Router spindle axial runout

[Michael Kellough]

Thanks Cheese!

Very interesting and informative and the only place I’ve seen to buy precision collets.

Now I want to check out my Shaper collets. I’ve had trouble with 1/32” bits cutting copper but there are several possible reasons.
Maybe I need a better collet but I guess we can only use Festool’s proprietary collets?

 

[Crazyraceguy]

Thanks Cheese!

Very interesting and informative and the only place I’ve seen to buy precision collets.

Now I want to check out my Shaper collets. I’ve had trouble with 1/32” bits cutting copper but there are several possible reasons.
Maybe I need a better collet but I guess we can only use Festool’s proprietary collets?

That's what I was getting at about chip load. Run-out changes the chip load on each rotation.
As the bit gets smaller, the importance of it goes up.

So far, the smallest bits I have used in my Origin were 2mm, and that was in aluminum. I was also an O-flute bit, is only a single cutting edge. I really don't know the significance of that, in this situation.
These were through-cuts in fairly thin material and it still required some lube to prevent chip-weld.
It didn't take much, just a swipe across the surface of the cut path, with an acid brush.
Copper is known to be gummy too, so I would expect the same, maybe worse.

 

[Cheese]

It didn't take much, just a swipe across the surface of the cut path, with an acid brush.
Copper is known to be gummy too, so I would expect the same, maybe worse.

Interesting...so not a spray of lubricant but a wipe of lubricant. What was the lubricant?

Just curious, does Shaper chime in on suggestions or are they also MIA like Festool?

For the last 15 years that's been my most annoying thing with this forum. This is a direct blood line to the larger Festool community and yet Festool corporate treats the questions of the FOG with ambivalence and indifference. YAWN...just another day...just another DM to add to the coffer. Ya we have a website, but we don't need to answer any questions because we're too busy.

That's insulting and I take that personally and I have for the last 15 years.

 

[Steve1]

Seems everybody understood what you are measuring.  I don't think anybody even questioned the title of the thread.
But just to be accurate, we are talking about radial runout, not axial.

 

[Michael Kellough]

[member=65451]Steve1[/member] can you explain the difference? I would rather get it right.

[member=44099]Cheese[/member]. I go to the Shaper forum rarely but I have seen a lot of participation by Shaper staff, but I do not know if that changed after Shaper became part of the family.

 

[Michael Kellough]

Now that I think about it, my problems running tiny bits cutting copper were not runout related.

I used the waxy lubricant which might have been unhelpful since copper chips seemed to be stuck in the wax on the bit. The bits I broke were 2 and 3 flute but that wasn’t the problem either.

The problem was copper burrs forming on the surface digging into the soft plastic base of the Shaper causing it (or me) to lurch resulting in excessive chip load to say the least.

The solution was to add a buffer between the copper and the Shaper base 1/16” thick basswood sheets. I got that tip at the Shaper community forum.

I have not found 0 flute tiny bits. Maybe at that collet link Cheese provided?

 

[Cheese]

I have not found 0 flute tiny bits. Maybe at that collet link Cheese provided?

The smallest 0 flute bits they offer are all 1/4" diameter.

They do however offer 2-flute carbide stub end mills that are specifically for use with copper materials.

"Carbide 2-flute stub end-mill for cutting precious metals, copper alloys and alluminum
For precious metals, copper alloys and aluminum
Tool Family: MN208
Our 2-flute stub end-mills were specifically designed for cutting non-ferrous metals like aluminum, copper, silver and gold. They are characterized by low aspect ratio flute geometries insuring low deflection and long bit life at relatively high feed-rates. The precise radial relief reduces burr formation and chattering resulting in smoother, more uniform cutting. Primarliy designed for surfacing and shallow pocketing."

They have 1/8" shank diameters while the cutting diameter can be as small as .050".
https://www.precisebits.com/products/carbidebits/precisebit-rubout.asp

The offering though that really has me scratching my head is this one with a cutting diameter as small as .002"...is that even possible?
I first thought is was a misprint until I noticed they offer bits in .001" diameter increments up to .012".
https://www.precisebits.com/products/carbidebits/precisebit-stub.asp

 

[tsmi243]

Axial- in the direction of the axis.  If you slide the bit in and out of the collet, you're moving it axially.

Radial- in the direction of the radius.  If your 10MM bit cuts a 10.5mm wide slot, you've got radial runout. 

 

[Michael Kellough]

[member=51752]tsmi243[/member] thanks for the very clear explanation.

 

[Cheese]

Michael, here are a couple of TIR readings from the 1010 & the 1400.
The 1010 comes in at .0005" while the 1400 clocks in at .0008". The 2200 is all over the board and I'm trying to figure out what's going on. More work for tomorrow.  [smile]

The readings were taken at a distance of 1" from the collet with a 1/4" dowel pin used as a standard.

 

[Cheese]

I have not found 0 flute tiny bits. Maybe at that collet link Cheese provided?

[member=297]Michael Kellough[/member] I finally ran across some with 3 mm & 1/8" shanks...22 of them in all.  They were referred to as 1-flute.
https://www.precisebits.com/products/carbidebits/micr-O_1F.asp

 

[Crazyraceguy]

[member=44099]Cheese[/member] The ones I have been using are 1/8" shank and came in a box of 10. That's what is in the square box in the middle of the foam cutout of the Sysmini

I used a thicker lube, rather than spraying because I was concerned about getting it into my CT26.
The lube I used is called "Slip-it". It is a gel-like substance that looks somewhat like Vasoline. It is not that heavy/viscous though. It is much softer and not greasy. I have no idea what it is made from, but doesn't feel like silicone. AFAIK it is intended for old fashioned wood on wood style drawers and such.
I used a very light swipe of the brush, barely enough to notice, but it worked perfectly.

I did still experience some "pulling into the corners", but I wasn't really trying to prevent it either. I cut those rectangular slots in a single pass, since they are just clearance holes.

 

[Steve1]

Well, Michael, if nothing more, your thread has convinced me to replace the cheap Makita motor that I keep in my router table. 

I have the Jessem Pow-R-Teck SR on order.  They spec less than 1 thousanth runout at 2" out from the collet. 
Their production run just came in the door, so they estimate 2 - 3 weeks before shipping.  Sounds like they still have some minor work and/or testing to do to them.

 

[Michael Kellough]

[member=65451]Steve1[/member] That Jessem router motor looks like an excellent choice.

The much less expensive motor I checked out at the top of this thread is being replaced. I hope it’s better than the first.

 

[Crazyraceguy]

Well, Michael, if nothing more, your thread has convinced me to replace the cheap Makita motor that I keep in my router table. 

I have the Jessem Pow-R-Teck SR on order.  They spec less than 1 thousanth runout at 2" out from the collet. 
Their production run just came in the door, so they estimate 2 - 3 weeks before shipping.  Sounds like they still have some minor work and/or testing to do to them.

They may be doing the final retail packaging? Shipped in bulk form to them, then they pack/ship individually.

 

[Cheese]

Initially this seemed like a very simple task, insert a precision pin gage into a collet, set up an accurate dial test indicator (not a dial indicator) rotate the collet and record the runout.

I used a 1/4" dowel pin as the pin gage (runout within .0002") and measured the TIR 1" from the face of the collet.

The 1010 measured .0005" TIR.
The 1400 measured .0008" TIR.
The 2200 measured .0048" TIR, a factor of 6x to 9x greater than the previous readings.

This was the beginning of the rabbit hole that I really DIDN'T want to go down but I had no choice because sooner or later it will impact further projects on the horizon.

I opted to swap the 1/4" collet with a 1/2" collet and installed a 1/2" dowel pin, again guaranteed to be within .0002" TIR.
The 2200 measured .0043" TIR.
I loosened the collet and rotated the pin 180º....0012" TIR
I loosened the collet and rotated the pin -90º....0009" TIR
I loosened the collet and rotated the pin +90º....0035" TIR.

I then exchanged the 1/2"-2200 collet for a 1/2"-1400 collet and decided to repeat the above measurements using the same 1/2" dowel pin.
Initially....0017"  See photos below.
180º....0019"
-90º....0043"
+90º....0025"

Nothing is really making sense here other than we are measuring very small tolerances and it doesn't take much misalignment, think collet bore perpendicularity and collet through-hole perpendicularity, to skew the results. Either one of those perpendicularity issues would add .00015" TIR per each 1/60 degree deviation (1 minute of arc) over a 1/2" length engagement of the collet and the dowel pin.

I'm still noodling on this one.

[attachimg=1]

[attachimg=2]

 

[Michael Kellough]

[member=44099]Cheese[/member] I see your problem, your dial test indicator is too good!  [wink]

Yours moves five times as much as mine registering the same displacement.

My mea culpa is about my (probably) misreading my lowly .0005” test indicator.
As coarse as it is compared to Cheese’s Swiss model I think I misread it to make the runout I have measured previously twice as bad as it really is.

Help me understand if I’m reading this correctly.

[attachimg=1]

My cheap SHARS indicator in this photo showing 2.5 x .0005” or 5 x.0005”?
Until this morning I read this as 5 x, so all my previously posted measurements should be divided by two, if I was really consistent.

Out of embarrassment I feel compelled to do them all over again now that the replacement router has arrived.

I’ve already done most of them and will wait until they’re finished to post them all.

Now that I have two new routers and two new 1/2” ER 20 collets I’ve observed that as much as anything the collet matters. Measurements of the spindle taper on the new router are much better than the old router but using the new collet at a certain rotation in the worse router makes it look very good.

Router gurus have been advising for decades to mark the spindle and the collet and rotate the collet until you find the least runout. It’s a painstaking process but worth the effort. At least on paper. I’m not making dust yet.

 

[tsmi243]

Cheese, I'm sure you don't need my help on this, but I'm wondering if your 1010 and 1400 measurements would vary by clocking the pin. 

In other words- maybe they're NOT better than the 2200, and you just happened to pick the lowest runout position on your 1st test. 

And clocking the collet, independently of the bit, well..... IDK how much time you got, but my lunch break's over  [big grin] 

 

[rvieceli]

Michael the scale on your indicator is .0005 for each gradation line. The numbers around the dial are in thousandths. 10x.0005 equals 5 thousandths at the first numeral. The range on your indicator is .030 basically 60x.0005

So the indicated amount is 5 times .0005 or .0025

I believe that is correct.  [scared]

Ron

 

[Michael Kellough]

Doh!

So my original numbers are right and I have to double all the new measurements…
That’s disappointing but easy enough to do.

Corrected measurements follow.

Spindle taper measurements

Router One  Deep .0018.  Middle .003. Top .0032
Router Two.  Deep .0005.  Middle .0005 Top .001

Router Two is much better but how about with a with a collet and shaft?
The shaft is a piece of polished HSS drill rod .499” in diameter.
I don’t have a good way to measure concentricity or straightness of the rod.

I measured runout four times, close to the collet and 4-1/2” away.
At first I just roughly rotated the collet a quarter turn before measuring.
The rod was not rotated within the collet.

Router One Collet One

1 Close.  .0025            Far. ?
2 Close.  .0017            Far. .0065
3 Close.  .0015            Far. .005
4 Close.  .0015            Far. .0047

Router One Collet Two

1 Close.  .0005            Far. 0052
2 Close.  .00075          Far. .0044
3 Close.  .0008            Far. .0048
4 Close.  .0004            Far. .0047

With Collet Two is this acceptable? Maybe the router is okay and only the collet needs to be replaced?

For Router Two I marked the spindle and collet and carefully rotated the collet 90* between tests

Router Two Collet One

1 Close.  .0003            Far. .002
2 Close.  .0004            Far. .002
3 Close.  .0007            Far. .002
4 Close.  .0008            Far. .0024

Looks like the hole in the collet is offset and tilted slightly so runout at the end change as much as expected.

Router Two Collet Two

1 Close.  .0002            Far. .0025
2 Close.  .00019          Far. .002
3 Close.  .00022          Far. .0028
4 Close.  .0002            Far. .0016

This is much better but is it really good?

I did one last test, keeping the collet in the best pod within the spindle taper and rotating the rod in 90* increments.

1 Close.  .0003            Far. .0026
2 Close.  .00015          Far. .0023
3 Close.  .00028          Far. .0028
4 Close.  .0002            Far. .002, .0018, .0018, .0017

So it looks like the rod is a little out of round and I’ve reached the limit of my ability to do this consistently.