Thread: Placement and overhang of Deckel model 6017 380mm rotary table

Originally Posted by TNB

Let me guess... Is it beige ?

Cheers Ross

Originally Posted by AlfaGTA

Thanos:
Here is a link to the job on the brake drum liners.......Some head scratching here to get this done.

FP4NC: Larger Diameter Work

Cheers Ross

Thanks for reminding, I remembered this post...very nice

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???

Originally Posted by ballen

PS: I think I'll do an experiment. I'll put 140kg of stuff onto my (60kg) mill table, and see how X and Z feel. It's not very "scientific" but it's easy to do and could be informative.

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.

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 ???

Hi Tien,

Originally Posted by TNB

I didn't really suggest you *should* buy a Hermle table.

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.

And I am convinced of that, also.

Think twice and realize that for example, 200lbs is not much for an M8 bolt (hard to explain, I hope you get it !)

I do. That's why I am playing around with the machine carrying this load, not so much to see how it looks, but to see how it would feel to be moving the axes around with this load. First impression: the Z is no problem, the issue is X, especially at the ends of the travels.

That's the reason I didn't keep the 2038 table I had bought for my FP3.

For me, the alternative would be a smaller 2037 table, for which I have found different values for the mass, ranging from 105 to 118kg. The weight difference is significant.

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.

I'm going to drive it around for a while this evening just to see if my impressions from yesterday remain, then will probably call Franz and ask for his opinion.

Do you know how much a psychiatrist would have charged you for that ???

Truth be told, I'm glad that you (and others here) "get it". Normal people would just shake their head in wonder that anyone could care about such things.

Cheers,
Bruce

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

Hi Ross,

Originally Posted by AlfaGTA

Additional things to consider here. First off the position of the weight is important.

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.

I don't think that's right. I think the "leverage" (force and torque) applied by a set of masses on the table is unchanged if all of those masses are replaced with a single point mass (with the same total mass) located at the center of gravity of the set of masses. So removing my stack of deadweight and replacing it with the Hermle table would apply the same forces and torques, provided that the total mass is unchanged and the COG does not move.

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 think your idea of putting the 2038-800 on the FP2NC is a good one. Do you share my concerns about the weight? Or is the FP2NC better set up to handle that load?

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.

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.

Some years ago I machined an adapter for a 2236 table so that it would fit on my FP3.
The original slot spacing was for, I believe, one of the CNC machines. The table works
well on the FP3 but I'm not sure how heavy it is. The adapter was machined from 5/8"
thick ground flat stock.

Originally Posted by ballen

OK, going back to the topic of this thread, I bought a used Deckel "raising table" (Zwischenplatte).

HI Bruce,
can you provide some additional information: what is the model number and the dimensions incl. thickness? Additional photos that show front and back would be much appreciated. I will be making my own, so the measurements will help a great deal.

-Dave

Hi Dave,

Originally Posted by rimcanyon

What is the model number and the dimensions incl. thickness? Additional photos that show front and back would be much appreciated. I will be making my own, so the measurements will help a great deal.

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,
Bruce

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.

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 !

Hi Dave,

Originally Posted by rimcanyon

can you provide some additional information: what is the model number and the dimensions incl. thickness? Additional photos that show front and back would be much appreciated. I will be making my own, so the measurements will help a great deal.

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

Originally Posted by TNB

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?).

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.