Mitutoyo vs. Mahr height stands

[jccaclimber]

Now at a place developing optical systems. We have a CMM, but it's often backed up and we're still getting the operators up to speed on general metrology. As a result we've been doing a lot of manual layout. Parts are inconvenient to ship, and we typically want same day measurements, so we haven't been utilizing outside inspection houses much lately. Parts range near 0 to 350 mm (14"). Our current height stand (Mitutoyo Series 192) doesn't have the desired resolution much less accuracy, so I've been attaching it to an Interapid indicator and using it as a transfer stand to stacks of gauge blocks. This is pretty tedious, so I'd like a faster way. Company policy makes buying used equipment difficult, so assume whatever we get needs to be new.

I thought about getting a height master (Mit. 515-322 and a riser block) to transfer to instead of gauge blocks, but think a better height stand will save enough more time to justify the increased cost.

I have experience with Mahr height stands from a past job (816 CL). They did well, but I only used them to measure small (<30 mm) heights, not to locate holes, larger diameters, etc.

I'm debating between a Mahr 817 CLM and Mitutoyo LH-600E (or EG).

Does anyone have experience with either of these, or a third recommendation I should look at?

 

[PegroProX440]

The only one Ive used was the Fowler Sylvac...... the thing was sweet.

54-931-450-0 Hi CAL Fowler Sylvac Height Gage 17.5"/450mm

 

[Gordon B. Clarke]

What I'd do was phone a few suppliers for brochures and information on the various types. Tell them what you want as well as what you want to use it for.

After that then a price comparison + gut feeling. Some suppliers are more helpful than others.

I doubt if many (any?) have had several types to compare each other with so you'll only be told what they think of what they have or have had.

 

[jccaclimber]

What I'd do was phone a few suppliers for brochures and information on the various types. Tell them what you want as well as what you want to use it for.

After that then a price comparison + gut feeling. Some suppliers are more helpful than others.

I doubt if many (any?) have had several types to compare each other with so you'll only be told what they think of what they have or have had.

Agreed that the odds are low. If anything I might find someone who used one at one employer, and another at a different employer, or someone who had a particular annoyance with one. From the spec. sheet it looks like the Mitutoyo model is a bit better, and pricing is comparable but the places I've been have always used the Mahr. Then again from the spec. sheet a BesTest 0.00005" test indicator should be better than a 0.0001" Interapid, but experience tells me the Interapid is a bit smoother which sometimes helps.


The spec. sheets are decent and seem to lean slightly towards the Mit. I'm getting formal quotes, but I think pricing will be similar. I stopped by Photonics West yesterday and happened to walk by the booths for both Mahr and Mitutoyo. Both sent CMM/OMM people, and only Mit. was able to talk in depth about height stands. No surprise, but I knew I hit salesmen when both places started with "Well, we're probably a bit more expensive, but also a bit more accurate" when asked how they would compare to the other. More specific applications conversation still pending.

 

[RJT]

Sylvsc motorized height Gage is what I need. We have several, they are a really useful measuring device. Watch some YouTube videos of them.

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk

 

[RJT]

Mis spelled Sylvac, don't know how to edit on taptalk

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk

 

[Delw]

Now at a place developing optical systems. We have a CMM, but it's often backed up and we're still getting the operators up to speed on general metrology. As a result we've been doing a lot of manual layout. Parts are inconvenient to ship, and we typically want same day measurements, so we haven't been utilizing outside inspection houses much lately. Parts range near 0 to 350 mm (14"). Our current height stand (Mitutoyo Series 192) doesn't have the desired resolution much less accuracy, so I've been attaching it to an Interapid indicator and using it as a transfer stand to stacks of gauge blocks. This is pretty tedious, so I'd like a faster way. Company policy makes buying used equipment difficult, so assume whatever we get needs to be new.

I thought about getting a height master (Mit. 515-322 and a riser block) to transfer to instead of gauge blocks, but think a better height stand will save enough more time to justify the increased cost.

I have experience with Mahr height stands from a past job (816 CL). They did well, but I only used them to measure small (<30 mm) heights, not to locate holes, larger diameters, etc.

I'm debating between a Mahr 817 CLM and Mitutoyo LH-600E (or EG).

Does anyone have experience with either of these, or a third recommendation I should look at?

I'm stuck in that predicament also. but every time I start to think about the 512's its around 4k Then a few master gage blocks to verify before every use., I think about the Fowler one mentioned is around 7.5k (which was recommenced to me by a few inspectors). I haven't check to see what each one would cost to get calibrated every year however. if the Calibration price is too high it would be better to go with a 25-30k manual cmm

 

[jccaclimber]

I'm stuck in that predicament also. but every time I start to think about the 512's its around 4k Then a few master gage blocks to verify before every use., I think about the Fowler one mentioned is around 7.5k (which was recommenced to me by a few inspectors). I haven't check to see what each one would cost to get calibrated every year however. if the Calibration price is too high it would be better to go with a 25-30k manual cmm

If you don't mind buying used, a Mitutoyo height master is regularly available for $500 on the 'bay. Note that the non-digital ones actually have better accuracy, at least in the current catalog.
From my perspective 1 minute saved using a height stand to read a measurement instead of transferring to a height master 6 times a day = 30 times a week at an average hourly cost of $200/hr is $100/week, so the nice height stand pays for its self in under a year vs. a height master, which has at least the same time savings vs. gauge block stacks.

I looked at the Fowler model people keep mentioning. From what I can tell it has a lower measurement force than the Mitutoyo and Mahr equivalents, but also much worse listed accuracy and a similar price tag. If you really need that lower measurement force it may make sense, but I don't think it does in my case compared to the other two. It is handy to have as a comparison though.

 

[Delw]

If you don't mind buying used, a Mitutoyo height master is regularly available for $500 on the 'bay. Note that the non-digital ones actually have better accuracy, at least in the current catalog.
From my perspective 1 minute saved using a height stand to read a measurement instead of transferring to a height master 6 times a day = 30 times a week at an average hourly cost of $200/hr is $100/week, so the nice height stand pays for its self in under a year vs. a height master, which has at least the same time savings vs. gauge block stacks.

I looked at the Fowler model people keep mentioning. From what I can tell it has a lower measurement force than the Mitutoyo and Mahr equivalents, but also much worse listed accuracy and a similar price tag. If you really need that lower measurement force it may make sense, but I don't think it does in my case compared to the other two. It is handy to have as a comparison though.

I have a problem buying used for the simple fact every time I do I get screwed and theres problems.

You have a good point on the height stand vs the height master. I been doing everything with gage blocks set up different blocks using a height stand and leave them set up till the jobs done.

I recently bought a new Mitutoyo dial high stand I need to go get it calibrated. I been verifying it with gage blocks and its pretty damn accurate, but for some reason I don't trust them.
all my height stands I use for holding and indicator and using blocks only. I waste a ton of time, but have 5 of them so there all set up on different Dims for the job.
I have the SPI electronic one that I bought years ago. with in 4 months I couldnt get it to repeat with in .002. so now its just a glorified indicator holder.

we spend alot of time inspecting parts during machining and final inspection. I need something that will get that time way down.

 

[jccaclimber]

Long term follow up. I eventually got to demo both the Mahr 817 CLM and the Mitutoyo LH-600E. TLDR is that both are very nice instruments, but for our use the Mahr edged out the Mitutoyo.

I'm going to ignore the pros and cons of the sales staff for this post as those are regional issues rather than technical differences between the devices:

Carrier:
I liked the Mitutoyo probe carrier a bit more. It had two positions to put the probe into, which allows a bit more height.

General feel:
The Mitutoyo model had several external plastic bits which feel a bit cheap, but don't negatively impact functionality.
The shape of the Mitutoyo base was a bit easier to hold on to. My hands fit a bit better into the notches for moving it around.

Accuracy:
I don't have a well enough temperature controlled space to distinguish these. On paper the MIT is slightly more accurate, but that's effectively in the noise.

Air float:
It depends what you want to do, but IMO the Mitutoyo wins this one. It has two modes, although it's a bit of a pain to switch between them. There is the usual air float that makes it easier to move the gauge as if it was on an air hockey table. There is a second lower pressure/flowrate option where it takes some weight off, but doesn't really pick the stand up much. This makes it possible to use the glide function when measuring flatness (technically parallelism). I measured <0.001 mm rise when engaging/disengaging this function. On the Mahr stand the air glide is much stronger. It makes moving the stand much easier, almost to the point of being too easy. It takes a bit of practice to not have it move slightly when you engage/disengage it. While I like this for moving it around, it also lifts the stand several tenths when it engages depending on how you are holding it. This makes it harder to take measurements which require sliding the gauge. There is an adjustment for this somewhere under the battery, but I have not yet dug in to it.

General interface/software:
The buttons on the Mahr stand are a bit easier to press, and more importantly it seemed to take a few more button presses to do things no the Mitutoyo than the Mahr. The buttons were also not as intuitive. On the Mahr after having the first two buttons explained I was able to easily figure out how to run the rest of the common functions without any additional explanation. On the Mitutoyo a bit more explanation was required, and I found myself having to think my way through how to do something a few times rather than having it be immediately apparent.

Bluetooth/USB integration:
Both have this built in or as an option. I can see that it would be very helpful at times, but I have not yet tried it out.


Hole diameters:
While both gauges are capable of meeting their claimed tolerances on hole diameters, the fixturing required (specifically positioning or bore parallelism to the table) to get couple micron repeatability is not practical if other options are available. If you just need to be to the nearest thousandth it'll work great, but that is often more easily done with a pair of calipers.

Minor annoyances:
The Mahr turns off a bit faster than I would like, and it needs to re-home the probe each time it turns on. AFAIK there isn't a setting to increase this timeout and it's somewhat annoying, especially with a somewhat involved setup. It also gets a bit confused if the calibration tool isn't at the height it expects. This is easily resolved by turning it on with a clear path to the table, but it's something I'd prefer not to deal with.

End of the day we opted to buy the Mahr due to the easier interface. I'll dig into the air bleed and see if I can get it to work a bit more like the Mitutoyo, but that seems easier to change than the software interface. If I did a lot of measurements where I need to sweep the probe over a surface I probably would have gone with the Mitutoyo as the two were close. When I measure something it's typically a 10 to 20 µm profile tolerance in an area that I cannot get a micrometer. I'll typically have 10 or so of these measurements, all of which are farther apart than the range of my Interapid mechanical indicator. In comparison to stacking gauge blocks it's a ton faster (no surprise), and this thing definitely pays for its self. Given the third alternative of readjusting the a height master and then adjusting an indicator to match, this is still much faster.

 

[newtonsapple]

Minor annoyances:
The Mahr turns off a bit faster than I would like, and it needs to re-home the probe each time it turns on. AFAIK there isn't a setting to increase this timeout and it's somewhat annoying, especially with a somewhat involved setup.

I was just looking through the manual and spotted this. Let me know if this works.


I potential buyer of the Mahr I have asked about extra batteries. From the manual, it looks like the battery isn't really meant for regular swapping. How long does the battery last on yours or do you just leave it plugged in all the time?

 

[jccaclimber]

1. Yes, I found that setting at some point and it absolutely works.
2. I don't know what the battery life is, but it's definitely longer than 8 hours at my use. If you were constantly using the air float to move it around it might be shorter but I don't know how much as I've never done that. I do occasionally forget to turn it off at the switch (vs. just letting the screen auto off) and it's dead when I come back in a week. It starts back up as soon as I plug it in though. It goes get a little flaky when the battery is really low, but you can tell both by the screen being dim and uneven and by the low battery indicator.
3. I got the email about this thread and my first thought was "I should point this person at NewtonsApple if they want one", though it's you directly.
4. When I use this I tend to measure a lot of parts and I got tired of typing the results in. Rather than buy the official bluetooth adapter or $200 Mahr serial to USB cable I'm using this $14 one from Amazon, and it works great:https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B075YGKFC1/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&th=1. Mahr support was quite helpful in helping me get it going. The free software, MarComProf, is probably from 1995, but it is free (call them if you can't find it, sort of hard to find on their web page). The only issue I have with the cable is that I have to go into my device manager and change the COM port it's on each time I first plug it in, but that's not Mahr's fault. Also, the software might default to the EU period/coma convention so I had to update that. Fortunately that setting sticks.
5. One more note, I don't think mine meets the planar repeatability specification. It's within a micron of meeting it which is good enough for 95% of the work I do, so I haven't opted to send it back to Mahr for a checkup, but if you really care about that last micron you might reconsider. Ultimately I started using an interferometer for the things where we really care about that last micron, which is the right tool for that application anyways.

 

[newtonsapple]

Thanks for the input on the battery.

One more question, do you use the perpendicularity setup? I was trying to figure out if the electronic correction is used with a 1086 electronic indicator. You have to use the fancy the P1514 H indicator to generate the correction table if you don't want to use the factory one. The mechanical perpendicularity is 20um and is cut to 6um with the correction table.

The Marcom software is definitely a bit clunky. I haven't used it much, just played with and some wireless calipers.

Crazy thing is they used to sell it and some vendors still have it listed https://willrich.com/product/mahr-federal-software-marcom/

 

[jccaclimber]

Section 4.4.2 of the manual states "Digital indicator1081, 1086 / 87 to a 16 EXr data cable via. the INPUT 1 interface." so you should be ok with the right RS232 cable.

I do measure perpendicularity, but I have the incremental probe, used on INPUT 2 rather than an indicator.
I do have and use the incremental perpendicularity probe, though I don't remember the part number. On the back of the unit there are two inputs for perpendicularity, an RS232 for the indicator and the 15 pin SUB D for the incremental probe.

While I haven't messed with it, it looks like you can set your own correction table for perpendicularity without having to delete the factory correction table. I have put an indicator on and swept a Mitutoyo granite square, so I can say that the mechanical perpendicularity isn't as good as the values with the correction table. Both were within the factory specifications.

 

[newtonsapple]

Thanks JCCA!

Has anyone used both the Mahr and a current Tesa-Hite?

The most recent party to inquiring about the Mahr I have for sale is getting push back from his QC team to go with a Tesa-Hite for $4.5K more than I am asking. There is no warranty on the Mahr I have which is the biggest hang up, $4.5K is an expensive warranty.

Anyone have any other input?

 

[jccaclimber]

I didn't go into it back in the first post but there were height stands I considered that aren't in my OP. I didn't go with Tesa because I couldn't actually get a hold of anyone despite phone calls and emails. Give that I never found out what their claimed accuracy was.
I didn't go with Fowler due to insufficient accuracy even in the spec. documents.
If I wanted to buy new with a warranty I'd consider the new 817 CLT.
Perhaps they can route through a third party warranty? I've never used them, but Ebay is always trying to sell one with electronics. Don't know if they are any good.

If it make them feel better, these things are pretty robust. The Mahr salesman who first showed me the 817 CLM had it shipped in and regularly checked it (inside a too stiff but padded golf club case) for airline flights. Several years in it was still working fine.

So long as you don't break the screen and don't try to tilt or ship it with the counterweight unsecured I'll bet it's fine. I'm speculating, but I'd guess that even a head unit replacement is likely to cost less than $4500. We had 816's in 24/5 production use in an oily operator machining environment for years at one of my former employers and never had issues with them.