|
5C Collet Chuck: Part 2
Click here for Part 1
Boring
the Spindle Nose Hole: Using CAD to Fix An Alignment Issue
Now that we've
roughed in a center hole, it's time to set up the boring head to make
a more precise bore. The eventual bore is 52mm = 2.047". Before going
further, I wanted to adjust the center we're boring to to eliminate as
much error as possible. The approach I've chosen is to rely on my CAD
program for help. First, I measure the distance from the OD of each cam
lock hole to the OD of the nascent spindle bore. Of course they were not
equal. I got measurements of 0.543, 0.575, and 0.500". Things are
off pretty far, it looks like!
Next, I drew up
a diagram in my cad program that shows these relationships:
Here's how the
diagram works:
- First I drew
the Actual Bore at the center of the drawing.
- Next, I drew
a circle for each of the errors. The center of the circle is on the radial
to the cam lock bore where it intersects the actual bore, and the radius
of the circle is the amount of the error: 0.543, 0.575, and 0.500".
Those are the red circles on the diagram.
- Now I drew a
circle describes by the points where the 3 radials intersected the far
edge of the error circles. Those points are just the centers of the cam
lock holes. That circle is the purple circle. The desired location of
our bore (as opposed to the Actual Bore, DOH!) is at the center of that
purple circle.
- I drew another
smaller purple circle on the same center as the big one but closer to
the actual bore circle so I could eyeball where I'm off.
Now, I did a really
cool thing that CAD programs make easy. I drew a rectangle that had one
corner at the center of the Actual Bore, and the other corner at the center
of the Desired Bore, and I applied dimensions to it:

That rectangle
tells me exactly what I need to do to fix the error on my Actual Bore!
In this case, Y needs to move down about a thousandth (pretty darned close!)
and X needs to move to the right 40 thousandths (something lousy there
on my original layout or in how the milling operations worked. In fact,
given that almost all the error is in X, I would be willing to bet a lot
my be due to my mill head being out of tram. Having your head out of tram
causes an X error if you raise or lower the head. And, I had been face
milling and fly cutting since I trammed last to get the faceplate square.
Doggone it: need to re-tram the head after face milling or fly cutting
every single time!
Thank goodness
I have this nifty CAD program to help me figure out how to recover!
Boring the Spindle Nose Hole: Getting
on With the Boring!
Having stopped
to figure out the error of my ways, it was time to get things going again.

First step is
that pesky "leveling" operation again. I clamp a parallel and
sweep it just as you would to tram the vise jaws. Now I'm oriented to
match my CAD drawing so that the correction on the X-axis can be dialed
in on the handwheel...

Next, I got
out my Blake Coax and made sure that bore was centered under the spindle.
I should've used a shorter feeler that would be closer to the boring head's
actual location. Trouble is, I was thinking the boring head was in an
end mill holder, and I wound up using a collet instead. After centering
on the bore with the Blake I used the handwheels to adjust for the error
in the bore: I move the X-axis 40 thousands and the Y-axis a smidge over
1 thousandth. When I did this, it was pure voodoo. You'll be amazed later
on when I measure how well it worked out!

And so the boring
job was done, using rough caliper measurements to check the diameter.
Sadly, I do not have a big enough internal mic to do this check...

But, I do have
my trusty spindle plug gage! I made this handy little goober the first
time I did a faceplate. I even stamped some useful information into it,
as you can see. I had forgotten it, but luckily spied it on the shelf.
It's 4.7 thou too small (an error in my early days), but still handy.
I can use it to tell when I'm close and then dial the last few in after
the plug just fits. I added 6 thou to be sure things would fit before
tearing down the seutp.

I can't tell
you how pleased I was to see that big ugly cast iron potato fit perfectly
the first time!
Truing
the Backplate on the Lathe
Now that I can
mount the backplate using the faux cam lock system the spindle was designed
for, the real fun begins. I can actually use the lathe to machine this
thing in such a way that it will be veyr accurate. Besides which, my lathe
is easier for me to be very accurate with to this day.

Clearances are
very tight! To face, I had to put the tool holder in a kind of odd position
in the holder. Should be more rigid though! That edge is not pretty because
it ain't done. I just roughed it. I will make it right after the chuck
is mounted as the very last step.

At last, after
turning and facing, this thing is square on the lathe.
Now most guys
would cut the spigot that fits in the chuck's recess, drill the chuck
mounting holes, and call it a day. However, a collet system can be extremely
accurate! Therefore, I want to go the extra 9 yards. My plan is machine
a second bore for the spindle nose on this side. I will then reverse the
cam locks to this side, reverse the whole backplate onto the spindle,
and this side will have a much closer fit to the spindle nose because
it will have been bored on the lathe in the position I want it to be concentric
with. It will be interesting to see the difference in the two bores, but
I expect it to be quite noticeable for two reasons. The first bore was
located relative to the faux cam locks, which was not a very precise business
to start with. Also, I slightly oversized the bore to make sure I could
get it onto the lathe. The second bore will be made to much tighter tolerances
to located that backplate exactly!
Boring
a Second Spindle Nose Bore
Okay, good news
and bad news on this step. First the bad news: there are no action photos!
I left the camera upstairs and got absorbed in doing this boring job,
so there are no pictures of the process! All is not lost. There was nothing
special here, just your ordinary run of the mill lathe boring job. Relax,
it'll be okay. Now the good news:

See the ridge
that blue arrow points to? That's the line of demarcation between the
old bore done on the mill with a boring head and the new bore done on
the lathe for concentricity. Remember, the new bore is ever so slightly
(a couple thou) smaller in diameter to make a snugger fit on the spindle
nose. Look at how that ridge looks. It looks like the two bores are concentric
within a thou or less because the ridge is completely symmetrical all
the way around. I would never have believed it!
I guess it really
does help to measure twice and cut once, and to own a CAD program to help
you figure out how to fix your mistakes!
Making
the Backplate Spigot to Fit the Chuck Back's Recess
Coming into the
home stretch now fans!

I cleaned up
by facing away that marking dye as well as turning the edge down a little
further. You can see there is no more phonograph lines now. BTW, the really
rigid way to do this is to lock the carriage and feed with the compound.
I found that way out on this long diameter (between 5 and 6") I couldn't
take more than 20 thousandths depth of cut without stalling the lathe.
I swapped the belt, which I haven't done in ages due to my variable
speed DC motor, and that got me to 30 thousandths. I can see why folks
want a lot of HP on an industrial lathe. My DC treadmill motor claims
to be 1 HP, but there is no way. It doesn't even feel as strong as the
Chinese 1 HP that came with the lathe. Someday it would sure be cool to
slap a 2 HP motor on with a real VFD. Man this lathe would fly!

Okay, the spigot
is close. It's about 60 thousandths too large still. I want to get it
to almost an interference fit, within about 2 thousandths of the ID of
the chuck back. This will ensure maximum precision fitting it up. I also
need to decide how to drill and thread holes for the mounting bolts if
I've interference fitted the chuck, so I'll need to be able to get the
two apart one last time too. It's late, and I'm going to bed now!
Shrinking
the Chuck onto the Backplate and Testing Accuracy
To achieve the
shrink fit, I needed to machine the backplate to an extremely close fit
to the chuck. In fact, as close as possible. I would then rely on heat
and cold to make it possible to temporarily fit them together. When the
two return to room temperature they'll be locked together.
My first step
was to accurately measure the internal bore on the back of the chuck.
This is not an easy task! Digital calipers are nowhere near close enough.
I do not own an inside mic that is large enough for the 3.772" bore
(what I eventually measured). So, I improvised. I stacked a bunch of precision
objects in a line in the bore. The centerpiece was a 1-2-3 block laid
right in the middle of the bore. On either side of it, precision gage
blocks. Lastly, on either side of the gage blocks, I put a pin gage. The
round pin gage would fit the bore nicely. After some futzing around to
get all the pieces snugly fitted, I pulled them out. On paper, just looking
at what the dimensions were supposed to be, I would get one number. Instead
of trusting that number I measured each piece individually with a micrometer
and added them all up. The difference in the "real" figure versus
the "labeled" figure was 0.00065". Not too bad considering
there were 5 different pieces, but I definitely wanted to use the measured
value. In this case, it put my Chuck ID at 3.77259". So, I resolved
to put the nose on the backplate at 3.7730". The shrink fit comes
from the 4 tenths difference in the two.
Keeping my micrometer
handy, I delicately turned the chuck shoulder down to as close to 3.7730"
as I could get. I wound up a couple of tenths under, but I was pretty
proud of the work on this little lathe. I was taking very light passes,
I did not set up the compound for find feed as I was using carbide (doesn't
do microfine cuts), so I had to "nail it" on a final cut that
was 0.001" and a scosh. The other thing I was careful of was not
to let things get too hot. I started a little 60 thousandths out from
where I wanted to be, so I took some "rough" cuts in the ten
thousandths range (20 on the diameter) and then one final pass for the
win.
Having accomplished
that, I carried chuck and backplate upstairs to the kitchen. The chuck
went into the oven at 380 degrees, and the backplate went into the freezer.
I brought a long my largest soft hammer for additional insurance. I let
the two reach their temperature equilibriums of hot and cold for an hour.
When I assembled the two over a cutting board (my wife always cringes
when these things are going on in her kitchen), the chuck just plopped
very nicely onto the backplate. No muss, no fuss!
I left them there
to reach equilibrium for another 2 hours while we went to dinner, and
then ran down to the shop to test the accuracy of the fit on the lathe.
The test I decided to perform was to measure a "real world"
situation. I would take 2 different sized parts requiring two different
collets, insert them in the chuck, and measure the runout with a DTI on
a magnetic base.
The first part
was a partially completely faux camlock:

The barrel of
the camlock (largest diameter) and the lefthand smaller diameter should
be concentric as I made them with my 6-jaw back at the beginning of the
project. Eventually I will finish, but meanwhile, I swiped the camlocks
from my 4-jaw to get on with testing. The 4-jaw cares least about them
because you dial it in every time anyway, so the new camlocks will be
going to it.
The second "part"
was a precison pin gage 0.250" in diameter. I took 3 measurements
on each that involved completely removing and reinserting the part in
the collet, but not removing the collet itself. And now for the bad news,
as you can see in this photo of the runout being measured for the pin
gage:

Very depressing,
about 0.004" runout! I tried these measurements 3x for each part
as I mentioned, and they were very repeatable. That, at least, was something.
I resolved to try the tests with different positions of the camlocks in
the spindle. Perhaps there was one that was better than the others? So,
I used my Starrett Automatic Punch to mark the spindle and the chuck.
This will be useful in future, and is something I should do with all my
chucks once I find their "best position" so I can repeat that.
This procedure
helped a little, but not a lot. I got the TIR down to around 0.003".
It was also far better for the pin gage than for my camlock part. Rarely,
I could get the pin gage down to 0.001". The camlock, OTOH, was sometimes
out as much as 0.007". I went to bed thinking I would need to engineer
an adjust-tru setup, which would mean a lot more work before I'd get much
use out of the chuck.
The
Next Morning I Figured It Out: Back to Basics
I wandered down
to the shop thinking I had a lot of work ahead. Before diving in, I just
wanted to try a few things. I set up the indicator to measure the runout
on the taper without a collet. It was the advise of Bogstandard on the
HMEM board that these tapers weren't worth much on cheap chucks. Sure
enough, I had the same 0.004" runout on the taper. At least my collets
appeared to be in good condition!
So I pulled the
chuck off and was about to get out a gear puller so I could separate the
two and start work, when I had a thought. Was my lathe's spindle nose
out? Back to the DTI and I found the lathe spindle nose was around 2.5
tenths as far as I could see. Very good, and a real relief! While there
I noticed some debris, and got going cleaning up the lathe. Then it hit
me: what if debris was throwing off my collet chuck? Worth an investigation.
So I cleaned chuck
backplate and spindle nose thoroughly. I cleaned the collets thoroughly.
I got looking at my cam lock test part and noticed a ridge at the unfinished
end which I ground off. I put it all back together and did the measurements
again. It was much better: I was now seen 0.001 to sometimes 0.002"
accuracy. The camlock was now just as repeatable as the pin gage, which
was also reassuring--that ridge was throwing me off.
But it was still
not good enough. Along came the lucky break. For some reason, I didn't
move the DTI out of the way as I started loosening the camlock nuts. Because
of this, I was able to see how much the DTI moved even before those nuts
weren't tight. Hmmm, could this be helpful? So I developed a procedure
for attaching the chuck. It involved installing the chuck with the nuts
just a little past finger tight. I would then put the DTI in place and
tighten the nuts that had the most error until the needle was back to
zero. Odd, but it worked.
I remeasured everything,
including the nose taper:

As you can see,
my troubles had gone! This chuck was now accurate to 0.00025", and
dead repeatable. I'm still not done, but I am so much closer!
Last step:
Drilling
and Tapping the Chuck Mounting Bolts
The shrink fit
might even work by itself for light work, but the better answer is to
install the mounting bolts. This will be a bit tricky without removing
the chuck from the backplate, but I believe I can do it.
Ball
Bearing Collet Chuck Key
If you use a collet
chuck much, you'll realize there is a lot of key cranking when you change
collets. Not so much to change workpieces in the same collet, maybe a
turn or so. I got tired of the cross bar for my chuck key falling on the
floor as I would try to spin it quickly with my index finger. The knurl
intended to keep the bar in place was so light as to be useless. Looking
around the shop for appropriate scraps, I came upon a bag full of little
skate bearings and a piece of brass stock. Not too long after I had a
much more convenient way to operate my collet chuck!
Here are a couple
of pix:

The components:
I re-knurled the key to keep it from sliding out on that side. The brass
piece fits the ball bearing and the chuck key cross bar on the other side..

To fit the ball
bearing to the brass piece I did a shrink fit. the bearing goes in the
oven and the brass axle goes in a glass of ice water...

After a little
while we can assemble the works and Voila! Ball bearing chuck key spinner.
The bearing outer rim makes a fine knob to grasp when spinning the key...
|