# Fitting Rebate Block On Spindle Moulder Spacer Question



## pollys13 (22 Sep 2018)

I removed another block before fitting the rebate block. I removed all the spacers shown in screenshot A. However when doing so I noticed there is collar, spacer at bottom of shaft. Photo B shows it in place and C shows removed from base of shaft and removed from base but left on shaft in photo E. This spacer isn't shown or mentioned in the manual. I assume it is meant to be left in place at the base of the shaft?
That said, the only way I can get the block and combination of spacers to correctly fit the rebate block as shown in photo D, is to remove and use this collar, spacer at the base of the shaft.
So am I OK to continue without this base collar, spacer in place at base of the shaft? Or should I get a suitable sized spacer to combine with the others to make up the gap?
Thanks.


----------



## Jacob (22 Sep 2018)

Not sure but I think it's probably a "top hat" collar intended to accommodate an old 1 1/4" block on a 30mm spindle, in which case there are supposed to be two, one at top and one at bottom.
I suppose it'd run OK with just one at the bottom.
Check diameter of spindle - probably 30mm which is the most common on later machines. Check dia of blocks - may be 1 1/4". 
Other sizes crop up too.


----------



## Trevanion (22 Sep 2018)

I don't see why not.

Personally I always load the smaller spacers underneath the larger ones so you don't get the problem of a small spacer sitting above the shaft (Which really isn't a problem anyway). So long as the prongs on the locking nut engage with the slots on the shaft you can have a spacer that's above the shaft (Which is the correct way, it doesn't need to be dead flush).

You should get some more spacers anyway as when you begin to buy more tooling that's thinner such as saw blades and grooving blocks you're going to need more spacers to hold them in. Probably just a single 50mm spacer would do you just fine.


----------



## Lons (22 Sep 2018)

I'd agree with Jacob, looks like top hat washer. I use them on the 20mm shaft of my spindle to pack out for standard 30mm block.


----------



## Trevanion (22 Sep 2018)

I'm certain that there is no top hat there.


----------



## Jacob (22 Sep 2018)

Trevanion":3m5ez7jo said:


> I'm certain that there is no top hat there.


Maybe not but I can't see what OP is talking about in the photos!


----------



## Lons (22 Sep 2018)

yeah Trevannion you're right it's not a top hat at all I jumped to conclusions that were wrong and it looks like just a spacer washer. 
The whole thing looks a bit strange but I'm not sure what the problem is in locating the block on the shaft tbh. Surely it's just a case of placing spacers above or below the block to position it where the op wants it.


----------



## pollys13 (22 Sep 2018)

I had another look at fitting the rebate block leaving that collar at the base of the shaft. I tried various combinations of spacers, got it right this time. In the user manual, photos not very clear. I'm not sure if there is any shiny steel showing at the base of the shaft, which would indicate, perhaps the collar was an add on, or left there by original owner. I think Axminster are on a 1/2 day Saturday and take a day or two coming back , so I asked on the forum.

Jacob, thanks mate but can't see how this collar could act as a top hat, is a 30mm spindle. Top hats, see attached.

You might have missed my post about buying a 9 degree cill block. I'll reiterate one of the Axminster reviews of the machine I have. He was having problems with the tilting spindle. I didn't want myself in the same boat and not being loaded with dosh, having to fork out, full whack, around £400 for a new cill block. Cill blocks aren't that common on Ebay, few and far between. I happened to spot one and thought it would be prudent to bid on it, in case I found I was also having problems with the spindle tilt. I made sure I got the block, cost more than I would have liked but there you go.

Anyway, the original approach, via Coley was to use a 125 x 60 x 30mm rebate block to cut a 9 degree sub cill.
Uum I've encountered..... problems, with the block angled at 9 degrees and the 60mm cutter exposed, the back knife is fouling on the tables circular ring and the ring won't seat properly. See attached photos. Not sure how to proceed I could, I think get a machinist friend to use his mill and lathe to make up a table insert ring with a larger diameter hole, so the knives don't foul. If people think that is an option, what should spacing be of knife to ring?
Or should I forget about angling the rebate block and use the cill block I bought?
Cheers.


----------



## Trevanion (22 Sep 2018)

Whenever I needed a certain size ring (only once) I just cut it out of a scrap of 9mm plywood using a bandsaw and jigsaw and made it to suit the size and drilled a few holes around the ring undersize for M6 Grub screws so I could level the ring.

More often than not though I'll just run it without the rings in if I can't run it with the standard ones.


----------



## Jacob (22 Sep 2018)

pollys13":3sw0hke4 said:


> ......
> Jacob, thanks mate but can't see how this collar could act as a top hat, is a 30mm spindle. ...


Right. Just that I couldn't see what the problem was, basically because there wasn't one. :lol: 
I don't know about that ring fence either. It's not what I know as a ring fence - which sits above the cutter. Is your workpiece supposed to bear on that ring as it is being cut?


----------



## ColeyS1 (22 Sep 2018)

Use it without the ring  Are you sure you're using the bevel box correctly, it looks a bit peculiar in the picture ? 

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk


----------



## Trevanion (22 Sep 2018)

Jacob":1di7r24l said:


> I don't know about that ring fence either. It's not what I know as a ring fence - which sits above the cutter. Is your workpiece supposed to bear on that ring as it is being cut?



It's not a ring fence, it's just a regular table ring which stops the piece you're feeding through from dropping down into the cavity under the cutter block. The problem they have is that when they tilt the spindle shaft it faults against the ring and cannot be tilted any further without the ring removed.


----------



## Jacob (22 Sep 2018)

Trevanion":20j4xta7 said:


> Jacob":20j4xta7 said:
> 
> 
> > I don't know about that ring fence either. It's not what I know as a ring fence - which sits above the cutter. Is your workpiece supposed to bear on that ring as it is being cut?
> ...


Right. I thought it was some new gadget thing. 
Can't you just leave it out? Most workpieces will span the gap no prob and the open space helps with dust extraction.


----------



## LBCarpentry (22 Sep 2018)

Took me a long time to get there but I now see what you mean. The spacer is not specifically supposed to be at the base of the shaft. if it's loose feel free to remove it and place it onto of the cutter block. Any big blocks ideally want to sit on the shaft with no spacers underneath. The higher the block sits up the shaft, the more likely you are to bend the shaft when machining. Ideally you want to purchase extra spacers for the future anyway. For example if you wish to use a groover blade in the spindle moulder.

as for the ring fence, just take it out. Most spindle moulder will come with a selection of 3 or so ring fences of different internal diameters to accommodate different width blocks. Make a ply one like others have said. But to be honest, if you have a 9 degree block, just use that?


----------



## pollys13 (23 Sep 2018)

Trevanion":3d75ltrg said:


> Whenever I needed a certain size ring (only once) I just cut it out of a scrap of 9mm plywood using a bandsaw and jigsaw and made it to suit the size and drilled a few holes around the ring undersize for M6 Grub screws so I could level the ring.
> 
> More often than not though I'll just run it without the rings in if I can't run it with the standard ones.


OK even though I'm using a power feed, as an extra safety measure. I think I should close the gap up by making a ring up. What size gap should I allow for between the back knife and ring to avoid the knife catching and adequate chip extraction?
Cheers.


----------



## pollys13 (23 Sep 2018)

Jacob":1v33v7wd said:


> pollys13":1v33v7wd said:
> 
> 
> > ......
> ...


" Is your workpiece supposed to bear on that ring as it is being cut? " Yes.


----------



## pollys13 (23 Sep 2018)

ColeyS1":r3jbwlbq said:


> Use it without the ring  Are you sure you're using the bevel box correctly, it looks a bit peculiar in the picture ?
> 
> Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk


I think I'd be happier making up a ring. I used a square to set the block to the table, stuck the box on and set to zero, then adjusted tilt to 9 degrees. The top of the bolt has raised, stampings? indicating type of bolt, bevel box won't sit flat on it, so thought side of block would be fine.
.


----------



## Jacob (23 Sep 2018)

pollys13":pcxm12q2 said:


> Trevanion":pcxm12q2 said:
> 
> 
> > Whenever I needed a certain size ring (only once) I just cut it out of a scrap of 9mm plywood using a bandsaw and jigsaw and made it to suit the size and drilled a few holes around the ring undersize for M6 Grub screws so I could level the ring.
> ...


Large gap is best. Too small gap and you can get chippings packed in under the ring. No ring at all probably fine.


----------



## pollys13 (23 Sep 2018)

LBCarpentry":18znwov2 said:


> Took me a long time to get there but I now see what you mean. The spacer is not specifically supposed to be at the base of the shaft. if it's loose feel free to remove it and place it onto of the cutter block. Any big blocks ideally want to sit on the shaft with no spacers underneath. The higher the block sits up the shaft, the more likely you are to bend the shaft when machining. Ideally you want to purchase extra spacers for the future anyway. For example if you wish to use a groover blade in the spindle moulder.
> 
> as for the ring fence, just take it out. Most spindle moulder will come with a selection of 3 or so ring fences of different internal diameters to accommodate different width blocks. Make a ply one like others have said. But to be honest, if you have a 9 degree block, just use that?


OK, cheers for input.


----------



## pollys13 (23 Sep 2018)

Large gap is best. Too small gap and you can get chippings packed in under the ring. No ring at all probably fine.
Large gap, 10mm OK? No ring at all probably fine. Even though a cill section will span the gap OK I'd feel happier having it closed up.


----------



## pollys13 (23 Sep 2018)

Thanks everyone who replied.


----------



## Jacob (23 Sep 2018)

10mm is a small gap and may trap chippings in the well.
I'd just go for no rings and see how it goes. I can't see a problem unless you are doing very short pieces, especially if you are using a power feed.


----------



## pollys13 (23 Sep 2018)

Jacob":2v9am55s said:


> 10mm is a small gap and may trap chippings in the well.
> I'd just go for no rings and see how it goes. I can't see a problem unless you are doing very short pieces, especially if you are using a power feed.


Uum, OK


----------



## Trevanion (23 Sep 2018)

pollys13":g116h9ek said:


> OK even though I'm using a power feed, as an extra safety measure. I think I should close the gap up by making a ring up. What size gap should I allow for between the back knife and ring to avoid the knife catching and adequate chip extraction?
> Cheers.



You can go quite tight. You won't "catch" chippings as those new style rebate blocks aren't really capable of producing any large solid chips as the older ones could, even if they did it wouldn't go anywhere near the ring it would just get sucked out of the top port. 2-3mm would be plenty.


----------



## Doug71 (23 Sep 2018)

You will be fine with no ring, in fact I would feel safer with no ring than with a homemade plywood one.


----------



## pollys13 (23 Sep 2018)

Doug71":lek3uyc3 said:


> You will be fine with no ring, in fact I would feel safer with no ring than with a homemade plywood one.


OK cheers.


----------



## ColeyS1 (23 Sep 2018)

With a large gap and the rollers set up correctly it should be pretty difficult to get the wood to fall in the gap.






The first rollers already pushing down on the wood so it shouldn't want to go in the gap.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk


----------



## pollys13 (23 Sep 2018)

ColeyS1":2zdrf4wa said:


> With a large gap and the rollers set up correctly it should be pretty difficult to get the wood to fall in the gap.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Cheers Coley, mate


----------



## Jacob (23 Sep 2018)

ColeyS1":2ncvvnol said:


> With a large gap and the rollers set up correctly it should be pretty difficult to get the wood to fall in the gap.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yep. 
And you get better dust extraction. Bigger machines have another extractor port in the well but you are still better off not closing the gap much, if at all, unless it's a very big machine with a wide well.


----------



## ColeyS1 (23 Sep 2018)

Happy to help Pollys13 

Must admit Jacob that took me years to get my head around. I always use to think the smaller the extractor hose the more suction. I also use to think the smaller the gaps the greater the suction. It's all about airflow though. Get as much air moving as possible to clear the chips and get them flowing in the right direction. Polly, think of a wide open front and back door on a windy day vs just the front door open- it'd still get the air moving but nothing like having both open (some nice gaps)

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk


----------



## pollys13 (25 Sep 2018)

OK great.


----------

