Centuar Ultra-t-shift sstem

On Sunday, May 23, 2021 at 4:08:29 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/23/2021 3:33 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:

Before bolts and nuts that they attached to were made of soft materials, torque wrenches were NOT USED to make sure you didn't overtighten things but to allow you to tighten things evenly.
Wrong.
But why don't you tell us again what the metric equivalent of 1" is when that also had nothing at all to do with the conversation?
Tom, nobody would have brought that up if you hadn't gotten it wrong.

I don't know how you manage to do it, but you seem to more mistakes than
correct statements.

Perhaps you can explain exactly how you botched such a common
conversion? It might be interesting to observe your mental processes.

I don't get why conversion is an issue. My cheap-ass calipers have a metric scale. https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon....AC_SL1500_.jpg Just read the thing.

No need for a super accurate outside micrometer since it is basically a go/no-go measurement of 19mm/24mm or 30mm -- or thereabouts. You have three choices with an FSA crank.

Determining crank spindle size is not rocket science, and in fact, you can skip the measurement altogether, sit there with a beer in one hand and a BB bearing in the other and see if it (the bearing and not the beer) fits over the spindle. Its like Fisher Price toys. https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon....AC_SL1500_.jpg Dopey mechanics in shops across the country manage this while stoned.

-- Jay Beattie.

On Sun, 23 May 2021 15:00:38 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

On Sun, 23 May 2021 12:48:49 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
wrote:

German Chef knives are the best in the world.

I'll assume you mean Zwilling JA Henckels or Wusthof. Yes, they are
very good knives with subtle differences. For chef knives, Wusthof
uses a 14 degree bevel (per side), which is slightly sharper than
Zwilling, which uses a 15 degree bevel. Both companies Asian style
knives use 10 degrees per side which are therefore the sharpest, but
again the most fragile. Wusthof blades are slightly harder (RH58)
than Zwillig (RH57), which means you need to be a little more careful
not to chip the Wusthof edge. Zwilling and Henckels are part of the
same company but have different product lines. All of these use high
carbon stainless steels, but not exactly the same type and processing.
Personally, I prefer one of the high carbon steels over stainless, but
I'm not a chef.

They are hardened by heating them up to near the melting point

Nope. The melting point of carbon and stainless steels is about
1510C. The most common temperature use for hardening knives is
between 1050 and 1090°C. If you head the blade anywhere near the
melting point, it will deform, bend, sag, and generally ruin the
shape.

and then plunging them into liquid nitrogen which is something
like negative 277 degrees.

Nope. Absolute zero is -273.15 °C. It's not possible to go below
that temperature. Quenching from "nearly melting" to absolute zero is
going to crack the blade from the internal stresses produced.
Cryogenic hardening is typically done at -185 °C.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryogenic_treatment
There is also cryogenic tempering and annealing, but I don't know
enough about those to explain them. Suffice to say they're not done
below absolute zero.

Are you telling me that the Germans are stupid and don't know
what they're doing?

Probably not, but you're doing an excellent job of demonstrating that
your numbers and explanations demonstrate that you have no idea what
you're doing. Do you even care that you're providing wrong numbers
and explanations? A few minutes with Google search and you could
easily fix your own mistakes and nobody would know you're clueless. Or
perhaps you want your answers to be wrong, so that you can attract
more attention?

1 out of 3 correct. Not bad and you're improving your score.

Well actually his basic thesis is flawed as currently the Best Overall
chef's knife is the MAC MTH-80 Professional Series 8-inch Chef's Knife
with Dimples,
https://www.foodandwine.com/lifestyl...st-chefs-knife
MAC is an American company :-)
--
Cheers,

John B.

On 5/22/2021 4:29 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Saturday, May 22, 2021 at 12:57:07 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/22/2021 2:58 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:

I'm really not that knowledgeable about steel castings though I know it is done commonly. These are generally machines like auto disk brakes and the like. But making steel from iron, the steel has to be rapidly quenched to prevent the formation of a crystalline structure that will fail along the crystal lines.
No.

You're wrong Frank. Why do you suppose that metal fatigue in steel parts are all crystalized? The work heats the parts to above the point where crystallization can occur, and then the part fails along the crystal lines. http://www.graemecooper.com.au/objec...20x%20234).jpg

No, Tom. The parts are not hot when fatigue cracks are progressing.
You're guessing based on near total ignorance, yet again.


--
- Frank Krygowski

On Sun, 23 May 2021 16:48:00 -0700 (PDT), jbeattie
wrote:

I don't get why conversion is an issue. My cheap-ass calipers have a metric scale. https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon....AC_SL1500_.jpg Just read the thing.

I've done the same thing when I can't find my calculator. However,
it's difficult to set the calipers to exactly 1.0000 so that I can
read the metric conversion. Most commonly, I type something like this
typed into the Google Search box:
convert 1 in to mm
Google recognizes the key word "convert" and provides the answer.
https://www.google.com/search?q=convert+1+in+to+mm

If Google can't find anything useful, it provides pointers to web
sites that have a conversion calculator or table:
convert 1 ft to cubits
https://www.google.com/search?q=convert+1+ft+to+cubits

If I'm doing something on Windoze:
https://joshmadison.com/convert-for-windows/

If I'm using Linux:
https://www.gnu.org/software/units/

For electronics, radiation, and just plain weird stuff:
https://www.unitconverters.net

For historical units of measu
https://www.convert-me.com/en/convert/historical.html

Last resort:
https://www.pingdom.com/blog/strange-funny-and-baffling-units-for-measuring-almost-anything/

No need for a super accurate outside micrometer since it is basically
a go/no-go measurement of 19mm/24mm or 30mm -- or thereabouts.

http://www.11junk.com/jeffl/pics/drivel/calipers.jpg
Having several is nice. If I don't like the numbers, I can try one of
the other calipers until I find one with an acceptable number. The
reason I have so many calipers is when I closed the office, I combined
the tools from the office, car, radio site, upstairs house, and
downstairs shop, into one large mess. There's a box of gauge blocks
(for caliper calibration) somewhere, but I couldn't find it.

You have three choices with an FSA crank.

Determining crank spindle size is not rocket science, and in fact, you can skip the measurement altogether, sit there with a beer in one hand and a BB bearing in the other and see if it (the bearing and not the beer) fits over the spindle. Its like Fisher Price toys. https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon....AC_SL1500_.jpg Dopey mechanics in shops across the country manage this while stoned.

It more fun when used to play Towers of Hanoi:
https://www.google.com/search?q=tower+of+hanoi&tbm=isch

-- Jay Beattie.
--
Jeff Liebermann
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On 5/23/2021 7:48 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, May 23, 2021 at 4:08:29 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/23/2021 3:33 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:

Before bolts and nuts that they attached to were made of soft materials, torque wrenches were NOT USED to make sure you didn't overtighten things but to allow you to tighten things evenly.
Wrong.
But why don't you tell us again what the metric equivalent of 1" is when that also had nothing at all to do with the conversation?
Tom, nobody would have brought that up if you hadn't gotten it wrong.

I don't know how you manage to do it, but you seem to more mistakes than
correct statements.

Perhaps you can explain exactly how you botched such a common
conversion? It might be interesting to observe your mental processes.

I don't get why conversion is an issue. My cheap-ass calipers have a metric scale. https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon....AC_SL1500_.jpg Just read the thing.

I suppose it's a matter of what tools Tom has at hand. If he has a
micrometer measuring in inches but no calipers, it wouldn't be unusual
to take an inch measurement and try to convert to millimeters. And in
Tom's case, it wouldn't be unusual to botch the conversion.

I've got an inch mike, a dial caliper in inches, and a vernier caliper
in inches and millimeters, plus a bunch of other assorted measurement
tools. I usually grab the dial caliper because it's easiest on these old
eyes.

I don't have a digital caliper. I remember the first one we bought for
one of our labs at school, when they were very new technology. It was
used so little (much less than our dial models) that the battery failed
and corroded the contacts. That would probably happen here too, if I
bought one. But I have given them as gifts.


--
- Frank Krygowski

On 5/23/2021 9:38 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sun, 23 May 2021 16:48:00 -0700 (PDT), jbeattie
wrote:

I don't get why conversion is an issue. My cheap-ass calipers have a metric scale. https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon....AC_SL1500_.jpg Just read the thing.

I've done the same thing when I can't find my calculator. However,
it's difficult to set the calipers to exactly 1.0000 so that I can
read the metric conversion. Most commonly, I type something like this
typed into the Google Search box:
convert 1 in to mm
Google recognizes the key word "convert" and provides the answer.
https://www.google.com/search?q=convert+1+in+to+mm

If Google can't find anything useful, it provides pointers to web
sites that have a conversion calculator or table:
convert 1 ft to cubits
https://www.google.com/search?q=convert+1+ft+to+cubits

If I'm doing something on Windoze:
https://joshmadison.com/convert-for-windows/

If I'm using Linux:
https://www.gnu.org/software/units/

For electronics, radiation, and just plain weird stuff:
https://www.unitconverters.net

For historical units of measu
https://www.convert-me.com/en/convert/historical.html

Last resort:
https://www.pingdom.com/blog/strange-funny-and-baffling-units-for-measuring-almost-anything/

No need for a super accurate outside micrometer since it is basically
a go/no-go measurement of 19mm/24mm or 30mm -- or thereabouts.

http://www.11junk.com/jeffl/pics/drivel/calipers.jpg
Having several is nice. If I don't like the numbers, I can try one of
the other calipers until I find one with an acceptable number. The
reason I have so many calipers is when I closed the office, I combined
the tools from the office, car, radio site, upstairs house, and
downstairs shop, into one large mess. There's a box of gauge blocks
(for caliper calibration) somewhere, but I couldn't find it.

You have three choices with an FSA crank.

Determining crank spindle size is not rocket science, and in fact, you can skip the measurement altogether, sit there with a beer in one hand and a BB bearing in the other and see if it (the bearing and not the beer) fits over the spindle. Its like Fisher Price toys. https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon....AC_SL1500_.jpg Dopey mechanics in shops across the country manage this while stoned.

It more fun when used to play Towers of Hanoi:
https://www.google.com/search?q=tower+of+hanoi&tbm=isch

-- Jay Beattie.

I like the unit conversion capability of my HP-48 calculator.

But there are some conversion factors I've used so often that I don't
need to bother looking them up. 25.4 is probably first on that list.

So are 231, 43560, 778, 1728, etc. etc. ...

And of course, for metric units, 10 and 100 and 1000 etc. Boy, I wish
we'd switch to the metric system.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Sun, 23 May 2021 12:33:05 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
wrote:

On Saturday, May 22, 2021 at 7:34:55 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote:
On Sat, 22 May 2021 07:09:37 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
wrote:

On Friday, May 21, 2021 at 8:00:45 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, May 21, 2021 at 7:17:13 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Fri, 21 May 2021 08:47:14 -0700 (PDT), jbeattie
wrote:

You do have to be careful using a cordless driver to install
screws, but my driver has five or six torque settings, and
the lowest is very low, so I've had no problems with stripping
six-bolt disc rotor screws, which, IME, are always Torx head.
I get them snug with the driver and then finish them with a
torque wrench.
Which maker and model driver do you use? I sometimes use a DeWalt
DCF787 driver and DCD777 drill/driver for chainsaw work. However,
like the bicycle, I don't use either to install screws. The DCD777
drill/driver has an adjustable clutch but the DCF787 driver does NOT
have a clutch. I also have a DCD710 drill, which I use for
disassembling computers and few other DeWalt power tools.

Some details on torque including torque specs for various DeWalt
models:
https://toolguyd.com/dewalt-cordless-drills-uwo-torque/
My DCD777 will produce 65Nm or 575in-lbs at 500 rpm maximum. No
numbers for minimum torque. Apparently, the 15 position clutch is not
calibrated.
My ancient Makita died, and I got an el cheapo Black and Decker replacement at Home Depo. https://tinyurl.com/25as2rk It has 11 clutch settings. It's a surprisingly god drill for the price. I also have some macho corded drills including a Milwaukee hammer drill. I'm just throwing that out there to establish my tool bonafides.

I only use a drill on two bicycle fittings -- spoke nipples and six-bolt rotor bolts. I also use it for the bolts on my gas pole hedge trimmer (Husky) since there are so many M5 bolts, and removing them with a wrench takes forever. I've driven lots of other types of screws -- including the self-tapping Torx heads I linked, deck screws, drywall, cement board, etc., etc. It is easy to strip all of those with the corded screw gun, and you have to be light on the trigger.

We had Frank gaffawing that torque wrenches were around forever. What he doesn't seem to know was that they were NOT used to limit how tight you make a bolt as much as to make sure things were evenly tightened. This prevented things like head gaskets leaking and the like. It wasn't until softer materials like Aluminum came into use that rather to make sure things were all tightened equally they were used to prevent overtightening and stripping softer materials.
Tommy boy you are simply flaunting your ignorance. Torque on a bolt is
basically a method of tightening a threaded device to a specific
tension which is a method to determine that the fastener is loaded to
a percentage of it's nominal strength.

I grant you that if you torque all the bolts/studs on a device to the
same torque you will equally tighten them but single fasteners are
also torqued for the reason I mention above.

Example, I once worked in a shop that rebuilt radial aircraft engines
and one model engine had a two piece crank shaft that was held
together by one bolt. To properly tighten that bolt you first measured
the length of the bolt - in thousands of an inch - and then tightened
the nut to achieve X thousands stretch on the bolt.

I also assembled a German made tower crane that used the same scheme
to properly tighten the bolts that held the tower sections together.

Note here, these was not an aluminum bolt.
--
Cheers,

John B.
Show more of your ignorance. I like you to show the entire world that you like Frank cannot even follow a conversation but have to change the subject around so that you can pretend that you're smart. Especially you're doing nothing but cutting and pasting from Google.

Before bolts and nuts that they attached to were made of soft materials, torque wrenches were NOT USED to make sure you didn't overtighten things but to allow you to tighten things evenly. This was especially important in aircraft reciprocating engines where irregular head torque could and DID cause engine failures at or near maximum output. It would cause the heads to lift unevenly and blow through the gaskets. Since the motors were all steel no one had to worry about overtighten these things since it would have taken a 3 foot long torque wrench to break them by a strong man and you were never one of those.

Well to start out:
"were made of soft material" what do you mean by that?

After steel has been manufactures as long ago as 1800 B.C. so
obviously you can't be talking about steel nuts and bolts.

But ignoring your obvious ignorance of materials if you read my post
above I wrote:
"I grant you that if you torque all the bolts/studs on a device to the
same torque you will equally tighten them but single fasteners are
also torqued for the reason I mention above."

But your story about aircraft reciprocating engines seems rather
strange. After all I worked on military aircraft ranging from the T-6
which had a Pratt & Whitney R-985 (450 H.P.) thru the B-29 with the
R-3350 engine (about 2800 H.P.) to the B-50 and C-97 which had a
R-4360 (3350 H.P.) and you know, I never torqued a head bolt. Never!

But why don't you tell us again what the metric equivalent of 1" is when that also had nothing at all to do with the conversation?

But who mentioned the metric equivalent of 1"? I didn't.

Or is this just another example of you changing the topic to avoid
admitting that you really truly, don't know what you are talking
about.
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Sun, 23 May 2021 21:41:41 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

I don't have a digital caliper.

They're cheap enough these days that it wouldn't hurt to have one
handy. Carbon fiber prices start at about $7:
https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=digital+caliper&LH_PrefLoc=1&rt=nc&LH_ BIN=1
while stainless jaws and body start at about $15:
https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=digital+stainless+caliper&LH_PrefLoc=1 &rt=nc&LH_BIN=1

Note that the body is allegedly carbon fiber, making it politically
correct for most of the performance tasks mentioned in this newsgroup.
It also weighs less than the stainless steel version. However, the
big advantage is that the stainless version was typically very crudely
machined. Everything outside and visible to user is clean, but inside
is some of the sloppiest finish work I've ever seen. I thought I had
bought a oddity, so I ordered a similar model from a different vendor.
It was just as bad inside.

One problem you might have is that the on/off switch doesn't really
turn off the calipers causing the battery to discharge prematurely.
You can measure the "phantom load" will the multimeter in series with
the battery. Silver Oxide cells last longer, but cost more. My
solution is to simply remove the battery when it's not in use.

I remember the first one we bought for
one of our labs at school, when they were very new technology. It was
used so little (much less than our dial models) that the battery failed
and corroded the contacts. That would probably happen here too, if I
bought one. But I have given them as gifts.

If the cell leaked, it was probably an alkaline LR44. Try an SR44 or
357 (zinc and silver oxide) cell next time. They last longer and leak
less. There's a list of silver oxide cells in this article:
http://www.davehylands.com/Machinist/Caliper-Batteries/
10 cells for about $6.
https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=sr44+357+cells

I'm not sure why you didn't use the digital calipers. I use them for
most everything. I have a pair of vernier calipers, which I've never
used since I bought the digital calipers. I would give you one of my
calipers, but it's cheaper for you to order one on eBay, than the $9
it would cost me to mail it to your via USPS flat rate priority mail.

--
Jeff Liebermann
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Sunday, May 23, 2021 at 6:00:46 p.m. UTC-4, wrote:
Snipped
Do you even care that you're providing wrong numbers
and explanations? A few minutes with Google search and you could
easily fix your own mistakes and nobody would know you're clueless. Or
perhaps you want your answers to be wrong, so that you can attract
more attention?

1 out of 3 correct. Not bad and you're improving your score.
--
Jeff Liebermann
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

Well, you have to admit that it's working for him. He gets lots of attention here. LOL

Cheers

On Sunday, May 23, 2021 at 7:44:17 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Sun, 23 May 2021 21:41:41 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

I don't have a digital caliper.
They're cheap enough these days that it wouldn't hurt to have one
handy. Carbon fiber prices start at about $7:
https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=digital+caliper&LH_PrefLoc=1&rt=nc&LH_ BIN=1
while stainless jaws and body start at about $15:
https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=digital+stainless+caliper&LH_PrefLoc=1 &rt=nc&LH_BIN=1

Note that the body is allegedly carbon fiber, making it politically
correct for most of the performance tasks mentioned in this newsgroup.
It also weighs less than the stainless steel version. However, the
big advantage is that the stainless version was typically very crudely
machined. Everything outside and visible to user is clean, but inside
is some of the sloppiest finish work I've ever seen. I thought I had
bought a oddity, so I ordered a similar model from a different vendor.
It was just as bad inside.

One problem you might have is that the on/off switch doesn't really
turn off the calipers causing the battery to discharge prematurely.
You can measure the "phantom load" will the multimeter in series with
the battery. Silver Oxide cells last longer, but cost more. My
solution is to simply remove the battery when it's not in use.
I remember the first one we bought for
one of our labs at school, when they were very new technology. It was
used so little (much less than our dial models) that the battery failed
and corroded the contacts. That would probably happen here too, if I
bought one. But I have given them as gifts.
If the cell leaked, it was probably an alkaline LR44. Try an SR44 or
357 (zinc and silver oxide) cell next time. They last longer and leak
less. There's a list of silver oxide cells in this article:
http://www.davehylands.com/Machinist/Caliper-Batteries/
10 cells for about $6.
https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=sr44+357+cells

I'm not sure why you didn't use the digital calipers. I use them for
most everything. I have a pair of vernier calipers, which I've never
used since I bought the digital calipers. I would give you one of my
calipers, but it's cheaper for you to order one on eBay, than the $9
it would cost me to mail it to your via USPS flat rate priority mail.

A micrometer for the usual measurements on a bike is like using a scalpel to cut cake. Since everything follows standard dimension conventions (sing it), you don't even have to be that exact. Just throw a caliper on it and get close.
-- Jay Beattie.