h a l f b a k e r yIf you can read this you are not following too closely.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
After planks of wood are finish cut in the sawmill they are laser etched with measurement markings. The marks would be lines burned into 1 side of the board in standard measurement (feet/ inches). No numbers would be written, only markings like a ruler from 1' down to 1/4" or 1/8".
Lasers that can
do this work are cheap these days, the automation process would be cheap to build and implement.
Reduces waste by lowering chances of incorrect measurement. Helps workers make more accurate cuts and saves the time of measuring and marking cut lines.
Wont affect strength of wood since the burn line is so shallow. Used on all types of structural framing wood, and possibly some finish wood.
Pre-marked wood panel system
http://www.diynetwo..._3776268_02,00.html
Scroll down for Martco [csea, Apr 02 2008]
(??) working on framing lumber, also
http://www.patentst...7181887-claims.html
[xandram, Apr 02 2008]
[link]
|
| |
A great half-baked idea! + |
|
| |
Possible considerations: calibration, accuracy, metric?, liability/waste for incorrectly marked wood? Finish wood would need better than 1/8" resolution.
What is the after-drying dimensional stability of wood? |
|
| |
What would be even better would be to take thin strips of finish wood, and mark very fine scales, even with numbers on them. These thin strips could then be held up against any other piece of wood, or in fact any material at all, and measurements transferred exactly and only where needed. |
|
| |
[vvv] What is the advantage over a tape measure? Or am I missing the irony? |
|
| |
vvv, that is such a good idea. |
|
| |
[csea] wood does not change shape lenghtwise. |
|
| |
Won't replace a tape measure, but will provide a cheap ready-reckoning solution. [+] |
|
| |
So, did you saw it in half at the right place? |
|
| |
p.s. I thought this was about bed posts |
|
| |
Whereas at my school I cut it twice and it was still too short. |
|
| |
You will have problems with the width of a saw blade chopping out extra and making subsequent marks incorrect. |
|
| |
If you wanted to take, say, an 8' (foot) 2x4 and cut it into 3 2' sections, your first cut would be fine, but subsequent cuts would be short, if made by the lines. |
|
| |
Just more shit to sand off. |
|
| |
Not if you're painting it. |
|
| |
[-] IMO if you need markers, you really shouldn't be building anything with dimensional lumber. They put marker lines on OSB plywood, but because the saw blade can take as much as Œ" out of the wood, I will always measure before I cut. |
|
| |
Sorry to be off topic here, but my curiosity has the upper hand: in the U.S., the primary common framing lumber size is called a "two by four" (in spite of the fact that's not the actual size.) What would be the equivalent (as per usage and idiom, not just a dimensional conversion) in places using the Metric system? |
|
| |
Two by four is 50mm by 100mm (unfinished). Around here it is still called two by four even though it is sold by the metre. Finished (ie planed smooth) two by four is more like 45mm by 95mm. |
|
| |
Thank you. I can sleep better now. Although //two by four...sold by the metre// I may wake up with uncontrollable giggles. |
|
| |
I guess this concept goes with unconventional work site operations. This may prove useful for fast building that requires varying lengths of wood. |
|
| |
You could set up a band saw for your cuts and reduce or eliminate the offset of the traditional circular saw- |
|
| |
I am an American and that means I have to think of ideas where I can use a fancy laser to do the work of a simple ruler and pencil... |
|
| |
I'd be happy if it was just date stamped in fine print ever six inches or so. I use, reuse, and rereuse my wood as far as possible, and I cherish things with some age to them. |
|
| |
{idly imagines post-marked wood} |
|
| |
//What would be the equivalent ...in places using the Metric system?//
"A Royale with Cheese." |
|
| |
A Two by Four (3 1/2" x 1 1/2") sheathed on both sides with 1/4" drywall yeilds a 4" wall.
I think the real reason is that the 1/2" is the shrinkage from the kiln drying process, though. |
|
| |
What's a 2 b' 4? Playing in a polka band! |
|
| |
//No numbers would be written// So to cut 3' 5 1/2" board, I would just eye ball it to the nearest 1/8" or would I count out all 332 tick marks? |
|
| |
//332? "One inches off"// |
|
| |
Try adding it up again [Zimmy], *this time* remember that a foot is not a base-ten measurement. |
|
| |
I didn't even do the addition, I was just thinking about how 1/8" is more than accurate in a lot of construction situations . . . At least it was for the people who built my house. |
|
| |
I found that out when hanging a pot & pan rack from the ceiling of my kitchen. I thought my studfinder didn't pass studfinding school, but, no - the ceiling joists were not even close to true parallel with the walls. |
|
| |
Anyone here mention saw blade width? |
|
| |
//I thought my studfinder didn't pass studfinding school// I bought one of those, but when it failed to go off when I put it in my pants pocket, I knew I'd bought a dud. |
|
| |
Antegrity, someone did, but people don't seem to mind the problem of this idea not being able to work... I think this discussion has turned to nomenclature. |
|
| |