A Novel Idea For Those That Can't Afford A Sensitive Level

[matthew_g]

As the title says, A very simple way to make your own precision machine level....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVa8TNarEUA

[.RC.]

That is not a very sensitive level... Better then nothing I guess...

Model Engineers Workshop did a article on making your own level vials.. It had a jig made up to grind the inside of the tube...

[matthew_g]

I realise that it's not as good as my Starrett, But I thought there are a lot of people on this forum that couldn't justify spending $300.00 odd dollars.
I appreciate what you are saying though Richard.

With a of diddling you could get t pretty good I would assume though, which would be good enough for lot of people.

I just thought it was worth putting up as I had no seen I done in this way before.

Thank for your input as I will have to go back through my library f MEW and read the aticle as I don't remember reading it.
Should be an interesting read and possible project.

Matt

[rat52]

many yrs ago before cheap 2m levels were avaliable I made one for myself using a length of alu sliding door stile and the bubbles came from cheep plastic line levels.
I still use them and the last one I made 5yrs ago cost less than $25

[Machtool]

I realise that it's not as good as my Starrett, But I thought there are a lot of people on this forum that couldn't justify spending $300.00 odd dollars. $20 bucks at Bunning's would get you something with more accuracy than that.

How long do we figure that was? It was a pretty small machine he had it sitting on. I'm guessing 6 inches. He put a 6 thou shim under one end, and it only moved two divisions.

And after all that, he didn't spin it 180 degrees end for end, to actually establish a level.

Regards Phil.

[Ueee]

It looks to be only about .003"/foot, (maybe even more?) as RC says not exactly precision. The cheap asian levels from CTC are not exactly expensive if you want a fairly sensitive level.
If you want to make your own there was a place i think Joe got some vials from, very sensitive and not too expensive. I can't find the link (it has been posted before) maybe Joe can provide it?

Cheers,
Ew

[.RC.]

I realise that it's not as good as my Starrett, But I thought there are a lot of people on this forum that couldn't justify spending $300.00 odd dollars.
I appreciate what you are saying though Richard.



I realise that, but why go to all that trouble for something not very useful...

The 0.02mm/m vials here are 20UK pounds http://www.leveldevelopments.com/products/vials/ground-vials/

[Machtool]

If you want to make your own there was a place i think Joe got some vials from, very sensitive and not too expensive.

It could be either be Geier & Bluhm. or W.A Moyer.

[kwijibo99]

Did I miss something or are we being a bit over critical here?
I think what this bloke has done is pretty good for a home made job and deserves credit where it's due.
As presented he has what looks like an 8” base with ½” divisions on the vial and gets three divisions for a .006” feeler gauge, that’s .002” per division over 8”.
If you wanted a bit more precision you could easily make the divisions 1/4” that’s 0.001” per division and 0.0005” per division if you make them 1/8”, neither of which would be that difficult.
Matthew even said this isn’t as good as a super flash store (or ebay) bought one so what’s the point of getting so excited?
It’s a lot better than one you don’t have at all and I think I’d back it any day against a Bunnies level.
Take a chill pill fellas.
On a side note, does the bloke in the video look like Jarrod from Storage Wars?
Cheers,
Greg.

[RayG]

Did I miss something or are we being a bit over critical here?

Nope, it's just that this is a pretty tough and savvy crowd to try and impress with a precision level, every second man and his dog around here has Wyler Frame Levels.. :D

And yes, he does look a bit like that guy...

Ray

[Stustoys]

I would be interested in just how good you could make this.
It was a pretty rough adjustment on the video.
If we assume tube is bent(which it almost certainly will be at the level we are talking about).
Work out which way it is bent.
Put the bend down in the middle.
Then bend away.

Though I am a little worried about needing to wear safety glasses while using my level.:D

Stuart

p.s. I should add I know what its like lvling a plate to the sort of level we are talking about with 1mm pitch threads 400mm or so apart. I assume the tube will need to be bent about the same amount.

[cba_melbourne]

This type of level does not have a fixed sensitivity calibrated in mm/m per division like we are used to with curved vials.

This type of level is "adjustable sensitivity". Without any preload from the two adjuster screws left and right the glass tube is straight and has in theory an infinite sensitivity (it behaves digital with the bubble going either to the left or right end, with no stable middle position). Only when applying a preload will the glass tube bend around its wooden center support, it begins working like vial. The more one bends the glass tube the less sensitive it gets.

It can certainly be made to work in a pinch. But I can see several problems with it:
- the lines cannot be calibrated. Well, one can calibrate for a single use session, but it will not stay calibrated for long.
- the sensitivity adjustment and the zero setting adjusment are intertwined. One touches the one setting, and the other changes too. This downside could be avoided though by a slightly changed design. The way it is now, it is probably very fiddly to set up.
- the glass tube is probably not ground inside. Most glass tubes are drawn, meaning there are minute waviness and iperfections in the glass surface. This means that even if the glass tube was only very slightly preloadad for an in theory very fine sensitivity, the air bubble on the inside will "stick" to the waves and imperfections of the glass and move in jerks instead of providing a sensitive, smooth and repeatable indication. Some experimentation with different glass sources may be necessary. Glass tubes used for NMR could probably the most promising, as nthese are manufactured to be very straight and uniform (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NMR_tube).
- the massive Aluminium block frame is probably not the best choice regarding thermal expansion...

[th62]

As Mathew G said, not everybody can justify spending $300 for a level, or even $160 for Hafco's cheapest.

I bought this one for $67:
http://www.aliexpress.com/item/150mm-0-02mm-per-1000mm-Master-Precision-Level/1864203835.html. The 200mm level is roughly the same price and if you have a close look it's identical to Hafcos, except for the MX sticker.

Regardless of how useful it is, this guy is using his noggin. I'd bet his lathe is probably truer than most people's lathes - how many people with lathes actually true them after installation?

[DaveTTC]

Did I miss something or are we being a bit over critical here?
I think what this bloke has done is pretty good for a home made job and deserves credit where it's due.
As presented he has what looks like an 8” base with ½” divisions on the vial and gets three divisions for a .006” feeler gauge, that’s .002” per division over 8”.
If you wanted a bit more precision you could easily make the divisions 1/4” that’s 0.001” per division and 0.0005” per division if you make them 1/8”, neither of which would be that difficult.
Matthew even said this isn’t as good as a super flash store (or ebay) bought one so what’s the point of getting so excited?
It’s a lot better than one you don’t have at all and I think I’d back it any day against a Bunnies level.
Take a chill pill fellas.
On a side note, does the bloke in the video look like Jarrod from Storage Wars?
Cheers,
Greg.
I agree.

As Mathew G said, not everybody can justify spending $300 for a level, or even $160 for Hafco's cheapest.

I bought this one for $67:
http://www.aliexpress.com/item/150mm-0-02mm-per-1000mm-Master-Precision-Level/1864203835.html. The 200mm level is roughly the same price and if you have a close look it's identical to Hafcos, except for the MX sticker.

Regardless of how useful it is, this guy is using his noggin. I'd bet his lathe is probably truer than most people's lathes - how many people with lathes actually true them after installation?
I like when someone thinks out an idea and comes up with a solution. It might not always be the best one and I read some very valid points in some of the other comments. I am not even going to pretend I know what I am talking about here cause I'm only a wood worker but I liked it for the above reasons

[Machtool]

I'd bet his lathe is probably truer than most people's lathes - how many people with lathes actually true them after installation?

In you tube Guy's defence, he only named the video of it a machinist's level. But then he went on to verbally call it a "high sensitive level" Machinist's levels typically top out at 5 thou per foot. Starrett, Lufkin. B & S have all done them for a million years.

I'm blaming Matthew :D:D, it was he that called it precision.

But you blokes are kidding yourselve's. How can it be a level, if you never knew enough to spin it end to end 180 degree's? A brick layer knows that.

I'll tell you why, he didn't even know better than to let the wood fulcrum float away to the left hand side, so it wasn't even in the center. That gizmo was never going to pass a spin test. It just wont repeat, if the fulcrum wasn't on centre. I thought he could have banged in a selftapper to stop the fulcrum floating.

Lets not forget the use of liquid butane. Temperature / pressure / evaporation features of that is a wonderfull to maintain a constant bubble lenght.

Did I not hear him say it leaks? It was empty when he started. Good luck to you smokers with butane. (Which I note he is, imediately before he fills it). And a bubble that gets longer, as it leaks, thats a hugely wonderful feature. For those of you that can level / shim / adjust a lathe in 4 minutes. I guess thats not a problem. Could you possibly use a worse gas. Glycol / Glyserene has worked for the past two centuries.

It’s a lot better than one you don’t have at all and I think I’d back it any day against a Bunnies level..
Next time your in there, take a look at the US made Empire blue levels.. 0.0005 per inch, so 6 thou per foot. Its only a thou away from a Starrett's machinists level.

I also think your math was a touch on the underdog thing. Thats a tiny 3 in one machine. Would you have us believe the cross slide in 8 inches wide? Then he goes on at 4:21 to tell us about "before the fire kicks in. Its aluminium, ding ding ding???? and probably been machined on the 3 in One. Would you like to tell me thats flat? With a fast expanding gas. With a fulcrum that isn't in centre, or knowing enough to spin it end to end to test.

Thats the problem with U-tube. Any clown that has a camera is now a guru, no matter how little knowedge they know.
Case in Point: Here's a wood wacker.


I agree.

I like when someone thinks out an idea and comes up with a solution. It might not always be the best one and I read some very valid points in some of the other comments. I am not even going to pretend I know what I am talking about here cause I'm only a wood worker but I liked it for the above reasons
"But I liked it for the above reasons" Cant work wood to save my life, but humour me. If I come up with a gizmo, say 45deg a corner, and I could get the corner with in 1/8 inch of joining up. That would be O/K wouldn't it.

Any way you look at it, this is a gizmo, with its Andy Warhol 15 minutes of fame. Aluminium and Butane. Good luck with that solution. You blokes are just waisting your time with this Mickey Mouse solution's.

[.RC.]

The issues in MEW that deal with vials are 33 and 77..

77 deals with lapping of a vial on a home built rig and testing the vial...

I do not think the person that made the video has much of an idea on levels outside your carpenters level and I fear he is trivialising the subject..

I will explain why...

There has probably been hundreds of thousands of bench lathes all used in the home shops that have never seen a level yet still turned out masterpiece work.. The design of these machines was such that a level is not needed.... Reading the Hercus Text book of turning reveals why... It says there to align the lathe headstock, put a piece of metal in the chuck turn two small sections so far apart, it they are different diameters you jack up or lower one side at the tailstock end... And from my experience it works... I had my 260 levelled according to my machinist level, but it turned a taper... Did the Hercus trick (no doubt borrowed from South Bend) and it was all good..

Bigger, longer machines you do need a level, as the method described by Hercus does not work on them.. Some machines you do not need a level... My 10EE you do not, nor the cylindrical grinder I have... Both sit on three pads.. I do level them for other reasons though..

So why was this video not very helpful?

Because it does not mention why you level, nor what sensitivity you need for levelling.. It does not mention the importance of heat in levelling, nor does it mention the base of the level (how flat it has to be). As I said he has tried to simplify a subject that is while not complicated, it is more in depth...

The articles in MEW especially the one in issue 77 are worth reading as it goes into why, quite well... Not about actual use of the level, but why the author went to the trouble of grinding his vials.. As the article on MEW 77 says... If you level your milling machine or shaper so it is to a high standard... Setting up work parallel can be as simple as using the level and adjusting the work to suit... Or if you need it tapered by a smidgen, you could use the vial graduations...

I do have that article in pdf somewhere on my computer when I scanned it into my computer if anyone is interested.... I just have to try and find it which will not be easy...

[th62]

I think the point has been missed here: it may not be the best level around and certainly not the most accurate. a bit more attention to suitable materials, along with an understanding of how to use the level, could very well result in a useable device. I'm sure a lot of first attempts left a little to be desired, some probably never worked at all. The attempt is the important part - without that some of the things we now take for granted would never have eventuated!

[.RC.]

MEW issue 36 also has an article on making vials by bending glass at 10 arc seconds per 1mm bubble movement... It is surprisingly more complicated then one would think and did not go into the ID accuracy of the glass...



I think the point has been missed here:

I do not think so.... It is like trying to remake the wheel.. What he made would have been surpassed by technology a hundred years ago or more... Fair enough if it was simply to replicate an old device for historical reasons.. But this is not the case...

[Machtool]

I think the point has been missed here:
Only point that has been missed here, is some you-tube wanna-be. If you dont know enough to turn your sudo level 180 degrees?

[Oldneweng]

I don't know where turning the level 180 degrees relates to this video. I only saw a demonstration of the vial working. I did not see any attempt to to calibrate the level. Why would he need to turn it 180 degrees to show the viewers how the bubble moves in the vial?


So why was this video not very helpful?

Because it does not mention why you level, nor what sensitivity you need for levelling.. It does not mention the importance of heat in levelling, nor does it mention the base of the level (how flat it has to be). As I said he has tried to simplify a subject that is while not complicated, it is more in depth...

Quite true. But he made the video and he put in the video what he wanted to. Obviously these points were outside the scope of his intentions. Why criticise someone because his idea of what to put in a video differ from yours.

He did mention heat and its effect on the level, by the way.

It seems to me that he intended to show how his level worked, mechanically, not how to use it. Maybe that will be covered in a future video. :D

Dean

[Michael G]

I don't know where turning the level 180 degrees relates to this video. I only saw a demonstration of the vial working. I did not see any attempt to to calibrate the level.

The standard test to check the "truth" of a level is to adjust it so it is level in one spot then turn it 180 degrees and return it to the same spot. It should read the same. Without showing the results of this test no claims can really be made about how good the level really is because any level that does not repeat it is not much better than a paper weight

Michael

[DaveTTC]

"But I liked it for the above reasons" Cant work wood to save my life, but humour me. If I come up with a gizmo, say 45deg a corner, and I could get the corner with in 1/8 inch of joining up. That would be O/K wouldn't it.

Any way you look at it, this is a gizmo, with its Andy Warhol 15 minutes of fame. Aluminium and Butane. Good luck with that solution. You blokes are just waisting your time with this Mickey Mouse solution's.

I tend to look at an overall. Also consider a persons experince.

It may be the gizmo and the more importantly the principle of the gizmo that is the point. I make prototypes and share them on line. I get some constructive feed back for which I am happy.

Yes it is nice if everything is just 'perfect' or at least very good but it does not all ways need to be the case.

On another note I thank everyone for there practical suggestions and points. I have learnt a lot about a topic that is new to me.

[Oldneweng]

I tend to look at an overall. Also consider a persons experince.

It may be the gizmo and the more importantly the principle of the gizmo that is the point. I make prototypes and share them on line. I get some constructive feed back for which I am happy.

Yes it is nice if everything is just 'perfect' or at least very good but it does not all ways need to be the case.

On another note I thank everyone for there practical suggestions and points. I have learnt a lot about a topic that is new to me.

This mirrors my opinion.

Michael. My point is that this video shows a concept. Anything more is up to the individual. My opinion is that there was no intention to prove accuracy. Just to show how it was made and that the bubble centres.

On this subject, How much movement would you expect within the limits of a precision level, in comparison with the .006" used to demo the bubble movement?

Dean

[PDW]

It seems to me that he intended to show how his level worked, mechanically, not how to use it. Maybe that will be covered in a future video. :D

Dean

I could get a few bits of RHS, a couple of pillow block bearings, some allthread and build a metal lathe too.....

IIRC there were articles in HSM years ago on making your own sensitive level. I gave away all my copies so can't chack, but memory tells me the level of sophistication in the HSM one was orders of magnitude greater than this attempt.

I fully agree with the criticism of it. It's a waste of time (and so is the continuation of this thread, most likely).

PDW

[th62]

Considering this thread is such a waste of time, why on earth would you bother reading it - let alone waste your time on commenting.

The time this fellow spent on this project and the obvious enjoyment he has derived from it makes it 'worth his while'. I thought that was the prime reason for indulging in any hobby. And lets not forget the most important part - he is learning something.

Don't like a particular thread, can see no point in it or see it as a waste of time - all seem like pretty good reasons not to follow or comment. Why post such insulting comments. Why not be constructive, post some helpful criticisms.

Not everyone can afford or justify expenditure on top of the line tools and equipment: one look at his lathe should tell you he is in this bracket.

[Oldneweng]

It appears that Ray's comment was prophetic. lol.

I would like to thank Matthew for posting this link. I found it informative.

Dean

[kwijibo99]

Let’s try coming at this from a different perspective.

Somewhere in the world an amateur horologist (clock maker) makes a simple weight driven clock.
Now the movement might be fairly basic and he might have to tweak it once a week to keep it on time but hey, he’s pretty chuffed with what he has created.
Comes a time he decides to post a little clip of his clock on the web for no other reason than that he can and he believes it might even be of interest to other budding amateur horologists out there. He makes no claim that his clock is incredibly advanced, accurate or innovative nor does he state that it is of a design that should be emulated by others.He simply shows what it is, states the logic behind its design and even highlights its flaws.

Meanwhile, another bloke comes across this clip one day and decides to post a link to the clip on an amateur horological forum that he happens to be a member of.
He reckons it’s not a bad effort despite some flaws and as an example of the craft might be of interest to other forum members.

Turns out he’s right and some of the forum members have alook at the clip and take from it what they will, good bad or indifferent.
However some members pronounce the clip (and post) to be pointless because the design is not what they perceive to be of a suitable standard and is hence worthless.
Rather than a constructive critique of the design of the clock in question what is offered is a condescending if not openly aggressive assessment form a point of superiority.
The original maker is labelled a clown and castigated, how dare this upstart have the nerve to show his amateurish attempt to other like minded people?
Why would anyone waste their time building something so flawed when they could just go and buy one that will do a better job?

And now back to our own humble, fundamentally amateur oriented metalwork forum.
I’m well aware of the expertise and level of knowledge of some of the members here and I keep coming back because I not only learn from but am entertained by the content I find here.
The vast majority of readers and posters do this for a hobby and hang around here to share their experience and learn not only from the successes but also the mistakes and failures of others.
I am more than happy to be corrected when I’m wrong and I’ll be the first to admit that I’ve made my fair share of stuff ups in my time but I’ve learned from most of them.
I’m also grown up enough to take in what I read and see, both on this forum and elsewhere, to filter it, and reach my own conclusions about the merit of one piece of information over another.
What I really don’t need is to be pontificated to, if I did, I’d take up religion.
Nothing stifles innovation and the sharing of knowledge more than hubris and dogma and it saddens me that these traits are emerging here even if only rarely.
it would be to the detriment of all members if it got to the point that people were reluctant to post here because they didn’t want to be exposed to ridicule and name calling.
Of course this is just my two cents, but I hope it's taken in the spirit I wrote it. :2tsup:
Cheers,
Greg.

[eskimo]

are some of you missing the point?

To get a lathe level..ie no twist...you dont have to have a level that one needs to spin 180 degree to prove it reads correct.

Rather you just need a level that shows a decent type of movement from a given reference point.

we dont really care that our lathe points backward or froward 1 or two degrees do we?...we want it so that the level reads the same the entire length of the bed...then there is no twist?.

[th62]

Well Greg, I think your spot on the money there - I hope you are prepared for the backlash though. Unfortunately ridicule and self serving bias are more the norm than humility on this forum and those that display these unfortunate aspects of the personalities tend to stick together like a pack of baying wolves.
I frequent this forum in the hope of learning new things. The expertise of people like Ueee and Anorak Bob to name a few is something to behold; unfortunately, the armchair experts and even some of the seriously gifted on this forum cannot understand not everyone has bundles of cash lying around and not everyone has the desire nor the need to own top of the range tools. And as is patently obvious, not all have the sense to avoid that which they do not enjoy. Funny as it sounds, some people simply enjoy 'reinventing the wheel' or simply just like to enjoy their workshop toys and exercising their noggin.

[PDW]

Considering this thread is such a waste of time, why on earth would you bother reading it - let alone waste your time on commenting.


I'm bored. My machine shop is 1500+ km away.



The time this fellow spent on this project and the obvious enjoyment he has derived from it makes it 'worth his while'. I thought that was the prime reason for indulging in any hobby. And lets not forget the most important part - he is learning something.


I think the term you're searching for is 'reinventing the wheel' and doing it poorly.



Don't like a particular thread, can see no point in it or see it as a waste of time - all seem like pretty good reasons not to follow or comment. Why post such insulting comments. Why not be constructive, post some helpful criticisms.

Not everyone can afford or justify expenditure on top of the line tools and equipment: one look at his lathe should tell you he is in this bracket.



Got it in one. That's me to a T........

PDW

[.RC.]

Considering this thread is such a waste of time, why on earth would you bother reading it - let alone waste your time on commenting.

The time this fellow spent on this project and the obvious enjoyment he has derived from it makes it 'worth his while'. I thought that was the prime reason for indulging in any hobby. And lets not forget the most important part - he is learning something.

Don't like a particular thread, can see no point in it or see it as a waste of time - all seem like pretty good reasons not to follow or comment. Why post such insulting comments. Why not be constructive, post some helpful criticisms.

Not everyone can afford or justify expenditure on top of the line tools and equipment: one look at his lathe should tell you he is in this bracket.



I am sorry if my post upset you, but I had good reason for posting it..

The problem I have is with the problem of simplifying a subject to the lowest levels, rendering all how and why as irrelevant..

When someone else tries to do the same thing, they get caught up in unforeseen traps... If we take Eskimo's post above.. Not singling him out but he illustrates an example of a trap..

The question he put was, why does it matter if the level has not been calibrated to read the same 180 degrees apart...

Why it matters is due to the sensitivities involved... if you put an out of level, level on a bedway.... Then remove it and put it some other place on the bedway pointing in a slightly different direction, then the bubble could be telling you a lie.. You do not know if it is or it isn't, you cannot know... That is a trap...

I look at humans and see we have come so far technologically wise... We can put people in space, at the moment microchip sizes are down to 9 nanometres.. We have extended the life of people by many years through medical breakthroughs..

We did not get this far by accident, it was done through due scientific process.. And while our discussion of the video in question might be highly trivial, I personally feel it dumbs down a subject that is scientific in nature.. And I feel dumbing down long established science is to our detriment... We would not be where we are today if scientists and researchers did it....

I am not coming from a position of being all smug and superior, but from that science is our future and always has been and long established and proven knowledge should be respected....

[Oldneweng]

Yes Greg, very well explained.

Sometimes I have found that people with a lot of knowledge find it difficult or even impossible to visualise what it is like for someone without that knowledge.

Eskimo, you make a good point. That is why I asked about movement expected, so I can comprehend what is required to set up my lathe. I have no intention of precise levelling. I want to check the bed to ensure it is not warped and then check for parallel cutting. I don't have time to waste on achieving perfection. Life is too short already.

Dean

[RayG]

Can someone explain why he chose to use butane as the liquid in the vial? Seems like a weird choice... logic and a few seconds worth of research would have suggested some mineral spirit..

My conclusion is that the guy knows zilch about levels, at the very least he could have just googled the subject and come up with some better ideas. But to then go ahead and push his ideas on the rest of the world
via youtube is just crazy ( and arrogant )... how many people out there are now thinking that butane is a good choice for vial filling?


Ray

[shedhappens]

It is simple and would work for basic leveling, and I like it but i wouldn't trade my stabila or machine level for it.

It could be a bit hazardous for a bloke standing over it with fag hanging outta his gob, twidle twidle twidle
tink WHOMP, hehe.... no more eyebrows :D

[RayG]

It could be a bit hazardous for a bloke standing over it with fag hanging outta his gob, twidle twidle twidle
tink WHOMP, hehe.... no more eyebrows :D

Yes good point, exactly how far can you bend a glass tube before it goes ( as you say ) ...tink.... and then the butane ignites.. whomp.

I suppose it's not really funny, when you think someone out there could be watching his video's thinking of copying the idea. Cheap haircut I guess... :oo:

Ray

[Stustoys]

I suppose it's not really funny, when you think someone out there could be watching his video's thinking of copying the idea. Cheap haircut I guess... :oo:

My comment re safety glasses was more to do with flying glass shards than the fire ball.

If one was to over fill this thing on a cold day.....heats up until there is no bubble......
(no idea what sort of temp rise you would need)

Stuart

[kwijibo99]

the armchair experts
Unfortunately I think you might have missed my comment about name calling, respect is a two way street.


from that science is our future and always has been and long established and proven knowledge should be respected....
And questioned, if we blindly accepted all proven science without question we would have stopped advancing a long time ago.


I suppose it's not really funny, when you think someone out there could be watching his video's thinking of copying the idea. I think the term for what happens to anyone who blindly emulates what they might see on the internet without considering the consequences is natural selection.
Cheers,
Greg.

[RayG]

My comment re safety glasses was more to do with flying glass shards than the fire ball.

If one was to over fill this thing on a cold day.....heats up until there is no bubble......
(no idea what sort of temp rise you would need)

Stuart

Do you think the glass tube being already stressed by bending would lower the temperature rise needed?

Years ago, I was working in a chemistry lab, just before lunch I got a winchester ( 2 1/4L) full of acetone from the solvent store put it in the lab, went to lunch, when I came back the bottle was gone... then I noticed fragments of glass all over the floor... The solvent store was cool, and the lab was warm enough to explode the bottle. Lucky I was eating sandwiches in the cafeteria at the time... :)

Ray

[eskimo]

Can someone explain why he chose to use butane as the liquid in the vial?

would it be that the fluid is less viscuous or has a smaller miniscus....moves more easily.....etc etc?... or what ever the terminology is lol

[cba_melbourne]

Can someone explain why he chose to use butane as the liquid in the vial? Seems like a weird choice... logic and a few seconds worth of research would have suggested some mineral spirit..
Ray

Ray, the more viscous the liquid in a vial, the more will it "stick" to the inside of the glass tube, which is not good for sensitivity. Think how oil, or Mercury, would behave in a vial. Now logic would say that the opposite is true too: the less viscous the liquid in the vial, the less will it be affected by imperfections in the inside of the glass tube and hence the more sensitive.

The Stabila level is probably filled with just some common alcohol. But sensitive precision levels appear to be filled with secret proprietary fluid mixtures. Anhydrous (= dried to 99.9%purity) Isopropanol and Ethyl Ether seem to be the key components of these mixtures. Our friend from the video may have thought that lighter fluid could be a substitute worth trying? Unlike the other stuff, it is easy to come by in small quantities.

The quantity used is probably one or two cubic centimeters. Less than the tank in a throw away BIC lighter. When I was still smoking, I never felt threatened by the flammable nature of lighter fluid stored in my pocket, so no reason to get excited if used in a level.

[Ueee]

would it be that the fluid is less viscuous or has a smaller miniscus....moves more easily.....etc etc?... or what ever the terminology is lol

Why not use an alcohol then, thats what is in most levels isn't it?

Ew

Edit, Chris and i cross posted.
Ever seen what a welding spark can do to a lighter Chris? Or what happens when you put on in a microwave? The amount of gas in a bic lighter can do more than enough damage.

[cba_melbourne]

Yes good point, exactly how far can you bend a glass tube before it goes ( as you say ) ...tink.... and then the butane ignites.. whomp............ :oo:

Ray

A thin walled glass tube can definitely be bent sufficiently for the purposes of a level (precision or not). After all, the glass fibers in fiberglass matting or glass fibers in data cables flex exceedingly well? It is all a matter of the thickness and the materal used - there are many "glasses".

[cba_melbourne]

Why not use an alcohol then, thats what is in most levels isn't it?

Ew

Edit, Chris and i cross posted.
Ever seen what a welding spark can do to a lighter Chris? Or what happens when you put on in a microwave? The amount of gas in a bic lighter can do more than enough damage.

Ew, I do not know if or how much lighter fluid is any better than alcohol for a level. But its flammability is IMHO not an argument. Many precision level have their glass vial protected under a perspex cover, or the vial sits inside another glass tube. My precision level has a plastic cover on three sides, I always assumed it was to protect the vial from breakage... never thought of it as a fire safety issue.

[cba_melbourne]

Here you go for some basics:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spirit_level

[RayG]

Hi Chris,

This is the thing we are talking about... it almost looks like it was designed to break glass tubing, just crank down on the screws and ... tink... boom

http://www.backsaw.net/pics/YouTubeIdiotLevel.jpg

I'd guess there's more butane than the average lighter in there. Perspex cover.. ? No.

Your comments are true for most commercial levels, but that wasn't under discussion..

Ray

[Machtool]

Many precision level have their glass vial protected under a perspex cover, or the vial sits inside another glass tube. My precision level has a plastic cover on three sides, I always assumed it was to protect the vial from breakage....
Are we back to real Levels and not gizmo's / talking points?

It surely cant be for breakage. You said precision level. It's not a clay duck.

Surely you would have to mis-handle a true level to break a vial. Thats hammer and chisel work

It's mechanical protection. The windows / shutters / glass / perspex over lays, are only there to prevent your and mine fat fingers from touching the vial. Touching the vial will upset the applecart.

Phil.

[cba_melbourne]

Are we back to real Levels and not gizmo's / talking points?

It surely cant be for breakage. You said precision level. It's not a clay duck.

Surely you would have to mis-handle a true level to break a vial. Thats hammer and chisel work

It's mechanical protection. The windows / shutters / glass / perspex over lays, are only there to prevent your and mine fat fingers from touching the vial. Touching the vial will upset the applecart.

Phil.


Phil, I suspect in a precision level like the one I have below, the Perspex dome around the vial is both to protect the vial from mechanical damage, and more importantly to keep away the warm breath of the user. The black plastic around the body is, exactly like on a good micrometer, to insulate the level from the heat of your fingers. Like precision micrometers, precision levels do not like temperature changes.

317791



In the case of a homemade level like in the video, such a half-round perspex dome could take care of concerns regarding sharp glass should it break. And to some extent flammable vial contens in case of breakage. This whole breakage fear is possibly exaggerated out of proportion. What if the wooden block under the vial was made of soft Balsa wood, would it not compress way before the glass breaks? Just thinking.

Model Engineers Workshop issue 36 on page 36 has an article by Peter Peters titled "A very sensitive level". Over 7 pages he describe in detail how he makes a level using a glass tube that is bent by mechanical force from below. The principle is EXACTLY the same as our friend in the video uses. But Peters model is beautyfully finished and much improved. He does not simply use a wooden block at the center, but two contact points to achieve a more circular curvature of the glass tube. He also separated the adjustments for curvature (=sensitivity) and level adjustments. A very interesting read. And proof that the idea is not as crazy as some people here want us to believe. Here some extracts for the non-believers:

317793317794

[RayG]

Model Engineers Workshop issue 36 on page 36 has an article by Peter Peters titled "A very sensitive level". Over 7 pages he describe in detail how he makes a level using a glass tube that is bent by mechanical force from below. The principle is EXACTLY the same as our friend in the video uses. But Peters model is beautyfully finished and much improved. He does not simply use a wooden block at the center, but two contact points to achieve a more circular curvature of the glass tube. He also separated the adjustments for curvature (=sensitivity) and level adjustments. A very interesting read. And proof that the idea is not as crazy as some people here want us to believe. Here some extracts for the non-believers:


Thanks for that, his design looks much better than crazy eddie's, I bet that his vial isn't full of pressurized butane either :)

As Stuart posted earlier, let's see what would have to be done to make the design work.
First ..the aluminium block is not required. A base that can be machined and scraped flat would be a good starting point, tilting the whole assembly to zero it seems dumb to me, so a seperate zero screw that adjust the tilt on the vial only... companies like Wyler/Tesa go to great lengths to ensure the vial is not stressed, (why?) the idea of bending a glass tube seems counter to that? Maybe buy a replacement 0.05/m vial and build around that...

Dunno, Seems like a lot of trouble...

Pretty soon the cheap chinese levels start to look attractive... 0.02/m for $US35 http://www.aliexpress.com/item/200mm-0-02mm-per-1000mm-Master-Precision-Level/1118443097.html around $70 landed

Or if you want Swiss quality, it's hard to go past this Wyler 0.04/m for $198+postage. http://www.swissqualitydiscount.com/product_info.php?cPath=16_18&products_id=41 No idea on postage?

Ray

[matthew_g]

I posted this thread as I thought it might interest and inspire other members as it did me.
I did NOT post it for members to belittle the poor fellow.
80% of the responses will make me think twice before posting here again.

IT SADENS ME TO THINK MEMBERS HERE ARE SO CRUEL !!!!!!!

[Oldneweng]

I posted this thread as I thought it might interest and inspire other members as it did me.
I did NOT post it for members to belittle the poor fellow.
80% of the responses will make me think twice before posting here again.

IT SADENS ME TO THINK MEMBERS HERE ARE SO CRUEL !!!!!!!

I understand what you are saying Matthew. I cannot see any reason for the behavior shown. The video is still on UTube for the whole world to see. Constructive criticism is ok, but anything more than that is demeaning. I believe that these posts were out of context, in this case.

I found the video useful and I don't believe that I was at risk of falling into any of the traps that were mentioned.

I was pleased that the most recent posts were back to normalcy. There have been some informative posts that I have also found useful. It has been a positive learning experience, but it was a shame that it was marred by well meaning people and their criticism.

When you are reading an "ABC" children's book discussion's on philosophical literature are premature.

Dean

[cba_melbourne]

....................................
Dunno, Seems like a lot of trouble...

Pretty soon the cheap chinese levels start to look attractive... 0.02/m for $US35 http://www.aliexpress.com/item/200mm-0-02mm-per-1000mm-Master-Precision-Level/1118443097.html around $70 landed

Or if you want Swiss quality, it's hard to go past this Wyler 0.04/m for $198+postage. http://www.swissqualitydiscount.com/product_info.php?cPath=16_18&products_id=41 No idea on postage?

Ray

Ray,

sometimes it is not about arriving, it is about the journey. Think about all the fools wasting time building model engines, when one could buy them ready made..... But there can be great satisfaction by "I made this myself", even if it does not run as smooth as the new chainsaw.

There is also the learning effect. I am sure the majority of people that use precision levels, have no idea how a vial is made in the first place. Being forced to think about what glass curvature is required for a given sensitivity, is certainly highly helpful at better understanding the magnitude of the errors that will cause say a lathe to turn taper.

[th62]

Cheap Chinese: 0.02/m accuracy for $US35

Quality Swiss : 0.04/m accuracy for $198

Quality aside, if accuracy is your goal, and this seems to be the case amongst the 'well meaning' on this forum, why would you buy quality?

Does this equate to form before function?

Please explain.

[.RC.]

Ray,

sometimes it is not about arriving, it is about the journey. Think about all the fools wasting time building model engines, when one could buy them ready made..... But there can be great satisfaction by "I made this myself", even if it does not run as smooth as the new chainsaw.



Quite right, but I have read the article you mention and as you say it is many pages long... Very well explained with lots of engineering calculations mixed in like the modulus of elasticity of glass.. It is quite well written, like most articles you find in the model engineering magazines..

I have nothing wrong with people doing rough work to serve a purpose, but you need to know the limitations of such a device, and if you want to show the whole world then at least explain the limitations..

I live/work on a farm, I come across quick, rough, cheap fixes all the time..It is wonderful coming across jops where ye olde farmer has jammed a 1/2" whitworth nut on a 1/2" UNC bolt with the aid of a 15" shifter, and rounded the nut off in the process. You try to explain and all you get is "damn brumby bolts/nuts, you would think they would standardise everything"....

No point explaining to them, they would not understand..

[RayG]

Ray,

sometimes it is not about arriving, it is about the journey. Think about all the fools wasting time building model engines, when one could buy them ready made..... But there can be great satisfaction by "I made this myself", even if it does not run as smooth as the new chainsaw.

There is also the learning effect. I am sure the majority of people that use precision levels, have no idea how a vial is made in the first place. Being forced to think about what glass curvature is required for a given sensitivity, is certainly highly helpful at better understanding the magnitude of the errors that will cause say a lathe to turn taper.

I think we are on the same wavelength here, I agree that the enjoyment and satisfaction you get from the journey often outweighs the end result, I recall showing the wife the scraped block after the Melbourne scraping course, all I got was blank looks and you must be mad... I tried explaining that it was flat to better than a few microns, what's a micron?

I happen to like making my own metrology stuff, cylindrical square, master squares, haven't done a decent straight edge, but one day I will. I've been toying with the idea of making a precision level for some time, but I plan to use MEMS sensors and make it variable sensitivity.

If you are going to make something yourself, you should aim to make it as good or better than the commercial units, at the very least it should work properly and have a bit of integrity about the design and construction, this is where I fail to get excited about a glass tube full of butane bent over a wooden block.. Maybe as a starting point for a design.

Ray

[Ueee]

My problem with the video is simple.
If he had said "i thought i'd like to have a go at making a level, here is my first attempt", then good on him for having a go, and i'd have to say well done, even if it has issues.

But he said "look at me, i made a sensitive level", hence my problem. It is neither sensitive or will it repeat well with that big block of ally.

Ew

[RayG]

Cheap Chinese: 0.02/m accuracy for $US35

Quality Swiss : 0.04/m accuracy for $198

Quality aside, if accuracy is your goal, and this seems to be the case amongst the 'well meaning' on this forum, why would you buy quality?

Does this equate to form before function?

Please explain.

Price and quality are two different concepts.. I'm sure I don't need to explain.

That $198 for a Wyler/Tesa level is cheap. That model normally retails for over $1000.. so that's cheap AND quality.

The chinese one is just cheap. ( Incidentally that's the model I have, and it works just fine, I scraped it flat and fiddled with calibration for a while, but it will do until I want something better (that's function :) )

The precision level is one of the most important tools for machine survey, and for those of us who like restoring old machines, a precision level is essential. Just like a good surface plate, an accurate square and good straight edge. A good level is up there with the essentials.

Ray

[Michael G]

Cheap Chinese: 0.02/m accuracy for $US35

Quality Swiss : 0.04/m accuracy for $198

Quality aside, if accuracy is your goal, and this seems to be the case amongst the 'well meaning' on this forum, why would you buy quality?

Does this equate to form before function?

Please explain.

It's about the reliability of that claim and the likelihood that the claim is still valid in a a few year's time. While a randomly selected cheap level may indeed check out, if the design and production of the item is poorly executed the chance of the next level also achieving that specification is lower than if it was from a recognised quality supplier. It is why people concerned with metrology commercially still buy the more expensive Swiss and Japanese offerings even though they can buy cheaper.

Michael

[Big Shed]

I have edited some posts and removed one other, could we please keep this debate at a non-personal level without stooping to personal insults?

We seem to have at least one member (with previous form) here, who is hell bent on upsetting the apple cart.

Please cease and desist or firmer action WILL be taken.

[th62]

You've missed my point: If the cheap Chinese level is only $35 and accurate to .02mm - why would you pay $198 for something with a nice brand name if it is only half as accurate?

[RayG]

You've missed my point: If the cheap Chinese level is only $35 and accurate to .02mm - why would you pay $198 for something with a nice brand name if it is only half as accurate?

Yes, I see how that could be confusing, the 0.02 and 0.04 relate to sensitivity NOT accuracy, I'd back the Wyler for accuracy. For a machine survey, accuracy is just as important ( if not more so ) than sensitivity.

I'd probably argue that 0.02 is too sensitive for most applications, 0.1 mm/m is more than adequate for lathe levelling type jobs.. 0.02 you just go crazy chasing the bubble..

Ray

[cba_melbourne]

You've missed my point: If the cheap Chinese level is only $35 and accurate to .02mm - why would you pay $198 for something with a nice brand name if it is only half as accurate?


Lets assume both levels have the same sensitivity and same length, so we compare apples with apples (you can usually buy the same level with vials of many different sensitivities inside, depending on purpose).

- Sensitivity is given as mm per meter per division. But that does not mean that two levels of the same "sensitivity" are as easy to use. It matters how long the vial is, how many divisions there are, how far the divisions are apart. If the divisions are far apart, the level may be capable of far grater accuracy because it is easy to read between the lines (interploation).
- Depending on application, it may matter if the vial can only be seen from top, or from the sides as well.
- Chinese levels are famous for the base being only very coarsely ground, and less flat than a properly milled base would be. Better quality levels have a finely precision ground base and are flat. Top quality levels are hand scraped to a slight concavity, and can only be used on workpieces with accurate surfaces.
- It may matter how soft the base is, how easily it will get dented.
- It may matter how quickly blank metal parts will rust
- If painted, it may matter how long the paint coat lasts. If it has plastic handpieces, it may matter if these are UV stabilised and solvent proof. If it has a clear plastic vial cover, it may matter how quick this scratches.
- how smooth is the adjustment screw, is it repeatable or is there lots of backlash when changing direction?
- how accurately is the small cross vial glued in place, or does it maybe even have its own adjuster screw?
- what is the liquid inside the main vial. If it is a near zero viscosity low surface adhesion liquid, is the vial properly sealed? Some of these highly volatile liquids are notorious for diffusing through many sealant materials.
- how well is the vial lapped inside? You do not want the bubble stick to imperfections - its like having a DTI with a needle that sticks and moves in jerks.
- how are the divisions applied to the vial? Is it a clear and crisp durable print with lettering, or is it just hand painted lines?
- when you place the level on a surface, how long does it take for the reading to stabilize? If the heat from your fingers is not well insulated from the metal parts, it takes longer.

Is a good brand name level worth the extra price over a generic Chinese level? Probably not in a home shop. But in all fairness, you have to add to the price of the Chinese level the time you will spend to make its base surface reasonably flat and fit for the purpose. Everyone will have a different hourly rate for how much one values his "quality time" in the workshop. One could also regard it as an exercise at scraping, provided the base surface of Chinese levels is soft enough for scraping (I do not know that, but suspect it's soft cast iron).


317846

PS: my Swiss tool catalogue mentions the use of Anhydrid Heptane to fill vials??

[Michael G]

You've missed my point: If the cheap Chinese level is only $35 and accurate to .02mm - why would you pay $198 for something with a nice brand name if it is only half as accurate?
I'm not sure whether your query was addressed to Ray or me, but my previous answer does address your question -


It's about the reliability of that claim and the likelihood that the claim is still valid in a a few year's time. While a randomly selected cheap level may indeed check out, if the design and production of the item is poorly executed the chance of the next level also achieving that specification is lower than if it was from a recognised quality supplier.

To put it another way, when the company I work for buys measuring equipment, they want to know that the brand that is being bought will provide repeatable results during the life of the item; that the equipment will still be serviceable after some time; that parts are available if needed and that the manufacturer's claims about the accuracy/ precision/ repeatability can be believed.

Leaving places of origin to one side, that is why a brand is worth something. I would pay $198 for a brand name level that is half as "accurate"* as a $35 one of unknown providence if I was making a long term purchase because accuracy/ precision/ repeatability/ maintainability are important to me. I feel that I can trust the claims made by a brand name manufacturer more that I can the claims of someone who may not be there tomorrow.

While getting even more OT, framing this in terms of the old argument that "Chinese equipment is just as good as the more expensive stuff" which is where I feel you are headed, yes - good things can be made in China but like just about everything you get what you pay for. I know that if I got 100 Mitutoyo levels (or Starrett or Wyler or...) and lined them up I would get results that are close to what they should be (accuracy) that would group pretty closely (repeatability) and within the limits of the resolution of the instrument (precision). If one was not reading as expected, it would be able to be adjusted so it was. If I got 100 of those $35 levels I would expect a much wider spread of results (less repeatability), which would in turn mirror their lesser precision and accuracy. Further more, adjustment to bring back to truth may not be possible (although far more likely to be an issue).

Getting back to topic, I applaud the guy in the video giving something like this a go - however, like some others I am concerned that what he has made is not as good as he thinks it is and hope that it doesn't inspire others to make something similar in the belief that they have something "as good as". I would however like them to be inspired to try and improve on it, realising the short comings.

* "Accuracy" is how close the reading is to the absolute value; "precision" is a measure of how closely one value can be discriminated from the next and "repeatability" is how well the instrument will indicate when repeated readings are taken. In this context, 0.02mm relates to the precision of the instrument.

Michael

[Pete F]

I'm not sure why this is even referred to as a "level". By anybody. It's a glass tube containing an air bubble in some butane. The video quite clearly showed the angle of the glass tube varying, and the fulcrum point was in no particular position. As Machtool quite correctly tried to point out, but it seems was overlooked by some, it doesn't become a "level" until it's reversed and proven. Even if it may not be accurate, a level can still be proven. It's quite clear from the design that it will never prove this way, as such it will remain a glass tube containing an air bubble in some butane. End of story. Sorry, nice try. Epic fail.

As far as justifying on the basis of cost, I don't know why anyone would spend even, say $20, on some parts to produce something that is functionally useless for its intended purpose, when for little more money a simple part could be purchased off the shelf to create a level that rivals commercial alternatives costing hundreds of dollars?

[DaveTTC]

I have edited some posts and removed one other, could we please keep this debate at a non-personal level without stooping to personal insults?

We seem to have at least one member (with previous form) here, who is hell bent on upsetting the apple cart.

Please cease and desist or firmer action WILL be taken.

Thanks. Glad someone else is watching.


Dave the turning cowboy

turning wood into art