Chesterman Vernier Height Gauge

[Bob SillitoeParticipant @bobsillitoe83708]

I have been lucky enough to have been given a Chesterman Vernier Height Gauge, 60’s or 70’s era I would guess. It is still with its original box and most of the gauge has cleaned up well. Unfortunately there are a few areas of corrosion on the scales, I think I can live with this but just wondering if anyone has any suggestions about making the scales a bit clearer in the corroded areas.

Thanks

Bob

[bernard towersParticipant @bernardtowers37738]

In my opinion that’s a bit more than corroded!

[JasonBModerator @jasonb]

Probably better to use gauge blocks to set it than hope to do anything with that deep pitting.

[cedric 1Participant @cedric]

Apply some black paint and let it dry. Then lightly sand off the paint with wet rub paper and a wooden block. At least the lines will be a little easier to see.

You might have to use a wire wheel in a Dremel to clear paint out of the pits,

[Graham MeekParticipant @grahammeek88282]

The biggest problem with the Rabone and Chesterman height gauge is that the scale starts at 2″. Everything has to be packed up by this amount to make the height gauge useful. Of course this then requires the need to do arithmetic for each dimension on the part being marked out or checked.

Most of the time when I used them in Industry they were used to carry a verdict clock. The stability, quick and fine adjustment made them ideal for this purpose.

You could always add a digital readout to this gauge.

 

Regards

Gray,

 

[old martParticipant @oldmart]

It might be possible to apply some rust remover gel to well degreased parts if Cedrics method does not work.

[Graham Meek]

On Graham Meek Said:

The biggest problem with the Rabone and Chesterman height gauge is that the scale starts at 2″

In a professional environment, if you are measuring at a sub-2″ level, would you not just choose a different tool to use?

It is not very ergonomic having that much column sticking up and fiddling about at the base of it.

In that setting, we do not generally observe that a 4″ micrometer has challenges measuring 3/4″, we just choose a 0-1″ version of the tool.

Considering now the use of the tool in a (modern) amateur workshop, to be very pedantic, the lowest point on the scale is 50mm.

If a person using imperial was in a fix and did not have suitable packing, putting the pointer below the arm would measure 0.900″ with the scale at 2″. Troublesome in a professional setting but perhaps acceptable for an amateur seeking to minimise purchases.

Other height gauges have a dog-leg (cranked) scriber. Making one of them to fit the Chesterman gauge could be an interesting project for an amateur.

Ultimately, I suppose a person’s view of the tool is influenced by whether they see a glass as half full or half empty.

[Bob SillitoeParticipant @bobsillitoe83708]

There is an imperial scale on one side and metric on the other, luckily the corrosion doesn’t line up so with a bit of arithmetic I can always used one scale or the other!

 

How would I add a digital read out to it?

[Graham MeekParticipant @grahammeek88282]

I was merely pointing out the limitations of the Rabone and Chesterman, and a possible re-purposing of the unit.

My tool of choice when marking out was always the “Microball” height gauge, 0-300, 0-600, or if you prefer 0-12″, 0-24″. With the blade of the height gauge built into the gauge. It is possible to take direct measurements off the surface table and micrometer accuracy. They were hard to beat for ease of use.

My twist on this design is shown below,

Or a more up to date version,

This last gauge was built to check perpendicularity as well and is fitted with a two speed drive. (handwheel in & handwheel out)

Regards

Gray,

[Bob Sillitoe]

On Bob Sillitoe Said:

There is an imperial scale on one side and metric on the other, luckily the corrosion doesn’t line up so with a bit of arithmetic I can always used one scale or the other!

 

How would I add a digital read out to it?

Sorry Bob,

Your post came in while I was typing. Digital scales like those fitted to a Digital Callipers can be had in various lengths. A couple of simple brackets to hold the scale could be made to grip the Chesterman vertical scale. The drive to the attachment needs to be kept simple to avoid putting any side load on the Slider

This is how I did my unit.

 

You will probably find the vertical style of scale like I used does not go above 150mm but the larger sizes which are like the conventional digital calliper would work.

Regards

Gray.

[renardiere7Participant @renardiere7]

Beautiful work Gray.  Complete agreement with you on the Microball, I love mine even though it’s imperial. I have put together some bits and pieces to make my own metric version.

The manufacturers of the Microball gauges was A.P.E. based in Horsham but I can find very little about the company on line.

[Howard LewisParticipant @howardlewis46836]

Most Vernier height gauges, used a cranked scriber, so that when showing the minimum 2″ the scriber was resting on the Surface Table.

Merely a matter of mentally deducting 2 from the reading.

The corrosion on this example is quite bad. Maybe, something like citric acid will remove the blackening from the pitting; ,but the pots will remain there. Painting the scales, followed by CAREFUL sanding might leave the graduations still visible.

Unless there is wear, there should be no reason to be concerned about the accuracy.

It may not look pretty, but it will do what you want, which is the main thing, as long as the graduations are still clearly visible.

Howard

[Author]

Posts