Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: RF31 Table not Square

Expand Messages
  • Greg Miller
    Ray, I used a Mitutoyo machinist square. Supposedly they are precision ground to ensure straightness and parallelism . I did the same test with a 1-2-3
    Message 1 of 13 , Nov 4, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      Ray,

      I used a Mitutoyo machinist square. Supposedly they are 'precision
      ground to ensure straightness and parallelism'. I did the same test
      with a 1-2-3 block on the table and got similar results. If I can't
      trust a machinist square then what can I trust?

      How should I be performing these measurements?

      Thanks,
      Greg

      --- In mill_drill@yahoogroups.com, "Ray Livingston" <jagboy@...> wrote:
      >
      > Greg,
      >
      > How do you know your square is truly square? Many are not. What
      > did you use as a reference surface when you setup the square? Did
      > you verify that surface was true?
      >
      > Regards,
      > Ray L.
      >
      >
      >
      > --- In mill_drill@yahoogroups.com, "Greg Miller" <gregrycm@> wrote:
      > >
      > > I removed the vise and clamped a machinist square to the table. I
      > > aligned the square in the X-axis first, then ran the indicator along
      > > the long edge of the square in the Y-Axis. This distance is about
      > > 5.2". Along the Y-Axis, I measured 0.014" difference.
      > >
      > > I have an inspection record that came with my 9x20 lathe, but I
      > could
      > > not find one for the Mill. Does anyone else have one for the RF-31?
      > > If so, what is the specification for X-Y perpendicularity?
      > >
      > > Thanks,
      > > Greg
      > >
      > > --- In mill_drill@yahoogroups.com, "Denis" <zapvss@> wrote:
      > > >
      > > > Hi Greg,
      > > > After reading your post I performed the same test on my G0484
      > Mill.
      > > > If I place the 1-2-3 block on the table loose and test with an
      > > > indicator, the needle doesn't move at all in the Y or X
      > direction.
      > > > Its dead on. If I put the 1-2-3 block in the vise without
      > tightening
      > > > the vise I get the same results. But if I tighten the vise a
      > little I
      > > > get .005 difference between front and back on the Y axis. I tried
      > > > tapping on the block with a plastic hammer to seat the block but
      > made
      > > > very little differience. There is a set screw on the back of the
      > > > movable jaw of my Enco vise, I tightened it until it seated, but
      > not
      > > > too tight. I ran the test again with the jaws clamping the block
      > and
      > > > bingo, it came in as half a thou on the 3" side of the block in
      > the Y
      > > > axis. That set screw will loosen over time, I guess I gota check
      > it
      > > > every now and then.
      > > >
      > > > Denis
      > > >
      > > > --- In mill_drill@yahoogroups.com, "Greg Miller" <gregrycm@>
      > wrote:
      > > > >
      > > > > Hello,
      > > > >
      > > > > This has likely been discussed previously, but my search did
      > not
      > > > turn
      > > > > up any direct links.
      > > > >
      > > > > I am finding that my table is about 0.008" over 2" out of
      > square in
      > > > > the y-axis. I indicated the fixed edge of the vise along the X-
      > axis
      > > > > over 5" and it is within 1 thou. I then put a 1-2-3 block in
      > the
      > > > vise
      > > > > and indicated along the 2" edge and find that there is about an
      > 8
      > > > thou
      > > > > difference over 2" I then turned the block over and repeated,
      > but
      > > > got
      > > > > the same results.
      > > > >
      > > > > Any suggestions or links on how can this be corrected or
      > further
      > > > tests
      > > > > that I can perform?
      > > > >
      > > > > Thanks,
      > > > > Greg Miller
      > > > >
      > > >
      > >
      >
    • davestanley50
      Curiosity got the best of me and I went and measured how orthogonal the X and Y of my Jet JMD-18 (AKA RF-31) was. I did this by using parallels in my vise to
      Message 2 of 13 , Nov 4, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        Curiosity got the best of me and I went and measured how orthogonal the
        X and Y of my Jet JMD-18 (AKA RF-31) was. I did this by using parallels
        in my vise to support a 6" Mitutoyo machinist square so that the thick
        leg of the square was slightly above the vise jaws. This allowed me to
        indicate the X axis to be 2 tenths variation in about 4" and measuring
        the Y axis at about 1.2 mills variation in about 5 inches. I then
        checked the square using a Brown and Sharpe 1-2-3 block and could not
        detect any error in the square.

        I am a little surprised at the error but after all, these mill/drills
        are not known for precision.
      • Ray Livingston
        Greg, Well, if I m understanding you right, it sounds like you did it right. You clamped the square to the table, ensured with an indicator that one leg was
        Message 3 of 13 , Nov 4, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          Greg,

          Well, if I'm understanding you right, it sounds like you did it
          right. You clamped the square to the table, ensured with an
          indicator that one leg was exactly parallel to the X axis, then
          measured the other leg moving the Y axis, right? 0.014" over 5.2" is
          pretty bad, even for these machines.

          Regards,
          Ray L.






          --- In mill_drill@yahoogroups.com, "Greg Miller" <gregrycm@...> wrote:
          >
          > Ray,
          >
          > I used a Mitutoyo machinist square. Supposedly they are 'precision
          > ground to ensure straightness and parallelism'. I did the same test
          > with a 1-2-3 block on the table and got similar results. If I can't
          > trust a machinist square then what can I trust?
          >
          > How should I be performing these measurements?
          >
          > Thanks,
          > Greg
          >
          > --- In mill_drill@yahoogroups.com, "Ray Livingston" <jagboy@> wrote:
          > >
          > > Greg,
          > >
          > > How do you know your square is truly square? Many are not.
          What
          > > did you use as a reference surface when you setup the square?
          Did
          > > you verify that surface was true?
          > >
          > > Regards,
          > > Ray L.
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > > --- In mill_drill@yahoogroups.com, "Greg Miller" <gregrycm@>
          wrote:
          > > >
          > > > I removed the vise and clamped a machinist square to the
          table. I
          > > > aligned the square in the X-axis first, then ran the indicator
          along
          > > > the long edge of the square in the Y-Axis. This distance is
          about
          > > > 5.2". Along the Y-Axis, I measured 0.014" difference.
          > > >
          > > > I have an inspection record that came with my 9x20 lathe, but I
          > > could
          > > > not find one for the Mill. Does anyone else have one for the
          RF-31?
          > > > If so, what is the specification for X-Y perpendicularity?
          > > >
          > > > Thanks,
          > > > Greg
          > > >
          > > > --- In mill_drill@yahoogroups.com, "Denis" <zapvss@> wrote:
          > > > >
          > > > > Hi Greg,
          > > > > After reading your post I performed the same test on my G0484
          > > Mill.
          > > > > If I place the 1-2-3 block on the table loose and test with
          an
          > > > > indicator, the needle doesn't move at all in the Y or X
          > > direction.
          > > > > Its dead on. If I put the 1-2-3 block in the vise without
          > > tightening
          > > > > the vise I get the same results. But if I tighten the vise a
          > > little I
          > > > > get .005 difference between front and back on the Y axis. I
          tried
          > > > > tapping on the block with a plastic hammer to seat the block
          but
          > > made
          > > > > very little differience. There is a set screw on the back of
          the
          > > > > movable jaw of my Enco vise, I tightened it until it seated,
          but
          > > not
          > > > > too tight. I ran the test again with the jaws clamping the
          block
          > > and
          > > > > bingo, it came in as half a thou on the 3" side of the block
          in
          > > the Y
          > > > > axis. That set screw will loosen over time, I guess I gota
          check
          > > it
          > > > > every now and then.
          > > > >
          > > > > Denis
          > > > >
          > > > > --- In mill_drill@yahoogroups.com, "Greg Miller" <gregrycm@>
          > > wrote:
          > > > > >
          > > > > > Hello,
          > > > > >
          > > > > > This has likely been discussed previously, but my search
          did
          > > not
          > > > > turn
          > > > > > up any direct links.
          > > > > >
          > > > > > I am finding that my table is about 0.008" over 2" out of
          > > square in
          > > > > > the y-axis. I indicated the fixed edge of the vise along
          the X-
          > > axis
          > > > > > over 5" and it is within 1 thou. I then put a 1-2-3 block
          in
          > > the
          > > > > vise
          > > > > > and indicated along the 2" edge and find that there is
          about an
          > > 8
          > > > > thou
          > > > > > difference over 2" I then turned the block over and
          repeated,
          > > but
          > > > > got
          > > > > > the same results.
          > > > > >
          > > > > > Any suggestions or links on how can this be corrected or
          > > further
          > > > > tests
          > > > > > that I can perform?
          > > > > >
          > > > > > Thanks,
          > > > > > Greg Miller
          > > > > >
          > > > >
          > > >
          > >
          >
        • Ross Babcock
          You could flip the square so the y axis of the square goes to the oppositeĀ end of the table, re align the x axis of the square and recheck the y axis. If the
          Message 4 of 13 , Nov 5, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
            You could flip the square so the y axis of the square goes to the opposite end of the table, re align the x axis of the square and recheck the y axis. If the square is out of square by some chance, the reading should be in the opposite direction to the original reading. If the table is out, the reading should be the same.


            Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr!
          • John Autry
            ... Greg I am new to posting so this is ok after your post about your rf31. I checked mine and found it less than .001 until I reached end of travel. Posted
            Message 5 of 13 , Nov 7, 2008
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In mill_drill@yahoogroups.com, "Greg Miller" <gregrycm@...> wrote:

              Greg


              I am new to posting so this is ok
              after your post about your rf31. I checked mine and found it less
              than .001 until I reached end of travel. Posted pic under johns shop
              please look and see id I ran test ok and if please advise.


              John
            • Greg Miller
              John, That looks like the right idea to me, assuming that you indicated along the fixed jaw of the vise first to ensure that it was parallel with the X-Axis.
              Message 6 of 13 , Nov 8, 2008
              • 0 Attachment
                John,

                That looks like the right idea to me, assuming that you indicated
                along the fixed jaw of the vise first to ensure that it was parallel
                with the X-Axis. To ensure that your square is 'square' you could
                also flip the square over and indicate from the other side of the
                vise, again in the Y-axis.

                Glad that your Mill is truer than mine!

                Greg


                --- In mill_drill@yahoogroups.com, "John Autry" <johnaautry@...> wrote:
                >
                > --- In mill_drill@yahoogroups.com, "Greg Miller" <gregrycm@> wrote:
                >
                > Greg
                >
                >
                > I am new to posting so this is ok
                > after your post about your rf31. I checked mine and found it less
                > than .001 until I reached end of travel. Posted pic under johns shop
                > please look and see id I ran test ok and if please advise.
                >
                >
                > John
                >
              • John Autry
                ... Greg I did indicate the x axis first and then the y. The square is starrett and I thought it was true, but your suggestion f flipping it over would give
                Message 7 of 13 , Nov 8, 2008
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In mill_drill@yahoogroups.com, "Greg Miller" <gregrycm@...> wrote:
                  Greg

                  I did indicate the x axis first and then the y. The square is starrett
                  and I thought it was true, but your suggestion f flipping it over would
                  give another check for mill and square. I had not thought of that.
                  I have had a lot of trouble with my machine and most of it came from
                  the metal stand that came with it. If you will send me your ph# to my
                  email address I will give u a call if you like and talk about it.
                  I would try to tell u this way but the way I type and leave out words
                  and not including getting two thoughts tangled up in the same sentence
                  by the time I finished everyone would be confused
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.