Hi all ,New member here and also new to the lathe hobby. I have a HF 7x10 I got from a friend at a great deal. I followed this thread and tried my hand at grinding some keystock to the tune of the first post. Came out fine on my second try. Did a few more for practice and now ready to try on some HSS I ordered.
Thanks to Mikey for making this easy to follow and a great tutorial.
The cutters I have are the inserts and the HF carbide on the red arms. I don't seem to get a nice finish cut on cold rolled steel. Its ok on aluminum which is easier to cut.
I did have a question though.
Why remove so much material on the first cut of the side? Is this for all around cutting or for specific materials?
Thanks again,
Solman
Hi Solman, and welcome to the HM community to you, too. I'm really glad to see that you tried grinding tools from keystock. In my opinion, that is the fastest way to learn tool grinding. It does take some time to learn how to move your hands and to clarify the various tool angles in your head; keystock is the best way to do that.
The answer to your question is more complicated than it seems. You actually don't have to remove so much material from the cutting side of the tool. The Brits often use a knife tool as the default turning tool and that tool has a straight cutting side - NO angle. The side we're discussing is called the side cutting edge and the angle it is ground at is called the side cutting edge angle. A knife tool has a side cutting edge angle of zero.
In times past, turning tools were oriented with the shank of the tool perpendicular to the work. In this position, the side cutting edge angle gave the user the proper LEAD ANGLE for that particular tool. To be clear, the side cutting edge angle = the lead angle when the tool was perpendicular to the work. Roughing, facing and finishing tools all had their own side cutting edge angles and when oriented perpendicular to the work the lead angle that resulted was appropriate for the function of the tool. For example, a roughing tool has a shallower lead angle vs that of a finishing tool. This shallower lead angle allowed a roughing tool to take deeper cuts without chattering. The larger lead angle of the finisher allowed for a much finer finish but it would chatter more with deeper cuts. The reason lead angle influences the potential for chatter is that cutting forces increase as more of the side cutting edge comes into contact with the work; the more contact, the more potential for chatter but with shallower depths of cut we get better finishes. If the above is true then angling a roughing tool so that its lead angle is the same as a finisher should improve the finish, right? If you do this, you will find that a roughing tool will finish just fine.
So, tool shapes in the past reflected the way the tools were used. That is why there were roughers, facers and finishers. Nowadays, with the much greater mobility of our quick change tool posts, we can use any shape that gives us the strength we need and we simply adjust the angle of the tool to suit our purpose. The tool in the OP is one such shape. It has enough mass in the tip to rough, it has enough clearance to face into a shoulder and then face out and it can finish very well with the right lead angle. We simply angle to tool to allow it to perform each of these functions.
Now, if you take a turning tool - a knife tool or a general purpose tool - and you perform roughing, finishing or facing functions by changing the tool post angle to suit, you will find that the lead angle that works best for the particular task is very nearly the same as the old time tools that were oriented perpendicular to the work. Interesting, eh?
So, the tool shape is not critical provided it is strong enough for the task and allows access to shoulders if that is important to you. Keep in mind that we are talking only about tool shape here. The actual geometry of the tool is another matter. Roughing, finishing and facing tools cut with different parts of the cutting edge and this is greatly influenced by the rake angles. The strength and efficiency required for these different functions is influenced by the relief angles. And the rake and relief angles are influenced by the material being cut.
In addition, the size of the lathe matters. Where a larger lathe can rough with shallower relief and rake angles, a smaller one requires greater rake and relief angles to produce an equivalent depth of cut. The reason for this is that different geometries produce different cutting forces so the tools used on a big lathe
should differ from those used on smaller lathes. This is the key advantage to HSS tooling - we can change the geometry to suit the purpose and the lathe.
The bottom line is that shape is not as important to understand. Find a shape that suits your needs and go with it. Spend some time understanding what the relief and rake angles do and learn to use them to your advantage. Until then, try the tool in the OP. It will keep you turning until you find your own design to meet your needs.
I hope I explained this to your satisfaction. If not, let me know and I'll try again.
Welcome to HM, Solman!