Tutorial: make your own raker depth gauge supported by software tool

[hannes69]

My bad. As many here.......I was wrong.

Made your bachelor or master in irony?

 

[PogoInTheWoods]

We're humoring him a bunch? LOL

And aside from the slight slot dimension variances among different chain types, I am actually curious about how much difference there's gonna be between different brand profiles of 3/8's. My guess is it will be negligible in the real world and the tool will accurately represent the intended differences between different chain types of the same pitch with the exception of the much shorter LP stuff which is its own little category anyway.

 

[hannes69]

Please use a good quality rubber band...
Not that cheap german crap!!

Please send me one per airmail. Maybe the one that is holding the rest of your brain cells together. Two birds with one stone (or two flies with one swat as we say in Germany): I have your high quality rubber band for future experiments, and your brain can relax even more than it does already.

 

[HarleyT]

I would think that the overarching goal here would be is to make a tool that would work on all chains of the same pitch, not make one tool for each of the dozens of different brands and models of chain of the same pitch, like the dilemma that the makers of the auto-sharpening machines like the "Franzen".

 

[hannes69]

And this guy would make one of Hannes's tools in a heartbeat if he could ever get past page 1 here.

I think this guy can be considered as my person in a parallel universe, me on the theoretical side, him on the practical one
I think I could learn many things from him and maybe he from me as well.
But: If I should learn from him, first step would be that the given video gets some subtitles
And vice versa, if he should learn from this thread and he should get over page 1, I think he should learn to calm down a little bit
Nice video!

 

[HarleyT]

I think Poge is thinking about life in the real world a tad now.

Anyone here should be able to respond to basic questions,
that is all....

 

[HarleyT]

Hannes has great ideas, just not real practical.

 

[JimM]

I think this guy can be considered as my person in a parallel universe, me on the theoretical side, him on the practical one
I think I could learn many things from him and maybe he from me as well.
But: If I should learn from him, first step would be that the given video gets some subtitles
And vice versa, if he should learn from this thread and he should get over page 1, I think he should learn to calm down a little bit
Nice video!

Nah, not even close. Don’t flatter yourself.

 

[hannes69]

If I had some material even remotely close to the thickness in all these calculations I'd make one..., or a couple.

Hmm. I always collect some metal items that seem suitable for future projects. E.g. metal fittings and mounts from furniture. Maybe parts from old metal shelves. Maybe a cookie tray For a certain stability it should have a thickness > 30 mil I think.

maybe even some of the heavier metal pallet strapping would be strong enough?

Not the ones used here in Europe. You can easily bend a full circle with a radius of 2 inches that is fully reversible with this material

A Dremel or die grinder and a file along with a couple measurements should be able to knock one out in 15 ~ 20 minutes.

Yes.

And I won't be shy about my impressions of the roll your own approach (and effectiveness) vs. the Husky depth gauge tools I use now..., which happen to work fine for me already.

Don´t be shy, yes

 

[hannes69]

Germans are from a different culture, so there are differences in "politeness".

In most of the forums political or cultural discussions can be considered breaking some forum rules. Don´t know the rules here exactly. You already mentioned some other stuff like this regarding your 'leader' if I remember correctly. No need to play on fields like that I think.

 

[PogoInTheWoods]

I would think that the overarching goal here would be is to make a tool that would work on all chains of the same pitch..,

That's what I was getting at in my last post. It should obviously work for all chains with the same pitch ( by its sheer design ) given similar enough tie strap and preset characteristics ..., with the main difference among chains being the intended differences of the actual tooth design and corresponding performance..., which would presumably yield similarly corresponding results from the tool itself. Having numbers from various 3/8's chain brands will fill those holes in the calculator world. Having a tool to use on various chains looks like it may be a faster and more practical way to go about it, though.

And I think I've always leaned toward the practical side of this thread, but there I go gettin' all theoretical. Damn.

 

[hannes69]

And aside from the slight slot dimension variances among different chain types, I am actually curious about how much difference there's gonna be between different brand profiles of 3/8's. My guess is it will be negligible in the real world and the tool will accurately represent the intended differences between different chain types of the same pitch with the exception of the much shorter LP stuff which is its own little category anyway.

I hope as well that the different chains are comparable enough to work with only one tool. Let´s see. As explained earlier, the Husky tool shouldn´t even fit onto a Stihl chain as intended, so I´m not so sure about that at the moment...
EDIT: when speaking of type 1 of course. Type 2 is another case, this shouls hopefully be rather independant on chain type. So in the end the pro guys using all pitches should get away with 5 gauge tools. Maybe 10 when considering 'soft' and 'hard' (or 5 when making 'dual' gauges)

 

[Stihl 041S]

Made your bachelor or master in irony?

Why irony?
I read it wrong and admitted it.

 

[hannes69]

Hannes has great ideas, just not real practical.

By making your own gauge type 2 and using it you can prove this or the opposite.

 

[hannes69]

Why irony?
I read it wrong and admitted it.

Sorry, my fault then. Maybe sometimes I read a little bit too much between the lines....

 

[hannes69]

I would think that the overarching goal here would be is to make a tool that would work on all chains of the same pitch, not make one tool for each of the dozens of different brands and models of chain of the same pitch

Finally some light is shining on HarleyT´s path full of pain

 

[hannes69]

Nah, not even close. Don’t flatter yourself.

Most of the time, the smilies I use can be considered as part of the text.

 

[hannes69]

And I think I've always leaned toward the practical side of this thread, but there I go gettin' all theoretical. Damn.

Theoretically spoken, there should sometimes be some connection between theory and practice

 

[JimM]

Most of the time, the smilies I use can be considered as part of the text.

Sorry. I’m not aware of your formula for that.

 

[PogoInTheWoods]

I use the 3/8 Husky tool on all my pro style 3/8 chain which would obviously include Stihl, Oregon, Carlton, and now Husky, (as I understand they are manufacturing their own chain as of late). The results seem similar in practice among the different types relative to their originally designed performance.
That's my point. They're designed to perform differently from one another. With any luck, the tool will somewhat preserve those differences transparently and simply manage the depth gauge according to the personal tastes or needs of the user regardless of chain manufacturer..., (relatively speaking), and similar to the Husky tool, but perhaps with smoother results across the life of whatever chain it happens to be maintaining.

I also use the Husky .404 tool on my Oregon .404 chain with what I consider to be acceptable results.

There's no argument in theory that the Type 2 tool provides a smoother and more consistent cutting angle over the life a chain. The question now is how forgiving is it across chain brands of the same 'basic' style and pitch? While in theory the Husky gauges provide less than desirable numbers, they have yet to give me cause for alarm regarding how they work on any chain I've thrown at them. I would suggest that alone should be an encouraging sign toward similar (if not better) flexibility among chain types for the Type 2 tool.