Chester DB10VS – Which QCTP ?

[idriverParticipant @idriver]

Hi all,

I have a Chester Machine Tools DB10VS lathe on order and just in the process of sorting out my tooling etc. can anyone tell me if they have fitted a QCTP to a DB10VS and if so which one please?

Thanks.

[FulmenParticipant @fulmen]

Wouldn’t think so, not unless you got a special deal where it was expressly mentioned. Standard for almost all lathes is the 4 way holder.

[Fulmen]

On Fulmen Said:

Wouldn’t think so, not unless you got a special deal where it was expressly mentioned. Standard for almost all lathes is the 4 way holder.

I think you are misreading my question. I know it doesn’t come with a qrtp, I am asking if anyone has fitted a qrtp to their DB10VS and if so which one.

[FulmenParticipant @fulmen]

My bad. Please ignore.

As for general advice I will always recommend a 40pos “Multifix” system, especially if you have plans for a DRO.

[BazyleParticipant @bazyle]

I don’t have this lathe but as it is a 5in centre height I expect the next size up from the size used on a Myford.
Try this site which tells you how to size a tool post:
https://www.arceurotrade.co.uk/Catalogue/Machines-Accessories/Lathe-Accessories/Tool-Posts/Model-200-Quick-Change-Tool-Post

Don’t get one that is too big thinking you have to be able to use enormous tools – for this lathe you only need 6-9mm toolbits. Also smaller holders are cheaper and you end up wanting a lot of them.

 

[DiogenesParticipant @diogenes]

I use a ‘wedge-type’ toolpost on a 11″ / 280 swing Warco lathe – but the ‘100’-size – the critical measurement is how much daylight you have between the topslide/compound surface and centre-height.

Measure your lathe once it arrives and make a decision from there.

I much prefer the the ‘wedge-type’ toolpost to the ‘piston-type’; The wedge type uses a sliding tapered gib to pull the toolholder tight onto the body, the other type uses a piston to push it out onto the dovetail (go figure).

The one I have is this;

https://www.arceurotrade.co.uk/Catalogue/Machines-Accessories/Lathe-Accessories/Tool-Posts/Model-111-Quick-Change-Tool-Post

..of course you could buy a genuine Aloris, and support the original maker..

The holders are cheap to buy or easy to make and the system is inherently forgiving of dimensional inconsistencies.

Had mine since I got the lathe and like it a lot.

 

[Bo’sunParticipant @bosun58570]

If you go the route of a “Dickson” type QCTP, buy an established/quality brand if funds permit.  Copies can be inconsistent, especially when buying additional tool holders further down the line.  Ask me how I know?

[Fulmen]

On Fulmen Said:

My bad. Please ignore.

As for general advice I will always recommend a 40pos “Multifix” system, especially if you have plans for a DRO.

Thank’s for that, I hadn’t come across the MultiFix systems, I will have a look.

[idriverParticipant @idriver]

Thanks, I didn’t know that about using smaller HSS, I just assumed because mine will take 12mm I had to use 12mm. Every day is a school day when you are starting afresh.

[Diogenes]

On Diogenes Said:

I much prefer the the ‘wedge-type’ toolpost to the ‘piston-type’; The wedge type uses a sliding tapered gib to pull the toolholder tight onto the body, the other type uses a piston to push it out onto the dovetail (go figure).

The one I have is this;

https://www.arceurotrade.co.uk/Catalogue/Machines-Accessories/Lathe-Accessories/Tool-Posts/Model-111-Quick-Change-Tool-Post

 

Thanks for that, yes I am leaning towards the wedge type. Although as I understand it, the only one that will fit the lathe straight out of the box is a piston type. Something to do with a fixed bush at the base of the bolt that attaches the QCTP to the Top Slide. (I assume the bush or shoulder is part of the top slide). I have however come across a video where the owner of an older DB10 has machined a sleeve for the bush and bolt to allow a standard wedge type QCTP to be used. I won’t know the setup for sure until I take delivery but looking at the exploded drawings in the manual it does appear to have a bush.

[Hugh Stewart-Smith 1Participant @hughstewart-smith1]

hello idriver,

Have you not asked of Chester themselves as they should be in a position to recommend alternatives from their stock of quick change toolposts.

Hugh                                                                                                                                  Amadeal Ltd

[RobinParticipant @robin]

Every centimeter the QCTP pushes the tool to the left is another centimeter your carriage moves to the right, is another centimeter your tailstock extends. Add a DRO slide between carriage and tailstock and it can get silly.

I have never had a Multifix, I want one because they look really neat, but I have no experience 🙁

Robin

[Charles LamontParticipant @charleslamont71117]

I have standardised on 5/16 / 8mm. – rigid enough, large enough to see the faces I am grinding, and less work to grind than bigger ones. I also have 1/4″ but find them a bit small to handle while grinding and honing. 8mm is also a practical size for carbide insert toolholders.

[Clive FosterParticipant @clivefoster55965]

Leaving aside Robins very valid comments about the extra space consumed by a QCTP and the resulting need for more tailstock travel if working between centres the fundamental disadvantage of any QTCP system is the sheer cost of all the tool holders needed for efficient working.

Proper exploitation of a QTCP requires enough holders to carry all your regularly used tools plus a spare or three to take the extras needed for the particular job in progress. Something like 10 or 12 seems to be considered a desirable aspiration if you are not to run out of ready to go tools and either have to change mid job or plan ahead adjusting the loaded set before starting.

Setting a new tool to centre height mid job when you’ve got something in the machine that you’d rather not have to remover and re-aligning can be a right pain if the job crowds out the height gauge. Shuffling tools in an inadequate number of holders gets old fast! Marking the tailstock barrel or casting to indicate centre height can be a useful work around but, in my experience, doesn’t really fill the gap if a job is mounted.

A less costly alternative is swopping out complete, loaded, block tool posts whether conventional 4 way or the, preferable in my view due to being smaller, 2 way. Such blocks are quite easily made by gluing and screwing together stock sections of plate and bar material. Steel for the top and bottom, alloy in the middle to make tapping for the screws easier seems a good way to go about things. HSS tooling can be shimmed on the bench using a height gauge, inserts just need the right thickness base or a fixed shim to get the holder in the right place. A simple drilled block does just fine for boring bar and is more solid than the usual carrier.

I used a similar block swopping system on SouthBend lathes for a fair number of years and found it adequately satisfactory. Room for improvement in my first implementation to make accurate relocation simpler but a usefully better version 2 never seemed worth the effort.

The centre spigot on your machine is an advantage in locating block posts rather than a pain when arranging for a QTCP system. You will need to make arrangements for some sort of rotational location so the blocks go back in the same orientation. Whether a simple pin in the toolpost and matching location hole in the topside catering for one position or some sort of sub base giving several options. I pretty much never rotate the tool post on my machines so would not find a fixed angle from a single hole limiting. If I do rotate the post it’s for specific cut reasons so no need for general variability.

In an ideal world a quick release thread for the holding down handle would be faster than a standard one but a normal one with  a few turns to release is liveable with. Some years ago i schemed out a plausible quick release system requiring only about 1/3 rd of a turn to operate but the whole concept got sidetracked by changing machines. The new one came with a Dickson QC set up with serval tool holders so I just haunted E-Bay until I had enough holders.

Clive

 

[Howard LewisParticipant @howardlewis46836]

You can fit smaller tools into almost any toolpost, and then shim it to centre height.

If you grind a HSS toolbit as a form tool, you will have to do this anyway, in most cases.

But keep things as rigid as possible, minimum, overhang with any tool, to minimise chances of chatter.

Too big a tool cannot be set to centre height. (You can always mill then underside of the shank to reduce height, so that it can be set on centre height.

I don’t use QCTP, but the holders can adjust the tool to centre height.

Saves time when changing tools, once set.

Might be worth making a Centre Height Gauge, to aid initial setting, of the tool in each holder.

You will need space to store the various tool holders.

For accuracy, keep the locating faces clean. Preferably, clean after use, to be ready for immediate use, next time. Clean toothbrushes are useful for this!

HTH

Howard

[Robin]

On Robin Said:

Every centimeter the QCTP pushes the tool to the left is another centimeter your carriage moves to the right, is another centimeter your tailstock extends. Add a DRO slide between carriage and tailstock and it can get silly.

I have never had a Multifix, I want one because they look really neat, but I have no experience 🙁

Robin

I had not seen them before mention here, they look like they are going to be a source of even more flex?

 

[Hugh Stewart-Smith 1]

On Hugh Stewart-Smith 1 Said:

hello idriver,

Have you not asked of Chester themselves as they should be in a position to recommend alternatives from their stock of quick change toolposts.

Hugh                                                                                                                                  Amadeal Ltd

I may be falsely maligning Chester, but over my many years on this planet I have come to learn that asking a dealer for purchasing advice, generally results in being recommended something because they have it in stock that day. 😂

[FulmenParticipant @fulmen]

The core benefit with Multifix is the ability to rotate the tool without messing up the tool offsets. The downside is that you’re limited to 9° steps which can be a bit annoying.

[idriver]

On idriver Said:

On Robin Said:

Every centimeter the QCTP pushes the tool to the left is another centimeter your carriage moves to the right, is another centimeter your tailstock extends. Add a DRO slide between carriage and tailstock and it can get silly.

I have never had a Multifix, I want one because they look really neat, but I have no experience 🙁

Robin

I had not seen them before mention here, they look like they are going to be a source of even more flex?

 

On Howard Lewis Said:

 

Might be worth making a Centre Height Gauge, to aid initial setting, of the tool in each holder.

 

All good advice there, thank’s Howard. I have not come across the term “centre height gauge” before. I have only seen others using a centre in the tail stock to setup their tools. I will do some googling to find out more about a home made CHG. Thanks.

[Howard LewisParticipant @howardlewis46836]

CHG is easy to make

Turn up a suitable base, and tap it. Into it screw either a column with a thread on the end, or a piece of studding.

Make a blade from a piece  of 20 x 6 mm flat. It can be tapped for a grub screw, to lock it in place on a plain column, or a clearance hole, if you use studding, and two nuts.

before fitting the blade, hold the column in the chuck and face the underside of the base.  In that way, it will be perpendicular to the column.

Face the end of a bar, and keep shimming the tool until there is no pip on the end of the bar. The tool  it should centre height and the blade of the CHG can be set to rest on the top of it.

HTH

Howard

[Howard LewisParticipant @howardlewis46836]

If you P M me with an E mail address, and I’ll send you pictures of the ones that I have made.

Howard

[idriver]

On idriver Said:

On Hugh Stewart-Smith 1 Said:

hello idriver,

Have you not asked of Chester themselves as they should be in a position to recommend alternatives from their stock of quick change toolposts.

Hugh                                                                                                                                  Amadeal Ltd

I may be falsely maligning Chester, but over my many years on this planet I have come to learn that asking a dealer for purchasing advice, generally results in being recommended something because they have it in stock that day. 😂

Of course, but they do know what will fit on their lathe!  And internet advice, though well meaning, might not answer the exam question.

Now I’m going to upset the QTCP Fan Club by asking idriver why he wants a QCTP at all?  They pay off when the operator works primarily with HSS cutters doing work requiring frequent tool changes.  They only speed certain workflows up, and are not a universal panacea.  Plenty of people do almost everything with a tangential tool holder and though 4-way tool-posts aren’t as quick, they aren’t awful.  Are you in a rush?  And pre-shimming carbide insert holders to size speeds 4-way tool-posts up considerably.  May not be worth fitting one, in which case the money is better spent on something else.

I advise not rushing into fitting a QCTP.   Not needed to learn how to use a lathe.   Learning should focus on tool-sizes, centre-heights, cutter types, work-holding, speeds and feed-rate, threading and many other mysteries!   More, depending on what the lathe is used for, a QCTP may not be needed at all.  After the dust has settled and it’s become clear to idriver what his needs are, then he will know whether or not a QCTP is worth it.   As I say, plenty of other things for a beginner to spend money on.  Restocking with metal last month cost me more than a QCTP…

Heresy I know, but in my utilitarian view any tool that’s not needed is a waste of money!

Dave

 

 

 

[Clive FosterParticipant @clivefoster55965]

The optical type centre height gauge works very well and is probably the easiest to make.

Fundamentally it consists of a transparent plastic blade (perspex?) thick enough to be stable and not bend standing upright on a suitable base with a line at centre height scribed across it on both sides. The tool height is set by bringing the gauge very close to the tool tip, almost touching, and comparing its height to that of the scribed lines whilst looking straight at them so only one line is seen. Due to the thickness of the plastic blade there will be a parallex error if you are not looking straight at the lines so two lines will be visible.

The lines are best scribed directly on the machine using a sharp centre held in the headstock or tailstock taper. A flat plate across the lathe bed will be needed to slide the nascent gauge across the centre. Either retain the plate to stand the gauge on when in use or chop a bit off and add it to the base block so as to make up the error when the gauge is stood on the lathe bed. That wasn’t the way I did mine but its a better method if just making a basic version.

Mine has a blade about 1 1/2″ wide by 4 mm thick on a steel base about 1 1/2″ cube. Size chosen by the usual “got a couple of bits that will do” method. In practice a fairly sensible size but, given the choice, a 6 mm thick blade would be better as it enhances the visible parallex so its easier to be accurate.

Mine is significantly more refined than the basic version having extra lines so it can be used on both bed and cross slide of both my lathes. It also has provision for a mirror mounted at 45° on the back side allowing it to be used by looking down from above so the gauge can be some distance from the tooltip. Theoretically handy if needing to set-up a new tool mid job where simply standing on the bed with the tool almost touching is impractical. The guy I stole the idea from said he normally used the mirror system but I prefer to bend down and look from the front.

The angle of the camera shows up the parallax error on a couple of line pairs.

With 20/20 hindsight the extra features beyond two sets of lines to work of the beds of two machines are of little value in practice. I’ve never done anything that the basic device couldn’t have handled adequately, although perhaps with a bit more trouble.

Clive

[Howard LewisParticipant @howardlewis46836]

Wasn’t going to stick my neck out, but S O D has, so I may as well join him.

Have always used 4 way posts, and never felt the need for a QCTP. (A long time ago, there was an article in MEW extolling the virtues of QCTPs but admitting the tool changing time is on a par with a 4 way.

My front 4 way carries 3 tools almost permanently (one is removed for the occasional knurling or screw cutting job) The rear 4 way carries front and back chamfering tools and the parting tool.

So, I have no real need for a QCTP.

Howard

[RobinParticipant @robin]

I fitted a new QCTP and had to dash out to buy a new, extra long, skinny nose, live centre to compliment it. You can see where I have removed paint from the tailstock nose to check out adding a couple of inches 🙂

Robin

[Author]

Posts