taper turning parts, pre-RFQ guidance

Status
Not open for further replies.

ptxman

New Member
I’m contemplating submitting an RFQ for a series of similar, MT3 based tooling do-dads which are kind of outside my practical capabilities. I don’t have a taper attachment on my lathe. This is orientated for my rotary table & tailstock (hobby purposes) so I’d like to throw out the intended desired end-result for input beforehand, to see if this is even reasonable approach & what I’d be getting into.

Basically I want a series of machinable, tapered plugs. The base section is kind of common geometry – the top datum is defined by a specific diameter (about 0.890”) then reducing at MT3 taper angle to about 2” length. Some would have a straight, concentric hole drilled/reamed into them to accommodate typical nominal sized ground drill blank pins, like 0.125”, 0.250”, 0.375”.. Some would have an extending, integral cylindrical shaft section say 0.750”dia x 3” long (ie to be turned at the same time so it’s concentric with the MT taper). Some would have a blank, oversize knob that that I can turn to specific shapes on my own (and so 60 deg centers on both ends so I can take it from there.).

When I look at typical commercial MT3 arbors & tooling, I’m guessing they are hardened & ground for precision & wear etc. I’m also guessing that replicating that on my small qty, specialized request would be big bucks & probably not an option. So my question is: could this be done on a cnc lathe to ‘pretty-close-to’ commercial MT3 arbor standards, meaning surface finish & concentricity/runout if I opted for the best ‘machined’ surface possible from some suitable steel? Ie, trying to mitigate hardening + grinding $$ operation. If so, what kind of material would be best to request? How would I define the equivalent, (practical) surface finish? In this application, would it be advisable to have the MT plug partially 'splined', kindof like an ER collet?

I thought long & hard about modifying 15$ offshore MT blanks, but I just can’t see how I would properly hold that in my lathe to part-off the extending diameter, whether I could drill good tolerance holes in that kind of steel etc. Any input welcome. I can provide a drawing, that’s the easy part!
 

drylakemachine

New Member
MT adpter

I've seen straight shaft od's with MT on the id.True these up in the lathe and insert tool to be machined and turn your own custom holders. I don't think anyones going to get close to the offshore of $ 15.00
jim
 

ptxman

New Member
Thanks for the tip. I wasnt suggesting the RFQ part should cost $15, I was just referring to trying to utilize those parts.

So assuming I machined through the hardened surface & into the core to shorten the MT length, is it reasonable to expect the inner core would be drill/ream-able for pins & such?

I thought the only way to resist the turning force in this example would be if the MT blank had some sort of key (like the tang section on a tailstock arbor) since I cant see how a dog would fit. Otherwise, what prevents it from just slipping in the socket surface of the 'holder'.
 

drylakemachine

New Member
#3 mt

Hi just reread your question. Have you looked at dead centers? They wouldn't be able to do the .750 dia ,but everything else should work if i'm getting the jist of it right this time.The cheaper the better and should be soft enough.
jim
 

ptxman

New Member
Like these you mean? Thats what I was contemplating modifying. (I guess "MT blank" was a misleading term, sorry). Looking more closely at the description, they come in different varieties: carbide full, HSS full, HSS half, carbide tip. I just assumed they were all hardened. Does 'half' mean hardened halfway radially to the core or the pointy 'half'?

But getting back to my lathe turning question... assuming I chucked the cylindrical 'holder', which nests the dead center in its matching female MT3 socket, what prevents the dead center from slipping/spinning inside the socket due to the machining/turning forces? It has no tang like a tailstock arbor to retain it in position?
 

Attachments

  • 2010-01-14_214439.jpg
    2010-01-14_214439.jpg
    37.1 KB · Views: 44
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top