Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

repeatability of toolposts/toolholders

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • repeatability of toolposts/toolholders

    there are many different kinds of toolholding. i myself use either the multifix or a 4-way. repeatability of the multifix is extremely high. i remember nick müller having done some measurements with a scope and and came up with a better than 0,01 mm number. my own measurements yielded an incredible within 0,001 mm. with the 4-way i dont count on any repeatability at all, as i have a riser without detents.

    what is your experience?

    edit: experience with other types of toolholders
    Last edited by dian; 04-30-2020, 06:07 AM.

  • #2
    Originally posted by dian View Post
    there are many different kinds of toolholding. i myself use either the multifix or a 4-way. repeatability of the multifix is extremely high. i remember nick müller having done some measurements with a scope and and came up with a better than 0,01 mm number. my own measurements yielded an incredible within 0,001 mm. with the 4-way i dont count on any repeatability at all, as i have a riser without detents.

    what is your experience?
    Damn .I cant even measure 0.001mm

    Comment


    • #3
      I have a multifix clone. I can't answer your question about repeatability, but there was something in the instructions that surprised me. The instructions said that the handle should be turned counterclockwise to lock. I'd translated the instructions from German to English with Google, so I thought that it might have been a mistake in the translation. I contacted the manufacturer and they confirmed that the translation was correct. I have not checked the repeatability in either direction, but maybe it's slightly better when used as instructed? It appears to work fine in either direction, but I assume the instruction is there for a reason.

      Comment


      • #4
        Curiosity got the better of me. 2 micron/div DTI with the stylus resting on the side of the insert close to the cutting edge. Tested about ten times in both directions. Always within one division and nearly always right on the line. Good enough for me. I only tried one holder. This is the B size.

        Comment


        • #5
          you are talking about the multifix, right?

          pinstripe, who was the manufacturer?

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by dian View Post
            pinstripe, who was the manufacturer?
            It's a multifix clone. The brand is AXA. I ordered them from https://www.stahlhalter24.de, who I believe is also the manufacturer.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by pinstripe View Post

              It's a multifix clone. The brand is AXA. I ordered them from , https://www.stahlhalter24.de/ who I believe is also the manufacturer.
              Website doesn't work

              Comment


              • #8
                What repeatability are you guys measuring? The only thing I care about is the on-center height of the point of stock contact.. As long as I'm within +/- a thou or two, my non-multifix AXA clone is "dead on". If I check and brush chips off the body and tool contacts, I'm good to go. I keep a small needle height tester on the back side of the lathe. I check my tool height against my tail stock center. My eyesight and needle point is good enough for me.

                By the way, a few of my tools are set below center. How does your nanometer gauge deal with that?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by CCWKen View Post
                  ........

                  By the way, a few of my tools are set below center. How does your nanometer gauge deal with that?
                  Why would it be any different?
                  4357 2773 5647 3671 3645 0087 1276

                  CNC machines only go through the motions

                  "There's no pleasing these serpents"......Lewis Carroll

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Repeatability depends a lot on the quality of the manufacturing for any toolpost and also on the design. If you look up my recent thread "help needed identifying toolpost", you will see how one of the more sophisticated is designed. It is ground inside and out and hopefully will repeat to a tolerance of +- 0.001", maybe better.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by challenger View Post
                      Website doesn't work
                      That's what I thought at first. It only works in German. Click the flag in the top-right and then select German. The site has been redesigned since I ordered. The person I exchanged email with had good English, and at the time they had to set up a quote for me with the shipping and the VAT removed before I could order.


                      Originally posted by CCWKen View Post
                      What repeatability are you guys measuring? The only thing I care about is the on-center height of the point of stock contact.
                      I was measuring the position of the insert. From the side so that I could remove the holder and put it back in. The insert is relieved, so a difference in height would give a different reading even though I wasn't measuring the height directly. It was a quick-and-dirty test.

                      Holders like these were used in early CNC lathes. Repeatability was important because the controller had to know where the cutting edge was after the operator changed the tool. Repeatability is also important if you use tool offsets in the DRO.

                      This video came up when I searched for the stahlhalter24 web site https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwb5hVoOAYE

                      In it, the guy compares the cam mechanism in the AXA with the original multifix. He says that the multifix can repeat when tightened in both directions. The AXA repeats in both directions as well, but tightening CCW gives you a different position than tightening CW. That's what I saw when I tested it as well.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        so to be clear what im talking about: you take a tool and turn a diameter. you put in another tool and do something else. you put in first tool and turn a diameter. what difference in diameters do you get (adjusted for the taper you lathe produces)?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I didn't test that, I measured the position of the insert. Measuring with a cut has at least two problems that I can see.
                          1. Even without removing the tool, a spring pass will often take off a little more material. So the diameter could change even if the tool holder repeats perfectly.
                          2. If the tool holder does not repeat perfectly, it may cut air during the second test. This error won't show up as a change in diameter.
                          So I think measuring the insert position is a better way to do it.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by pinstripe View Post

                            It's a multifix clone. The brand is AXA. I ordered them from https://www.stahlhalter24.de, who I believe is also the manufacturer.
                            I wish I knew about this before buying the phase II AND several holders AND steel to make more holders. I despise chinese junk and would have been a buyer of one from these folks. I think their priced very reasonably.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              before you get too excited check out the prices of their holders - E70-100 ('bout the same in $ give or take). Not dissimilar to Aloris, but there's no way you're making your own copies of these.

                              I think there's a Chinese Multifix supplier that's decent, but I can't remember any details. Several people have reviewed them and the price per holder is much more manageable.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X