What is the theory behind levels?
I've heard that carpenter's are more precise
than those used by bricklayers.
I have examined the ones we have here and there
is no indication as to precision on either so
the only way to tell would be the mortar stains
on one of them...
--
underground experts united
http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573
On 12/31/2017 3:34 PM, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> Clare Snyder wrote:
>
>> As far as a level being able to measure
>> totally level both ways on a surface that is
>> not level - not possible. Even the cheapest
>> level will only read level on a level
>> surface, both ways, if it is level to within
>> a VERY small limit of error - if you can read
>> the bubble accurately
>
> So what level should one buy for general
> purposes? I won't abuse it. Today I made
> a fence with planks to three horizontal bars
> (ribs?) if you want an example application.
Most any level is going to be accurate enough for wood, especially
construction grade material.
>
> By the way, here I might also ask what way to
> put the planks with respect to the age rings?
> I thought I'd put them with the imagined circle
> away from the bars, so that the plank will
> naturally bend that way (toward the bars) over
> time. I'm not sure that will happen tho or if
> this is something to care about at all?
Are you asking which way to place the pickets? Does not matter, a nail
about 1" in from each side and one in the middle if it is a wide picket.
>
> Third question, the posts down in the ground,
> does it really help if you first put them in to
> a barrel with a fire?
>
Whuuut???
On Sun, 31 Dec 2017 17:12:51 -0500, "John Grossbohlin"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>"Bill" wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
>>After about 25 posts, no one has come back to the OP's point that a level
>>can indicate that a surface is level ("both ways") even for a surface which
>>is slightly off-level. Different levels have different tolerances by
>>design. As I indicated in my post, a 100% accurate level would be a PITA.
>>But, I believe that there are different categories of bubble levels. I
>>think this is left to be addressed.
>
>Stabila has specs for each of their levels and all the ones I looked at say
>"±1/32in @ 72in." I did not find specs for Stanley levels.... Irwin
>guarantees vial accuracy for the life of the product at .029 degrees but say
>nothing about the accuracy of the placement of the vial in the level's beam.
>
>One issue I haven't seen mentioned is that longer levels tend to give a
>better overall indication of level as they average out the irregularities in
>the surface being tested. For example, if you use a 2' level to plumb a 2x4
>stud wall you run the risk of placing the level at different points in the
>curve (no matter how slight) of the stud upon which the level is placed. A
>6' level would tend to give a better indication of overall plumb in such
>cases but a 4' probably suffices. Same kind of issue with laying bricks or
>blocks... a 2' level would be subject to the variation within the few units
>it's touching rather than giving an overall indication of the course...
>again a 6' level would be better but a 4' probably suffices.
>
>Put another way, there is the accuracy of the level itself (to include the
>vial, the beam, and the placement of the vial in the beam) and then there is
>the accuracy of the application of the level. I dare say that the level in
>my Starret combination square is highly accurate but it would be pretty much
>useless for use in plumbing and leveling the framing of a house.
A high precision "square level" is only about 3 inches long, but when
snapped onto a 2 foot framing square it is HIGHLY accurate. On a 4
foot drywall square, even better - yet it is only THREE INCHES long.
Similarly, using a 2 foot level with a good straight "guage board" of
whatever size you like makes the 2 footer "accurate" over the longer
distance - while a 4 foot level id totally useless if the space
available for lefeling is less than about 47 inches - - - -
Your Starrett combination square could well give you better accuracy
used in this way than your 4 or 6 foot level - and it will level a 8
inch surface as well.
On 12/29/2017 10:57 PM, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> What is the theory behind levels?
>
> I've heard that carpenter's are more precise
> than those used by bricklayers.
>
> I have examined the ones we have here and there
> is no indication as to precision on either so
> the only way to tell would be the mortar stains
> on one of them...
Use it to "level" a board, then put a cup filled with water
on the board. The cup will confirm whether the board is level.
On Saturday, December 30, 2017 at 6:29:00 PM UTC-5, -MIKE- wrote:
> On 12/30/17 5:13 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> > On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 16:48:00 -0600, -MIKE- <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On 12/30/17 4:37 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> >>> On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 15:11:07 -0700, Just Wondering
> >>> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 12/29/2017 10:57 PM, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> >>>>> What is the theory behind levels?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I've heard that carpenter's are more precise
> >>>>> than those used by bricklayers.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I have examined the ones we have here and there
> >>>>> is no indication as to precision on either so
> >>>>> the only way to tell would be the mortar stains
> >>>>> on one of them...
> >>>>
> >>>> Use it to "level" a board, then put a cup filled with water
> >>>> on the board. The cup will confirm whether the board is level.
> >>>
> >>> Just put it on something level (e.g. another level), then flip the
> >>> level end for end and top for bottom. If it doesn't read level after
> >>> any of the steps, throw it as far as possible and start over (with
> >>> another level).
> >>>
> >>
> >> Doesn't really have to be level.
> >> If it hits the line or is the same distance from the line when flipped,
> >> it's level.
> >
> > True, it's just easier if it's level. Comparing it to another level
> > makes it so you don't even need a fixed place to test (sometimes
> > difficult in a store).
> >
>
> Tell me about it.
> I like HF but I need to test their levels.
> I have a 6 footer from there and it's too cheap not to buy, but I had to
> go through about 7 of them before I found one that was acceptable. Not
> level, acceptable.
>
A level itself isn't level...unless it's laying on something level.
On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 06:11:07 -0800 (PST), Sonny <[email protected]>
wrote:
>On Friday, December 29, 2017 at 11:57:52 PM UTC-6, Emanuel Berg wrote:
>> What is the theory behind levels?
>
>In the spirit of chess, it's to give a comparative ranking to the individual players. BTW, are you the Swedish grand master?
>
>Otherwise: ???? I suppose it's to help make things level or as level as possible, no matter what the profession. I've never heard that one profession's efforts are more precise, than another's.
I would assume so. The masonry and frame structure had better line up
somewhere. ;-)
FOr masonry, the overall level is set up by the corners and strings
are used to mark "level" every several courses. The mason's level is
used to speed things up and keep things from going too far out of
whack between these "absolutes".
>"Something" is either level or it's not and the particular or different leveling tools make for achieving the goal as best as possible, in/for the particular scenarios.
Something is "close enough", or it's not (nothing is perfect). To
that end, I can imagine a trade-off of sensitivity for speed.
>When I bought my old pillared house, I suspected it wasn't level. I made a 100' water level, with 1/2" clear tubing. I was able to gauge the floor's levelness from one or more point(s) to any/all other point(s). That would have been much more difficult with a 4' level.
I use water levels for many things. It's easier to set up siding, for
example, with a water level. Set the level on the house, and measure
from there. Drains, landscaping, and concrete work, are other useful
applications for water levels. Gotta make sure to get all the air out
of the tube, though.
On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 18:59:16 -0500, [email protected] wrote:
>On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 17:04:31 -0600, Markem <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 23:37:46 +0100, Emanuel Berg <[email protected]>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>DerbyDad03 wrote:
>>>
>>>> But just once...
>>>
>>>When and how does decalibration occur?
>>
>>Banging around, more expensive levels have an adjustment for the
>>bubble, though I have not seen one for sometime for sale.
>
>The problem with calibrations is that the calibration mechanism,
>itself, is often the biggest reason calibration is necessary.
Work in a calibration lab once, so that is a good thing to me. ;)
On Saturday, December 30, 2017 at 2:37:48 PM UTC-8, [email protected] wrote:
> Just put it on something level (e.g. another level), then flip the
> level end for end and top for bottom. If it doesn't read level after
> any of the steps, throw it as far as possible and start over (with
> another level).
Or, adjust it (for old levels, with replaceable vials, this was always possible).
Nowadays, the adjustment feature is sometimes absent.
Many manufactured items look 'fixed' though a litle hot vinegar would
dissolve the matrix around the vial, and allow adjust/replacement. Every
bent old level is a source of replacement vials when one cracks...
On Sun, 31 Dec 2017 19:25:30 -0600, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
wrote:
>On 12/31/2017 3:34 PM, Emanuel Berg wrote:
>> Clare Snyder wrote:
>>
>>> As far as a level being able to measure
>>> totally level both ways on a surface that is
>>> not level - not possible. Even the cheapest
>>> level will only read level on a level
>>> surface, both ways, if it is level to within
>>> a VERY small limit of error - if you can read
>>> the bubble accurately
>>
>> So what level should one buy for general
>> purposes? I won't abuse it. Today I made
>> a fence with planks to three horizontal bars
>> (ribs?) if you want an example application.
>
>Most any level is going to be accurate enough for wood, especially
>construction grade material.
Try going through the levels at HF sometime. I've found some real
stinkers at the Borg, too.
>
>
>>
>> By the way, here I might also ask what way to
>> put the planks with respect to the age rings?
>> I thought I'd put them with the imagined circle
>> away from the bars, so that the plank will
>> naturally bend that way (toward the bars) over
>> time. I'm not sure that will happen tho or if
>> this is something to care about at all?
>
>Are you asking which way to place the pickets? Does not matter, a nail
>about 1" in from each side and one in the middle if it is a wide picket.
Uh, Leon, the picket points go *UP*. ;-)
>> Third question, the posts down in the ground,
>> does it really help if you first put them in to
>> a barrel with a fire?
>>
>
>Whuuut???
I think the idea is to carbonize the outside so it tastes bad to
critters. It might even work (burn off the sugars) but I'd think it
would be pretty hard to control.
On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 20:50:36 -0600, -MIKE- <[email protected]>
wrote:
>On 12/30/17 7:16 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 16:28:16 -0800 (PST), DerbyDad03
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> On Saturday, December 30, 2017 at 6:29:00 PM UTC-5, -MIKE- wrote:
>>>> On 12/30/17 5:13 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 16:48:00 -0600, -MIKE-
>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 12/30/17 4:37 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 15:11:07 -0700, Just Wondering
>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 12/29/2017 10:57 PM, Emanuel Berg wrote:
>>>>>>>>> What is the theory behind levels?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I've heard that carpenter's are more precise than those
>>>>>>>>> used by bricklayers.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I have examined the ones we have here and there is no
>>>>>>>>> indication as to precision on either so the only way to
>>>>>>>>> tell would be the mortar stains on one of them...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Use it to "level" a board, then put a cup filled with
>>>>>>>> water on the board. The cup will confirm whether the
>>>>>>>> board is level.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Just put it on something level (e.g. another level), then
>>>>>>> flip the level end for end and top for bottom. If it
>>>>>>> doesn't read level after any of the steps, throw it as far
>>>>>>> as possible and start over (with another level).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Doesn't really have to be level. If it hits the line or is
>>>>>> the same distance from the line when flipped, it's level.
>>>>>
>>>>> True, it's just easier if it's level. Comparing it to another
>>>>> level makes it so you don't even need a fixed place to test
>>>>> (sometimes difficult in a store).
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Tell me about it. I like HF but I need to test their levels. I
>>>> have a 6 footer from there and it's too cheap not to buy, but I
>>>> had to go through about 7 of them before I found one that was
>>>> acceptable. Not level, acceptable.
>>>>
>>>
>>> A level itself isn't level...unless it's laying on something
>>> level.
>>
>> If you use a level to compare against, it doesn't matter that the
>> (test) level is level (see above) or even that it's a good level, it
>> just needs to be somewhat close to being level and, of course,
>> repeatable.
>>
>
>It's not going to help at the store, but I make a habit of having the
>front of my workbench be perfectly level and perfectly flat on the front
>edge. It's nice to be able to quickly check a level you dropped and to
>be able to quickly check an edged board without using a held
>straightedge against it.
Good point and something worth considering in the future. My benches
are on wheels, so it's not possible to (keep) the front level. I'll
have to check them for straightness. I can use my saw table for that,
if needed, though.
>
>The long, perfectly straight front edge also makes it a quick task to
>check squares for square using the mark and flip method.
The instructions for my RAS showed how to do this as a setup step.
Works well.
On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 11:32:00 -0600, -MIKE- <[email protected]>
wrote:
>On 12/29/17 11:57 PM, Emanuel Berg wrote:
>> What is the theory behind levels?
>>
>> I've heard that carpenter's are more precise than those used by
>> bricklayers.
>>
>> I have examined the ones we have here and there is no indication as
>> to precision on either so the only way to tell would be the mortar
>> stains on one of them...
>>
>
>Interesting discussion. I've never really thought about it, as far as
>accuracy goes.
>I really doubt that a carpenter's level is more accurate than a mason's,
>but who knows.
>My gut is that *if* there was a difference, it would be the other way
>around since carpenters pretty much only need level or plumb for about
>8ft. And even then with framing, 1/8" off plumb at 8ft is still
>considered ok.
>
>In any case, the big difference is with durability. A mason will often
>use his level to tap brick/block into place. Also, it's easier to clean
>mortar off of wood.
My dad's favorite carpenter's level was wood with a brass edge, but
the one he used most was aluminum because it stood up to bouncing
around the back of the truck with all the other tools and supplies.
On Saturday, December 30, 2017 at 8:13:14 PM UTC-5, -MIKE- wrote:
> On 12/30/17 6:28 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
> > On Saturday, December 30, 2017 at 6:29:00 PM UTC-5, -MIKE- wrote:
> >> On 12/30/17 5:13 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> >>> On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 16:48:00 -0600, -MIKE- <[email protected]>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 12/30/17 4:37 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> >>>>> On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 15:11:07 -0700, Just Wondering
> >>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On 12/29/2017 10:57 PM, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> >>>>>>> What is the theory behind levels?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I've heard that carpenter's are more precise
> >>>>>>> than those used by bricklayers.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I have examined the ones we have here and there
> >>>>>>> is no indication as to precision on either so
> >>>>>>> the only way to tell would be the mortar stains
> >>>>>>> on one of them...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Use it to "level" a board, then put a cup filled with water
> >>>>>> on the board. The cup will confirm whether the board is level.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Just put it on something level (e.g. another level), then flip the
> >>>>> level end for end and top for bottom. If it doesn't read level after
> >>>>> any of the steps, throw it as far as possible and start over (with
> >>>>> another level).
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Doesn't really have to be level.
> >>>> If it hits the line or is the same distance from the line when flipped,
> >>>> it's level.
> >>>
> >>> True, it's just easier if it's level. Comparing it to another level
> >>> makes it so you don't even need a fixed place to test (sometimes
> >>> difficult in a store).
> >>>
> >>
> >> Tell me about it.
> >> I like HF but I need to test their levels.
> >> I have a 6 footer from there and it's too cheap not to buy, but I had to
> >> go through about 7 of them before I found one that was acceptable. Not
> >> level, acceptable.
> >>
> >
> > A level itself isn't level...unless it's laying on something level.
> >
>
> Yeah, I'm pretty sure everyone, you included, knows what I mean.
>
>
I guess I should have included the: ;-)
On Friday, December 29, 2017 at 11:57:52 PM UTC-6, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> What is the theory behind levels?
In the spirit of chess, it's to give a comparative ranking to the individua=
l players. BTW, are you the Swedish grand master?
Otherwise: ???? I suppose it's to help make things level or as level as =
possible, no matter what the profession. I've never heard that one profes=
sion's efforts are more precise, than another's.=20
"Something" is either level or it's not and the particular or different lev=
eling tools make for achieving the goal as best as possible, in/for the par=
ticular scenarios.=20
When I bought my old pillared house, I suspected it wasn't level. I made =
a 100' water level, with 1/2" clear tubing. I was able to gauge the floor=
's levelness from one or more point(s) to any/all other point(s). That wo=
uld have been much more difficult with a 4' level.
Sonny
On Sun, 31 Dec 2017 01:29:43 -0500, Bill <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Just Wondering wrote:
>> On 12/30/2017 3:15 PM, Emanuel Berg wrote:
>>> Just Wondering wrote:
>>>
>>>>> What is the theory behind levels? I've heard
>>>>> that carpenter's are more precise than those
>>>>> used by bricklayers. I have examined the
>>>>> ones we have here and there is no indication
>>>>> as to precision on either so the only way to
>>>>> tell would be the mortar stains on one of
>>>>> them...
>>>>
>>>> Use it to "level" a board, then put a cup
>>>> filled with water on the board. The cup will
>>>> confirm whether the board is level.
>>>
>>> Isn't that to take it back a level, having to
>>> use utensils to verify your tools?
>>
>> Perhaps. I was responding to the stated example about
>> "the only way to tell" with another way to tell. As
>> someone else pointed out, you could also check with
>> your level oriented in one direction, then turn your
>> level end-for-end and compare the result. There are
>> probably lots of other ways to tell.
>
>After about 25 posts, no one has come back to the OP's point that a
>level can indicate that a surface is level ("both ways") even for a
>surface which is slightly off-level. Different levels have different
>tolerances by design. As I indicated in my post, a 100% accurate level
>would be a PITA. But, I believe that there are different categories of
>bubble levels. I think this is left to be addressed.
I've addressed it.
There ARE different "sensitivities" of level - call it "accuracy" if
youi like - or "resolution".
It is specified by number of degrees per unit of measurement bubble
displacement - such as .05/2mm, or in units per unit of deflection -
like .2/1 - 0.2 inch bubble deflection with one end of 3 meter
level raised 1 inch.
Can also be metric.
An engineer's precision level (machinist's level) or a survey transit
may be as accurate as .005 degree per 2mm bubble deflection, while a
carpenter's square is tiypically closer to 1 degree - and a plumber's
level may have 3 or 4 vials of different accuracy for measuring
different "drops" for different drain or pipe installations
As far as a level being able to measure totally level both ways on a
surface that is not level - not possible. Even the cheapest level will
only read level on a level surface, both ways, if it is level to
within a VERY small limit of error - if you can read the bubble
accurately
On Sun, 31 Dec 2017 22:34:26 +0100, Emanuel Berg <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Clare Snyder wrote:
>
>> As far as a level being able to measure
>> totally level both ways on a surface that is
>> not level - not possible. Even the cheapest
>> level will only read level on a level
>> surface, both ways, if it is level to within
>> a VERY small limit of error - if you can read
>> the bubble accurately
>
>So what level should one buy for general
>purposes? I won't abuse it. Today I made
>a fence with planks to three horizontal bars
>(ribs?) if you want an example application.
"Rails" I'd use at least a 4' level for this. An "I-Beam" or "Box"
level is probably the best. "I-Beams" tend to be cheaper, at least
here. If you aren't going to abuse it, don't spend a lot of money,
just buy (test) a good one. Find a place to keep it where it won't
get dinged (and where you'll remember where it is ;-). A 4' level is
good for the posts (vertical part), too.
To lay out a fence, I'd use a "water level", described elsewhere in
this thread.
>
>By the way, here I might also ask what way to
>put the planks with respect to the age rings?
Center of the tree down.
>I thought I'd put them with the imagined circle
>away from the bars, so that the plank will
>naturally bend that way (toward the bars) over
>time. I'm not sure that will happen tho or if
>this is something to care about at all?
Good plan. Also, splinters down, if you're not going to keep them
well painted/stained. Up if you don't want people climbing the fence
(e.g. around a pool).
>
>Third question, the posts down in the ground,
>does it really help if you first put them in to
>a barrel with a fire?
Never heard that one before. I'd make sure they were rated for ground
contact. Also, put the bottom few inches in sand or, better, gravel.
Paint all cuts with "green" stuff and cut the tops (perhaps after the
fence is done) at an angle so water doesn't sit on the post tops. They
also sell post covers, here at least, to keep water off the post ends.
They're a worthwhile addition and can be quite attractive (and
pricey). I'm partial to the copper ones. ;-)
Bill wrote:
> As I indicated in my post, a 100% accurate
> level would be a PITA.
100% literally would be impossible but
100% practically speaking - why would that be
a PITA? Because nothing would ever satisfy it?
Well, if so, a ruler for example - I always
considered that 100% accurate practically
speaking but that hasn't stopped anyone from
using it as far as I know?
--
underground experts united
http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573
Clare Snyder wrote:
> Not critical, but I usually put the concave
> side to the post if using screws.
Stainless, self-drilling deck screws with
a "milling" (? - direct translation). I put
them in with a drill driver (torx 25 head)
without drilling first - very easy...
>> Third question, the posts down in the
>> ground, does it really help if you first put
>> them in to a barrel with a fire?
>
> A charred end MAY have some advantage
... you don't sound very convinced? :) Anyway
thank you and krw and everyone else
for answering.
--
underground experts united
http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573
krw wrote:
> Just put it on something level (e.g.
> another level), then flip the level end for
> end and top for bottom. If it doesn't read
> level after any of the steps, throw it as far
> as possible and start over (with another
> level).
Good rule, easy to remember :)
--
underground experts united
http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573
Just Wondering wrote:
>> What is the theory behind levels? I've heard
>> that carpenter's are more precise than those
>> used by bricklayers. I have examined the
>> ones we have here and there is no indication
>> as to precision on either so the only way to
>> tell would be the mortar stains on one of
>> them...
>
> Use it to "level" a board, then put a cup
> filled with water on the board. The cup will
> confirm whether the board is level.
Isn't that to take it back a level, having to
use utensils to verify your tools?
--
underground experts united
http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573
Sonny wrote:
> In the spirit of chess, it's to give
> a comparative ranking to the individual
> players. BTW, are you the Swedish
> grand master?
No :) Berg is common last name (means
"mountain"), Emanuel or Manne/Manny less so but
still not that uncommon.
> "Something" is either level or it's not
In the math world perhaps...
> When I bought my old pillared house,
> I suspected it wasn't level. I made a 100'
> water level, with 1/2" clear tubing. I was
> able to gauge the floor's levelness from one
> or more point(s) to any/all other point(s).
> That would have been much more difficult with
> a 4' level.
Here, the floor is so uneven even people who
are slightly drunk can hardly stand. I used
a marble to find out just which way it went and
it instantly rolled into a corner :)
--
underground experts united
http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573
DerbyDad03 wrote:
> Precision can often be based on the size of
> the bubble.
>
> My pet peeve when it comes to spirit levels
> are bubbles that are too small.
>
> If the bubble is so small that there is
> a relatively significant gap on both sides
> when trying to level something, then the user
> is left to "eyeballing level" by trying to
> get the gaps even via sight. There is
> certainly a lack of precision when that needs
> to be done.
>
> If the bubble is large enough that it almost
> touches (or perhaps just touches) the lines,
> then finding level is not as much of
> a guessing game.
That's right! I noticed this today when
I almost hurt my eyes trying to get the bubble
in the middle!
--
underground experts united
http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573
Clare Snyder wrote:
> As far as a level being able to measure
> totally level both ways on a surface that is
> not level - not possible. Even the cheapest
> level will only read level on a level
> surface, both ways, if it is level to within
> a VERY small limit of error - if you can read
> the bubble accurately
So what level should one buy for general
purposes? I won't abuse it. Today I made
a fence with planks to three horizontal bars
(ribs?) if you want an example application.
By the way, here I might also ask what way to
put the planks with respect to the age rings?
I thought I'd put them with the imagined circle
away from the bars, so that the plank will
naturally bend that way (toward the bars) over
time. I'm not sure that will happen tho or if
this is something to care about at all?
Third question, the posts down in the ground,
does it really help if you first put them in to
a barrel with a fire?
--
underground experts united
http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573
On Sunday, December 31, 2017 at 8:25:40 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
> On 12/31/2017 3:34 PM, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> > Clare Snyder wrote:
> >
> >> As far as a level being able to measure
> >> totally level both ways on a surface that is
> >> not level - not possible. Even the cheapest
> >> level will only read level on a level
> >> surface, both ways, if it is level to within
> >> a VERY small limit of error - if you can read
> >> the bubble accurately
> >
> > So what level should one buy for general
> > purposes? I won't abuse it. Today I made
> > a fence with planks to three horizontal bars
> > (ribs?) if you want an example application.
>
> Most any level is going to be accurate enough for wood, especially
> construction grade material.
>
>
> >
> > By the way, here I might also ask what way to
> > put the planks with respect to the age rings?
> > I thought I'd put them with the imagined circle
> > away from the bars, so that the plank will
> > naturally bend that way (toward the bars) over
> > time. I'm not sure that will happen tho or if
> > this is something to care about at all?
>
> Are you asking which way to place the pickets? Does not matter, a nail
> about 1" in from each side and one in the middle if it is a wide picket.
>
> >
> > Third question, the posts down in the ground,
> > does it really help if you first put them in to
> > a barrel with a fire?
> >
>
> Whuuut???
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvt2BA091XA
On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 17:04:31 -0600, Markem <[email protected]>
wrote:
>On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 23:37:46 +0100, Emanuel Berg <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>
>>DerbyDad03 wrote:
>>
>>> But just once...
>>
>>When and how does decalibration occur?
>
>Banging around, more expensive levels have an adjustment for the
>bubble, though I have not seen one for sometime for sale.
The problem with calibrations is that the calibration mechanism,
itself, is often the biggest reason calibration is necessary.
On 12/30/2017 3:15 PM, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> Just Wondering wrote:
>
>>> What is the theory behind levels? I've heard
>>> that carpenter's are more precise than those
>>> used by bricklayers. I have examined the
>>> ones we have here and there is no indication
>>> as to precision on either so the only way to
>>> tell would be the mortar stains on one of
>>> them...
>>
>> Use it to "level" a board, then put a cup
>> filled with water on the board. The cup will
>> confirm whether the board is level.
>
> Isn't that to take it back a level, having to
> use utensils to verify your tools?
Perhaps. I was responding to the stated example about
"the only way to tell" with another way to tell. As
someone else pointed out, you could also check with
your level oriented in one direction, then turn your
level end-for-end and compare the result. There are
probably lots of other ways to tell.
On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 08:01:20 -0800 (PST), DerbyDad03
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Saturday, December 30, 2017 at 12:57:52 AM UTC-5, Emanuel Berg wrote:
>> What is the theory behind levels?
>>
>> I've heard that carpenter's are more precise
>> than those used by bricklayers.
>>
>> I have examined the ones we have here and there
>> is no indication as to precision on either so
>> the only way to tell would be the mortar stains
>> on one of them...
>>
>
>Precision can often be based on the size of the bubble.
>
>My pet peeve when it comes to spirit levels are bubbles that are too small.
>
>If the bubble is so small that there is a relatively significant gap on both
>sides when trying to level something, then the user is left to "eyeballing
>level" by trying to get the gaps even via sight. There is certainly a lack
>of precision when that needs to be done.
>
>If the bubble is large enough that it almost touches (or perhaps just touches)
>the lines, then finding level is not as much of a guessing game.
>
>Compare the full-size bubble in this level...
>
>https://i.imgur.com/TQHLNXE.jpg
>
>...to this short one:
>
>https://i.imgur.com/uZ2WkRh.jpg
>
>All else being equal, which one do you think is more precise?
Not so much the size of the bubble as the size relative to the
reference lines. A smaller bubble, with the finer line spacing to
match, would by default create a more "precice" level. ASlso. the
diametric ratio of the tube (Vial) (or curve, in the case of a single
position level) also affects the accurace. The tube of an "all
position" level is larger in diameter at the center, and smaller at
each end. Some crappy cheap chinese levels are inaccurate because the
widest portion of the tube is not at the center, or one end is wider
than the other.. The bubble MUST be able to rize to the highest point
when the level is "level". The larger the radius of the vial, the
better the sensitivity - measured by the number of degrees of tilt
required to deflect the bubble a given distance. A virtually straight
vial (infinite radius) will be so sensitive that it will be virtually
impossible to center the bubble - the bubble will always be either at
one end or the other..
Engineers levels , transits, and machinists levels tend to be large
radius vials,and very sensitive and precice, while "framing" and
"bricklayers" levels tend to have a smaller radius and less precision.
A bricklayers level may be less accurate as well due to being banged
around more - so the bubble may be off center slightly (out of
calibration) Calibration error can be quickly checked by turning the
level end for end on the same surface and noting the relative
displacement of the bubble.
On Saturday, December 30, 2017 at 5:15:17 PM UTC-5, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> Just Wondering wrote:
>
> >> What is the theory behind levels? I've heard
> >> that carpenter's are more precise than those
> >> used by bricklayers. I have examined the
> >> ones we have here and there is no indication
> >> as to precision on either so the only way to
> >> tell would be the mortar stains on one of
> >> them...
> >
> > Use it to "level" a board, then put a cup
> > filled with water on the board. The cup will
> > confirm whether the board is level.
>
> Isn't that to take it back a level, having to
> use utensils to verify your tools?
>
But just once...
On Sun, 31 Dec 2017 13:27:59 -0600, -MIKE- <[email protected]>
wrote:
>On 12/31/17 1:13 PM, Emanuel Berg wrote:
>> Bill wrote:
>>
>>> As I indicated in my post, a 100% accurate
>>> level would be a PITA.
>>
>> 100% literally would be impossible but
>> 100% practically speaking - why would that be
>> a PITA? Because nothing would ever satisfy it?
>>
>> Well, if so, a ruler for example - I always
>> considered that 100% accurate practically
>> speaking but that hasn't stopped anyone from
>> using it as far as I know?
>>
>
>The point he's making is that close enough is close enough for most uses
>of a 2 or 4ft level.
>If you need more accurate, you go to a 6 or 8ft level.
A 6 or 8 foot level is not necessarily more accurate than a 24 inch
level - and in fact there are 4 inch or 6 inch levels that are MORE
accurate than the runof the mill 4 or 6 foot level
>I have a few 4ft levels and more, for whatever reason, is much more
>accurate than the others. In many situations, I don't use it because it
>is a bit of a PITA.
>I don't need to be scootching an 8ft wall back and forth to try to
>achieve plumb to within 1/64". That's what happens with this particular
>level. The center of the spirit vials is much flatter requiring much
>more precision in movement to get the bubble dead-center. Whereas, the
>other two have a much more pronounced curve to the viral meaning the
>precision of movement needed to get the bubble dead center is much more
>forgiving.
You figured it out!!! It's not the length of the level that makes it
more accurate, it's the radius of the vial.
>When that level is dead center, it might be accurate 1/16" in 8ft, which
>is plenty enough for framing.
>
>It's like using the course adjustment instead of the fine adjustment.
>Just like with a framing square. It needs to measure decent framing
>angles, not send a space probe to mars.
Or close a survey within 1/10 of an inch over 2000 feet.
"Bill" wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>After about 25 posts, no one has come back to the OP's point that a level
>can indicate that a surface is level ("both ways") even for a surface which
>is slightly off-level. Different levels have different tolerances by
>design. As I indicated in my post, a 100% accurate level would be a PITA.
>But, I believe that there are different categories of bubble levels. I
>think this is left to be addressed.
Stabila has specs for each of their levels and all the ones I looked at say
"±1/32in @ 72in." I did not find specs for Stanley levels.... Irwin
guarantees vial accuracy for the life of the product at .029 degrees but say
nothing about the accuracy of the placement of the vial in the level's beam.
One issue I haven't seen mentioned is that longer levels tend to give a
better overall indication of level as they average out the irregularities in
the surface being tested. For example, if you use a 2' level to plumb a 2x4
stud wall you run the risk of placing the level at different points in the
curve (no matter how slight) of the stud upon which the level is placed. A
6' level would tend to give a better indication of overall plumb in such
cases but a 4' probably suffices. Same kind of issue with laying bricks or
blocks... a 2' level would be subject to the variation within the few units
it's touching rather than giving an overall indication of the course...
again a 6' level would be better but a 4' probably suffices.
Put another way, there is the accuracy of the level itself (to include the
vial, the beam, and the placement of the vial in the beam) and then there is
the accuracy of the application of the level. I dare say that the level in
my Starret combination square is highly accurate but it would be pretty much
useless for use in plumbing and leveling the framing of a house.
On Saturday, December 30, 2017 at 12:57:52 AM UTC-5, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> What is the theory behind levels?
>
> I've heard that carpenter's are more precise
> than those used by bricklayers.
>
> I have examined the ones we have here and there
> is no indication as to precision on either so
> the only way to tell would be the mortar stains
> on one of them...
>
Precision can often be based on the size of the bubble.
My pet peeve when it comes to spirit levels are bubbles that are too small.
If the bubble is so small that there is a relatively significant gap on both
sides when trying to level something, then the user is left to "eyeballing
level" by trying to get the gaps even via sight. There is certainly a lack
of precision when that needs to be done.
If the bubble is large enough that it almost touches (or perhaps just touches)
the lines, then finding level is not as much of a guessing game.
Compare the full-size bubble in this level...
https://i.imgur.com/TQHLNXE.jpg
...to this short one:
https://i.imgur.com/uZ2WkRh.jpg
All else being equal, which one do you think is more precise?
On Saturday, December 30, 2017 at 11:22:29 AM UTC-6, [email protected] wrote:
> Gotta make sure to get all the air out of the tube, though.
And your tube needs to be 3/8" dia. or larger, I was told. A smaller dia. tube would allow for the water's adhesive forces to affect the internal flow, possibly giving an inaccurate reading..... and probably more so with a longer tube.
Sonny
DerbyDad03 <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
>
> A level itself isn't level...unless it's laying on something level.
You can rest assured that a level sitting on a level is truly on the level.
Puckdropper
--
http://www.puckdroppersplace.us/rec.woodworking
A mini archive of some of rec.woodworking's best and worst!
On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 16:48:00 -0600, -MIKE- <[email protected]>
wrote:
>On 12/30/17 4:37 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 15:11:07 -0700, Just Wondering
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> On 12/29/2017 10:57 PM, Emanuel Berg wrote:
>>>> What is the theory behind levels?
>>>>
>>>> I've heard that carpenter's are more precise
>>>> than those used by bricklayers.
>>>>
>>>> I have examined the ones we have here and there
>>>> is no indication as to precision on either so
>>>> the only way to tell would be the mortar stains
>>>> on one of them...
>>>
>>> Use it to "level" a board, then put a cup filled with water
>>> on the board. The cup will confirm whether the board is level.
>>
>> Just put it on something level (e.g. another level), then flip the
>> level end for end and top for bottom. If it doesn't read level after
>> any of the steps, throw it as far as possible and start over (with
>> another level).
>>
>
>Doesn't really have to be level.
>If it hits the line or is the same distance from the line when flipped,
>it's level.
True, it's just easier if it's level. Comparing it to another level
makes it so you don't even need a fixed place to test (sometimes
difficult in a store).
On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 23:38:40 +0100, Emanuel Berg <[email protected]>
wrote:
>krw wrote:
>
>> Just put it on something level (e.g.
>> another level), then flip the level end for
>> end and top for bottom. If it doesn't read
>> level after any of the steps, throw it as far
>> as possible and start over (with another
>> level).
>
>Good rule, easy to remember :)
It's quite a useful technique when buying a new level. Home Depot has
a lot of them to try (but discourage the throwing part). ;-)
On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 16:28:16 -0800 (PST), DerbyDad03
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Saturday, December 30, 2017 at 6:29:00 PM UTC-5, -MIKE- wrote:
>> On 12/30/17 5:13 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> > On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 16:48:00 -0600, -MIKE- <[email protected]>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 12/30/17 4:37 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> >>> On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 15:11:07 -0700, Just Wondering
>> >>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> On 12/29/2017 10:57 PM, Emanuel Berg wrote:
>> >>>>> What is the theory behind levels?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I've heard that carpenter's are more precise
>> >>>>> than those used by bricklayers.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I have examined the ones we have here and there
>> >>>>> is no indication as to precision on either so
>> >>>>> the only way to tell would be the mortar stains
>> >>>>> on one of them...
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Use it to "level" a board, then put a cup filled with water
>> >>>> on the board. The cup will confirm whether the board is level.
>> >>>
>> >>> Just put it on something level (e.g. another level), then flip the
>> >>> level end for end and top for bottom. If it doesn't read level after
>> >>> any of the steps, throw it as far as possible and start over (with
>> >>> another level).
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> Doesn't really have to be level.
>> >> If it hits the line or is the same distance from the line when flipped,
>> >> it's level.
>> >
>> > True, it's just easier if it's level. Comparing it to another level
>> > makes it so you don't even need a fixed place to test (sometimes
>> > difficult in a store).
>> >
>>
>> Tell me about it.
>> I like HF but I need to test their levels.
>> I have a 6 footer from there and it's too cheap not to buy, but I had to
>> go through about 7 of them before I found one that was acceptable. Not
>> level, acceptable.
>>
>
>A level itself isn't level...unless it's laying on something level.
If you use a level to compare against, it doesn't matter that the
(test) level is level (see above) or even that it's a good level, it
just needs to be somewhat close to being level and, of course,
repeatable.
On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 23:37:46 +0100, Emanuel Berg <[email protected]>
wrote:
>DerbyDad03 wrote:
>
>> But just once...
>
>When and how does decalibration occur?
abuse
On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 09:48:17 -0800 (PST), Sonny <[email protected]>
wrote:
>On Saturday, December 30, 2017 at 11:22:29 AM UTC-6, [email protected] wrote:
>
>> Gotta make sure to get all the air out of the tube, though.
>
>And your tube needs to be 3/8" dia. or larger, I was told. A smaller dia. tube would allow for the water's adhesive forces to affect the internal flow, possibly giving an inaccurate reading..... and probably more so with a longer tube.
>
>Sonny
strictly theoreretically, the small tube should eventially be just as
accurate as the larger one but it might take half an hour to rersolve
instead of half a second - - -
On Sun, 31 Dec 2017 22:34:26 +0100, Emanuel Berg <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Clare Snyder wrote:
>
>> As far as a level being able to measure
>> totally level both ways on a surface that is
>> not level - not possible. Even the cheapest
>> level will only read level on a level
>> surface, both ways, if it is level to within
>> a VERY small limit of error - if you can read
>> the bubble accurately
>
>So what level should one buy for general
>purposes? I won't abuse it. Today I made
>a fence with planks to three horizontal bars
>(ribs?) if you want an example application.
a 2 or 3 ft level is the handiest - if you are only going to have
one, I'd have a 2 footer
>
>By the way, here I might also ask what way to
>put the planks with respect to the age rings?
>I thought I'd put them with the imagined circle
>away from the bars, so that the plank will
>naturally bend that way (toward the bars) over
>time. I'm not sure that will happen tho or if
>this is something to care about at all?
Not critical, but I usually put the concave side to the post if using
screws.
>
>Third question, the posts down in the ground,
>does it really help if you first put them in to
>a barrel with a fire?
A charred end MAY have some advantage
Emanuel Berg wrote:
> What is the theory behind levels?
>
> I've heard that carpenter's are more precise
> than those used by bricklayers.
>
> I have examined the ones we have here and there
> is no indication as to precision on either so
> the only way to tell would be the mortar stains
> on one of them...
>
Think how annoying it would be to use a bubble level that was 100%
accurate. Different fluids having different viscosities yield different
sensitivity. More accuracy may be justified for a transit (surveying
tool), I don't know.
On 12/29/17 11:57 PM, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> What is the theory behind levels?
>
> I've heard that carpenter's are more precise than those used by
> bricklayers.
>
> I have examined the ones we have here and there is no indication as
> to precision on either so the only way to tell would be the mortar
> stains on one of them...
>
Interesting discussion. I've never really thought about it, as far as
accuracy goes.
I really doubt that a carpenter's level is more accurate than a mason's,
but who knows.
My gut is that *if* there was a difference, it would be the other way
around since carpenters pretty much only need level or plumb for about
8ft. And even then with framing, 1/8" off plumb at 8ft is still
considered ok.
In any case, the big difference is with durability. A mason will often
use his level to tap brick/block into place. Also, it's easier to clean
mortar off of wood.
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
www.mikedrums.com
On 12/30/17 11:48 AM, Sonny wrote:
> On Saturday, December 30, 2017 at 11:22:29 AM UTC-6, [email protected] wrote:
>
>> Gotta make sure to get all the air out of the tube, though.
>
> And your tube needs to be 3/8" dia. or larger, I was told. A smaller dia. tube would allow for the water's adhesive forces to affect the internal flow, possibly giving an inaccurate reading..... and probably more so with a longer tube.
>
> Sonny
>
You can add dishwasher rinse aid to the water to help prevent that.
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
www.mikedrums.com
On 12/30/17 11:32 AM, -MIKE- wrote:
> On 12/29/17 11:57 PM, Emanuel Berg wrote:
>> What is the theory behind levels?
>>
>> I've heard that carpenter's are more precise than those used by
>> bricklayers.
>>
>> I have examined the ones we have here and there is no indication as
>> to precision on either so the only way to tell would be the mortar
>> stains on one of them...
>>
>
> Interesting discussion. I've never really thought about it, as far as
> accuracy goes.
> I really doubt that a carpenter's level is more accurate than a mason's,
> but who knows.
> My gut is that *if* there was a difference, it would be the other way
> around since carpenters pretty much only need level or plumb for about
> 8ft. And even then with framing, 1/8" off plumb at 8ft is still
> considered ok.
>
> In any case, the big difference is with durability. A mason will often
> use his level to tap brick/block into place. Also, it's easier to clean
> mortar off of wood.
>
BTW, we're forgetting about the plumber's level.
It has three lines. 1st is level, 2nd is 1/8" slope in a foot. 3rd is
1/4" slope in a foot.
I think I have those number correct.
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
www.mikedrums.com
On 12/30/17 4:37 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 15:11:07 -0700, Just Wondering
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On 12/29/2017 10:57 PM, Emanuel Berg wrote:
>>> What is the theory behind levels?
>>>
>>> I've heard that carpenter's are more precise
>>> than those used by bricklayers.
>>>
>>> I have examined the ones we have here and there
>>> is no indication as to precision on either so
>>> the only way to tell would be the mortar stains
>>> on one of them...
>>
>> Use it to "level" a board, then put a cup filled with water
>> on the board. The cup will confirm whether the board is level.
>
> Just put it on something level (e.g. another level), then flip the
> level end for end and top for bottom. If it doesn't read level after
> any of the steps, throw it as far as possible and start over (with
> another level).
>
Doesn't really have to be level.
If it hits the line or is the same distance from the line when flipped,
it's level.
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
www.mikedrums.com
On 12/30/17 5:13 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 16:48:00 -0600, -MIKE- <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> On 12/30/17 4:37 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>> On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 15:11:07 -0700, Just Wondering
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 12/29/2017 10:57 PM, Emanuel Berg wrote:
>>>>> What is the theory behind levels?
>>>>>
>>>>> I've heard that carpenter's are more precise
>>>>> than those used by bricklayers.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have examined the ones we have here and there
>>>>> is no indication as to precision on either so
>>>>> the only way to tell would be the mortar stains
>>>>> on one of them...
>>>>
>>>> Use it to "level" a board, then put a cup filled with water
>>>> on the board. The cup will confirm whether the board is level.
>>>
>>> Just put it on something level (e.g. another level), then flip the
>>> level end for end and top for bottom. If it doesn't read level after
>>> any of the steps, throw it as far as possible and start over (with
>>> another level).
>>>
>>
>> Doesn't really have to be level.
>> If it hits the line or is the same distance from the line when flipped,
>> it's level.
>
> True, it's just easier if it's level. Comparing it to another level
> makes it so you don't even need a fixed place to test (sometimes
> difficult in a store).
>
Tell me about it.
I like HF but I need to test their levels.
I have a 6 footer from there and it's too cheap not to buy, but I had to
go through about 7 of them before I found one that was acceptable. Not
level, acceptable.
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
www.mikedrums.com
On 12/30/17 6:28 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
> On Saturday, December 30, 2017 at 6:29:00 PM UTC-5, -MIKE- wrote:
>> On 12/30/17 5:13 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>> On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 16:48:00 -0600, -MIKE- <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 12/30/17 4:37 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 15:11:07 -0700, Just Wondering
>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 12/29/2017 10:57 PM, Emanuel Berg wrote:
>>>>>>> What is the theory behind levels?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I've heard that carpenter's are more precise
>>>>>>> than those used by bricklayers.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have examined the ones we have here and there
>>>>>>> is no indication as to precision on either so
>>>>>>> the only way to tell would be the mortar stains
>>>>>>> on one of them...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Use it to "level" a board, then put a cup filled with water
>>>>>> on the board. The cup will confirm whether the board is level.
>>>>>
>>>>> Just put it on something level (e.g. another level), then flip the
>>>>> level end for end and top for bottom. If it doesn't read level after
>>>>> any of the steps, throw it as far as possible and start over (with
>>>>> another level).
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Doesn't really have to be level.
>>>> If it hits the line or is the same distance from the line when flipped,
>>>> it's level.
>>>
>>> True, it's just easier if it's level. Comparing it to another level
>>> makes it so you don't even need a fixed place to test (sometimes
>>> difficult in a store).
>>>
>>
>> Tell me about it.
>> I like HF but I need to test their levels.
>> I have a 6 footer from there and it's too cheap not to buy, but I had to
>> go through about 7 of them before I found one that was acceptable. Not
>> level, acceptable.
>>
>
> A level itself isn't level...unless it's laying on something level.
>
Yeah, I'm pretty sure everyone, you included, knows what I mean.
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
www.mikedrums.com
On 12/30/17 7:16 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 16:28:16 -0800 (PST), DerbyDad03
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On Saturday, December 30, 2017 at 6:29:00 PM UTC-5, -MIKE- wrote:
>>> On 12/30/17 5:13 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 16:48:00 -0600, -MIKE-
>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 12/30/17 4:37 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>> On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 15:11:07 -0700, Just Wondering
>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 12/29/2017 10:57 PM, Emanuel Berg wrote:
>>>>>>>> What is the theory behind levels?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I've heard that carpenter's are more precise than those
>>>>>>>> used by bricklayers.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have examined the ones we have here and there is no
>>>>>>>> indication as to precision on either so the only way to
>>>>>>>> tell would be the mortar stains on one of them...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Use it to "level" a board, then put a cup filled with
>>>>>>> water on the board. The cup will confirm whether the
>>>>>>> board is level.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just put it on something level (e.g. another level), then
>>>>>> flip the level end for end and top for bottom. If it
>>>>>> doesn't read level after any of the steps, throw it as far
>>>>>> as possible and start over (with another level).
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Doesn't really have to be level. If it hits the line or is
>>>>> the same distance from the line when flipped, it's level.
>>>>
>>>> True, it's just easier if it's level. Comparing it to another
>>>> level makes it so you don't even need a fixed place to test
>>>> (sometimes difficult in a store).
>>>>
>>>
>>> Tell me about it. I like HF but I need to test their levels. I
>>> have a 6 footer from there and it's too cheap not to buy, but I
>>> had to go through about 7 of them before I found one that was
>>> acceptable. Not level, acceptable.
>>>
>>
>> A level itself isn't level...unless it's laying on something
>> level.
>
> If you use a level to compare against, it doesn't matter that the
> (test) level is level (see above) or even that it's a good level, it
> just needs to be somewhat close to being level and, of course,
> repeatable.
>
It's not going to help at the store, but I make a habit of having the
front of my workbench be perfectly level and perfectly flat on the front
edge. It's nice to be able to quickly check a level you dropped and to
be able to quickly check an edged board without using a held
straightedge against it.
The long, perfectly straight front edge also makes it a quick task to
check squares for square using the mark and flip method.
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
www.mikedrums.com
On 12/30/17 10:41 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
> On Saturday, December 30, 2017 at 8:13:14 PM UTC-5, -MIKE- wrote:
>> On 12/30/17 6:28 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
>>> On Saturday, December 30, 2017 at 6:29:00 PM UTC-5, -MIKE- wrote:
>>>> On 12/30/17 5:13 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 16:48:00 -0600, -MIKE- <[email protected]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 12/30/17 4:37 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 15:11:07 -0700, Just Wondering
>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 12/29/2017 10:57 PM, Emanuel Berg wrote:
>>>>>>>>> What is the theory behind levels?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I've heard that carpenter's are more precise
>>>>>>>>> than those used by bricklayers.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I have examined the ones we have here and there
>>>>>>>>> is no indication as to precision on either so
>>>>>>>>> the only way to tell would be the mortar stains
>>>>>>>>> on one of them...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Use it to "level" a board, then put a cup filled with water
>>>>>>>> on the board. The cup will confirm whether the board is level.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Just put it on something level (e.g. another level), then flip the
>>>>>>> level end for end and top for bottom. If it doesn't read level after
>>>>>>> any of the steps, throw it as far as possible and start over (with
>>>>>>> another level).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Doesn't really have to be level.
>>>>>> If it hits the line or is the same distance from the line when flipped,
>>>>>> it's level.
>>>>>
>>>>> True, it's just easier if it's level. Comparing it to another level
>>>>> makes it so you don't even need a fixed place to test (sometimes
>>>>> difficult in a store).
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Tell me about it.
>>>> I like HF but I need to test their levels.
>>>> I have a 6 footer from there and it's too cheap not to buy, but I had to
>>>> go through about 7 of them before I found one that was acceptable. Not
>>>> level, acceptable.
>>>>
>>>
>>> A level itself isn't level...unless it's laying on something level.
>>>
>>
>> Yeah, I'm pretty sure everyone, you included, knows what I mean.
>>
>>
>
> I guess I should have included the: ;-)
>
Well, there it is, right there. ^^^^
:-p
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
www.mikedrums.com
Just Wondering wrote:
> On 12/30/2017 3:15 PM, Emanuel Berg wrote:
>> Just Wondering wrote:
>>
>>>> What is the theory behind levels? I've heard
>>>> that carpenter's are more precise than those
>>>> used by bricklayers. I have examined the
>>>> ones we have here and there is no indication
>>>> as to precision on either so the only way to
>>>> tell would be the mortar stains on one of
>>>> them...
>>>
>>> Use it to "level" a board, then put a cup
>>> filled with water on the board. The cup will
>>> confirm whether the board is level.
>>
>> Isn't that to take it back a level, having to
>> use utensils to verify your tools?
>
> Perhaps. I was responding to the stated example about
> "the only way to tell" with another way to tell. As
> someone else pointed out, you could also check with
> your level oriented in one direction, then turn your
> level end-for-end and compare the result. There are
> probably lots of other ways to tell.
After about 25 posts, no one has come back to the OP's point that a
level can indicate that a surface is level ("both ways") even for a
surface which is slightly off-level. Different levels have different
tolerances by design. As I indicated in my post, a 100% accurate level
would be a PITA. But, I believe that there are different categories of
bubble levels. I think this is left to be addressed.
On 12/31/17 1:13 PM, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> Bill wrote:
>
>> As I indicated in my post, a 100% accurate
>> level would be a PITA.
>
> 100% literally would be impossible but
> 100% practically speaking - why would that be
> a PITA? Because nothing would ever satisfy it?
>
> Well, if so, a ruler for example - I always
> considered that 100% accurate practically
> speaking but that hasn't stopped anyone from
> using it as far as I know?
>
The point he's making is that close enough is close enough for most uses
of a 2 or 4ft level.
If you need more accurate, you go to a 6 or 8ft level.
I have a few 4ft levels and more, for whatever reason, is much more
accurate than the others. In many situations, I don't use it because it
is a bit of a PITA.
I don't need to be scootching an 8ft wall back and forth to try to
achieve plumb to within 1/64". That's what happens with this particular
level. The center of the spirit vials is much flatter requiring much
more precision in movement to get the bubble dead-center. Whereas, the
other two have a much more pronounced curve to the viral meaning the
precision of movement needed to get the bubble dead center is much more
forgiving.
When that level is dead center, it might be accurate 1/16" in 8ft, which
is plenty enough for framing.
It's like using the course adjustment instead of the fine adjustment.
Just like with a framing square. It needs to measure decent framing
angles, not send a space probe to mars.
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
www.mikedrums.com
Clare Snyder wrote:
> On Sun, 31 Dec 2017 01:29:43 -0500, Bill <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Just Wondering wrote:
>>> On 12/30/2017 3:15 PM, Emanuel Berg wrote:
>>>> Just Wondering wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> What is the theory behind levels? I've heard
>>>>>> that carpenter's are more precise than those
>>>>>> used by bricklayers. I have examined the
>>>>>> ones we have here and there is no indication
>>>>>> as to precision on either so the only way to
>>>>>> tell would be the mortar stains on one of
>>>>>> them...
>>>>> Use it to "level" a board, then put a cup
>>>>> filled with water on the board. The cup will
>>>>> confirm whether the board is level.
>>>> Isn't that to take it back a level, having to
>>>> use utensils to verify your tools?
>>> Perhaps. I was responding to the stated example about
>>> "the only way to tell" with another way to tell. As
>>> someone else pointed out, you could also check with
>>> your level oriented in one direction, then turn your
>>> level end-for-end and compare the result. There are
>>> probably lots of other ways to tell.
>> After about 25 posts, no one has come back to the OP's point that a
>> level can indicate that a surface is level ("both ways") even for a
>> surface which is slightly off-level. Different levels have different
>> tolerances by design. As I indicated in my post, a 100% accurate level
>> would be a PITA. But, I believe that there are different categories of
>> bubble levels. I think this is left to be addressed.
>
> I've addressed it.
Yes you did. Thank you! I knew there were different "standards", but I
wasn't familiar with the underlying physics. I appreciate the
thoughtful lesson!
Happy New Year,
Bill
> There ARE different "sensitivities" of level - call it "accuracy" if
> youi like - or "resolution".
>
> It is specified by number of degrees per unit of measurement bubble
> displacement - such as .05/2mm, or in units per unit of deflection -
> like .2/1 - 0.2 inch bubble deflection with one end of 3 meter
> level raised 1 inch.
>
> Can also be metric.
> An engineer's precision level (machinist's level) or a survey transit
> may be as accurate as .005 degree per 2mm bubble deflection, while a
> carpenter's square is tiypically closer to 1 degree - and a plumber's
> level may have 3 or 4 vials of different accuracy for measuring
> different "drops" for different drain or pipe installations
>
> As far as a level being able to measure totally level both ways on a
> surface that is not level - not possible. Even the cheapest level will
> only read level on a level surface, both ways, if it is level to
> within a VERY small limit of error - if you can read the bubble
> accurately
On 12/31/17 2:24 PM, Clare Snyder wrote:
> On Sun, 31 Dec 2017 13:27:59 -0600, -MIKE- <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> On 12/31/17 1:13 PM, Emanuel Berg wrote:
>>> Bill wrote:
>>>
>>>> As I indicated in my post, a 100% accurate level would be a
>>>> PITA.
>>>
>>> 100% literally would be impossible but 100% practically speaking
>>> - why would that be a PITA? Because nothing would ever satisfy
>>> it?
>>>
>>> Well, if so, a ruler for example - I always considered that 100%
>>> accurate practically speaking but that hasn't stopped anyone
>>> from using it as far as I know?
>>>
>>
>> The point he's making is that close enough is close enough for most
>> uses of a 2 or 4ft level. If you need more accurate, you go to a 6
>> or 8ft level.
>
> A 6 or 8 foot level is not necessarily more accurate than a 24 inch
> level - and in fact there are 4 inch or 6 inch levels that are MORE
> accurate than the runof the mill 4 or 6 foot level
I didn't say it was, nor imply it.
You get a more accurate reading per the application by using the longer
level.
It also helps you find a more accurate reading because it bridges the
bow in a stud farther than a 4footer.
As an example, my 6' level is less accurate than my 4' level, but in the
above application, it give me a more accurate reading, in context.
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
www.mikedrums.com
On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 15:11:07 -0700, Just Wondering
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On 12/29/2017 10:57 PM, Emanuel Berg wrote:
>> What is the theory behind levels?
>>
>> I've heard that carpenter's are more precise
>> than those used by bricklayers.
>>
>> I have examined the ones we have here and there
>> is no indication as to precision on either so
>> the only way to tell would be the mortar stains
>> on one of them...
>
>Use it to "level" a board, then put a cup filled with water
>on the board. The cup will confirm whether the board is level.
Just put it on something level (e.g. another level), then flip the
level end for end and top for bottom. If it doesn't read level after
any of the steps, throw it as far as possible and start over (with
another level).
On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 23:37:46 +0100, Emanuel Berg <[email protected]>
wrote:
>DerbyDad03 wrote:
>
>> But just once...
>
>When and how does decalibration occur?
Banging around, more expensive levels have an adjustment for the
bubble, though I have not seen one for sometime for sale.
On 12/31/2017 9:51 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Sun, 31 Dec 2017 19:25:30 -0600, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
> wrote:
>
>> On 12/31/2017 3:34 PM, Emanuel Berg wrote:
>>> Clare Snyder wrote:
>>>
>>>> As far as a level being able to measure
>>>> totally level both ways on a surface that is
>>>> not level - not possible. Even the cheapest
>>>> level will only read level on a level
>>>> surface, both ways, if it is level to within
>>>> a VERY small limit of error - if you can read
>>>> the bubble accurately
>>>
>>> So what level should one buy for general
>>> purposes? I won't abuse it. Today I made
>>> a fence with planks to three horizontal bars
>>> (ribs?) if you want an example application.
>>
>> Most any level is going to be accurate enough for wood, especially
>> construction grade material.
>
> Try going through the levels at HF sometime. I've found some real
> stinkers at the Borg, too.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> By the way, here I might also ask what way to
>>> put the planks with respect to the age rings?
>>> I thought I'd put them with the imagined circle
>>> away from the bars, so that the plank will
>>> naturally bend that way (toward the bars) over
>>> time. I'm not sure that will happen tho or if
>>> this is something to care about at all?
>>
>> Are you asking which way to place the pickets? Does not matter, a nail
>> about 1" in from each side and one in the middle if it is a wide picket.
>
> Uh, Leon, the picket points go *UP*. ;-)
>
>>> Third question, the posts down in the ground,
>>> does it really help if you first put them in to
>>> a barrel with a fire?
>>>
>>
>> Whuuut???
>
> I think the idea is to carbonize the outside so it tastes bad to
> critters. It might even work (burn off the sugars) but I'd think it
> would be pretty hard to control.
>
Makes sense, wood rots or is eaten because it is a food source.
Charring it would get rid of the nutrients.