No announcement yet.

advanced newbee ?

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • advanced newbee ?

    Hi folks,

    I have read many discussions of QC toolpost quality. They boil down to reproducibility(?) not rigidity or convenience.
    Please explain; you remove a tool, then put it back expecting it to be in exactly the same place to a gnats eyebrow? When? Why? etc.? Is this something that may be important in a production machine (CNC) but totally unimportant to the hobbyist or one up machining??

  • #2
    Have you used a lathe before? Do you want to dick around with shims to get the tool height right each time you change the tool?
    QC toolposts are for convenience, productivity, hell they just make your life easier.


    • #3
      Apparently I didn't make my self clear.I have been using a QC since I owned my lathe (2.5 yrs.).
      I was just trying to find out the real difference between $100 set and a $400 set that "everyone" says is more reproducible.
      I would like to know how,
      1) in/out
      2) up/down
      3) side/side
      and in what situation is this important.


      [This message has been edited by rmatel (edited 12-12-2003).]


      • #4
        Ah ok, sorry I got it wrong.
        I have heard that the dovetail versions are supposed to be more rigid than the piston types, and people seam to like the Phase 2 stuff. I don't know how much better a true Alloris is, if it is even better.


        • #5
          It means the cutting site on the tool is
          placed within a few tenths of a thousandth of
          where it was before, once everything is
          set up when holders are replaced, assumming
          the tool is placed with equal precision in
          the holder. Piston holders are closer to
          a thousandth by comparison. Important to some
          just not most of us. Steve


          • #6
            Bob; Your initial take is correct. The wedge repositions the tool more precisely, which is a convenience when producing multiple parts and you have to change tools. Rigidity is pretty much the same. Convenience of having the proper tool set up and ready is a major plus with these holders.
            I have had a Phase II, or whoever China piston type for several years now, and am happy with it. It is probably the only Chicom tool I would recommend. I did have to retap the holes in the toolholders and replace the things they had in them with real Allen screws.
            There is a good market in HSM tooling, and I think Aloris, Dorian and the others are missing the boat by not offering some of their tooling in shop grade, or some class that would fit the HSM budget better. I find it hard to believe they cannot produce at a lower price, their engineering and tooling costs were amortized years ago.
            Jim H.


            • #7
              I agree with JC-be nice if Aloris and some of the rest made QC's for less than what some of us probably paid for the lathe we have. I AM NOT A TRAINED MACHINIST. The following is from observation of a devout amateur. The Aloris on a 15 in. LeBlond (both new) in the University shop where I sometimes made"stuff" was indeed a much smoother, precision device than the Phase 2 wedge I have on my 12" Atlas. I've had the Atlas since it was new in 1964. That said,neither one comes close to the Hardinge QC on the HLV-H that the University shop also had. They all beat the old lantern types for most things.



              • #8
                Do you guys know, does anyone offer QC holders that present HSS tools at the proper angle? The lantern post 'Armstrong' style holders have a fairly steep up angle, and the tools are presented with a positive rake (I think that's the right terminology) But the QC blocks present the tools pretty much straight away, with the rake built into the carbide inserts. Any easy way to mate the convenience of QC posts with the nice finish provided by the high speed bits?
                I'm here hoping to advancify my smartitude.


                • #9
                  I use HSS pretty much exclusively. You can grind a very short, steep positive rake by using corner of grinding wheel. It ends up looking like a large version of the chip breaker on carbide inserts, and acts as chip breaker too. Give a good side relief and round the nose, and you will get a nice finish.
                  I make many of my own toolholders, it would not be too difficult to make up one with tool at an angle.
                  Jim H.


                  • #10
                    I have a South Bend 9" with a phase II piston type on it and it is a pretty decent made holder. I am also a professional Tool & Moldmaker with 23 years experience, speaking from experience yes the Aloris is far superior, after all they invented the darn thing and then improved it to the Nth degree, it is as accurate as the .0005" readout on our Lathe at work and will repeat every time, it is also about 5 times smoother at locking and unlocking with virtually no effort. I to wish they were more affordable but somebody has to pay the union machinists. One of the problems with production work like this anymore is that it is made with CNC equipment and the guys do make as much or more than good diemakers and moldmakers because they are union help, and I can run machines and do things they can't even imagine doing, along with CAD design and engineer my own molds and such along with fitting stuff within micro inches. I have an acquaintence who works for Jacobs chuck in South Carolina and he says he doesn't think Jacobs will be made in America in another year or so because of the high wages they pay button pushing CNC operators who claim to be top notch machinists. I'm not ranting per say but that is alot of the reason why some of this stuff cost so much anymore.


                    • #11
                      Buy the post and one holder. I like Aloris. It is made very well and will last a HSM forever save a freak encounter with the chuck on a large lathe. Use the one purchased holder as a model for the ones you make. It is a simple dovetail with adjusting screw on top.


                      • #12

                        There are toolholders and inserts that look just like the carbide insert variety, but the inserts are HSS instead. I forget the name, but I'm sure someone here will chime in.



                        • #13
                          I have Aloris and Dorian in my shop. No discernable difference in posts and holders, but something about the "real thing".

                          I use carbide and HSS. I have devised grinding the HSS end to different angles to fit the posts. Simple really, just front angled more straight. 90 degree to a -3 degree front edge, almost like a diamond tool holder, but more end relief. I use HSS for tight to the tail stock turning, threading, and form tools.

                          The height thing, just set it up, tighten up the screws on top, check again.

                          The issue with all the toolholders and epeatablilty is this. Clean and very parallel tops. Clean underneath very often. When "centering" tools, especially on a piston type, center - tighten - check again - they "rock" whene the wedge type does not for the most part (centering slightly snug where a piston this will not work).

                          Very rigid as well. Tonight I was removing .200 DOC on brass at 1100 RPM 1 inch length on a regular basis (I make candlesticks for Christmas, 12 sets on order).

                          Just observations.

                          What's a rocker post? Oh yeah, have one of those in my closet for show and tell. believe it or not, almost 30 years in the field, started with Aloris and such, never used a rocker in all my years at my many shops working for or teaching in. Finally used one five years back when I found the thing in a "junk pile' in the scrap yard. Fun, but I cut my "teeth" on the OC tool posts.

                          [This message has been edited by spope14 (edited 12-13-2003).]
                          CCBW, MAH


                          • #14
                            Oh well!

                            To paraphrase Captain Kirk, "You keep missing the target". The target being how is this super accurate reproducibility important?

                            Looks like sch has the answer.."Important to some just not most of us. Steve "

                            In which case I would recommend the set sold by Grizzly.



                            • #15
                              had a good answer prepped, all done and posted, but in the end....just not worth it. Deleted

                              BUT returned a bit in the end, thanks Bill.

                              First thing, many of us in this thread were also talking to each other on this topic, just something to consider for reference R...

                              My job and hobby are a reflection to myself. I make parts that when they go out the door be it dubber items, or high precision .0002 items, they must be good and of high quality. Good items in the end really are not noticed that much, but Crap is, and crap is remembered far longer than good items. It is personal workmanship qualities, work ethic, and how you view yourself. heck, I measure my wood items I make with a dial caliper and mics, what is a ruler anyway? 1/32 inch???????

                              Ok, the QC Holder. I use many inserts that are "center" sensitive, and also "in and out" sensitive. Top notch grooving and thread tools. Ceramic bore bar inserts on a manual (unheard of unless you have good stuff, and watch your controls, and when you get this pat, you will never go back to even carbide), Form ground little radius tools and .015 groove tools, carbide tools with little end rad, and highly expensive inserts that tend to "pop" if not centered, or in and out repeated (replicated). This is on my own machinery as well as the school machinery. I find that if I use quality items from step one, I save money, headache, and chasing my tail frustration. Also initial investment lasts for years.

                              Replication, especially when I have four to ten tools set-up is absolutely vital for me, and I keep tool sets from one job to the next locked in and on the shelf, thus a minimum of monkeying, and a maximum of production, and dare I say enjoyment from the hobby. More chips. TRUST IN MY GEAR....Aloris or Dorian. It is not dollars, it is quality and experience. Inserts and tools last longer as well, I have a .063 rad HSS grooving tool I use for thread reliefs I have not sharpened in three years, and it has NOT been adjusted height wise. It holds. DRO sets and re-sets are uncommon, and usually the hair type re-sets throughout, not the full blown re-sets needed for each part.

                              "One ups" are a breeze, I know the tools are there on center, in good condition because of this, and will hold after a touch, and if I need to put the tool in again to do a second op on the same part.

                              I use my manual machines to often make "blanks" to use in CNC applications and finish items, and the errors I make on the manual ops compound exponentially fom manual to CNC. Same on milling on the G54, the lathe workshifts and wear offsets are important, and quality from step one is vital.

                              On my manual complete projects, centering means quality finish step one forward, and in and out replication also shows in mating parts on items if multiple and made to fit other items lathed on the same machine. Replication and centering on bores and ID threads is my biggest plus........

                              Back to the question Captain. Waters muddied a bit in the initial question, but better explained in subsequent follow-up and logic - Thanks Spock. For some. repeatability is not that important. Does not mean less quality of personal standards by any means - it is application. I am also very picky, and was "raised in this biz" by a really hard butt German apprentice master, whom I can still hear swearing in my ears every time I touch a dial. However, my Aloris and Dorian are top drawer for QC, and one is wedge, one a strange piston type, almost a wedge. Tried Phase 2 being penny wise, and after about $100.00 (8 inserts) blown to hell, and a week of tail chasing and trying to figure it out for hours, and wasting bucks on material, I junked the thing, and all the holders but for the cutoff tool holder.

                              In final. I make 24 sets of specialty candlesticks each year. $6.11 per inch for material. 6 tool blanking set-up, and I hate to think about what happens if I blow a piece (5 inches long 30.55), and have to get another piece (30.55, now loss of 61.10, or probably 15% or more of profit). Have to hold .001 on all around for the CNC ops, or I am forever babysitting the CNC machine - where centering and qualified tooling are my life blood. On the CNC I have to have five tools "blending" to make a stick, back turning, front turning, specialty grooves, and a bore and a piss poor blank blows the blends and bores from the start. All 24 came out, and each will just take 15 minutes to sand and finish, not three hours to file blend, play with sand paper, and such. There are actually three pieces that MUST fit in the blanking together for the finish product.

                              But this is unusual, I admit. And I create this issue, but man, I can sell 24 sets by a whisper - quality (brag brag)

                              I also make blanks for some surfacing jobs for the students on the lathe - for the Mill, and a .001 off means the surface is off, seeing we set to C/L of the part X and Y. Someday will post this.

                              It is in what you desire, and your application. For most of us, probably not that important, but for some of us, vital.

                              [This message has been edited by spope14 (edited 12-13-2003).]

                              [This message has been edited by spope14 (edited 12-13-2003).]

                              [This message has been edited by spope14 (edited 12-13-2003).]
                              CCBW, MAH