Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: rant
Posted by
Peter Reilley
on 2008-04-06 15:13:21 UTC
Could I suggest 508nm? That is a multiple of 2.54 and
would allow for easy imperial to metric conversion.
I wanted to get that in before we were banned!
Pete.
would allow for easy imperial to metric conversion.
I wanted to get that in before we were banned!
Pete.
----- Original Message -----
From: turbulatordude
To: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, April 06, 2008 2:09 PM
Subject: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: rant
I fear this thread will be banned sooner than later, but I think that
using the yellow band has inherent difficulties. one is that the
blueprint would not reflect the color properly,
second, since low presure sodium lamps are between 570 and 589 nm,
there is no good reference standard.
I propose using a blue-green wavelength as it will copy on a copy
machine (yellow will not) and it is near the 500mn or rounded number
that makes measuring easier.
I also propose not going with the longer orange side of the spectrum
as that is getting further away from the problem.
If we use SI and inch, why not just change the mm to be 0.040 inches ?
and be done with it ?
Dave
Discussion Thread
Peter Reilley
2008-04-06 07:02:46 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] rant
stan
2008-04-06 07:51:17 UTC
Ref: rant
Peter Reilley
2008-04-06 08:03:07 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Ref: rant
Tony Jeffree
2008-04-06 09:23:56 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Ref: rant
stan
2008-04-06 09:36:38 UTC
Ref: rant
Jon Elson
2008-04-06 09:47:27 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] rant
stan
2008-04-06 10:27:13 UTC
Ref: rant
Peter Reilley
2008-04-06 10:46:01 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Ref: rant
R.L. Wurdack
2008-04-06 10:51:29 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] rant
stan
2008-04-06 10:52:38 UTC
Alternatives to ballscrews
stan
2008-04-06 11:02:02 UTC
Ref: rant
turbulatordude
2008-04-06 11:09:26 UTC
Re: rant
R.L. Wurdack
2008-04-06 11:33:07 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: rant
stan
2008-04-06 11:34:51 UTC
Ref: rant
stan
2008-04-06 12:05:36 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: rant
Jim Peck Stamping
2008-04-06 12:32:54 UTC
rant
Jim Peck Stamping
2008-04-06 13:00:51 UTC
rant
R.L. Wurdack
2008-04-06 13:34:40 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] rant
Peter Reilley
2008-04-06 15:13:21 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: rant
Steve Blackmore
2008-04-06 16:59:36 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] rant
stan
2008-04-06 17:08:12 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] rant
Matthew Tinker
2008-04-06 17:16:38 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] rant
Jon Elson
2008-04-06 17:35:54 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Ref: rant
stan
2008-04-06 17:44:04 UTC
Ref: rant
wanliker@a...
2008-04-06 17:53:03 UTC
Ref: rant
Jim Register
2008-04-06 17:57:55 UTC
Laser Metrology (was Re: rant)
stan
2008-04-06 18:31:33 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Laser Metrology (was Re: rant)
stan
2008-04-06 18:55:02 UTC
Ref: Laser Metrology
Brian Foley
2008-04-06 20:52:42 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Ref: rant
Jim Peck Stamping
2008-04-07 04:00:27 UTC
rant
caudlet
2008-04-07 06:47:18 UTC
Re: Ref: rant [Off Topic]
Matthew Tinker
2008-04-07 06:49:42 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Ref: rant
Tony Smith
2008-04-07 07:45:14 UTC
RE: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] rant
dickw@n...
2008-04-07 13:16:10 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Ref: Laser Metrology
stan
2008-04-07 14:16:07 UTC
Ref: Laser Metrology
Graham Stabler
2008-04-07 15:28:14 UTC
Re: Ref: Laser Metrology
R.L. Wurdack
2008-04-07 19:40:34 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: Ref: Laser Metrology
vrsculptor
2008-04-07 20:20:05 UTC
Re: Ref: Laser Metrology
Peter Reilley
2008-04-07 20:21:26 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Ref: Laser Metrology