Author Topic: Time for standard threads  (Read 4281 times)

Offline HS93

  • In Memoriam
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 788
  • Country: gb
Time for standard threads
« on: January 25, 2010, 03:01:50 AM »
well I spent a few hours in the workshop, the first time for ages following my stupid acedent last year, I had to make 16 standoffs for steper mounts simple for most of the chaps on hear (it took me ages ) both ends had to be taped all in ally, was pleased they where finnished as I was tired, only to find I had taped the wrong size, I had miss read the drawring and instead of 10-24 unc I had used 10-32 unf  :doh: :doh:, I hate repetertive work anyway, why can it not all be metric or better still BA, I like BA, I dont make mistakes with them  (as often) :(

     :ddb: :ddb: Peter   :ddb: :ddb:
I am usless at metalwork, Oh and cannot spell either . failure

Offline John Stevenson

  • In Memoriam
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1643
  • Nottingham, England.
Re: Time for standard threads
« Reply #1 on: January 25, 2010, 03:21:47 AM »
One thing about standards, there are plenty of them and all different.  :scratch:

John S.
John Stevenson

Offline PTsideshow

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2570
  • Country: us
Re: Time for standard threads
« Reply #2 on: January 25, 2010, 07:17:01 AM »
As John has pointed out there are plenty of them! Here is a link to a listing of the more common ones. thread standard information

Here is another that has separate but numerous standard chart and info
engineering toolbox
I will also put a links in resources :thumbup:
"The internet just a figment, of my imagination!' 
 
 There are only 3 things I can't do!"
Raise the Dead!
        Walk on water!
                 Fix a broken heart!
and I'm working on the first two!
glen

Offline DMIOM

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 676
  • Country: gb
  • Isle of Man
Re: Time for standard threads
« Reply #3 on: January 25, 2010, 07:00:56 PM »
One thing about standards, there are plenty of them and all different.  :scratch:

John S.

or as somebody else once put it - "That's the great thing about standards - there's so many of them to choose from" !

Offline ieezitin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 662
Re: Time for standard threads
« Reply #4 on: January 26, 2010, 09:47:01 AM »
Peter.

Ive been there so many times myself. I empathize with you.


Any chance you can keep the 10-32? :thumbup:


All the best    Anthony.
If you cant fix it, get another hobby.

Offline HS93

  • In Memoriam
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 788
  • Country: gb
Re: Time for standard threads
« Reply #5 on: January 27, 2010, 09:28:36 AM »
I want to try and keep it original and not change the original Machine so unfortunayly had to re make them , nearley finnished now.

    :ddb:  peter   :ddb:
I am usless at metalwork, Oh and cannot spell either . failure

Offline Brass_Machine

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5504
  • Country: us
Re: Time for standard threads
« Reply #6 on: January 27, 2010, 06:59:59 PM »
Hi Peter!

I have no comment, just glad to see you posting!

Eric
Science is fun.

We're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad.

Offline John Stevenson

  • In Memoriam
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1643
  • Nottingham, England.
Re: Time for standard threads
« Reply #7 on: January 28, 2010, 03:49:49 AM »
Here's my favourite, from Machinery Handbook of Worlds threads 1941 I present the Manchester Plumbers thread.



Bear in mind that Manchester, England,  at this time would have been a small city and the plumber to population ratio must have been very small but still enough for them to have thier own standard and to get it in print  :scratch:

John S.
John Stevenson

Offline andyf

  • In Memoriam
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1795
  • Country: gb
    • The Warco WM180 Lathe - Modifications
Re: Time for standard threads
« Reply #8 on: January 28, 2010, 06:03:48 AM »
Quote
John Stevenson: Here's my favourite, from Machinery Handbook of Worlds threads 1941 I present the Manchester Plumbers thread.

Well, I learn something new every day! I've lived in the suburbs to the south of Manchester all my life, and never knew that before.
Actually, at around 400,000, the population of Manchester today is only about half what it was in 1941. But the city proper is relatively small in area, and slum clearance probably accounts for the decrease, and (in part, at least) for the great increase in size and population of the surrounding conurbation. 

Andy
Sale, Cheshire
I've cut the end off it twice, but it's still too short