A friend of mine who used to rebuild Bridgeport mills would use a similar planer with a modified Bridgeport head on it the rest of the accuracy was achieved by scraping
i just subscribed to your channel I love to watch Planers at work . I would like to find one someday . But I do have a 24" Rockford Hydraulic Shaper Thanks
Thanks for the comment about the planer gauge being used to determine height of the flat from the top of the planer table. I have gauge but have not used it much, not knowing what it was designed to do. I originally bought it just because I thought it was a neat looking tool. After reading your comment I went back in the video to see you using the gauge again. I now have some additional ideas on using my gauge.
@@reesacheson5577 - I couldn't have been more wrong about what I thought a planer gage was for. I had it in my head it was to set the knife height of a WOOD planer. I'm so ashamed...
@@reesacheson5577 Thanks for the reply would you mind doing a video of setup and explain some of it I have a early pratt and whitney planer I just got and am starting to use
Hi Nice planer , looks a interesting workshop . Did I see a horizontal boreing machine in background on previous video. Love to see a video of your shop. You don't see many small shops, now in the UK, with planers , borers and old school machines . Regards from UK
Hi , thank you for responding, have you found over the years the types of customers have changed for you , and have you noticed a change in people wanting to get involved in hands on engineering, in the uk it's changed dramatically not many want to get there hands dirty , and it's become to expensive to take apprentices on from the point of insurance and legislation, it's sad really ,we don't much do machining for customers now, we only maintenance for ourselves supporting a industrial cleaning "chemical and blast cleaning business" about three years ago when our dad passed, we had to rid of our big machines, and just kept the small ones we needed to maintain any machining we needed. Regards Cledwyn
I am surprised at how wide the tool contact is with no chatter. I have never seen a tool with a grind like that before. Is it ground that way just to clear the dovetailL
@@reesacheson5577 - Did you ever fix a machine way with weld buildup? I've been curious for a while if there was a viable way to build up worn ways rather than keep making them ever smaller!
I have looked over my explanation and see no reference to a clearance angle, so just to be clear about what angle we are talking about, the clearance angle is the part of the tool that is behind the cutting edge that, as you say, would rub on the just machined surface if the angle were too little. It is the part of the tool where the wear land forms as the tool wears out. If that is the angle you are talking about, for a wide end-cutting tool it is best that the angle not be greater than about 5 degrees and at least 2 or 3. If too great, and enough of the width of the tool is in cut, then chatter could become an issue - even with a goose-necked holder. If too little, the tool will not last long before the wear-land becomes too large for the tool to cut efficiently. Is that the angle you were questioning? If, instead, you meant that the cutting edge is held very nearly parallel to the surface, let me know I I will discuss that. Rees
@@reesacheson5577 Thanks for the reply, I should have been more clear. Yes, I mean that the lower edge of the tool is very nearly parallel to the work. So much so that I was curious if it was for a reason. I'm looking to have a lathe bed either planed or ground here soon, thus the interest. Thanks for posting! Very cool process that not many get to practice everyday...
@@ramper50 To cut broad flat surfaces a planer often uses a "flat-tool" - a broad end-cutting tool. The idea is that the tool is held parallel, or very nearly so, to the work surface. In this configuration larger feed rates can be used to save time. Feeds of 0.25" to 0.5" are common with some as high as 1.0" on large planers. If the depth of cut is very little, flat-tooling leaves a surface that is exceptionally well suited for scraping - flat and easily penetrable by the scraper edge. For a wide surface, the tool is held not exactly parallel. This is to insure that the part of the tool that passes over a previously cut surface does not cut. Otherwise the tool would always be cutting full width. So the tool is set up with the trailing part of the edge a little high just to be sure it does not drag. In the case of this video it is about 0.0005" high. This is all so that I can use a feed rate of what was probably about 0.10". Why not an even larger feed rate, like regular flat-tooling? When cutting this way, due to the overhanging dovetail, I could not use a true end cutting tool. Instead it is a combination of end and side cutting. As the edge becomes side cutting the necessary clearance in the clapper box comes into play and so with depths of cut of 0.0005" (5 tenths) the clearance tends to come into play and changing conditions of tool pressure could effect depth of cut. And with a flat-tool, even very small changes cause much larger changes in tool pressure. My clapper is in very good condition, but still this becomes a concern. So using less feed is a compromise. You asked why the tool does not chatter. Any broad edge end-cutting tool used on a planer should be held in a goose-neck holder (cutting edge behind the base of the tool holder) or some other holder that causes the tool edge to spring away from the work, rather than into it, as tool pressure increases. Using such a holder along with a sharp and properly designed edge, cuts as wide as 1.0" are easily made even on small planers like my own. I use the principle to cut lathe beds by setting the edge exactly parallel and plunging into the way. Two of my videos show this being done. To understand why the goose-neck concept principle is necessary, imagine if the opposite were the case: as tool pressure increased the cutting depth also increased. If the tool was 1.5" wide then a very small increase in tool pressure would immediately greatly increase it further as the entire edge plunged into the cut, creating a very unstable condition. That's chatter. Flat-tools work particularly well on cast iron. For steel a shear-tool is used - similar broad end-cutting tool but with a canted edge. Rees
My planer was made on a planer. However, I think your question might have actually been, how did they make the first planer? If you actually wanted an answer to that question, an accurate planer can be made by hand using a straight edge. Whatever tools that are at hand can be used to speed up the process, but one could do it with a chisel, file and scraper along with some measuring tools to keep things parallel and fitting. And a straight edge can be made by making three of them at once, scraping each to another in sequence until all are straight enough for the purpose. A small planer can be used to make a larger one by segmenting the bed and table, and scraping them together to make the fit straight, for example. Very long planers have segmented beds. Rees
@@mackk123 I am glad that your question was answered, and I apologize for thinking that your question might have been rhetorical. As for a perpendicular surface, there are two basic methods, with the first being used to check the 2nd. 1) Make a right angle surface, scraping to a right angle, with flatness maintained using a surface plate. To check the right angle, the easiest method is to make a cylinder square. These are made on a cylindrical grinder, but a lathe could be used. To make, start with a bar of steel with a diameter about half the length. First, the ends of this cylinder are relieved so that a rim exists on the ends. The OD is ground without taper. Then in the same setup the ends are ground square. The squareness of this end-grind is not that important - the side of the wheel will do. Placing one end of this completed cylinder on a surface plate, its diameter surface creates a right angle with the surface plate. This can be used to check a right angle plate. 2) The other way is to first machine the perpendicular surface squarely to a high degree of accuracy. Then scrape it flat using a surface plate. If desired you can check to be sure it remains square with a right angle such as the cylinder square or the angle plate. For the most part, this method assumes that the machining was, indeed, square, and in most cases, especially if the machined surface finish was good, the amount of material removed during scraping is so small that it is safe to assume that this squareness is maintained. For most machine tool rebuilding, this usually suffices. Of course this very much depends on the configuration of the part. That is, things like deflection due to its own weight need to be considered. Rees
@@reesacheson5577 thank you, I was trying to imagine I was on a desert island attempting to recreate precision from scratch, the cylinder square method seems to make sense, however in the desert island case, how _would one have_ checked the squareness/taper of the square? the mother lathe for that would need to be close; or even stacking a few of these "rims" atop each other so that their largest diameter creates a measuring contact point. I was thinking last night about the second method you described comparing an angle plate to another or even with a "3 plate method" with angle plates.
@@mackk123 I don't know about the desert island concept. You would need to be able to deoxygenate iron and cast it etc. Also, each one of the steps to make the machines would take an enormousness amount of time, and it would be better if various people were working on different aspects of the endeavor. Regarding the cylinder square, only the diameter has to be measured for taper. You do not need to be able to measure squareness, the process insures that it will be square. So, you would need to make an accurate measuring device - like a micrometer. That probably means a lathe, too. A cylinder square is twice as accurate as the measurement since it is the diameter that is being measured, yet the radius that is used for squareness checking. I should note that rather than making a cylinder square on a lathe, you could make a beam square. It's squareness can be checked by attaching 2 machinist buttons to an angle plate that is resting on a surface plate. The buttons would be mounted loosely enough that they could be slid on the surface. Then the square is placed on the surface plate, pressing the blade of the square against the buttons, moving them both slightly. The buttons are then tightened and the square is moved to the opposite side of the buttons. If the square is square, the blade will touch both buttons on at each position. Of course, to make machinist buttons you would need a lathe, and the cylinder square is easier to insure squareness of. Further, since the cylinder contacts the blade as a line instead of 2 points, you might rather make a cylinder square to use to make a beam square. I think the order of needed machines to be built would be: 1) planer; 2) lathe; 3) milling machine. The last could largely be done with the planer and so you might be able to get away without building one. A drilling machine ought to be in there some place. I am sure people have varying opinions on the order. Further, you might need to build several planers, each after the 1st used to make the next until you had one that would not wear out and would stay accurate. (Due to time constraints, the 1st planer might be designed simply enough to last not much longer than required to make the next planer.) As for the 3 right angle scraping method, no, I don't see anything that would insure squareness - only that they were flat and matched. Rees
The machine is called a 'planer' and is similar to a shaper in that a single point tool repeatedly cuts straight lines to make plane surfaces. The difference between the two is that for a shaper the tool moves, whereas with a planer the work moves. Both can be thought of as flat lathes. The term 'shaper' is okay to use to describe a planer, but it is generally not.
How good do you want the end result. Cast iron will move every cut. Over this length 0•0005 " is as close to flat as possible, even after rotation top and bottom. Grinding is the way to go.
Grinding is the way to go if the ways are hardened, or if you do not wish to scrape it afterwards. However, in order to get the results you suggest when using a grinder it would be very important not to use a magnetic chuck as this will effect the at-rest deflection of the bed. Or if one was used, insure that all surfaces that might be pulled down are supported adequately with shims or jacks - even surfaces a couple of inches from the chuck. The bed must not move or deflect as the magnet is turned on, and that is difficult to insure. If instead the bed is being clamped, you can insure that each clamping spot individually does not move anything. Personally, I think that if scraping is not a prohibitive factor, than a planer is preferable to a grinder. But I am sure that there are more than one schools of thought on the matter. As for cast iron movement and overall straightness that you mention, I will leave that discussion for another post if you would like to pursue it. Rees
The air is used to raise the "Clapper Box" up on the return stroke, but he can't use it here. When cutting into a female dove tail, you have to turn the air off, or else it will raise the tool up into the top of the dovetail. The solenoid valve for the clapper is still working however, and that's the noise you hear in the background. If you watch the last stroke closely, you can see the tool raise up slightly at the end of the last return stroke. He's either extremely good, or extremely lucky, because the tool didn't catch and gouge the top of the dovetail. In either case, he's got nerves of steel, I would have screamed like a little girl! (p.s. I used to love the sounds that a planner made. It was extremely soothing.)
That's a good question. And in one way, the answer is obvious: where is anyone going to find a planer in good condition these days? The last planer was made about 60 years ago. But the second sentence implies that the the Mattison is going to make the bed straighter and more parallel, and that is anything but obvious. With an equally good operator I think the answer sides slightly with your implication, albeit taking longer to do the job and at a much higher cost per hour. And with the grinder the surface does not need to be scraped afterwards - another big advantage in that it is difficult to find anyone who would scrape it. A big concern with grinding is heat and I responded to a similar question as yours on November, 2021 as to a comment on ua-cam.com/video/tIQlbdKjlbE/v-deo.html, of planing a Southbend. I wrote a long reason why planing might be a better option than grinding. It was in answer to "Weld Machine" who asked why it was not being ground. It's pretty long answer to a seemingly simple question, and people have different points of view on the matter. However, not many people know very much about planers and so their answer would likely side with grinders, which they are familiar with. I, on the other hand, have never used a way grinder and so the same could be argued for me. Rees
I think what you are suggesting is that the planer is merely copying its way surfaces to the work. Therefore the work would contain any flaws that were in the way. And you are correct in that. (Edit: removed the rest and left it at that) Rees
Yes, here you can see it transferring a height to the opposite side to check using an indicator. It is also (and probably originally) used to set the planer cutting tool to a particular distance from the table: use a micrometer to set the gauge, then lower the tool until the gauge only just slips beneath the tool. Then the tool will cut that thickness. A planer gauge is stout and will not change dimension once set. I think a great tool! Rees
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Bravo for giving these machines/ pieces a new lease on life ! Thanks for sharing !
You put a lot of information in your comments and video descriptions, thanks for taking the time to share!
Cool! First planner I've seen with a DRO 😁. Guess I've only seen 3 total, but still 😉. Thanks for the share!
Thanks for sharing your knowledge with us
Very relaxing to watch
The chip breaking action is so satisfying
Nice job, great video!
A friend of mine who used to rebuild Bridgeport mills would use a similar planer with a modified Bridgeport head on it the rest of the accuracy was achieved by scraping
Please tell me your passing this knowledge and skill on to someone who appreciates it!
Least people want to know this knowledge if you can earn 3x times in IT...
@@SawomirSzczyglak yeah but this is 6x more interesting/fun/fulfilling.
I respect those black hands a lot.
WOW! Here the rest of my thumbs up!!! 👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍
Fascinating. Thank you!!
i just subscribed to your channel I love to watch Planers at work . I would like to find one someday . But I do have a 24" Rockford Hydraulic Shaper Thanks
Thanks for the comment about the planer gauge being used to determine height of the flat from the top of the planer table.
I have gauge but have not used it much, not knowing what it was designed to do. I originally bought it just because I thought it was a neat looking tool. After reading your comment I went back in the video to see you using the gauge again.
I now have some additional ideas on using my gauge.
@@reesacheson5577 - I couldn't have been more wrong about what I thought a planer gage was for. I had it in my head it was to set the knife height of a WOOD planer. I'm so ashamed...
What tolerance does this hold,.
Just wondering if you know were a guy can find planer poppets or side clamps toe dog
No. Except for the standard clamps, all the planer furniture I have I made, including the stops and fingers.
Rees
@@reesacheson5577
Thanks for the reply would you mind doing a video of setup and explain some of it
I have a early pratt and whitney planer
I just got and am starting to use
Very interesting. I never see a pneumatic machine like this
Pulls the chips nicely =]
Hi Nice planer , looks a interesting workshop . Did I see a horizontal boreing machine in background on previous video. Love to see a video of your shop. You don't see many small shops, now in the UK, with planers , borers and old school machines .
Regards from UK
Hi , thank you for responding, have you found over the years the types of customers have changed for you , and have you noticed a change in people wanting to get involved in hands on engineering, in the uk it's changed dramatically not many want to get there hands dirty , and it's become to expensive to take apprentices on from the point of insurance and legislation, it's sad really ,we don't much do machining for customers now, we only maintenance for ourselves supporting a industrial cleaning "chemical and blast cleaning business" about three years ago when our dad passed, we had to rid of our big machines, and just kept the small ones we needed to maintain any machining we needed.
Regards Cledwyn
I am surprised at how wide the tool contact is with no chatter. I have never seen a tool with a grind like that before. Is it ground that way just to clear the dovetailL
@@reesacheson5577 - Did you ever fix a machine way with weld buildup? I've been curious for a while if there was a viable way to build up worn ways rather than keep making them ever smaller!
@@somebodyelse6673 I had a bridgeport table bought back to spec using tercite B it's a plastic based material for the coating of slideways
Why so little relief on the cutting tool? Figured you'd have issues with rubbing and chatter, but I've never run a planer before so...
I have looked over my explanation and see no reference to a clearance angle, so just to be clear about what angle we are talking about, the clearance angle is the part of the tool that is behind the cutting edge that, as you say, would rub on the just machined surface if the angle were too little. It is the part of the tool where the wear land forms as the tool wears out.
If that is the angle you are talking about, for a wide end-cutting tool it is best that the angle not be greater than about 5 degrees and at least 2 or 3. If too great, and enough of the width of the tool is in cut, then chatter could become an issue - even with a goose-necked holder. If too little, the tool will not last long before the wear-land becomes too large for the tool to cut efficiently.
Is that the angle you were questioning? If, instead, you meant that the cutting edge is held very nearly parallel to the surface, let me know I I will discuss that.
Rees
@@reesacheson5577 Thanks for the reply, I should have been more clear. Yes, I mean that the lower edge of the tool is very nearly parallel to the work. So much so that I was curious if it was for a reason. I'm looking to have a lathe bed either planed or ground here soon, thus the interest. Thanks for posting! Very cool process that not many get to practice everyday...
@@ramper50 To cut broad flat surfaces a planer often uses a "flat-tool" - a broad end-cutting tool. The idea is that the tool is held parallel, or very nearly so, to the work surface. In this configuration larger feed rates can be used to save time. Feeds of 0.25" to 0.5" are common with some as high as 1.0" on large planers. If the depth of cut is very little, flat-tooling leaves a surface that is exceptionally well suited for scraping - flat and easily penetrable by the scraper edge.
For a wide surface, the tool is held not exactly parallel. This is to insure that the part of the tool that passes over a previously cut surface does not cut. Otherwise the tool would always be cutting full width. So the tool is set up with the trailing part of the edge a little high just to be sure it does not drag. In the case of this video it is about 0.0005" high.
This is all so that I can use a feed rate of what was probably about 0.10".
Why not an even larger feed rate, like regular flat-tooling? When cutting this way, due to the overhanging dovetail, I could not use a true end cutting tool. Instead it is a combination of end and side cutting. As the edge becomes side cutting the necessary clearance in the clapper box comes into play and so with depths of cut of 0.0005" (5 tenths) the clearance tends to come into play and changing conditions of tool pressure could effect depth of cut. And with a flat-tool, even very small changes cause much larger changes in tool pressure. My clapper is in very good condition, but still this becomes a concern. So using less feed is a compromise.
You asked why the tool does not chatter. Any broad edge end-cutting tool used on a planer should be held in a goose-neck holder (cutting edge behind the base of the tool holder) or some other holder that causes the tool edge to spring away from the work, rather than into it, as tool pressure increases. Using such a holder along with a sharp and properly designed edge, cuts as wide as 1.0" are easily made even on small planers like my own. I use the principle to cut lathe beds by setting the edge exactly parallel and plunging into the way. Two of my videos show this being done.
To understand why the goose-neck concept principle is necessary, imagine if the opposite were the case: as tool pressure increased the cutting depth also increased. If the tool was 1.5" wide then a very small increase in tool pressure would immediately greatly increase it further as the entire edge plunged into the cut, creating a very unstable condition. That's chatter.
Flat-tools work particularly well on cast iron. For steel a shear-tool is used - similar broad end-cutting tool but with a canted edge.
Rees
How did they make the machine that made this machine?
My planer was made on a planer.
However, I think your question might have actually been, how did they make the first planer? If you actually wanted an answer to that question, an accurate planer can be made by hand using a straight edge. Whatever tools that are at hand can be used to speed up the process, but one could do it with a chisel, file and scraper along with some measuring tools to keep things parallel and fitting. And a straight edge can be made by making three of them at once, scraping each to another in sequence until all are straight enough for the purpose.
A small planer can be used to make a larger one by segmenting the bed and table, and scraping them together to make the fit straight, for example. Very long planers have segmented beds.
Rees
@@reesacheson5577 That does answer my question, now, however I have another question; how would one go about scraping in a perpendicular surface?
@@mackk123 I am glad that your question was answered, and I apologize for thinking that your question might have been rhetorical.
As for a perpendicular surface, there are two basic methods, with the first being used to check the 2nd.
1) Make a right angle surface, scraping to a right angle, with flatness maintained using a surface plate. To check the right angle, the easiest method is to make a cylinder square. These are made on a cylindrical grinder, but a lathe could be used. To make, start with a bar of steel with a diameter about half the length. First, the ends of this cylinder are relieved so that a rim exists on the ends. The OD is ground without taper. Then in the same setup the ends are ground square. The squareness of this end-grind is not that important - the side of the wheel will do. Placing one end of this completed cylinder on a surface plate, its diameter surface creates a right angle with the surface plate. This can be used to check a right angle plate.
2) The other way is to first machine the perpendicular surface squarely to a high degree of accuracy. Then scrape it flat using a surface plate. If desired you can check to be sure it remains square with a right angle such as the cylinder square or the angle plate. For the most part, this method assumes that the machining was, indeed, square, and in most cases, especially if the machined surface finish was good, the amount of material removed during scraping is so small that it is safe to assume that this squareness is maintained. For most machine tool rebuilding, this usually suffices. Of course this very much depends on the configuration of the part. That is, things like deflection due to its own weight need to be considered.
Rees
@@reesacheson5577 thank you, I was trying to imagine I was on a desert island attempting to recreate precision from scratch, the cylinder square method seems to make sense, however in the desert island case, how _would one have_ checked the squareness/taper of the square? the mother lathe for that would need to be close; or even stacking a few of these "rims" atop each other so that their largest diameter creates a measuring contact point. I was thinking last night about the second method you described comparing an angle plate to another or even with a "3 plate method" with angle plates.
@@mackk123 I don't know about the desert island concept. You would need to be able to deoxygenate iron and cast it etc. Also, each one of the steps to make the machines would take an enormousness amount of time, and it would be better if various people were working on different aspects of the endeavor.
Regarding the cylinder square, only the diameter has to be measured for taper. You do not need to be able to measure squareness, the process insures that it will be square. So, you would need to make an accurate measuring device - like a micrometer. That probably means a lathe, too. A cylinder square is twice as accurate as the measurement since it is the diameter that is being measured, yet the radius that is used for squareness checking.
I should note that rather than making a cylinder square on a lathe, you could make a beam square. It's squareness can be checked by attaching 2 machinist buttons to an angle plate that is resting on a surface plate. The buttons would be mounted loosely enough that they could be slid on the surface. Then the square is placed on the surface plate, pressing the blade of the square against the buttons, moving them both slightly. The buttons are then tightened and the square is moved to the opposite side of the buttons. If the square is square, the blade will touch both buttons on at each position. Of course, to make machinist buttons you would need a lathe, and the cylinder square is easier to insure squareness of. Further, since the cylinder contacts the blade as a line instead of 2 points, you might rather make a cylinder square to use to make a beam square.
I think the order of needed machines to be built would be: 1) planer; 2) lathe; 3) milling machine. The last could largely be done with the planer and so you might be able to get away without building one. A drilling machine ought to be in there some place. I am sure people have varying opinions on the order. Further, you might need to build several planers, each after the 1st used to make the next until you had one that would not wear out and would stay accurate. (Due to time constraints, the 1st planer might be designed simply enough to last not much longer than required to make the next planer.)
As for the 3 right angle scraping method, no, I don't see anything that would insure squareness - only that they were flat and matched.
Rees
What kind of ahaper is this???
The machine is called a 'planer' and is similar to a shaper in that a single point tool repeatedly cuts straight lines to make plane surfaces. The difference between the two is that for a shaper the tool moves, whereas with a planer the work moves. Both can be thought of as flat lathes.
The term 'shaper' is okay to use to describe a planer, but it is generally not.
Where are you located? I have two mill tables id like done. Thanks
Love the DRO
How good do you want the end result.
Cast iron will move every cut.
Over this length 0•0005 " is as close to flat as possible, even after rotation top and bottom. Grinding is the way to go.
Grinding is the way to go if the ways are hardened, or if you do not wish to scrape it afterwards. However, in order to get the results you suggest when using a grinder it would be very important not to use a magnetic chuck as this will effect the at-rest deflection of the bed. Or if one was used, insure that all surfaces that might be pulled down are supported adequately with shims or jacks - even surfaces a couple of inches from the chuck. The bed must not move or deflect as the magnet is turned on, and that is difficult to insure. If instead the bed is being clamped, you can insure that each clamping spot individually does not move anything.
Personally, I think that if scraping is not a prohibitive factor, than a planer is preferable to a grinder. But I am sure that there are more than one schools of thought on the matter.
As for cast iron movement and overall straightness that you mention, I will leave that discussion for another post if you would like to pursue it.
Rees
Works on stone too.
That dovetail must had been quite rough. But I still can't think of a better way to do this.
@@reesacheson5577 Actually I meant before.
Is the table feed pneumatically operated? That constant hiss of air on every stroke must drive you crazy, listening to that all day?!
The air is used to raise the "Clapper Box" up on the return stroke, but he can't use it here. When cutting into a female dove tail, you have to turn the air off, or else it will raise the tool up into the top of the dovetail. The solenoid valve for the clapper is still working however, and that's the noise you hear in the background. If you watch the last stroke closely, you can see the tool raise up slightly at the end of the last return stroke. He's either extremely good, or extremely lucky, because the tool didn't catch and gouge the top of the dovetail. In either case, he's got nerves of steel, I would have screamed like a little girl! (p.s. I used to love the sounds that a planner made. It was extremely soothing.)
A long A** shaper table. Different from the G&E ram-type that Adam Boot is working on. The part seemed like it was really worn in the center.
Why screw around with a shaper? Put it on a Mattison surface grinder, and make it dead nuts.
That's a good question. And in one way, the answer is obvious: where is anyone going to find a planer in good condition these days? The last planer was made about 60 years ago.
But the second sentence implies that the the Mattison is going to make the bed straighter and more parallel, and that is anything but obvious. With an equally good operator I think the answer sides slightly with your implication, albeit taking longer to do the job and at a much higher cost per hour. And with the grinder the surface does not need to be scraped afterwards - another big advantage in that it is difficult to find anyone who would scrape it.
A big concern with grinding is heat and I responded to a similar question as yours on November, 2021 as to a comment on ua-cam.com/video/tIQlbdKjlbE/v-deo.html, of planing a Southbend. I wrote a long reason why planing might be a better option than grinding. It was in answer to "Weld Machine" who asked why it was not being ground.
It's pretty long answer to a seemingly simple question, and people have different points of view on the matter. However, not many people know very much about planers and so their answer would likely side with grinders, which they are familiar with. I, on the other hand, have never used a way grinder and so the same could be argued for me.
Rees
Imagine the machine doing the work has low spots in it's rails.
I think what you are suggesting is that the planer is merely copying its way surfaces to the work. Therefore the work would contain any flaws that were in the way. And you are correct in that.
(Edit: removed the rest and left it at that)
Rees
Crazy how you can see the low spots in the center do you guys have contact information
How will the NFL be able to compete with this?
Im operator planner machine n wanted job in forn
So THAT'S what a planer gauge is for...
Yes, here you can see it transferring a height to the opposite side to check using an indicator.
It is also (and probably originally) used to set the planer cutting tool to a particular distance from the table: use a micrometer to set the gauge, then lower the tool until the gauge only just slips beneath the tool. Then the tool will cut that thickness.
A planer gauge is stout and will not change dimension once set. I think a great tool!
Rees
@@reesacheson5577
I still have the one I made as an apprentice.
I use it as a paper weight now as I am retired.
😉👍
Y angel 30 35 45
I m plano operator
Слушай , чугун драть в размер и дурак сможет ! ты лучше покажи как резец выстовляешь !?
А в чем проблема?))
Да чтож творят эти станки!! Скоро на хлеб металл намажут