Gentlemen,
I'm looking for one person from your group to try out my radical toolholder. I just had an article published in The Home Shop Machinist magazine (page 30 may/June issue). The toolholder in the article had a half-inch shank and a 3/16 inch square tool bit.
I have a couple of prototypes that have a 3/8 inch shank and a 1/8 inch tool bit. These prototypes are nothing to look at but they do cut very effectively. (I take the same sort of cut that I do with the larger one, for example on a piece of 3/4" diameter HRS, a pretty relaxed cut is .050" on the radius (depth of cut), 410 RPM, .0062 inches per revolution feed.)
I'm looking for one person from your group to evaluate this smaller version of the toolholder. Of course I am interested in someone who is active in the group and who does a lot of machining. I would also be looking for someone who does not work exclusively in brass, because rake angles are built into the toolholder. I would hope to find someone who still has some empathy for the tribulations of the newbie. I would hope to find someone that uses a lathe that accepts nothing larger than a 3/8" square shank. Finally, I would like to find someone who is interested in tool geometry.
Basically this is a toolholder that incorporates back rake and side rake so you do not have to grind the rake face. I am recommending two tool bit geometries. One is a negative lead angle configuration that allows you to turn, face, and turn to a shoulder. The other is a positive lead angle configuration that allows you to turn and face by using two noses on the same tool bit.
Sharpening is just a matter of creating the side facets of the tool. This eliminates the tedious and wasteful process of grinding the rake face.
My son and I have a company, Wimberley, Inc. that makes high-end photographic gear. this project really has nothing to do with the company; I've been doing it because I find it interesting and rewarding. I hope that the toolholder will simplify sharpening for new and experienced hands both.
I have made a handful of early production models of the larger size. I would expect to test the acceptance of this toolholder with the larger size and postpone making the smaller size until I see how things go.
I would welcome suggestions as to who might be the best person to try out this toolholder. I would like the toolholder back, but would be willing to exchange it for a new one, when and if I get into full production down the road.
Thanks for your consideration.
dwombat
I'm looking for one person from your group to try out my radical toolholder. I just had an article published in The Home Shop Machinist magazine (page 30 may/June issue). The toolholder in the article had a half-inch shank and a 3/16 inch square tool bit.
I have a couple of prototypes that have a 3/8 inch shank and a 1/8 inch tool bit. These prototypes are nothing to look at but they do cut very effectively. (I take the same sort of cut that I do with the larger one, for example on a piece of 3/4" diameter HRS, a pretty relaxed cut is .050" on the radius (depth of cut), 410 RPM, .0062 inches per revolution feed.)
I'm looking for one person from your group to evaluate this smaller version of the toolholder. Of course I am interested in someone who is active in the group and who does a lot of machining. I would also be looking for someone who does not work exclusively in brass, because rake angles are built into the toolholder. I would hope to find someone who still has some empathy for the tribulations of the newbie. I would hope to find someone that uses a lathe that accepts nothing larger than a 3/8" square shank. Finally, I would like to find someone who is interested in tool geometry.
Basically this is a toolholder that incorporates back rake and side rake so you do not have to grind the rake face. I am recommending two tool bit geometries. One is a negative lead angle configuration that allows you to turn, face, and turn to a shoulder. The other is a positive lead angle configuration that allows you to turn and face by using two noses on the same tool bit.
Sharpening is just a matter of creating the side facets of the tool. This eliminates the tedious and wasteful process of grinding the rake face.
My son and I have a company, Wimberley, Inc. that makes high-end photographic gear. this project really has nothing to do with the company; I've been doing it because I find it interesting and rewarding. I hope that the toolholder will simplify sharpening for new and experienced hands both.
I have made a handful of early production models of the larger size. I would expect to test the acceptance of this toolholder with the larger size and postpone making the smaller size until I see how things go.
I would welcome suggestions as to who might be the best person to try out this toolholder. I would like the toolholder back, but would be willing to exchange it for a new one, when and if I get into full production down the road.
Thanks for your consideration.
dwombat
