Deep Throat Chuck Jaw System for Large Part Machining

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

The headstock hole size in lathe machines limits the range of parts that can be machined, and existing outboard support devices, such as steady rests and live bell centers, either restrict machining capabilities or require additional setup that reduces efficiency and applies undesirable loads.

Innovation Solution

A deep throat chuck jaw system with jaw extension members and a clamping assembly that can grip parts larger than the headstock hole, providing radial support and allowing for efficient machining of parts without moving parts that can fail, and enabling face, inside, and outside diameter work.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If conventional outboard support devices like steady rests are used, then parts larger than the headstock hole can be supported, but the part cannot be spun at the correct RPM for efficient machining and the device is large and cumbersome

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemachining rangeVSAvoidmachining efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The jaw extension members are nested within the chuck jaw structure, with the extension receiving members positioned inside the jaw extensions. This nested configuration allows the support structure to be compact and integrated within the existing chuck, eliminating the need for external steady rests while maintaining the ability to machine larger parts.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #7Nested doll (Nesting)

Solution Approach 2:

The invention extends the gripping capability in the radial dimension by adding jaw extensions that protrude outward from the chuck. This dimensional extension allows the chuck to grip parts with outer diameters larger than the headstock hole without requiring longitudinal extension that would create cumbersome external support devices.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #17Another dimension (Dimensionality change)

2Adaptability or versatility

If a steady rest is used to support larger parts, then the parts can be machined, but the device has numerous moving parts that fail and reduces work space maneuverability

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemachining capabilityVSAvoiddevice reliability
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The invention extracts the support function from separate external devices (steady rests with multiple moving parts) and integrates it directly into the chuck jaw structure. The jaw extensions and receiving members provide the necessary support and gripping functions as integral components, eliminating the need for external support devices with numerous moving parts that can fail.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

The invention merges the gripping function and the support function into a single integrated chuck jaw system. The jaw extensions both grip the workpiece and provide the structural support previously requiring separate steady rest devices, thereby reducing the number of components and improving reliability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #5Merging (Combining)

3Ease of operation

If bored long jaws on a slight taper are used, then parts can be gripped, but the jaws apply more pressure to the outboard end and do not allow for sufficient gripping on the part

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvegripping capabilityVSAvoidpressure distribution
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSStress or pressure

Solution Approach 1:

The jaw extensions are designed with uniform thickness and parallel sides, creating a consistent cross-sectional profile along their length. This uniform geometry ensures even pressure distribution across the gripping surface, unlike tapered jaws that concentrate pressure at the outboard end. The local quality of the jaw extensions is optimized to provide consistent gripping pressure throughout the contact area.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

4Adaptability or versatility

If a hollow spindle lathe is used to machine larger parts, then the headstock hole limitation is overcome, but the machine is very expensive and cannot develop enough RPMs to machine smaller parts efficiently

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvepart size rangeVSAvoidmachining efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The invention segments the chuck jaw into multiple functional components: master chuck jaws coupled to the chuck, jaw extensions protruding outward, and receiving members positioned at the ends of the extensions. This segmentation allows the system to adapt to different part sizes by utilizing only the necessary portions of the jaw structure, maintaining high RPM capability for small parts while enabling large part machining when needed.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Data Source

PatentUS8596172B2Deep throat chuck jaw system
Publication Date: 2013.12.03 HEBERT JACQUES
  • US8596172B2 patent drawing
  • US8596172B2 patent drawing
  • US8596172B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A deep throat chuck jaw system adapted to be used with a lathe with or without a headstock hole is provided. The system includes a set of jaw extension members having an inboard end supported from a face of a master chuck jaw coupled to a lathe chuck. The jaw extension members also include an outboard end. The set of jaw extension members are operable to grip an outer surface of a part having an outer diameter greater than the headstock hole with a clamping assembly clamped around the outboard end.