I came across a Mitutoyo 187-906 protractor. It appears to be old stock
and unused, but something about it bugs me.

The beam is thicker than the blade, so its not possible to measure 0
degrees by laying the beam and blade in the same direction on a flat
surface. I'm not sure why you would want to do this, but it seemed like
the first test I could run with it.

The blade itself measures 0.6315" thick along the entire length and the
beam section with the protractor is two parallel bars that are 0.636"
thick. When the protractor is set to 0 degrees there is an offset of what
I'd guess to be half that difference or 10 or so mils where the blade
would sit that much higher across a flat surface.

This "error" if it's even one at all would not affect any other reading,
but it just seems odd to me. It this protractor made wrong or is that just
how they work? Can anybody measure theirs just for fun?

Cydrome Leader wrote:
I came across a Mitutoyo 187-906 protractor. It appears to be old stock
and unused, but something about it bugs me.

The beam is thicker than the blade, so its not possible to measure 0
degrees by laying the beam and blade in the same direction on a flat
surface. I'm not sure why you would want to do this, but it seemed like
the first test I could run with it.

The blade itself measures 0.6315" thick along the entire length and the
beam section with the protractor is two parallel bars that are 0.636"
thick. When the protractor is set to 0 degrees there is an offset of what
I'd guess to be half that difference or 10 or so mils where the blade
would sit that much higher across a flat surface.

This "error" if it's even one at all would not affect any other reading,
but it just seems odd to me. It this protractor made wrong or is that just
how they work? Can anybody measure theirs just for fun?

I called mitutoyo today and the support guy didn't have one his hands to
play with to confirm that the vernier protractor can't really measure a 0
degree angle of a flat surface. He said the digital ones can measure this
though. Measuring any angle other than 0 is still possible, so it's not
like the protractor is completely broken.

It still seems a bit weird, and I'm trying to confirm if this is normal or
not before either keeping or returning the thing.

On Mon, 17 Feb 2014 18:27:27 +0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader
wrote:

Cydrome Leader wrote:
I came across a Mitutoyo 187-906 protractor. It appears to be old stock
and unused, but something about it bugs me.

The beam is thicker than the blade, so its not possible to measure 0
degrees by laying the beam and blade in the same direction on a flat
surface. I'm not sure why you would want to do this, but it seemed like
the first test I could run with it.

The blade itself measures 0.6315" thick along the entire length and the
beam section with the protractor is two parallel bars that are 0.636"
thick. When the protractor is set to 0 degrees there is an offset of what
I'd guess to be half that difference or 10 or so mils where the blade
would sit that much higher across a flat surface.

This "error" if it's even one at all would not affect any other reading,
but it just seems odd to me. It this protractor made wrong or is that just
how they work? Can anybody measure theirs just for fun?

I called mitutoyo today and the support guy didn't have one his hands to
play with to confirm that the vernier protractor can't really measure a 0
degree angle of a flat surface. He said the digital ones can measure this
though. Measuring any angle other than 0 is still possible, so it's not
like the protractor is completely broken.

It still seems a bit weird, and I'm trying to confirm if this is normal or
not before either keeping or returning the thing.


It seems odd to me as well that they wouldn't match to make it easy to
verify zero. I took a look at mine, a Brown & Sharpe old enough that
there's no model number on it, and the blade and the body beam are
also mismatched a bit in width. Though the blade fits and locks
properly, it's possible the protractor and blade didn't start out life
together. The blade isn't marked so it could even be another brand. In
other words, not much help here.

--
Ned Simmons

On 2014-02-17, Ned Simmons wrote:
On Mon, 17 Feb 2014 18:27:27 +0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader
wrote:

Cydrome Leader wrote:
I came across a Mitutoyo 187-906 protractor. It appears to be old stock
and unused, but something about it bugs me.

The beam is thicker than the blade, so its not possible to measure 0
degrees by laying the beam and blade in the same direction on a flat
surface. I'm not sure why you would want to do this, but it seemed like
the first test I could run with it.

The blade itself measures 0.6315" thick along the entire length and the
beam section with the protractor is two parallel bars that are 0.636"
thick. When the protractor is set to 0 degrees there is an offset of what
I'd guess to be half that difference or 10 or so mils where the blade
would sit that much higher across a flat surface.

This "error" if it's even one at all would not affect any other reading,
but it just seems odd to me. It this protractor made wrong or is that just
how they work? Can anybody measure theirs just for fun?

[ ... ]

It seems odd to me as well that they wouldn't match to make it easy to
verify zero. I took a look at mine, a Brown & Sharpe old enough that
there's no model number on it, and the blade and the body beam are
also mismatched a bit in width. Though the blade fits and locks
properly, it's possible the protractor and blade didn't start out life
together. The blade isn't marked so it could even be another brand. In
other words, not much help here.

And -- I have an old Starrett with two blades, (long and short),
and they both have the measuring blade retracted a bit between the two
beam blades. It appears to have been standard practice.

*But* -- doesn't yours have the extra arm which mounts on the
main beam at 90 degrees? *That* can slide to contact the measuring
blade at 90 degrees to verify zero.

I can't find the newer one at the moment -- the one with the
satin chrome finish (easier to read) and only one blade.

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Remove oil spill source from e-mail
Email: | (KV4PH) Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

DoN. Nichols wrote:
On 2014-02-17, Ned Simmons wrote:
On Mon, 17 Feb 2014 18:27:27 +0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader
wrote:

Cydrome Leader wrote:
I came across a Mitutoyo 187-906 protractor. It appears to be old stock
and unused, but something about it bugs me.

The beam is thicker than the blade, so its not possible to measure 0
degrees by laying the beam and blade in the same direction on a flat
surface. I'm not sure why you would want to do this, but it seemed like
the first test I could run with it.

The blade itself measures 0.6315" thick along the entire length and the
beam section with the protractor is two parallel bars that are 0.636"
thick. When the protractor is set to 0 degrees there is an offset of what
I'd guess to be half that difference or 10 or so mils where the blade
would sit that much higher across a flat surface.

This "error" if it's even one at all would not affect any other reading,
but it just seems odd to me. It this protractor made wrong or is that just
how they work? Can anybody measure theirs just for fun?

[ ... ]

It seems odd to me as well that they wouldn't match to make it easy to
verify zero. I took a look at mine, a Brown & Sharpe old enough that
there's no model number on it, and the blade and the body beam are
also mismatched a bit in width. Though the blade fits and locks
properly, it's possible the protractor and blade didn't start out life
together. The blade isn't marked so it could even be another brand. In
other words, not much help here.

And -- I have an old Starrett with two blades, (long and short),
and they both have the measuring blade retracted a bit between the two
beam blades. It appears to have been standard practice.

*But* -- doesn't yours have the extra arm which mounts on the
main beam at 90 degrees? *That* can slide to contact the measuring
blade at 90 degrees to verify zero.

I can't find the newer one at the moment -- the one with the
satin chrome finish (easier to read) and only one blade.

Enjoy,
DoN.


It guess it sounds like this is "normal" behavior for these things.

Anybody else have stories of unexpected instrument or tool limitations?

Digital multimeters bug me the most. I keep hitting unpublished
limitations of them, over and over again. It recently got annoying enough
that I had to get an analog Simpson 260 series meter. It may not have the
precision of a DMM, but it doesn't get "confused" either.

On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 08:29:13 +0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader
wrote:

DoN. Nichols wrote:
On 2014-02-17, Ned Simmons wrote:
On Mon, 17 Feb 2014 18:27:27 +0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader
wrote:

Cydrome Leader wrote:
I came across a Mitutoyo 187-906 protractor. It appears to be old stock
and unused, but something about it bugs me.

The beam is thicker than the blade, so its not possible to measure 0
degrees by laying the beam and blade in the same direction on a flat
surface. I'm not sure why you would want to do this, but it seemed like
the first test I could run with it.

The blade itself measures 0.6315" thick along the entire length and the
beam section with the protractor is two parallel bars that are 0.636"
thick. When the protractor is set to 0 degrees there is an offset of what
I'd guess to be half that difference or 10 or so mils where the blade
would sit that much higher across a flat surface.

This "error" if it's even one at all would not affect any other reading,
but it just seems odd to me. It this protractor made wrong or is that just
how they work? Can anybody measure theirs just for fun?

[ ... ]

It seems odd to me as well that they wouldn't match to make it easy to
verify zero. I took a look at mine, a Brown & Sharpe old enough that
there's no model number on it, and the blade and the body beam are
also mismatched a bit in width. Though the blade fits and locks
properly, it's possible the protractor and blade didn't start out life
together. The blade isn't marked so it could even be another brand. In
other words, not much help here.

And -- I have an old Starrett with two blades, (long and short),
and they both have the measuring blade retracted a bit between the two
beam blades. It appears to have been standard practice.

*But* -- doesn't yours have the extra arm which mounts on the
main beam at 90 degrees? *That* can slide to contact the measuring
blade at 90 degrees to verify zero.

I can't find the newer one at the moment -- the one with the
satin chrome finish (easier to read) and only one blade.

Enjoy,
DoN.


It guess it sounds like this is "normal" behavior for these things.

Anybody else have stories of unexpected instrument or tool limitations?

Digital multimeters bug me the most. I keep hitting unpublished
limitations of them, over and over again. It recently got annoying enough
that I had to get an analog Simpson 260 series meter. It may not have the
precision of a DMM, but it doesn't get "confused" either.

Hell..I have at least 5-6 Simpson meters...from the 260 through the
270..including the 261, and the 260-8

I went to Fluke digitals years ago and havent looked back.


--
"You guess the truth hurts?

Really?

"Hurt" aint the word.

For Liberals, the truth is like salt to a slug.
Sunlight to a vampire.
Raid® to a cockroach.
Sheriff Brody to a shark
Bush to a Liberal

The truth doesn't just hurt. It's painful, like a red hot poker shoved
up their ass. Like sliding down a hundred foot razor blade using their
dick as a brake.

They HATE the truth."


---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 08:29:13 +0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader
wrote:



It guess it sounds like this is "normal" behavior for these things.

Anybody else have stories of unexpected instrument or tool limitations?

Digital multimeters bug me the most. I keep hitting unpublished
limitations of them, over and over again. It recently got annoying enough
that I had to get an analog Simpson 260 series meter. It may not have the
precision of a DMM, but it doesn't get "confused" either.


Btw..book mark this site..it may come in handy..

http://www.simpson260.com/downloads/downloads.htm


--
"You guess the truth hurts?

Really?

"Hurt" aint the word.

For Liberals, the truth is like salt to a slug.
Sunlight to a vampire.
Raid® to a cockroach.
Sheriff Brody to a shark
Bush to a Liberal

The truth doesn't just hurt. It's painful, like a red hot poker shoved
up their ass. Like sliding down a hundred foot razor blade using their
dick as a brake.

They HATE the truth."


---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

Gunner Asch wrote:
On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 08:29:13 +0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader
wrote:

DoN. Nichols wrote:
On 2014-02-17, Ned Simmons wrote:
On Mon, 17 Feb 2014 18:27:27 +0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader
wrote:

Cydrome Leader wrote:
I came across a Mitutoyo 187-906 protractor. It appears to be old stock
and unused, but something about it bugs me.

The beam is thicker than the blade, so its not possible to measure 0
degrees by laying the beam and blade in the same direction on a flat
surface. I'm not sure why you would want to do this, but it seemed like
the first test I could run with it.

The blade itself measures 0.6315" thick along the entire length and the
beam section with the protractor is two parallel bars that are 0.636"
thick. When the protractor is set to 0 degrees there is an offset of what
I'd guess to be half that difference or 10 or so mils where the blade
would sit that much higher across a flat surface.

This "error" if it's even one at all would not affect any other reading,
but it just seems odd to me. It this protractor made wrong or is that just
how they work? Can anybody measure theirs just for fun?

[ ... ]

It seems odd to me as well that they wouldn't match to make it easy to
verify zero. I took a look at mine, a Brown & Sharpe old enough that
there's no model number on it, and the blade and the body beam are
also mismatched a bit in width. Though the blade fits and locks
properly, it's possible the protractor and blade didn't start out life
together. The blade isn't marked so it could even be another brand. In
other words, not much help here.

And -- I have an old Starrett with two blades, (long and short),
and they both have the measuring blade retracted a bit between the two
beam blades. It appears to have been standard practice.

*But* -- doesn't yours have the extra arm which mounts on the
main beam at 90 degrees? *That* can slide to contact the measuring
blade at 90 degrees to verify zero.

I can't find the newer one at the moment -- the one with the
satin chrome finish (easier to read) and only one blade.

Enjoy,
DoN.


It guess it sounds like this is "normal" behavior for these things.

Anybody else have stories of unexpected instrument or tool limitations?

Digital multimeters bug me the most. I keep hitting unpublished
limitations of them, over and over again. It recently got annoying enough
that I had to get an analog Simpson 260 series meter. It may not have the
precision of a DMM, but it doesn't get "confused" either.

Hell..I have at least 5-6 Simpson meters...from the 260 through the
270..including the 261, and the 260-8

I went to Fluke digitals years ago and havent looked back.

the zero ohms knob and selection of every range with the test lead jacks
is a real throw back for sure. The fluke is still the one I'd grab first
for most stuff.