Router spindle axial runout

[Michael Kellough]

[member=44099]Cheese[/member] I don’t know if I’m qualified to offer advice but it looks like you have a problem with the 2200 spindle taper. When you rotated dowel does the collet rotation stay the same? If so, can you rotate it in steps instead of the dowel?

On the routers I’m testing when the collet nut is loose enough I can wiggle the collet and rotate it without rotating the dowel/rod/shaft.

If you can do that with both the 1400 and 2200 collets you might be able to compensate for most of the problem in the spindle taper, if that is where the problem lies.

 

[greg mann]

ER collets were first developed by a Swiss company, Rego-fix. Their collets are almost certainly of higher quality than what is coming with the router. Interestingly, they have an ‘extreme precision’ version as well. A good friend is a dealer and he told me that their processing has been refined over the years that the standard collets now are made to the same quality as the ones sold at a higher standard. If anyone wants to try these I will post contact info.

 

[Michael Kellough]

As in it sucks.  [eek]

After futzing around measuring runout on a pair of Chinese manufactured router motors I decided to follow Cheese’s lead and check out my OF 2200.

I’m shocked at how bad it is! Average of several tests at 4.5” from the collet is .013”.
Range was .012 to .0148”

Giving the motor a burst of electricity you can easily see the rod wobbling.

Close to the collet runout averaged .0014”, about the same as the Chinese router another 4+ inches out.

I wondered if I was measuring differently so immediately got out the better of the Chinese routers and measured .0015”. The Festool is nearly ten times worse.

Unlike the ER20 collet on the Chinese router the Festool collet is a snug fit. I couldn’t ensure the collet would stay in the rotation position I set it to after tightening. And there it too little of it visible to see what position it is in after tightening.

If you cut a mortise 3” deep with the OF 2200 it would be 1/100th inch wider at the bottom than the top. That is way too loose.

 

[Cheese]

If anyone wants to try these I will post contact info.

Greg...count me in, this was supposed to be a walk in the park.

It started with a simple question from Michael and it grows to this. I get it ...this is how many technical issues eventually pan out. This is exactly why Engineering is identified as "taking too long" to deliver a product.  [blink]  When evaluating new results, there are always too many results that result in endless parsing.

 

[Michael Kellough]

Would those ER 20 collets fit the OF 2200?

 

[Cheese]

So after dicking around with this for the last couple of days, I've decided there are 3 critical elements that need to be addressed. Circular position of the collet bore, circular position of the collet fingers and circular position of the dowel pin position.
Once these positions are marked, then a systematic evaluation can be done. Each can be moved and a corresponding measurement can be made.

Unfortunately, I only addressed 2 of the 3 variables and therefore my measurements were weird.

 

[Michael Kellough]

[member=44099]Cheese[/member]  being educated as an artist I often get engineering terms wrong. I’m not sure what you mean by “address” but it seems the most important element in getting a shaft to spin true is the one we can’t do anything about. The spindle taper (“collet bore”?).

My OF 2200 spindle taper seems to spec out pretty well, .00025 at bottom, .0002 middle, .0002 top, but apparently it is bored with yaw relative to the spindle axis.

You said, “Once these positions are marked…”  I couldn’t see a way to mark positions without the collet removed from the spindle. Then only by marking the collet and the nut in places that can’t be seen from outside. Then I found that the collet would change position relative to the nut as it was tightened. Since the collet can’t be reliably adjusted to try and get an imperfection in the collet to compensate for the condition of the bore the I can’t think of any way to “address” my OF 2200 except with expletives.

 

[tsmi243]

I can think of only one time that router runout was causing a specific problem for me, and it was trying to do shelf pin holes with a Trend T4.  The fit of the pins in the holes was real sloppy.

So maybe that's a good practical test, to give you an idea of what 4 thou of runout actually means in the real world. 

(I didn't measure the Trend, I just chucked a 12" drill bit in, and eyeballed it while rotating the collet by hand.  It was about 3/16" of wobble at the end.  Same bit in the 1010?  No visible amount whatsoever.  End of testing.)

 

[Cheese]

[member=44099]Cheese[/member]  being educated as an artist I often get engineering terms wrong.
1. I’m not sure what you mean by “address” but it seems the most important element in getting a shaft to spin true is the one we can’t do anything about. The spindle taper (“collet bore”?).

My OF 2200 spindle taper seems to spec out pretty well, .00025 at bottom, .0002 middle, .0002 top, but apparently it is bored with yaw relative to the spindle axis.

You said, “Once these positions are marked…” 
2. I couldn’t see a way to mark positions without the collet removed from the spindle. Then only by marking the collet and the nut in places that can’t be seen from outside. Then I found that the collet would change position relative to the nut as it was tightened. Since the collet can’t be reliably adjusted to try and get an imperfection in the collet to compensate for the condition of the bore the I can’t think of any way to “address” my OF 2200 except with expletives.

1. You're correct, the dimensional accuracy of the collet bore along with its concentricity (to the router shaft) and perpendicularity (yaw) of it all determine router bit positional accuracy.

The dimensional accuracy is probably the least to worry about because it's a ground feature and the likely hood that it is egg-shaped is probably quite minimal. It could be a little too large or a little too small but the taper of the collet would compensate if those are minor variations.

The concentricity is an issue but it never changes, it's always the same so you can compensate for it by rotating the collet or just accept it as is and working with the offset in the finished product.

The perpendicularity issue (yaw) is my largest concern because it's not consistent. It's always producing different dimensional sizes depending upon how far the router bit protrudes from the collet nut.

2. You're correct again... [smile] Actually, the collet isn't changing position relative to the nut but rather, the nut changes position relative to the collet.  So once the collet is inserted in the bore, it no longer moves, it's the nut that moves...that's a good thing because it becomes a repeatable datum.

This is how I'm going to go about it profiling the TIR for different combinations. I'll mark the router shaft in 4 positions with 4 different colored dots. Here's the first dot in red.

[attachimg=1]

I've already marked the 4 sections of the collet body 1-4.

[attachimg=2]

[attachimg=3]

I've already marked the dowel pin with a single alignment dot.

[attachimg=4]

What I controlled yesterday was the dot on the dowel pin relative to each collet body segment but I never controlled that combination to the collet bore in the router shaft.  [doh]

 

[Michael Kellough]

“I never controlled that combination to the collet bore in the router shaft.”

It seemed to me that wasn’t possible with the 1/2” collet. There is a lot of friction in the fit of the collet in the nut so the collet started turning in the spindle as soon as I turned the nut.

There is a lot more space for marking on the 1/4” nut. Didn’t seem practical (or I was lazy) with the 1/2” nut. I wanted to be able to see the position of collet within nut from outside.

I bought a used OF 2200 that looked unused, not a spec of dust, along with the accessory kit. Is the 1/4” collet in the accessory kit? I didn’t find one in the main Sys.

 

[Michael Kellough]

My original question, “ How much is typical? How much is too much?” didn’t receive any numerical answers so I bought an inexpensive kit for testing runout on my routers and eventually learned how to use the stuff.

The new router that spawned the question turned out to be fair on it’s own, bad with the original collet but better with a better collet.

The replacement router is pretty good with the better collet and very good when the collet position is optimized, .0002 near the collet and .0018 4-1/2” away. It’s a keeper. It’s designed to be used in a router table but runout should be similar to a regular router, right? An armature held in bearings high and low and the spindle end cone machined with a good level of precision.

Cheese posted some measurements for his Festool routers and got some unexpected results for his OF 2200 so I measured the runout on mine and found out it is appallingly bad, averaging .013” at 4-1/2”. The spindle taper must be off axis. Something that could only be countered with a really bad collet inserted in exactly right position. As is my OF 2200 is only good for use with short bits and that the opposite of what I bought it for.

While in the.measuring mindset I grabbed a couple other nearby routers and checked them.

Bosch 1618 with 1/2” collet, .0031” near the collet and a whopping .0135 at 4-1/2”, just like my OF 2200. Are crooked spindle tapers a thing with German routers!?

Next closest to hand was a Milwaukee 5616-29, the 1/2” “hand grip” router.
Incredibly little runout, .0002+ close to the collet and only .0007 at 4-1/2” out.  [blink]

The Milwaukee is leaving the locker room to sit on my bench full time.

[attachimg=1]

 

[squall_line]

I bought a used OF 2200 that looked unused, not a spec of dust, along with the accessory kit. Is the 1/4” collet in the accessory kit? I didn’t find one in the main Sys.

The current version of the OF 2200 only comes with a 1/2" collet, per the FUSA website:

"Includes 1/2" collet only. 8mm and 1/4" collets available separately."

I can't remember if my Recon model came with more than one collet and it's too buried right now to check.  If anything, it only came with a 1/2" and 8mm.

I have enough of the other collet sizes from my other routers plus a few spares that I got on clearance a while back. I'm guessing that given enough time they will all migrate to other systainers than the ones they originally came in...

 

[Michael Kellough]

I bought a used OF 2200 that looked unused, not a spec of dust, along with the accessory kit. Is the 1/4” collet in the accessory kit? I didn’t find one in the main Sys.

The current version of the OF 2200 only comes with a 1/2" collet, per the FUSA website:

"Includes 1/2" collet only. 8mm and 1/4" collets available separately."

I can't remember if my Recon model came with more than one collet and it's too buried right now to check.  If anything, it only came with a 1/2" and 8mm.

I have enough of the other collet sizes from my other routers plus a few spares that I got on clearance a while back. I'm guessing that given enough time they will all migrate to other systainers than the ones they originally came in...

Thanks! Now I don’t have to go crazy looking for it.

 

[Michael Kellough]

Found another router, the venerable Hitachi TR-12 plunge router. I think it was the first of its kind available in the states, arriving in the mid ‘80’s?

I never used it as much as anticipated because it’s kinda scary. 1300 watts kick the spindle up to 22,000 rpm’s instantly and the collet is an unusual design that goes from loose to tight is less than 1/8th turn. But if I want to make a deep mortise with a straight bit I’ll be using it instead of the OF 2200.

[attachimg=1]

Runout near the collet, .0014, at 4-1/2” .0034”. About 4 times better than the 2200.

So, to answer my own question, I’d say this is “good”. Maybe very good. 4-1/2” is pretty far out. Runout at 2” would be only ~.0016” (The Milwaukee posted above is exceptionally good)

 

[rvieceli]

While all this metrology is an interesting exercise, in real world  use it may not make that much difference. You need to remember that adage “perfection is the enemy of good”

4.5 inches out from the collet is a ways out, you’re talking about a five inch OAL router bit. Most of mine are 3.5 or less. In use bits have a tendency to flex slightly. Is it possible to introduce more error by not keeping the base in perfect contact with the workpiece? In a handheld is the base perfectly flat (within .001) over its entire surface? Does the workpiece hold the same tolerances?

Chuck a straight bit in the router and run down the edge of a board. Use a bearing and a straight edge or do it any way you wish. Drop a reference square on the result and see how square it is.

Run a groove down a board and see how well it holds the width along the length.

Ron

 

[greg mann]

If anyone wants to try these I will post contact info.
[/quote]

Greg...count me in, this was supposed to be a walk in the park.

It started with a simple question from Michael and it grows to this. I get it ...this is how many technical issues eventually pan out. This is exactly why Engineering is identified as "taking too long" to deliver a product.  [blink]  When evaluating new results, there are always too many results that result in endless parsing.
[/quote]

His name is Ross Jones, and he can be reached at (248) 640-6887. He can accept payment in several ways. You and he can work that out.

 

[Cheese]

Ya, as Ron noted, this whole metrology thing is interesting and coming from an engineering perspective, I fully realize that this study is  probably more interesting to me than 90% of the people on this forum.

While going through these laborious testing procedures, I was quietly chuckling to myself on the millions of router owners in the wild that keep their routers in a sawdust strewn environment and when changing router collets, do absolutely nothing to clean the collet or to clean the collet bore from debris. They just install a different router bit and go forth. So the seemingly insaneness of this thread is not lost on me.  [smile]

However, this is really a thread on router capabilities, understanding what your router is capable of dimensionally producing and if those capabilities meet, exceed or fall short of your needs.

I liken this to shooting firearms at the range, you bring a firearm and several different loads and shoot at a target to find out which combination performs the best and is the most accurate. Many rounds are fired but after the smoke has cleared, you establish which combination is the most accurate.

That's very similar to changing various collets and re-orienting router bits to produce optimal results. That's just tweaking the existing conditions, and this same process exists for every hobby/pastime that folks pursue, cars, photography, machine tools, motorcycles, rock polishing...the list is endless.

 

[Cheese]

If anyone wants to try these I will post contact info.

Greg...count me in, this was supposed to be a walk in the park.

It started with a simple question from Michael and it grows to this. I get it ...this is how many technical issues eventually pan out. This is exactly why Engineering is identified as "taking too long" to deliver a product.  [blink]  When evaluating new results, there are always too many results that result in endless parsing.
[/quote]

His name is Ross Jones, and he can be reached at (248) 640-6887. He can accept payment in several ways. You and he can work that out.
[/quote]

Greg, are these Festool compatible collets? I've looked at the Elaire line of collets and they don't appear to be Festool compatible.

 

[Michael Kellough]

Here is an interesting thread on collets.

 

[Cheese]

Here is an interesting thread on collets.

An interesting read Michael...also interesting that others are having similar accuracy questions.  The PB they are referring to is PreciseBits which was posted earlier.
https://www.precisebits.com/tutorials/Choosing_collets.htm

It's always been the large industrial organizations that have been at the cutting edge, but with the recent explosion of affordable CNC equipment for DIY'ers, the pendulum has really shifted. I feel it's now the singularly focused DIY'er that drives some of the more creative innovations.

What was once only obtainable with an industrial purchase order for thousands of dollars and hundred of parts, can now be obtained with some commonly available software and hardware on a per part basis.