Tramming question

Mgdoug3

Mgdoug3

Registered
Registered
Joined
Feb 2, 2020
Messages
149
I noticed some small ridges in the x axis. I trammed my head just the other day. When I was milling some aluminum, I could see ridges but I couldn't feel them. On steel, it's much more noticeable. I glanced at my manual just a moment ago and it mentioned setting the front 0.005" higher than the back.

I'm assuming I need to raise the front up a little because of tool deflection. On aluminum, it's softer hence less deflection and less noticeable ridges. Am I correct in my thinking?
 
I have always tried to tram my mill as close to zero as possible all the way around. This is on a knee type mill. 005 is a long way out of tram. I would think that would cause problems. Can you run an indicator across your machined part and see how high the ridges are. It's common to see a line between each pass of an end mill on a facing cut. To avoid it I sometimes will use a fly cutter to finish with one pass.
 
I think that number might actually be 0.0005" not 0.005". I've seen many mills that suggest the 0.0005" difference (certainly not 0.005").

Our eyes and fingers can sense a very, very tiny difference in successive passes. I was milling a plate flat on a project once and put the piece on my surface plate to check to see what these "steps" actually were. Well, they were a tenth or two at the most! Plenty close enough for a mill finish.

Sometimes, when you want something as flat as possible, it's best to use a small diameter cutter and take several passes rather than take only a few passes with a large diameter cutter. The "average" flatness will be greater this way, even though the finish probably won't look as pretty.

If you need things closer than this, that's where a surface grinder comes in to play.

Draw file it a bit and/or hone it with a stone and it should be plenty good enough.

Ted
 
When I was reading about alignment it notes 0.005" but in sketch one it says 0.0005" which makes more sense. The manual is a copy but it doesn't look like a copy error.

I'll check the tram again and see if it's moved any.
 

Attachments

  • 20210206_091612.jpg
    20210206_091612.jpg
    1.6 MB · Views: 17
Mgdoug3 said:
When I was reading about alignment it notes 0.005" but in sketch one it says 0.0005" which makes more sense. The manual is a copy but it doesn't look like a copy error.

I'll check the tram again and see if it's moved any.
Click to expand...

What brand mill is it? Maybe it's just chineseum??? .005mm is ~.0002" I have seen conversion errors in import equipment manuals in the past.

When I tram I usually just shoot for 0 in both directions. Maybe 0.0005" high in front is more correct, but I was taught years ago to shoot for 0 and I've been doing it that way ever since.

YMMV,
Ted
 
Haha.... I've got the same manual as you and it says the same .005 in the text, but 0.0005 in the sketch.

Also, here's a newer manual that states 0 in all directions.

Go figure!

Ted

Older manual.jpg
=========================================================================

Newer manual.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top