Re: Re: I really need a torque meter!

From: Fred or Judy Rash <frash_at_chartertn.net>
Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2011 23:36:10 -0500

A few years ago I performed a "highly sophisticated" calibration of an
unknown meter against a standard (now unavailable) Jim Jones B torque
meter. I asked my wife to record two columns of numbers. I held both
meters in my hands and twisted one against the other. I read each meter
aloud for 6 or 8 points. When I put the numbers from my wife's record
into Excel, I got a good straight line. It did not go through the origin
but it was close enough. Maybe 30 minutes total. Like I said "highly
sophisticated". <Grin>

Most CAD programs can readily plot a dial face onto paper. Even
divisions are not required, but at least a one-point calibration is
required.

None of this is as good as a Gowen meter, but it can be made to work
fairly well.

Fred Rash

On 3/6/2011 11:12 PM, art wrote:
>
>
> I'm with Bill on that. I had a couple of Flintstone meters with simple
> even divisions on the discs, and John Barker wrote that that was fine
> for just me, but how do you communicate with other modelers if you
> aren't all working with common units of measurement?
> Thus came the device to calibrate them properly, and from there
> discarding them and working straight to the calibrator.
> That said, you still need Flintstones, calibrated or not, for fuselage
> models, unless you've devised some way to tranfer a wound motor into a
> little tiny peanut model.
>
> Art.
>
>
Received on Sun Mar 06 2011 - 20:36:16 CET