Results 1 to 11 of 11
  1. #1
    TylerP is offline Aluminum
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Newtown, CT
    Posts
    105

    Default Measuring shaft run-out using balancing ways

    Hey Guys,

    We have a large rotating assembly that has a relatively high clearance plain bearing on either end. The plain bearings have a running clearance of about .030" and are 18ft apart. The bearing surface is about 8" diameter and 9" deep.

    I am measuring run-out on the shaft ends by placing the entire assembly on pillow block balancing ways. They are placed as in-board on the bearing surface as possible. Then I simply place a dial indicator on the outboard end of the bearing surface and rotate the assembly.

    Does this sound like a reasonable way to measure run-out in this situation?

  2. #2
    vettedude is offline Cast Iron
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    473

    Default

    No,

    Use V-blocks with NYLON liners or pads, and measure it in that, it is the best way to measure run-out as there is no influence from the measuring surface, and the bearings should eb the datum to with the parts are machined.
    http://www.ge-mcs.com/download/orbit...207_runout.pdf
    http://www.ge-mcs.com/download/orbit...005_runout.pdf

    I will post some more stuff later, you need to be sure to measure perpendicular to the vee-block surface.

  3. #3
    TylerP is offline Aluminum
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Newtown, CT
    Posts
    105

    Default

    I'm more interested in the axial alignment of the shaft ends than the diameter. Measuring directly at the balancing way location I get about .0005"

    Does this make sense, or is it a bad way to go about this? I see what you mean with the soft surface v-block, however it seems like the balancing ways provide a similar setup.

    Quote Originally Posted by vettedude View Post
    No,

    Use V-blocks with NYLON liners or pads, and measure it in that, it is the best way to measure run-out as there is no influence from the measuring surface, and the bearings should eb the datum to with the parts are machined.
    http://www.ge-mcs.com/download/orbit...207_runout.pdf
    http://www.ge-mcs.com/download/orbit...005_runout.pdf

    I will post some more stuff later, you need to be sure to measure perpendicular to the vee-block surface.

  4. #4
    litlerob's Avatar
    litlerob is offline Hot Rolled
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    PDX, OR
    Posts
    547

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vettedude View Post
    No,

    Use V-blocks with NYLON liners or pads, and measure it in that, it is the best way to measure run-out as there is no influence from the measuring surface, and the bearings should eb the datum to with the parts are machined.
    http://www.ge-mcs.com/download/orbit...207_runout.pdf
    http://www.ge-mcs.com/download/orbit...005_runout.pdf

    I will post some more stuff later, you need to be sure to measure perpendicular to the vee-block surface.
    I read through the first link, I don't think I agree with it, nylon has give. I understand the vibration theory, but the ebb and flow of the nylon is not going to give you an actual measurement, it may give you a rough comparison. I could be wrong.


    Robert my 2

  5. #5
    vettedude is offline Cast Iron
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    473

    Default

    springs work on the mas exerted on them at any point, if they have "Give" once you have placed the item on them, they have already "Gave" they are not going to give more as you turn the component.

    The nylon is used in the most precise of rotating equipment, (API industrial standard), we measure below tenths on it all day, it is far more acurate than any other method available.

    The balancing ways are roller bearings, correct?

    Roller bearings have run-out, a dead material has no run-out, it is a reference surface.

    One note, this is assuming you want to measure surfaces with roundness in the 0.0005" area or less, this method is not necessary for measuring a very rough or non circular surface. the bearing area of the nylon needs to be somewhat constant in order to function correctly, as stated by you it is more giving, (Much lower elastic modulus than steel about 100 times) and will give some due to differences in surface area contacting the nylon. but if the area round to 0.0005" or less we are talking 0.0000001" difference or close to that in the measurement of run-out. You can use steel to steel, but you must worry about galling. 0.0000001" is much lower than the run-out in nearly any roller bearing.

    I came up with the numbers using hertzian contact stress equations.

  6. #6
    vettedude is offline Cast Iron
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    473

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TylerP View Post
    I'm more interested in the axial alignment of the shaft ends than the diameter. Measuring directly at the balancing way location I get about .0005"

    Does this make sense, or is it a bad way to go about this? I see what you mean with the soft surface v-block, however it seems like the balancing ways provide a similar setup.
    We use the vee-blocks combined with stoppers at each end, the stoppers are rigidly held in place, and bumped to the shaft, usually shafts have turning centers, and a ball bearing is placed at those centers. you could bump the end of the shaft against nylon as well, but if the shaft end is not perfect, you will pick up surface inconsistencies in your run-out measurements. are you wanting the shaft ends to be parallel to one another, or perpendicular to bearing surfaces?

  7. #7
    TylerP is offline Aluminum
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Newtown, CT
    Posts
    105

    Default

    I'm expecting run-out of up to 0.010" and would not need to measure with any precision beyond 0.001"

    Balancing ways do have roller bearings, the runout in the ways is measured quite easily.

    Really I'm looking for some verification that my inspection set up is one that will give a usable measurement when questioning the amount of run-out inside of the plain bearing.

  8. #8
    vettedude is offline Cast Iron
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    473

    Default

    if all you are doing is measuring to 0.001" you will be fine on balancing ways.

  9. #9
    John Garner is offline Stainless
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    south SF Bay area, California
    Posts
    1,342

    Default

    This thread has been very enlightening. Thank you!

    John

  10. #10
    TylerP is offline Aluminum
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Newtown, CT
    Posts
    105

    Default

    Thank you for the information. The nylon does make good sense.

    I prefer the balancing ways in this scenario because after the assembly is complete and we take our measurements, I need to static balance it!

  11. #11
    jimmy-moto is offline Plastic
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    1

    Default V-block liners/pads

    Quote Originally Posted by vettedude View Post
    No,

    Use V-blocks with NYLON liners or pads, and measure it in that, it is the best way to measure run-out as there is no influence from the measuring surface, and the bearings should eb the datum to with the parts are machined.
    http://www.ge-mcs.com/download/orbit...207_runout.pdf
    http://www.ge-mcs.com/download/orbit...005_runout.pdf

    I will post some more stuff later, you need to be sure to measure perpendicular to the vee-block surface.
    Regarding v-block liners/pads, is Nylon the best material to use? Would Delrin or a self-lubricating plastic would be better? Any lubricant suggestions between the surface and the liner?
    We're working with very large shafts that are difficult to turn due to their weight. Any information on v-block liners/pads is appreciated.

    Thanks,
    James

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •