In article , "PDQ" wrote:
If you mean a miter cut, the length of the miter is

the root of two times the square of the width of the board.

If you mean a bevel cut, the length of the bevel is

the root of two times the square of the thickness of the board.

1 inch wide =3D 1.4142135623730950488016887242097
2 inch wide =3D 2.8284271247461900976033774484194
3 inch wide =3D 4.24264068711928514640506617262909
4 inch wide =3D 5.65685424949238019520675489683879

It appears the bevel/miter is proportional to the width by a factor of =
~1.41.
Or, the width/thickness is always 70.7106781186547524400844362105198% of =
the bevel/miter.
_________________________________________________ ________

Dougie, you said

| You missed the point rather dramatically, I'm afraid. You wrote that =
the width=20
| of the miter was proportional to "the square of the width of the =
board".=20

I don't think so. No where in the preceding, which I include herewith =
for clarity, did I state what you saw.

You *really* do have some reading comprehension problems. Go back and read it
again. Repeat until you realize your error.

Better get your eyes checked. Your geekiness leaves much to be desired. =
You might, however, be in line for the "Conehead" awards.

Nothing the matter with *my* eyes. Read it again, dolt.
_________________________________________________ _______
--=20

PDQ

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt.
And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time?