Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #529095 > unrolled thread

Wrench Physics Question

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  Wrench Physics Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-10-30 06:47 +0000
    Re: Wrench Physics Question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 08:09 -0500
      Re: Wrench Physics Question Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 08:50 -0500
        Re: Wrench Physics Question jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-10-30 17:10 +0000
          Re: Wrench Physics Question gilber34 <fafa@invalid.com> - 2015-10-30 20:54 -0500
          Re: Wrench Physics Question Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 21:35 -0500
      Re: Wrench Physics Question jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-10-30 17:08 +0000
      Re: Wrench Physics Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-10-30 17:23 +0000
        Re: Wrench Physics Question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 12:44 -0500
          Re: Wrench Physics Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-10-30 17:58 +0000
          Re: Wrench Physics Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-10-30 18:08 +0000
            Re: Wrench Physics Question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 15:37 -0500
              Re: Wrench Physics Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-10-30 20:42 +0000
                Re: Wrench Physics Question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 15:51 -0500
          Re: Wrench Physics Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-10-30 18:14 +0000
            Re: Wrench Physics Question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 15:40 -0500
              Re: Wrench Physics Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-10-30 21:13 +0000
                Re: Wrench Physics Question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 16:29 -0500
                  Re: Wrench Physics Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-10-30 21:59 +0000
                    Re: Wrench Physics Question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 17:15 -0500
                      Re: Wrench Physics Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-10-30 22:31 +0000
                        Re: Wrench Physics Question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 21:09 -0500
                          Re: Wrench Physics Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-10-31 02:22 +0000
                  Re: Wrench Physics Question xxein1@att.net - 2015-10-30 20:27 -0700
                    Re: Wrench Physics Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-10-31 04:23 +0000
                      Re: Wrench Physics Question xxein1@att.net - 2015-10-31 07:16 -0700
                    Re: Wrench Physics Question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-11-01 15:27 -0600
                      Re: Wrench Physics Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-01 23:16 +0000
                        Re: Wrench Physics Question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-11-02 08:58 -0600
                          Re: Wrench Physics Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-02 20:00 +0000
                            Re: Wrench Physics Question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-11-02 14:27 -0600
                Re: Wrench Physics Question jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-10-30 21:33 +0000
                  Re: Wrench Physics Question Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 21:19 -0500
                    Re: Wrench Physics Question jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-10-31 02:58 +0000
    Re: Wrench Physics Question "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 12:41 -0700
      Re: Wrench Physics Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-10-30 19:56 +0000
        Re: Wrench Physics Question jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-10-30 20:21 +0000
          Re: Wrench Physics Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-10-30 20:39 +0000
            Re: Wrench Physics Question jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-10-30 21:13 +0000
        Re: Wrench Physics Question Tom P <werotizy@freent.dd> - 2015-10-31 22:40 +0100
      Re: Wrench Physics Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-10-30 20:25 +0000
        Re: Wrench Physics Question jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-10-30 20:40 +0000
          Re: Wrench Physics Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-10-30 21:04 +0000
            Re: Wrench Physics Question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 16:23 -0500
              Re: Wrench Physics Question noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 14:27 -0700
                Re: Wrench Physics Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-10-30 22:28 +0000
                  Re: Wrench Physics Question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 21:10 -0500
                    Re: Wrench Physics Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-10-31 02:25 +0000
                      Re: Wrench Physics Question xxein1@att.net - 2015-10-30 20:45 -0700
                      Re: Wrench Physics Question dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> - 2015-11-01 07:53 -0500
                        Re: Wrench Physics Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-02 01:09 +0000
                          Re: Wrench Physics Question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-11-02 09:19 -0600
                            Re: Wrench Physics Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-02 19:43 +0000
                              Re: Wrench Physics Question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-11-02 14:16 -0600
              Re: Wrench Physics Question Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 15:56 -0700
            Re: Wrench Physics Question jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-10-30 21:38 +0000
        Re: Wrench Physics Question "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> - 2015-11-01 22:27 -0800
    Re: Wrench Physics Question xxein1@att.net - 2015-10-30 17:55 -0700
      Re: Wrench Physics Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-10-31 01:33 +0000
        Re: Wrench Physics Question xxein1@att.net - 2015-10-30 20:34 -0700
      Re: Wrench Physics Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-10-31 02:05 +0000
        Re: Wrench Physics Question xxein1@att.net - 2015-10-30 20:37 -0700
    Re: Wrench Physics Question xxein1@att.net - 2015-10-30 18:00 -0700
    Re: Wrench Physics Question xxein1@att.net - 2015-10-30 18:03 -0700
      Re: Wrench Physics Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-10-31 01:24 +0000
    Re: Wrench Physics Question Lofty Goat <rlwatkins@gmail.com> - 2015-10-31 18:44 -0500
      Re: Wrench Physics Question Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-10-31 19:35 -0500
      Re: Wrench Physics Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-01 01:33 +0000
        Re: Wrench Physics Question benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-10-31 23:21 -0400
          Re: Wrench Physics Question "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> - 2015-11-01 04:35 -0800
      Re: Wrench Physics Question Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-01 23:01 +0000

Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4  Next page →

#529203

On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 12:41:04 -0700, nuny@bid.nes wrote:

> 
> Here's what the U. S. Navy's training manual _Tools And Their Uses_ has to say:
>

The US Navy is still building huge and lumbering vessels in an age when smallness
ans swiftness rule the day.

>
> Apparently you suspect that one way is more prone to slipping off
>

No.  It's what happens *after* the wrench slips off.

Here is a force diagram.  The two cases are depicted as lines above
and below the horizontal lines:

http://s18.postimg.org/4k45guqrd/wrenchforces.png

In one case (F1) we have a component of force that is directed away from
the puller and in the other (F2) the component is directed toward the
puller.  If the wrench slips off which way is preferable?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#529221

Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 12:41:04 -0700, nuny@bid.nes wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Here's what the U. S. Navy's training manual _Tools And Their Uses_ has to say:
>>
> 
> The US Navy is still building huge and lumbering vessels in an age when smallness
> ans swiftness rule the day.
> 
>>
>> Apparently you suspect that one way is more prone to slipping off
>>
> 
> No.  It's what happens *after* the wrench slips off.

If the wrench slips off, you have failed.

> Here is a force diagram.  The two cases are depicted as lines above
> and below the horizontal lines:
> 
> http://s18.postimg.org/4k45guqrd/wrenchforces.png
> 
> In one case (F1) we have a component of force that is directed away from
> the puller and in the other (F2) the component is directed toward the
> puller.  If the wrench slips off which way is preferable?

One needs to analyze the cause of the failure, not the after effects.

The direction of applied force that is preferable in the event of a
failure is the direction that causes the least damages to ones knuckles.
 

-- 
Jim Pennino

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#529231

On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 20:40:36 +0000, jimp wrote:

> 
> If the wrench slips off, you have failed.
> 

Oh yes.  Mr. Perfect has never had a wrench slip off.

Tell that to the guy who failed to mention in the written manual
that metric dimensions were/were not being used.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#529238

On 10/30/2015 4:04 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 20:40:36 +0000, jimp wrote:
>
>>
>> If the wrench slips off, you have failed.
>>
>
> Oh yes.  Mr. Perfect has never had a wrench slip off.
>
> Tell that to the guy who failed to mention in the written manual
> that metric dimensions were/were not being used.
>

Don't you test the fit of wrenches before you torque them?

Here's a bit of folklore that I learned when I started to work on cars.
If you pull toward your torso, your knuckles will hit your torso if the 
wrench slips. If you push away from your torso, you should at least 
check whether your knuckles will hit something hard prior to your arm 
becoming fully extended.

-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#529239

pi minutes ago, you

> check whether your knuckles will hit something hard prior to your arm 
> becoming fully extended.
> 
> -- 
> Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#529273

On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 14:27:45 -0700, noTthaTguY wrote:

>> 
>> Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys
>>

Fine toys are highly inimical to childhood development.
They repress the imagination and stultify personal creativity.

Because fine toys are a serious threat to the well being of
children, and hence to the future of society, they should be
prohibited and banned and all those involved in their production
should be summarily imprisoned or even executed.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#529335

On 10/30/2015 5:28 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 14:27:45 -0700, noTthaTguY wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys
>>>
>
> Fine toys are highly inimical to childhood development.
> They repress the imagination and stultify personal creativity.
>
> Because fine toys are a serious threat to the well being of
> children, and hence to the future of society, they should be
> prohibited and banned and all those involved in their production
> should be summarily imprisoned or even executed.
>

I'm going to guess you spent a lot of time in the closet as a child. 
What was the infraction that earned that punishment?

-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#529342

On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 21:10:00 -0500, Odd Bodkin wrote:

> 
> I'm going to guess you spent a lot of time in the closet as a child. 
> What was the infraction that earned that punishment?
>

I was the child of wealth and privilege.  I was given fine toys in abundance.

But I, and my childhood associates, willingly abandoned such luxuries
in favor of the constructions within our own minds.

A pinch of imagination beats hours of craftsmanship any day.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#529376

On Friday, October 30, 2015 at 10:27:03 PM UTC-4, Fabian Russell wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 21:10:00 -0500, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> 
> > 
> > I'm going to guess you spent a lot of time in the closet as a child. 
> > What was the infraction that earned that punishment?
> >
> 
> I was the child of wealth and privilege.  I was given fine toys in abundance.
> 
> But I, and my childhood associates, willingly abandoned such luxuries
> in favor of the constructions within our own minds.
> 
> A pinch of imagination beats hours of craftsmanship any day.

xxein:  Take a dose of nostalgia and call me in the morning.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#529670

On 10/30/2015 10:25 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 21:10:00 -0500, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm going to guess you spent a lot of time in the closet as a child.
>> What was the infraction that earned that punishment?
>>
>
> I was the child of wealth and privilege.  I was given fine toys in abundance.
>
> But I, and my childhood associates, willingly abandoned such luxuries
> in favor of the constructions within our own minds.
>
> A pinch of imagination beats hours of craftsmanship any day.

Yes, note that youngsters will often play with the box that toys come in 
rather than the toy itself. The box can be so many wonderful things in 
the fertile mind of a child.

As to the angled wrench question, I can say that it's intuitively 
preferable to use it so that the angle of offset is opposite to the 
direction of desired rotation of the nut or bolt. In all my years of 
using wrenches I never thought to discover exactly why that was, I was 
usually too busy with the job at hand, it just felt "right" to use it 
that way. Very unscientific reasoning, to be sure, but I bet most 
mechanics would agree.

It's true that the particulars of the layout of the job can preclude 
using the wrench that way, things blocking the swing of the wrench 
handle being the most common. Flipping the wrench over repeatedly is 
often the only way to get the job done.

Interestingly, I've had situations where I've had to use a combination 
wrench (box on one end, open on the other) and switch back and forth 
from one end to the other to get a nut or bolt to turn in a particularly 
tight situation. Turns out the box end puts the wrench handle at an 
angle half way between the two possible angles offered by flipping the 
open end. At least that's the case with the quality tools I've used over 
the years, I don't know if the Chinese or Taiwanese tools are made that way.

-- 
dvus

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#529822

On Sun, 01 Nov 2015 07:53:49 -0500, dvus wrote:

> 
> Yes, note that youngsters will often play with the box that toys come in 
> rather than the toy itself. The box can be so many wonderful things in 
> the fertile mind of a child.
> 

Well, I wouldn't think that Odd's fine toys are actually toys, in the
sense that they are intended as an actual play item.  They are probably
just a type of collectible, that is, something fancy to be put on display.

Children usually end up wrecking their toys, either accidentally or
deliberately, and no parent would want to allow an expensive toy to
be quickly destroyed.

When I was a child I sometimes had cheap plastic trucks or military
hardware as toys.  Before too long each of those items would end up
being smashed with hammers or rocks or even set on fire.  Other children
(boys of course) would do the same thing.  For a little child, there is
no greater fun than the reckless abandon of destroying ones own toys.

Yes, Odd probably gouges his customers by charging an exorbitant price
for his creations and no purchaser would desire to see that beautiful
toy soldier, with all its fine workmanship, be senselessly dashed into
tiny pieces by the wanton desires of little junior. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#529916

On 11/1/2015 7:09 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
> On Sun, 01 Nov 2015 07:53:49 -0500, dvus wrote:
>
>>
>> Yes, note that youngsters will often play with the box that toys come in
>> rather than the toy itself. The box can be so many wonderful things in
>> the fertile mind of a child.
>>
>
> Well, I wouldn't think that Odd's fine toys are actually toys, in the
> sense that they are intended as an actual play item.  They are probably
> just a type of collectible, that is, something fancy to be put on display.

You haven't seen them. Your prejudgments belong to you.

>
> Children usually end up wrecking their toys, either accidentally or
> deliberately, and no parent would want to allow an expensive toy to
> be quickly destroyed.

Again, a properly made toy endures a child's handling. Which is what I 
make. I've made over 3500 toys since starting this business, and I've 
had reports of breakage of ... wait for it ... two. I repaired one and 
replaced another.

Your own childhood experience with cheaply built toys is no doubt a 
different story.

>
> When I was a child I sometimes had cheap plastic trucks or military
> hardware as toys.  Before too long each of those items would end up
> being smashed with hammers or rocks or even set on fire.  Other children
> (boys of course) would do the same thing.  For a little child, there is
> no greater fun than the reckless abandon of destroying ones own toys.
>
> Yes, Odd probably gouges his customers by charging an exorbitant price
> for his creations and no purchaser would desire to see that beautiful
> toy soldier, with all its fine workmanship, be senselessly dashed into
> tiny pieces by the wanton desires of little junior.
>

I don't make wooden toy soldiers.
And believe me, my toys get plenty of playtime.


-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#529983

On Mon, 02 Nov 2015 09:19:30 -0600, Odd Bodkin wrote:

> 
> a properly made toy endures a child's handling. Which is what I 
> make. 
>

Well, he didn't dispute the part about the price gouging, so that
MUST be true.

Don't fret, everybody does it.  Caveat Emptor.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#529994

On 11/2/2015 1:43 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
> On Mon, 02 Nov 2015 09:19:30 -0600, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>
>>
>> a properly made toy endures a child's handling. Which is what I
>> make.
>>
>
> Well, he didn't dispute the part about the price gouging, so that
> MUST be true.

Oh come on. You think that if you say something stupid and your target 
doesn't respond to your stupidity, you must be right?
That's the mark of an attention whore.

My toys are for children, and they are priced to be affordable to 
parents of children. Not as cheap as a cardboard box. Not as expensive 
as a blender. If you'd rather see children have cardboard boxes or 
blenders, that's up to you.

>
> Don't fret, everybody does it.  Caveat Emptor.
>


-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#529278

On Friday, October 30, 2015 at 5:23:36 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> On 10/30/2015 4:04 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
> > On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 20:40:36 +0000, jimp wrote:
> >
> >> If the wrench slips off, you have failed.
> >
> > Oh yes.  Mr. Perfect has never had a wrench slip off.
> >
> > Tell that to the guy who failed to mention in the written manual
> > that metric dimensions were/were not being used.
> >
> Don't you test the fit of wrenches before you torque them?

So your Odd point is that physics, engineering, or both simply fail to
apply when the wrench fails to accurately fit the nut. Grow up.

> Here's a bit of folklore that I learned when I started to work on cars.
> If you pull toward your torso, your knuckles will hit your torso if the 
> wrench slips. If you push away from your torso, you should at least 
> check whether your knuckles will hit something hard prior to your arm 
> becoming fully extended.

Poor baby kid, did you have growing pains too while learning to add?
 
> -- 
> Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Maker of fine tasty edible toys, by any chance, Bodkin?

-- Mahipal "IPMM, no I never get acknowledged by Odd or Sam or Hmmm..."

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#529254

Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 20:40:36 +0000, jimp wrote:
> 
>> 
>> If the wrench slips off, you have failed.
>> 
> 
> Oh yes.  Mr. Perfect has never had a wrench slip off.

Sure I have; but since then I have learned how to avoid it.

> Tell that to the guy who failed to mention in the written manual
> that metric dimensions were/were not being used.

It is trivial to tell metric from inch hardware; whitworth not so much.
 

-- 
Jim Pennino

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#529878

On Friday, October 30, 2015 at 1:27:12 PM UTC-7, Fabian Russell wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 12:41:04 -0700, nuny@bid.nes wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Here's what the U. S. Navy's training manual _Tools And Their Uses_ has to
> > say:
> >
> 
> >The US Navy is still building huge and lumbering vessels in an age when
>> smallness ans swiftness rule the day.

  Does that invalidate the recommended methods of tool usage in the manual?

> > Apparently you suspect that one way is more prone to slipping off
> >
> 
> No.  It's what happens *after* the wrench slips off.
> 
> Here is a force diagram.  The two cases are depicted as lines above
> and below the horizontal lines:
> 
> http://s18.postimg.org/4k45guqrd/wrenchforces.png
> 
> In one case (F1) we have a component of force that is directed away from
> the puller and in the other (F2) the component is directed toward the
> puller.

  Where is the puller- to the right, or below?

>  If the wrench slips off which way is preferable?

  The lower diagram is a beautiful example of how not to use a wrench. There should be no force component directed to the right in the lower diagram.


  Mark L. Fergerson

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#529304

On Friday, October 30, 2015 at 2:48:45 AM UTC-4, Fabian Russell wrote:
> C'mon, physics junkies.  It's time to discuss -- if you
> can.
> 
> Here is an image of a common open-end wrench:
> 
> http://s8.postimg.org/em76bn2k5/wrench.png
> 
> Note how the head, or gripper, of the wrench is set at an angle
> to the handle axis.
> 
> Thus, there are two different possible directions of rotation
> that can be used with either end to tighten (or loosen) a fastening
> nut or bolt.
> 
> Why is the wrench designed in this way?
> 
> Is one rotation direction preferable to the other?  If so, why?

xxein:  Wow!  33 replies all missing the mark.

The torque should be applied toward the obtuse angle of the wrench.  This allows some of the the applied torque to go into the direction of the nut axis to mitigate slippage.  This gives an edge to amateurs and pros alike who misdirect force away from the ideal 90 degree angle to the wrench handle.  Sometimes, circumstances prohibit the 90 degree angle of force.  15 degrees in this retarded direction also gives a psychological confidence to those mechanically inclined.

As for accessibility to the nut, notice that the handle still points to the nut axis.  Specially designed wrenches are often made for certain specific accessibility circumstances.  The 15 degree angle does allow one to flip the wrench over where a 60 degrees of rotation of the nut can't be realized. Some wrenches have the other end as a 6 or 12 point closed box.  Some 12 pointers have an open box that allows the opening to fit past the bolt.  I suppose some 6 pointers are open too but I haven't seen one - perhaps for lack of demand since 12 pointers are more versatile.

Your next question should be why boxed end wrenches have the box tilted upward from the shaft.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#529319

On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 17:55:07 -0700, xxein1 wrote:

> 
> The torque should be applied toward the obtuse angle of the wrench.
> This allows some of the the applied torque to go into the direction
> of the nut axis to mitigate slippage.  This gives an edge to amateurs
> and pros alike who misdirect force away from the ideal 90 degree angle
> to the wrench handle.  Sometimes, circumstances prohibit the 90 degree
> angle of force.  15 degrees in this retarded direction also gives a
> psychological confidence to those mechanically inclined.
> 

I know what you mean but your terminology is off.

Torque is not applied.  The applied force produces torque.  Also, the
term "nut axis" is a bit uncertain.

I am not splitting hairs.  The correct use of terminology is essential
in communicating physical concepts.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#529372

On Friday, October 30, 2015 at 9:34:58 PM UTC-4, Fabian Russell wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 17:55:07 -0700, xxein1 wrote:
> 
> > 
> > The torque should be applied toward the obtuse angle of the wrench.
> > This allows some of the the applied torque to go into the direction
> > of the nut axis to mitigate slippage.  This gives an edge to amateurs
> > and pros alike who misdirect force away from the ideal 90 degree angle
> > to the wrench handle.  Sometimes, circumstances prohibit the 90 degree
> > angle of force.  15 degrees in this retarded direction also gives a
> > psychological confidence to those mechanically inclined.
> > 
> 
> I know what you mean but your terminology is off.
> 
> Torque is not applied.  The applied force produces torque.  Also, the
> term "nut axis" is a bit uncertain.
> 
> I am not splitting hairs.  The correct use of terminology is essential
> in communicating physical concepts.

xxein:  I guess I disappointed you.  But 'the correct use of terminology' is just a formal convention - not colloquial at all.  I'll excuse myself even if you can't.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web