What's new
What's new

Microscopes for the lathe

Luke Rickert

Hot Rolled
Joined
Oct 24, 2007
Location
OSLO
I have been doing some relatively fine work on my lathes (schaublin 102 and 135) and it sure seems like being able to see what is going on would be helpful when doing things such as cutting very fine threads.

When looking at stereo microscopes what should I consider for working distance, magnification etc?

Should I go for a Leica A60 or are there better options on the used market? I would rather not spend 2k if i don't have to but hate low quality optics.
Thanks
Luke
 
I have been doing some relatively fine work on my lathes (schaublin 102 and 135) and it sure seems like being able to see what is going on would be helpful when doing things such as cutting very fine threads.

When looking at stereo microscopes what should I consider for working distance, magnification etc?

Should I go for a Leica A60 or are there better options on the used market? I would rather not spend 2k if i don't have to but hate low quality optics.
Thanks
Luke

As.. E.A. Myers & Sons / "Radioear" transitioned from body hearing aids to behind the ear and IN the ear.. they kitted out whole production lines with Bausch & Lomb 20X stereo over-arm mounts for soldering and assembly.

A smaller number, same family, of monocular 40X were in the toolroom area.

The monoculars were true RBK's to get used to - not even 'proportional' depth sensing. That said, it was human hand and tweezer or soldering iron under them, not a lathe and cutting-tool.

The binocular ones took some training to get hand movements down to scale, but at least had a semblance of depth perception. That 'might' matter in your lathe work as well.

Whatever you decide on, I'd make sure I had gone off and looked through it at typical tasking, first. A good 'fit' to the need is helpful, even relaxing. A poor one, stressful and frustrating. Very.

BTW.. All that was at the dawn of the 1960's. Closing in on 60 years ago already.

These days? I think I'd actually use a large flat screen and micro-cameras, just as my eye surgeon did. More than one choice of camera and/or lenses. Smaller. Cheaper to protect or replace. Lower risk if you have to put them in harm's way. Possible to use IR ones and read the heat pattern in the work and tool-tip. Or not. Whatever your needs of a given tasking dictate.
 
How about digital and use a monitor to view your work

What might be even more useful could be twinned cameras, artificially 3D-ed to suit the task, then displayed on a 'virtual reality' type headset with one mini-screen per eye, ability to cast eyes downward for direct vision of other controls.

My goal would include not having to lean-over and hunch-over a direct optical device that was critical as to its own positioning, but didn't give a damn whether *I* was in a safe and comfortable posture.

Enter cameras.

Sure seems to be a enough stuff in the chain cheaply surplused or obsoleted - even NEW - to give it a try on rather small money & low-risk. Prove the concept, upgrade the bits that need it, lather, rinse, repeat.
 
I'm piling on the video recommendation.

I'll keep you further "away" from the danger zone.

A camera/light source is probably less mass and size than a stereo microscope head so easier to support/stabilize.

I don't have enough knowledge to provide what specifications to select but I bet someone here will.
 
The Vision Engineering "Mantis" scopes I posted a link to above are great for working under. Unlike a usual binocular microscope you have a screen you look at and eye position is not nearly so critical. They come on nice counter spring bases and I find the older one I have very easy to use and work under. I've not yet used it on a machine, but have it mounted to my workbench and it's great for seeing and working in fine detail. I do not know what new ones cost, but finding then in decent condition of eBay does not seem to be difficult.
 
Thanks everyone, the digital route is also an option and could have certain advantages but at least for video the cheap USB "microscope" I have is not very impressive. I might set it up just to test things out. For still images it actually works fine as with some simple measurement software can be quite useful. Getting more depth of field and working distance would be a good thing. We have a cheap Chinese stereo scope in my office and it is terrible for anything that isn't flat and normal as even on low magnification it has no depth of field. I am guessing that digital or not, it is the optics that will drive the cost.

The Mantis scopes are interesting, I will look into them a bit more. I noticed that the engraving world mounts forhead rests on their scopes which should help with the eye position but then their work if a bit different.
L
 
Olympus is the only one I've seen that has what I consider usable eye relief, and an exit pupil that's like looking thru a picture window. Still kicking myself for not buying the one I looked at a few years back.

I've looked at the Leicas, B&L, and a couple others I've seen at auctions, and they all appear to be the same in terms of eye relief, if not in physical appearance as well.
 
I saw a demonstration of a Dino-Lite at a trade show. Dino-Lite USA Distributor. Price was between $150 - $200. The size of a led flash light.

I use a microscope eyepiece. It has 3M on it but it is made in Japan. I can hold it 6 inches away from the surface and get a good view. Considering what goes on about the lathe I like the monocular method. I bought 4 for $5 each, brand new.

3M Olympus 67.43mm f/7.91 PN 78-849-1821-3 LENS | eBay

Picture from ebay does not imply I would buy there. Or anything else for that matter. ebay is :icon_bs:
 
0d607623b3d316b1d2e966247c17487d.jpg


This is a pic taken through my older Mantis at 4X
The scale is metric and held at 45 degrees, so you can get an idea of the depth of field.
This thing is much easier to work under than the binocular scope I sold a year ago, to a guy who was going to weld under it... [emoji846]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I've been researching some of these ideas for an optical project. Here's some info that may help:

You can connect any finite tube length microscope objective to a c-mount video camera. You need an adapter from microscope objective thread (usually RMS thread) to c-mount, and the right length c-mount extension tube. Edmund Optics has a good explanation of this on their site (but you have to dig for it).

In general, you'd want to stick with low-power microscope objectives (1x - 10x) as the high power ones have very short working distance and usually are corrected for use with a cover glass.

There are high definition c-mount cameras available now. You can get up to 1080p resolution and connect directly to a monitor via DVI/HDMI.

It's possible to use infinity corrected microscope objectives but you need an additional component (infinity tube lens) to focus the image on the camera's sensor. This setup tends to be more costly.

I have thought about making a centering scope using a c-mount camera. This would have the advantage that you don't have to put your eye on an eyepiece. That would require a reticle and a relay lens, plus centering adjustment, but it would work.

If you really want a challenge, I believe that it would be possible to do a setup where you use TWO 4x micro objectives in a stereo setup, with an inter-ocular distance of 17mm. It would be like miniaturizing your head. The trouble is you'd need to see the resulting image through a VR headset.
 
This is a good setup - 0.7 to 3X magnification stereozoom. Those are 15X eyepieces but the regular 10X
ones would be just about as good. That setup has a fiber ring light, but these days a simple LED ring light
is cheaper and better. The boom stand is a good choice.

boley.jpg


The view from the driver's seat:

boley_1.jpg
 
While cameras have lots of pluses, as noted above, a stereo microscope gives a depth of field and 3D you won't get from a digital image. The camera is safer around rotating machinery, but the stereo microscope is usually better for manipulation and seeing a greater depth of field.

I have several of the American Optical "Cycloptic", the B&L StereoZoom (as in Jim's setup above), and also an Olympus StereoZoom. I've used one of the older Nikons. All work just fine. Even an older Swift (80 series) I gave to a neighbor kid wan't too bad. Also have a colposcope which gives great long-working-distance 3D images, but at the expense of greater bulk.

Main thing in buying a used (or cheap Chinese) stereo microscope is to make sure the prisms (AO) or mirrors (B&L) aren't loose and still collimated. Put something like an "x" in focus at the edge of the field and check one eye and the next. The X should be in the same place, or just ever so slightly diverging horizontally. While it's true that some folks have trouble merging an image with binoculars, stereo microscopes, etc. -- part of the problem is so many new scopes poorly built and so many old scopes out of adjustment.

As others have said, just 5x to 15x total magnification will make a big difference in most precision machine or measurement work. Add some LED lighting and you're ready to go.

For measurent an epi illuminated microscopes (either one or two tubes, but not necessarily or even desirably stereo), a simple x-marked reticle, and a graduated x-y stage are affordable and effective. The old American Optical industrial (3000 series) scopes can often be found, are compact and easy to fit to a stand, and work well.

The Mantis scope suggested above looks very cool. Still, it's about 10x+ the cost of some good used options. One question for Stradbash -- how bright is the image when distributed over several square inches of screen as opposed to viewing through eyepieces?
 
I think the field brightness is fine! It may not be quite the equal of the colposcope I sold, but it is quite good and it's much easier to work under. Mine is a first generation scope. They, and newer versions are on eBay regularly. Some day I may add LED lighting to mine.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 








 
Back
Top