-
01-03-2021, 02:26 PM #81
-
-
01-04-2021, 05:25 AM #82
-
01-11-2021, 05:37 PM #83
OK, going back to the topic of this thread, I bought a used Deckel "raising table" (Zwischenplatte). Here's the weird thing: the 12mm T-nut slots are at 45mm spacing as they should be, and all the other dimensions match, but the slots are only 11.2mm wide, which is way under size for 12mm (spec is 12H7, meaning 0 to 18 microns OVER 12mm).
Here it is with a 10mm and a 1.2mm gauge block stuck into the slot:
Can anyone speculate how it got to be like this? My only idea is that the table was a casting that was roughed but never finished. That would explain why the top and bottom are ground: Deckel would have planed the top.
PS: could this be an Imperial version, with 7/16" slots? Did Deckel ever make something like that???
-
01-11-2021, 05:49 PM #84
I am trying to decide whether or not to purchase a Hermle Type 14.2 universal toolmakers table, after TNB brought it to my attention, and I was offered one at a reasonable price. Positive aspects:
600 x 320mm top with 12mm T slots spaced at 45mm
Can add dial gauges on all 3 axes to return to tram
Table top can be removed to expose an SK40 cone in the center
direct and indirect dividing
cranks and gearing for all three rotation directions
Now for the negative aspect:
Weight (estimated) 190kg
"Boxy" styling doesn't match the FP2 very well
If I get this I would most often have a hydraulic vise (40kg) mounted. So for testing purposes, I need to drive the table around with 230kg sitting on it. For comparison that's about 20% of the total machine's weight.
Here we go:
Horizontal table: 60kg
Vise 1: 40kg
Vise 2: 40kg
raising plate: 20kg
lap blanks: 3 x 15kg
railroad tie: 15kg
Curiously, the up and down feel fine and don't bother me. But X does get quite a lot harder to move near full extension, +-250mm from center. It's OK if I am using power feeds, but all that torque on the top retaining plates can't be good for the ways.Last edited by ballen; 01-12-2021 at 02:55 AM.
-
TNB liked this post
-
01-12-2021, 02:20 AM #85
Bruce
I didn't really suggest you *should* buy a Hermle table.
I just stated that to me, it's the Hermle that offers the most as an universal table.
Now deciding if you need one and your machine can handle it is up to you !
Looking at your picture, I admit that the visual effect of all that mass is... frightening to say the least.
There's something I noticed : I'm not an engineer by trade, so I probably have a very questionnable approach of things sometimes.
Fact is, whenever I have to "eye-ball" structural efforts, I'm biased by the sensations of my own body.
So after a first reaction wich is always to oversize everything, I have to step back a little, think twice and realize that for example, 200lbs is not much for an M8 bolt (hard to explain, I hope you get it !)
Now I'd say that if you don't feel comfortable with it, don't buy the Hermle.
Otherwise, you'll always be ruminating about it.
That's the reason why I didn't keep the 2038 table I had bought for my FP3.
All that overhang and that mass (230kg) was too much *visually* for me not to think about the potential harm I was causing to the machine... everytime...
It was pure guts feeling but peace of mind comes at a cost !
So either you have a way to calculate the real load exerted on the ways (may be not that much in fact), relate it to some admitted limits and decide once for all that 230kgs is ok for your FP2, or you give up.
Do you know how much a psychiatrist would have charged you for that ???
-
ballen liked this post
-
-
01-12-2021, 03:14 AM #86
Hi Tien,
Fair enough, I re-worded what I wrote above.
I just stated that to me, it's the Hermle that offers the most as a universal table.
Think twice and realize that for example, 200lbs is not much for an M8 bolt (hard to explain, I hope you get it !)
That's the reason I didn't keep the 2038 table I had bought for my FP3.
So either you have a way to calculate the real load exerted on the ways (may be not that much in fact), relate it to some admitted limits and decide once for all that 230kgs is ok for your FP2, or you give up.
Do you know how much a psychiatrist would have charged you for that ???
Cheers,
Bruce
-
01-12-2021, 11:10 AM #87
Additional things to consider here. First off the position of the weight is important.
Your setup has the weight over the width of the table, which will greatly affect the "leverage" applied to the vertical and "X" ways at the ends of table travel.
The Hermle table will have its mass more centered and hence will affect the "Wedging" of the table less....
Actually all this is interesting to me.....After seeing"Sneebots" machining of a new base mount for the table for his FP4, i got to thinking......
I own a 2038 -800 table....This is the one designed for the FP2NC. Has the tram indicators, along with the Heidenhain encoder on the rotary axis....
Its a reasonable sized table being 12x24.....book rates the weight at 185 Kg (410#)
If i replace mounting base to get the proper bolt spacing, it might be a nice sized table for my FP2.
Table is made with 16mm "T" slots, but i rather think this is an advantage, as i already have Deckel CNC machines here with the same sized slots and plenty of clamping tooling.
That FP2 is fitted out with a "Positip" DRO box that can display a 4th axis.....think it might be pretty slick.
Cheers Ross
-
Erik liked this post
-
01-12-2021, 11:43 AM #88
Hi Ross,
I thought that I did it right. My "mass distribution" (horizontal table, 2 x vises, 3 x lapping plates, raising plate, train track) has its center of gravity (COG) in about the same place as the COG of the Hermle table would be located, if that were mounted instead. That COG is at:
X at 0 (halfway between extremes of X travel)
Y about 150 mm away from the face of the vertical table, towards the front of the machine
Z near the top of the horizontal table
The one place that I might not be a good match to the Hermle table is the Z location, I might be about 10cm too high.
Your setup has the weight over the width of the table, which will greatly affect the "leverage" applied to the vertical and "X" ways at the ends of table travel.
Actually all this is interesting to me.....After seeing"Sneebots" machining of a new base mount for the table for his FP4, i got to thinking......
I just had a look at the specs of the Deckel 2038-800 table, comparing it to the Hermle 14.2 table. The Deckel table has the same surface size (320 x 600mm) and almost the same weight (within 10%). Main difference is that for the Deckel table, the distance from mounting surface to table center is 205mm, whereas on the Hermle it is 173mm (estimated). That makes the Hermle a better match for my FP2. In addition, the Hermle T-nut slots are 12mm, which also matches my FP2.
Cheers,
Bruce
PS: the spec sheet I looked at said that the 2038 has 14mm T nut slots, not 16mm as you wrote. But perhaps it was made in both styles.Last edited by ballen; 01-12-2021 at 05:22 PM.
-
01-12-2021, 11:47 AM #89
Im not sure the mass of the Hermle will be much more centered than with Bruce's setup.
As you pointed it, the weight Bruce added to his fixed table is distributed all over the surface, but I think weight is also almost everywhere on an accessory like the universal table *. May be a little more toward the mounting flange, but not that much.
It's been a pretty long time since I had the 2038, but I seem to recall the T-slot I put the eyelets in to lift it up was very close to the center of the plate.
Edit : Bruce posted while I was typing.
* That may be part of the problem, because if there was a particular part that could be put on a diet (for a lighter use on a lighter machine), the problem would be easier to solve.
-
-
01-12-2021, 06:22 PM #90
-
thanvg liked this post
-
01-12-2021, 11:47 PM #91
-
01-13-2021, 01:43 AM #92
Hi Dave,
Sure. It may take me a couple of days before I can get into the shop to do this. Meanwhile here is an excerpt from a February 1986 catalog with part numbers. The dimensions of the top clamping surface are 210 x 390mm, thickness 50mm. I'll try and get you the overall dimensions later today so you can order stock.
Cheers,
BruceLast edited by ballen; 01-13-2021 at 04:38 AM.
-
01-13-2021, 03:17 PM #93
Back to the Hermle type 14.2 table...
I talked to Franz Singer about it today. Conclusion was that since I am operating the machine at most a couple of hundred hours a year, the extra mass is not going to wear it out. Yes, X has a lot of extra drag at the ends, but if I am working on a long part I can swap back the normal table. Most work on the machine is not going anywhere near the ends of the X travel.
I also looked closely at the mounting plate (the seller took measurements for me) comparing it to the vertical table on my FP2. It's an exact fit, not an approximate one. The vertical table on my machine is 240mm high. The mounting plate is 240mm high. The bolt slots and 12mm keys line up exactly. So I think Hermle had the FP2 in mind, when they designed this universal table.
Another sign that this was intended to fit an FP2: the standard vertical head will just go to the center of the table, as will the high-speed head and the fine boring head. (The long-reach head will go quite a bit past the center.) The only head which won't reach the center of the table is the shaping/slotting head,
Conclusion: I think I'm going to buy it.Last edited by ballen; 01-14-2021 at 04:19 AM.
-
01-14-2021, 01:59 AM #94
Great news ! I can't wait to see it on the FP2.
I wouldn't be too surprised if it turned out that you can shave some weight off it once you have it at hand (may be even by reducing the mouting flange thickness, wich would bring the remaining weight toward the column of the machine, who knows?). We'll see.
We're in for yet 15 years of babbling about the comparative merits of the universal vs toolmaker's tables, and now on top of that, Hermle vs Deckel approach of the same subject !
-
ballen liked this post
-
01-14-2021, 04:02 AM #95
Hi Dave,
Here are the dimensions, I started a new thread so this would be easier to find in the future:
Deckel Zwischenplatte / Riser Plate 2719 for 6017 Rundtisch / rotary table
If you make one, please post some photos in the new thread.
Cheers,
Bruce
-
01-14-2021, 04:33 AM #96
It would be a big improvement if I could shave off enough to matter (say 50kg, to drop the weight from 190 to 140kg). But I'm worried that the castings would warp. So I'm not convinced that this is feasible. Do the internal stresses in cast iron relieve themselves after 40 years?
When I get the table I will mount it and use it enough to decide if I like it. If I don't like it, I'll pass it on to Tien. Otherwise I'll take it apart to clean and fix any problems, and paint it to match the rest of the machine.
Bookmarks