# Norman Patent Style Qctp



## prasad (Apr 26, 2015)

Guys, 
I know I can buy a commercial QCTP for my Grizzly G4000 lathe for around $150. However it would deprive me the pleasure of making my own QCTP using equipment that is available to me. I am not thinking of making a Wedge or Piston type. I am wondering if I can make a "Norman Patent" style QCTP for my G4000 Grizzly lathe. I have a mini-mill for milling slots in the tool holder. So my logic is, apart from saving some money, I would stand to gain from the experience earned in putting my machines into some use. 

My questions: 
1. Has anyone made it? If yes any drawings or sketches? (Or any advice)?
2. Is there any reason to avoid going along this road? I do not see any commercial version sold in the market. Basically, is there any inherent issue with Norman Patent design? 

All your inputs would help me. 
Thanks
Prasad


----------



## kd4gij (Apr 26, 2015)

A picture or link will help us help you.


----------



## prasad (Apr 26, 2015)

Here is a picture I downloaded from Internet. I think this is only a typical design and there may be many variations to it. 

Thank you
Prasad


----------



## T Bredehoft (Apr 26, 2015)

Interesting concept.  I'm making a 4 tool unit that mounts directly on the saddle, instead of the compound.  Should I need the compound, i can still remove my unit and put it (the compound) back on.  The distance between the spindle center and the top of the saddle is 1.88 something, allowing me to rotate the tool holder and still hold 3/4 inch tooling. I'm working up drawings, will post when they're done.


----------



## ray (Apr 26, 2015)

Just sent you a pm or conversation @prasad


----------



## prasad (Apr 26, 2015)

T Bredehoft said:


> Interesting concept.  I'm making a 4 tool unit that mounts directly on the saddle, instead of the compound.  Should I need the compound, i can still remove my unit and put it (the compound) back on.  The distance between the spindle center and the top of the saddle is 1.88 something, allowing me to rotate the tool holder and still hold 3/4 inch tooling. I'm working up drawings, will post when they're done.



Hi

This Norman Patent tool post works very much similar to a QCTP - just like AXA. The main benefit is the feature to adjust the tool height using a tiny screw and then the tool height  is set. You can remove a tool holder and fit the next one without further need to adjust the tool height. Each tool bit will have a mating tool holder that is adjusted once initially and it will not need re-adjustment unless it is disturbed. I have been searching the web and just found a set of design drawings at this web site by a Ralph Peterson.  http://www.toolsandmods.com/docs/ralph_patterson_qctp.pdf I think these were drawn for 7x12 lathe but can be adapted for use on any lathe. 

I think it will be good to retain the compound because of additional benefits that one gets from the compound. Norman Patent design was created by a person by that name in 1925 as I find it. It does not appear to be any patent protected from all my Internet discoveries so far. 

It appears to be something that one can do easily in a hobby workshop. Why is it not popular then?

Thanks
Prasad


----------



## prasad (Apr 26, 2015)

ray said:


> Just sent you a pm or conversation @prasad


I replied back too.


----------



## T Bredehoft (Apr 26, 2015)

Doggone, that's a good looking project. I may have to reconsider.  No, I'll finish my 4 tool that sits on the saddle, but I'm gonna have to make one of these Pattersons, too.


----------



## prasad (Apr 28, 2015)

I have two designs to choose from - Ralph Peterson and Paul Alciatore. Paul's design looks thoroughly professional and has a flat milled edge on the tool holder that goes against the flat surface on the sleeve. Ralph on the other hand makes it very simple. The tool holder has a slit that gets squeezed tight to grip the round sleeve. Ralph's version appears to be easier to make and I think I will go for this. 

My plan is to make the sleeve out of mild steel and the tool holders with 6061-T6 aluminum. Since I will need many tool holders making them out of aluminum will be easier. Aluminum is easier to machine.  Any comments, anybody?

The disppointing find appears to be the shipping cost to get the materials. I see an estimate of about $20 for UPS ground from Speedymetals when the raw materials will cost me around $25. That is 40% will go for shipping. 

I also looked at McMaster-Carr who have a distribution center an hour away from me. Material cost will be about $27 but no shipping cost if I drive over to pick it up from their "will-call" window.  I am leaning towards this. 

Thank you
Prasad


----------



## ray (Apr 28, 2015)

Sounds like good choices on the design and where to get the materials.  The best to you.


----------



## Hawkeye (Apr 29, 2015)

I made a similar set to the Norman patent for my 9" Hercus Lathe. The main difference is that mine doesn't have the flat on one side of the centre post. Quite easy to make, works well. Here are a couple of shots of it holding a tool post grinder.


----------



## janvanruth (Apr 30, 2015)

the toolpost looks simple enough to make
the toolholders however..

you only need one toolpost and lots of toolholders

i would go for the pistontype
toolholders are very simple to make
and it gives you the opportunity to adapt the tool itself to work without a toolholder


----------



## Creativechipper (Jun 22, 2019)

The one in the picture posted by prasad looks like it would make a good tool post for a cross slide. So the tool post could be moved to either side of the spindle.
 Is this one of the advantages vs a QCTP?

 I am thinking of giving the upside down parting a try and noticed I cant easily move my tool post without using the compound dial to move the whole compound slide.


----------



## homebrewed (Jun 22, 2019)

I made a QCTP using the Patterson plans, but I didn't put a radius on the holders -- I left 'em rectangular.  Steel post and 6061 aluminum tool holders, used on a 7x12 mini lathe.  I used my benchtop mill to make the tool holders.  They are holding up fine.

The tool holders have a lot of "meat" around the mounting hole, so the hole can only be a few thousandths oversize -- much larger and it's difficult to squeeze it tight around the post.  To make it a little easier, I drilled a 1/8" hole on the side opposite the slot, halfway between the edge of the holder and mounting hole.  Then I cut another slot down to the 1/8" hole.  The radius provides some stress relief -- no sharp corners at the bottom of the slot.


----------



## mickri (Jun 22, 2019)

I made one of these.    https://www.hobby-machinist.com/threads/tool-post-holder.69487/   It works good.  Although I cut the slot on a mill/drill you can also cut the slot using a lathe.  Chuck up the end mill in the lathe and with the tool holder mounted on the cross slide you move the cross slide to cut the slot.  Search online for norman style tool post and you will get a bunch of hits.  A fair number of forum members have made these and all seem to be pleased with the result.


----------



## bill stupak (Jun 22, 2019)

Here is a design from Mikes Workshop. It features an expanding post, I used this design fro quite a while and it works really well, with a little imagination you could make it indexable.









						Novel quick change tool post
					

There has been a number of designs of quick change toolpost (QCTP) that are based on a pillar, securely mounted on the top slide, onto which the tool holder slides and is then clamped to the post by...



					mikesworkshop.weebly.com


----------



## Creativechipper (Jun 23, 2019)

oh yes another project to tackle, this looks fun!!


----------



## markba633csi (Jun 23, 2019)

That's the first one I have seen with the "quick change" lever- interesting, and eliminates the need for a separate wrench
However, a round post design might be more practical- the flat prevents you from rotating the unit easily, and the ability to rotate is essential I think
Mark


----------



## Downunder Bob (Jun 23, 2019)

It looks relatively simple without any traps for the beginner. Also it should work quite well. If you opt for the round post you will have no method of indexing, only presetting for height. However, with the flat on the side of the post it allows a form of indexing, as well as height setting.  Good luck.


----------



## mickri (Jun 23, 2019)

Creating indexing is fairly simple.  I did a lot of research on this when I made mine thinking that indexing was some really difficult thing to achieve.  What I found was all you have to do is machine indents in the base with a corresponding shape on the end of the height adjustment screw.  The screw will sit in the indent.  Something like this.


----------

