Rulers - or rules.

[Harbo]

This one belonged to my father who was a Compositor:

I worked in a drawing office for a time - I've lots of scale rules both Imperial and metric with various scales
Eg: ¼, ½, ¾, 1 ¾, 3", 1:25, 1:12, 1:480, 1:500, 1:1250, 1:2500 and dozens more!

Rod

 

[AndyT]

If anyone needs a little nudge towards a whole world of hundreds of different and collectable rules for many trades, I recommend the standard work "The Rule Book" by Jane and Mark Rees http://www.reestools.co.uk/books.html.
It is not a cheap book but although I don't have a copy I can confirm that it is VERY comprehensive.

 

[DiscoStu]

I use 2 x 12" steel rules all the time. One has a stop attached to it which I find really useful. It cost about £6 in Axminster and was one of the best purchases I've made. Other than that I have a 5m Stanley tape. I have a woodworking square but almost exclusively use an engineers square.

 

[Tony Zaffuto]

12' Stanley tape and a six foot Lufkin folding rule. Have a number of other measuring "items" but I aways go back to the two noted.

I've gotten into the habit (a few years back) of using a "story stick" with measurements marked out at the beginning of a project. I gage piece against piece whenever I can.

 

[iNewbie]

Wish I could find a steel ruler with mm on both sides (well all four edges if you see what I mean) and just mm, they all seem to have half mm normally for the first 100mm which just give me a headache

The nearest to that I've seen is Starrets - but it does have 1/2mm marks.

.............This one here

 

[Jacob]

..
I've gotten into the habit (a few years back) of using a "story stick" with measurements marked out at the beginning of a project. I gage piece against piece whenever I can.

Strictly speaking a "storey stick" (various names) is a builders tool giving the heights of items on one storey of a building
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Storey_pole
so what you probably mean is a "rod" which can be anything from a few marks on a board to a full size drawing of all details. Same principle as a storey stick.
Should be more than a "habit" - it's more or less essential for any project; all measurements/marks taken from it direct, without the intervention of a ruler/tape etc.
Not sure about gauging "piece against piece" - if it's at all complicated or repetitive this could result in accumulated errors (like chinese whispers). Instead it's normal practice to gauge each piece against the rod (or story stick if you are a builder) - errors are distributed evenly and you are continually referring back to base, i.e. the rod.
Once you have your rod drawn out in theory you don't need a tape or a ruler or any calculations. In fact you can design and work accurately and precisely without measurements/calculations at all - if you have to. Dividers are handy!

PS I'm about to do a storey stick for a staircase. A long rod (in my case a length of architrave is the only thing I've got long enough) stood vertically on the floor to the floor level above and marked accordingly. This mark is then checked/corrected for any unevenness on the ground floor as the position of the last riser isn't vertically above the first one. This is then divided into equal risers (using dividers traditionally, but a long tape and a calculator helps!) and off you go!

 

[Cheshirechappie]

No argument from me on the utility of rods (or story sticks, if you happen to be in North America).

If you're replacing or restoring an existing feature, you can set out the rod directly from existing features; no rules or tapes needed. However, for new work, when the only information available may be the architect's or furniture designer's drawings, how do you set out the rod without using some sort of standard measuring device such as a tape or rule?

 

[Jacob]

No argument from me on the utility of rods (or story sticks, if you happen to be in North America).

If you're replacing or restoring an existing feature, you can set out the rod directly from existing features; no rules or tapes needed. However, for new work, when the only information available may be the architect's or furniture designer's drawings, how do you set out the rod without using some sort of standard measuring device such as a tape or rule?

if the information you have is in the form of measurements then that's what you have to use. But if you had full size drawings you could work directly from them. Not that you have to it's just useful thing to be able to do and somewhat neglected nowadays.
A big woodwork manufacturer drawing office would pass work down to the shop floor as rods, or a foreman would convert the drawings into rods.
Or on a small scale - if you are the designer/maker than drawing up the rod is the last step in the design process.

 

[Cheshirechappie]

Quite.

Just a note to the wise - it's not good practice to scale directly from a drawing. Paper has a nasty habit of stretching and crinkling. Given the tolerances most woodworkers need to work to, it's probably not so critical for most jobs, but it's not good practice. It's most emphatically a no-no in the engineering world.

The materials from which rules are made - both boxwood and steel - are selected to be relatively unaffected by changes in atmospheric temperature or humidity (boxwood is pretty stable longways of the grain). Quality steel rules are marked 'standard at 20C' (or whatever other temperature), though the discrepancy at other temperatures will be insignificant for woodwork purposes. Either will be more accurate than scaling from a drawing could be.

 

[Jacob]

Quite.

Just a note to the wise - it's not good practice to scale directly from a drawing. Paper has a nasty habit of stretching and crinkling. Given the tolerances most woodworkers need to work to, it's probably not so critical for most jobs, but it's not good practice. It's most emphatically a no-no in the engineering world.

The materials from which rules are made - both boxwood and steel - are selected to be relatively unaffected by changes in atmospheric temperature or humidity (boxwood is pretty stable longways of the grain). Quality steel rules are marked 'standard at 20C' (or whatever other temperature), though the discrepancy at other temperatures will be insignificant for woodwork purposes. Either will be more accurate than scaling from a drawing could be.

Yes - and no, especially not if the measurements are wrong to start with.
Taking marks directly from a drawing by laying on components and marking off with a pencil (and a set square) is basically how you use a rod so it has to be a durable bit of paper or better still a board.
It is (or was) common in engineering too - steel yards, boat builders, sail makers and many others work up full size drawings on the floor with chalk lines etc and work from them. It eliminates error - it it fits on the rod, or the sailmakers loft floor etc. it'll fit in reality, whereas written down measurements are very prone to error. More complicated engineering would work up three dimensional rods i.e. full size models to work with.

 

[Cheshirechappie]

It is (or was) common in engineering too - steel yards, boat builders, sail makers and many others work up full size drawings on the floor with chalk lines etc and work from them. It eliminates error - it it fits on the rod, or the sailmakers loft floor etc. it'll fit in reality, whereas written down measurements are very prone to error. More complicated engineering would work up three dimensional rods i.e. full size models to work with.

Taking measurements direct from drawings (either paper prints or the draughting film or linen originals) is an engineering no-no. Trust me Jacob - I earned my living in engineering drawing offices for most of my working life, so I know of what I speak. Every drawing that left our offices (and there were thousands of them!) was endorsed 'If in doubt ask: do not scale'.

It used to be the practice in the chemical and petro-chem industries to build a scale plant model, usually about 1:20 or thereabouts, as drawings left the D.O. but before construction started. That made sure that everything fitted as it should, and confirmed pipe routes, maintenance access and such like. It was also handy for plant operators and plant engineers to see what they were dealing with. I've never come across a full size model. Nowadays, the models are constructed electronically; a development that put a lot of modelmakers out of work. In many ways, the electronic models are more versatile; some can be linked to stress analysis software, bills of materials can be generated automatically and other such conveniences.

I'm no expert on shipwright work, but my understanding is that the drawing office produced shear plans to scale, and the lofters set them out full size to produce the templates from which parts were marked out. Similar methods were used in steel shipbuilding until CAD/CAM superceded them, though I gather some templates are still lofted to check plate profiles during bending operations.

Still - we've veered rather far from woodwork and rulers. Maybe that's enough digression, eh?

 

[Jacob]

The rod is the drawing you take your marks from, you don't actually measure (not every time at least). Sometimes were on paper too - shop fitters would work from a drawing rolled out on to the floor and so on.
Full scale models - I didn't know this until I visited the (spectacular) Rolls Royce museum. One prime exhibit was a full size wooden mock-up of a ships engine. It was needed to facilitate the design of all the bits and bobs around it - pipes, valves etc and to see that it (plus accessories, ancillaries) could be fitted in the space in the ship itself. A common procedure apparently.

PS at the other end of the scale - anybody making model aircraft with balsa wood and tissue would almost certainly use a paper "rod" on which components are laid for cutting and assembly. Having to measure for each component would be impossible.
There's a lot of it about, with many variations. Dress makers patterns? It's all "engineering" one way or another, with a surprising amount of overlap in techniques.

 

[Jacob]

..... how do you set out the rod without using some sort of standard measuring device such as a tape or rule?

I forgot to answer this.
As an example say you wanted a CD box. You start with your bit of board for the rod (I use MFC shelf lengths from B&Q). You lay on it your CD case and mark it's width etc. then add clearances, then thickness of materials (might be direct from PAR samples if that's what you are using) then lid joint - and so on. If you have any hardware you can lay that on the rod too and draw marks as necessary. You can take off settings for marking gauges, etc. Other marks lifted by laying on components, or with dividers. Spaces (e.g. for DTs) divided with dividers. You could do the whole thing from scratch without touching a ruler, and it's quite a practical approach.

 

[bugbear]

Quite.

Just a note to the wise - it's not good practice to scale directly from a drawing. Paper has a nasty habit of stretching and crinkling. Given the tolerances most woodworkers need to work to, it's probably not so critical for most jobs, but it's not good practice. It's most emphatically a no-no in the engineering world.

The materials from which rules are made - both boxwood and steel - are selected to be relatively unaffected by changes in atmospheric temperature or humidity (boxwood is pretty stable longways of the grain). Quality steel rules are marked 'standard at 20C' (or whatever other temperature), though the discrepancy at other temperatures will be insignificant for woodwork purposes. Either will be more accurate than scaling from a drawing could be.

I think the errors that a full scale drawing avoids are conceptual, more than metrological. I agree entirely your point on a plan not being up to close tolerances, but working direct from a plan might save transferring a measurement for the WRONG part of the project. Getting super close to 4.6571 inches is all well and good, but not when it's the size of a part other than the one you're meant to working on.

So whilst working to measurement avoids one kind of error, full scale plans avoid another. It's then a matter of which kind of error matters most.

BugBear

 

[Jacob]

....working direct from a plan might save transferring a measurement for the WRONG part of the project. .....

Or just getting the measurement wrong in translation. And you'd have to dimension every detail correctly or risk mistakes in calculations. Lists of measurements on the backs of envelopes! The rod avoids nearly all of that.

 

[Peter Sefton]

I have 6"/150mm 12"/300mm 24"600mm and 36"1000mm rules that I use for marking out, all Fisher ones very nice matt Stainless Steel.
Tapes are o/k for rough work but every thing else I use rules.

Pete

All ways wanted a 2000mm one but they are expensive.

If the temptation for the 2M rule becomes to strong Pete give me a ring and I will see what I can do.

Mmm tempting, any idea how much?

One thing I like about the Fisher rules is they are matt and you can mark the rule with a pencil, which is good for dyslexics like me who can read things wrong with out knowing.

Pete

I will check out the price Pete and report back, I know I made a decision not to stock the 2M as it's a fairly rear beast! The satin chrome finish is one of the things I like about them too. I also suffer from dyslexia and forgetfulness, not a medical condition but marking rules with the pencil is one way around it!

Cheers Peter

 

[Tony Zaffuto]

Well, I suppose there are many here with far more experience than I and I remain open to suggestions. Whether I follow suggestions is up to me and my understanding of them.

Several clarifications: my story stick or whatever it may be called, simply shows critical measurements such as leg lengths, case widths, drawer widths, etc. At the beginning of a project, I'll layout these on a stick, use it for layout on boards for best yields before cutting. As far as gaging, for example, if I'm cutting four legs, I cut the first, mark it as master and mark out the other three from it.

Again, I'm a ham & egger amateur, not trained or even having attended classes of any sort. What I posted above is what works for me and may not make a whole lot of sense to some here, but that's quite OK, I don't take offense and am here to hear other methods and appreciate the group as a whole.

 

[Jacob]

What you are doing sounds fine Tony.
What I'm on about is the next stage where you take the story stick idea and do the full "rod" process. For instance you would then mark up all your four legs from the rod before you cut anything, which sounds like a trivial detail but becomes really useful with any level of complexity - and then becomes routine even for simple projects. Like just cutting a number of pieces to the same length - taking the marks from the same rod becomes easier than measuring and marking each one, and reduces mistakes

 

[DennisCA]

For folding boxwood rules, the classic hultafors one is where I'd go, though their yellow plastic version is said to be much better, but not traditional.

A Talmeter might also be of interest, you can measure and transfer markings without having to know the exact size.

 

[Jacob]

Having chuntered on about not using them I forgot to say what rulers I do use:- various tapes metric/imperial, Rabone combi square scale, cheapo Draper vernier callipers. That's it really.
That precise and accurate measuring devices will lead to precise and accurate finished work, can be wishful thinking. It's more about how you do it, rather than what kit you use - in fact you can be precise and accurate without measuring anything at all.