4th axis lubrification oil... [Archive] - CNCzone.com-The Ultimate Machinist Community

NC Cams

08-23-2007, 11:42 PM

Some MSDS's supplied by some lube companies ALSO list the ASTM ratings for wear and/or other properties that the oil offers and/or protects against. Then again, so do the spec sheets supplied by the lube blender/formulator.

Instead of looking this up, however, the inquiry was made of an internet message board - so be it. I took the time to find out the difference 'tween the lubes in question - many years ago and, as a result, already KNOW what the differences are, AND WHY and elected to share my knowledge - and entertaining "colorful anecdotes".

My "colorful annecdotes" are merely proof that I speak from experience - in some cases, from dumb, wrong and expensive learning experiences that i or some colleagues went thru as we traveled thru life. Credibility? Perhaps the resume doesn't show nor does it need to.

Yet, the manufacturer indicated which oil to use - I was merely offering an explanation WHY. Don't believe it? Do the reasearch yourself or use way oil to lube anything and everything that comes along. It is still your choice. In some/many cases, the generic lube may work just fine. However, you just may run into a situation where it is categorically WRONG for the application.

Example: used moly based "cam grease" EP lube as a prelube for a babbit bearing - my know it all, this will work idea didn't, and I didn't look into/properly consider why the OEM said to use "motor oil" to use for assembly lube. Lost damn near a week's productivity on my cam grinder due to that DUMB mi$take.

When one blends their life experiences with a technical background gained from college, employment and dumb experience based training in the automotive and industrial service engineering markets, a reality based knowledge base is developed and sometimes shared. That's what I offer.

The shop foreman in the prior "anecdote" was the school of hard knocks trained "know it all" in the shop I worked at. His contempt for "book smart enginears (sic)" was obvious and intense. Yet, he learned something about lubrication when the "book smart engineer" simply did some research into the proerties of the lube materials. He chose to repeatedly fix his same dumb mistake. I chose to research into and find out which lube would be better for the particular application. The results of the story pretty much speaks for itself.

Regarding relative viscosities of 80, 90, 30 and way oil: viscostity at 40C is purely one performance trait of a lube and not necessarily the defining dnA of a lube's viability. The cSt rating is purely a RELATIVE measurement of a lube's ability to flow thru a precisly sized metering orifice. Big deal - oil flow thru a metered leak.

This says NOTHING about the dynamic versus static shear viscosity of the lube which IS critical in high versus low speed torques/break away torques.

It says nothing about the ability of the oil to resist wear.

It says nothing about the corrosion resistance properties of the oil

It says nothing about the antifriction properties of the oil.

It says nothing about the ability of the oil to not swell up and/or attack rubber seals that may be in the device

It says nothing about the EP properties (prevents micro galling on the face of the sliding surfaces of gears) of oil.

If diluted honey had the same viscosity at 40C as the recommended lubes at 40C, would that make it a suitable lube? Not hardly.

My point is and remains: you don't choose a lube based upon one or two properties that you may know/recognize as being equal about a/the lube. You need to consider the WHOLE package and what's being asked of/for/by the lube in the application.

I guess in a pinch, way oil will suffice for just about anything short of nothing. I'd still not be inclined to use it in light of my life's experiences.

In case you're interested, some formulations of soft drink Cola's will outperform most petroleum lubes in 3 ball EP lube wear/siezure tests but does that mean you should use it in place of SAE30 in this application? I don't think so....

philbur

08-25-2007, 09:57 AM

Worthy of a politician, Give a long monologue full of facts and hope that nobody notices that you haven't actually answered the question.

Regards
Phil

Some MSDS's supplied by some lube companies ALSO list the ASTM ratings for wear and/or other properties that the oil offers and/or protects against. Then again, so do the spec sheets supplied by the lube blender/formulator.

Instead of looking this up, however, the inquiry was made of an internet message board - so be it. I took the time to find out the difference 'tween the lubes in question - many years ago and, as a result, already KNOW what the differences are, AND WHY and elected to share my knowledge - and entertaining "colorful anecdotes".

My "colorful annecdotes" are merely proof that I speak from experience - in some cases, from dumb, wrong and expensive learning experiences that i or some colleagues went thru as we traveled thru life. Credibility? Perhaps the resume doesn't show nor does it need to.

Yet, the manufacturer indicated which oil to use - I was merely offering an explanation WHY. Don't believe it? Do the reasearch yourself or use way oil to lube anything and everything that comes along. It is still your choice. In some/many cases, the generic lube may work just fine. However, you just may run into a situation where it is categorically WRONG for the application.

Example: used moly based "cam grease" EP lube as a prelube for a babbit bearing - my know it all, this will work idea didn't, and I didn't look into/properly consider why the OEM said to use "motor oil" to use for assembly lube. Lost damn near a week's productivity on my cam grinder due to that DUMB mi$take.

When one blends their life experiences with a technical background gained from college, employment and dumb experience based training in the automotive and industrial service engineering markets, a reality based knowledge base is developed and sometimes shared. That's what I offer.

The shop foreman in the prior "anecdote" was the school of hard knocks trained "know it all" in the shop I worked at. His contempt for "book smart enginears (sic)" was obvious and intense. Yet, he learned something about lubrication when the "book smart engineer" simply did some research into the proerties of the lube materials. He chose to repeatedly fix his same dumb mistake. I chose to research into and find out which lube would be better for the particular application. The results of the story pretty much speaks for itself.

Regarding relative viscosities of 80, 90, 30 and way oil: viscostity at 40C is purely one performance trait of a lube and not necessarily the defining dnA of a lube's viability. The cSt rating is purely a RELATIVE measurement of a lube's ability to flow thru a precisly sized metering orifice. Big deal - oil flow thru a metered leak.

This says NOTHING about the dynamic versus static shear viscosity of the lube which IS critical in high versus low speed torques/break away torques.

It says nothing about the ability of the oil to resist wear.

It says nothing about the corrosion resistance properties of the oil

It says nothing about the antifriction properties of the oil.

It says nothing about the ability of the oil to not swell up and/or attack rubber seals that may be in the device

It says nothing about the EP properties (prevents micro galling on the face of the sliding surfaces of gears) of oil.

If diluted honey had the same viscosity at 40C as the recommended lubes at 40C, would that make it a suitable lube? Not hardly.

My point is and remains: you don't choose a lube based upon one or two properties that you may know/recognize as being equal about a/the lube. You need to consider the WHOLE package and what's being asked of/for/by the lube in the application.

I guess in a pinch, way oil will suffice for just about anything short of nothing. I'd still not be inclined to use it in light of my life's experiences.

In case you're interested, some formulations of soft drink Cola's will outperform most petroleum lubes in 3 ball EP lube wear/siezure tests but does that mean you should use it in place of SAE30 in this application? I don't think so....

NC Cams

08-25-2007, 11:04 AM

Do I own a Tormach?

AGAIN, whether or not I own one does not preclude the fact that I can and did provide "....a long monologue full of facts and hope..." as opposed to opinionated B/S regarding lubricants.

If you want to use way lube? USE IT

If you want to use honey or cola to lubricate your gear box for reasons already cited? USE IT

If you want to use a more technically appropriate lube? You have a technically viable alternative as well as reasons why to use same.

EDIT: More pertinent lube facts for those readers who are interesed in knowing why NOT to use way oil:

Hypoid gear and SAE 30 motor oil have more than one thing in common besides relative viscosities - they both also have antifriction and antiwear agents. Both agents are critical for wear and friction prevention in sliding motion/high load parts such as piston pins, rocker arm pivot and sliding faces of flat tappet cams. They also provide chain and gear lube to the timing drives as well as seal conditioning for shaft and valve stem seals.

THis is/was why the "way oil" example cited previously did NOT work well in the cited appliction - it was an unsuitable lube that couldn't/didn't work when push came to shove.

END EDIT

Don Clement

08-25-2007, 12:09 PM

NC CAM: The reason I asked if you knew what the rapids speed for the Tormach RT was in response to your generalization of oil additives wrt foaming. Even if you ran the Tormach RT all day at rapid speed I doubt you could get any oil used in it to foam. It is not a high speed RT, in fact my Tormach RT is a motorized version of my Phase II RT and speed is kept low by design. The reason 30W motor oil is mentioned in the manual is as a last resort; it is better to use some sort of oil than to run the RT dry. Also as Phil stated the bearings are hydrodynamic oil film and need some sort of oil, way oil may be best in fact for that reason. I could have used Vactra #2 way oil instead of 80W hypoid gear oil.

NC Cams

08-25-2007, 02:49 PM

I don't troll Tormach websites to pick fights with Tormach owners or users. I do offer advice and or professional insight when my relevant life and/or professional experiences MAY be of use to the topic at hand. I simply figured that my experiences with lubing industrial machines just MIGHT qualify me to offer advice - for that reason I gave it.

My prior experiences with the fits-all, it don't matter use of "way oil" were, in my opinion, worthy of sharing with the readers. Why? Because if it just MIGHT prevent a person from having a similar lube problem from the improper use of a misapplied lube, so be it. Does that make me a bad guy? I hope not.

I was taking exception to the merely the us of viscosity as qualifying a lube to be adequate. Which is why I exlained why it could/would/might be unsuited for a lubricant for a/the device - no more, no less. I contend and offer the vice as being TOTALLY valid when the OEM recommended lubes are considered.

The OEM recommended lubes ALL have the anti wear properties and anti friction additives as I point out which are NOT necessarily additives of way oil. Use it as a last resort but it is not recommended.

My lube engineer pointed this out to me which is why I shared it with the members - way oil is pretty much generic oil and suitable for lubing ways and it is formulated with viscosity modifiers that work in ways, not at gear faces - my oil industry expert opined that it is not considered to be a proper, viable, adequate oil for gearboxes (any type) or any other applications where lubes having antifriction and/or antiwear properties are required.

The OEM's recommendation of hypoid 80 or 90 or (at worst) SAE 30 motor oil early denotes that oils with antifriction/antiwear are best suited/minimally required for the application. Way oil is does not necessarily meet the recommendations.

The addition of antifoaming agents is NOT a prequisite for all additive packages. In some cases, the oil could foam or not foam and it don't matter - our cam grinder foams like crazy which was very concerning but it doesn't seem to matter due to the way lube is channeled to the bearings. Yet in other cases, foaming oil could be a death knell.

In the rare case that you just might want to learn SOMETHING about industrial lubes, my prior input about the differences and features and additives in industrial lubes just MIGHT come in handy for something other than a Tormach, or for that matter a Bridgeport, Excello or Berco cam grinder.

I've made do and paid dear prices by using the WRONG, "it don't matter, anything will work" grade of lube in most of these devices, which are easily as or more expensive than a Tormach. I learned that the use of the wrong oil/lube can be a very costly and stupid trick.

If you learned something by my post, fine. If they irritate you, don't read and/or don't follow them. Strangely, asside from the fact that you feel that I don't belong here, no one has challenged the technical veracity of what I've said about the lubes and/or their properties.

I guess I could have done a lot worse to you all besides providing "...a long monologue full of facts and hope..." - I could have offered B/S. I guess had I owned a Tormach, that would have qualified me to serve up B/S which you'd have swallowed and loved doing so.

I might spend time cruising message boards to offer technical insight. But my detractors haven't proved me wrong and really probably should find ways to take opinions they find contrary to their misguided beliefs just a bit less personally and get a life themselves.

NC Cams

08-26-2007, 01:14 PM

"......you never answered the question as to the how fast the Tormach RT operates at maximum rapids...."

DUH, the max rapids of a Tormach are 65 inches/minute, not as quick as that attainable with servos but adequate for the type of use the machine was designed for and the price.

Does my now proven ability to answer (or at least find) that bit of technical minutae about the machine now at least qualify me to comment on a general lubrication lubrication question that could have been answered simply by following the manufacturers specs?

Want to know more? Don't believe me, don't even ask me. Go here:

http://www.tormach.com/document_library/PCNC1100_V2_107.pdf

If you have any more questions or comments about the viability of "way oil" for the or any gearbox of a Tormach, call 608-849-8381 - tell them I told you to call.

In the mean time, troll this........

NC Cams

08-26-2007, 07:34 PM

Allow me to provide some more detailed GENERAL LUBRICATION FUNDAMENTALS and how they pertain to the selection of lubes. Perhaps in doing so, I will answer Don Clement's concern about RT rapid speeds and whether or not antifoaming is critical in this case.

The purpose of any lubricant is usually multipurposed. For this reason, the lube makers formulate them with additives so that it will properly address a plethora of needs in various machines - some may be specifically endemic to a perticular application (Tormach RT) or a bit more generic (general purpose gear box use) in nature.

Specifically, allow me to elaborate on the properties that I bespoke of namely: visosity, antifriction, antiwear, antifoaming, corrosion inhibitors and/or rubber conditioners/ant-iswelling agents and how they pertain to the Tormach RT.

Viscostiy: viscostiy is simply a benchmark testing of the ability of an oil to "leak" thru an precisely sized orifice at two temp extremes. This provides a RELATIVE indication of how the lube viscosity changes thru the normal temp extremes of typical industrial lubes.

As soon as the forumulator adds VI (viscostiy index) modiiders to the oil, the Cst rating of say a non-VI modified oil to that of a VI modified oil, the apparent test viscosity is not necessarily a valid comparator anymore. It gets more complicated when the base stock differs, ESPECIALLY with respect to DYNAMIC viscosity (DV)of the oil.

The DV is the demonstrated ability of the oil to resist shearing while it is being subjected to vertical and shear loads - loads that readily occur between sliding gear faces and/or very highly loaded hydrodynamically lubed bearings.

Two oils of the same rated viscosity rating could have ENTIRELY different DV performance in exactly the same application. This is one reason why a BRAND of lube may be recommended by a manufacurer. Testing showed that Brand A offers better DV than Brand B even though they may have identical 0 or 100 deg Cst viscosity ratings

Antiwear: To prevent wear, the oil makers add agents to the oil which literally "plate" out on iron/steel parts. A common agent is ZDP (zinc diaryl or dithiophophate). This zinc microscopicallly plates out and shears/wipes away as the sliding parts rub against one another. Thus, "wear" occurs at/in the sacrificial zinc film and not in the parent metal.

The antiwear property is IRRESPECTIVE of load and/or speed as both high and low speeds and high and low loads have conflicting, yet consistent environments that antiwear agents address/prevent.

Hypoid lubes are DEFINITELY heavily fortified with such additives for what should be obvious reasons - sliding face gear wear prvention. Modern SAE motor oils (any that meet, SC, SD, SE or SF ratings) are formulated with antiwear for protecting things like cams, liftters, pins and the like, albeit not as much so as gear specific lubes.

Many oil pumps in cars are GEAR type. In some cases and the crankcase oil may also have to lube a gear train as well. Hence, the wide useage potential of motor oil may make it suitable, albeit marginally so, for the Tormach gearbox due to the antiwear agents it contains but it may not be OK for some other rotary table - that's the manufacturer's call to make.

Antifriction: friction modifiers are also added to help a lube be more wide range in use. Although both Type F and Dexron oil will work in most any transmission, Type F does not have the same type of friction modifier that Dexron does. This affects how clutches grab/sip in the applcation. Probably this is not a concern in the Tormach but read on.

Interestingly, Dexron is now recommended and used in a lot of axles and manual transmissions (lower viscosity Dexron aids in fuel efficiency) yet it has the additives that Type F does NOT have to prevent wear or provide EP protection like Dexron.

Yet, one could contend that ATF is ATF, not hardly. Type F and Dexron are both ATF's but use one in place of the other and you could initiate some serious transmission problems, especially in Mopar auto trans that need special Mopar lube or Ford and GM tranny's that require Dexron.

Antifoaming: this property is critical in some applcations and almost irrelevant in others. In a pressure lubed system (IE: pressure fed bearings in a car engine) foamed oil could lead to the death of the bearings.

A study that I'm aware of performed by Chrysler found that you can have nearly 55% air by VOLUME in the lubricant before you see a drop in oil pressure. Yet, at aeration levels far lower, cavitation can start to deteriorate pressure lubed bearing overlay. Thus, antifoaming may be an irrelevant feature for the Tormach RT lube

Antifoaming, agents can help prevent aeration from developing in the first place and alllow the air to separate quicher when/if it does occur. For drip fed bearings, antifoaming properties may not be as critical as applications that rely on pressure fed lube.

High speed gear cases that use splash lube, however, may need/want good antifoaming characteristics. Simply because a "mix master" effect is being used to splash the oil around to lube and cool - this also tends to aerate the hell out of oil. Need I say more? Probably not an issue to worry about in the Tormach RT but elsewhere it could be nasty.

Corrosion: lube protects against corrosion, especially if the oil runs the risk of seeing contamination (real issue with water based coolants & cutting fluids, etc). When these "foreign agents" mix with oil, they can start to corrode the daylights out of soft metal bushings - copper based brass or bronze are perticullarly susceptible as are "white metalsl" such as babbit and/or aluminum-lead bushings. Iron parts don't always like water based coolants either, especially if they turn acidic.

My lube engineer friend pointed out that corrosion inhibition was typically NOT a concern when his company (and others he knew of) formulated "way oil" which is a main reason why he told me "to get and keep that crap out of" the gearbox appication that I illuded to previously

Rubber swelling/conditioning: take mineral oil and squirt it on rubber and causes it to swell and deteriorate. Add the right additive and you can actually protect the rubber and prevent/minimize swelling and/or deterioration.

Dexron and motor oils can have essential the same viscosity and both will prevent friction and wear BUT Dexron is friendly toward rubber seals and many motor oils are not/may not be.

You'd no more want to put SAE 20 into your auto trans but you'd use Dexron in a heartbeat. The above is a good explanation why "way oil" was not to be used in a gearbox per my lube engineer associate. Way oil simply may not have much in the way of an additive package - again, not all are the same so generalizations are, as always, dangerous.

The above explains why these factors may or may not be critical or pertinent to the Tormach RT. The explantion is far more detailed than I had ever planned or hoped to have to offer. But, by now, I hopefully have addressed any questions you may have had about the why's and wherefore's of gearbox lubes.

Is it abslutely cricical to use the factory recommended lube?

After having NOT followed my own grinder manufacturer's recommendations for a gear box lube (smart ass me, I knew better), I spent a small fortune replacing bearings as a result. The same could be said for the other equipment that the machine shop manager lubed with way oil that I described in an earlier anecdote.

By the way, the machine I F/U'd was about 10 TIMES the cost of a Tormach - I therefore implore you to learn from my mistakes and do not repeat them!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hopefully the reader finds the above to be of educational value. I think/hope that I"ve explained in a simple, yet technically sound fashion, why lube selection can be/is critical.

Please address any further questions about Tormach lube issues (or any others for that matter) to Philbur - he seems to think he has all the answers. After all, he sure was critical as hell of any/all that I offered.

EDIT: Ball screw lubes: it depends on speed and environment. Some ball screws need a lube far more sophisticated than way oil.

Example: a former employer was a global maker of precision machine tool ball screws. They recommended Shell Alvania #2 as it gave good wear resistance and low viscous drag for general use. For ultra low drag, they spec'd Beach 325 - neither would qualify as "way oil" or anything even close. They formulated some special EP fortified stuff that I don't recall anymore for balls out, high speed/high load screws. No fits all lube for them.

Unless I knew better via my own testing or from a factory recommendation, I'd use whatever the factory told me to use for a lube. If you're willing to deviate from the factory recommendations, you'd better be prepared for the consequences, good or bad.

END EDIT

Don Clement

08-26-2007, 11:47 PM

I run the recommended Mobil Vactra 2 way oil in the Tormach factory one-shot lubrication system that is for both ball screws and way lubrication.

NC Cams

08-27-2007, 08:43 AM

Don

You might find the following threads to be of PARTICULAR interest:

http://www.practicalmachinist.com/cgi-bin/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=016372;p=0

and especially this:

http://www.practicalmachinist.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/30/6093.html#000027

I'd be willing to bet that not even Tormach is/was aware of the changes that can and are being made to heretofor sacrosanct lubes that they may have specified via their testing/development in the past - what "was" isn't necessarily "is" anymore.....

There is a comment or two in the Practical Machinist thread about what surely were considered other equivalent "way oils" that performed worse than the recommended product - empirical reasons why it isn't always good to ASSUME that oil is oil.

I hope you find that my "trolling efforts" to be of aid to your quest for message board expertise....

Cruiser

08-27-2007, 09:53 AM

NC CAMS, I have read this thread with interest, I have also read some other threads that you got involved in, with interest. I find that your inputs are always extremely informative, and enriched with plenty of truth and experience. this must come from a near excellent memmory and functional fileing system. I also noticed that there is always one individual that has to be the splinter under the skin which turns you on, and the thread then takes on what i'd term as a high concentration of data to be obsorbed. I just want to thank you for your input, I may not say it so well or spell it correctly but Plainly stated "I have an appreciation for your input" & I just had to throw in this little "Atta Boy" Thanks, I've been trying to get some info on oils lately with confusing results, Now, if i can remember it long enough I have the info I need !

NC Cams

08-27-2007, 10:20 AM

Cruiser: Thank you for your comments and support.

As luck would have it, I walked into the shop this morning and find the cam grinder operator ready to dump some generic way oil into it in place of the specified Vactra #2. I didn't go ballistic buy can darn close.

Seems that the office manager bought what he was told was "the same stuff" from the machine tool supply house salesmen. I can only surmise that they could make more by selling their own "private label" for more $$$ instead of the Vactra. Now I get to spend the morning trying to find Vactra because someone else wanted to save a few bucks.

Anybody want to buy some un used 5 gal bucket of way oil from PTS cheap????? I'll throw in the office manager for free.....

Don Clement

08-27-2007, 12:24 PM

Tormach PCNC uses a Turcite-like material in the ways. Turcite is a PTFE filled acetyl plastic that is self-lubricating. I believe the Tormach PCNC with Turcite-clone material is far more resistant to the case where the ways run dry than other machines with metal-to-metal way contact. BTW Hardinge uses Turcite with their high end machine ways.

philbur

08-27-2007, 12:48 PM

This is what Mobile say about Vactra way oils:

"Mobil Vactra Oil Numbered Series can be used for lubrication of ballscrews, linear guides, headstocks, translating screws, spur and bevel gears, and lightly loaded worm gears"

Where you read head stocks and lightly loaded worm gears substitute the phrase "Tormach 6" and 8" rotary tables"

This is what you said about way oils.

"Way oil is for ways, NOT, NOT, NOT hypoid or for that fact ANY gearbox......... and don't EVER use way oil for anything but lubing ways....."

So who is a poor girl to believe? A simple answer will do.

In addition Shell Tonna v68 (the original question) is Shells equivalent of Vactra #2 and is also good for EP service as well as slideways.

Your references to Practicalmachinist are of course message board recommendations and to be taken with a grain of salt.

Regards
Phil

Don

You might find the following threads to be of PARTICULAR interest:

http://www.practicalmachinist.com/cgi-bin/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=016372;p=0

and especially this:

http://www.practicalmachinist.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/30/6093.html#000027

I'd be willing to bet that not even Tormach is/was aware of the changes that can and are being made to heretofor sacrosanct lubes that they may have specified via their testing/development in the past - what "was" isn't necessarily "is" anymore.....

There is a comment or two in the Practical Machinist thread about what surely were considered other equivalent "way oils" that performed worse than the recommended product - empirical reasons why it isn't always good to ASSUME that oil is oil.

I hope you find that my "trolling efforts" to be of aid to your quest for message board expertise....

NC Cams

08-27-2007, 03:21 PM

We toasted the hell out of gearbox bearings because the generic "its all the same way oil" (Vactra was not mentioned until much later in the thread) that my know it all machine shop supervisor had full faith and credit in.

That particular brand of way oil worked great in his Bridgeports and beyond horrible in the gear box. Thus, once burned, forever shy.

I took and will always take exception to generic oils that guys throw out as recommendations for ANY application. Why? For reasons already cited plus more that don't pertain to this thread but DO pertain to APG's used in gear boxes.

FYI: The Vactra thread links that I posted took two words and 5 mins in google to find. The words: "Vactra #2" - I think the one link was in the top five links that turned up and the other came up in the thread.

I found the formulation change that Vactra went thru and was documented in the P/M threads to be of particular interest and pertinent to this thread. In some respects, what the P/M postings stated were not unlike the lube info that I documented in my voluminous albeit well intended replies. It also outlined why some folks had no problem with the reformulated Vactra and others a contrarian view.

What to use for lube? Whatever the FACTORY recommends. You already know/have my explanation and reasonings.

FURTHER HINT: go check the price of Vactra #3 and/or Vascuoline 1409. The 1409 runs ~$76 for 5 gallons (min quantity) PLUS $16 dollars for UPS. Vactra is comparably priced. Yet, hypoid 80/90 or multivis 90-140 can be bought at darn near any auto parts store for a few bucks for a quart.

I wish, oh how I wish that APG 80-90 would suffice in place of Vactra/Vascuoline but I'm not about to experiment with a $60K + grinder, not again as I learned that lesson already...

After all is said and done, I'd suggest using APG 80/90 in the Tormach RT table unless you have the need for 5 gal of the industrial lubes spec'd. One minor reason is cheaper price and better availabilty - the other, more important one is that it is an OEM approved lube.

In light of the P/M threads, I'd probably use the Vasuoline as it is fortified variant of Vactra that was resurrected once the "reformulated" Vactra did not satisfy some of the earlier needs of previously satisfied users.

That's what I ordered Vascuoline in place of the Vactra that my machine maker recommends - then again, the manual was written 20 years ago and I chose to use the better fortified stuf, especially since my one shot system also lubes a gear train.

Don Clement

08-27-2007, 04:30 PM

Where are the gears in the Tormach PCNC that the unholy Vactra #2 is suppose to destroy? Wow. I had better get rid of the Vactra # 2 that I have been using for the past 8 years on my lathe and Rockwell mill ways before it’s too late and these two machines are toast. Oh Yeah, I don’t use Vactra #2 in the geared headstock but Mobil DTE oil. Perhaps the formula for Mobil DTE has changed also? Better google Mobil DTE and find out the real facts.

NC Cams

08-27-2007, 10:05 PM

Vactra and the the Vacuolite "retrograde update" are both suitable "way oils".

Depending on the severity of the lube requirement for the particular appliction, one may or may not out perform the other. It is not until you push the limit or demand the most in performance from a lubricant will/can you encounter lube deficiency issues.

For many applications, either/or as well as any other "way oil" may work. However, you could find or run into a situation where the particular device may not like how the lube works and thus it retaliates by causing problems. Examples of both have already been cited.

New example: our cam grinder uses highly filtered "spindle oil". Reason: they drip feed some very precisely sleeve bearings that suport the grinding spindle. The bearing journals are 50mm dia and nearly 150mm in length. BUT the axial thrust is resisted by a double row ball thrust bearing. The sleeve bearing runs at 0.0005" clearance so low viscosity oil is used so it will flow into the clearance space readily.

The spindle oil runs perfectly in the sleeve bearings at this tiny clearance yet, we consistantly have had wear/siezure problems with the ball roller thrust bearings that axially contain the spindle.

My lube engineering friend looked at the application and was dumbfounded at the lube recommendation. The spindle oil was very lightly/barely fortified with the additives that the ball bearing needs and "overyly fortified" for what the sleeve bearing needs. Was it fortified? Yes. Was it adequate? Barely.

With the viscosity of the blend recommended (Velocite 0 and 1, equal mix) he theorized that they were shooting for a free flowing oil that would drip feed well to the sleeve bearing (it did). But, sadly, this lube strategy did not offer adequate protection the warmer the machine got, especially as you got deeper into a long hard day of grinding.

Result: regular siezure of the ball bearing even though EXACTLY the recommended oil was used. This was "normal" for the machine and there was "no solution" according to the factory rep.

The solution proposed by the lube engineer: replace the Velocite blend with Dexron III.

It had a slightly higher viscosity and was MUCH better fortified than 'spindle oil' which the OEM figured was PERFECT back when Moby Dick was a minnow (late 1950's) and when they only had 'spindle oil' (Velocite) pure enough to lube the beast.

The higher viscostity of Dexron raised the operating temp of the spindle a bit over Velocite BUT the higher viscosity of the Dexron easily withstood the temp rise. SInce going to Dexron, the spindle grinds noticeably smoother and we've never had another bearing siezure - not even close, sort of....

Once day, the machine was in store for an oil change and the operator used the remaining can of "Velocite spindle oil" as that's what the manual called for. He used it instead of Dexron because I had failed to add a note to the manual to outline the change in oil spec.

Result: spindle siezed shortly thereafter.

Point: Vactra probably won't toast your lathe and/or Rockwell or, perhaps even the Tormach. I don't suspect that the useage level will put it in a "danger zone" with regard to the need for the ULTIMATE in/of lubes or should/will you encounter the issues that the reformulated Vactra is alleged to create in the P/M thread.

Could it? I dunno, Will it? I still dunno but probably not. What would I do?

Use the Hypoid oil Tormach recommends and, in place of that, Vacuolite 1409. Why? Simply because 1409 SHOULD be better formulated for any application than Vactra 2 - especially anything that has gear drives which typically favor the use of an EP formulated oil.

Still confused? Call Mobil Tech Support. Explain your quandry and see what they say, especially when you tell them what the OEM recommends and your options that you've learned of in this thread.

WHen they tell you, please pass on their recommendations - at least just for grins.

NC Cams

08-28-2007, 02:15 PM

Many many threads ago, one of the other "trolls" offered/brought up Vactra as well as any other options for way lube - I merely responded to the inquiry as to what was the difference and why would should or should not use it. I also offered advice based on my bad choices and/or experience(s) i had made - hopefully to prevent someone else from doing the same.

I seem to recall that someone else said that the OEM recommended Hypoid 80-90 or SAE motor oil - I merely explained why these would suffice over generic way oil and WHY.

Sadly, I knew why both in technical and scientific terms why you should use it and I also had an expensive experience or two from the use of way oil that was ill suited for non-way type use. ALso I explained why the additives may or may not help or hurt your appliction or may be irrelevant.

I also cited empriical experience why "way oil" might (not would) simply may not suffice for lube in place of the OEM recommended. DId you or anyone else? NOPE. Snide remarks and name calling YES, but no technically justified recommendations - just B/S.

As i look back, NOBODY and especially two people in particular, gave any tech explanation as to the differences 'tween the lubes and/or why they would/would not, might/might not work. Questions and cat calls, yes. Valid info NOPE.

I tried to answer your questions - no matter how insipid or ignorant or snide I thought them to be, I still tried to answer them. For that I'm sorry....

I might be a "troll" but you seem to be an ungrateful, technically naive, poorly educated, poor mannered member who can't find out answers on your own. Why?

Maybe because youre too lazy to look or simply don't know how. You had plenty of questions but no answers and plenty of snide remarks and/opinions. Takes a lot of "class" (sic) to do that but no talent...

At this point, I don't give a good G/D if you use Vactra, hypoid or used cooking fat to lube any of your machines. I didn't offer Vactra as a lube, I recall stipulating that the OEM specs be followed.

I also said that the use of an alternative oil and the results generated by the users choice of same ultimately becomes the responibility of the chooser, whether it be good or bad.

You and others of your Tormach ilk can lube the machine with whatever you want and I didn't and still don't care. If you learned something from my posts, fine, If not, fine too. Again, I DON"T CARE. in the mean time, however, TROLL THIS!!!

The next time you want lube info, learn how to read, then learn how to comprehend and then follow the F'ing manual.

NC Cams

08-29-2007, 05:02 PM

To those who've made it this far in the thread, i suggest that you simply go back and re-read post #5

You'll specifically note that NONE of the lubes recommended by the FACTORY include ANY sort or form "way oile" not the least of which were:

Tonna, Vactra or any others that crept into the thread by hook, crook or casual reaference.

Amazingly enough, the "troll agitator" doesn't seem to remain consistant in following HIS OWN recommendations whereing he restates the OEM spec'd lube in one thread (again, post 5) and switches to Vactra later on (see comment in para 1, this post).

The other "troll food" anecdotes offered by this poster in this thread, which got highly criticised (but NEVER proved wrong or invalid or bogus), were simply offered to help educate and explain to the casual reader why "way oils" are not necessarily suitable for a "fits all" lubricant for a 4th axis. My "overengineering" was done for illustrative purposes to show what the use of an ASSUMED ADEQUATE lube could do - no more, no less

One choses to gain knowledge and wisdom just as effectively and dutifully as they may chose to remain ignorant, untrained and/or misinformed.

Especially one who can't even recall what he posted for a lube recommendation earlier in the thread (again, post #5).

However, if you really want to know what lube to use in a Tormach RT, all you have to do is read and follow post #5.

Don Clement

08-30-2007, 07:44 AM

"Is this a worm drive 4th axis?"

Yes. http://tormach.com/Product_PCNC_acc.html#FOURTH_AXIS the product manual can be found here: http://tormach.com/document_library/MRT-8_V1-5.pdf Note page 6 the Tormach Lubrication recomendations for the worm drive 4th axis rotary table.

Don Clement

08-30-2007, 08:23 AM

For me, the Tormach is just a means to an end. I use the Tormach PCNC & 4th axis RT to manufacture parts for a product, a precision linear positioner that paradoxically does NOT require any type of lubrication at all! The basic mechanism for my precision positioner does not use sliding bearings or rolling bearings but rather uses flexural bearings. Because of the use of flexural bearings, no lubrication of any type is needed. In addition there is no stiction ,virtually zero friction , complete immunity from grit, dirt or environmental contamination in the movement of my linear precision positioner. My patented linear precision positioner works as perfectly in a vacuum as it does covered with abrasive grit without the need for lubrication of any type.

Here is what Alexander H. Slocum, Professor of Mechanical Engineering at MIT. says about flexural bearings in his book “Precision Machine Design” on p521:
“Sliding, rolling, and fluid film bearings all rely on some form of mechanical or fluid contact to maintain the distance between two objects while allowing for relative motion between them. Flexural bearings (also called flexural pivots), on the other hand, rely on the stretching of atomic bonds during elastic motion to attain smooth motion. Since there are millions of planes of atoms in a typical flexural bearing, an averaging effect is produced that allows flexural bearings to achieve atomically smooth motion. For example, flexural bearings allow the tip of a scanning tunneling microscope to scan the surface of a sample with subatomic resolution*
*See, for example, G. Binning and H. Rohrer, “Scanning Electron Microscopy”, Helv. Phys. Acta, Vol. 55, 1982.pp 726-735

NC Cams

08-30-2007, 10:05 AM

Read books all you want. Patents are great to have, wish I had some. However I know of patents issued to devices that are paper proven yet fail miserably when they are put into hard metal reality. So what does a patent prove other than you created something unique that no one else has found/discovered or perhaps is smart enough NOT to do.

When you provide lube recommendations for multi-million dollar machines and programs that MUST work and live (I did just that for sleeve and roller bearing companies I was a service engineer for) and now you're got my attention.

Until then, just because its published and/or you have a patent, that doesn't make it 100% gospel for each and every situation. More expen$ive anecdotal evidence upon request.

The industry is full of anecdotal evidence where theoretically sound lubes fail to work in any number of devices. I know of a bunch of Indy engines that had problems for this EXACT reason. It takes skills and experience gained in the field that are above and beyond those of a simple "book smart" person to figure these out and correct the problems. Been there, done that and don't care what you think or believe to the contrary - I know better.

For some reason, I don't think that Tormach is using high octane, super wazoo bearings like those cited as justification in post #50. They're probably using mundane sleeve bearings, bushings and/or rolling element bearings (ala ball, tapers or roller bearings).

I assure you, I don't have experience in "flexure bearings" but, BUT I do have a sound background and PROVEN industrial expertise in copper, bronze and plated sleeve bearings/bushings (Clevite) and/or rolling bearings, especially machine tool grade (NSK).

I'll match my service engineering expertise gained from "real world" experience with that of the book writing academians cited in post 50. Unless the Tormach RT is using the EXACT type of bearings cited in post 50, the posting is IRRELEVANT - good reading but irrelevant.

The "theory" of not using lube in devices that are subjected to boundary layer lube film conditions is one that we fight/deal with all the time. Real tough stuff to make work. I've seen any number of slide rule jockeys slink away in an embarrassing fashion when they proclaim their poly razmatazz (bearing, lube, whatever) siezes in real world use. I wish I had been paid for all the " but it should have worked's" that I hear during my bearing engineering career.

I tried to illustrate this sort of thing with the "way oil" example cited earlier in the thread. I assumed a certain favorite EP lube would be "superior" to what the OEM recommended for my very own cam grinder (WRONGLY) and paid dearly for it - shared my stupidity to further illustrate/drive home the point. Merely offered these as empirical proof why readers might not want to use some message board lube recomendation.

DC: you rightly spec'd Hypoid 80/90 or SAE30 motor oil from the manual in post 5. Someone ELSE proposed the question as to whether or not "way oil" of "I don't care what brand/persuasion" would suffice. I simple explained more about what goes into the lube spec/selection process and why. For that I got chastized by your and Philbur's name calling and taunts.

DUH I was backing up DC's recommendation from as far back as post #5 as to why the factory spec'd lubes would be adequate as opposed to "way oil" that was inquired about originally. For supporting YOUR advice, I was chastized you you and any number of others. Go figure.

From prior posting experience, one can state chapter and verse on a M/B what is technically perfect to do - yet, let some well intended person come up with some "sage wisdom" "but I used cooking fat and it worked" anecdote and all of a sudden, cooking fat becomes "approved". A new American legend is created on a M/B. Just because some techno dolt had the good fortune to use the wrong oil and if by luck or stupidity, it worked, that don't make it right.

You now know what Tormach recommends or lube so USE IT.

You now know why "way oil" may or may not suffice for lubing your machine. Your call.

You also know about flexure bearings or at least have a book to go to in order to learn about them further.

But, sadly flexure bearings won't work everywhere. HOWEVER, don't think for a microsecond that what Prof. Slocum says and DC knows about "flexure bearings" pertains to rolling element and/or sleeve bearings and/or the sliding contact faces of gears in mesh.

For rolling bearing lube theory info, I encourage you to find a book by Tedrick Harris. I think it is called "Bearings" (havent' seen or hear of the book since I left the bearing industry). This IS the definitive rolling bearing book - believe it over Slocum - EVERY bearing engineer in the world ulltimately bases their recomendations upon the teachings of this book.

I'd also encourage you to look into books that deal with elastohydrodynamic lube film and/or boundary layer lube film theory. There are some SAE papers written by William Yahraus that are QUITE a bit more informative and pertinent to the typical 4th axis device than the DC/Slocum musings cited earlier - especially with regard to the typical sleeve type of lubricated bearings/bushings used in the mundane industrial devices us common folk use/rely upon.

Geof

08-30-2007, 12:26 PM

.... Flexural bearings (also called flexural pivots), on the other hand, rely on the stretching of atomic bonds during elastic motion to attain smooth motion....

This seems to be a high falutin name for rubber mounting.

Don Clement

08-30-2007, 12:55 PM

This seems to be a high falutin name for rubber mounting.

That could be! However the flexural bearings I use are the split-cross type known as flexural pivots made of spring tempered stainless steel. Split-cross flexural bearings are kinematically rigid except with one degree of constraint. See: “Engineering Metrology” by K J Hume http://www.bookfinder.com/dir/i/Engineering_Metrology/0356033376/ or Precision Machine Design by Alexander Slocum chapter 8.6 Flexural bearings http://www.amazon.com/Precision-Machine-Design-Alexander-Slocum/dp/0872634922

Geof

08-30-2007, 01:34 PM

That could be! However the flexural bearings I use are the split-cross type known as flexural pivots made of spring tempered stainless steel.....

Yes, I know, I am familiar with this type of pivot in Ultra Microtomes which is an application not far removed from the ST EM. Maybe an order of magnitude or two or three.

Don Clement

08-30-2007, 02:31 PM

Yes, I know, I am familiar with this type of pivot in Ultra Microtomes…

Split-cross flexural pivots can be used to get extreme precision. Precision positioners using flexural bearings built using ordinary precision machine tools can far exceed the precision of the machine that it was built with. An example is a precision positioner I built using a manual Rockwell vertical mill was tested on a Zygo interferometer and the tilt-tip and decentering over 1.4 inches of travel was 10 fringes over 10”. BTW I manufacture almost all of the parts for my precision positioners including the stainless steel flexural bearing parts.

NC Cams

08-30-2007, 03:11 PM

Here's what I make = racing camshafts.

Pretty mundane stuff compared to flexure joints and ultra microtomes.

However, we do have to be rather precise in what we do - after all, we're running our valvetrains at engine speeds at or above 9500 rpm in oval track and at nearly 10500 rpm for pro stock drag race - and doing so in front of hundreds of thousands of spectators for guys with HUGE budgets - if it breaks or tears stuff up, people get REAL unhappy.

Stresses: we're running cams only at or above the yield points of most of the traditional automotive camshaft steels (5160, 8620, etc). So we now make cams from tool steel billets. Operating stresses are at/above 210Ksi. The roller followers are M50 tool steel too. Few if any of the "name" cam companies do tool steel - we do and welcome the challenge.

Accuracies and lifts: we're at above 0.800"+ lift at that valve for oval racing and at/above 1.00" for drag racing. Cam profiles are checked and ground to millionths of an inch and 0.01" deg. Lobe to lobe timing is usually less than 0.1" total deviation. Think that's easy to do? Try it some time while grinding profiles that look like mirrors.

Aircraft people shudder in amazement at the type of stresses we work at - the OEM's we do prototype work for respect us for the NASCAR work we do as it is at or better than what they'd EVER want.

Too bad the info/advice/tech stuff we offer on message boards isn't always treated with the same degree of respect. Then again, my stuff tends to work and my clients come back for more and they pay the prices I ask- can't ask for any more/better from your client base.

Legend? No, not hardly. We're simply a small shop that is operatored/owned by someone who choses to make jewelry that just so happens to fit into an IC engine that masquerades as a camshft.

CarbideBob

08-30-2007, 05:37 PM

Appears to be a Vertex table with a servo motor mounted to it.
I've tried many oils and gotten the best life on these using Mobil SHC-630. It s a synthetic oil blended for use on worm gear drives. The worm is always the first thing to die on these tables.
BTW: As my yooper friends remind me I am a Troll. (cause I live below the bridge) :)

philbur

08-30-2007, 06:32 PM

I have an 8" Vertex with a home conversion to CNC and I can confirm that the tormach RT is not a Vertex. Also it's driven by a steppr motor not a servo.

Tried many oils suggest 3 or 4 or more. This presumably means that, to conclude which gives the best life, you have worn out 3 or 4 or more rotary tables. You must be an extraordinary prolific maker of chips. My hat is off to you

Regards
Phil

Appears to be a Vertex table with a servo motor mounted to it.
I've tried many oils and gotten the best life on these using Mobil SHC-630. It s a synthetic oil blended for use on worm gear drives. The worm is always the first thing to die on these tables.
BTW: As my yooper friends remind me I am a Troll. (cause I live below the bridge) :)

NC Cams

08-30-2007, 07:59 PM

Background info on worm gear lube problems and desmo's:

Gears (any type) are subjected to high unit loads, especially at the gear faces. Thus, the lube needs to have EP properties as well as anti-wear. Antiwear is often in the form of zinc additives (see prior post for types and names).

What happens is that the zinc in the lube is in solution with a carrier that allows it to plate itself quite readily to steel via simple imersion. Rather than wear the parent metal, the rubbing action of the gear contact zone rubs/wears away the sacrificial zinc "plate" instead of the steel in the parent metal.

Here's the rub (no pun intended), the same stuff that causes the zinc to plate to the steel also tries to bond and attach itself to ANYTHING that contains copper - as in bushings or bearings.

The trick is that in doing so, the antiwear agent will protect the steel wearing surfaces but simultaneously attack the copper and anything it is alloyed with. Thus, any bronze alloyed bearing could be "hurt" via long term exposure to some formulations of oil with heavy anti wear agents. The copper can start to literally crumble the longer it "sees" too much of a zinc concentrate imersion and/or other additives.

Cam break in lubes are highly fortified with EP and anti-wear agents. They are good for break in but really need to be drained after breakin is completed for this reason. NOTE: the zinc, being metalic, can also form combustion chamber deposits in IC engines which is another reason why you shouldn't get too carried away with break in lubes as a "use it all the time lube".

Worm gears create new challenges, especially in repetitive motion oscillatory situations. As the gear oscillates, you can literally rub/punch a hole in the lube film - this is more prevalent in small angle, repeated moves. When that happens, you are now rubbing metal to metal.

Unless the lube is quite clingy (dare I say way oil clingy) you're in luck. However, if the oil is NOT EP rated nor WELL fortified with anti-wear or it does not reflow/replate into the load zone, the "clingy oil" is NOT going to protect the wear surface - the gears WILL rub a hole in the lube.

When metal to metal rubbing occurs, you run the risk of micro-welding and/or spalling in/at the load zone. Once this occurs, the metal will NOT repair itself and it will deteriourate at a faster rate of progression. It is no small wonder why Tormach RT's should be lubed by Hypoid 80/90. No finer oil has been formulated for worm, hypoid or spur gear box use and for reasons already cited.

The hypoid stuff is well suited for lubing ball, tapered roller and bushings - why? hypoid lubes are formulated to lube EXACTLY those types of bearings right along with gears. It is pretty hard to have one without the other in a gearbox of ANY kind.

Not familiar with SHC-630. But if it is worm gear rated, I"d bet it has EP and some sort of anti-wear package - and a good one if it is automotive gear box rated.

The auto industry which I work in has been at the forefront of lube research for quite some time now. NO other industry outside of aerospace perhaps has the performance requirements and the certification requirements that are as prevalent in auto industry.

Moreover, NO industry has had the government pressures and/or legislation for emissions, fuel efficiency and cost drivers as the auto industry. Cars will run and run well with very little service. The superiour characteristics of auto lubes is surely responsible in no small way for this "take it for granted" performance.

I do respect the folks who use and develop desmodromic valvetrains. HOWEVER, we've learned how to create variable lift valvetrains with spring type return mechanisms that do things that desmo's can't even dream of doing.

Some technology's time comes and goes. The lowly valve spring controlled pushrod systems that we specialze in aren't particulary challenged anymore by desmo's. What used to be a limitation (valve float) is now an exploitable advantage IF you know what to do and how to do it. Besides, spring return systems are cheap and come in small, simple packages as compared to desmo's. Some contend that desmo's are complexity in search of a need. Some swear that spring based systems are "primitive".

If you know how to make the stuff work, it is all a simple exercise in the practice of physics and dynamics. No brag, just our take on the realities of our industry as we see/experience it.

NC Cams

08-30-2007, 08:13 PM

"...Tried many oils suggest 3 or 4 or more. This presumably means that, to conclude which gives the best life, you have worn out 3 or 4 or more rotary tables...."

Sorry, bad assumption.

CarbideBob and I both are suppliers to the auto industry. We see LOTS of issues that challenge the knowledge base of engineers, lube technicians, buyers and metallurgists. SOmetimes we are asked to solve the problems and sometimes we help solve them - sometimes we are lucky enough to be there when someone sharper that us does so. You'd be amazed at what working in the auto industry teaches you.

CB and I also know someone who has had problems and asked us for input or advice. An automaker who's whatever is down or has a warranty problem because of a lube problem is beyond being in panic mode. Chances are, we've seen or been involved in more catastrophic fire drill problem solving episodes in a few years than a DIY CNC'er might encounter in a life time. You learn and learn FAST under such duress.

Moreover, we get paid to solve these problems. We share our knowledge, sometimes - and even do so to/with people who doubt that we've seen and done the things we've seen/done/fixed/resolved.

Frankly, after a while you tire and are offended by people who doubt your word or make light of your hard earned and shared experiences. How so? Look back thru this thread - it shouldn't be hard to find glowing examples of such taunts. If the shoe fits, quit wearing it......

CarbideBob

08-30-2007, 11:37 PM

Tried many oils suggest 3 or 4 or more. This presumably means that, to conclude which gives the best life, you have worn out 3 or 4 or more rotary tables. You must be an extraordinary prolific maker of chips.

I wish, over the years I've probably gone through about 20 rotary tables and at least 30 or 40 gearsets some of them at $4500 a set.
I've used everything from Nikkens and Troykes to Vertexs.

I've also learned a thing or two about manufacturer's recommendations.
Some of the engineers working at machine builders are great. Some are just trying to make it through the day and collect a paycheck. Others think they are experts but don't have a clue. A good lubrication engineer is rare indeed.

Yea I make a lot of chips. Tons actually.
Just trying to give some advice from the field.
You guys are too wound up.

Bob :cheers:

Geof

08-30-2007, 11:44 PM

....You guys are too wound up.

Bob :cheers:

Never was a truer word spoken; or typed in this case.

NC Cams

08-31-2007, 09:44 AM

DC:

Any number of people come to this website, visit various threads and offer advice/wisdom/information, gratis to help the uneducated, unwise and/or ill-informed so they might NOT make some of the mistakes that we made. Or, just perhaps, solve a few problems along the way.

The contributors don't have to be proven owners of the devices, they just have to have relevant knowledge and be willing to share it.

CarbideBob, Geof and I do and have done just that, over and over and over. Do some searches for other threads we've contributed to and see how many times we've contributed to the knowledge base of others.

So you have a patent. Bully for you. I won 3 Daytona 500's with my cams - so frigging what. You make things with flexure joints. I make lowly automotive camshafts.

However, I dare say that my prior background in machine tool bearings and sleeve bearings and lubricants for OEM's like Hardinge, Bridgeport, Mazak and the like HIGHLY qualifies me to discuss rotary table lubricants - at least as much and perhaps more so than that of a lone Tormach owner/user.

In the end, it only matters what you know, what problems you can solve and the people you can affect as you go thru life.

ger21

09-01-2007, 08:51 AM

Any further back and forth bickering, or whatever you want to call it, and the entire posts get deleted.

NC Cams

09-01-2007, 08:26 PM

If you delete everything AFTER post 6, the question is answered and the post that caused the disagreement/bickering (post 7) is automatically eliminated.

Unless it is felt that the exchanges of sound info that were/may have been exchanged after and as a result of post 7 have no redeeming value, there would be no real loss (outside of any entertainment value) if you deleted the subsequent food fight portion of the thread....

tobyaxis

09-01-2007, 08:44 PM

Wow, what a Thread. Personally I agree with NC Cams because he at least knows what he is saying.

I have all too many times seen individuals use the wrong Lubrication saying,"Oil is OIL". Well readers if "Oil is Oil" why don't you put some Vegetable Oil in your Transmission or Crank Case?

Oil and Lubrication products have specific applications. Otherwise you could put Transmission Fluid in your Crank Case and vs versa.

It only takes a little common sense..

BTW: Phil do do remember the run in we had about Extended Tooling a year ago??? I do, and what you posted in this thread and what has been deleted says a lot about what you shouldn't be telling anyone.

Sorry Ger21 I had to say it.

Everyone have a safe and pleasant Labor Day Weekend!!!!!

Don Clement

09-01-2007, 10:24 PM

http://tormach.com/document_library/MRT-8_V1-5.pdf
From the Tormach RT manual:

Lubrication
The rotary table has an oil reservoir and two spring loaded oil fittings sealing
oil passages that must be filled with SAE 80 hypoid or ISO 68 or AGMA 2 gear
oil or SAE 30 weight motor oil before first operation. Filling will be easier with a
trigger style piston pump oil can rather than a diaphragm bottom (baby jar lid)

I use SAE 85-90W hypoid gear oil in my Tormach RT. At 5 rpm max rapids I have found no problems with SAE 85-90W hypoid gear oil that is available at most auto supply stores and is the same stuff I run in my car and truck tranny. I ran SAE 85-90W hypoid gear oil for many years in my BMW 5-speed close-ratio ZF tranny with good results. BTW I put over 400K miles on that car.

Type of oil depends on a specific application and that is where generalization breaks down. The Tormach RT is a relatively slow speed 5 rpm max application and the worm is lightly loaded so use of even SAE 30W motor oil would be OK as stated in the Tormach manual.
For some precision worm gear applications the recommended lubrication is none. Ed Byres of Barstow, Ca is known for his ultra-precision worm-worm gear sets used in astronomical telescope drives told me once that he did not recommend to use any type of lubrication with the ultra-precision 12” diameter worm drive in his 812 Byres telescope mount. The error of Byres worm drives was in the low single digit arc-second range. He told me that this particular worm worm gear had been engineered for negligible wear at the speed of 1 revolution per day without the need of any lubrication. In fact any type of lubrication used on this exposed ultra-precision worm drive would eventually lead to a degradation of the worm drive’s precision. The reasoning was that grit and dirt contamination would combine with oil or grease lubrication and literally form a grinding compound between the worm and worm gear. So generalizing about the use of lubrication doesn’t always work. Sometimes oil is no oil at all.

NC Cams

09-02-2007, 12:03 PM

Any time that dirt/grit/dust contamination is an issue, the use of a lubricant can actually DETRACT from durability for the sound reasons cited in post 51 re; the telescope.

There are even times when the lubricant can cause MORE friction instead of less - we figured this out in our mini-ball bearings that we used in R/C car wheels. Bone dDry bearings simply ran better/longer/with less friction that ANY that had a grease or oil lubricant. Dry sump lube systems were developed to reduce viscous drag in engines and transmissions for this very same reason

Worm gear wear prevention is a signifigant challenge. Why? Because you can rub a hole in the lube film under some oscillatory situations (see prior post) or create problems in certain situations by attracting dirt. It should not be a surprise that hypoid 80/90 is rccomended by the OEM, it is darn good stuff - cheap too.

Yet in other worm drives (IE: electric power steering like that being developed for car use) you HAVE to lube them but how and with what? This is a problem that is a far and different cry one from the question that started this thread, namely lube for a 4th axis.

The proper lube for THIS 4th axis aapplication was ably and competently supplied in threads 2, 5 and subsequently restated in post 54.

I don't disagree AT ALL. In fact, I initially gave qualified support for these recommendations in post 4 and then UNQUALIFIED support of these exact same and PROPER recommendations in posts 12, 28 and 30.

Everything else (explanations, examples, tech info, etc) was offered to counter bogus lube recommendations that were offered or crept in by well meaning albeit ill-informed contributors who chimed in along the way.

There is a lot of lube info basics supplied in this thread. I do hope that ALL those who read it gain some general lube info that they didn't have in some way, shape or form - and that something is hopefully going to be far more than the entertainment value that was also provided.

I hope y'all enjoyed the effort.....

Don Clement

09-02-2007, 01:04 PM

Any time that dirt/grit/dust contamination is an issue, the use of a lubricant can actually DETRACT from durability for the sound reasons cited in post 51 re; the telescope.

I built a type of ultra-precision rotary table that doesn’t require lubrication for the final drive. http://clementfocuser.com/images/Cable_Drive_Print.pdf This rotary table just happens to be for a telescope drive but could be easily converted for use on my Tormach as an ultra-precision rotary table by adding a stepper. Internally is a sealed single 8” bore Kaydon X ball bearing race lubricated with Braycote high vacuum grease. The preload for the single Kaydon X ball bearing race was set by using a thermal differential between the aluminum housing and X bearing then injecting a layer of anaerobic Loctite 271 in the gap formed. I first saw this type of drive back in the early ‘90s used for an ultra-precision rotary table for a semiconductor diamond wafer saw. The diamond wafer saw cuts down the streets on silicon or sapphire wafers and works without any type of lubrication, in fact flood coolant and abrasive grit covered the cables in operation. Repeatability for this type of rotary table is in the sub arc second range and is unaffected by contamination or lack of lubrication.

NC Cams

09-02-2007, 04:41 PM

Don: As a former ball bearing engineer, I know that your example re' a LOW SPEED ball bearing running well with NO lubrication is a viable concept - but, BUT it isn't something that can/will work everywhere (hasty generalizations made by some other people never do) .

The problem I have with non-traditional examples/generalizations that work are that folks who are far less educated or technically astute can tend to see these examples and then extrapolate that ANY sort of device can work without lube or some other equally avante garde concept.

As has been the case in a lot of the exchanges in this and other threads, YES, but sort of, perhaps.

Kaydon and all ball bearing suppliers rely on EHL film theory (see prior post) to provide for long, trouble free life spans of bearings. Although an EHL film is NOT criitical for low speed and/or very low load (as % of capacity - a very critical qualifier), the presence of a lube film IS CRUCIAL when any appreciable load or speed is applied to the bearing.

Here's why.

The DYNAMIC load of the bearing is ultimately transmitted from the outer raceway, thru the balls to the inner raceway (or in reverse) via the lube film that hopefully forms between the components. In essence, the ball is "water skiing" over the raceway only lube is replacing water. There is a BIG difference 'tween STATIC and DYNAMIC loads and the stresses that they apply - look at the bearing tables, the capacity differences are published and can be DRAMATICALLY different.

If a DYNAMIC load is applied via metal to metal contact as opposed to "going through" the lube film, something strange happens to the bearing.

When you apply load thru a lube film, the peak stress is generated BELOW and within the subsurface of the bearing. There is adequate material to carry the load hence the stress is not high enough to cause immediate cracking.

HOWEVER, apply the load to a dry bearing and/or via a hole punched in the lube, the peak stress is shifted at/to the immediate surface of the material.

Since there is insufficient material at the surface to carry the resultant stress, micro cracks can form almost immediately. These initiation sites, when combined with any subsurface stress that occurs once an EHL film is generated leads to rapid/premature detioration of the bearings.

Do a search for "bearing brinnelling" and "ball bearing fatigue" and or "bearing spalling" if you want more info on what's going on.

Anyway, since the equipment or bearings maker never knows what sort of load they'll have applied to the RT or bearing or whatever, the equipment maker tries to protect for it via lubing the device with a lube that offers the most in the way of wide range operational protection. Hypoid 80/90 or SAE30 motor oil, again in the RT for reasons already cited.

Problems arrise when "someone knows better" (guilty as charged) or sees where someone they never even met before on a M/B used peanut butter to lube the device. Now, P/B then becomes a defacto accepted standard for lubricating stuff. Although P/B is easily attained, its use may not necessarily be SOUND advice.

There is no doubt that a 1 rev per day device operating at a small percentage of the rated capacity will have TOTALLY different lube requirements/needs than a device that rotates at 6000rpm and is running at full rated capacity.

I know it, you know it but some poor schmuck who doesn't have our background surely doesn't and never will - until he asks and is then PROPERLY instructed (see my prior rants inother threads about bearing load/life calcs in the 'Zone that people DON'T do).

Anecdotal evidence is good for illustrative purposed, both good and bad. Sound and COMPLETE lubrication fundaments, however, are not always taught nor are they readily documented let alone understood. But look around, here and elsewhere and it can be rampant and will stay that way until challenged and/or soundly rebuffed.

There will always be folks who pound screws with hatchets. But you WON'T catch me showing/explaining how to do so nor NOT correcting someone who has or was given the false impression that this is the OK way to drive deck screws.

I did that (many things wrong) and learned that it is wiser to learn how to do things PROPERLY or at least do them with the help of sound technical merit.

You and I do not differ appreciably in our understanding of the proper lube to use in the subject device. My effort was focused on counteracting the possible negative efffects that someone ELSE provided as an RT lube and said was OK for the subject device.

The rest of my postings were purely and simply to explain WHY lube features have to be considered - ergo, why "oil is simply not oil". The use of non-approved oil for the RT crept into the thread via someone else's bogus contribution long after the proper lube had been identified by you (posts 2 & 5)and and supported by me (posts 4,12,28 & 30).

Opinions are like navels - everybody has one. However, when it comes to lubricating industrial equipment, FOLLOW THE OEM'S LUBE RECOMENDATIONS. IF you're going to use something different, you'd better have darn good reason over and above the fact that you have a boat load of something different and want to use it simply because you have it.

You now have over 50 postings worth of explanations why the use of "its there oil" is or may be a BAD idea or a good one or it may not matter - again, your call.....

keithorr

09-02-2007, 04:55 PM

Get a room

tobyaxis

09-02-2007, 05:09 PM

Get a room

Meaning What?????:confused:

CarbideBob

09-02-2007, 07:11 PM

If you delete everything AFTER post 6

Oh ,,yeah,, sure,, Just go and throw my 2 cents worth right out the window (post#41) .
Yup, I see how you guys are. :D
Bob

tobyaxis

09-02-2007, 07:45 PM

Oh ,,yeah,, sure,, Just go and throw my 2 cents worth right out the window (post#41) .
Yup, I see how you guys are. :D
Bob

LOL Bob,
Your Posts weren't Ignored by everyone ;) .

Cheers!!!!!:)

NC Cams

09-03-2007, 10:11 AM

CB's contribution to the lube thread (SHC-630) does in fact seem to be some pretty good stuff - sort of "synthetic hypoid on steroids":

http://www.exxonmobil.com/USA-English/Marine/PDS/GLXXENMRNEMMobil_SHC_600.asp

I compares favorably to the many "hypoid 80-90" oils that have been discussed in the thread. For those looking for more info on the plethora of hypoid lubes that there are to choose from, go here:

http://search.exxonmobil.com/ledr/query.html?chooseLanguage=en&basicrefreshValue=0&hCountry=&Country=USA&ProductName=hypoid+gear+oil&URL=http%3A%2F%2Fsearch.exxonmobil.com%2Fledr%2Fquery.html&col=ledr&nh=25&st=1&rf=0&qm=0&pw=100%25&ws=0&lk=1&rq=0&InktomiSwitch=0&la=en&si=0&qc=ledr&co=USA&qp=url%3A%2FPDS&tx0=usa&op0=%2B&fl0=country%3A&ty0=w&tx1=hypoid+gear+oil&op1=%2B&fl1=&ty1=w&tx2=english&op2=&fl2=language%3A&ty2=w&searchAction=Submit

Surely, even the most discerning lube-o-file could find something "trick" enough to suit their taste for a truly "special" lube for their whatever.

NC Cams

09-03-2007, 10:41 AM

To further complicate the issue, I ran across some evidence that even automotive hypoid gear oils are NOT readily/totally equivalent.

Granted, the example below is that of a highly stressed automotive application but, clearly, even "hypoid gear oil may NOT be a suitable hypoid gear oil":

"....The Renault Transaxle demands specific oil to ensure satisfactory operation.

A huge amount of testing has been carried out in the vehicle (initially in
conjunction with Renault) to determine the oil type requirements for the
Lotus application. Due to the engine torque characteristics it was found
that the satisfactory operation / durability was only achieved using a
special Mobil oil - known as Mobil 630M. (note: not to be confused with SHC-630 - see below)

Using the normal Renault approved lubricant resulted in premature wear of the Crownwheel & Pinion. At this point Lotus only approved Mobil 630M for the transaxle. Gearbox development continued as the engine power and torque increased.

Several changes evolved to upgrade the transaxle for the increased demands put on it due to the increased Torque and vehicle traction. Another lubricant Castrol TAF-X was tested and approved for the Esprit application. At this point Lotus will only recommend the use of Mobil 630M or Castrol TAF-X.

The use of any other (untested) lubricant could result in premature wear of the gears or poor synchromesh operation. The approval is based on many thousands of miles testing in arduous conditions ( cold testing, hot testing, high speed and abusive operation) at great expense to the company.

Just comparing specifications of alternative lubricants would not give us the confidence to suggest that other lubricants would be suitable for this application.

Lotus Cars USA

At a later date someone asked what happened to the Mobil SHC 630M when the only thing available was SHC 630 (without the M suffix) Lotus replied:

The "M" in 630M stands for modified. This oil was specifically modified for
Lotus by Mobil and I think BMW used the same oil in some race applications.
I would stay with the Castrol TAF-X as that is readily available in the USA
whereas the Mobil oil is a little more difficult to come by..."

From that post I think you can concur that the SHC 630M and SHC 630 are not identical products, hence the reason for Lotus only endorsing Castrol TAF-X at this time.

The full exchange where the above was lifted from is here:

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?f=17&h=&t=104903

Again, anecdotal evidence and maybe overkill for the RT but, it shows that window shopped comparisons of hypoid oil properties may NOT yield the best lube for ANY/ALL applications.

The one thing that is relevant to the example cited above and/or the RT, the best results are probably going to be achieved with the OEM RECOMMENDED LUBRICANT.

Now that we've decided that, which one to use is something you can decide for yourself. Mobil has nearly 20 that are "hypoid rated" not counting SHC-630 and 630M. God knows how many more there are when all the other suppliers' offerings are considered.

For the RT, you can probably safely assume that nearly any automotive hypoid should/will work. However, I refuse to get into a discussion as to which one will work BEST.

However, consider this:

"....Fact is, there really arent't any fluids out there possessing optimum qualities for each. Use a fluid not readily compressible (high sulphur content - the typical smell of gear oil) and the gears will last forever, but the soft metal synchros (copper bronze, not unlike bronze gears or bushings) will react with the sulphur compounds, won't bite as well and the car will shift poorly. Use a readily compressible fluid (low Sulphur content) and the synchros will last longer, work better and shifting will be improved, but (the gears might wear/detiorate faster)..."

Caveat emptor

Don Clement

09-03-2007, 10:49 AM

Caveat lector

philbur

09-03-2007, 11:54 AM

It's snowing so hard round here this may have gotten buried in the Blizzard.

This is what Mobile say about Vactra way oils:

"Mobil Vactra Oil Numbered Series can be used for lubrication of ballscrews, linear guides, headstocks, translating screws, spur and bevel gears, and lightly loaded worm gears"

Shell Tonna v68 (the original question) is Shells equivalent of Vactra #2 and is also good for EP service as well as slideways.

So I still see no problem using these way oils for lubrication of a Tormach 6/8" rotary table.

Regards
Phil

zephyr9900

09-03-2007, 01:36 PM

I think NC Cams and Don Clement are both blowhards. I use 3-in-1 on everything. :p

Best regards,

Randy

NC Cams

09-03-2007, 03:08 PM

Re post 62: WHICH version of Vactra?

The original formula or the reformulated stuff that the paper industry found lacking or the re-reformulated version of the ORIGINAL stuff with the additives originally taken out that were then put back in for the paper industry (now sold as Valuoline or some such name)???

As stated any number of times before (specifially posts 2 and 5 at least) the subject device should be lubed with an oil designated as "Hypoid 80/90 or SAE 30". These are definitely NOT 'way oils" although they may have some of the same base oils or PARTIALLY (not fully) equivalent additve packages.

Disagree? Vactra is NOT so qualified as 'hypoid' as it didn't show up in the "hypoid" search I did on the Mobil website. See results posted earlier.

Disagree? Perhaps a discussion/explanation by the OEM, Mobil or someone else might suffice as I don't seem to be convincing as to the fallacy of using Vactra in place of the spec'd hypoid lube.

NUMEROUS examples were cited as to why "equivalent" oils are not/may not be suited for any device. Sound explanations were also given why and these too clearly seem to not be sinking in for some reason.

EDIT: Even Lotus cars feels that, "...Just comparing specifications of alternative lubricants would not give us the confidence to suggest that other lubricants would be suitable for this application...." Something to think about, gang...

What do other posters know/see in a mere perusal of lube specs that the engineers at Lotus or Tormach don't/can't? I dunno, so I'll simply follow the OEM's recommendations and NOT use any lube that is NOT factory approved - just to be safe instead of sorry as I've Been there and done that. Again, do what YOU want.

END EDIT

The OEM's recommendation is pretty clear and concise - it says hypoid 80/90 or SAE 30 motor (post 2 and 5). The factory literature does NOT even say that "something close" or "equivalent" to "way oil", Vactra or Tonna is/are acceptable alternative(s).

Just because an oil has any amount of an EP additive (per post 62), that does NOT, NOT, NOT make it suited for any application (see prior posts concerning the effect that various additives have/do not have on iron and/or bronze materials used in gearboxes). You also need a balanced ANTIWEAR package for hypoid gears which I don't believe that Vactra has. Again, Mbbild did NOT rate Vactra as a hypoid suited lube.

Pound screws with hatchets if you wish but it is NOT a recommended procedure for installing them even though it works. Since Vactra is NOT certified for HYPOID use pursuant to the OEM's recommendation, nor did it show up in the Mobil search when I typed in "hypoid lubes", Vactra probably should not be used for the RT even though it may be suitable for "lighttly loaded worm drives" and some feel it "should" work. Be my guest.

For that matter, if the load is light enough (see DC's prior post RE telescope worms) you may not even need lube. So does that mean it would be OK to NOT use any lube in a "lightly loaded" RT? I don't think so as "lightly loaded' is an unqualified/undefined scalar quantity. Is a very lightly loaded 9" Foid ring and pinion "equivalent" to the telescope worm? Non in any lifetime.

This discussion has gone from the sublme to ridiculous.

Why? Cuz guys chime in with "equivalent", "it should work" oils in spite of the fact that it should be self evident by now that there is NOT a true "equivalency" when you start to formulate/select oils (see SHC630M versus SHC 630 versus Vactra (early/late/renamed-reformulated) posts previously). Moreover, "should work oils" don't always work - examples already cited..

I don't see how it can be made any clearer and conciser and simpler but here's a try:.

a. DO NOT LISTEN TO ME

b. DO NOT LISTEN TO PHIL

c. DO NOT LISTEN TO CARBIDE BOB.

d. DO listen to anybody but the OEM.

e. DO Use ONLY the oil that they recommend (see link provided by DC especially if you chose to follow step a. above literally) .

f. Use anything else at your own peril....

Care to disagree? Be my guest. In the mean time, use whatever lube you want and keep us posted on the success or failure of your choice(s) - especially the failures as it is always more important to know what NOT do do......

philbur

09-03-2007, 04:16 PM

"and lightly loaded worm gears"

Phil

NC Cams

09-03-2007, 09:46 PM

Phil: You can NOT cherry pick out a convenient feature of a lube, namely "...suitable for lightly loaded worm gears..." and use that as support for its use simply because that one qualifer doesn't adequately address ALL the lube requirements or situations that a/the lube has to protect for.

Regarding loading (light or heavy, it don't matter) versus operating conditios, please go back and reread post #43, with specific attention to the anti-wear section. THis is a very important consideration for worm gears especially that you seem to be overlooking. Here's why it is so critical.

I worked on a worm drive EPS (electric power steering) system for a 200x model year for a major OEM. They had a motor driving a worm that drove the steering column from the cab instead of via hyd pump under the hood. IT packaged better and was lighter overall.

In testing, they could load the daylights out of it and run it lock to lock and it would sail thru the durability testing under far heavier loads than in the car with NO issues whatsoever.

Yet, in the car and real world use, the damn thing would wear the worm quickly regardless of the nature and type of lube. In fact, the problem was actually woRSE under light load conditions, especially low magnitude. low load oscillation (which surely NEVER EVER happen on a RT - not hardly).

The solution was found when we lookd closely to the load application rate/type (see post 43 for partial root cause). Here's what was happening in detail.

NORMAL steering input is a few degrees of wheel movenent back and forth to keep the car in the lane. This is then often followed by an occasional lock to lock for a major turning effort. Result: essentially "light loading of the worm" (fits the description of Vactra, no?) followed by occasional full rotation and/or heavier loading - not unlike a RT in my estimation.

The phenomenon encountered: when you lightly load and oscillate the worm, you literally punch/wear a hole in the grease. Unless the lube gets replenished and is anti-wear fortifed, you can/will get into localized parent metal to metal contact, parent metal wear and/or micro welding and subsequent tearing up of the worm and ring gear faces occurs.

The metal wear particles then contaminate the lube and get circulated into and mixed with the lube to form a perfect lapping compound. Shortly therafter, the thing eats itself.

It took some darn fancy lube and material changes to fix the problem. The OEM had to make the metals self lubricating and highly wear resistant and low friction as well. They also had to come up with a lube that was HIGHLY antiwear and EP rated yet still had low viscosity to prevent cold weather sluggish operation - and this was in a loading situation that was definitely "a lightly loaded worm".

Blow hard example? Maybe.

Real world knowledge/wisdom that is highly pertinent? Definitely.

Proof that simply being "suitable for lightly loaded gears" does NOT make Vactra suitable for the Tormach RT? You be the judge.

The OEM recomendation is still found in posts 2 and 5. I still strongly contend that Vactra is not an approved factory equivalent, regardless of what cherry picked words from the Vactra tech brochure may indicate to the contrary.

The readers now have the information in chapter, verse and volume and are free to read and follow whichever recommendation they so choose.

Geof

09-03-2007, 10:02 PM

Dead horses and the flogging thereof comes to mind :D .

CarbideBob

09-03-2007, 10:58 PM

Yea Geof, but someday someone will use this thread for their PhD paper titled "Dynamic Social Interaction on the Web".:D
I'm thinkin your signature alone says it all.

No offense guys (I'm sure someone will be upset), but I don't think anybody is taking a close look at the mechanical design of this table. This thing was not originally designed for cnc use. Anybody here got a manual phase II table from Enco? Take a look at your assembly drawing and compare it to the one on Tormach's website.
I'm not trying to badmouth these little tables (I absolutely love em and have 4 spares sitting in crates). Just trying to point out that we are using them a little outside of the original design intent.

For the light duty cycle of a home shop you could just about get away with filling this thing with 3 in 1 (easy there NC, I can see your blood boiling already). If by chance you are using one with coolant be sure to change the oil every once in a while.

OK guys, flame away.(chair)
Bob

zephyr9900

09-04-2007, 12:04 AM

Blow hard example? Maybe.

NC, I hope you realize that my tongue was firmly in my cheek when I wrote that. It has been an interesting exchange to read.

My philosophy when I buy something new is

1. I've never used it.
2. The manufacturer has used it.
3. I'll start out with what the manufacturer recommends.

I just checked my garage cupboard and found:

-Vactra #2 way oil
-Labelle 102 plastic-compatible gear oil
-Phil Wood Tenacious Oil
-Castrol GTX 20W-50
-Solder Seal Super Oil
-Mitee thread cutting oil
-Mobil1 synthetic grease
-Park Tool Polylube 1000
-Tri-Flow synthetic grease with Teflon
-Sta-Lube disk brake grease
-Permatex Anti-Seize Lubricant
-Bardahl Foamy Chain Lube
-Finish Line Bearing-Gel (100% Teflon)
-some brand of water-soluable cutting oil (I forget the brand--it's in a glass jar now)
-and the aforementioned 3-in-one

I haven't had any hypoid 80/90 since I had the Volkswagen bus (the spare liter of GTX also dates from that era, a good 15 years ago) but if I bought a rotary table and that was recommended, I'd buy it.

Best regards,

Randy

P.S. I have used the 3-in-one in the past week, but I can't remember on what...

EDIT: Oh yeah, it was on my wife's old sewing machine. :) Right before she bought the new microprocessor-controlled CNC sewing machine. What a cool tool THAT is. :D

philbur

09-04-2007, 02:17 AM

double post

philbur

09-04-2007, 02:18 AM

I don't understand the "cherry picking statement".

Suitable for lightly loaded worm gears means what it says "suitable for lightly loaded worm gears".

The rest of the lubricated surfaces are low pressure sliding, identical to machine ways.

Phil:)

Phil: You can NOT cherry pick out a convenient feature of a lube, namely "...suitable for lightly loaded worm gears..." and use that as support for its use simply because that one qualifer doesn't adequately address ALL the lube requirements or situations that a/the lube has to protect for.

CarbideBob

09-04-2007, 02:51 AM

Don Clement

09-04-2007, 08:24 AM

Randy wrote:"I think NC Cams and Don Clement are both blowhards. I use 3-in-1 on everything."
Randy: I thought you use KY grease on everything especially where there is 3-on-1 ;-)

Geof

09-04-2007, 08:57 AM

Phil,
You might be underestimating the forces on this worm gear.
I'm generating about 80 lbs of thrust force during accel/decel and its on a pretty small contact path. And then of course I expect it to take this load in the opposite direction. It's the inertia of that big round steel disk that gets ya.
Take a look at the Hass ads and you'll get a feeling for how important the worm gearset is to a rotary table. Worm gears are the nightmare part of any rotary table design.
Bob

I did a quick metal calculation about my Haas HRT210 which produces 180 lb-ft on the table with a gear 6" in diameter so that is 360 lbs at the point of tooth contact. Is 0.1 square inches a good guess for the likely tooth area? I guess light loading is not the case here.

NC Cams

09-04-2007, 09:18 AM

Phil: Ok, so take OUT the "cherry picked" phrase and reread post 66 slowly and carefully. Presented in chapter and verse an explanation and real life example why worm gear lubrication is SO critical.

Take CB's 80 lb thrust factor, apply it over a small repetive arc of travel and you easily poke a hole in the lube. THAT'S when you really need the advantage of an antiwear agent in the lube - and rapid replenishment of same in a worm gear.

The factory recommended lubes were formulated to address these EXACT forms of loading and wear prevention. The use of anything BUT is not wise for voluminous reasons already cited.

Earlier in my career, I was a service engineer for a noted aftermarket auto parts company. We were the guys that customers called when they had tech questions. We also processed ALL the parts warranties so we also were the FIRST ones who got biiitched at when parts failed.

The most enlightening and MADDENING part of the job was some of the stupid, moronic, idiotic, "old wives" tales that we heard regarding the accepted norm for installing auto parts. These were often the root cause of the failure rather than the hoped for "super trick" assembly procedure.

Examples:

a. pack the pump gear cavity with petroleum jelly to "prime it" - you can't imagine the grief to other parts that can cause.

b. smear a camshaft with "cup grease" as a prelube. Why C/G? It is stickly/tacky and good for "sliding deVices" (typically not EP or antiwear formulated but otherwise it should but didn't/won't work very well, over and over and over). See any similarity to the features of "way oil"???"

c. we put double spirolox/truarc pin retainers into our race pistons INTENTIONALLY. Yet, guys thought we put in "spares" and would only 1 per side instead of the planned/provided 2. Then they'd argue when the extra clearance would pound out the single ring and want us to buy them an engine.

d. or the repeated attempts to use high compression pistons with pump gas that could hardly support C/R's over 9.5:1. To this day I can still cite the piston part nunbers or engine models that were the most common victims of this travesty. Yet, "experts" all over the country built and blew up 12:1 steet engines with doctored up pump gas.

After a while, you get tired of people blowing up stuff and biitching at you day after day about "defective parts". In fact, the only "defect" was generally their ability to read and follow directions or worse, their use/belief in/of WRONG sage wisdom they "read about someplace". I"ll save the "car magazine technology diatribe" for a better, more pertinent forum.

Spend about 9 years doing NOTHING but deaing with that sort of ignorance/stupidity and you learn a lot about various technologies (in my case antifriction/antiwear agents in lubes). You also become EXTREMELY intolerant of bad, well intended albeit moronic advice.

You also start doing what you can to prevent customers from using your parts improperly. So, we crafted up new catalogs and user manuals and godawfully detailed instruction sheets. Result: only the truly "gifted" (sic) had problems.

We proved that when you make stuff bullet proof, customers will take mortars to it - and succeed. One guy in particular was quite persistant at doing dumb a$$ things. We ran across his stunts with stunning regularity. He even earned multiple FOW's (fool of the week) award.

One time, he had problems with a device I had engineered and had personally written the instruction sheet for. Naturally, he finally called and our paths eventually crossed. The call ended shortly after I asked him if he'd read and followed the instructions. He said he did but he couldn't understand them.

To which I responded, " Sorry to hear that. Let me have you talk to my secretary. After all, she was given a handful of parts along with the instruction sheet and she followed the instructions and assembled the device properly - and she knew NOTHING about assembling widgets before she read and followed the instructions that I wrote and you apparently ignored".

He said that wouldn't be necessary and hung up. I don't recall ever hearing from him again.

My intense need to stop/squash a bad practice or the use of improper lubes or some other misadvice comes from a prior lifetime of hell in dealing with the results that well intended people generated by following bad advice.

Personal problem? Probably. But, if it helps prevent someone from doing something dumb/stupid by not using what actually is a wrong lube, I've finally succeeded in contributing something positive to humanity.

Yes, Geof there is not a lot of merit to be gained in beating a dead horse. But this much is ceartain. a TRULY dead horse can't/won't continue to lead people astray.