7.5mm deep.

Craig


----------



## Brent H (Jul 11, 2020)

Loosen set screw and tighten with a 5 mm punch or 5 mm rod.  - - hardened punch will allow for some added tighten.  Take a pic


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 11, 2020)

Brent H said:


> Loosen set screw and tighten with a 5 mm punch or 5 mm rod.  - - hardened punch will allow for some added tighten.  Take a pic









Removed the nut and cleaned her up.






And cleaned up the spindle.






Greased the nut and ready to tighten.  Just need to figure out what to use to hold it.

Should I be doing with the chuck installed or does it matter?

Craig


----------



## Brent H (Jul 11, 2020)

Doesn’t matter.  Originally probably was a spanner used to tighten. You could use the chuck with a bar in the jaws to allow it to brace against the bed to tighten.


----------



## Brent H (Jul 11, 2020)

Just noticing that your back bearing (6203 2RS) is missing the seal at 12 o’clock- not a good sign.   That might just be your issue?


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 11, 2020)

Brent H said:


> Just noticing that your back bearing (6203 2RS) is missing the seal at 12 o’clock- not a good sign.   That might just be your issue?



I don't think it's missing.  Just the image or some grunge I didn't remove.  I'll take her off and double check though.

Edit.... I checked, the seal is ok, just some grunge I didn't clean out.

Can I brace the nut and turn the chuck instead?


----------



## Brent H (Jul 11, 2020)

You can, shouldn’t be that hard to knock up to tight. - just need everything snug.  The bearing is not a tight fit at the  back, you could take a dead blow hammer and tap the front and tighten.  You are looking at tenths.  Push on the front and tap with your dead blow - shouldn’t take much - how loose was the nut?


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 11, 2020)

Brent H said:


> You can, shouldn’t be that hard to knock up to tight. - just need everything snug.  The bearing is not a tight fit at the  back, you could take a dead blow hammer and tap the front and tighten.  You are looking at tenths.  Push on the front and tap with your dead blow - shouldn’t take much - how loose was the nut?



Tap on the front of what?  The nut wasn't loose loose, just easy to back off.  Tightening it appears to be a bigger challenge.











I made this up, but man that nut doesn't want to tighten up any more than it is. The spindle feels a little draggy now, but not much.


----------



## Brent H (Jul 11, 2020)

If it’s a little draggy then back  1/4 turn and lock the nut - that is it.  Same type of adjustment for a wheel bearing.  After the back off check out  the play.  Should be all easy to turn.


----------



## Brent H (Jul 11, 2020)

Nice tool fab


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 11, 2020)

Brent H said:


> If it’s a little draggy then back  1/4 turn and lock the nut - that is it.  Same type of adjustment for a wheel bearing.  After the back off check out  the play.  Should be all easy to turn.



Tap on the front of what?  I want to see if this will go a little tighter yet.  A 1/4 turn will loosen it right off?


----------



## Johnwa (Jul 11, 2020)

How big around is that nut?


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 11, 2020)

Johnwa said:


> How big around is that nut?



2"


----------



## Johnwa (Jul 11, 2020)

I was thinking OD.

I have this wrench that fits an OD of 4”.  The pin is ⅜”


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 11, 2020)

Sorry, 2" dia OD.

Ya, your wrench won't work, pin is too large for one thing.

Thanks anyways.

May have to make something up I guess.  The nub on my bar tool broke off, trying to tighten it.  Wish I could weld as good as you can.

Craig


----------



## Johnwa (Jul 11, 2020)

Ok.  I’ve got a couple that would fit 2”.  You can have the black one, It has a 1/4 x ¼ pin.  The other one I made to fit my Southbend spindle protector nut.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 11, 2020)

Johnwa said:


> Ok.  I’ve got a couple that would fit 2”.  You can have the black one, It has a 1/4 x ¼ pin.  The other one I made to fit my Southbend spindle protector nut.



PM sent.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 11, 2020)

I think I might be to the point now where the vibration is the same at 900 RPM as in neutral?  Have to check again tomorrow, the wife shut me down for the night.  Gee.... it's only 10pm LOL.


----------



## Brent H (Jul 12, 2020)

Bearings are not too pricy.


----------



## YotaBota (Jul 12, 2020)

That sounds better. When you reinstalled the nut, there should be a brass slug in the setscrew hole to protect the spindle  threads. If it fell out you will crush the threads with the setscrew and that won't be fun next time the nut has to be adjusted or removed.
Brent H - what machine are you parts sourcing from? The bearing list you show doesn't match up well with list in the SM9" manual.


----------



## Brent H (Jul 12, 2020)

That is for a SM10.

the 6203 would be $6 each x 3 and a 6203 2RS would be maybe a couple bucks more  - then the Timkin bearing is  around $50 if you don’t try for the über precision one.   My lathe is running fine with a regular Timkin


----------



## YotaBota (Jul 12, 2020)

Ahha,,,, sailors,,,, you just can't trust themlol. The uber precision for the SM"9 spindle is over $400 cdn and I saw it for $140 usd, the spindle tail bearing is about $30. I installed new 6203's when I was having the issues with my 9" and they were cheap and easy.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 12, 2020)

YotaBota said:


> Ahha,,,, sailors,,,, you just can't trust themlol. The uber precision for the SM"9 spindle is over $400 cdn and I saw it for $140 usd, the spindle tail bearing is about $30. I installed new 6203's when I was having the issues with my 9" and they were cheap and easy.



What issues were you having?


----------



## Brent H (Jul 12, 2020)

Since the lathe uses only one conical bearing and the back end is supported by a deep race ball bearing I did not see the need to put some crazy expensive bearing in there.  If the back bearing is out then it doesn’t matter much if that front sucker is $50 or $2000 - LOL.


----------



## YotaBota (Jul 12, 2020)

I was having a lot of gear noise in the headstock so when I had it apart investigating the noise I replaced the pulley shaft bearings and the idler shaft bearings. One bearing was iffy so it was worth doing at the time.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 12, 2020)

How's this for a more scientific approach for measuring the vibration?






How much does the water in a shot glass placed on top of the head stock jiggle.

Essentially nothing with the belt removed and I get the same result placing the shot glass on the mill running at 770 RPM.

With the belt installed and the spindle in neutral, it jiggles quite a bit and about the same amount when turning the spindle at 900 RPM.

On another note.  How much run out should I be seeing or should I say is acceptable on the outside of the tail end of the spindle?  I'm seeing 0.001 with a DI, but is that considered a trued surface?


----------



## Brent H (Jul 12, 2020)

Do you have a Morse taper sleeve you can insert into the headstock and take a reading off that?   I will send pic - STBY


----------



## Brent H (Jul 12, 2020)

I am getting less than 1/2 thou on a beat up dead centre


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 12, 2020)

That's the front of the spindle, I'm talking the back of the spindle past the spindle nut.  

I'm getting 0.003 off the chuck mounting plate.  I'll throw a MT3 in the spindle and take a reading on that now.


----------



## Brent H (Jul 12, 2020)

For what it is worth, that back bearing was bad on my machine- changing it is not as big a deal as you might think.  The arrangement is pretty similar. You could probably put a new bearing in in about an hour.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 12, 2020)

I'm seeing less that 0.001 on my cheap offshore MT3 center mounted in the spindle.

Bearings are an option.  Just trying to establish the source of this vibration.  Something I did notice when I was swapping pulleys was that the motor pulley has a couple of dings on the second largest and third largest sheaves which might affect the two most used belt positions.

Out of curiosity, I re-installed the original motor pulley we had replaced earlier to see how that behaved.  Ya, that thing is pooched, it has a discernible wobble to it and the machine vibration went way up.  It needs to be bored out and a bushing installed to restore it back to a usable state.


----------



## YotaBota (Jul 12, 2020)

I just tried scientific test 2.0, there is just about nothing for water movement, no waves, no tsunami and no Jurassic park rings.
I don't have an MT3 center but my MT2 center in an MT3 adapter gets me just under .003. On the spindle I get not even the width of the line on the dial indicator.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 12, 2020)

YotaBota said:


> I just tried scientific test 2.0, there is just about nothing for water movement, no waves, no tsunami and no Jurassic park rings.
> I don't have an MT3 center but my MT2 center in an MT3 adapter gets me just under .003. On the spindle I get not even the width of the line on the dial indicator.



Not a ripple at 900 RPM turning eh?

Despite the vibration, I'm still able to achieve a pretty decent finish for the most part.


----------



## YotaBota (Jul 12, 2020)

Would I lie to you??????? never,,,,,, I might BS you a bunch but never lie to you,LOL.
So if you have the same jiggle with the spindle in neutral or engaged then I think I would take out the pulley shaft and check the bearings. Even if the bearings seem okay I would still remove the gear, reinstall the shaft, run it up and see if the vibration goes away.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 12, 2020)

YotaBota said:


> Would I lie to you??????? never,,,,,, I might BS you a bunch but never lie to you,LOL.
> So if you have the same jiggle with the spindle in neutral or engaged then I think I would take out the pulley shaft and check the bearings. Even if the bearings seem okay I would still remove the gear, reinstall the shaft, run it up and see if the vibration goes away.



Ok, I pulled the lid on the headstock and had a peek inside.  How do you get that shaft and gear out without pulling out the spindle and everything in between?


----------



## YotaBota (Jul 12, 2020)

On top of the headstock behind the lid (just in front of the power cord) is a 1/4-20 bolt that secures the shaft into the headstock, remove the bolt and the pulley shaft will pull out. Knock out the roll pin and the gear will come off, you may need to use a puller on the gear but it's not on overly tight.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 12, 2020)

YotaBota said:


> On top of the headstock behind the lid (just in front of the power cord) is a 1/4-20 bolt that secures the shaft into the headstock, remove the bolt and the pulley shaft will pull out. Knock out the roll pin and the gear will come off, you may need to use a puller on the gear but it's not on overly tight.



The shaft and gear will come out as one?  You don't have to remove the gear from the interior side of the headstock?


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 12, 2020)

OK...… what is this telling us???? 

If I lift the motor ever so slightly, 80%-90% of the vibration diminishes.  Almost down to the same level as with the belt removed, and this is with the spindle in neutral and turning.

As a side note, I removed the motor tensioning spring all together as it didn't seem to accomplish anything.


----------



## Brent H (Jul 12, 2020)

Does lifting the motor loosen or tighten the belt?


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 12, 2020)

Brent H said:


> Does lifting the motor loosen or tighten the belt?



Loosens the belt.  In it's current configuration only motor weight tensions the belt.

I'm quit surprised as I don't have to lift it much and it just settles right down.


----------



## YotaBota (Jul 12, 2020)

Yup, the shaft, pulley, bearing and gear slide out as one piece. Did you find the bolt? It may be a setscrew or some other fastener, mine is a 7/16 hex-head.

Lifting the motor takes tension off the belt but I wonder if the belt is to long and allowing the motor or motor mount to touch the frame. Or the pulley shaft bearing is gone, either way we're getting closer.


----------



## Brent H (Jul 12, 2020)

Interesting - could be a bearing in the motor or as Yota says the shaft bearing. Since the weight of the motor will add a load to the bearing it may be shifting the shaft out of proper alignment.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 12, 2020)

YotaBota said:


> Yup, the shaft, pulley, bearing and gear slide out as one piece. Did you find the bolt? It may be a setscrew or some other fastener, mine is a 7/16 hex-head.
> 
> Lifting the motor takes tension off the belt but I wonder if the belt is to long and allowing the motor or motor mount to touch the frame. Or the pulley shaft bearing is gone, either way we're getting closer.



Is that screw/bolt on the top of the headstock to the back side?  I have a slotted screw on the top side.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 12, 2020)

Brent H said:


> Interesting - could be a bearing in the motor or as Yota says the shaft bearing. Since the weight of the motor will add a load to the bearing it may be shifting the shaft out of proper alignment.



I've taken that head stock pulley and shaft and pushed and pulled and shook it as hard as I can and I can't feel any play in it.  The motor..... that might be a different story.


----------



## YotaBota (Jul 12, 2020)

Yes, the screw/bolt, is on top to the back side. If you follow down the orange power cable from the for/rev switch it should put you finger right on the screw/bolt head.


----------



## Brent H (Jul 12, 2020)

@YYCHobbyMachinist I have seen lots of motors where the drive end bearing is still ok but the non drive end one is buggered.  You move the shaft about and it seems fine until you take the back of the motor off and the bearing is shot. - something to look at anyway.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 12, 2020)

Brent H said:


> @YYCHobbyMachinist I have seen lots of motors where the drive end bearing is still ok but the non drive end one is buggered.  You move the shaft about and it seems fine until you take the back of the motor off and the bearing is shot. - something to look at anyway.



Do those things just purr when you run them no load in that condition?


----------



## DPittman (Jul 12, 2020)

YYCHobbyMachinist said:


> How's this for a more scientific approach for measuring the vibration?
> 
> View attachment 10037
> 
> ...


Hey I use almost the same method when my machinery is vibrating! except I use southern comfort  instead of water.  The shot glass almost always shakes on the first attempt so I empty the glass and try again, I never take a reading on the first 2 or 3 tests.  By test #4 or 5 things always SMOOTH right out. But then the wobble somehow seems to transfer to me.   By then I'm ready to quit working in the shop anyhow and don't feel like dealing with the issue anymore.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 12, 2020)

DPittman said:


> Hey I use almost the same method when my machinery is vibrating! except I use southern comfort  instead of water.  The shot glass almost always shakes on the first attempt so I empty the glass and try again, I never take a reading on the first 2 or 3 tests.  By test #4 or 5 things always SMOOTH right out. But then the wobble somehow seems to transfer to me.   By then I'm ready to quit working in the shop anyhow and don't feel like dealing with the issue anymore.



Ya, I thought some one would comment on the shot glass thing LOL, and don't get me started with the Southern Comfort, after about test three it would be something like..... What Problem? Lets see what this does.


----------



## YotaBota (Jul 12, 2020)

That ranks right up there with,,, "HOLD MY BEER!!!!!" LOL


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 12, 2020)

YotaBota said:


> Yup, the shaft, pulley, bearing and gear slide out as one piece



There are two bearings? One on the head stock casting and one in the interior of the headstock. Which one comes out with the shaft or do they both come out?


----------



## YotaBota (Jul 13, 2020)

The bearings are pressed onto the shaft so all come out as a unit. The manual, pg 8, shows a picture of the shaft assy, item #2.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 13, 2020)

YotaBota said:


> The bearings are pressed onto the shaft so all come out as a unit. The manual, pg 8, shows a picture of the shaft assy, item #2.



Have to ask lots of questions here as the last bears I played with were re-packing the front wheel bearing on my first car a 61 Falcon and that was over 45 years ago LOL.

So, just take the screw out and pull (by hand) the whole assembly out?  No pullers, hammers or punches needed?


----------



## YotaBota (Jul 13, 2020)

Correct, the bearings are a very close fit into the headstock so you will need to pull out as straight as possible otherwise it will bind. If it starts to bind just give it a gentle side to side rocking motion and it will come out. You won't need the hammers, pullers or punches. I moved the pulley out on the shaft far enough to get my fingers in between the pulley and the headstock to pry it out.
If you have a look inside the headstock at the shaft you can see the screw blocks the inner bearing so the shaft can't slide out.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 13, 2020)

Ok, I'm convinced now the vibration issue is in the motor.  To eliminate the motor pulley as the issue, I picked up a 4 sheave pulley at CT (not exactly the same size but close) to try and got the same results.  Upon watching the pulley spin down I noticed that it appeared to start flopping around in an eccentric manner towards the end of it's spin down.  An illusion perhaps?  As well the vibration appears to increase.  As stated before unloading the belt tension causes the vibration to diminish significantly.  So I figure belt tension must be causing the motor shaft to cock.


----------



## Brent H (Jul 13, 2020)

Did you pull the motor apart and check the bearings???  

take the bearings off the shaft - clean them and check for any movement between the inner race and outer one.   If they are sealed type the grease gets old and they are done- inner race will feel gritty when turning (finger as a shaft). Are they hard to spin or is there a spot where they seem not as ready to spin?  Any ability to move the inner race is a sign they are done.  If you spin the bearing on your finger a new one will be smooth but not spin about too crazy (grease inside) a worn bearing may do a couple revs and abruptly stop.  
Man, I shoulda coulda woulda fixed the 3 phase that came with the donor lathe. Part of it was crushed but ...... alas ... crap.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 13, 2020)

I haven't gotten that far.  The motor is such a PITA to pull, I'm thinking of waiting to find a replacement before pulling it.  Haven't a clue how to disassemble a motor either.  Today I blocked up the motor with a piece of 2X4 and a thick rubber mouse pad.  It sure runs smoother that way.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 14, 2020)

YotaBota said:


> Correct, the bearings are a very close fit into the headstock so you will need to pull out as straight as possible otherwise it will bind. If it starts to bind just give it a gentle side to side rocking motion and it will come out. You won't need the hammers, pullers or punches. I moved the pulley out on the shaft far enough to get my fingers in between the pulley and the headstock to pry it out.
> If you have a look inside the headstock at the shaft you can see the screw blocks the inner bearing so the shaft can't slide out.



Ok, this morning I tried pulling the head stock pulley shaft out.  After an hour of pulling, jiggling, and pleading all's I managed to do was move her 1/4" to the point the gear is butting up against the inner bearing.  She ain't going any further without resorting to some form of forceful persuasion.  I'm not sure either bearing moved in the headstock casting.  I think the shaft moved in the bearings.  Now to see if I can get her back to where it was...……...

Ok, the inner bearing must have moved a little.  Where I had given up trying budge it the blocking screw wouldn't full seat.  A couple love taps with a wooden mallet set her back into position.  I didn't see any evidence of the outer bearing moving in the headstock casting at all.

CRAP!!!!!  While installing the bearing blocking screw I managed to drop the screw driver bit into the headstock Daaaaaa.  What a sickening plop that made. NOW what to do?????  Looks like a trip to PA to get a magnetic pickup is in order.  Then I remembered my scribe has a magnetic tip, I wonder if that will work????  A couple swishes at the bottom of the headstock and presto out it came. PHEEEWWWW.

I still think that headstock oil smells funny?  Almost fishy.


----------



## YotaBota (Jul 14, 2020)

On mine the bearings, both inner and outer, are pressed onto the shaft, the shaft/bearings/gear will come out as one piece. You may need to use two pry bars, one on each side of the pulley, and give the a gentle tug but not enough to bend the pulley.
It would be a good idea to change the oil and flush the crap out of the bottom while you have it open. There is a drain plug between the headstock front mounting bolts below the spindle, it's an Allen head plug. Once the plug is out the hole will probably need to be cleaned of crap before the oil will flow. You never know, it might be like finding change between the cushions of the sofa.
Did you ever get the apron leak fixed?


----------



## Hruul (Jul 14, 2020)

I didn't know there was a drain!?!.  I sucked the old oil out of mine with a suction gun, and then cleaned the headstock with kerosene and a bit of hydraulic oil mix.  Then sucked that all out and refilled with new oil.  I will have to see if I can find the drain plug on mine next time.  I think I will still suck out most of the oil from the top though.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 14, 2020)

YotaBota said:


> On mine the bearings, both inner and outer, are pressed onto the shaft, the shaft/bearings/gear will come out as one piece. You may need to use two pry bars, one on each side of the pulley, and give the a gentle tug but not enough to bend the pulley.
> It would be a good idea to change the oil and flush the crap out of the bottom while you have it open. There is a drain plug between the headstock front mounting bolts below the spindle, it's an Allen head plug. Once the plug is out the hole will probably need to be cleaned of crap before the oil will flow. You never know, it might be like finding change between the cushions of the sofa.
> Did you ever get the apron leak fixed?



No, I still haven't done anything about the apron drip.  I keep getting distracted LOL.  First installing the mill and dealing with it's Gibb issues and now the lathe vibration issue.  I'm still not convinced it's a gasket leak but rather it's leaking from clutch plate rod where it exits the apron casting in the front and back.  The gits oiler rises above that rod and since that rod has no seals it leaks when you fill the oiler to the top.  I've kind of proven that theory by wrapping the rags around the rod where it exists the casting at the front and back and not seeing a drip form in days at a time. Take the diapers off and you will see a drip formed on the drain plug the very next day.  I've also noticed that it leaks more when you use the lead screw and clutch which I assume is caused by the oil splashing around more in there.


----------



## YotaBota (Jul 14, 2020)

Yah, I used the suction gun the first time as well. Once the casting was empty then I noticed the the little divot in the bottom that lead to the plug. The manual does say the oil should be "drained" but I never picked up on that word enough to look for a plug, duh.
YYC - the leak in my apron was the lack of gasket so I just kinda figured that would go for yours as well and you're right, there is no seal on the clutch shaft.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 14, 2020)

YotaBota said:


> YYC - the leak in my apron was the lack of gasket so I just kinda figured that would go for yours as well and you're right, there is no seal on the clutch shaft.



My apron has a gasket installed.  Does your Gits oiler rise above the clutch shaft?  Also, there appears to be a drain point on the front of my head stock unless that's something else.


----------



## YotaBota (Jul 14, 2020)

The top of the filler is above the shaft but the bottom of the filler is at about the same level as the bottom of the shaft. I filled it to the top only once and it dripped for a couple of days after that and then quit dripping. now about once a month I top it up and it drips for a couple of days but at least I know there is oil in it.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 14, 2020)

YotaBota said:


> The top of the filler is above the shaft but the bottom of the filler is at about the same level as the bottom of the shaft. I filled it to the top only once and it dripped for a couple of days after that and then quit dripping. now about once a month I top it up and it drips for a couple of days but at least I know there is oil in it.








My traveling drip tray LOL.  Plastic tray attached with a double clip.  As you can see, I have a tray within a tray, within a tray.  Contains 90% of the mess most of the time.


----------



## YotaBota (Jul 14, 2020)

Have drip try, will travel lol. Nice and simple solution.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 15, 2020)

Sourced a 1/2 HP ODP motor from Tom today (@Tom Kitta , thanks Tom), and started installing it.

First observation:  The pulley fits the shaft better and had to be tapped on the last 5 mm.
Second observation:  Noise level is way way lower.  That surprised me.
Third observation:  Vibration is much lower and consistent through all speed ranges whether the spindle is in neutral or turning.

This is the filthy beast I removed.










That sucker weighs 40 lbs.  I just about dropped it trying to lift it over the headstock.  The replacement motor weighs about 1/3.  I think I see a 7 and a 5 in the HP stamping window.  Could it have been stamped .75 rather than 3/4?

I was going to wire the FWD/REV switch to the replacement motor until I saw this.






Ya, not going to happen.

Can I take this thing to the car wash and power wash all the crap off of it before starting the bearing replacement? It's filthy.


----------



## Tom O (Jul 16, 2020)

contact cleaner would probably work the best.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 16, 2020)

Tom O said:


> contact cleaner would probably work the best.



The exterior of the motor, the mount and ends are covered with filthy black stuff.  Probably grease with belt powder/dust stuff.  A power wash would make quick work of it?  Brake cleaner?


----------



## Brent H (Jul 16, 2020)

Brake cleaner will be fine on the outside


----------



## RobinHood (Jul 16, 2020)

YYCHobbyMachinist said:


> I think I see a 7 and a 5 in the HP stamping window. Could it have been stamped .75 rather than 3/4?



the decimal point is the same distance ahead of the 7 as the 7 is ahead of the 5. You can just see it here:





so yes, 0.75 is the HP. They left out the leading 0.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 16, 2020)

RobinHood said:


> the decimal point is the same distance ahead of the 7 as the 7 is ahead of the 5. You can just see it here:
> 
> View attachment 10117
> so yes, 0.75 is the HP. They left out the leading 0.



Interesting that the camera captured that.  I couldn't read what it was with the motor off the machine.  Looked like someone had purposely punched the value out.  So now I know.











So, what do you figure?  Is this motor worth restoring or not?  The shaft is pretty chewed up.


----------



## Tom O (Jul 16, 2020)

It never hurts to have a spare or one for a project.


----------



## Brent H (Jul 16, 2020)

Will you use that motor in 5 years?


----------



## trlvn (Jul 16, 2020)

YYCHobbyMachinist said:


> So, what do you figure? Is this motor worth restoring or not?


If it was up to me, YES.

A 3/4 hp motor is pretty usable size.  Bearings are really quite cheap and not difficult to change.  A little WD-40 or brake cleaner and the outer case will look just fine.  When used intermittently like in a lathe, these fractional horsepower motors last for many decades.  Maybe the start capacitor will need to be replaced.  That too is dead simple and inexpensive.

On another forum that I follow, they refer to the "rat hole".  As in: "Doncha have a motor or six squirrelled away in the rat hole?"  [Mixed metaphor, I know.]  Along with pulleys of all sizes, some SOW cable, magnetic and manual motor starters, locking plugs and receptacles, etc, etc.

Maybe thats just me.

Craig
(I'm down to 2 motors in my rat hole.  I've been hearing the siren song of the auction--"good stuff, cheap!")


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 16, 2020)

Brent H said:


> Will you use that motor in 5 years?



If it's worth putzn with, I'll probably re-mount it on the lathe and use the 1/2 HP as a backup.






Ooooops.  Had a little miscalculation with regard to available cable lengths here.  I intended to mount that switch vertically. Oh well, it was intended to be an in term solution until I get the 3/4 HP functional again.

BTB - That FWD/STOP/REV drum switch has three back wires and one green wire coming out of it.  How the heck are you supposed to know how to wire that thing up????


----------



## kevin.decelles (Jul 16, 2020)

Keep the motor. No brainer




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 16, 2020)

kevin.decelles said:


> Keep the motor. No brainer



It's not so much a question of keeping, it's a question of is it worth investing in the bearings and time.  As it is, it would do in a pinch if needed.


----------



## kevin.decelles (Jul 16, 2020)

Compare an old motor to a new one..... is keep the old and do the bearings. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Brent H (Jul 16, 2020)

Open up the old motor and change out the bearings as a learning exercise.  The. New bearings on. 1/2 hp to 3/4 motor should be about $20. - great learning


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 16, 2020)

Brent H said:


> Open up the old motor and change out the bearings as a learning exercise.  The. New bearings on. 1/2 hp to 3/4 motor should be about $20. - great learning



It's got grease nipples over the bearings?  What am I going to find in there?  Are a bunch of ball bearings going to fall out?


----------



## Brent H (Jul 16, 2020)

Nope, probably the old school type open cage bearings, shielded one side bearing, shielded both sides  or a sealed bearing that should of had the lube seek removed

Worst case is a sleeve bearing that has packing and wicks for lube.  - argh!  That is like I have for the tool grinder - it is for spindle grinding - very old but runs great with new felt


----------



## Brent H (Jul 16, 2020)

Get the number off the bearing - 6203, 6405 etc and you can order new ones - get the radial sealed type.  So if you have a 6207 zz that is a double “shielded” bearing.   A bearing with Z would be one shield.  Typically the one shield goes towards the electrics.   Easier to get a 2 RS bearing and be done with it.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 16, 2020)

Brent H said:


> Open up the old motor and change out the bearings as a learning exercise.  The. New bearings on. 1/2 hp to 3/4 motor should be about $20. - great learning



Ya, I'll haul her out back tomorrow and clean off the grung, then look at how to open it up.  Time to get my feet wet alright.

I gave the lathe a test run with the 1/2 hp installed tonight.  The abated vibration does show in the finish.  I didn't notice any lack of power taking 0.02" cuts.  Loving this HSS tool I ground, should have tackled that learning experience two years ago.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 17, 2020)

Well...… this was a bit of a struggle






Started at 8am this morning trying to clean off the grunge on the outside of the motor.  What ever that stuff is, brake cleaner had no effect on it.  All the brake cleaner accomplished was to flush away what ever the wire brush managed to lift.  Spent a good hour and a half working at it.

Pulled the bearing caps off (The shaft end one is lower left in the image) .  Well the bearings were well greased so no worries there.  Now you can push and pull the shaft and see that the bearings will move in the end covers, so looks like those have to come off next.

The shaft end cover came off easy-peasy.  Now the rotor wants to come out but something in there is holding it back.  Hmmm..... must be that centrifugal switch you hear click when it's winding down.

Well.... the back cover (electrical end) gave me no end of grief.  Could get the start of a hair line crack going but nothing wide enough to pry it off.  I tapped and pulled for an hour to no avail.  Finally I took a utility knife blade and tapped that into that hair line crack and she started to open up.  Finally it popped off.

Disconnected the switch assembly and out came the rotor, switch and bearings.  Phew..  it's now 12:45 pm.

As for the bearings, I'm not perceiving any issues what so ever with them.  Appear tight and turn freely.

So dunno now?  Replace them anyways?

Any suggestions as to how clean the crud out of the cage?  Blowing it out with compressed air is the only thing I can think of.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 17, 2020)

Filthy job...….






But all cleaned up now.  Brake cleaner, brushes, and compressed air got her done.  You can actually see the wire color coding now.  Everything was black before.  Got dirty clear up to my elbows.  Haven't had that much fun in a long time LOL.  SWMBO will probably have a choice word or two about this shirt though

Now to figure out how to remove those bearings.  The only pullers I see on the PA website are gear pullers?


----------



## Brent H (Jul 18, 2020)

Hey Craig,

if you push, pull or twist the outer casing on those bearings do you notice any movement between the outer and inner race?  When you rotated them, any gritty or harder to turn spots?   If you have cleaned them out, will they spin and go for a long time or just a revolution or two and then stop?  Any signs of corrosion or pitting on the balls? Any signs of the bearing spinning in the outer housing? 
Recommend replacing them with sealed bearings.  So on the race of the bearing will be some numbers - when you get new bearings ask for xxxx 2RS for example. 

make sure to gently clean off the centrifugal switch contacts before re-assembly. 
Notice that your motor is open to atmosphere (the slots on the back plate). That would be a typical drip proof type motor - that fan on the shaft draws air across for cooling.  It will also draw oil and swarf and other crap.  - if you recall from my lathe post I removed a bunch of swarf and a drywall screw from the old motor.  I now have a shield that keeps the swarf at bay but allows proper air flow.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 18, 2020)

Brent H said:


> Hey Craig,
> 
> if you push, pull or twist the outer casing on those bearings do you notice any movement between the outer and inner race?  When you rotated them, any gritty or harder to turn spots?   If you have cleaned them out, will they spin and go for a long time or just a revolution or two and then stop?  Any signs of corrosion or pitting on the balls? Any signs of the bearing spinning in the outer housing?
> Recommend replacing them with sealed bearings.  So on the race of the bearing will be some numbers - when you get new bearings ask for xxxx 2RS for example.
> ...



I haven't cleaned the grease out of the bearings.  Should I do that before passing judgment as to their condition?

I did find some fine swarf in there but mostly black sooty stuff as if it had ingested a smoked belt or two.

If I get sealed bearings, can I remove the grease fittings and plug the holes with set screws?


----------



## RobinHood (Jul 18, 2020)

Craig, while you have the motor apart for new bearings, I would address the rotor shaft as well. That is some chewed-up, sad looking piece...






pulleys will fit better as well. Turn it between centers on your lathe to clean up all the chowder marks. You will either have to sleeve the pulley or the shaft to make up the difference.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 18, 2020)

RobinHood said:


> Craig, while you have the motor apart for new bearings, I would address the rotor shaft as well. That is some chewed-up, sad looking piece...
> 
> pulleys will fit better as well. Turn it between centers on your lathe to clean up all the chowder marks. You will either have to sleeve the pulley or the shaft to make up the difference.



Ya, I was wondering if that shaft didn't defeat the bearing upgrade.  I suppose I could turn it down to 1/2" and re-cut the keyway on the mill.  1/2" would at least be a common size.  I have a motor pulley that needs to be sleeved, so I could sleeve that to 1/2" to mate up.

Project creep LOL.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 18, 2020)

Got the motor bearings off with the help of @BMW Rider , thanks Ed.  Less than a minute a piece with the right tool.






They are both labeled the same and measure the same.  0.665 ID, 1.574 OD.

After cleaning the grease out there is a distinct difference in the feel of the front v.s. back bearing.

The back bearing spins freely and goes to town with compressed air turning it.

The front bearing...… well it feels pretty gritty and doesn't react to compressed air at all.

So.... take them to a bearing supplier and ask for suitable sealed replacements?  I'll be looking at $20 each or $10 each?


----------



## RobinHood (Jul 18, 2020)

You sure you measured the ID correctly? Maybe measure the shaft‘s bearing journal instead?

Based on the OD, it looks like a quality 6203-2RS deep groove ball bearing would work.

6203 - 2RS is 40mmm OD, 17mm ID and a width of 12mm

https://www.skf.com/au/products/rol...ings/deep-groove-ball-bearings/productid-6203

PA has some cheap ones - not my first choice; would do in a pinch, however. I’d go for SKF Explorer (not their cheap line), NTN, NACHI, ore something along those lines.

https://www.princessauto.com/en/detail/bearing-6203-2rs/A-p3850658e


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 18, 2020)

Ah.... you're right 17mm and 12mm wide.

So I guess if I'm going to turn the shaft down I had better do that before investing in bearings in case things go sideways  Turn her down to 1/2" sound ok?











Man that interrupted cut across the key way just kills attaining any semblance of a nice finish.  I've had to slow the machine down to 250 RPM just to get something close to reasonable.  The image depicts 250 RPM, carbide tool, 0.003" cut using the power feed at it's slowest setting. Not great by any stretch of the imagination.


----------



## RobinHood (Jul 18, 2020)

YYCHobbyMachinist said:


> Turn her down to 1/2" sound ok?



I would turn it down just enough to clean up. Nice and parallel. You can indicate off of the bearing journals to see if the centres in the shaft are good to use. They should be, unless someone in the past has beat on them with a hammer. Then it gets a bit trickier, but still doable.

The pulley that was on that shaft probably has some deep gouges in its bore. I would bore it over size and make a custom sleeve that fits the undersized motor shaft and the oversized pulley bore. A piece of heavy walled DOM pipe would be a good starting point for a sleeve. I would make the sleeve a light press fit (with some red locktite) into the pulley. If the pulley is aluminum, you can even go the shrink fit route: leave the sleeve OD oversized. Heat the pulley evenly with a propane torch (or heat gun) and use red locktite and drop it in. Once it cools, it won’t come out again.
Then bore it out so the shaft just fits with no play. Cut the key way into the sleeve where the pulley’s is and install.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 18, 2020)

RobinHood said:


> You can indicate off of the bearing journals to see if the centres in the shaft are good to use.



Oh great, now you tell me  In any event, I checked it's all good, turning true.  I'll take it down to 0.55 and call it quits, I'm at 0.56 now.  Does the pulley sleeve need to be steel or can it be anything i.e. aluminum?


----------



## RobinHood (Jul 18, 2020)

Oh no, don’t stop, if you are doing well and you are happy, go for 1/2” shaft diameter. Just more work for you...

I aluminum would work. Make it a good fit to the shaft - ie no slop - or it will have a tendency to wobble and come undone and you will be back to square one when the shaft/bore gouges.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 20, 2020)

RobinHood said:


> You sure you measured the ID correctly? Maybe measure the shaft‘s bearing journal instead?
> 
> Based on the OD, it looks like a quality 6203-2RS deep groove ball bearing would work.
> 
> ...



I went to SKF this morning.  Doesn't appear to be a place that deals with general public purchases.  Looked to be an engineering office.  To gain access you had to call someone to come screen you with a thermometer.  I didn't pursue it other than to read all the instructions to gain access.

Who in Calgary sells bearings over the counter other than PA?


----------



## Dabbler (Jul 20, 2020)

Transmission supply, Acklands both deal with SKF.  SKF and FAG both have technical suppport lines, and will get you to the exact bearing number, which you can then order from the distributor.


----------



## Johnwa (Jul 20, 2020)

I’ve got some from Motion Canada .  I think they bought BC Bearings.


----------



## RobinHood (Jul 20, 2020)

Also Gregg Distributors.

https://www.greggdistributors.ca/catalogue.php


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 20, 2020)

Has anyone used BDI?  It's close to MSM which I need to visit.


----------



## RobinHood (Jul 20, 2020)

Not yet, been meaning to. Drive past them often enough...

if they sell quality brand bearings - you are good to go.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 20, 2020)

Trying to set this pully up to over-bore it.  I have it dialed in radially but I'm seeing 0.04 axially.  What's acceptable?


----------



## RobinHood (Jul 20, 2020)

You put shims in behind the pulley where it butts up against the chuck jaws. Then check radial runout again -> set to zero (by moving the independent jaws). Check axial again -> set to zero (by shimming). Back and forth until it runs as true as possible in both axis.






speaking of shims: you should put some aluminum or copper pieces between the jaws and the pulley so it does not get chewed up by the hard jaws.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 21, 2020)

RobinHood said:


> Not yet, been meaning to. Drive past them often enough...
> 
> if they sell quality brand bearings - you are good to go.



Looks like BDI is a pretty good place for bearings.  They carry SKF and other brand names bearings and Leeson motors etc.  BTB- The SKF office in Calgary is a design office, they don't sell to the general public (BDI confirmed that).

Now here is the deal......






The guy at BDI measured up my bearings and came back out with two to choose from and said..... these ones you can have or you can pay for these ones  Not to be one to look a gift horse in the mouth I took the freebie's LOL.

Look to be labeled 6203 ZZ C3 on the outer race and 6203Z on the inner race.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 22, 2020)

Done and Done.....






Got the motor bearings swapped out and the old defunct pulley sleeved from 5/8" to 1/2".  She is running, quieter and smoother than before, and the pulley appears to be turning true in both axis and has no slop fit wise.  Won't know what sort of improvement was achieved until I remount it on the lathe again.

Interesting that my camera captured this image while it was running.  The image makes it looks like it's stopped?  Look at the fwd/stop/rev switch, it's running.


----------



## RobinHood (Jul 22, 2020)

Good job, Craig.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 22, 2020)

RobinHood said:


> Good job, Craig.



Thanks.  

The sleeve turned into a bit of a Bubba job I think.   I drilled the defunct pulley from 5/8' to 11/16' on the lathe and then turned an aluminium plug until it just about fit the pulley bore.  I had to hammer the plug into the pulley it was that tight.  I then drilled the plug while mounted in the pulley on the lathe to 1/2" and started test fitting the rotor shaft.  1/2" drilled didn't have enough wiggle room for the 0.505" rotor shaft, so I started boring the 1/2" hole in the mounted pulley plug.  Once satisfied I was close, I cut the plug length wise using a manual jigsaw where it intersected the pulley keyway. This allowed the plug to be backed out of the pulley bore.  I then milled the saw cut along the plug to 3/16" to accept a key (or so I thought).  With the plug re-installed in the pulley I found it wouldn't accept a 3/16" key so lots of filling ensued (LOTS).  When I finally had the keyway sorted out (and more than filling was resorted to), I cleaned everything and red Loctite' d the sleeve into the pulley.  Now test fitting the pulley to the rotor shaft revealed it would go on 3/4 and then get too snug to go any further with out resorting to a hammer.  I need to get that pulley on/off without resorting to a hammer and puller every time.  Hmmmm…. have some sort of pulley bore taper going here as the rotor shaft measures spot on along it's length.  Now what to do?  Boring didn't prevent this?  Well... out comes the valve grinding compound and a few turns later that pulley was fully seated.  A few more applications of valve grinding compound and I could mount and dismount the pulley no problem.

So, ya... Bubba' d my way through this LOL.


----------



## RobinHood (Jul 23, 2020)

Nothing wrong with “Bubba’ing“ if the end result is what you wanted. You used the tools at hand and with some ingenuity got the job done.

It was probably the locktite that stoped the sleeved pulley to fit after you “glued” it. In oder for the locktite to work, it has to take up some room between the parts to be glued. It’s not much, but is is there. That’s the amount you had to take out with valve grinding compound.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 23, 2020)

Well, I won't be afraid of tackling bearings now.  They just tapped on easy-peasy.  Re-assembling the motor was a bit of a head scratcher.  The rear bearing caps need to be captured in order to align with the front caps so that you can get the retaining screws in.  I was getting pretty flustered until I noticed that the long rods that retain the cage end covers just happen to be the same size and thread.  You can use those to capture the back caps then slide the front caps down the long rods into place and then install the retaining screws one at a time


----------



## Tom O (Jul 23, 2020)

Nice I’d be tempted to remove the stickout of the keyway for safety sake.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 23, 2020)

Tom O said:


> Nice I’d be tempted to remove the stickout of the keyway for safety sake.



Yup, going to do that for sure.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 23, 2020)

Well...… this is a little disappointing 

I remounted the re-built 3/4 HP motor on the lathe and the vibration is still there.  It's a little less and running quieter but it's there and not as smooth as running the 1/2 HP motor?

Dunno now.


----------



## RobinHood (Jul 23, 2020)

Was the motor/pulley vibrating/“walking“ on the bench when you had it running in the picture above? Maybe the rotor on the 3/4 hp motor is out of balance compared to the 1/2 hp motor.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 23, 2020)

RobinHood said:


> Was the motor/pulley vibrating/“walking“ on the bench when you had it running in the picture above? Maybe the rotor on the 3/4 hp motor is out of balance compared to the 1/2 hp motor.



Nope, not walking.  Just sitting there humming nice and quiet and smooth.

Tomorrow, I'll check the pulley run out on the 1/2 HP setup and see if it's significantly different than the 3/4 HP setup.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 25, 2020)

Well... I sat both motors side by side on the bench today and compared them.

The 1/2 HP *with* a pulley runs way smoother than the 3/4 HP (with the bearings replaced) *without* a pulley.  
Go figure

As for pulley runout.

3/4 HP 0.007 radially, 0.023 axially
1/2 HP 0.003 radially, 0.012 axially

The 3/4 HP which had it's shaft reduced from 5/8" to 1/2" shows no shaft radial runout what so ever, so any pulley runout is in the pulley which I sleeved 5/8" to 1/2".  That runout is about the same as what it started out as with a good pulley installed.

Guess it's a no brainer, go with the 1/2 HP motor pulley setup.

Just need to decide if I'd ever use reverse and if so source a switch.  What's wired onto the original switch and 3/4 HP motor doesn't appear to be color coded, so I'm a little reluctant to mess with it.

Craig


----------



## RobinHood (Jul 26, 2020)

You could always redo the pulley sleeve to make sure the sheaves themselves have no runout. I.E.: do not indicate off the OD of the pulley but rather the belt drive flanks.


----------



## YYCHM (Jul 26, 2020)

RobinHood said:


> You could always redo the pulley sleeve to make sure the sheaves themselves have no runout. I.E.: do not indicate off the OD of the pulley but rather the belt drive flanks.



Redoing the pulley sleeve is certainly an option.  When I dialed in the pulley in the 4J I indicated axially off a sheave flank the belt rides on and radially off the bottom of a sheave V.   I guess the belt doesn't actually ride on the bottom of the V.

The bottom line is that the 1/2 HP *with *a pulley runs smoother than the 3/4 *without* a pulley.  So cleaning up the pulley runout isn't going to negate that fact.


----------



## RobinHood (Jul 26, 2020)

YYCHobbyMachinist said:


> The bottom line is that the 1/2 HP *with *a pulley runs smoother than the 3/4 *without* a pulley. So cleaning up the pulley runout isn't going to negate that fact.



Good point.

Is there a fan on the 3/4 HP motor? Try running it without it to see if there is a difference.

The centrifugal switch is nice and clean?


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 25, 2020)

So when @RobinHood offered up this  6.5” by 1.5”-8 TPI backing plate | Calgary & Canadian Hobby Metal Workers & Machinists

I remembered this FOR SALE: POLAND PUTM 5" 3-JAW CHUCK | Calgary & Canadian Hobby Metal Workers & Machinists

I suspect the jaws on my PRAT 3-J are toast, so here was a chance to own a BISON.






Spent a good portion of today turning the chuck registration on the plate.  Over shot the first go and had to start over from scratch  Second go was a slow and painful creep up to the required dimension.






The swarf cast iron makes in horrible.  What you see in the images is just the tip of the iceberg.  I probably vacuumed 5 or 6 times over the course of the entire turning operation. Will probably take an entire day to clean my lathe properly.






Now I need drill mounting bolt holes in the plate.  The bolt holes in the chuck are blind so I can't transfer punch their locations onto the plate.  Any suggestions before I over think this problem LOL.

Craig


----------



## David_R8 (Nov 25, 2020)

Dig out your Machinery’s Handbook for the formula to calculate the bolt circle diameter. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 25, 2020)

David_R8 said:


> Dig out your Machinery’s Handbook for the formula to calculate the bolt circle diameter.



That didn't help LOL.....


----------



## RobinHood (Nov 25, 2020)

YYCHobbyMachinist said:


> I can't transfer punch their locations onto the plate



make pins that fit inside the threaded holes nicely (sliding fit, but not sloppy). Turn a point on one end. Make the pins just long enough so you have the point just above the surface. Line up the backing plate and give it a tap. Volà, you have just transferred the bolt hole locations.


----------



## RobinHood (Nov 25, 2020)

An idea for while you are at it: if you make the register on the backing plate about 10 to 20 thou too small and the mounting holes a little oversized, you can have yourself a “set true” 3J chuck.

Mount the chuck on the plate with the three bolts just snug. Clamp the work piece, indicate it in and “bump” the chuck body to take out any run out. Then tighten the chuck mounting bolts.

Had my import chuck on the 9” Utilathe set up like that. Worked like a charm, especially if I needed to take the work out to check fit. You can always put it back and get it to run true to finish your operation(s) that way.


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 25, 2020)

RobinHood said:


> make pins that fit inside the threaded holes nicely (sliding fit, but not sloppy). Turn a point on one end. Make the pins just long enough so you have the point just above the surface. Line up the backing plate and give it a tap. Volà, you have just transferred the bolt hole locations.



I'm liking this approach.  Been sitting here scratching my head as to how to mount the chuck and/or plate on the rotary table.


----------



## PeterT (Nov 25, 2020)

Another option to consider = how I did my adapter plate so it would work for both 3 & 4 hole pattern
- mount the plate to your mill table (with a drill through sacrifice board underneath like MDF or something)
- dial in on your register boss (or hole if they were turned in same setup)
- probably you can find the bolt diameter for your chuck model number (yellow shade)
- I can generate a drawing like example & then its just easy XY coordinates (red shade)


----------



## historicalarms (Nov 26, 2020)

YYCHobbyMachinist said:


> I'm liking this approach.  Been sitting here scratching my head as to how to mount the chuck and/or plate on the rotary table.


   This will work, I've done the same thing a # of times, even pointed mild steel should mark cast.  I have used drill rod, cut to dia. then turn the point then temper, will easily mark steel. 

   Usually I manufacture one suitable pin is all...insert in one hole & mark & drill, now move pin to the next hole, now insert a bolt into first hole to make sure line-up is accurate to the first hole...cant go wrong.


----------



## RobinHood (Nov 26, 2020)

Maybe once you know the bolt circle diameter, you should be able to use your DRO’s bolt circle function?


----------



## Brent H (Nov 26, 2020)

They must sell these at KBC tools ?


----------



## David_R8 (Nov 26, 2020)

Insert a screw into two holes and measure the distance between holes, a shoulder bolt works best, but any screw tightened will work. Measure all three and average the result. .866 X distance should be the circle diameter.


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 26, 2020)

RobinHood said:


> Maybe once you know the bolt circle diameter, you should be able to use your DRO’s bolt circle function?



If I could get the plate centered under the quill there are a couple of options.  I could use the RT or the DRO. Centering is the challenge.  I was contemplating turning a 1-1/2" - 8 TPI arbor for that BUT...  was that over thinking the problem?


----------



## RobinHood (Nov 26, 2020)

Use a DTI on an arm held in the spindle and sweep the register that you just turned. Eyeball center the plate first uNader the spindle by lowering the drill chuck into the center bore. Lightly clamp the plate. Then remove the drill chuck and use the DTI. Move the table in X and Y until the DTI reads the same all the way around the register. That equals center under the spindle. Lock off both axis. Clamp down the plate. Recheck for runout. Then use DRO to move to the required bolt hole locations and drill.

If you have never done this - use a piece of scrap wood first to practise.


----------



## Dabbler (Nov 26, 2020)

to get the bolt circle: 

put in your regular bolts until the thread is stopped.
measure outside to outside on the bolts measuring all 3 spaces
-this will check that they are evenly spaced.
take the average measurement and subtract the bolt diameter.
plug the number into:

diameter = 2/3 * sqrt(3) * [centre-to-centre]


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 26, 2020)

Success.... I got the chuck mounted.






Here are my transfer punches ready to rock.






And the resultant punch marks.






Nailed the bolt holes.






And the chuck mounted on the lathe.

The runout on the mounting plate and chuck body are about the same as my PRAT.  0.004" (high-low) so didn't really gain anything there.  The runout on mounted stock is significantly worse.  0.015" v.s. 0.005"

I'm now wondering if the jaws are mounted in the wrong scroll slot.  The jaws and slots aren't numbered or keyed to each other.

Craig


----------



## PeterT (Nov 26, 2020)

Could be. Worth a try to change jaws around. You'll typically see a step discrepancy if they are out of phase. Also try gripping different (larger/smaller) diameter to see if you see the same runout & direction. Also snug each key hole the same torque. Doesn't have to be gronked but equal. Don't register off any kind of stock unless its accurate, just chasing your tail. Use like a ground dowel pin or maybe edge finder or EM shank...


----------



## RobinHood (Nov 26, 2020)

Good job. That will be usable as is.

As far as the run-out -> do as @PeterT says. Try all key and jaw combos. Label all key holes and jaws. Write down everything. When you find the best combo, stick with that.

If you want even better (i.e. zero run-out), go back to my post #451 above. The chuck only needs to be able to move 1/2 of your largest TIR on its backing plate. Stefan Gotteswinter talks about this in one of his earlier videos.


----------



## RobinHood (Nov 26, 2020)

Oh, forgot, have you had the chuck totally apart and cleaned everything really, really well?


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 26, 2020)

RobinHood said:


> Good job. That will be usable as is.



Really? 0.015" is acceptable???



RobinHood said:


> As far as the run-out -> do as @PeterT says. Try all key and jaw combos. Label all key holes and jaws. Write down everything. When you find the best combo, stick with that.



Ya, I labeled the jaws and the chuck slots with paint and am walking through all 6 combinations now.  Will see what happens.


----------



## Brian Ross (Nov 26, 2020)

With a scroll chuck there should only be 3 combinations. The jaws have to be installed in the same order no matter which slot you start with or they won't come to a point at the centre. Once you figure out the best starting slot, you really only need to mark that one.


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 26, 2020)

Brian Ross said:


> With a scroll chuck there should only be 3 combinations. The jaws have to be installed in the same order no matter which slot you start with or they won't come to a point at the centre. Once you figure out the best starting slot, you really only need to mark that one.


----------



## Brian Ross (Nov 26, 2020)

Confused? If you have the jaws out of the chuck, turn them over and take a look at the grooves that engage the scroll of the chuck. If you compare them, you will find that the "teeth" are somewhat offset from jaw to jaw. That is because the scroll is a spiral so the "teeth" need to be offset a third of a tooth gap so they form a circle at the jaw face. They need to be installed in the right order for this to happen.


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 26, 2020)

Brian Ross said:


> Confused? If you have the jaws out of the chuck, turn them over and take a look at the grooves that engage the scroll of the chuck. If you compare them, you will find that the "teeth" are somewhat offset from jaw to jaw. That is because the scroll is a spiral so the "teeth" need to be offset a third of a tooth gap so they form a circle at the jaw face. They need to be installed in the right order for this to happen.



OK...…As @RobinHood suggested, I need to back up and give this thing a good cleaning LOL.  The jaws and slots are numbered, they were just covered with gunk.  And they weren't installed per the numbering?


----------



## PeterT (Nov 26, 2020)

Is this a pretty snug fit to you chuck now?

Another thing you can check is mount & remount your back plate only & get a reading on the lip boss. Possibly your issue is with mating the spindle & not the plate-chuck?


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 26, 2020)

PeterT said:


> Is this a pretty snug fit to you chuck now?



Yes, it's a closer fit than on my PRAT actually, and the chuck body runout is close to the plate run out at about 0.004" (high-low).  But this reminded me that I could try mounting the chuck on the plate in all three orientations as well thanks.

UPDATE:  I'm down to 0.006" (high-low) on chucked stock by changing the chuck orientation on the plate


----------



## RobinHood (Nov 26, 2020)

YYCHobbyMachinist said:


> Really? 0.015" is acceptable???



I believe I said “usable”. Which it is, since any stock held in that chuck will run true after you turn it.

“Acceptable“, well that depends on your “standards”. If it was my only chuck and I needed it right away for a job - you bet that it would be acceptable and I’d use it. I’d then go back and improve on it later - just like you are doing.

When you are trying to make an old 3J chuck hold a thou or so at any jaw opening, it takes baby steps to get there, as everything matters. Heck, it is very difficult to have a brand new 3J hold a thou. And these are the very expensive ones like Rohm and https://www.swisschuck.com/xml_1/internet/en/intro.cfm
etc...


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 26, 2020)

So now I need to reduce the registration flange on the back of the plate by 1/8" so the plate picks up a few more spindle threads. 

Same issue that @Perry had. https://canadianhobbymetalworkers.c...t-be-able-to-chuck-up-a-5-backing-plate.2620/

Would milling it off work?


----------



## RobinHood (Nov 26, 2020)

Yes,  it would. Indicate the original flange face onto your mill table - shim the rim if required to make it dead nuts zero run-out before you mill off the excess. If you don’t, you will have to face the plate again once it is back on the lathe to make it run true to the spindle. Then remount the chuck.

How are you planning on chamfering the new face? On the milling machine? Or by hand after? Reason for the question: if you plan on milling the chamfer, you’ll also need to center the bore under the spindle and not just get the face parallel to the mill table ==> more complexity.


----------



## Perry (Nov 26, 2020)

@YYCHobbyMachinist

Hey Craig,    Well working on my backing plate on my chuck we noticed that the center register internal diameter (Red arrow) was larger than on my original Atlas 3 jaw chuck and on my 4 jaw chuck.





(Picture borrowed fror the other thread.)

This larger internal register had me concerned about how the chuck would line up properly on the lathe.   I haven't had a lot of time to play with this, but from the short time I put into this I can tell you this.  

The original 3 jaw Atlas chuck has tight fit register with the lathe.  Run out on  the outer diameter of the chuck.  0.003"   Surface is rough as it is an older chuck.

4 jaw new Bison chuck has a tight fit with the lathe register.  Run out on  the outer diameter of the chuck.  0.003"

The new Bison 3 jaw chuck with a loose fit with the lathe register has 0.003" runout.  


I did a lot of research reading on the internet and found different opinions on this.   Lots of people post stating that the internal register diameter is used for alignment of the chuck.  

A couple of sites mention that this is incorrect.  It should be a loose fit.  The threads will self center the chuck as it is pulled back onto the register face.  (Green arrow.)   One user with issues was suggested to clean the register faces and check the register internal diameter for being a tight fit.  Apparently if the register diameter is tight it can prevent the chuck from being centered as it is tightened on.


I'm not sure which of these theories is correct, but something to think about.


Something else I've been thinking about.......
Can I drill and tap 4 radial holes equally spaced on the outer diameter of the backing plate nipple?  I could install set screws and use them to fine adjust the register internal size.
I got this idea from YotaBota who posted this link in his thread to a youtube video by tublacain.
In the video he shows an Adjust-chuck and how it works.


----------



## historicalarms (Nov 27, 2020)

YYCHobbyMachinist said:


> OK...…As @RobinHood suggested, I need to back up and give this thing a good cleaning LOL.  The jaws and slots are numbered, they were just covered with gunk.  And they weren't installed per the numbering?



     Craig the numbering on your 3 jaw wont make any difference on the run-out of the chuck....they are only relevant when re-introducing a work piece back into a chuck to try to match the original run out of the piece.

The scroll is the defining item for run out...if it has any imperfections in casting and final machining or over stressed during a tightening of a workpiece, they will show up as run-out.
   Edited to add;  I will also add  that due to scroll imperfections that arise for previously mentioned reasons...you can actually have chuck with a run-out # at a small dia (say 3/4") workpiece  and have no run out at a much larger workpiece (say 4"). the scroll may have an imperfection for only a short distance at any position and it will be always repeatable at that position.  

   Brian Ross's posts are very correct, the jaws can be assembled in any of the slots and work the same as every other combination as long as they are inserted in the proper order...any improper order will have an immediate recognizable error run-out measurable in fractions of an inch not thousands.

   If the register rim on your plate & chuck are meshing exactly, then bolt adjustment will be unavailable to you and your left with what you have short of having the jaws re-ground I'm thinking.


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 27, 2020)

RobinHood said:


> Yes,  it would. Indicate the original flange face onto your mill table - shim the rim if required to make it dead nuts zero run-out before you mill off the excess. If you don’t, you will have to face the plate again once it is back on the lathe to make it run true to the spindle. Then remount the chuck.
> 
> How are you planning on chamfering the new face? On the milling machine? Or by hand after? Reason for the question: if you plan on milling the chamfer, you’ll also need to center the bore under the spindle and not just get the face parallel to the mill table ==> more complexity.



Hmmm.... sounds like I should just do it on the lathe.  I have no means of chamfering on the mill.

Need to find a way to get the spindle registration to meet the plate before the threads bottom out...…

An 1-1/2" ID bushing of sorts.


----------



## Brent H (Nov 27, 2020)

Hey @YYCHobbyMachinist :  can you post a few pictures of the threaded spindle on your lathe and any measurements if there is a collar or gap after the threads?  This is purely for making a spindle nose adaptor thing a ma bob


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 27, 2020)

Brent H said:


> Hey @YYCHobbyMachinist :  can you post a few pictures of the threaded spindle on your lathe and any measurements if there is a collar or gap after the threads?  This is purely for making a spindle nose adaptor thing a ma bob


















I'll post a sketch with dims shortly.

Craig


----------



## PeterT (Nov 27, 2020)

historicalarms said:


> ... the jaws can be assembled in any of the slots and work the same as every other combination as long as they are inserted in the proper order...any improper order will have an immediate recognizable error run-out measurable in fractions of an inch not thousands.



This is a much better way of wording what I was trying to say. If you have no jaw number reference or get the jaws out of order like 1,3,2 there should be a noticeable discrepancy as they converge. They will be out quite obviously to the naked eye ~one tooth width of the scroll. But if you first flip them over & line them up & examine the starting thread position relative to one another you will see a progressive thread sequence. Number them 1,2,3 on this basis and also enter them into the slots in this same order. Engage jaw #1 to the beginning of the scroll, turn the scroll 1/3 of circumference to engage #2 in next slot, then #3.

Now what I was trying to say is if you are already this far, then it could be that you get some improvement by shifting the (1,2,3) bank of jaws one or two slots over. The reason being (as I understand it) once the jaws are positioned & slots uniquely stamped the same as jaw#, then they do the ID grind. That's the factory position you are trying to get back to if possible. When you don't have numbers, that makes life more interesting & trial & error is the only option I know of.

With this established, it could well be you have a chuck with wear and/or distortion. Could be the scroll, could be jaws.... any number of things. If its worth saving the normal remedial action is a re-grind in-situ. But before you do that, you need the backplate sorted out because it controls the chuck.


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 27, 2020)

Brent H said:


> Hey @YYCHobbyMachinist :  can you post a few pictures of the threaded spindle on your lathe and any measurements if there is a collar or gap after the threads?  This is purely for making a spindle nose adaptor thing a ma bob



Does this make any sense?






0.20" is the amount of unthreaded 1.5" dia spindle before the 2.059" dia registration boss is encountered.


----------



## Brent H (Nov 27, 2020)

Perfect - so I can make a "mandrel" out of 2" round stock and capture your fitment requirements - excellent


----------



## David_R8 (Nov 27, 2020)

I'll measure mine tomorrow (or maybe tonight...)


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 27, 2020)

Brent H said:


> Hey @YYCHobbyMachinist :  can you post a few pictures of the threaded spindle on your lathe and any measurements if there is a collar or gap after the threads?  This is purely for making a spindle nose adaptor thing a ma bob



A few more details....


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 27, 2020)

Did some measuring...…..






The run out on the plate in this location is the same as the registration surface.  < 0.001".






When I reverse the plate the run out at the same location is 0.002".  In this case the threads bottom out before the plate contacts the registration surface.

Sooo…. I need to push the registration surface out 0.25" or so.

What do you think?  Would this work?

https://www.princessauto.com/en/detail/1-1-2-in-shaft-collar/A-p3871423e

Craig


----------



## David_R8 (Nov 27, 2020)

YYCHobbyMachinist said:


> Did some measuring...…..
> 
> View attachment 11934
> 
> ...



I’m confused. 
I thought that you wanted more thread engagement...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 27, 2020)

David_R8 said:


> I’m confused.
> I thought that you wanted more thread engagement...








The unthreaded portion of the ID in this image needs to be shorted (almost in half).  The surface of the plate hub that normally interfaces with the spindle registration surface needs to be turned down (what the DI is measuring).  In it's current configuration it only captures 2.5 of the 5 threads. When the plate is reversed it bottoms out on the threads not the registration surface hence the 0.002" runout, so I can't turn it down without rectifying that situation.

Does that make sense now?  Same problem that @YotaBota and @Perry had.


----------



## PeterT (Nov 27, 2020)

I'm not an expert on these threaded spindles but I think job #1 is get the proper plate hub / spindle nose fit first so it will sit where it will always repeatably sit. Then do the machining. 
I assumed this is where you were at way up post #447?


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 27, 2020)

PeterT said:


> I assumed this is where you were at way up post #447?



Yup.. you got it.


----------



## PeterT (Nov 27, 2020)

Again, don't remove metal just because I'm wondering out loud. Others more qualified will chime in. But if you have full thread engagement with it reversed like this & the plate is locked with the hub exposed (your #487 pic) can you not face off the requisite amount from the hub? The hub face will then also be perpendicular to the spindle axis so should mate well. Then do the flip-a-roo re-mount & machine the chuck face, the OD (and unfortunately hope for the best) the chuck registration boss you already turned? Only then will the runout numbers make sense.


----------



## Brent H (Nov 27, 2020)

this measurement - according to the drawing you posted should only be about 0.250" leaving 0.050" or fifty thou to allow the flange to make full contact with the face of the spindle landing and not bottom out your threads.

That being said -






Face 1 here needs to be nice and flat - really slow feed and sharp cutter to get a nice flat face.  Flip the adaptor to the other side and then machine down to 0.250 or 0.300  clearance depth with the last pass leaving a baby smooth landing - break the edges and flip the part back over and thread it back on.,  Then machine the landing (2) as indicated in the picture.  The landing 1 should not bottom out in the back of the chuck and the diameter of it should sit in the chuck recess snug.

You only need to get landing 2 nice and flat as that is the surface the chuck is  indicated from.

Edited to say:   the diameter of the #1 landing needs to be machined after you set up the back so it threads on to the correct depth, there is a lot of meat to play with so if the outer diameter of the 1 surface is not running true you should be able to correct that


----------



## RobinHood (Nov 27, 2020)

YYCHobbyMachinist said:


> What do you think? Would this work?
> 
> https://www.princessauto.com/en/detail/1-1-2-in-shaft-collar/A-p3871423e



You have the right idea: you will need a thin spacer to prevent the threads from bottoming out. A large flat washer should probably be sufficiently thick. The washer’s two surfaces will need to be parallel so it does not introduce any further errors. You can check them with a mic. Fix them with sand paper on a surface plate, if required.

then proceed with your plan as you and @PeterT are discussing.


----------



## David_R8 (Nov 28, 2020)

I had this same problem when I was making the backing plate for my 4-jaw.
I bored out some of the threads from the register side of the plate so that the register could run up against the face of the spindle. Worked like a charm. 
Or maybe I'm misunderstanding the problem.


----------



## Johnwa (Nov 28, 2020)

When I made a faceplate for my Southbend I did what I believe @YYCHobbyMachinist is proposing.  I made a spacer that fit over the register and butted up against the shoulder of the spindle.  When the faceplate was screwed on backwards it butted up against the spacer and hopefully held the front of the faceplate perpendicular to the spindle axis.  That way when the rear of the faceplate was bored ot and faced off everything was aligned.


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 28, 2020)

Per @RobinHood 's suggestion, I opened up the chuck...






And gave it a good cleaning.  Everything looks good.

There was grease in the back end (rack and pinion side) which brings up that old debate again.


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 29, 2020)

Brent H said:


> View attachment 11938
> 
> this measurement - according to the drawing you posted should only be about 0.250" leaving 0.050" or fifty thou to allow the flange to make full contact with the face of the spindle landing and not bottom out your threads.



Brent,

I've discovered 0.25" isn't sufficient.  You may want to use these dimensions instead.






Looks to need at least 0.33".  I'll confirm this later today once I have another spacer made up.

Craig


----------



## Brent H (Nov 29, 2020)

Ok Craig - That is good to know.  Hopefully acquiring the materials this week


----------



## PeterT (Nov 29, 2020)

This is what I was getting at before. I modified/exaggerated your sketch a bit just to illustrate. Are the red surfaces intended to be precision fit to the spindle nose? Or is it just the step surface is critical - must be perpendicular & concentric to the threads & the cylindrical surface has a bit of clearance? Have you been able to find a tolerance spec or something that correlates to that spindle nose?


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 29, 2020)

PeterT said:


> This is what I was getting at before. I modified/exaggerated your sketch a bit just to illustrate. Are the red surfaces intended to be precision fit to the spindle nose? Or is it just the step surface is critical - must be perpendicular & concentric to the threads & the cylindrical surface has a bit of clearance? Have you been able to find a tolerance spec or something that correlates to that spindle nose?



As far as I can tell those surfaces are of no significance and vary somewhat between my PRAT 3J, PRAT 4J, and drive plate.

This has me puzzled though.






I resurfaced Brent's surface 1 using a sharp HSS tool and the power cross feed (godda love that feature).  She is smooth as can be and shows zero runout.






Then I made up this 0.345" wide spacer to extend the spindle registration surface.  It measures very consistently all the way around.






But when I reverse the plate I still get 0.002" runout both with and without the spacer installed?

So not sure what is going on here.


----------



## Brent H (Nov 29, 2020)

Have you surfaced the back side? - AKA the side in your last picture? - then checking it flipped back the other way?


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 29, 2020)

Brent H said:


> Have you surfaced the back side? - AKA the side in your last picture? - then checking it flipped back the other way?



Just doing that now.


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 29, 2020)

Brent H said:


> Have you surfaced the back side? - AKA the side in your last picture? - then checking it flipped back the other way?



And now the front face shows the 0.002" discrepancy?  Going to take another pass on the back face and if the front doesn't get worse proceed to reduce the back to final dimension.


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 29, 2020)

So, I reduced the back of the hub to a depth that catches 4 of the 5 spindle threads and refaced the front.






The front face indicates zero runout and is repeatable.  I dismounted the plate 6 times or more and re-checked.

Now the chuck registration indicates 0.001" runout.  Is that fallout from squaring the other surfaces up?


----------



## Brent H (Nov 29, 2020)

Probably somewhere in the chuck - 1 thou is very good.


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 29, 2020)

Brent H said:


> Probably somewhere in the chuck - 1 thou is very good.



No, I'm talking the registration boss on the plate.  Haven't tried the chuck yet.  If I got 1 thou from a 3-J I'd be happy dancing until Tues LOL.


----------



## PeterT (Nov 29, 2020)

I think the more threads you have engaged, the more axially aligned the plate becomes to the spindle (a good thing). But threads have a fit tolerance so there will still be potential for slight movement, up-down, in-out & angular. So (in my mind) when the internal flat becomes mated to the spindle nose flat that basically freezes any angular change & provides a consistent stop position. So with this established, you turn the faces & boss & OD... in-situ & that will be about as good as it gets. So if you are achieving 0.001" runout on the registration boss & can consistently measure that repeatably by mount & dismount of adapter plate, then bravo, mission accomplished.

Now if your chuck fits this registration boss nice & snug but shows much higher runout when gripping an accurate OD pin, the culprit is in the jaws/scroll etc. If its like 0.005" you are probably in the range of most medium wear chucks. If its +0.010" well you have to decide yourself if that's good enough. Whatever you grip will turn round of course, but that's not the issue. Its when you re-grip a part which is known to be true & now have lost concentricity for a second turning operation.


----------



## RobinHood (Nov 30, 2020)

You are making progress when you are starting to have repeatability.



PeterT said:


> Its when you re-grip a part which is known to be true & now have lost concentricity for a second turning operation.



And this is where you can make a ”poor man’s adjustachuck”. Turn the register (the one you get a thou runout at the moment) undersized by about 1/2” the max TIR (or just a smidge more). Drill the mounting bolt holes in the plate oversized. Any critical part that needs to be held accurately can now be indicated (by bumping the chuck body on its backing plate while the bolts are just snug) to zero TIR. Job done.


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 30, 2020)

RobinHood said:


> You are making progress when you are starting to have repeatability.
> 
> 
> 
> And this is where you can make a ”poor man’s adjustachuck”. Turn the register (the one you get a thou runout at the moment) undersized by about 1/2” the max TIR (or just a smidge more). Drill the mounting bolt holes in the plate oversized. Any critical part that needs to be held accurately can now be indicated (by bumping the chuck body on its backing plate while the bolts are just snug) to zero TIR. Job done.



That's probably where I will end up.   I was just surprised that the registration surface went out after the facing was done.  I'm going to true up the registration and remount the chuck and see where we are at next.


----------



## RobinHood (Nov 30, 2020)

Could have been stress relieving as well. Things move when you start cutting off material.


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 30, 2020)

RobinHood said:


> You are making progress when you are starting to have repeatability.
> 
> And this is where you can make a ”poor man’s adjustachuck”. Turn the register (the one you get a thou runout at the moment) undersized by about 1/2” the max TIR (or just a smidge more). Drill the mounting bolt holes in the plate oversized. Any critical part that needs to be held accurately can now be indicated (by bumping the chuck body on its backing plate while the bolts are just snug) to zero TIR. Job done.



So I turned the registration down 0.005" (0.01" total) and drilled the bolt holes one drill size (1/64") bigger.  With a 1/2" end mill shank chucked I bumped the chuck in and got it to 0.001" indicated.  This arrangement appears to be repeatable as I dismounted/mounted the end mill and the chuck numerous times and still came in at 0.001".

So this is an improvement over my PRAT.


----------



## RobinHood (Nov 30, 2020)

There you go! Good job.

Sometimes the best results happen when one discovers a workaround.... Yes, having 3J chucks that are dead nuts accurate are nice, but if you don’t have one such beast, taking something inferior and applying a clever workaround still gets you there...


----------



## historicalarms (Dec 1, 2020)

Glad your getting to a pleasing end to this quest Craig, been following for a few days.
  I have a theory on threads that may clear up the question as to why you had a repeatable run out on the face of your new plate when oriented correctly to the lathe headstock but you lost that accuracy when you flipped it to re-machine the plate backside. 
    if I understand correctly, you have a repeatable .0001 run out when correctly mounted but lost that when you flipped to more than .0005. I think it is how the threads are cut in your plate. Both ways you mount the thing on the headstock uses the same surface side on the headstock threads...but on the plate you use opposing thread surfaces and even though threading can be absolutely true and uniform...what if it isn't...both thread surfaces aren't formed with the same tool. If the thread tool that cut the threads in the plate was a smidge off-angled by manufacture, dressing or mounting, the angle of the trailing face, the one you mount to on the flip side will be a different angle than the leading face. That angle difference could very well "cock" your plate enough to add the additional run-out.

  Some of the shooters (Dabbler) might find this interesting. 
      I proved this theory to myself during a discussion with the owner of A.T.R over precision re-loading with progressive loading press's compared to his "CNC manufactured precision press's" on the other forum we both attend.  
    His contention was that precision ammo could only be loaded on one of his or similar press and mine was that unless he used a rifle & dies camber cut from the same reamer and tapered collet tightening dies, his thread cut dies& press and shell holders with the proper play allowances to facilitate brass insertion, no mater if they were CNC cut , wouldn't make any better ammo than my press & dies will. I could have used a TPI indicator with an elaborate set-up for my test but I didn't have to. Besides a hand full of different sizing dies ( I have 35-40 die sets to choose from) and my old threaded press, all I needed was a small flashlight. My aim was to prove that any threaded item can have a run-out from the simple fact they have to have slack to be turned...simple...everybody knows that. 
    My test consisted of screwing a die into the press until it touched the shell holder and observing the sliver of light between the die mouth & shell holder. most of the die brands were very consistent in having a very slight sliver of light...until I tightened the locking ring then every die I tried had a very significant flat v shaped light showing through the die base...this causes a "tilt run-out" for every brass used in it.
     What else I discovered was that I could chase that light V around the base of the die by just loosening the lock ring and turning the die in or out a 1/4 turn and then re-locking. I took this to prove that one tread surface is never the same as the one it mesh's with unless very stringent 'copying" methods are used....not much of that happening in machines made in different factories I think.
   Enough rambling for today...Ohh ya I never convinced Rick at ATR that ordinary run-of-the-mill presses will produce as good ammo as his CNC machined pieces....


----------



## RobinHood (Dec 1, 2020)

I think those are very good observations @historicalarms. I bet that’s what it is: the difference in thread flank geometry.


----------



## YYCHM (Dec 2, 2020)

So this seemingly simple project took me the better part of the day......






It's a mock up of my spindle nose 1-1/2" X 8 TPI






This is the stock I started with.  A @Tom Kitta donation (thanks Tom)






After numerous manipulations using the steady rest, I got the piece to a state where I could attempt to turn off this welded on bracket thingy.  I didn't want to waste 2-1/2" of 2" round stock.






It was a bumpy ride turning that wart off, but at lease the weld wasn't as hard as I imagined it would be.






Eventually ended up with this and then it was on to the final product.






And the final result.


----------



## Brent H (Dec 2, 2020)

Way to Go Craig!


----------



## YYCHM (Dec 2, 2020)

Brent H said:


> Way to Go Craig!



So explain this to me please...….

Once I had threaded to target depth, I ended up having to re-thread at target depth 5-6 times before sufficient material was removed for the dog drive plate to thread on?  I was surprised at how much material was being removed with those subsequent threading operations.

Craig


----------



## Dabbler (Dec 2, 2020)

YYCHobbyMachinist said:


> re-thread at target depth 5-6 times before sufficient material was removed



In short, what you dial is not what you cut.  a small lathe has a lot of 'springiness' to it.  subsequent spring passes bring things clos(er) to the dialed-in dimension.


----------



## YYCHM (Dec 3, 2020)

Boy am I liking this arrangement for drilling on the lathe...….






This is way more stable than a drill chuck....


----------



## David_R8 (Dec 3, 2020)

Dabbler said:


> In short, what you dial is not what you cut.  a small lathe has a lot of 'springiness' to it.  subsequent spring passes bring things clos(er) to the dialed-in dimension.


Question for you @Dabbler : Does the nose radius of a carbide threading tool have the same minimum depth of cut implications as on a turning insert?
I.e. I have CCMT inserts with a nose radius of .4mm or .0158" so that is the number I use for minimum depth of cut with those inserts.


----------



## Dabbler (Dec 3, 2020)

David_R8 said:


> Does the nose radius of a carbide threading tool have the same minimum depth of cut implications as on a turning insert?




Welp, as always, it depends...  the sharpness of the cutting surface affects the minimum cut depth, thus all diamond honed inserts will have a smaller minimum cut depth.  

The radius will affect the surface finish and tool pressure more.  The more tool pressure, the more likely (on little hobby lathes) that there will be surface finish issues.  When I began doing turning I only used positive rake inserts to minimize pressure. -- They also help with accuracy when you are new to carbide tooling.  I finally know how to use both positive and negative rake inserts more or less equally well.

On the triangular inserts I use, I choose the smallest radius I can, but since they are coated, there is at least a 5 thou minimum cut or else things get a little erratic.

For minimum cut depth I use a very sharp HSS tool or vertical shear tool (and the shear tool, not often).

@Alexander will have a lot more info than I do on this - it's part of his daily job...


----------



## Dabbler (Dec 3, 2020)

update Tubalcane (mrpete222) has a great series on the shear tool:


----------



## YYCHM (Dec 3, 2020)

Oooops. Won't do that again......






Today I parked the saddle a little too close to my 4J and hit the run switch.  One jaw immediately locked up on the saddle.
No real damage to the saddle or jaw but man the chuck sure got torqued on tight.

Pictured is what I ended up using to break the chuck free.  And no I didn't whale on it with that hammer, just a few well placed taps on the end of the bar did the trick.  It's an awkward one handed maneuver as you need to hold the head stock pulley with one hand and swing with the other.  If I could have gotten both arms going on that bar I could have probably pulled it loose.


----------



## PeterT (Dec 3, 2020)

That's a good question. Threading usually has the compound set at the magic angle so that the leading edge (only) of the threading insert is fed & doing the cutting. Now that's kind of similar to one kind of regular turning insert geometry, but different than many others which may be zero, plus or minus degrees relative to feed. Having said that, many threading inserts actually say OK to feed straight in perpendicular to lathe axis up to a certain thread size, no compound pre-set. And technically a threading tool nose radius is defined based on the thread size itself, so you may not have much choice in the matter. 

I find MY threading speeds are so pathetically low relative to any kind of typical turning guideline purely because I personally feel crashing into the chuck is not conducive to long term lathe health or my bank account balance LOL. Unless you have some lightning speed reflexes to disengage threading or reverse threading or dynamic brake... the real life constraints tend to dictate the operation.


----------



## historicalarms (Dec 4, 2020)

YYCHobbyMachinist said:


> Boy am I liking this arrangement for drilling on the lathe...….
> 
> View attachment 12014
> 
> This is way more stable than a drill chuck....



    Yup...lots of antidotal write-ups in old publications about the dangers of threading a chuck tighter under power...if it make a KA-THUNK when it comes tight...an equal KA-THUNK will be required to remove the chuck. 

   Back in the days before the D mounting system when every chuck was threaded, lots of reading material about having to machine the chuck back plate off in the case of 3-jaws and the entire chuck body in the case of one 16" 4-jaw that I read. From the story, it stated that the lathe operator was installing the chuck and had it just spudded on a thread or two when a tool was dropped and hit the "go" lever on the lathe...it was set at 1000 rpm and the whole shop heard that chuck come up tight to the spindle. some attempts were made to mechanically hold the spindle and remove the chuck but it seems that it was quickly realized that damage to the headstock-spindle would occur before removal so the lathe operator was instructed to machine the chuck body from the lathe...his employment was ceased with the last cut, it was reported.


----------



## PeterT (Dec 5, 2020)

Recent Youtube discussing some of the same screw on / back plate issues thread & concentricity issues.
ps - this isn't the first time I've heard about some of the cheapo 5C chucks being gronked together with either high torque on the screws or permanent Loctite or whatever. I'm sure there is a way to remove but kind of too bad because sometimes these parts can be treated as 'kits' that you can tweak into a decent tool ala Stefan. But you have to get in there first. (I would bet a coffee the scroll teeth are probably the root issue, not grit).


----------



## kevin.decelles (Dec 5, 2020)

I oil my spindle threads on the old von wyck lathe and make sure the chuck threads are spotless when turning on the chuck. The 4 jaw is a 12” and weighs about 80 pounds. It’s ka-thunk is pretty audible when you spin it on nicely ..... can’t imagine if you crash it


I try and make a habit of taking off the chucks when I’m done as a couple of times I’ve had to chuck up a piece of 2x4 and apply some persuasion to break the seal





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## YYCHM (Dec 20, 2020)

I finally got fed up with my apron leak and opened it up.....






All the external shafts are above the oil fill level so it must be the leaking from the housing.  The gasket material that was used is next to non existent.  The good news is that all the internal gears etc appear to be in great shape. The pinion gear does show some wear, but not a lot.

What do you suggest I use for a gasket?  Would an instant gasket in a tube work, that is what was on it.  Would cardboard work?

@Hruul , @YotaBota what did you guys use?

Craig


----------



## Chicken lights (Dec 20, 2020)

That’s arguably the best gasket maker out there. Or you could make a gasket from gasket paper, smear some regular black silicone on the paper both sides before assembling 
Lots of ways to do it


----------



## YotaBota (Dec 20, 2020)

I used Permatex Aviation Form-A-Gasket #3 and so far so good.


----------



## YYCHM (Dec 20, 2020)

@YotaBota , @Chicken lights where did you source your gasket goo from?


----------



## RobinHood (Dec 20, 2020)

Gregg Distributors carry the full line of Permatex Products

https://greggdistributors.ca/search?q=Permatex gasket&resp_group=Default,Variations,ItemProperties


----------



## Chicken lights (Dec 20, 2020)

YYCHobbyMachinist said:


> @YotaBota , @Chicken lights where did you source your gasket goo from?


NAPA, Fort Garry, Traction, they all should have it or can get it, or similar places


----------



## YotaBota (Dec 20, 2020)

As RobinHood and CL suggest, a local jobber should be able to supply you something that works. 
Failing that you could order from aircraft spruce,  https://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/eppages/permatexprod4.php?clickkey=483329
Mine is left over from my airplane days and it's been around for a while and still works well.


----------



## YYCHM (Dec 20, 2020)

YotaBota said:


> Mine is left over from my airplane days and it's been around for a while and still works well.



Airplane days??  Now you have to tell us the whole story.


----------



## PeterT (Dec 20, 2020)

I'm kind of curious about this too. I've put some aluminum parts together with various gasket makers & the problem was it stuck too good. I had a heck of a time parting them. His apron is a more rigid piece of iron where some leverage would shear the goop & not probably distort the part. But generally for oil holding seals like this, should there be a gasket plus goop as opposed to goop alone? What does it depend on?


----------



## Chicken lights (Dec 20, 2020)

O


PeterT said:


> I'm kind of curious about this too. I've put some aluminum parts together with various gasket makers & the problem was it stuck too good. I had a heck of a time parting them. His apron is a more rigid piece of iron where some leverage would shear the goop & not probably distort the part. But generally for oil holding seals like this, should there be a gasket plus goop as opposed to goop alone? What does it depend on?


Interesting question. I’ve never been worried about disassembly so much, as I’m more worried about leaks.

For seals we always used to use Loctite plus grease or tranny assembly lube to help seat things 

Sometimes silicone on the outside of seals or loctite then grease or assenbly lube on the inner part to lock the spring in place


----------



## historicalarms (Dec 22, 2020)

YYCHobbyMachinist said:


> I finally got fed up with my apron leak and opened it up.....
> 
> View attachment 12271
> 
> ...



    Not sure where your oil level is in the case ( you say lower than all the shafts) but , for my money I would want a deeper oil reservoir than that bottom shaft shown. the shaft outlet on that cover has no seal or gasket provision so I think maybe your oil seep originates from that shaft. I know the carriage gearbox for my "China Doll" has a constant oil seep from the shaft journals on the inside face.

    A couple of points on gasket material. Like Chicken, I have basically gone away from paper gaskets and use strictly goop of one brand or another ( they all seem to work) unless it is something built that only a thick paper gasket will work. The thing is that on most aplications, gooped up pieces can be tightened but not over tightened and work fine.
    The thing with thick paper gaskets is that they need to be tight but not over tightened especially with cast or alum. box's. They are brittle and can crack between bolts if tightened too much. The paper gasket will compress at the bolt positions but the casting will bend & crack between them.
    I would use paper gasket only on a top "splash cover" that doesn't have oil bath to hold in over long periods of time....goop in your apron case.


----------



## PeterT (Dec 22, 2020)

That gasket discussion makes good sense. I need to get educated on the goops. There's gasket sealer, maker, different chemistry, silicone, rtv, urethane... different durometers... I also wonder if aluminum activates differently than steel or cast iron.


----------



## PeterT (Dec 22, 2020)

My (Taiwan 14x40) lathe similar shafts riding in holes in the cast iron apron casting. But I think mine is the last of the vintage before they went oil bath apron. You could pull a parts manual of some of these machines to see how the sealed. I suspect some kind of O-ring or rubber washer, but maybe inset into a machined groove. To avoid machining & experimenting I've read where people have siliconed a loose fitting rubber washer on the casting face. The excess goop makes kind of a fillet around the shaft. When cured breaks free from the shaft (acting as kind of a mold). I'm not sure if the shaft is treated with something like a release agent? Sounds a bit ghetto & never tried it but sometimes that's all it takes.


----------



## Brent H (Dec 22, 2020)

@YYCHobbyMachinist : make sure you clean off all the old liquid gasket and then use acetone or some other non residue cleaner to be sure both plates are oil free.  Apply a thin amount of the sealant as you do not want it gumming up your gears - once you re-assemble let it fully cure before you add oil.  I cannot recall any gasket or sealant on the donor lathe.  If the apron piece is still in the junk bin I will see if there is any tell tail signs.


----------



## YYCHM (Dec 22, 2020)

Brent H said:


> @YYCHobbyMachinist : make sure you clean off all the old liquid gasket and then use acetone or some other non residue cleaner to be sure both plates are oil free.  Apply a thin amount of the sealant as you do not want it gumming up your gears - once you re-assemble let it fully cure before you add oil.  I cannot recall any gasket or sealant on the donor lathe.  If the apron piece is still in the junk bin I will see if there is any tell tail signs.



There is no mention of shaft seals in the parts list, and either @YotaBota or @Hruul (one or the either or both) confirmed not finding any as well.


----------



## Brent H (Dec 22, 2020)

Are you leaking at the shafts?  At the front or back of the apron?  I do not think there was any sealant on the donor.  Here is a picture right after taking it apart - no seals and maybe a haze of some liquid gasket but possibly just the machined surfaces fit together.


----------



## YYCHM (Dec 22, 2020)

Brent H said:


> Are you leaking at the shafts?  At the front or back of the apron?  I do not think there was any sealant on the donor.  Here is a picture right after taking it apart - no seals and maybe a haze of some liquid gasket but possibly just the machined surfaces fit together.



I think I am, but @YotaBota claims his leak disappeared when he re-sealed the casting halves.






The hole I circled in red is the oil fill port which appears to be below the lowest shaft.  The oiler is however dog legged up and the top of the oiler is above the bottom edge of the lowest shaft.  The apron calls for 1/2 cup of nondetergent SAE 30W so it will be interesting to see to what level in the oiler that comes to.


----------



## Hruul (Dec 22, 2020)

I have not had my apron off.  It has a slow drip, but not worried about it at this point.  I figure its a good way to get new oil in.


----------



## YotaBota (Dec 22, 2020)

IIRC the 1/2 cup of oil was just below the lowest shaft. If I would stop giving the apron a shot of oil every week it would stop dripping, lol. It is seeping from the shaft but only a drop every couple of days so it's no big deal. Before I gooped the joint it was a puddle every day that was leaking.


----------



## YYCHM (Dec 22, 2020)

YotaBota said:


> IIRC the 1/2 cup of oil was just below the lowest shaft. If I would stop giving the apron a shot of oil every week it would stop dripping, lol. It is seeping from the shaft but only a drop every couple of days so it's no big deal. Before I gooped the joint it was a puddle every day that was leaking.



I couldn't get 1/2 a cup in her, close, but not a full 1/2 cup.  The oiler indicates fluid clear to the top.  An hour after filling it I spotted a drop forming on the bottom of the apron


----------



## YotaBota (Dec 22, 2020)

Is it leaking from the drain plug?


----------



## YYCHM (Dec 22, 2020)

YotaBota said:


> Is it leaking from the drain plug?



Nope


----------



## YotaBota (Dec 22, 2020)

What did you use for gasket?


----------



## YYCHM (Dec 22, 2020)

YotaBota said:


> What did you use for gasket?








It's leaking out the lower shaft openings as I suspected.  I filled it 1/8 cup at a time and let it sit for an hour between top ups.  The leak didn't surface until I put the last 1/8 cup in which brought the fluid level above the bottom surface of the lowest shaft.


----------



## YotaBota (Dec 22, 2020)

That's about what I found as well, so we're stuck with a bit less oil or a bit of a leak.


----------



## YYCHM (Dec 22, 2020)

YotaBota said:


> That's about what I found as well, so we're stuck with a bit less oil or a bit of a leak.



Yup......


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 14, 2021)

@Brent H 






When you cleaned up this 4J for me did you take it apart?  I assume it has a back plate but I sure as heck can't get it off?  If it's not a back plate why would it have bolts running through it?

Thanks,

Craig


----------



## Brent H (Nov 14, 2021)

@YYCHM : that is the back plate - I think I took it apart - maybe not - if you take it off it will get you into the gear works of the chuck. (back of the chuck is the back plate)

Make sure you mark it for orientation so the bolts go in the right holes and the plate fits exactly where it was fitted.

See the thin line on the circumference - that is where it is fit together.


----------



## Brent H (Nov 14, 2021)

@YYCHM : I think you need to remove the jaws and the screws for the jaws


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 14, 2021)

Brent H said:


> @YYCHM : that is the back plate - I think I took it apart - maybe not - if you take it off it will get you into the gear works of the chuck. (back of the chuck is the back plate)
> 
> Make sure you mark it for orientation so the bolts go in the right holes and the plate fits exactly where it was fitted.
> 
> See the thin line on the circumference - that is where it is fit together.



Hmmmm..... I don't see an alignment line?  So, I can't just swap backing plates with @Johnwa eh?  The backing plates on my 3Js are inter changeable.


----------



## Brent H (Nov 14, 2021)

Ya might be able to knock it off - Let me see if I took a picture?


----------



## Brent H (Nov 14, 2021)

@YYCHM - I can't find a pic where I specifically took it apart - I would say that the thread section is a pretty tight fit - you can probably knock it out carefully but it may take some force.


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 14, 2021)

Brent H said:


> @YYCHM - I can't find a pic where I specifically took it apart - I would say that the thread section is a pretty tight fit - you can probably knock it out carefully but it may take some force.



Hmmm.... so far with the bolts removed I have tried mounting it on the spindle and turning the chuck loose from the plate. That was a no go. Then I installed my spindle mockup into the plate and tried tapping the plate off. That didn't work either. I've applied some penetrating oil and will try again tomorrow. If it takes a hydraulic press to get if off, I'll probably just leave it be.


----------



## RobinHood (Nov 14, 2021)

Which line are you trying to spilt it at? Red arrow or green?






Looking into the bore from the front / back, do you see a step? If there is a step, you might be able to use an aluminum or brass drift and a hammer as a persuader to help it separate.

My guess is there is corrosion or just old, dried gunk holding it together.


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 14, 2021)

RobinHood said:


> Which line are you trying to spilt it at? Red arrow or green?
> 
> View attachment 18284
> 
> ...



Red arrow, there is no seam at the green arrow.  You're probably right about it just being corroded on.  @Brent H said it was a rust fur ball when he took possession of it.

Hmmm.... hang on here.  Maybe there is a seam at the green arrow.  That would explain why it wouldn't tap off.


----------



## RobinHood (Nov 14, 2021)

Roger.

They can take quite the hits to get them apart. If you don’t like metal on metal, use a piece of hardwood.


----------



## Johnwa (Nov 14, 2021)

I just checked the bolt circle diameter on mine.  It is about 2.7”


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 14, 2021)

Johnwa said:


> I just checked the bolt circle diameter on mine.  It is about 2.7”


Really?  Mine is very close to 4".  Guess a back plate swap won't work then.

Both chucks are out.  Should be 3.74" for a 6" 4J.









						Lathe Chucks
					

This page provides lathe chuck capacities and mounting dimensions.




					littlemachineshop.com


----------



## RobinHood (Nov 14, 2021)

You got it apart?


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 14, 2021)

RobinHood said:


> You got it apart?



No, when @Johnwa posted his bolt pattern dims it became a redundant exercise. *BUT *When I reinstalled the bolts they appeared to be sucking the plate back in, so I might have been close to getting it off.


----------



## RobinHood (Nov 14, 2021)

Ah, now I understand.

Might still be worthwhile to take the plate off for cleaning purposes and to see why it might be so tight.


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 28, 2021)

@Johnwa That 4J just spun on my lathe no problem, no modification required.  Thanks for swapping chucks with me.  Now I can cut threads running the lathe in reverse


----------



## Johnwa (Nov 28, 2021)

YYCHM said:


> View attachment 18613
> 
> @Johnwa That 4J just spun on my lathe no problem, no modification required.  Thanks for swapping chucks with me.  Now I can cut threads running the lathe in reverse


Good to hear.  Don’t you have a threading dial?


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 28, 2021)

Johnwa said:


> Good to hear.  Don’t you have a threading dial?



I have a threading dial, thanks to @Brent H  and @Chicken lights .  Why do you ask?


----------



## Johnwa (Nov 28, 2021)

I find it way quicker to thread using the dial.


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 28, 2021)

Johnwa said:


> I find it way quicker to thread using the dial.



I use the threading dial all the time, I just want to thread away from the headstock.  I find threading toward the headstock way too unnerving LOL.

Did my 4J mount on your machine ok?


----------



## Johnwa (Nov 29, 2021)

YYCHM said:


> I use the threading dial all the time, I just want to thread away from the headstock.  I find threading toward the headstock way too unnerving LOL.
> 
> Did my 4J mount on your machine ok?



That makes sense.
The 4jaw doesn’t screw on.  My measurement of the bore on the crack plate is 1.495” and my spindle measures 1.503.  I will have to bore a few thou out of the backplate.
I’ve taken the chuck apart.  The backplate just popped out..


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 29, 2021)

Johnwa said:


> That makes sense.
> The 4jaw doesn’t screw on.  My measurement of the bore on the crack plate is 1.495” and my spindle measures 1.503.  I will have to bore a few thou out of the backplate.
> I’ve taken the chuck apart.  The backplate just popped out..



You got that back plate off  It wasn't going to come off for me without beating on it.   Did you remove the jaws or anything like that? As I said I have another 4J with backplate inbound from @140mower.  You want to wait and see what that one measures?


----------



## Johnwa (Nov 29, 2021)

Well I did use a hammer.  Only 1 vigorous tap and it came apart.
I’m not in a rush, I’ll have to be in the right mind set before I attempt to bore it out.


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 29, 2021)

Johnwa said:


> Well I did use a hammer.  Only 1 vigorous tap and it came apart.
> I’m not in a rush, I’ll have to be in the right mind set before I attempt to bore it out.



This chuck is from @140mower 's SB stash.  Maybe they are a little bigger in the BP recessed area?  What machine are you attempting to mount it on?


----------



## Johnwa (Nov 29, 2021)

It’s going onto an SB model C.  This is a someday restoration  project.


----------



## 140mower (Nov 29, 2021)

Johnwa said:


> It’s going onto an SB model C.  This is a someday restoration  project.


Hi John, I might be able to help you out with that when you pass by my house on the 6th......


----------



## Johnwa (Nov 29, 2021)

140mower said:


> Hi John, I might be able to help you out with that when you pass by my house on the 6th......


???????????  Must be another John.


----------



## 140mower (Nov 30, 2021)

Yes, sorry.... Long day yesterday, brain went a little bit mushy.....


----------



## YYCHM (Nov 30, 2021)

@140mower Chuck arrived thanks!






@Johnwa We might have a winner for you.  A Skinner made for South Bend.


----------



## 140mower (Nov 30, 2021)

Excellent, glad it made it.


----------



## YYCHM (Dec 9, 2021)

So today we tried threading away from the headstock.....






To do this I needed to run the lathe in reverse.... It has a threaded spindle.






I was able to run in reverse because @Johnwa traded me this clamping type 4J chuck for my standard 4J chuck (Thanks John!)






Approaching the work piece from the front required the tool to be inverted.






@johwa will recognize this.  He 3D printed it for me quite some time ago.  (Thanks John).

All in all this went rather well and it is sure is a lot less stressful than threading towards the headstock.

Craig


----------



## David_R8 (Dec 9, 2021)

Nice work!
(I wonder if anyone has ever made a clamping collar for a chuck...)


----------



## YYCHM (Feb 3, 2022)

Look at the back splash @CalgaryPT made for me (Thanks Pete)






For free no less....

There's 3 years worth of swarf accumulated behind this lathe stand, it was time to do something about it


----------



## David_R8 (Feb 3, 2022)

Looks great!


----------



## Marc Moreau (Feb 3, 2022)

Nice Job


----------



## Susquatch (Feb 4, 2022)

YYCHM said:


> I was able to run in reverse because @Johnwa traded me this clamping type 4J chuck for my standard 4J chuck (Thanks John!)



If you ever take that chuck off, I'd love to see some photos of how that clamp works.....


----------



## YYCHM (Feb 4, 2022)

Susquatch said:


> If you ever take that chuck off, I'd love to see some photos of how that clamp works.....


----------



## Marc Moreau (Feb 4, 2022)

First time I saw that . Thank You


----------

