# Mill Tramming Tool.



## BaronJ (Jan 19, 2014)

Hi Guys,


> My current building project is a mill tramming tool.



As I mentioned I have done a drawing for this tool.  There is nothing particular about the materials or the dimensions, however a certain amount of precision is required.  In particular the squareness of the bar in relation to the spindle.  Other than this I used material that I had on hand.

A length of 1 inch square black bar, which I think came from a scraped iron gate.  It just happened to be 205mm (8.125") long and a short length of 15mm BMS.  At least that is what I think it is.  It actually was salvaged from an old printer.  In any case just use what ever is convenient.

The black bar was put on parallels in the mill vice and skimmed to give me a flat reference face then turned over 180 degrees and skimmed on the other side.  Using an edge finder I located the end and center line of the bar.  Then found and dimpled the three holes shown with a centre drill.  I then moved to the drill press and drilled the two outermost holes and reamed to 8mm.

The half inch hole in the middle was done on the lathe.

First I fitted the faceplate and checked for being true.  For this I used a .0005 dial gauge on a magnetic base stood on the lathe bed.  Surprisingly since this had spent the last 30 years or so in a box in a cupboard and I had to clean the horrible grease that was put on it to preserve it, off.  The needle barely budged.

Anyway I put a centre into the tail stock and located the middle dimple to hold the bar against the face plate then clamped it lightly.  Using a wobbler and my dial gauge made sure that I had it properly centered.  Tightened the clamps and re-checked.  It was at this point I realised I hadn't checked to see if the work would rotate without hitting anything.  Phew !  It only just clears on my Myford.  I must make a note that the faceplate is 7 inches in diameter and 8.5 inches will just touch the lathe bed.

At this point it is important to note which side of the bar touches the faceplate.  This is the reference face.

The centre hole is drilled using a centre drill first then 5mm, 6mm so on up to 12mm.  At this point I resorted to the boring bar and a half inch plug gauge.
Since I had already turned the 0.5" spigot on the spindle   I made the hole a good push fit.  Since I am going to use Locktight and cross pin the spigot it doesn't need to be an interference fit.

Back to the milling machine and a 4" x .045" slitting saw to cut the slots through the ends of the bar.  The slot is 24mm deep.  I then using the edge finder and a short length of 8mm silver steel rod, centered and cross drilled 3.2mm holes, tapped 4mm and counter bored for M4 x .75" cap screws.

Whilst I was turning the spindle I also drilled and reamed a 6mm hole about 15mm deep in the end.  This is to hold a small pointed piece.  But more about this later.

PDF Drawing attached. 

View attachment Mill Tramming Tool.01.pdf


----------



## Walltoddj (Jan 19, 2014)

Nice job that's basically what I had in tended on doing but a little longer to span the 9" table on my Bridgeport, looks good and it should be solid so it actually go to a tens indicator if needed. If you get any of the magazines they show one similar for sale by Pro Tram


----------



## Sshire (Jan 19, 2014)

Good one.  I have the Pro-tram and wouldn't be without it.
A few years ago, John Moore (Bogstandard) did a great build log on one.
For various reasons, John's pics have been removed by him, but Stew Hart did a build log of John's device

http://madmodder.net/index.php?topic=1077.0


----------



## RonGinger (Jan 19, 2014)

I have seen this ad, but I dont get it. How does it work?


----------



## BaronJ (Jan 20, 2014)

Sshire said:


> Good one.  I have the Pro-tram and wouldn't be without it.
> A few years ago, John Moore (Bogstandard) did a great build log on one.
> For various reasons, John's pics have been removed by him, but Stew Hart did a build log of John's device
> 
> http://madmodder.net/index.php?topic=1077.0




Thanks for that link.  I had no idea that there were other posts on making a tramming tool.


----------



## BaronJ (Jan 20, 2014)

Hi Guys,

It seems that there are some other posts detailing the making of this tool.  Some of the techniques that others have used were also used by me.  I haven't had chance to take any photos of mine yet, but I will post them as soon as I can.

In the meantime you will see that I shaped the cross bar into a elongated diamond shape.  Apart from its appearance the shaping was done in order to reduce the amount of material the M4 cap screws had to move in order to secure the dial gauge stems.

The way that I created the shape was to place a pin in the centre and one in the outside holes.  Using the centre pin as a pivot I raised the end by placing a piece of 1/4" tool steel underneath.  Using a fly cutter I made a number of passes until the cut got roughly level with the edge of the centre pin.  I didn't bother trying to work out a particular angle since all I needed to do was make the ends thinner.

As an aside I also discovered that my mill vice pushed the work piece up on one side a fraction, even though I snugged it down with a leather hide mallet.

Note to self:  Must get a decent mill vice !

I've got a pair of 0.01" dial gauges on order.  I had thought of getting metric ones but the price is considerably higher.  Another thing I found these imperial gauges have a metric stem of 8mm diameter.  Which I find most odd since my Mercer has a 9/16ths" stem.

I still have some work to do before the tool is finished.  There are a couple of parts still to be made.  One of these is the spindle centre centre pin.  No its not a spelling error.

You will note that I drilled a 6mm hole in the spindle.  I intend to fit a hardened steel pin into it with one end ground to a shallow point, a bit like a centre punch.  The idea is that by placing a bolt with a dimple turned in the head, placed in a T nut and nipped in the mill table, the point of the tramming tool can be located.  Then by adjusting the table position the head can be precisely adjusted for tram. 

At least that is the idea.  I've started on a drawing for these parts though the dimensions for the T nut and bolt will depend upon your particular machine.

More later.


----------



## BaronJ (Jan 20, 2014)

Walltoddj said:


> Nice job that's basically what I had in tended on doing but a little longer to span the 9" table on my Bridgeport, looks good and it should be solid so it actually go to a tens indicator if needed. If you get any of the magazines they show one similar for sale by Pro Tram



Nice picture !  But the price, ouch.

I've ordered two 1" inch travel 0.001 dial gauges with 8mm spindles for mine.


----------



## BaronJ (Jan 21, 2014)

Hi Guys,

Just a quick update.  I've taken a photo of the bits including the bit of tool steel I used for packing and the bit of 6mm rod that still needs to have a point put on one end.  The two white parts are the plates that I made to hold the 1" square bar to the face plate.  They are only there because the spindle kept rolling off whilst I was trying to take the picture.

The dial gauges still haven't turned up yet so I can't take and post a picture of the finished item yet.

I have decided that since its unlikely that everyone will have the same T nut size for the mill table, not to bother with the drawing.  Its production is not vital.  Its only purpose is to make it easier to shift the mill head to get it spot on.  However if anyone wants a sketch...


----------



## Walltoddj (Jan 22, 2014)

I've two 1" indicators but I'm thinking of using an R8-5/8-18 adaptor or maybe just a 3/4" bar. I like the idea of the shoulder on the adaptor so there is no movement of the main bar. Also I was thinking how do you tram a head with the spindle up or down, just a thought I've done it both ways with out thinking about it, but with the spindle extended it seems you would get better results because the farther away from the pivot will multiply the error reading does that sound right? It would be like a taper at 6" say .010" taper but at 12" it would be .020" so you can get a better tram.

Todd


----------



## Swifty (Jan 22, 2014)

I see how your thinking Todd, but if you have a certain gap with the spindle up, it will be the same gap with it fully extended.

If you have the spindle extended though, it will be slightly more accurate reading the dials because of the greater distance from the pivot point.

Paul.


----------



## BaronJ (Jan 23, 2014)

Hi Todd,
For the spindle why not use an R8 blank end arbour ?  There is nothing sacrosanct about the size of the centre hole.  You would have to be able to put the arbour into the lathe chuck (4Jaw) and ensure that it is true.  Then turn it down to the size you want.  Then after fitting the bar. Then its time to skim the bottom of the bar until it is true to the arbour.

What you say about the hight of the head is correct !  However any slight play in the quill will cause an error.  Now you have to decide if that error is acceptable.

I've still to finish mine and I'm still waiting for the dial gauges to turn up...:wall:


----------



## Walltoddj (Jan 23, 2014)

BaronJ said:


> Hi Todd,
> For the spindle why not use an R8 blank end arbour ?  There is nothing sacrosanct about the size of the centre hole.  You would have to be able to put the arbour into the lathe chuck (4Jaw) and ensure that it is true.  Then turn it down to the size you want.  Then after fitting the bar. Then its time to skim the bottom of the bar until it is true to the arbour.
> 
> What you say about the hight of the head is correct !  However any slight play in the quill will cause an error.  Now you have to decide if that error is acceptable.
> ...



Yes that will work I just fell if I'm buying one get it with the shoulder so it can be seated and flush. I might just use a straight shank turned from some bar stock I've got. Still trying to get my heat working better in the shop it's in the 20's today but I've managed to keep the shop at 55 deg which is better that the 40's it was at.


----------



## BaronJ (Jan 23, 2014)

Hi Todd,

As I mentioned I've not finished mine yet.  But I will put the bar back onto the lathe faceplate and true it up then skim the shaft down to 14mm so that I can either use it in a 14mm collet or in the 16mm chuck.

I know what you mean about it being a bit cold.  You definitely don't want cold fingers, or feet for that matter, whilst operating machinery.  The only heating I have is a night frost heater, just to stop things getting so cold that condensation occurs.  So far the workshop hasn't dropped below 48F even with the minus 4F (28F) the other morning.  2" inches of insulation all round and 10" in the ceiling helps.


----------



## Omnimill (Jan 24, 2014)

I've never worked as a machinist but was taught by a time served one to straighten the head on a milling machine by using a piece of bent rod clamped in the quill.
These tramming tools are very pretty (I like buying tools when I can afford them!) and if I had money burning a hole then I might buy one. If I worked in a production environment though I might try to find a quicker way.
A CV joint from a van, trued up in the lathe could be mounted in the quill. Loosten the mill head then raise the table till it comes into contact with the underside of the joint. Tighten the head, job done. Of course, an old CV joint from the breakers yard doesn't look as pretty though does it ...

http://image.made-in-china.com/2f0j...-CV-Joint-Constant-Velocity-Joint-MZ-004-.jpg

Then again you could always make yourself a fancy version. I would if I had the materials and a big enough lathe.


----------



## Swifty (Jan 24, 2014)

I've always used the "bent rod clamped in a chuck" method, with one indicator. However I can see the benifits of a 2 indicator tramming attachment, it would be so much quicker not having to constantly swing the arm with the indicator to double check the other end.

Paul.


----------



## Charles Lamont (Jan 24, 2014)

BaronJ said:


> As an aside I also discovered that my mill vice pushed the work piece up on one side a fraction, even though I snugged it down with a leather hide mallet.
> 
> Note to self:  Must get a decent mill vice !



Save your money. This is normal. Use a roller, or better a 'pull-down' between the moving jaw and the job.


----------



## Charles Lamont (Jan 24, 2014)

Swifty said:


> I've always used the "bent rod clamped in a chuck" method, with one indicator. However I can see the benifits of a 2 indicator tramming attachment, it would be so much quicker not having to constantly swing the arm with the indicator to double check the other end.
> 
> Paul.



Surely you have to swing this double indicator job round at least once anyway to check it is reading right?


----------



## Walltoddj (Jan 24, 2014)

I've used the bent rod for years I just fell that I can do a better job and a lot faster with the two indicators. If we wanted to have a true square in the shop we used the Cincinnati Mills or the Hydro ( tell) not the correct spelling it's been a while but the spindle was always ture on those mills because it could not changed.

Todd


----------



## BaronJ (Jan 24, 2014)

Walltoddj said:


> I've used the bent rod for years I just fell that I can do a better job and a lot faster with the two indicators. If we wanted to have a true square in the shop we used the Cincinnati Mills or the Hydro ( tell) not the correct spelling it's been a while but the spindle was always ture on those mills because it could not changed.
> 
> Todd



Whilst I can see and appreciate how the bent rod method works it seems a very messy way of doing it.

Re the Cincinnati Mills an their ilk.  I went to an auction a little while back there was a couple of big machines and some shapers.   Not a single bid for any of them.  Crying shame to see the scrappies breaking them up with sledge hammers.


----------



## Swifty (Jan 24, 2014)

Charles Lamont said:


> Surely you have to swing this double indicator job round at least once anyway to check it is reading right?



That would be correct Charles, I assume when using them you have to confirm that the indicators are set properly. I never knew that these tramming tools existed until seeing them here. To my knowledge they have never been available from Australian tooling suppliers.

Paul.


----------



## Omnimill (Jan 24, 2014)

Charles Lamont said:


> Surely you have to swing this double indicator job round at least once anyway to check it is reading right?



You won't be able to see the gauges then! ;D


----------



## Wizard69 (Jan 24, 2014)

BaronJ said:


> Whilst I can see and appreciate how the bent rod method works it seems a very messy way of doing it.
> 
> Re the Cincinnati Mills an their ilk.  I went to an auction a little while back there was a couple of big machines and some shapers.   Not a single bid for any of them.  Crying shame to see the scrappies breaking them up with sledge hammers.




Why didn't you bid on them?   It is really the only way to save our industrial history.


----------



## Walltoddj (Jan 24, 2014)

BaronJ yes it is a shame but GM did the same thing and scraped machines, a few were not destroyed like GM wanted because I own a mill and a grinder from AC Delco which is GM.

Charles and Swifty I to would assume that you would have to swing them around to see what is what, I read something about how to set them up I'll have to look again but this time save it. I found the easy way is to use a mirror that is how I was trained to pick up the center lines on our injection molds when we set them up to mill and to check location from time to time.

Found it   [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-D1gNYPi3A[/ame]    very simple to set up!!!
Todd


----------



## Wizard69 (Jan 24, 2014)

Charles Lamont said:


> Surely you have to swing this double indicator job round at least once anyway to check it is reading right?




I never understood the double indicator tool myself.  Since day one the only accepted way to check tramming was to spin the spindle with an indicator mounted in it.  You want to be swinging a fairly decent radius too.  

By the way day one for me was working as a mechanics helper on machines that where hand scrapped to get tramming in correctly.   None of this tilting the head to square it with the table.  Hard work when the saddles weigh much more than you do.


----------



## Omnimill (Jan 25, 2014)

Wizard69 said:


> You want to be swinging a fairly decent radius too.



Agreed. The reason I think the commercial units are so small is so that they can be used to check the X and Y axis on big mills with compound heads. I guess most hobbyists have more modest machines with heads that only tilt in one direction. My single head tool is effectively at least three times as long once rotated. It does take a little while to use it though. I still prefer this idea, similar to what I had in my mind except not as robust.

http://www.eztram.com/product_results.asp?ID=16


----------



## BaronJ (Jan 25, 2014)

Omnimill said:


> You won't be able to see the gauges then! ;D



If you have made the tool accurately you will only need to look at it from the front.  When setting the tool up for the first time, swinging the tool round the other way would be a means of checking that your work was accurate.  That is assuming that the mill was properly trammed in the first place.

I'll do another post on setting up later.


----------



## necchiom (Jan 25, 2014)

Hi folks. Today I finished mine. Here it is!
The most important thing is the perpendicularity between the D12 main hole and the bottom surface so all holes axes parallelism.
Gouge datum/reset is easy using the inspection surface plate. 







View attachment Tramming.pdf


----------



## BaronJ (Jan 25, 2014)

Wizard69 said:


> Why didn't you bid on them?   It is really the only way to save our industrial history.



Hi Wizard,

At the time they were of no use to me, nor could I have housed them or provided the 3 phase supply at the loading required.  In any case my XYL would have had my guts for violin strings if I had come home with any of them.

However I do agree with your sentiment.  I recently discovered that a foreign consortium was currently touring auctions and factories that were closing and buying up all sorts of machinery shipping it abroad, servicing and repairing it, selling it in their country, then using it to make goods that are then sold back to us.


----------



## BaronJ (Jan 25, 2014)

BaronJ said:


> If you have made the tool accurately you will only need to look at it from the front.  When setting the tool up for the first time, swinging the tool round the other way would be a means of checking that your work was accurate.  That is assuming that the mill was properly trammed in the first place.
> 
> I'll do another post on setting up later.



Hi Todd,

Thanks for that video...  Saves me having to explain.


----------



## BaronJ (Jan 25, 2014)

necchiom said:


> Hi folks. Today I finished mine. Here it is!
> The most important thing is the perpendicularity between the D12 main hole and the bottom surface so all holes axes parallelism.
> Gouge datum/reset is easy using the inspection surface plate.



Very nicely done.  I like the sculpting out.


----------



## barnesrickw (Jan 25, 2014)

I picked up the latest issue of Machinist's Workshop magazine.  They have an article on making one of these from old Stanley combination squares.  They are not nearly as nice looking.


----------



## Wizard69 (Jan 26, 2014)

Omnimill said:


> Agreed. The reason I think the commercial units are so small is so that they can be used to check the X and Y axis on big mills with compound heads. I guess most hobbyists have more modest machines with heads that only tilt in one direction. My single head tool is effectively at least three times as long once rotated. It does take a little while to use it though. I still prefer this idea, similar to what I had in my mind except not as robust.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.eztram.com/product_results.asp?ID=16




The way I see it those tools are basically useless.   You can make any mill setup look good if you swing a small diameter.


----------



## Swifty (Jan 26, 2014)

I suppose the ideal tramming tool to suit the mill that you have will have the indicators set to the maximum practical width of your mill table on the Y axis. Even using only one indicator, I only ever set it up to suit the Y axis width of my table.

Paul.


----------



## Omnimill (Jan 26, 2014)

Wizard69 said:


> The way I see it those tools are basically useless.   You can make any mill setup look good if you swing a small diameter.



It's designed for a mini mill so can't be too much bigger. The bigger unit designed for full size mills has at least the same size swing as the twin gauge units.


----------



## Walltoddj (Jan 26, 2014)

Omnimill said:


> It's designed for a mini mill so can't be too much bigger. The bigger unit designed for full size mills has at least the same size swing as the twin gauge units.



Yes they have different sizes the setup that necchiom and BaronJ made or have plans for are to small for my use I have a 9" table and a compound head so my machine would need a bigger span. Wizard69 it's all about making what suits your needs as we've said we use a bent bar to tram for years but if this will save me time and maybe be more accurate then what have I got to lose by making one? I think in my own case it will be handy because I move the head a lot to accommodate my jobs and needs, when I get the second mill up and running maybe I will not have this problem.

Todd


----------



## BaronJ (Jan 26, 2014)

Walltoddj said:


> Yes they have different sizes the setup that necchiom and BaronJ made or have plans for are to small for my use I have a 9" table and a compound head so my machine would need a bigger span. Wizard69 it's all about making what suits your needs as we've said we use a bent bar to tram for years but if this will save me time and maybe be more accurate then what have I got to lose by making one? I think in my own case it will be handy because I move the head a lot to accommodate my jobs and needs, when I get the second mill up and running maybe I will not have this problem.
> 
> Todd



Hi Todd,  Guys,
Yes  I agree there is no great advantage to making one that is too short, or too long, since you then end up in the realm of not being able to adjust to that microscopic fraction, though I have to admit that it didn't occur to me that I might want/need to check if the head of the mill nodds at all.  My mill table is 150mm wide.  However it was pointed out to me that mine was too big for the table width.  No problem it just means that I will have to do two checks to see if the mill nodds.  Though I would be a little perturbed if it did.


----------



## Walltoddj (Jan 26, 2014)

Don't feel bad I had to think about mine again my t-slot is in the middle of the table. I'd thought about making mine with adjustable arms to give a better read on the length of the table.

Todd


----------



## Wizard69 (Jan 26, 2014)

Walltoddj said:


> Yes they have different sizes the setup that necchiom and BaronJ made or have plans for are to small for my use I have a 9" table and a compound head so my machine would need a bigger span. Wizard69 it's all about making what suits your needs as we've said we use a bent bar to tram for years but if this will save me time and maybe be more accurate then what have I got to lose by making one? I think in my own case it will be handy because I move the head a lot to accommodate my jobs and needs, when I get the second mill up and running maybe I will not have this problem.
> 
> Todd




Just a couple of notes: 
Sweeping a large diameter makes it easier to tram in your head not harder.   Any deviation from ideal is magnified by the long sweep distance.  

You are right that the machine needs to setup to meet your needs.  If one never uses a fly cutter or other cutter sweeping a large diameter a perfectly. square spindle might not be seen as a big deal.


----------



## Walltoddj (Jan 26, 2014)

Wizard69 said:


> Just a couple of notes:
> Sweeping a large diameter makes it easier to tram in your head not harder.   Any deviation from ideal is magnified by the long sweep distance.
> 
> You are right that the machine needs to setup to meet your needs.  If one never uses a fly cutter or other cutter sweeping a large diameter a perfectly. square spindle might not be seen as a big deal.



Even if you use a 1/2" mill to cut a surface in more than one pass you will end up with a step or the amount you are out of tram. Yes the larger the sweep the less you'll be out?

Todd


----------



## Swifty (Jan 26, 2014)

Wizard69 said:


> Just a couple of notes:
> Sweeping a large diameter makes it easier to tram in your head not harder.   Any deviation from ideal is magnified by the long sweep distance.
> 
> You are right that the machine needs to setup to meet your needs.  If one never uses a fly cutter or other cutter sweeping a large diameter a perfectly. square spindle might not be seen as a big deal.



If you are drilling holes and using short and long drills, or moving the table up and down a lot (on those mills with a knee) the head needs to be trammed as the hole position will change with the quill or knee movement.

Paul.


----------



## BaronJ (Jan 27, 2014)

Walltoddj said:


> Don't feel bad I had to think about mine again my t-slot is in the middle of the table. I'd thought about making mine with adjustable arms to give a better read on the length of the table.
> 
> Todd



Hi Todd,

A trick that might help is to use a sheet of glass laid on the table.  You need a glass from an old scrapped scanner.  Don't attempt to cut it to size, it will just shatter into a million pieces.

I don't like the adjustable arms idea !  You would introduce too many variables.  A single gauge and a long arm would be better.


----------



## BaronJ (Jan 27, 2014)

Hi Guys,

Just a quick note to let you know that my dial gauges turned up this afternoon...
Well I had to unpack them and have a look.  Two different gauges !  Both 1" travel by 0.001".  It turns out that the mounting spindle is not 8mm.  Its actually 3/8" diameter.

I'm not going to alter the drawing but it would pay to double check the mounting spindle diameter before drilling and reaming.

So I have to set everything back up drill out to 3/8" and ream the holes all over again. :wall::wall:  I was hoping that I could get on fitting the spindle and truing it up.  Maybe tomorrow. !


----------



## Walltoddj (Jan 30, 2014)

BaronJ said:


> Hi Guys,
> 
> Just a quick note to let you know that my dial gauges turned up this afternoon...
> Well I had to unpack them and have a look.  Two different gauges !  Both 1" travel by 0.001".  It turns out that the mounting spindle is not 8mm.  Its actually 3/8" diameter.
> ...




I've had about 5 indicators from past buys and mine are 3/8" I had to make a holder for my mag base I thought about using my digitals and I may try them just to see but they are slow to react that is why we stopped using them on spindle at work. I hear what all the post are saying but if I key the arms them bolt them tight it will not be a problem. Watch the video and you will see it doesn't make any difference if the arms are not the same or if the arbor is is not square and true because you set the indicators once it's in the mill that's why I like the idea. What it does is lets you move the head to "0" with out turning the spindle and I hope it gets it a little better. I guess I'll see when I get back to work in the shop to darn cold and just got a $400 bill for propane.


----------



## BaronJ (Jan 31, 2014)

Hi Todd,
It was just annoying !  Not only was the mounting spindle size wrong but I got sent two different gauges.  OK they were both the same specification.  Anyway it turns out that one gauge spindle is 1/4" longer than the other.  So ended up trying to physically adjust one gauge so that it is that much higher than the other to get the probes at the same level.  I managed to get about a five or six thou difference in them.

Then I calibrated them for zero on the lathe with the spindle in the three jaw.  So I hope that they should be pretty close.  I've yet to check the mill and see how far its out.

Fine on the propane bill !  $400 ouch.  I only have a frost heater in the workshop...
Touch Wood !  Its not dropped below 48F in there yet.  However its very very wet and its just started to rain again.

Indecently the sluggish gauges they can be stripped and cleaned.  You just need to watch what you are doing and be careful with the screws.  Its often the stylus shaft that has become dirty and dirt has got into it.  An ultrasonic cleaning bath works wonders.


----------



## Walltoddj (Jan 31, 2014)

It's not the gauge it's the electronics two of the same gauges B&S do the same thing we all stopped using them to true up cam bars in the CNC machines at GM.
Sorry to hear about your gauge problem hope you get it all worked out, I'll be getting back to the shop this weekend I hope was in the 40's F today so getting better hate to waste the propane if I don't need to.

Todd


----------



## BaronJ (Feb 1, 2014)

Hi Todd,

I didn't realise that you were talking about the electronics.  Anyway I got a fair bit further on.  And learnt a lot about my mill in the process !  I'll come back to that later.

Photos:
One of the nearly completed tool.  One of a test after setting my mill and two of the different gauges.  One on the right and one on the left.

I also discovered another use for this tool that may be of interest to lathe users.  But it was accidental rather than a deliberate thought.


----------



## BaronJ (Feb 1, 2014)

As can be seen from the top picture the two gauges are at slightly different heights and the zero marks are not quite at 12 o'clock on one of them.  Still getting within five or six thou by hand is not bad.

The bottom two pictures are close ups of the two gauges so that the differences between them can be seen.  I think they were made by two different manufacturers although they came in identical packaging with identical instruction leaflets.

Setting up:
I set one gauge and secured it then fitted the other one and had to set its position in the bar slightly higher, about 6mm, in order for the probes to touch the work surface at the same time.  I initially did this in the lathe.  It seemed obvious to do it like this, since I still had the faceplate screwed onto the lathe spindle.  I put the tramming tool into the tailstock chuck and using the tailstock feed moved the tool so that both probes touched the faceplate.  Then I zeroed both gauges.

It was whilst doing this I realised that if the lathe bed wasn't true then the gauges would be out.  So I rotated the whole thing 180 degrees.  Yep !  Using a mirror I could see that the zeros had moved.  Not far but enough that you could see the change.  So I zeroed the gauges again and turned the whole thing back round.

It was at this point that it hit me !  I could adjust the lathe bed with this tool.  Though I hadn't realised that I was turning tapered.  So I used the setting method shown in the video.  Got both gauges reading the same and setting the tramming tool parallel to the lathe bed adjusted the lathe to be true.  A test bar 3/4" diameter was put in the chuck and a skim taken.  Half a thou over about 10" inches from one end to the other. 

So back to the mill.  I'll go into that later.


----------



## rotorhead (Feb 1, 2014)

Hi Folks,

I built a tramm from some other usable parts plus 2 new gauges, luckily both came as ordered and exactly the same (thank you Arc).

Setting up is done by adjusting each dial to a single reference point on the table, then trying the setup in either direction on the table using a ground parallel to span the 'T' slots.





The column is a long reach boring bar made up to fit a Clarkson Autolock chuck @ 1.25" diameter.
Cross bar is just bit of 25mm En24t, drilled, split and threaded 1/4" BSW for clamp screws.





This is the original finding, 0.003" over 8"










As can be seen I was able to true up the head on my Universal miller, to aid a more exacting machining operation.


----------



## BaronJ (Feb 2, 2014)

rotorhead said:


> Hi Folks,
> 
> I built a tramm from some other usable parts plus 2 new gauges, luckily both came as ordered and exactly the same (thank you Arc).
> 
> ...



I see you managed to get two identical gauges !  Jammy


----------



## BaronJ (Feb 2, 2014)

Hi Guys,

Well I got the mill trammed up with some difficulty !

I found that simply tightening the gib locks on the column changed the readings several thou so I set the tram with the column locked.  I also locked the spindle whilst tramming as well.

I found that it was very difficult to tighten the securing nuts on the mill headstock without the head moving.  Eventually I found that if I nipped both nuts and used a rubber mallet to tap the head and nipped the nuts some more I could get it almost perfect.  Certainly within a needles thickness.

Loosing the column locks did cause the tram to alter but it returned to tram when they were tightened again.  But you would tighten the column gibs anyway when milling.

The photos show my mill and the gauges.


----------



## barnesrickw (Feb 2, 2014)

So a touch over 0.001 out.  Do you adjust that, or is that good over that span?  And how accurate is the tram?  Don't have a mill and have never used one.  


Sent from my iPad using Model Engines


----------



## BaronJ (Feb 2, 2014)

barnesrickw said:


> So a touch over 0.001 out.  Do you adjust that, or is that good over that span?  And how accurate is the tram?  Don't have a mill and have never used one.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Model Engines



Hi Rick,
There is little point in trying to get better than the thickness of the needle since tightening or loosening the column gib locks will shift it a couple of thou.  So I set the tram with them tightened up.  You wouldn't mill with the gibs left loose anyway.

One thing I have noticed having made this tool and used it to set up the mill, just how sensitive it is and how poor the rigidity of the square mill column is.  Also the mill head nodds forward about 2 - 2.5 thou.  So I suspect that when milling the cutting forces will tend to push the head up a fraction.

Many years ago a had a "Denford" mill.  Basically a mini version of the famous "Bridgeport".  A really superb machine.  Unfortunately I had to let it go.  I had nowhere to put it when I moved.  Even if I had I didn't have access to a three phase supply.


----------



## barnesrickw (Feb 3, 2014)

I think the tram is 8"?  If so that would be less than 0.0003 over two inches.  I want to say that's really good, and trying to get closer to than that falls into the error caused by other issues; A dulling tool, tool deflection, runout on the machine.  Is that a safe assumption?  


Sent from my iPad using Model Engines


----------



## Omnimill (Feb 3, 2014)

Do you actually need the gauges! If the bottom of the horizontal part is square to the shaft perhaps just ensuring it's flat on the table would be good enough?


----------



## BaronJ (Feb 3, 2014)

barnesrickw said:


> I think the tram is 8"?  If so that would be less than 0.0003 over two inches.  I want to say that's really good, and trying to get closer to than that falls into the error caused by other issues; A dulling tool, tool deflection, runout on the machine.  Is that a safe assumption?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Model Engines



Hi Rick,
Yes you are right !  Particularly on a small machine like mine, I have to accept that there will always be some error.  The machine is just not rigid enough to say otherwise.


----------



## BaronJ (Feb 3, 2014)

Omnimill said:


> Do you actually need the gauges! If the bottom of the horizontal part is square to the shaft perhaps just ensuring it's flat on the table would be good enough?



Hi Omnimill,
There is at least one device on sale that is just that.  A shaft with an accurately turned disc that is placed in the machine chuck and the loosened head brought down until the disc lays flat on the table, then the head tightened up.


----------



## BaronJ (Feb 5, 2014)

barnesrickw said:


> I think the tram is 8"?  If so that would be less than 0.0003 over two inches.  I want to say that's really good, and trying to get closer to than that falls into the error caused by other issues; A dulling tool, tool deflection, runout on the machine.  Is that a safe assumption?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Model Engines



Hi Rick,
I'm happy with the tram on my machine now.  (photo)

You are right about other issues.  I've just been through skimming the machine vice jaws top.  Horror !  I got a couple of thou difference from one edge to the other.  OK I used a fly cutter that wasn't up to the job.  Did the same skim with a good face mill and that two thou disappeared.  The picture shows the surface finish from a 1 mm cut across 2" BMS.  The photo makes it look worse than it really is.


----------



## Walltoddj (Feb 5, 2014)

BaronJ said:


> Hi Rick,
> I'm happy with the tram on my machine now.  (photo)
> 
> You are right about other issues.  I've just been through skimming the machine vice jaws top.  Horror !  I got a couple of thou difference from one edge to the other.  OK I used a fly cutter that wasn't up to the job.  Did the same skim with a good face mill and that two thou disappeared.  The picture shows the surface finish from a 1 mm cut across 2" BMS.  The photo makes it look worse than it really is.



Depending on the Vise jaws are they hard, are they junk steel, I've got hardened jaw in some of my vises and I've soft jaw in the cheap ones. So depending on the jaw it could be your problem I've found myself grinding the jaws for a better finish.

Todd


----------



## barnesrickw (Feb 5, 2014)

I've used a lapping plate and various grits of AlO2 wet/dry sandpaper to take milling marks out.  As long as the surface is flat, it laps nicely. 


Sent from my iPad using Model Engines


----------



## BaronJ (Feb 5, 2014)

Walltoddj said:


> Depending on the Vise jaws are they hard, are they junk steel, I've got hardened jaw in some of my vises and I've soft jaw in the cheap ones. So depending on the jaw it could be your problem I've found myself grinding the jaws for a better finish.
> 
> Todd



Hi Todd,
The vice is all cast iron, its a "Record 414" from around the 70s.  Its been machined two or three times in its life.  But I agree there must be one end that is harder because it deflected the fly cutter leaving one end 2 thou proud.


----------



## BaronJ (Feb 5, 2014)

barnesrickw said:


> I've used a lapping plate and various grits of AlO2 wet/dry sandpaper to take milling marks out.  As long as the surface is flat, it laps nicely.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Model Engines



Hi Rick,
Give me a chance   I've only just got the mill properly trammed.  I haven't gotten that far yet...


----------



## BaronJ (Feb 27, 2014)

Hi Guys,
Had a chance to do some more work on the mill tramming tool.  I had a number of 2" x 3" x 9" pine offcuts kicking around, so I decided to plane and sand the wide sides of them flat then glue them all together to make a large block.  See photos.  They have been drying for several days now so the block was ready to be planed and sanded.  I used the tramming tool as a template and simply drew around it with a pencil.  After doing that I then used a spade drill to remove as much wood as I could.  I used a large 35mm spade bit to open out the holes where the gauges will eventually go and then a washer cutter to get near to final size.  The cutout is about 40mm deep.  All the other bits of wood were cut away with a sharp chisel.  Its still very rough yet, so there is a lot to do.


----------



## BaronJ (Mar 2, 2014)

The wood block carving out is now finished.  I have ordered a pair of replacement dial gauges so that I will have two that are the same.  When I get them I will continue with fitting out and making the rest of the storage box.


----------

