Date   
9 Inch Model A Headstock Upgrade

comstock_friend
 

Had a problem with my 9 Inch Model A, CL644A (4-2-1956) with the sixteen speed V-belt pulleys. After I cleaned and painted her up I bought a linked belt instead of the standard continuous V-belt. When changing speeds it was very difficult to get the belt on the lowest speed sheave (the belt was thicker than the space under the rim of the sheave). I just did an upgrade to the quick change forward/reverse lever and got a new headstock casting. As an added benefit the casting base is only 1.5 inch thick compared to the original’s 2 inch. Photos show a comparison of the two castings and the belt on the low speed sheave showing plenty of room under the sheave. Maybe South Bend noted that it was tight with the other casting.

 

John

Re: 9 Inch Model A Headstock Upgrade

Jim Croyle
 

Nice


On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 10:14 PM comstock_friend <jfriend314@...> wrote:

Had a problem with my 9 Inch Model A, CL644A (4-2-1956) with the sixteen speed V-belt pulleys. After I cleaned and painted her up I bought a linked belt instead of the standard continuous V-belt. When changing speeds it was very difficult to get the belt on the lowest speed sheave (the belt was thicker than the space under the rim of the sheave). I just did an upgrade to the quick change forward/reverse lever and got a new headstock casting. As an added benefit the casting base is only 1.5 inch thick compared to the original’s 2 inch. Photos show a comparison of the two castings and the belt on the low speed sheave showing plenty of room under the sheave. Maybe South Bend noted that it was tight with the other casting.

 

John

Re: Precision level needed or not?

George Meinschein
 

Gentlemen,
Thanks for the responses!  I have a cheapo Craftsman digital level with 0.1 degree resolution and a not so cheap Leica Disto D8 that measures angles with 0.05 degree resolution. I checked the specs on a Starrett precision level and found that the graduations in the vial are separated by roughly 0.025 degrees.  The spec is actually 80-90 seconds. Then, I thought - suppose I took my plumb bob and hung it from something oh about 5' high and attached to a parallel that sits across the ways. Unless I botched my quick calculations, a 1/64" movement of the plumb bob would represent about 0.015 degrees.  Time to do a little testing!  This is on the back burner right now, but I'll report back with results on my zero cost precision level when the project moves forward. 

Thanks,
George H. Meinschein, P.E.

Meinschein Engineering Consultants, LLC
150 Brittany Drive
Freehold, NJ 07728-1500

Email: george.meinschein@...
Direct Dial: 732-409-0778
Cell: 732-580-1736
Fax: 732-358-0369
www.meinscheinengineering.com

   

Re: Precision level needed or not?

Bill in OKC too
 

With photos! Please! I'd be quite interested in how you work this out!

Bill in OKC




On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 6:06 AM -0500, "George Meinschein" <bustedguns@...> wrote:

Gentlemen,
Thanks for the responses!  I have a cheapo Craftsman digital level with 0.1 degree resolution and a not so cheap Leica Disto D8 that measures angles with 0.05 degree resolution. I checked the specs on a Starrett precision level and found that the graduations in the vial are separated by roughly 0.025 degrees.  The spec is actually 80-90 seconds. Then, I thought - suppose I took my plumb bob and hung it from something oh about 5' high and attached to a parallel that sits across the ways. Unless I botched my quick calculations, a 1/64" movement of the plumb bob would represent about 0.015 degrees.  Time to do a little testing!  This is on the back burner right now, but I'll report back with results on my zero cost precision level when the project moves forward. 

Thanks,
George H. Meinschein, P.E.

Meinschein Engineering Consultants, LLC
150 Brittany Drive
Freehold, NJ 07728-1500

Email: george.meinschein@...
Direct Dial: 732-409-0778
Cell: 732-580-1736
Fax: 732-358-0369
www.meinscheinengineering.com

   

Re: Precision level needed or not?

Nick Jonkman
 

I never use a level. I use two straight bars of steel across the bed, one on each end, the longer the better and of course high enough to see over the carriage. Sight over these from the tail stock end and you will immediately see any twist in the bed no mater what angle the lathe is sitting at. Get a couple of pieces of cold rolled bar stock or precision ground bars about 1/2" thick and at least one foot long or longer and wide enough to site over the carriage and you have every thing you need to set up your lathe.

Nick Jonkman

On 19-06-11 7:45 PM, Steven H via Groups.Io wrote:
The idea behind using a precision level when leveling a lathe bed in my understanding is to check for and, if necessary, remove any twist in the bed. So the level is placed across the bed at the headstock and tailstock ends if the bed. You would want the bubble to be in the same position in the level vial so don’t rotate the level end for end when moving it from headstock end to tailstock end of the bed- that would theoretically mean that the bed is not twisted. It is not that important that the lathe bed be absolutely level along its length - close is good enough. In fact, trying to level crossways and lengthwise is an exercise in futility, ask me how I know.

After leveling the bed, one can take cuts on a piece to see if the lathe is cutting a cylinder, and then decide if further adjustment is necessary.

Steve Haskell

Re: 9 Inch Model A Headstock Upgrade

Ondrej Krejci
 

So, to be able to use a different belt with the lathe, you are going to fit (scrape, shim etc.) a different headstock to the ways then align the tailstock to the new headstock?

On Tuesday, June 11, 2019, 11:20:32 PM EDT, Jim Croyle <jjc4291@...> wrote:


Nice

On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 10:14 PM comstock_friend <jfriend314@...> wrote:

Had a problem with my 9 Inch Model A, CL644A (4-2-1956) with the sixteen speed V-belt pulleys. After I cleaned and painted her up I bought a linked belt instead of the standard continuous V-belt. When changing speeds it was very difficult to get the belt on the lowest speed sheave (the belt was thicker than the space under the rim of the sheave). I just did an upgrade to the quick change forward/reverse lever and got a new headstock casting. As an added benefit the casting base is only 1.5 inch thick compared to the original’s 2 inch. Photos show a comparison of the two castings and the belt on the low speed sheave showing plenty of room under the sheave. Maybe South Bend noted that it was tight with the other casting.

 

John

Re: 9 Inch Model A Headstock Upgrade

mike allen
 

        what kind of a A model is yer lathe ,that it came with that type of reverse tumbler ?

        animal

On 6/11/2019 8:14 PM, comstock_friend wrote:

Had a problem with my 9 Inch Model A, CL644A (4-2-1956) with the sixteen speed V-belt pulleys. After I cleaned and painted her up I bought a linked belt instead of the standard continuous V-belt. When changing speeds it was very difficult to get the belt on the lowest speed sheave (the belt was thicker than the space under the rim of the sheave). I just did an upgrade to the quick change forward/reverse lever and got a new headstock casting. As an added benefit the casting base is only 1.5 inch thick compared to the original’s 2 inch. Photos show a comparison of the two castings and the belt on the low speed sheave showing plenty of room under the sheave. Maybe South Bend noted that it was tight with the other casting.

 

John

Re: Precision level needed or not?

Guenther Paul
 

George
Use the level you have make a cut and see what you have. A precision level is nice but don't buy one 

GP


On Tuesday, June 11, 2019, 4:44:51 PM EDT, George Meinschein <bustedguns@...> wrote:


Group,

What's the consensus on whether or not a precision level is really needed to setup a lathe?  Can I use a regular old carpenter's level (or a digital level) and then check the lathe installation by cutting and measuring a cylinder?  I'm thinking even if I had a precision level, I'd still want to turn & measure a cylinder to check the installation and correct for any bed twist anyway.  Thoughts & comments please!

-- 
Thanks,
George H. Meinschein, P.E.

Meinschein Engineering Consultants, LLC
150 Brittany Drive
Freehold, NJ 07728-1500
Direct Dial: 732-409-0778
Cell: 732-580-1736
Fax: 732-358-0369
www.meinscheinengineering.com

Virus-free. www.avast.com

Re: 9 Inch Model A Headstock Upgrade

comstock_friend
 

Mike Allen, it started out as a CL644A shipped in April of 1956 with a standard bolted type reverse tumbler. I bought an 'adapter' that sandwiches between the quick change reverser and the old head stock. I have a CL344ZN UMD Model 9 also, so the adapter will now go on that lathe. The UMD headstocks (stripped) I can find with the quick change set up are north of $ 200 shipped.

John

Re: Precision level needed or not?

comstock_friend
 

Here's a method that doesn't require a precision level...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2qIdsnl5vpg

John

Re: Precision level needed or not?

George Meinschein
 

John,
That's almost exactly what I thought of this morning. I was going to tape a machinist scale on the parallel and go with a 5' plumb bob.  Bill in OKC!!!  You watching???

Thanks,
George H. Meinschein, P.E.

Meinschein Engineering Consultants, LLC
150 Brittany Drive
Freehold, NJ 07728-1500

Email: george.meinschein@...
Direct Dial: 732-409-0778
Cell: 732-580-1736
Fax: 732-358-0369
www.meinscheinengineering.com

   


On Wed, Jun 12, 2019, 2:53 PM comstock_friend <jfriend314@...> wrote:
Here's a method that doesn't require a precision level...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2qIdsnl5vpg

John

Re: Precision level needed or not?

Scott McGrath
 

You could also use a long precision straightedge to determine twist if yo have one.

Content by Scott
Typos by Siri

Re: Precision level needed or not?

Stephen Bartlett
 

I like the plumb bob idea, but have a question.

I have never done this but would it work to put a mandrel known to be the same diameter at both ends on centers and then indicate the surface at the two ends with an indicator on the carriage set at one end and then the other?

At the very least it might be quicker than taking cuts and adjusting twist until the ends are the same?

Steve Bartlett

Re: Precision level needed or not?

Steven H
 

What you are describing - an alignment bar placed between centers - is one way of checking and setting the tailstock alignment both horizontally and vertically. These alignment bars are commercially available - Edge Technology makes one that is 12” long. Don’t know if such an item could be used to check for lathe bed twist, but if the idea would work, the bar should be max length the lathe can hold between centers.

Steve Haskell

On Jun 13, 2019, at 9:32 PM, Stephen Bartlett via Groups.Io <tower.op=verizon.net@groups.io> wrote:

I like the plumb bob idea, but have a question.

I have never done this but would it work to put a mandrel known to be the same diameter at both ends on centers and then indicate the surface at the two ends with an indicator on the carriage set at one end and then the other?

At the very least it might be quicker than taking cuts and adjusting twist until the ends are the same?

Steve Bartlett


Re: Precision level needed or not?

carbure2003
 

Be careful with this method, you don’t know if your tailstock is aligned, or if it is worn enough to be slightly off axial alignment. In addition, you would have to consider wear on the bed.

Levelling with precision level is my preferred option. Other unknown thing is bed top of v way condition.If there are dints, it may impact levelling.
I rebuilt a few south bend lathes. In the bed restauration process, the first thing I usually do is the re conditioning of 3 levelling positions: under the headstock first, then tailstock end at the bolt location, and the third one is under the chuck area. Usually, bedways are not damaged under the headstock and have minimum wear at the tailstock end. The zone near the headstock receives many dints, chucks being dropped, stock hitting bedways, etc... I spend time with a fine honing stone in order to ensure I have identical readings at the 3 locations. Accurate levelling is done with a jig that I manufactured as a template for slide ways scraping. Instead of using top bed ways surfaces, it uses the v profile of bed ways as reference. I level the lathe bed with a master precision level, then I hone my flat surfaces at the reference levelling positions until I get identical readings on the level. When the lathe is back together, the reference under the chuck is used at the same time as the tailstock reference point.

Chienese manufacture master precision levels sold for less than $100. 0.0002" / 10”. They will do the job. In between times I need the level, they go out of calibration very easy. I always have to recalibrate mine. My Starrett bought later on Kijiji keeps its calibration quite good. I have seen level vials for sale on ebay for less than $40. One was mounted in an aluminium holder. This would enable you to manufacture your own master precision level.
Remember that a lathe does not need to be perfectly levelled, you need to have the twist taken off. A lathe in a ship is never levelled. It is set properly when ship is in dry dock.

Guy Cadrin

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Steven H via Groups.Io" <stevesmachining=aol.com@groups.io>
To: SouthBendLathe@groups.io
Subject: Re: [SouthBendLathe] Precision level needed or not?
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2019 23:08:55 -0400

What you are describing - an alignment bar placed between centers - is one way of checking and setting the tailstock alignment both horizontally and vertically. These alignment bars are commercially available - Edge Technology makes one that is 12” long. Don’t know if such an item could be used to check for lathe bed twist, but if the idea would work, the bar should be max length the lathe can hold between centers.

Steve Haskell


On Jun 13, 2019, at 9:32 PM, Stephen Bartlett via Groups.Io <tower.op=verizon.net@groups.io> wrote:

I like the plumb bob idea, but have a question.e bed

I have never done this but would it work to put a mandrel known to be the same diameter at both ends on centers and then indicate the surface at the two ends with an indicator on the carriage set at one end and then the other?

At the very least it might be quicker than taking cuts and adjusting twist until the ends are the same?

Steve Bartlett




____________________________________________________________
Oncologists Are Freaking Out Over True Cause of Cancer
healthresponses.org
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3241/5d031bfaa94aa1bfa7c35st02vuc

Re: Precision level needed or not?

eddie.draper@btinternet.com
 

Not between centres, but holding your test bar in the chuck or headstock taper.  If you do it between centres, even if the tailstock is set dead centre to the headstock, it will follow the twist in the bed so give a zero change of DTI deflection at all longitudinal positions.

If it wobbles when rotated or is otherwise off centre in the chuck, no matter, just average the max & min readings.

I actually prefer the DTI method, as no matter how small a cut you put on, it will deflect the bar more the further you go from the headstock.  Use as long a bar as possible and cut a diameter near its centre as well.  No need to pay lots of ££ or $$.  Any old offcut or scrap will suffice.  Just spend time getting the 3 diameters right, which would probably be done easiest betwen centres, but then change to the chuck to use it.  Diameter should be proportionate to length for stiffness.  Thick wall tube is quite acceptable.

On the subject of the giant pendulum, I admire the initiative.  The longer the better of course, but what it must absolutely have is rigidity of the point of attachment at the top, no wobble.  Make it long enough and you can use it for measuring the earth's rotation!  (See Foucault's pendulum.)

For users of boning rods (parallels placed across the bed) you need good eysight and a large depth of field, so bright illumination plus room to view from the end, which we don't all have.  I feel they might be more use eliminating or averaging out twist on a flat bed rather than a V bed, as the sides of the Vs rather than tops are the bits that wear.  However, as a comparative test on a V bed, they could be used as a measure of wear of the Vs.  Any further thougts on that?

Eddie

On Friday, 14 June 2019, 02:32:29 BST, Stephen Bartlett via Groups.Io <tower.op@...> wrote:


I like the plumb bob idea, but have a question.

I have never done this but would it work to put a mandrel known to be
the same diameter at both ends on centers and then indicate the surface
at the two ends with an indicator on the carriage set at one end and
then the other?

At the very least it might be quicker than taking cuts and adjusting
twist until the ends are the same?

Steve Bartlett



Re: Precision level needed or not?

glenn brooks <brooks.glenn@...>
 

Also, FWIW, I usually re-level my lathes twice a year. Sometimes more often, due to hydrolic movement of our soils under the foundation, due to water saturation. Parts of my shop and house move up and down irregularly with the winter rains and summer drying conditions. Like Guy, I bought a precision level for a hundred bucks and have found it to be quite useful.

Glenn Brooks

On Jun 13, 2019, at 8:59 PM, carbure2003 <guycad@...> wrote:

Be careful with this method, you don’t know if your tailstock is aligned, or if it is worn enough to be slightly off axial alignment. In addition, you would have to consider wear on the bed.

Levelling with precision level is my preferred option. Other unknown thing is bed top of v way condition.If there are dints, it may impact levelling.
I rebuilt a few south bend lathes. In the bed restauration process, the first thing I usually do is the re conditioning of 3 levelling positions: under the headstock first, then tailstock end at the bolt location, and the third one is under the chuck area. Usually, bedways are not damaged under the headstock and have minimum wear at the tailstock end. The zone near the headstock receives many dints, chucks being dropped, stock hitting bedways, etc... I spend time with a fine honing stone in order to ensure I have identical readings at the 3 locations. Accurate levelling is done with a jig that I manufactured as a template for slide ways scraping. Instead of using top bed ways surfaces, it uses the v profile of bed ways as reference. I level the lathe bed with a master precision level, then I hone my flat surfaces at the reference levelling positions until I get identical readings on the level. When the lathe is back together, the reference under the chuck is used at the same time as the tailstock reference point.

Chienese manufacture master precision levels sold for less than $100. 0.0002" / 10”. They will do the job. In between times I need the level, they go out of calibration very easy. I always have to recalibrate mine. My Starrett bought later on Kijiji keeps its calibration quite good. I have seen level vials for sale on ebay for less than $40. One was mounted in an aluminium holder. This would enable you to manufacture your own master precision level.
Remember that a lathe does not need to be perfectly levelled, you need to have the twist taken off. A lathe in a ship is never levelled. It is set properly when ship is in dry dock.

Guy Cadrin

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Steven H via Groups.Io" <stevesmachining=aol.com@groups.io>
To: SouthBendLathe@groups.io
Subject: Re: [SouthBendLathe] Precision level needed or not?
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2019 23:08:55 -0400

What you are describing - an alignment bar placed between centers - is one way of checking and setting the tailstock alignment both horizontally and vertically. These alignment bars are commercially available - Edge Technology makes one that is 12” long. Don’t know if such an item could be used to check for lathe bed twist, but if the idea would work, the bar should be max length the lathe can hold between centers.

Steve Haskell


On Jun 13, 2019, at 9:32 PM, Stephen Bartlett via Groups.Io <tower.op=verizon.net@groups.io> wrote:

I like the plumb bob idea, but have a question.e bed

I have never done this but would it work to put a mandrel known to be the same diameter at both ends on centers and then indicate the surface at the two ends with an indicator on the carriage set at one end and then the other?

At the very least it might be quicker than taking cuts and adjusting twist until the ends are the same?

Steve Bartlett




____________________________________________________________
Oncologists Are Freaking Out Over True Cause of Cancer
healthresponses.org
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3241/5d031bfaa94aa1bfa7c35st02vuc


Re: Precision level needed or not?

Rogan Creswick
 

Guy, Thanks for the details!

Could you share some pictures / diagrams of the jig you described for scraping? I need to do some inspection (and probably repair) work on a light 10k bed, and I imagine I'll need to make some tooling to help with that.

Thanks!
--Rogan

On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 9:01 PM carbure2003 <guycad@...> wrote:
Be careful with this method, you don’t know if your tailstock is aligned, or if it is worn enough to be slightly off axial alignment. In addition, you would have to consider wear on the bed.

Levelling with precision level is my preferred option. Other unknown thing is bed top of v way condition.If there are dints, it may impact levelling.
I rebuilt a few south bend lathes.  In the bed restauration process, the first thing I usually do is the re conditioning of 3 levelling positions: under the headstock first, then tailstock end at the bolt location, and the third one is under the chuck area. Usually, bedways are not damaged under the headstock and have minimum wear at the tailstock end. The zone near the headstock receives many dints, chucks being dropped, stock hitting bedways, etc...  I spend time with a fine honing stone in order to ensure I have identical readings at the 3 locations. Accurate levelling is done with a jig that I manufactured as a template for slide ways scraping. Instead of using top bed ways surfaces, it uses the v profile of bed ways as reference. I level the lathe bed with a master precision level, then I hone my flat surfaces at the reference levelling positions until I get identical readings on the level. When the lathe is back together, the reference under the chuck is used at the same time as the tailstock reference point.

Chienese manufacture master precision levels sold for less than $100. 0.0002" / 10”.  They will  do the job. In between times I need the level, they go out of calibration very easy. I always have to recalibrate mine. My Starrett bought later on Kijiji keeps its calibration quite good.  I have seen level vials for sale on ebay for less than $40. One was mounted in an aluminium holder.  This would enable you to manufacture your own master precision level.
Remember that a lathe does not need to be perfectly levelled, you need to have the twist taken off. A  lathe in a ship is never levelled. It is set properly when ship is in dry dock.

Guy Cadrin

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Steven H via Groups.Io" <stevesmachining=aol.com@groups.io>
To: SouthBendLathe@groups.io
Subject: Re: [SouthBendLathe] Precision level needed or not?
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2019 23:08:55 -0400

What you are describing - an alignment bar placed between centers - is one way of checking and setting the tailstock alignment both horizontally and vertically. These alignment bars are commercially available - Edge Technology makes one that is 12” long. Don’t know if such an item could be used to check for lathe bed twist, but if the idea would work, the bar should be max length the lathe can hold between centers.

Steve Haskell


> On Jun 13, 2019, at 9:32 PM, Stephen Bartlett via Groups.Io <tower.op=verizon.net@groups.io> wrote:
>
> I like the plumb bob idea, but have a question.e bed
>
> I have never done this but would it work to put a mandrel known to be the same diameter at both ends on centers and then indicate the surface at the two ends with an indicator on the carriage set at one end and then the other?
>
> At the very least it might be quicker than taking cuts and adjusting twist until the ends are the same?
>
> Steve Bartlett
>
>
>



____________________________________________________________
Oncologists Are Freaking Out Over True Cause of Cancer
healthresponses.org
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3241/5d031bfaa94aa1bfa7c35st02vuc



Re: Precision level needed or not?

Stephen Bartlett
 

Is it possible to discern whether a measurement difference between ends of an alignment bar is due to tailstock misalignment or bed twist?

I guess the first thing is to get the tailstock alignment correct with the tailstock right at at the headstock.

When I got my lathe back about 1968 it had very little bed wear and I have not put too many miles on it.

In practice I have never paid much attention to twist because I do not generally work with long stock. Years ago I borrowed a precision level from work and leveled the bed. I moved in 1985 and since the bed had an adjustable tail end base I just loosened the set screws to let it settle out and then snugged them again, tightening each a little at a time, back and forth. It is on a heavy steel cabinet.

I looked at the Edge Technology web site. Much of their product line is affordable for a hobby situation.

Steve Bartlett


From: Steven H
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2019 23:09:02 EDT

What you are describing - an alignment bar placed between centers - is one way of checking and setting the tailstock alignment both horizontally and vertically. These alignment bars are commercially available - Edge Technology makes one that is 12??? long. Don???t know if such an item could be used to check for lathe bed twist, but if the idea would work, the bar should be max length the lathe can hold between centers.

Steve Haskell

Re: Precision level needed or not?

Steven H
 

Another fellow earlier today said no, an alignment bar between centers won’t do for determining bed twist. Would just be useful for tailstock alignment. A check of eBay shows precision machinists levels starting at less than $30, but “you usually get what you pay for”.

Steve Haskell

On Jun 14, 2019, at 9:32 PM, Stephen Bartlett via Groups.Io <tower.op=verizon.net@groups.io> wrote:

Is it possible to discern whether a measurement difference between ends of an alignment bar is due to tailstock misalignment or bed twist?

I guess the first thing is to get the tailstock alignment correct with the tailstock right at at the headstock.

When I got my lathe back about 1968 it had very little bed wear and I have not put too many miles on it.

In practice I have never paid much attention to twist because I do not generally work with long stock. Years ago I borrowed a precision level from work and leveled the bed. I moved in 1985 and since the bed had an adjustable tail end base I just loosened the set screws to let it settle out and then snugged them again, tightening each a little at a time, back and forth. It is on a heavy steel cabinet.

I looked at the Edge Technology web site. Much of their product line is affordable for a hobby situation.

Steve Bartlett


From: Steven H
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2019 23:09:02 EDT

What you are describing - an alignment bar placed between centers - is one way of checking and setting the tailstock alignment both horizontally and vertically. These alignment bars are commercially available - Edge Technology makes one that is 12??? long. Don???t know if such an item could be used to check for lathe bed twist, but if the idea would work, the bar should be max length the lathe can hold between centers.

Steve Haskell