Thread: Try square not true

Thanks for the comments and the good advice about checking the trueness, IanW, much appreciated.

Loved your link to the try square you made, looks terrific. Toolmaking is a highly specialised and exacting trade, requiring a bent for absolute precision in all things, but it is not for me, as I could see myself getting quite obsessed with accuracy, so it's better not to go there. In my electrical engineering profession I have worked with metering specialists, and they are exactly the same, a strange breed No offence intended

Originally Posted by JillB

.....Toolmaking is a highly specialised and exacting trade, requiring a bent for absolute precision in all things, but it is not for me, as I could see myself getting quite obsessed with accuracy, so it's better not to go there. In my electrical engineering profession I have worked with metering specialists, and they are exactly the same, a strange breed No offence intended

Couple of points, Jill:
1. I'm not easily offended - years in academia toughened me up...
2. I'm not anally retentive about precision, either, though I do like to be reasonably accurate.

However, guilty as charged, tool-making has ocasionally taken up a little more of my time than it ought, I admit (sometimes when I should have been making what my better half calls "useful things"). It can easily become a consuming passion if you allow it to, but being from the stronger-willed gender, you wouldn't be in such danger, would you?.

To be serious, I suppose making your own tools is something you do either out of sheer necessity (which is how I started), or when you have the luxury of a little more time (which is where I am now). They were a lot more functional than pretty in the beginning, but get a bit more blingy as I 'mature'. Making tools really doesn't require any more skill than regular woodworking, just a bit more care, perhaps. Working soft metals like brass is a lot easier than you may think, just take it slowly & sneak up on dimensions & straightness, & it often works out better than you expected. The first time I inserted dovetailed brass wear-strips in a marking gauge fence, I was amazed at how easy it was to get a good fit. The advantages of making your own tools, even simple things like marking gauges & so forth, is that it does tend to improve your hand skills, and your understanding of the working fundamentals in the case of more complex tools like planes & saws is dramatically increased. You can often make something that suits you better than a bought item, and of course, something you've made yourself always works better than anyone else's!

It's almost inevitable that there'll be some miserable failures along the way, which is part of the learning process - I'm sure you are well aware of that already. Some postings of tool-making can make it look easy, and often enough it is, if you go at it logically. I do try to 'fess-up when I've had any major difficulties or blunders in my projects, but am probably guilty of glossing over some. If we'd had a Forum back when I started out, I would have been able to show quite a few blunders & monstrosities - or maybe having access to the wisdom here would have saved me from many!

Hmmm, reading back what I've written, it sounds a bit like pompous self-justification - apologies, it was meant as an encouragement to anyone interested in making their own tools to just get in & try it.....

Cheers,

Originally Posted by IanW

Hi Jill,
It's interesting how we seem to divide into two camps when it comes to try-squares. I don't think I have ever owned a try-square that had graduations on it,

that probably makes it a little hard to give your best judgment i'd think Ian ...

Originally Posted by IanW

& if I did, I doubt I ever took any notice of them. For me, a try-square is all about checking a single angle, accurately & reliably. A half-decent steel rule is what I turn to for accurate lineal measuring. But it's what you get used to & feel most comfy with, of course.

well, if it has measurements it makes it useful for more, than just a single angle (and the added function doesnt impede the other), they are as accurate as a steel rule (which it is, essentially with a handle) , even more so since working from the edge, with a rule requires you to hold the rule in the correct place by eye and then move your sight to the other end, using the square is quicker and easier to obtain the same thing with less room for error. while you are marking lines across your work (stiles, rails, drawfronts or whatever) you can also glance at the measurement, its an easy way to pick up on any small variances in dimensions without having to re-handle all the material again, a tiny variation of members can make all the difference for some pieces when trying to assemble. if you want to mark a scribing pencil line the measurements are at hand, just like you would use a combination square, in a worksop i much prefer a graduated steel rule square to a combination square, very very practicle. steel rules are a pita to pick up off flat surfaces unless you have long finger nails, wooden rules are easier and dont mark your work, squares are easy too which alleviate that frustration and saves having to swap and go looking for other tools, many many other instances they come in handy, dare i say if you used one for a while you would find it handy as well

Originally Posted by IanW

You should never 'trust' any square, even the most expensive, but check them, regularly. And you don't need a 'perfect' reference square kept soley for that purpose - if it's that good I'd rather be using it daily. You can just as easily check a square against itself. Scribe a line from a straight edge, flip the square & scribe a second line. Any error shows up as a deviation of the two lines (2x the actual error), and indicates which way the square is out. You can check both inside & outside angles the same way. Our old wodwork teacher insisted we did that daily, before we started anything else, which is probably a very good habit to acquire. (I confess, my checking is more like weekly to fortnightly.... ).

of course you dont 'NEED' a 'perfect' reference square, as in you cant do without it! i didnt say you did! you can do without all manner of tools and substitute others, but, it is, a very good practise to have a reference square, and if someone is buying one they may as well buy two to save on postage (unless its those pretty brass and wood ones that cost and arm and leg, and frankly they are among the easiest to go out of square traditionally). flipping the square over to check it is the first thing they teach you in school or on the job, but its not completely reliable (actually notoriously unreliable might be the best way to put it) and relies on what your testing it on, if you rely on the edge of timber (even if it looks perfect) its only a matter of time before you get caught out and have a problem with fitting your work together, on site i check several times a day to get an impression only usually on something i have marked first thing in the day that i can go back to now an again (actually more often maybe as i'm working through on a particular item or task i often filp just to keep an eye on it or to check), hard to remember as its just habit now, but a good one to have,.

in the workshop a place that you can trust and check it against was handy but even that over time (years) i have found can be unreliable, in a workshop where sawdust, glue etc finds its way to places you rather it didnt..i definitely like to have a reference square placed in a clean safe box where it cant get knocked that you can check 'all' your tools with, that may well be on a daily basis but put away safe after that...but like i said you dont 'need' it, you can use other things, without the use of a reference square i have used more things than i could mention to check my square, those cheap plastic squares from the newsagent seem amazingly square for what they are, i've even (had too, i could find nought else to use at the time) used an A4 sheet of paper a couple of times for lack of something better (dont recommend it though)...another advantage of a dedicated reference square is apart from being a dedicated proper tool, is, if your try square goes out you have another square on hand, you dont have to stop work to replace and you can check over all the work you did before in case restoration is needed. a good reason to pack one away in a padded box is apart from protecting it from getting knocked whether it be a cheaper quality square or the most expensive machinists square is its protects an expensive square (if thats what you have chosen for you reference square, some brands are quite pricy) whilst you use your regular square throughout the day that might cost $30, as apposed to around $400 for a vespar or other fancy brass and wood square, both are just as vulnerable to being knocked out of square, keeping it in a box or like is good too because when you ask someone to bring you a square they get the one they can see, not the one out of sight, that might even say something dont touch etc haha

Originally Posted by IanW

Making & calibrating your own square is a very worthwhile exercise, IMO. There are several ways to make squares, beginning with simple all-wood affairs. I saw these much-used in S.E Asia, and some looked pretty dubious, but the ones I checked were bang-on for square! If you're a tool-tragic-nutter like me, you can go overboard & create something like the one I made a while back, based on the same principle as the Clenton squares. If nothing else, it will reduce the mystery of this basic & essential tool & give you confidence that not only is it doing its job properly, but you can keep it that way...

Cheers,

making wooden squares is a good project to practise some basic skills, its the sort of thing trade school will have you make early on in 1st year (you also make ladders from memory mine is still going strong today), there are quite a number of tools that can be effective to make that only require wood and technique, but i can certainly understand why some people would prefer to use their time to make furniture or projects rather than being bogged down with metal work projects...making tools can be rewarding as some guys on here have shown (always a highlight for me to see), maintaining them seems to keep me in metal work as much as i like though (so far..) for example i have a nice big anvil and hammers i use for taking kinks and bends out of saws, when ever someone sees it they think i must do blacksmithing for a hobby, blacksmithing does look interesting but i've never got around to it, yet...working with wood seems cooler



cheers
chippy

Originally Posted by JillB

Well TobyC, I found it at the bottom of our garbage bin just in time, it gets collected tonight - thanks for that suggestion. A graduated straight edge will come in handy.

i should have said that myself, it crossed my mind but for some reason didn't...probably because the next thought i had was you could make a new wood handle drilled with new brass pins knocked in and have a graduated wooden handled square (why they dont do that i'm always amazed, particularly as some of them will go to the trouble to laser etch their brand name into it instead, graduations are infinitely more useful than a brand name), but that defeated the the first got thrown out with the bath water

there are one or two wood handled brands in europe i'm aware of with measurements but on dark blades (harder to see than the chromed), but the measurements run from the other end which i dont like either, and none on the inside edge

cheers
chippy

Originally Posted by ch!ppy

that probably makes it a little hard to give your best judgment i'd think Ian ...

True, Chips, but I was really just trying to make the point that different folks use different approaches to achieve the same ends. Indeed, there are rare occasions where I actually mark the blade of a try-square for some particular purpose or other, but they are very rare occasions. I have simply not developed my measuring habits using graduated squares, & don't miss them, but perhaps if I were to begin all over agin, I might learn a different way. However, as long as we get there with a speed, accuracy & precision sufficient unto the task, it's all good, is it not?

My preference for steel rulers is a personal trait & has has developed over the last dozen years or so. In my early woodworking career, I used folding boxwood rules as per tradition, later switching more to steel tapes. I still have my old 2-footer, bought brand shiny new in 1957, but the outside is becoming dark & hard to read after more than 50 years of service, & about the only thing I use it for nowadays is checking tpi on saws. I never found wooden rulers ideal for precision measuring. Perhaps because I mix wood & metal a lot these days, I much prefer steel rulers when high accuracy is called for. They are, on balance, a teeny bit more accurate over time, since they are less prone to wear & damage, but that aspect is not the main reason for my preference. Their main advantage is the thin-ness that you dislike so much, because it reduces parallax to a minimum. At my stage of life, everything that helps is welcome!

I will challenge your assertion that checking a square against a reference square is more accurate than checking it against itself. For short-bladed squares like engineers' squares, it's debatable, but to check a square by this method, you require another of equal size, which means in my case I would need another 350mm square. I find it difficult to hold two thin blades exactly together while scanning the entire length looking for gaps or deviation. The scribe & flip method does depend on having a reasonably straight reference edge, but surely, making edges straight (and checking for straightness) is what we spend most of our time doing? Done with a modicum of care, the accuracy of this method is certainly well within the range required for woodworkng, and the longer the blade, the easier it is to spot small deviations. Another advantage to me is that I get a static record of (twice) the deviation, & since both of the squares I use most are adjustable, it's then easy to reset the blade to split the angle formed by the "off" lines.

I hasten to say that there haven't been all that many occasions when I've had to adjust my squares. On both occasions I can rememebr, it was after a trip to the floor. I'm pretty careful with my tools, but accidents happen. I MUST do something about that hard concrete floor in my shed - for me as much as the tools!

Cheers,

Originally Posted by IanW

True, Chips, but I was really just trying to make the point that different folks use different approaches to achieve the same ends. Indeed, there are rare occasions where I actually mark the blade of a try-square for some particular purpose or other, but they are very rare occasions. I have simply not developed my measuring habits using graduated squares, & don't miss them, but perhaps if I were to begin all over agin, I might learn a different way. However, as long as we get there with a speed, accuracy & precision sufficient unto the task, it's all good, is it not?

sure Ian, yet here i am , finding myself defending my methods that you challenged . for the sake of the argument/discussion i would have to disagree that you do in fact get there with speed, accuracy and precision (if compared, particularly speed), using a square with graduations saves a good deal of time and its easier to be more accurate over longer periods of time (all day(well, half perhaps), every day). you'll just have to take my word for it i guess but i would not hesitate to say that, being the guy whom would set out for other carpenters, joiners and cabinet makers i can attest to that, the more you have working for you the faster you need to be. Much faster using a graduated square, swapping back an fro from rule and square is certainly tedious in comparison imo. for sure its no big deal how anyone goes about their work at home, particularly if their enjoying it, i'm simply outlining my reasons that you questioned is all, i am sure you are happy with your pace and precision is no doubt fine, a graduated square can probably improve both though, but is that necessary, probably not, only you can say. i dont know much (or is that anything lol) about making a dress or shirt out of cloth, i'd think i could muddle my way through, however if a professional seamstress told me one way was faster and more accurate i probably take her word for it, even if i preferred to continue with my muddled way

Originally Posted by IanW

My preference for steel rulers is a personal trait & has has developed over the last dozen years or so. In my early woodworking career, I used folding boxwood rules as per tradition, later switching more to steel tapes. I still have my old 2-footer, bought brand shiny new in 1957, but the outside is becoming dark & hard to read after more than 50 years of service, & about the only thing I use it for nowadays is checking tpi on saws. I never found wooden rulers ideal for precision measuring. Perhaps because I mix wood & metal a lot these days, I much prefer steel rulers when high accuracy is called for. They are, on balance, a teeny bit more accurate over time, since they are less prone to wear & damage, but that aspect is not the main reason for my preference. Their main advantage is the thin-ness that you dislike so much, because it reduces parallax to a minimum. At my stage of life, everything that helps is welcome!

folding wooden rules are thick arnt they, and no matter ones age that (parallax as you describe) is a problem, having a carpenters eye i dont have much of problem but if it can be avoided from the start so much the better, i've had apprentices that struggle to get measurements right under the best of circumstances, so i like to eliminate that easy one for sure. i reckon (tongue in cheek, sorta) everyone should have an old folding wooden rule though and use it from time to time, for the experience and besides they are just so cool and fun. however i should have made it clearer, what i mean is i actually prefer a wooden rule (about 400mm) similar to what you used in school for doing work where a ruler is preferable, they feel so much nicer than a steel rule, no cold sharp edges, no clangy metel sounds, slides around the timber surface your marking nicely, easy to pick up and doesnt mark your work, the other rule i like to use a lot is a plastic scale ruler, they have a shape that rocks/tips (which is easy to apply to a wooden rule btw) so its easy to pick up and easy to get an accurate measurement (they are more acurate than a steel rule imo) as the edge comes to point so even less paralex than a steel rule, its just something i found to be useful since i draw up plans for homes and cabinets (i havnt figured out google whatever its called yet) the ruler eventually found its way into the workshop, where it might look out of place but i find is quite useful, other wise i find a tape and graduated square fits the bill, tapes i still use a lot in the workshop, i wouldnt be without one

Originally Posted by IanW

I will challenge your assertion that checking a square against a reference square is more accurate than checking it against itself. For short-bladed squares like engineers' squares, it's debatable, but to check a square by this method, you require another of equal size, which means in my case I would need another 350mm square. I find it difficult to hold two thin blades exactly together while scanning the entire length looking for gaps or deviation.

you dont 'need' it but its preferable, naturally the bigger the square the more accurate or ease of identifying, you can still see an error with shorter square though. why do you object to having a larger square, cost would seem obvious, but cost is relative, you buy what you can afford, if you can only afford a cheaper try square, perhaps identical to what you are using then thats it, ideally a machinist quality square because it can be used for other things as well and its good to have something 'more' accurate to measure the tool you use for working with (first thing in the morning check over your tools and machinery you will be using for the day isnt a bad practice), if one can afford a nice brass and exotic wood boutique square then i imagine the person can afford a good machinist square (probably a couple), they can be had cheaper, actually, from a practical point of view, i would expect someone should have a machinist square (or two) in their kit before a boutique try square anyway

Originally Posted by IanW

The scribe & flip method does depend on having a reasonably straight reference edge, but surely, making edges straight (and checking for straightness) is what we spend most of our time doing? Done with a modicum of care, the accuracy of this method is certainly well within the range required for woodworkng, and the longer the blade, the easier it is to spot small deviations. Another advantage to me is that I get a static record of (twice) the deviation, & since both of the squares I use most are adjustable, it's then easy to reset the blade to split the angle formed by the "off" lines.

well, it depends on having a straight edge, not just 'reasonably' straight and a sharp pencil of course, if there is a variance you can centre the line and you might even be right but you cant be assured you are correct, your relying on the (unknown/untested) straight edge, is the edge you rested against out more on the right or left. as i mentioned before a place in the workshop that is a known stable straight surface or better yet, a known square surface (might be part of a jointer/planner bed etc) can be acceptable, its just that i found over years that a reference square was better, and portable.

as for being good enough for woodwork, thats entirely debatable, it depends on the particular task, even 1st fix i like to be precise, more so than many other carpenters perhaps (but not as precise as say rails and styles for cabinet doors), when i set up a roofing square i take my time and make it perfect to within a small fraction of a mm, as close as humanly possible anyway (nowadays they all use calculators and red books, which i know how (i taught them) but I still like doing it the old way) and then i can use that square all day to make all angles in the roof while their all running back to their calculators or books, calculators get you started quicker but i think my way catches up and passes them later. if every join is nice and square the whole house goes together easily plumb and square (multiple half or full mm add up to a lot over many joins), even on a bad day i never have even a very large home out of square more than 10-20mm overall, usually near perfect which makes the roof pop on easy, walls never more than a few mm out, most guys now will be out considerably more (disgustingly more imo)..it might sound like i would take a long time but my crew for a number of years was considered one of the quickest in the state, some of that i attribute to taking the time setting tools up square, the house goes together perfectly and saves times, the same in the factory for cabinets and furniture, set the tools up perfectly, there are obvious places where accuracy doesn't have to be perfect but other places it really pays off to be near perfect when marking out , it saves time with assembly, fit and finish

making edges straight and checking (sighting) for that is a part of the workflow but while its nice to produce work straight and square that can be used as a reference, its getting things back the front to use your work as the reference for your marking out tools, even though much of the time it will be correct, it wont always be...i get the feeling that you might think i'm being pedantic or causing extra unnecessary work, buying an unnecessary tool, quite the contrary, having a reference square is all about saving time, saving money (timber costs and so does time), eliminating doubt and frustration...i flip and check all the time as i am working through a piece (partly habit), particularly if i see a line i'm suspicious of, even though i can tend to see the smallest error without using a square, happens all the time when i'm looking at others setting out their work, i'll pick it up at a glance and ask them to check a line because it looks out to me (invariably they are). its not that i suspect the square is out first, although its always a possibility (it might have been checked in the morning), but mostly i suspect the timber edge the square was set against or human error or some sawdust or what ever is the cause... say you check by flipping, against an edge of timber or whatever and it is out, you then move it along a bit and recheck, its still out, so then you find yourself checking other places to confirm, if this happens a few times in a row, and it can very easily (be it bad luck or whatever), your beginning to think the square is out but still not 100% convinced (because you cant be), its saves a lot of mucking about to have a reference square, know that its square when you start in the morning and you have eliminated doubt, then all you do adjust the line by eye because your confident or mark from the other side and see how it looks...

Originally Posted by IanW

I hasten to say that there haven't been all that many occasions when I've had to adjust my squares. On both occasions I can rememebr, it was after a trip to the floor. I'm pretty careful with my tools, but accidents happen. I MUST do something about that hard concrete floor in my shed - for me as much as the tools!

its not always you that causes a square to go out of square, its kids, spouses, mates, apprentices and when its not them apparently its pixies, fairies, that other person, the weather, the wind, or , that just happens after a while


cheers
chippy

Oooops... sorry I asked... information overload

Originally Posted by JillB

Oooops... sorry I asked... information overload

But wait ... no-one has even talked about whether the straight parts are actually straight ...


(sorry)


Paul

Originally Posted by JillB

Oooops... sorry I asked... information overload

thats ok, sorry i spoke, next time i'll restrain myself.....



to read only

Originally Posted by pmcgee

But wait ... no-one has even talked about whether the straight parts are actually straight ...


(sorry)


Paul

But straight parts are always straight, it's the crooked ones that are crooked!

Toby

Originally Posted by JillB

Oooops... sorry I asked... information overload

Ah - but at least it's out of the bin

Another use for the rescued squared...make dovetail face markers by cutting off a lot of the blade and filing at least one side of the remaining blade to whatever angle you want. By doing both sides at different angles you'll get two markers for the price of one. Just remember which side is what angle

Originally Posted by ch!ppy

thats ok, sorry i spoke, next time i'll restrain myself.....



to read only

Please never rerstrain yourself

I only ever did High School Manual Arts and got thrown out to the Classics (Latin, Ancient Greek, Middle English and Haut Germanic) at 14

I'm catching up at 65 what I should have learnt at 15

It's not the concept it's the detail you allude to in passing that fills in what we hackers do not know

Neil