After the chaser is cut on the hob, its edges, as at c, and the corner, as at d, in Fig. 1328, should be rounded off, so that they may not catch in any burr which the heel of the hand tools may leave on the surface of the hand rest.

For roughing out the threads on wrought iron or steel the top face should be hollowed out, as shown in Fig. 1328, which will enable the chaser to cut very freely. For use on cast iron the top face should be straight, as shown in Fig. 1328 at a, while for use on soft metal, as brass, the top face must be ground off, as shown in Fig. 1329.

The Pratt and Whitney Co. cut up chasers by the following method: In place of a hob, a milling cutter is made, having concentric rings instead of a thread. The cutters are revolved on a milling machine in the ordinary manner. The chaser is fastened in a chuck fixed on the milling machine table, and stands at an angle of 15°. It is traversed beneath the milling cutter, and thus cut up with teeth whose lengths are at a right angle to the top and bottom faces of the chaser; hence the planes of the length of the teeth are not in the same plane as that of the grooves of the thread to be cut. Thus, let a, b, c, and d, Fig. 1330, represent the planes of the thread on the work, and e, f, g, h, will be the planes of the lengths of the chaser teeth.

The chaser, however, is given 15° of bottom rake or clearance, and this causes the sides of the chaser teeth to clear the sides of the thread.

Now, suppose the top face a, Fig. 1331, of the chaser to be parallel with the face of the tool steel, and to lie truly horizontal and in the same plane as the centre of the work. This clearance will cause the thread cut by the chaser to be deeper than the natural depth of the chaser teeth. Thus, in Fig. 1331 is shown a chaser (with increased clearance to illustrate the point desired), the natural depth of whose thread is represented by the line f, but it is shown on the section of work that the thread cut by the tool will be of the depth of the line d, which is greater than the length or depth of f, as may be more clearly observed by making a line e, which, being parallel to a, is equal in length to d, but longer than f. Hence, the clearance causes the chaser under these conditions to cut a thread of the same pitch, but deeper than the grooves of the hub, and this would alter the angles of the thread. This, however, is taken into account in forming the angles of the thread upon the milling cutter, and, therefore, of the chaser, which are such that with the tool set level with the work centre, the thread cut will be of correct angle, notwithstanding the clearance given to the teeth.

In order to enable the cutting of an inside chaser from a hub, it requires to be bent as in Fig. 1332, in which h is the hub, r the lathe rest, and c the chaser. After the chaser is cut, it has to be straightened out, as shown in Fig. 1318, in which is represented a washer being threaded and shown in section; c is the chaser and r the lathe rest, while p is a pin sometimes let into the lathe rest to act as a fulcrum for the back of the chaser to force it to its cut, the handle end of the chaser being pressed inwards.

When an inside chaser is cut from a hub (which is the usual method) or male thread, its teeth slant the same as does the male thread on the side of the hub on which it is cut, and in an opposite direction to that of the thread on the other side of the hub. Thus, in Fig. 1333, h is the hub, c the chaser, and r the lathe rest. The slope of the chaser-teeth is shown by the dotted line b. Now, the slant of the thread on the half circumference of the hub not shown or seen in the cut will be in an opposite direction, and in turning the chaser over from the position in which it is cut (Fig. 1333) to the position in which it is used (Fig. 1334), and applying it from a male to a female thread, we reverse the direction with relation to the work in which the chaser-teeth slant; or, in other words, whereas the teeth of the chaser should lie as shown in Fig. 1334 at a a, they actually lie as denoted in that figure by the dotted line b b. As a consequence, the chaser has to be tilted over enough to cause the sides of the chaser-teeth to clear the sides of the thread being cut, which, as they lie at opposite angles, is sufficient to cause the female thread cut by the chaser to be perceptibly shallower than the chaser-teeth, for reasons which have been explained with reference to Fig. 1321. It may be noted however, that an inside chaser cannot well be used with rake, hence the tilting in this case makes the thread shallower instead of deeper.

To obviate these difficulties the hub for cutting a right-hand inside chaser should have a left-hand thread upon it, and per contra, an inside chaser for cutting a left-hand thread should be cut from a hub having a right-hand thread.

The method of starting an outside thread upon wrought iron or steel to cut it up with a chaser is as follows:—

The work is turned up to the required diameter, and the V-tool shown in Fig. 1335 is applied; the lathe is run at a quick speed, and the heel of the tool is pressed firmly to the face of the lathe rest, the handle of the tool must be revolved from right to left at the same time as it is moved laterally from the left to the right, the movement being similar to that already described for the graver, save that it must be performed more rapidly. It is in fact the relative quickness with which these combined movements are performed which will determine the pitch of the thread. The appearance of the work after striking the thread will be as shown in Fig. 1336, a being the work, and b a fine groove cut upon it by the V-tool.

The reason for running the lathe at a comparatively fast speed is that the tool is then less likely to be checked in its movement by a seam or hard place in the metal of the bolt, and that, even if the metal is soft and uniform in its texture, it is easier to move the tool at a regular speed than it would be if the lathe ran comparatively slowly.

If the tool is moved irregularly or becomes checked in its forward movement, the thread will become waved or “drunken”—that is, it will not move forward at a uniform speed;[20] and if the thread is drunken when it is started, the chaser will not only fail to rectify it, but, if the drunken part occurs in a part of the iron either harder or softer than the rest of the metal, the thread will become more drunken as the chaser proceeds. It is preferable, therefore, if the thread is not started truly, to try again, and, if there is not sufficient metal to permit of the starting groove first struck being turned out, to make another farther along the bolt. It takes much time and patience to learn to strike the requisite pitch at the first trial; and it is therefore requisite for a beginner to leave the end of the work larger in diameter than the required finished size, as shown in Fig. 1336, so as to have sufficient metal to turn out the groove cut by the V-tool at the first trial cut, and try again.

If the thread is to be cut on brass the V-tool must not have any top rake. Some turners start threads upon brass by placing the chaser itself against the end of the work and sweeping it rapidly from left to right (for a right-hand thread), thus obviating the use of the V-tool.

In all cases the work should be rounded off at the end to prevent the chaser-teeth from catching.

In applying the chaser to the groove cut by the V-tool the leading tooth should be held just clear of the work at first, and only be brought to touch the work after the rear teeth have found and are traversing in the groove. By this means the chaser will carry the thread forward more readily and true. The thread must be carried forward but a short distance at each passage of the chaser, gradually deepening the thread while carrying it forward.

To start an inside thread the corner of the hole at its entrance should be rounded off and the back teeth of the chaser placed to touch the bore while the front teeth are clear. The lathe is to be run at a quick speed, and the chaser moved forward at as near the proper speed as can be judged. When the chaser is moved at the proper speed, the rear teeth will fall into the fine grooves cut by the advance ones, and start a thread, while otherwise promiscuous grooves only will be cut. It is an easy matter, however, to start a double thread with an inside chaser; hence, when the thread is started the lathe should be stopped and the thread examined.

The chaser should be placed with its top face straight above the horizontal level of the work and held quite horizontal, and the handle end then elevated just sufficient to give the teeth clearance enough to enable them to cut; otherwise, with a chaser having top rake, the thread cut will be too deep, and its sides will be of improper angle one to the other.

Thus, in Fig. 1337, w represents a piece of work, r the lathe rest, and t the chaser. The depth of the thread cut in this case will be from the circle a to the circle b; whereas the depth of the chaser teeth, and therefore the proper depth for the thread, is from c to d. Thus tilting the handle end of the chaser too much has caused the chaser teeth to cut a thread too deep. If on brass work the chaser has its top face ground off as in figure, tilting the handle too much will cause the thread cut to be too shallow, and in both cases the error in thread depth induces a corresponding error in the angles of the sides of the thread one to the other and relative to the axial line of the bolt or work.

If the chaser teeth are held at an angle to the work surface, the thread cut will be of finer pitch than the chaser, and the angles of the sides of the thread on the work will not be the same as those of the teeth. It is permissible, however, during the early cuts taken with a hand chaser to give the chaser a slight degree of such angle, because it diminishes the length of cutting edge, and causes the chaser to cut more freely, especially when the pitch of the thread is coarse and the chaser is becoming dull.

In the case of a taper thread the same rule, that the thread may be roughed out with the chaser teeth at an angle to the surface lengthways of the work, but must be finished with the teeth parallel to the surface, holds good.

Thus, in Fig. 1338 is a taper plug fitting in a ring having a threaded taper bore, the threads matching, and having the thread sides in both cases at an equal angle to the surface, lengthways of the work, though the tops and bottoms of the thread are not parallel with the axial line of the work.

Wood Turning Tools.—Wood turning in the ordinary lathe is generally performed by hand tools, and of these the principal is the gouge, which in skillful hands may be used to finish as well as to rough out the work (although there are other more useful finishing tools to be hereafter described).

It is used mainly, however, to rough out the work and to round out corners and sweeps. The proper form for this tool is shown in Fig. 1339, the bevel on the end of the back or convex side being carried well round at the corners, so as to bring those corners up to a full sharp cutting edge on the convex or front side.

The proper way to hold a gouge is shown in Fig. 1340, in which the cut taken by the tool is being carried from right to left, the face plate of the lathe being on the left side, so that by holding it in the manner shown the body and arms are as much as possible out of the way of the face plate, which is a great consideration in short work. But if the cut is to be carried from left to right, the relative position of the hands may be changed.

When the work runs very much out of true, or has corners upon it, as in the case of square wood, the forefinger may be placed under the hand rest, and the thumb laid in the trough of the gouge, pressing the latter firmly against the lathe rest to prevent the tool edge from entering the work too far, or, in other words, to regulate the depth of the cut, and prevent its becoming so great as to force the tool from the hands or break it, as is sometimes the case under such circumstances. When the gouge is thus held, its point of rest upon the lathe rest may be used as a fulcrum, the tool handle being moved laterally to feed it to the cut, which is a very easy and safe plan for learners to adopt, until practice gives them confidence. The main point in the use of the gouge is the plane in which the trough shall lie. Suppose, for example, that in Fig. 1341 is shown a piece of work with three separate gouge cuts being taken along it, that on the right being carried in the direction of the arrow. Now the gouge merely acts as a wedge, and the whole of the pressure placed by the cut on the trough side or face of the gouge is tending to force the gouge in the direction of the arrow, and therefore forward into its cut, and this it does, ripping along the work and often throwing it out of the lathe. To avoid this the gouge is canted, so that when cutting from right to left it lies as shown at b, in which case the pressure of the cut tends rather to force the gouge back from the cut, rendering a slight pressure necessary to feed it forward. The gouge trough should lie nearly horizontal lengthwise, the cutting edge being slightly elevated. The gouge should never (for turning work) be ground in the trough (as the concave side is termed), and should always be oilstoned, the trough being stoned with a slip of stone lying flat along the trough, the back being rotated upon a piece of flat stone, and held with the ground surface flat on the surface of the stone, and so pressed to it as to give most pressure at and near the cutting edge.

For finishing flat surfaces, the chisel shown in Fig. 1342 is employed. It should be short, as shown. It should be held to the work in a horizontal position, or it is apt to dig or rip into the work, especially when it is used upon soft wood. Some expert workmen hold it at an angle for finishing purposes, which makes it cut very freely and clean, but increases the liability to dig into the work; hence learners should hold it as shown.

Another excellent finishing tool is the skew-chisel, Fig. 1343, so called because its cutting edge is at an angle, or askew with the body of the tool. This tool will cut very clean, leaving a polish on the work. It also has the advantage that the body of the tool may be kept out of the way of flanges or radial faces when turning cylindrical work, or may, by turning it on edge, be used to finish radial faces. It is shown in Fig. 1343 by itself, and in Fig. 1344 turning up a stem. It is held so that the middle of the edge does the cutting, and this tends to keep it from digging into the work. The bevels forming the cutting edge require to be very smoothly oilstoned.

The whole secret of the skillful and successful use of this valuable tool lies in giving it the proper inclination to the work. It is shown in Fig. 1344, at e, in the proper position for taking a cut from right to left, and at f in position for taking a cut from left to right. The face of the tool lying on the work must be tilted over, for e as denoted by line a, and for f as denoted by the line b, the tilt being only sufficient to permit the edge to cut. If tilted too much it will dig into the work; if not tilted, the edge will not meet the work, and therefore cannot cut. For cutting down the ends of the work, or down a side face, it must be tilted very slightly, as denoted in figure by c d, the amount of the tilt regulating the depth of the cut, so that when the cutting edge of the tool has entered the wood to the requisite depth, the flat face of the tool will prevent the edge from entering any deeper. In cutting down a radial face the acute corner of the tool leads the cut, whereas in in plain cylindrical work the obtuse is better to lead.

For cutting down the ends, for getting into small square corners, and especially for small work, the skew chisel is more handy than the ordinary chisel, and leaves less work for the sand-paper to do. Beginners will do well to practise upon black walnut, or any wood that is not too soft, roughly preparing it with an axe to something near a round shape.

For finishing hollow curves the tool shown in Fig. 1345 is employed, the cutting edge being at b; the degree of the curve determines the width of the tool, and, for internal work the tool is usually made long and without a handle.

The tool shown in Fig. 1346 is employed in place of the gouge in cases where the broad cutting edge of the latter would cause tremulousness. It may be used upon internal or external work, being usually about two feet long. For boring purposes, the tools shown in Fig. 1347 are employed, the cutting edges being from the respective points along the edges c, d, respectively. But when the bore is too small to admit of the application of tools having their cutting edges on the side, the tool shown in Fig. 1347 at e is employed, which has its cutting edge on the end.

Chapter XIV.—MEASURING MACHINES, TOOLS, AND DEVICES.

Measurements are primarily derived in Great Britain and her colonies, and in the United States, from the English Imperial or standard yard. This yard is marked upon a bar of “Bailey’s metal” (composed of 16 parts copper, 2¹⁄₂ parts tin, and 1 part zinc), an inch square and 38 inches long. One inch from each end is drilled a hole about three-quarters through the whole depth of the bar, into which are fitted gold plugs, whose upper end faces are level with the axis of the bar. Across each plug is marked a fine line, and the distance between these lines was finally made the standard English yard by an Act of Parliament passed in 1855. A copy of this bar is in the possession of the United States Government at Washington, and all the standard measuring tools for feet, inches, &c., are derived from subdivisions of this bar.

The standard of measurement in France and her colonies, Italy, Germany, Portugal, British India, Mexico, Roumania, Greece, Brazil, Peru, New Granada, Uruguay, Chili, Venezuela, and the Argentine Confederation, is the French mètre, which is also partially the standard in Austria, Bavaria, Wurtemberg, Baden, Hesse, Denmark, Turkey, and Switzerland. It consists of a platinum bar, called the “mètre des archives,” whose end faces are parallel, and the length of this bar is the standard mètre. But as measuring from the ends of this bar would (from the wear) impair its accuracy, a second bar, composed of platinum and iridium, has been made from the “mètre des archives.” This second bar has ruled upon it two lines whose distance apart corresponds to the length of the “mètre des archives,” and from the distance between these lines the subdivisions of the mètre have been obtained.

As all metals expand or contract under variations of temperature, it is obvious that these standards of length can only be accurate when at some given temperature: thus the English bar gives a standard yard when it is at a temperature of 62° Fahr., while the French standard bar is standard at a temperature of 32° Fahr., which corresponds to 0 in the centigrade thermometer. But if a bar is copied from a standard, and is found to be too short, it is obvious that if its amount of expansion under an increase of temperature be accurately known, it will be an accurate standard at some higher temperature, or in other words, at a temperature sufficiently higher to cause it to expand enough to compensate for its error, and no more.

As all bars of metal deflect from their own weight, it is obvious that the bar must be supported at the same points at which it rested when the lines were marked, and it has been determined by Sir George Airy, that the best position for the points of support for any bar may be obtained as follows: Multiply the number of the points of support by itself (or, as it is commonly called, “square it”), and from the sum so obtained subtract 1. Then subtract the square root of the remainder, which gives a sum that divided into the length of the bar will represent the distance apart for the points of support. It will be obvious that the points of support must be at an equal distance from each end of the bar.

Measurement may be compared in two ways, by sight and by the sense of feeling. Measurement by sight is made by comparing the coincidence of lines, and is called “line measurement.” Measurement by feeling or touch is called “end measurement,” because the measurement is taken at the ends. If, for example, we measure the diameter of a cylindrical bar, it is an end measurement, because the measurement is in a line at a right angle to the axis of the bar, and the points of touch on each side of the bar are the ends of the measurement, which is supposed to have no width.

In measuring by sight we may, for rude measurements, trust to the unaided eye, as in using the common foot rule, but for such minute comparisons as are necessary in subdividing or transferring a standard, we may call in the aid of the microscope.

The standard gauges, &c., in use in the United States have been obtained from Sir Joseph Whitworth, or duplicated from those made by him with the aid of measuring and comparing machines. It has been found, however, that different sets of these gauges did not measure alike, the variations being thus given by Mr. Stetson, superintendent of the Morse Twist Drill and Machine Co.

At the time the Government established the use of the standard system of screw threads in the navy yards, ten sets of gauges were ordered from a manufacturer. His firm procured a duplicate set of these and took them to the navy yard in Boston and found that they were practically interchangeable. He also took them to the Brooklyn Yard Navy. The following tabular statement shows the difference between them:—

The advantages to be derived from having universally accepted standard subdivisions of the yard into inches and parts of an inch are as follows:—

When a number of pieces of work of the same shape and size are to be made to fit together, then, if their exact size is not known and there is no gauge or test piece to fit them to, each piece must be fitted by trial and correction to its place, with the probability that no two pieces will be of exactly the same size. As a result, each piece in a machine would have to be fitted to its place on that particular machine, hence each machine is made individually.

Furthermore, if another lot of machines are afterwards to be made, the work involved in fitting the parts together in the first lot of machines affords no guide or aid in fitting up the second lot. But suppose the measurements of all the parts of the first lot are known to within the one ten-thousandth part of an inch, which is sufficiently accurate for practical purposes, then the parts may be made to measurement, each part being made in quantities and kept together throughout the whole process of manufacture, so that when all the parts are finished they may go to the assembling or erecting room, and one piece of each part may be taken indiscriminately from each lot, and put together to make a complete machine. By this means the manufacture of the machine may be greatly simplified and cheapened, and the fit of any part may be known from its size, while at the same time a new part may be made at any time without reference to the machine or the part to which it is to fit.

Again, work made to standard size in one shop will fit to that made to standard size in another, providing the standard gauges agree.

The Pratt and Whitney Company, of Hartford, Connecticut, in union with Professor Rogers, of Cambridge University, in Massachusetts, determined to inspect the Imperial British yard, to obtain a copy of it, and to make a machine that would subdivide this copy into feet and inches, as well as transfer the line measurements employed in the subdivisions into end measures for use in the workshops, the degree of accuracy being greater than is necessary in making the most refined mechanism, made under the interchangeable or standard gauge system. The machine made under these auspices is the Rogers-Bond Universal Comparator; Mr. Bond having been engaged in conjunction with Professor Rogers in its construction.

The machine consists of two cylindrical guides, upon which are mounted two heads, carrying microscopes which may be reversed in the heads, so as to be used at the front of the machine for line measurements and on the back for end measurements.

Fig. 1348 is a front, and Fig. 1349 a rear view of the machine, whose details of construction are more clearly shown in the enlarged views, Fig. 1350 and 1352.

Fig. 1350 is a top view, and Fig. 1352 a front view, the upper part of the machine being lifted up for clearness of illustration. x, x, are the cylindrical guides, upon which are the carriages i, k, for the microscopes. The construction of these carriages is more fully seen in Fig. 1351, which represents carriage k. It is provided with a hand-wheel r, operating a pinion in a rack (shown at t in the plan view figure of the machine) and affording means to traverse the carriage along the cylindrical guides. The microscope may be adjusted virtually by the screw m⁴. The base upon which the microscope stands is adjustable upon a plate n, by means of the two slots and binding screws shown, and the plate n fits in a slideway running across the carriage. u is one of the stops used in making end measurements, the other being fixed upon the frame of the machine at v in the plan view, Fig. 1350. The micrometric arrangement for the microscope is shown more clearly in Fig. 1353. The screw b holds the box in position, the edge of the circular base on which it sits being graduated, so that the position of m may be easily read. In the frame m is a piece of glass having ruled upon it the crossed lines, or in place of this a frame may be used, having in it crossed spider web lines. These lines are so arranged as to be exactly in focus of the upper glass of the microscope, this adjustment being made by means of the screw s. The lines upon the bar are in the focus of the lower glass; hence, both sets of lines can be seen simultaneously, and by suitable adjustment of the microscope can be brought to coincide.

Beneath the cylindrical guides, and supported by the rack t that runs between and beneath them, are the levers p, in Fig. 1352, upon which weights may be placed to take up the flexure or sag of the cylindrical guides.

In Fig. 1352, h, h, are heads that may be fixed to the cylindrical guides at any required point, and contain metallic stops, against which corresponding stops on the microscope carriages may abut, to limit and determine the amount to which these carriages may be moved along the cylindrical guides.

The pressure of contact between the carriage and the fixed stops is found to be sufficiently uniform or constant if the carriage is brought up to the stops (by means of the hand-wheel r, Fig. 1351) several times, and a microscope reading taken for each time of contact. But this pressure of contact may be made uniform or constant for all readings by means of an electric current applied to the carriage through the metallic stops on heads h, h, and those on the carriage.

We have now to describe the devices for supporting the work and adjusting it beneath the microscopes.

Referring, then, to Fig. 1352, e is a bed or frame that may be raised or lowered by means of the hand-wheel c, so as to bring the plate s (on which rests the bar whose line measure is to be compared) within range of the microscopes. The upper face of e is provided with raised V slideways, which are more clearly seen in the end view of this part of the machine shown in Fig. 1354. Upon these raised Vs are the devices for adjusting the height of the eccentric rollers s³, upon which the bars to be tested are laid, s² representing one of these bars. To adjust the bars in focus under the microscope, these eccentric rollers are revolved by means of levers s⁴. At s⁵ is a device for giving to the table a slight degree of longitudinal movement in the base plate that rests upon the raised Vs; on the upper face of e and at s⁶ is a mechanism for adjusting the height of that end of the plate s. The base plate may be moved along the raised Vs of e by the hand-wheel d.

To test whether the cylindrical guides are deflected by their own weight or are level, a trough of mercury may be set upon the eccentric rollers s³, Fig. 1352, and the fine particles of dust on its surface may be brought into focus in the microscope, whose carriage may then be traversed to various positions along the cylindrical guides, and if these dust particles remain in focus it is proof that the guides are level with the mercury surface.