Workshop standards?

[PeterE]

I am just thinking about standardisation in my workshop. With that I mean, using bits that can be directly used on more machines than one. Since I came into the hobby around metal working quite late, I regard myself as a definite newbie.

In my shop there is an MJ-189 (Unimat3/4 clone), a C3 lathe, an SX1L bench mill, and a small bench drill press. All machines mainly use M6 for studding and accompanying T-nuts - apart from the drill press. My ER collets are ER 16 for the MJ-189 and for the sizes below 10 mm in the other machines and ER 32 for the other. Using MT2 taper tooling together with a few adapters I can use the MJ-189 tools also in both the larger lathe and the mill.

To me this means that I have access to quite a few tools for any of the machines and I only have to buy specific ones to fit a specific machine.


What is your opinion on this? Is it "over the top" to try to standardise or useful? How do you do?

BR

/Peter

[NeoTech]

Ooh i can only agree, my machines is spread all over.. The lathe uses MT3 and 4, the mill uses W20 (dont even ask) and the mini mill uses MT2.. i have managed to adapt MT2 and ER32 to my mill for standardistion and made the necessary tooling to hold those coolets and tools in my lathe as well.. It saves alot of time to standardise your shop to some form of metric or imperial standard and use a system that is common..

[Brass_Machine]

Peter,

Without a doubt, standardizing on tools (or most anything else really) is worth it. Instead of having to buy 2 or 3 tools for each machine you only need to buy one. In my case, 2 or 3 tools usually means 2 or 3 cheap(er) tools. When I only have to buy one, I can get better quality.

Eric

[Meldonmech]

Hi Peter,
              You are on the right track, I have standardized on two main fittings, the no 2 morse taper and the Myford lathe screwed lathe nose. I have got the same MT and nose on my lathe, milling machine , rotary table, dividing head, and my tool and cutter grinder. This enables me to turn a part to size, remove it from the lathe while still in the chuck, and screw it onto any of the other machines or accessories without losing concentricity. I for example can turn a gear blank, take it to the dividing head, set up on the mill, and cut the gear without removing it from the chuck. The combinations are endless, in my opinion it is the best move I ever made, for time saving and accuracy in the machine shop.

                                                                  Cheers David

[bp]

I am with the others.  I have a C3 lathe, with MT3 and ER32, an X2 mill with MT3 and ER32, a 4" rotary table that takes an ER32/MT2 chuck.
Also there is a case for standardising measuring equipment, in my case pretty much all metric.  Any fixtures I make I use M6 fasteners, as I have a vast quantity of M6 SHCS.
Well worth it!!
cheers
Bill

[PeterE]

Thank you all for comments. Feels good to know I am on the right track.

So far I have made three adapters to use bits in several places.

From left to right;
The 1st is an MT3 to MT2 sleeve. It is open in the back so I can put the draw bar in the MT2 tool in the lathe. It was therefore very nice to find a sleeve that had a release nut included. (This is a purchased item from Chronos (usual disclaimer), I cannot yet cut proper Tapers on my C3 but it is in the ToDo list.)

The 2nd is an MT2 to M14x1 adapter enablingme to use the MJ-189 tooling and chucks in either lathe or mill.

The 3rd is a straight 20 mm to M14x1 to be able to mount MJ-189 stuff in my UPT which has a 20 mm bore for the bars and fitments rather than the original 3/4" (19 mm).

Then I need to make a 4th to adapt from straight 20 mm to the 80 mm chuck flange to handle the C3 tooling.

As an example I took a picture of my UPT without anything else but the "table" ...

and one where I have fitted an MJ-189 chuck using the straight adapter.


Some time back I also fitted a light on the UPT, one does not get younger, and this was before the Jansjö light from IKEA was available.

BR

/Peter

<edit> Added a bit of info for adapter #1 </edit>

[Jonny]

Of course it makes sense to standardise otherwise have to buy at least two of everything.

Both mills run MT3 so use same collets in both with no needless loss of height and slipping as ER but have to use a different thread drawbar, easy to make.
Most of the larger lathe drills are MT3 so go straight in to the mills, smaller I use step up MT1/MT2 to MT3.
Drill chucks fit any machine straight in MT3 but each machine usually has its own any way.
Gave away the Burnerd 5C collets, drawbar and chuck never used them in over 10 years I just use an array of 3 and 4 jaw chucks from 11" to 5", easily changed over within 12 secs.

Next step will be powering a new mill from same 3ph power source as the lathe, saves a large wedge.

know what your saying but one better machine is better than 2 or 3 inferior, been there done it and now down to two lathes and two mills of which only one gets used, kept for emergency.

[unc1esteve]

PeteE,
One thought I have about standardization is to eliminate as many tools as possible.
An example would be the tool holders for a quick change tool post.  As I use and make more holders I change the holding screws to all the same screw.  This eliminates the need for several different allen wrenches.  The goal would be to eliminate all adjustment tools.  Such as just using the handles on a Quorn.  I have been thinking about converting every adjusting and mounting fixture to a ball handle or to just one indexable handle.  Slow progress.

[PeterE]

Thanks Jonny & unc1esteve for your additions.

It all shows that finding ones own shop standards really is a good thing and it will both simplify work and allow for better quality tooling as a result.

Thanks again!

/Peter