Here is a list of all the postings Clive Foster has made in our forums. Click on a thread name to jump to the thread.
|Thread: T'Internet - T'Wonders Of|
I think the folk who set-up such things assume that the recieving phone is a mobile "smart" phone with the usual screen and keypad capabilities. Going from text message to internet is designed in to such devices, along the the bazillion things that no mature person in their right mind would want to use.
The forget that all fully specified DECT wireless phones have rudimentary text message, SMS, receiving and display abilities built in so simple information of the "parcel arriving at 2pm" level can be sent. Internet links were pretty much unheard of when that sort of thing was specified.
Certainly a surprise to me when mine threw up an SMS message about 5 years after installation. Knew it was on the menu but never expected to see it used. Sending one via the "choose one of three letters on this button" keypad is probably challenging. Got a feeling mine is actually able to forward an SMS message to my computer. But, if so, that is way to deep in the manual to be of interest.
|Thread: Drill powered lathe slotter|
More details of the device here **LINK**
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nBPIRD0ih2k . Several others featuring it too I think.
Especially for Michael and noel a couple of links to two of several YouTube videos of an induction motor powered variant
and here **LINK**
The induction motor version has vertical adjustment on the slotter tool carrier. Although it obviously permits vertical adjustment I'm unconvinced that there are any advantages to offset the inherent loss of rigidity over a solid carrier. Mounting on the cross slide and working sideways gives at least equal adjustability.
Edited By Clive Foster on 24/09/2021 22:07:37
Edited By Clive Foster on 24/09/2021 22:08:06
|Thread: Soft floor and lathe...|
The amount of hot air nonsense promulgated concerning lathe levelling over the years is probably a significant contributor to global warming!
The pragmatic person ignores the whole lot and concentrates on getting the lathe set up with the bed in its natural, unstrained state.
If the wood floor is on a solid base, whether direct or with intervening joists, its not going to move unless there are serious flatness issues creating significant gaps between base and floor.
If its a suspended floor first thing to do is to check if the floor actually moves when you wander around. Adequately sensiitive level in various places with an assistant to watch it whlie you walk around will sort that. If it shifts think about where the supporting joists are and what might be done to improve support. Folk have been known to cut the whole floor area out where the lathe is going and insert a concrete block. Overkill for an itty bitty SouthBend. One or two layers of the waterproof tongue and groove chipboard underfloor stuff running all the way across screwed down to the floor should make it amply stiff. Check with your level.
If the lathe is going on a bench install the bench and screw it down with suitably strong joint brackets. Shim the feet so its as close to level as your patience will stand. Good strong bench will seriously stiffen the floor too. Sit the lathe on top, slide the bolts through the feet and use pull out force on spacers / shims under the feet to judge if its sitting evenly. If I were it do the job again I'd use a nice flat metal bench top and bolt the lathe feet to tapped holes in larger spacer feet maybe 2 inches thick perhaps 4 inches long by 2 inches wide. SouthBends are too low to the bench for easy cleaning and the wider feet makes it easier to do the shim trick. Two 1/4" or 6 mm bolts for each of the foot / spacers rather than standard one large is easier.
Designate one the master foot, rear of headstock is hardest to get at so probably one to choose. Slip a shim under so its a bit high and lightly nip up the bolts. Shim under the other feet until it takes a smooth stiff pull to shift a 1 or 2 thou test shim. Refit the test shims or make up an equal pack and bolt down all round just enough to keep it in position. 10 - 15 ft lb will be fine.
That method was good enough for sub thou errors when initially setting up a 4 section 12 ft long optical test rail with 4 feet per section so it will work just as well on your lathe as it did on my two SouthBends.
If the lathe has its own legs same sort of trick works but you have to be more creative. Frankly I'd take lathes oth this size off their legs and just bench mount. Underdrive systems usually have asolid cabinet stand so process there is to loosen the lathe, bolt the stand down solid and then do the shim trick between lathe and cabinet.
|Thread: Fixture plate ideas|
For smaller work "grid of tapped holes" plates can be very useful. But tapping all the holes is a pain.
I've used 1/2" thick anodised alloy breadboards from Thor Labs for such duties and found them both satisfactory and not impossibly expensive given the time and effort of DIY. If you don't have suitable material to hand aluminium tooling plate or equivalent quality steel plates of suitable thickness approaches the cost of a Thor Labs breadboard. In my case possibly 1/4 more for the ready tapped product so worth the extra cost for me. Thor were quite happy to take my credit card details.
Thor Labs single density boards with 6 mm holes on 25 mm centres are here **LINK** https://www.thorlabs.com/newgrouppage9.cfm?objectgroup_id=159
and double density ones in 5 spot pattern here
They also make round ones which can be useful on rotary tables. Especially small ones which tend to be short on clamp space.
There are other suppliers of similar items which may be better priced. Thor are simply the folk I know or, more correctly I suppose, knew.
Simple table clamps similar to those shown here **LINK** https://www.thorlabs.com/newgrouppage9.cfm?objectgroup_id=191 work well with grid of holes plates. Easily made to suit the job. Way too expensive to buy!
Being so easy to replace they can be considered disposable. If one gets in the way I've been known to simply cut through it and swop another one in when the coast is clear. Helps that the grid of holes flexibility lets you use more, smaller, clamps than a T slot system. With less load per clamp loosing one temporarily is no great problem. Much easier than doing the clamp shuffle with the common, effective but somewhat cumbersome, sets.
More clamps sharing the load is nice when dealing with something easily distorted too. Real nice if its possible to line up a bolt or screw with a hole in the part too. More a repair than a making thing methinks.
6 mm or 1/4" screws / bolts can produce ample clamping for anything we tend to deal with. But they are less stiff than the larger bolts and studs used with T slots. Where stiffness is needed a suitably large stub with a short male thread on the bottom works fine. 1/2" deep tapped hole and 1" of all thread / studding works fine.
As ever whats best for you depends on what you do.
|Thread: Tap Extractor|
I've taken broken 2, 2.5 and 3 mm taps out with carbide three flute centre cutting end mills without damage to the partially cut threads.
Machine was a Bridgeport with the end mills held in R8 collets. Pucker factor high!
Annoyingly I've mislaid the cutter details. Thing brand began with N----.
|Thread: March cutter Grinder|
When it comes to machine tools the concept of "strength" is a very broad church.
Fundamentally tool & cutter and the other more sophisticated grinders are designed to deliver smooth accurate motion of the workpiece against light loads. Heavy build is normal to ensure things stay where they should be to within close limits and provide plenty of mass to absorb vibration.
Milling machines also need to provide smooth and accurate movements, although generally not to the more exacting standards of grinders. They need to cope with much more substantial cutting loads as well as absorb vibration so the overall layout has to be intrinsically more stiff.
The offset table rotation arrangement of the March / Clarkson is convenient and makes for a versatile machine but the table assembly is well overhung from the support and the connecting casting is not exceptionally strong. Fine for grinding where the heavy tables easily absorb any vibration and the cutting loads are small. Not so good for a milling machine where all the cutting loads on the workpiece have to pass through the relatively light connecting casting. Careful examination of how a March / Clarkson is made will show other issues too.
The two piece table arrangement isn't very convenient for a mill and only one axis has screw feed so significant work will be needed.
Were I to do a conversion I'd get one of the large, import, X-Y tables that can be got for around £100 - £200 to replace the complete table assembly. Hopefully accuracy would be adequate. Hopefully the head rise and fall will be stiff enough and move far enough to make it all work. Still be a small machine on a large base so the vast effort to sort things is unlikelt to be worthwhile.
Sounds like you have a goodly selection of toys to go with it so it would be an attractive buy.
To my mind the universal head with cutter holders and the drill sharpener are the most attractive toys for home shop and ME folks. Sharpening the pointy end of drills and the ends of end-mills being the sort of thing that becomes routine. Doing side flutes et al not so needful as we rarely take super deep cuts putting lots of wear on the side flutes quickly and the change in size can be tricky to deal with.
Unless its really scruffy I'd just clean it up nicely, make sure there are no extra goodies in the shed, and price to sell expecting something in the £1,500 to £2,000 region. A serious purchaser ought to be happy. Its the sort of level I could fund if I were looking. But I already have a Mk1 and enough toys.
Tyre kickers will want you to give it away with a pretty red ribbon round it. Odds are you could get significantly more if its really nice and well smartened up but it may take a long time for the right customer to arrive.
Its not strong enough to make a useful milling machine.
Edited By Clive Foster on 11/09/2021 17:48:14
|Thread: solid edge community edition woes|
I suspect the big problem for experienced 2D folk is that we carry the 3D object and 2D plan conversion process automatically in our heads. For me flattening an object from 3D space into 2D views or reconstructing 2D views into the 3D object happens so automatically that I'm not even aware of it. When working in orthogonal (or other angled views) you have to do it by co-ordinates or the process just won't happen.
Shift over a bit can be useful in the drawing process, I use the copy array feature of VectorWorks (ex miniCAD) a lot but the end result is always in co-ordinates. When dimensioning co-ordinate origin selection is very important to make machining easier. As I have a DRO on the Bridgeport and good edge finders much of the time I work ± off the part centre rather than reference edges. Which can make post machining checking harder.
Generally the driver for 3D is CNC.
From a manual perspective the major benefits appear to be verifying clearances and part fit. Its easy to loose track of fit criteria when you have a number of complex parts.
To make things manually 3D and solid views have to be have to flattened to co-ordinate or axis of rotation sets to make it. CNC can do arbitrary curves from arbitrary centres "anywhere" on the part given a clear tool access path. I can't do that. As far as CNC is concerned a flat part is simply the infinite radius end point of permissible curve radii data.
|Thread: March cutter Grinder|
Noel may be unduly pessimistic as to interchangeability of toys between Mk 1 - 2 Clarkson / March machines and the Mk 3.
The is no doubt that the Mk 3 toys are rather better and more sophisticated than the Mk 1 - 2 versions but I'm pretty sure the Mk 1 - 2 ones can physically fit. Possibly simple spacers may be needed in some cases.
But much of the advantage of the Mk 3 comes from its better toys.
The Mk 1 - 2 versions sold well due to being relatively inexpensive and able to do routine machine shop sharpening duties with relatively limited kit given an adequately skilled operator. Although they can do a useful proportion of the work that a full blown tool and cutter grinder handles they were never first choice for a full blown tool and cutter grinding set up handing wide ranges of specialised tools.
The Mk 3 is more upmarket hence better toys.
Even if you use / adapt Mk 1 - 2 toys they are still individually expensive. I'm a little surprised that no one has settled down and drawn the basic range up for home building. Considering the more advanced ones the air bearing flute grinder and radius attachment are perhaps a bit ambitious but the drill & tap sharpener may just about be worth it now 6 jaw chucks of adequate quality can be got for around £100 - £150.
Edited By Clive Foster on 11/09/2021 11:05:08
|Thread: cutting threads|
When you have the thread dial operation data figured out I suggest you make up a data plate giving the threading dial drive gear and number of divisions between engagements for the various pitches. Either attach it to the lathe or somewhere else where it can easily be found and read when using the machine.
My metric Smart & Brown 1024 has a factory made one screwed directly to the apron. Frankly I'd be lost without it.
The S&B has a 4 mm pitch screw with 12 division dial so, unfortunately, you can't just copy mine. The relevant data for your machine will be in a manual and so should be findable via the internet if you don't have the right book.
I find the cheap laminators, mine is from LiDL, work well for making decently durable machine data labels from simple printouts. Stick or screw to the machine as needed. I've yet to replace one in over a decade of making them. Roller type paper cutter, LiDL cheapy again, makes a neat job of cutting to size.
|Thread: March cutter Grinder|
As ever the actual value is defined by the condition and how complete the tooling pack with the machine is.
The Mk3 is bigger and much more sophisticated than the earlier versions and, when new cost about 3 times as much. Realistically the basic machine, sans accessories, isn't of great value. Doesn't help that proper Mk3 tool holders et al are rare.
Running Mk1 and Mk2 variants in OK order without significant kit go for around £150 - £250 on E-Bay or via the grapevine. Start adding bits and the price climbs rapidly. Can get approaching £3,000 for fully equipped ones with the air bearing flute grinder, drill and tap sharpener and radius attachment as well as the more basic holders. Seems that tooling equipment prices are upwards from £100, even for something as simples as centres, so replacing what's missing gets expensive, fast.
Although I suspect the sophisticated stuff in Home Shop / ME hands is more for bragging rights than use. A radius grinder "nearly complete" came with mine but I've never used it and certainly wouldn't pony up the £200 odd that seems to be the going rate. The drill sharpener was worth its £100 tho', in spades.
Bottom line is that the basic machine probably isn't worth more than around £300. Its the tooling and holders that will drive the price. Fully equipped, in good order ready to plug in and go you might get approaching £4,000. I'm guessing it went into the shed because all the tooling went AWOL or was sold separately. Frankly I suspect that a dealer could get rather more for tooling alone than for a machine complete with bits so it may well have been asset stripped.
Edited By Clive Foster on 11/09/2021 09:33:15
|Thread: Help identifying some tools|
The micrometer heads are large diameter high precision ones. Commonly found in some sort of mounting frame. Often used as part of special test equipment. Bench micrometers are probably the most common commercially supplied items using these. Very expensive new.
The device with a micrometer and sprit level is a clinometer. Set it on a nominally level surface, adjust the micrometer so the level bubble is central, turn through 180° and red-adjust the micrometer until the bubble is again central. Movement distance of the micrometer lets you calculate the tilt of the surface.
Last picture in the album is a precision AvoMeter. Probably very rare now so may have collector value. Generally used with other equipment as part of electrical calibration set-ups.
Thermocouple test set probably came from the same lab as the Avo.
Four magnetic bases of the type commonly used to hold indicators et al. Medium quality when new. Commodity things these days. Maybe £10 - £20 'cos they have nice boxes.
Rethreading files have teeth the same shape as the specified thread so a damaged thread can be filed back to shape close enough to allow a nut to run down it or a bolt to be screwed in. Bodgers tool but sometimes essential. Can be found new for maybe £10 ish, yours are proper brand names so probably better quality. Box should give sizes.
The Mitutoyo indicator would be used in a test stand to verify whether components are within specifications. Two moveable arms set the limits. If the indicator needle is between them the component is OK. High quality meter but not of great value now. Mitutoyo still supply such things so a search should find a representative new price. Maybe get 10-15% of that on E-Bay.
Edited By Clive Foster on 10/09/2021 10:30:02
|Thread: Read the small print|
I thought wheel fitters were supposed to use those colour coded "torque stick" extension bar thingies to limit the impact wrench drive torque to something adequately close to the specifications.
That said I've never seen a set in use.
Although my tyre guys have them.
They use a low set windy gun to spin the bolts / nuts on and finish with a standard torque wrench. But I still loosen and re-do them properly when I get home! Usually pretty close. But on other folks cars I've had to dig out the 6 ft scaffold pole with 3/4 drive welded across the ends to shift them.
I have a set of 1/4 hex to socket square drive adapters to use with my Makita 18 V impact screwdriver. Just the ticket for spinning nuts and bolts into place ready for the torque wrench. Final torque on the Makita is related to rattle time, within limits. I can usually judge the time for 25 ft lb or so pretty well. Which is agood start.
Come to think of it how the heck do those torque limiting extension thingies work to deliver the calibrated torque?
|Thread: Threading myth .... busted!|
Judging by what Grahams Meek says he, like me, primarily uses what I was shown as the Zero-to-Zero / Zero-2-Zero system. Along with the star turner alluded to by Geo.H.Thomas.
The intrinsic forward feed of the top slide is no great issue when using an automatic screw cutting clutch or bed stop with that system. Simply bringing the saddle to the end of the thread, whether automatically with the clutch or by running up to the bed-stop with the slides retracted then bringing the cross-slide to zero and carefully feeding the top-slide forward until it gets to the preset zero produces an entirely adequate finish groove.
Similar results are possible using the "feed forward a little with the top-slide set parallel to the bed every few plunge cuts" are possible if you know how many feed forward movements you intend to do during the process. I know an easy way to set this but that merely adds a smidgin more complication to an over elaborated technique that is totally unsuitable for use by neophytes. There are reasons why things might need to be done that way. But not for any normal thread.
When it comes to Home Shop and generally inexperienced workers the elephant in the room which most pundits ignore is "F**** the thread doesn't fit now what do I do". Usually a bit more feed gets you there but a novice never really knows. Antediluvian penguins like me have the feel to sort it in mid-air but that takes years to gain.
Zero-to-Zero is the only method that allows you to figure out what has gone wrong from first principles.
If you use the cross slide to make the little extra feed when the thread you cut turns out tight it is calibrates the tool in-feed needed to produce the correct thread when using that particular tool. So if the thread depth is supposed to be 1 mm and your first effort turns out tight but, after a few more cuts, an extra 0.1 mm makes it just right you know to set the infeed to 1.1 mm before bringing the cross slide dial to zero. Something you can do with a bit of scrap before risking the real job. Far as I've heard overfeeding so the thread is too deep is almost unheard of with this method. I guess hand ground tooling is usually too pointed.
Forget trying to do that with any other method. Especially if you have the job set up in the chuck with considerable work done needing just a thread to finish.
Just because you have an insert doesn't necessarily mean that "book numbers" will be right. Partial thread ones need clear thinking for best results.
In my experience Johannesson/SKF/Dormer chasers are dead on the money tho'. Harder to find now and not cheap but I'd not use anything else for threads I don't have Coventry dies for. Neither being something a newbie can sensibly afford when every £ scraped off the side of the plate of family finance must do the work of £5 or, better, £10.
It can be hard for experienced folk to remember just how overloaded neophytes and inexperienced workers can be when at the beginning. Lots going on with thread cutting.
What number do I re-engage the half nuts at. Aaargh, they don't want to go in. Oh God its nearly got to the end. Panic, Panic, gotta drop the nut NOW before things go Bang. Phew! Do I need to feed forward a bit this time? How far. Have I gone too much. Eeek finish looks like a ploughed field. Gotta start over. Again! Is this ME business really worth the effort.
Much less stressful with an instructor, mentor or mate around to pat you on the shoulder says "Calm down. Take a few spring cuts. She'll come right." Pretty much always does. I did wonder about the attempt to do a thread in one cut tho'.
|Thread: New Old Kerry Lathe|
When it comes to replacement gap pieces on a smaller machine I wonder how practical fabrication exploiting modern adhesives and fillers would be.
I suspect the actual loading in Home Shop use would be relatively small. As the necessary hours worked lifetime being vastly smaller than in industrial use something less durable than a proper one piece cast iron job ought to suffice. If the actual bearing surfaces are turcite / moglice or an equivalent refurbishing premature wear ought not to be a great issue anyway.
The job will go much easier if you have access to a reasonable size milling machine or can charm, bribe, coerce, bully someone who has. Bridgeport would be nice.
It seems feasible to start with a lump of flat steel or cast iron the full width of the bed and at least as thick as the basic flat section. Fit a shallow slot where the raised Vee will go. Slot to be at least the width of the Vee base. Make the Vee a prismatic section with a rectangular portion below the triangular Vee so that it sits in nicely. All the top surfaces need to be made a touch undersize as the final surface will be made in place using turcite / mogglice or whatever. Cut the centre part out when finished.
Make a base out of what ever seems reasonable. Probably best to fabricate by screwing and gluing rather than carve from solid. Not forgetting suitable cross braces.Using one of the high end metal loaded fillers rather than simple adhesive will significantly reduce the accuracy of design and manufacture needed. But you will have to spend time on jigging to ensure it assembles true. I doesn't have to be made dead nuts to size. Fill to take up errors or make a bit over then machine accurate.
The trickiest, and most important, part is getting the basic alignment correct. The base of the flat portion needs to be level and parallel to the base of the original flats. Sides also need to be parallel and in line. Shim or build up with filler. Swearing optional! Once its all set add screws as appropriate to to ensure all stays put under shock loads. Don't need many, or even particularly large ones, but you do need something.
Finish off by moulding the bearing surfaces in place using the cross slide for reference as in normal practice with turcite / moglice.
Think I'd start out by having a root round suppliers or E-Bay to see if a box angle plate of sufficiently close size could be found to use as a starter for the base. From what I can gather such are theoretically really useful things but never actually get used. Mine hasn't come out of the cupboard for a real job after 40 years and counting.
Thick wall U section is another potential starter. Weld on hefty flats as needed then machine. Thats the way I'd go. Make the whole thing except the prismatic Vee from weldments. But I have a Bridgeport and good welding gear.
|Thread: Electric motor speed|
The common mains electric drill with brushed universal motor always has a cooling fan on the shaft which presents enough load to stop over speeding. Many have gearboxes too which also load things up.
For various reasons these motors have very little acceleration torque capability under overspeed condition.
If spinning up unloaded to grenade speed they will just keep accelerating but the actual acceleration curve has to fall into a fairly narrow band for it to keep going up. With no load the motor balances itself in the band and keeps going faster.
It is possible to make universal motors that are inherently incapable of overspeeding but, so far as I'm aware no one has bothered for many, many years. The price, performance, application ratios for such don't make sense. The whole point of modern universal motors is being cheap to make with lots of power in a compact, lightweight machine.
Universal motors speed up until the load matches the drive power of the motor.
If run without load they just go faster and faster until they either seize or grenade.
Generally universal motors carry a cooling fan which presents enough load under overspeed conditions to prevent grenade. Usually.
|Thread: Empty Drill Boxes|
Stands and de-lidded boxes are handy when you only use one or two sets. If you have several proper boxes with lids become essential for practical storage. I have eight boxes in the "workshop" storage and several others for handyman duties.
What I'd like to know is what twit decided that metric 0.1 mm increment boxes should stop at 10 mm rather than going up to 13 mm like the 0.5 increment ones do. Many useful sizes missed out that way. I hate having to go to loose drills or the very incomplete MT metric stock for those so usually an Imperial gets pushed into service. Guess it helps having almost all the MT 2 and MT3 imperials by 1/64 th.
|Thread: Threading myth .... busted!|
Aways thought the business of setting the top-slide at half thread angle as normal procedure was a wind up on the same level as sending new apprentices to the stores for a tin of elbow grease. What sane person would voluntarily get involved in all the trigonometry needed to recalculate thread depths. I do, however, get the impression it might be popular in America. Which could explain a lot.
Putting the top-slide parallel to the bed and tweaking every so often to clean up the sides appears to add difficulty for no sensible return. Accurate job needs the top-slide set dead parallel. A pain in itself. Need to keep track of the top-slide tweaks as well as the infeeds to get the thread depth and root radius right. So twice the work on things its easy to mis-step on. For me that technique is strictly reserved for when I want an acme or square thread cut dead on for minimal backlash. I know exactly where Duncan is coming from but its a method that has never felt right to me for normal threading.
Doesn't help that on many small lathes you can't leave the top-slide parallel to the bed for all normal work because it tends to argue with the tailstock unless tool stick-out is way too big. Life is to short to keep swinging the topslide around.
Why do folk have to make stuff so difficult!
Easy way was taught to me as the zero-to-zero (often zero-2-zero in online postings) which takes all the tricky bits out. Geo. H. Thomas described it as being the technique preferred by one of his best lathe operators.
It is an angular infeed method but the top-slide can be at any sensible angle a bit under half the thread angle. The lathe does all the trick trigonometry calculations for you.
My top-slides live at 25° off angle which suits both 55° and 60° threads and keeps them nicely out of the way of both tailstock casting and saddle controls. Important considerations with the S&B 1024 which has a properly man sized top-slide that wouldn't be out of place on a lathe of twice the swing and a hefty tailstock too. I frequently go months between changing topslide angle.
Basic zero-to-zero method as described for an external thread, starts with preparing the blank to size and set the tool tip perpendicular in the usual way. Its best to cut a relief groove at the end of the thread.
Then bring the tool tip up to touch the work and set both cross-slide and top-slide dials to zero.
Pull the top-slide back a touch so the tip doesn't scrape the work and move the saddle to bring it into clear air.
Feed the cross slide forward from zero by the desired thread depth and re-set the dial to zero at the new position.
Pull the top-slide back to gain clearance then move in enough for the first cut. I just shift along and touch the stationary job to find top-slide reading that corresponds to zero cut and go from there.
Threading passes are made with the cross-slide dial reading zero. Pull back half a turn, or whatever seems comfortable, for the return then move back to zero for the next pass.
Feed goes on the top-slide.
When you have worked out the spring with both dials on zero you have cut the thread you set-up.
Assuming adequately accurate feedscrews, if your tool tip is to book radius and your infeed is to book it will fit first time.
Generally hand ground tools come out too pointed so you will need to feed in a touch more. Cross-slide or top-slide, you choose, both work and both let you keep track of the little extra being added on. I stick with the top-slide because I use "finish on zero" a lot when setting up general cuts (no DRO in the lathes). Once you have the first part size right re-set the dials to get zero where it ought to be and any repeats will be on size.
Faster to do than to explain. All the set-up is done first using book figures so no mental maths or thinking wasted keeping track of where you are so you can concentrate on how the cut is going and material is behaving.
Internal threads need a bit more attention but the method works just fine.
|Thread: Dickson tool post|
At that date Jasons is almost certainly original.
As I recall it the ME friendly priced clones didn't start appearing until mid 1980s anyway. Chester I think were first to bring them in.
Thanks for the information about Warco being round tongue.
I'm not that familiar with the affordable varieties.
Want the latest issue of Model Engineer or Model Engineers' Workshop? Use our magazine locator links to find your nearest stockist!
You can contact us by phone, mail or email about the magazines including becoming a contributor, submitting reader's letters or making queries about articles. You can also get in touch about this website, advertising or other general issues.
Click THIS LINK for full contact details.
For subscription issues please see THIS LINK.