One of the old school tricks I picked up from one of my machinist books was the use of cigarette rolling papers Jan. The Zig Zag brand I have are for all intents almost exactly .001" thick. If you use one at the top and bottom of your square it's not hard to estimate how much pull is required to slide it out from between the squares edge and your part. I think estimating the pull required on each one is very likely accurate to .0002"- .0003" at least. It's an extremely accurate test for parallel and flatness and the price is dirt cheap. They can also be used as an edge or tool point finder on either the mill or lathe. Thicker paper can work, but it's far less accurate since you not sure of the exact amount of compression thicker paper might have. That pennies worth of paper can do some jobs better than even my very expensive Haimer 3D digital edge finder can do.
Not 100 % sure, but I think the base only gives bearing to the outer left and right segments of the column. Worth checking. 🙂 Ah, you already found out.
How rigid is this machine? When totally assembled, does it vibrate when working? I have just bought a brand new ZAY 7045FG and it is the worst machine I have even seen. It vibrates all over even with the smallest end mill cutter of 4mm. Unbelievable. Is that one the same?
Thanks for commenting. This is not my machine, but as far as I can tell, there were some issues with fit and finish. This may be a concern vs rigidity. After scraping the parts this is improved. I can ask the owner how it performa
PS! I assume you have "optimized" the other parameters involved? Ie. tightened down axis not in use, clamped workpiece, milling cutter speed, depth of cut etc. ? Also mounted the machine correctly ie. levelled and clamped to a sturdy foundation?
@@jansverrehaugjord9934 Yes, to all of your questions. I can, with all my strength, try to move the spindle by hand and feel no movement, either laterally or vertically, yet when the machine is in operation, it vibrates. I'm talking about every part of the machine from the milling bit to the table and spindle. An absolute mystery I have never seen before. I can only assume the base of the column is not mounted rigidly to the back of the base of the table body. Can you offer an opinion of this? The machine is painted all over in that area as well but I cannot see any paint splitting between the 2 parts. I would assume if the paint had cracked in that join, it would mean there is movement but there is no cracking.
@@redgum1340 As I am not using such a milling machine myself, I cannot really tell what the limits with respect to its' performance is. However, I suppose you have some sort of "open connection" somewhere, but this can be anything from a loose gib needing adjustment to more serious faults needing professional attention. I do however suspect the machine was tested before shipment so that this is a simple affair. If you are very certain this is not a matter of user error or like I hinted to earlier, then I would try to go through all different parts/assemblies and check thoroughly. If nothing is found, returning the machine might be one option.. or depending on where you are, move up in quality/price
@@jansverrehaugjord9934 Thank you for your thoughts and replies. I think it may be an "open connection" somewhere and I really do need to find it. You are a very patient man and again, I thank you.
For much faster process you can try to use epoxy glue (the slowest cure time) .... soft metal shim (can use annealed copper wire ...or lead .. First .. placed the copper wire sandwiched between the column and the base ... at four corners of the column base .. Then adjust the bolts until the column fully alligned to the base (using the spindle rotation and dial indicator will be easier) .. Then inject the epoxy glue to the gap between column and the base .... and wait until it's fully cured ... Done ... no need for scrapping .... For stronger/more rigid connection between column and the base ... you can try to add chicken wire / metal mosquito mesh ...mixed with eopxy glue .. then sandwiched between column and the base ...acting like ''rebar'' in concrete ..
Thanks for the comments.. and suggestion. I am aware of this and similar methods. There are usually many ways to solve a problem, but I wanted to have the possibility to adjust/remove etc.and consider scraping the surfaces to match superior vs.this suggested method. Properly sraped and mated surfaces in my eyes have the have most rigid metal-to-metal contact possible and will also last as well a be taken apart and if needed adjusted. As long as one can scrape, as I can, there wouldn't be any real reason why this shouldn't be used.
@@jansverrehaugjord9934 Thanks for your reply ... I heard they added very thin layer of wax/non sticky substance ..so the joint can be removed easily .. Am thinking adding 2 wider thick plate ...each one bolted to the column and to the the base to widen contact surface to give more rigidity to the joint ..
@@pooorman-diy1104 Still can't see any advantage in the method IF one can scrape the surfaces 😀, but it is of course up to the individual to decide. It can be that a larger base would have improved the sturdiness/rigidity, but as shown in the video where I test the deflection, this is minimal and in my judgement within any realistic goal for such a construction/hobby mill. Maybe a plate resting on a bigger platform will help, but I am not sure it will how much. If I was to suggest anything, I woud instead anchor the top of the column to the wall. The reasoning behind this is course that you by this methods anchors the point of most deviation and lowers the amplitude of vibrations. Although it should be modelled to verify, this will also poossibly shift the natural frequency of any vibration mode, further helping. But all in all, there is a limit for improving what is a essentially a sizewise maximized hobby mill/drill construction. Given the measures are taken to optimize the surface qualities/geometry issues as this video series was intended to highlight, then I think the next step would be to buy a bigger, more industrial mill
Sorry, but this method with shims and angle is very much error prone. You have everything what you need - place one edge of the angle to the bottom of the column (very firmly), and attach a base of a dial micrometer to the saddle. Then move the saddle alone the column touching another edge of the triangle by the micrometer tip. Of course, the angle precision must be 0 or even 00. And the bottom of column has to be flat before every measurement - this is a sort of overhead of the method.
Thnks for the comment! Will try this also!! This is what I usually do when the pieces are assembled (if I understand you correctly). I am happy to get this within 1-2 /100mm first now and then I asssume I will have to go back and adjust a little when the column and saddle are in place and I can measure this way.
@@jansverrehaugjord9934 There is completely different way to align a column. You can find out on the Stefan Gotteswinter channel (he did it with his Opti MB4 milling machine). Using compound under and measuring in final assembly. I like it much more as it requires less effort (no scraping at all) and can be much more precise.
@@vladimir.tsymbal Will do this test also the way suggested.. as said, when I have it more assembled (don't want to mess with so many things onto the plate.. and I don't have the leadscrews here.) I know Stefan.. he took a scraping class with Richard King that I was arranging down in Denmark and I think he (and we others also of course) learnt a great deal (more) on the topic of machine scraping and alignment. Stefan, Richard, another fellow student and myself also shared a summer house at the beach during this week.. very nice ! PS! I have seen the way Stefan aligns his milling machine column with the use of copper wire etc... clever! But I still want to do it the way I have done. I cannot see how this can be less accurate (as this is also an approach that I have been taught by a professional). I also use the approximate same method of measuring as he shows (this is one of the regular methods as far as I know) and also what we were taught (for ex. by Richard, on several occasions.. along with other ways, including what I have shown here). I will also measure with the compound mounted, but not at this stage when I have everything disassembled, but will do it when I have access to all parts and can run this test properly. It is also what you would want to do prior to taking the machine apart of course.. as I have shown before eg. in the Schaublin SV52 restoration series. Many ways to Rome.. 😀
@@jansverrehaugjord9934 Agree, there are many ways, some of them a long, some are shorter. It's cool that you were among these great guys. I'm not claiming that Stefan's method is most precise, but for the time spent, it is. I also started scaping all parts alone and then putting them together and hoping the axis remains within 0.01 - no way! I'm definitely less patient than you are, and want to get to result faster )) BTW, after all the adventures with Z-axis, I'd start with milling head. It may have a lot of surprises with pinole axis alignment to back-base and so on. Anyway, good luck!
Another great video Jan, thanks for sharing
Thnks
Thanks Jan,
I get the logic here... good video...
Cheers.
Paul,,
Thnks!
One of the old school tricks I picked up from one of my machinist books was the use of cigarette rolling papers Jan. The Zig Zag brand I have are for all intents almost exactly .001" thick. If you use one at the top and bottom of your square it's not hard to estimate how much pull is required to slide it out from between the squares edge and your part. I think estimating the pull required on each one is very likely accurate to .0002"- .0003" at least. It's an extremely accurate test for parallel and flatness and the price is dirt cheap. They can also be used as an edge or tool point finder on either the mill or lathe. Thicker paper can work, but it's far less accurate since you not sure of the exact amount of compression thicker paper might have. That pennies worth of paper can do some jobs better than even my very expensive Haimer 3D digital edge finder can do.
Thnks for the tip. I have never smoked, but can at least buy the paper .. haha. WIll try!
i wonder how much it will tilt forward once the head and motor are fitted?
Yes. That will be intersting to see.
Not 100 % sure, but I think the base only gives bearing to the outer left and right segments of the column. Worth checking. 🙂 Ah, you already found out.
You are correct.. only at the sides so I "overdid" the relief work a bit :) Principle is sound though..
Yes it’s really only some 50 mm at each side.
How rigid is this machine? When totally assembled, does it vibrate when working? I have just bought a brand new ZAY 7045FG and it is the worst machine I have even seen. It vibrates all over even with the smallest end mill cutter of 4mm. Unbelievable. Is that one the same?
Thanks for commenting. This is not my machine, but as far as I can tell, there were some issues with fit and finish. This may be a concern vs rigidity. After scraping the parts this is improved. I can ask the owner how it performa
PS! I assume you have "optimized" the other parameters involved? Ie. tightened down axis not in use, clamped workpiece, milling cutter speed, depth of cut etc. ? Also mounted the machine correctly ie. levelled and clamped to a sturdy foundation?
@@jansverrehaugjord9934 Yes, to all of your questions. I can, with all my strength, try to move the spindle by hand and feel no movement, either laterally or vertically, yet when the machine is in operation, it vibrates. I'm talking about every part of the machine from the milling bit to the table and spindle. An absolute mystery I have never seen before. I can only assume the base of the column is not mounted rigidly to the back of the base of the table body. Can you offer an opinion of this? The machine is painted all over in that area as well but I cannot see any paint splitting between the 2 parts. I would assume if the paint had cracked in that join, it would mean there is movement but there is no cracking.
@@redgum1340 As I am not using such a milling machine myself, I cannot really tell what the limits with respect to its' performance is. However, I suppose you have some sort of "open connection" somewhere, but this can be anything from a loose gib needing adjustment to more serious faults needing professional attention. I do however suspect the machine was tested before shipment so that this is a simple affair. If you are very certain this is not a matter of user error or like I hinted to earlier, then I would try to go through all different parts/assemblies and check thoroughly. If nothing is found, returning the machine might be one option.. or depending on where you are, move up in quality/price
@@jansverrehaugjord9934 Thank you for your thoughts and replies. I think it may be an "open connection" somewhere and I really do need to find it. You are a very patient man and again, I thank you.
For much faster process you can try to use epoxy glue (the slowest cure time) .... soft metal shim (can use annealed copper wire ...or lead ..
First .. placed the copper wire sandwiched between the column and the base ... at four corners of the column base ..
Then adjust the bolts until the column fully alligned to the base (using the spindle rotation and dial indicator will be easier) ..
Then inject the epoxy glue to the gap between column and the base .... and wait until it's fully cured ...
Done ... no need for scrapping ....
For stronger/more rigid connection between column and the base ... you can try to add chicken wire / metal mosquito mesh ...mixed with eopxy glue .. then sandwiched between column and the base ...acting like ''rebar'' in concrete ..
Thanks for the comments.. and suggestion. I am aware of this and similar methods. There are usually many ways to solve a problem, but I wanted to have the possibility to adjust/remove etc.and consider scraping the surfaces to match superior vs.this suggested method. Properly sraped and mated surfaces in my eyes have the have most rigid metal-to-metal contact possible and will also last as well a be taken apart and if needed adjusted. As long as one can scrape, as I can, there wouldn't be any real reason why this shouldn't be used.
@@jansverrehaugjord9934 Thanks for your reply ... I heard they added very thin layer of wax/non sticky substance ..so the joint can be removed easily ..
Am thinking adding 2 wider thick plate ...each one bolted to the column and to the the base to widen contact surface to give more rigidity to the joint ..
@@pooorman-diy1104 Still can't see any advantage in the method IF one can scrape the surfaces 😀, but it is of course up to the individual to decide.
It can be that a larger base would have improved the sturdiness/rigidity, but as shown in the video where I test the deflection, this is minimal and in my judgement within any realistic goal for such a construction/hobby mill. Maybe a plate resting on a bigger platform will help, but I am not sure it will how much. If I was to suggest anything, I woud instead anchor the top of the column to the wall. The reasoning behind this is course that you by this methods anchors the point of most deviation and lowers the amplitude of vibrations. Although it should be modelled to verify, this will also poossibly shift the natural frequency of any vibration mode, further helping. But all in all, there is a limit for improving what is a essentially a sizewise maximized hobby mill/drill construction. Given the measures are taken to optimize the surface qualities/geometry issues as this video series was intended to highlight, then I think the next step would be to buy a bigger, more industrial mill
Sorry, but this method with shims and angle is very much error prone. You have everything what you need - place one edge of the angle to the bottom of the column (very firmly), and attach a base of a dial micrometer to the saddle. Then move the saddle alone the column touching another edge of the triangle by the micrometer tip. Of course, the angle precision must be 0 or even 00. And the bottom of column has to be flat before every measurement - this is a sort of overhead of the method.
Thnks for the comment! Will try this also!! This is what I usually do when the pieces are assembled (if I understand you correctly). I am happy to get this within 1-2 /100mm first now and then I asssume I will have to go back and adjust a little when the column and saddle are in place and I can measure this way.
@@jansverrehaugjord9934 There is completely different way to align a column. You can find out on the Stefan Gotteswinter channel (he did it with his Opti MB4 milling machine). Using compound under and measuring in final assembly. I like it much more as it requires less effort (no scraping at all) and can be much more precise.
@@vladimir.tsymbal Will do this test also the way suggested.. as said, when I have it more assembled (don't want to mess with so many things onto the plate.. and I don't have the leadscrews here.) I know Stefan.. he took a scraping class with Richard King that I was arranging down in Denmark and I think he (and we others also of course) learnt a great deal (more) on the topic of machine scraping and alignment. Stefan, Richard, another fellow student and myself also shared a summer house at the beach during this week.. very nice ! PS! I have seen the way Stefan aligns his milling machine column with the use of copper wire etc... clever! But I still want to do it the way I have done. I cannot see how this can be less accurate (as this is also an approach that I have been taught by a professional). I also use the approximate same method of measuring as he shows (this is one of the regular methods as far as I know) and also what we were taught (for ex. by Richard, on several occasions.. along with other ways, including what I have shown here). I will also measure with the compound mounted, but not at this stage when I have everything disassembled, but will do it when I have access to all parts and can run this test properly. It is also what you would want to do prior to taking the machine apart of course.. as I have shown before eg. in the Schaublin SV52 restoration series. Many ways to Rome.. 😀
@@jansverrehaugjord9934 Agree, there are many ways, some of them a long, some are shorter. It's cool that you were among these great guys.
I'm not claiming that Stefan's method is most precise, but for the time spent, it is. I also started scaping all parts alone and then putting them together and hoping the axis remains within 0.01 - no way! I'm definitely less patient than you are, and want to get to result faster ))
BTW, after all the adventures with Z-axis, I'd start with milling head. It may have a lot of surprises with pinole axis alignment to back-base and so on. Anyway, good luck!
@@vladimir.tsymbal Thnks!