RE: Re: ANALOG VS DIGITAL TORQUE METERS. [1 Attachment]

From: John Barker <john.barker783_at_ntlworld.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 13:40:16 -0000

“The Colonel’s Lady and Judy O’Grady are sisters under the skin”(Kipling).

Thanks Tapio. That emphasizes the point I was making very emphatically. Although my ‘Judy O’Grady’ torque meter does the job some consideration, knowledge and skill can make a much more attractive package from the same fundamental parts and one that is easier to use.

John

 

 

From: Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com [mailto:Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com]
Sent: 17 January 2017 08:54
To: Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Indoor_Construction] Re: ANALOG VS DIGITAL TORQUE METERS. [1 Attachment]

 

  

[Attachment(s) from Tapio Linkosalo included below]



On 17/1/2017 1:40, Ron Patten ronald.patten_at_att.net <mailto:ronald.patten_at_att.net>
[Indoor_Construction] wrote:
> Any chance of your device becoming public knowledge, parts list,
circuit board, etc?
>

My meter is made from the common Chinese 200g (10mg resolution) handheld
scale. I dismantled the load cell, saw the body so that I have just the
electronics/display/buttons used. No extra electronics was needed, but
all those parts are from the scale. Built holder for a torque arm and
the load cell of aluminum profile, piano wire and brass tubing. The arm
is 10mm long as I read my scale on g*cm scale. Could have done oz*in too
by just locating the load cell further away from the torque shaft.

One extra benefit for a digital scale, not yet mentioned, is that "one
size fits all". With analog meters I needed to have separate meters for
F1D, F1M and larger models, but the digital one has sufficient scale AND
resolution to cover all classes, great and small.

-Tapio-






This email has been scanned by BullGuard antivirus protection.
For more info visit www.bullguard.com
Received on Tue Jan 17 2017 - 05:40:22 CET