Don-in-Japan
05-28-2009, 07:41 AM
First off, I should say what is left of my Sherline is the spindle and motor assembly. The rest is the full A2Z conversion.. along with the Kerk precision leadscrews, and anti-backlash nuts.
My current issue is backlash. I mount a dial indicator in the spindle, and set it against a flat object bolted to the mill. I then proceed to zero the indicator face, and jog the opposite way .0001 at a time. My indicator reads the X axis error to be .0025", and the Y axis .0035". Is this an acceptable value for the anti-backlash nuts/leadscrew from Kerk? I was expecting maybe less than half of those values.
The leadscrews are bolted down well, and I get zero runout while an indicator is measuring the backside of the leadscrew while moving it CW, and CCW.
These are recent upgrades to the mill, so I'm not sure what to expect. The mill is clean, lubed with way oil, and I can move the tables smoothly by hand if I remove the motors, so binding isn't an issue.
Any thoughts? The backlash seems to be pretty constant, and doesn't vary from the previous measurements.. just leave it as is, and allow the software to compensate for the error?
My current issue is backlash. I mount a dial indicator in the spindle, and set it against a flat object bolted to the mill. I then proceed to zero the indicator face, and jog the opposite way .0001 at a time. My indicator reads the X axis error to be .0025", and the Y axis .0035". Is this an acceptable value for the anti-backlash nuts/leadscrew from Kerk? I was expecting maybe less than half of those values.
The leadscrews are bolted down well, and I get zero runout while an indicator is measuring the backside of the leadscrew while moving it CW, and CCW.
These are recent upgrades to the mill, so I'm not sure what to expect. The mill is clean, lubed with way oil, and I can move the tables smoothly by hand if I remove the motors, so binding isn't an issue.
Any thoughts? The backlash seems to be pretty constant, and doesn't vary from the previous measurements.. just leave it as is, and allow the software to compensate for the error?