Needs Pictures: 0
Picture(s) thanks: 0
Results 16 to 21 of 21
-
12th Feb 2016, 08:20 PM #16Senior Member
- Join Date
- May 2015
- Location
- Richmond
- Posts
- 214
-
12th Feb 2016, 09:26 PM #17Most Valued Member
- Join Date
- Oct 2007
- Location
- Sydney
- Posts
- 3,112
G'day Michael, the process I described is how I set a boring head to size, but it could just as easily work backwards to determine the radius that you'd just bored. I've never had to do that myself, as I'm always working to a radius and not from, but there's no reason it wouldn't work both ways. So in other words, you may set the radius to 127 mm, bore the arc on the casting and find it didn't clean up. Let's just say you then decide to increase the radius and just keep increasing without measuring or noting any difference in radius until it cleaned up.
What you could then do to find the radius you've bored (say to make it's mate) is put an angle plate or similar opposite the casting where you have room on the table and set the angle plate to be tangent to the boring bar on the X axis. Once you've found that point, clamp the angle plate down, remove the boring head and find the edge of the plate. The distance between the point at which you bored the hole and the edge of the angle plate is the radius you bored. You could do this on the fly, just remember to move the angle plate out of the way before increasing the radius
Measuring the chord and height will definitely work, and with a long enough chord should be quite accurate, but I honestly can't see the point unless you're wanting to measure an existing arc you didn't create in situ.
-
12th Feb 2016, 09:59 PM #18Golden Member
- Join Date
- Mar 2009
- Location
- Melbourne
- Age
- 54
- Posts
- 825
G'day Michael,
You mentioned your tolerance is less than a mm, assuming this is in the range +/-0.5mm might a simple method be to machine a piece of say 3mm sheet to a circle of the required diameter then cut out a section large enough to cover your required arc which could then be used like a simple radius gauge?
A more accurate method would be to bore a full circle of the required diameter into some plate, position your dial gauge tool as you have described and zero the gauge. This could then be used to check your workpiece as you go with the correct diameter being achieved when the gauge reads zero in your machined arc.
Cheers,
Greg.
-
12th Feb 2016, 11:02 PM #19Most Valued Member
- Join Date
- May 2011
- Location
- Murray Bridge S Aust.
- Age
- 71
- Posts
- 5,959
Hi Michael,
I think this idea should work. As your good at what you do, draw your circle at 127mm, draw a line through the centre and offset them left and right a length that will fit your cord. Draw in a block of appropriate length and measure the distance required. Make a block of the length you chose, with a hole in the centre and mount a micrometer in it, so it looks similar to a depth gauge, once you get to the depth marked on your drawing, you should be spot on.
KrynLast edited by KBs PensNmore; 12th Feb 2016 at 11:03 PM. Reason: Granmar
To grow old is mandatory, growing up is optional.
-
13th Feb 2016, 07:24 AM #20Philomath in training
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
- Location
- Norwood-ish, Adelaide
- Age
- 59
- Posts
- 6,561
I could but supporting it properly then adds extra to the set up. Another option though
Another possible but a radius gauge will only tell me when I'm on size, not how much to go to get there and after I've machined this cylindrical feature I then want to machine a mating part that locates closely in it. If the sizes are too different they will spring/ distort. Turning an OD is easy, so I was was hoping to measure and avoid hit and miss "I'll just take a little more off" actions. With larger diameter circles a small amount in radius can make a big difference. I'd prefer to know I had to take say 5 thou off diameter rather than just do 10 thou jumps and discover I have a sloppy fit after the cut.
Not sure I can live up to the claim of "good at what I do". That illusion is partly maintained because I don't starting threads titled "the things I stuffed up this weekend" I think there would be lots of people on this forum who could do the things I do better if they had the gear I have.
Neither of my depth Mics (metric and imperial) are graduated down past thous or 0.01mm. I am thinking of making a base for the 2 micron indicator I have and using the roller idea, use that for measurement, so similar to what you suggest. I like the roller idea because it means not having to know exactly what the length of the beam is. More tooling to make...
Michael
-
13th May 2019, 12:00 AM #21Golden Member
- Join Date
- Jul 2011
- Location
- Adelaide
- Posts
- 837
Michael,
A tad late but
You could place 3 or more very accurate cylinders touching each other tangentially on your radius and then take a measurement across the outside of those. The smaller the radius the smaller this dimension will be, the larger the radius the closer the dimension the will be to the sum of the diameters of the cylinders.
Eric
Similar Threads
-
AL 960 Question
By Lindsalso in forum METALWORK GENERALReplies: 14Last Post: 5th Apr 2012, 05:04 PM -
TIG question
By pajeronj in forum METALWORK GENERALReplies: 17Last Post: 20th Jul 2011, 02:45 PM -
New Guy with Question
By Shovelfreak in forum TRAILERS & OTHER FABRICATED STUFFReplies: 4Last Post: 9th Mar 2011, 11:00 PM -
Question regarding VSD/VFD
By Com_VC in forum METALWORK GENERALReplies: 1Last Post: 22nd May 2010, 08:12 PM