Here is a list of all the postings Sam Stones has made in our forums. Click on a thread name to jump to the thread.
|Thread: Unusual Escapement|
I just had to turn your pictures around.
PS I haven't figured out how the impulses are transferred.
Nick said ... it shows up better in the cross view one.
That's curious Nick. I might presume an eye imbalance, which is very likely with my faltering right eye.
Spot on, Nick.
Although I tried to stay with the current (unwritten) convention seemingly adopted earlier, i.e., parallel at the top and crossed underneath, I was rather mischievous in withholding their identities.
Not knowing if those with a ‘predilection’ for parallel viewing can see in the blink of an eye, which is which, it suggests to me that crossed viewing has a slight edge.
Did you notice the longitudinal split in the plastic? It’s just under the lower loop of the red clip. Beside some dust, there's also a whisker ... top right on the red clip.
A couple of years ago (22nd May 2020), soon after Raphael’s thread became piggybacked with 3D images, I experimented with views from my skeleton clock CAD files.
For reference, look towards the end of … **LINK**
I noted then that a five-degree rotation of the CAD image seemed to work.
Before my enthusiasm faded, I messed about with a pair of plastic-coated paperclips that I could rotate five degrees. Photographed through a 100mm Macro on my Canon 300D here is the result for parallel and crossed viewing.
It’s quite clear that I could also have skewed the clips themselves to increase the 3D effect. Instead, I gave preference to depth of field.
Clearly, although only one camera is necessary, this (table-top) method is only suitable for static objects. I certainly look forward to your two-camera results Nick. My thoughts about synchronised shutters were more to do with if and when you turn your attention to animated objects.
So I see Nick ... with eyes crossed.
Thanks for your input and others for a most entertaining thread.
Spot on for me too Joseph.
‘Locking in’ (cross-eyed) is almost instantaneous and focusing is not a problem.
I’d say (from my perspective), it comes from viewing those “Spot the difference” cartoons and seeing the differences flicker as (I presume) the brain switches between left and right.
If one frame is above the other, it's necessary to turn the pair through 90 degrees.
That kind of gives the game away.
PS - There is a down side for some. Feeling nauseous.
Edited By Sam Stones on 24/04/2022 22:47:01
Thanks Nick, you've made an old man happy.
By the way, I tried to balance the pairs for colour and contrast in Photoshop (CS3), but got myself hopelessly lost.
"Could try better!" comes to mind.
Sorry if I appeared picky, I didn't mean to be.
I certainly look forward to your next steps with identical cameras and lenses.
Then after that ... dare I say ... synchronised shutters?
Your a man after my own heart.
Back again Nick.
This was the (L to R) switch I did. Hope you don't mind my leaping in here.
A great idea and setup.
Just one problem. As a 'cross-eye' viewer, and unless my eyes deceive me, both pairs are identical.
I switched the lower pair (L to R) in Photoshop and (for me) they looked 3D.
I could be wrong.
|Thread: Imperial v Metric Measures|
Not so much Imperial versus Metric …
My guess is that this (five to ten-minute), well-circulated story of horses and asses might already have appeared in the ME forum …
|Thread: Webb Telescope|
After a ‘once through’ of the video with clever graphics including whirlpools/plugholes and Scott Manley’s description, I can (sort of) get a sense of the dynamics. (Must try harder.)
However, I struggled far less with the slingshot effect used to accelerate space probes on their way out of the solar region.
I’ll more than likely run through it again if it continues to peeve me.
Euler should get more credit. I only knew of him from his ‘Columns or Struts’ formula.
Thanks for your input MichaelG and Mike, and apologies Alan Charleston for dipping into your thread.
As usual, ‘many thanks’ for your superlative guidance Michael.
At first glance, I thought “Whoa!" Too much information, I'll need a clear head to get through this"
I'll let you know how I go.
Good one Mike
That I understand Mike.
What is holding JWST in its own (perpendicular) orbit around L2?
Some sort of whirlpool or plug-hole effect perhaps?
Thanks for your quick response.
The telescope is in an orbit around L2 (Lagrange 2).
The orbit is some 1.46 million km from earth on the side of the earth away from the sun, but not in earth’s shadow.
The axis of the orbit is perpendicular to the earth’s surface.
Having tried but failed to understand what forces keep the scope in orbit (besides occasional adjustments), I’d be pleased if someone could provide a clear explanation or an Internet link.
|Thread: Acoustic Damping/Attenuation|
Maybe old hat Colin, but is thin lead sheet still used to surround the noise source?
|Thread: John Wilding 8 day Weight Driven Wall Clock|
WH - Although one click spring is like another, it will be clear that I'm talking about my John Stevens' skeleton clock and not Mr Wilding's 8-day.
Irrespective, I had several types of brass, e.g. round and flat bar, thin sheet, and for the frames CZ120. However, I'm not sure which brass I used.
At a guess I probably commenced with an off-cut of CZ120 although the drawing shows a thickness of 3/32 inch (2.4 mm). Although not obvious in this photo, the drawing also shows the spring as a lightly tapered section to be curved (bent) later. I now have a feeling that CZ120 was not the grade after all, but a somewhat softer (leaded) grade.
Did I anneal before bending it?
I can't remember.
PS - Get a load of those non-descript great wheel tooth profiles; neither involute or cycloidal but a beginner's choice.
It worked and has done for years.
Edited By Sam Stones on 24/11/2021 02:45:50
Adding to the above, this was a paragraph I wrote when I described building John Stevens' skeleton clock. (refer Model Engineer #4526 - Jan/Feb 2016)
To transfer the power from the barrel to the fusee I had used braided plastic fishing line. The (yellow) fishing line was rated as having a breaking strength of 80 lb. My fairly rough measurements had suggested that the main spring was exerting a tension in the line equivalent to a weight of about 10 kg (22 lb). There was plenty of strength to spare, or so I thought.
I trust this helps.
This happened to the 80lb fishing line I was goaded into using. Only our dog was there at the time it broke, but I imagine from a near full wind, it must have got off with quite a din.
BTW, from my background in plastics, I should have known it could happen (creep before failure).
Here's the result of a three-year stretch -
I replaced it with steel, generously supplied by a local antique clock repairer east of Melbourne.
PS - I wasn't the only one that got the winding direction wrong. It turned out to be how the barrel arbor had been drawn, and my lack of knowledge.
The knots on the ends are a mess, and will stay that way.
Want the latest issue of Model Engineer or Model Engineers' Workshop? Use our magazine locator links to find your nearest stockist!
You can contact us by phone, mail or email about the magazines including becoming a contributor, submitting reader's letters or making queries about articles. You can also get in touch about this website, advertising or other general issues.
Click THIS LINK for full contact details.
For subscription issues please see THIS LINK.