Thanks: 0
Likes: 4
Needs Pictures: 0
Picture(s) thanks: 0
Results 31 to 45 of 51
-
2nd February 2014, 10:12 PM #31
Hmm... go back a couple of posts... I already pointed out the fallacy of this method.
But since the mill itself can't be adjusted, you'd have to tram the vise with shims. Setup an indicator in the spindle so that it sweeps the vise jaws as the spindle rotates, Adjust until you get no change as the spindle is rotated.
Ray
-
2nd February 2014, 10:28 PM #32GOLD MEMBER
- Join Date
- Jul 2010
- Location
- Melbourne
- Posts
- 7,770
-
2nd February 2014, 10:37 PM #33
-
2nd February 2014, 10:53 PM #34GOLD MEMBER
- Join Date
- Jul 2010
- Location
- Melbourne
- Posts
- 7,770
I'm not seeing it.
If the spindle is out of tram and you move the vice to match the spindle, its now out of wack to the X axis. The "look" of the top face of the work is the results of the spindle angle to the X axis...... the angle of the vice and work piece wont change that.
Am I misunderstanding what you are trying to do?
Stuart
-
2nd February 2014, 10:58 PM #35
Hmm... ok take the vise away, for a minute. tilt the table 45 degrees.. ( if you could ) measure the distance from the cutter to the table. now run the table back and forwards. Does the distance between the cutter and the table change?
Ray
-
2nd February 2014, 11:16 PM #36
Hi Ray,
Do the same thing but leave the table flat and tilt both the head and vice 45 deg, they will be in tram with each other. But, the cut will be deeper at on end than the other (well at 45 you would just make a mess of everything). The only way to tram the head is to make sure the spindle center line is perpendicular to the X axis ways.
I would be judiciously scraping/filing the column to the base to get it in tram. The only other thing i can think of is shim it on the corners and inject something in the gap like an epoxy, or metal putty etc. Fill the damn column with concrete while your at it to add a little mass.
When fly cutting watch for more trailing cut as the leading cut comes off the work. This shows flex in the machine and a sign that for test cuts at least you need to go slower. The mill being in tram however will not change how parallel a machine part is-only how the cutter works and how square milled edges are, how square drilled holes are etc.
Ew1915 17"x50" LeBlond heavy duty Lathe, 24" Queen city shaper, 1970's G Vernier FV.3.TO Universal Mill, 1958 Blohm HFS 6 surface grinder, 1942 Rivett 715 Lathe, 14"x40" Antrac Lathe, Startrite H225 Bandsaw, 1949 Hercus Camelback Drill press, 1947 Holbrook C10 Lathe.
-
2nd February 2014, 11:25 PM #37
Hi Ewan,
Not quite....
The answer to the previous question you are thinking of is no change in the distance from the cutter to the table as the table goes back and forth in X.
Let me take it step by step...
Ok, now put the vise back on the table, still at 45 degrees, and clamp up a block of material in the vise, and take an X axis cut. Now clamp up the part you wish to work on parallel to the cut surface and you can machine as if the machine was trammed.
Now, what happens if instead of the block of material, I machined the same cut off the vise... any work I clamp to the vise parallel to the jaws will be in tram to the spindle.
Final step, instead of milling the vise, ( and ruining it's resale value ) I shim it instead by the same amount I would have removed had I milled it.
The only reason I'd even consider tramming the vise instead of the table, is on this mill it's not adjustable... hope that's confused everyone..
Ray
-
2nd February 2014, 11:32 PM #38
I think i follow but if the head is not trammed it remains not trammed, no matter what you do with the vice. If the LHS of the cutter is lower then the RHS, the LH will cut and the right wont, no matter if you are milling parallel or not....
Ew1915 17"x50" LeBlond heavy duty Lathe, 24" Queen city shaper, 1970's G Vernier FV.3.TO Universal Mill, 1958 Blohm HFS 6 surface grinder, 1942 Rivett 715 Lathe, 14"x40" Antrac Lathe, Startrite H225 Bandsaw, 1949 Hercus Camelback Drill press, 1947 Holbrook C10 Lathe.
-
2nd February 2014, 11:46 PM #39
-
3rd February 2014, 12:05 AM #401915 17"x50" LeBlond heavy duty Lathe, 24" Queen city shaper, 1970's G Vernier FV.3.TO Universal Mill, 1958 Blohm HFS 6 surface grinder, 1942 Rivett 715 Lathe, 14"x40" Antrac Lathe, Startrite H225 Bandsaw, 1949 Hercus Camelback Drill press, 1947 Holbrook C10 Lathe.
-
3rd February 2014, 12:11 AM #41GOLD MEMBER
- Join Date
- Jul 2010
- Location
- Melbourne
- Posts
- 7,770
Nope.
You may(should in fact) get a part that is parrallel*......but the tram still wont be right.
Changing the angle between the X axis and the top of the vice jaws doesnt change the angle between the X axis and the spindle. and thats tram.
*though I'm not sure what barons problem is.
Stuart
-
3rd February 2014, 12:22 AM #42
Yes, you are correct, the error is still there, and there's no easy way to get rid of it.. but you can machine a part "as if the mill was trammed"
I'm still thinking about what happens to Y... Ewan has confused me... I don't think nodding was mentioned earlier was it?
Ray
-
3rd February 2014, 12:28 AM #43
Not thinking about nodding, just using the Y to mill the vice jaws.....
Ew1915 17"x50" LeBlond heavy duty Lathe, 24" Queen city shaper, 1970's G Vernier FV.3.TO Universal Mill, 1958 Blohm HFS 6 surface grinder, 1942 Rivett 715 Lathe, 14"x40" Antrac Lathe, Startrite H225 Bandsaw, 1949 Hercus Camelback Drill press, 1947 Holbrook C10 Lathe.
-
3rd February 2014, 12:35 AM #44GOLD MEMBER
- Join Date
- Jul 2010
- Location
- Melbourne
- Posts
- 7,770
No it wont........Doesnt matter what you do with the vice....the surface of the workpiece will exactly the same in relation to the X axis....only the bottom of the work piece will have moved a little.
I'm thinking you're talking about getting it to cut parrallel. I'm talking about tram.
Stuart
-
3rd February 2014, 12:49 AM #45