How then would you check the alignment of the HS and then proceed to correcting twist? ie how do you tell if the misalignment is from the headstock or a twist in the bed.
Before I would do anything with the headstock I would check the tail stock. If not using the tailstock, then check the chuck, You can lift the headstock on most lathes maybe clean the ways and carefully reset it. This requires a lot of work. And I would try to get a hold of the manufacture and ask what adjustments and checks they recommend. Its easy to really mess an alignment up without the tools to set it up.Does anyone know how to adjust the Headstock Alignment on an Optimum TU2807V Lathe
I checked out the link and had a look at all their Lathes and mine appears similar in construction and size to the Precision Matthews PM-1030VI kind of chuckled when you use the word 'just'. This entire post is actually quite typical of many similar 'lathe levelling' posts one encounters on hobbyist forums. Its a familiar script. Someone notices they have taper cutting issue & the immediate solution offered is to jack the feet & twist the bed. The lathe type often does not even come up in in discussion as a qualifier. Or if it does, few people recognize that the HS is bolted to the ways & any misalignment there may well be the dominant if not entire source of taper cutting discrepancy. Then there is mysterious absence of the operator/parts manual even mentioning adjustment screws being there. If one has a larger lathe, say in 14" range, pulling the HS off & shimming is not exactly a trivial job although I recognize hobbyist skill sets vary. I'd certainly want to be sure before embarking down that path. Which is is exactly why a MT test bar is a valuable asset.
Just a guess on my part but maybe 20-30 years ago the chance of a hobbyist lathe being of the 'integrated' type (where no spindle alignment correction is possible) was certainly much higher than today. And yes, in that case you are stuck with what you have. Lathe twist is the only option & this presumes other factors like wear are good or minimal. But I would venture to guess a much higher percentage of hobby lathes in shops today are of the bolt-on style. Here is a popular vendor, quite typical of others including say Grizzly or other Asian importers. I count a dozen lathes from the smallest up to and including 14" swing which are bolt-on HS. Now if the factory did their job 100% and/or we have verified ourselves that HS is perfectly aligned in both vertical & horizontal plane, then we have arrived at the equivalent point of an 'integrated' lathe and hopefully relatively minor bed twist alteration may remedy remaining slight taper cutting. But if you have HS alignment problem & ignore it, and proceed to lathe twist, you are possibly attempting to fix the wrong problem or overcompensating which isn't the best solution. Of course this is a hobby so everyone is welcome to proceed as they see best. I'm just offering another perspective to the discussion.
https://www.precisionmatthews.com/product-category/lathes/12-14-swing/
The Lathe has hardly been used so their is no twist or wear in the bed as I have already checked this with a precision machine level, also the head stock is removable and as far as I can see the problem is only the alignment of the head stock which appears to have moved.That's a great question & maybe wordy answer, but I will try. Have a look at the picture I included in post#4 & the related description of how a test bar can be used. I attached picture of mine. Depending on your lathe you can use an MT sleeve adapter or just just buy the appropriate MT taper ended test bar. My spindle is MT5 so I use the MT3/MT5 adapter which I have confirmed is accurate. This allows me to use the MT3 test bar for subsequent tail stock work.
Pre-qualifiers: this relates to lathes of the type with removable HS where HS deviation is possible. This also assumes a newish machine with straight ways. The beds have not eroded away a hollow close to chuck. If that's the case, all bets are off, setup can only be a tradeoff compromise relative to chuck distance. Its an additional problem. And this discussion has zero to do with tailstock alignment. The TS must not be integrated into this initial test.
Personally, I think its best to get the bed as reasonably close to begin with even if it means somewhat undoing a prior setup. Why? because this is the very same datum surface that our DTI will ride along via the carriage when measuring the test bar pointing out into space completely independent of the ways. So as best you can, confirm the bed is not bending upward or downward relative to HS when viewed from side. And also is not twisting CW or CCW relative to HS when viewed from end. Unfortunately ($) to do this right is best accomplished with a precision level.
The test bar locates snugly into the HS MT socket and the extended portion exaggerates the HS axis relative to the 'mean' initial bed axis. Traverse an indicator down the length of the bar, both along the horizontal plane & vertical plane. We are attempting to discern if HS spindle axis is pointing inward/outward viewed from top and/or upward/downward viewed from the side relative to ways. If significant axis deviation is noted and dominated by the HS being mechanically out of alignment, that issue needs to be resolved first. If its a small deviation where we are satisfied HS alignment is as close as we will ever get, then we have arrived at the point of what I'll call the where classic methods like RDM come into play. The remainder of work is addressing lathe bed twist and ideally concluding with real cutting conditions. BTW if you doubt the significance of HS deviation as a source contribution, do the simple trig calculation for yourself. Consider a measly 0.001" over the length of HS block & extrapolate to the end of test bar. It translates into a significant amount of taper that actually represents a lot of equivalent lathe bed twist to accomplish. And something as measly as 0.001" HS rotation is nothing on a set screw, mere degrees of screw rotation depending on the thread pitch.
Here is my own summary. Others may have a different perspective. Taper cutting is a function of 2 somewhat independent sources. It could be 100% HS related, or it could be 100% lathe bed deviation related, or it could be some % blend of both. Unfortunately the sources could serve to counter/mask one another or they also could cascade & exaggerate one another. Adjustment may well be an iterative thing, but hopefully by standardizing one deviation source (ideally the one with lesser +/- limits) in order to conform the more dominant or significant source, we can proceed logically & efficiently & not chase our tails too much.
Enter your email address to join: