RE: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: Optical mouse for DRO anyone?

Back before 1997 when I was selected for the Olympic squad we used to have
clamps for test firing our .22 pistols, mainly for ammunition checks.

However I could shoot a tighter group off hand than with the pistol clamped.
When you hold it in the hand it can move before the bullet leaves the
barrel, seems when you are balancing a weapon for accuracy that movement is
important.

Similar effects apply to rifles, but that seems to be due to barrel
resonance which you can damp out with weights, but really this wouldn't
apply to a 4 inch barrel that is over an inch thick.

I expect with the pistol's it is due to part of the charge being absorbed in
the pistol motion and slide motion that effected the velocity and accuracy
of the round. It certainly effected how the lead rings form in the barrel,
if you shot one clamped it either had to be totally cleaned, or 50 rounds
thrown through before the off hand accuracy would return.



In those days I used to shoot between 500 and 1500 rounds a night, three
nights a week, it is now banned in the UK. We can only have muzzle loading
pistols, or pistols over two feet long with barrels over 1 foot long, has
taken all the magic away.



All this means, I'm not sure how a CNC mechanism would perform. Certainly
for the full bore guns it may be an advantage, the grip on a classic
revolver is horrible to hold with any precision.



Dr. Mark Vaughan Ph'D. B.Eng. M0VAU

Managing Director

Vaughan Industries Ltd, reg in UK no 2561068

Water Care Technology Ltd, reg in UK no 4129351

Addr Unit3, Sydney House, Blackwater, Truro, Cornwall, TR4 8HH, UK.
Phone/Fax 44 1872 561288

RSGB DRM111(Cornwall)

_____

From: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of John Hansford
Sent: 16 April 2007 21:47
To: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: Optical mouse for DRO anyone?



Has anyone considered cnc'ing a 357 or 44 Colt. This *could*
make mice-shooting accurate to .001.

;)
John

--- In CAD_CAM_EDM_ <mailto:CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO%40yahoogroups.com>
DRO@yahoogroups.com, "Mark Vaughan" <mark@...> wrote:

>
> I take my old mice out the range and shoot at them with my 44 Colt

Walker,

> clouds of smoke and plastic everywhere when you eventually hit it.
>
> They don't like the 357 either.
>
> Much more satisfying.
>
>
>
> Dr. Mark Vaughan Ph'D. B.Eng. M0VAU
>
> Managing Director
>
> Vaughan Industries Ltd, reg in UK no 2561068
>
> Water Care Technology Ltd, reg in UK no 4129351
>
> Addr Unit3, Sydney House, Blackwater, Truro, Cornwall, TR4 8HH, UK.
> Phone/Fax 44 1872 561288
>
> RSGB DRM111(Cornwall)
>
> _____
>
> From: CAD_CAM_EDM_ <mailto:CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO%40yahoogroups.com>

DRO@yahoogroups.com

> [mailto:CAD_CAM_EDM_ <mailto:CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO%40yahoogroups.com>

DRO@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Tony Smith

> Sent: 16 April 2007 13:23
> To: CAD_CAM_EDM_ <mailto:CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO%40yahoogroups.com>

DRO@yahoogroups.com

> Subject: RE: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Optical mouse for DRO anyone?
>
>
>
> > Has anyone had success using an optical mouse or it's
> > components to make a DRO or an accurately reading scale? If
> > so, can you share any tips, links, or other info?
> >
> > TIA, Chris
>
> Do you want the good news or the bad news? Well, it's mostly bad news.
>
> I do recall people dismantling the old ball mice (usually serial), and
> hacking up something to turn the wheels in those. This fact that

everyone

> isn't hacking up their old mice, coupled by the fact that digital

calipers

> are dirt cheap probably means their success rate isn't high, or it's

just

> not worth the effort.
>
> Have a rummage around for Honeywell mice; instead of a ball, they

had two

> wheels on the bottom of the mouse, directly driving the slotted wheels
> inside. Worked well, no ball de-junking sessions, bit of flop

commercially.

> I think they figured it out just as optical mice came out.
>
> The resolution of most mice sucks. A typical mouse is supposed to be

1/100"

> - 1/400" resolution, and 'gamer' mice have higher resolution, up to

1/4000".

> That doesn't sound too bad, except I think there's a bit of

marketing plus

> 'that number doesn't mean what you think' in there. The newer mice take
> more readings per second, but that doesn't mean they can detect a

movement

> as small as 1/4000". It just means that when you do move the mouse

in order

> to shoot something, it reacts faster. Then again, who knows?
>
> The real downside is that mice are USB these days, and good luck

building an

> interface for that. You're stuck with having to plug your mouse into

a PC

> (although you might be happy with that). There are serial port optical
> mice.
>
> On top of that you get to deal with everyones favorite, dirt.
>
> Tony
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]