h a l f b a k e r y"It would work, if you can find alternatives to each of the steps involved in this process."
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
|
Not quite sure what you're getting at here, but it sounds
tricky to engineer - maintaining a good right-angle in a
flexible tape. You can of course get T-squares with ruled
edges, but this is presumably what you're not looking for. |
|
|
See [link] for a similar oddity in my tool collection. It was made by Mitutoyo in Japan, but I don't see it in their current listings. |
|
|
Yes, I see. For measuring, say, the width of a board, straight
across and not slantwise. This is extremely clever. Why
doesn't it exist yet? |
|
|
Ah! Right, I underhend now. Good idea. However, for
measuring the width of a board, it's probably not needed in
most situations. |
|
|
You can easily get within 3 degrees or better just by eye
(draw the angle, and you'll see - it looks huge), in which
case the error is going to be less than 0.15%. This is 0.4mm
on a 12-inch board, or 1.6mm on a 4ft sheet. |
|
|
[MB] Only if the geometry permits you a good line of sight.
If you've got to squint at it from a bad angle or foreshortened
perspective, then this device'd come in handy. |
|
|
I've gotten pretty good at seeing level and square but it is not accurate enough for what I do. I admit that this would only appeal to a smallish market, but framers would like having one for marking stud placement on 2x4's with a single tool, and for my gig, marking and then making lines on tiles without having to swap tools. |
|
|
When your trade is all piece work it gets hard to figure out new ways to shave any more seconds off of your best times to get another raise after a while. |
|
|
[mouse] point taken.
[2fries] sounds to me as if you could just use a regular set-
square with ruler markings on the edge. I have a framing
square, which is about 2ft on each arm and marked in metric
on one side, imperial on the other (eg Link). |
|
|
Or is this not what you meant? |
|
|
No, framing squares are good, just too bulky when working with a 12"x12" tile or 2x4's. Normally framers mark 16" stud centers on the length of a top and bottom base plate. Then they pick up a square and draw lines for one side of the stud with a big X indicating which side of the line the stud should be placed. Having a smallish t-square attached to the tape measure would save this step. |
|
|
Point taken, but it's flexible, the precision of the angle will
be compromised. Would a smaller square not work - ie,
similar to the framing square but smaller? |
|
|
[2fries], try a swanson's speed square. |
|
|
[+] for the idea, although I would never buy one. My experiences have taught me that the more functions you pack into one tool, the less effective it becomes at said functions. |
|
|
The square, [link] I use now is fine. I just think this might shave off an hour or so from a years work. |
|
|
//Having a smallish t-square attached to the tape measure would save this step.// |
|
|
So, could you not construct such a tool from a try-square and the guts of a tape measure and your choice of fastener? |
|
|
Granted, it might use up the hour you'd save, but would go a way towards reinforcing that humans are tool-builders, and you'd save the hour every year going forward? |
|
|
Solution: Buy a bigger tape measure (with a 12" housing) and let the casing be the perpendicular leg of your square. |
|
|
Solution: draw a fine grid of lines on your glasses/contact
lenses/cornea. |
|
|
[MB] Or, for extra fun, a target reticle. |
|
|
I wonder if contact lenses could be weighted so that a reticle would always adjust itself to the horizon. |
|
| |