| Author |
Message |
|
Joined: March 26, 2002
Posts: 1342
Submissions: 199
Location: Chainmailland, Chainmailia
|
|
|
Joined: March 26, 2002
Posts: 1342
Submissions: 199
Location: Chainmailland, Chainmailia
|
|
|
| Posted on Wed Aug 01, 2012 11:10 am |
Link to Post:  |
|
Who said anything about an article?
btw, I have more. 
|
|
|
Joined: April 02, 2008
Posts: 1844
Submissions: 27
Location: Lincoln, NE
|
|
|
| Posted on Wed Aug 01, 2012 1:23 pm |
Link to Post: |
|
That is truly impressive! 
Once you stop learning, you stop living, so...
Ask questions.
Try new things.
Share what you know.
MailleCode V2.0 T5.3 R4.4 E0.0 Feur MFe.sBr Wg Cwb G.7-5.1 I3.1-11 N20.5 Pj Dcdjt Xa1w2 S08 |
|
|
Joined: March 26, 2002
Posts: 1342
Submissions: 199
Location: Chainmailland, Chainmailia
|
|
|
| Posted on Wed Aug 01, 2012 9:44 pm |
Link to Post: |
|
It's still only a little bit. I'll have more time to present more after I'm finished my entry for the sculpture contest.
|
|
|
Joined: March 26, 2002
Posts: 1342
Submissions: 199
Location: Chainmailland, Chainmailia
|
|
|
| Posted on Tue Jan 15, 2013 11:19 pm |
Link to Post: |
|
I'll be getting back to this soon.
I will eventually be putting it into an article using tables.
I'll probably do a second article: Rings Per Square Inch: Sheet Weaves.
|
|
|
losthelm
 [ Grand Master Speaker ]
Joined: July 25, 2008
Posts: 605
Submissions: 0
|
|
|
| Posted on Wed Jan 16, 2013 5:13 pm |
Link to Post: |
|
Iit looks like you have enough data to simply run the numbers if someone can wright a formula.
I know it gets a little tricky as each weave needs its own formula but it would be faster then an actually trying each weave in every AR and wire size. |
|
|
Joined: July 17, 2009
Posts: 361
Submissions: 15
Location: Palm Springs, CA
|
|
|
| Posted on Wed Jan 16, 2013 9:18 pm |
Link to Post: |
|
Would be great to see this data added to the weave library database along with min/max AR (which is already there). I have some 16 swg data to contribute if I can find it.
|
|
|
Joined: March 26, 2002
Posts: 1342
Submissions: 199
Location: Chainmailland, Chainmailia
|
|
|
| Posted on Wed Jan 16, 2013 11:14 pm |
Link to Post: |
|
I have no interest in making every weave at every size, as that would be ridiculous. I'm simply displaying some sample data I've collected over the years. I also have no interest in writing a formula for this kind of thing. As I said, I will be putting this into an article, and I have more than just what's listed above. This article will only contain data that I've collected personally.
M.A.I.L. welcomes other contributions.
|
|
|
Zlosk
 [ Major Voice ]
Joined: February 15, 2002
Posts: 347
Submissions: 10
|
|
|
| Posted on Thu Jan 17, 2013 6:35 pm |
Link to Post: |
|
CBB, are these all made from the same material? If so, what is the material? I'm asking to see if it's worth performing a springback analysis on your data.
|
|
|
Joined: March 26, 2002
Posts: 1342
Submissions: 199
Location: Chainmailland, Chainmailia
|
|
|
| Posted on Thu Jan 17, 2013 10:55 pm |
Link to Post: |
|
It's CMB.
I'll put the metal type info in the table when I put this in an article. Keep in mind that the listed inner diameters are measured, and that I have a list of over 700 ring types on my website listing metal, alloy, WD, MD, (measured) ID, (actual) AR, and springback % (technically it's ring size increase, as measurements were taken after the rings were cut, and this affects ring diameters).
I've got a Springback article in the queue, awaiting approval. I'm not sure what kind of analysis you wanted to perform, but there's some analysis in there, such as it is.
|
|
|
Kendermaille
[ Ringlet ]
Joined: March 09, 2009
Posts: 7
Submissions: 0
Location: USA
|
|
|
| Posted on Wed Mar 13, 2013 8:04 am |
Link to Post: |
|
I'm not excellent at math, but I *think* I have worked out how to find a value (which at present I'm just calling "RPI Value") that can then be used to determine the rings per inch for a given weave using any size ring.
I haven't tested this extensively, but the one test I attempted held up, so I thought I'd bring it up so that others can poke at it.
Step 1: Make a length of the weave out of any suitable rings. Note the wire diameter and inside diameter of the rings.
For this experiment I used 1.2mm wire with an ID of 6.5mm to weave Full Persian 6in1. (Metric is my preference for keeping track of wire size and ring diameters, though I still prefer inches for actual chain length measurement. What folly.)
Step 2: Determine the amount of length each ring contributes to the length. In this case, it was 16 rings to the inch, which works out to .0625" per ring.
Step 3: Divide by outside diameter of the ring (which is (2*WD)+ID); if you're like me and use metric, make sure to convert the value to inches first). This gives us the RPI Value for the weave.
To calculate the RPI for a different ring size, use this formula: 1/(M*O), where M is the RPI Value and O is the outside diameter of the ring you want to use.
To test this, I used .812mm wire with a 4.5mm ID, which (after converting those values to inches) gives me an RPI of 23.253. Obviously you can't use 23.253 rings in a weave (nor can you use just 23 rings in a length of FP6-1), but if you round up to 24 rings (6 complete weave units), you up with 1.032 inches, which appears to be very near what my 24-ring length of FP6-1 using those rings came out to.
I doubt that this formula is completely accurate, but I think it has potential. Anyone care to test it out on a few more weaves?
EDIT: It's worth mentioning that my ring measurements are not exact; my IDs are based off of my mandrel size and not the true ID of the ring. This shouldn't affect the functionality of the formula, though more precise measurements should be used to determine the RPI Value of each weave. |
|
|
