Chuck Run Out Question

This topic has 21 replies, 12 voices, and was last updated 16 May 2015 at 08:58 by john carruthers.

Viewing 22 posts - 1 through 22 (of 22 total)

Author

Posts
10 May 2015 at 20:39 #189371
David Cambridge
Participant
@davidcambridge45658
I’ve a 3 jaw chuck that I have mounted in my rotary table – with the chuck centred by means of an M2T taper sliding into the table (as supplied). I’ve not had great results when using it, and today I’ve discovered that whilst run out is < 0.1mm on the chuck body and outside jaws, run out using the inside jaws is a little over 1/3 mm as measured holding a bar of ground silver steel and just after the jaws. Before I get on to the supplier, does this seem quite normal or is it not very good ? My suspicion in that the inside jaws haven’t been ground too well ?

David

Edited By David Cambridge on 10/05/2015 20:39:37

Edited By David Cambridge on 10/05/2015 20:40:10
Advert

10 May 2015 at 20:39 #23871
David Cambridge
Participant
@davidcambridge45658
Chuck Run Out Question
10 May 2015 at 20:47 #189375
Bowber
Participant
@bowber
That's a lot, I'd even class 0.1mm as a lot but it all depends on the price, you do usually get what you paid for with chucks.
Not much help but I use a 4 jaw on my rotary table as it's usually holding something that has already had some work done on it so it needs to be clocked up to centre.

Steve
11 May 2015 at 02:37 #189393
Nicholas Farr
Participant
@nicholasfarr14254
Hi David, are you assuming the taper in your RT has little or no run out. But do make sure that there is no dirt ect. trapped in the tapered hole or on the surface of the table where the chuck clamps down.

Regards Nick.
11 May 2015 at 04:59 #189394
Paul Lousick
Participant
@paullousick59116
Hi David,
The first thing I would check is to see if the tapered hole in the RT is on centre.

You did not say how the chuck is then attached. Is it to a backing plate ? If so check if this is concentric with the taper. A photo would be good to see how it is mounted.

Are you able to mount the chuck on a lathe and check run-out ?

Paul.
12 May 2015 at 20:47 #189663
David Cambridge
Participant
@davidcambridge45658
Here is how I’m measuring my run out. Without the chuck mounted I’m within +- 0.1mm on the back plate, but even after a thorough clean I can’t do better than a run out of 0.2mm on the ground silver steel bar in the chuck. On my lathe I’d be an order of magnitude better than this.

The four jaw chuck sounds like a good suggestion, but I can’t figure out how to mount one on the 3 slot rotary table ? None the less I can’t help thinking I should be able to do better with the three jaw chuck , and that maybe something is up with the chuck ?

I've tried measuring run out with a 2MT centre held in the table centre taper, and it was too small to measure.

David

Edited By David Cambridge on 12/05/2015 20:49:05
12 May 2015 at 21:17 #189667
Clive Hartland
Participant
@clivehartland94829
Is it possible the jaws are out of their correct slots? Are they numbered or is the body of the chuck have a number denoting one of the slots?

Clive
12 May 2015 at 21:26 #189669
David Cambridge
Participant
@davidcambridge45658
Clive – I did wonder the same thing as that would have been an easy fix. Sadly no luck!
12 May 2015 at 21:29 #189671
Roderick Jenkins
Participant
@roderickjenkins93242
Just a word of caution about using ground silver steel as a standard:

a) It can be lobed, not something I've come across myself but a possibility.

b) It can be bent, something I certainly have come across.

Either of these conditions would lead to a false indication of run-out. The shank of a milling cutter, as mentioned by Bogs, might be a better choice as a standard.

HTH,

Rof
12 May 2015 at 22:38 #189683
David Cambridge
Participant
@davidcambridge45658
OK – now I’m completely mystified. I’ve tried with the shank of a milling cutter and both a 10 mm and 16 mm shank show 0.25 mm runout. But, a 12 mm shank shows 0.04mm runout. I don’t understand! It was repeatable as I tried all combination many times.

David
12 May 2015 at 23:08 #189688
Michael Gilligan
Participant
@michaelgilligan61133
Posted by David Cambridge on 12/05/2015 22:38:18:

OK – now I’m completely mystified. I’ve tried with the shank of a milling cutter and both a 10 mm and 16 mm shank show 0.25 mm runout. But, a 12 mm shank shows 0.04mm runout. I don’t understand! It was repeatable as I tried all combination many times.

.

David,

My guess would be that the scroll of the chuck is running eccentric, and 12mm just happens to be its optimum.

As mentioned earlier, a four jaw is often more useful on the RT, if you can work out how to mount one.

MichaelG.
13 May 2015 at 06:02 #189703
Thor 🇳🇴
Participant
@thor
Hi David,

If your 4-jaw independent chuck is smaller in diameter than the rotary table you could make a backplate that is larger in diameter than the chuck. I have tried to make a sketch:

Thor
13 May 2015 at 18:46 #189777
Neil Wyatt
Moderator
@neilwyatt
> But, a 12 mm shank shows 0.04mm runout. I don’t understand! It was repeatable as I tried all combination many times.

Sounds like time to strip the chuck and clean it up and re-lube.

Neil
14 May 2015 at 09:58 #189835
Neil Lickfold
Participant
@neillickfold44316
The chuck if new is a bad one. With different sizes of stock samples 6,8,10,12,16mm , an error or difference of 0.05mm is inside the normal range for most chucks these days. I have noticed that there are some very cheap chucks coming onto the market that are just not up to snuff at all. Tightening the chuck on the marked or zero key does make a big difference. Sometimes the best key position for the chuck is not the marked one. So try each key position and see if that improves it at all. But I still suspect it is a dud chuck.

Neil
14 May 2015 at 11:44 #189850
KWIL
Participant
@kwil
I had a RT where the taper was a pressed in insert and that item was not accurate in itself. Checked with a morse taper test bar and it had a wobble built in due to the taper being off axis. Cured by exchanging the RT for another new one!!
14 May 2015 at 21:22 #189932
David Cambridge
Participant
@davidcambridge45658
Well, today I took delivery of a new chuck and far better. So I guess you get what you pay for!
14 May 2015 at 21:33 #189934
Michael Gilligan
Participant
@michaelgilligan61133
Posted by David Cambridge on 14/05/2015 21:22:58:

Well, today I took delivery of a new chuck and far better. So I guess you get what you pay for!

.

It's worth remembering that the raw material is [or should be] only a small proportion of the cost [rather like the Paint in the Mona Lisa ?] … The real money goes into the engineering; manufacture; & quality-control.

MichaelG.
15 May 2015 at 19:14 #190019
john carruthers
Participant
@johncarruthers46255
Might be worth regrinding the old one? assuming the error is similar at various diameters?
15 May 2015 at 19:55 #190028
Michael Gilligan
Participant
@michaelgilligan61133
Posted by David Cambridge on 12/05/2015 22:38:18:

OK – now I’m completely mystified. I’ve tried with the shank of a milling cutter and both a 10 mm and 16 mm shank show 0.25 mm runout. But, a 12 mm shank shows 0.04mm runout. I don’t understand! It was repeatable as I tried all combination many times.

.

John,

I have quoted David's post, to make it clear … the error is not similar at various diameters.

I remain convinced that the Scroll on David's chuck was mounted eccentric.

MichaelG.
16 May 2015 at 07:23 #190073
john carruthers
Participant
@johncarruthers46255
I see, I stand corrected.
16 May 2015 at 08:12 #190077
Michael Gilligan
Participant
@michaelgilligan61133
John,

I've just re-read my posting from last evening.

It was rather brusque … my apologies.

MichaelG.
16 May 2015 at 08:58 #190084
john carruthers
Participant
@johncarruthers46255
not at all, I should have read the post better. Just mulling over how to improve it. If the eccentricity could be pinned down it might be made adjustable, but if it's different at diferent diameters there is little hope.

I recently did a little 3" Bernerd that had areas of wear on the scroll, all I could do was set it to a best average.
The jaws had also worn so the work was held at an angle to the axis so it desribed a cone, same as cone error in a telescope mount.
Author

Posts