lathe weight

[Sonny Kemp]

When adding a shelf or box to a lathe for extra weight ,should it be placed high or low or does it matter? THANKS

[Steve Harder]

My personal opinion, put the mass up high as close to bed of lathe as reasonably possible. Less chance for legs to flex over shorter span.

[Harry Robinette]

I've always been told that weight down low is for stability or movement, Weight up high closer to the lathe axises is more for vibration. just from reading and someone telling me. Jerry Glaser the original Glaser tool Man at one time had a heavy weight on a pole attached to the lathe for vibration try Google something like Glaser vibration dampener. I believe thats where I read about it.
Hope this helps.
Harry

[Andrew Musgrave]

Now I'm new to this so this is an actual question, but shouldn't the ballast be low down to avoid making the lathe top heavy?

[Jerry Marcantel]

A low CG = stability..... A high CG makes things top heavy.... Jerry (in Tucson)

[Jim Burr]

An old engineering rule...and no...I am not one, but I asked...weight low disperses to the lowest stable point...on a lathe, the feet. Weight high disperses to the nearest attachment point...on a lathe, where the bed meets the foot attachment, so at a single point. Sonny, it might also help to know what kind of lathe you have...little different on a Jet 1014 than a 1642 for example.

[John M. Smith]

I would think the lower the better. Don't want it to get top heavy.

[Sonny Kemp]

It is a 1014 Jet on a Jet stand with a bed ext.The uprights on the legs are 2" square tubing with same material horizontal connecting legs together with a short upright ,probably half upright height in the center.I was thinking something low down but the upright legs are pretty flimsy so am not sure if they are gonna be stiff enough for weight to do a lot of good by itself.Its not terrible but an out of round piece of green bowl material makes it shake pretty bad until I get it somewhat round.Thanks for the help.

[Thom Sturgill]

With a 1014 with a 5" throw and small motor, unless you are doing off-center turnings I doubt that you are going to get that much vibration. I started with a 1224 and the only time I had a problem was when I turned an 11" chip and dip bowl that had several small burls in it. They were heavy and not balanced, and the whole piece was right at the motor's torque limit.

[Jim Burr]

It is a 1014 Jet on a Jet stand with a bed ext.The uprights on the legs are 2" square tubing with same material horizontal connecting legs together with a short upright ,probably half upright height in the center.I was thinking something low down but the upright legs are pretty flimsy so am not sure if they are gonna be stiff enough for weight to do a lot of good by itself.Its not terrible but an out of round piece of green bowl material makes it shake pretty bad until I get it somewhat round.Thanks for the help.

As a thought, you may want to consider making a different stand (2x6's and 4x4's) or stiffening up the one you have. Any vibration will travel to the least stable joint and wobble like a Weeble! (don't know if you are old enough to remember Weebles;)) Add some support and then toss a couple of sandbags over the bottom bracing and see what you get!

[Nate Davey]

I had the good fortune, thanks to Tim Rinehart, to spend the morning with Anatoly Tsiris, (turner of ENORMOUS hollow vessels). His biggest criticism of the VB was that all the weight was on or above the spindle. His Nichols had all the weight below the spindle and he turning 6'x4' hollow vessels.

[Curt Fuller]

It is a 1014 Jet on a Jet stand with a bed ext.

I'll play the role of devil's advocate here. On a light weight lathe such as a Jet 1014, you might want to just leave it as is with nothing to dampen vibration. As you mentioned, the stand's legs are somewhat flimsy. And that's a pretty small lathe to begin with. A little vibration and wobble is to be expected, but anything more is telling you that you're exceeding what that lathe was intended to turn. I think a better approach to turning green bowls on a small lathe is to balance the blank off the lathe.

[ray hampton]

I had the good fortune, thanks to Tim Rinehart, to spend the morning with Anatoly Tsiris, (turner of ENORMOUS hollow vessels). His biggest criticism of the VB was that all the weight was on or above the spindle. His Nichols had all the weight below the spindle and he turning 6'x4' hollow vessels.

Nate, is this correct ? 6'x4' 6 feet long 4 feet wide

[Scott Conners]

Having turned many large things (and off center work) on my 1014, I can say this: Weight down low won't help. Bolting the feet down doesn't help. The stand will flex first. What I do is clamp a bar from the feet of the stand to the top of the uprights, creating triangle bracing, which makes it much more rigid. Then I also usually clamp a bar from high on the stand upright to a cleat on the wall. I've done 42" 6"x6" solid MDF architectural turnings (20+ lbs), and to get the exacting detail I needed, I had to reduce the vibration to the absolute minimum. The MDF density isn't even, so some of the blanks were quite out of balance - I had to just give up on one as it was shaking the wall. The bracing got the vibration tamed enough to let me work with precision and match the drawings exactly.

[Nate Davey]

Nate, is this correct ? 6'x4' 6 feet long 4 feet wide

Ray, yup. For reference, my wife is 5'2". You can also see Anatoly has more clearance left. This was a "small" piece.
242051242052

[Bill Boehme]

Sounds to me like a flimsy stand or perhaps has a short leg. I agree with the previous post about stiffening the stand. I have turned lots of stuff that is right at the maximum capacity of the lathe including hollowforms and natural edged bowls and never had a vibration problem -- and I just have my lathe sitting on a HF hydraulic cart. It is not bolted down or anything -- it just sits there. If you are doing multi-axis stuff, then it might vibrate. If changing speed doesn't fix the problem, then a solid sturdy table or workbench will. With a little lathe like this, trying to decide where to put a shelf with sandbags is barking up the wrong tree because something is loosy-goosy and fixing that rather than adding weight is the way to go.

Another thing to think about is to start off with a balanced piece -- mount it between center and statically balance it. Doing it that way will keep any vibration to a minimum.

[Michael Mills]

It may make cleanup a little more difficult but if it looks like this..
http://www.amazon.com/Jet-708354-JML-S-Adjustable-Lathe/dp/B000063XIB (http://www.amazon.com/Jet-708354-JML-S-Adjustable-Lathe/dp/B000063XIB)
I would cut two pieces of ½” ply to run the length and most of the height. Place front and back and tie the entire frame together. Should only take about four bolts in the main legs, a few in the cross piece, and one or two in the center support. If you run it high enough to catch at least one bolt in the short leg section at the top it should make it very rigid (of course you would have to have your height set first).

[Jake Helmboldt]

Stability and vibration damping are two different issues. In this case, as others have noted, the lightweight stand poses issues. Adding weight up high dampens vibration, but with such a light stand it could up top heavy and unstable. But in general, with ballast to dampen vibration it needs to be as close to, or higher than the spindle, not down low.

[Olaf Vogel]

Resistance to vibration is one thing, weight it is another. Note that his tailstock end is bolted down into a concrete floor (not sure what kind of weight that equates to) with a cross beam thats between 4 and 6 ft wide (can't tell from that angle). That wide beam will kill a lot of lateral vibration. Now that lathe is a monster. But even a smaller one will benefit from a cross member, bolted onto the bed and anchored down. That may exceed the need for a lot of weight.

[Bill Boehme]

Stability and vibration damping are two different issues. In this case, as others have noted, the lightweight stand poses issues. Adding weight up high dampens vibration, but with such a light stand it could up top heavy and unstable. But in general, with ballast to dampen vibration it needs to be as close to, or higher than the spindle, not down low.

Sounds like you might be an engineer or physicist. I agree, but I would like to add onto what you have said. For vibration damping, lots of mass is what the lathe needs, but in order to have the best effectiveness, it needs to be "tightly coupled" to the bed and headstock. The best way for mass to be tightly coupled is for it to be a part of the structure itself -- in other words a beefy structure. Having something attached to the structure is better than nothing, but not the optimal solution. Unfortunately, if the manufacturer didn't do his job of beefing up the structure, then we have to improvise as best as we can.

In the sense that Jake is referring to stability, it means dealing with the whole structure shaking or "walking" when turning something that is out of balance (or in some cases, in balance, but still shaking). As Jake said, adding weight up high could exacerbate stability problems. When dealing with stability, my opinion is that there is no one-size-fits-all solution. However, the heavier and stiffer the lathe, the fewer problems the lathe will have with shaking and walking.

[Olaf Vogel]

In the sense that Jake is referring to stability, it means dealing with the whole structure shaking or "walking" when turning something that is out of balance (or in some cases, in balance, but still shaking). As Jake said, adding weight up high could exacerbate stability problems. When dealing with stability, my opinion is that there is no one-size-fits-all solution. However, the heavier and stiffer the lathe, the fewer problems the lathe will have with shaking and walking.

I turn green wood 95% of the time, so have had to deal with this a lot.

On my first lathe (a little Delta) it was a huge problem since it was only about 150 lbs.
I bolted it to solid desktop (2 x 3/4" ply), 2x4 base, 45 degree cross braces, all bolted to the floor and back wall. The bracing should be right under the lathe's bolt holes.
That coupling helped a lot, was cheap and easy to do - but not portable. (I don't think there is a solution to this that keeps the lathe portable....)

My latest one is MUCH heavier, too heavy for my shed's 2x6 suspended flooring. So I cut holes in the floor, dug sonotubes into the ground and poured concrete up to the right height. There's 6' long steel crossbar (4"x4") bolted to the bed at the headstock and another at the tailstock. That will hopefully kill any vibration / walking.
(If it doesn't, I've gotta run like hell!)

I've been working on it nights for the past 2 weeks and its not yet turning anything of significance, so I can't provide any real verdict.....yet.

[Sonny Kemp]

So my best option is turn what this lathe is capable of and get a bigger lathe for bigger stuff.As suggested I could do several things to help but will probably not be completley satisfied.Thats what Ill probably do and not cobble this one up ,as it is a good lathe for what it was intended for.Whats that old saying,cant make chicken salad out of chicken crap.Thanks everyone for your help.

[Jake Helmboldt]

Sonny, Bill's comments above, (responding to my response), pretty much hits the salient issues. With the lightweight stand, extra ballast will do little, both for stability or vibration. A stiff, solid base is the starting poin for stability, and then any ballast to dampen vibration would be secondary and needs to be high up.