spoke key wire gauge

On Wed, 31 May 2017 07:42:00 +0700, John B.
wrote:

On Tue, 30 May 2017 20:14:44 +0200, Emanuel Berg
wrote:

AMuzi writes:

It's not relevant that 14g spokes are nominally
0.080 inches. What is relevant is that standard
spoke nipples for both 14g and 15g are nominally
0.130 inches on the flats. Early Japanese standard
for nipples was 0.136 inches, a tighter fit wrench
(very helpful for high quality builds with higher
spoke tension) is 0.127 inches.

How does the gauge system work and why does it get
smaller with higher numbers? Is it like the "P" system
for sandpapers? Not really, right?

Remember that a measuring, or gage, system is simply a method of
keeping track of something. In some countries a horse is measured as a
number of hands high., in other countries they are so many centimeters
high. Either system works perfectly well,,, for those who are failure
with it.

:-( for those who are familiar with it :-(

The traditional top tube diameter on a bicycle was 1 inch in the U.S.
and 25.4mm in Europe :-)

--
Cheers,

John B.

On Wed, 31 May 2017 03:21:37 +0200, Emanuel Berg
wrote:

John B. writes:

Remember that a measuring, or gage, system is simply
a method of keeping track of something. In some
countries a horse is measured as a number of hands
high., in other countries they are so many
centimeters high. Either system works perfectly
well,,, for those who are failure with it.

The traditional top tube diameter on a bicycle was 1
inch in the U.S. and 25.4mm in Europe :-)

Well, the English system makes sense because they were
the pioneers of industrialism and whatever embryo of
"systematic craft" that was before it, and it is
natural they used the body as the first "tool" to
measure stuff.

OK, so then the super-rational French who lagged just
a bit behind had the advantage of seeing where all
this lead, while still not having invested too much
into it mentally to be unable to let it go. So their
systems are better if compared as systems, but it
makes sense it appeared not as the first attempt.

"super-rational" based on 1\10,000,000 part of one half of a meridian,
measurement by Delambre and Méchain, which was later found to be
incorrectly measured :-)

The length of the King's foot seems as logical.

Here, we also have tons of units that relate to the
body. Not everyone even knows of them anymore and no
one works by them. It appears our "thumbs" are somewhat
bigger than those in England

And I've heard stories of joint Swedish-Norwegian (or
Norwegian-Swedish) projects when the carpenters almost
came to blows because nothing they did checked out.
What had happened, the Swedish and Norwegian inches
were very close to, but not entirely identical!
So everyone laughed and then the carpenters were happy
ever after. Probably an invented story, but doesn't
seem entirely impossible.


I had a English machinist work for me once who had worked for a
British tank (as in war weapon) maker who told a story about his
company building a tank to NATO standard drawings. After working for a
month it was found that the turret wouldn't fit the body of the tank
because the number of decimal places used to convert the metric
measurements to inch measurements was different from one part to
another.


We also have an expression "det var som sjutton" which
is "I'd be damned", only literally it is "that was
like 17", and the origin is the 16ths of an inch.
If it amounts to 17 rather than 16 something isn't
right
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Tuesday, May 30, 2017 at 10:17:43 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
Snipped

I had a English machinist work for me once who had worked for a
British tank (as in war weapon) maker who told a story about his
company building a tank to NATO standard drawings. After working for a
month it was found that the turret wouldn't fit the body of the tank
because the number of decimal places used to convert the metric
measurements to inch measurements was different from one part to
another.
Snipped

John B.

That's not too bad. How about a comercial jet aircraft running out of fuel in flight due to a imperial to metric error?

http://www.nytimes.com/1983/07/30/us...on-errors.html
"Published: July 30, 1983


Facebook
Twitter
Google+
Email
Share
Print
Reprints



Air Canada said yesterday that its Boeing 767 jet ran out of fuel in midflight last week because of two mistakes in figuring the fuel supply of the airline's first aircraft to use metric measurements.

After both engines lost their power, the pilots made what is now thought to be the first successful emergency ''dead stick'' landing of a commercial jetliner.

The pilots of the Ottawa-to-Edmonton flight came in over the end of the runway at Gimli, Manitoba, at an abnormally high speed of about 180 knots because the engine failure made it impossible to use the flaps to make a slower approach. But the only serious damage was a collapsed nose gear, and the only casualties among the 69 people on board were two passengers who suffered minor injuries.

The captain, Robert Pearson, was helped in gauging his approach to the 6,800-foot-long strip by the fact that he has had a glider-pilot license for 10 years. Another fortunate circumstance was that the copilot, Maurice Quintal, had taken training in the Canadian Air Force at the Gimli field, which is no longer in active use except as a drag strip for automobile races."

or

http://mentalfloss.com/article/25845...sion-disasters
Can you imagine losing $125 million thanks to a little metric system error? That’s exactly what happened in 1999 when NASA lost a Mars orbiter because one team used metric units for a calculation and the other team didn’t. Guess they didn’t learn from their previous mistake…

2. … just the year before, NASA lost equipment worth millions thanks to shoddy conversion practices. SOHO, the Solar Heliospheric Observatory, a joint project between NASA and the ESA (European Space Agency), lost all communications with Earth. After about a week of trying various things, communication was restored and everyone breathed a sigh of relief. Among the problems thought to have caused the sudden blackout?


• There was an error in the spacecraft’s navigation measurements of nearly 100 km, which resulted in a much lower altitude than expected and led to the vehicle’s break-up in the atmosphere.
• The conversion factor from English to Metric units was erroneously left out of the AMD files.
• Interface Specification required that the impulse-bit calculations should be done using Metric Units.

or

In 1999, the Institute for Safe Medication Practices reported an instance where a patient had received 0.5 grams of Phenobarbital (a sedative) instead of 0.5 grains when the recommendation was misread. A grain is a unit of measure equal to about 0.065 grams… yikes. The Institute emphasized that only the metric system should be used for prescribing drugs.

or

An aircraft more than 30,000 pounds overweight is certainly no laughing matter. In 1994, the FAA received an anonymous tip that an American International Airways (now Kalitta Air, a cargo airline) flight had landed 15 tons heavier than it should have. The FAA investigated and discovered that the problem was in a kilogram-to-pounds conversion (or lack thereof).

Cheers

John B. wrote:

"super-rational" based on 1\10,000,000 part
of one half of a meridian, measurement by
Delambre and Méchain, which was later found
to be incorrectly measured :-)

The length of the King's foot seems
as logical.

Ha! Sure, the style and self-image plays into
it. In the end, I don't think either nation is
more rational than the other. When the English
got to the top of Everest, it was a carefully
planned logistical effort under John Hunt,
a military man. But when the French pioneered
Annapurna, they got lost several times even in
their hike to the foot of the mountain, and
there they couldn't bother with to much camp
work as the monsoon was coming, so basically
they just went up and down

I had a English machinist work for me once
who had worked for a British tank (as in war
weapon) maker who told a story about his
company building a tank to NATO standard
drawings. After working for a month it was
found that the turret wouldn't fit the body
of the tank because the number of decimal
places used to convert the metric
measurements to inch measurements was
different from one part to another.

Tank a lot for that story

--
underground experts united
http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573

On 5/30/2017 9:17 PM, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 31 May 2017 03:21:37 +0200, Emanuel Berg
wrote:

John B. writes:
-snip gauges-

I had a English machinist work for me once who had worked for a
British tank (as in war weapon) maker who told a story about his
company building a tank to NATO standard drawings. After working for a
month it was found that the turret wouldn't fit the body of the tank
because the number of decimal places used to convert the metric
measurements to inch measurements was different from one part to
another.

Hence the well-worn quip, "Close enough for government work"

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 5/30/2017 10:03 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Tuesday, May 30, 2017 at 10:17:43 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
Snipped

I had a English machinist work for me once who had worked for a
British tank (as in war weapon) maker who told a story about his
company building a tank to NATO standard drawings. After working for a
month it was found that the turret wouldn't fit the body of the tank
because the number of decimal places used to convert the metric
measurements to inch measurements was different from one part to
another.
Snipped

John B.

That's not too bad. How about a comercial jet aircraft running out of fuel in flight due to a imperial to metric error?

http://www.nytimes.com/1983/07/30/us...on-errors.html
"Published: July 30, 1983


Facebook
Twitter
Google+
Email
Share
Print
Reprints



Air Canada said yesterday that its Boeing 767 jet ran out of fuel in midflight last week because of two mistakes in figuring the fuel supply of the airline's first aircraft to use metric measurements.

After both engines lost their power, the pilots made what is now thought to be the first successful emergency ''dead stick'' landing of a commercial jetliner.

The pilots of the Ottawa-to-Edmonton flight came in over the end of the runway at Gimli, Manitoba, at an abnormally high speed of about 180 knots because the engine failure made it impossible to use the flaps to make a slower approach. But the only serious damage was a collapsed nose gear, and the only casualties among the 69 people on board were two passengers who suffered minor injuries.

The captain, Robert Pearson, was helped in gauging his approach to the 6,800-foot-long strip by the fact that he has had a glider-pilot license for 10 years. Another fortunate circumstance was that the copilot, Maurice Quintal, had taken training in the Canadian Air Force at the Gimli field, which is no longer in active use except as a drag strip for automobile races."

or

http://mentalfloss.com/article/25845...sion-disasters
Can you imagine losing $125 million thanks to a little metric system error? That’s exactly what happened in 1999 when NASA lost a Mars orbiter because one team used metric units for a calculation and the other team didn’t. Guess they didn’t learn from their previous mistake…

2. … just the year before, NASA lost equipment worth millions thanks to shoddy conversion practices. SOHO, the Solar Heliospheric Observatory, a joint project between NASA and the ESA (European Space Agency), lost all communications with Earth. After about a week of trying various things, communication was restored and everyone breathed a sigh of relief. Among the problems thought to have caused the sudden blackout?


• There was an error in the spacecraft’s navigation measurements of nearly 100 km, which resulted in a much lower altitude than expected and led to the vehicle’s break-up in the atmosphere.
• The conversion factor from English to Metric units was erroneously left out of the AMD files.
• Interface Specification required that the impulse-bit calculations should be done using Metric Units.

or

In 1999, the Institute for Safe Medication Practices reported an instance where a patient had received 0.5 grams of Phenobarbital (a sedative) instead of 0.5 grains when the recommendation was misread. A grain is a unit of measure equal to about 0.065 grams… yikes. The Institute emphasized that only the metric system should be used for prescribing drugs.

or

An aircraft more than 30,000 pounds overweight is certainly no laughing matter. In 1994, the FAA received an anonymous tip that an American International Airways (now Kalitta Air, a cargo airline) flight had landed 15 tons heavier than it should have. The FAA investigated and discovered that the problem was in a kilogram-to-pounds conversion (or lack thereof).

Cheers


Back when 14mm pedals were as common as cockroaches,
screwing one into a 9/16" aluminum crank could also be
dramatic for the home mechanic.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

"Andre Jute" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, May 30, 2017 at 8:08:09 PM UTC+1, Ian Field wrote:
"Emanuel Berg" wrote in message
...
What are the digits on the spoke key?

It seems 14 and 15 are those mostly used on the bikes
I see.

Here is what units(1) has in
/usr/share/units/definitions.units , but it seems none
of those match my spoke key. (?)

Some slots are very wide by the way - perhaps to be
used on MC spokes?

Some sports cars also have spoked wheels. Usually short very heavy gauge
spokes.

If you mean the Dunlop wheels found on Jaguar of a certain age, and
Borrani on Maserati of the same age, those are sturdy precisely because of
their short spokes. If the car is neglected, though, any corrosion in
those wheels can be either expensive or lethal,

I assumed everyone would get that without spelling it out - was I wrong?

On Wednesday, May 31, 2017 at 9:42:42 PM UTC+1, Ian Field wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, May 30, 2017 at 8:08:09 PM UTC+1, Ian Field wrote:
"Emanuel Berg" wrote in message
...
What are the digits on the spoke key?

It seems 14 and 15 are those mostly used on the bikes
I see.

Here is what units(1) has in
/usr/share/units/definitions.units , but it seems none
of those match my spoke key. (?)

Some slots are very wide by the way - perhaps to be
used on MC spokes?

Some sports cars also have spoked wheels. Usually short very heavy gauge
spokes.

If you mean the Dunlop wheels found on Jaguar of a certain age, and
Borrani on Maserati of the same age, those are sturdy precisely because of
their short spokes. If the car is neglected, though, any corrosion in
those wheels can be either expensive or lethal,

I assumed everyone would get that without spelling it out - was I wrong?

It's possible. Most cyclist are probably too young ever to have seen a real automobile wire wheel, never mind handled one. Ask Muzi what's the average age of the little English sports car masochists. -- AJ

On 5/31/2017 4:03 PM, Andre Jute wrote:
On Wednesday, May 31, 2017 at 9:42:42 PM UTC+1, Ian Field wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, May 30, 2017 at 8:08:09 PM UTC+1, Ian Field wrote:
"Emanuel Berg" wrote in message
...
What are the digits on the spoke key?

It seems 14 and 15 are those mostly used on the bikes
I see.

Here is what units(1) has in
/usr/share/units/definitions.units , but it seems none
of those match my spoke key. (?)

Some slots are very wide by the way - perhaps to be
used on MC spokes?

Some sports cars also have spoked wheels. Usually short very heavy gauge
spokes.

If you mean the Dunlop wheels found on Jaguar of a certain age, and
Borrani on Maserati of the same age, those are sturdy precisely because of
their short spokes. If the car is neglected, though, any corrosion in
those wheels can be either expensive or lethal,

I assumed everyone would get that without spelling it out - was I wrong?

It's possible. Most cyclist are probably too young ever to have seen a real automobile wire wheel, never mind handled one. Ask Muzi what's the average age of the little English sports car masochists. -- AJ


I'm no expert but I'm considered young in that crowd.

BTW wire wheels[1] are cute and retro but inefficient in so
many ways besides being undependable. Add in rust, inner
tubes etc and pressed steel wheels are the logical choice
(modern light alloy wheels even more).

[1]1965 MGB

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Wednesday, May 31, 2017 at 3:02:34 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 5/31/2017 4:03 PM, Andre Jute wrote:
On Wednesday, May 31, 2017 at 9:42:42 PM UTC+1, Ian Field wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, May 30, 2017 at 8:08:09 PM UTC+1, Ian Field wrote:
"Emanuel Berg" wrote in message
...
What are the digits on the spoke key?

It seems 14 and 15 are those mostly used on the bikes
I see.

Here is what units(1) has in
/usr/share/units/definitions.units , but it seems none
of those match my spoke key. (?)

Some slots are very wide by the way - perhaps to be
used on MC spokes?

Some sports cars also have spoked wheels. Usually short very heavy gauge
spokes.

If you mean the Dunlop wheels found on Jaguar of a certain age, and
Borrani on Maserati of the same age, those are sturdy precisely because of
their short spokes. If the car is neglected, though, any corrosion in
those wheels can be either expensive or lethal,

I assumed everyone would get that without spelling it out - was I wrong?

It's possible. Most cyclist are probably too young ever to have seen a real automobile wire wheel, never mind handled one. Ask Muzi what's the average age of the little English sports car masochists. -- AJ


I'm no expert but I'm considered young in that crowd.

BTW wire wheels[1] are cute and retro but inefficient in so
many ways besides being undependable. Add in rust, inner
tubes etc and pressed steel wheels are the logical choice
(modern light alloy wheels even more).

[1]1965 MGB

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

Hmm. Jobst said that during cooling, cast wheels contract, so there is residual tension in the spokes of cast wheels. So, do you really think there is any difference?