Measuring patch material

[reddog]

When you folks measure your patch material, are you using a vernier caliper or a micrometer?

I use a dial vernier with the material across the entire surface of the jaws. I feel that this gives me a better average measurement. If I measure the same material with a mic, it is usually about 2-3 thou thinner.

 

[jamesthomas]

I use a dial caliper with the fabric in the back of the jaws were it has a flat area. Try to get fabric between .20 -.22 usually the blue stripe pillow ticking at Jo-Anns. Or #40 pocket drill.

 

[Vaino]

So which is correct?. I've always used a mike w/ the same amount of "pressure" and only measure when buying new mat'l. The "reading" on cloth whether w/ a mike or calipers is just a comparison w/ what was being used previously if the "pressure" is consistent......Fred

 

[Ken Rummer]

One variable is how tight you push the jaws.

I use a cheapo Sears micrometer. It has a clutch that limits how tight it can be turned and I think I get more consistent results.

 

[roundball]

I've always just used the same dial caliper I used through years of reloading...gently roll the jaws close until I just feel resistance and get an average reading...I don't compress them...consistency of method is what's important to me.

Although I mainly buy bulk purchases of precut/prelubed patches when I find them on a good sale, I've learned to sample mic them to ensure I know the thickness in the bags, as it's sometimes different from the printed label.

For Example:
Oxyoke labeled .018" pillow ticking measure .018"
Oxyoke labeled .020" tight weave cotton measure .022"

Most bags of .018" pillow ticking under T/Cs label measure .018...BUT I've discovered a few bags that measured .016"/.017"....or .020"/022"/024".
I re-label the bags and keep them sorted by "actual" thickness for use in different calibers / loads.

 

[123.DieselBenz]

One thing to remember is that different fabrics will compress differently . . . so a wide surface pressing on the fabric will give a thicker measurement, than a smaller section . . .

 

[bwhoffman]

One variable is how tight you push the jaws.

I use a cheapo Sears micrometer. It has a clutch that limits how tight it can be turned and I think I get more consistent results.

This is exactly how I measure it and also the device I use as well!

My final check and/or measurement is how it feels during the loading process as well as what the fired patch looks like!

I strongly feel that the slip clutch on the micrometer keeps things on an "apple to apple" basis.

 

[ohio ramrod]

Since I spent over 42 years as a machinist I use the micrometers that I am used to. Remember you measure the cloth for comparison n ot an absolute measurement. When I first started I used my fathers "spong mics" He worked in a rubber factory and had a set with one inch diameter discs on the stem and anvil to distribute the pressure when measuring spounge rubber. I found that on cloth I could get the same reading with a "light touch" so I just use regular mics. But calipers will work ,the thing you have to be is consistant! :idunno: :idunno:

 

[hanshi]

I use a dial caliper to measure cloth. I snug the jaws with fair pressure and watch what the dial springs back to when I release the jaws. I consider THAT figure as my thickness. Yes, consistency is what counts.

 

[necchi]

I use a micrometer and measure both soft and compressed readings. I actually twist the shaft and NOT the thumb dial for the "crushed" measurement.
But to answer flehto's question,
" So which is correct?. "
The method the individual (you) use is correct for you.

After all, the measurement only apply's to what each person needs. It's like a scale or powder measure. My 70grns may not be the same as your 70grns but my 70 with my measure works in my gun.

It was explained to me years ago that the dial caliper's jaws cover more space than the mic, so I chose the mic. Had I not been told this, I may still be happily useing my caliper and still finding the properties I need in fabric, :wink:

Caliper or Mic ?
Ying or Yang ?
:idunno:

 

[Rifleman1776]

I use a regular micrometer and turn until the clutch clicks.

 

[reddog]

Since I spent over 42 years as a machinist I use the micrometers that I am used to. Remember you measure the cloth for comparison n ot an absolute measurement. When I first started I used my fathers "spong mics" He worked in a rubber factory and had a set with one inch diameter discs on the stem and anvil to distribute the pressure when measuring spounge rubber. I found that on cloth I could get the same reading with a "light touch" so I just use regular mics. But calipers will work ,the thing you have to be is consistant! :idunno: :idunno:

Yes,,,I understand, I only have 40 years as a machinist, and about 30 yrs shooting front stuffers. and I do know how to measure, mostly I was curious about other fellows techniques. I agree consistincy, (sp)? is everything,,,but when I see a post that says "I use a .022 patch with a .xxx ball" I always wonder about "how" the cloth was measured, being well aware that different techniques can give different results.

 

[reddog]

I use a micrometer and measure both soft and compressed readings. I actually twist the shaft and NOT the thumb dial for the "crushed" measurement.
But to answer flehto's question,
" So which is correct?. "
The method the individual (you) use is correct for you.

After all, the measurement only apply's to what each person needs. It's like a scale or powder measure. My 70grns may not be the same as your 70grns but my 70 with my measure works in my gun.

It was explained to me years ago that the dial caliper's jaws cover more space than the mic, so I chose the mic. Had I not been told this, I may still be happily useing my caliper and still finding the properties I need in fabric, :wink:

Caliper or Mic ?
Ying or Yang ?
:idunno:

That is why I use dial calipers across the width of the jaws, I think it gives me a better "average". I am not proposing that my way is the best or only way to do it right, simply curious...

 

[reddog]

One thing to remember is that different fabrics will compress differently . . . so a wide surface pressing on the fabric will give a thicker measurement, than a smaller section . . .

I think I noted that in my first post,,,you are correct.

 

[necchi]

Ya know reddog, that's an interesting thing about fabric. It seldom measures exactly the same from bolt to bolt.
+/- .001-.002 or more in run tolerance seems to be the norm.
Those machines that weave/make cotton fabric deal with several variables such as speed and tention as well as natural issues with the cotton itself like moisture, individual fiber thickness and length. The "Nap" above the guide fibers is a factor also.

I've always found it interesting when guys sweat over red or blue pillow ticking and whether it's from Walmart or Joann's, because they just "hafta" have the same stuff.

When I post a fabric thickness in a topic, I usually state the measurement as a soft contact measurement, it will generally be quite close to the same with both tools. And it gives a new shooter an idea that there are other choices beyond store bought precut in .005-.010-.015,,,,

But once you purchase a fabric and find a way too lube it and use it successfully, you'll want something with the same characteristcs for the next purchase.

For me, what's important is the crushed dimention. That's what happens to the fabric when it enters the bore between the ball and the rifling,, the next fabric I purchse needs to "crush" the same as the last.

It takes experimenting man, small quantities of several fabric thickness and a bunch of shootin

 

[paulvallandigham]

I grew up when vernier calipers were considered "IT", and micrometers measured only to .001" inch, with no click adjustments.

I learned to use a micrometer and "Sneak up" on a measure by using a very light touch. First, measuring steel bar stock of known dimension. Then, I used a wooden ruler the kind we all had in school. The first time I got to use a more "Expensive" micrometer with the .0001: scale, using the brake and click adjustment was in 64-65, when I was finishing HS and taking a machine shop class to learn how to use a lathe, and a milling machine. My father acquired one of the better Sterritt micrometers, and brought it home.

I guess my formal training all those years ago has me finding it difficult that everyone doesn't know how to properly use a micrometer or caliper on cloth. Its been so long since I didn't know the "Touch" needed, Its difficult to understand people's problems.

Today, I have a dial caliper, but won't spend the money for the newer "digital" calipers. They are just another storage place for dead batteries, IMHO. :grin: They are wonderful tools if you are measuring small electronic parts, but I am not doing that.

One of my best friends, growing up, was in a Machine Shop apprentice program, and his class got to use then then-new click adjustable micrometers. His shop teacher was a bit jealous of Bud's skills with machine tools, and bet him one day that he would lose his "A" in his course, if his work piece did not measure accurately to 10 thousandths of an inch. He then grabbed Bud's tool, and held on to it in his hand while they discussed the terms of the wager. When they were done, he demanded that bud re-measure the piece. Bud knew that the heat of his hand would expand the diameter of the workpiece a few 10 thousandths of an inch, so he demanded that the piece be put down on the work bench to cool down to room temperature. The instructor knew he had been caught with his thumb on the scale, so he acquiesced. When Bud measured the piece, it came in Right on the money, and he kept his "A".

I know people who work with machine tools today that don't know how easy it is to change the dimension of a piece of metal with heat, especially when using those digital calipers and micrometers that will give you measurements to 100k's of an inch.

But, everyone today seems to think you can't live another day unless you own a digital caliper or micrometer. Oh Well. I just have to wonder about what our ancestors in the 18th century, who could build an entire gun with nothing more sophisticated for measuring tools than a straight edge, and dividers, would think of the stuff people fret about today.