PDA

View Full Version : lathe setup and alinement



gupton01
09-24-2005, 04:18 PM
Hay guys could some one help me? I bought a lathe and had to disassemble it to get it in to my basement I now need some INFO on how to get it back in alinement particulary the head stock to the ways Is there a good book in this

SGW
09-24-2005, 06:10 PM
Is there a good book? Not that I know of, unless you consider Connely's "Machine Tool Reconditioning," but that still wouldn't be quite what you need, either.

If it's a Logan or South Bend or simialar, where the headstock sits on V-ways, it should "all just work." Assuming you get the bed straight (e.g. level) the headstock alignment should take care of itself.
If it's one of the imports that have headstock alignment adjustment, then the solution is a dial indicator, a test bar, and abiding patience, I think.

Leigh
09-24-2005, 07:26 PM
The most important thing about setting up a lathe is leveling. Lathes are not rigid structures (compare to a Bridgeport). The bed will distort significantly if the machine is not level.

The standard for professional work is the Starrett model 199 level, which is calibrated to 1 division = 0.0005"/foot. If you adjust the lathe for 1/2 division maximum error in any direction, it should be aligned well when you put it back together.

And support the machine using the holes provided in the legs, with leveling pads attached. Don't just put blocks under the feet and expect it to work right.

------------------
Leigh W3NLB

[This message has been edited by Leigh (edited 09-24-2005).]

gupton01
09-25-2005, 03:43 AM
Thanks guys for the input It is an inprot I was thinking of getting a pice of 1 1/2 stock and chucking it then set up a indecator on the saddle and measure each end?Or may be use a C5 collete and a smaller pice of stock

Leigh
09-25-2005, 03:32 PM
You can indicate a piece of stock (assuming it's true in the first place, and your chuck or collet is properly aligned) to confirm alignment of the machine, but not to set it.

This technique tells you the magnitude of any error, but not the source of the error. If you start making random adjustments to bring the error to zero, you're likely to introduce additional problems which complement and cancel the original problem, but result in a less accurate machine.

------------------
Leigh W3NLB

[This message has been edited by Leigh (edited 09-25-2005).]

Norman Atkinson
09-27-2005, 03:03 PM
I am sort of returning from a holiday.
My friend has Alzheimer's and is far younger than me. Stuff had to be sold to help get him back to England. Not quite engineering!
Before I left, there had been quite a bit about aligning machine tools- and I thought that someone would say, Norman, will you have a go at scanning bits from perhaps the finest contribution on tools.
I refer to Testing Machine Tools by Georg Schlesinger. I had sort of sweet hearted a young-ish nubile librarian who had interest of how I wore my incontince pad.

Without moving away to less rigid structures( Ahem ), there is the a bit- and I quote-
Tolerances in Measuring the Differences of Height or Sag. If you want to know how to ascertain errors with an End Gauge. This is your thing.

I got into a fit of the giggles with
" The free end of the mandrel must rise"- and I wish mine did!
For those with a vertical column- buy the book.

Norman

gupton01
09-28-2005, 02:41 PM
thanks norman i will look for the book thanks guys for the help

3 Phase Lightbulb
09-28-2005, 04:28 PM
I've been playing with my lathe a lot recently and I found this set of Lathe Setup/Alignment notes on the WEB the other day:

http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/~chrish/tsetup.htm

It seems like it's well written, and certainly worth reading IMO.

-Adrian

Leigh
09-28-2005, 05:35 PM
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by 3 Phase Lightbulb:
I've been playing with my lathe a lot recently and I found this set of Lathe Setup/Alignment notes on the WEB the other day:</font>

Hi Adrian,

Interesting page, but I must take violent exception to one statement, to wit:

"There is a fundamental difference between the two methods - using either a level or the parallelism of turned work. The first assumes the lathe is basically accurate and if levelled on a true surface will be setup correctly."

The first technique (using a level) makes no such assumption. This is a self-serving apology on the part of the author to justify cutting corners.

The method which he proposes, i.e. jerking the lathe around until you can get a true piece, is specious. It introduces additional errors which complement the original errors in the setup.

It's like adding a second bend to a bent rod. You might get the two ends where you want them, but you don't have a straight rod as a result.

When a lathe is set up initially with a level, you have a known starting point from which the overall condition of the lathe can be assessed. Corrective action can then be taken in a controlled and efficient manner. This initial condition matches the conditions in which the lathe was originally trued at the factory.

Without this baseline, you're just p*ssing in the wind.

------------------
Leigh W3NLB

Norman Atkinson
09-29-2005, 01:13 PM
Stop it! The correct thing is to avoid the bed being " in warp" or in Twist when it is put down for re-assembly.
It doesn't matter whether the thing is flat or turned up 90 degrees. The only difference is that you have suddenly acquired a rather nice miller or drill.
The only valid point to levelling in a true horizontal plane is that you can use it as a repeatable reference for future assembly and future set ups.

I recall one of the greatest engineers of all time who knew that his workshop was slowly tipping down a bit of the English Lake District.With it, was his lathes etc etc.

Right now- shake hands and apologise.

We are having a be nice to everyone week.
Aren't we- IOWolf?

Norm

Leigh
09-29-2005, 05:27 PM
I hired a guy to be nice for me, 'cause I'm no good at it. He's on vacation this week http://bbs.homeshopmachinist.net//biggrin.gif

------------------
Leigh W3NLB

J Tiers
09-29-2005, 10:47 PM
Leigh has correctly identified the weakness of the "Rollies Dad's method" and similar.

SOMETHING is assumed. In teh case of RDM, it is assumed that the spindle axis CAN be made to point down the bed parallel to the line of the ways.

If you knew that the ways were straight, you could aline the headstock with RDM.

Conversely, if you knew the headstock was right, you might be able to aline the ways with RDM.

But if you know nothing about the machine, you can't use RDM or similar methods, unless you want to risk making the thing a pretzel. One little piece of swarf under the H/S, for instance, perhaps from some prior disassembly, and RDM will have you bending the bed every which way but straight.

Using a level, which, yes, simply uses the gravitational center of the earth as a reference, lets you get the ways straight. THEN, you can use RDM to assure yourself that you have the H/S alined.

OR you can use a "two collars" test.

Eitehr way, by already having SOMETHING known, you avoid the chance of pursuing the impossible dream, while twisting the lathe into odd shapes.

BTW, the idea that you MUST have a super precision level is not correct. The ordinary 0.005" per foot Starrett level is readable much closer, since the sensitivity is "per division". It will get you close enough to start honing in using another method.

At the very least, it will tell you when you are going "into the weeds" and making lathe pretzels.

A very sensitive level is actually worse, in some ways. It is so sensitive that it will spend so much time "pegged" and will fail to show you intermediate degrees of off-level.

Plus, you may get a bad one. The Grizzly I bought had a non-flat bottom, and only touched the granite flat on three corners. Fine level that was, drove me nuts until I had teh sense to go blue up the flat and check it.... then it went back to da Bear.

Incidentally, a level will NOT get things level..... A long enough surface, carefully leveled with a very sensitive level, will end up curved to the exact radius of the earth at that elevation.....
Only an optical measuring device will get it straight. We will assume for the moment that bending of light by gravity is not enough to be a factor......

[This message has been edited by J Tiers (edited 09-29-2005).]

3 Phase Lightbulb
09-29-2005, 10:58 PM
I just bought one of the Grizzly machinist levels. I'll try it out when it arrives in a few days..

I tried a new flood coolant system on my Lathe tonight and I absolutly love it. It's the ENCO special 3 gallon tank system.

-Adrian

mochinist
09-30-2005, 12:01 AM
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by 3 Phase Lightbulb:
I just bought one of the Grizzly machinist levels. I'll try it out when it arrives in a few days..

I tried a new flood coolant system on my Lathe tonight and I absolutly love it. It's the ENCO special 3 gallon tank system.

-Adrian</font>

Did you make a mess? I only use the flood coolant rarely and more often than not I just use it to cool down a part when the lathe is not running. It is nice if you use mostly HSS cutting tools though.

P.S. Get an aquarium air pump and an air stone and set it up on a timer to aerate your tank a few times a day, it will help keep the bacteria down, otherwise hat coolant is gonna end smelling up your garage bad. An oil skimmer to get rid of the tramp oil helps out a ton too, and if you wanna get real fancy, use distilled water to mix with your coolant oil.

Leigh
09-30-2005, 12:12 AM
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by J Tiers:
...Incidentally, a level will NOT get things level..... A long enough surface, carefully leveled with a very sensitive level, will end up curved to the exact radius of the earth at that elevation....</font>

Except for one thing (assuming a four-legged lathe here, as I believe is most common in the size range we're discussing here):

When you level a bed, you set the level exactly equidistant from the legs on the axis of interest. When you level the bed correctly, it's parallel to the tangent to the earth's surface at the midpoint of the bed.

If leveling a six-legged lathe, you first do the four outside legs with the middle legs dangling in mid-air, so you're technically leveling a catenary. Upon the success of this endeavor, you then shim up the middle legs to make the bed flat and true.

------------------
Leigh W3NLB

phil burman
09-30-2005, 01:25 AM
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Leigh:
The bed will distort significantly if the machine is not level.
</font>

Why is this. If the tail stock end of the bed is say 1" lower than the head stock end will this cause the bed to distort significantly.

Regards
Phil Burman

Norman Atkinson
09-30-2005, 04:09 AM
Hi Phil!

It is not the lathe bed which is crooked- it's the thinking.

As I said earlier, provided the bed is not put into twist- from incorrect levelling, it doesn't matter a hoot. If the ways are parallel to each other- in each plane, the lathe could be mounted on the ceiling- or in space.
Then comes the headstock- which should be in line with the ways. Or turned in to give a minor convex cut. No body has got to that one- yet! The saddle and its tool holders- can be fixed or loose- provided that any movement follows the correct alignments- already mentioned.
The Tailstock- and you have a Quorn- with a tailstock- operates quite happily removing metal- without the tailstock. Whether one uses a cutting tool or such or uses grit is purely a matter of choice.

In another posting- on the other channel- I described rather flippantly the potted or potty history of early machine tools.

Am I right? When we have all gone for our 11 minutes in the local crematorium, these empirical truths will remain- as they have done for 6000 years.

It is time for many of us to go back to Euclid, Pythagoras, and the greats- and relearn the basic fundamentals of our craft.

Norman

Leigh
09-30-2005, 07:24 AM
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by phil burman:
If the tail stock end of the bed is say 1" lower than the head stock end will this cause the bed to distort significantly.</font>

Hi Phil,

If the feet are free to move, i.e. not bolted to the floor, so that the legs are not under stress due to the difference in floor height, and assuming the lathe is properly leveled front to back, then the error that you described would not result in a misalignment.

The problem arises when all four feet are not on the same plane. Going back to basic geometry, any three points define a plane. For a lathe (or other four-legged machine) you have four possible planes, each defined by omitting one of the four legs from the equation.

For the bed to be free of distortion, all of these planes must be the exact same plane. The way to achieve this is to level the bed side to side and front to back. If the lathe is not level, then by definition one leg is above or below the others, and that causes the lathe bed to twist. Lathe beds are not rigid structures.

And it's not that the bed "could" twist or "might" twist if the lathe is not level. As you can see from the geometry of the system, the bed MUST twist.

The same holds true for a six-legged lathe, but the errors can be much more complex.

------------------
Leigh W3NLB

[This message has been edited by Leigh (edited 09-30-2005).]

JCHannum
09-30-2005, 07:53 AM
Leigh and J Tiers are both correct. Norman A is "kind of" correct.

I had my lathe reasonably well leveled and cutting nicely. I saw RDM and thought it would be a good way to fine tune it. I was soon adjusting everything in sight. I pitched the instructions and releveled the bed and got on with my life.

For a lathe to function with accuracy, the bed must be in a single plane, not warped or twisted. There are several methods of accomplishing this. The use of a level is the simplest, and available to most HSMs, so it is the one most often recommended.

Any level will work, the more accurate the level, the more accurate the outcome. I recommend starting with a carpenter's torpedo level and working up to a precision level.

A further benefit of having any machine level is that it permits using a level when setting up work on that machine.

The headstock is not to be pointed at an angle but must be as parallel as possible with the centerline of the lathe. Connelly recommends +- 0.0003"/12" for a tool room lathe and +-0.0005"/12" for a 12"-18" engine lathe. Note the plus minus dimensioning, not plus.

J Tiers
09-30-2005, 08:25 AM
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Leigh:
Except for one thing (assuming a four-legged lathe here, as I believe is most common in the size range we're discussing here):
</font>

The effect is not very important until you get to a goodly fraction of a kM, or you are extremely fussy....

I wouldn't worry about the curvature effect at any homeshop lathe size!

Leigh
09-30-2005, 08:52 AM
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by J Tiers:
The effect is not very important until you get to a goodly fraction of a kM, or you are extremely fussy....</font>

Very true. But you're the one who brought it up in the first place http://bbs.homeshopmachinist.net//biggrin.gif

------------------
Leigh W3NLB

3 Phase Lightbulb
09-30-2005, 09:45 AM
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by mochinist:
Did you make a mess? I only use the flood coolant rarely and more often than not I just use it to cool down a part when the lathe is not running. It is nice if you use mostly HSS cutting tools though.

P.S. Get an aquarium air pump and an air stone and set it up on a timer to aerate your tank a few times a day, it will help keep the bacteria down, otherwise hat coolant is gonna end smelling up your garage bad. An oil skimmer to get rid of the tramp oil helps out a ton too, and if you wanna get real fancy, use distilled water to mix with your coolant oil.

</font>

The coolant got all over my lathe, and ran down my ways, but it all ended up dropping down to the chip pan which has a drain that goes right back into the 3 gal tank. My lathe is old and it was very cheap so I'll continue to use flood coolant all the time unless it starts to smell.. It kind of smells nice right now but I'm sure that's not going to last.

-Adrian

Norman Atkinson
09-30-2005, 10:00 AM
I am so glad to find that i am sort of right.

I am now in a state of complete exhaustion.
It would appear that my little watchmakers lathe- the 6mm has lost three of its legs.
Again, coming from an area that built ship for the world, that the lathes fitted to effect running repairs had to be taken to the nearest quayside, screwed down firmly and repairs commenced.
Again, looking at the pillars in Durham Cathedral, I keep wondering where the bed was kept. the Cathedral is is situated on the River Wear and immediately above an ox-bow.As I said in another posting, it all happened some 900 years ago.
That, if my historical references are correct was before the time that Edward Connolly never scraped a lathe.

Verb Sap.

Norman

Evan
09-30-2005, 10:08 AM
As Norman has said, the lathe need not be level but it must be true. The level can be used to true it even if not level.

One question, how does one level a slant bed lathe?

http://www.lathes.co.uk/willson/

Leigh
09-30-2005, 11:14 AM
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Evan:
...One question, how does one level a slant bed lathe?</font>

With a slanted level, of course.

------------------
Leigh W3NLB

Leigh
09-30-2005, 11:18 AM
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by NORMAN ATKINSON:
...That, if my historical references are correct was before the time that Edward Connolly never scraped a lathe.</font>

Hi Norman,

As a student of archaeology, I can provide innumerable examples of ancient technologies which achieved astonishingly good results. That does not in any way invalidate the modern techniques under discussion here.

Modern optics can image features a few millionths of an inch in size. That does not in any way reduce the significance of Galileo's contributions. But modern techniques can achieve results which were unthinkable a century or ten ago.

------------------
Leigh W3NLB

Leigh
09-30-2005, 11:29 AM
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Evan:
As Norman has said, the lathe need not be level but it must be true. The level can be used to true it even if not level.</font>

Hi Evan,

Perhaps we're confusing different concepts here.

The purpose of a level is to return the lathe to the conditions which existed when it was trued initially at the factory. If circumstances dictate a different datum, then that should be used in preference to the "assumed" level condition.

As I noted in my earlier response, a 1" error in the height of the legs at the head and tail will not necessarily introduce an error if all four feet are coplanar.

And this whole discussion masks the fact that the legs may be of different lengths. By leveling the bed, you adjust the height of each leg as needed to compensate for errors in its length as well as errors in the mounting surface.

A lathe bed must be flat, i.e. the four corners must be coplanar, and the surface must be flat, if it's to produce accurate work. Leveling is a simple method of achieving this condition in the general case.

------------------
Leigh W3NLB

Evan
09-30-2005, 11:50 AM
I fully understand the concepts in truing a lathe. Leveling is commonly used to describe the process but it needn't be level. If that were the case it would be a bugger to install a lathe and use it on a ship.

Leigh
09-30-2005, 11:51 AM
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Evan:
...If that were the case it would be a bugger to install a lathe and use it on a ship.</font>

No. You just have to hold the ship still until you're done setting up the lathe. I'm sure the Captain would cooperate http://bbs.homeshopmachinist.net//biggrin.gif

------------------
Leigh W3NLB

Leigh
09-30-2005, 11:55 AM
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Evan:
I fully understand the concepts in truing a lathe. Leveling is commonly used to describe the process but it needn't be level.</font>

I believe I said the same thing. The goal is to have the bed flat and true, regardless of the surface on which it's mounted.

But setting the bed level, based on the use of that tool, is a concept which is easily explained to the inexperienced practitioner, and it avoids discussion of complexities which don't arise in the general case. And it achieves the desired result.

------------------
Leigh W3NLB

3 Phase Lightbulb
09-30-2005, 12:14 PM
My lathe is turning within .001" on a 6" stub axle now, but after adding flood coolant last night, I realized I better get my lathe level with gravity too because the coolant is now running down both ways off the end pooling in the chip pan at the tailstock end.

J Tiers
09-30-2005, 07:09 PM
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Leigh:
Very true. But you're the one who brought it up in the first place
</font>

Ah, but not for that reason..... we'll forgive you, never fear.

As far as the silly ship examples, etc, that ALWAYS come up http://bbs.homeshopmachinist.net//rolleyes.gif that's what they are, silly. Nobody (much) is saying the thing must be "level" forever.

If you have an autocollimator, please have at using it for alinement. You can do mine next. that works as well or better, and can be done off-level.

The "level" is just the cheapest way of producing an "unchanging" outside reference. Period. End of story as far as why you should use one.

Once alined, tip it anyway you want, using some way that doesn't either mis-aline it again, or shift the weight and cause it to sag differently (out of alinement). It'll work.

All the folks who say "ah never leveled my lathe an it splits tenths" are either lucky, used another alinement method, or don't know or care if it has a bed like a roller coaster.

Naturally, a watch lathe with one foot is either made straight and right, or not. If not, you are stuck.

Same with little 50 lb lathes like the 109. They take the shape the makers gave them, and that's it.

Leigh
09-30-2005, 07:29 PM
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by J Tiers:
..."ah never leveled my lathe an it splits tenths"</font>

Any lathe will split tenths, by definition. A properly-aligned lathe will split the same tenth every time http://bbs.homeshopmachinist.net//biggrin.gif

------------------
Leigh W3NLB

JCHannum
09-30-2005, 08:27 PM
Round bed lathes, such as watchmaker's lathes, and some ultra rigid high precision lathes such as those manufactured by Hardinge and some Monarchs for instance, are so inherently rigid they need no alignment.

Some procedures are so lacking in precision, that highly accurate alignment is not necessary. Most wood turning for example.

There is always someone who says what about the Navy? How do they align their lathes? Wink, wink, nudge, nudge. Well they might use one of these;
http://www.metalworking.com/dropbox/machinealignment.pdf

Use of this device will allow one to align a lathe in any position or location, on board ship, vertically on the wall or where ever else you may wish; or even a location someone might suggest for your lathe when you bring up the shipboard example.

Leigh
09-30-2005, 08:42 PM
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by JCHannum:
...or even a location someone might suggest for your lathe when you bring up the shipboard example.</font>

How do you read the gauge with no light http://bbs.homeshopmachinist.net//biggrin.gif

------------------
Leigh W3NLB

3 Phase Lightbulb
09-30-2005, 08:59 PM
I just tried something neat. I took one of my $9.99 bubble laser levels and placed it across the ways on my lathe. I placed a square across my shop ~20 feet away so the laser pointer could be measured. I removed the level, placed it back on the lathe several times just to make sure I got the same reading on the square across the room. I then moved the bubble laser level to the other side of the lathe and pointed it at the square cross my shop. I could see half an inch difference. I turned one of the leg adjustment screws about 1/4 turn and that went 1" too far on the square. I backed off about 1/8th of a turn and re-measured both sides again and they are perfect now.

I'll re-measure my ways when my Grizzly precision level arrives next week, but I'm expecting I probably won't have to make any adjustments. The cheap laser level is a great amplifer.

http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/photos/41800-41899/41895.gif

http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/ctaf/Displayitem.taf?itemnumber=41895

-Adrian


Nevermind, I just realized that doesn't tell me anything. I just probably put more of a twist in my ways. I'll just wait until my precision level arrives.


[This message has been edited by 3 Phase Lightbulb (edited 09-30-2005).]

Norman Atkinson
10-01-2005, 01:19 AM
At 10 dollars a shot for lazer levels, you could have four. Sounds expensive and rather daft and frivolous but your lathe is worth- well- add it up.

You have each pair pointing to one place- and quietly align as you bolt down.

Now, it is time for confession.

I have one of those unny things called a City and Guilds Certificate which allows me to weld and solder tails to donkeys- assuming the right flux. It also allows me to pull out- and align- crashed vehicle bodies. It was all a long time ago- but the
we lazer aligned with little plexiglass graticules hung along the chassis.

With the kindest intentions, I was playing the field to see what other people would suggest- or dig up. I love "ologies", don't you?

Again, lazer alignment is not new. It is following old Galileo and probably Hiram, King of Tyre and using the Morning Star Venus. I grew up with a Bronze Age skeleton in a cupboard. For my thoughts, the four lazer levels would be extremely accurate.
After all, the more able to determine inherrent error in the levels as well.

Great posting with lots of food for thought.

Norman

J Tiers
10-01-2005, 08:37 AM
The major issue with the lasers is the spot size and consequent resolution.

If you want 0.005" per foot alinement (none too great, but acceptable for a start) then you must be able to "read" the spot location to an equivalent accuracy.

Those lasers are purposely de-tuned" to avoid eye damage. The spot is blurred.

If the spot is about 0.150 diameter, that suggests that at 20 feet you can just about do it. The 0.005 would be 0.100 at 20 feet, so you are probably able to just get to the 0.005 per foot.

I don't know how big the spot really is, might be bigger than 0.150.

That is if you use the SAME laser level at each point. Using two, they woul dhave to be scraped-in to aline together.

I doubt that the wood-butcher tool companies are that accurate, especially since those things are probably cheaply made in china.

My small Starrett 0.005/foot level I got for $10 at a garage sale. Those lasers are too expensive, and the level will work in a closet, or a small shipboard compartment http://bbs.homeshopmachinist.net//biggrin.gif


[This message has been edited by J Tiers (edited 10-01-2005).]

3 Phase Lightbulb
10-01-2005, 09:34 AM
The Laser level alignment I did was totaly flawed because any height differences between the front/back would throw off the measurement I was doing. I was tring to see if there was any twist in my ways by projecting their relative angle across my shop.

-Adrian

3 Phase Lightbulb
10-01-2005, 09:44 AM
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by J Tiers:
That is if you use the SAME laser level at each point. Using two, they woul dhave to be scraped-in to aline together.

I doubt that the wood-butcher tool companies are that accurate, especially since those things are probably cheaply made in china.
</font>

I have a bunch of the cheap-o laser levels and if I place them all together and project their angle, they ALL have slightly different laser angles so they are definitely not very laser angle accurate, but they are very accurate for repeatibility so I would feel confident using the same unit for all measurements. I was hoping they would be more matched but they are close enough for what I bought them for: Squaring up my Buggy frame, setting up the front end alignment, etc.

-Adrian

Norman Atkinson
10-01-2005, 11:53 AM
This lazer suggestion has been the subject of a number of articles in the UK mags.
One of the most respected writers "got round" the size problem by pin hole masking the business end of the lazer.

In no way am I comparing a full lazer alignment set up in an automobile repair shop with a a cheap rig as suggested. However, for those with one of those round
column cheap and nasty mill drills- like wot I have- it is a cheap and quick solution!

I was musing- as old farts do- and recall some series in Model Engineer. Way back before most of you were born- you fresh faced and callow youths- a bloke called Artificer wrote " Microscope on the Lathe"
He was using them up through the mandrel and the tailstock projecting through to centres- and examining alignments.

Today, another article has appeared but in Model Engineers Workshop where a side of a binocular has been converted to help in alignment. Yea, I know it becomes a monocular but those of Oriental origin are surprisingly good. Mine for the Pair cost about 12 dollars. Fit one on your lathe- the one with one leg?

Sorry, we have someone with an "ology" and I don't want to catch something now at my age- hence the strict adherence to the Queens English

Might I apologise? I am sadly drying out after 14 days of Spanish Aurum beer at a dollar a litre.It's not wonderful but at that price you can drink a lot of it- and I did. Well, the wine is also modestly cheap- and strong.


Norm

[This message has been edited by NORMAN ATKINSON (edited 10-01-2005).]

[This message has been edited by NORMAN ATKINSON (edited 10-01-2005).]