Planer cutter head alignment

[wcndave]

Does it matter if the cutter head it's not in alignment with the tables if the blades are adjusted do they are parallel?

I am doing my first blade sharpening and noticed using dual gauge that the infeed table is about 0.4 mm higher than the cutter head at one end.

Looks fairly easy to adjust the out feed take on my scheppach 2600ci, however the in feed looks tricky.

I may have to make the same adjustment to me thicknesser bed, any idea how to do that?

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk

 

[blackrodd]

Check the cutterblock clearance is parellel to the tables, the lead off which is most important first or, you will get "sniping", dipping at the end, a piece of flat stock on the thicknesser bed and check for parellel by the cutter just a lights thickness off.
Then check that the lead on table is square and true in relation to the lead off table. The block will, or should be a constant entity, the only thing might be the bearings badly worn, but you would be aware of the really bad noise from rough bearings.
Any signs of damage or cutters moved? Adjust the lead on bed as best as you can see how it performs.
Can't be bad or surely you would have been allerted to the cutters not working on 1 side.
I presume that you do not move the planer by its tables? Then if its adjustable then do so.
Is it cast beds on that model? I know the earlier steel bed were a bit delicate. hope this helps Rodders

 

[wcndave]

Just realised my phone writing was not great.

Basically the in feed (lead on?) table seems pretty fixed. The outfeed is adjustable. However the cutter is not parallel to the infeed side.

I have never tuned up the p/t and the only thing I really noticed was that the fence was not square to both tables, so I knew i'd have to get round to this one day.

so with dial gauge, one side of (the highest point on the curve) cutter block is 0.4mm above the other side in relation to infeed table.

The outfeed table is only about 0.1mm out, so the two tables are slightly out. However given I can only (easily) adjust the out table, that does't help.

I used the scrap wood / rotate cutter head / measure movement technique before I removed the blades, and it was consistent across, so the blades must have been put in skew to make them parallel, hence I never noticed.

However on the thicknesser side it must exaggerate the effect, unless the table has been set of skew to compensate.

So it seems my options are:

1. adjust outfeed to match infeed, ignore cutter head and put blades parallel to tables (is this ok?), adjust thicknesser table to compensate (how?)
2. adjust infeed table to match cutter block (how?)

The tables are cast iron, so are pretty solid - just awkward to get to adjust anything, and infeed looks like it might not be - although hard to tell until I take off all the bolts, and that might be a mistake!

Dave

 

[fretnot]

the infeed and outfeed tables need to be co planar the bades in the cutter head are ajustable so they can be at the same hight to the table across their length

so ajust the tables as needed and the ajust blades to suit,so they are above the outfeed table hight as per your manual.

 

[wcndave]

OK, so if that is normal, then i need to adjust my thicknesser bed to compensate.

I am not sure if that is possible, i will probably have to take the base and the motor casing off to have a look, so I was hoping to avoid.

The attached shows a very exaggerated version of what I am looking at if I follow this method.

So I suppose what I would really like is to find someone who's done it successfully on this machine...

Perhaps I will email NME too.

Thanks!

 

[fretnot]

Were you getting good results with this machine as you have used it to a point of dulling the blades?

 

[wcndave]

The results were ok. I had a couple of minor nicks that caused some molding to appear, however it was easily sanded out. The fence was not 90 to both in / out so i was never confident I was getting PAR, however it has been good enough for what I do.

However I have found that what you get from the supplier usually needs work. I would always sharpen a chisel or plane on receipt (perhaps unless Matt sent it from workshop heaven), and stock blades are usually lower quality, so I figure I ought to sharpen it, and it has done quite a bit.

It is the only machine I have never tuned, and I could live with it, just thought that if it was easy to adjust, I may as well.

Turns our Allen from NMA does have some docs, and you in fact adjust the infeed table. Even though the outfeed is the one that lifts and gives easier access to adjust. So I will remove the housing and have a go!

The good news is that the infeed is not parallel to cutter head, whereas outfeed almost is, so it solves that problem mostly.

Also seems the thicknesser table cannot be adjusted, so I would guess the out/thick-bed/cutter head are all aligned, and it's the infeed that needs work.

If someone could lend me a 1m straightedge so I don't have to use my £2.99 macallister spirit level, that would be great!

I'll let you know how it turns out in case someone else has the same question.

Thanks

Dave

 

[Eric The Viking]

[Experience with Kity 439, so not necessarily applicable...]

The one that's usually hardest to do is the parallelism of the thicknesser table WRT the block. And you need to do that first. You adjust the alignment of the cutterblock in the frame on mine, although thankfully I haven't needed to.

That should get you parallel surfaces coming off the thicknesser. It's probably wise to check the feed rollers can move easily up and down, too. They shouldn't affect the parallelism, but can pull stock to one side. The thicknesser table on mine has a very slight dip in the middle (I think it's wear), and long stock does drift across if I'm not careful.

Then check the drum is parallel to the outfeed table, and finally check the outfeed and infeed tables are in parallel planes (parallel left-right and front-back).

At that point you can do the knives themselves

Incidentally, I have to be _very_ careful to keep the emerging stock level, to avoid snipe on the thicknesser. Either that or ignore it (about 1") and allow for it in cutting. I think there's a slight bit of float in my thicknesser table, enough to let it wobble slightly upwards on the infeed side as the end of the stock leaves the first roller.

YMMV, but checking that lot in that order worked well for me after a major strip down of the machine.

I didn't look forward to doing that lot. You need a dial gauge with a good stand for least pain, and a flat elephant's foot pad on the gauge is ideal. It turned out to be less horrible than I feared. I've found the easiest thing in use is to avoid adjusting the planer (jointer) infeed as much as possible - shallow cuts lots of times. Having it loose enough to move easily also made it inaccurate.

E.

 

[Steve Maskery]

+1 for doing the thicknesser first.
PTs are the hardest of machines to fettle properly, I think. I have a Kity and it sings now, but it wasn't always the case.
I originally bought a 636, but after a few years a large wall cabinet full of nuts and bolts fell off the walla nd landed on it. I wanted the insurance co to send an engineer to set it up again, but they insisted on replacing it. Unfortunately it was a Friday Afternoon model, but the UK distributor at the time were excellent. They sent out an engineer to fix it. He'd never seen a PT before, which didn't fill me with confidence, but as he'd spent a career keeping a fleet of Chinook helicopters in the air for the RAF I was prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt.
Eventually he took it away and brought it back pretty good. 16 hours of labour must have cost Kity a fortune.
It still wasn't perfect though, so a few years later I and my friend Brian set to with a file and got it right. It now works as it should, but it was a long and difficult journey.
S

 

[blackrodd]

If you're thicknesser bed is moved by handwheel and a chain and sprocket arrangement, each "corner" is only adjustable by the tension on the adjusting sprocket. Or the sprocket itself, moving onto the next tooth.
Is the bed difference, better or worse with the bed on the downward movement, or the upwards movement?
should the chain be very slack, the fine threads could be out of "sync" with each other
It maybe a good idea to check the tension of the chain, or, if it is out drastically it may be one tooth out, as a timing chain on the car would be.
Just so happens, I've just done mine. Regards Rodders

 

[sue denim]

I have one of these . I am a bit confused as you are asking about the two tables being in line..presumably on the surface planer. This is achieved by unbolting the fixed bed and putting a good straight edge along both sides to ensure the surface is flat. Make sure the cut depth adjuster is in it's highest setting (no cut). When the two beds are on the same plane the fixed one bolted up tight then the blades can be set to the out feed table. You should be able to get the surface planer to make a minimal cut of nearly nothing. Then you cut depth will be governed by the drop of the in feed table. Cannot see why there should be any discrepancy between the two surfacing beds.

As for the thicknesser bed that is on four nasty aluminium sprockets and is not the most accurate. I tend to recheck for square if making several passes.

My scheppach is up for sale soon having served me well since 2008.

Regards

'Sue'

 

[wcndave]

Many thanks for all the responses,I do have an update which I will put up once I have collated all my thoughts. Just didn't want you to think I was not appreciative!

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk