Beall Digital Angle Gauge - Strange measurements

[Quesne Ouaques]

I just got my new Beall Digital Angle Gauge from Hartville Tools (my first time ordering...very good service), but the first measurements out of the box are out of square with my machinist's gauge by 0.25 degrees.

There are some other weird observations and I thought I would post them here before returning it for a replacement. After all, the problem may simply be the nut behind the wheel!

1. I checked the square of the Beall case against my machinist's square and, as expected, they are a perfect match. The Beall case is square.

2. I then let the unit warm up, calibrated it as instructed, and zeroed it on my jointer table. I put the gauge on the fence, and adjusted the fence until the angle difference was 0.00 (i.e. 90 degrees).

3. I then checked the fence with my square, and it was out by a significantly visible degree. The square was able to "rock" back and forth with quite a few thousandths of play between the blade and the fence.

4. I squared the fence against the machinist's square and then tested it with the Beall the other way around, and I got 0.25 degree difference between the table and fence. These findings were repeatable on both the infeed and outfeed tables.

.....BUT GET THIS.....

5. I then tried a few experiments with the Beall: I zeroed the Beall on the infeed with the readout facing the cutterhead, then I flipped the unit around 180 degrees so the readout was facing the end of the outfeed table. Lo and behold, I see the same 0.25 degree discrepancy! On the same dead-flat surface just by rotating the unit 180 degrees in the same plane!

6. I tried the above with three other less precise squares (but which all matched the machinist's square very accurately) and the results were the same.

Am I doing something wrong? Am I not understanding something about the tool? Please chime in if you have any insights!

Thanks

[Mike Marcade]

Seems to me like the angle gauge is messed up, unless I'm missing something.

[Tom Veatch]

...
5. I then tried a few experiments with the Beall: I zeroed the Beall on the infeed with the readout facing the cutterhead, then I flipped the unit around 180 degrees so the readout was facing the end of the outfeed table. Lo and behold, I see the same 0.25 degree discrepancy! On the same dead-flat surface just by rotating the unit 180 degrees in the same plane!...

That is the type of result you see testing a spirit level that is not quite true - level a surface and flip the level 180 degrees. If the level is true, the bubble will be in the same place.

The result you're seeing may suggest that the device is out of true, but it may also suggest that the jointer bed is not quite level. The following tests should determine which of the cases it true.

If the device displays angles with a +/- sign, zero the device with the readout facing the cutter, rotate 180 keeping the same face of the device against the same spot on the jointer bed and note the angle and sign. Zero in that position, rotate it back to the original position and compare the angle and sign to the previous case. If the device is true and the bed is not level, the angle will be the same but the sign will be opposite. If the bed is level and the device is not true, the angle and sign will be the same in both trials. If the angles are different between the two trials, the device is not true.

If the device doesn't display a signed angle, or even if it does, you can shim a spirit level known to be true to dead level and run the tests above using the level instead of the jointer bed. If the spirit level is indeed level and the device is true, it will show zero after the 180 rotation. Test all 4 sides of the device.

[Lee Schierer]

I had the same thought. Your table is probably not level which would account for the changes when you rotate the guage 180. I also considered that even though you have a machinist square, it may not be actually 90 degrees so the new gauge could be right. I would check both items against a known third item if you can. If you work in a machine shop that has a CMM you can have tehm check it for you, might cost you a donut or cup of coffee.

I'm going to watch this thread as I plan on getting one of these if they are what they claim to be.

[Mike Goetzke]

Something else to possibly consider. I have a Wixey and read that the angle is measured by some sort of pendulum. So you need to give the thing a few seconds before you zero or take a measurement.

Mike

[John Lucas]

There are a lot of variables working here. I would not do too much more but call J R Beall. One thing nice about working with a small company, you can talk to a real person...in this case "J R" who is a machinist.
This is their contact page on their website. http://www.bealltool.com/contact.php

[Bruce Wrenn]

My first Wixey had a similar problem. I would square up the blade using a jig and a dial indicator. If readings on both sides of the blade are the same, then the blade is square. Wixey would show blade to be 89.9 or 90.1 depending on which side of the blade measurement were taken from. Second one works fine.

[Bruce Benjamin]

Something else to possibly consider. I have a Wixey and read that the angle is measured by some sort of pendulum. So you need to give the thing a few seconds before you zero or take a measurement.

Mike

The Beall doesn't use a pendulum. It's done electronically with no moving parts...Somehow. I have one and a while back I did a review on this forum comparing the Wixey to the Beall. While I prefer the Beall over the Wixey one thing about the Beall is that it is very sensitive and even the slightest movement will change the reading. It took me a few practice tries to get it to zero properly but when I got used to it it worked very well. I let mine settle for maybe 30 seconds after turning it on if I'm having trouble getting it to zero properly. I don't know that this has anything to do with the OP's problem though. I liked the Wixey too and it's slightly easier to zero but I liked the features of the Beall better.

Bruce

[Bruce Benjamin]

There are a lot of variables working here. I would not do too much more but call J R Beall. One thing nice about working with a small company, you can talk to a real person...in this case "J R" who is a machinist.
This is their contact page on their website. http://www.bealltool.com/contact.php

Yup. J.R. and the rest of the folks at Beall are very nice people and easy to work with. He's the owner, inventor, and he doesn't mind talking on the phone if you have questions. I have no doubt that he can help with this problem whether it's a problem with the Tilt Box, operator error, or a problem with your equipment.

Bruce

[Quesne Ouaques]

Just thought I'd give everyone an update on this topic. The short answer is: the instrument seems fine, but it does need to warm up before it can be relied upon for an accurate relative measurement. Also, the absolute measurement calibration should be done very carefully.

The Long Answer (for those interested):

I called Beall, and a most helpful gentleman walked me through the ins and outs of measuring using this instrument. He was extremely helpful, and filled in on some information that is useful in understanding how the angle gauge works and how to get the best measurement.

When I followed his instructions to take a relative measurement, the instrument performed flawlessly. We were NOT able to reproduce the
.25 inch discrepancy that I had been seeing before. We discussed it a bit, and the most likely culprit for the strange behavior was lack of adequate warm-up time.

I told him about the other problem that I perceived (i.e. the discrepancy it measures when turned 180 degrees on a fixed base). He said this was to be expected if the surface is not perfectly level. If the surface is not level, the relative angle of the gauge may change relative to the display face of the gauge. Once I thought about for about 2 seconds, this became perfectly obvious!

There is something else which had absolutely no effect on my relative measurements but is worth mentioning. I was making two mistakes in the absolute measurement calibration, namely: 1) I was calibrating on my jointer table which was not perfectly level, and 2) I was turning the gauge counter clockwise instead of clockwise (natural for a right-handed person but not correct according to the instructions)

I am going to continue testing and keep a very close eye on the results, but the bottom line is it was partially warm up and partially the nut behind the wheel!

[Alan Schaffter]

One thing I have noticed is if your floor is wood frame, your mobile base has rubber wheels, or there is flex in the machine cabinet/mobile base, and you are not careful where you stand or lean, you can introduce errors into the Beal or the Wixey.

[Quesne Ouaques]

One thing I have noticed is if your floor is wood frame, your mobile base has rubber wheels, or there is flex in the machine cabinet/mobile base, and you are not careful where you stand or lean, you can introduce errors into the Beal or the Wixey.

Yes, I did notice this, even though I have a very solid base with hard plastic wheels.

If your jointer base has any play at all, you have to resist leaning on the tables during measurement. This type of error is unique to using a digital instrument vs. measuring with a square.