Online Thread Tables?

Fred:

A Google search turned up the following,

I hope that some of this is of use to you. You caught me on a holiday from school and with time on my hands to wander the web.

Errol Groff Instructor, Machine Tool Department H.H. Ellis Tech

613 Upper Maple Street Danielson, CT 06239

860 774 8511 x1811

>

If you're going to write a program, why not just use the formulas which let you calculate all the values instead of using a look up table? It'll probably be just as quick, and will take up a lot less memory space.

Gary

On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 19:31:40 GMT, Errol Groff scribed:

Thank you Mr. Groff!

There are a nice amount of sites here that will do well in my research... What were your keywords for google BTW? I tried a few combos but most came to computers hyper-threading, or NG threads... Hmmm. I must get more google saavy soon!

Thanks!

Fred

On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 16:07:10 -0400, Gary Coffman scribed:

Thanks for the reply Gary.

Actually, I just might do that. A 1/4-20 UNC and a 1/2-20 UNC will use the same calculation and wires to measure the effective PD and all the min/max/root info should be consistent across the board.

I am sure there will be certain hurdles in implementing an algorithmic approach, and would like the "tables" as a backup to verify for testing, but your right...

There is a formula to derive any and every thread out there already!

Why re-invent the wheel (of threads), when all the needed information is a page or two away in the handbook... Just to work within the classifications and parameters of the thread class and formula for it.

Got me thinking about the right interface now...

Cheers,

Fred

Please! I get enough Mr. Groff at school. Errol will do just fine. One year I go so fed up with Mr. Groff this and Mr. Groff that I told the kids to call me Mr. Hamilton Of course after two months of that I was ready to go back to Mr. Groff. No significance to Mr. Hamilton, just picked it out of the air.

Anyway, machine thread dimensions and machine thread details were two of the search terms that I used. Had to sift through al LOT of unrelated stuff though. No one would mistake me for a web search wizard, that's for sure!

Errol Groff Instructor, Machine Tool Department H.H. Ellis Tech

613 Upper Maple Street Danielson, CT 06239

860 774 8511 x1811

Hey Fred,

A suggestion from a REAL amateur here. I always like the thread charts that also show one, or better yet two, clearance hole sizes for at least the smaller (numbered) screw sizes. One for tight clearance and one for the "just slap it together" clearance. I have never found an interest in the columns headed "% of thread".

I'm sure that Gary will correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the suggestion given earlier, about using a formula in a spread-sheet program, was just to make it so you didn't have to go find other charts to create your written/hard-copy chart. I don't think he was suggesting just printing a formula. That would be next to useless to me, even with a computer and lots of calculators in the shop, although printing the formula in a corner of the chart wouldn't hurt. I need something written, and big enough to be a real "wall chart" visible from at least three feet away. I still use an old "stare-it" that is getting pretty dirty and beat-up.

By the way, we're getting a lot of those "Dollarama" stores around here, and I picked up 3 pretty good calculators, with big keys and good sized tilt LCD, for a buck each (Canadian!). Heck of a deal.

Take care.

Brian Laws>On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 16:07:10 -0400, Gary Coffman

I wasn't suggesting that he print a formula. What I was suggesting was that he *implement* the formulas in his program. You plug in a screw designation, the program then calculates all the necessary screw parameters from the formulas and displays the result. No charts, no lookup tables in memory, no spreadsheets, just a query and a response.

Gary

There is one possible drawback to using formulas. Occasionally one of your calculated values will differ by .0001 from published data (Machinery's Handbook, etc.). I have my own experience to support this (I have written a program similar to the one Fred plans to write), plus it's confirmed by an article at one of the links previously suggested:

The formula will calculate the correct answer, and the published chart is wrong, but the question becomes:

"Will the user, upon seeing that your data differs from the "Bible", lose confidence in your program and quit using it?"

By being correct, will you win or lose? Because I was starting out with no credibility (Mike who?), I chose to include all the data in my program and force the output to match the published charts. A lot of work initially, but I only had to do it once. In today's computing world, I don't see the extra memory being an issue.

Would be a lot less work with the formula approach, though.

The third application on this may be the application you are thinking about writing or it may have all the data you want:

These are all stand alone apps written by Mike Rainey, who reads this group regularly, and they run under windows. Simply extract them and run the *.exe file.

Mike has made these available to the world for free, and he encourages further distribution of them.