email@example.com fired this volley in
I'm sorry, Pete, but I don't see anything there that a serious machinist
or serious amateur machinist would think was reasonable.
With the standard 'tee-handle' chuck wrench on the (Yes, an Atlas) chuck,
if you use the 'Portnoy's Complaint Method' (three fingers spinning the
wrench), you can move it just as fast as any of those except the dumb
idea of driving it with a power drill!
I mean, why? The only time you really need FAST chucking and de-chucking
is when you're doing production cut-off work. Then you need a QA chuck,
not a scroll chuck!
And using a drill on a 4 jaw as well. Maybe the 4 jaw is a hobby grade
version - and acts as a 3. 4 jaws should have all 4 independent
allowing offsetting and very good centering.
I have a Sheldon 11-44 with 3 and 4 jaw chucks. A wood lathe with 3, 4
and another special 4 jaw.
On Thu, 12 Feb 2015 18:08:54 -0800 (PST), firstname.lastname@example.org
The question arises, how much does one adjust chuck jaws? I don't
believe it is a significant portion of the machining time. and for a
four jawed chuck, as the guy shows using a power drive, my experience
has been that the majority of the time was spent getting rid of the
last few thousands of runout.
One gets the impression that the particular machinist in that article had
nothing worthwhile to offer the community, so he documented an abusive
technique he never really thought out.
He probably _doesn't_ "get rid of the last few thousandths of runout", so
it never occurred to him that his is a bad way to 'adjust' a 4-jaw chuck
(or any chuck, for that matter).
I seldom do rapid repeated cutoff work, but I was gifted a nice 3"
precision 6-jaw Quick-acting chuck, so when I do such work, it's both
fast and pretty accurate.
Kind of a funny story, that. I built a precision crimper for 5/32" o.d.
brass tubing for a client for fixing electric igniters into short lengths
of that tubing. He was using the assemblies as movie stage 'ammunition'
for prop guns in a country where real firearms are prohibited even as
The chuck became the 'crimper' part, as it would very precisely neck the
tubing down with a pretty six-point 'star crimp'. We didn't even have to
modify it.. just mounted it in a hollow-framed stand, and clamped a pull
handle to the closing ring.
The idea fell through with the movie studios. He later dropped off the
beautiful chuck-in-stand with "You want this boat-anchor?" "Well...
sure, thanks. I might find SOME use for it." <G>
On Friday, February 13, 2015 at 7:09:25 AM UTC-5, Lloyd E. Sponenburgh wrot
Yeah, I guess everyone wants to portray journalists who collect information
for reporting in trade manuals like this and others as somehow either too
detached, crazy, ignorant, corrupt or biased or even worse.
But notice how difficult it would be to be crazy AND corrupt AND biased AND
all of that that everyone says and even worse than all that all at the sam
e time? That's how you know that the journalist is neither one of them. S
o you should believe the report.
I did; I hold no rancor toward the fellow. It's just a bad idea. If the
occasional prod from a professional machinist hadn't set me straight on a
few things, I'd still be doing things that could damage my workpieces or
He's welcome to continue it, and I'm not being uncharitable by saying it
is not worthwhile -or even damaging- to do. He did, after all, offer it
up as an 'article' giving advice; bad advice. Some other 'amateur' might
follow it, and fooey-up a light-duty chuck, thinking he might save eleven
seconds of a two-hour machining job.
Well, guys, I feel thoroughly beat up now. But I really don't understand all the vitriolic comments.
Maybe I failed to explain WHY I offered these ideas:
The main reason for even considering the speed handle and drill ideas is when reversing chuck jaws or when going from a really small chuck opening to a really large chuck opening, particularly with the 4 jaw chuck.
Just go out to your shop and time yourself for reversing the jaws on a 8" 4 jaw chuck using the tee handle, then try it with the speed handle.
I have been "spinning the tee handle" for a long time and I am here to tell you that you shouldn't knock the speed handle until you try it.
The drill and speed handle thoughts were never meant to deal with making fine adjustments.
But the two little sockets/square stock tools are up to the job.
I probably wouldn't use the drill method myself, but I added it simply because I had seen it somewhere.
email@example.com fired this volley in
No vitriol! Most of the folks here (except a few crazies in the bozo-
bin) don't hate or even despise someone who throws out a bad idea.
But they are entitled to their opinions of how bad an idea it is, and
even to speculate about the motivations for offering it.
I, personally, would NEVER suggest that you don't continue to do it, even
though I will not.
On Fri, 13 Feb 2015 07:34:50 -0800 (PST), firstname.lastname@example.org
I'll endorse the speed handle as I do exactly that when reversing the
jaws on the 18" 4-jaw on my big lathe. Not sure I'd bother for the 6"
chuck on the little lathe, even if I had a speed handle to match the
socket in the adjusting screws.
And I'll confess to using an air ratchet when it comes to removing and
replacing the 12 socket heads in order to reverse the top jaws on the
Okay, guys. I hopefully fixed the typos and re arranged the whole page so it would, hopefully, make more sense.
Maybe y'all would rather that I went to OT stuff? That seems real popular here.
"What do you know about Roman blacksmithing? "
Not a lot. Except that they sure did a lot of it. I do know that they were
producing wrought iron all over the parts of the world that they had conq
uered. I suppose that ran right up to about 450AD.
Producing wrought iron is a lot of work. We make a couple of runs at it
each year around here. The reason I say this, is that they wouldn't have g
one to all that trouble if they weren't going to make a lot of stuff out of
The trouble for archeologists is that the iron items don't often survive
because of rust.
Can you be more specific with your question? I know several guys who can s
upply lot more detail. I do a fair amount of "traditional" blacksmithing.
That means, to me, that I mostly make stuff that people would have used ar
ound 1870 and before. Many of those items wouldn't have changed a lot from
what a Roman blacksmith would have been asked to produce.
When making wrought iron the way they did it, they often got chunks of high
er carbon steel here and there in the bloom. Sometimes (all too often) the
whole bloom would be of a higher carbon content than needed. These pieces
would be saved for edging tools that needed it.
We did a couple of 10 day 24X7 smelts back in about 1992 and 1995 or so whe
re we did our best to replicate smelters of the 150 BC period, attempting t
o produce wrought iron FOR the blacksmiths of that period. We learned a l
ot and got very dirty sifting 8 tons of charcoal for the furnace. I'll bet
the Romans did too. OT???
Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.