Anything that does the job
Thanks Paul - appreciated.
Agreed re. removal of burrs etc. with the caveat that they may well cause more problems with "sizing" than removal of any of the OD. The "finger-rub" or "finger-nail scratch" tests are pretty good at picking-up many of these problems.
Re. your question regarding hex etc. the short answer is that anything that can do the job will do the job. "Round" is easier. But even on hex key stock, providing you know the distance across the flats as well as the distance over the corners and can replicate them in the CAD drawing - it should do the job as most rolled/drawn hex stock will be very "regular" even if not "on-size". The "distance across the corners" - ie over the rounded corner can be sufficient if shown as "flats" instead of "rounded" as you will be measuring such that the micrometer will be tangent to any rounding on the corners. In fact only one "corner" is needed on the CAD drawing/file - the one that is being used for the micrometer setting/reading. The rest (5) "corners" can be shown just as "sharps" or "over-shoots" as it is only the two flats in contact with thread flanks/sides that count for thread contact. The two that form the "point" where the micrometer setting is represented need to be accurate as well.
"Rounds" will include the shanks of drill bits if their condition is OK. Any good "round/s" in the shop a the time will do. The size can be got with a micrometer and incorporated into the CAD file/drawing.
There are far too many chances of error with the "3-wire" method - from reading tables or "working things out" from formulae etc. This is in addition to actually getting the measurements correctly, accurately and repeatably. Its pretty well the Machinist's equivalent of herding cats or pinning jello/jelly to the wall - which are easier!!
Thanks Paul - appreciated.
Agreed re. removal of burrs etc. with the caveat that they may well cause more problems with "sizing" than removal of any of the OD. The "finger-rub" or "finger-nail scratch" tests are pretty good at picking-up many of these problems.
Re. your question regarding hex etc. the short answer is that anything that can do the job will do the job. "Round" is easier. But even on hex key stock, providing you know the distance across the flats as well as the distance over the corners and can replicate them in the CAD drawing - it should do the job as most rolled/drawn hex stock will be very "regular" even if not "on-size". The "distance across the corners" - ie over the rounded corner can be sufficient if shown as "flats" instead of "rounded" as you will be measuring such that the micrometer will be tangent to any rounding on the corners. In fact only one "corner" is needed on the CAD drawing/file - the one that is being used for the micrometer setting/reading. The rest (5) "corners" can be shown just as "sharps" or "over-shoots" as it is only the two flats in contact with thread flanks/sides that count for thread contact. The two that form the "point" where the micrometer setting is represented need to be accurate as well.
"Rounds" will include the shanks of drill bits if their condition is OK. Any good "round/s" in the shop a the time will do. The size can be got with a micrometer and incorporated into the CAD file/drawing.
There are far too many chances of error with the "3-wire" method - from reading tables or "working things out" from formulae etc. This is in addition to actually getting the measurements correctly, accurately and repeatably. Its pretty well the Machinist's equivalent of herding cats or pinning jello/jelly to the wall - which are easier!!
Comment