Fun fact: The red tip on the end of the probe (in the thumbnail photo) is actually a precious Ruby gem. I was a machinist for several years and worked in the CMM room occasionally where precision parts were measured in x, y, and z axis. They use a Ruby tip on the probe because it can touch objects many thousands of times without wearing out or becoming disfigured or flattened on the end, from repeated long term use. It maintains a perfect surface tip for touching and measuring with precise accuracy for repeated regular use over extended periods of time, as an accurate precise measuring device. Once the probe touches a part in many points, in all axises the computer gets a picture of exactly what the part looks like, in order to maintain continuity of accuracy in the production process of the parts being machined.)
#$600OrWAR ! give us our fvcking money! “every society is just 3 meals away from revolution” March on Washington! surround senators homes 24/7 "the french aristocracy didn't see it coming either!" they have unlimited money for wallstreet and the banksters and wars but only crumbs for us ? time to rise up! DEATH TO TYRANTS ! protest with GUNS so what do you think is gonna happen when 50 million people start to get evicted ? you think they just gonna lay down and die?? lol they are going to burn Washington to the fvcking ground !!! jfj
Got here from the Flatness video, this one is well done as well for a high level introduction. A great follow-up to this one would be a GD&T specific video on the differences between circularity (roundness), cylindricity, run-out, and total run-out. You may find your word choice in this video isn't quite as precise as it needs to be if you dive into that rabbit hole. Well done nonetheless.
around 5:00 they go on about "constant diameter" then go on some long winded explanation about circumscribed circles, instead of just saying to use constant radius. i quit watching the vid after that lol
Roundness is directly proportional to the volume of beer I consume in a given period of time. I am now perfectly round as I have optimized my consumption of beer.
when you try to drill a thin sheet of metal, most of the time the drill hole is a reuleaux triangle. i never realized that this shape has a constant diameter, it all makes sense now since the drill bits are almost a line in their cross section.
@@klazzera Also, use a vise to hold the part, oil for lube, and go slow on the drill press handle.. assuming of course that the roundness of the required hole is important.. ;)
@@genelomas332 yeah also you can use a piece of oiled fabric between the part and the drill, not sure why it works but i saw it on youtube, better for big sheet metal structures when you cant use the press
For drilling thin sheets I always put hardwood underneath and slowly drill through into the wood below The pressure from underneath keeps it flat and the slow steady follow thru keeps things round
I used to have to change tools in a horizontal mill and tram them in to less than 50 millionths TIR , the set the front of the insert to 6-9 microns above the guide pads and about 15 microns below at the back ... I would say this is a very truthful and informative video
Red Pilled mititoyo , and basic production machine shop. When your shoving a one shot boring bar ( no rougher ) that’s 4 fluted , pcd tipped , and 385 mm long down an aluminum part in 3.2 seconds holding plus or minus .015 microns on diameter , shit has to be straight.
Was doing some reading and it seems the ways of manufacturing machines often use moore scraping to get them very flat. The techniques are amazing really when you get to that level where holding a part and heating it will give you measurable deviations.
Although I agree, it isn't really an issue as the conversions are all exact and this video is more about the techniques rather than the units of measure. And I hope they use metric on the ISS.
@@RainBoxRed dude, of course they do.. EVERYONE uses metric, except most of those stubborn buggers on the other side of the Pacific, and half their northern counterparts.. ;)
Good point and the USC is not a true measurement system as it has no references other than to the Metric system. The USC is a trade barrier employed by axis of evil countries like the USA and North Korea.
I'm just a layman, but in the middle of the video I too begun to feel that something is not quite right. At first I couldn't put a finger on what it is, but a little later I realized that it's the words "science" and "inches" used together. It doesn't ruin the video at all (I think the video is very good). It just feels a little off. On the other hand it's easy for me to notice, as I live in a "metric country". I have a great sympathy towards those people who don't learn to use the metric system as children, and for some reason have to learn it when they are older. The metric system is of course easier than the imperial system, but you still have to "grow" to it to feel comfortable using it. I'm glad that I don't have to learn the imperial system - that would be torture. Well, I know that one mile is about 1,6 km, and an inch is about 2,5 cm, but that's about it :-). And of course the actual torture aren't the units themselves, but counting and converting between them.
This was great! I love details of precision machinery, the science of metrology and ideas of quantum mechanics. You combined them all. Very well done. This channel and "Machine Thinking" go very well together.
Great video! I'm glad these are showing up in my recommended. These videos make a great compliment to the Machine Thinking channel. FIM (full indicator movement) is slowly replacing TIR on engineering drawings. I would've liked to see discussion of roundness vs cylindricity vs sphericity. Roundness has a somewhat transcendent quality because it only exists in 2 dimensions and doesn't exist in a 3D world.
The reason why the wheel reduces friction is because when a wheel is rotating, without any force being applied on it, the point of contact is at rest when compared to the ground. This is because the point of contact has two components to its velocity, one the linear motion of the wheel, and two the rotational component, which are equal and opposite to each other, when the wheel is perfect rolling. And since there is no relative motion between the wheel and the ground, there is no friction. Also the frictional force between two surfaces only depends on the normal force between them, and the materials they are made from. It is independent of the surface area of the contact
What you say about friction is a theoretical concept laid down in Coulomb's law of friction. It does not hold up to close scrutiny in practice; the coefficient of friction is NOT constant. Both speed an pressure have an influence. As for no friction between wheel and surface: again, this is an assumption of perfection. The touching surfaces are not infinitesimally hard; they deform on contact. As there is hysteresis between compression and release, the center of force of the contact area is shifted from the point exactly under the axle of the wheel, resulting in a small distance that acts as a lever. Rolling friction thus is sometimes expressed in terms of that "friction radius"; this concept explains why larger wheels roll more lightly, (that, and the fact that they re less disturbed by imperfections in flatness on the surface they roll on.
@@HotelPapa100 That's totally irrelevant to the point in the video about leverage. If your wheel was the same diameter as your axle you'd have a hard time overcoming the friction. With a large wheel on a small axle you have leverage making it much easier to overcome the friction, because there's less distance for the rubbing surfaces to travel against each other, and more force (torque).
@@peetiegonzalez1845 I was replying to Sankar Manoj. That the lever in a wheel is hidden in the ratio outer diameter to bearing diameter is kinda obvious if you analyze the problem a little more in detail.
I just found you in my suggestions after watching a bunch of space videos and I'm glad you did. I love the information and how in-depth you go. Thank you for making all these videos, they are really interesting. You earned a new subscriber.
Runout isn't a measure of roundness the way you have it depicted in the video. If a component is in a fixed-axis rotational setup (as depicted in the video), then it could be perfectly round and still have non-zero runout if it's axis of roundness is not aligned with its axis of rotation. In other words, runout of a part rotating around a fixed axis is a measure of roundness and concentricity, and non-zero runout doesn't tell you whether roundness or concentricity is off. In order for runout to be a measure of roundness only, it has to be measured using a V-block, as depicted earlier in your video.
Interesting timing on this video. I was just sitting here trying to figure out what roundness callout to be measured on a SLA pattern we just built. Not that the video gave me that number but it was still educational. Thank you.
Got a job as a machinist a couple years ago and they made us watch these cringe-ass corporate training videos from the 70s/80s. They ought to be using these videos. 👍
True, but as he mentioned in the video an axis or point of rotation is not always available or useful in metrology, which is why the circumscribed/inscribed circle method is the preferred fundamental principle.
My life is complete, a video that uses "datums" as the plural of "datum" and "data" as singular. I'm just playing, I love this creator, one of the absolute best on YT
at 2:15 it is not related to diameter but to circumference and if you are talking science use metric like every scientific establishment in the world, it is much easier and avoids needing to relate scale to household objects
2:33, this double's the torque at wheel A's axle, not B's. 2:59, the reason a wheel reduces the effective coefficient of friction is NOT because only a small area of the wheel makes contact with the road. It IS because the vertical force on the axle bearing is (essentially -- see below) the same as the force between the wheel and the road. If the wheel is rolling, the sliding friction force acts on a lever length equal to the radius of the axle bearing, whereas if the wheel is sliding, the sliding friction force acts on a lever length equal to the radius of the wheel. The friction is reduced by the ratio of the two radii. Note that the above is for the simple case of same coefficient of sliding friction in the bearing and between the wheel and road, a simple sliding bearing (versus roller or ball bearing), and uses an ideal wheel (as mentioned in the video) that doesn't deform under load, and has zero weight (even real wheels weight much less than the loads on them).
I like your use of terminology with explanation. Many of my colleagues including myself in the manufacturing industry refer to these different types of measurement incorrectly and resulting in confusion regarding this very subject. Thank you
Ah yes, much better to use one forty-millionth the circumference of a random rock in space that isn't even actually spherical; and when we decide we don't like that, we'll use the distance light travels in one 299,792,458ths of 9,192,631,770 periods of radiation of Cesium-133. Far more scientific. :P
@@phiwise_9489 Are you aware that feet are defined in terms of meters, therefore, feet are also defined by the distance light travels in one 299,792,458ths of 9,192,631,770 periods of radiation of Cesium-133.
Makes one wonder how retard unit users measure voltage, current, power, magnetic flow, inductivity, time, frequency, amount of light, bullet impact force and file size...
Machining is done in imperial due to the legacy of the system including the equipment reading in imperial. So most machinists are fluint in both systems.
I just started my career as a CNC machinist. This video was absolutely entertaining and incredibly informative. Thank you for producing such a wonderful video!
I measure this stuff everyday and believe this is a terrific video to explain to the production folks exactly what we are measuring and how that measurement is being made. Thank you.
Not sure why 374 people (at time of typing) chose to give a thumbs down. Must be competitor video content makers, or some incredibly snobbish scientists who where looking to criticize this video. Very well done video,and well thought out. Thank You for your effort, it was quite informative and entertaining. Good editing, good audio, all around good production values. Keep'em coming!! When I was watching this video, I couldn't help but think of all those people who believe in evolution (yes, creation evolves, but that is obviously by design!). If you can't see design in the things around you and call the designers' works "mother nature", then you are being blinded by man's ignorance. I can't see how you could miss the glaring evidence of a creator in the simple things, much less the complex things!!
The lineup consisted simply of six hydrocoptic marzel veins, so fitted to the ambifaciant lunar wane shaft that side fumbling was effectively prevented. It's produced by the modial interaction of the magneto reluctance and capacitive directance. The original machine had a base-plate of pre-formulated amulite surmounted by a malleable logarithmic casing, in such a way that the two spurving bearings were in a direct line with the panometric fan. The main widing was of the normal lotus deltoid type placed in panodermic semi-boloid slots of the stator. Every seventh conductor being connected by a non-reversible tremi pipe to the differential girdle spring on the up end of the gram meter.
As a born metric European myself..., I too was sceptical at first regarding Imperial units, however I humbly discovered that their usefullness lay within the simple mannor with which they convey meaning via the use of anthropomorphicorelativistic symbology, one that can be easily grasped by so much as looking at ones body. Like their relative the Stone which yields a natural sense of weightness, the inch and foot deliver lenght as a human feature, one that immediately reasonates true. Therefrom the terrestrial mile, defined originally as the distance a Roman Legion was expected to march in one day, divided by eight (working hours), reveals not so much an arbitrarium of distance but a successfull accomodation of Nature within the sphere of what is Human - a sort of Naturalization of Man - which is this systems great victory, it reveals the part of Nature that is inextrinsical from the Human Condition. Of course anyone can arbitrarily subdivide or aggregate any lenght by orders of magnitude ten, and do so over and over again which is a simple albeit elegant concept, likewise anyone can measure a Kings foot, all of it being beyond the point entirely. Definitevly the Truthvalue of the metric is not defined by the length chosen, which eventually falls prey to margin of error, and requires conceptual rebirthings time and again, like the one portrayed in the video the "average number of Sillicon atoms contained within an object as a measure of its roundness ", yet within the paradigm of what it is to Measure itself - as part of defining Space unequivocally and unambiguously - from which the successively better aproximations actually arise from, and vanish into. Irrelevant to the true significance of the concept of Unit is the choice of Unit, and its fulcrum in search of Transcendence - the New Mind. Your videos represent some of the most important, fascinating and meaningfull content in the WWW, and for that, I gift you this my staunchest of pundits' defense. Keep it up. Liked, and Subscribed.
TIR0 I came up with this user name some 20 years ago. Over time I found out dozens of meanings of the word which always fit me. And you just unraveled another one, the biggest meaning so far. And it fits me again perfectly since I’m a notorious perfectionist.
This channel is one year old and already has such quality videos. It's like the new Vsauce but without too drastic tangents. Though, it'd be good if you cited sources and additional reading in the description alongside the transcript. Possibly through another URL such as google docs.
Fascinating video. Runout is not necessarily caused by out of roundness. At 8’22” a shaft with a smaller journal is shown. If both cylinders are ‘perfectly round ‘ but their axes are not concentric, non-parallel, or both, runout will be present. In this demonstration, the runout decreases as the indicator was lowered. Either the journal was less round at the shoulder than its tip or its axis was not aligned with the body of the shaft (or the specimen was not held properly in the fixture...).
If two perfectly round spheres are in contact, what is the surface area of the point of contact? It seems like it would be infinitely small. Is that possible? EDIT: I found the answer.apparently the area of contact is a “point” and by definition is infinitely small. So, If two perfect circles (which don’t exist) touch, the area is a point, (which doesn’t exist) So its all a hypothetical scenario that can’t exist and doesn’t exist.
Everything is a spring! Even really hard things! if you had two near-perfect diamond spheres and they touched, the pressure at the point contact would be enormous. It would deform the diamond until the contact area times the pressure on it equalled the force pushing the sphere's together. If the required deformation was beyond the elastic limit of the material it would permanently deform or shatter. This is why you shouldn't bang together your diamond spheres, or your hammers! :-)
Wow, I watched 2 videos on curves,solids of constant width like rouleaux triangles yesterday. I didn't expect to see them again in this video. I just came across it while binge watching other videos on this channel. I wasn't actively looking for anything about rouleaux polygons.
1 Flatness 2 Roundness 3...😁 looking for friction then. I may cancel my date this evening. If Friction is 'as good' I'm about to binge his channel till tomorrow night. Gotta make a Dewar's White Label run now!
This is where statistics come into play to determine your level of confidence in a set of material produced to determine what level of confidence you want vs what you produced to see how many “faulty” parts there are in the whole set
I really like how you start with the basic concept, and definition and step by step go thru different fields using the same or similar concept. For me it's really eye opening when I can compare different scenarios and find the commons or differences. Keep it up!
Your explanation of the least squares circle was fascinating to me because least squares is used all the time my field, computer science, but is normally taught in the context of machine learning, robotics, or computer vision.
Man, this is my new favorite channel. Great work on these videos. Don't listen to the unit of measure trolls. The concepts you explain are of the fundamental nature of things, and valid regardless of units systems.
@ 9:05 I experienced an endorphin kick when seeing the dial gauge shape up to 5 to 1. Having spent the last six months dialing in bicycle disk rotors seeing something go from 5 to 1 on a dial gauge makes happy. ROUNDNESS!
Finding not only a fulcrum that could be strong enough to life the rock in the initial example & a force that could reach the height of such a long fulcrum are major considerations. Love these videos- Roundness, flatness- I didn’t even know ovality was a word! Soundly like an arthritis medication lol. #RockOn #KeepLearning
It's not that wheels have small contact point which means little resistance, it's that the wheel is, get that, rotating. Wheels resistance is it's own thing.
The term according to the associated specifications is circularity which is half of cylindericity. A circle is a two dimensional object which has no thickness. Circularity is only a pictorial view. The concept of fits and clearences is based on the fact that two objects can occupy the same space at the same time.
