3 ms·
A similar process can also get you a master square, although there are other ways to do it (such as via circle division). You start with a surface plate and th
by jbay808 6y ago
A similar process can also get you a master square, although there are other ways to do it (such as via circle division).
You start with a surface plate and three "pretty good" squares. Then put the squares against each other, and look at the contact pattern, and so on...
Also, IIRC, Whitworth improved the method by introducing scraping to the process, which makes it much faster, but did not invent it; the same fundamental technique was already being done in Maudslay's workshop using lapping when he started working there.
- praptak 6y agoI don' get how this works. How exactly do you put the squares together? Stacking them (even with rotations by mutlplies of pi/2) will not detect the case when every edge has the same kind of deviation from the straight line, right? Putting them edge to edge will assure every edge is straight and the same length (within observation limits) but may get you a rhombus which is not a square. Do you somehow iteratively combine both of the above?
- yetihehe 6y agohttps://etshare.pbworks.com/f/Chapter%2014%20Reference%20Planes.pdf https://etshare.pbworks.com/f/Chapter%2014%20Reference%20Pla... page 5.