Page 14 of 18 FirstFirst ... 49101112131415161718 LastLast
Results 196 to 210 of 258
  1. #196
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    843

    Default

    Simon, good idea. I had a square up against the column ways looking for 15 thou or so gaps but no joy. I reckon I'll give your idea go.

    Baron, it wouldn't matter so much for grinding a top surface, but for grinding the side of something it
    may well do. I am not an expert either by any stretch. My concern at the moment is how far it is from connolly's recommendations. Going forward that will be my guide for getting the old girl back into shape.

    Edit: and thanks for the comment re the thread baron. Appreciated

  2. #197
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Norwood-ish, Adelaide
    Age
    59
    Posts
    6,542

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by StrayAlien View Post
    ... My concern at the moment is how far it is from connolly's recommendations.
    Remember though that the numbers in Connolly (which are pretty much the numbers in Schlesinger btw) are the recommendations on what an acceptable standard for a reconditioned machine should be. There are plenty of machines out there that exceed those limits and still produce satisfactory work.
    If you were in the precision grinding business I would encourage you to chase those limits because it makes your job easier. However, for the average task that you are likely to do it may matter at the end of the day.

    Michael

  3. #198
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    843

    Default

    Thanks Michael,

    Yep agree. Though, this is my first real go at understanding and measuring a machine's alignment so this is as much a learning exercise for me as anything else. If it were (say) 0.001" I'd not give it a second thought - waaay good enough!. With such a large variation I guess I want to understand whether it is my naivety or technique or whatever. I am a noob and a bit of a nong so I try not to stuff up if I can.

    Which I do a fair bit anyways.

  4. #199
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    843

    Default Proof and puddings

    Hi all, the next action-lacked installment on progress on old 'Mrs Brown'.

    I posted over on PM in the scraping and inspection section to see if I could gather some advice on my apparent misalignment. I roped in a big fish and Richard King himself offered some advice and some tests. Similar tests can be found in Scheslinger p74 (section 25 - "Testing Surface Grinder with Vertically Adjustable Horizontal Grinding Wheel Spindle") but the key difference with RK's advice is not using the t-slots as a reference.

    I did post some results over on PM, but I can go into more detail here as I don't have to suffer the "max 5 pics per post" limitation that forum has.

    After a solid burr-filing of everything I re-checked my previous head measurements - yep - spindle still at an angle to the reference surface and bearings - though a little less than my first measurements.

    I remounted the head block back onto the grinder - it fits very well with no slop as far as I can tell and moves freely up and down. It sure felt great to see it there again.

    IMAG2016.jpg

    I mounted the boring caps and inserted the boring bar to use as a test 'spindle' for the alignment tests.

    IMAG2052.jpg

    Note that none of my equipment could be classed as amazingly high-precision. Like I have no idea if my angle plate is really square etc etc - but I am after indicative measurements at this point, not for scraping etc so it is all good enough for that.

    Test 1: does the spindle run parallel with carriage movement in the horizontal plane:

    IMAG2021.jpg

    It leans in the direction I thought it might by about 0.001" in 4" - but not tooo bad actually.

    Test 2: Does the spindle turn on an axis that is perpendicular to the table movement. This is a 'swing around' test. Here is the set up:

    IMAG2029.jpg

    The angle plate front face was set parallel with the table movement (indicated by running the table back and forth and tapping the angle plate until it was correct. The plate was clamped down lightly).

    Then zeroing (well .. almost zeroing) on the left side then swinging it over to the right we look at the difference. In this case, almost nothing. So pretty good actually.

    (I couldn't figure a way to mount my 0.01mm indicator so the starrett 196 0.001" had to do)

    IMAG2030.jpgIMAG2028.jpg

    Test 3: Does the spindle turn on an axis that is perpendicular to the table surface. Same type of swing around test vertically showed the spindle pointing downwards by about 0.007" The error in the vertical plane when setting up the angle place in this position was only about 0.001" so the droop is actually the head or the spindle pointing down. Fixable.

    IMAG2033.jpg

    Test 4: Are the table and carriage movement are perpendicular to each other. I set up my best (only!) square that would fit and indicated in the base to run parallel with the table and then mic'd the long edge to measure error with carriage movement. Almost zero. So we're good there.

    IMAG2039.jpg

    So not too bad actually. Richard King's advice was to bore the bearings as I have suggested then scrape the head in to align the spindle.

    So despite a really odd alignment on the head itself, when it place it seems to be okay. I can only surmise that means the column ways are not perpendicular to the table. Who cares I guess!

    All that has given me greater confidence to bore the bearings using the setup I've shown and then deal with stuff from there.

    All that does not mean stuff is perfect. Without even measuring I can see the bed ways (for the carriage) are worn in the middle. This means that at the outer reaches of each end of carriage movement the carriage moves a fair bit. I am guessing this is because two worn areas hit each other and cause some movement. Not sure yet.

    And, as an aside, with head mounted again for the first time since all that sorry pile of rust arrived here, I thought I'd test fit the belt that jhovel donated (thanks again Joe!).

    IMAG2049.jpgIMAG2046.jpgIMAG2047.jpg

    Thanks all,

    Greg.

  5. #200
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Murray Bridge S Aust.
    Age
    71
    Posts
    5,945

    Default

    Thanks for the "how I did it", and the pics, Greg. Only way some of us can learn this stuff, by seeing how others do it.
    Kryn
    To grow old is mandatory, growing up is optional.

  6. #201
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    4,779

    Default

    Nice work. Glad it all worked out. Just goes to show, sometimes the alignment of individual components are not important its the overall alignment when they are all put together.

    Cheers

    Simon

    Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk
    Girl, I don't wanna know about your mild-mannered alter ego or anything like that." I mean, you tell me you're, uh, super-mega-ultra-lightning babe? That's all right with me. I'm good. I'm good.

  7. #202
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    843

    Default

    Kryn, thanks. Most of us are in that same boat!

    Simon, thanks also - yes, it seems that is the case. It makes the Connolly procedure for scraping/aligning an SG a bit incorrect for this machine. Nevermind.

  8. #203
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    4,779

    Default

    WRT Connolly, don't forget his publication is for machine rebuilding not machine manufacture. When you are a manufacturer, you can build and fit a machine together however you like and individual components need not necessarily be aligned only the finished products of all the components put together. An example would be a lathe headstock and it's matching bed. I doubt that the base of a headstock really needs to be parallel to the spindle axis, but when it is attached to the bed, the spindle needs to be aligned to the bed. I suspect the reason Connolly sets out such an alignment procedure with the various components is because you are rebuilding an already worm machine. It's much easier in the long term to align each component individually rather than rely on a single alignment after the components are already fitted. Machine datums and alignments of axes may not always be obvious on a worn machine so better to ensure each component is in alignment.

    Simon
    Girl, I don't wanna know about your mild-mannered alter ego or anything like that." I mean, you tell me you're, uh, super-mega-ultra-lightning babe? That's all right with me. I'm good. I'm good.

  9. #204
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Near Bendigo, Victoria, AUS
    Age
    72
    Posts
    3,102

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simonl View Post
    WRT Connolly, don't forget his publication is for machine rebuilding not machine manufacture. When you are a manufacturer, you can build and fit a machine together however you like and individual components need not necessarily be aligned only the finished products of all the components put together. An example would be a lathe headstock and it's matching bed. I doubt that the base of a headstock really needs to be parallel to the spindle axis, but when it is attached to the bed, the spindle needs to be aligned to the bed. I suspect the reason Connolly sets out such an alignment procedure with the various components is because you are rebuilding an already worm machine. It's much easier in the long term to align each component individually rather than rely on a single alignment after the components are already fitted. Machine datums and alignments of axes may not always be obvious on a worn machine so better to ensure each component is in alignment.

    Simon
    Looks like you are getting there! Well done.


    Sent from my InFocus M808 using Tapatalk
    Cheers, Joe
    retired - less energy, more time to contemplate projects and more shed time....

  10. #205
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    843

    Default

    Joe, thanks. slowly, but getting there. It's been a year since you dropped those parts over. Phew eh. Hey, any joy in bugging your mate for a viewing of how the friction feed works on his BS2?

    Simon, thanks. And this machine supports what you say. I do get the reasons why Connolly goes about it like he does. It makes sense. Though, his choice of datum to begin a resto is the front column ways "as they'll have very little wear" Hah! He hasn't seen mine!

    At this point I am not actually looking to do a big scraping job on it - as little as I need to actually. None is okay. First aim is just to get it together and see how it performs. If it doesn't do so well then I'll have to plan a resto regime for it. And you can bet I'll be bugging people here about it.

    Greg.

  11. #206
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    4,779

    Default

    Hey Greg, you arte doing an awsome job. Some of the stuff you are doing to breath life back into it is impressive. I think If it was me I would still be scratching my head.....

    Keep going...... I look forward to your next post.

    Simon
    Girl, I don't wanna know about your mild-mannered alter ego or anything like that." I mean, you tell me you're, uh, super-mega-ultra-lightning babe? That's all right with me. I'm good. I'm good.

  12. #207
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    843

    Default

    Well, after a nice summer 2017/18 break I was ready to get back into sorting this old lady out, but ... I've had a five month diversion on getting a poor neglected Bridgeport back into action:

    //metalworkforums.com/f65/t2020...geport-emerges

    So here we are 8 months later.

    There really was no space to do both grinder and mill at the same time. Having said that I did make some small progress. Namely, line boring the bronze spindle bearings before I dismantled the BP.

    The spindle head plus the end caps I made just fit on the lathe with enough room to bore one bearing at a time.

    IMG_20180330_170259.jpg

    There was no great way to secure it very well there, but given its considerable weight and that I was only taking a few thou at a time, I shimmed it until I could move the lathe carriage back and forth smoothly. As I had no real way of checking (in situ) of whether I had cleared the wear I just took off enough to be satisfied - likely in the range of 20-30 thou .. maybe more .. to be sure.

    The boring bar is the alignment bar in previous pics - now modified. One grub screw to adjust depth, another to lock the tool in place. The tools was 1/4" round HSS cut like a shear bit and with some random hand-ground negative rake angle.

    IMG_20180330_100313.jpgIMG_20180330_094328.jpgIMG_20180330_094351.jpg

    Ultimately it worked well. The finish was great. All wear taken out and felt like job well done:

    IMG_20180330_180911.jpgIMG_20180330_181457.jpg

    But then .... uh oh ....

    The bearings have a 'slices' along them. Their purpose being to be able to remove them and reduce them to take up wear. Originally made from phenolic (bakelite), these were brass so there has already been some adjustments made and likely they had been squeezed some.

    Soon after cutting ... mine fell out as the bearings opened up .... I imagine springing back out and de-stressing some ...

    IMG_20180401_172342.jpg
    (the fourth spacer went .. erm ... somewhere ...)

    So .. b*llocks and double b*llocks. I did a quicky rough survey of them yesterday and, even more unhappily, found the thicker / thinner ends have sprung differently so now the bores are also tapered and each side has sprung differently .. so they are wonky tapered. My quick survey showed that maybe, at worst, the taper was a thou or two. Research says they shipped with 0.00011" spindle clearance. Everything is relative but that ain't good enough.

    So, we'll have to strike up all that effort in making caps and boring and so on to experience. It sure took a long time, but I learned quite some stuff. All good. My original plan involved lapping them in place, but a wonky taper thing means I can't quite be sure along what axis I might be lapping. Front and rear bearings have to line up.

    I think I've a plan on how to make the next attempt, so getting started on that is the next thing .... actually, I'll think it some more and then explain it here for comment first.

    Greg.

  13. #208
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    843

    Default Lapping the front bronze bearing

    Okay, the plan is basically this:

    * Fix the 'warp' caused by the stress relief after machining.
    * Lap the bronze bearings, get 'em in and if they're not in alignment, use the front bearing as the 'master' and do whatever needs doing to get the rear bearing into alignment with it. Bore-in-place - whatever.
    * How to tell if they're in alignment? Create a 'dummy' spindle lapped at each end to match the bearings. If the rear bearing is not aligned with the front - then the dummy spindle gets turned into a boring-bar and the front bearing is used as a boring guide.

    'Fixing' the bearings means squeezing the bearings back up a little, getting the spacers back in. Making a new one to replace the one that went MIA. Glue the little buggers in and then keep them hose-clamped until they go back in the machine.

    Lapping:

    Some rough measurements show that the bores of both bearings are tapered. The rear bearing by only 0.001" but that is about 10x what we're shooting for. The front about 0.003". Ouch.

    I'll lap them using some home-made 3MT tapered expanding ID laps. Why 3MT? ... coz I have a 3MT reamer.

    After d*cking for hours on a worn-out-as-hell taper attachment I got something near a dodgy 3MT taper set up. I bored an aluminium sleeve and used the 3MT reamer to clean it up.

    IMG_20180826_140529.jpg

    Re-doing the 3MT taper the other way, I turned a 'quite dodgy 3MT' tapered arbor to mount the aluminium sleeve.

    IMG_20180826_154406.jpg

    And the sleeve:

    IMG_20180826_154423.jpg

    (the 'spin' marks are from me trying to eek some more out of the reamer and it spun some)

    Using the dremel I cut a very (very) dodgy slice around the sleeve to allow it to expand as it gets nudged up the arbor and also put some small notches for the lapping slurry. The slice does one turn of the sleeve. The idea here being that you tap the sleeve up the tapered arbor to make it larger.

    IMG_20180826_165614.jpg

    The bearings are bronze, so a non-embedding compound has to be used. I ordered this from brownells.com.au. It got shipped from the US. Maybe 600 grit is a little too coarse, but it'll have to do.

    IMG_20180826_165926.jpg

    I skimmed the sleeve to be about 0.001" smaller than the small end of the bearing bore taper. Some lapping compound on and this is the idea:

    IMG_20180826_170245.jpg

    Here it a pic of the sleeve after some use:

    IMG_20180826_173255.jpg

    Ideally, the sleeve would have been about 30% longer than the bearing, but practicalities meant that is not that (like I can't bore that deep). Such is life.

    The result? I've only done the front bearing, but ... the result is excellent. I can't measure a bore to tenths but as far as I can tell the are within the same thou, and if I go by 'feel' of the lapper then they are very close indeed. No more 0.003" taper. So a good start to this phase of the project.

    Interesting to note is that the inexactness to the 3MT tapers was not an issue. The dodgy 3MT sleeve didn't quite match the dodgy 3MT arbor but once the sleeve slice was in and it had been nudged up the arbor a little it didn't matter.

    Rear bearing next.

    Greg.

  14. #209
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    843

    Default

    Spindle prototype #1

    Rear bearing also done. I ordered some 1000 grit brownell's paste but it'll take 3 weeks to get here, so pressing on ...

    I've made a new spindle and am yet to decide whether to treat it as a learning exercise or as the item - I kind of think the former. Pic shows my a practice bar sorting out the taper, the spindle #1, and at the front is the original spindle.

    IMG_20180906_173617.jpg

    The finish on the spindle is perhaps not 'mirror finish', I have no fine lapping paste, but successive sanding with finer wet and dry up to 2000 grit has the spindle to size - regardless of the visible scratches it is pretty smooth. The material is 4140 pre hard and I left too much material to lap/sand off so it got pretty aggressive. The spindle bearing surfaces are consistent to about 0.00005. I've really no accurate way to know if I have 0.0001 clearance between spindle and bronze bearing, but, I just kept lapping and sanding until it just went in.

    I used contraptions like this to lap:

    IMG_20180901_154811.jpg

    .. and I used kerosene as lubricant for fitting as that is what I'll use when running it.

    ... and with the spindle in place. The fit is a little snug on the rear bearing but, I'll make a new pulley for the spindle fit it all up on the machine and run it (slow at first) and see how it goes.

    IMG_20180906_173739.jpgIMG_20180906_173756.jpg

    The proof is in the pudding so I'll really need to grind something.

    Getting there ....

    Greg.
    Last edited by StrayAlien; 7th Sep 2018 at 08:42 AM. Reason: typos

  15. #210
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Perth WA
    Age
    71
    Posts
    6,458

    Default

    Impressive work on that spindle Greg.

    I've made a few draw bars for the 13 from 4140 and it was a nasty job with lethal stands of razor sharp swarf. A boy's job compared to the spindle you've made. Well done.

    Bob.

Similar Threads

  1. Brown & Sharpe #2 grinder restoration
    By Greg Q in forum METALWORK GENERAL
    Replies: 102
    Last Post: 16th Dec 2020, 11:37 AM
  2. Brown and Sharpe No 2 surface grinder manual
    By StrayAlien in forum METALWORK GENERAL
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 1st Oct 2016, 11:25 PM
  3. Brown and Sharpe Grinder Manual sought
    By Greg Q in forum METALWORK GENERAL
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 1st Aug 2012, 12:56 AM
  4. Brown and Sharpe Taper tooling for mill
    By woodfast in forum METALWORK GENERAL
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 19th Apr 2012, 04:36 PM
  5. Brown and Sharpe Turret Lathe 1865
    By Anorak Bob in forum METALWORK GENERAL
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 6th Nov 2011, 09:03 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •