QCTP Tool Holders

All discussion about lathes including but not limited to: South Bend, Hardinge, Logan, Monarch, Clausing and other HSM lathes, including imports

Moderators: GlennW, Harold_V

Michael_Moore
Posts: 239
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2004 1:13 pm
Location: San Francisco, CA

Post by Michael_Moore »

This isn't Ross' machine, but it shows a Romi M17 with an Aloris mounted.

Image

cheers,
Michael
User avatar
GlennW
Posts: 7284
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 9:23 am
Location: Florida

Post by GlennW »

Michael_Moore wrote:
He also claimed it was rotating when drilling with a chuck on the CXA tool post! Does not sound like precision work to me as it had to have a lot of force on it to rotate. Couple that with the riser and I see possible problems right away.
Michael
Hello Michael,

What I was getting at is that perhaps the drilling operation was moving the tool post due to flex from the increased leverage of the riser and subsequent turning operations were off size due to that.

I was unclear if the problem was repeatability between parts or if it was repeatability between removing and replacing the same tool holder.

The reason for asking if the same riser was used is that the Multifix may have a larger foot print and tool height than the Aloris and he made a larger, shorter riser which would be more stable.

I didn't mean to imply that he did not know what he was doing or that the Aloris is a superior tool post to the Multifix! Just seemed a little odd with the reputation that Aloris has for repeatability.

Regardless, if the change solved his problem, that is a good thing!

Thanks Michael!
Glenn

Operating machines is perfectly safe......until you forget how dangerous it really is!
Rich_Carlstedt
Posts: 1754
Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2002 12:16 am
Location: Green Bay Wisconsin USA
Contact:

Post by Rich_Carlstedt »

Michael
Thanks for the follow up.
I agree with Glenn.
After reading Ross's notes you refered to, I have several comments.

He made a riser that did not fit well. but reworked it for the Multoflex.
He had only one dowel in the Aloris, but two in the Mulifix.
He made a special bushing to locate the centerpin of the Multiflex, while the Aloris had a loose pin and no bushing.
The multiflex had a bigger footprint ( size) than the Aloris.

I am not saying Ross was wrong,since the new toolpost did work better for him than the Aloris. Because of its multiple angle ability, I agree he is better off with it

My concern is that a newbie will think that Aloris's can't be trusted, and that is very far from the real world experience by about 100 %.
If Ross was experiencing toolpost turning, he should have keyed the riser to the Aloris or used a second hole. Case solved.
If the riser didn't fit right, and he needed it to less than .001, it could have been re-made to more exacting dimensions.
If the toolpost turned, the first thing you look for is a mushroomed riser or compound surface. Very common in manual lathes, and in fact, we would file the tool slide tops every once in a while to prevent rotation for any of our tools.
Since his toolpost was moving, any commentary about the tool holders changing is not necessarily fact. I realize he is doing CNC, but in our die work on manual lathes holding to .0005, any changes we encountered would be immediately noticed as differences on the DRO's

Unlike some toolposts, the Aloris locks the tool holder on 5 seperate surfaces and under rigid force in all three axis's (6 directions).
To claim variation, means any of the following needs to be checked.
1. contamination levels
2. lock nut loose ( or screw shaft !)
3. non-parallel dovetails ( common in foriegn made"cheap" tooling)
4. loose screws on tool holder
5. worn toolpost. ( very common on non-sliding wedge holders)

If you take apart an Aloris you will be impressed with the hardened steel , precision ground surfaces and precision ground worm, and know it was made for a long time of use. I have done this

I have never had anything to do with the Aloris Company!
They owe me nothing. I have had 34 years experince with thier products and found them to be of the highest reliability and construction.
Many times they worked where others failed in my employment.
Asa result, I have spent too long on this post and don't mean to second guess Ross or you in any way,
only that solutions to problems vary and we find satisfaction in many ways.
I do feel that the Aloris comentary needed further investigation because of its possible impact on a very fine tool.
Thanks for bearing with me Michael
Rich
User avatar
GlennW
Posts: 7284
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 9:23 am
Location: Florida

Post by GlennW »

I agree with Glenn.
Others usually agree with me about as frequently as total Solar Eclipses occur :shock:
Glenn

Operating machines is perfectly safe......until you forget how dangerous it really is!
Michael_Moore
Posts: 239
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2004 1:13 pm
Location: San Francisco, CA

Post by Michael_Moore »

I don't have any more details on the Aloris problem Ross was having than what he posted over at PM. I will say that Ross impresses me as an extremely savvy/knowledgeable/methodical machinist who is accustomed to solving very difficult machining problems (I've seen some of the stuff that he has done for customers).

I have difficulty picturing him not having made sure that everything he could fix on the Aloris was fixed. I don't know that the Aloris had a loose center bolt though a he comments that the Multifix had a "precision centr bolt hole". Since when he made a t-stem for the Multifix on my Mori he went to the effort of honing the elderly toolpost for a good fit on the stem, I'd suspect that he probably uses the same care on his own equipment, since he's counting on that equipment to to an outstanding job on customer's engines, some of which are valued in the 7 figure range.

I think the drilling is being given too much emphasis as that's a very heavy load and it wouldn't suprise me that a toolpost without some additional location help would turn under some situations. He does say that the Aloris had a single dowel, but that doesn't appear to have been enough. That was one problem he had with the CX Aloris on the Romi.

He talks about repeatability on turning when changing toolholders with the Aloris being just a skoosh worse than the Multifix. "Every time you had to chamge to a different tool holder the part would come out a different size and i was forever messing with the tool offsets."

A CX is a big toolpost. I wouldn't think it would have a lot of issues with shifting under finishing-cut loads, even if it was a bit hammered. I can't say I've seen anything in Ross' shop (other than some of the cars that customers have brought in) that even remotely begins to approach the state of "hammered", .



Does he think the Multifix is perfect? He puts forth what he thinks are drawbacks to it. Does he think the Aloris is junk? He continues to use the Aloris on the other lathes he has including his 10EE and Dong Yang (really nice Korean Okuma licensed copy). Ross did not, as far as I could see, say the Aloris was junk or disparage it. I can't find anywhere that I've said that I think an Aloris is junk.

But apparently on the CNC Romi lathe the Multifix makes a small but to him significant improvement. Could he have remanufactured the CX (which since he still runs the Aloris on his other lathes might well have been purchased brand new, after all he'd just spent $70K or so on his new lathe and was probably not going to put clapped out tooling on it) and made it work better? Possibly. He's not short on equipment to do something like that. Maybe he got the one duff CX toolpost that Aloris has made in the last 40 years. Things like that can happen.

I brought up Ross' experience thinking it would be interesting to show that one person switched to a Multifix from an Aloris for what he thought were quantifiable reasons on a specific lathe. He continues to use the Aloris on several other lathes where it appears it performs to his satisfaction. He seems to have high standards for what satisfies him on machine tools.

It is possible that there was something in the Aloris setup that was causing issues and he overlooked it and didn't fix that. Anyone, even the aces, can screw up now and then. But on the list of people "likely to overlook something that is even slightly obvious to check" (and I'm often near or at the top of that list) Ross strikes me as someone that I wouldn't even think of putting on the list to begin with.

cheers,
Michael
Rich_Carlstedt
Posts: 1754
Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2002 12:16 am
Location: Green Bay Wisconsin USA
Contact:

Post by Rich_Carlstedt »

Sounds reasonable Michael
I don't think we considered the comments as meaning junk, just concern for operation.

Rich
Michael_Moore
Posts: 239
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2004 1:13 pm
Location: San Francisco, CA

Post by Michael_Moore »

Rich, if the Aloris was having trouble holding .0005" vs .0002" for the Multifix, doesn't that mean the Aloris was out .00025" instead of .0001" like the Multifix? .00025" sounds pretty precise to me.

I'm usually struggling to hold +/- .0005, not .0002" TIR. I'd be thrilled to have had Ross' issue with that particular Aloris toolpost as it would mean I was operating about an order of magnitude above what is considered "pretty good for me". :)

It makes me look forward to trying my Narex (Wohlhaupter style) boring head and see if the .0005" divisions on the dial, which look pretty easy to at least interpolate to .00015", actually lets me hold that kind of precision.

That is presuming I can reliably get to reading tenths on the snap gauge and mic.

cheers,
Michael
User avatar
GlennW
Posts: 7284
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 9:23 am
Location: Florida

Post by GlennW »

Michael,

You should have no problem if the Narex is anything like the Wolhaupter, it will hold and repeat to anything you can measure using that method. Not condemning the measuring method, just that the Wolhaupter is a pretty nice piece of tackle!

You'll be surprised!

Of course, a lot will depend on what you are turning it with too!
Glenn

Operating machines is perfectly safe......until you forget how dangerous it really is!
Black_Moons
Posts: 545
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 6:57 pm
Location: Canada, Bc

Post by Black_Moons »

going through some backposts and I found this thread.. sorry to bring up a dead thread but I could'nt help but notice the origional question was never really fixed...
Simple solution to the handle getting in the way: unscrew the handle when using those posts close to the chuck

Simplest solution to fast realigning HSS tools to known angles:
Use angle blocks (or a preset protractor) beween: tool shank, tool post, tool cutting edge, whatever, verus spindle, some flat area of the workpeice, tailstock, etc
for production work you could even mill out a little alignment jig, just like a bent L or something with a edge to align to cutting edge + refrence.
[url]www.Cyberlazy.com[/url]
User avatar
GlennW
Posts: 7284
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 9:23 am
Location: Florida

Post by GlennW »

The problem lies in the improperly machined tool holder itself. Not the tool post, handle, setup, tool bit, chuck guard, or machine! :)

It was just an FYI for others.
Glenn

Operating machines is perfectly safe......until you forget how dangerous it really is!
Post Reply