Oops ! ..I also note that the acrylic blank isn't centrally drilled either. Not so that it matters too much, but on a promo video ?
Yeah I see that, not a very good advert....
-
Thanks for visiting The Penturners Forum today.
There are many features and resources that currently you are unable to see or access, either because you're not yet registered, or if you're already registered, because you're not logged in.
To gain full access to the forum, please log in or register now. Registration is completely free, it only takes a few seconds, and you can join our well established community of like-minded pen makers.
I always new it was the right thing to do!
- Thread starter Maurice
- Start date
Yeah I see that, not a very good advert....
Oops ! ..I also note that the acrylic blank isn't centrally drilled either. Not so that it matters too much, but on a promo video ?
Just goes to show Neil is right if even the manufacturers can't get these drills to drill straight
Walter
Fellow
Just goes to show Neil is right if even the manufacturers can't get these drills to drill straight
I think that Neil's comments are very valid, particularly with the thinner versions of the drills which as he says can be difficult to centre on the blank even when using a pillar drill. The DeWalt Extreme 2 with the bullet tip, or even a lip and spur bit being much better in that respect.
I don't however want to give the impression that I think they are total rubbish because the flutes do clear more quickly than most other drill bits and they do a good job if you need to drill longer blanks. All I am saying is that they are not the miracle tool that the manufacturer's make them out to be and their own promotional video demonstrates this admirably. No matter how you design the flute or the cutting edge, cutting generates friction generates heat and drilling too fast or failing to clear the flutes will cause one or the other of breakout at the exit point, a split blank or with acrylics, the drill bit melting the plastic and jamming.
As an experiment I tried drilling a couple of corian blanks that Neil very kindly sent me so that I can experiment with burnishing cream as discussed somewhere earlier. (Thank you Neil, they arrived safely.) They are quite thin at about 12 or 13mm so I though they would make a good subject. Using a 7mm Colt pen drill in my pillar drill I drilled one at 750rpm withdrawing regularly to clear the flutes and another at 1500 rpm without clearing the flutes. The first method produced a perfect clean hole with no breakout at the exit point, the second had so much breakout at the end that it will probably not be usable. So yes they are good drills but they are not a wonder tool that allows normal sensible drilling practice established over centuries to be ignored.
If you want real quality drill bits, with high tech fast clearing flute design and a centring spur, then you can't get better than the Famag 1594 series or their longer stable mates the 1599 long series but, before Brian says it, why would you spend that much when the DeWalts will do the job well enough?
Walter
Fellow
Penpal
Grand Master
Walter never heard of these drills if I can I will obtain some and check with snakewood and some of our burls like red mallee and some others just to be sure. One stage I made quite a lot of pens using ReBar still with the DeWalt Extreme 2,s that I use with all materials. Also interested how drills perform with African true Ebony. Thanks for the heads up I was paying for 7mm around 4.5 of our pesos per drill makes them cheap as chips for mine one of them gave me 500 drillings one time with never a breakout top or bottom. I made contact in the United States Manufacturers when they first appeared many years ago and they followed up with technical literature etc gone now in the sands of time.
On this forum and others I try to stay with this common theme works for me say it as it happens for me without any connection to any company, my Mum and Dad taught me to pay cash and shop where if felt the most comfortable.
In these days of American induced over the top court cases I feel like using a disclaimer but so far restraining from this still having faith in people making their own mind up. So many turners say it has never happened to me well good luck and hope it never does reminds me of insurance built me a house as a fouth yr apprenticed Electrician and have been fully insured ever since as the family increased to eight of us and now 65 of us many and varied have been my own experiences.
Kind regards Peter.
On this forum and others I try to stay with this common theme works for me say it as it happens for me without any connection to any company, my Mum and Dad taught me to pay cash and shop where if felt the most comfortable.
In these days of American induced over the top court cases I feel like using a disclaimer but so far restraining from this still having faith in people making their own mind up. So many turners say it has never happened to me well good luck and hope it never does reminds me of insurance built me a house as a fouth yr apprenticed Electrician and have been fully insured ever since as the family increased to eight of us and now 65 of us many and varied have been my own experiences.
Kind regards Peter.
Neil
Fellow
Walter,
Thank you for your earlier comments, all accepted, done dusted and buried from my perspective.
Howver, I am a coward at heart and don't want to hurt my fairy smooth hands! This thread is the first time that I have ever heard of a draw bar. I suspect that I am not alone in this on this forum!! Obviously therefore it is the first time that I have heard of its use as a means to get around the problem of the chuck arbor becoming unseated when withdrawing the chuck.
When this was first broached on this forum I was in a hotel room in Switzerland with the restricted viewing of an Ipad and wasn't too successful in determining what a draw bar was and how exactly it would work. I have today unearth this diagram on Peter Childs Web site:
It does state that the system is inappropriate for those with a telescopic quill, which my 1416 lathe has,
However, I was surprised to see the following comment on Peter Childs website about Record Lathes, "Not suitable for lathes with no through-hole in the spindle - e.g. Record lathes." Sorry, Chris but this is cobblers, I think Woody has already said it, but here's the tailstock of my record and it quite clearly has a hollow tailstock as there was no resistance when I shoved a screwdriver right up it:
(THIS PARA IS MY UNDERSTANDING ONLY!!) The issue of drilling pillar v lathe and the retention of the arbor in the morse taper receptical can be best summed up by saying that the morse taper system was designed to retain the active component in the machine, not the passive. When the pillar drill is used the two surfaces of the arbor and the morse taper recepticle are sufficient to retain the component in the system because there is approximately (based on a 60mm long MT2) 3,000 square millimetre of metal being pushed forcibly against each other and as a consequence not revolving (in the case of tailstock drilling) or revolving in the case of a dead centre or drive centre in the headstock. Inversely, when there is no compression force on the taper, there is no force at all other than the bind caused by the previous compression holding the taper steady. The retention force provided in a pillar drill is created due to the fact that the drill is spinning and not the item being drilled as Woody highlighted, which is why the chuck remains in a pillar drill.
Likewise Walter, I drill around four or five thousand blanks a year and from memory my pillar drill chuck has only fallen out once and that was because I had taken everything apart for a bit of maintenance and a bit of dirt got in and had broken the continuous friction bond between the arbor and taper recess.
I'm not trying to be bloody minded or argumentative, despite what the wife says, but I remain confused as to the book method of ensuring the tailstock chuck remains securely attached to the tailstock in the event of withdrawing the drill. I can't think of any way of ensuring it does. The hand on the chuck with the increased vibration caused by a loosening chuck at least provides me the time to leap for the off button, something I wouldn't be particularly keen to do if I had to lean through the axis of the flight path of the chuck should something fail in the interim. (My on/off switch is moveable which is a great benefit working at the other end of the lathe.)
Have I understood the drawbar correctly in this situation, because I've never heard of one before?
Thank you for your earlier comments, all accepted, done dusted and buried from my perspective.
Howver, I am a coward at heart and don't want to hurt my fairy smooth hands! This thread is the first time that I have ever heard of a draw bar. I suspect that I am not alone in this on this forum!! Obviously therefore it is the first time that I have heard of its use as a means to get around the problem of the chuck arbor becoming unseated when withdrawing the chuck.
When this was first broached on this forum I was in a hotel room in Switzerland with the restricted viewing of an Ipad and wasn't too successful in determining what a draw bar was and how exactly it would work. I have today unearth this diagram on Peter Childs Web site:
It does state that the system is inappropriate for those with a telescopic quill, which my 1416 lathe has,
However, I was surprised to see the following comment on Peter Childs website about Record Lathes, "Not suitable for lathes with no through-hole in the spindle - e.g. Record lathes." Sorry, Chris but this is cobblers, I think Woody has already said it, but here's the tailstock of my record and it quite clearly has a hollow tailstock as there was no resistance when I shoved a screwdriver right up it:
(THIS PARA IS MY UNDERSTANDING ONLY!!) The issue of drilling pillar v lathe and the retention of the arbor in the morse taper receptical can be best summed up by saying that the morse taper system was designed to retain the active component in the machine, not the passive. When the pillar drill is used the two surfaces of the arbor and the morse taper recepticle are sufficient to retain the component in the system because there is approximately (based on a 60mm long MT2) 3,000 square millimetre of metal being pushed forcibly against each other and as a consequence not revolving (in the case of tailstock drilling) or revolving in the case of a dead centre or drive centre in the headstock. Inversely, when there is no compression force on the taper, there is no force at all other than the bind caused by the previous compression holding the taper steady. The retention force provided in a pillar drill is created due to the fact that the drill is spinning and not the item being drilled as Woody highlighted, which is why the chuck remains in a pillar drill.
Likewise Walter, I drill around four or five thousand blanks a year and from memory my pillar drill chuck has only fallen out once and that was because I had taken everything apart for a bit of maintenance and a bit of dirt got in and had broken the continuous friction bond between the arbor and taper recess.
I'm not trying to be bloody minded or argumentative, despite what the wife says, but I remain confused as to the book method of ensuring the tailstock chuck remains securely attached to the tailstock in the event of withdrawing the drill. I can't think of any way of ensuring it does. The hand on the chuck with the increased vibration caused by a loosening chuck at least provides me the time to leap for the off button, something I wouldn't be particularly keen to do if I had to lean through the axis of the flight path of the chuck should something fail in the interim. (My on/off switch is moveable which is a great benefit working at the other end of the lathe.)
Have I understood the drawbar correctly in this situation, because I've never heard of one before?
Walter
Fellow
Interesting comments Neil,
First of all you seem to have gained a sound understanding of the principles of drawbars and I agree completely with your assessment of their compatibility with various types of tailstock.
I think there may well be something in the difference between the forces involved that renders the Morse taper more likely to unseat from the tailstock than from a pillar drill but I am not an engineer and don't profess to be an expert on such matters. Your explanation seems perfectly credible to me. Perhaps Doug might express an opinion, he has more knowledge of these things.
As for ensuring that the tailstock chuck remains securely attached to the tailstock when withdrawing the drill bit, I don't find it necessary to do this because, unless the bit has jammed in the work for some reason, the chuck Morse taper should remain seated. If there is so much swarf in the flutes that the bit is sticking then you are not withdrawing frequently enough to keep the flutes clear. If the chuck starts to revolve, or the Morse taper starts to unseat as I withdraw the bit then I stop the lathe, resolve whatever the problem is and re-seat the taper. I would never attempt to stop the chuck revolving by hand or continue to withdraw the tailstock.
Holding the chuck will only prevent rotation or unseating if the force you are able to exert exceeds the force holding the bit in the work. If the bit has jammed in the work, the reverse is likely to be true and then you are at risk of some sort of injury and I prefer to avoid that risk however slight. If something does go wrong it is highly unlikely, even if you have the reaction time of a formula one racing driver, that you will reach the off button in time.
A drawbar would prevent the unseating of the taper, but to be honest I couldn't be bothered to connect and disconnect one every time I decided to drill on the lathe.
All of this is of course just my opinion based upon my own experience and what I have learned from others. I am more than happy to listen to and learn from alternative views.
First of all you seem to have gained a sound understanding of the principles of drawbars and I agree completely with your assessment of their compatibility with various types of tailstock.
I think there may well be something in the difference between the forces involved that renders the Morse taper more likely to unseat from the tailstock than from a pillar drill but I am not an engineer and don't profess to be an expert on such matters. Your explanation seems perfectly credible to me. Perhaps Doug might express an opinion, he has more knowledge of these things.
As for ensuring that the tailstock chuck remains securely attached to the tailstock when withdrawing the drill bit, I don't find it necessary to do this because, unless the bit has jammed in the work for some reason, the chuck Morse taper should remain seated. If there is so much swarf in the flutes that the bit is sticking then you are not withdrawing frequently enough to keep the flutes clear. If the chuck starts to revolve, or the Morse taper starts to unseat as I withdraw the bit then I stop the lathe, resolve whatever the problem is and re-seat the taper. I would never attempt to stop the chuck revolving by hand or continue to withdraw the tailstock.
Holding the chuck will only prevent rotation or unseating if the force you are able to exert exceeds the force holding the bit in the work. If the bit has jammed in the work, the reverse is likely to be true and then you are at risk of some sort of injury and I prefer to avoid that risk however slight. If something does go wrong it is highly unlikely, even if you have the reaction time of a formula one racing driver, that you will reach the off button in time.
A drawbar would prevent the unseating of the taper, but to be honest I couldn't be bothered to connect and disconnect one every time I decided to drill on the lathe.
All of this is of course just my opinion based upon my own experience and what I have learned from others. I am more than happy to listen to and learn from alternative views.
Penpal
Grand Master
As mentioned before I have a substantial mill drill I use a lot my first experience of obtaining a flat surface using it as a mill the chuck moved a bit creating a dreadful finish. I went to my engineering friends and leant the first step in milling even with a Mill Drill was to use a captive deice to hold the bit be it a chuck or a special chuck using the threaded milling bits or whatever using a draw bar became second nature and I have never had a problem since.
When I bought my Pillar Drill the chuck dropped out a few times so I bought a MTaper reamer to suit, also the owner of the main distribution business in Australia came to here for a Working With Wood Show soon after my experieces he told me lots about the facts of life with at that time Taiwanese drills. He said whilst in Taiwan how much if I buy your drills and I dont take your chucks the manufacturer said same price. Now Australia on the world market is slim pickings with our relatively tiny population so our purchase power is not taken as very important some times.
Anyway the Aussie bloke said give me ten bucks and your address I will send you a decent chuck which he did. I have dedicated a drill press that same one for over twenty years as a pen related unit after chucking the Taiwanese under powered motor and fitting a one HP motor, replacing the bearings cleaning out the swarf from manufacture etc it has served me well. I fitted a draw bar to the chuck stem complete confidence ever since so it works for me. O the VL100 lathe it too is only used for pens as well I use a draw bar on the head stock it certainly maintains integrity there.
These things I have done to help me and share only because of the discussions lately I feel like not defending safe practices just applying them in what I do and enjoying the rewards.
With so many literally genius level mates in Engineering I am gratefull for their advice. I listen and note all the comments that have been made as well very interesting.
Kind regards Peter.
When I bought my Pillar Drill the chuck dropped out a few times so I bought a MTaper reamer to suit, also the owner of the main distribution business in Australia came to here for a Working With Wood Show soon after my experieces he told me lots about the facts of life with at that time Taiwanese drills. He said whilst in Taiwan how much if I buy your drills and I dont take your chucks the manufacturer said same price. Now Australia on the world market is slim pickings with our relatively tiny population so our purchase power is not taken as very important some times.
Anyway the Aussie bloke said give me ten bucks and your address I will send you a decent chuck which he did. I have dedicated a drill press that same one for over twenty years as a pen related unit after chucking the Taiwanese under powered motor and fitting a one HP motor, replacing the bearings cleaning out the swarf from manufacture etc it has served me well. I fitted a draw bar to the chuck stem complete confidence ever since so it works for me. O the VL100 lathe it too is only used for pens as well I use a draw bar on the head stock it certainly maintains integrity there.
These things I have done to help me and share only because of the discussions lately I feel like not defending safe practices just applying them in what I do and enjoying the rewards.
With so many literally genius level mates in Engineering I am gratefull for their advice. I listen and note all the comments that have been made as well very interesting.
Kind regards Peter.
Walter
Fellow
I meant Terry, senior moment, sorry!!