Lathe work

[Neverenoughwatches]

17 hours ago, RichardHarris123 said:

I have some stem blanks, I don't need them all. 

Actually  you might do mate lol

 

17 hours ago, nickelsilver said:

If you want to learn lathe work as it pertains to watchmaking, LWS started right. Start with brass, practice getting nice curly chips to start, then when you have a feel for the graver, practice making cyinders. With a micrometer you can see straight away visually with the spindle and anvil if you're cylindrical or tapered. Then practice making nice crisp square shoulders. Then two cylinders, with square shoulders. Then, cylinders to a specific diameter. Then to diameter and length. Then do it with steel. When it's automatic with steel, move on to blue steel. Part of the reason of going through these steps is to develop a feel for the graver and the different materials, and you will become very good at detecting a dull graver and sharpening gravers in the process.

 

In my opinion it's good to start with steel gravers. Get good with them, then you can move on to carbide. Carbide stays sharper longer, especially in blue steel, but it less forgiving as the tip/edge chip far more easily than steel. Chip the tip, and you can't make a square shoulder until you resharpen. Also, carbide really works best if lapped after sharpening, either on a charged copper or cast iron (spinning) lap, or on an ultra fine diamond wheel, like a D7. Steel gravers you just need a medium India stone and a decent Arkansas to get your edge.

 

When your hand graver skills are looking good, then start trying out the slide rest (if you have one).

I see the comparison of hss to carbide, same applies to wood turning . Carbon steel over hss tools. A softer edge over its longevity.  I have quite a few stones from being a joiner, I used to be obsessive about sharpening tools ( we all have our fetishes) . I've a really big book somewhere about the subject by James Kingscott, a total master with sharpening. I've a couple of Japanese  stones that will be far too soft. A Norton India stone two sides, A washita stone that is really hard and fine, a Welsh slate, a bit soft but creates an amazing edge. Some diamond stones that are ok but little bit rough cut. And my latest acquisition from China, and what an edge, a synthetic Ruby composite, fantastic value , hard as hell and super fine. Appreciate  that info Nicklesilver, I'll be ordering some steel shortly.  I seen mention of piano wire and racer spokes being used, what are your thoughts on that ?

[nickelsilver]

4 minutes ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

 I seen mention of piano wire and racer spokes being used, what are your thoughts on that ?

My thought is I like to know what I'm using, so I order steel that is predictable and known, haha. I know that it's not so easy everywhere, but I do recall that it's fairly easy to source "silver steel" in the UK, which would be what you want. I have some old pre- heat treated "blue steel" rods from Bergeon but I consider that OK for making simple pins or other non critical parts; it's not very consistent. Newer blued steel I've bought from other suppliers was far too soft to be really useful for anything critical. If I need to make something important in steel I use something I can heat treat myself. Here it's Sandvik 20AP or equivalent. In the states the go-to for staff or stems (or pinions or whatever) would be O-1 steel, which is essentially what y'all call silver steel. Any place that supplies to model engineers should have small quantities of silver steel.

 

Piano wire might be OK, never tried to turn it. Or a spoke for that matter.

[Neverenoughwatches]

13 minutes ago, nickelsilver said:

My thought is I like to know what I'm using, so I order steel that is predictable and known, haha. I know that it's not so easy everywhere, but I do recall that it's fairly easy to source "silver steel" in the UK, which would be what you want. I have some old pre- heat treated "blue steel" rods from Bergeon but I consider that OK for making simple pins or other non critical parts; it's not very consistent. Newer blued steel I've bought from other suppliers was far too soft to be really useful for anything critical. If I need to make something important in steel I use something I can heat treat myself. Here it's Sandvik 20AP or equivalent. In the states the go-to for staff or stems (or pinions or whatever) would be O-1 steel, which is essentially what y'all call silver steel. Any place that supplies to model engineers should have small quantities of silver steel.

 

Piano wire might be OK, never tried to turn it. Or a spoke for that matter.

Appreciated Nicklesilver, I respectfully  understand as a pro you need to get things perfect, it's your living. I'm in a bit of a make do and have something usable world. And to be honest I enjoy having that approach because it makes me have to think about what I'm doing. As I only every buy vintage and its mainly for my own pleasure of wearing something  I've brought to life it fits me perfectly, for now anyway. I'm sure I'll start to get an-l about it as I learn more. Thank you for that I will make good use of what you've told me. 

[LittleWatchShop]

17 hours ago, nickelsilver said:

and length

I am struggling with length measurements.  I use a classic threaded caliper to measure diameter, but it cannot measure length close to the collet interface--there is no room to position the gap.  Thinking about using a small scoring compass (not sure that is the best term...a compass with a sharp point on each leg).

Also, measuring the diameter of a hairspring collet presents a challenge.  I have an Obama gauge for jeweled holes, but noting like that for bigger diameters.

 

17 hours ago, nickelsilver said:

the tip/edge chip far more easily than steel

Yes. GRRRRRRRR!!!!!

[RichardHarris123]

2 minutes ago, LittleWatchShop said:

I am struggling with length measurements.  I use a classic threaded caliper to measure diameter, but it cannot measure length close to the collet interface--there is no room to position the gap.  Thinking about using a small scoring compass (not sure that is the best term...a compass with a sharp point on each leg).

Also, measuring the diameter of a hairspring collet presents a challenge.  I have an Obama gauge for jeweled holes, but noting like that for bigger diameters.

That should work.  Get a pair with the wheel adjustment.

[nickelsilver]

25 minutes ago, LittleWatchShop said:

I am struggling with length measurements.  I use a classic threaded caliper to measure diameter, but it cannot measure length close to the collet interface--there is no room to position the gap.  Thinking about using a small scoring compass (not sure that is the best term...a compass with a sharp point on each leg).

Also, measuring the diameter of a hairspring collet presents a challenge.  I have an Obama gauge for jeweled holes, but noting like that for bigger diameters.

Measuring length is tricky, one reason I like to do the maximum possible with the slide rest- it measures the lengths for you! Otherwise you can scour Ebay for a while till one of the Levin depth mics come up, usually don't go for less than a hundred and sometimes much more. Very nice tool though- mine has seen daily use for decades and shows no sign of wear. The pic shows one under the image if it in use in the Levin book. Another option, that a friend of mine did, is to modify a dial indicator to work in reverse. If you look at the pic, the spindle that pushes in at the bottom also comes out the top, inside the cap. If you make a nice precision hole in the cap, and face it off, and attach a rod to the plunger, you can push the lower (normally used) part to stick out your rod- works exactly like the Levin tool then, direct reading on the dial.

 

To measure holes it's nice to have plug gages. I have sets from 0.05mm up to 5mm by hundredths (by 0.0025 in the really small sizes), nice Swiss stuff with a little handle on each gage, and cost a fortune new. In the states you can find nice U.S. made plug gages that are just the precision pin, no handle (called pin gages there) for a fraction of the cost here- for reference a 50pc set of Cary gages from say 0.50mm to 1mm is over a thousand bucks...  I'm sure with some digging you can find import gages for a fraction of U.S. made price too, and for hobby use they will be absolutely fine.

 

https://store.gaging.com/v-g-metric-pin-gages

 

In a pinch, with something like a hairspring collet, you can slide it onto a smoothing broach, make a mark, then measure with a micrometer. That will be pretty close.

Edited April 23, 2022 by nickelsilver

[LittleWatchShop]

19 hours ago, nickelsilver said:

In a pinch, with something like a hairspring collet, you can slide it onto a smoothing broach, make a mark, then measure with a micrometer.

I like it.

For horizontal measuring, I improvised this yesterday.  Replaced the lead with a turned pivot steel.  Turned the other pin too so that they are ultra sharp points.

I like the depth gauge...probably not an easy find.

[nickelsilver]

1 hour ago, LittleWatchShop said:

I like it.

For horizontal measuring, I improvised this yesterday.  Replaced the lead with a turned pivot steel.  Turned the other pin too so that they are ultra sharp points.

I like the depth gauge...probably not an easy find.

That will work. Another thing that's really important is to avoid stacking up errors. When I make a drawing, all lengths are referenced to one datum, which is logically the very end of the piece, whether a staff or stem (or whatever). All lengths come from that point; if I make a measuring error when cutting of 0.05mm on the first length, there's no reason that will translate to the next or further ones. I see a lot of drawings where each individual length is called out, and I imagine the person fighting to measure those, and stacking things up to an overall error that's huge.

 

If you look at the pic (typical staff and stem sketches I make), all lengths are off the tip. For a staff, I then fill in the lengths off the lower part of the hub as datum, as I cut those with another tool in the slide rest- but they are derived from the original lengths, so any error introduced is in my visual centering of the second tool, which is a one time error. It's rare for me to be off more than 0.02mm overall on a staff length.

 

You can also use the tail (rod) of a digital caliper the same as the Levin tool, but depending on your caliper you might not have a enough material in the body of the tool next to the rod to provide a stop for the end of the workpiece.

 

 

Edited April 24, 2022 by nickelsilver

[RichardHarris123]

4 minutes ago, nickelsilver said:

That will work. Another thing that's really important is to avoid stacking up errors. When I make a drawing, all lengths are referenced to one datum, which is logically the very end of the piece, whether a staff or stem (or whatever). All lengths come from that point; if I make a measuring error of 0.05mm on the first length, there's no reason that will translate to the next or further ones. I see a lot of drawings where each individual length is called out, and I imagine the person fighting to measure those, and stacking things up to an overall error that's huge.

 

If you look at the pic (typical staff and stem sketches I make), all lengths are off the tip. For a staff, I then fill in the lengths off the lower part of the hub as datum, as I cut those with another tool in the slide rest- but they are derived from the original lengths, so any error introduced is in my visual centering of the second tool, which is a one time error. It's rare for me to be off more than 0.02mm overall on a staff length.

 

You can also use the tail (rod) of a digital caliper the same as the Levin tool, but depending on your caliper you might not have a enough material in the body of the tool next to the rod to provide a stop for the end of the workpiece.

 

 

Way beyond my skill and I don't even have a lathe but I'm really enjoying learning. 

[BillM]

Good information here for those of us just reading along, thanks. 
As a former mechanist, a trick Ive used many times for depth measurements is to use the top and back of my caliper, those surfaces are precisely machined and can be much easier than using the tail of the caliper. 
 

[RichardHarris123]

2 minutes ago, BillM said:

Good information here for those of us just reading along, thanks. 
As a former mechanist, a trick Ive used many times for depth measurements is to use the top and back of my caliper, those surfaces are precisely machined and can be much easier than using the tail of the caliper. 
 

Great advice.  

[Neverenoughwatches]

3 hours ago, LittleWatchShop said:

I like it.

For horizontal measuring, I improvised this yesterday.  Replaced the lead with a turned pivot steel.  Turned the other pin too so that they are ultra sharp points.

I like the depth gauge...probably not an easy find.

Hi lws. I've been looking at depth micrometers on ebay. There is one or two that may work but tbh look a little chunky for the job. If anything crops up as I spend a lot of time on ebay I'll let you know. There will need to be 2 though as want one as well . Also would it worth making up your own hole sizers, a bit time consuming but fantastic lathe practise and a lot cheaper than shelling  out a grand ? Just a thought .

3 hours ago, nickelsilver said:

That will work. Another thing that's really important is to avoid stacking up errors. When I make a drawing, all lengths are referenced to one datum, which is logically the very end of the piece, whether a staff or stem (or whatever). All lengths come from that point; if I make a measuring error when cutting of 0.05mm on the first length, there's no reason that will translate to the next or further ones. I see a lot of drawings where each individual length is called out, and I imagine the person fighting to measure those, and stacking things up to an overall error that's huge.

 

If you look at the pic (typical staff and stem sketches I make), all lengths are off the tip. For a staff, I then fill in the lengths off the lower part of the hub as datum, as I cut those with another tool in the slide rest- but they are derived from the original lengths, so any error introduced is in my visual centering of the second tool, which is a one time error. It's rare for me to be off more than 0.02mm overall on a staff length.

 

You can also use the tail (rod) of a digital caliper the same as the Levin tool, but depending on your caliper you might not have a enough material in the body of the tool next to the rod to provide a stop for the end of the workpiece.

 

 

The measuring . Exactly working from a set point. I do this everyday in joinery. Can someone explain how to pick out sentences so a can ref. My quotes to them. I can't work it out, I'm having a dumb day. Thanks

3 hours ago, RichardHarris123 said:

Way beyond my skill and I don't even have a lathe but I'm really enjoying learning. 

Come on matey, you can do it, I have faith. Watch lathe, I'm on the look out for you. We can make sweet mistakes together x

Edited April 24, 2022 by Neverenoughwatches
Bloody predictive texts wind me up lol.

[nickelsilver]

For some perspective for you guys about to pick up gravers:

 

In my workshop (which is a shared workshop between me and a small 4 person company), when they want to hire a new person, they do a week long test, and one of the tasks is to make a balance staff. The first guy to take it had made a tourbillon he fit up into a movement with the gears and such of another watch before coming to us. After 2 days we moved him on to other tasks, not completed. Next guy, had worked for various ultra high end makers, graduated from the top level class at the best French school, 2 days, not completed. Last guy, graduate of WOSTEP full training course, spent almost 2 years looking for a job, hadn't touched a lathe in that time, knocked it out in 6 hours* and was super apologetic for how long it took, haha. All in their early-mid 20s, all had spent weeks and weeks(used to be months and months) in school turning and turning and turning, lots between centers, and still.

 

So when your're starting out, heed the practical experience of LWS above and my advice above, start simple, master each step, and progress. I see lots and lots of watches doing restoration and repair, and see a lot of staffs and stems that are clearly not original. Sometimes they do work just fine, but are ugly. The goal is to make something no one would suspect is not original. I also see the few vids on YT addressing staff or stem making and, uff, I've yet to see one that is really any good. Maybe one of these days I'll do one!- (some other guy will say it's not any good, haha). But start small, work your way up, get good at each step. Keep practicing, and don't get discouraged- remember the hoity toity watch school grads who knackered the staff part of their bench test.

 

*A major company I did vintage work for until recently would send stuff with a time estimate; if there was a staff to do, they counted 8 hours for that. 4 for a stem. The fella who did his test (on unfamiliar equipment under stress) in 6 hours already beat that. A friend who works there told me the people there usually took 2 days. If one of those landed on my bench, ha, I took that work to the bank! But I do lathe work every day, keep my gravers in top shape, always try to find ways to improve, and most importantly, keep my basics in order. Square shoulders, straight clean cylinders, it's not a race- when you try to go fast or skip steps you will cost yourself more time.

Edited April 24, 2022 by nickelsilver

[RichardHarris123]

1 hour ago, RichardHarris123 said:

Wasn't running, lighter fuel over night.  Dried, replaced the ballance, oiled and geased,  running beautifully.  Cheap and nasty, maybe but functional. Not sure it would work on a prestigious watch. 

My every day watch is a Omega Seamaster, master chronometer, I love the aesthetics, plain and simple.  Not ready to work on it yet.  What's your every day watch?

Tried sending a video, won't let me. 

 

3 minutes ago, nickelsilver said:

For some perspective for you guys about to pick up gravers:

 

In my workshop (which is a shared workshop between me and a small 4 person company), when they want to hire a new person, they do a week long test, and one of the tasks is to make a balance staff. The first guy to take it had made a tourbillon he fit up into a movement with the gears and such of another watch before coming to us. After 2 days we moved him on to other tasks, not completed. Next guy, had worked for various ultra high end makers, graduated from the top level class at the best French school, 2 days, not completed. Last guy, graduate of WOSTEP full training course, spent almost 2 years looking for a job, hadn't touched a lathe in that time, knocked it out in 6 hours* and was super apologetic for how long it took, haha. All in their early-mid 20s, all had spent weeks and weeks(used to be months and months) in school turning and turning and turning, lots between centers, and still.

 

So when your're starting out, heed the practical experience of LWS above and my advice above, start simple, master each step, and progress. I see lots and lots of watches doing restoration and repair, and see a lot of staffs and stems that are clearly not original. Sometimes they do work just fine, but are ugly. The goal is to make something no one would suspect is not original. I also see the few vids on YT addressing staff or stem making and, uff, I've yet to see one that is really any good. Maybe one of these days I'll do one, haha (some other guy will say it's not any good, haha). But start small, work your way up, get good at each step. Keep practicing, and don't get discouraged- remember the hoity toity watch school grads who knackered the staff part of their bench test, haha.

 

*A major company I did vintage work for until recently would send stuff with a time estimate; if there was a staff to do, they counted 8 hours for that. 4 for a stem. The fella who did his test (on unfamiliar equipment under stress) in 6 hours already beat that. A friend who works there told me the people there usually took 2 days. If one of those landed on my bench, ha, I took that work to the bank! But I do lathe work every day, keep my gravers in top shape, always try to find ways to improve, and most importantly, keep my basics in order. Square shoulders, straight clean cylinders, it's not a race- when you try to go fast or skip steps you will cost yourself more time.

I'm a rank amateur as far as watch repair goes but I was taught an important lesson long ago.  There's only one way to do things, the correct way, time doesn't matter. 

[LittleWatchShop]

37 minutes ago, nickelsilver said:

but are ugly

so far...mine are ugly...but I am working on it!

[Neverenoughwatches]

1 hour ago, nickelsilver said:

For some perspective for you guys about to pick up gravers:

 

In my workshop (which is a shared workshop between me and a small 4 person company), when they want to hire a new person, they do a week long test, and one of the tasks is to make a balance staff. The first guy to take it had made a tourbillon he fit up into a movement with the gears and such of another watch before coming to us. After 2 days we moved him on to other tasks, not completed. Next guy, had worked for various ultra high end makers, graduated from the top level class at the best French school, 2 days, not completed. Last guy, graduate of WOSTEP full training course, spent almost 2 years looking for a job, hadn't touched a lathe in that time, knocked it out in 6 hours* and was super apologetic for how long it took, haha. All in their early-mid 20s, all had spent weeks and weeks(used to be months and months) in school turning and turning and turning, lots between centers, and still.

 

So when your're starting out, heed the practical experience of LWS above and my advice above, start simple, master each step, and progress. I see lots and lots of watches doing restoration and repair, and see a lot of staffs and stems that are clearly not original. Sometimes they do work just fine, but are ugly. The goal is to make something no one would suspect is not original. I also see the few vids on YT addressing staff or stem making and, uff, I've yet to see one that is really any good. Maybe one of these days I'll do one!- (some other guy will say it's not any good, haha). But start small, work your way up, get good at each step. Keep practicing, and don't get discouraged- remember the hoity toity watch school grads who knackered the staff part of their bench test.

 

*A major company I did vintage work for until recently would send stuff with a time estimate; if there was a staff to do, they counted 8 hours for that. 4 for a stem. The fella who did his test (on unfamiliar equipment under stress) in 6 hours already beat that. A friend who works there told me the people there usually took 2 days. If one of those landed on my bench, ha, I took that work to the bank! But I do lathe work every day, keep my gravers in top shape, always try to find ways to improve, and most importantly, keep my basics in order. Square shoulders, straight clean cylinders, it's not a race- when you try to go fast or skip steps you will cost yourself more time.

Jeez Nicklesilver,  you're not exactly selling the ease of this skill are you ?

[BillM]

Just as an example, here’s my little lathe set up. 
I was lucky and got a nice stereo microscope at a yard sale for $75. 
The scope boom was $200 though. 
The lathe is a Sureline 1000 that I inherited from one of my dads friends. ( more luck). The guy used to make model airplane engine parts on that lathe,  talk about a master! 
I’ve not made many watch parts on it, but I have made many many other things with this little lathe. I just wish it had dial or digital readouts, using the just markings is very hard. I have added a magnetic dial indicator on the cross feed when I really needed to make a precise turn, but it’s a pain to set up each time.  
 

Like nicklesliver stated, take your time and master each step. Start simple and really learn how to use your measuring tools. A bad measurement equals a bad part.  
On top of that, Have fun! 
 

[LittleWatchShop]

1 hour ago, BillM said:

here’s my little lathe set up

Nice.  Impressive boom.  I have been playing around with different configurations for magnification and for now am using a Bulova Accutron microscope (30x).  For awhile, I had a setup similar to yours (different style boom) but I never got the viewing angle and body position right.  Probably should revisit that someday.  Using stereo magnification just cannot be beat.

[HectorLooi]

1 hour ago, LittleWatchShop said:

Nice.  Impressive boom.  I have been playing around with different configurations for magnification and for now am using a Bulova Accutron microscope (30x).  For awhile, I had a setup similar to yours (different style boom) but I never got the viewing angle and body position right.  Probably should revisit that someday.  Using stereo magnification just cannot be beat.

Yes, a stereo zoom microscope is probably best. But I don't see any boom arm with a tilt function that allows the microscope to be tilted to a comfortable angle. 

I'm still looking for a suitable setup for my lathe.

[Neverenoughwatches]

3 hours ago, HectorLooi said:

Yes, a stereo zoom microscope is probably best. But I don't see any boom arm with a tilt function that allows the microscope to be tilted to a comfortable angle. 

I'm still looking for a suitable setup for my lathe.

Some of the cheaper swift fixed focus ones do HectorLooi, around £200 new, although I have seen at a bit less, eyepiece mags of 10 and 20x, they're OK for the price of new.Mine will be going over my lathe when I can decide on something else better with lower magnification and a wider field of view and  when I get my finger out to strip the lathe down.

[LittleWatchShop]

8 hours ago, HectorLooi said:

Yes, a stereo zoom microscope is probably best. But I don't see any boom arm with a tilt function that allows the microscope to be tilted to a comfortable angle. 

Indeed.  A scope mounted on a good ball socket seems like a good idea--four degrees of freedom.

[BillM]

19 minutes ago, LittleWatchShop said:

Indeed.  A scope mounted on a good ball socket seems like a good idea--four degrees of freedom.

Yup, that’s what mine has, works great.  

[HectorLooi]

24 minutes ago, BillM said:

Yup, that’s what mine has, works great.  

Any chance of a photo? 

[BillM]

Sure, Though I guess it not a Ball socket, it's a pin, on pin system, though It gives me all the positions I need.

The scope head rotates within the ring mount, it also rotates up and down and spins left and right, plus the boom is articulating in 4 places.