Thread: Precision Engineers Square

Originally Posted by Oldneweng

Thanks Stuart. 9" is around the size I would be interested in. 3mm is plenty to run a DTI against. I was not about to spend my money unless I knew what the thickness was beforehand.

Just to be sure we are talking about the same thing. The 9" M&W I am talking about is the same as the one I linked to. While mine is much older I don't the thickness has changed much.

Stuart

Does your column have a ground face Dean? You can set the table by putting a DI on it and clocking the front face of the column.
Cheers,
Ew

Originally Posted by Oldneweng

Thanks Peter. I may be interested. Depends on the size.

Dean

Hi Dean.
it have the long side 4mm thick and the base side is 21.50mm thick . i think it is 9" .
.
Peter

Originally Posted by Stustoys

Just to be sure we are talking about the same thing. The 9" M&W I am talking about is the same as the one I linked to. While mine is much older I don't the thickness has changed much.

Stuart

Yes. We are talking the same language., but considering Peter's post.

Dean

Originally Posted by Ueee

Does your column have a ground face Dean? You can set the table by putting a DI on it and clocking the front face of the column.
Cheers,
Ew

The column ways are the only ground surfaces. The height they begin can be seen in the picture I posted. Where the way cover becomes unruly. It is the dovetail holding it above this. The column is about 190mm wide, giving a good distance between measurements, but this requires moving the table away from the column to get past the dovetails. The top surface of the dovetails is also ground. This gives a width of about 130mm for measurement.

A great idea Ewan. I will give it a go. Thanks.

Dean

Originally Posted by thorens

Hi Dean.
it have the long side 4mm thick and the base side is 21.50mm thick . i think it is 9" .
.
Peter

Thanks Peter. I am interested in it even after Ewans idea arose.

Dean

Originally Posted by Oldneweng

Thanks Peter. I am interested in it even after Ewans idea arose.

Dean

cool Dean.
PM me.
Peter

Dean, I think you are overthinking this. After all, this is only a low cost hobby-mill.

I did the basic tramming of my Sieg X3 using a low cost engineers square like this:
T-squarre.png
The one I used was a cheap DIN875/1. It was 150mm long and that is plenty enough for this task.
Step 1: I put the DTI in the spindle, indicate on the 5mm wide vertical face of the square in x and y axes. Move the head up/down and tram/shim that columsn until the error is less than 1/100mm in 100mm travel.
Step 2: Move the quill up/down, tram the head to to the head carriage until you get that error too to within 1/100mm in 50mm travel. Note your Super X3 has a tilting head, so in x axis you need not tram the head but simply set the tilt, and make some sort of index mark so you find easily back if later on you need to tilt that head (or frill and ream for an easy to use locating taper pin).
Step 3: verify by taking a very very light cut with something like a very sharp (new, preferably uncoated) 20mm endmill (or a flycutter is even better). Move table bothe in x and y direction. The end mill marks on the surface finish MUST nicely overlap - else tramming is out, or there is slop somewhere. This test is very sensitive, probably more sensitive than if you spent $300 on a good precision square and DTI. If the cut marks are evenly wisible as circles, not as halfmoons, it means your mill is overall trammed to better than 0.01mm in 100mm. What more can you ask from an under $5000 mill??

If you do not have a suitable square..... make one!!! You have a lathe do you? Make a cylindrical square. These can be very accurate if you can align your lathe to cut parallel. It is made by finish turning a tube of about 50 to 100mm diameter and 150 to 200mm length, such as both ends measure identical diameter with a micrometer. Face one end in the same setup. Now you have a precision cylindrical square suitable to tram a mill. Of course you may need to adjust your lathe to make a cylinder 200mm long to 1/100mm parallelity, you do that by (un)twisting the bed, preferably with a jackscrew. If you can do that, you can tram your mill (if you feel not confident to align your lathe that accurately yet, then you do not need to worry yet about tramming your mill that accurately either, because I think the lathe comes first).

Good Luck, Chris

Originally Posted by cba_melbourne

Dean, I think you are overthinking this. After all, this is only a low cost hobby-mill.

I did the basic tramming of my Sieg X3 using a low cost engineers square like this:

Chris it seems you have not read the whole thread. I am not tramming my mill.

Dean

Originally Posted by cba_melbourne

I did the basic tramming of my Sieg X3 using a low cost engineers square like this:

It is a universal table mill... The table has been angled and now Dean wishes to bring the X and Y axis back square to one another again...

You put an indicator base on anything but the table, your square on the table, align the stock so it sits parallel the x axis ways, then move the indicator onto the blade of the square and adjust the table so the Y axis runs true within your limits to the blade stock...

Originally Posted by Oldneweng

Chris it seems you have not read the whole thread. I am not tramming my mill.

And lets all hope you don't have to correct it with shims.