Tom, no a click ruler is different.  I don't want a talking tape 
measure because I have heard they are not reliable and the batteries 
go dead.  Besides, I think I can be more accurate with a rotomatic.

earlier, Tom Hodges, wrote:

>Thanks for the info on the roto ruler. Is the same thing that some people
>call a click ruler? Also, why wouldn't you just use an electronic talking
>tape measure instead of something more complicated like this roto ruler?
>
>On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 9:18 AM, John Schwery 
><<mailto:jschwery%40runbox.com>[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > A roto rule, named a Rotomatic, has a 6.5 inch measuring unit with
> > extension bars of 6, 12 and 18 inches. The measuring unit is a 3/8
> > inch threaded rod , threaded 16 threads to the inch. This rod is
> > marked at each half inch and has a nut like object that spins on the
> > rod. The nub like object is marked on one side for reference. There
> > is also a locking nut to lock the nut like object in place if
> > desired. One can measure to an accuracy of 1/64 of an inch.
> >
> > earlier, Tom Hodges, wrote:
> >
> > >Hi, Tom:
> > >
> > >I must have come in on the back-end of this email; what specifically are
> > you
> > >referring to? Also, what is a roto rule?
> > >
> > >If I want to find the angle of something, I just my Sears 10" electronic
> > >level and tells you the exact angle.
> > >
> > >Thanks,
> > >Tom
> > >
> > >On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 7:31 PM, Tom Fowle
> > ><<mailto:fowle%40ski.org 
> <fowle%2540ski.org>><mailto:fowle%40ski.org>[EMAIL 
> PROTECTED]<fowle%40ski.org>>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > wonder why you couldn't have a device with two blades on a pivot with a
> > > > way
> > > > to fasten the roto rule across the blades to make up a triangle.
> > > > Then "simple" trigonometry could let you adjust the ruler to get a
> > desired
> > > > angle. This would be where you may have calculated the angle you want
> > but
> > > > not have a reference from which to get it.
> > > >
> > > > And, obviously you could measure an existing angle with it too if you
> > > > actually needed the measurement.
> > > >
> > > > Yeah, you can find relatively accessible protractors, but something
> > like
> > > > this
> > > > might be pretty easy to fabricate if we get it
> > > > figgered out correctly, and might be very accurate?
> > > >
> > > > So Dan Rossi, help with the gtrig.
> > > >
> > > > Let's assume most work would need angles less than 90 degrees as you
> > can
> > > > always subtract from 180 and measure the opposite angle.
> > > >
> > > > There must be something wrong with this?
> > > >
> > > > Thinking caps on plese. We could build a prototype
> > > > and document it here at Smith-Kettlewell if nobody beats us to it.
> > > >
> > > > tom
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> > >
> > >No virus found in this incoming message.
> > >Checked by AVG.
> > >Version: 8.0.100 / Virus Database: 270.4.0/1509 - Release Date:
> > >6/19/2008 8:00 AM
> >
> > John
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG.
>Version: 8.0.100 / Virus Database: 270.4.0/1509 - Release Date: 
>6/19/2008 8:00 AM

John


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

Reply via email to