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

#529274

On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 17:15:25 -0500, Odd Bodkin wrote:

> 
> You're homeless, aren't you?
>

Is it a "house" or is it a "home?"  That's a question for sci.sociology.

LOL!

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

#529334

On 10/30/2015 5:31 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 17:15:25 -0500, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>
>>
>> You're homeless, aren't you?
>>
>
> Is it a "house" or is it a "home?"  That's a question for sci.sociology.
>
> LOL!
>

Well, let's just say that a sleeping bag on cardboard on a sidewalk is 
not really a home.

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

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

#529341

On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 21:09:17 -0500, Odd Bodkin wrote:

> 
> Well, let's just say that a sleeping bag on cardboard on a sidewalk is 
> not really a home.
> 

If you analyze the construction and furnishings within the average
$750K suburban domicile, you will find essentially sleeping bags,
cardboard, and sidewalks.

The illusions of the domesticated make all the difference.

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

#529371

On Friday, October 30, 2015 at 5:29:13 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> On 10/30/2015 4:13 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
> > On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 15:40:23 -0500, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> I'm sure software and robots can do woodworking. I see it all the time
> >> in IKEA. But somehow people come to me for quality.
> >>
> >
> > Until the shop down the street, the one with the new-fangled 3D
> > fabricator, starts producing rival products of equal or better
> > intricacy at far less cost and at far greater rates.
> 
> Intricacy is not the issue. Craftsmanship is. A CNC mill will carve a 
> shape into whatever material you give it, and it will not care to check 
> the direction of the grain, or whether there are knots and burls or cracks.
> 
> >
> > I'm sure that a good portion of your clientele will give up that
> > "natural wood feel" for a better price and accessibility.  (Why
> > pay an exorbitant fee for one when you fill up your entire mantle for
> > the same cash?)
> 
> You get what you pay for.
> 
> >
> > But who's to say that extruded wood pulp and binders, if formulated
> > correctly, cannot compete with the "real" thing?
> 
> How long do particle-board cabinets last, do you think?
> 
> >
> > It's only a matter of some small time before you, like the dinosaurs,
> > are extinct.
> >
> 
> Maybe. I have no aspirations to make my great grandchildren woodworkers.
> In the meantime, I have plenty of business, despite your personally 
> hurled omens.
> 
> Enjoy your cheap, commodity, throwaway items. May your rocking chair 
> expire as quickly as your cell phone.
> 
> 
> -- 
> Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

xxein:  I had a woodworker as my best friend for many years.  I mean a real woodworker such as you claim to be yourself.

A Palm Beach woman had two matching Chinese accompaniment tables that dated to the late 1800's.  Made of a rare irreplaceable mahogany, I believe.  During one of her annual snowbird moves, spring as I reckon, they were damaged - one beyond repair. She just had to have them restored and money was no object.  We took them both to work on.  The repairable one was not much trouble.  Just one piece had to be replaced - the lower shelf.  The other one had to be re-manufactured from scratch.  To my surprise, he didn't find the wood he wanted at any specialty wood shops and went to the lumber yard.  High-grade plywood, some assorted dowels and the shortest 4x4 they sold. ???  Can he pull this off with junk wood?  By the way, this cannot be a short story.

After the gemologist studied the needed material, router, lathe and various chisels at hand, he crafted the bottom shelf to fit.  Now to do the stain and grain work.  This shelf had to be done first as a measure of reproducible quality.  Hopefully, she will have at least one table restored.  I was not ignorant to antiquing but he was a master of abuse.  Just right and a little more grain color staining.  Now ready for final sand and satinizing - or so I thought.  How many times do I have to do this.  And he expects me to some more grain enhancement too.  All day alone?  Oh? Two days?  Trust me?  If I think a little more burnt red in the stain?  How many times I took it in the house to dry.  Final rubdown and assembly.  Hmm.  That's plywood?

Now that we know that it could be done, we (he) crafted a matching table.  Each piece carefully oriented (with whatever of grain) and cut and matched to fit.  Replicated fastening was the easiest part of the whole project.  Cutting, staining and finishing with exact matching blends was the hardest and most time consuming with waiting for drying.  But with so many pieces there were overlapping times.

A word I failed to use was ornamental.  It truly was.  We were done.  What?  Just throw them in the back of the truck?  He says "yup".  We delivered them and she was in ecstasy.  How much?  My friend added up the meager material cost plus labor hours at a pretty cheap rate for the skill involved.  She was more than happy.  He could have easily quadrupled it without making her flinch.

I asked him later why so cheap?  He said:  "I dunno.  Maybe word will get around."  Oh!  The stories about working in Palm Beach.  If you want, I can tell them to you.  But not here in these pages.

Oh, Bod.  What have these times become?

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

#529380

On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 20:27:43 -0700, xxein1 wrote:

> A Palm Beach woman had two matching Chinese accompaniment tables that
> dated to the late 1800's ...
> She just had to have them restored and money was no object ...
> He could have easily quadrupled it without making her flinch ...
> Oh!  The stories about working in Palm Beach. 
>

All the stories have already been told:

"A Generation of Vipers," by Phillip Wylie

http://www.amazon.com/Generation-Vipers-Philip-Wylie/dp/1564781461

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

#529417

On Saturday, October 31, 2015 at 12:22:55 AM UTC-4, Fabian Russell wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 20:27:43 -0700, xxein1 wrote:
> 
> > A Palm Beach woman had two matching Chinese accompaniment tables that
> > dated to the late 1800's ...
> > She just had to have them restored and money was no object ...
> > He could have easily quadrupled it without making her flinch ...
> > Oh!  The stories about working in Palm Beach. 
> >
> 
> All the stories have already been told:
> 
> "A Generation of Vipers," by Phillip Wylie
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/Generation-Vipers-Philip-Wylie/dp/1564781461

xxein:  That relates no more than Mary Poppins or A Clockwork Orange.

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

#529771

On 10/30/2015 10:27 PM, xxein1@att.net wrote:
> On Friday, October 30, 2015 at 5:29:13 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>
> xxein:  I had a woodworker as my best friend for many years.  I mean a real woodworker such as you claim to be yourself.
>

[middle part snipped]

> I asked him later why so cheap?  He said:  "I dunno.  Maybe word will get around."  Oh!  The stories about working in
> Palm Beach.  If you want, I can tell them to you.  But not here in these pages.
>
> Oh, Bod.  What have these times become?
>

Paul Jobs, the father of Steve Jobs, instilled in Steve a sense of 
caring about craftsmanship. Paul made sure that the bottoms of drawers 
in a bureau were as smooth as the finished surfaces. When Steve asked 
why, when nobody would ever know that they were that way, Paul said 
something like "But I'll know". This bled into the design of the first 
Macintosh, where there was an inscription inside the case from the team. 
Since the case on a Mac was never typically opened by the user, this 
seemed to be wasted effort according to some on the Macintosh team. But 
Steve, you see, had learned to be a craftsman.

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

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

#529794

On Sun, 01 Nov 2015 15:27:29 -0600, Odd Bodkin wrote:

> 
> Paul Jobs, the father of Steve Jobs, instilled in Steve a sense of 
> caring about craftsmanship. Paul made sure that the bottoms of drawers 
> in a bureau were as smooth as the finished surfaces. When Steve asked 
> why, when nobody would ever know that they were that way, Paul said 
> something like "But I'll know". This bled into the design of the first 
> Macintosh, where there was an inscription inside the case from the team. 
> Since the case on a Mac was never typically opened by the user, this 
> seemed to be wasted effort according to some on the Macintosh team. But 
> Steve, you see, had learned to be a craftsman.
>

Gee, what a heartwarming and inspiring story (NOT!!!).

But it would never make it in any MBA program.  Such behavior can quickly
sink a company, and Apple, in the beginning, nearly perished under the
weight of shoddy Microsoft and cheap IBM clones.

What saved Apple was not craftsmanship.  It was public relations and advertising.
The Apple brand has been impressed into people's mind as being "cool" and
"hip,"  and people will buy any dysfunctional junk if if makes them believe
that they are the trendiest on the block.  Cf. Wormley.

Why toil over craftsmanship when you can create illusions far more easily?

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

#529909

On 11/1/2015 5:16 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
> On Sun, 01 Nov 2015 15:27:29 -0600, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>
>>
>> Paul Jobs, the father of Steve Jobs, instilled in Steve a sense of
>> caring about craftsmanship. Paul made sure that the bottoms of drawers
>> in a bureau were as smooth as the finished surfaces. When Steve asked
>> why, when nobody would ever know that they were that way, Paul said
>> something like "But I'll know". This bled into the design of the first
>> Macintosh, where there was an inscription inside the case from the team.
>> Since the case on a Mac was never typically opened by the user, this
>> seemed to be wasted effort according to some on the Macintosh team. But
>> Steve, you see, had learned to be a craftsman.
>>
>
> Gee, what a heartwarming and inspiring story (NOT!!!).
>
> But it would never make it in any MBA program.  Such behavior can quickly
> sink a company, and Apple, in the beginning, nearly perished under the
> weight of shoddy Microsoft and cheap IBM clones.

And crappy PC software and gaping security holes.

>
> What saved Apple was not craftsmanship.  It was public relations and advertising.
> The Apple brand has been impressed into people's mind as being "cool" and
> "hip,"  and people will buy any dysfunctional junk if if makes them believe
> that they are the trendiest on the block.  Cf. Wormley.

I think you have no idea what has made Apple the largest company in the 
world. Maybe you should visit a Microsoft retail store and note how it 
looks just like the Apple retail store, except without the customers.

>
> Why toil over craftsmanship when you can create illusions far more easily?

That would be your choice. May you live happily ever after in WalMart land.


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

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

#529989

On Mon, 02 Nov 2015 08:58:37 -0600, Odd Bodkin wrote:

> 
> I think you have no idea what has made Apple the largest company in the 
> world.
>

The largest companies in America used to be General Motors, Standard Oil,
and Carnegie Steel, with a few railroads thrown in.

Now the largest companies are Disneyland, Facebook, and [wince] Apple.

Can there be a better indicator of the degeneracy that has befallen
modern society?

I have a mild case of eczema and so I visited the dermatologist to
renew my prescription for some skin cream.  It was a large clinic, and
as I sat in the waiting room I watched all the demented riff raff swiping
their tiny screens with faces all aglow in some minor ecstasy.  It was a
sickening site.  They seemed more like retarded children than inhabitants
of an advanced civilization.

And they were probably all Apple products!

Yes, the degeneracy screams loudly.

 
>>
>> Why toil over craftsmanship when you can create illusions far more easily?
> 
> That would be your choice. May you live happily ever after in WalMart land.
>

No.  You have misunderstood the point.  I am solidly in favor of craftsmanship
but the world of capitalist mass production is not.

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

#529997

On 11/2/2015 2:00 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
> On Mon, 02 Nov 2015 08:58:37 -0600, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>
>>
>> I think you have no idea what has made Apple the largest company in the
>> world.
>>
>
> The largest companies in America used to be General Motors, Standard Oil,
> and Carnegie Steel, with a few railroads thrown in.

Used to be. Quite a while ago. Might want to catch up on why they aren't 
anymore.

>
> Now the largest companies are Disneyland, Facebook, and [wince] Apple.

Not even close. Largest companies by market cap are:
1. Apple
2. Exxon Mobil (which hasn't been Standard Oil since 1911)
3. Berkshire Hathaway
4. Google
5. Microsoft
6. Petro China
7. Wells Fargo
8. Johnson & Johnson
9. ICBC
10. Novartis

Facebook is in the next 10, and Disney is nowhere near there.

>
> Can there be a better indicator of the degeneracy that has befallen
> modern society?

Actually, can your just making shit up be a better indicator of the 
degeneracy that has befallen the mentally ill?

>
> I have a mild case of eczema and so I visited the dermatologist to
> renew my prescription for some skin cream.  It was a large clinic, and
> as I sat in the waiting room I watched all the demented riff raff swiping
> their tiny screens with faces all aglow in some minor ecstasy.  It was a
> sickening site.  They seemed more like retarded children than inhabitants
> of an advanced civilization.
>
> And they were probably all Apple products!

They should have been playing with little Standard Oil oil rig games, right?

>
> Yes, the degeneracy screams loudly.
>
>
>>>
>>> Why toil over craftsmanship when you can create illusions far more easily?
>>
>> That would be your choice. May you live happily ever after in WalMart land.
>>
>
> No.  You have misunderstood the point.  I am solidly in favor of craftsmanship
> but the world of capitalist mass production is not.
>

I don't mass produce. Not every business does mass production.


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

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

#529253

Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 15:40:23 -0500, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> 
>> 
>> I'm sure software and robots can do woodworking. I see it all the time 
>> in IKEA. But somehow people come to me for quality.
>> 
> 
> Until the shop down the street, the one with the new-fangled 3D
> fabricator, starts producing rival products of equal or better
> intricacy at far less cost and at far greater rates.

3D printing, is and always will be, slower and more expnsive than
conventional manufacturing except for narrow niche applications.

> I'm sure that a good portion of your clientele will give up that
> "natural wood feel" for a better price and accessibility.  (Why
> pay an exorbitant fee for one when you fill up your entire mantle for
> the same cash?)
> 
> But who's to say that extruded wood pulp and binders, if formulated
> correctly, cannot compete with the "real" thing?

People with taste.


-- 
Jim Pennino

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

#529340

On 10/30/15 4:33 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> 3D printing, is and always will be, slower and more expnsive than
> conventional manufacturing except for narrow niche applications.

   Wrong again, jimp.  3D printing is more economical in many
   situations, including the ISS.

-- 

sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
community, and physics-related social issues.

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

#529364

Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 10/30/15 4:33 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> 3D printing, is and always will be, slower and more expnsive than
>> conventional manufacturing except for narrow niche applications.
> 
>   Wrong again, jimp.  3D printing is more economical in many
>   situations, including the ISS.

Yeah, sure shit head, making things in a space station is not a niche
applicaton.

How many space stations are there, spamming shit head?
 

-- 
Jim Pennino

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

#529190

On Thursday, October 29, 2015 at 11:48:45 PM UTC-7, 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?

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

(long link)

https://books.google.com/books?id=wMTCAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA7&lpg=PA7&dq=why+do+open+end+wrenches+have+angled+handles&source=bl&ots=VtqMabcF9A&sig=o58deZKi-EsuNt5eKJuc2mSTnwc&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CEkQ6AEwBmoVChMIyK_59vHqyAIVUNtjCh0vogzN#v=onepage&q=why%20do%20open%20end%20wrenches%20have%20angled%20handles&f=false

  Basically, what others have said about tight quarters. Note that the angle may be anything from zero to ninety degrees, but the average angle is fifteen degrees.

> Is one rotation direction preferable to the other?  If so, why?

  No. Apparently you suspect that one way is more prone to slipping off of the nut. Well, why don't you figure it out for yourself?

  Since you don't say whether you've tried it, or even if you have actual wrenches available to you, allow me to suggest a gedankenexperiment. Look at your image. Suppose the end on the left has been slipped snugly over a nut. To tighten the nut the wrench must be rotated clockwise.

  Now assume the wrench has been flipped over before being put on the nut, so that the open end faces nearly directly to the left, and we still need to rotate the wrench clockwise.

  The usual way to induce clockwise rotation is to apply a force to the other end of the wrench perpendicular to the handle (how you're supposed to use a wrench), but assume the force always points down so that the vector component of that force around the bolt changes (how you're not supposed to use a wrench).

  Which position is more slip-prone, and why?


  Mark L. Fergerson

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

#529194

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

 
> Apparently you suspect that one way is more prone to slipping off of the nut.
>

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

I've applied HUGE forces to stubborn nuts and have experienced a lot
of slip offs (with consequent stripping of the nut).

The component of force that does not contribute to the torque will
be different in the two cases and will cause the wrench to accelerate
differently *after* it slips off.

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

#529205

Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 12:41:04 -0700, nuny@bid.nes wrote:
> 
>  
>> Apparently you suspect that one way is more prone to slipping off of the nut.
>>
> 
> No.  It's what happens *after* the wrench slips off the nut.
> 
> I've applied HUGE forces to stubborn nuts and have experienced a lot
> of slip offs (with consequent stripping of the nut).
> 
> The component of force that does not contribute to the torque will
> be different in the two cases and will cause the wrench to accelerate
> differently *after* it slips off.

A proper size wrench can not slip off of a nut unless you either do
something dumb or deform something, most likely the nut.

If you are deforming the nut, you are most likely doing something dumb,
such as lack of preparation.
 

-- 
Jim Pennino

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

#529214

On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 20:21:43 +0000, jimp wrote:

> 
> A proper size wrench can not slip off of a nut unless you either do
> something dumb or deform something, most likely the nut.
> 

When working in tight quarters when ones vision is partially
blocked, which is a common occurrence, and when ones frustration
level is running high, then "dumb" things will commonly happen.

However, your comment is really beside the point.  The discussion
is largely theoretical and concerns what COULD possibly happen
in the two differing cases.

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

#529237

Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 20:21:43 +0000, jimp wrote:
> 
>> 
>> A proper size wrench can not slip off of a nut unless you either do
>> something dumb or deform something, most likely the nut.
>> 
> 
> When working in tight quarters when ones vision is partially
> blocked, which is a common occurrence, and when ones frustration
> level is running high, then "dumb" things will commonly happen.
> 
> However, your comment is really beside the point.  The discussion
> is largely theoretical and concerns what COULD possibly happen
> in the two differing cases.

There is nothing theoretical about it; if the wrench slips, you have
failed and you either bash your knuckles or you don't.

 

-- 
Jim Pennino

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

#529537

On 10/30/2015 08:56 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 12:41:04 -0700, nuny@bid.nes wrote:
>
>
>> Apparently you suspect that one way is more prone to slipping off of the nut.
>>
>
> No.  It's what happens *after* the wrench slips off the nut.
>
> I've applied HUGE forces to stubborn nuts and have experienced a lot
> of slip offs (with consequent stripping of the nut).

In that case you should be using a socket wrench and not an open-end wrench.

>
> The component of force that does not contribute to the torque will
> be different in the two cases and will cause the wrench to accelerate
> differently *after* it slips off.
>

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

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

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web