Trunnion plate for milling vise.

I retrieved 2 pair large tapered roller bearings; specifically to create a trunnion. Only sketching this far has been mental. Bearing ID about 3.5'', OD might be 8''. Best mounting of vice seems lengthwise between bearings, won't center the forces, but would rotate 360 with sufficient centerline height. Of course backside of mount adds table clearance for deeper parts or projections.
Desirable features;
1. To fit 30'' turret mills minimum and larger. All steel for mag chucks [grinders], with jack to withstand deflection of vise plate.
2. Have sine rolls & be graduated in degrees.
3. Mechanically locked rotation, with intermediate drag for setups.
4. Surface & edges drilled/ tapped for clamping matrix along with specific holes for the vise.
5. Slotted for locating keys and dowels.
6. Lifting rings,...to allow setup on surface plate.
7. Haven't selected what vise to build around, but not less than a 6'' lock-down style [Kurt patent] + drilled and tapped for 2 piece table vise as well.
8. Plus what suggestions come along.
Attachment 15361
Mainly there are two versions. This has it's own support at each end, offering potentially lower profile. The other attaches to an rotary table or indexer 90 degrees to the vise jaws, restriction is based on centerline height of rotating attachment. Both can reference position from the bearing centers.
There is no requirement for numerical control.

This supplants a Pratt & Whitney milling vise that was upright, in that the jaws were vertical while base clamped to table. P&W is #1 of 3 of USA's greatest machine and tool makers, in my regard and DNSHO [Definitely Not So Humble Opinion]. Waited decades for one to appear...they are rare and apparently owners still cling to them. This trunnion will do all the P&W will and more. My AngLock copy is a version without clamp holes or coolant trough. It's slotted to clamp flat or upright, kind of makes up for the P&W quest.

Toolmaker51-

I'm not sure if I'm understanding what you are trying to do, bu I'm wondering if bolting a vise to a vertical rotary table would get you there?

Edit to add: With the picture I see what you are wanting to do. A quality 6" rotary table with a tailstock or other outboard support might get you there. If using a tailstock, you could put a ball bearing on the T/S spindle, rather than using the point in a center hole. You could probably clamp the vise through the hole in the rotary table. That would keep the vise jaws away from the R/T out in the open. Now you have me thinking about building that.

I'd take a look at the fifth Axis trunnion tables. They seem to have everything you are mentioning in terms of suspension.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Toolguy

Toolmaker51-

I'm not sure if I'm understanding what you are trying to do, bu I'm wondering if bolting a vise to a vertical rotary table would get you there?

---

.

I do that on occasion, it takes big ro-tabs to swing 6'' vise. Then on short parts, the spindle housing is in the way. I have tilting ro-tabs 12'' & 15'', but 4 & 5 axis work is challenging because position is lost with angular changes. Trunnions use bearing center as a constant. And again this is all manual, not CNC.

Thanks for the pic TM51, now I get what you are wanting to do. I can see how this would be a very handy thing. Just out of curiosity, who's #2 & 3 machine and toll makers DNSHO? When I was working for an orange packing co. they had a P&W 12x48 lathe and I just assumed it was made by somebody else with their name on it. Guess not, eh?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Toolmaker51

I retrieved 2 pair large tapered roller bearings; specifically to create a trunnion. Only sketching this far has been mental. Bearing ID about 3.5'', OD might be 8''. Best mounting of vice seems lengthwise between bearings, won't center the forces, but would rotate 360 with sufficient centerline height. Of course backside of mount adds table clearance for deeper parts or projections.
Desirable features;
1. To fit 30'' turret mills minimum and larger. All steel for mag chucks [grinders], with jack to withstand deflection of vise plate.
2. Have sine rolls & be graduated in degrees.
3. Mechanically locked rotation, with intermediate drag for setups.
4. Surface & edges drilled/ tapped for clamping matrix along with specific holes for the vise.
5. Slotted for locating keys and dowels.
6. Lifting rings,...to allow setup on surface plate.
7. Haven't selected what vise to build around, but not less than a 6'' lock-down style [Kurt patent] + drilled and tapped for 2 piece table vise as well.
8. Plus what suggestions come along.
Attachment 15361
Mainly there are two versions. This has it's own support at each end, offering potentially lower profile. The other attaches to an rotary table or indexer 90 degrees to the vise jaws, restriction is based on centerline height of rotating attachment. Both can reference position from the bearing centers.
There is no requirement for numerical control.

This supplants a Pratt & Whitney milling vise that was upright, in that the jaws were vertical while base clamped to table. P&W is #1 of 3 of USA's greatest machine and tool makers, in my regard and DNSHO [Definitely Not So Humble Opinion]. Waited decades for one to appear...they are rare and apparently owners still cling to them. This trunnion will do all the P&W will and more. My AngLock copy is a version without clamp holes or coolant trough. It's slotted to clamp flat or upright, kind of makes up for the P&W quest.

---

My only worry is the stability , if your only trying cut compound angles , there are some very well made vises on the market. Even milling machines that have tilting and rotating tables. Your right about P&W anything they have made seems to be #1 quality

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by C-Bag

Thanks for the pic TM51, now I get what you are wanting to do. I can see how this would be a very handy thing. Just out of curiosity, who's #2 & 3 machine and toll makers DNSHO? When I was working for an orange packing co. they had a P&W 12x48 lathe and I just assumed it was made by somebody else with their name on it. Guess not, eh?

---

.

Sure Not, doubtful they re-badged for anyone else.
Attachment 15368
P&W were certainly prestigious tooling and machine builders; with many, many, patents. Invested gargantuan quantity of iron into product. Seems many of the best products carried owner names, a visible commitment in pride. "...no effort is spared to keep our good name bright.” Tough call on top 5, let alone 3. Each had different product lines, and pursued varied industries.
My current P&W is probably older than anyone on this site. It's a "1A" sized jig bore, 20" table. Jig bores don't have a knee Z axis...the quill carrier slides on vertical ways, driven by a long splined spindle through the motor, isolating vibrations and temperatures for accuracy sake. Much like a lathe, except the bit turns. That is enhanced by proportionally long axial distance between the bearings in the carrier, can be lowered for minimum part & tool clearance, reducing extension of unsupported quill/ spindle. And why fine drill presses make crappy milling machines.
http://www.prattandwhitney.com/image...tory_book4.pdf
The care in design and assembly is staggering. Each [2] housing supporting the X & Y axis lead screw is doweled to the base, attached by large slotted cap screws...and each face is hand scraped into 3 planes square. No graduations on the hand wheels, position determined by measuring rods [very much like tubular inside micrometers] with tenths by vernier. 4 speed switch and corresponding motor, which also is hand fit to upper casting.
Previously, precision locational boring was completed via lathes and faceplates, one position per setup, extremely time consuming, and restricted by lathe swing.
First a plate was blued and scribed. The intersections were drilled and tapped, usually 6-32. There, toolmakers affixed 'buttons', small hollow cylinders placed in X-Y location from edge by caliper, depth mic, and Jo-Blocks. As demand for products expanded the need for accurate fixtures and dies multiplied astronomically.
The jig bore answered that, and a good reason why 'everybody' has grandfathers who worked as a Toolmaker.
Next, ask about tooling balls. Good ol' geo/trigo nometricky.
By the way, build date on my jig bore motor tag?
04 July, 1917. In use, right up to the day of my purchase.

If I was to rate machine builders, that would be a real sit and ponder. So within the general size footprints #3-#4-#5, not considering types of machines, just accuracy, longevity, operators handling comfort, power, flexibility of speeds and feeds, ease of repair as primary considerations. Those are measures of value; engineered, built-in, and evolved that cannot be readily modded. Lists are always excluding this and that; these meet those parameters, often setting the standard. Many excluded have idiosyncrasies. I've run them all, so when a checkbook is trying to call the shots, I have an answer. So, in democratically alphabetic order...
American Tool Works, Axelson, Blanchard, Bullard, DeVlieg, DoAll, Gallmeyer Livingston, Giddings & Lewis, Gray, Kearney & Trecker, King, Mattison, Monarch, Moore, Rockford, Tree, Van Norman.

And each time I write; have to update my program and browser dictionary.
It full of PC terms though, and not referring to the acronym "Personal Computer".
When I comment that our collective interests aren't "...just a hobby", is never meant to degrade those whose bread and butter is not dependent on tradework and skilled labor.
We uphold an icon, not only symbolic; the undeniable, critical, keystones of civilization and independence.

Thanks TM51. Not being in the field, I'm not familiar with some of the names but I did run into a jig borer that this guy was trying to sell for his grandpa. So looked up what the hell a jib borer was. It looked somewhat like the 1A but had no name plates on it. He tried for a couple of years to get $1500 for it, then it just went away. It was his grandpa's pride and joy.

I went to a huge barn sale about a month ago now and there was three huge machines sitting outside, each probably 7' tall and who knows how much they weighed. The first was a Axelson mill that looked ancient. An even bigger American Tool Works horizontal mill. Neither of those names were familiar before your list. They wanted $400 ea. for them. No way would they fit in a garage. There was an even older drill press that was probably 10' tall. Last I saw as the place was finally emptied out they were still sitting outside :(

$400.00 There are a lot of old machines selling for way more, kind of a geographic thing. The shock is what they sold for new, how many times they earned it back; over, over and over, while men running them are long gone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Toolmaker51

$400.00 There are a lot of old machines selling for way more, kind of a geographic thing. The shock is what they sold for new, how many times they earned it back; over, over and over, while men running them are long gone.

---

My brother just moved to Pennsylvania and had to sell his 40yrs of hoarding old machines. He sold his huge Hitachi mill that is a direct copy of a Cincinnati for $1000. Because it was so huge it took someone with a crane and the truck to haul a 4ton machine. The guy couldn't believe he was selling it so cheap but in two years of advertising nobody even called until this pump company. They had been looking for several years for something like it. Like you said, he'd had it for 30yrs and it didn't owe him anything. Bridgeport's abound but my brother just scoffed at them.

It begs the question, has CNC killed the machinists of old? Isn't there more to it than just inputting a program and setting up? Now with 3D printing there's the idea you won't need to machine anything and all of this will go away. But like black smithing it could become a lost art then have a comeback?

Meanwhile my journey with my hobby lathe continues. Thanks to you TM51 and Olderdan for the tips on the 3MT collet and reamer blank I was able to get the head on the 9x20 from .0035 out of tram to an astounding .0002! My next hurdle is the tail stock is .006 taller than the head now. So do I scrape the ways on the bottom of the tailstock( one side is v and the other flat) or just take the mating surface of say the bottom half of tailstock down? I guess the mating surface would be easier as its flatter. I've never tried to scrape v ways. But both the v and the flat are NOT very pretty right now. Looks like they did the rough cut and left it at that :(

It used to be the practice that the TS axis was left a bit high to account for future wear. Of course, hobby machinists are unlikely to use their machines enough to cause that degree of wear.

Actually, a bit of vertical misalignment is far less important than fore-aft misalignment of the axis.