Need Semi-Slim Scale Recommendation

[Nesse1]

I picked up a glass scale for the carriage travel, but for the cross slide, I need something smaller.

I've got 29mm height, and 14mm wide. The carriage lock is the limiting factor for the width.

Suggestions welcome.

 

[Weldingrod1]

I used a magnetic scale on the Hardinge cross slide for the packaging. I was able to bond it directly to the saddle and only lose about 0.1" of tailstock travel.

Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk

 

[Jubil]

This is how I did mine.
First photo is from tailstock end.
2nd is from front.
3rd is from headstock end.
Only lost .250” on tailstock side.
Had to add extension to back splash, (notice pop rivets).

 

[Nutfarmer]

Weldingrod 1 any chance of a picture of your cross slide magnetic set up? Would like to see how you did it.

 

[Nesse1]

Dumb newbie question...

I've read that the popular option is to use a 1 micron resolution scale for a lathe cross slide. Honestly, I'm seriously questioning whether my machine can hold such a tight tolerance; the machine is a 1994 Tida made "Central Machinery" lathe. I'm thinking a 5 micron scale is more than enough for my usage. Am I missing anything?

 

[ycroosh]

You know, this is an excellent question.
You might have noticed that when it comes to hobby machining there is usually only one correct answer... For example, regardless of what you are planning to make, be it resurfacing classic Chevy blocks or making sprockets for Swiss watches, a Bridgeport mill is THE only acceptable choice. Table-top Chinese mills will be nothing but a complete disappointment to you and and embarrassment to your loved ones. Similarly, despite the fact that the last [non-insanely-priced] lathe we've made in this country was decades ago, you can't even bring up Asian import lathes in some polite forums, or you'll be banned, etc.

I'm being facetious of course. Just like with everything else in life, there are tradeoffs and practical limitations. A 5-micron scale will give you resolution of 0.0004" on diameter. For many things this is accurate enough, and for most of us is far beyond the limit of the capabilities of our machines. I think for people who go this route it's often an inexpensive "upsell". I.e. "oh, for another $50 I can have 0.0001" resolution..."
You know best what you are planning to make. I had 5-micron scale on my old JET 1024 and it worked just fine for my work. On my "new" Rockwell 1124 I have a 1-micron scale because the price was almost the same. I use that machine as my test bed, so it made sense from that perspective.

Regards
Yuriy

 

[JimDawson]

Here is how I did mine, lost no tailstock clearance.

Lathe DRO

+1 big time on the heads up display! Contact the Air Force. They can probably tell you how to do it for a reasonable price. $3 million is reasonable, right?

www.hobby-machinist.com

 

[Winegrower]

My experience with resolution, or maybe my belief based on experience, is that you really have to figure, beyond the resolution, a one count error, so .0002 basic, a count to .0004, diameter then is .0008. I also am a bit suspicious about the metric to inch conversion in my DRO, that could add an additional error source. This is getting into thousandths on diameter, which seems larger than desired. Does it really matter? I use the Takisawa handwheel when it gets close.

 

[Eddyde]

I have a 1987 Taiwanese Mill that I mounted 1 micron scales on. I can get sub thousandth accuracy out of it, certainly not down to 1 micron, but a couple of ten-thousandths is doable.

 

[Nesse1]

What's the thought on using scales that use a magnetic strip with over lament, verses a scale that embeds the mag layer inside an aluminum extrusion? It seems to me that the extrusion is just a convenient way to assist with mounting the scale. In my particular application, that makes sense for the carriage travel, but for the cross slide, a simple mag layer stuck onto the cross slide would be super easy and secure.